FEEDBACK | Kill Permissions Re-Evaluation

[hebwig]

I don't think keeping this OOC consented is better for SRP. Theres easy ways to make killing a character entirely realistic and rare. Forcing people to interact and have lore and having characters have actual good reasons for trying to kill someone, which can all be explained to an admin or lore-team member and they can decide if its a good idea to give you permission to fully kill their character.

If you don't do this then to be honest, not a lot of people are going to die authentically, RP is going to feel more staged and planned out, I mean no random person is just going to say "yes you can kill me"

Its going to get annoying not being able to further your RP with someone organically, and knowing that someone literally CANNOT die is just not good for the whole aspect of GangRP. Theres no real good reason to not allow staff to give permission to kill someone, give them proof that you've had multiple encounters with someone, give them your characters reasoning, and show them what they even did to want you to kill them. Its 100% needed for people to die off in GangRP, and its just not going to be as organic as it can be if you have to have someone agree. Most the people in GangRP aren't even on good terms, and most the people are also petty. This limits RP greatly. If you want to kill a character you have to be on good terms with them, and them knowing they're going to die and also them likely being your friend, the RP is going to be staged or feel very staged.

Personally, I only like this idea if NLR and lore-team / admins are able to give kill permissions on someone. If not, the cons outweigh the pros for me. I already don't like GangRP that much because of the lack of writing and lore, and much wont change if theres no NLR, I also hate how restricted GangRP feels, too many rules, and making it to where people have to consent to being killed just still doesn't really get rid of the restriction part for me, I cant be creative still.

The reason GangRP is how it is is because people don't like to lose unfairly, or in generally most the times. So to remove complaining and to remove stalling and to remove loopholes, you have to remove losing. But thats stupid, you can't remove losing with something like GangRP without it losing what its even made for, but you kinda can with NLR. People hate losing their character, they cant stand having to buy a new skin. So when someone is trying to kill you what do you do? You stall, you metagame, you loophole, anything to save your precious creation, you do /me dips because you want to get out of their ASAP so your bleedout timer doesn't fill. But with NLR you won't die entirely, you don't have to stall anymore and be annoying, you can actually put effort into the scene being created because you don't have to lose all your time put into a character, and in turn, more quality RP is generated and longer lasting characters are made all organically, and the lore for your character will develop come that situation too. Its better.

I feel like im missing something but idk

I've already explained several times throughout my replies why this is not an ideal solution, unfortunately enough. It would bring about more cons than pros, which is the opposite of what I am trying to achieve with the suggestion regarding OOC consent for killing permissions. My first reply to ImKana regards the idea of consulting lore team members and staff members and why it may be suitable for a community and staff team such as FantasyRP but not SchoolRP. It's a bit of a disheartening thing to say considering that acknowledges there is bias within our staff members and that there may be shreds of leniency depending on who is consulted about certain permissions (alongside lore team as well; granted, they are a lot smaller, so there is less of a chance to be faced with bias/leniency on an inane level). This will lead to arguments and eventually worsen the reputation of GangRP in spite of it likely having success in lowering the amount of permanent kills that take place on the server.

In reality, both the owner and a great majority of the staff team have been looking to lower the amount of kills that take place on the server to a great amount. Again, I'll stress the same point that I've stressed in nearly every reply: forced / permanent character death is not a fond circumstance in other roleplay communities, especially text-based ones. We're making it so that forced death won't occur (minus some instances where people spend what'll end up being months to remove the limb and appendages of a single character; but, that's so unlikely considering how long it would realistically take given the new major assault permissions that would be updated with this suggestion (and even then, people are not forced to kill off their characters)) and that all deaths will require a person who actually cares about the roleplay aspect of GangRP and not the mindless/meaningless kills that are nonsensical to their character's lore and the server's setting.

You can still LOSE in GangRP. You can lose LIMBS! You can get kidnapped for an entire SEVEN DAYS without interruption and experience roleplay unlike any other kind we've had on the server during this time. Guys, losing a limb and being kidnapped are not normal things. It requires you to roleplay out a reaction of someone literally severely traumatized; and, many overlook these daunting aspects of GangRP because they simply do not know how to roleplay it out and treat this part of the server as a win-or-lose paradigm. GangRP's reputation is faltering because there is such little regard for the roleplay aspect, even in spite of the fact that we are a roleplay server. This is what we should be promoting.

NLR would be a good concept and something that we had previously on the server, from 2016-2019. However, there were issues with constant character death of relentless and meaningless kinds (which is what we're trying to avoid by having this suggestion implemented) & issues with forced character death. Yes, the person can begin roleplaying as their character again, but they are forced to remove their entire existing lore that took place on the server. Imagine a character that's been around for 3+ years being NLR'd. It would no longer be fun (which is exactly what roleplay is supposed to be).

In addition to that, what if another character had close relations with a character that got NLR'd? That other character just has to void it all because that character got NLR'd? There are needless consequences to NLR and continuously frequent character death of lacking lore. It would not resolve any issues that we are trying to tackle with this implementation. I hope that makes sense and better elaborates on why it was removed in the past (as someone who played heavily during 2016-2019).

I've mentioned in my replies that "roleplay being staged" is not a bad thing at all and a poor misconception to possess. It's not staged as you are still writing something at the same pace another person is writing in live time (an example of something staged would be copy-and-pasted messages) & potentially blending new, unplanned circumstances into the midst of it. A good example of this (which I've already referenced) is when Prosthettics and I planned the sewer explosion event in May 2022 with the conclusion that Ironside Koji would presumably die — however, we did a few unplanned things while actually roleplaying that made it a whole lot more fun. In addition to that, we didn't plan our final messages (at least. . .I didn't; but it's still not a bad thing if anyone did) of the event where the actual stabbing and explosion happened. "Pre-planned" conclusions are still fun.

Think of events: they're all planned, but they're still fun to be involved in, right? It's counter-intuitive to say that roleplay being staged/scripted is going to be the result of this suggestion and then continue to partake in completely staged/scripted events (that actually DO involve copy-and-pasted messages). I'm trying to stress the point in that this isn't a bad thing. The best thing I can recommend is to try and see a positive within these negatives (or just read my other replies as I've already addressed this several times).

The restriction on GangRP and it feeling unenjoyable is completely understandable — that is another thing that this suggestion tackles. When we 1. make minor assault permissions automatic on everybody, being the only thing required is an IC motive 2. make major assault permissions tie together with kidnapping permissions and allow more freedoms with the kidnapping 3. make killing permissions a consent-based system (all three of these are going to be updates if this suggestion is implemented, by the way), we are eliminating a lot of the restrictions and overcomplication. I've already explained in previous replies of how the consent-based system for killing permissions, especially, gives you a ton of freedom that did not exist before, such as being able to consent on the length of said permissions. Read my other replies.

Arguing that removing complaining, stalling, and loopholes would remove losing (if that is what you're trying to say) is completely baseless. Characters are still able to have their limbs chopped off or get kidnapped for several days on end without escape. Characters are still able to get killed by police officers or BMD, or get arrested being that the risk of police interference would increase. Characters are now encouraged to plan intricate crimes to escape these consequences of arrests and KPD-involvement, hence the concept of them becoming the biggest risk. Correct me if that is not what you are trying to say; but, in all honesty, the benefits of this implementation are not to be overlooked. Thank you for your replies, though!! Having someone disagree in detail brings up challenges that we can address early-on in potentially implementing this new system and I am very grateful that you spent your time highlighting your concerns. Being able to speak up about these sorts of things are exactly the freedoms that we want to permit players of the server to have.

That is not the issue, I believe the issue is how common it is.

If you aren't changing how kidnapping and major assault works, then why would people treat it differently? If you aren't changing kidnapping or encouraging it in any way, then why would people start kidnapping?

The main part of this though is the "differing opinions", why give up at differing opinions, theres many ways to work around this. Having guidelines is an easy way, having an unofficial team of people that review this is an easy way, or in my opinion, the best way, have BMDs and yourself be the main ones to decide who gets character kills. Its not hard. Write a set of guidelines, talk to your BMDs on how you want things to be decided, and let them choose on what characters should die based on what you told them you want. And on the BMD applications, maybe add a section like "In your words, why should someone die?", this would be so easy, BMD focus on crime, and you choose people capable of being serious and people that can roleplay. Have admins be able to review a death if someone complains thinking its unfair, and whoever issued it can get a warning or you can talk to them. Thats just off the top of my head, its easy to come up with something that nerfs "the differing opinions" people can have.

This is a change regarding GangRP, gangs ARE a focus of GangRP, this change does not affect the entire server, it only effects those who want to GangRP, therefore, gangs are a huge part and they are a focus of this.

You can still have OOC consent kills, but you should add BMDs or staff or lore-team, whatever you decide, to make a decision on who can be allowed to character kill.

I honestly believe I have stated that exact sentence regarding forced / permanent character death over ten times within this thread. Yes, it IS the issue — it is the issue that gives GangRP this toxic reputation that withstands it from growing. Commonplace deaths are also an issue, meaning they are both problems that we are tackling with this suggestion. As I've stated, many other roleplay communities (text-based ones, mainly) adopt this same idea regarding forced / permanent character death and limiting it greatly (or completely removing it, which would be in the case of NLR).

We ARE changing major assault and kidnapping. I've stated that several times throughout my replies as well. You may want to check out the other pages of this feedback post and then just CTRL+F for my name to read through some of the more important things I've already stated (and truly do not want to restate). The reason why other updates (that WILL be implemented alongside this rule) is not included in the original post, but rather in my replies, is because they are not the major update we are working toward. THIS is the major update. Consented killing permissions is (as Yonio described it) likely one of the biggest updates in the entirety of GangRP's several years of existence and a complete overhaul. It would be frivolous to provide this update without receiving feedback from the playerbase first and foremost.

I would not give up at differing opinions if I were confident that guidelines would suffice. As I've stated in this reply (specifically), there is bias and leniency that will always exist within the staff team. That's an issue that needs to be addressed; but, it would lead to issues and arguments regarding which killing permissions are permitted and which were not before that does get addressed. We are trying to avoid these kinds of arguments and the circling toxicity that does follow GangRP's reputation. An unofficial team would overcomplicate something we do not necessarily need, being that GangRP is just one part of the server and should not require many to run it (that's why there's only one crime faction lead). The idea of having a thread/guide to follow consulting BMD for killing permissions is actually a good idea if leniency did not exist within the BMD as well. I'm sure every single current BMD (including Minobu, Revra, Kaizer, Ruin, and myself) would EACH give a different answer if someone proposed a situation to us in regards to if something were killing permissions (regardless of what guidelines exist because there can be situations of vaguer variety that are proposed to us (this is something frequent that the staff team actually deals with and we oftentimes have to consult each other to assure that our responses are adequate)) or not.

My experience with the staff team (as briefly aforementioned in the former paragraph) is the evidence to me that the system of consulting a certain group of players or staff members would not be sufficient — at least, as nearly sufficient as what we're trying to achieve with consented killing permissions. We would still be promoting forced character death and I definitely believe some people would be unfairly targeted by more dangerous players if they were to make a simple call on whether or not something was killing permissions (I am speaking from experience — there are some wild people in the community who have threatened my wellbeing over literal Minecraft GangRP. It is ridiculous. Nobody signs up for that part of the server and I would not want to impose it on anyone else). The whole concept of "nobody signs up for that part" is a great thing to mention within these updates and the overall perspective of the people we've mentioned: staff, lore team, an unofficial team to decide killing permissions, or BMD.

If I'm suddenly giving them a new responsibility that they did not originally plan for when joining that faction of the server, that responsibility befalls unto me. Updates of this kind where someone would always have to consult a staff member always prove the same thing — consider how some of the SLT are DMed when they fire a person in-character, consider how I am DMed about how I treated a GangRP situation, consider how Yonio is DMed about a character's arrest. . .obviously, you can't literally consider it being that you haven't seen those DMs; but, it's just a needless add-on to the stresses of staff currently. Yes, that staff member can just leave the team, but it is still unfair to impose that on someone. This suggestion also helps avoid those circumstances. Not every staff member, lore team member, or BMD is fit for such a responsibility. These are entire characters with backgrounds and sometimes years worth of lore within SchoolRP; putting their fate in the hands of one person who could easily be targeted and treated as a horrible staff member or whatnot because of said decision is unnecessary. The whole point of this spiel is that we would still be forcing character death. That is an issue within GangRP.

I've explained several times throughout my replies how this suggestion does affect the entire server. Yes, it will affect GangRP greatly and arguably the most of all factions; but, it still is going to reap benefits within other factions of the server. You've read the replies of others, I'm assuming — we have people who are replying, stating that they would actually choose to involve themselves in GangRP for once if this suggestion were implemented. These are the people who care about their characters and the writing that goes behind it. This is not a bad thing. I'm also going to assume that you have read my replies too — which is why I'm not going to re-explain how this affects the entire server in positive ways. Once more, you can check the other pages and CTRL+F for my name to seek them yourself.

Idealistically, a group that decides killing permissions and if their motives are valid would be a great compromise; but, it's just not one that would befit the server. We would be forcing a new guideline onto people who did not originally sign up for this kind of thing, we would force them to deal with situations that they may not be most knowledgeable about (such as DMing the shrine faction lead or something about something crime-related), we would still be FORCING people to kill off their characters (regardless of if they were consented), and we would be adding an unnecessary roadblock to roleplay that ultimately hinders the experience rather than benefiting it (I would not argue, either, that the re-evaluation of killing permissions is considered an "unnecessary roadblock" either, if that's what you're thinking — read my other replies).

Again, however, I do appreciate all of this feedback! I'm happy that you and others who have given their insight are now belonging to a massive change that takes place on the server. Once more, I am grateful to you & I wish you the best. Take care!!!

The problem isn’t people not having time to action, it’s people don’t WANT to action, the people that do can and will still action. The problem is no lore killing, adding members of the community allowed to grant character kill does not take away from lore killing

(Also, a smaller thing since this was a small reply & I've addressed it: we would still be promoting forced killing. Read the above if you need a better elaboration upon that.)

 

[Hirathex]

I like the idea of adding more specific scenarios. The one other scenario that comes to mind that could result in unconsented killing permissions is if a person leaves a verified gang with valuable information in their possession. . .it only makes sense to eliminate their character at that point, yes? This is a great suggestion that builds on my own and I appreciate it a ton! Also, for your third point, I want to reference a conversation that I had with Yonio in VC about that exact circumstance. . .

Finally got a chance to see your reply after the pages of responses, and I'm glad you agree! Killing in gangs is something that's always gonna happen, and trying to leave said gang while in possession of valuable information of a perfect example of a time where killing that character would make sense, but also gives lore to it. I'm sure there's at least another few scenarios staff team could come up with where consent is not needed with actual reasoning behind it (if that makes sense).

Now to add to everything that's been mentioned in this thread since my last response: As Yonio mentioned people will hopefully realize if there's a strong enough IC motive, KPS should be given. If we move into a system where KPS doesn't become a forced thing, more something that can be properly roleplayed out (and have there be situations where the attempt to kill your character isn't always successful) people may be more willing to actually consent to permissions.

You can still LOSE in GangRP. You can lose LIMBS! You can get kidnapped for an entire SEVEN DAYS without interruption and experience roleplay unlike any other kind we've had on the server during this time. Guys, losing a limb and being kidnapped are not normal things. It requires you to roleplay out a reaction of someone literally severely traumatized; and, many overlook these daunting aspects of GangRP because they simply do not know how to roleplay it out and treat this part of the server as a win-or-lose paradigm. GangRP's reputation is faltering because there is such little regard for the roleplay aspect, even in spite of the fact that we are a roleplay server. This is what we should be promoting.

This is another thing I want to point out, the idea of expanding kidnapping with the changes suggested is SO COOL. I don't want my character to die, but I would 100% let him get kidnapped at the hands of a gang just to roleplay out what that'd be like (cough cough, if any gangs wanna kidnap a detective hit me up). You don't always have to end a character to be successful as a gang, kidnapping is arguably cooler and has more possibilities if we're being real.

 

[Lizalopod]

I would probably also suggest separating Kidnapping permissions from major permissions. If you want to make it more common, maybe making kidnapping 'less severe' on the perms scale could work better. Like maybe having kidnap perms be more significant than minor but less significant than major (if that makes sense)

So it would go Minor > Kidnap > Major and then KPS if it's agreed upon

It's always sorta struck me as meh that it's classified with major. Like sure maybe kidnapping for several days would be considered such, but I feel like it's generally a lesser offense to just limb go byebye!

 

[TrapstarRp]

Ok so what would you do after kidnapping someone if the only extent to your harming is beating their head in. Kidnapping would be even less significant than it already is and turn people away from actually doing it.

She did state that you will be able to kidnap for 7 days during school hours as well-meaning that the character can not be played for 7 days and even so you will be able to also major them cause you need majors to kidnap ofc, so yea kinda dumb to make a kidnap perm.

 

[The_eight8]

Hey, Cujo. Yep, your account is probably going to be banned. Forced / permanent character death, as I've stated in early every reply now, is frowned upon in roleplay communities. People never consenting to their characters being killed is a better alternative to the rampant character death that we currently have alongside no lore-based interactions with these deaths and endless arguments. We are taking a step in resolving the reputation that heavily surrounds GangRP. I explain in my first reply in this thread to ImKana why we cannot use the latter point of contacting a staff member / LT member. Thank you for your suggestions, but you're not in the community any longer & frankly do not have an understanding of what it is at the moment (unless you're bypassing, of course). I say the exact same thing that you do regarding that half of your suggestion.

I've stated in another reply, too, about how rules relative to roleplays that we see in Garry's Mod and GTA have very little correlation to us as our communities and in-character settings are completely different. We are text-based — and that is exactly what overpowers the other rules that are more commonly seen in these communities. I definitely think a good handful of our rules align with that server, though. It's just completely different circumstances and occasions. I'm grateful that you've replied, but don't do it again (you should probably just log out of that account).



I would read some of my other replies throughout this thread. I cover a lot of the concerns that you mention & that could maybe sway your opinion. These concerns are valid and I appreciate the notion about helping GangRP, as that's my goal in the entirety of this. I don't want the misconception that I'm trying to completely kill off GangRP — it is arguably the most interesting part of the server, which some might drop their jaw at in consideration that this server's name is SchoolRP. There's no denying that there aren't many other roleplay communities that have crime intricately thought out like ours and have systems for practically everything.

If you or anyone else also needs other convincing, it's worth mentioning that a lot of weapons are going to get buffs if this does push through. Almost each weapon will get a special statistic that separates them from others (such as pocket knives becoming projectiles. . .). So, consider it. I appreciate your reply & all of the other ones so far!!! You are helping this community grow even with small input and that'll always be something I look up to.



Thank you for your words!! Check out the reply I made to ImKana and why it wouldn't be ideal for SRP (but seems to be ideal for FRP). We are two different communities, in both playerbase and in staff members. We'd be asking for more player retaliation with a system like that, unfortunately. It's a good idea and it clearly works out for our sister server; but, there's very little confidence in its execution compared to this idea regarding consent for killing permissions.



This is YOUR personal involvement in GangRP and what YOU are thinking. It's not unrealistic, given our setting and the inane amount of deaths that occur within it. It's not realistic whatsoever; this is Japan. . .and, if we're arguing that Karakura would be the outcast of the country in terms of criminal rates and is known for being dangerous (which is the lore that we currently do follow), there are still too many permanent character deaths occurring. Read the thread for the benefits that this suggestion would bring and try to see it from a broader perspective, rather than from just yourself. I went into each gang discord's private chat and talked with them about how this is beneficial and a good amount were compliant and understanding to how it would help GangRP rather than hurt it.

Killing not taking place on the server is not a bad thing. By making it a consent-based thing, all kills that occur (minus police and BMD-related) become a lot more writing-fulfilled and help expand your intricate roleplay than ever before. Again, all I can ask is that you read my replies and the thread itself before replying with something that has already been stated by others & then refuted. GangRP can be about the competition; yes, but ALL roleplay is about the characters and their stories. Do not overlook that aspect within it as it is the driving force of the entire server. Gangs have lasted without centering their entire focus on kills and major assault (I know I'm a bit of an Akihito Clan fan and a bit of bias seeps into my opinion, but they are an example of a gang that does this. They don't publicize their kills or major assault and instead make GangRP more unique for themselves while managing to exist actively for over a year now); and, that is something which will become the norm. As you are a Bonten member, you may already be aware that they are working on shifting their focus to a red-light district. This is a great way to involve yourself on the server as a criminal and in GangRP that has never been done before. Trying something new is nice, especially if it has more benefits than setbacks.

The best way to persuade you is to have you read my other responses and to read the original thread. They explain everything. You only need to have trust. I appreciate your reply above all things as you are greatly active within the GangRP community and it's always nice to receive other perspectives!



Please read my other replies and the thread itself. I refute this and explain how this isn't an issue. Thank you for your compliments, however!! I really appreciate this input and I do see it as a valid concern, it's just worth noting that there is a resolution to it. There's no problem with killings not happening in the way that they currently are.




In another reply (to Hirathex, specifically), I explain how we could involve more specific scenarios that are exceptions to the consented killing — one of them being deaths through verified gangs. It's ALSO worth noting that with this rule, you can literally decide the length of kill permissions from now on if the other person consents. You get more freedoms with it and more unique roleplay experiences — which is what you should be seeking along with fun on the server. Expanding your character to their greatest length is just about the greatest fun that this platform is able to offer people, and is especially why I'm grateful to it for allowing me to host my characters upon it for so long. A gang is not easily "doomed," they just need to work around it. The point of this rule, along with all of its other benefits and setbacks that it'll resolve, is to force people upon this roadblock that they must work around. That's what people do already; so, why can't you do it again? Weapons will get buffs, major assault permissions will tie in with kidnapping permissions. . .you still are able to stop someone from revealing information. You just won't be forcing them to make a new character.

It will not cause GangRP to die and that is where you are sorely mistaken. View the other replies and review your private gang chat when I was conversing with them prior to making this suggestion. People are already mentioning how they are tempted to be re-involved with GangRP by this suggestion alone; and, there are several other updates that would come with this update to help "fill the hole." Trust me when I say weapons are going to receive a major improvement if this goes through. . .meaning, you aren't losing all too much. In fact, you're only gaining from this. Read the thread and read my replies for an explanation of how you are within a community that is improving itself.

The argument that GangRP is not GangRP without risks is baseless. GangRP is roleplay within a gang and crime; it's nothing more than that. The keyword within that is roleplay — you are on a roleplay server, and should therefore be roleplaying. There's nothing wrong with roleplaying, guys! And, I definitely agree that risk plays a role in it. I think, that with this update, kidnappings and hostage situations are going to occur much more frequently as you'll now be able to hold a character in confines for the complete seven days, even during school hours, still giving that "effect" of having taken away someone's character for a meantime while also permitting them to still roleplay as their said character. Yes, no one likes losing their character, so they'll oftentimes say no when asked for consent. . .and that's fine. That is okay, and I implore you to work to understand that. There is no issue with someone not wanting their character to die. We all put a lot of effort into writing ours, and that's fine. It's roleplay! We write!

A lot of my concern lies in your statement about the point of SchoolRP being to not whine/be sad when a character dies after you get them involved in criminal roleplay. That. . .is definitely not what SchoolRP is about, and I'm sure you understand that as well (maybe it was poorly worded?). The point of SchoolRP is to roleplay as a character within a school setting or to explore the other factions outside of it. . .the point is always going to be to roleplay, which is exactly what my suggestion is promoting. This update is needed. A good majority of the staff members find agreement within it because they are the people who have been on the server for the longest and are most frequent to the situations/scenarios you speak of. A lot of people possess disdain toward staff in spite of the fact that they are the people who were chose to represent the server. . .would it not be more acceptable to be lenient toward their opinions? They have the experience. The update is needed as it will improve the status of GangRP greatly; and, if you need proof, you can refer to the thread and my replies. I've already stated a good deal of what I've needed to within them (and you need to read them, considering it will help in convincing you). Be open-minded.

Yes. Losing is a part of the roleplay, and "mature people should not have a problem with losing." This was clearly not the same thoughts that were adopted by your gang during their war, considering the amount of powergaming reports that came through — so, what's the issue with limiting the instances of powergaming and those who are immature just a little more? This suggestion, if implemented, draws back on many of the issues we face during arguments. We will inevitably draw the curtain of toxicity backward by introducing this, which introduces a butterfly effect of GangRP bettering wholly. Again, refer to my other replies and the thread itself for how.

GangRP "flopped" a great deal because of rampant character death and little reasoning for people to continue to be motivated. As you see in this thread, there are people mentioning how they would be motivated and willing to involve themselves with GangRP if this suggestion were to be considered. There is NO issue with accepting people back into the faction of this server, unless they are a part of the problem — and you've provided no evidence that these people are a part of the problem. Good writers and people who care about characters will ultimately benefit this half of the server and bring about more benefits to the community as a whole, which I again do not need to elaborate upon as I already have in my other replies and the thread. You should read that.

It is not pointless. I've made that very clear, in this reply and in my other replies, at how this is not pointless and there is indeed a purpose for it. You just have to be open-minded and read them. I apologize if I'm coming off as passive aggressive with the persistence in asking you to read the other replies; but, they address a great deal of your concerns and have resulted in many people being fully persuaded in that this suggestion is for the better. I don't want to have to explain the same thing several times when you can just view it for yourself, which is why I'm replying to every single disagreement. Disagreements help bring up challenges that we can address early on; and, that is what I'm doing. I'm addressing it.

Risk, competition, and "reaching the top" can all be elements of your fun in GangRP; and, it is ridiculous to state that this rule would remove that. Yes, it would draw back slightly on it, but all of those elements still exist. Risk exists in the police and not having your character kidnapped for seven whole days while they are brutalized. Competition exists in that gangs will likely exist for a lot longer now, if this rule were to be implemented (and this is a GOOD thing, I'm sure you can agree). "Reaching the top" exists in that gangs are now forced to be more unique rather than traditional in the sense of logging each activity relative to killing and major assault. You just have to think a little differently now. . .it'll still be fun. I never permanently kill players on the server without consent. I can count how many people my characters have killed within my six years on the server on one hand, and a good deal of them were consented on. The other ones didn't even happen on the server and are just belonging to my character's lore. I have fun with what I do, roleplaying as two criminal characters (Sawa Taigyoku and Takuya Miwa). I found a way that still involves risk, competition, and "reaching the top" while avoiding. . .killing others. Permanent / forced character death is frowned upon in other roleplay communities. I'll keep saying that.

I don't mind your concerns in this response, though. Receiving a reply from someone who leads a verified gang and has been heavily involved in this part of the server (as a player) for a year is extremely helpful; as, when I address your concerns, I also address other ones. I will always be grateful that you spent your time replying to this and giving your insight. So, thank you, and I hope this clears up a lot. PM me over conversations if you want to discuss it a little more, as I'm more than willing to. Take care.



Read the thread and read my replies. My time is not wasted. Please note that several staff members, including the owner, have already agreed that this would be a beneficial suggestion and that this post was simply made to hear out the community. I hope that a bit of gratefulness lies in you and in others that we are choosing to consult the community, instead of just implementing this wild suggestion with no prior perspectives received. This is not going to waste our time and I do not think you should be speaking for staff, either. Please, do read the thread and my replies, and they may help a little in convincing you. Take care!



As the crime faction lead and the person who manages events on the server, no. I do not ignore you. I've recently lowered the amount of GangRP events because we had so many in the previous two months and we have several other events currently planned for several days on this month. Staff members post when they have a scheduled event in a channel, meaning we are all informed when an event is taking place.

This is just completely false. I'm still receiving event suggestions, there's just a little prioritization for updates within the crime faction and allowing other events in other factions of the server to thrive first. Please note in my original post: I state that introducing this feature to the server would benefit the reputation of GangRP, which would then result in more events. Consider that.

GangRP is roleplay within a gang or crime. As I've stated before, I went to each private channel of our gangs and asked them what they thought of the idea. A great deal of them responded in positives (or at least did so after being convinced) with the understanding of the benefits that it would reap. It is baseless to say that it only benefits non-GangRPers. It doesn't — it benefits everyone. Refer to my thread and my replies for how as I'm certain I do not need to repeat myself; however, I do understand where the basis of your concerns lie. I will always work to better the server and not hurt it, as having a platform where I can freely write and roleplay my characters on (especially for as long as I've been here for) will always be something I am indebted to and grateful for. Take care (and please read my other replies!! I mean it: the reason why I'm replying to each disagreement is so that you guys can reference those replies later on)!!



Hey! Your concerns are super valid and I'm glad that you gave a response, considering how much you involve yourself in the server. I appreciate the kind words regarding the suggestion and my work; and, it's worth assuring your rest in that baiting would greatly decrease with this. A lot of the basis for baiting came with wanting to kill another person's character — people want to avoid having their characters kidnapped for several days on end or having their limbs removed, as the character would still be alive and present to receive a arrest. There's even more risk now, and I feel that a lot of people are forsaking that with the suggestion. If you like risk, you're being handed it. Thanks for this reply! It helped me explain a part that I think a lot of people were worried about regarding risks.



We discussed this part briefly in DMs; it'd be a lot more concerning, as a new player, to see rampant character death taking place in the most random locations rather than amputees. Amputees are not the most shocking thing in the world. Again, refer to my other replies for how it is completely fine if people do not want their characters to die. Treat our event in late May as an example: we worked out a consensus for your character's fate and made something even cooler out of what we had planned of the kidnapping/explosion, as we blended a few unplanned things into it. We still found a way to make it fun, regardless of if it had a pre-planned conclusion.

I reference your latter concern in several other replies throughout this thread. CTRL+F and look for Minobu, since I like to reference his comment about turning characters into vegetables (and that's where I mention your concerns and how they actually bring more benefits than setbacks). One swift killing action, while having its rare circumstance of being beneficial for roleplay and character writing as a whole, is mostly known for not having any weight to it (even though it's a whole KILL). I don't mean any kills that you've done specifically and I truly believe you are an example of someone who would work around this rule perfectly fine; but, in general. I'm sure you know what I mean as you were the former crime faction lead.

Thank you for leaving your input, though. I understand where your concerns and disagreement come from; but, I want your unrest to be settled. I'm not looking to hurt GangRP; and, as I've elaborated upon much in my replies, it won't bring harm. Having your insight on this suggestion helps greatly in solidifying how a lot of other GangRPers feel in reading this suggestion. From each agreement and disagreement so far, I've noticed that it's generally mixed between the community. I can only hope that this sways you a little.



Hey! Thank you for your input. These are all valid concerns in which I address in the original thread and my replies. You should seek them, if you're looking to be persuaded. This is something that will be crucial and beneficial to GangRP and the community as a whole. Please take the time to be open-minded and consider my efforts — I would be grateful.



Hi, again. Did you read the thread? I explain how KPD are an exception to this. If anything, the roleplay within the KPD would be more interesting as this rule sets up a roadblock (a beneficial one) that requires that people put a bit more thought into what they do as a criminal on the server. KPD will likely have actual cases to resolve now and more hostage situations. . .arguing that there is "less activity within GangRP" is just a telltale sign for me of how YOU will specifically react to it. The rest of your gang, however, as I've stated, is planning a red light district that sounds absolutely phenomenal and a great way to involve yourself in a gang and in crime. If you think you're not going to be active in GangRP anymore, you're free to hand your gang off to someone who will do well by it.



All of these changes, minus the second point (which I explain why in my first reply to ImKana) are going to be added if this suggestion is implemented. Thank you for your efforts in reaching a compromise, though! You are a great example of a player who has always put their greatest effort in terms of writing into GangRP and have helped greatly in bettering it. I appreciate you, Infi.

hello, I read your reply to my post and wanted to say I am sorry as I meant it as a reply to something someone else made, when I clicked on the post it opened up a different msg for me of someone saying we should always ask staff if perms may be used and I thought that was the suggestion sorry for misunderstanding, I now have fully read the thread and believe in my opinion it should get a +1 as it is a good idea to have people not lose their character without oocly consent as I know I made a big deal out of it myself with my first char's death



Message @heb

 

[hebwig]

I would probably also suggest separating Kidnapping permissions from major permissions. If you want to make it more common, maybe making kidnapping 'less severe' on the perms scale could work better. Like maybe having kidnap perms be more significant than minor but less significant than major (if that makes sense)

So it would go Minor > Kidnap > Major and then KPS if it's agreed upon

It's always sorta struck me as meh that it's classified with major. Like sure maybe kidnapping for several days would be considered such, but I feel like it's generally a lesser offense to just limb go byebye!

A few other permissions will be switched around to befit this new rule, but tying kidnapping and major assault permissions together helps with overcomplication that already currently exists & also applies new freedoms to it. It's not classified with major at the moment; but, it would be. I don't want it to be misconstrued that there wouldn't be any other changes made in GangRP at the same time we do this since we already have a lot planned other than this suggestion alone (that isn't nearly as controversial as this one). I hope that makes sense.

 

[milkyram]

+1!
i adore this idea & it'd make gangrp much more enjoyable, in my opinion. :')

 

[Kurusu]

+1 I haven't been active on SRP or the combat rules or perms I know they did change quite a bit but I just wanna put my opinion here. Credit to @Undesires I think was his name about the fact that there are many dons and I do agree with that. GangRP when I was on quite a bit with people I knew was all competition on which gang can disband who and kinda use that to brag. Even killing random people for kill count was really what gangrp is in the eyes of the SRP community which makes sense since all we did was kill and use whatever perms we had. I say this thread does somewhat help with that since gangrpers (including me) used to run around kill and when they get caught they make new character and continue. Gangrp is a risky roleplay and if you die or get caught yknow that char is over unless bla bla bla but let's all agree even myself that most of the gangrp chars are throwaway sole purpose is to kill not saying all but MOST. Most chars and gangs never had any good lore behind them on how the gang formed or whats the job besides being number 1 or fuck with us we fuck with you, dont mess with us shit like that. Gangs whenever they disband you will see another gang pop up again and again there was no real let's say achievement in disbanding a gang since the gang you disband will just come back with another name and characters. Repetitive is what I'm saying which is why most people see gangrp shit. I feel as if the suggestion you mention will def get people a bit mad but I think it's helpful since rival gangs or just people who fuck with one another can have more in depth lore to their rivalry spicing things up instead of just going straight for the kill. Instead of just the plain gang wars that we had seem quite a bit gangs can now somewhat build onto their rivalry and shit but yeah idfk i just agree.

 

[Carnified]

What's the point of the risk factor in gang rp if you can choose what punishment your character gets out of it, will literally make 80% of gangrp pointless due to no one wanting their character to die especially if it's a character they like or if the player has OOC Beef with the person taking perms out of them.

-1 overall

 

[hebwig]

What's the point of the risk factor in gang rp if you can choose what punishment your character gets out of it, will literally make 80% of gangrp pointless due to no one wanting their character to die especially if it's a character they like or if the player has OOC Beef with the person taking perms out of them.

-1 overall

Hi! Read the thread and my replies. I address your concerns in them.

 

[D3_sp41r]

+1

I also think that any majors should also have to be consented to OOCly before they take place- that way, it keeps the players behind their characters in a healthy mental state- people can get really attached to their characters and not only that, but graphic violence can have a negative impact on people OOCly as well- you never know what triggers someone, so I feel it's important to ask first!

 

[Oliverium]

-1 but making kps more strict would be better.
1. Passing kps shouldn't be allowed. That way your char knows who to look for considering they and another person has beef with each other. It would allow the killer to have an IC reason.
2. Eliminate or move kps things to Majors. Breaking and Entering and Exposing a weapon (maybe for self defense when people use majors?) should be less risky.
3. Strict rules will still allow for GangRP and others to kill people and continue on their normal RP, just with more restrictions.
4. If you don't want your char to die don't get into dangerous situations, and when making rules strict, it would be straight forward on what or what not to do, so you can avoid those things.

Having BUILT UP hatred between people that escalates should be good for KPS. When escalating to killing someone, they should provide an IC reason why. It's realistic that way. KPS should be harder to obtain but not completely eliminated because "I don't want my char to die, but I still want to get into dangerous situations". Like others stated, it would eliminate the tension/danger of things because "Oh you can't hurt me I don't consent OOCly" Dangerous situations will lead to consequences, and having those consequences would teach lessons. Those lessons should be learned ICly, not OOCly when your favorite character gets killed without warning.

 

[Carnified]

+1

I also think that any majors should also have to be consented to OOCly before they take place- that way, it keeps the players behind their characters in a healthy mental state- people can get really attached to their characters and not only that, but graphic violence can have a negative impact on people OOCly as well- you never know what triggers someone, so I feel it's important to ask first!

if people are fr getting triggered by pixels getting detailrped then they shouldn't be on a ROLEPLAY server, jus my opinnion

 

[Carnified]

-1 but making kps more strict would be better.
1. Passing kps shouldn't be allowed. That way your char knows who to look for considering they and another person has beef with each other. It would allow the killer to have an IC reason.
2. Eliminate or move kps things to Majors. Breaking and Entering and Exposing a weapon (maybe for self defense when people use majors?) should be less risky.
3. Strict rules will still allow for GangRP and others to kill people and continue on their normal RP, just with more restrictions.
4. If you don't want your char to die don't get into dangerous situations, and when making rules strict, it would be straight forward on what or what not to do, so you can avoid those things.

Having BUILT UP hatred between people that escalates should be good for KPS. When escalating to killing someone, they should provide an IC reason why. It's realistic that way. KPS should be harder to obtain but not completely eliminated because "I don't want my char to die, but I still want to get into dangerous situations". Like others stated, it would eliminate the tension/danger of things because "Oh you can't hurt me I don't consent OOCly" Dangerous situations will lead to consequences, and having those consequences would teach lessons. Those lessons should be learned ICly, not OOCly when your favorite character gets killed without warning.

Ruins the entire point of the ROLEPLAY aspect of the server, 95% of the major gangrpers wouldn't want their character to die and they only focus on gangrp, no other aspect of rp. Therefore limiting what they'd be able to do even further would hurt the genre of roleplay more than it already is. Asking permission to kill someone due to a decision they made is dumb. There'd be literally no risk in doing anything to someone else if all they gotta do is "consent" for you killing them

 

[HunterHampter]

What's the point of the risk factor in gang rp if you can choose what punishment your character gets out of it, will literally make 80% of gangrp pointless due to no one wanting their character to die especially if it's a character they like or if the player has OOC Beef with the person taking perms out of them.

-1 overall

I think personally the amount of people that is willing to have their characters killed is underestimated, there will be people that will allow you to kill their characters to maybe finish their story or for lore purposes.

 

[HunterHampter]

(Hi, I'm re-commenting again, as my previous comment was made at 5AM, so now i can be more indepth to my Reasoning on why I agree with this Suggestion.)

+1, I agree to this.

Reasoning:

GangRP nowadays feels less like an Actual Roleplay, and feel more like a Strategy, RNG and text based PVP.
Decent amount will disagree with the suggestion, but think of it this way, People that joined GangRP was attracted to develop their character as a criminal, and some that aren't eventually gets attached as their character progressed through the Underworld of Criminality.

With the Suggestion, now Players can GangRP and fulfill their Character Development content, without having to be scared their character will be killed off permanently, note that they can still get hurt, which is already a Major Development to their character, and after they're satisfied and ready to end their character's life, be it short or long, they will consent to KPS.

And therefore people will be forced to actually have a Developed Character in GangRP as some of the Comments above stated about the amount of Throwaway Characters That exists today, and this is also a good thing for players that doesn't want to GangRP but still have the ability to CombatRP in a non-criminal settings, maybe like a School-Fight or a random Street-fight with no Gang/Crime Relation.

For OOC Benefits as Hebwig stated, Perms Verification will be easier, Gone the days to spam the person's /f msg with "Perms?" "Proof?" and other stuff or asking staff to verify, all KPS will be Consented the character's own Permission.



As for my REALLY Personal Reasoning:

I made all of my characters to develop fully including characters i use for GangRP, All of them eventually will be going through major things, and ALL of these characters will have their own ending which is their deaths, and with the addition to this new rule/changes, me and other people that have the same idea will be benefitted, and I guarantee you, there are plenty of people who think that way, and will consent to KPS when the time has come.

 

[DivingBlues]

+ 1

I agree while others will disagree I think its a great idea! This will allow people to have these stories and lore behind their characters and why they've chosen to do this in their life. I also gives people like me who are teachers or have jobs a chance to keep their characters, not having to worry about the fact people maybe hunting them down for giving a detention, or trying to fight back!

The ideas and suggestions may differ on a persons opinion but I think its a good idea to allow those who want to GangRP safely with their characters and not loose them in the click of a finger! It also makes it so that your character isn't always at risk of dying and those around that character family, friends ect ect will be happy to know their brother or sister, boyfriend, girlfriend, friend wont die so easily. This allows the suspense the drama in a roleplaying line or part to it! These also make it harder for GangRPers and people around those communities (not saying all GangRPers do it) don't create these characters get them into a situation and then they die and they have to make a new one and restart again. It'll allow them to keep them for a longer period of time and keep going so that they don't loose them so easily.

There are so many other ways to view these or agree with them, people will view these differently or have different ideas but I'll say for myself I agree with this it allows character development, those who are attached to their characters wont need to fear loosing them all the time and those in facility or workers are safe from always being killed off.

‧̍̊°。˚ .° 。˚ °。˚ °。˚ . ° 。˚ °。˚‧̍̊
Discord - Diving#5539

In Game Accounts -

DivingBlues [L.T] - [Teacher] [28] Rini Y. Kōraru

Quillstontavius [F+] - [Fox] [1] Raven / Nokoribi

DrivingCrazy [F+] - [Duck] [1] Quillsontavius ‘Quill’ / Aflac

_CreditCardInfo [F+] - [Grade-11] [17] Yuuki 'Yu Yu' R. Elyon / Viya Miyazaki

"Theres a whole world under us we can't reach yet, we just need to learn to find it"

‧̍̊°。˚ .° 。˚ °。˚ °。˚ . ° 。˚ °。˚‧̍̊​

 

[Kana]

Ruins the entire point of the ROLEPLAY aspect of the server, 95% of the major gangrpers wouldn't want their character to die and they only focus on gangrp, no other aspect of rp. Therefore limiting what they'd be able to do even further would hurt the genre of roleplay more than it already is. Asking permission to kill someone due to a decision they made is dumb. There'd be literally no risk in doing anything to someone else if all they gotta do is "consent" for you killing them

This only SUPPORTS the roleplay aspect of the server, many other roleplay communities do not allow perm character deaths, and as hebwig has stated, it's quite frowned upon in the entire RP sphere. It may not seem realistic, due to it being something you aren't used to. . but it is VERY common in other communities, and works perfectly. I, along with MANY others would consent to character death in a heartbeat if it was treated as more than just a game to people's characters. If there's a lore reason to kill me, and it will be done in an interesting manner that promotes the story, I would GLADLY consent to any of my characters' deaths. I've seen many people say this exact thing, which only supports my reasoning more.

 

[Toto]

I think people are severely over estimating people being okay with their characters killed, bit of a silly point. Just because you may consider it doesn't mean that you speak for the entire gangrp community who is well versed in arguing their characters out of death on the daily are going to just "have" the inkling that they should consent to it.

 

[ppetrichor]

+1! SRP is the ONLY server I know that uses KPS the way it does, and it had a massive learning curve because of it for me. I'm thrilled to see that it'll be more user friendly for people coming in from other areas of the rp scene and more focused on story rather than body/death count. This isn't a game you can win, and many gangrpers treat it that way.