Adariel Bug? What Andariel Bug?

[Occhidiangela]

What about this Duriel Bug refered to here?

I am only using Single Player, 1.10. I have finished the Duriel quest with multiple characters in Normal and several in Nightmare difficulties, but with none in Hell difficulty, yet. With most characters I visit Durial again, afterwards, and I am almost certain that I have never received a quest drop from him more than once. I am absolutely certain that I have gotten many a non-quest drop.

So, does this bug only manifest in Hell difficulty?

Has it been introduced on realms after 1.10 was released?

Have I found a way to circumvent it, that I use unknowingly?

Or could that be a lingering myth, like that of Urdars having ITD, something that was true in the past but not any more?

Edit: Never mind my stupid questions, if answering those would amount to educating the ignorant about how to cheat. Don't know what I was thinking asking such things here of all places...
[right][snapback]65335[/snapback][/right]

Oh dear.

Do we need to discuss the difference between "cheese" and "cheat" yet again? .

For example, is doing MF runs an exploit of the game and thus cheating? If so, all MF threads are hereby banned. (Right!) Is item hunting in the Crypt or Mausoleum in Hell Diff an exploit? Was doing a Pindle run an exploit (I am not referring to the use of bots.) Was doing a whole bunch of Bloody Foothills runs to build XP pre 1.10 cheating? Was exp leaching cheating? Or, was it a cheesy use of the features of the game and the group XP system?

I'd say most of the above coule be classed as cheese, at worst, and some of it attempts to correct for The Level Gap problem, not to mention a Rush mechanism that. (On no, are we to ban Crystalion when he discusses rush and twink issues? NO!!) While quite a bit of this could be cheesy, the Rush is not an uncommon tool used for a variety of reasons to get to Hell Diff.

Cheating is to break the rules of a game. Rules have to be agreed at the outset of a game or it is not a game. A game is defined by its rules. To a certain extent, it is defined in PC games by game code. (For a funny take on this idea, go to the old lounge and look up Sirian's "The Code is the Final Arbiter" thread discussion, which I thought was a funny follow up to a hard toned twinking debate that preceded it.) The exploit issue is an interesting area for discussion. Was stair trapping the Butcher in DI cheating? I don't think so, though it was a tactic meant to take advantage of the AI.

One of the few agreed definitions of cheat is "using third party software(to include packet sniffers, maphacks, bots, etc)" to change the way the game plays. This inevitably leads to duping discussions when the game is not cleaned up enough that it allows, for example, duping to happen in game. D II was yet another example. As they did not initially implement one of my old suggestions in Realms (assign any generated item an ID based on date and place generation) there was no good way to find and delete items on game entry. Bnet could not destroy dupes. It is not hard to classify duping as cheating, since one has to have explicit intent to dupe in order to do it, whereas any number of bugs can be exploited or stumbled upon in complete ignorance.

"Intentionally" doing out of game things to cause the game to dupe items, or for that matter any number of other things, can have bad side effects beyond an ethical bar sinister , to include degrading bnet and the jokonomy --sorry, the economy. Also, it is cheating by any game's strict definition. (Like melting the ice on a hockey rink at one end during a match . . . )

I was told by an idiot at D II.net that using a teleport ring in LoD during a duel, when I was playing a Paladin, was cheating. I told him he was completely full of crap. The game gave me the ring. Now, if we agreed BEFORE THE DUEL that a Paladin would not use teleport rings, sure, I would be cheating on our local rule if I used it to teleport to him and smite him into glorious stun lock and death. But generically, an item the game legitimately coughs up to you is not a cheat to use. (Bugged items are an extremely rare special case.) OK, he never saw the light on that, typical D II.net buffoon, who by the way claimed he was a PhD in math in Michigan. :wacko: Remember the dual wielding exploit? Was it cheating? According to Blizz, yes it was: they said so explicitly. THEY FESSED UP, and THEY CORRECTED TO CODE TO CLOSE THE LOOPHOLE. They also warned players ahead of time that they were fixing the bug that allowed it to happen. Similar to a ruling in a golf match: the rules authority had spoken.

If an exploit is known, like the MS bug in Diablo I or the old 75% slow opponent PvP bug for Cleg's Gloves in Diablo II, is it cheating to use MS or Cleg's gloves? No, but it is cheesy. Also, if before a duel the agreement is "no exploiting that bug" then it is a cheat on that duel to use Cleg's. What, rules in a knife fight? ;)

When a bug is brought to your attention, you can either play cheesy (and end up virtually invulnerable in the MS case,) or you can account for the bug and play by adding to vitality or other such measures to ensure you don't trigger the bug.

Deliberately standing there (in D I ) while black deaths whittle your Vit down to nearly nil is an extreme case of the MS exploit, and if tha is not cheating, which I deem it to be, it sure is close. Cheesy at best in any event.

Careless use of the classification of something as "cheating" needs to be avoided, since our policy here is very harsh on cheating. Not a charge to carelessly fling about the lounge, but when the shoe fits, it does need to be worn.

I find the assertion that Any1 was advocating cheating, or was explaining a cheat in his opening post or the follow ups, to be not only "elite nose downstaring" but quite simply wrong. Call me the Semantics police if you must, but please USE CARE when considering whether or not to use the word "cheat" in discussion here.

Cheese is a whole different topic.

Occhi