Idea for learning skills not normally in-guild

[spawnloser]

So, I just thought of something.  I know different people have expressed interest in the possibility of learning any and all skills, citing realism.  Sanvaen just said in another thread that if everyone had a skill, it would 'cheapen' the skill.  Upon reading, that, I had a flash of insight.  A couple possible ways to make it possible for anyone and everyone to learn any and every skill.  Now...there are actually two ways to leave certain guilds best at the things they do now, allowing those people to keep their worth.

First, make skills that are not part of one's normal skill tree more difficult to learn.  As an example, pretend that upon failure of a skill one would normally have, the chance of increase is one in ten and it would take ten minutes with an average wisdom before you could have a chance of increase again.  Make it so that skills one would normally NOT have have only a one in twenty chance of improvement and a thirty minute delay before it could be improved again.

Second, give those skills a LOW cap.  If we're talking percentages, I'm talking like about 10%, if one could normally get a skill one's guild would have up to 90% or higher.

A quick note, of course this would not include psionic and magick 'skills.'

A couple other ideas that I had on this subject:

I'm not sure on this one, but for those skills that are outside one's normal skill tree, hide the skills from the player regardless of the level they have those skills at.

Perhaps make it so that to learn a skill outside of your skill tree you would need instruction.

Possibly have skills one could branch later learnable early on, but only following the non-skill-tree-skills rules...and when it would be branched, they could advance the skill further.

What does everyone else think about this subject? ...these ideas?

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I like the concept.

[Praetorian]

I disagree with this concept of allowing even low-percentage gaining of all skills by just about anyone.  The class skill structures are set out to define proficiencies of what your character is inherently capable of doing, and learning.  There is however considerable room for flexibility on a game like Armageddon.  If you have legitimate need for a skill, and attempt to gain knowledge of that skill, and your in character situation is such that you would have the opportunity to learn the skill, then email the mud account outlining all of the above points and simply request the skill be added for you to use and learn.  The admin might say yes, might say no, might never even respond at all, but with good reason you stand a decent chance of the imms conceding and granting the request.  If the request is denied then go with the assumption you need something more to achieve it and try a different angle, or take it as an in character hint that your particular character is simply incapable of the task it wishes to master (like a ranger wanting to learn the fly spell or something).

[UnderSeven]

Well I don't.  What's the point of having 'every' skill?  The wayit's been described to me before is simply like this.

You can't have it all because your char has limited memory, we don't have skill deterioation and that's a playbility issue, but is also justified by the ability to NOT learn every skill.

Is it possible to learn more than the skills on your tree currently YES.  
But generally in order to do this the imms will require either massive roleplay AND/OR trading some of your skills for it.

I think this method is a fair and reasonable one because it requires all skills you get off your tree to be something you're serious about.

[Candi]

Perhaps make it so that to learn a skill outside of your skill tree you would need instruction.

Possibly have skills one could branch later learnable early on, but only following the non-skill-tree-skills rules...and when it would be branched, they could advance the skill further.

I think it's a great idea.  It would make sense if a player could begin to learn a skill with the instruction of someone who possesses the ability, and then follow that up with practice at a decreased rate of learning.  I think the guild of the learning player (ie. skillsets that are already possessed) should influence just how much of a disadvantage you will be at when practicing a skill.  For instance, it should be easier for a pickpocket to learn burglary skills, than a warrior to do so.  And there should be some skills that just Can Not be learned outside of a guild.  Like backstab outside of the Assassin's guild for instance. Also, a limit on the number of skills you could learn outside of your original skillset.  
It could help make your character more interesting and individual and not so predictable.

[Forest Junkie]

I like the concept.

I agree.

In my opinion, this could potentially be a great addition, though there would have to be -major- skill caps on such branched or learned skills, to even the playing field.

[crymerci]

Well, I was all set to say no before I read the post.  But a 10% skill cap isn't that much skill, assuming 10% represents a skill level where you fail most of the time, but have an occasional success.

I can see a merchant having 10% piercing or sneak, or a warrior having 10% listen or value.  10% is not very much use to them, but if they're lucky, it might work the one time they actually need it.

I think you would have to exclude certain skills, however.  Backstab, sap, lockpicking, hunt, the more advanced warrior branch skills, basically anything that is too class-specific.  Yeah, those aren't much use to them at 10% either, but the idea of having them available to everyone just...bugs me.  And, of course, as spawnloser said in his original post, no magick or psionic skills would be included in this.

[moab]

What about dumping the whole "class/guild" idea.
It doesn't really reflect real life where someone steeped in performance
of ritual magick could also be a computer programmer and a fairly
decent deer hunter as well.

Maybe we should all start with some basic skills (a language or two, a combat skill or two, a basic crafting skill) and EVERYTHING else would need to be taught to us in game.

Magick may be a different case so I won't include it in the above idea.

What do you think?

[Carnage]

Second, give those skills a LOW cap. If we're talking percentages, I'm talking like about 10%, if one could normally get a skill one's guild would have up to 90% or higher

At that level, it's completely pointless. You're going to fail almost all the time.

[Tamarin]

Maybe we should all start with some basic skills (a language or two, a combat skill or two, a basic crafting skill) and EVERYTHING else would need to be taught to us in game.

Might be cool, but I can tell you right now it won't happen.  Characters just don't live long enough for this to be feasible.  No one would be able to start anything on their own, and everyone would die to NPCs.

The whole concept of IG time would have to be shifted around.  Considering a game hour goes by in about 5-10 minutes, there's not enough of it to actually research and learn all the skills your character would deem appropriate.

[Anonymous]

I do think everyone should have the climb skill, just  different caps on it dependant on guild. Alot of other skills probably not.

I can see certain skills given to all, with the different caps...but definitely not all of them.

[Tamarin]

I think a very simple solution to this problem would be:

Let the skills that come with the subclass branch.

As it is I don't think this happens.  Thoughts?

[Twilight]

As it stands now, the skills I'd think would be allowed to be under your system, you already have a chance at now.  Lets go through the different types of skills.

Skills on your skill list.  This is fairly obvious.  You have them, whether through your guild, subclass or race.

Branch through use skills.  The most common being ride, of course.  You branch to the skill by attempting to do it.  No reason for these to be under your system, they are already handled.

No delay, low chance skills.  Climb, skin, etc.  There are skills out there that you have a chance of succeeding at even if not on your skill list, if you just try them.  Of course, your cap, if there is a virtual kind of cap in there, is generally pretty low.  I've had some characters that could do some of these fairly decently though, so they might be dependent on either guild, race or stats.  I could see these being under your system.

Long delay skills.  Certain skills, if you don't have them, will result in a very, very, very long delay.  At the end, I'm not sure if there is a chance for success, but my guess is there is.  These are generally more class defining skills, so I don't think they would apply to your system.

No chance skills.  Things that you absolutely cannot do without the skill on your list.  There is obviously a reason for this, and these skills should be excluded from your system.

In the end, only one class of skills, imho, would be added to your system.  The no delay, low chance skills.  However, since you already have a chance at doing them, my guess is that each guild or guild/race combination already has a virtual skill cap at which they can do them.  Balance would be set through adjusting that skill cap, not giving you the skill.  I just can't see you getting a chance at the long delay or no chance skills.

[My 2 sids]

Probably the best way I've ever picked skills for a role play was AD&D (or maybe it was just the DM, I don't play many RPGs so I'm not really sure).  Anyhow, basically the player has so many "skill points" and spends them to "buy" skills.  The skills normally found in that guild "cost" less, but one can always learn/buy other skills at a higher "price" ... something that may not have come so naturally for the character.

Keep in mind that the guild of your character only decides what skills your character will get, and which skills they will be able to pick up. It means nothing to what profession your character will have, or want to have, or what things they will enjoy or be good at.

Pick a guild that suits your background: think over how your character will have required the skills he/she has. Did someone teach her how to handle weapons, if so who, and why? Is he of guild merchant, if so, where did he learn the merchant tongue Cavilish? If a pick-pocket, how did she develop quick fingers, and has she used that "talent" and if so why and where? This isn't something you have to write out in your background; it's for your own use and will give a more genuine feel to your character.

I like this idea for the simple fact it promotes the fundamental idea that your character doesn't have to "be" the guild he or she is in.  It would allow for more diversity and realism to the skills of characters.  As it stands now guild does have a lot of control over employment and lifestyle of one's character because they can only learn so much.

[Bestatte]

I think the capacity for comprehension is important, which is why I don't think that "any" skill should be learnable by "any" character.

When you are working with a character who has been brought up in a certain family type, lived a certain life up til the point of showing up in the game, has certain basic goals (a rinth-rat might simply want to survive, a commoner might want to some day live in a nice apartment, a noble might want to prove their worth to their house and become head of the house, a templar might want to get rid of all the bad guys)..you're also giving your character some maximum capacity for learning, maximum capacity for intelligence, max capacity for comprehension.

Let's say you're just an average ordinary commoner. No big eccentricities, no dramatic traumatic OMG WTF incidences in your life. You know how to do a few basic things because you're an average ordinary commoner. You can cook your own supper, you know how to -hold- a weapon, you know that the value of silk, for you, is far LESS than the value of a good piece of meat (since you're just an average ordinary commoner and so a good meal is going to be much more important - and valueable - than a silk pouch). You aren't all that nimble-fingered, but you have a strong sturdy body and you're not opposed to learning to use it efficiently.

And so - 1) you don't give a shit about silk.
2) You're not nimble-fingered
3) You have no formal education
4) You were not brought up in a family where silks and "luxuries" were present, so you know very little about them.

Your -capacity- for learning to sew a beaded gown is not going to be all that great. And even if you do learn how to sew it, that nimble-fingered thing is gonna be a problem. Why -should- your character somehow manage to learn how to sew a beaded gown?

Or how about the other end of the spectrum:

You were raised in a family that exposed you to some of the finer things in life - learning the difference between kalan and jaluar wine, intricate embroidery, maybe mommy dearest was a house servant for Fale and papa was a crafter for Kadius, so all these wonderful things were commonplace at your living room couch.

You were raised to believe that guard work is for people who can't think for themselves, mercenaries are thugs, and no "proper" commoner would ever use a stabbing object for anything other than sewing a pretty beaded gown. You would not have the musculature for lifting heavy objects - what's what slaves are for. You would not have the wanderlust to explore the desert - all that sand and sun would mar your flawless skin and that just won't do.

Why -should- your character somehow manage to figure out how to wield and use a big-ass polearm spear? Even if they learn HOW, chances are they're just not fit to succeed.

So a merchant/crafter wouldn't know how to do certain things, because they don't have the capacity to do them.

A warrior/guard wouldn't know how to do certain things, because they don't have the capacity to do them.

That's how I see it, in any case.

[gfair]

Can someone justify how useful a skill with a cap of 10% will be?  What skills will be useful at a 10% max success level?