Talk:Death Games

Proposed rule change: no attacks in afk spots
I propose a new additional rule: When the target is standing in an afk spot which is marked as such, they may not be attacked. We have certain farms which require or benefit from idling, and with the current ruleset, the Death Games effectively prevent participants from using them, since they might be killed at any point. —Fenhl 19:31, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * +1 --Naturalismus (talk) 19:35, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * -1. Part of the game, in my opinion. Also, not well-defined: What is an afk spot? Who can decide if something's an afk spot? Can you just run into an afk spot when attacked? If no: how do you determine if someone's just hiding there or afking? --L3viathan (talk) 19:37, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * "marked as such", like a sign saying "afk spot". and no, you can't just run there when attacked :D --Naturalismus (talk) 19:45, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * I'd say you are allowed to run into an afk spot while being attacked, but that doesn't mean the attacker must stop their attempt. I'd say that if you as the attacker haven't seen the target actually do anything, give them the benefit of the doubt and don't attack. Also, afk spots can be built by anyone, for example as part of a community farm, just like anyone can build a base and disallow others from entering. Obviously, building an afk spot while being attacked also doesn't trigger this rule. —Fenhl 19:48, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * So I'll build hundreds of afk spots everywhere? ("anyone can build a base and disallow others from entering" that's a thing?) --L3viathan (talk) 19:50, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * You can, but why should you? The spots only protect you when you're actually afk aka obviously not moving. (Didn't know that, either. huh :D) --Naturalismus (talk) 19:53, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * Sure, why not? I don't see how that's a problem as far as the Death Games are concerned. If you do that at spawn, you might get into trouble with the Ministry of Origin, but that's a different topic altogether. As for bases, I don't see how being a Death Games attacker would give you special permission to enter a private base. —Fenhl 19:58, 29 November 2014 (CET)

This rule change has been implemented as of. —Fenhl 17:19, 17 December 2014 (CET)

Proposed rule change: remove the strict requirement for the final blow
The part of rule 3 which reads The final bit of damage must come from either the Sword or the Bow of Justice so that the bot can track Death Games kills seems too strict to me. After all, when the attacker kills the target through other means (such as potions or fall damage), they could just use, in the same way they must manually log a failed attempt. I propose to remove this part of the rule and update the FAQ entry accordingly, to explain that using the weapons of Justice for the final blow will cause the bot to automatically log the attempt. —Fenhl 19:31, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * +1 --Naturalismus (talk) 19:35, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * +0 Pro: Would make things more interesting. Con: DG might become "throwing damage potions". --L3viathan (talk) 19:37, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * If it becomes throwing damage potions we can always rule that out specifically. —Fenhl 09:06, 2 December 2014 (CET)
 * Well, even with the current rules, at least one damage potion at the begining of the fight is a pretty big advantage and it's rarely used, so I don't think it will be a problem. --Naturalismus (talk) 00:30, 4 December 2014 (CET)

This rule change has been implemented as of. —Fenhl 19:05, 1 February 2015 (CET)

Proposed rule change: no enchanted golden apples
Enchanted Golden Apples are so overpowered, that it is close to impossible to kill someone while they're under the effects. I propose that neither the attacker may eat an enchanted golden apple when attacking, nor may the defender eat an enchanted golden apple as a reaction to being attacked. --L3viathan (talk) 19:37, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * +1 --Naturalismus (talk) 19:45, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * -1. The target should never be restricted by Death Games rules in how they are allowed to defend themself. This would change the Death Games from a fun minigame to a major annoyance in my eyes. And disallowing Notch apples only for the attacker would tip the balance too far in favor of the target. —Fenhl 19:52, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * Well, this is just nonsense. For example with the current rules the most efficient defence is suicide, which a proposal you made restricts. --Naturalismus (talk) 19:55, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * How is suicide a defence? —Fenhl 20:00, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * "The final bit of damage must come from either the Sword or the Bow of Justice", if you jump into the void, obviously that isn't the case. --Naturalismus (talk) 20:06, 29 November 2014 (CET)
 * I was talking about defence in regard to the target's life, not in regard to the scoring for the Death Games. But we should probably clarify that defence as mentioned in rule 4 should be in the form of a counterattack, not running away or suicide. —Fenhl 20:12, 29 November 2014 (CET)