Does this mean that people who have already been banned, for example my character, are entitled to know the reason of their banning even when it happened before your post?
Secondly, does all the bans take in the 31 day countdown now? Unless reviewed and re-established as permanent bans?
Previous bans can be asked to be reviewed by the DM team. They do not simply vanish, however, that would cause far too much of a mess now with people who do not even play anymore/hardly play/have already been DM banned back then.
So if your character currently hold a permanent ban from a city/town/settlement you can ask for a review of the case and the 31 day rule begins to start that day for the DM to make their decision if than ban is still in place/justifies an ongoing ban.
Otherwise, you can also go the somewhat "nicer" (and more IC) route, and simply begin with writing an IC appeal to the government, as the case is likely more tan 3 months old already anyways.
The later method, due to ICness, is clearly preferred, though both are valid.
Amarice, my friend, some of the wording is like a ball of yarn. It can be figured out, but you have to bat it around a bit.
That said, this is kind of silly over all. I mean, was this really needed? As far as i'm aware, any banned player could always take IC actions to redeem themselves in the eyes of whatever government had banned them. Now its just enforced book keeping with the burden on the cities and factions, instead of the people that wronged them. Where as before, as i said, the burden lay with the perpetrator to find a way to redeem themselves. Mith said to Shyllia on their last meeting i'm sad to say, something along the lines of "I do not care if you wish to prove yourself, you are distrusted and unwelcome in my company. How then are you expected to redeem yourself is your burden to resolve, and not mine. Begone." In her case, she was not banned from the city, just treated as a leper by some. The burden as it should lay with her. Just as it lay with others that have wronged the city and either been banned, or shunned.
But maybe places like Barak Rundar and Winya Ravana are not exactly the norm. I don't see a bunch of lawful dwarves for example, forgiving a broken oath or whatnot every 31 days. I also don't see the Elves of Winya Ravana making a great effort to send out formal notifications to people who have wronged them. Everyone gets the same treatment, on a list or otherwise. Leave now of your own volition, or that of the currents.
I guess i don't really understand where this is coming from, as id not bothered to read the 'QQ were banned because our PCs are insatiable dicks' thread. There are places my PC cant go anymore because of IC choices. And rightfully so. Why should they be required to review the case? If my PC asked, perhaps, but even then they should not be REQUIRED to host a trial upon request. If my PC is ever going to be welcomed back into such places, it will be because of his IC actions that show he is (or isn't) of sound judgment and perhaps worth the effort of am appeal. Which will likely be denied because dwarves are stubborn dicks, as they should be!
Rant aside, i take the good from this as we need better book keeping, if for nothing else but to help the DMs be aware of the why of a situation. The bad, is now apparently people that have murdered, tortured, harassed, griefed, or just generally made a fool of themselves on the quest to be edgy and cool will be mandatory attention, OOC DM enforced or else..
(JOKE WARNING!!!)
So if we declare Amia itself a prison, and we its prisoners, does that mean we all get personal DM attention twice a month?
Some questions about this the long term imprisonment for 7 days single DM How will this work IC can the DMs give a example of the procedure? Cory Jails Hector for wearing white after labor day and locks him up under 1day holding but submits PM to DM to raise it to 7 days for such a heinous crime, given we know how IRL...ect and busy DMs can be you might not get a reply from such DM in time you hold him, how would work/effect this case? Is it going to be a case of mass PMing every DM on the team and with the first one that says yes because time sensitive explained above? Once the players find out what DM is more inclined to give a yes because they wish to give players the ability to punish them how will it be dealt with that only one DM is ever talked too?
What is a day to the DMs?/Imprisonment player 1 day The way I treat and view this is up to 24 hours online time, otherwise its not a punishment at all even more so when they can log on alts and wait out a timer. 24 hours online time I would state for 1day player holding, not so much 7day DM holding as its over a much longer time it does not seem like whack-a-mole of them popping right back up.
Long Term imprisoned attempt to escape or be freed, at least twice a month Does the single DM 7 day count as a long term imprisonment and in turn require the DM team to give them 2 attempts that month per that jailing? If so does the DM who issued it have to be the DM to over see the attempt? I noticed you said at least twice a month so I assume that's to allow people who log on their jailed characters and RP them to be given many attempts, instead of just letting them sit in the void of the vault playing alts as a timer ticks down and getting their 2 attempts? If they log on the imprisoned character does their online time count as reduced time for good behaviour? ((AKA reward them for RPing the punishment and not playing alts)) Long Term imprisoned RP The current rules state the PCs must RP with the ones they jailed or they will be released how does this effect if at all this notion?
_________________ ================-<Cory ShadowFlame>-================ Risenlord-Shifter(OMG a Non-Dragon Shifter that can hold his own in PvE)
Suggestion; Change "preferably both" in the notification rule to just "both" and add "preferably a forum PM as well." If the player doesn't know the forum account of the PC they want to ban, tell the DM's to send that information off. This is really important to me as I was banned for almost half a year and nobody ever told me.
Overall though this rule change really clears up a lot of confusion and I am glad for it. Time to fire off some appeals.
Amarice-Elaraliel wrote:
- If the accused does not show to the trial, he can be judged without his defense.
I wonder, have there been situations to warrant for this degree of clarity on ban/imprisonment rules? It seems somewhat redundant and too technical: why are there details of how long the ban times are, or how the ban must be given out IC? I understand that an OOC notification is for information and good conduct, but how people actually conduct their business IC, how they decide to carry out their punishments and whatnot, seems to me no concern of the DM Team to rule on. Would this also mean that people cannot bilaterally decide on differing arrangements of ban or imprisonment?
Unless I am sorely mistaken and the rule as stated in the original post is meant more as a guideline than a technical rule? And I appreciate you hearing our feedback on the matter, it's a good policy.
_________________ Every time you clock in the morning, I feel you just want to kill All my innocence while ignoring my purpose to persevere as a better person I know you heard this and probably in fear -Kendrick Lamar, good kid
I wonder, have there been situations to warrant for this degree of clarity on ban/imprisonment rules? It seems somewhat redundant and too technical: why are there details of how long the ban times are, or how the ban must be given out IC? I understand that an OOC notification is for information and good conduct, but how people actually conduct their business IC, how they decide to carry out their punishments and whatnot, seems to me no concern of the DM Team to rule on. Would this also mean that people cannot bilaterally decide on differing arrangements of ban or imprisonment?
Unless I am sorely mistaken and the rule as stated in the original post is meant more as a guideline than a technical rule? And I appreciate you hearing our feedback on the matter, it's a good policy.
There were two very gigantic ban discussions due to the way the system was being used/abused.
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
I can't wait to see how trials go in places like Zanshibon. "Your honor, I request a mistrial on the grounds that the defendant was delicious!". In seriousness, the hard numbers make this feel highly artificial, but the option to write in for longer bans at least leaves the door open for common sense things. I really would hate for this to become a thing of people stopping by settlements like "Hiho there, I'm here for my monthly murder. Everyone line up."
Then again, I really never understood this whole fuss about bans one way or another. People seem more upset about their character not being allowed to loiter in a particular area, rather than breaking contracts, lying, cheating, stealing, assault, or straight up murder. Which is, of course, the sort of things that start bans in the first place. I would have figured permadeath decisions would have gotten some hard protocols before I ever imagined bans would, but here we are.
The TL;DR of it that I'm coming away from this is--and why I see this announcement as ultimately a good thing is--: "If you need longer than 31 day ban, give DMs the facts so they can make sure it's warranted. If you need longer than 1 day imprisonment, a DM can grant a week long imprisonment. For longer than a week, the team has to decide, and we've made some rules so the PC that is imprisoned at least has some avenues to work towards their freedom, for however long they are locked up." If that's the gist of it, good 'nuff.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
Joined: 02 Jun 2015 Location: Georgia, United States.
Commie wrote:
Opustus wrote:
I wonder, have there been situations to warrant for this degree of clarity on ban/imprisonment rules? It seems somewhat redundant and too technical: why are there details of how long the ban times are, or how the ban must be given out IC? I understand that an OOC notification is for information and good conduct, but how people actually conduct their business IC, how they decide to carry out their punishments and whatnot, seems to me no concern of the DM Team to rule on. Would this also mean that people cannot bilaterally decide on differing arrangements of ban or imprisonment?
Unless I am sorely mistaken and the rule as stated in the original post is meant more as a guideline than a technical rule? And I appreciate you hearing our feedback on the matter, it's a good policy.
There were two very gigantic ban discussions due to the way the system was being used/abused.
Opustus,
People get perma-banned from areas, with this extremely low playerbase, it's basically saying you can't rp. Take it from a PC who is kinda perma-banned from many areas.. Without that many evil PCs on Amia to rp with, having someone say.. "Hey, you dropped salt on the floor.. You're banned from X for the rest of Amia."
No one ever gives way to lift bans. So once you get banned, unless you want to play a huge fine. (Ie / Kelemvorites in Cordor, Arcane Crusader had to pay hugely.)
So. Yes. Clarification on how long a PC can be banned without a DM should be maximized to X.
I really would hate for this to become a thing of people stopping by settlements like "Hiho there, I'm here for my monthly murder. Everyone line up."
Things like this will obviously result in the permanent ban clause taht exists in the rules being used.
The guidelines prevent a nebulous permanent exile from large fixtures from the server for IC reasons that may or may not exist with the possibility of finding out or having any IC or OOC recourse rendered impossible due to walls that may or may not be IC.
_________________ Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
Quote:
People get perma-banned from areas, with this extremely low playerbase, it's basically saying you can't rp. Take it from a PC who is kinda perma-banned from many areas.. Without that many evil PCs on Amia to rp with, having someone say.. "Hey, you dropped salt on the floor.. You're banned from X for the rest of Amia."
If you constantly piss people off on their own turf, right or wrong, they have the option to tell you to go away, though. Evil or any alignment for that matter is never justification to avoid IC consequences. Nothing intrinsically requires Blackguards to take a piss on the gates at Kohlingen, nothing innately requires Paladins to moon passersby in Tarkuul. But if they choose to engage in such actions, they get told to get lost. Does it mean there's less chance of shit being stirred up with the constant shit-stirrers permanently ousted? Yes. But that's natural. That's realistic. Allowing them to come back, simply because we know players become OoCly regretful about their PC's actions is largely artificial, albeit well-meaning.
This is not a change I'd have made, were I king of the interwebs, but then again there has been no place I've had a PC banned from that I felt stagnated or stymied my RP. My PC either pulled a Bender or learned "Huh, maybe I should at least pretend to follow places rules if I want to stay in those places". I'm not a fan of the numbers game that this is based on BUT I do like the added avenues people can take to change their lot, because that's totally IC and should have been a part of the banning process anyway. If perma-deathed people still have avenues to be brought back(Wish, Miracle, divine intervention short of being eaten by Kezef), then naturally there should be ways for perma-banned people to plead or work towards undoing their actions, however daunting that hill may be to climb. That people can have their bans officially reviewed and long bans are somewhat audited make me happy in so much as I think it makes people who feel they've been hurt by permabans happy. I don't have to like or agree with it as long as it keeps people engaged in RP.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
People get perma-banned from areas, with this extremely low playerbase, it's basically saying you can't rp. Take it from a PC who is kinda perma-banned from many areas.. Without that many evil PCs on Amia to rp with, having someone say.. "Hey, you dropped salt on the floor.. You're banned from X for the rest of Amia."
If you constantly piss people off on their own turf, right or wrong, they have the option to tell you to go away, though. Evil or any alignment for that matter is never justification to avoid IC consequences. Nothing intrinsically requires Blackguards to take a piss on the gates at Kohlingen, nothing innately requires Paladins to moon passersby in Tarkuul. But if they choose to engage in such actions, they get told to get lost. Does it mean there's less chance of shit being stirred up with the constant shit-stirrers permanently ousted? Yes. But that's natural. That's realistic. Allowing them to come back, simply because we know players become OoCly regretful about their PC's actions is largely artificial, albeit well-meaning.
That isn't a realistic scenario and you know it. People are getting banned for being associated with someone else, not for murdering people or desecrating temples. When players have the power to deny people from roleplay, not because they did something foul, but because they rp with someone they don't like, that's a problem.
The bullshit strawman needs to stop. No one is upset that they're playing a Banite and banned from Kohlingen. They are upset because they sold a pair of boots Banite three months ago and because of that they are banned for life.
... No one ever gives way to lift bans. So once you get banned, unless you want to play a huge fine. (Ie / Kelemvorites in Cordor, Arcane Crusader had to pay hugely.) ...
I essentially lived the lifespan of the EO up until Arcane Crusader took over, so I have no idea what transpired afterwards. And my account of the events is not to deny your point, but I don't know how intimately you were concerned with the situation. I always thought the ban was an IC consequence of IC actions as it should have been. The EO declared Cordor defiled and claimed that they were harbouring evil necromancers; they set up blockades outside of Cordor to catch bad guys, etc. From what I remember, we were excited to raise hell, a ban was just the kind of impetus that our actions deserved and what could have been expected.
EDIT: I thought that this change was designed to empower the banners, not vice versa. DMs: It might be a good idea to expose your rationale behind the suggested changes so there is no guessing on the part of the players.
_________________ Every time you clock in the morning, I feel you just want to kill All my innocence while ignoring my purpose to persevere as a better person I know you heard this and probably in fear -Kendrick Lamar, good kid
Last edited by Opustus on Wed, Jan 25 2017, 23:49 PM, edited 1 time in total.
I have been out of the game for a long time. Truthfully, I had clue no this was such an inflamed topic.
_________________ Every time you clock in the morning, I feel you just want to kill All my innocence while ignoring my purpose to persevere as a better person I know you heard this and probably in fear -Kendrick Lamar, good kid
People get perma-banned from areas, with this extremely low playerbase, it's basically saying you can't rp. Take it from a PC who is kinda perma-banned from many areas.. Without that many evil PCs on Amia to rp with, having someone say.. "Hey, you dropped salt on the floor.. You're banned from X for the rest of Amia."
If you constantly piss people off on their own turf, right or wrong, they have the option to tell you to go away, though. Evil or any alignment for that matter is never justification to avoid IC consequences. Nothing intrinsically requires Blackguards to take a piss on the gates at Kohlingen, nothing innately requires Paladins to moon passersby in Tarkuul. But if they choose to engage in such actions, they get told to get lost. Does it mean there's less chance of shit being stirred up with the constant shit-stirrers permanently ousted? Yes. But that's natural. That's realistic. Allowing them to come back, simply because we know players become OoCly regretful about their PC's actions is largely artificial, albeit well-meaning.
That isn't a realistic scenario and you know it. People are getting banned for being associated with someone else, not for murdering people or desecrating temples. When players have the power to deny people from roleplay, not because they did something foul, but because they rp with someone they don't like, that's a problem.
The bullshit strawman needs to stop. No one is upset that they're playing a Banite and banned from Kohlingen. They are upset because they sold a pair of boots Banite three months ago and because of that they are banned for life.
This was what bothered me so much about it too.
It's never bothered me that Bri is banned from so many places for being a fiend, I knew that's how it would be when I made her.
What does bother me is that merely hanging around her was grounds to get you banned from two of the most prominent cities to rp in.
Difficult thing is when you get banned for nothing/something you didn't do, you talk to a PC or NPC about it...
... and then never got any communication back other then "the ban stands" or total radio silence, offering no opportunity to defend yourself or even clarify what happened. You're told your charges, told you've already been convicted, and that it's already settled... even if the thing you did you didn't actually do, or did while alter-selfed or something and some how people know it was you...
... that's if you even get a reply back. I had a PC stringing me along for months telling me the issue was being discussed, only to find out it was literally never brought up at all with anyone else at all, and the whole wait was literally "I'm ignoring your character in character." A DM sorted that out in about 5 minutes. But that's what happens with no DM oversight.
But still. Glad the rule changes went in. It's actually ideal.
Joined: 20 Apr 2008 Location: The downeaster "Alexa"
Akhlys wrote:
That isn't a realistic scenario and you know it. People are getting banned for being associated with someone else, not for murdering people or desecrating temples. When players have the power to deny people from roleplay, not because they did something foul, but because they rp with someone they don't like, that's a problem.
The bullshit strawman needs to stop. No one is upset that they're playing a Banite and banned from Kohlingen. They are upset because they sold a pair of boots Banite three months ago and because of that they are banned for life.
Please do not tell me what I do and do not know, especially when I already admitted my experience with bans is limited and, subjectively, not too bad.
Even for the cases you present, I would say I have no problem with that from an IC standpoint. Places are free to make their own rules and if you associate with people they deem unseemly, that is an IC consequence of an IC action. However pedantic, however trivial. It's not a defense of those IC reasons, but a defense for them to be made completely IC. The first time my PC was banned from Cordor, it was over some shit he didn't even start. A guardsman talked shit to him(as was fine given his race and being an adventurer at the time), he talked shit back, got his signet taken, got merc'd, and his friend started spouting some anarchic shit over his body. They were both thrown out indefinitely for acts of terrorism. Was it right or fair from an OoC standpoint? Hell no. Was it a huge overstep for what was called for at the time from an IC standpoint? Absolutely, my PC said like 6 words to the equivalent of "Hey, buddy, we're not cattle. Hush that noise." But it was IC and fitting of the setting and the themes of Cordor at the time. My PC found RP elsewhere and eventually Cordor got what they had coming to them with all the anti-adventure sentiments. If a settlement is going to ban people over selling boots to a Banite, then ideally, they would get their comeuppance when they realize it's a stupid thing to ban people over and they're missing out on wealth/trade/social interaction because of it.
But that's me. I'm fine with those IC consequences and my being happy or upset is not that tied to what happens to my character, but rather than things do happen to my character, good and bad. I don't need the IC to reflect my OoC feelings of fair or unfair--which is good, as they often don't. If my PC associated with someone whom was hated and someone in power wanted to ban him from somewhere(mind you he often does, but makes no secrets or bones about it), I'd be accepting of that. I wouldn't see it as someone trying to ban me from their settlement because they "didn't like who I RP'd with," that's taking what happens to your character as a personal insult. The paladin/blackguard thing may be hyperbole, but the equivalence is still there in that you can choose to whom you do and do not sell things, as with whom you associate. But once more, this rule is not for me, and I do not begrudge it because if it keeps people RPing, so what? But I felt the need to point out the flipside of the argument. That lack of RP isn't an innate part of being banned, that bans are not necessarily some OoC jab against a player, and that being banned based upon IC actions, misconceptions, and circumstance has been a catalyst and a normal part of RP, in my own experience.
_________________
You think Magic is your ally... but you merely adopted the Art. He was born in it. Molded by it. Sometimes, an angel is simply a devil with better intentions.
Being banned for having a char who knows a person who looked funnily at a Drow from the Underdark is silly.
Being banned for arming the SS Amian Division of Dragon-Demons of chaotic evil that murders babies for fun....valid excuse.
_________________ Plays: Sylveera : Sun Elven fury packed in an Arcane Archer, not a Drow, promise. Tetrik : Greed incarnate in a Duergar. Budly : Has gone to a better place. Barrililath : Shadowy Drow, probably less Drow than Sylv ever be.
I have a hard time believing people would not consider appealing bans. If anything, as Amarice was saying, most cities are run by NPCs. All you have to do is contact the DM. But at the end of the day if you still smell of rot, or continue to be a shady edgy mofo, why the hell should PCs need to waste time giving Evil Clone Instigator #76 a 'chance'? The burden of proving you've changed is on YOU, not them. If they don't want to spend time getting to know your sob story, that's not their issue, its the person who did wrong.
Rather then these rules, i guess a players guide to teach people how to RP could have been useful. In short, it would be something along the line of; So you've been busted doing shady shit you shouldn't have been and consequently you've been run out of town. You want to convince them you've changed, or it was a mistake, but they wont fall for your stories. Next best step would be to contact a DM then to run an official NPC who you can dupe with well spent social skills!
Ta da! Now we don't need this silly OOC system.
I always admired Hojo for playing the outcast, even when it was not the current trend. Finding ways to have fun with yourself, because you made an evil disgusting PC that very few liked, and you embraced that. If you wanted Hojo to be accepted, this OOC system is hardly the way, rather actually making an effort to change and use knowledge of necromancy for good and to destroy undead, rather then create them. Yes, it will take a long time that way, as it should. Redemption is a long path, one you can spend your whole like walking and not reach the end of. Because trust once broken is not so easily mended.
EDIT: That comes off as needlessly harsh. My post is meant to highlight that as a player who traditionally is really only around Winya and by their own admission and work, does very little outside it, is not going to have the same sort of perspective as the players who are dealing with this on a regular basis. Winya's entire existence has been the city that ha sbanned every single not elf and not halfelf on the server from crossing a bridge, and has traditionally been able to enforce that with a hard to get to gate covered with NPCs, an active DM, and a large playerbase. While conflict has occasionally come to Winya, it's almost always been NPC and DM plot driven, which is incredibly idifferent from the PC conflict that has generally reigned elsewhere.
On top of that, when presented with large scale conflicts that Winya's players have disliked, Winya tends to take the opposite solution as other players.
When Winya players don't like what's happening to them, they don't ban people, because they're already banned. By and large, they stop playing until their opponents get bored and go away. That's unhealthy too, by the way.
_________________ Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
On top of that, when presented with large scale conflicts that Winya's players have disliked, Winya tends to take the opposite solution as other players.
When Winya players don't like what's happening to them, they don't ban people, because they're already banned. By and large, they stop playing until their opponents get bored and go away. That's unhealthy too, by the way.
Not commenting on whether it's healthy or not, but this made me laugh because it's what an actual Elf would do! Wait for your enemy to die or grow bored. Longevity has its perks!
I have a hard time believing people would not consider appealing bans.
You can appeal them. Then literally nothing happens.
Quote:
All you have to do is contact the DM.
Doesn't always work. NPC's ic don't give you a chance to defend yourself, if they contact you back at all.
Quote:
But at the end of the day if you still smell of rot, or continue to be a shady edgy mofo, why the hell should PCs need to waste time giving Evil Clone Instigator #76 a 'chance'?
I still don't know what I did to get banned from some places I'm banned from. Same with other members of our faction.
Quote:
The burden of proving you've changed is on YOU, not them.
You skipped a step; that being showing something wrong happened, or even that 'something wrong' actually happening. How can you ask someone to 'change' if nothing ever happened in the first place?
Quote:
If they don't want to spend time getting to know your sob story, that's not their issue, its the person who did wrong.
Incorrect, as some city-bans have been levied with literally no 'wrong' taking place, and until now stood eternal with no chance of appeal. Hence all these rules being about proper notification and appeals and duration.
Quote:
Rather then these rules, i guess a players guide to teach people how to RP could have been useful.
So would I. But it wasn't happening, so the DM's had to intervene. Took a lot of people being stonewalled by a lot of other people but DM intervention finally came.
Quote:
In short, it would be something along the line of; So you've been busted doing shady shit you shouldn't have been and consequently you've been run out of town.
Hard to be "busted" if you never did anything wrong, or are friends with someone who never did something, and got banned as a result... then had to find out 5 irl months later you got banned 5 irl months ago and had no chance to appeal and no NPC's would respond to you.
Quote:
You want to convince them you've changed, or it was a mistake, but they wont fall for your stories.
See previous points. Would you like being banned from Bendir Dale because of something Glendil was accused of? Then have your letters to Rosary and the NPC's of Bendir just get totally ignored and not responded to? Then you go to town and three people put up purple OOC text telling you that you can't be here because there are guards here so gtfo and you "arn't here right now the guards would do X?"
Quote:
Next best step would be to contact a DM then to run an official NPC who you can dupe with well spent social skills!
... unless they never reply.
Quote:
Ta da! Now we don't need this silly OOC system.
Tried that and it resulted in an OOC system being created. Permanent bans over guilt by association based on crimes which didn't even happen in some instances were the final straw that resulted in OOC rules being enacted.
Quote:
I always admired Hojo for playing the outcast, even when it was not the current trend. Finding ways to have fun with yourself, because you made an evil disgusting PC that very few liked, and you embraced that. If you wanted Hojo to be accepted, this OOC system is hardly the way, rather actually making an effort to change and use knowledge of necromancy for good and to destroy undead, rather then create them.
Hojo's case is clearly covered under the new rules and as far as I know was never an 'abuse' of the ban system.
Quote:
Yes, it will take a long time that way, as it should. Redemption is a long path, one you can spend your whole like walking and not reach the end of. Because trust once broken is not so easily mended.
Redemption... for being accused of being friends with people being accused of being criminals based on crimes suddenly being dredged up that may not have even happened almost half a year ago?
To be honest, I like the changes for the most part. I would personally like to change one thing, and that would be that a DM playerside has to go to another DM. That isn't actually talked about there, but it would make me feel a bit better, especially with things like with Lutra happening, where he does things as the DM of Kohl (or at least I got the impression of that), and plays a PC there, meaning he plays a huge part of Kohl. Then (and this not meant as a personal attack, but it would at least be possible) he could just waive through a perma-ban, and would handle any appeal, thus becoming accuser, judge, jury and executioner in one, rather than it being split into at least two people (player and DM). I could see this happening in any case where a DM has an active PC in one of the places he/she DMs.
To Commie, ban rules state that if Pitts name was taken off of the ban list, you would actually be unbanned from a place. A faction ban only holds in two cases: 1. You are wearing something that obviously marks you as from that faction (secret markings are not enough, but if they are not secret, like a banner of the barony...) 2. You are explicitely named on the ban list.
This bothers/bothered me with the Wharftown one, because it said something like "we know who you are". It's a nice IC statement, but OOC, it's worthless.
Also, for the 24 hours imprisonment, it's a difficult case. To Cory: How often have you seen me online? I'm going to bet, not that often/not that long. I'm European. If that rule was implemented, I would be a huge Lawful Evil ass, and log on at noon for me. Say: Nope, no RP for me, and walk away. Because that rule would be really annoying. I would like to RP with my captors, I like that idea, you talked about how leading someone to a rock and letting them mine, I liek it. But that is not something I would stay up until 2 AM for. The wording would be difficult. My case, maybe even someone who can't log on earlier than 1AM PST and has to leave at 6AM PST? Will you log on for them, on a weekday, or is their character perma-banned? Yes, I agree alting when one Pc is imprisoned, and personally, I would extend my imprisonment if I did that, but have you ever felt completely down? Or in some other way not able to RP your character? RL things that happen at a bad time? There are so many things that can, and likely will often enough, get in the way of those 24 hours, but 24 hours online play, if that was a ruling, I would expect you to come into my timezone, not the other way around. Maybe I'm an idiot for that, but that -might- work for americans, but it screws non-americans really hard.
Last edited by robbi320 on Thu, Jan 26 2017, 11:39 AM, edited 1 time in total.
Joined: 17 Oct 2012 Location: A hut in Howness. (GMT+2)
Lutra is not the DM of Kohl. He just helps moderate the forum. Tarnus is the DM.
_________________ Characters: Elder Torsten Eadgarsson "He’d only shown the best of intentions. Firm but not unreasonable. Eager to protect what was his but not eager to overextend his reach, to push himself on to others."
Also, for the 24 hours imprisonment, it's a difficult case. To Cory: How often have you seen me online? I'm going to bet, not that often/not that long. I'm European. If that rule was implemented, I would be a huge Lawful Evil ass, and log on at noon for me. Say: Nope, no RP for me, and walk away. Because that rule would be really annoying. I would like to RP with my captors, I like that idea, you talked about how leading someone to a rock and letting them mine, I liek it. But that is not something I would stay up until 2 AM for. The wording would be difficult. My case, maybe even someone who can't log on earlier than 1AM PST and has to leave at 6AM PST? Will you log on for them, on a weekday, or is their character perma-banned? Yes, I agree alting when one Pc is imprisoned, and personally, I would extend my imprisonment if I did that, but have you ever felt completely down? Or in some other way not able to RP your character? RL things that happen at a bad time? There are so many things that can, and likely will often enough, get in the way of those 24 hours, but 24 hours online play, if that was a ruling, I would expect you to come into my timezone, not the other way around. Maybe I'm an idiot for that, but that -might- work for americans, but it screws non-americans really hard.
I think my view is a touch different because I view it as case don't do the crime if you cant do the time.
If a player wises to say head into the Mill and toss a fireball at building and I catch them they are getting a real punishment not a 24 hour time out where they sit in a corner playing a alt, because the player in question went out of their way to do that knowing full well that is a hostile attack on a town. its not a case of "opps I did not know we could not have summons in town" and they dismiss it and we fluff it off as no harm no foul.....just don't do it again.((Undead they would not get away with))
As for the RP punishment in other time zones that is sadly a problem with have a wide range of players, but if I trusted the player and they gave their word I would be open to other options that make all things enjoyable for both parties involved. Lets say LibrisMortis_666 on Hojo committed a crime on Caraigh and so I enforced a holding and wanted to punish him with breaking rocks, if the players said they OOC would not flee/escape for any reason I would ok with them RPing having a guard follow them as they IC do their punishment and they could just take some screenshots and sent/post them even if our players were not around. Maybe even talk to the DMs about having temp bottled companion we hand out to people who wish to do that so they can IC be followed by a guard as they work.
And that works great with the job system because of the limited use on the resource nodes they could take screenshot after the first attempt showing the log of its uses, and then one at the end when its empty... as you then you they had to OOC be there for 2minutes multiplied by total resources per node. And because they saw though the punishment even when I was not around.... I would reduce the time and not expect up to 24 IRL hours taking up days to cover.
But this is all off topic!
I still very much like my first post looked over by the DMs so they could review it and reply.
_________________ ================-<Cory ShadowFlame>-================ Risenlord-Shifter(OMG a Non-Dragon Shifter that can hold his own in PvE)
I don't know if you have alts because I've only ever seen you main one character. As some one who has various characters. And actually a few I'm starting to get in to at once I want to state that to some extent for me if I couldn't play a pc I wanted to play because they were jailed or some such for the 24 hours it would be pretty damn awful.
I've been put in to situations where my pc did nothing wrong as in breaking laws or what have we- and was given over to other pcs . They tortured them for a good 5 hours and I was a pretty damn good sport about it and didn't go OOC. Due to some altercation DM's said I had to stay there for a full 24 hours despite roleplay that had happened.
So for the next 8 hours they continued to torture my PC. I'm not talking light description torture either. Prolonged detailed gory torture. I played up to the parts of the pc's that were having their bit of fun I role-played my part and tried to make things interesting. So I spent a good 13 hours in detailed torture with evil npcs and played up trying to talk to the character's captures and made an exceptionally well argue meant at the end... for... really no develop-meant on their side from what I saw. It was disappointing. It felt like my roleplay meant nothing and impacted nothing because they players were just having fun screwing with some one and didn't really care about the story I tried to weave in. I guess I can't really say it was with every one... I think there was one or two pc's that I saw actually take some development from the roleplay which made me a tiny bit happy. I was very disappointment at the lack of development that came from such a harsh incident over all on their side.
Imo if it was an evil group they very well could TORTURE a pc for 24 play time hours and some folks just do not want that kinda rp to happen or be apart of even vaguely detailed torture. I would not want to put some one in the position where they would have to play out 24 hours of their pc being tortured.
So While I under stand the want for the punishment to be or feel impact I wouldn't want to condemn some one who wasn't okay with that kinda stuff to play it our. For some not playing their character is a punishment.
From my experience on the server, the most I've actually been praised for was being a good sport and playing a good role for a character that's on the receiving end of torture roleplay. And I really must insist on not making it a rule that can be abused in to such a manner to force some one to do something very unpleasant- especially for that long a period.
I like having the freedom to log on to -all- my characters then again I'm the type of person who if you want to capture / imprison my character and hold them I'd rather log in and be on that character for a myriad of reasons. One of them being I just don't like not having the freedom to choose when ever / what character I want to be on there fore I want to resolve it.
When I was playing my Drow heavily they were shaked up in the elistrean shrine and they wanted to keep them there for the whole time... so I logged in the Next day after the rp needed and waited alllll day there was only really one very active shrine member though... so suffice to say it was a lot of sitting around in a room. Then A dm came by and noticed I was there and started asking me about it. I said I'd rather be available for rp because I know how rare it is to actually have apc prisoner on our server and I want to be able to offer that experience in full to any of the players. I truly think imprisonment roles can offer some really good chances at some hard core development for characters on both sides of the equation.
I just think a caveat should be clearly stated as not to force a player in to a very uncomfortable situation like torture play.
_________________
❤ Amia is Fun Again! ❤ #GreenisNotACreativeColour "It's easy to feel like a hero. It's a little harder to be one."
Some questions about this the long term imprisonment for 7 days single DM How will this work IC can the DMs give a example of the procedure? If a single DM decides this on the fly, it usually is so that a DM was present during the "caught in the act"
Weired Hector case If you cannot get a hold of any DM, you have to let him go, unless they give consent to a prolonged imprisonment. This is not a new rule, the PC enforced maximum time of imprisonment without consent of the other side to prolong, has always been one day.
Which DM I do I contact? All? Up to you. If you can see a DM online you may aswell grab thatone. You can PM all of them at once. Whatever tickles you fancy, we all speak about such things anyways.
What if a DM is harsher than another See point above. We all discuss things like this on Skype, spontaneously too. So even if it is a "one DM decision" it usually is spoken to about with the others anyways. If the one who is imprisoned for 7 days feels "bias" against himself, he can ask another DM for review.
Frankly though, it is a week, and such longer imprisonments are meant for big crimes. Murder IN THE CITY, attacking/destroying part of a city, etc etc. No DM will give a prolonged imprisonment because "your nose is stupid". This is why it is DM only in the first place. Those "severe" crimes inside a city usually require DM oversight anyways. Hence why, as mentioned under 1. this will usually be the case anyways if a DM is there an spontaneously can say "yeah, sorry, caught in the act, you won't geta way here with 24 hrs for killing 5 guards and burning 3 fields.
Long Term imprisoned attempt to escape or be freed, at least twice a month
Does the single DM 7 day count as a long term imprisonment and in turn require the DM team to give them 2 attempts that month per that jailing? Obviously not. You cannot give a twice a month in 7 days. Though if an imprisoned PMs the team saying they want to bust out, they normally aren't denied, and neither have been, in the past.
If so does the DM who issued it have to be the DM to over see the attempt? No. Any DM has the same autority and rights.
Rotting The minimum twice a month is set so that, even if they apparently fucked up royally, which you have to for this kind of long term imprisonment (aka months and months) to not practically permakill the character even if not literally. Which tossed in jail and forgotten, could very well mean in essence, otherwise. It is more or less a security anchor. More is of course always welcomed, especially by PC who have access to jails.
If they log on the imprisoned character does their online time count as reduced time for good behaviour? If they do not log on to try and break out and are caught, or insult guards etc etc, certainly.
Long Term imprisoned RP The current rules state the PCs must RP with the ones they jailed or they will be released how does this effect if at all this notion? Not at all, because this imprisonement kind is DM enforced not PC enforced. Hence the rules for set for the DMs here. It is however, of course incouraged for guard etc. PC to interact with the prisoners.
Joined: 12 Nov 2015 Location: The belly of the beast
*Gives Ama a hug, even though she hates him* Bravo. Just remember guys. Evil Roleplay should not be punished too harshly or the good guys will run out of bad guys. This is something the DMs have to consider for server balancing. This is on point.
_________________ Jace Fenneril: Cleric of Sharess.
No one is upset that they're playing a Banite and banned from Kohlingen. They are upset because they sold a pair of boots Banite three months ago and because of that they are banned for life.
Joined: 02 Jun 2015 Location: Georgia, United States.
OpenTheRift wrote:
Dig these changes.
Akhlys wrote:
No one is upset that they're playing a Banite and banned from Kohlingen. They are upset because they sold a pair of boots Banite three months ago and because of that they are banned for life.
Wisdom.
Consider it like, you're supplying the enemy with gear. Why would Kohlingen tolerate you if you're selling materials to their enemies? Same goes for Cordor / Brogdenstein / Wharftown e.t.c
Not my favorite thing, but I understand it. Would you be happy if someone sold your enemy a knife and he killed you with it?
No one is upset that they're playing a Banite and banned from Kohlingen. They are upset because they sold a pair of boots Banite three months ago and because of that they are banned for life.
Wisdom.
Consider it like, you're supplying the enemy with gear. Why would Kohlingen tolerate you if you're selling materials to their enemies? Same goes for Cordor / Brogdenstein / Wharftown e.t.c
Not my favorite thing, but I understand it. Would you be happy if someone sold your enemy a knife and he killed you with it?
That's a pretty big stretch. Are you saying if I sold a knife to someone and he stabbed another person with it I should be tried for battery? Should the CEOs at Walmart go to jail every time an armed robbery is committed using a mask bought there? Clearly they're aiding and abetting. What if a drunk driver runs over a kid? Sorry Tom of Tom's Automobile Emporium, you are under arrest for reckless driving and 1st degree manslaughter.
Would I be happy someone stabbed me with a knife? No. Would I blame the guy that sold him it? No, I'm not ridiculous.
However, I actually mean per incident. So if you try to abuse this by just issuing a 1 day ban every day aknew because day 1 you did not like someones nose and day 2 you still did not like his nose we will kick your behind. And if you do this as a chara with authority in a city chances are high you will get that authority stripped.
Example:
Rogue Sneakyfinger tried to rob people in Cordor. He was caught. Guard Grouch bans him for the day.
Now 3 days later....
Legit: Sneakyfinger tries his luck again, gets caught again, Guard Grouch bans him another day.
Not legit: Guard Grouch sees Sneakyfinger in the Market hall restocking. Remembers him, still is annoyed by him and doesn't trust him so he bans him another day, just to be safe.
P.S. Now of course you can play that corrupted badass "cop". Alas actions beget consequences and if the authorities get wind of it it may result in said consequences.
Ama love I think the question is if they have to be logged in for said 24 hours, be it consecutive or over a stretch of time. I have heard cases of people being snagged on 24hr and then simply logging out on the spot for 24 hours then set free.
To Commie, ban rules state that if Pitts name was taken off of the ban list, you would actually be unbanned from a place. A faction ban only holds in two cases: 1. You are wearing something that obviously marks you as from that faction (secret markings are not enough, but if they are not secret, like a banner of the barony...) 2. You are explicitely named on the ban list.
This is, to me at least, a clear indicator of that. Unless you are not actively banned, you are not banned. Since the ban against the Fort is just a Blanket Ban, it does not apply to anyone not listed.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
FAQ
Search
Login
How will this work IC can the DMs give a example of the procedure?
Cory Jails Hector for wearing white after labor day and locks him up under 1day holding but submits PM to DM to raise it to 7 days for such a heinous crime, given we know how IRL...ect and busy DMs can be you might not get a reply from such DM in time you hold him, how would work/effect this case?
If a single DM decides this on the fly, it usually is so that a DM was present during the "caught in the act"
