Donator
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
For reducing redundancy, removeIncluding the accompanying information in spoilers.
And update other rules as necessary to provide what little NLR did.
OR
Collapse/combine it and any other rule(s) that covers the same thing(s) that NLR does, into one rule.
Note that this does not mean to necessarily remove NLR as it's enforced on the server - See the last section.
Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I highly doubt it.Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
- A shorter rules page means less confusion easier revision for both new players getting into the server and anyone else needing to look it over for whatever reason.
- Potentially more concise warn/ban reasons dependant on the offence.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- An RP server without a direct 'NLR' NLR rule may be confusing (Although IMO, the way NLR works on this server already would be confusing to anyone that would be coming from more traditional RP servers anyway)
- Confusion about the removal of the rule as written may erroneously be perceived by the playerbase as an invitation to "Break NLR now that it's no longer a thing" even though the spirit of what NLR is as it exists on the server would still be enforced, via the application of other rules.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
Sometimes I have random thoughts. And this time, I was thinking about FailRP, Metagame and NLR (3.06 kinda comes a little into play here, but its existence really only further serves to prove my point).NLR as it's written on this server, seems to only exist as a holdover derived from what I can only refer to as 'ancestor RP rules' (Which are the basic things like RDM, FailRP, Metagaming, RDA and of course, NLR). NLR makes sense in more traditional RP settings, where you have a more general and unrestrained roleplay environment divisible into distinct and more direct opposition-based roleplay groups. Its primary purpose is to enforce conflict fairness in raids, wherein if Player A has base and Player B raids their base - If Player A successfully defends base and kills player B, player B may not return within the specified timeframe, allowing Player A to continue without having to constantly deal with chain raids. Similarly, if Player B successfully raids base and kills Player A, Player A cannot return within the specified timeframe, allowing Player B to steal/confiscate from Player A's base.
And its secondary purpose is to ensure sensible continuity of roleplay, which is really the only part that's applicable to CN; As it's a reasonable expectation that you aren't able to knowledge from your past life in your next life's RP - The primary problem with the traditional concept of NLR here is that on the server, other than the specific exceptions related to job duties, long-term RP storylines can and often do still persist if say, a key character is killed in a sudden SCP breach. So you can obviously see why this doesn't work on the server in a practical sense.
Another important note is that the server's implementation of NLR has these weird holes in it that are deliberate and specifically intended to facilitate gameplay of certain combative roles, wherein jobs such as MTFs and GenSec have specific exceptions related to their duties - As well as the exception for things unrelated to the cause of death to preserve long-term RP. All of which from a practical standpoint makes sense, but ultimately I believe comes across as roundabout and may be confusing for newer players.
My understanding as a result of this is that what is prevented by the server's NLR rule is either already covered or easily coverable by existing FailRP, Metagaming & Base Raiding rules. For example, if you die in an RP as your character, then respawn and return to the RP as that same character, are you not using OOC knowledge about that RP IC, and as such metagaming?
I of course recognise that sometimes redundancy is necessary - For example, metagaming could also be classed as FailRP, because it would be unrealistic to use information that you didn't get in an RP scenario. I think the key difference here is that other rules have not been as pared down from their original form as NLR has, for the sake of the server's function - I can't think of any traditional RP server setting that would have (or have anything like) these specific exceptions to NLR that we do on CN, whereas other basic RP rules like FailRP & Metagame are still very much the same as they would be, were this a more traditional and less custom setting (but also because those other rules are more flexible and adaptable than something like NLR is, where we've had to cut these large holes out of it and make huge exceptions that only make sense within the context of this server). NLR as we have it, I think is just taking up space on the rules page and potentially confusing newer players with our unorthodox implementation of it.
As for the idea that removing NLR as it's written could be seen as an invitation by players to "break it now that it's no longer a thing" despite it still being a thing, I'd argue that they were probably looking for any opportunity to do so anyway
The intended normalcy of the server is perfectly achievable without the presence of 1.07. What it achieves can be done so via the application (and potential alteration if necessary) of other rules, and given that we've already been through a major rules page update with the intention of cutting it down to make it more easily digestible, followed only by more additions made necessary by subsequent content changes, I would wager that any reason to improve the conciseness and clarity of the rules page is sought after to some degree.
Game Master