gotta ask why

[Erik K]

Why is it when somthing really good happens on Layo, it has to get complicated in the long run.  Take the Graceful Pleas, great idea, you make a mistake building your character, you get to redo it.  Great idea but now, it seems that character reapproval is necessary.  This from the people that are complaining they dont have time to approve characters that are waiting in the  wings.  Why? why cant it just be kept simple, you only get 1 shot at this as I undersatnd it, so why not make it a blanket thing.   you make a mistake, you get it fixed, you have fun.  
   The same is true with the SS reinbursement.  To get them replaced,  it seems like now you have to file an incident report on them.  A lot of us, me included, have not posted an SS loss, in the past, due to no WL/DM being around.  In cases like that, the chances of a reinbursement are pretty much zip, so why bother.  So I have to ask, is it such a horrid thing to give 3 GP's to extend a characters game life and have it be a blanket thing???  The way I see it, the GP's made life for a player simpler and the game more fun, but for some reason, it seems like that is just not right, that it has to be made tougher, like that is some badge of honor.  Why?  This server like its competitors is about fun.  So why does it always seem like it has to become a pain?  O.o

[Carillon]

Hi Erik K,

It sounds like you are certainly frustrated about the Graceful Plea system, but I think you might also be suffering from some misinformation, or perhaps have misconstrued something. If so, I hope the following clarifies for you:

The Graceful Pleas have not, in fact, changed in any way since we brought them in. Every character gets 3 Graceful Pleas, which can be used for a number of things, including rebuilds and resubmissions and soul strand returns.

With Soul Strand returns, Graceful Pleas must be used to request a soul strand be returned for a specific death, and it must be a death for which you lost a soul strand in some way that was irregular or unfair. You do not need to have a DM/GM witness, but you do need to be able to provide some reason (not evidence, mind, but an explanation in your own words) as to why that death should not have happened.

We will take a wide range of reasons. Really. There are only three of these, so although they could be abused by players who were willing to lie, we trust the community to use them honestly--and for the rare exceptions, we have put the limitation of three in place to prevent any sort of wide-ranging abuse. We will reimburse deaths due to invis and G-sanc bugs, deaths due to exceptional lag (if this can't be reimbursed the normal way for some reason), deaths due to unexpected disconnections, deaths due to your wireless mouse running out of batteries, deaths because your toddler STOLE your wireless mouse and your poor character was forced to make some very bad judgment calls while at the mercy of their tiny jam-covered fingers, deaths because your cat grew jealous of your gaming obsession and decided it would be fun to attack your fingers on the keyboard. We will basically reimburse almost anything with a GP, except SS lost due to bad luck, bad decision making, or bad tactics.


With regards to rebuilds, restarts and relevels, I think there has been some confusion here as well. Again, a GP can be used to request a rebuild, restart or relevel, but we still follow certain guidelines. It has always been the case that some sorts of rebuilds and relevels need to be approved by the character approval team, and this has not changed with the updated policies:

"Rebuilds and Restarts fall under the jurisdiction of character approvals and must be submitted in that forum for consideration with accordance to the listed policy."

-Combined Disputes and Grievances Policy

The reason we ask clarifying questions when looking into rebuilds and restarts and relevels is both because we are trying to find the way to handle them that will be easiest for both GM and player (an in game relevel, an offline database edit, a full restart) and because we are trying to decide whether such things are not simply mechanical issues but rather RP/character submission issues as well. For example, GPs have been used to change feats in the past, change an ability point, take a relevel beyond  the normal approval process, many other little mechanical details, etc., and we have not asked the player to submit to character submissions. However, something that fundamentally altered the nature of the character that had been approved (changing classes, changing certain specializations, etc.) does--and always has--need the approval of the CA team as well, since it is either a large change that will affect the RP of the character or it will change what was originally approved.

I hope this sheds some light on both the disputes, grievances and reimbursements processes, and also the Graceful Pleas. We understand that these are still fairly new and people may not yet be familiar with exactly how they work or why we sometimes ask the questions we do, so please, feel free to ask questions. We are always happy to answer respectful questions on either how things work or why a decision is made.

~Carillon

[Lareth]

I think then that there is some confusion caused by one of the opening statements for the rules regarding Graceful Pleas which causes some confusion.  I certainly was when I looked at it

"Effective immediately, all players have the right to three (3)

[willhoff]

I think some of the confusion stems from the fact that player error or "I messed up" can not be used as the basis for the return of a ss using a gp, but, the excuse/rational of player error is acceptable when using a gp for a character rebuild/restart/relevel.

[darkstorme]

A good point, willhoff.

The most straightforward answer I can offer is this:

When a character build is not to your liking, the player made a mistake.

When a character attacks something too powerful for them, dies, and loses a soulstrand, the character made a mistake.  

In-character, they charged into a mess of giants and were pounded into paste.  They did not, however, choose, in-character, to (for example) take Alertness rather than Toughness.  For those aspects of character build that are in-character (for example, school specialization for Wizards, certain combat feats), this is why all such requests must go through the Character Approvers as well - to determine whether the alteration would be at odds with their biography and subsequent character development.  The GPs are not, as a rule, there to correct IC mistakes.  They're there to provide a buffer against client or server glitches, hardware troubles, or player mistakes that are not in any real way associated with the character being played.

Hopefully this helps dispel some of the confusion.

[Lareth]

I believe that a lot of the confusion is caused by the following opening statement from the policy:

Effective immediately, all players have the right to three

[Dorganath]

First off, good question.

Second, Carillon stated the answer and reasoning rather eloquently and completely.  I think some of the perceived complexity of Graceful Pleas is in fact due to misunderstandings about them.

So on willhoff's question, I think the error here is in the assumption that Soul Strands and rebuilds/relevels are the same thing.  They aren't, nor should they be.  Even prior to these policies, the various things that one could request for return or reimbursement had different criteria, for the simple reason that they are different.

So to boil down the Soul Strand portion of Graceful Pleas to its simplest outline, it would suffice to say that Graceful Pleas give an avenue for reimbursement of a loss due to OOC factors.  As Carillon listed above, crashes, disconnections, rambunctious felines and grabby toddlers are all OOC factors.  We just ask to know what happened...that's all.

Secondarily, we ask the simple requirement that when you say "Oh I was at This Place and That happened and I lost a Soul Strand," we'd like it that this death actually happened AND that a soul strand was lost in the process.  Most people would see this as fair, because it's simply a matter of not giving something back that was not lost.

Rebuilds and relevels are something else entirely. I'd wager that most people here are not experts at at NWN mechanics and that we do not "run the numbers" to get the best possible character build for the concept, or we are not intimately familiar with the way everything works, the positives and negatives and so forth.  And sometimes, we just click the wrong thing when leveling, or make a bad assumption or simply do not understand the implications of such choices.  Sometimes we find this out right away and sometimes we don't.  For the former, there's been a long-standing avenue for rolling back a bit and being allowed to make that choice again.  For the latter, it's been almost completely prohibited until the Graceful Plea system.

And again, if the request is something that fundamentally alters the character that was approved, then yes, it's only reasonable to pass that through the CA process.

Another way of looking at this, which is really just rephrasing another well-written answer by darkstorme, is that Graceful Pleas are an OOC system to correct OOC mistakes, errors, losses and other such things.

So to get back to the original question, we're mostly just asking for a "what" and a "why".  It's simple, and it doesn't require long proofs or a certain number of testimonials and witnesses, GM or otherwise. We will verify that a Soul Strand was lost at a given time and location in the case of Soul Strand requests, but again, this is only fair and it is the most scrutiny we give such requests. We have no data that would say you crashed, or were under invisibility at the time, or that a cat walked on your keyboard. We're going to take your word for it.  Really!  We just want to make sure that the death really happened.

[jrizz]

Thanks for the info Dorg and Carillion. So let me ask this:
 
 Here is the definition for rebuilds from the CA forum:
 
 

A rebuild is when a character is allowed to restart and then gain all of their experience, items and equipment. This is only granted for an extensive reason, such as a CDQ or quest that results in the deity change of a cleric or something of that magnitude, or when the development team makes mechanical changes to classes that require such action. They are extremely rare and require the support of at least one GM in the capacity of GM not player witness.

 
 Can a GP be used for a rebuild? and if so what are some of the barriers to getting approved? Such as I am sure you cant turn a barbarian into a wizard But can you drop multi melee classes (WM/Fighter, Fighter/Rouge, Barbarian/DD, Ranger/WM) to refocus on one melee class (Fighter, Range, Barbarian) as a rebuild.

[darkstorme]

That would be one of the cases that fall under CA discretion, Jrizz.

Barring some very good in-character reason (quest result, major similar event), it would be very hard to justify such a substantial change to the abilities of a character.  (Particularly the third parenthetical example you provided.  Tossing aside the responsibilities, privileges and duties of the Dwarven Defender PrC would be a very, very substantial character change.)

Also, it's "Rogue".

[jrizz]

So the answer is that a GP cannot be used for a rebuild. That would be a clear statement.
 
 OH and thanks for the typo correction

[michb]

Also, it's "Rogue".

I don't know..maybe he meant a fighter who wears rouge to make him/her more appealing in combat!  

[darkstorme]

Not strictly true.

Something like changing Cleric domains, changing selection of first-level feats, etc, could have no real impact on the character but still fall outside the bounds of normal rebuild policy - and in such a situation GP could be employed for a rebuild.

So the answer is that a GP cannot be used for a rebuild. That would be a clear statement.

[Dorganath]

So the answer is that a GP cannot be used for a rebuild. That would be a clear statement.
 
 OH and thanks for the typo correction

No, that's not entirely accurate.  Under normal circumstances (meaning without a GP), a rebuild would only be approved due to something like a change in the class or a significant quest result (i.e. WLDQ or something else rather large).  But in that vein, the term "rebuild" generally applies to the concept of fixing the same character (i.e. same class(es), story, etc.).  What you're asking about is a remaking of the character on a more fundamental level, altering already-approved classes, etc., rather than simply rearranging stats and feats and such to something more suiting the RP or intent of the character.

In any case, while the GP could give the go-ahead to submit for a remaking in the way you describe, there's still a matter of making sure the new form of the character is approved and consistent.

In other words, a GP is not a blank check; it could give the OK to start the process, but the process moves through CA.

Hope that makes more sense.

[jrizz]

OK close to full understanding. a GP can be used to get the proccess going (as a CDQ would get it going) but the CAs still need to approve it? or guide it? If it is approve it and the CAs dont approve it does it still cost a GP? If it is guide it then it is a matter of working with the CA team to figure out the best way to address the rebuild as it fits to the RP of the character. Did I get that right?

[Lynn1020]

Also, it's "Rogue".

Oh please don't point out all of my typo's... I would have to stop posting all together!



Umm.. wait.. maybe that would be a good thing? O.o

[Dorganath]

OK close to full understanding. a GP can be used to get the proccess going (as a CDQ would get it going) but the CAs still need to approve it? or guide it? If it is approve it and the CAs dont approve it does it still cost a GP? If it is guide it then it is a matter of working with the CA team to figure out the best way to address the rebuild as it fits to the RP of the character. Did I get that right?

It depends!

If it's a matter of "Oh I goofed up at level 18 and took X feat when I should have taken Y." then that won't involve the CA team at all.  A fundamental class change or a change in the approved (and taken) classes of a character to better fit the RP of the character could be initiated through a GP, but the end result (i.e. class makeup and any bio changes that might be necessary) would have to go through CA.

It's difficult to give an all-encompassing answer because really there are very many variations and possibilities.  This is why the policy was not written with detailed specifics (though I'm sure some would like that).  It would just be too difficult to include everything.

As always, I suggest that rather than making the assumption that your case doesn't apply to the policy, just ask. Maybe it will, or maybe it won't, but in the latter case, we will, in most cases, be able to work with you to come up with something agreeable all around. In either case, it will help resolve any lingering confusion you might have.

[Erik K]

Oh please don't point out all of my typo's... I would have to stop posting all together!



Umm.. wait.. maybe that would be a good thing? O.o

naa, you are a fun and intresting read on the forums  

[Erik K]

sorry for not replying to this sooner, but Ive been doing 12 hr days at work and its taken its toll.

where I feel a lot of frustration with the GP system is that it give you only 3 chances to correct a mistake of some sort.   At the same tiime, we spend litterally years of time we steal away from RL to build the levels, the RP history and our ingame relationships.  The mistakes we make as humans can be as simple as being brain fried; too many hours at work, stress, a fight with someone close, whatever, its just a mistake.  As a result, we die in game, sometimes loose a strand, drop gear due to full inventory and cant get it back before the sweeper kicks in etc.  In regards to our character builds, sometimes, we start with a character concept, that changes due to the need of the people we play with and realise weve hit a dead end or maybe our characters and our concepts change as our characters grow, but we feel stuck.  Would giving players the chance to correct some mistake with a GP without having to go into the CA and get approval be soo bad?   I know it would be a serious bonus to the commuinty, but wouldnt it be worth it for how much better it would make the lives of those playing?

[Dorganath]

Would giving players the chance to correct some mistake with a GP without having to go into the CA and get approval be soo bad?   I know it would be a serious bonus to the commuinty, but wouldnt it be worth it for how much better it would make the lives of those playing?

It would depend on the nature of the change.  If you're talking about changing a feat or two around, there's really no need for CA.  If you're talking about something more fundamental about the character, like an altered bio, different class choice or something similar that was previously approved, then it's only reasonable to ask for a pass through CAs to make sure everything is consistent. We believe this to be a reasonable compromise.

Generally speaking, the limit of 3 is in place to keep things under control and to encourage players to consider what is important and critical, and not just make Graceful Pleas about anything and everything. The point about people making mistakes is well and valid, and I don't disagree. At the same time, i think you'll see that we need some very reasonable limits on something like this to protect everyone against the people who would predictably abuse such a system, were it more open.

It seems as though you (Erik K) have a specific question or request in mind for one of your characters, so perhaps it would be best just to start the request to see where it leads.  Operating in the hypothetical may not be the best thing if there is something more specific you want or are curious about.

[Erik K]

actually, I really dont have anything I really need to change about any of my characters.  they have their flaws, but most of them add to their RP and I have fun with them.  my point in all this is that I honestly think that relaxing the restrictions on GP's will benifit the server a lot.  at the same time, with a limit of 3 and the ability to regain lost SS's and equipement or the ability to rebuild a character, they are kinda self policing.