Thieving Changes Live On Test.

[Biohazard]

how exactly does this not work in conjunction with the thieves guild? if you steal from someone and are attacked. Then you proceed to kill them, it is in self defense. this does not give you a murder count and also does not oust you from the thieves guild.

its funny how ever year or so a new shard comes up touting era accuracy yet all of them say "it had to be this way because its how it should have been" how the F do you even know that? if it was supposed to be that way, the point is it was not that way. if you are being stolen from (and have been stolen from many times prior to this in other instances) and you have no safeguards to protect from this then you deserve it. On top of this when you are stolen from and you aren't protecting yourself its time to get the hell out of wherever you are and get prepared and go back and kick the thieves ass. When you steal, you go gray if you fail in any shape or form. This makes it so you can be guard whacked if in town and also makes it so any person who can see you can attack you. If anyone attacks you then you can defend yourself. if you cant do this then you should make it so the victim of the theft cannot retaliate either. It isn't really circumventing anything because YOU as the victim of the theft do not have to attack back because you know damn well you are scared to get killed cause you cant hold down your own fort.

[Psycho]

i was always under the impression that being in a thieves guild automaticly made it impossible for a thief to give murder counts period.

and going red boots you from the thieves guild.

?

[Derrick]

i was always under the impression that being in a thieves guild automatically made it impossible for a thief to give murder counts period.

and going red boots you from the thieves guild.

?

That is correct. The above post (which is pretty dated) is referencing the giving of counts to the thief.
A thief can never give a murder count, but is expelled from the thieves guild if he receives even one murder count, until the count is gone, but also for a minimum of seven days. You don't go red until you have five counts.

[Fungus]

From what i'm reading something does not sound right....

If you stole from someone(and turned any form of gray) and the thief-victim attacked you first and you killed them in self-defense you would not receive a murder count. it did not matter if you double clicked on them or auto attacked as they had aggressed you first, therefore you were safe to beat their ass in.

if you stole from someone and attacked them without them first attacking you then you would receive a murder count.

i don't even play here nor have i ever played here but i played around dec 97 to sometime in '00. i saw this post and felt inclined to register.

I agree wit this statement. I spent alot of time playing a "thief pk" during this time peroid. I pretty much played from the beginning of 1998 until the release of the renaisance patch and I do not remember there ever being an issue with me stealing from someone and them being able to attack me and remain blue. In fact, I remember quite vividly that if I stole from them and they attacked, I could most definately agress them and in most cases they died. Combat thieves or thief pk's were and still are an awesome template to play. The fact that I can take a murder within the first minute or so of stealing and being attacked is inconvenient and most importantly, not era acurate. If anyone else remembers is as it was because they actually played this template, please assist me in digging up some viable information to get these changes made.

[poogoblin]

From what i'm reading something does not sound right....

If you stole from someone(and turned any form of gray) and the thief-victim attacked you first and you killed them in self-defense you would not receive a murder count. it did not matter if you double clicked on them or auto attacked as they had aggressed you first, therefore you were safe to beat their ass in.

if you stole from someone and attacked them without them first attacking you then you would receive a murder count.

i don't even play here nor have i ever played here but i played around dec 97 to sometime in '00. i saw this post and felt inclined to register.

I agree wit this statement. I spent alot of time playing a "thief pk" during this time peroid. I pretty much played from the beginning of 1998 until the release of the renaisance patch and I do not remember there ever being an issue with me stealing from someone and them being able to attack me and remain blue. In fact, I remember quite vividly that if I stole from them and they attacked, I could most definately agress them and in most cases they died. Combat thieves or thief pk's were and still are an awesome template to play. The fact that I can take a murder within the first minute or so of stealing and being attacked is inconvenient and most importantly, not era acurate. If anyone else remembers is as it was because they actually played this template, please assist me in digging up some viable information to get these changes made.

I concur with these two. A thief was always able to defend oneselves after stealing if they were attacked first. You should probably make an "era-accuracy" thread about this one. There was always that question of "should I attack that theif that just stole 2 gems from me, or will I get my butt handed to me because he has a DP kryss in his backpack?" when I was stolen from around WBB.

[Gringo]

A thief not being able to defend themself after being attacked sounds very trammelish to me. Its been a long time since retail but from what I remember it went kinda like this.

Pre-T2A: Anybody could start a thief with 50 stealing and steal from innocents day one. No thieves guild needed.

T2A: Thieves must be in the thieves guild to steal from innocents.

Ren: Trammel, thieves not being able to defend themselves and pretty much all the rest from here on out that lead to the downfall of UO.

[Duke Jones]

So how does this play out, lets say, in town?

Does that mean that a thief has potentially no risk associated with being grey when they have a complete success?

So you could literally see an item get stolen from your bag and saying "guards" will produce no response? Is this correct with a complete success?

[Arkosh Kovasz]

You could still attack the thief if you noticed them steal from you, and by noticed I don't mean the game telling you that "you notice so and so stealing from you".

[Duke Jones]

You could still attack the thief if you noticed them steal from you, and by noticed I don't mean the game telling you that "you notice so and so stealing from you".

yeah, but if he's blue to everyone else doesn't that mean that he could potentially multiclient a healer, or get his buddies to heal untill the steal-victim is defeated or run away?

[Arkosh Kovasz]

Yep.

[Duke Jones]

Jeez, I foresee alot of lame combat in town, and additional forum posts about mutliclienting exploits.

[Derrick]

It should be noted that this thread is over 9 months old, and these thief mechanics have been on the shard for about that long. Just a note in case anyone thought this was a new proposal.

[Arkosh Kovasz]

Jeez, I foresee alot of lame combat in town, and additional forum posts about mutliclienting exploits.

These changes arent new Duke. They've been effect for quite some time now.

[Duke Jones]

Oh...

*Facepalm*

*Walks nose-first into the FAIL Corner*

[Lor]

Okay. So thief steals from innocent.

'You can't steal that.'

Innocent attacks thief.

Innocent remains blue to thief and appears to not be aggressive.

Thief dies.



So that's how its supposed to work? Cause that's fact.