What classes as "Poor Escalation" and more importantly, why?

[ChiefKid]

I think everything is fine as it is. If someone punches you? Punch back. If someone pulls a gun on you? Then you do have a reason to hunt them and kill them. It's all about equivalency.

[Barbie]

On 6/4/2022 at 3:41 PM, Mistery14 said:

There was also an apparent lack of information in the skinhead's /me, "/me sneaks [character] from behind" which, rightfully was interpreted as a "/me rushes." given the context. What this means is, that skinhead could have easily decided to end OP's character's life by throwing punches until they were in a downed state, looted them, and leave them for dead.

 

People are unpredictable. Yes, this is poor escalation in a normal world if it really stopped at one single punch, but at the same time, is it really surprising here? A sucker punch in GTA W almost always results in one party being downed, people don't want others to come back for them, so they use killing as an excuse to force people into a PK.

 

what… you can literally dodge punches all u have to do is fight + if someone kills u from a fight and loots u thats literally rulebreak u cant just shoot people to "prevent" shit that clearly would never happen just report if they break rules, like OP did

[Barbie]

Also perhaps don’t go to skinhead bars in Vespucci if you’re not a skinhead/don’t want ro run into skinheads. This topic is giving the same vibe as people who go to South Central with no means of protection/not knowing how to act there and act surprised when trouble comes to find them.

[Mistery14]

56 minutes ago, Barbie said:

 

what… you can literally dodge punches all u have to do is fight + if someone kills u from a fight and loots u thats literally rulebreak u cant just shoot people to "prevent" shit that clearly would never happen just report if they break rules, like OP did

 

Care to explain how the ability to dodge punches renders you able to somehow know that you're going to get punched from behind, especially when the person attacking you didn't even specify it in their /me that they were going to punch you?

 

It's kind of counter-intuitive to mention rulebreaking when you're suggesting that OP should've "just dodged the punches", which would have been metagaming if his character was unaware that he was going to be punched but the player might (i.e, the /me or 3rd person cam). The shooting is not about preventing getting hit, it's to prevent yourself from dying from an unprovoked, ongoing physical attack that you are unsure of the outcome of. It was wrong for OP to immediately shoot, but people need to stop crying about getting shot if they assault people.

 

You're legally armed, you're walking in the street minding your own business, someone shit talks you and you ignore them to not escalate the situation. They then sneak up behind you and punch you in the back of the head. Are you immediately going to stop and think about what you're going through? "Oh, okay, he punched me and didn't immediately shoot me in the back of the head, this must mean he's in for a square and equal, 1 on 1 spar! And his friend definitely isn't going to jump in, maybe I should man up and fight him with my bare fists!" Yeah no, you're going to take out your pistol just like everyone else because you're not sure in the heat of the moment.

 

TL;DR: You're suggesting that he should ignore the very tool he bought specifically to defend himself with. This wasn't a fight where they both mutually agreed to square out. It was a one-sided attack, as opposed to a brawl following an argument. Maybe OP is leaving some things out, but in either cases, if an attack is unprovoked, people should 100% be allowed to take out their self-defense weapons. Not everyone wants to resolve their problems with fists on the street.

Edited June 5, 2022 by Mistery14

[Plutonium]

3 hours ago, Barbie said:

Also perhaps don’t go to skinhead bars in Vespucci if you’re not a skinhead/don’t want ro run into skinheads. This topic is giving the same vibe as people who go to South Central with no means of protection/not knowing how to act there and act surprised when trouble comes to find them.

 

My character isn't not going to go to a bar because it's dangerous neither did he know it was a skinhead bar.

Neither was my character scared of the skinheads hence the actions leading up to this, this was a reaction to an action and would've happened to anybody who tried to punch him. Just because you're scared doesn't give you a OOCly acceptable reason to kill them.

[ChiefKid]

1 hour ago, Plutonium said:

 

My character isn't not going to go to a bar because it's dangerous neither did he know it was a skinhead bar.

Neither was my character scared of the skinheads hence the actions leading up to this, this was a reaction to an action and would've happened to anybody who tried to punch him. Just because you're scared doesn't give you a OOCly acceptable reason to kill them.

Quick question bro, you're saying that every character is different and it's foolish to expect them to all act the same way when confronted by someone in any way, correct? And that we should treat characters individually and not under some applied-to-everyone rule like the RoE and realistic escalation, right?

[Plutonium]

9 minutes ago, ChiefKid said:

Quick question bro, you're saying that every character is different and it's foolish to expect them to all act the same way when confronted by someone in any way, correct? And that we should treat characters individually and not under some applied-to-everyone rule like the RoE and realistic escalation, right?

 

The first one, yes. The second line, no.

Realistic Escalation isn't a rule, you can check. Even if there was a rule regarding escalation it wouldn't be realistic, it'd be restrictive.

Admins literally deal with this on a case to case basis, if you're a newer player with lower hours they will ban you for the exact same thing that somebody who has a 'seasoned' criminal character is permitted to do.

[ChiefKid]

10 minutes ago, Plutonium said:

 

The first one, yes. The second line, no.

Realistic Escalation isn't a rule, you can check. Even if there was a rule regarding escalation it wouldn't be realistic, it'd be restrictive.

Admins literally deal with this on a case to case basis, if you're a newer player with lower hours they will ban you for the exact same thing that somebody who has a 'seasoned' criminal character is permitted to do.

Got it, I agree with you. It's like they see a character that doesn't have a lot of hours logged and they think that the character was born ten hours ago for example. It's stupid.

[Barbie]

7 hours ago, Mistery14 said:

 

Care to explain how the ability to dodge punches renders you able to somehow know that you're going to get punched from behind, especially when the person attacking you didn't even specify it in their /me that they were going to punch you?

 

It's kind of counter-intuitive to mention rulebreaking when you're suggesting that OP should've "just dodged the punches", which would have been metagaming if his character was unaware that he was going to be punched but the player might (i.e, the /me or 3rd person cam). The shooting is not about preventing getting hit, it's to prevent yourself from dying from an unprovoked, ongoing physical attack that you are unsure of the outcome of. It was wrong for OP to immediately shoot, but people need to stop crying about getting shot if they assault people.

 

You're legally armed, you're walking in the street minding your own business, someone shit talks you and you ignore them to not escalate the situation. They then sneak up behind you and punch you in the back of the head. Are you immediately going to stop and think about what you're going through? "Oh, okay, he punched me and didn't immediately shoot me in the back of the head, this must mean he's in for a square and equal, 1 on 1 spar! And his friend definitely isn't going to jump in, maybe I should man up and fight him with my bare fists!" Yeah no, you're going to take out your pistol just like everyone else because you're not sure in the heat of the moment.

 

TL;DR: You're suggesting that he should ignore the very tool he bought specifically to defend himself with. This wasn't a fight where they both mutually agreed to square out. It was a one-sided attack, as opposed to a brawl following an argument. Maybe OP is leaving some things out, but in either cases, if an attack is unprovoked, people should 100% be allowed to take out their self-defense weapons. Not everyone wants to resolve their problems with fists on the street.

 

It's not metagaming to script fight after you get hit for the first time, especially if the person didn't provide any /me.  I was replying to  "A sucker punch in GTA W almost always results in one party being downed" and the part where you reached for the stars "that skinhead could have easily decided to end OP's character's life by throwing punches until they were in a downed state, looted them, and leave them for dead". My point was, if that was the case then fucking press left click too instead of pulling a gun and killing someone for a punch.

[Mistery14]

1 hour ago, Barbie said:

 

It's not metagaming to script fight after you get hit for the first time, especially if the person didn't provide any /me. 

 

 

This is completely correct and I agree. Script fighting someone once they've actually landed the punch isn't metagaming.

 

However, this was not at all what I interpreted from your earlier comment, to me it sounded like you were basically saying: "If someone is about to punch you in the back of your head, just dodge the punch." Which doesn't apply to all cases, including this one where the character was just not aware he was about to be punched.

 

What WOULD be metagaming would be to OOC read that someone is about to punch you while your character doesn't know IC, and to just spontaneously turn around to dodge the incoming scripted attack. It'd mean that the player used the meta information of the /me to block out an attack that their character isn't supposed to be aware of.

 

Quote

I was replying to  "A sucker punch in GTA W almost always results in one party being downed" and the part where you reached for the stars "that skinhead could have easily decided to end OP's character's life by throwing punches until they were in a downed state, looted them, and leave them for dead". My point was, if that was the case then fucking press left click too instead of pulling a gun and killing someone for a punch.

 

The above brings me to my next point:

 

I'm not going to use the "But it happens IRL!" argument, because while yes, killing someone and taking their belongings does happen IRL unfortunately, but this is not relevant to GTA W (Because people hate to see this argument), so I'm going to use the correct argument:

 

It happens in GTA World. A lot.

 

This means that it's a factor that the character themselves can consider when being attacked, and especially in the context of a rough neighborhood/spot. If someone sucker punches you, it's usually to catch you off guard and to bring you down, and chances of death or serious injury is very high, it's not to square it out fairly and be done with it. It's a vicious, unprovoked attack, and whoever falls victim to it, should rightfully so be able to make use of their defensive weapon, because they cannot possibly know the true intent behind the attack. - At its core, it doesn't matter whether or not the attacker wanted OP's belongings, it's the surprise of the attack that's a decisive factor of the outcome.

Edited June 6, 2022 by Mistery14