that's an interesting thought but the protection of money could be backed up by%. As an example, anyone can protect a fixed percentage of the same would be the same regardless of whether poor or rich, since the yield is still higher in the rich. Or one makes the punishment not from the value but from the total fortune, then the punishment would have been robbed with a poor man who became higher than with a rich one.

I'm glad you shared you opinion and thoughts on this matter. In my humble opinion, I'm afraid its too immersion breaking and mechanically, this really looks like a 'make deviancy (robbery) non-existent post, disguised as a balanced proposition post.'

Being able to fully secure things, no matter how small the amount, within your house with zero possibility of it being stolen is pure immersion breaking.

Anyone who's played MMO's for any length of time knows, 100% that gamers 'game' the systems, so the below senarios are without a doubt going to happen if given the chance.

You want farmers to have more ability to store things safely because they are poor. If they are poor, then they will more than likely be able to store everything they own within the 'safety cap' of their house, let alone just build another shackhouse and abuse the system. Making deviancy (robbery) a non-viable playstyle.

This effect is compounded when you apply it to "rich" players who can just build multiple houses on their land and safely store everything within the 'safety cap' of every house, making deviancy (robbery), again, a non existent play-style.

A "rich" player outside and inside the game can just make as many "poor" alts as they wish and have the benefit of storing their "rich" characters possession within the poor alt's house that has a secured safety cap bonus. Again, making deviancy (robbery) a non-viable playstyle.

To me, the system you suggested is rife for abuse and unjustly punishes deviant players.

Robbers will only have so much carrying capacity to begin with, along with "skills" player and character, picking locks (doors and crates), dodging guards, pets, traps, owners, random streetwalkers (no not the 'working kind') going about their business (player or NPC), carry lock picking tools, trap disarming tools, poison to knock out your guard pets, survival supplies, disguises and weapons. THIS is the balance.

I believe the above mentioned mechanics from SbS are enough to keep things balanced, so I can't suggest anything more than what has already been explained to us by SbS on Deviancy (robbery) balance thus far.

Wouldn't the presence of guards address this issue?

I don't know about you guys but deviancy in Kingdom Come Deliverance was difficult, if you wanted to truly achieve stealing without getting caught. The guards patrolling at night with torches had eagle eyes, I swear. I think it's very possible to make deviancy the high-skill niche it's meant to be. It's been said they want 10-12% of the population to be deviant, and so that's a baseline of the minimum that includes NPCs.

I read that as, 10-12% of the population has very specific skills. If someone's looking for ransom I can tell you they don't have money, but what they will have are a very particular set of skills. Skills they acquired over very long lifetimes. Skills that make me a nightmare for commoners. If you appease them, that'll be the end of it. They will not look for you, they will not pursue you, but if you don't, they will look for you, and when they find you, and they will kill you.

Robbers and thieves will generate excellent storys and conflict. We need to see Deviancy as a beginnig of somethig and not an end to something.

I think the idea of a "secure storage" that is immune from deviancy is contrary to the player run free-form conception of COE. There should not be a mechanic that makes property immune from theft.

Rather, there should be (and I think, are) mechanics to make theft very hard. The player built dungeon concept (DJ 15) describes many different robust and buildable security systems -- as well as dynamic measures (like guards and traps).

It might be cost-prohibitive for every player to build a defended vault -- but that could be an opportunity for banking. There could be bailment contracts with banks, and the bank could provide for a very secure location and a promise of reimbursement if something is stolen despite their efforts -- for a fee. That would be a solution far more in line with both the described mechanics and the conceived immersion.

My dude. The game is going to be fine. Your locks just need to be ahead of the deviant curve of lock picking capability. People that can't afford high quality locks should use a public storage facility that would be developed by the mayor or the count. People that live the life style of thievery, and don't target good targets will end up having to pay lots of real life money to keep doing those things and getting caught by the law.

I am not saying it's impossible or people will not be able to raid hamlets or small settlements that don't have the logistic capability of secure trade or secure storage. But this is a business that most people need to have within their domain is a way to secure peoples possessions and ways to get to them in state of emergency when people are going to be huddled around a few inns in time of war.

This problem can be solved by a myriad of ways both private and public ways people will go about solving the issue of weak targets that may or may not have valuable things. The key here is most buildings won't have anything too valuable that would be raided or could be raided.

The town's security is levied on everyone that is involved in the settlement and perhaps they may have some help with the public storage if they want to have that option with some one like a count.

Nobility's main job and to a lesser degree mayors job is to protect the vassals within the domain/city during times of emergency. The times without emergency they're tasked with protecting people possessions and property, the main reason why people will want to live in each and every-ones domain.

Those that work within a hamlet for farms and for mining or forestry will likely not have their main vested interest secured within the local area that their hamlet is. They will store their things remotely. In wurm online the mines for bigger cities can be 10 or 20 minutes away. You need to think about what you are doing logically don't put it on the game system to make you have a false sense of security. We, with what they have talked about, have all the tools at our disposal to protect our things, loosely akin to how we protect our things in real life.

Places that are weak to be raided by 10-20 people aren't going to have their valuables in that location. One raid shouldn't be enough to put an entire establishment out of business.