Requesting an official GM policy ruling...

[SteveMaurer]

Hi.... it' me again... *nervous smile*...   I hope I've not been bothering ya'll too much, but, um, I have another policy question I'd like to ask.


Darthirâe was walking around the pygmy lands, fully covered and protected by a recently cast Greater Sanctuary when the infamous G-Sanc bug hit: unlike the previous times she had been there, the pygmys saw her plain as day.   And because of the Greater Sanctuary spell effect, she could cast no spells to protect herself, got swarmed, and died in a few rounds.   (While she lost some coin, she did make her save vs the Soul Mother, so I'm not terribly upset.)

Now to my question.   We all understand that this kind of death isn't reimbursable under Layonara policy, because this is a bioware bug, not a Layonara bug.    But  when the G-Sanc bug hits, am I allowed to use her Tome of Teleportation to quickly exit the level?    The Tome does work, even when under the effect of Greater Sanctuary.

Please understand that up until now I have been extraordinarily conservative with my use of the Tome.   I have assumed, based on the rules I was given about it, that in Layonara "Lore", using the Tome of Teleportation involves a ritual that is rather lengthy, and so could never be used in any circumstance in which timeliness is a consideration.   Certainly it has no legitimate use during normal combat.

But given that this "combat" is not legitimate itself, but rather caused by a bug in BioWare's code that the team would fix if they could, I think an exception should be made.   It's only fair.

It also should be a rarity. The G-Sanc bug is very intermittent - which is probably why BioWare never caught it in the first place.    If you allow this one specific use, I promise it would be used only when she is alone and covered under the G-Sanc effect.

Thank you for your consideration.

[Rowana]

The Tome usage in this case would not be sanctioned. However, any loss in question (with a modicum of proof, screen shots and logs are always appreciated) could be reimbursed with a Graceful Plea. This sort of thing is exactly one of the things we had in mind when coming up with the Graceful Plea policy.

Gold, exp or strand loss may be returned from Bioware issues via Graceful Plea.

~row

[SteveMaurer]

The Tome usage in this case would not be sanctioned. However, any loss in question (with a modicum of proof, screen shots and logs are always appreciated) could be reimbursed with a Graceful Plea. This sort of thing is exactly one of the things we had in mind when coming up with the Graceful Plea policy.

~row

The problem with using a Graceful Plea is that you only get three of them per-character.    And further, they're meant for user issues for which there is no way for you to verify it: connection drops, misclicks, and the like.

This isn't a user error.  It's a well known bug.  And even if you go that route, doesn't it seem odd to be bugging Dorg to be making database edits over something that could be handled without any extra work?

I'll abide by the decision, but I would appreciate an explanation for the design team's reasoning behind the "no".    Do you see it as a slippery slope issue?

[ycleption]

Not a GM opinion here, but is it really fair for wizards to have a mechanism to escape the effects of a bug, (which as you say is well known, so they take on the risk of that bug when they use it) when all other characters only have those three graceful pleas?

[SteveMaurer]

Not a GM opinion here, but is it really fair for wizards to have a mechanism to escape the effects of a bug, (which as you say is well known, so they take on the risk of that bug when they use it) when all other characters only have those three graceful pleas?

Ummm.... how many fighters are going to be casting Greater Sanctuary spells anyway?

I suppose that someone playing a cleric might have reason to feel jealous.   But is the desire to see someone else hurt, just because you are being hurt, where we should be at in this game?

This all changes if the GM team decide to integrate BioWare's G-Sanc bug into Layonara lore.   If the spell is meant to fail inexplicably, because of some God or other doing something, then it's perfectly reasonable.  But that doesn't seem to be the case, so far as I've seen.

[darkstorme]

Fighters can use Stardusts of Beryl, if they're so inclined.

But that's beside the point.  Before the GP system was in place, soul strands lost due to the G. Sanc bug were simply lost, and unrecoverable.  It is, as you say, a well-known bug.  Therefore, in terms of, for lack of a better word, "perilous situations", it is a use-at-your-own-risk spell.

And sorcerers and clerics both might be miffed if we allowed the abuse of the Tome system in this manner.  

The thing about the Bioware bugs is that they're pretty much unverifiable without a witness.  So okaying the abuse of the Tome system for an unverifiable bug compounds the problem.  How do we know that you only used it to escape from a combat where G. Sanc. failed?

So, my personal view on the situation (not necessarily that of the management): the rule is that you cannot use the Tome to escape from combat.  This should be inviolate.  Doesn't matter how you got INTO combat, the Tome is not a way out.

[Rowana]

First before anything else, read this.

 Then read this. (I know this one is a bit of a bear, and we'll see about sneaking in to edit. It was mushed up a bit when the forums were transferred.)
 
 Next have a look here.
 
 I don't really think you'd be asking the questions if you'd already tracked these all down so go ahead and give them a read.

 Now:
 
 

Ummm.... how many fighters are going to be casting Greater Sanctuary spells anyway?

I suppose that someone playing a cleric might have reason to feel jealous. But is the desire to see someone else hurt, just because you are being hurt, where we should be at in this game?

This all changes if the GM team decide to integrate BioWare's G-Sanc bug into Layonara lore. If the spell is meant to fail inexplicably, because of some God or other doing something, then it's perfectly reasonable. But that doesn't seem to be the case, so far as I've seen.

 
 
 #1 - There are items that cast sanc/G-sanc that can be used by any class. So yes, any other class would be justified in being miffed that a Wizard or Druid can escape while they have to eat the loss. Not only this but the same issue occurs with invisibilty-type spells and the skill sneaking.
 
 #2 - We aren't writing in Bioware issues into Lore.  
 
 #3 - This is an issue that cannot be fixed. Bioware has not granted users access to fix this. Period.  

 The summation is, this is something that is not our fault, is not something we can fix, it is just an issue that everyone who plays NWN on PWs (and possibly SP too but I can't speak to that) has to cope with. We can't be responsible especially since there is no reliable way to prove that it happened unless a GM or WL happens to be standing next to the afflicted individual at the moment of occurrence and we've already gone that route and it was deemed by the community to be unfair. We cannot reimburse with out proof as it is very easy to exploit. So we have GPs to replace the old system in an effort to find something more fair to all.  
 
 Lastly, we won't be changing this stipulation on Tomes or Druid Sticks. Do not use them to escape from a Bioware issue.
 
 ~row

[SteveMaurer]

Lastly, we won't be changing this stipulation on Tomes or Druid Sticks. Do not use them to escape from a Bioware issue.
 
 ~row

I asked for a ruling, and I got it.  Thank you.