Jump to content
Server time: 2017-10-18, 02:17
Safe Zone: CLOSED

  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Seiceps the Deceiver

NVFL and the likes

Question

Seiceps the Deceiver    309

On a side note, the accused in that report wouldn't have been able to kill anyone had you or anyone else involved in that situation taken away the land mine or tied the accused making it impossible for the land mine to be placed and stepped on. It's all well and good saying they did something wrong, however if you take into account that no one took the land mine from the accused then it just seems like something that was skipped over.

Okay so I was skimming through the forums on a Monday night, per usual, and noticed this line in a response from a Staff Team who solved a report. From what I am understanding is that it is not considered NVFL or RDM(other hostages that were killed, not New Moon) because the aggressive party didn't take all harmful objects off of the accused?

So in that sense, when trying to save a hostage if I throw a grenade and the hostage dies it is not considered NVFL because he was going to perma-death anyways?  Can I get a better response about what happened in the thought process of the Solving party?

I posted this here because the Staff Feedback thread isn't for discussions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Hollows    450

I think if you've got the intentions to perma-death your character, then it might be acceptable to go out by suicide from explosives, or going up against people who significantly outnumber you... However, in this case if I were a hostage killed, I'd have made a report. They probably weren't intending to or going to perma-death, and they wound up just as dead as everyone else in the situation. The RolePlay up until that point now has to be erased from everyone's memory, so it was effectively a waste of time for the non-perma party, and ruined further RolePlay chances in that scenario.

Now, had the initiators done their job and taken the explosive from their hostage, whom at the time has KoS rights - this wouldn't have happened. However, as stated prior, innocent people whom nobody had legitimate KoS rights on succumbed to that suicide-bombing decision, so I feel it was a rulebreak because of that instance. Had no innocent party been injured or killed in the action, I could see from a legitimate standpoint on the situation not being an infraction on the rules.

So, basically if the woman who suicide-bombed herself and the guy stay perma-dead, then okay. But if they come back, EVER again on either character, I'd say it's stupid bad RP, NVFL and RDM on the innocent hostages killed during the suicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Seiceps the Deceiver    309

I think if you've got the intentions to perma-death your character, then it might be acceptable to go out by suicide from explosives, or going up against people who significantly outnumber you... However, in this case if I were a hostage killed, I'd have made a report. They probably weren't intending to or going to perma-death, and they wound up just as dead as everyone else in the situation. The RolePlay up until that point now has to be erased from everyone's memory, so it was effectively a waste of time for the non-perma party, and ruined further RolePlay chances in that scenario.

Now, had the initiators done their job and taken the explosive from their hostage, whom at the time has KoS rights - this wouldn't have happened. However, as stated prior, innocent people whom nobody had legitimate KoS rights on succumbed to that suicide-bombing decision, so I feel it was a rulebreak because of that instance. Had no innocent party been injured or killed in the action, I could see from a legitimate standpoint on the situation not being an infraction on the rules.

So, basically if the woman who suicide-bombed herself and the guy stay perma-dead, then okay. But if they come back, EVER again on either character, I'd say it's stupid bad RP, NVFL and RDM on the innocent hostages killed during the suicide.

Okay so, this still comes as a weird instance for me. 

So Derpy and Wave Carson are being held hostage, Derpy wants to find a way out of the situation and save Wave so she throws down a landmine and steps on it. Killing herself and many others within the house.

From what I am getting this can go either way,

1. She continues to play on the character (no perma) but she gets punished for NVFL.

2. She retires that character (perma) but receives no punishment?

So since this was the outcome of the situation, if I NVFL all I have to do is just make a new character and perma the one I NVFL'd on thus negating any of my rule breaks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Hollows    450

Yeah, that's the dilemma. I'm trying to figure out what makes this case so special, because this has occurred hundreds of times before and it's the same verdict normally. I guess you just have to be a girl IRL and do a far-fetched love story to get away with things, because the fact her actions caused the death of an innocent person and that was apparently overlooked, I guess it's alright to kill myself and other complying individuals to 'save' them, too. 

*Mandatory this isn't a flame to the person and or people(s) involved in the report, this is my opinion. I'm sorry if you're offended by it, but I'm also tired of seeing occurrences of this where people are granted random clemency where others were punished, often severely, for similar cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Diamond    0

Honestly I think the accused party used permadeath to wave the NVFL after it was broughtt up. If they had stuck with that story the whole time it wouldn't be a big deal I'm unsure here. I doubt it was pre meditated and was all in all a waste since no one else permed. But if thought out a Romeo and Juliet type deal that's kind of cool but a iffy situation.. cuz no one else can remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
SweetJoe    387

I think if you've got the intentions to perma-death your character, then it might be acceptable to go out by suicide from explosives, or going up against people who significantly outnumber you... However, in this case if I were a hostage killed, I'd have made a report. They probably weren't intending to or going to perma-death, and they wound up just as dead as everyone else in the situation. The RolePlay up until that point now has to be erased from everyone's memory, so it was effectively a waste of time for the non-perma party, and ruined further RolePlay chances in that scenario.

Now, had the initiators done their job and taken the explosive from their hostage, whom at the time has KoS rights - this wouldn't have happened. However, as stated prior, innocent people whom nobody had legitimate KoS rights on succumbed to that suicide-bombing decision, so I feel it was a rulebreak because of that instance. Had no innocent party been injured or killed in the action, I could see from a legitimate standpoint on the situation not being an infraction on the rules.

So, basically if the woman who suicide-bombed herself and the guy stay perma-dead, then okay. But if they come back, EVER again on either character, I'd say it's stupid bad RP, NVFL and RDM on the innocent hostages killed during the suicide.

Okay so, this still comes as a weird instance for me. 

So Derpy and Wave Carson are being held hostage, Derpy wants to find a way out of the situation and save Wave so she throws down a landmine and steps on it. Killing herself and many others within the house.

She killed all parties she intended to, he was not surviving capture, she didn't want to live without him. She used what she had to make sure they wouldn't suffer and also in an odd way, take out those that "killed them".  This was intentional as an end story, and as she was forced into the situation is not at fault.  She and wade were the only hostages and Wade was going to be executed.

From what I am getting this can go either way,

1. She continues to play on the character (no perma) but she gets punished for NVFL.

Verdict states a punishment for lying in a report.  That's worse than NVFL

2. She retires that character (perma) but receives no punishment?

Story fit the situation, Character is dead because she was forced into a situation she couldn't survive. Ever see the love of your live tortured to death, That's worse than dying.

So since this was the outcome of the situation, if I NVFL all I have to do is just make a new character and perma the one I NVFL'd on thus negating any of my rule breaks?

That would be circumventing a rule if proven to be true. That's a Permaban is it not? This was mentioned in the verdict.

I was In game that day, Hostage not even a thousand feet away. Hearing this is game was amazing. Shakespearian even. I'll tell this tale in game for as long as my character lives.

I'm impatient tonight and don't feel like writing, I'll be on TS if you'd like to talk about this. Ill detail short answers in red above in case not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Castiel    1124

SweetJoe pretty much summed up myself and other members of the verdicting parties reasoning behind the verdict. To myself and others the entire case was great to discuss and debate over but I think we made the right decision. To me, personally, the whole thing just screamed roleplay over ruleplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Seiceps the Deceiver    309

Yep, just talked to SweetJoe about the situation on TS. You can /solve this!

He gave me a better understanding of what went down since he was also a Hostage there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×