You're right that we don't get to decide how helpful we've been, but when you're reiterating points we've already rebuked like days ago, we do have a right to just say you're being either deliberately obstinate, or you're just not reading the responses.

'I don't want to change my character's power set blah blah'

Don't, then. But having a character clinically unable to power up an ability is a disadvantage in this system, it means your spells will only ever equate to a single prep, because apparently that's all you put into them. That being said, I doubt Divinity would mind if you were allowed to place multiple prepped runes over consecutive turns to compensate for this. As long as you weren't placing more than one 'prepped' (IN THE GAME MECHANIC FUNCTIONAL SENSE, TO REITERATE) rune down a turn. For example, you place down a fire rune in your first turn, it matures at the end of your turn if Divinity takes no infering action, next turn you place an ice rune next to it, it matures at the end of your turn if Divinity takes no time to activate it. Third turn you have two single prep spells on the field, you could add another or you could activate them. (You can't prep in a turn where you unleash a prepped attack, as far as I'm aware, though Divinity may be willing to compromise on this as well, as runes are a unique power-set.)

'Prepping only works OOC lolol I'm drunk'

That's not what anyone has said. I said that the prep mechanic is a game mechanic that transcends IC logic, you can do pretty much any fluff action IC that vaguely resembles preparing an action and have it count as a prep. However, there are plenty of things about the prep system that don't make sense, like losing your charge if you get hit regardless of the severity. These are things implemented to -balance- the fight.

'If I prepared a rune'

Here we go, you're actually started to ask the right questions now Detective Spooner. The simple answer is no, why in the world would you get to ignore a trap you stepped on? If I rolled a grenade at your feet and it exploded, could you ignore it? A better question would be 'if I prepared a rune and you stood on it, could you just void the damage with magic' and the answer is, yes, if you have a spell designed to do that. However, your spell would also be quick-cast, and you have literally just stood on the rune, so all things being equal an unprepped trap is going to beat an unprepped defence because it's going to get there first, because that's what is logical.

If that rune was prepped, then you would expect it to do damage even if they had a shield already up, or other factor in play. Unless that shield was prepped the turn before, activated, and then they stood on the rune. There are countless scenarios that can transpire, that's where that big logical head of yours should come into play Mr Dazsos.

'I don't want multi preps! Straw man straw man!'

What you're still talking about there is a hypothetical multi-prep, and it's just as good as having two preps in a turn. Your opponent has one prep a turn to defend themselves, you place down two runes that are matured by your next turn, except you only get to choose one to prep and attack with, but why does that matter? Your character can't commit to defending against both runes with their defence, so you get to choose whichever is most beneficial, tack a prep advantage onto it, and score some EZ dmg.

Not to mention, that was one of the first things I actually said to you. You can cast as many of your runes as you want, but that they couldn't all have a prep advantage, only one of them (potentially per turn, though that's a different question). That doesn't make them worthless, it just means your opponent can match them with their own magic. Asking for a prep with every spell would be like an opponent facing down a tank with an anti tank gun, and requesting every one of his rounds bursts right through the front. Some are going to glance, the tank is going to tank some of them, and one particularly well aimed shot might just go straight through.

Now we come to this; 'oh well Daz is trying to multiprep, he's a douche for that.' Well not really, you still didn't agree or disagree on how my runes & idioms may or may not count as preps whatsoever. You said he can create multiple runes, so berating me for counting 1 as a prep on one turn, and another as a prep the next turn, surely means you've entrapped me in to this idea. "Well he started creating both on the first turn!" Well that's because he has to, his spells take longer to finalize than his opponent's, and he's literally forced in to choosing between those two runes in the end. Obviously on that first turn he'd only be able to properly utilize one rune, one prep. I never said two preps would flourish on one turn, which was the original fit had. And the only line of the rulebook used against me was 'hey, don't use two preps in one turn.' Okay, I didn't, you're welcome. So what's the big deal? Oh, you don't like how I'm not bending over for you? Need someone to blame? Someone to put the entire fault of this mess upon? Alright guys, I'll be your man... shit, I'm totally used to that, actually! Practically half the people I know can't handle being responsible for messes they're partly to blame for. I just happen to be an excellent mop, thank you for choosing me!

You're a mop, alright. A mop indeed.

I cannot honestly explain how many things were said that were so blatantly false.... again.

We did not only say that you couldn't multiprep. We also said you had to abide by T1E, which does not allow for fully counting an unprepared action as a prep on the fly, while still maintaining the traded prep as a half-prep. Do you even use your brain when you build these desparation arguments? Its an incredibly powerful, tool you know? It's free, too!

*claps slowly*. Oh of course, there it is! We're upset because you're not 'bending over for us'? Yeah, because Melon has a stake in this for him to even want you to submit. Yeah. That makes sense. Go ahead, keep victimizing yourself as though the 'system' is out to get you. It's a weak arguing point to take.

And your teacher argument? Just as easy to punch through as every other argument. A teacher can try everthing in the world to be helpful, but at some point it falls on the child to be able to receive that help. The student needs to maybe.... pay some damn attention and his grades might improve? But not, god forbid the kid have to do work, right?! God forbid it falls to the children to sit down, shut up, and actually absorb the lesson from the teacher. The teacher doesn't suck, the student is just a spoiled idiot.

Your final comment is the most hilarious of them all. We dont Take responsibility for a problem we caused, huh? Oh my... for your credibilites sake, I really hope no one scrolls back and reads anything you've said, ever. I hope no one watches you redirecting a finger of blame literally every time your lack of reading comprehension leads us into another vicious circle(because remember how were not helpful, yet answered every question you used as a defense in that flimsy argument?). You have done nothing but been the antithesis to every argument youve presented. This entire time you have done nothing but backdate and prorate.

So yes, please continue this travesty of a debate. Please erect some other flimsy, self defeating argument like you have done literally every time since this thing started.

Divinity, you are salty! Wow! If you were pushed in to a slug infested swamp, you'd kill every urchin in there! I still can't extract anything useful from your arguments. Your thesis always seems to be. "You're dumb, I'm smart." And you're a broken record for that phrase. Well congratulations on having an opinion! Too bad it's only your opinion, and I think you should be exempt of the American freedom of having free speech. It'd be great if you and Melon had synergy with your arguments, constantly I'll mock you for some dumb thing you say, and he will react like it was directed at him.

The teacher in my metaphor actually failed everyone in his class, remember? Obviously it's no longer the fault of the students alone if not a single person passed! Plus, the schoolboard has a quota most teachers need to meet, where whoever passes the most kids is honoured as teacher of the year. You passed no kids, I bet nobody even wanted to attend your class.

So now I'm just going to show you mutual respect, Div, and selectively read what I want to... that being, mostly only Melon's half of your combined arguments. He's like the better half of your brain here.

O.K. Mel, here's my rebuttal. I agreed that 'prepped runes' that had to be cut short would instead count as quick casts. I agreed on a way to apply the 'prep' concept to his runes, which really dulls the logic behind them, but hey. I said I agreed to T1EA (to my chagrin), but the minute I also said Myron can ready 2 runes, and count one of them as a prep the next turn, and 1 as a prep that turn, Div lost his shit. This is under the assumption that both count as preps, but they don't in reality, not in the beginning, both just require a set-up phase that comes before them counting as a prep, or 'powerful spell.' In a way, it reveals what I'm going to do before I do so every time. I was determined to agree with the 1 prep per turn idea, but because my character prepares all his spells, I'm sure everyone here got crazy fuckcluster confused due to the difference between 'prepare' and 'prep.' Honestly, you need a way better term to use instead of prep, maybe like 'prime attack,' or 'prime defence.' (Sounds way better, don't you think?) This hypothetical multiprep, I believe is a misinterpretation; all of Myron's spells require a setup before counting as a prep, but I never said each one would count as a prep with multiple turns power behind it. (I think I've gotten the handle on your rulebook and how it applies to my character, now... just in time for the information to be useless, eh?)

You've held the only points I wanted to agree with, Melon, so I want your opinion on this. My biggest bargaining chip has been the fact I've broken no rules IC. I'm confident I have the advantage in this battle, and that I could defeat Divinity, and I want to, honestly. Have you ever taken down someone with such a huge ego, who was antagonizing you like a jerk final boss throughout the game? Isn't it the best feeling ever? I want that feeling, I want to lather it all over my body. Because the rules haven't been breached, and we came to conclusions on our profiles before any major fighting began, it should indeed retain the flaming symbol of a ranked fight. I'm willing to play by T1EA, and as much as he annoys me, I want to keep fighting Divinity, for a plethora of evil reasons. If he forfeits, I want it to count as his loss, cause it proves he couldn't commit to the shit flinging contest that we started with one another.

It's not up to me, the way I see it you can agree to fight under T1E rules and Innue can deal with any disputes, and if Divinity still wishes to resign then it's your victory. Provided Rilla accepts that this is a ranked fight, which is a big if, in my opinion. I would advise just asking Innue to make a decision on how to proceed in regards to the rules, I -think- I might understand what you're arguing for in regards to the preps effecting your runes. I believe you're saying you want to put down up to two runes and have one prep mature in the first, and the second in the second. This comes back to what I said about getting Divinity to agree to you being able to have multiple different prepped runes at once, so long as the one prep per turn rule is adhered to, which I believe you should probably be able to do because runes are a bit weird, but T1E has no contingency for rune users so it would require a rework.

To clarify, in that scenario though your first rune would be ready for use by the second turn, but your second rune would not.

Also, something which had occurred to me that would impact the prep system is that the 'interrupt' phase is based off how long it takes to carry out your preparation, so your time spell would still have an impact on that but shortening it. For example, if it usually took two seconds to cast a spell, it might take one instead. My character Metz has that in play as all his spells take a certain length of time to cast, but the cast time can be shortened with certain mana types. Therefore, with your time spell active the length of time Divinity has to interrupt is shortened, so you still gain an advantage.

That's just my take on it, it's still a big request though. Having multiple prepped abilities on the field you can activate at once is a powerful advantage, but perhaps it is offset by the visibility of the runes and their specific natures.

Yes, because I've been chastising you this whole time and throwing tantrums when I don't get my way. I've been the one complaining about every post after the last like the highest payed whistle blower ever lol. It's laughable.

I have no desire to continue this charade. This is my final word on the subject.

Well, guess it's up to Rilla then. @Rilla When you see this, if you want an objective run-down on things let me know, I'll PM you.

So, issues. Can everyone state their case for me. I'm going to be reading back anyway.

So, issues. Can everyone state their case for me. I'm going to be reading back anyway.

The only thing to decide is if this match should count as ranked at all, my thinking is that it probably shouldn't be because:

1. No rules were decided upon at the start, causing arguments over if T1E should be applied.
2. No judge intervention from the start, which meant no one ensured rules had been decided upon, and that sheets were suitable.
3. Corban's sheet was incredibly vague from the start.
4. Fight ended due to arguments over the rules, Divinity left first, but you could make an argument that Dazsos' conduct in creating and prolonging the argument rather than seeking judge intervention shouldn't warrant a win. It's understandable for fights to grind to a halt due to IC conflict, but it shouldn't happen because of an argument over rules.

You'll have to read it for yourself and listen to Dazsos and Divinity's arguments. Personally I don't think anyone deserves a win from this fight because it was a shambles from the beginning. It might have recovered, but as I suspected from pretty early on skipping over important structural necessities at the start just made it overly messy.

Yo!

Issues, issues. Everything's really already stated in the OOC, I'll try and summarize my half of it, so you don't have to rummage through that hot greasy mess.

Divinity is forfeiting the fight, which would normally count as a loss; we have Innue as our judge, but Melon decided to drag you in to decide whether the fight should count as ranked or not. Personally I don't see why it shouldn't, me and Divinity initially agreed that it would, and though we had some disputes about each others profiles, we came to conclusions about those very early on in to the bout. There's definitely enough fighting and damage dished out to count as a real match. I think Melon's big case about how it shouldn't count as a ranked fight, stems from the fact we didn't flesh out every single little detail about the rules before our fight, and because we argued so much. (But he argues with everyone, too. I'm sure he has some argument radar built in to him.) I can see a wager chip in the rules idea, not the arguing one, but I figured that requesting a judge works the same way as setting up rules. This whole T1 Eden Era really isn't advertised as the default, not enough to be commonly known by everyone! Plus it needs to be revamped in order to properly include characters like mine, who rely on preparing multiple things at once mid-battle; fleshing out how Myron's skillset might work in pure T1EA turned in to an argument that ultimately resulted in Divinity's decision to bow out. On a side note, to try and defeat this whole rule dilemma, if T1EA was applied 100% to the fight, I still wouldn't have broken any rules... mainly because T1EA has some pretty commonplace guidelines that are agreed upon in an unspoken manner by combat veterans.

So here we are!

Not to continue the argument further, but don't belittle my points from the outset Dazos. 'Every little detail' would suggest that you didn't clarify what clothes you were wearing or something. Not that you failed to establish what rule-set you were fighting under nor that your character was going to be using a special version of that ruleset, nor that you were going to suddenly jump up to high tier mid-way through the fight.

These aren't little things.

That actually is continuing the argument! That's like me saying. "I don't mean to insult you, but you nit-pick like a hungry monkey." Well, I probably did mean to insult you by saying that, although in a comical form. (The monkey thing kinda' applies to me, too! Whew, glad I made this joke before someone could use it against me! Muahaha!) Personally I'd forgo the first part, and cut straight to the jab, assuming you can give and take a good mocking. I get half my kicks out of being mocked, myself, so feel free to have at me!

'Every little detail' was an obvious exaggeration.

Back to the important stuff...

Judge intervention wasn't mandatory from the get go, because me and Divinity were able to settle most of our issues without Innue... only when we absolutely needed him, did we call for a judgment. And his judgment, I assume, would count as the rules. I did ask him right off the bat to be our judge, and I spoke with Divinity about that as well. There was order and preparation beyond what you've been able to see, much of it was done through private messages. It was a unanimous decision to swap from one power tier level to the next, so that shouldn't really effect anything. Only after you butted in to the debates we had, did things go further south. I wasn't disagreeing, or unwilling to work with T1EA until you made it clear that my character would suffer from using it... I was very intent on finding middle-ground, however, which spanned that huge debate. T1EA might need some tweaking in the future, I didn't enforce the idea of using a 'special version' of the ruleset, although it may have been hinted, I was mainly attempting to find a way for my character to work with it, without detriment to his sheet. By no means do I think that, because I tried to find middleground to use your rules, (which created their own problems) that my fight was in vain. If just arguing too much is a good reason to deny someone a win or loss, I'm sure you wouldn't have such a pretty looking score.

By those very rules which I was trying to flesh out with you two, Myron was able to dish out more damage than he ever took throughout the battle. I'm at an advantage IC, that's why I see this as a win if continued IC.

All I did was explain how T1E works, the fashion in which you wanted to use it would have given you an advantage, which is literally the antithesis of everything T1E stands for. No one is supposed to have an inherent advantage within the system, regardless of how their powerset works.

If by explaining something as simple as 'no Dazos, you don't get to gain an inherent advantage using the balancing mechanic just because your character uses runes rather than magic beams, that would be idiotic' caused the entire argument, then I'm 100% not sorry in the slightest.

Perhaps I should have said 'at the risk of continuing the argument further' then. Though the fact that you're rebutting me calling you out on your belittling language is really quite awe inspiring. I love a debate as much as the next guy, but debating the debate about how you debate is really too far, even for me.

Anyway, this is Rilla's problem now. I have literally no stake in this, but I was dissapointed that it ended this way.

You're no fun, Melon. Don't give me that, you looove debating, and shoving your opinions down other people's throats, just like every other biased buttbeater. Look how quickly you respond! Some people have gaydar, you have debatedar. Now you debate against my rebuttal to your argument disputing my contesting of your debate points, whilst trying to dispute heavy involvement in debating debates. Pffft.

So I may have hinted towards ways that Myron could abuse it, yes... but when called out or mentioned that it would go against the rules... did I not try and find another way? A way that would ultimately work? And when I finally did, we finally came to a conclusion that is bonafied T1EA approved... it didn't matter cause Divinity doesn't want to continue. Thing is, none of this truly applies to what happened IC, this was an argument that you practically helped design. Everything done IC followed the rules, it was a real fight, and you admitted to enjoying it. From my perspective, it seems like you're just holding T1EA in such extreme regards, that you'd believe any fight with independent rules shouldn't count, or anyone who thinks the current rules are imperfect should be punished for blasphemy. I doubt this is how you feel, but hell, it's exactly the elitist image you're giving off.

I'd say that's more a testament to my free time than anything, not to mention my ability to procrastinate on the dissertation I should be writing.

Technically I didn't debate against your rebuttal, I said it was awe inspiring and too much even for me. But now you've forced me to rebut your rebuttal of my rebuttal of your rebuttal of my rebuttal, I hope you're happy you monster.

We came to a conclusion eventually, but it still required a significant shift in the rules of T1E, which Divinity evidently wasn't going to accept hence why they quit. (Probably spurred somewhat because your responses were growing more and more inflammatory.) To reiterate, you wanted to have two different one prepped abilities activated at once, hell, probably more if consecutive turns allowed. In T1E a prep is supposed to represent intense focus on a single ability until it's unleashed, so for obvious reasons your rune compromise was still against da rulez.

I don't hold T1E to such extreme regard, hell, anyone who knows me would know I criticise it constantly for not making sense. However, if you wanted to fight under a revised version that should have been established from the start. It makes perfect sense for a ranked fight to default to T1E because it's the best general ruleset, so later arguing for a change to the rules to gain an advantage seemed like the essence of bad sportsmanship, to me.

What I actually think, is that in a ranked fight which has lasted over a month, for one player to resign without being at any real disadvantage suggests that an underlying problem exists. I know from reading this fight that Divinity didn't just quit because they're busy, or because they were losing, but because your conduct was growing intolerable. No one deserves a victory for ousting their opponent in that fashion, and the fact that you want to clamour for the victory is dissapointing to me. There would always be other fights, but now anyone reading this fight is going to be like 'well, do I really want to fight this guy if he goes to this length to earn a win?' Which is a shame. If my dissapointment in how things turned out and my belief that this sort of conduct should be frowned on by an official ranking system is elitism, then fair enough.

Don't get me wrong, I was indeed being rather insulting towards Divinity, but in a rather equally respectful manner. We were both butting heads, and I didn't want to act like the 'better man' and not throw down some jabs myself, that just wouldn't be any fun, and I don't see myself as morally better than most! This fight has probably come to a halt not because I'm breaking rules, in which I'm NOT, but because Divinity doesn't want to keep up this undignified battle of taunts. That has nothing to do with what happens IC.

The end result wasn't really a shift in the rules, if you read my arguments well; I continuously expressed willingness to abide by a 1 prep per turn basis; which was the very first thing mentioned that began this clusterfuck. It was a shift in how Myron's kit works, that we were jotting out that whole time. I'd expect this kind of berating if I actually broke rules. T1EA wasn't even mentioned from the start, what was mentioned was there being a judge, and eventually you told me about how T1EA is forced upon us as a default. You keep reiterating issues that were being resolved OOC, as if I'm STILL hellbent on having 2 preps in 1 turn. Completely ignorant of how many times I've said, 'I'm cool with 1 prep 1 turn.' Which I feel redundant for having to remind you constantly.

Of course I'll be petty for this win, we were complete and utter assholes to one another, and beating up the bully is just sooo satisfying. Self satisfaction is exactly what I want, so yeah, call me a disappointment for that, I never really cared for the opinions of people who don't know me; if anyone looks back on this fight and avoids me... good for them, it takes courage to challenge a bully!

See I'm willing to keep up the 'charade,' I'm willing to keep fighting, and honestly I'd rather bribe Divinity with the chance of a loss or win scenario, to yank his neck and convince him to really take me on. I'd rather this than say... walking away like nothing happened. Like all my hard work and effort put in to something I knew was ranked, was all in vain, and why? Because someone who insulted me so much couldn't handle being insulted anymore? Voiding this fight would seem like more of a way to preserve Divinity's ego because he just 'doesn't feel like it anymore.' Modern society is all about giving everyone participation awards even if they came in last place, and I don't agree with that. If you forfeit, you mentally accept loss.

Well, you were willing to abide by 'you get one prep to a spell' per turn, somewhat. However you wanted to modify it so you could carry out the preparation and earn one prep per turn over consecutive turns, which is still an alteration of the original rules.

You went into a massive tirade about time and IC logic remember, that wasn't you acquiescing to T1E that was you arguing that because you had a time spell it should change in your benefit. So if I was ignorant of you accepting T1E, that's only because you forgot to actually mention it anywhere other than your own mind. Once I realised that you were -somewhat- accepting it, albeit with a hypothetical two prep system, I stopped hammering in the point.

Voiding this fight would serve as a lesson to other people not to ignore all the fucking ranking rules and to not be a dick to your opponent to the point where they leave. If you're not aware of the ranked rules, don't be a judge and ensure you ask someone to judge who does. It says on the very first page that whoever issues a challenge has to set the rules under which the fight is fought, I honestly can't remember where Rilla said 'it defaults to T1E' but I'm going to suggest he adds it to the OP of the ranking headquarters, to ensure this doesn't happen again.

And for the record, unless the fight ended in perfect harmony if Divinity had forced you to leave through further vague sheet bullshit, I would be fighting for the fight to be voided in your favour.

Whether or not this counts as a fight is between the two fighters. Assuming nothing was said at the start of the fight about it being ranked, then both have to be in agreement that it is going to be ranked.

Was there any such arrangement?

Melon is the only one requesting that this fight not be considered ranked. Myself and Divinity were in agreement that it was a ranked fight from the very beginning, and played accordingly. I'm not sure if his opinion has changed ever since Melon suggested this attractive alternative, but we both were treating it very seriously until the whole T1EA debate exploded out of hand. I personally consider this fight very real, it definitely retained the kind of stress and struggle that comes with combat, that's why I'm driving the steak in to a legitimate outcome.

I'd honestly rather a draw than nothing at all... but I still feel as though Myron had an advantage, dealt more damage, and again... forfeiture is another form of loss.

That's an over simplification of things, there has to be an understanding that certain factors have to be met for a fight to be considered ranked, or we might as well ditch the entire system as it means literally nothing.

If all it takes is for the two competitors to agree at the start to fight, without any indication of how that fight is going to be regulated, then what does a fight being ranked even mean? The whole point is that it should be a competitive match, which can be judged as such. There is no competition in the world that exists with undefined rules from the outset. One can construct a reasonably sound argument that the reason this fight ended isn't down to anything less than the fact that one person was playing with a set of rules the other wanted to change, and when things got unnecessarily heated because there was no restriction or rulings being made, a person left. I'm not sure we should be condoning being a dick to win fights, it's the sign that our ranking system is shit and laughable.

Maybe Divinity gave up too easy and should lose, I dunno, but if this is to be the norm for ranked fights from here on out I'm disabling my ranked score and ignoring ranked competition forever, because it's meaningless and a waste of time.

Melon, you give me better reasons over and over again to continue my uphill battle. I'd love to be the person you blame for turning away from ranked combat! That's like beating one bird with another bird, and not even having to use a stone!

The fight was to be regulated by a judge, not T1EA, which wasn't mentioned until later. Say I didn't know anything about T1EA (you probably will say that), so I don't have a specific named ruleset to point at when I say I wanna' play a ranked match. This is wrong, it indicates that you can only fight in a ranked setting if you know about T1EA, or another mechanical version of rules, which isn't mentioned as being mandatory. Surely that's elitist, if it's not required but enforced anyways. The truth that T1EA was only acknowledged later provides me the leverage to say you're wrong if you think I'm breaking established rules or defying them. New rules were being added to the mix, and I was actually willing to find even ground and accept them, in order to satisfy my opponent's distrust.

You've only proven how T1EA isn't perfectly fair or catered to the unique, so why should I want to accept the rules of something that can be seen as illogical, or has mechanical glitches that nobody is willing to rework at this current date in time? I'd rather get rid of it all together from my life, and instead entrust judgment to someone who is catering their own time to reading over my fight, someone I know and trust to make a solid decision.

It was a judged ranked fight. There's a flaming icon saying 'ranked' next to this topic's title, and someone willing to say they'll judge who wins.