Thats because, and this is completely my opinion here - the whole farmer (hemp farmer, bondaged farmer, etc) quest is a NON-COMBANTANT quest you can send your newbies in to do. Both sides (Seren and Mag) seemed to have lept onto it as a violent struggle. Why does everything here have to tend towards becoming a violent struggle?

What's funny is that the furrikin only increase the amount of fruit, vegetables, or grain the village produces. All of which are useless to all but cooks and come cheap anyways.

Violence remains the best way to deter casual harm against things you protect and stop those a little more determined to get the job done.

Wow really? I thought it added power too or something similiar..meh

And this 'casual harm' is the realm of the non-big-PKers. Its the realm of the random little newbies who want to help their city.

Don't you guys think it'd be fun to actually let your novices steal farmers to and fro?

Maybe indirectly adds the village power score, but a minimal amount. We're all fussing over tomatoes.

It should be a sizable threat if you have made a bunch of enemies, through raiding or stealing or whatever. From in-game point of view, you are free-game when you are on neutral territory and if you are killed, you will get status, which adequately protects you from being killed multiple times by the same person.

Now in Nokraemon's example, someone is being hunted by a group of people, each taking turns to kill her. Is that griefing?

Take Arebin, the guy who stole Celest Arena's Fund, if he becomes active and joins Magnagora, I am sure he will be killed over and over again whenever he steps out of Magnagora.

People should learn that there are consequences of being an enemy, combatant or not. And when you have made enemies, you should expect to be attacked.

It's easy for you to say - Celest doesn't have any villages.

Well, they can only do it so many times before they're caught and enemied. If they're still in the village on being enemied, they either die to players, guards, or get away if lucky and Innocent. Also, with things like those statues that get all non-Mags, a newbie wouldn't stand a chance anyways.

Yeah, but I don't recall ever enemying someone for stealing hemp farmers. We just .. you know, got them back.

I'll keep that in mind the next time you get Delport.

But yeah, we kinda are overreacting with the farmers.

And this is rather off-topic.

It also makes the village remain loyal longer, I *think*. Acknor is usually without any slaves, and that village remains loyal the shortest of all the villages, so that seems to be it *shrugs*

There's a difference between leading hemp farmers to new work and home in Stewartsville, and poisoning and mind-controlling furrikin into slavery.

Plus, no one cares about the hemp AFAIK. I've never seen one being stolen, or heard about them being stolen.

Actually I wouldn't know how to start with.

As long as there is a warning given, or some means of knowing exactly what to avoid doing, then I don't have a problem with divine administration.

I actually think it would be better in some ways to give the role to a new character that is neutral to all organizations, rather than an OOC divine. That way organizations feeling victimized can approach it, and the accused can defend themselves and so on, all while remaining IC. It also allows for RP-solutions, rather than shrubbing/peace/death that you can't really explain.

Having skipped the last few pages... I'm not sure what to make of this to be honest. I know I have been annoyed to the breaking point before, even being inactive totally for a few weeks because I couldn't stand it anylonger.. but I'm not sure I'd like the Admin to put a wall in my way either (or just the prospect of them being able to do it).

For example.. I like to steal scholars from tainted.. -alot-. And I know that at least person I've stolen them from was still a novice (judging from the title at least). And I've stolen them at least three times from him. Is this griefing then? Would I get told after a few times by the Norns to stop it? Rp-wise it makes perfect sense for me to do it.. however if I got told by the Admin to stop it or get peaced..

I guess if it's about people that do things for the sole reason to -annoy- others.. then maybe yes, but if they actually have a reason to do it, rp-wise or some other (and I mean real reason not just quickly made up excuse) then no, even if it frustrates the other side.

This is not about small, petty, normal things. That would be ridiculous.

This is about huge, serious, restricting the pleasure of logging in and playing the game for others level of 'griefing'. Because it is THAT serious, it should be something that shouldn't be needing looking at beyond the rare case every so often in real life months.

I'm surprised measures weren't already in place to stop serious game-restricting behavior by a player. I really like the idea of the admins actually being able to say, "this is making the entirety of (insert organization here) want to quit the game, could you please stop it?"

Course, I'd expect a little bit of RP out of this, but that's just me.

I'd love the idea to be honoust, no more Munsia and Narsrim standing one room inside Glomdoring and wisp trapping everything alive that isn't graced, or standing one room away from the Ravenwood and beckoning and killing everyone again as soon as they conglutinated and rejected grace, after being killed. Or luring them out of Glomdoring so he can kill them outside, where they can't even conglutinate, but have to pray.

Over and over.. and then just saying:

"Hey, they attacked me, I'm just defending myself."

or

"I'm so clever, I just lure them out of Glomdoring and have them declare me, so I can kill them without gaining suspect and force them to pray."

I doubt it's going to be very hard to seperate griefing, from questing and purposeful raiding (like dwarves), for the admin.