Shinobi Legends Forum
Roleplay => All That Is Bijuu => Rules/Foundation => Topic started by: KayentaMoenkopi on December 04, 2015, 01:01:04 AM
-
Just stole this from the workshop thread as a starting place.
-->Make a Forum Account
- Post a thread with challenge preferences, IC or OOC, and include date when 14 day grace period is over, within first post.
- Update current activity log once every 14 days in this thread within second post.
- Keep a challenger list in this thread within third post. This includes IC hunters as well.
- Your preference rules do not exclude you from the basic rules.
- Matches can be held on the forum, in a separate thread, but it is not required, Time outs no longer occur on SL nor do posts disappear until months after the inactivity rules have been exceeded.
- Post any planned absences to this thread and match thread if applicable.
-->Activity
- You must make public posts once every 14 days in accessible areas. No dwellings, Hoshigakure, or upper zones will count.
- You must post in a current match once every 7 days.
- Failure to keep up activity will end in removal of beast.
- Notification of absence must be made in your forum preference thread and forum match thread if applicable. This includes in or out of match absences. Absences over 14 days will result in stripping. You may try again when life permits activity.
- You will not be stripped if public rp inactivity prevents you from taking your turn in the time frame of an IC match. However, after 14 days of waiting, the inactive player should be skipped or Character Controlled in a reasonable, passive manner in order to progress the RP. Such inactive players cannot be injured nor cause injury to another during a pass or CC turn.
-->You Must Accept All Challenges
- Defeated challengers cannot challenge the same host for the same bijuu for 3 months.
- violating this rule with alts will get you banned from ALL bijuu challenges for 6 months.
- The grace period of 14 days is sacred. No challenges will be accepted until it has elapsed.
- You must notify next challenger when it is their turn through pm. Make a reply to your preference thread that you have notified the next challenger.
- If challenger does not begin setting up the match with the host within 7 days of notification he is skipped and bumped to the bottom of the challenge list. Make edits to challenger list to reflect this bump.
- You may not challenge yourself on an alt. Violation of this will get you stripped and banned from all bijuu challenges for 6 months.
-->Challenging a Host
- You must post to the host's preference thread to make a valid challenge.
- You must check forum threads to stay informed.
- You must set up match particulars with host within 7 days of notification or you will be bumped to the bottom of his/her challenge list.
- You cannot challenge any host until after their 14 day grace period is over.
- You are bound by the activity rules too. Notify host of inactivity in pm and his preference thread or forum match if applicable. After 14 days in a notified inactivity you will bow out gracefully and may challenge this host for this bijuu again after 3 months.
- You must post to match every 7 days. After 7 days from a non-notified inactivity, you will bow out gracefully and may challenge this host for this bijuu again after 3 months.
- You may have more than one OOC match going at the same time.
- You can only do one IC match with no OOC matches at the same time.
- After Inactivity or defeat you may challenge a different host, or the same host for a different bijuu right away.
- OOC matches are 1v1. Preferences can alter this upon agreement of all parties involved.
- IC match participants will be arranged at time of encounter. Additions and extractions of participants are up to those involved. Be reasonable. Horde matches take too long. Please avoid this scenario.
-->Proficiency With Beast. [this needs work and is an RP issue but i copied bocc's list where I agree]
- 30 days per tail. You must post rp to this effect during that time.
- Beast taming ability KGs should be RP only. Resets do not decrease number of days to proficiency for each tail unless any reset counts. This is an OOC issue, has nothing to do with skill, and I do not see why it matters at all. But...this is the part that needs discussion. Try not to mix IC and OOC here. Forest fighting is an OOC thing, and accounts can be bought and people borrow resets so it really is not a measure of having earned anything and is just hand waving. My opinions, such as they are, differ from others. Here is where IC wins the day. RP to earn proficiency for the win. KG that are RP'd, not reset, should be what matters since we are talking RP proficiency.
- rehosting a formerly held bijuu decreasing proficiency but only if it was previously mastered. Otherwise the struggle of will starts all over again against a beast who was never completely befriended. Subduing does not infer mastery. How many days should this count for? It needs work.
- The beast must be completely mastered before the Jinchuriki can access Tailed Beast Mode. The Bijuu Bomb can only be used while in Tailed Beast Mode. The Bijuu’s passive ability can be accessed immediately upon being sealed with the beast, but the power will be weaker than someone who has mastered the beast.
- If a Jinchuriki attempts to access more tails than they have mastered they will lose control of the beast. If they were not already in a V2 cloak they will immediately ascend to such at the level of tails they attempted to access. They must then rp is much the same way as Naruto having lost control of Kurama. The host is unconscious and subject to the whims of a furious bijuu. They will attack perpetually until anything that could be perceived as an opponent is killed, this includes their own summons, such as animals or Edo Tensei zombies. The host will gain a tail each turn starting after the turn they first lost control. After reaching the maximum number of tails in the V2 state the host will ascend to the full bijuu form on the next turn. If this happens the host is killed and the challenger need only subdue the rampaging bijuu to win the match.
--> Bijuu Summons and Multiple Beasts
- Summons are permitted, but the bijuu is hostile and must be contained as such.
- You can only host one beast at a time.
- You cannot use an extra bijuu in a match that has its own challenger list, but must do those matches in a timely fashion too.
- Due to each beast having its own list of challengers, you can only be challenged for one bijuu at a time by that same person in the same match, unless that same challenger happens to be on both lists and their turn happens to arrive at the same time for both beasts. You do not have to make that match be for both but may break them into two separate OOC fights.
- If you are using a bijuu with no challenge list in a match to defend another and then get challenged for that extra bijuu, after the one week to make arrangements has expired, you must exit that bijuu from the prior match so that its challenger may begin his/her match with you.
- OOC - if you host a beast and use another as a summons during the match and lose while both are actively in the battle, you lose them both. ONLY IF THE EXTRA BEAST HAS NO CHALLENGER WAITING. You only lose what you have on you at the time of the defeat, not all the bijuu you may have as summons and did not use or have dismissed before you're defeated. The number of participants must be set prior to beginning. This includes the number of bijuu you will be summoning. If you have any extra beasts active, or you have their contracts/sealing mechanisms upon you, you should be prepared for extra loss. Again, this situation cannot occur for extra beasts that have their own list of challengers waiting for a match.
- IC - the winner cleans up big time. He gets your sealed beast, if you have one, he gets your active summons. He gets any contract or sealing mechanisms you have on you at the time of the defeat. Those beasts that are not on the field of battle go to the village/clan head or will spawn being free from constraints in an event up for grabs decided by the community in 2 weeks time.
- Is it possible to summons and control more than one beast at a time in the same battle? I do not think so.
-->Judging a Match
- both parties choose a judge and abide by their decision.
- create a forum thread to discuss a judge's decision you cannot live only as a last resort and then abide by the community opinions.
- Compromises must be made in the event of a deadlock. Failure to come to terms after ever option has been exhausted will result in stripping, challenger denied, and the bijuu turned over to a 3 month cool down during which time the community will decide what to do. Both challenger and host will be denied access due to gross incompetence.
--> Stripping a Host
- Breaking one of the above rules constitutes stripping.
- The bijuu goes to village or clan leader.
- If no such person exists, the bijuu is put into the hands of the community to decide.
- 14 weeks after stripping a new host must be chosen.
- 7 days after host is chosen an RP to seal must be completed. OOC sealing must be completed within 2 days of being chosen.
-->IC matches
- IC hosts must keep a bio tag to indicate current location, notoriety status, and minor clues for hunters to follow on SL bio and in preference thread on forum.
- Hunters must rp learning who the host is, locating the host, and setting up their encounter to force the challenge match.
- The number of participants is to be determined by those involved. Keep it simple to avoid unending combat.
- The defeated host dies after extraction unless extraordinary measures are met.
- The successful hunter must contain bijuu immediately.
- Killing a host before extraction results in respawning of beast in 2 weeks at that very spot.
- No dibs on respawned bijuu.
- Do not provoke a horde response from the host's village by announcing your challenge and intent to kill them at the gate then complain about the entire village joining the fight.
-->Uber No way you are getting in our village defenses
- This issue needs dealt with.
-->Personal Preference/Concerns
- I really feel that one beast per character is plenty, I do not care for bijuu summoning either.
- I want to see some stipulations made for IC hunts to be possible without the host having to be stakes out on the plains for anyone to just come at because of claims that hunts are 'too hard'.
- As in the case of village defenses being way too ridiculous, so to are the abilities of challengers in how they obtain their information concerning a host and some other OP powers that baffle imagination. I don't know if something can be done about that, but if so, what?
- I have concerns about the rule being balanced to favor neither the host nor the challenger.
- I like the descriptions Eric provided for the beasts on his SLS bijuu rule constitution. Maybe we could do that too.
- I think a clause that by becoming a host you agree to the rule and will be bound by the ruling of the council should be included.
-
The Rules
Tailed Beast Mastery and Control
A tail's worth of control, for those hosting these beasts, is either 2 weeks of RL time or through RP documented on the forum. Controlling the beasts via genjutsu or other methods constantly takes a 20% total chakra pool drain on the user. This does no change with chakra usage in battle, so plan accordingly.
Champions
Champions are the current "holders" of the tailed beasts. They are either hosts or controlling masters of the beasts. They may also be those aiding a host or master in defending the beast in an official fight. There are five basic criteria for being a Champion:
1) Must be active. One public post on the forum at least once every two weeks. Notices in advance of absences may permit a week extension.
2) Have an account on Shinobilegends and on the Shinobilegends Official Forum.
3) Not be currently muted nor banned.
4) Abide by the Tailed Beast Rules.
5) Keep a public record on the forum of all challenges.
Challengers
These are want to be Champions who are actively challenging for a tailed beast, or are supporting another individual in doing so.
1) Must be active. One public post on the forum at least once every two weeks. Notices in advance of absences may permit a week extension.
2) Have an account on Shinobilegends and on the Shinobilegends Official Forum.
3) Not be currently muted nor banned.
4) Abide by the Tailed Beast Rules.
5) Must have an open challenge in order to be considered a Challenger.
Mediators
The job of the mediators is to mediate between the Challengers and Champion(s). They are only temporary positions, and are picked by the Challenger and the Champion. A mediator cannot be a party of interest (in other words, have no character involved in the match being ruled on) in the match. There are only two criteria for being a mediator:
1) Must be active enough to make a ruling without dragging on the match. That's a 15 day (2 weeks and a day) activity limit.
2) Have an account the Shinobilegends Official Forum.
Challenging a Champion
To challenge a Champion, an individual must submit a formal challenge tot he Champion. A post on the Shinobilegends Forum will be sufficient. Any and all attackers who are allied with said individual will be considered Challengers, and thus must fit the criteria for Challengers in order to aide in the fight. This can be done just prior to the beginning of the fight or prior to any interaction at all, but Challengers should bear in mind that it is not an official biju match unless the challenge is issued and accepted.
Accepting a Challenge
A Champion may only refuse a biju challenge if:
1) The issuer is not eligible or if
2) Any of the participants on the attacking side are not eligible Challengers.
3) They are within their 2 week grace period, granted upon becoming a champion for the 1st time.
Otherwise he/she is required to accept the challenge. In the reply to the challenge post, the Champion should include any foreseeable allies that may come to their add. These allies must be eligible to be Champions on the occassion the original Champion falls but he/she/they are victorious. A Champion canno
Biju Fight Zoning
The following are strictly forbidden during any biju related events:
1) Harassment
2) Bad-mouthing outside of character interactions and exchanges
3) God-modding without the consent of either the Champion (if modder is Challenger) nor of the Challenger (if modder is Champion). If god-mode is suspected the match should be stopped and a separate thread created for either discussion or a brief presentation of points so that the mediator can determine the appropriate course of action. If a turn passes after the suspected god-mode, then that is considered acceptance of the act.
Guidelines for the conduct of the battle are as follows:
1) All disputes are to be settled by a Mediator. Discussion should only take 2 weeks and must take place outside of the fight thread itself. If the Mediator fails to resolve the dispute or make a decision within 15 days, then a Council Member may step in and make a decision.
2) All hunts/fights must be posted/documented on the forum. The mediator may negotiate the post-start entry of new Challengers or Champions, but they may only enter at the end of a turn cycle. Additionally, no first-turn attacks, counter-attacks, nor defends.
3) The fight is concluded when either all Challengers or all Champions are defeated. The mediator declares a winner in cases where it is unclear or if the fight is ended prematurely due to disagreements. A Council Member may also fill that role.
4) In cases where the beast has no Champion (freshly stripped beast) then all Challengers must fight for the beast battle royale style. The winner recieves the beast. If there are no other Challengers within 15 days of a biju having no Champion, then a lone Challenger is awarded the beast.
Tailed Beast Transfer
A tailed beast may change hands/be transferred to a player only through the method outlined in Article I Section G. Just OOC gifting is not permitted. Mock fights are encouraged for situations where gifting is necessary for the sake of documentation.
Jurisdiction
These rules apply to any and all biju fights, be they considered IC or OOC. They do not apply to any who do not acknowledge the tailed beasts or/nor the tailed beast rules. Accordingly, these individual are barred from becoming Champions and from becoming Challengers.
Biju Council and The Community
Council
The Biju Council shall consist of 3 individuals elected by The Community (those who accept these biju rules). They shall have executive authority to strip Champions of tailed beasts. In general, they are responsible enforcing the rules, and make decisions via vote. In the strange event of a tie (should one be incapacitated or more members added) the accused is considered not guilty for the time being. Council Members cannot be Champions nor Challengers, though they can be mediators.
The Community
The Community has the ultimate power through vote. The Community decides to amend, abolish, or otherwise alter the rules. There must be at least 12 total voters for a vote to have executable power. The Community is the pool from which Challengers, Council Members, and Champions are drawn.
[Original: http://slsociety.smfforfree3.com/index.php/topic,2203.msg27102.html#msg27102 ]
The reason I posted all of this was to present again (in an altered format) my suggestions for the tailed beast rules. Things that I felt needed the most work:
- Biju fights. How to fight them and how they are handled.
- Enforcers who will enforce the rules.
- Establishment of a Champion-Challenger system that bars noncompliant individuals from being either. This is essentially a refurbishing of the challenger system of the old rules, but tries to prevent the actual challenging as an announcement of intentions garuntee (to reduce metagaming of the lesser known hunters) in preparation for a blended OOC and IC system. It also increases recognition of excessive belligerence that actually causes the game mods to react (like mutes or even bans).
-
point one on Eric's list:
Are you saying that in order to maintain RP activity, the host must RP post on the forum?
I would not wish to see RP moved from SL by mandate to the forum. This forum is a supplementary tool to SL proper. If you mean that they must maintain a forum thread for bookkeeping issues, proving activity, keeping a challenger list, providing a place within that thread for official challenges to be made, then I agree.
-
point one on Eric's list:
Are you saying that in order to maintain RP activity, the host must RP post on the forum?
I would not wish to see RP moved from SL by mandate to the forum. This forum is a supplementary tool to SL proper. If you mean that they must maintain a forum thread for bookkeeping issues, proving activity, keeping a challenger list, providing a place within that thread for official challenges to be made, then I agree.
The host has to have an account on the forum, so it would logically make sense that they post (a copy of) the activity RP here on the forum. There is a definite timestamp, and for any sort of "enforcers" be they Council or otherwise, it would be much easier than hunting the village boards and zones of SL for the RP.
Although, I do advocate that some of the biju RP be moved to the forum by mandate, or at least a copy of it for record-keeping. In fact, I would love to see the fights/hunts themselves moved here so that SL does not have to put up with the biju RP. If it comes to a standstill, that standstill is here on the forum, and not on some village board that could be used for other things.
-
Totally unrelated rule idea. If the host and challenger cannot agree on a type of match it defaults to 1v1 ooc
-
Great ideas and work!
Let's start poking holes now into anything we may not like.
And figure out possible loopholes, future scenarios that may be a cause for concern, etc...
This will probably take a few weeks, but once we have hashed out the details, we can consolidate it all!
-
I am for location of match being optional.
I am for Host setting the type of match in their preferences list, either IC or OOC, with host and participant working out the details.
I am for hosts making a preference list.
I am for preference lists not being able to negate the main bijuu rules.
TO avoid indefinite loophole hunts: I propose...
The Host shall:
- RP a clues portion of the hunt providing GM services to facilitate the hunter in working to identify them if unknown.
- a second portion of the clues RP shall then be centered around finding the host. This step may be omitted if the identity of host has been previously identified by hunter, or waved by host.
- The host and hunter shall then face off and host shall cease serving as the GM facilitator and enter match mode. Terms of the match mode will have been determined during pre-hunt negotiations.
These are put into place with the understanding that as a host, you will defend your beast from challengers. This is to provide opportunity for RP to the host and to the hunter. Not to be used to avoid defending your beast or serving as the Jinchuuriki were originally intended: That of a challenge-able bijuu holder. where facing off with opponents establishes one as champion or defeated. Character death is to be part of the pre-hunt negotiations and optional, not a demand that one must agree to.
Personally, I feel the whole challenge thing for bijuu is not very canon. I view bijuu as being a village resource and I am not going to just let people challenge for my village weapons of defense. So keeping their identity secret seems like the thing to do. But I do acknowledge that is not how they function here. It is not very possible to keep the identity secret for they hold the position for life. a village could kill off hosts that were 'outted', as it were, and change up for new ones, but then again not a very efficient use of resources.
The way it is here just doesn't make good rp sense. A bijuu is supposed to be a challengable item. So the host is going to have to RP it so that eventually the hunter makes it to the match. Otherwise, choosing the IC hunt just becomes a means to avoid fulfilling your obligations as a host. In a sense, an rp hunt is just providing a bit of busy work through rp until the match phase is reached.
Should the hunt rp have a limit? Within a certain number of weeks the hunt needs to be completed or nearly done so that the match can begin?
Should the RPs be closed so that some third party does not jump in and ruin the match for either the host or the challenger?
Should RP hunter lists be inherited in the event of host defeat? I would say yes, you are challenging for the beast, not the host...
I would prefer it if everyone went through the IC routine to provide RP about the site. But that is just me. Keeping a list of who is engaged in these hunt rps would then make more sense as we would be making dates to rp with each other for a specific purpose.
IT would also demonstrate a bit more of the elite RP status that one assumes that goes along with being a host in more than a 'fight fight I got power' kind of way, but in having to GM and be interesting and hold the attention of your challenger. And then at the match phase, kicking them to the curb and rising victorious!!!!
RAWL!!
-
I haven't had time to quite read everything yet but one issue I see personally is the moving of rp to the forums. I don't think that should by any mean be necessary. It just find it strange not to allow people to rp at the site.
One major problem I see with that is this. Okay say you make the rp be moved here and those who do not have a form account want to get involved. That would enable them to do so. It just isn't fair... are we gonna imply everyone has to make an account here now?
They may not want the beast but rather to help defend the host who may be a comrade or friend.
This all brings me to another issue I have with way the IC hunt option has been carried out thus far. First off there is no need for a challenger list when it comes to IC hunt. It makes no rp sense. I think that the IC hunt should reflect making as much rp sense as possible.
Rp wise it makes sense more than one person at a time may come after you. Hell even those people may clash to get to you. It makes sense friends and comrades would protect you. It also makes sense that those seeking to hunt you wouldn't make it known. I think Yujo would understand that as he has been using the sneak attack as of late. RP wise it makes sense someone would try to get close to you perhaps before sneaking you for your beast. Hell it may even be your friends or comrade themselves aiming to back door you.
This is just like if someone was aiming to take out a Kage. They aren't gonna say we entered your village to kill your Kage. No they would say we came here to talk over redoing the peace treaty we had.
I think having it moved here for the most part would hinder that aspect of things. If we aren't gonna allow it to be carried out in an actual rp wise manner why have the IC hunt system?
-
I like to propose a rather radical *new* rule option.
- The chosen judge is process which both players give their consent to that judge to determine the outcome of their match or should any issues arise in their posting; he/she will point it out and will kindly ask for a repost.
- Under no condition should a "boot" be used to otherwise eject that judge from their fight based on their chosen judge's ruling not becoming in their favor. The chosen judge was selected upon a mutual agreement by both parties and should be treated as such.
-
I like to propose a rather radical *new* rule option.
- The chosen judge is process which both players give their consent to that judge to determine the outcome of their match or should any issues arise in their posting; he/she will point it out and will kindly ask for a repost.
- Under no condition should a "boot" be used to otherwise eject that judge from their fight based on their chosen judge's ruling not becoming in their favor. The chosen judge was selected upon a mutual agreement by both parties and should be treated as such.
I don't know man I've seen some pretty back asswards decisions.
-
I have a question.
Should a judge point out errors in the match that neither participant catches?
Is that putting the match on the skill level of the judge instead of its own merits?
I am not a fan of booting judges for small things. Obvious bias though would be a good reason to ask for a boot.
I do like the judge being able to call for a repost when a member of the match has an issue with something.
-
I have a question.
Should a judge point out errors in the match that neither participant catches?
Absolutely not. It's supposed to be 1v1. Obviously we can't stop peoples friends from pm'ing them going, "Hey watch out don't forget to dodge that, he did this, etc etc." but we can at least tell the judge not to do that. It would basically be cheating, as far as I'm concerned.
Unless it's something like, "Hey, that's an auto-hit." a judge could point that out and then ask if the opponent wants to allow it or not. Otherwise no. Do not speak unless spoken to!
-
I have a question.
Should a judge point out errors in the match that neither participant catches?
Absolutely not. It's supposed to be 1v1. Obviously we can't stop peoples friends from pm'ing them going, "Hey watch out don't forget to dodge that, he did this, etc etc." but we can at least tell the judge not to do that. It would basically be cheating, as far as I'm concerned.
Unless it's something like, "Hey, that's an auto-hit." a judge could point that out and then ask if the opponent wants to allow it or not. Otherwise no. Do not speak unless spoken to!
Great question, and great response.
-
I agree too. but even more strict.
When I was doing my SSM test, Zenaku gave me a suggestion on a move. It was something I was thinking about doing, but when he said it, it became the only thing I could think of. I bowed out of the test.
I was there to be tested, not my friends.
I think if the person doesn't catch the autohit then too bad. The judges should not be making comments until they are required to step in. To settle disputes...to keep a rule from being broken like...
if it is made one again...
having the bijuu tampered with or something.
-
I like to propose a rather radical *new* rule option.
- The chosen judge is process which both players give their consent to that judge to determine the outcome of their match or should any issues arise in their posting; he/she will point it out and will kindly ask for a repost.
- Under no condition should a "boot" be used to otherwise eject that judge from their fight based on their chosen judge's ruling not becoming in their favor. The chosen judge was selected upon a mutual agreement by both parties and should be treated as such.
I don't know man I've seen some pretty back asswards decisions.
Highlighted a portion for you. Judges are there to basically either determine the outcome should some sort of time limit be imposed on the match or a some sort of error is seen by either participant. Both *players* mutually agreed upon the chosen judge and through careful negotiations, of course. Why "boot" that judge based on a "back assward" decision? Oh. Dear me, it's because it didn't turn out in *your* favor. :)
Here's another rule option.
- Selected judges are *no* position to give advice to either participant or through third-party perspective aka alternate accounts. Doing so will revoke their privilege to ever become a respected judge in the future. Your reputation is *literally* on the line should you forgoe such underhanded tactics and this may garner the attention of the council. In others words, you may be looked at in a negative light for such actions.
-
hey I've had the boot clause for a while and I don't use it every time a judge doesn't decide in my favor. Shit happens. When I was fighting zen for the 9 tails we used someone as a judge and their decision on a matter totally baffled me. The next day I asked him how he could possibly think that and he went, "shit, you're right, I was half asleep and had no clue what I was saying, my decision was totally wrong." But zen wouldn't allow it to be changed. Like that's the kind of situation id use a boot in. Gross incompetence and such. Don't drink and judge kids.
-
hey I've had the boot clause for a while and I don't use it every time a judge doesn't decide in my favor. Shit happens. When I was fighting zen for the 9 tails we used someone as a judge and their decision on a matter totally baffled me. The next day I asked him how he could possibly think that and he went, "shit, you're right, I was half asleep and had no clue what I was saying, my decision was totally wrong." But zen wouldn't allow it to be changed. Like that's the kind of situation id use a boot in. Gross incompetence and such. Don't drink and judge kids.
If both players came to *mutual* agreement upon a selection of a judge then it assumed that they agreed that this *judge* was competent enough to make a decision at their own discretion and have the final say so in a sanctioned bijuu match.
You cannot under any circumstances, revoke your previous ruling just because you had a mistake pointed out in your ruling by the other player involved in that match or a third-party. Which leads me to another proposed rule(s) of mine.
- A judge having to revoke their previous or current ruling due to gross negligence will lead to one of the *current* council members having to interfere on that judge's behalf and be that *referee* for the match.
- This a *must* for those whom are selected at judges! Judges are supposed to remain professional and undoubtedly not mix business with pleasure or leisure. Inebriation in *any* form is strictly forbidden.
Edit: Fixed my grammar. Sleepiness has its toll. :oops:
-
I agree that gross incompetence should not be tolerated.
however, I am really not liking council members doing judging of any kind. I seriously think we have to have the two issues be separated. The integrity and impartiality of the council needs to be incorruptible.
the back up could be some other judge?
-
The integrity and impartiality of the council needs to be incorruptible.
Needless to say a system of accountability must be taken into consideration if that judge is somehow *corrupted*. A back-up judge can be taken into consideration but I feel that the issue needs to be viewed from a uncorrupted perspective and oddly enough as it may sound, that would have to be a *current* council member.
-
I am for location of match being optional.
I am for Host setting the type of match in their preferences list, either IC or OOC, with host and participant working out the details.
I am for hosts making a preference list...
I am completely against hosts making a preference list if the IC hunt is going to play out like a regular RP. Because that's kind of OOC in a sense, and gives the host leeway where they really shouldn't have leeway in a RP match. Even if you do sneak into a village and announce your challenge only after encountering the host, the preferences list is a proverbial middle finger that has been used to constrain hunters but not hosts.
If they are merely preferences in truth and are not enforceable on the hunter in any way, then there is hardly a point to having a preferences list at all.
Should the hunt rp have a limit? Within a certain number of weeks the hunt needs to be completed or nearly done so that the match can begin?
Yes, a limit is very badly needed. No hunter and hunted should be playing around with "busy work" for 4 months. I propose a MAX of 1 month before either the hunt is called off (hunter just couldn't finish it) or an OOC battle match ensues (the host made it too difficult). Not sure which viewpoint would be more popular, but YES a thousand times to there being a time limit on the hunt.
Should the RPs be closed so that some third party does not jump in and ruin the match for either the host or the challenger?
Now that doesn't make a whole lot of RP sense unless the hunt is a detached event, where the two RP a hunt in some detached location away from the main stream of RP (which I don't think is a bad idea btw). The fight itself should be closed, however, to any third party that did not get into the RP before the start of the actual fighting.
Should RP hunter lists be inherited in the event of host defeat? I would say yes, you are challenging for the beast, not the host...
My proposition suggested that a challenge should be able to be made at the last second of interaction, with only eligibility of participants barring it being accepted. Therefore, if a host were to lose, only those who were in the RP would at once know of the transfer of the beast. A challenge list inheritance would give the grace period host time to say to themelves, "well I know who is gunning for this beast, let me try to find a way to know about their intentions IC and make it a hassle". On the flip side, if you keep getting gimped cause someone is faster than you, you won't ever get your challenge, or even worse, a "mock" fight might be used as a means to keep a waiting challenger from ever getting the match.
If a challenger is allowed to make the challenge at the last second without having to have the host play GM, then I say no challenge list inheritance. Otherwise, challenge list inheritance is a yes in my books.
I haven't had time to quite read everything yet but one issue I see personally is the moving of rp to the forums. I don't think that should by any mean be necessary. It just find it strange not to allow people to rp at the site.
One major problem I see with that is this. Okay say you make the rp be moved here and those who do not have a form account want to get involved. That would enable them to do so. It just isn't fair... are we gonna imply everyone has to make an account here now...
I think it was already proposed that all challengers, Council members, and hosts have a forum account. By extension then it would be anyone who follows the biju rules, not "everyone" in the purest sense of the word.
And I think that at least a copy of the RP be placed here for recordkeeping purposes, even if the actual RP isn't done here. Even if done here (in a forum setting) it is still IC RP, because this forum IS the official forum for the Shinobilegends game.
I also think that we should start stir up discussion about standards for the actual fighting itself. Like what is godmodding and the likes. Ambigiuity on that in the past made for some butthurt and even for some questionable decisions. Things like how far do we bring in real world logic and the likes would make interesting fodder for this.
-
I think we are getting a bit off track in our discussions.
Now that we are moving toward broad topics that need lots of work upon them, may we have one thread to discuss each issue? Rather than stack smacking 20 suggestions into one post?
-
That would be good imo, since after reading all of this at least I'm not clear what exactly is being suggested as an answer to what exactly anymore.
-
No:
After Inactivity or defeat you may challenge a different host, or the same host for a different bijuu right away.
Doesn't this risk conflicting with the "you cannot challenge the same host for 3 months" thing? Or is the general consensus that you are challenging for the biju and not for the host?
You must check forum host preference threads to stay informed.
Informed of what, exactly? I don't think preferences should be changing mid-match, so unless you're talking other additions to the challenge list or the host replying to the challenger, I don't get what the challenger needs to stay on top of in that thread.
The purpose of keeping a forum thread is to post status and challengers and leaves of absence. So...you should be checking the forum threads often to see how things run. What use it is to post a leave of absence, to post accepting the challenge, to post accepting the terms of battle and all of that, if people aren't expected to stay informed and up to date on the current news.
It is about more than just stating preferences and then never looking at it again, the thread is the host's activity log and everything.
-
I agree with everything proposed except what has already been addressed about striaght to council and this part,
" Hosts who are stripped will be on a 3 month cool down period in which they may not participate in bijuu matters. During this time it is hoped they will train and refine their RP/participation in order to become a host in the future. This cool down period does not apply to breaking the activity clause."
I think it has been stated on part of the council that one can join the council even if stripped without a cool down peroid. The wording here stated all biju matters... I think it should be pointing out an exception for the council be applied.
this comes from the stripping a host voting thread....
and well, Kirk made a good point. stripped hosts are not banned from being council members during their time off.
it sounds vague...All things bijuu...I hate to do another vote over that. can something like that be dealt with during finalization of the rule if it is adopted?
-
I agree with everything proposed except what has already been addressed about striaght to council and this part,
" Hosts who are stripped will be on a 3 month cool down period in which they may not participate in bijuu matters. During this time it is hoped they will train and refine their RP/participation in order to become a host in the future. This cool down period does not apply to breaking the activity clause."
I think it has been stated on part of the council that one can join the council even if stripped without a cool down peroid. The wording here stated all biju matters... I think it should be pointing out an exception for the council be applied.
this comes from the stripping a host voting thread....
and well, Kirk made a good point. stripped hosts are not banned from being council members during their time off.
it sounds vague...All things bijuu...I hate to do another vote over that. can something like that be dealt with during finalization of the rule if it is adopted?
I see no reason why not. Like I was pointing out it was merely wording. I found it to be best not to having wording that may contradict something applied somewhere else. People may be led to argue about well it says this here and that there.
-
But Kirk,
The chances of a stripped host becoming a council member is extremely close to zero.
Besides, I assumed that ruling meant that a stripped host cannot go after bijuu for 3 months.
-
But Kirk,
The chances of a stripped host becoming a council member is extremely close to zero.
Besides, I assumed that ruling meant that a stripped host cannot go after bijuu for 3 months.
Not that close to zero, actually.
Depends on the reason the host was stripped. If it was something like obstructing RP then maybe, but if it was for getting into a car crash and not being able to get out of the hospital bed to make mention of an extended absence, the public would be far more forgiving.
-
Not that close to zero, actually.
Depends on the reason the host was stripped. If it was something like obstructing RP then maybe, but if it was for getting into a car crash and not being able to get out of the hospital bed to make mention of an extended absence, the public would be far more forgiving.
I can't imagine one being quick to run for a council position after a car accident.
You have to think about the time it would take to recover.
But let's talk about what it is meant by 'bijuu-related matters' in this proposed ruling.
Do you mean they cannot go after a bijuu for 3 months?
Or cannot partake in ANYTHING bijuu-related? (bijuu-hunt, council, judge, etc)
EDIT: I thought the former.
-
Not that close to zero, actually.
Depends on the reason the host was stripped. If it was something like obstructing RP then maybe, but if it was for getting into a car crash and not being able to get out of the hospital bed to make mention of an extended absence, the public would be far more forgiving.
I can't imagine one being quick to run for a council position after a car accident.
You have to think about the time it would take to recover.
But let's talk about what it is meant by 'bijuu-related matters' in this proposed ruling.
Do you mean they cannot go after a bijuu for 3 months?
Or cannot partake in ANYTHING bijuu-related? (bijuu-hunt, council, judge, etc)
EDIT: I thought the former.
Well, I don't think anyone would be eager to get on SL period right after a car crash. After he/she recovers and returns to see themselves stripped is what I am talking about.
We should explicitly clarify what "all biju matters" is, otherwise it will be interpreted as all biju matters, including Council membering.
-
this is not the voted upon rules.
this is http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8791.0.html (http://forum.shinobilegends.com/index.php/topic,8791.0.html)
may we please have those ones pinned instead?