As written, the karma system does not distinguish between lawful punishments like legal fines, jail time, or execution and less justifiable acts such as theft, kidnapping, or murder. Despite some confusion on the matter, this was always intentional for two main reasons. Firstly, because in-play laws written by PCs can easily be corrupted, and secondly, because it's possible to have multiple law-making bodies in play that all claim to be legitimate. Both of these create gray areas that weaken the karma system and defeat its true purpose, which is to discourage PvP.
That being said, I do agree with one thing: In order to be effective, laws must have teeth, and laws with teeth do a great job of hindering PvP. The Sheriff and his deputies ought to have the ability to fine, incarcerate, and execute other players for breaking the law without suffering karma. This, in my mind, does even more to further the goal of a low-PvP game environment.
The only question is how to solve the loopholes mentioned previously. I like to future-proof systems like this as much as possible, and while saying that the laws as written are perfectly legitimate may be fine for now, it may not be fine in the future when, say, a powerful group of players declares themselves nobles and decrees that nobles can kill whomever they wish. As with all things, there must be checks and balances against such abuse.
The most obvious solution is for plot, or even the owners, to have NPCs make and enforce the laws. As you might expect, we don't like this solution, and I'm guessing most of you don't, either. It creates more work for the game administrators and takes control out of the players' hands. It also sets up an adversarial relationship between the PCs and their law enforcers, rather than a feeling of camaraderie with them. We'd much rather allow the players to create their own society and live by their own rules.
In that vein, I've crafted a proposal that should solve the problem. As before, the laws of men do not absolve you of karma. If you coerce money or kill another PC in the name of the law, it is just as bad as doing it outside the law. That is, unless the law is Sanctioned.
Sanctioning is a ritual whereby laws, and the individuals charged with upholding them, are deemed just by the immortal Lemesin. The PCs write their own laws, designate their own upholders of justice, and submit them for judgement. If they are deemed just, no karma is incurred when the upholders of the law enforce them.
I think this solves the conundrum in a very "have your cake and eat it too" sort of way, but I'm curious to hear everyone else's thoughts. Do we like the idea of a player-driven law system that can be karma-free with a higher authority's stamp of approval? Or do we prefer the brutally indiscriminant system we have now?
You read between the lines correctly; Nick and I would be deciding whether or not the immortal patron of justice himself sanctioned town laws. That being said, it would likely be a lengthy ritual that is not performed in play. That way Nick and I have time to deliberate on it between games rather than making a decision on the spot.
On a side note, the laws would need to be published for all to see before they could be Sanctioned. (Hint, Hint) ;)
i like the idea myself. it will give players the believablility that they are involved in the setting and add immersion. plus its realistic, as laws are often corrupted by those who make them. it also will force the general populace to be more involved in the game and the decision making process as well as freeing plot up to do more. just my thoughts...