Question: Chardok named camping policy.

[Goregasmic]

Got in a kerfuffle yesterday in chardok over a named spawn. I wanted some input just to clarify rules as I'm new to chardok and the camping dynamics are different.

I was doing auditor/trustee/wiz as a chanter. Cleared the spawns and was gating/suiciding as they popped up. Gated and dictate was on cooldown so I got a drink irl, jbooted and headed in. Once in someone answered a CC that I apparently missed so I called all 3. Buffed friends at ent and headed down. I came in from behind the GHM building and didn't see wiz spawn up. Must have messed up timers. I wait and I start feeling it should have popped by now. I run forward and I see a shaman killing "my" wiz @ ~50% with a spade in the little cubby. Kinda didn't want him running away with "my" shovel so I dictated wiz while we sorted it out but dictate was about to break and we didn't sort anything so I threw wiz at the farthest mobs I could see and gated (which was a mistake because I realized after gating it would train him if he didn't gate fast enough and that wasn't my goal at all). Headed back down. Killed him and got shovel so someone else doesn't snipe it while we sort it out.

Now shaman was super pissed and there was some arguing. The gist of it being:

His point was that spawn was free when he got there and you can't claim more than one spawn.

My point was that wiz couldn't have been up for that long and if you want to contest I get first pick anyway.

Ultimately I know it wasn't very long but I wasn't sure how long it took before I got back; answered CC at castle entrance, got all the way down and waited 30-60s before figuring someone engaged and then wiz was around 50% so I feel it is possible he engaged around the time I answered CC, possibly after but I'll never know.

Apparently his first reflex was to report me. In the end I half heartedly conceded the shovel, figuring I should take the L in case I was in the wrong, didn't want to get banned for a 6k shovel. Should have been more on top of my game when doing multiple spawns... but upon reviewing the PNP:

the player leaves the zone, dies, or similarly "reloads" [...] Reloading does not include Dictate killing a PH and leaving the zone as a step to camping a mob.

Each player can hold as many camps as they want until another player asks to share. At that point the existing player gets to keep one camp, of their choice.

the player fails to engage the mob(s) at the camp within a "reasonable" amount of time (where "reasonable" is interpreted by the staff member in question for each case; you are strongly encouraged to talk to the camp holder and give them the longest definition of "reasonable amount of time" you can manage)

Chardok nowadays is very laid back and usually no one touches your stuff even if its been up for a fair bit if you're not too greedy. I kinda feel it is a dick move to snipe people's shit this quick, as if everyone did that it would become a warzone. To his defense he just got in zone so I would have done the same but if someone answered CC or came back while I was killing a named I would have handed the item over but that's just me. I know most people do this semi-afk, I realize the stakes are low and it isn't worth beefing over and I wouldn't like people killing my stuff the second I'm not there at spawn.

So what's the elf lawyers take on this? I'm not interested in naming/shaming the guy (if he's wrong) I just want to know who's right to avoid further conflict. I guess the easy answer is "kill shit on pop" but no one really does this it seems.

[bcbrown]

Look at this from the shaman's perspective: He calls CC, gets no response for this camp, starts killing the mob, and at 50% in someone runs in, charms it, trains him, then takes the loot.


1. You may not steal kills.

Kill Stealing is defined as the killing of an NPC for any reason that is already fighting or pursuing another player or group that is prepared to engage that same NPC without that group's specific permission.


You were clearly killstealing since the shaman had already engaged and gotten it down to 50%.


In general, if the placeholder or placeholders for a spawn are being killed, that 'camp' can be considered held by the player doing the killing so long as they are keeping the placeholders (or the room if there are no placeholders) cleared, within the same zone, do not die or log off.

You left the zone, were afk long enough to grab a drink, and the mob was up. It was no longer your camp.


10. You may not disrupt the normal playability of a zone or area.

Zone/Area Disruption is defined as any activity designed to harm or inconvenience a number of groups rather than a specific player or group of players. This includes, but is not limited to:

- Causing intentional experience loss to other players (deliberately impeding fleeing players by blocking their escape route, intentionally training NPCs on other players, etc.).


You charmed his mob, sent it at a far away mob, then gated out. Sure seems like you intentionally trained him.

Kinda didn't want him running away with "my" shovel so I dictated wiz while we sorted it out

This is the moment where you had to choose between escalation and de-escalation. De-escalation would have been saying "hey I was camping that" and waiting until he finished the kill to talk it over. Escalation is charming the mob mid-fight.

I get that Chardok has a relaxed unofficial player agreement, but if you stayed in zone and stayed on top of spawns you wouldn't have ended up in this kerfuffle. If your excuse was "I wasn't in zone when they called for CC" I don't think that's gonna cut it.

[PatChapp]

Answering cc isn't required,but if you aren't in a zone you can't claim a camp. Its always shaman vs enc when I've experienced this in dok,since shaman tend to just afk on one spawn and chapters dictate and train a few.
If he petitioned they would side with him in my experience.

Yes,this means that anyone can jump on one of your nameds whenever they pop,as you gated out and gave up the camp.
You could gate out and sit on one spawn,claiming it,to prevent this

[sajbert]

Even if all three mobs were in a shared area within line of sight you still gated and you are dead wrong.

[loramin]

One can Gate with or without leaving the zone.

If the OP did leave the zone, he clearly lost all his camps the moment he gated. But, if he gated in-zone, there's no rule against walking away from your camps ... as long as you're back when respawn happens (or a "reasonable" amount of time thereafter).

[Skarne]

aye- if you simply place yourself in the shaman's shoes, it's obvious he had done nothing wrong.

[Goregasmic]

Look at this from the shaman's perspective: He calls CC, gets no response for this camp, starts killing the mob, and at 50% in someone runs in, charms it, trains him, then takes the loot.

Yeah that wasn't lost on me but you get there around when mob was due to pop and someone is killing your mob that's annoying AF.

But zone dynamic is half the time people don't answer CC because everyone is AFK, if not straight up logging between kills, also people fight or suicide stuff and answer later so a not immediate CC answer doesn't mean much I realized. Finding a named and realizing it is claimed is part of the deal. You could make a CC and then kill what isnt claimed but you'll get into fights all the time.


You were clearly killstealing since the shaman had already engaged and gotten it down to 50%.

Between CC answer and the time to get down there on top of not immediately realizing it has been pulled it was at 50%. He couldn't have been engaged for that long. PNP says "longest definition of "reasonable amount of time". I don't feel like it was unreasonable absence but it is up to interpretation.


You left the zone, were afk long enough to grab a drink, and the mob was up. It was no longer your camp.

yeah this is the point where I feel I messed up.


You charmed his mob, sent it at a far away mob, then gated out. Sure seems like you intentionally trained him.

This is the moment where you had to choose between escalation and de-escalation. De-escalation would have been saying "hey I was camping that" and waiting until he finished the kill to talk it over. Escalation is charming the mob mid-fight.


I called it coming down and when I got there I told him I was camping it and I was getting no answer until he gated out. In retrospect I should just have invited him but I took a wrong snap decision.


I get that Chardok has a relaxed unofficial player agreement, but if you stayed in zone and stayed on top of spawns you wouldn't have ended up in this kerfuffle. If your excuse was "I wasn't in zone when they called for CC" I don't think that's gonna cut it.

Knowing people gate out all the time due to zone dynamics and it is deemed legal, I don't feel that is a strong argument. I often gate out, jboots immediately and run in to realize I missed a CC.

[loramin]

Knowing people gate out all the time due to zone dynamics and it is deemed legal, I don't feel that is a strong argument. I often gate out, jboots immediately and run in to realize I missed a CC.

It's always been legal to gate out of a zone ... after all, why wouldn't it be?

But I've been playing on P99 for over a decade, and in that time the rules have always stated that you lose any camp rights the moment you leave the zone.

[Goregasmic]

Answering cc isn't required,but if you aren't in a zone you can't claim a camp. Its always shaman vs enc when I've experienced this in dok,since shaman tend to just afk on one spawn and chapters dictate and train a few.
If he petitioned they would side with him in my experience.

Yes,this means that anyone can jump on one of your nameds whenever they pop,as you gated out and gave up the camp.
You could gate out and sit on one spawn,claiming it,to prevent this

PNP explicitely states a gate after dictate is not a camp forfeit. I fucked up waiting too long to get back. It was quiet and it was just me and another chanter, figured I wouldn't lose anything if I took an extra minute or two to come back. I forfeited the shovel because I realized I might have taken too long even though he knew I was coming back.

Full pnp section on losing camp:

the player leaves the zone, dies, or similarly "reloads" (eg. Evacuates or Succors ... but not being Call of the Heroed or Gating within zone, as those spells don't trigger "reloads"). Reloading does not include Dictate killing a PH and leaving the zone as a step to camping a mob.

Dictate killing a PH and leaving the zone as a step to camping a mob is basically what chanters do nonstop.

[loramin]

the player leaves the zone, dies, or similarly "reloads" (eg. Evacuates or Succors ... but not being Call of the Heroed or Gating within zone, as those spells don't trigger "reloads"). Reloading does not include Dictate killing a PH and leaving the zone as a step to camping a mob.
Dictate killing a PH and leaving the zone as a step to camping a mob is basically what chanters do nonstop.

So, here's the "fun" thing about P99: there are multiple versions of the rules, and they don't all agree. If you check the one that's linked to from the Starting Zone, ie. https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325349, you'll see nothing about that.

2. Help understanding what constitutes a 'camp'.

The definitions below are not absolute and Project 1999 Staff will not be defining what constitutes every "camp". All examples blow are just that, examples. Instead, Project 1999 Customer Service Staff will arbitrate spawn disputes on a per-case-basis. We greatly encourage players to find their own resolution to spawn disputes, as the solution provided by the staff will at best be a win-lose situation, and possibly a lose-lose situation. No two decisions, even at the same 'camp', are guaranteed to be the same, as we will take into account multiple factors in making a determination on a 'camp'.

That being said, you can absolutely "camp" mobs, and you cannot steal another players 'camp'. In general, if the placeholder or placeholders for a spawn are being killed, that 'camp' can be considered held by the player doing the killing so long as they are keeping the placeholders (or the room if there are no placeholders) cleared, within the same zone, do not die or log off. You do not necessarily need to be at the spawn point to call it 'claimed' while it is uncontested, however, if someone else wishes to contest the 'camp' you do need to return to the 'camp' and maintain a presence at or very near the spawn(s) in order to hold it. You cannot hold multiple 'camps' if another group wishes to contest one that you are holding. The player holding multiple 'camps' retains the right to choose which 'camp' to give up.

Please do your best to use courtesy and common sense when interacting with other players in spawn disputes.

[Goregasmic]

So, here's the "fun" thing about P99: there are multiple versions of the rules, and they don't all agree. If you check the one that's linked to from the Starting Zone, ie. https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325349, you'll see nothing about that.

I'm reading the "pnp enhanced" version here with seemed the most up to date.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Play_Nice_Policy_Enhanced

I suspect this rule was added specifically for the chardok situation since it is probably where 99% of that happens.

[Lookingforrez]

The only solution to this problem is to nerf enchanters and shaman to the point that they can't solo Chardok anymore.

[Goregasmic]

The only solution to this problem is to nerf enchanters and shaman to the point that they can't solo Chardok anymore.

You forgot necros and druids.

[loramin]

I'm reading the "pnp enhanced" version here with seemed the most up to date.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Play_Nice_Policy_Enhanced

I suspect this rule was added specifically for the chardok situation since it is probably where 99% of that happens.

I made that page with the best of intentions: I thought if people could more easily read the rules, they could more easily follow them. However, I knew the rules might change someday, so I let anyone update the page.

Unfortunately another editor (who doesn't have a history of being malicious, so I'm guessing it was a well-intended mistake?) made a change to that page: https://wiki.project1999.com/index.php?title=Play_Nice_Policy_Enhanced&diff=434142&oldid=234153

However, as far as I know, there have been no changes to the official rules. I'll admin-lock the page to prevent future issues, and I'm sorry for the confusion ... but the rules I've quoted are the correct ones.

[sajbert]

One can Gate with or without leaving the zone.

If the OP did leave the zone, he clearly lost all his camps the moment he gated. But, if he gated in-zone, there's no rule against walking away from your camps ... as long as you're back when respawn happens (or a "reasonable" amount of time thereafter).

Even if you gate in zone you left the camp and lost LoS to the target. Forfeit.

[loramin]

Even if you gate in zone you left the camp and lost LoS to the target. Forfeit.

That's not how the rules work: you only lose the camp if you leave the zone, die, or fail to engage the respawn in a "reasonable" amount of time:

that 'camp' can be considered held by the player doing the killing so long as they are keeping the placeholders (or the room if there are no placeholders) cleared, within the same zone, do not die or log off.

[loramin]

BTW, I use that term "reasonable amount of time" because I'm referencing a GM ruling (https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings#Lore_Item.28-only.29_Corpses_Will_Not_Be_Recovered) (well, there's actually several that use that term, but this is one):

Players can absolutely go AFK while camping SF, but they must engage within a reasonable amount of time. I would say 5ish minutes for this encounter.

Beyond that quote, I don't think the staff has every made public what the normal (non-SF) mob "reasonable amount of time" is ... but I think most would agree it's not very long.

[bcbrown]

Yeah that wasn't lost on me but you get there around when mob was due to pop and someone is killing your mob that's annoying AF.


Yeah, it's annoying, but being annoyed doesn't give you the right to kill-steal and train.


But zone dynamic is half the time people don't answer CC because everyone is AFK, if not straight up logging between kills, also people fight or suicide stuff and answer later so a not immediate CC answer doesn't mean much I realized. Finding a named and realizing it is claimed is part of the deal. You could make a CC and then kill what isnt claimed but you'll get into fights all the time.


I'm aware there's an informal understanding between Chardok farmers, but the key word there is informal. If 1) you are not in zone; 2) you do not respond to a CC; 3) the mob is up; then that mob is not camped. If you are not in zone when the mob pops it is not your mob.


I called it coming down and when I got there I told him I was camping it and I was getting no answer until he gated out. In retrospect I should just have invited him but I took a wrong snap decision.


If you just arrive in zone for the first time and "called it coming down" before getting to the camp, and when you get there someone else is mid-fight, would you think you deserve the camp? You zoned out. You went AFK. You dilly-dallied at the entrance buffing friends. If you were AFK at the camp, sure. But you were AFK out of zone. C'mon.


Knowing people gate out all the time due to zone dynamics and it is deemed legal, I don't feel that is a strong argument. I often gate out, jboots immediately and run in to realize I missed a CC.

There's nothing "deemed legal" about it, just an unofficial understanding between the people who're usually farming Chardok not to aggressively contest other people's camps. Just because some people agree to afford leniance to each other doesn't give you the right to kill-steal and train someone who didn't afford you that leniance.

Look, if you gate out and immediately run down to the camp before anyone else is there, it's still your camp. If you gate out, immediately run down, and someone else is sitting there with no spawn yet then maybe you've got an argument. But that's not what happened.

[sajbert]

That's not how the rules work: you only lose the camp if you leave the zone, die, or fail to engage the respawn in a "reasonable" amount of time:

Then why for instance these camp specific rules such as drolvarg captain in Karnor's or Fungi King in seb:
"Is a camp, and due to his location players do not need to maintain presence directly on his spawn point to camp him "
"Is a camp (with nearby mushrooms), and due to his location players do not need to maintain presence directly on his spawn point to camp him "
https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp_Rules

Or rulings on AFK such as this
"For the most part, a camp is yours as long as you have presence at that camp. If you die, go LD or leave the zone you can lose the camp if another player calls you on it. SF, AC, Lucan are no exceptions. "
https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings#Camps

[sajbert]

Just because some people agree to afford leniance to each other doesn't give you the right to kill-steal and train someone who didn't afford you that leniance.
This.

[bcbrown]

Then why for instance these camp specific rules such as drolvarg captain in Karnor's or Fungi King in seb:
"Is a camp, and due to his location players do not need to maintain presence directly on his spawn point to camp him "
"Is a camp (with nearby mushrooms), and due to his location players do not need to maintain presence directly on his spawn point to camp him "
https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp_Rules

Or rulings on AFK such as this
"For the most part, a camp is yours as long as you have presence at that camp. If you die, go LD or leave the zone you can lose the camp if another player calls you on it. SF, AC, Lucan are no exceptions. "
https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings#Camps

That only applies when someone is trying to contest a camp:

You do not necessarily need to be at the spawn point to call it 'claimed' while it is uncontested, however, if someone else wishes to contest the 'camp' you do need to return to the 'camp' and maintain a presence at or very near the spawn(s) in order to hold it.

[loramin]

Then why for instance these camp specific rules such as drolvarg captain in Karnor's or Fungi King in seb:
"Is a camp, and due to his location players do not need to maintain presence directly on his spawn point to camp him "
"Is a camp (with nearby mushrooms), and due to his location players do not need to maintain presence directly on his spawn point to camp him "
https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp_Rules

Or rulings on AFK such as this
"For the most part, a camp is yours as long as you have presence at that camp. If you die, go LD or leave the zone you can lose the camp if another player calls you on it. SF, AC, Lucan are no exceptions. "
https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings#Camps

At the top of my Camp Rulings (https://wiki.project1999.com/Camp_Rulings) page, the very first thing it says is:

WARNING: This page was created by a player to document "rulings" (forum quotes from staff about the rules). However, the only truly official server rules are the "Play Nice Policies".

In other words, the rules are the Play Nice Policies. Period, full stop.

Now, to clarify those rules when they're unclear (and they often are), the staff occasionally gives us players a kernel of clarification ... but nothing about those clarifications invalidates the rules. Hell, officially every last one of those rulings are ... well, not official. Despite coming from staff, they could change tomorrow.

[Zemekes]

We have a player's agreement between each other as well as the rules. Technically, you can call several camps if it's chill in the zone. And Dictate PH clearing is a normal strat for avoiding rep hits. That being said, if you went AFK outside, that mob is forfeit. When I camp down there, I pop back in and sit in front of spawn so folks know that's my next kill. You could have handled that better, and that's ok. It happens to many, just learn from it.

Good hunting,

Zem

[Goregasmic]

That's not how the rules work: you only lose the camp if you leave the zone, die, or fail to engage the respawn in a "reasonable" amount of time:

Honestly though, anyone who does chardok seems to know that gating a pet/dictate is fair game and you won't lose your camp for that. If you "contest" this you'll get your camp stolen next time your PH is up so you're not better off because you do the same anyway. No one memblurs a hasted/torched pet or diffuses a critical lull fail in chardok.

From what I've seen and been told if you call 3 mobs or less people will leave them alone unless you seem to have abandonned the zone. Maybe I'm "too nice" for the elf simulator but if someone on a camp I want seems gone I'll take over after a more than reasonable amount of time (10+ mins) but if they return I'll back off.

If you do 3 mobs it is easy to stay on top but if you get a named streak, especially at camps that require more preparation, it is easy to fall behind when you've been on top most of the night. I think that's why farmers are lenient. If you become cutthroat about it everyone will do the same and it becomes much less fun for everyone involved when you can't let the dog out or go for a smoke break because someone is breathing down your neck. On most days there's more than enough mobs for everyone.

[loramin]

Honestly though, anyone who does chardok seems to know that gating a pet/dictate is fair game and you won't lose your camp for that. If you "contest" this you'll get your camp stolen next time your PH is up so you're not better off because you do the same anyway. No one memblurs a hasted/torched pet or diffuses a critical lull fail in chardok.

From what I've seen and been told if you call 3 mobs or less people will leave them alone unless you seem to have abandonned the zone. Maybe I'm "too nice" for the elf simulator but if someone on a camp I want seems gone I'll take over after a more than reasonable amount of time (10+ mins) but if they return I'll back off.

If you do 3 mobs it is easy to stay on top but if you get a named streak, especially at camps that require more preparation, it is easy to fall behind when you've been on top most of the night. I think that's why farmers are lenient. If you become cutthroat about it everyone will do the same and it becomes much less fun for everyone involved when you can't let the dog out or go for a smoke break because someone is breathing down your neck. On most days there's more than enough mobs for everyone.

Before I go further, let me start with something basic: you do understand that there are the server rules, and then there are player conventions (ie. how most players handle X) ... and that the two are completely separate ... right?

In other words, whether a player will take your camp from you is not the same thing as whether or not a GM will award that camp back to you (if they get involved).

I don't mean to sound pedantic, but after pages and pages of dealing with DSM (in another thread), I just want to check my bases first.

[Goregasmic]

Before I go further, let me start with something basic: you do understand that there are the server rules, and then there are player conventions (ie. how most players handle X) ... and that the two are completely separate ... right?

In other words, whether a player will take your camp from you is not the same thing as whether or not a GM will award that camp back to you (if they get involved).

I don't mean to sound pedantic, but after pages and pages of dealing with DSM (in another thread), I just want to check my bases first.

Yes. All I'm saying is if you bypass player conventions by invoking server rules, don't expect being treated with player conventions in the future.

[shovelquest]

Before I go further, let me start with something basic: you do understand that there are the server rules, and then there are player conventions (ie. how most players handle X) ... and that the two are completely separate ... right?

In other words, whether a player will take your camp from you is not the same thing as whether or not a GM will award that camp back to you (if they get involved).

I don't mean to sound pedantic, but after pages and pages of dealing with DSM (in another thread), I just want to check my bases first.

Hmm

But when a kid gets in fifty fights in fifty days, that kid has a problem.

Very interesting.

why do you keep getting into fights loramin?

[Tewaz]

Chardok has the same rules as all zones, you gate, you lose the camp.

Most Chardok farmers have...let's call it an agreement that they won't steal each others mobs, but people that aren't regular farmers don't necessarily know that.

You wouldn't have had a problem if you responded to the CC or been there when the mob respawned, but you didn't do either, so you lost the camp when you didn't engage it soon after it popped.

Git gud

[Goregasmic]

You wouldn't have had a problem if you responded to the CC

I did and I got there shortly after. My main gripe was the mob was possibly engaged after I answered the CC but I understood I got there too late to legitimately contest the decision.

[Danth]

Calling camps when not physically at or near said camp is its own can of worms. If I zone in somewhere and something's open and I get into combat, some guy walks along and claims it was "his," how am I supposed to know whether he was really working the camp vs. him being full of crap? I've seen people try pulling that even in zones that had been entirely empty except for myself for over half an hour. I've seen players or even groups claim camps they weren't at and never even reached over periods of hours.

In general P99's rulebook suffers from 15 years of bloat, exceptions, and sometimes contradictory rulings. GM Medris is making a clean-up effort, so hopefully it can proceed and slim things down to more manageable levels. A completely new, current P99 camp rules post not compromised by a decade-plus of revisions and edits would be most welcome.

[Zuranthium]

In general P99's rulebook suffers from 15 years of bloat, exceptions, and sometimes contradictory rulings.

Instantly solved by going with the 1999 rules - whoever does the most DPS wins.

It's wild how the subscription version of EQ went back to that policy, reducing the work their employees have to do, while the volunteer classic version of the game has always ignored the classic ruleset and created far more headache for their staff.

[Ciderpress]

Chardok is kind of a grey area rules-wise, especially for enchanters, because you have to leave the zone so frequently, and according to p99 rules when you leave a zone your camps are forfeit even if the ph is down. There's kind of a gentleman's agreement and 99.9% of people abide by it though.

The sham didn't necessarily do anything wrong, and shams can only camp a handful of mobs in chardok whereas chanters can solo nearly every camp in the zone including prince so that should be factored in too.

[Duik]

Just dont mention GM Menden or tunne may show signs of apoplexy.
Sorry, its true.

[Pootle]

Maybe I'm "too nice" for the elf simulator but if someone on a camp I want seems gone I'll take over after a more than reasonable amount of time (10+ mins) but if they return I'll back off.


Sorry, but there is no way that when you get to an unclaimed (CC) camp with a named up, that you sit and wait for 10+ minutes.

[zelld52]

Chardok is a little different - because of the very specific ways that Enchanters can clear the spawns. Usually farmers give each other a few minutes of grace period to get back to camp after gating out, etc.

HOWEVER, if youre not at the spawn point after the 18 minute respawn timer, AND someone new sees a named mob up, calls CC, and doesn't get a response - it seems like that's an open camp.

Furthermore - are we all agreeing that you can claim multiple spawns in Chardok? Especially if you're not at your PC for 100% of the duration of camping the spawns, or at least in zone. I'm not very well versed in Chardok, but that seems a little excessive.

[PatChapp]

Sorry, but there is no way that when you get to an unclaimed (CC) camp with a named up, that you sit and wait for 10+ minutes.

I do this all the time when I see a named left up when im just running through.
I do what I was planning to do then check back,if its still up il kill it.

[PatChapp]

Chardok is a little different - because of the very specific ways that Enchanters can clear the spawns. Usually farmers give each other a few minutes of grace period to get back to camp after gating out, etc.

HOWEVER, if youre not at the spawn point after the 18 minute respawn timer, AND someone new sees a named mob up, calls CC, and doesn't get a response - it seems like that's an open camp.

Furthermore - are we all agreeing that you can claim multiple spawns in Chardok? Especially if you're not at your PC for 100% of the duration of camping the spawns, or at least in zone. I'm not very well versed in Chardok, but that seems a little excessive.

At least on green its super common for one person to hold 3 camps. If someone wants one they message the person, most people that still do chardok are very friendly to each other. Hand out reses,announce rotting lore loot etc.

[zelld52]

At least on green its super common for one person to hold 3 camps. If someone wants one they message the person, most people that still do chardok are very friendly to each other. Hand out reses,announce rotting lore loot etc.

Yea, that's been my experience in Chardok. For all the bickering going on in lower level camps, Chardok seems to have very little of it.

But - what if someone isn't in zone, or not at one of the camps when respawns happen - would you still honor their claim to the camp?

I probably would, because I'm not pixel-hungry, but I wonder what the normal etiquette in a special zone like Chardok is?