Shinobi Legends Forum
Roleplay => All That Is Bijuu => Bijuu Arena => Topic started by: Bocchiere on August 18, 2014, 09:39:46 PM
-
Ok, after the HonoxSabu debacle I just feel the need to ask this. Does anyone else think we need to change the rules some more? I feel as though the new system fails like 75% of the time and people just end up doing an old bijuu challenge anyway, and that means something is not right.
-
We could get rid of the biju altogether and solve it once and for all.
But that is too radical. Let's instead come up with some more rules that will indefinitely have interpretation issues and loop us right back to where we started.
-
What Eric said.
-
There are always going to be loopholes and exploits in any set of rules unless they are rigid to an extreme, which usually causes more harm than good.
The key is to use common sense in combination with the rules to avoid any blatant abuse.
-
There are always going to be loopholes and exploits in any set of rules unless they are rigid to an extreme, which usually causes more harm than good.
The key is to use common sense in combination with the rules to avoid any blatant abuse.
What's common sense and how much does it cost?
Seriously, though, as soon as power or loss of power is involved everybody misplaces any common sense they may have had before. And since, as Eric said, nobody is willing to just get rid of the tailed beasts there should be at least basic rules on how fights over them should be handled.
Especially when it comes to voiding.
I hate voiding.
-
Well I don't remember like 3/4 of the old bijuu fights being voided instead of finishing. With the new system we had.
Me and Trev: Worked
Sabu and Hono: Failed
Night Sabu and Shinko: Failed
Hazama and Warren: Failed
Akatsuki and Kiri: ...Well it certainly isn't a success.
I dont think anyone can accuse me of nostalgia here, I had very awful fights with the old rules. However it was much simpler. You fought your opponent till one of you lost, usually by judges decision, or someone gave up.
Now obviously that wasn't perfect either or we wouldn't have had these new rules made, but I also think these new rules don't seem to be working either.
I just think there is some kind of happy medium between the old rules and the new ones that would make it work out better.
-
Awww, me and Bocc made it work ;)
Anyway, I never thought I'd say this, but go back to the old challenge rule. It was much easier. Plus I hardly see anyone hosts posts outside their village ( a few, not many).
Go back to the old rules, and make a rule to have fights in public, eliminate the need for the he said/she said and screenshots.
-
Awww, me and Bocc made it work ;)
Anyway, I never thought I'd say this, but go back to the old challenge rule. It was much easier. Plus I hardly see anyone hosts posts outside their village ( a few, not many).
Go back to the old rules, and make a rule to have fights in public, eliminate the need for the he said/she said and screenshots.
I'm not against that idea to be honest. I just assume most other people would be.
-
Awww, me and Bocc made it work ;)
Anyway, I never thought I'd say this, but go back to the old challenge rule. It was much easier. Plus I hardly see anyone hosts posts outside their village ( a few, not many).
Go back to the old rules, and make a rule to have fights in public, eliminate the need for the he said/she said and screenshots.
As much as I would like to disagree...
Well I don't remember like 3/4 of the old bijuu fights being voided instead of finishing. With the new system we had.
Me and Trev: Worked
Sabu and Hono: Failed
Night Sabu and Shinko: Failed
Hazama and Warren: Failed
Akatsuki and Kiri: ...Well it certainly isn't a success.
I dont think anyone can accuse me of nostalgia here, I had very awful fights with the old rules. However it was much simpler. You fought your opponent till one of you lost, usually by judges decision, or someone gave up.
Now obviously that wasn't perfect either or we wouldn't have had these new rules made, but I also think these new rules don't seem to be working either.
I just think there is some kind of happy medium between the old rules and the new ones that would make it work out better.
Bocc makes a point. They were frustrating, they were irritating, but at the end of the day, they didn't have near the same issues as they do now as far as RP is concerned.
-
I'd also have to say that the old way was better. With that being sad I'd like to add in if people wanted to track down host to make it more fun and an actual rp event then they can still do so. No rule should say that you can't.
-
I can't think of any changes off the top of my head except that, if a host or challenger has/have general set of rules they like to propose, that they may make a forum post and get omeone to sticky it or something. If they are in the hunt long enough for that anyways.
The only thing else I thought of after reading about Grace Period, is if we're still going with "conference of a suitable host" thing. Cause if so, is there a set group to determine the next host for a set beast, or is it free for all based on whoever cares?
And I say that if they do want to track down the host still via RP in order to circumvent a long challenger list (otherwise, why else would you go through the trouble...) that general RP rules apply, rather than a special set of rules.
-
Old rules are sounding pretty good to me right about now.
-
It really shouldn't be an issue since you should just make the challenge IC. But yeah I always used the 3 month rule.
-
It really shouldn't be an issue since you should just make the challenge IC...
Now hold on, these challenges are supposed to be entirely OOC, including the actually challenging part. If RP is at all included in this, then issues of the recent sort are almost bound to arrive.
And persistence aside, I think the limitation should be not that you can challenge only twice in a 3 month period, but 4 times total in a year as long as the host does not change.
If that does not keep people from challenging back to back to back the same host for the same beast, then they have four times to go through it. For the year.
-
Well, where are the hosts going to post the lists? In their SL profile, on here? We all know how some people are about using the forum, as if it contains a trojan and a virus. :(
A list of known hosts should probably be on here anyways, and the hosts be responsible for noting changes in hands. Of course, having others double check is good, but just sayin'.
The challengers list being inherited, while I'm personally opposed, does make sense, and can't argue against because, as you said, if the beast constantly changes hands, then some folks just wouldn't get a shot, since persistent folks will re-challenge since their 4 times a year only applies to the host and not the beast.
Run-on for the win. ^_^ In short, I agree for a list of some sort to be inherited.
-
To the death is what I meany, yes. I almost always insist on mine being to the death.
4 times a year sounds solid to me as well as inheriting the list. I'm sure we could easily make a wiki page for the challenger ques.
-
To the death is what I meany, yes. I almost always insist on mine being to the death.
4 times a year sounds solid to me as well as inheriting the list. I'm sure we could easily make a wiki page for the challenger ques.
A lot more people use the Wikia than the forum too.
I like this, and I'm for it.
-
◾Jinchūriki have an obligation to be active, and are stripped of their bijū if they cannot get online and do their round (1 post in public a fortnight), regardless of the reason. The leader of their clan will inherit the bijū; if the jinchūriki wasn't in a clan, then a tournament/event can be arranged to determine a suitable host.
HOWEVER...one post every two week? shoot me now. No less than one a week please? if you can't manage that then you are not able to meet the demands of being a host. Perhaps you will get free time later on? well make a new challenge once you are free but let life go on for the rest of us.
◾Unless a jinchūriki has outstanding life force (from being either an Uzumaki, having Wood Release or from being downright immortal), they will die when stripped of their bijū. Else they will be left in a crippled state.
◾Tailed beasts must be sealed within a jinchuriki within a week of capture.
I highlighted in red that section because it's awesome.
Two weeks is a long time in SL. A ton of RP can happen in one day, let alone two weeks. Bijū are a great power, and if you know anything about Spiderman then you know what he would say comes with great power.
I also left in the other two rules I think should be kept. It's been repeatedly said in the manga and the anime that jinchūriki die after being de-bijū'd, so that should be a rule here, and the other rule keeps villages from sitting on cans with jinchūriki in them for months so that nobody can challenge them.
-
double posting here....
Perhaps Yumei can format a section on the tailed beast's page to include the challenge lists for each beast.
then once the OOC rules are confirmed they can be listed there to replace the RPing ones.
I believe it would be the easiest for hosts (who personally I believe have a responsibility to manage their own lists) to use the wiki's forum (http://narutoprofile.wikia.com/wiki/Topic:Tailed_Beasts?openEditor=1), as this way they'll be able to modify their top posts. I created a new board in the wiki forum, however I recommend creating a new topic by clicking on the "Start Discussion" button at the bottom of the Tailed Beasts page (http://narutoprofile.wikia.com/wiki/Tailed_Beasts#References). I've created a sample thread here (http://narutoprofile.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:12896), although I'll leave it to the thread starters to format their lists however they like (so long as it's done sensibly).
-
That all looks great to me.
-
double posting here....
Perhaps Yumei can format a section on the tailed beast's page to include the challenge lists for each beast.
then once the OOC rules are confirmed they can be listed there to replace the RPing ones.
I believe it would be the easiest for hosts (who personally I believe have a responsibility to manage their own lists) to use the wiki's forum (http://narutoprofile.wikia.com/wiki/Topic:Tailed_Beasts?openEditor=1), as this way they'll be able to modify their top posts. I created a new board in the wiki forum, however I recommend creating a new topic by clicking on the "Start Discussion" button at the bottom of the Tailed Beasts page (http://narutoprofile.wikia.com/wiki/Tailed_Beasts#References). I've created a sample thread here (http://narutoprofile.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:12896), although I'll leave it to the thread starters to format their lists however they like (so long as it's done sensibly).
What about people who hate using the wiki?
I'm just saying, it seems unfair to say that sense people don't like the forum they have to do it at the wiki when there are people who don;t sue the wiki as well. Why should one party be made to use what they don't like but the other not?
-
sounds good. so...
Is it to be the old list of rules as is or do edits need to be made?
I like these from the new list of rules too..
◾Jinchūriki have an obligation to be active, and are stripped of their bijū if they cannot get online and do their round (1 post in public a fortnight), regardless of the reason. The leader of their clan will inherit the bijū; if the jinchūriki wasn't in a clan, then a tournament/event can be arranged to determine a suitable host.
HOWEVER...one post every two week? shoot me now. No less than one a week please? if you can't manage that then you are not able to meet the demands of being a host. Perhaps you will get free time later on? well make a new challenge once you are free but let life go on for the rest of us.
I think these are nice too.
◾Unless a jinchūriki has outstanding life force (from being either an Uzumaki, having Wood Release or from being downright immortal), they will die when stripped of their bijū. Else they will be left in a crippled state.
◾Tailed beasts must be sealed within a jinchuriki within a week of capture.
Kirk made a point somewhere once that if this fight is challenge due to OOC match ups, then why rp the sealing at all? I think that aspect should be up to the host cause RP might be important to them. However...see it is timely.
Two weeks had been the limit out of reasonablness, we had agreed on that back then. One week seem to be cutting it a bit short, but considering that the biju fights are OOC anyways, I guess one week is not that shallow.
Dying when being stripped of the biju, even in an OOC challenge? Well shoot, no wonder someone would want the fight to be to the death, if you lose, you're very likely to die anyways, as even with outstanding life force you would eventually die anyways (maybe not as fast, but you would die yet still).
I actually vote that losing the challenge (or being stripped for whatever reason) does not kill the host automatically. It will decrease the incentive to hang onto the beast for dear life, at least in my opinion, which might reduce some nastiness that comes along with fighting for dear life. We have seen by now how even normally decent people get extremely on edge when their character's life is in mortal danger. At least this way, if life does get the better of you, you can more willingly hand off the beast without worrying about dying because you got too busy in RL.
Personally, I would rather keep my list either here on the forum or SLS, simply due to famaliarity. If required to use the wikia though, I would just attached it to the bottom of my character profile rather than creating a new thread on the forum, and then just link it both at the top of the profile and on my SL bio page.
And how about tailed beast must be sealed immediately upon victory? I mean, we are not talking about IC sealing here, I'm talking, you win, you become host after the last post. No wait time before you become host in order to delay the grace period, no RP even for sealing the beast. Just make the whole thing OOC and get it over with. That away, once you get out of the RP that you are in, you can get you tailed beast powers and be like, "I have been graced by my victory in so-so land, since the old host is dead you know you know."
People have to join the 21st century sometime.
What about the people who hate the internet?
They can just pm the old fashioned way and get info direct from the hosts I suppose. It seems reasonable to have a more efficient means of verifying publicly that a host even has a list of challengers by some means. As long as it isn't vandalized by tricksters it should be pretty reliable.
Folks who hate the internet would not be a factor here, because they wouldn't even be able to get onto SL. ;) Just had to put that joke in there for relax factor before continuing.
If we are going to go with the wikia forum thing, why not just have the invitation be replies to the main post? Undeniable and convenient proof that indeed you challenged the host a certain number of times, and that their denial is evident to all that you were not added to the list. Whatever mod exists on there can notice shenanigans, but it's a suggestion.
Please remove "other hosts" and "onlookers" from those who may support the arguments of either side. One reliable (activity-wise) judge to rule the entire thing.
If god-modding occurs, the opposing party "May" object. If they don't object, then that is their business, and discussion may occur after that.
"Hosts are allowed to use thier tails" section seems like a subsection of "Rules" rather than a separate thing to discuss. But that's just me.
Since there is a challenger list, should waiting challengers get any sort of dibs on the tailed beast? I know it's abusable, but throwing that out there, as I don't like the idea of the clan/organization getting it anymore. It used to be cool, but then entire organizations/clans could be just as inactive or unable to host it. Toss it up to a tourney of the challengers would probably run smoother.
What does the "one round" of activity count for anymore, I have to ask? Before the host had to leave the village, but now, is it just some post in public in order to prove that they are around? That's the gist I am getting, but just want to clarify for reference.
The last thing we have to do before these rules go into effect is to gather the jinchs (half of them being Akatsuki) and have them either agree to the rules or at least put in their input on how to change it to better fill the role. Incomplete biju challenge list from those who didn't even participate in the debate are going to be a problem if this is not brought 'round the table.
-
People already know how much I despise a great majority of the rules, so for the sake of staying civil I'll be brief.
If you want OOC challenges, then use them for cases like SabuxHono, and leave it at that. Stuff like that are the only reasons these discussions ever pop up, so people shouldn't try use them as an excuse to force more rules on others.
-
People already know how much I despise a great majority of the rules, so for the sake of staying civil I'll be brief.
If you want OOC challenges, then use them for cases like SabuxHono, and leave it at that. Stuff like that are the only reasons these discussions ever pop up, so people shouldn't try use them as an excuse to force more rules on others.
It's not MORE rules it's just different rules. As I gave an example of almost every bijuu fight on the current rules has failed and wound up just being an old OOC bijju fight instead.
-
I agree that the new rules do not work, but I do not agree that the old rules work better.
I worked under both. I think the RP aspects of the current rules are nice; hunting Jinchuuriki is an important aspect of everything, assuming people actually do it correctly. I haven't seen too many people do it correctly;
For example, in-game knowledge acquisition. Quite a few instances in that "not success" KirixAkatsuki battle, on Akatsuki's end, which were definite meta-gaming. I'm talking to Sabu and Bocchiball's alt who assumed a cloud was for a certain technique and then used a technique to seal that specific technique away. Also for identifying me as the Three-Tailed Jinchuuriki when none of them would have known about it in-game.
I think if there is a rule change, it needs to keep the RP hunting aspect, but mix in the old rules to make it an easier process. The rules are in place to make it difficult for hosts, and for hunters--not easier for one and not the other.
-
I agree that the new rules do not work, but I do not agree that the old rules work better.
I worked under both. I think the RP aspects of the current rules are nice; hunting Jinchuuriki is an important aspect of everything, assuming people actually do it correctly. I haven't seen too many people do it correctly;
For example, in-game knowledge acquisition. Quite a few instances in that "not success" KirixAkatsuki battle, on Akatsuki's end, which were definite meta-gaming. I'm talking to Sabu and Bocchiball's alt who assumed a cloud was for a certain technique and then used a technique to seal that specific technique away. Also for identifying me as the Three-Tailed Jinchuuriki when none of them would have known about it in-game.
I think if there is a rule change, it needs to keep the RP hunting aspect, but mix in the old rules to make it an easier process. The rules are in place to make it difficult for hosts, and for hunters--not easier for one and not the other.
You made a cloud in the air and Sabu attempted to use a water seal on it. >_> You claimed it wouldn't work because it was apparently a Raiton technique, even though a storm cloud made to shoot lightning bolts would still be made of water vapor. I don't know who claimed to know you were the three tails IC.
We could have it where you still challenge the people like the old rules but you need to discover they are Jinchuriki IC to challenge them?
-
I agree that metagaming is a problem. Though I certainly am not going to get bogged down in every instance of where it has occurred on SL, it is quite difficult to do things like use genjutsu and keep all the fan girls away from you due to reputation. We are a gossipy lot so it gets hard sometimes to remember what you are supposed to know and what you are not.
It would be nice to incorporate as much leniency and flexibility into the list so that reasonable and cooperative people can use them too.
How about a disclaimer....
ºDisclaimerº
The following OOC rules section of the list of quidelines for interactions between the denizens of SL are for use when said interactions breakdown and reasonable people turn into trolls. Otherwise IC hunting of hosts and verbal agreements between hunter and hunted should be the tradition employed.
I object. Define "trolls".
All seriousness on the table, the fewer people involved in the competition the better. The 1v1 system prevented meta-gaming (to an extent) involved in the "hunt" because it was an OOC fight. Sure, it determined things IC, but it was what it was. If folks hunt them down IC, then it is going to get a large amount of people involved, and frankly, the more people involved in a zone fight, the more likely it is to break down and devolve.
I deem it reasonable to call and be called out on every little thing in a biju match because my SL life is on the line. Verbal agreements are broken regularly, especially in zone fights. These kind of conflicts do not happen in a non-zone situation, or at least they very rarely do. I vote that the biju fights be contained to a small 1v1 fight. That away, if we have to deal with a crapstorm, it will be 2-3 involved parties being held up and haggled.
I agree that the new rules do not work, but I do not agree that the old rules work better.
I worked under both. I think the RP aspects of the current rules are nice; hunting Jinchuuriki is an important aspect of everything, assuming people actually do it correctly. I haven't seen too many people do it correctly;
For example, in-game knowledge acquisition. Quite a few instances in that "not success" KirixAkatsuki battle, on Akatsuki's end, which were definite meta-gaming. I'm talking to Sabu and Bocchiball's alt who assumed a cloud was for a certain technique and then used a technique to seal that specific technique away. Also for identifying me as the Three-Tailed Jinchuuriki when none of them would have known about it in-game.
I think if there is a rule change, it needs to keep the RP hunting aspect, but mix in the old rules to make it an easier process. The rules are in place to make it difficult for hosts, and for hunters--not easier for one and not the other.
That metagaming example, as I should have mentioned already, had little to do with the biju rules and more to do with zone/fight standards. Finding out there were jinchs in Kiri is the only metagame-able thing that had anything to do with the biju RP rules.
Sabu and Hono, despite it being a largely two person thing, turned into something far greater than it needed to be. And that I blame on the parties involved stirring things up using outside media (plus the nature of the relationship between the two).
Fighting IC without fighting each other OOC is the real problem. It is not every single player of SL, but when it comes down to tailed beasts, most of the time, that is what it boils down to. No matter which set of rules we go to, at the end of the day, zone stuff like meta-gaming or god-modding is what is going to stir up the most hubbub.
So I say contain it. In a 1v1, public fight. If the judge sees fit due to inactivity, they can mandate that posts be saved if things drag on exceptionally long (or if they just post that much in a single match). If people get their jimmies rustled because the zone is being held up, then oh well. It is far better than a village board getting held up.
*A noteable exception that I can think of where the biju RP rules entirely caused the hubbub is the Warren-Akatsuki hunt situation, and that still had some zone-god-mode related grief involved.
-
Alright, forgive me for my post. I don't use forums at all but considering the amount of people bringing this subject to my attention, it's time to finally crack and join.
I think both the old and new rules are broken. I'm not a terrible fan of queued lines for a bijū challenge. Nor does the in-game hunting of the jinchūriki really happen as it's suppose to be done. What I'm going to suggest seems to be what others have already said but I don't know how to quote. So, here it goes and bear with me here.
Bijū/Jinchūriki Rule Propositions:
•Make all challenges, whether IC or OCC, 1v1 only.
•Instead of having only four (4) challenges per year per host, I suggest having it be only four (4) challenges per year per bijū.
•I do like the one (1) week activity per fight but I believe earlier in the year it was discussed allowing a month of time in case of something drastic occurring? But only allowed to use that month clause ONCE a full year.
•OCC vs. IC to be determined by participating challenger and jinchūriki.
•Pre-determined judge to be present should issues arise.
->Just a shot in the dark but perhaps another jinchūriki can be the judge to foster that jinchūriki friendship found in the canon?
•Current jinchūriki cannot challenge for another bijū.
->This includes all alts.
-->Could be monitored.
•NO voiding! Have to finish the fight until a decisive end is met.
->Only voiding may be issued by judge's decision.
•Obvious game rules about roleplay.
If OCC:
•Hand over beast with no repercussions to character.
•Winner is immediately made host.
•Grace period of one (1) week begins the 24 hours after battle is over.
If IC:
•Public posts of obtaining knowledge.
->Maintain log of intelligence gathering.
->Challenged Jinchūriki to confirm posts are valid.
•Battle to death
->Previous jinchūriki dies if beast is removed.
->New host must be able to flee freely.
-->Could be intercepted by bystanders if said bystander were posted present at beginning of fight and do not roleplay elsewhere.
That's just a few things I could think of. Let me know what y'all think! Of course, other details to be hashed out but first, #letmetakeaselfie. Err...I mean, first let us deal with the main issues.
-
I really like Dart's framework for this. I would agree that a system that accounts for both IC and OOC challenges is more functional for all players since people's preferences will be different. Those terms lay out a foundation to keep things very equally fair for both sides and help quiet a lot of the chaos surrounding the issue.
-
it is rather inclusive. Which is the point I believe.
What was I thinking...
Oh!
So if you are going be the IC kind of guy you still have to be out in public and stuff. You can't hole up and not give people a chance to learn about you.
HOWEVER...I hate this everyone and their left shoe are now suddenly sensors. I don't' think chakra sensing should be legit in determining the ID of a host. Location of ID'd host is different, but I think some actually intel works should be used to ID one. If you are going the IC route.
Everyone has chakra-vision too though, and Neji was able to see Naruto's copious amounts of chakra. Would preventing sensors from finding bijū really change all that much?
Just curious, I like Kay's point about everyone being sensors.
-
I still vote that we do not tip the minefield and even allow an IC route. Why, for the love of goodness, would you want to go the IC route? It is more difficult, requires RP that has to be validated, and could open up yet another opportunity for a large RP to sink like a torpedoed ship.
Per biju regarding challenges I see no issue with, and am all for the proposed OOC. I just am really against the RP option right now.
-
What if we left it up to the host to pick IC or OOC? Would that be too problematic?
We already seem to be planning to let them pick if their challenge fights are IC/OOC
-
I still deny the Jinchuriki can't fight other Jinchuriki rule. I fought who I want!
-
Thank you for those who support my idea. I'm honestly astonished that it would get any.
@Bocchiere: Yea, we know. However, to promote fairness to the rest of the SLverse, it allows for others to grab a bijū for himself/herself. It's really only fair for one (1) player to have one (1) bijū despite the amount of accounts they use.
@Eric: Well, the IC option is available to allows for those who love to play out stories and roleplay. Most, it seems, want that quick time fix of gratification rather than the more enjoyed satisfaction of actually achieving a goal.
@Sabu and Eric: Also, as I proposed, the way the path is taken is purely up to both parties involved. If they want an OCC battle, then that's how it'll be with the (proposed) rules applied. If IC, same deal.
Ahh, for sensors, I have a few more ideas on them but we can hash that out after we amend the current rules. One step at a time will lend more progress than rapidly firing away at different topics.
-
Nothing more for me to say really, Dart already said about the same thing as I suggested.
Leave it to people to decide which they want to do, unless there's so much trouble otherwise that OOC is the only option.
-
... @Eric: Well, the IC option is available to allows for those who love to play out stories and roleplay. Most, it seems, want that quick time fix of gratification rather than the more enjoyed satisfaction of actually achieving a goal.
@Sabu and Eric: Also, as I proposed, the way the path is taken is purely up to both parties involved. If they want an OCC battle, then that's how it'll be with the (proposed) rules applied. If IC, same deal...
Are you implying that an OOC fight gives less satisfaction than an IC fight with RP involved? I may be embittered by recent events, but going through the RP just to have someone ninja you via challenge is a waste of time and effort. I would rather just fight the sucker in a 1v1 match, throw my dice, and continue moving on with more relaxing RP at the same time. But that's just me.
The only issue I guess I can put forth that is not a "I don't want to see another RP crapstorm cause someone wanted to do the RP route" is that we put stipulations that prevent the aforementioned conflict of an on-going RP being pointless because a host loses a challenge.
-
Woo. I'm here. I skimmed the 4 pages of responses, but did read in full Dart's post.
I agree with •Make all challenges, whether IC or OCC, 1v1 only. This I highly agree with. Do you know how long a battle with anymore than 2 people takes? A long ass time. 1v1 easier for everyone.
I don't agree with •Instead of having only four (4) challenges per year per host, I suggest having it be only four (4) challenges per year per bijū.
Mainly because this screws out any other person who may want a shot at it. Say the four people already went through and those took place in June. Then what? The host gets the rest 11 months off? The point of a bijuu is to battle, show power, ect. If you don't want to deal with challenges don't get a bijuu. If this is to be implemented who decides who fills the 4 slots? If the host gets to pick then they will pick all 4 weakest people.
As for •I do like the one (1) week activity per fight but I believe earlier in the year it was discussed allowing a month of time in case of something drastic occurring? But only allowed to use that month clause ONCE a full year.
I came up with the month off due to real life circumstances. 1 month per year. This was actually in the case of Xia who seemed to be quite busy.
Obviously agreeing with •OCC vs. IC to be determined by participating challenger and jinchūriki. Those are the only two who have say in the fight, ever. No outside bystanders decide that ever.
•Pre-determined judge to be present should issues arise. <- This I have delved into a lot. Taking multiple forms from judges to Gm's and so forth. I agree with it. However some things need to be taken care of for it to work.
Only those who are known to be unbiased. Darkshinobi is my go to for anything that needs to be judged. He's not afraid to shut the door on his own friends if it's to be fair. He also knows his shit.
Judge(s) are picked by the challenger and the host. No one else.
•Current jinchūriki cannot challenge for another bijū.
This doesn't make sense to me. I am doing this right now in the Kiri fight. I took the 2 tails and am now going for another one. You take a bijuu from the easiest opponent and then you can challenge another host to 'upgrade'. So if you're someone like Dart who claims lava release and such then the Yonbi would be a perfect match. However you only have the nibi so then you challenge to get the yonbi? That would make sense to do such.
•NO voiding! Have to finish the fight until a decisive end is met.
->Only voiding may be issued by judge's decision.
If the host and the challenger want to void it then they can. The judge has no say in it if both the parties agree on it. However one party cannot void the fight.
The OOC and IC things I agree with however that's still up to the participants. If it's IC yet they want the host to live after the beast is extracted then why can't they?
The main issues with bijuu fights are the debating and how to challenge. I'm going with the side that the host has most say.
Character | Tailed Beast | IC or OCC | Judge picked | Additional information | Rules |
Shadow | Nibi (Two tails) | To be decided by Shadow and the challenger | Darkshinobi | Anyone can challenge OOC anytime however Shadow can pick weather or not to accept the fight. To IC challenge him for the Nibi one must find him IC. If found IC has to accept the fight. Rules are to be picked by challenger and Shadow.
Things that cannot be decided by the host: Activity. Once every 2 weeks has to post. Anywhere they want. During a fight to avoid battles taking weeks; each person has to post weekly. After that the one that doesn't post is kicked out of the fight and then is subject to any terms agreed on beforehand. Example: It was decided IC to the death. However the host doesn't post for a week then the challenger wins and the host dies. If found IC they have to accept the challenge.
That's just an example of what I want.
-
It was meant as only one person maybe challenge for a specific bijū four (4) times a year to avoid people hopping right back "in line" for a challenge. Anyone can challenge but they may only challenge four (4) times for the same bijū. It wasn't limiting the jinchūriki to literally only having four (4) challenges a year, silly. :P It is limiting say Dart from continuously challenging for Kurama all year long. No, he gets four (4) shots at obtaining it, and then he has to wait until the year is over. However, to circumnavigate that, Dart could still challenge for the other bijū. Each time only four chances to secure it.
As I said to Bocchiere, it's more fair for the other player in the SLverse to have a shot at attaining a bijū. If you don't like your bijū, then give it away and go and fight for the other one. No need to "stack" up or have another Zenaku ordeal. (P.S. Which was awesome at the time, don't get me wrong.)
The voiding issue seems to be the biggest problem because one side does try to void out. Of course, if both parties can agree, then it would certainly come to fruition but how often does that really occur? The judge, when being asked for a decision, can choose what can or cannot be voided IF and ONLY IF it needs to be. I.E., blatant god mod, meta gaming, cheating, etc..
I do so very much like the end format of what you desire. I dare even say if these rules are adopted, each jinchūriki make a similar template. Just so much easier for others to read and choose and know how to challenge.
-
If it's a rule that Jinchuriki can't challenge Jinchuriki then it should only be for the OOC fights.
What if I attack Kiri and I have a bijuu Dart and Xia just can't fight me then? Or if they kill me do they just have to let the bijuu go? It would make no sense IC.
-
I don't agree that they can't challenge each other. For reasons Bocc said and cause if they want to become stronger by getting a 'better' bijuu then they should be able to.
-
Nah, I agree with Dart. No challenging others, it creates people who hoard biju, and that isn't very fun when that happens.
@Bocc's response: It should only be for ooc challenges, you should be allowed to fight, if you stumble across each other IC.
@Shadow's response: They should have tried for the "better" biju, before becoming a host for a different one.
-
Nah, I agree with Dart. No challenging others, it creates people who hoard biju, and that isn't very fun when that happens.
@Bocc's response: It should only be for ooc challenges, you should be allowed to fight, if you stumble across each other IC.
@Shadow's response: They should have tried for the "better" biju, before becoming a host for a different one.
I agree with Dart's comment as well, but more or less if people see each other IC, the only people who can sense a Jinchuriki is another Jinchuriki. This crap with people know you're a Jinchuriki without knowledge IC just annoys me.
I don't think much of the rules need to change, but it needs to be addressed that if you do not have knowledge, then you're wrong. Common sense guys.
-
Nah, I agree with Dart. No challenging others, it creates people who hoard biju, and that isn't very fun when that happens.
@Bocc's response: It should only be for ooc challenges, you should be allowed to fight, if you stumble across each other IC.
@Shadow's response: They should have tried for the "better" biju, before becoming a host for a different one.
I agree with Dart's comment as well, but more or less if people see each other IC, the only people who can sense a Jinchuriki is another Jinchuriki. This crap with people know you're a Jinchuriki without knowledge IC just annoys me.
I don't think much of the rules need to change, but it needs to be addressed that if you do not have knowledge, then you're wrong. Common sense guys.
I don't really care for the IC approach at all, but it seems like I'm losing that battle, so I'll try to pitch in ideas regarding the IC approach.
If the only people who can sense other jinchs are other jinchs, that would basically require jinchs to be on the hunting teams in order for a practical hunt to take place, unless you're going after your own village jinch.
...The main issues with bijuu fights are the debating and how to challenge. I'm going with the side that the host has most say.
Character | Tailed Beast | IC or OCC | Judge picked | Additional information | Rules |
Shadow | Nibi (Two tails) | To be decided by Shadow and the challenger | Darkshinobi | Anyone can challenge OOC anytime however Shadow can pick weather or not to accept the fight. To IC challenge him for the Nibi one must find him IC. If found IC has to accept the fight. Rules are to be picked by challenger and Shadow...
As I think already mentioned, the idea of being allowed to deny OOC challenges without a basis for the denial is a little too much selective power in the hands of the host. Not to mention that, while snazzy, every host having their own individual set of rules is jut going to be a screwfest for the challenger, especially if the challenger is required to comply with said rules in order to challenge.
-
Yeah I agree with Eric. That was one very bad thing about the previous rules. Certain people were very much of the opinion that, "Well I'm the host so I get to basically make up any rules I want, on the spot." That needs to not be a thing.
-
"@Shadow's response: They should have tried for the "better" biju, before becoming a host for a different one."
I went after Rinn cause I saw him as the easiest and fastest. I thought I could kill him and get the bijuu quickly. (While it was easy, it took a long ass time) The Nibi was a boost for me.
I wouldn't feel 'confident' going at say Zenaku (if I were to) without a bijuu.
With the Nibi I now have more chakra and even more moves to draw from once mastered. Thus I'm more confident.
This is what I mean. I get something that will help and do for now and once ready you go for the 'upgrade.' That only makes sense.
-
As for the Host has the most say, I'm still in favor of it. I'll refine my template.
Character |
Shadow
Bijuu |
Nibi (Two tails)
Preferred Judge(s) | [Both parties have to agree]
Darkshinobi
Trev
Kamui
Rules |
To be decided by Shadow and challenger
OCC or IC |
To be decided by Shadow and challenger
Fixed rules that cannot be decided by host or challenger |
If challenged IC the host CANNOT decline and must battle.
If challenged OCC the host CAN refuse if plausible clause is shown.
Fight has to take place in a PUBLIC area such as a zone preferably.
At least one judge has to be picked for the fight. If neither can come to an agreement on who they want both can choose 1 judge each.
Activity |
While not in a fight the host MUST post once a fortnight anywhere in public that they want. (No private areas) They must stay there for a FULL day. 24 hours.
Once a year the host can play the emergency card. This allows them a whole month (30/31) days until they have to post. (Excluding in the middle of a battle)
While in a fight both host and challenger have a time frame of 1 week (7 days) to post unless changed.
Things that may extend the time frame of posting |
A judge decision is being made.
Something in real life suddenly happens to either party. (Emergencies) Both can extend their posting time frame by (1) week ONCE.
If the time frame is not abided by |
Dependent on what the participants chose...
If OOC the match is canceled (basically) and things go back to normal.
If the challenger 'timed' out. They'll have to wait 2 months 'probation' before they can challenge another host.
If the host 'timed' out. They'll have to give up their bijuu and wait 2 months before challenging another host or the current host of their former beast.
If IC non-death match follow the above ^ (**)
If IC Death Match...
If the challenger 'timed' out. They'll die. Host gets to pick how this person died. (Human path, shinigami soul stealing, ect)
If the host 'timed' out. They'll die (**) and the challenger now decides how the host died. Also get their bijuu. (**If challenger decides to just 'extract' the beast the host can live if Uzumaki, immortal, or having wood release)
In-dept challenging details |
In order to challenge a host OOC you must send a mail to the respective character with this template:
Your character name: Ryakushi Tenzo
Challenging for: The 67 tails
Zone preferred: Zone 5
Judge(s) preferred: Darkshinobi, Kayenta, Zenaku
Fight Date: The 5th of April, 2016.
Once the challenging template is sent then the host can reply with a yes or no. If declined the host has to give plausible cause.
||
To challenge IC just find the host through LEGITIMATE means.
Calling your friend in Konoha does not count. Going to Kiri for a vacation and the host just happens to be there does not count.
Using an ALT will be voided.
You do not have to give the current host a 'heads up'
The host does not have to give away their status as a host.
Only other hosts and high leveled sensors can sense jinks.
Plausible Cause (OOC) |
Host is currently in a battle
Host is currently using the E card (30 day extend on their host activity duties)
Host just got finished with a battle. (Host then has the default fortnight to wait before accepting)
Host does not get along with the challenger or the challenger is known to not be able to rp. (?)
Challenger is currently on probation from a previous fight
Challenger has already challenged in the last 3 months.
I tried to cover every aspect. Please let me know if I missed anything.
Things that I didn't suggest fixing;
ºShould the Biju be Host-lessº
ºNo Auto-Hittingº
ºNo God-Moddingº
ºHosts are allowed to use their tailsº
ºGrace Periodº
ºTampering with the Bijuº
ºTime Limitationsº
ºChallenge Listº
ºChallenge Limitationsº
-
The only thing I saw there as a flaw Shadow was that if you are in a fight you can't have a leave of absence due to emergency...30/31 days.
I see that you have the one week stipulation to postpone your fight so I guess that might be enough time to make arrangements to inform people what is going on. However, it's not much of a change though seeing as you are only required to post once a week anyhow. Did you mean an additional week up and above the once a week activity clause?
I suggest that if the challenger or host...cause it could be the challenger's emergency...doesn't have a problem waiting then it should be permitted.
It would make it two weeks to post instead of one. If stacked.
So if they were already 5 days into the 7 day frame then an emergency comes up they can play that emergency card and add 7 days. Instead of 2 days they now have 9 to post.
If the opposer doesn't mind waiting for the other party then sure they can wait even longer. Max of 3 weeks then?
Post has to be done within a week. If an emergency pops up you can then extent your post by 1 week more, if the person you're fighting allows and doesn't mind it, they can give (1) week absence on top of that. Up to a total of 3 weeks. Past that, they're SOL. We don't want fights to take forever as other challengers may be waiting their turn patiently. While it's no ones fault if something happens not everyone should be forced to their 'time limitation'.
2-3 weeks max under extreme conditions and no more?
-
ºNo Auto-Hittingº
ºNo God-Moddingº
Yeah I think we should definitely allow god modding and auto hitting. I mean we've always denied them and we've been having problems with bijuu fights. So maybe that is the solution we've been looking for!
-
If the host is to live IC, then they had best have some method other than "extreme life force" to do so. Even if the challenger wants them alive for nefarious reasons after the extraction, there might as well be an IC method for that. Who is going to go around verifying that? Don't look at me, I aint got the time. :-?
Just saying "host can live anyways" after losing the tailed beast IC is kind of silly imho. If you want to do the RP route, might as well take the limb with it.
Regarding the judge thing, I would strongly advise against having more than one judge, or at least having an odd number of judges. Even if they can't agree on one, then a compromise of another sort has to be made. If two judges make conflicting statements, then the cloud just got confusing again, and we're back to square two of this mess.
If they can't come to a decision on a judge, then they must not want to fight each other bad enough. That's the way I see it. I do see, however, that that could give judge picking powers a bit more to the host in an OOC fight, but picking more than one judge, and it being an even number of judges at that, is asking for trouble.
-
If the host is to live IC, then they had best have some method other than "extreme life force" to do so. Even if the challenger wants them alive for nefarious reasons after the extraction, there might as well be an IC method for that. Who is going to go around verifying that? Don't look at me, I aint got the time. :-?
Just saying "host can live anyways" after losing the tailed beast IC is kind of silly imho. If you want to do the RP route, might as well take the limb with it.
Regarding the judge thing, I would strongly advise against having more than one judge, or at least having an odd number of judges. Even if they can't agree on one, then a compromise of another sort has to be made. If two judges make conflicting statements, then the cloud just got confusing again, and we're back to square two of this mess.
If they can't come to a decision on a judge, then they must not want to fight each other bad enough. That's the way I see it. I do see, however, that that could give judge picking powers a bit more to the host in an OOC fight, but picking more than one judge, and it being an even number of judges at that, is asking for trouble.
There's always Chiyo's life give thingy. I don't think it matters if the host lives after or not. We don't want everyone dead as said. "Uzumaki, Wood release, jashin/orochimaru'ness) Those are the only methods of living after. IF your opponent even allows you to. Highly unlikely.
So if they don't agree on a judge they both pick one and then the two judges they picked picks the third? xD This itself is getting confusing.
Judges should come to terms with one another through some method.
Agree on a judge to avoid all of this.
-
If the host is to live IC, then they had best have some method other than "extreme life force" to do so. Even if the challenger wants them alive for nefarious reasons after the extraction, there might as well be an IC method for that. Who is going to go around verifying that? Don't look at me, I aint got the time. :-?
Just saying "host can live anyways" after losing the tailed beast IC is kind of silly imho. If you want to do the RP route, might as well take the limb with it.
Regarding the judge thing, I would strongly advise against having more than one judge, or at least having an odd number of judges. Even if they can't agree on one, then a compromise of another sort has to be made. If two judges make conflicting statements, then the cloud just got confusing again, and we're back to square two of this mess.
If they can't come to a decision on a judge, then they must not want to fight each other bad enough. That's the way I see it. I do see, however, that that could give judge picking powers a bit more to the host in an OOC fight, but picking more than one judge, and it being an even number of judges at that, is asking for trouble.
There's always Chiyo's life give thingy. I don't think it matters if the host lives after or not. We don't want everyone dead as said. "Uzumaki, Wood release, jashin/orochimaru'ness) Those are the only methods of living after. IF your opponent even allows you to. Highly unlikely.
So if they don't agree on a judge they both pick one and then the two judges they picked picks the third? xD This itself is getting confusing.
Judges should come to terms with one another through some method.
Agree on a judge to avoid all of this.
For what reason would people want to do the IC route then? From what I have read/heard, it is to do things "properly", "earn it" through RPing the events, from the sniffing out of where the jinch is to the planning, then the attacking, and then the extraction as well. Dying upon getting the beast extracted is a part of that RP package that hosts would have to deal with. If you remove that aspect or make it completely irrelevant, then that is one portion of the RP experience that is not, well, experienced.
And for the record, Chiyo's "One's Own Life" technique would sacrifice the user's life if the target were dead. Most would just use a custom reincarnation technique rather than one similar to that.
Did we ever address the possibility of an OOC and an IC challenge going on at the same time? I can't recall.
-
Eric I don't they'd let each other live. By the time the fight starts the two are already heated by then and want to kill each other. Under the condition that one is feeling sympathy then why can't they live? Maybe IC they are that way. Take Goku. He's a badass, but will give his enemies a second chance. Let the rp'ers rp how they want I say. 99% of the time it will be a death match and no sympathy will be shown.
To my knowledge the reason Chiyo dies when performing the res is it uses all her life force. You link up with others and channel their total energy through the user of the jutsu and it depletes everyone quite a bit but kills no one.
^ There. Her technique does NOT kill the caster. She was just old af already. Naruto did not die cause he's a young spring chicken.
Moving on to IC and OOC happening at the same time. That CANNOT be done. What if the host losses both battles? This creates an issue I'd rather avoid altogether by saying one battle at a time, no more.
-
I believe one fight at a time is only common sense.
So, how to prevent it then? If you have a line of people challenging you OOC, you cannot be hunted down IC and vice versa?
* http://naruto.wikia.com/wiki/One%27s_Own_Life_Reincarnation
The user in general would die if the target is dead and they are trying to bring them back to life. If they are fatally injured (the likes of which getting your tailed beast extracted is probably the fringe without special life force) then according to the wikia that does not kill the user.
So while you are right, it's conditional, as someone without special life force would probably die before said technique could be used on them without having to sacrifice a life for it.
-
I believe one fight at a time is only common sense.
So, how to prevent it then? If you have a line of people challenging you OOC, you cannot be hunted down IC and vice versa?
I get what you're saying. If they are in an ooc fight and someone is hunting them IC and then what? Well this host seems to be very popular. Either way first come; first serve. Whoever asks/gets to them first. That's the only way I see how it can work out.
-
I believe one fight at a time is only common sense.
So, how to prevent it then? If you have a line of people challenging you OOC, you cannot be hunted down IC and vice versa?
I get what you're saying. If they are in an ooc fight and someone is hunting them IC and then what? Well this host seems to be very popular. Either way first come; first serve. Whoever asks/gets to them first. That's the only way I see how it can work out.
If, in theory, you have a long list of OOC challengers (cause folks are confident they can beat you) then you could not at all fight in IC battles for the tailed beast, because until the actual fight begins, the host is not obligated to consider the hunters as hunters, if I understand correctly.
This makes it very troublesome if a host is particularly popular.
-
This makes it very troublesome if a host is particularly popular.
Guys you can just say "Sabu" instead. ;)
-
I believe one fight at a time is only common sense.
So, how to prevent it then? If you have a line of people challenging you OOC, you cannot be hunted down IC and vice versa?
I get what you're saying. If they are in an ooc fight and someone is hunting them IC and then what? Well this host seems to be very popular. Either way first come; first serve. Whoever asks/gets to them first. That's the only way I see how it can work out.
If, in theory, you have a long list of OOC challengers (cause folks are confident they can beat you) then you could not at all fight in IC battles for the tailed beast, because until the actual fight begins, the host is not obligated to consider the hunters as hunters, if I understand correctly.
This makes it very troublesome if a host is particularly popular.
IC requires more work than OOC so I'd vote to make OCC challenges second to IC battles. Due to the work put in. That is, they tell the host they are hunting them?
Like I said, first come, first serve. The host by default I don't think has to accept OOC challenges if IC challenges are there.
If the host has no IC challenges then they have to start doing any OOC challenges.
If both are there then they do a crisscross action going from OOC to IC and so forth.
-
Or we just do it like I do. Since my fight with Zen is now OOC-ish when it finishes we will finish whatever rp's we are in and at the end of them it will be assumed that is when, chronologically the fight began. That way OOC doesn't effect IC stuff.
Unless of course you die IC and that screws up the OOC stuff. But just don't die then. xD
-
How about we deal with this first section of edits I am proposing....
1] ºHow to Challenge a Jinchurikiº
In order to challenge a Jinchuriki & obtain a Biju, one must extend an invitation to its host; this places you on the list of challengers that each host must maintain in a publicly accessibly spot. [Either as a post in this thread they will keep updated or on the wikia as a discussion topic on the tailed beasts page.] The two will make all arrangements for when the match will being and where. Should the Jinchuriki ignore or refuse the invitation(s)-with no reason given- 3 times consecutively, you may report it to other Jinchuriki. Subject for such an event's invitation, for proof & reference of a challenge, must be titled: (Number of tails) - (Name of Jinchuriki); the body of the message may be as you please (though manners & politeness would of course make things much smoother).
2] ºDetermine the Nature of the Challengeº
The host and the challenger must then decide it the match will be an IC Challenge or an OOC Challenge. This means that if an IC Challenge is chosen, the challenger has to RP learning the host’s identity and location and maneuvers him into a Match. This does not mean that the RP is used as a means for the Host to forever avoid having to face his challenger. The host must make it possible for the challenger to complete the terms of the RP event. This is not the battle part. You are going to face off with each other. You are just being creative about it.
If the OOC Challenge is chosen, then no RP concerning the challenge is performed. The details are agreed upon and the Match takes place.
3] ºDetermine the Details of the Matchº
The host and challenger must decide if the battle is to the death. They decide if others are permitted to participate or the match is 1v1. Will there be exclusions concerning what powers are to be used? Who will be the judge? Is a time limit proposed in which to complete the challenge?
In short, yes, yes, and yes.
-
@Kay: Sounds pretty perfect so far!
-
2] ºDetermine the Nature of the Challengeº
The host and the challenger must then decide it the match will be an IC Challenge or an OOC Challenge. This means that if an IC Challenge is chosen, the challenger has to RP learning the host’s identity and location and maneuvers him into a Match. This does not mean that the RP is used as a means for the Host to forever avoid having to face his challenger. The host must make it possible for the challenger to complete the terms of the RP event. This is not the battle part. You are going to face off with each other. You are just being creative about it.
If the OOC Challenge is chosen, then no RP concerning the challenge is performed. The details are agreed upon and the Match takes place.
What a drag. :( I mean, it's a good plan, but giving the hunter the tools to hunt them down? I can see some very long wait times for the IC route, because goodness knows how long it would take to RP said event. Making it possible for the hunter doesn't mean making it easy or convenient.
But I digress. I think 1v1 should be the only option for OOC matches for the sake of convenience. And if there are multiple others in the match, those "supporters" have no say in the rules of the match, or at least the picking of the judge. We don't need 4 people butting heads over who is going to be the judge.
-
2] ºDetermine the Nature of the Challengeº
The host and the challenger must then decide it the match will be an IC Challenge or an OOC Challenge. This means that if an IC Challenge is chosen, the challenger has to RP learning the host’s identity and location and maneuvers him into a Match. This does not mean that the RP is used as a means for the Host to forever avoid having to face his challenger. The host must make it possible for the challenger to complete the terms of the RP event. This is not the battle part. You are going to face off with each other. You are just being creative about it.
If the OOC Challenge is chosen, then no RP concerning the challenge is performed. The details are agreed upon and the Match takes place.
What a drag. :( I mean, it's a good plan, but giving the hunter the tools to hunt them down? I can see some very long wait times for the IC route, because goodness knows how long it would take to RP said event. Making it possible for the hunter doesn't mean making it easy or convenient.
But I digress. I think 1v1 should be the only option for OOC matches for the sake of convenience. And if there are multiple others in the match, those "supporters" have no say in the rules of the match, or at least the picking of the judge. We don't need 4 people butting heads over who is going to be the judge.
They took the time to actually rp it so they get 'dibs'. Then some think otherwise, which is why I stated the crisscross method. You go from OOC to IC and back. So not only IC challengers or OOC ones are done. Having a bijuu is never going to be easy or convenient.
I want 1v1 only. Anymore than that is downright awful. It doesn't work and takes months. No joke. That Kiri ordeal? STILL GOING ON AS WE SPEAK. It's stupid and doesn't need to be an option. 1 v 1 only.
-
2] ºDetermine the Nature of the Challengeº
The host and the challenger must then decide it the match will be an IC Challenge or an OOC Challenge. This means that if an IC Challenge is chosen, the challenger has to RP learning the host’s identity and location and maneuvers him into a Match. This does not mean that the RP is used as a means for the Host to forever avoid having to face his challenger. The host must make it possible for the challenger to complete the terms of the RP event. This is not the battle part. You are going to face off with each other. You are just being creative about it.
If the OOC Challenge is chosen, then no RP concerning the challenge is performed. The details are agreed upon and the Match takes place.
What a drag. :( I mean, it's a good plan, but giving the hunter the tools to hunt them down? I can see some very long wait times for the IC route, because goodness knows how long it would take to RP said event. Making it possible for the hunter doesn't mean making it easy or convenient.
But I digress. I think 1v1 should be the only option for OOC matches for the sake of convenience. And if there are multiple others in the match, those "supporters" have no say in the rules of the match, or at least the picking of the judge. We don't need 4 people butting heads over who is going to be the judge.
I want 1v1 only. Anymore than that is downright awful...
An earlier question I had is my reply, in short. What is the point of doing it IC-wise?
If both OOC and IC battles have 1v1, then the RP implications would state that the hunted would have to leave their nest, or in some way be isolated, in order for an IC fight to actually be 1v1 (and keep everything IC. Those knowing they are hunted wouldn't just up and engage in a 1v1 fight for the shits of it) unless there is some level of OOC added into the behavior of hosts.
All that considered, if IC fights are also 1v1 and the host is forced, RPwise, to engage in a 1v1 battle after also giving greater possibility of tracking for the hunter in some shape or fashion, why would a host want to fight IC when they can practically do the same thing in an OOC match?
As much of a mess as it is, there are apparently folks who would prefer a 2v2 or larger biju match of some sort. Otherwise, considering the stipulations, doing it IC is literally a waste of time and effort, as all the hunter is doing that is different from OOC is actually hunting down the character. Fighting them 1v1 just due to defacto rules renders null any jinch's attempts at venturing out with allies.
Again, in short, what is the point of there being an IC option? The answer is to have the IC experience, however gruesome it has been in the past (and will possibly be in the future) that is more than just "send PM or make post, start fight".
I do however agree that there does not need to be an entire village backing the jinch. A hard cap at 3v3 for the IC fights seems more reasonable than strictly limiting it to 1v1.
-
MY thoughts on the matter:
IF it is open ended like this and the host and MAIN challenger agree...fine.
But if they do not agree then it would have to default to an OOC match.
I however wish to refuse others to hone in on the event. I see no reason to permit it to be further complicated just because it can be. Only one fight at a time against one challenger. The next guy can wait his turn. No matter if the challenge is being rp'd or no. I seriously wish to have a list of challenges and the order they will be handled in to be adhered to.
The challenger and the host set the rules. I don't see any point in forcing people who wish to do an IC match to go the OOC route either. Obviously you will not be doing it that way. As a host you will take part in determining how your match will be. You do not need to decided how everyone else will do theirs as well. We should be flexible enough to allow people who wish to RP that option of doing so. You don't see the point in it. Well they do. How does it hurt you for them to do as they wish and for you to do as you wish? A limit of 3v3 sounds reasonable.
As long as I am not forced (while a host or even as a future hunter) to do an IC route, regardless of the hunter's initiative, then I'm done beating my drum on the matter. And as long as folks don't use the RP fight as a way to drag out fighting other challengers I am also putting the sticks down.
I won't put my stones down though until I see how this works in practice.
-
Why do you think I stepped down from having a Bijuu? I had it for 2 or 3 weeks and I gave it back. Too much a hassle.
-
Snorts...he said stones.
anyway...Absoultely. we are not going to know how any of this works until it is used or what the real time problems of it will be until they occur.
to have a flexible guide though that can be altered as needs be hopefully will be of use to people in the future.
Personally I never want to be a host again. I Can't handle the hoo ha. Which is a shame cause Yugito without her Nibi is just odd.
It is gonna be an issue though when the host really wants to rp and you say...ARGH. I don't know what to do. its wrong to try and force either option. I am against that completely.
what about the one fight at a time thing? I see that as just trying to stop the madness before it can start.
Sticks and stones. ;D
The one fight at a time thing is the only way to do it. Multiple fights at a time, just is not going to work. So placing both preferred method of combat along with the challenge lets other challengers know not just what position they are in, but what the person before them might be doing.
If I see that there are 5 people wanting the IC option before I challenge, I'll find some other host personally. Heck, if there are that many people ahead of me, I would probably just go find another host anyways, or come back later, even if it was OOC.
So yeah, challenger's entry: name, (beast desired should be implied based on thread replied to), preferred method of challenge, and preferred judge. If host doesn't like it because of any of said criteria, they do have to let the challenger know before they pass the buck, in case they are willing to compromise.
-
Ok....so the edits were made to rules 1,2,3 and placed in the official thread. Please vocalize objections if I got those 3 wrong. Here are the next three for discussion. As always even after we decide on the edits they are still easily revised and flexible.
5] ºShould the Biju be Host-lessº
Should the Biju be sealed within something not a Jinchuriki, whomsoever is in possession of the tailed beast (for a prolonged period of one week or more) is entitled to assume duties of fighting for possession of the Biju. As such: Biju are not to be set free to roam; they must be sealed and delivered to the kage of their last Jinchuriki.
6] ºHow to declare a winnerº
The battle commences with the initial post & terminates once either combatant is unable to continue. Such a feat can result in several ways, including knock-outs (concussions, etc.), full paralysis, almost-fatal wounds & so forth. So long as both parties declare it plausible & understand the longevity/risk of the claim, it's considered eligible for use. However, things can, of course, become debatable in an attempt to reach such a goal & in doing so arguments are bound to commence. Judges chosen before the match will officiate. If desired, either party can have other hosts or officials of sorts represent them for a more "legitimized" (as some have called it) reasoning or "Back-up". All discussion is to be kept civil as is befitting of a participant in this event.
One judge to rule on match. That's my pitch and I'm sticking with it.
Additionally, ownership should be specified to be a single person who is responsible for the beast. While cool to have "it is the village's pot, so we will fight for it as a village" idea, it would be rather tricky having even OOC fights with the potential mass of people who would be butting heads.
There needs to be a designated owner at all times the biju can be contested for, even if said owner is not the host. If an inactive is considered the owner, it either goes next in line already to have been designated or the beast goes up for public tourney (which I guess is a larger scale OOC challenge of sorts).
-
Additionally, ownership should be specified to be a single person who is responsible for the beast. While cool to have "it is the village's pot, so we will fight for it as a village" idea, it would be rather tricky having even OOC fights with the potential mass of people who would be butting heads.
There needs to be a designated owner at all times the biju can be contested for, even if said owner is not the host. If an inactive is considered the owner, it either goes next in line already to have been designated or the beast goes up for public tourney (which I guess is a larger scale OOC challenge of sorts).
I like the word Champion better than owner. But the concept is the same.
Not entirely the same thing as far as I see it. An owner would host/control the beast as if they were a jinch, whether they were the original host or not.
A champion would merely fight for it in the absence of the actual jinch, thus preventing the tailed beast from even being used in the challenge for it.
-
Which is precisely why I don't like it.
An owner would get all of the perks and none of the risks. Seems like a cheat to me.
only hosts should get to use the beast as if they were a host.
If the beast is passed over due to the original host's inactivity, then the new "owner" IS the new host, by defacto really. Unless I missed something.
-
then what you are saying is to pick a new host.
What I am now saying is "backup host", yes. Though champion indeed is probably what I was originally for in the post where I brought the matter up.
-
I haven't been reading too carefully, so forgive me if this has been addressed, but are we throwing out the tailed beast as summons concept? I know most players don't take that route, but it was an option.
-
I haven't been reading too carefully, so forgive me if this has been addressed, but are we throwing out the tailed beast as summons concept? I know most players don't take that route, but it was an option.
Kage did, I think. Obviously people will at times. I even thought about it.
I'd say same challenge rules apply. Why not right?
-
I haven't been reading too carefully, so forgive me if this has been addressed, but are we throwing out the tailed beast as summons concept? I know most players don't take that route, but it was an option.
Kage did, I think. Obviously people will at times. I even thought about it.
I'd say same challenge rules apply. Why not right?
More or less, the only real difference is the IC route, since keeping the beasties in a pocket dimension will make it rather difficult to acquire IC, even if the owner is beaten.
As far as champions and the sort, it's alot less sticky seeing as no extraction and sealing have to like, ever go on that might result in the death of a party member. I'm too lazy to reference the rules though, so no doubt if questions arise about it (which they will given time) we'll address them as we go.
-
I haven't been reading too carefully, so forgive me if this has been addressed, but are we throwing out the tailed beast as summons concept? I know most players don't take that route, but it was an option.
Kage did, I think. Obviously people will at times. I even thought about it.
I'd say same challenge rules apply. Why not right?
More or less, the only real difference is the IC route, since keeping the beasties in a pocket dimension will make it rather difficult to acquire IC, even if the owner is beaten.
As far as champions and the sort, it's alot less sticky seeing as no extraction and sealing have to like, ever go on that might result in the death of a party member. I'm too lazy to reference the rules though, so no doubt if questions arise about it (which they will given time) we'll address them as we go.
Most people just magically seal the beast in themselves. I did. Even if it's kept in a pocket dimension and the fight is IC, I say the challenger gets it. It warps out of the pocket dimension because it's too powerful to be held by a dead man's eye. Or something.
-
Reading over the rules in preparation for deliberation, I noticed that we lacked a statement regarding what we are going to do if a challenger, or host, goes inactive during their battle.
We never worked out a solid tournament format either in case a champion cannot be found for the tailed beast and the beast goes up for pot. Thoughts and suggestions on it? It's too early for me to be taking a crack at it.
-
Reading over the rules in preparation for deliberation, I noticed that we lacked a statement regarding what we are going to do if a challenger, or host, goes inactive during their battle.
We never worked out a solid tournament format either in case a champion cannot be found for the tailed beast and the beast goes up for pot. Thoughts and suggestions on it? It's too early for me to be taking a crack at it.
I addressed if the host or challenger went inactive. I don't know if you guys agree, but it was:
If In-character death match. They get to decide how the other died. Human path, shinigami soul steal, ect.
In OOC they just get the bijuu if the other goes in active.