+- CDBZ Archive (http://alex.zulenka.com)
+-- Forum: Out of Character Forums (http://alex.zulenka.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: RPG Discussion (http://alex.zulenka.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=125)
+--- Thread: Dante's Abyss 2011 (/showthread.php?tid=16294)
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Sophia - 01-26-2011
Jonathan Meer Wrote:I remember the DA in 2005 being a 'if you die, you actually die' type affair.
I'd prefer that sort of scenario.
Or, alternately, we could have 'dead' and 'obliterated,' where, if you die, you are simply 'reconstituted' (or whatever) at the end of the competition, but if you are obliterated (think, destroying Cell or Buu such that they cannot regenerate), then you cannot be reconstituted, and you simply remain dead.
EDIT: I know we need to keep things moving for people, and I know the afterlife has a reputation (I think, unfairly) as an activity-stifler, but I don't like downplaying the significance of death.
We actually talked about it, but we would have to change how DA works. Everyone but one person ends up dying, even in Ander's thing. We obviously can't have that.
We were just going to keep the "deaths don't count unless by a collar explosion" just because it keeps the vibe going (people liked reading about characters getting their faces blown off by shotguns or getting their throats slit by playing cards). Of course, if that's really not a concern and deaths should be real, then we can make it so.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Jonathan Meer - 01-26-2011
Then what of the 'alternately' scenario?
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Juno - 01-26-2011
I like the grid style, but then, that's the only one I'm familiar with. I do like the grading system described by Soph, though. When will this be happening?
EDIT: I'm a fan of the idea that the player can choose (in their exit post) whether or not they actually die. Collar explosions being the 'you always die' exception, of course.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Victoria - 01-26-2011
Explain in detail what you mean by "alternately"?
No date has been set yet, once we figure out HOW to run it we'll decide on the when. It also depends on how long Meer's saga is going on for.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Jonathan Meer - 01-26-2011
Victoria Wrote:Explain in detail what you mean by "alternately"?
Jonathan Meer Wrote:Or, alternately, we could have 'dead' and 'obliterated,' where, if you die, you are simply 'reconstituted' (or whatever) at the end of the competition, but if you are obliterated (think, destroying Cell or Buu such that they cannot regenerate), then you cannot be reconstituted, and you simply remain dead.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Victoria - 01-26-2011
Our basic idea is for it to be similar to how it used to be...as far as I know. If you aren't in the right place at the right time and your collar explodes, you die, same with if you're inactive. It would be another "virtual" setting.
So...obliterated would be "collar" death.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Jonathan Meer - 01-26-2011
Right; my suggestion is that we allow for some people to be obliterated on a non-collar death as well.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Sophia - 01-26-2011
I'm not sure either of us are willing to kill off people based on writing quality. Is that what you're suggesting?
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Jonathan Meer - 01-26-2011
Yup.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Sophia - 01-26-2011
Yeah. Then no, just like I said, we're not willing to do that. It seems unfair.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Jonathan Meer - 01-26-2011
...It seems unfair for people to die in a saga?
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Sophia - 01-26-2011
Jonathan Meer Wrote:...It seems unfair for people to die in a saga?
Based on writing quality. People are still dying due to inactivity or danger zones.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Jonathan Meer - 01-26-2011
Jonathan Meer Wrote:...It seems unfair for people to die in a saga [based on writing quality]?
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Victoria - 01-26-2011
I don't want people to be afraid to join DA. If they know that they could die for poor quality, they'll never join. We'll have deaths for good reasons. Writing quality/activity = winning, peroid.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Sophia - 01-26-2011
Victoria Wrote:I don't want people to be afraid to join DA. If they know that they could die for poor quality, they'll never join. We'll have deaths for good reasons. Writing quality/activity = winning, peroid.
And to add to that, we'll drive people away from the site in general if we hammer down that hard. If you want to talk about an activity stifler, that would be it. Besides, Chubbs has a fairly elitist reputation as it is.
Honestly, I don't think anyone should die unless it's for inactivity. Or story reasons, but even that is sometimes bullshit.
EDIT: As for it being unfair, it seems pretty...depressing to tell people "you're not good enough to even survive." I don't want to do that.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Jonathan Meer - 01-26-2011
I joined the first DA after I started here, in 2005, with full knowledge that I would probably die. I was, indeed, the first to die.
I spent a large amount of time in the Afterlife, learned Telepathy, and figured out what I wanted to do with Krillin. That death was probably the single most formative event in my understanding of and activity with Krillin.
It's really hard to take a saga (especially a saga as cutthroat as Dante's Abyss) seriously unless the deaths are actual deaths. Or, at the very least, unless death is at least possible/probable.
EDIT: Are you willing to say 'You're not good enough to defeat this other person'?
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Sophia - 01-26-2011
Okay. We'll compromise:
If the point value between the two participants is significant enough (we don't have the system in place solidly enough to give an actual number yet), then there's a chance that the loser will die. Also, we will add a coliseum concept where at random points in time, two people will be selected to fight (the players will write this fight), and the loser will then die. All of this is, of course, for realz.
Is this an adequate solution?
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Jonathan Meer - 01-26-2011
Absolutely, yes. That's exactly it. =D
I ESPECIALLY like the coliseum bit.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Celena - 01-27-2011
So say John Doe is in sector A and Sophia is in Sector B, they'll have to battle each other during some random point in time due to a coliseum concept?
I prefere the concept of person A and person B stepping onto the same location and encountering one another.
Don't like the idea of randomly fighting each other.
Dante's Abyss 2011 - Sophia - 01-27-2011
People who do step into the same location are going to fight one another. Coliseums are random and, for all intents and purposes rare. For IC purposes, you can just call it an attempt to boost the ratings by whoever's running it.