Moderators Olive Penderghast Posted June 11, 2017 Moderators Share Posted June 11, 2017 Attention NatRP Players!  Here is a box you can suggest new rules to be added to the NatRP Guidelines and Rules for NatRP!   Serious suggestions only, I will purposely ignore you if you joke around.       Sorry for short topic, Im too lazy to write a paragraph for a simple suggestion box   Quote If you see something you think is breaking the Forum Rules please click the report button, and I will get an email stating that a report has been sent. Thanks! Suspended and have questions? You can contact me at my email at: [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 I'd like to see the consent rule reworked, I do not mind the original intent but I feel there should be exceptions for 1) colonies near other nations, 2) genocide/mass atrocities 3) biological/chemical/nuclear weapons being used, feel free to add other exceptions @everyone, these are merely a baseline. Quote if you carry your childhood with you, you never become older Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Olive Penderghast Posted June 11, 2017 Author Moderators Share Posted June 11, 2017 I'd like to see the consent rule reworked, I do not mind the original intent but I feel there should be exceptions for 1) colonies near other nations, 2) genocide/mass atrocities 3) biological/chemical/nuclear weapons being used, feel free to add other exceptions @everyone, these are merely a baseline.   The only consent thing im going to require is direct attacks on said nation. If you mass genocide their people in your own borders, I am not gonna give you a warn point. If you send missiles through their borders that doesn't hit them, I will not give a warn point out for that either.  Thats as far of a removal im going to allow the consent rule to be.  If you want a completely free RP from a Consent Rules, I highly suggest you join Organic RP. It's a great subforums that is less restrictive than NatRP. Quote If you see something you think is breaking the Forum Rules please click the report button, and I will get an email stating that a report has been sent. Thanks! Suspended and have questions? You can contact me at my email at: [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 Using eva's recent RP as an example, I can literally take citizens from a particular ethnic group, let's use german for my own nation as an example take them to the border of myself and Ruhr, and hang them all from crosses and let them bleed out over several days and he can do not a thing about it, how does that follow any logical sense of nation interactions? If I am intentionally provoking my neighbors they should have a fair ability to reply. The consent rule from my understanding was to ensure I cant simply decide to declare war on someone with no provocation, not to stifle hostile interactions completely. Quote if you carry your childhood with you, you never become older Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Olive Penderghast Posted June 11, 2017 Author Moderators Share Posted June 11, 2017 I can see your point. I just fear of a major backlash if I allow direct attacks to happen without consent.  If you can get a petition of this, and can get the majority to agree. I'll change the rule.  Until then direct attacks are forbidden. Without consent. Quote If you see something you think is breaking the Forum Rules please click the report button, and I will get an email stating that a report has been sent. Thanks! Suspended and have questions? You can contact me at my email at: [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amaryllis Posted June 11, 2017 Share Posted June 11, 2017 (edited) Hmm as long as there's logic to the waiver (Nation A has to know Nation B is genociding IC wise) I'm for the waiver under special circumstances. If that's the case I also suggest having players put things down as internal or external to let players know. Internal if they want to keep what they're doing secret and external if they want to let the world know. That way players can't say I know Nation B did this without any proof. That and logic as how you're genocide can be kept a secret within your rp (such as scapegoating a terrorist organization) Â I'm also gonna assume that since the consent rule is just for wars. The ability to say rp out spy networks within another nation is allowed? I ask this because it does allow and encourage players to rp out to a legit IC reason for a war instead of just I want to blow stuff up. If they can successfully rp out obtaining the knowledge of the internal affairs then consent is waivered. Â Hope this makes sense. I'm like super tired. Edited June 11, 2017 by Amaryllis 1 Quote Nerd To The Core Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Olive Penderghast Posted June 12, 2017 Author Moderators Share Posted June 12, 2017 So, where are we heading with the consent rule? Quote If you see something you think is breaking the Forum Rules please click the report button, and I will get an email stating that a report has been sent. Thanks! Suspended and have questions? You can contact me at my email at: [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thalmor Posted June 14, 2017 Share Posted June 14, 2017 So, where are we heading with the consent rule? Â Responding to this: Â If you can get a petition of this, and can get the majority to agree. I'll change the rule. Â I'd like to be a part of this 'petition'. Â "The only consent thing im going to require is direct attacks on said nation. If you mass genocide their people in your own borders, I am not gonna give you a warn point. If you send missiles through their borders that doesn't hit them, I will not give a warn point out for that either." Â I agree with this 100%. Being a bit more progressive with the consent rule is really good. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Olive Penderghast Posted June 23, 2017 Author Moderators Share Posted June 23, 2017 Question: How do you guys want to handle the consent rule.  Mogar you wanted the consent rule rewritten.  Thalmor agrees on a less restrictive consent rule.  What I am going with this is I am planning to completely rewrite the consent rule, but I need to know the majority of the players opinions. Quote If you see something you think is breaking the Forum Rules please click the report button, and I will get an email stating that a report has been sent. Thanks! Suspended and have questions? You can contact me at my email at: [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) My perspective is a nation doing their own thing should be left alone unless they agree to the war. So long as they're not killing people or something egregious which a real life nation would react such as the three I already listed, Border disputes(contesting an expansion) diplomatic insults(obviously if you're starting drama with someone you should expect consequences), or Spying, since I agree with Amaryllis that spying could provide for some very interesting RP if anyone had the balls to try it. Edited June 23, 2017 by Mogar 1 Quote if you carry your childhood with you, you never become older Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 In addition, I'd like to add a very specific note to my beliefs. I feel very strongly that it is less the nation than the characters that people are so attached to, and I personally have a strict no killing characters policy unless previously agreed to, perhaps removing the consent to war would get more support if it was replaced with something regarding the removal of nonconsentual character death. Even in scenarios in which a character is captured, you're just being a dick if you refuse to RP someone's character making a jailbreak, or whatever. 3 Quote if you carry your childhood with you, you never become older Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eva-Beatrice Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 I'm going to suggest the removal of the rule regarding the week-long time period to reapply after being removed from the map, or more specifically, being unable to claim a recently removed country's land during that time period. The rule was originally added to prevent other nations from claiming another country's land for no reason, but with the new requirements for posts, I don't think that would be too much of an issue anymore. I also believe that adding another week on top of the usual month-long time period isn't really necessary either. With the way it is now, it might as well just be a month and a week instead of just a month for removal. 1 Quote When the seagulls cried, none were left alive. "If life is a miracle, then death is a certainty." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lelouch Vi Britannia Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, Eva-Beatrice said: I'm going to suggest the removal of the rule regarding the week-long time period to reapply after being removed from the map, or more specifically, being unable to claim a recently removed country's land during that time period. The rule was originally added to prevent other nations from claiming another country's land for no reason, but with the new requirements for posts, I don't think that would be too much of an issue anymore. I also believe that adding another week on top of the usual month-long time period isn't really necessary either. With the way it is now, it might as well just be a month and a week instead of just a month for removal. I disagree, some nations that get removed hold valuable land which triggers a land race. Being the ones who both edit the map and RP would give us a HIGE advantage of knowing what land is going to be available. As per the Suez race which could have been sent to me a long time ago, but because the week rule was in play it helped balance things out. It's mainly there to make sure no one has an advantage or disadvantage. Quote Ex-Archduke of Defence for BK 3 minutes ago, Buorhann said: @Lelouch Vi Britannia - BK needs you, but they really don't deserve you. Thanks for the dankness.   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eva-Beatrice Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Lelouch Vi Britannia said: I disagree, some nations that get removed hold valuable land which triggers a land race. Being the ones who both edit the map and RP would give us a HIGE advantage of knowing what land is going to be available. As per the Suez race which could have been sent to me a long time ago, but because the week rule was in play it helped balance things out. It's mainly there to make sure no one has an advantage or disadvantage. >hige It's not like that information is unavailable to everyone. All one needs to do is simply visit someone's profile and look at when they last posted. As for land races, those will occur regardless of whether the week-long time period is in place, or not. 1 Quote When the seagulls cried, none were left alive. "If life is a miracle, then death is a certainty." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lelouch Vi Britannia Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 Just now, Eva-Beatrice said: >hige It's not like that information is unavailable to everyone. All one needs to do is simply visit someone's profile and look at when they last posted. As for land races, those will occur regardless of whether the week-long time period is in place, or not. True, but the advantage would still lie in the hands of those updating the map Quote Ex-Archduke of Defence for BK 3 minutes ago, Buorhann said: @Lelouch Vi Britannia - BK needs you, but they really don't deserve you. Thanks for the dankness.   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eva-Beatrice Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 Then maybe keep the time period, but shorten it to three days, or something. 2 Quote When the seagulls cried, none were left alive. "If life is a miracle, then death is a certainty." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fukuda Kazuma Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 On 8/3/2017 at 4:21 AM, Lelouch Vi Britannia said: True, but the advantage would still lie in the hands of those updating the map So...you're giving yourself an advantage then.... Quote   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lelouch Vi Britannia Posted August 4, 2017 Share Posted August 4, 2017 3 hours ago, Zafri Zackery said: So...you're giving yourself an advantage then.... Zafri I feel like you didn't read anything But im arguing AGAINST giving myself an advantage Quote Ex-Archduke of Defence for BK 3 minutes ago, Buorhann said: @Lelouch Vi Britannia - BK needs you, but they really don't deserve you. Thanks for the dankness.   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Olive Penderghast Posted August 9, 2017 Author Moderators Share Posted August 9, 2017 Woo, this gets used when I'm on vacation with no internet access.   On 8/2/2017 at 3:04 PM, Eva-Beatrice said: I'm going to suggest the removal of the rule regarding the week-long time period to reapply after being removed from the map, or more specifically, being unable to claim a recently removed country's land during that time period. The rule was originally added to prevent other nations from claiming another country's land for no reason, but with the new requirements for posts, I don't think that would be too much of an issue anymore. I also believe that adding another week on top of the usual month-long time period isn't really necessary either. With the way it is now, it might as well just be a month and a week instead of just a month for removal. Denied. The week-long period stays.  I'm not sure where you got the 1 month and 1 week from. As far as I am concerned, if you fail to post in 1 month, you get removed. Quote If you see something you think is breaking the Forum Rules please click the report button, and I will get an email stating that a report has been sent. Thanks! Suspended and have questions? You can contact me at my email at: [email protected] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eva-Beatrice Posted August 15, 2017 Share Posted August 15, 2017 Okay, then what about the rule that allows nations to stay on the map for months on end without actually posting? I can't be the only one who thinks it's stupid. It's not as if they can't return if they're removed. Like it says in the NatRP rules, "If you are going to take up space on the map, then actually involve yourself with the RP here." 1 Quote When the seagulls cried, none were left alive. "If life is a miracle, then death is a certainty." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lelouch Vi Britannia Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 On 2017-08-15 at 7:15 AM, Eva-Beatrice said: Okay, then what about the rule that allows nations to stay on the map for months on end without actually posting? I can't be the only one who thinks it's stupid. It's not as if they can't return if they're removed. Like it says in the NatRP rules, "If you are going to take up space on the map, then actually involve yourself with the RP here." I'll agree to some part Perhaps only put in a rule where you can only leave for a certain amount of time? Quote Ex-Archduke of Defence for BK 3 minutes ago, Buorhann said: @Lelouch Vi Britannia - BK needs you, but they really don't deserve you. Thanks for the dankness.   Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eva-Beatrice Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 I would say a month, tops. 1 Quote When the seagulls cried, none were left alive. "If life is a miracle, then death is a certainty." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eva-Beatrice Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 My suggestion: To be kept on the map for an extended period of time (one month maximum), you must request it in this thread no more than a month following your previous post. 1 Quote When the seagulls cried, none were left alive. "If life is a miracle, then death is a certainty." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenclaw Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 Eva, you're not an RP mod anymore, stop smoking weed and getting high like my dog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eva-Beatrice Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 28 minutes ago, Relendus III said: Eva, you're not an RP mod anymore, stop smoking weed and getting high like my dog. I was never one... 1 Quote When the seagulls cried, none were left alive. "If life is a miracle, then death is a certainty." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.