Jump to content

Standing Your Ground w/ the gun draw anims, when is it fair to do it?


liq

Recommended Posts

Hi. I don't post topics often and I don't care too often either but this one seems prevalent depending on who you talk to. It's been a thing for a while and it's usually up to the administrator you get to deal with when you report someone or you make. 

 

In the typical armed/at gunpoint robbery scenario, when is standing your ground reasonable ans when isn't it? A wallet and some cash isn't worth dying over, but more often than not, someone with a gun (or a lot of guns mid trabsport, or whatever) may fight back if the opportunity comes around. When is it fair to draw back on someone? 

 

The context I'm asking for specifically directs to the gun draw animation. Since the animation now exists, it feels like it's up to the shooter to be alert and shoot when the anim does its thing, but that's considered unfair on others by some. It's the usual dilemma between some thinking that for as long as your character is being robbed, they're a deer in the headlights and should comply, and some thinking that for as long as you have the means (e.g. are armed), it's OK to stand your ground. 

 

That being said, I'm curious to see what the people think about pulling a gun in the typical situation where you're actively being robbed at a moment of opportunity (e.g. you may be in a car, the robber drops aim but not because they're typing OOC but because of actual emotes, etc.). Is it unfair on the robber or is it fair game given the gun draw anims denote enough intention and it's up to both parties to shoot or not shoot?

 

P.S. This has nothing to do with taking an L and carrying on with your day or with the typical Itsumi Takumi PF/CCW welding folks. It specifically has to do with people who role-play characters who'd have reason(s) to stand their ground and the means to as well, whatever those reasons may be. Not looking for the fairness in role-play crusaders but for whether or not the existence of the gun draw anims play a part in this.

 

/discuss. 

Edited by liq
Link to comment
  • liq changed the title to Standing Your Ground w/ the gun draw anims, when is it fair to do it?

It all depends on the scenario, as there's countless variables to determine whether it's powergaming, lack of fear RP, or reasonable. One has to weigh the advantages of the suspect(s) and the victim(s). Are the victims out-gunned? Are the victims trained in withdrawing and shooting the firearm, effectively? Would the character risk their lives over cash in a wallet? It all depends on the backstory and development of both the victim(s) and the suspect(s), alongside with the situation/scene.

Edited by DLimit
Link to comment

It’s America, though the point of the whole fear thing and not pulling the gun has to do with gamification. It’s more that it’s there to prevent people from just mindlessly suiciding or blasting their way out of things. Oh don’t like being [insert encounter] just pull your gun and shoot. You can still do this, the way it’s set up now just requires you to be able to justify it and think it through. 

Link to comment

The server needs to decide whether it wants emote fighting or script fighting to be what rules character decisions. Because the following are both true and it makes no sense.

 

1. If a guy holds me at gunpoint I am supposed to pee my pants and do everything he says.

 

2. If a guy holds me at  gunpoint and STARTS SHOOTING script wise, I am allowed to take out my gun and, with a little bit of luck, I can even win the fight.

 

Point 1 and 2 contradict each other. 

Edited by pateuvasiliu
Link to comment
3 hours ago, liq said:

In the typical armed/at gunpoint robbery scenario, when is standing your ground reasonable ans when isn't it? A wallet and some cash isn't worth dying over, but more often than not, someone with a gun (or a lot of guns mid trabsport, or whatever) may fight back if the opportunity comes around. When is it fair to draw back on someone?

 

2 hours ago, eTaylor said:

the point of the whole fear thing and not pulling the gun has to do with gamification.

 

Summed up well on fear rp.

This is one of the major issues (to interpret situationally as staff member) within our rule design:

To define whether I should roleplay fear or not, I should ideally have tactically awareness of the situation ooc, so to be able to let my character react accordingly.

 

Following this logic- which is not explicitly outlined in the rules, but the metagame around "fear rp", and thus often applied-, the question whether I have to roleplay fear solely depends on my character's chance of survival, alleging I as the player am able to tell this precicely.

 

Needless to mention: It's fairly easy to end up in a situation (like being robbed) where you cannot be totally sure what action of yours might have which consequence.

And this is where the general appliability of "fear rp" meets its borders- happens quite often naturally.

 

tl;dr,

The whole concept of "fear rp" is ultimately impossible to pack in full guidelines, for aforementioned reasons - i.e. demanding tactical awareness from players to react properly in ic stress situations- typically ends up in case-by-case-debates ("But my char X").

 

3 hours ago, liq said:

P.S. This has nothing to do with taking an L and carrying on with your day

It should not in theory, but it has in our game design:

The problem is that if you take the L, you're immediately suspected of not having properly roleplayed fear (as if you had roleplayed fear you'd have surrendered, not fought, so the false pattern of thought).

This brings back to issue with tactical awareness mentioned before- not only is it required from a player to reflect irrational actions (I'd agree on this approach even as else we'd have even more madmen), but more problematic, it expects players to be right about this (i.e. not fight back if they have no chance to win).

 

Taking this in account, it has to do a lot with the "taking the L" as some people- NOT the rules, mind you, but we have discretion too - define situations where you're losing as situations where you should have roleplayed fear instead to even consider fighting back.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, pateuvasiliu said:

If a guy holds me at gunpoint I am supposed to pee my pants and do everything he says.


This is a terrible misconception, you don’t have to shit yourself. You just can’t act in gross carelessness towards the well-being of your character.  There’s an argument to be made here and there, but ultimately it’s not about that. It’s about having a policy to prevent people from going full John Wayne, because that’s exactly what happens when you don’t have stuff like this in place.
 

Of course you can stand your ground but you’ll have to be thorough about it, think it through and be adaptive and quick on your feet. Bad examples that have been in the report section range from people just gunning down black characters because they walked towards them, to people just outright pulling guns on cops and others to avoid roleplay they don’t like. 

Link to comment

It's, again, a recurring problem that comes from the poor understanding of how fear/self-defense work, from the people back in the early 2010s who wrote the "fear RP" rules for the first SAMP servers. For some reason, those rules were copied and pasted on GTA V servers, never improved, and now we're stuck in situations where someone can be banned for not pissing their pants and crying, EVEN THOUGH their character have good reasons to retaliate. 

 

Apart from the fact that fear takes many forms (something I mentioned here, shamelessly promoting my own post 😛 ), and can lead untrained people to do VERY stupid stuff... the fact is that the people who wrote those old fear RP rules don't seem to have ever taken a self-defense class ever. Stuff like the failure drill (triple tap) may look like "John Wayne movie stuff" to a less documented person, but in reality it's one of the most often taught techniques, to get rid of someone at close quarters. :x  

 

 

Those aren't things everyone and their moms know of course. But before banning/ajailing someone for "lack of fear RP", it would be nice to at least check why they retaliated in the first place. Did their character react stupidly because of fear? Did they not see the 2 other dudes behind and thought they were 1v1? Did they actually take firearms handling classes and believed they could handle it? etc. 

 

Edited by Topinambour
  • Applaud 1
Link to comment
19 minutes ago, radreaper100 said:

I'd rather take my chances if I'm armed as opposed to be kidnapped. Who in their right mind wants to be fucking kidnapped?

I've got to agree with this. There's a statistic that chances of survival decrease a crazy amount if your kidnapper/robber removes you from a public area. People are encouraged to scream, run and generally make us much commotion as they can to draw attention to themselves - something I can imagine would land you with a fat ajail if attempted here.

 

The mindset of being held at gunpoint (I say held at gunpoint loosely, most of the time robberies on this server have the robber aiming in all sorts of directions rather than focusing on their victim) therefore you must submit to everything they say is archaic. Admins should actually look into the situation, including what sort of characters the robber and victim are.

Link to comment
  • Wuhtah locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...