Policy Questions Thread

If an item with a clicky that is clickable from inventory (NOT must equip) has a certain list of classes and a class not in the list is able to click it from inventory, is that intended?
 
I know for one, rogue poisons are currently usable by anybody which I doubt is intended, but as far as other items go, I'm curious also.
 
nah its not intended but since it hasn't been fixed in a year + id say its fair game..... taesh belts for everyone.
 
Can any Admin/Dev please contact me through PMs or email, I wish to inquire about possible exploits/hacking being done since none seem to log on anymore. Im not going to make an open statement because i cant provide evidence due to being just a normal player noticed things that are very improbable.
 
If it involves getting 4.3 robe, can you share that with me first so I can get one?

Then CW FG-style delete all the other exploiter robes EXCEPT mine.
 
Looking for clarification on the Taeshlin ward. I was under the impression that the ward was up for some time:
12-24 hours I thought
and when the ward re-popped it means you could no longer attempt Taeshlin. Is this correct?
 
To my knowledge, it is supposed to be available till it either dies or custodian respawns, wich also respawns the final ward. 12-24h is just the time it usually takes to bug out after ward has been popped/reset. (Petition if that happens to you.)
 
Pecannius said:
Looking for clarification on the Taeshlin ward. I was under the impression that the ward was up for some time:
12-24 hours I thought
and when the ward re-popped it means you could no longer attempt Taeshlin. Is this correct?
Click to expand...
If custo isn't up and taeshlin hasn't died, you can petition to have the ward respawned, This has been done in every guild I've ever been in, Exo,fwf,sf,handle,ringers, by staff ranging from nwaij to marza to slaar to just about anyone who can do it.
 
except for that one time 3 years ago back in SF when taryth got the petition and told us that if we didn't kill it 8hours after we popped the ward it wasn't supposed to be accessible.

would be cool if marza would comment how he intended this event to be.

does seem a little silly that if you wipe to a mob no one can attempt it for 7 days or whenever custo repops.
 
Seeking clarification on this rule:
You may have only 18 characters actively benefiting a raid at any time.

After a wipe, you may NOT log in a 19th person to fill a class role that is not present on your raid. I.E. No logging in a bot mage to DS/mod rod while you rebuff. Swapping in a mage and swapping him back out afterwards is not a clever way to get around this. This also means logging in a 19th person to rez the raid is disallowed.

You may have more than 18 people in the zone ONLY IF they are coming to replace someone that is leaving, and the above rule still applies.
Click to expand...

How does this action fall on the spectrum:
1) You have a raid of 18 people and wipe.
2) Someone was going to replace the raid is at the wipe spot.
3) You drop a member on your raid (down to 17) and add the new member who was at the wipe spot.
4) The new member rezzes the 17 remaining members of the raid (not rezzing the player who dropped previously).
 
Pecannius said:
Seeking clarification on this rule:


How does this action fall on the spectrum:
1) You have a raid of 18 people and wipe.
2) Someone was going to replace the raid is at the wipe spot.
3) You drop a member on your raid (down to 17) and add the new member who was at the wipe spot.
4) The new member rezzes the 17 remaining members of the raid (not rezzing the player who dropped previously).
Click to expand...
No bueno. You should rez with a guy that is (and stays) in the raid.
 
As long as that rezzer joins the raid and participate, I don't see how that scenario would break the rules
 
AngryCow said:
As long as that rezzer joins the raid and participate, I don't see how that scenario would break the rules
Click to expand...
Preparation: run a clericbox to your out of the way raid zone.
Form raid, move raid to out of the way raid zone, wipe.
Drop that one boxed cleric you have in the raid, rez on the conveniently camped CLR you ran to the out of the way zone, put him in raid.

To prevent any scenario like this, your answer is still no rezzing on toons outside raid.
 
Nwaij said:
Preparation: run a clericbox to your out of the way raid zone.
Form raid, move raid to out of the way raid zone, wipe.
Drop that one boxed cleric you have in the raid, rez on the conveniently camped CLR you ran to the out of the way zone, put him in raid.

To prevent any scenario like this, your answer is still no rezzing on toons outside raid.
Click to expand...

To the best of my knowledge unless you can find some prior precedence you just changed this rule. I've always understood and acted under the assumption (with multiple GM's giving the OK in the past) that a char who can rez that wasn't in the raid can rez and join the raid as long as that toon continues clearing.

One example would be a rogue coming to replace a DPS after a wipe at 8arm, sneak hiding to boss and rezzing the other 5 members.


Nomos giving me shit so i'll expand:

Killing in spires and wipe to Priest on 2nd floor. Old cleric plans to go to bed, new cleric is coming to replace. New cleric is keyed for spires and 2nd floor, rezs raid and joins raid, kill monster.

Since when is that not a thing because I've operated for years under the assumption it's fine.

Your nightmare scenario where people are camping rezzers and swapping them back and forth after wipes is just people being scumbags and they should be jailed for it.
 
Last edited:
Nwaij said:
To prevent any scenario like this, your answer is still no rezzing on toons outside raid.
Click to expand...

Here's another one for you:

Raid kills Tar`loc tribe. When "Spirit of the Tribe" spawns, they drop an on tier cleric, and load up a scum cleric to be in for KS on the spirit, and suddenly the non-participant becomes eligible for loot.

Where does that fall in the spectrum of rules?
 
you could just make the swap before the last pull in tarloc and there wouldnt be any reason to question it
 
@Blinkonian: picking HMalB as your example might not be the best of choices, considering that this place has an explicit exception stating that switching out people there and just there is fine.
Your example of priest is directly in violation of the spirit of the rules. Have one of the other rezzers come back and rez instead, it isn't that hard! Also I agree, my nightmare scenario is people being scumbags. Unfortunately, those same people tend to be rules lawyers. Making it so that replacement rezzers are allowed to rez is illegal makes it impossible for them to rules lawyer, solving this neatly.

@Marthog: It's not about the number of people benefitting, it's about the number of people contributing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom