Mechanics, FOIG, and Lanterns

[Kythana]

Some IC information that doesn't rely on:

1) Someone eventually hitting the correct parameters and noticing; AND
2) Sharing that information ICly

Would be amazing.

Heck, make it so PCs have a scaling chance to discover more detail about the ritual based off their Spellcraft and how many times they've performed it.

FOIG without any IG information on a mechanic kinda hurts things. When rituals first came out, I was expecting there to be books added in too that give hints or some general information on them.

Another example: Cometfall. I've done this ritual a number of times. Supposedly you should be able to bank the Comet for later use. I don't seem to be able to do this. Is it a bug? Is it because mystery mechanics haven't been met? Is it because I'm not seeing something simple or don't know there's a specific mechanical way to bank the Comet? Who knows! Do I waste staff time by submitting a bug report, forcing someone to dig into the code, and then tell me "it's working as intended"?

100% agreed. I mentioned this a few times, but FOIG when it exclusively requires other PCs sharing is not an intuitive or interesting solution.

For example, prior to the rework, the entire Dweomercrafting system has been broken down by players on an OOC level, with mechanical information shared freely through the wiki or Discord. The new system is seemingly even more transparent, with pretty obvious feedback being provided through the UI.

And are we really any worse off for it? I recall at a time when the wiki said that runes were supposed to be "FOIG" information. And yet, it is pretty clear as to how this system works now. And I really don't feel like any sort of value has been lost. Which really leads me into the overall question, which is: What is the intention for FOIG?

Is it meant to keep secrets? To create some element of mystery and intrigue? If so, I think it's a very poor solution for doing so for exactly the reasons highlighted above. The "mystery" component becomes all but irrelevant when there's nothing ingame to explain is this working as intended or not. How do I solve a mystery when the only clues provided just leads into a brute force solution? Just try every combination of events in every possible permutation, and eliminate what doesn't work over time, instead of actually solving it with presentable, identifying information.

And since it's FOIG, and possibly not well known, this just creates a very specific subset of users(aka the devs who wrote it), who know how this system actually works.

So the second option I can think is that it's to encourage roleplay. And this is fine, on paper. But presently, there still isn't enough detail provided ingame (from non player source) to reasonably go off and explore these systems. And when there is no lead in beyond, "just go ask something about it", this leads to frustrated players that feel like they're being gated by a system.

If we want to use an example of something where FOIG is good, we can take a look at sailing. The information on how to sail, what you need, and the mechanics behind doing so are explained both out of game, on the wiki, as well as ingame, with tutorials on boats. That means, in order to engage with sailing as content, you can just rent a boat, hop on, and go somewhere. And since you've lured in a player at their own pace, and let them intuitively discover the system, they're now more open to the idea of further mastery requiring the assistance of other players. Things like- Seagod rituals for boosts to sailing, pirates chests and maps, what islands are available to them, diving, ect.

And to bring this back to one of the original topics at hand, we have the introduction of Lanterns. Each provides a very vague description message. Now, without a developer telling me what these do, how exactly am I supposed to gleam the intended purpose?

How do I know that the description text isn't flavor text, and is actually a hint? I haven't received any feedback at all from the system. The angler's lantern improves catching speed time, similar to the Fisherman's waders. Well, if you're not paying attention really close, you probably won't even notice this.

Give us spellcraft checks, or lore checks. Give anything for players to go on, and it will generate a lot more collaborative roleplay overall, and generally be a lot more accessible for newer players. Which, I think is one of Arelith's strengths, and really it should be played into more.

[silverpheonix]

Put another way - imagine Spellmageddon was released but none of the spells had descriptions, we were told to figure out what the spells do ourselves, and only one or two devs knew what the spells did. That'd be chaos.

Why are rituals different? They're specific, complex pieces of magic meticulously developed by some wizard(s). There should be IC documentation about what it is they do or are intended to do.

My PC knows around 6(?) rituals automatically. What they're called, what they need, casting time, # or participants, etc. How did he get this information? From where? Is some maniac running around handing out ritual recipe pamphlets to all the casters but not telling anyone what the end product is? Why?

[ThisIsNotADrill]

So basically, too nebulous, not enough breadcrumbs, not enough feedback?

[silverpheonix]

So basically, too nebulous, not enough breadcrumbs, not enough feedback?

More or less.

Sure, certain RP things like the Harper/Zhent HQs? 100% makes sense for nothing to exist on them.

[Rubricae]

I didn't even know fisherman's waders did anything.

[Choofed]

I'll counter your own anecdotal experience with my own, in that, yes, I've absolutely seen problem players and faction that go out of their way to hide things that are "FOIG" for the purposes of gaining a one up on other players. Obscene gold farming methods are often hidden by said players as well, out of interest not to have it nerfed, as well as powerful builds that are not well known, and often outright exploits.

Probably the best example of this was the recent hood-checking controversy, which never explicitly stated that a primary reason for doing this was to bypass the godsave from disguises.

So your experience may not have shown that, but all that says to me is you're not looking hard enough, and you're not playing at high enough level to where this will make a difference. For the boons specifically, an extra 4 will save or 5 discipline (Which is what they give to some builds) is the difference between passing a save or knockdown attempt. That's pretty important, especially when you want to challenge exceptionally skilled players ingame.

Hey I just want to hop in on this one point. This is portraying this as some sinister kept secret, it wasn't. And for many people, with me playing Lefric, I was the "Hood Checkpoint Guy."

I was explicit and openly discussing the mechanic in the main discord very clearly since I literally started running hood checkpoints. I did it explicitly because, as I've stated many times before, I still do strongly believe that the idea of "covering up entirely, denying the visage of your features" and "changing your features to look like you're a different person" are two different checks.

They would be in a tabletop game.

So please, because while the documentation wasn't great, don't potray me or any of the people running them as 'secretly hiding mechanics for benefits', everyone in their log very clearly got two notifications of disguise checks saying what was happening and I was very public about it and the mechanical benefits.

[Dreams]

Isn’t the problem then that your character makes use of that mechanical knowledge you have? If the mechanical knowledge is influencing your characters decision making just to get an advantage in a situation where you’re opposing other players, isn’t that metagaming?

[Cthuletta]

As someone who also ran hood checks and played a settlement guard, I think I have pretty decent examples of RPing against hoods and disguises as compared to 'gaming the mechanics'.

Scenerio 1: Someone is stopped, asked to remove their hood. They are disguised but I don't know the original person or their real name, so WYSIWYG. To my character, this means a more accurate description of the person just in case something goes awry. 'A fair-skinned human male with red hair' is better to go off of than 'A guy in a hood.' My character has no reason to believe they're disguised even I break it because they haven't met.
This is how most folks running the checks thought and operated which is a fair play of RP. Recognizing someone who your character knows is exiled or an exiled race is also fair play, because you're looking at their face. The IC reports have descriptions for a reason.

Scenerio 2: Someone is stopped. Disguised and asked to remove their hood. They do. A character says, "Wait they're wearing face paint, can't you tell?" or "This person doesn't look right to me.". Whether or not they broke the disguise check is irrelevant, because in this case, when the hood is off they are looking directly at the "Name" quotations and trying to ICly call out the disguise when they clearly don't know the person ICly.
THIS is absolutely gaming the mechanic with OOC knowledge. I've only seen it happen a handful of times and it was handwaved by the others in the situations ICly and explained OOCly later since that's not a reasonable way to handle knowing someone is disguised because they have quotation marks around their name. That's metagaming.

TLDR: There are plenty of reasons a character would want someone to take their hood down that make perfect IC sense. Of course the disguise check might be easier if the hood is down, because you can clearly tell that's no 'sun elf with a skin condition' but rather a drow. I'd be hard pressed to call that metagaming if it was RPed appropriately no matter what the mechanics might be.

[Ruzuke]

As someone who also ran hood checks and played a settlement guard, I think I have pretty decent examples of RPing against hoods and disguises as compared to 'gaming the mechanics'.

Scenerio 1: Someone is stopped, asked to remove their hood. They are disguised but I don't know the original person or their real name, so WYSIWYG. To my character, this means a more accurate description of the person just in case something goes awry. 'A fair-skinned human male with red hair' is better to go off of than 'A guy in a hood.' My character has no reason to believe they're disguised even I break it because they haven't met.
This is how most folks running the checks thought and operated which is a fair play of RP. Recognizing someone who your character knows is exiled or an exiled race is also fair play, because you're looking at their face. The IC reports have descriptions for a reason.

Scenerio 2: Someone is stopped. Disguised and asked to remove their hood. They do. A character says, "Wait they're wearing face paint, can't you tell?" or "This person doesn't look right to me.". Whether or not they broke the disguise check is irrelevant, because in this case, when the hood is off they are looking directly at the "Name" quotations and trying to ICly call out the disguise when they clearly don't know the person ICly.
THIS is absolutely gaming the mechanic with OOC knowledge. I've only seen it happen a handful of times and it was handwaved by the others in the situations ICly and explained OOCly later since that's not a reasonable way to handle knowing someone is disguised because they have quotation marks around their name. That's metagaming.

TLDR: There are plenty of reasons a character would want someone to take their hood down that make perfect IC sense. Of course the disguise check might be easier if the hood is down, because you can clearly tell that's no 'sun elf with a skin condition' but rather a drow. I'd be hard pressed to call that metagaming if it was RPed appropriately no matter what the mechanics might be.

While scenario 2 is the obvious problem so is scenario 1.

Scenario X: If Evil Exile Evan is sneaking into Cordor in his plans to spread mayhem and disaster. He puts on his disguise using his skills 70 Bluff, slaps on some magic as well (serene visage). Now it should be assumed that Evan is not stupid (we will say Int 12) and has some self-awareness (wisdom 12) so he realizes being exiled they won't let him in. It is why he disguised himself and used some magic to add to the disguise.

The game mechanically will not allow this. Now ICly you can say Blessed Brother Bob looks exactly like Evil Exile Evan. Because Evan didn't dye his hair, try a different hair style, or with serene visage (which he cast) didn't OOCly change his head model.

tl;dr There is a mechanical imbalance which does not have a counter play to hood checks. While ICly a character should be able to change their appearance either in a mundane or magical ways they cannot which allows WYSIWYG to have someone with 8 wisdom -1 spot to bet a disguise of 80.

[Cthuletta]

While scenario 2 is the obvious problem so is scenario 1.

Scenario X: If Evil Exile Evan is sneaking into Cordor in his plans to spread mayhem and disaster. He puts on his disguise using his skills 70 Bluff, slaps on some magic as well (serene visage). Now it should be assumed that Evan is not stupid (we will say Int 12) and has some self-awareness (wisdom 12) so he realizes being exiled they won't let him in. It is why he disguised himself and used some magic to add to the disguise.

The game mechanically will not allow this. Now ICly you can say Blessed Brother Bob looks exactly like Evil Exile Evan. Because Evan didn't dye his hair, try a different hair style, or with serene visage (which he cast) didn't OOCly change his head model.

tl;dr There is a mechanical imbalance which does not have a counter play to hood checks. While ICly a character should be able to change their appearance either in a mundane or magical ways they cannot which allows WYSIWYG to have someone with 8 wisdom -1 spot to bet a disguise of 80.

Apologies, let me clarify!

When I said 'Recognizes someone who is exiled or an exiled race', I meant purely when the disguise is broken.
If the disguise isn't broken, unless Evil Exile Evan is described as 'wearing a bright green trenchcoat with purple pants' and he is disguised as 'Good Guy Gene' while wearing a bright green trenchcoat with purple pants (which is stated in the Wiki as being part of common sense to change up the outfit for a disguise), your character shouldn't recognize them. I personally don't tend to RP recognizing someone based on head model alone since there are limited options anyway so tons of people share them.

There's no reason for my character know Good Guy Gene is Evil Exile Evan based on an IC description UNLESS the disguise is mechanically broken. That's what I meant, sorry if I didn't portray that clearly!

[Ruzuke]

While scenario 2 is the obvious problem so is scenario 1.

Scenario X: If Evil Exile Evan is sneaking into Cordor in his plans to spread mayhem and disaster. He puts on his disguise using his skills 70 Bluff, slaps on some magic as well (serene visage). Now it should be assumed that Evan is not stupid (we will say Int 12) and has some self-awareness (wisdom 12) so he realizes being exiled they won't let him in. It is why he disguised himself and used some magic to add to the disguise.

The game mechanically will not allow this. Now ICly you can say Blessed Brother Bob looks exactly like Evil Exile Evan. Because Evan didn't dye his hair, try a different hair style, or with serene visage (which he cast) didn't OOCly change his head model.

tl;dr There is a mechanical imbalance which does not have a counter play to hood checks. While ICly a character should be able to change their appearance either in a mundane or magical ways they cannot which allows WYSIWYG to have someone with 8 wisdom -1 spot to bet a disguise of 80.

Apologies, let me clarify!

When I said 'Recognizes someone who is exiled or an exiled race', I meant purely when the disguise is broken.
If the disguise isn't broken, unless Evil Exile Evan is described as 'wearing a bright green trenchcoat with purple pants' and he is disguised as 'Good Guy Gene' while wearing a bright green trenchcoat with purple pants (which is stated in the Wiki as being part of common sense to change up the outfit for a disguise), your character shouldn't recognize them. I personally don't tend to RP recognizing someone based on head model alone since there are limited options anyway so tons of people share them.

There's no reason for my character know Good Guy Gene is Evil Exile Evan based on an IC description UNLESS the disguise is mechanically broken. That's what I meant, sorry if I didn't portray that clearly!

Apologies on my end as well.

I wasn't talking about you in particular in general how scenario 1 could be RPed (and I have seen it). I have seen great RP as well with the disguise not being broken. I have also seen people not break it, different outfits OOCly use the information IC.

[Kythana]

I don't really want to get into hood checks too much, but the rp surrounding them isn't/wasn't the problem.

The issue I was referring to is how spotters get to make an additional roll towards piercing disguise when someone moves from covered state to uncovered.

AKA, fully covered disguiser comes by hood check. Godsave is triggered by the spotters. Hood is then removed, which allow all spotters to make another roll.

This has been confirmed to be an exploit by the DMs. And I think it's pretty obvious that it working that way is unintentional. But it wasn't well known, and it would leave you pretty blindsided when it happens.

[serono]

Scenerio 2: Someone is stopped. Disguised and asked to remove their hood. They do. A character says, "Wait they're wearing face paint, can't you tell?" or "This person doesn't look right to me.". Whether or not they broke the disguise check is irrelevant, because in this case, when the hood is off they are looking directly at the "Name" quotations and trying to ICly call out the disguise when they clearly don't know the person ICly.
THIS is absolutely gaming the mechanic with OOC knowledge. I've only seen it happen a handful of times and it was handwaved by the others in the situations ICly and explained OOCly later since that's not a reasonable way to handle knowing someone is disguised because they have quotation marks around their name. That's metagaming.

When you break a disguise you know the character is actively trying to conceal their identity even if you have never met them before. Calling them out for it isnt metagaming. Unless Im not understanding your example correctly?
Im referring to the The Ultimate Disguise Rules Flowchart @ viewtopic.php?f=14&t=40857

[Edens_Fall]

All the hood check talk is rather moot with the current server rules that were made to address these concerns. Yes, there were players who RPed hood checkpoints well, and there were those who didn't. One could even argue the use of hood checkpoints and what they brought to the server as a whole (But we won't as that's just another topic of conflict). Better I think we move on with the thread's topic of conversation or start a new thread if one desires to continue the hood check debate.

Just my personal thought on the matter.

[Rubricae]

what do hood checks have to do with foig mechanics i'm a little lost

[Deep Fried Thinking Emoji]

what do hood checks have to do with foig mechanics i'm a little lost

The fact that the people going through the hood checks didn't know that removing their headgear resets the diguise check CD, allowing the spotbot to bypass godsaves. They were brought up as an example of players taking advantage of FOIG systems to trump over those that didn't know them.

That said, I would swear having someone reseting their disguise CD by removing a piece of their equipment is considered an exploit, not a FOIG system. Or at least that's what the latest ruling around hood checks makes it sound like.

Whilst you can ask PCs to show their faces, a simple emote such as lifts visor/removes or lowers mask or lifts their hood, revealing a non-descript face with [color] eyes and [color] hair tucked into the folds of their collar for such should satisfy your PC.