Rule revision: 2.3 - Dead Men Tell No Tales

[Weapon]

Thank fuck. Personally I would amend that if it is consented between both parties then the rule should not apply, but that's just me thinking out loud.

A number of rules are already waived if both parties consent, especially when it comes to rules of engagement. I don't think this would be handled differently.

Whether or not it should be codified (we seem to be stacking unwritten un-rules these days) is another matter.

---

Recruitment | Task Force Prometheus | ICN FIRESTORM

[Bat Bat]

Thank fuck. Personally I would amend that if it is consented between both parties then the rule should not apply, but that's just me thinking out loud.

A number of rules are already waived if both parties consent, especially when it comes to rules of engagement. I don't think this would be handled differently.

Whether or not it should be codified (we seem to be stacking unwritten un-rules these days) is another matter.

I think we should introduce Rule 0, like the one we have in EDH in Magic the Gathering, with a slight asterisk, which reads "both parties have to consent". In case of official factions it would be a no-brainer, but both parties sometimes could lead into situations which they want to have roleplay consequences in some sort in the further lore/faction shenanigans.

The question is, would that Rule 0 also apply to the written rules or to the IDs in consent of both parties, too?

Not that I am a longer period returnee and the new ID system is still something I have to get used to, especially how Junker, Hogosha and overall Intel IDs are worded now. However, if there's anything I am SO GLAD we removed division of "Core House" and "Border House" division that existed back in a time.

---

If you ever see me Disconnect, I am not escaping interaction.
My internet decided to die on me and I shall be back promptly!✀
Also, if I'm not back for a longer time the internet really took some time off (blame the ISP).