AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic - Bans and You: What NOT to do when you get tossed from a city

I've been getting a few reports recently of people ignoring IC bans from Cordor. If a guard PC or NPC bans you from there, or your faction/race as a whole is banned, it is metagaming to enter Cordor East, North, South, or West without DM oversight, or until your ban has expired. Do not go in to any of those areas without a DM watching, or we will smack you for it. In the case of drow in Cordor, a Cordor Signet Ring also suffices.

This is also applicable to other settlements, if a guard tells you you're banned from Wiltun stay the hell out unless you want a DM slap.

I see this happen far too often in Bendir Dale. Stop it or I'll come for you.

For clarification, does this extend to the roads in the same area? Am I not allowed on the Cart Routes or paths near Bendir if banned from there, or the road passing Nexus Falls if banned from Winya?

The Bendir bans apply only within the walls of the town itself, I think. The roads and stuff are free to travel.

Gers wrote:

The Bendir bans apply only within the walls of the town itself, I think. The roads and stuff are free to travel.

Thats currently the same with Wiltun bans. Only in the keep, you can still walk the roads in the Jarldom itself.

Unless you're told otherwise thats normally the thing to assume. Guards will most of the time just prevent you from entering (it requires dm oversight to bypass them into the settlement) but they don't tend to chase after banned people. Individual cases may be differ but if in doubt just ask a dm.

Heres a Question. If you're banned from Cordor, are you banned from entering the main city only, or the northern part out of the main walls too? I've always assumed it was both, but recently this came into discussion.

If it's got guards in it, you're banned from it, save for the sewers.

Obviously the parts of the sewers with guards in them are bannage to.

how about the SoS?

SoS is currently closed and on lockdown. But once it's back open, it'll depend on if there's guards in there or not >>

TormakSaber wrote:

Quote:

Currently Krugan is banned from Khem (which I think is the town of Djedet mainly but..)

Djedet =/= Khem.

Okay so then using the leyline and the caravans is not possible?

Simeron wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

Quote:

Currently Krugan is banned from Khem (which I think is the town of Djedet mainly but..)

Djedet =/= Khem.

Okay so then using the leyline and the caravans is not possible?

I was told that being banned from Djedet means the whole area. Is it true? I assumed it meant I just could not go within the walls of the town, but could go around. using caravan routes to get to lost river, or the oasis etc.

Obviously going around is fine.

I just want to ask to triple check. The law makes it sound like the outside of the town isn't alright either. Link

If PCs enforce it sure. But there's no NPCs in half those areas.

Okay, so to make it clear in my head...and avoid the M word being tossed around...

If you are banned from a city that means within the WALLS of that city?

Examples I can think of for Krugan...

Dale and Djedet.

Krugan can move OUTSIDE the walls of both but can not ENTER either without DM supervision correct?

If this is so...second question...

If a PC comes out and wants to enforce the ban...this could potentially become a hostile encounter (from either side) so, anything OUTSIDE those walls would be IC meaning if Krugan decided to shank the PC then its 'legal' more or less depending on the PvP rules.

NOTE:

This is an EXAMPLE using MY PC. This does not mean Krugan WOULD do this...but I know many other PCs that would have NO issue doing this...and having a PC confront them and just dropping a hellball on the spot.

The dale has a long tradition of claiming the area around it as well as a large amount of guards outside their walls so I would say that its pretty much their laws apply.

Djedet has yet to get an update with the guards in more areas so pcs can enforce but npcs aren't there like tormak said. In any situation be it cordor or what not, what happens ic I guess is that a wayx it would be common for people to defend their territory with pushing borders or laws to keep citizens safe... Safe to say if in the area expect possible confrontation but its not a sheer law against it.

Simeron wrote:

If a PC comes out and wants to enforce the ban...this could potentially become a hostile encounter (from either side) so, anything OUTSIDE those walls would be IC meaning if Krugan decided to shank the PC then its 'legal' more or less depending on the PvP rules.

Not if you're in the line of sight of the NPC Militia, no. You think those Militia are paid to just stand there? No, their job is to PROTECT the Dale. When you're shanking someone in front of the militia, that is metagaming. It's like that anywhere, unless you have DM supervision.

Remember YOU're the one that's banned. It's not out of some mandate that the Dale lets banned people travel on OUR roads. That's not a claim we threw out either. Last time I checked Djedet has no ownership extending into Khalem or the Oasis. For the Dale, it's a land that WE OWN rightfully so when the Dale was given to us. It's out of benevolence of the residents to not be a complete and utter dipshit that we let baned people WALK THROUGH the Dale lands outside of the walls. But that's it. If you're loitering in the line sight of the NPCs and THEN ATTACKED Dale PCs when confronted to move along, I don't know how that's not against the rules.

When a DM is watching over the Dale and you do this kind of thing (Shanking someone, resident no less, in front of the Militia), I've seen an army of NPC militia march out. Actually, I've seen Militia march out for just simple harassment. So I'd be really shocked if the NPCs are going to just stand there for someone trying to kill our resident in Dale lands.

The Dale's ban only extends to inside of the walls only because our current law say it is.

First off, please read the entire post. I am asking for the clarification for this very reason.

Second, naturally if there is a guard standing there and you attack someone and you are on the "criminal list" they are going to react in defense of the person that isn't...I would think that would be the case if ANYONE got attacked..not just someone from the town they are protecting.

For example, if Zelly attacked Krugan as she is banned from Cordor and a Cordor Guard is there, I would expect the guard to attack Zelly, not Krugan even though Krugan is NOT a citizen of Cordor...Zelly is on their list of people to keep out. (This is my understand at least).

What I am talking about is when there are no NPC guards around, such at at the top of the entrance to the Dale, many places around Djedet and throughout Khem and other places like Uhm, Wharftown and such where there is not a whole lot of militia or troops. (yet at least).

Also please note this part of my post...

Quote:

NOTE:

This is an EXAMPLE using MY PC. This does not mean Krugan WOULD do this...but I know many other PCs that would have NO issue doing this...and having a PC confront them and just dropping a hellball on the spot.

Krugan is not stupid and very rarely directly confronts anyone. That is not how he works. The one exception was when Amenia was taken and as his wife was captured by drow, he was not thinking clearly at the time and was reacting on emotion rather thing calculating thought that is what I figured he would do.

There are however characters that can and do react in this very way. I do not have a single character capable of casting a hellball (yet).

IF Krugan ever decided to start hunting the people that have banned him, I can assure you it would be a blade from the shadows, without warning and probably would be over in less then 2 rounds. Maybe 3. There would be no witnesses. Just a cold dead body (or group of them) be it his target or his own.

Despite his reputation, Krugan doesn't murder people. He rarely seeks to kill people and prefers to try to make path of peace. An example was when he killed Godo...he let him go after raising him even though IC everything things he tossed him into a volcano and Godo got a true res.

The bans on Krugan from Copper Industries, the Dale and Djedet have not really affected him in the least save some bothersome false tales that have gotten back to him that he is working to fix.

What I want is to know exactly what is and is not allowed. I thought I had a clear idea and have not been traveling through Djedet at all nor the Dale, I simply go around. A minor inconvenience.

I have a full portal wand and mythals are no big deal to get. But this is one of those things I am sure many others are reading and in an effort to avoid that metagaming word being tossed around more (as if its not already being tossed around too much) I'm trying to get the DMs to give a very clear ruling.

Right now, what I get is that if there are guards present (NPC) its a no go. In the case of Djedet and the Dale, its within their walls for MOVING THROUGH and if something gets started where a guard can see, naturally they are going to side with their side.

However if its out of sight of them, then its pretty much like anything else outside the view of guards or npcs...so if someone confronts you in the middle of the forest and the situation goes hostile then all bets are off and you deal with things IC.

If I am wrong, I am sure the DMs will clarify.

I am using Krugan and the Dale and Djedet as the examples because Krugan is my character and those are the only two places I know of that he is banned. Nothing more.

I read what you wrote. Whether you can understand what I am saying is beyond me. I guess we'll wait for DMs to clarify.

Simeron wrote:

What I am talking about is when there are no NPC guards around, such at at the top of the entrance to the Dale, many places around Djedet and throughout Khem and other places like Uhm, Wharftown and such where there is not a whole lot of militia or troops. (yet at least).

I'm not sure exactly what it is you asking with this, though.....

In my experience in the Dale, the PC militia folks generally acknowledge that a pretty major travel route passes through their town's domain. Thus, they've been more or less okay when a banned individual (or member of a banned faction) has passed through the Dale's lands outside the walls, but not if that individual stops to do anything suspicious. "Doing something suspicious" can include just about anything, including lingering around for any reason at all, instead of just passing promptly through.

Well, in Morshkul's case, he is only banned from Djedet for being a half orc, thus as their law states with monstrous blood. I don't see why he could not go around. He's not one to want attention drawn to himself anyway. There are a lot of regular players who play orcs, and others similar "monster races" who I've seen enter Djedet and no one ever harrases them. Guess I'm the unlucky one to get an official ban :lol:

Tomato Sword wrote:

I read what you wrote. Whether you can understand what I am saying is beyond me. I guess we'll wait for DMs to clarify.

I understand perfectly what you are saying.

I'm wanting the DMs to make this clear for everyone that has ever had a ban in either of the two places I know of that don't encompass the entire area with their walls.

Djedet is especially what I am thinking about given that you MUST pass through Djedet to get to some places to get the leyline node and the bark needed for heal potions.

As you stated yourself, if you read the law, it sounds as if they are claiming the entire territory outside the walls, as you have stated the Dale does in its area.

This gives ample opportunity for the "Metagaming" word to be thrown about willy nilly if a banned person moves through the area, much less if they stop for any reason, even if its to do an OOC Bio Break or something.

I thought the matter was dealt with and my understanding was the rule was "within the walls of a town" for passage and "within eyesight of a NPC Guard" for the NPC guards.

Meaning you can't enter the town proper nor cause problems within sight of an NPC Guard if you are banned.

PC Guards are an entirely different matter. They can move about and are controlled by human beings and thus, you can RP the situation. The NPC Guards don't react unless a DM has control of them.

If a PC Guard comes out and confronts a banned person, for the sake of sanity, we will say Player QBert the vile Pale Master, Half Demon, Baby eating, Virgin Sacrificing, Bane Worshiping butcher of paladins that is kill on sight to the Dale AND Djedet and 100 PC guards go out to a place where no NPC guard is and confront him.

And he hellballs them and slaughters them all and lives because he is also a level 30 rogue and a level 30 wizard and a level 30 pale master.

Is he a metagamer for being in the area in the first place?

And yes, I am taking this to extremes so we can quit with the nitpicking and focus on the issue in an effort to get a clear(er) view of this rule so that as DM plots and Player Plots and General interactions happen it doesn't keep coming up.

Morshkul's post is a good example of why I am asking this again.

He is banned for being a Half Orc from Djedet, other Half Orcs are seens often inside the walls. Right now, I would think that is metagaming. The NPC guards wouldn't let them in or stay inside the walls.

But could they pass through with the caravans.

Or as you have stated, if the Hin decide to say "We are not going to be nice anymore and so, you're banned and now you can't even pass through our lands" because the Hin of the Dale claim the entire area even through the walls of the town don't extend that far would someone that is banned now be metagaming for simply using the roads?

The last word from the DMs as I understand it is that its within the walls of the town, within eyesight of the NPC Guards.

That is not how others see it apparently.

This is what and why I am asking these things. No other reason.

As I said, Krugan's ban really has done nothing from either place. He's still moving along and does quite the business. But I know many that are going to be far more affected by this ruling. Espeically given the DM Plots going on.

This is not what this thread is intended for.

Morshkul was not banned for that. Message me if you really don't know. It was for much more than that.

All half orcs are banned yes. Exceptions are allowed om djedet, but none so far. The others don't get harraseed because there is no pc guards online.

GreatPigeon wrote:

This is not what this thread is intended for.

Morshkul was not banned for that. Message me if you really don't know. It was for much more than that.

All half orcs are banned yes. Exceptions are allowed om djedet, but none so far. The others don't get harraseed because there is no pc guards online.

that's news to me. I'll pm you.

Quote:

inprison666 wrote:

I was told that being banned from Djedet means the whole area. Is it true? I assumed it meant I just could not go within the walls of the town, but could go around. using caravan routes to get to lost river, or the oasis etc.

TormakSaber wrote:

Obviously going around is fine.

About going around the town walls.

Quote:

Tomato Sword wrote:

I just want to ask to triple check. The law makes it sound like the outside of the town isn't alright either. Link

TormakSaber wrote:

If PCs enforce it sure. But there's no NPCs in half those areas.

About the NPC Guards.

***

These are the last two things I see in the thread about Bans and their affects from a DM.

Given these two posts, to me....this means that if a banned person enters an area not within the walls of a town they are banned in and are out of the sight of an NPC guard then the PC guard or guards are on their own when confronting the said banned person, whatever that confrontation leads to.

Be that a peaceful move along or the PC guards ending up dead and on an auction block or worse.

THAT is what I want to get clarified. That if the conflict happens and it goes down that the PC Guards get their heads handed to them that there will be no more of things like this:

"well you shouldn't have been there anyway because you're banned metagamer."

Or if the DMs agree that they shouldn't have been, then they can be dealt with FOR Metagaming if a DM isn't present.

I really don't think the DM Team wants to have to be present every single time someone passes by the Dale or Djedet that is banned and simply wants to move by the town. I don't think the players want to have to wait for a DM to be online for this to happen and then bug them to do it just to avoid being told they are metagaming.

Now the other question is....what if they are passing in front of the NPC guards but are not doing anything wrong at the moment....just moving by, nothing more. If they have a helmet or face covering, maybe it could be said the guards don't know they are banned or wanted if they are NPCs or something. That again, is a DMs call.

I've often wondered how someone knows who Krugan is if he is not in his normal dress, has not spoken and has his face covered. He looks nothing like he normally does, he isn't wearing a name tag and he hasn't even spoken....

Smell I guess...time to get some manure or perfume I suppose.

Curious; The Ban for Cordor extends to all parts of the sewers, (Including the areas where there are no NPC guards im told), shouldn't this rule also apply to Kohlingen? Such as Kohlingen South, the Beastmen area, the west farmlands anywhere with the "Kohlingen: ???" prefix? including the sewers beneath the Mayfields..

Are there NPCs there?

No?

Not enforced except by PCs, who by definition you can't metagame since they're only there if they're actually there.

what about the various signs claiming that followers of certain deities are banned? i am assuming those signs are just to be ignored (as you see fit ic) as it is not possible with the game mechanics (of course pnp might provide insight) to know which god someone worships.

If you are banned, you are banned. Even if it's by deity.

While I find it somewhat annoying that some unknown worshiper can be mass banned from places, I understand the reasoning behind it since the Team cannot police everywhere all the time. At least, that's my logic though behind it.

What?

Gers wrote:

If a guard PC or NPC bans you from there, or your faction/race as a whole is banned, it is metagaming to enter *Cordor East, North, South, or West without DM oversight, or until your ban has expired.

*(and other settlements)

There's no mention of deity bans being binding. I mean, realistically, how would it be enforced? It would have to be taken case by case, ie open followers of banned deities or discovered followers whose descriptions have been passed to the right people. Is there a DM ruling on this? I looked around but I didn't see anything.

No. That's not it at all. The DM's are the final arbiters of what an NPC might or might not see, hear, taste, recognize, or even do about someone who might be banned from an area. Even if theres no way a particular NPC might recognize a banned individual or member of a banned group, it's still the DM's call if the disguise or situation is valid for entry.

As for diety or faction bans, it's always safer to ask a DM how that might apply to a characters particular situation rather than simply assuming that the NPC's don't know and metagame the ban. Only the DM's know for sure that a secret portrait hasn't been passed around or that some magical means will uncover your fiendish plot to eat at a fine Cordorian restaurant.

Bravo21 wrote:

No. That's not it at all. The DM's are the final arbiters of what an NPC might or might not see, hear, taste, recognize, or even do about someone who might be banned from an area. Even if theres no way a particular NPC might recognize a banned individual or member of a banned group, it's still the DM's call if the disguise or situation is valid for entry.

As for diety or faction bans, it's always safer to ask a DM how that might apply to a characters particular situation rather than simply assuming that the NPC's don't know and metagame the ban. Only the DM's know for sure that a secret portrait hasn't been passed around or that some magical means will uncover your fiendish plot to eat at a fine Cordorian restaurant.

Precisely.

Hm, I suppose I have been looking at it the wrong way, then. I figured that if no one know you followed X, then there was no way anyone would know. Like in the case of someone not ever once disclosing their true religion before and after character generation, I didn't think there was an IC method of finding that out. Not that I've been traipsing through Cordor with a Banite, though, haha.

Naivatkal wrote:

Hm, I suppose I have been looking at it the wrong way, then. I figured that if no one know you followed X, then there was no way anyone would know. Like in the case of someone not ever once disclosing their true religion before and after character generation, I didn't think there was an IC method of finding that out. Not that I've been traipsing through Cordor with a Banite, though, haha.

Who's to say someone in the guard wasn't watching stealthed as you prayed in your deity's temple, or any number of other things.

The rule is there for a good reason.

If the Guard knows you're a follower, why not just hand out a personal ban via PM or tell? I was under the impression that if you were banned in such a way that you wouldn't know about it ICly (say by committing some sort of crime that reaches the ears of the guards, who then decide to ban) you were informed OOCly, so that if your character tried to get in you'd know that they wouldn't be allowed (thus avoiding metagame issues). Or is this not correct?

I'm not arguing, just wondering at the logic.

serbiris wrote:

If the Guard knows you're a follower, why not just hand out a personal ban via PM or tell? I was under the impression that if you were banned in such a way that you wouldn't know about it ICly (say by committing some sort of crime that reaches the ears of the guards, who then decide to ban) you were informed OOCly, so that if your character tried to get in you'd know that they wouldn't be allowed (thus avoiding metagame issues). Or is this not correct?

I'm not arguing, just wondering at the logic.

Maybe they want to lure you in and capture you? *shrugs*

There are always possibilities.

Well, it's kind of hard to lure someone in who's OOCly banned from the place in the first place.

Hence the second part of my statement.

Needled247 wrote:

Well, it's kind of hard to lure someone in who's OOCly banned from the place in the first place.

I think it works like this:
You are OOCly banned. You ask a DM to let you in. You go in. They capture you, because they've waited for you all the time.

Without the OOC ban, you would just walk in and the guards couldn't capture you even though they would do it immediately if a DM was in.

So the OOC ban = DM supervision is necessary to lure you in.

Regards
Ts

Bans and You: What NOT to do when you get tossed from a city

Who is online