Cap's Proposal for a Consent Reform

Cap

Lord of Altera
#1
I'm not going to give you a wall of text because if I know you can't be bothered to read it.

Consent between individual players can be split into two distinct sections. These are consent within regions with defined classifications, and consent outside of regions or within regions without classification.

Consent between parties of players, factions, or regions can be split into two distinct sections as well. These are consent within the party, and consent between conflicting parties.

These four types of consent for RP consequences are what I'll be basing the reform off of.

---

1. Consent Between Players, without Region Classification

In the current system, players are permitted to instigate fighting, be prepared for fighting, and / or prepare and instigate others into fighting without being forced to accept RP consequences for their actions. In the reformed system, the rules are simple. If you are ready for or intentionally involve yourself in a fight, you are fully consenting. Carrying weapons, wearing armour, knowing magic that may be used in combat, or having armed companions is full consent to any RP consequence for your actions. If you are ICly prepared to enter combat, you should be OOCly prepared as well.

In the event that a player does not want to consent, they should have no need to worry about involving themselves in combat, and as such not need weapons, armour, or offensive magic. Exceptions would only be made for peaceful characters that need these objects for peaceful RP - i.e. hunters with bows, or mages who have dual-utility spells. The policing of this is easy, with character profiles existing as proof of a character's occupation in the event that their peaceful status is brought into question.

In the event that server events involve a peaceful player in combat, the consent rules are temporarily suspended to permit them to defend themselves. The rules are reinstated instantly at the time they no longer need to defend themselves, or at the time they use any of their defensive measures against another player rather than against a server opponent.

---

2. Consent Between Players, within Regions

In the current system, the entire premise of three region classifications is redundant and represents a bloated system. This is especially so now that violent regions no longer represent full consent. In the reformed system, region classifications would be split between Full Consent and Partial Consent.

In a Full Consent region, taking the place of Violent, everything goes as defined in section one. The region may be fortified, may take part in international politics, and may transfer IC hands without argument in the event that international politics or server events result in the loss of the region from its IC owners. This would NOT mean the OOC loss of the region without a reform of the server's region ownership system.

In a Partial Consent region, taking the place of Moderate, the ruling party of the region has permission to refuse any violent characters from roleplaying in the region, so long as that character is armed. If the character disarms themselves (as defined in section one), they may only be refused in the event that their presence will bring violent roleplay into the region. The region may not be fortified, unless the terrain of the area demands construction that may be interpreted as fortification - i.e. you're building in a volcano or somewhere else that you absolutely need big stone walls. The region may not take part in international politics, may not transfer IC hands through political action, and may not take part in server events without temporarily becoming a Full Consent region.

Peaceful regions no longer exist.

---

3. Consent Within a Party

Simple. If you are part of a party, faction, or other political group, you are fully responsible for making sure that your character obeys the laws or other rules of that group, and the violation of such is full consent.

Why would you be arguing with your friends? Stop it. Get some help. Or new friends.

---

4. Consent Between Parties

In current system, characters can form active political groups and then completely avoid the consequences of their actions, which is entirely unacceptable. It promotes cliques and the OOC separation of our player base, and furthers the problem of players who are too attached to their characters refusing to accept the consequences of their actions. In the reformed system, all political groups would need to have a defined classification like regions. With the upcoming forum restructure, now is the perfect time to integrate this into our server. These classifications would be Full Consent and Partial Consent, like regions.

In a Full Consent faction, the players of that faction are permitted to engage in international politics, including but not limited to wars, alliances, trade (of money, trade goods, land, people), etc. The actions they take while performing these actions reflect consent back onto their faction, meaning that the faction head takes responsibility for the actions of his or her players and must respond to conflicts that his players initiate. Kingdoms or other feudal entities above the individual house level MUST be Full Consent factions. Military orders MUST be Full Consent factions. Any other groups with a standing or levied army MUST be Full Consent factions.

In a Partial Consent faction, the head of that faction are not permitted to engage in international politics without the understanding that doing so results in their faction being responsible for taking the consequences of their actions should they go awry. The actions an individual player takes do not reflect consent back onto their faction, meaning that only the player takes responsibility for his or her actions and must respond to their own conflicts individually. Should their faction respond to these conflicts, they acknowledge that they have become a Full Consent faction until the time that the conflict is completely resolved. Individual houses, parties of friends or mutually aligned individuals, and non-military orders are permitted to act as Partial Consent factions. Partial Consent factions ARE NOT permitted to have a standing or levied army, but players within the faction are permitted to be armed.
 

French Roast

Lord of Altera
Legend
French_Roast
French_Roast
Legend
#12
Tbh I actually like this. There’d be more nuance that would have to be commented on when it comes to conflicts between regions/factions and attacks on said regions/factions but all in all this is good
 

Immerael

The Shadow Admín
Staff member
#16
This....was far better then I expected. Especially like the bit that allows for characters to engage in player vs server events without suddenly becoming a full PvP target.
 

Solus

Solzilla
Staff member
Server Owner
#18
There’s been little discussion so far since I’ve my active team spread a bit thin in their work. We’ve also gone through a reform that had consent be more specific, and coming to a fair descision took quite a while.

I know it has its faults, but I’m only inclined to relook at consent if players find it difficult to understand or rp with it. I’ll have the others read, though and see if someone can respond.
 

HogoShi_Kitsune

Lord of Altera
Legend
HogoShi_Kitsune
HogoShi_Kitsune
Legend
#19
I'm excited to see if this actually goes anywhere. The consent system is sort of a mess, considering we have a consent system and a revival system. I think Cap's suggestion allows them to work about as well together as they can. But with the current system, players act as described or generally don't care about their actions because they know they can just "come back."

With the proposed system here, I think it strikes a good balance between fair and practical, especially with the revival system in place. I'm definitely all for seeing this system or a similar system replace the current one.

Another option is dropping consent altogether and just letting players work it out among themselves (if you go attacking someone in a town, then surely the town's guard has something to say about it. And if you're in the wilderness, well there's nobody out to save you). The only "consent system" in this case would be RDM rules and metagaming rules. This is the system I have always operated on for my characters, i.e. I have forfeited any and all protections granted by the consent system. I operate under the assumption that by coming online, my characters may face injury, dismemberment, or death. I don't believe this system will cause any sort of increase in IC PVP - most characters on the server seem disinclined to participate in that anyways, if they can avoid it. And the violent players don't seem to be stopping themselves because of some OOC consent rule. Rather, I do believe people will continue to operate in much the same way as they do today, and it may even encourage players to start small raider bands and other such groups moreso than they do now. I've had a lot of fun working with a group Hyliade got set up, and I got to see my character get hurt! It's definitely something I would like to see more of happening around HW. After all, we pride ourselves on player-driven events, and while weddings and parties are fun, a few of the more violent events (unrelated to the campaign) is something we could use a lot more of.

// end wall