I've seen this happen a few times, so here goes: a PC wants to join a group, and for some reason the party leader says no. Two things on this. (monster races, evil people, PCs you PC dislikes...)

There are lots of good reasons to says no to a PC. It's ok when there's lots of folks on the server, because the player/PC can do other stuff. But when there's few people around, IMO, it's basically kicking the player out the field. So please, you CAN do a few exceptions to your excellent RP and bring someone else along (on quests obviously) so that more people can have fun. It is a multiplayer game, remember?

Second, whatever the party leader says, nothing can keep the guy from strolling along, follow the team, and enter the same caves/building/whatever, except the quest mechanics or the employer saying he won't hire more people. So basically, even if you say no to someone, IMO you should invite him anyways. Same thing, don't kick someone out of your party unless you've convinced/bullied/whatever the PC not to come.

Any comments on that?

I agree with taking players along but there are also other sides to this. I have had players send me tells being all negative because I didn't take them along. Sometimes it is not always perfectly fitting IC to have everyone come along or 8 people to do something extremely easy. At other times you may have only one warrior and he feels he cannot protect everyone? Perhaps the group are all good IC friends and you have made one angry with you or done something to earn just one of their distrusts? I know OOC it sounds great to always take everyone along but it doesn't always fit right.

Oh and sure you can follow a group, just get a DM they will let you right in more then likely if you have a good enough reason.

I don't have a problem with this as long as there is a valid in character reason for not doing so. What i do dislike is when a player arranges a quest and then rejects you because they feel they have enough people, even when they don't have the maximum party.

I do not understand why players seem to think since you do not have the max party members that you are NEEDING more people. All that information is OOC and if a group feels they have enough members with them to take on the task why should they take more? Of course this is all my opinion. ^_^

I would agree with this idea more if players were also more accepting of being kicked from a party/allowed to die on a quest.

Here is the problem: I take your character along to be nice, even though I have quested with you before, and in character don't like you or know you are dangerous. You charge into every group and generally put everyone at risk. As party leader I tell you to leave, in character, and the person always refuses. So the next time you charge into battle I stand there and watch you die, in character.

Inevitably the person gets angry and starts sending tells.

So, you get tells for in character refusing them a position in the party.

You get tells for kicking them from the party.

You get tells for not continuously coming to their aid when they do dangerous things.

So until people are willing to RP being kicked out of a party I think not allowing them to come is acceptable for in character reasons.

GFWD So the next time you charge into battle I stand there and watch you die, in character.

LOL, that's the spirit! :lol:

I like your answers, they make me feel like i'm not a hardcore gamer.

You should include players in your RP, not necessarily your quest. If there is an IC reason for them to not come, that is totally fine, and should not be disregarded out of OOC concerns (unless a DM requests it).

Some of my characters won't take people along on quests simply because they don't contribute something helpful to the group, or we already have someone that can do that. Usually my characters that do this have quested with groups with people that don't really help out the team.

I think I was the one kicked out in this instance! It's completely okay, I went off and found two others in about two minutes or so! (It's surprising since there were only like, seven people logged on). I personally love small questing parties, and I'm always sort of disappointed when people decide not to go on a quest because we have the minimum amount of people. Three to five people is the best group for quests, for both RP enjoyment, and difficulty.

If a questing group is too large, it's just a huge mess, with a lot of characters remaining silent and bored (or everyone speaking, and the chat log flying past like a bat out of hell), poor coordination and mob tactics. Most of the quests are scaled anyway, it's like if you take 8 high levels on the Goblin Fortress quest, it's going to be extremely laggy, and loaded with tough monsters. People seem to be under a misconception that max party is fun.

And in this instance, I was sort of goading the other PC, even though it didn't seem like it >_>

Also, if anyone is ever sending you angry/hostile tells for any reason, please let us know as DMs as this is not the type of person we want on EFU!

Also, just as an aside, there is absolutely no OOC rule or unwritten rule about sharing loot/gold evenly. Feel free to work that all out IC'ly. There is somewhat of a preference to make sure everyone gets a chance to see the loot, rather than just scooping it all up quietly, although that is mostly because NWN doesn't handle the mechanics of that very well (no way to tell that someone is carrying a huge bag of extra potions, for instance).

Oh, and also - if you are on a DM quest, it is even more important to make sure the loot gets "seen" and certainly if you intend on stealing stuff let a DM know.

That sort of takes the edge out of sneaky, anonymous thievery :P

People refusing players even when there not near the max party number is one of the ones that annoys me. I dont mind if its because of a faction or a group thing but often its because they have the optimised party for the quest even though Ic they should have no idea what an optimal party for any quest should be.

What if they just don't like your character because of past experience, or don't need umpteen Wizards/Fighters/Paladins/whatever? This really isn't that big of a deal. It's an IC issue, surely?

Well how would they know they dont need umpteen Wizards/Fighters/Paladins/whatever?

As far as i know pretty much any information a player knows from playing through the quests is Ooc except for the most basic of knowladge. However often in my experiance i find that the party's refusing to take anyone else are the ones that are optimised for the quest they are about to do.

I would say it's not but that is my opinion especially if you do a public sending i don't think it's right to turn round and say we got a cleric a fighter a rogue and a wizard well we don't need anymore help. How IC do you know that, it's an assumption and a bad one, i have been refused for going on a quest when it was done over the public sending system they didn't have the maximum for the party and all i got told was we have enough even although the quest had the facility for more players and the reason i got was i felt ooc. I feel that this doesn't help with rp and to be honest if someone does this to me for an ooc reason as a player it makes me want to reciprocate.

Mikhail, you do realise that differant people have differant concept's of what 'full' is. I, myself, perfer a group of 4 to anything larger, because I feel people get a chance to roleplay with each other- the group dynamic flows better. Just because a party is not full to the brim, does not mean that the players are under any obligation to let as many people in as the quest would allow.

Dilandau Kale Well how would they know they dont need umpteen Wizards/Fighters/Paladins/whatever?

As far as i know pretty much any information a player knows from playing through the quests is Ooc except for the most basic of knowladge. However often in my experiance i find that the party's refusing to take anyone else are the ones that are optimised for the quest they are about to do.

Core and I have a reasonably amount of experience slogging through quests with four wizards and one fighter, and I've got to agree with her. Sure, your cabal of wizards/church full of clerics/bar full of fighters or whatever may not know exactly what they're going to face on a quest, but they also have a general idea of what their group can do and what they may need. I don't see anything wrong with turning people away after making a sending if you have a general idea that you'll need something specific. If I'm leading a group that already is extremely heavy in one class, my character would be extremely reluctant to bring in another of that class unless he knows that he'll be a significant asset in the fight or will back him up if there's any kind of mutiny or they're going somewhere dangerous. This is especially true when there are a lot of people around.

While I usually enjoy smaller groups as well, I do try to include people when there are fewer people on. But if it doesn't make any sense at all - if our characters happen to be enemies, or if someone my character trusts has a serious problem with your character, or if I've gathered my lackeys to test out some new secret evil power on a quest - I'm probably not going to bend over backwards to include you.

But in general RP? Of course. Quests aren't EFU, at least for me. Focus your energy on coming up with mapping out goals that will impact other players, getting people involved with your plotting and scheming, and executing nifty storylines. Spamming clowns and trolls is only a means to an end, after all.

Well, if some dude in fullplate walks up to me and wants to come on a quest, and he says he's a cleric even if he's a fighter, I'm not one to dispute that if I don't know better IC. Though, when it comes to the quest and he's not preaching his deity's awesomeness and casting Magic Weapon like there's no tomorrow, I'm going to know that something's up. On the other side of the coin, if some guy in a flowing robe comes up to me and asks if he can come along, I'm going to assume he's some style of spellcaster, and ask him what his skills are. Basically, just RP it out. If you're asked what you can do, then obviously whoever's starting the quest group is going to know if they want you along or not, especially if they've asked everyone else, too.

And, like Dan said, sometimes you just don't want to have a huge pwntrain of 8 people going off to mack on illusions. That is easily explained IC, such as you want to investigate and don't want to rouse too much suspicioun, or you want to have a small team of highly skilled adventurers rather than a big team of brutes who may or may not follow orders.

As far as I'm concerned, as far as quests go, it's an IC issue that should be dealt with ICly. Of course, outside of that, it's completely -neccesary- to have others involved in your plots. Otherwise, it's not exactly going to go far.

Well thats another thing if a person is only looking for a certain type of charecter then why make a general sending for everyone? I mean would it be that difficult during the sending to say "looking for an Arcane caster to help with...." or the like instead of doing a general one saying "looking for help on....." where a lot of people are going to show up and youre not going to invite anyway?

Because, normally, you're going to need a mix of people, not -just- mages or -just- fighters. Basically, it's first come first serve, and that's fine by me.

Hmm i guess well have to agree to disagree on this one.

DangerousDan Mikhail, you do realise that differant people have differant concept's of what 'full' is. I, myself, perfer a group of 4 to anything larger, because I feel people get a chance to roleplay with each other- the group dynamic flows better. Just because a party is not full to the brim, does not mean that the players are under any obligation to let as many people in as the quest would allow.

That's your choice dan is suppose i disagree with you and if you did it to one of my characters then i probably wouldn't quest with your character again.

Being selective isnt wrong-

I'm usually going to select people based on the following (in order of importance):

- Are they interesting to travel with? - Did they make a good impression on my character now or in the past? - Do they contribute something unique to the group? - Are they interesting to travel with? - Will they save me or abandon me in the face of spice?

I tend to reject mechanic party optimization entirely in favor of interesting party optimization.

Conclusion: Be enthusiastic, and interesting and you will be selected over others!

Mikhail The Heretic

That's your choice dan is suppose i disagree with you and if you did it to one of my characters then i probably wouldn't quest with your character again.

Dont you feel you're being a little too much melodramatic?

I think people have to remember that it is your character getting told no and not you personally, as it sounds like some people are having their feelings hurt.

GFWD I think people have to remember that it is your character getting told no and not you personally, as it sounds like some people are having their feelings hurt.

Bingo! It's good to include people, but if you're the one that's getting rejected you shouldn't feel down about it. If anything, think of all the fun that they're missing out on by not inviting you into their faction. :P

Sternhund

GFWD I think people have to remember that it is your character getting told no and not you personally, as it sounds like some people are having their feelings hurt.

Bingo! It's good to include people, but if you're the one that's getting rejected you shouldn't feel down about it. If anything, think of all the fun that they're missing out on by not inviting you into their faction. :P

Or so you tell yourself.

Every. Waking. Hour.

This has been hit on already, but if your char becomes well known for his or her prowess/bravery/skill/etc., you will find people begging you to quest with them!

Kind OOC tells fix all OOC spite, i reckon.

If i was denying someone for IC reasons, i would prolly shoot them a i <3 u, dont be sad/another time/;-)/etc showing them that you are not doing it for OOC reasons, which it should primarily not be doing.

Nobody likes being the last one picked in gym class ;)

Pioneer7 is correct. I don't like alot of OOC chatter, but a simple, "hey, it's IC" can go a long way.

Some of my favorite players have characters that my dude hates IC! Establishing that from the beginning ensures that the IC hostility stays fun and never gets poisonous.

I prefer to send abusive tells about how much I hate the player and their character.

Then again, I'm a bad player.

Conflict is what moves EfU. In my opinion, refusing someone to come on a quest with you is as enriching (if, of course, there is meaningful RP involved) as bringing them on with you. Some of the greatest rivalries and enmities in EfU started over simple things such as refusal to bring someone along on a scripted quest, or disagreement over how to divide the loot.

One important thing to keep in mind: Meaningful enmities always need to be supported by meaningful interaction (conflict) between the characters. So, while you may think that holding a grudge towards someone just because they didn't bring you on their quest might be a bit shallow (and it is) remember it can be an excellent starting point for conflict. That moment when you get refused for a personal reason (the party leader is a follower of Torm and your full plate has a large black hand on it) is, a lot of times, the first clash between two characters. What you make of this conflict - the things you say, the threats you make, etc - will make something meaningful out of something ordinary. Everybody's been rejected on a scripted quest (except Zerelde) - but rejecting someone in a way that'll give them an avenue to either make amends or get back at you later (using religion, race or attitude as an excuse, for example) is one of the ways to make something completely ordinary (a scripted quest that anyone can do as many times as the server resets) into something meaningful (a unique interaction that leads to conflict or alliance between two characters).

- K.

If you get rejected from joining a group don't take it personally. Some people prefer to travel in a small group and others like to travel in a well-rounded group. Both of those are completely valid in-character reasons to limit a group.

A valid point can be made either way saying characters should max a group or not, however I think it is completely up to a given character how many people he feels like traveling with. Besides, I have been involved in a couple of occassions where a character (one time it was even me) ran out of a quest area to quickly gather reinforcements after their party was wiped out...good times. good times.

-Kalos

The only times I refuse to include players is when they are known necromancers or druids. (or some cleric of a god I don't like)

Kudos to you then, Thomas.