Starting skill level adjustment

[Kismetic]

Yeah, I didn't wanna start a derail, but it's a fairly confusing topic, the progression of magickers.  Maybe worth a thread of its own.

Anyway, my final answer is:  No, I really don't mind the grind, even though I agree it could be fixed in places.  It gives my character a chance to suck at stuff.  Sucking at stuff can lead to strange metaphysical interactions, like developing a personality.

[Armaddict]

This exact same topic was brought up in the past.

The fairly outright lean of the poll question is, in fact, disenchanting to empathizing with the OP's plight.  'Why reward grinders', as if this is some malicious plot that destroys roleplay and is just a bias towards people who...play more?  Who use their skillsets?  I'm not sure I understand:

Personally I think we should raise the starting skill level for people so they can spend less time trying to be useful and more time doing things that are fun and exciting

- That's like saying you should start neverwinter nights campaigns halfway through, aside from that there's no preset story to follow here, and the 'fun and exciting' comes about through exposure of the character to fun and exciting things, not through having skills that are capable.  If you worried less about being prepared for fun and exciting things, you'd probably stumble on more fun and exciting things.

The idea of starting skills higher to 'not reward grinders' is ridiculous.  Then everyone will start at a higher skill level, and the exact same issue remains, but at a higher level.  Skill levels are as they always were, and once again, we see this topic due to people getting overly fascinated with 'where they are' because of being able to see the skill levels in the first place.  It's irritating.  This was, for the most part, a moot topic very rarely discussed aside from contact and barrier, until skill levels were seen.

If you're in need of the skill, you'll be using it, and it will go up.  If you're not in need of it, it will take longer to go up, but will improve over time.  I've yet to see a compelling argument for it.  The closest thing has been 'It's frustrating to be something, but fail at it constantly', which is still not compelling, but is, at the least, understandable.  You do not start capable.  You start as just above the vnpc population, as a fledgling in your skillset...and I still think that's how it should be.

[bardlyone]

That's like saying you should start neverwinter nights campaigns halfway through, aside from that there's no preset story to follow here, and the 'fun and exciting' comes about through exposure of the character to fun and exciting things, not through having skills that are capable.  If you worried less about being prepared for fun and exciting things, you'd probably stumble on more fun and exciting things.

We're naturally at odds here. I hated the original NWN campaign. Give me the Hordes of Undrentide/Underdark where you get to prebuild your level 15 pc any time. I like the variety and array of abilities available at that point. I hate levels 1-7 in NWN.

[CodeMaster]

This was, for the most part, a moot topic very rarely discussed aside from contact and barrier, until skill levels were seen.

Interesting point.  I feel the trend in this thread is to worry about how your PC compares relative to other PCs, not to the environment at large.  The more powerful the PC population is, the more there must be this compulsion to grind so as to not feel completely outclassed.

If this really is the perspective everyone has, an equivalent solution would be to make everyone weaker across the board.  Which I wouldn't be opposed to, actually... I think 3 10 day warriors should wreck a 100 day warrior but I suspect that's not the case.

[CodeMaster]

Yeah, I didn't wanna start a derail, but it's a fairly confusing topic, the progression of magickers.  Maybe worth a thread of its own.

Anyway, my final answer is:  No, I really don't mind the grind, even though I agree it could be fixed in places.  It gives my character a chance to suck at stuff.  Sucking at stuff can lead to strange metaphysical interactions, like developing a personality.

Good point.  My fails have been some of the most exciting and nailbiting moments in the game.

[Armaddict]

That's like saying you should start neverwinter nights campaigns halfway through, aside from that there's no preset story to follow here, and the 'fun and exciting' comes about through exposure of the character to fun and exciting things, not through having skills that are capable.  If you worried less about being prepared for fun and exciting things, you'd probably stumble on more fun and exciting things.

We're naturally at odds here. I hated the original NWN campaign. Give me the Hordes of Undrentide/Underdark where you get to prebuild your level 15 pc any time. I like the variety and array of abilities available at that point. I hate levels 1-7 in NWN.

That was the point of the 'there's no preset story here'.  You don't like levels 1-7 because it's in the tide of an epic storyline.  On Arm, you're not.  You're milling around on a virtual world trying to make ends meet and progress a character.  Jumping up to journeyman doesn't 'jumpstart' fun and exciting things.  And I think, to be honest, being weaker might make the fun and exciting easier to find, since there is more of a sense of danger to even mundane things.

[Delirium]

The process of winning is more fun than actually winning. You may grind your teeth in frustration but you won't ever be bored.

Just like having a good enemy. You may hate that enemy with everything you've got, but without them, there's less conflict and things grow stale.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I think you have a valid point, but I think the biggest argument here is about the dead-stop issue. This issue shouldn't exist. Neither should the "I gotta do something stupid to become better" issue. Dangerous, sure, but not stupid.

I think that any good solution to this issue will involve killing the dead stall, and I think that any such solution will involve making successes count for something. Just that single change, where a success can still offer you a chance at learning more, solves nearly every issue. It wouldn't matter much at lower levels, but it would mean a ton at higher levels of skill, particularly if all of the relevant skills are taken into account in such a adjustment of learning processes.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Oh, also, no, don't kill the grind. Just make sure there's content for all skill levels (there is), and danger too (there mostly is). But don't kill the grind. Just fix it so one can use common sense ICly and still satisfy OOC urges for "the codez'".

[nauta]

I'd get behind a way to make skillgains more gradual - it seems with most of my PCs I max out (or max out to a reasonable degree) after about a month played, or 1 IG year.  It'd be nice not to feel the plateau.  (A fortiori with magickers.)

[Delirium]

I think you have a valid point, but I think the biggest argument here is about the dead-stop issue. This issue shouldn't exist. Neither should the "I gotta do something stupid to become better" issue. Dangerous, sure, but not stupid.

I think that any good solution to this issue will involve killing the dead stall, and I think that any such solution will involve making successes count for something. Just that single change, where a success can still offer you a chance at learning more, solves nearly every issue. It wouldn't matter much at lower levels, but it would mean a ton at higher levels of skill, particularly if all of the relevant skills are taken into account in such a adjustment of learning processes.

Oh, I agree with that. Combat skills should raise faster, and successes should give you a percent chance of a raise.

Starting out at journeyman vs novice wouldn't solve that problem though, and it would take away much of the progression storyline.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Agreed absolutely. Barring the cgp system, I'd be angry with skills starting at higher levels.

[Hicksville Hoochie]

I think one thing that gets lost sight of, is that Arm isn't really a game about skills first. Skills are awesome and great, but raising them isn't really what I'd consider the focus of the game, so much as the journey of what happens in the time that skills are raised in coincidence with your individual storyline progression. This is absolutely my opinion, and not an accusation towards anyone, but I feel that when you go into a character thinking about skill progression over the story to come, you're setting yourself up to be unhappy with your pc in the short (and potentially long) term.

That said, not everyone likes to start out as a noob in the world of Zalanthas, which means adjusted starting skills would help make a concept work. I think the cgp system will honestly address this, and we really don't need too much more. As most people have mentioned above, the combat skillup system feels like it could use some love. I'm of the mind that the progression rate is fine, up until the point in which is nearly-stops, and the mentioned 'silly things' have to happen to skill up. I believe partial fails should absolutely add to skill gains in a minimal manner at this level. (so many partials for an increment, etc.)

Another thing that I think might help with skills, would be to make on-level challenges reward gains, even with success. If I'm a journeyman tailor, making the entry level stuff is eyes-closed territory. The things I couldn't make until I hit journeyman, though? Whether successful or not, you're likely to learn something from finishing up the project.

Lastly, I really would like for age to affect starting skills in a limited capacity. That is to say either small numerical gains for every so many years, or a 'pick and choose' so many skills for every xx years to get a one-stage bump (likely one bump max). might be good to help flesh out concepts. (The grizzled old military vet with novice swords is kind of silly, yes.) I do think cgp can address age-based bumps more or less, though.

tldr; Starting skill levels could use some work, but aren't too overly broken. And (imo) focusing on the story might alleviate skill-gain woes to a certain point.

[Saellyn]

I'd get behind a way to make skillgains more gradual - it seems with most of my PCs I max out (or max out to a reasonable degree) after about a month played, or 1 IG year.  It'd be nice not to feel the plateau.  (A fortiori with magickers.)

Go play a warrior and tell me how fast you "max out".

[Synthesis]

Yeah, the combat skill plateau is a bitch.

I got to journeyman, advanced, journeyman (from apprentice, novice, apprentice) in my important combat skills by 3 days 10 hours.

Still at the same spot at 11 days 18 hours.

[Saellyn]

Clearly some of us focus more on RP than others.

no, wait, I figured it out.

Get out of here with your elf wisdom!

[Eyeball]

Combat skills should rise faster from novice to advanced, and then slow to the current crawl from advanced to master, with one lone change - successes must have a small chance to advance your skill. This single thing would change most of the hatred associated with grinding.

Maybe the notion of some sort of partial fail could be introduced that only becomes available once journeyman is reached or so. A stance to try to target a particular part of the anatomy.

> target neck
Ok.
>
You strike at the neck but your blow glances off <victim's> shoulder! == partial fail

[Eyeball]

I've always found the meteoric nature of magickers to be pretty bullshit. 

My 100-day Warrior never branched a special weapon because he had poor wisdom.

You've unwittingly identified a part of it here. Magickers tend to have very high wisdoms. Don't want your magicker to advance so quickly? Make wisdom his dump stat. Want your warrior to learn faster? Prioritize wisdom.

[BadSkeelz]

I'd rather make their skill up just as miserable as ours, TBH.

[Saellyn]

Maybe not as miserable as mundanes, but maybe I'm the special case because I've had 20d+ magickers who haven't branched all their spells.

[Old Kank]

I wish there was a way to balance out the grind with time played.

I kind of like the grind, but if I only play 6 hours per week, then there's just no point playing the warrior class.

[Delirium]

^ yes.

[Barzalene]

I wish there was a way to balance out the grind with time played.

I kind of like the grind, but if I only play 6 hours per week, then there's just no point playing the warrior class.

I can relate to this.

[jhunter]

Some kind of tweak perhaps to cut down the grind a little. Faster progression at the lower to mid range and slower at the top end.

I don't honestly know after all this time if the code reflects it, but I think that the base offense and defense should have built in bonuses depending on what guild you are and what it is you are in combat with.

Warriors: Greater bonus to base offense and defense vs. humanoids. Minor penalty vs. non-humanoid.
Rangers: Greater bonus to base offense and defense vs. non-humanoid. Minor penalty vs. humanoid.
Assassin: Minor bonus to base offense and defense vs. humanoids. Minor penalty vs. non-humanoids.
Something like that.

[Malken]

Man, when I think of all the grinding I would have to do to get back to skill levels I enjoy I'm like looooool no way *plays MMORPG of the month instead*

Assigning a skill to train automatically when you are logged out would bring Armageddon so much into the 21st century.