Shinobi Legends Forum

Roleplay => Village Square => Topic started by: Ѕhadow on June 20, 2014, 07:09:25 PM

Title: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 20, 2014, 07:09:25 PM
A link to this thread was posted on ALL village boards and in MHQ so the community could see what's happening.

So, as many of you know we have moved past the 1v1 in a zone and we then moved to IC rules. Fun stuff. However there are a lot of loopholes and the new system can and is being abused pretty badly.  Without further ado; bijuu rules modification.

CURRENT RULES

Guidelines

◾ (1) Jinchūriki are to be hunted in-character. As a requirement, knowledge as to their identity and location are mandatory to possess in order to legitimately locate them (not so much the latter if the jinchūriki is constantly roaming outside of a village).

◾ (2) Identity can be discovered if it's made common knowledge within a village and word gets around. Additionally an incredibly skilled sensor or another jinchūriki can sense and identify them if they're nearby within the same zone.
 
◾ (3) Location can be discovered through common knowledge similarly with identity. In the case of wandering jinchūriki, entering the zone they're in by chance and then using a sensor/jinchūriki is sufficient enough to locate them (so long as they have no safeguards preventing sensing up).

◾ (4) Jinchūriki have an obligation to roleplay, posting in a public location outside their village of residence at least once every fortnight for the length of a day, even if it's just to visit another village. Those unaffiliated with a village should either post in a village or in the zones.

◾ (5) 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.

◾ (6) 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.

◾ (7) Tailed beasts must be sealed within a jinckurii within a week of capture. Tailed beasts may be captured yet still before that time since there is no grace period.

◾ (8) Or, a tailed beast may be treated as a summon of the user. However, control of the beast must be maintained via genjutsu, and the user is only capable of defensive moves while the beast is active. In order to lose possession of the tailed beast, the user must have their contract nullified, control lost of the tailed beast, and/or have the beast sealed by someone else.

◾(9) If a host is killed while still hosting the tailed beast, then the beast also dies. The challenger, technically then, loses; however, when the beast respawns within a week's time, they are permitted to participate in the fight for the beast. In the meantime, among the challenger and the challenged, a game master must be declared to control the beast itself.
      The privilege to do so may be conceded to another party. If a decision has not been made due to a lack of choice availability, then the former host may control the tailed beast. Clear abuse of this will result in an official GM controlling the beast, the choice of which depends on availability and best two out of three for rock-paper-scisssors, with timestamps being used to limit hax.

◾ (10) The notion of real-time travel applies, where in cases a real day must elapse for one to travel from point A to B, with reductions depending on travel mode and obstacles between points. The Body Flicker Technique will not suffice as a suitable travel method, as opposed to summonings.

Those are the current rules. (If you couldn't tell) So now voice your concerns!
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Bocchiere on June 20, 2014, 07:12:13 PM
As I mentioned, no safeguards to prevent sensing. Sensors and other Jinchuriki can detect bijuu chakra whether it is sealed in a person or an old shoe, period. Otherwise it is impossible to locate them.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 20, 2014, 07:42:20 PM
As I mentioned, no safeguards to prevent sensing. Sensors and other Jinchuriki can detect bijuu chakra whether it is sealed in a person or an old shoe, period. Otherwise it is impossible to locate them.

You want to take out anything that prevents sensing? I don't have any objection to that. However I think we should add an addition to where nonsensors and those not a bijuu should be able to 'detect' them at least. I'm not sure if that's to be a time frame to where they start to sense the bijuu chakra or what, but I don't agree with the idea that only 2 types of people can sense the chakra.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Bocchiere on June 20, 2014, 07:43:51 PM
As I mentioned, no safeguards to prevent sensing. Sensors and other Jinchuriki can detect bijuu chakra whether it is sealed in a person or an old shoe, period. Otherwise it is impossible to locate them.



You want to take out anything that prevents sensing? I don't have any objection to that. However I think we should add an addition to where nonsensors and those not a bijuu should be able to 'detect' them at least. I'm not sure if that's to be a time frame to where they start to sense the bijuu chakra or what, but I don't agree with the idea that only 2 types of people can sense the chakra.

I just mean that anyone who has the ability to sense chakra could find them. People in Sage Mode, probably people with Byakugan and Sharingan too. It should be in the same "zone" though, village, or what have you.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 20, 2014, 07:53:28 PM
As I mentioned, no safeguards to prevent sensing. Sensors and other Jinchuriki can detect bijuu chakra whether it is sealed in a person or an old shoe, period. Otherwise it is impossible to locate them.

I just mean that anyone who has the ability to sense chakra could find them. People in Sage Mode, probably people with Byakugan and Sharingan too. It should be in the same "zone" though, village, or what have you.

You want to take out anything that prevents sensing? I don't have any objection to that. However I think we should add an addition to where nonsensors and those not a bijuu should be able to 'detect' them at least. I'm not sure if that's to be a time frame to where they start to sense the bijuu chakra or what, but I don't agree with the idea that only 2 types of people can sense the chakra.

So anyone with a dojutsu/sage mode can sense them, within the radius of the same zone/village. And those who don't have it; can't. I still think there should be a wait period to detect them. Instead of some person walking 1 foot into a zone and the bijuu chakra hits them instantly.
 
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 21, 2014, 02:52:15 AM
Seeing as we are starting with the sensing one, let me be clear, that when it was written, there were not exceptions in mind. However, when it came to practice and someone spoke on it, there were objections to it on the basis that it auto-hits, basically.

If we agree that there are no screws to give for that hole and reverse that exception, then that rule technically does not need to be changed, but rather, enforced as it was originally intended.

The safeguards portion is the only part that would need to be altered for the purposes proposed, basically.

Now, I think it is more important to elaborate on how tailed beasts are to be handled specifically when/if a jinch is stripped, as that is something that was almost completely omitted in the original text.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 21, 2014, 03:35:19 AM
I think more clarifications are needed to find the biju if they are used as a summoning, since in theory you could hide them forever. Maybe we could say the biju leaves traces of their chakra on the summoner or something?

As for the stripping, I think somethings are obvious and are givens to be added to the rules. Like if the Jinch is inactive and not in a fight, it goes to the leader of the clan/village or tourney if no affliation.

The question is, what happens if the Jinch is in a fight? Obviously from past rulings, if it is 1v1, it goes to the challenger.

The rest is up for deciding.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Kage on June 21, 2014, 03:55:36 AM
Sensing shouldn't be a problem at all if you're a proficient sensor. You should be all like "woah, that's a lot of chakra over there", since the Biju are beasts of raw and pure chakra.

Some for doujutsu when it comes to the Sharingan and Byakugan. The Sharingan can see chakra and differentiate between different kinds, since it gives color to it. The Byakugan can do the same thing, but it also has that fancy 360 degree view, x-ray vision and telescopic sight. That would make finding Biju even easier. Some may think it's unfair, but some people are born with talents/abilities that give them an advantage over others. That's basically what KG are.

And having a Biju as a summon means that they have to be jailed/confined, not sealed, somewhere. That's pretty much how I rolled when I had the Rokubi, which meant that if any hunters wanted to, they could easily find it using one of the above methods. Especially with the Byakugan. Now how might one confine a Biju? I just made Wood Dragons, put it in a Sharingan-induced genjutsu and called it a day. Not everyone may be able to use that method though, because of resets or KG they don't have.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 21, 2014, 04:04:09 AM
Sensing shouldn't be a problem at all if you're a proficient sensor. You should be all like "woah, that's a lot of chakra over there", since the Biju are beasts of raw and pure chakra.

Some for doujutsu when it comes to the Sharingan and Byakugan. The Sharingan can see chakra and differentiate between different kinds, since it gives color to it. The Byakugan can do the same thing, but it also has that fancy 360 degree view, x-ray vision and telescopic sight. That would make finding Biju even easier. Some may think it's unfair, but some people are born with talents/abilities that give them an advantage over others. That's basically what KG are.

And having a Biju as a summon means that they have to be jailed/confined, not sealed, somewhere. That's pretty much how I rolled when I had the Rokubi, which meant that if any hunters wanted to, they could easily find it using one of the above methods. Especially with the Byakugan. Now how might one confine a Biju? I just made Wood Dragons, put it in a Sharingan-induced genjutsu and called it a day. Not everyone may be able to use that method though, because of resets or KG they don't have.

A certain someone had it in a pocket dimension, however. Unless explicitly prohibited or implicitly by having only certain methods used for legitness, it is very exploitable to attempt to put it into the Kamui pocket dimension for the sake of convenience.

I think more clarifications are needed to find the biju if they are used as a summoning, since in theory you could hide them forever. Maybe we could say the biju leaves traces of their chakra on the summoner or something?

As for the stripping, I think somethings are obvious and are givens to be added to the rules. Like if the Jinch is inactive and not in a fight, it goes to the leader of the clan/village or tourney if no affliation.

The question is, what happens if the Jinch is in a fight? Obviously from past rulings, if it is 1v1, it goes to the challenger.

The rest is up for deciding.

So how does it go to the leaders? Magic? Transfer via seal or a gift box wrapped in Valentine's packaging? Especially in the context of the Kiri fight, that is kind of an important thing to know in case hunters wanted to drop the ax before a new host is selected and has the ability to hide for a fortnight.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 21, 2014, 04:39:30 AM
Yes, magic ooc. How else would you give the biju to a leader if a host went inactive? Especially one that was inactive and not in battle?

As for the Kiri debate, most agree in that situation, the beast goes back to Kiri. The only problem with that, is Xia is moving and as active kage, if the beast gets stripped, he has to decide where it goes. This brings up an important aspect to the rules, what happens in the Jinch and active leader go inactive?

Perhaps the next highest ranked member, or a council if one decides?
Or a tournament for Kiri members only? Or consider it to be unaffiliated and a site wide tournament. Numerous ways to deal with it.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 21, 2014, 05:06:55 AM
Yes, magic ooc. How else would you give the biju to a leader if a host went inactive? Especially one that was inactive and not in battle?

As for the Kiri debate, most agree in that situation, the beast goes back to Kiri. The only problem with that, is Xia is moving and as active kage, if the beast gets stripped, he has to decide where it goes. This brings up an important aspect to the rules, what happens in the Jinch and active leader go inactive?

Perhaps the next highest ranked member, or a council if one decides?
Or a tournament for Kiri members only? Or consider it to be unaffiliated and a site wide tournament. Numerous ways to deal with it.

If he is inactive to the point in which he can't make that call or fulfill the duties as jinch, then the next rabbit in line hops up to the plate and takes a nibble.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 21, 2014, 06:05:55 AM
He's moving, so I'm pretty sure he gets a pass and won't get stripped. I don't know his activity level, so maybe he'll be able to name a Jinch. Either way, it proposes a what if scenario, which needs to be covered for the rules.

The scenario being, an jinch and inactive clan/village leader. Perhaps if they have a council or second in command lined up they decide, or if no one can do it within two weeks, it be hosted as a prize for a tournament.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Bocchiere on June 21, 2014, 06:59:51 AM
If it's a 1v1 fight then the opponent gets it yes.

In a situation like Kiri I would say it is just now sealed in a pot somewhere and the attackers could find and snatch it.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 21, 2014, 07:15:28 AM
1v1 the attacker gets it.

If it's to where it's in a group rp and said host goes inactive it goes to the kage, if said kage is inactive the bijuu automatically gets stuck into a container of sorts?

Then it comes down to who defends it?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 21, 2014, 02:43:22 PM
1v1 the attacker gets it.

If it's to where it's in a group rp and said host goes inactive it goes to the kage, if said kage is inactive the bijuu automatically gets stuck into a container of sorts?

Then it comes down to who defends it?

I hate to be that guy, but what about 2v1 or 2v2? Is there a limit before the beast goes to the village, or a limit before the challenger just claims it?

He's moving, so I'm pretty sure he gets a pass and won't get stripped. I don't know his activity level, so maybe he'll be able to name a Jinch. Either way, it proposes a what if scenario, which needs to be covered for the rules.

The scenario being, an jinch and inactive clan/village leader. Perhaps if they have a council or second in command lined up they decide, or if no one can do it within two weeks, it be hosted as a prize for a tournament.

There has to be a second-in-command somewhere. Life happens, not having a second in command in a clan like Kirigakure would be extremely careless. If that second in command goes absent, then the next one in the line of succession steps up to handle the duties.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 21, 2014, 07:01:04 PM
1v1 the attacker gets it.

If it's to where it's in a group rp and said host goes inactive it goes to the kage, if said kage is inactive the bijuu automatically gets stuck into a container of sorts?

Then it comes down to who defends it?

I hate to be that guy, but what about 2v1 or 2v2? Is there a limit before the beast goes to the village, or a limit before the challenger just claims it?

He's moving, so I'm pretty sure he gets a pass and won't get stripped. I don't know his activity level, so maybe he'll be able to name a Jinch. Either way, it proposes a what if scenario, which needs to be covered for the rules.

The scenario being, an jinch and inactive clan/village leader. Perhaps if they have a council or second in command lined up they decide, or if no one can do it within two weeks, it be hosted as a prize for a tournament.

There has to be a second-in-command somewhere. Life happens, not having a second in command in a clan like Kirigakure would be extremely careless. If that second in command goes absent, then the next one in the line of succession steps up to handle the duties.

It seems to be that the number of attackers doesn't matter. So a 10v1 in the case that the host goes inactive, the 10 attackers decide who gets it. And something that just popped into my head...

With Isa's case since Akatsuki is attacking for the bijuu; the people already in the fight have to defend it. (If he fails to post and get on, therefore stripped) It'd be like that in a 5v2 If one of the 2 defenders goes inactive then the last one remaining must defend it?

If the host goes inactive it goes to the next in line to defend it, if the next in line isn't active it goes down one more. (A lot like how the government works. President, Vice, president pro tempore, ect.)

So here's how Kiri's succession line looks. (To my knowledge on their ranks);

Xia, Former mizukage (too inactive to do anything), and then great old Dart, Gitsune, and then the council. Most noted Shadowfire and Mioku.

So it's up to Dart to defend it who is already in the fight? Therefore nothing changes except he's fighting for 2 bijuu.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 21, 2014, 07:34:57 PM
That seems to complicated, I'd rather if the Jinch goes inactive and no one is active enough to seal/ become it's summoner, I'd rather see it go to a tournament or something.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 21, 2014, 07:56:40 PM
That seems to complicated, I'd rather if the Jinch goes inactive and no one is active enough to seal/ become it's summoner, I'd rather see it go to a tournament or something.

And then who would host/organize the tourney? That seems kinda BS to me. The attackers should still have the chance to get it instead of now having to wait a long time again, cause we all know their WILL be debate in those who participate. Probably ending up in delaying the whole thing by months when this attack on Kiri has already taken, what, 2? It doesn't seem right to make them wait another 5 months due to a tourney.
 
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 21, 2014, 08:47:15 PM
You do realize if it gets stripped and sent back to Kiri, it could potentially go to someone not even in the battle >>

The beast must be sealed or used as an summoner within two weeks I believe, no exceptions. If a clan/village cannot, it is stripped from the village and a tournament is hosted I believe.

How would such a tournament be hosted or run? Idk, so lets figure it out and decide. Not saying this is what will happen to the Sanbi, we cant create a whole set of rules, based off one fight. Got to look at all possibilities, so we never have to make another thread again!

Edit: We should also spread awareness of this thread, so it's just not Akatsuki.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 21, 2014, 09:05:13 PM
You do realize if it gets stripped and sent back to Kiri, it could potentially go to someone not even in the battle >>

The beast must be sealed or used as an summoner within two weeks I believe, no exceptions. If a clan/village cannot, it is stripped from the village and a tournament is hosted I believe.

How would such a tournament be hosted or run? Idk, so lets figure it out and decide. Not saying this is what will happen to the Sanbi, we cant create a whole set of rules, based off one fight. Got to look at all possibilities, so we never have to make another thread again!

Edit: We should also spread awareness of this thread, so it's just not Akatsuki.

They're attacking the village as a whole and can sense the bijuu. xD It doesn't matter, if they have it, they have to defend it cause Akatsuki will just sense it and attack the new host.

It's one week actually, but I go by two weeks since it seems more suitable. Unless you're Suna then you can take half a year.

Well at times when talking about the objects of a bijuu tourney or whatnot; I like to involve the kage and current hosts. That's what I did when I stripped Rinn.

So to hold a tourney each kage from each village will send whoever wants to participate for the bijuu, but no more than 2-3 from one village. All rouge nin can enter regardless. After that the kage and hosts will set up the order and such. The zones will be used for the battles. Judges, I think there should be at least 3 for the total. Consisting of; Kamui (If the poor guy is willing) and then 2 others decided by who's the most unbaised. After that have 3 battles running at a time (The reason for 3 judges) and hopefully that will make it go faster?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 21, 2014, 10:07:52 PM
I was thinking if a tournament had to be had, perhaps have a 16-32 member maximum count (I'd go with 16). The participants would literally be first come, first served (no alts, however). Perhaps Kamui and other GM's could be judges, or anyone really.

To speed up the process, stress activity. Normally in a fight, you get what, one-two weeks of inactivity before you have to post? For a tournament, make it 2-3 days, else you get dq'd. That would force people to post and fight, or be eliminated to speed it up.

Also make it ooc, as that makes sense. That's how I'd run it anyway, seems the easiest and quickest.

I'd also only limit other people and alts to be the only ones not able to enter. And perhaps to make sure the tournament doesn't overwhelmingly have too many people from one side, put a limit of like 3 members from any organization/village. But mostly first come, first serve as 2-3 from each village is unfair to other clans and the smaller villages.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 22, 2014, 12:18:30 PM
That seems to complicated, I'd rather if the Jinch goes inactive and no one is active enough to seal/ become it's summoner, I'd rather see it go to a tournament or something.

What is so complicated about sending the biju down the line of succession? The ranks are quite clear, and considering this is a village-wide attack, the most active among the heads would likely already be in the fight anyways, so for the most part, as Shadow said earlier, not much would change in fights on this kind of scale.

There are always exceptions of course, and then said person would likely have to enter the fight in order to defend the beast, so on and so forth. As I am sure you may have noticed, while I am not completly against a tournament, I am biased against those simply due to the fact that they rarely finish; stressing activity is nice, but a 16-man tourney, if everyone gets two days to post or else, will at minimum take 32 days to complete round 1, and that is if folks post twice a day and win on their second post. People may be a little more active and post more than that, but worst-case scenario will take quite a while to complete.

A tournament would be more complicated than the line of succession deal. However, since a tournament is one of the solutions for the biju rules, then it is a good idea to bring that up and discuss it, but I would still rather not replace succession with a tournament.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 22, 2014, 05:51:57 PM
Has a crazy and wild out of the box idea. Void the damn tailed beast. They are more of a burden than a benefit to SL rp. Truthfully they cause more ooc fighting and problems then any other thing on SL.

It is not like without them rp would suck at SL. We could actually strike up some interesting plots that weren't just 'get the tailed beast'.

Other then that in my opinion I like the old biju methods more than these new ones. Kinda like Kay said 1vs1. it was much more simple that way and seemed to not cause such of a big fuss in quantity of people.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 22, 2014, 06:46:02 PM
Tis quite funny to see everyone go from biju challenges make no sense and biju must be hunted, to lets go back to the old rules! When these new rules were made, I don't think giant village based rp was in mind. It was expected, but I assumed everyone thought that the jinch would get attacked when they made a public post, vastly cutting down the number of participants.

Unfortunatly, some Jinch's never posted outside their village, and others did so for only one hour, so village fight became necessary, ruining the new system.

Any who, I agree on Kay and others on some things, if this new system is to be upheld. We have a few things people seem to agree on.
If it's a 1v1, the challenger gets it.
If it's a village battle, it gets placed in a jar and maybe won if a clear victory is had.

As for a tourney, I have to disagree with you Kay. I don't think it should be just the village participating, or they can exclude members. Yes, this is a way to rip it from the village's hands, but this is the option if there is no one around of higher rank to seal/summon it. If the village or clan fail to do so in the allotted time, this is a punishment as they have a chance to lose their biju.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 22, 2014, 08:06:16 PM
Has a crazy and wild out of the box idea. Void the damn tailed beast. They are more of a burden than a benefit to SL rp. Truthfully they cause more ooc fighting and problems then any other thing on SL.

It is not like without them rp would suck at SL. We could actually strike up some interesting plots that weren't just 'get the tailed beast'.

Other then that in my opinion I like the old biju methods more than these new ones. Kinda like Kay said 1vs1. it was much more simple that way and seemed to not cause such of a big fuss in quantity of people.

We can't void something people want as competition. If we take out the tailed beasts what will people 'go' after for a trophy so to speak. Besides that, I'm against it and any other host should be. You can't just void something as people will just void your void.

Also Kayenta since I don't want to make a page long reply to yours to make it easier on myself and others....no one here is autohitting. We all are talking how we normally do and I am 100% sure that no one is taking our suggestions as fact. Until I see a verdict be drawn or a vote taken nothing will change. All changes that are ruled on (if any) will be posted below in some color under the rule it fixed.

As for 'sending' your nuke out and leaving your village defenseless I don't get that at all. The reason we go to your village is because the bijuu is there. If you really wanted to keep your village safe then you would, indeed, travel outside of the village. As you know we break stuff when an attack is made. Mainly bodies and buildings.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 22, 2014, 09:09:57 PM
Trev: I don't think the village/clan/group needs to be punished because its leadership failed. I believe they should be given the opportunity to deal with the bijuu properly on their own. Only after every attempt has been made to give the village/etc....the opportunities to handle their own property, should it even be considered to be open up for the general public to participate. And even then it should be organized by what is left of that village.

When dealing with the property of others you have to be extra careful not to lay yourself open for an accusation of theft or unfair play. Believe it or not, it is not just the higher ranks of a village who can do things. Many lower ranks are veteran rpers of SL too. To exclude them from attempting to carry this responsibility ASSUMES incompetence.

I agree with you Kay, but at the same time people get higher ranks based on a combination of things in most cases. While someone may be a veteran in terms of rp that doesn't mean they are competent. In Kiri's case especially, those in the lower ranks cannot handle the responsibility of a bijuu. You may ask how I know this and it's based on how long they've been off and I know about half of the people/alts under the rank of Ansatsu Senjutsu Tokushu Butai. Even those in the higher ranks: Kiba, Adge, Xaos ect are inactive in terms of rp. The whole clan is alt/inactive with 1/3 of them actually there. I'm not saying it's a lost cause, but it's close to it. That's why a tourney needs to be held for those outside of the clan instead of having someone of mediocre stature getting the bijuu cause all the others are inactive.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 22, 2014, 10:07:54 PM
I'm not saying their incompetent, but their is a time limit to make sure the biju are around. If no one in a clan or village can figure it out (this includes from leadership to down below), it should go to a tournament.

If they still want it, they can apply to the tournament, but it shouldn't just include them.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 23, 2014, 02:00:12 AM
This whole assumption that the village own the biju is bull. The only way a village has any rights to a beast is is the council of said village has it sealed away within something or something of that sort. It is not the village's duty to uphold the tailed beast but the person it is sealed with in.

I have to disagree with this if you go inactive it is passed on to the next person in the village cause I don't see a village as owning the beast. It should go to the challenger who was after it.

I say that because (note I am not sure and don't care to really look into it) it seems to me that in Kiri the host of the tailed best may not be doing their job. Therefor the beast should not go to another in Kiri but to the attackers. The attackers should have rights to the tailed beast.

Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 23, 2014, 02:09:58 AM
I say my view again, on the matter of the tournament. I'm fine with the village/clan getting every chance to settle it, however it must be in a reasonable amount of time, which currently stands at two weeks. If they cannot settle the matter in the allotted time, I say bring it to the tournament.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 23, 2014, 02:37:34 AM
What exactly is this tournament?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 23, 2014, 02:47:26 AM
A tournament is an idea proposed to solve an inactive biju problem if say the leaders of a clan/village are inactive or cannot put a but a biju in a host/summon in the time allowed.

Basically if a organization takes too long to do something with a biju, a tournament is held to decide. So far there are no tournament rules, which is what I'm trying to get done. It's not a main issue, but needs to have rules in the event a tournament is ever needed.

So just to organize everything stated so far, we have these topics and proposes answers (rules)

1v1 fights:
If Jinch goes inactive, challengers gets biju (everyone commenting on thread agrees)

Mutli/village fights:
 If Jinch is inacitve, biju goes back to the village in a pot and can be taken by challengers with overwhelming victory.
Dissenting opinion: Uetto proposes it goes to challenger.

Tournament:
Should be a last case scenario as it can be slow (Pretty much agreed upon)
Shadow has proposed set of rules
Trev has proposed set of rules
Kay believe the village should handle it, and it not be open to the public.

Pretty much a recap, someone fix if I missed something. I think everyone will agree with the 1v1, and it might be presumptuous to assume the rest of SL does, but I think that topic is done and settled.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 23, 2014, 03:20:52 AM
So to hold a tourney each kage from each village will send whoever wants to participate for the bijuu, but no more than 2-3 from one village. All rouge nin can enter regardless. After that the kage and hosts will set up the order and such. The zones will be used for the battles. Judges, I think there should be at least 3 for the total. Consisting of; Kamui (If the poor guy is willing) and then 2 others decided by who's the most unbaised. After that have 3 battles running at a time (The reason for 3 judges) and hopefully that will make it go faster?

I was thinking if a tournament had to be had, perhaps have a 16-32 member maximum count (I'd go with 16). The participants would literally be first come, first served (no alts, however). Perhaps Kamui and other GM's could be judges, or anyone really.
To speed up the process, stress activity. Normally in a fight, you get what, one-two weeks of inactivity before you have to post? For a tournament, make it 2-3 days, else you get dq'd. That would force people to post and fight, or be eliminated to speed it up.
Also make it ooc, as that makes sense. That's how I'd run it anyway, seems the easiest and quickest.
I'd also only limit other people and alts to be the only ones not able to enter. And perhaps to make sure the tournament doesn't overwhelmingly have too many people from one side, put a limit of like 3 members from any organization/village. But mostly first come, first serve as 2-3 from each village is unfair to other clans and the smaller villages.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So those are the current guidelines Trev and myself have proposed and I'm going to try and mix them into a current template...
Max of 32 champions. 2 from each village max; kusa, kumo, Oto, Iwa. Any village has a max of 2 champions. Villages DO NOT have to participate. Champions are to be chosen by the kage/council of the village. I do not care how the village chooses their champions. The villages will have ONE WEEK to choose these people. Those without a village can enter as they please.
To speed up the process a inactivity time of 3-5 days will render you to forfeit the match and be DQ'ed from the competition. After such you CANNOT re-enter under any terms regardless of inactivity reason.
NO ALTS. If we find out you do have an alt you will automatically be DQ'ed, all characters. If we find later you indeed won the bijuu with an alt, stripped. (This is to be debated)
As for judges...I think Kamui comes to mind for everyone. And I insist on having 3 judges and 3 fights to take place at one time.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 23, 2014, 03:44:22 AM
For the combined set, I would insist upon the 16 max, as like Eric said, if a tournament is to be had, it will be slow. Having 16 members eliminates one whole round, as compared to 32. I also disagree with the champions list, it should be fist come, first served. Some kages could be inactive and the time it takes to find willing participants might take too long.

The two members count should extend to every organization, not just villages. Example being only two members from Akatsuki allowed or Genesis. I don't agree with just the villages having an automatic buy in, first comes first serve seem fairer to me, but with a limit on how many people from an particular organization, so a village say Konoha doesn't have like 8 participants cause they were on earlier.


Of course, for any rules to be placed, we need more opinions, as Kay proposed the organization or village with the biju should host and run it, while we're advertising a more global one. So that should be determined first with the tournament rules. Is is it local (the place where is biju resides) or more of a punishment for not settling the biju matter in the time accordance (global)
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 23, 2014, 03:55:30 AM
For the combined set, I would insist upon the 16 max, as like Eric said, if a tournament is to be had, it will be slow. Having 16 members eliminates one whole round, as compared to 32. I also disagree with the champions list, it should be fist come, first served. Some kages could be inactive and the time it takes to find willing participants might take too long.

The two members count should extend to every organization, not just villages. Example being only two members from Akatsuki allowed or Genesis. I don't agree with just the villages having an automatic buy in, first comes first serve seem fairer to me, but with a limit on how many people from an particular organization, so a village say Konoha doesn't have like 8 participants cause they were on earlier.


Of course, for any rules to be placed, we need more opinions, as Kay proposed the organization or village with the biju should host and run it, while we're advertising a more global one. So that should be determined first with the tournament rules. Is is it local (the place where is biju resides) or more of a punishment for not settling the biju matter in the time accordance (global)

I see your point...so for global a max of 16 people can enter on a first come basis and only a max of two from whichever village/organization they are from.

As for a clan tourney, why not just keep the same rules? Max of maybe 8 this time, everything else is the same more or less.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 23, 2014, 04:20:13 AM
Could keep the same rules, just saying the community need to decide if it's global or local.

Global:
Trev
Shadow

Local:
Kay

Need loads more of votes.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 23, 2014, 05:21:06 AM
Could keep the same rules, just saying the community need to decide if it's global or local.

Global:
Trev
Shadow

Local:
Kay

Need loads more of votes.

Global. I think if it goes this far then it probably boils down to the village not being able to handle hosting it in the first place. Perhaps this will result for a wake up call when the time comes and one of their own will try to win it and handle it better.

Now I didn't read everything cause I am to lazy right now and handling rl stuff. Anyways, I ask this will this be OOC or IC done? Should it be IC it would result in death of actual characters competing and rp lock all those involved. Which may be a good thing as it may limit a thousand of people jumping at the idea.

Also I have to say no to the first come first serve. Really it could be done so that only those in the village and what not are the first one's to know about it and therefor be the first to jump at it.
I'd say allow each village to send no more but at least one person. If there are open slots after that and rogue get their first come for serve along with organizations. Who should only be able to enter one person as well and no making an alt real fast to fill in I hate the whole alt thing it needs to be a character that has been around for awhile. Anyways, if there is still an open spot then the village with the least amount of tailed best can send another person. Something of that sort. No first come first serve though cause I feel that can be alt spammed.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 23, 2014, 07:39:15 AM
I agree completely Kay, I'm not trying to take the power out of the village or organization. A global tournament should/ is the last way of dealing with a biju. If the organization wants a clan tournament to decide the host or some other method, sure go for it!

This global tournament is only applicable should an organization not figure out who or how their finding the new host within the allotted time (I believe two weeks, correct me if I'm wrong). If they do not find a host/summoner, or have no plans on how to determine it (In clan tournament), then and only then will a global tournament will he held.

If you and others can agree to that, then we can move on to the tournament rules, or see if we can't persuade Uetto to flesh out or convince him in the argument regarding multi battles. While also getting more opinions of course (I've been spreading this around, so has Shadow, I suggest other do as well, the more the merrier.)

Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 23, 2014, 08:45:52 AM
I don't understand how the bijuu is not the property of the village or organization. I believe that is how it has been represented in the manga, so that is where my bias comes from.

As it stands now it is up to the hierarchy of the village to determine who the new host will be.

I feel that it would have to be proven the village has defaulted on their ability to choose a new host before  an 'outside'  tourney would even be considered. As part of the process for a village to choose a new host, it should be acceptable for a village to hold a tourney to choose between its own members.

However, once an outside tourney is called for...I agree with the 3 day posting limit. Special events such as this should force activity. Otherwise if you cannot commit to that level of activity do not try for the bijuu.

My persinal thoughts are that SL tends to not follow the manga plot and all. So I still see the Biju as being held by the host not the village... that is just me though. As the person could defect or anything so to me truly the person owns the tailed beast. People at SL flipflop villages a lot.

Anyways. In my thoughts it is simple as to when a global tourny is needed. It is needed when the village has not chosen a host or started it's own tourny of sorts to determine a host within the time limit. We can't just sit around a year waiting can we?

Also the village needs to have 'started' their contest by the end of the time limit not say "Oh, we are working on it." or "We plan to have one soon." That is just methods used to BS your way into more time to benefit yourself which isn't playing fair in my thoughts. I'd suggest if this is passed and all that the village go ahead and create a contest for the tailed best so that if a host can't be chosen they can imply it immediately.

We could even extend the time limit from 2 weeks to 3. That is plenty of time for someone to make a move.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Kyutu - Super King - on June 23, 2014, 09:54:50 AM
... Has SL ever finished an RP tournament?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 23, 2014, 06:43:03 PM
My junior division finished, the advanced one... not so much >>

Hence the 2-3 day inactivity limit. If you go inactive, buh bye.

Even then, it'll be slowish (I imagine two weeks to a month for 16 people). That is why this is the last resort.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Sabumaru on June 24, 2014, 12:11:12 AM
I like the global idea a lot. The rules are excellent.
Like Kirk said, canon =/= SL at all.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 24, 2014, 03:14:36 AM
... Has SL ever finished an RP tournament?

I won a Jounin Exams, with me and Shadowfire's battle still posted here on the forum somewhere. But I see the joke you were making there.  :P

I don't understand how the bijuu is not the property of the village or organization. I believe that is how it has been represented in the manga, so that is where my bias comes from.

As it stands now it is up to the hierarchy of the village to determine who the new host will be.

I feel that it would have to be proven the village has defaulted on their ability to choose a new host before  an 'outside'  tourney would even be considered. As part of the process for a village to choose a new host, it should be acceptable for a village to hold a tourney to choose between its own members.

However, once an outside tourney is called for...I agree with the 3 day posting limit. Special events such as this should force activity. Otherwise if you cannot commit to that level of activity do not try for the bijuu.

My persinal thoughts are that SL tends to not follow the manga plot and all. So I still see the Biju as being held by the host not the village... that is just me though. As the person could defect or anything so to me truly the person owns the tailed beast. People at SL flipflop villages a lot.

The shinobi in the series would flip-flop alot too if there were absolutely no serious consequences for defection and there is a serious lack of family ties being torn by defection. Even then, defection was not very uncommon (especially in Konoha and Kiri) in the series considering all the rogue nin who turned out to be enemies at some point or another.

It can be argued that certain techniques are village property, but that does not keep people from stealing that property and running off and sharing it with their grandma half a state over.

A tournament is an idea proposed to solve an inactive biju problem if say the leaders of a clan/village are inactive or cannot put a but a biju in a host/summon in the time allowed.

Basically if a organization takes too long to do something with a biju, a tournament is held to decide. So far there are no tournament rules, which is what I'm trying to get done. It's not a main issue, but needs to have rules in the event a tournament is ever needed.

So just to organize everything stated so far, we have these topics and proposes answers (rules)

1v1 fights:
If Jinch goes inactive, challengers gets biju (everyone commenting on thread agrees)

Mutli/village fights:
 If Jinch is inacitve, biju goes back to the village in a pot and can be taken by challengers with overwhelming victory.
Dissenting opinion: Uetto proposes it goes to challenger.

Tournament:
Should be a last case scenario as it can be slow (Pretty much agreed upon)
Shadow has proposed set of rules
Trev has proposed set of rules
Kay believe the village should handle it, and it not be open to the public.

Pretty much a recap, someone fix if I missed something. I think everyone will agree with the 1v1, and it might be presumptuous to assume the rest of SL does, but I think that topic is done and settled.

I agree with that 1v1, as that is practically biju challenges style of play there.

I agree with the multi-village RP fight regs, as I would consider that second strike against the host at that point, and sending it to the challengers at that stage WOULD save some trouble, it would also mean that any RL implications for going inactive would ultimately punish the jinch. Landmine of exceptions and loopholes waiting to be stepped on.

So to hold a tourney each kage from each village will send whoever wants to participate for the bijuu, but no more than 2-3 from one village. All rouge nin can enter regardless. After that the kage and hosts will set up the order and such. The zones will be used for the battles. Judges, I think there should be at least 3 for the total. Consisting of; Kamui (If the poor guy is willing) and then 2 others decided by who's the most unbaised. After that have 3 battles running at a time (The reason for 3 judges) and hopefully that will make it go faster?

I was thinking if a tournament had to be had, perhaps have a 16-32 member maximum count (I'd go with 16). The participants would literally be first come, first served (no alts, however). Perhaps Kamui and other GM's could be judges, or anyone really.
To speed up the process, stress activity. Normally in a fight, you get what, one-two weeks of inactivity before you have to post? For a tournament, make it 2-3 days, else you get dq'd. That would force people to post and fight, or be eliminated to speed it up.
Also make it ooc, as that makes sense. That's how I'd run it anyway, seems the easiest and quickest.
I'd also only limit other people and alts to be the only ones not able to enter. And perhaps to make sure the tournament doesn't overwhelmingly have too many people from one side, put a limit of like 3 members from any organization/village. But mostly first come, first serve as 2-3 from each village is unfair to other clans and the smaller villages.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So those are the current guidelines Trev and myself have proposed and I'm going to try and mix them into a current template...
Max of 32 champions. 2 from each village max; kusa, kumo, Oto, Iwa. Any village has a max of 2 champions. Villages DO NOT have to participate. Champions are to be chosen by the kage/council of the village. I do not care how the village chooses their champions. The villages will have ONE WEEK to choose these people. Those without a village can enter as they please.
To speed up the process a inactivity time of 3-5 days will render you to forfeit the match and be DQ'ed from the competition. After such you CANNOT re-enter under any terms regardless of inactivity reason.
NO ALTS. If we find out you do have an alt you will automatically be DQ'ed, all characters. If we find later you indeed won the bijuu with an alt, stripped. (This is to be debated)
As for judges...I think Kamui comes to mind for everyone. And I insist on having 3 judges and 3 fights to take place at one time.


Tournament gets its own quote.  ;)

I disagree with the idea of 2 folks from the villages on a first come, first serve basis. I mean, jeez, look at what we had to do to get people looking on the forum; Shadow and others had to post a link in the village boards.

I say 1 person from the villages/organizations, first come first serve, with a limit of 5 days for the selection process. Why one? Well, if we go with the 16 max, then that means that 8 organizations at maximum could participate (assuming they each send 2 and manage to get them in) and that said members of the organization might would have to fight each other at some point. Which would likely defeat the purpose of sending 2 in the first place.

By sending just one, then that will broaden the spectrum of groups who can send a rep to try for the beast, especially since unaffiliated ninja have almost free jump on it (presuming we don't change that soon), and it would also make the first-come-first-serve just a little fairer, unless we see mass defections/disaffiliations in order to shove more people from a similar cause into the tourney, in which case we would need to keep an eye on that.

 This tourney would have to be OOC, otherwise it would take even more time for reasons that should be obvious: everyone would have to RP gather in one place and since the fights will be IC, the sword will be drawn even moreso in order to keep character death from occurring.

A more local tournament could be held if and only if that is the only way to decide who gets it within the village in a non-middle-of-battle-situation where the jinch goes inactive. I would advise against that and just go with chain of command, but just throwing it out there.

How are we going to check alts, by the way? Because we all know that it will be attempted and, if the right people do it, it will succeed in deciding the fate of a a participant or two. Other than maybe Neji via the PvP system, there is hardly any way to tell that one computer is being used for multiple accounts definitively.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 24, 2014, 05:00:43 AM
I'll concede to Eric with the whole 1 max for each organization (Maybe incorporate what Uetto said and if spots are still open, then maybe one more can join?) For the sake of fairness and to make rounds easier, it has to be 16. If there aren't 16 people who want to participate, it must run at 8.

I say this was say 10 people sign up, unless we incorporated like a fatal four way or something (will take longer) two people will get a bye and that's unfair.

I 100% agree with the ooc. It will make things much easier, and I would gamble and say faster. People are less likely to complain every post if the only negative is a loss, rather than character death. IC is cool, but for this purpose ooc is better.

As for local tournaments, well if the active leaders want to decide the biju that way, go for it. However if they do nothing in the two weeks, global tournament.

As for alts, there is no real way to determine one, besides common knowledge. Like people know some of Shadow's alts, or Hazama's, or Yumei's etc. If we know you're one dq. But I don't see a way to positively find out if someone if an alt, if they hide it well enough. Heck I could be your alt Eric! Jokes aside, there is no real way that I know of to determine this. People just got to be vigilant and if it's discovered, they get dq'd.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 24, 2014, 05:54:19 AM
Could we not have a mod check into it? Like Kamui for instance? I'm not sure if he has that power or not but he has always been willing to help in these sort of things before. So could he not check for alts? If it is only 16 accounts that shouldn't be to hard right?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 24, 2014, 07:55:28 AM
Well cheaters will cheat. And there is no way around it. So I say if that is how you have to be, go for it. I don't think we need to be making up a butt tons of rules to punish people who are not cheaters just incase some cheaters are around. This isn't the launch codes to the missile silos we are talking about but a game.

So how about this...considering how low activity is and all.

You let anyone join the tourney.

You get 2 weeks to get the thing organized, not completed. That is a fairy tale and won't ever happen.

And then whoever wins has the beasty. And then they start their grace period. All OOC.

What parameters will be for the tourny fight?

KG? Implants? Any restrictions at all or just come as you are?

And...I suggest this.

No bitching. You just fight back and forth 12 posts each. Then it is done. The match is read. A winner named and they go to round 2 to wait for an opponent. Have the tourney here for the ease of the judge reading.

No voiding allowed. You gotta figure out how to deal with what you get...for a change. We used to do that you know, when someone auto hit us we just wrote it out of our reply and moved on.

Second-to-last time I did that I still got auto-hit due to a ruling, as supposedly I should have contested a post that I saw as unfair instead of just proceeding. I presume then that we will not be having that be policy in these tourneys? Not to mention what if someone completely auto-dodges something clearly not so easily dodgeable by the way they composed? Are we permitted to bitch then and get a repost done?

And 2 weeks was only for the local ones, as they, in theory, it is merely an option in case a village would want to do it that way. I believe it will be a "come as you are" kind of thing for the sake of simplicity.

Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 24, 2014, 08:54:31 AM
Well cheaters will cheat. And there is no way around it. So I say if that is how you have to be, go for it. I don't think we need to be making up a butt tons of rules to punish people who are not cheaters just incase some cheaters are around. This isn't the launch codes to the missile silos we are talking about but a game.

So how about this...considering how low activity is and all.

You let anyone join the tourney.

You get 2 weeks to get the thing organized, not completed. That is a fairy tale and won't ever happen.

And then whoever wins has the beasty. And then they start their grace period. All OOC.

What parameters will be for the tourny fight?

KG? Implants? Any restrictions at all or just come as you are?

And...I suggest this.

No bitching. You just fight back and forth 12 posts each. Then it is done. The match is read. A winner named and they go to round 2 to wait for an opponent. Have the tourney here for the ease of the judge reading.

No voiding allowed. You gotta figure out how to deal with what you get...for a change. We used to do that you know, when someone auto hit us we just wrote it out of our reply and moved on.

Second-to-last time I did that I still got auto-hit due to a ruling, as supposedly I should have contested a post that I saw as unfair instead of just proceeding. I presume then that we will not be having that be policy in these tourneys? Not to mention what if someone completely auto-dodges something clearly not so easily dodgeable by the way they composed? Are we permitted to bitch then and get a repost done?

And 2 weeks was only for the local ones, as they, in theory, it is merely an option in case a village would want to do it that way. I believe it will be a "come as you are" kind of thing for the sake of simplicity.

What Eric said. Also 12 post fight seems boring as hell. What about those of us that like to drag out or fight cause that is our fighting style to tire out the opponent. I say make them death matches. 12 post to me just seems pointless. Hell you may want to toy with your opponent some.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 24, 2014, 03:22:18 PM
Well cheaters will cheat. And there is no way around it. So I say if that is how you have to be, go for it. I don't think we need to be making up a butt tons of rules to punish people who are not cheaters just incase some cheaters are around. This isn't the launch codes to the missile silos we are talking about but a game.

So how about this...considering how low activity is and all.

You let anyone join the tourney.

You get 2 weeks to get the thing organized, not completed. That is a fairy tale and won't ever happen.

And then whoever wins has the beasty. And then they start their grace period. All OOC.

What parameters will be for the tourny fight?

KG? Implants? Any restrictions at all or just come as you are?

And...I suggest this.

No bitching. You just fight back and forth 12 posts each. Then it is done. The match is read. A winner named and they go to round 2 to wait for an opponent. Have the tourney here for the ease of the judge reading.

No voiding allowed. You gotta figure out how to deal with what you get...for a change. We used to do that you know, when someone auto hit us we just wrote it out of our reply and moved on.

Second-to-last time I did that I still got auto-hit due to a ruling, as supposedly I should have contested a post that I saw as unfair instead of just proceeding. I presume then that we will not be having that be policy in these tourneys? Not to mention what if someone completely auto-dodges something clearly not so easily dodgeable by the way they composed? Are we permitted to bitch then and get a repost done?

And 2 weeks was only for the local ones, as they, in theory, it is merely an option in case a village would want to do it that way. I believe it will be a "come as you are" kind of thing for the sake of simplicity.

What Eric said. Also 12 post fight seems boring as hell. What about those of us that like to drag out or fight cause that is our fighting style to tire out the opponent. I say make them death matches. 12 post to me just seems pointless. Hell you may want to toy with your opponent some.


12 posts per person should be plenty, even if you want to toy around with your opponent some. I mean, we are talking three actions per post (excluding intro posts, which I don't think are included in the count) with a total of 12 posts, meaning a max of about 36 actions per person. I think that is plenty, especially considering how timely we want these tourneys to be done.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 24, 2014, 06:22:32 PM
Hmmm, Kay is onto something here. I wouldn't say 12 posts per person, but perhaps maybe a week max per round (maybe even five?) before someone decides the winner? I say this, because if during a match two people are active and on all day, don't limit them to 12 posts. Reward them for their activity, let them go at it! Though I do see the point in 12 posts to speed things up, which i why I recommend after a week, if a match is not finished, then a winner would be announced (This would mean with 4 rounds, it would take a month maximum).

As for restrictions, I'm not thinking any. KG, implants, all are fair game. Use whatever powers you have available to win.

As in regards to my opinion on voiding, here is my opinion. They should be allowed to void something if it is unreasonable. However I would further propose this rule. If you have multiple posts invalid, you get dq'd. Basically if you are getting constantly told to repost (perhaps after the second or third time) you are not skilled enough in formatting your post and should not hold a tailed beast, thus are dq'd. This would point people to not being so ridiculous with their posts. Perhaps have a similar deal if someone is being a crybaby and trying to void posts that are legit? Just food for though.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 24, 2014, 07:25:58 PM
I read everything and I really have nothing to add, except; 12 posts is too low. Like Trev how about a week length in which any amount of posts is allowed. Voiding IS allowed, why the hell wouldn't it be? That's what the judges are for.

As for alts I know just about every single alt on this game you think I'm joking, but I'm not. There are easy ways to find out and if I don't know Genesis or someone else will so I'll try to employ their help if need be. However alts shouldn't be as big of an issue. You're welcome~

Anywho sadly I am not going to be able to post or read much for the next week or so due to HEAVY workload. If one of you would please try to sum it up each  day that'd be nice, if not, that's fine to. If something is voted on to be added I will add it when I'm back. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 25, 2014, 03:35:34 AM
I still feel like 12 is too low, and would say they get a good five  or seven days. (If someone wanted to, they could take way longer to do 12 post, as long as they posted every two, three days, just a thought, but I see your point.) I'll also maintain my position regarding the voiding. So I guess we differ on these options. We'll just have to wait for more opinions!  :D

I don't think anyone said a village has to hurry up a tourney precisely. But if a village is handling a tourney, people don't want them to go at the end of a two week biju inactivity to go "oh, we're just deciding to setup now and are reviewing things." Rather at the end of two weeks, already have a clear plan of action and how to proceed relatively soon. At least that's my take of it. I could care less if a local tourney last a month or so, as long as they weren't trying to bs it like the last day or something.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 25, 2014, 05:16:44 AM
I'm agreeing with Trev. No 12 posts as a 'show off'. I don't really get that. I can make a very detailed 12 + post and call it good. That does not show my battle prowess at all to any degree. Bijuu and the hosts are tools of war, you can't base all the categories (Ability to foresee attacks, set traps, ect) of battle off 12 posts. At least that's my opinion.

ALSO we can't base it just off battling either. They HAVE TO BE ACTIVE. That's a big issue we have now. If the person doesn't regularly get on, I don't care if they're a combo of Zenaku, Trev, Darkshinobi, Raifudo, Shinro, and Bocc; They cannot obtain the bijuu.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 25, 2014, 06:30:21 AM
.... a combo of Zenaku, Trev, Darkshinobi, Raifudo, Shinro, and Bocc.....

I wanna fight that guy, just saying.



So basically those of use who have full time jobs will not be permitted to host a tailed beast. I say this because lets be honest most of use are growing up. We can't get on everyday all day like we could when we were younger. I take myself as a prime example... I was in fact the most active person at SL at one point in time (I stand by that assumption :P ) but these days I can't get on to do my old methods because I work 40+ hours a week, travel to see my girl friend, and enjoy getting wasted.

I'd rather have the 12 post thing than a week to fight. Some of us may not even be able to get in 12 post a week. Say if I was facing someone from Europe who also has a full time job and what not. We could really only do one post a day each cause we wouldn't be on at the same time and would have to wait to get in from work each day to post a reply.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 25, 2014, 08:58:02 AM
.... a combo of Zenaku, Trev, Darkshinobi, Raifudo, Shinro, and Bocc.....

I wanna fight that guy, just saying.



So basically those of use who have full time jobs will not be permitted to host a tailed beast. I say this because lets be honest most of use are growing up. We can't get on everyday all day like we could when we were younger. I take myself as a prime example... I was in fact the most active person at SL at one point in time (I stand by that assumption :P ) but these days I can't get on to do my old methods because I work 40+ hours a week, travel to see my girl friend, and enjoy getting wasted.

I'd rather have the 12 post thing than a week to fight. Some of us may not even be able to get in 12 post a week. Say if I was facing someone from Europe who also has a full time job and what not. We could really only do one post a day each cause we wouldn't be on at the same time and would have to wait to get in from work each day to post a reply.

Okay here's the issue, while I get that you have a life and all the other things that come with it, you need to realize while you may want/deserve it you may not be able to have it. That being a host has a 2 week inactive span, but if you constantly only get on once every 2 weeks just to loophole the rules I will strip your ass. (Haha)

Look if you're on once every 3 days and take the time to post and such, I don't mind. Once a week? No. Long as it's like a schedule; Sat, an hour on Mon and 1 1/2 on Thursday I like it. If you can post and abide by the rules. Not asking a lot.

And this is where I have to deal with the inactive issue. Starting later today... it's like 3 am here; I will be working a 11-12 hour shift for the next 10 days and add sleep of at least 7 hours then I have to do other things That's like 6 hours max. I am still going to get on SL if I can everyday. if only for a few mins and post.

So if I cannot get on the forums(I'll get on sl at least) I am again asking one of you to sum it up if you'd be so kind to. I wish you all good luck on the things that may or may not progress without me.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 25, 2014, 01:42:13 PM
.... a combo of Zenaku, Trev, Darkshinobi, Raifudo, Shinro, and Bocc.....

I wanna fight that guy, just saying.



So basically those of use who have full time jobs will not be permitted to host a tailed beast. I say this because lets be honest most of use are growing up. We can't get on everyday all day like we could when we were younger. I take myself as a prime example... I was in fact the most active person at SL at one point in time (I stand by that assumption :P ) but these days I can't get on to do my old methods because I work 40+ hours a week, travel to see my girl friend, and enjoy getting wasted.

I'd rather have the 12 post thing than a week to fight. Some of us may not even be able to get in 12 post a week. Say if I was facing someone from Europe who also has a full time job and what not. We could really only do one post a day each cause we wouldn't be on at the same time and would have to wait to get in from work each day to post a reply.

Okay here's the issue, while I get that you have a life and all the other things that come with it, you need to realize while you may want/deserve it you may not be able to have it. That being a host has a 2 week inactive span, but if you constantly only get on once every 2 weeks just to loophole the rules I will strip your ass. (Haha)

Look if you're on once every 3 days and take the time to post and such, I don't mind. Once a week? No. Long as it's like a schedule; Sat, an hour on Mon and 1 1/2 on Thursday I like it. If you can post and abide by the rules. Not asking a lot.

And this is where I have to deal with the inactive issue. Starting later today... it's like 3 am here; I will be working a 11-12 hour shift for the next 10 days and add sleep of at least 7 hours then I have to do other things That's like 6 hours max. I am still going to get on SL if I can everyday. if only for a few mins and post.

So if I cannot get on the forums(I'll get on sl at least) I am again asking one of you to sum it up if you'd be so kind to. I wish you all good luck on the things that may or may not progress without me.

Now Shadow, though it is a loophole in the rules, saying that once every two weeks is not valid is not really all that fair. People do have lives, and though we do not want too lively of people having the tailed beast, let's be reasonable. If it falls within the time of the rules, then so be it. Once every two weeks they fulfill said obligation/ritual, I say let 'em keep it.

RL comes first. That's always been the stated and unsaid rule among SL, and that isn't going to change anytime soon. If you can't get on at least once every two weeks, then you just can't have a tailed beast. If you can get on at least once every two weeks, then even if stretching it, it's fair that you can host a beast. Granted, that would make fights against said party very difficult, but unless we reduced the time in which a host has to be active to a week or something, then that is just the way it is.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 25, 2014, 09:04:56 PM
.... a combo of Zenaku, Trev, Darkshinobi, Raifudo, Shinro, and Bocc.....

I wanna fight that guy, just saying.



So basically those of use who have full time jobs will not be permitted to host a tailed beast. I say this because lets be honest most of use are growing up. We can't get on everyday all day like we could when we were younger. I take myself as a prime example... I was in fact the most active person at SL at one point in time (I stand by that assumption :P ) but these days I can't get on to do my old methods because I work 40+ hours a week, travel to see my girl friend, and enjoy getting wasted.

I'd rather have the 12 post thing than a week to fight. Some of us may not even be able to get in 12 post a week. Say if I was facing someone from Europe who also has a full time job and what not. We could really only do one post a day each cause we wouldn't be on at the same time and would have to wait to get in from work each day to post a reply.

Okay here's the issue, while I get that you have a life and all the other things that come with it, you need to realize while you may want/deserve it you may not be able to have it. That being a host has a 2 week inactive span, but if you constantly only get on once every 2 weeks just to loophole the rules I will strip your ass. (Haha)

Look if you're on once every 3 days and take the time to post and such, I don't mind. Once a week? No. Long as it's like a schedule; Sat, an hour on Mon and 1 1/2 on Thursday I like it. If you can post and abide by the rules. Not asking a lot.

And this is where I have to deal with the inactive issue. Starting later today... it's like 3 am here; I will be working a 11-12 hour shift for the next 10 days and add sleep of at least 7 hours then I have to do other things That's like 6 hours max. I am still going to get on SL if I can everyday. if only for a few mins and post.

So if I cannot get on the forums(I'll get on sl at least) I am again asking one of you to sum it up if you'd be so kind to. I wish you all good luck on the things that may or may not progress without me.

Now Shadow, though it is a loophole in the rules, saying that once every two weeks is not valid is not really all that fair. People do have lives, and though we do not want too lively of people having the tailed beast, let's be reasonable. If it falls within the time of the rules, then so be it. Once every two weeks they fulfill said obligation/ritual, I say let 'em keep it.

RL comes first. That's always been the stated and unsaid rule among SL, and that isn't going to change anytime soon. If you can't get on at least once every two weeks, then you just can't have a tailed beast. If you can get on at least once every two weeks, then even if stretching it, it's fair that you can host a beast. Granted, that would make fights against said party very difficult, but unless we reduced the time in which a host has to be active to a week or something, then that is just the way it is.


Eric, I've said several times that I understand people have lives outside of sl and have said myself RL > SL. However, that being said, if your life is so busy you have to let go of the beast.

Also are you condoning a loophole? This whole topic is made to abolish those. Like I said once every two weeks and I will move to strip you, whoever it may be. You're giving pretty basic input here and I whole heartily disagree with you. Once every two weeks is not okay. And that's worse if that person is being hunted/in a fight. It stops the rp of those other people and is very very very rude if you know you are not being right by logging in just to not lose the bijuu instead of letting other people who are active have it.

What I'm trying to say is know when you cannot have it anymore.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Bocchiere on June 25, 2014, 09:47:06 PM
Well unfortunately once every two weeks is the current rule. So you need to change that then.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 25, 2014, 09:50:18 PM
Well unfortunately once every two weeks is the current rule. So you need to change that then.

Pretty sure I can strip it even then due to constant in-activeness. The reason it is two weeks is in the case something pops up and they have time to recuperate. It is not there to be abused and that is the exact same argument I will make to strip them. They are abusing the time limit not because they have real issues to attend to, but because they know they have to be on only once every 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Bocchiere on June 25, 2014, 10:01:05 PM
Well unfortunately once every two weeks is the current rule. So you need to change that then.

Pretty sure I can strip it even then due to constant in-activeness. The reason it is two weeks is in the case something pops up and they have time to recuperate. It is not there to be abused and that is the exact same argument I will make to strip them. They are abusing the time limit not because they have real issues to attend to, but because they know they have to be on only once every 2 weeks.

That's not abuse then, you just don't like it. It isn't a loophole, it is explicitly what the rule states.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 25, 2014, 10:02:39 PM
Well unfortunately once every two weeks is the current rule. So you need to change that then.

Pretty sure I can strip it even then due to constant in-activeness. The reason it is two weeks is in the case something pops up and they have time to recuperate. It is not there to be abused and that is the exact same argument I will make to strip them. They are abusing the time limit not because they have real issues to attend to, but because they know they have to be on only once every 2 weeks.

That's not abuse then, you just don't like it. It isn't a loophole, it is explicitly what the rule states.


So everyone besides me is in favor of this loophole then?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 25, 2014, 11:01:09 PM
Well unfortunately once every two weeks is the current rule. So you need to change that then.

Pretty sure I can strip it even then due to constant in-activeness. The reason it is two weeks is in the case something pops up and they have time to recuperate. It is not there to be abused and that is the exact same argument I will make to strip them. They are abusing the time limit not because they have real issues to attend to, but because they know they have to be on only once every 2 weeks.

That's not abuse then, you just don't like it. It isn't a loophole, it is explicitly what the rule states.


So everyone besides me is in favor of this loophole then?

How about this. We make it a week instead of two weeks, and permit a week's extension if something comes up, and if folks are made aware of it before time is up.

It's not that we do not like the loophole, it's that, unless the rule is changed, then legitimately stripping people for technically following the rules would be, technically, wrong since, by our own admission, we allowed it (after all, the rule did state at least once every fortnight or something to that flavor).

If we shorten the time and have extra space to grant extensions for special cases, or if we separate needed activity during a fight and needed activity outside of a fight, then that would probably help reduce the impact of said loophole.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 25, 2014, 11:03:48 PM
Well unfortunately once every two weeks is the current rule. So you need to change that then.

Pretty sure I can strip it even then due to constant in-activeness. The reason it is two weeks is in the case something pops up and they have time to recuperate. It is not there to be abused and that is the exact same argument I will make to strip them. They are abusing the time limit not because they have real issues to attend to, but because they know they have to be on only once every 2 weeks.

That's not abuse then, you just don't like it. It isn't a loophole, it is explicitly what the rule states.


So everyone besides me is in favor of this loophole then?

How about this. We make it a week instead of two weeks, and permit a week's extension if something comes up, and if folks are made aware of it before time is up.

It's not that we do not like the loophole, it's that, unless the rule is changed, then legitimately stripping people for technically following the rules would be, technically, wrong since, by our own admission, we allowed it (after all, the rule did state at least once every fortnight or something to that flavor).

If we shorten the time and have extra space to grant extensions for special cases, or if we separate needed activity during a fight and needed activity outside of a fight, then that would probably help reduce the impact of said loophole.


So the rule is to modded to where it's 1 week in which you have to post. Unless something comes up which it can be extended to two weeks. See I don't have an issue with that, but others do.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: UettoSenju on June 26, 2014, 07:00:54 AM
Seems fair to me. I was getting more at the way it seemed the talk was headed to we all need to be on SL 24/7.

Also I rather enjoy how Shadow keeps saying, "'I' will strip..." Last I knew nothing was decided by one person so I'm not sure how 'you' can strip anyone actually.


Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 26, 2014, 04:48:43 PM
Meh, I think two weeks is fine. Maybe do the one week thing if they're actively in a battle for the biju. Other than that, two weeks is fine. I've never seen anyone log in every two weeks, or it isn't common as a majority don't. Even if someone did do that, that's a dangerous game to be playing since if they ever miss it, they get stripped.

Anyway, like Kay says, we can't think of every single scenario of abuse. If abuse comes up and is evident, it'll be dealt with. So keep the two weeks, maybe one if they're in a battle.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 26, 2014, 09:22:30 PM
If we are going to mod it so it is extended back to two weeks if needed why not just leave it alone and stop wetting oursevles over the possibility of how someone might abuse the system?

For the record, I am still dry. >.>

The point of this thread, in some ways, was to reduce the abuse factor of the rules; if/when folks abuse it, either they will come with some excuse that is very hard to refute (RL issues) or merely point out that they are within the margin of the rules. 

The only thing I am wetting myself about is that, even if we modify the rules to great effect, we still can't have a proper shinobi world war.  :cry: And that makes this panda sad.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 26, 2014, 11:48:45 PM
If we are going to mod it so it is extended back to two weeks if needed why not just leave it alone and stop wetting oursevles over the possibility of how someone might abuse the system?

For the record, I am still dry. >.>

The point of this thread, in some ways, was to reduce the abuse factor of the rules; if/when folks abuse it, either they will come with some excuse that is very hard to refute (RL issues) or merely point out that they are within the margin of the rules. 

The only thing I am wetting myself about is that, even if we modify the rules to great effect, we still can't have a proper shinobi world war.  :cry: And that makes this panda sad.

There will never be a proper one. We can all think of reasons why and for the most part we have nothing to counteract them.

Back to the main point;

I guess 2 weeks will stand, however I do like what Trev said about while in a fight it is 1 week and I'd like to add it can be extended to two weeks if RL stuff comes up. This is WHILE IN A FIGHT. So the person is not made to spend weeks after this person waiting.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 27, 2014, 06:27:15 AM
I too would like to see more people here Kay, Shaodow sent a few links and I messaged some people to come here. You can't force people to participate, even though it does feel wrong  :oops:

We haven't really decided much, Uetto doesn't agree with the whole multi battle it going into a jar if someone is inactive, and the tournament still has a few kinks.

The sensing issue needs to be brought up (especially in the case of summoners) and we can go over the number of contestants in a match. We haven't moved to these topics cause other ones are not done (multi battle, which Uetto disagrees with and you could sneak in the number of combatants in a match into that topic as well. And the tournament has a few kinks.)
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 27, 2014, 01:37:39 PM
What do they want from us, to drag them (the populace of SL) onto this forum and demand that they make their input before we even carry on with our discussions? I personally am annoyed that they haven't already come and put in their voice, because fresh ideas may very well solve some of our problems right out the gate. Not to mention I am sick of hearing of us as some sort of dictators or power-hungry elitists from folks who don't even try. It takes effort to get on this forum and go back and forth with these topics.

If most of the SL populace could give less than two fucks (one to get on, one to get onto forum) about how the biju are handled, then maybe they would not care as much if we just plain got rid of the tailed beasts either. No doubt the outcry would make the end notes of "The Bells of Notre Dame" sound like a whisper. >_>

Rant aside:
I too would like to see more people here Kay, Shaodow sent a few links and I messages some people to come here. You can't force people to participate, even though it does feel wrong  :oops:

We haven't really decided much, Uetto doesn't agree with the whole multi battle it going into a jar if someone is inactive, and the tournament still has a few kinks.

The sensing issue needs to be brought up (especially in the case of summoners) and we can go over the number of contestants in a match. We haven't moved to these topics cause other ones are not done (multi battle, which Uetto disagrees with and you could sneak in the number of combatants in a match into that topic as well. And the tournament has a very kinks.)

I thought we had settled on 16 contestants; that we would stick with 2 weeks for out of battle, 1 week for battle engaged jinchs; that the village would recieve the biju to deal with it if a host is inactive during those time periods, even in battle; and that a tournament would be hosted if the village cannot decide on a new host to defend the beast within the RP periods, namely, two weeks in peace, one week in conflict/battle.

The sensing thing I believe was remaining the same (with no exceptions, even for barriers that try to prevent sensing), and that traces of the biju's chakra could linger upon the host or something to that effect.

Well, okay, that last one I completely pulled up myself, but the rest is what I garnered from the discussion.

Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 27, 2014, 01:55:04 PM
I'm far too tired to say anything more than this right now: Those who care enough to come WILL come. If they don't, it's not our fault. If they don't like the rules that the few of us have modified,  it's their fault that they decided to neglect the current topic, not ours. I will post the link again on all boards, unless someone else wants to be nice enough to do so while I nap.

TL;DR

We made it public and want people to come, if they don't, their own fault.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Kage on June 27, 2014, 10:17:06 PM
People have the right and power to voice their opinions and help lead the populace somewhere better. But if they never call their senator, use their right to vote, nor attend public meetings to address the concerning issue, then there is nobody else to blame but themselves for being unable to find it within themselves to truly stand up for what they believe in. Instead they would rather play the game of ignorance and believe things will get better by themselves. And when their blissful peace is suddenly rattled, they would rather point their fingers at the few who do let their voice be known and tote their arms at them, rather than look for any blame in themselves for what has become of their living situations.

America ya'll.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 27, 2014, 10:19:18 PM
People have the right and power to voice their opinions and help lead the populace somewhere better. But if they never call their senator, use their right to vote, nor attend public meetings to address the concerning issue, then there is nobody else to blame but themselves for being unable to find it within themselves to truly stand up for what they believe in. Instead they would rather play the game of ignorance and believe things will get better by themselves. And when their blissful peace is suddenly rattled, they would rather point their fingers at the few who do let their voice be known and tote their arms at them, rather than look for any blame in themselves for what has become of their living situations.

America ya'll.

Quit SL and join our government. They'd love you there. Seriously though this is SL and I doubt the reason is more than them just being lazy and uncaring.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 28, 2014, 01:25:39 PM
People have the right and power to voice their opinions and help lead the populace somewhere better. But if they never call their senator, use their right to vote, nor attend public meetings to address the concerning issue, then there is nobody else to blame but themselves for being unable to find it within themselves to truly stand up for what they believe in. Instead they would rather play the game of ignorance and believe things will get better by themselves. And when their blissful peace is suddenly rattled, they would rather point their fingers at the few who do let their voice be known and tote their arms at them, rather than look for any blame in themselves for what has become of their living situations.

America ya'll.

Quit SL and join our government. They'd love you there. Seriously though this is SL and I doubt the reason is more than them just being lazy and uncaring.

Any other rules for the tournament that should be considered? I know that we are rather short on how the beast is to be awarded to the winner. Since the tourney is OOC, then I presusme that the awarding would also be OOC?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 28, 2014, 05:52:57 PM
Yes, it would be handled ooc. The last piece before the tourney can be put to rest is time limit. Some people say 12 posts, some say a week (maybe five days).
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 28, 2014, 10:28:39 PM
Then how would you solve it Kay? I'm all for people getting included and I've tried. So if you know of a better way than please share or do it and get people here. Otherwise I don't know what to tell you. As for the ridiculing and insults, I agree on that part. People who are outrageous, this is a game and there is no need. You know who I fault for this? Not the players, the moderators. We need more, and we need them to hand out more than little ''warnings''. There are no consequences, and thus players will be as mean as they want, cause nothing is going to shut them up and at most they get a slap on the wrist. But this is all dreadfully off topic.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Hades on June 28, 2014, 11:20:14 PM
Then how would you solve it Kay? I'm all for people getting included and I've tried. So if you know of a better way than please share or do it and get people here. Otherwise I don't know what to tell you. As for the ridiculing and insults, I agree on that part. People who are outrageous, this is a game and there is no need. You know who I fault for this? Not the players, the moderators. We need more, and we need them to hand out more than little ''warnings''. There are no consequences, and thus players will be as mean as they want, cause nothing is going to shut them up and at most they get a slap on the wrist. But this is all dreadfully off topic.

I echo Trev very strongly on this. Thank you, Trev.

I've heard people claiming that SL "has become" broken, but from what I've seen it doesn't have any kinks different from how things ever used to be, going as far back as '06.

In a community like this there are always going to be people that disagree about how things should be done, especially with something as subjective as RP. It's just like a school, or a workplace, or even a household; people won't always play nice. For personal conversations, out-of-character chat in private messages works really well, and I think that is a feature that isn't always utilized enough and people with either just spam public boards or the forum here with things that can and should be discussed in private messages, but when you need to involve more people, doing it in a place like a dwelling can sometimes work, but the easiest way for it be visible for the whole community is to have it here.

If players just want to focus on the game construct itself as far things like leveling go, they don't need to bother with the forum. For the serious RPers, this is obviously a really easy thing to create an account for and just check to see the new threads. There's no reason that if someone wants to see what's being discussed or even decided upon that they can't come here and take a look. Someone made a joke earlier about this being like the American government, where people aren't happy with how things are going, but mostly aren't doing anything about it, and even though it was a joke, I have to agree to a certain point.

This forum was purposed for out-of-character discussions to decide on gameplay technics and guidelines for RP. Along with the wiki, this is where the rules are set forth. If players choose not to be active here, then that is their choice to not voice their opinions and have them considered. That being said, it can be difficult to put your thoughts out there if you feel like you are being attacked by other people being insulting.

On that note, I have frankly seen just about everyone say some pretty mean stuff. Maybe not all explicitly insults, but at the very least, I think I have seen some pretty derogatory comments come from all parties involved, be they my own friends, people on the other side of the argument (though I am not saying that I support any side), or people I don't know, and that really disappoints me because as Trev as said, there is indeed a much more carefree and calm way to go about this. I have heard of warnings being passed out, but yes, that appears to be the extent of it. I don't necessarily think we need to add moderators, although I don't think it would hurt, but we definitely need to have some more serious repercussions here from them for poor behavior.

Trev hits it on the nose and I have to echo: This is a game and everyone should be here to relax and have fun. There needs to be more serious consequences for the people that can't be nice.

For this topic, all we're trying to discuss is guidelines that should be set forward for the jinchuriki in the event that they should potentially have their biju relocated due to their inactivity. I recommend that to stay focused on that we set aside other disputes between those involved and separate those into conversations to be had elsewhere and keep this thread free of complaints about the community of SL. That's a separate issue and not what this thread is trying to accomplish.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Genesis on June 28, 2014, 11:31:15 PM
So everything comes down to "We need legit rp mods"?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 28, 2014, 11:31:47 PM
I'm far too tired to say anything more than this right now: Those who care enough to come WILL come. If they don't, it's not our fault. If they don't like the rules that the few of us have modified,  it's their fault that they decided to neglect the current topic, not ours. I will post the link again on all boards, unless someone else wants to be nice enough to do so while I nap.

TL;DR

We made it public and want people to come, if they don't, their own fault.

In my opinion this is a poor excuse for a small handful of people trying to shove rules down everyone's throat. It's what you tell yourself to make it sound fine, when in fact it is nothing more than trying to dictate to others how things will work to benefit a specific interest group.

The reason why people do not come here to comment is because of the well deserved horrible reputation this forum has for getting things done. It is not known for resolving any issue. It is known for creating a place for people to insult and malign one another.

Now you can say if people cared they would come here to help out in deciding how things are to be.

It is not that people do not care.

It is that they no longer wish to participate in a forum where everything they say will be ridiculed or ignored in favor of name calling and personal insults being hurled at them.

And who's fault is that?

Those who treat people shamefully. Not the people who are tired of it and no longer come here.

Little example:

TL:DR

This is about the most insulting thing a person can type. You are being cute, I know, but it is a slap in the face and means you think what someone has to say is not worth your time.

Why would anyone wish to come here to help out with anything when this is the general attitude their participation is begin met with?

Kayenta you complain about the reputation yet here you are burying it further into the ground by being aggressive with me. Please don't do it to me and I won't to you or anyone else. Like I said on the SSM topic;

IF IT DOESN'T PERTAIN TO THE TOPIC, DO NOT POST.

Now for the assumption of my TL;DR 'example' you pulled was for MY OWN POST. No one else, mine. I summed up my post if someone else did not feel the need to take the time to read it. So please do not assume I am being that ignorant at this time. I have in the past, but for the current topics I am honestly getting sick of you not being able to handle a simple idea tossing and instead turning it into a "He said, she said" type deal. So if you all please would stay on the current topic and no more bashing or I'll lock this and go about it in a different manner.

I'll post more ideas tomorrow. Work time. I wish you all good luck on figuring things out.

Also Nightfall I am sorry I do not have time to read your post. I will when I have time. Though I do think I echo your statements with the brief scan I did.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 28, 2014, 11:32:48 PM
Real quick; If you all feel the need to talk about mods please open a new topic. Thanks.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on June 29, 2014, 12:50:30 AM
Anyway, to steer this back on topic. Current issue I believe is the length of a global tournament. Eric and Kay say a limit to 12 posts, Shadow and I say a week in length (Maybe even five days). Uetto disagrees with 12, but I don't believe has outright stated he supports Shadow and I's idea. So more opinions on this, and then I'll combine all the tournament rules as a summary and that should close this particular topic.

So yeah, voice opinions people and note other topics you would like covered if there are any.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Camel on June 29, 2014, 07:58:46 AM
A link to this thread was posted on ALL village boards and in MHQ so the community could see what's happening.

So, as many of you know we have moved past the 1v1 in a zone and we then moved to IC rules. Fun stuff. However there are a lot of loopholes and the new system can and is being abused pretty badly.  Without further ado; bijuu rules modification.

CURRENT RULES

Guidelines

◾ (1) Jinchūriki are to be hunted in-character. As a requirement, knowledge as to their identity and location are mandatory to possess in order to legitimately locate them (not so much the latter if the jinchūriki is constantly roaming outside of a village).

◾ (2) Identity can be discovered if it's made common knowledge within a village and word gets around. Additionally an incredibly skilled sensor or another jinchūriki can sense and identify them if they're nearby within the same zone.
 
◾ (3) Location can be discovered through common knowledge similarly with identity. In the case of wandering jinchūriki, entering the zone they're in by chance and then using a sensor/jinchūriki is sufficient enough to locate them (so long as they have no safeguards preventing sensing up).

◾ (4) Jinchūriki have an obligation to roleplay, posting in a public location outside their village of residence at least once every fortnight for the length of a day, even if it's just to visit another village. Those unaffiliated with a village should either post in a village or in the zones.

◾ (5) 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.

◾ (6) 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.

◾ (7) Tailed beasts must be sealed within a jinckurii within a week of capture. Tailed beasts may be captured yet still before that time since there is no grace period.

◾ (8) Or, a tailed beast may be treated as a summon of the user. However, control of the beast must be maintained via genjutsu, and the user is only capable of defensive moves while the beast is active. In order to lose possession of the tailed beast, the user must have their contract nullified, control lost of the tailed beast, and/or have the beast sealed by someone else.

◾(9) If a host is killed while still hosting the tailed beast, then the beast also dies. The challenger, technically then, loses; however, when the beast respawns within a week's time, they are permitted to participate in the fight for the beast. In the meantime, among the challenger and the challenged, a game master must be declared to control the beast itself.
      The privilege to do so may be conceded to another party. If a decision has not been made due to a lack of choice availability, then the former host may control the tailed beast. Clear abuse of this will result in an official GM controlling the beast, the choice of which depends on availability and best two out of three for rock-paper-scisssors, with timestamps being used to limit hax.

◾ (10) The notion of real-time travel applies, where in cases a real day must elapse for one to travel from point A to B, with reductions depending on travel mode and obstacles between points. The Body Flicker Technique will not suffice as a suitable travel method, as opposed to summonings.

Those are the current rules. (If you couldn't tell) So now voice your concerns!

Wait, are you sure this is the real list?  :-?
I re-checked and this is what I got from the wiki.

Quote
Guidelines
Jinchūriki

-    Jinchūriki are to be hunted in-character. As a requirement, knowledge as to their identity and location are mandatory to possess in order to legitimately locate them (not so much the latter if the jinchūriki is constantly roaming outside of a village).
-     Identity can be discovered if it's made common knowledge within a village and word gets around. Additionally an incredibly skilled sensor or another jinchūriki can sense and identify them if they're nearby within the same zone.
-     Location can be discovered through common knowledge similarly with identity. In the case of wandering jinchūriki, entering the zone they're in by chance and then using a sensor/jinchūriki is sufficient enough to locate them (so long as they have no safeguards preventing sensing up).
-    Jinchūriki have an obligation to roleplay, posting in a public location outside their village of residence at least once every fortnight for the length of a day, even if it's just to visit another village. Those unaffiliated with a village should either post in a village or in the zones.
-    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.
-    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.
-    The notion of real-time travel applies, where in cases a real day must elapse for one to travel from point A to B, with reductions depending on travel mode and obstacles between points. The Body Flicker Technique will not suffice as a suitable travel method, as opposed to summonings.
-   Bijū can only be hosted in an object other than a proper host for no longer than one week. Otherwise they must remain sealed in a host, or be treated as a summon (elaborated below).

{Bijū as Summons}

    - Bijū cost 20% of the user's total (not current) chakra to summon, even in succession.
    - Bijū must be under the influence of genjutsu at all times while used as a summon. Regardless of the genjutsu's potency, it will tax 5% of the summoner's total (not current) chakra while it's actively being used as a summon, the taxation only ceasing when the bijū has been removed from the field. Techniques capable of transferring chakra from the bijū to the summoner are strictly prohibited from being used in this context.
    - Summoners are restricted to one action per post, be it offensive or defensive so long as the bijū is summoned.
    - Enhancements to the bijū, such as encasing it in Susanoo are prohibited.
   - Bijū utilized in this manner will always possess a hateful disposition towards their summoner, this is static. -Should a chance ever arise and they gain the ability to act of their own volition, they will prioritize slaying their ex-summoner first, regardless of the presence of any other actors.
-  If the summoner dies while the bijū is unsummoned and located in inaccessible territory (such as a pocket dimension), it will respawn within a week's time where the summoner was slain.

Tampering with the Bijū

- Tampering with the bijū, meaning: destroying it, altering its affinity, dividing its powers into multiple entities, etc. and any action that changes it from its known canon form is strictly prohibited.

The only concern I have is that no one can account for that user's own personal life.
What happens when a Jinchuuriki becomes absent due to personal reasons for more then the allotted two weeks time?

Everything else, I have no quarrels with; tournament and all.
Just pray to your gods that it an organizable one at that.
Since tournaments have a tendecy to die out after a month or two; due to in-activeness or chaotic posting order.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on June 29, 2014, 02:10:17 PM
If personal life gets in the way, then it's time to pass the buck. 'nuff said imho.

If we do it any other way, there will be exceptions from Canada to Mexico, and that is bound to cause issues.

Shadow's post seems like a copy-paste of one of my posts in another thread, where I had quoted yet another post that was made on the forum that had summed up the jinch rules; I had not considered going to the wikia for reference, since the main rules we had been adjusting had been the first section, which includes everything except that biju can only be hosted inside a proper host for a week, or else be treated as a summon or hosted.

I'm willing to compromises with a week, if the consideration is made that 12 posts per person may take a longer or shorter time depending on the activity of the parties. After all, if only one post is made every two days, that could take awhile.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on June 30, 2014, 09:31:28 AM
I did indeed just copy from Eric when he posted it on the previous topic. I will continue to push for a 5 day span. I don't think 12 posts will have enough in them to determine one's full capabilities.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on July 01, 2014, 04:18:51 AM
@Kamui
Hence why the tournament is the last option. However, if some of these rules go into effect, they'll either be a post limit or time limit. If it's a time limit, the max the tournament can be is 20 or 28 days, depending on the time limit. Considering the week or two to get it set up, the tournament would never go over a month, with the whole process maybe being a month in a half. Once again this is assuming a time limit, or else we go with the 12 post option.

As for the 12 posts option, Eric has switched sides, and like Shadow I'd also prefer a five day limit since people are concerned about time. Try to cut it down as much as we can. That leave Kay on 12 still, Eric on seven (maybe five) and a bunch of unaffiliated people who have yet to speak.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on July 01, 2014, 04:36:15 AM
Added a poll. So even those who do not wish to partake in the debate can vote.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on July 01, 2014, 06:01:04 AM
As for the 12 posts option, Eric has switched sides, and like Shadow I'd also prefer a five day limit since people are concerned about time. Try to cut it down as much as we can. That leave Kay on 12 still, Eric on seven (maybe five) and a bunch of unaffiliated people who have yet to speak.

I have not outright "switched sides". I said that I am willing to compromise if we consider that 12 posts may come sooner or later than how long we want things to drag on. Even if all doggy stuff is set aside and posts go smoothly one after the other, 12 posts could still be around how many posts a fight might last.

Not many fights that I have been in lasted twelve whole posts + (excluding intro posts) between both parties. 12 posts is a rather large amount of posts if you think about it, as most fights do not even last that long (presuming they are ever finished) between just two people.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on July 01, 2014, 06:05:50 AM
As for the 12 posts option, Eric has switched sides, and like Shadow I'd also prefer a five day limit since people are concerned about time. Try to cut it down as much as we can. That leave Kay on 12 still, Eric on seven (maybe five) and a bunch of unaffiliated people who have yet to speak.

I have not outright "switched sides". I said that I am willing to compromise if we consider that 12 posts may come sooner or later than how long we want things to drag on. Even if all doggy stuff is set aside and posts go smoothly one after the other, 12 posts could still be around how many posts a fight might last.

Not many fights that I have been in lasted twelve whole posts + (excluding intro posts) between both parties. 12 posts is a rather large amount of posts if you think about it, as most fights do not even last that long (presuming they are ever finished) between just two people.


Are we talking posts altogether or turns?

Like 12 turns or 12 posts?
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on July 01, 2014, 11:09:04 AM
As for the 12 posts option, Eric has switched sides, and like Shadow I'd also prefer a five day limit since people are concerned about time. Try to cut it down as much as we can. That leave Kay on 12 still, Eric on seven (maybe five) and a bunch of unaffiliated people who have yet to speak.

I have not outright "switched sides". I said that I am willing to compromise if we consider that 12 posts may come sooner or later than how long we want things to drag on. Even if all doggy stuff is set aside and posts go smoothly one after the other, 12 posts could still be around how many posts a fight might last.

Not many fights that I have been in lasted twelve whole posts + (excluding intro posts) between both parties. 12 posts is a rather large amount of posts if you think about it, as most fights do not even last that long (presuming they are ever finished) between just two people.


Are we talking posts altogether or turns?

Like 12 turns or 12 posts?

We are talking 24 total between the two players, 12 for each one. 12 turns would be 6 posts between each player, which is rather short, even for the sake of saving time.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on July 01, 2014, 09:18:27 PM
Most fights I see are above 12. I don't think I've ever been in one under 15. Anyway poll is up, so lets give that some time.

Any other topics? We could flesh out the sensing thing I suppose.

Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Trev on July 08, 2014, 10:02:27 PM
Bump.

So a week of nothing, we all good and go ahead and lock this if there is nothing more to say.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on July 09, 2014, 01:44:36 AM
Not going to lock it...takes a bit of time for people to think of ideas.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on July 15, 2014, 03:11:12 PM

Are we talking posts altogether or turns?

Like 12 turns or 12 posts?

I don't understand the question, what's the difference? Each player gets 12 turns....that's 12 rounds of rp...12 posts...

Eric makes a good point...how many rounds did the Kiri RP get? 3? 4?
I forget.

I think they may have moved it to a dwelling or something, i'm not entirely sure on how that is going down. So 12 posts total would simply be two players posting six times, three players posting four times, etc.

I am beginning to lean towards a day count, because if for some reason the tournament requires more than 2 people to compete at the same time, folks will have to do math. On the other hand, if we put a day requirement, if people have to wait due to inactivity, that could also affect the fight very negatively.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on July 16, 2014, 02:54:33 AM

Are we talking posts altogether or turns?

Like 12 turns or 12 posts?

I don't understand the question, what's the difference? Each player gets 12 turns....that's 12 rounds of rp...12 posts...

Eric makes a good point...how many rounds did the Kiri RP get? 3? 4?
I forget.

12 posts is sometimes 1 turn. Look at bijuu fights or the Kiri rp. Shadowfire's 'turn' was like 2 pages long with detail.

12 turns will be unlimited amount of posts, but each player gets a set number of turns to post.

Player 1 -16 page post
Player 2 - 8 page post
Player 1 (Turn 2) 1 page post
Player 2 (Turn 2) 1/2 page post

(Players have 10 more 'turns')
vs

Player 1 - 12 posts
Player 2 - 12 posts

(Rp is over)
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on July 16, 2014, 02:56:07 AM
As for the Kiri rp, totally off topic. It's in a dwelling and is being discussed by the participants. If one wishes to be part of, or just watch the discussion/fight message Isaribi for a key.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Eric on July 16, 2014, 04:17:20 AM

Are we talking posts altogether or turns?

Like 12 turns or 12 posts?

I don't understand the question, what's the difference? Each player gets 12 turns....that's 12 rounds of rp...12 posts...

Eric makes a good point...how many rounds did the Kiri RP get? 3? 4?
I forget.

12 posts is sometimes 1 turn. Look at bijuu fights or the Kiri rp. Shadowfire's 'turn' was like 2 pages long with detail.

12 turns will be unlimited amount of posts, but each player gets a set number of turns to post.

Player 1 -16 page post
Player 2 - 8 page post
Player 1 (Turn 2) 1 page post
Player 2 (Turn 2) 1/2 page post

(Players have 10 more 'turns')
vs

Player 1 - 12 posts
Player 2 - 12 posts

(Rp is over)


Well then, with that being on the same page, then 12 "turns" as you would call it then, per person.
Title: Re: Bijuu rules modification: RECALL Edition
Post by: Ѕhadow on July 16, 2014, 04:21:01 AM

Are we talking posts altogether or turns?

Like 12 turns or 12 posts?

I don't understand the question, what's the difference? Each player gets 12 turns....that's 12 rounds of rp...12 posts...

Eric makes a good point...how many rounds did the Kiri RP get? 3? 4?
I forget.

12 posts is sometimes 1 turn. Look at bijuu fights or the Kiri rp. Shadowfire's 'turn' was like 2 pages long with detail.

12 turns will be unlimited amount of posts, but each player gets a set number of turns to post.

Player 1 -16 page post
Player 2 - 8 page post
Player 1 (Turn 2) 1 page post
Player 2 (Turn 2) 1/2 page post

(Players have 10 more 'turns')
vs

Player 1 - 12 posts
Player 2 - 12 posts

(Rp is over)


Well then, with that being on the same page, then 12 "turns" as you would call it then, per person.

That's what we were trying to aim for. xD