PlaneShift
Gameplay => Wish list => Topic started by: supergrover on January 17, 2005, 12:13:27 am
-
Players should be able to pay other players to train them, if they are more than X levels higher than them in a certain skill.
This would enable players another way to make money, and simultaneously spur more player driven economy, as people would not train from other players if they cost the same as NPC\'s, unless of course they were out in the boonies with no towns nearby.
-
I think if this will be implemented the teachers would be out of work, so it isn\'t likely to get implemented in the game
-
Well I dont think so.
Players need to have a certain level higher than the other one to teach, So the trainers would perist.
-
And even if the NPC trainers go out of business: it\'s not bad. In fact, it\'s good IMO, since the more functions players actually fulfill, the more facets does PS get. It would be optimal, though unrealistic, to not have any NPCs at all. Anyway, NPCs should only serve to
1) maintain order (guards)
2) create balance in times of too few players doing a job.
-
hehe this wont work.
highskilled player could fastly push up lowlevel sub characters or chars of friends.
and even if you just allow to train for money it wont work... you could easily give back the money. i would like it like this:
you can choose somebody as appretiech (or how the word is spelled... a student of the char)
this one you can train. but it leasts for a week where you cant choose an other player... or even a month.
you cant spend more then 5 skill points a day.
sumpin like that... just implent it would suck :)
-
training should take time to learn. Not only you pay, you are train. But for the same reasons Nanaims told, I don\'t think player should be trainers.
-
Originally posted by Nanaim
highskilled player could fastly push up lowlevel sub characters or chars of friends.
He suggests to let player do the same job NPC do today in training, teaching the theoretical knowledge. You would still need the progression points for your training. And the pratice. Its not like A takes B apparentice and suddenly Bs skilllevels rise. All you would get is cheaper training and spending less time searching for a right NPC. (You wont find easily really good trainers.)
To balance against NPC money costs you could make a playertraining need a little more progression points with a teach skill to lower the penalty. Then you could decide do you prefer to spend more progression points with a player or (maybe) more money and time finding a NPC. That way the job teacher (to which i think glendull referred) will still usefull.
-
And why would a player give training for free, a teacher has to eat too :))
-
make is so once a char gets to that \"high enough\" point where they can train others, that they dont keep the gold, and instead they get some sort of \"star\", the gold goes to \"The Guild of X\" where X is swords/smithing/magic/ blah blah.
Perhaps \"Stars\" could be used (at further tria cost) to purchase from \"The Guild of X\" the permission/item/secretskill/something of that guild
problem solved?
no giving back money,
positive reinforcement for those who participate,
should not be used to hamstring others
gives people particpating a title?
encourages older players to help newer players (link the formula to the age of the account?)
dunno. you speak back
-
Alternatively, maybe a player could recieve a special Item that can be used like tria, but cannot be dropped traded ect. I think it\'s a very good idea to have some form of apprenticeship. ie. an enkindukai surpases level X in swordsmanship. He decides to wander the world doing good, and another person, (race nonspecific), asks to help him. Over time he trains the apprentice and helps him become stronger faster, because he sets a much lower price than the NPC, but the student still has to pay. The student should only be able to train under that one master. With a system like this, it\'s possible for a single character to train under all of the best in a skill and become stronger faster than with an NPC. Otherwise the only way to help someone train is to group with them to find things to kill, and that isn\'t much in the way of training, as both the master and the apprentice are in \"mortal danger\" as opposed to artful training. On that somewhat rambling note, I now stop typing for a period whilst I try to make sence of what i just wrote...
-
Actually this is a great idea, it brings people together making more interactions between players. Basically making higher skilled players doing the exact same thing the NPC does, trade PP for theoretical knowledge. But of cource the teacher would not gain any PP & the higher level player can give training for free or charge 100,000(tri) for the training. I think it should be something like depending on how different the teacher player is & the apprentice player is in skill makes the cost in PP higher or lower. If an extremely highly skilled Char trains a newb, the newb will gain lots of theoretical knowledge because the higher skilled player knows so much more then the newb, on the other hand the highly skilled player could charge a fortune for his knowledge. The closer the players are in skill level, the less the master can teach the apprentice. I think you should still gain some theoretical knowledge in battle or have Master NPC\'s that can still teach the higher skilled players because you have to have a higher skilled player to teach the lower one. but if you are the highest skilled player in all of Yliakum, who could teach you anything?
-
Originally posted by Zeraph
... I think you should still gain some theoretical knowledge in battle or have Master NPC\'s that can still teach the higher skilled players because you have to have a higher skilled player to teach the lower one. but if you are the highest skilled player in all of Yliakum, who could teach you anything?
exactly y it does remain neccessary to have NPC\'s that train in a skill. Otherwise you would have to find some other source of self-teaching. Actually self instruction makes sense to a degree. If you want to learn something there should be a way to practice it on your own, but obtain very small amounts of theoretical knowledge after a certain amount of practice. Therefor the need for trainer NPC\'s is completely obviated.
-
Ok, I was just thinking about this (thinking that one of my characters would be a master chef/teacher) and decided to do a search...vola, this popped up. Must have missed it while my PC was down.
All in all, I like the idea a lot. But it is a bad idea to say that anyone can be a teacher/trainer just because they are a high \'level\'. Some people just can\'t teach others. Either by having the wrong personality, or lacking the skill. Yes, I said \'skill\'. I think teaching should be a skill learned like any other. You go to an NPC, spend your points, and your teaching ability goes up. Once it goes high enough, you can start teaching others.
But hold on there. You still have to have something to teach. Sooo, I suggest linking one or more other skills (depending on your teaching skill) to your teaching skill.
Lets put this into a scenario.
1. Dwarf levels ax skill to lv. 20.
2. Dwarf decides to start teaching ax skill to others and making bling.
3. But wait! Dwarf has no teaching skills.
4. Dwarf grumbles.
5. Dwarf finds NPC teacher, spends hard earned PP, and -WOOT!- gets 5 points in teaching.
6. Dwarf assigns ax skill as his teaching profession after finding out that he is too low a level teacher to teach more than one thing.
7. Dwarf /shouts *Level 20 ax teacher here! Get your training today! Half off for Dwarves*
8. Enki /tells Dwarf *I\'m only level 7 ax. I\'ll pay well for training*
9. Dwarf grins. His first student.
10. Dwarf frowns. He can\'t seem to teach the Enki.
11. Enki grumbles.
12. Dwarf /shouts *Why can\'t I teach a level 7 ax Enki when I am lv 20 ax Dwarf?*
13. GM /tells Dwarf *Stop using shout. What level teacher are you?*
14. Dwarf /tells GM *5, but what does that matter?*
15. GM grumbles.
16. GM /tells Dwarf *You didn\'t read the Player Guide, did you? Skill teaching is (insert skill) divided by teaching skill. lv 20 ax divided by lv 5 teach= lv 4 ax teaching. If you want higher that that, you will need more teaching skill.*
17. Dwarf grumbles.
-
LOL, point to this.. probably wont happen. Period.
- Good idea, very complicated.
-
How so? Enlighten me.
Oh...sorry, your teaching skill is not linked to enlightenment. :)
-
Im not trying to be offensive but seriously to make that kind of gameplay.. just the time needed would be immensive and players would take advantage.. trust me theres always those people who take adv or things they arent supposed to.
-
We\'re also assuming that the skill of teaching would have to be distributed by the server. GMs could give it out to responsible players :) Also, you don\'t have to be a higher level to teach theory. ;)
-
Actually, if the GM\'s were active enough, and they manually gave the teaching ability to responsible players, that could actually work. :)
-
Ok Externals, let me explain this to you very simply.
Planeshift, at its heart, is a roleplaying game. That is its purpose. All this \'fighting\', \'magic\', and \'skills\' are just fluff to achieve this purpose. People take advantage of this, becoming power levelers. Perhaps we should remove these features? I thought not. Teaching would be a far harder skill to take advantage of, and would contribute far more to RPing. So I still don\'t understand where you\'re coming from.
*edit* Why would the GMs need to hand out teaching skill? They don\'t give out sword skill.
-
Like I said before.. if you read my post carefully, i said i had doubts about it and it would probably not work, but i was up with it.
Passing that point, im not trying to argue, i think your right but the fact that your waisting so much time to explain this to me, a person who actually contributes nicely and try to help people in game is kinda awkward. Imagine how hard it is teaching me and explaining this, now imagine how it would feel telling it to other people who really do try and take advantage. You were the one who brought up the fighting and such.
In fact, iv been exploring for the past 2 days, posting on the forums, and helping people in game to the extent i can and let me tell you, its quite enjoyable. But enough said, and again I repeat, if you like the idea, go for it. But good luck telling this to other people who really just play for the killing and magic.
-
Originally posted by Externals
But good luck telling this to other people who really just play for the killing and magic.
That, my friend, would be their loss. :) Teaching would be much like mining to those people. Boring to the point of tears. But I say good riddance. Let them do their killing elsewhere.
Teaching is one of the main jobs listed on the main site, and by far, one of the most important. Life is about learning.
That\'s where I think the Devs went wrong, placing combat and magic above the simpler things in life. It saddens me, but the way things are going...it\'s not good. :(
-
Well theres always room for improvement. Lets hope they see this idea but for now i must sleep. My eyes are closing in on me..
-
Originally posted by Azuros
training should take time to learn. Not only you pay, you are train.
Originally posted by Under the moon
... Lets put this into a scenario.
1. Dwarf levels ax skill to lv. 20, etc.
Current scenario: \"I\'m Lina the Very Rich Tefusang Slayer. There ! A cook-chief ! lets gain cooking theory ! Cool, I\'m level 1. Let\'s practice eggs&bacon alchemy :)\"
Nevertheless, the \'practicing\' phase will take some time, as cooking is probably longer than Summon-Missile-On-Tefussang casting.
Concerning teatching,
1) it can be free but it is an \'\"exchange\"\'
2) It requires pedadogy from the teacher, and a higher level than the student
3) The student will learn an amount related to his own skill or attitude.
Detail:
1) A top level teacher can teach for free (money speaking) because he wants to share or transmit his knowledge, or because he likes teatching and he has other subsistence way (he has another job (blacksmith, farmer, ...)). If he is a full-time teacher (in a Magic School for ex.) he will teach for money as he makes his living from it. BUT teatching is an exchange : the thing that is always spent is \'\"time\"\', and this aspect is not taken into account in PS :(. A teacher will spend time to teach in exchange of money, or attention, or services, or his own pleasure. But he will not spend all his day teatching. Let\'s implement a /train duration of 10 minutes, and during them the teacher (NPC or PC) cannot do anything else but speaking or walking.
2) I agree with the pedagogical skill as explain by Under the moon. To transmit knowledge, even a top-level master requires pedagogy. You have had teachers in real life, you know what I mean. A teacher couldn\'t be able to bring the student to a higher level than his own (in reality it\'s controversial, but for the game it is better)
3) Every student has different learning capacities. Supposing that the teatcher is a good teatcher, and will transmit 80% [teaching-unit], the student should do an attribute roll to see what he kept : 0% (critical loss), 60% (medium), 80% (success), 90% (critical success). Whatever the result of this roll, money (if there was a fee) is spent, and \"training time\" is spent too by both players...
Depending of the skill, different attributes should be used:
- Fight --> SAG test (or a combination of several: foil--> (AGI+INT)/2, claws--> (AGI+STR)/2)
- picklock --> AGI
- magic --> way\'s attribute
- dance --> (CHA+AGI)/2
In brief : each /train session should last several minutes of the game. It should imply teacher and student almost full attention. There should be two rolls, the first one to see what the teatcher transmits, the second one to see what the student understands for this.
If teatching eats a part of your day (as in real life), you will quickly decide of a reasonable fee... :D
-
I don\'t know if this has been said before since I couldn\'t bother to read the whole thread ...
But a similar thing does exist in the Star Wars MMORPG\'s. The method is very simple you just give every player the ability to teach the skills that they posses. It is up to the teachers themselves whether they ask money or not. Of course the student will still have to get sufficient PP\'s and the experience to actually get the skill afterwards, it could just be cheaper and make for some more interaction.
Another possibility is to implement a \'Teacher\' job so that only people who get the profession of teacher will be allowed to teach skills to others, instead of just letting everyone teach.
I personally like the idea.
-
you couldnt help your friends so easily to gain levels if you could teach on third of your own skill and student of course would need to have progression points to get better. so if you would have 18 red way you could teach only to level 6 and if the student has required progression points for that, and you couldnt teach over certain level like 10 or then teacher should have 5 times more bigger skill level than student would learn like 55 to teach level 11
-
hmmm teaching other players? So many people here seem to want to restrict it. I wonder why. Sure it gives an advantage if the player who would have the skill would do it for free, but if you make it hard to be able to teach WHY would he do it for free? And why would it be so wrong even if he did??
I mean the person needs PP just like he would right now. And the teacher would need money and PP extra just to train his teaching skill if the devs would go that way. Ofcourse at the moment getting money is harder then getting PP, but thats only becuase moneymaking skills aren\'t implemented yet (or atleast thats what the GMs keep telling me ;) ).
I think being a teacher would be a great way to get jobs for players. It is the one thing we are sure people will pay for. To better themselves. Even the hardcore roleplayers will want to train when things like climb and cooking will be implemented.
Ofcourse teaching shouldn\'t be made easy. Like when your teaching level is level 1 you can only teach people level one skills given that you are atleast level 5 levels higher in the skill. Wouldn\'t mind when you would have to chose a skill to teach and cant teach more till your higher in the teaching skill. Or if you have \"teach sword\"like you now have \"repair sword\".
-
Originally posted by SnowWolf
We\'re also assuming that the skill of teaching would have to be distributed by the server. GMs could give it out to responsible players :) Also, you don\'t have to be a higher level to teach theory. ;)
This is an excellent idea... ;) Theory is all we should be worried about. That\'s all schools give us... the rest is up to us. But I think limiting the ways people can gain skills should be just as strict as how we attain them in real life.
Theory can be easily attained from a library as readily as it can be sought from school.
A school however gives you a lot of theory all at one, based on the jobs we decided we want to do.
But we\'re not thinking about econmics.
The idea that a player can train, though, leads to how long should it take train a player?
For instance... what about combat?
I think the arena should be better, but instead of gladiator style, you think of something that requires the death of a character.
If a player fails to win that fight, he doesn\'t gain any experience for it.
Sorry... OT... ;)
---------------------------------
*** EDITTED OUT A BLOCK MOVED TO MONSTERS ***
http://planeshift.oodlz.com/wbboard/thread.php?threadid=3834&boardid=11&sid=e2db3536e577c0b5a4be1fb5adbe443f&page=13#260
-
Hmmm.... Mobs learning from players.... I like it!
But I still think the best way to do player teaching is my example. The coding could be similar to combat, but instead of assigning damage, you would spend PP and money (if the teacher charges) and level up your skill.
\"Class, draw your frying pans!\"
-
Whoops sorry man... ;)
-
I definitely like the teaching idea. So what if it reduces the number of people training at an NPC. NPC\'s are there to promote and tell the story. If the developers were worried about NPCs loosing their jobs to in game players then blacksmithing would not exist.