PNP clarification please

[HippoNipple]

Originally Posted by Kergan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Don't shit up my thread.

It was a legitimate question.

And in this case the healer did in fact leave and the group disbanded, rules were followed and no suspensions were issued. RIP lowbie exp group.

Why would the lowbie exp group be any different if there was no PnP policy and the SK didn't want them there?

You do realize that the cleric can ask the SK if it is okay for him to stay and the exp group can continue.

The PnP is to protect the person who gets killed and that is it. If the victor wants to let them stay he can. If he didn't want him to stay he can tell him to leave or in the old system corpse camp him.

[chu]

cleric should uninstall while the rest of the group just watches

[Kergan]

Originally Posted by HippoNipple [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why would the lowbie exp group be any different if there was no PnP policy and the SK didn't want them there?

You do realize that the cleric can ask the SK if it is okay for him to stay and the exp group can continue.

The PnP is to protect the person who gets killed and that is it. If the victor wants to let them stay he can. If he didn't want him to stay he can tell him to leave or in the old system corpse camp him.

When did I ask what would happen without the PNP exactly? I simply asked for clarification on the PNP and you have made multiple posts telling me what would happen without the PNP. Seriously stop shitting up my thread with your propaganda. Are you that scared whenever a post that outlines a possible gray area/flaw with the PNP pops up that you must immediately take a giant dump on it?

[mcappy]

Originally Posted by HippoNipple [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why would the lowbie exp group be any different if there was no PnP policy and the SK didn't want them there?

You do realize that the cleric can ask the SK if it is okay for him to stay and the exp group can continue.

The PnP is to protect the person who gets killed and that is it. If the victor wants to let them stay he can. If he didn't want him to stay he can tell him to leave or in the old system corpse camp him.

Stupid logic.

What if someone else in the group WAS in range and made the SK run? Is the cleric just supposed to leave (essentially disbanding the group) because the SK is allowed to force LNS on them?

Killing one person in a group of 6 does not equal zone or camp control. I'm fairly certain it's already been established that someone who dies can return if their group was able to win the fight.

The question was how the PnP rules are enacted when level range makes it impossible for the rest of the group to fight back. If everyone was in range, it'd be an easy answer. But of course, these wonderful policies have all sorts of gray or entirely blank areas that didn't take into account leveling players (you know, the people that we'll need to stick around if we want the server population to rise).

[HippoNipple]

Originally Posted by Kergan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

When did I ask what would happen without the PNP exactly? I simply asked for clarification on the PNP and you have made multiple posts telling me what would happen without the PNP. Seriously stop shitting up my thread with your propaganda. Are you that scared whenever a post that outlines a possible gray area/flaw with the PNP pops up that you must immediately take a giant dump on it?

I answered your question and addressed your concern of how PnP was hurting the server. Allowing you to see how it would have played out the same with either system should put your mind at ease.

[HippoNipple]

Originally Posted by mcappy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Stupid logic.

What if someone else in the group WAS in range and made the SK run? Is the cleric just supposed to leave (essentially disbanding the group) because the SK is allowed to force LNS on them?

Killing one person in a group of 6 does not equal zone or camp control. I'm fairly certain it's already been established that someone who dies can return if their group was able to win the fight.

The question was how the PnP rules are enacted when level range makes it impossible for the rest of the group to fight back. If everyone was in range, it'd be an easy answer. But of course, these wonderful policies have all sorts of gray or entirely blank areas that didn't take into account leveling players (you know, the people that we'll need to stick around if we want the server population to rise).

If a group of 2 people attack 1 person and people die on both sides the victory goes to the team with someone still standing. In this case it is a 1 v 1 and the loser would need to leave if the victor forced it.

Very clear rules being muddied up by manipulative people or those with a learning disability.

The only rules I see in question that has good reason to needing a makeover is LnS policy in the middle of a mass fight. I am all for just not allowing it until a clear victor has won the fight and claimed control of a zone. The only issue is once one zone is under control how do you address looting and moving to the next zone which then becomes the new focus of contention. The zone dance is tough to police.

[meatspin]

Cleric has to LNS. Refusing to LNS should = ban. Easy answer. The OOR people make no difference in this example.

[meatspin]

And for the people who argue that ruins 5 other players day, it wouldn't even be ruining the exp group. If they want to stick with cleric just go to another dungeon...

[HippoNipple]

Originally Posted by meatspin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Cleric has to LNS. Refusing to LNS should = ban. Easy answer. The OOR people make no difference in this example.

Unless the cleric asks the SK for permission to stay in zone and lvl peacefully. In reality this exact same situation would have happened in the past. Why would a cleric want to stay if he was going to be beaten down on continuously.

On the positive the Cleric can move to another zone and level with his group if the SK won't let them stay.

AND

The SK may have won over a spawn it wanted and continue to camp uncontested from a mad bind rushing cleric for an hour before he must once again compete over if the Cleric wishes to challenge.

[maverixdamighty]

Originally Posted by Kergan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Here is the situation:

A group of 6 people are leveling in SolA:
25 warrior
25 rogue
28 enchanter
27 monk
29 wizard
30 cleric

Things are going well until an SK zones in and attacks the cleric. The SK is only in range to the cleric, and kills him. Upon zoning back in, the SK tells the cleric to LNS. Fearing punishment, the cleric leaves the zone and the exp group disbands as they cannot continue without a healer.

So my question is, does the cleric have to LNS, or does the fact the group is still there allow the cleric to stay? If allowed to stay, can the SK continue to attack or would that be considered griefing?

If the SK leaves the zone he loses the right to ask the cleric to abide by the LNS rules or that's how i always interpreted them. You don't just port around clearing zones and expecting people to not come back for an hour.

alternative for the group would be /ooc full group of noobs leveling up needs a post to a better exp location due to LNS rules. i'm sure a friendly porter would oblige, but i get the point of your OP.