Clafiaction on changed rules

[Lythrilux]

"Halt" on its own is not a demand

Halt, Stop, Cut your engines, all that is not a demand. Just because the rule only says "Halt" does not mean you cannot get creative with telling them to stop. What is with all these rule clarification threads recently? Common Sense is seriously not common here on Disco apparently.

Agreed. People need to stop thinking they need to be baby fed everything.

---

[Garrett Jax]

3.3 Aggressors are not allowed to issue further demands during the same encounter after the trade vessel has complied, or destroy a trade vessel prior to issuing a demand, in system or local chat, and allowing sufficient time to respond. "Halt" on its own is not a demand, however, a trade vessel can be destroyed if they refuse to stop after being asked to in the form of a proper demand.

now lets say i did pirate a trader/hauler and got payed.
Then after that the hauler/trader starts to insult me or my wing men normally we/i would have shoot the hauler/trader up but not kill the trader/haule but dish out some good ammount of damage.

Now with the new wording the victim can get away from it or are the encounter ended when the demand are fullfilled IE payment are given to pierating player ?

The pirate can only make one demand per encounter. If that encounter is met, then the trader is free to go without any further demand placed upon him by the pirate.

If, after the demand is met, the trader chooses to prolong the encounter by arguing, name calling or some sort of rant, well, I'm not going to sanction a pirate for placing another demand.

As an aside, the pirate may not hold up the trader either after the demand is met, with the hopes of getting his pirate buddies in on the action.

I expect the trader to end the encounter by leaving as well as the pirate. If the trader refuses, then heaven help him.

---

[Thargoid]

If, after the demand is met, the trader chooses to prolong the encounter by arguing, name calling or some sort of rant, well, I'm not going to sanction a pirate for placing another demand.

But would you sanction someone for killing them?

[kikatsu]

I guess the issue I see here is that asking a trader to stop counts as a demand, if they do stop, you can't ask them for money because the first demand is met?

[Divine]

I guess the issue I see here is that asking a trader to stop counts as a demand, if they do stop, you can't ask them for money because the first demand is met?

That actually hits it.
It sure ain't what the rule should read, we all would agree that it's not within the sense of the rule, nor most other kind of common sense by pirate/trader encounters, yet...
It's what the rule right now, as quoted in the OP, reads as, which is the only problem imho.
Reword it, be done with it. The tricky part right now on it is just it reads that "asking a trader to stop" within a RP-scenario accounts as "proper demand" which conflicts with the first line of the rule.
Minor change.

Now. Nothing more to see here, everybody move along. Come'on, move. Keep going. Nothing to see here.

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=151485
Time left: (Permanent)

[Thargoid]

Now. Nothing more to see here, everybody move along. Come'on, move. Keep going. Nothing to see here.

There is, I want to know the answer to the question I asked Garrett.

[Divine]

It was stated by him, thought that's from what it reads just his personal opinion even when written in admin green, that it's the traders choice to initiate a new encounter by insulting/harassing the pirate. In return, you as a pirate can throw in a new demand, which when not met, will end in the traders destruction.
All along with what your ID grants you to do.
Ain't that hard.

Now everyone move along.

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=151485
Time left: (Permanent)

[Govedo13]

The pirate can only make one demand per encounter. If

Sorry but this wording sucks, what if I want to demand 1 mill and 50 nanobots? Those are two demands and I can demand only one thing as Divine mentioned.
The trader then have full right to refuse and rule-lawyer at me. Also ignore the common sense, people that are about to face some loss does not use it.
Do write clear rule set without such obvious loopholes please. There cannot be any ifs in the rules, this wording guarantees ruined RP encounters for me and pissed blown traders that would file sanctions that wont pass and this would make them even more pissed.

---

€œ

Official faction players that are often accused of elitism, never deploy them and have those weird, immersion killing "fair fight/dueling" suicidal hobbies. (yes, i've seen enough of those lolduels, where house military with overwhelming force on the field willingly loses a pilot in a duel. ffs.)

[Trogdor]

Imo you shouldn't even demand bots/bats, they aren't an inRP item as far as I'm concerned. They're simply a representation of the capability of the ship/crew to jerry-rig fixes to the hull and overcharge the shield. When you run out, you run out of stuff to repair the hull with, and you can't overcharge the shield anymore without damaging it.

---

[Govedo13]

I demand them since 4 years, never ever had problem with it, it is just matter of interpretation, i can demand everything that is transferable, for me they count as ammo.

---

€œ

Official faction players that are often accused of elitism, never deploy them and have those weird, immersion killing "fair fight/dueling" suicidal hobbies. (yes, i've seen enough of those lolduels, where house military with overwhelming force on the field willingly loses a pilot in a duel. ffs.)