Bounties for Writs

Siduri

@Carmain : Religion heavy cities just have to encourage their citizens to up and fight to protect the shrine before it drops. But exacting Order vengeance could be the Order's duty.

(And if your city is so religion heavy, induct everyone in the Order?)

@Austere: The cost of raising and rebuilding the shrine should be enough of an incentive to defend it before it drops, with or without the writ system or any sort of Order infamy system.

Atalkez

Here I thought we defended the shrines because we were devoted to the cause. Tbf if you're worried about the work or repercussions of shrine-networks, then why are you in the Order of an antagonistic diety?

Let's be frank, Mhaldor and Targossas deities and shrines are antagonistic whereas most of the others aren't. I don't see any valid argument as to why things should be easy to defend or attack. Don't join the RP if you don't want the problems. Targossas defiles Vastar fairly regularly. We don't get worked up about it because we're not required to defend. Just bash and re raise, nbd. 

Seems like part of the problem is being required/expected to defend and the repercussions of that. Why is a non-Order member defending the shrine anyway? 

Austere

Siduri said:

@Carmain : Religion heavy cities just have to encourage their citizens to up and fight to protect the shrine before it drops. But exacting Order vengeance could be the Order's duty.

(And if your city is so religion heavy, induct everyone in the Order?)

@Austere: The cost of raising and rebuilding the shrine should be enough of an incentive to defend it before it drops, with or without the writ system or any sort of Order infamy system.

A dragon can kill 21 death knights in 9 minutes average with level three pendant only.  The cost to raise is nothing. 

Siduri

@Atalkez : Most Targossians I see raising and defiling are, effectively, members of one of the two Bloodsworn orders, or at least of their pre-orders. We act in concert, within the two orders, because our divines are -Bloodsworns- (means that if one falls, the other falls, etc.)

Also, uh, the only city I see charging bounties for their shrines is Mhaldor. When we make the conscious choice not to react and defend a shrine, we don't get to witness and hunt afterward. It's a decision that rests on the defending order's shoulders.

No one should get away scot free -if- you have the balls to act in time. If not, suck it up. We do it everyday, too.

Siduri

Austere said:

Siduri said:

@Carmain : Religion heavy cities just have to encourage their citizens to up and fight to protect the shrine before it drops. But exacting Order vengeance could be the Order's duty.

(And if your city is so religion heavy, induct everyone in the Order?)

@Austere: The cost of raising and rebuilding the shrine should be enough of an incentive to defend it before it drops, with or without the writ system or any sort of Order infamy system.

A dragon can kill 21 death knights in 9 minutes average with level three pendant only.  The cost to raise is nothing. 

You're not taking into account the willpower drain that goes with raising a shrine. And for most of us, when we work solo, sanctifying a shrine is about 3 hours of work.

Atalkez

I feel like the bounty system is far better equipped to handle Order stuff than Writs.

If I shrine glance at a defiled shrine and see 5 people, the obvious logical assumption is that 5 people defiled. Place a bounty on those 5 and go defend it. Also I will be on the lookout for those 5. With writs I have to go to the shrine before it is down and try to witness. Who wants to willingly walk into a kill room? 

I see no need to hire a Mark for a writ, when I can cut out the middle man and handle it myself/throw a bounty and save the Order gold too. However this is from a Mark character who regularly defiles as well.

(Also I mean for the aligned factions. Ashtan won't be putting up bounties for any defilement as it isn't really aligned like that)

Austere

Siduri said:

Austere said:

Siduri said:

@Carmain : Religion heavy cities just have to encourage their citizens to up and fight to protect the shrine before it drops. But exacting Order vengeance could be the Order's duty.

(And if your city is so religion heavy, induct everyone in the Order?)

@Austere: The cost of raising and rebuilding the shrine should be enough of an incentive to defend it before it drops, with or without the writ system or any sort of Order infamy system.

A dragon can kill 21 death knights in 9 minutes average with level three pendant only.  The cost to raise is nothing. 

You're not taking into account the willpower drain that goes with raising a shrine. And for most of us, when we work solo, sanctifying a shrine is about 3 hours of work.

You are correct.  I did not account for willpower.  Over the years,  though,  willpower has become less and less of a limiting factor.  If I run out,  I just ask one of the numerous alchemist in Ashtan for more.  While I doubt you have access to as many as I do personally,  the option is still there.  3 hours for a single shrine?  Good heaven,  I am going to feel so griefy next time I drop one like it's hot. 

Bluef

Mishgul said:

It also doesn't address religion heavy cities that are violently encouraged to participate in shrine defense as part of their roleplay.

It encourages people in those cities to work to join the Order of the divine affiliated with the city if they want to aid in order-related conflict. 

Bluef

Carmell said:

Austere said:

Bluef said:

Raising the general infamy threshold does nothing to address the main concerns held by Orders because being Infamous only means you are open PK to all other Infamous people as well as all members of the Marks most of which will not in any way be affiliated with the Order. 

It would be much better to have a type of Order infamy as @Siduri suggested that permits members of that Order to attack defilers. This would work exactly like the pooled type of writ that @Jacen was suggesting, except that unlike a writ it will be clear to the defiler how long they have left to remain infamous and get attacked - and unlike current writs it will allow for more than one attack/death per defiling instance. If you're infamous to the Order, then anyone in the Order can attack you until that Order infamy goes away. I love this idea. 

Why would anyone rush to defend a shrine then?  This would just lead to orders ganking after the fact.  Defiling as it stands,  forces orders to react at that time if the are going to do anything.  You could never use this to instigate a raid,  as they would just sit back until the numbers were skewed or the group broke up.  Nonono. If they don't care enough to come gather their writ or confirm at the time,  they can just cry about it.  Pooled writs are an idea worth merit,  though.  If witnessing isn't balanceless, it should be and no more of this multiple witnesses for a single shrine crap. 

you can only get one writ per person for every instance of defiling a shrine not multiple witnesses the way everyone keeps saying.  If someone like @Proficy defiles a shrine and I go to witness I can get one witness on him unless he stops defiling for more then 20 seconds and then starts again.  .   I think if your going to talk about shrines and witnessing you need to be more aware of how it works.

You witness him defiling. You obtain a writ. Now you can attack him (which will stop him from defiling, I would assume). You can even run away at this point, run back and witness or attack again (or both). You hold all the cards as the witnesser. He can't attack you if you show up at a shrine simply because he thinks you hold a writ - because he has no way to know whether you've yielded it yet - so yes, it is possible to get multiple witnesses; you just can't stand there watching them defile and expect to get them.

Florentino

@Bluef - Sartai aren't minted nearly as easily or quickly as Aarashi/Caefir, unfortunately, so that's not realistic. Same is true of the Orders of Gaia, Babel, etc., I think. You shouldn't be closing down an avenue of RP that can build character (i.e. an Ashtani who once hated Chaos decides to start openly defending Babel shrines as a show of political loyalty to the Ashtani warlords) and show service (young Mhaldorians defend shrines to show their willingness to fight and die for the cause of Evil and earn their place atop Mhaldor). 

Also, c'mon guys, you *know* the "neener neener you didn't technically see me" arguments go against common sense. I don't need to physically type WITNESS when rooms five rooms out have icewalls, piety rites, and I can see five Targossians in a room with a unique name where I know there's a Sartan shrine and Hasar is telling us on CT that a shrine is being defiled in that room to know that people are trying to get themselves involved in conflict there. 

If you don't want conflict and would rather whine and skirt the rules and try to ISSUE ME and threaten folks with the results, sit out the shrine system. There is literally no other purpose for it. It's like RPWHO but for folks who like to hunt, fight and roleplay.

And it is the *only* source of conflict outside of exterms and random ganks that enables regular fights on territories that aren't (1) Mhaldor Isle, (2) Eastern Reaches, (3) Eastern Ithmia. Having to know geography/terrain, the potentially hostile denizens, doors, secret exits, etc. in an area is a really cool aspect. Once when we were on Meropis I took two Mhaldorians to a shrine in a hidden network of tunnels, Davio worldburned and they died because they didn't know the exits. Worldburning usually sucks, but I actually thought that was a really cool feature of this system.

Ruth

Bluef said:

Carmell said:

Austere said:

Bluef said:

Raising the general infamy threshold does nothing to address the main concerns held by Orders because being Infamous only means you are open PK to all other Infamous people as well as all members of the Marks most of which will not in any way be affiliated with the Order. 

It would be much better to have a type of Order infamy as @Siduri suggested that permits members of that Order to attack defilers. This would work exactly like the pooled type of writ that @Jacen was suggesting, except that unlike a writ it will be clear to the defiler how long they have left to remain infamous and get attacked - and unlike current writs it will allow for more than one attack/death per defiling instance. If you're infamous to the Order, then anyone in the Order can attack you until that Order infamy goes away. I love this idea. 

Why would anyone rush to defend a shrine then?  This would just lead to orders ganking after the fact.  Defiling as it stands,  forces orders to react at that time if the are going to do anything.  You could never use this to instigate a raid,  as they would just sit back until the numbers were skewed or the group broke up.  Nonono. If they don't care enough to come gather their writ or confirm at the time,  they can just cry about it.  Pooled writs are an idea worth merit,  though.  If witnessing isn't balanceless, it should be and no more of this multiple witnesses for a single shrine crap. 

you can only get one writ per person for every instance of defiling a shrine not multiple witnesses the way everyone keeps saying.  If someone like @Proficy defiles a shrine and I go to witness I can get one witness on him unless he stops defiling for more then 20 seconds and then starts again.  .   I think if your going to talk about shrines and witnessing you need to be more aware of how it works.

You witness him defiling. You obtain a writ. Now you can attack him (which will stop him from defiling, I would assume). You can even run away at this point, run back and witness or attack again (or both). You hold all the cards as the witnesser. He can't attack you if you show up at a shrine simply because he thinks you hold a writ - because he has no way to know whether you've yielded it yet - so yes, it is possible to get multiple witnesses; you just can't stand there watching them defile and expect to get them.

Bolded is absolutely not true! Remember when I said I had a hilarious few hours experiencing the above? Writs and attacks do nothing to stop the defiling. What they do is run away and attack a different shrine or stay in their city, then go back to defile the same shrine when we depart. Rinse and repeat. That happens, or they just continue anyway, while the other buddy in the room starts to wail at you.

Also, in the current context where orders/cities actively against each other are concerned, the second bolded statement will never be true. You show up, you die.

Bluef

I could be wrong, but I don't think many Order induct people en mass. I only know none of those I've been affiliated IC with have done so. IMO if people put as much into joining Orders as they did into PK and obtaining dragon, I think Orders would be brimming with new defenders. 

I mention that because this means that Mhaldor is not unique in their desire to enter the fray of shrine defense yet held up by the fact that you have to be a member of an Order to actually witness. As for cutting off RP avenues, I sort of disagree. People can still respond to Order members call for aid on their CT. They just have to deal with the consequences of doing so, which as you said should be expected if they're going to decide to enter into such conflicts.

Carmell

@Bluef‌  This would be true if they didn't attack as soon as we entered the room.  So many times I've showed up to witness and been instantly attacked.

@Ruth oh you met @Proficy?     He does this to Targossians every day.    If your complaining about us doing it the same way then you might want to talk to him about his actions.  What's good for the Gander is good for the Goose.

Atalkez

Carmell said:

@Bluef‌  This would be true if they didn't attack as soon as we entered the room.  So many times I've showed up to witness and been instantly attacked.

@Ruth oh you met @Proficy?     He does this to Targossians every day.    If your complaining about us doing it the same way then you might want to talk to him about his actions.  What's good for the Gander is good for the Goose.

Strategically speaking why should the defilers give up their advantage to see if you are going to attack first? 

Just assume when you show up you're getting attacked. 

Also I've said this before but if your normal mode of retaliation is a 5v1 gankfest, how is it not understood why people don't wait to see your intent?

Klendathu

Siduri said:

You're not taking into account the willpower drain that goes with raising a shrine. And for most of us, when we work solo, sanctifying a shrine is about 3 hours of work.

If it's three hours' work, you're doing it wrong

Ruth

I couldn't give a crap if I get attacked for arriving to witness, since I was already expecting it.

I'm simply pointing out that the mindset for half/most of those engaging in shrine conflict is markedly different from what we're expecting and that should be recognized, especially since writs were never this policed in the past where the PK cause system still existed.

Siduri

Florentino said:

@Bluef - Sartai aren't minted nearly as easily or quickly as Aarashi/Caefir, unfortunately, so that's not realistic. Same is true of the Orders of Gaia, Babel, etc., I think. You shouldn't be closing down an avenue of RP that can build character (i.e. an Ashtani who once hated Chaos decides to start openly defending Babel shrines as a show of political loyalty to the Ashtani warlords) and show service (young Mhaldorians defend shrines to show their willingness to fight and die for the cause of Evil and earn their place atop Mhaldor). 

Also, c'mon guys, you *know* the "neener neener you didn't technically see me" arguments go against common sense. I don't need to physically type WITNESS when rooms five rooms out have icewalls, piety rites, and I can see five Targossians in a room with a unique name where I know there's a Sartan shrine and Hasar is telling us on CT that a shrine is being defiled in that room to know that people are trying to get themselves involved in conflict there. 

If you don't want conflict and would rather whine and skirt the rules and try to ISSUE ME and threaten folks with the results, sit out the shrine system. There is literally no other purpose for it. It's like RPWHO but for folks who like to hunt, fight and roleplay.

And it is the *only* source of conflict outside of exterms and random ganks that enables regular fights on territories that aren't (1) Mhaldor Isle, (2) Eastern Reaches, (3) Eastern Ithmia. Having to know geography/terrain, the potentially hostile denizens, doors, secret exits, etc. in an area is a really cool aspect. Once when we were on Meropis I took two Mhaldorians to a shrine in a hidden network of tunnels, Davio worldburned and they died because they didn't know the exits. Worldburning usually sucks, but I actually thought that was a really cool feature of this system.

Calling it 'neener neener' is not making a point. At all. It's clear as day we're defiling, and it's clear as day that it's your job to get in there and fight (and die), if your Order duties are important enough. If not, you sit it out, and you accept the fact that you missed a chance of partaking in conflict.

Rules are there to be followed to ensure a quality of game for everyone, much like chasing away someone who bashes in protected territory (Enverren, or Jaru, etc.) does not give you the right to pursue the hunt once the person left the area. The rules basically said: You made him flee, you won!

Same with shrines. If you can't get a witness after the fact, you better be sure that you can interrupt them, and earn your victory by killing your foes. If you can't get victory because they kill you, or run away after finishing the shrine, then it's too bad. Better luck next time. Until the rules of the game change, it's pointless to excuse cowardly behaviour with 'it's logical because I'm a mean Sartai'.

And I want to say: Raves to @Xinna, @Xer, @Hasar, @Mycen, @Milenka and even you, damned @Eloru, for showing up to stop us in action instead of cowering in Mhaldor. When I defile, I'm normally with one or two others, and you can bet we run like shy virgins when we see you guys coming to lay the bitchslapper.

Siduri

Klendathu said:

Siduri said:

You're not taking into account the willpower drain that goes with raising a shrine. And for most of us, when we work solo, sanctifying a shrine is about 3 hours of work.

If it's three hours' work, you're doing it wrong

It's called "I'm level 85 and orcs two-hit-KO me".

Jonathin

Klendathu said:

If it's three hours' work, you're doing it wrong

TEACH ME YOUR WAYS OH MASTER OF F2

Jacen

I think the big issue is that there's such a discrepancy between what the rules say should happen, what the admin say is legal to do, and what happens on a daily basis. The expectations of a newcomer to shrine conflict (especially one, like myself, who comes from a city where few to no others are involved in shrine conflict) are very different from what really happens. What ends up happening is that two groups are formed: the rule-breaker lol-pkers, and the uptight cause-counting issuewhores. 

I've been hired on at least once for defending a shrine without a writ, which is technically legal (the contract, I mean). I suspect I was hired on a second time for the same reason, and the admin said the contract looked legal, but... hell, unless it was for telling someone to radiance a defiler, then I dunno. I've also been attacked instantly when entering the room of defilers doing their thing (3 deaths in 30 minutes)

Point being, I guess, is that I think the biggest issue is this discrepancy, and that resolving it (whether it be through policing shrine conflict, or changing the rules to match what actually happens) would go a long ways to fixing it. 

Siduri

@Jacen : Here's my interpretation of what should happen, but this in no way reflects the rules, nor is it any form of criticism about you (I've never had to fight you).

1. I defile.
2a. You come into the room to defend the shrine.
2b. You sit at Crossroads, gossiping about the latest Serpentlords political ploy and ignore the dying calls of the shrine.
3a. I attack you in self-defense, but won't hire, issue, or hunt you after the fact. You were just defending.
4a. You kill me, congratulations!
4b. I kill you! Thank you for partaking in Achaea's conflict mechanics.
4c. I flee and you get a writ, which gives you the right to chase me around after the fact to net a kill after all is over, or hand it to a Mark.
3b. Nothing. Just nothing. You sat out of conflict, and shouldn't feel entitled in any way to cheaply jump me 'just because one day you saw me on wholist'. End of the story.

Halios

Siduri said:

@Jacen : Here's my interpretation of what should happen, but this in no way reflects the rules, nor is it any form of criticism about you (I've never had to fight you).

1. I defile.
2a. You come into the room to defend the shrine.
2b. You sit at Crossroads, gossiping about the latest Serpentlords political ploy and ignore the dying calls of the shrine.
3a. I attack you in self-defense, but won't hire, issue, or hunt you after the fact. You were just defending.
4a. You kill me, congratulations!
4b. I kill you! Thank you for partaking in Achaea's conflict mechanics.
4c. I flee and you get a writ, which gives you the right to chase me around after the fact to net a kill after all is over, or hand it to a Mark.
3b. Nothing. Just nothing. You sat out of conflict, and shouldn't feel entitled in any way to cheaply jump me 'just because one day you saw me on wholist'. End of the story.

As I said, this encourages behavior like me setting up mindnet, going to a shrine, defiling the crap out of it until someone pops onto mindnet who is a defender, then earring out.

No writ, no bounty, no nothing (according to your logic).

That, to me, is horrible for the game, and for conflict in general, because it -discourages- conflict instead of -encouraging-.

Siduri

Halios said:

Siduri said:

@Jacen : Here's my interpretation of what should happen, but this in no way reflects the rules, nor is it any form of criticism about you (I've never had to fight you).

1. I defile.
2a. You come into the room to defend the shrine.
2b. You sit at Crossroads, gossiping about the latest Serpentlords political ploy and ignore the dying calls of the shrine.
3a. I attack you in self-defense, but won't hire, issue, or hunt you after the fact. You were just defending.
4a. You kill me, congratulations!
4b. I kill you! Thank you for partaking in Achaea's conflict mechanics.
4c. I flee and you get a writ, which gives you the right to chase me around after the fact to net a kill after all is over, or hand it to a Mark.
3b. Nothing. Just nothing. You sat out of conflict, and shouldn't feel entitled in any way to cheaply jump me 'just because one day you saw me on wholist'. End of the story.

As I said, this encourages behavior like me setting up mindnet, going to a shrine, defiling the crap out of it until someone pops onto mindnet who is a defender, then earring out.

No writ, no bounty, no nothing (according to your logic).

That, to me, is horrible for the game, and for conflict in general, because it -discourages- conflict instead of -encouraging-.

I'm probably wrong, then, because I always assumed defiling but not finishing the shrine left some sort of lingering trace that generated the writ. And I still want to point out that you are still wrong on this point: You showing up and hitting mindnet, and forcing us to flee, is conflict in itself. You don't need to land a kill to have been in conflict : congrats on having the balls to come save your shrine like a true Sartai would.

Ulrike

I highly recommend this edifying musical composition as a soundtrack for the thread so far (or, for that matter, a defiling excursion): 

Yilkon

Austere said:

Bluef said:

Raising the general infamy threshold does nothing to address the main concerns held by Orders because being Infamous only means you are open PK to all other Infamous people as well as all members of the Marks most of which will not in any way be affiliated with the Order. 

It would be much better to have a type of Order infamy as @Siduri suggested that permits members of that Order to attack defilers. This would work exactly like the pooled type of writ that @Jacen was suggesting, except that unlike a writ it will be clear to the defiler how long they have left to remain infamous and get attacked - and unlike current writs it will allow for more than one attack/death per defiling instance. If you're infamous to the Order, then anyone in the Order can attack you until that Order infamy goes away. I love this idea. 

Why would anyone rush to defend a shrine then?  This would just lead to orders ganking after the fact.  Defiling as it stands,  forces orders to react at that time if the are going to do anything.  You could never use this to instigate a raid,  as they would just sit back until the numbers were skewed or the group broke up.  Nonono. If they don't care enough to come gather their writ or confirm at the time,  they can just cry about it.  Pooled writs are an idea worth merit,  though.  If witnessing isn't balanceless, it should be and no more of this multiple witnesses for a single shrine crap. 

A way around this would be to have non-witnessed defiling gain order infamy relatively slowly and giving a witnessing a multiplier on this value.  For example one witnessed defile might be equivalent to five non-witnessed ones.

Austere

Yilkon said:

Austere said:

Bluef said:

Raising the general infamy threshold does nothing to address the main concerns held by Orders because being Infamous only means you are open PK to all other Infamous people as well as all members of the Marks most of which will not in any way be affiliated with the Order. 

It would be much better to have a type of Order infamy as @Siduri suggested that permits members of that Order to attack defilers. This would work exactly like the pooled type of writ that @Jacen was suggesting, except that unlike a writ it will be clear to the defiler how long they have left to remain infamous and get attacked - and unlike current writs it will allow for more than one attack/death per defiling instance. If you're infamous to the Order, then anyone in the Order can attack you until that Order infamy goes away. I love this idea. 

Why would anyone rush to defend a shrine then?  This would just lead to orders ganking after the fact.  Defiling as it stands,  forces orders to react at that time if the are going to do anything.  You could never use this to instigate a raid,  as they would just sit back until the numbers were skewed or the group broke up.  Nonono. If they don't care enough to come gather their writ or confirm at the time,  they can just cry about it.  Pooled writs are an idea worth merit,  though.  If witnessing isn't balanceless, it should be and no more of this multiple witnesses for a single shrine crap. 

A way around this would be to have non-witnessed defiling gain order infamy relatively slowly and giving a witnessing a multiplier on this value.  For example one witnessed defile might be equivalent to five non-witnessed ones.

Why even change witness then?  

Mishgul

I vaguely remember a shrine and essence rework promise from 2 irl years ago.

Aktillum

Halios said:

defiling the crap out of it until someone pops onto mindnet who is a defender, then earring out.

No writ

Even if someone leaves the area, you still have like 20 seconds to witness the shrine whether or not they're present. And if you know for a fact who is witnessing, you don't even have to waste time walking there, with that shrine power that lets you teleport to people standing at shrines. Of course, you might teleport yourself into a kill-room, but legally people shouldn't be attacking you just for witnessing. What happens is a completely different story, since the majority of people interested in PvP (myself included) treat defiled shrines as a warzone.

And yeah, I'd be on board with @Mishgul's idea for defiling giving lots of infamy, except someone brought up that being infamous makes you open PK to lots of people and not just the Order people, which would also be a problem. Would be sorta dumb if I was getting ganked by Dunn/Mizik/Jhui because of infamy from defiling Sartan shrines.

Mishgul said:

I vaguely remember a shrine and essence rework promise from 2 irl years ago.

Dude they're probably as stumped as we are when it comes to a solution that actually makes sense. Like others mentioned, the writs system was designed to allow people to get away with defiling consequence-free, provided they aren't caught defiling. Which should be viable. If they're caught defiling, and witnessed, they die 1 or 2 or 3 times, however many times @Carmell spams WITNESS while they're using goblin miners to drop a shrine.

This system made total sense when Achaea's PK rules were basically "he hit me first" "ok well you have cause to hit him back", because it allowed people to witness defilers without fear of being attacked, if they only planned on gaining a writ and not defending the shrine. Today's PvP atmosphere pretty much dictates that going to witness a shrine equals a 50/50 chance you're going to a kill-room.

If you don't agree (not you Carmain, everyone) that people should be allowed to defile consequence-free if they aren't caught, then the obvious solution would be to make shrines go HALP HALP AKTILLUM IS DEFILING ME and then auto-log a writ that anyone in the Order can complete for the next 48 hours or whatever.

Sobriquet

Mishgul said:

Just get rid of writs honestly. It's a horrid evidence system.

Make defiling give infamy instead.

Sorry buddy, but I don't really agree with this given that Achaean combat (outside of the arena) seems to be an all or nothing type affair. If you are infamous you can be attacked by all other infamous or Mark at anytime, which I would say goes against what we are trying to achieve here. 

For example, Bob the Human Priest wants to partake in fighting but is inexperienced, currently he can help in defiling a shrine (Skirimishes around a shrine for defiling should -always- be allowed) and potentially be witnessed. Given this situation, he knows he will likely have a Mark on his tail. He doesn't know who, but he knows it will only be one person and the exciting game of cat and mouse begins. While, given his combat experience, he is likely to die, it at least gives him an exciting opportunity to be jumped / fight etc.

If he was going to gain Infamy for defiling a Sartan shrine, being Targossian, he is now likely to get jumped by all Mhaldorian Marks / infamous and more then likely by a majority of Ashtan (Not a dig, killing an infamous member of an enemy city makes sense). This means his defiling has opened him up to, probably, hiding in his city until the infamy wears down. I'm aware that dying while infamous reduces that infamy total, but one death != total loss of infamy and even if it does, you could have a situation where @randomashtan fighter gets the kill, meaning no means of retribution for the Mhaldorians

I see exactly why you've suggested this, and in the face of it makes sense, especially for the more seasoned combatants, but I feel it doesn't really solve the problem. Although saying that, I don't really have a better alternative to offer

Lisbethae

Jacen said:

I think the big issue is that there's such a discrepancy between what the rules say should happen, what the admin say is legal to do, and what happens on a daily basis. 

qft