AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

Months of work away from the other cool things we are working on, in addition to the balance stuff? I know this is a catch-22 situation, but seriously. There's other stuff in the pipeline that adds to the atmosphere probably more than a longer day/night cycle and has 100% guaranteed results.

Well the new emote wand was a new immersion adding factor versus... well everything else is in the changelog.
I think we can see what the focus is. Chris likes his mechanics, so it's only fair he gets to spend his voluntary time on doing what he likes.

On the bright side, Selmak is overhauling the job system. So there's someone who's working on the immersion side at least right?

Dramatic_Prince wrote:

Well the new emote wand was a new immersion adding factor versus... well everything else is in the changelog.
I think we can see what the focus is. Chris likes his mechanics, so it's only fair he gets to spend his voluntary time on doing what he likes.

On the bright side, Selmak is overhauling the job system. So there's someone who's working on the immersion side at least right?

Plenty more, but you just don't get to see it until it's finished. That's the idea of a nice surprise.

Phearnun wrote:

I The same way why I do not understand why a change to make the world more as it should be

The world as it "should" be is entirely your own opinion, so I'd appreciate it if you don't push your own preferences onto the server. You've been here long enough to know the kind of magic-level Amia is; you've played your own devils, catgirls and frost giants too, so it seems you've managed to get some pleasure out of that. If you want ultra realism with slow RP gains and harsh atmosphere, Ravensloft is ---> that way.

The argument that concealing magical effects would buff mages is a completely valid point. If a mage has just enchanted themselves with a collection of powerful spells, then it's going to be apparent in some way. With this kind of change, mages will just slap on all their buffs and nobody will know the wiser. It's fine to argue "RP RP RP" till you're blue in the face, but PvP conflict undeniably plays a large part in this server too. Whether or not that's a good thing is a different matter, but it's a fact nonetheless.

Last edited by IronAngel on Thu, Feb 17 2011, 15:50 PM, edited 1 time in total.

In any case, the argument of "too busy, not important enough" is pretty ridicilous in this case of VFXs, where all you need to do is change one or a few lines in a dozen or two spell scripts (as far as I can see after Googling it). You might even find a volunteer.

Paladin: we're all just pushing our preferences on the server, so let's be honest about that. Some people just happen to prefer the status quo and have an easier time legitimizing their preferences.

PvP balance seems pretty contrived an excuse here. Fighters will just drink their potions and people will be none the wiser, too. What's the difference? As I said, potion users will actually be at a greater advantage, because it's mages who need to worry about Mindblank on their opponent whereas a melee class won't care and will expect that from the mage anyway. Not to mention you'll be spotted when you cast. And hey, we could have an Analyze Dweomer custom spell/widget or a Spellcraft roll to check what buffs people have running. Besides, most buffs would still be visible. I don't see how Mindblank, PfA or TS destroy PvP balance, because you should expect those spells by default.

Last edited by Pony on Thu, Feb 17 2011, 16:01 PM, edited 3 times in total.

In truth, the daylight and nighttime ratio is not even being looked at properly. The current responses are largely assumptions of what could be in the black box (which we made, so we do know quite a bit what we put in there and what is likely affected). And remember, it is one example. Because that one example may be the most difficult to do and if so, perhaps even impossible... that does not change the design and development treats as if amia is a hack and slash server on which rp takes a back seat (does not mean it is, but that changes are based as if). I do not mean to rip on the team, as this is not something that was not the case before.

And paladin, shame on you for that silly silly attempt. The fact I played two abyssal characters when I was fifteen (the server was very different at the time as well) does not change day night is broken or magic is not a rave show. I think I am not out of line to at least ask that such suggestions are regarded with some consideration, and not told that if you want anything done in the rp/atmosphere department I should head to another server. :roll:

In addition I am not saying that pvp/pvm balances have no place here. I am saying we should not treat atmosphere/rp mechanics as a orc lovechild we rather keep in the closet than dealing with.

Edit 3: Some bad spelling mistakes.

IronAngel wrote:

And even if those mechanical things are the priority now, that shouldn't stop us from deciding what we as a playerbase want, and then submitting it to the Dev team for implementation when they have the time. How and when they do their job is up to them. It's still up to us express our desires and come up with good ideas.

This isn't a question of when the dev team has time in general, btw, but if the suggestion is fit for addition, aka if it meets the required standards. You do understand that the module isn't an open source project that anybody can mess with and any and all suggestions demanded will be added. You probably disagree with this, but that's how it is and has always been, and will be. I think the reasons are pretty obvious, at least if thought a bit further, so I'm not going to get into them now.

Phearnun wrote:

In truth, the daylight and nighttime ratio is not even being looked at properly. The current responses are largely assumptions of what could be in the black box (which we made, so we do know quite a bit what we put in there and what is likely affected). And remember, it is one example. Because that one example may be the most difficult to do and if so, perhaps even impossible... that does not change the design and development treats as if amia is a hack and slash server on which rp takes a back seat (does not mean it is, but that changes are based as if). I do not mean to rip on the team, as this is not something that was not the case before.

Sorry, but we can't have our cake and eat it too. We have to prioritise, we can't give the module for just anyone to tinker with and some suggested projects just do not measure up to what I see as a good thing to spend time on. It's a simple cost/benefit calculation and this suggestion just doesn't give a balanced result, when put next to all the other stuff we're working on now and have planned. You are right, though, that it didn't meet the requirements before, either, for the same reasons. The benefits do not measure up to the amount of work it takes (daylight cycles can be RP'd to suit whatever RP you're doing atm, which is an easy way to ignore the short duration and something I believe most people do anyway), and there's lots of other more productive things that can be done in the same time. Including the atmosphere stuff you want to see.

There's a difference between asking if suggestions can be considered and posting sarcastic remarks that come off as you being rather snide.

Quote:

The same way why I do not understand why a change to make the world more as it should be, where magic is subtle and people do not look like the suburbs of New York at christmas is less important than Mosh's new super monster project XY and the re-design of the Yuan-ti number 56. Kinda like on an action server.

Quote:

Oh yay, another batch of summons and pvp/pvm stuff. But I think that just illustrated the point I wished to make rather well. Balance/Action/PvP before Immersion/Atmosphere/RP.

versus

Quote:

I've played on a server that has the spell visuals for every spell except a very, very few disappear five seconds after casting and it worked well. And showing them here works well, too.

The former is the kind of attitude I'd rather not see on the forums, and really, one of the larger reasons I don't bother with the public subforums anymore.

Nekh: Yes, but ultimately those standards are set by Amia as a collective, DMs, players and developers included. In practice authority is unevenly shared, but that doesn't change the fact that the ideal justification of developement authority is in serving the desires of the entire server (or its actively participating fraction, at least). If your own motives and standards have steered too far from the general desires of the playerbase, your role comes into question - though that's not the case here, and we need to also realize there's no external standard to judge by and all that happens on Amia is just power play. But just saying, since we went into the political theory of it.

I think you missed my point in an earlier post, where I said the developers (and DMs) are an evaluative safety net and that I have no illusions of direct democracy. But while we acknowledge this fact of life, we should also remember that ultimately Amia should be what Amians want it to be, and without a doubt the best way to achieve that is a rational discourse of exploring possibilites, convincing fellow Amians and consulting authorities. I am critisizing Mosh's backwards notion that just anyone can come to the developers (and testers, of all people) and suggest some nonesense, whereupon it's taken into private discussion to decide if it's good for Amia (that is, us).

I know how it's always worked: things keep getting brought up in public and good points are made, and ideally the DMs listen and try to do what they can. This is what we're doing. Discussing the issue, expressing our desires, pointing out and solving problems, and hopefully coming to some kind of a consensus that the Developement needs to take into consideration. I don't know if the consensus will turn in favor or against my suggestion but at this point, formal authority has no place in the discussion. (Especially looking at Tormak's "This won't happen" one-liner BS here.) Discuss the issue or don't discuss at all, IMO. Nobody's answered my PvP questions and counter-arguments, for example, yet they keep repeating the point as if it was unchallenged. Talk business, damn it!

Well, we do need to get things done at some point and not discuss for eternity. That's the main reason the discussions are taken off the public forums at some point: because things never get decided and implemented if a large amount of people is allowed to discuss the matter to death.

Same goes for keeping the final decision making to a select group of people because not all opinions are equally valid. Some people have expertise more than others in some areas and thus their opinion should weigh more. That's testers, designers and devs. I don't count DMs into this, as only a few DMs actually possess the skills to comment on balance or other stuff (and they don't need to, either).

Mind that testers are picked based on their contribution to the discussion on the public forums, so anybody has a chance to get into the "select few" if they show they understand what they're talking about. Doesn't mean they have to agree with the current team. Just display an understanding and skill to apply that knowledge.

Yeah yeah, but the contention here is in regards to this topic specifically. Where next to no reasonable discussion was had before it exploded into political nonsense. Where many players seemed excited and made a good case and were dismissed as unimportant. "Endless discussion" is hardly an accurate description of the half a dozen level-headed, thorough posts on the subject. If the best argument you can muster is "I have expertise and I say so", your actual expertise seems suspect. Bringing up the testers in this context is especially absurd, because this is not a case where their expertise applies. They're a group of combat balance experts, which will inevitably lead to a distorted emphasis on PvP in an issue which has so many other aspects too. This is also an ideological and aesthetic decision where balance knowledge should be awarded no exclusive authority.

Why do you think this isn't a good idea?

IronAngel wrote:

we should also remember that ultimately Amia should be what Amians want it to be

There is also the "if you don't like it, leave" camp. It's like politics and democracy is the casualty.

IronAngel wrote:

If the best argument you can muster is "I have expertise and I say so", your actual expertise seems suspect.

And that's how it works here? Doesn't stop us from questioning the wisdom of some changes though.

@ Paladin: What I am saying in essence is that I would like to see subjects that revolve around atmosphere and immersion not to be dismissed because of possible fears of balance issues or because the combat aspect seem to take priority, and that is not a far fetched call that has no validity. The fact I made a sarcastic comment because someone underlined by point does not make it less real. If you wish to ask me to refrain from sarcasm that can be interpreted as being snide or arrogant, then ask as you did after I replied to your first post. Being even more of a bad example of what bad forum discussions look like with a baseless argument/accusation and a suggestion if you want something changed in that department to leave the server is a silly way for a DM to respond.

I believe that small things can make the sever overall much better. Much of amia's style is very arcade like, while other roleplay servers focus much more on atmosphere and roleplay mechanics. Again, that does not change I intend to stay on amia. It means I care to make suggestions and push for things that I believe would add to the experience here. Balance issues, faction bases, custom things for players and so forth all are important. However, it appears very foolish of an important aspect of work that should be pursued by the team to be shut down and neglected so early by Mosh.

In summary what was said on the subject of the spell effects on hand is the following:

1. Suggestion to disable spell effects completely. Thought it would help lag.
2. Fear pvp with mages would become even more ill-balanced.
3. Most magic should have a VFX. In a world infused with magic, everyone should be at least sensitive to it's effects and it's reasonable for it to be flashy and totally not subtle. (Lore arguement)
4. Lag is on client and not host, hence it will not make the server less laggy.
5. Iron's remark it would not really make the balance worse as it benefits non-mages more than mages. In addition lore arguement magic should not be flashy and be subtle.
6. Aesthetic comments and banter about barkskin.
7. Side bla bla about mist dragons and horses and clarification from tormak concerning them.
8. Shut down by Mosh stated "I'm way to busy to dick around with this. Remind me in like 6 months when I've finished my current crop of awesome additions"

In other words, before it was derailed by all this other stuff out of the premature ending of the chance to discuss it, the topic was not even seriously looked at yet.

IronAngel wrote:

Why do you think this isn't a good idea?

I said it a few posts above why I don't think the daylight/darkness adjusting is a good idea, but I'll repeat it. It takes a lot of time that is away from other things. It cannot be done by any monkey because a) it takes some skill, b) I don't just give the module to anybody, c) it takes an understanding of where the NWN time counting is actually used (I've no clue myself, btw, I just know it's used in a lot of things that I know of and then some that I probably wouldn't think of), d) it takes an understanding of our script base in general, and e) some of the scripts where it's used probably use the kind of math that isn't just a matter of find and replace. It cannot be done in phases but would require to be implemented in one go, either postponing other possibly important updates or requiring the devs to do the same work twice (need to adjust the old script and the new script).

The benefit is questionable to begin with. People have lived with the annoyance of a short daylight and night for six years and been capable of adjusting their RP to it, or have RPd their own day cycles as it suit them. It doesn't bring any benefit to DM events, because they move at speed of plot anyway. Overall, I don't actual day/night cycles would get used in the end except by the few who care to nitpick about these things, because people RP at the speed they type and scenes happen at a variable pace in normal RP.

If you're in an exterior area and it's night, and then suddenly it's day... nothing stops you from RPing it's still night, if that suits your story better! The lack of visual aids in many other departments doesn't stop people, why should this be a major hindrance all of sudden?

All in all, there's so many other things that we can do in the time that it would take to implement something like this. It's just not cost effective. It's a minor detail that most simply gloss over and would take months to fix. That's insanity from dev perspective.

I have no opinion on the VFX matter, though. But from a purely cost/benefit perspective, it's a drop in the ocean. That's a guestimate, though, I didn't check how it should be done. Might be that it's a bit more complicated than I'd think at first.

Nekhy wrote:

I have no opinion on the VFX matter, though. But from a purely cost/benefit perspective, it's a drop in the ocean. That's a guestimate, though, I didn't check how it should be done. Might be that it's a bit more complicated than I'd think at first.

This is what I meant. I don't know about the day/night thing, though I have a hard time imagining anything would be more important than it. It's anything but a cosmetic detail. It just sets the tone of the entire server in a way you wouldn't believe, and you could do stuff like nocturnal spawns, NPC routines etc. with it. But that's really a different issue. VFXs may seem like a drop in the ocean to you, but it seems many people are quite interested in the idea and it would improve story possibilities and atmosphere a great deal.

So let's get back to VFXs, please?

When I say "a drop in the ocean" from dev perspective I mean I think it's a small thing as in a small amount of work, though that is a guestimate.

To get it back on track:

LAG ISSUE:

TormakSaber wrote:

Dramatic_Prince wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

1:Doesn't reduce lag like you think it will

1. In some DM events, people are instructed to debuff or to buff without VFX. So there must be some truth to that.

It's entirely client lag, not server lag, a.k.a the "get a better CPU" kind of lag.

TormakSaber wrote:

Mist Dragons and horses are super high poly count mdoels comapred to the rest of NWN and thus client lag, but unavoiable in part due to how NWN's engine handles models.

Auras are server lag because they run off heartbeats which are the most poorly optimized script type in all of NWN's coding, which is why we minimize their use as possible.

Lore/Atmosphere ISSUE:

Bravo21 wrote:

Let me get this straight. People who live in a fantasy world where they are inundated by magic at almost every second of their lives, cannot then see it's effect in the world around them?

Even a lowly fighter with no spellcasting and no spellcraft can drink a potion and appear ghostlike, becomming harder to hit in combat. Most magic should have a VFX. In a world infused with magic, everyone should be at least sensitive to it's effects and it's reasonable for it to be flashy and totally not subtle. Everyone should be able to see when a priest is infused by the power of their diety, wizards should be seen bending the Weave to their will.

This isn't street RP in Chicago or Amsterdam, it's Amia. It's a wonderful, mysterious, magical place where anything can happen. Maybe some other server can stand in for a little of the reality that I aassume most here are trying to avoid.

IronAngel wrote:

You're supposed to identify spells as they're being cast, and you do. "I don't want to read the combat log" is a poor excuse. You're not supposed to recognize spells once they're in effect, unless you actually see their effect and then it's obvious to you OOC. So any spellcraft argument or "you should see magic around you" is simply not true in D&D and FR, no matter how magical and rainbow-colored some people want the world to be. Magic is subtle, for the most part. Novels and spell descriptions show this clearly.

Of course VFXs should only be removed from spells with subtle effects, not every spell. True Seeing, See Invisibility, Mindblank, Protection From Alignment, probably the Energy Resist line, and whatever higher spells have unintuitive, disruptive effects. Premonition comes to mind. Polymorph and Invisibility should probably keep their VFXs.

BALANCE ISSUE:

Selvec Darkon wrote:

Against it. Simply because when someone casts a spell and your the opposing caster, you are meant to be able to tell what spells the person is casting and what spells they have on them. That's part of spellcraft. If you remove the VFX, then it suddenly becomes an exercise in cutting your own throat, as you need to read the battle logs in the middle of a fight to see what spells you identified as being cast or being on the magic-user.

Besides, its also a balance thing. Mages are already OP in almost every aspect. Lets not make them more OP, even to improve immersion.

IronAngel wrote:

Selvec Darkon wrote:

Against it. Simply because when someone casts a spell and your the opposing caster, you are meant to be able to tell what spells the person is casting and what spells they have on them. That's part of spellcraft. If you remove the VFX, then it suddenly becomes an exercise in cutting your own throat, as you need to read the battle logs in the middle of a fight to see what spells you identified as being cast or being on the magic-user.

Besides, its also a balance thing. Mages are already OP in almost every aspect. Lets not make them more OP, even to improve immersion.

You're supposed to identify spells as they're being cast, and you do. "I don't want to read the combat log" is a poor excuse. You're not supposed to recognize spells once they're in effect, unless you actually see their effect and then it's obvious to you OOC. So any spellcraft argument or "you should see magic around you" is simply not true in D&D and FR, no matter how magical and rainbow-colored some people want the world to be. Magic is subtle, for the most part. Novels and spell descriptions show this clearly.

Of course VFXs should only be removed from spells with subtle effects, not every spell. True Seeing, See Invisibility, Mindblank, Protection From Alignment, probably the Energy Resist line, and whatever higher spells have unintuitive, disruptive effects. Premonition comes to mind. Polymorph and Invisibility should probably keep their VFXs.

PvP balance is not a dealbreaker issue, even if some people like to use it as an unquestionable veto as if game balance was the authoritative discourse here. Those who know and care about it should find other ways to fix it, this is clearly a priority to many people. I don't see how it buffs mages anyway, because it's the mages who'd need to know if the PC they're fighting has drunk a Mindblank or See Invis potion, not the other way around. If you're fighting a mage, you should assume he's buffed anyway. So how does it buff mages more than it buffs casual potion-users?

I like how you ignore my post because it is the best reason to not do it: It buffs casters and casters do not need buffed, therefore this won't get done.

True. I already countered that, though. You need to do better. And you're not the one who says what will or won't be done, so unless you're interested in looking for a solution you don't really have a lot to contribute. If there's a problem with a suggestion, you deal with that problem rather than dismiss the entire suggestion.

Even if there is a balance problem with this change (which I'm skeptical about and nobody's managed to clarify) and even if it can't be remedied, it still needs to be weighed against other benefits. In this case, it seems pretty insignifigant in the big picture. Balance is only one aspect of design, after all, and not the most important one.

IMHO, Who's to say that spell effects don't have a manifestation after casting?

Really, I'm sorry but not having spells like 'Detect Magic' mechanically availible which COULD check for things like this quickly (even if you don't know EXACTLY which spells are there without further spell use such as 'Analyze Dweaomer' ), Certain buffs should have VFX. Not all do.

I'm for keeping the VFX in honestly.

Quote:

True. I already countered that, though.

How do you counter 110% fact? Not being able to see what a caster has running is a HUGE boost in power for a mage and a cleric who already romp the entire server.

Change not needed. Spells have visual manifestations when cast.

If you would like to be not sparkly, do not cast the spells that sparkle. There are many.

How can ten posting people say what the majority of Amias playerbase does want? Btw, you wont notice when my cleric is buffed up too, because I start the fancy stuff only when shit hits the fan. Where does that notion that you don't see certain spells come from anyway?

Because they think they'll win arguments that way. We smile and nod and pat them on the head but otherwise keep to our more serious work.

Spell Visuals are there for a reason. Deal. :twisted:

hendrack wrote:

How can ten posting people say what the majority of Amias playerbase does want? Btw, you wont notice when my cleric is buffed up too, because I start the fancy stuff only when shit hits the fan. Where does that notion that you don't see certain spells come from anyway?

Nobody's said there's a majority conclusion. It's an unfinished discussion, you know. Where the best arguments should follow a set of formal rules to eventually lead to a conclusion that satisfies the public. We haven't even properly started yet, it's just continuously interrupted by people who don't know the rules of rational discourse and therefore aren't a recognized part of the discussion. (In other words: dumb people get ignored, deal with it.)

I don't know where the notion that you do see spells comes from, other than NWN. Open your books or even d20SRD and look for floating eyes or dinner plates under See Invisibility and Mind Blank. You won't find them. I think it's obvious that they're a symbolic representation for the gamer's convenience. And I think we're past convenience at this point in Amia's history.

You won't find them because spell effects and visuals are left up to the DM to describe, and I have never met a DM who did not give spells visuals.

Not started yet? When Mosh says to bother him again in 6 months so the Devs/Testers take a look at it, the discussion is pretty much over. But feel free to continue your monologue.

IronAngel wrote:

I don't know where the notion that you do see spells comes from, other than NWN.

You follow this statement by asking us to read books you clearly have not read yourself for some time. Not all spells have visuals clearly spelled out, no, but the vast majority do.

Holes in the quote above: I can already see where an Illusionist may tell you to Pike-Off. Silent image? Spirit wall? Fireball? Magic missile? All these spells have visuals, just to name a few, and I am talking PnP (RPGA). Take a look in your PHB as well as your Complete Arcane books.

Furthermore, extending the comment logically to envelope all magic based upon your generic use:
Arguably, psionics (in magic-psionic transparency worlds where it counts as magic, and I am unsure if FR let alone Amian FR qualifies) also have visuals, namely ectoplasmic, but as I avoid that stuff like the plague, I defer to Amia's most known Psy player, Tormak. There is then Incarnum (big visuals there, boss), Pact Magic, and Shadow Magic (per the Tome of Magic. It is not the same as Shadow Weave magic, FYI for folks that don't have the book).

Yes, almost all psionic powers have visual manifestations, hough there is a feat that makes the power cost more PP but removes these on casting manifestations. You still see the end resultant spell effects, though, so it is essentially a still/silent spell sort of thing.

I've always RPed that you can see spells.

Why else is it called stoneskin, if it doesn't make your skin look like stone? Because it makes your skin as hard as stone? That could work, but I'd bet if it had a diamond visual, it'd be diamondskin. Or a metal visual, it'd be metalskin. Those would be cool spells to create.

Premonition is the same way, but more "subtle" as you put it, Iron. Already for the subtle spells, the VFXs are a little more subtle. You're not made of stone anymore, but there's a thin haze around you with eyes in it or something or whatever it really is. It's already more subtle. Why are you waving your hands around or speaking if you're not actually making any effects with it?

Trying to make some magic invisible makes the world more lame, it doesn't make it more cool.

TormakSaber wrote:

We've always allowed the cosmetic auras. It's the effect that goes along with the aura. I fail to see where you're going with this. When we changed the aura spells in Amia, we changed the VFX to reflect that it's no longer an aura following you as well. It's the fact that heartbeat scripts are firing off into big groups of spawns, 6 times a second, every round, over and over, etc.

Ok quick question because I've just assumed that I can't feel or see them until it passes over me then my character might shiver or something? I can imagine that an aura like divine might might give of a glow but the aura of despair that Blackguards run around with seems different.

I imagin it like this scene in LOTR (<3 LOTR)

Where he gets a horrible feeling and shouts "Get off the Road!" (and there are no clips of this scene online anywhere! Only one where someone mixed it with Starwars >_>)

I'm guessing that some aura's are not visual or have I got to start RPing:

*trips over flying red ring which sweeps her feet* or "don't trust him look at that giant red ring around him! He's got to be up to no good!"

Sarcasm aside, be nice to know *Thumbs up*

Both sides have made some good points.

Iron and Phaerun are both right when they say that the server tends to place mechanical changes over cosmetic ones. Over my years here, I've noticed that a balance change will be implemented much quicker than a cosmetic one. This isn't to say that this isn't justified or anything like that... only that they have a point.

DustSpray101 wrote:

Spell Visuals are there for a reason. Deal. :twisted:

Spell visuals that light you up like a freakin' Christmas tree are there because it's a video game and people like their characters to be sparkly because NWN in it's Single Player Campaign is ultimately an Arcade game. It's not until it's manifestation in online play that it begins to take on any real semblance of an actual RP game.

Referring back to the actual PHB and other canon source material will provide us with much better clues as to what to look for with the way spells "really" appear on their caster or beneficiary.

As for boosting casters by removing VFX for certain spells.... well.... I can see how it can be a boon for casters in certain cases, but as it stands now casters usually have so many VFX's running on them that you can't tell what the hell is what without really looking anyways. I'd also add that not every spell should have it's VFX removed. Stoneskin, Barkskin, Shadowshield, Ghostly Visage, Flame Weapon and Darkfire among others have rather obvious effects on the caster or their equipment. However, I do find it rather difficult to believe that See Invisibility makes little eyeballs float around your head, for example. I RP that that's the way it is because it's what we've been told to do, but in my heart of hearts, I think it's a bit ridiculous.

In concerns of boosting mages: As Iron pointed out, it would work against casters just as much as it would work for them. For example, the fighter can't tell if that mage has Premonition up, but that mage can't tell if the fighter has Mindblank up, either. Ultimately, it would become a double-edged sword making people pay more attention.

One technical thing to consider is that a lot of the VFXs are based on animated models. You could change the animation so that, for example, the VFX flares up for one second out of thirty seconds, and then fades away for the next twenty-nine. That way you still have the visual reassurance that it's active, but it's not constantly in your face. That said, I only have the faintest idea how to go about doing that, from my time messing around with magic missile textures.

Trouble is, any model changes can be overridden locally if you know which model goes with which VFX. Same goes for visualeffects.2da unfortunately.

Stupid idea. Don't like the visual effects? Turn them off in your ini. Don't force others to change their game to suit you preferences.

Selvec Darkon wrote:

Stupid idea. Don't like the visual effects? Turn them off in your ini. Don't force others to change their game to suit you preferences.

Pot, I'd like to introduce you to kettle. Kettle, this is pot.

Saying others should abide by the status quo because you think they have a "stupid idea" is forcing your preference on others. Not every player knows how to modify their .ini or their .2da files and could cause some issues with their gameplay if they went around messing about in those particular places.

Personally, I think this would be a cool idea... but, my world's not going to come crashing down around my ears if it doesn't happen. I'm more playing Devil's Advocate than anything else.

I think the only group that is "forcing" their views upon us is the DM staff. And I'm quite okay with that. After all, D&D is built around the DMs making the rules and the DM staff doesn't make unnecessary rules or nonsensical ones. They have a good, thought out reason for every one, even if you and I can't see them.

DerkDerkistan wrote:

I think the only group that is "forcing" their views upon us is the DM staff. And I'm quite okay with that. After all, D&D is built around the DMs making the rules and the DM staff doesn't make unnecessary rules or nonsensical ones. They have a good, thought out reason for every one, even if you and I can't see them.

Perhaps "force" is the wrong word, but I can't think of a more suitable word at the moment.

Selvec Darkon wrote:

Stupid idea. Don't like the visual effects? Turn them off in your ini. Don't force others to change their game to suit you preferences.

The point (or at least, *my* point) isn't that I don't like the visual effects (though it's true that I don't). My point is that I don't like that the visual effects provide other players with information which it's implausible and silly for them to be able to know, and that the game would be better off with them not knowing.

That can't be fixed by altering any one player's .ini file. Or even a hundred players' .ini files.

Dammit Fox, why did you feel the urge to ressurect this topic so you could post a LotR picture. No, Auras are not visible.

Quote:

In concerns of boosting mages: As Iron pointed out, it would work against casters just as much as it would work for them. For example, the fighter can't tell if that mage has Premonition up, but that mage can't tell if the fighter has Mindblank up, either. Ultimately, it would become a double-edged sword making people pay more attention

No, it wouldn't, because there's no longer anything to pay attention to. It is statistically approximately 300 BILLION lightyears easier for a Mage to dispel than it is for anyone else, and so it doesn't matter if you had mindblank or not: they were going to dispel you before attacking you anyways. It's their SOP. Meanwhile, you are at a disadvantage, because a lot of mages don't go around buffed to the gills! You might have had a course of action but now you must do "something else". If you're lucky, you have a scroll of mordenkainens you can (have to) use just to make sure that they aren't buffed and meanwhile while you're taking your full action to read a scroll you're dispelled, they just cast whatever one spell they need (probably Haste.) and you're dead. Not being able to see spell VFX is 110% a buff for spellcasters. And if they weren't actually buffed then you blew a scroll because you had to check and make sure and in doing so wasting that entire action lost yourself a fight that otherwise would have been won if spell effects were visible like they are and rightfully should be, and thus this entire situation is a gigantic case of not broken, cannot be improved, does not need fixed.

Quote:

My point is that I don't like that the visual effects provide other players with information which it's implausible and silly for them to be able to know, and that the game would be better off with them not knowing.

Why is it that you are able to define above the setting, above the DMs, and above the game itself what information is, quote, "implausible and silly for them to be able to know"? It is possible to have high spellcraft without having the ability to cast a single spell an d thus be able to identify magic at a glance all without being able to do so much as wave a damn finger. The game would in fact not be better off with you knoing. The impact on PvM would be relatively minor. We could randomize buffs on bosses and you'd have no clue whether or not something has anything... but this doesn't matter because the first move is to cast Mordenkainen's anyways if you're a mage or reading a scroll. Your proposed change has done nothing to affect the net equation and is therefore not worth the time to actually put into effect since it's not going to affect anything. Meanwhile, on the PvP end of the scale, you've radically handed more power to the spellcasters (see above for more detial), and frankly your strongest argument is "I don't like it, make it how I want" and that's dumb.

If I could give Fox a bad token by ressurecting this topic, I would. Hrgh.

"FIZZLE!", "CRACKLE!", "POP!"

All based on around on how I think you can hear or atleast sense the magic in the area, like a bunching of funny sparkly things in the area. Then by all means act as you think your character would and if such an action is to take place that some spell effects would be removed (as said, very not likely) then we're in for just a world of hell; of course it simply sounds as well like a fully buffed warrior could walk into a town without anyone realising it and just bash everyone into mincy pieces, simply because there was an innocent RPer outside that thought a CE walking into a lawfully cool Paladin city wouldn't be so bad.

If you truly wanted to be 'thinking' you could sense magic in the area then you could just simply saying that the character can see the strange, magical twinkle in a character's eyes then suddenly begin implying that he's buffed! Either that or just ask from both parties and see if it's agreed that all magical effects currently cast can be visible, even if I foresee many arguments in OOC parties of conversations on such a method.

How NWN rolls, ya just gotta roll with it!

TormakSaber wrote:

Why is it that you are able to define above the setting, above the DMs, and above the game itself ... frankly your strongest argument is "I don't like it, make it how I want" and that's dumb.

I'm not defining anything, I'm stating my opinion, because someone made a post in a public forum about a matter I have an opinion about. To be blunt, "who are you to have an opinion, dummy" is without exception the worst possible attitude for a DM to have.

ainjyll wrote:

Spell visuals that light you up like a freakin' Christmas tree are there because it's a video game and people like their characters to be sparkly because NWN in it's Single Player Campaign is ultimately an Arcade game. It's not until it's manifestation in online play that it begins to take on any real semblance of an actual RP game.

Referring back to the actual PHB and other canon source material will provide us with much better clues as to what to look for with the way spells "really" appear on their caster or beneficiary.

I've been saying this all along.

DerkDerkistan wrote:

After all, D&D is built around the DMs making the rules and the DM staff doesn't make unnecessary rules or nonsensical ones. They have a good, thought out reason for every one, even if you and I can't see them.

But this holds true regardless, DM's have the final say.

You folks reached a consensus yet?

My vote remains on.... yes/no.

TormakSaber wrote:

No, it wouldn't, because there's no longer anything to pay attention to. It is statistically approximately 300 BILLION lightyears easier for a Mage to dispel than it is for anyone else, and so it doesn't matter if you had mindblank or not: they were going to dispel you before attacking you anyways. It's their SOP. Meanwhile, you are at a disadvantage, because a lot of mages don't go around buffed to the gills! You might have had a course of action but now you must do "something else". If you're lucky, you have a scroll of mordenkainens you can (have to) use just to make sure that they aren't buffed and meanwhile while you're taking your full action to read a scroll you're dispelled, they just cast whatever one spell they need (probably Haste.) and you're dead. Not being able to see spell VFX is 110% a buff for spellcasters. And if they weren't actually buffed then you blew a scroll because you had to check and make sure and in doing so wasting that entire action lost yourself a fight that otherwise would have been won if spell effects were visible like they are and rightfully should be, and thus this entire situation is a gigantic case of not broken, cannot be improved, does not need fixed.

That whole example is moot. Basically you're saying that VFX's change the way you fight a mage. No, it has no effect on how you fight a mage. The scenario you just played out is the basic first few moves of PvP with a mage regardless of whether they'r buffed or not. If you're going against a mage period, first, you're at a disadvantage, second, you're going to try to pop off a Mord's scroll or you're going to try to get in his face before he can pop off a dispel or a Mord's of his own. Saying that you have to see spell VFX's to know that you're going to need a Mord's against a mage is leaving out a lot. Saying that if you're PvP'ing a mage you can expect to get a Dispel or Mord's thrown at you and you should hope to be able to do something about it beforehand, is more accurate.

TormakSaber wrote:

If you would like to be not sparkly, do not cast the spells that sparkle. There are many.

This alone insures that a person worth their salt in PvP is gonna use a Mord's or a dispel on their opponent. Mages almost always have some buffs up, it's just a matter of whether it's the sparkly ones or not.

It's especially moot since spells like Acid Sheath would/should be visible anyway, and a Fighter wouldn't give a damn in the mage had See Invisibility, Mind Blank or Energy Buffer running. I suppose Premonition is the only relevant example in the scenario Tormak describes, and if after careful consideration the problem turns out to be real we could simply leave the Premonition VFX on. Nobody wants every spell undetectable.

Spellcraft argument is false, anyhow. You don't immediately detect and recognize spells with Spellcraft, you can just deduce their effects when you see them in action (as in, Spellcraft lets you realize somebody is running Stoneskin if they're hard and gray).

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/spellcraft.htm

I'm done pushing this for now, but I don't want to end this topic with false information.

Herra Tutteri wrote:

You folks reached a consensus yet?

Considering every DM in this topic has said "no", you're all just yelling until you're blue in the face. Your consensus was reached two full pages ago, you're wasting your time.

Quote:

Spellcraft argument is false, anyhow. You don't immediately detect and recognize spells with Spellcraft, you can just deduce their effects when you see them in action (as in, Spellcraft lets you realize somebody is running Stoneskin if they're hard and gray).

Amia Rule 0: Specific overrides general and on Amia you can see spell effects. Your argument is null.

Not every DM. I'm not actually against it. My personal interpretation of magic is that it's manifestation depends upon the individual practicioner. Your average magic-user in Faerun is going to learn it flashy and bombastic, typically, because thematically speaking, the working of magic is so closely tied to theatrics: forcing one's will upon the world in order to get it to obey your laws rather than its own laws requires either intense charisma (sorcery path) or an intense knowledge of the universe (wizard path) or just hoping your god can help you overcome the laws of the universe (divine path). In all three of these interpretations, the caster has to play "a role" (including the non-magic user utilizing UMD!) on the proverbial stage, directing reality to bend through the typical prescribed models of magicking: verbal, somatic, invocation, evocation, ritual, component, what-have-you.

The majority of these methods require the caster to take some kind of action, and it is the taking of action that is acting and when practiced by rote (or pushed intuitively and improvisationally forward by a spontaneous caster), the process becomes theatrical (either because it is like a practiced thespian rehearsing lines and blocking, or because it is like a performance artist trying to mimic that process and compensating with raw "stage presence").

That said, I can rationalize that a natural state of magic is to be noticed or to be seen because the caster (or artist) was not intending, or casting, or thinking, or practicing with the intent for it to be unseen (seeing is believing and magic must be believed in order to work, fundamentally speaking).

To work against the natural state of magic would require some practice and some ingenunity, some editing to your paradigm - just like it does to avoid the use of components. Or the use of verbal components. Or the use of somatic, in certain instances. Or the use of X, Y, or Z.

You may recognize what that kind of work entails. They look like familiar feats, don't they?

Apparently you thought I was joking when I suggested the compromise of having to take a feat to have non-visible spell effects. I wasn't. I have a hard-on for wanting us to use the custom feat option we got, and I have an even bigger hard-on for making you fuck up your precious builds in order to get the little gifts you want, especially ones like this one that can have a noticeable effect on PvP.

TormakSaber wrote:

Quote:

Spellcraft argument is false, anyhow. You don't immediately detect and recognize spells with Spellcraft, you can just deduce their effects when you see them in action (as in, Spellcraft lets you realize somebody is running Stoneskin if they're hard and gray).

Amia Rule 0: Specific overrides general and on Amia you can see spell effects. Your argument is null.

Yeah, but that's the explanation that follows, not the initial reason. You seemed to use it as if it was an argument itself, like someone else did earlier in this topic. I'm quite fine with whatever houserule you come up with to explain it, as long as you realize it's not the reason for doing or not doing something.

Yossarin's suggestion sounds like great fun. It doesn't address the issue which I find most interesting, which is See Invisibility potions hypothetically at anyone's disposal, making Invisibility spying more exciting and risky. You can't have everything, I guess.

To be or not to be... OOC

Who is online