>What I could come up with so far:
>
>Make descriptions AND roles mandatory.

I don't really see this helping.

Some people write a huge book-long role but you never get to see any of it in play.

Some people don't write a role, but their role comes through like crazy in their RP.

Role is a hell of a useful tool, but making it mandatory (note: I mean to say, mandatory for everyone -- I completely support a given immortal making it mandatory for their religion/empowerment, etc. doesn't get you much of anywhere because what's written may or may not correlate to the character in play. I think there's lots of good reasons and incentives to write one without taking that step.

>"Punish" or inform people who are breaking RP instead of
>rewarding the opposite making RP the standard and not some
>"Immteraction" worthy bonus for those who know what is smiled
>upon.

This happens. I don't see taking the carrot away making the stick work any better.

>Allow only the person who delt the killing blow to be able to
>take things from a corpse.

I don't see this ever happening. We've got corpseguard, and while I'm sure over the years it will see tweaks, that's about as far as we want to go.

>Create a room (in every town?) in which players of every guild
>could enter with the understanding that negotiations would be
>taking place. It would have a guardian (that wouldn't allow
>you to enter if you were bloody?) Now the only time a Elf
>meets a Duergar doesn't have to be hack n' slash, they might
>be able to convince the other to "repent" as I hear so often
>by some followers of certain gods, and earn EXP or bonus for
>that. Or maybe a Fire giant persuades a Storm giant to turn
>from his goodly ways, embrace the darkness, and take the
>bloodoath. Of course negotiations will turn bad, people will
>get killed, but at least there is a small opportunity to say a
>few things, or emote a few things, or do some really cool RP
>before you get pincered or slept.

Like the Inn?

Along similar lines, I'd say that's about as close as we want to get to a safe room, either.

>On the same point. The Outlanders and the Tribunals have some
>really big issues with one another, how often do they get to
>explain their positions? The BattleRagers and the Scions are
>nearly night and day, do the ragers ever get to explain why
>they have come to hate magic, or the Scions to show their
>intelligence over the seeminly moronic barbarians? I'm not
>saying have a tea party, but with the exchange of words comes
>better understanding of characters, they can respect each
>other as foes, battle constantly, and enjoy it more I would
>think.

Be a Herald and throw an event where something like this happens. Be a character of some other kind that stands between opposing factions. The tools to make some of these things happen are in player hands.

>This is somewhat obscure but since the introduction of morale,
>perhaps the wearing of a recently desceased foes armor would
>lower your morale for a short time, or long time, depending on
>the relation. For example, a Fortress warrior wearing the
>gauntlets from a recently deceased Imperial or Scion wouldn't
>make him feel too good, they might smell, they may even feel
>like the armor or weapon help take the lives of many innocents
>and so on. On the flipside, an imperial who wears armor or
>weapons from an outlander may feel the power of the laws of
>nature, and dishearten his quest for imperial law and its
>domination.

This doesn't make much sense to me.