OOC spell graphical effects, should they be removed?

This is a general open discussion for all ALFA, Neverwinter Nights, and Dungeons & Dragons topics.

Moderator: ALFA Administrators

Should these effects be removed?

1) Yes, remove them all.
78
71%
2) No, they should all stay and be treated as being IC information.
7
6%
3) No, they should all stay and be treated as being OOC information.
4
4%
4) Only remove certain spells (please explain which ones bellow), and treat all remaining effects as IC.
21
19%
5) Only remove certain spells (please explain which ones bellow), and treat all remaining effects as OOC.
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 110

Ronan
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4611
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 9:48 am

OOC spell graphical effects, should they be removed?

Post by Ronan »

Many NWN spells have graphical effects they simply do not have in core D&D rules. We need to decide wether such effects stay, or go. Off the top of my head, some such spells include, barkskin, stoneskin, protection/endure elements, protect from good/evil, freedom, spell resistance, see invisible, true-seeing, ultravision.

Please vote on weather or not these effects should be removed, and try to choose the strongest reason you feel the way you do.

1) Yes, remove them all.
2) No, they should all stay and be treated as being IC information.
3) No, they should all stay and be treated as being OOC information.
3) Only remove certain spells (please explain which ones bellow), and treat all remaining effects as IC.
4) Only remove certain spells (please explain which ones bellow), and treat all remaining effects as OOC.

Note this poll is NOT about removing the graphical effects of spells that should have them (shield, globe of invulnerability, elemental shield, ghostly visage, discplacement, shadow shield etc).
Last edited by Ronan on Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Twiggy
Wyvern
Posts: 846
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2004 5:21 pm
Location: Aurora, the little known tenth plane of the hells
Contact:

Post by Twiggy »

1

Get rid of them all. I don't buff half the time cause they're goofy. And they lag like hell.
Magile wrote:
Image
Ronan
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4611
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 9:48 am

Post by Ronan »

I voted for option 1. Frankly I'm sick of my PC looking like a glowing, stone christmas tree (and as a mage, he depends on these buffs to survive). In a hardcore RP world such as ALFA, I think these effects are rather silly. Seeing as how many mage PCs dispell all their buffs to get rid of these annoying graphics relatively often (especially stoneskin and protection from elements), removing these effects may make things safer for those players, IMO.

But then I am in the habit of noticing when my effect bar shortens or flashes in combat, and I don't feel the immediate knowlege of exactly which buffs have been dispelled is very IC either.

Also, I find the brief moment of lag and the sound effects produced when a buffed PC walks onto the screen a bit annoying.
User avatar
Seva
Kobold Footpad
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 12:26 am

Post by Seva »

Option ONE
Rick7475
Haste Bear
Posts: 2097
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:59 am
Location: Ottawa
Contact:

Post by Rick7475 »

As long as we still can have the cool fireball, lightning and all the nice graphics with the offensive spells.

Nothing like shooting a fireball at a party of greenies all bunched up patting each other's behinds on a job well done when BOOM! God! Numbers everywhere! Anguished tells, screaming curses, and with that lovely fiery effect to soil the pants off any paladin!

Gotta keep that.


But the rest of the barkskin prot from evil Christmas tree light show .... gotta go ....
User avatar
ayergo
Penguin AKA Vile Sea Tiger
Posts: 3521
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 8:50 pm
Location: Germany (But frequent world travels)

Post by ayergo »

Get rid of them all except the ones that make sense (i.e. have a physical changing property like barkskin).
There's a place I like to hide
A doorway that I run through in the night
Relax child, you were there
But only didn't realize and you were scared
It's a place where you will learn
To face your fears, retrace the years
And ride the whims of your mind
paazin
Fionn In Disguise
Posts: 3544
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:07 am
Location: UTC +2
Contact:

Post by paazin »

ayergo wrote:Get rid of them all except the ones that make sense (i.e. have a physical changing property like barkskin).
Does barkskin actually change the appearance of the skin/clothing of the person? I was under the impression they didn't actually do that.
People talk of bestial cruelty, but that's a great injustice and insult to the beasts; a beast can never be so cruel as man, so artistically cruel.
User avatar
Vendrin
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 9594
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 12:48 am
Location: Nevada

Post by Vendrin »

Stoneskin should remain, but not barkskin. The rest of the buff vfxes should go.
-Vendrin
<fluff> vendrin is like a drug
User avatar
J.Madison
Shambling Zombie
Posts: 95
Joined: Sun May 15, 2005 12:54 am
Location: (GMT-5) Maryland, US

Post by J.Madison »

1

Superfluous eye candy.
User avatar
ayergo
Penguin AKA Vile Sea Tiger
Posts: 3521
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 8:50 pm
Location: Germany (But frequent world travels)

Post by ayergo »

PHB doesn't specify that it changes appearance or not, but it is transmutation, and given the description i dont' think its unreasonable there is a change in appearance to go with the physical change.
There's a place I like to hide
A doorway that I run through in the night
Relax child, you were there
But only didn't realize and you were scared
It's a place where you will learn
To face your fears, retrace the years
And ride the whims of your mind
Ronan
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4611
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 9:48 am

Post by Ronan »

ayergo wrote:PHB doesn't specify that it changes appearance or not, but it is transmutation, and given the description i dont' think its unreasonable there is a change in appearance to go with the physical change.
FR "novels" do not mention any such change with the spell. If it is treated as IC, the results would be significant (mostly in the ability to recognize people).
User avatar
DMyles
Dire Badger
Posts: 174
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 2:20 am

Post by DMyles »

please get rid of everything including barkskin and stoneskin
"As the fletcher whittles and makes straight his arrows, so the master directs his straying thoughts."
-The Buddha
User avatar
NickD
Beholder
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:38 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post by NickD »

I voted 4, to get rid of everything except barkskin and stoneskin, which is how it is in TLR already.
Current PCs:
NWN1: Soppi Widenbottle, High Priestess of Yondalla.
NWN2: Gruuhilda, Tree Hugging Half-Orc
paazin
Fionn In Disguise
Posts: 3544
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:07 am
Location: UTC +2
Contact:

Post by paazin »

Looks like there might need to be some sort of a run-off election dealing with stoneskin and barkskin :P
People talk of bestial cruelty, but that's a great injustice and insult to the beasts; a beast can never be so cruel as man, so artistically cruel.
User avatar
Fionn
Ancient Red Dragon
Posts: 2942
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 7:07 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Fionn »

Stoneskin, Barkskin, et al are certainly IC visual effects and should stay. True Sight, Ultravision etc are not, and should be removed.

Prot. Elements should likely be an IC que, but the effect is taxing on older vid cards and looks seriously silly anyhow. Nuke it.

I'm pretty sure there's an ERF on the DMFTP that already does this (I think Cres or Sanc did it).
PC: Bot (WD)

Code: Select all

     -----          -----          -----          -----
    /     \        /     \        /     \        /     \
   /  RIP  \      /  RIP  \      /  RIP  \      /  RIP  \      /
   |       |      |       |      |       |      |       |      |
  *| *  *  |*    *| *  *  |*    *| *  *  |*    *| *  *  |*    *|
_)/\\_//(/|_)(__)/\\_//(/|_)(__)/\\_//(/|_)(__)/\\_//(/|_)(__)/\\_(
Post Reply