I'm not sure the two proposed categories satisfy the issue here. Current runs would be invalidated for "True 100%", and in the category where they would not be invalidated has duping. The "new" category should have duping, and the "old" should still be valid.
Having "two categories significant enough to matter" is the issue. There seems to only be disagreement on one issue: Seashell duplication. I don't think that those are different enough, which is why I was against the idea of adding a new category.
A discussion about a newer, more expansive 100% (leaves, beaks, compasses, maps) is a completely different beast which needs to be discussed separately (probably after this is taken care of).
why would we need to add a "true 100%", im sure that category will die after a few days, that is just useless.
Ultimately, the goal is based on your inventory screen at the end of the game. I don't think anything else matters. So, by this standard, I think it should be allowed- HOWEVER, this is a category riddled with stupid rules to make it fun to watch- that's all it is, it has no logic behind what is/ is not allowed.
If this duping is allowed though, it only further makes me believe 100% isn't a logically sound category. Making rules as we go to fit what we want to/do not want to see... You simply cannot allow duping of one thing, and ban it for another.
Duping to my understanding is ruled out according to the current rules.
Fine then, let's talk SS duping. Give me a factual argument that states why we should ban it. I've said my piece on why it should be allowed, how it follows the same logic as 20/26 seashells, and how it is different from HP duping. I've given logical stances and justifications. All I've heard in opposition is that it doesn't "show off the game" enough. What does that mean? How do you quantify it? If you want the rule set of a category to be consistent, you must apply consistent logic to it.
If we ban SS duping, we are suddenly saying that seashells are some godly forbidden content that we can't skip, while we can say "Oh, literally skip ALL of the trading sequence, and get the boomerang before D5? No problem!" There is no logical consistency if we ban SS duping, and allow trading sequence to be skipped outright. As it's been pointed out by many people, we can't invalidate old runs. So we can't retroactively make the entire trading sequence a requirement, which means our only option within the current 100% is to allow for SS duping. If the current requirement was to complete the trading sidequest in its entirety, I would not be taking this stance. But when the goal is to have this category NOT contradict itself, we must allow SS duping.
Just to clarify, I'm not trying to say that the desire to show off the game is a bad one, or that it's not legitimate (not the intention in the slightest). One of the reasons I was arguing for a separate, more inclusive 100% is that it sounds like a lot of fun to me. I'm just trying to say that in THIS 100% category as it CURRENTLY is, that argument alone simply doesn't fit.
Factual justifications (reiterated): -We do not allow duplications of other items ---You argue that it is different than HP duplication, we argue that the distinction is minor. (As a result the "factual" argument you've proposed is an opinion, just like how this point is also an opinion). -The seashells are unique items which have individual locations. Whereas other things (like rupees) do not -We have banned other glitches that acquire items through artificial means in the past. This is a glitch that acquires seashells artificially. -There is no wording in the ruleset that everyone uses (except Cransoon) that protects trading sequence (unfortunately) ---There IS wording about seashells , which allows the justification of keeping them in the category. -If you want consistency, "no duplication" sounds like the most consistent (opinion).
Those are the justifications. Let's go, point-for-point, through Cransoon's current argument (in his last post):
-"All I've heard from the opposition is that it doesn't show off the game enough". I've cited precedent, wording in the rules, other glitches that follow the same idea. I think what you said has reduced the argument to one point only, which it is not. -"How do you quantify [showing off as much of the game as possible]". Just because something is not easily quantifiable does not mean it is not a justifiable reason to dismiss the argument. Since content is hard to numerically quantify, we are having a discussion. Most (if not all) people agree that going and getting the seashells is "more" content to the game. -"If you want the rule set of a category to be consistent, then you must apply consistent logic to it." Again, banning duplication in one sense then keeping it in a different sense seems less consistent to me, * regardless * of whether or not an "item disappears". I am having trouble seeing where the inconsistency lies. -Maybe it lies here (paraphrase), 'skipping the trading sequence and skipping the seashells is more or less the same'. Sure, the two are similar. The big thing is that the rules do not protect the trading sequence. We can not point to any word in the ruleset that says "you must perform the trading sequence". However, there is a statement (however vague) about seashells in the rules. THEREFORE we can justify keeping them in. There is no inconsistency within the dictated rules. ---["get the boomerang before D5?" I'm pretty sure this is slower at this point and would not be done] -"Our only option is to allow SS Duping [based on skipping the trading sequence]". That is false, for the above reason. It is ** not ** our only option. -"But when the goal is to have this category not contradict itself" Where is the category contradicting itself? The category, again, doesn't protect the trading sequence, so we can not argue for its presence (without invalidating old runs). It does not say "do the trading sequence, then don't do the trading sequence". There is no contradiction. If anything "duplication of certain items" is more of a contradiction than anything else (which has been reiterated a number of times in this counterpoint) -"we ** must ** allow SS duping". There is such strong finality in this phrasing. Again, there are other solutions to the problem at hand. There is not only one answer. -"... in THIS 100% category... [the 'showing off the game' argument] simply doesn't fit". Again, the precedent over the last 2.5 years is to keep content. It has been definitely "fit" with how we decide the rules. That is why we use the phrase "get the color tunic from the color dungeon" because we knew you could glitch the tunics. If the argument of showing of content was not a sound one, then we would say, "get all items, by any means, excluding OoB and WW". That is NOT what the rules say. The rules were put in place to make us get these items individually.
Summary: Duplication is not allowed for certain items. The fact that seashells "disappear" is a very thin reason to call for their duplication. Past decisions for 100% came from maintaining content of the game. The break in the trading sequence came from the unfortunate foresight from people who made the rules 3+ years ago and there is no way we can keep it in at this point. There is more than enough precedent, logical consistency, and people in favor to ban seashell duplication. No new categories. No runs invalidated.
If 100% is truly about collecting what is in the game, please explain the trading side quest. If we're going to allow the early magnifying glass in without a hitch, we've now taken a 13 part trading sequence, and reduced it down to 4 step sequence: Honeycomb, Pineapple, Bra/Necklace, Scale. How is it that the same logic is not applied there? What does "100%" mean, when you're not trading with 9 people who you were intended to trade with? For that matter, what does "100%" mean when you leave 6 seashells uncollected at the end of the game?
This category has always been about the ends, not the means. In that way, the term 100% is a misnomer (and why I've been arguing that "All Upgrades" is a better description of THIS category than "100%").
"There is no effective difference between 20 and 26 seashells, because they all disappear after the L-2 sword". "There is no effective difference between a 13 or an 8 or a 4 part trading sequence as long as you have the magnifying glass at the end". This is the logic the category has used up to this point. SS duping follows this logic, in that there is no EFFECTIVE difference between a 100% run that does and doesn't SS dupe besides the content of the run itself. And again, the content of the run is not what detemines this category. The state of the game at the end is. No HP, SS, or trading NPC left to interact with/collect. No capacity or item upgrades left to get. Photos say 12/12, and there's none left to take. That is the logic THIS "100%" category follows. Disallowing SS duping goes directly against the precedents set by this category for the last 3+ years.
You know what? Never mind. Ignore my last post. You guys do your thing. I'll do mine. I give up. I'm mentally and physically tired. I've lost sleep the last 3 damn nights over this (yup, I'm THAT loser). I'm also one of the guys who the lacked of foresight to actually make a fun category, apparently. Anyway, I'm done with this. I'm gonna run what I'm gonna run, you'll run whatever you wanna run, and the category will continue to contradict itself. Everybody wins, I guess.
I do agree, Cransoon. You should run the game as you please- whether it is accepted on to a certain website's leaderboards doesn't matter too much.
However, I do agree that "no duping" should be implemented in the rules- as it is already a rule that exists, we just don't have it clearly stated.
I don't agree with rules in speedrunning personally, but I do believe if we allowed for SS duping, we would have to allow for heart dupes- and then furthermore... What I'm saying is simply that SS duping would not fit into this category. It would feel out of place and only add to the rule-set confusion.
No duping is clearly something the current hundo% stands by, so why not just make it official?
As Zorlax said "We do not allow duplication of other items"- why are we even discussing it? :)
An awesome trick nonetheless
If you can't Seashell dupe then you also can't get early Bikini as you can dupe that too. Pretty much like you can bomb trigger to dupe the ribbon back into the game.
Dupe
Dupe
Dupe
Dupe?
Warr, the necklace isn't a duplication.
Trading sequence is not a part of the ruleset. Seashells are. Duping has been banned previously.
EZ every time.
You can dupe the necklace in exactly the same fashion though even with a necklace in your inventory :)
but it's only a duplication if you do it twice ;)
(And it's still not covered by the rules. However, I have no problem with banning it at all. It can all get filed under a "no duplication" rule.)
There's all this talk about "Duplication" being banned but it literally does not say that anywhere in the rules posted and that are on ZSR. It just says to get all the heart pieces/items/seashells etc. and duplication is a way of getting them.
Even if some interpret that it is "implied" that duplication is banned it doesn't actually state it. So unless i'm missing a section of the rules (and if I am then please disregard this and show me my error) I'm not sure where this strong case of no duplication being allowed is coming from?
At the very beginning of this Z was talking about losing the essence of hundo or something and again i'm not sure what this means since we skip other sections of the run without losing any "essence". So if it's a matter of not liking it as opposed to being against the rules then this sounds very similar to super jumps and look how they are now integrated into the categories that everyone now runs happily.
I wouldn't make too many appeals to the wording of the ZSR category explanation for precedent. I'm pretty sure I wrote that one day because the previously explained requirements (not the rules for 100% mind you but rather how we ¤define¤ 100% for LADX) for the category weren't worded very effectively. When that was written there was absolutely no thought put into the possibility of item duplicating or even the majority of the tech found in the last ~18 months.
It's not written in the rules that duplication of heart pieces is banned. That rule has been been told through word of mouth and agreed upon in a "general" sense.
It still IS about losing the essence of 100%, and still maintaining the rules as they have been followed for the last 3 years. In the last 3 years, we skipped the trading sequence because we forgot to mention it in the original rule set. At the same time, it was agreed on (just not in a formal, forum post way) that duplication (heart pieces), glitch tunic, etc, were banned. The glitches that were banned have been agreed either explicitly or implicitly by any runner who has run 100% on our leaderboards. THAT is the precedent I am trying to preserve.
I keep hearing the same argument about skipping the trading sequence. That is something that kinda slipped by, much like how we used to go OoB in Tal Tal Heights. Since Villa skip came around, and people did runs, skipping the trading sequence, it became too difficult to turn that back around. Yes, skipping the trading sequence is killing a part of 100%, and it is unfortunate that that was allowed to slide, when other glitches have not.
The general agreement, after the mistake of skipping the trading sequence became the norm, was to keep content. So yes, keeping the trading sequence is kind of inconsitent with skipping seashells. Duplicating seashells and not duplicating heart pieces (and other similar glitches) is more inconsistent. Allowing EVERY duplication and glitch goes against the last few years precedent provided by the runners of this category.
Just because one inconsistency has been allowed to fly over the years does not mean we need more. Just because of there was one thing that slipped through the cracks does not mean we need to overhaul the whole category.
"* this sounds very similar to super jumps and look how they are now integrated into the categories that everyone now runs happily. *" This was different. There was ** resounding ** desire to add superjumps to the category. On a similar note, there is an inconstency in the No S&Q rules that is not written anywhere but we all follow and understand. No SuperSwimming. Under no definition is it Out of Bounds, but we consider it to be so. We don't allow SuperSwimming (not stated anywhere) because it would violate the "essence" of no S&Q, although we don't say it. We don't allow heartpiece duping (not stated anywhere) because it would violate the "essence" of the category. We shouldn't allow SS duping (and we can state it now) because it would violate the category. We can ban duplication outright, and we can all integrate and run happily. Integration does not only come from adding new glitches.
Precedent. Rules. Logic. Support. I am not sure what else we need here.
That, and there are instances (a HP or two), where it would be faster. And most (if not all) 100% runners that I know (Leon(?), Riddler, Rusty, darko, Mab, friedpotato) knew about this glitch. No one did it. Community precedent.
