Would u still play on BGTSCC if yr Toon had only "X" Lives?

[Deathgrowl]

Don't compare raising availability in nwn2 to FR lore. Remember it is quite costly in the setting. Not just gold either. And lorewise there are fewer even high enough level.

I can also imagine som gods refusing to even grant the spells. Jergal comes to mind. Lathander an Myrkul may also be reluctant.

[aaron22]

Lots of FR fiction writers take ridiculous liberties at times from lore to be able to tell their own particular story with that particular feel. This includes R.A. Salvatore

that is not what i am talking about. i am talking about death. and it is in response to you stating that it lore compliant that characters are essentially death proof. how many major characters die in those books with seemingly powerful enough clerics at least nearby and are left dead?

i am exactly comparing FR lore and BGTSCC. it is ridiculously opposing. one has nearly no rezz or raises while the other has it everywhere all the time.

[chad878262]

Lorewise there also wouldn't be up to 96 level 30 people running around the Sword Coast (or all of Toril) at any given time. Even if you try to go with the whole '1/2 level' deal it doesn't work as you could probably count the number of level 15 people in the Sword Coast at less than 50, probably less (this is a rough guess of course). Dungeons and Dragons is designed around a small group of buddies which, if successful over the course of many sessions are likely to become the most sought after and competent adventurers within a given town/area/region. Trying to apply FR lore to the use of raising dead in an environment such as we have on this server is bound to fall flat simply based on the fact that high level characters are found reliably at any time of day. If you want to play in a lore appropriate setting you would likely have to chose a server with a level cap of ~10 or with a total limit on # of players in game at a time as ~6. If I recall there is a server that has a low level limit, though I am not certain if it is still around.

Lorewise a character at level 30 (or even 15) sort of is death proof (unless they are a complete moron or of a specific religion). However, as stated above, the number of level 15 people (much less level 30 people) is far more rare in FR then represented on the server.

[aaron22]

i would disagree that there are probably more than 100 level 15's in menzoberanzan during the exile book. with the school, bregan and the many families all having matrons and daughters and weapon masters and generals. 100 doesnt seem hard to fathom. this comes with not knowing what levels they actually are but lvl 15 doesnt seem like a stretch when i read them then think of the feats they are using and build the characters in my head. the wandering mage in sojourn had delayed blast fireball. that would make him at least a lvl 13 wiz or 14 sorc.

[chad878262]

Well, I can't find any specific numbers from WotC on the breakdown of Toril or even Sword Coast numbers, basically can only find various examples of individuals 'made-up' figures. Some have provided the 'math' behind it or compared it to real world examples such as US population of combatant vs. non-combatant. They all universally seem to agree that the numbers dwindle swiftly the higher in level you get, though there is thought to be a point where the numbers would expand a bit at higher levels due to those individuals becoming more risk averse and being very hard to kill.

Regarding the use of the novels, I will say that Drizzt is "only" level 16 in 3e and he takes on a lot of those powerful Menzoberranzan Wizards/priests/warriors... If all of them are level 15+ He would not have had a very good chance at only level 16 with no casting ability... The Companions of the Hall are supposed to be famous, some of the most powerful adventurers in Faerun. However, that can't really be the case if level 15's are a dime a dozen. They would just be your average everyday adventurers.

[aaron22]

i agree with this chad. making the numbers for the fictional characters vary greatly and obviously that is using these numbers to compare to BGtSCC which says we are level </=15 but we have talents that far exceed this. but even then, the difference between mortality in our server and what prevails in all FR lore and content is substantial. the sword coast is supposed to be one of the most dangerous places. what danger?

so if level 30 toons should be neigh invincible. then why are level 1 toons invincible? would 2 level 30 toons fighting just fight for eternity? are not the gods at or above these levels? they can die. a level 30 character is invincible because there is very little in the monster manual that can defeat it. 1000 kobolds cannot kill a level 30 wizard. i agree. but what about 100 dragons? a level 30 is not invincible. it should be able to die.

[Steve]

Lorewise there also wouldn't be up to 96 level 30 people running around ...

And oh...how permastrikes --> permadeath would alleviate this problem!!!

/poke

[chad878262]

Lorewise there also wouldn't be up to 96 level 30 people running around ...

And oh...how permastrikes --> permadeath would alleviate this problem!!!

/poke

Yep, instead there would likely be ~5 people running around, maybe another 10-15 hanging out at a camp fire...much better.

[aaron22]

Yep, instead there would likely be ~5 people running around, maybe another 10-15 hanging out at a camp fire...much better.

2 things on this...
1) why? scared.. whats the point?
2) maybe not. really guessing is all either side can do. i have heard many times in my just 1 year here, "i am leaving if (x) happens" and the server grows... whatever.

[chad878262]

1) why? scared.. whats the point?

Because at least 50% of the players on the server are less than or right around a year in. The learning curve for new players is relatively steep and frustrating. How many times did you die on your first ever character? Now imagine each third death you had to start from scratch (for example). As I stated earlier in the thread, had we made every death 'count' when I started on the server I likely would not have lasted past a month, which would likely have included attempting to level a dozen or more toons, most of which would not have made it past level 3. For me now? Sure, whatever...but for those who don't know 'safe' places to level, get loot, what-have-you? The vast majority will simply spend their time elsewhere. Thus we will have far less people in game.

2) maybe not. really guessing is all either side can do. i have heard many times in my just 1 year here, "i am leaving if (x) happens" and the server grows... whatever.

[/quote]

Very true. However, in the case of permanent death, especially based on non-DM monitored occurrences will have the impact of people leaving. I can say right now if one of my level 30 toons was suddenly 'gone' because of a lag spike or hacker attack or anything of the sort I certainly would not accept simply RCR'ing back to 20 because I DESPISE epic leveling on this server (or more specifically I despise questing which is the most efficient/only decent leveling mechanic in epics). Now, you can argue (and some have) that with permanent character deaths perhaps leveling could be relaxed, but as of now it isn't.

Frankly if Epic leveling didn't drop to the point where you're basically just getting ~15K from 4 hours of weekly questing while adventuring only gives ~1-1.5K experience per hour if you are grinding (and is thus pointless) I would personally be fine with perma-strikes/perma-death, whatever. I enjoy building new concepts and leveling them up....until you hit level 20, then I usually end up taking several weeks breaks at a time because I just can't be bothered to run quests if I want to gain levels more than once per 6 months.

Unfortunately, many don't care about leveling as they only want to play their one main character and perhaps occasionally a lower level alt, but they do care if that one permanent main character is gone forever and, thus you have the issue where they get upset and leave.

[aaron22]

yes. my first character was tough. but i realized quickly that the penalty of death was minor and i would recklessly smash and smash and if i die then i just take my minimal xp loss and get back to smashing. my tune would have changed pretty quick and i would have looked for safer alternatives to what i did without such allowances. people would play different. that is the point. and i have only had to talk to myrkul from lag twice in that whole year. plenty of hours smashing.

i think that for PvP to count in deaths they should count on a different tally. and can only be stricken by a DM. so if you want a fight to the death with another player then a DM supervising would be needed. PvP, to me, is not the main issue but it is a part of a bigger one.

and the issue is that players play what the server gives.. immortality. and that is DUMB. it makes everything you do worthless.

even jerry siegel knew that superman needs to be able to die. and so he wrote that in. its got to be there or else nothing matters.

[aaron22]

oh and if you want that perfect story for your character....

[Steve]

How many times did you die on your first ever character? Now imagine each third death you had to start from scratch (for example). As I stated earlier in the thread, had we made every death 'count' when I started on the server I likely would not have lasted past a month

Chad, this thread, from the OP onward, was never about dying in normal PvE circumstances. If you keep writing about that, it distracts from the MAIN POINT.

To reiterate the MAIN POINT: if you involve your PC in DM Events or the Server Wide Campaign, where actions have the "possibility" of changing the actual Sword Coast environment, or even lesser, just changing the nature of the Event the DM(s) have set up—again, think campaign/module—then actions have consequence, and thus, IC behavior should follow or exist in this paradigm.

It has been endlessly pointed out that Lag spikes, stupid Engine quirks, etc. are far too common and annoying to allow for 3-strikes-your-out in PvE situations. As well, Players want to just grind/die/grind/die/grind/die until Level 30, and because BGTSCC caters to the widest audience, there is little reason to take this away.

However...there is EVERY reason to make consequential role-play have a greater weight and value to it. There is even and EXISTING RULE on Permastrikes, and essentially, the only reason given why DMs do not utilize this Rule is because "Players complain."

Well, my thought is that Players complain because they are not given ample Reward to lure them into taking the Risk involved in such things as Events/Storylines that carry Perma-strikes.

In fact, would ALL events/storylines carry perma-strikes, should the situation warrant it, it would a) certainly change the landscape to as who would participate in events/storylines, b) would fundamentally change the stature of Characters that act/live/survive/prosper/or die, in such events and storylines.

One could really have the best of both "worlds," as I described above. It simply takes some courage and a bit of testing the waters, in order to show the yuuuuge benefits, in Player fun, Player experience.

I dare someone on Staff to take me up on it.

[aaron22]

steve.. distracting the conversation from only DM events and steering them to other avenues is at least partially my fault. the thread has had some over-view meandering. but yea. lets get it back on track.

to me, DM event strikes are a start. rome wasnt built in a day and all.

[Hoihe]

oh and if you want that perfect story for your character....

Let us deride the other side savvy? Not like I cannot do the same, yet I try not to barring that one case where I responded to one directly.





Indefinite or bust.


DM events - Metaplot "lives", where lives represent the permission to affect and participate in the events. It is up to the DM and the player to work together to find a plausible reason why they can no longer participate for the duration without making play of the character impossible or permanently debiliating them. Which will be an issue as It already seems my character will end up forced to participate in a potential event line which OOC I'd like to avoid due to IC sensibilities.


High-end Dungeons - Indefinite punishments as previously outlined to fit the great rewards at the end (well, only Hell shop has great rewards). Always make it fixable to avoid ruining characters. People want them permanent can always not fix them, those who don't will actually generate roleplay.





I'll admit that I very, very much want the Hell shop and dying in hell in general to have serious, long-term hard to fix indefinite consequences. Lore-wise, Hell can make you suffer identity death (dunking in river styx) (Which I really, really hate. People may dislike some forms of RP and find them greatly distasteful, for me it's identity death), or end up soul trapped or a lot of things very hard to fix (yes, you can fix river styx if you make a successful assault on where identities are stored!). And yet, people casually visit hell at such a level, that even my 8 wisdom 14 cha character goes "no (do-me) way I go anywhere near that portal, and I'm the person who skirted the border of the Far Realm."




Edit:

Here is definite proof indicating indefinite effects are better than permanent death for consequences.


viewtopic.php?f=18&t=35782
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=36382