It should not be risk-free to steal from said marks, though. You could be caught and have guards called on you, for example. My idea was that bare minimum an NPC mark should report a crime on failure and possibly on a delay after a success, like would happen with normal PC's. Give the Reeves someth...

My thoughts: 0. Everything Phoenixdoll has said. Thieving is riddled with what are basically newbie traps. The weirdness they describe with stealing, containers, and the 'open inventory' (which is often riddled with junk items no one is realistically open-carrying 24/7). And hide breaking in confusi...

Anyway, isn't this discussion backwards? It makes more sense to me that low lawfulness would increase the likelihood of shopkeeps to interact with concealed figures. That's what we were discussing. I inferred what Geras was saying backwards then. Regardless, I'm for it. There are too few incentives...

And if it was that easy to permanently dump a metric in the shitter, Piety would already be there. To the contrary, the kinds of characters likely to want Piety low are also systematically the ones who have difficulty interacting with Metrics. Most GL's and nobles do not 'want' any metric low, beca...

Agreed, it's very inconvenient to go hunting when even a 'glancing' blow to your beautiful feet makes you bleed everywhere and nearly unable to walk.

Correct. I have vivid memories of spending two GM slots on a GM-level spell only to find out it has, as far as I can tell, a purely cosmetic effect.

If I'd known I would have kept those skills at Master, since I'm not usually the kind of player who benefits from an enhanced mattack.

A gentle, automated reminder for monthly promotion reviews would be very nice. Even as simple as '[X] hasn't been promoted in [Y] months, you might wish to review their progress' would have made keeping track of affairs in my Guild much easier while I was actively GL'ing. My experience has been that...

I say that maybe guild apps should be open more often, then closed when, say, there's at least 2 active PCs of every rung of the ladder. I think in general it should be considered something of a serious issue, IC and OOC, if a Guild can't house 1 or 2 active non-GL rank 3's to provide the service t...

I'm going to be frank, these 'consequences' for GL's are really vastly overstated in my experience. Count the number of gambits you've seen; now count the number of gambits you've seen that weren't related to inactivity. Count the number of non-criminal GL's we've seen in the red zone of approval. "...

Making those a requirement to get to an active rank is basically invalidating the whole point of removing the seeking system. If the seeking system is removed.. and then we say 'okay well all the things we usually did during seeking is now required to get to an active rank', then what was the point...