Shinobi Legends Forum - Shinobi Legends Game Site

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Ever wondered if your ideas have been talked about in the forum already? Well, try out the "search" option, where all your questions can be answered.

Show Posts

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.

Topics - Hades

Pages: [1]
Council / Council Members as Judges, Pt. 2
« on: January 20, 2017, 01:06:07 AM »
I will try to be brief and concise here. I am presenting facts for the sake of clarity. The goal of this topic is to generate discussion. It is not intended as a criticism to any council members.

As you can see here,,8692.0.html, a decision was previously made in a 6:9 vote that council members can not judge biju matches.

At some point, this rule was forgotten and/or the new cohort was not made aware of it. Trev has judged many fights, and Shadow was the judge for at least one; a fight between Athos and Trev. I had forgotten about the rule myself, and seeing Trev and Shadow as judges never made me suspicions, I just ended up assuming council members were allowed to judge.

Athos had Shadow removed as the judge for his fight with Trev. Athos and Trev asked me to judge. I initially accepted. Before I had made any decisions, the thought occurred to me that it might be against the rules after all. I checked, and found the somewhat forgotten vote. Athos and Trev have now moved on to find a different judge so that I do not break any rules.

I messaged the council. Some confirmed that, to the best of anyone's knowledge, the decision that was voted on has not been changed. Others pointed out that council members have been serving as judges anyway, some stating that they personally do not mind.

I had voted that council members could serve as judges. Therein, I recognize that I am biased. However, I think if two people agree on a judge because they think that person is fair, then that's their agreement.

Acknowledging my own perspective, but also taking into consideration the variety of responses I received from other council members, I just wanted to bring this to light, and begin a discussion about whether we (as a community) think that council members should be prevented from judging or if the vote should be changed because people might prefer council members be able to judge.

Current Host: Yakan (Night)

Affiliation: Kumogakure

Battle Method: 1v1 IC match

Judge(s): PMs will be used to determine an agreed-upon judge

Challenger Queue:
[1] Hazama
[2] Machina Uzumaki

Special Rules:

-First you need to learn, IC, of Yakan’s possession of Matatabi. When you provide proof of how your character learned of Yakan’s possession of Matatabi, then you can request to take the next spot on the challenge list.

-Once you are on the challenge list we will discuss who we'd like to have judge the match. No match will begin until a judge is agreed upon.

-The match will strictly be 1v1, to prevent any complications arising from extra participants.

-The battle can be forfeit by either opponent and is won by any kill move, however, neither opponent will die as a result of the match. Whichever opponent is victorious will exit the match with Matatabi; both opponents will exit the match alive.

-Any challengers that lose the match will be required to wait the minimum of three months before requesting a new spot on the challenge queue.

-For anyone, including myself, participants will be allowed any common, general, and basic skills that their character possesses, as long as those skills are backed by reasonable explanations (they have an existing explanation in the character’s RP history). Any special skills will be determined according to the sixteen point system of resets:


~Every special skill must have a stated total of possible points (i.e. Rinnegan/Sage Mode max at six points, Sharingan/Byakugan max at four, etc.)

~If using any of the eight IG KG, the same system against combing rinnegan/sage, uchiha/hyuga, etc. applies. Any external or custom special skills will need to be accurately assessed and set before the match begins.

~This eliminates claiming the resets or borrowing the techniques of any other players.


-Arguing is discouraged. I will talk over any concerns regarding the match with you if the conversation remains calm and logical. If it steps outside of that, then the judge will be asked to make a decision. Pointlessly bickering is not fun or useful for anyone.

-For the sake of ease, the match will be conducted in a forum thread instead of in a public zone on SL. The same RP conduct rules apply, however. Additionally, while the environment can be selected, no “nameless posting”-type activity will be allowed.

-Participants will have fourteen days to post. If they wait longer than that period of time to respond to the other participant, the posting participant will win by default. However, if any post is discredited for rule-breaking and/or a repost is required, then that post does not count and the repost must be posted within the original timeframe.

-If any of the rules set forward are broken, I reserve the right to cancel the match. This will not prevent you from re-challenging after the three-month waiting period.

Non-Negotiable Voids:

-Anything that does not have a reasonable explanation within the Naruto/SL lore
-Any custom technique that has no prescribed flaw (auto-hitting/character control)
-Any of the recent Rikudo powered abilities
-Body Revival Technique (when used to survive Hachimon)
-Kamui (intangibility)
-Swift Release

All information subject to change

Mail me with any questions

Feature Requests / GM feature added to zones
« on: June 11, 2014, 05:20:07 PM »
Though it may go without saying, this ability to post namelessly in the zones is a really awesome feature to have made available to the players. I foresee that discussions regarding this may pop up soon anyway, so I figured I'd jump on it.

In the post that Oliver/Neji announced this new feature in, he did say that in the near future it may become limited to invitational zone battles anyway, seeing as people may abuse this. I had high hopes that this could be used fairly, but I've already seen instances of people using it and coloring/formatting the "nameless post" to pose as other players. I think that's pretty low, no matter who does it. Sure in some cases it could just be a funny joke, but the characters are unique to the people that created them for a reason and already, in RP, people have abused that privacy by trying to character control the actions of someone else. Using a nameless post to do that is a new level of low that's added to that, because now the average reader doesn't even have a way to discern where that post really came from. For that reason, Neji was (not at all surprisingly) probably right about the feature needing to be limited to invitational battles.

That being said, I do think there is a time and place for this feature, and probably outside of just the zones. Obviously we have needed this in places like the village square boards as well, although now that I think about it, I haven't checked to see if it works there. If it does, I foresee trouble. That's just me. But given the number of clans that exist to be secondary or non-game villages/village boards, I do think that having the nameless posting feature would actually be good in some other areas as well. Obviously the same problems that can arise in the zones can arise anywhere else too, but in regards to that, I think for the clan halls at least we could perhaps make it a feature available only to the higher-ranking clan members so that it is moderated in that way. The same would be true for dwellings; I think it would be nice for dwelling owners to be able to nameless post in their dwellings, and perhaps also select others who could do so as well. As for the village boards and just the other general talk boards like the bar/ramen shop/beggar's lane, they are the most problematic. I've yet to have any (good) ideas about a potential system that would be fair for allowing some people to nameless post there.

Please share your thoughts on the nameless posting feature below, as well as suggesting any changes we might like the moderators to consider and any thoughts or responses you want to add to anything already posted in the thread.

Pages: [1]

Page created in 0.049 seconds with 15 queries.