Some Elitist Rules Clarifications Needed

[Scrape]

Curiously, if someone wrote a program so that you could import legitimate multiplayer items that YOU YOURSELF HAD FOUND into single player games, would you then allow the Single Player Elitist to receive bday gifts or no?

Obviously it depends on who you are asking. It is still going against the way the game was written. Not that it is necessarily a bad thing, as I have stated multiple times, I just do not think it is right.

It is similar to using an importer, but it is a different style or method.

But essentially the definition of the Elitist variant ALLOWS Unique birthday gifts, doesn't it? (Read the rules! That is essentially one aspect of the definition of an "Elitist", isn't it?

Yes, for the multi player version. However, for the single player version, it should not be possible. (I just want to restate that this is my personal opinion, and I am not saying this should be the way to go.)

Yet if the item to be imported has the exact same stats ALL THE TIME, whether it is found or imported, and plays EXACTLY THE SAME whether it was found or imported, then . . . .

Regardless of whether the item is always perfect or not, it still goes against the way the game was designed. Perhaps it is not the way some people feel it has to be played, but as I seem to keep restating, I feel it is the way.

...and of course IronSnobbing would be out of the question entirely.

Entirely? Why? Because it is too hard? Nearly impossible to play? That may be true, but at least it is staying within the original limits of the game.

Not that I am going to try one (most likely anyway), but I would rather play a single player elitist that does not have a chance than use an importer (or what have you).

In a sense, it is similar to finding those "dream items." You might have to play fifty games or so, and then you might get helpful items early on and have a successful game.

But then again, you can always try and play how you would like to play.

[Lemming]

Curiously, if someone wrote a program so that you could import legitimate multiplayer items that YOU YOURSELF HAD FOUND into single player games, would you then allow the Single Player Elitist to receive bday gifts or no?

Where the item came from doesn't matter, because we never get to that point in analysis. The "It's not legit" flag goes up as soon as we start talking about importing anything into SP, because transfers just don't exist there. In Hellfire, transfers don't exist until CoW is available. So, as soon as CoW is available, then you can start worrying about whence the item is conjured.

[b]Attika

[b]Nystul
"Make the best of what is available. The line "Since the items CAN be legitimately obtained IF you had an unlimited amount of gaming time.... " is a very dangerous one. This is EXACTLY how some players go around with their perfect APOS and perfect KSOH and two obs/zods at level 25 and consider themselves legit."[/b]

Wait a cottonpickin' minute here. There's a big difference between a "perfect APOS" and a "perfect Civerb's Cudgel". [/b]

If I understand him correctly: Nystul's purpose in mentioning "perfect" has to do with the "unlimited time" concept. If you have unlimited time to play the game and the items you want can legitimately drop in the game, some players then conclude that having perfect versions of KSoH, Obs/Zod, and other rare-but-obtainable items is "legit" at clvl 25 because : "I'd eventually find the items if I played for an unlimited amount of time, so it doesn't matter where they come from as long as I can kill the monsters capable of dropping them." The reasoning applies to any item they desire. In short, this kind of reasoning disregards scarcity : you don't have unlimited time, you're not ensured you'll find any particular item, and you haven't found those particular items. That's why it's problematic.

If item importing is NOT to be allowed in playing Single Player Elitists, that's fine, I can live with that. No biggie. But you've pretty much killed it as a single player variant.

The SNOB rules don't cover it. That's not the same as disallowing it. We're saying SP SNOBs don't get birthday gifts if you play them "legitimately." If you'd rather have birthday gifts, in a SP IronSNOB write up, just say : "SP SNOBs technically have no way of getting birthday gifts, and I wasn't about to punch my way down to Diablo. So, I used an importer to obtain birthday gifts at the appropriate clvls."

-Lemmy

[KingOfPain]

Our excahnges took on the wrong tone somewhere and I knew neither one of us is going to sway the other.

I care little when you constantly twist and turned my words, and simply put words in my mouth when twisting is not enough.But now you have hit rock bottom by turning my words into this - "people in this community would be characterized as expressing negativity and prejudice toward someone attempting something that's actually challenging". A desperate act of a drowning man, indeed, to insult the community just for another chance to stab at me.

So the pattern continued and I have only replied to you out of courtesy. If you don't find my replies sufficient in word count, that is your problem. I have stated my opinions on the topic and gave as much answers as I have the time for, minus what I thought you deserved. I am not about to give you more words to play pretzel with. I am okay with it if I can't persuade you. I have my opinions and you have yours.

Perhaps you are not frustrated by the lack of indepth argument I gave (if you even took any points into consideration), but at your own inability to present a logical argument to convince. So you want to bite onto anything you can?

Say what you want about me, but leave innocent bystanders out of it!

I don't like to use this tone of voice even when provoked and usually end up editing it, but then I would be accused of being evasive. Maybe we caught each other on some bad days. Can we just agree to disagree?


KoP

[Lemming]

I care little when you constantly twist and turned my words, and simply put words in my mouth when twisting is not enough.

Where? If I misinterpret something, you need to correct me just as I do when you misinterpret me.

But now you have hit rock bottom by turning my words into this - "people in this community would be characterized as expressing negativity and prejudice toward someone attempting something that's actually challenging". A desperate act of a drowning man, indeed, to insult the community just for another chance to stab at me.

If you'll examine the context, it expresses confusion over this statement: "I would just like to add that you would gain nothing from using the Elitist name other than - generate negativivty, prejudice from those who would perfer you not use the Elitist variant name."

I wasn't characterizing anyone that way. In full context, I think we said :

KoP : "... you would gain nothing from using the Elitist name other than ... generating negativity, prejudice from those who would prefer you not use the Elitist variant name (with respect to playing SP IM Elitists that import items)."

Lem : "I was surprised people in this community would be characterized as expressing negativity and prejudice toward someone attempting (a challenge like an IM Elitist, even if he does import birthday gifts so that he can play more like MP IM Elitists)."

"Negativity" and "prejudice" seem like pretty strong words for the situation described. That's what surprised me. It's not my gut reaction to think people around here would react like that. Does that still sound so insulting?

Perhaps you are not frustrated by the lack of indepth argument I gave (if you even took any points into consideration), but at your own inability to present a logical argument to convince. So you want to bite onto anything you can?

I think I presented a fairly logical argument.

Can we just agree to disagree?

Perhaps we should, if only to get you to stop thinking I'm insulting everybody all the time. Why do you think I would do that?

-Lem

[T-hawk]

Can we just agree to disagree?

Speaking from the community you mention, please do. :D :wub: ^_^

[Attika]

Lemming quote:
The SNOB rules don't cover it. That's not the same as disallowing it. We're saying SP SNOBs don't get birthday gifts if you play them "legitimately." If you'd rather have birthday gifts, in a SP IronSNOB write up, just say : "SP SNOBs technically have no way of getting birthday gifts, and I wasn't about to punch my way down to Diablo. So, I used an importer to obtain birthday gifts at the appropriate clvls."

Here's where we really part paths.

I'm says that, to play an Elitist, you MUST have Unique items. It's the number one rule of the Variant; it's what defines the Variant.

Other's are claiming, in the name of legitimacy, that you cannot use an item importer and thus have to play the Variant WITHOUT Unique items.

I am saying, as soon as you do that, you violate the first written rule of the variant, Single Player or no. Then you are no longer playing an Elitist. You can call him a "naked boxer" or a "legitimist" or a "purist", but he is NOT an Elitist any more.

I also truly believe, that in the name of legitimacy, NO ONE has the right to change the written rules of SOMEONE ELSE'S Variant. Acting in the name of legitimacy does NOT give ANYONE the right or power to re-write someone else's Variants rules. You wish to try, contact the person or contact the community. But rewriting ANY variants rules for the sake of legitimacy isn't the correct thing to do.

Just say you can't play a legit Single Player Elitist.

DON'T CLAIM THE RIGHT TO CHANGE SOMEONE ELSE'S RULES, NOT EVEN IN THE NAME OF LEGITIMACY.


Attika

PS Please realize I'm not changing the rules, I'm contacting the community here.

[Scrape]

I'm says that, to play an Elitist, you MUST have Unique items. It's the number one rule of the Variant; it's what defines the Variant.

It is not like we are disallowing unique items to be dropped in the game. You just have to earn them.

This is true even for an IM SNOB. As I mentioned in a previous post, it might take you a lot of games until you have a successful one. At least you would be earning it.

But if you would not rather play that way, that is fine.

Again, that is just how I would prefer to play.

I wonder how Da O'Toth imagined the character to be played. I am talking in terms of legitimacy. I assume he meant his multi player version to be played with respect to the design of the game...legitimately.

Therefore, I would assume we would have to adapt to the design of single player.

Just say you can't play a legit Single Player Elitist.

Have we reached that conclusion already?

DON'T CLAIM THE RIGHT TO CHANGE SOMEONE ELSE'S RULES, NOT EVEN IN THE NAME OF LEGITIMACY.

I am speaking for myself here, but this might apply to others.

I am not trying to change anything. I am just contacting the community here as well.

That is why we are here, eh? We are trying to discuss this as a community and come to an agreement. Even if an agreement cannot be reached, we can try while maintaining respect.

In the end, regardless of what that may be, you can always play how you want to play.

[Lemming]

I'm says that, to play an Elitist, you MUST have Unique items. It's the number one rule of the Variant; it's what defines the Variant.

No, the rules say you must use only unique items, not that you must possess them.

[b]Snob Rules
(1) They only use uniques, except for the case of amulets

(2) Since uniqes are hard to find, they are allowed to receive one at birth, and henceforth on their 5th, 10th, 15th, etc. birthday. [/b]

If it were true that an Elitist who did not possess unique items was no longer an Elitist, then:
(1) An Elitist who died and couldn't retrieve his gear is no longer an Elitist.
(2) An Elitist whose items all broke would no longer be an Elitist.
(3) An Elitist who opts not to get birthday gifts [since SNOBs are "allowed" gifts, not mandated to receive them] would not be an Elitist.

None of these conditions cause an Elitist to cease being an Elitist. Thus, Elitists are not required to possess unique items in order to be an Elitist.

You can call him a "naked boxer" or a "legitimist" or a "purist", but he is NOT an Elitist any more.

I was so eager to start my SNOB Bushido I didn't even bother getting birthday gifts. I just naked-boxed my way through Church, killing Butcher and Leoric in the process. (I think I had to go through Church a second time before I could take Leo, though. Or I might've HB'd him. I'm unsure whether HB is too "proletariat.") If memory serves, I may've even found a unique or two along the way, but I think it was CC or something else unusable. At clvl 13 I finally got birthday gifts. I don't remember what, though. Probably TFoS, a useful weapon, and RoE.

DON'T CLAIM THE RIGHT TO CHANGE SOMEONE ELSE'S RULES, NOT EVEN IN THE NAME OF LEGITIMACY.

OK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-Lemmy

[KingOfPain]

I also truly believe, that in the name of legitimacy, NO ONE has the right to change the written rules of SOMEONE ELSE'S Variant. Acting in the name of legitimacy does NOT give ANYONE the right or power to re-write someone else's Variants rules. You wish to try, contact the person or contact the community. But rewriting ANY variants rules for the sake of legitimacy isn't the correct thing to do.

Right. And I have only offered to put in an addendum, if and when... I can only think of one case when we changed (updated) someone's rule without the author being there - But not without the whole community behind it, of course.

Now that we have more or less come to some conclusions, that it is quite a messy issue to try and fit Elitist into what's proposed, let me clarify something that might have been missed. And, to fianlly answer Lemmy's VK Snob related questions.

I have ignored his references to VK Snob because I wanted us to keep our focus on the main issue. VK Snob, or any other mod'ed Snob has little relevance to what is being proposed here, nor does VK Snob qualify as a precedent to what is being discussed. Not directly (remember the focus). First off, just because it has not been contested that "Snob" should not be called Snob in VK, it doesn't necessary mean it is acceptable, nor un-acceptable. It just mean people went with the flow, and no one bothered to ask, or speak up against it. I have never played any mod including Hellfire (which I have) but I don't think I would have any problem with the name VK Snob.

The focus - Noticed that Nystul and I are careful about this... I said I wouldn't be comfortable to call what you proposed an Elitist. And that means the name Elitist by its lonely self. I said I probably have no problem with VK Snob without knowing anything about the mods scene because, VK Snob for example, can be looked at as a multiclassed variant. And, VK being a well established mod helps.

Why is it important that I wanted to establish if what you propose qualify as Elitist? Simple. The difference in saying a "Snob does Ironman" and "IronSnob does Ironman" is rather significant.

"Snob does Ironman" - I would assume both rule sets are followed. The reporter need not elaborated because I know both variants. And because of that, I would expect the claimant to have gone naked until he finds an unique item in his IM run. Extreme.

"IronSnob does Ironman" Implies it is a multi-classed variant and therefore clarification is necessary. It is not always possible to adhere to all the rules. The person usually pick from each classes the most restricted rules if possible (without conflicting with other rules). But choosing the most difficult path is not necessary the best way. For example, it has to be playable - Which gives you some freedom to come up with the best combination of rules, and some freedom to introduce new elements into the variant.

Note that mod builds has no relevance to either example. For example, if they were played in Vk, I would still expect the same conditions to be met.

Now, if you want to multiclass whatever that is you are attempting, you are simply borrowing other people's ideas and building upon them without violating the original authors. But you already knew that.

KoP

PS: Lemmy, I hope you are at least satisfied you have some answers from me on the VK Snob topic, if not convinced.

[Lemming]

The focus - Noticed that Nystul and I are careful about this... I said I wouldn't be comfortable to call what you proposed an Elitist. And that means the name Elitist by its lonely self. I said I probably have no problem with VK Snob without knowing anything about the mods scene because, VK Snob for example, can be looked at as a multiclassed variant. And, VK being a well established mod helps.

I wouldn't call it a "SNOB" by itself, either. But I wouldn't consider VK-SNOB multiclassed. I view it thusly: Game -> Character Style -> Character Concept. Each character concept can be classified as a style (or multiple styles), but character concept also depends on what the game allows. Styles depend only on what the game allows. What the game allows is recursive: it depends on what the game allows.

Game : This category simply describes what game you're playing, including abnormalities that deviate from the norm of that game. Options here are D1 MP, D1 SP, D2 SP, D2 Realm, LoD SP, LoD Realm, HF SP, HF MP, or some mod (even if it's not an established mod).

Game is a mutually exclusive category. If a character plays one game, it does not have the option to play others; i.e. the environment is closed to other games. D2's an exception here, because it allows transfers to LoD. However, post-transfer the character cannnot return to Classic D2, so the environment is still closed to other games.

Because a mod is a "game" category, I don't consider it a form of multiclass. I consider it the "game world." VK mod implies one game world. D1 SP implies another. D1 SP w/transfers via item importing implies yet another.

Character Style : No change in definition from the normal use of "style." It just describes the way a character plays. Style depends on the game. In a game with no axes, "Axe-using warrior" does not exist. In a game with no uniques, a "uses only uniques" character cannot exist.

Character Concept : This is where variants and restrictions come in. Character Concept depends on game, and it may be classified as one or more styles.

e.g. (Game dependency) If a game has no unique items, porting the "SNOB" concept wouldn't make sense.

e.g. (Style vs Variant) If a game's uniques are all uber, playing a "SNOB" wouldn't be a restriction at all; it might better be considered merely a "uniques-only" style and forget about trying to make a variant around it. Why bother having written rules that don't restrict, right?

"Snob does Ironman"  vs  "IronSnob does Ironman"

I didn't know "IronSnob" was a separate entity. If I'd done an SNOB-IM game prior to this, I wouldn't have know to call it "IronSnob" if I allowed birthday presents. I would've called it whatever made sense to me (probably SNOB-IM) and explained how I attempted to combine the rules in my write-up.

-Lemmy