If you're standing at an outer and someone else is fighting it, you may get dragged into the fight because the outer decided to dirt kick you.

Even if it's your cabal!

Damn if I'm ever going to help Tribunal defend and then get a flag like this.

It was because OP hell gear was progging confuse on the vanquisher (progging eradicates damage being not OP enough by itself).

I hear there's at least one character running around right now who likes to confuse mobs and players, it's possible this outer guardian was confused, in which case they'll keep dragging in anyone in the room to combat at random.

IF you're certain there's no chance the mob could have been confused it seems like a bug.

There could be lots of random things in effect that led to this particular thing occurring.

...it's the code that made mobs use dirt and spec skills on all opponents.

Kers closes his eyes with a look of concentration for a moment.
Gloiyme drums at a massive giant with his maces.
Gloiyme's drumming maces DISMEMBERS a massive giant!
Gloiyme's drumming maces DISMEMBERS a massive giant!
Gloiyme's drumming maces MASSACRES a massive giant!

wilderness outdoor <100%hp 98%m 100%mv tipsy 3 AM> You stand up.

wilderness outdoor <100%hp 98%m 100%mv tipsy 3 AM> You sing 'I laugh in the face of adversity,
I chuckle as the face of death grins!
With laughter and wine, we will stand divine
Whilst kicked in the knees and the shins!'

You feel yourself better able to resist blows.

wilderness outdoor <100%hp 94%m 100%mv tipsy 3 AM>
Gloiyme's beating MANGLES a massive giant!
Gloiyme's divine power DISMEMBERS a massive giant!
Gloiyme's beating MASSACRES a massive giant!
Gloiyme's divine power MASSACRES a massive giant!

wilderness outdoor <100%hp 94%m 100%mv tipsy 3 AM>
A massive giant's kicked dirt misses you.
Gloiyme's beating MASSACRES a massive giant!
Gloiyme's divine power DISMEMBERS a massive giant!
Gloiyme's divine power *** DEMOLISHES *** a massive giant!
Your cleave DISMEMBERS a massive giant!
A massive giant is writhing in agony.

wilderness outdoor <100%hp 94%m 100%mv tipsy 3 AM> gr
Gloiyme's group:
<46 War> Gloiyme 95% hp 100% mana 100% mv 485101 xp
<51 Bar> Haraji 100% hp 94% mana 100% mv 438900 xp
A massive giant is writhing in agony.

wilderness outdoor <100%hp 94%m 100%mv tipsy 3 AM>
Gloiyme tries to drum a massive giant with his maces, but misses.
Gloiyme's drumming maces misses a massive giant.
A massive giant is writhing in agony.

In this case I'm grouped with the guy who's fighting the outer. It also happened a few times at the Huntress when I wasn't grouped with anyone, but it's problematic to grep a relevant log snippet (there are just too many fights with the huntress in my logs).

People tell me that outers even do it to their own cabalmates, and I've seen rager warriors in combat with the massive giant several times (while scanning).

There are lots of things that can lead to rager warriors fighting the massive giant, so seeing it via scan is not helpful.

If this happened when you were not grouped, but you were in the room while people in the same cabal as you were raiding, then I would guess the same cabal link is what makes you eligible to be targeted by the mob.

nt

>If this happened when you were not grouped, but you were in
>the room while people in the same cabal as you were raiding,
>then I would guess the same cabal link is what makes you
>eligible to be targeted by the mob.

Just to clarify, it sounds like you are saying here 'eligible to be targeted by the mob' = working as intended. Please tell me this is not accurate?

NPCs that perform targetable skills may target people in the same room who are of the same cabal as their opponent.

Example:

PC-A (Battle) and NPC-B (Herald) are fighting.
PC-C (Battle) is in the room picking his nose.
NPC-B may decide to dirt kick PC-C because he is clearly on PC-A's team.

This has been the case for something like 8-9 months now.

I hope that helps.

Are reavers and wardens on the same team now?

You may then want to update this:
1. Murder, Theft and Looting in a protected city are against the law. This includes looting the pit of equipment that is not your own. You will be held responsible for your groupmate's actions.

Since we are now responsible for our ungrouped cabal mates actions as well??

Ex

A cabal mate strikes a guild guardian while you are in the room, the guild guardian decides to dirt kick you. - You broke the law.

You are standing at the entrance of the spire and a cabal mate strikes the captain, the captain attacks you - You broke the law.

A cabal mate is fighting anyone else in PK in the same room as you who happens to have a pet with active skills in the same room, who attacks you. - You broke the law.

This doesnt even begin to look at the problems this could cause with cross alignment groups. A reaver and a warden in the same room, while the reaver is fighting a good aligned character with pets. The good aligned characters pets attack the warden, etc. This could go all kinds of bad ways.

Why is this working as intended? It is not that hard to check the status of the players in the room AND whether they are in a group with a player who is fighting that mob?

We're talking about writing an is_grouped function that confirms the target of the directed attack action of the mob is in the same group as all players who have engaged the mob. It's been a while since I've looked at rom code but that's a 10 line tops function?

First of all, you're not going to get anywhere being a condescending armchair coder that thinks having skimmed a 22 year old codebase that's less than 1/25th the size of CF and far less complicated means you understand something. That's beside the fact that you're making a lot of incorrect assumptions about the functionality in question, the (IC) laws of CF and the intention of the original author of the change (not me), at least as I understood it at the time.

Regardless, your objections have been noted.

I apologize if my post was taken as condescending. I've done a bit more than skim stock code over the 20+ years it's been out there but your point is taken. It was armchair coding. I do appreciate the efforts you and the rest of the staff have made with CF.

You did not state that any of my scenarios was a misinterpretation of the way in which this code works, so it is logical to assume that my scenarios are accurate, instead you've said I'm making incorrect assumptions about the way laws work.

Could you please elaborate how any of my examples would not be breaking the law? I don't believe that this is an innappropriate discussion topic or an ask IC type of scenario. Either being in a fight with a guild guard / the spire captain is a crime, or it is not. The idea that it could happen because of your group mates deciding to strike those creatures is covered under the law I qouted. Having a warrant issued because a cabal mate struck the same, is not.

As to fighting the pets of a player being a crime, if I've made an assumption then it is based entirely by Baerinika's post here on the forum directly to me - striking a players pet in town whether they are present or not is a crime, unless deputized by a magistrate.

http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=4&topic_id=115647&mesg_id=115671&page=

Thank you for noting the issues I've raised with the decision that this code is 'working as intended' rather than an unintentional consequence which could be remedied fairly easily. At times tone is difficult to determine online, I took your tone in that statement to be the same as you did mine that this could be fixed in 10 lines of code if it is indeed considered a bug.

gr

NT

You think you are not getting a warrant for either situation?

NT