Ye Olde Publick Execution

[Gaffer 250]

Seeing in recent patch notes a line time about a fix for an exploit sparked the idea of making a spectacle out of people who exploit bugs for bad ends instead of reporting them to the development team. The spectacle of which I speak is a good old fashioned public execution of the offending person's main!  It goes something like this...

 

Starter villages are outfitted with gaols or keeps featuring a raised platform where the action takes place.  At Wurm dawn ringing of a bell tower is the signal for logging in the banned person's avatar and positioning it in public view.  Also present is the Lord High Executioner, a silent fellow equipped with a fantastic adamantine huge axe.    Formal charges are read out in appropriately colored text in local and the sentence of death is pronounced.  The executioner then cuts the condemned deadly hard in the head and damages it.   One whack ought to do it.  The corpse is then pushed off the edge of the platform into the King's Pigsty where one of the hungry King's Pigs eats the corpse pretty much immediately.  Everyone in local receives a small quantity of Blood of the Condemned in their inventory, good for making a potion of ... something or other.

 

Fun for the whole family.  Attendees get a reminder of the consequences of exploiting bugs, an excuse to show off their Santa hats, and a dash of marginally useful blood. The new blood type and potion would require new development but everything else uses existing game assets.

[Cecci 1,609]

In a world where kids play online games while the adults around them get executed or killed in various kinds of conflicts, in Syria (religion) or in Mexico (drugs) or anywhere, we don't need executions in Wurm.

We have players from all over the world, they come here to enjoy, not to get their PTS triggered.

 

Extremly many -1 from me.

[Niki 2,278]

this is to intense personally.

[Wurmhole 3,650]

I really like this one.  It not only bring the offense to everyone's attention, making them so much more aware of the consequences for bad actions, but it then provides a welcome little gift, as a reward for participating in the "lesson".

 

As a parent, I suppose you could just tell your kids not to go to an execution?  I personally would not let my own kids play any sort of online game, until they were mature enough to handle the wierdo's and nut jobs.  Letting young children plan unattended opens up so many bad possibilities, both for the children and for other mature players that don't like when kids run loose in their playground.

 

Besides, I think this is much more civilized than pvp in general.  Here, players are being killed for misbehaving.  In PvP, players are being killed, to steal all their stuff.

Edited May 7, 2016 by Wurmhole

[ClericGunem 275]

+1 to the concept of public banning.  While Gaffer may have gotten a bit over zealous the public execution aspect, the shaming method has been used in other games in a usually in less personal and less ritualistic execution of an exploiter, by an impersonal entity.  What happened icbash requires a public execution to reestablish some trust in CC and show would-be exploiters that this kind of crap will be public and that person, if they are an established gamer, will forever be known for what they did.

 

Somersetting like this is what i think is appropriate.

 

 

 

Edited May 7, 2016 by ClericGunem

[Cecci 1,609]

Wurmhole, I was not speaking of kids going to executions. That is your interpretation.
Noone should have to vitness executions, nor perform them.

The world is full of traumatized adults also. And full of people that think they have a right to take other peoples lifes.
If nothing else, think of all those war veterans that play Wurm. I know several with PTS.

Personally I come from a country that do not accept death penalties, to me public executions are acts that mean to cause fear in people, rather than cause them amusement.

Maybe you live in a world where lynch,mobs are legit also?
I can provide a huge number of clips from the internet if you fancy looking at people killing people that can't even defend themselves. It is utterly disgusting.

 

Name and shame and in severe cases deleted toon would be better.

[QueenRocks 105]

"Execution" sounds a bit harsh. I can see a mechanism more to the likes of "Running the Gauntlet", without the punished ever dying. Instead of hitting with weapons, we could throw things (anything from a cotton ball to a rock shard). Once the punished reaches the end of the gauntlet, the show is over.

 

It would serve the purpose of making public an offender and provide entertainment for the crowed. Executions and public punishment in human history served exactly those purposes.

 

However, this would raise a whole other set of questions: Who will be judge and who will be jury? How do we prevent miscarriages of justice?

[Ayluin 170]

Personally, I've never found public shaming in any form to be useful in online games. People that deserved to be banned/reprimanded should be and that is something that is between GM's and that character alone. Just my opinion..

[Klaa 4,872]

Blood for the Blood God!

 

Also about the kiddie defense...

 

*points at the cannibalism, zombies, Swedes, human sacrifice, Bone Alter, and the BL in general* (granted the current BL are a bunch of pansies anyways )

 

Heck breeding with players and player zombies was even a thing for a while.

Edited May 7, 2016 by Klaa

[elroth 279]

-1

[Wargasm 1,926]

I'm waiting for Enki to +1 executions and beheadings, but I agree that such an implementation would not be suitable for all audiences.

[geode 292]

2 hours ago, Klaa said:

Blood for the Blood God!

 

Also about the kiddie defense...

 

*points at the cannibalism, zombies, Swedes, human sacrifice, Bone Alter, and the BL in general* (granted the current BL are a bunch of pansies anyways )

 

Heck breeding with players and player zombies was even a thing for a while.

 The Blood demon gets enough blood already, too much. I wish he would explode from gluttony already.

 

-1 to the suggestion of the OP... however.... +1 to banning players for exploiting the game and making the bans public. Criminal justice in secret has no deterrence value whatsoever.

 

and why do I say -1? because this player community would abuse public executions and eventually find ways to execute the characters of players that don't agree with the status quo.

Edited May 7, 2016 by geode

[Depends 220]

10 hours ago, Cecci said:

In a world where kids play online games while the adults around them get executed or killed in various kinds of conflicts, in Syria (religion) or in Mexico (drugs) or anywhere, we don't need executions in Wurm.

We have players from all over the world, they come here to enjoy, not to get their PTS triggered.

 

Extremly many -1 from me.

 

My parents were eaten by a bear, please remove bears from game, tia.

[Worksock 465]

+1

sounds fun

the blood should remain useless though

[lolmaster 120]

+1 anything to bring more awareness, probably should also broadcast an event message to let those that didn't make it know that it happened. Something similar to this was put into RuneScape back in 2012.  Players got to chose the form of punishment ( Incineration, crushing, swallowing) and also got emotes and pitchforks as rewards for attending.

[NeeNee 855]

I don't like it. Wurm is a fantasy game (medievalish, but fantasy) and we don't need to bring messed up modern RL stuff into it. I would be pro "public bannings" for people who got banned for breaking the rules, but these things need to be done in a timely fashion, before the banned can take revenge or otherwise run amok. Colored screen text and/or a forum post would be enough. Not a whole event.

 

"Enki (or whoever) arrives with a grim expression. The charges against XXX are as follows: 'macroing' and have been proven true by the gods. XXX is banished from the Freedom Isles." *poof all gone*

[ownerpure5 322]

If are into this kind of mature stuff i suggest you try this

https://www.lordofthecraft.net/forums/

[zethreal 582]

I used to play an MMO that had a functional prison. If you weren't a prisoner, you could go in and observe. After the offenders had served their time, the door would unlock and they'd be free. The biggest kicker... your time was only reduced when you were ONLINE and moving your character around.

 

Imagine having your character locked in jail for 6 hours. You have to be online and moving around in a 2x2 jail cell in order to serve your sentence. People can come in & walk the halls to point and laugh at you, as well.

[whereami 564]

I'm going to have to -1, simply due to the fact that I think it is a bit too extreme for Wurm. I can agree with a public event message or something publicly announcing bans though.

[Hailene 362]

I agree that the execution is probably a bit much. Executions are still a thing here in the US, but I know some of those more "civilized" countries out there have banned it.

 

I would switch it up with a life imprisonment without a chance for parole.

 

They'll be locked away in a dingy dungeon for the rest of their days while they ruminate over their misdeeds!

[Retrograde 12,013]

We used to make bannings public, letting everyone know who was banned and what they had done. The unfortunate side effect of this is some people deliberately sought bans, and treated them as a way of gaining noteriety. A system like this would simply promote that style again, and does somewhat glorify those who do break the rules.

 

It is an interesting concept, and does harken back to the medieval days of public executions/shaming (doesnt everyone get their picture taken while in the stocks?) but I do not think think this would translate well into the game

[TradingAlt 946]

So you'd rather keep cheaters/exploiters names hidden, so that other people can be screwed over by them, because you are afraid it will inflate their egos? Wow...

 

and I thought we were at a low...

 

imo if someone is caught cheating/exploiting and they don't have a good reason for it, they should be perma banned on the spot, and their name should be made publicly known so that if the players try to join other groups/villages/alliances those people are made aware of who they are dealing with.

Edited May 12, 2016 by TradingAlt

[Ostentatio 1,970]

7 hours ago, TradingAlt said:

So you'd rather keep cheaters/exploiters names hidden, so that other people can be screwed over by them, because you are afraid it will inflate their egos? Wow...

 

Kind of hard to screw people over when you're banned.

[Depends 220]

17 hours ago, Retrograde said:

We used to make bannings public, letting everyone know who was banned and what they had done. The unfortunate side effect of this is some people deliberately sought bans, and treated them as a way of gaining noteriety. A system like this would simply promote that style again, and does somewhat glorify those who do break the rules.

 

I don't see why this is a bad thing. As long as the end result is a ban then let people attention seek all they want on the way down.

[Hailene 362]

20 hours ago, Retrograde said:

We used to make bannings public, letting everyone know who was banned and what they had done. The unfortunate side effect of this is some people deliberately sought bans, and treated them as a way of gaining noteriety. A system like this would simply promote that style again, and does somewhat glorify those who do break the rules.

 

Just sort out the attention-seekers from the legit characters being banned. Don't announce the 2 hour hold character with the name "RolfSucks!" That's just free publicity.

 

A GM would have to make a decision (or group of GMs) whether or not to announce a character's banning. I think a good dose of human common sense can sort the attention-seekers from the true bannings.