Concern on the new guild outpost system.

[Tekill]

Why do I want outposts?
Or instead, should I be asking, why would I want the most outposts?
Do I want more outposts than you?

If you're an evil filthy necromancer, do I save up all my Roleplay Points and combine them with my pals, to smite your outpost, making it into an outpost to Tyr?

All your outpost are belong to us?

[Rain]

If you're an evil filthy necromancer, do I save up all my Roleplay Points and combine them with my pals, to smite your outpost, making it into an outpost to Tyr?

All your outpost are belong to us?

Imagine being a powerful necromancer and losing your outpost to a pack of paladins and knights by way of "loitering". Forget about all those undead and spirits likely wandering and guarding the outpost.

[Ghost]

On changing the world
Since I became HDM, I have been working towards allowing the players to influence the world more, both by physically changing locations and politically and socially changing NPC reactions to groups and individuals. I haven't been HDM for very long however, so it will take some time before you see the effects of my plans and work. But a lot of it is already in motion.

But how do people expect to be able to change the world? I understand that some people don't enjoy the forum RP, but unfortunately I have to say that expecting to be able to change the world significantly by asking a DM ingame out of the blue if you can assassinate a Grand Duke, demolish the Boareskyr Bridge or set up a trade agreement between Greenest and Beregost, is an unrealistic expectation. For our world to be consistent with itself, and for all the DMs to be on the same page (something we already struggle with at times), things have to be documented. There is a decision making process with a lot of factors involved that any one DM can't just decide on the spot how to deal with. Besides that, there are some efforts that realistically should take time to achieve.

As such, we need at the very least requests sent in as PMs about these kinds of things on the forums so that we can have a paper trail. Not only for us, but for posterity, so that when we do depart from lore, DMs in the future (and even current DMs not involved with the plot in question), will be able to search and look up current status for some geographical area, organisation or NPC.

If you want to change the world, you have to work with us.

On consistency
With all that in mind, how do we ensure that we treat people consistently? I know a lot of people think the DM team doesn't. That there's either deliberate favoritism going on or that some people get better or worse treatment based on the strictness of the DM they interact with. And historically, there have rather obviously been cases of both these things. And I'm sure it's still something going on, that we in the administration are constantly trying to stay aware of and correct if and when we see it. But we are only human, all of us. So we write guidelines, frameworks and systems. Rules and precedents for us to follow, so that we can improve our consistency more and more. There are some holes to yet fill, and I'm sure even some of them we haven't yet noticed because no one has stepped in them yet.

Will our guidelines, frameworks and systems be flawless? No, of course not. Again, we are only human and we cannot make things perfect, at least not from the get-go. And what is perfect for some is not perfect for others, and thus not truly perfect at all. But we try. And where we fail, we correct and amend. As we see how they work, we revise and we make additions, always trying to find that perfect balance and all too often trying to please everybody, where we know all too well that people's expectations, preferences and desires are different and very often mutually exclusive.

On measuring effort
Now, in order for any of these guidelines, frameworks and systems to be consistent, especially for political intrigue or other long-term projects, we need to have some way of gauging the efforts of individuals and groups. If one group manages to set up trade between Greenest and Beregost, how much did they have to work for it? How much work will it take to counter their efforts, and make them fail in setting it up? Or even break it after it has been sitting for a while? What about trade between Corm Orp and Soubar? To keep it consistent with similar cases, we must look to precedents. But is it the same situation, even? Greenest and Beregost may be far more agreeable to one another than Corm Orp and Soubar by default.

So we must have a meter. Water boils at different temperatures depending on air pressure. Role-play projects succeed depending on factors in those projects. We DMs are the keepers of the laws of physics that makes water boil. We are the custodians of the setting, who knows the factors at play. But we need a temperature. A measurement. A meter to judge when those factors have been met. This is something we keep looking for. But it's never going to be perfect, and it's never going to please everyone.

On the outpost system specifically
I have to end this with a bit of a frank note, I'm afraid. I fear many of you who object to the outpost system has read far too much into it. When it says it is about outposts, we're not trying to trick you. We're not lying and secretly making this about something bigger. It is, currently, about outposts. Physical locations, physical structures. And their construction. There is nothing in this system, so far, about anything other than building outposts.

It has a measurement in the points. Is it the right kind of measurement? Maybe. Maybe not. But unless we get to see if it works as we intended it to, it's going to be even harder for us to find some other meter. Maybe we shouldn't even have posted about them publicly and just kept them as a tool for us DMs to use. I suppose that would have assuaged some of the concerns that they can be gamed. But I also have to point out that this is something the playerbase keeps asking for: Transparency in how we decide things.

Does the system have all the contingencies we need? No, probably not. Not before we see how it works. Does it have all the functionality we need? Definitely not. I know at least one functionality that should be included that hasn't been yet. So we must refine it. But please, good community, be patient with us while we work on these ways for you to interact more significantly with the world. We are trying our best.

[Alexander Holgart]

We're not lying and secretly making this about something bigger. It is, currently, about outposts.

This part gives me peace honestly, and thank you for jumping into this and clarifying.

As long as we don't transform player impact in a point based system with daily/weekly/monthly upkeep, I'm in.

If it is just about outposts specifically I am less concerned.

[DM Gixustrat]

Thanks ghost, I most certainly couldn’t have said it better myself.

[eternal night]

It's very simple a trust issue.

Why DMs spawn unbeatable killing machines on certain events? (I know they can see our sheet so no idea myself) but make killable enemies on other times? What are the measures for making an OP monster one day but then 3 days later it has less hp and AC?

These kind of inconsistencies are just not good, I have seen DMs throw unbeatable monsters vs certain people and then throw the same kind of monster, this time beatable vs other players.

What gives? Is it gonna be like this too? How about the lore? Because that's another thing I've noticed. There's so many issues to be fixed that I know this system will make bigger and more noticeable.

The problem is not that this idea is bad but rather how it will be executed.

[Azroth]

Can we take a moment just stop using the : we are only humans.
as the go to safe word to say, when yes, everyone of us is human. I get it! But personal accountability must be upheld.
Once people accept that mistakes where made not giving excuses of who they believe they are, and rather more, what could be done better. That alone is key to winning trust.

[Rain]

We're not lying and secretly making this about something bigger. It is, currently, about outposts.

This part gives me peace honestly, and thank you for jumping into this and clarifying.

As long as we don't transform player impact in a point based system with daily/weekly/monthly upkeep, I'm in.

If it is just about outposts specifically I am less concerned.

I agree this does clarify a good portion of the concern. My only rebuttal to this is that yes it may be only about outpost but just because it's only about outpost does not mean there is still not a value that comes out of having such things in the world even if their "functionality" is just visual or limited to basic functions. Someone who is wandering the world and viewing an outpost placed in a zone that is controlled by a group is not going to ignore the presence of that outpost and i'm sure in RP terms that if something were to happen in that area the guild who has an outpost in that area would hold some sort of responsibility or jurisdiction to the current events.

Aside from this overall I think DM Ghost did clarify a good bit of the problems and concerns brought up in this thread, so credit where credit is due.

Edit: I still do not believe this helps in solving the main underling issue the server has and will continue to have. However... that's for another day, on another thread, for another disagreement.

[Wolfshear]

While my original concerns are not really alleviated I can appreciate the sentiment behind the response and I think anyone that expects perfection is always going to be dissapointed.

That being said I would love some kind of official clarification on all this as the response so far has left that very unclear.
Is the system going in as is in order to test it? Is it being held back to be worked upon? I think the not knowing is more frustrating than anything else.

[Tekill]

I was afraid this outpost thing was some sort of competition- like a mini game or something like that. ewwwwww.....

I like the focus on factions/guilds, so for that alone I think it has some potential.

Questions answered thanks.

[edmaster]

talk about making a Mountain out of a mole.... .. I'm sure this new system will be fine! Can't wait to see it pan out.

[Azroth]

Either way, I will say this then leave it at that.

It is clear to me with what's being said in so many words so often is that: No, nothing is perfect. But others seek assurance, and do not feel overly confident one way or another with the upcoming system.

There are some underlining issues that need to be addressed before we take this step or even further steps beyond if this goes live. A fix more than a patch if you will.

People who play nwn2 can be very competitive, yes. So expect some level of aggression here or there hinting how others can always improve. Including themselves

[izzul]

On changing the world
however, so it will take some time before you see the effects of my plans and work. But a lot of it is already in motion.

We are thankful, and grateful for the effort the DM's made. it takes a lot of focused thinking, discussion, unification of different opinionated people to make it happen. Change is not always bad, and the community need to give room for any ideas to grow and become mature, very slowly mature and to blend it with the community ideas and their concern heard. This transparent and fair motion is not hidden to anyone hence i believe the least we can do here is show appreciation towards the effort made to make our small community lively.

[Ghost]

While my original concerns are not really alleviated I can appreciate the sentiment behind the response and I think anyone that expects perfection is always going to be dissapointed.

That being said I would love some kind of official clarification on all this as the response so far has left that very unclear.
Is the system going in as is in order to test it? Is it being held back to be worked upon? I think the not knowing is more frustrating than anything else.

If there are still things you are unsure of that I haven't addressed, feel free to send me a PM and I will clarify to the best of my ability.

For clarity, as you ask for it: The system is live as it is right now. We are working on it, but we're not pulling it back. We still think it's a system that has merit, though we concede, as I have expressed in my previous post, that it will take some configuring as we get experiences with how it works.

Also, everyone: Please read through my previous post another time, and then if you have suggestions for us to solve some of the challenges I describe there, please send us a PM about them. I can't and won't promise that your suggestions will be used, but we will consider them seriously if they do address the issues we are trying to address.

[Ghost]

In the meantime of the above, we have been working on some changes. They are still subject to alterations, but we hope this alleviates some concerns. I am sure they also bring up new concerns, but know that we are taking concerns seriously, and that we are trying our best to find a system that works. But we must also test it at some point.

Update: viewtopic.php?p=929585#p929585