[RoboCat]

Hi. So before I throw some suggestions for it I want to say that I was really satisfied with the responses. It really feels like the situations and suggestions to help mitigate the displeasure in dealing with them can be treated like a coin. The middle area seems really tough to properly place things on, but with both sides of this idea of player on player conflict can really put too much in people's hands. That said, there's some stuff I feel like could also be worked on in this draft, not in the forms of what's already stated though. I'll post that after.

I wouldn't really call this side of the things too deep, but there's nothing set in the case of a person who actually manages to escape the person they're fighting mechanically in battle. I can't even begin to think on how that might work out, but I do think it'll have to be something that gets covered in the topic.

One thing that caught my eye was Shujin's post. I do think player-owned areas should be in a sense treated like Law's end to the discretion of the owner ofcourse. While yeah that might keep some players out of some specific player formed areas out of some idea of fear, I think it'd really drive the point home about the cheesy 'antagonists' that take every crumb they can use without consideration for the people they're antagonizing. I normally play on other byond games and this sort-of goes back to the coin thing. In most cases, roleplaying games are just balls to the wall in one direction or the other, either nobody dies and everyone skips around happily with no conflict or there's no representation or real consideration for that part of a system at-all outside of stuff like balancing combat abilities.

That said, reading through the ideas and whatnot made me think that imposing a limitation on a given individual's ability to deny the result of an IC conflict would make their choice to do that or not do that mean more and eventually bottleneck a person who's into cheesing their way through villainy or some comeuppance. Eventually, they'd either have to double down and not play that character or put themselves at risk.
 
(v What i mentioned at the end of that opening statement v)
I also kind-of feel like if there was going to be a specified time space where two parties in a conflict, it'd have to be really strict on who would have rights to being somewhere based on the results of the situation that caused the conflict-cooldown to begin with. The idea of the Rule Of Avoidance is the only one of the general ideas that I'd have a big problem with, mostly because it removes some idea of player agency and might make would-be organic conflicts deflate unorganically.