I was going to post this under Tremblay's death post, but figured I should make a new topic since it is only tangentally related.

DC's post made me think of this:

"Its not like what he's doing is cheating. He used common items out in the open and even posted logs about it. If the Imms felt it was cheating or wrong, they would've just fixed it. If distention didn't hit him, he probably didn't kill enough people. The only problem I even see is if he repeatedly targetted newbies, which he wouldn't be the only one guilty of. Yet you don't see people complaining about Marcus' characters, but I'm sure those 150 pks aren't coming from slaying veterans by the dozen but rather the same newbies three times a week."

The biggest complaint I keep seeing was that he was targetting newbies. The veterans all say "He didn't get me, but all the newbies! He's hurting the game!"

When I was a newbie, and playing a shifter, I got caught out of form numerous times and permalag bashed to the ground by Village applicants. Where was everybody complaining about the bully Village apps chasing newbies away? Because I can tell you, nothing was more frustrating than typing flee immediately after the yell and seeing it go through when I was a ghost. The same guy killed me several times. Yet if I posted those logs, everybody would have said it was good rp, or "Your fault for not doing x or y."

Why the difference? Why is it ok for one type of person to kill newbs, but another type not to? Sure, the same types of characters are no longer a problem for me, but at the time they were. If I got killed by Tremblay, it would have been no worse than the times I got killed by the bashing giants.

Newbies are pretty much a target for everybody. Even Nepenthe's AP had an imm comment about him beating up the same newbie. Where was the outcry then?

I guess I just don't understand why Tremblay is being picked out. Most new players here have it hard. Its what you get for playing a game this complicated. Either you're willing to stick through the learning curve or you aren't. Its why we don't have the playerbase of something like Aardwolf. If Tremblay is the straw that broke the camel's back, then it was close to being broken anyway.

So I haven't played in quite a while and I started a shifter to just roam around and see new things try and remember how to get to the past.. that sort of thing. So, while ranking I see Trembley walking right into the forest. My group is talking about him, blah blah. Here I am thinking, oh a thief walking right into the forest well he must not mean any harm. At this time I didn't know that the rangers I was with couldn't harm him. So he walks up and starts mind control and such, and when I figure out what's going on I'm poisoned for.. well I'm not exactly sure of how many hours as I don't have the log but it was a very long time. I worded and started selling all of my stuff to heal while slow, but ended up dieing to poison. So, I learned a few things. What mind control is like and planting and suggesting to eat and so on, as I had never had this used on a previous character. So, I go back to ranking. After I unghost, who comes back Trembley. Now, to an experienced player you would think if they did not just attack Trembley outright the first time, they're probably newish and didn't know what was going on, but! He still came back to give it another go. Of course I learned from my last experience and just attacked him rather then continue killing the mob with my group. After reviewing this fight, he wasn't great at tracking since I was running all over the place (I only knew the eastern road was somewhere north but that's about all I knew of the area I was in). So I ran around and he didn't get another hit in (I don't believe). I had time to revert and word. From this perhaps he wasn't a very good pker? Isn't half the battle being able to track someone to get them again while their down? This being said, it would seem I only died the first time due to inexperience, not because he was awesome at pk, but could take advantage of certain things to win over perhaps other inexperienced persons? I lived the second time because I learned something. That also brings up another point. Even if someone is new, can't you learn from the first time? Sure, some people have roles that say they must stay and fight and so on... but I doubt someone that's new would have one of those roles. Perhaps what Trembley did was wrong? Would he have tried to kill me over and over again, who knows. His character was gone after that. But at the same time, I really don't see why someone that is new can't learn to get around this?

Grenade and the total movement screwing neurological poison are very powerful tools without having to resort to power word kill items which originally were meant in spirit to kill TLB users, or even items not originally concieved as a weapon by the area author.

Just because the imms didn't think about it initially doesn't mean it would have been a trick they would knee-jerk react to. Consider Sebeok's ####ing around. He did far worse things, OOC things even, to abuse poisoners. ---> Silence does not necessarily mean approval. It can mean 'let's wait and see what happens'. <---

When 'lets wait and see what happens' becomes a problem is when people, especially noobs )but sometimes vets who find that when they do learn the counter it may require an unreasonable state of paranoia or gear configuration), lose gear or even worse TONS and TONS of CON to people in fights due to merely a lack of knowledge of game mechanics. I'm sorry, I know it happens, but there should be a minimum of deaths resulting from lack of knowledge of game mechanics. Most of us who were playing longer than six months wouldn't die to this *after the first time* log board or not, and whoever had detect hidden would be gunning for him.

The irony of this is he would have deleted alot sooner if duergar were the vogue race currently for warriors or AP's, with this easy kill trick or no. And he had ridiculous luck sometimes, as he would wake a basher and get one round bashes and unreasonably high amount of the time. Who is to say he wasn't hasted during these fights?

Yes, you can gear for saves. Would it be reasonable to expect to be geared for this stuff if you were either new or not expecting this? #### no. Could you escape it if that was the case? #### no. Every other trick in the game can be escaped despite the above or similar preparation being true.

Also let's not forget Emetic poison is every bit as dangerous as plague, and can be caught far more easily than you ever thought about catching plague. Considering the level you get it, plague-duration poison is ridiculous.

Don't complain that poisoners can't get kills without mind control. They can, and do, regularly. They just fade away if they don't find ingredients to make level 40+ poisons.

And in closing let me state that this doesn't necessarily reflect the preparations I'm personally capable of considering, but rather a player on the whole. The answer pretty much was 'without detect hidden, how many game hours would it take to remotely ward this off outside of avoiding hidden areas completely?' At the time of day/rank he was levelsitting, detect hidden classes were not a common occurence, of any alignment.

Two points.

1. Tremblay was singled out for two reasons, in my opinion.

a. His role-play was sort of "snide", which tended to exacerbate the situation when he killed someone. Note that I'm not saying he role-played poorly, necessarily, but that his role was to be an ass. If Tremblay had been a "friendly" Maran instead of a "mean" Scion, people might not have complained so much.

b. The manner in which he killed people was fairly difficult to avoid, short of avoiding him altogether. It sucks to die to someone and know you had almost no shot at survival.

Second point concerns newbie killing:

2. Excluding situations like ragers, I assert that most kills in general come against newbies. Or, at least, not against seasoned vets. Unless role-play demands it, seasoned vets tend not to die all that much. What separates the "scary" seasoned vets from (ahem) "people like me" is volume. To the extent that most of my kills come against non-seasoned-vets, all my characters are just like Tremblay. The difference is that I'll generate maybe 20 or 30 such kills before I wig out and delete, whereas a Marcus will have many, many more. So they end up having people pissed at them while I don't.

>"Its not like what he's doing is cheating. He used common
>items out in the open and even posted logs about it. If the
>Imms felt it was cheating or wrong, they would've just fixed
>it.

I generally agree with this.

Potentially, Tremblay caught a break because he was killing people in a way that PK logging and thus distention didn't account for. However, I've just crunched the numbers on that and even if all those kills had counted, he still wouldn't have been affected by distention. If he had played another week or two without levelling and riding the one-trick pony for all it's worth, he probably would've been.

>Why the difference? Why is it ok for one type of person to
>kill newbs, but another type not to? Sure, the same types of
>characters are no longer a problem for me, but at the time
>they were. If I got killed by Tremblay, it would have been no
>worse than the times I got killed by the bashing giants.

I think it's the opposite, actually -- I think Tremblay was killing more mid-range or veteran-ish players who aren't used to being able to be put down that easily.

Really, a handful of spell save gear would have cleaned Tremblay up all day. Not that he couldn't ever kill a character like that, but probably would die ten or more times for every kill. I can't think of the last really tough midlevel shaman/druid/invoker/etc. I can't remember seeing a really deadly midlevel necromancer since Palmer was in those levels. There was a time that the veteran and even midgrade PK players knew they were taking a calculated risk by loading on more dam or more stat or more hit points at the expense of saves at those levels, but the kinds of characters that capitalize on it having gone out of vogue (at least at those levels) for a while, I think everyone sort of forgot that.

>Newbies are pretty much a target for everybody. Even
>Nepenthe's AP had an imm comment about him beating up the same
>newbie. Where was the outcry then?

There wasn't an outcry because that comment didn't accurately categorize the character. God knows there was and continues to be a lot that people bitch about about that character, but that particular charge, not so much.

I can tell you exactly where it came from, having dug through that character's logs myself to try to figure it out. I attacked a group of three (2 paladins and a warrior) levelling in Arial City, killing all of them, the warrior (who wasn't great PKwise) dying last. An hour or so later, I found a group levelling in Teth Azeleth (2 different paladins and the same warrior), again killing all three, this time the warrior first. There were no other fights in between, so at a cursory glance, it looks like he was killing the same guy over and over.

>Really, a handful of spell save gear would have cleaned
>Tremblay up all day. Not that he couldn't ever kill a
>character like that, but probably would die ten or more times
>for every kill. I can't think of the last really tough
>midlevel shaman/druid/invoker/etc. I can't remember seeing a
>really deadly midlevel necromancer since Palmer was in those
>levels. There was a time that the veteran and even midgrade
>PK players knew they were taking a calculated risk by loading
>on more dam or more stat or more hit points at the expense of
>saves at those levels, but the kinds of characters that
>capitalize on it having gone out of vogue (at least at those
>levels) for a while, I think everyone sort of forgot that.

On this.. I must agree.. I hated Tremblay a lot, not only because of the name, but also because he was always killing anyone in sight... I was regularly PKed many times by him, with two very different chars, and the best I got from him was "You're lucky" or "It's your lucky day."

Anyway.. To get back on topic, most of the time he would plant fillets which can hold you and stuff.. And with both characters, I try to have good saves.. And I tell you, he never could hold me. I still died once, but not because of him.. He had me poisoned with a forget poison, and I was killed by another which happened to be where I fled to..

Saves are important, and now, I try to have good saves when possible... It saved by a$$ many times from Tremblay.

By the way, why was his name even allowed? It's a RL name, and a common one in Quebec... It's also exactly how it's written, so he must have known... The chances of picking this completly random are very slim...

They don't care.

It's famous names from text books or fantasy names taken from popular books, names like Noddafatha, names of places/locations (nouns), or something along those lines that get the axe.

And yet, I won't name the person.. But there's one with a very popular name, from fantasy, running around... And I had even reported it when the person was very low level...

I can't stand this name... It bothers me every single time I see it.
We should make a whole little cabal. We can have Mordor, Khazaddum, Rohan and Gondor and we can make friends with that character we're talking about and have big IC placename party.

>By the way, why was his name even allowed? It's a RL name, and
>a common one in Quebec...

This is the first time I've heard this, and there's your answer.

If it's something I haven't personally heard of, even if it's called to my attention I'll generally assume it's not that bad. Americocentrism, but there you go!

>I think it's the opposite, actually -- I think Tremblay was
>killing more mid-range or veteran-ish players who aren't used
>to being able to be put down that easily.

In other words: Think of the newbies.

Sorry it came across that way.

I don't think you saw a lot of Imms saying that Tremblay was cheap for killing newbies. I could be wrong, but I don't remember any Imms, in fact, saying anything Tremblay did was wrong.

I did notice that he did a lot of the silver-flask thing, and seemed to level-sit at level 36 (as soon as he could use the plant/suggestquaff combo). I actually pointed it out in his history, but said that he may not be levelsitting...he may have just pissed off his entire pkrange so that he's unable to find a group (I can't imagine poisonerthief being great for solo leveling).

I thought the fillet thing was somewhat original and a good changeup.

I don't know that it was all newbies that he killed - the tactic he used is pretty tough to combat unless you detect hidden or know he's going to do it and word/teleport away.

But to answer your question, the only real difference I see between what Tremblay did (to newbies, if we want to assume it was all newbies that he killed) and what rager apps did/do to newbies are these:
A. Bashdown and outmelee a mage is a time-tested tactic that CF and most muds (and rpgs that include magic) is based on.
B. It's harder to see a poisoner thief coming than a villager app that can bash.

Both things leave the victim feeling helpless: "There is nothing I could have done to NOT LOSE, let alone win, that fight." Nobody likes that feeling. I used to have that feeling a lot when I played a sphere honor berserker cloud giant warrior and Zorszaul and/or Palan would come knocking. It's the "I know I'm going to die now." syndrome - but at least then I knew it was coming.

I think the reason people have singled out Tremblay is the perceived "cheapness" of what he did to folks. People don't like to get assassinated, pwked, cleaved, etc.

Personally I HATED when transmuters had gate and charm person. THAT was teh cheapzor.

But all you need to avoid "most" rager apps is:
c inv
Thats right folks!
Just c inv!

Right.

And the way to avoid thieves is to stay out of places where they can hide, and when you have to go to a city, go to one they won't likely be hiding in.

So why didn't the newbs just do that to avoid Tremblay? The same reason newbs make all sorts of stupid mistakes (like standing around Hamsah not invis)...because they're newbs.

How else are they going to learn what to do and not to do? You can show them and tell them and demonstrate for them all day long till you're blue in the face, but until someone does something to them that MAKES them start to think for themselves, they will forever be noobs.

This being said, I think Tremblay was a horrible "character" (I quote the word because I didn't ever see anything but the most basic of lip service to RP) because he targeted the same people again and again, in at least two cases causing people who had been playing here for some time to stop playing. The people who left the game were good players, a little on the new side but they had real potential and had turned out some QUALITY characters. If memory serves the only characters of Tremblays I can remember were Nilian, Tremblay and Nopup. Nopup of course once posting on Dios and asking for wand locations to be emailed to him. This was my biggest issue with Tremblay, not so much what he did but who he did it to and the fallout from it.

I'll take fifty clueless Fort noobs getting me killed ten times a day with stupid mistakes and fleeing at 90% hps over one Tremblay any day.

Checking the logs, I didn't spot anyone that Tremblay killed more than twice, and there weren't even a lot of those.

For a guy who kills a fair bit, that's a pretty non-singling-out-same-people distribution.

I mean, I can't say I saw awesome RP from this character either.

But if we're going to bash, at least let's have the facts right.

To be fair, those figures don't include the number of attacks, attempting to use the same tactics over and over, nor does it include the interval at which the people died in. People quickly learned what he was about--murder everything in sight, using things like silver flasks, blowfish, devils backbone and hemlock. He also exploited some obvious oversights. Like being able to poison and knock-out a group of three people in "2 seconds" as quoted by Tremblay himself. The silver flask was an oversight as it was allegedly moved. I'm sure there are other things he did that were borderline. These were the reasons why people didn't like the character, or the person playing the character actually. A lack of decency to report suspicious activity.

Even though the blowfish is super easy to get, I think it has some serious drawbacks that should be reviewed. A level 60 poison and hold person is a bit much. You can barely even heal the poison at a healer. And hold person is an antiquated spell. I don't have a better suggestion on how to make it better other than to just get rid of it completely. Personally, I'd like to see it be one or the other.

Some of the serious drawbacks of Blowfish.

Once again Pro, you fail to actually read something and come up with a response that has absolutely nothing to do with the actual post. Did I say anything about there not being ways to prevent the drawbacks? No. Try reading it again.

I think Blowfish are fine as is.

That's my opinion.

Bear in mind, you could only see actual kills, and likely not even all of those, not just attempted killings.

http://www.qhcf.net/cforum/char/vpost.pl?17257

http://www.qhcf.net/cforum/char/vpost.pl?16888

http://www.qhcf.net/cforum/char/vpost.pl?17186

He never killed me either, but I watched him killing the same people. I'm sure a bunch of his kills look like mob deaths on their files, he loved attacking people who were ranking, or who had just unghosted.

I don't ultimately have any stake in this and I'm not sure how much effort I really want to put into this, but for the sake of discussion:

1) If you want to give me a specific character name or two that you think was horribly, repeatedly abused by Tremblay, I'd be happy to dig deeper into the logs and call the truth of it or not as I see it. I'm not calling anyone a liar, but some people have a small penchant for drama and/or exaggeration... I'm inclined to believe the logs, all things being equal.

2) I don't have a problem with attacking people while they're ranking. If you're one person trying to kill three, that's probably the only sensible time TO attack them.

The element of PK is what makes getting XP on CF interesting to me. Remove that and it mostly feels like grind to me. (Though I know that we do have players who really do enjoy just going out and getting a level or ten, and hey, more power to them.)

>I don't ultimately have any stake in this and I'm not sure
>how much effort I really want to put into this, but for the
>sake of discussion:
>
>1) If you want to give me a specific character name or two
>that you think was horribly, repeatedly abused by Tremblay,
>I'd be happy to dig deeper into the logs and call the truth of
>it or not as I see it. I'm not calling anyone a liar, but
>some people have a small penchant for drama and/or
>exaggeration... I'm inclined to believe the logs, all things
>being equal.

Yeah but remember the logs likely still won't bear everything out which I'll get to after point 2. I think the character one of the players who actually left the game was playing at the time was Elisarnia. She said he'd killed her several times, full loots each time. He also told her he was going to keep killing her till she was gone. Thats pretty abusive when the player is about as non-offensive as they come, and he still felt the need to kill her as she unghosted on at least one occasion. I KNOW she didn't do anything to provoke that kind of crap, because she's just not that kind of player. I don't care if he killed her ten times or only killed her 3 times, if someone keeps killing you in a way that you can't defend against and they tell you they are going to keep doing it to you over and over until you go away, why would you expect the person to find that as anything even remotely fun? Why would they want to be in that kind of enviornment? At what point is it reasonable for them to complain? 3 con down? 6? 10?

>2) I don't have a problem with attacking people while they're
>ranking. If you're one person trying to kill three, that's
>probably the only sensible time TO attack them.

I don't have any problem with it either, that wasn't the point I was trying to make. I meant that he attacked people who were ranking, so I wouldn't be surprised if a signifigant portion of people he "killed" actually died to a mob. Thats not going to show up as a win for him, but the players he killed will still certainly see it that way. Even moreso in fact because he also managed to cause them xp loss.

>The element of PK is what makes getting XP on CF interesting
>to me. Remove that and it mostly feels like grind to me.
> Though I know that we do have players who really do enjoy
>just going out and getting a level or ten, and hey, more power
>to them.)

I enjoy the PK aspect too, because if there's no risk there's no thrill. That being said, people who go out of they way to piss off the player of a character, instead of actually thinking in terms of roleplay are just bad for the mud. As much as I detest having to invoke his name as an example of anything other than what we DON'T need here, if Arolin had been doing this sort of stuff I can virtually guarantee the staff opinion of things would be vastly different and those flasks would have gotten moved a whole lot sooner. He did things that weren't quite abuse, he took features and used them in a way that they weren't intended and he killed the #### out of people with them. He was smacked down for it. How is this different?

People have been using those flasks for poisoners for literally years. Why does it take someone to really just abuse the hell out of something to get it made not so abusable? If Tremblay had only killed 20 people with those flasks, would they have been moved? How does it make it any better or worse based on the number? What if he had only killed each person one time but did it to a lot more people? For gods sake, I can sit and think of dozens of things that COULD be abused, but I don't do them. Because I don't think taking something and using it over and over until it gets nerfed does anything to enhance the game for anyone. I play CF to have fun, but I also play the game to BE fun for other people to play with.

Why are people who are clearly just going out of their way to ruin what should be a good time for other people even tolerated? I know different people play the game different ways, but this character was nothing but a tool to cause frustration in players. Is that really the kind of thing you WANT going on here? Because as much as I don't want to be one of those "the sky is falling" doomsayers, if you all don't want the playerbase to shrink, then the frustration level of players is something that needs to be considered. People weren't frustrated by Tremblay who have been here for years. The people who were most likely to go away and not come back because of his actions were the ones we really need here the most. The NEW players.

CF is a hard enough mud for new players to adapt to without abusing ####heads running around. I don't think we should all be sitting around holding hands by any means, gods know I don't want to see CF turn into some froofi MUSH enviornment. But the game is hard enough without adding the threat from some abusive asshole who a player doesn't think they can fight that they are "going to be killed again and again until they go away". Thats just not a good mentality to encourage.

>Yeah but remember the logs likely still won't bear everything
>out which I'll get to after point 2. I think the character one
>of the players who actually left the game was playing at the
>time was Elisarnia.

I can infer a fair bit from the logs, given enough time and interest. For example, if someone mob dies and Tremblay isn't logged on, it's a fair bet he wasn't involved.

In any case... I checked, and that character is a bit older than Tremblay. I did some more digging and can take a pretty good guess at the character of that player that did tangle with him. The picture ends up looking like this:

1) Character dies to what I'd guess is a bad teleport.

2) What's probably a couple minutes after they unghost, Tremblay does kill them. However, note the following:

- There's no reason to assume that Tremblay has any idea they'd just died, and even if I'm not sure I'd say it matters. It's not like he was involved in that death.

- It appears unlikely that Tremblay took or sacced much in the way of gear. Of course, this is a death in Galadon, and we all know how fast those are picked clean by anyone.

- Tremblay's famed one-trick pony tactic is not involved in this kill. It's good old-fashioned thief-jumps-out-of-the-shadows-and-stabs-you-to-death style action.

3) The next day realtime, character attacks Tremblay but is unsuccessful in killing him.

4) Two days after that, Tremblay kills character a second time. Again, this is a melee-style death and not riding the pwk-flask pony. Again, this is a death in the middle of Galadon. This time character is back at their corpse roughly ten seconds after dying, so it's unlikely Tremblay came up with much in the way of loot.

And that's it. They fight about two other times over the course of their lives and no one dies. "PKing someone into the dirt" (tm) this ain't.

So what this really amounts to is this. I've done as much as probably anyone to crack down on CF assbags over the years. I want a healthy and competitive PK game that mostly polices itself, but if things cross a line I get involved. (And we, as a staff, did get involved in the form of game balance changes as we saw necessary, such as easy flask availability.)

However, I look at a situation like this, as the facts are laid out, and I just can't see anything wrong. Is it okay to kill someone? Sure. Is it okay to kill them a second time three real-life days later, especially after they've jumped you in between? Absolutely. And that's really as much as there is.

Some people like to cry wolf / exaggerate / build drama where really none is warranted, and the irony of it is that it makes it just that much harder for the staff to quickly recognize genuine assbaggery when it does occur.

Why are people who are clearly just going out of their way to ruin what should be a good time for other people even tolerated?

Using the copyright story as the most recent example, go and look at the #### you spread about BT and the other parties at the time. You've been throwing around stuff like that for years. God knows how many people you told that to as fact, without bothering to:

1) Get the facts from both sides.
2) Speak informally with a lawyer.
3) Even bother to type "copyright" into a search engine and make sure you knew even one sentence worth of true information about anything ever related to a copyright, in any country, in any law system.
4) Bottle up your slander fountain until you've bothered to do one of the above.

No, instead, like so many other cases, you just sat in your corner spewing the worst accusations you could think of. Don't you think that can drive people away? Get off your ####ing high horse. You're the last person I'd listen to about one player driving away more than one. This copyright example is one of many that we both know I could drag up.

Tremblay's aggression, by the logs, doesn't look much different than what any high kill-count character did. He didn't multi-kill newbies, even though you claim he did. He didn't pursue any one person to a ridiculous degree, even though you claim he did.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>Why are people who are clearly just going out of their way
>to ruin what should be a good time for other people even
>tolerated?
>
>Using the copyright story as the most recent example, go and
>look at the #### you spread about BT and the other parties at
>the time. You've been throwing around stuff like that for
>years. God knows how many people you told that to
>as fact, without bothering to:
>
>1) Get the facts from both sides.
>2) Speak informally with a lawyer.
>3) Even bother to type "copyright" into a search engine and
>make sure you knew even one sentence worth of true information
>about anything ever related to a copyright, in any country, in
>any law system.
>4) Bottle up your slander fountain until you've bothered to do
>one of the above.

As I said, what I got about that came DIRECTLY from an Imp. So I guess what you're telling us here is, we shouldn't trust the word of the Imps. Good to see you finally acknowledging this publicly.

>No, instead, like so many other cases, you just sat in your
>corner spewing the worst accusations you could think of.
>Don't you think that can drive people away? Get off your
>####ing high horse. You're the last person I'd listen to
>about one player driving away more than one. This copyright
>example is one of many that we both know I could drag up.

And another case where you are making assumptions about me despite the facts. The fact is what I said came from someone on staff. Someone who was one of the only 3 Imps at the time. Someone who helped put the mud together from the ground up. Now when you clarified it, I didn't call you a liar. I didn't give you any ####. I didn't dispute your word. I took what you said at face value, and thanked you for "clearing things up". I didn't sit around trying to poke holes in what you said (unlike some people on the thread, who are perfectly entitled to, I just didn't see a need) and I left it lie. It's a damned shame that you just aren't capable of doing that. I don't spew accusations about things I don't have firsthand knowledge of. It's a real shame you can't say the same, isn't it? The fact is I backed up my saying that Tremblay cost us players by posting links to the posts from the players who left the game over him. I backed up EVERYTHING I said with the proof. You don't have to "listen to" me or take my word. I gave you the links. The people deleted, there is NO disputing that. It's there for everyone to see, but then it's not like you've ever let a little thing like the truth get in the way of your opinions is it?

>Tremblay's aggression, by the logs, doesn't look much
>different than what any high kill-count character did. He
>didn't multi-kill newbies, even though you claim he did. He
>didn't pursue any one person to a ridiculous degree, even
>though you claim he did.

I spoke to the players he did these things to, and saw the logs. Everything I said came backed up with proof. I'm FAR from the only one calling him out on this behavior, the forum is full of them. But I guess every one of them is a liar too, right Valg? I mean clearly if I'm not the only one saying the exact same thing, you are calling every single one of those other people a liar too, right? But again, you just sit in your little glass house and keep lobbing those stones. Thats just your thing and thats fine. Every single opinion I have ever had about things over the years is from FIRSTHAND experience or from the mouth of one of the principles involved. You like to go off about how I talk about things I "don't know about" but the fact is the things I talk about are things that have happened to me or things that I have heard about directly from the people involved, often times from people who are on staff. If you had the SLIGHTEST idea how many abusive jerky assholic things I have heard about from people who are on the staff, that I kept my mouth shut about over the years JUST because it was secondhand information then you would realize just how reluctant I am to spread things around that I don't feel confident are fact.

I'm going to leave this post off by saying that you of all people trashing anyone elses credibility is just laughable.

>
>valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>As I said, what I got about that came DIRECTLY from an Imp. So
>I guess what you're telling us here is, we shouldn't trust the
>word of the Imps. Good to see you finally acknowledging this
>publicly.

Morgath? You're trying to use Morgath's credibility to make a point? Let's not be too ridiculous here.

>The fact is what I said came from someone
>on staff. Someone who was one of the only 3 Imps at the time.
>Someone who helped put the mud together from the ground up.

I guess if by that you mean "became an IMP by promising Derit and Rahvin a place to host the game and never did any actual work" you could be describing Morgath... otherwise, not so much. As far as I know he didn't come through there, either.


>I spoke to the players he did these things to, and saw the
>logs. Everything I said came backed up with proof. I'm FAR
>from the only one calling him out on this behavior, the forum
>is full of them. But I guess every one of them is a liar too,
>right Valg?

Well, so far we've done the detective work on one of them and we're one for one. We can keep going if you want.

I mean, is that person not playing anymore? It's possible, I won't dispute that. Does being killed twice three days apart by someone that you went after between your two deaths justify quitting forever? I can't see how anyone could say yes.

>Morgath? You're trying to use Morgath's credibility to make a
>point? Let's not be too ridiculous here.

Say what you want about the man, he was an Imp. You can't have it both ways here. Either we're supposed to take the word of the staff or not. The fact is I did give YOU at the least more credibility than Morgath, and I took what you said as being good enough for me, didn't I? I didn't bitch, argue or try to poke holes. I came to you honestly with what I heard and ASKED you to correct my information if it was wrong. I didn't claim to be all knowing, I simply reported what I was told.

>I guess if by that you mean "became an IMP by promising Derit
>and Rahvin a place to host the game and never did any actual
>work" you could be describing Morgath... otherwise, not so
>much. As far as I know he didn't come through there, either.
>

I was told he was the one who secured the move to maple.can.net. Again, I'm just going on what I was told by the staff.

>Well, so far we've done the detective work on one of them and
>we're one for one. We can keep going if you want.

Again, I didn't dispute anything you told me. I took what you said as good enough for me. I'm not trying to say you guys were wrong about what you found according to the logs, but people in these numbers don't get this bent over nothing. I'm not saying he's as bad as EVERYONE says, but clearly with this many angry people there had to have been SOME basis for it.

>I mean, is that person not playing anymore? It's possible, I
>won't dispute that. Does being killed twice three days apart
>by someone that you went after between your two deaths justify
>quitting forever? I can't see how anyone could say yes.
>

The player was told their character was going to continue to be hunted over and over, and left naked every time until they were gone for good. Thats not just being a "good" killer, thats telling someone "I'm going to keep killing you till you go away". I don't see how someone should consider that fun.

>Say what you want about the man, he was an Imp. You can't have
>it both ways here. Either we're supposed to take the word of
>the staff or not.

That doesn't make any sense. That's like saying that since Nixon did criminal things, every American president since him is obviously without credibility.

>The player was told their character was going to continue to
>be hunted over and over, and left naked every time until they
>were gone for good. Thats not just being a "good" killer,
>thats telling someone "I'm going to keep killing you till you
>go away". I don't see how someone should consider that fun.

What it amounts to is, I'm not assuming that's true because the rest of the story as presented turned out not to be. . . especially since, you'd think if someone was going to full loot you over and over again they would... full loot you the times they did kill you.

We did take corrective action on pwk flasks and a couple other things. I'm not convinced any action on our part beyond that would've been appropriate. There are lots of great options for dealing with jerks in-game and I'd like to think that, for the most part, players are capable of dealing with things without me coming in like an angry parent and spanking someone.

>That doesn't make any sense. That's like saying that since
>Nixon did criminal things, every American president since him
>is obviously without credibility.

Except in this case I was erring on the side of giving the staff credibility. I wasn't calling you all liars. I wasn't calling him one. I came to you with what he told me and let you sort it out for us. No matter what you think, I give credence to the vast majority of the staff when it comes to being truthful. The only ones I say I don't trust are the ones who I have firsthand seen do or say things that cause their credibility to be damaged. In the case of Morgath, it was never made public why he left, just that there had been a disagreement and he went. I knew the guy OOC and know what a ####bag loser he is, and readily took your word over his.

>What it amounts to is, I'm not assuming that's true because
>the rest of the story as presented turned out not to be. . .
>especially since, you'd think if someone was going to full
>loot you over and over again they would... full loot you the
>times they did kill you.

I think you might have looked into the wrong character to be honest. She showed me the logs of him doing these things. I know he also killed her a few times with the flasks, because everytime he did she would start bitching about it off of the mud. The player involved is what I'd call "newish", and really NOT the kind of person to make this stuff up. Not to mention (and no slight to the player here) I doubt even had she tried she could have faked a log well enough to get it past me, had she actually wanted to for whatever reason.

>We did take corrective action on pwk flasks and a couple other
>things. I'm not convinced any action on our part beyond that
>would've been appropriate. There are lots of great options
>for dealing with jerks in-game and I'd like to think that,
>for the most part, players are capable of dealing with
>things without me coming in like an angry parent and spanking
>someone.

I agree for the most part players are capable of dealing with things without getting the staff involved. But it's not just one or two people who are saying how bad he was for the mud in general. It's quite a few. Those players cross a wide spectrum of player types from newer players to older vets, PKers to roleplayers. I think that alone should give you pause.

1) People posting a log and talking #### about someone isn't "proof". A lot of people, yourself especially, concoct campaigns to make individuals look as bad as they can. Logs get edited, selectively presented, etc., and then the usual peanut gallery shows up to take their shots.

2) People delete after being killed all the time. You're demanding that we run Tremblay's player out of town, despite the fact that he didn't break any rules, and his IC behavior (see Nep's posts for logged facts) wasn't egregious. If we were in the habit of running people out of town because they killed someone twice in three days, all we'd have left is the PK-incompetent crowd. If we were in the habit of running people out of town for being rude, you'd have been run out of town 12 years ago.

3) If someone did stop playing here over being killed twice in three days, this probably wasn't the right game for them.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

The funny part is that you think Vlad needs to make remarks to make you look bad. The way you've behaved on the forums for the last 6 or so years has sufficed plenty in that department.

Anyone who would leave over comments regarding copyright law is probably, at least, given my perspective on logic, equally or more likely to leave following Imms trashing players, flaming players and rolling abusive PK chars for classes they coded.

At least for the latter, I couldn't care less. I like Seb. I'm just saying, you're in a glass house, so put down the rock.