Death of a Traitor

posted on 2010-02-06 03:05:03
Login to my old character Hecet and find out I'm outlaw, outcast, all skills changed to 1% except for a couple, permacursed, background deleted, description changed, unable to flee, damnation for almost the full duration of the death tarot I was given, all money from the bank gone, and title changed. Why? Because I supposedly broke RP. My character was a Knight whose RP was to betray Knight for Legion. I got found out and evidently, that's not RP. Personally, I think it is, but, meh, shit happens. Here's the last few moments of Hecet, Traitor of Knight. Hope you find it as funny as I did.

Oh, and Soffen was surprised because I had had three people chasing me around and if ONE of them had been able to engage me, I'd be done for. But, I got away from them all and logged out ASAP and then decided to go ahead and log back in so the character would be dead.


Soffen says 'Your still alive?'

<499hp 506m 142mv no opponent no opponent calm> 'My life has come to an end
You say 'My life has come to an end.'

<499hp 506m 142mv no opponent no opponent calm> nod soffen
whe
You nod at Soffen.
The horrific smell of charred flesh burns your nose as Olyn rises up from the ground.

<499hp 506m 142mv no opponent no opponent calm> Players near you:
Soffen The Outer Gates of Castle Valour
Hecet The Outer Gates of Castle Valour
Olyn The Outer Gates of Castle Valour
Rosellin The Outer Gates of Castle Valour

<499hp 506m 142mv no opponent no opponent calm> 'the death tarot kills you when time runs out
You say 'The death tarot kills you when time runs out.'

<499hp 506m 142mv no opponent no opponent calm> 'my time is almost over
You say 'My time is almost over.'
Rosellin says 'Leave this City Filth.'

<499hp 506m 142mv no opponent no opponent calm> who
[ H-Elf ] Soffen Windfury the Master of Song
[40 H-Elf War] (OUTLAW) (OUTCAST) Hecet IS AN IDIOT WHO HAS BEEN MADE AN EXAMPLE OF
[ Duerg ] Unrgrav the Grunt
[52 Storm AVA] [LEGION] (OUTLAW) (OUTCAST) Olyn Lotide, Lord of Darkness
[ H-Elf ] [KNIGHT] Kashya the Steward of the Wooded Grove, Footwoman of Valour
[ Human ] [KNIGHT] Rosellin the Angel of Arcana, General of Valour
Players found: 6
There are 6 characters on; the most on since startup was 11.

<499hp 506m 142mv no opponent no opponent calm> 'so I will let my old slavemaster
You say 'So I will let my old slavemaster.'

<499hp 506m 142mv no opponent no opponent calm> nod ros
You nod at Rosellin.

<509hp 506m 187mv no opponent no opponent calm> 'end me
You say 'End me.'

<509hp 506m 187mv no opponent no opponent calm>
Rosellin frowns.

<509hp 506m 187mv no opponent no opponent calm> who

Soffen looks at you.
[ H-Elf ] Soffen Windfury the Master of Song
[40 H-Elf War] (OUTLAW) (OUTCAST) Hecet IS AN IDIOT WHO HAS BEEN MADE AN EXAMPLE OF
[ Duerg ] Unrgrav the Grunt
[52 Storm AVA] [LEGION] (OUTLAW) (OUTCAST) Olyn Lotide, Lord of Darkness
[ H-Elf ] [KNIGHT] Kashya the Steward of the Wooded Grove, Footwoman of Valour
[ Human ] [KNIGHT] Rosellin the Angel of Arcana, General of Valour
Players found: 6
There are 6 characters on; the most on since startup was 11.

<509hp 506m 187mv no opponent no opponent calm> whe
Players near you:
Soffen The Outer Gates of Castle Valour
Hecet The Outer Gates of Castle Valour
Olyn The Outer Gates of Castle Valour
Rosellin The Outer Gates of Castle Valour

<509hp 506m 187mv no opponent no opponent calm>
Rosellin growls at you. Hey, two can play it that way!

<509hp 506m 187mv no opponent no opponent calm>
Rosellin says 'Leave this city Traitor.'

<509hp 506m 187mv no opponent no opponent calm> 'may Legion RISE TO GLORY and end all that you declare as righteous
You say 'May Legion RISE TO GLORY and end all that you declare as righteous.'

<509hp 506m 187mv no opponent no opponent calm> spit ros
You spit on Rosellin...you're gross!


===Run into the KNight's path and wait for Rosellin to come in and end it===


<519hp 506m 186mv no opponent no opponent calm>
Rosellin utters the words, 'pzrrghcandusaw'.
You yell 'Help! Rosellin is hellstreaming me!'
The ground erupts as you are caught in a searing beam of arcane light.
Rosellin's hellstream >>> ANNIHILATES <<< you!
That really did HURT!
A tin canteen crumbles in Rosellin's hellstream.
Rosellin has some small wounds and bruises.

<248hp 506m 186mv shaft defensive evasive>
Your charge scratches Rosellin.
Rosellin's thwack DISEMBOWELS you!
Rosellin's thwack DISEMBOWELS you!
You sure are BLEEDING!
Rosellin has some small wounds and bruises.

<153hp 506m 186mv shaft defensive evasive> spit
You spit in utter disgust.
Rosellin has some small wounds and bruises.

<153hp 506m 186mv shaft defensive evasive>
Rosellin parries your charge.
Rosellin's thwack MUTILATES you!
You sure are BLEEDING!
You attempt to flee, but the Gods seem to be laughing at you.
Rosellin's thwack MUTILATES you!
You sure are BLEEDING!
You attempt to flee, but the Gods seem to be laughing at you.
Rosellin has some small wounds and bruises.

<69hp 506m 186mv shaft defensive evasive>
Rosellin utters the words, 'pzrrghcandusaw'.
The ground erupts as you are caught in a searing beam of arcane light.
Rosellin's hellstream >>> ANNIHILATES <<< you!
You feel yourself hurl upwards and then slam into the ground.
You have been KILLED!!

You turn into an invincible ghost for a few minutes.
As long as you don't attack anything.
You have died due to failing health.
Kills: 3, Deaths: 24.
You turn into an invincible ghost for a few minutes.
As long as you don't attack anything.
You feel less healthy
#Connection lost
  1. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Its good RP in real life (cuz its honest), but not something a mud can handle. I like the effort, but it just cant work in this setting.
  2. kalist Death of a Traitor -
    I think the only time this sort of thing works is when you have Imm support. I remember back in the day when Assassins was first created and Resatimm was their Imm, he was trying to get people to leave legion to join assassin. A few people actually went for it and they didn't lose any skills. A death at the legion cabal guardian, yeah, but no loss of skills.
  3. kalist Death of a Traitor -
    P.S.

    In that circumstance the person would just leave the cabal and join assassins. They wouldn't mess with cabal funds or captured items or anything. They'd just leave and be declared a prime target.
  4. Kessor Death of a Traitor -
    Yeah, I've been spoken to and I realize I should get IMM support if I come up with something like that again. I did not "sit around" and try to think of how to screw over Knights. I did not have a friend in Legion. I didn't "constantly" empty the Knight coffers. I withdrew money once and gave it to Legion. I was not the reason the coffers were always down. I gave the skull back to Legion once, as well.

    I am in no way saying my actions were appropriate. I was trying to roleplay, but I see now how stupid of an idea this approach was. The Immortal that did this did what he deemed was necessary and just and I have learned my lesson.

    It was a dumb mistake. Now, can we all please just move on?
  5. resatimm Death of a Traitor -
    It is never ok to do what you did. No immortal would ever support that.

    I made the mistake of forgetting to take away your ability to communicate. Completely forgot.

    That was not RP. That was cheating. Cut and dry.
  6. hampster Death of a Traitor -
    Cheating? Explain?

    I thought he desrved the punishment for being a tard. I think it was a lame attempt at rp. But it was still rp. Cheating is changing the dice, all he did was start betting on the other team. I don't classify that as a good thing in any way, but I don't think it was cheating as such. Its not as if he hacked an account or exploited a bug of some kind.

    Seriously, after he did what he did he even wrote a damn note to legion. That's not precisely underhanded.
  7. resatimm Death of a Traitor -
    I cant remember the exact circumstances, but in the investigation that I undertook, and the evidence that I saw, it was cheating. I won't get into details, but if I recall correctly, there were .. inconsistencies. God, that was like 6 weeks ago I did all that, and I can barely remember what I had for breakfast this morning! But I don't go to such lengths unless I am 100% positive.

    Or unless is Clifton or Kalist.

    Or Ramod.
  8. pip Death of a Traitor -
    No Hampshire. There is no valuable excuse for this. Roleplay consist of doing what that align/race is suppose to be via helpfile. At the point you waste the time of fellow knights who interview and take the time to induct you it becomes a inconsiderate player, then you steal from your own cabals coffer to benefit an organisation you are suppose to despise. If you want to be a legion warrior then make an evil, don't fuck over your cabalmates and the time and effort they put into farming gold and making the cabal better. Point is halfelf good Knight does not STEAL DECEIVE OR BETRAY no matter what and if you want to help legion as a Knight then don't be a dick and fuck it up for everyone else. Just send note get outcasted lose all your skills and realize that its a stupid idea.
  9. hampster Death of a Traitor -
    No pip-nuggets, the only really set in stone RULES you'll find are those you recite at the Darkhaven priest. Rp is flexible, or it wouldn't be any fun.

    Point of fact there have been other instances of changed alignments with immortal supervision and things went quite well. So, no offense, but you are incorrect.
  10. pip Death of a Traitor -
    obviously not because the guy is denied.
  11. hampster Death of a Traitor -
    I know for a fact it is absolutely possible to change everything about your character without having this sort of response. And I am surprised that I am having this argument with YOU of all people. You have been around long enough (I think) to have seen at least a few people who have changed alignments and left cabals.

    Point of fact, what he did wrong was how he went about this. He didn't "break the rules". He violated his code of conduct. He rp'd it, he even sent a damn note to Corzen and Legion. It wasn't underhanded and it wasn't rule breaking. To call it anything but a botched attempt at RP and idiotic in the extreme for that, would be disingenuous.

    He was stupid yes. But he wasn't a rule breaker. Call it like you see it, now how you think it should be seen.
  12. ergorion Death of a Traitor -
    Please view the section of the Abandoned Realms website which discusses the cabals. For those of you too lazy to go to it, I'll copy and paste it here:

    You need the right attitude

    A cabal brings together a bunch of people with a common purpose. For Justices that is the laws, for Knights that's eradicating the evildoers. THIS is your main calling. A cabal expects that you will devote lots of time into your cabal duties. If you aren't, then they will have absolutely no use for you, and might even decide to boot you for taking up space. Once you joined a cabal, you can't just do your own thing anymore. You do things for the cabal instead. You joined the cabal because its cause was common with your cause, and now you put the cabal's cause first. The cabals purpose is "A", and your purpose is "to help the cabal do A". Ask people to name 20 Knights and they'll probably be stumped, but everyone has heard of the Knight cabal. You will have to give up of your individuality when you join, unless you wish to be remembered for the wrong reasons.

    Also, you need to be obedient. It goes without saying that if you ever disobey an order from a superior you'll be kicked out of the cabal. The same can be applied to messing them up, especially when deaths are caused, but mistakes tend to be tolerated a little more than when its intentional.

    http://abandonedrealms.com/realms/cabals/
  13. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Go read the helpfile on how to be a cop. They define the rp required.

    if you break your rp, you are uninducted, skills gimped, and you are jailed.

    But you didnt break the rules of life.

    Do you guys like to make up your own definition of shit?

    Pip, I am also surprised at you.

    Punishment was justified. He didnt break any actual game rules.

    If you think he did, name one.
  14. groq Death of a Traitor -
    He says he didn't have an ooc friend in legion but I find that really really really hard to believe. That would be breaking the rules via ooc. Either way he's a fucking retard and shouldn't be allowed in a coterie or cabal for a very long time. Like someone else stated it's alot like justice wanting everyone rping he's corrupt. Hopefully he gets hit by a bus.
  15. Clifton Death of a Traitor -
    He did break game rules. You are supposed to RP your align/ethos. Breaking it slightly, to minimal offenses, warrants a similar punishment, outcast/align. This was blatant, premeditated disregard for RP rules, therefore against game rules.
  16. davor Death of a Traitor -
    how fucking special must you be that you can't develop RP within clearly outlined limitations given?
    and how fucking stupid can you be that when you want to bypass those rules you don't even consider to run it by those who set the rules?
    Don't bother to answer. Obviously more then enough.
  17. sebryn Death of a Traitor -
    You know how many times I've thought about trying to RP a corrupt Justice? I've thought, not about being the guy who flags everybody wanted and apprehends 'em all, not about even being the guy who flags ONE or TWO people here or there, just to see if he can get away with it. I've thought "I could just be the guy who conveniently slides out of town each time there's going to be a fight, or take payments to 'turn the other way', or to completely deny/ignore when attacks are made, as long as the attacker is evil". I thought I could probably even argue the last action, thinking "Well how can anyone prove that I heard the attack? Maybe I was doing something else that pushed the scrolling text on my screen up so quickly that I really *did* miss it?"

    You know why I haven't tried something like this? Nevermind the fact that I'm an Imm. The real reason is that, despite how "fun" it would be, or how "cool" it would be, it fucks over other players and there's no hard-coded recourse for it.

    When you play the game BY THE RULES, your expectation is that everyone else is going to play by the rules as well. You expect that Keepers are going to go after the people with too many rares; you expect Knights and Legions to fight each other; and you expect Justices to town-sit and protect your monkey ass, or at least avenge you if you're attacked. When someone decides to fuck up that facet of the game for you and others, it's not comfortable; it breaks your immersion and it feels like a violation somehow.

    Everything that *you* work for and spend your time on being so easily discarded by someone who doesn't care can't be remedied by someone explaining "...But it was RP, he was trying to be 'original'..." That won't make anyone feel better.
  18. stiehl Death of a Traitor -
    I don't know if any rules are broken but it seems like people are saying that because your character is a certain alignment/ethos that character can not have traumatic events or mental illness or a myriad of other circumstances that causes their core beliefs to be shaken and in some cases shattered. It should be met with punishment of some kind...but it is possible. I remember that Healer running around for ages as an OUTCAST and attacking knights, elves, drow...whatever passed her way. She lasted for quite a while. Again, I am not saying that breaking ethos should not be punishable...it should be. I am just saying that if someone wants to RP a break in align/ethos they should be allowed to (to an extent)...they just need to deal with the loss of skills/spells/ability to safely go in town, etc. (A lot...2 words).
  19. Clifton Death of a Traitor -
    There is a difference between a character reacting to an in game event and a character being planned as a saboteur which goes directly against the align/ethos that was chosen. And as it's been noted, it has happened a few times. But to set out to break rp/ethos, that's pretty dirty.
  20. hampster Death of a Traitor -
    I didn't see anything anywhere that showed he 'set out' to break ethos/alignment. He did it and it was idiotic, but I don't any claim was made that shows that this was premeditated.

    To bring up Mullets question again; What rule was broken?
  21. blarg Death of a Traitor -
    rule 2: stay IN-CHARACTER at all times (RP RULES)


    'ROLEPLAY'

    Abandoned Realms is a roleplaying intensive MUD, and you are expected to
    cast off all trace of any unworldly personas and immerse yourself in its
    gameplay. Though we do not expect everyone to excel at this aspect, there
    are some basic requirements that everyone MUST follow.

    * names must satisfy the requirements in HELP NAME
    * players are attacking others and/or above 15 must have a valid DESCRIPTION

    Language restraints:
    * d00d-speek or modern languages are not allowed, this is a medieval setting
    * abbreviations or popular modern slang (e.g. WTB, AFK, or Wazza) is illegal
    * spell words out (e.g. write out "you" instead of "u" and "thanks" not "ty")
    * no profanity or vulgarity on people you don't know will care to hear it
    * no discriminatory language (racist, homophobic, sexist, etc)

    Knowledge restraints:
    Keep your characters SEPARATE - they must not know each other even exist,
    and knowledge accumulated on one character must not be shared with the
    other. This does not apply to areas, quests, if you know a quest then you
    know it - it applies to dynamic information.

    Behaviour restraints:
    * stay IN CHARACTER at all times. The people that meet you in game should
    meet and know your character, not the player behind it.
    * use channels appropriately (e.g. auction is for buying/selling, not chatting)
    * uphold your ALIGNMENT/ETHOS where applicable (see help good/neutral/evil)
    * ICA = ICC (In-Character Actions have In-Character Consequences), don't
    misuse OOC commands/mechanisms to avoid ICC. e.g. SUICIDE, QUIT
    * don't flood the screen deliberately to annoy others
  22. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Cliff attempted to claim what rule he broke, and Blarg actually pointed to a rule... Heres why you are wrong.

    Chaotics have zero care of laws. Justices... who gives a fuck. I dont know one chaotic EVER that doesnt consider the Justice, and then usually says "meh, I can get them later." Yes, that is self preservation, but that is also NOT CHAOTIC.

    The problem with RP is that its a hazy term. Which is why we have Imms to judge on a per person basis. He RP'd. Who cares if it was premeditated? The only difference that I see if it was premeditated is that he is an UBER douche that has no care who he fucks over, but that doesnt make it cheating.

    Controversy = Hazy. To give a real life example: Life vs abortion argument.

    There is no actual line. At most I would say he pushed a very bendy rule too far. He didnt "cheat". That suggests some sort of gain for himself... And I really see a lose lose for him.
  23. blarg Death of a Traitor -
    Nothing says you can't be chaotic and a pussy. Chaotic people aren't inherently braver than others.

    In this case, you have someone undermining the entire cabal system. You had one knight defending a captured cabal item for over an hour against two legions, then this guy gets on, requests the item from the holy knight so Legion can kill him and run it home. Taking coins from Knight bank and handing them out just shows that it wasn't a misguided noob.

    You're right that this is handled on an individual basis by immortals. You can also see that this guy was made as an example to everyone of what will not be tolerated.

  24. hampster Death of a Traitor -
    Yes 2 knights were fighting 2 legions. Hecet died twice to me and twice to the skull killing him at the guardian. Hecet than gave out the skull. He sent a note claiming he wantes to be a spy for legion and than left after a bit.

    He didn't break rp rules. He was rping.

    He broke cabal conduct. An IN GAME rule. So in that way, yes he "cheated".

    Let me point out I am in no way defending his actions. He was idiotic for doing this. However, I do believe that this is getting blown WAY out of proportion. I don't think he should be viewed as a cheater, that'd be foolish. He did not break any rules, he just didn't talk to the imms and the imms made an example of how that kind of stupidity is handled. The message I got was;

    "Be careful how you decide to rp, we are watching and we will crack down. I.E. don't be dumb".
  25. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Blarg, dont put words in my mouth, and if you could do me a favor and actually read my post before you respond, I would appreciate it.

    A chaotic person thinks laws are stupid, and that they dont apply. That doesnt make a chaotic person obeying laws a pussy, it makes them breaking rp. Because by not attacking when they want, they are obeying laws. And when you obey laws as a chaotic, you are not roleplaying.

    Read the fucking post.
  26. sebryn Death of a Traitor -
    Hampster says: "I didn't see anything anywhere that showed he 'set out' to break ethos/alignment."
    Kessor/Hecet says: "My character was a Knight whose RP was to betray Knight for Legion."

    ** Intent stated by player. **

    Hampster says: "He broke cabal conduct. An IN GAME rule. ..."
    Hampster says: "He did not break any rules, he just didn't talk to the imms ..."

    ** Contradiction in the same post. **

    mullet says: "Chaotics have zero care of laws ... Yes, that is self preservation, but that is also NOT CHAOTIC."
    mullet says: "...by not attacking when they want, they are obeying laws. And when you obey laws as a chaotic, you are not roleplaying."

    ** This is open to debate. If you're caballed and chaotic, and you don't attack your ANATHEMA/CONTRACTED/etc. in Seringale because you don't wanna get wanted/die, it's not "self-preservation", it's breaking your cabal guidelines and will likely be met with demotion/uninduction. If you're not caballed and you're chaotic, it could be viewed as "Eh, I can do more good alive than dead, I'll just wait til the Justice leaves." That's a pussy move, sure, but don't confuse CHAOTIC with CRAZY.

    A serial killer is CHAOTIC; they don't give a damn about the laws/rules that society creates regarding safety and other peoples' right to live. However, many of them do their killing silently and covertly, they don't run into a police station with a victim and say "Fuck you guys, I'm killin' this bitch anyway!"

    What you're viewing CHAOTIC as is more of a PSYCHOPATH, but even those guys don't *ALWAYS* kill in plain sight of cops. They don't care about the law, but that doesn't mean they're suicidal. Not all of 'em anyway.
  27. hampster Death of a Traitor -
    First of all. I didn't contradict myself. That's why I put it in nice BIG letters. IN GAME rule. For instance, if you trie ld to steal in town and failed you'd be breaking a law. Or a, say it with me now, in game rule. The actual rules of the game are far different than the cabal codes of conduct. The cabal conduct rules surround a characters actions, not a players actions. There is a distinction.

    As for Hecets post, I think he meant that he came to the rp eventually. That's what I took from mixing my observations of his character and what he said there. Which from my view point makes it larger douche move. I'd rather see a person rp a troubled goody who goes ape shit and betrays his code, than a random "oh I died now I am going to act out" bullshit rp. That is why I believe he deserved punishment, not because he is a cheater, which implies he was trying to break the PLAYER rules, but because every mortal is at the whim of the "gods" and he broke an (say it with me now) IN GAME rule. A cabal conduct rule meant for the character.
  28. retard Death of a Traitor -
    'help cabal conduct' is also set in stone , for those people that join. Its not flexible. The guidelines, maybe, depending on the circumstances, but definitely not the core.
  29. hampster Death of a Traitor -
    That's my point really, that its a character problem not a player problem. It should be treated like that. Not like he is a cheater, because he isn't. Now if it is habitual from all his characters, that's different.
  30. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Sebryn... If you judge a character as a Justice, and they are chaotic, the GAME says "they dont believe in laws".

    If I dont believe in a fist, I am going to act as if it is not going to hit me, even though its flying right at me.

    However stupid that is, and insane it may sound, if I dont BELIEVE in something, it doesnt exist to me at all. This includes the repercussions associated with that belief.

    And he isnt a cheater. Plain and simple. You idiots.
  31. Clifton Death of a Traitor -
    "As for Hecets post, I think he meant that he came to the rp eventually." -- yeah, now you're just rationalizing. I think you've lost at this point. Cause obviously what you think he said is much more worthwhile than what he actually stated.

    Mullet - not believing in something and directly antagonizing it are different things. If you walked to a sketchy area (ie: your mom's <3), wearing the wrong colors and got your ass kicked, would you wear those same colors the next time you did it? Just cause you think you could kick a bear's ass doesn't mean you'll definitely try it. OTOH, I think any chaotic cabal character that doesn't attack a flagged person due to justice should be insta outcast to neutral.
  32. sebryn Death of a Traitor -
    Personally I think "doesn't beleive in laws" should read "doesn't agree with laws", but I don't code that kind of stuff.

    I think you're taking "believe in" to mean "acknowledge existence of" instead of "agree with validity of". If *EVERY* chaotic character acted the way you suggest they should, then Justice wouldn't be the low-activity cabal that it is.

    If people that are "chaotic" IRL followed that mantra IRL, we'd need 100x as many cops as we already have.

    As for AR though, AS A GAME, alignment and ethos aren't *EVER* 100% truly and completely followed by any player/character. Good-aligned characters (Knights included) still attack and kill completely innocent creatures and people (neutral mobs) without *ANY* provocation. Evils (Legion included) don't attack and kill *every* good- or neutral-aligned character or mob they see.

    Why? Because it's a game, under all the B.S. people want to lawyer one way or another in their favor or for their argument. It's a game, and teh game's success is measured by (in AR's case) PK efficiency and bodycount. You don't get either by haphazardly chain-bashing anything with next to it. You get it by planning, and playing it smart.

    If you or anyone thinks that "chaotic" = "kill anyone in town that opposes my goals, Justice or not, cuz I don't believe in laws" then I'd like to see you roll it and play it, either a Knight or Legion. Once you're caballed, send me a note in-game, and I'll keep personal track of how many times your character's name comes up in Justice reports.

    Cuz right now, and up til now, it hasn't happened like that from anyone.
  33. sebryn Death of a Traitor -
    Disclaimer:
    "Cuz right now, and up til now, it hasn't happened like that from anyone"

    By that, I meant recently.
  34. erlwith Death of a Traitor -
    first taking rp advice from mullet is like taking game rules advice from mico. Read the game rules... He didn't break any. His rp was shitty and maybe if he had put some effort into it instead f just withdraw xxxx give xxx yyy he MIGHT have gotten a slightly better response.

    still however shitty he was playing his role he was STILL roleplaying. And besides a moronic and comoletely immersionbreaking title restaimms response was completely rp. He betrayed the knights and was punished for it by the gods above. He wasn't denied so technically he didn't even die a cheaters death.

    since when is shit like this even an invokation matter. Shitty log... Shitty rp... Shitty waste of time. And I'm typing from a palm so I can't even review my post.
  35. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Erlwith, argue for another side. You are an idiot who blathers on about shit already said. I dont want you tainting my team.

    Sebryn,

    "Personally I think "doesn't beleive in laws" should read "doesn't agree with laws", but I don't code that kind of stuff. "

    goes with cliftons response to hampster. I am reading the lines given. Game states believing in.

    And the fact that no one rp's 100% is my point exactly. RP is fuzzy. He wasnt CHEATING is all I am saying.

    And clif, if you dont believe in something, you believe it doesnt exist, thus you believe there are no repercussions from said non-existent item.

  36. sebryn Death of a Traitor -
    I'm just arguing for the sake of argument here, but this is from the website, under the "Roleplay" link:

    "If you come up with a unique kind of character, you may want to get help from the imms in the align/ethos you should be choosing for it. It will hurt your character to have it changed later - penalties range from the outcast flag to your character being killed, deleted, etc."

    "help rp rules":
    - Behaviour restraints: uphold your ALIGN/ETHOS where applicable

    "help chaotic good":
    - "...they are the overthrowers of tyranny and the fighters for freedom."

    He did *NOT* uphold his alignment (ethos is arguable, he did cause chaos), as his actions (weakening/spying on Knights and aiding Legion, supreme evil organization in Thera) were intended to strengthen evil, not "fight for freedom".

    Did not uphold alignment = breaking RP rules. There, he broke a rule. Who seriously believes that his actions didn't breach good alignment? (And that's a game rule, hampster and mullet, not an IN-GAME RULE, just to clarify.)

    What it boils down to is: he broke RP with an attempt to screw over other peoples' characters. Am I saying that I don't admire the attempt? Not at all. But it's still breaking the game rules. As it *IS* a game, and not a Hollywood production, and no audience members were aware of the "hidden agenda" to be able to tell the Knights "don't trust him, he's a bad guy that's just gonna screw you over!!" like telling the dumb blonde with the big tits "don't go in that room, the axe murderer's gonna get you!"

    That ramble aside, in-game mechanics don't allow for the "sneak attack" RP of good-posing-as-an-evil or vice-versa, so either "ask before you roll-n-rank a character and waste your time" or be prepared to eat it if you break alignment RP.
  37. Clifton Death of a Traitor -
    "you believe it doesnt exist, thus you believe there are no repercussions from said non-existent item."

    and yet when you get killed for your actions, you learn that there are repercussions, thus shattering your disbelieve in non-repercussion. qed.
  38. sebryn Death of a Traitor -
    Watch it, Clif, you used the phrase "you learn"... next comes the argument that when playing stupid races like giants there's an RP excuse for disbelieving in laws, rules, etc. >:)
  39. iolo Death of a Traitor -
    Am I the only one who has been thinking about the fact that Hecet did something that the Imms didn't approve of and whether or not it was explicitly written in the rules that you shouldn't do what he did the imms still disapproved of it and Resatimm therefore went all rabid-canadian on his ass and the imms don't *need* to quote rules because well they're IMMS so how about everyone shut the fuck up since you all know what he did was 'wrong' in AR. Super. Thanks.
  40. sebryn Death of a Traitor -
    iolo - it's the thrill of "who can justify or explain away (lawyer) the actions of a character who was punished because they pushed the envelope." It's a daily occurrence in-game, but when it's voiced on a logboard, it doesn't involve characters getting denied for speaking out.
  41. murfin Death of a Traitor -
    it's funny how everyone other than kessor has been airing their bunched panties over this incident...

    does it matter if you call it in-game rules or ar rules? there was SOME rule that he intentionally ignored without discussing his intents with imms, and went about it in a retarded manner. as a result, he was resatimmed. everyone agrees on this point yes? why are you all still arguing??

    bottom line is, if you design a char to cross alignment/ethos, do it believably and let more people know about it (esp. imms) so everyone else can also rp with you, not in an o hey random FLIP OUT NINJA TIME!! kind of way.
  42. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    What I dont get is how adults are so fucking ignorant. Iolo, yes thank you for not reading posts.

    Murfin, we are having a discussion. Thank you for your completely useless post.

    Clif, Lets say god exists. I dont believe in a God. God smites me. I blame the big rain cloud. God gives me the plague. I blame rats. Orrrr I can then believe in god. Which would change my "ethos". Or opinion on a specific fact.

    Sebryn, I could give you several arguments which all would point at hazy RP. RP is undefinable, and thus you cant really break that rule.

    E.G.: Tyranny is defined as an empirical dictatorship. No one is really trying to cause that. Orrr, you could say Knights are trying to cause that as much as Legion is.

    Its a very very bendy rule he bent too far, is my opinion.

    I liked the term resatimmed.

    Again, my opinion was he was stupid, deserved to be punished, but didnt "cheat" in any way.
  43. Clifton Death of a Traitor -
    Mullet... you don't get it. You could still believe God doesn't exist. But if everytime you did something, and then you got hit by the rain cloud (ie: justice wanted flag -> death), you develop a sense of correlation. Maybe you still don't believe in god, but you also know what happens when you blaspheme.

    Suppose you say bleh in game. You don't believe in a god. You get smited. So you do it again, you get smited again. Pretty soon you won't be saying bleh constantly. Whether or not you believe that it's a storm cloud smiting you or god smiting you is irrelevant. simple pavlovian theory.

    Suppose you say Bleh
  44. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Pavlovs theory relies on consistency. Every time you attack in town you dont get wanted.

    Now I recognize the fact that this doesnt make sense. "Not believing in laws" is a pretty silly concept. So is magic. However, you dont argue the fact that you cant pop a mushroom out of the ground with your mind...

    And trust me, I understand your argument fully. It just doesnt pertain to this fantasy setting.

    And lets say you DO get wanted every time you are in town. You have to get wanted at least once to develop a correlation (many more times than that if you are scientific about it, rather than religious). Either way, the breaches in rp by a chaotic are very much there.
  45. Clifton Death of a Traitor -
    Your argument effectively boils down to "if a character is chaotic, they must attack everything that moves while in town otherwise they are breaching chaotic rp" - at least that's how you've been describing it. this of course relies on the fact that they would attack everything all the time anyway, which I would argue is not the case.

    in my opinion, the only time chaotic rp is breached is when the presence of law alters the way the character proceeds. for instance, if a victim is at 1% hp and chaotic breaks off chase because there is a justice in town, then there is a clear example of neutral RP, where attacking isn't wise. in my opinion, chaotics who do this should be slain and outcast to neutral (i don't think outcasting to alignment/ethos is done enough.. too many perks in chaotic to pick neutral).

    so basically, the premise of your argument is flawed because not all chaotics are always attacking in town. so it is possible for a chaotic to not attack in town while maintaining chaotic rp.
  46. sebryn Death of a Traitor -
    mullet said: "Pavlovs theory relies on consistency. Every time you attack in town you dont get wanted."

    If you get wanted every time you attack in town with a guy with [JUSTICE] next to his name also in town, there's your consistency. You're arguing silly points of an extremely circumstantial hypothetical situation.

    Haven't you ever heard someone say "I don't believe in sex before marriage", or "I don't believe in abortion"? It's not the same as "I don't believe in Bigfoot". In the first two examples, the phrase "don't believe in" means the person doesn't accept the subject in question to be proper or correct. That's what is meant by "he doesn't believe in laws". It's not saying they can't fathom the idea of laws, it's saying they choose to not acknowledge them because they view the laws as something that shouldn't be applied to themselves, or Therans at all.

    If you want to roleplay the chaotic who keeps attacking in town and gets WANTED over and over, and say that he's too stupid to put two and two together because he "doesn't believe in laws" that's your prerogative, but don't confuse it with what the true meaning of that phrase is in the context of the game.
  47. Clifton Death of a Traitor -
    Sebryn's post is funny because mullet's already been there and done that.

    "If you want to roleplay the chaotic who keeps attacking in town and gets WANTED over and over, and say that he's too stupid to put two and two together because he "doesn't believe in laws" that's your prerogative" == Jeigtoft
  48. faelon Death of a Traitor -
    I think the argument got silly, lol.


    I agree with Clifton, to a point. I do think that every now and than a chaotic will just do something because they feel like, right under the Justices nose. Do I think they are suicidal? Not always. But that is down to the rp.

    Alignment/Ethos/Race, are guidelines, nothing more, nothing less. They have certain aspects of them you cannot break, other than that, you are free to RP within them.
  49. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Someone who doesnt believe in abortion, would never abort a baby.

    Someone who doesnt believe in laws, wouldnt ever follow them.

    And using an example of someone using a word poorly (I dont believe in abortion). Abortion exists. You cant not believe in it.

    Define: belief (in google):Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.

    An idiot "doesnt believe in abortion". Just because they arent "right" according to their definition doesnt make them not true.

    I am using the terms provided by the game. As an Imm, you can change the word use.

    And Sebryn, again, you have to get wanted at least once in order to develop an idea as to why the consequence happened from your action. AT LEAST once.
  50. sebryn Logjack -
    Despite the fact that this log and subsequent discussion have gone off-track...

    mullet: Your definition is of "belief," a noun.

    Define: believe (also from google):
    - accept as true; take to be true; "I believed his report"; "We didn't believe his stories from the War"; "She believes in spirits"
    - be confident about something; "I believe that he will come back from the war"
    - follow a credo; have a faith; be a believer

    So "he does not believe in laws" could be restated as "he does not accept laws as true", or "he is not confident about the laws", or "he does not have faith in the laws". Someone "not believing" doesn't mean "deny the existence of" like you're trying to imply. They simply don't accept them as truth.

    I'm gonna stop after this, cuz it's like arguing with a brick wall. But hopefully my point is understood by *someone* reading this.
  51. mullet Death of a Traitor -
    Awww, Sebryn. I would hope you dont think its like arguing with a brick wall. I refuse to say that I am wrong unless you have proven it and, sadly, I have to admit defeat here. Which subsequently kills my example of breaching RP... I could probably find another, but you seem to want to stop the banter, so I will cease and desist.

    I thoroughly enjoyed this however.
  52. retard Death of a Traitor -
    posting in a thread that's too long to be worth trying to read through
  53. Baer Death of a Traitor -
    Posting while I wait for the damn old zmud to load.

    *kills a kitten*