Jump to content
Server time (UTC): 2020-01-19, 17:36 WE ARE RECRUITING
Sign in to follow this  
Dustup

RulePlay Appeal

Recommended Posts

Link to the source of punishment (report/post):

Why the verdict is not fair:

The rules have been used in the verdict without considering related rules, their meanings, the situation as a whole, extremely recent verdicts with similar situations and without further background which may have further had an effect on the verdict and which I should have mentioned at the time, but had not thought it necessary. 

The verdict is also not fair as my actions in just shooting someone and not killing them while having valid rights to kill them, do not constitute a rulebreak.

 

Additional statements/comments explaining your point of view:

So, hear me out.  The rules do not exist in a vacuum.  Rule 3.3 was quoted as the reason for the alleged "ruleplay" which states:
"You may not focus on out of character gains to the detriment of RP. For example, "rule play" is prioritizing things like kill rights or OOC information above more appropriate IC actions or behavior. Always prioritize role play over rule play."

Now in this particular situation, the kills were exercised using "Defender Rights" which had been obtained.  Let's take a look at what the rules say about what constitutes "Ruleplay" in such a situation shall we?  "Defender Rights" come under the heading of "Hostilities".  Now the rules say the following about such rights:

"If you are a defender - the one being initiated on or subjected to other hostile actions that threaten your life which you did not start or provoke - you are allowed to defend yourself by gaining DEFENDER RIGHTS on the attackers. Defender rights allow you to kill attackers for 2 hours or until your character dies. Defender rights can be shared with anyone who you recently role played with as well as all your group members, if you are a part of an approved group."

Now looking at what the rules say about such "Defender Rights" and when using them become "Ruleplay", rule 4.3 states:

"You shouldn't use defender or attacker rights in situations where it doesn't make in-character sense as it can be seen as rule play. In other words, obtaining kill rights alone does not give you explicit permission to use them any time you want and in all situations. Think about if using them to kill another character is viable in the current situation considering role play and In Character information."


I would like to now bring to the forefront of staffs mind, these quotes from the swedish overlord:

"Usually equal force should be used as a response to an attack on you - eye for an eye principle ( if someone shoots, you shoot, if they kill, you kill, if they punch, you punch). A good example for this is the execution rule 4.6 where you can only execute a hostage if that hostage was responsible for death of your ally"

 

Now let's analyse what the rules themselves basically set out as the core foundations under ruleplay when using defender rights shall we?

  1. Kill rights shouldn't be exercised if there are more appropriate IC actions or behaviour;
  2. When using kill rights it should make sense "in Character";
  3. Equal force in retaliation is usually appropriate.

 

 

Now this report was put up by those who had kos'd and attempted to kos our group member, but basically had both tried to murder our guy, one was just more successful.  The situation that kicked all this off was the OP and his buddy murdering our innocent comrade in cold blood, without so much as having the regard to find out if it was the person whom they claimed was shooting at them or even bothering to go and see if he was still alive after finding out they screwed up (I asked his group members to get them to go see if he was still alive as shown in the stream and they seemingly ignored me).  Their kill and attempted kill, were subsequently confirmed IC to us.  OOC it was was found to be invalid in this report:

The invalidity of the kos and  attempted kos STILL granted us "Defender Rights" and did not invalidate our rights, and given that the guilty parties were part of an approved group, and had killed a member of our approved group, we actually gained rights on ALL wolfpack members, including the ones in our truck.  But none of us exercised those rights, instead choosing to RP out the situation and get them to hand over the murderers of our fallen comrade (who it turns out was in fact related to jesus and rose again from the dead).

It has already been acknowledged that we did in fact have kos rights.

 

Some further background and context to the situation that occured:

There is relevant history that our group has with the Wolf Pack.  I will just highlight some of this:

  • The two groups have had multiple gunfights with each other, there has been losses on both sides, and both sides have started the various fights;
  • Hostages from both groups have been taken;
  • Our group members IC for the most part DO NOT LIKE the Wolf Pack and view most of them as "weak" which is the worst type of person to be in our core belief system IG;
  • An arrangement at peace was attempted and this resulted in the death of our members Nik and Bobby by members of the Wolfpack.  This information was subsequently given to various members of the jackals IC by someone present at the time and then the information was spread throughout the group.  We, as a group, and my character included, viewed this as a serious slight against the Jackals and suspected that this may have been a planned ambush/backstabbing.  From what we gathered from the situation, the actions were done by people low in the WP ranks and the higher ups didn't really do much about it in the way we would have expected them to deal with it (death to those that disobeyed and did the shooting).  Someone has been gracious enough to inform me that the situation was streamed and has sent me this link ;
  • After this, peace was somewhat achieved and we moved into the compound with the WolfPack in what can only be described as a very fragile peace. 
  • Personally speaking, I have had some of who I assume are lower ranking members of the WP start talking shit or just come and try to be as annoying IC as possible.  From an IC perspective, it appears that they clearly don't have too much care or worry about us, and they really should given the short history between the groups.  We aren't their "buddies" IC and are a known hostile group who have no issue with dealing with our enemies in the most violent of ways.

 

Situation which occurred:

As shown in the stream, we continued to RP with the wolf pack members who were with us, including at least 1 person we are aware was a "higher up" and whom we had been informed was present at the situation with bobby and nik being initiated on and killed whilst discussing possible peace.  I had told them on at least 1 occassion to have them ready and tied up when we arrived.  As can be supported by what the stream shows, it was my belief that the two murderers knew we were coming up to exact our revenge.

When we got to the Wolfpack Base, despite my request, we were faced with two still armed murderers not tied up and not standing by the grocery store as requested, but towards the two stalls where people in the prison building would easily have shots on us.  We had a few WP members in view and I suspected that there were likely more hidden in the impenetrable fortress of death and loot (AKA the prison building), or the other surrounding building that had eyes and positions on us on us.  As the stream shows the two murderers didn't give a shit about what they had done.   We get out, and start talking to them, we did not immediately gun them down.  It then becomes clear that they showed absolutely no fear, there was no attempt to try and apologise, no concern shown etc, just a very blasé "So what" attitude.  There was absolutely no emotion shown at all despite them KNOWING what they had done and they would have also known about our group and it's tendancies.  This IC leads me to the conclusion that they didn't care what they had done, and likely had backup coming and/or were going to try and screw us over as they had done with the nik and bobby situation.  to me justice could only be achieved by their deaths, blood for blood!  IC I thought that this had to be done quickly to avoid anyone trying to interfere or rescue them.

Now knowing that they had already screwed us over as a group (i.e. the bobby and nik situation) once before, we had every right IC to suspect that the same was about to happen  to us, especially when faced with the uncaring attitude of the soon to be deceased.  Now if this were to happen, not only would we likely die/be severely injured if we resisted, but the death of Big John would have been without consequence, and the Wolf Pack, or at least the lower downs would have thought they could harm and or kill us with no consequences.  We could not let this happen, and an example needed to be made to the group as to what would happen to all those who tried killing our members again.

You can see, even after the kill the bodies are disrespected and theres some poking at the remaining WolfPack members including me accusing them of not giving a shit and laughing about their guys.  It becomes clear to me IC at this point that my initial and legitimate suspicions were wrong and that the wolf pack had actually kept their word about letting us do what we wanted to them and not interfering.  Some of our guys are then involved in the taking of another member hostage and moving them out of the base just to help rub the point in that we will not be messed with and will not sit there and take it.  This person had an "S" and was done right in the face of a wolf pack higher up with the point being that nothing would keep them safe if they tried to kill our guys, not even an "S".  

Applying the above to the Rules:

The deaths were not "executions" within the meanings of the rules, as that would have required them to be our hostages, which they were not.  Instead, I, much like my other ban-buddies,  was responding to the fact that they KILLED OUR GROUP MEMBER,  who is IG basically the groups 2nd leader and equivalent in status to the groups official leader.  He is deeply respected IG by our group members as a truely "strong" person who is at the apex of our core belief system IG. 

were there "more appropriate IC actions or behaviour"?  I would argue that there was not.  Blood for Blood, and eye for an eye etc etc.  We worked hard to RP with the Wolfpack members and get all the information we needed, they had murdered someone very special to us as explained above, and didn't give a single fuck about their actions.

Did the use of kill rights "make sense "in Character"?  Yes, yes it most definitely did!  I think I have explained this enough already above, let me know if you want more elaboration on this.

I am really not sure what other IC motivation would be "appropriate" at this stage if someone can get away with killing one of your groups leaders and you cant return the favour in fear of it being "ruleplay" to kill the guys that killed your guy aprroximately 1/2 an hour ago and don't give shit about having done so.


 

I would now like to bring up this situation and recent report which was subsequently overturned by an admin:

Now here we can see two people who were originally found guilty of invalid kills had their verdicts overturned.  NOBODY AT ALL was found guilty of "Ruleplay".  The facts are comparible and bear a striking resemblance, except that I would argue, we had more IC motivation to want to kill those who had shot a group leader.  Lets compare:

 

Overturned report verdict:                                                                                                                   Current verdict:

people take a member of Group B hostage and then kill said hostage                                        Two members of the WolfPack shoot one of our leaders and kill him, no initiation at all

Group B gains "defensive rights" as they recently roleplayed with the victim                             The Jackals gain Defensive rights on the entire Wolfpack as victim is in an approved group with the jackals

People of group B start looking for and observing those involved in taking the hostage           We RP with WolfPack members all the way up to the base and find out exactly who killed and shot our guy.

People of Group B set up an ambush and wait for the truck                                                           We, thinking the wolfpack is going to screw us over and stop us from having our justice, go into the                                                                                                                                                                              Wolfpacks own compound and see the two suspects still armed and roaming free despite what was said.

The truck comes, someone says "Dobreden motherfucker" and they try to gun                         We talk and see they dont give a shit about what they did from their attitude and suspect we have been set down everyone who they think took their friend hostage                                                                 up/help is coming to stop us getting our justice, bobby says "Joe Dewski"                                                                                                                                                                        sends his regards" and him and I shoot at the 2nd person.  He dies.

NOT RULEPLAY!                                                                                                                                        RULEPLAY?

  

To me it just seems like the classic quote from George Orwell's "Animal Farm", "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." I hope I am wrong and can have it explained to me as to why this is not the case here.                                                                      

 

 

Did I infact break any rules at all?  (NO SERIOUSLY):

My next and final argument is that I, the great Dustup, did not infact break a single rule!  Even if you were to STILL claim it was ruleplay after everything I have listed, to have killed the two MURDERERS whom we had valid Defensive rights on, the logs show that I didn't actually kill either of the two that were killed but just shot one of them 4 times.  Now as a comparison, if you kill someone without rights it is kos, but if you just shoot them without rights, it is "attempted kos".  How can not actually killing someone but just shooting them while actually having "Defender Rights" be ruleplay?  At best it's "attempted ruleplay" but there is no such rulebreak now is there?  If I am wrong, please point me to where it lists such a rulebreak and its corresponding punishment in the report punishment guide.....

 

 

What would you like to achieve with this appeal: Ban overturn, points removed, some consistency in somewhat similar reports so close to each other, world peace (it is almost xmas after all), or alternatively perhaps just a verbal and no points with this being a learning situation for the community as a whole given that I couldn't even track down a report where someone exercising their valid Defensive rights acquired after someone intentionally killed and attempted to kill a group member was ever found to be ruleplay.

 

 

What could you have done better?: explained more in the report, attempted to have the two who murdered our group member in cold blood moved out of the compound to try and minimise the risk of ambush so we could potentially take a bit longer to kill the two that in my characters eyes had to die for their actions and blasé attitude about killing our guy IG.

Share this post


Link to post

Hello @Dustup,

First we want to address your appeal. We appreciate the time and effort that went into this, and providing backstory as well as context to the events that happened. These sorts of things truly do help the staff team to have a full realization of how and why things went down, and what motivated players to do what they did.

A separate team of staff have reviewed this appeal and have come to the conclusion to deny it. We are going to address point by point as best we can the number of things you have brought up to consider, but if you feel we missed or inadequately explained anything please feel free to message us directly and we will attempt to provide further clarification.

A tl;dr will be provided at the end of the appeal for clarity.

 

I'm going to address something right here that is going to make a large portion of your appeal null: You had both valid kill rights and execution rights on the people you killed.

This point was not in contention. If you did not have defender rights or execution rights on the people you killed, you would have been punished for attempted invalid kill, as you did not have rights. That was never the issue with the situation at hand, the issue was that we do not agree with how, when, and why you chose to apply your kill rights, whether those be kill rights gained through defender rights or execution rights.

 

Spoiler

 

On 12/9/2019 at 6:26 AM, Dustup said:

The rules have been used in the verdict without considering related rules, their meanings, the situation as a whole, extremely recent verdicts with similar situations and without further background which may have further had an effect on the verdict and which I should have mentioned at the time, but had not thought it necessary. 

The verdict is also not fair as my actions in just shooting someone and not killing them while having valid rights to kill them, do not constitute a rulebreak.

 

 

  • We disagree, and believe we did consider related rules and their meanings.
  • The situation at its whole is not what the report was about, the report is specifically about the two people that were killed, and the circumstances of their death.
  • Reports do not set precedents, as such they are not something we are required to consider. (Although we feel it would be safe to say most of us do)

 

Spoiler

 

On 12/9/2019 at 6:26 AM, Dustup said:

Additional statements/comments explaining your point of view:

 

So, hear me out.  The rules do not exist in a vacuum.  Rule 3.3 was quoted as the reason for the alleged "ruleplay" which states:
"You may not focus on out of character gains to the detriment of RP. For example, "rule play" is prioritizing things like kill rights or OOC information above more appropriate IC actions or behavior. Always prioritize role play over rule play."

 

Now in this particular situation, the kills were exercised using "Defender Rights" which had been obtained.  Let's take a look at what the rules say about what constitutes "Ruleplay" in such a situation shall we?  "Defender Rights" come under the heading of "Hostilities".  Now the rules say the following about such rights:

"If you are a defender - the one being initiated on or subjected to other hostile actions that threaten your life which you did not start or provoke - you are allowed to defend yourself by gaining DEFENDER RIGHTS on the attackers. Defender rights allow you to kill attackers for 2 hours or until your character dies. Defender rights can be shared with anyone who you recently role played with as well as all your group members, if you are a part of an approved group."

Now looking at what the rules say about such "Defender Rights" and when using them become "Ruleplay", rule 4.3 states:

"You shouldn't use defender or attacker rights in situations where it doesn't make in-character sense as it can be seen as rule play. In other words, obtaining kill rights alone does not give you explicit permission to use them any time you want and in all situations. Think about if using them to kill another character is viable in the current situation considering role play and In Character information."


I would like to now bring to the forefront of staffs mind, these quotes from the swedish overlord:

"Usually equal force should be used as a response to an attack on you - eye for an eye principle ( if someone shoots, you shoot, if they kill, you kill, if they punch, you punch). A good example for this is the execution rule 4.6 where you can only execute a hostage if that hostage was responsible for death of your ally"

 

Now let's analyse what the rules themselves basically set out as the core foundations under ruleplay when using defender rights shall we?

  1. Kill rights shouldn't be exercised if there are more appropriate IC actions or behaviour;
  2. When using kill rights it should make sense "in Character";
  3. Equal force in retaliation is usually appropriate.

 

 

 

  • The reason rule 3.3 was quoted is because that is the rule we feel you broke; You had valid defender rights and execution rights, so rules 4.2 and 4.6 would not apply here.
  • The bulk of your quoted section above is confirming that your kills were valid under the ruling of what Defender Rights is. This is not in question. You had valid defender rights.
  • The Report and objection by @Roland quoted has no bearing on this situation, as it is referring to an incident where a character was attacked and defended themselves. That is not what happened here, and the quoted portions is out of context and not relevant to this report. This is a prime example of why "case by case" exists and why we are advised not to look at old reports for precedents. 
  • The thing that seemed to have been missed in the above quote is under rule 3.3, where you did not bold this: "Always prioritize role play over rule play." This is the reason you were found guilty of rule play; it was the opinion of the staff team you did not prioritize the roleplay experience of those you killed, and instead opted for exercising your validly obtained Defender rights.

 

Spoiler

 

Quote

Now this report was put up by those who had kos'd and attempted to kos our group member, but basically had both tried to murder our guy, one was just more successful.  The situation that kicked all this off was the OP and his buddy murdering our innocent comrade in cold blood, without so much as having the regard to find out if it was the person whom they claimed was shooting at them or even bothering to go and see if he was still alive after finding out they screwed up (I asked his group members to get them to go see if he was still alive as shown in the stream and they seemingly ignored me).  Their kill and attempted kill, were subsequently confirmed IC to us.  OOC it was was found to be invalid in this report:

The invalidity of the kos and  attempted kos STILL granted us "Defender Rights" and did not invalidate our rights, and given that the guilty parties were part of an approved group, and had killed a member of our approved group, we actually gained rights on ALL wolfpack members, including the ones in our truck.  But none of us exercised those rights, instead choosing to RP out the situation and get them to hand over the murderers of our fallen comrade (who it turns out was in fact related to jesus and rose again from the dead).

It has already been acknowledged that we did in fact have kos rights.

 

 

  • We are sure you meant to say you have Defender rights, not KOS rights, but yes. This is not in dispute.
  • You did indeed, technically, have kill rights on the entirety of Wolfpack. We are pleased that you did not choose to immediately attempt to exercise these rights and mow down everyone around you, and instead were trying to pursue an RP outcome of having Wolfpack serve you up the two that killed your ally.
Spoiler

 

Quote

Some further background and context to the situation that occured:

There is relevant history that our group has with the Wolf Pack.  I will just highlight some of this:

  • The two groups have had multiple gunfights with each other, there has been losses on both sides, and both sides have started the various fights;
  • Hostages from both groups have been taken;
  • Our group members IC for the most part DO NOT LIKE the Wolf Pack and view most of them as "weak" which is the worst type of person to be in our core belief system IG;
  • An arrangement at peace was attempted and this resulted in the death of our members Nik and Bobby by members of the Wolfpack.  This information was subsequently given to various members of the jackals IC by someone present at the time and then the information was spread throughout the group.  We, as a group, and my character included, viewed this as a serious slight against the Jackals and suspected that this may have been a planned ambush/backstabbing.  From what we gathered from the situation, the actions were done by people low in the WP ranks and the higher ups didn't really do much about it in the way we would have expected them to deal with it (death to those that disobeyed and did the shooting).  Someone has been gracious enough to inform me that the situation was streamed and has sent me this link ;
  • After this, peace was somewhat achieved and we moved into the compound with the WolfPack in what can only be described as a very fragile peace. 
  • Personally speaking, I have had some of who I assume are lower ranking members of the WP start talking shit or just come and try to be as annoying IC as possible.  From an IC perspective, it appears that they clearly don't have too much care or worry about us, and they really should given the short history between the groups.  We aren't their "buddies" IC and are a known hostile group who have no issue with dealing with our enemies in the most violent of ways.

 

Situation which occurred:

As shown in the stream, we continued to RP with the wolf pack members who were with us, including at least 1 person we are aware was a "higher up" and whom we had been informed was present at the situation with bobby and nik being initiated on and killed whilst discussing possible peace.  I had told them on at least 1 occassion to have them ready and tied up when we arrived.  As can be supported by what the stream shows, it was my belief that the two murderers knew we were coming up to exact our revenge.

When we got to the Wolfpack Base, despite my request, we were faced with two still armed murderers not tied up and not standing by the grocery store as requested, but towards the two stalls where people in the prison building would easily have shots on us.  We had a few WP members in view and I suspected that there were likely more hidden in the impenetrable fortress of death and loot (AKA the prison building), or the other surrounding building that had eyes and positions on us on us.  As the stream shows the two murderers didn't give a shit about what they had done.   We get out, and start talking to them, we did not immediately gun them down.  It then becomes clear that they showed absolutely no fear, there was no attempt to try and apologise, no concern shown etc, just a very blasé "So what" attitude.  There was absolutely no emotion shown at all despite them KNOWING what they had done and they would have also known about our group and it's tendancies.  This IC leads me to the conclusion that they didn't care what they had done, and likely had backup coming and/or were going to try and screw us over as they had done with the nik and bobby situation.  to me justice could only be achieved by their deaths, blood for blood!  IC I thought that this had to be done quickly to avoid anyone trying to interfere or rescue them.

Now knowing that they had already screwed us over as a group (i.e. the bobby and nik situation) once before, we had every right IC to suspect that the same was about to happen  to us, especially when faced with the uncaring attitude of the soon to be deceased.  Now if this were to happen, not only would we likely die/be severely injured if we resisted, but the death of Big John would have been without consequence, and the Wolf Pack, or at least the lower downs would have thought they could harm and or kill us with no consequences.  We could not let this happen, and an example needed to be made to the group as to what would happen to all those who tried killing our members again.

You can see, even after the kill the bodies are disrespected and theres some poking at the remaining WolfPack members including me accusing them of not giving a shit and laughing about their guys.  It becomes clear to me IC at this point that my initial and legitimate suspicions were wrong and that the wolf pack had actually kept their word about letting us do what we wanted to them and not interfering.  Some of our guys are then involved in the taking of another member hostage and moving them out of the base just to help rub the point in that we will not be messed with and will not sit there and take it.  This person had an "S" and was done right in the face of a wolf pack higher up with the point being that nothing would keep them safe if they tried to kill our guys, not even an "S".  

 

 

 

The information contained in the above is appreciated, as it explains and clears up the situation quite fully. It is not our intention to cherry pick, but there are a few things that we must specifically address:

  • Whether they knew or not what was going to happen is irrelevant to the situation at hand, and you can not shoot players without repercussions based on your belief.
  • If you suspected that you were in an ambush and did not want to face Wolfpack why did you shoot two of their members? It is our conclusion this can't have been a real concern, or you would have chosen a better and alternative method of exacting your vengeance.
  • We highly disagree that the two players did not give a shit, or that you could ascertain that so quickly. You did not roleplay with them long enough to come close to properly formulating that conclusion. Everything you say about their behavior and their actions is something we will have to disagree on, as you can not uncover all of that in under 20 seconds. This will be covered in more detail in the tl;dr.
  • Regardless of what you requested of Wolfpack members, @cjackson821 & @Blizna received next to zero roleplay from you before you shot them.
Spoiler

 

Quote

Applying the above to the Rules:

The deaths were not "executions" within the meanings of the rules, as that would have required them to be our hostages, which they were not.  Instead, I, much like my other ban-buddies,  was responding to the fact that they KILLED OUR GROUP MEMBER,  who is IG basically the groups 2nd leader and equivalent in status to the groups official leader.  He is deeply respected IG by our group members as a truely "strong" person who is at the apex of our core belief system IG. 

were there "more appropriate IC actions or behaviour"?  I would argue that there was not.  Blood for Blood, and eye for an eye etc etc.  We worked hard to RP with the Wolfpack members and get all the information we needed, they had murdered someone very special to us as explained above, and didn't give a single fuck about their actions.

Did the use of kill rights "make sense "in Character"?  Yes, yes it most definitely did!  I think I have explained this enough already above, let me know if you want more elaboration on this.

I am really not sure what other IC motivation would be "appropriate" at this stage if someone can get away with killing one of your groups leaders and you cant return the favour in fear of it being "ruleplay" to kill the guys that killed your guy aprroximately 1/2 an hour ago and don't give shit about having done so.
 

 

 

 

 

  • There is a case to be made that they may have been considered hostages with how they were presented, but either way it is irrelevant as once again the fact that you had kill rights is not in dispute, and whether they were hostages or not doesn't change the outcome of the verdict or this appeal.
  • While we can understand that it made sense ICly, this is not justification. As an example, it makes sense for a bandit not to initiate and just shoot people from ambush if you want their gear, but obviously on a roleplay server that would not result in good roleplay.
  • There was much more roleplay that could have been had here. This only further evidenced by your own admission that after you killed @cjackson821 & @Blizna you were not then immediatedly killed by Wolfpack in return, but received roleplay. This just shows that you had the opportunity to provide a meaningful death to both of the above, but instead elected for the quick kill. That is what ruleplay is, prioritizing kill rights over roleplay.
Spoiler

 

Quote

I would now like to bring up this situation and recent report which was subsequently overturned by an admin:

Now here we can see two people who were originally found guilty of invalid kills had their verdicts overturned.  NOBODY AT ALL was found guilty of "Ruleplay".  The facts are comparible and bear a striking resemblance, except that I would argue, we had more IC motivation to want to kill those who had shot a group leader.  Lets compare:

 

Overturned report verdict:                                                                                                                   Current verdict:

people take a member of Group B hostage and then kill said hostage                                        Two members of the WolfPack shoot one of our leaders and kill him, no initiation at all

Group B gains "defensive rights" as they recently roleplayed with the victim                             The Jackals gain Defensive rights on the entire Wolfpack as victim is in an approved group with the jackals

People of group B start looking for and observing those involved in taking the hostage           We RP with WolfPack members all the way up to the base and find out exactly who killed and shot our guy.

People of Group B set up an ambush and wait for the truck                                                           We, thinking the wolfpack is going to screw us over and stop us from having our justice, go into the                                                                                                                                                                              Wolfpacks own compound and see the two suspects still armed and roaming free despite what was said.

The truck comes, someone says "Dobreden motherfucker" and they try to gun                         We talk and see they dont give a shit about what they did from their attitude and suspect we have been set down everyone who they think took their friend hostage                                                                 up/help is coming to stop us getting our justice, bobby says "Joe Dewski"                                                                                                                                                                        sends his regards" and him and I shoot at the 2nd person.  He dies.

NOT RULEPLAY!                                                                                                                                        RULEPLAY?

  

To me it just seems like the classic quote from George Orwell's "Animal Farm", "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." I hope I am wrong and can have it explained to me as to why this is not the case here.                                                                      

 

 

 

 

It is worth noting that no instance of Ruleplay was overturned in the above report. What was overturned were two invalid kills that were deemed valid as the admin team and @Roland decided that by driving around other aggressors the parties that were killed invalidly brought down their end on themselves through their association with people that had active kill rights on them by another group. That is a very different situation then what we are looking at in this report.

The instance of Ruleplay in the above Verdict was not overturned, it was upheld as the hostage was executed too quickly without proper roleplay being provided. That is similar to this report, except that we feel defender rights were applied too quickly in a situation that did not call for it. You were not staging an ambush on a moving vehicle full of perceived combatants. You were presented with two complying people that you then killed with barely any effort at roleplaying with them.

Spoiler

 

Quote

Did I infact break any rules at all?  (NO SERIOUSLY):

My next and final argument is that I, the great Dustup, did not infact break a single rule!  Even if you were to STILL claim it was ruleplay after everything I have listed, to have killed the two MURDERERS whom we had valid Defensive rights on, the logs show that I didn't actually kill either of the two that were killed but just shot one of them 4 times.  Now as a comparison, if you kill someone without rights it is kos, but if you just shoot them without rights, it is "attempted kos".  How can not actually killing someone but just shooting them while actually having "Defender Rights" be ruleplay?  At best it's "attempted ruleplay" but there is no such rulebreak now is there?  If I am wrong, please point me to where it lists such a rulebreak and its corresponding punishment in the report punishment guide.....

 

 

 

The act of Ruleplay in this case is using defender rights in a situation where roleplay would have been a better decision. The act of shooting someone is valid if you have defender rights. Because you shot someone, using defender rights, in a situation where the staff team feels you should have tried to roleplay instead, you were found guilty of ruleplay. There is no attempted ruleplay as Ruleplay is not contingent on killing someone.

 

TL;DR

The reason you were found guilty of ruleplay is simple.

At 4:33 and 54 seconds you and your allies exit the truck at the Wolfpack Compound.

At 4:34 and 14 seconds, you and your allies shoot them.

Your entire roleplay with them consisted of, paraphrased, "Who's who? You are Ivan? That ones Alex?" bullets.

That is not acceptable.

You were not in a gunfight. You were not staging an ambush. You didn't just come across them. You had the entire drive up to plan your roleplay. It was woefully rushed and utterly inappropriate to the situation at hand to just end them as you did. While you provided roleplay to other people in the situation, @Blizna & @cjackson821 got nothing more then a quick identifiying greeting and an execution. This isn't the kind of roleplay we wish to promote.

With that said; Appeal Denied.

 

Signed: @Rover, @Scarlett, @Peril

 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...