A way of jailing people?

[Walther]

Or, how about you throw two people in a holding cell, two npcs, one npc and yourself, whatever and they fight to the death.

two go in, only one goes out.

 

'fight 'til the death for my amusement NPCs, would you?'

[PlasticandRage]

It's not like zombies can open doors quickly

 

What about locking someone up who's friendly to you, but might be infected?

 

Or how about this one: Lemmy mentioned possible fights over leadership. Throw someone in lock up for a bit until you know you can trust them after a coup attempt.

 

It's not like there's much guess work involved in figuring out if you're infected or not though. When it comes down to it wounds sustained from a zombie is really the only way it can happen, and generally that produces signs of sickness relatively quickly. A well informed player is going to know when it's happening and when it's not, and I think most of those same players, especially if part of a team, are going to want to take advantage of those circumstances and go do something dangerous that would benefit the team instead of dying in a locked room, like lure a huge horde away from a congested area with good loot, or what have you. Same way a lot of us handle it now if we plan on reusing the same game world. Drop all your loot in a box in your safe house, and go get something high risk done that will benefit your next character. I could see the whole idea working if it were implemented with NPC's in mind, but I just can't see any player making the conscious decision to allow themselves to be locked in a room for an extended period of time. I know I wouldn't. I have better things to do IRL then sit with an online video game where another player/s is forcing me to stand in a room for hours. I'd bite the bullet and risk an escape attempt before I'd let that happen.

[GodWaffle]

I think this is a great idea, especially on a hardcore server (one where you won't respawn if you die), where life is a massively valued thing.  I can imagine keeping someone hostage and demanding supplies from their group in return for the person's release would be good.. or perhaps even to find out where their base is.

I too would love to be able to capture a load of zombies and throw someone in the room since I'm an evil bastard.  

I think we should have the ability to knock someone out for a few minutes (2 at most I'd say), which would allow you to take their weapons off their 'body'.  Some would say that's a bit overpowered but the way I see it, if I get the jump on you and knock you out, it's your own fault for not being more aware of your surroundings.

[gekkobear]

 

Lock em in with a bottle of bleach.  Untill you open the door again, the captive is alive AND dead.  (as in the Schrodingers Cat thingy from big bang theory xD )

 

You're misunderstanding Schrodinger's Cat. The cat is alive and dead because there's a 50% chance that a particle will decay and release the poison (which is completely reliant on the Heisenburg Uncertainty Principle that tells us we have no way of predicting whether the particles will decay or not).

 

 

Heisenberg,... I did some research on him in school.  Interesting guy, but I feel sorry as heck for his wife.

 

When he had the position he didn't have the speed; and when he had the energy he didn't have the time.

 

There you go... the only dirty particle physics joke I've ever seen in the history of my life.

[CliffExcellent]

I kinda thought that once NPC's are added and long into the future multiplayer, we would need some way of keeping people in captivity, whether they misbehave, potentially infected, or your holding someone ransom.

Locking up other players is not a good idea though. Forcing the other player to just sit there and do nothing for ages is not fun.

[PlasticandRage]

^ Exactly. I don't think people would actually do it. I personally could see myself turning the game off before I sat for hours doing nothing, and I wouldn't think a goal of the devs would be to implement an action that inspires players to turn off the game.

[CliffExcellent]

^ Exactly. I don't think people would actually do it. I personally could see myself turning the game off before I sat for hours doing nothing, and I wouldn't think a goal of the devs would be to implement an action that inspires players to turn off the game.

It would work great on NPCs though.

 

Honestly I doubt a multiplayer mode will work for this game in general.

[Rathlord]

You're missing things, though, Plastic. What about NPC's? What about characters with the Hypochondraic trait? What about those of us who actually like to Roleplay as our characters rather than go out in an unrealistic blaze of glory that the vast amount of human beings would NEVER do? What about if you've just been bitten and want to see if you're gonna capitalize on that 4% chance? I wouldn't let someone just wander around my survival settlement like that!

 

You may not agree with all of the reasons to do this, but that certainly doesn't mean that it's not things people might want to do.

 

What if your settlement is under attack by NPC's and one begs for mercy? You're still under attack... you just gonna let him roam in your settlement? Or are you going to be cold hearted and put a bullet in his head? What if your NPC friends respect your leadership because of your kindness... gonna risk a rebellion? Or you could lock him up and deal with him later.

[CliffExcellent]

You're missing things, though, Plastic. What about NPC's? What about characters with the Hypochondraic trait? What about those of us who actually like to Roleplay as our characters rather than go out in an unrealistic blaze of glory that the vast amount of human beings would NEVER do? What about if you've just been bitten and want to see if you're gonna capitalize on that 4% chance? I wouldn't let someone just wander around my survival settlement like that!

 

You may not agree with all of the reasons to do this, but that certainly doesn't mean that it's not things people might want to do.

 

What if your settlement is under attack by NPC's and one begs for mercy? You're still under attack... you just gonna let him roam in your settlement? Or are you going to be cold hearted and put a bullet in his head? What if your NPC friends respect your leadership because of your kindness... gonna risk a rebellion? Or you could lock him up and deal with him later.

I'm fine with all this as long as they don't try to put in multiplayer. It just won't work.

[silents429]

How wouldn't it work.

Obviously sitting in a jail isn't fun, but then don't get yourself in that position, it puts a risk on you, and theres always a chance of escaping, if they were going to keep you alive they have to bring food in somehow.

And if not then you will die in a day or two so it doesn't matter.

I say don't break into my place or expect a slow painful death in my makeshift cell.
 

[PlasticandRage]

 

What if your settlement is under attack by NPC's and one begs for mercy? You're still under attack... you just gonna let him roam in your settlement? Or are you going to be cold hearted and put a bullet in his head? What if your NPC friends respect your leadership because of your kindness... gonna risk a rebellion? Or you could lock him up and deal with him later.

 

I would put a bullet in his head without hesitation. I personally don't plan on cooperating with NPC's though. I work alone. I really can see the benefits of integrating a system like that if it were targetting NPC's specifically though, and designed well with that target in mind. I do. I just don't think it'd work for other players unless, as you say, they're purposely role playing, but even then I think it's a stretch to assume that someone is going to want to stand around and be locked up for an extended period.

 

I think the whole locking up someone that's potentially infected thing is a bit nonsensical though with the way the game currently works. If that whole system were changed in the future so that the sickness has a longer incubation period between initial contact and when the sickness actually begins, then it'd make sense, but things as they are now you know pretty quickly what's going to happen. You get bit or scratched and within a couple hours you're either sick, and you're going to die, or you're not, and you're fine. There's not much guess work invovled there. Maybe if it were an NPC, and NPC's are implemented with programming to do things like be frightened of consequences and lie about being infected, which coincidentally would be awesome. That circumstance would actually really make sense with a system like that and work so well, but player's generally know whether they're infected or not fast enough and with enough clarity between the bite/scratch, the beginning of the sickness, and death. There's plenty of time there to make decisions that I can't see being locked in a room as really being a necessity.

[silents429]

Yall are convinced jail = spending entire game sessions sitting in a cell.

Its not going to be easy to just be brought into someones jail, and the chances of escaping should be brought out, along with the fact you could commit suicide by not eating, or die from not being fed.

Maybe press Q and make a lot of noise to draw a hoard towards the camp and cause a distraction.

Don't focus to much on being in jail and more on ways of getting out, because there are plenty.

[GodWaffle]

Yall are convinced jail = spending entire game sessions sitting in a cell.

Its not going to be easy to just be brought into someones jail, and the chances of escaping should be brought out, along with the fact you could commit suicide by not eating, or die from not being fed.

Maybe press Q and make a lot of noise to draw a hoard towards the camp and cause a distraction.

Don't focus to much on being in jail and more on ways of getting out, because there are plenty.

 

I agree with this, I think a lot of people who play Project Zomboid would like to roleplay as their character, myself included, and as silents said there's always a chance of escaping when someone brings in food, etc.  

In a lot of zombie fiction, there will be times when a survivor is locked up by another group in order to obtain information, so why not have this possibility in Project Zomboid? I think if you end up in a cell, it's your own fault for not being aware of guys sneaking up on you, and if you really don't want to go you can try and fight them off and run for it.

Things like this won't make the game boring, it'll become even more fun and interesting when you get thrown into a situation like this.  And to be honest, I don't think people will want to keep a prisoner too long, it's a lot of hassle and also considering food shortages you're wasting food on a prisoner.

I know a lot of people will be the DayZ shoot first, think later types, but I could imagine playing as the kind of person who wouldn't just kill other players, if I had a prisoner and found out what I wanted, I would let him/her go.

[MrZombifiedGamer]

slave labor?

Slave labor? I don't think the devs will do that, I heard they're pro capitalism.. lol

[CaptainBinky]

The benefit to locking up an NPC as opposed to killing them, is that the rest of the survivors in your group would probably be a lot more down with that than their leader going around murdering people

[Walther]

The benefit to locking up an NPC as opposed to killing them, is that the rest of the survivors in your group would probably be a lot more down with that than their leader going around murdering people

well, you could always lock people away and murder them without anyone noticing... right? right? ^{I'll leave meow}

[Kajin]

Yeah, but what to do with them after?

[GodWaffle]

The benefit to locking up an NPC as opposed to killing them, is that the rest of the survivors in your group would probably be a lot more down with that than their leader going around murdering people

 

This.. I think people are forgetting that as a leader of a group you need to make choices that your group should view positively or risk getting your own head blown off by a group member.

[Walther]

Yeah, but what to do with them after?

 

Blame someone?

[silents429]

Yeah, but what to do with them after?

Clean up the body, which is planned to be added.

Stuff into the back of a trunk >_>

[Kajin]

I meant what to do if you plan on keeping them alive!

 

Jeez, you guys are evil. My plan is much better. If possible, I'd starve them on low rations for a week or five until their spirit is broken, then come along offering a full steak dinner in exchange for information/joining my group/helping me steal their old group's supplies/helping me kidnap other members of their group

 

Because that's clearly the better way to do things.

[RorekSR]

I meant what to do if you plan on keeping them alive!

 

Jeez, you guys are evil. My plan is much better. If possible, I'd starve them on low rations for a week or five until their spirit is broken, then come along offering a full steak dinner in exchange for information/joining my group/helping me steal their old group's supplies/helping me kidnap other members of their group

 

Because that's clearly the better way to do things.

 

No it isn't, because if I was a person in captivity barely left alive, and suddenly was brought a real meal and just... offered to join the group or something, there's no way in hell I or any other sensible human being would believe it's that simple. Why would I take you to my friends? Once you know about them, you'd kill me and then my friends would be fucked. Why would I want to join the group of someone who starves their prisoners? Why would I EVER want to assist those same people of surviving? Especially if they added the stipulation that I betray my old friends in the process?

And why would YOU want to let a turncoat who WOULD be willing to do those things to his "friends" into your haven? You don't think he wouldn't do the exact same to you, or worse, seek vengeance later for what you did to him?

If you pulled some shit like that on me (or most players I'm going to guess) then I would make sure I was having the last laugh.

[Rathlord]

Probably true, but on the other hand... Stockholm Syndrome.

[Kajin]

I was mostly just making a joke by calling everyone else evil and then going on and making a suggestion that's arguably even more evil.

 

But there's a little bit of merit to the argument. I don't know if you've ever been hungry before. I'm not talking "I've overslept and had to skip breakfast or else I'll be late" hungry. I'm talking "I haven't eaten a solid meal in three weeks, may I please have that moldy bread crust that'll probably make me start blasting out both ends but I'm so hungry I don't care" Capital H Hungry. Give a prisoner a chance at a more substantial meal than what you've been giving them and you'd be surprised at what they do. I'd probably draw the line at trying to use it as a way to get information on an enemy group, though.

 

And keep in mind that, thus far, the discussion has mostly been about imprisoning NPCs over players, so this is something you'd only try with an NPC that would actually be affected by the above instead of a player who would only be annoyed that their character just starved to death and they had to reroll a new one.

 

Probably a bit too much for the dev's tastes, but if we're going to have the ability to imprison NPCs there has to be SOME kind of logical follow up.

[Rathlord]

Well typically in cases (other than Stockholm Syndrome) you'll get their temporary cooperation, but once they're wandering merrily around your camp as a trusted friend... harder to trust.