2.5 PKing Rules / Removal of Thread Tags

Lessa · October 25, 2017

27 minutes ago, Manta Gaul said:

To be completely straight with all of you, no one gives a **** if a low level player dies. At least, generally speaking at the point very little effort has been put into the character time-wise. It would be sad and awful and off-putting for the one who died, but really, it isn't too big of a deal.

I couldn’t disagree more. If you’re a new member of the site, and your character is PKed before you can even get a few threads done, you’re going to leave. Finding and keeping new members is a huge issue. Sweeping it aside like this is very dangerous.

Amira · October 25, 2017

I'm not saying that it should be open season on new players. And I apologize for my use of language there. My point is that it's a much bigger deal when a dedicated member of the community leaves than a new player. And I think that's it's much more harmful both to the player and the forum.

I think that pking should always require permission.

I don't think that anyone has ever liked pking. Pking always brings drama with it and arguments and rules changes and discrepancies. I highly doubt that either party involved has any fun with it, unless it was agreed on by both parties and planned out.

Edited October 25, 2017 by Manta Gaul

Aereth · October 25, 2017

First draft of 2.5.1 Hotfix PK Issue: (I have marked the spots I changed)

Player vs. Player (PvP) combat is almost identical to normal combat. The hate system is ignored, as players may choose their target regardless of who or what has already attacked them. There are two kinds of PvP combat: Authorized Duels and Unauthorized Combat.

Duels:
Duels are consensual battles in which one player challenges another and the opposing party must accept. There are three different types of duels:

[First Strike]: Whoever lands the first strike wins.
[Half Loss]: Whoever drops their opponent to 50% or below of their total health wins.
[Total Loss]: Whoever drops their opponent to 0 HP wins.

Duels may be initiated at any time and place outside of other combat, including in safe zones. When accepting a duel, the challenged party specifies the type of duel. After accepting, players are allowed one round (1 post each) to prepare. During the preparation round, each player should use a LD roll for initiative to determine who goes first. A double-post is permitted in an instance where the last person to prepare wins the initiative roll.

Duels have a time limit (or in this case, post limit) of 15 rounds. If the victory condition for the duel is not met within the time limit, the victor is chosen based on who has the highest percentage of their total HP remaining. In the event of a tie, the duel is considered a Draw. When a duel ends, a large notification will appear between the two players declaring the victor. If the two players are far apart at the end of the duel, they will each receive a notification separately. If a player is killed in a duel, the victor receives the losing player's col and equipped items.

Unauthorized Combat:
First off: We highly encourage players to communicate with others when there is conflict between characters. Whenever one player engages in unauthorized combat with another, it should make sense for them to do so. Using a character to attack or harass another player for OOC reasons will not be tolerated. SAO-RPG staff reserves the right to validate, void, or otherwise make rulings on certain actions that involve unauthorized combat. If you are interested in playing a PKer or 'villain'-type character, check out the FAQ for suggestions involving NPC-Players.

Second: Player are now allowed to enter other PP or SP threads where they are not invited in order to attack, scare, etc. other players. Initiating combat against another player outside of a duel must also begin with a similar initiative roll.

However there are several rules on invading other players threads:

After a Player has entered a PP or SP without permission there is a 3 thread Cooldown before this player can invade another thread.
- Cooldown threads must be created after the 'Invasion' (Time Stamps) and must be tagged as such.
- At your first post of an 'Invasion' you have to link your last 'Invasion' as well as the 3 Cooldown threads. Failing to do so, will result in the 'Invasion' to become invalid and deleted.
Invading players have to post at least (Max SP available)*20/3 rounded up posts to qualify for SP rewards.
- Example: Player A invades the SP of Player B. The thread ends at 20 posts; this means Player A has to post at least 7 posts in order to qualify for SP rewards. (Player B always receives normal rewards)
  Example: Player A invades a PP of Player B and C. The thread is already very long and after the thread is done, it has 80 posts. So in order to qualify for SP rewards at least 27 posts must have been made by Player A (Player B and C always receive normal rewards)
Invaders do NOT qualify for Col rewards, no matter the amount of posts they do in an invaded thread.
RP combat only.
- This means that no dice, stats and calculations are used. The combat only happens in the RP so please take care to avoid 'godmodding'
- In case you feel like somebody is 'godmodding' in your thread, contact the Player Support Team and we will help you.
And most importantly: NO player can be killed this way without OOC permission of the other participants of the thread. There will be no exceptions made to this rule.

The attacker(s) and the target(s) use a LD result to determine the conditions of the first attack. The attacker must treat the initiative and attack roll as one, and include the details of their intended attack and 'initiative' in the Roll Purpose. If the attacker's result is higher, the attack happens normally. If the target's result is higher, the damage they take from that initial attack is reduced by 20% (rounded down, after mitigation). Unauthorized combat cannot be initiated in a safe zone, and if a player with a green cursor damages another player with a green cursor, the attacker's cursor will change to orange.

Player Killing:

Generally the rules for Player Killing are the same as for unauthorized combat, with the addition that no player can kill another player without OOC permission. SAO-RPG staff reserves the right to validate, void, or otherwise make rulings on certain actions that involve Player Killing without OOC permission, so if you have problems with unauthorized Player Killing immediately contact the Player Support Team and we will help you.

Safe Zones:
Player shops and most settlements are classified as safe zones. Players that are in a location designated as a safe zone are protected by the <Area> effect. This prevents damage from being done to a player outside of a duel. A player may still attack NPCs and other players while in a safe zone, but the target will only receive an unpleasant feedback from the attack.

Cursor Colors:
A player's cursor can be one of two colors: green or orange. An orange cursor indicates that the player has committed some type of crime, and the duration of the orange cursor depends on the nature of the crime and how many infractions the player has had in the past. Examples of what would cause a player's cursor to turn orange would be:

Attacking a green player outside of an authorized combat
Physically harassing another player
Stealing

For the first three infractions, a cursor changes colors until the end of the thread in which the crime was committed. Cursor color changes must be noted in the summary once a thread is completed. Afterwards, a player's cursor will turn back to green. On the fourth infraction, a player's cursor turns orange indefinitely. The only way to revert to a green cursor at this point is to complete the <<Redemption>> quest. After a fifth infraction, or after the first instance of killing a green player outside of a duel, a cursor will become permanently orange. Nothing may revert a permanent orange cursor back to green. Players may choose to track when and how many times their cursor color changes in their journal.

If your cursor would turn indefinitely or permanently orange, a PST member will have your on-site cursor color changed. Temporary cursor changes (infractions 1-3) should simply be roleplayed and noted in the summary of the individual thread. An on-site cursor color will remain green until a player has met the conditions of an indefinite or permanent orange cursor.

Orange Players:
Players with an orange cursor have a more difficult time getting around in Aincrad. Not only are orange players widely regarded as criminals, but most safe zones will have NPC guards that will act hostile towards them.

Orange Players are also always at risk of getting killed, since there are no penalties for green players if they attack orange players. This means Orange Players can still get killed even without OOC permission.

Just remember:
Using a character to attack or harass another player for OOC reasons will not be tolerated. SAO-RPG staff reserves the right to validate, void, or otherwise make rulings on certain actions that involve such actions.

NPC Guards:
In order for an orange player to enter a guarded safe zone, they must sneak past the guards. An orange player will always be at risk of being captured by NPC guards unless they enter a building or until they leave the safe zone. NPC Guards will not leave the safe zone and cannot deal or be dealt damage.

On the post in which an orange player would enter a safe zone, they will be immediately captured if they do not use an action to successfully stealth past the guards. A player must succeed on at least two consecutive stealth attempts in order to safely reach a building or leave the safe zone.

If an orange player fails a stealth attempt or leaves stealth, they will be captured unless they Run Away with at least partial success on their next post. Successfully Running Away allows the player to safely enter a building or leave the town. The guards will continue to search for a player if they have not entered a building, left the safe zone, or entered stealth. Successfully Running Away allows the player one post before they must use another action to deal with the guards.

A guard's Stealth Detection is Floor number divided by 3.
Ex. 8 on F26. 0 on F2.

Like mentioned above, this is going to be my first draft of the 2.5.1 Hotfix PK Issue and I want to share everything I do with you, the community to see if these changes are going to fix the problem or just make them worse.

So I want to invite all of you to take part for the development of this fix, in order to make this place a fun spot for some awesome RPs, without players having to live with the fear of getting their whole progress and character development taken away from them.

@Vale I appreciate the compliment, thank you. xD

Macradon · October 25, 2017

21 minutes ago, Aereth said:

Example: Player A invades the SP of Player B. The thread ends at 20 posts; this means Player B has to post at least 7 posts in order to qualify for SP rewards. (Player B always receives normal rewards)

Player B needs to post 7, but still always receive normal rewards? :^)

Aereth · October 25, 2017

Dang it.

Corrected though. xD Thanks for mentioning it @Macradon

Lessa · October 26, 2017

Assuming I’m understanding everything correctly, I really like the new proposal. Scaring for story element only provides for that surprise factor, but no real damage is done. Very well done, staff!

Endilix · October 26, 2017

The main disagreement I have is in inherent player selfishness. Not many players will say, "Yeah, it's cool if you kill my character." Not that it wouldn't happen, but it's unlikely. This is going to result in a lot of, "No I won't let you kill my character even if it makes complete sense for the story." moments. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that anyone deserves to die. But I certainly don't want the brothers to die. I generally wouldn't willingly allow someone to kill them. So believe me I'm not trying to be hypocritical here.

I think in times where there is an obvious motive, justification, and opportunity, staff should rule on these moments and be able to override the permission aspect.

For example: Endilix is a high level character being stalked by a group hunting frontliners. They've been collaborating on this story for weeks, and having good threads with invasions and scares and it all culminates in a thread where Endilix agrees to have a proper PK combat with dice rolls. Endilix thinks he can win but the rolls aren't in his favor and he is about to lose (die). He calls it all off and says he gives no permission to kill his character. This is unfair to the players that had been hunting him and having proper threads and RP combat culminating in a climax storyline that makes sense.

in the above example, I say that a staff member should be allowed to override OOC permission if it seems like a player just "changed their mind" because they are losing. Otherwise, I'm pretty okay with the rest.

Edited October 26, 2017 by Endilix

Hakai · October 26, 2017

The way i interpreted it was that once the player gives permission and combat is started thats it, they can be killed. But i see what your saying @Endilix that isnt stated explicitly and should probably be clarified.

Other than that i really like it. I think the idea of invading threads and rp combat is really good and will bring a lot of depth to rps along with the scare factor as well. It allows people that want to play evil characters a way to do that. Looks great. ^~^

Seul · October 26, 2017

You kids might actually be insane. What are you even doing anymore? Thread invasions? Really? This is like kicking sao-rpg when it's already down. My main issues stem from invasions so that'll be the focus for the rest of this post.

First I'd like to ask, what exactly does integrating this accomplish? Why do we need this mechanic? Because death is a thing in the sao universe? I guess, but it's not like we’ve ignored it until now. Imagine this: You and your friend are writing a thread and edgelord laughing coffin wannabe kid invades it because why not. Well now that thread is ruined and you’re forced into doing this dumb plot that you’re not even invested in. On top of that fighting is rp based only, so it's not like anything of value actually happens in the end. I don't understand this leap in logic that says randomly showing up and forcing your way into threads is good for storytelling lol. Like… Forget all the game aspects for a minute and think: If you can't tell a good story as a writer and not as a sao-rpg player, no amount of additional ridiculous game mechanics the staff cooks up will change that. If you're orange you should quit the site now. You're just kinda out of luck if five people decide they want to mess with you for “plot” reasons or because they're evil or whatever and invade your threads.

Next I want to address Endilix directly and ask again: Are. You. In. Sane? Do you even realize what you're saying? Not allowing someone to kill your character because they've been plotting to kill your character for WEEKS is selfish? What are you on? Selfish is acting like your character is the only one who should matter. That if me and my friends want to be “villains” it's our birthright to just kill you whenever we feel like it because you're a side character to us. It baffles me how you can say I wouldn't allow someone to kill me but I should be able to kill anyone because I forced the into a story forced that makes sense. The example you gave isn't so unrealistic too. “These guys wanna kill me; better put myself in a situation where they can kill me”.

“This is unfair to the players that had been hunting him” <- This about sums up my problem with this half of your post. Just stop.

The second part of your post is crazy too though. I mean the staff can already do that since now they have absolutely authority to make rulings on these things. But I will ask do you know who is running this place and what has happened in the past when you give this kind of power? Think about that, the people who've been affected by similar situations.

The old pk rules made it harder for player characters to kill each other, but at least it handled this in a clear and objective way. You didn't have to worry about some kid getting his staff buddy to just rules that you instantly died. You had to CONSENT to putting your character's life on the line, PvP and such. If they died then so be it. But the difference is there was something in place that put everyone as a members of this community on equal terms. I can't say this will do the same. Using “plot” to justify this just proves to me that you all don't know what a story is.

I want to close this post by saying as someone who has been around consistently for a little over 2 years now I am not joking when I say sao-rpg is dying. It might not be too late, but if it continues down this path there won't be anyone left except for the few zealot members who are blinded by their love of whatever they thought this place used to be.

*SCREECHES*

Edited October 26, 2017 by Seul

Helios · October 26, 2017

I can't wait to see what you have planned for 3.0, ngl.

Endilix · October 26, 2017

@Seul Yeah, I am insane, but that's realistically a topic for outside of this thread. I think you've taken a core concept I presented and blown it completely out of proportion. To clarify, I was talking about people who had collaborated properly over the course of weeks. I'm someone who writes for the story, not for the character. Someone who has lost countless characters I loved in tabletop RPGs such as DnD. I understand what it's like to lose those characters. But when it all makes sense, follows the rules, I didn't go to my GM and complain or write angry letters to Wizards of the Coast about how broken their game is. I knowingly played this game while understanding the risks to my character, and who was running those risks.

That aside, to clarify in a tl:dr manner. Nobody is ever going to die, because nobody will give permission to do so. Your entire post is indicative of the actual selfish nature of most players in any permadeath scenario.

Also, if you're not an adaptable enough writer to write around some of the scenarios presented by collaborative writing in an open thread or an invasion, even if the other writer is garbage, then go write a book or get good kid.

Hakai · October 27, 2017

You both make good points. Seul especially. If someone random invades your thread doesn't that mess with your story? Maybe your the one whose working on some in depth story arc over the course of even a whole month and all of a sudden some random wannabe kid barges in to invade and messes the story up.

I want to say this as unemotionally as possible. I think Seul is right, and Ive been convinced that the invasion thing is destructive and a bit pointless.

To tell the truth I don't see why things needed to change from the whole NK tag thing. When I got pked and that rules set was put in place I didn't think there would ever be an issue with it or pking again. At least not at the scale it was in the past.

Messing with this stuff at this point seems like playing with a hornets nest.

Endilix · October 27, 2017

The NK tag is also dangerous, in the sense of, "Why would I never put that tag on my thread to keep my character safe?" Let's just have everyone live a happy life with no death. It's not like this is a death game. Let's just take out PvP and orange tags entirely. Nobody will use them. Nobody wants to die, right? The only way to die in SAO should be suicide.

What Seul said at a base level is correct. What if some novice RPer ruins my story? But if you're so worried about that, then why are you writing collaboratively in the first place?

Azide · October 27, 2017

Yes, Sword Art Online is a death game. Yes, it has PVP, player-killing, orange players, etc. Yes, if your HP hits zero, your brain gets turned into a less palatable variation of a baked potato.

That said, SAO obviously doesn't exist, because if it did most of us would probably be playing that instead of hanging out around here. This is SAO-RPG, a writing-based RP site. I would hope that it wouldn't be too much to ask of everyone to be able mentally separate in-universe lore from the meta mechanics that we use when role playing here. Just because something is possible in SAO/in-universe doesn't (and in my opinion, shouldn't,) mean that it needs to be an out-of-universe mechanic on SAO-RPG.

Sleep PK was a thing in-universe, but would anybody think that it would be a reasonable idea to emulate that by allowing players to full-loss duel the characters of site members that're sleeping in real life? I would hope not. In-universe, you could unilaterally send people to prison through the use of crystals. Does anybody want to volunteer to have their character be restricted to a jail cell thread for an indefinite amount of time to simulate that? Should we ban the accounts of people who don't post at least once every hour in order to emulate the idea that there's no logging out of SAO? And why allow members whose characters have died to come back with a new character at all? We should just IP ban them and blacklist their e-mails and mac addresses, because otherwise I wouldn't be able to enjoy an authentic SAO RP experience.

Maybe I should also point out that the vast majority of RP's aren't set in video games, and so SAO is very much the norm when it comes to the whole "if you die, you die" thing. Coincidentally, the vast majority of RP's also don't allow for non-consensual PK-ing.

tl;dr SAO-RPG can either be a poor man's discount budget bargain bin text-based snail-paced mmorpg simulator with the user base of about 20-30 people, or it can be a story-based experience built on writing, creativity and imagination. Just because you personally aren't allowed to waltz up to Calrex and flail your arms around until he's a bloody pulp doesn't mean that the RP doesn't take place in a death game in-universe.

---

On another note, thread invasions as a mechanic is something I find incredibly unappealing. Yes, this is a collaborative writing site. No, that doesn't mean that I believe all threads should essentially be open to everyone. Unexpected entrances should be unexpected from an in-universe perspective only. The sort of people who would rather invade a thread without any warning over and strong-arm their way into the story don't strike me as the sort of people I'd be too excited to RP with. Honestly, I would much rather have my thread be "invaded" by someone reputable who'd inform me beforehand that their character would be making an appearance part-way through. Collaboration means just that: collaboration. That's a two-way street. Invading somebody else's thread isn't something I'd call collaboration.

tl;dr How many people want k1r1t0, the Laughing Coffin's level 10 6-star general to invade their thread 30 posts in and harass everyone 150 words at a time, all while mechanics-based combat becomes temporarily disabled?

---

in general tl;dr There's an awful lot of conflation between the in-universe SAO and the out-of-universe SAO-RPG, one of which is a fictional game and the other is the forum-based RP adaptation of said fictional game that we write on. There are things that don't work for us because of our medium/format, and because of that, the translation can't and shouldn't be 1:1. Rather, it's in the site's best interests to implement things in a way would enhance the site from a writing perspective while avoiding things that would detract from that.

Play to the medium's strengths. Don't make decisions for the site as if it were a literal mmorpg.

Endilix · October 27, 2017

From a writer's standpoint, I get and respect what you're saying Azide. And as someone who has seen some unfair deaths, I can see how playing this game 1:1 in terms of ganking and this site functioning more as an open world MMO can be completely detrimental.

But, this site still tries to follow canon. It still wants to give characters that psychological trauma that comes with living in a game where someone can kill you at any time. I won't say that invasions are the way to go about it. I don't ultimately care how the staff goes about it. But I want the danger to still be real and present. Because if you're going to write an immersive story, the world has to be properly immersive too. If your character can't die, you as a writer will probably recognize this and your character won't ever feed off of the proper paranoia and real and imminent threat of death.

Really, that's all I want. A non-NPC real and imminent threat of death. The way the rules sound like they keep swinging is towards keeping everyone safe at all times in a death game. I don't want anyone to die. But I want them to realistically be able to. This creates a proper immersive writing world foundation in which these well crafted stories can be created. A large part of SAO's depth comes from the real trauma caused by being unsafe in a video game you thought you could trust. You take that away, and this is just another semi-fantasy RP.

Edited October 27, 2017 by Endilix

Seul · October 27, 2017

So you can only understand everything in a literal sense and also don't know how to form a logical argument? Noted.

I didn't blow it out of proportion. Your clarification changes nothing. If someone doesn't want their character to die then what gives you the goddamn right to say otherwise? Your precious little story? Gimmie a break.

With the old rules COUNTLESS PEOPLE HAVE DIED. Have you seen the monument of life recently? Guess not. Here I'll do the work for you and list off some: Lowenthal, Beatbox, Wardege, Opal, and Sierra. All pks. All done with consent from the parties involved beforehand. All done using thread tags. I haven't even gotten into PvE deaths. I don't know who you're trying to fool, but the act of losing characters hasn't been as scarce as you're trying to propagate it to be. Stop.

Your dnd example doesn't make sense because:

1) It's a different game.

2) Our rules are the problem. This isn't an opinion, it's the objective truth. If it wasn’t then this thread wouldn’t exist.

3) Unlike Wizards of the Coast, the staff here are actively giving YOU THE PLAYER a platform to air your grievances and help work toward improving these systems. I know you said you're insane, but surely you can understand that's kinda why we're talking here now.

4) You say you write for the story and not the characters. Okay. How does that work? How do you tell a story without making characters for said story? You can’t. Name one successful book, movie, tv show, anime, whatever that doesn't put effort into making their characters because they're just plot devices. “This character has to die here because the plot says so and we need our death quota for this story”.

Honestly. You're pissing me off. How dare you call ME selfish. Where have you even been? Not here. You like to come in for a week and say all this then leave for months at a time. Who has to deal with these things you're proposing afterward? Us. I am not being selfish. I actually care about the people of this community. I actually want them to flourish and to not have to write in a constant state of fear because some random guy wants to get off to having his character being death edged. It is unbelievably frustrating that this is even being debated. The whole reason NK and KE tags were made was because of this exact thing. History will repeat itself and then we’ll be back at square one and have to talk about this again in a few months.

Also Endilix I'm surprised you're in favor of this. As someone who was so vehemently against the timeskip a while back I would have thought you'd be on the side of the writers and not mechanics that would hinder the creative process of you as a player. I guess you are a hypocrite.

I'm done talking about this. What you want is not collaborative writing. If consent isn't involved at all times how is that collaborative? Being good at writing or an adaptable writer has nothing to do with this. Grow up. You wanna die, then die by yourself but don't bring these people down with you because they owe you N O T H I N G.

And staff I hope you've been following along. A community that advocates for the destruction of it's own members like what I've read in this thread will not last in the long run. Think long and hard about what you're doing here and who this will benefit. Then ask if it's worth it or not. That's all I have to say.

Endilix · October 27, 2017

I'll say one more thing, and then that should be it. Consensual deaths do happen. Good writers will allow for these. They will want to write that story for the worth of the story itself. You can message Flints and ask her, because at one point I had given her permission to kill Emerath. Which she decided not to. Good writers know that it just might be time for that character.

But this is the exception, not the norm. Compare the number of created characters to the number of characters who died through a collaborative PK. Compare the actual number of PVE deaths to PVP deaths in general. Think about how often these deaths happen in relation to each other. How extreme the circumstances were or had to be to make these happen at all.

In terms of a logical arguement, then I argue statistics. Often these speak for themselves.

I don't plan on leaving this site forever. And you can ask Teion, I never, not once, stopped caring about this community, regardless of absences. You know that quest list made by Zulee? Zulee is an alt of mine that I made to play without the paradigm of how everyone views me.

At least Azide had the common courtesy to be polite when basically destroying my point. Which I respected and agreed with. Staff, please PM me or hit me up on Discord if you wish for further opinions on the PVP rules. I'll not be looking at this thread any further. See you guys in the next discussion.

Ruby · October 27, 2017

Alright it was informed to me that things were getting really heated here, and I understand why it would, and I worried that it might get to this point. And yeah, it did. I am disappointed that things had gotten to this point, but people can be different eh? I understand both of your points and I would like to reply to them as much as I could. And for a conversation of who deserves to be punished or what not, I am not going to punish anyone in this situation granted things get better.

On 10/25/2017 at 7:01 PM, Endilix said:

The main disagreement I have is in inherent player selfishness. Not many players will say, "Yeah, it's cool if you kill my character." Not that it wouldn't happen, but it's unlikely. This is going to result in a lot of, "No I won't let you kill my character even if it makes complete sense for the story." moments. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say that anyone deserves to die. But I certainly don't want the brothers to die. I generally wouldn't willingly allow someone to kill them. So believe me I'm not trying to be hypocritical here.

I think in times where there is an obvious motive, justification, and opportunity, staff should rule on these moments and be able to override the permission aspect.

For example: Endilix is a high level character being stalked by a group hunting frontliners. They've been collaborating on this story for weeks, and having good threads with invasions and scares and it all culminates in a thread where Endilix agrees to have a proper PK combat with dice rolls. Endilix thinks he can win but the rolls aren't in his favor and he is about to lose (die). He calls it all off and says he gives no permission to kill his character. This is unfair to the players that had been hunting him and having proper threads and RP combat culminating in a climax storyline that makes sense.

in the above example, I say that a staff member should be allowed to override OOC permission if it seems like a player just "changed their mind" because they are losing. Otherwise, I'm pretty okay with the rest.

Paragraph 1: No I don't think its selfishness you are looking for, what I really think you are looking for is uncooperative towards the topic. Many players say no when someone goes up to them for a PK because maybe they have story they wish to finish, or they have future plot they wish to see. And in a sense of "Sword Art Online" the game this is based off of many people died despite them not wanting to, its just the context of the world we live in. However for a forum based RP things can get pretty heated about it.

Paragraph/Line 2: Well, really the override would be mostly used if the kill is just blatantly pointless or revealed to be a personal vendetta.

Paragraph 3: While that is true, and many players have done it before. The answer honestly would be to let the killers finish what they started, because he showed willingness the first time around. I am sorry RNG decided to be against you, but in a real RPG you can't just up and say I don't wanna do this anymore.

Paragraph 4: Paragraph 3 follows.

11 hours ago, Seul said:

You kids might actually be insane. What are you even doing anymore? Thread invasions? Really? This is like kicking sao-rpg when it's already down. My main issues stem from invasions so that'll be the focus for the rest of this post.

First I'd like to ask, what exactly does integrating this accomplish? Why do we need this mechanic? Because death is a thing in the sao universe? I guess, but it's not like we’ve ignored it until now. Imagine this: You and your friend are writing a thread and edgelord laughing coffin wannabe kid invades it because why not. Well now that thread is ruined and you’re forced into doing this dumb plot that you’re not even invested in. On top of that fighting is rp based only, so it's not like anything of value actually happens in the end. I don't understand this leap in logic that says randomly showing up and forcing your way into threads is good for storytelling lol. Like… Forget all the game aspects for a minute and think: If you can't tell a good story as a writer and not as a sao-rpg player, no amount of additional ridiculous game mechanics the staff cooks up will change that. If you're orange you should quit the site now. You're just kinda out of luck if five people decide they want to mess with you for “plot” reasons or because they're evil or whatever and invade your threads.

Next I want to address Endilix directly and ask again: Are. You. In. Sane? Do you even realize what you're saying? Not allowing someone to kill your character because they've been plotting to kill your character for WEEKS is selfish? What are you on? Selfish is acting like your character is the only one who should matter. That if me and my friends want to be “villains” it's our birthright to just kill you whenever we feel like it because you're a side character to us. It baffles me how you can say I wouldn't allow someone to kill me but I should be able to kill anyone because I forced the into a story forced that makes sense. The example you gave isn't so unrealistic too. “These guys wanna kill me; better put myself in a situation where they can kill me”.

“This is unfair to the players that had been hunting him” <- This about sums up my problem with this half of your post. Just stop.

The second part of your post is crazy too though. I mean the staff can already do that since now they have absolutely authority to make rulings on these things. But I will ask do you know who is running this place and what has happened in the past when you give this kind of power? Think about that, the people who've been affected by similar situations.

The old pk rules made it harder for player characters to kill each other, but at least it handled this in a clear and objective way. You didn't have to worry about some kid getting his staff buddy to just rules that you instantly died. You had to CONSENT to putting your character's life on the line, PvP and such. If they died then so be it. But the difference is there was something in place that put everyone as a members of this community on equal terms. I can't say this will do the same. Using “plot” to justify this just proves to me that you all don't know what a story is.

I want to close this post by saying as someone who has been around consistently for a little over 2 years now I am not joking when I say sao-rpg is dying. It might not be too late, but if it continues down this path there won't be anyone left except for the few zealot members who are blinded by their love of whatever they thought this place used to be.

*SCREECHES*

Paragraph 1: Not really, we're simply fixing the things that is wrong with our site.

Paragraph 2: I don't exactly understand your point here, the main reason why killing in this game is in the game is exactly that. It was a part of "Sword Art Online", sorry if you dont like it, but its here to stay. Not much I can really say about it. Many people took Killing more as a luxury for a character to do rather than actual story they could actually forge.

Paragraph 3: Well, first off I don't appreciate calling one insane, don't think you'd like being called that. What you missed is the fact that Endilix had also been plotting this thread coming up, its not a matter of just these people plotting this thread, Endilix was a part of it too. In a sense, yeah Endilix is going a little too far for agreeing to let them kill his character and when combat didn't go well for him he decided to take it back. Sorry, thats not how story telling works.

Paragraph/Line 4: I am unsure how to respond to this one.

Paragraph 5: While this may be true, Staff should only be asked to intervene if theres a serious problem here.

Paragraph 6: The problem with this, players have found a way to kill players even in a non KE thread. Many players have displayed it, and some still didn't feel safe.

Paragraph 7: You may think its dying to us we feel like we've just hit a road bump in our path.

5 hours ago, Endilix said:

@Seul Yeah, I am insane, but that's realistically a topic for outside of this thread. I think you've taken a core concept I presented and blown it completely out of proportion. To clarify, I was talking about people who had collaborated properly over the course of weeks. I'm someone who writes for the story, not for the character. Someone who has lost countless characters I loved in tabletop RPGs such as DnD. I understand what it's like to lose those characters. But when it all makes sense, follows the rules, I didn't go to my GM and complain or write angry letters to Wizards of the Coast about how broken their game is. I knowingly played this game while understanding the risks to my character, and who was running those risks.

That aside, to clarify in a tl:dr manner. Nobody is ever going to die, because nobody will give permission to do so. Your entire post is indicative of the actual selfish nature of most players in any permadeath scenario.

Also, if you're not an adaptable enough writer to write around some of the scenarios presented by collaborative writing in an open thread or an invasion, even if the other writer is garbage, then go write a book or get good kid.

Paragraph 1: Not much to say on this paragraph. I agree fully, you should have understood the risks of going into a situation like that in the first place.

Paragraph 2: While it may seem that way, I truly believe its not true. It just takes a bit of conversation, not direct "Hey can I kill your character?"

Paragraph 3: I uh, don't know what this is a response to? For all I know this is a aggressive jab at Seul.

1 hour ago, Endilix said:

From a writer's standpoint, I get and respect what you're saying Azide. And as someone who has seen some unfair deaths, I can see how playing this game 1:1 in terms of ganking and this site functioning more as an open world MMO can be completely detrimental.

But, this site still tries to follow canon. It still wants to give characters that psychological trauma that comes with living in a game where someone can kill you at any time. I won't say that invasions are the way to go about it. I don't ultimately care how the staff goes about it. But I want the danger to still be real and present. Because if you're going to write an immersive story, the world has to be properly immersive too. If your character can't die, you as a writer will probably recognize this and your character won't ever feed off of the proper paranoia and real and imminent threat of death.

Really, that's all I want. A non-NPC real and imminent threat of death. The way the rules sound like they keep swinging is towards keeping everyone safe at all times in a death game. I don't want anyone to die. But I want them to realistically be able to. This creates a proper immersive writing world foundation in which these well crafted stories can be created. A large part of SAO's depth comes from the real trauma caused by being unsafe in a video game you thought you could trust. You take that away, and this is just another semi-fantasy RP.

Skipping Paragraph 1.

Paragraph 2: Many players would agree with you here, however some players are just extremely concerned about asking others to RP with them and the other just decides I am gonna kill your character. It just doesn't suit well in a forum RP ya'know?

Paragraph 3: I agree with you, but for our site its just kind of hard to forge without some players twisting it in some way or form where they just pointlessly kill. We want kills to have meaning, not just some meaningless kill every time because your character felt like it. And yeah you could argue Laughing Coffin killed for the shits and giggles, but I don't know any active players right now thats in Laughing Coffin, so I wont know where the arguement of LC could come in.

1 hour ago, Seul said:

So you can only understand everything in a literal sense and also don't know how to form a logical argument? Noted.

I didn't blow it out of proportion. Your clarification changes nothing. If someone doesn't want their character to die then what gives you the goddamn right to say otherwise? Your precious little story? Gimmie a break.

With the old rules COUNTLESS PEOPLE HAVE DIED. Have you seen the monument of life recently? Guess not. Here I'll do the work for you and list off some: Lowenthal, Beatbox, Wardege, Opal, and Sierra. All pks. All done with consent from the parties involved beforehand. All done using thread tags. I haven't even gotten into PvE deaths. I don't know who you're trying to fool, but the act of losing characters hasn't been as scarce as you're trying to propagate it to be. Stop.

Your dnd example doesn't make sense because:

1) It's a different game.

2) Our rules are the problem. This isn't an opinion, it's the objective truth. If it wasn’t then this thread wouldn’t exist.

3) Unlike Wizards of the Coast, the staff here are actively giving YOU THE PLAYER a platform to air your grievances and help work toward improving these systems. I know you said you're insane, but surely you can understand that's kinda why we're talking here now.

4) You say you write for the story and not the characters. Okay. How does that work? How do you tell a story without making characters for said story? You can’t. Name one successful book, movie, tv show, anime, whatever that doesn't put effort into making their characters because they're just plot devices. “This character has to die here because the plot says so and we need our death quota for this story”.

Honestly. You're pissing me off. How dare you call ME selfish. Where have you even been? Not here. You like to come in for a week and say all this then leave for months at a time. Who has to deal with these things you're proposing afterward? Us. I am not being selfish. I actually care about the people of this community. I actually want them to flourish and to not have to write in a constant state of fear because some random guy wants to get off to having his character being death edged. It is unbelievably frustrating that this is even being debated. The whole reason NK and KE tags were made was because of this exact thing. History will repeat itself and then we’ll be back at square one and have to talk about this again in a few months.

Also Endilix I'm surprised you're in favor of this. As someone who was so vehemently against the timeskip a while back I would have thought you'd be on the side of the writers and not mechanics that would hinder the creative process of you as a player. I guess you are a hypocrite.

I'm done talking about this. What you want is not collaborative writing. If consent isn't involved at all times how is that collaborative? Being good at writing or an adaptable writer has nothing to do with this. Grow up. You wanna die, then die by yourself but don't bring these people down with you because they owe you N O T H I N G.

And staff I hope you've been following along. A community that advocates for the destruction of it's own members like what I've read in this thread will not last in the long run. Think long and hard about what you're doing here and who this will benefit. Then ask if it's worth it or not. That's all I have to say.

Paragraph 1-3: I would disagree with you when it came to a logical argument, however I do agree that yeah I suppose there is a few holes in his argument but this just wasn't the way to come across it. Well if you agreed to go into this thread, and combat doesn't go right for you is it right to say "yeah you cant kill me anymore".And yeah a lot of players have died, but the matter is theres not many deaths inbetween each kill. Sometimes its even months.

Your Argument:

1. Just because its a different game doesn't mean the same context couldn't be used.

2. You're right, theres flaws in our rules and we ask players to help us fix them.

3. Yeah, any company that wants to improve their game would do so :P Not sure what this is a response to.

4. I think you took this one a little too literal, I believe he wanted to put more emphasis on the story thats being built rather than a characters beliefs or core values.

Paragraph 4: I don't see where he called you that, however giving you the benefit of the doubt and saying that sure he did, still I would like you to understand that we are simply going where the players want us. Player Killings used to be pointless and many players did it because they could, then the tags and many rules were introduced and it felt like it was too safe, now we are here trying to come up with a solution. And whether or not he comes and goes is irrelevant, his opinion matters as much as anyone elses. Why? Because he shows interest to play, just because that maybe he has a busy life doesn't mean his word doesn't matter.

Paragraph 5-6: Timeskipping and PKing are entirely seperate. In a story aspect going with a timeskip is rather iffy because it removes the story build up inbetween each floor. PKing as a mechanic can take a players story to a grinding halt. To me, he's not being a Hypocrite.

Paragraph 7: We are going where the players feel like its right. We put trust into all of you, and we only hope this is the solution we are looking for.

All in all, theres no reason to be heated about this. We're all here to have fun and write fun stories, getting heated about mechanics that fill in the gaps simply just isnt worth it. We ask for the beehive to calm itself and just leave it be if it annoys you that much.

Endilix · October 27, 2017

I totally didn't do as I said I would. I peeked. Thank you Ruby. I feel that staff recognizes and has given their reasoning on my points in a fair manner, so I'm content.

One thing I've always appreciated about SAO was it's atmosphere. SAO as a piece of fiction works because of the philosophy involved in its root arc. The following arcs keep this philosophy but keep it more under the radar. The true underlying story should always be, "Even in the game world, you aren't always safe."

At the end of the day, you're right, I don't want my characters killed without reason or meaning, but with purpose. But I don't want my characters to feel safe.

And as for the original point. I'm glad it's recognized that a player can't just say, "No, no, timeout! I don't want to die!" when losing.

Fwiw: I haven't commented much on how I feel about invasions because of how heated things got. But I've been an advocate for something like invasions from only months since I had started playing. Though I had imagined it to be more stealth based. But that a mechanic like this has made it's way in works for me. If it does get out of hand as Seul and Azide have suggested, then I'm sure we'll all say they were right and fix it again. But until then, I think we should give it a fair shake instead of all just being doomsayers. We have a lot of responsible people on this site. Let's have some faith in them. And even in K1r1t0, or at least in those extreme cases in staff to mediate.

Aereth · November 9, 2017

Final draft of 2.5.1 Hotfix PK Issue: (I have marked the spots I changed)

Player vs. Player (PvP) combat is almost identical to normal combat. The hate system is ignored, as players may choose their target regardless of who or what has already attacked them. There are two kinds of PvP combat: Authorized Duels and Unauthorized Combat.

Duels:
Duels are consensual battles in which one player challenges another and the opposing party must accept. There are three different types of duels:

[First Strike]: Whoever lands the first strike wins.
[Half Loss]: Whoever drops their opponent to 50% or below of their total health wins.
[Total Loss]: Whoever drops their opponent to 0 HP wins.

Duels may be initiated at any time and place outside of other combat, including in safe zones. When accepting a duel, the challenged party specifies the type of duel. After accepting, players are allowed one round (1 post each) to prepare. During the preparation round, each player should use a LD roll for initiative to determine who goes first. A double-post is permitted in an instance where the last person to prepare wins the initiative roll.

Duels have a time limit (or in this case, post limit) of 15 rounds. If the victory condition for the duel is not met within the time limit, the victor is chosen based on who has the highest percentage of their total HP remaining. In the event of a tie, the duel is considered a Draw. When a duel ends, a large notification will appear between the two players declaring the victor. If the two players are far apart at the end of the duel, they will each receive a notification separately. If a player is killed in a duel, the victor receives the losing player's col and equipped items.

Unauthorized Combat:
We highly encourage players to communicate with others when there is conflict between characters. Whenever one player engages in unauthorized combat with another, it should make sense for them to do so. Using a character to attack or harass another player for OOC reasons will not be tolerated. SAO-RPG staff reserves the right to validate, void, or otherwise make rulings on certain actions that involve unauthorized combat. If you are interested in playing a PKer or 'villain'-type character, check out the FAQ for suggestions involving NPC-Players.

The attacker(s) and the target(s) use a LD result to determine the conditions of the first attack. The attacker must treat the initiative and attack roll as one, and include the details of their intended attack and 'initiative' in the Roll Purpose. If the attacker's result is higher, the attack happens normally. If the target's result is higher, the damage they take from that initial attack is reduced by 20% (rounded down, after mitigation). Unauthorized combat cannot be initiated in a safe zone, and if a player with a green cursor damages another player with a green cursor, the attacker's cursor will change to orange.

Player Killing:

Generally the rules for Player Killing are the same as for unauthorized combat, with the addition that NO PLAYER CAN KILL ANOTHER PLAYER WITHOUT OOC permission. SAO-RPG staff reserves the right to validate, void, or otherwise make rulings on certain actions that involve Player Killing without OOC permission, so if you have problems with unauthorized Player Killing immediately contact the Player Support Team and we will help you.

Safe Zones:
Player shops and most settlements are classified as safe zones. Players that are in a location designated as a safe zone are protected by the <Area> effect. This prevents damage from being done to a player outside of a duel. A player may still attack NPCs and other players while in a safe zone, but the target will only receive an unpleasant feedback from the attack.

Cursor Colors:
A player's cursor can be one of two colors: green or orange. An orange cursor indicates that the player has committed some type of crime, and the duration of the orange cursor depends on the nature of the crime and how many infractions the player has had in the past. Examples of what would cause a player's cursor to turn orange would be:

Attacking a green player outside of an authorized combat
Physically harassing another player
Stealing