PK / Value of Life Rule Discussion

[MasterChief]

I know this has been discussed at length in other threads, but what I'm trying to do here is come up with a legitimate system that ends with a compromise regarding PK's and value of a person's life. A player's value of their own life doesn't seem to have any sort of bearing on behavior in most illegal RP when you look at situations with gun fights, gang disputes, shootouts with Police, evasions, driving recklessly, etc. Why? The end result is a PK that is ultimately temporary and players OOC are aware they will just be able to /acceptdeath and start right back up again with zero consequence besides losing their items. So, in a gang shootout, players have no real value of life because a PK is just a PK. They forget it ever happened and go on about their day.

 

Now just to note, I am not in support of getting rid of PK's in favor of CK's. I believe both of these tools have their uses in a role play server and as such function well here (CK application notably). I don't feel this server is hardcore enough to warrant just using a CK system. I do believe that there should be a split in the PK rules to allow for a "Value of Life" addition which compromises with both legal and illegal role players. The current rules discuss role playing fear, but they don't specify that there should be a value for one's life requirement. Here's where I'm going with this:

 

• Scenario A: I'm an innocent bystander riding my bike through gang territory. A gang shootout happens and I end up getting killed in the crossfire. Nothing really happens besides items lost. This is not a situation where fear RP occurred because it was basically collateral damage. This is a standard PK, through which current rules apply just fine.
• Scenario B: I am a gang member who has initiated the shootout in Scenario A. I have pulled my weapon and started shooting at other gang members over a territorial/gang dispute. Other gang members in turn, start pulling their weapons and shooting back rather than running for cover in fear of losing their lives. At this point, these players have disregarded a value of life rule in favor of engaging in a shootout rather than running for cover and getting away from imminent danger.

 

Scenario B is where I'd like modified PK rules put in place for violation of a value of life rule. People could argue that shooting back was for the reason of  fear for their lives, but I could argue that running for cover and preserving their lives would be the appropriate reaction if they didn't want to die. Choosing to engage in the shootout is a blatant disregard for their lives. I believe a PK is still the right thing to do, but I think there should be more harsh consequences involved for this specific scenario where there was a disregard for value of life. Here is where I feel there should be a middle ground compromise between a normal PK (server desync, bug, error, accidental shooting, & a number of other situations) versus a PK that involves a disregard for value of life. What those consequences are? I'm not quite sure. That's why I want a discussion about it. I believe there should be way more thought put into one's actions before deciding to act in a manner that would jeopardize their life. The "Value of Life" rule should specifically state that one should always value their life and if that value is disregarded, harsher punishments should be put into place.

 

Discuss. 

Edited July 13, 2019 by Kestalas

[aldo]

Broo I completely agree with thiss, support!

[MasterChief]

9 minutes ago, aldo said:

Broo I completely agree with thiss, support!

What kind of suggestions would you offer for the consequences for a Value of Life PK? I'm hoping to get enough discussion to formulate a few concise ideas and then put this in as a proper game/rule suggestion.

Edited July 13, 2019 by Kestalas

[aldo]

Just now, Kestalas said:

What kind of suggestions would you offer for the consequences for a Value of Life PK? I'm hoping to get enough discussion to formulate some concise ideas and then put this in as a proper game/rule suggestion.

I’m trying to figure that out too man but even if someone is shot in a crossfire, I believe that they should have to RP an injury after accepting death.

[MasterChief]

Just now, aldo said:

I’m trying to figure that out too man but even if someone is shot in a crossfire, I believe that they should have to RP an injury after accepting death.

Oh of course. I believe everything should still apply in-character even in Scenario A. If you've been shot, even after going to a hospital, there should be some ramifications to deal with IC'ly. Gunshot wounds/stab wounds/broken bones/etc don't heal instantly. Just trying to see how someone should be punished accordingly in Scenario B to properly show that a Value of Life PK is more serious, as they disregarded their personal safety. 

[aldo]

4 minutes ago, Kestalas said:

Oh of course. I believe everything should still apply in-character even in Scenario A. If you've been shot, even after going to a hospital, there should be some ramifications to deal with IC'ly. Gunshot wounds/stab wounds/broken bones/etc don't heal instantly. Just trying to see how someone should be punished accordingly in Scenario B to properly show that a Value of Life PK is more serious, as they disregarded their personal safety. 

Agreed, hopefully when hospitals are actually added they could get held in hospital, similar to jail or something?

[MasterChief]

1 minute ago, aldo said:

Agreed, hopefully when hospitals are actually added they could get held in hospital, similar to jail or something?

Possibly. The problem lies in that this situation requires Admin intervention (most likely after a report is filed). So the punishment would come later on. Maybe this could be applied though, to where they are confined to the Hospital for a particular amount of time instead of jail. I feel players should lose something else though, maybe a % of their money (like a fine). Just trying to see how that could be applied in-character and not seem like an OOC punishment. I think players should have a real fear of getting PK'd this way. Something has to be at stake that players don't want to lose each time.

[aldo]

2 minutes ago, Kestalas said:

Possibly. The problem lies in that this situation requires Admin intervention (most likely after a report is filed). So the punishment would come later on. Maybe this could be applied though, to where they are confined to the Hospital for a particular amount of time instead of jail. I feel players should lose something else though, maybe a % of their money (like a fine). Just trying to see how that could be applied in-character and not seem like an OOC punishment. I think players should have a real fear of getting PK'd this way. Something has to be at stake that players don't want to lose each time.

Yeahhh, for treatment or something which is similar to nopixel. I suppose losing a gun is a lot already though however when you kill someone and don’t get anything from it and the other person doesn’t lose anything it feels really meaningless. It seems that people just kill and then brag about it OOCly or something.

 

I just wish there were less killings.

Edited July 13, 2019 by aldo

[SaintBatemanofWallStreet]

51 minutes ago, Kestalas said:

Scenario B is where I'd like modified PK rules put in place for violation of a value of life rule. People could argue that shooting back was for the reason of  fear for their lives, but I could argue that running for cover and preserving their lives would be the appropriate reaction if they didn't want to die. Choosing to engage in the shootout is a blatant disregard for their lives. I believe a PK is still the right thing to do, but I think there should be more harsh consequences involved for this specific scenario where there was a disregard for value of life. Here is where I feel there should be a middle ground compromise between a normal PK (server desync, bug, error, accidental shooting, & a number of other situations) versus a PK that involves a disregard for value of life. What those consequences are? I'm not quite sure. That's why I want a discussion about it. I believe there should be way more thought put into one's actions before deciding to act in a manner that would jeopardize their life. The "Value of Life" rule should specifically state that one should always value their life and if that value is disregarded, harsher punishments should be put into place.

Here is the flaw. If you pull a gun on someone in a robbery and they book it, I guarantee that you're saying they didn't RP fear. But in your scenario, if they do exactly that, you're saying they're RPing fear.

To be honest the "fear stipulation" can't really be put into rules other than very broadly and let the admin handling the situation make a judgement call.
Your argument leads to a "whoever pulls first wins" fostering, and that's not necessarily correct either.

I've been involved in robberies on both sides of the law here. Here's where it gets dicey, The whole part of patting someone down while holding a gun on them. Attention is split, and people have the chance to make their move. However if that gets done on this server, the robbing party is usually pretty quick to cry fowl because they have a gun and there is no possible way that someone could surprise them because they're the best criminal ever and can do nine things at once. Nevermind the fact the person they're robbing may be a veteran, self defense coach or coached, etc. It doesn't matter. The inverse effect to that is the person who is being robbed is all of the sudden RPing that they're John Wick. RPing fear is worded the way it is for a reason. It's there so when the situation comes on, the parties have an option to explain their backstories and how or why unfolded events may have unfolded the way they did.

But that's never how things go. Because the second a scenario comes up where someone is going to take a loss, they want to cry bullshit about characters they probably know nothing about.

 

22 minutes ago, Kestalas said:

I believe everything should still apply in-character even in Scenario A. If you've been shot, even after going to a hospital, there should be some ramifications to deal with IC'ly. Gunshot wounds/stab wounds/broken bones/etc don't heal instantly. Just trying to see how someone should be punished accordingly in Scenario B to properly show that a Value of Life PK is more serious, as they disregarded their personal safety. 

Here is the thing here, if you die in a scenario, you lose all memory of the scenario. You shouldn't RP injuries in an event you were killed in if you have to act as if nothing happened. If you die, you die. Scenario over. If you're wounded and not RPing your injuries, that's an issue that needs to be reported. Making someone sit something out mechanically is not the way to handle that.

[aldo]

40 minutes ago, SaintBatemanofWallStreet said:

Here is the flaw. If you pull a gun on someone in a robbery and they book it, I guarantee that you're saying they didn't RP fear. But in your scenario, if they do exactly that, you're saying they're RPing fear.

To be honest the "fear stipulation" can't really be put into rules other than very broadly and let the admin handling the situation make a judgement call.
Your argument leads to a "whoever pulls first wins" fostering, and that's not necessarily correct either.

I've been involved in robberies on both sides of the law here. Here's where it gets dicey, The whole part of patting someone down while holding a gun on them. Attention is split, and people have the chance to make their move. However if that gets done on this server, the robbing party is usually pretty quick to cry fowl because they have a gun and there is no possible way that someone could surprise them because they're the best criminal ever and can do nine things at once. Nevermind the fact the person they're robbing may be a veteran, self defense coach or coached, etc. It doesn't matter. The inverse effect to that is the person who is being robbed is all of the sudden RPing that they're John Wick. RPing fear is worded the way it is for a reason. It's there so when the situation comes on, the parties have an option to explain their backstories and how or why unfolded events may have unfolded the way they did.

But that's never how things go. Because the second a scenario comes up where someone is going to take a loss, they want to cry bullshit about characters they probably know nothing about.

 

Here is the thing here, if you die in a scenario, you lose all memory of the scenario. You shouldn't RP injuries in an event you were killed in if you have to act as if nothing happened. If you die, you die. Scenario over. If you're wounded and not RPing your injuries, that's an issue that needs to be reported. Making someone sit something out mechanically is not the way to handle that.

But when you get PK’d, you get sent to the hospital... so you would have to rp injuries.