Rebelling On Lr Rule Edit

[xGShadowSpy 108]

Well during the round, if a T rebels and you don't see it, you can't kill him. So if you rebel on lr ( as in without the plugin that says you're rebelling) and a CT doesn't see you, it should be made so they can't kill you, like if only one CT follows you and you're in a seperate room. Just my thought on it.

[ItsAaron 1]

Don't see why not. It makes sense to just keep the rule the same for LR rather than adding yet another

[diabeetus 20]

+1 just a common sense thing right here, it doesn't really make much sense for our rules to contradict each other in different parts. @@DarkWolf6052 @@Eucliwood input plas.

[DarkWolf6052 0]

Well the thing about that is basically once you rebel on LR, you're stuck as a rebel. You can't LR after rebelling.

[Kyoko 0]

Well the thing about that is basically once you rebel on LR, you're stuck as a rebel. You can't LR after rebelling.

but it makes since as long as they aren't seen doing it, they should be able to LR.

[xGShadowSpy 108]

Well the thing about that is basically once you rebel on LR, you're stuck as a rebel. You can't LR after rebelling.

Which is why im saying to edit this, to make it so that if you aren't seen rebelling then you can still lr, but if seen by CTs you can be killed.

[DarkWolf6052 0]

Which is why im saying to edit this, to make it so that if you aren't seen rebelling then you can still lr, but if seen by CTs you can be killed.

Oh I see. Fixed.

 

Rebelling on Last Request

A T may choose to rebel on LR, but once you choose to rebel, you may not choose any other LR. A T can only rebel if an LR choice has not already been chosen, and under no circumstances may the T choose an LR if they have already started to rebel (Doing so will result in a slay). The T does not have to announce they have chosen to rebel, and may do so at any time as long as another LR option has not been chosen. CTs may not tase a rebelling T or tase on LR as this is an unfair advantage. CTs are not allowed to gun plant the T with LR, as this may lead to freekills. CTs can not kill a rebelling-on-LR T unless they see the T rebel, but again, the T may not choose another LR after rebelling.

Rebelling on LR can be chosen with either option; using the choice from the !lr menu when available, or without it, using a gun to rebel.

[Forest 309]

If that's the case, you should remove the announcement of the T choosing to rebel, let alone the other instances of it announcing an LR option, otherwise it makes no sense. If they have chosen to Rebel, and it clearly states it, the Terrorist can't possibly be doing anything else other than that. I mean, it's going to say if they did a LR, and if they didn't, they obviously chose to Rebel. But because you didn't see it happen, you have to watch them Rebel again?

 

I'm just trying to grasp the rationale behind this implementation.

[diabeetus 20]

If that's the case, you should remove the announcement of the T choosing to rebel, let alone the other instances of it announcing an LR option, otherwise it makes no sense. If they have chosen to Rebel, and it clearly states it, the Terrorist can't possibly be doing anything else other than that. I mean, it's going to say if they did a LR, and if they didn't, they obviously chose to Rebel. But because you didn't see it happen, you have to watch them Rebel again?

 

I'm just trying to grasp the rationale behind this implementation.

ok the commenting is annoying/buggy as shit so I'm just going to type out my full reply. Like it says in the motd, CT's aren't allowed to kill a T for rebelling unless they see that T commit a rebellious action. In a normal round of jailbreak, a CT is not allowed to kill a T because he heard the T knife a vent or if the CT sees a T kill someone in the kill feed (but does not see the T actually kill the CT). We should enforce the rules the same on !lr. If the T lures a lone CT into a room and kills him (without choosing the rebel option in the !lr menu) then the CT's shouldn't be able to kill said T on sight without seeing that T further commit a rebellious action. If we just start allowing the CT's to kill the rebellious T on !lr just on a hunch or because they saw the T kill someone through the kill feed, then our motd contradicts itself. We should aim for our motd to be as uniform as possible, so CT's should react to the rebellious T on !lr exactly the same as they would any other rebellious T. Just like the rest of the round, the motd should state that CT's must see the T commit a rebellious action in order to kill said T, regardless if it's !lr or not. It's just all about consistency.

[Forest 309]

ok the commenting is annoying/buggy as shit so I'm just going to type out my full reply. Like it says in the motd, CT's aren't allowed to kill a T for rebelling unless they see that T commit a rebellious action. In a normal round of jailbreak, a CT is not allowed to kill a T because he heard the T knife a vent, or if the CT see a T kill someone in the kill feed (but does not see the T actually kill the CT). We should enforce the rules the same on !lr. If the T lures a lone CT into a room and kills him (without choosing the rebel option in the !lr menu) then the CT's shouldn't be able to kill said T on sight without seeing that T further commit a rebellious action. If we just start allowing the CT's to kill the rebellious T on !lr just on a hunch, or because they saw the T kill someone through the kill feed, then our motd contradicts itself. We should aim for our motd to be as uniform as possible, so CT's should react to the rebellious T on !lr exactly the same as they would any other rebellious T. It's just all about consistency.

If that's the problem, than the implementation should be re-worded. All that needs to be said is that "During Last Request, the Terrorist is to be treated the same way as any other Terrorist 'Pre-LR' (with the exception of following Warden's orders) until they have chosen a Last Request option."

That to me makes more sense without having to re-address everything that was already made obvious.

[DarkWolf6052 0]

If that's the problem, than the implementation should be re-worded. All that needs to be said is that "During Last Request, the Terrorist is to be treated the same way as any other Terrorist 'Pre-LR' (with the exception of following Warden's orders) until they have chosen a Last Request option."

That to me makes more sense without having to re-address everything that was already made obvious.

Fixed >.< Sorry, derp

[Forest 309]

Fixed >.< Sorry, derp

I didn't mean to come off as a dick head or anything, just thought that it sounded a little complex for something simple :oops:

[DarkWolf6052 0]

I didn't mean to come off as a dick head or anything, just thought that it sounded a little complex for something simple :oops:

Best I could find that isn't porn.

artworks-000025031575-ieu13j-original.jpg?3eddc42

[snakeboyeric 0]

Great more complicated rules. This is stupid. Now all a T has to do is round a corner, kill a ct then holster his gun. and he's safe. Rinse, repeat.

 

When there is more than one T alive, Ct's cannot kill anyone if they didnt see it because we are supposed to disregard the kill notification thingy. Like real life, we wouldn't know whodunit. With one T left, however it has to be the last T. Logic. At least @@DarkWolf6052 give us more time to discuss this before the rule is changed. I foresee this as a misguided rule change.