Fight/Death system suggestion

[Seayn]

Whoa, whoa. How am I ever supposed to plan a coup when Ryan will just come back the next day? D:

[Merik Dragmire]

Decap Seayn, decap

[Leviathan]

Majority yes vote. No replies since 24th. If there are no more protests. Calling for final decision.

[Sundosia]

I'm a late responder here, but I would like to put my two cents in.

Honestly, I was totally against it at first, but now I'm on the fence.

On the one hand, yes, there are times where death in a fight is unavoidable, but at the same time, death without permission would be a good reason for people to go b.s.'ing and killing off characters, and I only have one official character who could get herself into some trouble, but I don't want her killed. How do I know that she won't get killed? You could always just say "Well then don't get her into too much trouble" but what if the character just tends to get themselves in trouble like Sundosia does? She could easily anger the wrong person with the way she is, and that's in-character, and her skills aren't all that great.

I have a suggestion. Perhaps you could have people challenge to admin-approved death matches?

Like they use a form kinda like this, they do this on another RP site I'm on

Challenge: Death Match
Challenger: Jake
Vs: Bob
Reason: For killing Jake's family and friends and stealing all his rupees and leaving him to die

and then admin come in and approve it after being notified? Or deny it if they feel there's some b.s. reason?

Just my thoughts.

[Eliam]

I like this. It reflects the most common rule of questing and battling in general perfectly:

If you do something stupid, your ass is getting murdered.

As for Sundosia's suggestion, I'm against bureaucrafying deadly combat. If a character has a habit of pissing people off and then pisses off the wrong person, that's an opportunity to develop the character, not fill out a form.

[Leviathan]

Sorry but I'm with Eliam on that one, this sentence pretty much spells it out.

but what if the character just tends to get themselves in trouble like Sundosia does? She could easily anger the wrong person with the way she is, and that's in-character, and her skills aren't all that great.

Unfortunatly. Thats the same kind of argument as me saying. Leviathan eats people. What if he eats the wrong persons relative and accidently ends up with a death mark on his head. The idea is that by choosing to RP a character that is povokative like that, you should automatically know that such things are bound to happen. Filling out a form once again leaves us with the issue of the other person denying the death match.

Once again. I will state.

If you do not wish to die.
A) Most important. Do not put your character in that situation.
B) If you have already accidently done the above, remove them from that situation. ie) Running away.
C) Make your character a pacifict, theres an idea running about that pacificts would be allowed to opt out of being attacked. So long as they didn't go against point A.



Finally it seems that most people in this thread from their wording have not read the actual point of this. I will make clear once again. The only main change to this is that

By fighting back/ not running away, you automatically give permission for your character to die. This mofication does not allow automatic murders/sneak assassinations etc) All hits must first be confirmed by the owner of the character. Or by the admin.

[Nairore]

I'm going to re-enter this topic because some people just won't let it die. Nightmare's seen it, he's made a post stating his unofficial opinion on the matter and has left it at that. It was a hint that he didn't want something like this, and after talking to him it's quite clear it achieves nothing but irritating the admin. It's not going to happen, so you're best off dropping the idea and finding other ways to wave your dick around. )_) Because we all know that's what this sort of system is for.

[/size]

[Leviathan]

Nightmares previous posts have been concerning putting this rule through. And then allowing further discussion on it. The subject won't die. Till a final ruling has been made. Shelving a subject does not make it go away. As I've said before this subject as of now has a majority yes vote, including the co-admin's approval. So I suggest that if this is Nightmare's decision. Then he post it himself. Suggesting that he would rather ignore something than deal with it. Does him injustice as an admin.

On your final note. As I have said on multiple occassions. This system is about fixing an OOC issue. If you wish to devolve this conversation into personal jibes. I can obliege you if that is your wish. However I'd prefer to do so over PM's to try and salvage the professionalism of this thread.

[Maverick Decheil]

Well, if you want to get technical. The reduction of cost for resurrection would make death pointless anyways. There'd be no repercussions for having a character be a douche bag to everyone and everything that walks. Oh no, you killed him, hey guess what, he's back and walking around already. Kinda belittles the whole death thing. Hell, they wouldn't even have to become a poe if they have the points to get a resurrection(which would be craptons cheaper). Imo, death shouldn't just be something cheap/unimportant like that, and if the death without permission reduces the costs, it would be treated that way.

So technically, either IC is getting broken. So, I'd rather have the permission thing being what breaks IC than death being nothing more than a joke.

[♛Brouda]

DE| Death Enabled* The entire thread and all Involved instantly becomes a target for death. This allows players to get the full experience from a fight, and the role-play all together.

NDE| Not-Death-Enabled* No matter what happens, the entire thread is a "safety" zone. This means, no dragon can come up and be all "lolol, me gonna eat you!" and bite off another players head or vital organ. When fighting, death isn't a question. The players will fight, one or both may suffer some broken bones, but will ultimately never die.

Just my two crystals in the matter*

[/size][/font][/b]

[Leviathan]

@mav: TBH dude I already consider death a joke as far as this current system is played. If ya wanna compare examples. " Oh no he's going around raping people wives sisters and daughters, shitting on their front lawns and constantly attacking them, but oh dear me, the player doesn't want his douche char dead so theres no reprocussions. Player in Question: Trollface.jpeg". In this case. its already a damned joke that you'd have to find a reason NOT to kill said person.

Death I imagine IC is quite a painful process. So unless your char happens to be totally off the rocker nuts. Then you'd already be breaking character by persuing the very same thing that got you killed first time round.

@ Brouda: Good idea, but doesn't really go far enough. Again it makes any reprocussions for characters irrelavent. And you can't really DRAG a person into a death thread. I'd be behind this idea IF in certain circimstances, reason breaks IC so much that it'd be literally insane not to kill. That the thread's non death thing would be dispeled.

[Maverick Decheil]

And it'd even be a worse joke, cause killing them wouldn't leave a lasting effect either. Maverick could get killed for acting the way he is, and he would still act the way he is. Why? because that's part of his character. Plus, if death doesn't really do much against him, he's the type to start pushing boundaries, etc.

and honestly, I'd prefer Brouda's idea. if the no death gets to the point both are immobile, no more fight anyways.

[♛Brouda]

Yeah, I see what you're saying. Like if it was a evil character that went around killing for the kicks. But keep in mind, if it's a evil character. All their threads should be DE in the first place, don't you think? And if there not, then said player isn't really a evil character.

This idea would be manly for the people worrying about dying. I honestly don't think it's fair for a character that likes to cause trouble to die the first time they do it to the wrong person. It's basically asking a person to break character just to make sure they don't die, right? And we both know, you're against breaking character.

It all comes down to this. If a player does a DE thread with a player they know they can beat, and beats said weaker player. And next week does a NDE thread with a player they know they can't beat. That's a totally pussy move.

Once again, just my two crystals in the matter*

[/size][/font][/b]

[Leviathan]

True point, however thats assuming that whatever happens, occurs in a Death thread. Could easily occur in an open non death, and people could take advantage of the thread type. Take note tho, I'm more willing to go with this idea, than to leave the system as is.

[♛Brouda]

Yeah, dood. You make some good points (everyone makes good points from what I'm seeing). To sum up what I'm trying to say though: It all comes down to the RPer in question. If he/she wants to be a little dick and troll the system, that's not right, but we can't really do anything about it. Sure, we can kill him/her but they'll just be back next thread with -5 rupees.

But you also need to keep in mind, Lev. Not everyone is a hardcore RPer like yourself. Some people just want to have fun and RP without the fear of their character dying because someone dislikes them OOC.

So whatever happens, happens.

//Throws two more crystals into the pot*

[/size][/font][/b]