There is a rule, though, that explicitly forbids the use of any walkthroughs. Asking on a forum could be interpreted as violating the spirit of this rule, as it's essentially a way to skirt it.Originally Posted by Galaer
Starker, do people actually take that rule seriously though? As in "Well I satisfied every other ghosting requirement for Bafford, however I once watched someone's video / read a walkthrough of that mission and can't unlearn the knowledge of loot locations I obtained from it. Therefore I'll mark this report as a fail."
Well, I never used the rules as they are because of it.
I thought that too, but klatremus explained in one of his past posts that asking on forum isn't the same as using walkthroughs and lootlists. Also this rule isn't enforced, it's just point of honor, which I usually ignore, because it has nothing to do with actual ghosting and I want to find all secrets that I never found on my first playthrough.
So I could ask for the location of any piece of loot, just not use a loot list? Seems like a distinction without difference to me. Also, while the rule is not enforceable (for example, you can't post a video to prove that you ghosted the mission without having read a walkthrough), it's obviously meant to be followed or else it wouldn't even be there.
As far as I can remember, I've only ever seen klatremus ask on the forums for a hint about what general area to search, not an exact location. That way he could still find the piece(s) of loot himself on a standard playthrough without having to spend who knows how many hours scouring the mission.
Unless I'm mistaken, I've always interpreted the "walkthrough/loot cheat" rule to mean not getting outside help during the ghost run itself. You either know beforehand how to find the loot and avoid alerting the guards, or you figure it out as you go. Otherwise, wouldn't that mean everyone who wants to ghost Kidnap would have to figure out how to "unhook the caboose" without reading/watching about the trick in detail?
While I don't like the rule much myself and don't play by the so-called official rules, I also think that ghosting is meant to be an extra difficult challenge, not something that should be doable in every mission or that everyone should be able to do.
IIRC I don't think I figured out how to snatch him myself, so after a while I just counted it as a bust and moved on. Now if I went and looked at a walkthrough or a video tutorial and got past that bit with its help, I wouldn't really feel like I have legitimately solved the ghosting puzzle the mission offers.
On the other hand, I want to get missing pieces of loot and secrets, so I have no compunction about using loot lists/walkthroughs for that purpose or look up forum threads for any other things I might have missed.
Last edited by Starker; 13th Sep 2021 at 01:49.
I remember from the early 2000s ghosters were fine asking for loose hints to loot or objectives on the forums. That does not go against the rule. I've always used loot lists that I have made myself, which I also got confirmed was ok a long time ago. Beyond that, it's really up to the player's own conscience. I report whenever I use direct spoilers from walkthroughs in order to complete a mission. I guess loot lists are ok if you want to check what buildings or general locations you've missed loot, or perhaps what kind of piece you're missing so you know what to look for. Some players stay away from everything related to loot lists or walkthroughs, and never ask on the forums. Others are ok with anything that is not a direct spoiler. It's really up to each player, which the rule also says in that it is a "point of honor that cannot be enforced". The rule explains the spirit of the mode, but not exactly what is allowed/disallowed.
Also, the rule actually doesn't say "loot lists" but instead "loot cheats", which have always been interpreted to include lists. Another thing, the Supreme rules actually don't say anything about loot lists or walkthroughs, only the regular Ghost rules...whatever that means.
Can someone explain to me this supreme ghost rule: "Lock picking that creates infinitesimal degradation of the lock mechanism is OK"? It's the first time I hear that picking the lock can also damage it.
It just means picking locks is not a bust to Supreme. Sneak wrote the rule that way to argue it's not property damage to the lock. Maybe someone claimed that back in the day.
I'm asking, because regular ghost doesn't have that sentence in property damage rule.
Galaer, perhaps after the creation of Ghost but before the creation of Supreme, someone tried to apply the real-world logic that lockpicking would introduce small degradations to the lock, and so is property damage. So this flavour text was added into Supreme to essentially say that such real-world logic can be ignored as There is no game mechanic associated with this degradation?
Perhaps too, the Supreme authors didn't want to alter what had been written for older modes, they just wanted to write the new Supreme rules? Hence why that text doesn't appear in the earlier modes. And why the rule about walkthroughs is still in them despite having been removed for Supreme?
On another note, if you pickpocket a guard's key I have noticed before now that this can alter the guard's patrol route. In Cragscleft for example, instead of unlocking and going through a door, without a key the Hammer will now turn around and go off somewhere else. This is not a ghost issue?
Last edited by Cigam; 17th Sep 2021 at 15:12.
Basically as noted by Klatremus, it means lock picking is not property damage. We used to have a lot of discussions and semi arguments back at the beginnings of Ghost. Some were kind of intense believe me. Just ask Peter Smith. During a bit of a discussion including property damage, someone tossed lock picking out there saying something like metal to metal scrapping away micro-fine pieces; honestly I can't remember the exact words. But it was one of those things like "is this a serious argument" or "Is someone just yanking the boards chain ?" Clayman, who was the board Curmudgeon, had some fun with that one. This discussion was after Ghost Mode started but before we authored Supreme Ghost. That is why it isn't in the Ghost Mode Rules. The words "infinitesimal degradation" are Claymans words and fit Perfectly. And I certainly couldn't see any reason for a rule in Supreme to require players to carry a dust pan and wisk broom to sweep up those micro -fine metal dust molecules. There is the history of that one. So pick all the locks you want, it isn't Property Damage.
Just Sneakin Through!
Thanks for the explanation Sneak! I really wish I could read those old discussions. Sadly, they got lost in the Square-Enix debacle I'm quite sure.
Something I meant to ask you Sneak: Since relocking of doors is required for Supreme, why was avoiding unnecessary lockpicks never required also? I mean, if you pick open a door and then cant relock it, isnt that just as bad? I mention this many times in my videos and notoriously try to minimize the number of locks picked, especially if they can't be relocked.
Dragofer pointed me to a different version of the stealth statistics tool made by kcghost here. Instead of having a document you have to read, it changes the loot inventory item to also show the stealth statistics. It's more minimalistic which is one reason why I like it better, but it also updates the stealth score live, as you are spotted which is plain awesome. Check it out and decide for yourselves, but I'm definitely gonna change to that for upcoming TDM missions.
Can't check this file. Looks like it's unavailable for some reason.
The link works fine for me. It's just linking to the dark mod forum post where he announced it. How about this?
Oh, I get it, I need to have account on TDM forum first probably. Oh, well, if ever my motivation to play this game recover, I will check it out.
So after playing quite a bit of The Dark Mod lately, I think it's time to update the official ghost rules. I have no objection to marbleman's suggested changes from this post. Those were the result of extensive discussion anyway, so I assume they're agreed upon by most. I will also add a rule in the Supreme mode to disallow the moving of lights in TDM, but allow blocking of lights using for example doors or crates. Unless there are any major objections, I will do this in the next few days.
Maybe indicate that the player can use the stealth statistics tool of their choice.
Yes I will include download links to both Dragofer's and kcghost's stealth tool. The latter I will list as highly recommended since it updates live and becomes an inventory item. I will include direct download links to my website and highly encourage players to use these.
Ok, I have edited the Official Ghost Rules to include the Dark Mod addendum. Please look it over for glaring mistakes and post here if you see any. If none are spotted, I will direct the post to be reclosed. The only TDM rule I have added that wasn't in marbleman's original draft is Supreme rule #6a regarding light sources.
Just two things. Wondering if the date here is accurate? I thought the arrows clarification happened more recently? But could be confusing it with something else.
And the other, regarding this part:Edited Oct 26, 2014 by Peter Smith and Klatremus. Clarified rule 2 to account for objectives that are not necessary. Clarified rule 6, now 6a, 6b, and 6c, to allow for use of arrows to solve puzzles, as opposed to dousing torches and deadening sound, which are still not allowed.
I guess I have the problem that to me this reads as if there is an expectation or onus on the player to skip such loot. As in "It is up to you to study hard for the exam. I would have prefered:It is up to each individual ghoster to skip loot pieces that they know will cause these responses.
Because that makes it sound like it's a free choice with no sense of saying that a player ought to skip such loot.It is up to each individual ghoster whether or not they skip loot pieces that they already know will cause these responses.
I think that it should be clear that it is a free choice, to avoid punishing the players who are more knowledgeable.
The rule from 2014 was edited by Peter Smith, where we allowed moss arrows to be used for puzzles. They were disallowed outright before that, which wasn't the original intent. He split rule 6 into a, b and c.
I agree with your new wording of the loot response rule. I will edit to make it clearer.
A dark mod observation I've made recently is that if you pick open a door and a guard later uses that door as part of his patrol route, the door gets relocked. This is probably because the guard has been assigned a "key" to that door, even though there might not be an in-mission key for that door in existence, and part of his scripted mechanism is to 1 unlock door, 2 open door, 3 close door, and finally 4 lock door. He would skip step 1 since the door is already unlocked, but still carry out the other 3. This is great for Supreme, since I always worry about leaving doors unlocked if I can avoid it. Well, now I can safely choose to pick open doors used by enemies, knowing they will be relocked automatically.
Another thing I noticed, where I wanted to hear a community opinion:
Most candlesticks will have the wax part fall to the table still lit up when taking the base and you can just reposition the candle part on the table, while others you can take off the wax part separately and then grab the base. But others again are automatically set to extinguish once taken. For the latter, if you first extinguish the candle and then take the base, the candle suddenly relights! I tested this a bit and even if you remove the wax part first and move it far away from the base, when you take the base the candle extinguishes even if it's in a different room. Or if you first put it out it will light up again in the other room. The most Supreme-like way I've found to get this loot is to extinguish the candle by frobbing, then as quickly as possible take the base, at which the candle relights again. The light is off for maybe 0.2 seconds. Is this still a Supreme bust? It just seems like a malfunctioning script to me, since the game is supposed to let you choose to extinguish them or not.
Last edited by klatremus; 28th Nov 2021 at 19:08.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote