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

Put in an OOC universal bank so we don't constantly need to pine other people to spend their time muling.

Same result, less inconvenience for everyone. No reason not to do it, aside from possible technological hoops that can be jumped (we already have two different banks, beta and another iirc).

No.

There's really no reason to add more OOC conveniences.

There is no real reason not too either? it would also mean less "Help my items have gone missing" messages to DM's

Valefort wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:29 pm No.

There's really no reason to add more OOC conveniences.

This is a tad confusing as when the storage system was announced to be unable to be accessed in "disguise" it was also announced that a solution to make muling items easier is being prepared and hopefully will be done soon.

Valefort wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:29 pm No.

There's really no reason to add more OOC conveniences.

Good talk.

C'mon, we all know how super metagamey and OOC as (do-me) Universal Storage would be. Considering the benefits of Universal Storage can already be gotten by the current system of muling/alts/etc, adding more OOC tools to make this game less about RP Experience and more about digital value loss/gain rights, truly, truly, truly just pokes more holes in an already flimsy Medium RP Server label.

Just alter the RCR-bot to store/retrieve xp and gold.

Since we're speaking in absolutes here: there's no reason not to. Either ban muling or make it easier so that people can play the game more

Indeed muling is allowed but several people (myself included) would rather see it disallowed entirely. Isn't the compromise we have now better than nothing at all? I'm definitely more inclined to remove it entirely than I am to make it "super easy for everyone," but I'm not drawing any lines in the sand about this (nor responding in kind to such lines drawn). There's clearly a difference between tolerating something and outright sponsoring it--on BGTSCC, muling is "tolerated."

We are in discussion about ways to ease the burden of RCRing (like automatic gear/inventory transfer), but it's not exactly on anyone's agenda to make transferring items to their alternate/low level characters a trivial or common task. For that you'll still need to find a buddy to help you.

DiceyCZ wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:41 am

Valefort wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:29 pm No.

There's really no reason to add more OOC conveniences.

This is a tad confusing as when the storage system was announced to be unable to be accessed in "disguise" it was also announced that a solution to make muling items easier is being prepared and hopefully will be done soon.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=68582

We have not outlawed muling with this decision. In fact, we will be investigating ways to make RCRing easier and simpler, so that this system is not felt to be as necessary for the purpose of RCRing. Those changes will be announced soon.

It should not be confusing. What was announced is to make rcring easier, not muling items from one character to another.

PS. Not one of those to disallow muling

mrm3ntalist wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:11 am

DiceyCZ wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:41 am

Valefort wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:29 pm No.

There's really no reason to add more OOC conveniences.

This is a tad confusing as when the storage system was announced to be unable to be accessed in "disguise" it was also announced that a solution to make muling items easier is being prepared and hopefully will be done soon.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=68582

We have not outlawed muling with this decision. In fact, we will be investigating ways to make RCRing easier and simpler, so that this system is not felt to be as necessary for the purpose of RCRing. Those changes will be announced soon.

It should not be confusing. What was announced is to make rcring easier, not muling items from one character to another.

PS. Not one of those to disallow muling

Oh alright...didn't realize there is another reason for muling than rcr.

Valefort wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:29 pm No.

There's really no reason to add more OOC conveniences.

So, you'd prefer two people being taken out of IG/RP (rather than one) and the possibility of lodging staff with unnecessary complaints to deal with (lost items, people stealing items, etc.), rather than streamlining the efficiency of the process?

I'm not seeing the logic of the anti-efficiency stance. Perhaps you could give a more comprehensive argument as to why the server would suddenly become awful if this was added?

You know it doesn't have to be in-game, right? You can allow people to put items in in-game, but only allow people to take out items in the nexus. That would serve its purpose fine.

Valefort wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:29 pm No.

There's really no reason to add more OOC conveniences.

Hey Valefort, can I remind you of the rules of the suggestion forum as posted by Endelyon...?

viewtopic.php?f=407&t=54386

1. Do not dismiss the original poster's suggestion as outright unneeded.

It doesn't matter if you think that they want the game to be too easy for them or even if you think their suggestion would ruin BGTSCC and cause you to ragequit forevermore. This board is here so that anyone can make a suggestion, not so everyone else can put in their 2 cents on it as well.

It could be easily abused or result in substantual glitches that could lead to lost of equipment. I'm sure that with enough time a full proof system that is stable could be developed but I think the time investment wouldn't be worth the inconvenience of asking a helpful bystander. If you need a mule for rebuilding just shoot me a tell IG if i'm around ^^,

Endelyon wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:46 pm Indeed muling is allowed but several people (myself included) would rather see it disallowed entirely. Isn't the compromise we have now better than nothing at all? I'm definitely more inclined to remove it entirely than I am to make it "super easy for everyone," but I'm not drawing any lines in the sand about this (nor responding in kind to such lines drawn). There's clearly a difference between tolerating something and outright sponsoring it--on BGTSCC, muling is "tolerated."

We are in discussion about ways to ease the burden of RCRing (like automatic gear/inventory transfer), but it's not exactly on anyone's agenda to make transferring items to their alternate/low level characters a trivial or common task. For that you'll still need to find a buddy to help you.

Several people does not also the majority make. There was no compromise at all with the disguise /option/ that I saw until a post was made when it was removed entirely with simple the warning of this is happening. A compromise would be something like

Having an account wide storage, but add in tabs or something for each character's inventory, /you/ have the option to mule over or not. If you want to stick to not muling, as hey that is your choice and you can! If you want to mule well you can! Click the item, as I doubt a drag and drop may be viable, and a click to move to X character's tab.

There is a difference and leaving the disguise in was also a toleration not a sponsor because it was likely not known you could do it until that one person found out you could and then it was filtered to the rest. (Can't have certainty since I am not behind the scenes for the code personally.) But it is odd to take something out now that has been used in the way it has for quite a long time now. Simply because there is "No RP Basis", this is also toted as a Medium RP server. Unless you want to make the jump to Hardcore RP Server as not many of the ones who just want to smash monsters faces in the dungeons always want to start out fresh with a new char when they have this nice +4 item on a separate char.

metaquad4 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 11:42 am

Valefort wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 6:29 pm No.

There's really no reason to add more OOC conveniences.

So, you'd prefer two people being taken out of IG/RP (rather than one) and the possibility of lodging staff with unnecessary complaints to deal with (lost items, people stealing items, etc.), rather than streamlining the efficiency of the process?

I'm not seeing the logic of the anti-efficiency stance. Perhaps you could give a more comprehensive argument as to why the server would suddenly become awful if this was added?

You know it doesn't have to be in-game, right? You can allow people to put items in in-game, but only allow people to take out items in the nexus. That would serve its purpose fine.

This.

Zethrenx99 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 07, 2019 1:39 pm It could be easily abused or result in substantual glitches that could lead to lost of equipment. I'm sure that with enough time a full proof system that is stable could be developed but I think the time investment wouldn't be worth the inconvenience of asking a helpful bystander. If you need a mule for rebuilding just shoot me a tell IG if i'm around ^^,

Very helpful of you and it is nice to know you would not be bothered! But my issue is I hate asking people as it takes up their game play time to help me with swapping items over. It's tedious, the barter itself is trippy as it will close randomly and a slower option, the campfire is risky as the heads of BG often inform to not do so because it is so risky, tho it is faster and you will always pray that the server will stay stable enough to not crash while you are swapping your items be it by normal barter where you can still lose the items either by bartering. (So why dont we just have an account wide that automatically saves when the item is put in.) or by that person taking them because hot damn look at those items. Not the honorable thing of course but it is always a risk, and if it happens the DMs are still going to get those complaints sent up when the barter bugs, server crashes, or someones steals ya goods.

I am obviously for an account wide storage one for the convenience of course but I don;t have to interrupt anyone else's RP or time with it and I am sure there are more reasons I cannot think of right now.