Roy's return?

A 5th* opinion at this point, but sure. I'll contact the staff members who weren't part of the official ruling so one can come in and give their opinion.

I will be looking into this.

Expect a post in a few hours.

.... Could of sworn I posted that I posted on here.

"Just letting you know i am still looking into this. I just have one question I am awaiting to have answered before giving a full ruling. Just want to make sure I have every scrap of info before making a ruling."

thank you

Heya! Sorry for the hold up. I got held up finding somehting out, and as soon as I found out I was having Wifi Isues.


After extensive research, I have to go ahead and agree with Mr. Ryuka here. I am willing to go into more details in private if you wish, however, here are the main points of contention.

1. AC's are really weird when it comes to IC actions, it is basicly a hard rule that you can't mess with a PC who failed an AC.

2. Your argument for this being an IC action is.... well.... iffy at best. From my understanding you made this post back before the AC started, but edited to change your actions to claiming his body/items only after he failed an AC. From an Outsider's point of view, I think you can agree that could give off the apperance of you only doing this to take advantage of a character that can't protect himself. There is more to this as well. You say it only makes sense that you would take his armour and weapons, and while one could agrue that taking his weapons make sense, Roy is wearing robes as his armour. Essentially, to claim his armour, you would have to publicly strip him, which I just don't see being an IC action.


I can go into more details on this if you wish in private, but unless I missed something huge, I am going to have to support Mr. Ryuka's rulling here.

It was my intention to wait for him to have the opportunity to post to my interrupt, when he didnt and instead failed the AC I felt that at that point it was clear he would not be reacting... thus I altered course with the understanding he wasnt going to do anything (not to mean that because he was vulnerable, but standing around trying to delay time wont give him time to react to been pointed at, watched, and reacted to) so I figured since he put in that he blacks out and since the activity check was a death check Id post he falls over while we are talking... reshifting the point we are at in our time to the point in his time for him blacking out.

as for the armor part, Shinoskay knows armors can have abilities and effects and while they may not be offensive they could possibly accomplish problematic things such as turning invisible or who knows what. the safest bet here is to make as much an effort to remove gear as possible. I dont think shinoskay would have issue removing most of Roy's cloths as well for disarming, taking anything more durable then a mundane shirt and pants, to mitigate the risk of problematic occurrences. as he had thought the person was likely dead and he intended to seal them as a corpse.

With all that said, since you are supporting nero's ruling does that mean you are saying you feel I have no claim over anything? not even weapons? because it sounds like you feel weapons would have been the most plausible claim here but you werent clear if you were permitting at least that or if you are outright denying everything as nero did.

This message is not one of dispute, I ask for clarity in what you mean here as well as I present clarity to what seem to be uncertainties from your perspective.

Sorry, I can see where the mix up is.

Let me be a bit more clear by what I mean when I say "While one could argue that the taking of the weapons makes sense." I do see why you could argue that taking his weapons is an IC action, but I have to disagree with it being and IC action. I am a little bit busy right now so I can't go into full details, but I find it unlikely that Shinosky would strip a Kirigakure shinobi of his weapon seeing what happened to Sal for standing up against Kirigakure.

That being said, I don't want to say what would be your actions and Godmod you, your character's actions belong to you. If my rulling is truely bothering you from an IC point of view, I would be willing to discuss a way to make this feel like something that Shinosky would do, (Like have Roy walk away instead of just passing out and making Shinosky make an desicion what to do with the body and items.) However, we do still have rules regarding characters that have died from AC's, and even if we have an argument IC of what our characters would do, we can't allow players to loot the bodies of those that have failed AC's. That is staff's final ruling on this.

well, the ic of it only solved 1/3rd of the issue, it is also a matter of principle and its a matter of feeling punished for been patient and nice.

anyways, I this latest response clears up the ruling in that you are fully enforcing that I get nothing from roy. I got my second opinion and that is that then I guess.

thank you for your time.

Any time, thanks for being cool about it.

"Hm. Sounds exciting." she flatly replied to his clarification. Suzume observed his mask, as she couldn't see any facial features to take a hint on his true psychological status. Because she sure did enjoy messing with Shinoskay. Though he had a point that this mysterious somebody could be up to no actual good. Without saying another word, she trailed behind him as he went to inspect. Seeing as there wasn't much else going on other than someone simply being weird, Suzume decided to move on with her day. 

[Exit]
[WC 613, claiming 3 stat points]