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

Sever update from: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2716&start=240

Revision: 1595
Author: Valefort
Date: Sunday, January 21, 2018 11:33:22 AM
Message:
No looting or grinding on the other side.

Topic. Discuss.

EDIT: Please mention if you have experience playing surface char or UD char just for the sake of others to know why you have the opinion. Thanks.

adobongmanok wrote:Sever update from: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2716&start=240

Revision: 1595
Author: Valefort
Date: Sunday, January 21, 2018 11:33:22 AM
Message:
No looting or grinding on the other side.

Topic. Discuss.

Was against the rules already. Simply became enforced by mechanics.

It's not game mechanics discrimination. It's mechanics implemented to align with DM rulings.

It's not discrimination.

It's anti-rp, anti-lore rules created out of personal ooc dislikes on the one hand, and failure to competently deal with well known long-time pockets of pvp rule breaking on the other hand.

But might makes right, so that's it.

Considering it's been in the rules that you shouldn't be doing it, it isn't really discriminating against anyone.

I find it sad that enough people were ignoring the rules for a mechanical enforcement to become a needed thing to spend development time on, though.

I don't feel like the rules about it are all that necessary to begin with, but evidently the server staff feel otherwise. *shrug*

Encourages total lack of involvement between UD and surface characters.
Also, UD is very tiny compared to the surface. And most of its rewarding places are labeled as "Upperdark" So surfacers can also make use of them. So we are locking characters to do stuff in 15 areas and PERHAPS interact as some kind of trade for a little and then go back, as there's nothing else you can do up there. As IC reasons weren't enough of a threat, OOC rules also encourages no surface/underdark relations.
Just saying that if you play (just) with an UD character you're missing 90% of the server's content.

Updated original post message. Didn't expect to get fast replies! I wish my comcast customer service was like this

Azkan wrote:And most of its rewarding places are labeled as "Upperdark" So surfacers can also make use of them.

Yes, how very strange that it was only those particular spots that were chosen to be a neutral area, and not one place on the surface received the same status. How very strange indeed. Hmm, hmm. Now, why could this be, I wonder?

adobongmanok wrote:Sever update from: viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2716&start=240

Revision: 1595
Author: Valefort
Date: Sunday, January 21, 2018 11:33:22 AM
Message:
No looting or grinding on the other side.

Topic. Discuss.

EDIT: Please mention if you have experience playing surface char or UD char just for the sake of others to know why you have the opinion. Thanks.

Yes for "no looting", no for "no xp". This one is a bad idea. UD is quite empty, you know.

chad878262 wrote:It's not game mechanics discrimination. It's mechanics implemented to align with DM rulings.

In my communication with DMs I've been told that It is now allowed to go to the other side as long as you have a reason you can state to a DM on the spot. If you don't have one, you'll get teleported back.

If that was based on decision, then the decision should be overturned. This kind of measure only kills RP opportunities.

And honestly, if someone went through all the trouble to getting to the other side, getting no xp from combat feels like spit in the face.

Here's the propostiion thread for you:

viewtopic.php?f=443&t=64165

I feel like this is a bad idea, and it should be reverted.

While I vehemently disagree with the change, it does not inhibit RP or RP xp gains made while on the other side, only the mental vacuum of ICly explaining why there is no treasures to be found while exploring.

Again, this change does not inhibit RP or IC interactions one iota. It is only a disincentive to loot grinders using the other side for (easy?) gains.

Being at constant risk of attack isn't what I would call easy gains.

Having access to the upperdark as a neutral zone when we play surfacers is easy gains (if such a concept makes sense). If anyone is having it easy, it's the surfacers who grind in the upperdark as if the upperdark somehow weren't the realm of the drow, duergar and mind flayers, among other very nasty things.

The reason for this is as thinly concealed as an elephant wearing sunglasses inside a china shop, of course.

Now, I don't think the upperdark should be closed off to surfacers in an ooc manner - I don't think anywhere should be closed off to anyone in an ooc manner. But if we have ooc-enforced apartheid, then it should go both ways. Make the best loot and xp farms on the surface neutral zones too, or keep the surfacers off the upperdark.

It's a matter of fairness, which these rules, along with logic and respect for the setting, thoroughly lack.

Whoever votes for these things should be ashamed of themselves. Such people spit in the face of the Forgotten Realms setting and on the faces of their fellow players who try and take that setting seriously to the best of our abilities.

And make no mistake here, people. When a DM approaches one of us asking "what is your IC reason to be on the surface/in the underdark?", this is quite simply a DM overstepping his bounds by roleplaying MY character.

The responsibility of a DM is to roleplay the NPCs. Roleplaying MY character is MY responsibility.

For shame.

Tsidkenu wrote:While I vehemently disagree with the change, it does not inhibit RP or RP xp gains made while on the other side,

I have an issue with disabled Combat XP. You go to the realm you've never seen ebfore, kill creatures you never know existed and get 0 for it.

That's wrong, in my opinion.

Speaking of which, if RP XP is enabled while combat XP is disabled, then this change encourages social butterfly drow at fai campfire instead of someone who goes to explore.

So, the script encourages behavior that goes against the lore.

Because of this I think that no-xp part should go.

Hi everyone. Thanks for keeping it civil even though I know there's quite the bad blood with the recent changes...

I just want to put these numbers here for everyone to see:

Number of Areas Grindable by Surfacers: https://wiki.bgtscc.net/index.php?title=Areas_by_CR

According to the source = 83 Surface maps

Number of Areas Grindable by UD: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=20968&hilit=Gharu%2527s+gift

Map is a a bit outdated. I counted 29, but since there were newer maps I would probably do a +4 or 5 to make it a total of:

34 grindable areas UD Maps

adobongmanok wrote:Hi everyone. Thanks for keeping it civil even though I know there's quite the bad blood with the recent changes...

I just want to put these numbers here for everyone to see:

Number of Areas Grindable by Surfacers: https://wiki.bgtscc.net/index.php?title=Areas_by_CR

According to the source = 83 Surface maps

Number of Areas Grindable by UD: viewtopic.php?f=18&t=20968&hilit=Gharu%2527s+gift

Map is a a bit outdated. I counted 29, but since there were newer maps I would probably do a +4 or 5 to make it a total of:

34 grindable areas UD Maps

woa...that's huge. xD