Forums Home Forum Rules Achaea.com Lore Wiki Vote for Achaea! IronRealms.com
Home› Everything Achaea› North of Thera

Memorable quotes

1…686687689691692…807

Comments

  • KryptonKrypton shi-Khurena
    Once you leave the lawlessness of Annwyn, however, you may not seek retribution for what happened there.

    "There." Annwyn is "there." Continuing attack on Prime Material Plane is not "there." Continuing attack on Prime Material Plane is "here."

    So we may seek retribution (hire, Issues, or otherwise) for "what happened HERE."

  • NazihkNazihk
    Krypton said:
    Once you leave the lawlessness of Annwyn, however, you may not seek retribution for what happened there.

    "There." Annwyn is "there." Continuing attack on Prime Material Plane is not "there." Continuing attack on Prime Material Plane is "here."

    So we may seek retribution (hire, Issues, or otherwise) for "what happened HERE."

    Yeah, sure, that's fine. I have no problems with them getting to get retribution if you chase them and continue the conflict off the plane.
  • KoganKogan
    Nazihk said:
    Krypton said:
    Once you leave the lawlessness of Annwyn, however, you may not seek retribution for what happened there.

    "There." Annwyn is "there." Continuing attack on Prime Material Plane is not "there." Continuing attack on Prime Material Plane is "here."

    So we may seek retribution (hire, Issues, or otherwise) for "what happened HERE."

    Yeah, sure, that's fine. I have no problems with them getting to get retribution if you chase them and continue the conflict off the plane.
    Either you're not even trying to read or you're trolling at this point. 
  • ShirszaeShirszae Santo Domingo
    edited March 2017
    Edit: Meh

    And you won't understand the cause of your grief...


    ...But you'll always follow the voices beneath.

  • AnedhelAnedhel
    S'a lot of lawyering over possibly one death. If someone chases you out of Annwyn, just hire? Marks gotta eat. 
  • AsmodronAsmodron
    I admit though, I always did wonder why Annwyn was a pk plane to begin with. I could easily see why Underworld was, based on the general theme of the plane and the danger therein, but i never got why a fairy plane was considered a free for all.
  • ValariaValaria
    edited March 2017
    Anedhel said:
    S'a lot of lawyering over possibly one death. If someone chases you out of Annwyn, just hire? Marks gotta eat. 
    yeah we need foods on the table. assassins need some too. heh.

    Asmodron said:
    I admit though, I always did wonder why Annwyn was a pk plane to begin with. I could easily see why Underworld was, based on the general theme of the plane and the danger therein, but i never got why a fairy plane was considered a free for all.
    Probably, it is because it is not part of PMP group. 

    2015/01/12
Tecton, the Terraformer has bestowed His divine favour upon you. It will last for approximately 1 Achaean month.
  • PrythePrythe
    edited March 2017
    Farrah said:

    It says you may not seek retribution, not that you may not chase. There's a pretty substantial difference between the two.

    If you attack me and kill me in Annwyn, and then leave, I cannot stumble upon you in Delos and kill you for killing me earlier. That's clearly prohibited by the rules.

    If you attack me, and I truelock you, and you say "I wish," I'd say I'm permitted to wish out, chase you, and immediately finish you. Not attack you later on.

    I don't think so - anybody ever issue that one?

    eta: Never mind. I see somebody did issue and yes, not allowed.

    - To love another person is to see the face of G/d
    - Let me get my hat and my knife
    - It's your apple, take a bite
    - Don't dream it ... be it


  • OgnogOgnog
    Personally, I find ANNOUNCE NEWS #3700 most illuminating on the issue of PK ...

    "The spirit of the guidelines is this: don't be a jerk"

  • FrederichFrederich
    You tell the eternal sea, "Hi."
  • KlendathuKlendathu Eye of the Storm
    Ognog said:
    Personally, I find ANNOUNCE NEWS #3700 most illuminating on the issue of PK ...

    "The spirit of the guidelines is this: don't be a jerk"
    Pretty sure that ship sailed a while back!

    To go back to the original point, which seems to have been lost in all the rules lawyering about whether it's legal or not to chase out of Annwyn, that's not what happened. Avianca was killed in Annwyn, then attempted numerous time to get retribution on the prime plane in separate incidents, all unsuccessfully. The legality of chasing out of Annwyn seems moot in this.

    Tharos, the Announcer of Delos shouts, "It's near the end of the egghunt and I still haven't figured out how to pronounce Clean-dat-hoo."
  • AntoniusAntonius
    There is a difference between seeking retribution and continuing a fight that's already in progress; the fight isn't over just because you left the area.

    If that's not what the administration intend in terms of the rules then they need to change the wording in that HELP file.

    Results of disembowel testing | Knight limb counter | GMCP AB files

  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    But they've already ruled in an issue that it's intended for all conflict to end in Annwyn.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

  • AsmodronAsmodron
    Makarios probably reading all this lawyering and debating and just shaking his head.
  • AntoniusAntonius
    Kayeil said:
    But they've already ruled in an issue that it's intended for all conflict to end in Annwyn.
    Issues and their outcomes aren't public record. Word of mouth about an issue ruling is not an adequate means of communicating the rules of your game.

    If they decide something when ruling on an issue that is contradictory to the wording used in the HELP file - and that's exactly what they did in this case, since in every other instance "seek retribution" means "attack later on", not "continue a fight that's already in progress" - then the wording needs to be updated.

    Results of disembowel testing | Knight limb counter | GMCP AB files

  • RyzethRyzeth
    Prior, it used to be that you had 1 (maybe 2?) minutes to get back to your opponent before it was no longer considered acceptable to continue pursuit. If you don't get to them again within that time, the fight was considered to be over.

    No idea what it is now. Just know people have a penchant for getting unreasonably salty when you kill them in Annwyn / UW >.>
  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    Scarlatti said:

    To stop the spread of misinformation:

    One minute chase from Free/Open PK areas was one of the many technicalities in the old PK rules and isn't in the new rules.  See instead: Jacen's Vegas explanation.

    One minute rule in HELP HONOUR still applies, though.

    Now get back to raves before I give you something to rant about!




    http://forums.achaea.com/discussion/comment/144845#Comment_144845

    And I've not seen a single admin state otherwise since.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

  • KoganKogan
    Klendathu said:
    A blood-soaked dwarven miner exclaims in Dwarven, "You will never defeat me!"
    You slash into a blood-soaked dwarven miner with a crude-looking rapier. - CRUSHING
    You have slain a blood-soaked dwarven miner, retrieving the corpse.

    That's a more memorable quote than anything for the last however many pages.
    First speeding and now killing dwarves eh? :dissapointed:
  • KoganKogan
    Antonius said:
    Kayeil said:
    But they've already ruled in an issue that it's intended for all conflict to end in Annwyn.
    Issues and their outcomes aren't public record. Word of mouth about an issue ruling is not an adequate means of communicating the rules of your game.

    If they decide something when ruling on an issue that is contradictory to the wording used in the HELP file - and that's exactly what they did in this case, since in every other instance "seek retribution" means "attack later on", not "continue a fight that's already in progress" - then the wording needs to be updated.
    I think the issue with that has already been stated. I can't attack you when you head out because that would be seeking retribution for attacking me so its unlikely they meant for people to chase and continue fights either. Honestly I don't care either way as long as people follow the rules and don't complain when they break the rules and get embarrassed enough to result to insults. If they need to clarify to prevent lawyering they should. I agree with that much.
  • AntoniusAntonius
    Kogan said:
    Antonius said:
    Kayeil said:
    But they've already ruled in an issue that it's intended for all conflict to end in Annwyn.
    Issues and their outcomes aren't public record. Word of mouth about an issue ruling is not an adequate means of communicating the rules of your game.

    If they decide something when ruling on an issue that is contradictory to the wording used in the HELP file - and that's exactly what they did in this case, since in every other instance "seek retribution" means "attack later on", not "continue a fight that's already in progress" - then the wording needs to be updated.
    I think the issue with that has already been stated. I can't attack you when you head out because that would be seeking retribution for attacking me so its unlikely they meant for people to chase and continue fights either. Honestly I don't care either way as long as people follow the rules and don't complain when they break the rules and get embarrassed enough to result to insults. If they need to clarify to prevent lawyering they should. I agree with that much.
    No, it wouldn't be "seeking retribution", it would be continuing a fight that's in progress (assuming both participants have performed aggressive actions prior to leaving Annwyn). Perhaps we have different definitions of what those two words mean together, or perhaps you're trying to construct a definition that fits what you know the rules to actually be, but let's not pretend that the rules as they're currently worded make any sense at all.

    People have every right to complain when they break a rule that isn't worded correctly. Word of mouth about issue rulings, or forum posts from three years ago, are not adequate or appropriate ways to communicate the rules of your game.

    Results of disembowel testing | Knight limb counter | GMCP AB files

  • KoganKogan
    Antonius said:
    Kogan said:
    Antonius said:
    Kayeil said:
    But they've already ruled in an issue that it's intended for all conflict to end in Annwyn.
    Issues and their outcomes aren't public record. Word of mouth about an issue ruling is not an adequate means of communicating the rules of your game.

    If they decide something when ruling on an issue that is contradictory to the wording used in the HELP file - and that's exactly what they did in this case, since in every other instance "seek retribution" means "attack later on", not "continue a fight that's already in progress" - then the wording needs to be updated.
    I think the issue with that has already been stated. I can't attack you when you head out because that would be seeking retribution for attacking me so its unlikely they meant for people to chase and continue fights either. Honestly I don't care either way as long as people follow the rules and don't complain when they break the rules and get embarrassed enough to result to insults. If they need to clarify to prevent lawyering they should. I agree with that much.
    No, it wouldn't be "seeking retribution", it would be continuing a fight that's in progress (assuming both participants have performed aggressive actions prior to leaving Annwyn). Perhaps we have different definitions of what those two words mean together, or perhaps you're trying to construct a definition that fits what you know the rules to actually be, but let's not pretend that the rules as they're currently worded make any sense at all.

    People have every right to complain when they break a rule that isn't worded correctly. Word of mouth about issue rulings, or forum posts from three years ago, are not adequate or appropriate ways to communicate the rules of your game.
    Yeah I think the way they're worded now is terrible and should be fixed. I agreed there. My part about people complaining is more when they break them... then call people names because they still died to said person. Lets say I attack you in Annwyn and die. Then attack you PMP-side because I'm salty like the example that was given earlier in this thread... and die again. I pretty much have no right to be mad at you and insult because I was an ass. Also I wasn't assuming the person being chased had performed an aggressive action in my earlier post. I assumed said person just fled and was chased out.
  • RyzethRyzeth
    I'm with Antonius personally. What's so hard about updating the scroll to say, "This isn't allowed. Don't do it." (if what's being complained about is, indeed, not allowed)
  • KayeilKayeil Washington State
    Absolutely, the admins could be more clear on this!

    I am with Kogan on the point that we were not just talking about people who had mutually been aggressive in Annwyn. People do chase out people who never attacked back and attempt to kill them. This has gone so far as being chased to my ship by someone I don't know and them waiting around outside it trying for a kill because they couldn't finish what they were attempting in Annwyn.
    What doesn't kill you gives you exp.

  • DunnDunn
    Meh. I'm going to chase you if you're locked or enlightened. Hire if you need to. It's become a rarer occurrence since they made prone (and paralyse?) stop wishing, though. 


Sign In or Register to comment.