[Rental Suggestion] Applications and Expirations for Rentals

[SardineTheAncestor]

I'm okay with the removal of the plot lock on rentals if they can also be bypassed with Ethereal Jaunt, as well as bashed open in melee and destroyed by spells, black powder barrels, and so on. Also breaking them off their hinges so they can never be relocked until the server resets.

[BraveSirRobin]

Correct, DC or not you cannot stealth in a faction base without some measure of oversight. It just means DMs have to do extra work of opening doors or conduct rp where the individual taking this huge risk takes a key off someone. Citation needed on ‘often abused’ because that should be reported unless I misunderstood what you mean.

When I was playing a Gendarme, we would frequently find the doors unlocked or bashed open. However, after a certain point, there's no way to tell if a player left that door unlocked (despite those in the faction at the time remaining of the belief that they locked the doors) or to tell who bashed them. As they are also bashable. It wasn't an every week incident, but it would happen when I played with the faction. I even reported and mentioned it a few times. Given there is no incident in which such a thing should be able to occur without DM oversight, I don't really see the benefit to allowing it to happen without a DM present.

Even the Savant shops have NPCs within sight of the door, usually. It is one of the most secure districts of Port-à-Lucine. Marchand shops have a patrolling Gendarme (albeit single) and that's on par with the low security of the area. I don't know about Vallaki's rentals, though, I have no experience with them. So in those specific instances, why would you put a DC on a door that requires DM oversight to break into in the first place?

[foxtale]

Even the Savant shops have NPCs within sight of the door, usually. It is one of the most secure districts of Port-à-Lucine. Marchand shops have a patrolling Gendarme (albeit single) and that's on par with the low security of the area. I don't know about Vallaki's rentals, though, I have no experience with them. So in those specific instances, why would you put a DC on a door that requires DM oversight to break into in the first place?

A stealther can get inside the shops, where there are no NPCs, and unlock or bash it from there. They shouldn't be plot locked. No player controlled area should be plot locked unless it happens to also contain a plot.

And I agree that even those that do contain plot relevant stuff (or whatever counts as plot-like on a PW), would benefit from being interactible, just to decrease DM workload during whatever infiltrations are being overseen in there. Sure, that means people can break in around the clock at other times, but they are doing so at the risk of getting caught and suffer consequences OoCly. And they will get caught if they are doing anything in there that should have needed oversight. If a prisoner is released or a trap is placed, that is sure to be investigated by the team. The best thing they can get away with when they break the rules and go in there without permission is to gain knowledge about the map OoCly, which other players have anyway due to maybe having played a faction member of the place before.

[BraveSirRobin]

Even the Savant shops have NPCs within sight of the door, usually. It is one of the most secure districts of Port-à-Lucine. Marchand shops have a patrolling Gendarme (albeit single) and that's on par with the low security of the area. I don't know about Vallaki's rentals, though, I have no experience with them. So in those specific instances, why would you put a DC on a door that requires DM oversight to break into in the first place?

A stealther can get inside the shops, where there are no NPCs, and unlock or bash it from there. They shouldn't be plot locked. No player controlled area should be plot locked unless it happens to also contain a plot.

And I agree that even those that do contain plot relevant stuff (or whatever counts as plot-like on a PW), would benefit from being interactible, just to decrease DM workload during whatever infiltrations are being overseen in there. Sure, that means people can break in around the clock at other times, but they are doing so at the risk of getting caught and suffer consequences OoCly. And they will get caught if they are doing anything in there that should have needed oversight. If a prisoner is released or a trap is placed, that is sure to be investigated by the team. The best thing they can get away with when they break the rules and go in there without permission is to gain knowledge about the map OoCly, which other players have anyway due to maybe having played a faction member of the place before.

That's not entirely true, either. They can use it to spy on PCs whilst they're within, ignoring the NPCs present. They aren't required to hostile for it, either, so even if the NPCs would catch them, they wouldn't be able to say anything.

Furthermore, stealthing into the shop and then bashing the door out from the interior would still have effects on the opposite side of the door that the NPCs could see. Ignoring that is abusing the transition. There's no situation in which doing these things, illegally, near NPCs that could see the effects does not need a DM present to oversee them, and the only result of doing so means that when it is reported, even more Staff resources are required to investigate, debate, and give a ruling on the results.

[SardineTheAncestor]

However, after a certain point, there's no way to tell if a player left that door unlocked (despite those in the faction at the time remaining of the belief that they locked the doors) or to tell who bashed them.

It'd be nice if damaging the door with melee or magic left an impression on the Examine text. So if you want to know why a door that's usually locked is unlocked, you check it with the Examine tool and see some text has been added there. Maybe a dev can provide insight whether or not that's a viable solution.

I know we have @mark but sometimes you are in a rush. Player power starts with options and convenience.

[foxtale]

Furthermore, stealthing into the shop and then bashing the door out from the interior would still have effects on the opposite side of the door that the NPCs could see.

You are taking the concept of would-be-could-be too far in my opinion. The transitions are part of the game and we have to live with it - it has been ruled before that stealthing after a transition in PvP even if a pursuer is right behind you is legal - I don't see how this is much different. Do we have to stop and drop everything if somewhere near the vicinity of a city a fireball is cast? Depending on the wind it could be audible to the NPCs within miles, who could decide to come to investigate. The same would apply to a pistol.
And people have been killed in Inn rooms on this server a lot; even though the floor would be only so thick and soundproof. All this has not been rolled back for a reason, because the simple rule is: Out of sight, out of mind. Unless a DM decides to spice it up in the moment.

But we're playing a game, at some point. And what does bother me is that players get safe pockets of full control where they can be sure that if any intruder followed them in and no DM is present, there is no way for them to escape, period. Or trap people aggressively that they invited in on the pretense of friendliness. I have seen it happen while I was on the benefiting side of it, and I didn't think it was cool. The person that came into our rental took a great risk to spice the going-ons on the server up for everyone. They already competed with our character levels in a system that we are trying to balance in a way that everyone can get a shot in - they shouldn't also have to compete with the Door of the Gods.

Locking a plot locked door behind someone should require a standard action and PvP buy in.

[LeSidhe]

Man-oh-man. For all the stealther-hate going on here, you all sure did a great job stealing this thread from its actual topic!

[SardineTheAncestor]

Man-oh-man. For all the stealther-hate going on here, you all sure did a great job stealing this thread from its actual topic!

Looking over the responses again, it seems pretty clear that most posters are not in support of applications for rentals, but if anyone has anything to add the topic is open.

To the problem of rental scarcity, I support Sinthepie's idea of adding more rentals which can't be customised permanently. You can find that part of the discussion here:

Honestly I think a decent solution would be to maybe add a few barebones rentals and not make them customizable. Make the rentals fit for the area they are in. Does it make sense that the renters would want to customize? Yes. But it also makes it a hassle for the dm that has to customize it. Nothing can stop a player faction that has the chance to own properties from owning them, even if it is through applications. Make them simple, make them usable and decent. Maybe they could be small enough that even if you did customize it, because of its size you couldn't add much OR like the rooms in Governor's Hotel where you can rent them, but you don't have the need to change them because of how they are.

Then I would propose a one rental per real player rule to prevent hoarding these alongside the event/faction ones. Of course, you could have keys to rentals owned by other players. In no uncertain terms, I think there should be too many rentals for people to try and hoard them, just as no one group can currently farm every dungeon spawn or resource on the server.

I think the rest of the discussion regarding how to break into rentals is relevant even if it's contentious. We probably don't need to change the way that locking doors works in rentals and inns (though I would like to see the system overhauled and made more robust if the server can handle it) as much as we need more rooms for people to feel like they can get their own fair shot at having them, in my opinion, and again, I don't believe the Tenements suits the need, as it is too out of the way and it's basically inside a dungeon. The same exact idea applied elsewhere in the right place(s) would be really very popular, I'm certain of that much. The truth is, most factions, both player-made and officially supported, only host 3-4 concurrent players most days. So a single tile room is ample space for a private conversation. Give them two tiles and they can do a little more temporary furnishing that they refresh a few times a week with carpentry, and now ten players can be comfortably hosted all at once. Again, I'm not a dev, just floating that idea to see how others respond, but we shouldn't expect them to suddenly do a whole ton of work if they consider this a non-issue at the moment (no dev reply atm).

[BraveSirRobin]

Furthermore, stealthing into the shop and then bashing the door out from the interior would still have effects on the opposite side of the door that the NPCs could see.

You are taking the concept of would-be-could-be too far in my opinion. The transitions are part of the game and we have to live with it - it has been ruled before that stealthing after a transition in PvP even if a pursuer is right behind you is legal - I don't see how this is much different. Do we have to stop and drop everything if somewhere near the vicinity of a city a fireball is cast? Depending on the wind it could be audible to the NPCs within miles, who could decide to come to investigate. The same would apply to a pistol.
And people have been killed in Inn rooms on this server a lot; even though the floor would be only so thick and soundproof. All this has not been rolled back for a reason, because the simple rule is: Out of sight, out of mind. Unless a DM decides to spice it up in the moment.

But we're playing a game, at some point. And what does bother me is that players get safe pockets of full control where they can be sure that if any intruder followed them in and no DM is present, there is no way for them to escape, period. Or trap people aggressively that they invited in on the pretense of friendliness. I have seen it happen while I was on the benefiting side of it, and I didn't think it was cool. The person that came into our rental took a great risk to spice the going-ons on the server up for everyone. They already competed with our character levels in a system that we are trying to balance in a way that everyone can get a shot in - they shouldn't also have to compete with the Door of the Gods.

Locking a plot locked door behind someone should require a standard action and PvP buy in.

This seems like a personal axe to grind, rather than understanding the nature of the system in general. In order for us to debate incidents in which things have, or have not been rolled back due to a lack of DM oversight, we would have to get into individual situations which is against the rules as well. The only thing that I can say with a certainty is that it in my experience, especially with Port-à-Lucine, nothing can really transpire in the upper-two districts reliably without DM oversight or else it risks getting rolled back. Fortunately, DMs are generally present in Dementlieu, so it's never really been an issue. The presence of Gendarmes everywhere in the Publique and the Savant, as well as an excess of clusters of Noble NPCs leaves little room for players to perform PvP-esque antagonistic actions without a DM around to play the witnesses in the ensuing investigation.

That's something you don't really see in Vallaki, or other areas of the server. It's much more cloistered, and heavily monitored, with (traditionally) more DM support to boot to compensate for that. I can't speak for instances in Barovia, because I barely play there.

[BlackEmperor]

Any rentals outside of faction bases should not be plot locked, they dont have NPCs in them to react and therefore do not need DM oversight. - Player housing already has a tendancy to splinter RP.

I am of the opinion we have more then enough rentals already without offering up even more.

[BraveSirRobin]

Any rentals outside of faction bases should not be plot locked, they dont have NPCs in them to react and therefore do not need DM oversight. - Player housing already has a tendancy to splinter RP.

I am of the opinion we have more then enough rentals already without offering up even more.

Savant #2 is directly beside two rotating, patrolling Gendarmes and Noble NPCs walking the streets. Savant #3 is situated on the patrol route of a Gendarme, in visual range of a cluster of nobles and is on the path of a patrolling noble. Savant #1 is in the path of a patrolling Gendarme, and wandering/patrolling Nobles.

Warehouse #1, and #2 are on the patrol route of a Gendarme in the Marchand, with Warehouse #3 bisecting the patrol routes of two separate Gendarmes during the day. They're supposed to be there to keep the peace, but if someone can bash into the door or force it open, it's a bit immersion breaking. You can't really do that without a DM present, unless at night in the Marchand because only hostile NPCs exist there. But in the Savant, they never stop. So being able to do that to the Savant shops in specific would mean that the intruder would be ignoring the NPCs exterior of the building during entry.

[SardineTheAncestor]

Any rentals outside of faction bases should not be plot locked, they dont have NPCs in them to react and therefore do not need DM oversight. - Player housing already has a tendancy to splinter RP.

I am of the opinion we have more then enough rentals already without offering up even more.

I've got to disagree - even with our already "more than enough" rentable properties, not only are people frustrated that they can't get a space of their own, but you can't throw a stone without hitting someone in the server. The entire thing is set up in a linear fashion, so you're bound to pass people on roads or find them in hubs. Again, they even moved the Vistani caravan in Port to facilitate this. But when too many people are congregated in a single area, as others have pointed out, lag starts to get really bad and then the server gets closer to crashing, especially around event times.

People have to leave their private spaces eventually, plot locked or not. A vast majority of the server participate in the material and level progression (ninjalooting, dungeoning, crafting, etc.) as a main launching point for their roleplay, but there is no experience to gain inside a rentable property besides RP XP, and there's certainly no wealth. Even if we discount the fact that hundreds of players play daily, it wasn't inn rooms and the Governor's Hotel that made it hard to find people in cities pre-EE, long before rentals were added. Hubs are pretty much always populated now, but they're hardly the end all be all for roleplay, and they're not going to depopulate because of a few people having private conversations from time to time, which they already do inside inn rooms and the rest. All this would do is move some of them some place else.

[BraveSirRobin]

Any rentals outside of faction bases should not be plot locked, they dont have NPCs in them to react and therefore do not need DM oversight. - Player housing already has a tendancy to splinter RP.

I am of the opinion we have more then enough rentals already without offering up even more.

I've got to disagree - even with our already "more than enough" rentable properties, not only are people frustrated that they can't get a space of their own, but you can't throw a stone without hitting someone in the server. The entire thing is set up in a linear fashion, so you're bound to pass people on roads or find them in hubs. Again, they even moved the Vistani caravan in Port to facilitate this. But when too many people are congregated in a single area, as others have pointed out, lag starts to get really bad and then the server gets closer to crashing, especially around event times.

People have to leave their private spaces eventually, plot locked or not. A vast majority of the server participate in the material and level progression (ninjalooting, dungeoning, crafting, etc.) as a main launching point for their roleplay, but there is no experience to gain inside a rentable property besides RP XP, and there's certainly no wealth. Even if we discount the fact that hundreds of players play daily, it wasn't inn rooms and the Governor's Hotel that made it hard to find people in cities pre-EE, long before rentals were added. Hubs are pretty much always populated now, but they're hardly the end all be all for roleplay, and they're not going to depopulate because of a few people having private conversations from time to time, which they already do inside inn rooms and the rest. All this would do is move some of them some place else.

Just to top this off, we have nearly 3x the server pop we used to. I really think the concern regarding rentables is overbloated in terms on splintering roleplay. If people want privacy, they will find privacy. If that means leaving the city altogether, then that is what that means. If anything, these spaces create more roleplay by anchoring people in a general zone rather than encouraging them to spread out, or go to Edrigan for instance, to find reliable privacy.

Whether we want to admit it or not, in Port in particular, the style of roleplay there encourages splintering, secrecy, intrigue and deception. The Drain encourages that. The only place that doesn't, which has rentals, is Vallaki. No, Vallaki instead encourages people to go indoors at night and lock them lest the boogeyman gets them.  Loitering outdoors looking for roleplay is actively discouraged, there.

Fifty percent of the time, at least.

[Quartermaster]

I am also going to disagree that there are enough PC rentals either as stores, faction head quarters, or as housing. I'm also going to add that player housing with actual storage capabilities is severely lacking on this server. I have read through various threads and comments from both Player and Admin's alike, with one overarching comment. "There needs to be a gold sink for all the outrageous sums of coin long time players end up getting".
PC housing with storage could actually make a viable gold sink. The building itself, and it could well be a cabin in the woods, not just an apartment in Port, could be rented for 10-20 thousand a year. A PC could then buy furniture to place with in it for another 10-200 thousand. Add the capability to actually store things there for another 50k a year. ((there are other systems to store things for a PC other than what is currently in use on PtoM. These storage systems have long been tested in NWN multiplayer and do not cause lag or break easily. These systems are also available on the NWN Vault free of charge.) Add taxes for property to the local government and other 10-200k. That's not to mention actual landscaping and outdoor furniture costs, repairs when things attack in the night, or invading Gundarkites.

There could be so much more here.

[JustMonika]

I am also going to disagree that there are enough PC rentals either as stores, faction head quarters, or as housing. I'm also going to add that player housing with actual storage capabilities is severely lacking on this server. I have read through various threads and comments from both Player and Admin's alike, with one overarching comment. "There needs to be a gold sink for all the outrageous sums of coin long time players end up getting".
PC housing with storage could actually make a viable gold sink. The building itself, and it could well be a cabin in the woods, not just an apartment in Port, could be rented for 10-20 thousand a year. A PC could then buy furniture to place with in it for another 10-200 thousand. Add the capability to actually store things there for another 50k a year. ((there are other systems to store things for a PC other than what is currently in use on PtoM. These storage systems have long been tested in NWN multiplayer and do not cause lag or break easily. These systems are also available on the NWN Vault free of charge.) Add taxes for property to the local government and other 10-200k. That's not to mention actual landscaping and outdoor furniture costs, repairs when things attack in the night, or invading Gundarkites.

There could be so much more here.

As someone that desperately wants to spend their time roleplaying and not grinding phenominal amounts of gold, I am desperately against making rentals cost hundreds of thousands of gold.

[Wilkins1952]

I am also going to disagree that there are enough PC rentals either as stores, faction head quarters, or as housing. I'm also going to add that player housing with actual storage capabilities is severely lacking on this server. I have read through various threads and comments from both Player and Admin's alike, with one overarching comment. "There needs to be a gold sink for all the outrageous sums of coin long time players end up getting".
PC housing with storage could actually make a viable gold sink. The building itself, and it could well be a cabin in the woods, not just an apartment in Port, could be rented for 10-20 thousand a year. A PC could then buy furniture to place with in it for another 10-200 thousand. Add the capability to actually store things there for another 50k a year. ((there are other systems to store things for a PC other than what is currently in use on PtoM. These storage systems have long been tested in NWN multiplayer and do not cause lag or break easily. These systems are also available on the NWN Vault free of charge.) Add taxes for property to the local government and other 10-200k. That's not to mention actual landscaping and outdoor furniture costs, repairs when things attack in the night, or invading Gundarkites.

There could be so much more here.

As someone that desperately wants to spend their time roleplaying and not grinding phenominal amounts of gold, I am desperately against making rentals cost hundreds of thousands of gold.

This Rentals should not be gold sinks. There are better ways to go about that, Especially considering rentals are RP tools Gating them behind gold just removes more RP.