jtringl 35 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I think taking items in the wild should be totally permitted for everyone. Its the wilds, the badlands, you have to take risks out there. It is also very roleplay like for people to take items if they are scavenging in the wilds. I think everyone should basically be allowed to act as a villain in the wilds, since there are not any nations out there to control people. Just saying. Written in the official Native orange! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Secret Lizard President 313 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Looks great to me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloaked_Philosopher 7 Share Posted January 12, 2012 Stealing is in no way related to "being protected." Stealing is a moral choice. A non-villainous character would not steal, even from an unprotected chest in the wilds. If you yourself didn't farm it, kill it, cut it, buy it or build it... don't touch it. Unless you're a villain... Then do whatever you want with it. :) What about taking items in an abandoned or what appears to be an abandoned house out in the wilds, i.e. where there are no laws of such. Morals are based on laws we created ourselves it makes no sense for someone to be punished because they took a little food from a house where there is no governmental authority. Also you don't have to be a villain to think taking items like that isn't wrong. Morals are based on personal experiences and to an extent can be different in the values of laws and how they apply. For example a ranger looking through the forest would investigate abandoned housing or unprotected housing and may take items of use to him. Its not stealing in this case merely scavenging. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narrogan (Nathan1506) 42 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I propose a solution to the ongoing argument. It has been made quite clear numerous times that Metagaming is against the rules. My simple proposition is to outline that Metagaming is a banable offence, ESPECIALLY in war situations where the leader acts un naturally due to the OOC agreement. Also this rule should apply to ALL other nations regardless of thier involvement in the current war, this would be to prevent such situations such as what happened at galahar; when the monks decided to take a "relaxing daily walk" dressed in full diamond with weapons towards the warzone! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dun_Irongut 104 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Yes, if unprotected this'll keep hermits out of the wilds perhaps And if the chest were to be in protected territory, with you having permission in that territory? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitebeard 126 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Would take twice as long, and only a handful of players are going to have maxed out skills anyway. It doesn't create the effect of one 550 skill pointed player any more than two maxed out players make a 550 skill pointed player. Once again, it strikes me as no worse than two players. I hear people on TeamSpeak arranging armour repairs OOC all the time. Doesn't require them to be simultaneously online. To clarify anyone organizing such an event should be reported on the forums as such. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
argonian 14254 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Shift said you forget everything in the last 20 minutes. I personally think you should forget everything got to do with your death but remember everything that is completely unrelated. EDIT: Sorry for the double post Anyone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eruza 11 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I have two objections to these very well written rules. Firstly, I feel an exception to the rule stating people wearing hoods and helmets are unidentifiable is needed to state that if your visible appearance is easily recognizable you should be able to be easily identified before even hearing the person speak. As a prime example I offer myself. My character wears a hood at all times, and people are able to easily recall my name as I am one of maybe 2-3 people who commonly wear the same robes I do, and probably the only one who walks around in public with said robes on. Secondly, you state that player should not stray too far from their original biography; however, I would object to say that over the course of one's experience in Aegis a series of character developments occur that can completely change who you are as a character. As an example take a spineless wimp traumatized by a childhood experience into severe pacifism. Should enough ordeals beset this person to toughen their spirit, they might become a more aggressive person, which is entirely against their original biography. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
argonian 14254 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I have two objections to these very well written rules. Firstly, I feel an exception to the rule stating people wearing hoods and helmets are unidentifiable is needed to state that if your visible appearance is easily recognizable you should be able to be easily identified before even hearing the person speak. As a prime example I offer myself. My character wears a hood at all times, and people are able to easily recall my name as I am one of maybe 2-3 people who commonly wear the same robes I do, and probably the only one who walks around in public with said robes on. Yeah, if you have seen that person wearing those robes before and they are the only one who wears those robes, you should be able to recognise them. As long as they aren't covering the robes with armour of course. Secondly, you state that player should not stray too far from their original biography; however, I would object to say that over the course of one's experience in Aegis a series of character developments occur that can completely change who you are as a character. As an example take a spineless wimp traumatized by a childhood experience into severe pacifism. Should enough ordeals beset this person to toughen their spirit, they might become a more aggressive person, which is entirely against their original biography. I think that rule was for villain applications so thieves don't murder etc. If you are a villain and something has changed your character in a way that makes them do villainous things that you weren't originally accepted for, then in the villain application section, you can apply for new traits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Austin 697 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Just a question, but would GM's ever consider adding the rule "Don't constantly threat a person with banreport" Becuase, from personal experiance one time in a battle I killed someone he immidiatly started to rage at me through message saying "Give me my things, or ban report". I decided to return his things. However he was claiming I didn't return all of his things so following this he was spamming RP chat at me saying "Give me my Diamond sword, or I write a ban report" He then followed me around for around 20 minutes or so threatening even after I tried to engage RP with him. I'm sure other villians find this aswell after they kill someone the person threatens with Ban report. I mean honestly I would rather keep it too a single threat and then write it. It does get quite annoying and i'm sure others agree. On another note my character, an Orc engages in arena fights quite often so I was wondering if it was okay that during a arena fight the PVP rules are negated unless stated otherwise. Such as returning to the arena you fought in and such and remembering you lost. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toryk Embane 8 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Imagine that I have been given a contract on a person in game and I am told to eliminate them. Upon finding the target, instead of sneaking up behind him and stabbing a dagger into his back, I have to say some crap about how I need to kill him... just give up... yadda yadda yadda. Instead I would like to propose this new idea! This would require multiple peoples participation and agreement. An assassin is given a contract, somewhere on the forums is an assassin/target list. Where the target and the assassin(who was chosen to kill him) are listed. Then the chosen assassin is allowed to no rp kill the target. This is just an idea and you can shoot it down if you want or you can support it and help get it on the server. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akeron 55 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Will we be refunded plots? I'm not a donater because I don't have access to a credit card/paypal, but I still spent 64+ diamond blocks on a 200x150 plot. Would that plot be reaccessed? I have proof that it exist. It's region protection is 'Aloria'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 2232 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Will we be refunded plots? I'm not a donater because I don't have access to a credit card/paypal, but I still spent 64+ diamond blocks on a 200x150 plot. Would that plot be reaccessed? I have proof that it exist. It's region protection is 'Aloria'. Plots probably wont refunded to anyone except donators. If you bought land on this map, it wont be there for you in the next - it's make no rp sense if it was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akeron 55 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Plots probably wont refunded to anyone except donators. If you bought land on this map, it wont be there for you in the next - it's make no rp sense if it was. It was given to me by Enor. I gave him 64 diamond blocks, and I gave him my service as a body guard. In return, he gave me a deed to claim a specific plot of land. It might not be valid forever, but it should still be in effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 2232 Share Posted January 14, 2012 It was given to me by Enor. I gave him 64 diamond blocks, and I gave him my service as a body guard. In return, he gave me a deed to claim a specific plot of land. It might not be valid forever, but it should still be in effect. Then it wont carry over, gifted land is the same as purchased land - rights to it are lost at the new map. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.4e5370fc69f142d96a905e477cd5dd97.png)
Recommended Posts