Changing the -6 Safety Net

[SwordSaintMusashi]

That being said, PnP has no rules against bouncing back off the floor if you nearly die and going back into the fray.

Yes it has, it's called death. At least I am talking about saved from -10 by the -6 floor, any effects shouldn't be applied if you legitly drop to -5 (or even to -9 which is converted to -6). In PnP you would be bouncing back from death fighting. Casting time of raise dead / resurrection is 10 minutes, not to mention the side effects.

Breath of Life - Casting time, one standard Action. Effect: Someone who has died within 1/round per caster level is brought back to life with 5d8 + CL hit points as if brought back to life by True Resurrection.

Level 5 spell (same as Raise Dead), and no component.

So there are options in pen and paper that we do not have. But we're comparing to pen and paper when there is no need to: This is the house rule ALFA has, and its not going to change. Adjust what we already HAVE without adding brand new systems (in the spirit of avoiding abuse)? Possible.

[Ronan]

Ronan-- I must've missed Ander's tech rezz (and there may be logging and/or parser problems in there; I think he's on the reports as still dead). So yeah, my numbers are off by one, and with last month as a reference, hitting the floor in party is slightly less grim (a third instead of half).

The rest I shug at. It's anecdote. We started logging this stuff so we could have data. Data is better than anecdote, and data looks like this is far from immunity to death while still blasting the majority of those ding dang dirty soloers. Mission accomplished?

I'm aware you have data; I added the log to the death floor for this very purpose. I would compare the number of times the floor saves someone (if it kicks in and they still die its the same as not having a floor) to the total number of party deaths. A 2:1 ratio of saves:deaths as indicated from last month is lower than I'd of guessed but strikes me as believable.

And yes I realize anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but anecdotes are still data points. I know I've seen more near-death NWN2 combats (from both sides of the screen) than probably everyone else in this thread combined, so I've quite a bit more data than 5 points to go off of. Hell I've knocked out more PCs than that in a single session. I'm not saying your wrong, I'm just saying 5 points ain't data.

Something could be said for putting the -6 cap on a cooldown after it fires once, but I have not seen that presented: If I missed it, I apologize.

I suggested it above, though I was thinking more like a random "no-mo'-floor" cooldown lasting as long as a RL week. IMO being saved from death should be a pretty big deal which PCs would not want to repeat any time soon. But hey, maybe not. Maeredhel was certainly semi-suicidal.

However, AoE is always more dangerous than single targeting in dungeons and dragons, and its no different in NWN2: It either softens up a huge array of foes, or finishes off multiple at a time. Its why you don't 'clump up', a practice that even follows into most gaming.

All true, but with the floor in place consider that direct-damage opponents are incapable of killing anyone in a party unless the party is routed or out of healing. The result is that a truly dangerous encounter for a prepared party leaves one or more PCs in the negatives, as a routine. It can get pretty silly after a while.

Zelk: Hypothetically, would something like a 5 minute cooldown on the -6 cap after it fires once be possible, or is that a bit far fetched?

While the death system is a giant mess as Zelk says, this would probably be trivial. If you were concerned over testing you could simply have the change cause only textual output to the combat log for a patch, make sure the flags were as they should be, then make it have real effects. The harder bit on longer intervals/penalties would be giving DMs some interface to reset the timing in case of a 'tech KO'.

Anyway, if Zelk didn't want to make a change I suppose I could. I spend about 70 hours a week writing code, and when I take breaks the last thing I want to do is write more in NWN... But this is simple enough. I do need to do some crafting stuff first, bleh.

I do think, however, that a "recovery time" where the floor is deactivated after a save would only lead to metaing, particularly metagaming by not playing until the floor is surely back, which is a loss to the community.

This is why I suggested a random "recovery time", but I like the idea of an 'injury' too, though like SSM I think your penalties are a bit much when a DM isn't around to adjudicate.

Really, anything to give a near-death experience some weight to it. I don't think I'm proposing anything drastic or cruel. I just think having your brains smashed in with a mace only to be saved in the nick of time by a healing potion should maybe have some lasting consequences and affect RP?

Can we just leave well enough alone please? I'd rather not make it easier for PCs to die to be completely honest. The DM client is buggy enough, and determining combat encounter difficulty is hard enough, that I think our PCs should have the extra protection we already grant them via the safety net. There are some good arguments for changing the system I suppose, but SSM's post (three up) is pretty spot on. It'd be nice to have something a bit better, but at this point in the game, there is not a compelling reason to change. Especially something that will increase PC deaths. I'm probably just an old softy but nothing I've read seems convincing enough to adjust this now.

[edit]
Also, I'd like to think that players are okay with keeping the net as is, and that they are okay with a DM manually making a NPC commit a coup de grace if it has the IC motive to do so.

Well, I'm not all that ok with having to manually kill PCs. I'd rather the game do it. I've done it twice and I think I've seen OGR try to kill one of my PCs once, but other than that I haven't seen it in-combat.

IMO the issue of 'difficulty' is a red herring. Staff will adjust difficulty as they wish. What we really want out of the floor is to incentivize group play, let lowbies survive with highbies and take some of the randomness out of PC death in our slow-advancement world.

[SwordSaintMusashi]

Another hypothetical: On the scale of Trivial to Herculean, how hard would it be to take Death Magic off of the -6 Safety Net?

Saving Andromeda from the Cetus.

Do we already have the gorgon's head, or is it a chain quest in difficulty?

[Ronan]

Another hypothetical: On the scale of Trivial to Herculean, how hard would it be to take Death Magic off of the -6 Safety Net?

Tri.... err, yeah what Zelk said Please don't do this. If I ever got time again it'd make me re-do a lot of spell-loadouts to remove death spells. Edit: Simple changes to game logic are easy compared to sifting through module blueprints.

[SwordSaintMusashi]

Another hypothetical: On the scale of Trivial to Herculean, how hard would it be to take Death Magic off of the -6 Safety Net?

Tri.... err, yeah what Zelk said Please don't do this. If I ever got time again it'd make me re-do a lot of spell-loadouts to remove death spells. Changes to game logic are easy compared to sifting through module blueprints.

S'why I ask these questions: You guys know what is or is not worth doing in terms of effort and reward.

Its almost as if you guys had been elected, now or in the past, to a position that can advise us unknowing folks on such technical hurdles.

[Ronan]

In other news, Rumple is actually a big softie, and this thread was only created to make you think otherwise.

Edit: Also, I'm fairly certain I was last elected out of spite. My real terms as TA are long past and I hope forever behind me.

[Zelknolf]

I notice a pattern here, and I really don't want to be stuck handling all of the implications of 'trivial' changes again. I still haven't fixed crafting yet.

[SwordSaintMusashi]

I notice a pattern here, and I really don't want to be stuck handling all of the implications of 'trivial' changes again. I still haven't fixed crafting yet.

If that was the impression I gave, I apologize as it was not meant to be. I just literally wanted to know the difficulty, as I have no semblance of knowledge of such things outside what you guys tell me.

[Ronan]

I was not meaning to volunteer you, only answer the question.

If you're referring to crafting item pricing, I think we had a regression many months back in item cost properties for the new RP spells. Or maybe more spells were added after I'd changed the costs - I forget.

[oldgrayrogue]

Just leave it be. If people abuse it whack a mole style and get caught sanction them.

Here's an out of the box idea that requires no tech work: When DMs see PCs actually RP the effect of being floored -- by like RPing being stunned and out of it while companions fight on or the after effects of near death -- reward them greatly. I have learned a lot more in RL from getting the living crap beat out of me than from pounding on others, so should our PCs, if they RP it I mean. Lately I am all about getting better RP through positive reinforcement. Besides, when a group is out adventuring without a DM the AI doesn't really let you RP dropping out of the fight once you get healed up does it? I suppose you could try to run away from the hostiles, but that's pretty much it. I have often seen that RPd as desperation fighting and then RP after the fact of the near death experience. I gotta say, even with the floor I have a hard time targeting a downed party mate for healing in the chaos of battle. We don't have a pause button after all. It is a good rule IMO. The one thing that might be cool -- no clue if it is feasible -- is having a very small random chance that the floor does not trigger. So 99.99% of the time it saves you, but that other .01% the crit was just too massive and you be dead.

For the record, Ronan, I DM targeted Maer more than once but only when the AI had my orcs standing there doing nothing or walking around while he and Sywyn cut them to ribbons with arrows.

[Zelknolf]

Your function keys (F1, F2, F3, etc) will target members of your party.

Required reading for all healers. Probably sensible reading for everyone else.

[Rumple C]

Problem with -6 then being healed, is the enemies retarget you. while in the -'s it is perfectly possible to rp'ing coughing up blood and holding your guts in with your hands. One CLW later and you're auto up, with the baddies pulling at your entrails.

Any potential randomising to the firing of the -6 net works for me. Maybe it works, maybe not. Diminishing chance based on levels? even better. 100% at 1, 50% at 5, 0% at 10.

Offcourse, I can see a lot of people against messing with it for various reasons. I'll save my breath for ALFA 3. Along with randomised hit points.

[Ronan]

I think the divide here is pretty clear. DMs who try to challenge PCs with lethal combat see the floor a lot more often, to the point where it becomes a regular thing. And we think "this is really silly, there must be a better way". DMs who don't do this don't see it as often and probably have a different opinion.

Note that a floor-save due to poison is generally more common than a floor-save due to death magic, as poison is more common than death magic. I think I've gotten that slippery Merrin Allister to 0 CON with wyvern poison twice? At least once. Toc got hit the same whilst scouting in the CW once (poor rogues).

For the record, Ronan, I DM targeted Maer more than once but only when the AI had my orcs standing there doing nothing or walking around while he and Sywyn cut them to ribbons with arrows.

There was a time in the cave with Brymorel's ritual where you emoted an orc moving to finish off Maer. At the time I figured you were explicitly targeting him (fine with me). Then Sywyn got up off his ass, loaded Chuck Norris into his bow and obliterated everything in a round or two like he always did.

Anyway, this is one of those situations where its easier to code some sort of injury than enforce something. We do already track and handle things like ability score damage, so applying -2 to STR and DEX or something is very feasible and easier than messing with timers.

[Fionn]

Any potential randomising to the firing of the -6 net works for me. Maybe it works, maybe not. Diminishing chance based on levels? even better. 100% at 1, 50% at 5, 0% at 10.

So, chiming in here with $0.02 that hasn't seen this floor in action. I do remember the daily request for vault wipes due to the stack of dead bodies the old system caused. I remember the monthly rage-quite as yet another n00b tired of loosing every PC before they were experienced/connected enough to be allowed at the Big Boy Table with all the DM led PCs.

If folks are routinely using their 200 HPs as a buffer all the way down to 10, I'd be supportive of this. I'd be more supportive of XP penalties, and possibly other sanctions for mild powergaming. I expect most players are reacting to grievous wounds IC. If memory serves, Pu'Q was still well within a single axe crit at Wiz9, thus I played him as the wussy mage he was. With a safety net, one of my first 30 PCs might have survived to level 3, so who knows

What we're really talking about is removing the safety floor from high level play - aka adding a Resurrection fee to high level play. Unfortunately, it also means smart group play is likely to result in an untimely death before most folk can afford a rez, unless the wealth balance is vastly off here. This promotes power gaming vs RP until your group can afford a rez. You can't RP from the morgue.

again, I'm newly back, so I may be horrified when I see how this plays out in group. I'd still urge we have a solid dataset showing the scope of the problem before we fix a system based on anecdotes.

[Rumple C]

More importantly than this whole thread, nice to see you back, get in game