Orcs

[Moltrazahn]

Id like it clarified if we (orc players) can enter it while disguised or we also have to afk tag to do the sandwitch quest? Given the staffs newest decision on KoS in the small hamlet, it clearly means fishing is out of the question if disguises count as braking the towns laws.

*Cigarsmoke.
Afk tags are used for grey-orcs to gather quests in human areas. Given that most quests are city-based and located in areas most orcs would never go near in character. Consider it a method of reach and ooc-equality rather than method of... "god modding".

If you come across people who use abuse afk-tags to move around the server in an inappropriate manner. You should report it. Or even ask said player of their reasoning. Ive met folks who were afk-running to a safe place because of time issues (and afew times of "the baby just woke up"). Sometimes it's rather understandable reasons why someone puts on the tag .

That being said... "not wanting to deal with people" is not such a reason.

[Glowfire]

Tbh, the DM team should update the Laws of the Lands to state what is acceptable and what is not acceptable in Ulgoth's Beard. Banished people have been allowed in Ulgoth's Beard in the past. If Ulgoth's Beard goes under Baldur's Gate's jurisdiction, then that should be clearly stated to avoid confusion.

I do think it's fair that orcs and drow not be allowed in the hamlet. But a DM ruling posted in a rumour thread is not going to be accessible to anyone looking around for laws and proper behaviour in Ulgoth's Beard a month on from now.

[TarnishedSoul]

AFK tags are extremely god-moddy and should be frowned upon - as for orcs in disguise, their physicality alone makes that impossible. They are extremely large creatures - even larger than half-orcs, distinctive enough in body type, strength, and sheer friggin' size that they'd be considered a monster from a distance by most people. They're over a head taller and wider than half-bloods, we need to remember that when we're RPing not to look at the computer graphics, but what lore we're running off of.

Subject: DM Rulings: A Record of DM Decisions

DM RULINGS

IC/OOC Nature of Quests
As it stands, it is open to players to treat individual quests their own characters undertake as IC; alternatively they can treat the quests as OOC. As an exception to this, when undertaking quests in settlements in which they would not be permitted (Baldur's Gate, Ulgoth's Beard, and "uncivlised" orcs in Nashkel and Beregost), Grey Orcs must use an AFK tag, not interact IC within the settlement and keep the time spent there to a minimum.

Hidden: show

Please note this is a temporary ruling, to account for the fact that currently there is unfair access to quests across the alignment spectrum and for the various races.

We understand some of the quests seem strange to be repeatable. This can be put in the same box as travelling hundreds of miles in a few transitions, and the mass slaughter of grinding/levelling up - a concession to the game world.

The staff is looking for ways to to revamp the various quests available throughout the world, subject to a space and willing bodies in the development window. The goal would be to make access to quests fairer and remove the need for any OOC questing or use of AFK tags. We're also brainstorming ways to revise the nature of quests to make them easier to understand in IC terms. This quest review, however, is a large task and is a project for the post update period.

[cigarsmoke]

Thank you TarnishedSoul and Moltrazahn for clearing the AFK rule for me, I didn't know! I'll keep it in mind in the future.

I totally get that, wanting to help others be equal OOC - but at the same time there are a lot of people who don't put up AFK tags and refuse to go to certain places where they could get quests. If you ask me if you want to play that kind of PC, you should suffer the consequences and that seems like special treatment to me, and still leaves a bad taste in my mouth over godmodding, I mean, that can definitely be abused. I think it also takes away some realism in the server, and makes it less about RP. But this is just personal opinion, again, thanks for showing me the rules - most servers I've played on don't allow it for any reason, so I had assumed it was similar to theirs, I haven't played BG for about year, so I'm a bit out of touch with some things here particularly concerning things like that.

That said, Glowfire had a really good point. She's totally right on the money, though the rumor part is fun ^^

[Stonebar]

I thought the added quest to Soubar was to make it so BG city quest are not needed for the AFK sign stuff.
I though Roaring shore was Orc ok as well?

PS: I hate the AFK sign when moving about, unless special cases like QC/Builders, or making a quick dash back to where you were before the reset (if close-ish)

[Mork]

Potentially I see a need for AFK signs to simply transition between areas.
Normally I imagine IC-ly orcs/drows/whatever could use routes that no one else normally travels by like forests etc. Paths far away from main roads. Seems fair it should be allowed since when someone like that wants to transition from one place to another IC-ly he is not even there - but simply making his way through some unused road or sneaking through plains/forests that no one else normally uses. Absolutely no godmodding here - just fixing what limited amount of maps do.

[Moltrazahn]

And of cause.... when people are actually AFK