Mildly Irritating: Aetolia's Pet Peeves

Seurimas

I would add to a point Elene mentioned though - I personally do find the "They are my allies", or "My org are allies to their cause", or "my friends that got assaulted I must revenge." reasons are really weak sauce to justify PK.

I don't know the specifics here, but I firmly believe "because they're my allies" is a fine RP to defend someone, and that the rules allow this behavior. RP isn't transactional between two people. Communities exist, and protecting your own is natural. This isn't a lesser, though, and you should be ready to be involved, because you open yourself up to retaliation.

Conversely, the same does not hold as strongly (possibly at all, by the rules) for offensive acts. If you're not involved in an ally's conflict, you don't get a free pass just because you're buddies.

Tetchta

Akrios said:

Btw this overly condescending, passive-aggressive paragraph of your post kinda invalidates anything else you tried to say in the rest of your post.

Outstanding, you're going for a Bad Discourse Triplet it seems. Are you taking requests? 'cause you've covered Sealioning and tone policing already. Gaslighting is always a big hit.

Lim

Seurimas said:

I would add to a point Elene mentioned though - I personally do find the "They are my allies", or "My org are allies to their cause", or "my friends that got assaulted I must revenge." reasons are really weak sauce to justify PK.

I don't know the specifics here, but I firmly believe "because they're my allies" is a fine RP to defend someone, and that the rules allow this behavior. RP isn't transactional between two people. Communities exist, and protecting your own is natural. This isn't a lesser, though, and you should be ready to be involved, because you open yourself up to retaliation.

Conversely, the same does not hold as strongly (possibly at all, by the rules) for offensive acts. If you're not involved in an ally's conflict, you don't get a free pass just because you're buddies.

Yeah, you're probably right that it is a fine reason on its own. It's when it's paired with the general 'no issue over one death/PK attempt' guideline that it becomes a bit more questionable. So the formula would be to 1. start a fight (whether justified or not, it's still acceptable because of the general guideline), and then 2. bring in friends on the retaliation. It's a recipe for PK farming/the appearance of PK farming, which I think is the recurring theme here. So it's in that context that the bringing in of allies becomes a bit more eh.

What might probably work better is if a person is allowed to bring in friends as a general rule, but where such person is the aggressor, then they/their allies are expected to have stronger reasons for jumping in on the retaliation.

Seurimas

Lim said:

I would add to a point Elene mentioned though - I personally do find the "They are my allies", or "My org are allies to their cause", or "my friends that got assaulted I must revenge." reasons are really weak sauce to justify PK.

I don't know the specifics here, but I firmly believe "because they're my allies" is a fine RP to defend someone, and that the rules allow this behavior. RP isn't transactional between two people. Communities exist, and protecting your own is natural. This isn't a lesser, though, and you should be ready to be involved, because you open yourself up to retaliation.

Conversely, the same does not hold as strongly (possibly at all, by the rules) for offensive acts. If you're not involved in an ally's conflict, you don't get a free pass just because you're buddies.

Yeah, you're probably right that it is a fine reason on its own. It's when it's paired with the general 'no issue over one death/PK attempt' guideline that it becomes a bit more questionable. So the formula would be to 1. start a fight (whether justified or not, it's still acceptable because of the general guideline), and then 2. bring in friends on the retaliation. It's a recipe for PK farming/the appearance of PK farming, which I think is the recurring theme here. So it's in that context that the bringing in of allies becomes a bit more eh.

Well, I'd say retaliation is offensive. Unless your buddy is being actively attacked right now by an aggressor, you're not defending, and you need something better than friendship for jumping into the fray. If someone balks at that restriction, they should remember the "bad guys" need better reasons than blood lust for murdering you, too.

Akrios

Tetchta said:

Akrios said:

Btw this overly condescending, passive-aggressive paragraph of your post kinda invalidates anything else you tried to say in the rest of your post.

Outstanding, you're going for a Bad Discourse Triplet it seems. Are you taking requests? 'cause you've covered Sealioning and tone policing already. Gaslighting is always a big hit.

Lol, if you don't wanna be called out for something, don't do it. I get that it's hard for some people.

Lim

Seurimas said:

Lim said:

I would add to a point Elene mentioned though - I personally do find the "They are my allies", or "My org are allies to their cause", or "my friends that got assaulted I must revenge." reasons are really weak sauce to justify PK.

I don't know the specifics here, but I firmly believe "because they're my allies" is a fine RP to defend someone, and that the rules allow this behavior. RP isn't transactional between two people. Communities exist, and protecting your own is natural. This isn't a lesser, though, and you should be ready to be involved, because you open yourself up to retaliation.

Conversely, the same does not hold as strongly (possibly at all, by the rules) for offensive acts. If you're not involved in an ally's conflict, you don't get a free pass just because you're buddies.

Yeah, you're probably right that it is a fine reason on its own. It's when it's paired with the general 'no issue over one death/PK attempt' guideline that it becomes a bit more questionable. So the formula would be to 1. start a fight (whether justified or not, it's still acceptable because of the general guideline), and then 2. bring in friends on the retaliation. It's a recipe for PK farming/the appearance of PK farming, which I think is the recurring theme here. So it's in that context that the bringing in of allies becomes a bit more eh.

Well, I'd say retaliation is offensive. Unless your buddy is being actively attacked right now by an aggressor, you're not defending, and you need something better than friendship for jumping into the fray. If someone balks at that restriction, they should remember the "bad guys" need better reasons than blood lust for murdering you, too.

Naw, bloodlust is an okay reason for the first kill. You generally get one eye closed for the first kill, whatever the reason.

And as for the 'retaliation is  offensive' take, I think its probably something you've got to experience yourself if you can't immediately empathise.

Sryaen

People (Whirran and Sheryni) who carry PK from the Vortex and Fracture outside both zones.

From HELP VORTEX SPECIFICS:

-The area is open-PK. There are no limits to how many people from any organization can be in the
zone at any given time.

Note: Any conflict initiated within the The Vortex will not be carried outside of it. Likewise,
revenge cannot be enacted for deaths received in the The Vortex while your target is outside of The
Vortex.

And also from HELP PK, regarding ylem aura.

- Much like Ciem, this operates under the rules of no revenge; deaths
suffered whilst bearing an aura do not allow the victim to exact revenge at
a later date unless the target is also wearing an aura. Conflict tied
around the auras is to be immediately dropped once auras dissipate.

So all this talk about following established rules, which is it?

Nipsy

I'm pretty sure that defending order shrines you are not a member of or aiding defilers of another order would give them enough cause to PK you outside of that criteria.

Or it could go back to RP justifications, based on earlier discussions in this thread.

Vortex is just a convenient OPEN PK zone.

Naos

I'm kind of confused here. We've all watched anywhere from 3-6 people routinely gangbang Whirran at literally any time of the day for nothing more than "It's my RP" - even just trying to hold sermons. Are you really posting about this?

Sryaen

Naos said:

I'm kind of confused here. We've all watched anywhere from 3-6 people routinely gangbang Whirran at literally any time of the day for nothing more than "It's my RP" - even just trying to hold sermons. Are you really posting about this?

Yea, I guess so. Even if either of them felt like they had any justified sense of PK, they've.. uh, died. A lot tonight. I thought we didn't advocate for endless revenge PK to get your pound of flesh? Like, sorry if getting rolled up on in an open PK zone left some people tilted but I'm sure Isia didn't want to get killed twice while she was just participating in the Great Hunt. These two were well within their rights to kill her, as she was in an open PK zone but that also goes both ways.

Sheryni

I mean, these are the same people who think you can't shout about people being dishonourable after they dogpile you 3v1 in Vortex for bashing because "it's the Vortex." Yeah, the Vortex is part of the roleplay game and your character's actions there, while "legal," can still be criticized!

Using "it's the Vortex" to justify shitty behavior is about as silly as using "he is giving a sermon" to justify it. Allowable or not, it's still shitty behavior. But ganking is only okay when it's Spirit doing it, apparently.

I did not touch Isia, ever, by the way. Deathsight would confirm this to anyone with eyes. And yes, I'm going to keep going after you if all you do is hide behind guards. If you want it to stop, face the consequences head on. It seems simple. You do not get a free pass just because you continue to hide and gank.

Sryaen

Sheryni said:

I did not touch Isia, ever, by the way. Deathsight would confirm this to anyone with eyes. And yes, I'm going to keep going after you if all you do is hide behind guards. If you want it to stop, face the consequences head on. It seems simple. You do not get a free pass just because you continue to hide and gank.

That's fine. But you were still in the Vortex regardless. As for the last part, uh.. that's not really how Aetolian PK works. Fairly certain you don't get to just claim endless PK on someone until you're satisfied. That may be how it works in Achaea, but this isn't Achaea. I also dunno where this misconception is that I only hang out behind guards. Like, I've also literally had zero personal IC interaction with your character, so I dunno what else to do for you. But it's not on me to try and figure out whatever perceived beef your char has with mine; that's sorta on you to be a bit more vocal about it.

Nipsy

Rules dont exist to be wielded as a weapon in battles made between characters either, if you feel you were unjustifiably attacked, then ISSUE, but if you lose an issue, then its a problem with how you the player are playing the character, not the person one chooses to be victim to.

That being all said and done, there's a whole lot of, "I'm gonna say or do this thing, but not deal with the consequences of my choices." going on in the game as of late.

Like with all things of this variety, they usually come to a head and get popped, like a big nasty pimple.

Sheryni

Sryaen said:

Sheryni said:

I did not touch Isia, ever, by the way. Deathsight would confirm this to anyone with eyes. And yes, I'm going to keep going after you if all you do is hide behind guards. If you want it to stop, face the consequences head on. It seems simple. You do not get a free pass just because you continue to hide and gank.

That's fine. But you were still in the Vortex regardless. As for the last part, uh.. that's not really how Aetolian PK works. Fairly certain you don't get to just claim endless PK on someone until you're satisfied. That may be how it works in Achaea, but this isn't Achaea. I also dunno where this misconception is that I only hang out behind guards. Like, I've also literally had zero personal IC interaction with your character, so I dunno what else to do for you. But it's not on me to try and figure out whatever perceived beef your char has with mine; that's sorta on you to be a bit more vocal about it.

Yes, we had no interaction other than you ganking me with Caitria. I also never actually went after you. Caitria was spewing BS to me in tells, as well as threatening me. I went after her, you continually defended, and so on. You also had traps around the world repeatedly hitting me. It seems silly to play victim when you are clearly going after someone.

Saltz

Naos said:

I'm kind of confused here. We've all watched anywhere from 3-6 people routinely gangbang Whirran at literally any time of the day for nothing more than "It's my RP" - even just trying to hold sermons. Are you really posting about this?

Well, I feel like I've to chime in here. As someone who participated in those ganks Whirran is not innocent, no. He antagonizes multiple people at the same time on a regular basis and attacks them without cause and/or refuses to fight them head on afterwards. I've personally gotten interrupted numerous times so far while fishing, hunting, doing keystones or instances. Most if not all of them were without a cause mind you, other than just him being a nuisance. And the moment I try to resolve it by fighting back all he ever did was fleeing and hiding the moment he got contested (except that one and only time in which he died). I personally find this whole content distasteful, but moving on.

Yeah, he's getting ganked by multiple people, but do you think we're incapable of just 1v1'ing to decide on the outcome once and for all? Or do you think we're just not letting this go out of spite? The sole reason behind this whole thing is his actions and the sheer fact that it just requires numbers to pull someone out of their safe zones and/or pin them down on the fly, because they are not fighting. Is this fun content? Not really. But as far as I'm concerned he's getting fair treatment.

Like I totally did not pursue most of the causes he gave me. But that does not really stop him, he just finds other ways to harrass your character. Which is fine because that's a very clear sign that he invites all the attention to himself. Like, maybe you didn't know that, and that explains a lot. But if you knew that then calling Spirit players out because they are killing him, but they are not killing him fairly makes no sense to me. Especially when the guy is nowhere to be found when it comes to single combat if you prove that you can beat him once, but he's still being a nuisance regularly.

Lim

Saltz said:

Naos said:

I'm kind of confused here. We've all watched anywhere from 3-6 people routinely gangbang Whirran at literally any time of the day for nothing more than "It's my RP" - even just trying to hold sermons. Are you really posting about this?

Well, I feel like I've to chime in here. As someone who participated in those ganks Whirran is not innocent, no. He antagonizes multiple people at the same time on a regular basis and attacks them without cause and/or refuses to fight them head on afterwards. I've personally gotten interrupted numerous times so far while fishing, hunting, doing keystones or instances. Most if not all of them were without a cause mind you, other than just him being a nuisance. And the moment I try to resolve it by fighting back all he ever did was fleeing and hiding the moment he got contested (except that one and only time in which he died). I personally find this whole content distasteful, but moving on.

Yeah, he's getting ganked by multiple people, but do you think we're incapable of just 1v1'ing to decide on the outcome once and for all? Or do you think we're just not letting this go out of spite? The sole reason behind this whole thing is his actions and the sheer fact that it just requires numbers to pull someone out of their safe zones and/or pin them down on the fly, because they are not fighting. Is this fun content? Not really. But as far as I'm concerned he's getting fair treatment.

Like I totally did not pursue most of the causes he gave me. But that does not really stop him, he just finds other ways to harrass your character. Which is fine because that's a very clear sign that he invites all the attention to himself. Like, maybe you didn't know that, and that explains a lot. But if you knew that then calling Spirit players out because they are killing him, but they are not killing him fairly makes no sense to me. Especially when the guy is nowhere to be found when it comes to single combat if you prove that you can beat him once, but he's still being a nuisance regularly.

Hmm this is great - I think Whirran should be happy to 1v1 you (for each instance of outstanding cause that you guys have on each other) and let that resolve everything between you, i.e. both of you leave each other alone thereafter. But will let Whirran confirm.

Nipsy

The sect battles usually go pretty quick in Whirran's favour from my recollection.
I imagine the posturing could be settled easily enough.

Elene

Whirran said:

...I may be missing some, but I know in the last week I've 1v1 killed at least these people. Valorie, Iesid, Illikaal, Saltz, Kalena, Aeryx, Rasani. All of these are folks who have chosen to engage with me in pk for various reasons, and while I won't try to tell anyone if they are or are not experienced, I think if all of these folks are inexperienced the pickings for who IS experienced get rather slim. Mind you, I've not won every fight against these people, not even close. But I've won enough, I think, to make the claim that I don't avoid them.

It is true that 1v1 situations are becoming much more rare, I will and do avoid conflict with veterans when they are attempting to kill me in groups. This morning for example, Benedicto after me became Benedicto and Saltz, became benedicto, Saltz, Rhine and Kalena, and that finally became a six man gank that finally got me in death caves. I'm not complaining, mind you, it was very well executed and I died horribly. But under those circumstances I'm not going to fight straight up, that's just absurd.

...

Got your answer right here, 2 pages back.

And I did see him die to Benedicto after a pretty long fight 1v1 yesterday.



And Iesid in a 1v1 after which Aeryx decided to hypnotize him from phase. Who then ran.



Whirran's a righteous pain in the ass, and even my character can IGly admit that he gets himself into unabashed trouble, to her (sometimes) vexation. I can understand the desire that most people probably want, too, to just put him in the ground more and force him to surrender, but let's not assume 'facts' because they didn't happen when you're logged in.

Toz

"He PK'd me with no cause" is really baffling too. That keeps coming up, and I don't really understand it one bit because I'm pretty sure if you asked he could list off the exact reason he's coming after people. Hang on I still have it saved somewhere...

Saltz

I merely responded to Naos with my insight as a direct participant of this conflict, you and the few others that comment on the thread are merely spectators that just speculate, "I'm sure he'd do x, I heard/saw he did y, I heard/saw he got z'd." So, yeah, it's normal for you to be baffled and confused. I did not know he fought Bene and/or others solo, but that doesn't invalidate my experience with him. Nor does your posts. And yeah, I'm pretty certain he attacks without causes sometimes, maybe he loses track of them, who knows.

Iesid

I'm replying to things as I read them:

Naos said:

[...]
Ultimately our specific argument boils down to me not agreeing with you feeling like you have 'carte blanche' on members of Bamathis' order and/or congregation when outside of normal avenues of conflict. [...]

Naos said:

I'm kind of confused here. We've all watched anywhere from 3-6 people routinely gangbang Whirran at literally any time of the day for nothing more than "It's my RP" - even just trying to hold sermons. Are you really posting about this?

These are both uncharitable descriptions of what a few Spirit characters are doing - and I feel as if you are describing it that way on purpose. Let me take all the nuance out of this so that people can stop being disingenuous:

We do not have 'carte blanche' - 'carte blanche' would be rolling up and killing them in any bashing area during the Great Hunt because 'they're our enemy and it's our RP'.

We are attacking them only when they actively do Bamathis Things (raising shrines, holding sermons, etc) and only WHILE THEY ARE ACTUALLY IN THE ACT (Whirran's basically Always In The Act). There's miles of difference that you are turning a blind eye to strictly for the sake of argument and I think that's kinda strange. There is derision in the way you utilize the phrase "it's my RP" - as if you do not believe, for one minute, that someone can roleplay being opposed to a god.

If you 'value a well-crafted emote', it makes no sense to me that you can't see the difference between your portrayal of what my character does and what he actually does.

Nipsy said:

Or it could go back to RP justifications, based on earlier discussions in this thread.

Vortex is just a convenient OPEN PK zone.

Vortex is a convenient Open PK zone where the conflict/motivation must remain in there. We all get ganked in open PK zones. Nobody gets sore about it and tries to take it outside of those zones - and make no mistake, that's what is going on here. The reaction was near immediate upon Sheryni returning from mirror - anything she does as a character could be taken as motivated by that Vortex gank and that puts it strictly in the territory of 'not allowed'.

This is not a hill I would be trying to die on, if I were you, considering all your previous comments in this thread the last twenty-four hours.

Sheryni said:

I mean, these are the same people who think you can't shout about people being dishonourable after they dogpile you 3v1 in Vortex for bashing because "it's the Vortex." Yeah, the Vortex is part of the roleplay game and your character's actions there, while "legal," can still be criticized!

I don't think this is particularly relevant to the conversation? What does this add and what point does it support?

You may criticize in shouts all you like. Criticism and claiming cause, however, are so far removed from one another. Shouting your own criticism of people does not justify you taking Vortex as PK Cause outside of that area. If you have another valid IC reason that isn't "I'm angry at their dishonor and their hiding!" (since that's very flimsy and can really be claimed by anyone without much or any roleplay to back it up), I'm all for you ganking me and others - but you've got to do the work to get there. When I look down a little further in this thread, I see:

Sheryni said:

Caitria was spewing BS to me in tells, as well as threatening me. I went after her, you continually defended, and so on.

Yeah, shit talking in tells is absolutely cause. That works just fine in my book. At that point, Caitria has also taken her share of the conflict outside of Vortex. Use your noodle and self-moderate, but feel free to go after her.

Sheryni said:

Using "it's the Vortex" to justify shitty behavior is about as silly as using "he is giving a sermon" to justify it. Allowable or not, it's still shitty behavior. But ganking is only okay when it's Spirit doing it, apparently.

I don't think ganking you in an Open PK zone is 'shitty behavior'. It's on the label, as far as Vortex goes, that you are open PK in there and you can't take that reasoning outside of Vortex. If you get ganked in Vortex and now you're sore about it, you can't suddenly decide to align with my opinion about what is acceptable PK cause and say "Well my character is angry at this dishonor, so I shall gank you outside the vortex!"

"He is giving a sermon" is a roleplay decision where your character is spreading the word of a god. Objectively, that's what a sermon is. If there's known criminals going around the game world who are deeply opposed to that god, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever that they would not interfere with that sermon. To compare getting ganked in Vortex to getting ganked for a genuine roleplay-motivated reason sounds a lot like you are trying to place both on the same level of severity and they just aren't.

Sheryni said:

I did not touch Isia, ever, by the way. Deathsight would confirm this to anyone with eyes. And yes, I'm going to keep going after you if all you do is hide behind guards. If you want it to stop, face the consequences head on. It seems simple. You do not get a free pass just because you continue to hide and gank.

You're still open PK in the Vortex. If Whirran is going to go around frying bashers in the Vortex, why can't we? Eye for an eye and all that. Very hypocritical to assert this point, imo.

Elene said:

I can understand the desire that most people probably want, too, to just put him in the ground more and force him to surrender, but let's not assume 'facts' because they didn't happen when you're logged in.

That's not what I want. I can't speak for others, but the game isn't fun without villains and Whirran is absolutely a villain. However, villains are pointless to a fantasy narrative if nobody stands against them.

Saltz

Yeah, the Vortex/Fracture revenge is so absurd, I did not even want to reply to that. You can revolutionize how we PK'd so far and start claiming causes after you get outnumbered at a lesser too, by the same logic. Because "dogpiling" ? (Check.), "shitty behavior"? (Subjective check.) for something you completely opted into by being in an open pk zone. And when you are called out, it's just weaponizing the rules. :Copium:

Ioai

Playing in Iron Man, then getting chased around vortex until I have to qq. Thanks Iesid.

Edit: nice rp.

Iesid

Ioai said:

Playing in Iron Man, then getting chased around vortex until I have to qq. Thanks Iesid.

Edit: nice rp.

Nice breach of rules, mate.

Vortex is Open PK.

Seurimas

Ioai said:

Edit: nice rp.

I feel for you, as that sounds troublesome, but... it's the vortex...

Elene

Iesid said:

These are both uncharitable descriptions of what a few Spirit characters are doing - and I feel as if you are describing it that way on purpose. Let me take all the nuance out of this so that people can stop being disingenuous:

We do not have 'carte blanche' - 'carte blanche' would be rolling up and killing them in any bashing area during the Great Hunt because 'they're our enemy and it's our RP'.

We are attacking them only when they actively do Bamathis Things (raising shrines, holding sermons, etc) and only WHILE THEY ARE ACTUALLY IN THE ACT (Whirran's basically Always In The Act). There's miles of difference that you are turning a blind eye to strictly for the sake of argument and I think that's kinda strange. There is derision in the way you utilize the phrase "it's my RP" - as if you do not believe, for one minute, that someone can roleplay being opposed to a god.

Roleplay-based deaths
---------------------
While a roleplayed motive can be a reason to attack another player, it is not carte blanche to kill
whomever you want with impunity. EVERYONE is presumed to be playing a role in Aetolia, and those who
violently inflict their roleplaying on others are subjected to a much higher standard.

Your role defines your motives, not the other way around. If it's not clear to others that you are
immersed in a role, then you effectively aren't. The burden is on you to demonstrate that your
aggression is in-character, not only at the time of a fight, but constantly through your character's
everyday behavior, habits and speech. See HELP ROLEPLAYING for more information.

Hurt feelings only go so far as an excuse for player killing. Failure to apologize is not a good
reason to continue killing someone repeatedly.

I don't know, man. However you slice it, it does sound like a free pass for Iesid and whoever else who was accompanying him to kill whoever they want *in Bamathis' order for doing anything simply because their character now absolutely hates the God after the Farsai betrayal. I think if you want to go down this route, you should make it clear so that people who might have missed the event (read: Evelyn, Mjoll who hasn't logged in for nearly a month now and somehow got enemied for, and others I probably missed) that this is what they're going to expect in the unforeseeable future.

If anything, I think it is evidently not IGly clear why - to return to the example - Iesid deigns to go after people simply for hosting one of Bama's sermons, and instead they think you're just doing it because you can, or are griefing. You're having to explain your motivations on the forums. And like the file says, if it's not clear the others that you are immersed in a role, then you effectively aren't.

Reverse this for anyone in Ivoln's Order, who you can argue should now bear an effective hatred for those of Haern's Order for sullying the purity of the Earth and almost putting into jeopardy the realm by ignorantly working to weaken the prison of the Sorcerer-Kings with the monolith. They also have got to make it obvious - exceptionally, exceptionally obvious - why they are going after Haern everything or they'll also end up looking like bullies looking for any reason to violently inflict their roleplayingon another.

Iesid

Elene said:

Roleplay-based deaths
---------------------
While a roleplayed motive can be a reason to attack another player, it is not carte blanche to kill
whomever you want with impunity. EVERYONE is presumed to be playing a role in Aetolia, and those who
violently inflict their roleplaying on others are subjected to a much higher standard.

Your role defines your motives, not the other way around. If it's not clear to others that you are
immersed in a role, then you effectively aren't. The burden is on you to demonstrate that your
aggression is in-character, not only at the time of a fight, but constantly through your character's
everyday behavior, habits and speech. See HELP ROLEPLAYING for more information.

Hurt feelings only go so far as an excuse for player killing. Failure to apologize is not a good
reason to continue killing someone repeatedly.

I don't know, man. However you slice it, it does sound like a free pass for Iesid and whoever else who was accompanying him to kill whoever they want *in Bamathis' order for doing anything simply because their character now absolutely hates the God after the Farsai betrayal. I think if you want to go down this route, you should make it clear so that people who might have missed the event (read: Evelyn, Mjoll who hasn't logged in for nearly a month now and somehow got enemied for, and others I probably missed) that this is what they're going to expect in the unforeseeable future.

If anything, I think it is evidently not IGly clear why - to return to the example - Iesid deigns to go after people simply for hosting one of Bama's sermons, and instead they think you're just doing it because you can, or are griefing. You're having to explain your motivations on the forums. And like the file says, if it's not clear the others that you are immersed in a role, then you effectively aren't.

Reverse this for anyone in Ivoln's Order, who you can argue should now bear an effective hatred for those of Haern's Order for sullying the purity of the Earth and almost putting into jeopardy the realm by ignorantly working to weaken the prison of the Sorcerer-Kings with the monolith. They also have got to make it obvious - exceptionally, exceptionally obvious - why they are going after Haern everything or they'll also end up looking like bullies looking for any reason to violently inflict their roleplayingon another.

I think your entire post is just an exercise in moving goalposts.

So now, it's OK to have RP cause, but I have to prove that RP cause? I'm sorry, but you're asking me to convince people who are going to willingly take a dissonant position to make sure I don't get to Do The Thing. It's not my responsibility to remedy your unwillingness to accept my character's roleplay in good faith. The only people I have to convince of the sincerity of my roleplay is the admin who will look over a filed issue.

I don't have to tell you why my character is motivated to stand against Bamathis. I will gladly share that information IC if someone engages me, but the level of engagement I've got from this has been:

* Whirran saying 'good fight' after he and my character went 1-1.
* Evelyn sending me OOC tells trying to police my cause and my roleplay without making any attempt at roleplaying with me herself.

Not a very good look. If you want clarity, seek it - don't just sit here and claim I don't have cause when you aren't willing to do the work to prove I don't.

Just FYI: before any of this complaining started (and that's what it is - complaining), my character's god gave him the full approval to carry on opposing Bamathis. If that isn't roleplay cause, absolutely nothing in this game is.

Xavin

Ioai said:

Playing in Iron Man, then getting chased around vortex until I have to qq. Thanks Iesid.

Edit: nice rp.

Be careful about that, the admin typically take qqing to avoid pk seriously.

Ioai

Xavin said:

Ioai said:

Playing in Iron Man, then getting chased around vortex until I have to qq. Thanks Iesid.

Edit: nice rp.

Be careful about that, the admin typically take qqing to avoid pk seriously.

Cool. I play this game to bash and fish, and since I can't do that right now, might as well ban me @Ictinus /or whoever admin it is who'll respond to the Iesid's issue.

I'll be back next week. Cheers.

Edit: Also Iron Man sucks. If I competed in my normal rank, I would still be at top 5 with much more XP than I got. There's no incentive to it, and it only provides a really easy target for you to get ganked given you have half health, 2 celerity, and no artist.

Iesid

Ioai said:

Xavin said:

Ioai said:

Playing in Iron Man, then getting chased around vortex until I have to qq. Thanks Iesid.

Edit: nice rp.

Be careful about that, the admin typically take qqing to avoid pk seriously.

Cool. I play this game to bash and fish, and since I can't do that right now, might as well ban me @Ictinus /or whoever admin it is who'll respond to the Iesid's issue.

I'll be back next week. Cheers.

Edit: Also Iron Man sucks. If I competed in my normal rank, I would still be at top 5 with much more XP than I got. There's no incentive to it, and it only provides a really easy target for you to get ganked given you have half health, 2 celerity, and no artist.

You could have just sat and let fought. Or you could have gone and bashed another zone.

You had options that didn't involve literally QQing out of combat, my guy.