Cantr II Discussion Forum

I've got a question I'd like to have answered, based on a very unlikely event that is still possible in the real game.
You have two characters, A and B. A is a trader, and B is a bandit. Your trader finds himself needing to get to another city- one route is through B's camp, one route does not. They are nearly the exact same length. Going through B's camp will mean certain death.
I know it would be possible to find out if this had truly been a CRB, but what would you have to do to choose character A's route? Roll dice? Just decide to avoid the camp even though this uses OOC knowledge? What!?

How would your character decide to take which route if he had no knowledge of the bandit whatsoever? If he would normally flip a coin that's exactly what he should do. If not, he should still decide how he would if he wouldn't know about the danger.

Honestly though, I would probably choose the route which would avoid the bandits. (Unless I would wouldn't care much for my character very much.) If the roads are absolutely equal I would just assume the save road would have the prettier flowers along the way.

I'm saying perhaps that the bandit encampment isn't know by your character explicity- and perhaps that this was his first time to choose this route (I know that I'm making this more improbable), so that he's had no habit of having to do a coin flip.

Sounds like a pretty lousy bandit if they have to kill everyone they meet even if some people might just be ready to drop all their stuff just to stay alive. Although it would create a problematic situation if your bandit character enslaved your trader character because that would be practically keeping a mule, but if the trader did their best of slacking off and maybe sabotaging machinery even, trying to escape and such then maybe it wouldn't be considered benefiting the bandit character.

Isn't it best just to avoid having your own characters meet, and if that's not really possible to avoid having them interact? It might be a CRB if for no real reason you decided to take a long complicated route to go around the bandit, but if there's no real difference I would take the safe road and think nothing of it. (Or if they had to cross paths I would make the non-travelling one just sleep a few hours...)

Besides, in the original example who's to say you're not sending your trader along to benefit your bandit?

Marian wrote:Isn't it best just to avoid having your own characters meet, and if that's not really possible to avoid having them interact?
Besides, in the original example who's to say you're not sending your trader along to benefit your bandit?

Indeed.
Best to keep the characters apart so that it doesn't look remotely suspicious.

I think the best rule one can have to avoid conflicts like this is don't have characters spawned on the same continent. This is nearly impossible for an individual so Cantr staff, i'm looking at you.

The spawning system is supposed to be random, though i'm not sure how you can expect it to give you 15 different continents for 15 chars when there's only 7 or 8 English/mixed islands to choose from.

Having said that, programming and execution are completely different in the sense that it's never as random as a player wants it to be (i've been bitten by this with my last 6 or so chars). Even if you do get an island where you've already got 3 chars, it's still up to the player to keep those characters lives and goals separate.
If you don't want yet another char on the same island, find a forest, build a boat and leave.

And in every case if you find your characters are going to be coming into close contact unavoidably, where's the harm in contacting a member of PD to let them know in advance?

I've forgotten the rest of the point i was making...

It should at least be made so that you can't spawn a char in a place you already spawned a char in before. :S

I had a char die, spawned a new char and it spawned in the same place as where the char died. Gonna be hard to keep the information I, as the player, remember apart from the information my character actually knows.

Surely this is one of those points where you bend the 'no OOG info' rule in order to maintain the CR?

Better they just don't meet and you have to traverse that issue, even if it means an odd choice for one character?

Dantezro wrote:I've got a question I'd like to have answered, based on a very unlikely event that is still possible in the real game.
You have two characters, A and B. A is a trader, and B is a bandit. Your trader finds himself needing to get to another city- one route is through B's camp, one route does not. They are nearly the exact same length. Going through B's camp will mean certain death.
I know it would be possible to find out if this had truly been a CRB, but what would you have to do to choose character A's route? Roll dice? Just decide to avoid the camp even though this uses OOC knowledge? What!?

What route would your trader take? If you can answer that then you're out of a Capital Rule Breach. Because it is not about what you would do because you nor your knowledge factors into the situation. Your bandit character does not yet factor in because the situation has not presented itself to him or her (and when it does then again do what the character would do in the situation based on them). So the only question you should be concerned about is what your trader, from his or her knowledge and personality, would do in in the current situation that he or she is in.

formerly known as hf wrote:Surely this is one of those points where you bend the 'no OOG info' rule in order to maintain the CR?

Better they just don't meet and you have to traverse that issue, even if it means an odd choice for one character?

I disagree with this because that within itself is a Capital Rule Breach. As long as it is played out in terms of what those characters would do then that is how it should go.

rklenseth wrote:

formerly known as hf wrote:Surely this is one of those points where you bend the 'no OOG info' rule in order to maintain the CR?

Better they just don't meet and you have to traverse that issue, even if it means an odd choice for one character?

I disagree with this because that within itself is a Capital Rule Breach. As long as it is played out in terms of what those characters would do then that is how it should go.

I understand what you're saying, rklenseth. I used to think that way for quite a while. But having been in the trenches of the GAB and PD for a while, I can tell you that the mood has shifted to preserving fairness to the other players. We'd rather characters avoid contact. The simple reason for this is because, when the inevitable contact from the PD comes, it is oftentimes difficult to tell if a player is telling the truth about their characters motives or not. After you've been lied to over and over by players trying to save their asses, it tends to create a more skeptical environment.

I'm not saying that this is ideal or correct, just that it is, as a consequence of real-world experiences. I am a CR purist at heart, but the fact is, there have been a not small number of players who have abused the system and habitually lied to the PD, wreaking havoc in the game and costing other players their characters by exploiting doubts. We'd rather a player break the CR in a small way by having his characters avoid potentially troublesome interactions than force the PD into a situation of having to determine the truthfulness of stated intent, most of the time which can't really be verified.

Like I said, it may not be correct, but it's what's evolved in the reality of what's going on out there in the game. It's a philosophical debate that's been had several times over the years within the PD and the GAB - how things are, how they should be.

I don't know, man. It might be troublesome for PD, it might get me into trouble, but if the situation were to present itself to me, I'd do what my characters would do, every single time. It's the correct way to roleplay, and I'm in it for the roleplay.

You are supposed to ignore your own characters who need healing food, as that's helping your own character, so even if I did go to the bandit character, I wouldn't kill my own character simply because of that. :S It's just unfair that you wouldn't be able to heal your other characters as that's what your character would do, but you would have to kill your own char? Meh. I'd choose the other way just to avoid the PD, but even if I did end up chosing the other way I still wouldn't kill my character.