klatremus on 8/12/2019 at 15:15
Dml fixes are ok. They are made by the community to fix major problems, missions that cant be finished, objectives that cant be completed, loot that are out of bounds and cant be reached, those kind of things. What im saying is if there's a discrepancy between starting and in game objectives, then youd go with the latter. If there is only 5000 available and it requires 6000, then youll get what you can and explain that no more can be found, then shift ctrl alt del to end the mission. Whatever you do, as long as youre honest about it and explain your reasoning in the report, then you are fine.
Cigam on 11/12/2019 at 03:29
Quote Posted by klatremus
Cigam: Losing health is only frowned upon in the plain Ghost rules, not disallowed completely. For Supreme it isn't allowed under any circumstance.
Even so it's the principle. IMO no action that doesn't affect the environment or the disposition of AI, should be a bust of any Ghost. Disapproved of maybe, but not a bust.
Bienie on 11/12/2019 at 20:25
Hi, I'm thinking of doing some supreme ghost in The Dark Mod. Being that the rules were developed for Thief there will be some differences to consider. I've successfully supremed two of my own missions so far (in my mind), but I wonder if I can pose the following quandaries:
1.
In the Dark Mod you often run in to passive NPC's that will quip when they see you. They also react much more easily to you than would an enemy. How should this be treated while ghosting, is them reacting to you a bust or does it not count since they are allied/neutral? I know some missions in Thief require you to meet somebody etc and that wouldn't count as a bust, but is that because it's required to progress / is mandated by objectives?
2.
Sometimes guards will react to stolen loot, and the game does not count these types of alerts as "caused by player" as in it is not reflected in your post-game stealth report. My assumption has been to treat it as a bust, but I'm not sure what to make of it. The same principle would presumably go for AI noticing open doors (which also doesn't count as a hit on stealth score)?
3.
A clarification on "pinch lights" and switch lights, is it not permissible to turn these out even if they are relit after? I've been working under the assumption that it's a bust, but I also feel like maybe it's not a bust unless an AI comments on the lights being out? For example; "Those damned candles always going out", "They don't pay me to relight those..." etc.
4.
Is moving an object and not putting it back in it's place after considered a bust to Supreme? If the item becomes unfrobable after moving it is it still a bust? Maybe only if it's mandated by an objective? In my specific example a discoverable side mission requires you to take an item and place it in a specific spot, it then becomes unfrobable and the player is able to gain extra loot. In my run I skipped it since it was optional and I figured better to skip loot than bust supreme.
Thanks!
klatremus on 12/12/2019 at 00:13
Great questions!
1. Neutral guards or the likes (servants, civilians, etc) usually do not count as busts, unless they see you use a weapon and clearly turn hostile. Allies that you are meeting certainly would not be a bust.
2. Guards alerting to loot normally would bust supreme. However, this is fairly illogical as the loot being gone would necessarily be noticed sooner or later anyhow. If most of the loot in dark mod would be noticed as gone then it would all have to be skipped for supreme, which wouldnt make sense either. Tough one this.
3. Putting out lights is not allowed for supreme, period. Ok for regular ghost though.
4. If the item cant be put back, you are not busting supreme. If it turns unfrobable for example. It would be ok to take loot even if it means moving something that cant be reset.
Perhaps someone else who has played more dark mod than me could chime in as well. :-)
Galaer on 12/12/2019 at 09:27
I would like to talk about rule #7 of supreme ghost:
7. Put Everything back that can be put back: doors closed and re-locked if they are re-lockable, chests and gates closed if closable; keys returned, books/scrolls/letters returned to their original place. If items are picked off a patrolling AI, drop them back on the original patrol route or at their feet if they are a stationary AI. If the item was acquired from a niche or other similar place you can’t get it back into, drop the item on the floor below it or the nearest logical place. You cannot stack boxes to gain access to an area when your stack is on the patrol path of an AI. If it can be done in a shadowed area off a patrol path or even in direct light where no one is patrolling, that is fine. But all boxes used must be put back in their original location.
Specifically about bolded part. From this I understand that I can't leave crates in the place visible by the enemy. But it doesn't really make sense. First - enemy never alert to it. Second - there is no problem with leaving rope arrow and open doors in visible for enemies areas. You just need to grab rope arrow and close doors in the end. So my question is: Why crates are exception?
Bienie on 12/12/2019 at 22:23
Quote Posted by klatremus
Great questions!
1. Neutral guards or the likes (servants, civilians, etc) usually do not count as busts, unless they see you use a weapon and clearly turn hostile. Allies that you are meeting certainly would not be a bust.
2. Guards alerting to loot normally would bust supreme. However, this is fairly illogical as the loot being gone would necessarily be noticed sooner or later anyhow. If most of the loot in dark mod would be noticed as gone then it would all have to be skipped for supreme, which wouldnt make sense either. Tough one this.
3. Putting out lights is not allowed for supreme, period. Ok for regular ghost though.
4. If the item cant be put back, you are not busting supreme. If it turns unfrobable for example. It would be ok to take loot even if it means moving something that cant be reset.
Perhaps someone else who has played more dark mod than me could chime in as well. :-)
Thanks! Seeing as your YouTube channel is my inspiration for starting with supreme in the first place, I will gladly defer to your judgement.
1. OK, good to know. Sometimes neutral AI will react to the player's weapon with a "Hey, watch out with that thing" or "Put that away before you hurt someone" or similar. I will treat that as a bust, but a regular courtesy greeting is not.
2. As far as guards noticing missing loot in the Dark Mod, I can tell you as a mission author that it is an active choice that the mapper has to make on a per loot item basis. It's normally a percent chance to notice while it is within their field of view. They do not react more easily if the item is stolen while they are seeing the item either. Your case for it not being a bust is strong, logically they would notice at some point anyway. You don't just have all the valuables taken from your house etc and carry on like nothing happened.
Doors have a binary argument "should be closed" which means the AI will always notice if the door is open when they walk by, and go into hunt mode. If the door is picked open but not left ajar they will not react. I feel like that could be a bust, or at least breaking with the spirit of supreme. I.E. The guards know someone is skulking around.
Another difference to Thief is that AI always react to getting pick-pocketed in TDM. They will stop their patrol for a few seconds, reach for their belt and utter a phrase (for example "Oh, where did it go?" or "Did I drop it?"). This one I also feel is not a bust since the AI don't really get suspicious, they just notice it's gone.
3. Upon reading the rules about lights again, it is quite clear. I think it's fair to call it a bust as it's supposed to add a significant challenge over regular ghost mode.
4. Ok, that makes sense. I guess it's the same principle as with items that go in to your inventory but can't be dropped again (which is quite common in TDM). I too feel like loot is higher priority than returning every item to it's original spot.
Awesome, well I think I am almost ready to start doing some supreme ghost reports now. I was planning on recording them with commentary on YouTube as well. I will be adding a little script that gives a pop-up message if an AI was alerted, because you sometimes get alerts from far away that you can't hear, and then you get a nasty surprise in your stealth score after the mission ends as your first and only indication. Hopefully this is allowed, looking back at what Psych0sis was suggesting on the previous page of this thread.
Galaer on 9/3/2020 at 17:53
I have a question about grabbing plans through painting in Thief 2 Demo and Life of the Party. Is grabbing this plans through painting in Karras Office shouldn't be considered a supreme bust? My problem with this painting is it doesn't behave as a normal painting, but more like safe door. In other words frobbing painting gives sound of something being locked. And painting is operated by the switch nearby pretty much like for example safe with diamonds in Bank in the same mission. Or every other secret stash in the game. That's why I think this painting should be considered as a door rather than decorative object hanging on wall.
And that means grabbing scroll though painting should be considered engine exploit. Because let's be honest - you aren't grabbing scroll through painting, but through wall very close to the painting. That's why it should be a supreme bust.
What do you think?
Tannar on 9/3/2020 at 21:47
Yes, I would say that breaks the rules for Supreme which does not allow any engine exploits. Even if you think of it as a painting, if it's on hinges then it's not as if you could just move it aside.
klatremus on 20/4/2020 at 04:19
Another point of discussion has recently surfaced, so I'm opening up this beloved thread again...:ebil:
It regards Supreme rule #8: No turning off of watchers, or other security systems.
Simply put: Does this rule also refer to the disabling of traps, especially traps that are protecting objects of value (loot/objectives). Galaer just ghosted The Varyx Obelisk, which I haven't played, and apparently had to disable 2 traps there, and counted them as busts. This naturally refers to the "other security systems" part of the rule, which is the vague part. What is meant by these three words? I have always thought of them as referring to other mechanical/electrical systems (aka watchers) that trigger an alarm of sorts, in order to alert people to your presence. If it was supposed to include traps, then why doesn't the rule simply say so? Traps are after all a very common part of Thief. Also, traps are already mentioned in other rules, why not here, if it applies? Secondly, to me it seems very unfair to have one rule (#9) which flat out disallows triggering traps, but then also have another rule that flat out disallows disabling them! Then there are many missions that at the outset wouldn't be possible to Supreme simply due to a combination of rules. I know this is a situation the player will find himself in at other times also, but here it seems like the rules themselves are trying to trap you (no pun intended).
One might on the other hand argue, "Well, isn't it the same with alarms systems? You aren't allowed to disable them, yet setting them off also busts you?" Well, hang on a second. Disabling the alarm is disallowed yes, but tripping the alarm is not by itself a bust. If tripping a watcher (which counts as an AI), it usually sets off a bomb shooter, so that would be considered a trap and bust you, even for regular ghost. If you trip an alarm however, then it is second alerting the guards in the building that ultimately busts you, not the sound of the alarm itself.
An example that backs up my line of reasoning is the "seals" that sometimes protect objects of value, such as the Talisman in Undercover. When you read the Prayer of the Wallbuilder, the seal disappears and the "trap" of taking damage when you try to frob it is removed. That would also be removing a security system, but it has always been accepted for Supreme, and never even mentioned in the ghosting discussion for that mission. A similar example arose in Rose Garden where there is a similar seal around the cursed gemstone at Haskell's that has to be removed with a holy water arrow. Practically identical to Undercover.
I think a discussion is here warranted, and a clarification of Supreme Rule #8. I'm not looking for an amendment, simply a specification of a fairly vague term that has been overlooked for a long time. Quite frankly, this is the only rule I have been unsure of for the past 4-5 years. All the other ones are pretty clear to me. Not this one.
I would appreciate players' input and interpretation of this. Naturally, ghosters are welcome to join in (Galaer, Tannar, marbleman, etc), but anyone's input is here valuable. I'm more looking to discuss the spirit of that rule, rather than the literal interpretation of the words. What was the rule originally meant to cover? Was it only watchers and alarm systems? Or was it anything that could imaginably be called a protective device for something else? I imagine the answer lies somewhere in between.
ultravioletu on 20/4/2020 at 07:49
Well, when taking the rule too literally, a lock is also a security mechanism, so any lockpicking should be a bust!! :)
My humbe opinion: "Was it only watchers and alarm systems?" -> Yes. It's about the technological means to alert others to Garrett's presence.