Skills, Classes and Guilds

[moab]

After reading lil'bit's posts in Ask Staff I had to ask myself - and you - are we better off getting rid of classes and going with a selection of skills?

Here are a couple of ideas:
Everyone starts with a pick of four or five basic, reasonably comman skills:
1 language
1 choice of weapon attack skill
1 choice of weapon defense skill (parry, disarm or misc skill below)
1 of sap, subdue, shield use, <insert other skill>

2 misc skills from second class skills or additional languages

if you have karma you would get additional choices to play magicky characters here.

EVERYTHING else would be taught in game.  Find a PC or NPC, pay them, subjugate yourself to them, whatever and learn the skills they have to teach you.  Spent five in-game years learing how to stalk Vestrics and want a change of pace?  Join Kadius and learn tailoring for the next five or the Byn and learn how to be a soldier, maybe adding six new skills to your list.

Maybe you would still branch, but differently - if you're smart you can branch, if you're dumb you might branch, but maybe get dead-ended because you lack insight.  Go find a teacher and they'll help.

*ponder*

I think classes are an artifical way to create a pretend "balance" in the game.  Everyone uses the example of the the thief with a mon fireball as an explanation of why we have classes and in this case, it might happen - but he would have to find someone with those particular skills to teach him how to pickpocket or cast magick - and likely will have to pay dearly for it.  And in the end - so what.  You have a thief with a fireball.  Now - weren't we just discussing how to make magickers a bit more fearsome?

[mansa]

I would abuse the system and become the uber mansa.  I think it's fine the way it is, now.   The only thing I would change is giving a certain guild a certain skill that I fell is making it a crippled guild.

[My 2 sids]

Although I'd be open to a different type of skill choosing process, or even some new classes or subclasses, I don't think this idea will work out.  Our characters have to last long enough as it is to build up skill levels appropriate to a master whatever.  To start out with even fewer skill levels would, for me, be asking too much.

[Delirium]

Dude. You pick sneak and hide and backstab and pickpocket and palm and listen get them all to master so you can teach them. I'll pick dual wield and parry and slashing and piercing and kick and bash and disarm. Then we can teach each other all our skills and be UBER WEAPONZ OF MASS DESTRUKSHUN!

[Marauder Moe]

I don't like ideas that tempt the powergaming demon inside of me.

I wouldn't mind the idea of a sub-subguild option, though.  Perhaps split it into one choice of a crafting/fighting subguild and one social subguild (languages, listen, accents, barter).

Anything further seems like it would be too flexable/abuseable.

[Ktavialt]

All in all, I'm in favor for a class-less system, though I voted dumb idea
b/c it just wasn't set up right :P. I'd post more, but I'm about to go hit
the bars for a little bit so I can't.

- Ktavialt

[crymerci]

In general it doesn't seem like a bad idea, except that this is the kind of decision that is usually made before a MUD opens, not changed a decade later.

The thing that made me vote "dumb idea" was this:

EVERYTHING else would be taught in game.  Find a PC or NPC, pay them, subjugate yourself to them, whatever and learn the skills they have to teach you.

The problem with this system is that PCs don't live long enough.  Say you have a master of fire magick...she's so good she's practically an elemental.  She takes on a select group of apprentices to learn under her.  But she dies before imparting all her knowledge.  Now no one can learn that top tier of knowledge.

Learning from NPCs is, IMO, too prone to be unrealistic or twinky.  At the very least, it means less PC to PC interaction.


Anyway, I don't think there's much wrong with the current system.

[EvilRoeSlade]

The only thing I would change is giving a certain guild a certain skill that I fell is making it a crippled guild.

What skill?

[Miee]

Ktavialt, you're not hitting bars.  You're hitting one of the ilovebees.com payphones.  Admit it.

I'm wondering if Ktaie there, was thinking of a weighted system.  I'd like it, but I immediately see a few problems from the start.  One is that people can still min/max and the other is that people are going to come on here and complain that skill <x> is so powerful and it should cost more and n00b/twink <x> was twinking out with it and skill <y>.

Without the use of a thermal detonator or a plasma grendade, we can't solve that last one, you little tunas.  :p

If we switched to this system, what if we listed the skills for our P.C.s in a weighted order (say Slashing, Tailoring, NinjaBackflip, Ride) and the approving Imm had to check and make sure that combination was ok.  Well, it would solve most of the potential balance problems until some little bastard (Yeah you.  No, not you.  That one over... yeah, you, ya little punk) figured out how to min/max those.  Also, do we really want a period of time greater than 24 hours?

But that's my (very poor) solution to such a problem.  I think if we could get this to work, it'd be great and allow for more flexibility, but as of yet, I just don't see it.

[Agent_137]

I think it's fine as it is. If you got a warrior/thug who wants to learn to make knives, let him get some one to work with him, log it, try and try, log it, try some more, log it, and send it to the mud asking for an extra skill.

Alternatively, there is the system like in fallout.
You start out, and you see a full list of all skills. You pick a few skills as your specializations, and you gain those at a double rate. Everything else is learned slower. But you -can- learn everything else. You could modify this to have your choice skills have a bonus, ...nah... it works for an RPG but not for this game. Hurrah status quo.

[Krath]

No, for many many reasons. If you wish to know PM me. But I am highly against this idea.

[Halaster]

I wouldn't be too fond of this type of system the way you have it suggested.  The game's focus would change from roleplaying to skill acquisition.

I wouldn't mind seeing, however, taking away some skills from guilds, and making those guild-specific subguilds.  For example, you could have a warrior with some basic stuff.  He could have a subguild choice of weaponmaster - which would give him more weapon profs than normal, plus some weapon-crafting abilities, and maybe even a higher start% in a weapon skill.  Or, he could choose the archer subguild, and get archery, fletchery, and so on.  The difference in this and the current system is that the 'base' guild would have less skills, and the subguilds would have more.
*shrug*  Just my own ideas, they don't necessarily represent anyone else's.

[Modest Mouth]

I wouldn't mind seeing, however, taking away some skills from guilds, and making those guild-specific subguilds.

Although my experience within the Armworld is somewhat limited, I can see the advantages of following this approach. The obvious one being solving the problem of 'cookie-cutter' warriors.

Although it seems to me that the problem of a generic warrior is something that could be dealt with in game, by utilizing what skills you want to develop and shunning the rest.

But eh, if there were to be a change in char gen, I would prefer it follow Halaster's suggestion.

[Ktavialt]

Ktavialt, you're not hitting bars.  You're hitting one of the ilovebees.com payphones.  Admit it.

I'm wondering if Ktaie there, was thinking of a weighted system.  I'd like it, but I immediately see a few problems from the start.  One is that people can still min/max and the other is that people are going to come on here and complain that skill <x> is so powerful and it should cost more and n00b/twink <x> was twinking out with it and skill <y>.

Hennessey's, Redondo beach, now owns $40 more of my money between
this post and my last, prolly a three hour span of time. Slow drinking, but
I got my Contracts class in law school coming up in a few hours and I
needed the break, thank you very much.

I just didn't like his grouping of "You need one weapon skill, one defense
skill, etc." Suppose that was just an example of his, though.

My main concern, which this seems to address, though I think the exact
setup he gave isn't the ideal one, is this:

It would be nice if changes were made so nobody could say "Oh hey,
this guy's good with crafting, can drive a wagon, and can barter well, he
must be a merchant and therefore cannot use a sword." This meaning, it
would also be nice to see a merchant, or magicker that -could- fight. Not
well, not nearly as good as a warrior, but able to hold his/her own for
a short while.

Without going too much into the drawbacks which make me dislike the
original poster's style, since I'm currently trying to do case briefs for my
upcoming class, and I don't have the time for it , here's my proposal
that I think would be both beneficial and with few drawbacks:

Give everybody the chance to learn every skill (magick of course is still
dependent on being born with the ability). Give everyone the starting
"guild" skills of the guild of their choice, then...

Allow for a command that lets you pick a focus of sorts for your
character (not a dwarven focus). You can focus on things like "weaponry",
"merchantry", "magick", "stealth". You pick one, and in essence, it means
what you spend your off-time, not-logged in time, concentrating on. Maybe
even it includes online time - just things you try to comprehend in your
head when sitting at the tavern.

For the skill set that falls under "weaponry", "stealth", or whatever your
particular focus is, knowledge and ability in them will come to you faster
(ie. the current rate of skill learning). For all skills that do not fall under
the skill set, knowledge and ability in them goes much slower, and if you
don't use them often enough, skills will eventually deteriorate. Of course,
when they deteriorate, they won't go all the way down to zero. They'll
only go down to a certain point.

Also, you may change your focus, however this should be something that
only changes at your logout, so people won't "focus magick" cast a few
spells, then "focus weaponry" and fight a few gortoks. Maybe even only
is changed weekly, else someone might log in, cast spells, then log out,
then tomorrow, log in, fight, then log out.

Of course, the above is just a hypothetical example of the groupings of
skills that I'd use, and I'd probably even change it, but it's close enough to
give the jist of what I'm trying to show.

- Ktavialt

[Delirium]

I think a couple warrior subclasses could fix this perhaps. A moderate cap in a weapon of choice and maybe the ability to kick and bash. Not any better than, say, a moderately skilled burglar or assassin would ever get, but enough to defend themselves in a pinch.

This way you could see a merchant with the ability to swing a weapon. Not as well as a seasoned warrior, but he's learned a thing or two about defending himself and his precious wares.

Or a gemmer that used to be a mercenary. Etc, etc..

[crymerci]

I like the alternative that Halaster put forth, where it's more like dual-classing than the current system.

Delirium's idea is good, too.  We have subclasses that give you a couple of the "fringe" or specialized combat abilities, but none of the subclasses gives you a weapon skill (that I can think of).

[Larrath]

Ideally, I would like to see Armageddon as a mostly classless MUD.

What does that mean?  Classes would still exist, but they would go like this.

a) Regular
b-g) Elementalists by Temple
h) Psionicist
i) Sorcerer

Everyone will be able to learn everything that mundane people are able to learn, and guilds will be used for other stuff.

Subguilds would still exist, but the idea is that if a merchant wanted to become a ranger, or pick pockets in his free time, assuming he will continue with this hobby for twenty years, his skill will not be capped.


I have no idea how this can be done right now, perhaps just because I'm tired.  Still, it's a nice notion and maybe, someday, it will be solved and implemented.

[Sir Diealot]

I'd like the idea of Classes, the BIG CLASS (warrior, ranger, etc.) being removed, to make way for a choice of two or three subclasses, instead.. Like Spear-Fighter or Stone-Crafter or Pick-Pocket or General Warrior (less proficient starting, and with a lower cap on spears than a spear-fighter)..etc. etc. ad nauseum.. it'd make combinations a LOT more varied, and would add to reality by adding to customization.

[JollyGreenGiant]

I think that the original idea in this post actually removes variation from characters rather than creating it.  Think about the characters that you have played, and what skills they had.  If you could just pick and choose, there are probably a few skills you'd want with every character, such as listen and scan.  Then consider that in a pick-your-own-skills system, there's no allowance for variation on skill caps.  Without a complicated system of synergies between skills, everyone that picks the skinning skill will have the same learning rate, the same skill cap, etc.

You also lose certain types of specialization, some skill-related and some not.  If you've played a variety of classes, you've probably run into a few, probably without even knowing about it.  One example of this is that rangers can quit out in places where other classes cannot.

Then there's the whole question of learning new skills instead of branching, and so on.  I agree with the assertion that this would shift the focus of many people too far to skill acquisition.

[wizturbo]

This is what I would like to see.

ALL guilds gaining what I call 'everyman skills'

What does this mean?  Certain common skills be available to every single class, but with a low score that cannot be improved.  Everyone should be able to listen, scan, hide, sneak, and use a basic weapon, or any other 'common' skills that really anyone should be able to do.  Its absurd that you cannot hide because you didn't choose such and such guild.  Sure, your hide skill will blow and anyone who scans will find you (and i mean anyone, because they'll have the same 'everyman' ability to use scan).  

That means if my merchant wants to leap behind a couch in the Bard's Barrel to hide from a horde of angry kanks, he can do so.  He'll suck at it, and literally anyone in the game can find him, but he has that option.  It also means a big warrior thug type CAN try and easedrop on a surrounding table, it'll be really hard to get it to work and he's likely to miss out on a lot of the conversation, but he'll have the option to try.  

These are all things anyone in zalanthas should be capable of attempting, but only their 'guild' would allow them any opportunity to really become good at it.  Personally, i'd say don't even put the skill on your "skills" list, just have everyone in the game naturally have a certain level of these everyman skills.

I'm also FULLY for making these 'everyman' skills race specific.  A half-giant literally might not be able to hide anywhere, they're too stupid and big :-)  Where as an elf, even a merchant one, should be able to hide/sneak/steal with some very basic proficiency.

[Angela Christine]

We have some everyman skills: contact, barrier, dual wield, two handed, sheild use, cooking, analyze, and maybe a couple others that I'm not certain of.  I assume some classes have really low caps on dual wield and shield use, but they are somehow necessary to the calculations used by the combat code so everyone gets them.  It is kind of funny when you have dual wield but no weapon skills, so you can suck with weapons in both hands!  

It would be nice if changes were made so nobody could say "Oh hey,
this guy's good with crafting, can drive a wagon, and can barter well, he must be a merchant and therefore cannot use a sword." This meaning, it would also be nice to see a merchant, or magicker that -could- fight. Not well, not nearly as good as a warrior, but able to hold his/her own for a short while.

I think the introduction of subguilds helped with this quite a bit, although they were introduced a little before I started playing.  I had a secret magicker become a soldier, not a very good soldier and s/he sucked at armed sparring, but somehow s/he managed to fool everyone well enough to work as a guard for a couple IC years, and no one suspects a person in a guard's uniform to be a magicker.  :twisted:  So it isn't impossible to pass as something else, especially with good subclass choices.  It would be funny if a warrior claimed to be a mage and got himself gemmed.  He couldn't actually do magick, but anyone that attacked him when he was out mining obsidian would get a surprise.  :lol:


I think "passing" as something else would be easier, and character concepts much more flexible, if we had . . .   Two Subclasses For Everyone!  

A mage or merchant that took two combat subclasses still wouldn't fight nearly as well as a warrior, but he might have enough combat skills to pass.  A warrior or thief that took two merchanty subclasses still wouldn't be as good at crafting or NPC trading as a real merchant, but he could do pretty well and would make a better "traveling trader" than a real merchant since he could ride from town to town with his goods much more safely than a real merchant.  It would also make some combinations available that aren't currently possible, like a sneaky leatherworker (the armorcrafter subguild doesn't get skinning, so if you have a guild without skinning then you have to buy all your hides, which sucks).  Most subclasses give you 2-4 skills so it wouldn't make PCs hugely more powerful, just more tailored.



I don't mind classless systems, but I think it is far too late to convert Armageddon now.  That isn't a project they could do one Saturday, it would take months and would probably require a pwipe, extended downtime, and other unpleasantness.  And classless systems like the one proposed DO focus players on aquiring skills much more than branching does.


AC

[Delirium]

pwipe

<cringes in terror>

NEVER post that word again!

[TooLazyToLogIn]

I must admit it would be an interesting concept to do it like the first poster said...you start off with base skill everyone has, then you join could join guilds or other poeple to learned varied amount of skills at various levels.  Unfortunately whether we do it this way or are allowed to pick skills from the start people would either begin on focusing on aquiring skills or find the most uber template.  Let's face it the only reason we would want to choose our skills is to make our char. more uber.

                    Something about the game i hate right now is how sometimes you lack the skill to Rp something really cool or can't find someone skilled enough to Rp something cool...I hate having to go through 1 RL month of training my 25+ years old whatever just so he can begin doing basic things that he should already know just due to the fact he is alive.  I don't want them to start uber but don't the rest of you get tired of training the same old skill over and over.

                      I would like to see more wieght added to subgiulds though...I hate the definate nature of the main guilds, ya you can try to Rp around this but just too obvious to try to be something when your skills support it....eg merchant class/hunter, trying to be a full time hunter...if you say Rp being a bad hunter but bad hunters are just plain dead hunters.

[Mr.Camel]

The only thing I don't like about the current system is that it restricts a character from learning. What I mean is, lets say your character has a merchant guild and you ended up joining the byn. While you would most definately suck for some time, I don't see why you can't become as good as the other ones with enough time and training.

A classless system sounds ideal, but wouldn't work because of the reasons pointed by others before me, mostly the short lifespan of PCs. So I'd like to keep seeing guilds/subguilds, but I would rather see a guild as being starting skills, and no more. How good you can get with a skill should be determined by stats/race instead of guild, IMO.

And you should be able to learn(a.k.a appear in the skill list) almost all the ordinary( non-magicker, etc) skills given the appropriate teacher and effort.

And I completely agree with wizturbo about the 'everyone' skills.

[Sir Diealot]

Only problem with that is that sorcery is Learned, not Inborn like elementalism.. So we'd have everyone eventually become Sorcerers.