Lock function on Freedom - Please fix... please

[Qwizat 30]

There is a serious issue and potential greifing ability allowed by the way locks are handled.  The main issue is that a Mayor cannot pick locks to chests and bsbs and fsbs on his deed which makes no sense and causes a huge problem.  I always have attach lock perms set to OFF for citizens but on multiple occasions people have managed to lock containers.  I used to be able to pick large chests, but now it seems even that is made impossible.  So what i end up with is a collection of containers that are locked by villagers that don't play anymore, no way to get at the contents, and i can't even stop them from locking in the first place.  In terms of greifing it would be more than easy to take shared village resources fill bsbs, fsbs, chests and lock them and do some great harm.  Maybe the chest has to be off deed first to be locked, i'm not sure, but when i find the locked containers they're always in a house on my deed.

 

What I suggest and I plead for is for the ability for Mayors to be able to pick locks of containers on deed.  This seems like a reasonable thing for a mayor to do as he can break into houses easily.  Locking things can make sense too, if you have an unfinished house and want to keep items safe from other villagers.  But not having the ability as mayor to remove these locks when people leave is unfair and highly frustrating.   There's no legitimate reason why the mayor should not be able to pick locks, especially when its impossible to stop them from being placed to begin with.  Please help, this has been an issue for a long time.

[JakeRivers 2,921]

12 minutes ago, Qwizat said:

There is a serious issue and potential greifing ability allowed by the way locks are handled.  The main issue is that a Mayor cannot pick locks to chests and bsbs and fsbs on his deed which makes no sense and causes a huge problem.  I always have attach lock perms set to OFF for citizens but on multiple occasions people have managed to lock containers.  I used to be able to pick large chests, but now it seems even that is made impossible.  So what i end up with is a collection of containers that are locked by villagers that don't play anymore, no way to get at the contents, and i can't even stop them from locking in the first place.  In terms of greifing it would be more than easy to take shared village resources fill bsbs, fsbs, chests and lock them and do some great harm.  Maybe the chest has to be off deed first to be locked, i'm not sure, but when i find the locked containers they're always in a house on my deed.

 

What I suggest and I plead for is for the ability for Mayors to be able to pick locks of containers on deed.  This seems like a reasonable thing for a mayor to do as he can break into houses easily.  Locking things can make sense too, if you have an unfinished house and want to keep items safe from other villagers.  But not having the ability as mayor to remove these locks when people leave is unfair and highly frustrating.   There's no legitimate reason why the mayor should not be able to pick locks, especially when its impossible to stop them from being placed to begin with.  Please help, this has been an issue for a long time.

 

this would simply make it possible for anyone to drop a deed on top of someones locked chests/bsbs and rob the contents

[Steveleeb 1,067]

-1

 

[Retrograde 12,013]

Picking locks requires ownership of the lockable container. Allowing the mayor to pick any lock on deed would open the potential for enormous issues 

[Qwizat 30]

If you are enjoying the space of being on someone's deed the villager should bear the risk that a mayor might pick the lock, OR the perm for locking should work effectively and not allow locked bins on deed.  Either solution works for me, but there should be a way a mayor can control locks.

[JakeRivers 2,921]

don't allow people to lock chests on deed then, you can turn off the function, and if they quit the game and you want the contents of the chest, push it into your perimeter

[Reylaark 1,100]

5 minutes ago, JakeRivers said:

don't allow people to lock chests on deed then, you can turn off the function, and if they quit the game and you want the contents of the chest, push it into your perimeter

 

If this is something you habitually do:

Quote

Lockpicking
A ) Lockpicking anything that does not belong to you is not permitted.
Punishment: You may be warned, or banned based on the situation.

From:

 

Perhaps even as such an experienced vet, you weren't aware of the rule?  Would be surprised if you're somehow convinced there's no chance you'd be caught or held to account.  Even so, though, the rule remains the rule.  Probably shouldn't advise others on how to break them.  I would fully expect to have a GM appear and drop the hammer on me if I break the rules.  Everyone should operate under that assumption.

• Quote

  You must abide by the Wurm Online game rules, forum and chat rules as published by Code Club now or in the future

  From:

@QwizatI understand it's frustrating, and I've certainly been dying to know what's inside something that's clearly been abandoned just out of serious curiosity... but unfortunately suffering through the curiosity is the only option.  You can, as Jake suggests, push it off your deed so it's out of the way and out of sight, it is your deed after all, but you cannot, as Jake suggests, use that as an exploit to get at the contents.  Just FYI, I suppose your mileage may vary but realize your car could explode at any moment depending on the path you choose.

 

@MamaDarknessif there has been a change in the rules and what I'm saying is incorrect, please do correct me!  Much appreciated.

[JakeRivers 2,921]

46 minutes ago, Reylaark said:

blah blah blah

 

I said push it into the perimeter, was no mention of lock picking, but in case you didn't know, a chest will no longer decay on deed, but it will decay in the perimeter.

[Reylaark 1,100]

1 hour ago, JakeRivers said:

 

I said push it into the perimeter, was no mention of lock picking, but in case you didn't know, a chest will no longer decay on deed, but it will decay in the perimeter.

 

I see, so I'm not allowed to lockpick something to get at the contents of a container I don't own, but I can push it off deed for the purposes of getting to the contents of a locked container I don't own.

 

Certainly doesn't work like that for BsB's and FsB's, but stuff that doesn't belong to you in a chest is different.  I don't know why it's different, but it apparently is.

 

I did suggest being able to access contents of severely decayed BSB's before, and that was summarily denied by people assuming I wanted to steal things.  That was the primary concern.

Had I been talking about a locked chest, though, then that would have been a completely different conversation and getting at those contents through decay is perfectly fine...?

 

Wurmpedia mentions bashing a chest won't destroy the contents.  It doesn't say anything about it being locked, or the ownership.  I always assumed that was for people who lost the key to their own chest.  Can the OP just push any of his villager's locked chests off deed and bash it?

 

If you could please clarify what you would do in that situation so we can all do it.  At least then we can be sure we won't get in trouble for it.  Wait for the decay?  Or bash it?  Only difference is time, which doesn't really make a difference to the owner depending on where you push it.

 

It is possible to bash locked containers that don't belong to me right?  I've never tried.  Or is the only way we're allowed to access the contents of a villager's locked containers to push them off deed somewhere and wait?

[JakeRivers 2,921]

Here is how it works, chests and bsb's there is no way on freedom to pick the locks off these items, on deed or otherwise. Locked chests can not be bashed either, I think the same applies for bsb's that are locked. 

 

Villagers that are active deserve some form of security with the use of locked chests and carts these guys go inactive it is a different story, let natural decay sort out the contents for you, they will decay on deed even if the chest takes no decay, so you just as well shove it off and salvage anything useful, if you are truly worried the person deserves the item back one day, then pick them up and care for them.

 

Now does destroying a bsb release its contents? At one time I would of said yes, but in the past few weeks I have found some odd piles of items that seem to be what was once the contents of a bsb so I am no longer sure about that.

 

I recently cleaned up a few chests left behind on my deed by inactive villagers, I have put there items into storage as I am sure they may return one day, in the mean time its out of the way and the items are not decaying away inside the chest.

Edited August 25, 2017 by JakeRivers

[nicedreams 1,035]

Well kind of like real life.  Just because someone rents your house or rent some property doesn't mean you are allowed to enter the house/property or take their things or anything like that.  If the person defaults on their rent, you still legally are not allowed to enter the house and collect their things for compensation without going through a lot of legal hoops.  Usually the landlord will never be able to get the physical items of the tenant that defaulted and those items are later auctioned off by a 3rd party to help pay what was defaulted on.

 

So all in all it makes sense.  Still sucks though and understand your frustration.

 

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, I just play one in Wurm.

[JakeRivers 2,921]

7 minutes ago, nicedreams said:

Well kind of like real life.  Just because someone rents your house or rent some property doesn't mean you are allowed to enter the house/property or take their things or anything like that.  If the person defaults on their rent, you still legally are not allowed to enter the house and collect their things for compensation without going through a lot of legal hoops.  Usually the landlord will never be able to get the physical items of the tenant that defaulted and those items are later auctioned off by a 3rd party to help pay what was defaulted on.

 

Real life has no comparison to wurm.

 

Each village unless for some reason the owner choose to make it a democracy is actually a dictatorship.

Villagers are living there under the grace of the deed owner, it does not matter if they pay rent or not, they can be booted at anytime and items confiscated, within reason I am sure, as there is still the play nice or they rip your heart out rule. 

 

If anyone does not like this, wurm is a big place and all it takes is a few silver coins, a deedstake and you become your own dictator ruling over your own fiefdom.

 

 

[Reylaark 1,100]

The contents of the chests should disappear with decay just as the contents of a bsb do.  Unless that's changed in the last couple of weeks but as of very recently before that, the bsb from my place poofed with all contents.  I don't really have any reason to believe that has changed.

 

The only way it makes sense to have the items of a chest drop, and not those of a bsb, is that a bsb could have 1000 items in there and you can't exactly drop that on a tile.

 

I can understand a technical limitation... but then they shouldn't run around making BS rules that people can just loophole around which is all this is at the moment.

 

• Contents are locked in a chest.
• Yes your deed, but no not your contents.  Not allowed to lockpick or bash to get the contents.  You are not allowed to access the contents.
• Oh, but pushing it off deed to get the contents is perfectly ok.

That's completely asinine.  Either it's okay for a mayor to access the contents, or it is not.  This whole tacit loophole for those willing to exploit loopholes should not be an accepted practice.

 

If it is not okay for a mayor to access the contents of a locked container on their deed, which is fine by me, then that should be the end of it.  Contents should poof on decay.  No access.

But you want to be able to save things for your villagers?!  Okay, that's nice, that means you want access.  Rule needs to allow access, period.

 

It's really not about the deed being a dictatorship or not.  It's about the game applying rules fairly, equally, and clearly.  It should be a question of what the rule is, NOT what accepted underhanded practice people are using this week if they can do these things without getting in trouble.

If one person can exploit a loophole, I don't care who it is and who they are to anyone else, everyone should be able to exploit that loophole.

If everyone is able to exploit the loophole without consequence, the rule is superfluous and only serves to punish people who follow the rules.

 

You're not allowed to access the contents... but everyone just pushes them off-deed to get the contents... = idiotic.

You're not allowed to access the contents.

OR

You're allowed to access the contents.

 

I realize I'm preaching in the desert over here and none of this is going to be changed, but the feeling of an old boy's club with secret handshakes where some know they can just do xyz to circumvent a rule while everyone else just reads the rule and plays by it makes for a very, very... very tiny little club of players.

[JakeRivers 2,921]

Stuff has always decayed off deed, nothing has ever been any different than that.

 

No different than when the walls collapse on a old building and you can clean out the contents.

[Qwizat 30]

A Mayor should have ownership of all items created on deed.  that will solve alot of issues for me.  

[Ayes 3,715]

16 hours ago, Qwizat said:

the perm for locking should work effectively and not allow locked bins on deed.

Seems this *may* just be a situation where the permission to prevent others from locking containers on deeds is not working properly. As far as I am aware this is the standard on deeds, meaning that others can not apply locks on deeds unless they have specific permission to do so. I agree that it should work effectively and if not be rectified.

 

=Ayes=

Edited August 26, 2017 by Ayes
guess

[JakeRivers 2,921]

4 hours ago, Ayes said:

Seems this *may* just be a situation where the permission to prevent others from locking containers on deeds is not working properly. As far as I am aware this is the standard on deeds, meaning that others can not apply locks on deeds unless they have specific permission to do so. I agree that it should work effectively and if not be rectified.

 

=Ayes=

 

nothing prevents one from adding locks to chests and bsb's off deed then hauling them back

 

[Reylaark 1,100]

17 hours ago, JakeRivers said:

Stuff has always decayed off deed, nothing has ever been any different than that.

 

No different than when the walls collapse on a old building and you can clean out the contents.

Difference is intentionally hastening the decay when any other method of getting at the contents is against the rules.

 

You can drop a deed and put an undeeded house in the perimeter so it cannot be repaired and will decay... but people freak out about potentially, possibly, maybe someone dropping an entire deed over a chest to get at the contents...  Don't explain to me why the perimeter thing exists, well aware.  I just think it's incongruous and find it annoying when people who aren't otherwise dumb as a door nail don't see it.

 

Obviously things decay off deed.  Not news.  Point is using and advising others to exploit the way a mechanic works to circumvent the rule.

 

Can't imagine that's purposely how the rules are meant to work.

 

Whether or not I'm able to do something doesn't determine if I will do it.  The rules determine that.  Obviously we differ in our approaches, and yours appears to be the best way to use the rules since otherwise there would be repercussions.

You're not allowed to do something, unless you find a way to do it.

I really can't imagine living comfortably like that, but I suppose if I was sure I'd never be held to account, maybe I'd be more comfortable.  Don't know, doesn't matter, since I'll never believe that anyway.

 

5 hours ago, JakeRivers said:

 

nothing prevents one from adding locks to chests and bsb's off deed then hauling them back

 

secure permissions?  I remember seeing something about not allowing someone to pick up secured items.  Can't be bothered to check on pushing or pulling, but...

 

Perhaps that should be extended to push and pull, since there's apparently always someone looking to take advantage of how something works to go above the rules and their intent.  Sure, someone could take advantage of that too.

 

You bring up yet another good loophole and exploit to look into though.  You're really phenomenal at finding them!

[JakeRivers 2,921]

5 hours ago, Reylaark said:

You bring up yet another good loophole and exploit to look into though.  You're really phenomenal at finding them!

 

lmao have a brain? try using it sometime

[Talohan 129]

Yeah, you can take a chest, bsb, fsb, etc, off deed and attach lock then bring it back on deed and drop it. It doesn't change the lock state and think the locks on deed thing is more for gates, and public secured storage. Before carts came with locks automatically you used to have to take them off deed and then attach a lock if the deed had no lock perms in effect.

Edited August 27, 2017 by Talohan
added something