Knocking on Death's door.

[Nemesis]

I am well aware of the "no-killing" policy, unless agreed upon, here at the forums, but I have also noticed that this stipulation poses a potential and even prevalent issue during rps.

Allowing someone to prevent their character's death under any circumstances gives them an unrealistic lease on life. Tempting fate is one thing, but an outright defiance of reality is entirely different.

Example: Character A is a villain with no force abilities and can be considered to have the typical strengths and weaknesses of the average human male. Character B is a hero who is also human with no outstanding powers beyond the ordinary.

"A" is holding an innocent bystander over the ledge of a tall building, a plunge that would cause certain death for the victim. "B" has just arrived and, realizing he can not directly attack "A" for fear he would drop the hostage, draws a blaster and places it along the villain’s head at point blank range.

Given the characteristics of both "A" and "B", there would be no feasible way for "A" to either drop the victim or attack "B" without being gunned down. However, "A", knowing that "B" can not kill his character, may in fact drop the hostage; take up a battle with "B" while still holding the victim; or even drop the victim then fight "B".

This scenario could be played out by force or non-force users of any rank and in a limitless number of ways. In any case, "A" would be abusing the privilege to keep his character alive at the expense of "B", whose hands would be tied by the "no-killing" policy.

I mean no offense toward any one rper. I've seen this tactic employed in several threads by more than one person. Perhaps this classifies as GMing, but I've never seen anyone brought up on this particular charge. I simply feel if this problem can be dealt with now, before it adds yet another name to the growing list of heated OOC debates, we may all be spared a little grief.

Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

[Wei Wu Wei]

Well, if I was in A's position, I would set the victim back on the roof of the building, hold my hands up as though admitting defeat, and when B relaxes, double-cross him and kick his butt.

[imported_Blade Ice]

"A" is holding an innocent bystander over the ledge of a tall building, a plunge that would cause certain death for the victim. "B" has just arrived and, realizing he can not directly attack "A" for fear he would drop the hostage, draws a blaster and places it along the villain’s head at point blank range.

Theres a flaw in this theory though unless villian "A" is Moron. First off me being a villian would have dropped the hostage as soon as I seen him draw for his gun and if he ended up getting his gun out before I noticed theres no way in hell I let him get at point blank range. The hostage would be dead and his mission failed.

Your theory isn't sound and it could never happen unless your villian is a Moron in which case he deserves to die.

[Wei Wu Wei]

Well, I never said I'd let the victim survive. Even villains have to get their priorities straight. I'd much rather let one victim go and save my behind so that later on I could terrorize more victims. That, and I would have never gotten myself into such a situation in the first place. To be honest, B getting point-blank on A is pretty unreasonable in the first place. Unless B knew ninja or something and could make his footfalls silent.

[Inu]

It's hypothetical. The point isn't to bash the example scenario, its to deal with the problem of the death policy in situations where a death is inevitable and the rule could be used to gain unfair advantage. As for me, I think that in such a situation, the one who is at risk of losing his life (the villain in this instance) should find a compromise so that he doesn't have to give up, the hero still has a mission that can potentially fail, and they can both live without taking the risk of being "unrealistic". Wei had a good example.

[imported_Blade Ice]

But my point is there is no possible way that Villain or a good guy should find himself in a noway out situation. Its simple if its a good guy versus a bad there always a chance for human error there is no perfectly excuted no way out situation. There is always a way out you just need to think about it.

[Nemesis]

Thank you Inu. The scenario was meant to pose the problem, nothing more.

Wei, you raise a good point. There are means of getting out of situations such as these without misusing the rules placed upon role-playing. However, very few are willing to do as you have said because that would entail them giving something up. Sometimes pride won't allow for even a hollow gesture of surrender.

Again, to prevent any harsh reactions, this is a general statement not a personal attack toward any one rper.

[Jeseth Cloak]

If the villian you described in your scenario did something which he was incapable of, then it would be (if I'm not mistaken) god-moding. I'm fairly sure you could always just report him to a member of the SWFans.net staff and ask that he edit his post.

[Nemesis]

It wasn't the fact this sort of behavior has occurred in one of my threads that drove to write this because, to be quite honest, it hasn't. I do know at least two people who have experienced this abuse of power and were angered by the act, but were gracious enough to move past it. They felt, as do I, the OOC debates instigated by such GMing accusations result in nothing but shameless displays of immaturity (on both sides) and hurt feelings; ultimately accomplishing nothing.

My only reason for bringing this into the open now is: I know that sooner or later someone will have a specific example of it happening to them, but rather than expressing themselves in a respectful fashion, such as through PMs, they will air their "dirty laundry" for the entire forums to see. Which will in turn, cause the other person to become upset, both will end up quarrelling, a moderator or administrator may be forced to close the thread entirely, and the two rpers may never have anything to do with each other again. As in any community it is impossible to effect only one or two people, because everyone is connected to someone else.

Thus, I believe if this matter can be settled now, then we may all be spared needless grief, as I stated before.
:)

[Mr. Happy]

Like James T. Kirk, I too have a hard time believing in the no win scenario. I guess I don't really see the problem here, that 2 way communication can't fix.

[Nemesis]

It's not that I believe there isn't a way out of any situation, but my point is the fact many find ways out of predicaments that are completely absurd.

There are, indeed, means of escape to any encounter, such as Wei's example when he said he would simply pretend to surrender, long enough to make his move. However, I see many instances in which rpers decide to take actions that would, in all reality, get them killed because they bank on the fact their character can not be slain.

My apologizes if I didn't make my issue clearer before hand.:D

[Marcus Telcontar]

I've already thought of three different ways to get out of this senario.

All logical, all possible, one implusible, but quite funny.

One introduces a twist to the senario.

The other is sort of alluded to.

The point is, this is roleplaying and if your caught in a difficult position, then using your writing skills to get out of it is totally acceptible. I see nothing in that senario that says only one course of action must be taken.

ALSO.....

To avoid no way outs, you should in the spirit of fair play give the other a possible out. A lack of fair play and common sense is against the rules as well.

[Mr. Happy]

I disagree with Marcus's latter point, as the point is to eventually produce "checkmate" in such an encounter. But yes, I could think of half a dozen outs of that hypothetical. Never underestimate the power of imagination.

[Nemesis]

o_O

You appear to still be missing my point so I will try to put it as bluntly as possible.

Question: Are there unacceptable ways of escaping a situation, (i.e. "A" fighting "B" while still holding the hostage over the ledge.), that wouldn't necessarily involve use of powers beyond one's rank, but simply performing a physically, or otherwise, impossible feat?

[Lord Soth]

True, true...I have to agree with Nemesis on this one...Very valid point's here... I have found myself in similar situation's and indeed, the after math can leave one in great need of shock treatment...Trust me...lol

Unfortunately, I really don't see any move to act upon such a measure. It would be easier for some to claim "GM" on this issue rather then address the real problem. Not to sound like the pessimist here, that's just how I see it...But yes, I agree...Let the ball roll if all possible...

[Mr. Happy]

Well, sorry...that's too vague for me to work with :)

[Mr. Happy]

Do you mean to ask if there are ACCEPTIBLE ways? I guess I'm just not getting the question

[Nemesis]

Well, at least we tried.:D

I have nothing further to add, so I guess the topic is open for discussion. Thanks anyway.
:)

[Nemesis]

No, not acceptable ways. I know there are limitless means of escape the imagination can concoct in this world of fiction. However, should it not still be tempered by the limit of reality. I am not attempting to state anyone should be forced into a position of entrapment, but that their escape should be realistic.

[Lord Soth]

Well, MR.HAPPY, it's quite simple...Peep taking full advantage of the fact that in a "Life or Death" situation as Nemesis has brought up...i.e. Is the concern of those who would or will always find a way for their character to come out on top even if it's pushing the envelope past and beyond fairness or realism in any given or particular post's...

I believe peep can work thread's out ahead of time, however, often time's this cannot be done and thus...It brings up the point once again...

[Marcus Telcontar]

I disagree with Marcus's latter point, as the point is to eventually produce "checkmate" in such an encounter. But yes, I could think of half a dozen outs of that hypothetical. Never underestimate the power of imagination.

There are better ways to win a senario than kill. Just trying to force a kill shows a lack of imagination. In this place, where there is a definate No Kill policy, you have to come up with other ways to "win"

(Which I dont like the sound of trying to win, it's this have to win mentality that leads to problems - but I digress)

And really, there is much more fun to be had concentrating on more than just KILL KILL KILL!!!!!!!! GRR MAIM TEAR!!! EAT FLESH OF BABIES!!! KILL!!!! SNARL!!! RIP!!!!

* slap *

Err, where was I?

Oh yeah.

Engineering a piano fall on someones foot or 2 ton of marshmellow is much, much more enjoyable. And forces some imagination and writing skill. Try it. I get more pleasure from the time A NAmeLess NR Tech completely screwed up RSO's attempt to take Bespin (and that was three years ago now), to a recent kill. Roleplaying is sooooo much more than grunt kill STAB HACK BITE KICK POING BEAT GRIND BASH HACK

* smak *

Err, where was I?

Oh yeah.

RP is so much more, there are virtually limitless possibilities. Expand and embrace the power of limitless roleplay!

[Nemesis]

I suppose you are right, Soth. As I stated before, at least we tried to do a little preventative work. :)

I Thank you all for your opinions.

:)

For anyone else, feel free to make your own comments if you would like.

[imported_Akrabbim]

If I may comment, I think I see Nemesis' point, and it doesn't always involve the no-win scenario. Lets use a thread I was just in, for example. I was fighting Silus, and had the upper hand. He calls a TIE fighter from the group he was with to help him get out (to summarize). So, I go invisible. However, the TIE still blasts a nice rapid fire burst between me and Silus.

Here's where the problem comes in. Unless I'm mistaken, a laser cannon on a TIE is too big to block with a saber, so I can't block that way. Now, in real life, there'd be no way I'd run through that barrage, even invisible. The reason is simply that if one of them hit me, I'm prolly dead. However, in SWFans rules, I can't die if I don't wanna. So, I could use this to my advantage and rush straight through. Yall see what I mean?

[Lord Soth]

Amen, Akrabbim...Nicely put...

[Marcus Telcontar]

Here's where the problem comes in. Unless I'm mistaken, a laser cannon on a TIE is too big to block with a saber, so I can't block that way. Now, in real life, there'd be no way I'd run through that barrage, even invisible. The reason is simply that if one of them hit me, I'm prolly dead. However, in SWFans rules, I can't die if I don't wanna. So, I could use this to my advantage and rush straight through. Yall see what I mean?

That's where Common Sense and Fair Play kick in. If it can not be resonably done, then it is not done. If it is impossible to go through the barrage, then you cant. You rchouce would be to to do somethign else. If Common Sense says you cant do it... then you cant.

If the query is about using the no kill to achieve something impossible, then simply put, you cant. <smallfont color={hovercolor}>-Censored-</smallfont>head actions are still <smallfont color={hovercolor}>-Censored-</smallfont>head actions - you still have to stay somewhat realistic.

[imported_Akrabbim]

Well, that's the problem... it's not quite impossible. In my situation, I have a fair chance of making it. But I don't have a strong one, and in real life, only a fool would risk it. That's where rule abuse comes in. I could prolly make it, odds are about 60% - 70% in my favor. But that's not enough to make me wanna do it in real life.

Look, I agree Marcus. A fair rper would be willing to stop. But some could use the rule and just say, "well, I made it".

[Marcus Telcontar]

A fair rper would be willing to stop. But some could use the rule and just say, "well, I made it".

Rule 4 still is you still must use Common Sense and Fair Play. If the character in question could not logically do the action, it's GM'ing.

While I understand where your coming from, the Common Sense and Fair Play dictacte isnt overridden by the No Killing clause. You cant just go saying "Oh I cant die, so I will do somethign stupid to escape". If you walked through a hail of blaster fire and worte yourself unharmed, that to me is illegal as GM'ing. If you wrote yourself getting the hell out of there, thence avoiding being hit (say leaping aside), that would be resonable. The actual minimal rulset I believe reads...

1. No Godmoding
2. No Maiming without permission
3. No Killing without permission
4. Use of Common Sense and Fair Play

If the action uses Rule three, but goes outside of rule 4, then it's out.

(I'd actually think Rule 4 is the one people should be referring to the most. That's what encourages good RP and less arguments to start with)

I'd agree, in your senario, waling into a hail of fire like that and saying you survived unscathed is blatant GM'ing, because it makes no sense.

(I'd add, in a similar situation I've written a character basically had to use every bit of their power to avoid death, but was still burnt and knocked out for hours, with every scrap of equipment lost. Still somewhat GM'ing, but the point being that even a highly powerful Jedi Master could not possibly get through unscathed. The point remains however - if you dont use some sense, you can be called for Moding)

[Wei Wu Wei]

Well, Marcus has made one very valid point. Rpers who are out to kill other people's characters won't last long on this board. Whenever I enter a thread that involves fighting, I look for the Checkmate move like Mr. Happy mentioned, but i also make sure that the Checkmate will not kill my opponent. Besides, it's much more fun to wear out your opponent, because you are not forcing them into a no-win scenario.

[Mr. Happy]

Where in my previous post did I mention kill? I didn't. Don't insinuate...thanks.

[Lord Soth]

Yup...I agree on that one Akrabbim. Wei you have a few good point's too...Also knowing your CHR's strength's as well as his or her weakness, (Having nothing to do with luck) would be a good rule of thumb. Common sense should be a given, but when placed in a situation were you have no choice IC draws on the imagination I would have to say. Of course no one really want's their CHR to get snuffed, however, pushing it to the point of unfairness and unthoughtful actions for a fellow RPer is grossly wrong. (Nothing to do with one's CHR's abilities or power's) The real question is, other RPer's placing their fellow RPer in a Life or Death setting with no regard to "Rule's or Etiquette " knowing full well they can't die at any given time. Is their an element of realism in that?...No...But the funny thing is, it happens and thus, is why I think Nemesis brought up the topic in the first place...

Hurmmm...I wonder if "pride" comes into play here?...lol

[Nemesis]

Akrabbim, I couldn't have said it better myself.

I did not start this thread as a advocate for this behavior which has now, with gratitude to Marcus, been labeled what it truly is - GMing. Herein lies the reason for my question: I wanted to have this flagrant abuse openly contested as against the rules; so that in the future anyone who is found in violation will have a reference point.

Many times GMing accusations are hurled at those who don't realize what they are doing is wrong. As Soth said, "it does happen."

I know, Marcus, you have justly titled this as a "common sense" ruling, however I am sad to say many do not display such sense. Therefore, this thread was meant to educate, and with any luck, prevent more hazardous OOC debates.

[Wei Wu Wei]

So, what you want to do is make it illegal for one RPer to corner another RPer into a situation in which a character's death is likely to happen? Sounds good to me.

But would it be illegal to "checkmate" another RPer as long as there is not possibility of death? Like if I were to "checkmate" another RPer so that they have to take a punch?

[Mr. Happy]

or if there are defeat options besides death.

[Lord Soth]

That would be a good thing...But getting peep to do that is an entirely different story altogether...Great idea though.

[AmazonBabe]

Oh hell... if I were Character A, I'd throw myself off the building along with my victim. But on the way down, I'd inadvertantly hit a flag pole, and catapolt myself through a window. I'd actually leave it open to whether the victim goes splat or whether Character B can save the victim (kind of like a compromise on the situation... but no one wins really... victim may live, thus foiling villains plan, and hero doesn't have a chance to kill villain cause he's busy saving victim).

Actually, that'd be fun. :D

But in all seriousness, I know what ppl are trying to say here, and I guess it just boils down to curtesy, fairness, and some form of communication, which this board thankfully gives through PMs (heck, even a short OOC comment in a RP is not uncommon).

[Mu Satach]

Perhaps what is needed as well as the creative yet believable solutions to mortal situations is the humility to realise when you have been "checkmated" by the opponent and to bow out gracefully.