[Lolzytripd]

I don't think you all understand that the point isn't about punishing players who are being an antagonist.

being an antagonist in an rp game is a sacred duty, without one the game grows stale.

Maybe its because a gm runs the guard that's gotten you all blind to this.

[Noxid]

Look I was in the 2nd group who fought them in cellsvich when they fled. Can you please stop saying they abused stuff when they didn't. They are simply using the methods given in the rules to escape. There is no abuse. Please focus on the rule itself and keep the petty insults out.

As to what was said in regards to preparation we did prepare and had a very favourable match up downing two members quickly. The issue really lies in the fact there is little you can do to stop someone fleeing mechanically. All it takes is one person to be at the border and they can beam the whole party up regardless of location and status. I really think individual fleeing should be added mechanically because flee rule changes are just putting a bandaid on the problem. We've had at least 3 of these threads in recent months and we will have more even with another change as soon as someone "abuses" the new rules.

I don't buy the arguments for being lax on the rules for antagonists sake. An antag walking into town starting a fight the running away really isn't interesting so this rule changes little in regards to interesting antagonists. That particular issue in my opinion is more to do with the fact you can't find anyone outside the arena/cells but that's for another topic. I don't even think these guys were antags from my understanding they just didn't realise they were wanted.

[Nerserus]

I don't buy the arguments for being lax on the rules for antagonists sake. An antag walking into town starting a fight the running away really isn't interesting so this rule changes little in regards to interesting antagonists.

Grind Member in the fight that occured in Dormeho here - I actually was just minding my own business near the fishing area when a party of four guards came out of the portal and immediately declared three of us were under arrest - which was really fascinating considering that I was both a new character and never actually attacked anyone/commit any crime at all. Although I corrected the guards, and I personally was...Pardoned, I guess. (They kind of just said, yeah sure you can walk away, was pretty confusing considering we were still challenged to a fight) you bet your ass I was wanted after I defended myself.

This of course, doesn't stop "Good people" from dogpiling my side after we already beat the guards of course, and people will always try to leverage that number addvantage even further; despite the fact being an antagonist is already a thankless, dangerous job in which you can go to prison or die if you lose but the most that'll happen if a protagonist falls, is they'll shrug their shoulders, say "No" to being killed and just watch someone else fight you with absolutely no risk to anything they own - and will gleefully complain on the forums about how we should take even more risks, and have an even harder time not just winning one four v four, but in fact twenty v four and just have to devote six hours real life to resolving the situation.

Good people don't even lose Murai if you beat them! No wonder they're so eager to throw themselves at supposed terrorists; they know out of character nothing bad can happen to them, and that's what gives them the courage to act so cavalier in game. It's ridiculously two faced, and I implore that people show some empathy to our situation - people were doing roleplays about blowing up our guildhouse and such, as if any band of civilians would run up to a known Al Qaeda hideout in real life and attempt to trade blows with the terrorists themselves - it's a real coincidence, having four guards and what, sixteen vigilantes? People who are totally ready to risk it all (In character) to fight our guild?

I feel that the two groups maximum rule, doesn't just keep it fair; it keeps it realistic. You're not going to have everyone in a group of observers just have the cajones to get involved, that's not how it works, that's never how it works. This is what guards are for. (Whether or not they're up to the task is of course another story - but it is technically their job) Sure, you'll have some people pitch in, but there needs to be some perspective here.

[Gilape]

This of course, doesn't stop "Good people" from dogpiling my side after we already beat the guards of course, and people will always try to leverage that number addvantage even further; despite the fact being an antagonist is already a thankless, dangerous job in which you can go to prison or die if you lose but the most that'll happen if a protagonist falls, is they'll shrug their shoulders, say "No" to being killed and just watch someone else fight you with absolutely no risk to anything they own - and will gleefully complain on the forums about how we should take even more risks, and have an even harder time not just winning one four v four, but in fact twenty v four and just have to devote six hours real life to resolving the situation.

Good people don't even lose Murai if you beat them! No wonder they're so eager to throw themselves at supposed terrorists; they know out of character nothing bad can happen to them, and that's what gives them the courage to act so cavalier in game. It's ridiculously two faced, and I implore that people show some empathy to our situation - people were doing roleplays about blowing up our guildhouse and such, as if any band of civilians would run up to a known Al Qaeda hideout in real life and attempt to trade blows with the terrorists themselves - it's a real coincidence, having four guards and what, sixteen vigilantes? People who are totally ready to risk it all (In character) to fight our guild?

I feel that the two groups maximum rule, doesn't just keep it fair; it keeps it realistic. You're not going to have everyone in a group of observers just have the cajones to get involved, that's not how it works, that's never how it works. This is what guards are for. (Whether or not they're up to the task is of course another story - but it is technically their job) Sure, you'll have some people pitch in, but there needs to be some perspective here.

Maybe if you're a vigilante/bounty hunter and you decide to interject ahead of the actual guard force, you accept that if you lose you can be maimed or killed without, and consent to that when you enter the battle. Then people might think twice before throwing themselves at the "bad guys" with that OOC confidence you just described.

It's definitely a situation where some people have gained a serious OOC motivation to thwart certain individuals through any means possible; there are people with an obvious bias here and I would hope that we can come to a conclusion that is fair for both parties. I think charging head-first into a group of wanted criminals who have been known to be armed and dangerous should come with a disclaimer that you might lose a spleen/your head if you lose.

[BluestStark]

Again we're starting to get off track here. The fleeing rules have been updated, Let's not get salty at each other.

[Lolzytripd]

Again we're starting to get off track here. The fleeing rules have been updated, Let's not get salty at each other.

There is no track here at all

this was brought up in regards to context and to not discuss the context would be in genuine.