It seems to me that ones reputation is not increased strictly through pkilling. One also gains a reputation for their deeds elsewhere. I think that a nice way to reflect this in the reputation stat, as well as a way to reintroduce some balanced pking in the realm of tempus, would be to have ones reputation increase with remorting. I think that increasng by a value of say 50 points/gen would be a reasonable quantity. In theory then a gen 10 player would have at minimum half of the possible reputation any player could garner. This is a fairly accurate reflection of reality I think. It also would allow pking to increase without threatening the player base by encouraging attacks on new players. Just my thoughts and not the thoughts of the establishment.

ok… i agree and disagree on this idea… for the following reasons. I was under the impression that the reputation scale was put in place to both cut down on pk abuse of lower level players and also to give those of us on the mud (as i'm sure i'm not the only one) who want nothing to do with pk a chance to enjoy the game as is enjoyable to us. i agree, pk is a great part of the game for those who enjoy it. fine, there's an outcry for more pk possibilities. yes, this would increase pk. but ya know what… it's going to lose people who want nothing to do with that side of the game. i feel like i have to support this side of the game… the non pk side of the game because as difficult as it is to believe… and i know some of you couldn't fathom this… but folks like myself actually enjoy creating a character and building up their power merely to be able to fight better more interesting mobs. i like the challenge of going to a new, more difficult zone for my character.

while scaling the reputation thing over several gens, i don't understand why, if a gen 10 player was a newbie helper, helped people learn to level and kept to themselves… why it'd be reasonable for them to have a 500 reputation with this 50 rep per gen idea. (now that the numbers side of the reputation thing was explained to me). we need to keep a protective aspect for people who want nothing to do with pk. yes, it's out there… no, as of the general gaming atmosphere… it's not optional… but not only do we need to protect newbies… but there needs to be a continued sense of protection for non-pkers. personally, if i knew my characters would log on and begin getting pk'd just because someone could… i'd stop playing my mortal characters all together because the game would cease to be fun for me.

i agree we need to bring back more pk… but i disagree that EVERYone MUST be pk'able.

if a person has a pk'ing character… there should be (if not already) some kind of flag on the account so they can't abuse it by pk'ing and hiding on some other character that's non-pk. i remember that being a concern from previous pk debates.

just my opinion…

now im kinda new, but already i see a problem with the reputation system

a gen 10 can get all the way TO gen 10 with an innocent flag, then when a new player (like me) gets a little bit of good eq, and gets past level 25, the gen 10 can kill the level 25 mortal with no penalties whatsoever

i find this extremely unfair

but thats just me

It just means you gotta take one for his patience, it's totally fair. You are dumb, and I am right. -ill

what about putting like a level restriction on who you can kill with the reputation. The lower the reputation then lower the level difference you can be so you can pk them, the higher the rep the higher the difference. shrugs just a thought

amazingly enough, this mud is not !pk and yeah some people dont like pk but if you dont want to be pked and want nothing to do with pk…dont play on a mud that has pk its part of the game and i think it makes it more interesting

i actually liked the pk system from pre-lock better. Frankly, this pk system didn't stop me from getting pk'd a lot, and it didn't stop me from losing a lot of valuable equipment.

If we're goign to talk about bring pk back, let's just use the old pk system and I can guarentee there will be more high gen pk's.

I liked the playerkilling system before the lock. It was simple, effective, and it seemed to be liked. However, killer flags weren't a great deterrent to low level player killing. This is where the reputation system begins to shine. The reputation system with harsh killer flags picks up the slack by keeping players who don't want to kill or be killed relatively safe. The problem with it is that the outlaws, or those with a high reputation have very little in terms of 'targets' so to speak (without suffering a harsh killer of course). This may lead to them creating new players, which gives them a chance to take a shot at an innocent person for free.

Both ideas have their good points and their faults. This is my proposal…

Combine them. Bring toughguy tags back, remove reputation, keep the harsh killers, remove the 'instant toughguy at gen 3', and add a bigger 'level before you can kill' thing. The toughguy system was a great system in my opinion, and seems to be well liked by others as well, but maybe I'm just blind. Toughguy tags are just a less specific form of reputation, so that's the 'remove reputation' bit. Harsh killers are the only thing keeping player killers from killing non player killers. It is easily circumvented, but only if the killer really wants it. The instant toughguy tag at gen 3 allowed killers to kill non killers for free when they got to gen 3, a little unbalanced it seems. As for the 'level before killing' thing, that keeps killers from getting out of a killer penalty as easily by just creating a new player, getting it to level 25, and busting someone's chops. My solution to this is making the 'level before killing' level something bigger, like the twenty fifth level of the first gen. This means that if a killer wants to suckerpunch a non killer, the killer will have to pay the cash, apply the effort, and spend the time to remort a character before suckerpunching said non killer.

This concludes my idea for now. I need some feedback too, so maybe together we can create something nifty that may be implemented. So post and tell me why it sucks, because to me, this idea glows in the dark because it's so great.

-Trisk

As stated previously on a different thread, I like this reputation system, but with the introduction of players being bounty hunters, I would like to propose that the bounty hunters should have some sort of reputation as well… they are either a good bounty hunter, a bad bounty hunter or still learning and in between someplace. Their reputation would come into play when they fulfilled a contract on a criminal. If they had a small # of successful bounty hunts, then when, and if, they caught up to their target and killed them, they would get a small bounty reward, and their "bounty rep" would increase proportionately. If a bounty hunter had many more successful hunts then they would reasonably be able to collect a much larger bounty. If a bounty hunter happened to miss a target, (agrro on a target but fail to kill) their "bounty rep" would be decreased, causing them to get paid less for their next target. This would stop basing the payout to the bounty hunter based on the criminals reputation and base it soley on the skills of the bounty hunter which IMO is exactly what it should be based on.

And since this was also stated on the aforementioned other thread that doesnt seem to be acessible anymore, I will restate my proposal for looting after pks. I think that a system of looting based upon the criminal's rep who kills you would be fair and would be balanced with the bounty hunter fees mentioned above. I dont know the reputation rankings but i will try to give an example here. If criminal A has a current rep of mostly harmless, and they kill player B, then there would be a reputation based max loot of say 1 piece of eq.(coded into the game) (any items in inv would not be counted and would be free loot). However, a criminal with a reputation of True killer would be able to full loot their victims if they so chose because, they are more skilled by that time in the art of removing eq from fresh corpses. I think this might be the most fair way to handle pk/revenge/etc etc. It seems fair as far as I can tell, and I look forward to any ideas or thoughts everyone else has on this subject. -Istari- aka DS

While keeping track of a separate Bounty Hunter Reputation is an interesting thought, I'm not sure that it makes a whole lot of sense.

One could assume that the player with a high reputation has either a) killed a lot of people or b) killed people of much lower level/gen than themselves.

In the case of situation "a" the player is a highly skilled player killer, and in that respect should be skilled at avoiding being killed by a bounty hunter. Since the player killer is that skilled, it shouldn't matter how experienced or inexperienced of a bounty hunter the person that finally gets him is. The fact of the matter is: the bounty hunter was skilled enough to defeat a skilled player killer… regardless of how many bounties the hunter has claimed before. Why should a bounty hunter who has become an experienced bounty hunter be any more rewarded for killing a criminal of a certain skill level than an unexeprienced bounty hunter?

In the case of situation "b" the criminal is someone who is, at least according to the current system, deserving of some sort of severe punishment (hence the high reputation). If an inexperienced bounty hunter decides that normally bounty hunting isn't really his cup of tea, but feels that the criminal in question is just so deplorable that he deserves to be punished, the bounty hunter deserves just as much reward as the experienced bounty hunter.

Granted, I may have missed the point you were trying to make, but as I see it, the point of the bounty system is to serve as another form of player-induced restriction on pkilling. Criminals get a high rep due to either their pkilling skill or through picking on people that can't fight back. Seeing as they are particularly skilled (or depraved), the high penalty is due to the fact that it should hypothetically be harder to kill them (or in the case of the bullies, the higher penalty is to satisfy a general sense of justice).