What's new

Revised Robbery and Scamming rules.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bauer

Retired Admin
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
8,609
Location
The Netherlands
Hello RC-RP,

I've been listening to feedback from the community and attempted to re-make the rules for robbing and scamming with the rest of the admin team. The main issue players seem to have was the lack of freedom and restrictions they were given by the old rules. We ourselves have noticed that too many rules were made, and Roleplay scenarios that were never restricted before, suddenly became restricted. People started hiding behind those rules, and created annoying situations for both admins and players.

People will be given more freedom now, but that also means players will lose some OOC protection. Driving around in a Sultan filled with drugs and full-automatic weapons will no longer be protected by OOC rules. There are of course still some restrictions that try to make it fair for everyone.

The current rules can be seen here: viewtopic.php?f=10&p=1655183#p1655183

In the following weeks we will be looking at how everything plays out and if the community has any feedback on these rules. The best advice we would like to give everyone: Play it smart.

Here's a short changelog of stuff that has been done:
  • Revised the look of the entire topic to try and make it easier to read.
  • Edited every tab to make sure certain rules are in their corresponding tab. For example there were general rules about scamming sitting in the money tab. And trunk robberies were sitting in the House burglaries tab.
  • Added a legend with more clear uses of terms and used those terms in the entire topic.
  • Cleared up a lot of unnecessary text and changed those rules into clear list items.
  • Removed unnecessary or doubly rules. For example it is obvious you cannot rob a SPAS 12 because that weapon is SP/Aperture only. Or rules that are already restricted by the script.
  • Edited/added rules which were recently discussed about stealing stuff from vehicle trunks etc.
  • Added a part about confiscations.
  • Removed the mentioning of materials.
  • Removed some unnecessary rules for House/Business Burglaries.
  • Edited some small stuff to try and make it a bit tighter so people wont try and argue about small gray areas.

Any feedback can also be posted here.
 

Lee

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Messages
4,762
i never really had a problem with the robbing rules, but neither did i dedicate all of my time to doing it all day. good work. its nice to see improvements made from the communities feedback, hopefully this can happen more.
 

OutWorld

Donator
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
2,576
Location
Portugal
Those rules needed to updated and you and the rest of the admin team made a great job. EZ :thumbup:
 

Sunca

Donator
Joined
Dec 19, 2015
Messages
2,605
This looks very fresh, I like the enhancement of the rules!
 

Trapp

Donator
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
2,502
im confused. am i allowed to forcefully steal someone's car keys and then use the shared key to empty their trunk?
 

Kemp

Retired Admin
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
6,459
Location
United Kingdom
I'm a little disappointed that they've not been updated to coincide with Meyrick's topic he made in the admin board regarding SASP and their position with having reasonable cause to search trunks / property.
 

Bauer

Retired Admin
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
8,609
Location
The Netherlands
Trapp said:
im confused. am i allowed to forcefully steal someone's car keys and then use the shared key to empty their trunk?
Good question. I've talked to Earl, and decided to add this to the rule:

"You can only steal car keys if the car is near / has just been used."

Then you can do anything you want with the car, and like you said, steal from it's trunk.

Kemp said:
I'm a little disappointed that they've not been updated to coincide with Meyrick's topic he made in the admin board regarding SASP and their position with having reasonable cause to search trunks / property.
As of right now the SP has a lot more freedom with these new rules. The old rules disallowed them to take things completely if they didn't witness anyone storing anything. The current rules coincide quite much with the original topic Meyrick made. Could you give me an example as to why this isn't the case right now?
 

Kemp

Retired Admin
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
6,459
Location
United Kingdom
Bauer said:
Trapp said:
im confused. am i allowed to forcefully steal someone's car keys and then use the shared key to empty their trunk?
Good question. I've talked to Earl, and decided to add this to the rule:

"You can only steal car keys if the car is near / has just been used."

Then you can do anything you want with the car, and like you said, steal from it's trunk.

Kemp said:
I'm a little disappointed that they've not been updated to coincide with Meyrick's topic he made in the admin board regarding SASP and their position with having reasonable cause to search trunks / property.
As of right now the SP has a lot more freedom with these new rules. The old rules disallowed them to take things completely if they didn't witness anyone storing anything. The current rules coincide quite much with the original topic Meyrick made. Could you give me an example as to why this isn't the case right now?
My bad entirely, I skim read it and didn't pick up "authorities". Looks really good. :thumbup:
 

Trapp

Donator
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Messages
2,502
Bauer said:
Trapp said:
im confused. am i allowed to forcefully steal someone's car keys and then use the shared key to empty their trunk?
Good question. I've talked to Earl, and decided to add this to the rule:

"You can only steal car keys if the car is near / has just been used."

Then you can do anything you want with the car, and like you said, steal from it's trunk.
What do you mean by "if the car is near"? Does this allow me to rob keys off of someone who just pulled up in his vehicle? If so then it is a good addition as the opportunity cost of carrying illegal stuff in your car increases significantly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top