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

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=64163

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

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

Basically, UD is incredibly small, lacks populace, and this script discourages itneraction between both sides.

I feel like this kind of feature is one more attempt to enforce rules through mechanical "wall" rather than allowing IC consequences. I feel like this is a bad trend.

Basically, my main problem is that if you make it to the other side, kill the horrible monster and get ZERO for that, it feels like spit in the face.

The drow should be able to go to the surface and get hanged.
The surfacers should be able to go to UD and get sacrificed to Lolth, fed to spiders, and be eaten by illithids. This is how it should work and not "your character is too dumb to comprehend fighting on the other side and learn anything from it".

This is wrong and not what BG is supposed to be. That's the way I see it. A right approach would be to implement some sort of framework for IC consequences for trespassers, and not mechanical walls.

This wasn't like a "community requested feature." It was done to prevent rulebreaking.

You're not supposed to be fighting monsters on the other side. As long as our current UD/Surface travel policies remain in place (which the DM team has reviewed and debated very recently) this mechanical restriction will remain in place.

Endelyon wrote:It was done to prevent rulebreaking.

Then I believe this would be a good time to rethink the rule.

I rolled an UD char, and ... this place is quite empty. You have 1..5 people active top when server populace is at 70..90. As other people mentioned, by playing in UD you're missing 90% content, and I can add that you'll be missing 90% of people too. That's the reason for going for the other side.

This is a RP server, and "somebody is not supposed to be there", shoudl be dealt through IC interactions, and not mechanical barriers.

Rules are supposed to have a reason and purpose for them. This particular rule is based on very ancient stories that happened 8 years ago.

Also, notice that I'm fine with "no looting on the other side" thing.

If you're fine with the no looting mechanic what's the issue? You can still go up and RP with zero issue. You can't just go up and fight monsters and surfacers can't go down for the same.

Nothing at all is preventing RP.

Flasmix wrote:If you're fine with the no looting mechanic what's the issue? You can still go up and RP with zero issue.

No XP is the issue. I feel like bumping in the most horrible monster on the other side you'ven ever seen before, defeating and then getting.... 0 for it is insulting.

I know there were deranged creatures like devourer worm before (Mini-boss creature that gave 10 xp for defeating it), but this simply doesn't feel right.

If XP is your goal, don't come to the surface? If the problem is the UD is dead and can't sustain RP or give enough XP, then other things should be considered. Why have a UD if the UD players dont want to play there?

If you are top side to RP, even if you kill a monster in the process (within the rules), you are still RPing. You won't get XP, but IC you still killed it, you still have the achievement, you just dont have the OOC reward and incentive to do so. Which is exactly what this was intended to do - nix the incentive to be topside for anything more than RP.

As it is, the handful of times I have been to Soubar lately there have been drow pvp-baiting in the merchant area or nearby. I can watch from the EB tower and see drow dragging handfuls of undead right up to the merchants, threatening low level characters, and otherwise just 'hanging out' being their tough selves. I think there is a fine line between 'outlaw village' and 'drow friendly' and we are way on the other side of it.

It gets to the point, when you see the same names and know they've been killed before, that you just kinda ignore it altogether.

Planehopper wrote:If XP is your goal, don't come to the surface? If the problem is the UD is dead and can't sustain RP or give enough XP, then other things should be considered. Why have a UD if the UD players dont want to play there?

If you are top side to RP, even if you kill a monster in the process (within the rules), you are still RPing. You won't get XP, but IC you still killed it, you still have the achievement, you just dont have the OOC reward and incentive to do so. Which is exactly what this was intended to do - nix the incentive to be topside for anything more than RP.

I feel like this is wrong. If I don't want to kill a dangeorus thing on the other side, I want to have xp for it. Discouraging from going there this way also feels wrong, and OOC. If there was a chance of bumping into a Radiant Heart patrol as a drow that's one thing, but when you're simply prevented from learning anything on other side in one specific map, that's definitely not how things should be done on an RP server.

Planehopper wrote: As it is, the handful of times I have been to Soubar lately there have been drow pvp-baiting in the merchant area or nearby. I can watch from the EB tower and see drow dragging handfuls of undead right up to the merchants, threatening low level characters, and otherwise just 'hanging out' being their tough selves. I think there is a fine line between 'outlaw village' and 'drow friendly' and we are way on the other side of it.

It gets to the point, when you see the same names and know they've been killed before, that you just kinda ignore it altogether.

Planehopper.... I haven't seen any of this happening, but the problem is... "no combat xp on the other side" script does not prevent this behavior at all. Because you do not get xp from pvp. So, regardless of whether the script is active or not, this can still happen.

In fact "no combat xp" encourages it. Because while "pvp baiting" you'll have rp xp drop, but while killing a wolf near soubar you'll get zero.

Likewise, if the drow in question is already level 30, then it doesn't matter whether you have this script or not. If they want to pvp bait, they will pvp bait.

Basically, I feel like this measure kills possibility of having "explorer on the other side" kind of character. Which looks at the environment, risks getting permakilled by authorities of the setting and learns more of the world . Because of this , I think this is a bad idea.

Such barrier should not exist on a RP server. That's the way I see it.


To summarize the problem, the script in current form encourages going to the other side for the purposes of taunting people, and encourages ridiculously powerful characters to go to the other side. Meaning the visitors will either engage in conversation (i.e. taunt) fishing for RP xp, or will go to soubar at level 30 when they have ntohing to lose anymore.

However, lower level character making it through - the one that can actaully lose a lot and is not all powerful - those kind of encounters will be signficantly less likely to happen.

And that is a bad thing,.

I've changed the poll to allow for more useful data. Revote if you voted before.

Why are we polling if the global admin said it would stay?

My Svirv is getting "the other side" error when Shapechanged in the Upperdark opening chests. Also the transport that connects the Upperdark to the dwarven city does not work. So I had to cut my way through a bunch of trolls on the surface to RP visiting the dwarven city. My Svirv got lots of exp killing these trolls on the way to the city.

I probably just do not understand the basis of this new mechanic- but why create it, in the first place- it seems buggy and unnecessary, as it is a non issue.

Was there really such a problem with one side ninja grinding the other sides territory, that you felt you had to install extra code to make it impossible?
I sometimes see the odd group of Surfacers in the UD- I never considered it rule breaking that they were there or not - because it happens so rarely. I was just glad to see another soul down there.
This mechanic just seems superfluous and annoying to me.

On a side note:

I used to complain about how easy it is now to get to the UD. But since its been made easier, there has been a lot of great RP blending together both worlds. Seems like a good balance of things right now, the way things are.

Perhaps certain pvp'ers masking as RP'ers aside - the Surface to UD RP looks fun and exciting.

Sshamath is not like other drow cities, probably because it is not Lolthite. Therefor there are a lot more opportunities to work with Sshamath in less openly hostile ways. Maybe as more of a 'cold war' enemy or quasi ally than the - 'hot war', KOS anything that crosses the demilitarized zone, way it is now.

Perhaps with this in mind we could loosen the rules even a bit more?

Maybe allow parties to go on safari on the other side- but maybe keeping the kill on site rule in place, so it is still a deterrent. Do you think the Xvarts village will suddenly have an infestation of drow?

The current pvp rules will deter the drow raids of this servers history.

Maybe this is a conversation for another thread but I will say for now why bother with this level of strictness when there does not seem to be a problem in the first place?

NegInfinity wrote:This is a RP server, and "somebody is not supposed to be there", shoudl be dealt through IC interactions, and not mechanical barriers.

Right, as other OOC barriers open up when PvP happy players take advantage of the situation.

NegInfinity wrote:This particular rule is based on very ancient stories that happened 8 years ago.

A wild swing and miss.

Aspect of Sorrow wrote: A wild swing and miss.

You need to talk to few people that has been around longer than you were and longer than I was. They'll explain how the netherese maze with CR60 monsters came to be in the first place.

i think

-UNDERDARK should not give XP to surfacer (duergar mines, Illithid, wild drider, beholders,Pitt fiend)

-but UPPERDARK should (ex: Oghrann, Kro)

hopefully areas that was flagged wrongly is reverted back to what it was. thank you

IF the problem really is an OOC problem but is "excused" through IC reasons - like an OOC problem such as PvP-baiting excused as Drow plundering caravans - I would call that an act is Griefing, where attempting to discourage through not allowing rewards on the other side WON'T solve the problem - no matter the IC reason, its griefing. If you keep seeing the same characters or characters somehow affiliated with an organisation that is known to be sending characters this way for this purpose, keep doing this then you know who it is and can punish them accordingly for griefing rather than to impose a rule that really makes no sense to enforce upon all players. Because the problem is an OOC issue which has to do with players wanting to do PvP, attempting discourage through disabling the rewards for the other side, won't deal with the problem - because to these the rewards won't matter if its PvP they want.

There is absolutely no reason why rewards (xp & loot) should be disabled for any other of the side, just the fact that alone from coming to that coming to the other side would be seriously dangerous as you risk capture, torture, most likely death, etc.

Since you have had the need to enforce such a rule, then its indicative that something isn't working as intended and you should've taken a step back and looked at the greater picture and fix the issue at the root rather than attempt a bandaid solution that really doesn't solve the problem.

What does the No Xp on both sides mean? As in, nobody can get XP at all?