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.
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.
That'll work.
If the heroes didn't want to be betrayed, they shouldn't have teamed up. I don't think betrayal should be allowed unless both users are on board with it.
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.
If RPC2 replies on time, then they may decide they're fate. If not, then that is their problem.
We could extend it, but a week may be too long. How about 5 days?
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
Oh he is the Chinese-Welsh were-sheep of gratitude who bestows random people with a thank-you in Chinese, all the while secretly hoping that they'll give him something to be grateful for, a bowl of leeks and daffodils. Some would count him as a villain because as a were-sheep, he screws up the fact that in Wales (a country of about 3 million people bordering England) has 3 sheep to every one person. The FBI doesn't want anyone to hear about him, which is why he isn't on Google.
Seriously though, does Ethan Bennett as Clayface count as a villain?
Well, I... We could... Ah... We should have... A... Plan... Okay, I suppose the first order of business is creating the world. What topics should we have? What locations? Headquarters, cities, that sort of thing? I'm open to suggestions. Okay, you thinka some, I'll thinka some, and we'll post our ideas here. I'll get on that.
Well, Avenger's Tower is a must. For Marvel, I normally tend toward the movies rather than the comics. So, that's where my perspective will be based. Are we doing canon characters or made up ones?Segovia is a must. Perhaps the space dimension seen in GotG,GotH II,and the Thor movies. We could have the place where the black panther is from, and for other"less important"places we could have a location topic.
1. I guess we're just doing MARVEL and DC. The people have chosen. 2. Hey, we already got a mutant! Sweet! 3. Avenger's Tower, definitely. 4. Gree? Sorry to hear that. 5. We will be allowing canon and fanon characters.
Alright, I'll be posting a list of locations soon, so stay tuned... We're getting more people! This is great!
Sure thing, pal! 
