Thu Dec 12 11:16:31 2013

At 11 o'clock AM, Day of Deception, 16th of the Month of the Long Shadows
on the Theran calendar Saguntius perished, never to return.

Race:	human
Class:	anti-paladin
Level:	50
Alignment:	Evil
Ethos:	Orderly
Cabal:	EMPIRE, the Empire
Age:	43
Hours:	207

Despite the terribly rough start we had together IC, I grew to really like Saguntius over time, and we had a lot of fun. Thanks for the chats, information and... apologies. LOL. :P

GLWYN

I can't say for certain that I didn't type vault eum, having just typed group eum. Not that I realised what had happened until some time afterward, and I was possibly lucky that it's a skill that sometimes hits allies. Hence I was more than usually apologetic on that occasion.

Hang in there, given the deletions that are going on you're one of the last things Empire still has going for it

Ha! I believe that Vault just has the chance to miss in general, so I didn't assume that it was a player error so much as just a fail. If I wasn't there, you might have just landed on the ground... BUT for Eurm it was a big deal, so I had to make it one IC. To be truthful, I'm not sure that the two of us would have become that close and honest with each other if that hadn't happened when we first met. It was great to have you as Dread Lord, and I hope you give Empire another shot soon.

Thanks for the kind words.

Ye had the' right balance of threatening evil widout lookin ridiculous, wid yer taunt that ye'd put down a Squire everytime I took th' Orb that ye managed to follow through wid until hero. Skillfully played an' well done. Enjoyed th' fightin.

Ishtugar has a problem with the black sect, so I didn't actively
sought you out, but I think we had a reasonably professional relationship.

I liked that you tried to take the reigns in an imperial way.
You did seem to struggle a bit when above 40. My best advice would be
to focus on other aspects of the game. Let your next character
have a lisp and a fear of open spaces as well as a vested interest
in young arial warriors of either sex.

Obviously there is a very real incentive with an ap to go out and find suitable or less suitable PKs all the time. However, that may lead to a focus that ultimately lessens your enjoyment.

If you weren't so set on the AP class I would suggest trying playing a fortress or battle character and try to enhance the inherent comradie (spelling?) of those cabals. From your cabal comments you seem to like those parts of the game. Why not seek them out?

Best of luck to you, and I hope you will be back soon. AP or no AP.

Wanting to take charge and trying to be an effective leader was part of my role, though I don't think it ever made it to a role entry - most of my character traits usually don't. The character was supposed to be arrogant and self assured (more so than I was as a player) which got eroded when I started losing, rather than winning PK's, which led to greater focus on trying to marshall the strength of the Empire instead of going it alone (sphere Order after all).

Ishtugar was great to have around for that. I didn't realise you had a problem with the black sect until you told me, but looking back it does explain one or two things.

I have said it in Aqa's death thread, but I should say it here too.
I (Both the char and the player) had much respect for you Saguntius, and I had many fun fighting/interacting with you.

GLWYN

p.s. Saccing an AP's weapon, is not what you should do to an ENEMY. It is what you should do to an OP enemy. and Saguntius was not one for Aqa at all. And You never do kill an enemy or it's familiar for their con death. You do it for the fun of PK. Even if I have an OP AP enemy, I would never try to con kill them by saccing the weapon when they unghost. I might kill a familiar to weaken a conjurer, so I can kill them, but if I know that I can kill them directly, I never kill their familiar for the con kill, either.
Just think that you are an AP (maybe not a full vet) and have gathered some souls. How you feel when they full loot, sac weapon, multi-kill you by saccing weapon when you unghost? Do not try to ruin others' fun.

I always thought sac'ing a weapon gave you a double death - which is why I would do it. To con kill you. If you want to keep it, don't die. I have 0 tolerance for letting anyone in empire get strong.

Good job in the end. You figured out how to stop me from killing you. You managed to live, not die horrific, twisted, gruesome deaths. Granted, you had a pet invoker, and healer, and dispeller, but still.

All IC responses aside. I've fought _all_ of your previous A-P's and this one is by far, head and shoulders above the rest. Keep killing it!

Stay below 38 until you distend. Then organize a way in game to power rank to hero. Usually 1AM-7AM EST is best.

GLYWN!!!

Mirozah

You have to wait for the a-p to unghost for them to take any damage. It's about an eviscerate for a 0 charge weapon and that increases the more charges that are inside. By the time I was in your range I never got another weapon worth sacrificing for damage. You weren't on my list of people who I felt were deserving of returning to an empty corpse, but I sure as hell would have taken that OP staff.

There was no pet invoker? Healer, sure, and occassionally a shifter to try dispel. You posed the same problem as most heroes in that it was exceptionally difficult to land anything at all on you. In that battle on Kiadanah I think you resisted more than ten attempts at curse, but what really baffled me was the way you resisted countless attempts to land plague when we were in the Underdark with 16 con, and it landed on me every time you volleyed. Since I'm quite sure you hadn't done the quest to get resist disease it makes me wonder whether it really is a con check or if saves come into play there as well.

Transmuters are actually one class that I'm usually fairly confident fighting against since bloodlust, 3rd attack, fire control and spine of the akragaka more or less turns the usual advantage that haste gives in melee on its head. No idea what you were thinking accelerating me. Transmuters that have attempted neuro spam on my previous A-P's have typically gotten nowhere, disruption seems to do more damage than iceball given equal protections and that's usually the better option, but you seemed to get some mileage out of it. I was unusually skittish about fighting you given the absurd amounts of hp I knew you had from seeing logs and bailed on fights I might actually have been winning.

We only ever fought after the character had gone to crap, though. I had more hp and damroll at level 38 than I did at level 50.

I, in fact, did complete the quest.

I accelerated you for a very specific reason. One of which I never got around to finishing because you made me deaf.

Guess you will have to find out later.

As for our bouts, I think we went 4-0? 5-0?

Wasn't counting for individuals by that point, though I remember at least two of the kills were ganks. Both of which I should have seen coming.

Fairly impressed that you did the quest for reasons I won't go into here, which I may or may not be mistaken about.

>I always thought sac'ing a weapon gave you a double death -
>which is why I would do it. To con kill you.


That is seriously douchey.

That is some serious player hate going on there. Swings and roundabouts mate; swings and roundabouts.

Isn't that the point? Killing your enemy takes 1/3 con. The point of killing your enemy, is to KILL them.

This is not Hello Kitty: Islands of Adventure.

I am not exploiting anything here. Just like killing someone familiar, then killing the conjurer, is a viable tactic. 2/3 Con.

Killing an AP, then Saccing their Weapon used to be 2/3 con. If you don't want to eat the extra death, don't make an unholy weapon. It's the balance to the power.

What am I missing here. Mirozah *IS* an evil conniving bitch, right? Isn't that what I'm supposed to be?

Is why a 0 charge sacrifice hits for Eviscerate. Probably need at least 20 for a second kill.

Or - Save it for when you just get away. Like an unholy call lightning. n/t

Sure, that's kind of evilish... But an unholy weapon could have a better RP use than doing a tiny to moderate amount of damage to its former owner.

At the end of the day, the decision to drop 1.; sac 1. on an unholy instead of trying to do something interesting with it is a lazy OOC motivated option. ICly, that weapon is leverage with the AP, your god, their god and a littany of other characters.

That said, a 0 charge weapon is utterly worthless and sacrificing it is usually just a kick in the nuts for no good reason.

So you have no qualms about following around a ghost in duo after you've killed him (esp a newbie stomp) in order to smoke him again? It is the exact same thing, only you don't have to even put in that leg work.

If you want to kill my familiar in order to do the damage to kill me, go for it, since it gets that first PK on me. You got one over on me and I respect that, even if it cost me 2/3 con.

Now if you have me in a locked norecall room with 2 allies and I have nothing, guaranteed to die, and you instead focus on killing my familiar just to take 2/3 con, that is being a douche.

I've always interpreted the ability to kill an AP twice with their weapon as an unfortunate side effect of the intent to be able to kill them the first time by disarming their weapon and saccing it. This happened with Gzurweeg.

The bottom line is there are certain concessions we make in regards to behavior that might not be ideal-world-rp, but we do them so that the game is fun for everyone. Yeah, your paladin might want that scion conjurer gone forever, but you don't follow him around after he unghosts if he's a total newb and keep smoking him over and over until he is out of con. You also don't drop the full sac on everyone you kill. I don't understand how this isn't clearly the same thing to you.

All that being said.

I sac'ed the guys weapon once, maybe twice.

I don't make a habit of full sac'ing someone.

Maybe in the last 20 years of playing. Once, twice.

Leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

How do I know you dont have 1 charge? Id have to loot it to check, then the weapon is now in my possession. And it's unholy bless'd... which means I do not return it therefor I sacrifice. It's like giving the imperial codex back to an imperial you kill. It's their source of power and hope.

The difference between animist wood-elf Fred and sagnatius is that every PK with an unholy gets him more power. Even if not collected in a the form of many charges at one time collectively. In the long term it creates controls, which is obtained individually. Its our job in CF to stop cabdru before cabdru becomes cabdru.

Hey old buddy,

I think you are leaving out part of the equation. While I agree that an AP having his weapon sacc'd is par for the course...if you're talking about killing the SAME (arguably newish) AP in a 24-48 hr period (or maybe even 3 times in that period) Are you really gonna sac his unholy every time thinking you are preventing a Cabdru?

I'm not, because I know damn well that if I am able to dominate an AP like that...they likely aren't going buck-crazy getting charges...Also given the pbase if you sac'd his unholy 48 hrs ago..do you really need to do it 'again'

I think that is why people are calling Mirozah out on this one, and I kinda have to agree with them.

While mostly, as you know I support full looting just like you do.

-Sarien

She returned two 0 charge unholies. Several other people did make a habit of sacrificing every weapon in the inventory every time even when it was obvious I didn't have charges, but Mirozah actually wasn't one of them.

Excellent - thank you for clearing that up.


That having been said, I think my point is still the same. given the reduction in pbase you will end up killing the same folks. I don't think its necessary to sac AP weap every time I kill such said AP.

This discussion is not about saccing a weapon.

This discussion is about intentionally running people out of con. The means being used is by saccing the weapon. The effectiveness of such is not on the table.

Intentionally running people out of con is douchey. Killing them is not.

nt

Anyone that you *could* do that to, you'd be a real jerk for actually doing that to. You have to be all kinds of bad to let someone kill you 30+ times.

... The reason to why I played CF was to have fun, and to make others have fun. I've played plenty of evils, and sure, I'm rarely super evil, but when I do bitchy evil things, I try to think how that'll affect my fellow CFers gameplay. It's been said a thousand times: You can be evil without being a ####.

Being a #### is all about the player, nothing about RP or the being in character.


(And never since I've started playing CF in the late 90s has saccing an AP weapon taken 1/3 of a con as far as I know.)

"Isn't that the point? Killing your enemy takes 1/3 con. The point of killing your enemy, is to KILL them.

This is not Hello Kitty: Islands of Adventure."

You're right, Hello Kitty is way more popular than this game. Usually if I dominate someone pretty conclusively I find a way to forget to take their stuff.

Unless they talk a ton of smack.

Other people can play however they want but for me killing them is usually the objective, not con killing them or looting their pies.

Now what's great about this game though is, when people do run off with their mouth, you can really make it hurt...but you're not obligated to all the time.

Seemed like one of the pillars of continuity for the empire, I was curious how things might have played out down the road between us, especially after todays adventure.

Good luck with the next AP.