Mume.net - LOG: How to get shining without kill

Vargas

2001-03-29 20:39:07

ROFL ASSKICKING!!!!
Ofcos nsl dont get demoted :P Fun anyhow

Fredde

2001-03-29 20:39:13

isent hideing eq and reving it later ilegal? hehe i can spell!

Chauncey

2001-03-29 20:39:31

HAHAHAHAHA!!! Awesome. :)

Nimroth

2001-03-29 20:40:20

Only if you die and go reveal it.

Wryak

2001-03-29 20:41:30

I suggest NSL ppl read rules banking..The same applies to obvious variations with the same intention; giving equipment to mobs, hiding it in rooms, etc.. there was a chance he could die so he hid the shining with the intention of safekeeping it, then when he didn't die he came back for it...

Cagim

2001-03-29 20:42:46

I had been waiting to backtrap nsl in there!

Vorlin

2001-03-29 20:43:27

Let's put it this way: how many of you think if he had died that he wouldn't have gone back for it? *smirk*

Butter

2001-03-29 21:00:46

Well in my eyes that aint illegal, It's kinda obvious that If I think im gonna die I hide the best eq, If i whould have died no way I whould have gotten it back, but since I didn't die I still "know" it's hidden there and therefor know where to look.. Anyways if it is illegal demote me, coudn't care less. Im quitting this game more or less within the month =p

Butter

2001-03-29 21:03:43

Butter

2001-03-29 21:04:14

Let me quote "Similarly, hiding equipment before you get pkilled is only allowed if you don't recover it (or tell anyone else about it)

Did I get pkilled no?

unknown

2001-03-29 21:11:26

we all know you would recover it if you died

fearsome

2001-03-29 21:25:03

Clearly, this also applies to leaving your equipment or gold in the safe-
keeping of another character whilst you go off into a risky situation. The same
applies to obvious variations with the same intention: giving equipment to
mobs, hiding it in rooms, etc.

Wryak

2001-03-29 21:30:14

Those rules contradict eachother. If you clearly have no intention of revealing eq IF you happen to die, yet reveal it when you didn't die.. then how can it be considered safekeeping? We'd need a mume mind-reading machine to actually enforce this rule, so I don't think anyone but Butter himself can prove he did anything wrong.

Stussy

2001-03-29 22:03:05

What's the difference....you hid the eq because you thought u were going to
die...which doesnt make much sense in battle..like a warrior would take off his breastplate when he is almost dead and attempt to hide it? You hid it because
you didnt want darkies to have a nice shining set. The key here is that is just like banking..you give some of you good eq to player b to hold who is in rivendell while you go and fight a battle incase u die. Anyhow, just my 2 cents.

Edvard

2001-03-29 22:11:50

hahahahhaha hope he gets demoted, damn fjortis

Daevia

2001-03-29 22:22:37

It is obviously illegal. :P Freaks.

Nazgum

2001-03-29 22:31:31

Now that's some obvious fucking banking if I ever saw it ;p

Butter

2001-03-29 22:31:48

Well if it was illegal it was, I take the shit for it. But let me make it more visual! Think that this shining set was a superior sword, and if darkies get their hands on it all the free people whould die, Isnt it better that I hide it, so darkies don't get it, then letting darkies get it? If darkies whould have got the whole shining set, it whould have made them stronger, maybe not alot, but alittle, and in my eyes its better that noone gets it then darkies. I was kinda sure I was going to die. Then I didn't die, and i reveald it, since as i said before i still "Knew" where I had hid it.

Butter

2001-03-29 22:33:35

Thats in a RP mood tho *wink Manwe*, and we all want Mume to be more rp, don't we?

Gawain

2001-03-29 22:36:45

Butter thats total bullshit, give up it was cheating

Oile

2001-03-29 22:36:48

The demote-happy people don't understand the rule the way I do. The point is about playing "in-character", where a character should act as if his death was final. The person who dies shouldn't recover the EQ, because they had died. This removes the motivation of banking EQ so that you can recover it after you died, which is clearly NOT an in-character thing to do. However, hiding the EQ to spite your foes, or to help the efforts of the war, could be considered in-character. If Butter dies, and NSL recovers the EQ, it's legal, so long as Butter doesn't get it back. It should also be figured that Butter should not communicate about the hidden EQ after he died.

Nazgum

2001-03-29 22:38:07

* W C>rules banking
BANKING "EXCHANGING EQUIPMENT"

Banking is storing items and gold so that you may have a source of new
equipment should you for some reason lose your old equipment. Bank characters
usually have lots of gold and have tons of good equipment. When discovered,
bank characters lose all equipment; both bank and "client" can be subjected to
harsher punishments as well - for instance, loss of levels.

Another obvious form of banking is to hide or hand off your equipment for
safekeeping whilst you deliberately DT. Similarly, hiding equipment before you
get pkilled is only allowed if you don't recover it (or tell anyone else about
it). Clearly, this also applies to leaving your equipment or gold in the safe-
keeping of another character whilst you go off into a risky situation. The same
applies to obvious variations with the same intention: giving equipment to
mobs, hiding it in rooms, etc.

The minimum punishment for equipment exchange is destruction of the exchanged
equipment, though usually the punishment is much harsher.

Gawain

2001-03-29 22:38:40

True Oile but how can you ever control that... everyone could hide behind you explanation and cheating would be very easy

Nazgum

2001-03-29 22:39:05

I think: Clearly, this also applies to leaving your equipment or gold in the safe- keeping of another character whilst you go off into a risky situation. Summarizes this situation pretty well.

Butter

2001-03-29 22:39:13

Thats my point, but I think it whould be ilegal to nsl to recover the eq, without me telling to anyone who got out alive that I had hid the eq =p

Hurolg

2001-03-29 22:41:30

hahaha you have just been cought doing some nasty cheating here butter!!!!

Edvard

2001-03-29 22:43:51

if you tell someone, while your still alive, where the eq is, then THAT person should be authorized to reveal it... just my opinion...

Unknown

2001-03-29 22:45:24

Edvard, how can you expect that this is controlled in anyway...this makes cheating way to easy

Edvard

2001-03-29 22:48:13

yeah, would suck, but it would be mume-based=)

Nimroth

2001-03-29 23:01:36

I was in lab and I know for a fact that he had no intention to reveal it if he
died which he didn't.

unknown

2001-03-29 23:05:51

right nimroth, ofcourse you say that, why the fuck would we belive you

Líng

2001-03-29 23:08:42

I'm not saying this because I'm NSL, but I am really curious if this is illegal?
I've never thought that hiding eq b/c u think that u will die, and then u dont so you go reveal it is illegal. Because it's the same 'life' so you still got the info from earlier, that you hid it. OF COURSE it is illegal if Butter died, and spammed back to reveal- thus 'using the info from the previous life', and that's clearly illegal, but he didn't die and revealed uh I don't see a problem?

Rogon

2001-03-29 23:11:36

If he hid the eq outside priest, then went inside to take a risk, then yes it would be illegal even if he survived to reclaim it, since he was already in the dangerous situation when he hid it, and he survived, and took it back, i dont see what rule it would be against.

Galadon

2001-03-29 23:13:55

Mr Unknown, I don't give a shit about your personal opinion but for the rest of you who have doubts - why would he reveal it if he KNEW it was illegal? I don't think he'd even "let" us labbies go get it.

Nimroth

2001-03-29 23:17:52

To Unknown, do we give a fuck what you really think?
Butter doesn't have to prove anything to you.

Gawain

2001-03-29 23:19:19

nimroth nevertheless what unknown or Nimroth said, its bloody cheating whoever it did

Gawain

2001-03-29 23:22:17

I think this was discussed lotsa times. In my opinion, if the hidden eq would be revealed after Butter died by someone noone would ever be able to control if the guy found it by luck or not. And this opens the door heavy cheating!

Natash

2001-03-29 23:28:10

Damn Galadon you are VERY naive... so called 'NSL'style playing is nothing more than (ab)using features/bugs as far as the rules can be stretched... if you are NSL or not :P

Wryak

2001-03-29 23:28:17

Hrm, Butter didn't die, he didn't tell anyone to go reveal the eq... how is it BANKING if he has no intention of retrieving it if he dies? Like as a caster you hide your staff before going out to moors and won't reveal it if you die. But if you survive you get it back. You don't benefit a damned thing :P

Oile

2001-03-29 23:39:04

Actually, Gawain, it doesn't. The admin has ways of tracking EQ, and deaths. They'd have had proof if Butter had recovered the same shining he had before he'd died. And that _can_ enforce the rule how the rule is defined. Butter might be able to explain it away, but considering Stormblast, Macros, and Fingeror's stories, I doubt Dain listens much to what people say.

Natash

2001-03-29 23:40:24

Ppl, the way i see this, is it is so EASY to cheat with this (how can it be checked you won't check after u die, or get some labbie to get it ('I yelled across the lab while i was awful, didn't feel like typing blahblah' (could be possible :P))), that rules have to be set up. Using IC/OOC comments is not applicable (NO warrior who is about to die gets out of his armour), just a standard needs be set. To bring back S&O... THIS is more difficult to defend against the rules

fredde

2001-03-30 00:03:02

bah who cares

Aschit

2001-03-30 00:36:34

Easy way to solve problem: muddle a time-delay for wearing/removing armour. The heavier the armour, the harder (slower) it is to wear/remove. This way, warriors could take the time to prepare for a coming battle, but they wouldn't dare try it in the MIDDLE of one (db could be reduced to resting level or so for the duration). Smaller or more handy items (rings, scrolls, weapons, etc.) would have very little or no delay to switch. Just an idea ;)

Juston

2001-03-30 00:40:01

At 2001-03-29 22:33:35, Butter commented:
Thats in a RP mood tho *wink Manwe*, and we all want Mume to be more rp, don't we?
That particular comment sent the needle in my Bullshit-o-meter (tm) flying through the den door.

Cody

2001-03-30 00:42:38

one thing I wonder is why it is legal for labbies to re-eq each other often giving entire full-sets, and those of us who don't have labs umm can't have a bank guy when labs themselves act like banks.

Udo Spears

2001-03-30 00:44:03

Im still sexy!

Stussy

2001-03-30 00:46:04

Hello????? If the whole point is to be in RP, then why in the heck would
you remove your most valuable armour in a near DEATH Situation...oh I am going
to die, so lets hide it anyhow? Seriously, hiding eq in a RL situation would
take some time i.e have to dig a whole etc....whereas in mume, of course, you
can hide eq in a second...point is he hid it because he thought he was going to
die and this isn't very RP'ish...If you think you are going to die in rl, you
sure as heck dont go making it easy for the other person to kill you imho.

Bleh, its just a game, but it fairly obvious to me that this is covered under rules banking as in Nazgum's post...regardless, you are in a potentially dangerous spot on mume just about anywhere, cept west of GH and inside towns if you are a puke.

Butter

2001-03-30 00:51:10

Stussy, Do we want mume to be like Rl situations? Could it possible work anyhow? In my eyes no! And we all know gods don't give a shit about our opinion, they do what they feel like, and what they think is right at that moment =p

Armin

2001-03-30 00:52:50

This whole mess just shows that supereq like shining just corrupts ppl.
Aschit's suggestion actually made sense... putting a delay on remove armour could prove to be an ideal approach.

Unknown

2001-03-30 01:35:58

Did you ever realize that it takes longer to hide something than find it in mume?

Vanamoor

2001-03-30 01:57:57

Will it be so that if some fucks are seen to break some rules the LAAB will instantly start changing that stupid rule? WTF this was cheating anyway because at that moment that rule did exist and ignorance is no excuse!!! DEMOTE 'EM ALL AND LET MORGOTH SORT 'EM OUT!!!!

Nighthawk

2001-03-30 02:01:04

I wrote recently on a god board that if I was playing puke and I purposely removed my staff when fighting a bn would this be considered illegal. Manwe replied that this is illegal. Could it be the act of just removing superiour eq in battle is illegal? To be honest I don't know and only the A+ know

Deor

2001-03-30 02:55:32

In my experience its not illegal unless he had died. I think its a good starting
point anyway. If the rule is rewritten to say that it is illegal if merely in a
dangerous situation it would be too vague. Walking out of bree puts some people
in a dangerous situation, where would the line be drawn? Anyway if Manwe said that
nighthawk's situation was illegal, he should reword the rules file to specify it.

I think you guys are a little too horny to demote NSL and aren't looking at the
wording ;) "before getting pkilled" is key, and it's only banking if he has died
and tries to make a withdrawl. But what do I know, I'm just an Ms. I'd be interested
in seeing what someone who counted thought.

Azg

2001-03-30 03:51:31

If you had a good chance of dying RL and you were wearing godlike armour, would you remove it and hide it somewhere?

Unknown

2001-03-30 04:39:38

DEMOTE BUTTER, that cheating FUCK!

Aschit

2001-03-30 04:48:47

Re: Unknown: "Did you ever realize that it takes longer to hide something than find it in mume?" Erm, Hide has *nod* delay, reveal has significant delay.

Vorlin

2001-03-30 05:29:11

Possibly have it where a person can't Hide items if their novoid flag is set from a pk encounter? That might be considered too 'twinkish' a thing to implement, but the current situation is pretty exploitable as it is.

Daevia

2001-03-30 06:13:20

Right now, is there any way to detect LabDarkieA hiding loot before he dies and LabWhitieB coming sometime later and revealing that eq? Assuming they are different accounted characters... I say just remove the ability to hide equipment. Or make "examine" show all hidden eq in the room or something.

Rogon

2001-03-30 06:22:30

Yeah daevia, its logged, you can go ahead and try to move eq crossrace and see if it works! People have been caught when an elf hid a black amulet, then a troll revealed, people have also been caught with an elf giving a darkie receipt to a mob, then a darkie killing the mob and looting the receipt. the management has ways you could never imagine! or something. now quit spamming about this, just because some of you dont like butter, is no reason to cry like children for something that was surely bad style, but in no way illegal.

Toe

2001-03-30 07:44:53

Why not just remove ability to hide stuff when novoid ?

Echo

2001-03-30 07:47:57

cause i like to hide pukes staves before the get their boys and wack me quick

Daevia

2001-03-30 08:21:50

I know its logged, but how do you grep through something like that? :)

Antar

2001-03-30 08:25:33

Flame on! But Rogon is right. He did not break the rules imho. It appears to me that all he did was hide the eq so a darkie wouldn't get. Maybe I'm kissing NSL ass in hopes of a nice donation on day? Or maybe I'm just saying my opinion going from past experiences. If he really was planning on cheating, I think he'd at least wait a little longer after his rl-friend was demoted some. I know I sure as hell would. I'd at least wait a month before I did anything remotely demote-happy-ainur-type-illegal.

Nimroth

2001-03-30 08:51:22

Thank you Deor for clearing that up for people.

Enforcer

2001-03-30 09:45:16

so he hid shining, and revealed it, BIG DEal....get over it, its just eq .... shining eq.....mmmmmm..........MMMMMMMMMMMMMM:...........SHINING I WANT!!!
DEMOTE DEMOTE DEMOTE!!

Gawain

2001-03-30 10:44:49

that sums it up Enforcer :))

Glaze

2001-03-30 10:57:20

Dammit add a delay in hiding eq: - *You begin to search for a suitable hiding place...* It wont completely stop people from cheating but it sure will prevent people from hiding whilst someone else is on their heels...

Námo

2001-03-30 11:14:47

Hiding eq is not illegal. If you happen to die you can't go back to reveal it. I believe the second paragraph in 'rules banking' pretty clearly states what is illegal and not. What's so difficult to understand about that paragraph?

Natash

2001-03-30 12:17:44

Uhm, this is as dubious as the S&O case Namo... Butter was SURE he was gonna die, when he hid the shining (or maybe he wanted orcs to have 1 in a million chance of accidentally typing search in room).
This is stated in rules banking as illegal (Hiding stuff right before you are gonna die). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the odds on determining wether the character in question was or wasn't going to get stuff back after he died.
Dunno if demote is worth it, but some kind of warning shuold be placed (or *rofl at the thought* help files need be clarified, so people can't balance on the edge of the rules). Orso (in short... Rules/justice are extremely subjective, Judge>>Law

Unknown

2001-03-30 13:14:38

Natash, read rules banking before you make comments about the rules. Hiding stuff right before you are going to die is ONLY illegal if you reveal it AFTER you died.

Gray

2001-03-30 14:39:41

Yesss, Oile, thats nice definition: demote-happy ppl! Darn, maybe you, demote-happy retards, at last let VALAR decide whom to demote, and whom not?? Or you think they can't manage to decide without your help/opinions? *grin* // Natash: even if this case looks as clear cheating, you simply can't PROVE that Butter was going to recover his shining after his death, or to tell some labbie to recover it. Even heard about presumption of innocency?

Gray

2001-03-30 16:37:32

Errm, used not quite right sentence... Should be 'if this case looked TO YOU as cheating' (it's ok for me).

Raichu

2001-03-30 16:54:16

Snicker and that kind of ppl whine to me when I make a mistake against the rules..... rofl!

Jocke

2001-03-30 17:21:16

You can simply not base your arguments on what you THINK Butter EVENTUALLY COULD
have done if he died. Judge hom for what he did, not what you think he could have
done.

Nazgum

2001-03-30 17:40:36

I dunno, I fail to see how this isn't cheating. He got himself into a dangerous situation (He was blocked in priest with darkies) so he hid his equipment (for all intensive purposes I thoroughly belive another nsl would have revealed it later) then, after door got broken and he got out, and the danger has passed, he went back in to reveal his equipment. I fail to see how this isn't banking, but whatever, Mume never was a very just place at all, favoritism applies much more then anything else here, and because most of the rules are worded vaguely, different treatment is always applied to different people.

Nighthawk

2001-03-30 18:13:25

Manwe told me it is illegal to purposely remove a staff vs bn. Now if i hide the staff after removing would this make any difference then if I just the remove staff and keep it in iventory? Is this a loophole which gives me the chance to finally remove staff in pk vs bn the "legal" way?

Rogon

2001-03-30 18:17:40

Nazgum, there is a vast difference between putting your eq somewhere safe before you walk into danger, and hiding it when you're already in the danger, and the danger cant possibly get any worse than what you're in already. And saying it isnt just for all is in this case TOTAL bullshit and you know it, if its not, NAME ONE SINGLE PERSON WHO WAS DEMOTED OR PUNISHED FOR THIS. If you cant, stop the fucking bullshit whine. Anything is vague and unclear if you're stupid.

Alweon

2001-03-30 18:47:34

I fail to see why this is a big deal. I mean, Butter did lose the bplate, so in a way his lesson was learned. I think alot of the comments flaming that he should be demoted are just biased because they don't like NSL. Also, you shouldn't factor in whether or not his labbies would reveal the eq since we don't really know. One can assume, but judgements should not be passed based on assumptions. Anyhow, any nsl'er that still plays once they graduate will be playing from home, and the lab factor in their pk style will diminish. I bet some of them will still be effective even without being able to use their rl voices for mume info communication.

Alweon

2001-03-30 18:49:48

interpretation of mume rules differ alot. intelligence may be a factor in some cases, but to blatantly say they are stupid for not seeing it the way you yourself does makes you a bigot.

Armodo

2001-03-30 19:30:14

You hide something and reveal it later while in the same life-span.

Not illegal. Why is that so hard to see? Hiding isn't banking since hiding has
risks involved, not the least that hidden stuff can vanish without any obvious reason.

Butter was an idiot for checking on it while people were around. He was too
conspicuous.

Remember in LotR, elves HID THEIR RINGS OF POWER to avoid letting them fall into
the hands of armies of Sauron.

Gandalf probably even recovered his EQ from moria, I bet, after dying with Balrog.
From a DT too!

adroit

2001-03-30 20:13:57

I have to agree, I believe without a doubt that butter was attempting to do some illegal banking. He pretty much admitted to that fact in his *wink Manwe* remark. But he did not get around to commiting the illegal action, He lived. however, the ruling against removing staves when fighting bns and against duels seem to be against the rules of arranged fights because of the possibility for cheating, so it seems to me that it should be illegal as well (but since it is not technically defined as illegal i am not screaming for a demote, but perhaps a bit of a parole).

Nazgum

2001-03-30 22:01:13

I think rogon's last comment was vague and unclear ;p

Actually the "isn't just" instance refers to several cases I have seen
with hidden equipment, which all appeared the same to me yet each was
treated differently. Names I was thinking of specifically were Galadon,
Jayhawk, and Umodetic. *shrug* I think those rules need to be rewritten.

Tulkas

2001-03-30 22:34:41

Not illegal since you didn't kill him. And it's pretty stupid to hide shining
to reveal post-mortem, you think the Gods wouldn't catch that?

Scared...

2001-03-31 00:33:38

Is Tulkas Back!!?!?!?!!?

Torment

2001-03-31 10:40:03

Why waste energy caring over this? I'm sure Dragoth has no problems whatsoever with what happened, being the proud new owner of Butter's breastplate. I do think a dwarf warrior removing his armour to hide in case he dies is about as silly as you can get though.

*a thought*

2001-03-31 18:31:05

Well Tror and Zaber did a similiar thing few months back tror ripped to bns
but hid shining inside log is here somewhere. No tells about him hiding shining
in his own log, yet somehow Zaber revealed it.

*another though

2001-03-31 18:31:51

Inside Umuk

Johannes

2001-04-01 22:59:07

I had to log off before I read all comments, but as I see it, as the rules are now,
there was nothing illegal going on here. The other day Snowball wasted my lv 16 scout
moveless, I knew I was going to die so I hid some legend eq because I thought it
was too cheap for him to get it like that - he didn't deserve it. (He proved a good
sport and didn't loot my other stuff though, neither did he loot my friend at all).

I did not reveal the stuff after dying of course.