I have had at least half a dozen instances where either myself or a group and I were griefed in such a manner, although I do try my best not to let it get to me or let a DM know if it was done in such a way. (Although, without knocking them, I've rarely seen anything come of that.)

However, actual in character confrontation can be good if done right, although try and resolve it quickly before more spawns pop up and murder everyone when their buffs wear off and they're sitting ducks. People who repeatedly go through the same area however, I can understand being PvPed out of the area if they won't go willingly. There's plenty of other areas that are of equal enough level to partake in.

_________________
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

>_> That rule has been in places since I started a couple years or so back.

Oh, so one of their people stayed behind? Okay that was asshattery on their part. I would have definitely reported that, because it's just being OOC dicks at that point

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

1. You should not have tried to take their grounds, even if they ignored your greeting. The rules are there for a reason.

2. If they called you names OOC, even if you broke the rules, you should have print screened that and sent it to the DMs.

3. If someone stayed behind to wait for a spawn to respawn you should have sceened that as well and sent it to the DMs, because there is a rule that states that if two parties are interested in the same hunting ground, the one who was there first has the right to clean the dungeon first, but after that, if the second party is still waiting for their turn, the 1st party must give them a run.. and so on. So one party is legally entitled to only 1 run at the time, if there are two or more parties interested in the same hunting ground.

_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Login: Narkudauman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ╬ Join the Magisterium Mortis ╬

Look what i found btw. There's a link to a set of "Core rules" down below that i have never seen before which is relevant to our discussion. In there is the "Rule" about camping; but it is actually worded differently. It says;



What also bothers me is the link to the "Core rules", a set of rules that seems to not have been updated in a LONG time and isn't on the "main rules of amia" topic.
Some of those rules seems to state the same thing, too. Is that Link perhaps outdated? Are those rules outdated?
Because if you look at this quote.


"Here" is a URL link to a topic that do not exist.

Why do i think these rules are outdated? Here's a prime example.

We all know the OOC restrictions has been lifted on a majority of the items. Deity rings anybody?



Edit - Honestly. That entire rule section is FILLED with broken links. I have spotted five (5) broken links already linking to topics that do not exist.

_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856

Dead's pretty right, though in all fairness I think you could also treat the parts not explicitly OOC as IC and have more than good reason for a nongood character to hunt down and murder them later on (say, when you're not outleveled like mad). I'll agree that I've seen people bullied out of hunting zones by a high-level, or basically just pushed around period because of that. Some respond to it by leaving, others respond to it by escalating the proverbial arms war and building a cornersneaking PvP murder build to hunt those people. 'S all in how you react to things, I suppose.

_________________
~Diana de Priondragas - Enigmatic druid, Arbiter, Counselor, Bear.
~Corinn Aldaine - Just a girl with a big heart... who can turn you into a newt.
~Vigdis Haldorsdottr - Walk softly and carry a big axe.

Ok, so I can enter a dungeon and stand at the entrance for as long as I like and no one else may use the dungeon? These people hadn't killed a single monster. At what point is a group of people unfairly claiming a dungeon without even doing anything in it? Obviously there is some threshold here.

Can I stand in a dungeon all day and no one may pass until I say I'm ready? Their only recourse is to PvP me and then leave after they kick my ass? That is stupid.

Honestly though, I just gave up on this server because its WAY too geared for "good" characters. How am I supposed to roleplay an evil character if any in character evil action is against the rules? Every evil action I took in game was met with OOC text. Every, single, time.

I'm playing an evil assassin so I start taking all the loot in a group and this is immediately met by OOC "you have to rotate loot." Uhh.. what? If its such a problem then leave the group or make me leave. Thats why I started doing it, to force an interaction of our characters on a level more than us grinding experience in the dungeon. I have no problem leaving if the group calls me an asshole, thats what I expected honestly, not a bunch of people referring me to the server rules.

Its MUCH more important to people here that I not disrupt the standard flow of exp/loot than it is that I roleplay an evil character who has no problem breaking up a group over some drama about loot. It doesn't even matter who gets the loot to me, I tried to roleplay being greedy and everyone cried about server rules and begins calling me an asshole OOC for disrupting their grind sessions.

I kept reading that there was almost no "evil" presence on the server anymore and its pretty obvious why that is. It seems like every time I acted evil here I was told OOC that I had to stop.

I had one really good evil roleplay experience here, outlined in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=70956

Guy claims dungeon, threatens PvP if I try to pass, we attack and get killed. I manipulate some people outside enter attempting to enter the dungeon and the guy inside gets his ass kicked. Everything was going really well.

Then what happens? I get OOC tells from him calling me a shitty player and insulting my equipment choices. Telling me he could see me when I was trying to hide and calling me an idiot for not using +hide rings. I've never even played NWN before, I have no idea what items exist in this game or where they are.

This pretty much sums up my whole experience here though. About 5 seconds of good evil roleplaying followed by a bunch of OOC complaints. No wonder the whole evil community here is practically non-existant.

Loot taking is an IC thing, people should be dealing with it IC, not complaining OOC'ly to you. As for the other things, it's best not to air them out in the open (but rather take screenshots of such incidents of poor behaviour and send it to the DM team so we can handle it) as people shouldn't be displaying such poor attitude to others.

_________________

Signature by Maryn! <3 I am also seen as DM Snuffles.

Really? I actually can take loot and force people to address it IC? If so then maybe I've just been listening to too many whiners who are making things up.

What am I supposed to do if someone has "claimed" a dungeon and is just standing at the entrance talking? Do they just get it for as long as they want or is there some reasonable period where they need to either start moving in or allow others to do so?

It's an IC thing, yes. Many people do default to dealing with 'acquiring' it OOC'ly, but that doesn't change that if someone feels like trying to take more than their fair share IC, they need to deal with it IC'ly.

And I imagine 'camping' hunting zones falls under the same ruling as camping spawn zones, but the consensus may be that it is otherwise. Some people may simply be role playing stuff out, before they head in - preparing tactics, taking breathers and the like, so talking outside could be considered valid i these cases (and more!)

_________________

Signature by Maryn! <3 I am also seen as DM Snuffles.

This seems so strange to me though considering how fast the respawn time is. If you're busy chatting, roleplaying, take a break, etc (and haven't even killed a single mob in the dungeon yet) why is it so horrible to let someone else go in front of you without it being considered against the rules?

You're already waiting obviously and in 3-5 minutes the mobs will be back again. It seems like the rule should be that if you're not actively engaging a dungeon, meaning you're standing at the entrance, then someone else can go ahead of you unless you opt to begin fighting.

If not, then I'm still waiting to understand what the rules are regarding standing at the entrance to a dungeon and roleplaying for an hour there and denying access to everyone else. How long do you have to wait for someone to move in before its considered "camping"?

That being said, I probably am not the only person who would find it incredibly stupid, if you took all the loot, then refused to give any of it back when confronted IC, and ultimately were killed for doing it, and the people who killed you still cannot reclaim the loot. That would just be stupid.

Keep in mind that while loot is IC,

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

That actually sounds like a really good rule adjustment. Suggest it in the Improving Amia forum?

It sounds like you were just dealing with some assholes. People like that almost invariably have poor builds (even though they think they don't) and squish delightfully. I've met my fair share of them as well, and usually I just laugh at them for a while and tell them to react IC like I will. The whiners are pretty transparent, even to a DM called in afterwards, and you shouldn't really have much trouble with them.

My bit of never-forget advice: Screenshot any PvP conflict extensively because eventually shit will go south and you'll need proof of what happened.

_________________
~Diana de Priondragas - Enigmatic druid, Arbiter, Counselor, Bear.
~Corinn Aldaine - Just a girl with a big heart... who can turn you into a newt.
~Vigdis Haldorsdottr - Walk softly and carry a big axe.

Yeah, I can understand that viewpoint. I'm not trying to rule lawyer anyone into getting items or dungeons. I just want to be able to roleplay an evil character. If I was killed for taking loot I would have no problem giving it back as looting a corpse is obviously easy and trying to claim the rules protect me from giving up loot would just be lame.

Rigela, thank you for providing some clarification. I'd still like to know how long is appropriate for someone to roleplay at the entrance of a dungeon though before its just considered camping and unfairly locking down a dungeon.

If people are just out there, shooting the breeze, then I can't see them really as having claimed it. If they are preparing to go on in, then they technically have grounds to say they have (but, as you say, if they are just lingering and not going in - I would consider classing it as camping) I can't really give a time frame though, unfortunately.

It is a bit iffy, really, with what is allowed/accepted.

_________________

Signature by Maryn! <3 I am also seen as DM Snuffles.

Give them a few minutes. See what they're doing/emoting/etc. It'll give you an idea whether they're preparing or whether they're just there, shooting the breeze or whatever. Don't be in a rush, and that way if you need to you can give them an OOC prod and say "Hey, we're here too, do you mind if we go ahead, or could you guys get going" if you need to, and they're not responding ICly.

_________________


Aly'dra Zau'ana: Priestessish Of Eilistraee
Danika Nefzen: Druid of the Earthmother
Delia Am'Anodel: Paladin of Torm

I'm quite disappointing in the majority of responses found on the first page of this thread, now that I've had the opportunity to "read up", and how quickly things degenerated. Conversely I'm also quite happy with how the second page has progressed, pointing out some issues and addressing some of them in a civil manner, rather than berating each other in entirely unnecessary and borderline unacceptable ways as was done on page one.

I do what I do as a Dev because I have hope that the server is a generally good place (despite its faults) and that we have generally good people that populate it (despite some of their faults). Some of what I read however didn't exactly help me to "keep the faith" as it were, especially being a person naturally inclined towards cynicism (one of my own many faults).

People will always bitch when they don't win, whatever the rules are. They might not do it publicly, or in any spectacular way, they might just internalize it, steaming away, or they might even just shout, "Dammit," and move on. Whatever the case, it's a general human trait. Rules will never keep people from bitching, but neither will the absence of rules; someone will still lose and someone will still bitch. What the rules are there for, are to keep the worst cases at bay, and to enable us (the staff) to deal with those cases, to try to limit their frequency and their impact on the server and on the players here.

Lets say we didn't have the rules. Poof. Gone. And someone goes around killing the same person all day, or consistently runs ahead of people and kill steals or whatever the case may be. There's no rules against it, so when we (the staff) come to deal with this person, we have no clear reasoning behind it beyond "we don't like what this person is doing." I've played on servers like that and I know how daunting that can become, how toxic.

I've seen some people post in the past, or heard them say in the past, and I'm sure it's still said by some people to this day, that the staff here are authoritarian or make rulings on a whim, ban people to get their rocks off, whatever. Imagine how much more prevalent that perception would be if we had no clearly defined (see below note) rules by which to act on? And when the general populace of a server begins to lose faith/trust in its staff, the people who are supposed to be helping them and even (in a business sense) serving them, well that's when the proverbial really starts hitting the fan.

As for the "note", yes, or rules aren't the most clearly defined in their current incarnation. I won't say anything more on that because it's already been stated that we're attempting to address this, but I knew if I didn't add this little note someone would point it out for me. Covering my own ass here.

So as nice as it would be to be able to stay "true to RP" at all times, and never have any OOC rules, it's simply not the slightest bit practical in an environment like the one that exists here. Less rules, more clearly defined rules, more clearly defined punishments for first/second/third/etc infractions? Absolutely. But the stability of an environment such as this, with so many different people/ideologies/values/wants/needs/etc. dictates a certain level of rules be in place to maintain a (generally) "peaceful coexistence".

There is no utopia, even though we try our hardest. And the staff is not standing idly by; we're no more pleased to be hit with miles of screenshots and combat logs and "he said, she said" than you are to compile the data or deal with the OOC IG. We'd much rather be IG running events or even tending to requests, and I'm sure that's where you'd rather have us too.

The question I want each of you to ask yourselves (you don't even necessarily have to post, just ask yourselves, introspection is good) is what can you as a player do to help with whatever issues you perceive exist in "the system"? No, the onus isn't all on you, it's on the staff as well, obviously. But we can't fix things alone.

So what can you do?

Unfortunately, like you said,





I must say, that on the topic of death, and PvP rules, there is never going to be a universal agreement. But there are several solutions that are better (for everyone, whether they realize it or not) solutions for roleplaying health of the server as a whole. I've already done my part, and given plenty of suggestions through plenty of threads, which obviously have so many other people just like me done the exact same thing.

When you guys made the balance changes, you didn't ask everyone what they thought, you just did it. I certainly have several disagreements (here's to hoping they get fixed in the future so it can be even better) with alot of what's happened but at least overall it's better than how it was before. Why don't you just do it again? Do what seems like the logical choice because what's there right now isn't working, and the community will never make up their minds anyways.

That's how I can help.

Consistency.

That's the only word we need when it comes to rules and punishments.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

kill them give them a ooc raise and leave

_________________
-Ja'acira Arrows'R'Us
-Balorin Wolfhammer- A dwarf so old he remember when the Beer stein was invented
Saisha Jai'diem Knight of bahamut, and abit of a looker

^
|

World's smallest facepalm

=============================================================

Back in the land of contribution:

@foerum

Here is what I'd do: If someone is afk (nonresponsive, non-RPing) for more than 10 minutes in a dungeon, then I'd go ahead and do the run. If he meanwhile catches up: 1) merge the party. 2) let him finish the dungeon. 3) ask him to let you finish the dungeon.

Everything that is IC should be sorted out IC. If they bitch about you taking their loot OOC, kindly tell them to adress it IC. Then resolve the situation IC. If they keep bitching OOC, call a DM or screenshot it.

@Glim

If I got right what Needled said then I must agree. Consistency, especially in punishments. Same breaking of the rule should be met with the same kind of penalty, regardless of the player (both violator and the violated). Everyone should be equal before the rules of Amia, and especially before the tribunal. Which means that punishments should be defined and not arbitrary.

_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Login: Narkudauman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ╬ Join the Magisterium Mortis ╬

Unnecessary and not in the realm of keeping it civil. In fact I'll point out that this section of quote is more "lacking" in contribution than what it is referencing, since Kran was providing another perspective, whereas you are just berating her for answering the OP. Please don't.


And yes, I agree completely as well.

I obviously failed to see the contribution in saying something that has nothing to do with PvP rules or anything that is in a remote connection with RP, especially since it is addressed to a new player that is obviously still struggling to get a hold of the server rules. So forgive me if I am harsh when standing in the opposition of someone advising a new player to "kill, raise and leave". I always will be standing in the opposition of PvP happy people. Thus, my contribution to that is: do not do that. RP, honor the PvP rules, and again RP. No need to kill anyone, no need to leave, unless the RP itself dictates such.

_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Login: Narkudauman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ╬ Join the Magisterium Mortis ╬

Weeelllll.... i shouldn't, but i will.

If we break down kraniums statement we can probably understand it better. She/he is a fabulous player and keeps her cool whilst ooc drama ensures around, i can attest to this.
I think she ment pretty much what i said - "Kill them IC and stay IC" though she is actually the nice player to offer an ooc raise.

I wouldn't. The 'System' will raise you in 5 minutes anyway.


@Glim - You are simply fabulous. And yes you sre correct in your assumptions. I would definitely point it out if you did not mention the "Note"

_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856

I'm not sure I know what means kill them IC? Is there a way to kill them OOC?
Or by kill them IC you mean follow the PvP rules (which are completely OOC)?

_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Login: Narkudauman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ╬ Join the Magisterium Mortis ╬

There is but it's highly illegal.

_________________
@Thanatopsis#6293

I should elaborate - "Kill them Ic" = Kill them Ic with an Ic reason. I thought it was crystal clear. If you kill them out of ooc spite. . . Now that would probably be classified baaaad...

_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856

Lmao...

You guys are killing me.

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

I just hope that whatever happens, there are no more arbitary rules like.. "oh, you can't PvP someone based on alignment.. but you can PvP them if they have undead out."

Seems very toppled on the good side. Evil people can't kill people for being paladins, even though that's exactly what some evil people probably would do. Anyways, consistency.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

Cut the random visuals please Naivatkal.


That always struck me as a bit odd as well.

"You have an undead out, Imma keel you!"

"You have an angel out... but I can't do anything. Sadface."

I agree. Consistency.

I think the reason for it being that way, though, is that Paladins are compelled to Do Something About It. They can't really just walk away. Palemasters aren't required to Do Something About It in regards to there being a celestial summon out. Neither are Blackguards, even, although they'd be the best one to make a I Must Do This case for. They can all just walk away, if they want, without having to risk losing their class abilities and have to do a quest to get them back. Paladins, as far as I am aware, cannot turn a blind eye.

It's supposed to be harder to play Good because you have less options, because there are so many Right Things you can do. Most Evil can do whatever it likes, by and large. That seems to be getting 'favored' in the PvP rules by the examples of what it okay reasoning for PvP being largely Good-biased.

It's not toppled on either side. The Player still has to give the other player an OOC out, weather it be letting them run away or asking them to remove their summon, if the evil-sided player refuses both those outs, that's when PvP is done.

Evil characters can get away with so much more than a good character can. Your Blackguard of Cyric could purchase something from my Paladin of Torm (my Paladin is ignorant of the other characters alignment/faith, of course) and my Paladin would still get hit with the fall, and the Cyricists gets nothing. So how is it toppled towards the good, if you get more freedom in what you can do?

_________________
Aoth Nathandem - Wizard of house Tholaunt and chosen of Ma'at.

We are talking about PvP here. Please, please do not turn this into another mindless, pointless and pathetic "Evil's OP" thread.

What Needled said is related to PvP. What 666 said is not.

And just a small add, Needled is right. As another example I will name the assassination rule. "You must let your target know you will perform an assassination on them."

Hysterical. And here I thought assassins depends on a moment of surpise.

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

I think I forgot to quote something in my previous post, but I was merely responding to the consistency of reasoning behind PvP between good and evil alignments. And how bad guys do get a lot more freedom with how they act, unlike good guys. It's indirectly on-topic, if you think about it.

_________________
Aoth Nathandem - Wizard of house Tholaunt and chosen of Ma'at.

Please quote the full rule if you are trying to make a point:

Ergo, have a DM supervise. They can even change your character's name and bio so it's something completely anonymous. If no DM is available and you don't want to tell the player, wait until a DM is around.

Alternatively my thought is to tell the player, however do not tell them the day it will happen or what character it will be. Go the extra mile and also send the message either via forum or using a different logged in character. It's not exactly like complete surprise, but it works nearly the same since they won't know when to expect it. Hell you can even have your assassin moved to a different account and you can let them know via your main. Lots of ways to still make it surprising.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

But why should I?

With a bullet-proof RP reason, why should I not be allowed to perform an assassination. The whole class is literally killed by this one rule.

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

1. Screenshot the assassination order
2. Log in with an anonymous account and inform the player
3. Screenshot that as well
4. Do the hit when the time is right

_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Login: Narkudauman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ╬ Join the Magisterium Mortis ╬

Exactly what I was thinking to do should I ever get a contract. I mean, to the letter. I was just unsure if it would be kosher.

Bravo, good sir.

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

*stares*

That's exactly what I said, except about the screenshot part. Figured that was obvious (since no other way to have proof of it). I've a feeling you stopped at 'Ergo, have a DM supervise.' -_-

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

I've been assassinated once, and I still dunno who did it or who ordered it! It was fun...the only mistake the person made is they did it in a very public place in front of a lot of NPC witnesses, so I was raised almost immediately after. But still it was fun.

In that case though they had a DM supervising and I had literally no warning, I found out afterward the player had been stalking me for several hours before even attacking me.

_________________
Sir Taelar Ardelyn of Wiltun
Winner of the Razor Tongued Award 2015!

Kira "Penny" Sigers
Better than Boulderdash!

*pat pat*

I just like doing the 1. 2. 3. 4. thing. I almost wrote step 5. ??? and step 6. Profit

_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Login: Narkudauman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ╬ Join the Magisterium Mortis ╬

Okay, okay... you're right, but Dead's 1.2.3 thing was just like being served on a silver platter.

EDIT: Omg... ninja'd much.

_________________
Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem*
Alex - Life is adventure or nothing!
Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex.
=========
Obsidian (inactive)

I hate you all! *cries!*

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

The point is, why does my character suddenly need to turn a blind eye to there being a celestial on prime when your character can't turn a blind eye to there being an undead? One can argue that it's the exact same thing, only in opposite roles. Don't try to use the paladin code, because as an evil player, you can simply make up your own code too. (I.e.) I want to kill every paladin and their celestial that I see, because ... x, y, and z. Furthermore, paladins are already the most powerful class in the game, in both PvP and PvM (maybe minus shifters right now.. since they're broken lol) and if anything, it seems odd to me that a "good" PC gets explicit rights to kill someone based on the summon they have out when the evil PC cannot kill them for the summon they have out. 1:1. Consistency. Don't call it consistent, if you're going to be like "Yeah, I want consistency, but I still think good should be able to initiate PvP with evil but in the exact same scenario, evil can't do it to good." I don't care which way you try to explain that through RP, it's lopsided, and any evil can explain their reasoning to not turn a blind eye through the antithesis roleplay.

Also, please don't bring up how the buying loot and using loot is lopsided in favor of evil. That just makes me laugh. Look at the deity rings of Torm, and Tyr, which each have over 3 powers, and look at the fact that evil like myself are banned from every major city and cannot trade with the majority of people simply because I'm evil. Note I'm not complaining about it (though the deity ring example has always mystified me), I'm just simply expressing just how shortsighted a comment like that really is.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

If I may inquire, who is telling you that you can notkill X character because they have a good-aligned summon?

_________________
Aoth Nathandem - Wizard of house Tholaunt and chosen of Ma'at.

The PvP rules.

_________________

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Login: Narkudauman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ╬ Join the Magisterium Mortis ╬

The DM that gets on and bans her.

_________________

THREE

The rules say you can PvP based on summon, so strictly speaking you could PvP someone for having a celestial out. The issue is, you don't really have any setting-enforced imperatives to do so, which might result in rule-murkyness or confusion and arguments etc. I'm confident a DM would rule it as fine, though.

Nevertheless, this is a problem of the setting's bias for good vs evil, not strictly a problem with the rules.

_________________
@Thanatopsis#6293

And since the rules are likely being revised, then it would make sense to get the bias taken care of on the rule level.

Furthermore, is the rule quote. It's ambiguous, but I'm sure if you attacked someone for having a celestial, you'd be called a griefer, whereas the opposite isn't true.

_________________
a.k.a. Audrey Zinata

That's neither feasible nor possible though, pretty much for the reasons Letum explained; evil characters don't have a setting-enforced obligation to take down certain summons save for extreme cases.

But yes I do agree that the wording could use a bit less of a bias against evil in general, since it is rather a problem.

_________________
@Thanatopsis#6293

I'd say that yoinking a creature made of pure Good from her home and work and asking her to protect your irrelevant, mortal self is disrespectful enough that even evil characters would protest.