After fielding this topic all day on behalf of the team, and my own personal feelings, I think I need a break from it. I'll revisit it tomorrow,

_________________

"The world takes and takes, even things that aren't offered. Finally, it gave us something back; I wish he was here to share it with me."

Ah. It's just that it's one thing to move posts and another to outright delete them, BoB. Thanks for letting me know. Yoss- I understand. Your character is beloved by DMs and highly "serious" to the server, but half of that is potentially your seniority and influence. Or simply that your RP is "better than..." When someone doesn't have that behind them, of course they are seen as lesser in the eyes of BoB's explanation. The point you make is powerful. This new system gives little chance other than one excerpt with high standards and stress to "impress" the team enough... And I am not very convinced that disagreements don't come without consequences, especially in light of my own experiences, Righteous's "guide to a streamlined request" and BoB's comments and benevolent dictatorship here.

Well, I'd like to quickly state that I appreciate that the people in here are willing to continue negotiating. That's kind of nice, to see a dialogue happening. Kudos to Pony, Hackums, and Burningoutbright in particular for being the chief people speaking in this thread, though it extends to everyone else posting as well.

There's one more thing that I'd like to ask about, and it's... Perhaps a little bit off of the initial topic, but related to the current discussion.

We're now discussing the standard of quality of RP on Amia. I have nothing against a community standard, and have, in fact, repeatedly stated how such things are necessary. I've always felt this way, and have continued to do so since playing here.

However, I will personally say that, seeing all of the staff posts in this thread and comparing them to my time so far on the server... I'm extremely confused, and rather concerned, for one sole reason: It feels like you guys aren't really unified on this, nor have a firm idea of where the server as a whole is going.

I say "you guys" as in "the DM team as a whole". And before you react to that, let me state two things. One, I love you guys. Actually quite a fan of the DM team here, and I consider all of them that I've talked to to be friends, or at least friendly and good people if I don't know them that well. Two, this is a personal observation that I'm making for a very good reason, and I'll tell you why, real quick:
(edit: it's not real quick, it's a wall of text, but please do me the courtesy to read it. I've read the ones posted so far.)


I've only been on this server since October. So, it's not like I'm a vet' who's out of touch, all I know is current events. Well, a month or so after joining the server, there was this one thing going on that kind of bothered me. Outside of Bendir Dale, there was... uh, to put it bluntly, chaos. A bunch of level 30 mages had gotten together and were casting really high-level spells at each other, including wide-effecting damage-doing AoE spells, summoning 10-foot-tall agents of death to attack property, and other forms of chaos. I found it kind of weird that they were doing all this in full view of the guards, and also found it entirely silly and childish. So, for multiple reasons, I was kind of displeased.

I let a DM know, just to see what they thought of it. One responded, talked to me about it, and ultimately told me in pretty blunt terms that nothing was going to be done about it, for two reasons. One, Bendir Dale's guards don't do anything about anything not happening in their gates. I found this to be a kind of... unusual policy, due to the fact that such things would surely disrupt trade and ultimately harm the town, but, hey, if they said so, I could go for it.

But the key thing that convinced me to leave it be, and ultimately accept it, was the second thing that was said. The DM acknowledged that, yeah, the RP was kind of obstructive to others in the area and ultimately pretty childish. But they weren't going to do anything about it, and they had a very good reason for it. Because it was in the rules. That DM pointed to the rules about roleplaying with others, and how there were very clear parts of it that said, in no uncertain terms, that we did not judge each others' roleplaying ability or style on this server. That others were allowed to RP how they wished, and, as long as they were keeping to the guidelines that made sure they didn't hurt other players' experiences, they were fully in their right to enjoy themselves how they wished. I was told that this was not a server where we judged each others' RP like that, and, quite simply, to just "let them have their fun" if it's not hurting anyone.

I thought about this for a long time, and I actually found it really... Nice, after a bit. I ultimately had a change in viewpoint, and decided that, yeah, they were just having fun and there was no reason for me to be bothered by it. If I wasn't into that style of RP, I could go somewhere else, to another area with other people. It wasn't a big deal. I accepted and embraced this, and ultimately enjoyed interacting with those same people as a result of this mindset.

Now, however, I look at this thread, and you guys seem to be saying the exact opposite. Talking about how there's a need to ensure that everyone's characters are "taken seriously", and that their concept can be "considered viable". How, apparently, DMs watch over people with certain characters to ensure that they're roleplaying in a certain way, or they get a slap on the wrist. It's the exact opposite of what I was told by a totally different DM about what you guys did on this server, and what this server was about. (It also only applies to people trying to make certain kinds of characters, and totally ignores people who, say, just make straight-up level 30 human wizards or fighters. So, it's a pretty terrible "standard", if that's the route you guys are taking.)

I'm terribly confused by this total disconnect between what some of the staff seem to think the server should be like, and what others seem to think. How the server should be run. How we're supposed to act. I mean, by looking at the rules, it says very little about any of this except for recent additions like this, and still has those rules about respecting others' roleplay and the fact that not everyone is as good as you may be, or roleplays the way that you might.

It's like you guys are conflicting with each other as much as you're conflicting with players. And it doesn't help that, for the entirety of this thread, the only staff member to post or engage in this conversation at all is Burningoutbright. I can see other staff members clicking on and reading this thread in the "Who's into this shizz" thing at the bottom of the post, but everyone else is mysteriously and utterly silent. And, while I quite like and respect you, Bright, you keep speaking about "my desire" and how "I can say this", how "I can only speak for myself".

It's good that you make that statement, and that clarification. But that begs the question. What is the policy of the staff, as a whole, about how we should or should not RP? What is the standard we're supposed to meet to be able to play here?

If you guys can't agree on what kind of standard we're expected to live up to, how in the world are we supposed to?

_________________
Currently Playing:

• Krel'xiekiv - Kobold Scout
• Aldriano Alode'tnen - Fabulous Bard

I appreciate you taking point on this thread though, BoB. I remember doing so myself for a few threads in the past and being the only team member addressing the community damn near drove me to tears. I hope you get some team support here.

And yeah, as I said as a preface to that wall of text, I really do appreciate those who have been involved in this dialogue so far. I've had a lot of experience as a moderator/DM on various servers, I know how difficult it is to do so. I really respect you, Bright, for getting so in-depth with us on this. Thank you.

I'd really like to encourage the rest of the team to do the same, or at the very least have an internal dialogue about this, for the reasons stated in my post above. We're all asking the same question at this point, and we all have the same concern. Where are we, as a server, going, and where do we all fit in with it?

_________________
Currently Playing:

• Krel'xiekiv - Kobold Scout
• Aldriano Alode'tnen - Fabulous Bard

I feel timid to ask for anything from Dm's. Just feel's like the deck is stacked against you and you have to jump through crazy hoops to get anything accomplished.

_________________
E'Lyn†riss Emberrose-High Merchan† of the Emerald Rose Company-Retired
E'Van†le Emberrose- Cleric of Helm High Watchman of the Emberwa†ch Knights

I had a fair sized post written up but the tone of this thread makes me feel, as a player, that my opinion does not matter.

Let me just say a few things: I have to echo the sentiments of Yoss, Pony, and some others. The class emulation thing is a bit off-putting. Are people doing some crazy stuff that warranted this? Or are we just doing this just because? There really shouldn't be a need to prevent this sort of thing with a rule change unless things are getting out of hand (like the Amian early years). And there is absolutely no reason grandfathering (within reason; extreme cases should not be grandfathered wholesale) should not be a thing.

I am also like Pony, I avoid the Request forum if I can (save maintenance stuff and a rebuild or two and a spell). Special Race request? Hah. Why bother? The process to do so is so cumbersome that I hardly see the point in putting the energy into doing so. Same with lots of other things. Hell even asking for class emulation seems like a huge pain in the ass. I have spoken with a number of players over the years that have shared these sentiments.

Also, why are people acting like the noble thing is new? That's always been a rule on Amia since I've been here (or so I have thought) >_>

Furthermore I feel compelled to ask you, BoB, directly: You keep saying 'my' and such. Is that to be taken literally or are you just taking possession of these changes/ideas/terms in your posts?


I have to be honest; this comment, which directly correlates to the tone of this thread, sickens me when you consider we are generally beign told 'my way or the highway'. That's really the nicest thing I can say about it, to be honest.

I am at a loss for what direction Amia is heading in, have been for some months now, and it's really depressing.

_________________
Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play:
Salema Nefahri :: A penny for your thots
Zrae'a'stra'fryn :: That which nightmares are made of
Khasir :: From the East a storm is coming

Just a quick post from me here as I am at work.

1.
Question: Have people done some crazy shit or is this just random?
Answer: The first.

2.
Question: Is grandfathering still a thing?
Answer: Yes. Though it does have some limitations.

3.
Question: What are these limitations?
Answer: One is if we notice and recieve a lot of complaints that it is a very special chara played horrifically wrong. And by that I do not mean RP standards. I mean simply fully lore wrong as a full demon running about hugging people and wanting to marry a half-celestial.
Another thing that can cause issues to grandfathering is if someone suddenly digs out an 8 year old chara noone knows, noone ever interacted with, where there is no documentation of in any of the forum or elsewhere and sudenly claims "But back then I played it as an undead/celestial/demon/devil/whathave you." We do try our best to do any search we can, but we also need to ensure people are not abusing the grandfathering too. For everyone's sake.

And now my personal opinion:

Amia allows a lot of freedom still. Like with RDD we give plenty option to choose from.

Things like a special PRC or a special subtype do not require any epic request. They do not require a ton of DC (usually non unless you request something special alongside with it).

All it takes is showing that you actually read up a little on the special thing you want and that it does fit your chara. Is that really such an awful thing to ask?

You only look at the bad side of having to invest some time into writing it. But look at the nice sides too maybe? If it is documented you

1. Won't have issues with a staff change as it is documented you are that. This right now actually is a big issue as many things of old lack documentation.
2. The DM know you are and can ackknowledge it if you do want to use flavor stuff of that special class etc in a plot.

_________________

I will say that if anyone wants their posts from the previous topic that I moved to a clean up forum, I can PM them to those who ask.

_________________

"The world takes and takes, even things that aren't offered. Finally, it gave us something back; I wish he was here to share it with me."

Was it really applicable for PnP classes ? The latest version of the character creation rule dates from eight months ago and did not mention PnP Classes, and the Request FAQ only mentions prior approval of specific abilities.

It might be easier to add a "PnP section" to the forum, covering :
+ PnP spell general guidelines (what/when/how)
+ PnP abilities already approved (PC name / source reference)

If the rules are updated to include prior approval for all PnP classes, maybe add another thread where people would post:
+ PnP class emulation (PC name / source reference material)



If the server intends to implement this notification thing on PnP base and prestige classes, the expectation should also be clarified IMO :

- Hardcore : 'back and forth exchanges with the team, need to justify class intent'
to
- Post n' walk : 'tell us you've read the book, post Player Account and PC name for future tracking' ?

_________________
Nana Anvilmar - Slower Talking, Faster Running
Lester, Jester, Chandler, Alchemister !
Pauris Sennemen de Laelith - Merchant (currently in Suzail, Cormyr)
Metzlitemoctzin - Payit slave, now freed from Silent's sadostyle of plotting !

The later cannot be set and stone, simply because there are so many PnP classes and some are more or less problematic than others.

In most cases it will be a post and explain what you want and why it fits your chara. If it is a class with complicated PnP restrictions or bonuses, we will ask for more detail.

So you may aswell start simple, if we need more, we will just ask.

_________________

Just as a query, would it be feasible to ask Spellcasters to request their PnP spell repertoire (emulated ones, that is) just the same as people would request PnP PrCs? All too often are mages PnP spells thrust upon with a "Is this ok to use?" and it always feels awkward to want to say no to them at times because it feels as if it's a "I'm going to use this, I'm just saying regardless.".

_________________

I got no horse in this race, so some of this is sort of befuddling to me.

But, this kind of interference seems kind of light compared to other servers. Try Ravenloft out.

This is on the stove, as it were. I've already been asking people for these for when I do plot/event stuff!

_________________
Abernathy Hearthart, Salandran Healer (similar to my avatar picture of the lovely Jordan Madley )
Azorgl da Mercenary, Cigar toting Ogre...hero?

The things mentioned are things that have either been "Unwritten rules", which wasn't very helpful at all, or were already being enforced - they are being written now, as of the reminder, and will be in the updated rules and lore and other many helpful threads that are being put together, as well as a future forum organization that will hopefully eliminate the difficulty in finding/referencing/searching these things in the first place.

Actually no. Shifter has no druid requirement lore wise. It is something NWN did as the true prequisites are hard to implement otherwise.

The prequisite to become a shifter is to have any kind of means to alter your shape. That can also be a mage or ranger with polymorph, certain races who have that as a racial feat and so on.

Shapeshifters who focus on abberations and undead are actually making no sense to have a druidic base, on the other hand. Seeing that the druidic oath is in direct conflict with that.

_________________

There is no clean way for this to occur within our current request forum structure and practice. There's nothing quick and simple about requests. The player feels compelled to write a great deal of information and present it in a fitting format, the DM team-- myself included at the time-- uses this opportunity to really bear down on said player's request.




Re-reading this passage and considering PnP spells, I don't see how it could be fair to waive such a large exception to something so patently, obviously outside of NWN. The sheer amount of requests this will induce is overwhelming just to think about. We don't really have any practice differentiating between easy and hard requests. And more importantly, there is nothing overt that warns the player whether or not his PnP emulation request will be something easy or hard to pass. It's entirely based on the immediate judgment of the staff. While the staff may think these requests should be simple to pass, while only very few will be difficult, the playerbase has the exact opposite impression. And because they have this impression, they will be incredibly wary of producing requests. The ultimate outcome will, in my estimation, be that most players would just as soon drop that 'custom' part of their character rather than engage the request system we currently have. That's why players are pushing hard against this. That's why it may seem an overreaction. Because it's not a matter of simply requesting these things and then having them, it's that most players are wrestling with the fact that in order to ever have these things again, they need to wade through our request process. And that because they won't, for many reasons, that they now have a vastly limited scope of potential character freedom.

It's important to realize that no one in this conversation has malicious intentions. Enforcing greater control on the community is undoubtedly done to help increase the quality of RP, the richness of its atmosphere. BoB's cited her desire to help tackle cliques, Amarice states the benefits of documentation. None of these things are bad, but one would have to try very hard to neglect the opportunity to listen, and to say comfortably that the community supports this direction when so many voices address their concerns as they are now.

I have a feeling that the DM's are looking at this defensively, and perhaps even dismissively on account of the players overreacting to something so simple as these rule changes. That's a fair gut reaction, I think. Many players, including myself, are addressing broad, abstract concerns that appear at first to have little immediate relevance to what's being said. However, these sentiments should be a very clear indicator that the community is worried, and unsupportive of the general direction toward greater quality control. The DM team may wish to continue this agenda, but it should recognize that in doing so, it will cut more deeply into the playerbase than previous estimations accounted for. And I know there were prior discussions on these things because I was a part of them myself.

Up until now, I'd never considered the potential, indirect damage that our request system can do. In my time on the staff, I was also a large part of this problem.

Devs are working on this also, and the 'solution' for the PnP spells aspect is, I think at least, pretty simple and elegant. It'll also remove the awkward phase we're at right now, which is sort-of-allowing-everything but also unspokenly-not-allowing-some-stuff while also sometimes-being-not-okay-with-this-thing but that other guy go it so I guess we have to? thing.

Also, pardon my short responses; they're not meant as short in tone, just tired, but I feel like it the concerns do warrant some sort of acknowledgement in the meantime. Anyway, I'll have some stuff to share when it's a bit more polished. Speeding up requests, making it less of a panic attack inducing bramble.

But this is, I feel, the crux of the thing.

You are right, it is hard to judge upfront if this is easy or hard a PrC/special (or homebrew) chara background to emulate and/or pass. But I feel this is why it is important to make this request. because nothing is more frustrating then making your chara, playing it... and then suddenly getting told this is not working in the setting or something else does not fit and they suddenly need to drop or change it.

I understand people feel we try to restrict them. And noone truly loves too many restrictions. But it also is a security for the players. You hackums know, how hard a time we sometimes had to have to tell people something they played cannot be worked in and how noone of us really enjoyed that people were really disappointed and/or heartbroken after, though it was necessary to do it.

This largely is also to spare people of that. Nothing is worse (not even the "looming DM who may have issues with the request") than to be told "sorry you cannot keep playing your chara like you have". And you also know that in the past we sometimes HAD to do it because it simply could not fit.

_________________

Hrm. That's probably something that requires careful consideration. At first, it's honestly a very compelling reason for doing this. There is nothing worse than being told that the character doesn't fit in the setting-- and that at least having these requests would spare them that.

Unless players were concerned that years later, the staff would make changes to policy that would override previous requests, or push them into uncomfortable compromises that jeopardize the player's image and enjoyment of the concept. If there's insufficient trust, the player isn't going to make the request-- and more importantly, isn't going to seek customization at all for fear of the exact same thing that these requests are trying to prevent from happening.

Then I also ask myself, why would the staff be pulling characters in the first place? There are things that are lore-breaking, and things that are lore-improbable. But is this line fairly assessed, and is the player given benefit of the doubt? A tiefling who has a propensity for hugging? Lore-improbable, but not breaking, either. Evil elven PC's? Lore-improbable, but not lore-breaking.

In the end, it feels like the most compelling justification for exerting these controls is that you're going to exert these controls anyway, and that the best way to not receive the short end of the stick is to just roll with it, and to submit the requests. I think that's dangerous circular logic.

Teams will change, and so will rules with them, so I don't think it's very useful to dwell overly long on how things may be different a few years from now. I pick on that mostly because I've seen it mentioned a few times, and in my opinion it's not a constructive point to debate much. Things are different from how they were a few years ago; some good, some bad, some whatever. Some things I'd like to change back, or change again to something new. Best we can all do is to keep modulating, not be scared to try new things, keep changing it if it turns out to be wrong or not work, and keep looking for better ways of doing as the core motivating reason.

We can debate the changes themselves, but worry over changes that might happen in the far-flung? Energy better put elsewhere, I think.

I am not disregarding or denying that there are advantages to the DMs conducting such quality control in regard to the characters of the playerbase. Of course there are. There are reasons why there are players who prefer servers where such quality control is higher.

My opinion remains that we should devote ourselves tenaciously to encourage higher quality roleplay through inspiration and enthusiasm through example. Instead of breeding a daunting atmosphere where players are afraid to try their hand at something they do not have a full grasp on, because they fear that their fellow players and DMs will crack down on them. This is very much true for drow roleplay, for example.

With the drow academy I basically said, that if you know almost nothing about drow but the bare minimal basics (such as general naughtiness or dark skin, white hair), that is fully alright. Do not worry about, as we will be welcoming and understanding of it. Through roleplay, we will teach you the ropes without overburdening you, so you feel comfortable of having a grasp on the lore and being able to truly delve into the world.

Could this be established through making drow requestable? Of course. But I can tell you that three awesome new Underdark players would never have dared to join in the fun, and the Underdark would not have seen the initial activity it did. Will it mean there will happen to be players with characters who go outright crazy on us, whose rp might make it difficult for some of those in the UD to immerse themselves? Sure. But that is so rare, and such small of a problem, which we really do not need to worry about. And if you provide the players with an enjoyable inspiration they often will love to take that chance.

This judgment of other players will only increase the more we go into quality control. We are after all saying that it is fully alright to expect and demand members of the community to not make mistakes to the degree we set. That will always be in place, but the more we move into the direction of quality control, the more often we will see that judging occur. Again, in my opinion, we should not move in that direction. The community will take their pointers from the DMs, and imo the DMs should hence encourage quality roleplay through plots, events, player-events and the like – not through judging and enforcing their opinion on quality roleplay.

This in my opinion should also be the mentality on the request forum. Less judgment and daunting standards, more encouragement.

It is also a reality DMs do not always know the rules, and they at times impulsively enforce their opinion. Many players are timid and uncertain when going out on a limb and trying their best in roleplaying. Especially the newer players (but clearly many of the old) are uneasy of trying to new or more difficult types of roleplay or writing requests. The more quality control we have and the higher our standards, the less likely it is they will dare to tackle something. That cuts down creativity, and will of course reduce our chance to see some fantastic characters that stun us with a creative style.

Do I teach the bardsong or flight to other players? No. I put hours of roleplay into that before, and had my rp teaching ripped apart on the request forum by a DM when someone used the screenies of my teaching those. Anything that requires a request I generally do not teach. I feel/felt 1) I really can not help those players, and they need someone who is better at roleplay than me. 2) I really felt like I sucked at roleplay after that. And I have been around this server for a long time and am far less timid when it comes to defending my choices to the DMs.

Do I teach sacraficial roleplay to drow anymore? No. When the player I taught it to was cracked down for exceedingly graphic gore by a DM, I felt fully at fault of getting them in the situation. I honestly do not feel it exceeded good taste, but it is subjective and the way the DM handled it just raised the flag for me "here be dragons. Do something else." This is one of the several encounters with the DMs I had in regards to the academy that currently make me feel uncomfortable at continuing it. Which sucks, as it went incredibly well and I am letting down a lot of players who enjoyed it and want to continue to enjoy it.

Am I going to be requesting a special character down the road? No. Am I going to play any of my special characters from the olden days like my dm-approved yuan-ti, or my grandfathered devil? No. That is a reflection of how uncomfortable I am to try my hand at it, because they are now fair-game to be altered.

Do I feel this has improved my rp? No. Do I feel encouraged to dare new things? No. It just means I will be less likely to try to aspire to "new heights", enter "new waters", and stay in my slowly decreasing zone of comfort.

_________________
Abernathy Hearthart, Salandran Healer (similar to my avatar picture of the lovely Jordan Madley )
Azorgl da Mercenary, Cigar toting Ogre...hero?

Good post, Pony.

I'm just going to quote this for emphasis, as an echo of something I was recently discussing with someone. Requests are in need of an overhaul.

I do not look back fondly upon my tenure as a DM and handling requests. There are some that I tackled and did well, but most were executed with judgment and daunting standards. Or just awful responses that did little to encourage further exploration. It took a long time but I finally came to the conclusion that it was harmful and then changed my tune there, but by that time everything else was falling apart.

Nowadays there are a lot of times where I skim the requests and I see people struggling with the concept or the ideas and I am compelled to offer suggestions to the player to help, but forum rules prevent me from doing so.

In that thread, at least. Don't let it discourage you from PMing them, though!

My fear in that is that the team will detect my handiwork, because under a little bit of scrutiny it bears certain hallmarks.

I mean, I don't see anything wrong with helping someone out through the PMs. Whether DMs detect the handiwork or not. If it's something like helping someone who doesn't know much about lore, or just is having a difficult time writing up a proper request, there shouldn't be any issue. For lore, it's as easy as linking some source material relating to what they are requesting. Even helping to correct something if they made a mistake on the lore in question. Similarly, you can ask some questions that even the DMs might ask if it isn't very up to snuff, and help mold out a good request.

If DMs have issue with stuff like that, then... I actually don't really know what to think with that. LOL. But I don't imagine there would be.

_________________

And how does it matter if we detect it? We never forbade people to help other players. I help players too if they ask me to and I am pretty sure some of my "hallmarks" are easy detected aswell.

The reason why players are not to post (uninvited) in other peoples requests is because that got very much out of hand back then. If you offer your help in a PM and it is accepted there is nothing wrong with it.

Additionally, if people ask for help in their request and explicidly say other players are free to post there, anyone can post there and help too. It is up to the player who makes the request if they want only the staff to reply or others too. Which I personally feel, is only fair.

_________________

Well, if it doesn't bother you, that's good because I just gave someone a little direction yesterday!

Nope, course not. I always like it if people who are a bit uncertain get a helping hand through the maze that D&D can be.

And by the way, some people already do this, but here as an official offer, if someone is uncertain about a request or some lore aspects or simply wants a pre-read or second opinion on a request, feel free to PM me.

_________________

(The "you" in the following post is not in reference to anyone in particular. It applies to the reader, whether they're a DM or not, and arguably moreso if they aren't.)

The responsibility of a DM should be to promote an enjoyable and immersive environment. This is my mantra when I run games, and this is what I endorse when I play in other people's games. I have run quite a few settings at this point, from small tabletop settings to live action role playing games, and I've cultivated that mantra from my successes and failures.

I say enjoyable because that's got to be the whole point of this endeavor. People play games because they want to have fun. People have fun in a medley of ways, and understanding what makes a game fun for each player is very important. In order to make a game enjoyable for your players, you have to be willing to tailor the game to their wants.

Some people will want a game with a great many rules. Some people will want a game with none. Some people will want a ridiculous and funny setting. Some people will want a very serious tone. Some people will want multiple aspects in varying degrees. In many situations you will find that your players don't agree with each other on what makes a game fun. Balancing these gets exponentially more difficult the more players are involved.

Now you have a few choices, and here are a few more common ones; run an individual game for each player, choose a particular style that accommodates one or some of them and disregard the others, or find a way to compromise so that aspects of each players' preference are illustrated in the setting to varying degrees. You probably don't want to, nor have time to, do the first one. The second option can work, depending on how many people are involved, and how desperate the players are to have some semblance of fun. But I've found the third option to be the best way to make all of your players as happy as you can feasibly accommodate.

Compromise is fostered entirely by communication, but it also requires a firm, objective perspective. As a DM, you're responsible for making sure that the game actually happens. You're not empowered because you're DM. You're empowered because your players have decided that you are the most likely candidate among them to provide an enjoyable, immersive game. Now you're responsible for making it happen.

The only way you're going to do that is by making sure that your players come to an agreement as to what the terms of the setting will be. For example (but far from a comprehensive list)... Roll for stats, or point buy? High or low magic? Evil or good-aligned party? More combat or more diplomacy? High RP at the table or are we just horsing around with goofball characters?

In most small tabletop groups all of this is pretty well covered between friends, and far in advance. But that's really not the case once your group gets over a certain size. I've been involved in tabletop D&D games involving 30+ people sitting at multiple tables running different parties in the same setting, with multiple DMs. I've been involved in LARPS with 50+ people, some with multiple different groups of 50+ people in coterminous settings, with dozens of storytellers. I can tell you for certain that well before it gets to the double digits of participants, personal liberties are curtailed across the board.

It happens all the time. As the number of players rises, the (in a manner of speaking) lowest common denominator of what each participant finds 'fun' keeps getting closer and closer to baseline. And that baseline is the only thing a DM can be sure each player has in common: a desire to play in the setting. In this case, the setting is Faerun. The players are here, in NWN, to play in this particular Faerun setting.

This brings me to the other responsibility of a DM: immersion. Players don't just want to know about an enjoyable game, they want to dive into it. They want to surround themselves with it, and put aside whatever's going on outside of that game. Immersion is the tool by which a DM provides the enjoyment their players want. If finding the scope of what your players find fun is taking a large subject and reducing it, immersion is the opposite process. You take that thing that your players are looking for and you blow it up as big as you can; as big as life.

Faerun is a well-established setting (unfortunately more in quantity than in consistency), and here a great deal of the work is already done. You try to make room for as much of your players' unique ideals as you can within that framework by listening to their wants and studying that framework as hard as you can (and you hope they recognize how hard you're working to do that). You do this by providing consistency.

To make a game setting consistent means that you have to provide limitations and change those limits only when the entire player base's enjoyment requires it. These limitations are not in place for the purpose of limiting player creativity - that is an unfortunate side effect of trying to fulfill so many different ideals of what is fun. The limitations are in place to provide meaning by virtue of comparison.

Nothing by itself in a game setting has any meaning without the context, without contrast. If you have millions of gold pieces, it means nothing if it is easy to become a millionaire. If you have wealth and it is difficult to become wealthy, then that wealth has meaning (regardless of whether or not individual characters recognize it). If your character is self-described as pious, wise and benevolent, it means nothing if you are not these things by objective perspective (you demonstrate faith, wisdom and peace). If you are a supposed warmonger and you have no capacity to win a brawl, etc etc.

I'm not advising where these limitations should be set: that's the DMs' responsibility to carefully deliberate and maintain. And if the player base disagrees with those limitations then they will be debated (or in a worst case scenario, even ignored). The ultimate responsibility lies with the individuals that the player base has empowered to run their game, and they must be held accountable for providing a setting that is both consistent and immersive.

So how does all that crap I just said relate here?

Personally, I can see the merits of many of the arguments listed above, and I don't necessarily see them as being on binary sides. I think that the DMs have a responsibility to provide a setting with rules that are consistent and fair, and that the players have a responsibility to abide by those rules. I think it is healthy that the rules are being laid down since in the past it was painfully amorphous and easy to incite reprimand, but I also agree that we should be cautious as to what those rules say because so much is borne from personal opinion about the setting and not cited source (to this day in games that I've run I have learned something new nearly every single session, from base rules to setting lore, and I've been playing for over a decade - it is humbling but also fulfilling if you let it be). I think we should trust the DMs to make judgment calls as to what this particular setting allows if multiple sources cite differently, but I also think they should make it perfectly clear what those setting changes are and work very closely with players to help them develop something as close to their dream as they can get.

Most importantly, I advocate any option that facilitates broad and open communication between players and DMs and the fostering of a general environment of understanding that:

Yes, the players are frustrated with limitations upon creativity...

...BUT...

...the DMs have a responsibility to all of the players that the setting be as fair and consistent as possible.

And they don't get paid for this shit.

_________________
Mathus, Void Apostle of the New Moon

I'd say Pony and Hackums are spot on. I also agree with VitalTouch, even if I think s/he is overestimating shifter power just a tad. Most level 30 characters have access to powers that are quite lore-implausible. For example, the populist leader of the ragged West Cordor can duel a dragon and win, and his second is a partially-undead monster of a man (I say it with love!). An ogre mercenary is utterly mundane in comparison, as is the odd shaman or bladesinger.

Personally, I've never made a request, other than asking a DM to swap a character's head or dragon heritage, that sort of thing. I'm not sure if I'll be making one anytime soon either. Part of it is the myriad negative stories I've heard from people who have been shot down in the request forum... and another part is that it sometimes feels like my style of RP isn't all that welcome in any case. In the four years I've played on this server (and in fairness, it's been a very on again off again kind of thing) I've earned a grand total of eight Dream Coins. Half of those came from events where I was pretty much a background character. The rest were more or less entirely gained while in the company of more "in-group" players. The most incongruous was probably when Aven and Circe swung by the clean-up of Cordor Central and got coined after about five minutes of tossing debris into the water.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciated the coin, but it very much highlighted the disparity to me.

_________________
Currently playing:
Aven Brinyflask
Safaya Dalai
Riyit
Chsera Hile

(Credits to Raua for the sprite, sauce -here-.)

This I am agreeable to. However, older characters with long and extensive histories should continue to be grandfathered.

_________________

~Sharess on AmiaWiki~
Priestess, politician, prostitute
"[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer Bolt
AmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)

_________________
Abernathy Hearthart, Salandran Healer (similar to my avatar picture of the lovely Jordan Madley )
Azorgl da Mercenary, Cigar toting Ogre...hero?

-- Totally Not Constructive--

_________________
"The Skin is your costume, The Stage is The Enviroment!"

There's a difference there, though. You came down on a player who wasn't roleplaying properly AFTER approving the character. This is about requests, which have the potential to kill a character in the womb, so to speak. There is nothing stopping DMs from coming down on characters who are being disruptive in-game, an ogrillion claiming to be a bladesinger can be reprimanded just as easily as someone who is pretending to be the son of Elminster. I'd rather keep that as the default way of doing things, as opposed to forcing people to go through a request system that, frankly, intimidates and discourages players.

_________________
Currently playing:
Aven Brinyflask
Safaya Dalai
Riyit
Chsera Hile

(Credits to Raua for the sprite, sauce -here-.)

I am not sure where this discussion now suddenly is coming from.

We never said we pull all grandfathered charas (which are not even that many these days as grandfathered means they really are several years old) if they are known to be old charas and have been played and are not something horrid like an old vampire who suddenly sparkles in the sun.

_________________

Then what's causing this? I mean, unless things happened very recently, I'm not aware of any such extreme character cases that would warrant this level of caution. The language seems to indicate this is something that has been going on for a while, but my own experience just doesn't match with that.

That I understand, but the Team are saying about toning down characters backgrounds that have roleplayed here for years and have been under the DM's eyes. Its wrong. I really think that the Team are bang out of order and not aligning themselves with the playerbase. Alienating talent in both roleplayers and developers, Not to mention new roleplayers getting to grips with lore that have a concept in mind, but what if it isnt acceptable to DM's standards?

Theres a difference between managing expectations in characters and lore and then jumping through a member of the DM teams roleplay expectations which no doubt is different on perspective and scrutinizing players through server rules that make no sense?

_________________
"The Skin is your costume, The Stage is The Enviroment!"

We just noticed over a few months that it happened quite regulary that we spotted a background with unapproved nobility, homebrew countries/planes, PrC or races and so on.

So we figured it would be good to make it clear and easy to find in case it was not.

There was not a "this chara is the key trigger" for the post. It just summed up and we thought it a good thing to do for the clearity many people asked for.

It could have been last month or next month too.

_________________

Finally going ahead and adding my two cents on all of this.

After reading through everything and keeping an eye on the thread, I have to be blunt and say that people are honestly blowing this up far more than it should be. Like, we're talking Michael Bay levels of blowing up. From what I can tell, this whole thing is generally about simply being able to make sure players don't make stupid characters that conflict with lore, mechanics, and otherwise. It's also so there can be proper documentation for a character, that DMs can properly use. I personally see this as a good thing, given the fact that DMs can take that information and develop RP and events/plots with it in mind. Maybe not player specific all the time, but it adds that potential. Something players severely seem to fail to realize is that, while DMs are what they are and can even portray in-game gods, they are human in real life. They are NOT omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent. They can't see every little thing that you do. They don't automatically know your character's backstory or similar.

As a whole, servers also evolve. I personally think it's a VERY good thing that the server has developed to this point from what it used to be, as it serves as a far more stable ROLEPLAY server. That's exactly what it is, too. It's a roleplay server. Not a social server where people can feel free to do what they will. In the sake of NWN and D&D in general, roleplay itself has general restrictions for a reason. If this server kept all that it used to have, it wouldn't even be Forgotten Realms anymore. From my own point of view, the server would become something more like Planescape/Sigil than anything else, but somehow be on the prime material plane at the same time. I'm not saying that people should lose their grandfathered progress, however. I will admit it's a bit disconcerting to note that there are some really over-the-top characters that have been around a long time, that are also not even permitted to be played anymore (and for good reason). But I don't think they should be losing those characters, and I don't even believe that's the case with this.

Overall, Amia even seems to be the last real haven for RP on NWN at this point. There are tons of players on here that all have their own RP style, but even with an RP style, there are still limitations that need to be had. But for this case, these really aren't bad limitations. They only seek to improve RP on many levels, for both DMs and players alike. It's as simple as writing up a quick bio for your character, if you choose to make something different, to tell the DM's "Hey. This is what I'd like to do and it can easily be represented with these classes. Cool? Cool." You wanna play a Spellsword? Can easily be represented by Figher/Wizard. Wanna play an Arcane Trickster? Rogue/Wizard(or Sorcerer). And so on.

I think a lot of why this has blown up so much is due to a lack of understanding from the players. Perhaps misunderstanding the way something was written or likewise. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, too. I dunno. But that's how I see it. So people should just take a moment, take a breath, and think about it a bit more logically. Or just simply listen to what some of the DMs have to say in the matter, as a number of things that are being argued have already been clarified by DMs to be false information.

TL;DR: This thread has blown up more than a Michael Bay movie. Calm down and listen to what is being said. You might understand situations a lot more.

Also, apologies if this got ranty/hostile sounding. I can assure you I'm calm and some of those things were even meant to be in a more light-hearted tone.

Thanks for taking the time to read this message.

EDIT: Lost my train of thought at one point and forgot a more specific point. In regards to actually restricting some things with new characters, that's a perfectly valid point. Especially with stuff where people might play characters with completely wrong content to the lore or otherwise. Same can be said for people who might seek to make characters that are way off-base with the way they RP their stats. Like a 6 Charisma character that somehow is a natural leader, like a General or Mayor. Stuff like that.

_________________

I think we've got plenty of reason to be upset. And that's putting it very mildly.

I partly agree with that sentiment in that quality roleplaying should be encouraged.

But I also feel if you start down a new avenue you need to learn to crawl before you walk which means that if you make a drow for the first time it's not a good idea to start out as a matron mother of your own new house/ high priestess of Lloth/ monkey gripping greataxe wielding albino drow. It's probably safer to make a less conspicuous drow first, mingle with more experienced drow players and learn more about drow and their lore while enjoying rp and then, when you get the gist of it and want something else submit a request. By that time you likely know the possibilities as well as what you want better.



Why would these need to be reprimanded? A character can claim in game whatever they wish and characters can respond to that. The moment the son of Elminster gets hit by divination magic to ferret out the truth however, the ooc information given by the player should be correct. If not, then an ooc reprimand is coming.



No plans to that end are being considered. I'd be firmly against it as it adds a lot of flavour to the server imho.



Maybe I can answer your previous concern with the above example you kindly provided. Please mind, I exaggerate.

Imagine you request a CE red dragon who intends to terrorize Amia in Tiamats name, rebuild Wyrmhold and demands maidens in sacrifice weekly. The dragon is in line with what one can expect of a red and the request is accepted.
You play your dragon and terrorize Amia for two months before your red dragon falls in love with the local high priest of Eilistrae and decides to change his wicked ways and to become CG, abandoning Tiamat for Eilistrae in the process, build a monumental garden for moonlit dancing and become father five half drow, half red dragons with your lover.

At that point you may hear a warning cough behind you because you in no way play the dragon as you requested. Evolution, yes. 180 degree hairpin turns, please don't. If you persist to play the goody red dragon then yes, your character may be pulled in the end.

And I think that is the only reason why a dragon/celestial/half dragon/ half celestial/ fey would ever be pulled (That's a personal opinion)

_________________
Characters played:

Harold Kendry (Illusionist) -> see avatar
Elloanore (Travelling bard)

Whoa, Hold on a minute, Are you insinuating that the server was previously lacking in its immersion in roleplay? Because I would seriously disagree with that, The story of the Thayvian Artefacts, How Tarkuul developed amongst other places is in fact one of the most amazing stories I have ever read. Leading that was a Lich and looking back through archives, (Yes I do agree with you Terallis that there are some characters with lore gaps) but regardless, The roleplay on this server has always been good, for you to say its "Developed" is utter rubbish.

Over the top characters? I dont quite understand your comment, If you would care to elaborate that.

Considering yourself as a developer, You support the Toning down of older characters?

_________________
"The Skin is your costume, The Stage is The Enviroment!"

_________________

As I'd said before: this might seem an overreaction, but it is more now a confrontation and expression of severe discomfort for the broader, more abstract direction which has/will be leading the staff to enact similar decisions as this.

There's no real reason people should be getting upset about the individual points presented. But there is ample reason to express broad-scale concerns. Concerns which have received fairly poor responses.

I will one more time point out that this has nothing to do with taking away peoples old grandfathered charas, or discriminating or "toning down" old characters.

I will pull out of this topic for a while now, as I feel it goes in circles and that too many hard feelings are starting to fester between people instead of going anywhere helpful or constructive.

_________________

This. I know it's natural to get anxious when you feel the character you invested so much in is being threatened, I'd feel the same.

But again, we as the DM team have no plans to pull old characters for having pnp classes/ being special races/ everything else except for the exception in my previous post and that happens very rarely (thankfully.)

We'd like to see a request for a new character with a pnp class though or a character that starts to level into it so we can align special abilities with NWN mechanics if need be and balance and can see how you'd play the new class. So we are all on the same page.

_________________
Characters played:

Harold Kendry (Illusionist) -> see avatar
Elloanore (Travelling bard)