Suggestion : Perma-death or Forced Shelving

[McDuck]

What i just see right now,

People just being frustrated that higher lvls exist in this server.

All the sugestions at current are just outright based on Higher lvls in Barovia.

I vote no for this sugestion it will only further the distance of your player base.

Encourage RP and not just outright these kind of selutions to get your way in getting rid of the higher lvl players

[BraveSirRobin]

I wasn't aware that the vault wasn't a respawnable zone, because it's yet another thing not listed on the forums. So, my apologies there.

But my key issue with this entire conversation, and one of which the polls greatly reflect, is that we aren't children anymore. We're all adults, we have jobs, and our time is valuable. No-one wants to dedicate their time into something that they cannot capture; Having a character who will eventually die of no fault of your own is fine, in a game where it is a rogue-like with minimal time investment. I would encourage it, were Ravenloft a low-level rogue-like in a Gothic Horror setting where death is inevitable, expected, and part of the game's legacy.

However, given that Ravenloft requires more time invested into it than just about any other PW on NWN at this particular moment, to achieve end-game content, and has such a heavy and cumbersome crafting system that is literally only rewarding in that he who endures the most boredom will reap the rewards of commerce? It's not a setting, or server environment I would personally care to have any kind of mechanical perma-death system involved in. My time is too precious and valuable, to look back at characters I've put time into and watch them waste away. If you want me to be able to enjoy that kind of play, then you'd want to make the curve of hitting max level at, at most, three months, not in the ballpark of a year with regular, 8-hour a day play days.

At which point, this falls more into the category of a Second Life-scenario, rather than a game, and even as it stands currently? It's not a game that's very respectful of anyone's time. I wouldn't have made this argument five years ago, but these days, there are just greater concerns that I have in my life than Neverwinter Nights. That doesn't mean I don't wish to recapture my youth, but I'm willing to bet this sentiment isn't mine alone among the veteran playerbase of the server who are no longer living at home with family, or dependent on someone else's income. Once you've kicked down that gate and stepped out, you start to wonder what your-- Two, three hours of spare time are worth, in the day. When you have a break, a vacation, how would you like to spend it?

Ravenloft used to be an amazing way to kill time, when my chief and daily concerns were killing summer break, killing time after school, and vicariously achieving and doing things I felt I couldn't do in my real life. Now that I have other things to do, I look at Ravenloft in a different light. I look at it with the value it gives to me, and currently, the only justification that exists for lengthy leveling times, is that once you get your level-20 Bard, Druid, Cleric, Fighter, you have them forever, and can forever use that class, which took you a year to get. It does not seem like a net-gain proposition for me to willingly get rid of them, after spending a veritable year of my life to get them where they were, and the every year that passes, the proposition seems less and less enticing alone. Then having them forcibly killed off? You've officially killed any value I could bank into these characters, unless the value of levels are made cheaper, and more easily obtainable.

[SardineTheAncestor]

In a way, the slow pace of leveling makes a good case to those who want to play a little at a time and don't have too much to burn. You can't be online grinding dungeons forever, and RP XP will only count for so much. What you do on the server only has to be for your enjoyment, like anything roleplay, whether you have a lot of time or not. You can play how you want and a wide variety of playstyles are meant to be supported here. Some characters will find RP easier than others, some will prefer to dungeon with their limited time, and anything that's a notorious timesink can be avoided.

In a more fast paced server where permakills are automated, there are consequences for playing sparsely and/or sporadically, beyond not getting to participate in events or even just moment to moment RP. Of course, if progression is faster, and people get used to losing characters, they might also take more risks, knowing everyone's in the same boat anyway.

[BraveSirRobin]

In a way, the slow pace of leveling makes a good case to those who want to play a little at a time and don't have too much to burn. You can't be online grinding dungeons forever, and RP XP will only count for so much. What you do on the server only has to be for your enjoyment, like anything roleplay, whether you have a lot of time or not. You can play how you want and a wide variety of playstyles are meant to be supported here. Some characters will find RP easier than others, some will prefer to dungeon with their limited time, and anything that's a notorious timesink can be avoided.

In a more fast paced server where permakills are automated, there are consequences for playing sparsely and/or sporadically, beyond not getting to participate in events or even just moment to moment RP. Of course, if progression is faster, and people get used to losing characters, they might also take more risks, knowing everyone's in the same boat anyway.

While I don't disagree with you, the slow pace means that if I want to get to X; It doesn't matter how much effort I put into, it will take X time. Which makes the prospect of losing your time investment without any tangible benefit to be unpleasant. People risk characters in events for profit, whether that's a mechanical item, advantage, or a boon for roleplay. The latter has a worth that only the player can ascertain; To some, dying to gain a Barony, or the prospect thereof, may or may not be enough for what their character's goals are.

But if the benefit of that roleplay boon is ultimately dissatisfactory, it tends to guard people against that risk-reward proposition in the future. If PoTM had a character rollover token like Arelith, you'd see people closuring old characters much more frequently. You aren't going to get people to voluntarily lose something in exchange for nothing, no matter how much peer pressure is given through positive reinforcement.

[HirtZirk]

...However, it'd be like this, where levels 2-8 have 10 resurrects (or more), then when they get to higher levels, it goes down and doesn't replenish and probably around level 14 they get no resurrects and suppose their soul's "ability to return have been dampened long then."

To be honest that would do a lot more to the horror setting than blanket ban. maybe restrict the condition to NPC healer.. so that in case of pvp you can always be player res...

[SardineTheAncestor]

While I don't disagree with you, the slow pace means that if I want to get to X; It doesn't matter how much effort I put into, it will take X time. Which makes the prospect of losing your time investment without any tangible benefit to be unpleasant. People risk characters in events for profit, whether that's a mechanical item, advantage, or a boon for roleplay. The latter has a worth that only the player can ascertain; To some, dying to gain a Barony, or the prospect thereof, may or may not be enough for what their character's goals are.

But if the benefit of that roleplay boon is ultimately dissatisfactory, it tends to guard people against that risk-reward proposition in the future. If PoTM had a character rollover token like Arelith, you'd see people closuring old characters much more frequently. You aren't going to get people to voluntarily lose something in exchange for nothing, no matter how much peer pressure is given through positive reinforcement.

My stance on it is that "character churn" only has subjective value. I would not try to incentivise it, because I don't think it's always positive. I think people should feel free to RP the same character as long as they want to, if they're still having fun playing that character. Maybe some would like to have some carryover benefits, but I think a good reputation for letting go and responding to conflict in RP adequately will count for more in terms of being accepted to play monsters and the subraces that are a little trickier to play.

I'm not against "incentivised retirement" so to speak, but I would have to hear more about what it entails. It would easily become possible to give too much, and it's also possible for it to make too little impact, compared against the effort to create it. Level 2 can be awkward if you've only got a rough idea of your character and need more time to figure things out, but this is probably not the right solution for it, though it could be part of it.

[BraveSirRobin]

... but I think a good reputation for letting go and responding to conflict in RP adequately will count for more in terms of being accepted to play monsters and the subraces that are a little trickier to play.

That's more-or-less the kind of mindset that I'm talking about. There's a world of difference between playing an aMPC/MPC character, and a standard character on the server, in terms of what you are getting, and what you are expecting. You're going into an aMPC/MPC with the knowledge that it is a temporary arrangement where you are given tools, mechanical capabilities, and unique roleplay aspects that you would otherwise not get access to, in exchange for a limited play time to engage the concept. The risk-reward ratio is known upfront.

Just because you may or may not decide to closure a character that isn't on a timer, doesn't mean you are any less well-equipped to play a character who is upfront, on a six-month timer with (possible) extensions.

[SardineTheAncestor]

I don't think there is an actual culture that says otherwise here at PotM, or a mindset issue that needs solving. By the time I made my AMPC for an NCE, I wasn't asked to closure a character. I think if I had done the same outside an NCE, I wouldn't have been asked to do it either, or judged differently if I had. At the time I was a fairly new player and barely more active than I am now.

I'm just saying if there's nothing else to go by, gracefully accepting closure does display a player is willing to let go when the time comes. There can be a positive side to closure and the way people perceive it, but I see no peer pressure. A kudos thread isn't killing anyone. I think people closure to get closure, and also give closure.

On Arelith, it's different. An experienced player can hit max in a few weeks, maybe grind gold for a few more, and potentially unlock the ability to play a dragon disciple, a fairy, a minotaur. I've never liked applications, but this is a worse form of gating if you ask me, even if both options exist. This creates a direct correlation with making throwaway characters and gambling your playtime away for a rare character, rather than having done something (like closure) you were going to do anyway and being seen a little more favourably, yet new players get subraces all the time.

AMPCs are rare because of another server issue, not our lack of character churn meaning no one closures meaning nobody's allowed. They're immediately outgunned; interest goes way up during NCE where you can survive without too much trouble, focus on what you want to do, and go out on your own terms. You could say they're outgunned because we lack character churn, but I think what we lack is a lower level cap. Like I said in the other thread, my ideal situation would be a level cap of 14 across the entire server, with AMPCs and MPCs allowed to progress to 20 if they make it that long, although in 6 months I don't think they'd level up that many times. Although this has proven to be unpopular, I think it's a fair bit better than making Vallaki utterly unplayable for adventurers level 2-6 and its surrounding environs unplayable for levels 7-12.

There may not be many reasons to closure but like I said above, I think it should be just to do it. It's more pure that way. Imagine if the thread got filled up for months because cliques formed around the concept of recycling powerlevel parties, and we had to take it away from those who would just like to post thanks to those they RPed with. I get the feeling we're turning a pool hall into a 7/11 if we do this.

[BraveSirRobin]

I'm just saying if there's nothing else to go by, gracefully accepting closure does display a player is willing to let go when the time comes. There can be a positive side to closure and the way people perceive it, but I see no peer pressure. A kudos thread isn't killing anyone. I think people closure to get closure, and also give closure.

I think that begs the question of what, 'Gracefully accepting closure,' means in this context. Can you elaborate?

[zDark Shadowz]

Closing a character and finding closure are two different things.

I've played on one server before this where I was happy to close on my own terms if a low level made a mistake and I ended up dying trying to correct it. Also been subjected to other characters closing me, some benign (making a show of it, revealing a plot twist before I died) and some outright malicious because they want me as a player to "FOIC" or they "Aren't their character" so they aren't responsible, no context was given when I tried to seek reconciliation with the pretext I am in the wrong for asking.

I voted no because I prefer the current system where it isn't over so quickly. It promotes people to generate good karma because it can quite swiftly bite back, instead of dusting people in your way under rugs, "with roleplay".

"Roleplay" becomes a very sharp and unforgiving knife when your only crime might be accidentally finding out a thrall indirectly because your mind spell failed to work, an AoE heal hit the wrong person so now everyone must die permanently nearby to maintain silence for one persons benefit, you were doing better, honest trades than your competitors, the person below you wanted to try get a promotion in your faction the easy way and then stops playing a week later after usurping.

.. no I'm fine with just leaving it to the DMs and myself to decide when I close. I'm in a much better mindset to detail and describe how I died or left if I have the illusion of choice.

I invested in a LOT of characters prior to PotM and lost them for the most precarious of reasons. I don't close my characters here because i've already done more than enough of that over there, and I am trying to play NWN overall more casually so I don't go crazy.

I really did go crazy with some of those closures. Thought I'd grow out of it on my first serious one back when I was 21, still didn't handle it too well when I was 27.

Seen plenty of great folk get hamstringed by perma-death and forced closures in those six years. Haven't seen that happen here yet for the four years I've been here (except for two instances but they left quietly)

I can tell you this server is a hell of a lot healthier than the other servers I played over those other six years because of its current death rulings.

There is a weight that comes with investment, and there will always be people that won't respect it and will play by the rules so when they expire someones free trial at life it can't be refuted.

Being able to kill other people like that are just trophies for their own enjoyment and story. It still leaves me bitter, because I cared, and left many otherwise excellent players bitter. I'd rather PotM didn't begin sharing in that bitterness.

Maybe I'm just being a jaded vet, and maybe it'll be different here if the change is made. I don't know. My perception is thoroughly coloured at this point.

[SardineTheAncestor]

I think that begs the question of what, 'Gracefully accepting closure,' means in this context. Can you elaborate?

The circumstances leading up to closure aren't always ideal, even if the player has a choice. PvP closures for example, some might not take those so well. If we have a culture around the closure, it's that what's expected is people interested will stick to positive vibes in the thread, not make a sibling/related character to get revenge, not go around in private channels talking bad about people, that sort of thing. edit: Not to say there is currently a problem with this. I am barely engaged with the community. I only know like 3 people here now and this is not the kind of thing we talk about. But on any RP server, this can happen, it's always hard to put down something you wanted to keep, and it can get worse with permadeath as people struggle to cope with losing characters and having little say in it.

It is a completely optional route to tying up a character's story, a formality. For those who really don't want to, I don't think a +1 sword, a free level or two, a 30% XP potion that lasts 30 days, 4000 gold to start a character off with, or whatever is going to make it sting less. I just can't think of any bonuses that seem right.

More esoteric character concepts, sure, but then we're gating stuff behind closure for real, assigning a real value to it, rather than just respecting that some people want their characters to just be over when it feels right, and that some will want to play their characters for longer. We don't have to put either on a pedestal or say that one side's better than the other, we just have to respect their decision.

Even if we speed up progression to compensate for this, I think we'll find that in a permadeath roguelike Ravenloft RPG, no one really gets to do anything except the minmaxers with the most active cliques of skilled players. Everyone else now has to sit in a tavern and play super low risk and either burn their limited lifecount trying something new with a suboptimal group for the fun of it, or lose the character outright for the want of doing something else besides sit around the campfire, uninvolved in any faction's politics. You won't see people willingly throwing their 3-4 month old characters into the fray if it means they could get locked out of the game when things go ever so slightly wrong. You will see those cliques dominating every aspect of play and killing people out of their own factions so they have majority consent to wipe out competitor factions and any other opposition. Permadeath servers can quickly become wastelands where RP only happens in the safe zones, and everywhere else, nobody wants you close enough to put them in danger. Even if we fix every crash, even if everyone's internet becomes perfect so no disconnects ever happen in combat, even if every bug and awkward musical chairs AoO disaster just never happened again for all time, even if you never walk through a transition and immediately die to something that chased someone else there, people will be more dissatisfied just losing characters and having to start over.

Or we just keep it by consent and let people get to a high level faster. I am not sure the devs are okay with this. It's already pretty fast and painless to get out of the lowest levels now with the changes that have been made. Gothic horror may not be entirely synonymous with survival horror, but increasing the average level even more so that nothing in Vallaki is ever a threat is going to have side effects, even if we can't all agree on them.

If faster progression's the goal (which I'm indifferent/somewhat supportive toward), I would rather a lower level cap than potentially let someone easy street their way to 20 and destroy the server by killing everyone off as an unknown. I think quicker progression actually helps those of us who have spent a lot of time crafting, or have high levels. We would be able to let go of those characters easier, knowing we could max it with far less time and effort, were we to start anew. And the bonuses aren't just for us, new players get to keep pace with us. This is the best of both worlds to me. The lower level cap I would want to see is independent of this.

If encouraging and incentivising character churn's the goal (which I'm against), I dunno if I would even want bonuses, permadeath or not. But this is far from my ideal unless we actually want something like a level 10 cap server where permadeath is certain within the first few months of play. Then, sure, I think even the newest of players would benefit somewhat. But the moment the focus is off the game world and more on what +1 you can get here or there for sacrificing today, or what +2 you can get if you wait a few weeks, I start to lose interest. I do think this can cripple RP and I don't think it's the middle ground it seems like.

[BraveSirRobin]

The circumstances leading up to closure aren't always ideal, even if the player has a choice. PvP closures for example, some might not take those so well. If we have a culture around the closure, it's that what's expected is people interested will stick to positive vibes in the thread, not make a sibling/related character to get revenge, not go around in private channels talking bad about people, that sort of thing.

Well, just to clarify, a player cannot closure another player. ..Even if they corpsehide their bodies, you can now respawn after a certain duration, so there's not even soft closure through obfuscation. The activity you describe is against the server rules.

When you say, 'Closure,' I assume you mean encouraging people to sunlight characters and start new ones, whether through orchestrating a closure with a DM, a natural happy-ending-esque scenario, or otherwise acting with the intent to eventually close them out, and start up a new character. Not the results of some sort of PvP, or otherwise.

It is a completely optional route to tying up a character's story, a formality. For those who really don't want to, I don't think a +1 sword, a free level or two, a 30% XP potion that lasts 30 days, 4000 gold to start a character off with, or whatever is going to make it sting less. I just can't think of any bonuses that seem right.

What I'm suggesting is that if you want people to voluntarily closure, offering them some kind of incentive to make their second return-trip easier on them, or worth something they couldn't otherwise get, encourages that kind of behavior. Otherwise it's a net loss.

Even if we speed up progression to compensate for this, I think we'll find that in a permadeath roguelike Ravenloft RPG, no one really gets to do anything except the minmaxers with the most active cliques of skilled players. Everyone else now has to sit in a tavern and play super low risk and either burn their limited lifecount trying something new with a suboptimal group for the fun of it, or lose the character outright for the want of doing something else besides sit around the campfire, uninvolved in any faction's politics. You won't see people willingly throwing their 3-4 month old characters into the fray if it means they could get locked out of the game when things go ever so slightly wrong. You will see those cliques dominating every aspect of play and killing people out of their own factions so they have majority consent to wipe out competitor factions and any other opposition.

While that would quickly be more interesting than the pace PoTM sometimes adapts, you still find this kind of behavior in Ravenloft and fully protected by the rules. Entering into faction play comes with a page-long disclaimer that you're essentially opted in to many, many avenues of conflict, sabotage, PvP, or otherwise. It isn't uncommon in say, the Gendarmerie, or the Red Vardo, to see this kind of internal sabotaging to gain power for yourself, whether that's in the form of corpsehiding, or aggressively framing and oppressing opposition characters you want power over.

Because factions all come at the risk of conflict, there are people who already do this. On the other hand, there's no longer any risk of actual closure. This thread is arguing that we need to include some method of perma-death, or forced shelving, to which I argue if you want to do that, you're going to need to put a carrot at the end of the stick to keep people playing. Otherwise, there's absolutely no reason to go from where we are now, to there. No-one particularly wants that. A very small minority of the server regularly rolls characters, shelves them, and makes another, and that's their thing to do. But if it is desired to become a broader policy, it's easier to attract flies with honey, rather than vinegar, because not everyone has the excess time or drive in their lives to constitute a half-dozen characters to roll, closure, and roll again.

If encouraging and incentivising character churn's the goal (which I'm against), I dunno if I would even want bonuses, permadeath or not. But this is far from my ideal unless we actually want something like a level 10 cap server where permadeath is certain within the first few months of play. Then, sure, I think even the newest of players would benefit somewhat. But the moment the focus is off the game world and more on what +1 you can get here or there for sacrificing today, or what +2 you can get if you wait a few weeks, I start to lose interest. I do think this can cripple RP and I don't think it's the middle ground it seems like.

If you want to see people voluntarily closuring, Arelith is an example of a server where people do this, and they get tokens that give them access to play other, more unique races. It's also a server that unfetteredly allows you to grind to level 30, then simply roll your character. Ravenloft isn't a server that allows you to do that; The RP XP cap more-or-less ensures that you're on a 12-14 month journey to level 20. In Arelith, you can achieve 30 in about a month and some change, if you really, really no-life that grind.

The result of having a fast-grind to 30 on Arelith is that most people don't even bother roleplaying in-depth until they're level 30, because at that point they're on par with most of the server, except for rare equipment, and it's detrimental to the roleplay on Arelith as a result. On Ravenloft, there's no real way to achieve that. You're going to spend a year doing this no matter what you say, or want. That means that whether or not we implement a system that rewards you for closuring a character, the pace and flow of roleplay will ultimately stay the same.

No matter your server, or your system, there's always going to a clique of hardcore mechanical playboys that outperform everyone else. It's the inevitable fact of the MMO play model, that some people will not only have the expertise and knowledge, by virtue of having free time, but also the play time to apply it. So even if they aren't grinding, they're getting gear, ninjalooting, crafting, or otherwise increasing their power level by getting good gear that would take, you, yourself, additional time ontop of grinding. That exists in PoTM, has before, and always will, so long as there is mechanical variability between characters and gear. That's part of the game aspect, and it's an entirely valid way to play the server so long as you're roleplaying as well in the process.

At the end of the day, we have to look at PoTM and remember that this is a videogame, which should have all of the draws and interests, and rewards, of a videogame for someone who invests time to learn how to play it, and excel at it. It isn't just a medium solely for roleplay equality. It's a roleplaying server, but it's still a game, as well. Player skill will always affect that.

[noah25]

I have proposed making death significantly more crippling in the past and it did not get traction. It would keep people from pretending like the night doesn't matter, flinging themselves at MPCs like it doesn't matter, and trying to fight trolls with no armor on (yes this has become unbelievably common) and you best believe I would solo less.... Things I have proposed in the past have included:

-A similar death cap to the one listed in here that result in permadeath

-A sliding scale where death is worse the higher level you are (start losing permanent ability scores at random when you die) which doesn't force closure but makes your actions actually have consequences

-Death minuses working similar to a cap. So instead of resting and magically being cured of being badly impaired, you regain your ability score minuses slowly over time

-Going buffy style and the more you get rezzed the more often you come back "wrong" and progressively become less and less human until you start losing control of your character ( similar to vistani moon madness but way worse)

Unfortunately, in my experience this suggestion is dead on arrival. Over the last decade the server has consistently drifted away from challenging and unforgiving to welcoming and soft to encourage new players. IMO, with the loss of signifcant consequences or challenge, we ushered in more disruptive behavior, lack of regard for the setting, and other OOC behaviors.

Essentially, do I think bigger consequences for high levels is a good idea, even those that lead to debilitating weaknesses or closure, yes, but not by region. Ultimately, though. If I am taking bets the server will continue to get more forgiving not less   

[HouseOfLament]

I feel like NCE is a much better mechanic for addressing stagnancy than anything that might be coded or handed down by a player.  It's a good example of positive reinforcement.  Make a new character -> good experiences -> idk maybe this should be my main now?

What Chadyo said earlier about impact on staff is also important.  Players really do lose sight of the impact that their requests might have on staff, which is why I've personally resolved never to staff anything again until after I'm retired.  I'd rather staff be having fun conversations about the possibilities with players who are excited about the possibilities than have them burning out over justifying the outcomes that would come from implementing various suggestions here.

Further, I really enjoyed opting into a storyline with a high chance of permadeath level consequences.  Very exciting stuff happened.  There were times when I definitely felt anxious, even afraid.  The most important thing to me here is that I opted into this situation when I was ready.  I think I was only level 8?  I don't have an opinion on what level other players ought to be ready, tbh.  It's their call and not mine. 

[SardineTheAncestor]

Agreed with above. I think the whole point of it really is just recognising when you're ready. The general sentiment, I'm not completely against, but to address these core points:

Well, just to clarify, a player cannot closure another player. ..Even if they corpsehide their bodies, you can now respawn after a certain duration, so there's not even soft closure through obfuscation. The activity you describe is against the server rules.

I am aware. Hard feelings do still exist after closure due to the circumstances leading up to closure. You can do a lot worse than corpsehide someone for the max duration and force them to lose half their levels. Closure also exists as an escape but some people do sweat it and struggle to move on. It exists in any RP medium, independent of any other observations about the communities that form around them - it's hard to let go regardless of a happy ending or a disappointing one.

What I'm suggesting is that if you want people to voluntarily closure, offering them some kind of incentive to make their second return-trip easier on them, or worth something they couldn't otherwise get, encourages that kind of behavior. Otherwise it's a net loss.

I actually do not want people to voluntarily close characters unless it is completely voluntary. I don't want them to do it for an incentive, or for respect, or anything like that. I don't care how others RP or handle endings very much at all and I don't want them to stop playing their character let alone render it unplayable, not unless they feel like that's what's right for their character, and hoped to express through my posts that I think character churn is made up and doesn't really benefit the server by itself. I don't think there is any gain if we make a broader policy regarding it, some people just like to keep playing new characters, others don't want to be done with theirs.

To keep the rest short: on faction stuff, true, more or less agreed, this is all by design and the power that factions have supports my point that you can do a lot to other players besides campfire and hide them. I think people are generally aware of this and that's a big part of why factions are perennially understaffed. A lot of players see relatively little value in actively pursuing conflict RP and will opt out when given the chance. I don't even necessarily think it's because of unhealthy attachment most of the time, and it's not wrong that people want to engage with the game side of the RPG too. I just think the level cap is so high, the time it takes to get there is so long, and the crafts are so grindy that yeah, people are gonna get attached and most of the time they won't want to closure, which is fine.

It's not a problem that people play their characters for a long time. If there is a problem, it is that they attain a power level far too high for the server. The reason I suggested both a soft level cap (e.g. Vallaki only) and a hard level cap (e.g. all across the server) was so that people could play their characters for as long as they want without having to worry about the IC and OOC complications. I think it's clear both the lower level cap and permadeath ships have sailed, and I don't mean to post just for the sake of obstruction, but I would just have to see a really good suggestion for this specific feature of incentivising closure by providing a bonus to a new character. I don't think it's possible that the trade off will ever be enough. Let's say the RP speaks for itself and you're satisfied, now you have to justify the pure game element: 1-2 years of play or more, let's say you are at or near level 20 with several enchanted items and an inventory full of hoarded items, perhaps one craft maxed... this just cannot be quantified in material gains for a new character.

If we are going to have a discussion about it, we really have to move away from Arelith's failures within their own ecosystem and focus on what would be right for PotM. I'd have to say no if it comes back to subraces, nobility, starting gold/equipment/ability scores, anything that Arelith does, I want to see something unique that actually benefits roleplay rather than gating it behind grinding.

[BraveSirRobin]

To keep the rest short: on faction stuff, true, more or less agreed, this is all by design and the power that factions have supports my point that you can do a lot to other players besides campfire and hide them. I think people are generally aware of this and that's a big part of why factions are perennially understaffed. A lot of players see relatively little value in actively pursuing conflict RP and will opt out when given the chance. I don't even necessarily think it's because of unhealthy attachment most of the time, and it's not wrong that people want to engage with the game side of the RPG too. I just think the level cap is so high, the time it takes to get there is so long, and the crafts are so grindy that yeah, people are gonna get attached and most of the time they won't want to closure, which is fine.

Well, when you discuss attachment and an unwillingness to let go, there has to be a distinction to be defined before sifting into it any further. When I discuss the arithmetic of time invested vs. gained value, I.E., I put 1,000 hours into mechanically reaching certain milestones in character level and crafting, I have a natural expectation that unless I do something wrong, I am not going to lose that investment. I wouldn't call that attachment, as much as expected possession, or the notions of ownership one would have over property. It's my time invested, my character, my decision.

But if we push that part aside and look at attachment on an emotional level, that is an inherently unhealthy attachment. I'd not encourage anyone to see their fictitious character as an actual person, or thing. Then you start getting depressed when say, something bad happens to them that doesn't necessarily cause you to lose time invested into the character; I.E., in-character emotional trauma, scarring, maiming, disfigurement, relationships, etc.

Going back to the original intent of this thread, if you want people to think being forcibly shelved or closured is a net positive, you have to acknowledge the inherent cost of their time invested and either reduce that cost of investment, or remunerate them in some form. If you don't, then you can expect this whole idea to be a hard pass and a move on.

I bring up Arelith as an example because, their community issues aside, they have a genuine culture of character turnover there. It just happens the roleplay on the server is not exactly what I would call immersive at most hours.

If we're discussing what's best for PoTM specifically, then that's a very subjective question. But I presume the simplest answer would be to maintain the status quo and only closure characters as direct punishments for said characters breaking the bubble of the setting by getting too uppity with secular powers, or voluntarily closuring out.

If you ask me, I'd be much more interested in a high-stakes horror version of PoTM where you level relatively quickly, but everything is extremely lethal, and if you corpse you're permanently dead. However, I suspect that isn't what OP had in mind when broaching this topic.

Another question I'd have is that, disregarding all I've written above, why is closure, forced or voluntary, something that is important? What is the perceived benefit of this? Why is this discussion unique to this server?

[SardineTheAncestor]

I don't think emotional attachment is good in any case, no, but I'll go along the semantic lines and call it expected possession. This can still be understood as unhealthy, I would personally not be comfortable in the sphere of someone who takes their frustration out on others whether the situation is IC or the situation is OOC. At that moment this whole "it's just a video game" thing crumbles. It doesn't just erode trust and friendly bonds between players, it removes all the stops entirely. There's healthy banter, and then there's taunting/insulting over stuff like dungeon gameplay, PvP outcomes, and IC situations, none of that is good, and I see nothing reasonably separating that from entitlement to play a character and any taunting/insulting based on that expectation.

I personally don't think there is any way to get people playing a wide net server like PotM to accept forcible shelving or closure after so many years of the main line of consequences being generally self-inflicted, besides the inconvenience of the raise/resurrection system. I don't want them to think it's a net positive, I voted no.

I am a fan of quicker leveling for increased difficulty and consequence, but I think there needs to be more to it than that. Flipping PotM upside down like that wouldn't work unless it was done as an experiment and presented as a different experience.

Character churn as a topic comes up everywhere. It's always been said that playing a character for too long inevitably leads to attachment. I disagree. I think people should feel welcome to wait until they feel it is right to closure. Even on permakill servers where one life is all you get, people complain because they've reached the opposite end of the spectrum, where no one wants to do anything because the possible reward could never be worth it.

DMs can run more permadeath events whenever they want, but transforming a whole region of the server - the starting zone/NCE region especially - just seems like it will alienate people. Would I personally RP my characters defying the weight of the situation and accepting the risk when appropriate, to travel back to Vallaki because of something important to them personally? Sure, I have done so in the past knowing this was on the table, I would do it again. But like I said, PotM's a wide net server. You might be able to get some of us to use some kind of bonus XP thing where we have a limited number of lives but level up quicker. It would only be some of us though. Perhaps a vote could be put up for that specifically, just to see where interest lies, but I expect there to be opposition to the idea, and personally I'm really not sure it's the right direction.

[BraveSirRobin]

I don't think emotional attachment is good in any case, no, but I'll go along the semantic lines and call it expected possession. This can still be understood as unhealthy, I would personally not be comfortable in the sphere of someone who takes their frustration out on others whether the situation is IC or the situation is OOC. At that moment this whole "it's just a video game" thing crumbles. It doesn't just erode trust and friendly bonds between players, it removes all the stops entirely. ...

I'm confused. I'm not sure this was ever the discussion, or that it was ever a subject I broached regarding OOC misconduct. Maybe something I said was misunderstood, so I'll try to clarify a bit, but keep it brief. On PoTM, we, the players, enter into an agreement with the server that we'll obey the rules and server expectations as listed on the forums, and in return, we play the game and RP with the community. So long as we follow these rules, and so long as we do not willingly opt-in to the risk of closure or permadeath, or what-have-you, then we're safe to protect our time invested into our characters.

My point was to make, that if you want to encourage or find new ways to kill off these characters, you're going to need to find a way to incentivize the change.

There's healthy banter, and then there's taunting/insulting over stuff like dungeon gameplay, PvP outcomes, and IC situations, none of that is good, and I see nothing reasonably separating that from entitlement to play a character and any taunting/insulting based on that expectation.

I don't understand where this is coming from, either; I never condoned any of this, or suggested it. I don't know where the idea of taunting, insulting, or OOC misconduct comes into play when explaining that if you invest time into something, it becomes valuable. In a way, we're all entitled to a certain degree to have access to our characters if we've not opted into scenarios in which they die, and we've not violated server rules that would see them deleted. If tomorrow, your character was suddenly dead without recourse, without warning, would you not say you are entitled to be able to play that character without grief or molestation?

Any kind of OOC misconduct like that should be reported and dealt with by a DM, and is entirely irrelevant to what I'm saying, here. It's a non-sequitor.

I personally don't think there is any way to get people playing a wide net server like PotM to accept forcible shelving or closure after so many years of the main line of consequences being generally self-inflicted, besides the inconvenience of the raise/resurrection system. I don't want them to think it's a net positive, I voted no.

You and I agree. I think if you're going to institute that, you're going to have to create some way for the value of time invested to carry to new characters if you want to retain the interest of the playerbase.

I am a fan of quicker leveling for increased difficulty and consequence, but I think there needs to be more to it than that. Flipping PotM upside down like that wouldn't work unless it was done as an experiment and presented as a different experience.

I'd vibe a fixed-level PoTM Ironman experience where everything is hyper-lethal, and you're less concerned about dungeoneering, and just surviving in an alien, and hostile land. Only Natives are application-gated, and serve similar roles as MPCs to oppressively ostracize the outlanders in their domains. Turn everything up to 11. Yeah, that'd be hot. Make it like the action server, and see which one takes off harder. Original, or Spicy+.

Character churn as a topic comes up everywhere. It's always been said that playing a character for too long inevitably leads to attachment. I disagree. I think people should feel welcome to wait until they feel it is right to closure.

Character churn comes up on this server more than any other I've ever known, and the utter concern with other people's characters ceasing to exist has never ceased to amaze me. I've played on servers on NWN since Exaria I & Exaria II back in the day, and while death did happen, there was never a particular interest or concern in characters achieving some higher level standing or wealth, and then existing too long. Here, it seems like people who don't often get their characters to late-game get filled with righteous consternation about characters roaming about with a treasure trove in their pocket and an iron boot to kick around. If you want to permanently delete your character, that's up to you; But that's all it is, to me. Erroneously deleting your character, unless they either died or sunsetting to achieve something they otherwise couldn't, or in the attempt of trying.

Every year, the rules become stricter on character origins, possibilities, equipment, and what can-be, that if you delete your grandfathered character from way back then, you have to acknowledge you'll never get to do that thing again. Recently, it's all about policing origins. A decade ago, it was reducing the kinds of subraces you could play, or the number of planetouched traits you can have. Hell, I even heard that they stopped supporting characters from Warhammer Fantasy as a setting and removed all of their deity support from the forums, except for WHF characters that already existed. Not sure if that's true or not, but- You get the idea.

Even on permakill servers where one life is all you get, people complain because they've reached the opposite end of the spectrum, where no one wants to do anything because the possible reward could never be worth it.

I've been on a fair few over the years, and all I can say is; If you want to it work out right, you have to have a good number of carrots for people to chase, and even let them have it some of the time.

DMs can run more permadeath events whenever they want, but transforming a whole region of the server - the starting zone/NCE region especially - just seems like it will alienate people. Would I personally RP my characters defying the weight of the situation and accepting the risk when appropriate, to travel back to Vallaki because of something important to them personally? Sure, I have done so in the past knowing this was on the table, I would do it again. But like I said, PotM's a wide net server. You might be able to get some of us to use some kind of bonus XP thing where we have a limited number of lives but level up quicker. It would only be some of us though. Perhaps a vote could be put up for that specifically, just to see where interest lies, but I expect there to be opposition to the idea, and personally I'm really not sure it's the right direction.

I agree, more-or-less. Part of the problem PoTM suffers in my eye, is that it is psychologically distressing. Not even in the Gothic Horror kind of way; For the last five or six years, it has followed a trend of becoming more restrictive and cloistered, redacting, removing, and otherwise taking away features, options, things, abilities, and applying nerfs. There are some additions, such as new classes, for instance.

But those classes are always immediately assailed by criticism and then nerfed, so, parts taken away again. I'd like to see it expand horizons, rather than narrowing them after a certain point. But that's neither here nor there for this thread, and it's only relevant as to say that turning West Barovia into NullSec is probably not the best idea, when it is currently HighSec.

[William Roberts]

Some emotional attachment to / investment in one's character is probably necessary for good RP. The player who can be "in character" without it is, I expect, the exception, rather than the rule. Likewise, to get the full immersive experience of a role-playing game, some sense of possibly meaningful loss (or victory), I think, the same identification is required. One cannot care and not care at the exact same moment.

Balancing that and keeping perspective...sure. It's why one needs to step away from the game and recharge.

And, as in real life, we can love life very much and cling to it tooth and nail, yet accept that--in the words of an infamous monk--"Death comes to us all!"