Thoughts from the Lawmakers?

[Chongo]

It's interesting as this very conversation came up between me and a prospective GM no more then 3 weeks ago.
 
 If you have some manner of emergency, and have to log... let's say in the deepest darkest part of Layonara and basically be abandoned there, is a GM port out alright?
 
 I said that it wasn't.  The prospective GM thought that it was.  Actually, about 4 GM's I spoke to about it thought it was okay.  I figured that since there's no way to prove an emergency, that it doesn't pass the standard mindset of the disputes forum, for example, where proof must preceed action.  Portals or GM intervention is off limits so to speak, unless sanctioned by a GM event.  And since things can't be proven, GM's should typically never port anyone out to evade guaranteed demise, otherwise it would potentially create a trend of favoritism or perceived favoritism.
 
 Now, tonight, someone in our group had a family emergency.  And it was in a very bad spot.  I told them a corner that I thought was safe.  They logged back in about two hours or so later, and as we tried to get back to them from 10 maps away, they were killed, hit their #14 DT, and basically threw up their hands in surrender to the system.
 
 So, am I wrong?  Or, am I right?  Because I'm fairly sure that a significant portion of the staff thinks it's alright, while the other portion doesn't.  And I'm looking at this knowing that it's going to get thrown out almost immediately from the disputes forum, but I also know that people have and will continue to be rescued if the situation is deemed dire enough.  And that's a bit unsettling to my stomach.

[Dorganath]

It's generally OK, but with the qualifier of "it depends".

Let me try to explain.

I've done this personally.  Generally there's some "benefit of the doubt" in such situations. I've also done it before server reboots, but that was more for my benefit than anyone's.

I typically prefer for there to be some sort of IC solution.  Often someone will come onto IRC and say "I had to log early, etc." or "I crashed out hard and couldn't get back in..." and then someone else will say "Oh hey, stay there, we're on our way in."  A little OOC, yes, but overall a good situation.

When I have ported people as a result of things like this, I don't generally move them completely out of danger. Someone stuck in the Rift, for example, I might put only at the entrance.  Same for the Deep. I would not, in either of those cases, port the character all the way back to Prantz, for example.

This all said, it shouldn't be an assumption that a GM can or will get a person out safely.  As you observantly pointed out, it's easy enough to fake an emergency. Typically speaking, if someone's asking for a lot of ports, claiming all manner of reasons, then we get wary of the whole thing.

It also depends on the character, in some cases.  If a character could solo the areas in question, then I'm not likely to port them out for convenience.  On the flip side, a level 9 mage stuck at the bottom of the Rift (who likely could not have gotten there alive without help) would likely get a port out.

So it's very much a judgment call, and if it becomes a pattern, then we start taking a closer look at things.

I don't believe we've had much of a problem with this over the years to be honest.  It is a rather risky assumption that a GM will be around and available to help in such situations, so I personally haven't seen much widespread abuse of this.

[Serissa]

Having to respond to a real life crisis or obey a parent shouldn't mean losing a beloved character or even coming closer to it.  We always say RL comes first, but it doesn't seem like we mean it.  Perhaps the lawmakers need to give more thought to this.

[Dorganath]

Uh...did you read my response?

[Chongo]

So, am I wrong? Or, am I right? Because I'm fairly sure that a significant portion of the staff thinks it's alright, while the other portion doesn't. And I'm looking at this knowing that it's going to get thrown out almost immediately from the disputes forum, but I also know that people have and will continue to be rescued if the situation is deemed dire enough. And that's a bit unsettling to my stomach.

 
 It would sound like you're saying that I'm wrong, so my question would really be directed towards how unsettling this is to this scenario, and likely conclusion in the disputes forum.

[Dorganath]

There are precedents for "hardship" refunds due to urgent RL factors.  Each is handled on a case-by-case basis, as each is different.

[jrizz]

Well to add a bit to this. I was the person in question. It was and has always been my understanding that asking for a port out of a deadly place for any reason was a no no. I had with in my party two GMs, if it was a well established practice that in the right circumstances a port would be ok then I would have asked one of them to do so and to move me not out of danger but out of certain death. But that was not the case and Wren is now at DT 14 . I guess that safe corner was not really safe, what a way to lose your PC gah!

[jrizz]

There are precedents for "hardship" refunds due to urgent RL factors.  Each is handled on a case-by-case basis, as each is different.

Well that answers the question I sent to Row. I had not ever heard of this and there are no rules around it. Thanks Dorg, I will file for a refund.

[Carillon]

As the GM candidate in question that Chongo was referring to, let me post an excerpt from what was a thought-provoking discussion via PMs after we disagreed on the subject. I'm posting this mainly for transparency, and simply because it voices my opinion on the subject. It is not intended to spark controversy, though thoughtful and respectful discussion is another thing altogether. Please take it in this spirit.

Pre-post edit: I was slow in dredging this up, and now this post is almost obsolete, but I'm stubborn enough to post it anyway!

Post-post edit: This refers to a GM on as a GM, not a GM on as a player logging off as a player and back on as a GM.

To clarify, my question is why do you think it so inappropriate for a GM to port a character to safety when RL rears its ugly head and they have to leave a party unexpectedly to log off? When considering the possible reasons for your strong opinion on the subject, I thought carefully about the implications and I'm really not sure I see your reasoning. These are not cases where a party has gotten itself nearly or almost totally killed, leaving one character stranded, nor cases where a character has made a bad judgment call and gotten him or herself into an area well beyond their abilities and wants to be "rescued". These are cases where the unpredictable nature of our RL responsibilities necessitates us logging off in a dangerous area.

One thing I considered was the RP implications of a "safe port" in these cases. Does it compromise the RP? Not really, I would argue, for in the vast majority of cases that a character would end up stuck somewhere, they would never have left their party save for the unavoidable OOC concerns of real life scheduling. Nor, in many cases, would the party have left one of its members behind in dangerous territory (RP wise, at least).

Well, if not RP considerations, does it imply GM favoritism? Is this a privilege that would be afforded to only a few players or characters, and hence upset the equality of our server and the fair treatment of all players by GMs? Not really, as any character/player who had the patience to wait for the port could easily post in the Ask A Gamemaster forum or send out the request on IRC.

Another angle I considered was whether there was anything inherently unbalancing or detrimental to the server about the concept of a "safe port" in these rare instances. What is the consequence of the port? The character does not receive any gold or experience points, nor need they be ported across a continent, neatly avoiding boat fares, etc. They merely are ported to a safe area and can then continue to play the next time they log in without worrying about trying to negotiate a dangerous and potentially unfamiliar area alone, just to get back into more comfortable territory.

Consider also the implications inherent in a policy to deny players this courtesy. Should players only venture in parties into areas they can comfortably solo, should such a situation arise? This seems to undermine the philosophy of teamwork and the motivations for forming adventuring parties at all. Another potential consideration is whether such a policy would truly be family friendly. Layonara has always been a family friendly server, but what precisely does this mean? Does this epithet merely imply that our content should remain G or PG rated, or does it imply a community that makes allowances for RL? I've often times heard both GMs and players alike express the sentiments that "RL takes priority" and "Family always comes first", and wholeheartedly agree with these. But certainly everyone and especially parents with babies or young children at home has experienced the unexpected when playing. The baby wakes up. Your child gets sick. Something happened at school and you need to go in right away. Someone hurts themselves, and you need to attend to it. In these situations, it's impossible to take the time to safely retreat from an area, or wait for a party to escort you out. And what of the party, then? Should their adventure have to come to an end and turn back early because one of their members suddenly has to log? What if you're deep in an area that would take at least half an hour to fight your way back out of?

It's considerations such as these that lend me to disagree with what I perceived as your sentiment that GMs should never help players out of an area. Perhaps we're on rather different wavelengths, or we envision the help differently. Likely I'm showing my ignorance now, as I can only see this from a player's perspective, not being privy to what I can only assume is at least a dozen threads, examples, thoughtful discussions and case studies concerning the matter in the GM forums. However, I feel my opinion differs from yours here, and I'm hoping you will share your viewpoint with me. Clearly you have considered factors that I've either overlooked or given less importance, and if I'm suffering under a misconception I'd like to correct it.

Overall I think I'm just curious to hear your viewpoint on this, as you seemed rather strongly opinionated. I've seen GMs port characters out of areas before for similar reasons with no perceived hassle, and am wondering if this is the norm or whether I witnessed an exception and merely perceived it to be the norm. Certainly, if I was on a GM quest and had to log early unexpectedly, I would expect the GM to port me back to an appropriate area if he or she had time.

Anyway, I'm rambling now, but I hope you'll consider this and get back to me. Please feel free to post this PM in the GM forum if you think it warranted for any reason. In fact, I invite you to do so if you think it appropriate. My intention here is for a thoughtful discussion, since this is either an issue I have some misconceptions or a difference of opinion about, or perhaps simply something I have never considered in enough depth.

Regards,
Carillon

[jrizz]

Thank you Carillion this is as well stated as it can be. And was exactly the situation I found myself in last night. I have always been under the belief that asking a GM in the group you are in or that is on at the time to get you out of a tight spot for any reason was a no no. And it always did not sit well with me as I felt that were reasons to do so but the converse was that if it were done then it would look like favoritism.

Let me give you another example. Wren was with a group on one trip that had at least one GM in it. He got "pushed" to the top of a wall and was thusly stuck. He used a beryl dust to keep from getting attacked but ther was no way down. It was late PST and no one (other then the GM in our group) was around. So as not to show favorites the GM did not log on as a GM and get him out of it. The dust wore off and the nasty nearby showered Wren with death. It should have been ok for the GM playing in our group to log on his GM avatar and get him off the wall.

[Erik K]

Having read the posts in this thread, Im left with the feeling of   so what  .  Not a so what for Wrens loss, but so what if a GM uses his / her ability to port for a RL emergency.  There is no realistic way to know if it is real or not or even if we would connsider it an emergency, if it were us.  So why not err on the side of compassion?  The people on this server put a lot of hard work and time into their characters and for some of us, that time is a premium.  So does it really unballance the server to pull out something that is so important to someone? especially if after years of work they find themselves in a situation that was not born of stupidity or recklessness?  If there is a concern about favoritism, then set up an area of the server that lists all the emergency ports and who was involved.  Then it would be pretty obvious who if anyone is abusing the system and can be dealt with accordingly.

[Filatus]

It's really not much different from porting PC's out of area's when their players fell asleep with their heads on their keyboards.

Pretty sure I logged on purely for that about half a dozen times. :rolleyes:

[Rowana]

Guys, I don't want to be a rain cloud on the potential debate here, but I just want to clarify a few things.

1) If a PC is stuck and a GM is needed to unstuck, no one's going to get their head chopped off because they logged out as PC and into GM to free said stuck PC... Where this rumor came from I couldn't say, but gosh every GM on the team is likely to get kicked off if it's true because all of us have had to log out as PC to help a community member at one time or another, whether we were in the actual group or not. I've logged out of a quest to help a PC get unstuck, I'm sure other GMs have similar experiences as well.

2) As to the actual RL emergency thing, I'm just going to reiterate what Dorganath has already said, there's precedence. It happened a bloody long time ago, and will take a little time to sort out what the actual precedence is, but it's there.

3) As to porting out PCs who have had to log in dangerous places for various reasons, that too I know most of the GMs on this team have done. Myself included. About 2 weeks ago I helped someone with the same problem. There's a web based client into IRC. If you log out because of emergency RL stuff (or heck your net went out for 6 hours) and are in a dangerous place, pop in to IRC and see if a GM is available to port you out. If not, please post in the Ask a GM forum here and ask for a port and WAIT. Saves the work of a database edit later when you get a strand cut, saves the heart ache of loosing a strand for such an OOC thing, saves a lot of heart ache and trouble in general.

Hope this answers some questions and quells a rumor or two.

~row

[Pseudonym]

It is my understanding that when we are on as players, we are on as players. When we are on as GMs, we are on as GMs .... and never the twain shall meet. There should be no advantage afforded a character who travels with one of my characters because I have the ability to log off myself and relog on in my capacity as GM. They should follow the same processes as would any character whom (for any reason) does not regularly party with a character who is played by a GM player. That 'rule' followed, there should never be any favouritism, nor perceived favouritism.

Porting a character out of a certain death situation when they return in-game after logging suddenly for RL reasons seems a completely separate issue? I can't recall seeing, in the GM forum or any other, any directive that prohibits us, as GMs, from doing this. Just so long as the player in question, in this case jrizz, follows the same processes as would have another player who found themselves in a similar situation without GM players in party (IRC, forum request, etc).

Anyways, that is my understanding of it.

EDIT: Heh, that was my understanding of it even before Row posted at the same time I was posting!

[Dorganath]

First off, let me say that this may come out sounding more harsh than intended. I had something rather frustrating happen in RL today and it stands a good chance of bleeding over.  Having said that...

Having to respond to a real life crisis or obey a parent shouldn't mean losing a beloved character or even coming closer to it. We always say RL comes first, but it doesn't seem like we mean it. Perhaps the lawmakers need to give more thought to this.

So why not err on the side of compassion? The people on this server put a lot of hard work and time into their characters and for some of us, that time is a premium. So does it really unballance the server to pull out something that is so important to someone? especially if after years of work they find themselves in a situation that was not born of stupidity or recklessness?

I didn't think I was terribly unclear in my original reply here, but I guess I need to be a bit more succinct.

People can ask for ports in such conditions.  GMs can give them if it seems reasonable.  But the same person shouldn't keep asking for ports repeatedly for the same/similar reasons. That gets away from being a case of RL intruding and toward a case of habitual abuse.

RL does come first, and I said there is usually a benefit of the doubt when it intrudes and causes someone to log out in less-than-ideal place.  It's fine, it happens.

As well, there have been in the past, and will continue to be cases where something urgent happens in RL (family/medical emergencies being at the top of the list) that leads to a rather OOC situation with losses. Most of these situations can be avoided after the fact by calling for GM assistance, but people either a) didn't want to bother a GM or b) didn't know they could ask for help.

I'm not saying, by any stretch, that we'll give out free ports for any and every reason given.  "Hey, I want to watch {insert favorite TV show here}. Can you port me out?" is not a valid reason, for example.  Most reasonable situations, however, can get some GM assistance.  It's there for the asking.

So yes, there is compassion and understanding of RL and family.  Many GMs have families of their own, myself included.  Porting out of immediate danger in such cases is not a big deal.

When I say that a GM port should not always be expected, I refer to situations where someone thinks "Oh, I think I'll just log out here and have a GM port me out tomorrow." That's an abusive use of the system, and is the reason for the qualification in my original response.  

But if you have to log urgentlyfor RL reasons, ask for help.  If none comes immediately, ask when you get back.  Asking gives you a chance.  Not asking doesn't.

Onto the next point:

It is my understanding that when we are on as players, we are on as players. When we are on as GMs, we are on as GMs .... and never the twain shall meet. There should be no advantage afforded a character who travels with one of my characters because I have the ability to log off myself and relog on in my capacity as GM. They should follow the same processes as would any character whom (for any reason) does not regularly party with a character who is played by a GM player. That 'rule' followed, there should never be any favouritism, nor perceived favouritism.

We're not talking about advantage here...we're talking about aiding the community in our role as GMs.  No, being in a group with a GM, or being a GM oneself, should not impart any sort of IC or IG advantage to anyone.  But if someone is stuck or if someone needs to go urgently, there's no reason why a GM logged in as a player can't relog as a GM and handle the situation.  

The problem would come where the same GM logs out to give his group XP, as an example.

To put a finer point on what Row said, if someone in the community is having a problem, one that keeps them from playing or is affecting them in some OOC way, there's no problem with a a GM player logging out as their character and back in as a GM to rectify the situation if it seems appropriate or important to do so.

If I'm on as a player and another player gets stuck or jumped across an area...or has another issue of significance that needs to be addressed, I have no problem logging on as a GM to handle the issue.  It doesn't matter if that character is in my group or not.  Now, if I gave out XP or some other kind of bonus while I was logged in as a GM (i.e. "Wow, my group did really well, they deserve a load of XP and maybe a few spiffy items."), then that would be a rather serious problem, and it is this sort of thing that is expressly not allowed.

I hope this clarifies things.

[jrizz]

thank you Dorg. Not only does it make it perfectly clear I also think this should be in the GM primer.

[Link092]

People can ask for ports in such conditions.  GMs can give them if it seems reasonable.  But the same person shouldn't keep asking for ports repeatedly for the same/similar reasons. That gets away from being a case of RL intruding and toward a case of habitual abuse.


As well, there have been in the past, and will continue to be cases where something urgent happens in RL (family/medical emergencies being at the top of the list) that leads to a rather OOC situation with losses. Most of these situations can be avoided after the fact by calling for GM assistance, but people either a) didn't want to bother a GM or b) didn't know they could ask for help.

It's this very reason that I try to not bother DM's because I often get called downstairs to do work at very inopportune times. I ask if I know for sure that i'm in a tight spot, but most times, I just try to sneak out, with fingers crossed. (hehe. it's kinda funny watching a giant walk up to you while your in stealth. scares the living daylight out of you.)


PS: You should sticky this or something, like Jrizz said, for GMs and players alike.