Projects by Criminals

[Oasis]

This is a difficult case, especially as one of my chars is directly involved and would benefit/lose depending on the decision. Therefore, I find myself in a position where I'm unable to give a specific opinion.

However, in general, this issue does need to be figured out............

If a character clogs a machine with one gram of resource per machine, with a large amount of resources required for the project, it is deemed an abuse of the game mechanics, thus is undone.

If a character clogs a machine by starting a project with resources that are near impossible to find in that region, I would think that would be deemed an abuse of the game mechanics, and thus be undone. (I can't recall any specific cases of this)

If a character starts a building with an offensive name, it is removed. If a character starts a building to annoy other characters, but the name is not offensive, it is not removed.

If a character does something in excess that interrupts the game unnecessarily (e.g. note bombing, excessive knocking) this is deemed inappropriate and thus asked to be stopped. "Writing on the walls", i.e. starting building projects with messages in them, is not deemed a crb, however.......it is asked not to be excessive. (one to three is fine, but any more is starting to become excessive)

Now, it follows that the questions here should be similar......... is this an unnecessarily excessive abuse of the game mechanics, and/or if it disrupts the game unnecessarily, and/or is offensive.

Note bombing and excessive knocking disrupt the game by creating notes/events that pollute the area, when a lower number would create the same message.

Using stolen materials on tons of unnecessary projects is something that is very irritating, most definitely. I've seen it done where one gram of hide or fur is used on over twenty or thirty different projects. (nothing was done about the one case I can think of, as it was my charrie who would have benefited to have it undone)

However, the issue still remains, is this excessive abuse of game mechanics? I think it is. Does it matter if all the materials needed for the project are added, or if only one gram is? I don't think it should. Should it matter if the resources are valuable or not? I don't think there should be a differentiation. Should it matter if the materials are even stolen or not? That is an in-game issue, and shouldn't even have a bearing. I think the question becomes.....what is unnecessarily excessive? Starting three or four projects of this type, to get back at another character/town as opposed to 15 to 30 or more?

On the other hand, if the character is wanting to get revenge/irritate other characters/town, as opposed to irritating other players, is allowing only three or four fair? Will this sufficiently allow them to feel they are getting that revenge, without needing to push it too far and become an abuse of the system?

If these types of projects were reversible, would we still have this question? It is my understanding when they are, not all materials will be returned, only a portion, so the question may still remain even then. And in the case of only one gram per project added, and it may take a few hours to undo these projects, the question of excessiveness will still be an issue.

[Sicofonte]

Full of good points.

Another one:

Assuming that the activity (or project) for "recovering the employed resources in an unfinished project" will be time-consuming.

If the fact of employing resources in a project wasn't an instantaneous action, as it is now... would we have this problem still?


Going to thhe suggestions forum...

[the_antisocial_hermit]

If the fact of employing resources in a project wasn't an instantaneous action, as it is now... would we have this problem still?

*winces* Don't take all the few moments of instant gratification away from the game. It already takes long enough to get the stuff for and make some things.

I would've thought that starting lots of meaningless projects would work like starting excessive building projects.

[Oasis]

Even though having to wait for resources to actually add to a project would help in these abuse cases, it would make 99.5 % of projects started a real pain in the behind, having to wait before you could start it or whatever. (I'll reserve any other comments for your suggestion thread, Sico)

Hermi, I believe you would be right. However, is starting an excessive number of building projects considered abuse? I would think it should be, but I don't know as we have made that determination as of yet. (I could be wrong......... Chris, cantrlady or others might know different)

[Phalynx]

Personally I see reporting such things to the PD as way more of a CRB than the original action.
You are trying to solve an IG problem by OOC means.

If someone stole enough resources to make 10 anvils then the town leadership made a decision what to do with him/her. The could have slaughtered the criminal there and then and there would not be a problem - if the resources are that valuable it would have been a heinous crime.
If a town has rules which don't allow for such an apporach, or the characters choose to do differently they should have anitcipated that this could have happened.

It's mirrored in real life. In the UK we don't have the death penalty - not discussing wether thats right or wrong, but because we don't execute people we accept that it costs an average of £40, 000 a year to keep someone in jail, when it would be cheaper to kill them.

It's a wierd combination of OOC influences (I don't know the circumstances but it's difficult to imagine why you would want to keep such a crim alive without daft OOC ideas) and people as usual being overmaterialistic.

How can it be CRB for a prisoner to do absoultely anything possible to make his Jailer's life as miserable as possible. Personally I feel the same about note knocking as there ae ingame ways of preventing it from being a problem....

[Nakranoth]

This really dumbfounds me how this could be anything but an abuse of game mechanics. IRL, putting down a small pile of iron and saying it's going to eventually be an anvil doesn't prevent someone from picking it up and doing something else with it. Yes it'll irritate the charries, but it's mostly because it irritates the players to have resources locked by a senseless happening. If a Prisoner actually built 7 anvils, I'd have no problem with it, but to put down piles of metal and now requireing that it become anvils, that's just senseless and an abuse of the game mechanics.

[Phalynx]

This really dumbfounds me how this could be anything but an abuse of game mechanics. IRL, putting down a small pile of iron and saying it's going to eventually be an anvil doesn't prevent someone from picking it up and doing something else with it. Yes it'll irritate the charries, but it's mostly because it irritates the players to have resources locked by a senseless happening. If a Prisoner actually built 7 anvils, I'd have no problem with it, but to put down piles of metal and now requireing that it become anvils, that's just senseless and an abuse of the game mechanics.

By that count all theft is an abuse of game mechanics because a character simply could not stop four burly blokes from removing anything from their person, the minute a character is detained they should immediately drop everything they are carrying...

The prisoner is starting to build an anvil.. I can't believe it's even being discussed because that is simply the way cantr is programmed. the character uses whatever means or mechanics to acheive their objective...

[Nakranoth]

Nope, you misunderstand. Holding onto stolen goods is what the system was designed for. It wasn't designed for people to lock resources to piss of other people.

*edit* If it's just the way things are programmed, than it's no diffrent from spamming notes... after all, the code allows it to happen.

[Phalynx]

By which account every cantrian who ever put stuff in repair to prevent rot would have been under sanction. It's adouble standard. The same people who might put three sabres into repair in order to hold onto them will then complain because a thief has wasted 'their' resources.

The same with people who drag themselves, abuse of mechanics, or those who jump of a locked vehicle at preciesely the time they can attack and then jump back, or the various ways people abuse the docking system...

The list can go, I don't see why this particular glitch should get special attention.. or rather I do, because some hoarders get their knickers in a twist.

[deadboy]

Look, you are all still assuming that cantr has a set format.

The criminal is not an evil man, that is a purely IG idea. Therefore the jailor having him "In jail" is also a purely IG idea. Therefore the fact that a building belongs to the jailor is also a purely IG idea. Again, the fact that the steel belongs to the jailor again is merely an IG idea

If the criminal was inside a building, and owned the resources to make himself a few anvils, it's a free world and he can do as he chooses. If the jailors say they are going to kill him, that doesn't make the resources theirs, that'll only happen once he is dead. This means that if he wants to make 15 anvils he is free to, he will only appear to be a distraught character

In the same way, would someone be complaining if a character used their "own" (In inverted commas) steel to make these anvils? No, IG you would merely think them quirky, and so let's keep this IG too yes?

I don't know really why this thread irritates me considering I have nothing to do with the events, but something about it really does annoy me

[Phalynx]

I don't know really why this thread irritates me considering I have nothing to do with the events, but something about it really does annoy me

Same here, though obviously for different reasons...

[Nakranoth]

Honestly, Phalynx You're right, there are all sorts of things of similar nature that need correcting, but just because there's a long list of them doesn't mean they shouldn't be corrected.

Deadboy, I'm not saying that it's wrong to build more than one anvil, I'm saying it's wrong to set up projects that can't be completed by the person. The problem come in when a charecter puts his iron into somesthing just so it becomes worthless. This is something that couldn't ever happen in real life. It's his because he stole it, so on the flip side, it should be theirs when they killed him, because they killed him.

[Phalynx]

Honestly, Phalynx You're right, there are all sorts of things of similar nature that need correcting, but just because there's a long list of them doesn't mean they shouldn't be corrected.

Fair enough, but until it is corrected (by being able to cancel projects with resources applied) then I think it should not be constituted as a breach of any rules.

Going back to the original question:

Have we ever discussed if it was a CR breech for a theif to use all the stolen iron and steel to build a bunch of crap inside the jail just so the stolen items would be wasted?

it would appear from the question that the detainee had actually made the items.
In fact if the character had applied the full resources and then did 1% of work on each project then all this discussion would of course be meaningless. The guy in the jail started to make some stuff. If you don't like what he made tough, look after 'your' stuff better!

[Bowser]

He did not add near enough stuff to even start the project. As for looking after my stuff differently, I'll continue to play the same.

The amount of resources isn't very much, thats not the point. He started a project for a pot still, 2 alumina refiners, 2 sets of hoists and pulleys, and an anvil. He tried to tie up the only machine already in the building by starting a project on reclaiming a huge amount of tin coins. Luckily he had no tin coins to actually clog it.

I am not crying or whining over the actions of this character, merely asking the question as to if we have ever discussed this or lumped it into the category of note bombers and machine cloggers.

It is obvious by the response to my question that there is a lot of dissention on the topic.

[Phalynx]

Sorrry Bowser, not offence intended towards yourself... the question was entirely legitimate... more the responses of others that irked me... I've made my point, and I'm not in charge...