Do warlocks fit into the Forgotten Realms?

[Veilan]

Isn't the PGing debate off-topic for this thread?

[ayergo]

Isn't the PGing debate off-topic for this thread?

+1

[NESchampion]

Whether or not it fits in Faerun is a moot point if you can't play it because it "could" be powergamed.

[Blenderhead]

A funny truth is: Those who fear powergaming the most are infact the powergamers. A powergaming mentality arises in a player out of the fear, that there are other players who can potentially create characters that are stronger, so you can recognize a powergamer simply by noticing that he is unwilling to allow "powergaming"! (allow stronger characters). A funny paradoxical truth, that is actually pretty obvious. I'm not saying that we should let go of all regulation though, but maybe we should be more tolerant than we are - at least some of us

[AlmightyTDawg]

As to Alara's point, I say "hah." We will not be bound by your limited mortal views of "on topic." I realize Ronan tried to steer it back there, but I'm an arse who prefers all of my work to be confined to as few threads as possible these days.

As to the point on Powergaming, I don't know... everyone's entitled to their opinion. In some formats, such as say "Arena" servers or say a Magic: The Gathering tournament, I think these little statistical differences and how to best use/manipulate them are actually the point. I guess I've just played with too many both in tabletop and in ALFA who extend character imbalances to the power politics of the in-game RP.

I've seen munchkins dominate tabletop sessions when the DM takes a permissive attitude to "it's in the rules." I've noticed a great many of the "bold" characters in ALFA are, when you look objectively at build and gear and other such things, not nearly as bold as they get credit for. I've seen less numerically apt characters get pushed around, I've seen bombastic and rude PCs suddenly become demure and polite little doobies when they meet a higher-level PC for the first time (and should theoretically not know about the level), and I've seen some of the most hotly-contested disputes in ALFA at a very intricate level.

I personally don't see it as an irrational "fear" of PG/MG, I think it's a plausibly deniable actuality.

The way I look at ALFA, I think you get a depth of character and investment I've only ever had once in a tabletop game, and that was a summer living with the DM and another player, playing during car rides and dinner and pretty much everywhere we were bored. I believe in that context that to the extent that obvious "deviations" from the intended balance can interfere with or even somewhat define RP, we have not only the capacity, but the charge to smooth out the rough edges.

I think that's what puts the focus back on the RP - when the glaring mechanical inconsistencies are lopped off. Reasonable minds are welcome to disagree.

[Zekal]

Am I the only one that thinks that a Warlock/Rogue (or any multiclass combination) could simply sound like a fun kind of combination to play?

You know, there are some people that will look into possible combinations and in "crunching" the numbers, they aren't doing so to try and create the biggest, baddest, phat tattoo wearing PC ever, they just want to make sure that the combination (that sounded cool to them) wasn't pure gimp? What's the point of making a character that has adventure and danger as a part of their concept if they are going to die the first time they come up against your friendly neighbourhood sewer rat?

The idea of having a street urchin reaching a certain age and all of a sudden having nightmares of hellfire and brimstone, feeling burning fire at his finger tips and not knowing what the hell is going on. I think being able to play this character over an extended period of time would be a blast. Hiding a secret which he himself does not understand.

Fear of powergaming destroys so many classic and many more original charcter ideas that can be highly entertaining to play. Besides, many multiclass combinations need to have some game-mechanics thought put into them as it's just as easy for a multiclass to be much weaker if you don't know what you're doing.

I think the number one concern with the warlock should be abundance. Everyone will want to try one atleast once and at the start lots of people will want to try one straight away -- however, this is to be expected... as the shinyness of the new class wears off, so too will the abundance issues. *Hands up if you plan on playing other character classes then warlock over the next 4 years*

[Mord]

*hand up*

[AlmightyTDawg]

Fear of powergaming destroys so many classic and many more original charcter ideas that can be highly entertaining to play. Besides, many multiclass combinations need to have some game-mechanics thought put into them as it's just as easy for a multiclass to be much weaker if you don't know what you're doing.

I'm not sure how you get to "destroys so many classic . . . character ideas." What would destroy the idea of a rogue/warlock if you were told to a) take warlock at first level, or b) go through the requirements of taking it as a PrC at say 5th or 6th level? I'm not sure how a character idea is destroyed by an altered development cycle - at least no more than the idea of an elite arcane archer is destroyed because I can't take the PrC at 1st or 2nd level.

To call it fear of powergaming I think is a rhetorical misnomer. More appropriately, I think it's a recognition of the fact that the exact same build between two different players can be either a powergaming build or not as a function of the motivations of the player. That's the thing - it's not about a fear of powergaming, it's a fear of how the mathematical imbalances cause effects even when someone's not trying to exploit the system. So you can either a) punish the innocent, b) let the guilty flout the spirit of the rules, or c) try your hand at psychoanalysis to discern the guilty from the innocent. Each of those violates either violates the ideals of ALFA or contains monumental pain in the butt drama, maybe both.

In that sense, it's a desire to find a middleground where we aren't always looking for powergamers. You can interpret it one of two ways - either making the "ideal" build reasonably discernible even for non-number crunchers, or mitigating the effects of a powergaming ethic.

I don't like warlocks for a number of reasons, and I voted "No" to this poll. But I accept that it's variety and a lot of potential for fun, and enough people buy into it. So at that point, my focus shifts to addressing all the valid concerns while being focused on making them reasonably playable without being a source of drama for the next three years.

Dismissing the concerns as "fear of powergaming" is selling them short - you could make the same argument if there was a PrC that at 1st level boosted all your stats by +4 that people wanted to exclude.

[Fionn]

A funny truth is: Those who fear powergaming the most are infact the powergamers. A powergaming mentality arises in a player out of the fear, that there are other players who can potentially create characters that are stronger, so you can recognize a powergamer simply by noticing that he is unwilling to allow "powergaming"! (allow stronger characters). A funny paradoxical truth, that is actually pretty obvious. I'm not saying that we should let go of all regulation though, but maybe we should be more tolerant than we are - at least some of us :D

Bullhocky.

Anyone with an ounce of foresight in a communal environment will understand that DMs must balance the campaign to the 'better' players (or remove any dynamic economy). That makes life much harder on anyone *not* crunching the numbers. Then add the ability for powerful characters to dominate the plot. Then add CvC.

This also doesn't address the immersion issues you would see on Arena servers where everybody plays about 3 class/race combos because they work best.

[Blenderhead]

I was only speaking about the psychology of the powergamer. I just find it funny that the biggest antipowergamers are the biggest powergamers! A player completely fooled me earlier this year, I thought he was very cool. His forum name was Arkhiam and he played the role of the antipowergamer down to perfection. I now realize that he has been thrown out of ALFA three times for cheating, and he had more than once told me in tells, that he did not trust Dergon Darkhelm and thought he was a powergamer (fear of stronger players). A funny thing, that those who accuse others could infact just be projecting their own tendencies of powergaming at other players, they don't realize that they are powergamers themselves, because they are unwilling to identify with a negative word so they project their own tendencies away from themselves

But this is of course not part of this discussion, I'm simply sharing my view on PG'ing in ALFA from a pshychological perspective, it may be of use to some, but maybe it isn't important at all

[White Warlock]

Agreed Fionn. Blenderhead, ALFA does not need to develop tolerance to PGing. What it does need to do, is work on removing the fear that PGing will overrun ALFA. As long as ALFA maintains roleplaying as its flagship, there really is nothing to fear. Why? Because roleplaying encompasses a mentality of 'constrained powergaming.' Not total abandonment, mind you, just constrained.

And yes, i understand what you're saying in your post... but the truth is, your particular analysis lacks evidence. Only one example, and that example was lieing to you.

But there's still a degree of validity in your postulation, although not in the way you presented it. One of the things to consider is, if others PG in ALFA, and get away with it, their characters will rise in levels faster and potentially gain more ingame influence. If they later decide to CvC (PK or intimidate other characters), then resentment ensues. Roleplayers may loosen their grasp on roleplay ethics as they are urged to 'compete' for levels (happened to me, btw). This, is a very valid concern... which is why PGing should not be tolerated by 'anybody' in ALFA (DM and player alike).

In other words, too much PGing in ALFA could instill the Darwinian theory. Survival of the fittest... and thus we must PG instead of RP. A very bad thing, but it is something that can be easily managed... as long as the community as a whole is roleplay-geared and 'intolerant' of PGing. I.e., players must report actions, to DMs/Admins, committed by other players that clearly detract from roleplay

An extreme example i reported years back was: an albino drow, walking in the daytime, in a desert town full of humans. Another was a guy running while shooting arrows, PKing everyone at the 'new character' spawn point in front of the city gates, in front of the NPC city guards.

These are clear examples of PGing, with both also presenting a degree of 'cheating.' Question is, can you tell which parts were PG and which parts were bug exploitation?

Whether or not it fits in Faerun is a moot point if you can't play it because it "could" be powergamed.

umm, everything could be powergamed (but i'm sure that was your point, right?).

But to expect that DMs shouldn't have to do any enforcing, and that code can cover all bases perfectly is a fantasy that would strangle a community.

If I thought that, I should be recalled immediately and could be replaced with a poodle that would do a better job.

Umm, let me go get that poodle.

Seriously though, i wanted to cover something here. I don't know where you, or any of the other ALFA coders stand on this, but i'll toss out something about coding policies discussed many years ago in ALFA:

Almost all coding should be geared to provide an environment that 'encourages roleplay.' When NWN first came out, it was loaded with things that 'detracted' from roleplay. The coders immediately got to work fixing it so it could better fit our PW goal, and goal of utilizing NWN for roleplay purposes. However, in time some coders started getting distracted, thinking they could code-out powergaming. Their talents started going into such things, and suddenly... ALFA was death-incarnate. In their efforts to discourage powergaming, they only made it more likely that those who PGed their character's stats... had a larger chance of survival.

Simply stated, you can't code out PGing. Efforts to do so invariably penalize roleplayers. The greatest means to discourage powergaming is to create, and maintain, community guidelines that encourage roleplay. This is the single-most effective route for providing what we all want in an ALFA gaming session, partly because roleplay-minded players will easily note PGing actions and, if they're responsible members of this community, will report them.

I think that's what puts the focus back on the RP - when the glaring mechanical inconsistencies are lopped off.

Agreed. However, what makes a warlock class mechanically inconsistent? Nothing...

Extremist powergamers could attempt to exploit the benefits entailed in a warlock, just as they could any other class, merely by grabbing a few levels of each class that provides said bonuses. So what are we to do with this? Deny multi-classing in ALFA merely because we want to discourage PG-minded players from going that route?

ATD, you said something earlier that bothered me, and i would like to address it directly here. You mentioned about "looking" for PGers. I stated earlier, and maybe i didn't make it clear, that Admins/DMs don't need to look for them. This is a roleplaying community, and it is the community that we are geared to protect but, in truth, it is the community that must protect itself. If the actions of a pger are impacting the roleplay and entertainment of others, the DMs/Admins won't have to look. Said players will (or should) be brought to their attention by the very same offended community members.

But this is the catch, isn't it? I experienced this problem here and in other communities that players are the greatest weakness to protecting ALFA from extremist PGers. Many players encounter these people, but don't let DMs or Admins know of incidents they witnessed, or experienced firsthand. Because of this, extremist PGers have a chance to live long and fruitful lives in ALFA.

Last comment is about exploitation of bugs. Exploitation of bugs is not about PGing... it's about cheating (farming of spawns is an example of bug exploitation). The difference here really does need to be emphasized, because it is a common mistake to think cheaters are PGers. They are not. Cheaters are simply cheaters and should be banned. Cheating needs to be monitored by Admins/DMs, and can be done so by coding (providing reports, etc). In fact, it is here that 'preventive/monitoring' coding has a home.

Isn't the PGing debate off-topic for this thread?

Sort of, and no. The examination is that of warlocks, and how they fit into ALFA. Because of this, we must examine ALFA as a whole, and classes as a whole. We've talked aplenty about how they may or may not fit into ALFA and the world of Abeir-Toril, so we're left to discuss classes and the potential impact on game play, or roleplay. Unfortunately, such discussions tend to pose the examination with emphasis on the ALFA bad guy and how he could wield said classes to create mass destruction.

We cannot disconnect warlocks and point out 'how' a PG-minded person can exploit them, without also looking at how a PG-minded person can exploit a druid, rogue, paladin, ranger, monk, or cleric. Each class provides characteristics that make them unique and individually powerful. We multi-class and we gain some of the benefits of each class, which could make that particular character stronger at the early levels... but weaker in the later levels. That's the way it works. The good and bad of multi-classing. So, as a whole, the concerns about PGing via multiclassing are unwarranted and the calls to remove leaps and bounds are, likewise, unwarranted.

What is warranted, is Ronan's earlier comment about looking how warlocks were posed in the CA, as opposed to how they were implemented in NWN2. If the warlock is incorrectly setup in NWN2, then they need to be corrected, just as the druid friends and wizard familiars were corrected for appropriate strengths and behaviors. Bioware and Obsidian both made changes so that they could make a game that would sell to the majority... munchkins. It's up to the coders to bring D&D back to its original intentions.

[Joos]

Since there are Devils that are demigods, a warlock fits into the campaign. 'Cuse since when has horny little devils been able to keep their wang in check?
HA!

[Ronan]

Almost all coding should be geared to provide an environment that 'encourages roleplay.' When NWN first came out, it was loaded with things that 'detracted' from roleplay. The coders immediately got to work fixing it so it could better fit our PW goal, and goal of utilizing NWN for roleplay purposes. However, in time some coders started getting distracted, thinking they could code-out powergaming. Their talents started going into such things, and suddenly... ALFA was death-incarnate. In their efforts to discourage powergaming, they only made it more likely that those who PGed their character's stats... had a larger chance of survival.

Thats not trying to code-out PGing, thats just dumb. "Coding out PGing" is not done by increasing the game's difficulty. PGing typically takes the form of specific combinations of character traits which increase power over what is "normal". If you consider the state-space of all possible character options, a space that awarded PGing would have a higher discrepancy between the power levels of the different states, while a space that awarded PGing less would have power levels closer together. Basically, we want to make sure that as many different character concepts are viable, without a few specific ones being so much more powerful than the rest.

The first step in this is pretty obvious: Remove the outliners. Fix the horribly gimped abilities and remove the stupidly powerful ones. 3.5 itself is pretty balanced, so in most all circumstances this takes the form of shifting things back to 3.5 rules.

Saying that dev time should only be spent on things directly related to RP is, in my opinion, extremely unfounded and incorrect. I think ATD has a good handle on why: Any mechanic which takes place out of the game engine is subject to human interpretation, and therefore takes an undue amount of effort and coordination (in ALFA, that means endless arguments). For the most part, DM time and RP in ALFA is not stiffled by game mechanics changes at all. DMs burn out all the time because they have to enforce things that are not enforced in the game engine, and adding additional options in the game engine increases RP, especially when DMs aren't around. Note that by additional options I don't necissarily mean adding new options to the interface or anything like that. I also mean "options" as in viable character choices that may have been made unviable because they were too gimped, or were made unviable because more powerful choices totally overshadowed them. Consider an extreme case where only a few clases were powerful enough to truely play, and how that would limit RP.

Its also hard to RP when your chosen character concept, while decent in concept, is completely gimped by the game engine.

I'm not trying to say we should try to automate everything. Clearly we shouldn't, but there are some cases we can look at and say "there is no reason not to automate this" with certainty.

[White Warlock]

Thats not trying to code-out PGing, thats just dumb. "Coding out PGing" is not done by increasing the game's difficulty.

This is getting just a tad tiring. You're not reading my posts correctly. I stated that their efforts to code out PGing had the 'end result' of making it too easy to die. It wasn't their intention to do this, but it was not realized that by imposing various restrictions, they simply made it harder for the 'average' character concept to survive.

The first step in this is pretty obvious: Remove the outliners. Fix the horribly gimped abilities and remove the stupidly powerful ones. 3.5 itself is pretty balanced, so in most all circumstances this takes the form of shifting things back to 3.5 rules.

I don't see this as coding to counter PGing. I see it as an effort to get the game back to it's original format, prior to Obsidian's distortions. Anyway, this is a repeat of what i stated here:

• "What is warranted, is Ronan's earlier comment about looking how warlocks were posed in the CA, as opposed to how they were implemented in NWN2. If the warlock is incorrectly setup in NWN2, then they need to be corrected, just as the druid friends and wizard familiars were corrected for appropriate strengths and behaviors. Bioware and Obsidian both made changes so that they could make a game that would sell to the majority... munchkins. It's up to the coders to bring D&D back to its original intentions."

Saying that dev time should only be spent on things directly related to RP is, in my opinion, extremely unfounded and incorrect.

Ronan, that is not what i said. At this point i'm starting to lose my interest in discussing things with you, since you're either grossly misunderstanding what i'm saying, or intentionally misrepresenting so as to turn my posts into easily dismissed straw man arguments. The former indicates to me a bit of tunnel-vision, the latter indicates someone trying to 'win' a debate. Neither hits me well. Do realize, i'm not trying to make a personal assault, just venting my frustrations.

DMs burn out all the time because they have to enforce things that are not enforced in the game engine, and adding additional options in the game engine increases RP, especially when DMs aren't around.

In my experience, and that of most others i've spoken to, enforcement has little to do with 'burnout'. What has more to do with burnout is having DMs in the team that don't DM, causing those that do DM, a feeling of disproportionate responsibility. Inevitably, those that do DM take it upon themselves to try and compensate for those who take up the DM mantle, but do not participate in the DMing process. By incorrectly viewing the DMing status as a 'job,' a responsibility to the community... as opposed to merely a means to obtain some entertainment whilst providing entertainment for others.

I'm not trying to say we should try to automate everything. Clearly we shouldn't, but there are some cases we can look at and say "there is no reason not to automate this" with certainty.

And i don't disagree. I just hope you'll pose a little more effort into correctly comprehending my posts, because in most things I think we're in agreement... and these unnecessary clashes are simply a waste of both our times.

Thanks for reading (and comprehending).

[NESchampion]

Its also hard to RP when your chosen character concept, while decent in concept, is completely gimped by the game engine.

It's hard to RP? You mean hard to survive the worlds created to handle the more powerful classes, I hope. I've played a variety of settings and PWs, and weak character concepts (melee mages, pure gnome bards, etc.) might be harder to survive, but they are not harder to RP.