Regarding Skaljard pvp counter/writ system update

[dominantdrowess]

Just a reminder:

Arelith is in the hands of the admins for development. It’s their sandbox to decide what goes in and will freely implement changes as they need or feel they need to. When you join, you accept all these changes to the world - it’s part of going forward.

Feedback threads exist for a reason to gauge how changes impact the players. So let’s not debate what is ethetical or not - and lets constructively review changes.

This is the feedback thread though, Spyre.

The whole "GOT YA it's already been live" after people voiced their complaints is a little underhanded.

EXACTLY this. I'm outraged. This is incredibly deceptive.

[TimeAdept]

The whole "GOT YA it's already been live" after people voiced their complaints is a little underhanded.

A little? Incredibly so, considering the comment about it never triggering isn't even true, as posts in this topic have shown. We've been lied to as a playerbase, after the fact, in an attempt to damage control and justify.

[Jack Oat]

if u don liek updoot than don play
ez

[Liareth]

I'm disappointed. This strikes me as a policy that punishes the whole over the few. The severity of the consequence isn't what galls me. It is the precedent. We have had 5 rules that guided play on Arelith for over 15+ years, and I believe they have served this community very well. The rules don't label specifics. Players have to use their best judgement and DMs adjudicate between those lines.

By defining PvP as an unacceptable behavior (i.e. If you have killed 2 or more other characters within 24 hours, then consequences) the incentive is towards a more "safe" and social environment.

This sums my feeling on the matter too. The implementation feels like a repeat of the grind script in that it doesn't actually punish problem players (who won't care much about this, or will game it) - it seems like the change will indiscriminately punish players who prevail in PvP regardless of the context and have the greatest negative impact on players who stay true to their character. Can you imagine the NPCs refusing to interact with a paladin because they killed two drow, or the commander of the guard for killing two crazy criminals, etc?

I think a system like this could work well as part of a larger faction reputation system. Losing reputation by slaying citizens of a settlement, resulting in higher buy and lower sell rates, some merchants refuse you, and eventually leading to guards hostiling you on sight, all within the settlement you've been hounding - and all evadeable with a disguise check, of course! That sounds like a cool system I could get behind. This one, not so much.

[Basementfellow]

If we don't want people killin' each other so much in PvP why is the Subdual system still garbage? Not to derail, but I feel removing the restrictions on it would alleviate butthurt far better than an arbitrary OOC punishment.

[dominantdrowess]

If we don't want people killin' each other so much in PvP why is the Subdual system still garbage? Not to derail, but I feel removing the restrictions on it would alleviate butthurt far better than an arbitrary OOC punishment.

I agree with this, and have asked about ways of doing this a few times.

[Spyre]

I think a system like this could work well as part of a larger faction reputation system. Losing reputation by slaying citizens of a settlement, resulting in higher buy and lower sell rates, some merchants refuse you, and eventually leading to guards hostiling you on sight, all within the settlement you've been hounding - and all evadeable with a disguise check, of course! That sounds like a cool system I could get behind. This one, not so much.

This is similar to my own feelings and thoughts on how this could be managed.

Consequences:

- NPCs making commentary about your character for first offences (Bad mouthing on perception of your character).
- NPC merchants gaining word of it and reducing purchase prices and increase sale prices.
- Guards becoming rough and discouraging your presence.

This could be done with perception scripts too, as the NPCs would need to physically see it, the person and beat a disguise check. Rather than blanketing it across areas where no presence could be at all.

Though the difficult part that I see is tracking (I haven't even looked into the actual coding personally). How does NWN scripting enable accurate tracking of who initiated versus who the victor was. Is there a way to determine the first line of what is perceived as hostile RP? Not something easily done, that I can think of. And, if we look at who first started combat? Who is to say it was a defensive action based on RP?

I think it could be utilized to make NPC presence more meaningful versus the current implementation.

My own two cents, for what it is worth.

[Liareth]

I think a system like this could work well as part of a larger faction reputation system. Losing reputation by slaying citizens of a settlement, resulting in higher buy and lower sell rates, some merchants refuse you, and eventually leading to guards hostiling you on sight, all within the settlement you've been hounding - and all evadeable with a disguise check, of course! That sounds like a cool system I could get behind. This one, not so much.

Though the difficult part that I see is tracking. How does NWN scripting enable accurate tracking of who initiated versus who the victor was. Is there a way to determine the first line of what is perceived as hostile RP? Not something easily done, that I can think of. And, if we look at who first started combat? Who is to say it was a defensive action based on RP?

I think it could be utilized to make NPC presence more meaningful versus the current implementation.

My own two cents, for what it is worth.

Most games tend to track this based on who in the encounter took a hostile action first. It's crude works well enough, usually. Sounds like something that would be trivial to do via script. Maybe some complexity in tracking it for party vs party combat.

[ASuicideMissionForSure]

New mechanics are cool and all, but is this really necessary when there are existing tags that could work just as well for something of the sorts?

Outcasts, pirates, warlocks (past a certain level so they're not bullied out of Cordor straight away), circumvented with bluff.

Edit: Moreover, do they add anything to the game, other than a hinderance when mechanics don't react appropriately to a complex situation? This is a limitation to what is a sandbox.

[Skibbles]

I have to say things are getting a little melodramatic here with the whole social experiment thing. It's not like Little Weasel created the feedback topic herself while rubbing her hands Mr. Burns style waiting for the perfect moment.

It seems like a solid dev choice to test the background mechanics, see if it works, and then monitor it afterward to see how those wily players are going to try and get out of it so you can tweak your code and fix bugs that arise.

It's a video game, and players are going to challenge your coding all the time. It seems like simple logic to take this approach.

[LittleWeasel]

Okay ...

First off: I apologize. When I checked the logs this morning (which I pulled last evening), it did not show me a person that killed more than twice and then had the writ conversation with the mayor. Thus, I went off that information to assume the script did not trigger (disregarding the last 24 hours, because I had not had access to those logs yet).

Going over the logs just now, again - I can find 1 instance where it SHOULD have fired (and seems it did), 1 where it shouldn't (it should NOT have fired, when 1 character kills the same character twice in a row). And the last 24 hours I'll have to look at after the server resets, as they haven't been generated yet.

Let me back off, and start by what the script was intended to do:

The very first and foremost intention of the script was to show that the world is a living, breathing world. That NPCs are living creatures in the world we play in, and react to what is going on around them. It was intended to show, that NPCs show apprehension in the face of much violence.
That was the intention for the world.

The WIDER intention for it was an example we had faced since August. There was one player, who repeatedly grieved, ganked, and PvPed without roleplay, but that player exclusively played in time zones where he had almost zero overlap with DMs. Hence it took over 3 months for that player to be caught, talked to, and eventually removed. That script would at least have slowed the grieving player down, from leveling too much, and doing less damage than he did. As it was, he did a lot of damage. (left sour impressions on new players, given that Skal was the recommended starter area, for example)
So that was another idea/intention behind the script: Slow down those, who slip through the cracks due to time-zone issues.

As to the "quiet implementation"
- When I sent the script life on Tuesday, I had no intention of NOT announcing it. I honestly just forgot about it, since I was doing several things at the same time. When I kept looking at it, it had absolutely zero impact on the general player base (it didn't trigger, save for the one time I had tested it). When I did a quick skim last night, I still didn't see it triggering (again, I am reading the logs manually and do not have an automated count), so I figured "I'll leave it in, for it would have triggered on players like that griever, but not on anyone else, so rather than remove it, I'll finally announce it."

I fully admit, that the order of actions could have been handled better by me, and I apologize for it appearing "underhanded" - that was absolutely NOT my intention. I just really thought "meh, it has no impact anyway, so a delayed announcement isn't going to hurt." (again, an error of my judgement for which I apologize).

LW

[Ork]

I apologize, and fair enough skibbles. I still have concerns about the policy, but my accusation of underhanded was premature and didn't gift you the benefit of the doubt, LittleWeasel. My bad.

[Skibbles]

I apologize, and fair enough skibbles. I still have concerns about the policy, but my accusation of underhanded was premature and didn't gift you the benefit of the doubt, LittleWeasel. My bad.

That's why I love ya, Ork =)

[ASuicideMissionForSure]

Again, is that really necessary? The suspension of belief is necessary in a PW, there are limits that can't be handled, and changes like this doesn't necessarily add to the realism of a "living breathing world". Thousands of monsters and NPCs die every day to adventurers grindin' it out, the unique named bosses like the Stormlord have died enough times even Sean Bean is taken aback. Adventure Guild people have the psychic powers to know when you have killed exactly 10 red spiders (especifically red spiders) in the tunnel between Crypt A to Crypt B.

This, ironically, adds another layer of "game", where the mayor also has the psychic power to know someone killed two people in the last 3 or so days in game, and even though he may be a necromancer or something awful, he forgets that after 3 days. That isn't what I'd call adding to the "living breathing world", it feels to be quite the opposite effect.

And, lastly, I know it's not my place to tell the team how to handle problem players, but I'm aware players can be banned without them being online, and if someone is doing as much damage as implied, skipping the talk to the ban shouldn't have been an issue. The fact his "rampage" lasted 3 months is, honestly, embarrassing, and I feel for the players he was allowed to harrass for that long.

[Rooshi49]

I propose changing the idea of punishing people with lack of systems to instead making guards that are in towns that attack the person who initiated the combat.

Make areas that have a really high density of guards and range it down to areas with no guards whatsoever.
This would mimic the idea in EVE Online where there are territories with low security and areas with high security.

That way the people who want to RP primarily can stay in the secure zones and people who want to be risky can venture out to the lower security zones.

[Nobs]

I propose changing the idea of punishing people with lack of systems to instead making guards that are in towns that attack the person who initiated the combat.

Make areas that have a really high density of guards and range it down to areas with no guards whatsoever.
This would mimic the idea in EVE Online where there are territories with low security and areas with high security.

That way the people who want to RP primarily can stay in the secure zones and people who want to be risky can venture out to the lower security zones.

I like the sound of this.

[sad_zav]

the person that started isn't necessarily in the wrong

a system like this was in place before and it was heavily abused

[Rooshi49]

the person that started isn't necessarily in the wrong

a system like this was in place before and it was heavily abused

Your right, its not perfect. I havn't really had a chance to study how EVE Online did and and elaborate it on it further. But something of this nature I feel could be neat.

[Spyre]

And, lastly, I know it's not my place to tell the team how to handle problem players, but I'm aware players can be banned without them being online, and if someone is doing as much damage as implied, skipping the talk to the ban shouldn't have been an issue. The fact his "rampage" lasted 3 months is, honestly, embarrassing, and I feel for the players he was allowed to harrass for that long.

I'll just address this part:

Player may have been causing mischief for awhile; however, no reports were coming in of the behaviour. When the player was taken care of, as the issues were brought to our attention, there was a removal of them. However, they attempted to circumvent their ban three times - but similar characteristics lead to them being identified and banned again.

I wouldn't say it was allowed for three months, it just went unnoticed due to a lack of reporting. However, the team was prompt to investigate and action the case once the problem was brought to our attention.

What LittleWeasel was implying was that the script would have made it easier for us to handle it and slowed the player down.

[Aodh Lazuli]

What LittleWeasel was implying was that the script would have made it easier for us to handle it and slowed the player down.

In this case, might it not be better to simply use the same data gathered to raise an alarm with the DM team when someone appears to be making a threshold number of kills within a certain amount of time, rather than an automated intervention into the gameplay experience...

This brings the potential issue to the attention of the team without the need for a player to report it, so that it can be observed and then handled in a manner appropriate to the context, with no risk of the script disrupting the experience of the game for people who have, essentially, done absolutely nothing wrong.

[Spyre]

What LittleWeasel was implying was that the script would have made it easier for us to handle it and slowed the player down.

In this case, might it not be better to simply use the same data gathered to raise an alarm with the DM team when someone appears to be making a threshold number of kills within a certain amount of time, rather than an automated intervention into the gameplay experience...

This brings the potential issue to the attention of the team without the need for a player to report it, so that it can be observed and then handled in a manner appropriate to the context, with no risk of the script disrupting the experience of the game for people who have, essentially, done absolutely nothing wrong.

Correct, a notification system could be used and is being considered. I'm not saying that the script was for that sole purpose - I think LittleWeasel did put its use above, and I just added what it would have done as a benefit for us. Which was slowing them down in gaining levels from writs.

[ASuicideMissionForSure]

And, lastly, I know it's not my place to tell the team how to handle problem players, but I'm aware players can be banned without them being online, and if someone is doing as much damage as implied, skipping the talk to the ban shouldn't have been an issue. The fact his "rampage" lasted 3 months is, honestly, embarrassing, and I feel for the players he was allowed to harrass for that long.

I'll just address this part:

Player may have been causing mischief for awhile; however, no reports were coming in of the behaviour. When the player was taken care of, as the issues were brought to our attention, there was a removal of them. However, they attempted to circumvent their ban three times - but similar characteristics lead to them being identified and banned again.

I wouldn't say it was allowed for three months, it just went unnoticed due to a lack of reporting. However, the team was prompt to investigate and action the case once the problem was brought to our attention.

What LittleWeasel was implying was that the script would have made it easier for us to handle it and slowed the player down.

That's fair. The first reply given just wasn't very flattering or informing.

[Nymann]

So I'll admit, I'm not surprised about the PvP numbers on Skal. Its a rough and tumble frontier town, you're dealing with a large number of people new to the server. There is going to be fighting by its very nature.

I've never, in all my time playing, ever seen a corpse depot in a temple look like this.


I'm not sure what the solution is. I'm honestly not sure we should have a solution. Perhaps Skal just needs more DMs specifically to watch over skal and keep things above board. As the place with the most newbies, I feel they're the ones that need the most scrutiny anyways.

As for the people complaining about the UD attacking the surface, and the piracy on the high seas...

The UD attacking the surface is 80% your own fault. Surface parties coming into the UD and harrassing people at our local dungeons, surface parties raiding Andunor and the hub, surface goodies patrolling Sibiyad to try and force all the evil people down into Andunor... Good job! You united the sharps and the table in their aggravation and animosity to surfacer hijinks, and its come full circle to bite you in the booty.
The UD has largely put a moratorium on fighting itself, because the surface made it nescessary.
The scales of power up there have long been tipped in the favor of team good ever since wharftown was destroyed and its population funneled into Andunor. If you're going to use PvP and IC means to force your evil under a rock, expect a whole lot more attacks to come from under those rocks than in the past.

For years, we've been told to change our RP to make the surface fear the denizens of Andunor because we weren't being taken seriously. Now, while I do see more outcasts than I'd like(by sheer numbers, they're a slim majority at this point), I do not see as many tourists in the UD as I used to. I can't say its a bad thing. I recently had a drow on the surface, and for the first time in years the reaction was not "Oh hey, its a drow", it was "Oh shite! That be a drow there! *nervously pulls a weapon*".

If people are running behind the walls of their forts at night because they're worried raiding parties? Thats good RP. Thats normal in FR.
If people are hesitant to use the ships outside of large crews because they're worried about pirates? Thats good RP, thats also normal in FR.

If it really takes frequent raiding to get those who play the surface to take the UD seriously, then I hope we keep up the pace. And there are IC reasons WHY the UD has drastically increased its skirmishing with the surface of late. Its up to you to figure out exactly WHY, and how to convince the dark to ease up through RP.

The other 20% of the 'problem' is dev related.

The uptick in piracy is expected, and unrelated to the UD. There is a pirate faction now. Sencliff has an ample number of pirates to actually do pirate things at this point. It didn't used to. It didn't used to be organized enough to do it. The dearth of piracy in the past was largely a result of the environment being new, the characters being new, and the factions being new.

And again, the whole destroying wharftown and pushing all of team evil into the UD without giving them any real viable alternative...thing.

Not when it reached a point of logging off and stop everything you are doing. Leave server And don't log in when too many is gathered on same server

[Nymann]

So I'll admit, I'm not surprised about the PvP numbers on Skal. Its a rough and tumble frontier town, you're dealing with a large number of people new to the server. There is going to be fighting by its very nature.

I've never, in all my time playing, ever seen a corpse depot in a temple look like this.


I'm not sure what the solution is. I'm honestly not sure we should have a solution. Perhaps Skal just needs more DMs specifically to watch over skal and keep things above board. As the place with the most newbies, I feel they're the ones that need the most scrutiny anyways.

As for the people complaining about the UD attacking the surface, and the piracy on the high seas...

The UD attacking the surface is 80% your own fault. Surface parties coming into the UD and harrassing people at our local dungeons, surface parties raiding Andunor and the hub, surface goodies patrolling Sibiyad to try and force all the evil people down into Andunor... Good job! You united the sharps and the table in their aggravation and animosity to surfacer hijinks, and its come full circle to bite you in the booty.
The UD has largely put a moratorium on fighting itself, because the surface made it nescessary.
The scales of power up there have long been tipped in the favor of team good ever since wharftown was destroyed and its population funneled into Andunor. If you're going to use PvP and IC means to force your evil under a rock, expect a whole lot more attacks to come from under those rocks than in the past.

For years, we've been told to change our RP to make the surface fear the denizens of Andunor because we weren't being taken seriously. Now, while I do see more outcasts than I'd like(by sheer numbers, they're a slim majority at this point), I do not see as many tourists in the UD as I used to. I can't say its a bad thing. I recently had a drow on the surface, and for the first time in years the reaction was not "Oh hey, its a drow", it was "Oh shite! That be a drow there! *nervously pulls a weapon*".

If people are running behind the walls of their forts at night because they're worried raiding parties? Thats good RP. Thats normal in FR.
If people are hesitant to use the ships outside of large crews because they're worried about pirates? Thats good RP, thats also normal in FR.

If it really takes frequent raiding to get those who play the surface to take the UD seriously, then I hope we keep up the pace. And there are IC reasons WHY the UD has drastically increased its skirmishing with the surface of late. Its up to you to figure out exactly WHY, and how to convince the dark to ease up through RP.

The other 20% of the 'problem' is dev related.

The uptick in piracy is expected, and unrelated to the UD. There is a pirate faction now. Sencliff has an ample number of pirates to actually do pirate things at this point. It didn't used to. It didn't used to be organized enough to do it. The dearth of piracy in the past was largely a result of the environment being new, the characters being new, and the factions being new.

And again, the whole destroying wharftown and pushing all of team evil into the UD without giving them any real viable alternative...thing.

Not when it reached a point of logging off and stop everything you are doing. Leave server And don't log in when too many is gathered on same server

Not story telling anymore... it's skull bashing or clamped. Only to be given same choices later same day. By another group. It's not IC fear it's OOC annoyance to literally not be doing anything else the few hours I can actually be online to play with US people

[LittleWeasel]

I'm going to lock this now - the discussions of Pirates / UD / Surface PvP are irrelevant to the script update, and this thread will otherwise just degenerate into a flame fest.

As for OOC pressure / harassment: If a concrete case is happening, please screenshot it and report it, to where we can look into the matter.
As for the PvP Raids, PvP undertakings, etc. please continue referring to the rules (Interaction before PvP, Be Nice rules, etc.) and report where they have been broken. Overall, just be considerate of one another, please.