AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

Last edited by TormakSaber on Fri, Dec 23 2016, 6:14 AM, edited 1 time in total.

You need wings to fly - there's no "jumping" using Flight.

PCs need to have wings in their natural form to be approved for the flight widget. Otherwise anyone could just request Flight on the grounds of being able to magically fly.

TormakSaber wrote:

You need wings to fly

no. there are other ways you can get the flight widget w/o wings. i was wondering what they were in case i have eligible characters.

Commie wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

You need wings to fly

no. there are other ways you can get the flight widget w/o wings. i was wondering what they were in case i have eligible characters.

What? No there's not. you need wings to be approved. That's the entire discriminator. Otherwise every wizard nd sorceror and most druids and clerics are by default eligible for Flight and Shadow Jump due to spells.

TormakSaber wrote:

Commie wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

You need wings to fly

no. there are other ways you can get the flight widget w/o wings. i was wondering what they were in case i have eligible characters.

What? No there's not. you need wings to be approved. That's the entire discriminator. Otherwise every wizard nd sorceror and most druids and clerics are by default eligible for Flight and Shadow Jump due to spells.

no, I saw it today. no wings.

i wanted to know since my wizard has magical flight if I could get the widget too.

The DMs need to clarify if flight is now able to be requested by every character capable of magical flight without wings then, because basically half the classes in game have it built in, along with a bevy of races that were never allowed to do it before due to being wingless, i.e. levitating Drow, psionic Duergar, etc.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=87042&p=1408632&hilit=+Flight+request#p1408632

A request for flight denied to a winged character because "you'd need to fly magically."

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=82718&p=1378771&hilit=+Flight+request#p1378771

Flight denied to a flight capable magical character, even capable of taking winged forms capable of flight.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=84682&hilit=+Flight+request

flight denied of magical, and for no-wings-in-natural-form.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=83779&p=1367578&hilit=+Flight+request#p1367578

Wingless magical flight ability denied.

To go back further gets pretty far back in the years, but it's been a trend for as long as I can remember: You Must Be This Wingly To Fly.

You need wings to fly. No exceptions.

There was one mistake there made (because that flight was even requested was missed in the long thread) and that was retconned weeks ago and already told. Was that not removed? I was told it was.

Amarice-Elaraliel wrote:

You need wings to fly. No exceptions.

There was one mistake there made (because that flight was even requested was missed in the long thread) and that was retconned weeks ago and already told. Was that not removed? I was told it was.

pm sent

Thanks, I thought I was going crazy for a moment.

What you can receive with good explanation and such is the magical "flight" by the hovering pheno.

So you can levitate magically, but not fly by the means of flight widget.

So you can't levitate over a chasm? Over a pool in a dungeon? It seems a bit weird. Then again, we could then lmost just hand out fly widgets to wizards then... So I'd understand if it wasn't allowed.

robbi320 wrote:

So you can't levitate over a chasm? Over a pool in a dungeon?

You can use flight spells (which are PnP spells) in such a manner or polymorphs or shapeshifts in DM plots and the DM can move you over then.

But yea, the main reason, as you said, is that there is always some excuse. At that point every sorcerer, wizard, druid, shifter, cleric to an extend, would get the widget.

I encourage you all to be creative in DM plots though! Withing reason, PnP stuff is usually quite accepted.

Okay.

Main reason for me is the lack of creativity and knowledge of PnP spells. That's actually the reason I've been playing a lot of Assassins. I'm starting to understand the PnP spells for them. They only have like 20. Better than the... thousands of sorc/wizzy spells. BG is similar for me, but anything that has any more spells makes me read too much. And I really love reading. Just not the dry information for spells.

Do I need to ask permission at all in a DM event? Or just from the DM?

During a DM event, the DM is the only one permission is required from for the usage of pnp spells.

Does that still also extend to if a DM is just hanging around watching RP, too? Like when a DM is obviously there but not running an event, I've asked them in the past to do something PnP and they gave the go-ahead.

Amarice-Elaraliel wrote:

You need wings to fly. No exceptions.

There was one mistake there made (because that flight was even requested was missed in the long thread) and that was retconned weeks ago and already told. Was that not removed? I was told it was.

I think he's talking about Dragons that have "other methods of flight" as was explained to me. I have no idea what these methods are, but... I was told by a DM they can fly by alternate methods.

That Guy wrote:

Amarice-Elaraliel wrote:

You need wings to fly. No exceptions.

There was one mistake there made (because that flight was even requested was missed in the long thread) and that was retconned weeks ago and already told. Was that not removed? I was told it was.

I think he's talking about Dragons that have "other methods of flight" as was explained to me. I have no idea what these methods are, but... I was told by a DM they can fly by alternate methods.

Negative. Most of these alternative ways require the use of heavy magic or some other draconic ability that a half would have at the required strength.

Ok, was informed that things have been retconned, even as late as the past 24 hours so.... what I knew is now
inaccurate.

Maverick00053 wrote:

That Guy wrote:

Amarice-Elaraliel wrote:

You need wings to fly. No exceptions.

There was one mistake there made (because that flight was even requested was missed in the long thread) and that was retconned weeks ago and already told. Was that not removed? I was told it was.

I think he's talking about Dragons that have "other methods of flight" as was explained to me. I have no idea what these methods are, but... I was told by a DM they can fly by alternate methods.

Negative. Most of these alternative ways require the use of heavy magic or some other draconic ability that a half would have at the required strength.

Umm... wait.. are you saying they -can- fly then?

A full dragon, yes.

A full dracolich can fly even with technically non function wings (bones)

A lung dragon can fly without wings.

Dragons are pure magical beings, they can do a lot of stuff.

A dragon disciple or a dragon-mix offspring, can not, unless they have wings that are mechanically capable of flight. If their wings are 1. bone/rotten mess 2. torn 3. far too small 4. far too big they cannot. if the wings are lacking, they cannot.

TormakSaber wrote:

every wizard nd sorceror and most druids and clerics are by default eligible for Flight and Shadow Jump due to spells.

But is that necessarily a bad thing?

It is, until we make a "jump" maneuver or player tool and address a few problem dungeons where the tilesets are screwed up by vertical movement. The tilesets should be addressed anyway because we have new and better looking ones, and also enemies sometimes get shoved up there, well out of harm's way to anything melee.

One DC item modifications:
How much RP is neccessary? Let's say all I would like to do is my my scythe look more evil (color 5), or have punch daggers or claws, do I also have to provide RP why it looks different? It's just an appearance change, so I'm not sure. You can't really bring it to a smith and say "Hey, can you just smelt my kamas and make claws out of it?"...

Dunecat wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

every wizard nd sorceror and most druids and clerics are by default eligible for Flight and Shadow Jump due to spells.

But is that necessarily a bad thing?

Yes, absolutely. It's just-barely-allowed exploit as it is, and comes with heavy rules regulations. NWN just isnt designed to be functional with an at will point to point teleport.

What are the credentials for "legendary reputation" such that a DC request can be made with the reason of "I have legendary reputation"?

TormakSaber wrote:

What are the credentials for "legendary reputation" such that a DC request can be made with the reason of "I have legendary reputation"?

For that, you have to be dead.
You won't know until centuries after the death; if people are still talking about that person, they had a legendary reputation.

Other than that, if you're not Drizz't, no one cares

I figure it's like pornography: you know it when you see it. To that end, there's no set credential, only determination after something is requested off of it. I mean if we can get a guideline for ability scores, we probably don't have one for more abstract things like legendary status. I recall the title of "archmage" being a hard enough to convince DMs of and that's a few rungs lower than legend I'd wager.

Reminds me as it's somewhat related. By past opinions of some DMs, the whole rule of "no statues of living PCs" is defunct right? I know we've had a few requests for plc statues of PCs, but in our current climate it seems like a really arbitrary OoC rule for IC happenings.

To stop clouding IC threads.

viewtopic.php?f=134&t=75015&start=200

TormakSaber wrote:

MazeOfThorns wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

//This is a public event witnessed by NPCs and should be posted so DMs can properly react. There is nothing wrong with posting a public happening, a public event, and is actually what this entire topic is for.

Moreover this is an IC posting of an IC happening and isn't being taken OOC. Until you posted, that is.

//I took it as OOC since... you know... the "//" was at the beginning. I'm not sure what to make of it now. Maybe the poster you're defending can redo it so it's IC? So it's not so confusing?

// Why are 5 IC screenshots in a public area visible by tons of PCs in a public road crossing an OOC post?

From past experience, it's always been frowned upon when people just straight up copy-paste chat logs and the like to explain an IC event. I understand this particular instance might have been different because they're screenshots, but they were supplemented by only OOC comments, which is confusing it all. Is there any actual rule on posting logs (question unrelated to this instance) to show an IC event? Would this particular instance be seen as OOC? Would this be frowned upon? Or can we just expect to stay IC and move on?

An honest question, for DMs who can clear this up before people continue with this argument. Thanks for your time.

I was specifically told by a previous dm [I believe it was Burning out Bright at the time] that I was not allowed to post screen shots of something a character did ic in the manner to prove they did it on the forums.

The reason I was given for this was that no pc should have 100% factual proof of what your pc says ig about other pc's. By posting snap shot of the actual going on it is seen as 100% proof. I was told that the exceptions were for things where DM's needed proof of something and that would be handled via forums like the request forum or sent directly to the dm's via Private message.

The example I was given was that even with how Matthew was a holy aasimar at the time not even his colleges should be given 100% knowledge that what he is saying is the factual truth- ergo screen shots for evidence ooc in the manner above are not permitted on the forums used in such a manner.

I was told to removed them immediately and so I did as the DM team asked.

The player in question to this particular incident I believe was That Guy. [I could be mistaken this happened when Matthew was very new as a character]

As far as I know there is no forum documentation of this rule.
As far as I know this rule comes from some one who is no longer an active DM.
It is unclear if the current team expects this to be the standard to abide by, however I'm sure they will gladly clear up any and call confusion on the matter.

In the future,it is my suggestion to keep with the friendly, common practice to remove plc's left out by destroying them mechanically but not doing so IC.

In the future to avoid confusion or causing problems either leave the plc there or remove it OOC if is creating a problem by beginning a walk way or being a distraction. "

Remember guys try to pack up your plcs if you are leaving an area if possible unless they are meant to be there permanently , or are not inconveniencing others in any way shape or form that can detract from the setting, the ambiance or the immersion.

Remember the number 1 rule guys; Have fun.

I'm not a DM, but my personal take on it is:

If a post is precluded by // then it means the post is OOC (since that is what // means). However, when we are talking about IG screenshots of something done IC then we are instead looking at definitely IC actions so the post should be IC. With this instance the only issue is presentation; ie if there was a IC blurb and then after an OOC section with the screenshots, then there wouldn't have been an issue. So we are basically down to semantics because presentation of a post doesn't trump IC events.

I think that is how it's usually done anyways, to avoid confusion: IC post and at the bottom OOC tag the relevant screenies. Or else send them to the DM Team so they can handle the events.

But that's just my take on things

PS, you ninja! lol
But that is a good point, on the IC/OOC removal. I've seen it lots, you break the PLC (like a easel left in the middle of the road) but make a note you are OOC breaking it and make the IC actions that you are relocating it. Usually makes things easier to handle for everyone! I've done it, myself, and then I screenshot what I did so if anyone is curious I can show them.

+1 to having fun!

Thank you guys for your feedback! I remember being told something similar to PS, which is why I was asking here again to confirm. 'Cause the DM team is a mostly fresh generation and things change.

There is no exact rules written on the subject but it is more like a common law thing. Indeed PCs have no way of knowing the exact details of the interaction if they weren't present. It can violate many things, especially the following parts of the main rules:

Quote:

Never use OOC information IC in any way. For example: just because you can see someone’s name hanging over their head in the game, your character wouldn’t know that character’s name unless someone had told you in-game.

Much the same applies to screenies. If your character wasn't there then you simply don't know the exact details of what happened unless someone told you that ICly. The character could have heard about the events but again...the exact details shouldn't be known unless someone who was present tells them.

In terms of context though the rules are clear and please follow them accordingly...even in the case of screenshots as they can be selective on their own:

Quote:

Never include someone else’s character in a written story that didn’t actually happen exactly as you wrote it without letting that character’s player proofread and approve the story before you post it.

Also, as it was said, just because the mechanism doesn't allow any other method of removal you can always emote that you remove it even when destroying the said PLC mechanically.

Leaving PLCs around is also a matter of etiquette. Don't do it unless there is a very good IC reason for that.

Quote:

In terms of context though the rules are clear and please follow them accordingly...even in the case of screenshots as they can be selective on their own:

Quote:

Never include someone else’s character in a written story that didn’t actually happen exactly as you wrote it without letting that character’s player proofread and approve the story before you post it.

So what does this mean for journal entries then?

If some one posts a modified story of what my character did or said is it within my rights to ask them to delete or alter it?

Journals are counting as written stories, so yes.

Lutra wrote:

Journals are counting as written stories, so yes.

Then can I also have any IC postings about what people say about my character on hidden forums I do not have access to purged as well?

as I was not given a chance to approve them people can still post stories about my character with out my consent.

The screenshots were selective? they were complete, unedited posts with overlaps in the chatlogs so that you can see they are as unselective as possible. They display events exactly as they occured, with no bias and no change presented, or even possible. There's no way they were selective.

Quote:

Also, as it was said, just because the mechanism doesn't allow any other method of removal you can always emote that you remove it even when destroying the said PLC mechanically.

This didn't happen, you can very clearly see the altar was shattered, with an accompanying emote about how weak the stone was. IC is IC: The altar was destroyed.

Quote:

Leaving PLCs around is also a matter of etiquette. Don't do it unless there is a very good IC reason for that.

Selunite Paladin with Preacher ranks, ordained clergy of Selune, leaving a consecrated altar of Selune in a public area in Wharftown, Amia's home to Selune, for the public to use and worship at.

Pretty good IC reason, I think.

Quote:

From past experience, it's always been frowned upon when people just straight up copy-paste chat logs and the like to explain an IC event. I understand this particular instance might have been different because they're screenshots, but they were supplemented by only OOC comments, which is confusing it all. Is there any actual rule on posting logs (question unrelated to this instance) to show an IC event? Would this particular instance be seen as OOC? Would this be frowned upon? Or can we just expect to stay IC and move on?

The "OOC comments" are to prevent an IC post from being nothing but 5 links and very clearly state as such. This is the tiniest most nitpicky argument in recent history. Without a doubt, that is an IC post, and the first two characters of the post being "//" do not invalidate that.

Quote:

Journals are counting as written stories, so yes.

I want every post in every IC forum that mentions Korthan removed, including any and all hidden forums I do not have access to because I was not consulted on any of them. This includes unambiguous mentions of "bluekin" or "blue dragonkin" that could reasonably be traced to Korthan. I will not accept them unless I am able to personally see them and audit them as accurate and able to post.

Selunite Paladin with Preacher ranks, ordained clergy of Selune, leaving a consecrated altar of Selune in a public area in Wharftown, Amia's home to Selune, for the public to use and worship at.

Pretty good IC reason, I think.

You seem to know who put it there then?
Odd they would leave it un attended IC.

It's not an argument. It's an opinion, saying that it confuses me and some others. Not a fact. Not a stance. Not evidence for an argument. This was for the sake of clarification, not having more circular arguments. My questions were answered, though, so thank you either way!

PassionateShadow wrote:

Selunite Paladin with Preacher ranks, ordained clergy of Selune, leaving a consecrated altar of Selune in a public area in Wharftown, Amia's home to Selune, for the public to use and worship at.

Pretty good IC reason, I think.

You seem to know who put it there then?
Odd they would leave it un attended IC.

I placed it because my character is a paladin of Selune so I figured that putting down an altar to her god in wharftown would be what she would do. I left for a few minutes but returned to find that my altar had be smashed not taken apart with care and reverence. This is where my point of contention has been.

Gribbo wrote:

PassionateShadow wrote:

Selunite Paladin with Preacher ranks, ordained clergy of Selune, leaving a consecrated altar of Selune in a public area in Wharftown, Amia's home to Selune, for the public to use and worship at.

Pretty good IC reason, I think.

You seem to know who put it there then?
Odd they would leave it un attended IC.

I placed it because my character is a paladin of Selune so I figured that putting down an altar to her god in wharftown would be what she would do. I left for a few minutes but returned to find that my altar had be smashed not taken apart with care and reverence. This is where my point of contention has been.

I should have taken the bet! I would a won.

@Tormak:
My post was a general answer/clarification for the questions that were made. You are referring to a specific incident, while my post did not mean to judge the contents of that.

@All of you:
Please refrain from insulting eachother.

Quote:

@Tormak:
My post was a general answer/clarification for the questions that were made. You are referring to a specific incident, while my post did not mean to judge the contents of that.

Are you saying your ruling doesn't apply to the situation that caused you to make the ruling, then?

What about:

Quote:

Journals are counting as written stories, so yes.

Quote:

Gribbo:

Then can I also have any IC postings about what people say about my character on hidden forums I do not have access to purged as well?

as I was not given a chance to approve them people can still post stories about my character with out my consent.

Quote:

Tormak:

I want every post in every IC forum that mentions Korthan removed, including any and all hidden forums I do not have access to because I was not consulted on any of them. This includes unambiguous mentions of "bluekin" or "blue dragonkin" that could reasonably be traced to Korthan. I will not accept them unless I am able to personally see them and audit them as accurate and able to post.

They also have to be untrue as the quote from the main rules indicate. Please list them and then we can look into it.

I can't list them without being able to see them.

How do I prove what people say about my character's is true or false with out screenshots though?

Lutra wrote:

They also have to be untrue as the quote from the main rules indicate. Please list them and then we can look into it.

Should posts about my character on hidden forums be blanket purged because i have no way of proving what is true or not with out screen shots

Forum search determined that no faction forum mentions Korthan by name, except yours.

Please be advised that faction forum reports do not count as PC stories but general off-screen IC correspondence between PCs. Not every IC post counts as story. Use common sense. That is also a rule by the way.

Goodnight and good luck

There is no difference between an IC Story post lying about my character, and an IC faction forum post lying about my character. We both know there are faction forum posts that are used as general correspondence and PC journal entries, and we both know there are PC Story posts used as both general IC correspondence and PC journal entries.

Singling out my name but not paying attention to Brieli's (or any other character's) doesn't win you any points, btw.

If you say so. I checked a few faction forums now with search using the the keywords that you provided above. It is late though, but I couldn't find any cross-reference to your PC, not even with the keyword "blue". Will check again tomorrow if you want me to or ask someone else to do that for you.

As for posts and storytelling...Yes there is a difference between IC correspondence and storytelling. There is also a difference about public and private postings. Again...common sense is a friend that we can always rely on.

The second part of my previous response was also to Gribbo.

Gribbo wrote:

How do I prove what people say about my character's is true or false with out screenshots though?

You either prove it or you can't prove it. Providing proof is the player's responsibility at this point to make their case. There are also other ways too that may not have equal credibility with a screenshot (witnesses, logs) but might work.

I like the picture posts. They were done in a very unbiased manner. I also think that there is a greatly un-represented fact of population in Amia going to the wayside and only at specific moments being brought up.

IE: Krin and his banning from Kohlingen.

Anyways a few things:
1: For destroying an Altar he did it pretty respectfully, mind you this is still no grand solution for the actual destruction ICly because you don't just go around busting up altars.
2: It really looks like Aedan ultimately destroyed it due to IG mechanical limitations, it was in the middle of the road by all accounts, and there is no IG way to move it from the crossroads as I'm sure Aedan probably would've if it were an option.
3: There is the truth that what occured was witnessed (in a rather well traveled town, not by players (who were not present, as is the rule of law) but by NPCs. So I imagine ultimately the reposting was for DM deliberation so they may determine the IC reactions of the populace.

Next time can just emote that you are carrying the altar off to a better spot while still destroying it ingame, as there is no other way to really move/remove such things from inconvenient spots.

Quote:

If you say so.

I do. It's easily verifiable. Don't be so dismissive of publically verifiable information. It is a fact: There are IC hidden forums with general IC posts, general IC offscreen correspondence posts, and post that function as journals for characters. The PC Story forum also contains these topic types. Public and private faction forums both contain these topic types. There is no difference between any of them - they all serve the same IC purposes.

Quote:

As for posts and storytelling...Yes there is a difference between IC correspondence and storytelling. There is also a difference about public and private postings. Again...common sense is a friend that we can always rely on.

You're falling back on dismissive non-arguments as a way to prove your point. You're the one that made a cast iron ruling, but defending it with "if you say so", and "use common sense", does nothing for any player that might be negatively affected by this, with no recourse to defend themselves, since the information is being tracked and traded via hidden, inaccessible sources. Rather than say "use common sense", you should describe the difference between these identical IC topics that somehow serve different purposes on the forums.

Quote:

You either prove it or you can't prove it. Providing proof is the player's responsibility at this point to make their case. There are also other ways too that may not have equal credibility with a screenshot (witnesses, logs) but might work.

You pass the burden of proof to the victim, remove tools from their arsenal to prove it, and in the same breath encourage the moving of hurtful and harmful and potentially rulebreaking information to private forums, where it can no longer be seen to be defended against, and where it now has been provided blanket immunity, despite it being the same sort of topic and the same sort of information as the public forums. You know very well "not have equal credibility" means "will not be believed by the DMs." How many times have we heard "We can't take actions without a screenshot"? How many times have you said that? How many times have I?

You've freed the rulebreakers from any rules and passed the onus of enforcing the rule onto the players, and put yourself on a pedestal. "You prove it or you can't." You know what proves it? Screenshots.

General Questions

Who is online