If you sell it IG should it be stealable?

As a player, who in the past has sold food that I have brought into game for in-game money only. I sell the food for for coin, person who buys it, just got REAL food for FAKE money. I have in the past been "rolled" for my food, I was ok with it, everything has a "price". After that happened, I had a bunch of "body guards" any time that I was selling food. They took their payment in food, and they tipped me.

If you leave a plate of browines out and someone sneaks off with them, your fault for leaving them unguarded. If someone comes and touches all of them with dirty hands that's just RUDE and not sanitary.

So as someone who has done this and has had all the "bad" stuff happen. Just roll with the punches.

But if I just bring myself a sandwich and "Beer" i.e. soda, then someone better not "steal" i.e. take and keep themselves, give it the Tavern Keeper and I will "buy" myself another order.

Matt K.
 
If someone is selling brownies, and I poison them with a note saying: "all of these are poisoned" and now nobody wants to buy them, how is that going to be dealt with? I've essentially stolen their brownies. Is it a violation of the rules for me to do so? More importantly, is it violating the rules for them to put the tray "away" and set out a "new" tray? At what point does the ruling or lack thereof become subject to abuse by one party or another?
 
They can put out a new tray, or wait 10 minutes.
 
Well, first I would need to find out that they are all poisoned...and if you want to use that much poison and can get away with it, Cool...but I would not sell them for a few i.e. 10 or so min, and then all's well...once I found out they were poisoned.. :)
 
So putting out a "new" tray becomes automagically removing my ig items (poison) from play. Ignoring an effect, which is cheating.
 
I would say the person could not put out a new tray. but, if they find it poisoned, they can warn people to come back in 10 minutes when it wears off.
 
But here's the thing: without an official ruling, as it is case by case, one marshal might say "oh, he blew up/poisoned your food? Sorry pal, can't do anything about it." And the next could say "you're a terrible person, now you need to compensate them/leave and never return".

No official ruling means case by case punishments which means unjust punishments half the time (either too lenient or too harsh) due to there being no standard policy in place.

It needs to be handled on a chapter level not a national level. And here's why:

Chapter setting A) Represents a town or a place where people are "dug in" and have "stuff" off stage that can not be easily repped. (Access to their family bakery for example) so it makes sense that, well if you blew up THAT tray of brownies, I have plenty more I have tons in my bakery. This is a site that will allow PC's to "set up their cabin with their stuff" before game on because they've been there for awhile.

Chapter setting B) Has strict Carry in Carry out rules. PC's were expected to actually carry in and rep to the best of their ability all their belongings for the event that is being run. No Presetting up cabins here, we need to win the town from the monsters and stake our claim before they counter attack. This setting may not be as conducive to "unlimited" food, as determined by THE LOCAL PLOT TEAM. And even then the local baker could have come in with the "back convoy" and may still have more food stores and supplies with them then he could rep on his at the time.

Making a blanket "one size fits all" ruling that supports Setting A or Setting B could harm the other. This is why I say, the blanket rules are the ones we have now: Game items are game items, everything else is not a game item and not subject to the "game item" restrictions unless otherwise specifically addressed by a rule (poisoning food for example).

Local chapters can inform their marshals and local player bases any modifications they have to the blanket rules that will be in effect for their campaign. Keeping all their marshals in line is up to a local chapter staff, and not national rulebook.

If you ever feel that a local plot team is acting against the rules or spirit of the game there are avenue's for that too, if going to that chapters Customer Service or Owner is not an option, Stephen (@RiddickDale) is National Customer Service... or you can go to Ali (@zehnyu) who is the National Chairman and they can help you out with your grievance. It's their job.

I still feel there is not a need for any new policy to address how Non-Game-Items interact with the Game world, as the rules we have now cover it just fine.
 
So putting out a "new" tray becomes automagically removing my ig items (poison) from play. Ignoring an effect, which is cheating.

Be careful how you use the word cheating. It carries significant implications.

With that said, you have identified one of the reasons why poisoning food is challenging. Once people know that food is poisoned they can circumvent that delivery very easily.
 
I am normally a huge advocate of trusting people to do the right thing, and I was not aware we had resources like customer service if thing ever escalated to that degree. Good stuff.

I don't like the policy, but I can't conceive a more agreeable solution or compromise. I'll just have to put roleplay on hold when my character encounters unattended food like I do when he encounters unattended cabins. If the rules disallow something, roleplay takes a back seat.

If you suckers leave unattended brownies and coin though, I'm still stealing all you coin and buying brownies later. Be warned!
 
So if all food brought to game MUST be paid for at logistics and become IG stealable, that will discourage some people from doing it. Others may suddenly NOT be able to even bring food to events. If I bring 40 sodas to an event but have to pay a 4 gold "game tax" (1 silver per) to logistics each time I do, I will do it far less often, if ever again. And "new" or "poor" characters won't even be able to do that, as they can't scrape the luxury coin together.

If I need to pay 1 copper for every tea bag I bring to game, I will likely stop bringing it. Largely because I don't feel like performing "tea inventory" before and after events when restocking my supplies.

I think this thread unfairly attacks food items. I know of leather workers who sell their wares, some for IG coin, should all leather goods be subject to the same rule? Ditto for most pieces of costuming I can imagine.

Fact is, some people will be ok with this. However, other people, such as myself who just wants to bring food to share with my friends, don't want people pilfering through it simply BECAUSE it's food.

Here's the biggest rub for me. If all other forms of PC to PC treasure, coin, and favor transfer are unregulated, why are we suddenly concerned about stealing non game property items. Frankly I am allowed to STEAL treasure from a player, and give it to a completely unrelated character for no reason other than to offload the hot item, and people find that perfectly fine with the game. Why can people not also just trade game items for non game items. Hi I'm Johnny new player, thank you for giving me extra gear Ms. Helga High-Level, I don't have any coin to compensate you but you can have this string of beads as a token of my friendship. These transactions are suddenly ILLEGAL... or Johnny must declare every piece of costuming he would ever think of giving away, when he arrives at game, to make sure it's tagged and legally paid for.


If any form of IG sales restriction were to pass I would IMMEDIATELY create a side "NPR donation" economy. Donate to my cause and you will receive a donation reward of <x>. You're not actually buying that Morning Edition Tote Bag, you're receiving it as a thank you gift in return for your minimum donation. The tote bag is not an IG item, not stealable and is NOT being directly bought from me. As long as people are legally allowd to tip people for singing / helping and/or give money to other players in an unregulated fashion for no real IG value transfer reason there is nothing barring the "NPR donation" economy to keep things OOG.

And before people cry fowl having all these non-game things around (like they currently are now), there is a large precedent about non game items being IG and targetable by effects. I can disarm your treasure chest, your cup, even your plate with a spell. I can poison your drink with a tag. However that does not make your personal property and/or food MY OOG property. That just means I've added an additional effect to it.

If you want to force every item around the game to be tagged, stealable, and IG property, awesome, That's a great RUST style game. Nothing is off limits except undergarmets, sox, and shoes.... go nuts you Lord of the Flies fans. Sadly, I won't want to play it, as it's not the LARP experience I am currently looking for.

As long as theft and "giving because I want to and for no other reason" are legal, sale for OOG items will be legal. You can't crack down on one without effecting the other, or removing OOG items from the game altogether. Frankly, I feel the system we have now IS the happy middle ground.

Some of us like the system the way it is.

So that we're perfectly clear, I in no way condone the requiring of everything to be tagged. The logistical nightmares alone make the veins in my temples throb. Nor would I want that style of game either. I would only require a tag for those items you are going to sell, and what you're actually selling IS the tag, along with the appropriate (if sometimes edible) physrep. This also means that what someone would be stealing is the actual tag, and returning the tag physrep (sword, brownie, leather vest, coin purse) just as with all other theft. If you bring an entire kiddie pool full of bottled juices in ice and hand them out for free, they're OOG items only, not stealable. They're like your untagged hat. If someone takes one without permission, they're committing real world theft, petty theft, but theft all the same. What I'm saying is that if you bring the kiddie pool of bottled juices and are looking to sell them at even 1 copper a pop, you should have drink tags. If a thief steals a bottle from the pool, he gets a drink tag and the actual bottle of juice has to get returned to the owner. The thief can then merchant / pawn / trade / whatever that tag in any way the game condones.

Now the idea that this unfairly hits new/poor characters because it would cost them 4 gold to sell 40 bottles of ale, if that's the case then our Alchemy/Blacksmithing/Potion/Scroll creation systems are unfair because it costs those people coin to create their IG saleable items. What this would do is bring these OOG created items more into line with other saleable items in our game: It makes them IG stealable like other saleable items in our game; follow the same thieving rules as everything else; and fall into having a creation cost like other saleable craftable items IG. In addition, like other craftable consumables, they are a way to help control the game economy by way of having coin turned in for production. Unlike other craftable consumables they provide "soft" IG benefits instead of power.

Also, Keegan, if you ever encounter an unattended cabin, you are well within your rights to get a rules marshal to oversee your burglary. If I'm around, just get me and I'll oversee your theft of IG items.
 
I know, however due to the tediousness (at times) involved, its a fool venture, as usually if a cabin is unattended, its because town is busy with plot somewhere, which means the bulk of rogue/rules marshalls in general are busy as well. By the time they would be free, the cabin would likely be attended again.
 
Yes, however if that IS your intent go to the monster camp in advance, and let the plot team/me know. I'm sure we can work something out.
 
Something to compensate for the time spent acquiring a rules Marshal? Because that changes things immensely. My biggest concern with roguing like that was that it'd take time to go find someone translating to less time to pull off the "heist" despite there being no ig reason for it.
 
So that we're perfectly clear, I in no way condone the requiring of everything to be tagged. The logistical nightmares alone make the veins in my temples throb. Nor would I want that style of game either. I would only require a tag for those items you are going to sell, and what you're actually selling IS the tag, along with the appropriate (if sometimes edible) physrep. This also means that what someone would be stealing is the actual tag, and returning the tag physrep (sword, brownie, leather vest, coin purse) just as with all other theft. If you bring an entire kiddie pool full of bottled juices in ice and hand them out for free, they're OOG items only, not stealable. They're like your untagged hat. If someone takes one without permission, they're committing real world theft, petty theft, but theft all the same. What I'm saying is that if you bring the kiddie pool of bottled juices and are looking to sell them at even 1 copper a pop, you should have drink tags. If a thief steals a bottle from the pool, he gets a drink tag and the actual bottle of juice has to get returned to the owner. The thief can then merchant / pawn / trade / whatever that tag in any way the game condones.

Now the idea that this unfairly hits new/poor characters because it would cost them 4 gold to sell 40 bottles of ale, if that's the case then our Alchemy/Blacksmithing/Potion/Scroll creation systems are unfair because it costs those people coin to create their IG saleable items. What this would do is bring these OOG created items more into line with other saleable items in our game: It makes them IG stealable like other saleable items in our game; follow the same thieving rules as everything else; and fall into having a creation cost like other saleable craftable items IG. In addition, like other craftable consumables, they are a way to help control the game economy by way of having coin turned in for production. Unlike other craftable consumables they provide "soft" IG benefits instead of power.

Also, Keegan, if you ever encounter an unattended cabin, you are well within your rights to get a rules marshal to oversee your burglary. If I'm around, just get me and I'll oversee your theft of IG items.

The problem with your above described system is this:

You place no limits on someone like me who does not intend to "sell" the treat... but heavily limit someone who does. I can severely damage an opponents market by giving away an item for free that they charge for. Undercutting the value of their good. Since I don't have to pay for mine and it can't be stolen, and they have to pay for theirs and it CAN be stolen... how is that fair?

This only effects the spot market of "non game goods"... Blacksmiths and Alchemists are needed to make game items, I can't just show up with unlimited of those, even if I make 100 sword reps, without the IG tags for them, they are just reps which cannot be used in combat. Giving every player at a chapter a free sword rep may be kind, but it would in no way impart the ability to use it without the tag.

Selling food or any other non game item (costuming, armor (rep not tag), trinkets, future MI reps (not yet a game item) is a great way to add to our game... and get those people some coin if they could not otherwise participate in other parts of the game, due non ability or non interest. The non-game items market is based solely on what people will pay for it. If a local economy says "we're not interested Mr Hat Vendor" then there is no recourse I just didn't sell them.

I don't see the need to make everything IG that possibly could be sold by a character tagged, and "ready for theft". When otherwise it may not be a game item. The amount of tags and logistics work it creates for a game is silly. As long as we have a system where non-game-items are around, they are going to get sold from time to time... that's just how it is. Guess what though, that sold item won't effect the game at all, so really the person who bought it is just "giving their money away" to another pc... which, last I checked, is ENTIRELY legal. I don't see why a third party wants to get involved and take not just the game items that changed hands, but the non game item too... Please let people keep their baubles, sashes, and cookies too.
 
Which, again, is why I suggested simply allowing players to freely print their own food/clothing/whatever item tags if they wanted to sell those things for IG profit. It's simple, places no strain on logistics, can be coupled with clearly marking trays or trays as in game with an accompanying pile of tags, and requires no ig cost to do which changes nothing for game purposes save that you now must ensure that food item is tagged and return the phys rep on request before gulping it down.

This doesn't make non-tagged items a better choice or less costly, and doesn't impart ant unfair advantage to anyone.
 
Right, so you're saying people should print their own tags, but still require them to pay logistics to get the item into the game? Still sounds like a logistics hassle, as they have to confirm these player printed tags somehow, requiring a signature or stamp at least, on each tag, to denote it passed through logistics. As, if I steal this tag and turn it in to logistics, I get that coin back.

If you're not selling the beverage you're still allowed to flood the market with ulimited "freebies" is tipping considered bad form in game culture now? As it's imparting a benefit to somebody who hasn't "paid their dues" to logistics to get those items IG. Sounds to me like there will be a lot more out of game questions under the new system (is this a tagged brownie... yes? ok tips allowed... no?... no tips I guess, even if they were nice... I want to steal the brownies but just so I can get the logistics coin, the plate of brownies has to go back to the original owner, to then decide if they want to reup the logistics tax or just bring them IG for free.... oh crap now it's a free browine I guess I can't steal it again, I hope the other thieves notice the difference and don't steal the reps this time because 20 minutes ago these were totally legal to steal brownies....)

OR the current system... oh look it's not a game item I guess I can't steal it. Oh well, let me go find a game item to steal instead.

WHY? How does this improve the game... I just don't see how the game is being hurt under the current system. As long as we allow unlimited non-game-items to float around IG this will be an issue... attack that problem not the "ambiguous spot market on non-game-items"
 
I don't think it does. And a lot of the arguments in favor of changing it really boil down to "I want to steal peoples food/stuff without in game consequences" there's even been mention that getting a rules Marshal is too much trouble.

It also opens a lot of room for theft of items that aren't tagged {-especially- with food} because "Oops, I made a mistake"

No one is forcing a player to pay for food in game. If you paid a gold for a cookie, maybe you need to assess a bit more how you're spending your coin, or start bringing your own cookies. But if that player can convince you that cookie is worth the gold? More power to them.

edit: I don't think the current rules restrict role play at all. They're there because, ultimately, we're playing a game. The immersion and rp is great! But if someone steals my things outside the rule set, the actual player Christine is going to be real pissed. And I don't want to play a game that says this is okay.
 
The problem with your above described system is this:

You place no limits on someone like me who does not intend to "sell" the treat... but heavily limit someone who does. I can severely damage an opponents market by giving away an item for free that they charge for. Undercutting the value of their good. Since I don't have to pay for mine and it can't be stolen, and they have to pay for theirs and it CAN be stolen... how is that fair?

What you're saying is something that can be done, right now. There is a player that sells tea in our chapter. If I rolled in and just started giving away tea I would undercut this person, and this person's character... in the system that exists now. The only difference in what I propose is that the tea salesman would still have tea tags that he could Merchant back at cost or sell after dealing with the business interloper.

I'm going to quote Bryan here as to why this is an issue, he summed it up pretty nicely. I understand that you don't see it as such, but some people do. Can you at least see where we're coming from?

I think my points have already been made by others :) Here's how I'd sum it up, at the risk of repeating various points others have brought up:

1. To me there is no material difference *at all* between me giving you $1 for a long sword tag, or me turning my $1 into brownies and you turning your long sword tag into 2 silver, and me giving you the brownie for 2 silver. It's the same thing, 100% exactamundo the same thing in my eyes. Both are trading an OOG resource ($1, or a brownie worth $1) for an IG resource (a long sword tag, or 2 silver, both of which are worth the same thing in-game by the rules). Dollars and brownies are both relatively exchangable at an event, just like silver and long sword tags. I can use Merchant and IG resources to easily exchange 2 silver for a longsword or vice versa. I can easily go to the store to buy a brownie. In my mind the two situations are interchangable.

2. I am better with giving the chapter $1 and getting gobbies to gobby that long sword tag. Why? Because it's going to the chapter, where I know it will be used to benefit the game, not another player. I wish we had better uses for gobbies than giving in-game power, but despite years of brainstorming I have found little else that works.

3. The "stealability" thing is a big one. Characters of mine have palmed a *lot* of gold over the years off of other characters in-game. Every time I do so, I run the risk of being caught. On the other hand, I can't steal milkshakes or root beer or brownies. That's effectively "currency" (since that's the way other characters in-game treat it) that's invulnerable to my sleight of hand. Boy, I wish I could do that with other in-game resources. A common reply to this point is "but people don't get rolled for their wads of cash that they earn!" to which my response is "you might be surprised how much gold goes 'missing' while they're counting it with people nearby". Brazen waylaying is not the most common form of theft.

4. I am generally better with people performing service for IG resources. Serving in the tavern can deserve tips. Food prep can be rewarded for IG resources - I can't steal someone's time (bar a rather rudely used Enslavement, but we won't go there). But the food itself, especially when it's brought in straight off the street or with very little effort to assemble/cook/mix? That is an OOG resource which should garner OOG payments. I am generally a fan of JP's model, where he is reimbursed OOG for the OOG food cost and IG for the time and service (he puts on a darn fancy table when he cooks). It's a grey line, for sure, but generally it's pretty clear which side of it someone is falling on.

Again, all of this is my own personal opinion *only*. It informs my actions as a player of Alliance but I recognize that others feel differently. I choose to not partake of that part of the game, but others do and that's their business. I am long since the point in my LARPing career where I'm going to whine at others simply because I disagree with the way they play the game within the rules :)

-Bryan

Ah, I remembered one reason which hasn't been brought up as much by others in this thread - the game world economy.

I still have a dream that someday we can come to some semblance of an actual functioning economy in Alliance. We're a loooooooooooong way from it, and this isn't even the biggest culprit of the problems we have right now, but it definitely contributes.

Here's the thing. I have a decent OOG income. If I chose to take that route, it would be *far* easier for me to gain in-game gold from bringing lots of fancy root beer bottles and selling them in game (or substitute milkshakes, ice cream, brownies, whatever) than it is for me to, well *actually* earn money in-game through in-game methods. When you gain the best IG coin income by using OOG cash, the economy gets hosed.
 
Right, so you're saying people should print their own tags, but still require them to pay logistics to get the item into the game?
Nope, not at all.
I'm saying that they print their own tags, there is no in game benefit for them to do so save that they can now turn a profit on their brownies whereas without tagging them, they wouldn't be allowed to do so.
No payment to logistics, no requiring they have their tags signed. There's no reason to limit or control the number of IG brownie tags, as, with very few exception, I can't imagine someone forking over cash for a tag with no brownie phys rep included, and it has no real IG effect.

If you allow untagged brownies to be sold, but not stolen and treated as personal items like other phys. reps, that's cool, but here are a number of ways I can see this abused:

1. Steal coin, pay for brownies, steal coin again. -Effectively stolen brownies.
2. Bring brownies, sell brownies, demand phys. rep back. -If tagged or otherwise. The difference being that as an untagged item, I can just turn around and sell it again. If it's tagged, I only have as many sellable brownies as I have tags, and it's in my best interests to just sell the damn things.
3. Undercut other brownie sellers by giving away free brownies. -Economic destruction.
4. Bring a slew of juice-boxes, brownies, cheese-sticks and other snack items, establish an IG snack-shack and turn a huge profit IG without ANY IG investment. -Own the economy. You can gain coin by donating to the game directly, or you can cut the game out and gain more coin with less OOG cash. Gee, whats the more frugal choice?
5. Buy out someone's entire stock, sell that stock at inflated prices. -No set value means nobody can say you're wrong or unfair.
6. Steal coin, pay for brownies, steal coin again, sell brownies. -Stolen brownies + Profitable business venture.
7. Slander brownies IG, convincingly run a counter campaign against brownies, mentioning, IG, that they made you sick, taste like dirt, etc. -Destroy credibility. Without tags or rules, there is no way for players to verify this save by buying a brownie anyway.

Keep in mind when I say "brownie" I'm also talking about other food stuff, drinks, clothing or garb items, weapon phys. reps, etc. If it's sold for IG coin, and not tagged as IG, it no longer follows OR is protected by the same rules as tagged items. Just because I can't steal something doesn't mean it's not susceptible to being gamed, and while I wouldn't blatantly do something against the spirit of the rules, if I, as my character, see you making free money off something that for some reason I cannot steal (magic!), and that you don't seem to run out of or have to pay any cost for, I'm going to find a way to bring you back down to my level: dirt poor and financially worthless because that's in his nature. You work for what you have, or you don't deserve it.

It brings up roleplay concerns, cheating concerns, and concerns about what constitutes fair or unfair advantage. At least in my opinion.
 
I don't think it does. And a lot of the arguments in favor of changing it really boil down to "I want to steal peoples food/stuff without in game consequences" there's even been mention that getting a rules Marshal is too much trouble.

It also opens a lot of room for theft of items that aren't tagged {-especially- with food} because "Oops, I made a mistake"

No one is forcing a player to pay for food in game. If you paid a gold for a cookie, maybe you need to assess a bit more how you're spending your coin, or start bringing your own cookies. But if that player can convince you that cookie is worth the gold? More power to them.

edit: I don't think the current rules restrict role play at all. They're there because, ultimately, we're playing a game. The immersion and rp is great! But if someone steals my things outside the rule set, the actual player Christine is going to be real pissed. And I don't want to play a game that says this is okay.

Why is why I suggest the tag system above. If you take a bottle of "rum", you can keep the tag, but not the bottle (or the rum). If someone is stealing your actual things, and not tags, you have every right to be angry. If they eat my brownies without my permission, I'm going to be pretty livid. I do not condone the sale of untagged items because it actually can cause the infamous Step 1: Pay for brownies. Step 2: Steal money back. Step 3: Eat brownies. It's completely legal, if a jerk move. If they had to be tagged it would be Step 1: Pay for brownie tags. Step 2: Steal money back. Step 3: Return brownies as OOG physrep. Step 4: Merchant or trade tags. The player can never actually steal the physical item because the physrep must be given back.

-edit-

While I personally would prefer paying for the tags for the sake of helping create an IG economy, self printed tags for things you sell, that cost nothing and are worth nothing other than noting that you're putting these items into the IG system is an acceptable solution for me.
 
Back
Top