- Joined
- Sep 25, 2020
- Messages
- 847
- Thread Author
- #1
Lets start with the more pretentious examination of the new system and move on from there.
Put Simply!
For rebels/partisans:
1. Rebels cannot be PK'ed as a result of a sweep, or any CP incursion unless they were the direct target of the sweep.
2. If not the direct cause of a sweep, rebels can still be killed by being 'captured' (more on this later)
3. If a rebel who was not the cause of the sweep commits any Red tier+ crime (Which can range from having bad boi items, to straight up murdering someone) are also immune to PK's.
CP's:
1. CP's cannot be killed at any point unless in a shadow sweep. (More on that too)
2. In theory, the only way to PK a CP is to now gather information on which CP is who, write up a PK request, have it accepted and then carry out the kill.
So, with the summary finished, lets start with each problem and work our way down.
Narrative and Why Death Matters
I want to start with this, cause fundamentally this is what makes PK's important and necessary to the server as a whole, even if they are painful at the best of times. If I were to ask you to think of the last story you read/watched/played that did not in some respect entangle with the concept of death or mortality in some sense, even if nobody directly died in it, you would be very hard pressed to do so. Death is the single most common overarching element in any given story. Likely due to the fact of its inherent relatability and how easily it can be manipulated to change and evolve characters. Specifically to our setting and medium it also forces people to think more rationally. More carefully. It forces you to stay your weapon when you may not have otherwise. Hold you tongue when you'd rather speak...etc.
So what does that matter for us? Well the new PK rules have, at the narrative level, fundamentally eliminated this entire narrative angle when CP's and Rebels are contesting one another directly. Outside of key circumstances, such as a rebels being the direct target of sweeps, or CP's conducting shadow sweeps, the only thing to be gained from combat, is scripts and OOC bragging rights. Not a single element of the combat will truly matter.
What about NLR's, you may ask. What about them? NLR's are, narratively speaking, lampshades. In other words, it is nothing more than an attempt to conceptualize an event that breaks suspension of disbelief. Somebody clearly died in front of twenty people, but rules were broken in the process? How do we justify that? NLR. A way of avoiding a complete nullification of potentially hours of character development, and to avoid muddying waters, by claiming he who was shot - was just some guy. A useless, faceless nobody who knew no-one and truly did nothing. A body. Its is a tool to rectify narrative mistakes, not a narrative angle itself. Because its a poor one, as lampshading very often is. Its just there to hide the shadow of doubt long enough for us to move past it.
In the most basic terms - Combat between the two most combatative factions has essentially been nullified at the narrative level. Nothing evolves between them any longer. Rebels fire at CP's for scripts, and scripts alone. CP's enter the slums simply to give chase to an activity that is not starring at a wall for another hour. If you're lucky, to try to remove some weapons from the rebel market.
For Example:
You are a rebel and see your buddy, John Rebel, being searched near the slums gates. You know he has a bomb you set him off to deliver and know his time is short. So, you pull out your Pipe pistol and blast the rather British sounding CP searching him. Chase is on, sweep begins - looking for you. Another group mate, Sally Rebel sees the incoming chase. Like you, she reckons its better to help than standby and do nothing. So, she fires at the CP's killing one. Distracting them long enough for you to get away.
Sadly, she is killed shortly after. You escape, although barely. Hunkering deep into the sewers for hours on end, soaking up spores.
Good news however
As per the PK policy, this was an NLR for your dear Sally, and she appears the next day - oddly deprived of her goods, but looking quite well for someone riddled with shot. The CP she killed, the rather British one, is also on Triumph street the next day as well, talking about his bad teeth. In truth, you could say it almost feels like nothing changed. The same people live on, saying nothing of what happened. Because the person who saved you, wasn't your friend - it was a random nobody. The CP who died? Also a nobody.
Nothing is lost, or missed. Despite shots being traded and all around the district hearing of them, nobody will speak of it save for you, and maybe your bomber friend. Because nothing really happened when you pull aside the lampshading of a few lost scripts, and a lost rank. Both of which are not IC consequences, but OOC.
Loopholes and Bad faith
Okay, the more subjective part is now over. Now, we move onto something far simpler to convey.
The objective flaws in certain stipulations provided.
1. Outcome for Non-CP during Sweep
If captured and amputated (with a valid reason for amputation): a PK (as per the normal PK policy)
This is probably the worst example. This rule essentially encourages rebels to ignore FearRP at any and all costs and ensure that they are taken dead, rather than alive. Being NLR'ed is a certainty if you dropped to the ground in the midst of the sweep. However, once captured you are at the mercy of the CPs at hand, both ICly and OOC. I don't really need an example for this as its very easy to understand the problem. You would be better off leaping into a Striders Dark energy canon than into the cuffs of a CP. This is inherently Anti-RP.
Secondly, it opens up many Loopholes for CP's. As all rebels enter bleedout to start with, a CP can easily slap a bandage on them and forcefully save their lives, much to the dismay of the rebel at hand - who would probably be reaching for the nearest weapon to kill themselves rather than the CP's. After failing this though, the CP can drag him out of the slums, 'capture' him and then blow his head off for a clean PK about an hour later.
The counter to this is the concept that doing it in bad faith wont be tolerated. Of course, this is a bad counter. Having to solidify the extent and reach of your rule with an exclusively subjective sub-text is not good for consistency or the rules themselves. What will and wont count as bad faith is never known until it happens.
2. Outcome for CP's (Shadow Sweeps)
always a PK
Outcome for Non-CP's
Any other case: NLR no refund (refunds can be given via an appeal for exceptional circumstances)
This is a simple logical issue. I suspect Shadow sweeps are likely to never occur simply because there is no logic in risking your character being PK'ed for the best case scenario of NLR'ing another. Its simply high risk with low reward, if you want to look at it that way, and as such will likely very rarely actually be utilized.
Size
The final and admittingly more mild complaint regarding the new PK policy is its size and complexity.
My god, is it large now. This new section - which mind you only effects two of the roughly nine factions in play - has nearly doubled the entire policy in length. Even while writing this very document I have to continue to revisit it constantly as there is simply so much to digest in such a limited document. Even size aside, its complexity is overbearing.
Okay, the more subjective part is now over. Now, we move onto something far simpler to convey.
The objective flaws in certain stipulations provided.
1. Outcome for Non-CP during Sweep
If captured and amputated (with a valid reason for amputation): a PK (as per the normal PK policy)
This is probably the worst example. This rule essentially encourages rebels to ignore FearRP at any and all costs and ensure that they are taken dead, rather than alive. Being NLR'ed is a certainty if you dropped to the ground in the midst of the sweep. However, once captured you are at the mercy of the CPs at hand, both ICly and OOC. I don't really need an example for this as its very easy to understand the problem. You would be better off leaping into a Striders Dark energy canon than into the cuffs of a CP. This is inherently Anti-RP.
Secondly, it opens up many Loopholes for CP's. As all rebels enter bleedout to start with, a CP can easily slap a bandage on them and forcefully save their lives, much to the dismay of the rebel at hand - who would probably be reaching for the nearest weapon to kill themselves rather than the CP's. After failing this though, the CP can drag him out of the slums, 'capture' him and then blow his head off for a clean PK about an hour later.
The counter to this is the concept that doing it in bad faith wont be tolerated. Of course, this is a bad counter. Having to solidify the extent and reach of your rule with an exclusively subjective sub-text is not good for consistency or the rules themselves. What will and wont count as bad faith is never known until it happens.
2. Outcome for CP's (Shadow Sweeps)
always a PK
Outcome for Non-CP's
Any other case: NLR no refund (refunds can be given via an appeal for exceptional circumstances)
This is a simple logical issue. I suspect Shadow sweeps are likely to never occur simply because there is no logic in risking your character being PK'ed for the best case scenario of NLR'ing another. Its simply high risk with low reward, if you want to look at it that way, and as such will likely very rarely actually be utilized.
Size
The final and admittingly more mild complaint regarding the new PK policy is its size and complexity.
My god, is it large now. This new section - which mind you only effects two of the roughly nine factions in play - has nearly doubled the entire policy in length. Even while writing this very document I have to continue to revisit it constantly as there is simply so much to digest in such a limited document. Even size aside, its complexity is overbearing.
TLDR:
Narrative:
While it sucks, yes, PK's are a needed part of the server and the story in general. Without them, nothing of note changes. The same people continue to do the same things, endlessly, without any real mortal threat making them think twice. There is no upheavals in leadership, no secondary development for those that survive them. No tangible change in interpersonal narratives. Every single death, one of the most important tools in any story, is just 'some guy'. The people this new ruleset protects the most, are the kind of rebels that walk around in full kit when taking a generic stroll.
Rules:
Overcomplicated and with one too many loopholes to be viewed as a comfortable addition. Too much inclusion of subjective judgement to finalize objective rulings.
Possibly missed some aspects worthy of critique but this has gone on long enough. Discuss below, and don't be dismissive or rude about it. This was made specifically to open a more consistent and cordial discussion about it.
