The only thing i see here is poor wording indeed.
However what i want to know is if the OOC clarification was given after the report or before the report.
Fine or threaten to fine is the same thing. To me it makes no difference.So i won't judge differently.
But what i really see here is a bad wording and nothing more.
It is only expected for a General to give orders to the soldiers and demand from them to act but everytime a player gives such an order he/she should make sure to include that those who won't follow orders will be submitted to investigation as to why they haven't acted.
It is a fact that the game itself reports the actions of nobles.For example in a TO as TOs now work everyone knows who contributed and who didn't thus those who are leading have every right to ask why those who were ordered did not follow orders and according to their answer act as they should.
That of course also means they should be very careful in how they phrase their orders because a strict one can lead players to think that in case they miss a turn they will receive a punishment.This is absolutely wrong even if the intentions were genuine.
Thus i am asking. Was the clarification given right away by the player because he himself understood that his order could be misinterpreted ? Or was he asked for one?
