Law and Order: Suggestions on how to handle your citizen's misbehaviours.

[Alfryd]

These initial suggestions are made with my ideas for quarters, multiple advisors, skill-based levelling and free recruitment, etc. in mind, but should be roughly applicable within a game more similar to Majesty at present.

I think we can all say that those Rogues have had it too good for too long.


Notion 1: Crime and Punishment
Go to your Security tab, and simply select desired penalties for various crimes and misdemeanours.

These penalties can vary from specified fines, monetary compensation to the victim, prison time, or various corporal punishments- the pillory for minor offences, flogging in more serious cases, and execution (by either quick and clean or prolongued and agonising methods. Note- public punishments will often take place in your fairgrounds as a source of public edification. Hooray!)

Offences Include:
Intimidation and harassment
Theft
Trespass
Vandalism
Assault
Murder
Slavery
Curfew violation, public disorder or disturbance of the peace
Cowardice and desertion
Perjury and corruption
Indolence and debauchery
Smuggling and contraband

(There might also be various modifiers for the severity of the offence, repeat offenders, and the age of the defendant.)
All these penalties, of course, apply only to citizens of your own or possibly allied kingdoms. Neutral kingdoms who persistantly violate your laws are essentially giving you fair grounds for a declaration of war, while citizens of hostile kingdoms vanquished in battle guilty of such crimes can only be tried as war criminals under certain circumstances- rank & file soldiers who massacre eachother on the battlefield are not generally guilty of murder, for instance.

You may also choose to apply no penalty for chosen offences, essentially legalising the practice. For instance, if you apply no penalty to indolence and debauchery, citizens can freely visit bordellos and casinos, and you can tax the proceeds on their trade!
Bear in mind that various guilds, races and temples or factions will take exception to certain patterns of enforcement (or the lack thereof,) in addition to impacting general citizen mood and reputation. Legalising murder or slavery is apt to horrify most parties and makes citizens very reluctant to settle in your fiefdom. Vice or contraband will repel the Church of Dauros, but draconian enforcement is a draw for them. Elves and the Cult of Fervus, on the other hand, detest curfews and actively demand the right to indolence. The Kryptan sects have few preferences either way, and so on and so forth et cetera.


Notion 2: Individual hearings.
Cases awaiting trial will show up at your guardhouse or keep (where trials and hearings are generally held) and, by default, are handled by your Palace Guard, or perhaps a citizen jury or other appointed magistrate. However, you may also choose to handle cases personally, granting clemency or inflicting punishment as you see fit.

An individual case shows a list of witnesses (with basic information on their reputation/prior record,) and whether they support or deny the charge in question. You may pass judgement as you see fit, and future trials will render verdicts that attempt to approximate your own over time- if you are lenient toward smuggling, but tough on perjury, future penalties will be applied on this basis. If your decisions are haphazard of course, no firm conclusions can be drawn, and depending on the severity of your punishments will be seen as wishy-washy at best and a capricious tyrant at worst.


Notion 3: Trial proceedings and combatting corruption.
Note: Normally, automatic trials are made on the basis not only of the evidence, nature of the crime and status of the defendant, but by bribery or coercion of witnesses (or even the judge,) and their own Charisma score and Etiquette skill in arguing against conviction. Naturally, you may freely ignore any of these factors- (in any case, only the most extraordinary felon would have the means or nerve to bribe or blackmail kings and queens!)

Inidividual hearings are the first means available to combat Corruption within your city and among henchmen- if you render judgement fairly and wisely, magistrates will be obliged to follow your example.
Allowing citizen juries is the second means- one man is far easier to bribe than 13- but applies greater drawbacks to overriding the trial if a decision seems unfair, and grants you less control over the quality of magistrates.
The third method of fighting corruption is to survey the records, reputation and abilities of individual magistrates to ensure they're reliable, and sack those that don't measure up. A magistrate with a reputation for greed, or with low Intelligence and few levels in the Acumen skill, can't be relied on the deliver good judgements. (Of course, arbitrary dismissal can also make you seem capricious and despotic unless there are real grounds for concern.)
The fourth method of fighting corruption is to attract guilds, races, temples and factions that promote integrity, logic or honour- Dwarves in particular, followers of the Churches of Dauros or Lunord, or to some extent Warriors/Rangers/Wizards/Eastern province natives, tend to be quite resistant to corruption.


Notion 4: Caught Red-handed.
You see someone doing something you don't like? Arrest them! Slap a nice fat bounty on their behind and watch the sparks fly. Eventually, one hopes, they'll observe an underlying pattern and stop doing it.
Of course, this makes substantial demands on AI by way of pattern recognition, and is almost certain to be perceived as arbitrary and unfair unless you're very careful.


And that's that. Any thoughts?

 

[unmerged(80041)]

This would be an excellent addition to the kingdom dynamic if it was well implemented.

 

[Greymane]

It's a very interesting idea, Alfryd. I could certainly see this adding a lot to the 'sim' aspect of the game. Personally, I'm more in favor of keeping the sim-side of things light, but if Paradox does choose to develop the games along those lines, this would be a very good addition.

Who would actually be responsible for bringing in criminals though? I would assume by and large most would not submit themselves to judgment (though I could see Monks or Paladins who accidentally violate laws turning themselves in voluntarily). You mention the Palace Guard as having a sort of custodial duty, but do not make mention of who would be responsible for enforcement.

The City Guard would be the obvious choice, but given the great difference in strength between heroes and henchmen, it would seem unlikely for guards to successfully bring in any hero who did not want to go. This may not be the case in the 'skill based progression' system you mentioned this idea taking into consideration (apologies for not having read that yet to determine for myself) and heroes might not be quite the juggernauts they are in the original Majesty (where in, with a few levels under their belts, most heroes would be able to handle swarms of guards and get progressively stronger every moment as well).

Still, if the difference in strength is at least close to the original Majesty, attempting to bring a hero to justice for a crime seems very costly affair. Would heroes then be expected to police themselves in this instance? Would you have to place a bounty on their head for their capture? Would the expectation be that heroes accused of a crime would never put up a fight, but surrender to the guard by default?

 

[Alfryd]

Thank you Greymane, those are good points: and you're mostly correct.

I actually thought the majority of offenders are likely to be small-time citizen miscreants, which a couple of well-trained and equipped city guards could stand a good chance against (assuming they can apprehend them in the first place-) pickpockets or street urchins, harlots, thugs, beggars, poachers, smugglers, and the like. (Of course, a harmless peasant farmer who's had too much to drink could wind up in the pillory for disturbing the peace.)

The second reason why many heroes wouldn't choose to run is because they risk having their entire assets (i.e, savings after tax) confiscated should they elect to skip town, and their guild affiliations will likely be severed. Even the rogues' guild itself is likely to insist that their members do time if they're careless enough to get caught red-handed in the first place- having established a cosy understanding with the local sovereign, it simply doesn't do to rock the boat. Moreover, if you skip town there's the additional charge of Cowardice and Desertion to face if you're caught.

And, as you mention, you could always place a capture bounty on their heads in extreme cases, while certain heroes, (notably solari, monks vindicant/inquisitor, and possibly rangers or paladins) would contribute to law enforcement of their own accord.

Still, if the difference in strength is at least close to the original Majesty, attempting to bring a hero to justice for a crime seems very costly affair.

But the cost of the alternatives may well be greater.

Still, for experienced rogues, yes, you're effectively loooking at "you''ll all remember this as the day that you almost caught Jack Sparrow." (Possibly the most lovably Chaotic Evil character in recent memory.)

 

[Hassat Hunter]

I dunno... taking Majesty in mind (what else?) Rogues in settlements without a Statue or 2 quickly have a criminal record the size of a 800x600 screen (all that theft from marketplaces, houses etc.)

Should they become more hero-ish in M2 then to avoid such things?

And there is always the adding in of the "Wizard's Curse" Hooligan enemies who do such debauchery when specific conditions are met (# vice???)

 

[unmerged(80041)]

Should they become more hero-ish in M2 then to avoid such things?

No, they should just avoid stealing with the Sovereign is looking.

(Or more seriously, with Alfryd's ideas - not move into your kingdom if the law is too well enforced.)

 

[Alfryd]

I'm actually preuming that the direct loyalty benefits of statues would be scrapped in Maj2 (their effect would depend on the hero's Vanity and have to be built in their specific likeness.)

I dunno... taking Majesty in mind (what else?) Rogues in settlements without a Statue or 2 quickly have a criminal record the size of a 800x600 screen (all that theft from marketplaces, houses etc.)

That is precisely what this mechanism is intended to address. Hopefully, by the time those rogues have graduated to level 8 and can safely ignore your regular henchmen guards, you'll have solari and bounty hunters who fill in the gaps.

In fact, a system that might be interesting to look at in this context is the Gambit system you see in FFXII- the ability to chain together arbitrary preconditions for a given action could be used to formulate laws and ordinances. Just pick a series of preconditions, a particular action to be taken, and an associated incentive for compliance.

This technique could also be adapted to setting persistant rewards/bounties for specific acts, instead of the hall of Champions.
Precondition: Enemy Werewolf
Action: Capture
Incentive: 500 gold reward

Alternatively, you could set a draft along the following lines:
Precondition: Peasant
Action: Enlist at Barracks
Incentive: Cowardice and Desertion penalties

Or soemthing like that. It might all be a little fiddly to implement, but it could even be adapted to giving very specific, tailored commisions to individuals heroes or groups thereof.

Precondition: Member of selected group of heroes.
Precondition: Level 5 or better.
Action: Rondevous at Tiger's Eye Inn.
Action: Infiltrate Enemy Advisor's Bodyguard.
Action: Kill Enemy Advisor.
Incentive: 4000 gold reward.
Incentive: Death penalty for failure.

Etc. etc.

 

[unmerged(80041)]

That is precisely what this mechanism is intended to address. Hopefully, by the time those rogues have graduated to level 8 and can safely ignore your regular henchmen guards, you'll have solari and bounty hunters who fill in the gaps.

This would have to be accompanied by a major boost in the effectiveness of Rogues' thievery to be taken seriously.

 

[Alfryd]

I dunno. If a rogue takes an enemy sovereign's offer to assassinate your highest-level ranger in a dark alley, I'd consider that to be a singificant offense.
But yes, I'd like to see a Majesty where high-level rogue larceny is a not insignificant drain on your coffers, with peoples' life savings in jeopardy if things get out of hand.

 

[Hassat Hunter]

Precondition: Member of selected group of heroes.
Precondition: Level 5 or better.
Action: Rondevous at Tiger's Eye Inn.
Action: Infiltrate Enemy Advisor's Bodyguard.
Action: Kill Enemy Advisor.
Incentive: 4000 gold reward.
Incentive: Death penalty for failure.

Wouldn't this become "too controlled" (as in almost like controlling them on their own)? Just you do it in text-form instead of selecting and right-clicking.

And with rogues doing stuff as mentioned above I doubt anyone would want rogues in their service anymore (I already refuse to use them in The Siege and such, and I doubt they are *hot* in MP); wouldn't it be better if the criminal activities would be done not by "Heroes" but by villains; and your heroes need to respond on it?
Shortly: More non-monster enemies that do something else than just cause damage...

 

[Alfryd]

Wouldn't this become "too controlled" (as in almost like controlling them on their own)?

Possibly. It is a danger. But they're still free to refuse if so inclined, there are just potential drawbacks to doing so. (Bear in mind that if you use things like the death penalty for disobediance, heroes and citizens are likely to desert your kingdom in droves if given the chance. The guilds to which they belong are also likely to take grave exception to this kind of threat directed toward their members.)
Plus, the time taken to draw up a commision like this would make direct 'control' of citizens virtually impossible on a large scale. There'd be far too much micro involved. In 90% of cases, they don't use direct control simply because it's not in their interests to get bogged down in minutiae.
The thing is, I can't see any reason, in principle, why a king/queen would not be able make this kind of offer if the mood struck them.

And with rogues doing stuff as mentioned above I doubt anyone would want rogues in their service anymore...

The whole point to the rogue class is that they're supposed to be a two-edged sword. The same qualities that make them useful- greed, secrecy, adaptability- also make them treacherous.
It is possible to earn rogues' loyalties, but I'd say you'd have to do this through the emotional mechanics described here.

 

[unmerged(79778)]

While I do like this idea I think that the result would be that you would almost have to use the chaotic/lawbreakers as a result simply because it is a lot easier to keep your heroes and a lot less work trying to maintain your city. A person choosing the law side would have to keep track of the crime and punishment aspect of the city full time simply to make sure their heroes stay around. While the lawless side would only have to do enough to make sure it didn't get to bad.

The balance to this seems to be that since there will not be as much crime then there won't be as much of a loss monetarily due to crime. But the crime side has monetary incentives such as more tax options which potentially offset this disadvantage. Also to have an effective system of laws it cost more money to enforce them (ie guards and courts salaries and bounties for lawbreakers) which also partially negates the gain.

Therefore what is the potential advantage to choosing lawful? Could the heroes be stronger. Or maybe in time the lawful police themselves while the lawless require continued monitoring so that while early lawful is difficult to maintain eventually it becomes much easier.

 

[Hassat Hunter]

The whole point to the rogue class is that they're supposed to be a two-edged sword. The same qualities that make them useful- greed, secrecy, adaptability- also make them treacherous.

I know, but in current Majesty that means; Usefull in Singleplayer; useless when another kingdom steps in. No-one revives a Rogue; nor cares too much when the entire guild dries up after a while. They just miss the punch to give them even more disadvantages.

 

[Alfryd]

I know, but in current Majesty that means; Usefull in Singleplayer; useless when another kingdom steps in. No-one revives a Rogue; nor cares too much when the entire guild dries up after a while. They just miss the punch to give them even more disadvantages.

Actually, some MP players keep one or two rogues about in the late game- not for the sake of winning combat, because they don't- but for the sake of distractions. If a level 10 monk is destroying your marketplace, 500 gold on his head will attract a rogue and not much else. The rogue will die, but he's cheap to replace and at least you got enough time to repair the market before other heroes arrive to shoo that monk off.

But the main problem with Majesty regarding rogues at present is that it won't let them do their jobs properly. At present, all a rogue can do is stand still, pecking away with his crossbow until some armoured tank creeps up and mauls him with gusto. In short, the game forces rogues to fight on fair terms, when the whole point to rogues is that they don't fight fair in the first place. Rogues should be using (apart from poison,) lockpicking, trap detection, backstab attacks, hit & run, mobility, stealth and concealment to (a) circumvent most defences and (b) avoid combat in the first place. If this were implemented properly, rogues would remain useful even in the late game.


Housefish: Your summary is generally accurate, but I would think that the benefits of a Lawful settlement are fairly self-evident- you don't lose citizen incomes to theft and assault as often, which means you get a better cut from taxes, and people are more likely to settle in your kingdom when they feel safe, which also boosts citizen mood.
To a certain extent, Lawful heroes (at least at present,) the monks/healers/paladins do seem stronger than their counterparts, but that really ought to be fixed, so I'll leave that for now.