Kingdom Does Not Run The Server

[tadkins]

Can someone explain to me what "corpsing rings" means? Genuinely curious, I've never really been to that area beyond buying mage spells.

[greenspectre]

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

Can someone explain to me what "corpsing rings" means? Genuinely curious, I've never really been to that area beyond buying mage spells.

So the Ring of the Ancients (for JBoots) is a Lore item. "Corpse"ing an item is when you have a lore item and die, then loot everything but your lore item. This enables you to loot a second Ring of the Ancients, and then you have a week to sell that MQ and loot your old corpse to sell another.

Alternatively, in Plane of Sky, people "corpse" their keys on the first island so they can raid sky again later that week without having to re-do the earlier islands and re-key.

Corpse'ing is a violation of server rules if there is somebody else who wants a camp, as when you get your loot you are supposed to pass the camp to next on list. However, if there is nobody available to take the camp by the time the next named spawns, then you aren't obliged to just leave the AC roaming around either.

[tadkins]

Ah, much appreciated, thank you. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I already was sort of familiar with the process (though I've only ever done it delivering bard letters when I happen to die mid-delivery, lol) just never heard that term before.

[adruidarkly]

This thing has been up like half a year and still so many don’t understand that the google doc has no authority it’s just an augmentation of the in game manual player list which also is of no authority. Whoever is at the camp when the camp holder gets their ring gets next period. If you do anything else than that you are going beyond your requirements just like this online list does.

You are right Kingdom doesn’t have shit for power over this but if you read that doc they obviously don’t assume they do, they are just the first to take initiative to address it. And it’s been wildly successful hundreds of rings coordinated fairly with only a few numbskulls causing problems. One probably is OP.

I will say at least the online list is auditable for corruption unlike the shady shit that historically went down at Hadden several times, likely from those who are vocally opposed to this augmentation.

[BlackBellamy]

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

Have seen so many terrible names, I don't think the name policy is actually enforced.

Good! You think some name is terrible but it doesn't affect you or your gameplay at all so why worry about it? Why be a snitch and ruin someone's good time?

[Local]

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

This thing has been up like half a year and still so many don’t understand that the google doc has no authority it’s just an augmentation of the in game manual player list which also is of no authority. Whoever is at the camp when the camp holder gets their ring gets next period. If you do anything else than that you are going beyond your requirements just like this online list does.

You are right Kingdom doesn’t have shit for power over this but if you read that doc they obviously don’t assume they do, they are just the first to take initiative to address it. And it’s been wildly successful hundreds of rings coordinated fairly with only a few numbskulls causing problems. One probably is OP.

I will say at least the online list is auditable for corruption unlike the shady shit that historically went down at Hadden several times, likely from those who are vocally opposed to this augmentation.

No. Begone with your sense making. We must cater to the vocal idiotic minority rather than the content majority. This is the way.

[Kareem2]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elNPuU9Fsbo

Your Welcome.

To all the people bitching about my name. Get a damn life.

I never corpsed a damn thing. So... Again, re-read it and see what I am saying. They are causing serious defamation of character and yet at the same time acting like they run the list...

Urbro'

[OuterChimp]

Defamation of character, defamation of character, or defamation of character?

Are we talking in EQ, in P99 EQ, or in real life?

What if you defame the character of my character? Does this still count as defamation of character? Or would it count as defamation of a character's character?

I guess the real question is, can you really defame the character of a character without defaming the character of the character's owner? ...another question that just popped up, who truly owns the character?

[Kareem2]

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

Defamation of character, defamation of character, or defamation of character?

Are we talking in EQ, in P99 EQ, or in real life?

What if you defame the character of my character? Does this still count as defamation of character? Or would it count as defamation of a character's character?

I guess the real question is, can you really defame the character of a character without defaming the character of the character's owner? ...another question that just popped up, who truly owns the character?

Man I want some of the chit dis guy smoking!

Urbro'

[loramin]

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

This thing has been up like half a year and still so many don’t understand that the google doc has no authority it’s just an augmentation of the in game manual player list which also is of no authority. Whoever is at the camp when the camp holder gets their ring gets next period. If you do anything else than that you are going beyond your requirements just like this online list does.

I think you are half right. You are 100% correct that the google doc basically has no authority ... but if you follow that logic then "Whoever is at the camp when the camp holder gets their ring gets next period." doesn't naturally follow. Let me just use my Guise of the Dark Elf Lawyer to explain ...

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you check out https://wiki.project1999.com/Rulings#Camp_Waiting_Lists, you'll see that way back in 2014 GM Derubael clarified P99's list policy. I've added emphasis to three key sentences in his quote:

Pretty clear-cut, and these exact rules have been around in one form or another for quite some time. I really need to compile a "Project 1999: Errata and other extraneous information" post to put all this stuff. For now, this will have to do:

Camp holder has the right to pass the camp to whoever he would like. However, and this is very important, two things must happen in order for this to be a legitimate hand-off:

1) The player being handed the camp must be present around the time the first placeholder spawns after the last holder of the camp has gotten his or her item in hand. The person handing off the camp must stay at the spawn until the next person in line arrives, if that person is on their way to take the camp. There is a little leeway here, and we refuse to set an exact timer on how long the placeholder can be up before the camp is forfeited, but in general it should never be for more than a couple minutes or so. We tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the person coming in to take the camp in these situations as CSR staff, so waiting a bit longer will never hurt.

2) The person holding the camp cannot mislead you, or change his mind after telling you who is next. Something that no one ever does (and I will never understand why) is to specifically address the camp holder, asking who is next or if you can be next. The camp holder does need to reveal to you who the next intended camp holder is - if he doesn't, you may ask to be next and your claim will be valid unless he reveals the next person immediately. This person cannot change after the camp holder has "revealed" the next person to take the camp to you. It is an automatic forfeit if this occurs. If you ask to be the next camp holder and are told yes, the camp holder may not later retract or change this agreement and attempt to hand the camp off to someone else - it's yours once he has gotten his item or moved on from the camp.

Something else important to note about handing off camps - in particular, popular ones, but this applies to any camp that becomes contested. If you are solo camping, once you attain the item you were waiting for (an AC ring, for example) you are done camping that mob. The person coming to take the camp had better be prepared at this point in order to come eliminate the very next placeholder spawn in order to "stake his claim" on the mob. You cannot work wacky corpse lines on lore items in order to grab multiple items in the same "camp session" if there are others waiting to take the camp. Please be aware that we reserve the right to apply this same ruling to any camp if we deem it necessary, including camps with multiple players.

Thus, as I understand it, there is currently no obligation on any player to hand the camp to the next person on the list. The only obligation is that whoever they pick to get the camp next must be there, and they can't lie about who is next.

This rule would seem to encourage guilds to monopolize camps ... and they've done exactly that over the course of P99's history, as far back as year #2 of Kunark on Blue! https://wiki.project1999.com/Raid_Hi...roga_Lock-Down

So, personally I would LOVE it if the staff came out and said "if you got a camp by waiting on a list, and there are still others on that list, you are obligated to A) maintain that list, B) keep its established rules, and C) pass the camp to the next person on that list". I'd love it even more if they said "if someone is waiting for a camp, you must create a list and add the person waiting as the first person on it (even if you want to give the camp to a friend/guildmate)" ...

... but unfortunately P99 history, GM quotes, etc. seems to instead suggest that you can wait on AC list, get the camp, and then hand it over to whoever you feel like (eg. a guild friend) after ... as long as they are there on time, and you don't lie and promise the camp to someone else.

P.S. Staff, I would be happy if you showed up here and told me how wrong I was, and how players are required to pass camps to the next person on the list. Please come tell me how wrong I am (and give us another helpful/clarifying quote in the process)!