Shattered Kingdoms

Should people be able to be reported for 'crimes' they commit against people who are banished in that country?

Instead of having a long-winded, derail-able thread about every possible idea or grievance we could have with the law system, this thread will discuss one thing, and one thing only.

Discuss. If you derail this thread, I will hunt you down.

It might be something that should depend on kingdom.

While in most cases, it may seem stupid that you can get thrown in jail for throwing Taslamar's most wanted out of the Heart and Rose, the issue may be more complex than that ICly.

In Zhenshi, for example, there is no death penalty. Would the Zhensh government approve of you killing an outlaw, when you're not part of the tribunal? I don't think they necessarily would.

On balance, though, I do NOT think you should be reportable for offenses against people who are BANISHED. Someone who is banished has essentially been branded an enemy of the country and an extreme menace/danger to society. The automated law code messes up and puts city defenders in jail. This shouldn't happen.

I agree, but that gives a lot of power to the tribunal leaders. I remember I got deported and then banished from Taslamar once just for getting into an IC argument with one of the leaders. I didn't even commit any crimes.

I think it's weird you can banish people who haven't committed crimes, btw. Unless they changed this? It was a while back.

-edit-

Whoops, derail.

I don't know that I think you should be able to commit crimes freely against criminals. It's illegal in real life to murder murderers unless in self-defense.

Maybe we could implement a "citizen's arrest" type of thing, though, since some tribunals are currently so dead. If the guards engage a banished outlaw in a fight, then citizens of the country nearby can fight the guy with the guards and be temporarily granted immunity. Probably difficult to code, though.

Being banished is totally different from being a criminal. Or at least it should be. Yes, I see how this can be unbalanced considering some 'organizations' are designed to be corrupt and others not so much. But that just means you have to work harder, smear campaigns.. under-the-table deals. Whatever it takes. I totally agree that banished people, or perhaps just people who are 'at war' should have exemptions from laws, in whatever form that may take.

On the other hand, the current law system.. while bugged. Serves a vital purpose and is functioning well all things considered. The real issue is lack of people who can pardon/parole, and their times online.

Banishment is being forsaken by a government.

It's a political version of blemish.

Right now you lose, what, shopping?

It might be better to scrap bounty NPCs and just have outlawed folks not incur law violations for being attacked. This would promote player activity on both sides of the badge and solve multiple problems in one action that might be able to recycle coding already out there.

I like this because it means not being bogged down completely by bounty NPCs when attempting any sort of attack whatsoever. I don't like this in that surprise attacks(outside of gating to Ratana, I HATE HER) once again is a viable option.

Hey, I had a good reason for that deportation/Banishment, Jennbo.

To be hunted down:

grep

However, I will derail my own thread and say:

Are members of tribunals at war with other tribunals still auto attacked by certain of their enemy's city guards, regardless of legal status?

If no, disregard.

If yes, I think these people should be lawlessly killable, too.

Basically, what these two people have in common is that, unlike the average joe criminal, they are not a lost soul that the government wants to resocialize. They have either taken oaths to a country currently at war, or they've committed crimes so plentiful or horrible that the administration has declared them unwelcome regardless of attempted restitution.
And both have standing orders to be attacked on sight, no matter what they do, until the tribunal leader personally declares otherwise.

Continue to discuss.

Yes.

But I'm not sure I'm a fan of this "feature," either. How does an NPC know of my affiliation before I've ever engaged in battle with the opposing Tribunal?

Dulrik said tribunal membership isn't supposed to ever be secret. Something about being in a tribunal meaning that you publically represent the government. This is why guards will take orders from you (you're a public figure in the government).

I didn't like the change either, especially since it applied to MC.