[Jupiter_Storm]

I am very excited about the First Draft of this system. The way that it's been constructed as well as subtle points such as - 'If the conflict is started in town or other area where NPCs are likely to be, this rule does not apply.' - really demonstrates that Devourer of Souls is really keeping in touch with the Common Issues presented by a range of parties who still want to see active involvement from the (Factional) Guard, as well as those who would like to see more freedom for adventurers to handle conflict themselves.

So many nitpicky points that I otherwise would have had are very clearly and repeatedly addressed by the oldest rule of thumb in the book - both interacting parties are the ones ultimately in control of how the roleplay pans out.

'Consent cannot be forced in conflict between two player characters. -- If both players agree to RP the scenario instead of PVP, that is perfectly acceptable -- If all participants agree to waive this rule, they may do so. -- All parties should apply basic logic, however.'

What this means for the First Draft of this rule-set is that none of these rules are mandatory if both parties agree to play a different way. You have to understand that the purpose of these rules is not to stifle Roleplay, but instead to provide players (and more importantly, Staff) a clear base-line to fall back upon if both sides have a different idea of how the conflict should be resolved.

Again, this proves that Devourer of Souls is listening and taking steps to act upon issues that are frequently raised by the community.

I am especially happy to see the new rules for Immortal characters and Suicide - both for the reason that it has, in the past, led to some very cheesy and nonsensical roleplay AND because it detracts from the sheer seriousness of such an act (for characters, and IRL). Let's not forget that we all know at least one person who's had those kind of thoughts, and considering the younger audience of this game I absolutely agree that we should not hand-wave suicide as a 'way to escape consequences', REGARDLESS of whether it is just 'roleplay' or not.

The only change I would personally like to see to this rule-set is to support the motion for making Maiming (Level 3) require explicit consent. As Fern has stated, for some characters this is a very life-changing experience that can occasionally make a character 'feel' unplayable - or otherwise 'dead'. However, there is a light at the end of the tunnel - Such as the approval for Limb Regrowth during rituals performed by certain characters.

It's important to note that these 'additional' levels of consent already stack on top of the very first 'initial' consent a character gives by responding to, and interacting with the antagonist in question.

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

As a final point, I would like to address the two gentle-folk above.

I understand that in the real-world, conflict is not avoidable as a concept - however this is a game, played by a community and these rules are designed for a broader spread of individuals who play it for very different reasons. If you force a character into an interaction they do not want to do, for which they are not required to give consent, the only person who is going to be enjoying that encounter is you. At which point it's essentially the same as interacting with an NPC, because you will not obtain satisfying responses or active, interested involvement from the other party.

The consent rule does not necessary imply that you can simply be ignored with an LOOC: 'Sorry don't feel like it' - Consider this. You want to make a name for yourself as an Antagonist, and these same rules (as well as notable changes that have been proposed for the Factional Guard) enable adventurers to resolve issues rather than the authorities - outside of town environments. If a player does not give consent to be attacked, why not continue the roleplay and see if they are willing to be intimidated into fleeing from you (and perhaps telling someone about you)? This sets an ideal precedent for further narrative development with your 'Nemesis(es)' who WILL be interested in multiple scenes of conflict.

That, to me, is a far more satisfying outcome than robbing some poor person who isn't keen on fighting and then being forgotten.