Hello Everyone, 

After much soul searching, research and discussion with the staff here as well as some other fed admins out there the XWF has decided that starting with the first show in 2024 we will be going to a 1 roleplay model for all Warfare and Pay Per Views. Anarchy will stay as is currently with it's 1 rp 1k model. If Jett wants to change that later that is up to him but for now the upcoming change will only effect Warfare and Pay Per Views. 

Starting January 2024 the rules will be as follows:


All matches will have the same roleplay stipulation of 1 rp and 4k. Regardless of whether it is a title or non title match. Regardless of what title. With one caveat being tag team matches. Tag team matches can either be 1 rp 4k or 2 rps, 2k. So as to allow for teams that are handled by 2 people the option of doing their own rps or doing one collab. 

What this also means is that the soft deadline will go away as everyone will now have 2 weeks to post their roleplay. With that it also means that the cold open rule will go away however because everyone is only doing 1 roleplay, direct responses are not allowed. 

What this means is that you can not address anything your opponent said in this cycles roleplay should they post first. However you are certainly allowed to respond to anything else they say elsewhere, be it Twitter, Results, previous ctcles roleplays etc. 

Now what I have not decided yet and am still debating on is whether I want to bump the RP rules up to 5k for Pay Per Views. So what I'd like in helping my decision is if you all could respond to the poll I am going to post with this. 

Now for those of you wondering why we are making this change out of the blue I want to first assure you that this change is not being made without a lot of discussion and thought. I have literally spent weeks talking with people trying to figure out what the best thing would be for the fed moving forward and ultimately it felt like this is the way to go because this model or ones similar are what most feds are doing. And while I don't necessarily want to be like every other fed out there I do want us to have a writing structure that is appealing to as many people as possible. So that's where we are. I hope everyone understands that everything the staff here does is in the best interest of the fed as a whole and not any one individual, myself included.

Well, this is a turn.

This doesn't change the game, but at the same time, it does.

On the one hand, the aspects of the tête-à-tête are almost annihilated, because the pissing contest aspect of picking apart where someone was a dumb are gone. I feel there are several people who were standouts throughout the feds history who may have never thrived using the new rule system.

On the other hand, adapt or die.

I'm absolutely not hearkening back to the days of slamming down a total of 14 rps between just two writers for just one match during a cycle. It preserves some creative juices, similarly to a pitch count preserving an athlete's shoulder. Are multiple RP matches completely off the table? How will tag team matches, or War Games work?

On a personal note, this has a very old-school vibe to it, and is more realistic in pro-wrestling terms. Randy Savage wouldn't cut five promos and go on an adventure, he'd annihilate an opponent in one. Similarly, those long term tales we saw on TV that took weeks to unfold took weeks to unfold and played out in segments on shows.

From a storytelling aspect, a way around this is to have an angle in place between two writers. One RP cycle they have a pose-off/tug of war/arm wrestling match/whatever contest that isn't a wrestling match, etc., or just to be super basic, they're best two of three falls. Technically anyone could still do a 3 RP match except they'd stretch it out over three cards. In example, we KNOW The Universal Champion will be defending against Mr. XWF at the next PPV, to bump up the amount of RPs they're allotted it would be carried over a few shows, judged week by week.

Just a few ways I just thought up to play around with the new rules.

To your first point Bobby, I do agree with you, there is an entire era of people who probably would not be successful in what is to come. Which is not to say that they are untalented writers at all but these new rules obviously won't work for everyone. Which is a big reason why I've honestly put this transition off as long as I have. When we first revamped the rules a year ago or whatever it was we should have changed the rules to what we are doing in 2024 but I and a few others really didn't want to be because we knew how important the back and forth was to people and how much it was a staple of what made the XWF so awesome but like you said, adapt or die. That's really what it comes down to. And as much as I will miss the back and forth because it did make for some great stuff I know that this is the right call.

I am hoping that these new rules take off and maybe down the road we can introduce a new title that allows us to take advantage of the back and forth setting. Kind of like the Federweight used to be.

I would love it if a side effect of this lead to more on show promos from people because lord knows we could always use more segments on shows. And those segments can obviously be used to help further stories and further sell matches/programs.

Thanks for thinking hard about how we can keep growing and producing good product guys.

I quite like long builds and multi-show feuds, is that something that'd be taken into grading/scoring? That'd incentivise everyone to have a longer term view of their matches, particularly highlighting the benefits of PPVs.

I'm fairly comfortable with the 4K limit, and the removal of the soft deadline. Like Bobby Im wondering if there's some flexibility to that? 2/2K if it's negotiated, even a back and forth if people were comfortable with it?

I'll be the first to admit that I believe the rules benefit my general style and approach as a whole. As someone who has historically struggled with trash talk, especially on the follow-up, I think these rules definitely benefit writers like myself.

I am also not entirely enthusiastic about the changes. I don’t mind making things more manageable and approachable to new users. I would even go as far to say that it is a necessity in keeping up with the times. There is no shame in making something for me people.

However, there is a level of concern I hold for the standard give and take and at least having the option available. My hope is that, at some point, conversations shift towards something more akin to the total wordcount over unlimited RPs style, just to preserve the back and forth that many people love about the XWF. Some of our favorite matchups have been wars of words where each RP pushed their opponents further. And I'm sure, like Bobby and Isaiah have already mentioned, there will be ways for people to experiment and play around in the new rules. It just does definitely feel like we could lose some identity here and the spirit of this place, added to be a whole lot of people over a whole lotta time does matter a lot to me. I guess I just worry we could be giving up a lot here.

Most likely, I'm just overly resistant to the new rules and I'll become accustomed to them in time. Appreciate y'all, staff. It's a thankless job.

"You can't run from yourself."

Having spent the least amount of time here compared to many, one factor to consider is how much easier it will be to judge matches quickly.

So I'll try and address a few posts in a row here rather than responding to each individual one:

Quote:I quite like long builds and multi-show feuds, is that something that'd be taken into grading/scoring? That'd incentivise everyone to have a longer term view of their matches, particularly highlighting the benefits of PPVs.

I'm fairly comfortable with the 4K limit, and the removal of the soft deadline. Like Bobby Im wondering if there's some flexibility to that? 2/2K if it's negotiated, even a back and forth if people were comfortable with it?

To your first question, it's not something we've discussed but something we can discuss and I can follow up with where we land on it.

To your second question, it's not something I really want to do, allowing for shifting rules, different options etc, but at the same time if both parties are ok with it then I guess that's fine. What I would say is that all matches will be booked as 1 rp 4k. If the people involved want to go to a 2 rp 2k arrangement you'll have to do it after the card goes up and let someone in management know so we can account for it.

Quote:However, there is a level of concern I hold for the standard give and take and at least having the option available. My hope is that, at some point, conversations shift towards something more akin to the total wordcount over unlimited RPs style, just to preserve the back and forth that many people love about the XWF. Some of our favorite matchups have been wars of words where each RP pushed their opponents further. And I'm sure, like Bobby and Isaiah have already mentioned, there will be ways for people to experiment and play around in the new rules. It just does definitely feel like we could lose some identity here and the spirit of this place, added to be a whole lot of people over a whole lotta time does matter a lot to me. I guess I just worry we could be giving up a lot here.

So I sort of addressed this in my response to Bobby. I recognize that we are giving up something that has made the XWF what it was, and part of our identity. It's not something that I or any of the staff take lightly. We are definitely giving something up but the hope is that in doing so we are gaining something else, which is more roster members. While our rules are working for some, they are off putting to a lot of other people. That was something that became abundantly clear when I talked to people the last few weeks. And if you look at where we are as a roster, I have to practically beg people to opt in right now. That's not good. We've lost a lot of people the last few months who were regulars for a myriad of reasons and haven't really replaced them with anyone, save for Dion joining and Big D coming back. So this change is as much about survival as anything else.

To your point about a war of words, we do have boards set up where people can absolutely go back and forth. They used to be utilized a lot back in the day. Probably one of the few things I actually miss about the previous era. Maybe the trade off is that they are utilized more now. Obviously that stuff wouldn't be factored into judging because it would be a nightmare to try and keep up with but I do think it helps to address some of the concerns some of you have fairly mentioned. There is also the utilization of segments. That too is an avenue for addressing some of these concerns and then of course there is Twitter/X. Which, again as much as I hate it, it has it's uses. And while I get the mindset of "Why would I do that extra stuff if it's not going to count or increase my chances of winning?" I'd simply just say, you either care or you don't right? You're either willing to go the extra mile to make the program/feud/match great or you aren't. And its perfectly acceptable if you don't and all you care about is doing the work for the RP. That's perfectly fine but there are other avenues out there we just have to be creative about it. There are many other successful feds out there who make it work within the rules we are switching to which is why I am confident that this fed can as well. We have a lot of great community members, some old and some new who care deeply and want this place to succeed and I really do believe, despite my own reluctance that this is the way forward. Also, I want to make it clear that while I'm addressing what Ned specifically said my response is in the more general sense to anyone who may have similar feelings to Ned because I know you are out there. I'm one of them but I've had the luxury of spending weeks working through all this while for the rest of you it's just been a few days.

As for what Dion said, yes this will make judging easier though that honestly was not something that was ever discussed and not something I even really thought of until you mentioned it. My entire approach to all of this was "How do we improve our roster? How do we get more people to come to the XWF that are currently reluctant to do so?" And I am hopeful this will do that.

Ultimately what this is boiling down to, from my perspective, is that it is a change that may help attract both new and returning participants into the fed. Madness has seen substantial growth, but since a majority of their time is spent on Twitter (I'm not calling it X out of spite), sometimes it does not translate to the activity here on the boards.

If there is a desire for a back-and-forth format, I think I may have a suggestion that could fit the bill. Feel free to tailor it as necessary:

I've seen divisions comprised primarily of back-and-forth call-and-response style posting. You'd set a number of posts and a word limit, and it would be purely promo, no CD at all. So for example, if Bobby and Ned were in one of these matches, it could be set so each opponent has 5 posts ranging from 500-1000 words. At worst, you're reading 5000 words to judge between both opponents.

It could be made as an entire division, or a match stipulation, whichever would work best.

(11-28-2023, 07:25 AM)Dionysus Said: Ultimately what this is boiling down to, from my perspective, is that it is a change that may help attract both new and returning participants into the fed. Madness has seen substantial growth, but since a majority of their time is spent on Twitter (I'm not calling it X out of spite), sometimes it does not translate to the activity here on the boards.

If there is a desire for a back-and-forth format, I think I may have a suggestion that could fit the bill. Feel free to tailor it as necessary:

I've seen divisions comprised primarily of back-and-forth call-and-response style posting. You'd set a number of posts and a word limit, and it would be purely promo, no CD at all. So for example, if Bobby and Ned were in one of these matches, it could be set so each opponent has 5 posts ranging from 500-1000 words. At worst, you're reading 5000 words to judge between both opponents.

It could be made as an entire division, or a match stipulation, whichever would work best.

So Thad had actually made that exact suggestion to me previously and I definitely think it has a lot of potential. We both thought it would be best to see how things play out and if it's something that there is a desire for we do it and if not we don't. I sort of alluded to it previously when I mentioned a potential new belt. At this moment it certainly seems like there is a desire for it, at least among some folks here. Anyone else want to weigh in? 

I am all for creating a new title to go along with what Thad suggested and Dion expanded upon but there isn't much sense in doing it if there are only like 3-4 people interested in it.

As a guy who left for a fed that has rules more akin to what Theo and crew have implemented take this with a grain of salt. But I am both completely understanding of why this was done and completely  disappointed that it had to be done. 

I always saw XWF as being something different from the rest of the field, and one of those differences was how the dynamic trash talk process had not become a thing of the past.  I feel strongly that to preserve the flavor of XWF as a fed there has to be some kind of option that allows for back and forth. Something both players would have to opt in to that would create a big game match vibe. 

I know Theo said he wasn't crazy about allowing for such diversity, but speaking as but one voice these new changes reduce the chances of me ever wanting to come back. I went to the other Feds when my gas was getting low and I needed the lower counts. But I came home when I was ready to roll.

I hope at the very least this does bring some more players back to the fore. But damn this ADHD I have to be in 12 goddamn Feds mentality that forced this change.

(11-28-2023, 12:45 PM)Corey Smith Said: As a guy who left for a fed that has rules more akin to what Theo and crew have implemented take this with a grain of salt. But I am both completely understanding of why this was done and completely  disappointed that it had to be done. 

I always saw XWF as being something different from the rest of the field, and one of those differences was how the dynamic trash talk process had not become a thing of the past.  I feel strongly that to preserve the flavor of XWF as a fed there has to be some kind of option that allows for back and forth. Something both players would have to opt in to that would create a big game match vibe. 

I know Theo said he wasn't crazy about allowing for such diversity, but speaking as but one voice these new changes reduce the chances of me ever wanting to come back. I went to the other Feds when my gas was getting low and I needed the lower counts. But I came home when I was ready to roll.

I hope at the very least this does bring some more players back to the fore. But damn this ADHD I have to be in 12 goddamn Feds mentality that forced this change.

You know, this might not be a bad idea for PPVs in particular. These should be big matches with a bit of back and forth banter.

So to throw my two cents in, I'm almost the opposite of Corey.

This change makes it more likely that when I'm ready to commit long-term again, I'm more likely to come back 'home'. I guess I've seen the fed go to 1 rp once before in the forgotten times, so I kind of never had the attachment to the multiple rps that the fed has been built on over the last few years. When that change was made way back when, it was done for a similar reason. And got similar feedback. Moreso, I just support whatever helps make this place a thriving community. Plus I hated the thought of a 2k limit.

However, in a macro sense, the XWF filled a niche with the back-and-forth that doesn't really exist in efed-land right now, and I think it's sad that will cease to exist. But it needs the numbers to continue. I had actually been talking to Thad, who must have relayed a similar thought to Theo, about a micro division that focuses exclusively on trash talk. But it would need to be a test case first. For now, I think just give this a go, and see where it lands for you. If it encourages more use of other spaces to tell stories, I think that'll make the fed feel more 'alive'.

TLDR: I'm for. Hope everyone gives it a solid crack.