consider classes and more careers and professions so no one can do everything., trodo, 2004-03-01 13:36:43

consider classes and more careers and professions so no one can do everything.

I like doing everything :), aeao, 2004-03-01 14:02:40

Anyway I agree. But I think that was planned anyway.

Yeah, focker, 2004-03-02 17:25:10

This'd almost definately help the economy greatly, because with everyone having the ability to do everything, they're a lot less likely to hire someone to do it for them.

Ways to accomplish this...?, acius, 2004-03-02 18:09:51

I don't like absolute division of classes, but I do agree that all players shouldn't be able to do everything *at the same time*. You might optimize your player to be a craftsman OR a warrior OR a traveller OR a mage, but not all of the above. The stats decay system is intended as a means of accomplishing this, but it doesn't work. There are a couple of reasons for this:

1. The purpose of stats decay is to make it possible to have a stable state in which a few stats are maxed out, a few are average, and a few are poor. It looks like we need to change this function, though, because a determined player is able to keep ALL their stats at 20. Suggestions on how to do this? I'm thinking that having an enforced zero-sum system might be best here (i.e. all your stats must always sum to 100 or less, otherwise they get penalized immediately to keep them this way).

2. We haven't consistently disciplined use of stats when tied with spells or skills; for example, I believe there are spells that train str, cha, or con. If stats are going to be used to determine what type of character you are, we *can't do this*, unless we want these spells to only be usable by warrior-type characters!

3. We need to have skills refuse to work when stats are below a certain level; for example, if your int is below 15, you wouldn't be able to cast ANY spells.

Solutions:

1. Leave stats the way they are, and add a changable character class setting. Figure out how to make changing class possible.

2. Fix the above problems to make stats usable as a class determinant.

Preferences?

so..., aeao, 2004-03-02 18:27:26

Are you referring to me as the determined player? Anyway I like the first one. "1. Leave stats the way they are, and add a changeable character class setting. Figure out how to make changing class possible."

Hmmm, focker, 2004-03-02 20:27:16

Both of those solutions are appealing in their own way, so I think I'll stay on the fence for a while.

And a suggestion: If you go with the first one, you could make it so that if a player sets their class to one thing then it would be a little bit easier for them to learn the skills often used by that class, and harder to learn the skills of another class. And if they *switch* their class from one to another, the skills that they had learned under that class specification would degrade a little faster than normal atrophy would.

But I would suggest that there be a gray area between classes that are similar to eachother. For instance, a warrior-class character and a mage-class character might learn some of the same skills: because a mage is basically a warrior of magic, right? Or a craftsman and an explorer: both would have to know how to make things, like weapons -- for survival but not much else in the case of the explorer, and for selling in the case of the craftsman -- because their profession depends on it.

And actually, since these four examples seem to fit so nicely into pairs, maybe we could try and duplicate that pattern when creating different classes? It would make it easier to distinguish between the classes, because this class is kinda like this other class but almost nothing like these two classes, or *those* two classes, etc.

Someone who's classed themself as a merchant could have a career change and do something else.... Like, maybe.... politics? I dunno, that's the only other possible classification I could think of that we might use; and they are kind of alike. Both would have high empathy and charisma, if they're good at their job they are anyway.


The more I think about all this stuff I just wrote, the more I disagree with the second solution you listed. That being, using stats as a class determinant; I think that the problems you meantioned (except the second one, of course) are probably worth fixing or at least thinking about even if we go with the first solution.

But as for stats determining class, I don't like it. I think players should be able to advance most of the stats regardless of their class. For instance, a warrior would obviously need a lot of strength and constitution for stamina and learning to use different weapons and such; but if you implemented the zero-sum thing, then a merchant who has to run around town carrying things from one place to another might get stuck with these stats being lowered, thus hindering his performance at doing his job.

Now, I know I said that I thought the first problem was a valid one that needs to be fixed. But I don't like the zero-sum idea. A way to solve this contradiction is to make the stats/skills decay *work*. Like I suggested before, if a player is of one class, they should be able to learn these skills and advance these stats more easily than a character of another class.

My two cents.

Is this still an issue or becoming more of one?, zaecus, 2005-05-30 14:33:12

Stat decay has been turned off. I'm not sure there ever was a skill decay. Given that the average person knows hundreds of things that they don't use every day and that not using something for a day on the mud could be the equivalent of not using it for months, I'm not sure how you'd go about modeling skill decay.

I know my problem with it was always how to model the rejuvenation period: After you've 'gotten rusty' at something, there's a period of accelerated relearning where you regain most, if not all, of what you lost very quickly.

That's why people say what they do about riding a bicycle. The skill set is mostly just doing stuff you do already (walking) but doing it in another way (pedalling). You do get rusty, but it doesn't take long to reacquire those skills once they've faded.

becoming less of an issue., sora, 2005-05-30 16:13:10

Before this post originally occured, I was master of everything. I could make anything, kill anything, basically do anything.

Now, not only can I not make effective armor, I'm not the greatest mage at everything. If you want a fire mage, Talk to Garvin.

Not to mention, that I'ven't even *touched* farming.

I think we have effectively resolved this issue.

I disagree, zaecus, 2005-05-30 16:24:50

And I can't say why without it, completely unintentionally, sounding like an attack.

Mildest one I've got:

Only reason you're not a good fire mage or armourer is because you are not working on those skills.

feel free to be harsh., sora, 2005-05-31 19:18:34

Yeah, I'm not a good armoroer or a fire mage, because I'ven't been practicing.

The entire game isn't implemented, and I imagine that this will be less of an issue when everything is implemented.

Is it possible to master any one skill in this game? Does anyone have any skills at essentially perfect? I did before the nerfing, but don't anymore.

I haven't as much as gotten a skill increase since then. But haven't really increased any of those skills, possibly because of Acius's bug?

So why aren't you a master Mage and a master everything else Zaecus? Because you aren't really working an all of those skills. I maintain that it isn't possible to master all the skills in the game right now.

Time, zaecus, 2005-05-31 19:52:05

"So why aren't you a master Mage and a master everything else Zaecus? Because you aren't really working an all of those skills."

No.

Because of time and lack of recipes. Working on these skills takes time, and I can't work on them if I don't have the recipes for items that use them. For those skills that I have appropriate recipes or spells, I am working on them.

I just became a Legend today.

The point I was trying to make was that just because you haven't done it doesn't mean it can't be done. Currently, there's nothing stopping someone from maxing out everything except lack of recipes.

Which is, if I am hearing correctly, entirely deliberate.

Well, lemee see, sora, 2005-05-31 20:07:40

1. I'm working being a mage to death (quite literally)
2. I'm not a master mage.
3. Its not possible to be a master mage (1,2)
QED. It's not possible to be a master everything

Any questions?


Looking for recipes? Spend points, they're yours. Don't have the points? Write stuff.

Can I help you with anything?

Actually, right now..., zaecus, 2005-05-31 20:17:32

Master mage might be the one thing that's not possible to do. You'd need level 3 spells to get there. I don't know that any of the other skills are quite so limited.

Assume, however, that there were master level skills and recipes in the game, then tell me how you couldn't do it.

Ya see, I didn't want to say anything antagonistic because, when I do that, people get defensive and lose the point of the conversation. Don't know whether you'd say you're defensive or not, but you seem to have lost the point:

There is nothing preventing people from mastering /every/ skill because once they have one maxed out one skill, they can safely ignore it while they max out another, and so on, and so on...

Yes, and, sora, 2005-05-31 23:00:15

Yes, It is possible to master all the skills one by one, but that would take a significant amount of time. Having level 3 spells, would help some, but I'd be spending 9/10ths my time meditating. Have you seen how much mana those things take? Its like 500 mana for some. We don't have a way of getting that high yet. And for 1 spell, with like 20 good practices? It would take a long time. And as the skillset is increasing, I think it would take a long time. A very long time.

True, all true, zaecus, 2005-05-31 23:10:36

The biggest factor and, in my opinion, the biggest deterrent, in becoming a master of all trades is time (well, and interest). This is true in real life, and I think it works best on the mud by giving people Way Too Much to work on.

The lack of mana is an issue, right now, but if you haven't noticed, I have a habit of following paths to their logical conclusion. It won't be long before spell crystals give you all the mana you need. Druids will have Ambrose, and even now, we have mana potions.

Time, and an ever expanding set of skills, spells, and recipes, will encourage most people to specialize for sanity's sake.

There will always be those two or three, though, who manage to go for the gusto and break things.

Other muds handle this by taking them out of the player pool, forcing them to regenerate as new characters, etc. Of course, other muds are designed to work for that type of player not against them. Natural deterrents are best, and skill degradation is a natural deterrent, but I'm not saying bring it back. I never really got to see how it worked, so I don't know what it was like.

meh

Guess it's not broke and only getting unbroker.

Degredation, sora, 2005-06-01 19:13:01

AFAIK, there was never a skill degredation, there was however a stat degredation, and it didn´t really make that big of difference, really, it just made me work more.

hmm, malkier, 2005-07-08 22:29:01

I myself like the idea of being able to do a bit of everything, but I agree that by doing so I shouldn't be able to master everythingor atleast not easily. I havent been playing long and my mining is already fair, currently its not going to take all that long to get decent at a lot of skills (with more recipes). Why not make have more range of skill levels so to master something I would have to concentrate mostly on that one skill to master it, yes people could still eventually master everything, but its going to take them forever. Also to give a reason for mastering, have it so you need really high skills to make the good stuff, even have it so theres actually mastering of the recipes themselves? The few recipes I have make it so I can build/craft them without any problems, maybe have it so I can make say a mine but cause my knowedge of making mines is only lvl 1 it only goes a max amount of levels deep and lots more stones fall from the roof onto me while I'm mining, where as someone who as mastered mine building is able to build a really good mine that goes deep and is stable? smae goes for armour, poor armour breaks quickly as opposed to a mastersmith?

couple of comments on skills, sora, 2005-07-08 22:47:51

Getting to fair is a *lot* easier than getting to even good.

Take a look at me for instance. I've been playing, and casting magic for quite some time. I cast a few dozen wind spells every time I'm on. And my Wind Skill isn't to essentially perfect. Heck, I don't even have any magic techniques at essentially perfect (but I think I would have if the skill change happened about a year prior).

So don't think that just because you're at fair today, that you'll be at essentially perfect in even a year. The skill system is exponentially harder the higher you get.

Also, though we haven't really seen anything about it yet, there are supposed to be skills that you can't learn until you've mastered a previous skill.

Make stats harder to advance the higher they are, sicarius, 2005-07-01 14:43:14

Not sure if you want ot head this way; but if stats become an issue, why not look at implementin a bell curve on stat advancement.

The higher a stat is, the harder and more time consuming it is to advance it further.

This would make getting all stats to 20 extremely difficult, as well as taking ages. It also has the added benefit of working for someone who restricts themselves to a 'class' or 'profession', int that the stats they are advanced through the skills they use would be resonably high, yet others that they don't use much would still be in the lower ranges.

Just an idea.

pffft, sora, 2005-07-02 22:43:52

Well, they had something like this in place, but then they decided against something else (don't remember what though). Skills are a much more elaborate system.

Makes sense to me at least..., sicarius, 2005-07-03 02:31:43

Well, I think it's rather more realistic if it gets harder. It also adds a challenge to raising them.

I died and my strength dropped to 11, next thing I know after a short time mining and the occasional tree chopping, I'm back up to 20.

There is not much challenge in this IMO...

yes, allaryin, 2005-07-10 15:40:01

Acius' stat growth math is woefully backwards. It was written a long time ago for a much simpler skill system. The way things are now... stats are horribly skewed. We have been wanting to rebalance this for at least a year now, but I have been kept busy with other elements of the game.

Perhaps with the death penalty in place now, I need to push this onto the top of my priority queue.

You push yourself too hard, zaecus, 2005-07-10 15:41:51

I'm sure there are far more important things you could be working on. No need to stress yourself over this, I'm sure.

*halo*