frezeli

Again, not a justification for Forced RP/Powergaming just to ensure arrests.

I think some of the recent replies actually show why this needs clarification. I am not trying to turn this into a “PD bad” thread, and I do not think police providing treatment after shooting someone is unrealistic by itself. Of course police should attempt to preserve life. That is not the issue. The issue is when “attempting treatment” becomes “guaranteeing survival” for custody purposes. There is a difference between trying to save someone and forcing the outcome of that medical RP so the person can be processed and jailed. Realistically, police/EMS can attempt treatment, apply BLS, slow bleeding, etc. But they cannot magically decide that multiple serious GSWs are successfully resolved simply because the person needs to face charges. The real issue is the practice of forcing RP, literally, which is contrary to the spirit of several rules. If the injured player’s RP and /do responses are being skipped over or treated as irrelevant, then the other side is effectively deciding the outcome for them. That is exactly why it feels like Powergaming/Non-RP. The injured player is not being allowed to properly RP the consequences of being shot, while the treating side is forcing the result that benefits them. I get the conflict of interest point, but that is exactly why the outcome should not be controlled entirely by the side that benefits from it. LEOs should have an interest in preserving life, not forcing jail time. To clarify, I am not talking about every injury or every downed suspect. I am specifically talking about situations where the injuries being RPed are clearly lethal or catastrophic. In those cases, forcing survival just so the person can be processed feels like the exact conflict of interest this rule should address. I am also not saying “just let criminals die.” If someone is clearly abusing injury RP just to avoid prison, that can and should be handled. But at the same time, if a person is shot dead in a gunfight, then realistically that is usually the end of the situation. It should not be treated as unacceptable simply because the suspect being dead means they cannot be jailed. I also do not think PD lowering the quality of their RP because the other player is “salty” is a good justification. If someone gives poor RP, it should not allow the other side to force RP or rush through treatment just to stabilize someone. The standard should not become “they gave basic RP, so I can force the outcome I want.” That just creates the same problem from the other side. So again, I do not disagree with preserving life. I disagree with forced outcomes. Police/EMS should be able to attempt treatment, and criminals should not be able to force death to dodge consequences. But police/EMS also should not be able to force successful survival just to secure jail time. Both sides’ RP should matter.

Honestly, I think the scripted medical system point is a solid suggestion. If someone gets shot, there could be scripted text showing where the bullets landed. That would remove a lot of the subjective back-and-forth from both sides. But until something like that exists, the current problem still remains. The issue is the practice PD has adopted where they shoot/down a suspect and then force medical RP mainly to preserve charges and put the person in jail. That is not really “preserving life” in an RP sense, it is preserving custody. I agree that criminal players can abuse injury RP to avoid consequences. But PD also abuses /stabilize and treatment RP to force consequences as we speak. Both things can be true. The answer cannot be that one side’s abuse is treated seriously while the other side’s abuse is basically normalized because it leads to prison time. If someone is giving completely unreasonable /do responses just to die and avoid jail, staff should deal with that. But if PD is ignoring serious injury RP, skipping over the injured player’s response, and forcing a successful outcome because they want to jail the person, that is also Non-RP/Powergaming. The point is not “criminals should always get to die.” The point is that PD should not automatically get to decide that every suspect survives either. Until there is a scripted system, both sides’ RP should matter, not just the side trying to process charges.

You’re missing the point again. This is not about whether someone wants to die when their friends are trying to save them. The same principle should apply in gang shootouts too. If your friends are trying to treat you, your injury RP should still matter. Nobody should be able to just ignore the downed player’s RP and force whatever outcome benefits them. The issue is that PD can shoot someone, then immediately skip over the injured player’s consent/response to whether the treatment actually works, and force survival because they want to jail them. If a player abuses injury RP just to avoid consequences, staff can deal with that. But the solution cannot be to let the other side completely disregard the player’s RP and decide the medical outcome for them. Maybe reread the suggestion, a few more reads should help get some clarity haha.

I get that concern, but that is not really what I am suggesting. I am not saying players should be allowed to just RP death whenever they want to avoid jail. That would obviously be abused and should still be punishable if done in bad faith. My point is more about the opposite problem, which is that PD should also not be able to force survival every single time after shooting someone just because they want to process charges. There has to be a middle ground. If the injuries being roleplayed are reasonable and serious, especially after multiple GSWs or shots to vital areas, then the outcome of treatment should not be decided only by the officer who shot the person. The officer can attempt treatment, EMS can attempt treatment, but the injured player’s /do response HAS to matter. If the injured player is clearly abusing it just to escape consequences, staff can deal with that as Non-RP/poor RP. But if PD is forcing stabilization despite severe injury RP just to jail someone every single time as a matter of routine, that is clearly the definition of Forced RP & Powergaming. So I’m not asking for “let criminals die to avoid prison.” I’m asking for “don’t let police force a successful medical outcome every time for custody purposes.” Both sides should have to RP it properly, and if either side abuses it, staff should step in.

I would like to suggest a specific rule against forced stabilization/treatment after shootouts, especially where police shoot and down suspects and then use medical RP or /stabilize mainly to keep the suspect alive for arrest and imprisonment. The issue is not that police should be unable to provide treatment. They obviously can and should be allowed to attempt treatment where it makes sense. The issue is that the outcome of that treatment should not be controlled by the same officers who just shot the suspect and now have an obvious interest in keeping that suspect alive only to process charges and send them to prison. In my view, once a player is downed and injury RP begins, the consequences of treatment should depend entirely on the injured/downed player’s response through /do. Police or medics should be able to attempt treatment, but they should not be able to force a successful stabilization where the injured player is roleplaying serious or catastrophic injuries. For example, if a player is downed after multiple gunshot wounds and responds through /do that the injuries are severe, life-threatening, or not realistically treatable on scene, that response should control the RP and if it is felt that the response is being abused in bad faith, forum reports are always a thing. Otherwise, this becomes Powergaming. The officer is effectively forcing the injured player into a medical outcome that benefits PD, regardless of the injuries being roleplayed, just so the suspect can be imprisoned. That removes the injured player’s ability to properly roleplay the consequences of being shot and turns /stabilize into a custody tool rather than a medical RP tool. I am not suggesting that suspects should be allowed to avoid consequences by instantly forcing death every time they are caught. That would also be poor RP. The suggestion is simply that police should not be allowed to force survival either. Both sides should be required to RP the situation fairly, and the injured player’s /do response should be respected unless it is clearly unreasonable. This would still allow PD and EMS to treat suspects properly, but it would stop the unrealistic practice of shooting someone, forcing them to survive, and then immediately using that forced survival to jail them.

@HobGoblin I don’t think this reply really answers the main issue in the report. Nobody is denying that we tried to run. The issue is that running away does not automatically justify immediately killing multiple suspects, especially when no one on our side fired at PD or even aimed a weapon at PD. Saying “if you run you will be shot” does not by itself make lethal force proportionate under the DM rule. You still have not explained why ID 73, who was unarmed, was shot. You also have not explained why less lethal options were not allowed to play out, especially when other officers were clearly trying to tase, tackle etc. instead of instantly shooting. You also have not explained why the tyres/vehicle were not targeted first if the goal was genuinely to stop the escape. The rule does say players must RP the consequences of their actions, but those consequences still have to be reasonable and proportionate. “You ran, so you get killed” is exactly the issue here. That is not measured escalation. We were escaping, not shooting. There was a whole operation with multiple officers present, which makes it even harder to justify why lethal force was the first real option used by ID 106. Also, bringing up FearRP does not answer the DM issue. Even if you believe a FearRP report exists, that is a separate issue. It does not give permission to shoot unarmed or non-threatening players when there were obvious non-lethal alternatives available. My point is simple: fleeing from police may justify being chased, tackled, tased, boxed in, rammed if appropriate, or having the vehicle disabled. It does not automatically justify mowing down three people when no one had used lethal force against PD.

Player(s) being reported: ID 106 - Samuel Martin Date of interaction reported: 23.05.2026 Unix time stamp from HUD: 1779508099 Your character name: Charles Covelli Other player(s) involved: Johnny Dang, Marcus Reeves, Sienna Valentine, Alexander Covelli, Winston Yin Specific rule(s) broken: 3. Deathmatch - Deathmatching is attacking a player without a proper in-character motive and/or without sufficient prior escalation. The rule also requires any retaliation to be measured and proportionate to the escalation that actually occurred. How did the player break the rule(s)? (300 words maximum) During the incident, me and ID 73 were DMd by this person, while attempting to escape from the police. ID 106 escalated directly to lethal force and shot multiple people without sufficient IC escalation or a proportionate basis to do so. At no point before ID 106 opened fire did anyone on our side use lethal force or even aim their weapons against the police. For the record, only two people on our side had weapons (me and Alexander Covelli, and not ID 73 who was DMd regardless), but those weapons were empty and were not pointed at any officer. We were not actively shooting at police, nor were we presenting an immediate lethal threat. The situation was an attempted escape, and ID 106 had alternative and more proportionate options available, including continuing the pursuit or attempting to disable the vehicle/tyres by shooting them. What he chose to do was extremely disproportionate and cannot be seen as anything but DM. As seen in the video evidence, as opposed to ID 106, other Police present actually tried to tackle, verbal threats etc. and not a single other person proceeded to use their weapons, knowing that there was no need to do so. Instead, ID 106 mowed down three people despite the lack of prior lethal force from our side. As a police officer, ID 106 was expected to respond in a measured manner and only use lethal force where it was justified by the escalation. The use of immediate lethal force in these circumstances was excessive, disproportionate and not supported by proper IC escalation. When taking up the issue in /b, all he said was "You don't listen, you get smoked." Also in the clip, he can be seen as saying, "I have hella bullets, you wanna join him?" This clearly indicates that all he wanted to do was shoot people, whether or not he had reason to do so. I was told that if I did make a forum report, I would be reported for FearRP, which seems like a bald accusation to me especially since I knew very well I was not supposed to be shot at since no one, and especially not me and ID 73, did anything at all to escalate the situation to the point where 106 would have had no other option but to take us down. Evidence of rule breach https://streamable.com/j74ugd