Really simple suggestion. When you kill someone whatever cash they have on hand you take, or at least a percentage of it.

From a RP perspective, when you have just gone through all the effort/risk to kill someone and you can see mountains of cash oozing out of their pockets, there is an excellent chance you are going to help yourself to it. You aren't going to respect their money more than their life...

Conversely if you see someone strolling the streets with millions on hand, they start to look like an attractive target. It wouldn't be the first time that someone is killed for the money they are carrying.

I obviously don't think this should apply to NPC's/CA's but they don't exactly have much cash on hand in any case.

I looooooooooove this idea.

Now, I know I will be going a little .orgish here, but I have always like that feature. The option to search someone's pockets after killing them.

Personally, I think it should be a percentage based on how good/strong your gun it. Simple enough, the stronger the gun, the more money you get your fingers on when you search his pockets before dipping out before the police come. Should make it an option however, can be selected whether you want to or not.

And... Call me crazy, but if the shooter decided to "search pockets" it can lower the percentage of the shot just a little, maybe like 1%, nothing major. Just a little risk for choosing the option to begin with.

All just a few ideas that ran through my mind when I read this, but overall I like this idea and it's a nice touch.

Success!
Dat bums swimmin wit the fishes!
You searched your victims pockets and kept $2,345,388!

You cannot say that does not look/sound sexy. No?

Not to mention I get a little bored seeing the same "Success!" over and over. Would be a little rewarding to yield pockets.

Personally, I could go with this. Unline Zero, I thouroughly enjoy the Success screen, ( moreso the BG success, as its original ) But the extra added bonus, and legitamacy of rollin a victim afterwards does cross my mind.

If I commit a murder crime... hate, passion, or whatever fueled, Im probably gonna take what they got, and have a night on them, if they arent cheap enough to not roll with the benjamins.

Hell yeah. I accept this.

I don't think this is a good idea. It was never implemented, and I consider Wacking as a way to get cash out of the game, which needs to be done at some point otherwise it would just get ridiculous. 

There's a reason that in all this time this was never implemented... It would change the game and the economy drastically, and I don't believe so in a good way. 

It isn't going to impact cash that is stored in bank accounts. (Which is where it should be)

From an RP perspective you aren't likely to wander around carrying massive amounts of cash on you, and if you do there is a really good chance that someone is going to notice and take advantage of it.

Will as much cash be removed form the game? Obviously not, but for the majority, at most it will be a couple of hundred k on hand. During wars, when the majority of high ranking deaths take place anyways, cash is sent away and put aside.

I can't see this drastically altering the economy as you put it.

Just a percentage Spike, not the entire haul and only depending on your gun strength. Meaning, if the person is holding 5,000,000 the top gun would get like 80% of that. Lower guns would get an even lower percentage.

Only on real people too, it's not like you are getting money from NPC's, RIA's, or MIA's. (Not that they hold that much money anyway). So you are talking wars or take downs or something along that manner.

And to be honest, BGs are a shit ton harder to pay for now or to get someone IWPed that you would like. That has inflated drastically. That or a swift kick in the ass for 10 days at gangster. Nothing is cheap anymore... upgrading DFPs, BGs, keeping up with the MIAs, etc. No one is even selling credits on the marketplace, so I don't think there is that much money flooding through right now as there was.

Also to add, this is 'money on hand' not 'money in the bank'. Who honestly carries around 10 million + anyway? You won't be getting as much as you think you will. Just a little something on the side, and yet maybe a 1$ chance of missing the shot for doing so.

That last part doesn't really matter to the money option, but you don't think this would be a nice touch? Is it just because of the in game money? Because most of the in game is in people's banks, not on hand. No one wacks people just to kill some cash in the game lol. This isn't 10+ plus we are talking about unless the highest gun in the game hits someone carrying 15 million plus, which rarely happens or someone just gets an extremely lucky timed shot off. (The odd of this, aren't good in happening)

* 1% chance of missing.

Sorry about the typo.

During a war, you keep your cash on hand for private flights as well as other things., and it needs to be there so it can be used immediately. Most people (with money) die in wars. I've seen numerous Extremely Rich people die. etc etc. 

Zero, they greated grave robbing so you can get a tiny percentage. It would go against that feature if you were to find any extra funds on the body. I knew we were talking about real characters; NPCs don't have much on them at all, you can see that through PPing them. 

I'm fully aware how much BGs cost to buy and maintain, but this isn't the way to try to balance that out. 

I wouldn't be surprised if someone decided to rogue to kill someone for money, just so they could send it off (if it wasn't a small percentage). It would be like putting a hitlist on one's own head to have the money out. The odds of their money being out is pretty high... as previously stated.

"I wouldn't be surprised if someone decided to rogue to kill someone for money, just so they could send it off (if it wasn't a small percentage). It would be like putting a hitlist on one's own head to have the money out. The odds of their money being out is pretty high... as previously stated."

Well obviously that is the point. This is an online Mafia RPG, not a tickling competition. The objective should be to strive towards reality. When someone is strolling around with $10million on hand of course they are going to be a giant target.

You are looking it from the perspective "Oh you know people walk around with 10mil on hand and they might become targets"

Every time an element in a RPG (Role Playing Game) should be considered you need to revert to real life.

So lets paint a picture.

I am a mafiosa in the 1930's, I work for a respected family in the 6 cities. I am walking around late one night when I spot someone in an alley carrying stupid amounts of money. I am a criminal, I have killed a lot of people... I look at this man as a target, because that is what he is. I see the family tag on his chest, but at the end of the day there is an amount of money that will tempt everyone. If you walk around with large amounts of money, you need to be aware of the risks?

Would you walk around with $1mil on hand in real life? If so you are slightly more hardcore than me.

If you don't like the idea that is entirely your choice. But the ultimate criteria should be "How does this compare to what the situation would be in real life". At the end of the day, and I will say it again. This is a Mafia role playing game, and should be treated as such.

With a percentage taken on the shot, it will still leave some money for people to get grave robbing. People do that for the achievement more then they do it for the actual funds involved in it.

Ok, during a war people do have a little bit of money out for those things. The average user sends their money off though or transfers it out in credits to have for their next character. The people who are going to die, usually don't die with their characters whole earnings unless they got 1 shot. Even if they do get one shot, a high majority of people aren't going to have serious cash on them. If they do, they that is their lose for doing so in my opinion.

I am not saying it is a good balance to the bgs situation, I was just stating that the bgs are harder to keep up with or to get someone IWPed. This leads to to more money, and less people getting bodyguards at a full HP. But the value of money you are getting off shooting someone, isn't going to buy you a new IWP and it isn't going to train your bgs for the week. It might help a little, but it won't happen.

Most of the people who carry any high amounts of cash on them are IWP and rightfully should be carrying large amounts on them. If you can shoot an IWP character, then why can't this play towards a small advantage in your favor? Most of the people that can be hit by a rogue, don't have that type of money on them worth shooting just for that purpose alone.

This isn't about rogue's though. This is about an added effect that is interesting and yet kind of fun.

In a realistic mafia standpoint, if you shoot someone down in cold blood and see some money fall out of their pocket {or hanging there), you aren't going to grab a handful of it to shove in your pockets before you leave his corpse?

I just don't agree with you that people carry that much money on hand. Especially if you only get a percentage of it on the hit and depending on gun strength. This isn't game changing money honestly.

"Well obviously that is the point. This is an online Mafia RPG, not a tickling competition. The objective should be to strive towards reality. When someone is strolling around with $10million on hand of course they are going to be a giant target."

He is right. Everyone eyeballs people who have Extremely Rich on them. They notice it and talk about it behind closed doors. They might even get a chuckle when they see one of their enemies die with that much cash on them.

People already notice when someone has serious cash on hand..

Here is my take on this a way that I would like it to work sort of thing:

Pay 1 credit for 30 days of "Pocket Snatcher". The 30 days that you have the "Pocket Snatcher" gives you 50% Chance of taking 100% of the money in the pocket of the person you just killed.

I do think that 50% would be the right amount because most of the time your going to be shooting NPC which most likely only carry a couple of $$$. Now if you decrease that amount and say give Tylers lots of $$$$$ then that would work. :)

I've always thought that it was silly that you couldn't lift some cash of a corpse, but then again its not as silly as Picking someone's pocket, taking 5k out and putting their wallet back.

As I've said in other threads, the economy in MR is delicately balanced, so if money is injected back into the game, it needs to be taken out in other ways. Yes, this is different from things that magically create money, like CAs for instance, the money was always there to begin with, but death has always been a way to remove cash from the game.

Also, I like the idea of killing folks to get the contents of their wallets, as has been said, if I was a mobster in the 30s and I heard of some rich person wandering the streets with untold millions in their wallet, I'd certainly take the risk.

It would have to be a percentage of Cash on hand, and it would have to have side effects. I'm not sure a higher percentage to miss is the way forward, after all you aren't looking for the wallet as you shoot. I'd suggest a more realistic approach would be reduced stealth and higher WS clarity, after all you are rifling the targets pockets instead of fading into the background.

I think this would be a realistic addition that would add a little more depth to the game in a fairly simple way.

It adds more temptation to shoot someone for money - we have a hitlist where you can take a risk to benefit from shooting someone with a bounty on them, why not be able to take a risk to kill and pilfer someone who's carrying an inordinate amount of cash on them? Few people actually enjoy rogues and/or general shooters when they're on the receiving end of them, but is this a reason to oppose a game change, so said rogues/shooters can be deterred moreso than they already are? I think greater choice and realism is of benefit, even if it culminates in a bloody outcome. It also adds another considering on what monies you're going to bank or carry, as in a way, by not managing your money smarter, this feature adds slightly more insult to injury when dying (this is a good thing, IMO).

I think if this was based on a percentage of what the victim had on hand, then it would never be a significant enough amount to really be a game-changer. Wars would definitely be a more profitable time for the victor - I'm not really sure of the unrealistic or negative side to that though.

I guess the main downside raised is that wacking loses its ability to take all of an account's money out of the game. I'd like to see some actual figures of how much we're talking here, as I imagine it's a pretty minor amount that would remain in game. Having said that, if you make this a perk, like Vince suggested (although I don't know if I like the 50/50 idea.. I'm not going to suggest/support any percentages, moreso just the idea of it being a perk), you're actually creating another way for people to spend money in the game, support the credit market, etc.

Maybe I'm missing something drastic here, but it's an interesting suggestion none-the-less.

This is an interesting idea. I don't think I would have a problem seeing something like a small percentage of cash on hand being lifted. I don't think I would like to see the percentage even anywhere near what it is on a mug, but realistically as it was pointed out... If you were to shoot someone you would surely wipe out their wallet as well.

That comes down purely what your motives for killing are. During a war, or an assassination or hit you'd be less likely to lift a wallet. If you were killing for fun or for robbery, then yeah I can see you lifting the targets wallet easy.

While I understand the realism Cass, I think graverobbing handles that small percentage. If they want 5000 like for a PP, that's fine with me...

I think something like $5000 would make the feature pointless in terms of adding any depth. Such a small reward for the risk would make it a token feature and remove most of the benefit/realism being discussed above.

That was why I said it... I don't know. I like seeing people lose money during wars. It helps to deflate the economy.