Shinobi Legends Forum - Shinobi Legends Game Site

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


New members: you need admin approval, please petition *in game* if you made an account. :)

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Eric

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 230
Bugreports / Services no longer required page in forest
« on: August 24, 2019, 07:42:36 PM »

Recently coming back and playing a bit, I remember healing in the forest and getting a "you're now better" (paraphrasing) page with an image of a medical ninja on it. Now, I instead get the page for if I had clicked heal option when I"m at full health.


1) Go to the forest anywhere in SL. In this particular case I was in the Kirigakure forest.
2) Fight a creature and lose any amount of HP
3) In the left menu, choose any of the heal options. In this case I chose the full heal one
4) Instead of a page with a medical ninja picture, you instead just get the text that "healing servies aren't required" (again, paraphrasing)

All That Is Bijuu / Re: Turtle and monkey
« on: August 24, 2019, 05:54:29 PM »
So dwelling RPs count now? Was the rule below modified, because if it is, I will have to update the one in the wiki... and someone else should update the one here in the forum...

No, dwelling RP's do not count towards public posting activity. Discussion/execution of the activity clause is a useful resource for coming to the conclusion that dwelling RP's do not count, outside of the fact that dwellings are not inherently "public".

In one instance I even referenced the rather difficult to find via search function (I tried before posting, though to be fair I could just be rusty) set of discussions regarding the activity rule itself in the Biju Rules Workshop, and activity rules in general.44,9500.msg237214.html#msg237214

Village Square / Re: Edo Tensei Tobias AWOL
« on: January 24, 2019, 02:34:46 AM »
I agree with the replacement as well. However, since it has literally been years since the post was lasts updated, an updated list of users on the whole would be nice as well. I can make the change if someone gives the intel.

* Nevermind on the request for info, the wikia has it.

Village Square / Re: Edo Tensei Tobias AWOL
« on: January 19, 2019, 05:58:12 PM »
Was told an actual vote needed to happen here to take the 'teacher' spot from Tobias in the Edo Tensei Teacher < Student pairing.

Tobias has been inactive for 179 days and has seemed to quit Shinobi Legends. Via circumstances he took Ryoji's spot in the Teacher spot while Uematsu Tomi was the Student spot.

Is he sufficiently inactive to be considered for removal of his Edo Tensei Teacher Spot or no?

Who should be voting on this matter? Is it the general public, only Edo Tensei affiliated peeps? The Official Edo Tensei guidelines do not address succession beyond the death of the teacher or student freeing up a slot:

Teacher:Student rule.  "Teachers" are allowed to teach a single person Edo Tensei. Once done, neither teacher nor student can share the technique, unless one or the other dies.

Bijuu Arena / Re: Current In-game Jinchūriki and Summoners
« on: January 03, 2019, 06:47:18 AM »

Council / Re: Inactive Hosts Protocol
« on: January 02, 2019, 08:15:03 AM »
Then I guess itís settled and now I have the 7, unless anyone objects?

Once you make your post in the 7-tails thread regarding preferences, affiliations, etc. then I will update the current list of jinchurikii.

Council / Re: Inactive Hosts Protocol
« on: January 01, 2019, 06:50:23 AM »
So does that mean since jestar has been offline for 18 plus days I can put in for chomei? If so I would like to do so.

It's as good as yours.

Then, can new dibs be called again? By me? Right now?

That depends on the current situation of the beast.

 Uchiha Madara challenged Ray for the  7-tailed beast back in May according to the respective challenge thread, and Ray said that he was "busy". Presumably he became unbusy as eventually he the two fought both Madara and Athos over the 6-tails here,9499.0.html  (Madara),9495.0.html  (Athos)

Chronologically, the Athos fight came first, and Athos' challenge is recorded in the 6-tails challenge thread. However, there is no record of Madara challenging Ray for the 6-tails in the challenge thread, and yet, there was a fight and, according to this post, an exchange of tailed beasts from the fight:

Ray chuckled and tossed the scroll containing the 6 tails towards the regenerating man. "Good answer~"He Began his own healing of his wounds which wouldn't take as long thanks to the Rebei's healing ability with the dark chakra. "Now what exactly do I get to learn?"

Uchiha Madara did not officially challenge Ray for the 6-tails, but he did officially challenge him for the 7-tails. Presumably, based off of this evidence, the held off challenge from the 7-tails thread instead became a fight for the 6-tails, meaning that Uchiha Madara's challenge for the 7-tails was fulfilled.

In that case, it depends on the activity of Ray. If Ray has gone inactive, then since it is outside of a currently active biju battle, then the Biju Council should be notified so that Ray can be stripped of the tailed beast.

Some of the active members of the Biju Council, earlier last year (man how time flies) in this thread stated that their default decision would be to give the beast to the latest challenger, which at this point would be Sabumaru, so yes, it can be claimed now by Sabumaru. This is assuming that Ray has not publicly posted a RP post somewhere in the SL world within the last 14 days and that any potential appeals to the Biju Council do not have the beast going anywhere else.

TLDR: If Ray's last public RP post was later than 14 days ago, then barring an appeal to the biju council for deliberation, then yes Sabumaru, you may claim the tailed beast as yours.

Bijuu Arena / Re: Current In-game Jinchūriki and Summoners
« on: December 28, 2018, 09:16:10 PM »
I apologize to all for not keeping this list more up to date.

List has been updated based on the challenge threads. I am operating under the assumption that the last posted ruleset was posted by the current owner, per the biju rules. If the fact is contrary to that, let me know so that we can get it sorted out.

Council / Re: Potential inactivity: Jay Nara
« on: July 14, 2018, 12:02:26 AM »
I do have to address the issue if we allow this event to take precedent. The reason we have the activity rules at all, referring to public posts, is to ensure that beast hosts are available to find in RP. At least that's what I see as the "spirit" of the rules as you refer, Eric.

If we allow NPC posts to be considered activity, then what's to stop someone from demanding the need for an IC hunt, refuse to allow orchestrated hunts like with Sabu and you, lock themselves away in a pocket dimension, and continue to post forever as NPCs to keep up with their activity...

Hosts can't demand the need for an IC hunt and refuse to allow orchestrated hunts because:

...Players cannot hunt and capture a biju IC outside of a biju hunt. If the host is killed in a RP unrelated to the biju hunt, then the biju will go to the Biju Council. There are no guarantees that the biju may go anywhere else after that (IE, challengers who challenged for a biju OOCly or IC hunt do not necessarily get first picks if this happens), but the Council must grant the biju to a player no later than 2 months after the biju first gets into its possession, unless a tournament or other event is on-going for the beast.

A host cannot require an IC hunt without abiding by the orchestrated guidelines and negotiating with the hunter(s). A hunter cannot just up and ambush a host IC outside of a biju hunt and immediately get the beast by unsealing or what have you.

Whether or not hosts or hunters have been taking this into account in the past few months is beyond my current knowledge, but OOC fights are still the most popular for good reason.

However, if you want, you can propose a discussion/vote on a rule change explicitly stating that the post requirements for activity must be IC with the biju holding character.

Biju Rules Workshop:,8578.msg225815.html#msg225815,8578.msg224647.html#msg224647,8578.msg224651.html#msg224651

Inactivity proposal for RP items:,8868.msg229056.html#msg229056

In-Match Activity Requirements:,8830.msg228508.html#msg228508

These are a few prominent examples I have regarding how Activity rule posts are considered. What are the thoughts of the other Council Members? So far the count is:

Dart - Activity RP posts cannot be NPC posts
Eric - Activity RP posts can be NPC posts

After doing my bit of research though, I'm leaning more on Dart's position than my initial one.

Council / Re: Potential inactivity: Jay Nara
« on: July 13, 2018, 07:14:52 AM »
I meant it to be, considering my circumstances. Which was why I chose it to react to the man's post instead of making it something separate.

I wanted a few extra techniques to be finished before I made my return, but I don't want to encounter this situation again, so I'll just do so.


In Jay's defense to some degree, I have made similarly "lazy" posts as activity on my own in order to fufuill my activity quota, but it was always my actual character, sitting in a zone inviting a challenge.

Example: Rusaku sits down atop the roof of a building within the empty township and waits for incoming challengers, fluctuating his chakra so he can be found.

While even that is more involved than Jay's post, I still got guff from other players for being lazy. So I'm not exactly a good example. 
I don't personally like the idea of it being an NPC post, and not Jay himself, but I'm not familiar with what the rules actually mandate in that regard. I'm interested in your take, Eric. I also want to hear about the private dwelling RP being considered public activity and if it fulfills the aforementioned quota.

Don't get me wrong, length is not the factor as long a it passes for actual roleplaying and not just chatter or something of that sort.,9118.msg232145.html#msg232145

As far as the rules go, if you search for the acronym "RP" (Match Case) you can see all of the instances in which it is used in the current set of rules. From that you could say that in general, RP as far as the rules are concerned refers to the stream of events that influences characters in the SL RP world, IE, IC events. It does not per say have to be the player's own character that they are playing as, as long as it's a post that is a part of the public RPing sphere. That is how I am looking at it at the moment.

If you want to speak on the spirit of the rule, a few forum searches can probably dig up more information on that.

According to our current rules, there HAS to be a PUBLIC post that the Host/Summoner posts about. As far as Iím aware, this means it has to be the individual in charge of the beast in order to allow IC paths to play out as need be. Not NPC posts created by the person.

In the "Forum Account and Challenging the Host" section, the terms "host" and "challenger" are regularly used to refer to players rather than characters. As a result, as long as it is verifiably Jay the player making the public RP post, then as the rules are written, the RP post is valid.

Council / Re: Potential inactivity: Jay Nara
« on: July 13, 2018, 05:14:25 AM »
Uzushiogakure at 11:03pm EST, excerpt:

(1d7h) Sugoi nodded, pushing himself back to his feet. He'd grab his coat and pull it on, the replace his sunglasses and pick up his cloak and mask before accepting the packet from the small woman, "Sure thing. Should have it in a day or so." he replied, and began to show himself out, giving her a firm -
> (1d7h) Sugoi - pat on the shoulder as he passed, "Oh, would you let the woman in charge know I'm heading back her way? And tell the kids not to play by the river." he added, seemingly completely serious, despite the fact that the two sentences had nothing to do with each other, and he made no mention of -
> (1d7h) Sugoi - who the kids in question were.
> (16h45m) <未来> Mr. Jay |Somewhere in the world, some kids were playing by the river...

There is no need to debate IC or OOC here, but given the context and from what you've said in this thread, is that really a RP post?

Rules/Foundation / Keeping track of beast transitions
« on: May 25, 2018, 04:22:25 AM »
A host must create a thread with the name of his or her bijuu in the title to the Bijuu Arena board, and use this thread to: state his or her preference for battle, keep a list of challengers, indicate if he or she is a new host and when his or her grace period will be over, and post any notices of absence.


In cleaning up the Mazou thread I came across a conundrum where, for record keeping purposes (especially in the longer term) I thought it necessary to keep at the bare minimum a few posts to explain the transition. While my intentions for a challenger thread would have been to keep a record of all official challenges and transitions that have occurred ever via different challenge threads or all kept in one per beast, as there had been some initial resistance to adopting official challenge threads way back when. As one can tell by the challenge threads, that has not necessarily been the way the threads have been kept since then as previous challengers' records have been deleted on numerous occasions.

Bearing that in mind, I stopped at removing the challenges after Yomi's but before her claim post because I am not sure if leaving just hers would serve the purpose of record keeping, or if we are even doing that at all.

There was the record keeping in the "current in-game jinchurikii and summoners" thread but that too is an incomplete record at this current point in time.

So, my question is, how are we, if at all, do we keep track of beast changing hands beyond who is the "current" host?

Just wondering if the rule for mastery includes IC berserk events. Like say I've mastered Version 1 but in an out of control state, enter Version 2. Is that a no go? Or is it only if I claim to be in control of the Version 2 state as I would Version 1?

Going into berserk state is an automatic forfeit in a biju mach:

If a host goes over their mastery for any reason at any time during a biju match, it is considered an automatic forfeit by the host.

Outside of a battle for the beast (even an IC one), like for training or RPing an event that cannot be classified as a biju match of any kind, then while it still counts as going over mastery, it can be done without forfeit of the beast. But if it is done in a setting that could as a biju match, then it is a no go no matter what from what I have read of this rule.

Alrighty, its been two weeks since this was brought up. I will gladly take it into my possession if there be no objections.


Inactivity means that there is a hierarchy of claimants, depending on the order in which there was a challenge or stated interest for the beast.

1) Yomi    [5/08/2018 at 2:50:59 am]
2) Camel  [5/08/2018 at 8:25:33 pm]
3) Uchiha Madara  [May 10, 2018, 04:01:49 pm]
4) Nekomaru  [May 12, 2018, 01:12:36 am]
5) Athos [May 22, 2018, 07:38:08 pm]

If Yomi doesn't want it, then it goes to Camel. If Camel does not want it then you get it Madara, with Nekomaru as your first challenger. That's the order of the challenge list, that's the order of the creature claim.



This post will serve as the "placeholder" to explain the transition of the beast from Vail to Yomi, along with Yomi's original claim post. The date and time of claim will be forum time and be next to each person's name in my original post above. As Camel pointed out this is not a priority list for challengers once grace period is up, new challenges will have to be issued after that time.

Yomi's post accepting the tailed beast after any uncertainty was cleared up has also been preserved for grace period related reasons, just in case there is uncertainty about that start date, there are 2 logical places for it to have started rather than just 1. If the grace were to start from the 8th it would already be over ( 14 days and all) so I am under the impression it will start on the 22nd (correct/challenge me on this if I'm wrong, in new thead please).

** Athos added post post script, had not noticed that he also issued a challenge at one point **

Council / Re: Inactive Hosts Protocol
« on: May 19, 2018, 02:19:14 AM »
So does that mean since jestar has been offline for 18 plus days I can put in for chomei? If so I would like to do so.

It's as good as yours.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 230

Page created in 0.056 seconds with 34 queries.