Make Provoking Fights For No Reason Count As Deathmatching.

[UseroneGaming]

The current deathmatching rule says:

Quote

Deathmatching is the act of attacking a player without a proper in-character (IC) motive and/or prior escalation.

It however doesn't feature prohibitions on provoking fights for no reason.

Why is this a problem? Because anyone can effectively approach anyone, start provoking them for no reason by being in their personal space, threatening them unjustifiably and when they receive a reaction - they can escalate it to a fight, then to a murder. Which all starts from nothing.

This is why I feel it's essential to note that to intentionally provoke a fight, there must be a justifiable reason to do so. 

The deathmatching rule exists for the purpose of fair play. In real life, any individual can physically kill any other individual intentionally and without any reason. However, in the game we limit this,, so that it doesn't turn into GTA Online, where everyone kills each other on sight. That is great and all, but it doesn't account for unnecessary provocation.

"Just don't react."
 Some provocations, like insults, can be ignored entirely - yes. However, if someone makes real threats to kidnap you, or to hurt you, it's reasonable to expect any average person to react in aggression. Then, the instigator can use said aggression as justification to escalate things to violence, and then to murder. This is a problem, because anyone can kill anyone by just instigating a fight with them and then calling their friend to kill them.

I hope you see my point of view on this topic, but let me know what you think!

[GodDammitKopi]

If someone is being a nuisance IC then I would suggest doing exactly what you said "Just don't react". If you ignore them and don't engage and they attack or kidnap you if you haven't escalated anything then it would likely be viewed as Non RP or DM depending on the circumstance. Just like in real life some people are just annoyances and just like in real life it's best to not engage them and either leave the situation or ignore them completely.

[SneakySniper]

I see your point, but just by not reacting they quite literally cant do anything, reacting in an aggressive way is what triggers escalation then it progresses from there. It is shitty however to start a provocation from absolutely nothing, and is no doubt a shitty situation to be apart of. However it happens a lot IRL, however on RP u cant just go and attack people for no reason, it would be justified as a rule break. If you react, ur opening yourself up to be apart of something that progresses onto potential death or injury, just how it goes.

[UseroneGaming]

2 hours ago, SneakySniper276 said:

I see your point, but just by not reacting they quite literally cant do anything, reacting in an aggressive way is what triggers escalation then it progresses from there. It is shitty however to start a provocation from absolutely nothing, and is no doubt a shitty situation to be apart of. However it happens a lot IRL, however on RP u cant just go and attack people for no reason, it would be justified as a rule break. If you react, ur opening yourself up to be apart of something that progresses onto potential death or injury, just how it goes.

So, even if someone is threatening you with violence, assaulting you (which does not require physical contact), you must be a stoic individual regardless of your inebriation or other conditions, and not react if you don't want to risk being murdered for no reason whatsoever? I just feel like that's unfair to anyone who roleplays a character that is realisticially reactive to such circumstances.

From a purely legal perspective, if someone comes up to you and threatens you with violence, imminent real violence, you are legally allowed (this is not legal advice, I am not a lawyer) to react proportional to the threat presented to you. However, you do that here - and that gives them a justification to kill you, even though they were the ones who intentionally provoked you in the first place.

I just think that this logic doesn't even work for people who are on-duty law enforcement officers. Anyone but a lifetime devotee shaolin monk cannot be reasonably expected to not react at all when presented with a real imminent threat. And whoever makes such threats intentionally for no reason should be held accountable, or they'll just keep doing it for the sake of killing innocent people.

PS. I appreciate your comment, and like I mentioned in the original post - mild provocation is completely fine without needing any logical reason as it is completely reasonably ignorable.

It’s just the unprovoked threats of real imminent violence this server’s Deathmatching rule doesn’t account for, but in my opinion should.

Edited November 30, 2025 by UseroneGaming

[Felarx]

Your posting this because your report got denied.

What you're explaining vs what really happened is pretty different. You approached a high profile gang member and started a fight with him. Your lucky you wasn't shot. If you (a random to me) was to walk up to me, begin talking some kind of shit or even provoking me which leads to a brawl. Which my gang members then saw, you would be killed. Same as if it was real life, if you did that to a gang member in real life you'd be killed. Maybe even tortured. 

You said it yourself, just ignore them and walk away. If you don't you deal with the consequences, its how it goes.. 

[UseroneGaming]

2 minutes ago, Felarx said:

Your posting this because your report got denied.

What you're explaining vs what really happened is pretty different. You approached a high profile gang member and started a fight with him. Your lucky you wasn't shot. If you (a random to me) was to walk up to me, begin talking some kind of shit or even provoking me which leads to a brawl. Which my gang members then saw, you would be killed. Same as if it was real life, if you did that to a gang member in real life you'd be killed. Maybe even tortured. 

You said it yourself, just ignore them and walk away. If you don't you deal with the consequences, its how it goes.. 

1. No.

2. Stop lying, he approached me.

3. I'm not talking about this here.

[SneakySniper]

1 hour ago, UseroneGaming said:

So, even if someone is threatening you with violence, assaulting you (which does not require physical contact), you must be a stoic individual regardless of your inebriation or other conditions, and not react if you don't want to risk being murdered for no reason whatsoever? I just feel like that's unfair to anyone who roleplays a character that is realisticially reactive to such circumstances.

I mean if u roleplay a character who is reactive to those circumstances u gotta be ready to take an L once in a while. If u decide to react you either die or u dont. If u dont like those outcomes dont react in the first place. If u do, gotta be ready to face those consequences

[UseroneGaming]

7 minutes ago, SneakySniper276 said:

I mean if u roleplay a character who is reactive to those circumstances u gotta be ready to take an L once in a while. If u decide to react you either die or u dont. If u dont like those outcomes dont react in the first place. If u do, gotta be ready to face those consequences

I’m not talking about mere insults here, even if someone walks up to you threatening to murder you on the spot, that technically doesn’t currently violate this server’s Deathmatching rules. Any reasonable person would react to that.

[jason]

This is already covered under our ruleplaying rule. If this is happening to you and seriously affecting your roleplay experience, feel free to report it as such.

7. Ruleplaying

Ruleplaying is a term used when players are using, manipulating, or interpreting rules or rulings falsely or outside of their intention, in an unrealistic or unintended way that does not constitute quality or realistic RP standards.  Some examples of ruleplaying:  In a criminal chase, driving at slow speeds knowing that your pursuers are unable to attack you because they can't deliver demands. Walking into a hostile situation with your hands up, knowing your backup is hiding, in order to bait deathmatching rights. Taunting e.g., an enemy at a public place (e.g. fishing pier) knowing that they can't retaliate at said public location, effectively showing no fear for your safety. Each situation will be reviewed and dealt with as case by case basis by staff, the examples above are not precise and there could be realistic context to someone's actions.  Punishment: Anything from an admin jail to an indefinite ban.

[UseroneGaming]

1 hour ago, jason said:

This is already covered under our ruleplaying rule. If this is happening to you and seriously affecting your roleplay experience, feel free to report it as such.

7. Ruleplaying

Ruleplaying is a term used when players are using, manipulating, or interpreting rules or rulings falsely or outside of their intention, in an unrealistic or unintended way that does not constitute quality or realistic RP standards.  Some examples of ruleplaying:  In a criminal chase, driving at slow speeds knowing that your pursuers are unable to attack you because they can't deliver demands. Walking into a hostile situation with your hands up, knowing your backup is hiding, in order to bait deathmatching rights. Taunting e.g., an enemy at a public place (e.g. fishing pier) knowing that they can't retaliate at said public location, effectively showing no fear for your safety. Each situation will be reviewed and dealt with as case by case basis by staff, the examples above are not precise and there could be realistic context to someone's actions.  Punishment: Anything from an admin jail to an indefinite ban.

I'm sorry, but this is the vaguest rule I've ever seen and I challenge you to find a single instance when it was actually enforced.

Each example provided can be referenced to other specific already existing rules:

1) In a criminal chase, driving at slow speeds knowing that your pursuers are unable to attack you because they can't deliver demands. - That's technically failure to properly roleplay fear.

2) Walking into a hostile situation with your hands up, knowing your backup is hiding, in order to bait deathmatching rights. - This one's not very clear, but failure to roleplay fear would still apply I think.

3) Taunting e.g., an enemy at a public place (e.g. fishing pier) knowing that they can't retaliate at said public location, effectively showing no fear for your safety. - Same thing, failure to roleplay fear and maybe metagaming ontop of that.

I believe rules should be as clear as possible, but this particular rule seems entirely subjective to me.

[jason]

I have personally enforced it several times, as have other staff members. It's there to specifically address people dancing around other rules' "technicalities" and shut down those with that intention. You were provided a solution; the choice is yours as to whether or not you use it.

[UseroneGaming]

Just now, jason said:

I have personally enforced it several times, as have other staff members. It's there to specifically address people dancing around other rules' "technicalities" and shut down those with that intention. You were provided a solution; the choice is yours as to whether or not you use it.

I didn't mean to come off as harsh, I appreciate you reaching out with an alternative. 

However, let's look at this practically. Let's say someone wants to DM people and get away with it. So, they approach someone on the street and begin provoking them for no reason what-so-ever. Current DM rules allow this, as long as they don't directly attack them - just making it look like they're attacking them, they're technically not DMing them.

Is the rule 7 about Ruleplaying going to be enforced in that case against said player who's provoking people into a fight? Because that's not very clear to me.

[MrSilky]

4 hours ago, UseroneGaming said:

I didn't mean to come off as harsh, I appreciate you reaching out with an alternative. 

However, let's look at this practically. Let's say someone wants to DM people and get away with it. So, they approach someone on the street and begin provoking them for no reason what-so-ever. Current DM rules allow this, as long as they don't directly attack them - just making it look like they're attacking them, they're technically not DMing them.

Is the rule 7 about Ruleplaying going to be enforced in that case against said player who's provoking people into a fight? Because that's not very clear to me.

Just ignore them and move on with your day. 

[Cal]

I prefer not to speak, but I will say -1 for this.

Just don’t react and especially don’t continue to provoke them.

[Normal]

as a straight yn street mobster imma have to -1 this, you can always walk away or report if you feel they are genuinely baiting for a fight, as jason showed, ive also personally seen ruleplaying (such as the exact instances you are talking about) getting punished, just depends on how the situation unfolded, staff are usually pretty good with their decisions, and if you think they made the wrong one appeal it!

[DaddyShrood]

Quit while you're behind, chief.

[Ritchie Stones]

That is such subjective thing, who is going to state that the other party provoked….

As enoying as it is, the last thing you want is to not be exposed to this, it only makes you stronger and smarter to ignore. 
 

making this prohibited by rule wil keep you weak for ever. And you cant even really tell if its a genuine fight or a attempt to provoke 

[UseroneGaming]

3 hours ago, Ritchie Stones said:

That is such subjective thing, who is going to state that the other party provoked….

We can make the standard be a “real imminent threat of violence,” now it’s no longer subjective and mild provocation is still allowed without needing a logical reason.

What gripes me is that, the way the DM rule is technically written right now, anyone can Assault (threaten violence) anyone they want for any reason, as long as they don’t Batter (actually use violence) them.

[DaddyShrood]

42 minutes ago, UseroneGaming said:

We can make the standard be a “real imminent threat of violence,” now it’s no longer subjective and mild provocation is still allowed without needing a logical reason.

What gripes me is that, the way the DM rule is technically written right now, anyone can Assault (threaten violence) anyone they want for any reason, as long as they don’t Batter (actually use violence) them.

Then don't respond? You're not a robot where if X happens then Y must happen. 

Use a bit of self control and don't respond if you don't want to involve yourself in that kind of thing.