Rule Suggestion Make a Rule on Negotiations on safe passage [SCPRP UK]

[NotTuga]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Make a new rule where if there is a hostage and kidnap negotiation and a safe passage is offered, make a rule if the safe passage is offered they cannot kill you when delivering a hostage to the enemy team.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Not that i know of

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
It gives two options to negotiations where if a safe passage is offered than you won't be killed but if it isn't offered there is a chance to be killed.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
People who like it the way it is may dislike it but i've heard many people not liking the way it is right now.

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
It should be accepted because it makes more sense it is basically like an agreement on a safe passage for when you're delivering the hostage back to the enemy team and you wont get killed, it allowed it to have two options, safe passage where you wont be killed and no safe passage where you are at risk of being kidnapped back to back or being killed to save the hostage.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

you mean like enforcing safe passage by staff?

i mean yeah i guess it's sort of scamming, but like... it constricts RP kinda if they absolutely HAVE to have safe passage under any circumstance
-/+ Neutral
unsure

 

[Biscuits]

you mean like enforcing safe passage by staff?

i mean yeah i guess it's sort of scamming, but like... it constricts RP kinda if they absolutely HAVE to have safe passage under any circumstance
-/+ Neutral
unsure

Would be regarding if both sides agreed to the deal, if no actual deal is made then it wouldn't really apply. I believe this is a thing on MRP and I see no one complaining about it.

 

["Arachnid"]

-support
Not a problem on the US means it shouldn't be a rule

 

[Gizzmo]

-support

 

[Naffen]

Deception and ambushes is a vital part of roleplay to counter a lot of these things, adding more and more rules to stop roleplay is a poor mindset
If you get ambushed then you've planned yourself poorly anyway
-support

 

[Bohemia]

- support
uk issue

 

[Geronimo]

-Support
As Naffen said, deception and ambushes are a vital part of roleplay. I believe its more so of an 'in character' issue. If one side breaks safe passage, then the other does, so on and so forth.

 

[Zen]

-Support
If people don't stand by their negotiated agreements, you have RP reason to never negotiate with them again, so just rush the CI with the kidnapped O5.

 

[Holland]

- Support,

This would just remove an RP aspect from the server. Making it less interesting to negotiate. If you say no free passage okay you don't get your guy back its that easy. You need to play smart. preventing the player/team from coming up with a way to solve the issue won't benefit the RP.

 

[Holland]

you mean like enforcing safe passage by staff?

i mean yeah i guess it's sort of scamming, but like... it constricts RP kinda if they absolutely HAVE to have safe passage under any circumstance
-/+ Neutral
unsure

Scamming is not a rule in role-play or in-character interactions. It only applies to trades involving items, chemicals or v points. It is not considered scamming when you offer a hostage for 2000 dollars and then shoot them before they notice that you dropped only 2 dollars. Similarly, promising free passage to a D-class with a hostage in the 173 area and then killing them after they hand over the hostage is not considered scamming, but rather a lack of smart play.

 

[Niox]

Deception and ambushes is a vital part of roleplay to counter a lot of these things, adding more and more rules to stop roleplay is a poor mindset
If you get ambushed then you've planned yourself poorly anyway
-support

agree with this
the world isnt all rainbows and sunshine, if CI/F can safely guarantee the return of a hostage without pay then they will.
Breaking Safe passage used to be a rule break, until SSL clarified it wasnt, so i dont see why it would need to be changed back.

 

[Bill Nye The Guy]

-support

make it impossible for the enemy faction to even consider breaking safe passage, ie if you plan on asking for safe passage make sure if they break their word hostages will be killed, SCPs will be breached, etc...

 

[Blackknight95]

Suggestion Denied

Hi NotTuga

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.

We have decided to deny your suggestion, as we feel it does not need to be changed at this time.

Mercer