TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 389101112131415 LastLast
Results 301 to 325 of 364

Thread: Ghost rules discussion

  1. #301
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2004
    Location: Heidelberg
    Quote Originally Posted by klatremus View Post
    I pulled out an old walkthrough/ghost report of Sneak's for Calendra's Legacy to see if it was the same as the report linked to in the Ghost Report thread, and it is not! In his write-up for Mission 3 from May 10th 2002 he writes: "Literally the no purchases rule applies only to weapons, ammunition and potions but I clicked right through it.".
    Well, wouldn't it be sensitive to clarify the rule with exactly this addition? The quote illustrates what sneak intended, and it's perhaps the actual wording of the rule that doesn't reflect that entirely.

  2. #302
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2018
    @marbleman: crate isn't any pickup (it doesn't go into your inventory) and you can return it to it's original place. On the other hand rope arrow is unnecessary pickup that you also can't return back to it's chest. Also if you say that there is no need to grab this extra loot (I also mentioned that in my post), then why are you grabbing rope arrow to get it? Skipping it would be more in supreme ghost spirit.

  3. #303
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2004
    Location: Heidelberg
    Quote Originally Posted by marbleman View Post
    In fact, a lot of loot is unnecesarry. You don't need to pick it up to complete the mission, so why do it then?
    Yes, judging strictly, one should stop as soon as the loot requirement is met. Don't we have a variation that requires that?
    And, for the extra challenge, pick up only those pieces of loot that sum up exactly to the loot requirement

  4. #304
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2018
    @klatremus: Sorry, I read carefully mentioned by you paragraph and looks like he understood this rule in the same way you originally mentioned. Just before quoted sentence he mentions that you can't buy non-loot items in loadout store. After quoted sentence he says that this is the reason for not buying Skeleton key and Garrett's Tip.

  5. #305
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by marbleman View Post
    @Starker: Well, if someone comes back and sees all the gold missing from their house, they would think the same.
    Yes, but that is the one big contradiction to the whole ghosting premise, isn't it? That one of the major objectives in the game defeats all the point of leaving the place in a state as if you had never been there. Therefore the ghosting rules explicitly allow stealing items while placing restrictions to other activities and supreme ghost restricts these activities further for additional challenge.

    The principles of ghosting are: you are not seen or heard and you do no damage. The only evidence of your presence should be the items you have stolen.
    However, while stealing is a very common objective in both the OMs and FMs, deactivating traps is not. It might sometimes be necessary to achieve other objectives, but that's a separate
    issue.


    Quote Originally Posted by marbleman View Post
    I don't agree with all the rules and interpretations myself, guys, but if there's something I understood from all these discussions is that you shouldn't think of them in absolute terms. Otherwise, your options for what you actually can do for Supreme will be meager, and the point of all ghosting playstyles is still to have fun with the game, not the most hardcorest experience possible.
    Isn't supreme ghost meant to be that, though? An extra hard challenge, not just a different flavour of ghosting? It already contains some tedious things like having to reshut all doors, putting back all items, etc, all in the service of its premise.

    This Thief is the absolute best there is. He is faceless, he could be anyone. No one has ever gotten a fingerprint, a footprint, not even a whiff of him. Even the Keepers are oblivious to him. He carries out his work with meticulous detail, leaves no evidence at all that he was there. He has quite a large self image but cares nothing about gaining a reputation. In fact, he wants to remain anonymous. But at the same time, he enters a mission with a heightened sense of paranoia. Nothing can go wrong, he will settle for no error or slip ups in his execution of the job. He is a Paranoid Perfectionist while working, nothing out of place or amiss when he is finished. Not even the Allusion of a Thought in anyone's mind that he was there. He is also discriminating. Some missions he might not take because he might leave a trail, clue or hint of something. People are wondering how these things happen or get stolen and who is doing it and how. But no one knows anything or has a clue.
    Last edited by Starker; 14th Feb 2021 at 08:08.

  6. #306
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2016
    Location: France
    Yes, but as klatremus pointed out a few pages ago, the point of Supreme is not to leave everything untouched but rather cover the tracks by returning all items that can be returned and resetting everything that can be reset. It's not always possible though. Often, keys are not droppable and doors become unfrobbable when open. It's impossible not to leave evidence in these cases, but the Supreme rules specify that you're excused in such situations. So, you can pick up such keys and open such doors, it's not to be avoided. Traps aren't mentioned in the rules. This means deactivating them is okay, but you have to re-arm all of them that can be re-armed; otherwise, it's a Supreme bust.

    Isn't supreme ghost meant to be that, though? An extra hard challenge, not just a different flavour of ghosting?
    It's obviously harder than regular ghosting, but it's not the most difficult mode imaginable, and you can always add more rules on top of it to make it harder. Stuff like no saving and loading that so many people frown upon, or "immersion enahcers" like never using elevators because they make a lot of noise yet AIs don't hear them. But none of these were part of the original ruleset, so I stand by what I said.
    Last edited by marbleman; 14th Feb 2021 at 08:31.

  7. #307
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    That's the reason why I don't think it fits with the premise -- a deactivated trap is miles more suspicious than an open door or a misplaced crate. Traps are there to deter passage, after all, and often placed as part of a security system. And that's another thing I cannot get my head around -- why are only things like watchers and alarms considered to be security systems, but not traps? So... if triggering a trap activates an alarm, then it's a security system, but if it does something else, like trapping the thief or injuring them, then it's not? Deactivating a turret is not allowed, because it's a security device, but deactivating a pretty much identical trap that serves the exact same purpose is allowed? Seems pretty inconsistent to me.

    I mean, by that logic, can the floor trap in Masks be deactivated, because it's a trap and not a security system, even though it's obviously meant to be a security system?
    Last edited by Starker; 14th Feb 2021 at 09:53.

  8. #308
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2013
    If there is something about returning everything to it's original state if possible, then if you turn on a light you'd then have to turn it off? And that's a bust.

  9. #309
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2003
    Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA, Earth
    Quote Originally Posted by Galaer View Post
    About rope arrow: Again, sorry if it annoys you. You mentioned that rope arrow is needed in this mission, but no, rope arrow isn't needed to complete any objective. You mention that using crates would be tedious, but you are doing even more tedious things in your runs. I would say setup for kidnapping Cavador is more tedious. I remember watching Travis Whitsitt trying for couple of hours to do this technique. In Cragscleft you are waiting 10+ hours for novice to move forward. In Angelwatch you are waiting another 10+ hours for golden child to move away. I would say these activities are more tedious than stacking crates. There is no shame in skipping optional tedious loot. Also you would only need crates to climb high places in Building B. Sure there is elevator secret in one of hangars, but it's allowed to shoot water arrow into switch. As for doing supreme ghost without rope arrows, I may at some point do that. Not now though, because these tedious activities scares me out of even regular ghosting OMs.
    I don't think you understand the point I was trying to make earlier. In those situations mentioned above with the crazy stack, there is no other way to get that loot/objective, so you are forced to do it that way. If I had an option and didn't have to make that stack and instead could take a rope arrow, then I would. That's what the "unnecessary pickup" rule is all about. What you don't need, you don't take. If you choose to take a rope arrow because the other method of doing it is too tedious and too risky, then that is your choice. Of course, you need to report that you took it, and that it actually can be avoided. If it worked the way you interpret it, then what if someone Supreme ghosts a mission, then a year later realizes there was a way to avoid taking a certain item (say a rope arrow)? Does that mean his run now suddenly is busted, and that he actually didn't Supreme ghosted the missin? Absolutely not. That would be ludicrous. It would take the fun away from successful runs, and would make for a very judgmental attitude among other players. And as far as the rope arrow in Shipping & Receiving, I refuse to accept your argument until you actually take all the loot I used the rope arrow to take, and prove to me that boxes can indeed be used.

    Quote Originally Posted by ultravioletu View Post
    Yes, judging strictly, one should stop as soon as the loot requirement is met. Don't we have a variation that requires that?
    And, for the extra challenge, pick up only those pieces of loot that sum up exactly to the loot requirement
    No mode ever has included that rule. Objectives and loot are not considered "unnecessary".

    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    That's the reason why I don't think it fits with the premise -- a deactivated trap is miles more suspicious than an open door or a misplaced crate. Traps are there to deter passage, after all, and often placed as part of a security system. And that's another thing I cannot get my head around -- why are only things like watchers and alarms considered to be security systems, but not traps? So... if triggering a trap activates an alarm, then it's a security system, but if it does something else, like trapping the thief or injuring them, then it's not? Deactivating a turret is not allowed, because it's a security device, but deactivating a pretty much identical trap that serves the exact same purpose is allowed? Seems pretty inconsistent to me.
    Well, there are currently two different rules, one that governs traps and the other governing security systems. So the makers of the mode had them separated. It has therefore been ruled in the past that security systems are watchers and alarm systems that are meant to alert other AI of your presence. Traps are devices meant to hurt you or kill you (gas, arrows, spitfire, bombs, falling debris, spikes, etc). Sure there are some security systems that work a bit more like traps. I'm especially thinking of some of the turrets in First City Bank & Trust. They are operated by pressure plates, so they would be traps more than security systems. But you could say they are part of the whole building's security system. But since they don't set off any alarms, I would probably put them in the trap category. No information is given in the rules about deactivating traps, and we are not going to add extra limitations now, 19 years after the mode was made. I agree that from a "leaving no trace of presence" attitude, it perhaps makes sense, but not all the rules make perfect sense. There are a lot more limitations that we could've included that would also make sense, but since the mode already is very difficult, future modifications to the rule set will only set out to clarify existing rules, not add or remove rules or parts of rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cigam View Post
    If there is something about returning everything to it's original state if possible, then if you turn on a light you'd then have to turn it off? And that's a bust.
    No it is not. Rule #6a: No dousing of torches. Turning off electric lights, snuffing candles, or removing any light source including Mushrooms is also Not Allowed. Removing light sources directly created by the player, for example in order to complete a puzzle, is allowed. 'Nuff said.

  10. #310
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2013
    Quote Originally Posted by klatremus View Post
    what if someone Supreme ghosts a mission, then a year later realizes there was a way to avoid taking a certain item (say a rope arrow)? Does that mean his run now suddenly is busted, and that he actually didn't Supreme ghosted the missin? Absolutely not. That would be ludicrous.
    Just a thought but isn't there already scope for this? You might place a crate then only find out months later that it was on an AI patrol path. Some AIs have a very long route and how would you know in a new FM that if you had waited another 15 mins Benny would have turned up.

    But anyway, fair enough regarding light sources.

  11. #311
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2013
    On another note, I do agree that the original rules can't be changed. But surely a new set could be created. Rules 2.0 say. Then someone could state which version they are using, just as they should state whether they are playing a new or old dark version of the mission. But then I suppose that would complicate things, and the new rules wouldn't have the same kudos, even if they did fix some of the logical/consistency problems 20 years of analysis and FM-evolution, have brought up with the originals

  12. #312
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2018
    @klatremus: Now that you are saying it that way, I will definitely try supreme ghosting Shipping an Receiving without rope arrows. Also I think you are exaggerating a bit this challenge. I remember moving 50 or 60 crates through Life of the Party for my jumpless challenge. It was way more tedious, but also satisfying. It took me 6 hours, but Life of the Party is much longer mission. How many crates do I need for highest spot in Building B? Probably around 10 for 1st stack and another 10 for other 2 stacks to climb up. So 20 crates. It's not that much and many crates is nearby, so getting them and returning them will not be that hard. So I would say that the biggest challenge for me will be other enemies, especially spiders.

    So yeah, I made note to remember about doing this challenge, so when I will finish my no horizontal camera challenge, I will jump to it.

  13. #313
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2003
    Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA, Earth
    @Cigam: If something obvious has been overlooked, like forgetting to close/lock a door, or a first alert that wasn't noticed, resetting elevators and such, then yes it would be a bust. Crate stack on a long patrol path, I dunno. If it's so long the player didn't see anybody patrol there, I'd say you're good. I mean nobody saw your stack then either, so it's not like you were detected. But you should familiarize yourself with the patrol routes before stacking if Supreme Ghosting.

    @Galaer: If you take on that challenge, that would be very cool. But even though you manage to, I'm still claiming it's no bust.

  14. #314
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2003
    Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA, Earth
    Quote Originally Posted by Galaer View Post
    @klatremus: Sorry, I read carefully mentioned by you paragraph and looks like he understood this rule in the same way you originally mentioned. Just before quoted sentence he mentions that you can't buy non-loot items in loadout store. After quoted sentence he says that this is the reason for not buying Skeleton key and Garrett's Tip.
    No, he says he won't pick up any non-loot items when playing the mission. It wouldn't make any sense to say you can't buy non-loot items. Of course you can't buy loot in loadout screen...
    The second sentence in the paragraph says "That means no purchases at the loadout." But then later in the same paragraph he specifies and says "Literally the no purchases rule applies only to weapons, ammunition and potions but I clicked right through it." So he was arguing that the rule really does not refer to keys or readables, but he chose not to buy those items anyway.

    Another interesting piece of information I found in his actual ghost report of mission 1 (from the ghost report thread) is this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sneak
    Putting the flipping keys back down was another one of those, I don't get it, things. The cells doors make a sound at least 150 decibles louder than dropping a key ring. But he doesn't alert from the cell doors at all. But drop that key ring near him and that teensie little clink will have him in a wholesale fit of wide awake hunting you down. Well this has been discussed before in other places. Is just something the game does and has nothing to do with anything else. Drop a key where you got it, on a patrol path, in a logical nearby location, or other logical spot such as a guard or security station etc. I could have avoided this whole area also and there was no loot amount to get in Objectives. But I wanted to play with it. I could drop the key dwon the hallway a bit from him which was probably fine. And I could drop it a bit closer if I leaned in and looked sort of down. It would land on end and fall over making a bit less sound. But nothing I could do would get the key back beside him. Around the corner by the stairs is a chair that has a Fort Key laying on it. That is a logical place. I ended up leaving it there for that reason.
    I think this really proves that we are much stricter with the rules today than what Sneak intended. He used the "nearest logical place" argument when he couldn't put the key back besides the sleeping guard without waking him up. I've only ever used that principle if you have an item that you can't physically return due to limitations in the engine, like if a key taken from a niche can't be placed back in there, but instead has to be dropped on the floor nearby.
    Last edited by klatremus; 15th Feb 2021 at 02:11.

  15. #315
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2018
    Sorry for changing the topic, but right now I'm preparing to ghost Scarlet Cascabel. In Version 2 you are forced to explode barrier made out of big boulder, fallen wooden beams and 2 powder kegs. Destroying boulder is allowed by damage property rule, but destroying wooden beams and powder kegs (made by someone) isn't. Explosion is happening by using jumper switch.

    My problem is execution of this explosion. First it makes custom sound, which doesn't alert anyone. Then I see only trace of the explosion on ground and a bit of smoke. No other traces, which leads me to thinking that the whole barrier has been cleverly teleported away and traces of explosion were teleported in. So my question is how should I interpret this rule: through story (need of making explosion is stated in nearby red book and also sound and teleported traces suggest that explosion happened) or through mechanics (boulder, wooden beams and powder kegs has been teleported to some room outside of map)?

  16. #316
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2016
    Location: France
    I thought about that myself and I would call it property damage. The authors decided to do this pseudo-explosion instead of a real one just so that it doesn't alert the entire town.

  17. #317
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2000
    Location: Land of enchantment
    Quote Originally Posted by klatremus View Post
    I suggest the following clarification to Supreme rule #5:
    Inventory and Weapons: You can not purchase weapons and inventory items from the store at loadout. This thief doesn’t even go to the store to chance being seen and identified purchasing said items. Free items at loadout are allowed to be taken. Stores other than at loadout, such as in-game shops, are ok to use as long as you are not spotted and do not break any other rules. Use nothing that would leave a trace or remnant of evidence. No Potions can be used at all. Rope Arrows and Scouting Orbs can be used but they must be retrieved. Holy water vials are not considered potions and are allowed.

    This is not a change to the rule, but as stated above, a clarification. This is in order to avoid prior reports from being invalidated. Let me know your thoughts.
    I agree with everything you proposed here other than the continued inclusion of the sentence "This thief doesn’t even go to the store...", which we agree is pointless. It causes confusion when taken literally in the case of the loadout screen because it is impossible to satisfy. If taken literally, it prevents one from going into an in-game store. It is self contradictory with other provisions of rule 5. I can't understand the rationale for keeping that sentence for historical purposes. I see no value in trying to rewrite that sentence either. What is lost by deleting it, as long as you explain why in your release notes?

  18. #318
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2013
    Just curious about two crate-related queries. First, can you drop a crate on a patrol route IF the AI hasn't started patrolling yet? Or has stopped patrolling that spot?

    Say the AI won't start patrolling that spot until after you trigger a conversation, or stops and stands still once they have reached a destination, and so never comes back?

    Secondly, about returning crates to their original positions. Does it matter if you return a different crate to a spot, as long as there is a crate in the original spot?

    For example, you make a ten-crate ramp and can reload to see how the crates were originally arranged in the storage shed. But can't quite remember whether the top-most crate in your ramp say, was the one originally against the back wall of the shed, or instead was the one next to the entrance. Does it matter as long as there a crates back in all the right places? Just wondering
    Last edited by Cigam; 15th Feb 2021 at 19:58.

  19. #319
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2003
    Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA, Earth
    @smithpd: Thanks for your feedback. Yes that sentence is confusing.

    @Cigam: Good questions. It is based on current patrollers, so those that have stopped patrolling or not yet started don't count. Also, if the crates are identical in appearance then it doesn't matter which crate goes where. But if there are some dark and some light crates, they should go back the way they were.

  20. #320
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2018
    In Scarlet Cascabel Mission 2 I'm forced to destroy mirror. It's not connected to any objectives, but you are instructed by ghost to do it. Can this damage property be excused or not?

  21. #321
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2003
    Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA, Earth
    Are your objectives diruecting you to aid the ghost or follow its directions? If so, its excused. Otherwise no.

  22. #322
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2013
    Just wondering, but would people call the following a "clarification" to the rules, or cross the line into being a "change"? It wouldn't however invalidate old supreme runs either way.

    I am talking about relaxing the rule on not dropping crates on an AI patrol route, so it would be OK as long as the AI isn't near for the duration that it is there.

    This is harking back to a previous point, but if I did not know a level such as say Kidnap very well, it seems weird to me that I couldn't just temporarily plonk an object down in a deserted area. I would technically first have to track down each AI, learn their routes by following each one around their (often long) patrols, and possibly take more than an hour doing this. Just to know whether a future Mechanist would walk through a spot.

    I just feel that a rule that requires significant fore-knowledge and "research" of a mission in order to know whether you are complying with it, is unnecessary.

    So, would that be a non-line crossing clarification or a line-crossing change?

  23. #323
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2018
    Quote Originally Posted by klatremus View Post
    Are your objectives diruecting you to aid the ghost or follow its directions? If so, its excused. Otherwise no.
    So destroying mirror is one of things necessary to free ghost from curse, she instructs to do that. And there is no escape from room other than that. But there is no objective talking about destroying curse or helping ghost. After destruction you get 2 new objectives from ghost what to do to destroy curse. Reward for completing both objectives is artifact called Quinicine Torc, which also completes one of objectives. We are getting it from ghost as a reward for destroying curse.

    So can it be excused or not?

  24. #324
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2000
    Location: Land of enchantment
    Klatremus is correct. Only departures from the ghosting rules that are explicitly required in an objective are allowed. The rule in question is:

    Any mission objective that explicitly demands that the player break one of the rules above is OK to complete and does not bust the ghost. Examples of such an objective are:

    "Kill the bad guy."

    "Kill all the Haunts" (in Return to the Cathedral)

    "Kidnap Cavador" (he must be KO'ed to be picked up)

    So long as you do this without alerting any AI, including (for example) the one who must be killed, and so long as you do not break any other rule, it is OK. It is not acceptable, however, to incur a ghost bust that the player thinks is "necessary" to meet another objective. For example, it is not allowed to KO an AI or slash a banner simply because they stand in the way of meeting another objective, such as stealing something.
    I think that no further clarifications are needed.

    Regarding the mirror. There is no explicit objective to break the mirror, so breaking it is a bust.

    Again, there is no shame in being busted. You can justify your game play and claim it was mostly successful. I think that it is not advisable to create an endless set of exceptions. I regret many of the exceptions that we allowed in the past because they are cause of much discussion and desire for even more exceptions.

  25. #325
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2003
    Location: Phoenix, AZ, USA, Earth
    @Galaer: Unless it is explicitly stated in the objectives, it can't be excused. Like Peter said, if we start making exceptions, then other players will see that and start asking for other exceptions. "If you can break the mirror here, then why not the window here?" It's much safer to have a plain rule that follows the objectives, and if the mission forces a bust, then so be it. If it's a bust by design, then report it as such and nobody will blame you. Its not like you are a bad ghoster, since nobody can avoid the bust anyway. Who knows, maybe somebody clever comes along and finds an out of the box workaround. Hard rules sometimes force imaginative solutions.

    @Cigam: Yes that rule is a bit up to the player. If a patroller has a long route and you have a small stack and know for sure that nobody sees it, then I'd say you're ok. The problem is when the stack is big and you have to leave the stack there for a while. That wouldnt be allowed if people are patrolling. Big stacks should be done out of view. But then the rule doesn't say anything about stationary guards. What if you can make a stack right in front of a standing guard, since it's in the shade? Since the rule doesn't say anything about that, I think its intent is to avoid stacks that walking guards obviously would see and react to, as in practically bumping onto. Good example is the fire shadow in Bonehoard. Being a bit relaxed here is ok.

Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 389101112131415 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •