Kalin
Level: Master Delver

Rank Points: 224
Registered: 01-25-2016
IP: Logged

One reason to have judges is so that exceptions can be made when appropriate.

I agree with Doom's idea of publishing the hold, but put a warning in the download post explaining which rule is broken and why an exception was made for it.

And we can do this for other holds too, like the ones published before we had these rules.

To me, the important thing is that players are warned about non-compliant holds before they download them.

____________________________
he/him
~170th Skywatcher

mauvebutterfly
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 774
Registered: 05-03-2015
IP: Logged

Alright, I'll continue looking at it.

____________________________
106th Skywatcher

Xindaris
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 1593
Registered: 06-13-2015
IP: Logged

Hm..the only way I know how to do that for my entry would be to lock the player into it until they complete it. I guess that's fine, if there's a scroll or something explaining why it's being done.

EDIT: This was a reply to Doom's post, whoops.

____________________________
109th Skywatcher

Here are some links to Things!

---

[Last edited by Xindaris at 11-08-2022 03:11 PM]

mauvebutterfly
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 774
Registered: 05-03-2015
IP: Logged

Xindaris wrote:
Hm..the only way I know how to do that for my entry would be to lock the player into it until they complete it.

bbb already did that for every entry. I agree that it's a good precaution to take for a hold like this.

____________________________
106th Skywatcher

navithmastero
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 625
Registered: 01-03-2012
IP: Logged

I think I'd tend to agree with Doom on this one. I wouldn't be so against allowing a hold which has back tracking issues in it given that there is significant warning and the whole point is to 'show off' these issues. That being said, I also think that this only holds to a certain degree. Frustrating players by making them redo vast amounts of the hold because they messed up something in the first entry they tried should definitely be discouraged, again though, I haven't played this particular hold.

One other way around it could be allowing the player to easily restart an entry using the special command for example and then reseeding all of the rooms and placing the player at the level entrance. Not sure if that's particularly viable / whether the hold author want to do this but it's one solution that's not been mentioned yet.

EDIT: somehow missed that players were locked in to the entries. This seems reasonable, don't think (in theory) I'd be against promoting this but obviously couldn't say properly until having a better look.

____________________________
Member of the Snake Appreciation Society

One of your local HAs.

My stuff:

---

[Last edited by navithmastero at 11-21-2022 08:11 AM]

bbb
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 215
Registered: 10-07-2013
IP: Logged

mauvebutterfly wrote:

Xindaris wrote:
Hm..the only way I know how to do that for my entry would be to lock the player into it until they complete it.

bbb already did that for every entry. I agree that it's a good precaution to take for a hold like this.

That is exactly why I did that, even though the general recommendation for compilations is to allow leaving incomplete levels. The idea is that each of the levels on its own keeps the backtracking problems it was designed with, but that they don't leak to the hub.

While I believe the current setup (as intended - there may be bugs) is reasonable, and the hold can be promoted, I started the contest with the knowledge that it might not be, and won't be offended if the hold is rejected.

In case anyone else wants to take a look, the hold is available in this thread.

---

[Last edited by bbb at 11-24-2022 06:43 PM]