Do we want more consequences/realism in game?

[dedude]

The server doesn't force its vision on any of us

Sure it does. The setting, the rules, the DM events, etc. are all part of that vision.

You can't hop into a server, appraise it, find it lacking, then decide YOUR vision will make it so much better. C'mon.

That is precisely my point. If you like the server enough to play here, you need to have faith that the powers that be steer this ship right. But that doesn't mean people won't offer suggestions for change, especially in a thread like this.

[DM Dagon]

So the level 30 = 15 is only to gage the RP value of your level, not a mechanical one.

But it causes inconsistencies with your abilities. That's where the problem comes in regard to this particular discussion. We have, in other words, level 15 clerics who can cast ressurrection like it's no problem at all. Part of this also comes from the fact that we can rest all the time of course.

Yep, the biggest problem I have. But lorewise we even couldn't allow people being 15, would make it so that our PW would be land of "titans" and such. Honestly, it is a mess. Heck, even if we say -level 10 at 30-, our PCs is still just barely weaker then, say Elaith Craulnober. And that is -one- PC. That still means that like 10 PCs would be a considerable "spec ops" team on the whole Faerún. Personally, I would rather just leave this paradoxon be, becuse I don't see a viable solution, which would make sense with this many max level PCs. It just does not. There is no way in the lore to have this many adventurers of power at one place.

Even if we speak about 100 level 10 PCs, that is a lot. I just don't see a number which does not make lore make no sense at all, but still gives the PCs some power.

Hence, I would just rather separate mechanical and RP power. Even though the point is valid, giving an exact level won't adress it.

[Lambe]

Sure it does. The setting, the rules, the DM events, etc. are all part of that vision.

But none of it is forced, it simply is how it's always been. I play here because I like the setting it provides, not forces. I don't log in with the intention of breaking the rules, meaning I knowingly abide by them. And I'm giving the DM team the benefit of the doubt as a whole because for every rumor of DM event railroading I hear or read about, there's at least twice more I personally experience that's entirely dependent on player choices. And I don't even get to be part of that many events.

That is precisely my point. If you like the server enough to play here, you need to have faith that the powers that be steer this ship right. But that doesn't mean people won't offer suggestions for change, especially in a thread like this.

Problem with that is everybody has an opinion on how the ship needs to be steered. Who's right and who's wrong? Suggestions are fine, changes are too. But for every "hurrah" there's a "wtf".

Edit: By the way, I voted "No". But if there's one realistic aspect I'd like to see, it would be travel distances. Areas are separated by miles. Imagine having a penalty to stats that stacks up for very transition made without resting, to simulate travel fatigue. Gives the teleporters some added value. Bothersome? Maybe. Realistic? Of course.

[Ithilan]

So the level 30 = 15 is only to gage the RP value of your level, not a mechanical one.

But it causes inconsistencies with your abilities. That's where the problem comes in regard to this particular discussion. We have, in other words, level 15 clerics who can cast ressurrection like it's no problem at all. Part of this also comes from the fact that we can rest all the time of course.

Yep, the biggest problem I have. But lorewise we even couldn't allow people being 15, would make it so that our PW would be land of "titans" and such. Honestly, it is a mess. Heck, even if we say -level 10 at 30-, our PCs is still just barely weaker then, say Elaith Craulnober. And that is -one- PC. That still means that like 10 PCs would be a considerable "spec ops" team on the whole Faerún. Personally, I would rather just leave this paradoxon be, becuse I don't see a viable solution, which would make sense with this many max level PCs. It just does not. There is no way in the lore to have this many adventurers of power at one place.

Even if we speak about 100 level 10 PCs, that is a lot. I just don't see a number which does not make lore make no sense at all, but still gives the PCs some power.

Hence, I would just rather separate mechanical and RP power. Even though the point is valid, giving an exact level won't adress it.

Then stop thinking in levels, its really that simple to me. I dont even see how you can translate levels in to an IC term, there is experience of life, abbilities and traits you pick up. We dont need to sit here and compare PCs to the power level of Elminster at all, its the personality profiles, feats, skills and abbilities we should have a look at, access to certain spell levels and what not. Not in PnP terms, nor in NWN2 engine terms, but in a common sense where we dont say "Hey I learned requiem at level 27 epic feat" but rather that the bard through excesive practise has obtained the very abbility to invoke music with a devastating effect for his/her adversaries.

Originally when I wrote my characters background, I had her lessons and courses listed with granted feats and abbilities, since I found it was the only way I could translate to IC terms how she gained experience and grew to learn new feats and languages.

I think a huge problem here is many people compare the server and setting to PnP, it simply just is not and should not be following guidelines appropriate to PnP either. We have an immersive fictional universe to delve in to, with many famous and legendary characters that in comparrison to our PCs ought to be quite powerfull, yes. But given the mechanics we have to work with, it doesnt take a lot of imagination to scale these legends up figuratively. If some of our PCs were to encounter Elminster, im sure they would be thoughtful and cautious, if anyone was stupid enough to attack him, I assume it would take extraordinaire feats and prowess to overcome him, if at all possible. Not because he should be much higher level, but because he should be exceptionally skillful in how to utilize magic and handle such situations (as he has countless times).

The whole emphasis on who is what level and how that compares to others, is just plain silly to me and I think its immersion breaking too. Ive met many characters that changed their personality profile entirely as they leveled up, became cocky and boastful suddenly because of mechanical progress, I dislike this tendency a lot, sure we would realistically grow more confident with achievements of slaying fearsome monsters and participating in horrific battles, but most would utilize that knowledge and experience cautionary to achieve further success, rather than say leap at the balor with an axe in both hands, because it worked last time (low intelligence score there from a realistic standpoint).

Dont let the mechanics dictate how you percieve the game and those around you.

[7threalm]

not to derail the thread but 100 people have voted that seems quite odd to me....

[DM Pun Pun]

I don't think consequences/realism would work here in the manner proposed. I've seen how most players react when presented with the possibility of such and its discouraging to this idea. This just isn't the server for this.

Reading this is difficult and disappointing.

It makes me think the DMs do not consider players capable of handling what they are asking for.

Some players can handle it. Most players cannot. Even players who are suggesting "Sure, let's have consequences" are probably some of the people thinking "It will never happen to me anyway, so why not".

[trogers2]

Some players may get very upset over a perma strike though, which is why I think it is best to always ask the players if they want to take part in the perma strike risk or not. It doesn't have to be that way to make things good - not at all.

For example; failing to kill a boss monster can lead to the players losing an important NPC / item / town / city. I guess what I am saying is things can be kept just as intresting without perma strikes -- but if they are there, I believe players should be given the choice.

[Side]

RP with the right people is all I've ever needed to get the perfect level of consequences and realism for my own tastes. I didn't need rules or DM attention or anything, all I needed was the right people.

[metaquad4]

I can't blame the DMs for that thought. Just from the amount of whining from PvP that had little to no impact in the end, I've gotten sick of things and had to take breaks. Just imagine the amount of whining from something serious.

That being said, the more the players are coddled away from things they might raise complaints, the more it becomes ingrained in them that they are entitled and don't actually have to deal with anything. It wouldn't hurt to show the players who do whine and moan that their bratty behavior isn't something that should be condoned or tolerated. Additionally, it would show players that they can make an impact. On the server, and on their own characters.

I think its a bit of a self-feeding circle. Players complain when they have to deal with consequences. So, DMs make it so they don't have to deal with consequences. When a consequence happens to come up, players complain because they think they shouldn't have to deal with consequences. So, the DMs don't make them have to deal with consequences. And it goes on and on. Breaking the cycle is the only way to fix the issue. Its the reason why BG is one of the few servers where the issue of maturity when it comes to things happening to their characters is such a problem. Because the players have been coddled and tricked into thinking "Your character is *special*. You don't have to deal with anything at all. Complain enough, and we'll drop all consequences."

I don't blame the DMs for not wanting to deal with crummy people. But, at the same time, taking a hard stance and making it clear complaints won't get them out of anything may be a decent idea as well. But, the staff are the ones who have to initiate it and start to grow player maturity. The players don't have the physical power to make each other deal with consequences and show the staff it can be done, sadly.

I think the stance RoD took should be done. If you are going towards a path that could end in permadeath, let the player know. Give them a chance to bow out. But let them reap rewards if they succeed. Just as an example, of what could be done. We don't want to make it too hardcore, but, at the same time we should ensure that actions do have consequences.

[Steve]

Some players can handle it. Most players cannot. Even players who are suggesting "Sure, let's have consequences" are probably some of the people thinking "It will never happen to me anyway, so why not".

Still, if the "some players" that are asking for it, and can handle it...is the DM Team going to politely deny this higher level of Risk vs. Reward?

I'm coming away with the feeling that there is some resistance here. Of course, it could also be that there simply isn't enough time and energy to give to creating a more engaged, higher R v. R environment or Storyline for some to play in.

I don't know...you tell me??!!

[AlwaysSummer Day]

I'm torn. On the one hand I want things like raise scrolls to be craft only items and require UMD or divine caster levels to use. On the other hand if you make the consequences tougher you encourage more people to play Favored Souls and effectively punish people who play weaker classes such as non caster non hips melee. Since I know players who will powerbuild and focus on confrontational RP exclusively against builds they oocly know they can pwn I can see how the light at the end of this tunnel might be an oncoming train.

Tough call either way.

[Steve]

Except, there is no Rule that says mechanically powerful builds are the only ones that shall succeed in DM events or the Server Campaign. Are we always railroaded into mechanics and battles in order to "prevail" in the role-play of situation, of event?

Why can't the chapter resolve itself—and determine the next one—by the success/failure of a Diplomacy DC?!?

[7threalm]

mostly because people will they got railroaded, I think it would be awesome if an outcome was based on a roll of two opposing sides, where they dont got any skill points in.

people do min/max rp skills as well

so who is justified

player that min/max martial prowress
player that min/max in rp skills

to me they are about the same except one cannot go solo bosses, thats about the only difference

I have notice the min/max rp skills players always take the moral high ground, but they are just as bad as powerbuild in my opinion

I was like the idea of hard cap on social skills that way dm's could have standard they can guage off them

say a hard cap of 10 on dipolmacy
Player a has 10 diplomancy
player b has 0 diplomancy

player a rolls 10 + 5 roll = 15
player b rolls 0 +20 = 20

player a better chance of rolling then b, but b still has the option to win in dm events

instead of player a rolls 80 +20 = 100
player be rolls 0 +20 = 20

if the dm's could institue a policy in dm events only* that would be accepted universally i think that would help.

its a d20 system but with players at level 30 it all falls apart

and a good way to implement it would be juts making a dmfi roll system for dm events only that cap skill points this would help the dm's instead of throwing out crazy dc's that sometimes can be plan by the dm, though i do hope that doesn't happen, but it can.

also you make it only count base skills and ignore modifiers

[AlwaysSummer Day]

Exactly. Railroading in DM events happens whether by design, chance, or imaginary. Besides that is a decision for the DM's not a debate for the players. I can't make a DM permanent kill my character nor can I prevent it. I just know that when my level 30 barbarian is in an event with a fvs and the dm wants to show the fvs he is not invulnerable I get screwed.

At any rate if they made the serious consequences heavily skill based well Bards are amongst the most powerful on the server in both combat and skills. They are also incredibly popular due to their versatility.

[7threalm]

well with the system that i presented dm's could still use the zainy system we already have with roll play if they want. It would just may cater to some dm's style.

I know dm's have a hard time with roll play anyways and a fair simpler and "fair" method would be useful i would think. It would just be another tool in their arsonal.

as it stands in my opinion roll play is broken and exploited to some degree.