Skill Progression and Starting Levels

[nessalin]

Once upon a time, Arm had a system in which the skill levels attained by one character were transferred in part to the next upon death.

I recently stumbled upon some of the code for this, actually!  As well, the values for it are still stored on character files, even though they're not used.  Prior to the account system this was how we would track which characters belonged to the same person.  Although a new e-mail could be quickly created, most people would still name their prior character to make use of the skill bump.

For those that weren't around, the process was (as I recall) when creating a new character you could list your previous character and 'reincarnate's some of the skills into your new PC.  For the most part it was things that were guild-agnostic.  Offense, defense, some psi skills, and so on.

[HavokBlue]

I think it would be kind of neat if instead of increasing the capability of a fresh PC, we talked about reducing the time required to become capable.

[BadSkeelz]

Once upon a time, Arm had a system in which the skill levels attained by one character were transferred in part to the next upon death.

I recently stumbled upon some of the code for this, actually!  As well, the values for it are still stored on character files, even though they're not used.  Prior to the account system this was how we would track which characters belonged to the same person.  Although a new e-mail could be quickly created, most people would still name their prior character to make use of the skill bump.

For those that weren't around, the process was (as I recall) when creating a new character you could list your previous character and 'reincarnate's some of the skills into your new PC.  For the most part it was things that were guild-agnostic.  Offense, defense, some psi skills, and so on.

That's really interesting. I don't think bringing something like that back for the general populace is necessarily a good idea (though intriguing), but I could see it being a hand-up for people who store PCs to take on sponsored roles. Especially roles like Sergeants where being able to survive in your own training hall is something of an iffy prospect.

I think it would be kind of neat if instead of increasing the capability of a fresh PC, we talked about reducing the time required to become capable.

I support this as well. There should be a difference between an experienced an an inexperienced character. I just don't think it should be a part-time job to become experienced.

[Delirium]

I think it would be kind of neat if instead of increasing the capability of a fresh PC, we talked about reducing the time required to become capable.

Yeah, there's a few offenders in particular.

In general crafting skills increase at an appropriate rate. It's combat (especially weapon skills) that's the big offender.

[nessalin]

Once upon a time, Arm had a system in which the skill levels attained by one character were transferred in part to the next upon death.

And you could play a mul sorcerer for no karma!

By which I'm guessing you mean that everything which has been removed from the game over the years must have just been horrible and absolutely deserving of it. And must never be spoken of again. Like halflings and Blackwing and Red Storm East. Just awful.

Some of these were, in reality, "just awful", for staff side in ways that didn't affect players much, if at all, negatively.  Others were "just awful" for players in ways that didn't affect staff, but made things unplayable for other character concepts.

Certainly bad decisions have been made over the years, and that's unfortunate, but also the reality, and an effect of growth in a complex system.  Holding a grudge, pretending bad decisions were driven by nothing more than staff whimsy, or hoping to go back in time won't really make a difference, though.  It certainly doesn't increase the likelihood of staff being open about their process when they'll be attacked for it endlessly - even after the people involved have been gone for over a decade.

[nessalin]

We have regularly, over the years, bumped up the starting value on a variety of skills.  Some of these were publicized, not all were. Almost always this is done in response to seeing new players immediately going off and doing something boring, like ride a kank in a circle for a week before they can leave the city.

[Dresan]

Woah. A Nessalin post!

I know staff complains about the negativity and attacks on them, and its true. Just reading the back and forth threads between Nyr and some hostile people, or the vitriol in some threads here would make anyone not want to contribute. I've had those feeling myself in the past, and I'm not even staff.

But its good to see staff engaging in positive conversation. It also inspires those of us who would like to see the game continue for at least another 10 years to contribute more towards a more enjoyable IC and OOC experience.


Thanks for posting.  

[Taijan]

My thoughts and feelings (phew, tough act to follow after a series of Nessalin posts!):

Melee combat
When it comes down to close quarters combat, I'd kinda like there to be a serious threat of harm every time you get in a direct fight. Being skilled should mitigate this to a degree, but getting up close to a giant insect or a pack of raptors should be cause for concern and make people want to hunt in groups. Melee with the big nasties should be suicide.  Overhauling combat would be a different topic though - for the sake of this one, I think it'd be better to leave weapons skills and other hidden factors to combat as they are.

All other skills
So, with the exception of weapon skills, I think that having the skills from your main guild starting around Journeyman would be great - as well as skills that you branch through your main guild.  Typically that seems like it's a high enough level to make use of the skill reliably while still having room to improve.

This way, a ranger can hunt competently via ranged combat if they have the right equipment, pickpockets can steal more often than not without getting thrown into a militia blender, and crafters can make things reliably without the grind as long as they can get materials.

And for warriors, things like kick or bash would have a higher chance of success.

[Dresan]

The right stuff.

[Armaddict]

I speak mostly about combat because those are the harshest offenders of what is being called 'the grind'.

I'm not certain what is being spoken of when people talk about needing 5-10 days for their non-combat skills to be viable.  By being sneaky, my sneaky characters are almost perfectly sneaky by 2 days of playing time.  By hunting, my hunters are very very competent at non-combat hunting skills in about the same amount of time.  By thieving, my thieves are very good at pilfering in, again, about the same amount of time. It's not going out of their way to skill up in those areas, it's just doing what they do.  That does not mean they've branched, but everything is working at the level that I am fulfilling my role.  It should also be noted that it is not a part time job to get competent at skills.  The way skill code works, playing more during the day is actually less efficient use of game time, as far as advancing skills.  More failures in less time != more skill ups, it equals the same amount of skill ups as occasional failures in the same amount of time.  It's only once you're succeeding most of the time that more playtime becomes truly better at pushing skills along.  If your role, and what you are working to do in the game, requires your skills, then they will go up accordingly, relatively fast.  Thus, increasing starting skills does not address the concern on that front, it only bumps the starting level that the 'competitive skilling' that you talk about begins at.

When I hear of 'the grind', I really do always assume the combat skills, because that is where I agree there is a very different time frame expected.  But that's also how I expect it to be.  I don't think being a runner in the byn needs to make you more badass than it already does.  I feel like 'journeyman' is very underrated, as far as weapon skills go...

I've said elsewhere, I think that when you're going out looking for fights to lose and having a hard time, you're in a pretty good spot, and the argument that your weapon skills aren't maxed yet is a disorienting argument for me...if you're winning your fights, that's a good thing, and should have no relation to what your skills are.  The exception to this was addressed in my previous post, where weapon branching is concerned.  I don't think weapon skills need to go up faster, I don't think people need to start at higher levels, I just think we could move the level they branch at downwards.  Winning fights too easily is not a valid method of approach for why we need to be able to improve combat skills more easily.

Mostly, I do not resonate with the mentality of 'Higher skill levels means more time to RP'.  RP is what is constantly happening.  If you're an aide...your combat skills will likely not go up quickly because you're more oriented around non combat skills.  If you're a hunter, who is actually hunting, that is you role-playing.  You hunt, you socialize between hunts, you balance survival and social.  If you're a criminal, you crime, you balance crimes against your survival and anonymity as a criminal.  The insinuation that 'This is degrading RP' is exactly false on a MUD like Armageddon, and seems to be more reminiscent of a MUSH, where you don't skill up, you just dictate what you should and shouldn't be able to do.  This is not the platform of Role-Play that has brought Armageddon here, because it's about the progression from useless to useful, from no one to someone, from new character to established one.  These progressions are done on a variety of scales, and skills is only one of them, but it -is- one of them and should not be removed out of a group's preference to prioritize on another scale of progression while wanting the benefits of the one they don't like to play as much.

On another front, while this may be ideal for some of those who do not really engage much in the skilling up game, there are likewise groups where skills are their focus.  The early-level danger and uncertainty is something of a rite of passage for the character.  That thief who isn't that good yet?  He doesn't go after templars and noble's belts.  That's left up to the longer lived, established thieves.  That hunter there doesn't bring in the raptor hides.  For that, you need a hunter who's been established for a bit.  Taking away that level of scaling really does interact fairly heavily with both economy and the 'social hierarchy' of PC's.  Reputations are made and built based off of how this rite of passage is traversed and used.

I do, however, concede the point...an older character should probably have something to show for their age in their guild.  That I do not disagree with.

[Dresan]

Just one more slight idea so that warriors don't get the short end of the stick here. Right now one weapon skill gets a boosted to apprentice. I think all warriors should start with their all weapons skills at that level.

Again i agree invisible skills like offense and defense shouldn't be touched.

[Dresan]

Mostly, I do not resonate with the mentality of 'Higher skill levels means more time to RP'.  RP is what is constantly happening.  If you're an aide...your combat skills will likely not go up quickly because you're more oriented around non combat skills.  If you're a hunter, who is actually hunting, that is you role-playing.  You hunt, you socialize between hunts, you balance survival and social.  If you're a criminal, you crime, you balance crimes against your survival and anonymity as a criminal.  The insinuation that 'This is degrading RP' is exactly false on a MUD like Armageddon, and seems to be more reminiscent of a MUSH, where you don't skill up, you just dictate what you should and shouldn't be able to do.  This is not the platform of Role-Play that has brought Armageddon here, because it's about the progression from useless to useful, from no one to someone, from new character to established one.  These progressions are done on a variety of scales, and skills is only one of them, but it -is- one of them and should not be removed out of a group's preference to prioritize on another scale of progression while wanting the benefits of the one they don't like to play as much.

On another front, while this may be ideal for some of those who do not really engage much in the skilling up game, there are likewise groups where skills are their focus.  The early-level danger and uncertainty is something of a rite of passage for the character.  That thief who isn't that good yet?  He doesn't go after templars and noble's belts.  That's left up to the longer lived, established thieves.  That hunter there doesn't bring in the raptor hides.  For that, you need a hunter who's been established for a bit.  Taking away that level of scaling really does interact fairly heavily with both economy and the 'social hierarchy' of PC's.  Reputations are made and built based off of how this rite of passage is traversed and used.


I do, however, concede the point...an older character should probably have something to show for their age in their guild.  That I do not disagree with.

This is a game. We are here to have fun. There is a reason our characters don't need to go take shits everyday. Or that there are no openings for stable boy position. Because that would be really boring to do, and we rather focus on RPing more enjoyable things because again this is a game, it should be fun at all levels to play.

Its great aides not need to grind skills but they have other demands of their role, not to mention alot of us enjoy being mercenaries, hunters, and rogues that really do need some skills under their belts before they can perform adequately. The time it takes to get to that point might not seem that much to you, but its alot of time for me. It shouldn't take a month of bordom for someone to get to enjoy some good plots with their character. Characters should be more adequate out of the box, they should be more useful to everyone around them, so they can focus doing stuff that everyone can find enjoyable. That way new characters can do more then just going into a tavern sitting in a corner waiting for something fun to happen, like trying to RP accomplishing something that is worth their time. Again no one is saying for people to be the best over night, just being more capable out of the box to play the roles they want and be able to engage in more enjoyable RP with others.

The idea that a player should be bored to tears as a rite of passage is outdated, and there are too many games out there that will offer a better alternative. I understand some people enjoy the grind, but frankly there is a reason korean grind games are changed for western audiences, because the general populace doesn't enjoy them.

I can agree that maybe age should play a factor for those that want to start a younger character (under 20?) with more of a 'challenge'.

[Rokal]

My thoughts and feelings (phew, tough act to follow after a series of Nessalin posts!):

Melee combat
When it comes down to close quarters combat, I'd kinda like there to be a serious threat of harm every time you get in a direct fight. Being skilled should mitigate this to a degree, but getting up close to a giant insect or a pack of raptors should be cause for concern and make people want to hunt in groups. Melee with the big nasties should be suicide.  Overhauling combat would be a different topic though - for the sake of this one, I think it'd be better to leave weapons skills and other hidden factors to combat as they are.

All other skills
So, with the exception of weapon skills, I think that having the skills from your main guild starting around Journeyman would be great - as well as skills that you branch through your main guild.  Typically that seems like it's a high enough level to make use of the skill reliably while still having room to improve.

This way, a ranger can hunt competently via ranged combat if they have the right equipment, pickpockets can steal more often than not without getting thrown into a militia blender, and crafters can make things reliably without the grind as long as they can get materials.

And for warriors, things like kick or bash would have a higher chance of success.

I can't agree more with you - Another mud I played, CLOK, doesn't use an HP system like armageddon does. theres an 'energy' stat that when you take damage, is lowered, and blood loss slowly drains it, and if its negative enough, you die.  but you can be injured on any of the limbs of the body, head, neck, torso, back, and abdomen, and the eyes.  If any of the places beside the limbs take a total of 120 damage, its instant death, but 45 damage for the eyes. as the damage gets to the middling point, a character starts bleeding, and it gets increasingly worse. A limb thats 'severely injured (80+ damage) can have negative effects - you cant block with a shield on a severely injured arm, for example, or even use a weapon.

A single hit from a well placed arrow, or weapon, without armor to protect someone (Sometimes even with, depending on the weapon) can instantly turn the tables of a the fight so hastily, or instantly end it. The average longsword deals 25-60 damage on a hit, and can attack up to two times per round. It makes the threat of melee combat very scary when going up agaisnt properly equiped opponents., an arrow could graze, doing 1 damage, or be absoutly lethal, hitting for 100 damage.  Not to mention trying to move with an arrow stuck in you makes your energy use go way up! (Energy is also used from fighting, traveling, ect. So its a risk of energy management agaisnt combat. A lengthy fight where either side barely got wounded, then suddenly someone has a serious wound? they'll die within moments from bloodloss if they don't run away to tend to it!)

I'm not saying that we should over haul to this, or anything, but Melee combat should be SCARY. But its also a game, making melee combat unpreferable wouldn't be -fun-. Making it dangerous, with risks vs reward in mind, is definitely important. Keep in mind the mud I spoke of above does not have perma death.

As for the mention of skills - I generally agree. WIth pickpockets as my favorite guild to go with, I can tell you right now that more often then not i've felt it important to get other skills up first before even -trying- to steal. I do not feel it should be that way.

on the subject of skills the guilds have, I'd have a lot to say about the guilds in general and what skills they have,ect  and general thoughts of a new player, but this isn't the topic for feedback on such things.

[Alesan]

My thoughts and feelings (phew, tough act to follow after a series of Nessalin posts!):

Melee combat
When it comes down to close quarters combat, I'd kinda like there to be a serious threat of harm every time you get in a direct fight. Being skilled should mitigate this to a degree, but getting up close to a giant insect or a pack of raptors should be cause for concern and make people want to hunt in groups. Melee with the big nasties should be suicide.  Overhauling combat would be a different topic though - for the sake of this one, I think it'd be better to leave weapons skills and other hidden factors to combat as they are.

All other skills
So, with the exception of weapon skills, I think that having the skills from your main guild starting around Journeyman would be great - as well as skills that you branch through your main guild.  Typically that seems like it's a high enough level to make use of the skill reliably while still having room to improve.

This way, a ranger can hunt competently via ranged combat if they have the right equipment, pickpockets can steal more often than not without getting thrown into a militia blender, and crafters can make things reliably without the grind as long as they can get materials.

And for warriors, things like kick or bash would have a higher chance of success.

Everything said here is awesome.

[Erythil]

I'd like to agree that the skill grind is a little intense.  I think easing up the low end of the grind, while maintaining the long term grind for overachievers with things like advanced weapon skills is a good way to go.  Somewhat faster skill gains for people who have maxed a guild before would also be good.  My first character was basically a skillmaxed merchant.  Later, I tried to play another, and wound up retiring him simply because the prospect of having to max all those skills again was too depressing.  And merchants are easy compared to warriors, I'm told.

I also like the idea of having better skills if you make an older character.  This might discourage people from artificially making all their characters kids just because of the accelerated clock in the game and the knowledge that they will need their character's teenager years to reach adulthood without looking like a total chump.

Making a 40-year old grizzled ranger who can actually be played as a grizzled ranger would be great.  Maybe these could function as new guild templates like 'veteran warrior.'  And maybe their potential gains should be reduced, though I think people's desires to be young and hot would naturally limit the number of older characters.

[nauta]

Making a 40-year old grizzled ranger who can actually be played as a grizzled ranger would be great.  Maybe these could function as new guild templates like 'veteran warrior.'  And maybe their potential gains should be reduced, though I think people's desires to be young and hot would naturally limit the number of older characters.

How is a 40-year old grizzled ranger not hot?

[Beethoven]

It might be neat if older characters had higher skills by default, while younger characters tended to learn skills faster (despite reduced wisdom.) Then again, I guess there wouldn't be much of a point to giving older [mundane] characters higher wisdom if it doesn't affect the learning rate.

[Delirium]

What about having a small, set amount of skill points that accrue just for being logged in and NOT idle - that you can distribute where you wish?

This can be considered to be time you've spent off-screen training, or doing whatever it is you do.

[Jingo]

I think combat skills are the only real contenders for compression here. Everything else comes with time, more or less.

My other concern is that it's just easier to grind combat skills if you're a lone hunter that can login at 1am and get some grinding done. If you're in a semi restricted clan that doesn't patrol or hunt, it's going to take you 3 times as long.

[Rokal]

What about having a small, set amount of skill points that accrue just for being logged in and NOT idle - that you can distribute where you wish?

This can be considered to be time you've spent off-screen training, or doing whatever it is you do.

This is a cool idea.

[Jingo]

What about having a small, set amount of skill points that accrue just for being logged in and NOT idle - that you can distribute where you wish?

This can be considered to be time you've spent off-screen training, or doing whatever it is you do.

This is a cool idea.

It would be great for clanned characters that are too busy doing clanny things instead of training.

[Narf]

My other concern is that it's just easier to grind combat skills if you're a lone hunter that can login at 1am and get some grinding done. If you're in a semi restricted clan that doesn't patrol or hunt, it's going to take you 3 times as long.

Or infinite times as long, depending on which skills.

[Delirium]

What about having a small, set amount of skill points that accrue just for being logged in and NOT idle - that you can distribute where you wish?

This can be considered to be time you've spent off-screen training, or doing whatever it is you do.

This is a cool idea.

It would be great for clanned characters that are too busy doing clanny things instead of training.

Maybe there could be more skill points offered as an OOC perk of being clanned, explained by having virtual mentors that train you in said "offscreen" time.

[Armaddict]

Assigning skill points, and all this discussion of needing higher skills to do anything, makes me feel like you guys are more meta-gamey than the metagamers.

The skill system of armageddon and it's basis of improvement-through-use has been a long-time appreciated value.  I'm unsure how this suddenly turned into a detriment.  The big complaint beforehand was not 'Oh, I can't do this well immediately', it's always been 'I wish I could customize what I started poor at but could get better at, rather than using classes'.

I think this is another poor byproduct, for reasons that were already explained but I think misunderstood.  Basically...I think there's too much of the 'I hate dying'.  I don't think this is about competence in plots (you actually get roped into a lot of plots in Armageddon through incompetence, because it reveals you to interested parties), I think it's about risk aversion, once again.  If your first five days of playing time as a rogue being roguish or a mercenary being a mercenary are boring skill grinds, I'm pretty much putting that on you.  Those are very exciting times that define the rest of my character's life, which may or may not be short.

[solera]

Armaddict, you may be right, but these topics are about what makes players unhappy enough to eventually stop playing. Combat skill ups is one of the issues that some of our players have been complaining about for years. If we can change it so they don't play lizard loving hermits, or just stop making combat PCs, and give them some happiness, it is worth it, in my eyes.