A discussion of stats.

[Clearsighted]

I wasnt really sure what an "Immortal" was...I think I saw them as "Gods" or something...because I wished up...

wish all Please dont let me die from this posion oh great Immortals!!! I will offer anything back in return if you will only use your powers to spare me this once!!!

Someone sends: It doesnt really work that way, we are just game staff.

You suddenly feel better.

That's so full of awesome.

[Lizzie]

What I think some people are suggesting, is something like a "retire" command, with limitations:

1. You can use this only within the first 2 hours' play of your character, after he/she has left the Hall of Kings.
2. You -must- have already rerolled your stats. The command won't work, if you haven't already done that.
3. Retire is irrevocable, will not be reversed, you will be asked if you are sure you want to do this, and if you say yes, then that decision is final.

How's that sound?

Benefits:
1. It keeps the staff from having to deal with players who simply don't like their stats and would otherwise e-mail/request-tool/suicide. +8
2. It prevents the suicide cause my stats make my entire character concept totally bogus syndrome. +8
3. It saves time on the players' part, having to get a character approved, then wait for someone to retire it, before submitting another new one. +10

Drawbacks:
1. It has the potential for a very very few people who are really into the whole min-maxing to min-max - which they'd do anyway, if they're like that, by killing off their characters or requesting retirement. -4
2. It has the potential to make people who -don't- appreciate it, accuse those who -do- appreciate it, of being min-maxing twinks. -1

Based on my ranking system, which is completely arbitrary, I have concluded that the benefits of this suggestion outweigh the drawbacks.

[Rahnevyn]

Based on my ranking system, which is completely arbitrary, I have concluded that the benefits of this suggestion outweigh the drawbacks.

Best debate strategy ever.

[Dakurus]

And have it prompt them for a reason for it, so that we can store it, and collect/search them to see if there are common issues why someone would retire a character in the first 2 hours without playing, that we may or may not be able to address.

[Desertman]

I have always thought the "Store Request" thing was pretty funny.

I understand the logic of course, the staff want to be able to monitor why someone is storing, incase their storing will have an affect on current plot lines.

The concept of having to request a storage for a brand new PC baffles me though. I chuckle inside when I think about getting this message back...

"No, your request for storage has been denied. You will play this PC, and you will enjoy it."



Honestly, I would probably be so blown away, I would actually end up playing and enjoying the PC.

[Lizzie]

>Do you really want to retire your character? Y/N
y
>How come? Please pick:
1 - my stats suck, even after rerolling (note: your stats are: average, below average, below average, poor).
2 - I just found out my boyfriend is mudsexing with the girl down the street from me so I need to roll a f-me who will steal my boyfriend back so I can mudsex him and then kill him and his girlfriend and that other girl he wants to mudsex, to get my revenge
3 - I hate my stats, even after rerolling
4 - Ugh I TOTALLY picked the wrong guild and had NO idea that my character wasn't gonna have listen OR scan OR haggle and I need them for my character concept.
5 - Fuck these stats to drov and back.
6 - I was just KIDDING about making a dwarf with a mustache and a focus to go permanently bald!
7 - I just got an e-mail from staff saying I got more karma and really want to try out playing a mul!
8 - He's a desert elf. With poor endurance, poor strength, and 87 stamina. Nuff said.

[X-D]

In over 30 PCs I have suicided 3. 1 was total IC reasons and I even got staff kudos...Woot!

The other two were for stats. Abysmal...in one case the reroll was exactly the same as the starting, and in the other he started with BA/Ave/Ave/Ba...reroll...poor/poor/poor/AA, Splash into the silt sea. Nobody but me and staff ever knew they existed, not sponsered and not concepts that I was OMG I JUST HAVE TO PLAY THIS on either. If in the same situation again I would do it again. Put in a request for storage, your kidding right?

Now, That said. I have also, at least two times had PCs that though not sponsered, I REALLY wanted to play who also had pretty bad stats. Both times (before request tool) I was able to wish up with "Hey, I really like this dude, but this and this stat are simply too low to play, How about a little love?" Both times the stats were raised to usable levels.

I guess what I'm saying is, I see both sides, and I hate to suicide for stats, but come on, put in a request that could take 1-10 days easy to resolve then still have to wait for app approvel on a PC that has had ZERO impact on the game world? And the other side, If the stats are not too horrible, play it and ask staff nicely for a little love...or if they are mostly playable take the RP route to improvement.

I am in the camp of we should have an automated storage system, That way People who for whatever reason are sick of a PC can stop playing them and start another ASAP. I am one of those people who, when I'm done playing that PC, I'm done NOW, not tomorrow or next week, NOW. And staff can still review the storage at leisure after the fact. As has been said before, make sure the docs and even the system make it plain what abuse to it is and if somebody still abuses it, simply remove the option, everybody happy.

[Ammut]

Maybe people should be allowed to store themselves.

Going through the replies here, I would like to see this as an option on the login screen.  The players would not have to wait for
approval to store their characters and could apply for a new one (still having to wait for that, obviously).  Maybe there would be
an optional field which would state the reason for storing the character in question?

[NoteworthyFellow]

Maybe people should be allowed to store themselves.

Going through the replies here, I would like to see this as an option on the login screen.  The players would not have to wait for
approval to store their characters and could apply for a new one (still having to wait for that, obviously).  Maybe there would be
an optional field which would state the reason for storing the character in question?

I think non-sponsored characters should have this option available, and you should have to state your reason for storing.  For sponsored or leadership characters, this option should be unavailable--once you're in a position like that, you affect others by your storing almost as much as you affect yourself.

[Lizzie]

Personally, I would rather leave storing/retiring in the hands of the staff, *except* within the first two hours of gameplay for each character. During that first two hours, it's pretty difficult to get TOO involved in plotlines. Plus considering how long it takes to come up with a character concept, submit it through character generation, get it approved, and log in for the first time, it isn't -too- likely that someone will want to retire in the first 2 hours unless something is really fubared. Like - poor, below average, below average, below average - on a reroll.

I came up with the first 2 hours simply because it is the same amount of time you are allowed to use the reroll option. I would add, that if your character dies within the first two hours, and repops, you should -still- have the opportunity to retire the character. I don't know how the code would handle that, but I can't imagine how frustrating it is now, to show up fresh from the Hall of Kings, with sucky stats, and be -just- about to type "reroll self" when some other noob shows up and instaganks you just cause he thinks you're a mob. Will "reroll" even work if you haven't used it yet, and it's still within the 2 hours, but your character was killed before you had the chance to try?

Anyway. The point is to be able to retire a character because you know from the very start that your character just plain isn't gonna work out. BEFORE you get involved in plotlines, before you have a chance to practice your coded skills, before you really have -too- much chance to do much of anything other than realize your character isn't gonna work out.

[Bogre]

I had an adolescent elf warrior with below average strength.

He got pretty decent.

But then again, it probably took me longer and I didn't realize it. I'm generally pretty patient though and good about having long-lived characters.

I did have a very long lived character with exceptional endurance, I think that helped in a few cases.

[AmandaGreathouse]

I've had qualms over a characters stats only once. It was in making up a crafter that had scores so low they could only have 3-4 items in their inventory. I was like, nuh-uh, not when some recipes used 5 items, not counting the tools used in the crafting itself. I requested for her to be stored though. I have only suicided once,  and it was completely for IC reasons. I do like the idea of being able to store yourself though. On top of other things, it would cut down on staff workload in the long-run, and that can't help but be a good thing. 

[Jingo]

We got a lot of responses from staff, which is great. But nobody answered my second problem. How come I can't train my stats beyond beyond an arbitrary limit? I can potentially roll AI strength when I make my character, but for some reason staff will not let me go past 'good' (in my case) if I roleplay training it. Can anybody tell me why? I have absolutely no knowledge of the system in place and there probably is a good reason for it. I just don't see it.

[Barzalene]

We got a lot of responses from staff, which is great. But nobody answered my second problem. How come I can't train my stats beyond beyond an arbitrary limit? I can potentially roll AI strength when I make my character, but for some reason staff will not let me go past 'good' (in my case) if I roleplay training it. Can anybody tell me why? I have absolutely no knowledge of the system in place and there probably is a good reason for it. I just don't see it.

I don't know. My suspicion is that if everyone could train up their stats the fear is that instead of rping with one another in the furtherance of plots people will be playing alone lifting weights and running in circles until everyone is AI at everything. Not that they would. But they could.

[Nyr]

We got a lot of responses from staff, which is great. But nobody answered my second problem. How come I can't train my stats beyond beyond an arbitrary limit? I can potentially roll AI strength when I make my character, but for some reason staff will not let me go past 'good' (in my case) if I roleplay training it. Can anybody tell me why? I have absolutely no knowledge of the system in place and there probably is a good reason for it. I just don't see it.

I don't think there's ever been a stated staff position on this (I searched and couldn't find anything).  My opinion is that it's not arbitrary to limit stat increases.  Your character is unique and has personal strengths and weaknesses like any person would.  Stat increases from logs and training are marginal increases, they are not jumps from point A (my stat sucks) to point E (my stat is AI).  They are jumps from point A to point B.  As stats are important but not the focus of the game, we allow the ability to increase a stat if it is lower than one would wish it to be through logs of roleplayed training--but not farther than that point, in the vast majority of cases.

Short answer:  It is not an arbitrarily assigned limit or cap.  Stat progression and skill progression all must stop at a certain point.

[Shiroi Tsuki]

Another good way to think of it is that you're born with the body you have.  You can train really hard to be less of a clutz, but you'll probably never train to the point that you've got the reflexes of Catwoman (Catman?).  You can bulk up until your strength is good, but maybe your bones and tendons just aren't made to support all that muscle past a point.  Etc etc.  Unless you are born with it and develop it, which is where those people with exceptional strength come along.

My beef with the tiny, petite girl with AI strength beating up my burly bynner because he only has above average strength is of an entirely different nature involving stat prioritization.

[spawnloser]

After having read through a few things, here's my thoughts.

My issue with stats?  I play roleplaying games because I want to play someone cooler than myself.  I have better stats than half my characters.  They are obviously not cooler than me unless they can use magick, but then I get dirty comments from people about all the magickers I'm playing.  Well, if I could play anything else and end up with stats that allowed me to survive a fight with a rat 1/20th my size, I'd play something else.

The aging code?  To date I have never seen a stat increase.  I've only seen them decrease.  So far, I am unimpressed at best.

A retire option that removes the need for staff to handle retirement of a character?  I see this being abused.  Oh, and by the by, Lizzie, by ridiculing an argument you do not necessarily eliminate the veracity of an argument.  It's akin to saying, "Well, you're stupid!" in an argument.  Why do you think that people that have suicided characters because of horrible stats will not use this for min-maxing?  That is completely against the fundamental ideals of this game.

I don't want a way for players to store their own characters.  I want as much attention on a retirement as possible by someone of human intelligence and not a machine.  I want our characters to have better overall stats while still having the potential for a low stat because that adds character and dimension.  (For an example, in a D&D campaign I once played a character with what would be poor for two of my six stats, both strength and endurance, but my other stats were phenomenal.  Those low stats provided SO MUCH roleplay opportunity for both me and the party members because of my sickly weakling.  It was awesome.)

[Qzzrbl]

If the chances of rolling poor/below average, along with Exceptional/Extremely good were lowered a bit, I think it'd all be fine.

Either that, or make "average" everything a little more playable than it is. I know alot of people who would suicide a character with average stats across the board.

[Marauder Moe]

Just bump up the names one degree.  That'll make people happy.  Average -> above average, above average -> exceptional, etc.

[Malken]

If the chances of rolling poor/below average, along with Exceptional/Extremely good were lowered a bit, I think it'd all be fine.

Either that, or make "average" everything a little more playable than it is. I know alot of people who would suicide a character with average stats across the board.

I know I would hate to have a character with all average stats, I think I've been spoiled a lot by the stat prioritizing system and my "knowledge of how age, classes and races" work.

Mind you, it's probably all in my head, but when I want my first stat to be excepional/extremely good, I have it 80% of the time.

I usually get another exceptional in there, as well, most often my second stat.

Yah, see, now I'm totally spoiled and would probably consider a character with average in all his stats to be mediocre, at best.

[Qzzrbl]

Ehh... I would say bump up -everything- up a notch..... But "Average" could use a little more love.

Maybe if "average" were much more common (as "good" or "very-good" seems to be these days), then "average" would really be average, as it would be the most common stat among the people. Exceptional should be as rare as AI is currently, and AI should be just something special.

[Qzzrbl]

If the chances of rolling poor/below average, along with Exceptional/Extremely good were lowered a bit, I think it'd all be fine.

Either that, or make "average" everything a little more playable than it is. I know alot of people who would suicide a character with average stats across the board.

I know I would hate to have a character with all average stats, I think I've been spoiled a lot by the stat prioritizing system and my "knowledge of how age, classes and races" work.

Mind you, it's probably all in my head, but when I want my first stat to be excepional/extremely good, I have it 80% of the time.

I usually get another exceptional in there, as well, most often my second stat.

Yah, see, now I'm totally spoiled and would probably consider a character with average in all his stats to be mediocre, at best.

Hah, see? That's the thing. We're all spoiled to great stats.

[Marauder Moe]

Ehh... I would say bump up -everything- up a notch..... But "Average" could use a little more love.

Maybe if "average" were much more common (as "good" or "very-good" seems to be these days), then "average" would really be average, as it would be the most common stat among the people. Exceptional should be as rare as AI is currently, and AI should be just something special.

Average stats are lacking compared to what, though?

[Malken]

I think what he meant is that you often end up with characters like, "exceptional strength, exceptional endurance, below average wisdom, poor agility", as opposed to, "good strength, good endurance, good wisdom and average agility"

[Qzzrbl]

Ehh... I would say bump up -everything- up a notch..... But "Average" could use a little more love.

Maybe if "average" were much more common (as "good" or "very-good" seems to be these days), then "average" would really be average, as it would be the most common stat among the people. Exceptional should be as rare as AI is currently, and AI should be just something special.

Average stats are lacking compared to what, though?

Compared to what seems to be the most common stat, or the true -average- of stats, "Good" or "Very Good".

Observe.

Poor, Below-Average, Average, Above Average, Good, Very Good, Extremely Good, Exceptional, Absolutely Incredible.

"Good" looks to be the middle man. Where I thought "Average" would be the middle man. Because it's average, you know? If anything, we should bring "Average" up to "Good" status, and go up and down from there. It could be more like this

Kill yourself, Balls, Teh Suck, Poor, Below-Average, Average, Above Average, Good, Very Good, Extremely good, Exceptional, Absolutely Incredible.