OoC Battle of Telos - Lords of Telos

[Reign]

I'm calling BS on this and hoping to get a second opinion involved.

It was brought to my attention that I should have voiced my complaint in the OoC thread, but my objection is clear and time-stamped in my post as occurring PRIOR to @Bauren posting.

It can be seen in the hidden spoiler at the bottom calling him out on timing and explaining the correction I posted in my post itself.

He then disregarded it completely.

Not sure who I would call in in this situation, but @Marf and @Phœnix since you guys are either FL or were FL at the start of the thread.

At the very least, it's poor tact on his part. At most, it's just poor PVP.

The footnote summarizing my complaint in quote:

Bullet point the time frame here to explain why Bau is not likely able to cut Ban off; should be noted that all of these actions would likely take a solid minute+ IF he did them quickly-- Ban's actions would probably take a few seconds, tops.

- My character, under the intact bridge, attempts to bind Fiyero in a force grab
- Marf destroys the bridge and area to send Bau flying.
- Simultaneously, I release Fiyero and retreat right before the bridge falls.
- Bau shrugs it off.
- Sometime around here or while Bau is looking for Vi, Ban talks some shit and leaves.
- Bau stops to look/sense for Vi. Notice Vi's gone. All good.
- Bau glances down to inspect your lightsaber, which (and I quote Bauren from an earlier post) " was likely he could salvage most of the parts and fix it simply "
- Bau repairs his lightsaber casually on the battlefield without any spare parts ready or on hand, or any mention of parts in his possession, after clearly suggesting he'd need some (I'm actually okay with this as the word "likely" was used, but it still retconning a previous post).
- Bau ignites it then leaps down behind me, backwards in time to several moments or minutes before the bridge broke and I grabbed/released his padawan? This is where the issue is. He performs a good 5-6 actions and ignores the timing clearly posted in previous rounds. Me releasing the padawan occurred when the bridge collapsed. This was while Bau was still being pushed back. Given that 4-5 more actions occurred, the likelihood Bau could head me off in a field of debris after everything he attempted to do (especially fixing his lightsaber) is next to none.

 

[Oreus]

E. In duels, if an opponent completely ignores an attack in his/her counter reply, that attack is an automatic hit. If clarification is needed for an attack, it's up to the players to contact their opponent and clarify an attack. Do not make assumptions and exploit vagueness.

F. Once a participant posts, the previous post can not be addressed for changes. For example, if metagaming is believed to have occurred in Post 1 and the opponent posts Post 2, the opponent has solidified the actions in Post 1 and cannot argue Post 1. This only applies to opposition. If a teammate of the poster of Post 1 posts Post 2, it does not exempt Post 1 from review. Any and all posts can be reviewed at the discretion of the admins.

As much as I feel like a jerk, the rules clearly state that you didn't challenge me before solidifying my post with your IC post. And there is no defense in your post other than your OOC argument that mine should be wrong. It's simply a lesson in following the rules where you could have challenged me before as you did for other things during this fight.

It was brought to my attention that I should have voiced my complaint in the OoC thread, but my objection is clear and time-stamped in my post as occurring PRIOR to @Bauren posting.

Yes but you posted it as part of your IC post which solidified my post per point above.

 

[Reign]

Lol I'd feel comfortable calling someone in on this. Cause honestly, there's CLEAR contest.

You literally did something outright wrong. Lol. I said it, explicitly. IC or otherwise, it shouldn't matter if you're just wrong.

But we'll see.

 

[Oreus]

I'm fine calling others in too. Not trying to be mean OOCly just following the rules and so forth. If it goes against me, great we clarify the rules and you run away. If it goes the way I posted, we all learn to be more careful about challenges and OP posting. Win-win.

 

[Marf]

Bauren I'm sorry, but I am incensed. From here it just feels like you took advantage of me having to leave due to health issues, and tried to gang up on and kill my team-mate.

I feel absolutely terrible that I wasn't there to help Reign, I wrote my exit in a way that I hoped would get us both out and leave Ferre and Reign to fight, but you had to miraculously brush off my attack go and get that extra kill. Cool.

That's all I have to say on the matter.

 

[Sreeya]

Bauren I'm sorry, but I am incensed. From here it just feels like you took advantage of me having to leave due to health issues, and tried to gang up on and kill my team-mate.

I feel absolutely terrible that I wasn't there to help Reign, I wrote my exit in a way that I hoped would get us both out and leave Ferre and Reign to fight, but you had to miraculously brush off my attack go and get that extra kill. Cool.

That's all I have to say on the matter.

EDIT: Original post was super mean due to me being tired so here's another try:

@Marf, Bauren didn't do anything wrong by attacking your teammate. Leaving the battle well into it horribly inconveniences the other parties involved. From the very start this was not a good idea because different agreements were made between players about whether it was death enabled or not. If you're sick, you should let someone know you absolutely need a replacement or just throw in the towel for the fight. You shouldn't leave it and assume @Bauren would do the same.

 

[Marf]

Bauren didn't do anything wrong by attacking your teammate. Leaving the battle well into it horribly inconveniences the other parties involved. From the very start this was not a good idea because different agreements were made between players about whether it was death enabled or not. If you're sick, you should let someone know you absolutely need a replacement or just throw in the towel for the fight. You shouldn't leave it and assume would do the same.

In my defense, I had no idea what I was doing. I was so anxious I was ill and unable to properly process coherent thought, and just winged it. I was panicking and wanted out. Beyond that, I just don't know about PvP, I don't know about these technicalities and how combat works or the rules regarding it, I didn't think about those things.

I didn't think, I didn't know what I was doing and yes, I'm responsible for Reign's characters' potential death. I am beyond sorry to everyone, for my disorganization and for this mess, for Reign's character and I have been discouraged from ever PvPing again.

 

[Reign]

I don't even care that Bauren attacked me.

No outright offense to Bauren, but if we did fight, I don't frankly think it would have been a contest. I mean, there's a grotesque mistake in his post. And it's one he consistently makes through other posts. He's not detail oriented. He seems to half-read posts given other objections. I know this sounds harsh, but I wanna make sure I'm steering this to the point.

What has me frustrated is that, as a new member, oversight on whether or not my objection was IC/OoC should be beside the point. He clearly made a mistake. I don't think he's even objecting to that point. Yet, because I objected clearly in character, it's a moot point? My character's going to die because he's a bad PVPer attempting to exploit something over a member that's been around a couple weeks. That's where I would have a problem.

I follow rules are rules, but rules are intended to protect and not hurt. I would hope admin see it that way. It's a big enough issue to move off site over to be frank. Because rule or not, this is exploitation of a rule because OoC he decided he disliked me when I played my character's attitude the way she should be played.

 

[Oreus]

I don't even care that Bauren attacked me.

No outright offense to Bauren, but if we did fight, I don't frankly think it would have been a contest. I mean, there's a grotesque mistake in his post. And it's one he consistently makes through other posts.

What has me frustrated is that, as a new member, oversight on whether or not my objection was IC/OoC. He clearly made a mistake. I don't think he's even objecting to that point. Yet, because I objected clearly in character, it's a moot point? My character's going to die because he's a bad PVPer attempting to exploit something over a member that's been around a couple weeks. That's where I would have a problem.

I follow rules are rules, but rules are intended to protect and not hurt. I would hope admin see it that way.

We can have a dispute without attacking each other OOCly. I get that it's upsetting but going on about how awful my post was and how awful I am at PvP doesn't really help the situation. If you feel that way ask an admin to look at it, as I said earlier. This is essentially just a fun game to play and write some stuff. If you still want to have fun after this blows over and fight a bad pvper I'd be up for a fight no matter how short it is due to my grotesque mistakes. :)

My aim with the posts were not to kill you but to create a realistic 2v1 fight that would make you flee. Instead of rolling with what was one of the more sane posts in an insane thread you decided to not talk about it but tried to invalidate mine with an OOC note on an IC post. What would have been easier: Ending the thread by defending against my attack and fleeing or this? Heck even a PM or OOC note BEFORE you posted would have been fine and we could have discussed it with a civil attitude as I am trying to do still now. Instead you chose to insult me in the IC thread with a spoiler OOC note on how bad my post is while doing one that did a lot of the same things in your own.

You also claim that I exploited a new member who had been around for only 2 weeks or so. The same member posting a PVP guide in the OOC section (before this post) and claiming I am bad at pvp. Harsh as it may be you need to pick an argument. I'm not a mean guy and your last challenge via PM wasn't exactly kind yet I still complied and was happy to work with your perception of what things should be for the sake of moving along. Throughout this whole process it's felt like walking on thin ice not to actually make it real pvp and simply rolling with some things to avoid fights.

TL;DR - Please call an admin if you want to argue the results. I hope you can learn from this and have some fun in pvp still.

 

[Reign]

That's not the same. I posted a PVP guide because I know PVP and a particular rule set.

In most rule sets, objections can be made IC and OoC. That detail is unique to this forum, and was not accounted for. And that OoC rule was exploited in your favor seeing, very clearly, that I objected to your course of action.

My OoC note was of neutral tone to explain what was not accounted for, clearly, and to explain why I dismissed it.

Also, our PMs were very pointed. Your original post objected to my actions (by the way, you did this IC). My first PM to you about it was saying that I accounted for the blaster bolts. That was all. You pushed an argument and I proceeded to offer quotes from posts in support of mine while you made vague generalizations and bounced around to whatever next thought seemed convenient. It got a little heated because of that fact. You then took a jab at the end as though you were "teaching me a lesson." So it wasn't one-sided heat by any means.

That said, in fairness, I'll digress. I state what I state about your PVP because the evidence is there. It might be a little harsh, so I'll chill on that front.

 

[Oreus]

That's not the same. I posted a PVP guide because I know PVP and a particular rule set.

In most rule sets, objections can be made IC and OoC. That detail is unique to this forum, and was not accounted for. And that OoC rule was exploited in your favor seeing, very clearly, that I objected to your course of action.

My OoC note was of neutral tone to explain what was not accounted for, clearly, and to explain why I dismissed it.

Also, our PMs were very pointed. Your original post objected to my actions (by the way, you did this IC). My first PM to you about it was saying that I accounted for the blaster bolts. That was all. You pushed an argument and I proceeded to offer quotes from posts in support of mine while you made vague generalizations and bounced around to whatever next thought seemed convenient. It got a little heated because of that fact. You then took a jab at the end as though you were "teaching me a lesson." So it wasn't one-sided heat by any means.

That said, in fairness, I'll digress. I state what I state about your PVP because the evidence is there. It might be a little harsh, so I'll chill on that front.

One major difference is when you had an issue with my post it was brought up OOCly that time first and I made the edit before any heated arguments started (Yet they started anyways because you can't seem to carry a civil conversation). You made no such effort this time and simply decided it was okay to negate my post because you knew better. Just because "Most rule sets at all these much better pvp sites you play" are one way doesn't mean those rules apply here. This argument is pointless. You didn't get your way so this has turned into insults and trying to gain some high horse. Don't like it? Call an admin. I'm not going to sit here and argue with you, especially if it will be like this.

 

[Reign]

Lol, what you did, ignoring the passage of time, is bogus no matter where you RP.

I highly doubt here is any different. But fair enough. If that is how it works here, it's good to know now before I get too invested.

You're right. The name calling won't help. It's juvenile at best. So as I said before, I'll relax.

 

[Phoenix]

I don't usually like posting in fights that aren't my own because I don't think it's the AFL/FL role to act as mediators as it can often cause situations to escalate. Because I was tagged here, I will give my two cents of advice to both sides but if this hasn't been reported to the admins yet, someone should because I can't make an actual ruling.

So, I've gotten a chance to look over the posts a bit and my two cents of advice to everyone would be as follows:
@Reign I would recommend putting any notes like the ones you made at the bottom as IC notes. Work them into the actual post. That's what I usually do and it helps cut down on any arguments about what was said IC/OOC.

@Bauren I'm not an admin, but i would tend to classify what reign posted as an interrupting action, which would make things in your post not necessarily cemented. For anyone that's reading this that doesn't know what interrupting actions are: if someone does 30 actions in one post, you can interrupt at action 2 and the other 28 aren't cemented (obviously this is an extreme example, but hopefully helps clarify). Reign probably should have detailed it more in his IC post why it was interrupting (though he did mention it) rather than doing it in footnotes. That said, it doesn't (to my understanding of the rules) automatically cement everything in your post.

Again, if no one has yet, I'd vehemently suggest reporting this so that everyone can get a conclusive answer to what is/isn't allowed.

 

[Reign]

As a note, this was reported to admin.

I have always used footnotes to highlight things that might be missed despite it being posted I character. I could have elaborated in character why Bauren probably wouldn't have been there. I chose not to because it was predominantly ooc rationale.

In the future, the objection would come ooc and IC anyway. But my in character reflection of his mistake is just how it's always been done in the camps I've played. And I get it, this is a different camp that I've been trying to familiarize myself with. Generally, resolving it in IC posts is what I've done. And ooc comes if there's still an objection at that point.

Also, I wasn't necessarily calling you and Marf in to mediate. As I know you are not third party or neutral. It was more that I didn't know how to report the grievance. Marf clarified that for me yesterday. Either way, I appreciate it.

 

[Marf]

Since this fight is, or was, a 2 vs 2, does that mean the limit is three weeks, not two weeks?

 

[GABA]

OK, so lets clarify something: regardless of what site you come from, but on SWRP, you must contest a post before replying. That doesn't mean you contest it in your reply or 3 posts after your reply. This is what we have OoC discussions for and we expect them to be used as such.

As for the thread ruling:

The battle has been successfully won by the Jedi. Bauren's final post stands and Reign's character has been killed in battle due to Reign failing to recognize Bauren's attack written in his previous post. As mentioned above, disputes about posts need to be made before the reply, not at the time of the reply. I would also like to mention, as it is against the rules to exploit vagueness too. If another member is not giving enough detail, tell them, don't blow it off until a real issue occurs. Details on PvP rules can be read here under Combat and Manaan Rules 2.0.

Lastly, Marf's character, is still stuck on Telos, just because you bow out of a PvP battle, it doesn't mean there will not be consequences for that character.

 

[Marf]

I am sick, I am numb. I don't know how I can take this in.

I entered this thread because as FL, I felt I had to partake in combat to set a good example for the site, but I couldn't do it. I sincerely apologize to all parties involved for my irresponsible and disorganized actions, I don't think I can live with fact that I am partially responsible for the death of someone else's character.

For the sake of my own health and those I RP with, I will not be PvPing again for as long as I am active on this site.

 

[Reign]

@Marf To be very honest, you aren't responsible for the death of my character. I can't say that enough, and I genuinely hope you understand that.

A bad rule was. And that is what it is. I know The weight of my statement means little. But the reality is, everyone is punished here except the guy who failed to account for reasonable passage of time, acted in spite of my objection, and was protected by a rule. If I'd been beaten fair and square, if I'd been outplayed, then fair enough. But I highly doubt anyone can look at that thread straight faced and tell me that.

But rules are rules.

I had some hype going for star wars. Been a while. But I have places I can role play that respect logic and pvp more to my liking. Ill miss what I had planned for my character, but this obviously isn't the type or approach to pvp I want anything to do with.

Good luck with your thing SWRP.

 

[Marf]

To be very honest, you aren't responsible for the death of my character. I can't say that enough, and I genuinely hope you understand that.

I'm somewhat relieved that you think that, even though I'm incredibly sad to see you go - although I completely understand why. You're wonderful writer and brought beautiful material to the site. I'll miss you and your character.

 

[Eccles]

Lastly, Marf's character, is still stuck on Telos, just because you bow out of a PvP battle, it doesn't mean there will not be consequences for that character.

Regardless of the fact the ruling has been made, I understand @Reign's frustration of someone getting away with screwing the timeline because of a non-posting rule, while the argument that ensued lasted more than 48 hours and thus would've required an admin ruling right from the getgo. Rules are what it is, but it does open up the question whether or not it needs to be looked at in some cases, taking into account context both IC and OOC.

I really hope @Reign will reconsider and give us, the fellow Sith members, a chance to convince you to stay. If not then I wish you all the luck in the world, as you're a good writer and one we definately needed in this faction.

As to the quoted part:
If it's okay with everyone I'll just post an [Ask] thread picking Vereshin up and we can call it a day. Putting someone who gets sick over PvP purposefully on a planet where she'd have to PvP her way out against a faction that are merciless this timeline is just plain mean. We accept players leaving threads over time-issues without consequence, so why in hell would we put consequences to people leaving over health issues. That's unbecoming.