15228 replies to this topic

[corey_russell]

Alesia wrote...

There haven't been any cases were the community consesus and the player's decision have been in conflict.

 

Well off-hand, I can think of one. There was a new no-reloader who didn't carefully read the Rod of Terror effects (in particular the CHA draining the user every time they use it). Thus they reloaded (and continued posting as if their run was still going) because they thought it was a bug. The community unanimously declared it was not a bug, just a D&D effect of death if any stat gets to 0 or less, such as when mind flayers INT drain players. The player in question continued posting though, because they were sure it was a bug. I can't remember for certain what happened next - he may have died again, or maybe eventually abided by the community ruling, but was definitely in conflict so to speak at first.

[Blackraven]

Does that make sense?

 

It does to me. I hope and think a consensus will be attainable on this point (bugs and glitches). Thank you for taking the time to elaborate. 

There are other aspects though: 

 

Note that the phrase "transient anomaly" has never been interpreted to refer to player errors, misclicks, real world distractions, hardware lags, or any phenomena outside of the game world. It refers to documentable erroneous and aberrant game mechanics.

It's interesting to see you include hardware lags in your above enumeration. Unlike the other external phenomena you mention, I've always considered (serious) hardware lags should justify reloads. I tend to agree with semiticgod at the BG Forums, who said: "No-reloads are supposed to be a test of the player, not a test of the computer."

You may or may not remember that I reloaded with Scintilla after repeated lags made it pretty much impossible to either fight or flee from the undead that were after her in Ghoultown. I didn't even ask for people's views here as I assumed it an acceptable reload. (I must say no one objected.)

[corey_russell]

It does to me. I hope and think a consensus will be attainable on this point (bugs and glitches). Thank you for taking the time to elaborate. 

There are other aspects though: 

 

It's interesting to see you include hardware lags in your above enumeration. Unlike the other external phenomena you mention, I've always considered (serious) hardware lags should justify reloads. I tend to agree with semiticgod at the BG Forums, who said: "No-reloads are supposed to be a test of the player, not a test of the computer."

You may or may not remember that I reloaded with Scintilla after repeated lags made it pretty much impossible to either fight or flee from the undead that were after her in Ghoultown. I didn't even ask for people's views here as I assumed it an acceptable reload. (I must say no one objected.)

Blackraven - I doubt very much what you experienced was a "hardware" lag. E.g., BG is an old game,and modern computers are so much faster than the windows 98 systems that BG was designed to work on. However, I know both from personal experience and others' posts that excessive scripting can cause significant lags (SCS for example) - thus what you described actually sounds like a bug of a whatever scripts were running.

 

The rules already take account "hardware" bugs, such as hard drive failure.

[Alesia_BH]

The player in question continued posting though, because they were sure it was a bug. I can't remember for certain what happened next - he may have died again, or maybe eventually abided by the community ruling, but was definitely in conflict so to speak at first.

 

Understood. I wasn't around for that.

 

The point I was making is that procedurally the player is the final authority, though the norm is for the individual player to abide by community rulings.

 

Best,

 

A.

[Alesia_BH]

I tend to agree with semiticgod at the BG Forums, who said: "No-reloads are supposed to be a test of the player, not a test of the computer."

 

I don't think anyone here would disagree. That's among the principles that would influence rulings under the hardware doctrine.

 

Hardware issues fall outside the scope of the bug reload rule. Other rules apply to hardware issues.

 

My earlier statement shouldn't have been taken to apply the hardware lag could never justify a reload but, rather, that such an issue would be handled under a different doctrine.

 

Best,

 

A.

[Blackraven]

Blackraven - I doubt very much what you experienced was a "hardware" lag. E.g., BG is an old game,and modern computers are so much faster than the windows 98 systems that BG was designed to work on. However, I know both from personal experience and others' posts that excessive scripting can cause significant lags (SCS for example) - thus what you described actually sounds like a bug of a whatever scripts were running.

 

The rules already take account "hardware" bugs, such as hard drive failure.

 

Hm yes, that makes sense. 

[Blackraven]

I don't think anyone here would disagree. That's among the principles that would influence rulings under the hardware doctrine.

 

The hardware doctrine

Gotta love the legal jargon here.

[Alesia_BH]

The hardware doctrine

Gotta love the legal jargon here.

 

Yeah. I need to ice that trip. Plain talk from now on.

 

Best,

 

A.

[Alesia_BH]

Quick Note on Ariel's Game:

 

Since Ariel's counterpart, Seguro, has entered SoA, I'll resume playing Ariel.

 

She is currently working through the Mae'Var Guild Hall quest. I'll post an update later today.

 

Best,

 

A.

[Blackraven]

Quick Note on Ariel's Game:

 

Since Ariel's counterpart, Seguro, has entered SoA, I'll resume playing Ariel.

 

Hmm were you considering retiring her? Anyway good luck. A third Thief is doing his best to join the heroic Halflings in Amn soon.

[Alesia_BH]

Hmm were you considering retiring her? Anyway good luck. A third Thief is doing his best to join the Halfling heroes in Amn soon.

 

More-or-less. I guess you missed that post. See below.

 

 

Quick Note on Ariel's Game:

 

I have a confession to make. I'm totally bored with Ariel. At this point, I need something more challenging than a Halfling F/T.

 

If Seguro reaches ToB territory then Ariel will have a reason for existence again (the original point of running a F/T was to compare one to a swashbuckler in ToB), but for now she's on hold. I may start a new character in BG1.

 

Best,

 

A.

[Blackraven]

@Alesia, whoops. yes missed that. 
Boredom is not what we look for when playing...  
Good on you if Grond0's Swashy gets you going again with Ariel. (Personally I probably wouldn't be influenced by it.)

Btw wasn't Arcadia even less challenging for you than Ariel?

[Alesia_BH]

Good on you if Grond0's Swashy gets you going again with Ariel. (Personally I probably wouldn't be influenced by it.)

 

Grond0's SCS swashbuckler crusade was motivated by our conversation regarding the comparative advantages of swashbucklers, blades, and F/Ts in ToB SCS/Ascension melee. Given that he decided to demonstrate what a swash could do in the SCS/Ascension endgame, I felt I should demonstrate what either a blade or F/T could do.

 

Since I've already had a success with a bard and had just run an F/M, I chose a F/T. Were it not for Grond0's decision to run a swashbuckler, I would have never created Ariel. Grond0's swashbuckler is sort of the reason for Ariel's existence. In the absence of a swashbuckler counterpart, I'd probably set Ariel aside.

 

Btw wasn't Arcadia even less challenging for you than Ariel?

 

Arcadia was a Half-Elf, which made managing disabler risk a greater challenge. Granted, she had SI:A and save buffs, but maintaining those does require in combat decisions.

 

Arcadia's game was also my first run in over a year. At that point, I didn't mind being a bit over-powered. But after re-familiarizing myself with the game and having had a recent success I'd like something a bit more challenging.

 

At this point, I'd not inclined to say whether a Half-Elf F/M is easier for me to no reload than a Halfling F/T. They're both awesome and top tier. I may comment on that issue if and when Ariel completes ToB.

 

Best,

 

A.

[Grond0]

It's interesting to see you include hardware lags in your above enumeration. Unlike the other external phenomena you mention, I've always considered (serious) hardware lags should justify reloads. I tend to agree with semiticgod at the BG Forums, who said: "No-reloads are supposed to be a test of the player, not a test of the computer."

You may or may not remember that I reloaded with Scintilla after repeated lags made it pretty much impossible to either fight or flee from the undead that were after her in Ghoultown. I didn't even ask for people's views here as I assumed it an acceptable reload. (I must say no one objected.)

I think it's hard to put yourself in someone else's shoes about the impact something has, which is why I didn't object.  I doubt very much if I would personally ever consider a lag a reason to reload.  I've had several occasions where I've died to dragons in circumstances where lag was a major factor and at least a couple where I've abandoned a run because it was habitually too laggy.  I'm aware though that I do take a very purist approach to 'no-reload'.  I do normally reload when the game crashes, but hate even doing that ...

[Blackraven]

I've abandoned laggy and buggy runs myself - opting for a new install instead - on a few occasions, but I think that's a different matter than allowing a reload after incidental (severe) lagging, as with Scintilla in Ghoultown, which was the first truly laggy part of the game. Actually I thought of you and Gate70 when I reloaded there. I remember how one or two (or more) of your multiplayer runs ended with lags playing an important part in Charname's death.

Like you, I hate reloading (and considered not doing it with Scintilla), but indisputable bugs and severe lagging are both justications for a reload in my book. This makes you indeed more of a purist than I am.

It's true that with lag-reloads defining the required severity of a reload allowing lag and peer appraisal of specific cases can be problematic if not impossible, but then, the whole no-reload challenge is based on trust amongst the participants. 

 

[Alesia_BH]

I think it's hard to put yourself in someone else's shoes about the impact something has

 

Yes. This is why we have a seperate legal test for lag/hardware issues. The language and applicable standards have to differ significantly.

 

Like you, I hate reloading (and considered not doing it with Scintilla), but indisputable bugs and severe lagging are both justications for a reload in my book.
 

 

The general tendancy here has been to play through lag. Hardware issues have been pretty rare. That said, cases like this were dealt with in the old forums on occasion. If I were to put the standard into words, it would read something like this:

 

If a hardware issue that a reasonable person could not have anticipated has made the game unplayable or has precluded continuation, the player may, at his or her discretion, reload from the most recent save. The impact of the issue must have been severe and unavoidable and it must have unambiguously compromised the integrity of the game world. Players are encouraged to anticipate and preemptively address potential hardware issues rather than invoke this rule.

 

Make sense?

 

Best,

 

A.

[Blackraven]

Yes. This is why we have a seperate legal test for lag/hardware issues. The language and applicable standards have to differ significantly.

 

 

The general tendancy here has been to play through lag and hardware issues have been pretty rare. That said, cases like this were dealt with in the old forums on occasion. If I were to put the standard into words, it would read something like this:

 

If a hardware issue that a reasonable person could not have anticipated has made the game unplayable or has precluded continuation, the player may, at his or her discretion, reload from the most recent save. The impact of the issue must have been severe and unavoidable and it must have unambiguously compromised the integrity of the game world. Players are encouraged to anticipate and preemptively address potential hardware issues rather than invoke this rule.

 

Make sense?

 

Best,

 

A.

There's still a lawyer in you.  It's as good a criterion as it gets, clearly with concepts that would have to be fleshed out by case law ('reasonable person' which btw was pretty much the topic my PhD was going to be about, 'unplayable', 'severe and unavoidable', 'unambiguously compromised'), but as I said that's inevitable I think.

[Alesia_BH]

Ariel, Halfling F/T: BG2 Update 7- Mae'Var's Guildhall

 

 

Mae'Var is a master schemer, a cunning rogue, and a formidible opponent. He is also dead: very, very dead. Chunkiliciously dead. His schemes are at an end.

 

Some of you may have noticed a dearth of bandit ambush coverage in Ariel's run. The reason for this is straight forward: there haven't been many ambushes to cover. Ariel has used the Sandthief Ring prior to area transitions and has in almost all cases opted to steath by rather than fight. 

 

Prior to the Mae'Var Guildhall quest, Ariel decided to teach Athkatla's bandits a lesson. Upon being ambushed, she immediately withdrew and set her three traps. She then cast Draw on Holy Might and activated RoAC II. With the mage Stoneskinned, Ariel selected the bandit cleric as her first target. He was chunked with an opening backstab.

 

With Harmony in the off-hand and negative saves, Ariel then raced for her traps. This elimiated the invisible bandit thieves. The bandit warrior and mage were then dispatched with the aid of Mr. Efreeti.

 

Spoiler

 

The bandits apparently got the message. The next time Ariel was ambushed, they called off the assault, declaring that Ariel was too much for them to handle.

 

After completing Mae'Var's early tasks, Ariel undertook the assassination of Rayic Gethras. 100% fire resistance via Dragon Helm + Dragon Scale Shield + Potion of Fire Resistance neutralized the mephits. The stone golems were taken down with Belm. Arvoreen was in the off-hand to protect against Slow. Full plate + RoAC mitigated damage risk.

 

Spoiler

 

Rayic Gethras never got off an offensive spell. Poison from opening traps bottled him up. Detect Illusions prevented him from hiding. Acid Arrows finished him.

 

Spoiler

 

Against Mae'Var, Ariel decided to play fair. But all is fair in Guildhall politics- including opening chunk-stabs.

 

Opening traps took out the western thieves. The Reflex negated ranged attacts. Detect Illusions thwarted backstab attempts. The Priest of Cyric was diced with Belm before he could get an offensive spell off. It was a righteous beatdown- righteous in the world of thieves that is.

 

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

 

In the interest of scoring potions, Ariel invested a Potion of Explosions and her single random drop Arrow of Detonation in the destruction of the first floor thieves. She ended up with a surprising number of Potion of Invulnerability, though the Oil of Speed and Potion of Invisibility tallies dissapointed.

 

The Planar Sphere is up next.

 

Best,

 

A.

[Alesia_BH]

There's still a lawyer in you.  It's as good a criterion as it gets, clearly with concepts that would have to be fleshed out by case law ('reasonable person' which btw was pretty much the topic my PhD was going to be about, 'unplayable', 'severe and unavoidable', 'unambiguously compromised'), but as I said that's inevitable I think.

 

Yeah.

 

Basically, you don't want players telling other players what they saw. At the same time, you don't want players willy-nilly invoking the hardware rule to get themselves out of jams. The language was setup in such a way as to give the player complete discretion while, at the same time, making the rule unlikely to be invoked often.

 

Best,

 

A.

[Grond0]

Alac {4) - dwarf fighter/thief (update 1)

 

I'm again attempting to complete a no-reload trilogy in a 24-hour period.  The first attempt today got through BG1, but died against Mekrath.  The second attempt has just gone past the first and done the Planar Prison (done early in order to get boots of speed) - though it cost him a potion apiece of magic shielding and invulnerability.  It's just coming up to 6 1/2 hours since the start of the 24 hours, so plenty of time left on the clock yet.

[Grond0]

Alac {4) - dwarf fighter/thief (update 2)

 

Alac has just taught his first dragon a lesson in the Umar Hills.  He's a little bit behind my target schedule for SoA, but still has plenty of time in hand to complete the trilogy if he doesn't fall down dead or I don't fall down asleep first.

[Grond0]

Alac {4) - dwarf fighter/thief (update 3)

 

The second dragon is down and Alac has completed all the major encounter areas he's intending to do, though there's still some tricky smaller areas to come (also just got his first HLA).  He's continuing to slip behind my target schedule - I think largely because it's less of a brain strain for me to do nearly everything in an area rather than pick and choose the really worthwhile bits.  He should still be capable of finishing well within the 24 hour limit though - except that that doesn't take into account that I've consumed all my stores of chocolate and am only 10 hours into the challenge at this point .

[Grond0]

Alac {4) - dwarf fighter/thief (4th and final update)

 

Another depressing end to Alac's adventures - this time in Spellhold after a total of just under 8 hours in his run from Candlekeep.  As noted previously I wasn't doing very well at following my script and that ultimately proved costly.  He cleared the first level without problems and moved on to the second level.  He only needed one of the paintings to get access to the locked area in order to get the Gesen bowstring, but just collected them all rather than identifying the right one.  There are several traps there, but his saves were sufficient to protect against instant death.  However, one of the traps unleashes what I had thought was a cloudkill.  I had noted after collecting the 3 paintings on the wall and emerging from the room that he was down to 45 HPs, but hadn't registered which trap had done particular amounts of damage.  He'd been unable to pick up the 4th painting and the horn from the pool due to a full inventory, but after shuffling that around to make space I sent him back in to the room - thinking that his HPs would be ample against a cloudkill doing no more than 10 HPs damage at a time.  Checking the autosave after he died I could see that the trap must actually have been an incendiary cloud doing 20 odd HPs at a time.  

Spoiler

I'm still surprised that he was actually in there long enough to be hit twice - I intended to pause as the pool inventory was displayed, which would have meant he was only in the room for a couple of seconds of gametime, but I presume the pause didn't activate properly.

 

Oh well - maybe next year .

[Blackraven]

Hmm sorry Grond0! I thought you had picked the F/T class in part to deal with traps. Better luck next year...

[Epsil0]

Unfortunately, that's not a trap per se, or at least not one that can be disarmed. It's kind of like the pool under the Copper Coronet, or the pool in Bodhi's lair where the MoD is: not traps, but they still release damage/effects. Hard luck, Grond0! Don't lose your Swashie too now.