A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

OOC General Discussion

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Active DMs

User avatar
BegoneThoth
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:20 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by BegoneThoth » Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:19 am

That's what I did, it's just +1 because if you have 15 ranks and roll a 1 on your check that's 16, which is why they're like that.
\

Harasha
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2018 10:14 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Harasha » Sun Jan 14, 2018 4:15 am

Riding a horse could be like learning a language. The more you try it, the better you get.. And the ride skill and gifts would greatly speed the process instead of being mandatory.

User avatar
BegoneThoth
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:20 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by BegoneThoth » Sun Jan 14, 2018 4:25 am

That would be extremely painful.
\

JediMindTrix
Posts: 1190
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:35 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by JediMindTrix » Sun Jan 14, 2018 5:09 am

This isn't a system that really lends itself to the 'magic of discovery'.

User avatar
BegoneThoth
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:20 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by BegoneThoth » Sun Jan 14, 2018 5:25 am

Earlier it was said the DC was obtained dynamically, the game would roll, I think they said 3d10's, and I think that's pretty unacceptable as well, but I can't confirm or deny if that's whats in the game right now, and neither will anyone else.
\

Stath
Posts: 693
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2014 11:28 am
Location: Arelith.

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Stath » Sun Jan 14, 2018 5:37 am

I have a character with 8 points of ride invested and in roughly 2 hours of continuous mounted exploration they were thrown off once.
Ork wrote: *who filters sexy elven fun times, really?

TimeAdept
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:02 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by TimeAdept » Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:42 am

Can you exactly describe the conditions under which you were riding? human? Pony? Warhorse? Weather? Armor style? Weapons? In combat? With what? In what area of the server?

By the creator's own admission, te information in your post isn't enough to determine what 8 ranks do.

Kirito
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 8:22 pm

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Kirito » Sun Jan 14, 2018 9:29 am

I have taken a couple of days off this thread to cool off and to have a clear mind to reply. Firstly, I want to apologise in getting flippant in my replies here and before now and taking examples to the extreme out of my own frustration.

I do, however, want to highlight, the poor attitude in this thread. For that matter the whole topic has had a problem with attitude and entitlement from the very start, long before this thread.

I acknowledge the initial implementation of it was really quite badly handled. That happened in part due to a miscommunication within the contributor team but mainly because EE happened and suddenly almost ALL focus went on that. In hindsight, when it became apparent that horse breeds weren't going to make it into the game world for sometime I should have pulled the code and delayed it until the rest was ready. For that I apologise as it has left some people with a bad feeling and a dislike of the (incomplete) ride system. I'll note here that there is still an issue with a few of the horses (those are the ones that fail to re-appear when you dismount) and again, EE is the big reason why this hasn't happened.

What has been most disheartening about all this and, quite frankly has me questioning whether I continue implementing anything to do with horses that had been though of, is that lack of trust and openness to experiment.

I talk about lack of trust, because we have people saying things like
The main thing that doesn't make sense about the current implementation is that you need epic levels to get enough ranks in ride to even competently ride a horse in any kind of remotely strenuous situation

This implies that only near-demigods are capable of riding a horse.
Which is completely untrue. You will need to have very high levels of ride to successfully ride certain horses, but not all. Likewise in certain situations, (real example) like facing a dragon, the plan is to need high level ride and the right horse.

However, to think that it is necessary to have epic levels of investment to ride the most basic horse in even slightly dangerous situations, (again real example) like facing the badgers outside cordor, shows a real lack of trust and suggests a completely thoughtless approach to development.

In order to clear up any further thoughts in this area, at the moment, with 6 ride, a non-negative DEX and a sober character you can grab either of the horses outside Cordor and ride to the arcane tower under normal module conditions.
Stath wrote:I have a character with 8 points of ride invested and in roughly 2 hours of continuous mounted exploration they were thrown off once.
Thank you for trying the system :).

In reality, it takes half an hour to try the system. You roll a level 3 character, put 6 ride in it and go find a horse. It has been stated that only ride ranks and dexterity count towards the falling roll so you can create a character with an effective score of 10 ride with no effort or time commit and with that go and try some horses. What has become increasingly evident is the most vocal people around this topic have not even given this cursory try to the system (since the actual horses went in at least)
BegoneThoth wrote:because rolling a 1 should not be an auto-fail
Agreed, consider it changed.
BegoneThoth wrote:Earlier it was said the DC was obtained dynamically, the game would roll, I think they said 3d10's, and I think that's pretty unacceptable as well, but I can't confirm or deny if that's whats in the game right now, and neither will anyone else.
I'm sorry, but you are perpetuating misinformation and outright lying. This was stated as not being the case in the subsequent post to the one that suggested it (viewtopic.php?f=13&t=15498&p=130589&hilit=3d10#p130589). Yet you have brought it up as a probably answer at least twice since. Stop spreading things you have been told are untrue claiming they are credible.

Right, I've gone and written far more than I intended and now have a very annoying dog wanting to go and walk, so I'm again going to take a break from this topic for a few days. Feel free to continue discussing this topic, but I urge you to be respectful in what you say and to actually try out this system before ripping it apart since many concerns are frankly unwarranted.
Harasha wrote:Riding a horse could be like learning a language. The more you try it, the better you get.. And the ride skill and gifts would greatly speed the process instead of being mandatory.
I like the outside the box suggestion :). You could add trainers in to help or learn to ride certain breeds. (And sadly I feel I now have to state this before it gets miss-interpreted... This is not the current system.)

User avatar
flower
Posts: 1287
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2017 12:16 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by flower » Sun Jan 14, 2018 10:47 am

Kirito

I would prefer if you got a horse which you can re-summon after purchase because caring about horse going back to re mount and so on when logging off is painful. So if you could sent horse off or conjure it after period (1 rl day?) after it got killed because it is so easy to get horse killed by accident.

With this i would prefer if you could customize your horse and without need to switch to ten different horses each time you fight something else :D

Edit: With dex 15, 25 riding and mounted combat feat my Elf never fell off from a horse in past months.

User avatar
Teshil
Posts: 191
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Teshil » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:26 am

Thanks for the fuller information, Kirito! I can see now how you felt a lack of trust in this. This is precisely how we all felt, too, when the system was made secret to us. I don’t think BegoneThoth was purposefully spreading lies, just frustrated as we all are.

User avatar
BegoneThoth
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:20 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by BegoneThoth » Sun Jan 14, 2018 4:57 pm

I'm sorry, but you are perpetuating misinformation and outright lying. This was stated as not being the case in the subsequent post to the one that suggested it (viewtopic.php?f=13&t=15498&p=130589&hilit=3d10#p130589). Yet you have brought it up as a probably answer at least twice since. Stop spreading things you have been told are untrue claiming they are credible.
Right, but you go on to say
Kirito wrote:No it's not the formula ( that would be crazy :) ). I'm giving you an example of the absurdity that would be typing out the different DCs.


So I assumed and have been assuming that some system like that is how the game determines the DC's. If that's wrong then please give an example of how it works so I can be correct.
I do, however, want to highlight, the poor attitude in this thread. For that matter the whole topic has had a problem with attitude and entitlement from the very start, long before this thread.
I don't really see entitlement here. The poor attitude likely stems from an incomplete system being pushed on people where character choices (to ride or not to ride) are permanent. People are being forced to decide now; "do I want one of my pre-epic feats to be mounted combat? Am I willing to prevent this character from ever properly participating in the ride system once it's done? Am I prepared to re-make this 'knight' just so I can get a horse if one day we do indeed have permanent companion custom mount features?" And it's a very frustrating state to be in.

I strongly believe the system needs to be both explained in detail and hyper-simplified at the earliest possible opportunity, see my example of how it should work earlier in the thread. Frankly, if a system is so complex it can't be explained in a paragraph I do not feel it has a place in a D&D simulation. In the meantime, I believe fully that ride should be reverted to how it was when you needed 8 ranks and then could ride anything at +50% movespeed, and stay there until a better version is implemented and completed.

Epic ride starts at 24 ranks, iirc most skills are 'epic' at 24ish as epics begin at level 20, so having a DC in there that can be met at 24+ or so skill investment means you're in epic skill territory.

And that, I feel, currently constitutes a lot of riding content, stuff over dc 24.

Another thing;
In order to clear up any further thoughts in this area, at the moment, with 6 ride, a non-negative DEX and a sober character you can grab either of the horses outside Cordor and ride to the arcane tower under normal module conditions.
On Thazar I have 8 ride and regularly fall off doing exactly that. No combat, no casting, just fall on my bum for no reason riding basic horses literally from Cordor to the Tower, often walking so I didn't lose the people I was walking with, and no combat at all. I actually stopped doing it because of how frustrating it was. I've had it where I fall from a nondescript 'Horse,' get back on, and fall right back off again seconds later.

And note;

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/ride.htm
Ride (Dex)

If you attempt to ride a creature that is ill suited as a mount, you take a -5 penalty on your Ride checks.

Typical riding actions don’t require checks. You can saddle, mount, ride, and dismount from a mount without a problem.
Either way, I want you to know that nothing is personal, these comments are directed to the server, both players and contributes, as a whole, and not to a singular individual. We're voicing our concerns with an incomplete system that has been implemented as-is and is so complex it cannot be explained, it's not a singular individual issue.
\

User avatar
If Valor Were Inches
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:57 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by If Valor Were Inches » Sun Jan 14, 2018 5:16 pm

I'm an avid ride user, and I disagree with the motion of going back to what it was before, despite it's incomplete state. I actually wish, and some of this might be coming:

1: Horses were at or the best ones could reach 160% movement speed, so they could always out-run the hasted, but with how movement speed works, I don't see that being possible until EE or Haks.
2: Own able Horses. It doesn't matter to me if they're summoned or unsummoned, or you speak to a stablemaster to retrieve your purchased horse.
3: More distinction between the horses. Maybe horses built for war are a little slower but add 1 AC, and pack horses able to store X number of items temporarily, while Wild horses are faster than the rest.
4: More open dungeons/land on the 1.69 module for horse-riding benefit.
5: A Jousting Tourney mechanic somewhere
6: Horses in 1.74 Arelith module. The open land lends itself very well for their existence.

I actually did not fall very much at all in my low ride days, and I rode all the time. I did sometimes, and for me it was a show that my character wasn't the greatest at horse riding yet. I don't see anything wrong with having to work at a skill, especially with pack horses being a safe not fall option. Perhaps they could be even safer though for the grumblers?

When the system is done though, a brief explanation of the need to know bits would be nice. Some things require more than a paragraph, so I don't mind if the horse system is that detailed. I'm not making any suggestions right now though, because I actually want to wait until the system is finished before offering more input. I think what is there is a good starting point, I understand why it is incomplete and can't wait to see how the rest unfolds.

I understand other people's frustration, but I understand why it came out as it did and now think it's just a matter of being patient and trusting, and I get why it may not be fully explained right now due to its not-yet-set state.

User avatar
BegoneThoth
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:20 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by BegoneThoth » Sun Jan 14, 2018 5:29 pm

I only waned the 150% movespeed 8 ride style back for now, only until the more robust version is implemented, because it worked, and with many people already having points in ride, didn't want to propose to them just turning ride off until it's done. It's a stopgap until the things you mentioned (which are mostly planned) are implemented.
\

User avatar
Ork
Arelith Gold Supporter
Arelith Gold Supporter
Posts: 2488
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 8:30 pm

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Ork » Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:08 pm

I think it's supremely unfair to have an entitled tone in a game run by ultimately hobbyists that do this out of their own enjoyment. Chill.

User avatar
If Valor Were Inches
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:57 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by If Valor Were Inches » Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:12 pm

Ork wrote:I think it's supremely unfair to have an entitled tone in a game run by ultimately hobbyists that do this out of their own enjoyment. Chill.
I do agree that we should be more careful with word choice and how we write. Kirito is not getting paid to do what he does. His free expansion work to Arelith, for us, is free. This definitely needs to be remembered when giving out criticism, which should be constructive. (X is bugged, when this happens, can you fix it to be this as intended when you can?), and polite (Hey, if youn't mind, can you look into this?). Not a moderator, but how you come across probably plays a part in how your suggestion is received. I certainly would be more hesitant to do something for someone that was rather rude to me. I don't thinkanyone means to be rude, but since this is purely text communication, you really have to be gentle, polite, complimentative when deserved (I don't think contributors get enough), and constructive with your input.

TimeAdept
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:02 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by TimeAdept » Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:15 pm

I don't think it's entitlement to request a system not be so complicated that the creators are unable to explain it, because then how are we, as players, expected to be able to interface with it and learn it IC if it's completely unknowable?

Conversations With Your Car Alarm
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 6:37 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Conversations With Your Car Alarm » Sun Jan 14, 2018 7:09 pm

Thanks for all the work, Kirito. I can't even tell you how many hours I have gotten out of this server over the years. Just, thank you and everyone else that has poured countless hours into Arelith.

User avatar
Imperatrix
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 7:06 pm

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Imperatrix » Mon Jan 15, 2018 12:28 am

If rolling a 1 was resulting in failures then that probably accounts for a lot of the complaints of unreliability and also the disparity between individual experiences. It's not something I would have accounted for since rolling natural 1s and 20s aren't supposed to effect skill checks and I wouldn't be surprised if the ride experience improved greatly just with that fix. That said, I do firmly believe that ride mechanics are not something that should be kept "FOIG" for the reasons Liareth put quite succinctly.

I apologise if my previous post came across as offensive in some way but it wasn't intended to be. I appreciate the work you and the other devs put into the server.

User avatar
Mithreas
Emeritus Admin
Emeritus Admin
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 3:09 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Mithreas » Mon Jan 15, 2018 12:29 am

TimeAdept wrote:I don't think it's entitlement to request a system not be so complicated that the creators are unable to explain it, because then how are we, as players, expected to be able to interface with it and learn it IC if it's completely unknowable?
Again, please read what Valor suggested above. It's not the *content* of the request that's being called out. It's the *tone* of the request.

For instance, the OP's subject line is fine. Using the word "plea" is good way to say "request that I feel strongly about but which you may or may not do". Contrast with "demand".

But then in the body of the post, referring to something as "cruel and bad design" is... not fine. For one thing, there are different opinions on what makes good and bad design, and context is important (e.g. Liareth commented that D&D mechanics are well defined and look-up-able... which is usually true. However, I have deliberately added some systems which are *not* well-defined or look-up-able, such as the divination system - does that automatically make them bad design in the context of D&D? You could argue that either way - and it's a discussion I have had with people in the past - but outright calling someone else's work bad is not the way to give feedback).

It is absolutely fine to say "I think ride requirements should be more transparent because of X and Y. Can you document them, e.g. in this format?"

It is not ok to say "Riding is too complicated and impossible to understand. You are a bad designer and ruining the game for me."

Note the use of "I think", calling out specific reasons for the position, and the specific "ask" phrased as a question in the first example. Whereas the second one makes assertions as fact that are actually opinions, goes ad hominem, and emotionally charges the discussion.

The OP did include some elements of the "good" example, but also included many elements of the "bad" example. It would be much more persuasive if it didn't.

HTH.
xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1.For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing.

User avatar
BegoneThoth
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:20 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by BegoneThoth » Mon Jan 15, 2018 12:52 am

Well, I and others have made their opinions known. I only hope that the tone of my OP, which I did not write to be rude or single anyone out, does not prevent the team from acting on this issue.
\

User avatar
Ebonstar
Posts: 1471
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 2:17 pm
Location: you may not see me but i see you

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Ebonstar » Mon Jan 15, 2018 12:53 am

BegoneThoth wrote:
I'm sorry,
In order to clear up any further thoughts in this area, at the moment, with 6 ride, a non-negative DEX and a sober character you can grab either of the horses outside Cordor and ride to the arcane tower under normal module conditions.
On Thazar I have 8 ride and regularly fall off doing exactly that. No combat, no casting, just fall on my bum for no reason riding basic horses literally from Cordor to the Tower, often walking so I didn't lose the people I was walking with, and no combat at all. I actually stopped doing it because of how frustrating it was. I've had it where I fall from a nondescript 'Horse,' get back on, and fall right back off again seconds later.

And note;

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/ride.htm
Ride (Dex)

If you attempt to ride a creature that is ill suited as a mount, you take a -5 penalty on your Ride checks.



Either way, I want you to know that nothing is personal, these comments are directed to the server, both players and contributes, as a whole, and not to a singular individual. We're voicing our concerns with an incomplete system that has been implemented as-is and is so complex it cannot be explained, it's not a singular individual issue.


this section caught my eye in particular. so this might help relax the mood abit.

perhaps Thazur has done something that horses dont like. Does he bathe? Does he bring them apples or sugar cubes? Is he a animal friendly person in general? or do the horses always see him killing other innocent animals they may be friends with. Not everyone can ride a horse no matter how hard they practice, Maybe Thazur is just born to walk.

and the second part is why are you following d20 specs, when the systems probably are not the same. Quoting from another source is rather ridiculous, considering what our teams do above and beyond what is posted with systems
Yes I can sign

TimeAdept
Posts: 1336
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:02 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by TimeAdept » Mon Jan 15, 2018 8:22 am

I don't think it's out of scope to look at what dungeons and dragons does with a ride system considering we are a dungeons and dragons game. At some point, you don't need to reinvent the wheel.

User avatar
The Kriv
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Posts: 579
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 1:44 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by The Kriv » Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:27 pm

So 2 coppers more... This system of ride.. I keep hearing about folk exploring and being thrown off, etc.. etc.. I can't say I know how the system works myself, but I've had riding lessons in my life to the point where if I needed to saddle and tack a horse, I could certainly handle it. And riding for exploratory purposes, and getting the horse to do what I wanted when I wanted it wouldn't be too much of a struggle, and as such, I'd gage my ride skill as a 6 out of 20.

And speaking as a 6 out of 20... if I were mounted on a horse and we came up on a bear or other scary creature, I would have a much more difficult time keeping the horse from getting scared and running off than I would keeping myself "IN" the saddle.

If there's any tweaking involved with this ride system, I'd rather see it modified so that the REALLY low skill (like 1 actual rank), you have trouble keeping from falling off the horse... but if you are not in combat? falling off a horse shouldn't even be a thing. If you mount a horse, you should get a skill check to fall off right then not again.. if you pass it while mounting?.. the next check shouldn't come until you try to dismount it... unless... combat...

IN COMBAT should be altogether different thing... Combat... ride-checks out be made every round, and 'falling off' really shouldn't be just a failed skill check.. it should be a critical failure... or a failure by 10 or more or something. Or if you have less than 6 ranks, you auto fall off... period.

IN COMBAT the TRUE test of a rider should be, how do you maintain control of the horse from getting scared and running away?

War-horse? high skill to even ride... low chance of 'fear' taking over the horse in combat
Light Riding Horse? -low skill to ride... HIGH chance of it freaking out and running away in fear in combat.

That would be the only change I'd like to see.

(end these 2-coppers)
-Unit of beauty required to launch one ship = 1 milihelen

User avatar
BegoneThoth
Posts: 1589
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:20 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by BegoneThoth » Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:10 pm

As much as I like that idea, I don't think giving the AI control of your PC to emulate a scared horse running away is a good idea, and that's the only way I could see that happening.
\

Seven Sons of Sin
Posts: 2184
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:40 am

Re: A plea to publish/redefine ride requirements.

Post by Seven Sons of Sin » Tue Jan 16, 2018 8:13 pm

I think Ork and BegoneThoth both make fair points. And, tbh, the root of this discussion is nothing new(read: transparency).

I've probably been blabbering on about this a long while but if the swift pace of change continues to be swift, I encourage the Supreme Leaders to invest time and energy in making coherent, articulate Patch Notes that can later be consolidated to give proper outlines on mechanics to new and old players.

As someone who doesn't play with any great consistency, it can be difficult to navigate old/new changes. For example, I've been trying to figure out all the changes to druids made in the past year, and I've basically had to create my own google doc to consolidate all the new/altered/deleted mechanics.

I don't feel like players should have to do this - with ride, Kensai, or any other Arelith-specific design.
Previous:
Oskarr of Procampur, Ro Irokon, Nahal Azyen, Nelehein Afsana (of Impiltur), Vencenti Medici, Nizram ali Balazdam, (Roznik) Naethandreil

Post Reply