To Disable Buff Effects or Not To Disable Buff Effects

[The Explorer]

As a secondary vote I'd like Wired to name and shame all those that voted no so we can greif them into changing their minds

[superpoweredchimp]

So some people like having the effects in, big whoop.

[Mon-da-oth]

Hehe. You work for FEMA? Rhode working for FEMA brings a a sadistic little smile to my face actually.

FEMA? Federal Emergancy Management Agency? Or do you mean PETA? People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Rhode working for PETA? LOL That would explain a lot, he is an animal after all.

[Wired]

Funnier if he'd been head of FEMA.

*queue xfiles music*

[izzul]

As a secondary vote I'd like Wired to name and shame all those that voted no so we can greif them into changing their minds

well i gues a newbie me still vote no to disabling..hoho.. ... if i say yes then it will become a tyranny...so vote no for more democracy...lol

[Peregrinus]

Izzul, the simple fact that a vote is occurring makes it a democratic decision. Opposition or not doesn't make it democratic, and voting against something just so there is opposition doesn't mean you're making it more democratic, it means you're voting against it, that's all.

Also, a unanimous vote isn't "pathetic," it just means there's a consensus on the matter. Voting no to make it look less "pathetic" doesn't, in fact, make it look less pathetic, it just means that there's a greater likelihood of nothing being done because there's no consensus on the matter. We've held polls on this before, with very similar results to this, and nothing was done because there was a large enough minority that the DMs were afraid to make a change.

In short, if you're voting against this for any reason other than you want to maintain the spell effects as they are, I ask you to refrain from voting, because otherwise it doesn't give a good feel of the community's actual attitude towards the issue and makes it more likely that no actual consensus will be reached.

[Evelond Formos]

I think he was alluding to the phrase "tyranny of the majority", a concept that does deserve thought in many scenarios. Democracy can occasionally be the worst kind of tyranny. I gather this is what he meant based on the fact that he said "more" democracy, rather than just democracy.

That said, Pere's pretty much right on this one. In this case, there's no real opportunity for anyone to get oppressed. Those who dissent are, quite frankly, doing so on false premises. (No offense meant to those that are dissenting, but that is my view.) If people are voting no just to even the odds a little, then no "tyranny" is, in this case, being prevented. All that's happening is the stifling of progress.

[Vahene]

I voted no because I don't see the buffs as a big deal.

I actually like them.

I'm not voting no on false premises. I like the buffs.

A lot.

K

[The Explorer]

I voted no because I don't see the buffs as a big deal.

I actually like them.

I'm not voting no on false premises. I like the buffs.

A lot.

K

Pshh and oh look all of a sudden Vahene's Chars are killed in mysterious yet obvious ways

[Evelond Formos]

You like the buffs. A lot. Really?

The ones in question are two-dimensional circles of obtrusive luminosity that ruin screenshots and really just sort of look like magical hamster balls. And you like them?

You like how they look, not how they may present a tactical advantage to the player?

I'm at a loss for words.

[Peregrinus]

If she likes them and votes no, that is her prerogative, at least she's voting no for a reason that is tied to the poll rather than some half-baked reason. You and I might disagree that they look good, but aesthetics are a matter of personal taste and no amount of debating or stating our opinions on the matter will change people's minds.

[Evelond Formos]

I disagree on that last part about not being able to change people's minds. Perhaps I can't, but it can be done.

I am firmly in the camp of objective quality. Subjective appeal comes after that, not before that. It is spawned from quality, but it is not an element of quality.

[Wired]

Apparently pro-buff people are come-from-behind types.

*Gobbylin regrets putting such a looooooong timeline on this poll*

[Gixxer Chixxer]

I would vote to get rid of most of the effects, in large part because buff effects have a long history of being one of the root causes of instability in the NWN games. Performance is secondary; I have the graphical power to view them just fine, though I would say my (limited) visual enjoyment of them is not worth the hampering their existence puts on the entirety of another person's gameplay.

As for the tactical advantages of being able to see buffs, one could say that was an OOC advantage, and if they are changed, that the buffs that are 'left' to be visible (whichever may remain) are the only ones that can be seen IC. You can even go so far as to say that the others were ICly visible before, but due to some sort of change in the alignments of the axis of magic or some hoohaa like that, many spells which were once ICly visible before or not now. Thus the tactical advantage shifts.

In fact, aside from the instability issues caused by the effects, I'd say that's the biggest argument there.. and really, if the powers are so powerful as to make them overpowered if they cannot be seen, perhaps the spells in question need a debuff.

[Redleafe]

I think we should just make them much more larger, the hamster balls 2/3 the screen would be awesome.


All in all at the end of the day I'll be logging in.