So based on a recent report were it was deemed Invalid KOS and RDM based solely on the wording used , completely ignoring the situation that justified what was said how do these situations get handled? D says "2 inno left, kill each other" based on radar which the innos can not see and there for are going by the word on the D (which isnt always correct) now 1 inno kills the other based on that, However there was no actually valid KOS called based on the rules. so does that mean that was RDM? 6 players left all but 2 have tested and someone informs everyone to that fact. (saying only player A and B haven't tested kill each other) , of which 1 acts on whats said and kills other. now this 1 would probably pass the strict kos rules based on naming the 2 people and saying kill each other. both situations can happen with out the Kill part of the statement but usually still acted on based on statement of being just 2 left (of which your 1 of) would it then be RDM?
For situation 1 I think its a very grey area. Situation 2 is just rdm plain and simple Regarding the recent report though I dont think that was RDM based on the fact the player said, kill him he threw a harpoon. In that situation it is said that someone threw a harpoon AKA a kosable act
A D saying 2 innos left, kill each other, isnt much of a kos Situation 1 is common sense. Clean kill, no RDM. Situation 2 is RDM, since you dont know if everyone is proven, killing the other player would be RDM. And the reason that the situation in the report was RDM is because it was still an invalid kos. A kos needs to comprise of 2 parts, the name of the player, and the command to kill them (Kill, KOS, K0Z, etc). Sleepy handled this situation correctly, since mods have to go by the rules, and dont have the discretion to deviate from it. This is a specific situation where there is a flaw in the rule, but any attempt to change it would open up the ability to kos on sus or location, so without admin discretion, that situation will always be a slay.
It's not that simple to just define these situations in 5 or so words each. Why is it not that simple? Well, the situation where both unproven players are innocent is extremely rare. In both situations, the last two unproven players may kill each other if they know that everyone else but that other person is proven. At the end of the day, it's your responsibility to act upon that information. If you don't know that the information is true because you missed someone being proven, you probably shouldn't act upon it, but the other person is a traitor, what even is the difference? It just adds more pressure for the traitor and they also can't know that the last innocent didn't see anyone get proven, which is why no one reports for that and no one has ever been slain for killing in that situation. If the other person is innocent, it's pretty clear that you acted on an information you were not sure and will be slain, which is the case that happens most of the time, though it is rare. Basically, you need to be absolutely sure that EVERYONE but you and the other person that was called out not to be proven is actually proven. If you don't know that, it's RDM. Also, only the two last unproven can act upon that information unless one of them calls a KOS on the other or is witnessed commiting a traitorous act. Now the thing is: if the detective in the first situation tells you that information that you literally cannot know and you and up acting on it but both are innocent because the traitor is disguised, who exactly should be slain here? This is a question for an admin to answer more thoroughly, not for me, or another regular player to answer in just a few words that don't explain anything.
1. how is it common sense, since your acting on what the D said not your own knowledge, your following a supposed kos from a D but no players were named, or even valid kos called. 2. how is it RDM then since a kos was called in a way that player A should kill player B and vis versa
1. Just reread the question. If he says "2 innos left," you cant kill, since that would imply a 3rd ping on his radar. If he says "I only have 2 pings, 1 of you is a T, kill each other," I am comfortable calling that common sense. 2. It is still RDM since saying "kill each other" isnt a kos. And if you do call a kos on both players, that would be RDM, since you dont know which one is the T. Either way, someone is RDMing in this situation, it would just depend on the wording of what is said. If everyone was proven except 1 person, then you can just outright KOS them based on common sense
For clarification, in situation 2 where 4 players are proven via tester and two aren't. To say, "kill each other" isn't good enough and it would be rdm if they did kill each other. But what if one player, either innocent or traitor, claims "I am innocent, KOS (player)." Is this a valid KOS? The other 4 can kill the kosed person, find out whether they were innocent or traitor, and react accordingly?
Acting on the kos would still be valid, but the kos itself is RDM unless one of these 2 things is true: The koser was a T The koser witnessed all 4 players get proven, and then is able to use common sense to kos the last person
Let me know if I am not allowed to keep asking follow-up questions or not. It just seems redundant to make a whole new post dedicated to continuing this topic. I have seen many times where say, a group of people test. A player deduces that there are two players who have not tested. The player was not there to witness visually every single player be confirmed, maybe some1 said some1 was confirmed bc they killed a T or maybe some1 in chat just said some1 was innocent, but they did not witness it themselves. Are you saying from this, that unless a player is the one who witnessed each person be confirmed with total confidence, that to deduce who the last two are is not enough to call a duel? Bc I have seen many duels happen when it comes down to two. Sorry for so many follow-ups, it just feels like there is a lot of grey areas here that I am curious to know.
No worries. Happy to answer any questions. And the short answer is, that yes, it is still RDM. If they serve a slay for it is another question. Kills like this go unreported 9/10 times, because people decide to trust others and might not even know its RDM. If I got killed, I wouldnt report, since I think its a fair kill, even if its not a valid one.
