Feature Suggestion: Contracts (name pending)

[Shistar]

omg yes, implement ingame NFT

Huh?? LOL How would this become a non-fungible token..? You're just paying someone to help you, same way you pay mercenaries in PF to help you get a mount.
Unless this is a joke, in which case whoops, went right over my head.

As much as I like this idea, as soon as you introduce "soft" targets (which cannot be confirmed by a system event), you run into trouble:

Check out Jerry Smith and the Meeseeks to see where this sort of request might end

Yeah, if it's something the game can confirm by itself I'm all for it, but stuff like soft targets could lead to a lot of trouble. I think it would still be worth adding for specific targets such as duty completion, crafters/gatherers for hire, etc.

[Soverus]

As much as I like this idea, as soon as you introduce "soft" targets (which cannot be confirmed by a system event), you run into trouble:



Check out Jerry Smith and the Meeseeks to see where this sort of request might end

Mind giving me some examples of "soft targets"?

[Gwenkatsu]

Mind giving me some examples of "soft targets"?

As I quoted from your post: "Teach me how to play reaper", then the client turns out to be absolutely incapable of playing reaper, no matter how long or good you explain it to them. Maybe they're daft, or maybe you're a terrible teacher - this contract will never be finished.

[Soverus]

Ah, Yeah, the "Teach me how to play XXX" was more of just a filler idea. The primary reasons for this would be anything that could be auto-completed with a Duty Completion, or Quest Completion. However, to erase the prospect of the Quest requirements being fulfilled, but not being turned in by the requesting person as a means to try and circumvent the system, I would suggest it being tied to Quest/Duty requirements being fulfilled. Not by the Completion trigger. When a quest requirement turns to a Green checkmark is a good example.

I work in cybersecurity and am cautious by nature. I aim to look at all of the ways someone could take advantage of something like this so as to help snuff out those "vulnerabilities" and make it as desirable as possible.

[Brandr]

As I quoted from your post: "Teach me how to play reaper", then the client turns out to be absolutely incapable of playing reaper, no matter how long or good you explain it to them. Maybe they're daft, or maybe you're a terrible teacher - this contract will never be finished.

I think the quest giver is the one to rate if the quest is complete or not. Just like Uber Delivery.
Maybe in this system we gotta need a 5 star ratings as well

[Aonns]

I rather like this.

[Soverus]

There are too many ways for the requester to skirt the system and give poor ratings in an attempt to get their Gil back. It would be best to have it decided via an automated means that is not controlled by the Requester or the Contractor. Instead, having it trigger based on Quest requirement fulfillment or on Duty Completion, based on the requested service, would force impartiality within the system.