POLL: The Stealth Skill
Damocles
Okay, let's see what the newsgroup thinks about this. Should we:
1) Leave the stealth skill as it is now. Hey, those roleplaying rogues
need it, right?
2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
No snooping while invisible, either.
3) Remove it from the game. A failed experiment that cannot be
salvaged.
What do you think?
--------------
'Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine.'
- Patti Smith, "Gloria"
Reid Elledge
was probably on the toilet (where he gets all his bright ideas) when he came
up with this one. "YAY!! STEALTH!! NOW I CAN WALK AROUND TOWN AND NOBODY
CAN SEE ME!!! I AM 3733t!! Ph43r me!!" Let's see...instead of wasting
time on creating and implementing this stupid skill, they could have spent
their time fixing shit that has existed since day 1 *cough* macro mining
*cough cough* I must have a cold. Good bye.
Mriswith of Sonoma
Dundee
wrote:
>2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
>Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
>use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
>No snooping while invisible, either.
I think since you're revealed automatically when you loot, that's good
enough for that.
Extending the "auto detect" to friends of the house as well as to the
owner takes care of that.
And no snooping while hidden *would* solve the stealth-steal problem.
I think.
-
Dundee - http://dundee.uong.com/
Skara Brae - http://members.xoom.com/skara/
Lake Superior - http://mars.spaceports.com/~lakesup/
Puck
while hidden, I do a walk by snoop (double kill on their paper doll
while far away) walk by them and ctl-1 (last object macro) and usually
get their pack on the first try (80 snooping) then I go under a tree, or
some object, disguise myself and change cloths (if I'm dealing with a
mage at least- they're so testy about being snooped for some reason) and
stealth over there. Also, making snooping a revealing act would
circumvent how it's suppose to work (ie, ideally, snoop the fellow bag
without him knowing) Perhaps if failure revealed you, I could live with
that :)
Puck: Don't hurt! I already gave your pearl to Corwin!
Brandy
Damocles wrote in message <36daf4a0...@news.rdc1.va.home.com>...
>
>Okay, let's see what the newsgroup thinks about this. Should we:
>
>1) Leave the stealth skill as it is now. Hey, those roleplaying rogues
>need it, right?
>
>Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
>use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
>No snooping while invisible, either.
>
>salvaged.
>
>What do you think?
>
>--------------
>
>'Jesus died for somebody's sins, but not mine.'
>- Patti Smith, "Gloria"
I can live with 2 but I prefer 3. And I have a thief char (just not a jerk
one).
Brandy (SBR, LS)
Puck
Puck: Strong Proponent of Stealth
ungod
have to realize that it fixes something that needed to be fixed: using spells to
reveal. Fire field used to be one of the only ways that people revealed hidden
people. Now, they can just walk away from where they were. And besides, it's
not like the owners can't auto-detect in houses. And if you're not a friend or
the owner of the house, WHAT THE HELL ARE *YOU* DOING THERE?? The people that
should actually be worried about the stealth skill nerf it easily just by being
in the house.
Avatar of Hell
Puck
Puck: Steal? Umm, no, I'm a mage...
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|
|Okay, let's see what the newsgroup thinks about this. Should we:
|
|1) Leave the stealth skill as it is now. Hey, those roleplaying rogues
|need it, right?
|
|2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
|Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
|use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
|No snooping while invisible, either.
|
|3) Remove it from the game. A failed experiment that cannot be
|salvaged.
4) Moderate it a bit without shooting it in the head. Snooping under
Stealth should go -- any skill check should break Hiding -- but there's no
need for massive skill delays. They've already got to break LOS first anyway.
Dennis F. Heffernan UO: Venture (Catskills) dfra...@email.com
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days
when Victoria reigned." -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
Dundee
wrote:
>stealth over there. Also, making snooping a revealing act would
>circumvent how it's suppose to work (ie, ideally, snoop the fellow bag
>without him knowing) Perhaps if failure revealed you, I could live with
>that :)
How it's supposed to work is: You get crim' flagged for it if you're
caught doing it.
OSI quit doing that because newbies were "accidently snooping".
They should have made it an action skill, snooping. With a skill
delay. Impossible to do it "accidentally" then. Impossible to do it
while hidden. And make it a crime to get caught doing it, which it
really ought to be.
But I'm getting to be old and bitter, in UO years. I'm sick of
entertaining thieves, killer, jerks, looters, etc.
Remember this?:
"For some time now the Dev Team has been developing a plan to further
reduce antisocial behavior in Britannia. The first stage of these
plans is tackling the problem of rampant thievery."
I read that and I thought they might be trying to *reduce* the
antisocial behavior in Britannia. I thought they might try to tackle
the problem of rampant thievery by making it *less* rampant.
Stupid me.
Marc
> Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
> use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
> No snooping while invisible, either.
I think that snooping while hidden should always pose the risk that you
are revealed, depending on the victims detect hidden skill. The chance
should be much less than when DH is actively used, but then again, a
thief needs to snoop several times to get to the goodies (normally).
Aside from that, I think people should not be able to hide in any form
of house (public or private) unless they are a friend of it. Anyone
that is sneaking should become visible upon entering the house.
Honest Dragon
Quench
There are skill enhancers - I'm talking about the apparent use of anatomy to
increase the damage in melee...
Make it so that if stealth is active that snooping becomes that much
harder... No, the better the stealth, the easier it is to snoop. Do it
something like this:
Value of Stealth Result when Snooping
0 - 20 90% Chance Hidden person will
appear and/or -40% Snooping is successfulll
21-35 80% Chance... and/or -35% Snooping
is Successful
36-50 70% Chance... and/or -30% Snooping
is successful
51 -65 60%Chance... and/or -25%....
66-80 50% Chance... and/or -20%....
81-90 40%Chance.... and/or -15%....
91-95 30%Chance.... and/or -10%
96-100 20% Chance... and/or -5%
Or something to that effect... Basically, even a GM Rogue with 100 Stealth
and 100 Snoop will still have a 20% Chance of being caught and only a 95%
chance of successfully snooping... This is, of course, if they are in
stealth. If they are snooping out of stealth then these ratios would not
apply.
Quench
Damocles wrote in message <36daf4a0...@news.rdc1.va.home.com>...
>
>Okay, let's see what the newsgroup thinks about this. Should we:
>
>1) Leave the stealth skill as it is now. Hey, those roleplaying rogues
>need it, right?
>
>2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
>Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
>use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
>No snooping while invisible, either.
>
>3) Remove it from the game. A failed experiment that cannot be
>salvaged.
>
Mark
gaming experience of other players.
On Mon, 01 Mar 1999 19:59:54 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
wrote:
>
Mark
wrote:
>
>I think since you're revealed automatically when you loot, that's good
>enough for that.
>
So, you are pro-stealth? Holy shit! And I always thought you had a
good handle on the game. I will wait and see what you say after one of
your OU sessions is wrecked by repeated annoyances from some of the GM
stealth thieves out there.
>Extending the "auto detect" to friends of the house as well as to the
>owner takes care of that.
>
>And no snooping while hidden *would* solve the stealth-steal problem.
>
>I think.
>
Graham Nash
Harold Roberson
Sean
useful skills like...
Fencing
Tactics
Magic Resistance...
Why not take from Snooping, which I haven't used since they nerfed combat
stealing? The skill atrophying is fubar, IMO.
--
* Sean - ICQ: 1826323 - sunymoon at geocities dot com
* Assistant Web Adminstrator @ www.ZenSearch.com
* My Public PGP Key http://home.rochester.rr.com/zapem/pgpkey.zip
* Small Files? Zap `Em!: http://home.rochester.rr.com/zapem/
Damocles wrote in message <36daf4a0...@news.rdc1.va.home.com>...
>
DrubDevil
Try and keep in mind...people other then just you are playing as well. They
pay to have a good time and enjoy the game. If you're paying, not enjoying
it , and still paying... whos the moron? them or you? Simple answer...stop
paying for it and stop playing. Things change. OSI owns the game...not
you. Don't like it? leave. Its an Online game. It has no effect on your
real life (if it does seek help). These guys that go suicidal because they
got pk'd or house looted need a shrink and a GameBoy.
Scott Morton
wrote:
>
>Okay, let's see what the newsgroup thinks about this. Should we:
>
>1) Leave the stealth skill as it is now. Hey, those roleplaying rogues
>need it, right?
>
>2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
>Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
>use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
>No snooping while invisible, either.
>
>3) Remove it from the game. A failed experiment that cannot be
>salvaged.
>
>What do you think?
>
Remove it from the game. It serves absolutely no purpose except to
make it even easier for thieves to harass other players.
na
> They should have made it an action skill, snooping. With a skill
> delay. Impossible to do it "accidentally" then. Impossible to do it
> while hidden. And make it a crime to get caught doing it, which it
> really ought to be.
Hear, hear... why ISN'T it an action skill???
...
> Remember this?:
> "For some time now the Dev Team has been developing a plan to further
> reduce antisocial behavior in Britannia. The first stage of these
> plans is tackling the problem of rampant thievery."
> I read that and I thought they might be trying to *reduce* the
> antisocial behavior in Britannia. I thought they might try to tackle
> the problem of rampant thievery by making it *less* rampant.
> Stupid me.
Don't feel bad, I fell for it too. DD = GM fibber methinks.
na
Erinn
>
>Okay, let's see what the newsgroup thinks about this. Should we:
>
>1) Leave the stealth skill as it is now. Hey, those roleplaying rogues
>need it, right?
>
>2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
>Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
>use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
>No snooping while invisible, either.
>
>3) Remove it from the game. A failed experiment that cannot be
>salvaged.
>
>What do you think?
Remove it.
--
Erinnyes Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
Moonglow, Atlantic
Green17
>3) Remove it from the game. A failed experiment that cannot be
>salvaged.
I'll go with that one.
Damocles
Players complaining about the ease of the thieving profession is what
produced the patch in the first place, pal. If enough players have
problems with the sneaking scum continuing to find holes in the
system, OSI will patch stealth away too. Then it will be you and your
friends who will be finding new games to play.
jx...@po.cwru.edu
>
> 4) Moderate it a bit without shooting it in the head. Snooping under
> Stealth should go -- any skill check should break Hiding -- but there's no
> need for massive skill delays. They've already got to break LOS first anyway.
Agreed. Besides the snooping, the only other problem with stealth seems
to be house looting, and the change to detect hidden inside houses fixes
that pretty well.
-Smedley, Summoner of Daemons
Bob Roland
The skill makes sense, it's new and it's interesting.
Besides, consider it an exchange for the thieves guild idea.
Great Bob
Brandy
But so far I have run into 2 "good" thieves using this (including you). And
around 20 jerk ones.
The odds are against you friend.
Brandy (SBR, LS)
Puck wrote in message <36DB07D4...@mail.utexas.edu>...
Brandy
ungod wrote in message <36DB09D0...@midsouth.rr.com>...
Friends of the house cannot auto-detect yet. Makes it kinda tough when you
have 3 people sharing a house (like I do) _which is what OSI wanted_.
It's so great to be punished (and yes this is a punishment) for doing your
bit to reduce housing.
Brandy (SBR, LS)
Takis
>2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
>Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
>use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
>No snooping while invisible, either.
no snooping while invinsible sounds right ,but they could do something about
hiding after being attacked.I dont think its working so well as it is now.
Scott Morton
wrote:
>On Mon, 01 Mar 1999 19:59:54 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
>wrote:
>
>>2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
>>Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
>>use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
>>No snooping while invisible, either.
>
>Nerf it: Make it more difficult to be stealthy. Snooping is OK: But
>if you are caught, you are revealed. Oh, and make it so that you
>can't resume Stealth mode for 1 minute after stealing an item or being
>revealed.
Or better yet make it one of those wonderful random skill delays that
OSI is so fond of putting on skills that aren't used to piss off other
players.
Reg LeCrisp - Atlantic
flister john m.
standing behind their hay bales. It's actually a dang fine skill.
Now your monster exploiting and harvesting is not going to be as easy. I
love removing your hay bales, you cheatin' guyz!. Beg DD for a sterile
UO, I hope he doesn't listen! Using stealth I got into areas in the
spider dungeon I have never been able to reach!
What the heck are you gonna do when you have deadly traps in dungeons if
there is no rogue to stealth in, detect draps, and disarm them?!!!!
Stop yer dang whining!
On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Reid Elledge wrote:
> Remove it. It sucks, makes no sense, is too exploitable, etc. etc. etc. DD
> was probably on the toilet (where he gets all his bright ideas) when he came
> up with this one. "YAY!! STEALTH!! NOW I CAN WALK AROUND TOWN AND NOBODY
> CAN SEE ME!!! I AM 3733t!! Ph43r me!!" Let's see...instead of wasting
> time on creating and implementing this stupid skill, they could have spent
> their time fixing shit that has existed since day 1 *cough* macro mining
> *cough cough* I must have a cold. Good bye.
>
> Mriswith of Sonoma
>
>
>
>
flister john m.
provocation. Bards macro all day. Mages macro all day. Now something
comes along to put a crimp in monster harvesting, make dungeons dangerous,
and bring a little life to the sterile realm of UO. I love to creep a
dungeon. It's almost like a snipers life. I want to be an assassin. I
want to stealth in, sneak up on you, and kill you virtuous do-gooders.
But no....
See pucks post.
On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Damocles wrote:
>
> Okay, let's see what the newsgroup thinks about this. Should we:
>
> 1) Leave the stealth skill as it is now. Hey, those roleplaying rogues
> need it, right?
>
> 2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
> Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
> use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
> No snooping while invisible, either.
>
> 3) Remove it from the game. A failed experiment that cannot be
> salvaged.
>
> What do you think?
Dundee
<fli...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
>If you nerf stealth, then I say you nerf G@ddamn magery and G@ddamn
>provocation. Bards macro all day. Mages macro all day.
X sucks.
Y sucks.
Therefore it is ok if Z sucks too.
>Now something comes along to put a crimp in monster harvesting, make
>dungeons dangerous, and
The "fix" for monsters being too stupid to pose a threat is: "Delete
the monsters and let the players kill each other"?
>bring a little life to the sterile realm of UO.
One question:
What was the purpose of the thief patch?
Puck
OrionCA wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Mar 1999 19:59:54 GMT, phae...@yahoo.com (Damocles)
> wrote:
>
> >2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
> >Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
> >use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
> >No snooping while invisible, either.
>
> Nerf it: Make it more difficult to be stealthy. Snooping is OK: But
> if you are caught, you are revealed. Oh, and make it so that you
> can't resume Stealth mode for 1 minute after stealing an item or being
> revealed.
> --
> Think about the tiny, furry rodents scurrying around the
> Jurassic landscape being eaten by predators many times
> their size. To them, the asteroid wasn't a disaster,
> it was a Godsend.
I like these ideas, I could live with them if they were implemented :)
Puck: Wha-hey! That guy has a bow of Vanquishing!
flister john m.
Let's see.... hrmmm... to be stealthy I have to have at least 80 hide
skill. To activate stealth I have to be very talented at it. It has
around a six second delay before reuse. It has limitations in the
number of steps... Ug. Now we should do a nerf on it to make it polite?
sheesh-0-rama! Never have I seen so much whining!
On
flister john m.
On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Dundee wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Mar 1999 10:46:07 -0500, "flister john m."
> <fli...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
>
> >If you nerf stealth, then I say you nerf G@ddamn magery and G@ddamn
> >provocation. Bards macro all day. Mages macro all day.
>
> X sucks.
> Y sucks.
> Therefore it is ok if Z sucks too.
I would say just because Z is different doesn't mean it should be nerfed
for those who like x and y.
>
> >Now something comes along to put a crimp in monster harvesting, make
> >dungeons dangerous, and
>
> The "fix" for monsters being too stupid to pose a threat is: "Delete
> the monsters and let the players kill each other"?
UO put the Assassin class in. I suppose somewhere in that concept murder
of players and npcs of sosaria is involved.
>
> >bring a little life to the sterile realm of UO.
>
> One question:
>
> What was the purpose of the thief patch?
>
To keep thieves from being able to steal and kill. Now they can only do
one or the other. If you attack Joe Stealth, who is a thieves guild
member, he has to leave.
If you attack Joe Stealth, who is an assassin, you get what you pay for.
Dundee
<fli...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
>> What was the purpose of the thief patch?
>
>To keep thieves from being able to steal and kill.
Oh... so close. Credit to you for a partial answer. There *was*
another purpose of the thief patch. Says so right on the OWO website.
Harold Roberson
The day they put traps in dungeons is the day I stop going to
dungeons. That's just a damn stupid idea..
"flister john m." wrote:
>
> Stealth puts a crimp in the macro killa mage and the superbard, all
> standing behind their hay bales. It's actually a dang fine skill.
> Now your monster exploiting and harvesting is not going to be as easy. I
> love removing your hay bales, you cheatin' guyz!. Beg DD for a sterile
> UO, I hope he doesn't listen! Using stealth I got into areas in the
> spider dungeon I have never been able to reach!
>
> What the heck are you gonna do when you have deadly traps in dungeons if
> there is no rogue to stealth in, detect draps, and disarm them?!!!!
>
> Stop yer dang whining!
>
> On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Reid Elledge wrote:
>
Damocles
<hj...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>The day they put traps in dungeons is the day I stop going to
>dungeons. That's just a damn stupid idea..
>
>
It's part of the plan for making thieves useful in adventuring
situations. I thought it had gone in with the thief patch, but maybe
not...haven't hit any dungeons recently.
Dopester
mode, and the amount you can carry is halved. There is no non-criminal
reason to use stealth. And if you are too scared to walk around a dungeon,
visible, i suggest you stay in town and knit.
no matter what they do to stealth they HAVE to make it so snooping reveals
you.
Hiding and stealth need to be nerfed servely.
Damocles wrote in message <36daf4a0...@news.rdc1.va.home.com>...
>
>Okay, let's see what the newsgroup thinks about this. Should we:
>
>1) Leave the stealth skill as it is now. Hey, those roleplaying rogues
>need it, right?
>
>2) Cripple the skill so that it cannot be used to screw other players.
>Easiest way I can see is to impose a severe encumbrance penalty to its
>use, combined with a skill delay after looting or stealing anything.
>No snooping while invisible, either.
>
>3) Remove it from the game. A failed experiment that cannot be
>salvaged.
>
>What do you think?
>
flister john m.
all be able to stroll right on through, picking up notoriety and treasure
and...
Did you know that there are two levers in the cathedral level of the
spider dungeon? You cross a rope to get to the first. You pull it, it
unblocks a door to another lever protected by a horde of spiders, you pull
that lever and....
On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Damocles wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Mar 1999 15:21:25 -0600, Harold Roberson
> <hj...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >The day they put traps in dungeons is the day I stop going to
> >dungeons. That's just a damn stupid idea..
> >
> >
>
> It's part of the plan for making thieves useful in adventuring
> situations. I thought it had gone in with the thief patch, but maybe
> not...haven't hit any dungeons recently.
>
>
Sohi
: Let's see.... hrmmm... to be stealthy I have to have at least 80 hide
: skill. To activate stealth I have to be very talented at it. It has
: around a six second delay before reuse. It has limitations in the
: number of steps... Ug. Now we should do a nerf on it to make it polite?
kkk
Oh bull - it cqn be macroed up in 3-5 days, along with the hiding and dex
pre-req. I say leave it in place for what it was designed for (the
adventuring rogue), but nerf it to non existence when involving town (bank
stealing) and houses (house looting). I.e. - if you enter a house other
than one you own or are a friend of you are immediately unhidden on the
stairs and cannot hide until you move to "neutral" ground. And for town,
if a thief attempts a teal (like banke thieves), they have an immediate
skill delay and are revealed (to give the mark a chance to strike back in
town). If you are out in the woods or dungeon - hey thats a chance you
take. But in town and your own home, you should be able to be secure.
That would limit scumball immature and antisocial predators like looters
and thieves, but not the adventuring rogues like Puck.