Feedback on Idea Wanted: Role Based Guilds

[mansa]

Brokkr,

Will you have a (published) second pass of suggested changes before you decide to implement it, based on the feedback you've received?

[Brokkr]

The feedback on guilds looks fairly mixed at this point.  I would probably do a pass again with Staff to digest the feedback and how it impacts our thoughts on a course.  Unless that comes out as do nothing, I would expect to be back with revisions.

Overall my interpretation is that the support for the subclass proposal is not as mixed and overall largely in support, at least conceptually.  Still need to talk to other Staff, but I think that would incline us to work on that first.  I would need to look over the feedback for those again.  I think there is an entire subclass missing.  The Mastery suggestion also had mixed reviews, so likely redoing Roughrider, looking for things that make sense to tweak based on feedback for other subclasses, etc.  Then pitching it back out here.

The boosted stuff also got mixed reviews on whether to do something like that, although going off memory the support seems to be more for a class rather than a subclass option.  But the strength of that also seems a bit murky.  Understandable, seems like people have different end goals.  So subclasses likely to take a priority over decision making on this as well.

[X-D]

Brokkr, I had not itemized all the craft skills so I had just assumed they were missing some crafts is all.

So, they are fine, But the suggestion for the other 3 still works.

Faire already has the ability to become an epic maker, Let the other three not have that ability and instead improve utility so the JOAT people are less unhappy.

And still get a class reduction, which is good, six focused classes and three not so much.

[Lotion]

@brokkr do these skill lists assume that there is no branching? a class's branching tree heavily impacts how people will utilize it it. take for example dune trader's branching. in particular it has armor repair -> armor making which is commonly known to suck ass along with tentmaking -> clothworking which also really sucks ass

[mansa]

@brokkr do these skill lists assume that there is no branching? a class's branching tree heavily impacts how people will utilize it it. take for example dune trader's branching. in particular it has armor repair -> armor making which is commonly known to suck ass along with tentmaking -> clothworking which also really sucks ass

in the pictures, the ". <skill>" means that it branches from the skill above it.



So that one above would branch guarding, rescue, and blind fighting from parry
sneak from hide
poisoning and bandagemaking from bandage, etc.

[MeTekillot]

A little late, but I'd more clearly demarcate melee and ranged types. I'd also suggest giving them appropriate (and significant) boosts and penalties to their class defining stats. If possible, I'd give the melee types significant worn armor weight reductions and give the ranged types a +1 room distance sight in any weather or level of light.

[MarshallDFX]

Because the subclass discussion has been necro'd...  Some thoughts I shared on discord.

I understand there are some practical implementation issues, but it would be nice to have refresh of class names... Preferably to things that categorizes a type of play which might be more newbie friendly?  This tramples some current classes, subclasses and old classes, but a suggestion if things were starting from scratch:

[mansa]

I thought perhaps we should look at classes and subclasses differently:

High Level Overview:
You have 5 character classes, Fighter, Ranger, Thief, Maker, Mage.
These classes define most of the attributes / perks of the class.

You have a choice of specific subclasses based on the class you choose:
Fighter is the only one with "Fighter++", Ranger is the only one with "Ranger++", etc.

You can prevent the subclasses from being chosen by the class - Mage cannot pick Fighter++, etc

example:
Fighter
* Fighter++
* Ranger
* Thief
* Maker
* Mage

Ranger
* Fighter
* Ranger++
* Thief
* Maker
* Mage

Thief
* Fighter
* Ranger
* Thief++
* Maker
* Mage

Merchant
* Fighter
* Ranger
* Thief
* Maker++
* Mage

Mage
* Fighter
* Ranger
* Thief
* Maker
* Mage++

You can potentially have different types of "Fighter++" subclasses specifically tailored towards character tropes you want to present - example:
Maker++ subclass 1 - general + wood specialty (wagonmaking, low master weapons / armor)
Maker++ subclass 2 - weapons + poisons (high master weapons, brew, low master armor, leather)
Maker++ subclass 3 - armors + clothing  (high master armor/clothing/leather, low master weapons)
or
Fighter++ subclass 1 - large weapons  (high master clubs, axes, polearms, hack, sap)
Fighter++ subclass 2 - small weapons  (high master swords, daggers, backstab, reposte)
Fighter++ subclass 3 - general (low master all weapons, advanced hack, reposte)

If you choose fighter class, you get advanced weapon skills.   If you choose mage, you get mage subclasses
If you choose mage class, you don't get to choose fighter++ subclasses, but can choose fighter subclass (perhaps limited advanced weapon skills)

[whengravityfails]

Hi. I hate this. I like guilds as they are just fine, the changes to subguilds ought to be enough.

[Patuk]

I agree. I don't know what changing the main guilds would accomplish and this looks like a headache with no benefit.

[BadSkeelz]

Guilds are fine (barring some painful/nonsensical branching paths: looking at you, Laborer).

Cities (really, Allanak) are busted for non-guild reasons.

I would suggest just replacing the current zero karma guilds (except custom crafter) with the Extended Subguilds just because there's really no reason to take a 0K sub if you have any alternatives.

[Armaddict]

No, guilds aren't fine, but you're never going to get players to actually get on board with getting rid of too much excess.  For the same reason you're just not going to run into too many landlords that say 'Hey, this has been great for me, I've decided to lower your rent.'

[RheaGhe]

Guilds as they are, are currently in a fine if not good, state of implementation.

Changing one thing at once, would be better. Implement the subguilds, because they are in desperate need of the revamp.

See how the balancing pans out. And then in a year or so, I'd say revisit the idea of cinching down on the current guilds for more "pure" conceptual implementations.

Acknowledgement of bias:I personally like the current guilds, but DISLIKE heavily the current subguild situation. I find that the current guilds are a balance of world flavor and concept flavor. And you can play just about anything and it'll still have variety.

Yes there are some over tuned main guilds. But  I think that can be helped along by tuning up subguilds to fill in the gaps. More than by scrapping the guilds all together.

[Synthesis]

I think the current guilds are good enough. They just need some tweaks.

Enforcer branching sap and backstab from a weapon skill is dumb. Branching from a weapon skill is an incredibly tedious bar to clear.

Dune trader branching armor making from armor repair is absolutely infuriating.

No class or subclass should branch anything (except maybe woodworking) from lumberjacking. There's no reason Allanaki laborers, etc. should be at such a huge disadvantage to Tuluki.

Certain criminal skills (e.g. peek, steal) might as well not be part of a guild if they don't get them at master.

Again, with city sneak and hide...if a guild doesn't get at least hide to master, they might as well not even have the skills.

Along those lines...I don't understand the point of the Fence and Pilferer guilds.  I can sneak around and craft stuff? Okay. Why do I need to sneak around? Why do I need to ever use steal, when I can make an obscene amount of 'sid just by crafting?  That being said...these aren't a big deal, because you can simply ignore them, as they serve no useful purpose.

[Armaddict]

I can sneak around and craft stuff? Okay. Why do I need to sneak around?

Instead of hiring the help, you steal from the help and make them help against their will.

ETA:  Not that this shouldn't be a guild/subguild combination instead of a class itself.  Not that these classes aren't completely bloated making subguilds just a weird vestigial leftover.  Not that everyone is going to love everything that makes them able to do everything they want, then continue to complain about the lack of interaction.  These guilds are -fiiiine-.

[Patuk]

Speak plainly, man. Nobody likes having to decipher sarcasm when a genuine post would have been perfectly well within your grasp.

[zealus]

I'd say that if you implement both of these at the same time, seeing what it does for balance is not really possible. As in you won't know if it's the sub or main guild changes. If it were up to me, I'd say let the subguild change happen, see what it does, and revisit this idea later. Too much change at the same time is going to be confusing.

[Tuannon]

Give me a two thirds done skillset with some handshaking with staff to round out the skill set up for 1 karma and we're good to go.

I want to have a guy who sails out of RSV to chop down trees on Silt Islands for a GMH client.

[Agent_137]

Seems more limiting than what we have now. I don't like the hunter split. Seems like strong hunter vs agile hunter.  Why split it? Stats already guide if you're better at bows or melee. Regardless, I agree we should delay any guild changes for many months to gather data on the success of the sub guild change. 

We should also gather data now. What guilds are unused? Is that bad or good? Why do we think they are they under used? What are the most popular guilds? Should we make sure they don't get nerfed in a new system? Or should they get nerfed?

The guild subguild choice is complex now. Is that what we want to fix? If so then I like a return to simple main guild and wide ranging subguild. Ranger Rogue Fighter Crafter. No need for pseudo-crafters or other combined guilds because subguilds. But that's just one idea. What we need are goals, data, and presumptions made on the data. 

[SpyGuy]

I would ask staff to not change the guild structure again any time soon.  The guilds work fine and just need QoL tweaks.  They should be the bottom of the list for fixes if anything is really even wrong with them.

[Gunnerblaster]

I thought perhaps we should look at classes and subclasses differently:

High Level Overview:
You have 5 character classes, Fighter, Ranger, Thief, Maker, Mage.
These classes define most of the attributes / perks of the class.

You have a choice of specific subclasses based on the class you choose:
Fighter is the only one with "Fighter++", Ranger is the only one with "Ranger++", etc.

You can prevent the subclasses from being chosen by the class - Mage cannot pick Fighter++, etc

If you choose fighter class, you get advanced weapon skills.   If you choose mage, you get mage subclasses
If you choose mage class, you don't get to choose fighter++ subclasses, but can choose fighter subclass (perhaps limited advanced weapon skills)

I like the idea of higher tier classes preventing someone from doubling up on an equally powerful Elemental Subclass.

Something akin to selecting Enforcer/Raider/Fighter disables Elementalist Subclass options, unless a special application.

The next combat tier, Infiltrator/Scout/Soldier are still able to select Elementalist Subclasses, but their lower overall proficiency in combat reflects their attunement to the Elements.