New revenge scent

[galathil]

I've been reading the forums and I have noticed that if you kill a murderer you will leave a murder scent. This gave me an idea of if you kill someone and you have a murder scent they made, instead of leaving a murder scent you leave a revenge scent. This will mean passing people wont think that you have unjustly killed someone and track you down.

[Legolas6531]

I think that's a good idea, I would hate to be mistaken as the "bad guy" when someone steals from me and I have to kill them. It should also work with Theft.

[DatOneGuy]

No thanks, a murder is a murder, what one person believes just may not be the same as others.

There are ways to hide it if you have scents in the first place, so this is a non-issue.

[Legolas6531]

awww, The Man is always bringing me down XD

[Wirt]

I don't see why not, as long as it works like other scents - that you can summon with it, maybe with an extra skill. It is exploitable, like other scents, but I don't think there's anything to be done about it.
The real question is, is this extra layer of redundancy good or bad? I haven't played a ranger or a fighter, so I wouldn't know.

awww, The Man is always bringing me down XD

Do you want to be the guy?

[Zirikana]

Yeah, i kinda agree that this probably shouldn't be implemented. I mean, I like the idea of distinguishing between murder and revenge, but honestly killing is killing. The justification of the act (or lack thereof) is due entirely to us.*

By the "slippery slope" argument, then we would also have to have scent differentiation between "stealing" and "borrowing", between "trespassing" and "just-passing-through". It's been my impression that the devs seem to want everything to be value neutral, and to let in game politics and morality arise ex machina.

* just for the record, I mean IN GAME, not in real life that's a whole 'nother can of worms...

[Wirt]

I'm probably going off topic here, but I'll argue about videogames having to provide some basic moral guidelines and, traditionally, go on a tangent. Let's just say it's for everyone trying to approach this issue from this angle. Of course any moral/legal system that crops up naturally in a game will boil down to "whatever gives the biggest bonus is good". Killing a leader will never be such a big deal as it is in real life: the player can just make a new character and lose nothing important. If a morally-questionable mechanic, say, cannibalism is introduced that doesn't have any drawbacks, no-one is going to bat an eye when people start hunting newbies for the FEP. Of course there will be a lot of whining from the newbies as they're being digested, and a few white knights protecting them, but they'll be a minority.
It has to be fixed from the developers' side by giving a side effect or drawback that will make the cannibal dangerous to everyone else.

But yeah, revenge scent, not a bad idea but itself, but probably not worth bothering with unless related mechanics get changed.

[DatOneGuy]

I'm probably going off topic here, but I'll argue about videogames having to provide some basic moral guidelines and, traditionally, go on a tangent. Let's just say it's for everyone trying to approach this issue from this angle. Of course any moral/legal system that crops up naturally in a game will boil down to "whatever gives the biggest bonus is good". Killing a leader will never be such a big deal as it is in real life: the player can just make a new character and lose nothing important. If a morally-questionable mechanic, say, cannibalism is introduced that doesn't have any drawbacks, no-one is going to bat an eye when people start hunting newbies for the FEP. Of course there will be a lot of whining from the newbies as they're being digested, and a few white knights protecting them, but they'll be a minority.
It has to be fixed from the developers' side by giving a side effect or drawback that will make the cannibal dangerous to everyone else.

But yeah, revenge scent, not a bad idea but itself, but probably not worth bothering with unless related mechanics get changed.

Yeah, sorry but no.

Not only was that a nice big tangent but murder is still murder, no guidelines should be set because guidelines force you into a particular path, which as far as I know is heavily discouraged in this game. If you want to murder people just because they stole some bread from a basket you left out, you can do that and that's YOUR sense of justice, the repercussions for doing so are the same exact as someone who decides to go with an "eye for an eye" approach, or people who don't care about petty thieves and only bother with severe crimes.

A good example is the recent thread where someone stole something from a stand because someone in IRC said they wouldn't leave a scent, the person extorted them for what they did and could or would kill them if they didn't deliver said goods, with that said that could be called justice in their eyes. I may not see it as so, you may not see it as so, but they do, what matters is their interpretation, no one is limiting the game for them to play as such, that is their choice and their choice alone.

Having these 'revenge' scents in may make that person leave 'murder' scents but some other person who was vandalized or murdered leave 'revenge' scents, this brings a differentiation which is a big problem philosophically in the development process.

[Chakravanti]

A good example is...

Noob fuck-ups due to ignorance are not a valid argument dog. I know you know better.

[DatOneGuy]

I didn't mean to play into his fuck-up, simply the idea of "Stealing means death".

Setting a predefined standard for what's 'right' and what's 'wrong' in these circumstances just won't be a good idea.