Rules on Camps that have lists

[Foxplay]

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

Don't be a douche, it's pretty simple.

Legendary SmackDown

[Ella`Ella]

None of this will be an issue on the highly anticipated green server.

[Slave35]

So Andakos just came in and ruled against me being next in the AC list, even though I was told I was next (and waited 6 hours under that assumption). It turns out, the camp owner just invited someone to his group, and now the entire group can get the AC ring first before me. Apparently they can just keep inviting new people and giving them the ring instead, and somehow that doesn't go against what Derubael says here:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...19&postcount=9

2) The person holding the camp cannot mislead you, or change his mind after telling you who is next. Something that no one ever does (and I will never understand why) is to specifically address the camp holder, asking who is next or if you can be next. The camp holder does need to reveal to you who the next intended camp holder is - if he doesn't, you may ask to be next and your claim will be valid unless he reveals the next person immediately. This person cannot change after the camp holder has "revealed" the next person to take the camp to you. It is an automatic forfeit if this occurs. If you ask to be the next camp holder and are told yes, the camp holder may not later retract or change this agreement and attempt to hand the camp off to someone else - it's yours once he has gotten his item or moved on from the camp.

Seems to me that if anything should be covered by the Play Nice policy, it's that. And it seems to me that ruling is 100% in error. But there you go, now you have a your-mom's-vagina-sized loophole to drive your greed through.

[fastboy21]

Originally Posted by Slave35 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So Andakos just came in and ruled against me being next in the AC list, even though I was told I was next (and waited 6 hours under that assumption). It turns out, the camp owner just invited someone to his group, and now the entire group can get the AC ring first before me. Apparently they can just keep inviting new people and giving them the ring instead, and somehow that doesn't go against what Derubael says here:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...19&postcount=9

2) The person holding the camp cannot mislead you, or change his mind after telling you who is next. Something that no one ever does (and I will never understand why) is to specifically address the camp holder, asking who is next or if you can be next. The camp holder does need to reveal to you who the next intended camp holder is - if he doesn't, you may ask to be next and your claim will be valid unless he reveals the next person immediately. This person cannot change after the camp holder has "revealed" the next person to take the camp to you. It is an automatic forfeit if this occurs. If you ask to be the next camp holder and are told yes, the camp holder may not later retract or change this agreement and attempt to hand the camp off to someone else - it's yours once he has gotten his item or moved on from the camp.

Seems to me that if anything should be covered by the Play Nice policy, it's that. And it seems to me that ruling is 100% in error. But there you go, now you have a your-mom's-vagina-sized loophole to drive your greed through.

Details matter. As you presented the facts, my understanding is that you should have gotten the camp after he explicitly told you that 1) there was a list and 2) that you were next on it.

Even so, the list rules have always been essentially that the person holding the camp can pass it to whomever he wants.

If player A is camping AC and player B shows up here is what should happen:

• Player B asks Player A, "Are you camping AC? Is there a list?"
• Player A tells Player B, "Yes, I am camping AC. There is a list: Me, JimmyJoe, JackyPutz, DumpyNitwitz, then you if you want to be on list."
• JimmyJoe, JackPutz, and DumpyNitwitz might not be real players. They might not be online. They might not be in the zone. They might be alts that Player A has camped out at the camp. (This is cheating, but how would Player B every actually know? -- he won't)
• When JimmyJoe gets the camp when Player A is done, my understanding is that JimmyJoe has no obligation to honor the list Player A originally told Player B.
• JimmyJoe can now start a whole new list if he wants to...pushing Player B back to the end of the list. FUNCTIONALLY, it is possible that Player B (no matter how long he sits there) legit never gets to the front of the line.

I don't like the system. It is very unfair and easily cheated. Every time it has seriously been discussed it seems to come down to that this is how it was enforced in classic EQ. The guiding principal was simply that whoever has the camp can pass it to whomever he wants without regarding to anybody who has been waiting (and might even have been told) that they were on a list.

TLDR: Lists are bull. If you are on a list you only get to the top if the people holding the camp aren't jerks.

AC usually works out because of the nature of the camp (the named always drops the ring, the spot is hard to get to before the next PH has been up for a couple minutes)...but if someone WANTS to be a jerk you are out of luck.

[Slave35]

Originally Posted by fastboy21 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Details matter. As you presented the facts, my understanding is that you should have gotten the camp after he explicitly told you that 1) there was a list and 2) that you were next on it.

Even so, the list rules have always been essentially that the person holding the camp can pass it to whomever he wants.

If player A is camping AC and player B shows up here is what should happen:

• Player B asks Player A, "Are you camping AC? Is there a list?"
• Player A tells Player B, "Yes, I am camping AC. There is a list: Me, JimmyJoe, JackyPutz, DumpyNitwitz, then you if you want to be on list."
• JimmyJoe, JackPutz, and DumpyNitwitz might not be real players. They might not be online. They might not be in the zone. They might be alts that Player A has camped out at the camp. (This is cheating, but how would Player B every actually know? -- he won't)
• When JimmyJoe gets the camp when Player A is done, my understanding is that JimmyJoe has no obligation to honor the list Player A originally told Player B.
• JimmyJoe can now start a whole new list if he wants to...pushing Player B back to the end of the list. FUNCTIONALLY, it is possible that Player B (no matter how long he sits there) legit never gets to the front of the line.

I don't like the system. It is very unfair and easily cheated. Every time it has seriously been discussed it seems to come down to that this is how it was enforced in classic EQ. The guiding principal was simply that whoever has the camp can pass it to whomever he wants without regarding to anybody who has been waiting (and might even have been told) that they were on a list.

TLDR: Lists are bull. If you are on a list you only get to the top if the people holding the camp aren't jerks.

AC usually works out because of the nature of the camp (the named always drops the ring, the spot is hard to get to before the next PH has been up for a couple minutes)...but if someone WANTS to be a jerk you are out of luck.

Before you post again, read this:

2) The person holding the camp cannot mislead you, or change his mind after telling you who is next. Something that no one ever does (and I will never understand why) is to specifically address the camp holder, asking who is next or if you can be next. The camp holder does need to reveal to you who the next intended camp holder is - if he doesn't, you may ask to be next and your claim will be valid unless he reveals the next person immediately. This person cannot change after the camp holder has "revealed" the next person to take the camp to you. It is an automatic forfeit if this occurs. If you ask to be the next camp holder and are told yes, the camp holder may not later retract or change this agreement and attempt to hand the camp off to someone else - it's yours once he has gotten his item or moved on from the camp.

-As per GM Derubael here https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...19&postcount=9

I have bolded the most pertinent passage here for you.

[fastboy21]

Originally Posted by Slave35 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Before you post again, read this:

2) The person holding the camp cannot mislead you, or change his mind after telling you who is next. Something that no one ever does (and I will never understand why) is to specifically address the camp holder, asking who is next or if you can be next. The camp holder does need to reveal to you who the next intended camp holder is - if he doesn't, you may ask to be next and your claim will be valid unless he reveals the next person immediately. This person cannot change after the camp holder has "revealed" the next person to take the camp to you. It is an automatic forfeit if this occurs. If you ask to be the next camp holder and are told yes, the camp holder may not later retract or change this agreement and attempt to hand the camp off to someone else - it's yours once he has gotten his item or moved on from the camp.

-As per GM Derubael here https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...19&postcount=9

I have bolded the most pertinent passage here for you.

Nothing in your quote contradicts anything that I wrote. The only exception is that the person holding the camp is not allowed to mislead (virtually impossible to enforce).

Tell me where you see the contradiction so I can clarify where you misunderstood me.

[Slave35]

Originally Posted by fastboy21 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nothing in your quote contradicts anything that I wrote. The only exception is that the person holding the camp is not allowed to mislead (virtually impossible to enforce).

Tell me where you see the contradiction so I can clarify where you misunderstood me.

not sure if willfully ignorant or actually insane.

>_>

[NegaStoat]

Originally Posted by Slave35 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So Andakos just came in and ruled against me being next in the AC list, even though I was told I was next (and waited 6 hours under that assumption).

If it really went down like this, link your screenshots and video to RnF and raise some hell with name and shame. The player, the party members, the GM, all of it.

[Slave35]

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

If it really went down like this, link your screenshots and video to RnF and raise some hell with name and shame. The player, the party members, the GM, all of it.

Pretty sure that's heavily frowned on so I've just posted the actual facts of the incident here, the most important thing being this guide's ruling and how it may lead to camping in bad faith, directly counter to the Play Nice Policy.

[Dartagnan]

What about camps relating to XP? What are the rules here?

For example, the GY group in MM. Can they lay claim to the pit plus jail, tower, etc? Or can another group come in and take over other areas?

I've seen squabbles over the raider room in Highkeep goblin area. What's to stop someone from laying claim to the 3 spawns in that room?

I can't believe people can lay claim to the AC. I was always under the impression that mobs that randomly spawn like Pyzjn, Quillmane, AC were free game for people in the area and that someone couldn't lock the spawn down.

I agree, server rules aren't clearly laid out and it makes it difficult to understand.