Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Eric]

Eric trust me luka pulls so much nonsensical bullshit that the maximum amount of time anyone should be forced to deal with him is 15 minutes or less

Sounds like something a judge could easily take care of. Especially in the interests of preventing arguing or a stalemate.

[Mortiferous]

I do agree, though. If the other party dies, then the host continues to hold his beast. I mean, if it's legit in character, I think both parties die? And the beast should be returned to the village, as both parties are dead. But in OOC purposes, people may go all-out and pull out as many cards as they need to prove they are the one who holds the beast, so sometimes things happen. And since it isn't in character, by technical means, the challenger loses by default since he/she could not survive. Survival is key!

[Eric]

I do agree, though. If the other party dies, then the host continues to hold his beast. I mean, if it's legit in character, I think both parties die? And the beast should be returned to the village, as both parties are dead. But in OOC purposes, people may go all-out and pull out as many cards as they need to prove they are the one who holds the beast, so sometimes things happen. And since it isn't in character, by technical means, the challenger loses by default since he/she could not survive. Survival is key!

But, if the champion didn't survive either, I still find it kind of odd to reward the champion for kamikaze attacks but default punish the challenger for it.

[Camel]

I do agree, though. If the other party dies, then the host continues to hold his beast. I mean, if it's legit in character, I think both parties die? And the beast should be returned to the village, as both parties are dead. But in OOC purposes, people may go all-out and pull out as many cards as they need to prove they are the one who holds the beast, so sometimes things happen. And since it isn't in character, by technical means, the challenger loses by default since he/she could not survive. Survival is key!

But, if the champion didn't survive either, I still find it kind of odd to reward the champion for kamikaze attacks but default punish the challenger for it.

How about this concept?  I'm going to break it into two ways and will pair them up with a corresponding number with it.

[1]Kamikaze attacks done in an *IC* fashion and the failure to procure the 'win' in this sort of situation will automatically lead to a win and reward of the specific bijū in the challenger's favor. (You literally have to outmaneuver and avoid your opponent while he does his 'kamikaze' attacks)
[2]However if that host manages to procure a win without any hassle, then the challenger also loses and the battle results in a tie. (Four week cool-down period for the opponent making the challenges and that village head/leader has a fortnight to assemble a *new* host; this not including the fortnight to commune with the beast)

[1]If these actions are done in an *OOC* fashion then in the result of a *tie* the challenger may rematch the opponent at any given time after the initial challenge and will not have to go through any cool-down periods. (The host also doesn't go through any cool-down periods for the duration of this.) [2]If that host manages to secure a win before his opponent then by going by the idea that this was done in an *OOC* fashion then by default that challenger loses. (The same concept of exemption of cool-down periods can still be applied here)

The whole key method of all of this is to keep the bijū in circulation and *active* within our community. This is the way I thought would keep shenanigans to a minimal. Survival is a key to these bijū challenges!

[Eric]

How about this concept?  I'm going to break it into two ways and will pair them up with a corresponding number with it.

[1]Kamikaze attacks done in an *IC* fashion and the failure to procure the 'win' in this sort of situation will automatically lead to a win and reward of the specific bijū in the challenger's favor. (You literally have to outmaneuver and avoid your opponent while he does his 'kamikaze' attacks)
[2]However if that host manages to procure a win without any hassle, then the challenger also loses and the battle results in a tie. (Four week cool-down period for the opponent making the challenges and that village head/leader has a fortnight to assemble a *new* host; this not including the fortnight to commune with the beast)

[1]If these actions are done in an *OOC* fashion then in the result of a *tie* the challenger may rematch the opponent at any given time after the initial challenge and will not have to go through any cool-down periods. (The host also doesn't go through any cool-down periods for the duration of this.) [2]If that host manages to secure a win before his opponent then by going by the idea that this was done in an *OOC* fashion then by default that challenger loses. (The same concept of exemption of cool-down periods can still be applied here)

The whole key method of all of this is to keep the bijū in circulation and *active* within our community. This is the way I thought would keep shenanigans to a minimal. Survival is a key to these bijū challenges!

Then the challenger is indirectly rewarded for kamikaze IC, especially if he/she can severely damage a village in the process and kill off half a dozen players. Kamikaze should not be rewarded at all for an IC match (whether challenger or champion). If both players die then the beast can be thrown to the Council for placement (either with the survivors in the hunt, if there were multiple participants)

In an OOC match winner takes all. Only if both die should a tie be considered. And in that strain of thought, I'm a bit hesitant to the idea that the challenger can re-challenge at any time without there being a cooldown period.