Question On Nexus Policy

[Lima 774]

So I am curious here, from what I can gather from multiple sources if you are on a nexus region the region owner at any time can choose to have your chests unlocked and take all your items.

This seems like a major concern, while I doubt it would happen to me in Urguan, if people in the game can find themselves politically disagreeing with their plot owner, their plot owner can just kick them off the region and declare all their items theirs while getting the chests unlocked?

Is there a policy on this, at the moment GM's? 

[AGP 3169]

I was asleep. A rollback happened, plot unclaimed. By the time I woke up, all 80 double chests worth of stuff unlocked and given to the new owner.

 

Considering I've read all the ban reports since... ever, lol, I've seen a few cases where this came up.

 

Gm/Admin policy precedent is that a plot owner effectively owns everything on his or her plot. They can at whim get a Gm to unlock anything and it is perfectly legal. You don't need IC justification.

 

In fact, if you have IC justification but don't actually own the region the chests are in, you cannot get them unlocked, as was seen in Fimlin's ban.

 

As Cappy has said, "Get plot owners you can trust." Don't store your items in a racial city's plot.

[_Stigwig 1510]

From what I've seen if the plot owner owns the plot, they can do what they want with chests and other locked items on it - despite if someone else has locked them. I believe Cappy dealt with this in another post and simply told them to make sure they only put their items in plots where they trust the owners totally so as to avoid this.

[Temp 2006]

If you wanna store some stuff with absolutely no chance of theft, ironically enough, the best place is the wilderness.

But yes, they can yank all your stuff with no prior comms. Seems dumb but, that's personal opinion.

[Lima 774]

So everyone agrees this policy is bad.. so why do we keep it? 

Can we please just think of a system that doesn't make people paranoid to live in nation capitals?

[zaezae 1098]

That's...actually really dumb. I think plot owners should be able to force people to get their crap out of a chest and destroy it, but to up and claim all of it? Come on. 

[AGP 3169]

So everyone agrees this policy is bad.. so why do we keep it? 

Can we please just think of a system that doesn't make people paranoid to live in nation capitals?

 

Several feedback threads have been made about it. Nothing happened.

[_Stigwig 1510]

Maybe this could work if communication and some form of RP to do with lock breaking were included, but the current system seems rather unfair - particularly to people with cases similar to Pie where they lose all of their items due to a rollback or something of the sort.

[Lima 774]

Can we have a GM please respond to this so we can actually know the policy in full?

[oblivionsbane 714]

I've been dealing with plots a lot recently because I've claimed two in the past week. The interesting thing that happened with me was that there were some people planning to take the plot, but I got to it first. I actually /cprivate'd their chest because they had tons and I mean /tons/ of wood. I figured it would be useful for building the new town and claimed it later that day. Then, that day, I found that my LWC's had somehow been popped and all the stuff taken. What's more, when Zarsies checked the logs he couldn't find who actually popped them. I've also been dealing with old LWC's people have left behind, and generally getting them out of the way can be a hassle when you just took over the region. I wouldn't mind if the complete opposite happened, so that when someone takes over a plot all LWC's reset so I don't have to make 3 modreqs to destroy doors, signs, and chest LWC's. 

 

What I will say however is that it shouldn't be allowed for the current owner to pop peoples chest willy nilly. My backing for this is if that owner has a reason to look or take from the chests, he should go to that persons character. He shouldn't forcefully have LWC's removed, no one else on the entire server can do that, so why should he? What I am getting at is LWC's should be allowed to be popped AS LONG as there is no way to go through the RP of having it unlocked for you. For instance you IC'ly have no clue who locked it, and the only real way is to beat the lock off. Otherwise, it's more of just avoiding RP? I dunno.

[zaezae 1098]

How about plot owners, after like, I dunno, a day, can have a chest /destroyed/ but can not have anything inside? I mean, no one else on the server is allowed to just steal everything from someone's chest but the offending chest has to get off the plot. Seems fair to me?

[oblivionsbane 714]

How about plot owners, after like, I dunno, a day, can have a chest /destroyed/ but can not have anything inside? I mean, no one else on the server is allowed to just steal everything from someone's chest but the offending chest has to get off the plot. Seems fair to me?

I feel like that could be even worse. Hopefully someone doesn't leave anything important of theirs in a chest in some plot. At least if it gets popped and the guy takes everything in it the other player can ask to get it back.

[GodEmperorFlam 3447]

I made a feedback thread a week or so ago about the policy as well, although it was on a different part of it (still was about unlocking chests though). I'm in support of the policy being changed.

 

https://www.lordofthecraft.net/topic/120234-feedback-nexus-plots-and-gm-policy/ <--- The one I made.

 

Here's another. https://www.lordofthecraft.net/topic/120063-nexus-regions/

 

All three of these have been ignored by GMs/Admins (aside from techies trying to figure out Emily's glitched issue, but that wasn't the point of the thread).

 

So yeah, could a GM please comment and explain why the current policy is even close to fair in regards to chest unlocking by owners, and the issues discussed in the other threads?

[VampsWillDie 76]

Put this in a sta tus or something, spam it.

 

"GMs/Admins check this out!" https://www.lordofthecraft.net/topic/120565-question-on-nexus-policy/

[Lima 774]

I mean, I am not a victim of this, but its just stupid.