[Jokhah]

It was determined by staff in game that the limo isn't subject to fear rp because its bulletproof.  Players were told that they would have to "roleplay" the situation out using /me commands to remove the people from the backseat, else they didn't have to get out of the limo.

This presents a loophole in the rules, as you are not allowed to force someone out of a car via /me, else you would be in direct violation of the powergaming rule.

SWAT Van is also subject to these terms, however since the back doors open and close, you could easily fear rp them out when the doors were open, so its balanced in the game sense.


To be clear, my question is: Could you make a ruling so its crystal clear as to the procedure for fear rp vs bulletproof that also outlines powergaming vs bulletproof? Additionally, after said ruling, could it be added to the rules for clarity to the players on the server?

It seems like I could just sit in the back of the limo and not get out, feasting on fish, and no one can do shit about it.

Would love SA feedback on this topic as well.

[Woody Mac]

@"Nightmare" @26'

Nightmare and 26 have both discuss this with members of LL and they did come with a reply to it but I couldn't remember.

[Falcon]

@Faustie curiosity kills the cat, what's up with this?

[Night]

I don't believe I did make a final comment about this, and if I did then my memory doesn't serve me well.

[roxas]

The problem is not the "powergaming" aspect. RP does not mean that only one person / party is doing the whole thing.
RP requires everyone to actively participate and being creative. When someone tries to remove me from a vehicle I fkn might aswell go along with it to continue the RP and to see where the situation is going.

But as already said. Just sitting in a bulletproof vehicle and being an egoistic massive cck and be like: "Sprölölölöl, not going to do shit, get out of my face" does not lead you anywhere and is not even remotely considered proper roleplay.
You take a certain role and you act like someone of this role. Being all egoistic and refusing to actively participate in any form of RP is just plain stupid. There are so many ways where you could make this scenario unique and maybe even add a plot twist.

I see that phenomenon more often when it comes to Police "RP" - people being all egoistic, just swinging their magic stick around with no effort in actually trying to roleplay whatsoever.

We have to get rid of this "It's all about ME - leave me alone!" attitude first, before we discuss certain rules like this.
But yes - as long as this attitude is still a thing, I'd simply say if someone sits in a limousine you are basically fkd and you can't do anything about it.

Sent via mobile.

[Lord Octagon]

I'd simply say if someone sits in a limousine you are basically fkd and you can't do anything about it.

This is the only relevant clause you've written, relevant but not coherent. 

In other words, you're deflecting and have no real answer to the question.

[Soviethooves]

It was determined by staff in game that the limo isn't subject to fear rp because its bulletproof.  Players were told that they would have to "roleplay" the situation out using /me commands to remove the people from the backseat, else they didn't have to get out of the limo.

This presents a loophole in the rules, as you are not allowed to force someone out of a car via /me, else you would be in direct violation of the powergaming rule.

SWAT Van is also subject to these terms, however since the back doors open and close, you could easily fear rp them out when the doors were open, so its balanced in the game sense.


To be clear, my question is: Could you make a ruling so its crystal clear as to the procedure for fear rp vs bulletproof that also outlines powergaming vs bulletproof?  Additionally, after said ruling, could it be added to the rules for clarity to the players on the server?

It seems like I could just sit in the back of the limo and not get out, feasting on fish, and no one can do shit about it.

Would love SA feedback on this topic as well.

Again as I told you in a previous post. If you are in a situation where you have literally no power over the opposition, you are under their whim. This should be clarified in the rules IMO as you've said to avoid any confusion and to get rid of the "You can't get me out *sticks tongue out*" bs.

[Soviethooves]

@Enzyme @Overlewd

The man would like a response from one of you guys. Don't be rude plz

[Enzyme]

I'm not really comfortable making a rule here on behalf of the staff-team. I'll raise this question internally, get a discussion going and hopefully get a conclusion very soon. If it takes too long then I'll go ahead and decide on it myself. I want to get opinions internally first though.

Thank you for your patience.

[Haamster]

Just a quick tip seeing as it hasn't been brought up here, just because the vehicle is bulletproof, doesn't mean the person(s) inside can't die.

If you somehow manage to get the limo to a standstill, take out all security and future government forces coming to the rescue, you can always threaten the people inside with a molotov and let them burn to death if they don't oblige to what you say.

[richie]

Just a quick tip seeing as it hasn't been brought up here, just because the vehicle is bulletproof, doesn't mean the person(s) inside can't die.

If you somehow manage to get the limo to a standstill, take out all security and future government forces coming to the rescue, you can always threaten the people inside with a molotov and let them burn to death if they don't oblige to what you say.

ok cool very nice

[Jokhah]

@Enzyme Thank you very much and of course expect your team to weigh in on the topic and determine the best outcome.

@Haamster Yes, molotov could kill them while they were in the car. I've also considered using a tow truck to simply pull the limo into the lake too, or possibly dragging it to the ravine then plowing it off, but this last option seems least likely to have positive results.

I'm just seeking clarity, as the mechanical function of bulletproof creates a special situation that circumvents specific rules. Though I completely understand that not every situation can be covered in the rules. I feel that since this is a content related situation, they should as a clause to outline the exemption and alternate procedure in an official manner, as this isn't a random unpredictable player created situation.

Example: Man with bat walks up on man with gun = player created situation which may require an on spot ruling, but doesn't need an actual rule added to cover it.

Example 2: I add a jetpack to the server = I should probably create a rule to outline any specific approved or disapproved activity, should the regular rules not exactly cover it.


While one could argue that the rules already cover it, the procedure to roleplay the situation requires use of /me forced outcome, which in itself isn't allowed under the powergaming rule. So the logical way to proceed in terms of the actual rules, without adding tons of text, is to do like this:

Sample Solution to this issue

Rules:
----
----
FearRP Rule #
FearRP rule #a - Passengers of bulletproof vehicles (SWAT Van, Limo) are/aren't effected by Fear RP.

------
------
Powergaming Rule #
Powergaming Rule #a - You CAN/CANNOT roleplay forcing someone out of a stopped, driverless bulletproof vehicle. (Example: Text)


Though this seems like two new rules, it's actually just exceptions to rules under specific circumstance that is predefined by the content.

[The Rock]

If its bulletproof than u just go way simple , and something that im agaisnt like example , fear rp if a guy come with gun and aim to you while you are in car , in real life people or would run him over or try to escape , last thing would be is doing what he says , its called survival mode and happens on real life

[Haamster]

While I would love to hear an official ruling on this, in my personal retrospect I’ve simply seen the limo and SWAT van the same way that I see a bulletproof wall/window, as it’s a nearly identical situation.
You simply have to find ways to play around it, by for example using a molotov.
It’s not really different from how the President being locked in a safe room would work.

[ForceGhost]

While I would love to hear an official ruling on this, in my personal retrospect I’ve simply seen the limo and SWAT van the same way that I see a bulletproof wall/window, as it’s a nearly identical situation.
You simply have to find ways to play around it, by for example using a molotov.
It’s not really different from how the President being locked in a safe room would work.

The only thing is a safe room has to have a keypad. The Limo isn't lockpickable if I recall correctly.