So let\'s explore some \"real\" attributes of a life of thieving and/or murder that might carry over into a game world.
Even though this thread isn\'t specifically about thieving, I think it\'s fair to lump non-consentual theft with non-consentual PvP, at least for the sake of discussion.
Although not set in Medieval times, Dicken\'s Fagan, offers a good starting point for veiwing the life of pick-pockets and petty thieves. The first thing that\'s apparent is that Fagan and his boys are not heroic nor are their victims. They don\'t target strong, aware people but rather fat, distracted, self-satisfied merchants, ladies and burghers....people usually represented in MMORPG\'s by NPC\'s, not players. My point is that the sort of characters players play are greatly more prepared not be the victimized by petty theft than those a \"real\" thief would target...especially a new thief.
The \"path\" to acquiring thieving skills in real life is slow and notably unrewarding while marked with frequent failures and punishments ranging from a simple beating to incarceration or worse. I\'m not sure any of those consequences would make for fun game content but it seems to me they are essential to creating a realistic thieving experience. To be valid in game terms, the experience needs to be \"real\" for the perpetrator, not just the victim.
The other example from Dickens and also earlier literature relates to actual techniques for theft. Musicians, jugglers and entertainers were frequently lumped in the common peoples mind with thieves and pick pockets...and with good reason. The distraction and crowds that an entertainer drew created a better environment for thieving. People are less likely to notice being jostled or bumped when in a situation where it\'s common. Even an average fat, merchant is much more likely to notice and thwart a pick pocket if he\'s walking alone down a well lite road.
Which rasies the question of how much the success of a thieving ability ought to be tied to various environmental modifiers and not just a simple skill level number. Also, any game that allows people to learn how to steal ought also to have mechanisms or skills people can learn to defend against it. One\'s thieving skill needs to be weighed against many unknowable player as well as learnable situational variables to be in any way fair.
Using Dickens again, some other common themes that greatly enhanced success are thieves working in pairs or teams. some to distract and some to steal. Success is also greater if law enforcement is \"corruptable\" i.e. can be bribed. The flip side of that is that it greatly reduces profits while avoiding more serious consequences.
Implementing even parts of this starts to sound like a thieving game exclusively so, at the very least, is likely to be put off by the development team until many, many more pressing issues are addressed. However, I think these are the sorts of things a game which allows Player on Player theft must address to be in any way fair and acceptable to those opposed to it in any form presented in a game up to this time.
As for murder, where to start? Modern laws differentiate punishment for killing someone due to circumstances and yet the Nations of the world can\'t agree on a uniform code. Thankfully, a game set in a generally Medieval frame doesn\'t have to reflect these varying moral codes. However, to adopt a completely simplified, one law-fits-all-situations code of justice is also not particularly RP-centric either. This is, for me, an excellent reason to just leave it out of the game altogether for being too dang complicated to deal with in any acceptable way...and is also the reason, from what I\'ve read, that it won\'t be part of PS.
However, in the interest of fairness, let\'s explore a bit. Firstly, why kill another player? What\'s the motivation in game terms? Certainly it can\'t simply be \"Because I want to\". PS already allows duels and Guild Wars which, with an enhanced alignment system or broader selection of Guild options as discussed in other threads, ought to allow for the great majority of PvP situations to be handled that are actually RP driven.
So now we come to \"evilness\'. As Rick Moranis (Dark Helmet) said in Space Balls \"Evil will always defeat goodness because goodness is soooo STOOPID!\". It follows than that evil must be \"smart\".
That implies some reasoning or reward from an \"evil\" killing. Looting the victim six ways to Sunday and leaving them naked is pretty much not acceptable to anyone except those who get their kicks by destroying other peoples fun...even though it is the logical outcome of being killed in a remote area. It\'s quite simply to costly for players to make an enjoyable gaming experience for the RP player PS is aiming at.
The best rewards I can think of relate to oppositions and conflicts created due to an alignment system that\'s built into the game...not just some nutjob saying \"I\'m RPing a psycho killer!\". I think that to be in anyway acceptable, any and all PVP must arise from imperatives, choices and goals that players agree to make and pursue with their characters. One example of this was planned for Warhammer Online before the project was stopped (although the DaoC developer has just signed on to revive it).
Two classes of players were allowed, upon completing certain goals and quests, choosing certain skill paths and attaining proficency in them (That game also didn\'t have set \"levels\") to hunt and kill each other. These were necromancers and witch hunters...two professions specifically opposed to each other in the Warhammer environment. They had every RP reason to be in conflict. Players had to conciously direct their character along this path and then engaged in their own sub-game due to their dedication. It\'s worth noting that the Warhammer realm was set in the heart of a strong kingdom with a robust constabulary where random murder was so unlikely to succeed, it was considered unneccesary to even have it in the game. However, both Necromancers and witch hunters had to deal with some attack-on-sight NPC\'s depending upon where they chose to travel.
At any rate, there is another model for PvP that, while not non-consentual, could easily provide a great enough pool of players to beat up on to create an \"enjoyable\" PvP experience while retaining and reinforcing PS\'s RP values... especially if it was expanded to create more than just one set of opposing paths.
The only thing is, as I understand it, the PS world is largely a harmonious society without any of the stresses that would create appropriate conflict scenarios among players. So, again, we\'re back to talking about hugely rewriting the game to create any sort of valid reason for PvP.
