Main Battles Moving Forward

[Rom]

Bring back the danger. I want to walk into a thread knowing that I simply can't know what will happen. An organic conversation becomes an argument, becomes a bar brawl, becomes an ambush and oh look my character is now blind in one eye. My best memories on the site and in table top have been where the story throws a curve I didn't expect and I was forced to the edge of my creative capacity to respond and survive. I'm all for removing the floaties for next timeline and putting myself and my characters in that wonderful area where chance and the risk of the unknown intertwine.

 

[Marcus]

One thing to consider, as again I am all for risk. Death means you stop writing for that character (other than minimally for Jedi or Sith spirits). Other major risk results mean you get to keep writing. I think this is a pretty critical difference, and not one that should dictate progression in any way. I totally get that we need to add risk back in, and that by writing "together" we give up an amount of control. But by allowing (or forcing the probability of for progression) death means an author could also be forced to stop writing. Yes they could spin up a new character, but that's a bit much to enforce if you ask me. It'd be like having permadeath in SWTOR (ok not the best analogy, but hopefully it gives a hint of where my brain is).

 

[Jake]

One thing to consider, as again I am all for risk. Death means you stop writing for that character (other than minimally for Jedi or Sith spirits). Other major risk results mean you get to keep writing. I think this is a pretty critical difference, and not one that should dictate progression in any way. I totally get that we need to add risk back in, and that by writing "together" we give up an amount of control. But by allowing (or forcing the probability of for progression) death means an author could also be forced to stop writing. Yes they could spin up a new character, but that's a bit much to enforce if you ask me. It'd be like having permadeath in SWTOR (ok not the best analogy, but hopefully it gives a hint of where my brain is).

Thinking that anyone is suggesting we shouldn't write "together" is a grave misinterpretation. Roleplaying is all about writing together. However, part of what's great about is that it allows for a spontaneity otherwise unavailable in solo writing. The idea of writing together isn't to always know what is going to happen, I think this is the main point that's being made. Otherwise, it's also important (and I'm just using your post, Marcus, because you bring it up specifically but it might be what a lot of others are thinking) that you understand that no one is saying anything about character death being obligatory. We're not defining that, or what character death is, or what its repercussions are. It has always been a part of the site, at some times more or less than at others.

What's being discussed is the fact that it has recently become a vanishingly small part of the site, or at least in respect to the risk it used to pose. And it's only a symptom (edit: in my opinion) of a larger problem that's currently affecting this timeline, which is that the competitive edge has been lost (edit: also my opinion). I already stated earlier in this thread or one of the other announcements my opinion about this, but to briefly summarize, I think that the competitive edge provides a momentum to the timeline that keeps it fresh and new. This is why battles need to be revamped, why the complete absence of character death as a result of more tightly choreogaphed storylines is being discussed, and why the word 'competitive' came up in the first place in the announcements. Currently there is no real conflict driving the timeline. That's partly why it has become somewhat stagnant.

EDIT: Also, admins, can we get any ETA on the next announcement? I think boli mentioned somewhere that it would be about the think tank.

 

[Marcus]

Actually I said we DO write together, and I agree that the risks SHOULD be present. But forcing the possibility of death means you're forcing the possibility that the author has to stop writing. That seems silly to me. I've never been a part of any gaming system or writing environment where that was forced as a possibility. Even in good old D&D tabletop you could either work around death or knew it was pre-arranged. A good GM in table top would make the game VERY risky but could ensure he doesn't permakill players.

 

[Jake]

Sorry if I misquoted you there. No one is forcing the possibility that you have to quit writing because there is an option to have up to 3 characters. If you choose to have one and are unfortunate enough (because I think that the presence of character death is being exaggerated, like Bac said) that your character dies (which, given the precedence for character death on the site, was probably a risk you knowingly took by joining in a battle) then you can't really say that you've been strongarmed into not being able to write, at least not IMO.

I think if we had a total death tally for most of the timelines it wouldn't be (as a generous estimate, really) over 20 in the whole timeline, especially deaths that didn't happen as part of some prearranged plot. The bloodiest thread in SWRP's history would probably be that infamous wedding thread that Ruukil torched with his Pyro expy.

 

[Marcus]

Do I really need to spell out "stop writing for that character"? It was implied. And yes, someone might get attached to one character, or they might only have time for one.

Now all that said, you're probably right with B's point in that the fear of death is far greater than the actual chance. I still don't like it. :p

 

[Jake]

You did say it once, but I also thought you were suggesting a change and not just stating your opinion. My bad. Your opinion is completely valid, but I think it's safe to say that there's 0% chance that character death will be removed or even specifically discouraged on the site at this point. Especially considering this discussion only started because so few characters die, even compared to how few characters used to die.

 

[Green Ranger]

Just to keep in mind, but just like now, you can still PM the other person and yknow, ask for the final blow to not be fatal. Its something thatd strictly be agreed between the two of you, but its worth trying.

We want to encourage a culture that's more about RPing than simply writing, obviously, but that doesn't mean there isn't wiggle room within those rules. Just because there's more risk doesn't mean every thread will require a fatality or anything. What's happening here is that, as the staff, we're simply tweaking the rules to be freer in regards to death, as well as focusing on giving perks to those who actively take risks like that. Whether there is more death or not is really ultimately up to what happens in the Rp

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I already stated earlier in this thread or one of the other announcements my opinion about this, but to briefly summarize, I think that the competitive edge provides a momentum to the timeline that keeps it fresh and new.

Bingo.

 

[Mr.BossMan]

Sometimes characters die, but life moves on....

 

[Marcus]

:( *cries and runs off*

 

[Mr.BossMan]

*Gives @Marcus a hug and whispers* "It's okay....It's not your fault....."

 

[Sin]

I just find it laughable that you want everyone to be a "hero" but you also want death to be a "frequent thing." Heroes don't die frequently, they're safeguarded by "being special." I'm not attacking anyone, I'm just really sitting here scratching my head like: lolwut?

Like, this is a forum. People are here to write (hopefully) about their characters. I mean (to me) this 1v1 system makes me feel like I should have a set of dice out in front of my keyboard and be ready to roll them because what you're describing here feels like a pen and paper RP.

Collaborative storytelling doesn't meant that all of the persons involved know what's going to happen before it happens. It means you work together to progress the story in a reasonable manner. The collaborative part just means you discuss a few thing prior the getting into the weeds of the RP so there aren't any problems in the future. For example: what do you want out of this RP? why are you participating in this RP? do you have anything you would like to see your character do/achieve in this RP? so on and so forth... That's what collaborating is (or at least it should be). Not your RP being scripted. There should still be something that pops up in the RP that surprises you and/or throws you for a loop. Otherwise you should just give up roleplaying and start co-writing short stories or writing them on your own.

This is a large site with a relatively large active roleplaying group (compared to other Star Wars RP sites). Everyone is going to see things differently, naturally.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, the only problem with the 1v1 (Manaan rules) system...in my opinion...is this: it's just not immersive. There's nothing meaningful about it when it comes down to the characters. The characters are what make up any online forum-based roleplaying community. The staff or faction leaders or whoever absolutely have to make these "Main Storyline Duels" more appealing from a storyline and character progression perspective. Regardless of how "successful" you think they are...if they don't seem meaningful/epic people are going to get tired of it really quick (I can promise you this will happen). Just because I'm a part of a faction and that faction decides they want to invade or defend this planet, it may or may not make sense to have my character who what off doing this or that just appear on this planet all of a sudden for this duel. They're needs to be more drive than that. The faction leaders need to usher their faction members to this planet to put emphasis on the conflict that is happening there. This way...it doesn't seem like all of a sudden there is a problem on planet A that you're posting a sign up for someone to go participate in a 1v1 duel for the sake of victory. There's no way around it...it's just cheesy (at least to me).

People don't have to agree with me. This is just be begging/pleading with the staff to make sure that these main story battles don't appear to me as a pop up on my window screen when I visit a new website. SURPRISE! BATTLE OF TETH! SIGN UP NOW TO DUKE IT OUT WITH ANOTHER NON-FORCE SENSITIVE! FOR THE REBELLION! Because I'll be honest with you, that's very much how the Manaan duels felt. I just can't see that being appealing over an extended amount of time. I think people will eventually be like: another random battle eh? :rolleyes:

I hope that doesn't happen. I really do. I have high hopes for this next timeline as it was hard to get into the last/current timeline coming into it so late. Not to mention a general decline in activity and the lack of Rebel soldiers to RP with made it increasingly difficult. The story you guys have now has a lot of potential to be a good story. The staff has done a good job with working out some major details and figuring out how to make the new timeline appealing and interesting. This is like the one thing that I've seen from the new TL stuff that really needs to be looked at based on what I've seen of the system in the current timeline. I'm not trying to offend or upset any of the FLs that organized the battles or 1v1 PvP duels from the current timeline, I'm just telling you as a fellow roleplayer, there wasn't enough there that made me want to sign-up and participate. It just felt like the Manaan stuff "came out of nowhere."

Edit: I didn't proofread this post and tonight was 2 for 1 margarita night and for those of you who have seen "The Interview" you know that 2 for 1 margarita night must be honored.

 

[Jake]

I'm not sure this needs to be stated, but 1v1 duels won't just be happening in a vacuum, they will be surrounded by descriptions of what the NPCs are doing and how the battle is going on and whatnot. The initial statements about NPC participation are pretty much just to avoid people 10v1ing someone in the middle of a thread. The idea to take it to 1v1 pvp threads is an extrapolation upon the tendency of most previous battles (at least in my experience) to naturally reduce themselves to 1v1 pvps that simply become a massive clusterfuck due to the number of people involved.

@Sin

However, you raise a valid point. What kind of system would you suggest the FLs/admins implement to make the system feel less arbitrary?

 

[Brandon Rhea]

People don't have to agree with me. This is just be begging/pleading with the staff to make sure that these main story battles don't appear to me as a pop up on my window screen when I visit a new website. SURPRISE! BATTLE OF TETH! SIGN UP NOW TO DUKE IT OUT WITH ANOTHER NON-FORCE SENSITIVE! FOR THE REBELLION! Because I'll be honest with you, that's very much how the Manaan duels felt. I just can't see that being appealing over an extended amount of time. I think people will eventually be like: another random battle eh? :rolleyes:

We have 11 years of experience that says you're wrong, so I would either encourage you to keep an open mind or simply not sign up for battles that don't interest you.

That's the last comment I'm going to make on this. We're going around in a circle.

 

[Mr.BossMan]

Quick question here.

How many people do you intend to fight in a PvP at once?

1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4
1v2 2v3

Me vs the whole SWRP community?

How many people do you think would be reasonable under the Manaan rules?

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Quick question here.

How many people do you intend to fight in a PvP at once?

1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4
1v2 2v3

Me vs the whole SWRP community?

How many people do you think would be reasonable under the Manaan rules?

Ideally each thread would be 2v2 because it moves things along at a quicker pace, which is necessary with the time limit.

 

[Mr.BossMan]

Sounds good.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Keep in mind that this is just for battles organized in an official capacity, though, aka by faction leaders.

If a bunch of people end up getting into a PvP scenario organically, or want to create their own PvP threads with lots of people, go nuts.

 

[Mr.BossMan]

Keep in mind that this is just for battles organized in an official capacity, though, aka by faction leaders.

If a bunch of people end up getting into a PvP scenario organically, or want to create their own PvP threads with lots of people, go nuts.

Awesome! Cause I was really looking forward to getting like 6-7 people to just be in one massive ass battle. NPC's running around everywhere shooting and blowing shit up. My dude with his lightsaber kicking some ass. Some other generic Jedi PC messin shit up. Then having a BA member mowing some shit down with a minigun. Were all roaring in battle then out of nowhere a frickin space ship rolls up and is all like "am I late to the party?" as she shoots up a whole coulum of republic troopers. Then everything goes Boom! Cause some other PC decided to go suicide bomber and blow up some big wigs house.

Then the credits roll with the dreaded "To be continued...."

Yes this will happen next Timeline.