Evangeline Anovilis Posted December 23, 2011 Report Share Posted December 23, 2011 [quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1324673895' post='2885042'] Yeah, no peacemode for CNRP. I do think people need to mellow out with their territorial acquisitions and work together with others if possible. Even when an attempt to preplan breaks down the attacker should state more or less the outcome should they win and be generous [b]in their concessions to the losing party.[/b] [/quote] I always thought the losing party made concessions to the winning party... And altough I'm not for peace mode, I agree that the winner should try to be considerate and humane towards the losing party. This shouldn't mean no terms at all, because the loser is a sore one and loves every square meter of their land, but just that you shouldn't wipe someone off the map, if they aren't accepting that. I mean, I don't see a problem if it is like New France. Curristan looks happy being a colony. In general, I wouldn't make it a rule, but just a sign of respect for other RPers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 [quote name='Evangeline Anovilis' timestamp='1324677675' post='2885081'] I always thought the losing party made concessions to the winning party... And altough I'm not for peace mode, I agree that the winner should try to be considerate and humane towards the losing party. This shouldn't mean no terms at all, because the loser is a sore one and loves every square meter of their land, but just that you shouldn't wipe someone off the map, if they aren't accepting that. I mean, I don't see a problem if it is like New France. Curristan looks happy being a colony. In general, I wouldn't make it a rule, but just a sign of respect for other RPers. [/quote] Indeed, but had Curristan really wanted to he could have fought his way free. So it is more of a choice on his part than anything. And yes, not sure that the idea can be codified into a rule without going into some insane realm of percentages versus post lengths versus GDP versus whatever. Best to leave it as an idea and encourage people to live up to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 You could always try to encourage the idea of cabinet wars ingame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK47 Posted December 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 Thank you everyone, there has been some very helpful input here and I think there's enough to get a fairly decent feel for where we need to go. The season being what it is, I have far too many meatbags to blast to act on this rapidly, but I am keeping it in mind and I'll present something more solid for you soonish. In the mean time, I will leave this thread open for the time being provided you all remain civil and all that. Also a few notes: *I will not be banning forced wars but I will be enacting methods to discourage them. *As much as the quality of RP suffers at the hands of limitless wealth each nation seems to have, forced national economies are not something I am going to implement. Having said that, nothing is stopping you from roleplaying that way yourself. You are more than welcome to develop some kind of opt-in system for yourselves. *There will be no lizardmen, zombies, alien, demonic, mer, cyborg, or other primarily non-human nations. Finally I would like to thank Cochin for his long standing contributions to CNRP and the GM team. It is unfortunate that he no longer feels able to continue his GM-ship. With that I say adieu and enjoy your meatbaggy holidays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 [quote name='HK47' timestamp='1324694111' post='2885283'] Thank you everyone, there has been some very helpful input here and I think there's enough to get a fairly decent feel for where we need to go. The season being what it is, I have far too many meatbags to blast to act on this rapidly, but I am keeping it in mind and I'll present something more solid for you soonish. In the mean time, I will leave this thread open for the time being provided you all remain civil and all that. Also a few notes: *I will not be banning forced wars but I will be enacting methods to discourage them. *As much as the quality of RP suffers at the hands of limitless wealth each nation seems to have, forced national economies are not something I am going to implement. Having said that, nothing is stopping you from roleplaying that way yourself. You are more than welcome to develop some kind of opt-in system for yourselves. *There will be no lizardmen, zombies, alien, demonic, mer, cyborg, or other primarily non-human nations. Finally I would like to thank Cochin for his long standing contributions to CNRP and the GM team. It is unfortunate that he no longer feels able to continue his GM-ship. With that I say adieu and enjoy your meatbaggy holidays. [/quote] Oh robotic one, have yourself a clanky good holiday as well. Thank you for hearing us all out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 [quote name='HK47' timestamp='1324694111' post='2885283'] With that I say adieu and enjoy your meatbaggy holidays. [/quote] You've become soft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 (edited) Related Topic update from HK47's new thread: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=107780 (Congratulations to our newest GM )[quote name='HK47' timestamp='1324697559' post='2885318']GMs at war: *In cases where GMs are in conflict with each other, or are otherwise compromised, GMs may now elect amongst themselves with a unanimous vote a temporary fourth GM who's sole responsibility will be arbitrating that particular dispute. Forced wars. *In order to engage in a forced war, you must be able to provide proof of having made at least reasonable attempts to contact the other parties and to come to some arrangement for a planned war. It is suggested, but not required that a planned war include an agreed outline for maximum losses for each side. A predefined outcome is not required and may be used as desired. [/quote] Edited December 24, 2011 by Generalissimo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK47 Posted December 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 [quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1324695611' post='2885304'] You've become soft. [/quote] Oh, master, I could not allow myself to harm another. What if they have families? Or children? We must always think of the children. The littlest ones always suffer in war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Generalissimo Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 I know I’m late to the conversation Twelve pages late to the conversation But there’s something that’s been bugging me Killing other players characters without consent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 Not sure, but isn't it something like the player who RPs the characters has full right to whether that character can die unless relinquishing control threw rerolling, or deliberately sent the character in harm's way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 [quote name='Generalissimo' timestamp='1324699030' post='2885346'] I know I’m late to the conversation Twelve pages late to the conversation But there’s something that’s been bugging me Killing other players characters without consent [/quote] you mean you want to prevent people from being pricks because of OOC conversations? that'll never happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShammySocialist Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1324701619' post='2885394'] Not sure, but isn't it something like the player who RPs the characters has full right to whether that character can die unless relinquishing control threw rerolling, or deliberately sent the character in harm's way? [/quote] Deliberately putting a character in harms way, or relinquishing control by rerolling without a concerted effort to save that character could lead to death, as I've always interpreted it. This could be considered to be put under the same notions of "forced RP", where someone is "forced" to kill their leader, which shouldn't have to take place, without consent. But say, if your president decides to do what, say, the American President does in [i]Independence Day[/i], going on a high stakes mission, vulnerabilities have to exist if you do it deliberately. Killing other players' characters, without consent or the player putting them at some risk, or their loss without a concerted effort to save them during a reroll, is frowned upon. Edit: [quote name='Generalissimo' timestamp='1324697901' post='2885326'] Related Topic update from HK47's new thread: http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=107780 (Congratulations to our newest GM ) [/quote] Thanks, Generalissimo. Edited December 24, 2011 by TheShammySocialist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Generalissimo' timestamp='1324699030' post='2885346'] I know I’m late to the conversation Twelve pages late to the conversation But there’s something that’s been bugging me Killing other players characters without consent [/quote] I don't think that's ever changed. In my thread for Rio Negro characters can be killed, but not by act of god. They have to accept the hit and they've signed on for the RP knowing dying is part of it. I personally don't like the idea of safe haven for characters. I think a character ought to be on the block like everything else is. If someone can sneak a bomb into my country and plant it to kill one of my characters, they will die. I won't mind. As that isn't an option I'll just find ways to subvert the community norm and convert people to the righteous path of tallying their hard fought character kills like modern day gladiators. It isn't allowed now, but one day.. one day it will be. Godlike kills that are inescapable though.. that's an autokill, not on for that sort of thing. Edited December 24, 2011 by Tidy Bowl Man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Minister Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 Nah, we have enough lulz attacks without allowing people to assassinate people's characters. Going against this long standing unwritten rule would open a can of worms - that, and my characters will die when I say they do if they aren't anywhere they're not supposed to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted December 24, 2011 Report Share Posted December 24, 2011 Same here, you can attack me, I still have to accept the hit, none of this autokill business with inescapable scenarios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted December 27, 2011 Report Share Posted December 27, 2011 Well, I'm surprised this thread became reasonable, more or less, toward the end...usually CNRP polorizes on just about every issue. That said, I'd say HK-47's ruling seems to be the best compromise all around. (And yeah, I know, late reply is late Deal with it.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah Tintagyl Posted December 27, 2011 Report Share Posted December 27, 2011 [quote name='Subtleknifewielder' timestamp='1325022609' post='2887480'] Well, I'm surprised this thread became reasonable, more or less, toward the end...usually CNRP polorizes on just about every issue. That said, I'd say HK-47's ruling seems to be the best compromise all around. (And yeah, I know, late reply is late Deal with it.) [/quote] Join the community again...at the moment I'm just hearing wind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted December 27, 2011 Report Share Posted December 27, 2011 Hahah, Sarah. I've told everyone exactly when I'm joining again. You should know this one by now too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.