AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

I have a question on tree houses in the forest,

Short and simple can any tom dick and harry go up to talk and drink tea.. Or can only druids and other such grove people use them?

*Hopes for a DM to fly out of nowhere and to make a call in seven words or less!*

Not a DM, but IC, in game, druids and rangers enforce these as guard stations. Perhaps a fine line on meta-gamey for the Ranger Guards for you to be up there, but I'll let someone with more "say so" say so.

Quote:

Perhaps a fine line on meta-gamey for the Ranger Guards for you to be up there, but I'll let someone with more "say so" say so.

My thoughts exactly.. But then it went into a deeper question.. Are those fellows ranger guards? I mean when talked to they are friendly enough to people in the trees.. And they are not dressed like the other ranger guards..

Could it be they are people on a quest to stop people from getting drunk and falling over the side?..

The more thinking I do about tree houses the more mind blowing it is and the more I want to construct one in my back yard..

Also Kirby!
<(''<)
<(``)>
(>")>

They are guards from the Grove yes. Going up there to kill people or being there when not allowed will get you a nice push off the edge to your death.

This needs to be addressed.

There needs to be scripted dialog from the posted guards letting people know they shouldn't be there, or a faction lock so only those with a treehouse insignia can get in, or something.

I'm for removing them all, except the one behind the Grove gate, which is rarely used. There are other votes for this as well on the Grove forum.
They are cool, but not worth the bullshit involved.

I'm tired of explaining this to everyone who goes up there, and most times it turns into an OOC argument. The DM's have better things to do than step in every time this happens.
Now I can't find Tormak's statement on metagaming...

they dont need a faction lock, people need to not go up there if asked not to.

I will say the one by the cross roads I used abit and I liked it alot, people would start causing stuff then I would climb down and I catch them red handeed because they never looked up ; )

*shrugs* At least its now out in the open, at the very least anyone who has seen this post wont go up..

The tree houses look very good and help add to the feel of the place so removal would be a shame, and it starts to get silly and become a giant absorption of Dev time to mechanically implement every little thing

Quote:

I'm tired of explaining this to everyone who goes up there, and most times it turns into an OOC argument. The DM's have better things to do than step in every time this happens.

I had this today in the form of a tell from a player, as a suggestion just enforce it with much zeal ICly and threaten to throw people to their graves if they don't comply within fifteen seconds..
Or just put up a player PLC (Plc is a word I learn't two weeks ago or so and Im loving it) telling people to pike off

I mean player enforced would generate more RP then burning down some tree houses...
(or have me script a druid only leaver that when pulled will throw people to their graves.. I don't mind putting in time to make something awesome!)

Quote:

as a suggestion just enforce it with much zeal ICly and threaten to throw people to their graves if they don't comply within fifteen seconds..

\
Thing is, they shouldn't be there in the first place, as there's a guard up there already.

Someone told me last night: "the guard didn't tell me I shouldn't be here"
wtf, the guard has no dialog, or very limited.

Quote:

they dont need a faction lock, people need to not go up there if asked not to.

People don't listen anyway, and all the lookouts are doing is creating OOC tension. I don't even want to be in the forest anymore just because of those things.

Eh, whatever, it is what it is.

Kudark wrote:

Quote:

they dont need a faction lock, people need to not go up there if asked not to.

People don't listen anyway, and all the lookouts are doing is creating OOC tension. I don't even want to be in the forest anymore just because of those things.

Eh, whatever, it is what it is.

I find that kind of hard to belive that some lookout posts are causing such OOC tension, seeing as I used to be around in the forest ALOT befor a event of B-mia caused me to be away for sometime, but I dont remember them causing such a big problem.

Quote:

I find that kind of hard to belive that some lookout posts are causing such OOC tension, seeing as I used to be around in the forest ALOT befor a event of B-mia caused me to be away for sometime, but I dont remember them causing such a big problem.

They've been a problem since the day they went in, and I called it before it happened. they should simply be removed.

If you're in the grove and you ask me to yell at someone in the treehouse, and that someone is not banned from the forest or causing issues, I will not remove them. It is not metagaming to just be in the things.

Thaty said: People bitch so hard they should just be removed.

TormakSaber wrote:

Quote:

I find that kind of hard to belive that some lookout posts are causing such OOC tension, seeing as I used to be around in the forest ALOT befor a event of B-mia caused me to be away for sometime, but I dont remember them causing such a big problem.

They've been a problem since the day they went in, and I called it before it happened. they should simply be removed.

If you're in the grove and you ask me to yell at someone in the treehouse, and that someone is not banned from the forest or causing issues, I will not remove them. It is not metagaming to just be in the things.

Thaty said: People bitch so hard they should just be removed.

I knew when they were new and cool people were causing abit of a fuss but did not think it turned into crazy OOC drama with DMs being bugged all the time.

I leave amia forest and it all goes to hell, still think they worked well to get a better view of the area and its a shame they might have to go.

Yups, it's pretty much "this is why we can't have nice things".

TormakSaber wrote:

Yups, it's pretty much "this is why we can't have nice things".

Agreed on that, Tormy, it is......but it's a shame if the toys all have to be put back in the box away from everyone, rather than the naughty kids just getting a well-deserved smack.

I was silently against them being there from the start. The day they were put in, I thought to myself, "great, another thing to start OOC arguments..."

By "them" and "they," I mean the Grove Rangers being put up on the tree houses in the forest and being removed from the Grove proper. I like the tree houses, I just don't like NPC Grove guards being on the forest ones. I'd like them put back inside the Grove, personally.

Only PC Grove characters should be guarding the forest and other lands on a regular basis. Save Grove NPC activity in the forest for DM controlled situations alone.

Imho, the problem isn't the tree house but the NPC guards.

Everytime you have NPC guards in an area, you pretty much remove any possible IC conflict between players from an area and encourage babysitting behaviour.

I saw someone shapechange into a humongous iron golem in the treehouse once. They must have rebuilt it.

Yes I was against NPCs too. But they were being abused by people by exploiting transitions and just generally ignoring any IC warnings and it came to a point of remove them, and or make it so if you use them to mass PVP you metagame something and are in trouble.

And since that doesn't work, and guess they will be removed. I would be lying if I said I wasn't very disappointed. Guess we really can't have anything cool.

Next its going to be Shadowjumpers and flying characters on the clifftops pvping people. :evil:

o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote:

I was silently against them being there from the start. The day they were put in, I thought to myself, "great, another thing to start OOC arguments..."

By "them" and "they," I mean the Grove Rangers being put up on the tree houses in the forest and being removed from the Grove proper. I like the tree houses, I just don't like NPC Grove guards being on the forest ones. I'd like them put back inside the Grove, personally.

Only PC Grove characters should be guarding the forest and other lands on a regular basis. Save Grove NPC activity in the forest for DM controlled situations alone.

I agree with this too.
Though, I'd rather just see the treehouses gone, to be honest.

Quote:

I find that kind of hard to belive that some lookout posts are causing such OOC tension, seeing as I used to be around in the forest ALOT befor a event of B-mia caused me to be away for sometime, but I dont remember them causing such a big problem.

That's because you were in it most of the time. and no one was going to give you shit for it.

Quote:

If you're in the grove and you ask me to yell at someone in the treehouse, and that someone is not banned from the forest or causing issues, I will not remove them. It is not metagaming to just be in the things.

That said: People bitch so hard they should just be removed.

I got a bunch of screenshots of banned people in the treehouses, but i'm not crying like a bitch over it, in fact i lose my head over it...well Crow's head..
Take a vote, or something.
You can put mine right next to Tormak's.

oh, and it's not that we can't have nice things, it's that a very few can't play nice with the nice things and ruin it for those of us who are trying to have some fun and escape reality for a little while.

Quote:

Only PC Grove characters should be guarding the forest and other lands on a regular basis. Save Grove NPC activity in the forest for DM controlled situations alone.

Totally agree with this.

I think it's unfortunate that they (the treehouses) need to be removed, but that is probably the best option at the moment.

I don't think we have to get rid of the tree houses, just the NPC's.

That said, what's there is there, let's change what's there with RP, rather than just making it go magically "poof." In fact, it's already being talked about ICly.

I agree with removing the NPCs a pretty quick and easy fix.. Or another option is turn the NPCs into non-grove defenders and allow people to sit up and drink tea.. but not drop down hellballs on people

npcs or not the grove would still be removing none grove members icly of course.

Quote:

npcs or not the grove would still be removing none grove members icly of course.

That sounds good if you ask me.. Leaves doors open for RP.. Heck I could almost see allot of people binding themselves to a tree in a form of a peaceful protest!

o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote:

I don't think we have to get rid of the tree houses, just the NPC's.

That said, what's there is there, let's change what's there with RP, rather than just making it go magically "poof." In fact, it's already being talked about ICly.

I'd rather do this than lose them.

Bob wrote:

Imho, the problem isn't the tree house but the NPC guards.

Everytime you have NPC guards in an area, you pretty much remove any possible IC conflict between players from an area and encourage babysitting behaviour.

I disagree and will hold my tongue about a scathing, impolite, but all too true, comment. For your sake.

Quote:

I disagree and will hold my tongue about a scathing, impolite, but all too true, comment. For your sake.

..Why post a post that states you want to post a post but decide not to, It kinda just adds unneeded girth to a topic >_>

Anyway as a nice middle ground.. why don't we keep the pretty looking tree houses.. just remove the transitions up?

because then those who fly and can shadowjump can abuse them and attack people without a chance to be hit back?

Krado wrote:

Quote:

I disagree and will hold my tongue about a scathing, impolite, but all too true, comment. For your sake.

..Why post a post that states you want to post a post but decide not to, It kinda just adds unneeded girth to a topic >_>

Anyway as a nice middle ground.. why don't we keep the pretty looking tree houses.. just remove the transitions up?

Because then they are useless bloat and should just be removed.

Quote:

because then those who fly and can shadowjump can abuse them and attack people without a chance to be hit back?

I agree with you fully.. Lets also start removing buildings and ledges... In-fact lets just have a flat server so those pesky players who managed to get the fly ability cant abuse it.. Its better that way its not like the DMs would do something nuts and take the widgets away from them!

Quote:

Because then they are useless bloat and should just be removed.

A matter of opinion that lots of players seem not to share.. I was tempted to start listing other useless bloats we can remove but I don't want to be mean to anyone.. *coughs* Hirk *coughs*

Or just key the transitions to those with Duir bark/Toenail clippings/bouncy balls whatever you leafy people use for your ID these days and change it from a drawn transition to a clickable item like a ladder placeable put over top of the ladder effect of the tree house, that way it's faction keyed.

Dieu_Le_Fera wrote:

because then those who fly and can shadowjump can abuse them and attack people without a chance to be hit back?

That really isn't an issue at all. Or i should say its an issue once, then you get your wings clipped. The jumping/flight items have as far as i know always been a 'Use responsibly' and if abused you will lose it. It really isn't a matter of us not being able to have nice things, its a matter of pulling out the weeds that abuse the nice things. This isn't WoW with some 5 billion users and hard coded abilities. Flight and Shadow Jump are a gift, and as far as i know if its abused to get somewhere that you can not be reached for the sake of PvP you are in the wrong, abuses your abilities in a way that is not intended, meta gaming, and exploiting. All of these are already against the rules, hardly a need to make sub rules for it.

The issue with the tree houses is not that you can be up there. The transition is not an issue either because again, transition hopping is already against the rules, do it and you get a nice vacation. The only thing id suggest to change is removing the guards because it raises questions of what is or is not meta gaming the guards. If i attack a member of the grove at the cross roads, i am starting PvP in sight of an NPC of that faction/City which is against the rules without a DM. Perhaps the guards are there JUST to defend the tree houses themselves? Okay so let us then say the fight spills over into the Tree House, or a Druid is up there raining lighting down upon her enemies. If i go up there to smack her am i then meta gaming? For that matter is s/he?

Feonir wrote:

Or just key the transitions to those with Duir bark/Toenail clippings/bouncy balls whatever you leafy people use for your ID these days and change it from a drawn transition to a clickable item like a ladder placeable put over top of the ladder effect of the tree house, that way it's faction keyed.

This is in itself meta gaming. If a Druid or Ranger or Sausage smoker of the grove can climb that rope or ladder, then there is nothing that keeps anyone else from being able to do it. When the Tree Houses first went in i talked to the person that made the area and strongly suggested that the hidden transitions were a forum of meta gaming, if a druid/ranger knew where the spot up was, then why can random Joe not also climb said tree? Eventually ropes were put in and the hidden transitions were made more viable. I rope is a rope.

Anyway, most of the issues pointed out in this thread that I've read are all covered by the current rules, its just a matter of taking the screen shots and dealing with people like we would anywhere else.

*Goes off to tie himself to a tree* For as little as its worth, i would very much not like to see the tree houses removed.

Oh noes, someone ran amok with a chainsaw. Wasn't me.

Vroom vroom!

Question on Forest tree houses

Who is online