Heavly restricting portal lenses: discussion

[mourisson1]

But what you describe has nothing to do with lenses. It has to do with rule breaking and is thing to be answered to by DM team. In both cases, surface parties in Andunor and drow ones in Cordor.

You either didnt read the text or didnt get it, im sorry.
Im talking about escaping consqeuences (of running around in UD with surfacer, or vice versa) , which has something to do with lenses.

[Revelations]

But what you describe has nothing to do with lenses. It has to do with rule breaking and is thing to be answered to by DM team. In both cases, surface parties in Andunor and drow ones in Cordor.

You either didnt read the text or didnt get it, im sorry.
Im talking about escaping consqeuences (of running around in UD with surfacer, or vice versa) , which has something to do with lenses.

It still has nothing to do with lenses.

If you feel that someone does something that doesn't match the setting, such as drow running around Cordor ignoring NPC guards and insulting everyone, to then just lense out, and it all left a sour taste, report it.

But there's still a misunderstanding here, anyway. You seem to think that you can dictate what the consequences for other characters are. The thing is, you can't.

You seem to want to speak about "consequences" rather than PvP deaths. Here's the catch:

You can't actually force consequences of any sort.

Nothing happens without the consent of the other player. You're not going to enslave them, you're not going to torture them, you're not going to imprison them - If the other player doesn't want it. And this is the reason why lenses are not going to be removed, either, because being able to opt out of PvP is important, and necessary, especially to counter griefing and terrible narratives.

Without lenses, or with overly nerfed lenses, you can (perhaps) kill the character. And then? They'll respawn. And they can do it again. No consequence.

Everything that happens in this game always happens with the consent of all parties involved. Because this server isn't about winning, it's about collaborative storytelling.

To everything in this game, there's only as much meaning as the other player allows.

This is a question of mentality.

[WanderingPoet]

LW: *Edited post for detailed description of an Exploit, we do not wish to see used*

[mourisson1]

But there's still a misunderstanding here, anyway. You seem to think that you can dictate what the consequences for other characters are. The thing is, you can't.

What about well timed ward teleport that allows you to dictate the consequences (death)? It allows you to lock up someone (provided they wont exploit the lens-dialogue) and kill him if you wish to. It is sad, but it kind of goes against your argument, because then there is mechanical way to dictate.

[Cagus]

....

Sorry, but that is a big nonsence. It is not god-like ability versus players. It allows people to opt out. This server is not about PVP, if you have not noticed. This server is about RP, adventuring. UD is not owned by UD characters. And surface character is not expected by rules to wait for UDers to kill them in UD either.

Big nonsense? Sorry, but that is your opinion.
Also you are the person bringing PvP in this discussion, don't.

This server is about RP. Which is Role-Playing. Fear (of dead and harm) is essential part of any personality of sentient being. Striping it off is way from IC to OOC, making your character not CHARACTER but empty husk. (Even in psychology lack of fear is almost always part of Antisocial Personality Disorder. Disorder.) Ability to avoid consequences of risk taking is doing exactly this.

And about underdark:

[...] To those who live beneath the rays of the Fiery Orb; it is a land of Horror and nightmares. Twisting labyrinthine passages filled with a dreadful silence broken only by the screams of fierce predators. [...] and your steps tracked by creatures from your most horrible fears. Few have ever reached to the depths of Deepearth and returned to tell their tale.

And then there are the Drow. The stuff of legend and the name used to strike fear into unruly children.

http://wiki.arelith.com/Underdark

I guess the point of UD is there should be fear.

[mourisson1]

....

And about underdark:

[...] To those who live beneath the rays of the Fiery Orb; it is a land of Horror and nightmares. Twisting labyrinthine passages filled with a dreadful silence broken only by the screams of fierce predators. [...] and your steps tracked by creatures from your most horrible fears. Few have ever reached to the depths of Deepearth and returned to tell their tale.

And then there are the Drow. The stuff of legend and the name used to strike fear into unruly children.

http://wiki.arelith.com/Underdark

Also THIS. I dont think this matches the description of land where every surfacer come, with a portal lens to get to safety with no risk. Actually, you are not deciding someones consequences. You dont force surfacers to go to underdark. They do on their own will. Its like going to dungeon. Do you feel that DUNGEON unrightfully forces a consequence of death on you? I dont think so. And the surface/ud should be the same for the opposite faction. You should walk there with risk of being killed, tortured, whatever. You dont want it? Dont come. Easy as that. But allowing everyone everywhere by giving them oh-crap button in the form of lenses really kills this atmosphere.

[Revelations]

But there's still a misunderstanding here, anyway. You seem to think that you can dictate what the consequences for other characters are. The thing is, you can't.

What about well timed ward teleport that allows you to dictate the consequences (death)? It allows you to lock up someone (provided they wont exploit the lens-dialogue) and kill him if you wish to. It is sad, but it kind of goes against your argument, because then there is mechanical way to dictate.

If you read my complete post, there's an answer to that question.

(...), you can (perhaps) kill the character. And then? They'll respawn. And they can do it again. No consequence.

To everything in this game, there's only as much meaning as the other player allows.

[mourisson1]

(...), you can (perhaps) kill the character. And then? They'll respawn. And they can do it again. No consequence.

To everything in this game, there's only as much meaning as the other player allows.

If you can freely say that death is not a consequence, then something is really wrong with death settings tho. And with players. Because as was written before, characters shouldnt be a dumb husks not even afraid of death. I would really consider almost anyone who does this quite a bad RP player, sorry.

[MissEvelyn]

More importantly, if you're someone who everyone lenses away from... perhaps consider why? There are players where I know them by reputation, and I'll stick around and see what happens.
There are also players that are well known for one line PvP, where I'll *** Little Weasel Edit: Please do not describe Exploits on the forums! *** , because I don't expect a good or enjoyable RP encounter from them. Its predictable, I know their build will kill mine, I also know that they'll killbash my character. All I can expect from these people is irritation, because they're not known for making PvP a fun experience for anyone, so why would I entertain playing along? I'm already sure I'm only going to get one line of RP off in the whole interaction, so it might as well be a line of dialogue along with an emote that I cracked a lense.

Long story short, if you don't make conflict fun for people, don't be surprised if people bounce when you try to initiate it.

Addendum: Pro-tip, if you walk up to someone while fully warded, weapon drawn, and your PC is being aggressive, the odds of the other player deciding to have their character lense increase dramatically. If this is a frustrating occurance, reconsider your approach.

This is absolutely on point.

Furthermore, if someone starts buffing up in the middle of a conflict-filled conversation, you can bet I'm going to lens out of there 9 out of 10 times. Them buffing in the middle of the RP tells me two things: They don't care enough to let the conflict RP play out - they only care about winning PvP. And secondly, their build is most likely by far superior to mine.

I have neither the desire nor the inclination to partake in that kind of RP. I just don't. Other people might be more PvP savvy and might want to teach the player a 'lesson' not to be trigger-happy. I personally don't have that kind of resilience or patience. If someone is on here to solely focus on PvP, good for them I suppose, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to type out as much as possible within the 10 seconds it takes them to RP up a 1-line pre-PvP conversation before killbashing my corpse.

Therefore, restricting the use of a Portal Lens in any way is not a good solution whatsoever. As Durvayas so elegantly states, consider the why behind the use of Portal Lenses in PvP. You may not be an aggressive PvPer with a history for killbashing characters. That's fine, but perhaps the other person has gotten so used to dealing with these types that they immediately act on instinct and crack a lens. That makes perfect sense both for them as a character and as a player. They just don't want to deal with that again.

[WinkinBlinkin]

I'd like to echo the point that portal lenses make playing this game whilst being responsible for young children remotely possible. Even the sleeping variety are capable of throwing a shard of NWN disjunction as a free action at any point in the game. I could possibly survive some kind of a timer on its use, but making them more costly/difficult to acquire would vastly disadvantage those of us who are often pestered by mini human gremlins. You think you have them set up watching a movie for the next hour and a half, but then suddenly Fuschia has a basket jammed on her head like a bridle and Tarquin is sticking a plastic octopus up the cat's nostril.

Life is hard.

I love writs and portal lenses.

[flower]

No character will fear yours because it can kill it.

It does not work this way.

Surfacers won't fear UD because are killed there either.

Does your character fear to enter epic dungeons where died? Hardly.

Lensing out is actually also played fear play. They aborted because were afraid is it not what you desire after? To make them fear your character? Congratulations if party lenses away from you, you succeeded )

[Miaou]

A small reminder that we do not allow and urge members away from using cuss words on the forum. Even subsituting a letter or two for an asterisk does not excuse, we all know what word was used.

I've had to pull back and edit several posts already. This thread has been going well so far, let's just keep our vocab to a more leveled tone. Thanks.

[Ork]

I can't add to what's been said only to say I agree with the people that have voiced that this game is collaborative. It really isn't the players place to enforce consequences. We can however incentivize consequences with bomb Snuggybear roleplay, but we can't force it.

If something doesn't agree with the setting, make it through sheer force of will through great roleplay or report it. There is no middle ground.

[Revelations]

If you can freely say that death is not a consequence, then something is really wrong with death settings tho. And with players. Because as was written before, characters shouldnt be a dumb husks not even afraid of death. I would really consider almost anyone who does this quite a bad RP player, sorry.

That's exactly the point.

Some people can't seem to get over the fact that this is a collaborative game where we all work together. You can't force anything on another player.

If they want to play a slave? They'll play a slave. If they want a meaningful death of their character, only returned with a lot of RP for people trying to bring them back, they'll do that. If they want to have a cool permadeath ending, they'll do that.

But none of that happens because you decide it.

You expect others to play out being the loser when you killed them in PvP, and give it super much weight! Raah you're powerful and they should fear you and do exactly what you want!

Oftentimes, that's not a lot of fun to players.

But we're all here to have fun.

Problem.

Solution?

Create a narrative that doesn't make people want to get away as soon as possible. Enable them as a player, give them room.
If the other side notices you don't want to smother their story but rather want to drive a story together and after buildup it eventually does get to PvP, slave RP, whatever, most people will love to play out consequences.




People lense out because they expect the other side to smother them right away and try to dictate their RP. They lense out to avoid having to downplay consequences, which makes it awkward for everyone involved.

I'm sure many of us have been on the receiving end of a random warparty stomping through for the nth time this week, or your classic one-liner RP followed by WoBs or IGMs spams. How much meaning do you expect people at the Arcane Tower will give to their character deaths, being killed over and over and over again by the same warparty?

Yeah, right. Likely next to none. Because it's a terrible narrative.

[The GrumpyCat]

A small suggestion in this morass:

If you have an interaction with someone - especially of the PvP vareity - when they could have lensed and didn't, or where they rped the pre-fight really well, or where they got captured and stuck around for consequences, or where they rped the effects of death really well... any of that Jazz...

LET US KNOW!

Drop us a message. Drop us a kudos!

Carrot is almost always better than stick. And if we can work to encourage this sort of thing, then that may help to aleviate the issue.

[mourisson1]

You expect others to play out being the loser when you killed them in PvP, and give it super much weight! Raah you're powerful and they should fear you and do exactly what you want!

I would like to just clarify that i dont talk about actually killing someone, as i didnt kill a single character (dont count disables and such), rather then THREAT of death, which, in my experience, just doesnt work on people, because somewhere back in their minds, they know it wont really hurt, dying. When i talk about consequences, i dont talk about killing someone, more like... showing to him that he is not welcome in this place, and that he should not come here the second time. But how can one achieve this, if people do not fear, or if you cant even do anything, if they wont allow it?

There are good people, who will willingly play with this, who wont portal lens, who will RP and it is a nice game, totaly.
On the other hand there are people who either insta-lens, or are like "I wont tell you anything, you can kill me." and this kind of (imo) super-heroism, which makes playing with such people quite ...boring... even from the agressors side.

As was said many times, aggressors shouldnt expect to force anyone to anything.

On the other hand it IS quite shameful to track someone, bribe to get info and knowledge, scry, whatever, and then when you finally reach him he insta-lenses or without the fear of death just rushes you.

So, basically, i would like to ask both sides, agressors and targets, give each other a chance, thats all. It may end badly, the guy may just one-line and kill you, remember him next time, but it gives a chance to good aggressors to show they are not like this

[Durvayas]

There are also players that are well known for one line PvP, where I'll preload a lense just in case, because I don't expect a good or enjoyable RP encounter from them. Its predictable, I know their build will kill mine, I also know that they'll killbash my character. All I can expect from these people is irritation, because they're not known for making PvP a fun experience for anyone, so why would I entertain playing along? I'm already sure I'm only going to get one line of RP off in the whole interaction, so it might as well be a line of dialogue along with an emote that I cracked a lense.

I would think/argue that 'preloading' a lens is exploiting, doubly so if it bypasses people engaging in combat/warding against teleportation. RPwise my understanding of a lens was always: You crack it and think of where you want to go and appear there. Cracking it early and leaving the window open I feel is fishy.

I'd think that throwing a web or grease spell at someone's feet to put them in combat and block lenses without hitting the hostile button is also exploiting, but you don't see a DM ruling against it. Until I see a DM ruling explicitely against preloading lenses, or a mechanical change implemented to prevent it, I'm going to use it where I see fit, and encourage others to do so if it improves their experience.

The purpose of preloading a lense is so that your PC doesn't get killed due to how lag can make conversations, yes, even lense ones, take up to 30 seconds or more to come up on laggy days. Ample time to get killed and defeat the purpose of the lense. Its not something I'd even consider if the server was reliable enough for my PC not to get killed based on a very OOC mechanical limitation of server hardware and network latency.

I don't even recommend preloading lenses generally, I personally only do it when I'm expecting the encounter to be a shitshow on an OOC level because I know that I'll be given time to either activate an item, or emote, and I know I won't be given time to do both before they're on my PC because regardless of what I'm about to do, its just a checkbox my opponent is waiting for me to fill out before they PvP me according to the letter of the rules.

Generally, I don't feel a need to do this, because Arelith has plenty of players I've not had the pleasure of roleplaying with adversarily, and decent players abound.

But again, for certain people, oftentimes players I've had trouble with before, I see literally no reason to give them the satisfaction; so I preload a lense, and hope I don't need to use it. I hope that perhaps this encounter will be different, that they won't immediately take a hostile action the second I hit the enter key in an attempt to stop an escape my PC planned from the moment they stopped in front of them while fully warded. I hope that I'll be allowed to say more than one line of dialogue before they rush me, because I hate running, and I'm here to roleplay, but if they're not interested in roleplay with me, why should I be interested in PvP with them? So I preload, and hope that this time, I'll get to RP, because I'd rather RP with more people than less.

My characters PvP a lot, and die somewhat often, people know I don't shy away from PvP where I'll lose, I'll engage in a 1v5 on occasion where I'm the 1. But the important thing is I have to expect that there will be fun RP afterwards to even want to bother. The longer the RP before PvP, the less likely I am to use a lense.
It is not hard to get me to RP, but if I'm shown that someone isn't really interested in the RP, as MissEvelyn mentioned, I'm more likely to lense. If they do the same thing repeatedly, I effectively blacklist them, as I come to expect poor conduct/sportsmanship and don't have the time to bother with that at all.

Show you're here for collaborative fun, and I'll be your nemesis any day. Follow the absolute letter of the PvP RoE and treat anything I say or emote as a checkbox before you can killbash my PC, and I don't have time for you.

Gold is plentiful, and I carry plenty of lenses on all my characters; Do try not to make me use them early, its less fun for both of us.

Addendum: I never use notells. If you feel like I'm not giving you a chance to properly RP before lensing away and I'm treating you unfairly in this regard, you can hit me up in tells. If you take advantage of my leniency in this regard, and then use the next opportunity where I don't lense away to one-line killbash my PC, My opinion of you as a player will plummet, and you'll never be given another chance.

[CosmicOrderV]

No. I don't like people lensing out because they CANNOT kill me, when I'm trying to talk to them in RP and if they cannot kill me, I'd like to force them to interact a little OR not put themselves into situations (such as hanging out in the Underdark) where they're obviously looking for trouble if they're not going to talk at all.

If you're outgunned? You gotta make RP concessions. I do it when I'm outgunned. It's part of living in a world with other people who have opposing goals. When people refuse to make concessions, they either immediately attack, or they lens. This is not RP.

I can think of only three instances where I've consciously NOT offered a player a way out:

Code: Select all

Surfacers picking on newbies in a grind zone.. trying to demand tribute from every Underdarker they encountered.

"Don't like it? You know where to find me." After they earthquaked fixtures I just paid to have repaired, right in front of me.

And a time where my character went with a crowd, and halberds, looking for an elven sacrifice for the Temple,
to get a friend off of heresy charges in The Temple of Lolth -- but I personally feel that was a proper use of subdual
and walking the prisoner back on foot allowed a lot of rescue opportunity.

Every other time I can think of, my character was either attacked first, being confronted with intent -to- provoke or attack, or the other player was actively buffing themselves in order to get up to 70 AC (or otherwise gain tactical advantage) forcing my hand to avoid defeat ... or refused to comply with demands like: "Give us that invalid writ of passage, it's six years expired and I won't allow you to keep trying to fool people with it."

But a majority of these interactions where I feel I -should- be able to, through a show of force (where actually using the force would have no impact, showing that you -have- force is the intent) ... and say: "Hey. We could screw you up ... but we're trying to put a stop to this behavior that brought us out here." ... people just lens.

No RP. No talking. It's kinda silly to me. And they don't just lens 1 on 1. They lens en masse. And there is only one feat in the entire game to stop them from doing so... ONE epic feat at the end of a chain of other feats.

Even worse? -Ward doesn't work properly. If you activate a lens before the -ward is put down? And you sit there with the menu open? You can STILL get out by "preloading" your lens even 30 seconds after a -ward teleport is put down. And you can do this while you are hit in the face with a throwing axe.

I've personally witnessed this.

Sometimes? People who act in anti-social ways deserve to get killed for the health of the multiplayer environment. Sometimes? Those people need to learn to talk better to avoid it, and compromise with other people rather than being given a pass to act however they want at the low low cost of 3,500 gold.

The worst part is? if you actually get the -ward teleport ability? People OOCly act like you're somehow the villain for preventing them from doing something they naturally do in so many situations: Teleport away from anyone trying to stop them from acting how they want. Even when those individuals are not as innocent as many have presented in this thread.

I am a person who often walks and grinds alone. I move alone through an often hostile town, I frequent grind zones alone. Sometimes I go sailing alone. My character is a terrible duelist, with limited access to buffs, built suboptimally. Doing these things and having these experiences does not change my opinion to the defensive.

I honestly cannot think of an instance of Solo PvP where my character has won... and I -still- think lenses need to be addressed. They'd honestly be -more- balanced than they are now if using one dropped a portal at your feet or they had some kind of timer before you had to reuse them.

This is about the effort and frustration of a large number of people, and the politics involved in organizing said, people ... being countered by ANYONE ... regardless of class and feats and often without counter-play ... for 3,500 gold. Not about its convenience.

Agree with this completely. A lot of the comments here worrying about players who 'care too much about winning' seem more they're written by people who care toouch about losing.

I honestly don't think lenses really need much of a change, but it is amusing to see several comments that go against the very spirit of Arelith as an immersive worlds. Bad things happen to good adventurers. It's not all under our control. Players can absolutely mete out consequences to other players. Eviction? Exile? Assassination? These are all player instigated consequences that effect other players. Sometimes it's not what we wanted for our character, but y'know what? That's okay. Learn to roll with the punches. Make the PvP part of your narrative. What you see is what you get.

[DM Sollers]

Hello.

Do not pre-load lenses. It is used to get around other in-game mechanics such as "-ward teleport" in a way that is unintended. Individuals pre-loading lenses to circumvent other mechanics will be handled on a case-by-case basis. If somebody is suspected of abusing this, please report it to the DMs.

Thank you.

[Durvayas]

Hello.

Do not pre-load lenses. It is used to get around other in-game mechanics such as "-ward teleport" in a way that is unintended. Individuals pre-loading lenses to circumvent other mechanics will be handled on a case-by-case basis. If somebody is suspected of abusing this, please report it to the DMs.

Thank you.

DM ruling duly noted.

[MissEvelyn]

Hello.

Do not pre-load lenses. It is used to get around other in-game mechanics such as "-ward teleport" in a way that is unintended. Individuals pre-loading lenses to circumvent other mechanics will be handled on a case-by-case basis. If somebody is suspected of abusing this, please report it to the DMs.

Thank you.

While I agree that mechanics shouldn't be exploited, more likely than not people aren't aware that pre-loading lenses breaks the -ward teleport from an Epic Abjurer. I myself had no idea prior to reading this thread.

Would/Could there be a way to make the lens *not* work, regardless of when you loaded the lens conversation, when a -ward teleport has been dropped?

[DM Sollers]

Would/Could there be a way to make the lens *not* work, regardless of when you loaded the lens conversation, when a -ward teleport has been dropped?

I am not sure, but it's a good question. I know nothing about coding these things. I'll ask.

[MineTurtle]

Would/Could there be a way to make the lens *not* work, regardless of when you loaded the lens conversation, when a -ward teleport has been dropped?

I am not sure, but it's a good question. I know nothing about coding these things. I'll ask.

Probably just a case of changing when the script checks for the teleport thing, so that it checks during the dialogue rather than when you use the item. [Or alternately, both.]

[Durvayas]

Would/Could there be a way to make the lens *not* work, regardless of when you loaded the lens conversation, when a -ward teleport has been dropped?

I am not sure, but it's a good question. I know nothing about coding these things. I'll ask.

Probably just a case of changing when the script checks for the teleport thing, so that it checks during the dialogue rather than when you use the item. [Or alternately, both.]

Codingwise, you could probably just put a checking hook into the script between the moment a destination is selected, and when it actually sends the PC to a new area, or even better, when the conversation is ended by selection.

[DM Atropos]

For the record, as an actual ruling:

Preloading a lens is absolutely an exploit. If we receive reports of it, they will be acted on. It uses a mechanical glitch to override systems put in place specifically to stop the lens' use, and that is no more okay than any other exploit.

If you are having issues with one line RP, it is far, FAR better to report said issues than to risk getting in trouble yourself. There may be parts of the story you (players in general) don't know, or we may not be aware that Johnny BadGuy is doing this. Do remember, there are about fifteen of us, and over two thousand of you guys. We rely on your help because we cannot be everywhere and see everything. Reports are our "eyes in the dark", so to speak.