Stat rolls and the experience of having good/bad stats

[DesertT]

Instead of having a 12-point difference (or whatever it is) for a single race, what if it was only a six point different?

[LindseyBalboa]

What if we renamed stat levels instead and changed nothing else:

good
very good
great
extremely good
excellent
incredible
absolutely incredible
awesome
legendary
godlike

[Brisket]

What if we renamed stat levels instead and changed nothing else:

good
very good
great
extremely good
excellent
incredible
absolutely incredible
awesome
legendary
godlike

This would solve it - also old players who aren't actually all that good at combat/the game who complain endlessly about stats should calm down, because it agitates the newbies.  Stats matter for the first couple of days and last ten minutes of a character.  Between those two times, your skill is the thing that matters - and 'bad' stats often mean you'll be skilling up faster.

80 hp vs 120 hp is 2-3 hits - try using the flee skill more, you may not be able to sit and facetank every creature if you third/fourth slotted endurance.  You may take longer to kill something if you got a bad strength roll.  It's not a hack and slash mud, being The Best At Combat is not the point.

[HammerofJericho]

I only speak of receiving 2 below average or poor stats.  Or of tanking on hp even at average. The very low end of stats are tough to make work.  Poor/below average strength is basically a non combatant until you master multiple different things. (So 10-15 days played? Depending on wisdom).  Flee is a great skill but combat happens so fast most times if you lag even a little/ get reeled you're dead.

[Armaddict]

Pretty sure narrowing the range just results in increasing the level that everyone still relentlessly complains about.

[Brisket]

Pretty sure narrowing the range just results in increasing the level that everyone still relentlessly complains about.

As with a lot of code stuff, its people making bad assumptions about how negatively it impacts their PC.  I've had ultimate badasses with below average strength.  I've had total chumps with AI.  It does matter, but it just alters how you should play.

[Doublepalli]

On my dwarf Krull Stonetusk, he had a PC under him named Drie. Drie, clearly, had below average or lower strength. She sucked. She really did. Drie, over the period of 5 IG years of training with Krull, became one of the most deadly, dangerous combatants in the game - all with shitty strength.

Stats do matter.

But they aren't the end all see all.

Enough time and hardwork will turn anyone into a certified bad-ass.

Like my highly successful c-elf miscreant who had poor strength. He couldn't hold a wine bottle in his hand. Think about that. But he could kill and tango with high-str, high-level heavy combatants.

[mansa]

I mentioned my idea before, but..

I wish that on your character's first birthday after they were created, and on their fifth birthday after their character was created, you get to pick any stat and have it increased by one.  This would encourage players to continue to play their character, and would also have a manual choice in what you think your character's progression in their stats would be after practice in game.  Everybody would be entitled to it.

[Patuk]

The game already actively discourages risky behavior and encourages longevity above all. I'd much prefer that doesn't happen even more.

[Miradus]

There is no stat which matters more to the risk-taking player than wisdom.

It allows you to skill up fast and become competitive with the risk-adverse.

[LindseyBalboa]

The game already actively discourages risky behavior and encourages longevity above all. I'd much prefer that doesn't happen even more.

Eh. I'm of the opposite opinion, it barely changes anything and doesn't help or solve any issues. +1 for surviving an RL month and then another a few more RL months is barely a motivator. Especially when after 5 IC birthdays your stats have probably changed already due to age range. Getting rid of karma timers kind of removed any encouragement to 'play it safe' at any point, imo.


However, to add on to what others have said just now:

My longest living combat character had 1 less HP than the minimum amount of HP I considered, as a player, necessary to survive.

My top 3 longest living combat characters, actually, all had one more issue than I was really 'okay' with having. And I'm okay with a glaring weakness to overcome, so that's at least 2 'bad things before' I even started playing.

Conversely, I've spec app'd a character with max racial strength due to his position and experience, etc. I think he died 2-3 days played? All of his stats were randomly top tier. And that's the story with almost any character I've had who started off with really noticeably great stats.

A really huge thing to take out of an earlier post was "bad stats tend to equate to better skill gains." Including stuff you can't see.

Unless you're playing an elf with ~good or less strength prior to the etwo change, or an extremely high stat character in a very fringe set of circumstances that all align correctly (incorrectly?), you are going to be fine when it comes to stats and combat.

The only other issue I've seen in the thread is low hp, which is solvable by prioritizing endurance.

Disclaimer: you may not be the best, however, without being very lucky or putting time into it. This is a standard game mechanic.
(edited for proofing)

[LindseyBalboa]

Devil's advocate, I am curious about how much time players spend not playing between suiciding accidental deaths of PCs because of bad stats accidents and waiting on approval.

And also how much staff time is wasted approving apps for characters with really low stats that die quickly.

[Miradus]

Here's some baselines ...

below average or less strength on a combat char ... without an enormous amount of  twinking you will not be  able to do more than tickle, assuming you can even get past their armor. Your hits will glance off more than not. For a long, long time. This  is somewhat mitigated with a spear and it's high armor-piercing factor. But not a lot.

Below 92 hp on any climbing character puts you at risk of death with any failed climb. And the way climb is so random, you will still fall sometimes even at master. A 3 room fall does about 93 damage. So if you fall from that height at 92 hp ... mantishead.

Below avg or less wisdom - 90+ minute skill timers mean you'll be less effective at 90 days played than most everyone else with higher wisdom. Unless you cheese it and only log in, get your twink on, then log right back out and go play Valheim.

[Narf]

The game already actively discourages risky behavior and encourages longevity above all. I'd much prefer that doesn't happen even more.

Gonna echo this.

I think a lot of the push to make the game world safer comes from how punishing it is to start new characters over. If you want player support for a harsher world, the very first thing you should do is make death less OOCly punishing.

[Brisket]

Here's some baselines ...

below average or less strength on a combat char ... without an enormous amount of  twinking you will not be  able to do more than tickle, assuming you can even get past their armor. Your hits will glance off more than not. For a long, long time. This  is somewhat mitigated with a spear and it's high armor-piercing factor. But not a lot.

Below 92 hp on any climbing character puts you at risk of death with any failed climb. And the way climb is so random, you will still fall sometimes even at master. A 3 room fall does about 93 damage. So if you fall from that height at 92 hp ... mantishead.

Below avg or less wisdom - 90+ minute skill timers mean you'll be less effective at 90 days played than most everyone else with higher wisdom. Unless you cheese it and only log in, get your twink on, then log right back out and go play Valheim.

These 'baselines' are not supported by my experience with the game, or the experience of several others posting in this thread.  These stated 'baselines' are why newbies fear a stat that's labeled as 'below average' when, without a range that allows for 'below average' average has no real meaning.

[Kavrick]

I mentioned my idea before, but..

I wish that on your character's first birthday after they were created, and on their fifth birthday after their character was created, you get to pick any stat and have it increased by one.  This would encourage players to continue to play their character, and would also have a manual choice in what you think your character's progression in their stats would be after practice in game.  Everybody would be entitled to it.

Maybe it's just a scewed perspective from me, but I would much rather characters start with much lower stats but then more regularly be able to bump them up and shape their character. Rather than the majority of the character's attribute progression be front-loaded.

[Brisket]

I mentioned my idea before, but..

I wish that on your character's first birthday after they were created, and on their fifth birthday after their character was created, you get to pick any stat and have it increased by one.  This would encourage players to continue to play their character, and would also have a manual choice in what you think your character's progression in their stats would be after practice in game.  Everybody would be entitled to it.

Maybe it's just a scewed perspective from me, but I would much rather characters start with much lower stats but then more regularly be able to bump them up and shape their character. Rather than the majority of the character's attribute progression be front-loaded.

The issue with it is you get people gamifying statgains, rather than just playing a role.  And its a game about playing a role, even if your role isn't Conan the Barbarian.

edit: I want to be clear to you also Kavrick, and any other newbies - the people making bold claims about 'poot strength means you can never do damage!!!' are wrong.  I'm not saying you can walk out and reel-lock a scrab with a poor strength stalker elf, but there are things you can fight and there are IC ways to improve.  That's part of the journey.  Part of the story.  Part of playing that role.

[Kryos]

Someone mentioned them "upping the mins". I don't think that happened. 

Was me, and you're right.  Turns out it was emphasizing the possibility of at least one good stat, and most likely two 'better' ones, not lifting the min bar.

Its funny, this thread shows that the players are taking away several different positions about the impact and importance of stats.  Unless staff let us 'pull back the curtain' and go with logs and deep examples to disabuse strange notions or reinforce others we'll just end up continuing the circles that are currently being discussed:  some more earnestly or politely than others.  With that in mind I'd stick with my first guns:  they're just about right. 

Games like WoW or 5E go for homogenization, dumbing down, and pandering to the most players possible with the least depth  and difference possible.  Others have taken this route before and the path it sets those games on is predictable.  Good in the short term, but the bell tolls.  I'd rather Arm keep its distinctness, even if it is modified or improved upon in ways and RNG stats are part of that, long as they are 'fair'.

But for the OP I'd like to add that yes, when asking for certain roles and coming out of Chargen with quad average when you want to be Conan in that role:  that is a sucky place to be.

[Narf]

I've always thought that stats should just matter less. Like they still exist, but the bonuses and penalties you get from them are halved from what they are now. I don't normally like random elements for character creation, but I think if they were just a lot less impactful (either good or bad) it'd be more palatable. Maybe even kinda fun. Having a stat that's "Very poor" agility on your sheet would be a lot more appealing to role play if it didn't come with the inability to hold more than two things in your inventory.

[Brisket]

That is, again, a bit of an overstatement of what actually happens unless you dumpstat agility on an older half-giant.

[Riev]

That is, again, a bit of an overstatement of what actually happens unless you dumpstat agility on an older half-giant.

What if you didn't dumpstat, and still can only hold three?

Lets not play blame the player.

[Kavrick]

Honestly after reading a lot of the responses here, it's a little bit of a mixed topic. I do understand both sides. I'm not personally someone who wants to roll a god character every time, usually I'm happy if I have one good stat, two 'ok' stats (like AA to VG) and then one bad stat (P to A, Very poor is pretty much always an awful experience).

I do understand the idea of 'that's just how the dice drop, deal with it' concept but I guess personally in a game where you're encouraged to play out a long-lived character and not intentionally die or anything, being saddled with something you had no power over does feel kinda sucky.

[LindseyBalboa]

it really seems like people just don't like being told they have bad stats, even if they have absolutely no idea of the code or mechanics behind those stats. this pretty clearly shows that veterans who have no idea how code works very directly affects the play of new players who weren't worried about this before.

one option would be to be completely transparent with how code works. people are going to 'game' if they want to game. everyone has a level playing field so they can focus on roleplay. give everyone the same understanding of how stats work, how game mechanics work, and i'd wager bugs/exploits would be more quickly reported as well because the majority of the playerbase would know when things are not working.

there are bugs for stats/combat that have literally been exploited for rl years by players on this game (not accusing anyone in this thread specifically) that only get found out by the majority of player population when there's an update or someone complains about it publicly elsewhere loud enough. sometimes these bugs are exploited by players that have no idea they things are not working as intended (i have 100% done this: see elf hidden running, which I thought was coded and had fails/successes so only used rarely). those are huge drawbacks to the current opaque system, which really unfairly favors people that are ignorant of code and ignorantly exploiting it, or willing to cheat in a multiplayer game until someone stumbles upon that bug who knows it's a bug and reports it... and then also only when it is addressed, which means it's found out and reported at a time when it is a priority amongst all the things happening in arm.

i also think people would mostly stop worrying so much about stats if they saw how little it mattered most of the time, except in rare fringe cases, and mostly when you're first starting off.

although i do like idea from Kavrick to conform with RPGs that start you off low and let you raise your stats over time, as opposed to those that start you off with full stats that gradually adjust over time due to age (and maybe after randomly finding a 'skill tome' or whatever you want to call it). i thought about that a while and starting off even shittier, even if everyone does, seems kinda unfun, too. it would require a massive game rebalance.

[Bogre]

I mentioned my idea before, but..

I wish that on your character's first birthday after they were created, and on their fifth birthday after their character was created, you get to pick any stat and have it increased by one.  This would encourage players to continue to play their character, and would also have a manual choice in what you think your character's progression in their stats would be after practice in game.  Everybody would be entitled to it.

This is a pretty cool thing.

My thought is that stats do matter. And it does feel great to roll a character with fantastic stats. There'd be a loss if everything was homogenized, I think. But then again, it can feel crushing to get a character who just sucks on the stat roll. So minimizing the bad and still allowing for some randomization would be good.

[LindseyBalboa]

And maybe address the fringe circumstances. Let HGs carry 6 things who cares. Elf stuff may be fixed with the combat change, so willing to wait. But the little things that are more oocly punishing than roleplay hooks.