Mob Camping Rules

[Hitchens]

No. This is page seven and at no point were my motivations to defend ninja looting, but instead to argue personal responsibility.

I don't think there's much left to discuss here.

[vinx]

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

I still don't see how it is different than dropping items on the ground. It is a risk you choose to take by not communicating with those around you, or having a friend help, or finding a safer spot, etc. And therefore shouldn't be something you can petition over.

But hey, it's obviously a gray area and up to guides to decide if they want to help, if this situation were to actually arise.

referenced on page 6

[Hitchens]

Check page two. The comparison was initially brought up there.

Good day.

[aggrikta]

This is interesting, but I think if you kill it, it's yours no matter what toon you loot it on, I can't see how it can be otherwise, you'd have to be very unlucky for someone to just happen upon it during the seconds it takes to jump toons.

[Callnoutthenewbs]

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

Calling out the noobs is a noob and has called himself out.

No one can loot a mob I kill without my permission, even if I log out to another char. What they can do when I log to another char, is take my camp.

Have a great day everyone !

If the timer goes and u log to a alt it it becomes open you better bet your ass im gonna loot it and im well within my rights to do so.

You had 5 mins to loot whatever was on it you clearly didnt and the loot is now open to me

[tekniq]

I really hope the shit you guys are discussing never really happens in game...it's bad manner to *intentionally try to fuck someone over for your own benefit. greedy shit like this is what rots our server. I thankfully have never had to deal with this, thank god.

[Frieza_Prexus]

If the timer goes and u log to a alt it it becomes open you better bet your ass im gonna loot it and im well within my rights to do so.

You had 5 mins to loot whatever was on it you clearly didnt and the loot is now open to me

Having the ability to do something does not equate to having the right to do it. Provide an analysis supported by some authoritative rules, and we might take you more seriously.

[Atmas]

I think Falkun's posts hit the nail on the head.

I'm going to take it a step further and say that people shouldn't assume logging a character should be taken as a person denouncing their loot claim. Rather the opposite view should be taken, that someone must explicitly give you loot rights for you to take an item from their kill.

I will agree that leaving a camp through travel or logging means giving up the camp and future kills, but not what you already killed.

Some people seem to think that an item going to rot is a validation for looting it, which is not the case.

Also, there is a fair amount of irony here for people joking about the OP not comprehending their responses to a question the OP didn't ask.

[Slave]

Looting a corpse, that you did not kill, without permission, is the very definition of ninja looting and it is against the rules of the server.

Done and done and done.

[Tricky Beverage]

As an avid lurker, I really like both Xasten and Hitchens. Thus far, Xasten has made the better supported argument (mostly because he's cared enough to type out his full argument). That said, I believe Hitchens is right.

Xasten, I like you and I appreciate your style, but I think you're wrong on this one. Here's why:

I think Xasten is trying to straw man us here (as opposed to reductio ad absurdum). To put this in context a little better, I have included a little more of the full quote from Rogean. Sorry the formatting is shitty; I guess I can't actually use the quote function because the thread is locked. I recommend following the link to Rogean's locked thread.

http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...19&postcount=1


Quote:
raid disputes

Ninja looting is not a raid dispute. It is an individual basis. If a mob is killed in a non-disputable zone, the group (and thus raid/guild) that is merited the kill has rights to the loot. If they don't grant you permission to loot the corpse, you are violating an individual server rule by ninja looting.

Pathetic honestly that you are resorting to that after losing a kill and crying about it.

If you have any more questions about this you can send me a PM.

Now I will agree with Xasten on the content of Rogean's post -- Rogean seems to be saying exactly what Xasten is representing him to have said. Xasten and I disagree, however, on what Rogean is trying to say here.

It is painfully obvious to me that Rogean took a situation where we all (and yes, I'm including the original TR ninjas in this) have the same innate gut reaction to the situation: "What happened here is undeniably wrong."

Rogean had this reaction to the raid-ninja scenario and then did what many famous Supreme Court Justices have done since the US was founded: he created a fallacious argument to back up his (correct) gut reaction. In short, if what Rogean said in this thread is taken literally, then Rogean is wrong. Now yes, I'm aware Rogean makes the rules and we answer to him (hell, I'm thankful he lets me play on his server). But that doesn't change the fact that Rogean's logic in that locked thread is filled with holes. Apply Rogean's justification to the analogous scenario of training, and you'll immediately see the reasoning is nonsense:

"Because it can happen to individuals or groups, training is not a raid dispute. Therefore it falls into the exception to the non-intervention rules, and CSR will lay down the banhammer for those who train in VP."

Ridiculous, right?

To avoid cries of "GM INTERVENTION IN A NON-INTERVENTION ZONE!!!11" Rogean says that "ninja-looting" is NOT a raid dispute, but rather a violation on an individual basis. While "ninja-looting" certainly can be an individual/group issue, saying that raid "ninja-looting" is not a raid issue is clearly a cockamamie claim. Of course, the simple fact of the matter is that "non-intervention" is a misnomer for VP and always has been. There have been caveats and exceptions to VP's non-intervention rules (e.g., CSR will restore corpses that fully rot in VP) on p99 from day one. The p99 Dev Team should have just called VP what it is: a no-intervention-when-you-dolts-train-the-shit-out-of-each-other zone. But that is too hard to type and as soon as the words "non-intervention zone" were uttered by the Dev Team, trolls from both TR/IB and TMO immediately latched onto the phrase and began using it in their respective forum propaganda.

Because poor Rogean made a silly argument to justify his (just/correct) result, the ruling he appears to be making can be overextended far beyond what I believe Rogean intended -- which is exactly what's going on in this thread.

What's much more likely (than the literal reading of the above locked thread) is that Rogean wanted to prevent future abuses of the non-intervention zone rule in VP. "Ninja-looting" raid loot is such an obvious and egregious exploitation of VP's non-intervention rules that Rogean felt he needed (he didn't, by the way) some justification to intervene. It should also be noted that there's a valid (and distinct) reason to permit "ninja-looting" in the raid scene, but allow "ninja-looting" in the solo/group scenario: it takes longer to award loot in a guild than in a group (or solo). So while there's a valid GM interest/rationale to preventing raid "ninja-looting," there is no such interest/rationale in preventing "ninja-looting" at the solo/group level. Solo/group players should just figure it out before the timer expires, or lock down the corpse. This brings me to my next point...

I have been putting "ninja-looting" in quotes this whole time because for some reason what we call "ninja-looting" on p99 is not the same as what real ninja-looting was on live. I don't know how the term came into such misuse here. But (actual) ninja-looting is when a member of a group or raid loots an item he has not won (or been awarded) while the corpse loot-lock timer is still going (a la Xosire or Taluvill), usually followed by gating, logging, or AFKing. Ninja-looting does not include looting an item on a non-locked corpse. As far as I know, that's just how the corpse-lock mechanic is supposed to work. If you engage in that sort of "ninja-looting," you're not a ninja, you're just an inconsiderate player. The whole reason the corpse-lock mechanic was utilized on live was to keep GMs from having to deal with this kind of bullshit dispute. Had the EQ development team intended for a corpse to be "THE SOLE PROPARTY OF THE GRP WHO KILLD IT," then the corpse would just remain locked to those outside the group until it fully decayed, and anyone who wanted to loot on an alt would simply have to be added to the group to loot. However, that was never the intended mechanic. If you left the corpse unattended and the corpse-lock timer ran down on live, you were just a dummy. If even the group rule on p99 is that a corpse is "THE SOLE PROPARTY OF THE GRP WHO KILLD IT," then that server rule is definitely not classic and moreover, is just plain retarded(/counterintuitive). While I have heard of some situations on classic live where both (actual) ninja-looting and raid "ninja-looting" (post-timer) incurred CSR intervention, I don't recall any instances where solo/group "ninja-looting" (post-timer) were punished. Perhaps I recall this incorrectly, so feel free to cite any proof of instances where I might be wrong and I will amend accordingly. The point is, if you leave a corpse unattended past its loot-lock timer on p99, then you're a dummy, just like you would have been a dummy for the same behavior in classic. And you, dummy, aren't entitled to any CSR recourse for being a dummy; you should have taken precautions.

Rogean was clearly justified in his decision, and his decision is perfectly valid in the raiding context he made it in. But it is a mistake to read Rogean's argument literally, take it out of the original context, and then attempt to apply it to the distinct case of a completely unmanned (if only briefly) corpse. All of that said, I'd love to hear Rogean's opinion on this issue -- maybe I'm wrong about his actual intentions and he actually believes the ludicrous argument he posted in that thread to justify his (correct) decision based on his (correct) gut feeling.

Hitchens' dropped bag analogy is much more applicable to these facts than Xasten's raid "ninja-loot" analogy. In both the case of the dropped bags and the case of the unattended corpse, a player leaves his item (and yes, I agree that the loot on the corpse is his item) on the ground in the world without being logged into the server to watch it (if only for few seconds). When that happens, that player loses his claim to his item if someone else gets to it before he does. Either way, the second player ganking the item is clearly an inconsiderate jerk, but in my view, just because the first player is a dummy doesn't necessarily mean the ganker has violated any rules.

Finally, on a personal note, I don't approve of either taking someone's bags off of the ground or looting a corpse that doesn't belong to you. Under normal circumstances would never even consider engage in either of these questionable behaviors. Even so, just reading the original poster's whiny, self-serving, incoherent drivel makes me want to find out what camp he's doing and just so I can try to loot when the corpse timer runs down. Just sayin'.

Holy shit, sorry for the excessive length.

TLDR --

1. I think Hitchens is right, Xasten is wrong, and OP is a whiner.

2. Xasten makes a strong argument, and either way, this is an interesting debate.

3. VP isn't really a 100% non-intervention zone. Never has been.

4. I don't think Rogean meant the referenced thread to be applied as literally as Xasten applies it here.

5. If Rogean's post is the literal embodiment of the rule on p99, then the rule on p99 is pretty stupid.

6. Ninja-looting doesn't mean looting after the corpse-lock timer runs out.