Should a full defensive stance count as attacking a mob?

[Pip]

Could you stop dragging this discussion off topic, Janner?

The topic is wether Full Defensive should be classified as attacking, not wether or not Zanzibar stole a kill. Could you for one time lie your childish fingerpointing aside, please?

In my humble opinion Full defensive is not "attacking a mob", but still classified as "being in combat with a mob". You are enduring the mob's attacks, so (under the current set of rules) it should be your decision wether or not to let someone else join in, by usage of the group function. On the other hand however it can be rather tedious for everyone else when a player parks his character near a creature, then leaves to do something else while his character levels in some armor skill, this practice, however, already as far as I can is forbidden. While I am not believing in "fighting fire with fire", I do believe that anyone who "parks" his character, that way, is in the least position to whine about killstealers.

OK, since I feel I am being falsely accused here, I will explain what happened:
I log in and go in search of a mob on which to train my light armour. The arena afterall is where one goes to train up combat skills, is it not? I find a suitable opponent, a mercenary, and begin training. I do NOT go afk. I use a full defensive stance until I run out of stamina then I kill and loot the mercenary. There is nothing in the rules of the game to say I cannot do this.

Nine minutes after I have logged in Shalmaneser turns up and I say "hello"  Shal says "Do not use this mercenary to train light armour" "If you would be so kind" But before I can answer he runs off and disappears. Twelve minutes later he reappears kills the mercenary nearby. I am in combat with "my" mercenary which is clearly shown by the animation of my arms but because of a deficiency in the game mechanics Shalmaneser is able to jump in, without another word, and kill "my" mercenary. Was I in combat with the mob? yes I was. Did Shal steal my kill? yes he did since I intended to kill it myself.

It is indeed a question of whether Shal was killstealing, because if I had been using any other stance he would not have been able to attack the mob.

I agree with bilbous that if there was nothing to loot in the arena those who were after the loot would go elsewhere and leave the arena free for those who wanted to use it for combat training.

[zanzibar]

All form of attack are indeed a form of de-fence, and all forms of de-fence are also a form of attack, within the game mechanics you are wearing down your opponent, hopping to kill them at the end.

This not true.  If you attack an enemy, then you are on the offensive.  A full defensive stance isn't even an attack - a full defensive is saying "I'm not going to attack you, but I'm going to stop you from hurting me."

So, is it IC not to be able to attack an engaged MOB? yes it is. Your character can not attack an engaged mob unless you (the player) use an OOC bug to change the way the world exists for all chars.

Except that we aren't talking about a bug.  The game doesn't register full defensive attacks as attacks because they aren't attacks.  A person in a full defensive attack is not engaging their enemy.  A person in a full defensive attack is not fighting their enemy, they're just defending themself.

Did Shal steal my kill? yes he did since I intended to kill it myself.

You were in a full defensive stance for most of 20 minutes.  That very clearly shows that you had no intent to kill the mercenary.

[Karyuu]

I am in combat with "my" mercenary which is clearly shown by the animation of my arms but because of a deficiency in the game mechanics Shalmaneser is able to jump in, without another word, and kill "my" mercenary.

I don't see this as a deficiency, Pip. A couple of explanations have been posted here to explain exactly why this is allowable - it's to prevent a player from "claiming" an NPC without attacking it (and defending is not attacking) for ages. Imagine a situation where a group of players claim the entire arena through a full defensive stance, not allowing anyone to do anything, and not attacking themselves as well.

This is not a bug, and a player who comes in to take an NPC who is attacking you while you're not attacking back is not killstealing. That you "intended" to kill it later holds no meaning.

[Janner]

Then you are leaving the door wide open for anyone to walk up and do as he did, yet again the rules set out by Talad, are wrong, according to you. he clearly says it is not allowed.

No, Janner.  The rules do not clearly say this at all.

All form of attack are indeed a form of de-fence, and all forms of de-fence are also a form of attack, within the game mechanics you are wearing down your opponent, hopping to kill them at the end.

This also is not true.  If you attack an enemy, then you are on the offensive.  A full defensive stance isn't even an attack - a full defensive is saying "I'm not going to attack you, but I'm going to stop you from hurting me."

 Then you cant read it is clear to me it is.
 IN a attack do you not defend from your enemies blows? In A defense do you not use weapons, hear I class fists as a weapon also, do you just defend, of corse you don't if the opportunity arises you strike. so both apply. Having boxed, and other forms of combat up to and including weapons, you do both at all times.

[Karyuu]

Janner: Defending is not trying to harm the NPC, therefore it is not attacking, and therefore this is not "killstealing."

[Idoru]

That you "intended" to kill it later holds no meaning.

I inted to kill the rogue in the canyon area between hydlaa and Ojaroad 1, as soon as I log in il do it, if anyone is there between now and then you have been KSing.  

I know this sounds silly but someones intention to do something (like Karyuu said) should have no bearing on whether its KSing or not.

[zanzibar]

IN a attack do you not defend from your enemies blows? In A defense do you not use weapons, hear I class fists as a weapon also, do you just defend, of corse you don't if the opportunity arises you strike. so both apply. Having boxed, and other forms of combat up to and including weapons, you do both at all times.

When attacking someone, you defend yourself from their blows, but you make blows of your own.

[Janner]

Janner: Defending is not trying to harm the NPC, therefore it is not attacking, and therefore this is not "killstealing."

 Care to tell us all the command for full defense ?
 Also care to explain why we have a full defense ?
 Posted by: zanzibar.  When attacking someone, you defend yourself from their blows, but you make blows of your own.? Is that not what I said?
 Like I assume you are doing I am trying to point out a flaw in the game. Just because we may be in full defense, it is not real to assume we do not hit back if the opportunity arises.

[Karyuu]

Care to tell us all the command for full defense ?

I'm afraid I don't follow.

Also care to explain why we have a full defense ?

Perhaps because we like to give players some options on how they react to NPC attacks? Is it realistic to be limited to responding with blows of your own, or would it be better if players had the choice to only defend themselves as well? I can think of tons of scenarios where this can help RP.

Like I assume you are doing I am trying to point out a flaw in the game. Just because we may be in full defense, it is not real to assume we do not hit back if the opportunity arises.

A full defense is just that - it's not attacking. That's why it's a "full defense." So no, your character isn't going to hit back when the opportunity arises.

[Janner]

The command is /attack 5

 A bit misleading don't you think.

[Karyuu]

Sure Plenty of things should be changed to something else.

But I hope you haven't been ignoring the reasons people have posted on why a full-defense allows others to kill the NPC you are engaged with?

[Janner]

Sure Plenty of things should be changed to something else.

But I hope you haven't been ignoring the reasons people have posted on why a full-defense allows others to kill the NPC you are engaged with?

 Of course I have read there reasons and from there point of view they are good ones, but why should they as in this case just kill no word or may I, a few seconds of typing and no harm is done, but to just walk up and kill, is ignorant, not to say upsetting to the player how is trying to up there armor, also do they not need loot to pay for the training, why should they be the ones to move on,? There is two sides to every encounter.

[Karyuu]

And you are here on the forums to argue over a "He should have asked"? I do not consider this a valid topic of discussion, as it can very well be discussed in private without dragging everyone else into what doesn't involve them. Moreover, GMs are not around to enforce that characters "be nice" to one another and characters are MOST certainly free to be rude.

[Janner]

And you are here on the forums to argue over a "He should have asked"? I do not consider this a valid topic of discussion, as it can very well be discussed in private without dragging everyone else into what doesn't involve them. Moreover, GMs are not around to enforce that characters "be nice" to one another and characters are MOST certainly free to be rude.

 I AM not hear to do that at all, I have a right same as you to point out what the existing rules stat same as you, also I have posted the said rules, and you say they are not implying what they clearly say they are.

[Pip]

I am in combat with "my" mercenary which is clearly shown by the animation of my arms but because of a deficiency in the game mechanics Shalmaneser is able to jump in, without another word, and kill "my" mercenary.

I don't see this as a deficiency, Pip. A couple of explanations have been posted here to explain exactly why this is allowable - it's to prevent a player from "claiming" an NPC without attacking it (and defending is not attacking) for ages. Imagine a situation where a group of players claim the entire arena through a full defensive stance, not allowing anyone to do anything, and not attacking themselves as well.

This is not a bug, and a player who comes in to take an NPC who is attacking you while you're not attacking back is not killstealing. That you "intended" to kill it later holds no meaning.

By your logic then "Taking an NPC from someone when they have already started an attack is considered killstealing and will be punishable by GMs through warnings," is a lot of meaningless waffle and I would be within my rights to go around, using magic to attack mobs others are using, just because I can. Thanks very much Miss GM.

There is a limit to the time you can go on using full defence (one min seven secs with weapons) because you run out of mental stamina and then you must kill it before it kills you. So you are not tying it up for ages doing nothing but defend. The situation you want me to imagine would be impossible.

Shalmaneser knew I was engaged with the mob this way and therefore he stole the kill. If, however, I was being attacked and using full defence while trying to get away I would have thanked him for rescuing me. It is the character's intentions that count. If the second instance had been the case there would be no argument. The fact that I was willingly engaged with the mob and Shal knowingly took the kill because he had something to prove makes it kill stealing in my opinion.