Alternative traveling

[Ithildur]

Had a number of discussions with players and DMs recently where one thing that kept popping up that's an obstacle on TSM is the large distances between PC centers of activity. You often log in, and find people in Rivermoot, all the way on the opposite end of the server from say, a lone dwarf that logs on in Felbar. Heck, if you log in inside SM, if you're a low lvl (especiially at night), even trying to get to RM or HH to hook up with a group of folks can be deadly. So you wander around alone, find no one to RP with, get bored and log off.

MorbidKate and I were discussing this, and the topic of a caravan system came up; I'm sure it's been discussed often before, the pros and cons, but I wanted to add a few twists and put it out there again in the interest of facilitating bringing players together who tend to be thinly spread out as is even without the great distances in between them.

Why not start with using the current overland map traveling system and modifying it, in the interest of efficiency and getting maximum bang without huge expenditures of resources (time/manpower etc)? ie, instead of the party leader's avatar representing the party, you see something like a covered wagon, and traveling speed is quicker, perhaps equivalent to running speed on the current overland map.

Now, add to that a chance for random encounters, just like normal travel, EXCEPT, two differences:

1. (optional) the chance of random encounter is perhaps higher, or the CR is more difficult; a caravan carrying goods is more noticable, likely to attract more attention from highwaymen and humanoid monsters - also from time to time this percentage can be tweaked to represent campaign/plots/seasons of increased banditry activity or more quiet, peaceful times, possibly based on PC actions/consequences.

2. (likely more essential) How do you help keep the poor lone low lvl pc, so they do not keep dying off while trying to hook up with other PCs? Have the caravan encounter maps spawn NPCs that are other travelers/staff for the caravan, including possibly an adventurer or two among them. They act similar to the NPCs outside the gates of say, RM or Sundabarrr. You know you can expect a bit of help from them if a monster spawns nearby; a group of us recently were relieved to see the (apparently tough SoB) caravan master at sundabarr join the fray against a troll that showed up too close to town.

The end result effectively would be a mini adventure while traveling, just like the current overland travel system, but exponentially less lethal for the poor soul who's trapped by himself away from the rest of the playerbase. As far as the cost of the caravan, make it reasonable, possibly even minimal or outright free if the PC is involved in helping defend the caravan from attackers (possibly even a small reward from the caravan staff, ie perhaps the caravan itself costs 10 gp, for every attacker you kill you are paid 5 gp by the caravan staff, possibly even netting a small profit. If you choose to cower behind the NPCs, like say a lvl 1 wizard or commoner might, that's fine, you do so and pay the full fare - better than traveling alone and getting splattered).

Between the increased rate of travel with this system and significantly higher safety benefit, I believe it will faciliate players/PCs gettin together more often and quicker and more safely, which atm according to many folks is a significant obstacle/downside to playing on TSM. It's also imo an entirely believable/IC solution that real characters would opt for. Furthermore it's an opportunity for plot hooks for DM run events where PCs can help with establishing the initial routes where they may need a few sessions of going back and forth between two station points and overcoming encounters of various types, before driving away hostiles/clearing the areas enough for a route to be firmly established. There's a lot of stuff you can do with this RP wise/mini plot wise.

Lastly, basing it off of the current travel system means it's low cost to implement.

[Melody]

It sounds like an excellent idea to me. I've had similar experiences with being stranded in one area or another unable to meet up with other PC's because of the time of day. *puts a bag of gold on the table* Sign me up!

[Veilan]

Facilitating people playing together is a Good Thing.

And TSM basically screams for Riverboat transport to ferry people to each other.

I'd say the trad-off is cost for speed, vs. danger though: You pay your fee, and are faster and safer than if you hoof it.

[oldgrayrogue]

Riverboat travel is an excellent idea. The cost should be minimal IMO. I would even support portal travel between major and distant city centers like say Silverymoon, Felbar and Settlestone. Portals are fairly common according to FRCS I believe. However, this does raise an issue regarding certain "supply" quests.

[Ithildur]

However, this does raise an issue regarding certain "supply" quests.

Good point; supply quests issue ideally can be handled in a manner at least somewhat consistent with IC realities, but I'm not sure if that's even the case currently. ie If there are riverboat options for travel between, say RM and Rauvinwatch (would necessitate building a small dock by Rauvinwatch, perhaps there are IC/geographical reasons why there is no docks by Rauvinwatch? for that matter wouldn't it make more sense currently to haul the stuff over to nearby SM and load onto boat/ship? perhaps cost/availability of water transport is the issue which necessitates the more risky overland travel?) then the quests make little sense unless rewards are adjusted (still manual labor deserving small wages; think about being given responsibility over 100+ lbs of equipment to take to the docks, helping load them up, overseeing safe transport on the barge, unloading at destination, delivery to the doors of the receipients). So wages/reward yes, but small amounts. Overall the travel and supply quest system should be a system more about encouraging/enabling PCs to move about, get together rather than being stuck in one area, not so much a way to pile up gold/xp anyway.

Another idea tied to travel system: random encounters currently feature a chance to meet a traveling non hostile NPC such as a traveling merchant or priest. How about a random chance of meeting a quest giving NPC/NPCs? Said quest can give significantly more XP/reward (with correspondingly greater danger requiring one to take time, gather a party, plan things out, etc) than a simple static quest, for the reason that it is not readily available just by walking up to and talking to the NPC that's always around. It's randomly available (perhaps one time per NPC for each PC), and requires one to be traveling already for a random chance to receive such a quest, ie not something you can grab easily like static quests.

Really, the idea again is to encourage movement/PCs being able to/wanting to get together; adding to this is the reality that there is a serious shortage of DM presence in ALFA currently, which imo necessitates content like the above that can lead to further adventuring/RPing opportunities sans DM, but are still within reason/not out of control.

[Keryn]

For the quests maybe a check if the PC carries one of those items and if he does ask a stupid amount of money for the trip after all that valuable cargo and heavy so it wouldn't justify doing it like that. I think that can be done.

On other note, Ith idea for a caravan is awesome and I think we could do something we a few small areas, that are used randomly for the encounters, with 2 or 3 small areas we could do lots of different encounters, just spawning the PCs in different places, maybe AL could give some input on this, maybe rotate the area or something. I think I've seen this done.

[AcadiusLost]

in brief:

I think a scripted caravan / riverboat thing would be a welcome addition (minimal fee, chance for scripted attacks, some time involved but less than walking it, etc). The problem is that making it work like we'd like is quite an involved task, could take weeks to months even if scripters were available for it (and presently they aren't).

The alternative, of making some sort of instant minimal-expense conversation-based AT to zip between settlements doesn't sit well with me- it minimizes the continuity and sense of scale of the server; many of these settlements are meant to be quite significantly distant from each other IC...

For lack of a good caravan system, and for lack of the scripting staff to develop one, we make do with what we have. It doesn't really take /that/ long to travel between most points on Silvy via travel map. If a DM is around, he or she may also be happy to facilitate interaction via porting PCs to simulate caravan travel while offline, etc.

[t-ice]

The actual reality on the ground with me at least is that the rare times I've logged to TSM, I've found my PC good as trapped to Rivermoot. Players not being able to meet up and play is silly. The "vast expanse of territory" argument doesn't really fly ICly, when the PC has now been stuck to Rivermoot for weeks. ICly that means weeks he has hung around and not found a single caravan or Argent Legion patrol to travel towards Silvy with.

I'd think what we're looking for here is:
1) No zipping between the areas within a session or event. (The "vast expanse")
2) Allowing the player to choose where, among hubs, she wants to start a particular RP session in. After figuring out where other players are. (ICly having hitched a ride there with patrol/caravan in the time between sessions.)

As a simple solution to affect this, how about a twist to what AL put as: "instant minimal-expense conversation-based AT to zip between settlements ". Create that system, but limit the use so that it can only be used when starting a new gaming session :
1) Reset the usage ability variable when PC logged off for long enough to have the off-time rest and heal script kick in.
2) Optionally turn the usability off when time-xp loop has fired twice/thrice for this session (~15mins)
3) Telling the players that using the system represents finding a patrol/caravan off-time and hitching along a ride between the major settlements. And we should use and RP it as such. Places that don't have such regular traffic shouldn't be included in the network.

Efficient and (relatively) simple to make.

[Keryn]

The actual reality on the ground with me at least is that the rare times I've logged to TSM, I've found my PC good as trapped to Rivermoot. Players not being able to meet up and play is silly. The "vast expanse of territory" argument doesn't really fly ICly, when the PC has now been stuck to Rivermoot for weeks. ICly that means weeks he has hung around and not found a single caravan or Argent Legion patrol to travel towards Silvy with.

I'd think what we're looking for here is:
1) No zipping between the areas within a session or event. (The "vast expanse")
2) Allowing the player to choose where, among hubs, she wants to start a particular RP session in. After figuring out where other players are. (ICly having hitched a ride there with patrol/caravan in the time between sessions.)

As a simple solution to affect this, how about a twist to what AL put as: "instant minimal-expense conversation-based AT to zip between settlements ". Create that system, but limit the use so that it can only be used when starting a new gaming session :
1) Reset the usage ability variable when PC logged off for long enough to have the off-time rest and heal script kick in.
2) Optionally turn the usability off when time-xp loop has fired twice/thrice for this session (~15mins)
3) Telling the players that using the system represents finding a patrol/caravan off-time and hitching along a ride between the major settlements. And we should use and RP it as such. Places that don't have such regular traffic shouldn't be included in the network.

Efficient and (relatively) simple to make.

Was about to post exactly the same.. Thansk T-ice for making the post.

We play to have fun, and RP with others, having some sense of consistency is good, but not being able to meet other PCs, only leads for people to log out. If we can get such a system and a cooldown time between usages seems the way to go. And it can simply be seen as the travel the Pc would do while offline. If i log in silvy but wished to head to RM, it only makes sense i would log the next day and be able to hit a caravan and be there... wouldn't make sense though to get back 5 mins latter using the same caravan...

i hate the outland map... it is nothing but time consuming... but since we need it, we should find ways to make the gameworld welcoming to those who want to play and have fun. Otherwise it only works for those who are stubborn enough to go on and on untill they achieve what they want. I have found myself loggin asking where my buddies are, start moving towards them just to reach the place and see them leaving because it took so long... We may sey form RM to Silvy its only 15 mins, but those 15 minutes i could have enjoyed RP i was looking at a map... doing nothing..

You obviously dont expect a ride to wintersedge, but in the main roads, between main hubs...makes only sense

[Blindhamsterman]

even more than that, an option for lowbies to get from A to B would be nice. All too often we have folk getting killed by overhard encounters at a certain crypt that are unavoidable. An option to take a boat for a small cost would work well IMO. Allowing travel between SM, RM and HH.

[Veilan]

I find myself mostly agreeing with t-ice and Keryn here. While we must ensure that noone's immersion gets broken, and distances do mean something, the premier goal here is to play together, not to treat this as some single player CRPG.

A system that allows you to pick your "starting hub" after a whole restoration cycle of being logged out is a good idea. Of course, it needs to be a little more sophisticated - say, recharge your ability to travel along set routes, not: "Oh I was lost alone in the Nether Mountains - BAM I'm back safe in Silverymoon."

Something like intra-server portals, with the same rules as inter-server portals (only portal once every 24 hours) could solve that issue, and could likely be easily done using the same platform of script already present? Those portals still would have to make sense, of course, like riverboats, caravans or the like.

We could then install only a couple deliberate ones - like, Rivermoot <-> Silverymoon and Silverymoon <-> Felbarr (meaning you can't immediately jump from Rivermoot to Felbarr either - one attempt every 24 hours, or even longer if we so choose), that have an adequate cost. This would already be a fair help for people wanting to play together. We could tweak the available routes (shorter intervals -> less distance you can cover with the system, longer cooldowns -> less uses per playtime) as we deem necessary, but again, we'd likely help people to join up with buddies. Or targets .

That said, in TSM's case, traversing even the whole server does seem to be a bearable trek of no more than what, 30 minutes?

In any case... letting people play together still is A Good Thing.

Cheers,

[Ithildur]

The irony for me is that the current nwn1 server I often play on, has so many insta caravan/porting options that I find it jarring/immersion breaking. Talk about covering long distances instantly - this server allows you to travel from Arabel to the heart of Deepingdale in seconds via caravan without a thought. It costs an arm and a leg, the price based on character's lvl which I think is extremely silly, but that's their model based on a typical RP lite NWN server economy where gold grows out of people's butts.

At the opposite extreme end of the spectrum is TSM currently, where a lone PC in RM is effectively barred from interacting with someone in SM, not so much because of the time factor (although that is a factor) but more so because of the danger of a solo PC traveling and running into deadly encounters. I think that's fine if your lone pc has chosen to log off/log back in in a remote, obscure out of the way location; it's perfectly IC to find yourself isolated and in danger and it would be the downside to going to such a location in the first place. However, the problem is these are not remote, obscure locations; they're major centers of activity both IC and OOC. From an ooc/design standpoint, the current situation is the price of having so many centers of PC activity/base of operation that are so far apart in a single mod with solo travel being as dangerous as it is. IC wise it's also strange that there are no caravans/safer means of travel between places like RM and SM.

That's why I proposed a system that does place 'realistic' limitations (twice as fast as current overland map travel speed, but still not instant) but more importantly, far less lethal for a lone PC stuck somewhere away from everyone else. I felt that it would be a sensible compromise that makes sense IC, so that we don't have the ability to teleport around freely at low cost which the nwn1 server I referenced effectively allows, and yet are freed up from having things as static as they are currently.

Ice T's suggestion is less ideal imo, but it does introduce restraints/limitations on how freely you can zip around; basicly it'd be the equivalent of a DM port for planned DM sessions, which are viewed as kosher in most situations by ALFAns.

The reality is that we are lean on DMs atm; some tweaks need to be made so that the mod is playable, heck even enjoyable when DMs are not around. After seeing new players come and go and lose interest, with one of the most clear reasons cited as difficulty in hooking up with others to interact with, I'm convinced change may be a good thing.

One last food for thought; as far as timescale in ALFA, it seems the current accepted reality is that things are far from realistic. The current ingame timekeeping is way too fast, ingame calendar is completely whacked, and traveling times via the current overland map is far from accurate. We have a 'rule' clearly stated in the alfatips loadscreens that time references are intentionally kept vague. If a modified overland travel system at double speed via caravans is a no go, then a strictly limited insta port system (as much as I don't like the flavor) might be acceptable given the fact our time system already breaks down verisimilitude/realism a dozen different ways.

[Ithildur]

[edited, came off a bit hard I think]

[AcadiusLost]

Unless things have changed significantly with the travel map encounters since last time I spent much time on the western half of the server, the trip from Rivermoot to High Hold is generally uneventful, and even if an encounter is triggered, 95% of the time one can just click an AT to exit it and carry on unless they have some in-character reason to "seek and destroy all hostiles (or die trying)". If there are one or two encounter maps that are consistently throwing PCs in inescapable positions, they need to be fixed, as that was never meant to be a "feature" of the system, certainly not when travelling major roads.

Even at first level with each of my PCs, I made fairly frequent travel of the RM-TSM corridor without ever being forced into combat. AT'ing out of a travel map encounter without exploring and battling whatever mob may or may not be there is not a crime.

That said, the system T-Ice describes would be a simpler implementation and less jarring to IC continuity than most others. I can give some thought to how it might be implemented; seems like the best way would be to do it via convo with an NPC in one of the established areas (RM, HH, TSM), to arrange for passage "on the next riverboat to X", with the OOC explanation that this will happen while you're logged off. Once being offline for an IG day, the script would port you on login over to the destination. Stipulations could include a check to make sure the PC last logged off within the vicinity of the NPC/boat etc (so one doesn't use it as a magic parachute out of the wilderness).

The problem with this, of course, is that there's no guarantee that your chosen "destination" from yesterday will be the RP hotspot of today... could be you'll log in and appear at Silverymoon only to hear that everyone's back in Rivermoot again. Would that be an acceptable compromise though? Seems like it's the easiest to reconcile IC, allows some mobility for those who feel "trapped" in a given area, but doesn't provide on-demand teleportation services.

Thoughts?

[Blindhamsterman]

If there are one or two encounter maps that are consistently throwing PCs in inescapable positions, they need to be fixed, as that was never meant to be a "feature" of the system, certainly not when travelling major roads.

Wendover Crypts. I've had PCs killed there, and I know a great many others that have also, often being paralysed by a ghoul before its even finished loading up - Not fun and pretty harsh!