Start all skills at low journeyman

[CodeMaster]

Some skills are more useful than others at novice and apprentice levels. An across the board retuning of starting skill levels to journeyman would contribute to power creep as Delerium said.  The hunt skill is incredibly useful even at apprentice levels, for instance.  The weapon skills as well, I suspect.

But some skills might be worth looking at on a case by case basis. This happened with contact and barrier recently. I think cooking could be looked at, especially with the frequency with which one can get these bizarre failure outcomes. The backstabbing skill seemed to be a joke at novice levels and seems to have no utility even against sleeping opponents.

Basically it would be cool if some skills had modest or even extremely circumstantial usefulness at the lower levels. Some already do but many could stand to be looked at.

[Rokal]

It'd be neat if all PCs at creation could pick a couple of skills they are 'decent' at, to reflect their background and time spent in Zalanthas virtually. Yes, you can use CGP to further boost skills, but if you're an assassin, you can bump sneak and hide, or if you're a warrior, you can bump rescue and disarm. The sort of thing that doesn't make you a wet-behind-the-ear so obviously when you step into the ring that first time.

Then again, skills aren't really hard to train, they just take a system and patience.

I dig this, chosing a few, 'favored' skills of your list on creation to suit your background would be really nice.

[Armaddict]

It's funny how that slippery slope argument against seeing skill levels is slowly coming to be, at least on the side of what players want.

[Xeran Van Houten]

What's with all these ridiculous threads lately?

Do not support this idea - there's a system in place if one wants (some) skills to start hirer than normal.

If one is really that bothered by seeing "novice" after their skills, I'm fairly sure you can actually turn those off.

[Dresan]

I think if skill boosts were changed to 2 skill bumps per CGP, it would be enough to ensure that someone wanting to invest in skill bumps instead of a extended sub-guild could start off feeling pretty experience. They would probably still have four or more RL months of training to be the best of the best but they could probably still do some really cool stuff right out of the box.  

I think this idea applies here and would be enough to ensure, you didn't always have to start character from scratch. The special app system would give players a nice break now and then, letting them start with more experienced  character. It shouldn't be an everyday thing but three times a year seems pretty good to me.  Skill bump restrictions would still apply though.

[absurdist]

Seems fair, right? Novice is fucking unusable, at best... fuck, journeyman is too. We've got anti-twink measures in place to discourage the grind, why do we start off so miserable at the things our PCs were born to do? Fuck the grind, fuck branching, especially parry, why does that have to be such a murder of my time? Give all guilds parry to varrying degrees. Well, except Merchant, they're already OP with their master-crafts and all.

You have to get to 5-10 days played before you're competent at anything, well, besides mudsex.

Do not want. I prefer things the way they are.

What I really want is for the system to go back to when you couldn't see your skill levels.

I preferred that. I feel like the current "skill level seeable" culture has created a playerbase of, "If it's not master level, it's shit.".


I preferred only knowing how good I was by knowing how good I was. I don't like being able to see the numbers.

Also keep in mind if you make everything start at journeyman, all that means is journeyman just became the new novice for all playable reasons.

This.

[Jihelu]

I feel like I like the idea but I feel like the "I've been doing this my life " argument shouldn't apply as much as I have seen it applied.

Make your character young.
Have them struggle to get better.
If you want to be better, make an app.
But eh.

[Aruven]

The whole topic of this thread ; No.

I only came in here to banter with the people bringing up 'old days'.

Do you not remember the sheer frustration for combat based PCs back then?

NPC environment does not work out with not being able to see skills. Also, crafters really need it. I mean without it the game was really just annoying playing a merchant unless you were a veteran, veteran player.

Nobody that has ever played a crafter class and plans to do so in the future wants to see a return to the days where you didn't know where your skill level was actually at. Correct me if I am wrong.

[hopeandsorrow]

I feel like I like the idea but I feel like the "I've been doing this my life " argument shouldn't apply as much as I have seen it applied.

Make your character young.
Have them struggle to get better.
If you want to be better, make an app.
But eh.

I believe age has an almost ridiculous effect to stats some times.  Some ranges I find are impossible to work (a single piece of light armor knocking encumbrance into manageable) can cause a bit of ooc frustration when you're trying to pull off something, so I know I personally avoid age ranges (Dependent on race) because you can get handed a really hard time or something rather jarring for the character you created (The wall of muscle with poor strength syndrome).  

As well the time needed on an OOC level can be measure in rl months depending on play times before a character can even brooch "competent".

Skills/Stats are perhaps the most frustrating thing to deal with in the game in terms of RP.  Sadly they can play a huge impact if you envisioned a role or goal for character, and the code just isn't going to work in your favor.

Not that I could offer any solutions (jman being the new novice isn't a great idea).  I wish there was an easy solution, as some one who's characters rarely have long lives, I feel for that grind, its rough, its annoying, its equally frustrating when everyone wants mekillot bones from your day old indie hunter.  I tend not to blame those lone, new characters out in the wastes, hiding from any job, position, or plot, because they don't wanna be a useless tag along and their one bad dice roll from being scrab food anyway.

Good ole days

Oh gawd that sounds even worse.  Maybe I just a pathetic newbie, but I'd at lest like some rough idea of what my character is and isn't capable of.  That either lead to terrible deaths because of misjudgment or terrible stagnation being too scared to branch out.
I never experienced that level of "hardcore" but it sounds terribly frustrating.

[Lizzie]

hopeandsorrow, even if you know your character is "advanced" at something, you have no way of knowing what that means until you actually do that thing. This is one of those rare exceptions I make in referring to "realistic" play. In real life, you have no idea if you're capable of climbing a mountain, until you get to the mountain. If you have any brains in your head, you'll try climbing a short hill or a lowland trail first for a few times to make sure you can handle even that much.

The same goes for skills in the game. You don't know what you're capable of, until you try to do it. That's part of what makes the game fun for most people. The journey, not the destination.

[Saellyn]

Can't you turn off skill visibility? I'm pretty sure that's a thing.

[FantasyWriter]

But then how would you please the I-don't-want-it-so-noone-should-have-it-or-it-wouldn't-be-fair people?

[Barzalene]

I'd kind of like not being able to see the levels again.

[hopeandsorrow]

But then how would you please the I-don't-want-it-so-noone-should-have-it-or-it-wouldn't-be-fair people?

+1

[Narf]

I'd kind of like not being able to see the levels again.

This reminds me of situations where I'd have a coach tell us to get running. People would ask how far we're running and he'd just say "I'll tell you when you get there."

It didn't matter how far the run was, it was excruciating every time.

I foresee this making branching skills exceptionally arduous (except I don't have to foresee, because I played back when it was and I hated it).

[Barzalene]

I'd kind of like not being able to see the levels again.

This reminds me of situations where I'd have a coach tell us to get running. People would ask how far we're running and he'd just say "I'll tell you when you get there."

It didn't matter how far the run was, it was excruciating every time.

I foresee this making branching skills exceptionally arduous (except I don't have to foresee, because I played back when it was and I hated it).

More a passing thought than an actual call for revision.

[nauta]

I'd kind of like not being able to see the levels again.

This reminds me of situations where I'd have a coach tell us to get running. People would ask how far we're running and he'd just say "I'll tell you when you get there."

It didn't matter how far the run was, it was excruciating every time.

I foresee this making branching skills exceptionally arduous (except I don't have to foresee, because I played back when it was and I hated it).

More a passing thought than an actual call for revision.

I realize it was a passing thought, but it reminded me of a friend of mine who asked me to make a program that would force them to not check their e-mail during work hours.  I was like: You have that already: it's called self-control and not clicking on the icon!

But in all seriousness, newbies would really suffer if skills weren't around - I still don't know what actions train certain skills, or what skills certain guilds have, and there'd be no real way (unless you get a mentor) to find this out.

[Saellyn]

Brief skills.

You're welcome.

[Armaddict]

So I keep hearing that.  The old way was harder, more arduous, more annoying.  I don't really see how that's the case...nothing changed except for you seeing...'Oh, that branched at journeyman', instead of 'I branch that quickly'.  'I can craft that now', versus...well...'I can craft that now'.  Either way you pick things up and type 'craft <item>' and see what you can make.  The only difference, that I can see, is that when it comes to PC to PC dynamics, the old way allowed for some misconception on where you actually were, which made more sense, i.e. 'I haven't lost a sparring match in ages, I must be pretty good', where you would make assumptions, then lose to that guy from the other clan and realize you weren't as good as you thought you were.  Which...makes a lot more sense than the constant mentality of 'I'm not as good as I -could- be.  Yet.'

I just don't really understand what makes it 'harder', could someone explain that to me?

Yes, we know about 'brief skills', but as above...the change isn't about 'Oh, I don't want to see them', it's about the total unknown of everyone, and everyone gauging themselves by in-game events, rather than just knowing.  Me turning off my skills doesn't bring back that blanket mentality and that IC comparison method.  So...why would I use it, if it doesn't bring the perceived 'benefit' of not seeing it?  I won't.

And it's not something I'm ranting about, I'm just genuinely curious as to what makes that argument.  I don't see a change in difficulty, at all, because of it.  Only a difference in how players perceive skills.  One is based on events, the other is based on information just given to you...and the former is great in roleplaying game.

[TheWanderer]

Brief skills.

You're welcome.

I don't think that solves the issue? We... all understand that when two strangers meet in the desert, and one knows their skill level, while the other doesn't, that the former might have an advantage in this confrontation, yes? One knows for a fact that he's leveled his sword skills to the max, while the other isn't quite sure as to whether or not he's been fighting novices his entire time in the Byn.

It's a game. You'd prefer your extra steps toward an immersive experience not handicap you on the OOC level so that it becomes an upsetting venture.

I, however, don't want the skill levels to be removed from view, anyways.

Edit: I might have posted this as Armaddict posted his.

[RogueGunslinger]

Uhh? What issue? It's almost like you guys don't realize how easy it was to gauge where your power level was before they were shown. Or that because now that we know a skill is at "journeyman" we somehow suddenly know our skill level in relation to another person. That simply isn't true. It has nothing to do with "advanced" or "master" or any of that, because every skill functions differently at those levels. Bash at Advanced doesn't not have the same chance of success as Backstab at advanced, and all kinds of things effect skills, like stats. I've been using the same method to determine where I am at competently as I always have, knowing vague ranged between 1-5 doesn't change that..

"I don't fail this skill anymore so I know I'm competent at it."

"I only fail this skill once in a while, but the danger outweights its usefulness, so I won't use it in mortal situations"

"I've seen Amos spar with Malick, I know I can beat Amos, so I know I can beat Malick.



I want you to imagine this same type of reasoning for something like stats. Could you imagine if stats were hidden? That'd be annoying as fuck. And reverting back showing skills would be too.

[whitt]

So I keep hearing that.  The old way was harder, more arduous, more annoying.  I don't really see how that's the case...

There is a group of players that enjoy gaming based on a sense of accomplishment.  It's why achievements are a big deal in more modern games.  Being able to see skills progress, via the "skills" command feeds that sense of accomplishment and therefore their enjoyment of the game.  With skill levels not being shown, there is a distinct lack of visible growth in a character that translates into a distinct lack of sense of accomplishment for this style of player.

[Narf]

So I keep hearing that.  The old way was harder, more arduous, more annoying.  I don't really see how that's the case...

There is a group of players that enjoy gaming based on a sense of accomplishment.  It's why achievements are a big deal in more modern games.  Being able to see skills progress, via the "skills" command feeds that sense of accomplishment and therefore their enjoyment of the game.  With skill levels not being shown, there is a distinct lack of visible growth in a character that translates into a distinct lack of sense of accomplishment for this style of player.

This would be my personal reason, though for me it's more about branching to the skills I want my character to have. I can't count the number of times I've trained a skill until it branched, and then never bothered with it again. Pickpockets, Rangers, and Merchants in particular often have key skills you'd like to have but they don't start with them. This is tangenting a little though...

That said, keep in mind that new players don't necessarily have a good sense of whether or not what they do improves their skills. I can picture a new player just going to town on a sparring dummy constantly and being shocked that they are so far behind the guy that logs on once a week and goes out hunting.

[Erythil]

I'd like to see a system where characters who enter the world at an older age get automatic modest bumps to their class skills, to represent a lifetime of effort.

I always thought it was silly in these games where playing a 30 year old combat vet always requires making excuses for his lack of combat ability as compared to a 14 year old who's been grinding.

[Armaddict]

Uhh? What issue? It's almost like you guys don't realize how easy it was to gauge where your power level was before they were shown. Or that because now that we know a skill is at "journeyman" we somehow suddenly know our skill level in relation to another person. That simply isn't true. It has nothing to do with "advanced" or "master" or any of that, because every skill functions differently at those levels. Bash at Advanced doesn't not have the same chance of success as Backstab at advanced, and all kinds of things effect skills, like stats. I've been using the same method to determine where I am at competently as I always have, knowing vague ranged between 1-5 doesn't change that..

"I don't fail this skill anymore so I know I'm competent at it."

"I only fail this skill once in a while, but the danger outweights its usefulness, so I won't use it in mortal situations"

"I've seen Amos spar with Malick, I know I can beat Amos, so I know I can beat Malick.



I want you to imagine this same type of reasoning for something like stats. Could you imagine if stats were hidden? That'd be annoying as fuck. And reverting back showing skills would be too.

I'd agree, that would be somewhat annoying with stats.  But only because it's a random roll that stays, for the most part, static.  None of your in game actions have any bearing on them.  I don't think it would be as annoying as you -say- it is, except for the one circumstance of 'do I reroll or not?'.  That being...because it's a determining factor in efficacy of your character from chargen, and something that varies greatly from character to character.  Skills, on the other hand, are relatively equal from chargen across the board.  As you stated, 'seeing' them doesn't keep you from using the same method, because a journeyman rating in this skill is not like a journeyman rating in that skill, which makes the rating itself a relatively moot point.  Aside from the 'issue' that was stated, which is that it changes the relationship between player and how they treat their skills, and how they relate their with their skills with other PC's.

However, that being said...all of my responses are a derailment to the thread, made because of a somewhat snarky comment I made about how those opposed to the change said this would happen, 'this' being the request for skills to be raised, them being more closely monitored by their players, so on and so forth.  I think the 'basing skills off of relativity to the game world' rather than 'based off of a given value' provides a greater sense of interaction with the world, but I'm not really trying to impress a movement to change things back.  Things are as they are, I just miss some of the things that came about because of the 'old way', and all my responses have been in response to allusions to how the old way was bad, which I'm really just having a hard time wrapping my head around.  For example:

So I keep hearing that.  The old way was harder, more arduous, more annoying.  I don't really see how that's the case...

There is a group of players that enjoy gaming based on a sense of accomplishment.  It's why achievements are a big deal in more modern games.  Being able to see skills progress, via the "skills" command feeds that sense of accomplishment and therefore their enjoyment of the game.  With skill levels not being shown, there is a distinct lack of visible growth in a character that translates into a distinct lack of sense of accomplishment for this style of player.

I was a distinctly skills-based player and powergamer for much of my early arm career.  It was -all- about improving skills.  It's only in retrospect that I realize how cool it was to not be told I was advanced or journeyman, because before?  I measured that change by overcoming obstacles that were previously in my path.  I'd go out hunting, and realize that scrab used to almost kill me.  That I used to have flee pretyped in, expecting that big hit that would send me scrambling back to the gates.  But then that would fade, to where it became a common hunting target.  And then I'd run into a random beast, and I'd chance it.  Oh, it won.  I avoided those things for a long time, then got caught by one by surprise...and I beat it down.  I'm improving.  Hell yes.  I'd go back and brag that I'd killed one of those things.  Some people would be impressed.  Other people would say no big deal.  No one 'knew' about when you could take the thing on, just that it ate those who were unprepared.  I never had a sense for 'I'm at master level'.  It was about 'I win most of my fights'.  Altogether, the difference between the two is very small...but one is based on the perception based off of accomplishments, and the other is based around finding ways to prepare.  'I don't think I should hunt that thing, I'm only an apprentice level swordsman' versus 'Those are scary.  I don't think I can do it yet, I still get trounced by this other beastie that is more commonly hunted than that one, sometimes.'

Again, I just have a hard time wrapping my head around why, in a roleplaying game as hardcore as this one, we'd prefer the one that gives you a hint of a scale.  However, to reiterate, this isn't so much me pushing for a change back to how it was as discussion based off of my own derail (I'm sorry I derailed it) that engages my own perception of the change.  So to RGS's reply in particular, I think you're misreading my intent.  This isn't so much me attacking the fact that skills show, as much as me having a set of benefits from one system in my head, and trying to have a discussion that will help me gain more appreciation for the other system.


Edited to add:  TL/DR I'm not pushing to put things back, but I am trying to get a firmer understanding of why seeing skills was such a benefit, or not seeing them such a detriment to a roleplaying game.  In my head as it is, the only true benefit I see out of it is that it 'streamlines' skill progression so that you know when you've improved so that you can immediately jump up to the next step, rather than stumble on the insight that you've improved that much.  But in the vision of the game, stumbling on it makes a more fluid roleplaying experience for me, and something that used to set apart 'Arm roleplay' from 'tabletop character sheet roleplay'.