PlaneShift
Gameplay => Wish list => Topic started by: Pakarro on January 02, 2012, 10:47:25 am
-
From combining the Magic and Armor thread with my own thoughts on the topic, I would like to propose simple rules for avoiding the superman (-woman, -kra) syndrome. In the present state, one can be (in a rl terminology) world boxing champion, chess grandmaster, and Nobel laureate in Physics medicine and chemistry. This is not consistent with an ic character development.
A simple way would be to counteract this by just capping the sum of all stat ranks by (just to give a number) 60% of the maximum value (would be 1440, instead of 2400). That way you have to consider carefully, which way you are going.
A useful addition would be to be able to undo an increase in rank, when you find you have gone a wrong way or for further development of currently already maxed out characters (pls, don't bash me for that :) ).
This cap would only involve restrictions at very high stats. One could also think of a more complicated scheme, where a certain profile has to be maintained during the whole character development. For example, the third highest stat rank has to be a certain percentage lower than the highest, the fifth again lower by the same step. By making this step height low or zero at very low ranks, and increasing for higher ranks, a careful character development can be enforced (e.g a linear increase from zero to 10% maximum for the highest ranks). Notice the packages of two, or else no exchange of priorities would be possible....
All this is subject to the effect of stats in the game mechanics, which I have not a real feeling for, being a rather inexperienced player. So, please consider these ideas in the light of my experience.
-
Someone with max Strength might also have max Endurance, but it feels wrong that they would also have max Intelligence. I think that's the basis of the problem. What if training one past a certain point makes it either harder or impossible to train the other? So you get a sort of "training resistance" for opposing abilities. The same idea could be extended to skills also, with different magics hindering combat training in different ways or being good at Heavy Armour makes it hard to master Hide in Shadows, etc. etc.
-
harder could be acceptable. impossible is illogical and unrealistic.
-
I think calculating the cost to raise a stat not only on the current stat value but also on the current sum of one's stats value could do the trick.
-
The problem with harder over impossible is that given enough time, you can still end up with 100% in everything, which is also unrealistic.
-
Blue men made out of silicon are a bit unrealistic, at least from Earthly experience. What is your point, again?
Is it that PS needs The Blue Man group to hold a performance?
/cue Nelson
// I know, I know. I'm not very funny all the time but I do nail it once in a while.
-
reality itself is unrealistic, and here we play in a fantasy realm.
-
If you don't like the semantics of "unrealistic" how about "contradictory"? If you want a bunch of supers running around then there's no problem, though they are usually balanced by the fact that other supers can kill with eye beams and mind bullets.
I think that Tzarhunt's idea has merit. Though, depending on the implementation you may get stuck if you raise the wrong abilities too far and can't afford to raise any of them.
EDIT: Also, just to clarify, when I said "impossible" to train opposing abilities, I meant impossible past a certain percentage of max.
-
in all fairness, I agree with the problem, but not entirely the solution. The supermen being described here relates to the Mary Sue phenomenon, which we all roll our eyes at and try our hardest to avoid, yet manifested via stats rather than narrative. But, this being a 'game', there are those who will find all of the shortcuts, exploits, and formulas to make their character the 'best' because it gives them the sense that they are 'winning'. Therefore, you end up with players abusing the system in ways unintended by the developers, because developers are purehearted and honest, and believe the rest of the world is too.
What the developers expect from us players is to create a character who has BOTH STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES, fears and desires, hopes and dreams, yada yada, and who will eventually fill a role in this fantasy realm society. At the same time, they don't wish to have programmatic classes and such, and want to give us players the autonomy and freedom to develop our characters the way we choose, and trust us to limit ourselves so that we don't develop into a society of ubermensch.
Another thing to keep in mind is, this is a game in development, and us current players are actually lab rats and testers. Some players out there actually enjoy exploring every single facet of the game, and push themselves to test the limits. Gods help them.
Anyways, you'll find that those players who are after the superman as their goal are basically rendered ineffectual when it comes to the core of this game and of this player community, and that is RP. I've been playing for a year now come one week, so I may be a newb in some eyes, but I've remained constantly active for the most part and in my experience, within roleplay, stats are basically ignored in favor of character reputation and the Rules of Storytelling.
Those that grind constantly (for that's what it takes to be superman) are, well, grinding constantly, and the most interaction you'll ever have with them is see them run past towards the dlayo pit fully armed in plate and dual wielding reinforced battle axes. Those that return night after night to suffer and rejoice in their character's losses and triumphs, to run the whole gamut of emotion and be left in catharsis, they may or may not care if your INT is 300.
-
I don't like artificial constraints in situation where realism is lacking in many other areas already.
-
If you want to play the semantics game, Planeshift is one big artificial constraint. Its rules are tools meant to be used as a base for you to RP around. I get where you guys are coming from, I do. It's not where I come from, being more of a designer/programmer, but when you talk about Mary Sue (the over-skilled or over-idealized character) it reminds me of Min/Maxing potential or in this case Max/Maxing which is even worse. Whatever you want to call it, if your tools are faulty, it will actually impede your ability to RP. You can't RP your way around a person winning a duel by having an extremely {contradictory|unlikely|illogical|unrealistic|unintuitive} combination of skills and attributes.
So consider what boundaries might be useful to RPers and give some feedback to the developers. You guys have been around longest, you should be using that experience to come up with fixes, not knock every proposal down.
-
I've had enough experience with tabletop rpg's to know about the min/max exploits, and I think you're touching on the same point, no matter what sort of rule system you come up with, there will always be ways to exploit it. Even with a system of caps, eventually, a certain combination of stats will be discovered which will be undefeatable by any other possible combination, and that will be exploited and continuously cloned by those who want to be 'the best'.
So far, the best we can hope for is self governance, which is putting a lot of faith in humanity, I know. I don't mean to be a negative ninny, I'm actually a big proponent for positivism when it comes to problem solving, but the problem you are addressing here is not the system, but a certain player type, and what are we to do, ban those players?
-
Your argument is that if it isn't perfect it isn't better. Or as Voltaire said, "the perfect is the enemy of the good". Sorry but I disagree. Canonizing optimal builds and min/maxing exploits would be like Shakespearian literature compared to the current exploit of being able to maximize every stat and skill in the game. You can mitigate the effect such players have on the game, or your can do nothing.
-
I'm prolly known by this point for my absolute hatred of the maxed all system. I won't try and argue settings or whether or not its realistic to be the best at everything, since that gets nobody anywhere, but I will say this.
Do you want one or two 'unrealistic' restraints that improve the game in its entirety, RP included. Or do you want no restraint at all, and to have to continue dealing with the black hole that is the Mary Sue Maxed All.
And while I know plenty who though they've got uber stats purposefully restrain it in RP (and thus are 80x more fun to be around, if at the very least bearable) , I also know an equal or larger force that don't.
-
I agree Aramara, no matter where you set the limits people will eventually get there. The only way to prevent that is to set levels exponentially such that the highest levels are not possible to achieve and insignificantly better than previous levels.
All games either max out or get so that the challenge disappears after a while.
I'm not sure what effect such players have on your game when you can just /ignore them. Do they make you jealous?
My stats are maxed how does that hurt you? My skills will never be.
-
It doesn't hurt us, it hurts you, Mary Sue.
-
Alas Poor Yorick, it doesn't hurt me a bit.
-
I see the logic, and to some extent agree with it, but in principle, I would never like to see this implemented.
I'd like to throw two things out there, from my perspective. Pakarro, if you know anything about martial arts, then you would know about judo. It's the second most widely played sport in the world, and is an extremely difficult competitive sport to master. Many of the recent Olympians and national champions actually DO have master or doctorate degrees in the computer, physical and biological sciences. It IS possible to have both intelligence and physical prowess. It's just not universal. And if you look at the broad range of players in the game.. it's not universal there to see characters who do both magics and melee.
If you're going to cap stats on the basis of magic and melee, you might as well say crafters can't max either, because they'd be spending all their time perfecting their craft, and not training anything else. Sure, it might be more "realistic" but it will also make the game a lot less fun for people.
Secondly, I'm one of those players trying to gain high stats if not maxed in everything. I defy anyone to say I don't RP though. It's a hard balance to try and find time for the grinding I actually enjoy doing, with the people I enjoy talking to and interacting with. Some days, I want nothing more than to sit in the middle of BD1 and whack ulbers for an hour or two while chattering OOCly in guild and alliance and gossip. Some days, I want to run rampant through the city sowing discord and others, I want nice, simple RPs. As an active player in an RP game, I think it should be my decision how I chose to spend those hours, provided I'm not hurting anyone else's experience. And it's not hurting someone else by me sitting in a wilderness training, anymore than it hurts mine by someone sitting at a furnace.
If you insist upon imposing restrictions like this, you will run players off to other games, where they can grind to their heart's content, without people whining about it. And it won't just be the PLers who leave, it will be the people who choose to explore every side of the game, but find some of them summarily closed to them.
Imposing restrictions like this hinders character development over time. It means whatever path you start on, you have to finish. Lets say your character trains up as a soldier, maxes the physical sides, shutting down the intellectual and magical areas. Then they go into some RP war, and end up emotionally scarred so that they can never lift a blade again. Welp, they're screwed from a stat standpoint, because even if they would want to have that change of heart and go the way of the cleric or priest or healer, they can never actually have any decent stats to back them up. And we all know how people love to complain about characters that are RPd beyond their stats.
I just don't see this being a good idea, even if the motive behind the thought is a good one. I think there are other, better ways to try and accomplish the main goal of this game.
-
Alas Poor Yorick, it doesn't hurt me a bit.
It does, you went through all the trouble of maxing every stat even though ostensibly you're not using them all in character. Why did you do that? Was it like Mt. Everest, because they were there? Or was it because everyone else does it so you have to in order to be competitive? And now you're just like they are, defeating the purpose of attributes in the first place (as a measure of one person's ability vs. another's). That's a pretty big disconnect between how these systems are intended to function and how they are being used.
Many of the recent Olympians and national champions actually DO have master or doctorate degrees in the computer, physical and biological sciences. It IS possible to have both intelligence and physical prowess. It's just not universal. And if you look at the broad range of players in the game.. it's not universal there to see characters who do both magics and melee.
The easy answer is somewhere there's another person who is better at computers and physical or biological sciences than the Judo guy. Even if that's not true in real life, it needs to be in a role playing game for niche protection. No one is saying you can't do both, what we're saying, or at least what I'm saying, is that the top of one field should not be at the top of the other simultaneously (unless they are related). So Tesla should not mix with Miyamoto Musashi to make super intelligent unstoppable guy. In game terms, you shouldn't be able to max both and still be just as good as any guy who maxed one. Otherwise, why would anyone only max one?
Secondly, I'm one of those players trying to gain high stats if not maxed in everything. ... And it's not hurting someone else by me sitting in a wilderness training, anymore than it hurts mine by someone sitting at a furnace.
Fine, go forth. But the game should not allow you to max every ability and skill. If the goal of the game is to max every stat, then all characters will have basically the same progress and same result, only the RP is different. If that is the case, why pretend there's any differentiation in skills and stats to make them unique? Just drop that abstraction and compare something more general such as using base level as the true measure of your progress. Once you hit max in everything all chars are the same anyhow.
If you insist upon imposing restrictions like this, you will run players off to other games, where they can grind to their heart's content, without people whining about it. And it won't just be the PLers who leave, it will be the people who choose to explore every side of the game, but find some of them summarily closed to them.
That's why no one plays WOW for example, because it's too balanced (by the way, I've never played WOW but people seem to like it).
Imposing restrictions like this hinders character development over time. It means whatever path you start on, you have to finish.
No it doesn't, it just means you can't be all things at all times. You could allow plenty of flexibility to allow a career change. It could warn you that if you choose to train X then your skills in Y might degenerate for example. Ultimately, the way you like it just doesn't make sense from a game theory perspective, sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
-
Most games that have classes offer the option to change your class. Some for money, some with like 'you get X amount of career changes before we stay stop those shenanigans'. Since planeshift is free, I'd assume it'd be free. Or if they don't want to add fancy options for it, you could just as easily ask a GM to cut you out of that path. (i know they can change peoples skills, ive seen it done)
-
what if stats and skill levels could fluctuate? Like in Dwarf Fortress, if a dwarf gains competency in a skill, but doesn't use it, they become rusty in that skill, they grow less competent.
(i just discovered DF about a month ago, expect me to draw many comparisons to it in the near future)
-
Thaloric, I did it because that is what you do in a role playing GAME, I didn't do it because I wanted to win the Improv Olympics.
It wasn't any trouble at all really at the time and it gives me the best results from using the skills I have. If it is now considerably harder to do then I might develop my character differently. I am doing more crafting now because it has become more reasonable to actually do.
I hate to tell you this but I am far more interested in the game development part of this game than in the artsy fartsy lets play make believe aspects others enjoy. Even at that my interest waxes and wanes like the tides on a Jovian moon -- you know the one or two that actually might have large bodies of liquid whatever.
People who just want to role play do not need any skills or stats whatever.
-
thalaric: I agree with Aramara here. It's better for players themselves to decide how to balance / develop their characters, rather than to enforce restrictive classes and other similar limitations. It's not the game for the game, it's for players. So if you aspire for ideal game, but players loose interest in it - you failed anyway. Also, if someone is "maxed everything" - it's simply not interesting to interact with such chars in some competitive RP, and those players know that.
Also, for those who worry about maxing all stats - don't forget there is a penalty of loosing progression points, which is already aimed at discouraging doing just that.
-
what if stats and skill levels could fluctuate? Like in Dwarf Fortress, if a dwarf gains competency in a skill, but doesn't use it, they become rusty in that skill, they grow less competent.
Rather loosing some competency (for a while) after a substantial amount of ale ;)
-
I hate to tell you this but I am far more interested in the game development part of this game than in the artsy fartsy lets play make believe aspects others enjoy.
...
People who just want to role play do not need any skills or stats whatever.
You're not here for the RP, fair enough. I'm kind of 50/50 on it myself. Then you of all people, if you have any interest in mechanics, should see why across the board maxing is pointless. What will you do with your next character; max everything again? Or maybe you're done now, because there's nothing else to do. I don't even care if they grandfather in your super maxed characters with any new changes. You can all be demigods for all I care, it'll add to the flavor of the game. Eventually though, if you want more people to play it's going to have to institute some kind of point to the progression, so people can feel like they're actually building something.
It's better for players themselves to decide how to balance / develop their characters, rather than to enforce restrictive classes and other similar limitations. It's not the game for the game, it's for players.
A skill based system is nice because it allows you to take advantage of a basically infinite number of character concepts, but only if you get the niche protection and balance right. Niche protection (mechanics that encourage you to follow formal archetypes, classes, professions etc.) allows for exploration of different character concepts and cooperation between different characters, with each making up for the other's deficiencies. Game balance allows for each niche to perform equally relevant functions, and allowing the mixing of those niches into an even greater number of specialized fields without completely surpassing them. If you fail to either create niches or maintain balance then there is really only one type of character, the one everyone is playing. Kind of like now. You can very easily encourage some niches in a skill based system by enforcing some limits. Balance is always harder.
Also, if someone is "maxed everything" - it's simply not interesting to interact with such chars in some competitive RP, and those players know that.
Not sure how to reply to this. Are you saying that I'm right, but it's easier to just ignore everyone except your friend's characters? Have fun...
-
what if stats and skill levels could fluctuate? Like in Dwarf Fortress, if a dwarf gains competency in a skill, but doesn't use it, they become rusty in that skill, they grow less competent.
Rather loosing some competency (for a while) after a substantial amount of ale ;)
hehe, in that game, dwarves are alcohol dependent, and can't get through the working day without a barrel of booze.
-
Not sure how to reply to this. Are you saying that I'm right, but it's easier to just ignore everyone except your friend's characters?
I'm saying that non competitive RP won't suffer from that, and if people want something else they themselves will realize not to use "maxed all" character for that. So far some key facets of the game are simply missing (for example alchemy and overall balance of professions and economics), therefore restricting classes and etc. won't serve anything good in the current situation even if you consider it useful in general.
-
Even if that's not true in real life, it needs to be in a role playing game for niche protection. No one is saying you can't do both, what we're saying, or at least what I'm saying, is that the top of one field should not be at the top of the other simultaneously (unless they are related).
Why does there need to be niche protection in a fantasy setting?
Secondly, I'm one of those players trying to gain high stats if not maxed in everything. ... And it's not hurting someone else by me sitting in a wilderness training, anymore than it hurts mine by someone sitting at a furnace.
Fine, go forth. But the game should not allow you to max every ability and skill. If the goal of the game is to max every stat, then all characters will have basically the same progress and same result, only the RP is different. If that is the case, why pretend there's any differentiation in skills and stats to make them unique? Just drop that abstraction and compare something more general such as using base level as the true measure of your progress. Once you hit max in everything all chars are the same anyhow.
The goal of the game is something different to each individual player, and you don't have the right to dictate to anyone else what it should be. [You collective] As it is an RP based game, the important part is for the RP to be different. Stats only matter to individual player goals: duelling, hunting, collecting, trading, merchanting. And progress is also based on personal goals. Some people don't want certain things, and that's fine. They don't HAVE to train certain things. Those people who choose to train don't go around complaining because someone doesn't have anything maxed. Likewise, there's no need to take away the option for us who choose to train anything or everything.
That's why no one plays WOW for example, because it's too balanced (by the way, I've never played WOW but people seem to like it).
I'm going to hope that there's a significant amount of sarcasm associated with this statement. I couldn't tell you a thing about how WOW is balanced. I've never looked at it, and have no desire to play that type of game. I dislike the run of the mill irritation provided by people with large egos, who cannot show others at least civility if not respect.
Imposing restrictions like this hinders character development over time. It means whatever path you start on, you have to finish.
No it doesn't, it just means you can't be all things at all times. You could allow plenty of flexibility to allow a career change. It could warn you that if you choose to train X then your skills in Y might degenerate for example. Ultimately, the way you like it just doesn't make sense from a game theory perspective, sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
The type of stat-cap being discussed here, where you reach a certain level in one stat and cannot move up to a certain level in another WOULD cause that. It would mean that once certain levels were attained, without GM intervention, you would not be able to go back. One doesn't know where their character will be in 6 months, at least if they are a decent RPer, allowing themselves to be influenced by those around them, they cannot. Things changed, and static caps will hinder dynamic development. We're not talking change over days or weeks, but over months and years.
It's not about the way I like it. It's about there being no good reason to cap stats. You cannot pull the "realism" card in a game that is full of fantasy and based upon the ability to defy the natural laws. And to clarify, no, I don't think someone should ever RP having maxed everything, but I see nothing wrong with someone having the actual stats maxed. There's a difference in being a Mary Sue, and having good stats because you worked for them.
I like Aramara's idea of fluctuating stats, if there needs to be any type of cap atall, because it allows for development over time. But even then, you are limiting out the concept of the Battle Mage, or the Warrior Priest.
-
The arguments have been made on both sides, and if you still disagree so be it. If I continued to respond I would just become very redundant. The answers to all your arguements/questions are in my last two posts.
-
thalaric, it is my feeling that the maxed characters which you are thinking of are probably owned by players which have been playing PS for a substantial period of time. They have played through times when some things have been easier (and others harder like crafting). Some have seen tria bonanzas that are now closed. That is just one of the perks of being here early.
At this stage of things it is hard for me to imagine anyone coming into PS, now, and maxing out in everything.
My approach has been to diversify attempts at maxing among different characters. One of my characters is a Priestess/Warrior who has never held a pick axe in her hand. Another is a veggie crafter who has never killed anything in PS. They compliment each other; as neither studies in areas where the other studies.
We are in agreement that no one character should know everything about everything; yet like others on this thread it is, also, my feeling that that decision should be up to the player to decide how to deal with trying to explore all aspects of the PS mechanics while keeping their characters true to who they are.
Some may deal with that as life changing changes for one character or some may take my approach.
- Nova
-
As a side note about fluctuating stats - Dramborleg proposed an interesting crafting spell for imbuing items with some enchantments, which in process would drain different stats of the crafter (depending on the resulting effect). Stats can be retrained if needed, or one can RP exhaustion keeping them lowered.
-
The problem with harder over impossible is that given enough time, you can still end up with 100% in everything, which is also unrealistic.
so I must have found a bug in reality as I know someone who did that. they are usually called genius. I'm not one of them unfortunately (or fortunately depends on the POV)
-
The problem with harder over impossible is that given enough time, you can still end up with 100% in everything, which is also unrealistic.
so I must have found a bug in reality as I know someone who did that. they are usually called genius. I'm not one of them unfortunately (or fortunately depends on the POV)
Ah, but how many genius' do you know just walking around? Bet not more than one or two. Its a pretty small amount of genius' walking around, similar to not everybody up and going to the Olympics.
-
The problem with harder over impossible is that given enough time, you can still end up with 100% in everything, which is also unrealistic.
so I must have found a bug in reality as I know someone who did that. they are usually called genius. I'm not one of them unfortunately (or fortunately depends on the POV)
Ah, but how many genius' do you know just walking around? Bet not more than one or two. Its a pretty small amount of genius' walking around, similar to not everybody up and going to the Olympics.
that's why the correct way is increasing difficulty and not putting an artificial limit :P
-
so I must have found a bug in reality as I know someone who did that. they are usually called genius. ...
Actually, no. Geniuses would be people who are top in one field, or related fields, not in all. Again, there is no one who wins the Olymics in boxing (or Judo :) ) and at the same time a Nobel prize in Chemistry.
Just to clarify, I don't mind having extremely strong characters (maxed or not) around - some of them I really do like. Hey I have them in the Family :) . But I think the overall feeling for my character is much better, when I have to decide where she/he/kra goes, instead of ultimately maxing all. And tweaking under limitations is (in my opinion) much more fun than knowing you ultimately are at the top and cannot improve.
Anyways, this is not a matter of life or death, just what I believed was a rather simple way to improve in game consistency and immersion.
Yours Pakarro/Pakerl
(name Pakerl not available in forums, due to confirmation letter problems)
-
It is not a bad thing that this discussion pops up again every now and then.
Still I think the actual way how physical and mental stats are trained now looks much like a workaround or a placeholder for another mechanism. Quite a while ago I reasoned about deriving those stats from the characters race and skills (http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/smf/index.php?topic=37524.0), but things get quite complicated when you try to dwell into the details, even though the concept looks very simple.
In the end, raising the costs for an otherwise effortless gain of instant training is not any worse or better than enforcing rigid limitations. Finding a proper solution will need some innovation.
-
so I must have found a bug in reality as I know someone who did that.
Really? You know someone who has achieved the top of human experience in every attribute and skill? That's amazing (that you really think that).
-
As pointed out before, a fantasy game is not reality. In reality, people can't carry more then twice their own weight comfortably, nor do they use giant lizards to commute to work in the morning. Apart from being a fantasy game, this is a game in development. That implies that there are holes in the rules, settings and overall balance that you can not only fit your own hometown in, but your whole state - and you still would find plenty of space to store all the paperwork you need to do and know in Germany to pay your taxes. ;)
I guess it was just a matter of time until somebody asks for a reset or character wipe just to level the field again. And that will not happen, nor would it make sense (unless there is a major overhaul of many things that would make a re-level important for people to play the characters they want - and I doubt even then).
Instead of whacking each other over the head with polemics and irony, I think it would be a better use of our time to actually log on and roleplay - unless you join the Dev-Team or Skunkworks, most of these debates will be little more than quarries later on. Let's better make them good quarries. I want this project to go somewhere good. ^^
Also, because I can't help it: overcoming all boundaries of the own, limited body and mind leads to the development of technology. And strange ideas like singularities and transhumanism. And even stranger lines of thinking that involve implanted sunglasses and extendable blades at the fingertips. So yes, in any fantasy being perfect in (nearly) all/a lot of things is entirely possible and a common trope. Ascending to godhood voids warranty.
-
It is not a bad thing that this discussion pops up again every now and then.
Still I think the actual way how physical and mental stats are trained now looks much like a workaround or a placeholder for another mechanism. Quite a while ago I reasoned about deriving those stats from the characters race and skills (http://www.hydlaaplaza.com/smf/index.php?topic=37524.0), but things get quite complicated when you try to dwell into the details, even though the concept looks very simple.
In the end, raising the costs for an otherwise effortless gain of instant training is not any worse or better than enforcing rigid limitations. Finding a proper solution will need some innovation.
Boni, I think I much prefer that path, tying stats to skills, so that as you progress in a skill, it boosts any related stat. Say mining for instance, if you slave away all day slinging a pick at rocks and lugging sacks of ore around, it stands to reason you'll increase your strength over time. Combat increases physical attributes, magical and intellectual pursuits increase your, well, intellect. Politicking increases your charisma and so on.
-
Okay, so I only skimmed the thread very briefly and someone's probably already brought this up, but while I like this idea, I really don't think INT should be limited by physical stats. The brain is a muscle too, y'know.
-
The brain is a muscle too, y'know.
The "grey matter" is as little a muscle as an "erectile tissue".
-
Okay, I stand corrected on that, but I still say physical strength/endurance shouldn't limit intelligence.
-
In real life, it usually does.
The best approach I know to train both physical and mental features may be "chessboxing". But I doubt that one person practicing the combined sport will also become a world champion in both separate chess and boxing championships.
And even among the physical stats only, there is usually a balance between specializations. Muscles for endurance (e.g. running a Marathon) need a different practice than muscles for quick strength (e.g. martial arts or weight lifting).
-
LigH, your point is well taken and most people, even those who disagree with your position, will stipulate to it (provisionally).
I am going to do you a favor though, and intercept what comes next; the obligatory "But This Isn't Real Life" rebuttal. A few posts after, yet another post would have used reality to discredit any proposed limitations of course. Historically, it goes like this: (A) "There should be restrictions on training", (B) "No there shouldn't because of such and such real life example" (A) "Actually, real life doesn't work like that" (C who agrees with B) "But This Isn't Real Life". This circular logic has dictated the pace of the discussion for the last three pages.
So here's the core of the issue: In addition to not being an accurate model, maxing many unrelated abilities *limits gameplay*.
Here's how and why:
The top of character progression is a character with all abilities maxed
Thus, sense of accomplishment is skewed towards that character progression
Thus, anyone who intends to keep playing will have the same goals and motivation
Thus, in-game characters are extremely similar, meaning they act the same, have [many|all] occupations, and their stats don't denote relative meaning
Thus, characters don't need anyone else since they are equally skilled in everything as all others of their pp/tria level (no niches)
Anecdote. Someone in the game told me to contact them if I needed a mage. A mage, I thought, how quaint. Why would he limit himself like that? I already picked up magic for my Ynnwn since it is easy and useful. Am I wrong? Now I know the reader has not been paying attention for awhile since they are already skimming to formulate their responses. If any of you did make it this far, those of you who are RPers will begin to retort, "None of this is true, because I make crap up about my character that is not really expressed by in-game mechanics". To which the obvious answer is "We're talking about game mechanics, which does not affect your fantasy either way, so those are not germane to the discussion".
Now that I've structured all of these arguments into one post, it makes it really easy to reference it. Anyone who uses one of these tired arguments in the future should be backhanded with a link to this post. We should now be able to go new places or let the discussion die in peace.
-
At the risk of verbally backhanded for disagreeing, I'll say this:
Imagine world A:
Everyone is completely self sufficient. They can smelt their own plat, craft their own q300 goods, and nuke anything that crosses their path - using axes, swords, and every flavor of magic.
Imagine world b:
Each character has strengths and weaknesses, hence they leverage off one another's strengths by communicating, bartering, and cooperating.
While these arer two extremes, I would rather play in word b or something fairly close to it than in world a.
World a is more typical and suitable for single player games. B, in my opinion, is more suitable for multiplayer games.
-
In addition, I believe that the ability to maximize all skills without disadvantages supports the separation between casual and "permanent" players. If half of the characters are perfect, the other half becomes useless, if you rate them by skill values only.
I don't want to be sorry about being employed and having less time to invest in skill training than other players. I want to enjoy playing the game as much. For me as casual player, it means that I should be satisfied with average skills, and I hope that roleplaying won't be seen as the only excuse for a lack of training, but that skills will develop in a way that even characters with average skill levels will be useful regarding the game mechanics. I believe that metallurgy already uses such a concept, that higher levels won't produce basic goods anymore...
Specialization supports the diversity of the player base and the interaction. The differences between the characters make them interesting. If everyone can be perfect, then it doesn't matter who I play with.
The little use of EZPCUSA seems to support the opinion that there was little interest in rating skills higher than friends to play with.
-
LigH, that's the interesting part of it. The max everything approach changes all character interactions from professional relationships into those more resembling lord/serf. A brand new mage just out of the academy who meets an accomplished wizard would naturally assume a subservient attitude. That's not necessarily true of persons with different trades. For example, if a low level fighter interacts with a higher level wizard, he should be given some kind of professional courtesy. It's certain that even a low level warrior is better at martial combat than the wizard. The same is true of smiths, miners, leatherworkers, etc. In PS not only is it not certain, it's almost certainly the opposite. So anyone you meet falls into two categories: more powerful, or weaker. When you're a newb you'll aways be the serf, which can be demoralizing but if you stick with it eventually you'll always get to be the lord.
-
Why do people care about this so much? I don't care if you have vastly more skill than me in any measurable way. Many characters do. I don't slight you because you are completely untrained in everything, many characters including my own are. All I care about is making my own way through the hoops laid out before me by the developers.
David got off a lucky shot on Goliath and they made him king, did that make him a better person? I don't think so. The game metrics are an entirely OOC system to provide the mechanics. Why sweat the small stuff?
-
True. Roleplayed battles can be fun too, and the biggest challenge is to lose gracefully. :)
-
I don't know about you but I've had one real life fight in the last 15-20 years and it didn't last very long. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if I never fought another character again in the game.
-
I don't expect you to enjoy a battle.
And I hope you won't judge bad what you didn't try.
Some may enjoy it. Allow them to.
Long ago, we had duelling points. They have been removed for a good reason.
-
Ya I went negative pretty quick back then.
Whatever floats peoples boats is tide into this discussion. :)
-
Long ago, we had duelling points. They have been removed for a good reason.
Very glad to see the point system removed. All that contributed to was OOC grinding of duel points, and the encouragement of noob-killing. :thumbdown:
-
Long ago, we had duelling points. They have been removed for a good reason.
Very glad to see the point system removed. All that contributed to was OOC grinding of duel points, and the encouragement of noob-killing. :thumbdown:
Can't say that if those were still around I might be plagued by urges to say... incinerate random nublets by the Lava Pit-load.
-
Alright, I know the topic's been kind of dead for a bit but I just read through it and feel like this might be a good place to propose an idea that might satisfy a lot of the 'problems' I've read. Thalaric's summary post that pointed out the circular nature of the argument and pretty much killed all progressive discussion is a really good place to start.
Historically, it goes like this: (A) "There should be restrictions on training", (B) "No there shouldn't because of such and such real life example" (A) "Actually, real life doesn't work like that" (C who agrees with B) "But This Isn't Real Life". This circular logic has dictated the pace of the discussion for the last three pages.
So here's the core of the issue: In addition to not being an accurate model, maxing many unrelated abilities *limits gameplay*.
Here's how and why:
The top of character progression is a character with all abilities maxed
Thus, sense of accomplishment is skewed towards that character progression
Thus, anyone who intends to keep playing will have the same goals and motivation
Thus, in-game characters are extremely similar, meaning they act the same, have [many|all] occupations, and their stats don't denote relative meaning
Thus, characters don't need anyone else since they are equally skilled in everything as all others of their pp/tria level (no niches)
To be fair, I'd like to draw a line here between "stats" and "abilities", and assume that Thalaric was referring to the former, whereas stats are the numeric values assigned to skill ranks; your strength, your blacksmithing, your crystal way skill are measured by stats. Abilities are actions your character is capable of performing; in its current form, Planeshift really only offers magic spells as its abilities - maybe (hopefully) these will also include specific types of melee strikes or defensive manuevers, even magically-enhanced attacks. Anyway, a distinction should be made here.
It should also be pointed out that, while we as PCs ARE Yliakum, our characters were set into the place not while it was being created, but long after it already had an established society. It's already been suggested that a player must choose ONE Way via a certain quest, and while not actually established as a game mechanic just yet, it hints that once your character chooses and pursues a certain Way, that's it. No other Circle will train you. You're cut off from all but the most basic understanding of that magic. Yliakum's society, as it is built now, is competitive, but cooperative and community-minded. It would be extremely difficult for a character to have any close relationship with a person or group without other people figuring out pretty quickly, so sneaking in and pretending to be part of two different Circles would quickly be discovered.
What's wrong with this system? Yes, you can still max the stats and skills for other Ways, but as for being truly adept at it, obtaining its abilities, no - not because you're not ABLE, but because the SOCIAL LORE of Yliakum prevents it. Here we have a seamless lore-driven restriction that still allows for character progression. All citizens of Yliakum are required by law to receive weapons training, so it's not a hard thought to swallow that someone could be adept at combat and magic, or any combination thereof.
Could we carry this into crafting? Perhaps there's crafters guilds, one for armor, one for weapons, one for alchemy, an artist's guild, whatever, the list can go on. Everyone can learn the basics and max the skills and stats and continue to produce not just basic, but good and useful items, but perhaps only weapons guildmembers could enchant a sword, given the secret knowledge of the guild. Or, another good idea, items can only be enchanted by using a special wand, which only responds to the person it is bound to by some sort of spell. Master weaponcrafters will have a weaponcrafter's wand bound to them in some ritual or some such that only they can use to perform enchantments. You could go so far as to assign specific enchantments different Way alignments, so that only enchanters that follow certain Ways can perform certain enchantments. Or not.
Anyway, my point here is that if we limit abilities, we don't have to limit stats, and we can avoid that "Thus, in-game characters are extremely similar, meaning they act the same, have [many|all] occupations, and their stats don't denote relative meaning" part.
We can also avoid the RP vs. not-RP arguement by making the system a logical part of the setting and completely overriding it, making it both a game mechanic AND an immersive reflection of the game world. This is actually how many other MUDs do it.
Point is:
By implementing a REAL, lore-driven restriction on character abilities in the Ways, and giving more definition to the Ways and how they work in game-mechanic combat, we can build PCs that are equally powerful and important, and can fulfill different roles in a larger setting without overly limiting their capabilities or hindering their stat and skill building. This can probably be carried over to gathering, crafting, melee combat techniques, you name it.
-
+1
Excellent ideas. I really like the idea of quest decisions actually having consequences. Real, big consequences. Like members of some circles won't train you or give you quests. Or members of this faction won't associate with you if you do something terrible to one of their members.
It kinda reminds me of the game Morrowind (the prequel to the prequel to Skyrim) where the Theives Guild and the Fighters Guild were hostile toward each other, and doing certain quests for the Fighters Guild would make the Theives Guild not even allow you to join. There were also three warring Great Houses and you could only pick one to join.
I think it would be really cool to implement something similar. Factions having relationships with one another (good or bad), and building positive relationships with one faction having effects on your ability to interact with another.
-
It is possible to have a permanent negative faction rating with Concave of Glyphs (doing so also increases your rating with Laanx)
-
To tman: Big consequences of quests can extremely dangerous. You can ruin your carefully built character in one blow. Not so nice.
Still, any means to achieve a more distinguished character development is highly desirable.
-
To tman: Big consequences of quests can extremely dangerous. You can ruin your carefully built character in one blow. Not so nice.
Obviously any quest that can damage your reputation with another group would have to have a big fat warning before you accept it. Like "If you do this, that group of people probably won't want anything to do with you anymore. Make sure you're ready for the commitment." Or something.
-
Ima throw in my five cents, towards the original post, there should be no cap, its an RP game, We all have the right to train whatever stats/skills we want, however that does not have to mean it is IC'ly part of the character, you can max every type of combat skill in the game, and still RP that you are only a sword master, if sombody wants you to duel them with axes, but your character is supposed to be weak with them, use a text duel, there is no reason to limit what we can do mechanical-wise, when everything relivant to the character, can be done through text, thats the whole point of RP isnt it?
-
Earowo: Your post made me understand the different approaches to rp. In my opinion, people like me understand role-playing as me, the rl person is playing a role in a game, or maybe even on the forums :). Accidentally, we role play persons who are role-playing.
To me, it looks like you want to make your character role-play, a meta-role-play, actually. Maybe we should call it mrp :)