vivaledead wrote: 1. A valid reason would be along the lines of if the inno they killed were killing them first, and they were simply defending themselves.
2. Its really your choice to believe them or not. If you feel their explanation isnt satisfactory you can kill them. You do not have to ask if you witness someone kill multiple people at once, or an AFK (use common sense here)
3. Yes, most people will just try to deny it anyway and you will know they are lying since you have DNA on them

This rule isn't game breaking at all, its up to you to believe them or not and if you find the reason they killed the innocent valid

[quote="vivaledead" post=1251003]how am i supposed to know that valid reason how am i supposed to trust that valid reason am i supposed to ask every single person i have dna on why they killed the innocent this rule is game breaking[/quote] 1. A valid reason would be along the lines of if the inno they killed were killing them first, and they were simply defending themselves. 2. Its really your choice to believe them or not. If you feel their explanation isnt satisfactory you can kill them. You do not have to ask if you witness someone kill multiple people at once, or an AFK (use common sense here) 3. Yes, most people will just try to deny it anyway and you will know they are lying since you have DNA on them This rule isn't game breaking at all, its up to you to believe them or not and if you find the reason they killed the innocent valid