I like the idea of the contestants of a match grabbing who ever they agree upon to mediate problems in a match.
Personal selection? I'd agree to that, but the negative-belief of bias-reasoning keeps nudging at me.
I like the idea fo having clear rules established with leeway for the individual contestants to add or detract from them in agreement before a match. A window for them to set terms for their specific battle.
I am not, sadly, a lawyer. So, my ability to close-in all loopholes is resolved through trial and error.
I like the idea of there being certain rules that are inviolable that are true and held to across the board. Such as time lines and settling in periods. Rest between matches if desired.
Rest between matches? As in stop and RP that you're stopping to catch your breath? That's kind of weird since they're fighting to take something from you.
I would like to see KG and OPness dealt with as one of these inviolate rules, but if the opponents agree as a to what is permitted or not permitted before hand then that would supersede the rules. Posting such an agreement may be necessary so the loser doesn't try to weasel out.
What do you mean by KG and OPness be dealt with?
List what you can and can't do? 'Cause that's already set under special rules.
But I fail to see how any authority will be imposed upon anyone for anything.
There is a fine line between what is acceptable in creativity and what is not. And Who gets to decide what is legit and what is not. Upon those points I think no agreement will ever be reached.
You know, you can't please everyone. That said, the same can be applied with things such as the states. "Who are the states to dictate abortions or not? Our bodies, our choices."
We need to set what the majority of people want, 'cause that's the closest thing we can find to everyone.
@Kamui:
Why is another similar topic to Kayenta's own made here in Game Development?
Also before anyone says "Oh the topic is dead and blah blah."
It isn't dead until the user decides to lock it, maybe if you decided to put some more input into the original topic rather then make an entire new one then maybe we'll get somewhere.
I also recall some questions were never answered in the original topic which I will post here and hopefully it will not be ignored again.
But how will the next cycle of rebirth enact?
I'm pretty sure if the beast itself dies in general it gets reborn after a number of years passed.
I made this topic because no one bothered going back to the last one, yet problems persisted. I also took the moment to bring up other questions that relate to it.
And as far as "dead" = "lock", that's just silly. Lock = locked. Dead = well, seeing since you're having issue with it, when a topic is no longer being used. When no further posts are being made, etc. Can't revive a locked topic, after all. The term goes hand-in-hand.
I'm not going to go further into your response except just to answer your question that Eric, partially, answered.
What I"m understanding is that apparently in SL, if you kill the host as a challenger, then you lose, and the host dies and the bijuu is returned to the village of the deceased host.
I need to put that in the rules more clearly. There is already a way to win that's laid out. As for killing the bijuu, that falls with tampering the bijuu, but I guess that can be overwritten with the knowledge of the bijuu coming back. The problem I have with killing bijuu, is that time-frames don't really apply correctly here.
'Cause, we've only been up for ~6 years, so, let's say a bijuu would be, barely, brought back.
*Also taught Kayenta said something about blessing us with silence*
Be nice.
I thought about that exact samething, should items like those be challengable. Jolt brought this to my attention about a month ago, as he challenged Mioku for the Nuibari blade. His challenge was denied and was told that he could not be challenged for such, which I think was a pretty lame thing to do as, once again, this invokes great roleplay.
I asked Mioku as well for a fight; cept he accepted it yet never fought me after I waited the weeks and just ignored me.
We already said, or at least I kept saying, the council should be just well known and, popularly-declared, unbiased people.
Edit: I messed up on the quotes.