Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Burns

  1. As some of you might remember, i used to be the drachorn guy. I just realized how long it's been when i looked up the corresponding announcement https://magicduel.com/page/Announcement/view/4044 To my knowledge, there hasn't been any serious attempt at picking up the role, so i once more encourage whomever it may concern to prove your skills and claim it for yourself! About the poll, i don't consider the charms 'mine' anymore, but i still have technically unlimited access to the drachorn cave. Seeing as i finished my exams, i can make a little more time for MD again, and if there's a general consensus that charms should be up for grabs, i'd keep an eye out for quests to sponsor (i don't have nearly enough time to make and run a quest of my own anymore). Obviously, if Chewie or Mur disagree with that, it won't happen. If neither of them has concerns and the vote is generally in favor of me using the charms, i'd encourage anyone who wants sponsoring to approach me. If your quest has positive responses, there might be a charm in it for the creator, too
  2. moved to offtopic I want to trade 5 kilos of fat for 5 kilos of muscle without the hassle of going to gym <.<
  3. Mod: There has been movement in the AL, and this thread is really hostile enough by now. If you could all dial it back one notch, that'd be great, and if you can't, i'll start hiding things.
  4. *voice from the off* You all probably realized that i turned into a silent reader a rather long while back, but 'taking it to the game' is nigh impossible currently. As of this moment (which used to be a good time to be online), there's 14 people logged in, 7 of them idle. You seriously can't expect people to wait around for the exact right people to play with and do nothing meanwhile, there needs to be some stuff people can do on their own while hanging around. Otherwise they won't hang around long enough to find any catch to push the story off. I admit that i wouldn't even know about the fact that the altar is closed if it weren't for this thread, but that's because i don't have time to even play by myself... *voice goes into the off again*
  5. Split off an interesting bit of discussion about the scene name "Pathway to Pips Palace" to ~Mod B
  6. I like that idea, i think that's the first drachorn that actually "flies" I'll leave this here a bit longer, see if you get more upvotes... remind me if i don't come back to you by friday It's got the details, it's a really nice concept, and i'm a fan of recycling, too... i think that's a 5-rating (on a scale from 2 to 8)
  7. Woohoo, thanks! Had a great time in germany, thanks
  8. I like that idea, if that's a technical option. Generally, i think that even when we say or write stupid things, it's better to apologize and actually take them back than to "rewind time". I agree with the people above about having a public edit history, too, but i think that's just another technical way to making this "redacting" thing impossible, while it doesn't add to the process of deciding whether we want to remove redacting or not.
  9. i don't know why, but it seems to work again. Did you do some wookie magic fix?
  10. How so, if they can't come to you and you can't come to them? That would require them to have an item collecting spot, and it would take away a lot of the 'mini-quest-layer' thing Mur mentioned over here
  11. Same issue, same version of opera Maybe we need to switch our habits of MD? Version: 49.0.2725.47 - Opera is up to date
  12. I think that must've been khalazdad, i got stuck at the howling gates and didn't realize that the right arrow had popped up... we talked a few minutes, and i was a little freaked out back then because i had literally no clue about any lore, and he was the most in-character-player ever to exist
  13. I'm certain that absolute democracy will under all circumstances lead to absolute idiocracy, given enough time. I firmly believe that all voting must be limited to certain topics, but not certain people. If we allowed any sort of interference about the question who gets to vote, the "loud" ideas will inevitably overrule the "quiet" ideas, and history shows that the loudest ideas have almost always been the worst. Taking away the ability to vote from certain groups would in turn lead to this group being ignored, since their voice stops to count, and thus it also stops to matter. You can freely take rights, choices and property from those people without ever getting bad results, on the contrary, you will get better results from the people who dislike the non-existant group. For the same reason, some things must be exempt from voting, call it basic human rights or civil rights or whatever you will. In fact, i think that it's much better for the continued existence of a society when you don't allow people to vote on laws at all, but only on representatives for some form of parliament every once in a while (3-5 years, imo), who are in turn personally accountable for the decisions they make while in power. The representative towards the outside should be elected by the parliament itself, as primus inter pares. This would allow people to lead in a meaningful way, and give the general population the option to actually influence the way they live. Funny part is, all of us always exempt a very large part of the relevant population from all decision by sticking to the notion of borders. Small wonder no country actually cares for 3rd world development or immigration rights, after all, those people can't cast a vote. So, in my opinion, all votes need to include the whole known population to be effective in making everyone's lives better, in all other cases it's always about making the life of some group better, usually at the expense of another group. TL,DR: I disagree with the question in itself, because i'm quite sure that there is no vote that should exempt anybody at all. If the voting is narrowed down so much that it only applies to a certain group, the vote is inherently bad.
  14. I've just noticed that the icons in the left bar don't light up anymore. Tested with fight log, ally chat and PM, none of them send a notification (turn yellow or ping). Running on Opera: Version information Version: 46.0.2597.57 (PGO) - Downloading update 100% Update stream: Stable System: Windows 7 64-bit Browser identification Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/59.0.3071.115 Safari/537.36 OPR/46.0.2597.57
  15. Has current VE / VP - that allows you to make quests where people can actually help or hinder one another through combat features Has achievement - specifically thinking about research depth here, but i could think of newbie quests to require burst burner or high end quests to require full glow Has ally / specific ally - what ivorak said, but with allies. You could create nice little gang wars, for example
  16. http://magicduel.invisionzone.com/forum/321-heated-discussions/ IIRC that subsection is visible only to registered users?
  17. It's got ears, spiky tail, even toes, that's more detail than most had Lovely little thing, the drach is heading out! What did you use for the eyes? It that a glass pearl?
  18. Ad Sub-Lease: That's exactly what we had in mind when we made it, all those constructions won't matter. Once your time expires, you can demand your item back, regardless of where / on whom it currently is. It wouldn't matter whether your lessor leased it to someone else, sold it, gave it away, or simply tries to hide it, you just get it back. Ad Formality: We discussed posting it on the forum, but we figured it'd clutter the forum needlessly, and some people would want to keep secrets. We tried to make a failsafe for the people who would attempt to alter the text afterwards in a simpler way instead, that's how VIII. got in there. We figured the process to be like this: 1. Agree on terms, in any way you like, can be chat, forum, PM, out-of-game, it really doesn't matter. Just like you would have done anyway, basically. 2. When you have an agreement, you have your lessor print the essentials in chat: "Burns: Renting RainCollector, expiration date day 310". and make a screenshot of that. That gives us the name of your lessor, the item, and the expiration. Since you have the contract form (at least from your side), you also have the item-id and can provide that and the last itc you knew. That way seemed safe enough during discussion, in all directions. And it gives you the option to go to a secluded area, keeping it as secret as it gets. Ad "What do i get back": The intention is to guarantee the return of your item, nothing more. The fee, penalty, and any other conditions go to judges if you want to make your claim, and might take a while to process, and there's the chance we don't believe you about some parts. Having the contracts strengthens your position, obviously, but we'll still need to make sure it isn't forged. Your item comes flying back practically at once, though, since you provide everything that's required to grab it right from the database. That's a pretty nice security already imo, wouldn't you agree?
  19. Heh, we didn't even come up with sub-lease, sounds rather unlikely, too... I can't see how a sub-lease weakens your position, though? Once the time you agreed on expires, you get your item back, no matter what the other party does with the third party... I can't see a problem with sub-lease, please do enlighten me. About the silver, if you wish to do more, feel free. There's no admin warranty on that part, though, admin powers only get you the item returned, i hope that's clear.
  20. Chewie brought up an interesting thought about a contract form and the option for people to call onto admin powers to get their stuff back, to promote the lease of items. So, after some internal discussion and tweaking, here's the form How to: Just fill in names, dates and terms at the points where you see [ and ]. Points that say 'optional' should be deleted if you don't need them, it gets confusing if you leave them blank. Read carefully before use, specially point VIII! Lease Agreement between [Owner of the Item] (referred to as 'Owner') and [Leaseholder] (referred to as 'Leaseholder') on the day [] of year [] I. The object of the following agreement is the item [Name] with the unique ID [ID] and the ability to [] (referred to as 'Item'). II. The parties agree on a rental fee of [silver, gold, creatures, whatever]. II. a. (optional) The parties agree upon a security deposit of [whatever]. III. The lease expires (optional): after [x] uses of the item, but at latest on [day, year]. IV. The Owner agrees to transfer the Item to the Leaseholder once the agreement is finalized (optional: before the end of [day, year]). V. The Leaseholder agrees to transfer the rental fee (optional: and the deposit) once the agreement is finalized (optional: before the end of [day, year]) and to provide the current ITC to the Owner. VI. The Leaseholder agrees to transfer the Item to the Owner before the end of the expiration date [day, year] (optional: or after [x] uses) and the Owner agrees to not use the ITC before this time. VI. a. (optional) The Owner agrees to return the security deposit to the Leaseholder within [x] days after receiving the Item. VII. The Leaseholder agrees to have the Item taken from him by a Game Admin upon official request of the Owner after the expiration date. VIII. To request Admin assitance for the return of an item, the Owner needs to provide a screenshot of the Leaseholder stating the item name and expiration date in chat as well as the last known ITC. IX. (optional) The Leaseholder agrees to pay a penalty of 1 Silver Coin to the Owner for each full day after the expiration date until the Owner receives the Item / for each use exceeding the agreed number of uses.
  21. Doesn't sound like you asked for a judgement on a specific situation. You asked about a judgement on "the Nomad's Bring In spells". You see how that's quite different from asking for a judgement on whether it's okay if Azull teleports somebody to Necrovion to get a kill on them, right?
  22. Burns likes to be highly cryptic, get used to it Chewie made it clearer than i could have, mainly because he lives in a common law system and has english as first language... If i had tried to tell you how rules and judges work, i'd have taken twice the words and still only made it half as clear. One thing i want to underline, because i think Chewie didn't make that clear enough just yet, is the material difference thing. In Chew's summary (page 3, par 2) it sounds a lot like a change in law can make for a material difference, and the same is applicable for a different setting. The different setting thing is by far the more important of these two, and should be on a more prominent spot imo. You can only use precedents when the precedent and the case at hand are the exact same in all major points. That's the main thing judges need to consider in common law (and MD): Is this the same, or is this different from the one we had before? Changes in the rules almost always invalidate all previous cases either way. Apart from that, i love his explanation
  23. At longer consideration, and after Chew pointing out the obvious to me, i'll have to withdraw my previous post. There's too much risk of people considering everything that doesn't make it on the list to be okay, so i can't provide one. Sorry to get your hopes up.
  • Create New...