Static Quests

Nalo Jade · Post by **Nalo Jade** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 7:58 pm

Rick mentioned Static Quests in the Moderation thread... I really wanted to chime in but we were about to be moderated or derailing the moderators thread...

Should we have more statics?

What about just "things to do" Gambling, delivery jobs that garner gold but no exp, training that garners exp but costs gold, what about crafting?

I think statics are a very important part of FUN, which equals PR, retention, and I see no reason we can't have them ... if done in great quantity with very limited rewards, this way it doesn't take anything away from a good DMed event.

Rick I agree with Danubus that some of your quests may have been a little to easy for the reward back in DF days, but they were also a breath of fresh air! People had something to do instead of like you said, sitting in a bar waiting for the DM to show up... THAT is meta gaming...

I think the difference between us and an MMO would be that the static content would be used mostly to have something to do when a DM or other players aren't around, and they should give the character PURPOSE.

The delivery quests and other "generic" quests are not the quality that we should strive for.

ALFA has aimed for excellent RP as a standard that sets us apart, why not add FUN to that as well?

Even if a static quest gives no reward, fishing, gambling ect ... it is something to do. I don't know very many servers that had a LOT of good static content, we could do that and reduce the reward to nothing and I bet people would still do the quest, after all its not for the EXP and phat lewt right?

LancasterX_2 · Post by **LancasterX_2** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:08 pm

Statics are great, but the baggage of bitching that goes with them from this community don't make them worthwhile for any builder.

I can make statics too, but after I saw all the bitching that went on because of Daggerford's, Waterdeep's, and Shadowdale's statics, no way.

from the other thread before it gets deleted:

I agree with wvincenti. I am level 2 on TSM, can barely find anyone to group with, and I only got to see 1 DM the whole time. It is boooooooring.

If ALFA is moving to no statics, then I'm gone to join the rest of the crowd on other srvers or just quit NWN2 all together.

Daggerford was a beautiful server and the statics were all adjusted quickly when they needed to be. I am quite postive that whatever Rick has done on TSM can also be adjusted. People here just have no trust, patience and care little for passed experience. All of the statics on TSM started out of whack, from Wynna's who was constantly making corrections and all of Indio's statics were adjusted down (there were tonnes of players exploited the bugs in Indio's statics and they all had to be corrected). So why do Rick's get the boot?

You folks here are all out of whack with your over the top requirments and henpecking the builders to perfection or else the high road.

ALFAModerator1 · Post by **ALFAModerator1** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:18 pm

Those were moved from the other thread.

Lusipher wrote:Yeah this is getting off topic.

I will say this and if you start a new thread ill comment there:

ALFA doesnt need 100 statics. It becomes a MMO then. What it needs is more servers live and DMs to staff them. Thats what this place needs. We need folks who are only playing to give more to the community by helping build or script. If you cant do either consider Dming. Our ALFA NWN2 community is still for all intents and purposes in its infancy. We need folks to step up and help out.

And Rick, I dont know how to say this without making you mad...You have good ideas, but the implementation sometimes goes awry. Some of your statics had some out of wack rewards not only on Daggerford, but also in TSM. I think that was the issue that the DM team had with them. I'm not on the team so I cant say for certain, but I know from experience some of your rewards and even sometimes your encounters you put into the game are too far over the top and not in line with standards, etc. I dont know what was said to you about them but thats just my opinion and the opinion of a few folks I talk too/play with. You tend to get very defensive about a lot of things. I know its your work, but you dont seem to see others points of view when they bring up the problems.

I've always thought you were a great Dm, Rick. You had a wonderful server in Daggerford. I just can see both sides of the picture here in regards to your statics and encounters. Again, I wasnt there to see what was said to you, though.

I apologize if this touches a nerve, but It also is the truth

Rick7475 wrote:Don't worry, I'm not building here anymore, so no offense taken. I sort of got the impression a lot of people didn't like my statics and would have rather done without them. The problem you propose is that there are people who don't want statics, and there are people eager for them. You lose the people that want them when there are no DM's around. When TSM (as with WD and DF and many other servers with a host of statics) went live, there were a great number of players going through the statics, making groups, meeting one another, etc having great fun with and without DM's. But when they moved on to try and form groups the population splintered with certain groups under DM domains. That was great for certain players, but many others that rose about level 3 that couldn't find a group sat around with nothing to do. No statics, no DM's, so they are not having as much fun.

You said you don't want it to be a MMO, but when there are no DM's, what do you want it to be? A bunch of bored players sitting around in a bar waiting for a DM to show up?

So, if you don't want statics, then don't complain when you find numbers dropping, because a good majority of people do want statics, and many do want the servers to be like a MMO when DM's are not around. You can't have it both ways.

If you only want servers with DM's and few if any statics that are working, advertise it that way. ALFA is a world with DM run events and if there are no DM's on, make sure players are aware there is nothing else to do except buy and sell and travel. Many people come and play expecting something to do. When they do not find it, they leave. Perhaps they were expecting statics like there were in NWN1, but since statics are not what ALFA wants while there are no DM's, then make sure the players know that.

My vision of server obviously is not want ALFA wants. My vision was of a server where there is plenty to do, crafting and statics, so many players log on and get to know each other and build their characters while DM's are away. When DM's are on, they run large campaigns, dungeon crawls, and help build PC's through active role-playing. My vision would be a server where players can create their own adventures with statics while DM's were away or monitoring while adding to the fun. My vision was less work for DM's so that they could spend more time developing their plots instead of micromanaging. That is what we designed with Daggerford. But I have since learned that this is not what ALFA wants. And that is fine. I hope to play once my 30 days are up. Here and Exodus. Sorry for hijacking the thread, moderators, do as you please.

LancasterX_2 wrote:I agree with wvincenti. I am level 2 on TSM, can barely find anyone to group with, and I only got to see 1 DM the whole time. It is boooooooring.

If ALFA is moving to no statics, then I'm gone to join the rest of the crowd on other srvers or just quit NWN2 all together.

Daggerford was a beautiful server and the statics were all adjusted quickly when they needed to be. I am quite postive that whatever Rick has done on TSM can also be adjusted. People here just have no trust, patience and care little for passed experience. All of the statics on TSM started out of whack, from Wynna's who was constantly making corrections and all of Indio's statics were adjusted down (there were tonnes of players exploited the bugs in Indio's statics and they all had to be corrected). So why do Rick's get the boot?

You folks here are all out of whack with your over the top requirments and henpecking the builders to perfection or else the high road.

edit: sorry, did not see the new thread.

Nalo Jade · Post by **Nalo Jade** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:23 pm

We don't have to worry about complaints and such as long as we set a bar that is visible...We have to have limits and standards, of course but if they are clear and laid out in an easy fashion its cool.

You can have X static quests on any given server ... X is equal to ...

A quest that can be repeated and done by every class/race/ alignment/ religion ect ... counts as 3

A quest that is single shot and can be done by everyone ... counts as 1

A quest that is extremely limited Race and Class or religion and alignment would count as 1/2 a quest ...

ect ... (The above examples are shite, I know this, but its a way of "identifying" how many quests you have)

The next step would be to identify the EXP/GOLD reward ratio to difficulty, this could be handled as lets say ... 1/2 or even 1/4 the norm for a DM quest. This way DM quests are still prefered over running out statics.

Statics that grant no reward, don't count. Build as many as you want.

I think it would be cool to have something to do at every level, make some that take a REALLY long time, this way you have some "on-going" thing that you are working on...

Lusipher · Post by **Lusipher** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:25 pm

Rick I agree with Danubus that some of your quests may have been a little to easy for the reward back in DF days, but they were also a breath of fresh air! People had something to do instead of like you said, sitting in a bar waiting for the DM to show up... THAT is meta gaming...

Its not that some were too easy. Its that they were repeatable. I use to see folks do those quests over and over and over because they could. People were abusing them.

Im all for static quests that actually evolve the server storyline or are class statics, etc. Those give players something positive to do. Putting in statics to deliver A to Z is cookie cutter time consuming at its best and nothing more. People even now on TSM do the delivery quests a lot because they can. Sometimes its the only way their getting any XP or gold because DMs arent online.

If statics are done right like I mentioned above I wouldnt have a problem. I just dont want statics in game because there "needs to be something to do". If I wanted that Id play on an Action server.

Nalo Jade · Post by **Nalo Jade** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:30 pm

Statics that bring together other characters is good as well...

What if you NEED a rogue and a priest to complete the quest, that makes it much more interesting.

Repeatable quests are the hum dinger, your'e right Danubus.

Post by **ayergo** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:46 pm

Nalo Jade wrote:Statics that bring together other characters is good as well...

What if you NEED a rogue and a priest to complete the quest, that makes it much more interesting.

Repeatable quests are the hum dinger, your'e right Danubus.

I can't agree with this sentiment more. I would also add that it needs to be repeatable and random.

I urge anyone who feels this way to step in and help me with building BG into the ultimate in ALFA playing experience. The framework is there, a few more builders and we'll be at the tipping point of bringing back ALFA from the brink and into the light.

Join up and lets fix this thing!

wvincenti · Post by **wvincenti** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:51 pm

Repeatable static quests and spawns aren't the problem.
Greedy fools abusing them are the problem. Deal with them instead of punishing the rest of the crowd.

Rick's rewards might have been over the top when Daggerford went Live, but they got toned down quite nicely. You needed a serious party to get through a 'simple' patrol mission and I found that it would usually take me 2-3 hours to pull a party together and get the whole thing done. For three hours of hard work with no guarantee of survival the rewards were either right on the money for standards or low. (xp and gold on the order of 100-150 each for the job. 50-75/hour) The rewards were also enough that folks actually logged in to go explore and get into trouble without a DM about. Amen!

Did Shadowdale's patrol quests get abused by some folks? Sure. What got done? Rewards got nerfed down to next to nothing. (20xp & gold) Why not slap the PC/Player upside the head? It's not that hard to pick a pocket or give someone a good dose of fear when a DM holds all of the cards. Somehow I think dealing with the Player must be less time consuming than nerfing the rewards in a pile of statics quests and a server full of static spawns.

Did other servers have static quests and spawns with similar problems?
Yes. TLR, Waterdeep, Northern Cormyr, all of them other than the first TSM server had things to do and places to get killed.

Please give us content, whether it's static quests, static spawns in areas or dungeons to explore.

-Bill

Demson · Post by **Demson** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:02 pm

Statics?

I prefer dynamics. NPC's and quests are DM-session through proxy anyway. Make a connection between 'static' quest activity and the main server plot, and all is well.

ALFAModerator2 · Post by **ALFAModerator2** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:09 pm

Moved from another thread:

wvincenti wrote:Lusipher,
If ALFA had anywhere near 24 hour/day DM coverage I'd agree with you about the statics. It hasn't and it doesn't. Bring on the statics and other content that doesn't require a DM.

Rick's rewards might have been over the top when Daggerford went Live, but they got toned down quite nicely. You needed a serious party to get through a 'simple' patrol mission and I found that it would usually take me 2-3 hours to pull a party together and get the whole thing done. For three hours of hard work with no guarantee of survival the rewards were either right on the money for standards or low. (xp and gold on the order of 100-150 each for the job. 50-75/hour) The rewards were also enough that folks actually logged in to go explore and get into trouble without a DM about. Amen!

ALFA's servers have been slowly morphing into what TSM was when ALFA first went Live over the years. Campaign servers with next to nothing to do when a DM isn't around other than chatting in taverns. Suffice to say I'm getting bored and starting to look for other options.

-Bill

ALFAModerator2 · Post by **ALFAModerator2** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:10 pm

Also moved, related to the other of Rick's content that has been moved:

Rick7475 wrote:When players have nothing to do, they create mules and loot corpses because they want to keep up with their friends and play in the same level of adventure. Sure, you can run campaigns with multilevel players, but the lowest player in the party still feels inadequate. DnD PnP was never designed like this, and we are trying to emulate PnP, but with players of different levels, it is tough. Statics allow players who are in different time zones to keep up in a level playing field. Nothing replaces a DM, but when there is no DM, players leave unless there is something else to do that earns gold and exp, such as statics and crafting.

Bottom line, as we have always said since ALFA's inception, players need something to do. Joe was booted for trying to force the crafting issue so that players could find something to do. Crafting would be marvelous. But since no one here trusts a crafting system (I once offered to build one, but when it became a multi-threaded critic-fest, I gave up). So, statics are the way to go. Who here builds statics? If you find them, get them to build on TSM or NWN1 servers. And don't rip out a builder's hard work without explanation or a chance for them to fix it, or you will lose builders, and you already have lost enough because of the an over-inflated beauracracy that seems suspicious and wary of everyone, especially builders.

Mayhem · Post by **Mayhem** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:53 pm

If a static is IC to be repeatable, why is repeating it a "powergaming" issue?

The road will need patroling tomorrow just as much as it needed patroling yesterday.

If people are repeating it lots, then the risk/reward ratio maybe needs adjusting, but I repeat, if a static is IC to be repeatable, why is repeating it a "powergaming" issue?

***

In fact, repeatable quests are the only ones that make IC sense. Non-repeatable quests can, actually, be repeated, just not by the same person. If its a membership/getting to know you type quest, thats fine, but if its' a "go kill the monster in the cave" quest, it breaks suspension of disbelief more if the monster is there but you, for some purely OOC reason, can't go hunt it whilst the guy standing next to you can.

Nalo Jade · Post by **Nalo Jade** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:54 pm

This is the first draft of a template I will be using when (some day in the far off future) I begin working on a server of my own... I need organization for my brain to work well... but the basic idea is to have some bit of content for everyone, some stuff only they alone can do, some that everyone can do and some that they need to find a buddy or 4 to help them with.

I don't want them to be high reward. I do want them to "add" to the character's purpose. This template will help me get a "bird's eye" view of what I plan on having in the server...

But I would need to know what the limits are, I would be just as ticked off as anybody if I did a BUNCH of work only to have it thrown out or drastically altered. Its not a big deal if I know the limits ahead of time.

Class & Level

Low-level ALL
Medium-level ALL
High-level ALL

Low-level Duet
Medium-level Duet
High-level Duet

Low-level standard 4 party
Medium-level standard 4 party
High-level standard 4 party

Low-level Large party (over 5)
Medium-level standard Large party (over 5)
High-level standard Large party (over 5)

Low-level Warriors
Medium-level Warriors
High-level Warriors

Low-level Arcane casters
Medium-level Arcane casters
High-level Arcane casters

Low-level Divine casters
Medium-level Divine casters
High-level Divine casters

Low-level Rogues
Medium-level Rogues
High-level Rogues

Then I was hoping we could further categorize or identify them by...

Location, name of quest or task, reward and finally the type of static...

Infinately repeatable open:
Can be done forever. Is open to everyplayer.
I pay you X gold for goblin ears.

Infinately medium restricted:
Can be done forever. Is open to 1/2 the players or more.
If you are "non-evil" I pay you X for skeleton knuckles.

Infinately extremely restricted:
Can be done forever. Is open to less than 1/2 the players.
If you are an evil dwarf I pay you X for Halfling ears.

Limited repeatable open:
Up until level X, I will pay you Y for goblin ears.

Limited repeatable medium restricted:
If you are "non-evil" I pay you X for skeleton knuckles, until I you have given me 100 knuckles.

Limited repeatable extremely restricted:
If you are an evil dwarf I pay you X for Halfling ears, only on the third thursday of every month.

one shot open:
I will pay you X for Y ears.

one shot medium restricted:
I think you get the point by now...

one shot extremely restricted:
I think you get the point by now...

No gain content:
No tangible gain, may be used to gain entry into an organization or gain knowledge...no Gold or EXP directly awarded from this quest.

Zelknolf · Post by **Zelknolf** » Mon Jul 28, 2008 11:52 pm

From my personal perspective, alignment-restricted quests seemed to be metagaming NPCs. Unless a character has developed some reputation for dogooding or being a ne'erdowell in an area (something which could be represented by no-weight no-drop tokens or persistent variables), the chances of an NPC eyeing the potential employee up and declaring "I don't think we have compatible philosophies" is fairly low.

Of course, it's entirely possible to script a quest where the NPC asks questions to 'feel out' a PC's potential reaction, and to have them very unlikely to be accepted by certain alignments. (not many evils will work in a soup kitchen, and not many goods would kill a family because he wants to buy the family's land [and the next of kin is much more willing to negotiate!]) I'm not sure that "restricted" is the word in that case so much as "bears karmic consequences."

White Warlock · Post by **White Warlock** » Tue Jul 29, 2008 12:17 am

Alignment should not play a factor in whether a static is available. Instead, it should be modified if said static is completed. A good time to reprint something:

A character's motive is not sufficient to maintain a character's alignment

Motive is merely the hand that flips the switch. It does not govern what that switch causes to occur. Knowledge provides insight into what that switch does, but it is very often you do not have all the facts when having to make a decision. Therefore, when you 'flip' the switch, you may inadvertently cause an effect not consistent with your character's intentions.

You may cause to effect, to put in motion, machinations so Machiavellian, so rarely experienced or encountered by any character, the outcome of which would inexorably influence your character's station in this world. All through the flip of a switch, an error in judgement, a trick, deception, a little white lie, or simply acting for short-term satisfaction, dismissing outright the longterm consequences associated with 'any' and 'all' actions you opt for.

A Player does not decide all facets of their character's development

Characters are NOT your avatar. They are artificially defined entities that you can 'physically' manifest and control. You do not, however, control their psyche'. If you stay in-character, you react to the changes presented by the decisions (good or bad) that you make for your character. If your character acts with good intent, but causes an entire city to be destroyed, your character will suffer for it. To dismiss this means you are not keeping your character... in-character. If you do keep in-character, and your character is not emotionally effected by it, it means your character accepts the part they played in the devastation, and thus has 'accepted' the change in their alignment.

Players are not the only ones who decide what happens to a character's psyche'

You, as a player, are not entitled to all the plots, and all the influences, that govern your character's development/deterioration. As such, you must accept the 'will' of the DMs, for they are all-knowing in the gameworld before you.

You may not like the decisions posed by DMs, or by the mechanics setup by DMs, but you must abide by said decisions. You have the option to contest, communicate your greivances to a Player Representative, but you do not have the 'right' to dismiss or bypass said decisions.

Alignment is not merely a roleplaying utility that sometimes must be adhered to in order to keep advancing in a particular class

In DnD, alignment is not merely a roleplaying utility. It is a gauge for how external influences react to your character. Alignment, in DnD, defines 'where' you are in the scheme of things, what place you stand in the ongoing war between factions of good and evil, law and chaos. It's not where you 'think' you stand, but where you 'actually' stand.

Consider the Christian concept associated with the commission of sins. If you commit a sin by your actions, even if not intended, it is nonetheless a sin, and you must atone (ask forgiveness, sacrifice a lamb, whatever) or go to Hell.

All this stated, All statics should be available for every class and alignment. However, an alignment hit or a 'change' in class should occur if said static is completed. Rather than preventing players from stepping outside of the boundaries of their character concept, we should impose consequences for doing so.

I.e., if a static exists to destroy a portion of the forest to make space for a city's expansion efforts, and a druid opts to complete said static, said druid should lose his ability to cast all spells (by having the script remove the druid's holy item from his/her possession. Without it, the druid cannot pray).

And clerics, committing an act that inadvertently helps the god or clergy in opposition, should get penalized in a similar fashion.

I also think some statics should be presented as ambiguous. It is extremely rare that someone will come up to you and say, "i'll pay you 100gp to kill this person." More likely they'll paint a story, true or false, about how this 'mark' is doing so much harm to this person or that. An evil person will take the job for the money, while a good person may take the job thinking he's doing right. But, in the end, if the act is wrong, a good person must repent (alignment moves closer to evil), while an evil person would smoke a cigarette.

In short, many statics should have alignment modifiers upon completion, and class penalties for failing to adhere to a class's beliefs. Allow players to make mistakes. It will make them better roleplayers.