havenooc | Poll

This poll is un-related to the current event.

As this is a new game, there have been some kinks to work out along the way. One of these, I feel, is to do with items. The more applications I process, the more I believe I was mistaken to allow powers and not some items (for example a character who uses guns, not necessarily a whole arsenal). As this seems unfair toward 'normal' characters who only have their items as defence.

There is a valid plot reason for taking these things. However, it would not break the game plot to alter this, and I would rather tweak the plot to be fair to all players than leave a rule that may be flawed.

However, I would like the input of the player-base on this issue. As polls can only be set up on paid journals, there are three sub-headed threads, please reply to the relevant one and keep discussion to the discussion thread.

Vote yes to allow items -> This will allow characters to bring in any items currently on their person. But not extend to massive arsenals of weapons or vehicles.

Vote no to keep the rule the way it is -> Self-explanatory.

This vote will remain open until the end of the current event, when a decision will be made. If the rule is changed, there will be opportunity for characters who would otherwise have brought in weapons/items to request these be brought in.

Thank-you for your input.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I vote yes. Not that any of my characters have anything, but I think that some characters do have or need things that are not only useful to them and can be helpful to gameplay as a whole, but it is somewhat unfair to allow characters with innate abilities to have those still and not to have a cop with a gun or a girl with a sword to be able to bring them in.

Evening the scale out seems fair.

Yes for me! Seems like a fair thing to do.

Voting yes. Not only does it seem more fair when you take into consideration that some characters have innate abilities, but some characters have items on them that, while not part of them, are nonetheless incredibly important to them in some way (I'm going to use the example of Brigitte's monkshood for this, buuut there are probably way better examples out there lmao).

My vote is on yes!

my vote is for yes!

IF I VOTE YES CAN I HAVE MY DOG?

Re: VOTE YES

tellittothefrogs - 2012-11-22 23:20 (UTC) - Expand

havenmods - 2012-11-22 23:28 (UTC) - Expand

I think I'm going with yes!! Izaya only ever has knives on him but I think for normal human characters it'd be good for them to have SOMETHING to protect themselves with so they weren't completely helpless, if they usually use weapons. Though you could always do item drops or something.

I vote yes! Personally I'm okay with what Deadpool has now (although a gun would be nice XD)-- there's no need to change it and it provides a particularly nice challenge when I'm trying to keep him alive. (He already has that ridiculous healing factor-- there's no need to overpower him with weapons on top of that.)

But for someone who has no powers, it can provide kind of an imbalance when you're trying to be on the same level as someone who can fire lightning blasts or something.

Not to mention personal, non-combative items (pictures of loved ones, good luck charms, etc) could provide some good potential for character development if they were allowed to be kept.

I vote yes.

... I may be voting yes just 'cos strange items are cool. :(b

I do like the idea of a cap though, as I play a character who technically has his own arsenal on him, not this guy or my other two. I like the idea of if they have more than one of them, perhaps limiting what they can bring in.

Maybe give them a number they can't exceed. :3

Voting yes.

Echoing everyone above with a yes.

I vote yes! It seems fair, though I'm also down with a weapons cap.

If the rule is changed, it could be interesting to incorporate an event for characters to retrieve their weapons, rather than having them just appear? Just an idea though!