Allowing RBA for 100%

So, we disscussed this in zas chat earlier today.

Allowing rba aslong as you still get the items "legit" (opens the chests, triggers the right cs, do cs/ww properly, step in warp)
This wouldn't affect the category hugely, but it seems kinda odd that in 100% you're not allowed to use a trick.

I think one option would be to reclassify 100% as No RBA so that ZFG can keep his 100% throne forever if we do this.

Historically it's been banned because of our SDA origins. Allowing RBA means that the ruleset becomes more complex, and it also introduces the question of "What counts as obtaining an item?", which made it easier to just ban then. Also, back then I feel like our understanding of RBA (and really the game as a whole) isn't quite what it is now, where we fully understand the consequences of RBA.

well, he'll probably get the new wr fast anyways, it doesn't grandfather any runs so his time would still stand until he (someone else Kappa) beats it again

Id say rba for extra bombchus (for example) really doesn't do anything that should be banned in 100%.

I agree fully, but also bottles for example (you still would have to get all of them legit) would be the same as duping over nuts and then get them back, but you could also rba magic arrows to get bks and such, even tho it might not be faster, but shouldn't be banned since they aren't needed for the rest of the defenition.

Running 100% myself, I wouldn't have a problem adding RBA, it kind of works out for us VC 1.2 players since we could now remove Shadow/Spirit Cut scenes.. since we need to trade up to eyeball frog anyways, however we could also somehow use BA.. I am curious would Saw on B when trading it, effect Deku Nut 40 upgrade? since we never really triggered having saw in our inventory the first item we would obtain would be broken goron sword?

Imo its really weird RBA is banned in 100%. Its obvious that RBA can achieve stuff like extra bottles but just RBA for chu count doesn't break the legitness of the 100%. So RBA should be allowed as long as everything is also got legit, bottles, songs, medallions etc. I mean rba for four bottles doesn't make ruto's letter disappear from the lake so you're obviously missing something from 100%. Even if it did disappear wouldn't mean you have acquired it.

I am in favor of allowing RBA as long as you still get everything anyway to fulfill the definition.

That being said, I want to point out that I don't think banning RBA is an entirely arbitrary decision, and here's why:

I think Cosmo was the one to point out that MST is a weird category because the premise of the category is to do the trials (which would imply not to skip them). But you DO skip the trials in MST (at least in the current route). You just go back and do them anyway. This kinda makes it seem pointless to even include the trials in the definition.

By this same logic, allowing you to temporarily skip an item, or get use out of it without actually having it, kinda defeats the purpose of getting the item in the first place. It's important to keep in mind that "100%" is just a nickname for the category (which is why we don't include all chests and such). The proper name for the category would be something along the lines of:
-All Items
-All Highest Upgrades
-All Heart Pieces/Containers
-All Dungeons/Bosses
-All Skulltulas
etc.

This title is obviously not very usable, so we use the name 100% instead. But if forcing you to complete a task legit even though you can skip it anyway is arbitrary in MST, then it would also be arbitrary in 100%. So banning RBA is almost less arbitrary than allowing it but still getting everything.

Regardless, I hate glitch restrictions in general, so I'm in favor of allowing it.

Sounds fine to me although I didn't really think about it that much

I think it would be fine to allow it as long as everything is still required to be gotten.  Though I also agree with everything nathan said regarding the arbitrariness, so I wouldn't mind too much if it remained banned either.

MST was No Major Skips at one point. The completion of trials comes from the idea that rescuing the sages in Ganon's Castle is an important plot point, thus not as arbitrary an objective as it is today.

I love the idea of allowing RBA for 100%, but, is that mean that we still can use DoT skip?

Zargaroc wrote

I love the idea of allowing RBA for 100%, but, is that mean that we still can use DoT skip?

Allowing RBA for 100% wouldn't affect the use of DoT skip in any way, so yes.

Cosmo wrote

Id say rba for extra bombchus (for example) really doesn't do anything that should be banned in 100%.

Someone recently asked me in my chat this question, before I knew this thread existed and I said something very similar (RBA an item count seems fine).

Doing RBA like 4th bottle slot is really gray to me. I remember where this started, and why RBA was decided to be banned: http://forums.zeldaspeedruns.com/index.php?topic=415.msg13749#msg13749

Quote

Just wondering - are you sure duping an actual bottle over Ruto's letter is SDA-legal? It could be argued that you don't actually obtain the bottle until you show the letter to King Zora, because it's in an unusable letter-in-a-bottle-quest-item state, and duping over it just removes the letter bottle and creates a glitched empty bottle that doesn't count towards completion, so you technically don't complete all the quest steps required to legitimately acquire the bottle.

If you follow that thread, some interesting discussion follows, this is noteable:

Quote

in the matter of getting bottles through glitches, wouldn't the poe bottle be also skippable if the 4th slot is filled with a RBAed bottle? it is basically the same logic used for the Ruto Bottle and the other items in that it only matters the end result and not the quest to obtain the item (the rest of the non-bottle items can't be RBAed but the bottles could be and you could create up to 2 or 3 so you only need one of the real ones)

that's why i assumed RBA was banned for 100%.

I'm pretty sure we banned RBA shortly afterward to just simply eliminate these technicalities? I don't know where that discussion was (maybe on IRC?)

I think Runnerguy is right. Banned for convenience at the time, but now with the new bottle B method RBA is suddenly very viable in making new routes due to extra chu count or other things. Perhaps these old arguments should be re-examined.

yeah, RG give a interesting point to this

I don't think anyone is actually against this (to my surprise), I'm for it personally since I don't see why it was banned in the first place but that's in the past (or it will be in the past. so it's in the present? idk)

For the bottle issue, I still say you need to get them legit instead of RBAing NL/red pot/empty bottle because in that case, what would stop you from RBAing other items? You could easily get free HPs and medallions, ammo upgrades, equipment, etc.

I vote against having items appear in you inventory, but, as I mentioned, banning RBA just cause isn't the most compelling argument. It would still be useful for things like chu count and BAing pig poes for last bottle.

RBA could be usable as long as none of the needed items get affected by it.

like, use RBA to increase item counts of things like Bombchus but don't use it to get extra bottles (get all bottles through their sidequests)

there wouldn't be much use of RBA in 100% due to how it can mess up the inventory if you try some of the more beneficial RBAs (can't RBA any of the items that don't come back)

If you RBA poe bottle the poe hunter still has a bottle unobtained so clearly you're not at 100%. Same applies to ruto's letter and milk. And if i remember right obtaining a 5th bottle gets put in the first bottle slot so your RBA'd bottles would remain RBA'd.

Yeah I agree with Zas. RBAing for bottles in bottle slots makes it impossible to 100% anymore, because even if you get all the bottles legit at that point, the last one doesn't get put in the right slot. I still think RBA is fine, but may be end up fairly limited because of side effects like this.

If RBA/BA is to be reallowed, that would likely mean Ganonless would be used in 100%.
I feel like that was a major factor in the decision to ban it?

That said, has anybody bothered to check for sure that Ganonless is currently slower? Currently you would have to use either RCE or Down A/Ladder RI to set FW at a place that WW's to Nocturne, use Collection Delay to duplicate the Eyeball Frog so you can trade it and use it as a timer both, then timer WW to Gohma, FWWW to Nocturne, and then finish with another RI FW and WW to credits. It takes a fair amount of time to set up and monopolizes all 3 WW's, but skips all of Ganon's Tower (and part of the Nocturne CS too, I guess).

One weird thing is that, though it's technically possible (might not be reasonable to do it, as I think it would either involve never equipping a sword or saving inside the water temple or something) to get swordless with quickdraw, but it would currently be disallowed as you have to go through bottle to get there.

r0bd0g wrote

If RBA/BA is to be reallowed, that would likely mean Ganonless would be used in 100%.

We could just go the All Dungeons route and say that Ganon is required. It's not a very arbitrary decision, considering the category IS 100% (which aims to complete a bunch of objectives that aren't required anyway). In fact, I think it would be simple enough to just add "All Bosses" to the 100% definition. The current route fights them all right? So nothing would be obsoleted.

100% is defined by items you have to obtain, and Ganon gives you nothing. I'd be very-much against this change.

Also, OoT3D has been doing Ganonless in 100% for a long time now...

I'm extremely against allowing wrong warp to the credits in 100%.  No, ganon doesn't actually give you anything, but it seems incredibly stupid to skip the final boss in a category based on completion.

r0bd0g wrote

100% is defined by items you have to obtain, and Ganon gives you nothing. I'd be very-much against this change.

Also, OoT3D has been doing Ganonless in 100% for a long time now...

All Dungeons is part of the 100% definition, even though the dungeons aren't items. Yes, they give you items, but completing the dungeons is a separate requirement. If you got all stones and medallions through other means (for example if RBA wasn't banned), you'd still have to beat them anyway. 100% isn't really just about items, although you're right, is is primarily about items.

EDIT: Oh whoops! I guess All Dungeons isn't currently part of the definition. Either I'm crazy, or the definition was rewritten somewhere down the line or something. But anyway, I think All Dungeons should be a requirement simply because they are major progression points in the story. Same could be said about fighting Ganon. Call it arbitrary if you'd like, but 100% is an entirely subjective category anyway, since percentages are not defined by the game.

ZFG wrote

I'm extremely against allowing wrong warp to the credits in 100%.  No, ganon doesn't actually give you anything, but it seems incredibly stupid to skip the final boss in a category based on completion.

I agree. Skipping the final boss is a "purist" any% philosophy along with things like save corruption, and ACE. Therefore it seems like it would require a special indicator in the category name, and not be assumed. This is part of the reason running All Medallions felt like such a sham--it's not the "Complete all dungeons and beat the game," it's "Glitch items that would indicate that you have beaten the dungeons, then warp into the credits."

AD for example, "beat all dungeons" means get each dungeon's blue warp into a complete state, and "beat the game" means defeating Ganon.
The same should be true in 100%. Ganonless should require being stated in the category name if its not purist any%, and wouldn't make sense as being combined with other categories.

Feel free to disagree with me here, I'm all ears. It just seems that this is the direction where things make sense. I've seen similar, convincing arguments for using this type of categorization on TASVideos.

Similar example: SotN has arbitrary code execution. Maybe you could just write code that makes all bosses in a dead/gone state, then have more code that warps to the credits. Is this "All Bosses", a main category that people compete with on the leaderboards? I reckon a majority would disagree. If somebody were to run this, a more appropriate name seems like "All Bosses ACE"

The problem here is that two philosophies of "anything is allowed" and "you must complete some primary objectives" butt heads over what should count. It will be resolved in time though.

Hmm, I've actually never thought of credits warp along the same lines as ACE or save corruption. I'm actually inclined to agree now, although it's a shame because I really like the All Medallions route, and now it seems arbitrary lol (not that that should matter, but idk)

EDIT: Since TASVideos was brought up, here's an example in SMW of what Cosmo said about SotN and All Bosses:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t07xYlAc9Uw
It uses ACE to allow modifying your coordinates with another controller. So although it technically beats all the levels you would see in a non credits-warp run, it was ultimately rejected for obvious reasons (not just because it was unoptimized, see Nach's comments here: http://tasvideos.org/4252S.html). It's also worth noting that TASVideos has been moving away from using percentage labels for the most part, and using more sensible labels instead. This is primarily because TASVideos' emphasis is on the viewer's enjoyment, so they want to make each branch varied and labelled clearly. That being said, I'd like to see that happen with OoT as well, which is why I tend to think of the name "100%" as nothing more than a nickname for the category.

I think of the OOT 100% definition as "Complete the inventory using the intended quests to do it, and beat the game". This definition means that you cant just RBA to obtain medallions or the 4th bottle or make anything new appear in the inventory, but it does allow you to RBA bombchu count for example. It also bans HP/GS duping because you arent following the intended quests to get them all. This is also consistent with not having to complete trials or cow in house, because they dont give you anything in the inventory. Since beating the game doesnt give anything in the inventory, I dont think you have to follow the intended quest for it, and credits warp should be allowed.

gamestabled wrote

I think of the OOT 100% definition as "Complete the inventory using the intended quests to do it, and beat the game" and credits warp should be allowed.

How about "Complete the inventory and beat the game, using the intended quests to do it" and credits warp should not be allowed? Same logic.

Also, if we really are trying to pretend Ocarina of Time has some kind of completion rate, I would think levels are just as important as items. After all, in games that actually track your completion rate, levels are usually counted toward 100%. The dungeons are just the "levels" of OoT.

Cosmo wrote

Team Ganonless

you liar D:

if beating a dungeon means entering the blue warp (i.e. not RBAing the medallions), beating the game should end at killing ganon. 100% is a completionist category, no reason why killing the end boss should be cut out imo