Skill Training Suggestions

[Zoltan]

This is not a thread to discuss current skill gain techniques.

Inspired by recent posts in the RAT thread, I thought it would be a good idea to get a separate thread going so suggestions don't get all buried. I'll start with my idea.

I think one change that may reduce the "need" to twink is to factor skill successes into skill gains. Skill failures would still be the main impetus to skill growth, but repeated success should really show growth. I think it would be far more realistic than what we have now. The main problem I see with putting in this sort of system is that there may be an increase in the amount of highly-skilled characters. If skill gain were added to success, it would need to have an extremely low chance of "going off".

I think this would be very beneficial to pretty much any character in any role. Particularly for those military clans that perform structured training day in and day out, and will hopefully reduce the "need" for characters to "challenge themselves" by risking life and limb chasing dinosaurs or whatever.

Any thoughts? Other ideas? Put them in this thread! Also, disclaimer: my greatest, most accomplished warrior had piddling skills compared to his contemporaries. I am not obsessed with skill level whatsoever. I just want to bring the OOC and IC motivations closer together, and I think the system we presently have can sometimes work to push them apart.

[Narf]

This is not a thread to discuss current skill gain techniques.

Inspired by recent posts in the RAT thread, I thought it would be a good idea to get a separate thread going so suggestions don't get all buried. I'll start with my idea.

I think one change that may reduce the "need" to twink is to factor skill successes into skill gains. Skill failures would still be the main impetus to skill growth, but repeated success should really show growth. I think it would be far more realistic than what we have now. The main problem I see with putting in this sort of system is that there may be an increase in the amount of highly-skilled characters. If skill gain were added to success, it would need to have an extremely low chance of "going off".

This would be more realistic in certain situations (fighting a large and extremely dangerous creature that doesn't dodge very well), but would be a lot less realistic for characters that wander around killing and skinning "level 1 rats" and just happen to get ridiculously skilled from it. Even someone that wasn't trying at all to do anything but sustain themselves with some stringy meat would, over time, become some sort of uber warrior.

The other, probably larger problem is that it would be a lot more invasive to the code to change this I'd imagine. Code invasive solutions tend to get put on the back burner.

One really easy solution that has been bandied about before by others is to reverse the defense nerf that was put in years ago. Since it would just be a reversion, it presumably wouldn't be hard at all to implement, and should allow players to train against each other much more effectively. I feel hesitant to suggest this though as I'm not really clear why it was nerfed in the first place. I never played warriors back then so I didn't have any experience with how upper-tier combat worked.

[Cutthroat]

If we're going to stick with a system where skill use affects skill gain, then the ideal use of skill success should only factor into skill gain when the success was at least still challenging.

The ideal system for skill growth in a game would combine skill failure, skills barely succeeding, and EVE-style natural growth over time in a skill which you choose to focus on. Ideally the automated growth of basic skills would be possible for anyone, whereas skills that are more complicated (like certain crafting skills) or that require a partner to train with (like guard and rescue) might require clanning in a particular clan to reflect specialized training in those areas. Some skills would probably not be trainable at all in this manner.

The reasoning for an at least partly-automated system is pretty simple. It gives players more time to actually play with each other rather than potentially seclude themselves from other players in order to raise their skills to a level they consider acceptable. It would make a difference for even a few solo-hunters to have their skills raise automatically over time and be in cities more often to interact with each other and join clans, which is considered by players to hold people back from skill gain.

The bottom line is that there should be no impediments to interaction and story-building. A good skill training system would be one that just works in the background while you are playing and don't have to worry about at all.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Honestly, just changing the way that the teach skill works would have a great impact. Lower the gap needed in skill between the teacher and the student, and if there is any chance that a successful teach does not add to the student's skill, take it out. This would be much less code invasive.

You could also change the points that gaining a skill from failures in combat offers without getting code invasive. If you gain .1 points from a fail, make it .3. I suppose you still have to battle serious things, but less so.

I think changing the teach skill would be the best option, myself.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

We could also implement a system where you could gain a blanket increase to your skills based mostly on the number of days you have played your character. There would be modifiers for wisdom, and your current skill level. That would handle older characters being able to 'skill up' without hunting death. Each ten days played, you would obtain a percentage of a certain number.

For instance, lets say that your sneak ability was 33 out of 100.

You have been playing for twenty days. Every ten days you get a 10 point boost modified thusly: 10*days played/skill level.

skill level:33
days played:20
10*20 = 200
200/33 = 6 (rounding down)
new skill level = 39.

skill level:42
days played:30
10*30 = 300
300/42 = 7 (rounded down)

skill level:65
days played:40
10*40 = 400
400/65 = 6 (rounded down)

Hrm, haven't added a wisdom modifier. Bear with me while I work the numbers out.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Ok, let's do days played divided by skill level played multiplied by wisdom divided by 2. I'm going to assume that wisdom ranges are per normal diku. We round results up to the nearest single zero number.

skill level: 10
days played:10
wisdom:18
10/10=1
1*18/2=9

You gain 9 points to your sneak skill.


skill level: 35
days played:20
wisdom:18
20/35=.6 (rounded up)
.6*18/2=5 (rounded down)

You gain 5 points to your sneak skill.


skill level:40
days played:30
wisdom:18
40/30=.8
.8*18/2=7

You gain 7 points to your sneak skill.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Messages for being alerted you have undergone this process while in game?

"You realize a few techniques you didn't know a year ago."

[Dar]

I could dig this, if you were to add certain changes.

One, you have to select the skill you want to improve. So, you're not improving in "all" skills that you've got. But only in one to three that you specifically select.

Two, the gains in that skill are affected by the overral improvements of all the other skills that you've improved that year.

So if a merchant focuses on expel, but in that year turns master in ... every single frigging other skill that he's got. He was simply too busy and distracted to get any good at expel that year. Or maybe somewhat busy and distracted, so expel would improve only half the amount it would've otherwise.

I suggest not offering the bonus to learning due to wisdom, but maybe allow multiple skills to be focused on depending on wisdom with the max of three, let's say.

Allow teaching/mentoring system.

It's something that has been done in other muds. A teacher designates a student, a number of students is influenced by his skill level, wisdom, and ... teaching skill? This does not improve the students skills right away. But what it does is creates a process that lasts say 10, 20, 30 rl days. It increases the skill gains of that skill for the student while he/she is in teacher's presence and allows the teacher to give specific lessons to the student. Upon completition of the 10, 20, 30 rl day process, the teacher 'himself' gains an improvement of the skill he was teaching. So he's learning by teaching and witnessing the students mistakes and hearing innovative fresh views on things from students.

[Is Friday]

I think changes to the teach skill could be a fairly decent fix.

Probably would be a good idea to cap it based on wisdom and skill maxes of both parties.

[Narf]

I think changes to the teach skill could be a fairly decent fix.

Probably would be a good idea to cap it based on wisdom and skill maxes of both parties.

Oh! Now that's clever. Make wise characters better teachers.

[valeria]

Messages for being alerted you have undergone this process while in game?

"You realize a few techniques you didn't know a year ago."

Uh, please not this part.  My immersions.

[Harmless]

having been taught shit by other PCs a pitiful number of times in my whole career, and knowing that so many people are... reluctant to teach me (Sorry I'm not mudsexing you or whatevs), I am much less excited about a massive boost to teach than I am about the suggestion of an EVE-style "train in the background."

[rodic]

I'll make a suggestion, Hi Newish guy here.

I feel as if the problem could be solved in a more simple manner by simple nerfing 70% of the NPC population.

Its so painfully silly I could role a 34 year old, street thug and get completely owned by everything in the Rinth, even the youths, despite having decades of street battles over them.
That my 40 year old veteran of many hunts, still gets whooped by a jozhal and can't hit the broad side of an merchant stall.

Journey Man skills are useless, at lest in my limited experience.  It doesn't count for much when 99% of everything can put  a smack down on you despite background.

Players shouldn't have to grind for months to play a role they desire realistically, or be forced to play or change my role to fit in the confines of the code.  Right now, the skills system and the code is actually in the way of role playing.  Players can't pick up desired roles, or flesh out a world that is suppose to be filled with hardened mercenaries, skilled hunters, and dangerous thugs.  This shouldn't just be a realm of vNPC and the NPC's, our PC's need to be apart of these roles, with out massive time sinks to get there.

I feel that if we tone down the straight craziness that is some the NPC's ability to destroy PC's, we can make Journeyman and Advance actually mean more, we can make PC's "feel" more bad ass, with out everyone having to grind their way up to bad assery.  In fact we eliminate a huge problem, the desire to twink up skills over realistic role play.  Why grind your way to master when Advance is really just as good for what most of your PC will run into? 
Aren't we in a way diluting advance/master level by forcing all PC's to grind their way to the skill level? Just to even be... competent?  those Characters should be legendary, not par for the course if you want your character to matter at all in combat.

I feel as if we made journeyman and lower combat levels mean just a little bit more on the PC side, we could easily fix the problem by allow PC's to feel more accomplished and confidant in their ability to fill our the roles they desired.  With out a flimsy "Amnesia or injury" excuse.   It's mean a lot less skills gains needed, a lot less grinding, and a lot more time players can put forth the effort into Role playing.

This way, a journey man feels more accomplished, advance actually means something, and MASTER is still in the legendary status we need want it to be.  Badass master swordsmen are still bad ass master swordsmen, but A journeyman swordsman doesn't feel like a kitten trying to face a lion when fighting random NPC thug in Random Alley #2.  Getting destroyed over and over again, despite actually knowing a few things about sword play.


But hey, I'm a bit new, I've never seen many skills branch or get past advance, nor have I been playing for years.
It just appears to be a simpler solution, to and obvious complex problem.  Hell at least it takes less coding then actually trying to tweak combat skills.  Just make the NPC's a little bit weaker, so more low to mid-level characters can get in on the action, feel a bit more accomplished and can focus on role playing, rather then getting their characters "there", so they can role play.

[Is Friday]

Weapon skills are not all encompassing of combat. That's the effect of "journeyman skills sucking" you're experiencing. There's several other key skills that play a factor. Read these:

HELP WEAPONS
HELP PARRY
HELP OFFENSE
HELP DEFENSE
HELP DUAL WIELD
HELP SHIELD USE
HELP TWO HANDED

[rodic]

It still applies, it lower skills mean more, then people are less likely to twink and need to skill up less to feel "bad ass".

Maybe I should of been more general, I was using weapon skills as an example.

Same applies for all other skills.  If lower levels mean MORE, then the desire to twink or skill up is lessened because your character feels less squishy.

I thought the goal here was to make character more competent with less time played.

[Is Friday]

Having lower skill levels be more competent is not really a good idea for a multitude of reasons. However, increasing the speed of which combat PCs can gain skill levels is good. So long as they're in an organization where they can learn from masters.

[Reiloth]

Or possibly starting older characters with apprentice/journeyman skills rolled at random, along with lower attributes.

In a random musing, I started playing Shadowrun, which is a skill based pnp, which reminded me of Armageddon. It starts PCs off at a pretty competent place -- They are good at their specialities, or generally okay at a few skills. They aren't talentless flubs.

I think something I've done and noticed others have done is the "training period", where for the first five days played or so, people develop their PCs skills to this "competent place" before really getting into their character. While CGP helps with this, it's also a bit narrow. It'd be nice if you could spend up to your karma on skills, but only a max of 2 per skill. I think in this way, one could round out their PC to competence and not feel the need to grind to that level before truly playing or getting into their PC.

[CodeMaster]

Make teach more popular but more subtle:

Remove this echo for recipients of 'teach': The rugged, grey-haired man instructs you in the skill of 'parry'.  It's an OOC message for something that presumably already happened.  Also gives teachers the option to not use teach in this particular instance, for whatever reason, with no hard feelings.

Enable two different levels of instruction: "teach <target> short" (e.g., a little hint from your sergeant to keep your shield up during sparring) and "teach <target> long" (i.e., for longer, more-involved lessons spanning an IC hour or so).

More information about how to roleplay "teach" in its associated helpfile, solicited from the player base.

A way to distinguish good teachers: a teacher subguild, a teaching skill, or alternatively, players with more karma have higher potency when they use teach.

[Kismetic]

I've heard it before, and I think it's a good idea ...  Make a random critical miss chance, 1/100 or so.  No matter how good you are.  There's a trade-off there, and although the progress is still slow, with enough practice you can excel, while still knowing that no matter how good you are, you can still fail.

[solera]

Or possibly starting older characters with apprentice/journeyman skills rolled at random, along with lower attributes.

I think something I've done and noticed others have done is the "training period", where for the first five days played or so, people develop their PCs skills to this "competent place" before really getting into their character. While CGP helps with this, it's also a bit narrow. It'd be nice if you could spend up to your karma on skills, but only a max of 2 per skill. I think in this way, one could round out their PC to competence and not feel the need to grind to that level before truly playing or getting into their PC.

I like this , though can many subguilds can give you that starting boost?  Do you mean older, as in middle age when attributes are dropping?

[Eyeball]

EDIT: Never mind.

[HavokBlue]

I'd honestly just be happy to see the CGP system implemented as a char-gen option.

With your 3 points of skill bumps you can roll a warrior or a ranger or whatever that's past that new-character hump and can at least go out and do things like hunt a scrab without getting rolled.

[Kol]

I'd honestly just be happy to see the CGP system implemented as a char-gen option.

With your 3 points of skill bumps you can roll a warrior or a ranger or whatever that's past that new-character hump and can at least go out and do things like hunt a scrab without getting rolled.

Me too.

However, I'm sure the staff are working on this, not being a coder myself, I can only assume adding something like this to a character generator already in place, is a nightmare, or we'd have it already.

Although maybe it's there to stop one day old assassins being able to backstab anything to death out the gate....

[RogueGunslinger]

Well after two years nearly three years I'm starting to think coded CGP is heading the way of Arm2.

[Harmless]

Make teach more popular but more subtle:

Remove this echo for recipients of 'teach': The rugged, grey-haired man instructs you in the skill of 'parry'.  It's an OOC message for something that presumably already happened.  Also gives teachers the option to not use teach in this particular instance, for whatever reason, with no hard feelings.

Enable two different levels of instruction: "teach <target> short" (e.g., a little hint from your sergeant to keep your shield up during sparring) and "teach <target> long" (i.e., for longer, more-involved lessons spanning an IC hour or so).

More information about how to roleplay "teach" in its associated helpfile, solicited from the player base.

A way to distinguish good teachers: a teacher subguild, a teaching skill, or alternatively, players with more karma have higher potency when they use teach.

I like ALL of this! I ESPECIALLY LIKE REMOVING THE ECHO.

But no thank you to the karma boost to teach. Makes no sense ICly to me.