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

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

1

Council / Re: Memories

« on: September 16, 2017, 02:41:43 AM »

I'm going to agree that having the Tailed Beast hand out information beyond a name and maybe a physical description would cause complications, and add my vote that we limit it to that. I don't agree with the idea that it's metagaming (because it is a reasonable way to gather information; you're not drawing from a source that's outside of the scope of the character you're learning about, nor of the game itself), but arguing what a Tailed Beast does or doesn't know about a prior host sounds like something that would need to end in arbitration, and I really don't think anyone wants to deal with that sort of a situation.

I'll use Ethaniel as an example (more so of the type of issues that could arise, since he was never a host). Which of his techniques could the Beast have learned: the ones he had used in combat, or all of the ones in his repertoire? Would it include knowledge that he himself was no longer privy to, due to his lost memories? Could the Beast pass on his energy signature, so that a new host would be able to find Ivory through it, since Ethaniel doesn't exist anymore (I'll admit this isn't one that would come up outside of this specific example, but it's a question worth asking)? And these are only a few of the things that could come up in a debate about the knowledge a Tailed Beast carries of its previous host, if we were to allow it to work that way.

2

Council / Re: Established Consequence

« on: August 29, 2017, 08:19:09 PM »

... In the case of retro-posting, I would propose that so long as your opponent isn't rushing (which is a whole different can of worms, and a debate for another time), you should be reacting to actions as they come, point blank. For example, if your opponent uses a technique, such as a cloning jutsu, and can reasonably follow it up with another action before your character could realistically react to the first, I submit that you only be allowed to react to the second action. However, if a judge rules that an action is not viable, at any point, I also submit that the following actions become null, and the fight continue from the last legal action. In the event that this would be a large setback (IE erasing a long string of rounds and possibly compromising the entire match), I submit that the ruling be brought before the Council for judgment. That being said, if you feel an action should be ruled legal or illegal by a judge, you should bring it up as soon as possible, and not wait until such a point that it requires a rollback...

As for consequences to breaking these rules, I second that there be a penalty system of some kind implemented, with a three-strike basis. I submit the first strike be a warning, the second strike being a forfeiture of the bout or match, and the final strike being a heavier penalty, such as stripping of a Beast, or banning from challenges for a set period of time, to be decided upon by the Council...

While I do like the suggestions for limitations on, well, the infinite response loop, I have to object to the 3 strikes initiative based on its premise. If during a zone fight with a judge present one of the players retros or metas and the judge rules it as such and mandates a repost, then what is the problem here? Yes, the number of reposts can get pretty long, which is why some people limit the number of reposts that can be had. But if in the repost the same mistake is made again, then again, in alot of preferences, that would be grounds for an automatic auto-hit or even removal from the biju match.

What the final judge rules, rules. I do not see the reason for a formal "3 strike" system in an OOC fight over general zoning rules. There is a judge for the match who can rule autohit as a result of not responding properly as long as there is no agreed upon term stating that that is not something a judge can do. At best the player can get a new judge and then that is it for an OOC fight; only in an IC Hunt can a judge's decision be appealed to the Biju Council.

As far as enforcement goes, if the Council starts enforcing and punishing players for breaking zoning rules in OOC biju matches (heck even IC Hunt biju matches) then we kind of start becoming judges. I mean, that is the whole point of having a judge for a match that does not involve the real storylines of either character. To enforce zoning rules or, as some have put it, guidelines, which is against the biju rules for the Council to do.

With regards specifically to my suggestion of a three-strike rule: I was not referring to it happening repeatedly within a single match, but rather across multiple matches. Say User A is fighting User B, and is ruled to have metagamed during their match, and are warned against such. Then User A goes on to fight User C, and metagames again. And then a third time against User D. There is a point where it ceases to become accidental, and if there's nothing officially done about the problem, it can make people feel like nobody cares. Simply saying something is against the rules doesn't mean much unless there are clearly outlined consequences. We don't become judges by punishing people for breaking the rules, because we don't decide whether or not the rules have been broken. My proposal is only that when a judge decides that a rule has been broken, and when the player has a history of breaking the same rule multiple times, the Council mete out the appropriate punishment. Quite simply, I propose that we let the judges be judges, and that the Council be no more than executors.

3

Council / Re: Established Consequence

« on: August 27, 2017, 09:46:50 PM »

Please note that this response is not in regards to any specific situation, and any suggestions are meant to be taken in general, and are not considered reprimands, directly or indirectly, to any party.

I can get behind having set consequences for rule-breaking, especially with rules that are there to keep things smooth and enjoyable. The whole reason we have judges to oversee things like this is to help avoid and correct annoying occurrences that disrupt gameplay and/or just make things less than fun for all parties. In the case of retro-posting, I would propose that so long as your opponent isn't rushing (which is a whole different can of worms, and a debate for another time), you should be reacting to actions as they come, point blank. For example, if your opponent uses a technique, such as a cloning jutsu, and can reasonably follow it up with another action before your character could realistically react to the first, I submit that you only be allowed to react to the second action. However, if a judge rules that an action is not viable, at any point, I also submit that the following actions become null, and the fight continue from the last legal action. In the event that this would be a large setback (IE erasing a long string of rounds and possibly compromising the entire match), I submit that the ruling be brought before the Council for judgment. That being said, if you feel an action should be ruled legal or illegal by a judge, you should bring it up as soon as possible, and not wait until such a point that it requires a rollback.

As for metagaming: if a judge rules that a character could not take an action, due to that character not having the required knowledge to make an action, I submit that the action be considered illegal, and the steps outlined above be taken. In the examples given, I would say this: if you can make a solid argument as to why your character would have this knowledge (specifically regarding the Rinnegan/Byakugan), such as the character having gained intimate knowledge of the technique in the past (or similar reasoning, determined by the exact situation), it is up to the judge to declare the action as legal or illegal. However, if it involves knowledge of game mechanics (specifically regarding action count), unless your character could be argued to have such knowledge due to metacognition (see Wilson, Wade; Diane Pie, Pinkamena), I submit that any resulting action be considered illegal by default.

As for consequences to breaking these rules, I second that there be a penalty system of some kind implemented, with a three-strike basis. I submit the first strike be a warning, the second strike being a forfeiture of the bout or match, and the final strike being a heavier penalty, such as stripping of a Beast, or banning from challenges for a set period of time, to be decided upon by the Council.

This is my stance as a member of the Council, and I invite everyone to comment upon it as they see fit.

4

Council / Re: Where does the Sub fit in the 2:5 ratio?

« on: August 18, 2017, 08:56:11 AM »

Honestly, would a 3:4 ratio make that much more of a difference than a 2:5? Holders still wouldn't have majority, or even 50%.

I'll admit though, I don't fully understand the 2:5 rule to begin with.

That's what I'm thinking as well. As long as the limit remains below a majority, I don't see a problem.

5

Council / Re: Council Election Volunteers, 3rd Cohort

« on: August 04, 2017, 06:34:36 AM »

I'd like to start being active again, and therefor volunteer as tribute.

6

Spam / Re: What kind of toppings do you put on your hot dogs?

« on: June 03, 2016, 08:07:12 AM »

Cheese, when I eat them, which isn't often. Last time I had a hotdog was after a major surgery. I was absolutely blasted, so I put grape jelly on it.

7

Spam / Re: Cookin up Good Things!

« on: June 03, 2016, 07:30:05 AM »

Taiyaki and Dango with strawberry daifuku and a cup of ramune! Made from a Kracie Happy Kitchen set.

8

Game Related Discussions / Re: The integration of Ninja Central into RPing

« on: January 07, 2011, 03:45:12 AM »

That wasn't exactly the point in case here. What is, is the leadership of Ninja Central as an RP village (think Sunagaure) falling to me by default. Basicaly if anyone (namely me and Itachilover) will be able to officialy declare themself leader of Ninja Central (i.e as KayentaMoenkopi was earlier) for RPing purposes. Sorry if that wasn't entirely clear.

9

Game Related Discussions / The integration of Ninja Central into RPing

« on: January 07, 2011, 03:06:13 AM »

In an attempt to hep start up RPing in the game once more, I have decided to make Ninja Central into an Rping area, rather like a village. It seems I may have overstepped myself here, so, at the behest of Jestar, I would like to ask the oppinions of Neji and the moderators on this.