New rule

[Ernil]

But also from a perspective of an active hunter - it basicly means that if a robber robbs a hunter inside a dungeon while hunting - the robber can take his full cloth set - whikle if the robber dies the hunter can take what his potions ?

Make it full drylooting or no looting. Also will be less whining from the department of proving that a robber only took clothes etc.

[Simmo]

Aint it harder to kill the person if his in nice cloth set?

But what do i know

Robber takes SS what he looted and if the person who was robbed tells that he looted other stuff too then he needs SS to prove it also.

[Ernil]

True, but it will still bring unnecessary trouble to both parties with proving this

[Johnny Walac]

Heh? You always gotta take SS. Even now the robber gotta take SS so Staff knows he didn't loot more then gold and gems. I don't see the problem just cause you added cloth in there.


And I see what you mean Ernil about robbers taking down hunters. But it's the hunters choice to wear cloths as much as it is for the robber. If I want the upperhand when killing I can wear my cloths. But then also I accept the risk of loosing them. I will probably run without cloths. Taking down a fullgeared clothed hunter as an archer without cloths? Yeah it's possible, but hard.

[Arthur White]

Regarding to this rules I want to say two things.

First: It doesn't aid economy. Richer will become richer. Poor, will become poor. Why will this happen?! Because the ppl that put cloths on sale are always the same and some of them are pretty rich already. So this is boosting the fighter class even more. Creating an economy based on magic cloths and not on what really should move money around, merchants. And of course this is boosting robbers and not the other ppl that actually need the cloths to hunt or gather materials.

Second: Add weapon loot instead. Every crafter can get materials to craft'em, thus boosting economy for all crafter classes.

I will not say, add armour loot, because everyone knows how hard it is to get leet armour. Thus, adding that rule will just make ppl hide their armours or just use them when fighting/hunting in groups and still I think everybody will just use vampire bone everywhere they go.

Another thing is, if I got magic cloths I want to use them. I don't want to have them kept in chests at my home, which I will do if this rule is going to be applied, because I don't have money to buy indy stuff everyday. So I will only take'em from chests if I go hunting or fighting in groups. Still, i will think twice before putting'em on.

I don't see a point to add it to the looting rules, it will only destroy the pleasure ppl have at playing in this shard. Because it takes a lot of time to get a magic cloth and loose in a matter of seconds it's just a waste. Knowing they can be killed and not looted for their magic cloths helps a lot in terms of getting ppl to really stay in the shard.

Again, what's the point of buying a cloth if I will loose it next time I pass through brit? Worse! loose it to some dumb person who just wants to piss everybody he/she meets in his/her path and kill them plus looting?

A question to the GMs what were you thinking? What were the reasons that led you to the conclusion that adding this rule would improve gameplay, player base and fun? Or are you just trying to make ppl unhappy? Oh, I forgot the telborean guys are happy! Anyone else?

[Ernil]

Johnny - but it also means that the risk the hunter involves himself with is much higher than that of the robber.

If we say the robber succeds in killing the hunter then he or she may take the clothes. However if the hunter succeds in killing the robber - what ? he takes his potions ?

This rule was not properly discussed before releasing it. It should have been you can loot weaponry or armor instead of clothes. With looting weaponry and armors it would also boost the economy for merchant classes.

[Johnny Walac]

Johnny - but it also means that the risk the hunter involves himself with is much higher than that of the robber.

If we say the robber succeds in killing the hunter then he or she may take the clothes. However if the hunter succeds in killing the robber - what ? he takes his potions ?

This rule was not properly discussed before releasing it. It should have been you can loot weaponry or armor instead of clothes. With looting weaponry and armors it would also boost the economy for merchant classes.

As I said. The hunter knows the risk by putting cloths on. A red char can also wear cloths.

Edit: I didn't hear all this when it was dryloot. Everyones cloths can be taken. Red or not. If you don't wanna loose cloths don't wear them when solo hunting.

[Simmo]

This topic is getting hot.



As a side note i have to say that cloth looting too. People mostly hunt on certain groups and other wont be involved. That makes hunting harder ( because of player mostly ).

[Arthur White]

I'll just add one thing, put the shard first yourselves in second. Can you guys do it? I can. That's why I think this rules won't help the shard, only the 3-5 ppl that rob.

[Dalton]

Let's not complain when we are given something that will make it abit more intresting shall we?.

LOL!! Really?!?!?!? This is your valuable input?! Let's not complain?!!?

1) I didnt see anyone complaining here, just throwing in overviews on the looting rules
2) If one feels like he/she can give constructive input on someone elses idea/rule (or w/e) there is no reason not to do so! Not doing it would just make us sheep!
3) If however ones point in commenting is just to be a smartass, one might as well save the finger tips and keep it to himself/herself