GM Answer needed: off deed question

[azuleslight 87]

If i have enclosed an area off deed and someone bash's my fence down and take the crops there, can I report them for "stealing" or "griefing" only happened once? or is it the golden rule of deed what you want to keep safe? because as far as i understand it the enclosure rule is gone now. I need an official game master/dev response preferable red or higher. Yes, i know the dont be a jerk rule and all that. 

PVE server*

Edited September 15, 2020 by azuleslight

[Sovos 220]

https://www.wurmonline.com/2014/05/07/enclosure-rule-no-longer-effective/

 

Quote

As per the last weeks notifications, changes and updates to pricing, the enclosure rule is no longer effective and off-deed fences are no longer protected by the GMs.

 

Seems pretty clear to me. Deed it if you want it.

[azuleslight 87]

Just now, Sovos said:

https://www.wurmonline.com/2014/05/07/enclosure-rule-no-longer-effective/

 

 

Seems pretty clear to me. Deed it if you want it.

I understand this but i have a GM saying that you are not allowed and on a case by case basis you can be banned if you do it. just 1 time. thats why i need a dev or red label GM response

 

[Tpikol 1,057]

then use /support ingame.

[Nekojin 197]

It would seem that a donut house with locks is the only way to preserve crops/trees off-deed, but if you've got enough Carpentry skill to make a big donut, you've got enough skill to be able to earn silver to pay for a deed. 

 

Edit: Or can you grow crops inside a house if you never add roofs and floors to it? 

 

TL;DR: Deed it if you need it. 

Edited September 15, 2020 by Nekojin

[azuleslight 87]

1 minute ago, Tpikol said:

then use /support ingame.

i have lol and the answer is always the same as i expect..."deed it or lose it" except from this one GM.

[Sovos 220]

2 minutes ago, azuleslight said:

i have lol and the answer is always the same as i expect..."deed it or lose it" except from this one GM.

If 9 out of 10 dentists recommend one toothpaste, why are you buying the one the tenth recommends?

[azuleslight 87]

2 minutes ago, Sovos said:

If 9 out of 10 dentists recommend one toothpaste, why are you buying the one the tenth recommends?

because they are in CA saying this, it effects new players and is misleading. if it was a pm or freedom/gl i wouldnt care.

[Nekojin 197]

7 minutes ago, azuleslight said:

because they are in CA saying this, it effects new players and is misleading. if it was a pm or freedom/gl i wouldnt care.

They're in CA saying what that is misleading? 

[azuleslight 87]

Just now, Nekojin said:

They're in CA saying what that is misleading? 

that you can be banned if you take off deed crops just once and that a GM can decide that on a case by case basis. making the implication that you can be banned for snagging off deed crops. As SOVO's has linked to, its not case by case basis, there is no time you can be banned for it. As it has been said "As per the last weeks notifications, changes and updates to pricing, the enclosure rule is no longer effective and off-deed fences are no longer protected by the GMs." so its misinformation....i know dont be a knob but to tell a new player they can get banned for doing what i have said isnt correct. Even if its done multiple times. 

[Locath 523]

Off-deed crops are public. There is no way to tell if the crops belong to an existing player or someone who just disbanded and quit Wurm and the nearby deed was plonked 2 hours ago.

Rules are very clear about this.

One scenario that could be a reason for a /support call is the owner of the crops actively asking the person harvesting those crops to stop but even then - it's public land, you can chop down a tree in a forest, you can kill a horse, you can harvest a crop.

[Nekojin 197]

You're misreading, or misunderstanding, what the GMs can and can't do. If you see someone bashing your fences and stealing your crops, and they do it even after you ask them to stop, you can report it to a GM - they can then look at logs and compare to the claimed actions. They have a name, a time, a location, and potentially a voice log that they can check. 

 

If, on the other hand, you log on to find that your fence is gone and your crops gone, there's really not much that they can do - the logs don't have that fine of searching, they have no way of finding who did it within a reasonable amount of time. By asking for it, you're effectively demanding an inordinate amount of GM time to solve the problem. 

 

The game offers you a reliable way to prevent your problem. Since this is the case, the GMs are justified in not spending (potentially) hours trying to find out who took your stuff. But if you have evidence of who did it - and a name and time is evidence, in a digital world - then they have a greater ability to resolve it in a reasonable time, and potentially punish a griefer. 

 

Nobody in CA is wrong; you're just viewing what was said through a very narrow perception. The "play-nice" rule means that people CAN be punished for griefing, and more importantly that GMs can act on dickish things that griefers do that follow the letter of the rules, while violating the spirit. But asking them to play Detective to a mystery is just wasting their time. I'm reminded of a recent poster who said, "Kiting mobs isn't against the rules," while deliberately spamming giant scorpions onto another player's Deed. 

[Platyna 521]

56 minutes ago, azuleslight said:

i have lol and the answer is always the same as i expect..."deed it or lose it" except from this one GM.

 

"Deed it or lose it" is nowhere in the rules, deeds are AFAIK optional, enclosure rule was about protection of fences adjacent to a house, which was abused by the people to secure large area of land without deeding it. However, the "no stealing" and "play nice" are in the official rule set, and it is an issue raised by me several times - that to preserve consistency and the spirit of PVE game play it shouldn't be allowed to break into enclosed structures to take crops, mining resources, animals etc. because it is by ANY known definition, stealing. 

 

At least the structures on the perimeters should have some protection, or a mayor should have an option to shrink their perimeter to 1 tile, as it is so much land just going to waste. 

 

Current interpretation, that excludes resources protected by fences, closed gates and closed mine doors brings logical inconsistency - why containers or vehicles left off deed are protected then? If the interpreation was to be consistent either lock picking off deed should be allowed or no form of stealing (as the current rule set indicates, as there are no exceptions listed there) should be. 

Edited September 15, 2020 by Platyna

[Nekojin 197]

"Deed it or lose it" isn't a rule, it's a reasonable consequence of limited GM abilities and time. GMs can't cover every possible situation, and can deal with things if they get enough information to follow up, especially if they can see it themselves, in person (which requires reporting things when they happen). 

 

As I said before, logging in and finding out your things are missing in an un-deeded property and wanting it all returned is asking too much of them. Not enough information, you'd effectively be wasting their time. 

[Platyna 521]

9 minutes ago, Nekojin said:

"Deed it or lose it" isn't a rule, it's a reasonable consequence of limited GM abilities and time. GMs can't cover every possible situation, and can deal with things if they get enough information to follow up, especially if they can see it themselves, in person (which requires reporting things when they happen). 

 

As I said before, logging in and finding out your things are missing in an un-deeded property and wanting it all returned is asking too much of them. Not enough information, you'd effectively be wasting their time. 

 

AFAIK GMs have the ability to check many player actions, they can see their friends list, they have supreme tracking ability. When it comes e.g. for the right to unique creatures there is said by a high level staff member to dig something or chop a tree because they can check who did it etc. etc. you are also not allowed to alter heritage sites without GM permission to do so, so they have to have tools to check player activities in a certain area, otherwise all these would be just dead law. 

Edited September 15, 2020 by Platyna

[Ekcin 2,402]

While I agree to Nekojin about both, the "deed it or lose it" warning (I understand it as such, not an encouragement for any ruthless behaviour off deed), and as well about the point that filing a ticket for crops removed (and of course felt stolen in a social and ethical sense) is pointless and wasting team's time, intentionally and repeatedly destroying fences and destroying or taking crops may of course be interpreted as griefing, and a violation of the "play nice" rule, which is a rule, other than "deed it or lose it". Therefore a GM may of course rule that such behaviour is a bannable offense, at least after warning and repetition.

Edited September 15, 2020 by Ekcin

[Chakron 1,023]

31 minutes ago, Nekojin said:

You're misreading, or misunderstanding, what the GMs can and can't do. If you see someone bashing your fences and stealing your crops, and they do it even after you ask them to stop, you can report it to a GM - they can then look at logs and compare to the claimed actions. They have a name, a time, a location, and potentially a voice log that they can check. 

 

This is not against the rules unless you're doing it constantly just to be toxic.

 

31 minutes ago, Nekojin said:

If, on the other hand, you log on to find that your fence is gone and your crops gone, there's really not much that they can do - the logs don't have that fine of searching, they have no way of finding who did it within a reasonable amount of time. By asking for it, you're effectively demanding an inordinate amount of GM time to solve the problem. 

 

This is wrong.

[Platyna 521]

2 minutes ago, Ekcin said:

While I agree to Nekojin about both, the "deed it or lose it" warning (I understand it as such, not an encouragement for any ruthless behaviour off deed), and as well about the point that filing a ticket for crops removed (and of course felt stolen in a social and ethical sense) is pointless and wasting team's time, intentionally and repeatedly destroying fences and destroying or taking crops may of course be interpreted as griefing, and a violation of the "play nice" rule, which is a rule, other than "deed it or lose it". Therefore a GM may of course rule that such behaviour is a bannable offense, at least after warning and repetition.

 

Only rules listed in official rule set should apply, otherwise, what is the point of it? 

[Nekojin 197]

@Platyna& @Ekcin- Sure, but they need to have more information than "My fence was broken by somebody." Knowing who did it helps immensely, especially if there's chat logs. 

[Ekcin 2,402]

11 minutes ago, Platyna said:

 

Only rules listed in official rule set should apply, otherwise, what is the point of it? 

I politely disagree, or fall back to the "play nice or we shall rip your head off" rule. As Enki joking that may sound, it is a sweeping clause denoting that intentionally unfriendly and disruptive behaviour will not be tolerated in PvE environments. In fact, the GM invoke and enforce this rule very reluctantly, referring to mediation and players' self regulation as much as possible.

 

"My fence was broken" is certainly nothing valid for  a ticket. Even a troll can do that (or could? not sure), and a legendary anyway.

 

@Chakron: I fail to see how bashing a fence and going on with when the builder sees it and asks to stop would not count as extremely toxic to me unless there are very good reasons for, which should first be explained to the builder anyway. "I want your crop" is certainly not one. That would certainly justify a ticket, and most probably end in a warning, reprimand, or disciplinary.

Edited September 15, 2020 by Ekcin

[Platyna 521]

@Ekcinmaybe I am weird but breaking someone fences, gates or mine doors to grab stuff behind it is kinda unfriendly and disruptive.

[armyskin 930]

3 hours ago, Platyna said:

 

Only rules listed in official rule set should apply, otherwise, what is the point of it? 

is there a way we can have this be made into a rule too?

 

[TheTrickster 2,279]

38 minutes ago, armyskin said:

is there a way we can have this be made into a rule too?

 

Yes, but only if it is listed in the official rule set.  😇

 

Actually, the ruleset really should begin with that specific statement that "Here and only here are the rules."  I remember getting caught out on a crowdsourcing website (cost me real money in lost commission) by a "rule" that was actually a years-old comment in a long-dead sub-thread in an apparently unrelated discussion topic, that wasn't even stickied.  If there are rules, it is critically important that they are all in one place.

[Ogare 74]

I don't like all the "read between the lines" business going on here. Things work much better when rules are black and white. imo, if you build stuff off deed expect someone to come along and do stuff to it that you don't like.

[ChampagneDragon 971]

6 hours ago, Platyna said:

 

"Deed it or lose it" is nowhere in the rules, deeds are AFAIK optional, enclosure rule was about protection of fences adjacent to a house, which was abused by the people to secure large area of land without deeding it. However, the "no stealing" and "play nice" are in the official rule set, and it is an issue raised by me several times - that to preserve consistency and the spirit of PVE game play it shouldn't be allowed to break into enclosed structures to take crops, mining resources, animals etc. because it is by ANY known definition, stealing. 

 

At least the structures on the perimeters should have some protection, or a mayor should have an option to shrink their perimeter to 1 tile, as it is so much land just going to waste. 

 

Current interpretation, that excludes resources protected by fences, closed gates and closed mine doors brings logical inconsistency - why containers or vehicles left off deed are protected then? If the interpreation was to be consistent either lock picking off deed should be allowed or no form of stealing (as the current rule set indicates, as there are no exceptions listed there) should be. 

So I deed enough to cover all my animals and have a 1500 tile farm, but someone who deeds a minimal sized deed is afforded the same protections? Why am I paying 11s/mo??

 

Deed it or lose it. I deeded it.