Answered Out of Couriousity

Discussion in 'Questions & Answers' started by Voca, Mar 12, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Voca

    Voca VIP

    Q1. If we have 2 mods on and 1 mod reports the other mod for RDM, who handles the report? the Victim or the one reported?

    Q2. And further more what will happen if they disagree about the verdict?

    Q3. One thing states that T acts never expire, another thing states that you cant be killed for actively Identifying bodies. So what are the circomstances if you in a case: Walk down a path on a foggy night, you dont see any bodies, so you pass a statue and a stone fence, then after a few secs you turn around and notice there was an unid body to the right side after the stonefence, you start walking towards the body with intentions to ID it and then suddenly you get KoSed and attacked for having passed the UnID body that you just were attempting to ID. All this happened within like 4 seconds or less, with 2 of the secs being the passing and running towards UnID.
    Does Actively trying to Identify a body cancel the act of having ran past the body. In this case where both acts happened within a few seconds. (Im aware that it doesnt apply to a case where the T act happened long time ago)
  2. MangoTango

    MangoTango The Best Is Yet To Come VIP Silver Emerald

    When it's two staff, it's usually the reporter, but a usual occurence is that it's handled by both of them cooperatively. An admin+ can always be consulted for discrepancies.

    If your engagement begins before they try to ID it, then it's not RDM. However, if they're going back for it, then they're actively going to ID it.
  3. neutral

    neutral VIP

    That’s interesting. The rule hasn’t been interpreted that way before.

    Since initially walking away from a body is traitorous- wouldn’t initially walking away be the point of the traitorous act? The way you just described it means the T-act expires. Previously if someone hesitated, even if caught walking away from it, they were still able to be killed because the T-act has already been committed and the T-acts, in the past, didn’t expire.

    If I see someone walk passed an unid’d earlier in the round does this mean I can’t kill them later on when it’s safer if I lose sight of them? Since at that moment I can’t say for certain if they ever did make an attempt to ID the body, thus expiring the T-act?

    T-acts haven’t expired previously in SGM’s history. Is there any other rules that now allow for T-acts to expire since the rule change?
  4. MangoTango

    MangoTango The Best Is Yet To Come VIP Silver Emerald

    You witnessed them committing the traitorous act. The OP examined a specific situation where a player didn't see the body. I did consider the fact that sometimes traitors turn around to ID bodies and that's where if someone is actively identifying a body, it isnt traitorous. A report response, "he didn't ID the body" when he was witnessed IDing the body is not logical.

    This isn't a rule change. It's an interpretation to how I've always read it. Not sure why we would watch someone ID a body that for all we know they were aware of, but walked by to make sure they could ID it without danger. That is kind of a trigger-happy playstyle.

    You can't tell someone, you didn't ID the body when they're actively heading to ID it.

    We say traitorous acts don't expire, but shooting at someone is always a traitorous act, but if someone shoots and kills a traitor, ID's it, they can't be killed later on for committing a traitorous act, because they nullified it by their secondary act.
  5. neutral

    neutral VIP

    You're saying two different things here, so it isn't really clear now. Maybe it'll help if I give another scenario.

    You hear gunshots, and you walk in to a room with multiple exits, and you see someone walking away from an unid'd- but haven't fired yet. They see you witness them, so they decide to go back and ID the body that you first clearly saw them walking away from. Would it be RDM to kill them?

    Where my confusion with this interpretation is that they at one point of the game, were not identifying a body- thus at that point the traitorous act has been committed. Just because they go back and ID the body doesn't mean that the traitor act never occurred.

    That is true- but that's also why there is a clause written in (or at least was- it may have been removed?) for the 5 second rule. Because it's an exception to the norm. If this is how unid'd bodies are being treated now, can a clause be added for this as well since it is being treated differently? Unless I missed it in the rewrite- a clause for this hasn't been added.
  6. MangoTango

    MangoTango The Best Is Yet To Come VIP Silver Emerald

    If you're telling me that you cant react in the time they are walking away that you need to wait for them to turn back to kill them, then yeah, it's RDM. A player would be assuming that they're not chasing to neutralize the threat which I have seen happen quite a bit. The moment they turn around and head towards it they are actively IDing the body. The traitorous act is "not identifying bodies" and it's based on action.

    The grace period was allowing a player to be killed for the traitorous act they just committed. And, like I said, if they didn't ID it, then it's traitorous, but someone is honestly stupid if they watch someone long enough to see them turn around and go to ID the body.

    There is no clause because it is written in the rules.

    1. You can kill someone for not actively IDing the body.
    2. You cannot kill someone for actively trying to ID a body.
    As soon as 1 becomes 2, it's no longer 1. In my opinion, it doesn't need a clause as it's already based on witnessing an action rather than reading the global events or checking the tab menu.

    However, I'll bring it up to other leadership if we should add a "Turn time" to account for witness lag. Meaning within something like a 3 second window after a person turns to ID, they can be killed for the traitorous act. I wouldn't want it any longer because it would allow for a more trigger-happy playstyle.
  7. iii

    iii eye-eye-eye or triple eye is fine VIP

    What about these cases(I can think of more cases, but I don't want to ask about too many):
    - You are reloading or out of ammo
    - You have no guns
    - You are planning on waiting for them to look down at the body to ID it to kill them while they are occupied
    - You aren't confident you can kill them with your current gun or without someone else helping
    - You want to see what role the body is before you kill them, even if you didn't witness the kill

    If any of these aren't RDM, would you have to add that to the rule?
  8. MangoTango

    MangoTango The Best Is Yet To Come VIP Silver Emerald

    You can always KOS for this, but if they turn to ID it and you saw them doing it, you should call it off since they're trying to ID it.
    That's pretty toxic gameplay. Watching someone come back to ID a body then kill them for not IDing the exact body they were trying to ID when you kill them.
    Again, you can call a KOS or you can let the ID the body. Once they've ID'd a body, you can't kill someone for not IDing a body because it didn't happen they ID'd it.
    Waiting for the role wouldn't really play into anything because they're IDing a body. It's not traitorous to ID a Traitor or an innocent.
  9. neutral

    neutral VIP

    I'm not sure why it keeps getting referred to as a trigger-happy playstyle-- this is something that happens all the time. You're a T- running away from a body, and you get caught- so you go back to ID it. It happens all the time, but I digress. It's nice to see the clarification on how the rule is being changed, thanks Mango.

    You seem to have edited out on of my questions in your response for some reason though, so I'll ask again- what about his scenario?

    "If I see someone walk passed an unid’d earlier in the round does this mean I can’t kill them later on when it’s safer if I lose sight of them? Since at that moment I can’t say for certain if they ever did make an attempt to ID the body, thus expiring the T-act?"

    If I need to further clarify, I will. I see someone pass an unid'd at innomotel spawn for instance, but I decide not to kill them immediately because there are other at spawn, so I escape through the restrooms.

    The body gets ID'd by someone else, but what I did not see is if he tried to ID that body as well while the other person went to ID it. Due to the changes in how this rule is being handled, does that mean I can not kill that player later on in the round since I did not see if the player attempted to ID the body or not?
  10. Solar

    Solar El Dorado VIP

    It shouldn't matter whether the player goes back for it or not, the player already committed the t-act - passing over the unid. So a KOS should be justified already. "Trigger happy" it may be, it matters not.

    But hey I'm just an ex-admin that hadn't staffed for almost a year so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  11. Siddo❄

    Siddo❄ Dork Moderator VIP Bronze

    With how this Q&A is shaping up, I think it may be turning in to a discussion, as there seems to be ex-staff and current staff disagreements about how this rule has been, is, and should be implemented.

    Previously, the situation described in Q3 was handled as a valid kill, even as the player turns to ID the body. The reason for this is that the moment you are physically in line of sight from a reachable body and neglect to ID the body, it is traitorous. Even if you then turn to ID it, it remained a traitorous act that you could be killed/KOS'd for, at the discretion of a witness.
    An important thing to remember here is that just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Just because you see someone T-baiting doesn't mean you should kill them. And just because you see someone walk past an unid'd body in a corner out of their immediate line of sight doesn't mean you should kill them. Only that you may choose to do so. It may be stupid to do so, but it's a valid thing to do.

    The reason for grace period is that once you've confirmed a kill on a traitor, it makes no logical sense to kill you for that traitorous act. But we account for the confusion and rush of the moment judgment that can happen. This does not apply to not IDing bodies, as there is no logical reason to consider the player's actions 'innocent'. They still commit the traitorous act. Turning around and IDing the body does not disprove them being traitors, therefore it cannot clear the player of suspicion.

    Whether or not a kill is toxic or mean-spirited is one question. Whether it's RDM is another. Historically, this situation has never been RDM and I fail to see justifiable reason to consider it RDM now. I understand the point that once they turn around and move to ID it, they're not commiting the traitorous act anymore. But just because someone stops t-baiting, it doesn't mean they didn't commit the traitorous act before.
    Or more generally: ceasing to commit a traitorous act does not invalidate the traitorous act already committed.

    TL;DR: I can see the reason, but it does not make sense to interpret the rule in the way described.
  12. Voca

    Voca VIP

    Now my personal understanding of the rule has always been that it depends on the situation and circomstances o.o

    If Player passes or walks over unID while the body is completely within your PoV and they turn around to ID the body, its still a T act.

    But if the case is the body was behind an object that obstructed your view of the body and you passed it that way, then turn around and attempt to ID it, it shouldnt be KoSable to have passed it the few secs earlier o.o

    This QA was to determine short reaction situations, not long reactions >~>
  13. Siddo❄

    Siddo❄ Dork Moderator VIP Bronze

    It is only KOSable if it's visible to you. Whether you're facing toward or away from it is irrelevant, as long as you turning in that direction lets you see it. If there's a wall or other obstruction, it's not KOSable.
  14. MangoTango

    MangoTango The Best Is Yet To Come VIP Silver Emerald

    So, for now, it will go with that no matter what if you even hesitate to ID a body, you can be as you have committed the traitorous act of "not identifying bodies".
  15. Voca

    Voca VIP

    Okay so I dont feel like I actually got a clear answer towards my Q3, because of all the discussion that happened that didnt really include much from my Q3 but rather ended up as a Discussion about the general ruling.

    The passing UnID, turning around and running towards the UnID I missed at first happened within 2-3 seconds.

    So are you telling me that you can be killed by bias, just because you didnt see a body for 1 second, despide running back towards it?
  16. MangoTango

    MangoTango The Best Is Yet To Come VIP Silver Emerald

    Yes. According to the way the current rules are interpreted. It's assumed that you ignored it and therefore didnt ID it; even if you went back to ID it.
  17. Voca

    Voca VIP

    Even when Helix was lead, there was staff who slayed people who killed me in the situation I described because I was actively attempting to ID a body. So already back then the rule was intrepeted differently by different staff.

    So to me it looks like the new way to read is is their way. But eh, not a discussion subforum so just lock this up Mango o.o
  18. Teroxa

    Teroxa eyo, r̶̶e̶̶s̶̶p̶̶o̶̶n̶̶s̶̶i̶ bribable adult here Lead Admin VIP Silver

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.