(09-21-2015, 05:52 PM)Ignacius Wrote:(09-21-2015, 05:45 PM)Flickering Ember Wrote: Honest question: What is the difference between godmodding and "auto-ing"?
They're sort of opposites of each other. Â An auto is any action which "automatically" succeeds. Â Like when you have a hammer which you swing and hit someone without giving them a chance to dodge. Â The hammer and swinging is perfectly fine, it just assumes the other character eats it.
Godmodding is using a trait or action which, by its nature, cannot be defeated. Â The classic example is the man who can eat that hammer without a scratch. Â However, it's more common that people have electrified weapons that can't be blocked, killing the entire room with poison that nobody could have known he left there, etc. Â It's essentially something which is immune to any action.
In a way, they're opposites because autoing implies that something succeeds no matter what, and godmodding implies that no matter what, nothing succeeds. Â They're both technically etiquette violations and it's fine to allow someone to do it if that's part of your story, but in open RP, they're both pretty much forbidden.
I've...literally never heard anyone try to break these up into two separate things. Â I've always heard "godmodding" defined as basically taking an action without allowing for a reaction. Â You don't give the other party a way out. Â This is actually the first time I've ever heard of the term "autoing," much less as something separate from godmodding. Â People normally cover both of the situations you are describing under "godmodding."
mod note: I cleaned up the quote a little bit. Put stuff back in the right boxes.
![[Image: hFalP38.jpg]](http://i.imgur.com/hFalP38.jpg)
