Rule 4 Brainstorming as per request

Every time I have ever spared anyone, they or people closely related to them, have ganked me later. Happening from as lately as Era 4 to as long ago as like 5 or 6 years.

As I said earlier, Rule 4 might as well not exist at this point, because the RPC will twist the wording and the circumstances to their convenience. "This doesn’t count as rule 4 because the scenario never really ended, it wasn’t one guy let the other live and the other guy killed him later, because it all happened really quickly." or "This doesn’t count as rule 4 because they were imprisoned instead of being permed and not ‘let go’ " or "This counts as rule 4 because the person didn’t get permed, they weren’t spared, they escaped, but the situation lead to them leaving alive"

All of the above ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

Oh, yeah, I forgot about that one.

Oh, don’t forget the part where if you osay "hurry up and kill me" or "just go ahead and do it, I’ll probably get a restore" or anything resembling that, you are 100% guaranteed to not get a restore, no matter how bullshit the perm may have been.

So if ever you found yourself being hauled around the galaxy while stunned for half an hour while you’re being meticulously strip searched, just go get a sandwich!

It looks like the general consensus is that this rule is often manipulated and therefore counter productive to the fairness of the game, so why not just remove it?
With that rule there, a lot of people will abide by it (to their detriment) while a few will exploit it.

Non-combat mains who run solo may not have too many options when it comes to fighting their enemies aside from assassinating their opponent via bombs or by spaceship, since they can’t incapacitate their target in close-range combat. Yet combat mains have a lot more options when it comes to incapacitating their non-combat target and having the choice to let them go. Also a group ready to ambush a single target has a lot more choices then anyone else.

Oh, and Xav, on the topic of rule 4-ing everyone you meet, I think it’s like the practice of inducting everything that moves, whether they want it or not, so they can’t act against you because of spyapp. I.E. it’s strictly forbidden unless you’re Rojan.

I don’t think rule 4 should go away any time soon.

It definitely should be clarified to prevent abuse, both by the RPC and by the players.

Yes, I’m reopening this can of worms. It just occurred to me that if someone is going to invoke Rule 4, would it not be in their best interests to not attempt to provoke the person they released or just reneg on Rule 4 on a whim or because they "assume" they are in danger without actual proof?

Just seems to me to be another way to keep the asshats in line who will run around and Rule 4, then come back a day or two later, be a douchebag, reneg Rule 4, and Perm the person they just released.

EDIT: That didn’t really come across the way I intended, so I’ll clarify below:

Think of it in terms of a ceasefire between two individuals. The individual being spared cannot take aggressive action against the person who spared him/her for whatever span of time is decided by Rule 4. Conversely, the one doing the release agrees to not pursue the person (s)he is releasing unless the terms of the ceasefire are broken (e.g. apparent aggressive action taken, new information comes to light, what-have-you). As with all ceasefires, the person in the strongest position (i.e. the one invoking Rule 4) has the right to dictate the terms. It will still keep the essence of what Rule 4 is about, and in turn help curb the asshats who see Rule 4 as a clever way to ICly troll people.

Alrighty. I now present you all with the [u:2t3a5dm7][b:2t3a5dm7]First Draft[/u:2t3a5dm7][/b:2t3a5dm7] of my rule 4 rewrite.

I am well aware that it is ridiculously wordy as it stands, but it is a [u:2t3a5dm7][b:2t3a5dm7]First Draft[/u:2t3a5dm7][/b:2t3a5dm7] and I’d rather write too much and chip away at it than write too little and end up being in a massive discussion with someone once the rule is implemented. Feel free to try to trim the fat or redraft it here to give us all a hand. (That way you guys can’t say we never asked you!)

---

(4) As an alternative to a legal perm a player can choose to let their target live and be protected from reprisal from that player. More detail can be found in help rule4.

(Short, clear summary in help rules1, enough that people can get the gist of it then go to the help file for specifics)

---

HELP Rule4
A player who is in a clear position (For Example, having their enemy stunned and mortally wounded, a doomed prisoner or an enemy ship disabled/out of fuel) to legally perm another may choose to invoke rule4. If the other player (eg the soon-to-be-deceased) agrees to this, they are then barred from seeking to harm that player or players. If they refuse, they can request a restore if permed as normal.

This rule works in hand with Help Perm. The victim can not seek to harm those who would be the defendents in a RPC case.

Seeking to harm: Examples: Attacking/killing/fighting them. Hiring a bounty hunter, friends attacking/killing/fighting the person for revenge. (I suppose this can go into help terminology, though I really need a better name for that file!)

Common Situations

A bounty: The victim would be unable to attack or call for revenge against the bountier or the bounty hunter responsible for capturing him.

Clans: Possibly the most common situation. When a clan takes someone prisoner, it is usually a soldier following someones orders who then is responsible for deciding a persons fate. In this case, the victim is barred from ‘seeking to harm’ the arresting soldier as well as the one giving the order.

(I really like this section I think, it covers basically 90 percent of all rule 4 situations.)

Other Stuff

If you rule 4 someone, it is a good idea to keep a think log entry as well as a client log. The same goes for the ‘victim!’

A player can &Rapply&w to immortal staff to be freed of rule 4, much like a spy app. Usually this will only be granted after a long period of time and possibly only in rare cases, ie an era change or a major game development. The other player(s) may be informed if this occurs.

There are ways to phrase it icly, though using osay (or asking imms to be a go-between!) is preferable. For example, it could be roleplayed as offering a ‘pardon’ or, perhaps offering someone the chance to surrender.

Baddies can rule 4 people too and not come across as a wimp! Perhaps it’s a case of "join me and we’ll rule the galaxy together!" Or, the baddy has a noble streak to him and will reward his enemy who fought bravely. Or perhaps it’s something far meaner, the villain choosing to let someone live as an example to those who would continue to defy them, perhaps with a memento of their devilry. – The French were known for reer’ leasing English Archers taken prisoner only after half blinding them, cutting off their thumbs and a finger so they could never fire a bow again as a warning to English soldiers.

A final word

The goal of rule 4 is to provide a safety net for our players who don’t want to deprive another of their favourite character but also don’t want to be killed themselves for ‘being nice.’ My final advice is, if you end up being ‘rule 4ed’ don’t resent it! After all, your character could instead be dead!

---

I need better ways to call the two of them rather than ‘the player’ and ‘the target/victim’ – suggestions welcome!

Let me repeat

[b:2t3a5dm7][u:2t3a5dm7] SUGGESTIONS WELCOME!!!!! THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO IMPROVE THE MUD [/b:2t3a5dm7][/u:2t3a5dm7]

<3
Oh, and a second <3 for adding the space element. I’ve been lobbying for that for years.

However, I would be sure to CLEARLY define what it means to "agree" to the rule 4 situation–especially in space battles, where you can’t exactly use osay.

I like it a looooot. Biggest problem I see is in clan warfare where the guy is spared and suddenly can’t fight the enemy clan by extension.

Maybe add something in there to clarify that in cases of clan-related rule 4 situations, the ‘victim’ can still fight against the clan in general, they just can’t knowingly take direct action against their specific captor and the person or people who gave the orders to spare them.