The Amendment to Fugue Rules seems flawed

[perseid]

The amendment to the death and memory rules feels haphazard to me even if I recognize its intent. There's already a strong mechanical favoritism towards being the first person in an interaction to attack, to the point that even good characters in settlements will at times murder people who are just being rowdy, and now shotgunning is even more encouraged because in addition to the narrative control you gain from forcing people out of a space you now get the added boon of forcing the other player to rp from ambiguously laid out memory criteria. It's fine to say that it's in the name of treating death seriously but in my opinion it just contributes to a rules meta where death is somehow serious but murder is actively encouraged. I think the main change we'll see is that now there's even less reason to try and give a player you don't recognize some good faith leeway in a conversation.

Edit: This was brought up by someone else but there's no replies so I'm editing it in. I think the rule change also creates rp friction with the 48 hour rule because now my character doesn't know who killed them without clues so barring clues how does a slain character explain avoiding their murderer to respect the 48 hour rule?

[Paint]

Edit: This was brought up by someone else but there's no replies so I'm editing it in. I think the rule change also creates rp friction with the 48 hour rule because now my character doesn't know who killed them without clues so barring clues how does a slain character explain avoiding their murderer to respect the 48 hour rule?

The 24 and 48 hour rule is awkward specifically because of this, but the onus isn't on your character to avoid their murderer. The onus is on you, the player. You need to figure out how to make it work. I've had awkward incidents on Skal especially where I've been going into a dungeon while my character's killer or the person I killed is walking right out of the same dungeon. And what happens is a nod of acknowledgement and then passing. I tend to let whomever I'm partied with know that I'm currently under the 48 hour rule with them so they know not to drag me into anything.

I've always played it as described in the fugue rules stated recently anyways. It feels weird to have perfect memory of one's own death, especially on a server where death is supposed to be respected. Part of that is that the personal experience of death should remain mysterious for characters, even if the systems behind it are well described and preached by various clergies.

[Hazard]

Personally I think this is a step in the right direction. The "I was murdered by <person> RP" was always ridiculous. Few things more awkward than someone running up to others and explaining how they were just killed and the murderer is such and such. Personally, my characters have always treated this as less then credible. "Killed? You look fine to me." .. "Do you have any proof/witnesses?"

Knowing all the details of your own death also robs us of a very important story-telling opportunity. A lack of witness.
A few times I thought, cool. This event was really well planned and patient. They didn't just kill them in the open, they waited to be somewhere away from witnesses, killed the person and hid the evidence - But then the person just magically springs up all on their own and gives the guards a detailed account of the entire event. LOL! Oops.

I can see where your concerns come from, though .. but I think that if a player is having issues with players too quick/eager to kill (shotgun pvp) that might be something worth reporting. Even if it isn't a rulebreak, it's just not the best for storytelling and a DM might be able to take that player aside and give them some advice and help them grow and improve.

As for respecting the 48 hour rule, I can think of a few ways. Of course there will be an OOC element to it, of just avoiding the area/player without your character being aware and explaining it as a vague traumatisation. "I don't know what happened to me or who did it, but I am terrified of going anywhere near the place it might have happened." Personally I've never needed my character to remember who killed them to avoid the killer/area, and I've never had them remember who killed them (has always been left to witnesses). I see the 48 hour rule as more of an OOC thing and doesn't need an IC aspect to it. For example, the same rule applies to theft. There's no IC reason my character can't/won't steal more than one thing. They just don't.

You definitely raise some good points though, but this step towards taking some things in RP more seriously really gives me some hope. Maybe we will see some other minor rule changes too, that will help alleviate those concerns. I'd love to see a few little tweaks like this to how things are done, to raise the quality of RP-culture on the server.

[perseid]

Edit: This was brought up by someone else but there's no replies so I'm editing it in. I think the rule change also creates rp friction with the 48 hour rule because now my character doesn't know who killed them without clues so barring clues how does a slain character explain avoiding their murderer to respect the 48 hour rule?

The 24 and 48 hour rule is awkward specifically because of this, but the onus isn't on your character to avoid their murderer. The onus is on you, the player. You need to figure out how to make it work. I've had awkward incidents on Skal especially where I've been going into a dungeon while my character's killer or the person I killed is walking right out of the same dungeon. And what happens is a nod of acknowledgement and then passing. I tend to let whomever I'm partied with know that I'm currently under the 48 hour rule with them so they know not to drag me into anything.

I've always played it as described in the fugue rules stated recently anyways. It feels weird to have perfect memory of one's own death, especially on a server where death is supposed to be respected. Part of that is that the personal experience of death should remain mysterious for characters, even if the systems behind it are well described and preached by various clergies.

This isn't entirely true though. The rules specify first that it's a responsibility between characters in a conflict to avoid interaction, which has a lot of implications for players that run many alts. While it's true that the new ruling is addressing how a player should guide their character's behavior this counterpoint also largely ignores my baseline criticism which was that it creates rp friction which is immersion breaking in its own fashion and leads to an environment where character interactions are encouraged further towards hostility even if there's room to be more generous towards the other player during the interaction.

[DM Poppy]

Hey, I can address your questions as best I can.

So, regarding your first point. This rule is to help reduce what has been identified as a growing problem regarding RP and it is something that is reported frequently.

Whilst we understand that their is concern that some people may try to use this favourably, it doesn't really work as well as you explained, unless you are in an area with absolutely no witnesses. BUT. Even before, if you were killed in the Forest by Bob and returned to Cordor to tell everyone Bob killed you. Bob could just scoff and call you a liar.
This simply removes what we feel is terrible RP with regards to finger pointing your attacker some 10 seconds after recovering from a light ailment called being dead.

As for the 48 hour rule. Most of our rules are conditions that the Player must respect and show through their Character. The same applies here, whilst your Character might not recall, you do as a Player and so it's your responsibility still to avoid them. You recall some events leading to your death, so it's perfectly reasonable to be wary or afraid of someone following the event and avoiding them.

[Spriggan Bride]

The 24 and 48 hour rule is awkward specifically because of this, but the onus isn't on your character to avoid their murderer. The onus is on you, the player. You need to figure out how to make it work. I've had awkward incidents on Skal especially where I've been going into a dungeon while my character's killer or the person I killed is walking right out of the same dungeon. And what happens is a nod of acknowledgement and then passing. I tend to let whomever I'm partied with know that I'm currently under the 48 hour rule with them so they know not to drag me into anything.

TBH I think it would be nice if "winners" would be gracious a little more often. I mean, you win the fight and get all the bragging rights from that... If you see the "loser" out doing writs with a group later you don't have to make it on them to be somewhere else, you could be the one to nod and move along.

I understand there's no obligation but little things like this are what give you a good name in the community.

[Kalthariam]

So then people just mention they blacked out, have memory issues, feel weak, and the last vague thing they recall is being near bob. (To use the example of bob killing you that was used earlier)

Some characters might not talk about their hiccups for pride reasons, but there's plenty of characters that if you RP out you know, recovering from dying as we're suppose to. People are going to be concerned, ask what happened, and these characters are going to respond the best they can.

Having some general fogginess of what happened immediately after being revived makes sense, but then in the background you can just sort of get up either through your god reviving you or an NPC dragging your body away after your killers gone and reviving you, or a friend finding your body and reviving you.

Coming back to life is rarely a surprise in the setting, people going out to KILL people should also have to take that into account I think. There should be consequences for murder. If your on an island that resurrection magic is plentiful (Which it is) and you decide to kill someone, there's canonically no way to kill them and make sure they don't come back.. you should be careful about your actions if you don't want it to get out that you killed someone.

Death should matter, but killing people should have ramifications and consequences too. Otherwise you promote people becoming murderhobos and the victims are completely out of luck because the rules benefit people just killing you because suddenly your not allowed to remember who killed you? Does that end at the end of the 48 hour rule? If we're not allowed to remember who killed us at all, what stops someone from abusing the forced amnesia?

[ReverentBlade]

There's definitely arguments for and against. That said, speaking from strictly personal experience, some death amnesia is better. I've played on lot of servers, with and without death amnesia, and the amnesia has always felt better. Can you work against the spirit of the rules and be within the rules? Absolutely, but the cheeseballs stand out much more vividly when amnesia is in play.

[Spyre]

We are open to adjusting wording and providing further clarity if required.

The intent is to create a more serious nature for death. You do not know how you died, you don't really know you died - you have no recollection of being in the fugue, you do not know what happened around your death. But, you have some RP that you do remember around it. You remember the conversation, a potential build up, but not the fight.

In my personal take (and be mindful this is how I'd handle it and not an official ruling on how to handle it) I'd probably forget the last 10 minutes of the interaction. Just that I was somewhere with that particular person and that the rest I am unsure of.

But, yes - we will make it more clear and precise as we should.

RE: 48 Hour rule - this has always been a player responsibility, and not a character responsibility. You as a player must remove yourself from the area with the person and conscientiously avoid interacting with them. Your character might still want to act, but you as the player need to make the right decision in not and respecting the events and your fellow player.

[Amateur Hour]

For a general suggestion for people who aren't sure how to react to someone dying, or being killed under the current rules:

Focus on the victim.

The victim themselves, not the killer. Are they okay? Is there lasting damage? How do they feel? Has the experience brought them any important revelations about their direction in life? Do they just want to chill with their friends and talk about literally anything other than their harrowing experience?

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

This was one of those "rule changes" that made me ask "Wasn't this always the rule?" when I read the announcement. I guess it wasn't so...yeah, this is a logical change

[AstralUniverse]

Every good role player I came across in the last 15 years is already playing like this. This is an excellent rule change.

[Hazard]

... what stops someone from abusing the forced amnesia?

I'd assume the 'Be Nice' rule. Along with alignments, dogmas, laws, and other characters/NPCs, tracks, etc.

But yes, it does give some weight to the dangers of the isle. You can't just follow some shady character into the depths of a spooky cave all alone without the thought of "Oh gods, what if something happens to me?" and I think that's a good thing.

I definitely see how some might be worried about abuse, but it's a roleplaying server and if we can't trust each other in those ways then that's a sign the situation needs DM intervention/mediation.

[Richrd]

The change of the rules if absolutely fine and a step in the right direction. Remembering every single circumstance surrounding how you died was immersion breaking and absolutely f*cking awful.

The issue you mentioned there, with people abusing this "flawed amendment", is not with the rule but with the players.

It's players who create toxic environments where storytelling is only pushed by might makes right and where "even good characters" shotgunning rowdy folks down in settlements is a normality.

But even this toxic player behaviour stems from the same ol' problem of death in PvP having no serious consequences and only being worth what players on both sides decide to make of it. Thus creating a "so what if I killed that guy? We all know he's just going to come back" sort of environment.

[Aren]

Every good role player I came across in the last 15 years is already playing like this. This is an excellent rule change.

100%

[MissEvelyn]

This was one of those "rule changes" that made me ask "Wasn't this always the rule?" when I read the announcement. I guess it wasn't so...yeah, this is a logical change

It used to be in the past.

I was never a fan of when it got changed, so this change / reversion is one I welcome greatly.

[-XXX-]

This is a good thing!
It dismisses respawning as some sort of everyday IG reality - characters can now refuse to believe dubious accusations without being patronized.

[Subtext]

I like that rule change.

[chris a gogo]

Like Babylon System is the Vampire I thought this was already a thing.

You know with the exception of when you see the killer you have your character react with fear or distrust due to your subconscious telling you to run away.
But maybe that was just me.

[The GrumpyCat]

Also remember, like the 48 hour rule, this rule can be wavered!

Say you were Bob the Blackguard and you met up with Paul Paladin in the wilderland and had an epic confrontation and fight (duel of the fates music playing, yelling, lots of dramatic shouting - really cool stuff). You can always contact the player and said 'Say, any issue with my character remembierng that you were the guy who duled and bested me?' And they may say yes! In which case... cool! Though I'd give them time for victory to sink in, ect even so.

[Morgy]

Also remember, like the 48 hour rule, this rule can be wavered!

Say you were Bob the Blackguard and you met up with Paul Paladin in the wilderland and had an epic confrontation and fight (duel of the fates music playing, yelling, lots of dramatic shouting - really cool stuff). You can always contact the player and said 'Say, any issue with my character remembierng that you were the guy who duled and bested me?' And they may say yes! In which case... cool! Though I'd give them time for victory to sink in, ect even so.

Whilst this is a good example of being good to each other OOC, it seems the rule is flat out that if your PC died, your PC cannot recall it. I thought the point of this was to make death have more consequences for your PC on the server, regardless of what the other party might not mind personally - waiving it seems like a reverse on the intention of this change.

I don’t think any other player should be able to authorise your PC remembering the nature of their death, if I understand this rule correctly.

[Spyre]

Also remember, like the 48 hour rule, this rule can be wavered!

Say you were Bob the Blackguard and you met up with Paul Paladin in the wilderland and had an epic confrontation and fight (duel of the fates music playing, yelling, lots of dramatic shouting - really cool stuff). You can always contact the player and said 'Say, any issue with my character remembierng that you were the guy who duled and bested me?' And they may say yes! In which case... cool! Though I'd give them time for victory to sink in, ect even so.

Whilst this is a good example of being good to each other OOC, it seems the rule is flat out that if your PC died, your PC cannot recall it. I thought the point of this was to make death have more consequences for your PC on the server, regardless of what the other party might not mind personally - waiving it seems like a reverse on the intention of this change.

I don’t think any other player should be able to authorise your PC remembering the nature of their death, if I understand this rule correctly.

The above example is of good faith. However, I do agree it is counter productive to the intent of the ruling. And, should not be the standard or part of it.

Waiving the 48 HR rule enables further interaction between the players; however, the waiving is done on the OOC basis that you do not want to hinder each others roleplay or that you want to further the narrative by giving them a raise. However, I do not see any benefit of allowing a waive of not remembering your death. You already remember the interaction leading up to it; however, you do not know how you died / any interaction in the fugue.

[Zavandar]

Every good role player I came across in the last 15 years is already playing like this. This is an excellent rule change.

100%

[Azensor]

A few things:

If your character doesnt remember who killed them..would your character 'give ground', ie leave the hub, if they see the other character is already there?

A few weeks ago, maybe six or so, we had someone in the ud killing noobies(lvl 2 fresh off the boat) at the gate into town..with the current ruling..would we be able to handle a similar situation on our own like we did back then? and again, just incase people kinda skimmed over that..this isnt a hypothetical that actually happened until others /learned about it/ and put a stop to it in-character.

Whats to stop someone from just saying, "Oh well I was with bob then the next moment..I dont know I woke up at the temple with [insert wounds]" ..it just sounds...daft very daft.

[AstralUniverse]

If your character doesnt remember who killed them..would your character 'give ground', ie leave the hub, if they see the other character is already there?

OOCly speaking, if there's 48h rule in place, then yes, someone needs to give ground, but that's entirely ooc driven and there's no IC relation to it. you just need to pretend the other guy does not exist and is invisible to you along with anyone interacting with them, and also do your best to not be in the same area as them at all. That's all ooc tho, and that part hasnt changed.

ICly speaking, your character doesnt remember who killed them, they dont need to 'give grounds' because they dont know. So you can just move along your day, continuing to investigate what happened to you in those few hours you cant remember, or whatever it is you're doing. The expectation is that you do not act IC over things you dont know IC.