Galaer on 6/2/2021 at 13:15
Another counter argument to yours, klatremus, is your interpretation of this rule makes regular ghost harder than supreme ghost. Usually every aspect of supreme ghost is the same or harder than regular ghost. This time it makes it easier.
Other than that this rule never mentions any requests situation. The rest of this rule mentions only tools that can make missions easier (potions, rope arrows, scouting orbs). Also how can you know what's the original intent of this rule was? This gimmick happens very rarely. The first instance is in Lost City OM. The only supreme ghost reports of this mission belongs to you and Travis Whitsitt. So my question is: Did any of you ask the question about Gervasius' request when you were making your reports or did you just assumed it's forbidden to buy it? Maybe it would be better to verify this aspect of this rule with Peter Smith?
Also let me remind you that yours interpretation of the rules isn't always very strict. I'm talking here about grabbing rope arrow in Shipping and Receiving. Rope arrow isn't needed to complete any objective or getting any loot (you can stack crates), but you allowed that, because it's easier to get some loot. Isn't it the same situation with requests? Sure, reward doesn't appear in the stats, but Garrett isn't charity institution. You can easily imagine that he's completing objectives for the sake of getting more money after completing mission.
That's why I think this aspect of the rule should be excused for supreme ghost.
klatremus on 7/2/2021 at 07:45
Your arguments are good here Galaer. I must say that I largely agree with you, and think probably free items should be allowed, but I'm not sure. I wasn't saying not to apply real world logic because I disagree with you, I just think that you maybe took it a bit far, that's all. I don't agree it would make Ghost easier than Supreme, because even though you get an extra objective, they are usually optional (and those aren't required for regular Ghost) and you still don't need to adhere to Supreme rules to complete them. As far as the Lost City request, it costs 150 to obtain, so that would definitely be a purchase and certainly against Supreme. Yes the rule only mentions equipment, but that doesn't mean it doesn't include other purchases also. Like you said, contract requests are rare, so it would be weird to mention rare opportunities as examples in the rule.
I am not always that strict about the unnecessary pickup rule because there is a balance between risk and reward. Does he risk stacking crates (and you'd have to make many stacks to get all those spice bags) or just take a rope arrow? The rope arrow isn't against the rules, and if you use the item to your benefit then it doesn't go against the rule either, which says "don't pick up what you don't need". Well, I strongly felt I needed that rope arrow, and I think a careful thief would make the same call. If there were no rope arrows in the mission, then I would have to stack boxes and that'd be ok (but tedious).
Edit: And I did contact Peter Smith, so maybe he replies.
Galaer on 7/2/2021 at 10:12
The reason I'm saying that regular ghost is harder than supreme ghost in this aspect is in ghost buying request isn't against rules. Sure, you need to buy it an read it, but after reading it stops becoming optional objective and you have no option to abandon it. And this request objective can complicate your ghost run. For example: in Lost Among Forsaken each relic spawns new zombie, so ghosting through ruins becomes harder.
Also don't you think that this no purchase rule go a bit against Rule #2 about completing all optional objectives. Sure, you are allowed to not trigger. But what do you think was intent behind this rule? I think it was to not trigger objectives that leads to alerts or damage property. So avoiding this objective not because it's impossible to supreme ghost it, but rather because it's purchase, sounds weird.
Also I wanted to mention once again shops inside missions. You excuse making necessary purchases in inside missions shops. You can imagine that loadout stores have shopkeepers who knows Garrett and his activity (example: Thief 3 shopkeepers know him). On the other hand in FMs you usually visit city you never visited before, so shopkeepers just don't know you. Don't you think that risk of being identified is higher in them than in loadout stores?
About Lost City request - yes, you spend 150 loot for request, but in return you get 120 loot for each mask. There are 3 masks in Lost City, this means 360 loot in total. This means that Garrett ultimately gains 210 loot based on this transaction.
Ultimately right now it's only you who supreme ghost missions, klatremus, so it's your decision how you want to play. But have in mind that currently by doing supreme ghost you are missing some content.
ultravioletu on 8/2/2021 at 00:09
It occurs to me that this rule is kind of pointless. Usage of most items is directly prohibited by other rules, and I had to be very creative to figure out use-cases in which the spirit of supreme ghosting would be deafeated by loadout purchases. Something like buying a rope arrow instead of doing something "troublesome" to get one in the mission, or buying potions to use them in stacks and to avoid returning in-mission items that otherwise should have be used instead. Anything else?
Cigam on 8/2/2021 at 07:20
Just some thoughts. If you think as I do that the rules are primarily concerned with game mechanics, then freebies at loadout would still be forbidden, as it is the mechanic of entering the mission with extra assistive items that is the issue. Doesn't matter if that extra moss arrow cost 25g, or was given away for free. It is the same mechanic.
Once you enter a mission you are now dealing with the mechanics of obtaining in-mission items. This is not outright disallowed, but you must be conservative. Buying in-mission store items comes under this new mechanic.
Finally, the rules are concerned with the mechanics of the alert system, rather than simple AI awareness of the player, and friendlies don't alert. Hence being seen by store-owners is not a forbidden mechanic.
So yes, the "flavour text" associated with the rule forbidding the mechanics of obtaining loadout goodies, might provide a "flavour" explanation about not wanting to be seen by shopkeepers or anyone else, and real-world logic would say that this would extend to in-game stores. But the mechanics are obviously quite different. And the mechanics of being seen by neutrals and obtaining items in-mission, are not disallowed.
smithpd on 11/2/2021 at 17:38
Sorry I am late responding.
The Supreme Ghosting rule with the current confusion regards the loadout store:
"5. Inventory and Weapons: You can not purchase weapons and inventory items from the store at loadout. This thief doesn't even go to the store to chance being seen and identified purchasing said items. Use nothing that would leave a trace or remnant of evidence. No Potions can be used at all. Rope Arrows and Scouting Orbs can be used but they must be retrieved. Holy water vials are not considered potions and are allowed."
First, I should say that I did not write the Supreme rules. I had a hand in writing the rules of the original ghost mode and early interpretations. I would not have written Supreme rule 5 the way it is. That said, following is my interpretation of what is written.
To me, the key sentence is "You can not purchase weapons and inventory items from the store at loadout." The key word is "purchase". That means to me that free items are OK to grab because free is not a purchase.
I think that the sentence "This thief doesn't even go to the store to chance being seen and identified purchasing said items." is pointless. The loadout screen is unavoidable when starting the game if the author incorporates it. I would delete this sentence if given the opportunity.
I see no essential difference between a free item that contained in the loadout store and a free item that the author places in initial inventory. Examples might be lockpick, a map, or a clue. To me, is is just a mechanism the author uses to supply the item. The store does give the opportunity to avoid taking the item, but so what? There is no difference in game play with either approach if the player takes the item, which should be allowed, as it is free.
One possible sticking point is that an item may change the objectives. To me, that is a separate issue from the loadout store and whether the items is in initial inventory or found in game. In any case, you can frob the item or not, thus changing the objectives or not. My personal preference is to take such items and deal with the changed objectives. That way, you get to play the complete mission. To me, the idea of saying that the changed objectives impedes or prevents ghosting and then going back (reloading) and refusing to take the item is a bit artificial. Still, I would regard that as a personal choice and not covered by any rule, unless I missed a rule somewhere.
These are just my personal opinions. I would be happy to discuss them.
marbleman on 11/2/2021 at 17:49
If the key word is "purchase," then buying anything from in-game stores such as the one in Calendra's Cistern should not be allowed for Supreme. That's why to me the key word is "loadout screen" and everything available there.
klatremus on 11/2/2021 at 18:12
Thank you for your reply, Peter. I agree with your reasoning, and largely agree with your conclusion. Marbleman summed it up nicely that 'purchase' and 'loadout screen' are key terms. I would also say like you Peter, that free items should be allowed for Supreme. In game stores to me are also ok then, because there you can control the alerts, and the rule specifies during loadout. Is that your take on it also marbleman? So far, I can only remember UV that felt even free items should be disallowed.
Edit: As for Calendra's Cistern, you don't need to buy anything from the store for Supreme after all. You can bring Adrius' head there and he'll eat the dried frog for free. I show this in my segmented run.
smithpd on 11/2/2021 at 22:42
I agree, Klatremus, that in-game stores are OK to enter provided that the rules of Supreme are adhered to, that is, no alerts, etc. Apart from alerts, I see no difference conceptually between an in-game store and the loadout store. Again, I don't like the sentence "This thief doesn't even go to the store..." because I think it is pointless no matter what form the store takes.
marbleman on 11/2/2021 at 22:47
That's not my take; if the key word is "purchase" then any purchses should be disallowed, including in in-game stores. If the key word is "loadout screen," then even free items should not be taken. It just seems like the rule is too easy to bend when it requires both "loadout screen" and "purchase." However, I seem to be the minority here so if you all think that it's fine, so shall it be.
