New PVP rules #2

[Monad]

I just read the Harlequin's idea for new PVP rules and I agree on many parts. However, I'll present you quite much different and more drastic set which is open for adjustments and improvements if it were to take place. I'd like to hear your comments on this. When the drafts are pretty much final I'll put a vote to the poll where either of the idea drafts can be voted alongside with the current rules and see how it goes.

This doesn't mean something will be necessary changed and this isn't staff's official suggestion, but I personally agree that the rules we currently have got way too complex during the years and this is just wild idea.

1) .robber tag removed
2) All reds are attacked by all religion guards
3) Religions still cant aid robbers
4) Everyone can be killed and looted but with proper RP reasons (more responsibility to Law/in character politics, less to GM's determining robbers etc.)
5) All war rules removed, war will only prevent murder counts to be collected
6) War will be initiated by GM's if the attacks are constant toward some guild or religion
7) War can be ended by either of side but have to pay 500k as a surrender fee to the other guild/religion

Basicly this would mean that all what's left for GM's to supervise are:
1) Religions dont help robbers
2) RP reasons are valid for attacking/looting someone (to prevent PK fest)
3) Declaring war if attacking between some guilds are constant if the "defender" so wishes

Rest would be up to players hands. This would mean more freedom, less complex rules, more responsibility required from players. If we'd see assholiness and abuse of freedom, we would use the asshole rule more often to stop the madness.

Could you handle this, could you take the responsibility to play with fair etiquette in exchange for less complex rules?

[Aileth]

If we'd see assholiness and abuse of freedom, we would use the asshole rule more often to stop the madness.

As long as this sticks and there is a proper punishment, I'm fine with the draft you suggested.

[yuusou]

Honestly, the simpler the rules, the better, as long as there aren't players trying to extort them. That falls under assholeness though, so it should be fine.

In that case though, robbing rules should also be simpler, but stricter as well.

Honestly, GMs should only be dealing with assholeness and rule breaking and nothing else, the rules should be enough to keep quarrels away.

[Zaradon]

I'd like to add that there should be a "cooldown time" for 'Revenge' pvp attacks, i'm not sure but players are currently RP'ing attacks every day which is fine - but to prevent "non-rp'd revenge attacks" it should have a look in it also.

And the second thing i'd suggest is that some players are trying to "go around corner" from some lines of rules, i'd see this also being punished for.


PS; Thanks Monad for putting such effort into balancing PvP/PvP/RP.

[Mike]

Honestly I doubt it will work without more detail.

[Aileth]

Honestly I doubt it will work without more detail.

It works as long as players don't try to exploit the loopholes. They're already too complicated as they are and all they've been bringing is forum spamming for "can i do this or that with this x rule?"

[Mike]

Honestly I doubt it will work without more detail.

It works as long as players don't try to exploit the loopholes. They're already too complicated as they are and all they've been bringing is forum spamming for "can i do this or that with this x rule?"

If the rules are not clear you can't know if what you do is allowed or not, thus defeating the purpose of having a rule in the first place.

[Johnny Walac]

Q&A

2) All reds are attacked by all religion guards

Q: Even those that dont RP to be robbers? Why? Personally I like being able to help Tekstone for example on my red chars. I guess we can still be allied but I cannot help inside Wind.

4) Everyone can be killed and looted but with proper RP reasons (more responsibility to Law/in character politics, less to GM's determining robbers etc.)

Q: What is a proper RP reasons? Will there be guidelines for this things? I take it "Being Evil" is not enough etc.
Q: Just want it confirmed. So you do not need War to loot another guild?

6) War will be initiated by GM's if the attacks are constant toward some guild or religion

Q: Incase one guild keeps denying War just so the other guild will get murdercounts? Sounds good.

Rest would be up to players hands. This would mean more freedom, less complex rules, more responsibility required from players.

Q: As you remove the War rules. Two guilds/religions can still RP a war is on. Will this make "RP Reason" for looting easier if it's a "war" going on?

[xHarlequinx]

1) .robber tag removed
3) Religions still cant aid robbers

This is my only concern. What constitutes a robber? For example, if Telborea are punishing people for hunting on their lands, by killing and looting them, is this robbery? If not, then why would anyone ever rob when you can just create another rp reason to do the exact same thing and still benefit from religion protection?

Also, there needs to be some sort of mechanism for religions to know who has been designate robbers or not (this could be a locked forum post in the RP section, for example).

I'm generally fine with these rules (besides the above comment), but remain sceptical that they can work given the level of hostility between certain factions. I'm all for giving it a go though.

[Glarundis]

agreed with harlequin