Quote Originally Posted by Zagen View Post
How does that affect:

Player 1 sleeps a monster.
Player 2 wakes that monster without doing enough damage to lock hate.
Player 1 now gets hit by said monster.

This is an obvious definition of MPK from the 75 days...

Reives working as intended has nothing to do with players being stupid. If you see a BLU with a bunch of monsters looking at them and not attacking it should be obvious they are slept.
MPKs are intended, depends on context, really. Unless Player 2 woke mob without taking hate with the intention of killing Player 1, a GM will do nothing as he runs the risk or accusing and issuing a warning flag to a player who did nothing wrong besides not pulling hate. This could only be called an "MPK" by similarity, in that one player indirectly kills another. A GM won't (or atleast shouldn't) ban, issue warnings, or usually even contact a player on assumption alone, it usually just ends in them telling you that they will investigate, then they do and if they can't find proof, they do nothing.

Sorry, I just don't think you have a case. But I do agree that the shared aggro should be taken out.