minor rule change proposal

[hollyfant]

After being a bit of an arse in IRC yesterday regarding the rules, I thought I'd try and be a bit more constructive today.

The rule against metagaming lists as an example of disallowed behaviour:

Telling another player out-of-character (OOC) where to find a static quest

I propose this particular example is removed from the rules, and is no longer considered an in-game offence.

Much static content, on several servers, has no in-game clues to its existence. And with our player numbers as they are, people in some timezones are simply unlikely to spontaneously run into each other. The rules as they are now, leave us with a numner of undesirable options:

• New players miss out on a large part of a server's content, while the new PCs of older players have no such disadvantage.
• New players spend several days blindly entering every building they see and talk to every NPC in sight, for no significant gain and quite likely with little enjoyment.
• Or they just go out and kill stuff, getting killed themselves in the process due to being poorly equipped.
• PCs travel across large parts of potentially dangerous terrain so they can meet up with a new PC, and disregard all IC motivations not to talk to that other PC just so that the new players learn the things they need to know.

We simply do not have the coverage to ensure all PCs get to know the things they need to know through IC means. It is not a crime to ensure a fellow player has some fun too, and actually finds the missions scripted to allow their character to advance with some initial safety.

[Rotku]

Logical. Reasonable. Why not?

[Veilan]

I guess it makes sense. Come on, old-hares always know where to find what after a while anyway, so it's mostly noble, but wishful thinking that inspired that rule.

Of course it's more fun to find out IC by roleplaying or exploring on your own, but people would still be free to not ask if they wanted.

Also, the rule is basically unenforcible - so, I see no merit in it.

Cheers,

[Magile]

Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with this. Telling them how to do it? Maybe a bit wrong, but there shouldn't be anything preventing a PC from asking an NPC where work is (and someone in chat being that NPC).

[Blindhamsterman]

agreed, changing this seems sound

[DMyles]

I think it was written like this to encourage ic telling of where the statics are rather then he dude you can get fat L33t doing x.

[hollyfant]

I think it was written like this to encourage ic telling of where the statics are rather then he dude you can get fat L33t doing x.

It was a decent rule, when modules were smaller and players plentiful. But I think it outlived its usefulness.

[Vendrin]

Have no objections.

[Rotku]

Have no objections.

Bang the hammer down and go make the change to the rule book. You hold the power!

[Hialmar]

If you need a third Admin to approve it, you have my support.

But I think that Rotku is right, as usual , and you can change it yourself Vendrin and obviously Veilan won't veto it

[Veilan]

Eh, I'll only veto the ensuing of endless dithering now .

Just go change it, Ven?

Cheers,

[Castano]

no reason for this rule...I would add a caveat to use common sense...some stuff IS hidden on a server on purpose and you have to explore deep to find it...statics in town that are regular jobs don't fall into this category. What does fall in the category of meta is "high lvl spawn cave" deep in the mountains on server X.

I do think players who know each other IC should be able to leave messages for each other too about anything their PC knows IC. You can always RP leaving a note with someone.

But yes as written the rule is too strict.

[Rotku]

no reason for this rule...I would add a caveat to use common sense...

Well, the rule itself is a Don't Metagame rule. Th ething Holly suggests removing is just one of the examples. If someone clearly is telling all the top server secrets, then you can still slap them with that rule, with or without a caveat.