Can you hold vehicles hostage with destruction?

[The Antichrist 251]

Title^  The wording makes me think it should be legal, but I thought I'd ask to see if anyone has actually attempted this before plowing in and assuming it hasn't been ruled against. 

Example, specific situation:  Two guys land a heli and start chasing  me.  I lose them for a second and juke backwards and plant a remote bomb on their heli.   Then engage them and tell them to leave or I blow it up.   Would that be legal?  I would think it would constitute 'a reason.'  I'm not looking to debate the issue, just want to know.  Thanks

[Dank MeeMoo 193]

This is actually pretty interesting but if your sole intention for placing with explosives is to blow up their vehicle and not kill them then that would be rvd. If they were next to the heli however and you plan to also have them killed in the explosion then that’s ok

[The Antichrist 251]

I mean, my intention is only to blow up the heli if they don't comply with reasonable demands.

[Panda :) 1920]

I've actually never seen this question asked before but with the way that the rule is worded by it saying you cannot do it for no reason as long as there is a GOOD reason I wouldn't see why not.

[evannnn 590]

5 minutes ago, Panda said:

I've actually never seen this question asked before but with the way that the rule is worded by it saying you cannot do it for no reason as long as there is a GOOD reason I wouldn't see why not.

u have a small dick

Edited June 20, 2020 by evannnn
sada

[Panda :) 1920]

1 minute ago, evannnn said:

I've got a small dick

wtf? ok?

[evannnn 590]

1 minute ago, Panda said:

wtf? ok?

dude not cool man i didnt say that

i said go to bed 

[Linka 2963]

2 hours ago, Panda said:

wtf? ok?

dont worry man, if you're my son youll grow into it

[Millennium 5834]

I believe you are talking about a speed bomb on it?

If so, there aren't any rules against it so long as you do not use it to kill people in restraints, may have changed but thats what I recall.

If you using the vehicle as a hostage I actually have no clue tho, thats pretty funny.

[Slav 323]

4 hours ago, Panda said:

I've actually never seen this question asked before but with the way that the rule is worded by it saying you cannot do it for no reason as long as there is a GOOD reason I wouldn't see why not.

Wouldn’t using a vehicle as hostage be a GOOD reason though? There is intent behind destroying the vehicle, which is when the other party does not give in their demands. It’s really no different than going to the chop shop.

[Creepy 1305]

To quote @Peter Long anything can be role-played

[Pancake 893]

ex admin here. Its a misconception that RVD is against the rules, its not and is in fact encouraged.

[The Antichrist 251]

3 hours ago, Pancake said:

ex admin here. Its a misconception that RVD is against the rules, its not and is in fact encouraged.

Gonna go ahead and put this in the bin of stuff not to do.  

[Joce 256]

forgiveness is easier than permission and your not a real Olympus player until you've had a rule change/made because of something you did.