I’m a little confused by the specific situation and I think it’s not going to be entirely clear to people not on the game but: are we then defining PvP as just physical combat? Is social ‘combat’ not okay?
Because it seems like that’s what PP was doing (snark) and it seemed to all be IC (it was other people OOCly deciding MH was OOCly an asshole and messaging admins? Not entirely clear there). Like it seems from these examples that PP was pretty good at painting MH in a bad light ICly, which to me would be PvP on a social level (gossip, manipulation, just controlling the IC narrative that gets spun, etc.)
If the game is all just about PvP being physical combat (which it seems like so many are) and they don’t want the social aspect of PvP or see that as ‘bad’ why allow pacifist characters at all? And it sounds like PP was using the coded aspects of PvP (blocking the exit) as intended, but is that command only supposed to lead to physical combat where two people fight?
I guess I’m just not seeing where the OOC bleed was from the examples. If the snark was in the OOC communication or PP was saying to all their friends “MH is such an asshole not going with my plan IC” I can absolutely see that as being toxic for a game. But if PP is just being a snarky pacifist jerk IC, but OOCly is like “Oh it’s fine, go ahead and hit me I’m absolutely being a jerk IC” that seems ok?
But if the game is just not okay for pacifist characters and PvP is supposed to only be about punching each other, I think just a flat out ‘we won’t approve these characters’ would be worthwhile since they would appear to be at a real disadvantage.
