How to bring back the people?

[Blindhamsterman]

BH what you are describing here sounds a lot like an NPC. Retiring your high level PC, and asking the DMs to NPC them is cool. Their story goes on in a sense and they become permanent fixtures in the game. You can even DM and play them again as an NPC if you want =D

I know what you're saying mate, I also know your view, but there are plenty of people that don't want to retire and start over... I've considered it a few times lately, and in the end I decided not to, in part because there are no dms in my time zone, and in part because the next two concepts I have are either too much like this one or simply not possible in Alfa.

Crafting and teaching doesn't equal an npc, nor does player initiated quests, its simply a route that might work well.

[Heero]

There's been lots of times where lower levels can make all the difference, but I guess it depends on the players....

It is very true. It depends on the the player, the DM, and the type of character (ie a skill monkey with a bunch of social skills will potentially add more to high(er) levels than a front-line fighting type, especially one that is not a solid block of steel hiding behind a picnic table sized shield). Despite any potential benefits, it is still more ideal, both form a player standpoint and a DM standpoint, to have a closely-leveled party of people. I know that it can be frustrating playing a low level and being told to stand in the back despite being a character that fancies itself a swordsman, for instance. I know it makes sense from a mechanical standpoint, but this is so very OoC/meta-y as our characters arent supposed to know their level.

My ideas:

Multiple PCs can and will help. There is nothing wrong with having high-leveled characters in the world, but there is something wrong with a model where there are only high-leveled characters in the world. As we have seen, many DMs do not want to DM these characters, and many potential players are put off by having only well-established, high(er) leveled PCs logged in. Multiple PCs will help the people unwilling to let go of a treasured PC as they can keep that PC in the hopes a DM might come along willing to continue their story while also playing a new PC, hopefully furthering group play through lower levels as new parties spring up.

As others have said, the difficulty level needs to be the inverse of what it is now. While it is true that it is the easiest it has ever been in ALFA for a player to breeze through low levels; it is also the most mind-numbingly boring, consisting of a lot of menial tasks and flower picking to maximize progress. Unfortunately, meaningful and/or fun and exciting progression is extremely high risk at low levels and 'adventuring' becomes completely mundane, for the most part, as one progresses. Which brings me to my next point…

Static content. I would suggest there needs to be more static content. This static content should be intended to be completed by a group rather than solo players. The rewards of said static content should be level range limited based upon their encounter levels and difficulty to encourage PCs within intended level ranges to participate rather than allowing PCs to ‘out-level’ the content before going back to easily solo it in order to claim rewards. This static content should focus on, say, level 1-5s, for the most part. It should pose somewhat of a risk to a party of its intended target levels, but the challenge should be relatively small when compared to that presented by DMed events. And to accompany this, there needs to be…

More building. NWN2 has come a ways since its release, and we are no longer as limited as to how much can be put into a mod. Let’s face it, the servers are rather stale at this point. There are places to adventure here and there, but they are often a single area surrounded by a sea of ‘safe’ places in the form of towns, forts, cities, inns, etc. New building needs to focus on generic ‘complexes’ of attached areas spread through the servers…forests, hills, mountains, caves, etc. Locations written about in the fluff are nice to have, but it only makes sense for a canon dungeon with its canon big badie to get cleared out once – it simply is not a good use of effort when compared to things that can be reused. And don’t even get me started on adding even more inns, taverns, towns, holds, forts, or whatever other things can work to split up players as they idle keeping a barstool warm.

Lastly and most importantly, more DMing. This cant be said enough. DMs are going to be what makes the world come alive. Static content will certainly help, but completing static content rarely leads to the sort of real character development that can come about with the help of a good DM.

[Heero]

Oh, and Id add slower progression to the list, but Im not as adamant about this one.

[Ronan]

There's been lots of times where lower levels can make all the difference, but I guess it depends on the players....

Absolutely, but this isn't always the case. Maeredhel for instance was better than the rest of the server (save Keren and Alyra, though SSM was retired for a while) at everything except talking. There wasn't any way for him to participate in most events without dominating them. Doing so wasn't that much fun for me and probably less so for the others involved.

Though I would argue he was mostly useless in the UD There were many sessions where it felt like The Sywyn Show, though Maer did find those duergar maps. The level difference wasn't too great though, as I think our spread was 6-10 (pretty sure Aglaril was 6th or at least hit 6 down there; Maer and Ethan were 7).

So yes a DM can make every PC relevant, but it is much more work when there's a great level spread and the highbies start getting Angel Summoner powers. Perhaps I'm simply not a very good DM, but I have a very hard time providing as much problem-solving freedom as I can whilst manipulating circumstance so the low-levels can be relevant (though I generally prefer consequences to be a product of the environment and PC decisions, not DM whim). No one is saying its impossible, just more difficult (as DMing high levels in general is more difficult due to the greater number of rules, spells, etc. which must be known).

[Brokenbone]

On a positive note, I think there's been like, 2-3 adds / changes to DM ranks underway while this mess of a thread has been ongoing.

Stories n' stuff bring people. Maybe.

[oldgrayrogue]

Good points Heero. I played on a LoTR server where quests were limited by level and you absolutely needed a party to complete them. It was all done ICly as the NPC quest giver would have a dialogue something like: "*Looks you over with a discerning eye* "Ya best come back see me when yer a bit more seasoned laddie and bring a few friends along with ya if ya plan on makin it back from them ruins." -- or some such. Quests were also set up so you needed a balanced party -- for example, dungeons had locked and trapped doors that only a requisite level rogue could get through, or required a specific divine or arcane spell be cast to progress. One quest could take days to complete as you found out the party members needed to make it through -- and they were lethal without a party to begin with. DMs also gave out "quest tokens" to party leaders that would "unlock" massive static quests that could take many days to complete. Other quests required you to complete several stages and obtain a "token" from each. As each token was turned in the quest giver would tell you to go see another NPC, often across the server, to get the next leg of the quest and so on. Some quests had five or six legs and spanned the entire server. They could take weeks to complete. Much RP was had over how to complete them and often a story developed out of the completion. Of course, talented scripters are required for this type of stuff and I aint one. I offer it as an example of the type of "story based" static content that I believe would be more engaging than mail runs.

Someone else mentioned crafting. This same LoTR server had a crafting system in place as well. Instead of collecting herbs and handing them in for XP and GP, you collected "crafting components" and then earned skill points and XP by actually crafting. It was a very involved system I am sure some members are familiar with. These are all worthwhile improvements that really up the static content experience when DMs are not around.

Both the quest system and the crafting component collection system was also designed to foster exploration of the gameworld. For example, a certain type of metal could only be mined in a deep cave that was very dangerous to get to and could only be accomplished in a party, or a rare herd could only be found by climbing a frozen mountain and fighting nasty monsters on the way -- again all requiring a party or resulting in death.

The guy who ran this PW is a former ALFA member. I wonder if we could lure him -- and his scripting skills, back into the fold.

[Blindhamsterman]

was that 'the rise of sauron'?

good server that (although I've not looked at it in many many moons)

[FoamBats4All]

Quest giver, crafter, trainer. That's three ways off the top of my head a higher level could enrich a lower levels game.

They can all be done already, but are not rewarding for either pc.

If I could actually train a lower level (rp that is based around learning skills my pc had to learn) and actually grant them some bonus exp beyond just the rpxp ticker and eventually validate them into said prc, that would likely provide a lot of rp for a prospective pc over a large period of time, it'd also provide them with something other than farming to do...

Crafting, while possible at the moment requires a dm for item crafting, if I could do it without, I'd make items and be able to provide them to lower level pcs, less long term rp I guess, but its something I made my pc to do, and I'm not the only one to have done so. It also means other rp can branch off of those interactions. Currently as I have no mans to make means to make money due to lack of dms I'm enable to do this though.

Quest giving would probably come from the money made from the thing above. I could then pay pcs to go explore etc, and dms could utilise me to give other quests too.

Most of the above would be viable for the majority of our high levels I think.

<edit>
I guess I could ask to be a dm, npc my character and ONLY do the above, but then I lose out on the fun of progressing my own pc as well, and I doubt many hdms would be happy with me basically 'playing my pc' as a dm and adventuring with him still

<edit2>
I guess combining campaign pc with dm wand would work if dma would go for it. Once a pc gets to a certain level, give the player the option to switch that pc to a campaign only pc, but allow the player to basically dm through said pc. Perhaps don't give the player access to the normal dm forums, but give them the same sort of power a provisional dm would get....

This. Where DMs aren't yet active, player-driven plots can help a ton. We never got any rewards for it other than RP XP, but I had great fun DMing tasks for my character's apprentice.

I've been trying to think of other ways to do this with my PC. Statics helped some -- I could get a reasonable story going, gather up some people, get the static reward, pad it with personal money, the distribute rewards. As for crafting, I've always hoped that a DM would take up my mentioning of having to do questing for supplies. For example, a group of lower-level dwarves requested half a dozen items. It'd have been great if this required them to go into some infested mine to gather crystals required for the enchantment. I believe this, DM-driven, option is better than allowing automated crafting, but if we're not going to get super high DM activity from DMs who don't mind doing stuff like this, automated crafting opens up quite a few new player-driven avenues of plot.

But, a firm no no no on campaign-only "requested" retirement. We do not have the DM staff and consistency, nor do we have many DMs willing to take a personal interest in developing/DMing players 1-on-1. No need to half-ass it. Just allow 2 characters per player.

[Adanu]

'Player driven' quests and such sound like a good idea, but they would require DMs or systems to make them work simply by nature of everything being scripted.

There is also the fact that I've seen a lot of looking down on 'farming' which is very possible to make a 'player quest'. My PC would probably be very willing to gather a bunch of PCs to serve as mercenaries for a job or whatever... that still means we need something to do. I was actually going to get together a thing on MS before most of the 'eyes of the isles' stuff went into limbo. A duergar encamped castle with a big fat bounty to clear it. Zyrus would have led a charge with a group for that. I don't know if that options is still open (kid was the DM I'm pretty sure, after the OAS period I can look into it again).

[Ithildur]

It makes me pretty sad that the feeling is lower levels cannot contribute, or that high levels take over entirely, having played in a couple of long ish campaigns here I can say its simply not true.

In viigas' campaign we had aglaril as a level 3 or 4 pc, alongside maeredhel who was about 7 at the time and laniara whom was 9 or 10 plus myself on 9 and sywyn on 10 or maybe even 11. Whilst its true that sywyn was able to do more damage than anyone else, its also true that aglaril quickly found his place helping elenaril up front and maeredhel was able to do all sort of skill type stuff due to a couple of rogue levels plus add backup spells....

And the above doesn't even include the rp benefits aglaril got from growing over that 2 month or so campaign...

And equally a level 6ish elrien saved elenarils life in a different dm event. There's been lots of times where lower levels can make all the difference, but I guess it depends on the players....

+1.

Ronan, BHM's right; Aglaril was level 3 when he started in the UD, though I think he soon hit 4 after starting.

Higher levels training and hiring lower lvls is great and all, yes. That and some other good points aside, I honestly don't get this mentality that being lower level means you can't have fun when around high levels... ALFA has a great tradition of creative/cooperative players and DMs not letting level disparity get in the way of excellent fun. I remember having a blast as a noob Duckling in SD quests alongside folks like Aravilar and Hignar, and yes, Aglaril running the Underdark with higher levels was a blast, growing both from a RP standpoint (from self-centered coward to Elfhero Savior of Worlds! j/k) and skillz. With a bit of inspiration and a DM who encouraged lower level contributions, he did make fun and meaningful contributions to the party a number of times, and being lower level didn't stop me from participating in that IC thread that a lot of folks seemed to enjoy posting in and reading!

I've always thought that the most awesome moments in DnD are often when a low level figures out solutions that have the higher levels stumped; the players I admire the most don't rely on numbers but rather ideas and imagination. Also, I always felt it was a tribute to this project's mettle that the most powerful and influential PCs in ALFA in the past were often very mediocre in combat (iirc nearly every PC in ALFA's Hall of Fame were suboptimal builds). Let's get creative once more folks, both players and DMs! Not all solutions depend on whether your to hit modifier or spell DC or even skill ranks is uber or not! Be liberated from the mindset that says 'If my toon can't kill 70% of the mobs then I can't enjoy this game!'. Lowbies, show the high levels stuck on how they can beat everything to a pulp how it's really done!

[wvincenti]

What Ith said.

Word.

-Bill

It makes me pretty sad that the feeling is lower levels cannot contribute, or that high levels take over entirely, having played in a couple of long ish campaigns here I can say its simply not true.

In viigas' campaign we had aglaril as a level 3 or 4 pc, alongside maeredhel who was about 7 at the time and laniara whom was 9 or 10 plus myself on 9 and sywyn on 10 or maybe even 11. Whilst its true that sywyn was able to do more damage than anyone else, its also true that aglaril quickly found his place helping elenaril up front and maeredhel was able to do all sort of skill type stuff due to a couple of rogue levels plus add backup spells....

And the above doesn't even include the rp benefits aglaril got from growing over that 2 month or so campaign...

And equally a level 6ish elrien saved elenarils life in a different dm event. There's been lots of times where lower levels can make all the difference, but I guess it depends on the players....

QFT.

Higher levels training and hiring lower lvls is great and all, yes. That aside, I honestly don't get this mentality that being lower level means you can't have fun when around high levels... ALFA has a great tradition of creative/cooperative players and DMs not letting level disparity get in the way of excellent fun. I remember having a blast as a noob Duckling in SD quests alongside folks like Aravilar and Hignar, and yes, Aglaril running the Underdark with higher levels was a blast, growing both from a RP standpoint (from self-centered coward to Elfhero Savior of Worlds! j/k) and skillz. With a bit of inspiration and a DM who encouraged lower level contributions, he did make fun and meaningful contributions to the party a number of times, and being lower level didn't stop me from participating in that IC thread that a lot of folks seemed to enjoy posting in and reading!

I've always thought that the most awesome moments in DnD are often when a low level figures out solutions that have the higher levels stumped; the players I admire the most don't rely on numbers but rather ideas and imagination. Also, I always felt it was a tribute to this project's mettle that the most powerful and influential PCs in ALFA in the past were often very mediocre in combat (iirc nearly every PC in ALFA's Hall of Fame were suboptimal builds). Let's get creative once more folks, both players and DMs! Not all solutions depend on whether your to hit modifier or spell DC or even skill ranks is uber or not! Be liberated from the mindset that says 'If my toon can't kill 70% of the mobs then I can't enjoy this game!'. Lowbies, show the high levels stuck on how they can beat everything to a pulp how it's really done!

[Blindhamsterman]

FWIW

I'm in the progress of trying to put my 'money where my mouth is' and get something setup....

[Galadorn]

Higher levels training and hiring lower lvls is great and all, yes. That and some other good points aside, I honestly don't get this mentality that being lower level means you can't have fun when around high levels... ALFA has a great tradition of creative/cooperative players and DMs not letting level disparity get in the way of excellent fun. I remember having a blast as a noob Duckling in SD quests alongside folks like Aravilar and Hignar, and yes, Aglaril running the Underdark with higher levels was a blast, growing both from a RP standpoint (from self-centered coward to Elfhero Savior of Worlds! j/k) and skillz. With a bit of inspiration and a DM who encouraged lower level contributions, he did make fun and meaningful contributions to the party a number of times, and being lower level didn't stop me from participating in that IC thread that a lot of folks seemed to enjoy posting in and reading!

I've always thought that the most awesome moments in DnD are often when a low level figures out solutions that have the higher levels stumped; the players I admire the most don't rely on numbers but rather ideas and imagination. Also, I always felt it was a tribute to this project's mettle that the most powerful and influential PCs in ALFA in the past were often very mediocre in combat (iirc nearly every PC in ALFA's Hall of Fame were suboptimal builds). Let's get creative once more folks, both players and DMs! Not all solutions depend on whether your to hit modifier or spell DC or even skill ranks is uber or not! Be liberated from the mindset that says 'If my toon can't kill 70% of the mobs then I can't enjoy this game!'. Lowbies, show the high levels stuck on how they can beat everything to a pulp how it's really done!

Oh! just checked up a bit, seems Ith and I think similarly. *ahem*

[Brokenbone]

Lower level does not mean less personality, or a lower capacity to be memorable.

*highbies licking wounds, lowbie is attempting to roll a boulder down a cliff face on top of them*

[Ronan]

Obviously yes given the right circumstances, lower-levels can make quite a difference, even all the difference (e.g. Korlar in Barrenrock). In general however they don't; I know me and Killy felt pretty useless during the UD crawl with viigas. I've retired two PCs because, despite being far from the level cap, I felt they were too powerful to continue without affecting others' fun. Plus I like to actually play when I play, and not be asked to sit out.

Clearly we don't want all PCs at the same power level, or some-easy-to-hit power cap. Veteran PCs who've seen a hundred dungeon crawls should be more powerful, maybe held in awe. But we don't want our highest levels 10,000x more power than the level 1s. Where's the balance? I don't know, but I'd say that our starting levels need to be relevant in combat and general adventuring. A new player should be able to roll up a new PC and jump into most any campaign and find some static content that isn't a deathtrap. Sure they'd suck, but hopefully be able to make some difference even in a combat-oriented session (or at least not die to a minor spell). Note I'm not advocating faster leveling; I like that we start low and players slowly work their way up. I just dislike the core ruleset which NWN is unfortunately based on.

D&D's massive power spread between levels affects a lot more than just the players. Ever wonder why it has like 6 Monster Manuals? Because you need a huge number of monsters when your PCs can go from chicken-feed to god-slayers. There are a lot of different levels of power to fill with some sort of challenge, so you fill them with monsters. LOTS of monsters.

At a business level hey, this power spread sells lots of books. There's lots of content of all sorts on the way from cat-attack-victim to new-Bhaal. At a technical level all that crap needs models, scripts, soundsets, spawn points, static quests, etc... Its a huge pain in the ass. Even with what we've been given in NWN2, retooling BG to support level 15+ play would be a pain, and would crowd out the lowbie adventure areas. Even a well-played party of level 12s would probably make mincemeat of nearly everything on the server except the lowest parts of Throrgar.

DM, in-game and player resources are scarce, and we simply cannot support all the gazillion different levels of power the D&D ruleset allows. Saying "DMs can make the difference" is true of nearly everything. Unfortunately this truism also makes their time and attention valuable and scarce, so we must economize what we ask of them.

This is all moot for NWN2; we've not going to have a vault wipe, or institute E8, or whatever. That ship has already sailed. But its worth thinking about for ALFA3 (AGFA?), or whatever comes next. In hindsight I think we should have started with a low level cap and decided whether or not to raise it when our PCs started bumping up against it. A level cap is an easy thing to raise after all, but lowering one would cause some friction!