V3 PK Policy

[Genny]

I am opening this thread to collect feedback for the PK policy that will be used in V3. The aim is pretty simple, just basically: identify what works, what does not, and what players want to see improved as well The goal is clarity and fairness, not arguments about past cases okay!!!!


Please use this thread to share:

• What parts of the current PK system you think should stay.
• What parts create confusion or frustration.
• What you want executions, S2K kills, and high-stakes scenes to look like in V3.
• What staff should prioritise when handling PK requests and appeals.
• Any examples of good practice that you want to see carried forward.

BUT GROUND RULES, OKAY!?
Keep it clean! (you can still swear dw)
No personal attacks
No arguing about individuals or old incidents.

All the feedback will be read! After a while, I will see if I can make a summary draft so the community can see what direction people support as well as to show our overlords (aka Rad and Robert)


If you want to add something but prefer not to post it publicly, you can DM it instead

 

[Fregiscard]

I just believe PK should apply to YOU only !!

 

[FungletheBungle]

 

[Kappatalist]

PKs for all, except NPC deaths.

This is the way

 

[Ansty]

All deaths pk, prop glitches in CWU workshifts included and will be treated as an Ic workplace incident.

 

[chrysalis]

I think suicide PK/character ban should not be set in stone.

I killed a character of mine via kidney failure as I was going through a real life mental crisis and thought I would quit playing the server. I changed my mind soon afterwards and my PK/char ban appeal was denied purely because of the "suicide = PK" rule even though I had a reasonable roleplay development around the PK and no other players were affected. Depending on the circumstances NLR should be acceptable.

 

[toby]

All deaths pk, prop glitches in CWU workshifts included and will be treated as an Ic workplace incident.

"I can't believe that table flew mach 3 at johnny...what a horrible workplace accident!"

 

[Eviction Notice]

All deaths PK, obviously bugs/garrys mod fuckery exempt. HARDCORE server, HARDCORE ruleset. HARDCORE setting.

 

[Lost Coast Chanties]

Introduce a good Combat System (TBC 2) and go from there. Anything that isn't fundamental S2K and S2RP cuts down on the rule bloat considerably.

 

[Marco]

All deaths PK, obviously bugs/garrys mod fuckery exempt. HARDCORE server, HARDCORE ruleset. HARDCORE setting.

I'd be for this if there was some kind of quality control within the server.

 

[Rabid]

One of the PK's that sticks with me from 2020 before Willard removed its most hardcore PK rules was the time a well geared rebel played by a really sweet member of the community loaded into the server after a server crash and, in trying to get down to the sewers to continue their RP, got grabbed by a barnacle that had been respawned due to the server reset and died by falling to their death after they shot it.

The appeal got denied because, at that point, NPC deaths were always a PK for the sake of DANGER.

Its stuck with me because it was not only utterly pointless but reinforced the idea that (in general) everyone really likes the idea of hardcore rules and deaths until they are the ones who get hurt by them. The more hardcore a server is the less likely anyone is going to actually do anything and risk losing their character.

 

[FungletheBungle]

One of the PK's that sticks with me from 2020 before Willard removed its most hardcore PK rules was the time a well geared rebel played by a really sweet member of the community loaded into the server after a server crash and, in trying to get down to the sewers to continue their RP, got grabbed by a barnacle that had been respawned due to the server reset and died by falling to their death after they shot it.

The appeal got denied because, at that point, NPC deaths were always a PK for the sake of DANGER.

Its stuck with me because it was not only utterly pointless but reinforced the idea that (in general) everyone really likes the idea of hardcore rules and deaths until they are the ones who get hurt by them. The more hardcore a server is the less likely anyone is going to actually do anything and risk losing their character.

1. It was not pointless, it highlights the very real danger of the world of HL

2. We need to make it so losing you character does not set you back to square 1

 

[Atom]

1. It was not pointless, it highlights the very real danger of the world of HL

2. We need to make it so losing you character does not set you back to square 1

 

[Kappatalist]

The appeal got denied because, at that point, NPC deaths were always a PK for the sake of DANGER.

1. It was not pointless, it highlights the very real danger of the world of HL

NPC deaths being a PK is just a dumb idea, I wouldn't mind it being at staff discretion if somebody is just throwing themselves into packs of zombies constantly but given how outright spiteful certain members can be at times it's just a bad idea

Also this was at a time of 1 hit alpha headcrabs being spawned in the slums so that was fun

 

[Rabid]

1. It was not pointless, it highlights the very real danger of the world of HL

The thing is though nobody is going to think "man, I lost my character in a way that fits the setting and consider it a good end", they're going to think "I can't believe I wasted five months building a character only to lose them to a janky overpowered shitty NPC."

Which was ironically pretty much the consensus in the appeal I referenced and, even though it got denied, was one of the catalysts that got NPC's causing PK's to be removed.

but given how outright spiteful certain members can be at times it's just a bad idea

This is honestly the other big problem with a hardcore ruleset. Is there enough trust in the community that people won't abuse it? I can't honestly say there is. There wasn't even in 2020 and its been a long five years.

 

[Eviction Notice]

The more hardcore a server is the less likely anyone is going to actually do anything and risk losing their character.

I'm going to counter this: if the gameplay matches, the more death there is, the more people are encouraged to experiment because death is just a part of the loop.

 

[Rabid]

I'm going to counter this: if the gameplay matches, the more death there is, the more people are encouraged to experiment because death is just a part of the loop.

This is true! You make a good poin, honestly. But I also think there are two major problems:

• If I have a character concept I really want to explore, I'm going to be far more likely to do whatever I need to do to keep my character alive (I think most people who like their characters do this in hardcore situations).
• The only way to counter this would be to literally make sure death isn't a concern (via letting gear be handed out at character creation or however else) but that utterly fucks the gameplay loop and makes everything feel static.

Its a tough spot.

 

[Janek]

Parts of the current PK system I believe should stay:

1. Good Faith Principle.
2. Narrative Death and Core Requirements for Roleplay PKs.
3. Bleedout Protection and MedRP Emphasis.
4. Distinctions in Combat PK Criteria (Aggressor vs Defender).
5. Evidence and Suspicion Requirements for Combine Executions/Interrogations.
6. PK by Default for High-Value/Important Characters

What I believe executions, S2K kills, and high-stakes scenarios should look like in V3:

• Executions

1. Narrative-Driven and Evidence-Based: No execution without a clear storyline buildup (weeks/months of RP) and credible evidence (e.g. logs, witnesses, captured items, etc.) Suspicion alone shouldn't be enough unless it's deemed crucial and tied to groups/cells, with the accused getting a chance to defend/manipulate their way out.
2. Roleplay Quality Mandate: Detailed /me descriptions should be mandatory. No lazy keybinds or spamming. Include sensory details, dialogue, etc.
3. Player Agency and Consent: Victims must have voluntary entry into the risk (e.g. knowingly escalating rebellion.)
4. Exceptions for High-Value Targes: For PK by Default roles (e.g. Overseers, high-level CA), executions could happen faster, but still require guards/downed states for MedRP opportunities.

• S2K Engagements

1. Aggressor vs Defender Dynamics: Aggressors (e.g. rebels initiating a shotcop) should always be PK-eligible if they lose, but defenders get NLR unless they meet RP/PK default criteria. No PKs in collateral sweeps to protect unaffiliated players.
2. Bleedout Grace Period: 5-minute window for MedRP or capture, no reflex kills. Isolation/removal from aid before finishing someone off.
3. No Powergaming: Ban rushed grabs, keybind spam, or looting mid-firefight. All actions should be realistic and respondable.
4. Exceptions: CP/OTA in reactionary sweeps get PK immunity in safe zones, but full PKs apply in outlands.

• High-Stakes Scenarios (e.g. interrogations, hostages, or narrative escalation).

1. Buildup and Mutual Escalation: Weeks of RP required, no PK's from minor beefs (e.g. insults/theft). Must involve decisive choices (e.g. betrayal) that impacts broader narratives.
2. Targeting Validity: Only for specific, personal reasons (e.g. revenge for equal/worse actions). No faction blanket kills, suspicion PKs need narrative support.
3. Impact on Factions: Post-scene, allow char auth requests for role continuity to avoid OOC disruptions.

Priorities for Staff Handling PK Requests and Appeals

• Good Faith and Fair Play (Highest Priority)

1. Confirm the PK aligns with honest intent, respect, and serves the overall story, not as an end goal in itself.
2. Void any PK involving OOC interference, disrespect, revenge motives, weak justifications, or actions undermining fair play (e.g. powergaming, minge grabbing, rushed/lazy /me's, or keybind spamming).
3. Ensure no OOC personal conflicts or biases influenced the situation, as well as treat all players equally.

• Narrative Integrity and Story Impact

1. Assess if the PK provides a meaningful, deliberate conclusion to the character's arc, pushes broader narratives or impacts other players' RP.
2. Ensure it's not random or forced. The death should logically result from the character's deliberate, acknowledged choices (e.g. betrayal, refusal to surrender) or failures to act.
3. Prioritize narrative death over isolated encounters. The PK should matter specifically to that character (e.g. due to their role, actions, or relationships) and should not be interchangeable with a random one.
4. In appeals, evaluate if the outcome enhances RP for others or merely removes a character inconveniently.

• Evidence and Documentation

1. Require concrete proof for accusations (e.g. logs, captured evidence) in executions or suspicions to avoid unsubstantiated claims.
2. For bleedout scenarios, ensure the 5-minute grace was respected, with proper MedRP and deliberate, detailed /me actions for any execution.

 

[RedHotGinger]

Very basically going to put this but

One issue I think we have is there is no appropriate middle-ground between NLR and PK.

NLR is essentially a soft void. Provides no real RP, except for chance observers who will hardly care because it does not shift any meaningful stakes. PK is extremely punishing, and serves as a finale for a character, no matter what the circumstance.

Hence, I think V3 could benefit from the introduction of such a middle-ground

For now, I'll simply call it a Critical Wound
The basic idea of this concept is that it's employed in order to make death consequential, without making said consequences overwhelming, or inherently final. Characters that suffer a critical wound would be subject to the following:

• Long-term debuff (2 weeks to a month at most. Possibly variable via medrp intervention?) to either a specific attribute, or skill. Or even health cap, or stamina reduction. Ideally, in a correlation with the 'injury' sustained.
• PK by default status enabled for the debuffs duration, so long as it meets basic RP/narrative requirements.

While the details would need to be hashed out as to what would precisely trigger this, I feel some general rules of thumb:

• Getting caught inside a sweep you were neither a direct, nor indirect cause of
• Dying in any minor or non-narrative S2K venture
• Environmental or NPC based deaths (In appropriately dangerous areas where such a fate could be expected)
• Triggered by certain RP circumstances in which you are severely wounded.

This, in theory, enables a enhancement of danger, without making it meaningless (NLR) or absolutely crippling (PK) right off the bat. A rebel, officer or any other character is now afforded at least one opportunity to make a mistake, or do something adventurous without risking a character loss, right out of the bat. Assuming they don't qualify for a PK right off the bat, which should still be a possibility just not the only one.

The consequence hefty enough to deter stupidity, but not so extreme as to remove enjoyment, or future agency (Via death)

Currently, the PK policy is buried in thirty or one-thousand variables that desperately teeter between trying to measure the lengths between NLR's and PK's. This would add a middle-ground that might enable a significant reduction is rule-bloat by simply providing a more baseline, and tolerable, RP inclusive consequence to failure.


This is a bit of a basic overview, and I certainly haven't considered every angle, but it was an idea that came into my head, and I figured I'd toss it down.