So, for a time, wRHG characters were allowed to be made without any real form of regulation, to allow creative outlets to run wild. However, this sort of freedom can and has shown to create a schism if left out of check. These regulations will be set in place not to limit the potential of new characters, but to ensure that they'll meet a certain standard that should ensure the process of community acceptance will be streamlined.



1. All-Encompassing Powers are not allowed.
This regulation applies to abilities such as omniscience, omnipotence, ominpathy, omnikinesis, etc. If an ability is able to be used on a massive scale, affecting unreasonable numbers of things/people at once or controlling an unreasonable or infinite number of aspects, then it is expressly forbidden. The reasons for this are that there can be no true justification for such an amount of power, and to battle against somebody with such power will almost certainly lead to defeat. To make an easy to understand example, "If you have a gun in a fight, no matter how much you say you won't use it, if the circumstances show up, you will shoot somebody." If you're not going to use an ability, then the ability is not needed.

2. Number of Abilities (Variety)
This regulation is to keep characters consistent. Characters are allowed to have multiple abilities. This said, a character's abilities must logically relate to each other, or the character's theme overall. Simply adding a list of abilities that do not reasonably go together, or which together create too much power, will not be tolerated. An example of an acceptable mix of diverse powers would be if a character controls elements; a list of several elements may then be used, provided they don't go overboard. An example of abilities that don't go together are teleportation, firebending, and summoning any type of gun. It creates too broad a character, and risks becoming a toolbox which creates an unfair scenario for competing writers.

3. Multiple Characters
This regulation comes in two parts; the first part is that EVERY USER IS ALLOWED A SINGLE GLADIATOR AT A TIME.

Characters which qualify as "Duos" or "Groups" are allowed, but under the condition that they function as a singular gladiator. What this means is, neither character should be able to be a viable/serious threat on their own; reliance on the other character(s) is required. Simply having two characters who alone are capable of winning battles reasonably is the same as having two gladiators, which is strictly against the rules. An example of a duo character would be Maka and Soul from Soul Eater. Though both characters are able to fight solo to some extent, they're only truly a fighting force when working together, and their abilities complement one another. Soul turns into a weapon and Maka can use abilities such as Witch Hunter and Djinn Hunter through him. Similar, having a character who is physically weak and unable to fight themselves, but can summon other fighters is acceptable, so long as it is within reason. The main concern is that there is dependency which makes it a necessity for all characters present to be used.


The second part of this regulation applies to NPCs. NPCs are allowed, but are not able to be used in official gladiator battles. Otherwise, there are no particular regulations relating to these characters; because they're not gladiators, the don't need to be moderated nearly as much.

4. Ability to be Defeated
Possibly the most important regulation, a character must be able to be defeated within reason. While it is no problem to have specific weaknesses, they cannot be the only way in which a character can be stopped. If your character can only be defeated through performing specific actions, or using a certain type of ability, then the combat options for the opponent become vastly limited, as well as one's options for opponents in general. Having an opponent who, unless shot in a specific part of the body is unstoppable is no fun for an unarmed character, or one who uses fire; they've no actual way of winning, bar avoiding fighting to begin with. Using Manny Ken as an example, despite having the specific weaknesses of being flammable and only being able to be killed through the total destruction of the head, he can still be stopped in combat since he's just a living mannequin. Normal humans, demons, angels, aliens, monsters, all manner of character stand a reasonable chance of winning in a battle. Even Superman can be defeated without Kryptonite or magic, despite the difficulties in accomplishing such.





Blatantly breaking any of these regulations will result in a character not being classified as a gladiator, and therefore being ineligible for official battles or recognition within the Hall of Warriors. This said, there is a level of subjectivity to each of these regulations, which reinforces the need for the community to decide whether or not they believe a character works. If a character is a high level fire user and able to burn everything, this doesn't necessarily mean they're breaking the first regulation, so long as the community deems it is properly justified/utilized. Refusal to fix characters who a majority of the community deem poor or who blatantly break regulation after a period of three weeks from posting/the last edit will be binned.

*This list of regulations is subject to changes as is seen fit by moderators relating to the section, though community consensus may lead to the addition, removal, or adjustment of present regulations.

I'm fine with everything except the no NPCs in fights. Personally, I'd rather that more be something discussed between the two battling each other, or at least having them be allowed to a minor extent. Like, the police getting involved if it hit the fan in a city, or other people in a bar fight, or even use their assault as motivation for the battle.

The no NPC fighting regulation relates more to directly made characterized NPCs directly influencing the flow of battle. If for example you have some gal who wields a railgun snipe at your opponent from a distance, this is not ok. Having police show up and order people to put their hands in the air is less of a concern due to their nature as NPCs, as well as the actual threat they're able to put up against a majority of gladiators.

Feel free to use NPCs for story, not for advantages is what I hope gets across here.

Flow meaning throught the battle, or are hiccups acceptable? Similarly, the deal with endings. Like, let's say Mike is my gladiator and Betty is his wife. My battle starts with my oppenent getting into a car wreck with them, at with point it's Mike vs them, but at the end when Mike's about to eat it, Betty shoots them in the face with the gun in the glove compartment. Since she only affected the ending, and it's done primarily for storylinr character development between the two, is this the type of thing that would or wouldn't be acceptable?

I can see there being an issue of it becoming a reoccuring thing, like if Betty afterwards was always in his corner with a glock, but I stand by other character involvement should be agreed upon by the writers.

Or, if Betty can't shoot my opponent, can Mike be runover by someone I'm introducing and end the fight that way?

Crank brought up a good point. Certain things should be an agreement between writers, rather than subject to the whims of a majority. If two people agree to a battle, then who cares if one (or both!) characters "break guidelines?" If it's their battle, and their stories, let them fight it, and let them tell their stories.

I am also planning to look at our list of gladiators to get an idea of which ones would technically already break these guidelines, if not for them having already been accepted by the community. "The Handyman" is one. The "Doctor and The Fixer" are another. Certainly, there are more. Yet I myself am currently working with both of these wRHGs. Azure himself has waged a clan war against the latter of these wRHGs (and little old me). Zalgo, Azure's clanmate, is arguably on or near the same level as Handy. The application and implementation of these guidelines demands further review by the community these guidelines have the potential to impact. This should be visibly self-evident.

I dislike Rule 3 *read dislike as have a hatred for that outburns the furious fires of Hell and the denizens of Rageland
The rest of it seems HIGHLY sensible (although, yeah. How does one do things with the no-NPCS?).
*proceeds to go rage abominably in a corner at the fact that one of my perfectly planned (read as ACTUALLY DECENT) chars will be forced to stop being a wRHG and therefore you can't use them (I would explain, but there isn't any need)

Handy and Z are more mindgames than brawlers (I think), but I don't think the Fixer and Doc should get a pass. Should've spoken up when it initally game up, but I guess I just expected someone else would.

Quote from 969_DoomsDruid_969

(I would explain, but there isn't any need)

Actually, Dooms- your input would be very much appreciated. As I understand, it was the issues surrounding your character's (highly contested) introduction to the wRHG community that have led to our current state of declared unrest. I don't mean to pry, but if you don't mind going into detail, what are your thoughts on all of this? From when you started out with Alex, through the editing process, and to now, with your choice to completely overhaul your original character and begin anew- what was your experience like? And what can we do to make the experience better for new users like yourself? Our goal is to make sure everyone gets what they want out of wRHG.

Hmm...I guess this calls for an alteration of my chars.

I suppose I was pushing the boundaries. Then again, really, since creating David I've only used Altaer in a battle once. I'll edit and demote Altaer to an NPC affiliated with my organization/clan.

I will retain Altaer's character page, though, since that will remain relevant to non-battle pieces such as collabs and storyline Olit works.

First off... MY VIEW COUNTS?

Second, my view is simple. One is good. Very good.
Two is kind of obvious if you are good at char design, but fair enough.
Three should be a LIMIT of chars (on one thread as to not take up space). Like three. Or something. That's my opinion. probably shit but whatever.
Four is... difficult to define IMO but ok.
Thirdly Malacal will respond after this shitty comment

Yes, Dooms, everyone's view counts. You've (finally) decided to accept group rule, and we really appreciate this.

Also, as the main person with a duo, I'm the first to say it is OP. Both of my chars together are pretty much unbeatable by any normal person -- besides, David can create Reflections.

I like the idea of an accessory character. Duo chars are fine by me, if done alright.

One char should have a primary strength, one or two secondary strengths that compliment the primary, and some plain physical enhancements to make sure they don't die too hard.

If you go for two characters, then there's a few ways I can see that going about. One, is if that character is nothing but a complimentary strength- Like, only half or a third as strong as the main char- or Two, if the overall primary strength of the character is that there's TWO of them. Which means that both characters should have strengths that aren't too powerful but compliment the fact that there are two of them. As I said, secondary strength complimenting the primary strength.

And if anyone didn't understand what Azure meant by:

Quote from Azure

and risks becoming a toolbox which creates an unfair scenario for competing writers.

In regards to having too many powers, it's a term I conjured up (With help of someone in the WL chat, forgot who.) I touch more upon it in my thread where I'm talking about, what I believe, a standard good character should have.

But it comes down to this: A toolbox lets you have all the tools you need for whatever situations. A toolbox character is when they have enough powers where they can tackle... pretty much anything thrown at them. Deus Ex Machinas count. What you want instead is a sexy multitool character where their main strength can cover a good range, and they have an accessory strength that compliments the main by either covering a bit more range, or helping the primary cover a bit more range.

Floppy, I've already decided to downgrade Altaer to an NPC and edited my profile accordingly, but I'm interested in what you said:

Would you consider my Duo to be complementary? I mean, I personally don't see it that way, but I'm curious if you do/did.

Quote from Alphaeus

Hmm...I guess this calls for an alteration of my chars.

Not necessarily. If you can argue for it, which you have, and calm the majority, which you have, then you needn't change a thing. All that seems to have changed is that your arrangement may now be called into question by a majority after 3 months, if this ruling stands. Even if the ruling stands, and the majority rules against you, a moderator may end up ruling in your favor.

To be straightforward with you, I don't have too much desire to read into your characters. But I will elaborate upon something.

When I say a primary strength, I mean their main ability, their big thing. When I say complimentary strength, I mean something that's like a third or a half as powerful as the primary. You can also call it a lesser strength, an accessory strength. You often refer to your characters as blatantly OP. Sounds like you don't much care in the way of having one character strong, other lesser, or two characters that are mildly strong due to their combination. Sounds like your characters are pretty powerful standalone.

If I recall, you had these characters standalone at some point? Meaning the feel I get from you isn't 'two characters that compliment each other to the point where, together, they are gladiator-level'. I feel 'I like these two guys so much and they get along in my universe, and I can't choose between them, so I'm gonna have them both.' But all of these are purely assumptions. I'd prefer to elaborate upon this kind of thing in Skype where talk is easier.