Jump to content
Server time: 2017-08-17, 11:56

Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Execution Rights

Execution rights.  

106 members have voted

  1. 1. Should execution rights be changed?

    • No, keep them like they are.
    • Make it 3 hostile actions needed.
    • Make it 5 hostile actions needed.
    • Remove the rule completely.


Recommended Posts

Guest   
Guest

Execution rights are probably the most broken and redundant rule right now. In case people don't know it here it is:

  • 8.2 A character that is taken hostage may only be executed once for a hostile incident that happened in the past where the character was responsible for, or participated in the incident.

The current version of the rule states that after 1 hostile actions you have execution rights on the people doing it. Now, this is kinda useless seeing as it does not promote RP one bit. In fact, it actually creates a loop: hostile encounter - execution - repeat. This is just pure redundant, especially with how the NLR works, being executed is just useless. It does not add anything to the roleplay which is exactly why it was created, it just kinda became the opposite and it is used as an excuse to kill the hostage and move on.

So what we could do is one of those things:

  • We either go back to 3 or 5 hostile actions in order to gain execution rights.

OR

  • We just remove the rule.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

Shulda never fucked with this rule, it was a "rule of thumb" that 3 is a go, so 3 should be the official IMO 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beni    677

This shit shouldn't have been changed...

Three builds up tension... 5 is to much, 1 Is just shit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Elmo    879

Given that the executions are pretty much useless, and most I've participated in have been RP'd out poorly, I believe it should be removed, re-hashed and then re-instated with amendments to the rule. 

Edited by Elmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grimnir    584

I agree right now it's massively broken. Most of the time I don't see a reason to comply anymore, since in 9/10 times I will get executed anyway. I'd say go back to how it was, 3 hostile encounters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skinner    423

I agree, this "1 Hostile encounter grants execution rights" is extremely detrimental towards RP. If everyone could be trusted to only execute if RP justified it, then maybe I would be more open to it. However, the reality is that 90% of the community will execute when they can do so without being punished for it. As several people have pointed out, this does not promote RP, this simply motivates people to run or fight to the death since their execution is practically assured. 

Why this rules was changed seemingly without any public discussion or support is a mystery to me, but I think the time has come to change it back.

Edited by TheMatt924

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hollows    410
10 minutes ago, Grimnir said:

I agree right now it's massively broken. Most of the time I don't see a reason to comply anymore, since in 9/10 times I will get executed anyway. I'd say go back to how it was, 3 hostile encounters.

     I pretty much agree with this, as it would be NVFL to outright comply to an initiation when I know I'm going to be executed 9/10 as opposed to rolling the die and spraying + praying, or outright trying to sprint away into the woods to survive. It's a double-edged sword at this point, as you either NVFL by surrendering and getting executed, or NVFL trying to escape or retaliate your inevitable doom. I voted for the 3+ rule, but I feel executions should be reserved for only when the person you're killing is going to perma. All you're doing when you kill someone is cutting off any RP that would've been. No point in shooting someone in the back of the head with a shotgun, their face flowering out and in two day's time, you've ran into them again. Seems redundant to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doc Holiday    153
1 hour ago, Grimnir said:

I agree right now it's massively broken. Most of the time I don't see a reason to comply anymore, since in 9/10 times I will get executed anyway. I'd say go back to how it was, 3 hostile encounters.

This pretty much. Why would people comply when if you have done something bad to them you know they will straight up shoot you? With the NLR right now, it seems easier to try and take some of them with you than comply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rolle    2440

From what I understood it was difficult to keep count of and prove the amount of previous interactions (especially for staff handling reports) after long periods of time. People would basically guesstimate how many encounters someone had in the past in order to execute that someone. So it was changed to "eye for an eye" thing, which is obviously much easier to keep track of. The rule however should still subject to rule 7.4 which should not allow any kind of abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
2 minutes ago, Rolle said:

From what I understood it was difficult to keep count of and prove the amount of previous interactions (especially for staff handling reports) after long periods of time. People would basically guesstimate how many encounters someone had in the past in order to execute that someone. So it was changed to "eye for an eye" thing, which is obviously much easier to keep track of. The rule however should still subject to rule 7.4 which should not allow any kind of abuse.

 

But it doesn't promote RP at all. If it is too hard to enforce why not remove it and have it like 1 year ago when you had to ask for permission. That would make people further the RP rather than ending it short because they have the rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
2 hours ago, Dustin said:

Shulda never fucked with this rule, it was a "rule of thumb" that 3 is a go, so 3 should be the official IMO 

Rule of thumb. I agree, we should stick to 3 encounters. Because, we all know everyone is going to go for the execution all time. This demotes the amount of potential roleplay...

Edited by Vapor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest
Just now, Andrey said:

If it is too hard to enforce why not remove it and have it like 1 year ago when you had to ask for permission.

Because nobody would say yes.

People now have to face some consequences, though I do agree the current system is broken as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusty    1022

Nobody ever dies anyways, so it doesn't matter too much. That being said, I think the old 3 hostile actions thing was a good guide to stick to. I think it'd still be good to work on a permadeath rule (when killed with execution rights). Executions don't really happen that often anyways, but at least if execution rights require 3 hostile actions, it kind of forces people to wait until they've had a good few hostile interactions with their enemies before just 'killing' them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadows    993

If it was too hard to enforce at 3 and it's (in my opinion) completely useless with 1, just remove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Voodoo    356

I say just get rid of the rule all together and let the player decide whether to execute or not like it was back in the Mod. 

If people are here for the RP then they would only execute when the time was right. As it stands now it basically gives free reign to execute as long as there has been a hostile action meaning players will just do it because they can by the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SpaceCowboy    226

3 strikes and your out is about right to me as it builds up tension to a climax. Now if only permadeath rules were a thing this would make the RP more interesting in execution type encounters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squillium    321

I've always been about realistic responses I suppose. If someone tries to kill you or robs you and you capture them, letting them go really doesn't make sense. The problem with this is of course that people rarely perma death, which is their right, but that's the same regardless of how many hostile encounters it takes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
APureGamer    55

Always makes me laugh when I see polls like this. Ive never been executed. I dont bother with that type of RP because its not fun. One person in most cases leaves salty and RP should be fun for both people involved. But I would say 3 times lets the tension build up.

But if you want to fix the rule. It needs to be removed and reworked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Eagle    341
3 hours ago, Voodoo said:

I say just get rid of the rule all together and let the player decide whether to execute or not like it was back in the Mod. 

If people are here for the RP then they would only execute when the time was right. As it stands now it basically gives free reign to execute as long as there has been a hostile action meaning players will just do it because they can by the rules.

 
 
 

+1

At the current moment, people don't use the rights for RP, it's used to close of the scene so the person dealing with the hostage can just leave as quickly as possible.

Having 3-10 hostile encounters literally does nothing but get a questionable report up claiming that he was never there or he was never a part of x situation turning it into a loophole of its own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

In my opinion, how it is recently, it doesn't at all further RP between people or groups. You get initiated on by someone you have robbed and know exactly they will execute you, cause hey.. the rules allow you to, right? So the only way to maybe get out of there alive is to not comply. And even if you know you are outnumbered, at that point you don't care if it's NVFL since you would have been executed anyways. I don't see an issue with the old rule. "Eye for an eye" itself sounds not bad in theory, yeah, but it is usually rp'ed out as "Your head for my shoes" (Get it, new moon? love you ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

Ive made a thread about this and my opinions on it in the past but Ill revoice them. How anyone thought this rule was going to further RP is beyond me at this point. Especially after experiencing it and having the rule around for a bit. The normal chain of events now follows. 

Initiated on-- Barely any RP-- Execution

Its just an excuse at this point to get cheap kills and never once have I had a memorable RP experience on either side of the new execution rights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squillium    321
1 hour ago, Eagle said:

+1

At the current moment, people don't use the rights for RP, it's used to close of the scene so the person dealing with the hostage can just leave as quickly as possible.

Having 3-10 hostile encounters literally does nothing but get a questionable report up claiming that he was never there or he was never a part of x situation turning it into a loophole of its own.

Exactly, forget counting hostile interactions. If you capture/kill someone and get captured by them later I'm not sure what you expect. There's enough rules protecting hostages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grimnir    584
6 hours ago, Rolle said:

From what I understood it was difficult to keep count of and prove the amount of previous interactions (especially for staff handling reports) after long periods of time. People would basically guesstimate how many encounters someone had in the past in order to execute that someone. So it was changed to "eye for an eye" thing, which is obviously much easier to keep track of. The rule however should still subject to rule 7.4 which should not allow any kind of abuse.

The problem is that right now there is rule wise no difference between me robbing you and taking your gun and me killing your children in front of you, enslaving your wife and maiming you. One should obviously give you execution rights the other one not so much. Both are hostile actions, but there is an obvious difference. I know that it was hard to keep track of but even two times is better than one time. Right now I get executed pretty much everytime I'd comply, therefore might aswell try to take some with me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest   
Guest

Hello? Is there something done about this?

Edited by Andrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skinner    423

It's pretty clear that the vast majority of the community is unhappy with the current state of the rule. Pretty much everyone is in favor of reverting back to the old "3 hostile encounters" rule, reworking the rule in some other way, or simply removing it entirely. I hope staff are working on this and I sincerely hope that similar rule changes will consider the community opinion before they are implemented. In this case it seems like a tiny number of people made a huge rule change with no advanced notice that affects everybody, even though nobody asked for it and the vast majority of the community doesn't want it this way.

I'm not saying we need a DayZRP Senate or anything stupid like that, we obviously trust staff to make decisions that drive this community, but when changes like this are made that so few people actually like, and these changes are pushed through so suddenly (if I recall there wasn't even an announcement about the change, @Riggsee had to point it out in a forum post before anyone was even aware of the change) it really makes me scratch my head and wonder if the community was even a consideration when making this change or if it was just to make solving reports easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×