UO Second Age

I know in the past, someone brought up a possible second shard with the SP ruleset. That thread devolved into shard wipes, the harm it would cause to split the players, etc. I am unsure if the SP ruleset, in part, has been discussed and figured i would start one.

Obviously a wipe won't happen and obviously you can't limit people to one character per account without a wipe. So for the sake of this conversation, the one character per account rule can be nixed and ignored. In fact, this could be explained away by claiming our three accounts are actually 15 1 character accounts (sorta... O_o).

So on that note, given that siege perilous was meant more for hardcore players and everyone at UOSA is basically a hard core player, what would be the ramifications of implementing an SP ruleset?

From stratics:
http://uo.stratics.com/php-bin/show_con ... tent=30947

- 1 character per account (ignored requirement, not feasible)

The Siege Blessing

This is an AoS addition and would not be added.

Townsfolk

The shopkeepers on Siege Perilous hoard their gold greedily and will not buy items from players.
The set price for NPC's selling their wares/services is 3X that of normal shards. However, Faction pricing is in effect on Siege Perilous, so if you search every town, you are likely to find one that is set at, or below the normal price for items on other shards.
The NPC craftspeople of the town guard their knowledge jealously and will not train players in exchange for gold.
NPC shopkeepers do not sell gatherable resources (ingots, boards, leather, wool, and feathers).
Considering these differences and the ones noted under "Your Character", it would be very wise to befriend, rather than to attack, your local tradesmen. A skilled blacksmith, alchemist, tailor, or scribe can be a very powerful ally.

Shop keepers not buying items would help boost the economy a bit, I think. The higher prices would as well.
In addition, the fact that NPC's wouldn't sell hides, ingots, etc...would certainly boost the economy. RIght now, these resources are capped because of vendors. If vendors no longer sold them, then the price of these resources would more accurate be based off of real supply and demand, which would benefit resource gatherers.
This blurb mentions factions, id completely avoid that aspect, personally. We don't have enough players and guild PVP is good enough.

Magic

Spellcasters adventuring in Siege Perilous should be wary of the changes to their trade. Most noticeably, the spell "recall" will not function.
Telekinesis will not work on trapped or locked chests.
You will not be able to mark runes in dungeons nor cast Gate while in a dungeon.
For those involved in faction or guild wars, it is vitally important to note that direct damage spells will work in towns.

No recall at all? I always though recall was only barred in dungeons. As an orc I can't say I dislike this, lol.
No telekinesis on chests? This would change, to a degree, teh dynamic of a dungeon picker and treasure hunter. As I have a treasure hunter character, I can say it would be very unfair to future t-hunters who didn't 'have it easy'.
No dungeon runes? Awesome, I think. No more quick in and out which would make gold harder to earn. In addition, more chance to set ambush and more chance ot encounter people in dungeons.
Again, factions, disregard, its not worth the effort, bugs, or time.

Breaking the Law

Characters that hue red will not be attacked by guards when they venture into town. Healing a red character is a criminal offence, but will not get you guard whacked.
Although you must still be in the Thieves Guild to steal from players, you will not be removed from the guild for collecting a murder count, nor are there any skill or time requirements to meet before joining.

Reds in town, no problem there. Thieves with murder counts could be an issue though I have no opinion on the matter.


Umm, okay, the stratics page goes on to talk about armslore giving resists and other facets...so clearly this is far far far out of T2A era. If anyone can find a T2A era accurate listing for siege perilous ruleset that'd be nice. But overall, I think the bulk of what I listed was T2A accurate. So what do you think? Would it benefit the shard (especially given who our player base is and the size of the shard) or would it harm the shard?

Is it too late to implement something like that? Has it been discussed before?

I can't imagine turning the present UOSA into SP. Way too many issues with that, not the least of which is that it is HIGHLY discouraging to new UO players (and longtime-removed UO players). And given that people are always leaving UOSA, it seems unwise to also have something that discourages new players from coming in.

A second shard, however, with SP rules, would be something that would bring me (and perhaps others) back into playing with y'all. So in that sense, it wouldn't quite be splitting the population as some might expect.

I don't think Derrick has the time, inclination, cash, or BS tolerance, to start such a second shard. But it would be cool.

Mikel123 wrote:I can't imagine turning the present UOSA into SP. Way too many issues with that, not the least of which is that it is HIGHLY discouraging to new UO players (and longtime-removed UO players). And given that people are always leaving UOSA, it seems unwise to also have something that discourages new players from coming in.

A second shard, however, with SP rules, would be something that would bring me (and perhaps others) back into playing with y'all. So in that sense, it wouldn't quite be splitting the population as some might expect.

I don't think Derrick has the time, inclination, cash, or BS tolerance, to start such a second shard. But it would be cool.

You really think it would make things too difficult for noobs to start up? Most noobs have played before, and there are plenty of people who will help them out. I would think it'd be the opposite effect because they could mine or harvest leather and sell it and actually be able to sell it.

I wont' comment more on a second shard though as id rather this thread not become a second shard topic.

That Siege Blessing crap came with AOS. That is precisely the time I quit playing, once everyone had a blessed artifact weapon.

MatronDeWinter wrote:That Siege Blessing crap came with AOS. That is precisely the time I quit playing, once everyone had a blessed artifact weapon.

Ok, I didn't think it sounded right, though I never got the privilege of playing on SP cause I didn't wanna restart. Le Sigh. Thanks for the insight.

Yeah, one day everyone logged in to find "personal bless deeds" in their backpack. You could even unbless an item and re-bless something else. That on top of all those magic resistance types (ice armor preventing ice damage etc) just ruined the game for me. I don't know when they started calling it Siege Blessing though, I guess they just got rid of the deeds all together and made it a character option so it was impossible to lose the deed too.

The only thing I used the Bless deed on was my best piece of luck armor. Something i knew I wouldn't get easily.

I didn't like everyone using pbds but they served a purpose, especially when EVERYTHING at the time was item based.

GuardianKnight wrote:The only thing I used the Bless deed on was my best piece of luck armor. Something i knew I wouldn't get easily.

I didn't like everyone using pbds but they served a purpose, especially when EVERYTHING at the time was item based.

Can we get back on topic? Screw bless deeds, they shouldn't be apart of this discussion as it wouldn't be implemented.

From what ive heard, siege also means no stat loss (though people are still red)?

I was fighting tamed polar bears on Ice Isle when a bunch of blues came and pk'd me.

This shard is trammel and you're all newbies.

Player justice.

Ronk wrote:

GuardianKnight wrote:The only thing I used the Bless deed on was my best piece of luck armor. Something i knew I wouldn't get easily.

I didn't like everyone using pbds but they served a purpose, especially when EVERYTHING at the time was item based.

Can we get back on topic? Screw bless deeds, they shouldn't be apart of this discussion as it wouldn't be implemented.

From what ive heard, siege also means no stat loss (though people are still red)?

Yeah they still turn red. The only difference is they are treated as the "attackable" notoriety instead of the criminal notoriety. This allowed them to come into town and bank as long as they were not a criminal, but they were freely attackable. There was no stat loss either.

Is this a serious proposal? You might as well be suggesting trammel because it would simply never happen. Why even waste the breath talking about it?

lol seige RONK i thought you hated trammel ?

How does SP equate to trammel? Am I missing something? I was under the impression siege was a more hardcore ruleset...not more trammel like...

note, im talking about era accurate T2A siege...not modern day siege.

I miss siege so much. It was the UO I loved so much. I was a red Saul and my brothers Judas and Sanford and I owned Blanche island.

We played there for a while even after AoS hit. It was still good actually even with age of items. What killed siege was when they added trammel to it effectively destroying the shard.

Reds had no stat loss and could go to any town. The player economy SSS the strongest ever. Once blues could farm safely the server died.

There were more honorable reds than blues.

Proteus wrote:I miss siege so much. It was the UO I loved so much. I was a red Saul and my brothers Judas and Sanford and I owned Blanche island.

We played there for a while even after AoS hit. It was still good actually even with age of items. What killed siege was when they added trammel to it effectively destroying the shard.

Reds had no stat loss and could go to any town. The player economy SSS the strongest ever. Once blues could farm safely the server died.

There were more honorable reds than blues.

The economy and the stat loss things are my big draw to Siege. Hence why I started the discussion about implementing it here and whether thats even feasible.