02-12-2024, 02:11 AM
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2024, 02:11 AM by dandead10. Edited 1 time in total.)
I'm letting people know about this, because it's a system that needs to be fleshed out to be conducive to roleplay. I don't really mind I got banned from gambling all that much, I mean, I can always come back on any of my five characters that aren't banned to just gamble anyways. It's about the matter of principle. :3
I could legit just theoretically take a civie character, be given money, so long as it isn't my money, gamble until I'm char banned from the casino theoretically, delete the character and say that they retired or flew out of the city, and then just come back on a fresh new person and keep gambling. But you can see why it's problematic where a mechanic exists that isn't conducive to roleplay. What would be sensible to me is if faction members ushered a casino, saw someone was winning too much, and told them that it's time to go. And if they refuse, then potentially kill them, or otherwise maybe even escalate it to a PK scale conflict if it's a repeated infraction. Or just otherwise make a more roleplay conducive conflict or set of rules as to govern people being banned from casinos!
I could legit just theoretically take a civie character, be given money, so long as it isn't my money, gamble until I'm char banned from the casino theoretically, delete the character and say that they retired or flew out of the city, and then just come back on a fresh new person and keep gambling. But you can see why it's problematic where a mechanic exists that isn't conducive to roleplay. What would be sensible to me is if faction members ushered a casino, saw someone was winning too much, and told them that it's time to go. And if they refuse, then potentially kill them, or otherwise maybe even escalate it to a PK scale conflict if it's a repeated infraction. Or just otherwise make a more roleplay conducive conflict or set of rules as to govern people being banned from casinos!
-
x2