A Request

[Gairun]

I am sad to say this but the past two weeks I have been running into alot of folks that are flooding the local 'say' with out of character babble. And this is not just simple OOC Afk phone, or OOC Sorry crashed. Lately it's devolved into more than half the chat on an adventure is OOC, one character I was with even only spoke one line in character, the other 42 lines were OOC!

Also along these lines I've seen alot of Meta-Gaming going on, in a very very bad way. For example I saw somebody I know from outside the game talking to a Paladin. The person tells the Paladin something truthful, but then rolls a bluff skill check (A low roll). So immediately the Paladin runs around saying the character was lying, when in fact they weren't. The person playing the Paladin just assumed and meta-gamed that 'Oh you rolled a bluff skill check, so you must be lying'.

Now the above is an extreme example, however I have also seen alot of information passed from one character to another in Tells. Especially where one group is and what has been going on. It totally breaks immersion when someone shows up at a group and allready knows all the trials and tribulations that have been going on because they've been getting tells from someone else in the group. I mean come on. . . why bother playing on a Role-play server? How the hell would your character suddenly show up and know someone was badly wounded ten minutes ago? How the hell would your character suddenly show up and understand we are searching for a hidden text in these caves?

I really hope I didn't come off too harsh, but please guys, try to remember that OOC chatter and Meta-Gaming are real killers of Role-play and Immersion for what it's worth.

[steel505]

Harsh, perhaps, but needed none-the-less. Again I'll admit that I've done my fair share of OOC, but I will certainly try to keep it to a minimum from now on. I also really agree with the Meta-Gaming; you can't really assume anything. Not long ago, one of my characters ran into a young elven woman who, after I read her log, was attempting to hide her heratige. It's lucky that no one else was around when I greated her in native tongue, as it might have damaged her character's RP.
As a side note, I now always "examine" other players before I say anything other than hello, just for that kind of situation.

[Leaving Hope]

Guys, please do stop the OOC. We're going to have to start deducting XP if it continues. As mentioned above, OOC really kills the immersion. Just use tells or party chat instead. There should never be a need for OOC chat.

[Verrath]

As a side note, I now always "examine" other players before I say anything other than hello, just for that kind of situation.

I think that was my character, Alijah... and it's actually totally understandable - and no harm done If others had been about, then we'd simply have assumed an elf knows his own, and simply hiding her ears wasn't fooling your char


Not totally on topic but still something that occurs to me:

I like to read in game character-descriptions as a rule. I think they are cool and can be great to give a first impression of the other toon. But too many times you come across either

- "RP to find out" (Why should I need to RP with a character to see what they look like? Isn't that exactly what you can use the in game char description for? So the player doesn't need to emote to each and everyone he encounters that his PC has this scar running across his right eye, that his left eyelid is sagging and his nose broken a few times, and that he is just in general staggeringly handsome?)

- a blank page, well, at least it's not

- the default NWN2 one. Gets old after a time.

- the entire biography, motives, goals, background, which of course shows the player gave it a lot of thought - but it's not really something I want to know (meta-able even if unintentional, besides I'd rather find out through RP) - so I generally don't read those through either, unless my character has come to know the other.


This isn't meant to come across harsh or elitist - just more food for thought. I hope.

[Landaren]

I hope people read my back ground.

Maybe then I would get less cheery folks bothering my for conversation.

[Kaeldorn]

I'm just going out on a limb here and assume with the paladin in the example you're meaning me. I don't recall you being there when it occured, unless you were that halfling bard who suddenly took off without saying a word, but because that character's name doesn't appear to be in your signature, I don't think that's the case.

I have some things to say about that particular encounter, if you may call it that.. And I really don't see how I'm guilty of any meta gaming whatsoever.
I'll start off by saying exactly how I remember what happened, in full detail. It is somewhat long, so if you prefer skipping to a summary of what he should have done differently in my eyes, scroll down a bit.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

We went into the goblin caves with 4 people. Me, Sehron, the person in question and a halfling bard. Coming to the second level, we slew the baneguard and I looted the gold and mace, saying (IC) to the rest of our party we'll split the coin evenly when we get out and back to safety as I normally do. Judging from the people who were with me, I assumed noone needed the weapon, which would not be improbable both IC and OOC. A minute or two later, said person whispers me OOC that he could use the weapon, so I asked him to play it out and ask me about it IC if he wanted it.

5 minutes later, he claims IC that he could really put the weapon to good use, followed by a pretty bad bluff check. I responded by making an opposed wisdom check against it and beat the DC even without potential sense motive modifiers. Knowing that bluffs are used to make falsehoods seem true, I took it for granted that his character was lying and responded accordingly IC (my character can't stand deceit or any attempts at it, and though my character isn't racist, him looking like his origins aren't all that pure and good didn't exactly help my char form a positive opinion of him).

A few moments later, after killing the goblin chieftain, Sehron opened a chest and looted a magical shield. He gave it to the person in question when he said that it was a really nice shield. This time without a bluff check, and he didn't say he needed it so he didn't lie if he took it for selfish purposes.. It would just a smart way of words to get what he wanted. Followed by that, said person walks up to me and offers to trade the shield for the mace we found earlier, because he could really really use it, making a bluff check again. Can't remember the results because I found them irrelevant, because after just having been told the exact same lie, I'm just not going to buy it IC, making my character's dislike for him grow even more..

Then I think (don't quote me on this one because this little thing I'm not 100% sure about) he said something like 'I have to log off (OOC)' 'I'll take this shield as my share of the loot then (IC)'. I asked OOC if anyone knew what the shield was worth, so if it'd be a fair split considering the value of the other loot we found. I wasn't looking to get into any OOC problems with anyone and I believed he really did have to go. I don't recall getting any real response from him, I thought only Sehron said he didn't know what it was worth.

In the meantime the halfling bard had left the goblin caves and left the party without saying a word. No idea where he went. I think it might have been because he wasn't in the mood for sticking around to hear us exchange words. Then the person in question left too and logged off soon after, I decided to just shrug it off and stick with my character having grown some degree of distrust and dislike towards him. Me and Sehron took the road back to town and sold the mace there, splitting the gold among the two of us because the bard was nowhere to be found.

A couple of days later, we meet again by the exigo trade post campfire, my character not being all too pleased with his company. He starts going on IC asking why I dislike him, I respond referring to the goblin cave adventure earlier and believing he was just a liar and a greedy thief. He claims IC that my accusations are falsehoods, and that he even gave the shield to someone who needed it rather than selling it. Whether he was lying about it or not, my character found it hard to believe considering the happenings of our adventure earlier. (OOC I have no reason to question it, but I was just RPing it out) He proceeded insulting my character to be greedy and selfish herself, which is quite an accusation to make against a paladin. Still, I maintained calm and simply responded as little as possible. Soon after I just walked away, having had enough (again IC).

That's when he whispered me (OOC) that he really did need that mace and that he hadn't been lying about it. He asked if I believed him OOC, and considering the events before, I said I didn't. Then he proceeded claiming the same thing you came up with in your post, that bluffing doesn't mean you're trying to make the untrue seem plausible (ehm.. what?). I told him I disagreed, and that I had been correctly making my character respond to his, as I've already said here.

After that, he took to even more whispers about how he was right and I was wrong, which I mostly just ignored because I didn't want to get into any OOC arguments about something so stupid. Something specific I recall though, was that he said it was me who disappeared and logged off, and that I did so with all the loot in order to sell it for my own good and OOC greed for a few pixels and bits indicating how much gold my character has, which is a flat out lie. If he really did have problems with me, he should have taken it up with a DM and let us sort it out with the three of us, rather than telling his real life friend about his dissattisfaction with my interactions with him.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Things he should have dealt with differently:
- If he really did need the weapon, he could immediately tell my character IC about it after I picked it up and said I'd carry it to sell for an even split. I don't mind that much that he whispered me about it OOC, but if he had expected me to just give it to him, then I would be meta gaming, and he as well.
- Why bluff about needing something then later claim your character wasn't lying? Bluffing to make it seem like you're lying, while telling the truth? Hardly makes sense unless you're trying to play a prank on someone and you want him to notice. If anything, he should have used diplomacy if he simply tried to convince my character of a truth that I might believe to be a lie without proper explanation. The only reason for not using diplomacy I can think of is your character not having invested points in diplomacy and thus preferring to use bluff for a greater chance of success. That would be an OOC reason, and a form of meta gaming.
- If he was not telling the truth about needing the weapon and later on trying to push me to accept not only OOC but also IC that I shouldn't see his character's bluff as an actual bluff... the only reason I can think of someone doing that would be that he doesn't want to face the consequences of a bluff gone wrong because OOC he doesn't want his character to be at risk of becoming impopular and untrustworthy. Which, again, would be meta gaming.
- I'll just literally repeat myself on one point again: If he really did have problems with me, he should have taken it up with a DM and let us sort it out with the three of us.

Again, sorry for the long winded explanation but I just wanted to make sure that the events as I remember them were all clear to everyone reading this. I have someone who can back my whole story up bar the whispers, but I don't think that should be neccessary.

Now that that's out, I have to say I agree there's a share of meta gaming going on and it can be a bit detrimental to the RP experience. Some people I won't name have also on occasion encouraged me to meta game so they could 'get going' faster or whatever, but I only ever did as they asked of me (such as come to area X) when it made sense that I would do so in the first place, without knowing of the request. Otherwise, I simply try to encourage them to just play it out in character to try and get the response they want from me (which of course still isn't guaranteed then).

Just doing stupid things meant to be funny OOC also bothers me a bit at times. For instance, I've seen someone talk in 1337 speak to a tree trunk (yes you can be crazy, but that's just out of line in an RP server), and someone was playing with a DM killing off completely random summoned enemies in the middle of a populated area, while saying things like 'this is all a dream and you will eat screwdrivers when you wake up'.

[Saulus]

It's a server rule, we don't need a discussion about it, people who decide that they don't want to follow the rules will end up like the other 30 some-odd banned users.

[Kangleton]

I don't see the problem with running around telling people "He lied" when he rolled a bad bluff check. Aren't you supposed to assume he lied, in that case? I imagine that on a low bluff roll, the character would be sweating, hands shaking, stuttering, lip-biting, unable to make eye-contact, or any combination of the above.

Good bluff allows you to appear confident, calm, and sure of what you're saying, whereas poor bluff provides the opposite - why then, is it a bad thing that someone assumes a lie based on a bad bluff roll versus a good wisdom roll?

Or am I missing something?

[Venture]

For example I saw somebody I know from outside the game talking to a Paladin. The person tells the Paladin something truthful, but then rolls a bluff skill check (A low roll). So immediately the Paladin runs around saying the character was lying, when in fact they weren't.

Dont roll bluffs if your not bluffing, it doesnt make sense, and if =the otherr character beats the roll of course they have the right to say the person was not being truthful.


Thats what bluff is.

[nickbeat]

That was a very clear and detailed description of the events, and fairly accurate too. As the bluffing character in question, I would like to clarify a few points.

1. Dice rolls are OOC, characters should not presume their meaning. In this instance, LOSING the bluff check allowed the Paladin to know the truth, which was clarified in tells.

2. Paladins should be nice.

You refer to myself in place of my character. You say he when you mean she. This suggests that your referring to me as a player, not my character.

[undeadsteak]

Losing the bluff allows people to know that you are lying, it doesn't tell them anything about what the truth is, actually. As for paladins being nice, if you're lying and appearing greedy in their eyes, they'e not going to take a liking to you.

[Dark presence]

Bluffs are not synonymous with lies. From what I read of the description, I have no idea why the bluff was done, but ignoring the plethora of reasons bluff should not be used without a DM, you still have no right to assume that a failed bluff is a lie.

Why? Because you do not ever know the "truth" from a bluff roll. That is always unknown, whether you see through the bluff or not. Failure doesn't mean you can read the bluffer's mind, just that you don't believe them. To take another step and claim they are lying means you are privy to the truth, which you most likely are not.

Bluff is for making the implausible seem true, which certainly does allow for a lot of deception. But it can also be used when something is true, just hard to believe.

Think about it. If someone walks up to you looking like a homeless person and claims to be the CEO of a fortune 500 company, you won't believe them. Doesn't mean it can't be true though. Translating it to game terms, they should have so many negative modifiers to bluff that you can roll a 1 and they can roll a 20 and still you would not believe them.

Now if you dress them up in a suit, have them drive up in a limo, and exit it with a professionally dressed entourage, you'll probably believe them, true or not.

I see no actual reason to use bluff at all unless someone doesn't believe what was said, true or not. But the problem with bluff rolls is that there are supposed to be so many other factors involved, that often, a d20 shouldn't be the sole determining factor.


And for the record if they claim they can 'use it' and intend to sell it, that is, strictly speaking, not a lie at all.

[Chiangtao]

Up for debate? My dear Saulus, haven't you noticed? EVERYTHING is up for debate with some of these guys...

[Landaren]

I don't really roll bluff checks.

Unless its something totally unbelievable I don't see why I should.

[nickbeat]

The point here is that the character was acting upon OOC knowledge of the bluff roll. If I only rolled bluff rolls when my character was lying, then the player would always know. THAT is why I make bluff rolls when I am telling the truth.

She really could have used that mace, since she is a rogue with few weapon drop options beside this. In this case, the decision to deny the item to her was based solely upon metagame information.

I don't wish to throw stones here, really I just hope to clarify for Kaeldorn and other players what dice rolls mean and how they are used. If I am incorrect in my assumptions, please do let me know.

For the record, my character Shalika was not the greedy one. She got next to nothing out of the arrangement, while Yashia scooped up the loot without offering any of it to her.