[Radioaction]

I would like to start off by saying one thing.

It appears my superiority has caused some controversy.

Either way, this little demon on my shoulder keeps jabbing me with a stick and telling me to be involved and give my opinion. However, a lot of people disliked my opinion due to it being 'roasting' and not 'helping. So, I'll give it my best shot to assist.

First off, these conflict rules seem to be making SL2 more like a daycare for toddlers than before. I'll explain why.

I understand this a draft, but there's some things that I feel should be stomped into the dirt immediately.

1. Consent cannot be forced in conflict between two player characters. Furthermore, attempts to force or coerce someone into giving consent for something they do not want to do is not allowed. Do not harass them OOC - simply accept it and continue roleplaying, or move on.
   

In my opinion, this appears to be outright a pure mistake. According to my understanding, this prevents anyone from "dealing" with a player who insists on harassing others ICly. Ontop of this in a loophole nitpicking style, this also means that a player can "refuse" a fight from the Guards as well.. Of course, simply nitpicking that part. However.

The main complaint is that,

If I were to walk into a bar and start calling everyone a bunch of idiots, and outright being an ass.

Someone tries to fight me, I could by all means just go, "No."

At first, I believed this merely meant consenting to the danger level. However, after reviewing the example of what "consent" implied,

• The aggressor may give consent to robbery by giving a clear IC implication that they are intending to rob the other party. For example; Masked Man flourishes his dagger threateningly, flashing in the moonlight. "Hand over your valuables."
  
  
• The victim may play along to let the aggressor know they are giving consent. For example, Unarmed Fighter smashes his fist into his palm, and then waves his fingers tauntingly. "Take them if you can!"
  
  
• The aggressor and the victim may use local OOC to clearly state that they are giving consent. It is also best to do this in the event that one party is refusing to give consent.
  

So, maybe I'm misunderstanding. But I feel like if I'm not, it's good to get that out of the way.

NEXT UP

1. To avoid never-ending cycles of revenge conflict, both parties must avoid interacting for at least 12 real-time hours following the resolution of the conflict.
   

All things considered, this just seems like it'll cause a lot more bad blood and boiling anger than it's worth. I can see what you're going for, but how do you decide to do this?

Say for example, these parties initiate this conflict in the arena. And we're assuming guards are not called for whatever reason.

Does the winner decide that the loser has to leave? Do they both have to leave? I personally believe it should be left up to the players calling the guards if the two parties continue to conflict and fight. Otherwise, forcing players to leave an area or avoid a person's presence for TWELVE real time hours is a bit ridiculous. What if the RP spot where everyone is, happens to be Cellsvich square? But they just conflicted, so one party is restricted from RP because their ex-opponent is there?

SUGGESTIONS

For the former, that's a very difficult topic. It always has been, but honestly?

Talk shit, get hit. You shouldn't be able to anger people then just laugh and get away with it. That'll piss a lot of people off, and overall makes an extremely toxic community. Trust me, I've been in a community that does that.

My best suggestion?
If a player refuses to consent, yet the aggressor wishes to continue. The conflict is considered level 1, and PVP-based.

That's my basic idea for it.

As for the avoidance rule, I'd suggest-
After the conflict, the losing party must leave the area. If they happen to come across their opponent again, oh well.

Because honestly, having an OOC-enforced restraining order that affects IC? That's a bit much. Like, imagine getting punished because you want to be in an RP spot but your opponent says "haha no". If it's that serious, just call the guards and sort them out. They need things to do anyway.. It's their job, my guy.

Now, sure. I may be expecting the worst out of these rules.
But that's because in all honesty, you're likely to get the worst.
And I want to nitpick, and patch the loopholes because the last thing I want to hear is different GMs giving different rulings.

Like one conflict being the same as another, but having two different outcomes because there was two different mindsets from two different GMs.
I, by all means, want to see SL2 be better. This is a good start. The ideas I didn't touch on in this post, I genuinely approve of. But I will not be getting on my knees and crawling to the gloryhole saying, "I love these ideas!". But, some of these are good for a first draft. . Also, I tried to be nicer than last time.

I might have missed some stuff, but I'm not gonna pull out my reading glasses and start analyzing every ounce. If I misinterpreted the actual idea? That means others can too. Until next time, where I get dragged out of the basement and held at gunpoint to type another Gamer Review.