Player training.

[supergrover]

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.

[glenduil]

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

[Merdarion]

Well I dont think so.

Players need to have a certain level higher than the other one to teach, So the trainers would perist.

[Seytra]

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.

[Nanaim]

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

[Azuros]

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.

[zinder]

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.

[Darakus]

And why would a player give training for free, a teacher has to eat too )

[Ulf Kleppe]

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

[Jakob]

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...

[Zeraph]

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?

[Jakob]

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.

[Under the moon]

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.

[Externals]

LOL, point to this.. probably wont happen. Period.

- Good idea, very complicated.

[Under the moon]

How so? Enlighten me.

Oh...sorry, your teaching skill is not linked to enlightenment.