/sighalibasil wrote:Is there really any need for that? To see finger pointing like that really isn't good, its not big in any way!
Original post edited
/sighalibasil wrote:Is there really any need for that? To see finger pointing like that really isn't good, its not big in any way!
Very adult Sprite.sprite wrote:ohnoes, ooc comments in RP areasHow about these then? Plenty by people who are "RPers", including yourself and other members of your guild... yet this is the first time its been brought up.
I admit the last sentence is OOC, but I was trying to make the point clear. I shall endevour to do better in the future, but I might still slip up. Hopefully our future mistakes can be forgiven or dealt with in a more constructive manner than this thread.me wrote:Not at all. Kamists who have disarmed are welcome. Kamists who are armed for a fight are not. With the new changes in pvp timers, this really shouldn't be a problem except for those looking for trouble, IMO.
I was talking about lines like these. Maybe if you concentrate on the pieces inbetween you can arrive at a different meaning. I'm sure Uma can clarify, but to me it looks like a simple enough request to not mention OOC stuff, maybe because I have the same request. TBH I could tolerate DT's original OOC clarification it's just every other post responding on two levels destroyed the thread.oldmess wrote:You re-read it. She focused almost entirely on the fact that DT's original post had an OOC motivation behind it
uma wrote:i've been reading that post, found the IC part quite interressting, very appropriate to the general mood and all, nice to see some people RPing a bit
uma wrote:But i definitly can't have fun playing it if i'm aware u "took these measures" OOC
uma wrote:i can't prevent them ganking me for OOC beliefs, i just don't want to know it's OOC coz it's sooooooooo lame
uma wrote:maybe u can just post the IC part in the saga Forum, then start an other thread in the General forum that link to the IC post and express your glorious OOC feeling there
There's no difference between IC and OOC IMHO - it's all posted by the person making the post.sprite wrote:*sigh* Guess its true when they say you can't please everyoneSlammed for the RP, slammed for the ooc; isn't life fun.
katriell wrote:You can't "complete" the mainland. If one thinks one has seen or done everything there, one is kidding oneself. But be prepared to "get out what you put in," because the mainland does not coddle or hold hands.
on the opposite, for example that one....... ( sry it's again for u vguerinoldmess wrote: 1. OOC - "bearing arms" or "being armed" is the RP phrase we've been using to mean "PvP tags on". It does not mean you have sword in your hand.
vguerin wrote: OOC:
Interesting to see the posturing in the forums by Kamists that are already unflagging before entering our city... VERY INTERESTING !
/OOC
Hurrah, no one can critic anyone ever.oldmess wrote:Unbelievable. We try to add a layer of RP around real game play issues and we're poisoning things?!
I guess the only valid RP is made up stuff that never really occured and has no impact on real game play? Nothing against those events, but why is there such hostility to RP that actually affects game play and was inspired by game play?