Fixtures, their placement, and the rules that protect them.

[Royal Blood]

Happy and sad on this one hah

I agree fixtures can be out of control. When I first came here there was Forges everywhere. Like one forge every ten feet. Forges stuffed in mountainsides, forges under trees. It was super dumb. I didn't know what fixtures were then so I really did think it was module design.

That being said, some of the wilderness fixtures are cool. I'd maybe see about allowing players to petition for certain areas to be added into the module proper? One example I could think of is the Knights Graveyard at the base of the mountains leading up to Brogendenstein.

Additionally, the Graveyard area in Myon. I think those areas should allow for an abundance of fixtures particularly to place gravestones or remembrances as a Graveyard would have.

To another point regarding border markers,

I kind of like those tbf. They add to some political drama and sort of represent a 'sphere' of influence a settlement might have.

[Subutai]

I think the trouble with borders now is honestly that they don't really seem to run into each other. Right now, since they mostly end up in an area or two of no-man's land, they really only serve to start conflict with the factions and characters that the faction with borders doesn't like. Rather than getting rid of border markers, I'd much rather see borders extended to run into each other. If Cordor's borders ran into Darrowdeep's borders, and Bendir, Cordor, and Darrowdeep all started trying to lay claim to the area around Mayfield's, for example, I think we could start seeing a lot more inter-settlement conflict, which IMO is sorely lacking. Instead of the boring old Good vs Evil, we could end up with the much more interesting conflict of different factions and settlements conflicting over who controls what area, and lays claim to what people and lands.

[Durvayas]

One of the most fun wars I remember in the UD was between Udos and the Duergar of Jhared's trade post. Both sides had territory markers butting up against eachother.

Initiially, it was subtle. One side moved the markers just a little bit each day, shifting the border, and then the other side noticed. The border began moving noticably each day, with tension ratcheting up. The markers got smashed, propaganda was posted everywhere, insults were exchanged, and eventually it escalated to a full scale war between the drow and the duergar.

The entire conflict lasted a couple of months, the actual fighting only for a few weeks.

So to the people posting territory markers...

Eliminate the no-man's land. Be greedy, it makes for great RP.

[Sea Shanties]

I have to chime in on "the wild" too. There are areas in "the wild" that become mini-settlements by groups who are outcasted from cities, are wilderness/survival types or a dozen other reasons. Some of them have even become more or less permanent landmarks like the Skal druid grove (or even the Dark Heart grove, wasn't that a player initiative?) or even settlements like the half-orc camp. Taking that away would, well, kind of suck.

I'd suggest rapid deterioration in the wild instead. So if someone is trying to make a survival camp or an altar or something and puts in the effort to maintain it, it will stick around, but if they just plop down a sign it will be gone in three or four days?

[Nitro]

I have to chime in on "the wild" too. There are areas in "the wild" that become mini-settlements by groups who are outcasted from cities, are wilderness/survival types or a dozen other reasons. Some of them have even become more or less permanent landmarks like the Skal druid grove (or even the Dark Heart grove, wasn't that a player initiative?) or even settlements like the half-orc camp. Taking that away would, well, kind of suck.

I'd suggest rapid deterioration in the wild instead. So if someone is trying to make a survival camp or an altar or something and puts in the effort to maintain it, it will stick around, but if they just plop down a sign it will be gone in three or four days?

None of these became permanent server fixtures because the players spammed fixtures but because players put in the effort to consistently roleplay in those areas, sometimes for RL years on end. You can see all over the server where people tried to create a pseudosettlement in the wild by creating a bunch of fixtures, the vast majority of them dying off after a month or two, leaving only an ugly fixture campsite that takes longer to clean up due to the rules behind fixture bashing.

[The GrumpyCat]

None of these became permanent server fixtures because the players spammed fixtures but because players put in the effort to consistently roleplay in those areas, sometimes for RL years on end

Very true.

[Subutai]

None of these became permanent server fixtures because the players spammed fixtures but because players put in the effort to consistently roleplay in those areas, sometimes for RL years on end.

I'd argue it's not as black and white as that. Would the players have enjoyed putting in the consistent roleplay in those areas, sometimes for RL years on end, if they couldn't place fixtures? I'd argue that, at least in many cases, no. Being able to set up camp, and have a recognizeable and comfortable place to come home to, whether a quarter in Cordor or a fixture camp tucked away back in the forest, can be extremely conducive to RP. If the best they could do was just show up at the same spot in the woods every day, sit down, and say, "Pretend there's a tent here. Oh, pretend our perimeter is secured by barricades. Just pretend there's a barrel over there", I think for most of them, it would have lost its appeal very quickly.

The ultimate reason for the permanent sites is because players put in effort over years, and that effort shouldn't be dismissed, but neither should the role of fixtures in making those places come alive.

[Archnon]

None of these became permanent server fixtures because the players spammed fixtures but because players put in the effort to consistently roleplay in those areas, sometimes for RL years on end

Very true.

I'm sure this would be a programming nightmare but a decay function on fixture would be realistic and solve some of this problem. Something like 1 rl mo the in a town and 1 rl week in the wild. Then the fixture automatically breaks and needs repaired by the appropriate crafter. This would insure that active wild camps stay active while at the same time encouraging cooperation as one player will be unlikely to repair everything. Cuts down on the loan player making the public area his home. It would also encourage settlement rp with patrols to repair fixtures in the wild, maybe even an office for the position of engineer or something. Repair kits would be essential for fixtures though!

For the record I know someone mentioned this but I couldn't find it to quote. If it was you kudos and I agree

[Subutai]

I found the quote, don't worry!

A partial solution would be to make them decay after a certain time like an RL month, unless they are refreshed by the owner.

That covers border markers (must be an active faction) and advertisements (must be an active merchant)

Gravestones and statues are more tricky though. Maybe have them permanent if 40 people or more pay their respects at the monument.

And I absolutely agree on all of this. Rather than seeing the number of fixtures in wilderness areas being restricted, I'd much rather see them decay.

I feel like 40 people paying respect at a gravestone is a lot, though, and to be honest, I'm not sure we want to set the precedent that only super popular, beloved characters get to have gravestones. Maybe a different way to do this could be to change decay time based on materials. Wood and cloth decay in a RL week or month, while stone really doesn't decay. That would mean stone thrones, vases, etc., would last and add to the clutter, but if a few stone items is all there is to worry about, I think players could clear those out pretty easily without worrying about the 24 fixture destroying rule, if the stone fixtures were just spamming things up.

[Sea Shanties]

None of these became permanent server fixtures because the players spammed fixtures but because players put in the effort to consistently roleplay in those areas, sometimes for RL years on end. You can see all over the server where people tried to create a pseudosettlement in the wild by creating a bunch of fixtures, the vast majority of them dying off after a month or two, leaving only an ugly fixture campsite that takes longer to clean up due to the rules behind fixture bashing.

They didn't "spam" fixtures but don't for a second tell me fixtures weren't used in the RP and development of those areas. They're a valuable tool for that and I'm speaking up because I think completely removing the ability to set up a fixture outside a city is too much. Yes, spam is a problem which is why they should rapidly deteriorate in the wild or have some other limiter beyond player bashing, but if someone is able to stake out a campsite and turn it into something-- which DOES happen, and even if it only lasts a few RL weeks that's still something-- it should be possible, perhaps with more effort required to maintain than placing fixtures in town.

I'd also add, people who set up campsites trying to make something happen usually have some RP inspiration going behind it. Like most efforts, it usually dwindles and fails for various reasons, but I would rather see people have to chance to try something new and fail than to block off possibility entirely because we're precious about keeping wilderness areas pristine. This isn't a binary choice and there should be a little middle ground.

[Emotionaloverload]

I am curious as to what would happen with graveyards and burial grounds that have been built in wilderness areas or outside of city walls and all the historic fixtures that are associated with them.

Aside from historic fixtures, I am always against clutter so I will appreciate the coming changes.


-S

[Brandon Steel]

Think a lot of these are good points. I really wish there was a decay system implemented rather than full out removal. But, if that can’t happen frankly I’m fine with the limit being to 0 or close to it. It’s really gotten out of hand unfortunately.

[Subutai]

I'm going to be honest, and hope I don't come off as overly rude. The argument that fixture spam in wilderness areas is so bad that we need to completely or almost completely remove the ability of anyone to add any fixtures outside of cities seems like a huge, huge overreaction. I don't know what areas are so clogged up with fixtures that people would rather completely demolish the ability to set up camps, mark borders, and set up other interesting outdoor locations for RP than have to deal with a few too many advertisements that they could just as easily destroy themselves over time.

I've been through most of the island many times, except for the farthest reaches of the underdark, and I seriously cannot figure out which areas people are referring to. Are there a few too many advertisements? Yes. Are there sometimes fixtures that don't make sense? Sure. But for the life of me, I can't understand what areas are so full of spam that they're rather shut the door to anyone having any kind of RP fixtures.

If something seems like inappropriate fixture spam, why not report it to a DM? If there's no rule about what constitutes fixture spam, why not create one, or at least some guidelines. Why do we need to close the pool to everyone, just because a couple people brought too many pool noodles?

[The GrumpyCat]

None of these became permanent server fixtures because the players spammed fixtures but because players put in the effort to consistently roleplay in those areas, sometimes for RL years on end

Very true.

I'm sure this would be a programming nightmare but a decay function on fixture would be realistic and solve some of this problem. Something like 1 rl mo the in a town and 1 rl week in the wild. Then the fixture automatically breaks and needs repaired by the appropriate crafter. This would insure that active wild camps stay active while at the same time encouraging cooperation as one player will be unlikely to repair everything. Cuts down on the loan player making the public area his home. It would also encourage settlement rp with patrols to repair fixtures in the wild, maybe even an office for the position of engineer or something. Repair kits would be essential for fixtures though!

For the record I know someone mentioned this but I couldn't find it to quote. If it was you kudos and I agree

I just want to clarify something briefly - that post was very short due to RL concerns. To expound a little - fixture placment /by itself/ is NOT a road to any sort of perminent change. Indeed just plopping down 50 fixtures and moving away is a sure road to failure. I will agree however that a few judiciously placed fixtures can help, but only if there is lots long term, and interesting roleplay around said fixtures.

[Reallylongunneededplayername]

1. Let players report clutter

2. Hire me to sort it out.

3. I remove clutter to DM clutter storage.

4. Clutter owner has ten days to make his case on the
Clutter
5. After ten days said clutter is perma removed.

6. ????

7. Profit.

[WJLIII3]

I just want to note that, as a new player (c. December), outdoor and wilderness features are amazing, a huge part of why I've stuck with Arelith, more than anything else they make the world feel alive, lived in, and 150 years old. Finding old gravesites, ancient inscriptions, graffiti, even forgotten advertisements for some long-gone store buried deep in some unvisited zone really make it feel like a real place.

[Zaravella]

Fixtures, placed in the wilderness or inside town areas, are helpful to propagate peopel's RP.

I agree that the original post is a bit of an overreaction - I have not seen any placeables in the wilderness thats too cluttered or placed in such a way that contrast to the theme of the environment.... I actually like seeing camps out in wilderness and it makes the place seem more alive.

One of my characters maintains a shrine to Tempus just aroud Guldorand. It has been there long before I ever played in Arelith. When I first discovered it, it was one of the things that helped me develop my character's story. Im thankful also to read the fixtures descriptions written by the players before me that contributed to this area.

Id be a bit disappointed if this area had to be eliminated as it has become source of many of my RP.

There are other camps out on the wilderness put by players elsewhere that served the same - grave sites anda altar sites. Altars to nature gods can be expected to be placed somewhere in the wilds... e.g. Mielikki. We dont expect the lady of the forest to have an altar in the middle of a city... do we?

I also believe current fixtures Ive seen in the server goes well with the spirit of the server - especially a player-driven one, like Arelith.

These placeables are one of the many tools thatvplayers can use in order to make an environment more immersive. You want some sort of mark, or change in a place. It also brings others attention towards an RP story. It progresses and creates stories....

I believe fixtures are placed because someone wants to tell a story - their prime objective in their minds is to convey the story or engage others around .... no one in a PW server would think "Oh I wanna annoy you and clutter everything and invade this, cuz this is my territory" - when they spend time creating fixtures... and spend time in that place RPing with others.

[Zeskay]

I think player fixtures can add more life to the server. If you walk down the same road for a decade, don't you expect to see changes over time? Stumbling into new things every now and then adds a dose of dynamism and can create RP as well. Unless the devs plan to tweak all areas every couple of months, they will quickly become stagnant once players are no longer able to add their touch and leave their mark.

I understand that some fixture placement might clash with the dev's vision, but at the same time it let's players interact with the world and keep it alive by allowing them to interact and add to it.

Yes, signs can be annoying, but they have also been effective in luring my characters to check shops once there's a change of ownership or something along those lines that spurs them to check out what's being advertised. I agree with what others have said regarding things like signs, add decay so they don't last forever and require maintenance, they are exposed to the elements after all.

[Gimble]

I think the reason we all play NWN and Arelith especially is the wonderful agency each player has and the respect we keep to the system. Most games don't allow you to leave a mark, or any sort of legacy for other players to wonder about.

It seems like the folks who are pro-fixtures understand and respect this system. The anti-fixture arguments fixate on the things that break the responsibility linked to the privilage of using fixtures.

It would be disappointing if this mechanic was put into effect, it shows shallow understanding of the problem and solves it with a solution of equal depth.

[Party in the forest at midnight]

It seems like the folks who are pro-fixtures understand and respect this system.

No. That's the problem.

I've been trying to clean up fixture spammed areas and form a group IG to help do it, because I don't want to see us lose nice things. But it seems like it's too late for that.

[Subutai]

Again, I'm really interesting in which areas these are, and what fixtures are being spammed, because I really don't see it. Are there places that are just littered with random junk fixtures? Or are we complaining about a few shop advertisements scattered about on roads?

I'm absolutely not asking this rhetorically. I legitimately would like to see some examples/screenshots of areas that people think are so extremely overly spammed that they think it justifies getting rid of the entire system.

[Archnon]

I feel like this thread started with a conversation about fixture caps in highly trafficked areas and ended with a discussion of fixtures in the wild, where fixture caps aren't a real problem (yet).

It seems that:
A.) People think fixtures in the wild that are left there and abandoned are an eye sore, thus there is talk of a.) Low fixture limits b.) fixture decay c.) Clutter cleaning crews.

However, the counter to this has been consistently that these fixtures are predominantly RP in nature and are used as such and shouldn't be removed.

B.) What happened to the conversation about fixture limits in restricted areas. I mean, I can handle some grave stones out in the woods and it adds some nice lore, but when everyone needs every single crafting station, two candles, and a couch in their one bedroom apartment that no other player has ever set foot in, it seems a bit ridiculous. I think the ridiculous fixture placement in and around cities and residential areas is a much bigger problems and includes the advertisements!

C.) Finally, as a new player, it strikes me that there are three types of fixtures:
1.) Fixtures that are expressly RP in nature and designed for public consumption (be that viewing or interacting with in an RP capacity) This is a lot of what the nature people want to save about the wild and the things that preserve some of the lore of the server. Statues, paintings, in addition to message boards that are used for RP purposes.
2.) Fixtures that are functional in nature but designed for public purposes. This can include workstations that are crafted and left within public spaces that are designed for workstations (The cubby areas in Brog, the area next to the fire on Skal). I would not include everyone getting their own three workstations next to their shop in this category. Altars centrally located to provide access to players, etc.
3.) Fixtures that are selfish in nature and designed to improve ease of access for a single player. This includes the 12 workstations that I need in my own home that no one else ever uses. Altars to my own personal god in my home for grinding out piety to get that K&I godsave. This can also include unnecessary private decorations if no effort is made to produce RP around them. I would also include advertisements that extend to "come and buy my junk!", particularly when there are functional message boards (category 1 items) through which to channel that RP.

It seems like the server wants more from category 1, needs some from category 2 to be functional but could use a lot less of category 3 whether it be in the heart of Cordor or deep in the forests of Skal. However, places like the heart of Cordor fill up with category 1 and 2 naturally (they are social in nature) and what is left is eaten by category 3 with homeowners and such. People without homes move out to the woods to set up their category 3 altar.

I feel like the decay function could be useful, as could changing the types of fixtures that add to the limit caps (exclude paintings and statues, or making some fixtures permanent-the altars in the grotto are a good example). Giving leadership more leeway to clean up is also a grand idea. "Your anvil has been requisitioned by the city government as a nuisance. Public anvils are available at X,Y, and Z)".

However, i think the only thing that might solve this problem is players moving towards a little bit less selfish play. If your home is not shared by more than one player, keep it to one crafting station, or even carry your ingots down the hall to the public space. If you want to advertise your shop, spam the appropriate message boards and don't leave billboards up everywhere so that the road to Cordor turns into I-90 heading towards Wall Drug (Sorry for those that don't get the reference, you should google it). Take advantage of public spaces for the that hold needed craft stations where you can develop RP around your craft skills (had a lot of good RP that started with, "Your cutting gems, can you cut some for me") and try to use your fixture allocation to contribute to the RP culture and things will start to clean themselves up in no time.

[Ork]

It seems that:
A.) People think fixtures in the wild that are left there and abandoned are an eye sore, thus there is talk of a.) Low fixture limits b.) fixture decay c.) Clutter cleaning crews.

However, the counter to this has been consistently that these fixtures are predominantly RP in nature and are used as such and shouldn't be removed.

For the longest time there was a sunite altar in the Bramble woods next to rampaging, violent hobgoblins. Fixtures in the wild are often placed with little to no consideration of the monsters in those areas. They are an eyesore. I prefer an uncluttered aesthetic in these wild areas especially when 1 or 2 players might infrequently roleplay at the site ..and the 60+ that travel through a day have to suck it up and suffer the sight.

While it's good to be mindful of our players, Arelith has proved time and time again that some players aren't responsible enough or reasonable enough to share.

[Subutai]

For the longest time there was a sunite altar in the Bramble woods next to rampaging, violent hobgoblins. Fixtures in the wild are often placed with little to no consideration of the monsters in those areas. They are an eyesore. I prefer an uncluttered aesthetic in these wild areas especially when 1 or 2 players might infrequently roleplay at the site ..and the 60+ that travel through a day have to suck it up and suffer the sight.

While it's good to be mindful of our players, Arelith has proved time and time again that some players aren't responsible enough or reasonable enough to share.

I'd argue that this is, at least in part, due to the sheer number of monsters in Arelith's wilderness areas. You'd be hard pressed to find a wilderness area that isn't full to the brim with monsters. If you want to place a camp, or an altar, or some pillars, your options are pretty much either in civilization, or among monsters. Others here have argued that players can't be expected to be so immersed in the monsters roaming the island when they continue to exist forever no matter how many times their homes are totally wiped out. I'd argue that players can't be expected to be so immersed in the monsters roaming the island when it's impossible to go 20 feet in almost all wilderness areas without running into enemies.

What we have here is a whole bunch of overlapping issues that should probably be carefully discussed and addressed to make the world more immersive for everyone, but we're approaching it as essentially, "Too many fixtures in too many places so we need to stop fixtures". Which is a heavy-handed and, at risk of sounding rude, an overly simple and black-and-white approach.

[Ork]

Or not. We all have a lot of varying opinions and discussion of these opinions may have some merit, specifically since Irongron posted already in this thread, but in the end the executive decision rests with him.

I hate wilderness fixtures, and I find a lot of fixtures tactless, tasteless and an eye sore - that's nothing to do with immersion but my own personal taste in aesthetic. There are some really good fixture wizards, but the majority of us aren't. If you didn't stick the time into creating, arranging and using these fixtures- they're better off not existing at all.

Ultimately it rests with Irongron what to do about fixtures despite discussions carefully formulated or discussed. I, for one, love the reduction of wilderness fixtures. Leave the area design to area designers.