I guess my real question is, are we going to ostracize Camberre or not for his behaviour, like everyone did to Caerlyr, or is there a double standard since he's been part of the Southern alliance. That's what I'm asking.
The two aren't even close, you're stretching one thin line here in an attempt to try and play the double standards card.
The divine voice
of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations,
Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
As soon as Camberre starts making crazy accusations in game or in the forums, drunkenly posts threads with no value, is quoted saying very...awkward things, publicly ragequits repeatedly, and picks fights with everyone, then yeah I guess he gets ostracized too.
But if all it takes is to gank your IC enemies before people kick you out, then I'm afraid Lusternia will be even emptier than it already is.
Okay so let me begin by saying that I am very happy that (for the most part) People have come together about this issue without being complete douches to one another. That more than anything makes me feel quite blessed for being a part of this community. That being said, couple important points to clarify about this whole thing.
1. If Arien was in a manse how exactly did Leolamins locate her? If you can't scry someone from inside your manse, then logically speaking, you should not be able to BE scried within it.
Secondly, and this is the more important point. The Perms WERE SET. This was not Arien's fault, it was a bug, one that will be submitted immediately following this post. The F.F.S. Enterprise(Don't hate me, I love Star Trek) was created by ME initially, and I set the perms to what they have been since that day. Below is a c/p of exactly how the perms are set when I checked them, at 7:25PM EST after Arien was able to get a whistle and check the ship.
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux: is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora OR is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring OR is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch
Warning: there is a rule that begins with "is not" for those who are hit by this permissions set. This can lead to unexpected results. For example, if you say "is member of Celest or is not member of clan Roark's Fanclub", your intent is probably to allow citizens of Celest except for those in the Roark's Fanclub clan. In reality, it will allow anyone who is a citizen of Celest and also anyone who is not a member of the Roark's Fanclub clan. This means Magnagorans who are not a member of the clan would be allowed by this rule. If your intent is to always ban people meeting a certain criteria then you want to use the exceptions syntax, such as "is member of Celest and except is member of Magnagora".
This was/is clearly a bug in which somehow the Perms did not fire/catch/whatever. These perms have been set since Arien and I purchased the Aethership almost 8(RL) months ago(As I'm sure the Admin can verify). The very next day after this occurred(Wednesday, October 8th) the Aethership in question was missing completely. Arien and I checked both the Aetherplex, SerenPrime, and EtherWilde and the only Manse visible to either of us that was owned by one of us was Winterfell(Our home)
EDIT: I just logged into my Magnagoran Character at 7:34PM EST and tried to enter the F.F.S. Enterprise as him and had no difficulty despite the Manse Perms being set as they are above. I believe this constitutes proof of a bug
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
It's called a scrying mirror. I have one, as do others. It shows everyone who does not have a gem, regardless what plane they are on. Leolamins would often ask me to tell him who I can see is about.
EDIT: Also, you CAN scry someone from in your manse or in their manse if you're on prime and you have high enough planar to see adjacent planes.
As to the manse perms, that obviously is a bug, but it's hardly something anyone would know about - if you see a manse you can enter, you presume poor privs being set, not a bug.
Below is a c/p of exactly how the perms are set when I checked them, at 7:25PM EST after Arien was able to get a whistle and check the ship.
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux: is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora OR is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring OR is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch
That's actually going to let in anyone. You want ANDs instead of ORs, if those exist. I'm not sure how manse permission settings get constructed. But, as written: People are allowed into your manse if they are any of: not magnagoran, not glomdorian(?), not gaudiguchian. All magnagorans are not gaudiguchian, and thus allowed in. All gaudiguchians are not magnagoran, and thus also allowed in.
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux: is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora OR is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring OR is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch
Welp, guess we figured this one out
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse set fulcrux perms except member of celest You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux. 3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex- Pressing her hands together before her, Arien bows her head and a golden glow suffuses the area around her solar plexus. 3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse set fulcrux perms except member of hallifax You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux. 3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse set fulcrux perms except member of serenwilde You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux. 3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse list fulcrux perms People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux: is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora OR is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring OR is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch ...with the following exceptions... except is a member of the Holy Principality of New Celest OR except is a member of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax OR except is a member of the Free Forest of Serenwilde
Warning: there is a rule that begins with "is not" for those who are hit by this permissions set. This can lead to unexpected results. For example, if you say "is member of Celest or is not member of clan Roark's Fanclub", your intent is probably to allow citizens of Celest except for those in the Roark's Fanclub clan. In reality, it will allow anyone who is a citizen of Celest and also anyone who is not a member of the Roark's Fanclub clan. This means Magnagorans who are not a member of the clan would be allowed by this rule. If your intent is to always ban people meeting a certain criteria then you want to use the exceptions syntax, such as "is member of Celest and except is member of Magnagora".
Funny, looks exactly the same including the "OR". Your point was what now again?
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux: is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora OR is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring OR is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch
Warning: there is a rule that begins with "is not" for those who are hit by this permissions set. This can lead to unexpected results. For example, if you say "is member of Celest or is not member of clan Roark's Fanclub", your intent is probably to allow citizens of Celest except for those in the Roark's Fanclub clan. In reality, it will allow anyone who is a citizen of Celest and also anyone who is not a member of the Roark's Fanclub clan. This means Magnagorans who are not a member of the clan would be allowed by this rule. If your intent is to always ban people meeting a certain criteria then you want to use the exceptions syntax, such as "is member of Celest and except is member of Magnagora".
This is no bug, this is a work around so you CAN let an enemy in if you so chose to bu you have to be very careful about it. there is even a warning about it, it is clear as day. to stop this instead try
manse set fulcrux perms is member of hallifax manse set fulcrux perms is member of serenwilde manse set fulcrux perms is member of new celest manse set fulcrux perms except enemies of hallifax
EXCEPT will prevent every single enemy, no exceptions even if they are halli, seren or celest, if they are an enemy, they are not getting in.
The soft, hollow voice of Nocht, the Silent resounds within your mind as His words echo through the aether, "Congratulations, Arimisia. Your mastery of vermin cannot be disputed."
Well, there goes the idea of defaulting manse permissions, since this isn't a case of forgetting to set it up because the person didn't know better, but instead is a case of complicated booleans making life difficult for the lay user. Can't really work around that.
For the discussion on "reasonless" killing, here's my opinion. (I think I mentioned this elsewhere before once as well) If you're a member of an org, you're a target for the org's enemies, period. Any exceptions are granted only at the discretion of the aggressor. This is not a player rule, but rather, the game atmosphere, and how the entire PK system in Lusternia is defined. Unlike Achaea's old rules, we don't have "PK-Rules" (this is one of the things I could take Estarra by his ears and frenchkiss him for) that state "You need a verifiable reason (like being insulted) within X amount of days within X criteria for a valid PK Cause to attempt to attack someone. If you find this right has been violated, you may contact your local attorney and send an official summons via the Issue system to notify the other party of the dispute etc etc..."
In Lusternia, the Avenger system handles ALL pk-cause disputes. If you get hit upside the head by a karmic curse or an avenging angel, you've broken one of the rules. If you don't, you haven't, end of story. Very few issues outside of this system are ever accepted. Issue-lawyering is literally non-existent in this game thanks to it. The only real exceptions to this system (policed by the Admin themselves) would be newbie griefing. Non-combatants are not covered under this admin-dictated exception to the Avenger system. The emphasis is very important. The only grace granted to non-combatants of any org is a community exception, where there is an unspoken agreement to just let people have the liberty to do what they want for as long as they conform to a certain standard of "non-combat" status.
There are a few good points about this policy - firstly, and most importantly, it greatly decreases the amount of administrative oversight required on the complaining (AKA whining) part of conflict. Secondly (peripherically), it is a by-product of the Western ideal of respecting other people's boundaries and freedoms. However, there are also quite a few shortcomings. First, and most importantly, it is subjective. What do you define as "non-combatant"? Someone who hasn't learned past virtuoso in their primary? Or someone who hasn't joined a PK event in a week? Or a month? Or a year? Or forever, and once he joins even one, he's always a combatant? Who can enforce this definition? No one. Who can punish people who don't follow this community-made rule? Technically, no one. Effectively, everyone. The emphasis here is also important. If someone wants to grief non-combatants, he is by no means doing anything against the rules for as long as the Avenger system does not punish him. So what can players do? Technically nothing. However, the community has often used ostracising as a tool and a weapon to wrest back initiative on enforcing this community rule. Vigilantism, if you want to make a connection to it. And while that is fine and all, it still doesn't solve the first and most important problem, subjectivism. What do you define as "breaking the rule" now? What constitutes a breaking of said rule? Where do we draw the line? Everyone draws it differently, and thus, how can anyone justify any kind of "punishment" we as a community hand out to anyone at all?
Something like "Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should." means absolutely nothing. Because how do you define what falls under "should" and what falls under "should not"? Common sense? If there's anything common to human sensibility, it's idiocy, and you're trying to define something based on that, good day to you. There is no common ground upon which to agree to "should"s and "should not"s on such a general scale. Any attempt to define in black and white (which is what a statement like this requires) will fall flat because as a community, we have no means to impose that definition on all members of the community, thanks to the the very same idea of respecting other people's boundaries. (See, American freedom-and-liberty isn't all what it's made out to be. Come join the communist side, guys.) If you try to impose YOUR definition on me, then you're basically doing something you "should not" do, based on the exact same sentence above!
My personal policy is simple. I avoid running foul of the Avenger system, and let newbies do what they want. Everyone else is fair game for me for as long as I can justify it to myself. I usually have more important things to do than to justify to myself why I want to kill someone in a text game, so I usually don't bother going aggressive. However, I reserve the right to do so for any reason I deem acceptable, even if it is because I have a butt itch for that day, or that I missed my mom's curry while away on work. In-game alignment usually serve as more than sufficient a reason for such justifications. If you're a Serenwilder, Lerad is hardly going to want to let you live if an opportunity to kill you arises, much less hang around and chat. When Lerad doesn't actually kill you, I RP it as because he simply didn't see you there. I can't be bothered to come up with some great RP reasoning, and there's really no need to. And if you have a problem with my killing you... well, that's your problem, not mine. Now, not everyone is going to be as gentlemanly as I am and avoid jumping everyone I see who I can. And by my personal policy, I'm not going to judge them until I know their justification for their own actions. If I have a problem with them attacking my friend, I'll just go hit them back. If I can't do it myself (because I'm on a "non-com" character) I'll grab my buddies and do it together, or just have them do it for me.
Sure, the waste of time and emotional investment, as well as frustration will result from my policy. Not just on the people I so-called "grief", but also for myself at times. Still, that is part of the way this game is designed, based on the Avenger PK system. Between this and the alternative (Achaea's old pk-cause lawyering), I'll gladly shed my tears and bang my keyboard and punch my screen all eight days of the week.
3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse set fulcrux perms except member of celest You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux. 3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex- Pressing her hands together before her, Arien bows her head and a golden glow suffuses the area around her solar plexus. 3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse set fulcrux perms except member of hallifax You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux. 3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse set fulcrux perms except member of serenwilde You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux. 3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse list fulcrux perms People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux: is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora OR is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring OR is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch ...with the following exceptions... except is a member of the Holy Principality of New Celest OR except is a member of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax OR except is a member of the Free Forest of Serenwilde
Warning: there is a rule that begins with "is not" for those who are hit by this permissions set. This can lead to unexpected results. For example, if you say "is member of Celest or is not member of clan Roark's Fanclub", your intent is probably to allow citizens of Celest except for those in the Roark's Fanclub clan. In reality, it will allow anyone who is a citizen of Celest and also anyone who is not a member of the Roark's Fanclub clan. This means Magnagorans who are not a member of the clan would be allowed by this rule. If your intent is to always ban people meeting a certain criteria then you want to use the exceptions syntax, such as "is member of Celest and except is member of Magnagora".
Funny, looks exactly the same including the "OR". Your point was what now again?
The point is that this is still broken and will still let anyone in. The warning (which you are including) explicitly says so. I'd suggest reading that warning through again, it may help.
basically to explain that manse permission and what happened is this
is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora OR is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring OR is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch
anyone who is not a member of magnagora, so this opens up to anyone but magnagora but then added glom and gaudi so this then opens up to mag (you really only needed on of them). so this is where the mistake is and is why the warning is there. Hope this kinda helps to explain what happened and why you really should be using excepts which there are no go arounds. @Inzaias
The soft, hollow voice of Nocht, the Silent resounds within your mind as His words echo through the aether, "Congratulations, Arimisia. Your mastery of vermin cannot be disputed."
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux: is a member of the Holy Principality of New Celest OR is a member of the Free Forest of Serenwilde OR is a member of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax ...with the following exceptions... except is an enemy of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax OR except is an enemy of the Divine Order of Isune, the Aesthete
This would allow any from those three orgs -unless- they are an enemy of Hallifax or Isune. It's easier to set who is allowed than it is to set who -isn't- allowed, and when you're setting your fulcrux perms, it should likely be set in that order.
IMO, @Arien here's what you need to set. Feel free to remove some of the top three if you want.
----------------------- People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux: is a member of the Holy Principality of New Celest OR is a member of the Free Forest of Serenwilde OR is a member of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax ...with the following exceptions... except is an enemy of the Free Forest of Serenwilde OR except is an enemy of the Divine Order of Your Order Here OR except is an enemy of Hartspirit -------------- This will bar the following people:
People who aren't a member of Celest, Hallifax, or Serenwilde. People enemied to your forest no matter who they belong to. People who are enemied to your order no matter who they belong to. People who are enemied to Hart no matter who they belong to. Rogues.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
Lusternia is ten years old and Achaea is seventeen. The loss
of experience from dying is not new. People losing massive experience is not
new and wasn’t even new when Lusternia was created (I have a distant memory of
Achaea lessoning the loss some before Lusternia was developed, but I could be
mistaken).
At least dozens if not hundreds of people who have had huge
losses from this mechanic (I’m lumping IRE games into this). Pointing fingers
at players seems misplaced when it is a clear design issue that has been
reviewed several times and kept in place.
Still, I have never understood why there wasn’t a cap to the
loss. It just seems a questionable business decision and I don’t recall ever
hearing any justification for keeping it so potentially devastating. The
potential for catastrophic loss exists and it is not some oversight.
As to manses. Could there not be some sort of test commanded
added? Something like ‘Manse list fulcrux perms’ or ‘Manse list fulcrux perms
check’ could maybe check by orgs against very common rules. Current perms
permit citizens of x, y, z, to enter. Also individually allows these persons,
Steingrim, Feyda, Syn…., bars: enemies of your org and your order to enter. Also
individually bars these persons: Kelly, Xena, etc.
Something like that would at least raise a red flag.
As an aside,
This is a very peaceful time for Lusternia and not
reflective of much of its past.
It is late, I am tired, so I may have missed it but HELP PK
as far as I saw refers only to prime areas covered by Avencha. So I can see by
reading HELP PK one might expect a certain amount of restraint which as far as
I know was ever meant to be part of its actual design or politics.
That said, perhaps HELP PK should be about overall conflict
expectations and HELP AVECHNA added?
“Lusternia is a dangerous place.” I would give credit to
that quote, but it would scroll the page and include more than a few names of
gods. But that doesn’t mean nice things don’t happen here.
Avechna protects prime period. It doesn’t protect manses,
nor does it protect off plane. Think of it this way, Lusternia is basically the
Wild West and Avechna is the sheriff. What the sheriff doesn’t see he doesn’t
care about.
There’s the weird philosophy creeping in that people should
be able to go where they want if they’re noncoms. That’s pretty contrary to
where the game started out. Then it was understood that going off plane was dangerous
(hell leaving your org could be risky). Staying in your own org could be risky.
Most orgs used to place guards at several exits. It was pretty understood that
if you couldn’t fight (or run) or hunt in groups that you were consigned to
hunting on prime.
For the health of the game most of us don’t want to run off
non-coms but that doesn’t mean they get to freely harvest in enemy territory or
even that they should be left alone to get experience with greater ease then
combatants.
The game design is for death to be a fairly regular and common
experience. On prime there are obstacles to death, but note they do not prevent
death, only attempt to hold it in check.
Comments
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
But if all it takes is to gank your IC enemies before people kick you out, then I'm afraid Lusternia will be even emptier than it already is.
PS I get kicked out first.
1. If Arien was in a manse how exactly did Leolamins locate her? If you can't scry someone from inside your manse, then logically speaking, you should not be able to BE scried within it.
Secondly, and this is the more important point. The Perms WERE SET. This was not Arien's fault, it was a bug, one that will be submitted immediately following this post. The F.F.S. Enterprise(Don't hate me, I love Star Trek) was created by ME initially, and I set the perms to what they have been since that day. Below is a c/p of exactly how the perms are set when I checked them, at 7:25PM EST after Arien was able to get a whistle and check the ship.
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux:
is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora
OR
is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring
OR
is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch
Warning: there is a rule that begins with "is not" for those who are hit by this permissions set. This can lead to unexpected results. For example, if you say "is member of Celest or is not member of clan Roark's Fanclub", your intent is probably to allow citizens of Celest except for those in the Roark's Fanclub clan. In reality, it will allow anyone who is a citizen of Celest and also anyone who is not a member of the Roark's Fanclub clan. This means Magnagorans who are not a member of the clan would be allowed by this rule. If your intent is to always ban people meeting a certain criteria then you want to use the exceptions syntax, such as "is member of Celest and except is member of Magnagora".
This was/is clearly a bug in which somehow the Perms did not fire/catch/whatever. These perms have been set since Arien and I purchased the Aethership almost 8(RL) months ago(As I'm sure the Admin can verify). The very next day after this occurred(Wednesday, October 8th) the Aethership in question was missing completely. Arien and I checked both the Aetherplex, SerenPrime, and EtherWilde and the only Manse visible to either of us that was owned by one of us was Winterfell(Our home)
EDIT: I just logged into my Magnagoran Character at 7:34PM EST and tried to enter the F.F.S. Enterprise as him and had no difficulty despite the Manse Perms being set as they are above. I believe this constitutes proof of a bug
It's not hard to keep a hand on the pulse of things though. I login to read news and check tells!
EDIT: Also, you CAN scry someone from in your manse or in their manse if you're on prime and you have high enough planar to see adjacent planes.
As to the manse perms, that obviously is a bug, but it's hardly something anyone would know about - if you see a manse you can enter, you presume poor privs being set, not a bug.
People are allowed into your manse if they are any of: not magnagoran, not glomdorian(?), not gaudiguchian. All magnagorans are not gaudiguchian, and thus allowed in. All gaudiguchians are not magnagoran, and thus also allowed in.
Edit: what he said
You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux.
3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-
Pressing her hands together before her, Arien bows her head and a golden glow suffuses the area
around her solar plexus.
3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse set fulcrux perms except member of hallifax
You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux.
3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse set fulcrux perms except member of serenwilde
You have added a new condition to the permissions list for your fulcrux.
3965h, 4803m, 4803e, 10p ex-manse list fulcrux perms
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux:
is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora
OR
is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring
OR
is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch
...with the following exceptions...
except is a member of the Holy Principality of New Celest
OR
except is a member of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax
OR
except is a member of the Free Forest of Serenwilde
Warning: there is a rule that begins with "is not" for those who are hit by this permissions set.
This can lead to unexpected results. For example, if you say "is member of Celest or is not member
of clan Roark's Fanclub", your intent is probably to allow citizens of Celest except for those in
the Roark's Fanclub clan. In reality, it will allow anyone who is a citizen of Celest and also
anyone who is not a member of the Roark's Fanclub clan. This means Magnagorans who are not a member
of the clan would be allowed by this rule. If your intent is to always ban people meeting a certain
criteria then you want to use the exceptions syntax, such as "is member of Celest and except is
member of Magnagora".
Funny, looks exactly the same including the "OR". Your point was what now again?
manse set fulcrux perms is member of hallifax
manse set fulcrux perms is member of serenwilde
manse set fulcrux perms is member of new celest
manse set fulcrux perms except enemies of hallifax
EXCEPT will prevent every single enemy, no exceptions even if they are halli, seren or celest, if they are an enemy, they are not getting in.
This is why my manse is set to ignore everyone by default and only allow in people I name.
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
For the discussion on "reasonless" killing, here's my opinion. (I think I mentioned this elsewhere before once as well) If you're a member of an org, you're a target for the org's enemies, period. Any exceptions are granted only at the discretion of the aggressor. This is not a player rule, but rather, the game atmosphere, and how the entire PK system in Lusternia is defined. Unlike Achaea's old rules, we don't have "PK-Rules" (this is one of the things I could take Estarra by his ears and frenchkiss him for) that state "You need a verifiable reason (like being insulted) within X amount of days within X criteria for a valid PK Cause to attempt to attack someone. If you find this right has been violated, you may contact your local attorney and send an official summons via the Issue system to notify the other party of the dispute etc etc..."
In Lusternia, the Avenger system handles ALL pk-cause disputes. If you get hit upside the head by a karmic curse or an avenging angel, you've broken one of the rules. If you don't, you haven't, end of story. Very few issues outside of this system are ever accepted. Issue-lawyering is literally non-existent in this game thanks to it. The only real exceptions to this system (policed by the Admin themselves) would be newbie griefing. Non-combatants are not covered under this admin-dictated exception to the Avenger system. The emphasis is very important. The only grace granted to non-combatants of any org is a community exception, where there is an unspoken agreement to just let people have the liberty to do what they want for as long as they conform to a certain standard of "non-combat" status.
There are a few good points about this policy - firstly, and most importantly, it greatly decreases the amount of administrative oversight required on the complaining (AKA whining) part of conflict. Secondly (peripherically), it is a by-product of the Western ideal of respecting other people's boundaries and freedoms. However, there are also quite a few shortcomings. First, and most importantly, it is subjective. What do you define as "non-combatant"? Someone who hasn't learned past virtuoso in their primary? Or someone who hasn't joined a PK event in a week? Or a month? Or a year? Or forever, and once he joins even one, he's always a combatant? Who can enforce this definition? No one. Who can punish people who don't follow this community-made rule? Technically, no one. Effectively, everyone. The emphasis here is also important. If someone wants to grief non-combatants, he is by no means doing anything against the rules for as long as the Avenger system does not punish him. So what can players do? Technically nothing. However, the community has often used ostracising as a tool and a weapon to wrest back initiative on enforcing this community rule. Vigilantism, if you want to make a connection to it. And while that is fine and all, it still doesn't solve the first and most important problem, subjectivism. What do you define as "breaking the rule" now? What constitutes a breaking of said rule? Where do we draw the line? Everyone draws it differently, and thus, how can anyone justify any kind of "punishment" we as a community hand out to anyone at all?
Something like "Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should." means absolutely nothing. Because how do you define what falls under "should" and what falls under "should not"? Common sense? If there's anything common to human sensibility, it's idiocy, and you're trying to define something based on that, good day to you. There is no common ground upon which to agree to "should"s and "should not"s on such a general scale. Any attempt to define in black and white (which is what a statement like this requires) will fall flat because as a community, we have no means to impose that definition on all members of the community, thanks to the the very same idea of respecting other people's boundaries. (See, American freedom-and-liberty isn't all what it's made out to be. Come join the communist side, guys.) If you try to impose YOUR definition on me, then you're basically doing something you "should not" do, based on the exact same sentence above!
My personal policy is simple. I avoid running foul of the Avenger system, and let newbies do what they want. Everyone else is fair game for me for as long as I can justify it to myself. I usually have more important things to do than to justify to myself why I want to kill someone in a text game, so I usually don't bother going aggressive. However, I reserve the right to do so for any reason I deem acceptable, even if it is because I have a butt itch for that day, or that I missed my mom's curry while away on work. In-game alignment usually serve as more than sufficient a reason for such justifications. If you're a Serenwilder, Lerad is hardly going to want to let you live if an opportunity to kill you arises, much less hang around and chat. When Lerad doesn't actually kill you, I RP it as because he simply didn't see you there. I can't be bothered to come up with some great RP reasoning, and there's really no need to. And if you have a problem with my killing you... well, that's your problem, not mine. Now, not everyone is going to be as gentlemanly as I am and avoid jumping everyone I see who I can. And by my personal policy, I'm not going to judge them until I know their justification for their own actions. If I have a problem with them attacking my friend, I'll just go hit them back. If I can't do it myself (because I'm on a "non-com" character) I'll grab my buddies and do it together, or just have them do it for me.
Sure, the waste of time and emotional investment, as well as frustration will result from my policy. Not just on the people I so-called "grief", but also for myself at times. Still, that is part of the way this game is designed, based on the Avenger PK system. Between this and the alternative (Achaea's old pk-cause lawyering), I'll gladly shed my tears and bang my keyboard and punch my screen all eight days of the week.
is not a member of the Grand Dominion of Magnagora
OR
is not a member of the Free Alliance of Glomdoring
OR
is not a member of the Holy Grand Duchy of Gaudiguch
anyone who is not a member of magnagora, so this opens up to anyone but magnagora but then added glom and gaudi so this then opens up to mag (you really only needed on of them). so this is where the mistake is and is why the warning is there. Hope this kinda helps to explain what happened and why you really should be using excepts which there are no go arounds. @Inzaias
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux:
is a member of the Holy Principality of New Celest
OR
is a member of the Free Forest of Serenwilde
OR
is a member of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax
...with the following exceptions...
except is an enemy of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax
OR
except is an enemy of the Divine Order of Isune, the Aesthete
This would allow any from those three orgs -unless- they are an enemy of Hallifax or Isune. It's easier to set who is allowed than it is to set who -isn't- allowed, and when you're setting your fulcrux perms, it should likely be set in that order.
IMO, @Arien here's what you need to set. Feel free to remove some of the top three if you want.
-----------------------
People who meet the following conditions may enter your fulcrux:
is a member of the Holy Principality of New Celest
OR
is a member of the Free Forest of Serenwilde
OR
is a member of the Grand Dominion of Hallifax
...with the following exceptions...
except is an enemy of the Free Forest of Serenwilde
OR
except is an enemy of the Divine Order of Your Order Here
OR
except is an enemy of Hartspirit
--------------
This will bar the following people:
People who aren't a member of Celest, Hallifax, or Serenwilde.
People enemied to your forest no matter who they belong to.
People who are enemied to your order no matter who they belong to.
People who are enemied to Hart no matter who they belong to.
Rogues.
Lusternia is ten years old and Achaea is seventeen. The loss of experience from dying is not new. People losing massive experience is not new and wasn’t even new when Lusternia was created (I have a distant memory of Achaea lessoning the loss some before Lusternia was developed, but I could be mistaken).
At least dozens if not hundreds of people who have had huge losses from this mechanic (I’m lumping IRE games into this). Pointing fingers at players seems misplaced when it is a clear design issue that has been reviewed several times and kept in place.
Still, I have never understood why there wasn’t a cap to the loss. It just seems a questionable business decision and I don’t recall ever hearing any justification for keeping it so potentially devastating. The potential for catastrophic loss exists and it is not some oversight.
As to manses. Could there not be some sort of test commanded added? Something like ‘Manse list fulcrux perms’ or ‘Manse list fulcrux perms check’ could maybe check by orgs against very common rules. Current perms permit citizens of x, y, z, to enter. Also individually allows these persons, Steingrim, Feyda, Syn…., bars: enemies of your org and your order to enter. Also individually bars these persons: Kelly, Xena, etc.
Something like that would at least raise a red flag.
As an aside,
This is a very peaceful time for Lusternia and not reflective of much of its past.
It is late, I am tired, so I may have missed it but HELP PK as far as I saw refers only to prime areas covered by Avencha. So I can see by reading HELP PK one might expect a certain amount of restraint which as far as I know was ever meant to be part of its actual design or politics.
That said, perhaps HELP PK should be about overall conflict expectations and HELP AVECHNA added?
“Lusternia is a dangerous place.” I would give credit to that quote, but it would scroll the page and include more than a few names of gods. But that doesn’t mean nice things don’t happen here.
Avechna protects prime period. It doesn’t protect manses, nor does it protect off plane. Think of it this way, Lusternia is basically the Wild West and Avechna is the sheriff. What the sheriff doesn’t see he doesn’t care about.
There’s the weird philosophy creeping in that people should be able to go where they want if they’re noncoms. That’s pretty contrary to where the game started out. Then it was understood that going off plane was dangerous (hell leaving your org could be risky). Staying in your own org could be risky. Most orgs used to place guards at several exits. It was pretty understood that if you couldn’t fight (or run) or hunt in groups that you were consigned to hunting on prime.
For the health of the game most of us don’t want to run off non-coms but that doesn’t mean they get to freely harvest in enemy territory or even that they should be left alone to get experience with greater ease then combatants.
The game design is for death to be a fairly regular and common experience. On prime there are obstacles to death, but note they do not prevent death, only attempt to hold it in check.