Since the staff are thinking about guild changes, here are my two cents on suggestions for each guild.
- All: Give everyone parry at varying levels. Warrior>Assassin=Ranger>Pickpocket=Burglar>Elementalists=Merchant.
Mundanes- Warrior: Let warriors branch advanced weapons around journeyman. Advanced weapons should be the primary perk of Guild Warrior, not some rare and treasured thing.
- Ranger: Reduce ranger's skill caps in bandage, brew, & listen. Bandage skill max should increase on subguild physician and apothecary to be the highest in the game. Listen is essentially an easedropping skill in practice, so Rangers shouldn't be so good at it.
- Burglar: Give pickmaking as a starting skill. Make picks break much more often than they do now so this skill becomes more essential. Make more locks that require master quality lockpicks to open, make master quality lockpicks require rare and valuable materials to craft. Improve poison use skill cap a bit, it's just awful at its current level. Add all standard weapons at similar skill caps as existing weapons.
- Assassin: Have assassin's start with sap, and branch backstab off of sap. Knocking someone out has more roleplay opportunities than killing them swiftly, and is easier to do. Down the road, reintroduce the trap skill, but instead of making things go boom, instead have it apply a poison effect on the target. Traps would be hidden poison needles, inhaled powders, etc. Add all standard weapons at similar skill caps as existing weapons.
- Pickpocket: Have them start with hide and sleight of hand, been a LONG time since I've played a pickpocket so maybe this is already the case. Add all standard weapons at similar skill caps as existing weapons.
- *Added Merchant: Add all standard weapons at apprentice skill cap. Give them the highest cap on scan and listen in the game.
Elementalists*Update: All skills below start at novice (0). These skills don't represent any past training or experience, they represent potential, can be used to help assist in "cantrip" effects, or are linked to the lifestyle these elementalists tend to lean towards. Keep in mind, these elementalist guilds have to support both rogue elementalists and Gemmed. The playstyles of each are very different from one another.
- Water: Add master bandage, advanced brew and advanced poison use skill to their skillset.
- Stone: Add journeyman climb, journeyman direction sense, journeyman wilderness hide , and advanced stonecrafting to their skillset.
- Fire: Add advanced cooking (lol), apprentice slashing weapons, apprentice jewelry making, and improved ability to learn languages to their skillset.
- Shadow: Add advanced listen, advanced hide (city and wilderness), and journeyman sleight of hand to their skillset.
- Lightning: Add journeyman throw, journeyman hunt (both city and wilderness), and advanced sneak (city and wilderness) to their skillset .
- Wind: Add journeyman scan, journeyman archery, and journeyman climb to their skillset.
- Void: Add advanced backstab, apprentice piercing weapons and an improved tolerance to pain.
Sorcs/Psions- Sorcerer: N/A, the tweaks to the main guilds will affect them too.
- Psionicist: Secret. I'll be glad to share via request tool if staff are interested.
[/list]
Erm, listen is good for a lot more than just eavesdropping.
i don't really see why drovians need advanced hide or sleight of hand.
rangers do not need reduced utility skills, they need to be less like desert warriors.
Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2016, 04:00:26 PM
Erm, listen is good for a lot more than just eavesdropping.
A lot more? Or just detecting sneak? That's the only other use I'm aware of.
Quote from: evilcabbage on February 24, 2016, 04:02:50 PM
i don't really see why drovians need advanced hide or sleight of hand.
rangers do not need reduced utility skills, they need to be less like desert warriors.
They'll be less like desert warriors if warriors are wielding advanced weapons.
Very few of the skill adds to elementalists are about need. They're about flavor. Drovians having advanced hide would let them skulk in the shadows a bit, something that seems entirely in line with the fantasy surrounding the guild. The sleight of hand addition is for the same reason the Majordomo and House Servant get it.
All of those Mage suggestions sound terrible and game-breaking, especially as more skills are avaiable through Extended Subguilds. You take a magick guild to be a magicker. Giving them mundane skills that are thematically similar to their magick skills is redundant and kind of insulting to both magickers and mundanes. Take an extended subguild if you want to do more things.
I think "Warriors branch advanced weapons at Journeyman" is a little too early. Maybe have them branch at advanced. I think Advanced Weapons themselves would need a close look to make sure they're not too unbalanced that their wide(r)spread presence would be destabilizing to the rest of the game.
Not sure "give burglars more picks, but make more locks stronger" is a sound argument for making them more fun and realistic. Wouldn't it just funnel new burglars in to hitting a smaller number of pickable doors over and over?
Swapping sap and backstab around on assassins is interesting, but not sure it'd do much good. Sap is just as deadly as backstab if you really want it to be. Instead of more roleplay, you'd probably just see people get sapped more and then finished off. Especially if sap is indeed an "Easier" skill to use.
What I would like to see is the addition of mundane skills where it makes sense that there would be a mundane skill that is similar to certain spell effect.
I won't go into details of what some spells could do, but some of these things should be accomplishable by mundane means and... just... aren't. To me, a lot of these are silly code quirks that makes mundanes feel unnecessarily limited.
This is on my wish list, the wish list that includes "look hemote" ;)
Quote from: valeria on February 24, 2016, 04:10:50 PM
What I would like to see is the addition of mundane skills where it makes sense that there would be a mundane skill that is similar to certain spell effect.
yes please.
wizturbo, detecting sneak is important for rangers in the wilderness. you're asking for them to be crippled in an area they're supposed to be the masters of.
Giving witches listen would be a godsend frankly. There'd actually be a point in going to the tavern.
Dubious balance aside, giving mages "mundane" skills related to magickal cantrip abilities is kind of a cool idea. I've always kind of wished that cantrips had SOME sort of coded representation.
Anyway, I'm going to hold my judgement/suggestions about the new guild changes until I see what the new guild changes are.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 24, 2016, 04:10:27 PM
All of those Mage suggestions sound terrible and game-breaking, especially as more skills are avaiable through Extended Subguilds. You take a magick guild to be a magicker. Giving them mundane skills that are thematically similar to their magick skills is redundant and kind of insulting to both magickers and mundanes. Take an extended subguild if you want to do more things.
You're pretty biased against magickers, so I take your criticism with a grain of salt. I'd be curious to hear other opinions before I debate this with you :)
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 24, 2016, 04:10:27 PM
I think "Warriors branch advanced weapons at Journeyman" is a little too early. Maybe have them branch at advanced. I think Advanced Weapons themselves would need a close look to make sure they're not too unbalanced that their wide(r)spread presence would be destabilizing to the rest of the game.
Maybe a valid point. I don't really know, I haven't gotten a Warrior up to advanced weapons before. Would definitely need to be looked at, but I'm guessing their legendary power is due to the fact that those who manage to branch them are extremely powerful already at that point.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 24, 2016, 04:10:27 PM
Not sure "give burglars more picks, but make more locks stronger" is a sound argument for making them more fun and realistic. Wouldn't it just funnel newbie burglars in to hitting a smaller number of pickable doors over and over?
The idea would be to make some apartments require special lockpicks to break into. Burglars shouldn't have open access to every non-clan guarded room in the city without jumping through some hoops to do it. The rare materials used to make these picks would create an interesting dynamic, requiring burglars to get access to them in order to break into those more secure places. That probably means they need an accomplice, or deal with the merchant houses to get those materials.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 24, 2016, 04:10:27 PM
Swapping sap and backstab around on assassins is interesting, but not sure it'd do much good. Sap is just as deadly as backstab if you really want it to be. Instead of more roleplay, you'd probably just see people get sapped more and then finished off. Especially if sap is indeed an "Easier" skill to use.
Agreed sap is just as deadly, but you can emote/roleplay out the scene more, with less abrupt end for the victim, and you have a choice about whether or not to finish them off. Assassins can be hired to send a message to someone rather than kill them with Sap.
i agree with all of that.
certain abilities aren't needed by mages. i don't think giving them wilderness and city hide is a good idea.
maybe one or the other, and at less than advanced.
their magick is already really powerful.
listen, however, is a tool that things like drovians should get.
Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2016, 04:12:23 PM
wizturbo, detecting sneak is important for rangers in the wilderness. you're asking for them to be crippled in an area they're supposed to be the masters of.
I didn't say remove listen from their skills, I just don't see why they need to be literally the best at it (along with a half dozen other things on top of it...)
Burglar skill caps need to be rethunk right across the board.
I'm actually not against the elementalist skills, it will give them something to do if they don't want to immediately sling spells. Our absolute worst case scenario is that we can have a pc that can hide, fight and spell. ---oh wait desert elves.
What I would -love- to see are more elementalist abilities that arn't classic spells. Almost ever spell effect in the game is a cast and then immediate/long-term effect. I would like to see more interesting ritual magicks, passive inborn effects and routes to power that aren't casting over and over.
Can we also make spell-cast leveling actually dangerous? I take more damage raising Ride from journeyman to advanced than people do fully branching a magicker.
What I would not want to see is people guildsniffing magickers based on the mundane skills that are associated with their guild, and I'm afraid this sort of thing would lead to that. Already they are guild-sniffed based on the mundane skills they -don't- have and subguild caps. Extended subguilds help a little but I'm still a little uncomfortable thinking about the consequences.
Quote from: wizturbo on February 24, 2016, 03:56:54 PM
Make more locks that require master quality lockpicks to open, make master quality lockpicks require rare and valuable materials to craft.
.. Dude. This sounds condescending as fuck, but have you ever
played a burglar beyond the two day mark?
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 24, 2016, 04:26:56 PM
Can we also make spell-cast leveling actually dangerous? I take more damage raising Ride from journeyman to advanced than people do fully branching a magicker.
100% for this. Removing "nil" as a
starting reach for
magickers elementalists is something I've always supported.
Quote from: Patuk on February 24, 2016, 04:29:14 PM
Quote from: wizturbo on February 24, 2016, 03:56:54 PM
Make more locks that require master quality lockpicks to open, make master quality lockpicks require rare and valuable materials to craft.
.. Dude. This sounds condescending as fuck, but have you ever played a burglar beyond the two day mark?
I have played 80+ days (about 2000 hours) as burglars between multiple characters. I'm not suggesting making any commonly available apartments require master tools to open. Locks inside noble estates, merchant house compounds, or apartments set aside for either might be worth considering though.
Dude, I usually agree with you whole-heartedly, but in this case I guess I'm glad you're not in charge of refactoring the guilds.
The ranger skill list makes total sense as it exists. The other guilds are the ones that need some expansion and love.
If you limit the listen skill, that means they'll be less effective at noticing sneaky NPCs, which means they'll be less effective at, well... rangering.
All I'm saying is reduce listen to advanced or low master and bandage/brew to advanced. Extremely minor tweaks. Delirium, I think you're going to look back at my suggestions for Ranger and wish that's the only thing staff did to that guild... Guess we'll find out soon :)
Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2016, 04:37:35 PM
The ranger skill list makes total sense as it exists. The other guilds are the ones that need some expansion and love.
and that's gonna be my opinion regardless of what actually happens, so yeah, I guess we will see.
There's a reason I posted that gif of nervous Bender.
Okay... I created this thread so we can voice our worries, joy, and hopes over upcoming changes to Main Guilds. What i am nervous about is the possibility of change to guilds that seem to work like rangers. I figure changes will have playability in mind and know you peoples have a better, broader view. I think there is a lot of dialogue from the player side that can and should be heard out, too and a few common concerns we all should touch on is what people want to see changed, what the game needs more of, and how this will positively or negatively affect the gameworld.
I do fear the nerf bat takin a beating on my favorite guild, but maybe they need it and I would like to read more about what everyone is thinking
Rangers get all the skills and beyond decent fight. I could see it becoming split into two guilds but with differing caps.
rangers need their melee combat abilities toned -down-, at least a bit.
i like that idea.
Quote from: wizturbo on February 24, 2016, 04:30:17 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 24, 2016, 04:26:56 PM
Can we also make spell-cast leveling actually dangerous? I take more damage raising Ride from journeyman to advanced than people do fully branching a magicker.
100% for this. Removing "nil" as a starting reach for magickers is something I've always supported.
Who do I train fireball on then
Quote from: Jihelu on February 24, 2016, 04:57:27 PM
Quote from: wizturbo on February 24, 2016, 04:30:17 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 24, 2016, 04:26:56 PM
Can we also make spell-cast leveling actually dangerous? I take more damage raising Ride from journeyman to advanced than people do fully branching a magicker.
100% for this. Removing "nil" as a starting reach for magickers is something I've always supported.
Who do I train fireball on then
cast 'mon un fireball' self
... nevermind. It's pointless to argue and I'm grouchy. I'll just say that if it's a case of fighting prowess, a warrior is still king.
The problem is the limited and boring skillset a warrior has. The limited and boring skillset a pickpocket has.
The fact that skills like climb should be accessible by all guilds without needing to sacrifice a subguild.
The fact that 90% of the reason to even be a ranger isn't their well-balanced skillset, it's their ability to wilderness quit.
I really hate seeing Armageddon stuck in a reductionist trend of thought.
An 'aide' or 'commoner' guild that I would play forever---
starts with
cooking to master
watch to advanced
listen to master
sleight of hand to apprentice
scan to apprentice
branching gets...
stonecrafting to master
clayworking to master
floristry to master
sneak to apprentice
hide to apprentice
climb to journeyman (for those who walk the rooftops)
Because while its still thematic for merchants to get to mastercraft I feel it is limiting to have them be 92% of those who are capable of mastercrafting.
Quote from: evilcabbage on February 24, 2016, 04:54:01 PM
rangers need their melee combat abilities toned -down-, at least a bit.
Pls
no
If they do and they raised parry tho I'd be fine with that.
The fact you canCAN NOT (I put can in my original i sowwy) make master bows without being a merchant makes me want to kill la kill my self (Not really)
Give ranger or archer or burglar master bow making.
Pls.
And no merchant /archer subguild cause thats bad.
raised parry to master that it already basically gets?
bah.
they need a reduction. not a big one. but they're quite literally the warriors of the desert, in nearly every sense of the word. they don't need that impressive melee prowess when they have the deadliest aim in the world.
You all maybe have been running into ranger protectors, because a maxed ranger/anythingelse is still weaker by far than a halfway skilled warrior in combat.
Ranger protecters are lacking several tactical combat skills that warriors get.
You are all so hung up on the fact that a ranger can maybe actually fight some dangerous beasties in the wild that you're forgetting that it'd be more fun to give warriors and rogue guilds more flavor.
Eh....
itstimetostopposting.gif
I'm out.
Their lack of disarm/bash easily makes up for it I'd say.
Just don't mention charge or trample.
I'd like to see pickpockets get completely re worked.
The whole argument I've seen since I've started this game of "Lets just throw assassin/burglar/pickpocket together"
I'd really like to see burglar/pickpocket linked and have it be some stupid shit like "Alley man/woman/fuck" where you lose throwing but get decent poison and backstab with all the other shit so you can effectively own a city.
Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2016, 04:59:03 PM
The problem is the limited and boring skillset a warrior has. The limited and boring skillset a pickpocket has.
I agree with you there. All of my suggestions were assuming very little if any new coding of skills (the assassins one would obviously.. I was on the fence about posting it at all because of that).
If skills were made to do more interesting things, Ranger wouldn't seem so good in comparison. Although I'd say that pickpockets got quite a bit of love with the sleight of hand changes...so not sure I'd use them as an example of boring skillset...limited yes...boring no.
I think warriors have plenty of room for 'fun' but your level of fun has to just be hitting things at a very good rate and having good combat skills.
I mean
Their skinning is okay I guess
Quote from: evilcabbage on February 24, 2016, 04:58:34 PM
Quote from: Jihelu on February 24, 2016, 04:57:27 PM
Quote from: wizturbo on February 24, 2016, 04:30:17 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 24, 2016, 04:26:56 PM
Can we also make spell-cast leveling actually dangerous? I take more damage raising Ride from journeyman to advanced than people do fully branching a magicker.
100% for this. Removing "nil" as a starting reach for magickers is something I've always supported.
Who do I train fireball on then
cast 'mon un fireball' self
Go hunt like everyone else. Or find a fellow magicker who can protect themselves against you to give you the chance to practice.
I'd also like to amend and highlight my statement and say remove "nil" as a starting reach for
elementalists. Sorcerers keeping nil is okay to me...gives them a better chance of laying low. Also note I said starting reach... I didn't say remove the reach from the game.
It makes sense to me that a new elementalist might not know how to control their magicks yet, and would require some tutelage in order to do so...
Some ideas I would like to see, is more variety in what skills you can get in the major classes.
I.E.
Mundanes:
Warriors start with Advanced weapons but lower the exceptionally large benefits from Advanced weapons.
Rangers that -can- eventually after mastering melee weapon lines can get advanced weapons but capped at journeyman or something similar.
Assassins - Bring back traps please but not explosive ones, perhaps needles and springs or sinew...
Merchants - More MC's per month since this is what the class specializes in.
Burgs/PP - Bundle, yes please into a single Rogue class.
Elementalists -
A negative growth of mana regen if in opposite sphere of the spectrum. Drov in daylight, or Krathi in darkness.
More freedoms for employment, the Viv's it says in the docs are sought for their abilities, but in the last
ten years I've seen one employed that followed the docs inside the city.
Quasi-Elemental Guilds,
Those that would/could relate to two attunments, something like a Whiran/Elkro or Viv/Ruk where you get some benefits from both spheres but not all them....
Elementalist Subguilds for all classes that are not Sorcerer related.
sorry at work, just rambling. But I'll write more when I can think straight.
ranger getting advanced weapons - nope nope nope nope nope
why
why even suggest that.
rangers already are literally the best at every single thing they want to do.
they do not need even more advantages.
absolutely not.
and why lower the benefits to advanced weapons? they're advanced for a reason. they're supposed to be exceptional tools that are situationally powerful.
This doesn't really contribute to the discussion, but my head is exploding with excitement over this. Thank you, staff, for earnestly looking at design/balance issues. Regardless of how the changes turn out, thank you.
Quote from: evilcabbage on February 24, 2016, 05:17:37 PM
and why lower the benefits to advanced weapons? they're advanced for a reason. they're supposed to be exceptional tools that are situationally powerful.
I was going to get into a discussion about advanced weapon balance, but then realized it wasn't germane to the thread.
Getting an advanced weapon to J-man would probably just suck ass.
Cause after getting your normal weapons to master to get it, the warriors (If they started with it in your idea) will probably have all of their fancy weapon skills to levels higher than yours.
You're better off just hitting them with a poisoned dagger or getting that good shit poisoned arrow
Ranger and Warrior are already well distanced on the combat potential continuum to accommodate a multitude of guild-blending subguilds. That is to say - a ranger/protector or aggressor should be much closer to the capabilities of a warrior than a more utility-focused pairing, such as a ranger/crafter.
Having played primarily warriors for years, I've never felt threatened by a ranger in melee combat, and those that are dangerous achieved this did so primarily through any combination of strategic utility/being exceptional long lived/having stupidly strong stats.
The only real change to the mean combat potential of warriors relative to rangers is that they should all be able to achieve no-handed ride, and advanced weapon skills should become more accessible; having well-developed one myself, the advantage they yield for the required duration of work is simply incomparably hard compared to other guild-specific advantages.
Rangers only seem over-powered in melee compared to warriors in large part because the warrior "special ability" of Advanced Weapon Skills is a non-factor for 99.9% of warriors. Warriors have a trump card, it just can't get played a lot. Warriors are supposed to get higher and better weapon skills, but they don't because doing so is almost impossible for anything but the most code savvy and dedicated of players. This leads to your average Warrior and Ranger both capping out at similar offensive and defense abilities in melee. Add in the ranger bonuses to ride, to archery, to brewing, perception skills etc. etc. and you begin to see why people say they're overpowered.
A newbie warrior will kick the shit out of a newbie ranger. (Possibly literally, as warriors can kick.) A 20 day warrior will beat a 20 day ranger in a straight fight. But by then, rangers should be having access to abilities that'll let them avoid that fight and engage Warriors where the warrior has much more limited counters. Warriors should at some point get advanced weapon skills, but they don't. Barring a few skills that branch off of much easier ones to level up than Weapon Skills, what you see when you make a warrior is what you get.
Rangers vs Warriors is a false dichotomy. Rangers can do more things than a warrior. Those things they can both do, rangers only appear to do better in practice because warriors cannot easily break in to their next tier of ability.
Edit: It isn't that Rangers can do to much. It's that Warriors (And other guilds) cannot do enough.
A solution is simple.
Either speed up a warriors scaling or perhaps make it so they can branch advanced weapons on both success and failure, not sure how that would work.
Or slow a ranger down.
I'd rather the first.
Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2016, 04:59:03 PM
... nevermind. It's pointless to argue and I'm grouchy. I'll just say that if it's a case of fighting prowess, a warrior is still king.
The problem is the limited and boring skillset a warrior has. The limited and boring skillset a pickpocket has.
The fact that skills like climb should be accessible by all guilds without needing to sacrifice a subguild.
The fact that 90% of the reason to even be a ranger isn't their well-balanced skillset, it's their ability to wilderness quit.
I really hate seeing Armageddon stuck in a reductionist trend of thought.
Just going on record that I agree with everything Delirium's said here. Especially regarding Rangers. They don't need hate, other guilds need love.
(Except magickers. Mraaagh. :-*)
After some teamspeak-fueled brainstorming, Saellyn and I came up with the following stealth fix:
Stealth nerf: If you watch some other person, you should be able to completely nullify any attempts at hide and other covert skills.
Stealth buff: HOWEVER, if said person leaves the room/your line of sight, the watch gets broken instantly.
Alternative buff: Watch gets a delay just as listen and scan do. Characters stay on the lookout for sneaky sorts for a while after they slip away, but not too long.
This is aimed at no guild in particular, but watch staying up indefinetly makes any stealthy person's job a lot harder in (imo) artifical ways.
I'm pretty new here (about 100 cumulative days played, and only warrior/ranger), but I have to say that Ranger is a lot of fun with all of its utility. Warrior feels rather bland by comparison. I'm not sure I understand any desires to gimp this experience. Does it stem from being annoyed with facing rangers in pvp? I've done almost none of that, so it skews my view, a bit. But I'd say that I'm with Delerium and BadSkeelz in that rather than make rangers suck more, frustrating those who love this class, instead the other guilds can be improved in ways that make them more interesting to play. I think the recent code changes to combat skill gains should help with warriors not being as strong as they could be, and the implications of that have yet to permeate everyone's lived experience of the difference between classes. Rangers had the option to attend Turaal/Lizard University, while a lot of warriors did things like AoD, Byn, etc where sparring was the main weapons skill use. My understanding of those changes is that they will help raise lower skilled characters up to the level of the top sparring opponents faster, which will give the top sparring opponents an equal challenge in a more timely manner, permitting them to squeak forward towards the top of their skill charts as well.
Also, I was excited by the (E)SG changes and thought they were interesting, so I'm pretty hopeful that the changes we'll be seeing should help make all guilds more fun and interesting, rather than just dragging one down.
Quote from: Adhirathe hope is that the changes actually make them better
8)
So there's now two threads about this. Should I just merge them? We don't really need two threads that are discussing the same exact thing.
Merge! Merge! Merge!
We should load them into the arena and make them fight it out!
Release the Gaj!
(https://i.imgflip.com/zrx82.jpg)
Watch already gives youy a pretty hefty buff against stealth even when untrained.
you should read the whole thing instead of taking one tiny fraction of it to pick apart.
it's a good idea.
The topic has been merged.
Quote from: Marauder Moe on February 24, 2016, 05:55:45 PM
Watch already gives youy a pretty hefty buff against stealth even when untrained.
I just figured nerfing watch without giving it anything in return might be overdoing it. If you don't think watch needs that buff, fine, just pick either one of the other two ideas.
With how the subguild changes were handled and the improvements they made, also for a lot of us oldbies it'll be a breath of fresh air. New stuff woohoo!
I feel pretty much the same about the guild changes, I think they'll be new and exciting.
Urge to suicide, RISING! lol
I guess I am just terrified because I've already been through a "main guild" change scenario and it was not a lot of fun. It destroyed my character conceot and would have meant a total retxon of her story if i hadnt stored. Not the best intro. I am trying to be otimistic though. I do like how the subs were refactored.
I have always loved warriors, and the few skills they DO get over other guilds make them absolutely baller. The one major problem with warriors, has nothing to do with skills.
Warriors are best when put in front of other humans/humanoids/fighters
Rangers are best when put in front of outdoor creaters/beasts/etc
Warrior vs Ranger all depends on the terrain. The trouble is, a warrior needs to get you behind a locked door or in a "controlled" space. A Ranger can get you in any open space but can't do shit inside cities.
More Warrior Love just needs more Humanoid v Humanoid aggression.
Quote from: Delirium on February 24, 2016, 06:08:55 PM
I guess I am just terrified because I've already been through a "main guild" change scenario and it was not a lot of fun. It destroyed my character conceot and would have meant a total retxon of her story if i hadnt stored. Not the best intro. I am trying to be otimistic though. I do like how the subs were refactored.
Well, unless they break Ranger in to the Archer Guild, the Tracker Guild, the Guide Guild and the Forager guild I don't think we have
too much to worry about.
I would like it if witch guilds each got one or two boosts or additional skills that make sense for them, like someone said. Not a lot of skills, but something they could use and incorporate as a code-backed cantrip or a skill they acquired that is possibly magickal in nature.
I doubt rangers will see much change in the end. They're skill-monkeys. They have decent combat effectiveness but a bad stat roll is a lot more important to them than warriors.
I'm stoked about this. Maybe even enough to play a character without storing in the first week. As it stands it feels like 3 of the 6 mundane guilds are the only ones worth playing and if they all get leveled out it could mean a lot more for certain areas of the game.
I'm excited about guilds with different starting levels. Sometimes I just want to play a character who doesn't need to grind to be useful, and I'm perfectly happy if that means they're never going to become a master.
I love, love grinding. Grinding a skill so I can get to master in time for my mastercraft is... okay, there is more fun to be had doing other things though.
#pickpocketlivesmatter
Ranger: get rid of fletchery, tanning, and bandagemaking. They need brew for poisoning, but cap it at 5 because fuck soap, tea, and whatever other nonsense brew uses that isn't directly relevant to hunting. They should start with parry, not branch it. Otherwise leave them the same.
Warrior: leave them the same. I think the warrior skillset is pretty much all they need to do what they do, and do it well, without any extra miscellaneous bull. Yeah, everyone would like advanced weapons to branch faster, but that's a problem with the skillup code, not the skill tree. Leave the skill tree alone and fix the skillup code as a separate issue.
Assassin: start with parry, start with brew -and- poisoning (or have brew and poisoning branch from the same skill at the same time) because it is CRUEL to start a class with poisoning and not brew. Increase their frickin' climb cap, but don't make it the best. Screw this branching backstab from sap idea--that's a really terrible idea, for multiple reasons I'm not going to get into. Raise their foraging cap, because...wtf? Why do assassins have the only gimped foraging ability? It's stupid. Again, cap their brew at 5, because fuck crafting skills.
Pickpocket: branch parry (it's much easier with a PP, trust me), start with sneak and hide, give -them- the gimped jman climb skill...maybe some other things, but it's been a while since I played a pickpocket. Oh, cap their cooking at advanced instead of master, because...really? Why?
Burglar: give them the highest-capped scan and listen, since they're like supposed to be spies or something. Highest-capped hide and sneak. Branch parry eventually, because I think -any- (mundane) class that might eventually get into a fight really ought to be able to block a god damn weapon with a weapon, especially after the defense nerf. Otherwise more or less fine.
Merchant: haven't played a good one in a long time...if it hasn't already been fixed, stop making armor-making branch from armor-repair. Branch repair and making from leatherworking. End all the stupid branches that come from woodworking, because the contrivances you have to go through to get wood in Allanak are ridiculous. Branch those skills from something else.
Magicker guilds: I got nothin'. Screw those weirdos.
I know this has to do with adjusting guilds, not creating them. However my imagination went a bit wild earlier today:
Time Witch
Speed Up
Lower/remove command delays for everything.
Slow Down
Forced extra delays on commands.
Mark/Rewind
Sets a recorded point that remembers hp/stun/stam/status(poison, magick buffs) and allows you to return to that point once.
Pause
No commands/movement in a room for certain amount of time. If someone is attacked they become unpaused and receive no delay.
Reflexes
Dodge missiles. Including magickal missiles. Increases dodge/parry chance.
Awareness.
Lower chance of crit hits. Increase your crit success chance.
Time-Shield.
Stops death once, leaves you with hp amount that is affected by power level. Time Shield also allows for movement in paused area.
Stop Aging.
Yep, you like it.
Accelerate Aging.
Ah-huh
Reverse Aging.
Oh fuck yes, you know you want it.
Omniscience.
You know what they're going to do before they do it and always have the element of surprise. This means you always get the first round of combat, and if you initiate, you get the double-attack bug.
Time mage Agressor oh baby
Oh baby
Though most of their shit sounds like psionics
Cause you know
Dark sun had time travel
Armageddon has seeing into the future.
LOOKING AT YOU MUK
One thing I'd like to take a look at is the city/wilderness divide.
For one, it's dumb. Either just give city folks sneak, or some ability that lets them sneak and run. Sneak and run in the wilderness sounds like a bad idea anyway, so you have a city version of sneak without the purely arbitrary divide.
If you remove hide from most city hiders, you could either replace it with a skill that prevents people from being looked at while they're affected by movement delay, or you can just prevent everybody from being looked at while under movement delay. Say they're moving too fast to see much detail or something. (Peek could get around this, potentially)
And there's no good reason to gimp listen and scan based on city or wilderness. It just prevents people from going to certain areas, it doesn't encourage a particular style of play.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on February 24, 2016, 08:04:04 PM
I know this has to do with adjusting guilds, not creating them. However my imagination went a bit wild earlier today:
Time Witch
...
Oh fuck yes, you know you want it.
(http://i.imgur.com/W1R95Q7.gif)
I don't think I could actually seriously comment vis-a-vis whether such a thing would actually fit the world much without touching on magick code... Could use a name for their Element. Unless we want to just call their element "Time" and refer to them all as "Timmies"
It seems like that time magick guild would have a lot of spells be much more permanent in nature than the ones we already have. This is not a criticism, but I think that if spells had the potential to be so permanent, we already would have a few such ones.
They could be something other than elementalist, like psionicist(I think????) are.
Just give it to psionicists ;.;
I'm pretty pumped to try some of the new stuff, I think you all will be too once it rolls out and you see the possibilities.
Quote from: seidhr on February 25, 2016, 12:49:43 AM
I'm pretty pumped to try some of the new stuff, I think you all will be too once it rolls out and you see the possibilities.
I want all the skills
Please don't change the main guilds. With the changes to subs/ext subs pc are so varied and interesting now, and there is no right answer or combination of guilds. I find myself planning PCs so carefully and I really think the most recent change defeated all my reservations.
I am loving the way it is now and I am not one of the status quo types.
Gas the rangers, guild wars now
Quote from: seidhr on February 25, 2016, 12:49:43 AM
I'm pretty pumped to try some of the new stuff, I think you all will be too once it rolls out and you see the possibilities.
I'm pumped too, but worry there's going to be a sudden disappearance of a lot of existing PC's who have 'accidents' to try and play them... :p
Merchants should get brew. Makes sense with them already having bandage. Besides, crafting is their only thing.
Quote from: Inks on February 25, 2016, 12:58:22 AM
Please don't change the main guilds. With the changes to subs/ext subs pc are so varied and interesting now, and there is no right answer or combination of guilds. I find myself planning PCs so carefully and I really think the most recent change defeated all my reservations.
I am loving the way it is now and I am not one of the status quo types.
Pickpocket and burglar are pretty indefensibly bad, though. I hope they, at least, get some love.
If they gave burglars scan, I don't think I'd ever play another class for as long as I live.
Quote from: LauraMars on February 25, 2016, 04:13:29 AM
If they gave burglars scan, I don't think I'd ever play another class for as long as I live.
Higher than ESG levels?
Advanced Scan:
Burglar/Cutpurse
Burglar/Outdoorsman
Burglar/Rogue
Jman Scan:
Burglar/Minstrel
Quote from: JackGibbons on February 25, 2016, 04:46:46 AM
Quote from: LauraMars on February 25, 2016, 04:13:29 AM
If they gave burglars scan, I don't think I'd ever play another class for as long as I live.
Higher than ESG levels?
Advanced Scan:
Burglar/Cutpurse
Burglar/Outdoorsman
Burglar/Rogue
Jman Scan:
Burglar/Minstrel
It's less about combinations available and more about opportunity cost. Why be a Burglar/Rogue when you can be an Assassin/something else? There's almost no compelling reason.
Good game balance is about providing compelling choices. If one choice or another is no longer compelling, it's time to change it.
Half-giant burglar/minstrel....
Breaking into people's apartments while they're mud-sexing and serenading them songs of passion.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 25, 2016, 01:09:12 PM
Ranger would still be just fine without the ancillary crafting skills. I seriously doubt they're going to nerf any of the ranger's combat skill-set.
Quote from: Delirium on February 25, 2016, 01:25:40 PM
The crafting skills they have make a lot of sense for someone with survivalist skills and who hunts a lot.
aka
don't take away my fletchery, I will cut you.
I think I can appreciate both sides here.
Rangers because of their Guild crafting skills are almost totally self-sufficient. This is great for players who don't have the time or inclination to seek out other players to convert their gathered materials in to goods. But it means those rangers are potentially a non-factor to the rest of the playerbase. They're a closed system. They don't need to play talk or play with other characters, to form mutually-beneficial relationships (which also spur others to form antagonistic ones, incidentally). They're just dudes doing their thing, and if they die to a scrab who cares? They're not really a part of any community to begin with.
A Ranger right now can Explore(with a minor in Stealth), Fight, and Craft things to support the former two. Slap on an appropriate subguild and they're one-man merchant houses.
What if the Ranger Guild could Explore and Fight, but no longer Craft? Well, this Ranger could choose a Subguild that would allow That Character to craft the things that make sense for That Character. If they just want to be a hunter with bow and arrow who is totally self sufficient at that, maybe Archer is the way to go. If they want to go the light cavalry guide route, Protector's a viable choice. If they want to focus on the skinning and processing of hides... actually I'm not sure of any base subguild that has tanning.
This brings Rangers more in line with the the other guilds who cannot make themselves as self-sufficient in their discipline. A Warrior+Master Weaponsmith will probably need a ranger buddy to help get the materials. A Ranger+Master Weaponsmith will not. Personally, I would rate the "Warrior+Master Weaponsmith with a Ranger Buddy" a higher value added relationship to the game that "Lone Ranger Master Weaponsmith with no other contacts."
"let's force interaction", aka "screw you offpeakers and sporadic players".
I get the arguments, I really do, and in an ideal world that'd be great. But this isn't an ideal world and being forced to rely on players sucks.
Quote from: Delirium on February 25, 2016, 02:32:05 PM
"let's force interaction", aka "screw you offpeakers and sporadic players".
I get the arguments, I really do, and in an ideal world that'd be great. But this isn't an ideal world and being forced to rely on players sucks.
Doesn't mean they should be super rich though?
Yeaaaah that is kind of the unfortunate decision to be made...
Maybe we just need an Offpeak guild that's just a reskinned 2015 Ranger. If you play more than 51% of your playtimes during peak you autostore >.>
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 25, 2016, 02:35:25 PM
Yeaaaah that is kind of the unfortunate decision to be made...
Maybe we just need an Offpeak guild that's just a reskinned 2015 Ranger. If you play more than 51% of your playtimes during peak you autostore >.>
I love you.
Quote from: Case on February 25, 2016, 02:35:10 PM
Quote from: Delirium on February 25, 2016, 02:32:05 PM
"let's force interaction", aka "screw you offpeakers and sporadic players".
I get the arguments, I really do, and in an ideal world that'd be great. But this isn't an ideal world and being forced to rely on players sucks.
Doesn't mean they should be super rich though?
That's kind of down to player choice. You can use those skills to make yourself boatloads of money or you can use them purely to survive and make the world come more alive.
That's less a class problem and more of a player behavior problem. We're not going to fix that by taking away craft skills from the main guild.
Quote from: Delirium on February 25, 2016, 02:32:05 PM
"let's force interaction", aka "screw you offpeakers and sporadic players".
I get the arguments, I really do, and in an ideal world that'd be great. But this isn't an ideal world and being forced to rely on players sucks.
I don't have any crafting skills.
I play off-peak.
I do just fine. Probably too fine. Imms please don't check my bank account.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 25, 2016, 01:45:27 PM
This brings Rangers more in line with the the other guilds who cannot make themselves as self-sufficient in their discipline. A Warrior+Master Weaponsmith will probably need a ranger buddy to help get the materials. A Ranger+Master Weaponsmith will not. Personally, I would rate the "Warrior+Master Weaponsmith with a Ranger Buddy" a higher value added relationship to the game that "Lone Ranger Master Weaponsmith with no other contacts."
Having played both rangers and warriors to high levels, I can tell you this is false. I had a warrior with no crafting skills manage to make it as a lone indy hunter with zero crafting abilities with his skinning abilities just fine, I didn't need a ranger buddy to sustain me.
Any class can sustain themselves without interaction. All you need to do is type forage salt, you don't have to interact with anyone!
Skills do not determine whether someone will be a PC that interacts with someone. The desire of that player to be an interactive player is the ONLY thing that will determine that.
Quote from: Delirium on February 25, 2016, 03:02:48 PM
That's less a class problem and more of a player behavior problem. We're not going to fix that by taking away craft skills from the main guild.
Personally I like the code to enforce positive (or at least discourage negative) behavior. I also believe Player behavior trends towards the shit. Give someone the ability to do something and chances of them doing it go up. That's why I'm afraid that if we make all Guilds as potentially versatile as Rangers, we're going to see a lot more lame kind of behaviors and a fractured playerbase of singleplayers.
I don't know. It makes sense for rangers to be these rugged individualists, especially in the wilderness. Is it just that self-sufficiency that makes them look so cool compared to other guilds? Can we make other guilds more versatile without also making them supportive of antisocial behavior?
Quote from: Ender on February 25, 2016, 03:24:34 PM
Skills do not determine whether someone will be a PC that interacts with someone. The desire of that player to be an interactive player is the ONLY thing that will determine that.
Very well said.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 25, 2016, 03:26:09 PM
Personally I like the code to enforce positive (or at least discourage negative) behavior. I also believe Player behavior trends towards the shit.
Yea, but really I don't think punishing the playerbase by making guilds less versatile because we're all so cranky about the potential of people not playing in your preferred sandbox is the right way to make policy decisions about guilds.
I can tell you if you believe the world is full of anti-social rangers, you are wrong. I'd argue that the majority of rangers played right now do not fall into your jaded perception of loner non-interactors. And even if it were true, playing a PC that is self sufficient is absolutely not against any rules of the game and their existence hasn't managed to destroy the social/political aspects of the game in the last 20+ years of the game's existence.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 25, 2016, 03:08:34 PM
Quote from: Delirium on February 25, 2016, 02:32:05 PM
"let's force interaction", aka "screw you offpeakers and sporadic players".
I get the arguments, I really do, and in an ideal world that'd be great. But this isn't an ideal world and being forced to rely on players sucks.
I don't have any crafting skills.
I play off-peak.
I do just fine. Probably too fine. Imms please don't check my bank account.
You do realize that's an argument for leaving the crafting skills in the ranger skillset right? You've just proven that they don't matter for interaction.
Ender said it better than I did.
Quote from: nauta on February 25, 2016, 03:29:04 PM
Quote from: Ender on February 25, 2016, 03:24:34 PM
Skills do not determine whether someone will be a PC that interacts with someone. The desire of that player to be an interactive player is the ONLY thing that will determine that.
Very well said.
But not necessarily true.
I had a character in Red Storm. I gave her the subguild of tailor just to see what it was all about. Worst subguild decision I ever made, far worse than Warrior/Thug on a human. In Red Storm, between tailoring and spicing, I had unlimited coin. Even trying to limit my intake/increase my spend, I had depressed desires to do risky behavior. My character didn't need to take risks, so I didn't feel the need to take risks.
I know it says a lot about me and how I play, and why I play (my goal is rarely anything more than "see how long this role can survive"). I had the easy road before me and I took it.
These days I avoid crafting (sub)guilds and prefer to make my coin on clan Salarries or from PCs. I build my characters so that their coded options for self-sufficiency are limited or non-existent, because I don't want to fall in to the Red Storm trap again.
The question is, what is the more common mindset among the playerbase: Players who will limit their characters for the sake of roleplay, or players who will use every coded benefit available to them to the benefit of their character. I believe the latter is more prevalent, and I believe rangers have a lot to offer that mindset.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 25, 2016, 03:39:50 PM
Quote from: nauta on February 25, 2016, 03:29:04 PM
Quote from: Ender on February 25, 2016, 03:24:34 PM
Skills do not determine whether someone will be a PC that interacts with someone. The desire of that player to be an interactive player is the ONLY thing that will determine that.
Very well said.
But not necessarily true.
I had a character in Red Storm. I gave her the subguild of tailor just to see what it was all about. Worst subguild decision I ever made, far worse than Warrior/Thug on a human. In Red Storm, between tailoring and spicing, I had unlimited coin. Even trying to limit my intake/increase my spend, I had depressed desires to do risky behavior. My character didn't need to take risks, so I didn't feel the need to take risks.
I know it says a lot about me and how I play, and why I play (my goal is rarely anything more than "see how long this role can survive"). I had the easy road before me and I took it.
These days I avoid crafting (sub)guilds and prefer to make my coin on clan Salarries or from PCs. I build my characters so that their coded options for self-sufficiency are limited or non-existent, because I don't want to fall in to the Red Storm trap again.
The question is, what is the more common mindset among the playerbase: Players who will limit their characters for the sake of roleplay, or players who will use every coded benefit available to them to the benefit of their character. I believe the latter is more prevalent, and I believe rangers have a lot to offer that mindset.
In that scenario the only person you cheated is yourself. Again, I will stand by my statement that guild's should never be created with a punitive mindset. Just because you couldn't help yourself doesn't mean we should remove the tailor subguild.
I've played in Red Storm a few times. I had one character who was capable of being a tailor, and yes it made it so I didn't have to take risks for coin, so I used that coin to invest in people in Red Storm because I wanted more than to just make sleeves. I funded people to gather me other things and information and slowly grew a network that greatly benefited my character later down the line.
If you have a problem of it being too easy to survive, you should plan for what you want to do once you reach that point of survival. Humans tend to always want more more more, it's our inherent flaw but that should be built into the character. Should they be happy being a sleeve baron in a shitty little village or should the aspire to more once they achieve the means?
So in other words, you've done this and you want to make sure that nobody else ever can again either.
That seems to be largely what this forum's discussions are about. Vets trying to decide what newbie ought to be able to do for "the good of the game".
I'm sorry, but the player to player interaction here isn't good enough to make me want to stay in it all of the time.
Heck, just look at the forum discussions. It's all mudsex, mudsex, PK, PK, mudsex.
And some of you want to set up a game that forces me into that interaction? Screw that.
I'm perfectly fine just waiting to see what comes out of the changes, but I hope like heck that the producers aren't paying too much attention to the community input.
>forage salt
(which, by the way, I can count on one hand the characters who have willingly done this.)
BadSkeelz you have a really narrow viewpoint of how the game should be played, which is your prerogative, and on some points we agree - I like to keep my characters poor. But not everyone plays this game for the same reasons or for the same experiences, and that is okay. As long as they are not actively hurting anyone's fun, let them do what they like.
When I balk at removing craft skills, I balk at removing them because they make sense for the guild. Money doesn't play into it. I guess you could churn out 10 arrows every night to flood the markets with, but I'd rather not. Still, I'm not going to judge the guy that wants to sit in his apartment and make some arrows, because who is he really hurting?
Having crafting skills actually helps keep a ranger poor, because then they don't need to make money to buy arrows, and they can just hunt enough to scrape by with just a few hundred sid jingling in their pockets. Take that away, and rangers will be forced to go out there and make more coin so they can buy more overpriced arrows.
We have to sit back and consider the ramifications on game design that personal desires and tastes would have, or you'll just end up with a really boring and stagnated game.
I don't think anyone should be effectively forced to interact on any character that they don't want to.
Not only do we have offpeak players, we also have people who come here with other Bartle associations than "socializer." Some people really just want to roll up a character and explore. And you know what? I think they should be able to do that.
Meanwhile, I see plenty of people artificially limit their characters' coded possibilities for some roleplay reason or another. Not just so that can feel superior to people who don't, but also for the same reason people try to do no-kill runs of kill heavy games--it's more challenging that way. I also know people who don't, and those are fine too. But I think there are better ways to handle the broken PC economy than removing play options.
Quote from: valeria on February 25, 2016, 03:53:59 PMNot only do we have offpeak players, we also have people who come here with other Bartle associations than "socializer." Some people really just want to roll up a character and explore. And you know what? I think they should be able to do that.
Thank you.
Everything about your post, really, but especially that.
I like that rangers are self-sufficient. That's what makes them fun and feel less "gamey."
Ranger is the only guild that seems to embody not just a profession or a talent, but a lifestyle. And I really like that.
Quote from: Delirium on February 25, 2016, 03:36:20 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on February 25, 2016, 03:08:34 PM
Quote from: Delirium on February 25, 2016, 02:32:05 PM
"let's force interaction", aka "screw you offpeakers and sporadic players".
I get the arguments, I really do, and in an ideal world that'd be great. But this isn't an ideal world and being forced to rely on players sucks.
I don't have any crafting skills.
I play off-peak.
I do just fine. Probably too fine. Imms please don't check my bank account.
You do realize that's an argument for leaving the crafting skills in the ranger skillset right? You've just proven that they don't matter for interaction.
Ender said it better than I did.
Yes, that's correct. Rangers do not need crafting skills in order to avoid depending on other PCs to survive.
So...why give them crafting skills?
The only thing it does is allow them to continue their positive cash-flow during times when the NPC market in 1st-order items (food, raw hides, herbs, gemstones, etc.) is saturated...and that saturation point is typically well above what a PC needs to just get by. Nobody actually hunts with those arrows, unless they're doing it just to be contrary.
Nobody really hunts with arrows at all, honestly. You use arrows to annoy other PCs and to clear shit like drov beetles and kryl out of your way when you don't feel like fighting them. If you've reached the point where you actually branched fletchery, you probably don't need more than 4 shots to clear either, you'll probably get 1-2 arrows back, so you're minus 2-3 arrows, every once in a while, which is like what...maybe 150 'sid.
So I mean, yeah, if you've got some bizarre ranger concept where you're going to powergame archery to get to fletchery just so you can go out and shoot things instead of melee them, and then stay profitable by crafting your own arrows...okay, fine...pick a subclass with fletchery and go out and be weird like that. 99.9% of rangers are just chopping shit up with bone swords and selling arrows on the side.
I'm not making this argument because I want rangers to interact more. I can probably count on my hands the number of times I used say/tell/talk in the last week (not counting talking to myself). I'm making it because the crafting skills are completely unnecessary in the ranger skillset.
You're operating off of an extremely flawed and code-focused premise based on your own personal game play preferences.
Archery is incredibly viable regardless of PK. Sheesh.
I think this thread is suffering from a lot of "I assume everyone else plays like me." For the same psychological reasons why honest people assume other people are honest, cheaters assume other people cheat too, etc, you're going to assume that other people play the same way you do. It doesn't mean that they do.
Rather than getting rid of rangers crafting arrows, I'd rather give low-level relevant crafting to all guilds who don't already have it. Warriors with certain weapon proficiency should be able to craft weapons/shields at a lower level, for instance. But hey, I like crafting for the sake of crafting. And I'd rather see other guilds improved than a good guild "nerf"ed.
If we could agree for the moment that Rangers are the Gold Standard for what a Guild should be (which, concerns about what kind of behaviors they encourage in players and how that behavior impacts other players aside, I do largely agree with) ... what would we like to see added to other Guilds to bring them up to that standard?
edit: What Valeria said. I'd like warriors to get jman or advanced weapon crafting off of high level weapon skills. Even if they might become money mills (though a PC at that point probably wouldn't need it), they also give a lot of flavor to a warrior and something to do in the downtimes. I've enjoyed playing and conversing with crafting warriors as it allows for some discussion about the nature of Zalanthan warfare in-game.
I also think they should get armor repair as a Guild skill at journeyman. Although I can't say I've needed to repair a single piece of armor since the changes went in... But a character's who skills "involve only the many aspects of fighting" should be able to keep their gear moderately functional.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 25, 2016, 04:02:26 PM
Yes, that's correct. Rangers do not need crafting skills in order to avoid depending on other PCs to survive.
So...why give them crafting skills?
The only thing it does is allow them to continue their positive cash-flow during times when the NPC market in 1st-order items (food, raw hides, herbs, gemstones, etc.) is saturated...and that saturation point is typically well above what a PC needs to just get by. Nobody actually hunts with those arrows, unless they're doing it just to be contrary.
Nobody really hunts with arrows at all, honestly. You use arrows to annoy other PCs and to clear shit like drov beetles and kryl out of your way when you don't feel like fighting them. If you've reached the point where you actually branched fletchery, you probably don't need more than 4 shots to clear either, you'll probably get 1-2 arrows back, so you're minus 2-3 arrows, every once in a while, which is like what...maybe 150 'sid.
So I mean, yeah, if you've got some bizarre ranger concept where you're going to powergame archery to get to fletchery just so you can go out and shoot things instead of melee them, and then stay profitable by crafting your own arrows...okay, fine...pick a subclass with fletchery and go out and be weird like that. 99.9% of rangers are just chopping shit up with bone swords and selling arrows on the side.
I'm not making this argument because I want rangers to interact more. I can probably count on my hands the number of times I used say/tell/talk in the last week (not counting talking to myself). I'm making it because the crafting skills are completely unnecessary in the ranger skillset.
Well shit. All these years I've been playing my rangers all wrong, I guess.
Or else I'm just contrary. That's probably it. :)
I think just about every ranger I've ever had has made and hunted with their own arrows.
One occasionally sold arrows to a PC aquaintance.
I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've tanned anything with a ranger.
The real argument for removing Ranger's crafting skills is similar to other arguments for nerfing it: the class gets too much stuff that steps too much on other guilds' toes. The crafting prowess of the ranger steps on the merchant's toes. The wilderness combat prowess steps on the warrior's toes. Paired with an urban stealth subguild, it steps on all of the stealth guilds' toes, too.
It's easy to say we should buff the other guilds rather than nerf ranger, but that has very interesting and largely unanswered implications about what we think about Armageddon's philosophy on class, skills and player advancement generally. Ranger gets so much stuff, if you brought the other guilds up to its level, you'd probably end up with a system where you are able to create virtually any possible character concept with the right guild-subguild combination, which is great. But...if that's the goal, why stick with a stringent guild system in the first place?
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 25, 2016, 04:50:16 PM
It's easy to say we should buff the other guilds rather than nerf ranger, but that has very interesting and largely unanswered implications about what we think about Armageddon's philosophy on class, skills and player advancement generally. Ranger gets so much stuff, if you brought the other guilds up to its level, you'd probably end up with a system where you are able to create virtually any possible character concept with the right guild-subguild combination, which is great. But...if that's the goal, why stick with a stringent guild system in the first place?
Because it's easier to code than the alternatives?
Edit: this isn't meant to be snarky. I think it's just the nature of the beast. I would love to have freeform character generation where we could build up our PCs with the skills, advantages, and disadvantages that they would have as actual characters... but I just don't think that's allowable under the current codebase. It's like Dungeons and Dragons vs Shadowrun character generation: in one you have classes, the other you have point-buy. For better or for worse we're locked in the class system.
But if we make those classes broad enough, with enough overlap, and throw in a bunch of cool subguilds to add further variety and flavor... we could get pretty close to imiating the outcome of the point-buy. Just by different methods.
Everyone is going to say don't nerf ranger.
I'm going to get on here one day and they'll be a large post about balancing the game and expanding options.
And it'll translate as "Ranger nerf"
I sadly believe in this.
Make all skills branch at journeyman. I think that would solve most my issues with class progression. Breadth comes earlier, depth comes after.
Buff everything to Ranger level awesome.
Quote from: Miradus on February 25, 2016, 03:47:41 PM
So in other words, you've done this and you want to make sure that nobody else ever can again either.
That seems to be largely what this forum's discussions are about. Vets trying to decide what newbie ought to be able to do for "the good of the game".
I'm sorry, but the player to player interaction here isn't good enough to make me want to stay in it all of the time.
Heck, just look at the forum discussions. It's all mudsex, mudsex, PK, PK, mudsex.
And some of you want to set up a game that forces me into that interaction? Screw that.
I'm perfectly fine just waiting to see what comes out of the changes, but I hope like heck that the producers aren't paying too much attention to the community input.
That's pretty unfair. It's a multiplayer game, and RPI at that, with a specific theme. If people are coming here specifically to not play with PCs ever, then that's avoiding the point of the game. Have you really found the player to player interaction that poor? Because I'll straight up call that out, it's such an unfair treatment of those that work really hard to make this game interesting for others. There's definitely some solid stuff out there, you sometimes need to find the right PCs, but holy shit is there some amazing interaction out there. Lately, for me at least, it's been some of the best stuff I've seen. Sometimes it's mudsex or PK, mostly not.
As for the vets vs newbs comment? What the hell? Vets probably do know what's better for the game that newbies. Not in all cases, but there's something to be said with experience. The idea that some players want changes where others don't shouldn't be a shock. I'm in line with Badskeelz on a few things, because I think he and I like the gritty simulationist stuff rather than everybody being a special rich snowflake after grinding pelts or whatever, but I know he hates magick and high plots where I love those, and we have have like, hour long arguments in real life over that stuff. Because we're passionate motherfuckers who love the game and want to improve, not elitist vets wanting to maintain some bullying status quo. He's not a vet, I guess I'm a vet now but that's new. Then there's vets like Delirium arguing with vets like Synthesis over the economics of arrow manufacture. All three of them are brilliant RPers who make interesting, creative stuff happen around them and I love RPing with them all very much. This whole idea that disputes over detailed tweaks is really unfair. They're all pet peeves that people are fighting for in the only way the GDB knows how - forums drama and antagonising. It's nothing to do with vets and newbs, I promise. It doesn't show up IG.
Split out the stats a bit more, lower all skill maxes and extend the maxes by stat equations then allow for a stat minimum by guild
or I dunno, skill choosing could be neat from various categories picked around a central theme. Select which skills you get higher caps on.
That'd be my ideal really. Never liked cookie cutter guilds. But I am interested to see what'll come out of the changes.
Are those two posts naughty or nice, Case?
Quote from: nauta on February 25, 2016, 05:40:23 PM
Are those two posts naughty or nice, Case?
:D
I forgot some smileys
To be honest, if rangers WERE nerfed at all, I'd rather see their combat prowess get taken down a notch rather than a removal of their utility and crafting skills.
If pickpockets were changed to start with hide, I would be completely fine with them as a class. I have played a lot of pickpockets and that sneak grind is so frustrating at this point. The only reason I don't play burglars instead is the lack of scan.
If I were magically in charge of things, I'd change things up as follows :
Warriors would largely stay the same. Give them some basic ride skills.
Rangers would lose most of their stealth skills. They don't use them on mounts anyway. Rangers would be just fine focusing on mobility over real stealth.
Then the rest of the stealth guilds would be much as they are now, with some accommodation for wilderness activity. No more magic stealth distinctions, please. Give them some basic ride skills, too.
Riding in groups is a fundamental part of the game. There's no reason someone should be hamstrung from riding with other characters on a road.
Merchants? Yeah, much the same. I'd up their defensive ability, though. There's not a good reason for them have all the defensive ability of a wet tissue. It's a pain in the butt to involve them in anything not entirely secure. Just give them parry and strip all the styles except for two-handed. Solved.
Don't give me any crap about non-combat classes, either. Combat is a major part of this game, and I think you'd find a lot more diversity if you let everyone participate, get bored of it, and then go off on their own.
Rangers: Based on sub-guild changes I feel as if rangers are going to lose slashing weapons. It would not only make sense but force them to make some tough sub-guild choices like everyone else. We'll see though
I don't think its needed if the other guilds get buffed.
That said, ranger:
- should lose throw
- weapons should be capped right at advanced.
- Rangers should start with sneak, and branch listen from it, but capped at advanced.
Warrior:- Should be able to ride hands-free.
- Should eventually branch direction sense when they branch blindfighting.
- Should start with basic weapons skills at apprentice.
Assasin:- Should eventually branch slashing and chopping weapons at apprentice, journeyman max.
- bludgeoning weapons to journeyman
- piercing weapons to master but no branching
- Should lose sap
- Should gain master throw, master climb, master watch, and have best eyes in the game.
Burgalar and pickpocket should be merged. They lose assasin abilities, but gain master sap and get advanced throw. They would have pickpocket fighting abilities, and get bludgeoning weapons to advanced. Best ears in the game.
Merchant- Should get slashing and piecing weapons. Maxed at apprentice.
- They should start with bandage making, and branch bandaging and brew from that.
Magickal guildsAre fine, except magick is often only used outside of cities. By their sheer nature they are often outcast and need to spend some time in the wastes, even if you are gemmer, you work is outside a city. Thus most magickal guilds should start with novice direction sense (journeyman max).
All Guilds- Should lose trample
- Ride subguilds should get ride high enough to branch trample.
- Should branch somewhere between low and mid advanced instead of having to grind to master
- Remove regional weapon skill boosts
I would like to see Ranger broken down into two guilds, one utility and one combat, and combine the three city guilds into the same configuration. City guilds get city quit. Warriors stay on top of combat, and Merchants still craft everything under the sun. I don't care to pontificate on specifics, it's only my unerring desire for balance.
Double post.
Explorer/Wanderer guild? Max forage with outsidey sneak skills and a bit of utility comparable to rangers? CAN SNEAK WHILE MOUNTED AND HIDE THEIR MOUNT.
Quote from: Tannhäuser on February 25, 2016, 07:40:22 PM
I would like to see Ranger broken down into two guilds, one utility and one combat, and combine the three city guilds into the same configuration. City guilds get city quit. Warriors stay on top of combat, and Merchants still craft everything under the sun. I don't care to pontificate on specifics, it's only my unerring desire for balance.
I like this, not sure if it works for skill balance but I like it. The idea being that Warrior, while the best combatants, will have the least of utility skills, but enough from both city and wilderness classes to get by without being annoying.
A general idea of the main guilds would be something like:
Ranger-Wilderness stealth max
Bandaging
Brew
Scan
Tanning/leatherworking
ride-max
Hunter- Wilderness stealth-advanced
Archry-max
ride- to charge/trample
Poison/Brew
Parry-Journeyman
Warrior-Parry/shield-max
No-hands ride
Branch scan
Armor maintenance skills
Trample
advanced weapons
Assassin-City stealth-advanced
Throw-master
Backstab/sap-max
Parry-journeyman
lockpick- journeyman
Rogue-City stealth-max
lockpick- max
listen- max
scan- max
pickmaking
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on February 25, 2016, 08:31:05 PM
A general idea of the main guilds would be something like:
Ranger-
Wilderness stealth max
Bandaging
Brew
Scan
Tanning/leatherworking
ride-max
Hunter-
Wilderness stealth-advanced
Archry-max
ride- to charge/trample
Poison/Brew
Parry-Journeyman
Seems kind of a weird skill break down and kind of incoherent. What's that Ranger guild really suppsoed to accomplish on their own? I wouldn't play either of them.
To Elaborate: If we "broke Ranger up" ... If you want just utility skills with an outdoor flavor, a Merchant/Outdoorsman is probably your best bet. If you want a fighty-type with some outdoor or mounted flavor, I'd rather take a Warrior and a riding/archery subguild than the Hunter.
I still feel that Rangers are a great trifecta of Combat, Utility, and Crafting. If I had to choose one thing to lose out of there I would lose the crafting, knowing I could retrieve (or replace) it with a subguild. But I would prefer to see other Guilds get another leg (or two) added to their tripods.
Yeah I don't want to see anymore burgalar and pickpocket watered down guilds, as opposed to more stronger wholesome ranger guilds that are awesome to play.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 25, 2016, 08:35:50 PM
Seems kind of a weird skill break down and kind of incoherent. What's that Ranger guild really suppsoed to accomplish on their own? I wouldn't play either of them.
Well, that's because you're probably excluding all the other things they would get that rangers currently get. It's just those skills would be the focus. For instance both would still have master direction sense, wilderness quit, master skinning, master forage, forage food and so on. .
Also:
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on February 25, 2016, 08:31:05 PM
not sure if it works for skill balance but I like it.
Rough idea. If you want combat prowess you sacrifice utility, is the concept
Even with those skills you've mentioned (what I would call Utility), splitting Ranger in to those two guilds just doesn't make a very appealing sale for me. Utility without Combat seems pointless (unless your crafting is high enough to generate coin to buy Combat from someone else). Little point in climbing that cliff if something living at the top immediately bites your head off.
I feel like every Mundane should be able to do at least one thing Great, one thing Good, and one thing Okay. Call those groups Utility, Combat, Stealth, and Craft.
Currently, Rangers are The Best at Utility (forage, climb, ride, desnse, etc), good at combat, and okay at crafting AND stealth.
Currently, Warriors are "Great" at Combat in the sense they get all the combat skills and, theoretically, advanced weapon skills. We could go back and forth at whether they're truly Great or the Best at combat ad nauseum. What I think is less debatable is that Warriors have nothing else that they're good or even OK at. Except, I guess, Skinning.
I invite people with more experience of other guilds to sketch their own tripods and make suggestions of what needs improving on them.
Just to be clear: a stealth skill capped at advanced is not useful for PvP, and is barely functional for PvE. The idea of capping the assassin main guild at advanced sneak and hide is ludicrous.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 26, 2016, 02:19:15 AM
Just to be clear: a stealth skill capped at advanced is not useful for PvP, and is barely functional for PvE. The idea of capping the assassin main guild at advanced sneak and hide is ludicrous.
Or we improve stealth code?
Preferably both. But it's easier to adjust skill caps than the system itself. So long as the system is broken, don't gimp those who have to rely on it.
I play mostly rangers and I'm confused at what crafting people are talking about that is apparently so OP.
You can make:
-your own arrows, which seems reasonable for a competent outdoorsman. I've never tried to sell these, but I suppose the combinations of heads and feathers would create exploitable coin possibilities.
-soaps, which I'm fine with losing, provided tablet brew is revamped to actually use/raise the skill. Soaps always felt like a weird hack. It's convenient not having to schlep over to a soap shop to stay clean, though.
-your own bandages. I've also never tried to sell these.
-just enough tanning to rip expensive pelts. Being able to sell the tanned and untanned versions of the easier pelts while using good tools can be a decent money maker. Personally I made a lot of money from PC to PC sales rather than the hides shop.
- and you get the same decent cook as everyone else.
Anything else would come from SG/ESG which is available to any other guild, though Rangers are well suited for bringing in their own materials.
Barring soaps, I don't think that modest tanning, fletchery, and one's own bandages are really an encroachment on merchants who get dozens of crafting skills. Barring tanning, they're all essential survival skills for the wilderness character this guild encompasses, unless we want to force people to come into cities to buy what they need. The various scattered bases and quit locations, though, seem to suggest that a wilderness wanderer who only comes to market on occasion is a viable, supported playstyle. In fact, I find it rather appealing and suppose that others might as well.
I don't know why y'all are fighting so hard over the damn fletchery skill.
If rangers get nerfed, you should PRAY that it's only the fletchery skill that gets jacked.
Nerf fletchery, buff slings
(http://cdn.memearcade.com/2013/8/8/460e67cb4a3a7af98bdfcd1317f60780.gif)
Merge Pickpocket and Burglar into guild Griefer
@badskeelz, I'd say there are three axes: stealth, combat and utility. Ranger is off the charts because it has its fingers deep in all three axes,
and it is the indisputable master of the entire utility axis. For warrior and the stealth guilds, they are either/or.
Since nerfing ranger is off the table and giving warrior and stealth guilds more of the other axes to push them towards ranger just kind of dilutes the guilds, I would say the remaining fix is to give the stealth and warrior guilds more toys on their specialist axis that ranger does not get.
Unfortunately, this is probably the most involved way to address the problem. It'd involve things like:
- Merge pickpocket and burglar. (New class is now much further down both the stealth and utility axes.)
- Add an "evade" skill unique to the pickpocket/burglar that allows them to seamlessly vanish from combat into stealth, gith-like. (both stealth and combat axis)
- Give assassin an advanced weapon skill. (Assassin is more differentiated from ranger along the combat axis.)
- Give assassin a unique skill that allows it to briefly distract guards, defeat rescues, be untargetable by >kill or >assist. (stealth & combat.)
- Give warrior an anti-cavalry skill. (Warrior is more differentiated along the combat axis.)
- Give warrior a unique skill for resisting poison & magick. (ditto)
- etc.
No class should need to grind hardcore combat for weeks and months in order to branch parry. Parry should be given as a starting skill to everyone that gets it. The fact that it generally takes 400+ hours of play for a ranger to learn to deflect blows is nothing short of absurd. Having to master the most difficult fighting style in order to learn the most basic combat maneuver makes no sense.
The notion that some people are just literally helpless against anything hidden is silly. Every class should get scan to at least advanced, probably even the lowest master level. Those who get it higher remain experts, and just 10 points in scan makes a huge difference. I also think the game sorely needs a way to actively search out hidden entities that you know are there. If someone has shadowed you into your apartment and you know they're there, you shouldn't have to resign yourself to the fact that they cannot be found. Make it slow enough that anyone can sneak away if able. Also, a way to point out and reveal a hidden entity that you've spotted.
The wilderness and city stealth distinction is problematic. Either just do away with it and let everyone with stealth use it in both places, or make it so that getting proper stealth in the opposite environment of your guild takes more than just the right choice of subguild. For many characters, the opportunity cost of taking anything other than the subguild that gives you dual stealth is huge. It shouldn't be something people take just because it's better in case they some day end up in that environment, and it shouldn't be something where you're just forever screwed if you didn't pick the right subguild at creation. If nothing else, make it something that can be learned, like accents. Right now, if I make an assassin and take anything other than outlaw (or whatever extended subguilds give the same), I can never use this character in the wilderness. If I make a ranger and don't have an express need for some specific subguild that pertains to the role, I'm overwhelmingly encouraged to take thief/rogue/whatever just in case having city stealth is one day useful for me, completely without any sort of regard for whether or not this fits the character in any way. I could have never set foot inside a settlement but somehow know city stealth just because I have that OOC knowledge of this mechanic. This should change.
The city/outdoor distinction is fine.
It makes you think hard about choosing a crafting subguild for monies and trading contacts or stealth.
The problem for rangers is that it's so damn easy to make money without any crafting skills, that the value of a crafting subguild (for me, anyway) is usually vastly overshadowed by the value of dual stealth. Also, if you plan on just being in a clan and being on the clan payroll with the clan perks, you don't need a crafting subguild to make money, so you might as well pick something useful like dual stealth (or mini-warrior, or protector). It's not really players trying to min-max, it's just that crafting and selling to NPCs isn't that big a deal. This has changed somewhat with the mastercraft ESGs, because now you can write new items (which is both fun and rewarding IC, because people love dat Armageddon Dress-Up game).
And it's really only a ranger problem. Playing an assassin/hunter successfully is fucking -hard-. Shitty ride and no flee for the first several days means most of them die horrible deaths early on. Also, you have to MASTER poisoning before you ever brew your first tablet. That suuuuuuucks. By comparison, ranger/rogue/slipknife is pretty chill if you have half a brain to work with. I can't imagine seriously rolling a pickpocket/burglar dual stealth, because...why? Planting coins on mobs so they drop loot like a stock DIKU would lose its charm fairly quickly, I think.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 12:58:21 PM
Add an "evade" skill unique to the pickpocket/burglar that allows them to seamlessly vanish from combat into stealth, gith-like. (both stealth and combat axis)
Because Flee e,e,e,e,e,e,n,e,u,hide isn't good enough?
The Predator should wish for the Arm-like stealth abilities that allow someone to follow you through a claustrophobicly narrow hallway and through a door faster than someone can close the door behind them. Being able to cloak in combat would be some top-level BS.
I'd even vote for just the opposite. The same timer that won't let you quit out of the game should prevent you from hiding. You are far to excited to hide, catch your breath and try again later.
Eh...hiding after running away from someone who wants you dead is a pretty staple survival strategy.
Quote from: whitt on February 26, 2016, 02:38:18 PM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 12:58:21 PM
Add an "evade" skill unique to the pickpocket/burglar that allows them to seamlessly vanish from combat into stealth, gith-like. (both stealth and combat axis)
Because Flee e,e,e,e,e,e,n,e,u,hide isn't good enough?
The Predator should wish for the Arm-like stealth abilities that allow someone to follow you through a claustrophobicly narrow hallway and through a door faster than someone can close the door behind them. Being able to cloak in combat would be some top-level BS.
I'd even vote for just the opposite. The same timer that won't let you quit out of the game should prevent you from hiding. You are far to excited to hide, catch your breath and try again later.
Let's just remove all stealth classes from the game, then. We can all be warriors or merchants. Problem solved.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 03:24:26 PM
Let's just remove all stealth classes from the game, then. We can all be warriors or merchants. Problem solved.
Nope. Just saying asking for more "better-than-magick" as a "mundane" skill seems pretty over the top.
Quote from: Armaddict on February 26, 2016, 02:48:05 PM
Eh...hiding after running away from someone who wants you dead is a pretty staple survival strategy.
There is a marked difference between going somewhere the person isn't looking and codedly vanishing into thin air. I'm all for running to the rooftops, the Rinth, an apartment or the Byn compound to "hide out". Being able to round a corner and *poof*? Not so much. Heck, the corner is optional, really.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 26, 2016, 02:13:03 PM
I can't imagine seriously rolling a pickpocket/burglar dual stealth, because...why? Planting coins on mobs so they drop loot like a stock DIKU would lose its charm fairly quickly, I think.
LOL
Quote from: whitt on February 26, 2016, 03:47:15 PM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 03:24:26 PM
Let's just remove all stealth classes from the game, then. We can all be warriors or merchants. Problem solved.
Nope. Just saying asking for more "better-than-magick" as a "mundane" skill seems pretty over the top.
I can describe every mundane skill in the game as equivalent to or better than magick. There are many crafting and utility skills that fit the bill. That doesn't make it a reasonable description.
Rooms and the stealth code are abstractions, and you aren't the sole arbiter deciding what they mean (especially considering you are unlikely to know the whole story when stealth is in the equation!). Please give people the benefit of the doubt.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 04:21:50 PM
Quote from: whitt on February 26, 2016, 03:47:15 PM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 03:24:26 PM
Let's just remove all stealth classes from the game, then. We can all be warriors or merchants. Problem solved.
Nope. Just saying asking for more "better-than-magick" as a "mundane" skill seems pretty over the top.
I can describe every mundane skill in the game as equivalent to or better than magick. There are many crafting and utility skills that fit the bill. That doesn't make it a reasonable description.
Rooms and the stealth code are abstractions, and you aren't the sole arbiter deciding what they mean (especially considering you are unlikely to know the whole story when stealth is in the equation!). Please give people the benefit of the doubt.
most people do not give people the benefit of the doubt strictly because they know how often people will abuse the code to get their win.
so, there's that.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 04:21:50 PM
I can describe every mundane skill in the game as equivalent to or better than magick.
I'd doubt that, but a skill that enables a mob to vanish into thin air, while someone (or a whole group of people) are actively pounding on you? Yeah. I'd challenge you to find any mundane skill similar. The closest I can think of? Hide. Works right in the middle of a conversation.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 04:21:50 PM
Rooms and the stealth code are abstractions, and you aren't the sole arbiter deciding what they mean (especially considering you are unlikely to know the whole story when stealth is in the equation!). Please give people the benefit of the doubt.
Oh I do. I also look at coded skills (which
are the sole arbiter on deciding whether someone can or cannot be targeted in this case) and reasonably consider how they could be abstracted to work ICly in the situation they are described and how they could be abused by someone significantly less concerned with shouldering their portion of that benefit.
In this case, there is little IC excuse for the vanishing act you suggest and a huge potential for a skillset already wide open to abuse to be made even more abusive. Benefit of the doubt given, still not something I would want to see. Accomplish this with Flee and Hide. These skills already exist.
Rangers shouldn't even fucking get parry.
Rangers should range, and bow shit to death.
And if you can't flee/vanish from persuers, you don't need a better skill because you are going to use it wrong too.
Sneakies are Arm easy-mode, they don't need more ways to vanish. They need to be more robust in other ways.
I feel like rangers shouldn't have to range things to death, they should just be really good at killing things outdoors....
Which translates to ranging things to death most days.
But that warrior with master shield use and four shields...he....he annoys me
I hate the idea of merging burglar and pickpocket. I like that they're separate now, so you don't have people running around with grandmaster steal, grandmaster sneak/hide and grandmaster pick on the same guild. I say grandmaster because there is a very very big difference between the ranger "master" stealth and burglar "master" stealth. One is near invisibility, the other is not without full camo gear.
I'd rather just give pickpockets some buffs, and give burglars some buffs, but keep a distinction between the two core guilds.
I think burglars are in need of some love, as their core skill (pick) is really gimmicky in that its usefulness is mostly centered on breaking into apartments. Most of the places you'd want to break into are clan controlled and have NPC guards. I'd like to see that change. I'd like there to be a) secret entrances to more places. b) some doors without guards, but REALLY good locks that require special master quality tools and proper timing to break into. The addition of roof tops in Allanak is a pretty great boon for burglars though, and I'm eager to check them out. Those are fairly substantial changes though... Other than my suggestion of giving them pickmaking from the start, I'd love for them to get scan, and be pretty damn good at it too (ranger quality scan, but city based).
I say, along with my warrior argument, that a lot of things between pickpockets and burglars aren't so much skill-based as they are opportunity based.
One, people hate pickpockets MORE THAN A MINDBENDER because a pickpocket can mildly inconvenience you by taking that nice dagger you spend 5minutes foraging salt on. All a mindbender can do is ALL GLORY TO THE HYPNOTOAD.
I like that they are separate, but "master" level locks aren't even close to common enough to care about it, and whats behind them is usually not worth the grind. The VERY FEW things that other non-mastery classes can't get into, aren't generally a thing you'd be going into without staff getting a warning first.
With pickpockets, they're just viewed as absolute scum. One of my FAVORITE things on my last pickpocket was that he had to steal a Kuraci's spice knife. A very PARTICULAR spice knife, without being noticed. Why not, instead of hating pickpockets, hire them to make your enemies' lives miserable?
The only CODE-robust thing I think the stealth classes need is a disguise ability. No, not more stealth, that shit is OP and I love it to my wee-wee and back. Disguising yourself as another person, SOMEHOW. Be a con man, but don't burn your entire identity because one person knows you're Jim Amos, the guy from the Gaj last night. Sneak into a Noble's estate not because you stole some aides cloak, but because you're DISGUISED to look like one. "Infiltrate" various clans in the world by disguising yourself as a lowly hunter who needs a job, but isn't immediately recognizable as Lady Hardpants' aide because people know sdescs.
Give pickpockets unlimited description changes.
Quote from: Riev on February 26, 2016, 05:22:01 PM
The only CODE-robust thing I think the stealth classes need is a disguise ability. No, not more stealth, that shit is OP and I love it to my wee-wee and back. Disguising yourself as another person, SOMEHOW. Be a con man, but don't burn your entire identity because one person knows you're Jim Amos, the guy from the Gaj last night. Sneak into a Noble's estate not because you stole some aides cloak, but because you're DISGUISED to look like one. "Infiltrate" various clans in the world by disguising yourself as a lowly hunter who needs a job, but isn't immediately recognizable as Lady Hardpants' aide because people know sdescs.
This would be a cool skill. Something that would allow you (on success) to acquire a "clanned" flag. Still up to you to assemble any necessary pieces of identifying gear. For example Disguise Byn, might grant add the Byn clan to your list of "jobs" for a short duration, but anyone in the compound might notice you don't have a patch or forgot to salute the sergeant or were totally skipping out on whatever duty was supposed to be happening. Likely a bitch to code for, but a cool concept for a skill.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on February 26, 2016, 05:25:09 PM
Give pickpockets unlimited description changes.
Would be cool. Or simple make two versions of "tdesc" One that goes before your actual description, one that goes after... You could "Disguise" yourself by modifying your pre-tdsec and post-tdesc...but if someone reads your whole description and notices your real description in there you might be caught.
Give them a psi intercept skill. *cough*
I like the idea of splitting a ranger, ONLY because I would drop ride from my ranger in a heartbeat, IF I was able to pick up some other combat skill instead. The reason I say that, is that I play a race that can't/won't ride, and charge/trample/ride skillset is completely useless. Granted they get some sweet perks for the race, but that extends to all classes of said race.
I would like to see the ability to pick skill sets similar to above, but I would break it down a bit further....
Combat Wilderness Ranger Skillset;
All Non Advanced weapon types
Parry,
Archery,
Make Trap,
Wilderness Trapping. (Would summon a mob after X-time indigenous to the area you are in. If provoked they go into fight or flight mode. (Would need materials to make trap prior and set it.))
Caltrops (Also Assassin Viable) (A trap that can slow, stun or knock out perusing predators. (Must be set prior can not be on the go))
Climb
Hide
Sneak
Scan
Listen
Wilderness Warrior;
All weapon skills
Shield use
Bash
Disarm
Climb
Hide
Sneak
Scan
Listen
(Note no bow, or no trap skill.)
Quote from: whitt on February 26, 2016, 05:29:26 PM
This would be a cool skill. Something that would allow you (on success) to acquire a "clanned" flag. Still up to you to assemble any necessary pieces of identifying gear. For example Disguise Byn, might grant add the Byn clan to your list of "jobs" for a short duration, but anyone in the compound might notice you don't have a patch or forgot to salute the sergeant or were totally skipping out on whatever duty was supposed to be happening. Likely a bitch to code for, but a cool concept for a skill.
The problem with 'clanned' flag is its too binary. Could you get past a gate guard with a clan uniform? Maybe, would depend on the guard. Could you start filling your backpack with clan items in a barracks and walk out without anyone saying anything? Hell no.
Quote from: wizturbo on February 26, 2016, 05:10:01 PM
I hate the idea of merging burglar and pickpocket. I like that they're separate now, so you don't have people running around with grandmaster steal, grandmaster sneak/hide and grandmaster pick on the same guild. I say grandmaster because there is a very very big difference between the ranger "master" stealth and burglar "master" stealth. One is near invisibility, the other is not without full camo gear.
In my humble opinion, having three city guilds is jarring. Maybe it's because I'm so used to tabletop RPGs.
I would envision one city guild that is swift at killing, very precise at 1v1 combat, even to the level of a Warrior in a fight where they've taken their advantage, but struggles mightily against non-humanoids. The second guild is a true rogue, someone who possesses the dirty tricks the other guild does not, but can access apartments, find secret passages, alleys and hiding spots (city search), as well as obtain sensitive materials with quick fingers. The two would not overlap in skillsets.
I picture much the same for the wilderness the dual wilderness roles. One is an accomplished explorer and survivalist, with a nose for finding secret locations (wilderness search). The second guild is a focused hunter, killer, desert ranger.
It's only a thought, though.
If we want our other guilds to be at ranger power level, you could probably argue for merging all of the stealth guilds. DnD just has the single rogue class, after all.
There's more than three "city" guilds already. Warrior and Merchant are both easily more at home in the city than they are outside it. The only non-city guild is Ranger, unless of course they choose one of numerous sub-guilds that make them amazing in the city as well. A pickpocket or burglar is just a sub-guild away from being alright in the wilderness too.
The issue is you don't want too much concentration of powerful skills in one guild. While rogues were only one class in D&D, this worked because rogues had to choose skill points to specialize in. The rogue class couldn't be at master level in everything, they either had to specialize or spread their points around and be jacks of all trades, masters of none. We don't have code to support skill choices, so the multiple 'rogue-like' guilds were created to simulate this.
An all-in-one Rogue Guild with master levels of all the skills that Pickpocket, Burglar and Assassin currently have to master, along with warrior level weapon skills, would be a monstrously powerful guild, far more powerful than rangers.
Quote from: wizturbo on February 26, 2016, 08:29:41 PM
The issue is you don't want too much concentration of powerful skills in one guild. While rogues were only one class in D&D, this worked because rogues had to choose skill points to specialize in. The rogue class couldn't be at master level in everything, they either had to specialize or spread their points around and be jacks of all trades, masters of none. We don't have code to support skill choices, so the multiple 'rogue-like' guilds were created to simulate this.
An all-in-one Rogue Guild with master levels of all the skills that Pickpocket, Burglar and Assassin currently have to master, along with warrior level weapon skills, would be a monstrously powerful guild, far more powerful than rangers.
What on earth are you talking about? What rogue in DnD had to choose between sneak attack, sleight of hand and open lock? Rogues have more skill points than they know what to do with. It's rangers who had to choose a specialty: bow or melee, favored enemy, favored terrain, etc. Guess which guild doesn't have to choose a specialty in Armageddon?
What would make the combination so powerful? How would it be more powerful than rangers are now? Just saying it doesn't make it true. It's nothing you can't accomplish now with extended subguilds, honestly. Getting inside locked doors or stealing small things from people isn't going to make assassins vastly more powerful than they are now, it just means you don't have to play a gimped class if you want to explore the non-combat side of the rogue experience. If you give the new, merged class Pickpocket level combat (rogues don't have full BAB, after all) you'd probably have veteran assassin players come out in droves complaining that it still wasn't as strong as a ranger/slipknife.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 26, 2016, 08:53:59 PM
Quote from: wizturbo on February 26, 2016, 08:29:41 PM
The issue is you don't want too much concentration of powerful skills in one guild. While rogues were only one class in D&D, this worked because rogues had to choose skill points to specialize in. The rogue class couldn't be at master level in everything, they either had to specialize or spread their points around and be jacks of all trades, masters of none. We don't have code to support skill choices, so the multiple 'rogue-like' guilds were created to simulate this.
An all-in-one Rogue Guild with master levels of all the skills that Pickpocket, Burglar and Assassin currently have to master, along with warrior level weapon skills, would be a monstrously powerful guild, far more powerful than rangers.
What on earth are you talking about? What rogue in DnD had to choose between sneak attack, sleight of hand and open lock? Rogues have more skill points than they know what to do with. It's rangers who had to choose a specialty: bow or melee, favored enemy, favored terrain, etc. Guess which guild doesn't have to choose a specialty in Armageddon?
What would make the combination so powerful? How would it be more powerful than rangers are now? Just saying it doesn't make it true. It's nothing you can't accomplish now with extended subguilds, honestly. Getting inside locked doors or stealing small things from people isn't going to make assassins vastly more powerful than they are now, it just means you don't have to play a gimped class if you want to explore the non-combat side of the rogue experience. If you give the new, merged class Pickpocket level combat (rogues don't have full BAB, after all) you'd probably have veteran assassin players come out in droves complaining that it still wasn't as strong as a ranger/slipknife.
To be fair, rogues also balanced out in the fact they had a lower base attack bonus and some other things to balance out their ridiculous amount of versatility, and other weaknesses that other classes did not.
comparing D&D's mechanics to arms is comparing apples to oranges, IMO
Rangers are so overvalued because they're the only guild that performs well in the desert without the need for specific subguilds. Nobody else can forage food, nobody else can wilderness quit, I don't think any of the other mundane guilds even have direction sense without getting it from a subguild. Riding with hands free requires investment in certain subguilds that give little else. Rangers also mysteriously regenerate stamina 50% faster than all other guilds.
Rangers aren't too good at fighting, and don't need to be split up into two guilds that both suck. It's just that they have too many monopolies on things that are extremely important for wilderness play. Just the idea of trying to play a desert warrior is hugely off-putting to me because I know I won't be able to log out when I wish, and there's really no reason why rangers should be the only ones who can forage food. That one isn't even realistic, it's just a completely arbitrary limitation.
There's too much emphasis on needing to pick the right subguild to enable stuff like wilderness stealth, no-hands riding etc. People who don't know about these things screw up their characters forever if they had any intentions of playing a desert-bound character, and even those who have this largely undocumented knowledge are then limited to a much more narrow selection of subguilds, with considerable opportunity costs involved. This is why ranger is so popular. They get it all for free.
Quote from: Warsong on February 27, 2016, 07:56:50 AM
Rangers are so overvalued because they're the only guild that performs well in the desert without the need for specific subguilds. Nobody else can forage food, nobody else can wilderness quit, I don't think any of the other mundane guilds even have direction sense without getting it from a subguild. Riding with hands free requires investment in certain subguilds that give little else. Rangers also mysteriously regenerate stamina 50% faster than all other guilds.
Rangers aren't too good at fighting, and don't need to be split up into two guilds that both suck. It's just that they have too many monopolies on things that are extremely important for wilderness play. Just the idea of trying to play a desert warrior is hugely off-putting to me because I know I won't be able to log out when I wish, and there's really no reason why rangers should be the only ones who can forage food. That one isn't even realistic, it's just a completely arbitrary limitation.
There's too much emphasis on needing to pick the right subguild to enable stuff like wilderness stealth, no-hands riding etc. People who don't know about these things screw up their characters forever if they had any intentions of playing a desert-bound character, and even those who have this largely undocumented knowledge are then limited to a much more narrow selection of subguilds, with considerable opportunity costs involved. This is why ranger is so popular. They get it all for free.
Well, if you want to play extensively in the outdoors, that's why there's a guild for it, right? Warriors have their perks over Rangers as well, but usually need to collaborate with Rangers if they're doing desert stuff. Inside the city, on foot, they really shine.
Why not just get rid of warriors?
Assassins are people hunters. Rangers are animal hunters. Warriors are sitting around waiting on a war?
Split their skills between assassin (offensive) and ranger (defensive).
There are no friendly areas outside the city and I've lost chars just stepping outside the city walls for the first time.
The few times I tried an assassin in the rinth it was like candyland compared to the outdoors. Just walk around pick up all the loot on the ground and backstab at will, nobody cared, no npcs got aggressive. The only thing your warrior will die of in a combat clan is boredom from sparring so much. Rangers are the only challenging class to play and I think that's why people play them, not because they are OP.
Quote from: burble on February 27, 2016, 10:03:13 AM
Why not just get rid of warriors?
Assassins are people hunters. Rangers are animal hunters. Warriors are sitting around waiting on a war?
Split their skills between assassin (offensive) and ranger (defensive)
And as I've said, numerous times, before:
Warriors are pretty sick at face to face combat, and wartime scenarios. A full blown assassin has to think VERY carefully about attacking even a middling warrior because they might be able to strip your weapons, knock your ass down, and absolutely murder you while you're still recovering from your backstab.
Unfortunately, there aren't many roles for warriors. People don't need PC guards, because the streets are amazingly safe. They don't need guards while salting, even the salts are amazingly safe. The conflict required for PC Warriors to really be necessary is either the same old gith invasion that happens every few years, or OTHER people doing risky behavior that will probably see their investments killed for the sake of a warrior having a purpose.
Make bash and kick skill up quicker that weapon skills. Same with rescue. With a couple IC years of training a warrior should be pretty damned good at getting between people, and controlling the battlefield. With bash, disarm, and guard/rescue a warrior's skill set is superior in combat. Its just that type of combat doesn't occur and, when it does, warriors are often institutionally untrained.
Warriors are Arena fodder, and generally useless otherwise.
The idea of splitting up rangers or merging pickpockets and burglars makes me sad because of less variety.
This is why tinkering with the main guilds is such a difficult undertaking. Sure, some of the classes need LOVE and BALANCING but I don't think I want a total redo of the entire class structure.
(Edited to remove negativity someone objected to.)
Quote from: Riev on February 27, 2016, 10:19:28 AM
Quote from: burble on February 27, 2016, 10:03:13 AM
Why not just get rid of warriors?
Assassins are people hunters. Rangers are animal hunters. Warriors are sitting around waiting on a war?
Split their skills between assassin (offensive) and ranger (defensive)
And as I've said, numerous times, before:
Warriors are pretty sick at face to face combat, and wartime scenarios. A full blown assassin has to think VERY carefully about attacking even a middling warrior because they might be able to strip your weapons, knock your ass down, and absolutely murder you while you're still recovering from your backstab.
Unfortunately, there aren't many roles for warriors. People don't need PC guards, because the streets are amazingly safe. They don't need guards while salting, even the salts are amazingly safe. The conflict required for PC Warriors to really be necessary is either the same old gith invasion that happens every few years, or OTHER people doing risky behavior that will probably see their investments killed for the sake of a warrior having a purpose.
Make bash and kick skill up quicker that weapon skills. Same with rescue. With a couple IC years of training a warrior should be pretty damned good at getting between people, and controlling the battlefield. With bash, disarm, and guard/rescue a warrior's skill set is superior in combat. Its just that type of combat doesn't occur and, when it does, warriors are often institutionally untrained.
Warriors are Arena fodder, and generally useless otherwise.
Disarm, bash, kick, and rescue already skill up way faster than weapon skills.
Warriors are not even nearly useless, at all. Yes, they are a little boring, but whatever. You sacrifice utility for the ability to tank -and- faceroll. Having a single warrior with decent defense and rescue means the noob squishy rangers in your clan don't get eaten before they skill up a little. Also, since the new skill-up code has gone in, it means everyone else in your clan can potentially skill up faster. Basically, as a warrior in a clan, job #1 is to make sure all the non-hackers without the parry skill don't die while they're in the process of skilling up. Also, like...how many epic stories are there of warriors, versus any other class? It's the class you want to pick if you want to live a long time, because it's a lot more difficult to die by accident or random PK.
Aside: the edge of the salt flats -should- be kinda safe, because the whole point of salting is to allow solo noob PCs to scrape by until they get some skillz. Requiring them to team up with a warrior would entirely defeat the purpose.
Quote from: Harmless on February 27, 2016, 10:57:10 AM
Not to be mean, but a lot of the suggestions in this thread are really disappointing to read, like the idea of splitting up rangers or merging pickpockets and burglars (I'd rather they both be given a truly unique flavor. Being renamed is okay, but losing another urban stealth class would make me cry). Getting rid of warriors? Sheesh.
This is why tinkering with the main guilds is such a difficult undertaking. Sure, some of the classes need LOVE and BALANCING but I don't think I want a total redo of the entire class structure.
Eh, I think the guild system is inherently awful and can stand to be changed as much as the coders can stomach redesigning it. I would vastly prefer something more like the RPI Codebase system where you simply pick, say, eight skills, and then you can learn additional ones during play if you like, but have a maximum total stat points that depends on wisdom (holy shit, making wisdom a good stat for non-mages!) This will let people choose the skills that actually suit their character, eliminates guild sniffing completely, and is infinitely more realistic and suitable for a roleplaying game.
I realize this is a pipe dream and would take way more work than can be expected, but any move in that direction is an improvement in my book. This whole notion of 'you picked warrior when you created your character so you are incapable of ever learning to sneak' sort of thing doesn't belong in an RPI game. It's actually completely anti-RP. It belongs in hack'n'slash games where arbitrary gamist rules determine character development.
What about a pick system where if you select too many skills in one of Utility/Stealth/Combat you lose access to selecting skills from the other spheres, better skills would "cost" more. That would make it so that other guilds would still need to depend on each other where it mattered, but also allow for an overall blending of classes when it came to their less "core" skills.
There's probably a slew of problems/benifits that come with it though.
I've played majority warriors, a few rangers, burglars and assassins. Unless the warrior in question is untrained, and the ranger is well-trained and amazing statted, they are going to get the crap kicked out of them without a question. And if the ranger is well-trained and amazing, he could just shoot him in the eye with a perrained arrow from a distance. While warriors don't really have alot in terms of other skills, they serve their purpose just fine. It depends on where you take your warrior to get trained. If you can actually get adequate training for your warrior, and if you're well-statted just like that ranger, with the right subguild you're going to be riding down that ranger the moment they even think about shooting at you. Or you can shoot back, or impale them with a javelin, right off their mount. In my eyes, warriors are already pretty strong, and it's up to you how you utilize their skillset. Advanced weapons do take FOREVER to branch though, and once you get to the point of branching them, you're already way too strong, and can't really even train them, because no other warrior (or guild period) will be able to defend, even with training weapons. While super strong I know, it'd be nice to have a change in regards to advanced weaponry. Having them branched sooner would make warriors able to serve their intended purpose. Warriors! Tell me why mages can spend no time maxing out, but some people have to spend over a real life year to branch a weapon skill?
Quote from: Dresan on February 25, 2016, 06:42:56 PM
Rangers:
- should lose throw
- weapons should be capped right at advanced.
- Rangers should start with sneak, and branch listen from it, but capped at advanced.
I don't want to say something like throw is a city skill, but I think rangers have enough ranged skills with archery. They can afford to lose this. Weapon skills should be capped slightly lower, but advanced is still pretty damn good and most people don't even reach that. Finally I feel starting with sneak is a nice boon for anyone not starting with a sneak guild. Over all these wouldn't be nerfs most people would even notice.
Quote from: Dresan on February 25, 2016, 06:42:56 PM
Warrior:
- Should be able to ride hands-free.
- Should eventually branch direction sense when they branch blindfighting.
- Should start with basic weapons skills at apprentice.
I roll ranger/protector and I think the only thing I'd be missing out on is disarm at best, because if my warrior lives long enough to branch weapon skills then I'm probably having as much fun as I could with the character. Warriors don't need much, they just need a little bit more utility so they have a bit more freedom to select sub-guilds, hands free ride and eventual direction sense are really it so they can be the leaders they are destined to be. Starting at apprentice weapons is just a bonus that I think warriors should have, in the same way other classes start off with plenty in apprentice.
Quote from: Dresan on February 25, 2016, 06:42:56 PM
Assassin:
- Should eventually branch slashing and chopping weapons at apprentice, journeyman max.
- bludgeoning weapons to journeyman
- piercing weapons to master but no branching
- Should lose sap
- Should gain master throw, master climb, master watch, and have best eyes in the game.
Assassin should be masters of killing and pretty good at fighting at the end of their career. GOOD but not GREAT. Again while you can argue sap is something they develop, I would rather give that as a unique thing to Rogues and improve their overall killing abilities.
Burglar and pickpocket should be merged. Or give pickpocket lock picking and pick making, advanced throw and that's it. Making master sap unique to them would also help them out greatly to make them a unique but strong class
Regional weapon boosts currently mostly benefit warriors and rangers , which is why I feel they should be removed and have warriors weapon skills all begin at apprentice
Master sap for pickpockets, lol.
I'm just going to register my complete disagreement with that one. I'm not explaining why.
Just add skills and make everything freaking awesome. More fun for everyone!
Quote from: Doublepalli on February 27, 2016, 12:06:31 PM
I've played majority warriors, a few rangers, burglars and assassins. Unless the warrior in question is untrained, and the ranger is well-trained and amazing statted, they are going to get the crap kicked out of them without a question. And if the ranger is well-trained and amazing, he could just shoot him in the eye with a perrained arrow from a distance. While warriors don't really have alot in terms of other skills, they serve their purpose just fine. It depends on where you take your warrior to get trained. If you can actually get adequate training for your warrior, and if you're well-statted just like that ranger, with the right subguild you're going to be riding down that ranger the moment they even think about shooting at you. Or you can shoot back, or impale them with a javelin, right off their mount. In my eyes, warriors are already pretty strong, and it's up to you how you utilize their skillset. Advanced weapons do take FOREVER to branch though, and once you get to the point of branching them, you're already way too strong, and can't really even train them, because no other warrior (or guild period) will be able to defend, even with training weapons. While super strong I know, it'd be nice to have a change in regards to advanced weaponry. Having them branched sooner would make warriors able to serve their intended purpose. Warriors! Tell me why mages can spend no time maxing out, but some people have to spend over a real life year to branch a weapon skill?
I definitely agree with changing something with advanced weapon skills. By the time you manage to branch an advanced weapon skill, other combat skills such as two-handed and dual wield (in my experience) are already or are very close to being mastered as well. This is itself makes training the advanced weapon almost impossible, mainly for the fact that you just don't miss. I think there's some potential for schematics to change here. I enjoy having the advanced weapon skills, but I feel like maybe they should have some differences in the way they are skilled up (maybe make fails include more than just misses?).
I don't know. I enjoy playing warriors, especially with an outdoorsy subguild. I think they could use a little love, for sure, but largely I like the way they are set up.
Quote from: whitt on February 26, 2016, 05:29:26 PM
Quote from: Riev on February 26, 2016, 05:22:01 PM
The only CODE-robust thing I think the stealth classes need is a disguise ability. No, not more stealth, that shit is OP and I love it to my wee-wee and back. Disguising yourself as another person, SOMEHOW. Be a con man, but don't burn your entire identity because one person knows you're Jim Amos, the guy from the Gaj last night. Sneak into a Noble's estate not because you stole some aides cloak, but because you're DISGUISED to look like one. "Infiltrate" various clans in the world by disguising yourself as a lowly hunter who needs a job, but isn't immediately recognizable as Lady Hardpants' aide because people know sdescs.
This would be a cool skill. Something that would allow you (on success) to acquire a "clanned" flag. Still up to you to assemble any necessary pieces of identifying gear. For example Disguise Byn, might grant add the Byn clan to your list of "jobs" for a short duration, but anyone in the compound might notice you don't have a patch or forgot to salute the sergeant or were totally skipping out on whatever duty was supposed to be happening. Likely a bitch to code for, but a cool concept for a skill.
Allow rogue guilds to have one or more alternate short and main descriptions they'd create in charter generation. Then allow for some in game mechanic that'd allow them to change between the "fake" description and the main description. I think this would put rogue guilds in high demand for a while.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 27, 2016, 12:26:02 PM
Master sap for pickpockets, lol.
I'm just going to register my complete disagreement with that one. I'm not explaining why.
So the same approach as usual? trololol :P
Anyways , not master sap for pickpockets, but the guild Super Rogue, consisting of the merging of pickpockets and burglars guilds. Besides pickpockets already get sap and bludgeoning weapons, just upping their levels slightly, but more importantly making it unique to them. This is a knockout move and is better suited for thieves. They can keep throw but not poison.
This would really with the other changes proposed. The guilds would all be strong and have a variety of unique things to offer.
Quote from: Dresan on February 27, 2016, 02:30:40 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on February 27, 2016, 12:26:02 PM
Master sap for pickpockets, lol.
I'm just going to register my complete disagreement with that one. I'm not explaining why.
So the same approach as usual? trololol :P
Anyways , not master sap for pickpockets, but the guild Super Rogue, consisting of the merging of pickpockets and burglars guilds. Besides pickpockets already get sap and bludgeoning weapons, just upping their levels slightly, but more importantly making it unique to them. This is a knockout move and is better suited for thieves. They can keep throw but not poison.
This would really with the other changes proposed. The guilds would all be strong and have a variety of unique things to offer.
He is pointing out what is obvious to people who have played a character with maxed assassin sap; its so powerful, that it should be exclusive to the guild that's devoted to taking motherfuckers out. Its an incredibly powerful (and abusable) skill that is intentionally hard to acquire.
And I already pointed out that pickpockets get sap to a very use-able levels already, having masochistically played the guild myself. A little more won't hurt. Not to assassin would be get buffed already under my ideas.
But yeah, thank you for pointing out exactly what he was thinking somehow, and explaining it for him, somehow... since I was thinking he was referring to something selse which would have probably made more sense and been a stronger argument. :-\
Quote from: Harmless on February 27, 2016, 10:57:10 AM
Not to be mean, but a lot of the suggestions in this thread are really disappointing to read ...
That's a strange sentiment. They are, after all, only suggestions.
Yeah.... I'm that girl that posts in the wrong thread.
Quote from: Sunburned on February 27, 2016, 02:35:33 PM
Quote from: Dresan on February 27, 2016, 02:30:40 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on February 27, 2016, 12:26:02 PM
Master sap for pickpockets, lol.
I'm just going to register my complete disagreement with that one. I'm not explaining why.
So the same approach as usual? trololol :P
Anyways , not master sap for pickpockets, but the guild Super Rogue, consisting of the merging of pickpockets and burglars guilds. Besides pickpockets already get sap and bludgeoning weapons, just upping their levels slightly, but more importantly making it unique to them. This is a knockout move and is better suited for thieves. They can keep throw but not poison.
This would really with the other changes proposed. The guilds would all be strong and have a variety of unique things to offer.
He is pointing out what is obvious to people who have played a character with maxed assassin sap; its so powerful, that it should be exclusive to the guild that's devoted to taking motherfuckers out. Its an incredibly powerful (and abusable) skill that is intentionally hard to acquire.
That is not a particularly good reason. It's not like there would no longer be any reason to roll an assassin if you gave max sap to pickpockets. You can change how sap branches on pickpocket if you want to keep it hard to obtain. Make it branch off sleight of hand and it'll take much longer to get on pickpocket than on assassin.
No it wouldn't. Some of these suggestions make me want to be buried alive.
I would prefer something that seperates pp from other stealth guilds. Master disarm representing snatch and grabs or tailoring represent making disguises. Thematic but different.
For pickpocket, both skills wouldnt be much of a power creep.
At the end of the day it comes down to this, what is the theme of the guild:
Warriors are all being superior in head to head combat
Rangers are all about desert survival
Assassins are all about assassinating their targets
Merchants are all about being awesome
The last guild should have just been called thief, with its focus and theme simply being thievery.
However, right now pickpocket and burglar both revolve around thievery, and their skill sets broken down into two lines: stealing from people and stealing from apartments. It sounds good on paper but in practice these are two very narrow niches, especially when you consider how easily any other class can do these things with the right sub-guild and how much risk you are taking for what is very often little reward. I think these two guilds should be merged, given master sap allowing them to disable and steal from squishy rich looking targets. Since, again, this would now fit with the overall theme.
Otherwise, right now you can ranger/cut-purse/rogue or assassin/bounty hunter/etc/etc and get quite a bit of mileage in my opinion because both pickpocket and burglar revolve around very specific skills, not really a broader theme like the other guilds .
Everytime you play a pickpocket you'll probably want to be a burglar.
Vice versa.
And everytime you play both you'll just want to be ranger.
And when you play ranger you'll wish you were warrior.
And when you want something mastercrafted you'll want to be merchant.
Sap is a PK skill, yo.
You keep acting like, "oh, it's just to steal people's pants while they're asleep."
No.
It is to knock people the fuck out, then a) kill them on the spot or b) drag them somewhere else and kill them.
I mean, it's like saying, "Oh, haha, heramide and peraine, lol...they're just for thieving around! Stealing boots!"
Also, comparing jman sap to master sap is like comparing jman archery to master archery.
That is...there's really no comparison.
I can only assume your premise is guild_pickpocket should not be able to PK. I see no reason why we should accept that.
Quote from: Inks on February 27, 2016, 08:31:09 PM
disarm representing snatch and grabs
I like this for pickpockets.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 28, 2016, 02:55:47 AM
I can only assume your premise is guild_pickpocket should not be able to PK. I see no reason why we should accept that.
Uh, no.
Did I say that anywhere? No.
Any guild can PK. Only certain guilds should be good at it. I've never said "take away sap from pickpockets." I'm fine with it being capped at jman. A pickpocket can get lucky every once in awhile, and that's okay.
Only one mundane guild should be the undisputed master of instantly knocking you right the fuck out, and that's: assassin.
Journeyman sap is almost unusable, anyway. The odds of knocking someone out with it vs. the completely insane lag you incur after usage makes it frankly suicidal to even attempt, especially on a guild that won't be able to defend itself very well during those 20+ seconds of helplessness.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 28, 2016, 03:05:25 AM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 28, 2016, 02:55:47 AM
I can only assume your premise is guild_pickpocket should not be able to PK. I see no reason why we should accept that.
Uh, no.
Did I say that anywhere? No.
Any guild can PK. Only certain guilds should be good at it. I've never said "take away sap from pickpockets." I'm fine with it being capped at jman. A pickpocket can get lucky every once in awhile, and that's okay.
Only one mundane guild should be the undisputed master of instantly knocking you right the fuck out, and that's: assassin.
I think Burglar should be able to as well but then burglars become assassins with the ability of taking your house as well.
I'm all for combining burglars and pickpockets to create one singular broad niche thieving class. But ... in all honesty, in my opinion, if one is to do that then the class should lose all those awesome skills that pickpockets get that makes them a very very "VERY" passable fighters. They get parry, they get sap, they get throw. I think they should lose sap and parry. But have throw to what burglars have and poison at some useable, but imperfect levels. Make Rogues almost like a merchant class. Excellent at everything related to theft, infiltration, and escape from sticky situation. Give them throw/poison just to give them some kind of vague danger affinity. But if the rogue ever decides to take someone face to face in open combat, they should be punished for their stupidity. If necessary, give them +10 defence -10 offense in the beginning to show that these guys are 'not' about killing/harming folk at all, but are capable of evading and escape of sticky situations.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 28, 2016, 03:05:25 AM
Only one mundane guild should be the undisputed master of instantly knocking you right the fuck out, and that's: assassin.
Why?
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 28, 2016, 12:45:15 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on February 28, 2016, 03:05:25 AM
Only one mundane guild should be the undisputed master of instantly knocking you right the fuck out, and that's: assassin.
Why?
Because that's how guilds work?
My only problem with your arguement synthesis is that you are practically saying a player that plays assassin/bounty hunter is going to be a better assassin with just sap then somene who relies on both backstab and poisons.
I don't know how true this actually is, I don't believe its that true at all, but for arguement sake I'd be willing to give you the benefit fo the doubt. However, I feel that even if it were true, I don't think sap shouldn't be a better killing alternative then backstab/poison. If only just due to the fact you have to invest so much time/money and effort into both poison/ingredients and grind to use both poison and backstab effectively. :(
Quote from: Dresan on February 28, 2016, 01:09:54 PM
My only problem with your arguement synthesis is that you are practically saying a player that plays assassin/bounty hunter is going to be a better assassin with just sap then somene who relies on both backstab and poisons.
I don't know how true this actually is, but I feel that even if it were true, I don't think sap shouldn't be a better killing alternative then backstab/poison. If only just due to the fact you have to invest so much time/money and effort into both poison/ingredients and grind to use both poison and backstab effectively. :(
That's not implicit in his argument at all.
Its simply that the potential to master backstab, poison, and sap are part of the core defining skills for an assassin, and they should exclusive to them, for the same reason that warriors don't have master archery, and so on...
Sap and bludgeoning weapons in general are pretty OP.
Also ranger/thug is fun.
Quote from: Synthesis on February 28, 2016, 01:07:34 PM
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 28, 2016, 12:45:15 PM
Quote from: Synthesis on February 28, 2016, 03:05:25 AM
Only one mundane guild should be the undisputed master of instantly knocking you right the fuck out, and that's: assassin.
Why?
Because that's how guilds work?
Is it really? The guilds step on each other's toes all the time. Pickpockets with better sap aren't going to suddenly usurp the assassin's position.
And even if "that's how guilds work" right now, that's not an argument for keeping it that way.
Quote from: Sunburned on February 28, 2016, 01:14:12 PM
Its simply that the potential to master backstab, poison, and sap are part of the core defining skills for an assassin, and they should exclusive to them, for the same reason that warriors don't have master archery, and so on...
You still didn't explain why they should remain exclusive. It also isn't self explanatory why warrior's shouldn't be given better archery.
I'm seeing a lot of "Keep the status quo because status quo" arguments in this thread. I'm not necessarily saying it's a good idea to give pickpockets max sap or warriors max archery, but I think a lot of people are allowing the discussion to be hamstrung for no reason.
Refusing to hear the reasons does not equal not being given reasons.
do you really want to see sixteen different people conked out in the middle of the street, completely naked because pickpockets have master sap now?
i do not.
I think all this debate on this thread is useful for staff to see just how much controversy there is going to be during these guild changes.
agreed.
it is not going to be possible to please everyone.
Quote from: evilcabbage on February 28, 2016, 03:05:09 PM
do you really want to see sixteen different people conked out in the middle of the street, completely naked because pickpockets have master sap now?
i do not.
Hah. Suggesting people make pickpockets. I wouldn't be surprised if they were more rare than anything 6+ karma
Having some experience with long lived assassins and long lived pickpockets, I am of opinion that pick pockets are already very powerful combat wise for what they're supposed to be. Sap is also a good 2x more powerful then backstab. If I was special apping a concept and I had to ditch either backstab, or sab, I'd ditch backstab.
There's a pretty big difference between a branched assassin with raised skills and sap and a branched pp with raised skills and equivalent sap. Ditto with ranger + sap.
Assassin will always be more terrifying with it.
(http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/mt/2014/09/The_More_You_Know/lead_large.png)
Quote from: evilcabbage on February 28, 2016, 03:05:09 PM
do you really want to see sixteen different people conked out in the middle of the street, completely naked because pickpockets have master sap now?
i do not.
This argument is illogical. Master sap already exists in the game, and this has not been the usual consequence.
And yet, I'm still more terrified of that bash from a skilled warrior with advanced weapons. Archery from a ranger with poisoned arrows. And master back-stab with the right poisons from an assassin.
This is not to say that sap is not effective or scary but since people can currently play assassin/bounty hunter, or any number of other sub-guilds to get to master sap quickly, I still don't think giving it to a new merging of burglar+pickpocket guild to eventually branch is a bad idea. There is no reason they shouldn't have their own special tool to make them scary. It doesn't change the fact that you will still want the newly buffed assassin with better combat abilities to take out beefier targets.
I will agree though that burglar+pickpocket should probably not branch parry, but these modest fighters should still be master of the sap.
Change is bad. I fear it and do not approve.
At the very least, let it not be said this community is not full of great tippers
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f6/75/58/f675582422db235092c9741040e2d28b.jpg)
I honestly don't think Rangers, Warriors, and Assassins need much re-working at all, with the new sub-guild changes. I mean, if you go back 2-3 years, before extended sub-guilds, your main guild was your only real guild, and because of their almost uselessly low caps on skills, sub guilds were really only good to get your cross-environment sneak, quicker branching, or one-off popular skills like desert-nav, food forage, and climb.
Now, with the 2/16 change (may it live on in infamy), anyone with 2 or more karma (which is probably most of us) never has to play a standard subguild ever again. You want a warrior who sneaks and backstabs? You got it, no spec-app necessary. You want a ranger with parry from day 0, hour 0? Here you go? You want a character who can sneak, hide, peek, steal, pick, poison, backstab, scan, etc? (The classic D&D Rogue.) Also easily doable...
Even without main guild reworkings, the average PC going forward has the potential to be so versatile it's scary... Take a minute to think about that.
At that rate, I don't see a lot of point in arguing Warrior vs Ranger vs Assassin in terms of what skills they get - they're all pretty solid already. But let me tell you about pickpockets....
Well, actually I'm going to step back and weigh in on this D&D Rogue situation. D&D and a MUD are extremely different. In D&D you play an epic level adventurer who occasionally does day-to-day things (usually between sessions, via a phone call to your DM). In a MUD, you play a day-to-day person who occasionally goes on epic adventures in which you stand around and try not to spam the screen while the templar you're escorting does epic things. Or you sit on a bar and talk to people all day. So in D&D, rogue is a fun and necessary class to most groups because the party needs someone to shadow the suspicious guy, or steal the guards keys, or open the locked treasure chest. And since D&D is combat heavy, they also have this sneak attack gimmick to make them not entirely useless. It works for D&D because its players versus the environment. In Armageddon, it's mostly PvP in the capacity that the meeting you're listening in on could foil IRL weeks or months worth of planning. The items you're stealing are things that could be sorely missed, or of immense personal value. And the guy you're backstabbing for the majority of his health has days and days invested in that character. It's too much power to cram in one class. (Even though you can, with the right Guild/Ext. Subguild now. And it's awesome.)
So, I think the aspects of the D&D Rogue need to be split of for Arm. Whether it's with two classes - Assassin and Burg+Pickpocket (Scoundrel?) - or the three we have now.
But if we keep the three we have now, for the love of all that's grimdark and unholy, revise pickpocket. Currently Assassins are good at killing, and can even learn to burgle to a passable level. Burglars are great at burgling, good at stealing/peeking, and can throw/poison to make them a bit dangerous to mess with. But pickpockets can basically only pickpocket. They can learn to fight decently well against shitty opponents, and they can kind of sap, but they really don't have a lot to fall back on. To make matters worse, their branching order is all kinds of fucked. Sleight of hand and hide from day 0, hour 0 would make them a hell of a lot more useful / easy to keep alive.
The other major difference between burglars and pickpockets, is that burglary is much more socially acceptable. Player behavior has proven countless times that we're much more open to the idea of shelling out hundreds of coins for "apartment insurance" than we are with having a 60 sid dagger stolen off our belt. Additionally, burglars are far less likely to get caught than pickpockets, because if they open your door and see that you're home, they're going to book before you even get a chance to see what cloak they're wearing. Pickpockets, by nature, have to be point blank with their hand in your cookie jar to even use their flagship skill. If they fail, they could be insta-gibbed by overzealous soldiers. And even if they codedly succeed, there's a good chance they'll still "lose" to shitty RP, or another GDB gripe thread about how they didn't graciously accept their own imminent demise with 5 emotes and 2 forms of identification. (Pro-tip: You can do "steal (bumping into ~amos as he walks past)" to emote while stealing. You don't need to use an extra emote or hemote that tells the whole room "Hey, I'm about to steal some stuff." Didn't see who swiped your dagger, or how they got close enough to you to do it? Well that's because YOU ACTUALLY DIDN'T FUCKING SEE IT!) </rant>
So, I don't find main guild revisions incredibly necessary for most classes, but since it's happening here's my personal guild by guild thoughts:
All Guilds:
I think weapon skills are bad, and they should be revised. (http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,50710.msg931053.html#new)
Warrior
- Under my proposed weapon skills system that will probably never happen, they would get all teh weapon skills, and to a cap at least 10% higher than any other guild...
- Under the current system, give them advanced weapon skills at like mid-journeyman. Most warriors can hit that in 5-10 days played, and still have time to raise an advanced weapon skill to a useful level. But if this is done, I think the supposed power of advanced weapons should be lowered some. (If they're really all that good. We've all only ever seen them on scary-maxed warriors, so maybe we think too highly of them.)
- Also, giving them no hands ride and charge would be nice, and would give the C-elves more to cry about.
Ranger
- Good as is, but if it has to lose something I'd say a slight drop in melee prowess (like their weapon and fighting style skill caps drop by about 10%).
- Branch parry at Journeyman dual wield or etwo. Parry is a huge boon to early warriors, and I personally am not sold on giving that up. Though it shouldn't be a pipe dream for rangers either.
- Also, I think it would make sense to start with sneak/hide, then branch scan and listen. Reason being, Sneak/Hide are much more useful early on to help you catch the easier prey when you don't have a mount, and can't safely fight more powerful things.
Assassins
- Branch parry at journeyman dual wield or etwo.
- Get brew from sneak or something other than poison. If you can find tablets, you can grind poison earlier, but if you can't you don't have to die or out yourself trying.
Burglars
- Start with pickmaking (or allow some more common items to be used as shitty picks). Or allow it to be branched off of something other than pick. In trade, they could start with much lower pick so that it's not as immediately useful.
Pickpockets
- Start with hide and sleight of hand. In trade, you could make climb and flee branch from something like sneak or sleight of hand. Don't be sour, this means that PPs might actually try stealing from you BEFORE they've already mastered the skill.
- Throw, FFS. To a high level, because they're deft like that.
- I could get behind disarm, but I'd much rather have....
- Pick and pickmaking, to assassiny levels. Burglars can peek and steal from day one, why can't pickpockets learn to burgle a little, after they've mastered stealing outright?
OR, combine Burglar + Pickpocket (Scoundrel?)
The skills could look something like this:
- weapon & combat skills as burglar has now (including high end throw)
- sneak
- - listen
- hide
- - scan
- peek
- - search
- steal
- - pick
- sleight of hand
- value
- - haggle
And maybe throw in flee, and some low level poisoning or something.
The idea is they start as low level urchins and work up to burglary.
Merchants
I actually kind of want to see merchant split into two guilds; one for silkies, and one for weapons and armors. Uh, Artisan and Warforger? Idk.
I die a little bit inside every time I have to buy a weapon from "the <beverage>-skinned, <color I don't know>-tressed fme", and they're like "here u go i made this myself. its good i know cuz im a master weaponsmith. but i don't use them myself. evr."
The silky branch could get all the listen, scan, and whatever other skills would compliment someone catering to society's elite. Meanwhile, the weapon branch could get some low level weapon skills, so you get the impression that they have the faintest clue what the fuck they're talking about.
But this is a minor urge. Anyone else?
Various Wigglers
Just, no to giving them "thematic" skills. If your drovian isn't killing people because he doesn't have backstab, you're doing it wrong and backstab won't solve that for you. Put in a special app if it makes you feel better. With the expanded subguilds, and the possibility of extended sub guilds via spec app, if your mage needs to get some more mundane skills, they readily can.
The other thing I would like to see changed, more than anything else, is a way to fix the grind. Right now mages can just sit in their temples for ~5 days and grind in absolute safety, than step out and be scary. On one hand, it's understandable because they have almost no survival skills until they've branched them. I'd love to say "no Nil - go out and do something!" but honestly, in practice this would either mean that you need to run up to a scrab unarmed and try to fireball it before it kills you - LITERALLY DOZENS OF TIMES, or you need to spend even more time than you are now sitting in your temple waiting for a spell effect to wear off so that you can go out an RP...
Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on February 28, 2016, 06:26:55 PM
But if we keep the three we have now, for the love of all that's grimdark and unholy, revise pickpocket. Currently Assassins are good at killing, and can even learn to burgle to a passable level. Burglars are great at burgling, good at stealing/peeking, and can throw/poison to make them a bit dangerous to mess with. But pickpockets can basically only pickpocket. They can learn to fight decently well against shitty opponents, and they can kind of sap, but they really don't have a lot to fall back on. To make matters worse, their branching order is all kinds of fucked. Sleight of hand and hide from day 0, hour 0 would make them a hell of a lot more useful / easy to keep alive.
While this is true, such a change would make it so that pickpockets branch practically nothing. They'd start with all of their relevant skills. Burglars already pretty much do that, and these two classes largely suffer from a lack of... well, evolving. Maybe that can just be a fact of life for the two thieving classes, but it does feel a little boring. I like the feeling of having a kind of development curve for characters, and pickpockets and burglars already feel like they lack this. There's nothing to look forward to. It's as if things like latch/unlatch should have been its own skill that branches from steal. Add some kind of disguise skill to branch from hide, merge the two guilds, and then I think we're looking at something that stacks up to the other mundanes.
Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on February 28, 2016, 07:30:12 PM.
Merchants
I actually kind of want to see merchant split into two guilds; one for silkies, and one for weapons and armors. Uh, Artisan and Warforger? Idk.
I die a little bit inside every time I have to buy a weapon from "the <beverage>-skinned, <color I don't know>-tressed fme", and they're like "here u go i made this myself. its good i know cuz im a master weaponsmith. but i don't use them myself. evr."
The silky branch could get all the listen, scan, and whatever other skills would compliment someone catering to society's elite. Meanwhile, the weapon branch could get some low level weapon skills, so you get the impression that they have the faintest clue what the fuck they're talking about.
But this is a minor urge. Anyone else?
I never knew how badly I wanted this until just now.
Quote from: Warsong on February 28, 2016, 07:45:31 PM
Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on February 28, 2016, 06:26:55 PM
But if we keep the three we have now, for the love of all that's grimdark and unholy, revise pickpocket. Currently Assassins are good at killing, and can even learn to burgle to a passable level. Burglars are great at burgling, good at stealing/peeking, and can throw/poison to make them a bit dangerous to mess with. But pickpockets can basically only pickpocket. They can learn to fight decently well against shitty opponents, and they can kind of sap, but they really don't have a lot to fall back on. To make matters worse, their branching order is all kinds of fucked. Sleight of hand and hide from day 0, hour 0 would make them a hell of a lot more useful / easy to keep alive.
While this is true, such a change would make it so that pickpockets branch practically nothing. They'd start with all of their relevant skills. Burglars already pretty much do that, and these two classes largely suffer from a lack of... well, evolving.
That's fair, but the issue is more that pickpockets are missing two skills that could be considered essential. I guess sleight of hand isn't THAT essential, but thematically it's weird that I can steal a longsword in broad daylight with ease, but I can't cheat at cards. I think it would be better if latch/unlatch were on a different skill than sleight of hand. Also, in my 2nd monolithic post I also advocated giving pickpockets more skills, which could all be branched since they're less essential.
Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on February 28, 2016, 06:26:55 PM
Well, actually I'm going to step back and weigh in on this D&D Rogue situation. D&D and a MUD are extremely different. In D&D you play an epic level adventurer who occasionally does day-to-day things (usually between sessions, via a phone call to your DM). In a MUD, you play a day-to-day person who occasionally goes on epic adventures in which you stand around and try not to spam the screen while the templar you're escorting does epic things. Or you sit on a bar and talk to people all day. So in D&D, rogue is a fun and necessary class to most groups because the party needs someone to shadow the suspicious guy, or steal the guards keys, or open the locked treasure chest. And since D&D is combat heavy, they also have this sneak attack gimmick to make them not entirely useless. It works for D&D because its players versus the environment. In Armageddon, it's mostly PvP in the capacity that the meeting you're listening in on could foil IRL weeks or months worth of planning. The items you're stealing are things that could be sorely missed, or of immense personal value. And the guy you're backstabbing for the majority of his health has days and days invested in that character. It's too much power to cram in one class. (Even though you can, with the right Guild/Ext. Subguild now. And it's awesome.)
I don't see how the game explodes if you give assassins Steal, which is basically all the merger idea is. Master pickpockets are rare enough we're really talking about merging burglar and assassin, whose skills overlap so much it's hard to convince me that merging them will change anything at all. The parade of horribles I'm seeing here are things that already can and do happen.
Mundane characters do epic stuff all the time. If we look at the maximum potential of the ranger and warrior vs. what this hypothetical merged rogue would have, I'm not seeing a big difference.
Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on February 28, 2016, 07:30:12 PM
Burglars
- Start with pickmaking (or allow some more common items to be used as shitty picks). Or allow it to be branched off of something other than pick. In trade, they could start with much lower pick so that it's not as immediately useful.
No, this would be bad because of the way training pick works (needing a lock of the right skill level to be able to try). They definitely need to start where they do to allow for enough flexibility to learn it at all.
Then how do assassins, whose pick starts quite a bit lower than burglars, train it? I'm merely offering trade offs for giving easier access to picks. Not that a few points in pick will slow down progression much at that point.
Quote from: hyzhenhok on February 28, 2016, 09:21:35 PM
I don't see how the game explodes if you give assassins Steal, which is basically all the merger idea is. Master pickpockets are rare enough we're really talking about merging burglar and assassin, whose skills overlap so much it's hard to convince me that merging them will change anything at all. The parade of horribles I'm seeing here are things that already can and do happen.
True, I played an assassin/cutpurse once who had all the skills, and could do them all well - but he wasn't a master of everything, which is more what I'm arguing against. I like the idea of there being a sneaky class focused on killing, and a sneaky class that is not. Currently there are two sneaky classes that are not so much, but one of them is basically an exercise in willful masochism because it has no secondary aspect to it.
Assassins should have maxed throw.
They get master. It's fine.
Why have I always thought it was journeyman and never trained it?
Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on February 29, 2016, 08:28:05 AM
Then how do assassins, whose pick starts quite a bit lower than burglars, train it? I'm merely offering trade offs for giving easier access to picks. Not that a few points in pick will slow down progression much at that point.
They find the wimpiest locks in the game to start with, and they are few.
Strongly disagree with the ideas of merging any classes. I can see your guys' arguments, but I'd rather we had a bigger pie to cut from than to make everyone share their slice. If that makes sense.
Merge pickpocket and burglar into rogue, maybe adjust starting levels for assassin skills, give merchants brew from floristry & start all initial craft skills at journeyman, give warriors advanced/master riding & mid-level perception skills, leave rangers alone.
Scatter a few journeyman crafting skills among all guilds that correlate to their primary profession.
Give everyone mid-level climb, give forage food to select subguilds or have it branch from basic forage, and open wilderness quit to anyone with a tent.
Subguilds can cover the rest.
Done.
If they remove nil just have it so you don't have to choose a target or can choose "wall" or "floor" as a target.
Otherwise leveling fireball will take years.
And it will be more funny if you just chuck a ball of flame towards the wall every now and then till people in the temple get fucking pissed at you.
Quote from: Delirium on February 29, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
give warriors advanced/master riding & mid-level perception skills, leave rangers alone.
I was under the impression that mid-level perception skills are useful for catching hemotes and not much else.
Quote from: Delirium on February 29, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
start all initial craft skills at journeyman
My grind!!
Quote from: Delirium on February 29, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
Merge pickpocket and burglar into rogue, maybe adjust starting levels for assassin skills, give merchants brew from floristry & start all initial craft skills at journeyman, give warriors advanced/master riding & mid-level perception skills, leave rangers alone.
Scatter a few journeyman crafting skills among all guilds that correlate to their primary profession.
Give everyone mid-level climb, give forage food to select subguilds or have it branch from basic forage, and open wilderness quit to anyone with a tent.
Subguilds can cover the rest.
Done.
I like this. I'd only emphasize that the guilds get resource processing skills.
A good example would be giving warriors tanning and armor repair at a decent/useful level. Probably a low-level skin, too. Didn't they change skin to have a better chance of giving certain resources?
In general, I'd like to see every guild capable of performing most services. I'd also like to see some guilds perform specific services with far greater ease, which is what will make them valuable.
Quote from: Dalmeth on March 01, 2016, 12:32:37 PM
Quote from: Delirium on February 29, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
Merge pickpocket and burglar into rogue, maybe adjust starting levels for assassin skills, give merchants brew from floristry & start all initial craft skills at journeyman, give warriors advanced/master riding & mid-level perception skills, leave rangers alone.
Scatter a few journeyman crafting skills among all guilds that correlate to their primary profession.
Give everyone mid-level climb, give forage food to select subguilds or have it branch from basic forage, and open wilderness quit to anyone with a tent.
Subguilds can cover the rest.
Done.
have you ever played a warrior?
they get a decent level skin.
I like this. I'd only emphasize that the guilds get resource processing skills.
A good example would be giving warriors tanning and armor repair at a decent/useful level. Probably a low-level skin, too. Didn't they change skin to have a better chance of giving certain resources?
In general, I'd like to see every guild capable of performing most services. I'd also like to see some guilds perform specific services with far greater ease, which is what will make them valuable.
Let's play Fable.
Give everyone everything, over time.
Yes, this is sarcasm. But given the number of threads with this exact discussion in the past six months, I find this one completely uninformative and unneeded, so that is my uninformative and unneeded contribution.
Less useless is do not merge pickpocket and burglar because reasons already hashed out in previous threads had in recent months. You not wanting to play a thief does not make thieves in need of revamping. Or we need to revamp the magick system to make mages more appealing to play for me.
Quote from: evilcabbage on March 01, 2016, 02:31:26 PM
have you ever played a warrior?
they get a decent level skin.
Years ago. I haven't since because it was boring.
I never managed to max out that idling skill.
Quote from: Armaddict on March 01, 2016, 02:38:16 PM
You not wanting to play a thief does not make thieves in need of revamping.
Yeah, well that's just like... your opinion, man. I
do like playing pickpockets, but also they
do need revamping. Just because I enjoy a class doesn't mean it can't improve. Otherwise, stfu about warriors.
But don't take my word for it, lets look at some numbers, shall we? Not including psionic skills, here's how I count the skill spread amongst classes:
Quote
Warrior - 29 total skills, 8 unique to class, master 19 skills, best in game at 12 things.
Ranger - 31 total skills, 1 unique to class, master 18 skills, best in game at 13 things.
Assassin - 27 total skills, 0 unique to class, master 9 skills, best in game at 4 things.
Burglar - 22 total skills, 1 unique to class, master 7 things, best in game at 4 things.
Pickpocket - 20 total skills, 0 unique to class, master 7 things, best in game at 3 things.
Let me beat you to it, and agree that yes, my numbers
are wrong! Please don't tell me they're wrong; I already know they're wrong. And so are yours! So please feel free to count things up yourself and tell me if the overall
trend is wrong.
I don't want to merge pickpocket and burglar. :( Vive la différence.
I understand there are problems, or at least a feeling of meh, about each. But I think it's better for the game to have specialists in different areas, rather than some kind of criminal generalist class.
Quote from: IAmJacksOpinion on March 01, 2016, 05:51:36 PM
But don't take my word for it, lets look at some numbers, shall we? Not including psionic skills, here's how I count the skill spread amongst classes:
Quote
Warrior - 29 total skills, 8 unique to class, master 19 skills, best in game at 12 things.
Ranger - 31 total skills, 1 unique to class, master 18 skills, best in game at 13 things.
Assassin - 27 total skills, 0 unique to class, master 9 skills, best in game at 4 things.
Burglar - 22 total skills, 1 unique to class, master 7 things, best in game at 4 things.
Pickpocket - 20 total skills, 0 unique to class, master 7 things, best in game at 3 things.
Let me beat you to it, and agree that yes, my numbers are wrong! Please don't tell me they're wrong; I already know they're wrong. And so are yours! So please feel free to count things up yourself and tell me if the overall trend is wrong.
Given how much their skills overlap, this actually indicates how reasonable the idea of fully merging assassin, burglar and pickpocket into a single DnD-style Rogue would be, compared to the power level of rangers and warriors. ;)
Would be cool if a generalized sneak guild could choose its specialization as certain skills hit cap. Maybe through a special app? It's something only the staff would know how to implement.
I wonder when we're going to start seeing these.
Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 13, 2016, 04:07:09 AM
I wonder when we're going to start seeing these.
I noticed that they started reporting how much they were enjoying making the changes long before any of you started debating the changes, which sort of told me that they had a plan already.
Everything is fine how it is.
Necromancy!
Quote from: Delirium on February 29, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
Merge pickpocket and burglar into rogue, maybe adjust starting levels for assassin skills, give merchants brew from floristry & start all initial craft skills at journeyman, give warriors advanced/master riding & mid-level perception skills, leave rangers alone.
Scatter a few journeyman crafting skills among all guilds that correlate to their primary profession.
Give everyone mid-level climb, give forage food to select subguilds or have it branch from basic forage, and open wilderness quit to anyone with a tent.
Subguilds can cover the rest.
Done.
A lot already has been said for the Three Guild Idea (Warrior, Ranger, Assassin). I doubt I can add anything valuable -- and I don't know enough about the skills that the guilds get to do any detail analysis -- but I do think having one guild that mirrors Ranger in pretty much every way (e.g., city scan/hide/sneak/hunt instead of wilderness scan/hide/sneak/hunt) sure would make picking a Guild for a sneaky character a less overwhelming process.
If you wanted to be a pickpocket, you'd just pick Assassin + Pickpocket Subguild. Burglar: Assassin + Burglar Subguild.
Quote from: nauta on June 29, 2016, 01:42:24 PM
Necromancy!
Quote from: Delirium on February 29, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
Merge pickpocket and burglar into rogue, maybe adjust starting levels for assassin skills, give merchants brew from floristry & start all initial craft skills at journeyman, give warriors advanced/master riding & mid-level perception skills, leave rangers alone.
Scatter a few journeyman crafting skills among all guilds that correlate to their primary profession.
Give everyone mid-level climb, give forage food to select subguilds or have it branch from basic forage, and open wilderness quit to anyone with a tent.
Subguilds can cover the rest.
Done.
A lot already has been said for the Three Guild Idea (Warrior, Ranger, Assassin). I doubt I can add anything valuable -- and I don't know enough about the skills that the guilds get to do any detail analysis -- but I do think having one guild that mirrors Ranger in pretty much every way (e.g., city scan/hide/sneak/hunt instead of wilderness scan/hide/sneak/hunt) sure would make picking a Guild for a sneaky character a less overwhelming process.
If you wanted to be a pickpocket, you'd just pick Assassin + Pickpocket Subguild. Burglar: Assassin + Burglar Subguild.
Further it'd be cool to have assassin specialize either in close combat, or ranged combat.
I don't like the idea of assassin being either: Melee or ranged.
If you wanted to be a ranged assasin just go ranger with city subguild to sneak around and bang you win.
My understanding is that the main guild changes were supposed to be small buffs and changes. That why i suggested the ideas below, except for burglar/pickpocket . However, considering the changes to magick guilds and the length of time its taken for guild changes, I'm wondering if that isn't the case anymore.
I still like all the changes I suggested below for every guild, except perhaps for assassin. I still think they should loose sap (making it unique to combined burglar/pickpocket) but perhaps they should get more utility like being master of stealth anywhere without needing an extra sub-guild. Or something more 'fun' and 'unique'... something like traps. At the very least, I don't think assassins should only be useful in cities, poison and backstab should be something you can use with any bladed weapon.
Also trample should be removed for everyone except for rangers, and sub-guilds with ride.
Quote from: Dresan on February 27, 2016, 12:08:00 PM
Quote from: Dresan on February 25, 2016, 06:42:56 PM
Rangers:
- should lose throw
- weapons should be capped right at advanced.
- Rangers should start with sneak, and branch listen from it, but capped at advanced.
I don't want to say something like throw is a city skill, but I think rangers have enough ranged skills with archery. They can afford to lose this. Weapon skills should be capped slightly lower, but advanced is still pretty damn good and most people don't even reach that. Finally I feel starting with sneak is a nice boon for anyone not starting with a sneak guild. Over all these wouldn't be nerfs most people would even notice.
Quote from: Dresan on February 25, 2016, 06:42:56 PM
Warrior:
- Should be able to ride hands-free.
- Should eventually branch direction sense when they branch blindfighting.
- Should start with basic weapons skills at apprentice.
I roll ranger/protector and I think the only thing I'd be missing out on is disarm at best, because if my warrior lives long enough to branch weapon skills then I'm probably having as much fun as I could with the character. Warriors don't need much, they just need a little bit more utility so they have a bit more freedom to select sub-guilds, hands free ride and eventual direction sense are really it so they can be the leaders they are destined to be. Starting at apprentice weapons is just a bonus that I think warriors should have, in the same way other classes start off with plenty in apprentice.
Quote from: Dresan on February 25, 2016, 06:42:56 PM
Assassin:
- Should eventually branch slashing and chopping weapons at apprentice, journeyman max.
- bludgeoning weapons to journeyman
- piercing weapons to master but no branching
- Should lose sap
- Should gain master throw, master climb, master watch, and have best eyes in the game.
Assassin should be masters of killing and pretty good at fighting at the end of their career. GOOD but not GREAT. Again while you can argue sap is something they develop, I would rather give that as a unique thing to Rogues and improve their overall killing abilities.
Burglar and pickpocket should be merged. Or give pickpocket lock picking and pick making, advanced throw and that's it. Making master sap unique to them would also help them out greatly to make them a unique but strong class
Regional weapon boosts currently mostly benefit warriors and rangers , which is why I feel they should be removed and have warriors weapon skills all begin at apprentice
Not having guild skills that need branching at all would be a pretty sweet change.
Quote from: Majikal on June 29, 2016, 09:15:02 PM
Not having guild skills that need branching at all would be a pretty sweet change.
I...
I mean.
I.
I kind of agree actually.
You'd be able to start doing whatever you want faster.
Want to use glaives and shit? Fucking go for it.
Give us our Bash Door, Its time.
Quote from: WanderingOoze on June 29, 2016, 10:07:30 PM
Give us our Bash Door, Its time.
"Knock knock"
"Who's there?"
"Warrior"
"Warrior wh-"
*Bash door*
Quote from: Jihelu on June 29, 2016, 10:09:08 PM
Quote from: WanderingOoze on June 29, 2016, 10:07:30 PM
Give us our Bash Door, Its time.
"Knock knock"
"Who's there?"
"Warrior"
"Warrior wh-"
*Bash door*
This happened to me, except it was a Red Robe.
I have always liked the model where you pick an archetype and then use points to select skills available to that.
assassin should get a combat buff, i mean right out of the box, they suck at killing anything. yet they're primary function in game is to, oh wow kill people/pc's... yet without grinding for hours, rl weeks, and months they just blow ass at what they're spose to do.
Ranger = pretty easy to go out and start doing all their rangery things.
warriors = great for just going to mess shit up on day one. wait they branch weapons whaaaat??? yeah make it branch sooner then master.
assassins = bend over and take it you can't kill anything on day five. rl week or more playing.
burglar = someone that steals primarily, just slapped your assassin around and called him suzy.
pp = see above, only called him pete!
don't even know why I'm typing this, gonna stop now. Continue.
okay so warrior is a solid guild cause lets face it, it's all about being up in your face and smashing you down. Though it's never made sense to me that it doesn't have the ability to repair armor, I thing that imo is a necassity. Also it would be good if it got no hands riding, and a shield skill that lets shields be more then just uber blocking (probably not possible but hate that shields are just uber walls), if it was up to me I'd get rid of the slashing, piercing, chopping, bludgenoing skills all together. put in small blades, medium blades, large blades, axes,, clubs, spears, polearms, whip skills. probably a nightmare to do, but again doesn't make sense that you can learn to use a spear by practicing with daggers. and such like that. (not really voting for it cause yeah that would be a great deal of work.)
Rangers - I honestly don't see where they need to be changed. Though would be nice if other subguilds/origions got food forage. makes no sense joe dirt lived in 'Nak all his life, working in kitchens, tavern, served some highlord, sucked sid from his merchant type family, picks ranger and wham, can now surivive better in the wilderness then Mr./mrs. tribal who lives in a tent, was raised outside of civilization. Maybe spread that love to outdoorsman, grebber (who may have learned through grebbing how to, tribal/tribal origion, hunter, the ones where you are outside more. (not sure which ones get it or don't)
Assassin - see above, also could assassins get the ability to make/use some of the more infamous ninja items? black eggs (uses throw/toss command, blinds creature for eh small amount of time) fake flutes that work, but can be used as a blowdart. give them slashing weapons. Completely remove the words backstab off the skills, and make it assassinate or something. Cause seriously backstab just sounds soooo limiting, and then people are like how do I stab people in the back like thats the only feasible way to assassinate a dude. Make doorways no sneak/hide, make it impossible to hide in an apartment if a fight is going on. Unless it's like some giant apartment, with rafters. Cause from looking at some of those room descriptions theres no way you'd be able to hide in a dinky apartment with people fighting in them. Please give them the ability to use traps, contact poisons would be needed for them, as well as needles. No explosive traps, or very rare ingredients, let them start with apprentice backstab, and sneak. Two of the biggest time consuming grinds, to make your assassin idea feasible. (not really but it would be nice. and hate grinding them) give them a higher lock picking cap. cause honestly mr, highborn ain't gonna be behind an easy door to unlock if someone hires you to go after them. (Not like they would, highborns are so untouchable). theres alot more potential to this guild then is obvious, they just seem to be completely window dressing, then people that can slip in murder you next to your fme/mme and back out again. give them some crafting skills that make sense to it. maybe armor repair, weapons crafting select clubs, knives, give em brew to start, and maybe toss in bandage skill (if they don't) cause yeah it makes sense. they know or should know the workings of the human body enough to be able to patch it up.
other guilds - never really play them so can't chip in anything other then they'll usually beat an assassins ass one day one with no problem. and that just seems again wrong to me. Well except for merchants... let merchants have weapon skills capped at apprentice, so they can at least stand up to a newborn babe.
Still adamant against the combination of pp, burglar, and assassin. The combination of those guilds put together is staggeringly out of whack. The moment my assassin can also manipulate your inventory without fear and break through every door and never fail climb checks is a very bad moment for the game, in my opinion.
All that we really gain out of it is people feeling more powerful as those characters and more burglars and pickpockets being played. None of those are particularly good things.
I'm not against tweaking of them on their own. But making them all one is the creation of the class called 'nightmare'.
Make only one guild that can reach master in every skill.
And give everyone unicorns.
Make every creature in the game mountable.
Only let Templar Guild ask for consent
Quote from: Yam on June 30, 2016, 01:14:05 AM
Make every creature in the game mountable.
Including all humanoid races. >.> *whistle*
Put level minimums and guild restrictions on all the weapons and armor. (Joking)
warrior: Give warriors scan to journeyman so they can guard stuff from the sneaky. Or at least subguild guard.
Assassin: I haven't played any successful ones, but making backstab branch instead of the other is a great idea.
Burglars: are perfect. I do wish that slight of hand came first, but eh. I like them now too.
Pickpocket: are perfect.
Merchants: I think it would be best if people got to choose what crafting skills they began with. I think this would promote traders to specialize in one craft more often than every merchant ever created just trying to sell everything whenever they can. (which I think is cool too) I just don't ever see shoe salesman very often. This would fall under leather working and obviously if they can work leather they're not /just/ going to make shoes, because they need coins! They're going to leather work armor and what have you. And I just think that if people could pick which skills they started with it would promote this specialized salesperson idea.
Ranger: lower the bandage skill - in the helpfile it says that rangers are modest healers, but honestly they're as good as subguild physician. I have yet to play apothecary and I have yet to get a merchant good enough at bandage to tell the difference.
I think ranger's bandage is so good it's like magick. If it gets better than this, my mind is going to be blown away.
Quote from: bardlyone on June 30, 2016, 01:48:23 AM
Quote from: Yam on June 30, 2016, 01:14:05 AM
Make every creature in the game mountable.
Including all humanoid races. >.> *whistle*
yes this, mudsex partner mounting go!!!!
the tressy tressed fme is here being rode by the slobbering, scar riddled man!
Please do the 'mounting people' thing for april fools next year or something.
Then keep it for half giants so I Dont need to buy mounts anymore.
Quote from: Armaddict on June 30, 2016, 12:28:45 AM
Still adamant against the combination of pp, burglar, and assassin. The combination of those guilds put together is staggeringly out of whack. The moment my assassin can also manipulate your inventory without fear and break through every door and never fail climb checks is a very bad moment for the game, in my opinion.
All that we really gain out of it is people feeling more powerful as those characters and more burglars and pickpockets being played. None of those are particularly good things.
I'm not against tweaking of them on their own. But making them all one is the creation of the class called 'nightmare'.
Yeah I can see the worry with a sneak who is best burglar, best pickpocket, and best backstabber.
My idea would be for a generic Rogue (or Assassin) class, which would have all the flex like Ranger does (and with capped combat skills like Ranger): it'd have scan, hide, climb, sneak, listen, sleight of hand, poison, brew, and so on (like the Assassins/Rangers do, but with city versions). It'd have steal/lockpick/backstab set at something like journeyman, however.
You could then choose to go with the Pickpocket Subguild to get master steal or the Burglar subguild to get master lockpick or Assassin subguild to get master backstab. Or something
roughly like that.
The motivation here is how fun it is to play a ranger owing to the flexibility a Ranger offers, and how limited Pickpockets are (in my experience).
Your options at chargen then would be:
Do you want to play someone who is awesome outside the city? (Ranger)
Do you want to play someone who is awesome at smashing things? (Warrior)
Do you want to play someone who is awesome inside the city? (Rogue)
Do you want to play someone who makes stuff? (Merchant)
You could then qualify that awesomeness with subguild choices.
Quotewarrior: Give warriors scan to journeyman so they can guard stuff from the sneaky. Or at least subguild guard.
Should be noted that anecdotally...people with guard higher than j-man are often harder to prevent attacks from than someone who is stealthy. High guard skill seems to go against other people's guard attempts.
Warriors should get lower skinning too. Journeyman skinning is good enough to make a living off of. And with this new skinning thing, warriors'll be fine with extremely low level skinning - if not just novice now.
Quote from: Chettaman on June 30, 2016, 03:29:01 PM
Warriors should get lower skinning too. Journeyman skinning is good enough to make a living off of. And with this new skinning thing, warriors'll be fine with extremely low level skinning - if not just novice now.
Stupid
fucking idea.
Downgraded to simply stupid idea.
Warrior skinning is fine. You'll bungle about 30% of your cuts in my experience. Better to keep it where it is; if you lower it, you'll just encourage people to do more spam hunting.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on June 30, 2016, 03:29:48 PM
Quote from: Chettaman on June 30, 2016, 03:29:01 PM
Warriors should get lower skinning too. Journeyman skinning is good enough to make a living off of. And with this new skinning thing, warriors'll be fine with extremely low level skinning - if not just novice now.
Stupid fucking idea.
Downgraded to simply stupid idea.
Warrior skinning is fine. You'll bungle about 30% of your cuts in my experience. Better to keep it where it is; if you lower it, you'll just encourage people to do more spam hunting.
I'm going to spam hunt you.
You ineptly hack the body into pieces.
I don't agree with a combination of everything. Only a combination of pickpocket and burglar into a Thief. Thief should be a city class, ranger more wilderness based, assassin should be useful both city and wilderness terrain, a bit like warrior somewhat is as well.
I think poison and backstab should be usable with all bladed weapons of modest size. Therefore Assassins starting with slashing,piercing and chopping with stealth usable on any terrain. They would loose bludgeon and sap. The new thief class getting piercing/bludgeon for weapon weapon skills and sap.
Quote from: Dresan on June 30, 2016, 06:40:28 PM
I don't agree with a combination of everything. Only a combination of pickpocket and burglar into a Thief. Thief should be a city class, ranger more wilderness based, assassin should be useful both city and wilderness terrain, a bit like warrior somewhat is as well.
I think poison and backstab should be usable with all bladed weapons of modest size. Therefore Assassins starting with slashing,piercing and chopping with stealth usable on any terrain. They would loose bludgeon and sap. The new thief class getting piercing/bludgeon for weapon weapon skills and sap.
Preach it brother!
Quote from: BadSkeelz on June 30, 2016, 03:29:48 PM
Quote from: Chettaman on June 30, 2016, 03:29:01 PM
Warriors should get lower skinning too. Journeyman skinning is good enough to make a living off of. And with this new skinning thing, warriors'll be fine with extremely low level skinning - if not just novice now.
Stupid fucking idea.
Downgraded to simply stupid idea.
Warrior skinning is fine. You'll bungle about 30% of your cuts in my experience. Better to keep it where it is; if you lower it, you'll just encourage people to do more spam hunting.
Well sure, I guess. If warriors were more interested in making coin then they were surviving - because of the new skinning thing. And spam hunting just means they need a hunter of some sort. They should drag those bodies back to camp or whatever and have it skinned by someone who knows how. ... or just spam skin everything. I'm okay with spam skinning as long as they realize they could be doing things a different way to get what they want.
Quote from: Chettaman on June 30, 2016, 08:52:11 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on June 30, 2016, 03:29:48 PM
Quote from: Chettaman on June 30, 2016, 03:29:01 PM
Warriors should get lower skinning too. Journeyman skinning is good enough to make a living off of. And with this new skinning thing, warriors'll be fine with extremely low level skinning - if not just novice now.
Stupid fucking idea.
Downgraded to simply stupid idea.
Warrior skinning is fine. You'll bungle about 30% of your cuts in my experience. Better to keep it where it is; if you lower it, you'll just encourage people to do more spam hunting.
Well sure, I guess. If warriors were more interested in making coin then they were surviving - because of the new skinning thing. And spam hunting just means they need a hunter of some sort. They should drag those bodies back to camp or whatever and have it skinned by someone who knows how. ... or just spam skin everything. I'm okay with spam skinning as long as they realize they could be doing things a different way to get what they want.
Frankly, most Warriors prioritize things that don't help with skinning, per se. With the new spoiling code, and their relatively shit cooking skill, Warriors don't do well with hunting as it is. Lowering the skinning max WOULD cause them to over-hunt the visible spawning mobs just to get a few pieces of meat that they'll probably burn trying to eat.
The way skinning works now is kind of silly. Anyone can get some meat from a corpse. Every corpse should have at least one meat item that pops out with a skin failure.
Quote from: Yam on June 30, 2016, 10:12:13 PM
The way skinning works now is kind of silly. Anyone can get some meat from a corpse. Every corpse should have at least one meat item that pops out with a skin failure.
Yep. Especially with large creatures.
I can see someone with poor skinning not getting anything useful from a relatively small animal, but when it's a fair sized creature it's hard for me to imagine that I just hacked the entire corpse up to the point that I couldn't even get a one-bite strip of meat from it.
You ineptly hack the mek to pieces.
QuoteWelcome to Meatcraft!
« on: June 23, 2016, 06:18:20 PM »
Hello, and welcome to the beginning of a new world!
Welcome to Meatcraft!
Over the past few months our staff, and more importantly, our builders have been hard at work on a new project to bring the world to life. But how, you ask yourself? Well, we went through all the animals of the Gol Krathu, and looked over the skinning lists - then we decided to mix things up.
We've made sure every animal in the region can be harvested for some form of meat or food product. We've also made sure that they drop at least one resource item a piece. In some cases this meant increasing the amount of meat large animals drop, changing the hides certain animals drop, and in very specific instances completely recreating the skinning file for certain animals. Then we went through and made sure every single item had at least one basic recipe that someone with a proper crafting skill can use.
There are approximately 100 new items being put into the game right now for you to go out, find, and use - and this is only the beginning. Other regions will begin to see similar changes as the months go by.
Go forth and hunt!
I haven't got a chance to check this change out yet for it to prove my point, but seriously, ya'll... I've played warriors with no hunting background and done fine with how it is. There's nothing incredibly terrible about it now, and if it were made worse, I'm absolutely sure people would be fine. Oh, yeah... and I did it on foot mostly as a non d-elf. This was even /before/ there were hordes of chalton outside of allanak. And was during the time gortok surprised me by chasing me after I fled.
I hardly ever see spoiling of food happen and people can definitely survive on over-cooked food even if they hunger faster and get full less.
of course... I'm a minimalist even in game.
But again, I agree. More failures would increase the amount of spam OR need of someone with more skill.
"with how it is" meaning, with the new spoil code?
Because I've played Warriors that, unless they had another source of food coming in, had a real hard time eating non-raw, non-burned cuts of meat.
Maybe its just me, but I'm not going to eat shriveled bunches of meat because "codedly it makes me full". I actually like to eat a nice steak once in a while.
lol. (I'm not laughing at you. I'm definitely laughing with you)
Anyone who is currently roleplaying with me can tell you that I too roleplay eating good food compared to just SURVIVING. But that's part of my roleplay.
I also think cooking should be so much easier.
**this may change the fears people have about "over-hunting".
*** I didn't mean to make the above sound like I my roleplay was better or worse. I'm only trying to send the message that "yes. Life in the game is hard. But not so hard as to make it unplayable. or even close to being so." You don't need to know game mechanics, you just need to... understand the world these characters live in.
Ya live somewhere. You go out 'n kill enough for a few days of living, considering you burn it or not. While the chance of burning food is ridiculous it's not /that/ rare you manage to cook something well. Then you enjoy yourself until you have to do it over again.
If you wanna go a little crazy, make the advanced weapons pop in at journeyman for warrior, but at advanced, make it so that warriors branch that specific kind of weaponcrafting up to apprentence.
There are already quite a few subguilds that let you make knives and spears that also offer other useful skills, all the way up to advanced. I figure a man who has nearly mastered swordwork would be able to make a basic sword to cut with in a desperate situation, but never really be even decent at it.
You could even possibly offer the same for the advanced weaponry, too, if they ever manage to get those skills that high.
How to fix warrior is Hauwke's opinion.
Raise the level of parry they get, if its able to be raised of course because rl sword play is 90% parry or get chopped the fuck asunder.
Make the weapon grind for them slightly easier somehow. Sure easier doesnt mean better, im only talking a tiny fraction, I have seen people -rarely- miss to the point of parry barely coming into it let alone a full dodge.
Raise their weapon maxes, to the max unless its already at max, in that case lower other guilds a teensy tiny bit, these guys are the cream of the crop of the melee, but it feels like a ranger can often be just as good if not better under the right circumstances. Just give them that little edge they really should have. A mid skill ranger and a mid skill warrior should never stack up evenly in a sword fight in my opinion barring the ranger tricks a warrior cant use obviously.
Give warriors no hand ride, for the love of god this if nothing else. Being able to fight mounted is very important, and while at max ride Im sure they can do it, (havent played a max ride human warrior sorry guys) it just would be waiting to be attacked then quickly change hands ep etwo or es shield or something which is sort of silly considering they are now losing control of the reins yet are fighting while mounted, which means moving the mount around to get the right positioning.
Advanced weapons.
Never gotten to one but if they are indeed all powerful in the hands of a good solid warrior maybe they need to be slightly more common, doing this would actually even out the ranger-warrior combat difference but then they do need to stay somewhat rare, they are for the very best and thats it really.
Weapon crafting for warriors, I am a little iffy on this one, but I do agree with AdamBlue. If my swordmaster spends a decade learning all there is to know about a sword then he should be able to slap a hilt on a sharp stick and call it a sword, maybe give them some crafting skill but only for the experienced ones, I dont know it just seems like it would be a decent idea.
Also mid level direction sense and maybe scan for them because screw those hidden npcs that get you on every single ride even after ten years of them getting you.
Tl;dr just my opinions on how I personally would fix any issue warrior has albeit the few issues I see. I dont think it has many issues but the ones I feel it has are fairly annoying ones to me. Not ranting or anything just trying to be helpful.
(Insert malifaxis yelling here to finish him right.)
I think warriors are fine combat-wise; I've seen relatively new warriors go toe to toe with ancient maxed-out rangers.
Where warriors lack is in utility and crafting skills.
They of course suffer from the universal trials of "I just want to get my fucking dodges in". But so does every combat-capable class.
Warriors are fun because sometimes you just want to be able to decently hold your own right out of the box. And if you invest a special app into some skill bumps, you're quite competent.
I've changed my opinion on this a few times, but in a world like Zalanthas I think it makes sense that rangers are more powerful because of how comfortable and maneuverable they are in the wastes.
Warriors shouldn't get no-hand ride automatically, but they should be able to use special equipment to bring them over that threshold. It might be possible already, I don't know. I was never able to gather enough riding equipment to test it out.
I'd personally just like to see a 'specialization' of sorts you can pick from chargen. I know, I know...I guess that's what subguilds are for. But if you have a subguild in mind for RP purposes, it leaves you in the lurch with your main guild. Let me explain:
*Make it so you can pick an Assassin that specializes in sap and bludgeoning weapons, at the sacrifice of backstab and piercing weapons.
*Make it so you can pick a Warrior that specializes in one weapon type, at the sacrifice of lower caps for all other weapon types, affecting their defense against them. Include advanced weapons, here.
*Make it so you can choose an animal you have an affinity for, as a Ranger. You get larger bonuses against these animals.
Just some ideas. As it currently works and skills develop, you have to cross Bridge X to get to Ferry Y, but they don't necessarily seem related other than 'we don't want you to have both of these skills in tandem'.
Quote from: Reiloth on July 18, 2016, 11:36:01 AM
I'd personally just like to see a 'specialization' of sorts you can pick from chargen. I know, I know...I guess that's what subguilds are for. But if you have a subguild in mind for RP purposes, it leaves you in the lurch with your main guild. Let me explain:
*Make it so you can pick an Assassin that specializes in sap and bludgeoning weapons, at the sacrifice of backstab and piercing weapons.
*Make it so you can pick a Warrior that specializes in one weapon type, at the sacrifice of lower caps for all other weapon types, affecting their defense against them. Include advanced weapons, here.
*Make it so you can choose an animal you have an affinity for, as a Ranger. You get larger bonuses against these animals.
Just some ideas. As it currently works and skills develop, you have to cross Bridge X to get to Ferry Y, but they don't necessarily seem related other than 'we don't want you to have both of these skills in tandem'.
I'd like the animal idea to be something half elves get, as opposed to rangers.
Rangers should be able to learn/be alright with all sorts of animals.
Here's an idea:
Advanced Guilds.
Of course, you have your warriors as they are, with subguilds, but you could probably split them into a few catagories when they reach a certain threshold of skills for them to choose from.
You could have a warrior split between a Commander, a Shieldbearer, and a Ravager.
A Commander would be given some small ability to further lead an army. Extremely minor skills in the common languages so that he can at least passably understand and lead people he doesn't share much with- The ability to cut through a storm and bring an army through, and to ride effectively. Being so knowledgable,
A Shieldbearer would be charged with protecting his home. Given the ability to maintain armor and make some basic protective implements to guard himself, as well as scan for any threats that may try to stand past his sigil, and some manner to effectively hide themselves to be a silent protector.
A Ravager would be the most brutal of the trio. Charged with honing their weaponry, they have some ability to produce new, if basic implemements of weaponry that they excell with, up to journeyman or higher. They would also be given a small ability to sap or backstab foes to capitalize on the absolute ability to obliterate.
Please note that the ability to make weaponry, to speak languages, to make armor, to backstab; All of these skills would be even less then a subguild's ability to do such, as subguilds usually allow to at least advanced skill, and possibly be much harder to raise as well. These would hit journeyman at absolute best, but usually linger around novice or apprentence.
---
The same could be said with Rangers. You could divide them into subclasses. Ones that are better with poisons and stealth, ones that are better with bandaging and curemaking, and ones that are better at combat.
Just little changes that allow greater variety in characters, to make them just a wee bit better at some things then the other warrior, that allow people to make choices based on how their character has played out. Of course, this is all just a fever dream of hopes that could never, ever come to pass, but ya never know.
This is just random babbling, but it could be fun to add more variety between the Guilds.
We fucking need Merits and Flaws.
Quote from: AdamBlue on July 19, 2016, 02:23:15 AM
Here's an idea:
Advanced Guilds.
Of course, you have your warriors as they are, with subguilds, but you could probably split them into a few catagories when they reach a certain threshold of skills for them to choose from.
You could have a warrior split between a Commander, a Shieldbearer, and a Ravager.
A Commander would be given some small ability to further lead an army. Extremely minor skills in the common languages so that he can at least passably understand and lead people he doesn't share much with- The ability to cut through a storm and bring an army through, and to ride effectively. Being so knowledgable,
A Shieldbearer would be charged with protecting his home. Given the ability to maintain armor and make some basic protective implements to guard himself, as well as scan for any threats that may try to stand past his sigil, and some manner to effectively hide themselves to be a silent protector.
A Ravager would be the most brutal of the trio. Charged with honing their weaponry, they have some ability to produce new, if basic implemements of weaponry that they excell with, up to journeyman or higher. They would also be given a small ability to sap or backstab foes to capitalize on the absolute ability to obliterate.
Please note that the ability to make weaponry, to speak languages, to make armor, to backstab; All of these skills would be even less then a subguild's ability to do such, as subguilds usually allow to at least advanced skill, and possibly be much harder to raise as well. These would hit journeyman at absolute best, but usually linger around novice or apprentence.
---
The same could be said with Rangers. You could divide them into subclasses. Ones that are better with poisons and stealth, ones that are better with bandaging and curemaking, and ones that are better at combat.
Just little changes that allow greater variety in characters, to make them just a wee bit better at some things then the other warrior, that allow people to make choices based on how their character has played out. Of course, this is all just a fever dream of hopes that could never, ever come to pass, but ya never know.
This is just random babbling, but it could be fun to add more variety between the Guilds.
This might well be the way things go, although much of this is already possible with the subguilds that we have in game, only that the main guild guild stays the same for everyone no matter what sub guild option is chosen.
Another possibility is to split the main guilds into components that you can choose from, to customize the build of your PC. This half guild idea is something that others have suggested before (RGS??? Don't remember). You could opt for the old "pure" main guild by choosing some options, or tailor it by choosing another set. Sounds ideal. However, with the addition of a subguild the whole thing gets very messy, and chargen would be complicated.
With the myriad of subguilds we have now, I am not sure that -all- of the main guilds even need changing at a drastic level. Yet seeing what has happened to Sorcs and Templars, I reckon we are in for changes like it or not. :)
Quote from: Malifaxis on July 19, 2016, 10:25:44 AM
We fucking need Merits and Flaws.
It WOULD be kinda nice to be able to pick coded perks and disadvantages. Not just for the min-maxing (because lets be fair, people would), but because how great would it be to pick, like, Blathering Idiot, where CODEDLY sometimes your psi's would come out as says.
I know it happened once, but its an example.
So far as on-topic, may as well make the whole game "subguilds" and just allow people to pick whatever two code-sets they think fit. No more "Well I'm a warrior so my combat is JAW-some", but more of "Well, I picked two combat-based classes so I'm pretty danks."
Quote from: Delirium on July 18, 2016, 10:29:14 AM
I think warriors are fine combat-wise; I've seen relatively new warriors go toe to toe with ancient maxed-out rangers.
Where warriors lack is in utility and crafting skills.
They of course suffer from the universal trials of "I just want to get my fucking dodges in". But so does every combat-capable class.
If your maxed ranger is being beaten by any warrior with less than pretty good skills you arent maxed. No where near, hell I would even go so far as to say it would take many days played for a warrior to rival a maxed ranger quite easily.
Quote from: Hauwke on July 19, 2016, 11:15:39 PM
Quote from: Delirium on July 18, 2016, 10:29:14 AM
I think warriors are fine combat-wise; I've seen relatively new warriors go toe to toe with ancient maxed-out rangers.
Where warriors lack is in utility and crafting skills.
They of course suffer from the universal trials of "I just want to get my fucking dodges in". But so does every combat-capable class.
If your maxed ranger is being beaten by any warrior with less than pretty good skills you arent maxed. No where near, hell I would even go so far as to say it would take many days played for a warrior to rival a maxed ranger quite easily.
That may be what you'd think looking off of numbers, but in practice...there is actually a very distinct difference in the combat efficacy between warriors and rangers. Warriors develop very -quickly- in terms of melee combat, while rangers seem to suffer a long-term 'behind the curve' sort of effect. They have the skills. They do. But they suffer a lot more from the 'uncanny hole' in their defense than warriors do, putting them much closer on tier to the other classes than comparable to warriors. Warriors, on the other hand, start off just as weak as everyone else (but noticeably better on a consistent over time observation), but very quickly develop into very formidable defenders. If you play consistently in the Byn as several classes, you'll notice the trend of who improves most quickly and who ends up at the top of that ring. I think you're misinterpreting 'go toe to toe' and 'relatively new'. If you have a 90 day ranger, and throw him up against a 30 day warrior...I'll eagerly lean forward in anticipation of a long lived character probably about to die. Even if the ranger wins in that combat, it's gonna be closer than you realize. And that is someone with 1/3 of the playtime. Lower it down to 15 or 20 and they're likely to lose, but they will hold their own in melee combat regardless and be far from risk free. Hence...'relatively' new, going toe to toe.
So unless you're putting rangers into their element against that warrior, you'll end up finding that in most cases, rangers do indeed end up losing to warriors more often, or in a more directly relatable comparison, will always have a lot more anxiety about standing in front of a big baddy creature than a warrior. There are some who will risk it and survive, but such doesn't seem to be nearly as consistent on the top end as a truly skilled warrior.
Also, I'm not sure if this is related, but I think it's worth telling you that very very few hit the point of 'truly maxed' in this game. So comparisons of number sheets is...very misleading, since the vast majority are somewhere on a spectrum below that. Even the 90 day ranger above would not likely be truly maxxed.
It would be cool if every IG year, a character could pick one merit and one flaw. Upon selecting them, they have to put in a small prompt of why they have this merit/flaw. It shouldnt be observed/monitored/enforced in too draconic a fashion. It should be allowed to give some kind of leeway to a point of it being virtual. It will also demonstrate who's in it for the min maxing, and who's having fun.
Imagine something like.
Shell Stomach : + 25 alcohol resistance.
Spent a lot of time tavern sitting, getting drinks for free.
Spent a lot of time with Sun Runners.
Agoraphobia:
-10 stun maximum.
Dont get out of the city much, kind of new to it.
Allow people change their merits/flaws every IG year, as they see fit.
I like the idea but preferably with something more permanent.
Flee being more exclusive in both guilds and subguilds is now irking the shit out of me.
What do you mean? I was under impression all guilds get them. Some just have to branch it
Quote from: Dar on July 24, 2016, 08:39:04 PM
What do you mean? I was under impression all guilds get them. Some just have to branch it
Entirely possible, though the reasoning behind that shift and the removal of it from several subguilds would be interesting to know.
what's a point of having flee in a subguild, when all guilds get it anyway?
Quote from: Dar on July 24, 2016, 08:41:06 PM
what's a point of having flee in a subguild, when all guilds get it anyway?
If all guilds now get it, that would be worthy of an announcement of such to prevent such confusion. And I'd still like to know why running away would need to be learned later.
Quote from: Armaddict on July 24, 2016, 08:42:49 PM
Quote from: Dar on July 24, 2016, 08:41:06 PM
what's a point of having flee in a subguild, when all guilds get it anyway?
If all guilds now get it, that would be worthy of an announcement of such to prevent such confusion. And I'd still like to know why running away would need to be learned later.
Running away is fairly easy, but running away with exposing yourself to attacks of opportunity can be rather hard. Few people IRL can turn their back on an armed attacker and not get hurt, imho.
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on July 24, 2016, 08:46:03 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on July 24, 2016, 08:42:49 PM
Quote from: Dar on July 24, 2016, 08:41:06 PM
what's a point of having flee in a subguild, when all guilds get it anyway?
If all guilds now get it, that would be worthy of an announcement of such to prevent such confusion. And I'd still like to know why running away would need to be learned later.
Running away is fairly easy, but running away with exposing yourself to attacks of opportunity can be rather hard. Few people IRL can turn their back on an armed attacker and not get hurt, imho.
While this is true(Edit again: Though I'd love to see you catch me with a sword if I was, from the getgo, entirely unwilling to engage in combat and would run at the sight of the drawn weapon. Code allows that first attack by surprise, that's a given, even if circumstance says otherwise, but the idea that anyone who types kill <person> fast enough can lock you completely into combat is not exactly true, hence the blurb of overly functional at the first edit), this is something that is more accurately portrayed through restriction to novice than through saying the vast majority of the time, you're going to get thwacked and have no idea which way you're going because you've just become a crazed reptilian brained person with no awareness because you decided to run.
Edit: Not to mention the whole 'You try to run away 5 times but can't manage to, even if you are willing to take the hits'.
In essence, through the added functionality to flee over the course of time, we've made it overly functional to the point that not having it makes you kind of a moron, then, unless what Dar says is true, we've made it pretty standard to be a moron.
If there was a "flee reckless" command I'd be happy.
Quote from: Armaddict on July 24, 2016, 08:48:45 PM
Quote from: Raptor_Dan on July 24, 2016, 08:46:03 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on July 24, 2016, 08:42:49 PM
Quote from: Dar on July 24, 2016, 08:41:06 PM
what's a point of having flee in a subguild, when all guilds get it anyway?
If all guilds now get it, that would be worthy of an announcement of such to prevent such confusion. And I'd still like to know why running away would need to be learned later.
Running away is fairly easy, but running away with exposing yourself to attacks of opportunity can be rather hard. Few people IRL can turn their back on an armed attacker and not get hurt, imho.
While this is true(Edit again: Though I'd love to see you catch me with a sword if I was, from the getgo, entirely unwilling to engage in combat and would run at the sight of the drawn weapon. Code allows that first attack by surprise, that's a given, even if circumstance says otherwise, but the idea that anyone who types kill <person> fast enough can lock you completely into combat is not exactly true, hence the blurb of overly functional at the first edit), this is something that is more accurately portrayed through restriction to novice than through saying the vast majority of the time, you're going to get thwacked and have no idea which way you're going because you've just become a crazed reptilian brained person with no awareness because you decided to run.
Edit: Not to mention the whole 'You try to run away 5 times but can't manage to, even if you are willing to take the hits'.
In essence, through the added functionality to flee over the course of time, we've made it overly functional to the point that not having it makes you kind of a moron, then, unless what Dar says is true, we've made it pretty standard to be a moron.
Skilled combatants are able to get out of combat easier than non-skilled combatants. That's a problem? The show Cops is pretty much all about trained combatants vs non-trained combatants. I submit exhibit A.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtAltJanbyA
Looks to me like pack bonuses preventing flee. That would be the guard skill.
Likewise, I do not see melee weapons being swung and connecting with someone stuck there just taking it, because they started off out of reach of said melee weapons.
Likewise, I see physical conditioning, not a difference in flee skills.
QuoteSkilled combatants are able to get out of combat easier than non-skilled combatants.
Likewise, I do not see most classes as non-skilled combatants, nor the flee skill as so archaic that it should be restricted to only two or three guilds as a starting skill.
Also, a compilation of successful tackles does not include the compilation of people who do evade immediate combat all the time without your version of superior combat skill.
Edit: Using your same line of thought, you seem to be asserting that it should be easier for most of the classes to have the potential to learn how to fight effectively than the potential to learn how to run away from a fight with even a remote chance of awareness in that action or even remote reliability. That's your take on it? Again, the problem here is not that we've made the flee skill very functional. It's that we've made it very functional then somehow, for some reason, harder to come by. Why? If it's to restrict the 'tactical retreat', then limit it in skill level. Make it so that only warriors can reliably determine their direction. Make it possible, but less reliable for rangers. Make the others able to know where they run to, but not able to reliably choose the direction, and occasionally get thwacked. But having this many main guilds, by default, entirely susceptible to -running away- being their biggest mistake, with very few subguild options to counter that (if any, anymore?), is an overcorrection to something that I'm not sure even needed fixing.
kinda curious as to how many people are untrained in arm, for the most part and I may, and am probably wrong. the number of combat orientated pc's outnumber the crafter types, with even the crafter types at times getting into the ring/circles to spar against combat types.
During any of these times the more combat pc can explain, and teach different techniques for the crafter/merchant types, yet because the squishies don't have flee they still get squashed. and flee to me is rather hard to get up, having down so numerous times in sparring and not once did it go up.
This is why I like another muds version of opening combat better. Where you advanced in stages, like bow range, long spear range, melee range, and last knife range/fisticuffs. So it gave others a chance to flee, before they got bombed by person they seen coming and couldn't do anything about.
If this combat version was used, then height could also be taken into consideration, and the different advances could be negated by kill bill v2, you enter into bow range from bill, charge bill, bash bill, you swiftly close with bill, and your tressy tressed fme tramples all over him. or your bash sends bill sprawling.
You could use agility to see how fast one gets into melee or whatever range, and height which I think is how movement speed/lag is determined anyways.
Unfortunately, we don't have an intra-grid room system for combat.
So far as flee, it has two uses, these days. One is to escape from combat, which GENERALLY takes a small amount of skill to do so (as you can spam without much lag at all if you "cannot escape") and another that determines if your opponent gets to take an Attack of Opportunity for you moving away from the combat. Those well trained in flee, do not provoke an Attack of Opportunity, but an attacker with a higher flee skill may pass THEIR check and still get the free hit on you.
I THINK it was implemented so "flee self" isn't an immediate "no consequences" button.
I'm not asking for anything mind-shatteringly difficult here.
I'm wondering why one of the most basic of skills that had a bunch of functionality added to it over the course of a decade was just suddenly made more rare or inaccessible without so much as a peep. I'm wondering why the even middling or -novice- ability to run away just became harder to get than the ability to ride a beetle out in the desert, or the ability to stab someone in the eye with precision, or the ability to pick someone's pocket without noticing. How did this just become this rare? What was the reasoning? This was a conscious decision to remove it from several subguilds.
In the case that what Dar said is true, that would make more sense. But then I wouldn't understand why it was branching. Unless it was 'popped' instead, like Ride. In which case...no announcement?!
...that wouldn't make any sense. Flee self is for when you're not in combat, in which case the bonuses to flee matter very little.
That would be like removing parry to make archery more viable.
I really would rather less people had the ability to escape than there already is. But I don't mind the idea of everyone getting novice flee except for warrior(master)/ranger(advanced)/assassin(advanced). Then apply a huge penalty to flee if your opponent is mounted and you're not.
No subguild flee. Maybe an advanced subguild with it.
I dont understand. Anyone can flee, whether they have a skill, or not. They're penalized, they get opportunity strikes, they cannot control which way they're fleeing, sure. But it doesnt make them incapable of fleeing combat. Flee as a skill is an ability to escape combat in an organized, safe manner. Which is indeed an acquired skill even IRL. But just fleeing a fight? Anyone can do it. You dont need a skill for it. Where is the problem?
QuoteWhere is the problem?
Let me rephrase this, because I think me arguing the point is detracting from the simplicity of it. Is there a legitimate, good reason why those combat-middling classes without flee should not be able to pick up flee, as a skill? Because at some point, it was decided that such was a bad thing, or we wouldn't have done it, yet in so doing, it appears to be only to the detriment of those without flee that are already, for the most part noticeably weaker in combat and more likely to need it?
Your mention of the organized retreat was not unnoticed, but such was already addressed in one of my own previous posts:
QuoteIf it's to restrict the 'tactical retreat', then limit it in skill level. Make it so that only warriors can reliably determine their direction (advanced). Make it possible, but less reliable for rangers(low journeyman). Make the others able to know where they run to, but not able to reliably choose the direction, and occasionally get thwacked(apprentice/novice). But having this many main guilds, by default, entirely susceptible to -running away- being their biggest mistake, with very few subguild options to counter that (if any, anymore?), is an overcorrection to something that I'm not sure even needed fixing.
So prior, it was possible to use subguilds to get what translates into a skill that doesn't give you absolute control of the flee scenario, but it does help start reduce that chance of 'Panic! You couldn't escape!' filling up your screen, and it does make it so that people aren't blind and unable to tell what direction they're going because they decided to pull out of a fight. That option is now, seemingly, entirely gone, which makes it reliably easier for someone to make sure to get the 'kill' command off and do a lot more damage than just that primary attack. That further accentuates the combat disparity (hence why I'm not sure that needed fixing, from the quote above; the disparity was already sizeable) for the classes that are not helpless in combat, but have been far more likely to have been running away a lot through their previous experience (assuming by class trope). Thieves, burglars, and assassins are now unerringly -bad- at getting away from someone trying to hack them up? It's a very odd thing to be changed into when flee at its current state is more necessary to survival than it used to be, and doesn't seem like something that should be utterly and hopelessly beyond reach of people that are still capable of and involved in combat.
You're relating the lack of the flee skill to the inability to flee. This is not the case.
Quote from: Majikal on July 25, 2016, 12:34:36 PM
You're relating the lack of flee to the inability to flee. This is not the case.
'Conflating', not 'relating'. (Nerd smiley face.)
I've been tracking this topic from the sidelines and I agree there's some confusion -- to me at least -- owing to the conflation -- and maybe it'd help to distinguish two questions.
Now, first though, it's a fact (AFAIK) that everyone can type 'flee' and actually flee from combat (with better chance of success if you have the 'flee' skill.)
1. Is the concern that the skill-less use of 'flee' isn't powerful enough? (My own limited experience with characters without the 'flee' skill suggests it is powerful enough -- I successfully flee now and then, although this is limited experience.)
2. Is the concern, rather, that although skill-less flee is fine, more Guilds (and/or Subguilds) should all the same get skilled flee?
I also think this probably should go into its own thread, e.g., 'On the Flee Skill'.
Quote from: Majikal on July 25, 2016, 12:34:36 PM
You're relating the lack of the flee skill to the inability to flee. This is not the case.
No, I'm not.
I've said several times now that I'm talking about the detrimental effects that are more common in fleeing without the skill, i.e. More failures to escape the room, increased chance of punishment for attempting to flee, and inability to see where you're going while fleeing. The last bit has been in place for a long time now, but only recently became a larger issue since the act of fleeing can put you at lower hit points than before, making the several seconds of 'Where am I now?' more prone to causing your death. Saying that not having the flee skill results in complete inability to flee hasn't been said, only that lack of flee skill results in complete ineptitude while fleeing and the increased risk of failure. Which leads into, once again...
Quote1. Is the concern that the skill-less use of 'flee' isn't powerful enough? (My own limited experience with characters without the 'flee' skill suggests it is powerful enough -- I successfully flee now and then, although this is limited experience.)
2. Is the concern, rather, that although skill-less flee is fine, more Guilds (and/or Subguilds) should all the same get skilled flee?
It is akin to the latter. It is, rather...why are we giving flee such increased functionality to the point that it is a true survival skill, then suddenly making access to it the same as if it were a magickal skill? We used subguilds to grant the ability to mesh with pretty much every skill in the game...but then -removed- access to flee for main guilds without it. Completely. We made it exclusive to certain main guilds, despite other main guilds having every reason in the world to be able to maintain their head while running away. Sooo, again...the reason why it's in this thread is because I said if we're removing the ability to make the choice to have even a novice/apprentice flee on a character, then more main guilds should have access to novice/apprentice flee.
It is not a magickal skill. It is not archaic knowledge. It is not a skill that apprentice level guarantees anything, nor gives the same 'ordered retreat' function that warriors get it to. Thus, there is no real reason to restrict those main guilds who don't get it by default from ever having it.
I want to see:
"You try to flee but slip and fall!"
flee
"You have to stand up first!"
flee
You slip and land on your neck!
A long, slippery roofsnake has arrived from the up.
Welcome to Armageddon!
Quote from: Yam on July 25, 2016, 12:58:44 PM
flee
You slip and land on your neck!
A long, slippery roofsnake has arrived from the up.
Welcome to Armageddon!
I once lost a very long-lived character because instead of typing "Flee"...I typed "Flee S", and entered it about fifteen times.....I was fleeing face first into a wall repeatedly and of course that doesn't work haha. The irony is that if my Flee skill hadn't been so high, I would have randomly fleed in another direction likely...but instead I "successfully" fled south every single time. My HIGH flee skill....kept me from fleeing.
It was late at night and I was very sleepy and actually on my way to logout very soon when I was attacked.
It was a perfect storm.
I had been attacked by SO MANY staff animated monsters, NPCs, and "things" during my time on this PC, easily hundreds, that when I saw I couldn't flee, I just said to myself, "Well, it's another staff animation, I can't codedly flee for some reason...alright...I guess I'm supposed to die here.". I just made the assumption I was codedly not being allowed to flee because I was supposed to die in that situation, and more or less just calmly resigned myself to said death.
(I had also recently squashed another group, twice, and had staff animate some high-end people to punish me and send the message it wasn't appreciated. I assumed this was additional "punishment" for squashing said staff directive/direction.)
Come to find out I was just sleepy, and stupid, and was trying to flee my face right into a wall repeatedly, and the code was letting me heh.
I sent a message to staff basically asking, "Umm, did you guys just kill me? I can see why you would and how it would be an appropriate world response, but I basically just want to know.".
The response I got was, "Here is the log...you were fleeing into a wall...."
*FACE FUCKING PALM*
Kind of funny now that I look back on it.
Having the Flee Skill basically killed me, whereas if I had a low flee skill, or no flee skill, I likely would have fled instead in a random direction and probably lived.
...so the gist of your story is, more classes should be restricted from flee or else you'll end up fleeing into walls?
Edit: Again, so that maybe someone will actually address it rather than deflect it...why should flee be -impossible- for anyone to have unless they are one of two or possibly three mainguilds? (Or, if this is false, why was there just no telling about the changes to flee, which is again, one of the most basic survival commands of the game that anyone involved in combat will depend on at least once?)
Give every class like high apprentice flee potential and there ya go.
Quote from: Armaddict on July 25, 2016, 01:11:32 PM
...so the gist of your story is, more classes should be restricted from flee or else you'll end up fleeing into walls?
Edit: Again, so that maybe someone will actually address it rather than deflect it...why should flee be -impossible- for anyone to have unless they are one of two or possibly three mainguilds? (Or, if this is false, why was there just no telling about the changes to flee, which is again, one of the most basic survival commands of the game that anyone involved in combat will depend on at least once?)
Oh no, that's not what I was saying.
I just thought I would post a funny little story loosely related to the topic about how having flee actually killed me once, which is ironic.
I wasn't making an argument for either side.
To address your main point, I think ANYONE should be able to learn at least low-level flee, just like pilot etc.
Quote from: Armaddict on July 25, 2016, 01:11:32 PM
Edit: Again, so that maybe someone will actually address it rather than deflect it...why should flee be -impossible- for anyone to have unless they are one of two or possibly three mainguilds? (Or, if this is false, why was there just no telling about the changes to flee, which is again, one of the most basic survival commands of the game that anyone involved in combat will depend on at least once?)
I could be wrong, but this is from starting in early 2014: four of the main guilds I selected had flee -- they were the ones you would suspect should get flee -- and the other one that probably should get flee I haven't picked yet.
So I suspect main guilds where it makes sense to have skilled flee actually do get skilled flee, but then again maybe I'm confused and a subguild gave me flee and not my main guild -- I have limited data to work with here.
ETA: I decided to check, and here's what I found in the help files:
Assassin: "...
as well as how to more easily get out of combat."
Burglar: no mention
Merchant: no mention
Pickpocket: "Some small skill with weapons is also a pickpocket's province,
as well as how to beat a hasty retreat."
Ranger: "Ranger skills involve hunting persons or animals, exceptional powers of observation, a strong aptitude for archery, and some moderate skill with weapons
and strategic retreat."
Warrior: "Unarmed combat, expert battle maneuvers such as disarming, the ability to hurl missiles,
strategic withdrawal, and the eventual expert use of bows and arrows are all part of a warrior's skills."
So, under the reasonable assumption that the bolded bits suggest the Main Guild gets the 'flee' skill, it looks like 4/6 of the main guilds do get the flee skill. (And screw booglers: I catch one of 'em in my room, they dead.)
QuoteOh no, that's not what I was saying.
I just thought I would post a funny little story loosely related to the topic about how having flee actually killed me once, which is ironic.
I wasn't making an argument for either side.
Eh, I'm in argument mode. This is what happens when I'm trying to convey what should be a simple point, but am getting responses that are for the most part deflections rather than answers or explanations, which makes me have to reiterate...and reiterate...and then, at a certain point, I just assume everyone is ignoring what's being said to deflect or redirect.
QuoteSo I suspect main guilds where it makes sense to have skilled flee actually do get skilled flee, but then again maybe I'm confused and a subguild gave me flee and not my main guild -- I have limited data to work with here.
I keep waiting for someone to tell me I'm completely wrong, but the most we've gotten is 'I suspect'. I was routine picker of thief or thug subguilds, whether or not their skills contributed anything to me, just to pick up the flee skill. This is purely because I anticipate being the lower skilled combatant in most encounters, and I plan on running away a lot. Apparently, I'm not allowed to have that plan anymore. Hence why I keep bringing this up. I'm not sure what the issue was that said I shouldn't have that option.
@armaddict: check my ETA above. I think that clarifies things, doesn't it? 4/6 Guilds do get the 'flee' skill, at least if the help files are a guide here (and they do map onto my own experience). IF TRUE, then this refines the discussion: should Burglar and Merchant receive the 'flee' skill as well? (No opinion.)
Also: "By practicing their ability to parry, protectors learn how to flee, and can practice it to an advanced level."
...and maybe others, I dunno, I'm not going through all the help files right now. Suffice to say, help files are helpful. And you don't even really need to read into them anymore (like in the old days), they pretty much say straight-up what the major included skills are, details about branching, and so forth.
Quote from: nauta on July 25, 2016, 01:39:53 PM
@armaddict: check my ETA above. I think that clarifies things, doesn't it? 4/6 Guilds do get the 'flee' skill, at least if the help files are a guide here (and they do map onto my own experience). IF TRUE, then this refines the discussion: should Burglar and Merchant receive the 'flee' skill as well? (No opinion.)
...interesting, I had read the helpfiles before even posting about it, as well as all the subguild helpfiles of those I used to know had it, and saw nothing. Apparently I missed it two or three times (or the in game helpfile is different, can't check right now but that seems unlikely[I'm really unsure how I missed it. Apparently sometimes I read very inefficiently]). That means the last page on it could have been ignored, and the question posed in the second post or so of '...why should this be branching?' was the relevant question.
Quote from: Talia on July 25, 2016, 01:48:23 PM
Also: "By practicing their ability to parry, protectors learn how to flee, and can practice it to an advanced level."
...and maybe others, I dunno, I'm not going through all the help files right now. Suffice to say, help files are helpful. And you don't even really need to read into them anymore (like in the old days), they pretty much say straight-up what the major included skills are, details about branching, and so forth.
Indeed. I am satisfied. A little surprised it took a whole page of me showing off that I missed it in the helpfiles before someone showed me the helpfiles, but satisfied.
Quote from: Armaddict on July 25, 2016, 01:49:31 PM
Indeed. I am satisfied. A little surprised it took a whole page of me showing off that I missed it in the helpfiles before someone showed me the helpfiles, but satisfied.
*thumbs up* It is also surprising to me, somewhat, that the helpfiles are now helpful :D (Even though I was on staff when that first started happening, they have since become even more helpful.) It seems like there are probably a few ways for you to craft the PC you want to play, and the helpfiles are a good resource.
Oh definitely. But I actually looked at a couple of class helpfiles (burglar was one of them) and just fully missed it in there. I actually investigated before getting irked, which was my original post about it. The whole 'This is still irking me'. Nauta, shame on you for not bringing up your help file helpfulness project stuff sooner! (Edit: Yes, this is totally me blaming you for me not reading gud. TAKE THAT.)
Quote from: Armaddict on July 25, 2016, 02:10:27 PM
Nauta, shame on you for not bringing up your help file helpfulness project stuff sooner! (Edit: Yes, this is totally me blaming you for me not reading gud. TAKE THAT.)
Yeah it's like when you get hired to assassin someone and they start having really bad mudsex, and you just sit there and watch them with morbid fascination for way too long before finally typing in:
backstab armaddict;
em crawls out from under the bed, knives out;
say (just before the knives drive in) Got room for one more?
Quote from: nauta on July 25, 2016, 02:14:15 PM
Quote from: Armaddict on July 25, 2016, 02:10:27 PM
Nauta, shame on you for not bringing up your help file helpfulness project stuff sooner! (Edit: Yes, this is totally me blaming you for me not reading gud. TAKE THAT.)
Yeah it's like when you get hired to assassin someone and they start having really bad mudsex, and you just sit there and watch them with morbid fascination for way too long before finally typing in:
backstab armaddict;
em crawls out from under the bed, knives out;
say (just before the knives drive in) Got room for one more?
Remember.
You all consented.
So just, whip it out as well. Might as well.
Blood wells up in your mouth as nauta shoves a helpfile up between your ribs!
(http://www.richardstrange.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Richard-Strange-and-Christian-Slater-in-Robin-Hood-Prince-of-Thieves7.jpg)
There's always room for one more.
Is there a bonus given to trying to flee when disengaged, as opposed to being fully engaged? I wondering, because if so, that would give sound reason to actively try and avoid combat by turning on nosave combat, and refusing to fight.