Guild War Rules for PlaneShift.

[Chucki]

PlaneShift Rules of Engagement

Version 1.0

[/b][/u]

I have created this article with the purpose of creating a set of IC and OOC rules for guild war in PlaneShift.
Prior to engaging in Guild Wars, both sides (and any allies joining into the conflict) can agree to these rules,
and inform a Game Master of the conflict and request moderation as per the rules stated.

Section One: Out of Character Rules of Engagement.

I: No player involved in the Guild War on either side can engage in OOC activities that are included in the following:

a) Insulting a player on the opposite side. Players are to retain an OOCly civil experience from the beginning of the conflict to the end, in accordance with PlaneShift's OOC policies. Failure to comply with this will result in action by Game Masters according to PlaneShift's player rules and policies.

b) No OOCly harassing players on the other side to fight you, such as sending tells repetitively asking a player to meet you at a location for a fight.

II: Any player in any guild on either side should have the following rights:

a) Players should be allowed to back out of the war without having to leave their guild. To facilitate this, the fighting guilds should set up an OOC forum thread listing those who don't wish to partake. ICly, these characters could be referred to as civilian members of the guild. Some occasions may call for this rule to be ignored (underground mafia style conflicts and the like). In that case both sides should agree to that beforehand.

b) Guilds not involved in the conflict should be allowed to join in alliance to assist any side they see as fitting. However, the alliance they are joinging should give two hours notice before allowing them to join. This allows the other alliance to prepare OOCly.

c) One or two peace zones (perhaps cities or designated areas) should be OOCly and ICly agreed upon as peace zones. Peace can be enforced OOCly and ICly in the area by a non-combatant guild.

III: Rules pertaining to retaining a role-play atmosphere at war.

a) There should be at least token amounts of roleplay in each conflict. Players on both sides should use /shouts and the like to initiate skirmishes and battles. OOCly, both sides could agree to deeper roleplay involving larger scale armed clashes at times of peak online activity, peacekeeping zones, and other realistic wartime actions.

b) One or more "objectives" for each side should be created to give the war a purpose. Care should be taken to ensure that these are balanced fairly.

Section Two: In Character Rules of Engagement.

I: Who can and cannot be attacked.

a) Anyone classed as a 'civilian' on the forum thread cannot be attacked unless they attack a combatant or attempt to prevent a combatant from attacking another combatant [civilian shielding will only result in your own death, in other words].

b) Anyone who is unarmed and unprepared, such as wearing no armour, bearing no weapons, and not attempting to use magic, should not be attacked. [This is an honor rule, it is optional according to the type of conflict and guilds involved.]

c) The war does not extend to the Realm of Dakkru, and no one under Dakkru's Curse can be attacked. [Optional, but ensures fairer play. In return, death should be realistically roleplayed.]

d) All combatants and civilians should wear their guild crest and name on their person on a visible part of their body. [Put it in your description, so that people can RP identifying you as a combatant/civilian quickly.]

e) Civilians deemed to be carrying supplies for their alliance may have the supplies acquisitioned. However no harm can come to the civilian if he hands over his goods. Ransom of civilians is strictly forbidden. [OOCly civilians performing supply runs have an obligation to be truthful about supply run activity and exactly what they're taking.]

f) Combatants captured during a conflict can be ransomed. [This would require OOC organisation.]

II: Home Territories.

a) All partaking guilds have a right to claim a portion of the area around their guildhouse, appropriate to the size and strength of their guild,   and agreed upon by the leaders of both alliances prior, as their "Home Territory". Any opposing guild member, civilian or combatant, that enters this area can be killed for espionage [roleplaying discovery of allegiance is vital in this case].

b) No member of a partaking guild may enter an opponents guild house for the duration of the declared conflict, unless taken there for ransom.

--End of Rules--

Please add to this thread by giving more ideas for clauses and sections for this agreement. The purpose of this agreement is to ensure an enjoyable war roleplay for both sides, using PlaneShift's war and combat mechanics.

[Tessra]

Looks like you put a lot of effort into this, and it looks great!  There's a lot of points you made that I completely agree with, especially the OOC issues.  Let's keep this game fun for everyone.

The only thing I would ask about is how big a territory a guild can claim as home base.  I'd hate to see someone claiming an entire city, and then slaughtering any opposing members who wandered in.  I think common sense should rule here, and that it should be limited to certain areas, but not interfering with training and game play for all players.  For instance, TAO's guild house is right by Malco.  We wouldn't want to bar anyone from being able to visit Malco.

Also, what if a guild doesn't have a house?  Can they just pick a random area?

[Earowo]

Some of the rules, are pretty good points, but personally I believe that the guilds have the right to make their own rules, It's the way I've always known guild wars. The two guild leaders should discuss, before the war, the rules that they want, weather they can kill anyone, if there are safe zones, weather or not they will fight in town, those are all things guilds have the right to choose themselves.

If your rules, became official, it would be almost impossible to have a legitamite guild war, becuase it would be damn impossible, to have every single member in your guild to agree, to your spoken rules, especiialy since everybody has their own opinions and ideas.


The only thing that should be official, are the harassment rules, about OOC insults, the rest is all IC guild fueds, that have to be worked out with the war itself.

All is fair in war.

[Chucki]

All in a day's work, really. I just had ideas that really were common sense and compiled them into

"and agreed upon by the leaders of both alliances prior" <<-- this is to limit territories to what is practical and common sense.

If a guild doesn't have a house, like KIC, you could stake claim to a particular building and it's area. KIC usually uses the large Utlic in Kore Dsar by the museum for this purpose. Of course we don't OOCly lay claim to it as KIC territory, but it's sorta "home base" for the clan. So other guilds could do similar. Of course we don't leave objects lying around.

It would be nice if the guilds that didn't have guildhouses chose areas that fitted their guild, and/or alliance. trying to block trade routes, major roadways etc. isn't going to be accepted by the opposing alliance leader so you do have to be... nice about where you try and choose. Other options include the various dungeons and caves around PlaneShift.

@Earowo: This isn't "official" at all. It's a template that others can use. As stated within the rules themselves, many IC rules are optional based on the type of conflict.

And this isn't about how everything is fair in war, this is about taking a step back and creating a set of rules for war that make the experience pleasant for all parties.

[Perlam]

i foresee troubles in some of your "rules"

b) Anyone who is unarmed and unprepared, such as wearing no armour, bearing no weapons, and not attempting to use magic, should not be attacked. [This is an honor rule, it is optional according to the type of conflict and guilds involved.]

c) The war does not extend to the Realm of Dakkru, and no one under Dakkru's Curse can be attacked. [Optional, but ensures fairer play. In return, death should be realistically roleplayed.]


I foresee that a lot of "incidents" will come, as in not regarding these rules, or: not wanting to see....

Apart from that: i think most guilds do not want a war in the first place...

Perlan, Masters of Move

[Sangwa]

A great idea and well executed. Here are my two cents:

Section One

II a) Players should have the choice to keep out of fights even if it's totally OOC. I'd clear the part about IC reasons and the example. IC people can decide whatever for each situation.

II b) I wouldn't say 2 hours breach (mainly because it would kinda spoil one of the fun parts of alliances). I'd make this point be obligatory to be agreed upon beforehand, instead of establishing times and such.

II c) [Edited] OOC peace zones should be discussed, not obligatory.

I'd add this one III c) Characters killed in a battle may not join it again after being sent to the Death Realm. They should not fight each other either within the Death Realm either. Else we have endless clone wars.

In general, I'd make this section more like a guideline for OOC contracts, with certain obligatory rules.

Section Two

II) This group of points isn't very useful. Law says you can't kill people in public sites within the town (i.e. near your guild house), and it says that you can kill trespassers and people who offend you in your house. I think the second section could go without this point.

[EDIT] It should be made clear that no lawful fighting can occur within or in the vicinity of towns.

I'd take the part about Dakkru from here and throw it into the OOC zone. When the game is ready, you should be sent randomly within the Death Realm and it shall be very hard to find the people you killed or who killed you there.

Besides that, this section two should be thrown into the Library. With some fancier talk in one or two points.

@ Perlam: That is not a big problem. Those are IC rules and they should just make it more fun when people break them and face the IC consequences.

[Knightspark9]

DE vs. Adani? Is it really happening!?

[Sangwa]

Not probable. DE has no reasons to fight for the time being.
I think this has risen from the HC vs Adani thing.

[EDIT]: Let's not keep with this Off Topic chatter though

[Perlam]

@ Perlam: That is not a big problem. Those are IC rules and they should just make it more fun when people break them and face the IC consequences.

It can and will be a problem, Sangwa, will be a point that can lead to grieving.

In short i can say this: the terms of a guild war should always be discussed by the leaders of the two parties involved.

Perlan, Masters of Move

[Sangwa]

It seems to me that section two of Chucki's proposal is an IC set of lawful rules for Guilds that wish to fight each other without breaking any rules. Therefore it is just a bunch of IC rules that will be as grievous as the current set of laws. We can't think about immature players that get annoyed by IC events that don't go their way every time we want to see something cool implemented.

And I agree that OOC the terms should always be discussed beforehand and follow certain guidelines and civil rules only. I think that's already covered throughout Chucki's proposal... Maybe he should add a point that opposing parties should sign a contract of terms beforehand and then say that they must at least follow those rules.

[Caraick]

I think this reflects a lot of common sense, and hard work on your part, Chuckl. I also think that he intends for the two guild leaders to discuss the terms beforehand, it may even be explicitly stated up there, it looked like someone raised that issue up.

As for the actual rules themselves, again, I think most of them reflect good common sense. Like Tessra, I really appreciate the OOC considerations, let's keep this all where it should be: IC.  I also really like the idea for each guild's "home territory" I think both reflect good common sense, as before.  I think that if two guilds sat down over a copy of these rules, and made their own specific changes and alterations as necessary, you would see a well-ordered and OOCly organized guildwar.  I don't foresee any guild leaders having any tremendous issues with these guidelines, but there's always specific issues involved in each conflict, but I think there's flexibility incorporated in these rules.

Nice work 

-Car

[Chucki]

"Prior to engaging in Guild Wars, both sides (and any allies joining into the conflict) can agree to these rules,
and inform a Game Master of the conflict and request moderation as per the rules stated."

Noting that some rules are marked as optional, they can simply strike them out before handing it on to the moderating GM.

There's also nothing stopping guilds from creating additional rules.

IC rules have IC consequences, I can't see how anyone could possible justify an OOC punishment for an IC action, unless the IC action was a thinly disguised OOC grief action.

OOC rules only have OOC consequences, though the OOC consequences (such as temporary bans and the like) may affect your ability to do anything IC and you as a player will have to accept that. OOC rules in my opinion are more important to police than IC rules, especially in this case, as it is fundamentally core to an enjoyable player experience.

[Sarva]

I think there is one rule missing so far. Before trying to draw another guild into a war talk to the other guild OOC to see if they are even interested in being in a war in the first place.

[Chucki]

That rule would apply before this stage entirely and therefore isn't relevant.

[ncfbn]

Any time I have been involved in a guild war, cities were pretty safe since settings wise fighting was not supposed to happen in the city. If it did, then you risked being jailed(*cough*Earowo*cough*) . Of course that was when guards were a lot more active.

Most the rules mentioned would be nice, but there isn't really a good way to enforce them. Most guild leaders wouldn't kick a member for killing a someone from the opposing guild who was a 'civilian' or for fighting in a declared safe zone.