PVP games/elements?
-
@HorrorHound said in PVP games/elements?:
Have I been playing WoD wrong? All World of Darkness games are PvP. If your Splat interacts with my Splat, you die, sucka. If you have what I want, you die, sucka. If I fail frenzy, you die, sucka.
Oh I agree... but I harken back to TR where a vampire mouthed off to my werewolf...
The vampire was warned w/ a statement much like: "Keep it up and I'll feed you your fucking teeth."
It kept going, smash cut to 6 months later with PK still unresolved.
I'm hoping for a game where that's not the case.
-
Which is why violence solves all problems, and if it does not? You are not using enough of it. But, where I started, such things had a really simple solution. If you die, you die.
The Center Cannot Hold.
-
@HorrorHound said in PVP games/elements?:
Which is why violence solves all problems, and if it does not? You are not using enough of it. But, where I started, such things had a really simple solution. If you die, you die.
Yeah, I remember the old school WoD games with the OOC Masq thing going on, where if you found out that someone was Cam (I usually played Sabbat), they were dead as fuck ASAP. I kind of miss those days.
-
@somasatori said in PVP games/elements?:
@HorrorHound said in PVP games/elements?:
Which is why violence solves all problems, and if it does not? You are not using enough of it. But, where I started, such things had a really simple solution. If you die, you die.
Yeah, I remember the old school WoD games with the OOC Masq thing going on, where if you found out that someone was Cam (I usually played Sabbat), they were dead as fuck ASAP. I kind of miss those days.
Yeah it can be a blast as long as everyone treats it as a game, there isn't to much of a painful way to get back into playing, ect.
I miss it.
-
I am for, and against, OOC-Masq. But then if you look at my wiki pages, there is nothing deceitful there. It is pretty much out in the open. Which is how I like to play, OOCly, and I enforce it when I can.
But, yeah, Sabbat Scum Must Die. Fear the Sword-Breaker Gargoyles.
-
You know... If you made a Shadowrun game with PvP/PK as a primary element, I think you'd get a lot of players who'd really go for it. Obviously you'd need to find a coder interested in coding up a Shadowrun game, but Denver's been the only thing in town for something like 8-9 years now. I'm pretty sure you'd get a decent playerbase, and Shadowrunners who aren't on the same team as each other (and you could even open up apps for people in Lone Star, Knight-Errant, the Red Samurai, etc.) would be more inclined toward PvP than talking things out. I'd probably even help out with setting it up (though I'm a shit coder, unless it's something relatively easy or deals with building). You could also set up a system like BITN where you have an alt in the wings that'll come in as soon as your character dies. Character death being such a big part of Shadowrun, it'd work really well.
-
Gasp
You mean my magely Mage of Mage can't have babies?! -
Hi,
I'm @ThatOneDude's friend in question and we've been having this discussion for a couple of weeks. You guys have given some really cool feedback so far and we're basically trying to figure out how we would set this up and balance it.
So, first, what we like about WoD, or rather, what we envision it to be:
We like playing in this universe because we enjoy the danger that comes from being pushed into corners, badassery, politicking, backstabbing and genuinely dark elements that come with the genre. We want death and destruction, conspiracies (not Conspiracies, though those too), and struggle, but we also want to see character growth, heroism, and redeeming qualities. We love complexity, dark moments alongside humorous moments, and the question of 'What is it to be human?' that great stories can put out there.
The easiest way to do this would just be to run a tabletop with a few friends. I'm pro-this, but @ThatOneDude has rightly pointed out that MU*s offer the benefit of being able to really expand who you play with, which makes for great dynamics. But of course, putting everything into the hands of the players turns things into a sandbox, which typically isn't that interesting.
So, we've basically broken this down into several issues, but the main one is:
We need a metaplot.
The reason we all RP is because we enjoy a good interactive story, right? If the main goal was to run around and get to level 99, or to give you an alternate identity and social life, there are plenty of games out there that can accomplish it without us putting in all the effort of setting a game like this up.
However, running a metaplot is incredibly staff-intensive, which is likely to lead to burnout, particularly if the game gets bigger than we can plan for. Since no one's getting paid to run a game, we can't be around 24/7 to make stuff happen.
To take some of the pressure off, we'd like to:
- Build as much lore infrastructure as possible that can be taken advantage of by PRP-runners.
More established lore, more pre-written NPCs and/or NPC templates at specific levels, and possibly a few 'stock plots' that can be retold and spun differently to have different effects on the landscape. My personal feeling is the more that's clearly written about the universe, the less likely it is people may run PRPs that are too unbelievable for the world, as well as make them easier to spot.
However, we understand PRPs have different quality levels and that providing XP bonuses for running them tends to lead to 4/5 of them being super railroad plots, monster-of-the-weeks which have no lasting impact, or becoming scenes indistinguishable from a social scene with a news bulletin at the end.
What's the solution to this? Well, we could force staff to read all the logs... but see above where this can't be our 24/7 job. So here's our working solution to that. Instead of giving a flat amount of beats and a checklist, we think we'd like to require basically 1-3 line answers to the following questions:
- Give a short summary (1-3 lines) of the plot.
- Who took the biggest risk in your plot? What was it? Did it pay off?
- Did any of your players take any surprising actions with their characters? What were they?
- Did any of your players manage to alter the direction you were going with this scene through IC action? How?
- Did this scene give your players any subsequent hooks for investigation into a bigger plot?
A flat amount of beats can be awarded to players as per the book rules, but I'm thinking giving small beat bonuses for risks taken by characters, particularly ones with negative consequences, is a decent model. I also think that putting STs into the mindset of moving stories along instead of checking beats off is a better recipe. We really would like to reward quality rather than quantity.
We want player STs to be able to influence the world, albeit possibly in limited ways. There's inherent possible unfairness that can come into running plots that specifically benefit your friends, for example. We haven't worked out exactly how to handle that yet, and it ties quite a bit into part B of this issue.
- Encourage PVP in order to allow players to drive the plot themselves.
This one is hazier. Both @ThatOneDude and I love the dynamics that come from PVP. We've had some great times fighting each other ourselves, in fact! To us, player conflict is a valuable experience, but we know it often leads to OOC drama, and where there's OOC drama, well, there's the Hog Pit. So re: preventative measures, here's what we have so far:
- No PK until your PC has been active for a certain amount of time. I'm thinking from somewhere between 2-4 weeks of activity. I'm also leaning toward a no alts policy, only backup characters, but that's still under discussion.
- Any premeditated murder needs to be declared to staff via a job at least 24 in advance.
- Non-premeditated first time altercations between any two characters can only result in beat downs.
- You can kill in self-defense. Yes, that would mean you could be provoked into a fight that could end in your death! That's the risk you take by swinging first.
Of course, we will also declare that we want to be pro-player-conflict and discourage whining so as to prevent staff burnout. Them's the breaks, if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen, etc. etc.
Edit: (I forgot to write this part)
We also want to reward PVP, of course. And risk-taking in general! Therefore I'm for giving some sort of XP bonus for dying in a scene, but this too is mechanically very hazy. @ThatOneDude pointed out to me that large XP disparities between characters means stronger characters tend to snowball while weak characters can easily be picked off. This is why he's for reducing XP to 50% upon death, where I'm more pro-XP cap. More stuff that needs to be worked out that we haven't found a good solution to yet. Suggestions are welcome.
-
@acceleration said in PVP games/elements?:
Hi,
I'm @ThatOneDude's friend in question and we've been having this discussion for a couple of weeks. You guys have given some really cool feedback so far and we're basically trying to figure out how we would set this up and balance it.
So, first, what we like about WoD, or rather, what we envision it to be:
We like playing in this universe because we enjoy the danger that comes from being pushed into corners, badassery, politicking, backstabbing and genuinely dark elements that come with the genre. We want death and destruction, conspiracies (not Conspiracies, though those too), and struggle, but we also want to see character growth, heroism, and redeeming qualities. We love complexity, dark moments alongside humorous moments, and the question of 'What is it to be human?' that great stories can put out there.
The easiest way to do this would just be to run a tabletop with a few friends. I'm pro-this, but @ThatOneDude has rightly pointed out that MU*s offer the benefit of being able to really expand who you play with, which makes for great dynamics. But of course, putting everything into the hands of the players turns things into a sandbox, which typically isn't that interesting.
So, we've basically broken this down into several issues, but the main one is:
We need a metaplot.
The reason we all RP is because we enjoy a good interactive story, right? If the main goal was to run around and get to level 99, or to give you an alternate identity and social life, there are plenty of games out there that can accomplish it without us putting in all the effort of setting a game like this up.
However, running a metaplot is incredibly staff-intensive, which is likely to lead to burnout, particularly if the game gets bigger than we can plan for. Since no one's getting paid to run a game, we can't be around 24/7 to make stuff happen.
To take some of the pressure off, we'd like to:
- Build as much lore infrastructure as possible that can be taken advantage of by PRP-runners.
More established lore, more pre-written NPCs and/or NPC templates at specific levels, and possibly a few 'stock plots' that can be retold and spun differently to have different effects on the landscape. My personal feeling is the more that's clearly written about the universe, the less likely it is people may run PRPs that are too unbelievable for the world, as well as make them easier to spot.
However, we understand PRPs have different quality levels and that providing XP bonuses for running them tends to lead to 4/5 of them being super railroad plots, monster-of-the-weeks which have no lasting impact, or becoming scenes indistinguishable from a social scene with a news bulletin at the end.
What's the solution to this? Well, we could force staff to read all the logs... but see above where this can't be our 24/7 job. So here's our working solution to that. Instead of giving a flat amount of beats and a checklist, we think we'd like to require basically 1-3 line answers to the following questions:
- Give a short summary (1-3 lines) of the plot.
- Who took the biggest risk in your plot? What was it? Did it pay off?
- Did any of your players take any surprising actions with their characters? What were they?
- Did any of your players manage to alter the direction you were going with this scene through IC action? How?
- Did this scene give your players any subsequent hooks for investigation into a bigger plot?
A flat amount of beats can be awarded to players as per the book rules, but I'm thinking giving small beat bonuses for risks taken by characters, particularly ones with negative consequences, is a decent model. I also think that putting STs into the mindset of moving stories along instead of checking beats off is a better recipe. We really would like to reward quality rather than quantity.
We want player STs to be able to influence the world, albeit possibly in limited ways. There's inherent possible unfairness that can come into running plots that specifically benefit your friends, for example. We haven't worked out exactly how to handle that yet, and it ties quite a bit into part B of this issue.
- Encourage PVP in order to allow players to drive the plot themselves.
This one is hazier. Both @ThatOneDude and I love the dynamics that come from PVP. We've had some great times fighting each other ourselves, in fact! To us, player conflict is a valuable experience, but we know it often leads to OOC drama, and where there's OOC drama, well, there's the Hog Pit. So re: preventative measures, here's what we have so far:
- No PK until your PC has been active for a certain amount of time. I'm thinking from somewhere between 2-4 weeks of activity. I'm also leaning toward a no alts policy, only backup characters, but that's still under discussion.
- Any premeditated murder needs to be declared to staff via a job at least 24 in advance.
- Non-premeditated first time altercations between any two characters can only result in beat downs.
- You can kill in self-defense. Yes, that would mean you could be provoked into a fight that could end in your death! That's the risk you take by swinging first.
Of course, we will also declare that we want to be pro-player-conflict and discourage whining so as to prevent staff burnout. Them's the breaks, if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen, etc. etc.
Edit: (I forgot to write this part)
We also want to reward PVP, of course. And risk-taking in general! Therefore I'm for giving some sort of XP bonus for dying in a scene, but this too is mechanically very hazy. @ThatOneDude pointed out to me that large XP disparities between characters means stronger characters tend to snowball while weak characters can easily be picked off. This is why he's for reducing XP to 50% upon death, where I'm more pro-XP cap. More stuff that needs to be worked out that we haven't found a good solution to yet. Suggestions are welcome.
We Need Metaplot:
Set your game one year exactly before The Week of Nightmares.
-
It was a bit weird. I apped onto a totally open PK game (oWoD) and like, no one really actually killed each other.
-
So, what you would need to do with your metaplot would be to enforce some rationale as to why the characters would be against each other. The thematic aspect of the meta could literally be anything, from vampires and whatnot fighting hunters (like @ThatOneDude mentioned), or something like what we did on TR the first couple years when I was running it and have it stem from some kind of eldritch horror thing. Nonetheless, the meta needs to establish the animosity between PCs.
My suggestion would be similar to what was said before: have a few tiered Conspiracies in the area - pick three of them that don't work well together, like Task Force Valkyrie, the Cheiron Group, and the Ascended Ones, for example - and put them in a location that's highly anomalous. Your metaplot could be something as such: after a massive war between some extra-spatial beings (spirits and the like) and supernatural creatures in the mortal world, a section of the Amazon Rainforest has been cordoned off by the United Nations. Three groups of supernatural Hunters, one even funded by the United States government, have come forward to deal with the potential threat. Everyone knows about the existence of the supernatural now, as the Shadow now bleeds into the real world in the location where the last great battle was fought. Hunter cells are expected to travel into the Bleed Zone (B-Z) to take care of any obvious threat to the surrounding population, and most of the people in the area have been evacuated to safer locations. Each hunter conspiracy has its own reasons for being there, down to specific cells. Your orders from on high are to acquire any anomalous artifacts and equipment from the B-Z and bring them back to base camp in order to be studied and figured out to ensure that something like this never happens again. With luck and enough research and development, humanity may even be able to close the rift between the Shadow and Earth.
In this sort of setting, you could have supernaturals rounded up and captured, or in deep, deep hiding. They wouldn't be PCs, but you could throw just about any sort of PvE antagonist into the mix by using the stats from one of the splats. Vampires who have Blood Tenebrous interested in the Bleed Zone? There you go, now your Cell has to fight a Coterie of OD. Werewolf pack moves in while a TFV cell has an Ascended Ones cell pinned down with machine gun fire, and now the two groups have to fight off the werewolves. Then the one that takes the least casualties fighting off the theriomorphs finds that their former opponent is much less equipped to deal with them, so they take 'em out. The Cells are being run like a military op, with each other Conspiracy acting as a different military group, and therefore enemy combatants.
So PrPs could be something like: we're going into the B-Z to find this powerful fetish that was used in the big conflict. Word gets out to the other Conspiracies that this thing exists and they send in some of their own soldiers. Who can get to it first, and who can hold off long enough to get extracted? Or... We've recovered this artifact from the B-Z and now our best scientists are working on it back at base camp. But it seems like one of the other Conspiracies realized that we've got it, so now we have to defend our scientists from an all-out assault and push the enemy back. Even something like: we've figured out the properties of this vampire blood magic anomalous entity and we're about to have it extracted back to Washington D.C. so we can put it to use as best we can in defending humanity from the depredations of our supernatural enemies. Unfortunately, the Cheiron Group wants to take credit for its discovery and potential defensive abilities, etc., etc., etc.
Forgot to write out: So, the PrPs would push both the meta and they'd also theme themselves toward PvP, just by the nature of what sort of military operations are done into the Bleed Zone (or whatever you wanna call it).
-
@silentsophia said in PVP games/elements?:
It was a bit weird. I apped onto a totally open PK game (oWoD) and like, no one really actually killed each other.
That part is ok to me, its more the understanding that if you do something to a PC (ICA=ICC), he/she could respond with an action that could include trying to PK you.
Like if your PC had his henchmen come in and rob my PC in the middle of the night, kill his puppy and then laugh about it as they drive off in my badass oldschool mustang... Wait, that's John Wick... But you get what I'm saying
-
I like your metaplot idea and really want to incorporate elements like that into play. However, metaplot stuff is once again ST intensive, and @ThatOneDude and I are both in the States, so anything we run will end up being limited hours and not globally friendly. Also, we don't want only action scenes and combat-oriented players.
PVP is great, but it doesn't need to only take place with combat dice. I want to see social and intellectual characters have strong impact on the game as well. To that end I'm considering some sort of territory and politics system, but haven't figured out a good model yet either.
-
@somasatori said in PVP games/elements?:
So, what you would need to do with your metaplot would be to enforce some rationale as to why the characters would be against each other. The thematic aspect of the meta could literally be anything, from vampires and whatnot fighting hunters (like @ThatOneDude mentioned), or something like what we did on TR the first couple years when I was running it and have it stem from some kind of eldritch horror thing. Nonetheless, the meta needs to establish the animosity between PCs.
My suggestion would be similar to what was said before: have a few tiered Conspiracies in the area - pick three of them that don't work well together, like Task Force Valkyrie, the Cheiron Group, and the Ascended Ones, for example - and put them in a location that's highly anomalous. Your metaplot could be something as such: after a massive war between some extra-spatial beings (spirits and the like) and supernatural creatures in the mortal world, a section of the Amazon Rainforest has been cordoned off by the United Nations. Three groups of supernatural Hunters, one even funded by the United States government, have come forward to deal with the potential threat. Everyone knows about the existence of the supernatural now, as the Shadow now bleeds into the real world in the location where the last great battle was fought. Hunter cells are expected to travel into the Bleed Zone (B-Z) to take care of any obvious threat to the surrounding population, and most of the people in the area have been evacuated to safer locations. Each hunter conspiracy has its own reasons for being there, down to specific cells. Your orders from on high are to acquire any anomalous artifacts and equipment from the B-Z and bring them back to base camp in order to be studied and figured out to ensure that something like this never happens again. With luck and enough research and development, humanity may even be able to close the rift between the Shadow and Earth.
In this sort of setting, you could have supernaturals rounded up and captured, or in deep, deep hiding. They wouldn't be PCs, but you could throw just about any sort of PvE antagonist into the mix by using the stats from one of the splats. Vampires who have Blood Tenebrous interested in the Bleed Zone? There you go, now your Cell has to fight a Coterie of OD. Werewolf pack moves in while a TFV cell has an Ascended Ones cell pinned down with machine gun fire, and now the two groups have to fight off the werewolves. Then the one that takes the least casualties fighting off the theriomorphs finds that their former opponent is much less equipped to deal with them, so they take 'em out. The Cells are being run like a military op, with each other Conspiracy acting as a different military group, and therefore enemy combatants.
So PrPs could be something like: we're going into the B-Z to find this powerful fetish that was used in the big conflict. Word gets out to the other Conspiracies that this thing exists and they send in some of their own soldiers. Who can get to it first, and who can hold off long enough to get extracted? Or... We've recovered this artifact from the B-Z and now our best scientists are working on it back at base camp. But it seems like one of the other Conspiracies realized that we've got it, so now we have to defend our scientists from an all-out assault and push the enemy back. Even something like: we've figured out the properties of this vampire blood magic anomalous entity and we're about to have it extracted back to Washington D.C. so we can put it to use as best we can in defending humanity from the depredations of our supernatural enemies. Unfortunately, the Cheiron Group wants to take credit for its discovery and potential defensive abilities, etc., etc., etc.
Forgot to write out: So, the PrPs would push both the meta and they'd also theme themselves toward PvP, just by the nature of what sort of military operations are done into the Bleed Zone (or whatever you wanna call it).
Totally could be the "darkzone"... I think this idea has a lot of merit for something like that. Easy access for PRP fodder as well to have some zone that's just a nightmare...
-
@acceleration said in PVP games/elements?:
PVP is great, but it doesn't need to only take place with combat dice. I want to see social and intellectual characters have strong impact on the game as well. To that end I'm considering some sort of territory and politics system, but haven't figured out a good model yet either.
Oh yeah, absolutely. You could have different groups of hunters that have claimed parts of the darkzone as their own, and all of the conspiracies have some form of internal politicking. Plus, the higher-ups will probably be doing some politic junk between themselves and the higher-ups of other organizations. But yeah, just spitballing ideas, but it could work. Plus, you could have faction heads that push their various organizations and act like "mini-staff" to that end, which might take some of the strain and stress off of staff to run things specifically for folks (except the occasional Big Plot[tm]). Ideas are kinda my schtick, so if you want to throw anything at me, let me know.
@ThatOneDude said in PVP games/elements?:
Totally could be the "darkzone"... I think this idea has a lot of merit for something like that. Easy access for PRP fodder as well to have some zone that's just a nightmare...
Yep, basically it's kind of like what the Hedge is to Changelings (or should be). This nightmarish place that's just horrible and you don't ever really want to go there, but you kinda have to. Plus if you're being ordered to, then that puts another spin on it altogether. Especially if, say, one conspiracy's territory (as mentioned above) is particularly dangerous compared to another. Then you've got soldiers going AWOL and trying to join the enemy's side, and so on. I think you guys are on a pretty good path in regards to what you want to do.
-
One thing that has always bugged me about WoD PvP:
PvP != PK
It's possible to go up against a player and just beat the crap out of them without actually killing them. In fact, this should probably be the standard, with an actual PK being far less common. Having someone beat the hell out of someone is far less likely to result in blowback than if you kill a member of some faction.
But people just sort of naturally assume that death is the only outcome of combat. So weird. I have nothing against PvP, but I think that PK should be somewhat discouraged unless it's really the only logical outcome for the scene.
But then, people just come up with a reason to try and do mental gymnastics to justify why -their- character is some sort of frenzied maniac. It goes round and round.
I'd be interested in a game where PvP is actually encouraged, so long as actual PK is kept to sane levels.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
@Derp said in PVP games/elements?:
One thing that has always bugged me about WoD PvP:
PvP != PK
It's possible to go up against a player and just beat the crap out of them without actually killing them. In fact, this should probably be the standard, with an actual PK being far less common. Having someone beat the hell out of someone is far less likely to result in blowback than if you kill a member of some faction.
But people just sort of naturally assume that death is the only outcome of combat. So weird. I have nothing against PvP, but I think that PK should be somewhat discouraged unless it's really the only logical outcome for the scene.
But then, people just come up with a reason to try and do mental gymnastics to justify why -their- character is some sort of frenzied maniac. It goes round and round.
I'd be interested in a game where PvP is actually encouraged, so long as actual PK is kept to sane levels.
Yeah I could see in Hunter the beat down being a bigger thing on the whole vs a straight murder. Maybe that's the key to the whole PK issue we've been trying to figure out. How do you stop just random PK by troublemakers that make no sense in the story? Maybe this is it? If you want to /finish him/ there is a tiny hoop to be jumped?
Then when it's all over and the rest of you are ready for Dead Animal Pickup, I'm gonna go balls deep into Dahl. But only because she asked me to. Sweet-like. - Riddick (2013)
-
@ThatOneDude said in PVP games/elements?:
If you want to /finish him/ there is a tiny hoop to be jumped?
If it were up to me? This is how I would do it:
Basic rule of the game: PvP can happen anytime, anywhere. However, if things escalate to the point where you think a PK is required, then you should either submit a job ahead of time to a staffer, in which case approval would be needed for a PK, or call for a judge right there on the scene if things have escalated unpredictably, and attempt to make your case for such an action.
Otherwise, PK is flat disallowed. Find a reason for your character to back off. Maybe he got a text from his wife saying there was an emergency, or he remembered he left the iron on. Whatever. But unapproved PK will not be upheld.
This way, the random troublemakers can be screened, and the act itself will be less frequent because oh god, there could be a form you have to fill out!
-
Really, any ideas you have for giving social and intellectual characters a leg up in a PVP environment would be welcome. Neither @ThatOneDude nor I have typically been big into politicking in games like these, so I'm not sure what kind of models tend to actually work for them.
Bottlenecking via requiring staff approval is a troublesome model. We don't want to discourage PK that may happen as a result of escalation. That's why we ended up with the rules we've written out so far.
That would be these, for reiteration:
- No PK until your PC has been active for a certain amount of time. I'm thinking from somewhere between 2-4 weeks of activity. I'm also leaning toward a no alts policy, only backup characters, but that's still under discussion.
- Any premeditated murder needs to be declared to staff via a job at least 24 in advance.
- Non-premeditated first time altercations between any two characters can only result in beat downs.
- You can kill in self-defense. Yes, that would mean you could be provoked into a fight that could end in your death! That's the risk you take by swinging first.
In a conflict-oriented MU* we expect some form of troublemaking. That's part of the point of opening up a game that encourages PVP as a large part of the game's build, and part of the point of declaring it to be this type of game outright-- so that people who find they don't enjoy the ups and downs of investing a character who will eventually be killed can avoid it and go elsewhere.
Of course, an extended nemesis storyline is also something we'd like to encourage! I've bounced the idea of some sort of declared nemesis system off @ThatOneDude to some extent as well, but it's something that's still under discussion. A lot of these systems are, because it turns out building your own MU* is pretty tough... but that aside, what I would ideally like to do is give small beat bonuses or willpower back in a manner similar to awarding for fulfilling a vice/virtue. Do something in line with your nemesis storyline at the expense of another of your character's goals, get rewarded for it somehow.
The troublemakers who can't distinguish between IC and OOC will end up needing staff intervention, no doubt. As neither @ThatOneDude nor I are particularly patient people, we'd probably just give them one warning and then ban them.
Edit: (Forgot to add, again)
With regard to combat systems, naturally we have to make sure everyone is playing fair if PK is involved. Beat downs are something that can be shrugged off to some extent, but PK definitely can't be and would require some sort of staff or neutral presence to oversee the dice unless all parties agree to go forward without a moderator. Haven't worked out a perfect solution to that yet, either.
-
If I wasn't afraid of Palladium I'd make a RIFT's game that was no holds barred sandbox, but, I'd want to automate it so not everyone needed to have every book and to make chargen not a nightmare.
Hello! Long time listener, first time caller...
