Update to members on the two PC policy change

[Regas]

Hi all,

Rumple, after doing a fair bit of research into the background on the history of the Pillars and the Charter, has determined that the two pc policy is the responsibility of the PA. Based on this determination and the recent all member poll regarding the "one pc policy", I am planning to offer a draft policy allowing two pcs for review by Admin, HDMs, DMs, staff and the general members. My personal position is that I'm not keen the idea of allowing multiple pcs. I don't think it will be a panacea to ALFA's issues with regard to density or player participation but it's clear to me that the policy change is being sought by a majority of members who participate in polling at least.

The issues I'll be reviewing in drafting the policy are:

1) Making the policy temporary to test how well it works within ALFA (note based on Rump's ruling a new PA could either change back to one PC or change any other part of the policy. Likewise, a new Lead could in theory try and argue for different ownership of the policy itself).

2) Considering what rules we should have in place on two pc's belonging to a player being active on the same server at the same time.

3) Rethinking how we treat the temp retirement policy going forward.

4) Addressing other issues that may come up.

Once I have the finished policy I will offer it for an up or down vote to the members. What I'd like to see is a second two thirds "for" vote outcome (I am stopping short of requiring it though), as I believe that having two thirds of the members for a specific policy change is a strong check against any one member (in this case me), making a significant change to our rules. Please continue to post your ideas and opinions on the two PC policy, or feel free to send me a pm. I know many of you want this to be changed ASAP- and I will do my best to expedite the policy change proposal.

Thanks

Regas

[danielmn]

If this policy change is enacted, I would like to make a comment on my veiw as far as #2.

Simply put, no. the whole push for a two pc rule is to allow us to play another pc with other people in a different place so we can have more playtime. 2 pc's on the same server at the same time does not fit in to the above. I would prefer it if the pc's must be on seperate servers at all times. I don't believe there are any issues at all that would need two pc's on the same server, as far as equipment, since BG and TSM are pretty good right now about dealing with items in stores, ect. Now, weather a cool down time need be installed if pc a leaves server x and pc b comes to server x I will leave for others to debate, as I am not really invested in that part of the discussion. Regas, I thank you for your time, and consideration, and the great job you are doing as PA so far. I know you are having your own personal reservations about the idea, but you are doing the office justice in following what the majority of the players want, and I applaud you for it, and your invaluable service to the community.

[oldgrayrogue]

Two PCs playable on different servers, and never the twain shall meet. Period. No need to get overcomplicated. DMs get shafted a bit, but we get other perks (ie we get to play on the client) and we have enough servers so that this should not be a problem.

Try it out for 3 months. If there is some huge upswing in metagaming, end it and go back to 1 PC. Make that known. That should be deterrent enough.

End Temp Retirement in favor of the 2 PC rule if it works out. It is now superfluous. If someone wants to play a new PC on their "home" server, just retire your mainstay. Now you will be able to enjoy new adventures with new PCs on two different servers if you like =D

[mr duncan]

I am totally against two PCs in any way shape or form unless we made it one PC per server and just turned off cross server travel.


J

[FoamBats4All]

Two PCs playable on different servers, and never the twain shall meet. Period. No need to get overcomplicated.

[Castano]

Two PCs playable on different servers, and never the twain shall meet. Period. No need to get overcomplicated.

I liked kid's 30 day rule. the PC could exist on the same server, e.g. moving, but only with 30 days having passed after the PC1 was moved off that server. This allows you to move PC 2 over to another server if a plot takes you there, although it means your other PC must get out or be locked down for for teh duration of the plot +30 days. This should prevent muling/meta.

[FoamBats4All]

Two PCs playable on different servers, and never the twain shall meet. Period. No need to get overcomplicated.

I liked kid's 30 day rule. the PC could exist on the same server, e.g. moving, but only with 30 days having passed after the PC1 was moved off that server. This allows you to move PC 2 over to another server if a plot takes you there, although it means your other PC must get out or be locked down for for teh duration of the plot +30 days. This should prevent muling/meta.

It will also require even more "uh, damned, when can I go to X?" which I hear bitched about in IRC from time to time. And for that rule to be any sort of meaningful we'll need tech to get on board to implement some block, and our tech team is pretty much stagnant right now.

Simplicity and trusting members works for me.

[Stormbring3r]

will the logs show if someone is muling or twinking thier other toon... kinda lick the loot script?. Maybe put some way to track? But I will say no 2 toons on the same server...period.. easier to handle.. if Toon one want to moce from TSM to BG then if toon 2 is on BG then toon 2 must be moved first..

[Brokenbone]

I've suggested to Regas that the first incident of watching an item get from PC A to PC B of the same player is a simple cheating ban. Cheating does not require three strikes in our rules. Single instance of cheating can be a ban even at first instance. Any third parties in the middle helping move around the items to get to PC B, ban as well. In most cases you'd need a proxy/buddy to make item movement of that sort work. There, our worst sky is falling scenario, agree to deal harshly and go forward with trial. Dramatic item movement is not all that hard to notice among DMs or even without being in client, checking out acquire events in logs.

[Castano]

yes storm muling is tracked. they will totally get caught.

[maxcell]

will the logs show if someone is muling or twinking their other toon... kinda lick the loot script?.

with respect to BB and Castano. someone has to pour over those logs. There is no ai notifying anyone of an indiscretion, it still take manpower that someone has to be willing to give.

[Castano]

yes that's why i suggest the 30 wait period. it will make any muling require that much more planning. i review server logs monthly. this is why people have been banned for self loot etc., had XP docked for farming.

[Xanthea]

I don't think it's a huge deal, but the wait period could be slightly awkward. I don't think anyone needs to spontaniously decide to swap their PCs home servers or anything, but it does inconvenience people who just need to make a quick stop by a server for some plot reason or other.

Or, for example, someone's friend is passing through a server and gets turned into a vampire. They round up the gang of super friends to go save him, but inexplicably need to wait 30 days before some of them can go do it. Awkward.

Edit - what about a DM on the server being able to grant permission to ignore the 30 day rule if nothing else?

[Castano]

eh I'd rather keep the PC's servers/campaigns separate. After seeing DMs in ALFA lied to recently etc. I don't want anyone getting fusked by a bad player.

[Brokenbone]

will the logs show if someone is muling or twinking their other toon... kinda lick the loot script?.

with respect to BB and Castano. someone has to pour over those logs. There is no ai notifying anyone of an indiscretion, it still take manpower that someone has to be willing to give.

Another reason I'm not hugely in favor, is the "increased policing", but whatever, we'll get used to it.