Brain-storming the Underdark / Surface interaction

[Aspect of Sorrow]

I only ask because I would like to see a vote set up and I'd be interested to know what the options would be in such a vote.

The majority of players probably have not rolled a UD alt with any significant playtime, and are unaffected by simply voting negatively.

[Flasmix]

I am personally a fan of an updating poll. I did it for a QC thing and it worked out well.

The first poll will have a lot of different options, after a few days, the options with the highest numbers are kept while those with the fewest are removed. This will reset the poll, now it continues as 'The unpopular options have been removed, please recast your vote' Those who had voted for an unpopular option now have to pick between what's available and choose what they would deem as the better option from what's available.

As for what the points should be? What comes to mind is;

1) Keep current rules in place.
2) No UDers on the Surface, no Surfacers in the UD
3) Change the rules to allow free travel between the two as long as the purpose is not strictly for PvP, Repeat offenders will receive strict punishment.
4) Same as 3, but death on either side prevents travel for X RL weeks
5+) Anything anybody else can come up with

My problem was never with the ones who came up for PvP, it was the special snowflakes who wanted to be Eilistraeeans or Drizzt clones and be friends with surfacers. Yeah it's an RP reason, but it's an RP reason that NOBODY wants to do.

[DM Pancake]

Not taking anything here personally at all, Storm Munin. We also recognize that there have been a lot of bad DM related issues in the past.

The point here is, we can't release examples of why we feel that the rules needs to be in place as they are. Even as we sit on too many to list accurately.

But what I feel is generally overlooked here is, we the DM team, only ever get involved these days when an issue occurs. Which they do. Almost as a rule, we don't even hear about situations where interaction between the surface and the UD playerbase goes well. These are the successful interactions that happen all the time. But we don't get to hear about those. We get to hear about when people spot drow at the FAI, when there have been a PvP , casualties on both sides, and there is a disagreement over it. That is generally it. We get the complaints. And in some situations, requests we deem either reasonable or unreasonable, and have to decide on.

The rules are there to not make the surface or the underdark just another light adventure where you get to fight other players, or be a setting where you are different and ignore the world your character is entering. If you play it smart, then we are likely to never hear about it. If, however, you make yourself a visible target, then you should not feel it unfairly if the setting reacts accordingly.

Kill on Sight, isn't a mandatory rule for players to follow blindly. But it is lore appropriate to defend oneself if they see a creature that stories will have it, steals children away and so on. The other rules, and the reason why we don't let people settle on the 'other side', can be said to be there for the simple reason, to respect the players around you, and avoid difficult situations that might happen. Such as adventuring in the Xvartz village, and run into a group of drow, doing the same thing. Try to imagine yourself in either's shoes, and being the lower level player.

And that is probably the best point to make on this issue. Try to see things from the others perspective. Would you want a group of drow/deep gnome to appear outside your guild asking for refuge? Or how about a group of elves arguing loudly with a mage/priestess in Gloura's Wing? We are a community here, and have to act as such. And that means that we have to respect where we are playing, and as what. Not just the setting, but how if comes across to the players that we are sharing this community with.

And just to summarize. If all interaction was successfully done, we would never hear a thing about it.

[Flasmix]

The difference is that Elves would be allowed in the Gloura's Wing... And be protected by law if they were Wizards.

[Narsil]

I would enjoy seeing a poll for the DM's to vote what they think of the same options ? Anonymous, if preferred, but with public result counts ?

After all, opening up travel basically means a potential of much more "work" for them.

And yes, while it's true that DM's are mainly aware of the more negative incidents, while successful ones go on quietly in the background......... I will tell you I personally have simply walked-away from countless situations that I probably SHOULD have stuck around in order to "report" it.......but as a player, I choose not to. I have better things to do with my limited playtime......much as the DM's and others here for the storytelling. I know other players who have done / do the same, for the sake of self-sanity. Suffice it to say that far from all negative encounters are brought to the DM team.

[Aspect of Sorrow]

That was due to our original consideration of playerbase inclusion with a potential threat, not what it had delved into over the past 8 years. The module has flipped on this decision a few times before the dust settled, partially due to what we weren't able address at the time (the special snowflake).

Today that is less of a concern.

Use built in mechanics to the advantage. The module shouldn't have the floodgates open per se, populated areas such as cities and towns, the FAI included, shouldn't see Drow running amok. Instead try a remote location for the surface point, flag just a handful of areas, ten or so, as Drow accessible. Position the storytelling arc that there are NPC outposts deployed as a maneuver to try and control these regions (and explains the limit of travel). When UD players interact within canon and server regulation appropriately, permit more areas of expansion to the UD players. When a problem arises that a player cannot handle the circumstances appropriately, bar them from the use of the UD / Surface bridge and them only.

[ValerieJean]

That was due to our original consideration of playerbase inclusion with a potential threat, not what it had delved into over the past 8 years. The module has flipped on this decision a few times before the dust settled, partially due to what we weren't able address at the time (the special snowflake).

Today that is less of a concern.

Use built in mechanics to the advantage. The module shouldn't have the floodgates open per se, populated areas such as cities and towns, the FAI included, shouldn't see Drow running amok. Instead try a remote location for the surface point, flag just a handful of areas, ten or so, as Drow accessible. Position the storytelling arc that there are NPC outposts deployed as a maneuver to try and control these regions (and explains the limit of travel). When UD players interact within canon and server regulation appropriately, permit more areas of expansion to the UD players. When a problem arises that a player cannot handle the circumstances appropriately, bar them from the use of the UD / Surface bridge and them only.

+1, This seems the best route to take for testing the waters. I say why not give it a shot!

[Steve]

Position the storytelling arc that there are NPC outposts deployed as a maneuver to try and control these regions (and explains the limit of travel). When UD players ....

Seems if BGTSCC Underdark dwellers started to work towards creating their own outposts, then maybe this would become a reality. Don't you think?

As has already been posted a million billion times, the Server Rules state that Drow can be on the Surface for RP reasons. And the above, to me, is a definite RP reason.

And I do not see why DMs need to set this up for Players. Though, DMs could maneuver NPCs to assist Players on doing it, if the PCs involved succeed in overcoming DCs applied to their actions.

[Aspect of Sorrow]

Seems if BGTSCC Underdark dwellers started to work towards creating their own outposts, then maybe this would become a reality. Don't you think?

The outposts to contain the UDer access is on the surface, maintained by surfacers.

As has already been posted a million billion times, the Server Rules state that Drow can be on the Surface for RP reasons. And the above, to me, is a definite RP reason.

Which is fine, but the ease of access is in question as well.

[Blame The Rogue]

part of it is how often there would be interactions

other than the occasional overly confident adventuring party, there really shouldn't be a lot of surfacers in the UD

other than the occasional drow night raid, there shouldn't be a lot of drow on the surface

one concern is that if the passage, or passages, are opened up, then every single day we're going to have this going on. that's too often, even for rp sake. and that's too often to burden the DMs

[Aspect of Sorrow]

Limiting the accessible range on the surface invites the two to blend in optionally without the UDers running amok. The "burden" claimed upon staff is vastly trivial if this is implemented as mechanically controlled as possible such that the server is enforcing the matter instead of depending on user labor; hell, I volunteer for moderating the interactions if need be which wouldn't detract from the already apparent strenuous staffing requirement.

[DM Galatea]

Subject: Brain-storming the Underdark / Surface interaction

Then don't describe it as laziness.

It isn't laziness. It is to reduce the amount of adminstrative work DMs have to do to break up the near daily squabbles irresponsible players get themselves involved with, in preference of actual storytelling. Never mind the temper tantrums thrown when players do not like the consequences of their actions, which again, are unpleasant. These tend to escalate to the point where a number of actions taken are legally chargeable, though thankfully those cases are few in number.

As I stated in the other thread, I and others have had run ins with DMs who are outright hostile when an UDer is on the surface. From my recent experiences and how things are said, I have the belief that DMs do not wish UDers on the surface at all. While I may be wrong, while you may not feel the same way, there are DMs who do feel like that probably. Perhaps it's the same case of the minority ruining it for the majority, hm? You may not be the lazy one, but others are.

If you talk to DMs, most of our topics about UD/surface interactions involve preventing OOC grinding, policing random PvP and preventing a legion of Drizzt clones. I am usually the one who mentions the latter. Other DMs have varying levels of interest in the topic.

This whole 'probably maybe' weasel wording is dimly viewed however. Perhaps you have had run ins with DMs. Fortunately we are a team and self regulating. Tell us what happened in PM.

As I said. I will ask again. Do not suggest DMs are lazy.

[Aspect of Sorrow]

As I said. I will ask again. Do not suggest DMs are lazy.

While the DMs aren't lazy, irrefutably the implementations relative to the UD typically cater to a lower denominator or often takes a back seat to the remainder of the server. It's perpetuating and alienating, giving tendency to threads like these.