Here we go again: Planetouched and the DM vote

Rick7475 · Post by **Rick7475** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:22 pm

So, Planetouched is a NWN2 thing. Sorry NWN1 DM's, don't see how you can vote on this.

I say we either do 2 things, have a community vote now, or have the closest NWN2 DM's vote.

The closest live NWN2 DM's are here, with the exception of the OAS, and I am not sure if they get a vote (I would be in favor):

HDM Rick7475
EADM angel_caller
darrenhfx
Jimbo
Wynna

So? How should we vote? Other PW's do it, so we should. Mine is Yes.

danielmn · Post by **danielmn** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:34 pm

Rick, OAS2 Dm's do not get a vote, as we are no longer franchised and under the DMA, but have chosen to switch back to being strictly under PA...and therefore not considered Live dm's.

Also, a decision by the Admissions Team has been made that....

So long as planetouched are not a playable race in Live, neither shall they be playable on OAS2. We agreed that a change in Live policy would mean a change in OAS2 policy, so we did leave the door open for the future. Up to you guys, as well as the Admin.

DAniel M Noah

Rick7475 · Post by **Rick7475** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:49 pm

Thanks Danielnm.

Why I bring this up now when it has been beaten over and over again?

Because other PW's have em. If they can do it, why can't we?

But the preliminary things is for the community to decide and let it be done with. If the community says yes or no, then it is the communities' fault.

No Admin gets a blame.

I want it now so I know, because I'll probably be HDM'ing the first live server to implement it if it is in, and I'd like to start planning for how NPC's are going to react and research the canon of it in TSM.

The vote should be be simple, Do you want planetouched races to be a playable class in ALFA?

No discussion on how to implement it yet, but we have folks in other hard core role playing PW that have, so we know there is a precedent.

fluffmonster · Post by **fluffmonster** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:54 pm

I'd like to know what the NWN2 DMs and builders think. There's not that many, can they just shout out?

darrenhfx · Post by **darrenhfx** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:10 pm

From my position as minor-builder and future NWN2 DM, I don't have a problem with including planetouched.

As long as a character is rp'd properly, I don't really care which race you choose to play. I tend to favour those who play their character well, regardless of race/alignment/class/hair colour etc.

I need to be reminded of Standards pov however.

*edit*
I had a look at the issue's pros and cons as summarized here:

http://www.alandfaraway.org/phpbbforum/ ... hp?t=37017

The only thing holding me up is the LA issue. I'll need to think about that aspect a bit more before I say anything further.

With respect to re-opening this can of worms, rather than pressing the issue I would let Thangs take up the proposal if the others have given up on it. It's an important matter, and I get the sense that a number of our members are waiting to see how this is finally handled before deciding whether or not to find greener pastures.

indio · Post by **indio** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:16 pm

What darren said.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:27 pm

The solution to the PTQ is not to keep trying to redefine electorates until one is found that provides a predetermined conclusion, but to address the concerns that have been raised with regards to PT. Those concerns have been developed in some detail in other threads; simply ignoring them or dismissing them as illegitimate is unlikely to generate the consensus without which this community rapidly becomes dysfunctional.

fluffmonster · Post by **fluffmonster** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 2:34 pm

If those who are actually running the game want it, who are you to tell them they can't? Rusty, self-appointed guardian of ALFA purity? How about letting the discussion unfold and then serving the will of the DMs rather than expecting them to serve yours?

Brokenbone · Post by **Brokenbone** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:25 pm

I do not think there was ever a "Standards POV." We do not have any published standards about Planetouched that I'm aware of... haven't had to under NWN1, and so far, haven't had to under NWN2.

History is still Rotku's vote thing as LA, though I guess there were recently invitations to make Proposals which got half cooked then abandoned. Lots of threads new and old about the topic, many moved to that PT forum.

Think all that process though was based on desire (or dislike) as opposed to detail like knowing how warmly/poorly any canonical FR location which teams have selected to represent would receive members of such races, or of similar importance, how an ECL system would apply to these, or the other traditional ECL races. Note dealing with ECL may also involve dealing with starting XP, to put non-ECL PCs on an even footing with those deemed to be ECL+1, +2, +whatever. Starting at "level 1 or something other than level 1" is another of those big hot buttons, but these things are all linked.

Maybe Beta will include trying out a few versions of some as-yet-unknown ECL system. If you can have XP granting levers or resurrection levers or whatever else for testing purposes, running statics and all the other rules relaxation that being principally interested in bug testing entails (except in DM sessions or other times when people mutually agree it is "serious time"), try on svirfneblins, try on tieflings, who cares if your bugtester has flaming hair or a pointy tail? It might help form impressions on advancement rates or whether abilities are worth the ECL price tags, whether we've done a good job on ECL, whatever. Even organize some bugtesting CvC, see if a level 3 earth genasi fighter (ECL making him seem more like a 4th) always mops the floor with a level 3 human fighter, stuff of that nature.

Note I may have a false impression on the "doneness" of any ECL system applicable to PT and others, maybe it's being played however the game shipped, as far as XP gains from combat, though that is a small part of what ECL management entails.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:32 pm

Fluff's characterisation bears about as much relation to reality as his explanation of the decline in NWN1 being entirely the result of the Charter. I'll assume that he either hasn't read or has forgotten the various - lengthy - discussions of PT that have already taken place. Given that, it might be worth quoting this:

Wynna wrote:I certainly read it, in the hopes that something new will be introduced, something along the lines of an implementation proposal, including estimation of manhours required to script a workable global plane-touched solution, an offer to do the scripting and a schedule by which proof of concept may be seen.

I'll summarise: instead of yet more circular discussions, let's have an actual proposal.

I'd respectfully suggest that all the time and energy that goes into repetitive forum threads could be better spent picking up this proposal - as Thangs suggests - from whatever stage it reached. Let's try and be constructive.

Wynna · Post by **Wynna** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 4:11 pm

I would love to see Thangs proposal.

Rick7475 · Post by **Rick7475** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 5:56 pm

Technical feasibilities aside, proposals aside, and all other arguments aside.

The only question that we need to ask as a community is DO WE WANT IT?

Once that is answered, then we check proposals, technical issues, and anything else.

Let's not bog this down any further than it already has been.

It is a simple question, do we want it?

JaydeMoon · Post by **JaydeMoon** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 6:02 pm

I understand the need/desire for a proposal...

However, one of the biggest issues about plane-touched was the 'work' that would be needed by the community to serve those players who wanted them.

The need for a proposal assumes that the issues are valid and thus would have to address them. This is the main, if not only, purpose of the proposal, no?

So, please, Wynna and Rusty, explain to me what the proposal should entail if it has come to light that the issues actually do NOT exist (let's play the hypothetical game). If it is determined that the issues do NOT exist, are we still going to require a proposal to address them? If so, why?

It is easy to say we're talking around what's important, which is the established request for a proposal, but if we can determine that it is no longer important, then are we talking around it?

If the people who it is assumed will have to pick up the additional 'work' required by planetouched and ECL races all state, quite simply, that it is a non-issue for them, then maintaining that it is an issue for the community is stubborn and serves no one but those that cling to it.

This is not to say that just because it's what the community wants we should put them in right away without considering the impact or ensuring that we have systems correctly in place.

Currently, we assume that the issues are valid and thus put the burden on proponents to show how to address them before ALFA will consider them again.

If the issues are deemed invalid, then surely we can make the consideration first, so that those who will end up working on the means and methods to include them will know whether their work will utilized or simply wasted.

ThinkTank · Post by **ThinkTank** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 6:31 pm

Joe ALFA: "I will suddenly begin to care about planetouched as and when I want to play one and someone wont let me."

ç i p h é r · Post by **ç i p h é r** » Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:27 pm

Yes.

I think PT offers unique RP opportunities for our membership. We profess to be a serious RP community. We screen applicants and monitor new players. This is not something our membership should be denied, technical challenges aside.