Public Rules Proposals

[Die Shize]

Wait, deculalas had an impact? On what?

Its members’ activity and storytelling even if, as I pointed out, that impact is confined to the members and doesn’t branch into ‘main story impact’. I keyword “if” because I don’t know either way. My own activity was too limited overall.

But, if you get adventurous, we can argue that little pockets of activity ultimately combine toward total site activity, so overall impact is not always so direct.

 

[Malon]

Not to pivot from the conversation about independent factions, but talk of factions has brought a reoccurring issue to mind that has proven to be a headache across multiple timelines and continues into this one. I don't know if site rules can be modified to account for it, but I'll put my thoughts here and let the admins do what they will with it.

The issue surrounds the two major Force religions on the site: the Jedi and the Sith. For several timelines now, it has almost become a running joke that Jedi never act like Jedi and (to a lesser extent) the same can be said of the Sith. In this timeline, for instance, we literally have Jedi Knights establishing romantic and implied sexual relationships with Sith. In some instances, both parties were aware that the other belonged to the enemy order, or became aware at some point in their relationship. We've had Jedi outright abandon Padawans in the midst of PvP combat. I've also noticed a trend around making the Jedi Council the "bad guys," if you will, even among good Jedi.

Maybe its the lore geek in me, but there are several problems with all of these, the most critical of which is that it just isn't Star Wars. Jedi don't sleep with Sith. Sith don't sleep with Jedi. Even in eras where the Jedi Order allows romantic connections, this would be a grievous crime that would at the very least provoke expulsion from the Order. Likewise, your everyday Jedi would absolutely trust the will and guidance of the Jedi Council. Jedi who disagree with, despise, and outright ignore the Council number at barely a handful even during the height of the Council's corruption during the Clone Wars, and talk of this kind was usually the last indication that one was about to go to the dark side of the Force—so seeing an entire faction of Jedi talk like this timeline after timeline is troubling.

Part of me thinks these problems stem from OOC reasons. Members cannot separate their in-character perceptions, the way their character would have grown up and viewed their religion and the galaxy, from their out-of-character perceptions about other users or situations. Many members, for instance, openly acknowledge the imperfection and flaws of the Jedi Order but then seek to imprint their own understanding of these flaws onto their characters, which results in a whole site of "woke" Jedi that don't act anything like Jedi should, to the point that when a few users do act like Jedi, they're vilainized and are very much the outliers in the faction.

Obviously, the admin team shouldn't seek to tell members how to play their characters. There are also cases where members choose to play a "bad Jedi" as part of a fall-to-the-dark-side character arc, and that's just fine. But I do think provisions should be put in place to mandate that if you create a character to be part of a certain faction, that character should be played in a manner that is realistic to the faction in-question. And, if a member wants to play a Jedi who for instance sleeps around with a known Sith or consistently pushes the bounds of what would be realistic in a faction (i.e., rebelling against either the Jedi Council or the Sith equivalent), then there are in-character consequences for that and they should be ready to pay those consequences if that is the type of character they wish to write.

 

[Dread]

The Exchange. Under Dread. Had a lot of activity there before they got offed. I think even before Blackwell even existed. And it got big enough to piss off a Sith Lord and an Emperor, so it got pretty big

As much as I'd like to claim this, it never grew to the point that it was able to impact the story. It had activity until it got the attention of the PvP folks, then I messed up by peacing out. I knew my character would die via the bounties system forced PvP because I don't have the same skill level as the people we were facing, so I moved on.

 

[The Captain]

I'll admit I haven't really been on the site consistently for a long time (and in fact missed all of this timeline), but I'd like to add my probably redundant two-cents to this discussion.

I don't think the problem with the site stems from an overabundance of rules, PVP, levels, or faction-based tomfoolery. I believe it stems from the fact that all of these things encourage players, perhaps not directly, to be competitive. The rules only grant bonuses to PVP threads, not PVE or self-DMed action, with few safeguards for losing a character other than a possible credit exchange. Levels only provide a basis for PVP power scaling since level 1 characters are stronger than most common NPCs, and it is all too easy for a high level character or multiple characters to jump into a thread and destroy a low-level PC with no way out. Even in faction, there are no protections for player groups or indies, so a larger faction can just make up an IC excuse then swallow the smaller, weaker faction alive just to kill high-level players and capture resources without a fight. All while making a thread and attacking a larger NPC organization makes more sense in and out of character. If you want your character to survive, you either have to lay so low you can't engage in high-adventure, or get uber competitive to stave off potential ganking. A better system might incentivize cooperative behavior and good storytelling over straight combat.

Just off the top of my head, you could replace PVP and PVE with a No-Risk and Risk system, where players can decide ahead of time if they want a thread to have repercussions, with different consequences for different types of threads. A heist or smuggling operation might get you in trouble with the law or a powerful crimeboss. A social or political thread might cost you your public reputation, status, or standing with a crucial ally. Fighting threads can get you maimed, killed, or worse. And all of this can be against players or DMed NPCs, with increased rewards for Risk-Enabled threads and plots.

Another rule might be preventing factions from fighting each other until they reach a certain threshold of players, plots, and/or useful assets, or perhaps implementing a Faction Level system so that new factions can fly below the radar of larger ones until they are ready. Of course, if you start a fight with a larger faction prematurely they can fight back, but the big kid on the playground can't go around starting fights with the new kids anymore.

I know these two have already been at least hinted at in this thread, but I hope I brought a bit more detail to the suggestions, as I think they might help keep things fun for most players.

 

[Wit]

How are you going to judge the risk factor of a thread when you submit a pvp or pve thread for evaluation? Either someone reads them all or people will exploit the system. Same goes for self-dm threads, people will just fluff through a few posts and claim they won a fight. PvP should most definitely have its perks, you’re taking a risk with your character and you should be rewarded for taking that risk.

The issue isn’t whether or not we have too much PvP or if other forms of combat are not given enough importance. We’re at a fairly good state with regards to that. All that really needs to change is the impression that defeat in a PvP means death. Get rid of that and people will be more comfortable getting into fights and get more comfortable with writing fights.

As for the faction thing, that has mostly been a unspoken understanding and I think more than making a strict rule on it it’s another thing about culture.

 

[The Captain]

How are you going to judge the risk factor of a thread when you submit a pvp or pve thread for evaluation? Either someone reads them all or people will exploit the system. Same goes for self-dm threads, people will just fluff through a few posts and claim they won a fight. PvP should most definitely have its perks, you’re taking a risk with your character and you should be rewarded for taking that risk.

The issue isn’t whether or not we have too much PvP or if other forms of combat are not given enough importance. We’re at a fairly good state with regards to that. All that really needs to change is the impression that defeat in a PvP means death. Get rid of that and people will be more comfortable getting into fights and get more comfortable with writing fights.

As for the faction thing, that has mostly been a unspoken understanding and I think more than making a strict rule on it it’s another thing about culture.

You could use dice rolls in a public thread as proof of your work or DMing could be encouraged more among players. As for rewards, I would say it should depend on risk rather than just whether or not someone is in PVP, since two players could theoretically work behind the scenes to create a thread that looks like real combat, but is actually just cinematic PVP. No system is perfect, I'm just laying out options.

As for factions, rules can be used to shape culture, and even if something is meant to be understood in an unspoken way, that doesn't mean it will be executed in that way. A solid rule would just help to reinforce that pouncing on weaker factions for their assets shouldn't be done.

 

[Sreeya]

..We already have dice in place today and we also have DMs. Also, the people pretending to pvp is not prevalent enough to be an issue - the oocs point to that. I guess I'm not seeing any new suggestion here that isn't already there and available today.

I think the level system can be looked at again though.

 

[Malon]

Another issue has been on my mind for awhile, but after seeing it pop up in a recent PvP, I decided to go ahead and make this thought known too—and it kind of piggybacks off of my last point about Jedi and Sith acting like Jedi and Sith. It's also something I think is important when and if the current PvP meta is reconsidered.

To put my thoughts plainly: there is absolutely zero reason for members of the Jedi and Sith Orders to have side arms, firearms, or grenades of any kind. For this timeline, it sort of made sense for the Jedi Order considering these Jedi were more in the vein of Luke Skywalker in the days of the Rebellion. But, now that the Order is returning to its height, they should be moving away from this practice.

Likewise, the Sith have even less of a reason. The most powerful canon Sith Lords don't even use armor. They wear black robes and they carry lightsabers. That's it. And, while I think armor is okay to wear—the Jedi wear light armor during the Clone Wars and we all know about Darth Vader—this business of Sith Lords coming into fights decked out with pistols, rifles, grenades, and all other manner of weapons is frankly ridiculous and is born out of a PvP meta that almost requires them to do this because the Force and a lightsaber have been so undervalued somehow.

In canon, the Grand Inquisitor, given here as an example of a Level 2 character, could dodge point-blank blaster fire aimed right at his head. A Jedi Knight (Obi-Wan) could block and incapacitate a bounty hunter shooting at him from behind thanks to his reflexes and sensory abilities. Vader could survive being dipped in a river of lava by throwing up a Force barrier. Vader also took out a whole team of the best bounty hunters in the galaxy with just the Force after being robbed of his lightsaber. Lightsabers cuold deflect blaster bolts coming out of tanks and starfighters.

My point?

The Force and a lightsaber are powerful enough weapons for Force-sensitives. Obviously, a little nerfing has to be done to make the metagame fair, but there should be no reason that Jedi and Sith need to walk around carrying arsenals on their belts to stay competitive. I recommend that whatever PvP rules come out of the new timeline take into account the power of a competent and well-trained Force-user. There is a reason even Mandalorians feared to go up against them, but that isn't immediately apparent looking around the site's PvP scene.

 

[KinkyPrawn]

Another issue has been on my mind for awhile, but after seeing it pop up in a recent PvP, I decided to go ahead and make this thought known too—and it kind of piggybacks off of my last point about Jedi and Sith acting like Jedi and Sith. It's also something I think is important when and if the current PvP meta is reconsidered.

To put my thoughts plainly: there is absolutely zero reason for members of the Jedi and Sith Orders to have side arms, firearms, or grenades of any kind. For this timeline, it sort of made sense for the Jedi Order considering these Jedi were more in the vein of Luke Skywalker in the days of the Rebellion. But, now that the Order is returning to its height, they should be moving away from this practice.

Likewise, the Sith have even less of a reason. The most powerful canon Sith Lords don't even use armor. They wear black robes and they carry lightsabers. That's it. And, while I think armor is okay to wear—the Jedi wear light armor during the Clone Wars and we all know about Darth Vader—this business of Sith Lords coming into fights decked out with pistols, rifles, grenades, and all other manner of weapons is frankly ridiculous and is born out of a PvP meta that almost requires them to do this because the Force and a lightsaber have been so undervalued somehow.

In canon, the Grand Inquisitor, given here as an example of a Level 2 character, could dodge point-blank blaster fire aimed right at his head. A Jedi Knight (Obi-Wan) could block and incapacitate a bounty hunter shooting at him from behind thanks to his reflexes and sensory abilities. Vader could survive being dipped in a river of lava by throwing up a Force barrier. Vader also took out a whole team of the best bounty hunters in the galaxy with just the Force after being robbed of his lightsaber. Lightsabers cuold deflect blaster bolts coming out of tanks and starfighters.

My point?

The Force and a lightsaber are powerful enough weapons for Force-sensitives. Obviously, a little nerfing has to be done to make the metagame fair, but there should be no reason that Jedi and Sith need to walk around carrying arsenals on their belts to stay competitive. I recommend that whatever PvP rules come out of the new timeline take into account the power of a competent and well-trained Force-user. There is a reason even Mandalorians feared to go up against them, but that isn't immediately apparent looking around the site's PvP scene.

Glad someone else also noticed this.

Personally I feel like Force Users have been extremely nerfed compared to their counterparts in the comics, series and movies. Especially the level 1's and 2's. Unless you're a PvP'er with the knowledge and skills of the likes of the site's PvP veterans, going into a PvP at low level without even a pistol is asking to get killed.

Sure level 2 unlocks a ton of epic force powers. But using them creates a lot of issues in a PvP. One strong enough force push and a few other applications like lightning or force fire can risk fatigue in the middle of a PvP. Maul can choke people without even needing to look at them and can pull entire starships off a cliff in Clone Wars without even breaking a sweat and he's only a level 2 according to the site rules. Miles stronger than a level 2 on the site. Ventress chokes out both Kenobi and Skywalker at the same time and they couldn't get out of it, and she's apparently only a level 1. A far cry from the level 1's on the site. Overall I feel that Force Users need a buff in terms of power to make up for that lack of functions and other bonuses that Non-Force Users use.

I fully agree that a Sith or Jedi shouldn't have reason to carry a blaster or grenades on them. With the arsenal they have in the force alone it shouldn't be necessary. Armour is an entire different story, in my opinion. That stuff saves lives. Malgus used heavy armour in the TOR trailers along with every other Sith crusader or Jedi Knight. Even then they moved like nobody's business. And like you said, we all know about Vader and the rest of the gang. I also think Revan is a nice example of a Sith wearing armour. Of course I feel for Jedi/Sith some medium or light armour is perfect to allow for a balance of mobility and protection.


This is all stuff I feel from both personal experience as well as observations made from watching other PvP's on the site and talking to people. There's of course the possibility that I just totally suck at PvP thus I'm talking out of my ass here. So maybe take this with a sack of salt.


Edit:

Another thing that I think is an issue is the average range of a PvP. A lot of engagements happen at ~30 meters, so having any effect at that range with force powers are gonna have issues, especially for low levels and even at high levels. For instance, lightning/fire is out at that range and I'm sure people will complain about a choke or other easier moves at that range. Getting closer will also have its own can of worms.

 

[Wit]

I think the range issue would resolve itself if Force Users were given a rework. If it’s more viable to use the Force in combat then Jedi or Sith would be more inclined to get up close in combat, where their powers would be most effective. That would be the new meta maybe, FS characters trying to get up close while NFS ones try to keep them at a distance.

 

[Phoenix]

Another issue has been on my mind for awhile, but after seeing it pop up in a recent PvP, I decided to go ahead and make this thought known too—and it kind of piggybacks off of my last point about Jedi and Sith acting like Jedi and Sith. It's also something I think is important when and if the current PvP meta is reconsidered.

To put my thoughts plainly: there is absolutely zero reason for members of the Jedi and Sith Orders to have side arms, firearms, or grenades of any kind. For this timeline, it sort of made sense for the Jedi Order considering these Jedi were more in the vein of Luke Skywalker in the days of the Rebellion. But, now that the Order is returning to its height, they should be moving away from this practice.

Likewise, the Sith have even less of a reason. The most powerful canon Sith Lords don't even use armor. They wear black robes and they carry lightsabers. That's it. And, while I think armor is okay to wear—the Jedi wear light armor during the Clone Wars and we all know about Darth Vader—this business of Sith Lords coming into fights decked out with pistols, rifles, grenades, and all other manner of weapons is frankly ridiculous and is born out of a PvP meta that almost requires them to do this because the Force and a lightsaber have been so undervalued somehow.

In canon, the Grand Inquisitor, given here as an example of a Level 2 character, could dodge point-blank blaster fire aimed right at his head. A Jedi Knight (Obi-Wan) could block and incapacitate a bounty hunter shooting at him from behind thanks to his reflexes and sensory abilities. Vader could survive being dipped in a river of lava by throwing up a Force barrier. Vader also took out a whole team of the best bounty hunters in the galaxy with just the Force after being robbed of his lightsaber. Lightsabers cuold deflect blaster bolts coming out of tanks and starfighters.

My point?

The Force and a lightsaber are powerful enough weapons for Force-sensitives. Obviously, a little nerfing has to be done to make the metagame fair, but there should be no reason that Jedi and Sith need to walk around carrying arsenals on their belts to stay competitive. I recommend that whatever PvP rules come out of the new timeline take into account the power of a competent and well-trained Force-user. There is a reason even Mandalorians feared to go up against them, but that isn't immediately apparent looking around the site's PvP scene.

Glad someone else also noticed this.

Personally I feel like Force Users have been extremely nerfed compared to their counterparts in the comics, series and movies. Especially the level 1's and 2's. Unless you're a PvP'er with the knowledge and skills of the likes of the site's PvP veterans, going into a PvP at low level without even a pistol is asking to get killed.

Sure level 2 unlocks a ton of epic force powers. But using them creates a lot of issues in a PvP. One strong enough force push and a few other applications like lightning or force fire can risk fatigue in the middle of a PvP. Maul can choke people without even needing to look at them and can pull entire starships off a cliff in Clone Wars without even breaking a sweat and he's only a level 2 according to the site rules. Miles stronger than a level 2 on the site. Ventress chokes out both Kenobi and Skywalker at the same time and they couldn't get out of it, and she's apparently only a level 1. A far cry from the level 1's on the site. Overall I feel that Force Users need a buff in terms of power to make up for that lack of functions and other bonuses that Non-Force Users use.

I fully agree that a Sith or Jedi shouldn't have reason to carry a blaster or grenades on them. With the arsenal they have in the force alone it shouldn't be necessary. Armour is an entire different story, in my opinion. That stuff saves lives. Malgus used heavy armour in the TOR trailers along with every other Sith crusader or Jedi Knight. Even then they moved like nobody's business. And like you said, we all know about Vader and the rest of the gang. I also think Revan is a nice example of a Sith wearing armour. Of course I feel for Jedi/Sith some medium or light armour is perfect to allow for a balance of mobility and protection.


This is all stuff I feel from both personal experience as well as observations made from watching other PvP's on the site and talking to people. There's of course the possibility that I just totally suck at PvP thus I'm talking out of my ass here. So maybe take this with a sack of salt.


Edit:

Another thing that I think is an issue is the average range of a PvP. A lot of engagements happen at ~30 meters, so having any effect at that range with force powers are gonna have issues, especially for low levels and even at high levels. For instance, lightning/fire is out at that range and I'm sure people will complain about a choke or other easier moves at that range. Getting closer will also have its own can of worms.

On the whole I have to agree with this sentiment. While I can understand (though don't love) that Jedi/Sith carry something like a pistol or grenades at lower levels, as far as I'm concerned, level 3/4 FS have no business carrying any guns/grenades/etc. Armor I have less of an issue with because there are many examples of armor in both legends and canon, but doing so is going to come with disadvantages still.

Even in the current iteration of the rules, 3/4 FS definitely don't need to be using them. In fact, I would dare argue they put themselves at a disadvantage if they do. Most of the things that Malon listed can currently be done as a level 3.

Some of my own thoughts on the balancing issues: First off, level 1 FS are underpowered compared to level 1 non-FS. I've always known this and some tweaking still might be required, but personally I'm not sure I actually have a huge issue with it at this point. If an experienced padawan/fresh knight runs headfirst into a bounty hunter/assassin/soldier touting a bunch of special gear then, yes, there are plenty of examples of people like that getting killed in canon/legends. You have to be a bit smarter than that at level 1.

Level 2 isn't in too bad of a spot, but I do think it could be improved to be a bit stronger. I know that there have been some rules about level 2 having difficulty deflecting lots of incoming gunfire, and that would be one of the things I think needs amending to make them more viable so they aren't just shot while trying to close in.

Level 3/4 absolutely do not need to be made more powerful imo. Level 3/4 FS are actually quite powerful. The particular fight that was linked may not be the best example because that's a non-FS picking an advantageous battlefield to fight a FS. That's exactly how it should be done and how it is done in the rest of SW. If they were in super close quarters, I would argue the FS is at a pretty large advantage. Terrain does matter.

That being said, I do think range is an issue and there are two things that could be done to help the overall balance and push things away from FS using tech. One would be to increase the range of general Force powers, and the other would be to decrease the overall range of things like pistols. Both of these are just suggestions and may not solve the issue, but they would help keep the "I'm going to stay at range and always pepper you" idea suppressed.

I'm also going to put in another plug for my idea of tightening up and making the level system more fluid. It might help this issue if there are fewer opportunities for people to rule-lawyer about what FS can and cannot do.

Finally, I will just say in general that FS are not nearly as bad as they're being portrayed here. If you take a look through the level rules (particularly for level 2) they can do some pretty intense stuff from tossing around huge objects to powerful blasts. I can't actually remember a single ruling this entire TL where someone was ruled to be exhausted either (could be wrong, but even if there was one the point is there haven't been many). I think people just don't bother to try it out because if you can carry tech AND use the Force, why not? Tech is easier (press a button and it happens), but not necessarily more powerful apart from range issues.

 

[KinkyPrawn]

I think the range issue would resolve itself if Force Users were given a rework. If it’s more viable to use the Force in combat then Jedi or Sith would be more inclined to get up close in combat, where their powers would be most effective. That would be the new meta maybe, FS characters trying to get up close while NFS ones try to keep them at a distance.

That's certainly the best option for FS and also a fun playstyle. Only issue is the balance for FS at the moment. Like I don't think a level 1 or even level 2 FS wanna go up against twin Quickdraws and perhaps even nades at <10 meters with how they are now. Not saying it's impossible. But it's definitely gonna be tricky

 

[KinkyPrawn]

On the whole I have to agree with this sentiment. While I can understand (though don't love) that Jedi/Sith carry something like a pistol or grenades at lower levels, as far as I'm concerned, level 3/4 FS have no business carrying any guns/grenades/etc. Armor I have less of an issue with because there are many examples of armor in both legends and canon, but doing so is going to come with disadvantages still.

Even in the current iteration of the rules, 3/4 FS definitely don't need to be using them. In fact, I would dare argue they put themselves at a disadvantage if they do. Most of the things that Malon listed can currently be done as a level 3.

Some of my own thoughts on the balancing issues: First off, level 1 FS are underpowered compared to level 1 non-FS. I've always known this and some tweaking still might be required, but personally I'm not sure I actually have a huge issue with it at this point. If an experienced padawan/fresh knight runs headfirst into a bounty hunter/assassin/soldier touting a bunch of special gear then, yes, there are plenty of examples of people like that getting killed in canon/legends. You have to be a bit smarter than that at level 1.

Level 2 isn't in too bad of a spot, but I do think it could be improved to be a bit stronger. I know that there have been some rules about level 2 having difficulty deflecting lots of incoming gunfire, and that would be one of the things I think needs amending to make them more viable so they aren't just shot while trying to close in.

Level 3/4 absolutely do not need to be made more powerful imo. Level 3/4 FS are actually quite powerful. The particular fight that was linked may not be the best example because that's a non-FS picking an advantageous battlefield to fight a FS. That's exactly how it should be done and how it is done in the rest of SW. If they were in super close quarters, I would argue the FS is at a pretty large advantage. Terrain does matter.

That being said, I do think range is an issue and there are two things that could be done to help the overall balance and push things away from FS using tech. One would be to increase the range of general Force powers, and the other would be to decrease the overall range of things like pistols. Both of these are just suggestions and may not solve the issue, but they would help keep the "I'm going to stay at range and always pepper you" idea suppressed.

I'm also going to put in another plug for my idea of tightening up and making the level system more fluid. It might help this issue if there are fewer opportunities for people to rule-lawyer about what FS can and cannot do.

Finally, I will just say in general that FS are not nearly as bad as they're being portrayed here. If you take a look through the level rules (particularly for level 2) they can do some pretty intense stuff from tossing around huge objects to powerful blasts. I can't actually remember a single ruling this entire TL where someone was ruled to be exhausted either (could be wrong, but even if there was one the point is there haven't been many). I think people just don't bother to try it out because if you can carry tech AND use the Force, why not? Tech is easier (press a button and it happens), but not necessarily more powerful apart from range issues.

Agreeing 100% here. Level 2 is in my opinion way too underpowered for what it needs to be. And as for how bad they are, I was personally told in a fight this TL that my level 2 Sith was verging on exhaustion after using a powerful force push(like in the example gif for them) and a fireball. Granted, I know force fire is intensive, but I felt that that was still well within the power abilities of the likes of Maul and the Grand Inquisitor to pull something like that off and still stay in the fight.

So far (in my opinion) level 3 is where a FS shines. Their powers are much more potent and the fact that they can easily split focus between 2 opponents is a MASSIVE boon to have. I personally just struggle with the limits of their force powers and how intensive they can go before getting fatigued and drained.

As for range, I think simply amping up the range and power of force powers will solve the issue pretty nicely already. And currently getting peppered is an issue at the moment for level 1 and (as you said) level 2. So if the abilities of a level 2 is amped up to be able to contend with a spray of blaster fire then they have the ability to close in for closer engagements. But as it stands, all a NFS has to do to stay safe from a FS is to fly off to 30-40 meters with a jetpack then plink away with pistols or rifles. And while a level 3 MIGHT be able to drag them back with a force stasis or whatever, anything lower than that is gonna have a really hard time to keep up.

 

[Wit]

Thinking back on recent PvPs, stamina does seem to be an issue. Personally I have always been cautious about using Force powers in threads because I was scared of running out of juice before some critical moment and at times the thread just ended with barely any Force usage.

Which makes me think of a crazy proposal, which might be a bit orthogonal to this discussion. Speaking for myself, I really like playing around with tech, specially in recent timelines. But there were things that couldn’t be done or didn’t make sense for a FS character (which I often main). So what would you guys say about the possibility of picking a payload for a thread and allowing FS users to use tech and armor functions in PvPs where they declare upfront this thread will use my NFS payload. From a story point of view say you have a character who is going undercover, or is a rookie force use and so has to use tech to fight. They would not be allowed to use the Force in any way in these threads but rely only on their tech. Like letting people explore a new flavor of combat without having to make a new character. They would have to maintain a proper load out on their profile for this, and would need to be strongly punished if exploited, but maybe something that can be done in some form.

 

[KinkyPrawn]

Thinking back on recent PvPs, stamina does seem to be an issue. Personally I have always been cautious about using Force powers in threads because I was scared of running out of juice before some critical moment and at times the thread just ended with barely any Force usage.

Which makes me think of a crazy proposal, which might be a bit orthogonal to this discussion. Speaking for myself, I really like playing around with tech, specially in recent timelines. But there were things that couldn’t be done or didn’t make sense for a FS character (which I often main). So what would you guys say about the possibility of picking a payload for a thread and allowing FS users to use tech and armor functions in PvPs where they declare upfront this thread will use my NFS payload. From a story point of view say you have a character who is going undercover, or is a rookie force use and so has to use tech to fight. They would not be allowed to use the Force in any way in these threads but rely only on their tech. Like letting people explore a new flavor of combat without having to make a new character. They would have to maintain a proper load out on their profile for this, and would need to be strongly punished if exploited, but maybe something that can be done in some form.

Personally I like the restriction to a degree. I'd argue some wrist functions or other small stuff would be nice to have on armour, but I personally like this restriction of not having functions on FS. Only issue is the fact that a FS is outclassed REALLY easily by a NFS with functions at lower levels. That's why I think by simply buffing force powers on level 2 and MAYBE level 1 it would most likely solve a lot of those AT issues.

I think it's safe to say this is one of the reasons why FS kit themselves out so much. Draining your force reserves is so friggin easy that you can be exhausted by the time you actually need it. Tech makes up for that by giving an alternative to not use the force until the time is right.

 

[Yuan]

.....

I, personally, am rather turned off by all of the above. I get the whole "Lets try and make it like the cannon!" thing, but I think the force is plenty powerful enough as it is. Lets not forget that while we do want to respect cannon, this is an RP site and we should be trying to make things as fair as possible. When @Phoenix said "If an experienced padawan/fresh knight runs headfirst into a bounty hunter/assassin/soldier touting a bunch of special gear..." he was saying THAT would be understandable for an equal rank FS char to lose, but THAT already is unbalanced. That's saying that the only way for a lvl 1 non-FS to beat a lvl 1 FS is if they have already earned a lot of advanced gear, where as the lvl 1 FS got their lightsaber and the force for free at creation just by saying that they want to be a jedi or sith.

Lets look at the facts:

1. FS chars have general immunity to blasters by the virtue of lightsaber deflection. A repeater or a scattergun would be necessary to cause them problems and even then, all they have to do is grab a crate or piece of metal or [insert random object] with the force and pull it in between them and the shooter. Higher level characters can also learn tutaminus (spelling?) and just block blaster bolts with their bare hands.

2. Projectile attacks like grenades and rockets are also virtually useless because the FS chars could just deflect/push them away from them with the force.

3. Jet packs and other mobility items can be rendered useless by FS chars simply grabbing the enemy right out of the sky.

4. At close to mid range FS chars can choke, push, pull, read mind, chill, heat, etc. non-FS chars.

5. I'm told FS chars can even pull ships out of the sky at higher levels.


My point is, while the cannon star wars universe does seem to rise and fall based on the whims of the jedi and the sith, there are plenty of characters who make a sizable impact without the force, and there are those of us on this site who would like to do the same. I'm not saying I don't ever want to have a sith or jedi, but I would like to think that my non-FS characters would have just as much strength and impact as equal-level FS chars. I feel like even as it stands now, Non-FS characters really have their work cut out for them to beat even an equal-level FS character. But that's just my opinion.

Also, @Malon, when have we ever seen a lightsaber block lasers from tanks and star fighters?


At this time, I would like to draw attention to all of the non-FS, cannon characters who have killed Jedi, sometimes numerous Jedi.

General Grievous
Cad Bain
Jango Fett
Auroa Sing
Mandalorians
Yuuzhan Vong
Clone Troopers
George Lucas (lol)

 

[Phoenix]

.....

I, personally, am rather turned off by all of the above. I get the whole "Lets try and make it like the cannon!" thing, but I think the force is plenty powerful enough as it is. Lets not forget that while we do want to respect cannon, this is an RP site and we should be trying to make things as fair as possible. When @Phoenix said "If an experienced padawan/fresh knight runs headfirst into a bounty hunter/assassin/soldier touting a bunch of special gear..." he was saying THAT would be understandable for an equal rank FS char to lose, but THAT already is unbalanced. That's saying that the only way for a lvl 1 non-FS to beat a lvl 1 FS is if they have already earned a lot of advanced gear, where as the lvl 1 FS got their lightsaber and the force for free at creation just by saying that they want to be a jedi or sith.

Lets look at the facts:

1. FS chars have general immunity to blasters by the virtue of lightsaber deflection. A repeater or a scattergun would be necessary to cause them problems and even then, all they have to do is grab a crate or piece of metal or [insert random object] with the force and pull it in between them and the shooter. Higher level characters can also learn tutaminus (spelling?) and just block blaster bolts with their bare hands.

2. Projectile attacks like grenades and rockets are also virtually useless because the FS chars could just deflect/push them away from them with the force.

3. Jet packs and other mobility items can be rendered useless by FS chars simply grabbing the enemy right out of the sky.

4. At close to mid range FS chars can choke, push, pull, read mind, chill, heat, etc. non-FS chars.

5. I'm told FS chars can even pull ships out of the sky at higher levels.


My point is, while the cannon star wars universe does seem to rise and fall based on the whims of the jedi and the sith, there are plenty of characters who make a sizable impact without the force, and there are those of us on this site who would like to do the same. I'm not saying I don't ever want to have a sith or jedi, but I would like to think that my non-FS characters would have just as much strength and impact as equal-level FS chars. I feel like even as it stands now, Non-FS characters really have their work cut out for them to beat even an equal-level FS character. But that's just my opinion.

Also, @Malon, when have we ever seen a lightsaber block lasers from tanks and star fighters?


At this time, I would like to draw attention to all of the non-FS, cannon characters who have killed Jedi, sometimes numerous Jedi.

General Grievous
Cad Bain
Jango Fett
Auroa Sing
Mandalorians
Yuuzhan Vong
Clone Troopers
George Lucas (lol)

I suppose my relatively simple counter-argument to "it's already too difficult for non-FS to beat FS" is that the Mandalorians have won almost every single engagement they've had against the Sith this entire TL. I'm not saying that that's exclusively because of the current rule system, but it's difficult to make the argument "non-FS are underpowered" when they're constantly winning.

 

[KinkyPrawn]

.....

I, personally, am rather turned off by all of the above. I get the whole "Lets try and make it like the cannon!" thing, but I think the force is plenty powerful enough as it is. Lets not forget that while we do want to respect cannon, this is an RP site and we should be trying to make things as fair as possible. When @Phoenix said "If an experienced padawan/fresh knight runs headfirst into a bounty hunter/assassin/soldier touting a bunch of special gear..." he was saying THAT would be understandable for an equal rank FS char to lose, but THAT already is unbalanced. That's saying that the only way for a lvl 1 non-FS to beat a lvl 1 FS is if they have already earned a lot of advanced gear, where as the lvl 1 FS got their lightsaber and the force for free at creation just by saying that they want to be a jedi or sith.

Lets look at the facts:

1. FS chars have general immunity to blasters by the virtue of lightsaber deflection. A repeater or a scattergun would be necessary to cause them problems and even then, all they have to do is grab a crate or piece of metal or [insert random object] with the force and pull it in between them and the shooter. Higher level characters can also learn tutaminus (spelling?) and just block blaster bolts with their bare hands.

2. Projectile attacks like grenades and rockets are also virtually useless because the FS chars could just deflect/push them away from them with the force.

3. Jet packs and other mobility items can be rendered useless by FS chars simply grabbing the enemy right out of the sky.

4. At close to mid range FS chars can choke, push, pull, read mind, chill, heat, etc. non-FS chars.

5. I'm told FS chars can even pull ships out of the sky at higher levels.


My point is, while the cannon star wars universe does seem to rise and fall based on the whims of the jedi and the sith, there are plenty of characters who make a sizable impact without the force, and there are those of us on this site who would like to do the same. I'm not saying I don't ever want to have a sith or jedi, but I would like to think that my non-FS characters would have just as much strength and impact as equal-level FS chars. I feel like even as it stands now, Non-FS characters really have their work cut out for them to beat even an equal-level FS character. But that's just my opinion.

Also, @Malon, when have we ever seen a lightsaber block lasers from tanks and star fighters?


At this time, I would like to draw attention to all of the non-FS, cannon characters who have killed Jedi, sometimes numerous Jedi.

General Grievous
Cad Bain
Jango Fett
Auroa Sing
Mandalorians
Yuuzhan Vong
Clone Troopers
George Lucas (lol)

There are literally 28 confirmed kills on people by Mandalorian hands between December and March/April and only 3 or 4 Mando deaths in that same time. Plus a NFS doesn't necessarily need AT to beat a level 1 FS. Starter gear is already powerful enough(and very nicely outlined for a player's convenience). You can get jump boots, gription boots and then something else like a filter to counter a smoke/gas grenade. For a lightsaber you can get phrik gauntlets for free and to counter you can use boxing gloves/wrist blades/literally a dozen other choices of generitech melee weapons. Going with your list:

1. General immunity is really inaccurate. You can overwhelm a level 1 really easily with enough firepower from a pistol or 2 alone. Even a level 2 will have issues covering themselves. Throw in 2 heavy or burst fire blasters and that FS is gonna be FUBAR. As for high levels, abilities like absorbing or catching bolts are doable, sure. We see Vader do it effortlessly and we see Kylo Ren catching a bolt while SIMULTANEOUSLY putting Poe Dameron in a force stasis. BUT with how the force is handled on the site, those abilities are REALLY intensive and pulling them off on the fly mid-PvP is not gonna be easy. And as you said, you can summon a piece of steel to you for defense but even then that has issues. Those bolts will punch through eventually and if it's a little too convenient you might have someone calling you out in the OOC for it.

2. Grenades and rockets will cause a lot of issues at lower level for FS. Especially when they have to contend with blaster bolts or other attacks as well.

3. Not at lower levels they can't.

4. At close range a NFS can use melee as well and can overwhelm a lower level FS REALLY easily with enough blaster fire.

5. Can't comment on this.

And in Rebels both Kanan and Ezra block shots from a TIE fighter and I think the Inquisitors block shots from the Ghost as well (if you watched the show)

That list of yours is also really flawed. Those characters are all notorious Jedi killers. Jango Fett killed an entire squad of Jedi bare-handed while they had lightsabers. Grievous has an astronomical record of Jedi kills and Cad Bane is the most dangerous bounty hunter in the galaxy second only to Jango Fett.(btw Yuuzhan Vong isn't canon) and the Clones overwhelmed and surprised the Jedi when order 66 was issued. Overall I don't understand your point here. This just shows that NFS are more than a match for FS and that FS really aren't that good. And given the fact that Cad Bane and Grievous are level 3 according to the site and Jango is a level 4, that shows that they are really powerful even compared to their FS counterparts.


And no offense Yuan, but when was the last time you were in a PvP on the site? FS people have tried all those stunts you mentioned and they only worked either situationally or they didn't work at all. For example, a dude got his level 2 sith double-tapped in the back cuz at that level taking on 2 opponents simultaneously is not an easy task at all. FS could really do with a buff

 

[Green Ranger]

So, I've been reading over this thread, as well as bunch of RP OOCs as well and just generally trying to get an idea of what's going on with the site in general because I logged in once and now the site's back in my history and....honestly muscle memory is a pain and I keep autotyping it into the url bar >.>

Anyway, long story short, I've been sniffing around and catching up on everything and lurking in the shadows because I've got a bit of a Star Wars itch again.

And I guess I'm getting this impression that a lot - and I mean a lot - has been done to create frameworks upon frameworks of various mechanics and hoops to jump through, and all of it is for the purpose of player combat.

And I mean....hell, back when I was active last, the site was collectively asking itself 'how do we fix player combat?'

In fact, I think that's been a perpetual question for a long time.

And obviously there's no perfect solution, but thinking back, I think the crux of the issue dates back to when the staff at the time - myself included - got all nostalgic for the 'good old days' when player death was more frequent, back in the Second Timeline of the site, a million (at least it feels like a million) years ago.

You know, when death mattered, and character deaths were meaningful and significant and added impact to the story and personal development of our characters.

Except the thing is, thinking back on those of us who were getting all nostalgic for those days of more frequent player deaths? Our characters didn't really die all that much.

Or....at all.

For all of our nostalgia for the 'good old days' we were nostalgic over something happening to everyone else. Meanwhile, our characters - Sith Lords and Jedi Grandmasters and Dematri Sephiroth ripoffs and immortal Nem'vaah and broken-ass Force Mancers - didn't really do all that much dying. Or we didn't risk it because our chars were OP as all get out.

Thing is, we didn't really bother asking anyone who actually experienced frequent player character death. And it got me thinking more about all of the player character deaths that I'd seen on the site or been involved with.

All of a sudden you start thinking about all of those losing parties who had their characters suddenly offed, and how upset they were, and suddenly that nostalgia for the good old days disappears and you realise those days were only good for us because we were on top of the pecking order.

So I guess what I'm trying to say (albeit in a long winded and slightly rambly way, but hey it's 2AM >.>) is that I think one of the core issues for the site - in that it's an issue that almost every possible thing I see complained about can draw a connection back to it - ultimately boils down to player combat - or more specifically how players approach player combat - because players don't want their much loved and heavily invested characters to die.

***

So I guess my suggestion for the staff for a rule suggestion or rule amendment would be , first and foremost, to create a mechanism that reduces unintended deaths due to battles.

Now, before you tear my idea to shreds, I'm not suggesting to get rid of unintended player deaths or to remove all stakes from battles or anything like that. Battles still need to have stakes and be meaningful, otherwise the motivation for them dries up and the RP setting stagnates. However, turn the focus away from trying to kill one another.

Instead, I'd suggest something like....at the end of a fight thread, the winner and the loser roll 1d100 dice each. If the loser is higher than the winner, they manage to escape (preferably cackling evilly or shouting how the winner will live to rue the day they crossed them) with their ego hurt, but more or less unharmed.

However, if the winner rolls higher than the loser, they 'roll for damage' so to speak.

A roll of 1: The loser escapes unscathed and cannot be captured because you bungled it. (Every roll needs a critical fail option ;P)
A roll of 2-30: The loser is defeated but unscathed, and can be captured. If they are captured, they might have their equipment confiscated.* (I think escape tropes should apply herein case of an escape attempt, where said items are also conveniently close by in a nearby armory, but that's just me >.>)
A roll of 31-60: The loser is defeated and receives a permanent cosmetic scar and can be captured.*
A roll of 61-80: The loser is defeated and receives a major injury such as losing a limb that requires treatment to recover from and can be captured.* (Maybe you could do something with the tech requirements being that emergency prosthetics are a shabbier quality than black-market elective ones?)
A roll of 81-100 The loser is killed.* (I suppose you can capture the corpse if you want. >.>)

*Also, at the winner's discretion, they might choose to be merciful, so they can choose any of the previous rank choices instead. So, maybe as the winner of a thread, you rolled that the losing player loses a limb, but you feel like that doesn't fit your character's alignment or beliefs, or you just plain feel like the player wrote well enough that their character doesn't deserve to lose a limb, you can give them a cosmetic injury and capture them instead, or you could even choose to just let them go entirely if you want.

Obviously the numbers are just examples and could be tweaked, but it would downplay the amount of sudden and unwanted death that occurs without eliminating it entirely, it allows the winning player to opt for a more merciful option, but also helps eliminate the frequency of bad blood that can come from a player death as well.

It also prevents or at least severely limits people from just intentionally setting out to kill as many PC characters as possible, and generally makes making purpose-built player-killer characters less desirable to create. Not saying that that's happening now, but still.

***

That being said, that's just an idea though, and by no means am I saying 'implement this exact thing' or anything like that - however, I do think that unwanted or unexpected player deaths are the root of a lot of other issues in terms of how players compete against one another, and the subsequent frameworks and mechanisms that are devised to prevent players from getting too competitive. So my advice as an outsider looking in would be to tackle player deaths in relation to death-enabled threads, battles, missions etc and introducing new outcomes that further the story of these characters, rather than cutting them short.

I mean, if every comic book finished every week with the hero just killing the villain, they wouldn't be very interesting, would they? Better to provide opportunity for ongoing rivalry, character developments or setbacks or injuries. A nemesis who comes back for round 2 with a score to settle and a chip on their shoulder is much, much more interesting than a corpse and another random enemy you've never met before.

 

[Wit]

So, I've been reading over this thread, as well as bunch of RP OOCs as well and just generally trying to get an idea of what's going on with the site in general because I logged in once and now the site's back in my history and....honestly muscle memory is a pain and I keep autotyping it into the url bar >.>

Anyway, long story short, I've been sniffing around and catching up on everything and lurking in the shadows because I've got a bit of a Star Wars itch again.

And I guess I'm getting this impression that a lot - and I mean a lot - has been done to create frameworks upon frameworks of various mechanics and hoops to jump through, and all of it is for the purpose of player combat.

And I mean....hell, back when I was active last, the site was collectively asking itself 'how do we fix player combat?'

In fact, I think that's been a perpetual question for a long time.

And obviously there's no perfect solution, but thinking back, I think the crux of the issue dates back to when the staff at the time - myself included - got all nostalgic for the 'good old days' when player death was more frequent, back in the Second Timeline of the site, a million (at least it feels like a million) years ago.

You know, when death mattered, and character deaths were meaningful and significant and added impact to the story and personal development of our characters.

Except the thing is, thinking back on those of us who were getting all nostalgic for those days of more frequent player deaths? Our characters didn't really die all that much.

Or....at all.

For all of our nostalgia for the 'good old days' we were nostalgic over something happening to everyone else. Meanwhile, our characters - Sith Lords and Jedi Grandmasters and Dematri Sephiroth ripoffs and immortal Nem'vaah and broken-ass Force Mancers - didn't really do all that much dying. Or we didn't risk it because our chars were OP as all get out.

Thing is, we didn't really bother asking anyone who actually experienced frequent player character death. And it got me thinking more about all of the player character deaths that I'd seen on the site or been involved with.

All of a sudden you start thinking about all of those losing parties who had their characters suddenly offed, and how upset they were, and suddenly that nostalgia for the good old days disappears and you realise those days were only good for us because we were on top of the pecking order.

So I guess what I'm trying to say (albeit in a long winded and slightly rambly way, but hey it's 2AM >.>) is that I think one of the core issues for the site - in that it's an issue that almost every possible thing I see complained about can draw a connection back to it - ultimately boils down to player combat - or more specifically how players approach player combat - because players don't want their much loved and heavily invested characters to die.

***

So I guess my suggestion for the staff for a rule suggestion or rule amendment would be , first and foremost, to create a mechanism that reduces unintended deaths due to battles.

Now, before you tear my idea to shreds, I'm not suggesting to get rid of unintended player deaths or to remove all stakes from battles or anything like that. Battles still need to have stakes and be meaningful, otherwise the motivation for them dries up and the RP setting stagnates. However, turn the focus away from trying to kill one another.

Instead, I'd suggest something like....at the end of a fight thread, the winner and the loser roll 1d100 dice each. If the loser is higher than the winner, they manage to escape (preferably cackling evilly or shouting how the winner will live to rue the day they crossed them) with their ego hurt, but more or less unharmed.

However, if the winner rolls higher than the loser, they 'roll for damage' so to speak.

A roll of 1: The loser escapes unscathed and cannot be captured because you bungled it. (Every roll needs a critical fail option ;P)
A roll of 2-30: The loser is defeated but unscathed, and can be captured. If they are captured, they might have their equipment confiscated.* (I think escape tropes should apply herein case of an escape attempt, where said items are also conveniently close by in a nearby armory, but that's just me >.>)
A roll of 31-60: The loser is defeated and receives a permanent cosmetic scar and can be captured.*
A roll of 61-80: The loser is defeated and receives a major injury such as losing a limb that requires treatment to recover from and can be captured.* (Maybe you could do something with the tech requirements being that emergency prosthetics are a shabbier quality than black-market elective ones?)
A roll of 81-100 The loser is killed.* (I suppose you can capture the corpse if you want. >.>)

*Also, at the winner's discretion, they might choose to be merciful, so they can choose any of the previous rank choices instead. So, maybe as the winner of a thread, you rolled that the losing player loses a limb, but you feel like that doesn't fit your character's alignment or beliefs, or you just plain feel like the player wrote well enough that their character doesn't deserve to lose a limb, you can give them a cosmetic injury and capture them instead, or you could even choose to just let them go entirely if you want.

Obviously the numbers are just examples and could be tweaked, but it would downplay the amount of sudden and unwanted death that occurs without eliminating it entirely, it allows the winning player to opt for a more merciful option, but also helps eliminate the frequency of bad blood that can come from a player death as well.

It also prevents or at least severely limits people from just intentionally setting out to kill as many PC characters as possible, and generally makes making purpose-built player-killer characters less desirable to create. Not saying that that's happening now, but still.

***

That being said, that's just an idea though, and by no means am I saying 'implement this exact thing' or anything like that - however, I do think that unwanted or unexpected player deaths are the root of a lot of other issues in terms of how players compete against one another, and the subsequent frameworks and mechanisms that are devised to prevent players from getting too competitive. So my advice as an outsider looking in would be to tackle player deaths in relation to death-enabled threads, battles, missions etc and introducing new outcomes that further the story of these characters, rather than cutting them short.

I mean, if every comic book finished every week with the hero just killing the villain, they wouldn't be very interesting, would they? Better to provide opportunity for ongoing rivalry, character developments or setbacks or injuries. A nemesis who comes back for round 2 with a score to settle and a chip on their shoulder is much, much more interesting than a corpse and another random enemy you've never met before.

In the words of Yuan, I, personally, am rather turned off by all of the above. I have seen sits where death is regulated like this, and it was super detrimental to the site. On that site you literally needed permission from the writer to do anything to their character, and it was boring af. While your suggestion isn’t as extreme, putting limits on PvP isn’t the answer. You started off by talking about there being rules and structure now that didn’t exist before and suggest more rules and structure which we don’t need.

If a character is dying then it is because the writer knowingly entered a fight, aware of the risks involved. The percentages of fights that end in death was a reflection of PvP culture, which is already changing. I have seen more defeats end in maiming and capture than death in the last four or five months than ever before. It’s nowhere like the old days when people got surprise ganked in threads they didn’t expect pvp in, PvP is it’s own entity which you only enter at your own risk.

As for adding dice into the result, I would not want luck to play any sort of role in how my character ends up. If I lose then it should be a discussion between the participants to find a comfortable ending for both and one that drives the story forward.