You guys imm one person who was a well known gearwhore then slap a negative title on someone else who is, while dressed well, pretty free with handing out what she gets to other people. I'm pretty irritated about the title one of my cabalmates was branded with today.

It's like the level sitting thing. Some of you say there's nothing wrong with it, then others slap negative titles on people for doing it. Whats the deal? Is it BAD to actively seek out good gear now all of a sudden or what? I think whoever did it is pretty lame.

Sorry, I wasn't on at all yesterday so I have no direct knowledge of what happened, nor do I know any of the players involved, but this thread is so bad I have to chime in. If I understand what happened then someone got a title. (If this is wrong, then ignore the rest below.)

The only thing a title does is change the reputation of a character. Sometimes this is deserved, sometimes it isn't. In real life this happens too. For some reason instead of dealing with the problem in character, someone decided to take it out of character. I don't get it. Here you have a golden opportunity to roleplay your way through the mess of having your reputation sullied and you abandon that chance. You could have hired bards to write tales of how you were other than whatever the title suggested you were. You could have talked to Heralds about it to change your reputation. You could have gone to your god or some specific god that you felt could address this aspect of your reputation. If it was something about ganging, go to an honor god for instance.

This is roughly why I argued against having any OOC forums in the past and why I rarely if ever participate in them. Why go through the actual roleplaying in game when you can just turn things into a pissing match in an ooc forum?

Halistanis - I stand by you. I think title was undeserved.
However I agree with Daevryn regarding you as a leader bearing responsibility of actions of people under your command.

Neikulous - Do you realize some enemy none-heroes can only harm you? And not Halistanis or Dacob?
So this is why they target you. So it was not 4vs3 but 2 separate battles.
Numero Uno: Haratzi vs. Neikulous, Halistanis and Dacob(3vs1). Plus associated wolves and Jotunblot healing.
Numero Dos: Neikulous vs. Orc+Imperial shaman+who else?

Daevryn - I am not in position to critisize immortals.
I just say you could have handled this incident way better. And not turning it into forum drama.

>A mad dash to loot the corpse of an out of range person who died to a bad teleport.

May I suggest REMOVING ability to locate PC corpses from general 'locate object'?
I am cool with gravesight as niche ability.

My $0.02,

-=NNNick=-

I see the root of the problem now. Our views of how Outlanders should be run differ too much, and we won't find agreement most probably.

As for your answers

1) Who cares who else you have or haven't ganged?
I do. But you don't, obviously.
Read the log. If you think it was a gang, we have different definitions of gangs. In addition, Haratzi admitted he didn't know there was invoker there at all, doesn't matter really but just FYI.

2) A cabal leader, even in Outlander, has some measure of control of the people below them, especially people they can uninduct if they choose. You certainly bear some responsibility for what they do in your sight.

Here is the deal for you. If you didn't get it already.
I am NOT going to order any Outlander of any branch to stop doing anything if he is not directly breaking the will of Ancients. Period.
We are Outlanders, we are not Empire. I lead by example and requests. I do not order people around, and I will never do.
Also, we are chaotic and hardly honorable (unless very specific role is involved). Looting is not forbidden. I asked to return things which Nameless One didn't need, and he agreed. Haratzi logged off till that time. Too bad.

You can title me whatever you wish. I won't change my RP and my view of Outlanders.

3) Put yourself in the position of either of the characters/players in question. Would you feel wronged? I sure as hell would in both cases -- or at least, I'd feel like you exhibited behavior that you should not.

I saw this Out-Of-Pk assassin looting Outlanders. A couple of times. Taking two items from his corpse in return is hardly something I will be ashamed of.
On a side note, why don't we title each lowbie who loots EVERYTHING from fallen hero? Food for thoughts.
And again, if you find place in my role or RP where it is said I am honorable knight... Oh well.

4) I don't think I'm talking about the same mob(s) you are. If a (especially non-evil) Outlander killing natural animals in order to gear isn't questionable, clearly we're at an impasse.

Dear god! There was not choice but to kill those animals there. They are agressive and you CANNOT flee from them. At all. Can you understand it? Agressive and you cannot flee. Should I repeat one more time?
In addition, none of us knew they are going to strike.
In accordance to your logic Outlander when in such situation should remove weapons and let himself be killed? *dismay*
Again, I guess we have different views of Outlanders.
And again, why don't we title each Outlander who is ranking on owlbears then?

In general, I already recieved a number of in-game tells from people who said in one way or another that this title is BS. And many of them were those who don't have any reasons to like me. Those I killed at one point or another.
Their opinion is of greater value to me then opinion of some Imm who had a bad day and decided to be an a***. End of story.

Thank you for attention.

Stop trying to make a martyr out of yourself. You're only making the situation worse for your character. You should have just kept your mouth shut. Now I cannot look at your character without feeling some sort of OOC derision and that ruins it for me. So I'll just avoid you from now on.

Largely to prevent you from setting the cryfest record. Grow up.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

It can easily change in the near future. It shouldn't affect your roleplay either.

I can't even begin to respond to this without outing you and, basically, calling you five different kinds of ignorant and/or stupid, so I'm just not going to.

Whatever.

Your irrational, almost obsessive hatred of another player is just going to keep you from seeing the reason of it.

I've pissed in your wind enough. I'm not in the mood for giving you ten posts that aren't going to persuade you anyway today.

I ask for guidelines by which we can consider ourselves to be a BAD levelsitter or BAD gatherer of equipment. You tell me I'm hating on someone. I wasn't being irrational, I wasn't being insulting, I wasn't calling anyone out. At all. I was asking for what is supposed to be too much so people can have some sort of standard.

>Your irrational, almost obsessive hatred of another player is
>just going to keep you from seeing the reason of it.
>
>I've pissed in your wind enough. I'm not in the mood for
>giving you ten posts that aren't going to persuade you anyway
>today.

Well, for the record, I'm not sure if this exists or not. But it would be cool if backstage somewhere there was a guideline as to what constitutes as "gear-whorey" and what does not. Or whether some rank sitting conjurer/druid should get a title, or whether they should not. It just seems sorta arbitrary. One person's actions get punished, another defended and it pretty much all boils down to which imm is observing and what their personal opinions on the subject are.

It'd be equally cool if that guideline could get formalized somewhat and put somewhere. Sorta like a paladin's code only not as strict. Specifically for alignment issues and OOC mechanics issues.

My biggest problem is consistency and honestly not knowing what is wrong or kosher, since opinions tend to flip flop over time. Like if I rolled a rank sitting shaman tomorrow, would I get titled/unempowered or left alone? I have no idea and probably it would depend on cabal/imm involved, and what their personal opinion is. That really makes it difficult for me as a player to know whats acceptable and whats not. I think many of us don't feel like ranking all the time and would like good gear to PK with and etc, but we don't gear-whore/ranksit because we're afraid of some invisible hand beating us or think someone's going to reward us for not doing that. Unfortunately, the entire process seems dependant on blind luck.

>Well, for the record, I'm not sure if this exists or not. But
>it would be cool if backstage somewhere there was a guideline
>as to what constitutes as "gear-whorey" and what does not. Or
>whether some rank sitting conjurer/druid should get a title,
>or whether they should not. It just seems sorta arbitrary. One
>person's actions get punished, another defended and it pretty
>much all boils down to which imm is observing and what their
>personal opinions on the subject are.

In this case the title was merited by a sequence of specific actions, including:

1) A bunch of complaining that single members of enemy cabals whose items were held wouldn't come and fight (despite one such character in range making constant, if not stupid enough to result in death, attempts).

2) Over-the-top ganging of a different such character who made an attempt, followed by looting 100% of that character's items. Food, stuff no one wanted, everything.

3) RP with other characters primarily involving what good gear other people had and how much we wanted it.

4) A mad dash (there's more here, but I don't really want to get into it) to loot the corpse of an out of range person who died to a bad teleport.

About half an hour later we noticed the title and prayed about it; unfortunately, at this time we were

5) Killing mobs people in our cabal (at the very least, of this alignment) shouldn't be killing in the quest for gear. (This also is slightly complicated and I don't want to get into it in greater depth.)

I don't know. How do you write guidelines for that?

Would be pretty easy.

1) As a neutral, either you are ambivalent to things or you have a cause which is not either good or evil. In the latter scenario, that cause should be the focus of your character. If its not related to wealth or objects, those should not become the focus of your character. Such examples of bad behavior include :

a) A druid making a mad dash to loot an out of range person's gear from a mob kill.
b) A cloud ranger talking for hours and hours about what sort of nice gear they'd like to get.
c) A gnome invoker plotting with others to try to assassinate someone for a wand they have.

2) You should not kill good NPCs as a good-aligned person if it can be avoided and never just to get items or money.

Anyway, I'm just saying. People have done what Halistanis has done (loot out of range people, gear whore to the 50th degree around kuo-toa/silent/etc all day long while cabal is being raided, make repeated mad dashes for stoneform after a reboot, etc) and not gotten titled. I don't disagree with the title. Its just that tons of people have also played the "I'm a neutral assassin, its cool for me to kill anyone and everyone I can find in case they have some money on them" and never been bothered about it. Ideally, in both cases, you'd be punished.

>2) Over-the-top ganging of a different such character who
>made an attempt, followed by looting 100% of that character's
>items. Food, stuff no one wanted, everything.


I'll agree 100% that the full loot was kind of lame. Not disputing that in the least. However I'm not sure there is any such thing as an over-the-top gang of a fully wanded invoker who is trying to raid your cabal. I just felt this should be pointed out.

I'm not going to get into any of the rest, because for the most part I think it was fairly accurate. I just don't think it was any worse than anything else anyone else has done, which was my original point.

>I'll agree 100% that the full loot was kind of lame. Not
>disputing that in the least. However I'm not sure there is any
>such thing as an over-the-top gang of a fully wanded invoker
>who is trying to raid your cabal. I just felt this should be
>pointed out.

I wouldn't call trying to get your item back raiding a cabal, but that's really semantics.

I'd probably agree with you, except, invoker on the other side. What should have been his most crushing spells in that fight did 0 damage. Frankly, I have to respect the balls on invoker who'd even try to fight 3 people (one with insect swarm) when one on the other side is also an invoker. I think that's actually one of the worst kinds of fights anyone can get into.

I have to look at situations like that and ask (not you specifically)... do you want to only fight massive gangs? Because no one rational is going to take the least risk they might die in fighting you if you treat your enemies that way. If I, IC, see something like that and then later have to fight one of those characters, and I think I can take them... I'm rounding up some people to gang them just to make sure, because I know what I'm not even getting my pies back if I'm wrong.

>I wouldn't call trying to get your item back raiding a cabal,
>but that's really semantics.

Yeah it is. Potato tomato.

>I'd probably agree with you, except, invoker on the other
>side. What should have been his most crushing spells in that
>fight did 0 damage. Frankly, I have to respect the balls on
>invoker who'd even try to fight 3 people (one with insect
>swarm) when one on the other side is also an invoker. I think
>that's actually one of the worst kinds of fights anyone can
>get into.

The thing is, I think he saw how many levels he had on me and basically discounted my ability completely, which was clearly a mistake. Also in retrospect the person who got the title wasn't even the one who looted, and the invoker wasn't alone. There were 4 other people in my range on the opposing side in that fight. I killed one, ran one off, and was summoned to the other two after the invoker died. Sure the invoker was the focus of the defenders, but thats just good tactics. We had 5 hostile characters coming to attack us. The invoker just happened to get seperated from the others. it wasn't some massive 5 on 1 gank, it was 5 people coming to raid against 3 defenders in range. The invoker was singled out because he was up in the forefront.

>
>I have to look at situations like that and ask (not you
>specifically)... do you want to only fight massive gangs?
>Because no one rational is going to take the least risk they
>might die in fighting you if you treat your enemies that way.
>If I, IC, see something like that and then later have to fight
>one of those characters, and I think I can take them... I'm
>rounding up some people to gang them just to make sure,
>because I know what I'm not even getting my pies back if I'm
>wrong.

I get full looted anytime I die to tribs or imperials. Ragers will sac everything magical which is about everything I own, even if they gang you down. It's been said time and time again when someone complains about someone else "Ganging and full looting are a part of the game. If we didn't want them then we wouldn't allow them". In this instance it wasn't even a gang, and the person who got smacked with a negative title wasn't even the one to loot. I'm not saying there's nothing to this, but a lot of the "reasons" for it just weren't factual. If what you are going by was the impression that the character was part of some massive 4 on 1 gang on a lone invoker, thats just not the case. It was a 4 on 3 attempt at retrieval, we were the ones outnumbered (for in hero range, we did have supporting out of range players). None of the people involved in the fighting were even the ones to loot, it was a lower level person who looted. I mean, if you were told it was otherwise I can see where you might think the title was deserved, but I'm telling you thats just not how it went down. Thats why I was irked at what I saw as a singling out of one character unfairly.

All I'm really saying is, I think there should be some consistency to things like bad titles being given out. I'd like to see less subjectivity to these things so people will be able to avoid these things in the future. I happen to think the character in question is quality, and didn't deserve the title. You can say "it's just a title" but it it didn't mean anything, then it wouldn't have been given to her int he first place.

>We had 5
>hostile characters coming to attack us. The invoker just
>happened to get seperated from the others. it wasn't some
>massive 5 on 1 gank, it was 5 people coming to raid against 3
>defenders in range. The invoker was singled out because he was
>up in the forefront.

I'm pretty sure he wasn't with any of those other people and some of them were trying to kill him. :P

So, yes, gang.

But if you've seen the log on Dios EVERYONE was trying to kill me so I was a little more concerned with my own point of view. :P

I don't really have a problem with #4, at least without more information. Dude died. That's why some classes get locate object. And they did't pick him clean (to my knowledge).

#3 should be okay, as long as it's not all the character ever talks about (assuming he's not sphere greed or envy).

#1 is lame, hands down. Being somewhat privy to the characters that were online during this little fiasco, retrieving would have been extremely tough. Halistanis is smart enough to realize that. To paint Outlander enemies as "wimps" for not walking into a death trap is...meh.

#2 is lame in the sense that everything was looted, but I don't have a problem with the fact that it involved a gang. Outlanders aren't particularly honorable. Should some of them have just stood there out of combat in order to make it "more fair"?

This char is still alive, but I don't have more e-mail adresses to register new accounts.

So, first of all, I don't care of the title. Yes, I think it is unfair. Yes, I think I don't deserve it. But as I am not a honorable knight, I don't really care. I will wear it with pride.

I will answer your insults and statements though.

1) A bunch of complaining that single members of enemy cabals whose items were held wouldn't come and fight (despite one such character in range making constant, if not stupid enough to result in death, attempts).

I don't need any help to fight any member of enemy cabal on my territory. Now, Daevryn, be a man and post my Gang rate, please. If it is more then 1.5, I will remove everything I wear and sacrifice it before your eyes. Also, I will accept any title or loss of any skill/spell.
I was complaining that they don't come when I was the ONLY ONE to defend against them, and they didn't show up even in pairs. I DIDN'T complain when forces were with me.

2) Over-the-top ganging of a different such character who made an attempt, followed by looting 100% of that character's items. Food, stuff no one wanted, everything.

Lies. I haven't touched more then two items of any enemy who dared to approach the Tree alone with me defending. Again, be a man, and post my Gang rate. As for now, you are liar in my eyes. I have NEVER full looted anyone. NEVER.

3) RP with other characters primarily involving what good gear other people had and how much we wanted it.

Examples, my dear. Examples. I asked Nei to shatter amulet not because I wanted it, but because it gave invoker too much of advantage in raiding/ re-raiding. Give me a name and a case of such RP on my part.

4) A mad dash (there's more here, but I don't really want to get into it) to loot the corpse of an out of range person who died to a bad teleport.

You were there, you saw the drill. I took two items from his corpse. TWO ITEMS. Gauntlets and periapt. Which was taken for very specific purpose (and yes, you know the purpose) and was given away to another char as soon as the task was completed. Am I lying here?

5) Killing mobs people in our cabal (at the very least, of this alignment) shouldn't be killing in the quest for gear. (This also is slightly complicated and I don't want to get into it in greater depth.)

I don't get it. First of all, we didn't kill that mob you are talking about. It attacked us, we fled as soon as we could, and blinded it. The mob was not DEAD. Can you understand it? And the most important, I am not goodie. Since when am I forbidden to kill anything I wish to?

So, Daevryn, I would appreciate the answers and the gang rate.

Oh, by the way, I posted the log on QHCF. Unedited, note it. But the name of the person who actually full looted the named mage. I HAVEN'T TOUCHED A SINGLE! ITEM IN HIS CORPSE.

I think he was under the impression that we ganged down Haratzi and that you full looted him. Neither of which are the case. But he has to go by what he's told if he didn't see it for himself. I don't think calling him a liar is any more fair than the title you got slapped with though, I'm perfectly willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this.

I know you're not happy about the title, thats why I wanted to say something about it. But remember no matter what your title some of us think you're a playing a quality character and are a good player. Don't let it get to you.

I'm not really interested in haggling through all of this point by point. I've got other stuff to do today. A few comments:

1) Who cares who else you have or haven't ganged?

2) A cabal leader, even in Outlander, has some measure of control of the people below them, especially people they can uninduct if they choose. You certainly bear some responsibility for what they do in your sight.

3) Put yourself in the position of either of the characters/players in question. Would you feel wronged? I sure as hell would in both cases -- or at least, I'd feel like you exhibited behavior that you should not.

4) I don't think I'm talking about the same mob(s) you are. If a (especially non-evil) Outlander killing natural animals in order to gear isn't questionable, clearly we're at an impasse.

Disclaimer: I have no idea who is being complained about in the slightest. I have no idea what staff member made the call, or what factors they took into account.

I know this answer won't be popular, but it really is a case-by-case basis.

One character might have a full set of armor plus ten limited, coveted objects in their inventory, and make regular use of all of them. Another character might have four unique items worn and nothing in inventory, but they hide in their guild and only play when their range is completely free of enemies, switching to other characters when the coast isn't clear. I consider the latter a hoarder and the former just fine. Good luck writing a rule that encompasses that kind of judgement call.

The major guidelines we've given staff:
1) Observe repeatedly. Make sure you're seeing a trend and not an exception.
2) Consult with other staff, especially if the person isn't "yours" (someone else's empoweree, etc.). You're surrounded by decades of collective experience. Use it.

Roleplay isn't an exact science. At some level, the staff is always going to be entrusted with making subjective judgements. It's not useful to anyone (player or player/staff) if the staff member is only allowed to make positive judgements about characters unless they to consult a lawyer, file forms in triplicate, get permission from the character's player's family, etc.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

I agree here to the extent it talks about level sitting. I don't know much about the gear hoarding stuff, I've never really been involved in a situation like that.

But re: level sitting, I was very upset to have one of my characters slapped with a derogatory title because of supposed level sitting. And it was for *far* less time than contemporaries who spent much more time at some level, far less than Vargraye in our current world, and, most importantly, did exactly what Nepenthe wrote earlier when he said that staying at one level is fine.

It still annoys me when I think about it because it was not only unwarranted, but smacked of obvious inconsistency and differential treatment. Those being at the root of some of my problems with the staff over the years.

Salting the wound of course were the repeated responses by the staff at the time (mostly the same staff as now, in the higher ranks, of course) that it was crazy that I even got upset about it, that that's how things are, blah blah blah. The sadly usual "shove under the blanket" response we sometimes get. And which is the other root of my problems with the staff over the years.

Anyway, this is just a good reason to mention it. I of course have no idea as to the merits of whomever it is you are all talking about in this instance.

Ultimately, giving any character any kind of reward or punishment is one of those areas where the staff just can't win by the players. It honestly is.

For every punishment, there's someone who felt it was unwarranted.

For every punishment we don't hand out, there's someone who feels wronged that it wasn't.

For every reward, there's someone who didn't get it who thinks they deserved it more.

Even if it were possible to come up with a completely non-circumstantial non-opinion-based set of criteria for my own judgements (and, let it be said, it's not), there's always going to be the guy who got a negative title for something from someone who's no longer on staff five years ago. (e.g., Phaelim and that dude in Vargraye's BF thread.)

At some point you give up on trying to please others there and just try to make what you think are the best choices you can, and the ones that are fairest to everyone, both those who are wronged and those doing the wronging.

Yes. Of course. The problem is that on some level, people expect some level of fairness, fairness here being defined as similarly situated people being treated similarly, and dis-similarly situated people being treat dis-similarly.

Nobody (or nobody rational, and I'll accept that some on the edge will claim to be within that bound when they are not) is suggesting that only with some bright line, line in the sand, by-the-numbers procedure should there be some action taken toward a character. It will always reflect some level of judgment.

What people - or maybe just me - are suggesting though is that some number of times (more than once, enough to raise it as an issue and be worthy of comment and change) something like a title for level sitting has happened that is just beyond what someone should expect, given past or near-future (hindsight) staff behavior. I was a good case in point. When I complained about my negative title, I was told by Zulgh that yeah, it wasn't so bad compared to a lot of others who went title-less before, but that they (the staff) were now going to crack down on it, intimating that some policy change had happened and collectively (again, within some bound of judgment) the staff was going to dis-incentivise level sitting with titles like mine.

I was still bitter, of course, but am capable of understanding that any change has to start somewhere, and so I went along. As we all know, that change never actually happened. So, when actions are taken like this - or not, in the case of Vargraye - people get upset because it just seems so randomly and inconsistently applied.

Resolution? Maybe you really should have some guidelines. Not rules, guidelines. And yes, I think you need more guidelines for giving punishment than for giving rewards - it's a game, people are here to have fun, being more liberal with nice things than with mean things is an ok situation. And I know you do have such guidelines for negative actions to a character. In this regard, if you want to slap a negative title on someone for level sitting, consider who else has stayed at a level for a long time recently. Is this person really different? Are they getting your negative attention for some other reason? What is the real number? Level sitting for 30 hours enough? 60? 100? What are they doing with the time?

I'm sure some of these and other considerations go through your mind, but perhaps not everyone's on the staff, and perhaps it wouldn't be so bad if they really focused on the comparison to the rest of the playerbase in the last six months. It's a small playerbase. There is a LOT of institutional memory. People will notice and immediately know if someone is getting hit when the past 7 guys who did the same thing did not. And that's what causes problems.

Greater consistency is the key. In my opinion. Maybe not so easy, but there you have it.

This is pretty much the heart of what I was trying to get at.

I'm not saying there's no judgement in handing out a title or not handing out a title. What I'm saying is that on one hand you have X criteria and the concensus is "This is poor behavior." And then, at some other point in time, you have X criteria again and "This is acceptable behavior." Its not about the fact that someone got punished or not, its that the general ruling on the behavior changed and we as players have no idea about it.

I'm ok with "that guy slipped through the cracks, we didn't see him" so long as there's a general concensus that what he did was *wrong*. But, the concensus is what changes, because the opinions change. Ideally, some of this stuff should get written down and made public as a set of hard guidelines. They may not result in 100% equal treatment in all cases, but at the very least they would explicitly state what was wrong behavior and what isn't wrong behavior. If you're toeing the line you'd know about it and if you got away with it you can consider yourself lucky.

I'm limiting this specifically to punishments. I know rewards should be subjective, but punishments should probably be mostly objective.

I'm just saying, how about giving people a standard to work by. Whats TOO much interest in nice stuff or sitting too long at a level. I mean, it just seems really subjective. I hate seeing good people given crap titles.

>I'm just saying, how about giving people a standard to work
>by. Whats TOO much interest in nice stuff or sitting too long
>at a level. I mean, it just seems really subjective. I hate
>seeing good people given crap titles.

I think they go along with it in case by case basis, like Valg said. That's how we do forum moderation in Dio's(Or I do, at least).

The guidelines for you as a player are to use your common sense. Surely you know what's a ####ty thing to do to another player? Also, you should be able to tell what a your character would or would not do, based on his role and mindset.