Skill Progression and Starting Levels

[Delirium]

It would be neat if you could choose one starting skill from a list in chargen to start out with two automatic skill bumps applied. Across the board: no karma needed.

So if you were a warrior, and in your background, you were a bouncer at a bar, maybe you get to pick "guard" and start out with it bumped up.

Or if you are a ranger, and in your background, you hunted a lot of small game from a distance, you would pick "archery".

Or maybe you are a ranger who spent a lot of time keeping watch at your family's caravan, so you pick "scan".

Or maybe you are a pickpocket who has been scraping a living as a thief ever since they were a child, so you pick "steal" to start bumped.

The list goes on. I think that would be a happy compromise between "keep the playing field level" and "let people start out okay at their profession".

These skill bumps would be on top of regional or guild-based skill level bumps.

You would be choosing from a list that was generated based on your guild choice, so if there were skills staff wanted excluded from the "start bumped" list, it'd be a simple matter.

[whitt]

It would be neat if you could choose one starting skill from a list in chargen to start out with two automatic skill bumps applied. Across the board: no karma needed.
.
.
.
You would be choosing from a list that was generated based on your guild choice, so if there were skills staff wanted excluded from the "start bumped" list, it'd be a simple matter.

Above is possible with skill bumps (three times per year).  If the three times per year limit were removed, this would be ok, but still requires staff intervention or a code change to allow for choice of which skill to bump.

I think it is more feasible to make one code change that sets all primary guild starting skills to all start at Apprentice instead of Novice.  Then apply cultural bumps and CGP point skill bumps.

[Desertman]

It would be neat if you could choose one starting skill from a list in chargen to start out with two automatic skill bumps applied. Across the board: no karma needed.
.
.
.
You would be choosing from a list that was generated based on your guild choice, so if there were skills staff wanted excluded from the "start bumped" list, it'd be a simple matter.

Above is possible with skill bumps (three times per year).  If the three times per year limit were removed, this would be ok, but still requires staff intervention or a code change to allow for choice of which skill to bump.

I think it is more feasible to make one code change that sets all primary guild starting skills to all start at Apprentice instead of Novice.  Then apply cultural bumps and CGP point skill bumps.

If you just start everyone at apprentice.....it just makes apprentice the new novice.

I've never understood this thought process.

If you bump all skills to advanced then that just makes advanced the new novice.

I think a HUGE part of what makes this game great is the fact it is SOOOO hard to get out of the "newbie" stages of a PC with them still alive.

I think it makes people make much more realistic decisions with their characters not only when they are new, but also once their PC's are established.

Imagine a system where everyone gets started at Master for example. (another idea I've seen presented here)

Nobody is working for shit so nobody is worried about losing anything so they will make their decisions based on the concept of not worrying about losing anything.

"Well, I could try and smoke this guy, but I might die.....oh well, who cares, I can just respawn with all Master skills. No big deal. I didn't put any work into this PC anyways."

I think one of the things Armageddon needs is a steep progression curve in order to force people to truly fear losing their hard work. In a perma-death game that is really a huge part of the game. The whole concept is centered around you making decisions based on the fear of you losing your hard work. It's what separates us from other games where you just respawn from your checkpoint and nobody gives a shit.

But, I'm old, I guess. I wasn't brought up in the culture of everyone gets a trophy etc...etc...I could be the extreme minority at this point.

(This is really a response to someone saying earlier they wished everyone just started with mastered skills. I have been meaning to respond to that but just got around to it.)

[Dresan]

I think the person that said they wondered if everyone should just start with most skills mastered and be able to just roleplay instead of grind was Adhira.

I don't understand why people suddenly think making some character viable in there chosen field suddenly means making them master in just about everything.

Ranger: give him advance/master archery, scan, hunt and ride. Melee skills...yup you can make/keep them all novice. Do you want this guy in your hunting party?...oh yeah, someone can guard him with a shield while he shoots things down as a hunter should. Do you want this guy to fight beetles head on? probably not until he grinds for the current set number of days.  He would still be very useful without having to spend the special app or grind RL days to become it.  There is still plenty of ruff circle for people to do here, before he can fight bahamets head on,  sneak like a ninja, parry like a warrior, and just about anything else depending on his sub-guild. I think there are still plenty of jollies to be had when the player loses a 50 day old character even if we did something like this.

If you branch archery you start at zero, if you get archery with a sub-guild you start at zero. Again all the classes are basically like this.

[whitt]

If you just start everyone at apprentice.....it just makes apprentice the new novice.

I've never understood this thought process.

This is only true if you are solely basing your judgement on combat skills.  It is not true when you look at failure rate for non-combat skills.  Given this is an RPI with a wealth of non-combat skills and a lot going on besides killing things with bone swords, let's put the combat skills away for a bit and talk about the experience of someone who is not a stick-jock.

If your character is anything but a child, you have made a living with your guild skills up to the point when your character commences.  To not be able to, for instance, cut cloth without failing 75% of the time?  Kind of pathetic.  Can you track your prey?  Well, no... not really, but it's because of... um...  How about sneaking past that half-asleep guard?  Climb to the balcony? I thought you were a burglar?  How about a nice beaded necklace.  Doesn't get much easier Ms. Jeweler.  No?  Hmmm.  And you survived thirty years, how?  Bet you don't make it to thirty-one.

That's the point.  Combat Skills aside, you shouldn't have to suck at your character's career skills.  Even with Combat Skills, if you were anything but an amnesiac or a child, there is no chance you survived to a playable age without better than novice ability in your guild skills.  Need proof?  Try working in that chosen profession for the next IG year without advancing any of your appropriate skills as a result.  

[LauraMars]

The binary nature of fail based crafting does make things seem rather ridiculous at first.  I've been making fun of it for years.  But I don't think starting people with higher skills is the solution.  A better solution might be to create a crafting game in which a craft does not equal either total success or total failure.  Craft a shirt as a novice?  Sure - but you're bad at sewing, so you craft a shitty shirt. It's still a shirt though, and you didn't inexplicably just destroy every piece of fabric beyond saving. Craft a shirt as a master?  Great - you craft a stunning piece of fashion. It's worth a lot. etc.

That would take a really code intensive overhaul though, but it's nice to dream.

[Desertman]

I like the fact not everyone starts the game being useful to the group. Being useful to the group is something you earn. Being useful to the group is what garners you respect from the group in a lot of ways.

I don't think everyone should be gifted that respect.

Suspending reality in regards to older characters is just one of those wonky sticking points that I think you have to look past.

People have been complaining about it for twenty years. I think it would be awesome if we could find a strong balance between 13 year olds and 35 year olds that made sense and did not also just "award people success" for apping an older character.

I don't know what that solution is though. Apparently nobody else has figured it out either as this has been an ongoing discussion for a very long time.

[Medivh]

If you just start everyone at apprentice.....it just makes apprentice the new novice.

I've never understood this thought process.

If you bump all skills to advanced then that just makes advanced the new novice.

I think a HUGE part of what makes this game great is the fact it is SOOOO hard to get out of the "newbie" stages of a PC with them still alive.

I think it makes people make much more realistic decisions with their characters not only when they are new, but also once their PC's are established.

Imagine a system where everyone gets started at Master for example. (another idea I've seen presented here)

Nobody is working for shit so nobody is worried about losing anything so they will make their decisions based on the concept of not worrying about losing anything.

"Well, I could try and smoke this guy, but I might die.....oh well, who cares, I can just respawn with all Master skills. No big deal. I didn't put any work into this PC anyways."

I think one of the things Armageddon needs is a steep progression curve in order to force people to truly fear losing their hard work. In a perma-death game that is really a huge part of the game. The whole concept is centered around you making decisions based on the fear of you losing your hard work. It's what separates us from other games where you just respawn from your checkpoint and nobody gives a shit.

But, I'm old, I guess. I wasn't brought up in the culture of everyone gets a trophy etc...etc...I could be the extreme minority at this point.

(This is really a response to someone saying earlier they wished everyone just started with mastered skills. I have been meaning to respond to that but just got around to it.)

It doesn't make apprentice the new novice, because guilds have different skills. Skills take different amounts of time to raise too. If the NPC mobs don't change, then that matters a lot too.
If everyone had a maxed character, then you would still have stats and position. You might also like a certain character more then your other ones.

That being said, I also agree about Armageddon needing progression to take a long time. It gives a longevity to characters that no other game has. I can still make improvements to a character's skills after 100 days played. The perm-death is the reason I keep up with this game. It gives weight to every choice that even has a little bit of danger to it.

[Jave]

I imagine that if we raised the bar on what new characters roll out of the hall of kings stat'd with, then expectations would just rise in lockstep and we'd be back in a thread like this voicing that we need higher starting skills in short order.

I don't believe this is true either.  I don't see folks asking to be rock stars.  Only to not suck at their guild's primary skills.  Not sure how starting every (not special app'd characters) at the bottom of Apprentice is that impacting to the overall state of things.  Especially if this level of bump is to all primary guilds for all characters.  It just means that if you're playing a fighter, you can beat a non-fighter right out of char-gen and if you're playing a merchant you can maybe only fail 75% of the time instead of 90% of the time.  

It's worth noting that if you are playing a fighter, you can already beat a non-fighter out of char-gen. Beyond that, I'm a little confused by your reply. I agree -- starting every character at the bottom of apprentice instead of novice would not impact the overall state of things. That's why I said it wouldn't actually address the source of the frustration people are having. Because it wouldn't have an impact.

@Jave

Its really about balance, no one said the other skills were useless. A character with just offense and defense and no other skills losing to a warrior with maxed combat skills? No kidding, but the point was that you believed loading up a character with skills would make the world trivial. How about sending an assassin with advanced combat skills and weapons and nothing else up towards a beetle, or many other of the nasties in the game see how they manage.

For clarity, I didn't say I loaded up a character with just offense and defense against a warrior with maxed combat skills. I said I loaded up a character with maxed offense and defense against a warrior with middling offense, defense, and combat skills.

It just really just comes down to this, there are much better ways to spend five real life days then to grind these character over and over. There are games out there that offer an enjoyable experience without ever having to pay the price of bordom, and they are very good at competing for our time. [...] Now you can argue that making characters more viable in the beginning isn't the way( and again this has never meant just being able to kill bigger things), that fine, but it doesn't change that fact that it drives people away. I know the 5 day grind to relevancy in my chosen guild is driving me away right now at least, the only time I log in is when I absolutely have nothing to do, and that often includes after I've already played a couple other games.

I agree, it really does just come to down to whether or not you enjoy the kind of game where you start at the bottom and have to progress to the top. Some people, like myself, do enjoy this kind of experience. I've been getting into Fallout 4 now that it's out and I add extra handicaps to myself in the game like refusing to carry more than 5 inventory items or what have you just to make it feel harsher because for me, it makes the satisfaction of finally arriving on top all the sweeter for the journey. It seems Desertman, Inks, Lizzie, and some others share my mentality. We are one sizable chunk of the player base that like this sort of thing.

But other people don't like this sort of gaming experience at all. We've tried to make a middle of it here in Armageddon by putting some avenues in that allow for people to circumvent this with special applications, skills bumps, and the like, but we can't please everyone when different people want mutually exclusive experiences.

All that said, I appreciate you responding Jave.

And I appreciate the candor of the discussion.

[Beethoven]

I always wanted it to be that if you choose a subguild that entirely overlaps with your main guild, you get significant skill bumps to those skills at the cost of future versatility. It also would be less painful for those noobs who choose warrior/guard for their first PC. That would provide a nice balance, I think. You'd still have to spec app if you wanted skill bumps AND a hobby subguild, but if you wanted to play a narrow-focused warrior who has done nothing but fight his whole life and actually has quite a bit to show for it, you can, no spec app necessary. The only problem is that this wouldn't usually really help with skills that actually need it, but it'd be a nice system with some tweaking in that area.

ETA: This would probably work really well if we replaced all regular subguilds with extended subguilds! (hint hint nudge nudge.) Extended subguilds are awesome at rounding out a character and making them feel more real. They feel less gamey. And if everyone had equal access to them, they wouldn't necessarily be OP.

[Dresan]

Desertman I understand and respect your opinion, but I feel that this way of thinking is very outdated in this world of instant gratification and toxic in a game with permadeath and a population that has its ups and downs and you need people to achieve things. I feel you point is also moot, since there is already so much in the game beyond just code that you still have to achieve and earn, including trust, social influence and relationships with others.  

Being good/useful in a group at one or two things (not everything) makes for some really fun experience and gives insentives to team up with others right from the start, allowing more interaction as people seek their help. Locking these potentially enjoyable experiences behind days of grind has not helped this game, but that too is in my opinion.

[Desertman]

Jave's Post

^

Just a response to the point about you not sucking at your main character's skills just because your skill level says "novice".

This is so very true. Do you suck compared to someone else who is the same guild as you who has been in game for a RL year? Yes you do.

Do you suck compared to someone who isn't the same guild as you who has no aptitude in what you're potentially best at out of the gate? No. You are leaps and bounds above them.

This is more true in the case of combat in regard to warriors than anything else in my experience.

I've got my shit stomped by brand new warriors out of the gate still wearing four pieces of clothing as both a 45 day Byn trained assassin and a 65 day Byn trained ranger. Leaves a sour taste in my mouth every time. Can I kill them in the desert or in the street with ease? Yes. But when it comes to a straight up fight....I think they are almost stupidly/brokenly good out of the gate at combat.

Just my two cents on that. As a starting warrior you are actually pretty damn beast.

[Desertman]

Desertman I understand and respect your opinion, but I feel that this way of thinking is very outdated in this world of instant gratification and toxic in a game with permadeath and a population that has its ups and downs and you need people to achieve things. I feel you point is also moot, since there is already so much in the game beyond just code that you still have to achieve and earn, including trust, social influence and relationships with others.  

Being good/useful in a group at one or two things (not everything) makes for some really fun experience and gives insentives to team up with others right from the start, allowing more interaction as people seek their help. Locking these potentially enjoyable experiences behind days of grind has not helped this game, but that too is in my opinion.

I don't think this is a game that should adhere to the world of instant gratification. But I'm very set in my ways in this regard. I will agree to disagree with you.

[Dresan]

Jave a better experiement would be load up two rangers: one with very max offense and defense and the other with advanced weapons and advanced combat skills but only starting offense and defense and see who comes out on top. My guess is ranger with offense and defense.

Take that experiment and do it with warriors, adding parry in combination with weapons skills at advance and you might see the opposite become true.


Having had a ranger with skill bump weapons and weapon skills though, I wasn't too impressed with is combat performance but i think that all this still goes beyond the point of this thread. As Whitt mentioned, this isn't really about combat skills.  

[Jave]

Jave a better experiement would be load up two rangers: one with very max offense and defense and the other with advanced weapons and advanced combat skills but only starting offense and defense and see who comes out on top. My guess is ranger with offense and defense.

Why would this be a better experiment? Offense and defense rise along with the combat skills of a character because you train them at the same time, so outside of finding a poorly created NPC, you will never find yourself in combat with a character that has advanced combat skills but only starting offense and defense. If they have advanced weapon skills, their O/D is going to be comparable.

You may however, run into a non-combat guild that has been grinding up O/D for a long time to give themselves an edge in combat. -- Hence why I did the test I did.

Having had a ranger with skill bump weapons and weapon skills though, I wasn't too impressed with is combat performance but i think that all this still goes beyond the point of this thread. As Whitt mentioned, this isn't really about combat skills.  

That's too bad. I did write in my earlier post that I suspected providing skill boosts wouldn't address the root cause of the frustration though. 

[whitt]

It's worth noting that if you are playing a fighter, you can already beat a non-fighter out of char-gen. Beyond that, I'm a little confused by your reply. I agree -- starting every character at the bottom of apprentice instead of novice would not impact the overall state of things. That's why I said it wouldn't actually address the source of the frustration people are having. Because it wouldn't have an impact.

I still think your focusing on combat.  You always go back to fighter vs non-fighter.  Please put the combat away.  Instead, look at how frustrating it is to try and skill-up non-combat skills. 

You're not going to sit down and have a knife-build-off with another PC to the death.  You're not going to IronChef Allanak, loser goes in the Pit.  Just trying to get the a half-dozen bandages made, or climb up onto the balcony, or sew a simple linen tunic that sells for half-a-small without spending two small in cloth or breaking your neck.

The PC is just trying to reach "less incompetent".  As has been pointed out, low-Advanced still fails plenty to be frustrating, so we're not taking the frustration out completely.  Just bypassing the five-days played of truly being pathetic.  This is taxing on the player of the new PC and any mentor that they might have.  As much as it's a drag to have to skill through Novice?  It takes a school teacher's level of patience to constantly recruit new crafters knowing they're probably going to vanish before they're useful.

tl;dr - I think it would make a significant difference in non-combat skills with regard to the level of frustration of the player.  Maybe run one of your tests with a guild Merchant at Novice vs Apprentice skills.  What is the availability of craftable items and more importantly how often do you fail at a simple craft.

Do you suck compared to someone who isn't the same guild as you who has no aptitude in what you're potentially best at out of the gate? No. You are leaps and bounds above them.

Leaps and Bounds?  No.  Can you try and fail something that the code doesn't allow someone else to even try?  Sure.  That's hardly leaps and bounds. 

[Desertman]

Leaps and Bounds?  No.  Can you try and fail something that the code doesn't allow someone else to even try?  Sure.  That's hardly leaps and bounds.  

You can literally do something someone else can't even attempt.

I can't think of a more exact definition of leaps and bounds.

I'm not going to beat Usain Bolt in the hundred yard dash. But I can run a hundred yards. I'm sure going to beat Stephen Hawking.

(Think of it from the roleplay perspective and not the coded perspective. Your PC is in fact leaps and bounds above those other people in the world who can't even imagine where to start. Also, imagine me racing Stephen Hawking...just for the chuckle. I'm sitting here laughing at my own joke. Save me from myself.)

[whitt]

You can literally do something someone else can't even attempt.

I think we're at the agree to disagree point.  Because the next step is a derail into the Pandora's Box of the closed skill system that is just how the game works.

I believe it's frustrating to the point of walking away to constantly have to fail to reach a level of less incompetent.  Unless I am wrong, you feel it's a rite of passage.

[RogueGunslinger]

Your solution is one possibiltiy but let me offer another more common solution, people can instead 'take a break' and then come back when weeks, months, years from now instead when they don't mind grinding once or twice more before leaving again.

Another solution is to use your Karma and free +3 CGP to make a character who's a decent way into things, skill-wise. I once used my 3 karma and 3 cgp to bump a dwarf warriors two-handed, bludgeoning, and clubs skills. + 2 each. He fucking wrecked shit right out of the gates. Excellent str and good agi probably helped, but still.

Or you could use the Special Application process to make a character tailored exactly to your wants and needs. They won't let you go overboard with laster eyes and master slashing, but I apped a warrior once who started out at J-man level of skills, bumps to offense-defense and had cool other little bonuses like height higher than you can choose from char-gen, and minor resistances to things like reel. Also a whole bunch of neat gear and items I'd never seen before that time(worn-out old armor, not flashy awesome statted stuff.)

When I got in-game I was competently sparring players who had been in the game for a couple in-game years. Had a background with items and gear that represented it. Sure, people probably knew I was a spec app, but it felt like I had been established in game for a long time when I jumped in. They might have been rangers or whatever, but the point still stands.

There are options for you, other than leaving, if you don't like the grind.

[Harmless]

this is true, but it sure would be easier for us if we could "upgrade" a mundane-subguilded PC to an extended subguild version of what they were, after having played for X days and Y years of IC time playing them. The caps would improve for those skills and you'd not be stuck at a painful level of mediocrity without ANY CODED HOPE of improvement any further.

People like to at least be competent, and I agree from playing some of these subguilds over the years, that being somewhat better than incompetent is a disappointing peak to reach, especially if your PC is involved in plots and has been around for a long while.

[Jihelu]

I used to think extended subguilds were subguilds you could branch into after time.
Then I read the docs and was dissapointed.

[Riev]

What if we used "Subguild" as more of a "What you've been doing to survive" and "primary guild" as "what you're truly capable of". Switch it around so that Subguilds don't provide extra skills, as much as skills set at a moderate value for start.

So, if you're a burglar, but you've been "getting by" as a scavenger, you have forage and climb at like low journeyman (or wherever its decided to cap) so that you have skills you've "been doing".

I know people would counter it with "But I'm a burglar, so I want my burglar skills high because he's a burglar" but at least its a patch fix.

[CodeMaster]

Some skills are pretty useful/fun even at novice levels, like hunt, flee, value, pick, listen, brew... and most recently, armor repair!  Maybe this list could be expanded.

bandage is a big one for me.  Why not have it restore 0hp most of the time, and 1hp on occasion.  Let someone burn through 500 coins of bandages if they want/need to.  It's a more roleplayable situation than "oops.  I recommend you sleep instead."

[555]

I find flee more useful at zero than having novice. Just my experience. I've never understood it.

[RogueGunslinger]

Some skills are pretty useful/fun even at novice levels, like hunt, flee, value, pick, listen, brew... and most recently, armor repair!  Maybe this list could be expanded.

bandage is a big one for me.  Why not have it restore 0hp most of the time, and 1hp on occasion.  Let someone burn through 500 coins of bandages if they want/need to.  It's a more roleplayable situation than "oops.  I recommend you sleep instead."

Very well put. I wish all skills were like that. Fun and possibly useful without the sudden chance of, you know, dying horribly for attempting to use it.