Arelith

I would like to to put the idea to the community and dev team that Arelith has been on a rise of power creep/disguise Meta and abuse.

The disguise mechanics doesn't feel like it permits roleplay, I think it stifles it for anyone except those taking advantage of the ease of investment and benefits to the system.

Status: Arelith is ripe with heavy charisma based classes which have built in disguise as a class skill, as well as class related benefits to drive disguise into numbers make the disguiser completely immune to detection. A player who is so heavily invested in achieving a bluff or perform skill in the 120+ range deserves to benefit from their build. But an opportunity for meta abuse exists which favors those whom choose to use this system.

Issue: BUT I suggest they should have some growing pains to achieve their dream, like any growth there should have to be some trial and error, some risk. It feels like there's an abuse of the disguise system to circumvent this in the prevalence of nicknames.

Example: The method is such. Play Arelith with a Disguise A active as your normal persona. This Disguise A, is more of a nickname a false disguise of which has no consequences of your disguise is broken. Use this time to build your disguise skill and over time, abuse people examining you to apply the meta knowledge that your disguise is broken to know you need to improve. Improve as needed until your skill with the safe Disguise A, is unbeatable. Then as you wish, do. A new disguise with the tested skill and undertake anonymous activity in absolute safety.

Conclusion: While I am obviously not a fan of the power builds and the prevalence of these beyond godlike disguise skill. But the meta aspect affecting how disguise is used and abused deserves a look at.

Suggested course: I would think an effective way to address the meta abuse is to no longer report to the disguising player that their disguise was broken. Doing so wont ruin anyone's build, nor will it change how they have to play. Instead it will invite the occasional failure to be addressed through RP interaction instead of console green/red text of a psychic understanding of everyone who looks at you.

Edit. A related discussion was brought up earlier this year. viewtopic.php?f=91&t=46332

I believe the meta for a lot of PVP AC is 70+ at that range for the most part anyone with a disguise of 80 is not going to be able to hit them. That is a lot of classes which BAB is medium and not high. Certain classes such as rogue do not get high CHA or a high BAB. A good counter to not having great skills though is being able to play as a sneak. Certain classes even have feats such as hidden persona which the description is based around not being seen and when the false identity is broken to abandon it. This provides the possibility of RP as a spy, infiltration, or even an outcast trying to distance themselves from their crimes.

A change in this balance only benefits PVP I can see and catch everyone and kill them. Unless a counter play to armor was added. Aside from grease (which discipline can counter). Finding weak points and a melee equivalent of spell breech for AC or armor breech. Perhaps the acid line of spells could damage armor and weapons for a short period of time.

With the disguise system you can entirely circumvent the assassin guild contract system, which is missing teeth as it is.

oh, they're doing reruns of this episode again.

the answer is always the same:
the OOC message informing the player that their disguise was broken exists so that they can be certain their disguise was, in fact, broken, otherwise any potential metagaming can be reported

it's ridiculous how often players will blatantly ignore the "you failed to break a disguise" message and insist their character can recognise somebody by their head model, hair colour, emote style, etc, i don't even think they're doing it maliciously

let us disguise-bros have this one safety measure, please

Most disguises I've come across in RP weren't even legit disguises but players acting as normal, introducing themselves by their real name and yet they are always in disguise. I'm more surprised when I see a disguise used properly, in those moments I'm glad for the system, but for the most part it's being used for something else entirely.

We need more people to play eagle totem druids with skill focus and epic skill focus in spot and maxed out wisdom. Sometimes meta problems require meta solutions.

When I read "Disguise Meta" I thought this was going to be coming from a whole different angle. My experience playing a number of PCs that used disguise regularly has shown me the rather unfortunate reality of how disguises are treated in conflict.

As controversial or perhaps depressing this is to say, I would argue that in a majority of "conflict" based interactions involving disguise, there is some degree of metagaming "against'' the disguised PC. This ranges from "innocent whoospies" to extremely obvious and deliberate "must-win" metagaming. I have of course had many players engage with disguises gracefully, and seen a ton of healthy conflict narratives. It's just so incredibly common, that when I see someone actually suspend belief and not meta the disguise tag, I am surprised, as its the exception not the rule.

Besides the fact that people don't always use disguise responsibly or even "properly" to great narrative effect (which is fair), it is an essential part of the module. The perception that people playing "disguised PCs" that are difficult or near impossible to uncover are a problem, is in my opinion a bigger problem. Allowing there to be counterpoints to your own narrative is important. Not being able to just know someone's name and exile, pariah or isolate them from RP is a good thing. Often times that disguised PC's entire RP arch and life changes the moment their name gets discovered. Our characters don't need to know everything.

Settlement politics often involve heavy gatekeeping. Playing an evil character or doing anything resembling criminal activity will (almost) always result in you being removed from the RP via mechanical exile, PvP, or simply social exile via extensive IC and OOC networks. On the positive end of the spectrum, this is soundly narrative driven, on the not so positive end of the spectrum, it's done deliberately to stifle a factions ability to recruit, operate and basically "exist" in order to "win the conflict." The same could be said for good aligned PCs operating in Andunor (or generally anyone attempting to shake up or challenge the status quo of the local power base in a given RP area). Disguises are some of the only defense against this.

Even with a 100% unbeatable disguise, and all due caution, you better believe that your name will get out (legitimately or otherwise). And when it does, it's going to get used in every way possible/imaginable, with every mechanical tool available to the opposition to limit your ability to continue whatever it was you were doing. Disguised PCs that are actually trying to drive narratives that run counter to others (in conflict), absolutely need protections afforded by disguise, or their experiences with said RP archs will be even more miserable and short lived.

Ask anyone who's earnestly tried to run a villain arch or do this kind of disguised RP, and I think you'll find a lot of similar stories. If anything, I'd argue its the opposite, and we need to get rid of the disguise tags and treat it as WYSIWYG with some rules to limit the more problematic potential abuses/rulebreaks. And then... enforce the rules!

And yeah, if you want to have an answer to this, there are builds for it, you just have to pay the price and specialize. So use the counterplay available to you rather than nerfing something essential to many PC's rp.

One thing might be separating those truly invested in a disguise vs those who want to hide their face and be anonymous or mysterious

Like maybe "fully covered" characters could have a mode that hides their name but demand you use an alias... I don't know, but I think there's a desire for something that isn't a true disguise but people are using the -disguise system to get there

You only need to break someone's disguise once in order to shut down their whole identity. Let that sink. Disguisers should have the advantage. Also, Spot can be pushed to 120+ as well.

Another issue is that when there's a name floating above your head and you RP with the same people several times, it's going to be hard for them to remember which name you gave them, so using the disguise system purly for a nickname is a thing, and while it's not the intended use for the system, it's pretty harmless overall, and the ones doing it are always at risk of "looking shady like they're hiding something" to people who dont know them well and break their disguise. That's on them.

Few years ago I played Gray Monk, which was an elven monk of the old order who insisted on being called Gray Monk because he gave up his identity in a very monastic fashion. I used to walk around with 0 bluff, disguised as Gray Monk and I didnt get any negative feedback on it from any players or DMs, but every once in a while strangers RPed suspicion, which was totally fine and acceptable. I see no issue with that.

Let's just get rid of names. I played on a server that had this really cool concept where you chose your name on character creation but when looking at other players it would read something like "Stranger" and you would have to assign a name to each player individually as you meet them.

Unread post by Security_Blanket » 05 Nov 2024 13:30

Let's just get rid of names. I played on a server that had this really cool concept where you chose your name on character creation but when looking at other players it would read something like "Stranger" and you would have to assign a name to each player individually as you meet them.

Draco Deleteur

Sounds like alot of work to type D-Head over everyone that annoys you.

There are actually a lot of spot bonuses that don't contribute to breaking disguises. So even if you can push spot to 100-120+, the effective disguise-breaking level would be lower. Not to mention there's always godsaving on the off chance that someone does break the disguise.

I think disguises are way too strong tbh.

Fenran wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:18 pm

There are actually a lot of spot bonuses that don't contribute to breaking disguises. So even if you can push spot to 100-120+, the effective disguise-breaking level would be lower. Not to mention there's always godsaving on the off chance that someone does break the disguise.

I think disguises are way too strong tbh.

It's possible to get a spot value of 127 that fully counts towards disguise breaking. It's a heavy commitment in the same way quarterbreaker or, dare I say, very deep disguise builds are.

As a general thought having been on both sides of the disguise battle fence: broken disguises shut down more narratives than they create. Let people have their fun, full disguise builds aren't kill bashing people in the streets, what's the harm?

Also, scry outright beats any level of disguise investment. A disguiser will get broken one way or another eventually.

Disguise as a system can absolutely be engaging and provide RP.

My stance against disguise does not have a lot to do with with the number crunching of disguise skill vs spot skill. My feeling is the availability of and viability of 100+ skill disguise builds out pace their counter of viable and available spot focused builds. .

My argument is that the state of the disguise system is overly catering and protective of those whom option to use a disguise. Inherently, when and where to don a disguise offers the benefit of control and initiative to the disguiser against others who are unsuspecting. Such advantage is added to with things like God saves, and the the omniscience of knowing if someone broke your disguise when they examine the disguiser.

I have seen many times player's behavior change suddenly from the immunity their false persona affords to a beck petaling or defensive behavior when that little red text appears letting them know they've been made. Plenty of times they just try to get out of the situation before engaging in RP or and owning their outing.

Another situation this has impact, though it's harder to point out by nature of the non-interaction. If someone's disguise succeed or fails when no one is apparently around. Should the disguiser be notified someone may be examining them from stealth or invisibility?

chris a gogo wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 2:06 pm

Sounds like alot of work to type D-Head over everyone that annoys you.

It's more about immersion in general, if you don't know someone then you simply don't know them, you can't take a shot in the dark and say "Hey Jimi Hendrix" if you don't know the man's name is Jimi Hendrix. Forgetting disguises for a second, it always annoys me when someone metagames my name when I make a point of not mentioning it.

Aeryeris wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:25 pm

Fenran wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:18 pm

There are actually a lot of spot bonuses that don't contribute to breaking disguises. So even if you can push spot to 100-120+, the effective disguise-breaking level would be lower. Not to mention there's always godsaving on the off chance that someone does break the disguise.

I think disguises are way too strong tbh.

It's possible to get a spot value of 127 that fully counts towards disguise breaking. It's a heavy commitment in the same way quarterbreaker or, dare I say, very deep disguise builds are.

As a general thought having been on both sides of the disguise battle fence: broken disguises shut down more narratives than they create. Let people have their fun, full disguise builds aren't kill bashing people in the streets, what's the harm?

Also, scry outright beats any level of disguise investment. A disguiser will get broken one way or another eventually.

Scry is really easy to avoid if you know what you do. Disguise breaking, +127 disguiser vs +127 spotter, the spotter has a 25% chance of winning IF the disguiser stays about while getting god saved. Say the spotter wins: the disguiser can go ahead and make a new one to force this interaction to happen again ad nauseam.

Disguising is strong and I say this as a disguiser. If you get caught legitimately it is, and I am sorry to say this, a heavy skill issue.

The same is true with "guessing" who someone is. I may not be able to know 100% "Noria the necromancer" is in fact "hooded woman". When "hooded woman" is constantly standing and replenishing the shop of Noria, goes to her quarters and starts to summon undead... I don't have to break her disguise to be 90% sure this hooded woman is in fact Noria.

Edit: I forgot to mention disguisers have the advantage of initiative. They get to decide when to wear their bluff intensive gear whole spot bots must always wear their non-combat, spot gear or fail.

Perplexia wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 12:20 am

oh, they're doing reruns of this episode again.

the answer is always the same:
the OOC message informing the player that their disguise was broken exists so that they can be certain their disguise was, in fact, broken, otherwise any potential metagaming can be reported

it's ridiculous how often players will blatantly ignore the "you failed to break a disguise" message and insist their character can recognise somebody by their head model, hair colour, emote style, etc, i don't even think they're doing it maliciously

let us disguise-bros have this one safety measure, please

This obviously been an issue for a while. Perhaps it's time to re ask this question if the meta message is still needed?

In the time since that the notification message was installed, many other better improvements and protections against meta spotting have been added.
-The logged in lists have been restricted, and options to indicate further you log in status has been hidden.
-player log in names are inherently hidden while using disguises(portal&nwn player list)
-An outfit management system an customization has been implemented to offer a great variety of different disguises.(/Tell name, or console.)
-a description management system has been added which may be tailored to varied disguises and states of cover.

If someone's using all the tools they have to disguise, I'm not sure how HOW you could determine the true identity on a meta level.

It feels like the problem the message was meant to protect from was better resolved through other assorted changes over the years.

So one thing I will say,

I don't believe you should get disguise examine notifications when you're in stealth. There are people who use diguises while in stealth to detect if they've been spotted, because they're notified they got their disguise examined.

Morto wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 4:21 pm

If someone's using all the tools they have to disguise, I'm not sure how HOW you could determine the true identity on a meta level.

Since you asked...

The server population is relatively small. It's easy for people to deduce OOC which characters or factions are likely to be involved in certain activities. Many do not factor in the large NPC population that is a part of the setting but not directly visible relative to the PCs. There are "thousands" of NPCs which should muddle the waters relative to PCs in theory.

By using knowledge of build and capabilities, as well as gender, race and other attributes of the character that CAN be determined through disguises, people make "educated guesses" in character. Add in the process of elimination given who you know is NOT involved, and you've whittled things down.

Things I have seen first hand:

"Oh this character used X spell or ability, they must be Y person."

"Disguised person did X action, and because I know their motivations I have deduced that Y person is the likely person doing X action." This is despite the fact that theoretically there are any number of plausible reasons for another character to have done said action.

There's no rule break in your character being "suspicious" or "lying" IC. But in my experience, these "lies" can be shockingly on the nose "educated guesses." If my character is lying saying "I know X person did Y action," where in reality my character doesn't KNOW or even have a strong reason to suspect, it still sticks and becomes truth ICly. IC lying is a strong bridge between OOC and IC knowledge that gets used fairly often and is a major grey area.

"This person was acting suspicious so I paid them extra attention." When in reality that character received "special attention" due to the disguise tag and was otherwise acting normally. Granted sometimes they're being sketchy and lurking in stealth or doing odd things, but not always. However saying you're just naturally suspicious or a guard and vigilant is valid enough to justify walking over and giving them special attention.

Special mention of people using failed scry attempts to deduce IC information about identities (thanks for the recent fix on this). Additionally stream crossing is still somewhat common despite it being an explicit rule break these days.

I've seen use of OOC information from discord to triangulate different information and deduce who is who based on player names, discord names and amalgamations of IC info. Yes, unfortunately this does happen. People talk and share things OOC (screen caps, recordings, or just chatting) and sometimes with the best intentions share sensitive information as well.

In general there's a trend of what I call "solving the equation backwards." That means knowing the result or where you want to get OOCly, and creating RP "justifications" to get there. If I have a conclusion I want my character to arrive at, it's pretty easy to find a narrative justification, regardless of how thin it is, for my character to arrive at said conclusion. Suspension of belief is very important but extremely hard to maintain, even with the best of intentions, because WE know things OOC and it can be difficult to compartmentalize. And it's very difficult for the DM team to catch and do anything about, given the work load, mountain of context, and ambiguity present in these exhanges.

Otherwise there are a number of other valid IC vectors such as direct IC infiltration, scrying, quarters/shop ownership signs, killing the individual and observing their corpse and/or capturing them for interrogation etc etc. Spot bots often show up for larger events where disguised PCs are expected to make an appearance as well.

All in all it's real tough to keep anything a secret around here haha...

Morto wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 4:21 pm

If someone's using all the tools they have to disguise, I'm not sure how HOW you could determine the true identity on a meta level.

i've personally seen people's attitudes shift after subjecting my character to a hood check, watching the cogs turn in their head as they go "Oh, I only know one halfling with head model 18 and hair colour 135, this must be them!", entirely disregarding any effort i had put into writing a description or creating an outfit

that's me using all the tools i have to disguise, evidently it was not enough

Perplexia wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 7:25 pm

i've personally seen people's attitudes shift after subjecting my character to a hood check, watching the cogs turn in their head as they go "Oh, I only know one halfling with head model 18 and hair colour 135, this must be them!", entirely disregarding any effort i had put into writing a description or creating an outfit

that's me using all the tools i have to disguise, evidently it was not enough

Hood checks, as I understand have been largely eliminated as an common practice for RP, because they create a scenario which circumvents the need for suspicion. It's really a different argument of what I hope to get across, and slightly moot because it's been done away with.

But the practice of recognizing, example halfling head 18 with hair colour 135 seems like it doesn't break the rules as described.

https://wiki.nwnarelith.com/Disguise
"No using -disguise to resemble a different race except for the subrace -disguise_race mechanic that is now a viailable. -disguise means that people should ignore the floaty name over your head, but does NOT let you ignore what your avatar physically looks like."

Perplexia, what your describing seems like an allowable interaction per the rules. Recognizing a character based on a familiar appearance, sounds like a totally reasonable response by another character.

This is distinctly different than if the hin, gets a game console warning their disguise was broken and runs away without playing out the scene.

There's argument that players can abuse out of game information to gain an advantage over other players in game. Executing a hood check is at least an interaction and RP practice which may play out differently for or against either party potentially.

It doesn't feel like countering meta players with meta information provided by the console is the solution here.

Anomandaris wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 5:58 pm

All in all it's real tough to keep anything a secret around here haha...

Anonmandaris pointed out a lot of strong examples. It's extraordinarily difficult to eliminate players playing the game on a level beyond what the engine facilitates.

Though I maintain that the notification a disguised player receives when they're examined, is not fit to properly prevent that.

Morto wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 7:55 pm

Hood checks, as I understand have been largely eliminated as an common practice for RP, because they create a scenario which circumvents the need for suspicion. It's really a different argument of what I hope to get across, and slightly moot because it's been done away with.

From my personal experience good checks are fairly common, specially on drow/elves as a way to cheaply circumvent “disguise_race”. The ruling of “mood hood checks” is either vastly unknown or (and I don’t think it to be the case) deliberately ignored from time to time.

It create some very awkward RP moments when it, quite often (from my experience at least once every other week, specially with new/unknown disguises) happens.

To the point that it might be useful add a nudge about the ruling in the log in tips

Morto wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 7:55 pm

Hood checks, as I understand have been largely eliminated as an common practice for RP, because they create a scenario which circumvents the need for suspicion. It's really a different argument of what I hope to get across, and slightly moot because it's been done away with.

From my personal experience hood checks are fairly common, specially on drow/elves as a way to cheaply circumvent “disguise_race”. The ruling of “mood hood checks” is either vastly unknown or (and I don’t think it to be the case) deliberately ignored from time to time.

It create some very awkward RP moments when it, quite often (from my experience at least once every other week, specially with new/unknown disguises) happens.

To the point that it might be useful add a nudge about the ruling in the log in tips

Having personally played a dedicated spotter with every feat + gifts. I was a bit disappointed to learn I couldn't actually pierce a bunch of disguises because my character was not wisdom based / had racial bonuses. By making the gift of spot not count towards the 50 skill cap could probably go a long way in solving this issue.