Quest repeatability

[bilbous]

continued from: this thread


That is the reason I have maintained that quests should be one time only, or alternatively, now I think about it, have some kind of built in per character delay for those who have already done it. For example if the standard delay for the offering of the quest was two days it would not be given to a character who had already done it until it had gone a week without being given out. I think this would be fair although I guess it would require some recoding so as to leave a permanent record on the character of quests having been done. I would even go so far as to suggest that tracking of how many times a quest has been done could be used to further delay characters from monoplising quests so that after you have done the quest twice as per the above example the third time you would need to wait eight days and the fourth time you would need to wait nine days, thus each additional time you do it adds another day to the length you must wait to get it. This could be capped at something like twice the repeat interval so as per the example: two weeks.

[Ralleyon]

Simply put - I wholeheartedly agree. Quests are far too exploitable at this time right now, sometimes even rendering them unusable for people who would like to take them first time. Until the current system evolves, I believe this to be a suitable workaround / quickfix.

[Nikodemus]

I agree its is hihly exploitable.
Everytime i see someone selling aglyph i wonder how they get them.
Sometimes it's even like: Selling mind glyphs .  What means that person has few of them.

Normally it sounds ok that you can buy a glyph on market/shop, but i don't think it is ok that the seller got them from a specific quest which stands for rarity of given quest. So that not the proce of a glyph decide of its rarity.

On a side note, i would love the syste of aquiring glyphs if only NPCs were smarter.

[Garile]

hmm I think that quests only being able to being completed once would be a good thing, but then you need to make it so you can get such items through more then one way. I mean it would be kind of sad that it would be made impossible to get an item when you lose it. Specially if it's becuase of a bug seeing the GMs aren't able to restore items lost this way.

Obvioulsy it would have to be limited to completing a quest aswell, becuase quests sometimes still have bugs that means you have to restart the quest.

[Idoru]

Isnt the healing glyph quest only completable once?

[Zan]

I just think of the people that keep selling glyphs as glyph hunters. They go out in nature and hunt down glyphs.

Completing the same quest over and over is rather unrealistic, unless it is a basic job like harnquist telling you he needs iron ore. I do agree that the more elaborate quests should only be completed once for every character, or maybe even less.

I would also like to add that it'd be interesting if quest rewards were more random. Now people know, I'll do this quest to get that glyph so they go do the quest just for the reward. Instead they shouldn't know what they'll get .. they could get a glyph, a load of tria, a good sword or a load of experience. That would help to reduce exploitability as well and make glyphs a bit harder to come by as well.

[Rioth]

Isnt the healing glyph quest only completable once?

All quests can be completed more than once. What must be causing doubts are the general and player specific time locks.

[bilbous]

As far as random quest items go the idea is ok as long as the main reward is given out the first time so if it is for the heal glyph you get it and subsequent repeats get lesser rewards. As far as lost glyphs goes it might be that completion of the quest gives access to a merchant from who you could buy more. I think glyphs could be made no-drop items and only be sold to npc's.

[Zan]

Well actually I'd like to see it random from the first time on .. of course we would have to make sure that the rewards are of more or less equal value.

[bilbous]

Seems to me that the main point of the important quests is to gain some item or ability of significance so that if you are going to hinder people from repeating quests as I suggested then you need to make the main prize happen the first time. Otherwise a person may never get the needed reward.

[Garile]

hmm random doesn't sound like a good idea. With my luck with looting that would mean never getting the important stuff I am sure It would also be unfair to the ones who only do those quests only once. They would do the quests mainly as they were intended but have fewer chance to get the items. Same effort same reward.

[Zan]

Seems to me that the main point of the important quests is to gain some item or ability of significance so that if you are going to hinder people from repeating quests as I suggested then you need to make the main prize happen the first time. Otherwise a person may never get the needed reward.

Exactly, this way not everyone can get everything .. even if they know the quest. Quests aren't just about rewards, helping people in real life isn't either. You shouldn't know what to expect as a reward. In my opinion quests should be a source of income but never the main source for a type of 'rare' item. If quests grant items that are supposed to be rare like the glyphs now, those items become available to everyone as soon as one person figured the quest out and shares it. Not quite my definition of rare

[Nikodemus]

Because there is no big deal about spoiling anymore. It was said that as long as it was done in not public place or ingame, the it's ok. Because this can't be controlled. Unfortunately this means that people don't try to restrict themselves anymore. There are few people who give the spoilers in a RP way, so that this can't be caled spoiling anymore. If it was said that giving spoilers no matter where is forbidden, but you will be punished only when caught, what isn't easy, then it would be honest and better rule than the one we have currently. By spoiling i mean giving exact phrases to the NPC, while if someone tell you, "NPC A like cookies, ask him about them" then it doesn't sound like a spoiler.

Anyway, the fact you always get the same from the sae quest, from the same NPC, is still issue, even if quest may be done only once.

[Jeraphon]

I do agree that the more elaborate quests should only be completed once for every character, or maybe even less.

You think some people should never have access to certain quests? If we're testers first and players second, I think we should all have access to the quests, just to make sure that they work.

Anyway, on the subject of quest repeatability, it would be nice to have a large reward once and a smaller or random reward (which may include the large reward or not) afterward. However, that would require a bit of reworking: one, the quest would somehow have to be remembered as completed, as opposed to being taken out of the completed list and placed in the uncompleted one. Perhaps after you get the large reward a separate quest title (possibly the same quest title with "again" at the end) can be made, which is simply added to and removed from the uncompleted list. To make it really special you'd have to change the NPCs. "I know you already gave me this item, but I really need another one. I might not be able to give you the same thing as before, but are you up for it?"

[bilbous]

Keeping track of accomplishments isn't very difficult. All you need is one table in the database that has a binary number x number of digits long where x is the number of quests possible and each digit corresponds to a specific quest which is done (1) or not (0). If you want to get fancy and you db supports it you could make the number trinary with 1 being in progress and 2 being complete, although I am not sure why you would need to do this. This would be the equivalent of a bit plane in C. There may be technical reasons to do with the specific DB Planeshift uses that render this approach impossible, I can't speak to that.