Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2020-08-10, 21:49
Sign in to follow this  
Elmo

RE: Taking tents

Recommended Posts

So I've got a question or two regarding raiding rules, specifically pertaining to removing item containers from bases when there may be no room in the base for all the items in the desired container.

Example: I raid @AndreyQ's base because he's a chad. During the course of this raid I discover a blue tent that I want, as a part of his stash, filled with bottles of vodka, AKs and a juggernaut suit. Assuming that the rest of his containers cannot possibly hold all of these items, would I be safe in dropping these items on the floor as I want specifically the tent and not the items inside?

Example 2: I raid Andrey's base again except this time he's been really good at the game and has two tents, as well as a gate and a code lock. I still want one of the tents so after hacking my way in I, as per the first example, dump all of his gear from one tent on the floor. However, his other tent has plenty of room for his items but I decide not to store it there and make my way out of the base with the tent. Is my decision to leave his items on the floor when I could have stored them away, if I were a particularly nice raider, against the rules?

Edit 1: @Rover thanks for your swift reply. Your answer to my first question was as expected, however I am wondering why the perception of maliciously griefing somebody matters, rather than the factual evidence that could be presented in a report. Let's take a quick look at the rule pertaining to griefing:

Spoiler

4.8 Griefing is act of damaging or destroying a player base, storage container, vehicles or their contents using OOC knowledge, ill intent or doing so without IC reasoning that is proportionate to the damage done.

Now, you stated:

Spoiler

You had the opportunity to save the items by stowing them in another tent. By leaving them on the ground, this is a willful choice to let the items despawn.

This is true, I had the opportunity, though choosing to leave them on the ground is not a choice to let them despawn as much as it is a repercussion of wanting their container. An unfortunate outcome yes but not a maliciously intended action. This would disqualify it from one portion of the griefing rule.

Spoiler

This could be seen as griefing, and I would lean towards seeing it as such.

I don't understand why you would see this as griefing. Having the opportunity to save someone's items doesn't mean I have to, the same way having the opportunity to not kill someone when I've got legitimate kill rights on them doesn't mean I have to spare them. This is not stated anywhere in the rules, as seen above, griefing requires four things, one of which is mandatory and must be supplemented with one or more of three conditions:

  • Damage/destruction of player bases, containers, vehicles or the contents [necessary]
  • Malicious intent [optional]
  • Out of Character knowledge [optional]
  • Lack of IC reasoning [optional]

Neither of my scenarios line up with the rule definition of griefing. How can this be seen otherwise?

Edit 2: 

Spoiler

In my eyes its usually always the last option that matters most; having a proper IC reasoning that is proportionate to the damage done. I do not accept the IC reasoning of 'I didn't want to move it the other tent.' Much the same as we expect players to abide by the initiation and kill rights rules, despite in reality us all knowing if you wanted someones items the safest way to get them would just be to shoot them and loot the corpse, not hold them up and risk dying.

This isn't really comparable as the no-KoS rule is designed to promote roleplay on this roleplay server. I did not make a realism argument, they are dumb as DayZRP does not promote realism, I am making a character and rule-based argument. The rules do not support your outlook, as seen above, as well as the fact that inherent character reasoning has never been an argument that was accepted at DayZRP. If you are going to make that comparison though, how does this outlook protect people's RP in any way? It seems to just protect gear and not much else, which isn't what DayZRP is about.

Spoiler

If your argument leans on trying to define the fourth bullet point as any IC justification makes it valid, then its remarkably easy to have a character that just goes around destroying every stash/base/supply cache they come across under the justification of 'Its what my character would do' for [Reason]. This is why all situations are viewed independent of each other, and the staff team weighs the merits of the case and the damage caused and the justification of the raider to determine if we would consider it griefing or not.

No, simply put, what I am saying is confined to these particular situations that are what I consider the most likely occurrences during base raids. I don't subscribe to this thin end of the wedge argument, as said above inherent character traits have never been an excuse to break the rules, so my interpretation of IC justification would not invariably lead to loose justifications being used to destroy whole bases. That would be absurd.

Edited by APositiveElmo

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, APositiveElmo said:

So I've got a question or two regarding raiding rules, specifically pertaining to removing item containers from bases when there may be no room in the base for all the items in the desired container.

Example: I raid @AndreyQ's base because he's a chad. During the course of this raid I discover a blue tent that I want, as a part of his stash, filled with bottles of vodka, AKs and a juggernaut suit. Assuming that the rest of his containers cannot possibly hold all of these items, would I be safe in dropping these items on the floor as I want specifically the tent and not the items inside?

Example 2: I raid Andrey's base again except this time he's been really good at the game and has two tents, as well as a gate and a code lock. I still want one of the tents so after hacking my way in I, as per the first example, dump all of his gear from one tent on the floor. However, his other tent has plenty of room for his items but I decide not to store it there and make my way out of the base with the tent. Is my decision to leave his items on the floor when I could have stored them away, if I were a particularly nice raider, against the rules?

These are my thoughts and how I would view your examples, based on my understanding of the rules. Your Verdicting Gamemasters mileage may vary.

 

Example 1: You do not have a choice about 'saving' the players items, as there is only one tent. So long as you take the tent with you, I would not see any issue with this or call it griefing. You did not intentionally or maliciously leave behind the items; you wanted the tent so you took the tent. I would not see this as griefing, as you had no options to save the gear if you wanted the tent.

 

Example 2: You had the opportunity to save the items by stowing them in another tent. By leaving them on the ground, this is a willful choice to let the items despawn. You should store as much as you can in the other tent to avoid the perception of maliciously griefing the players encampment by despawning items when you had another option available to you. This could be seen as griefing, and I would lean towards seeing it as such. (Context of the situation depending).

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, APositiveElmo said:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

This could be seen as griefing, and I would lean towards seeing it as such.

I don't understand why you would see this as griefing. Having the opportunity to save someone's items doesn't mean I have to, the same way having the opportunity to not kill someone when I've got legitimate kill rights on them doesn't mean I have to spare them. This is not stated anywhere in the rules, as seen above, griefing requires four things, one of which is mandatory and must be supplemented with one or more of three conditions:

  • Damage/destruction of player bases, containers, vehicles or the contents [necessary]
  • Malicious intent [optional]
  • Out of Character knowledge [optional]
  • Lack of IC reasoning [optional]

Neither of my scenarios line up with the rule definition of griefing. How can this be seen otherwise?

I'll quote the full rule to clarify your last bullet point, as the key addendum is 'proportionate to damage done'.

Quote

Griefing is act of damaging or destroying a player base, storage container, vehicles or their contents using OOC knowledge, ill intent or doing so without IC reasoning that is proportionate to the damage done.

I'm going to lead with this: TL;DR: My interpretation of 'IC reasoning proportionate to the damage done' is different then yours.

 

Now that that is out of the way, onto the explanation!

This is why I qualified my above statement with context matters. I have no idea how anyone will ever meet the OOC knowledge requirement as its as likely to be proven as rule 3.6 without video evidence or a self-admitted guilty by the party involved. Ill intent is again, just as unlikely to ever be proven because short of having the player admit they were salty and doing it for that reason alone, or an established history of OOC issues between two parties, I don't think it will be applied. I can't recall a single griefing verdict where that was factored in.

In my eyes its usually always the last option that matters most; having a proper IC reasoning that is proportionate to the damage done. I do not accept the IC reasoning of 'I didn't want to move it the other tent.' Much the same as we expect players to abide by the initiation and kill rights rules, despite in reality us all knowing if you wanted someones items the safest way to get them would just be to shoot them and loot the corpse, not hold them up and risk dying.

 

If your argument leans on trying to define the fourth bullet point as any IC justification makes it valid, then its remarkably easy to have a character that just goes around destroying every stash/base/supply cache they come across under the justification of 'Its what my character would do' for [Reason]. This is why all situations are viewed independent of each other, and the staff team weighs the merits of the case and the damage caused and the justification of the raider to determine if we would consider it griefing or not.

Share this post


Link to post

Greetings @APositiveElmo,

To answer your edited question;

When stealing from a base and leaving items on the floor when there were other storage containers with space for said items, you have a duty to put those items as way as it can be seen as griefing. This is because griefing is every destructive action that is not warranted by actions of the enemy. If you have previous history of murder etc, it would be fine to gain entry to their base, raid it and possibly leave a few items. However, If you have no previous history and you simply get in there and drop their items because you simply can't be bothered to transfer items, or you're just doing it "for a laugh", that is griefing. So, if you have no past conflicts with the players base you are stealing from, you shouldn't be dealing dis-proportionate damage to your in character reasoning and past conflicts with the base owners by letting their items despawn. However, there are certain circumstances that could change a verdict, such as having a good explanation as to why you left the items on the floor. One example being, you steal from a base, you have an overwatch guy on the hill and he let's you know over the radio that he see's the base owners heading back so you proceed to leave all the items on the ground so that you can get away undetected. 

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...