Mr_Maks wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 23, 2019 7:40 pm
Yes that's right and will be good if it will specifically stated in the rule itself.
One thought that had crossed my mind is that it would be nice if there were clarifications of the rules for specific situations. The rules can't cover every single possible situation, and if they did we'd have hundreds of pages of rules to go through.
Clarifications could be put together by GMs when situations come up. Something like:
1. A defending clan was accused of ___ during a siege. This is not a violation because ___.
2. A single clan member attacking a gate was accused of ___ with no defending clan members present. This is a rule violation because ___.
Each clarification could provide more certainty about the rules. This could possibly make things easier and avoid unintentional changes to the interpretation of the rules where something is allowed one day and not allowed later.
Some situations are very clear, so it isn't like this would be needed all the time.
It would be a bit more work, but really just some short posts in a locked thread. I have no doubt that GMs have internal resources as well, so this could be something for GM use only. When GMs come and go this could always provide some helpful information during transitions.
Warriors are not the ones who always win, but the ones that always fight.