Establishing Unfair Drip Check as an invalid LR (a suggestion to refine LR rules)

[pyrrhicevolution]

Despite the general discord between players on SG jailbreak rules, I think a significant portion believes the rules regarding invalid LRs are inconsistent.

According to the SG JB rules, you cannot request an LR to directly kill blus. However, unfair drip check is allowed despite being a syntactical reconstruction of the former. The only concrete difference between the two LRs is that there is no stated guarantee any blus will be killed in unfair drip check. Nonetheless, blus are still killed directly with no concrete reason and with no ability to interact in any way.

This discrepancy is noteworthy in-game because admins and mods have stated that unfair drip check is a valid LR, serving as justification for reds to make invalid custom LRs by redirecting intent whether sincere or not. It encompasses a larger issue with the vagueness of the rules differentiating valid LRs from invalid ones:

Invalid Last Requests / LRs
While players have the freedom to explain a custom activity for their LR, the following LRs are not allowed:

• Directly kill the remaining Blu players / Hit Blu players whenever; Set up your rules to fight against the Blus instead or play a minigame

The intent of this rule, one can infer, is to make sure blu players can participate in an LR with the surviving reds if said LR involves them. If that is the case, the rules constituting valid LRs should elaborate that blus must have some form of ability to interact besides standing AFK and taking damage/dying (preferably, blus should have some chance to survive or win in the LR through actionable choices made within the LR. This can still apply to unfair LRs where the actions of blus have a minimal impact on their chances of surviving but still allow them to participate in the LR through some actions.

TLDR: valid LRs involving BLUs should require blus be able to interact in the LR in some meaningful way (i.e. not just standing AFK), and by extension unfair drip check should be invalid.

 

[pyrrhicevolution]

Another example of an LR that does not allow BLUs to interact in a meaningful way but has been considered valid is Unfair Soccer: blus must stand AFK in a stack until killed by the ball (generally done by mods/admins on RED but sometimes done by normal players). With the suggestion above implemented, this LR would also be conclusively invalid.

 

[Buns]

Jas found the loophole, but now there will be a reckoning

 

[Bray]

In my personal opinion there is nothing wrong with either of these LRs as in drip check the red is "checking your drip" if they don't explain the LR then it's okay to kill them as they didn't explain their custom LR, while "Unfair Soccer" (I like to call it Soccer Bowling) is more of a get the round over with fast because I have nothing else to think of, it's sweet, to the point, and the red doesn't directly kill the blues, they kill them with a minigame.

 

[pyrrhicevolution]

In my personal opinion there is nothing wrong with either of these LRs as in drip check the red is "checking your drip" if they don't explain the LR then it's okay to kill them as they didn't explain their custom LR, while "Unfair Soccer" (I like to call it Soccer Bowling) is more of a get the round over with fast because I have nothing else to think of, it's sweet, to the point, and the red doesn't directly kill the blues, they kill them with a minigame.

But then what's the point of invalidating an LR that directly kills blus? It seems arbitrary to make it invalid when it also gets the round done faster and is self-explanatory in terms of rules.

 

[Bray]

But then what's the point of invalidating an LR that directly kills blus? It seems arbitrary to make it invalid when it also gets the round done faster and is self-explanatory in terms of rules.

Drip Check is basically the same thing as Theater or Diner, as the reds "directly" kill blues during those minigames, but the blues are still put through a minigame so it's fine.

 

[pyrrhicevolution]

Drip Check is basically the same thing as Theater or Diner, as the reds "directly" kill blues during those minigames, but the blues are still put through a minigame so it's fine.

That's not true. In Theater/Diner you input something as a blu (e.g. respond to a prompt or perform some act). You do not interact in any form during Drip Check. This is still the case even if it's unfair Theater/Diner.

"Put through a minigame" implies blus do some act in order to improve their chances of winning/surviving even if those chances are unfairly determined. Having blus sit on a line is not putting them through a minigame, just like having them stand AFK to die isn't putting them through a minigame.

 

[Color]

the minigame that the BLUs are being put through is the same in theater and diner as they still technically interact with the game, it's through their loadout
even though it's a big loophole the BLUs still can interact (in a way) by having a good loadout
even though the point of unfair drip check is likely to just kill all BLUs, whoever is doing the LR could genuinely like a loadout and let them live

 

[sapphire]

whoever is doing the LR could genuinely like a loadout and let them live

Which this part is the main issue from what I experienced. They are likely 1) Going to kill all blues without even looking, 2) Kill everyone besides their friend / someone they know, or 3) Kill the person they find annoying first. No one really plays any unfair LR "genuinely", they just find a way to kill without being marked KOS and leave their best friend alive and just delay the round making everyone wait longer. This is what I have seen and experienced.

 

[pyrrhicevolution]

the minigame that the BLUs are being put through is the same in theater and diner as they still technically interact with the game, it's through their loadout
even though it's a big loophole the BLUs still can interact (in a way) by having a good loadout
even though the point of unfair drip check is likely to just kill all BLUs, whoever is doing the LR could genuinely like a loadout and let them live

Having a specific loadout is not a minigame. You give a dish by speaking or typing something out DURING Diner. You perform an act by talking or taunting DURING Theater. You do NOTHING during Unfair Drip Check.

Here's a good way to put it: imagine I created an LR called Unfair Friendship Check. I tell everyone to AFK freeze and if I think they are a good person, I might let them live. According to the logic here, the minigame is how much I like who they are. Since that's technically "valid" in the same vein as Unfair Drip Check, I could also make an LR called Unfair Perish Check, where I kill blus based on if I want strange kills. The minigame here is if I for some reason lose the urge to kill blus for strange kills. Based on the logic supporting Unfair Drip Check, these would all be valid even though NONE of them involve blus to do something.

It's gotten to the point we believe somehow standing AFK can be considered a minigame. A minigame requires you DO something for the LR during the LR.