Fight Systems

[Lalani]

Alrighty please don't shoot the messenger. There has been some unrest considering our new combat rules. There are members that really liked and prefer to fight with the previous free-range style of fighting. They would rather be able to choose how they fight and who the victor is though OOC means and are displeased with the new combat rules. It was suggested that they just continue to fight the way they do and predetermine the winners but the problem arises if they are challenged by another wolf who wants to use the combat system. They can't just refuse based on the fact that they just don't want to fight.

Other members like the new rules and prefer to have a stricter system to follow, especially in those cases where they can't come to an agreement on a victor and would rather play it out and see who wins or with wolves who are more evenly matched.

Obviously we can't have people running around using different systems willy-nilly because there would be a block between players. If one person uses the free-range system and one uses the combat rules, how do you come up with a victor?

This was the compromise that came up. The challenger has to use the challengee's system. Either free-range or combat rules. For ex: I really wanted Lalani to fight Zitao. I like to use combat rules, but Tao likes to use the free-range method. If I insisted on Lalani fighting Zitao, then I would have to use the free-range method. On the other hand, if Zitao seriously wanted to fight Lalani, then Tao would have to use the combat rules.

[Deleted]

I second!
That way, those who prefer free fighting wont feel trapped, and those who like the judge based fighting have structure and rules to go off of.
Everyone is happy.

[Deleted]

Sup. The new combat rules are if you want to opt for mediation only - they do not replace the old style of combat as some people have assumed.

However, anyone who outwardly rejects combat mediation will be unable to have a wolf of a high rank, as it is unfair to have an alpha/beta/lead character who is invulnerable to rank challenges.

Again, the combat mediation is only if you need mediating. You're perfectly welcome to decide the outcome of the fight yourselves and continue with the old style - but if your wolf is intentionally antagonistic and you refuse to participate in a fight when challenged, then eventually many people will get frustrated with your role playing style. The choice is yours.

Mediation was put in place to keep bully wolves from being invincible - not because we are treating you like children or we expect you to be incapable of resolving things civilly.

[Lalani]

Okay. That was me laying out the argument, this is my point of view. I like the rules and I think it's perfectly fine to decide a victor, IF one can be decided. The system should come into play if there is a real conflict, as in when a victor can't be decided by the persons involved. I don't think it's fair to have a high ranking wolf if you can't accept that there will be rank challenges. Those would be the hardest to choose a victor for. The lower wolf wants the alpha position and the alpha wants to keep the position. Who wins? USE THE SYSTEM. It's the only way to solve an actually conflict. If a winner can be determined OOC, wonderful. Ignore the system. Easy as pie. (Agreeing with Zen)

[Deleted]

I have no problem with the system, I just think that those who don't want to use it shouldn't have to use it. The whole challenge thing, while perhaps more realistic, isn't exactly fair to those who worked hard to make a pack and were kind enough to accept you into said pack.

It's not about being 'invincible', its about not having to worry about others taking what some of us worked so hard on, and on the judgement of how well you write. I find that more unfair than a high ranking wolf enjoying her/his pack in peace for an extended period of time.

This new style also doesn't count factors such as allies. Lets say a wolf challenged an alpha for his pack. Who's to say the pack wont also fight back? If we are being realistic, we would have to include a lot more diversity and factors, which would be too time consuming and too up in the air to pinpoint a winner. 

[Lalani]

I have also wondered about allies, but other than that, I like the combat rules.

[Deleted]

Allies are something that were considered, but I removed that aspect of combat as it made it too convoluted and needlessly difficult to judge - but you are both right in saying that it would be an important part of combat, realistically speaking. For practicality's sake, there is no way to use these rules for multiple wolves fighting alongside each other (unless they were one x one battles happening concurrently), which is why this mediation is most useful for mano-a-mano challenges (like rank, or disputes of that nature).

And I wouldn't fret over the rank challenges too much - a random wolf can't just come along and challenge your wolf out of the blue (which would be outrageously unfair). There is a post count required to challenge for any rank, and it is a fairly high count at that, which means that all intentions of challenging for a rank would have been fully played out IC at that point, and likely been discussed OOC as a plot device - not just a random and malicious takeover. 

I've edited the mediation rules to fully state that you can still opt to use the old combat style, so that no one feels restricted or trapped by the new rules.

[Lalani]

Since this came up, I think it's best to ask questions about the fight system. I didn't understand the post count part. What do they mean exactly. What wasn't sure what they were.

[Deleted]

It means that in order to issue a particular challenge (or do a certain amount of damage) your character's account has to reach the minimum post count number for the type challenge that you want to incur.

It justs ensures that a new character can't be created and immediately go round challenging wolves willy-nilly. Their player must have a certain level of investment in that character to actually take the challenge and combat seriously, and having a minimum post count requirement makes that clear. The higher the stakes of a challenge, the higher the post count you need (it's also an incentive to post more, if you're wanting to issue a specific challenge in the future).