Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

sure, as long as they take away these continuous lag spikes...

Mac wrote:
Unless... you are speaking of strictly RP incidents. In which case the policy as I remember it was that perma-death generally rests in the hands of the player not the staff.

The permanent death rule says 3 strikes and you're out. For good. Players doesn't and shouldn't have any voice in it, though they can protest if they believe any of their strikes were given unfairly or by mistake, in which case the staff can review any evidence and/or talk with the DM who was present.

If it's all up to the players, then the rule is useless if not out right pointless. Or poorly written as it clearly says 3 strikes and bai.

Having a limited amount of lives sounds fun to me, but I think it would fit strangely within the rest of what is Baldur's Gate.

Limited amount of lives = hardcore mode. But what else is hardcore about BGTSSC ? It's PG 13. Lore is barely enforced. Muling is allowed. Roleplay skills are not required.

Maximvs wrote: Lore is barely enforced.

I know of at least two players that would argue their characters were forced to be RCR'd by DM ruling and would argue that Lore is enforced even if they disagree with it. Simply put DM's cannot watch everything at all times, but I have seen many times where players broke lore in events or where a DM was present and were very much corrected.

Maximvs wrote:Roleplay skills are not required.

No skills are required, nor should they be. However, a creative player can make use of many 'RP only' skills in DM events. I once participated in a DM event a couple months ago where my level 8 roguish build was leading a bunch of epic characters around. Why? Because even at low level he had more skill points in things like search. Most players will still use skills in RP with each other, even though players can't 'force' skill rolls on each other, they can still be utilized by mutual agreement and most enjoy including that bit of chance in their RP with each other.

I agree BG is not 'hardcore', but I would argue there is still lore enforcement and use for RP only skills.

good players understand that the sheet is the character and use the rolls to pit them against your rolls.

uh oh.. there is that soap box... sorry
i really like RP skills being used and it bothers me some when they are ignored completely and willfully. our characters, no matter what we want, are represented in the numbers on our sheet. if you choose to ignore survival(0 pts) then you literally know jack on the knowledge that is represented in that skill. you cannot avoid will save, so at least you have a roll against a intim/bluff/diplo roll. but if you get your will save smashed by a crazy intim number. RP IT. that is a very intimidating character. and they put the points in that to represent it. and you cannot just choose not to. that is VERY BAD FORM.

aaron22 wrote:good players understand that the sheet is the character and use the rolls to pit them against your rolls.

uh oh.. there is that soap box... sorry
i really like RP skills being used and it bothers me some when they are ignored completely and willfully. our characters, no matter what we want, are represented in the numbers on our sheet. if you choose to ignore survival(0 pts) then you literally know jack on the knowledge that is represented in that skill. you cannot avoid will save, so at least you have a roll against a intim/bluff/diplo roll. but if you get your will save smashed by a crazy intim number. RP IT. that is a very intimidating character. and they put the points in that to represent it. and you cannot just choose not to. that is VERY BAD FORM.

(most) Players do not understand how CvC skill rolls work. For one, Diplo/Int/Bluff were never intended to be used against a player character, but thankfully there exist mechanics for that.

To respond to your own "crazy intim number", intimidation works like this:

"Your Intimidate check is opposed by the target’s modified level check (1d20 + character level or Hit Dice + target’s Wisdom bonus [if any] + target’s modifiers on saves against fear)"

Immunity to fear (as professed by influence of Greater Heroism, Paladinship, Dragon Warriorship) means infinite modifiers against fear.

Furthermore, these skills are designed to alter the perception of a NPC towards the character, not convince them to do something. Now, it is more likely a Friendly attitude NPC will be more agreeable than a Unfriendly attitude NPC, and with Epic rolls it is possible to turn an NPC into a fanatic who does everything to serve you.




As such, Diplo/Intimidate/Bluff mustn't be used as skill checks, but rather guidelines. Alter your emotes and speech and chosen direction of conversation to fit your character. Let DMs handle the rolling of such, for they are trained to handle them. You are of course free to make these rolls to set the attitude of an interaction, but keep in mind skill rolls do not have nat 20 or nat 1, and often there is the chance to take 10.

A character with 0 in each 3 isn't a daft idiot, they're just average without training or talent for each. At most, us, players will have our diplo/int/Bluff range from -1 to 6, depending on our education and talents. Consider this when frowning at a well spoken PC who "only" has 10 diplomacy at level 30. (The same applies to survival. In fact, having as much as FIVE TRAINED RANKS gives you the ability to perfectly pinpoint north no matter what.)



Edit: Side note


Why does one need something to be real for it to affect their roleplay? Even if you know ICly that death is just a inconvenience, my character at least pissed off her entire guild to make sure a single person didn't die, despite having a cleric on board who can raise dead.

thats awesome stuff hoihe. love the formulas. but i am not referring to people making the rolls or pali fear immunity. im speaking of players that refuse to acknowledge the skills and the numbers and make it all up. of course the numbers reflect your styles too, but i have characters that are smarter than me. how much do i know as a player about lore:local. ive only been playing for a year and change. kinda need the rolls to show that i may be RPing poorly what my character should/would know.

anyway... i digress..

Why does one need something to be real for it to affect their roleplay? Even if you know ICly that death is just a inconvenience, my character at least pissed off her entire guild to make sure a single person didn't die, despite having a cleric on board who can raise dead.

the whole game is make believe. that is fine. we all play the make believe and do a pretty decent job at it. the paradox is we all play murder hobos but nothing dies. not the goblins not the humans not the orcs not the dragons. nothing dies. it is strange to RP seeing a player get their head removed via big sword and set on the bowsprit, put out to sea and set on fire. to return the next day like nothing happened. "oh that... yea.. i got rezzed by a mermaid cleric".

its like what i said before. its like we all live on a face of acheron. in some endless cycle of strife, war and suffering under the amused view of an evil god. thats lore... can i RP it?

HOLY CRAP!! That's it: Avernus is real, and the rest of the Server is HELL!!!!!

It all makes sense now.

and its all about Gruumsh...

the orcs had it right all along. you are all just playing a merciless game to the All Seeing God.

http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Nishrek

follow me and find the truth of it all!!!!

edit: whoever was behind changing maecius' name to barney... change it to Gruumsh for accuracy..

chad878262 wrote:

Maximvs wrote: Lore is barely enforced.

I know of at least two players that would argue their characters were forced to be RCR'd by DM ruling and would argue that Lore is enforced even if they disagree with it. Simply put DM's cannot watch everything at all times, but I have seen many times where players broke lore in events or where a DM was present and were very much corrected.

literally yesterday i saw someone with a japanese-sounding character name ask about "somebody-chan". What part of the lore is that based on?

I'm guessing Kara-Tur, or probably Kozakura or Wa specifically.

Winthorp wrote:

chad878262 wrote:

Maximvs wrote: Lore is barely enforced.

I know of at least two players that would argue their characters were forced to be RCR'd by DM ruling and would argue that Lore is enforced even if they disagree with it. Simply put DM's cannot watch everything at all times, but I have seen many times where players broke lore in events or where a DM was present and were very much corrected.

literally yesterday i saw someone with a japanese-sounding character name ask about "somebody-chan". What part of the lore is that based on?

DMs can't be everywhere all the time. My advice would be to role play your characters reaction, even if its "what the bloody hells are ye takin bout? Are ye daft? !"

But also

wangxiuming wrote:I'm guessing Kara-Tur, or probably Kozakura or Wa specifically.

Mac wrote:

Unless... you are speaking of strictly RP incidents. In which case the policy as I remember it was that perma-death generally rests in the hands of the player not the staff.

Xanfyrst

The permanent death rule says 3 strikes and you're out. For good. Players doesn't and shouldn't have any voice in it, though they can protest if they believe any of their strikes were given unfairly or by mistake, in which case the staff can review any evidence and/or talk with the DM who was present.

If it's all up to the players, then the rule is useless if not out right pointless. Or poorly written as it clearly says 3 strikes and bai.

I am sure it's happened at some point but perma-strikes are not generally given out for RP, (like they should be) They are mostly used as punishment for rule breaking. God modding guards being the most common. IE. Bentley would of stopped that fight so instead his guards killed you, enjoy the perma-strike. If they were used properly perma-strikes would be a badge of honor. A reminder of the time you tried that crazy RP and failed. Yet still live to tell the tale, At least for now.

Hence the decision to perma-death a character is almost entirely in the hands of the player. Which is as it should be anyhow.

I may continue to play regardless of what happens, but I can't help but feel like questions like these are square pegs trying to fit in round holes. To be fair, a round hole can eventually accommodate a square peg, but it's not a process that's quickly or easily done.

Mac wrote:Mac wrote:

Unless... you are speaking of strictly RP incidents. In which case the policy as I remember it was that perma-death generally rests in the hands of the player not the staff.

Xanfyrst

The permanent death rule says 3 strikes and you're out. For good. Players doesn't and shouldn't have any voice in it, though they can protest if they believe any of their strikes were given unfairly or by mistake, in which case the staff can review any evidence and/or talk with the DM who was present.

If it's all up to the players, then the rule is useless if not out right pointless. Or poorly written as it clearly says 3 strikes and bai.

I am sure it's happened at some point but perma-strikes are not generally given out for RP, (like they should be) They are mostly used as punishment for rule breaking. God modding guards being the most common. IE. Bentley would of stopped that fight so instead his guards killed you, enjoy the perma-strike. If they were used properly perma-strikes would be a badge of honor. A reminder of the time you tried that crazy RP and failed. Yet still live to tell the tale, At least for now.

Hence the decision to perma-death a character is almost entirely in the hands of the player. Which is as it should be anyhow.

Maecius Fri Jan 17, 2014 7:22 pm wrote:If a player does not want a permanent, long-term disability affecting their character, then it's not the place of any DM to give them one -- unless it plays a serious role in the plot and its development as a story.