New PK Policy for Review - Take Two!

Talk about anything TI here! Also include suggestions for the game, website, and these forums.

Moderators: Maeve, Maeve

Post Reply
User avatar
Kinaed
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:54 pm
Discord Handle: ParaVox3#7579

Sun Apr 03, 2011 11:10 pm

I hope I've addressed most of the concerns. I've kept the 24 hour wait before initiating a PK in place, removed the other items besides PK. A few other tweaks. If I forgot something, I apologize. Please gently remind me. :)

Code: Select all

Player Killing, or "PK" is the practice of one Player Character (PC)
killing another. This results in the IC death of a player. As The
Inquisition: Legacy is a role-play game, all PKills require a solid
RP basis. 

To ensure appropriate RP around PK, the following is required to enact
a PK:

- Desc notes explaining why a character intends to take these actions
  at least 24 hours in advance of the actual event. This allows
  time for an angry player to cool off and think about if their
  character would actually do the intended action. See {cHelp Policy 
  Desc Notes{x to see what a proper desc note entails. 

  All players, including Inquisitors and Reeves, are required to
  have a valid desc note for any PKs they enact. However, when
  acting in an official capacity, they may enact a PK with only
  four OOC hours in advance of the PK. If the desc note implies
  that the PK might be private, 24 hours applies.

  The only exception to requiring desc notes is if a character
  acts out of self defense. Self defense is explicitly one of the
  following conditions:

     + A PC is the victim of a steal attempt.
     + A PC catches another person casting magic. (Either party
       may consider a PK self-defense.)
     + A PC is threatened by another PC with deadly force. 
     + A PC attempts to restrain/arrest another PC.
     + A PC has been attacked with combat code.
     + A PC has attempted to awaken without permission.

- If a player wishes to play a serial killer they must apply to the 
  staff through {cHelp Application{x and clearly state in the 
  application that this is desired. The staff may choose to turn 
  this character archetype down based on the impact to the game.

- Death as the result of RP is not possible without the use of
  one of the following commands: finish, burn, dquarter, or die.
  Die is the command to be used when two players *agree* a death
  would have occurred. To use it, contact a staff to review the
  case, then the victim will use the die command of their own
  free will. There should be no OOC pressure on the person dying
  to choose to do so. Please see {cHelp Finish{x as there is an
  XP charge for the privilege of PKing an RP partner.

- PK is a major RP event. It is to be treated with respect. Make
  sure RP tools are in place, such as rumors, moods, and other 
  evidence surrounding the PK is left in the appropriate places.
  If a player is hiding their trail, they must write desc notes
  regarding the steps they have taken to do so. 
  See {cHelp Policy Twinks{x. 

- On bugs, fairness, and other issues... PKs seem to be a ripe 
  time for people to discover and make cases that some bit of code 
  used to PK them was "buggy" or "unfair", etc. This may be true,
  but we do not null PKs for bugs, lack of fairness, etc. See {cHelp
  Policy Reimbursements{x. 

- An IC death can be harsh, and at the very least involve a rename 
  and the loss of all RP involving the dead character. The character 
  is dead, and may not continue any line of RP involving their dead
  character. Playing a relative, friend, or anyone else that could
  pick up and carry on the dead character's RP is prohibited. 
  Retaliation with alts or the renamed character is not permitted.

  Because death is so final, and often difficult for a PKed player
  to handle emotionally, killers are requested to maintain a level
  of respect and humility when going into a PK. Certainly, the RP
  surrounding a PK must be substantial enough for the player at
  the other end to have a reasonable opportunity to understand:

     + Why they are being pkilled.
     + If there is or was anything they could do to avoid it.
     + What they could do differently in the future to avoid a
       similar PK, even if it pertains only to future characters.

  This information is to be transferred ICly, not OOCly.

- It is highly suggested that all involved in PKs, thefts, or 
  awakening to log that roleplay. Disputes surrounding PK will be 
  reviewed by the policy staff, who will determine the results based
  on policy rather than "fairness".

- If the tone or vividness of the RP occuring around these events 
  offends a player, they may use the GRAPHIC command to request that 
  the RP be worked out OOCly and assumed ICly. 

- A player may only request the halt of RP for a policy infringement. If
  a valid halt is requested, all players are required to cease all IC
  action and await a staff member. A halt cannot be enacted after the RP
  is resolved. (Eg, a player can request a policy review during a Review
  of Faith, but not standing at the pyre after the outcome has been
  determined). A halt is not required for any reason other than a policy
  review. See {cHelp Burden of Proof{x to understand when a policy case
  is valid.

If this policy is not followed, the character in question will be docked 
significant XP, and it is possible that the RP outcome may be altered,
or even reversed by staff. Scary effects that do not end in PK, such as
being knocked out, etc, are not PKs, but may be required to follow some
aspects of this policy.

Estelle
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:04 am

Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:34 am

I wholely support this. :) However, I think the following should be reviewed:

- On bugs, fairness, and other issues... PKs seem to be a ripe
time for people to discover and make cases that some bit of code
used to PK them was "buggy" or "unfair", etc. This may be true,
but we do not null PKs for bugs, lack of fairness, etc. See {cHelp
Policy Reimbursements{x.

Firstly, I can't find a Help Policy Reimbursements. Secondly, having been involved in a PK attempt where a 'bug' was called and the effect of the PK altered with myself being the side losing out, I still am of the opinion that if a bug is determined to truly be a bug and significant enough to change the course of the RP, it should indeed be nulled. As mentioned before, PK is a serious thing, and it would be quite discouraging for it to happen due to an OOC bug rather than anything IC. This ruling would encourage people to abuse bugs (ie twinkage), IMO.

User avatar
Kinaed
Posts: 1984
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:54 pm
Discord Handle: ParaVox3#7579

Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:49 am

Policy Reimbursements isn't written yet. I'm still planning it.

With regards to reimbursements and the issues you've mentioned, the problem is that bugs are often subjective. By definition, a bug is an undesirable behavior in code. Example:

Code: Select all

Raidon, in handcuffs, meditates. Then, he finds a gate in the astral plane and steps through it. 
Is this a bug, or not? 
From Raidon's point of view - no. It's a pretty cool code feature.
From the law's point of view - hell yes. Wtf? He disappeared like that?
Not going to argue the particular instances of why this case is or isn't viable, I'm just illustrating a point about bugs. When the staff members step in like that, it's subjective. So, if we say 'yes we reimburse' as a general rule, we'll always be giving players some token of something or another just to appease them or calm them down because, as mentioned in help PK, there's always something wrong.

The imms are not stingy. We're liberal with QP, easy on applications, etc. We do not reimburse, though. Where we feel obligated to, we compensate, but even that is at our discretion.

I won't write a policy roping the staff into payments, nulls, etc. Right or wrong, in most cases reimbursement is about appeasement. TI is a free game. The feeling of entitlement that reimbursement appeases is around a psychological creation of value and, whereas valid in one way, is not necessarily appropriate with regards to what is best for the game at large.

However, when we discuss the staff's morals and reimbursements, I believe you might find that our track record so far indicates that we're fairly compensatory and reasonably virtuous. But by choice, not by policy. :)

Estelle
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:04 am

Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:58 am

Hm, I see. In Raidon's case I would think it is not so much a 'bug-case' as sheer twinkage, however. From what I gather, he somehow managed to meditate while being dragged around in handcuffs by people who could logically have been able to wake him up with a good whack as soon as they notice it.. not very ICly viable. Fortunately the new twink policy allows staff to intervene with such? ... Or not?

I guess perhaps when I say bugs I am thinking about something that should have worked failing, or something else more clear-cut than someone just abusing loopholes. ie someone's cemotes simply not working (not sure if this is possible or not, just saying), or a player losing link but still being beaten on. I understand re: not making it policy that staff HAVE to intervene though.

registerednuisance
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:47 pm

Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:35 am

Estelle wrote:Hm, I see. In Raidon's case I would think it is not so much a 'bug-case' as sheer twinkage, however. From what I gather, he somehow managed to meditate while being dragged around in handcuffs by people who could logically have been able to wake him up with a good whack as soon as they notice it.. not very ICly viable. Fortunately the new twink policy allows staff to intervene with such? ... Or not?

I guess perhaps when I say bugs I am thinking about something that should have worked failing, or something else more clear-cut than someone just abusing loopholes. ie someone's cemotes simply not working (not sure if this is possible or not, just saying), or a player losing link but still being beaten on. I understand re: not making it policy that staff HAVE to intervene though.

I see that Raidon as no issue. If he's being dragged around in cuffs or beaten up, it's an issue, you can't feasible concentrate. If you're just chillin' in holding or waiting somewhere quiet, it makes sense.

Wilderop
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2011 6:19 pm

Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:57 am

If your mage character spends literally months meditating icly, he might be able to actually use the pain and discomfort being caused him to help him focus on separating his soul from his body. Once the two are separate it doesn't matter what you to do to the body, the soul is separate now.

This is just an example of how things are subjective.

However, some of the current bugs are not subjective. For example, if I attack someone after trying to restrain them. Then I -stop- the fight. The restrain code assumes the other guy surrenders and completes the restrain on them.

Or for example if I invoke certain spells while someone is trying to restrain me, it is assumed I automatically gave into the restraint by the code. Even though invoking a spell is not supposed to disable you. (as opposed to evoking a spell which takes immense concentration)

Both examples can lead to the death of your character almost immediately.

User avatar
Rabek
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:48 pm

Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:53 am

Okay, so as far as I can tell, the current help file doesn't mention the RPXP requirement at all (i.e. you have to RP with them a while before you can finish them). This is a problem, since everything else is waived for self-defense, and I was unable to finish someone in that very situation. Worth considering.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests