[Egil]

And regardless of what solution is taken, it's not as simple as to just change the rules. You should work to change how the players handle these situations themselves too, otherwise we're just going to have a bunch of rule breakers.

My experience with talking to people who say 'no' to every kill/abduction/maim/etc attempt, regardless of how valid those attempts are, have always ended with 'it's my character, I can decide their fate'. There's no compromise with these sorts of players. The solution that is most commonly given to me when I bring this up is 'Just do not RP with people do are like that' or, simply, 'Do not RP with bad roleplayers'. I personally feel that that is excessive and an unnecessarily shitty attitude to take when it comes to public roleplay, especially when it isn't just one or two people who have this stance. It's a significant portion of the community.

I think that combining our solutions- a change in the hard rule as well as better moderation of situations/better cooperation amongst players- would achieve what I am aiming for.

The main reason the rule exists is to prevent abuse cases. It's not there to protect anyone from reprisal for things they've done, but we all know if it weren't there, character death would be handed out by fellow PCs too liberally.

I heard that that was a big issue with SL1 and safe zones, and I certainly do not want everyone to be in fear for their character's fate when they aren't doing anything that would warrant something bad happening to their character. I believe that the issue of people hiding behind your hard rule to be immortal and invincible regardless of what they say/do can be alleviated without bringing SL1's issues into SL2.

Ideally this sort of thing should be handled maturely between people, because that's what good RP is all about. Making it more automated would be difficult especially when we consider the fact that sometimes the results of battles are decided by things it shouldn't be, for example, undiscovered bugs, etc.

Sure.

I have more thoughts on this, but I can't really make a big long post at the moment, so I'll just say I am open to the possibility of this sort of 'aggressor/revenge' RP more approachable through GMs, if it's desired.

Well, there was a situation today where a GM (rightfully) sided with those perpetrating an act of violence against another player, so change is already happening. At this point in time, however, death allowances are still a major issue that requires a solution.

... As well, for casuallers? There should be some 'safe zones' even casualers enjoy. In these safe-zones, you are not allowed to kill, maim, steal, kidnap or otherwise antagonize someone beyond KO without their or GM consent...

I never played SL1, but from how it was described to me, this solution is very reminiscent of it. I don't know if the community would be on board with this, and I'm personally in the grey about 'safe zones'. To me, tragedy can strike anywhere at anytime as long as it is within reason (ie not killing a character that just made). That's why I feel that regulations should be applied to the reasons why an action is being done, and not where an action is taking place.

Otherwise, you'll just have people never leaving safe zones.