The Crossover Act was established during the old Super Heroes RP on the LMBs. The Act stated that any media that has ever had a crossover with MARVEL or DC would be allowed in the RP. This meant that crossovers between MARVEL and Phineas and Ferb would make P+F legal in the RP. Other crossovers included Dr. Who, Transformers, Star Trek, The Powderpuff Girls, and Scooby-Doo. This Act allowed several unrelated characters into the RP. This is why the Crossover Act has been abolished for good.
This means that the villains from the Phantom Zone in The LEGO Batman Movie are not allowed. Phineas and Ferb are also not allowed. Thank you. -DC13
So, suppose villains or heroes want to team-up to take a case. The two would work in a single HQ working with each other to plan in jammers/spoilers (Stephanie Brown for the win) the heist until it is clear what the two (or more) want to do. When in action, a pre-determined owner would take control of both characters under the heist is done (at which point the reward is split between them as previously determined in the plan). If both owners would like to retain possession of the character they may do so (though I suggest against this in the case that one player is absent for a prolonged time - if this happens after a set time (two days from original post or something) than the other player may take control of characters).
For example: It's April 1st Calendar Man (hopefully owned by myself) wants to pull one on the Bat and decides to team-up with Clayface (SpoodaChicken's character) to pull off a heist. The two plan in Arkham (? is that a Villain HQ?) until they are ready to pull off the heist. As planned, Clayface takes on the form of Julian Day to attract the attention of Batman at Gotham Bank while the real Calendar Man is attacking Metropolis Bank (or some other area). In order to keep up the charade, I would be in control of both of both Calendar Men with SC's permission and would play as both characters in combat as appropriate. Once the heist is finished, whether defeated or not, the two return to the HQ and split the loot 50/50. (Written by Blight)
All for this rule, quote and say aye. All opposed, quote and say nay.
I vote aye.
The Reaction Rule
In battle, time and reaction decides the outcome. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for two IRL days, the attack is successful. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for 5 IRL days, then RPC 2 is instantly teleported back to RPC 2's HQ.
All for this rule, quote and say Yay. All opposed, quote and say Wah!
-DC13
Alliance Rule should allow villains to do hero things as well.
The IRL time in the Reaction Rule should be increased and should only happen if the person does not give a reason for their departure.
So, suppose villains or heroes want to team-up to take a case. The two would work in a single HQ working with each other to plan in jammers/spoilers (Stephanie Brown for the win) the heist until it is clear what the two (or more) want to do. When in action, a pre-determined owner would take control of both characters under the heist is done (at which point the reward is split between them as previously determined in the plan). If both owners would like to retain possession of the character they may do so (though I suggest against this in the case that one player is absent for a prolonged time - if this happens after a set time (two days from original post or something) than the other player may take control of characters).
For example: It's April 1st Calendar Man (hopefully owned by myself) wants to pull one on the Bat and decides to team-up with Clayface (SpoodaChicken's character) to pull off a heist. The two plan in Arkham (? is that a Villain HQ?) until they are ready to pull off the heist. As planned, Clayface takes on the form of Julian Day to attract the attention of Batman at Gotham Bank while the real Calendar Man is attacking Metropolis Bank (or some other area). In order to keep up the charade, I would be in control of both of both Calendar Men with SC's permission and would play as both characters in combat as appropriate. Once the heist is finished, whether defeated or not, the two return to the HQ and split the loot 50/50. (Written by Blight)
All for this rule, quote and say aye. All opposed, quote and say nay.
I vote aye.
The Reaction Rule
In battle, time and reaction decides the outcome. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for two IRL days, the attack is successful. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for 5 IRL days, then RPC 2 is instantly teleported back to RPC 2's HQ.
All for this rule, quote and say Yay. All opposed, quote and say Wah!
-DC13
Aye say yay. See what I did there? :tounge: Or what about yaye?
So, suppose villains or heroes want to team-up to take a case. The two would work in a single HQ working with each other to plan in jammers/spoilers (Stephanie Brown for the win) the heist until it is clear what the two (or more) want to do. When in action, a pre-determined owner would take control of both characters under the heist is done (at which point the reward is split between them as previously determined in the plan). If both owners would like to retain possession of the character they may do so (though I suggest against this in the case that one player is absent for a prolonged time - if this happens after a set time (two days from original post or something) than the other player may take control of characters).
For example: It's April 1st Calendar Man (hopefully owned by myself) wants to pull one on the Bat and decides to team-up with Clayface (SpoodaChicken's character) to pull off a heist. The two plan in Arkham (? is that a Villain HQ?) until they are ready to pull off the heist. As planned, Clayface takes on the form of Julian Day to attract the attention of Batman at Gotham Bank while the real Calendar Man is attacking Metropolis Bank (or some other area). In order to keep up the charade, I would be in control of both of both Calendar Men with SC's permission and would play as both characters in combat as appropriate. Once the heist is finished, whether defeated or not, the two return to the HQ and split the loot 50/50. (Written by Blight)
All for this rule, quote and say aye. All opposed, quote and say nay.
I vote aye.
The Reaction Rule
In battle, time and reaction decides the outcome. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for two IRL days, the attack is successful. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for 5 IRL days, then RPC 2 is instantly teleported back to RPC 2's HQ.
All for this rule, quote and say Yay. All opposed, quote and say Wah!
-DC13
Alliance Rule should allow villains to do hero things as well.
The IRL time in the Reaction Rule should be increased and should only happen if the person does not give a reason for their departure.
Otherwise, yay for both.
If the Alliance Rule would be applied to heroes and villains teaming up to take down a common threat, that would be cool and would work as plot device. I think the only definite rule there would be that they would have to plan in a public area (such as Gotham City) as neither would want to take each other to their secret bases.
I say aye to the Alliance Rule (Karz' it was my idea). I would also say that more details could/should be added to the rule such as, if we were to add hero/villain team-ups, a betrayal condition (when a villain double-crosses a hero by doing something or other).
I think the time for the Reaction Rule is suitable though some compromise should be made for those who give a reason for departure. So, I guess it's YaY from me.
So, suppose villains or heroes want to team-up to take a case. The two would work in a single HQ working with each other to plan in jammers/spoilers (Stephanie Brown for the win) the heist until it is clear what the two (or more) want to do. When in action, a pre-determined owner would take control of both characters under the heist is done (at which point the reward is split between them as previously determined in the plan). If both owners would like to retain possession of the character they may do so (though I suggest against this in the case that one player is absent for a prolonged time - if this happens after a set time (two days from original post or something) than the other player may take control of characters).
For example, It's April 1st Calendar Man (hopefully owned by myself) wants to pull one on the Bat and decides to team-up with Clayface (SpoodaChicken's character) to pull off a heist. The two plan in Arkham (? is that a Villain HQ?) until they are ready to pull off the heist. As planned, Clayface takes on the form of Julian Day to attract the attention of Batman at Gotham Bank while the real Calendar Man is attacking Metropolis Bank (or some other area). In order to keep up the charade, I would be in control of both of both Calendar Men with SC's permission and would play as both characters in combat as appropriate. Once the heist is finished, whether defeated or not, the two return to the HQ and split the loot 50/50. (Written by Blight)
All for this rule, quote and say aye. All opposed, quote and say nay.
I vote aye.
The Reaction Rule
In battle, time and reaction decides the outcome. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for two IRL days, the attack is successful. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for 5 IRL days, then RPC 2 is instantly teleported back to RPC 2's HQ.
All for this rule, quote and say Yay. All opposed, quote and say Wah!
-DC13
Aye.
Wah!
It's a key part of the unspoken RP rules that only the user decides what happens to their RPC, which is why you can only say you shoot or swing something at them. Only the user in control of RPC2 is ever allowed to say that anything happens to them.
Also, 2 days would be far too short a time. If such a rule was put it place, it would be better to have at least a week.
So, suppose villains or heroes want to team-up to take a case. The two would work in a single HQ working with each other to plan in jammers/spoilers (Stephanie Brown for the win) the heist until it is clear what the two (or more) want to do. When in action, a pre-determined owner would take control of both characters under the heist is done (at which point the reward is split between them as previously determined in the plan). If both owners would like to retain possession of the character they may do so (though I suggest against this in the case that one player is absent for a prolonged time - if this happens after a set time (two days from original post or something) than the other player may take control of characters).
For example: It's April 1st Calendar Man (hopefully owned by myself) wants to pull one on the Bat and decides to team-up with Clayface (SpoodaChicken's character) to pull off a heist. The two plan in Arkham (? is that a Villain HQ?) until they are ready to pull off the heist. As planned, Clayface takes on the form of Julian Day to attract the attention of Batman at Gotham Bank while the real Calendar Man is attacking Metropolis Bank (or some other area). In order to keep up the charade, I would be in control of both of both Calendar Men with SC's permission and would play as both characters in combat as appropriate. Once the heist is finished, whether defeated or not, the two return to the HQ and split the loot 50/50. (Written by Blight)
All for this rule, quote and say aye. All opposed, quote and say nay.
I vote aye.
The Reaction Rule
In battle, time and reaction decides the outcome. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for two IRL days, the attack is successful. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for 5 IRL days, then RPC 2 is instantly teleported back to RPC 2's HQ.
All for this rule, quote and say Yay. All opposed, quote and say Wah!
The Crossover Act was established during the old Super Heroes RP on the LMBs. The Act stated that any media that has ever had a crossover with MARVEL or DC would be allowed in the RP. This meant that crossovers between MARVEL and Phineas and Ferb would make P+F legal in the RP. Other crossovers included Dr. Who, Transformers, Star Trek, The Powderpuff Girls, and Scooby-Doo. This Act allowed several unrelated characters into the RP. This is why the Crossover Act has been abolished for good.
This means that the villains from the Phantom Zone in The LEGO Batman Movie are not allowed. Phineas and Ferb are also not allowed. Thank you. -DC13
So, suppose villains or heroes want to team-up to take a case. The two would work in a single HQ working with each other to plan in jammers/spoilers (Stephanie Brown for the win) the heist until it is clear what the two (or more) want to do. When in action, a pre-determined owner would take control of both characters under the heist is done (at which point the reward is split between them as previously determined in the plan). If both owners would like to retain possession of the character they may do so (though I suggest against this in the case that one player is absent for a prolonged time - if this happens after a set time (two days from original post or something) than the other player may take control of characters).
For example, It's April 1st Calendar Man (hopefully owned by myself) wants to pull one on the Bat and decides to team-up with Clayface (SpoodaChicken's character) to pull off a heist. The two plan in Arkham (? is that a Villain HQ?) until they are ready to pull off the heist. As planned, Clayface takes on the form of Julian Day to attract the attention of Batman at Gotham Bank while the real Calendar Man is attacking Metropolis Bank (or some other area). In order to keep up the charade, I would be in control of both of both Calendar Men with SC's permission and would play as both characters in combat as appropriate. Once the heist is finished, whether defeated or not, the two return to the HQ and split the loot 50/50. (Written by Blight)
All for this rule, quote and say aye. All opposed, quote and say nay.
I vote aye.
The Reaction Rule
In battle, time and reaction decides the outcome. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for two IRL days, the attack is successful. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for 5 IRL days, then RPC 2 is instantly teleported back to RPC 2's HQ.
All for this rule, quote and say Yay. All opposed, quote and say Wah!
-DC13
Aye.
Wah!
It's a key part of the unspoken RP rules that only the user decides what happens to their RPC, which is why you can only say you shoot or swing something at them. Only the user in control of RPC2 is ever allowed to say that anything happens to them.
Also, 2 days would be far too short a time. If such a rule was put it place, it would be better to have at least a week.
Actually, I think the only time I did that the other person had been inactive for like a month.
The Crossover Act was established during the old Super Heroes RP on the LMBs. The Act stated that any media that has ever had a crossover with MARVEL or DC would be allowed in the RP. This meant that crossovers between MARVEL and Phineas and Ferb would make P+F legal in the RP. Other crossovers included Dr. Who, Transformers, Star Trek, The Powderpuff Girls, and Scooby-Doo. This Act allowed several unrelated characters into the RP. This is why the Crossover Act has been abolished for good.
This means that the villains from the Phantom Zone in The LEGO Batman Movie are not allowed. Phineas and Ferb are also not allowed. Thank you. -DC13
Nay... also Powderpuff girls, really?
The Powderpuff Girls sounds like some sort of cake-baking group.
So, suppose villains or heroes want to team-up to take a case. The two would work in a single HQ working with each other to plan in jammers/spoilers (Stephanie Brown for the win) the heist until it is clear what the two (or more) want to do. When in action, a pre-determined owner would take control of both characters under the heist is done (at which point the reward is split between them as previously determined in the plan). If both owners would like to retain possession of the character they may do so (though I suggest against this in the case that one player is absent for a prolonged time - if this happens after a set time (two days from original post or something) than the other player may take control of characters).
For example: It's April 1st Calendar Man (hopefully owned by myself) wants to pull one on the Bat and decides to team-up with Clayface (SpoodaChicken's character) to pull off a heist. The two plan in Arkham (? is that a Villain HQ?) until they are ready to pull off the heist. As planned, Clayface takes on the form of Julian Day to attract the attention of Batman at Gotham Bank while the real Calendar Man is attacking Metropolis Bank (or some other area). In order to keep up the charade, I would be in control of both of both Calendar Men with SC's permission and would play as both characters in combat as appropriate. Once the heist is finished, whether defeated or not, the two return to the HQ and split the loot 50/50. (Written by Blight)
All for this rule, quote and say aye. All opposed, quote and say nay.
I vote aye.
The Reaction Rule
In battle, time and reaction decides the outcome. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for two IRL days, the attack is successful. If RPC 1 attacks RPC 2 and RPC 2 does not react for 5 IRL days, then RPC 2 is instantly teleported back to RPC 2's HQ.
All for this rule, quote and say Yay. All opposed, quote and say Wah!
