I dreamt this idea up last night and thought it sounded cool so I wanted to see what other people thought.
My idea is players can pick the highest level their stat will be. What happens is a player puts in their preferred level for their stats. The stats are then rolled and then their preference is looked at. For stats that are above what the player asked for, the stat goes down to what the player wants. Otherwise the player's preference is ignored.
So an example would be:
I say I want:
* Poor strength
* Excellent Endurance
* Average Wisdom
* Absolutely Incredible Agility.
My starts are rolled (without any regard to my preferences) and they are:
* Above Average strength
* Good Endurance
* Average Wisdom
* Poor Agility
My preferences are looked at and my stats are changed where appropriate, so the end result is:
* Poor strength
* Good Endurance
* Average Wisdom
* Poor Agility
What would be the advantage to this? It lets me have bad stats if I want bad stats. Quite often I'll write up a desc to show how weak I am, and then get AI strength. At the moment I have to put in a request to get my stats changed, and given how quick I go through my characters it must be annoying to the staff. This would let me have bad stats (or average stats, or above average stats but not perfect) when I want them. I'd like to think I'm not the only player who does this.
It also wouldn't require a code change to the app process (which Sanvean has said she's hesitant to do unless it's a complete revamp), because I can select my stats in the Hall of Kings. Your stats aren't rolled until you've pointed at the map and selected your starting town.
It also wouldn't allow powergaming because the you can only select a maximum, not a minimum. There's no advantage to having a preference, except that you can increase the likelihood of getting the stats that match your description and background. That doesn't mean though that you can pick poor Agility, poor Wisdom and get a bigger chance of having AI strength. The stats would be rolled (or rerolled) regardless of your preference.
It also wouldn't force players to make a preference, with the default being AI (so you can get any level in that particular stat).
So what do people think?
While this does take care of the problem of some stats being unrealistically high, it does nothing to address the problem of some stats being too low for a concept (the massive muscular man with below average strength but AI agility).
If any change to stats were going to be made, I'd vote for one that gave players a little more control than this.
It might be a nice two-part process. First, enter maximums for each stat, and then an order of highest to lowest.
Step 1) What is the highest your strength should be? Hit enter to not limit it.
Step 2-4 ) Rest of stats.
Step 5) Enter your most important stat. Hit enter if you don't have a preference.
Step 6-8 ) Rest of stats.
So, banging enter 8 times would give the exact same random results we have now, but the player that wanted to limit and/or order stats could do so.
I've always been in favor of stat ordering, as it helps sync up stats with description. Of course there are, for example, deceptively strong scrawny people out there, but they are the exception, not the rule.
I think it's a very nice idea, with no disadvantage or possibility for abuse, but I think that it'll be low on the staff's priority list.
As for stat ordering, I'd rather see the possibility of picking one stat rather than all four. Should be sufficient for anyone who wants to play "the brutally-muscled man", "the extremely lithesome elf" or "the totally clever guy", and if your character concept has more than one high stat requirment, maybe you should tone down your goals a bit.
I think this is one of those "Hey, I thought of it, so I may as well throw it out there" ideas.
I'm guessing very, very few people ever create a character they intend to play for a long time with the specific intent of having that character be a pathetic weakling or a complete moron.
Basically, you can play around your stats, so do it.
People deal with having heinously low stats (lord knows I do with this character, sheesh). I think you can deal with having a particular stat be a little too high. I think -everyone- can deal with it, and that your idea is a solution to something that isn't much of a problem at all.
Personally, even if this idea took exactly 30 seconds to implement via a code change, I'd rather the staffer take that 30 seconds to fix a typo somewhere. Or take a deep breath and relax.
Another RPI mud lets you prioritize your stats in order from most important to least important. Mind you they have like 12 different stats.
I want a warrior: STR END AGI WIS
I want a mage: WIS AGI STR END
Whatever works. I admit, this doesn't work as well on a mud with only 4 stats.
Quote from: "Yang"Another RPI mud lets you prioritize your stats in order from most important to least important. Mind you they have like 12 different stats.
I want a warrior: STR END AGI WIS
I want a mage: WIS AGI STR END
Whatever works. I admit, this doesn't work as well on a mud with only 4 stats.
Yea, it would make everyone seem less unique.
Rather than stat ordering I think the best solution is to add an 'advanced character creation' option to chargen. This would all be done through the magic of coding which I'm told is done by laboring gnomes whilst we sleep and therefore should be no problem at all.
:arrow: You create a character (name, age, height), pick a guild, subguild and race.
:arrow: You are given a chance to edit the above before ending part 1.
:arrow: your character is generated with their stats (which are displayed to the player) and a generic sdesc/desc.
The key here is that at this point there is a character attached to your account and quitting out won't do any good. From this point on another editing menu is provided for part 2.
:arrow: Knowing their character's stats the players can now edit the generic sdesc and desc as well as the background before submitting.
:arrow: The immortal review process is modified to approve the existing character and transport them into an active zone after applying the submitted descriptions/background or to reject the application, send an email, flag the player's account to start at part 2 of chargen to change the submitted desc/sdesc/background all the while leaving the generated character hanging out in no-man's land.
At least, that's what I see as the answer to all this business since stat-ordering hasn't seemed to be the desired solution.
Not to derail, but is stat ordering in now?
remember the numbers you can't see.
a dwarf rolls poor str and ave agi. Numbers wise it would be almost the same thing really. Because the number for poor str on a dwarf is a lot higher then it's number for poor on it's agilitiy.
This would begin to give away the numbers for the characters which, In six years of playing I have enjoyed not knowing.
Quote from: "jcarter"Not to derail, but is stat ordering in now?
No.
Quote from: "CRW"
At least, that's what I see as the answer to all this business since stat-ordering hasn't seemed to be the desired solution.
Since it hasn't been implemented yet, I think it's a little too soon to judge.
Stat ordering will be going in soon.
Quote from: "Morgenes"Stat ordering will be going in soon.
Just in time for the HRPT. :twisted:
Quote from: "Morgenes"Stat ordering will be going in soon.
I have to ask, by that you I hope mean you just pick where the highest numbers are assigned. Not switching things up?
I was chatting with a friend about this and I discussed a HG character, if he said
well I have ave str (maybe a 18 on a HG) and good agi (maybe an 8) I want
to switch them so it is G str Av agi... but it would be an 8 str and 18 agi which
I would think would be poor str and ai agi.
I hope that makes sense. If it was just a matter of prerolled numbers and you
assigned where they go highest to lowest with racial caps kicking in. That
would be a good system. We will still get those uber crappy characters
that are so much fun when your leet and your like "holy shit I just did
that with the weakest character ever!". Or that all AI roll where you are just like wow, and you die from falling off your mount and crit fail falling on
your head in 2 hours.
Quote from: "Yamako"I have to ask, by that you I hope mean you just pick where the highest numbers are assigned. Not switching things up?
That's the idea. During character creation you will be prompted to prioritize your attributes as few or many as you want. So you could just say that strength is the most important attribute to you, and you don't care about anything else. We will assign your highest roll to strength and the rest will be random.
Or you could specify you want 'wisdom, agility, endurance, strength'. We will assign rolls such that they are ordered as you specified.
So uh...there's no more random chance of that absolutely -beefy- roll anymore?
Quote from: "Morgenes"Stat ordering will be going in soon.
THANK YOU, MORGENES. I wasn't sure I'd ever see the day that Armageddon MUD could acknowledge that having a stat ordering system wouldn't bring the anti-christ of RP down upon us.
Quote from: "Armaddict"So uh...there's no more random chance of that absolutely -beefy- roll anymore?
If you roll a dice once for each stat, or roll four dice at once and then arrange the values to different stats, the chance of getting a high roll doesn't change.
From what I understand, no more beefy stat chances.
What if you played a HG that you selected wis agi str end or a human that you selected wis agi str end. What you saw when you typed 'score' would show strength as good, agility very good, wisdom extremely good, above average for BOTH characters while it being the equivalent of the 'same roll.' This would be on scale, in otherwards. Even though it means that the HG's strength at good is (fake numbers disclaimer) 20 and wisdom (his 'highest stat') is 5, compared to the human with wisdom 16 and strength 12.
If this is wrong, could someone that knows for certain correct me please?
Quote from: "spawnloser"From what I understand, no more beefy stat chances.
Maybe I don't understand what you mean by 'beefy stat chances', but the rolls will be the same, we're just gonna play some tricks to order them to your preference.
Quote from: "spawnloser"What if you played a HG that you selected wis agi str end or a human that you selected wis agi str end. What you saw when you typed 'score' would show strength as good, agility very good, wisdom extremely good, above average for BOTH characters while it being the equivalent of the 'same roll.' This would be on scale, in otherwards. Even though it means that the HG's strength at good is (fake numbers disclaimer) 20 and wisdom (his 'highest stat') is 5, compared to the human with wisdom 16 and strength 12.
If this is wrong, could someone that knows for certain correct me please?
You are correct. It still is in scale to racial mins and maxes. A Half Giant will not have the wisdom of a human, no matter what you choose in your ordering.
Quote from: "spawnloser"From what I understand, no more beefy stat chances.
The rolls would be exactly the same. You still have just a much a chance to roll that AI score. It's just that now, if you roll an AI, it'll go where you want it to go instead of the numbers being randomly assigned to a stat.
edit: Er, yes. What Morgenes said.
By 'beefy stat chances' I was responding to what Armaddict had said and meant that you don't have, with stat ordering, any more chances of getting an AI, an exceptional, etc. Your chances for each of the descriptive stats that we see as players is the same as without stat ordering.
The conversation that preceeded this HRPT:
Morgenes: Well, it's almost done. Rock and roll. Time to call the strippers and caterers.
Halaster: What's done?
M: Stat ordering code.
Tlaloc: That's going to give a large advantage to the new created PCs.
H: Yeah, but it'll be worth it.
M: Well, there is one simple fix. Let's just make everyone equal.
(brief pause)
T: We can't really pfile purge. It's Armag.
H: We'll do a manual pfile purge.
(pause)
H: You know. HRPT.
T: Oh, right!
M: Heh.
Quote from: "spawnloser"By 'beefy stat chances' I was responding to what Armaddict had said and meant that you don't have, with stat ordering, any more chances of getting an AI, an exceptional, etc.
Why wouldn't you have any more chance of that? I don't see the connection.
Quote from: "spawnloser"By 'beefy stat chances' I was responding to what Armaddict had said and meant that you don't have, with stat ordering, any more chances of getting an AI, an exceptional, etc. Your chances for each of the descriptive stats that we see as players is the same as without stat ordering.
After talking it over it was finally explained to me.
Say you roll 15,12,13,4
Those will just be assigned in the order you want, so you can still get "beefy" stats
You just say hey I want my highest at str and my lowest at wis (I am a HG)
They will then get assigned and racial bonuses/negatives/caps applied and there you go.
So if you rolled 3 6 4 5 you still suck mek butt, and if you roll 21 21 21 21 you basically will still own noobs.
*please correct me if I am wrong*
You can still get 'beefy' stats. Let's say you roll 15, 14, 13, 17.
You pick HG as a race.
You say you want strength to be your highest roll.
Let's pretend that HG gets a +3 to their strength stat.
The game will assign 17 to strength, and then add the bonus to it. So you end of with the equivalent in words to 20 strength.
Of course, I'm just speaking out of thin air. But that's how I'd do it.
Your chances of getting any particular stats (an by this I mean what values you're getting) are NO different than before. You just choose which stat goes where.
And that's the key, and why I am so in favor of this change to Chargen. You choose where the highest stat goes. And if you want that high stat in the races strong stat, then so be it, but you'll suffer elsewhere.
I can't wait for this.
Yes, never again will you write a description for that burly human with a tree trunk neck and chainsaws for arms who ends up with below average strength. :D
Quote from: "spawnloser"Your chances of getting any particular stats (an by this I mean what values you're getting) are NO different than before. You just choose which stat goes where.
Quote from: " a few days ago, spawnloser"
From what I understand, no more beefy stat chances.
Gimme some o' dat mind altering substance you bin smokin'.
So, modifiers get added -after- the stats are picked?
Quote from: "desert_spider_eater"Yes, never again will you write a description for that burly human with a tree trunk neck and chainsaws for arms who ends up with below average strength. :D
Smartass. :)
Still, it will be a
lot less likely.
Quote from: "desert_spider_eater"Yes, never again will you write a description for that burly human with a tree trunk neck and chainsaws for arms who ends up with below average strength. :D
Unless below average is your highest stat roll...
Quote from: "Marauder Moe"Unless below average is your highest stat roll...
You will still be able to reroll once, and you can still improve attributes through submission of roleplay logs.
Things will only be better after this, not worse.
Quote from: "Medena"Quote from: "spawnloser"Your chances of getting any particular stats (an by this I mean what values you're getting) are NO different than before. You just choose which stat goes where.
Quote from: " a few days ago, spawnloser"
From what I understand, no more beefy stat chances.
Gimme some o' dat mind altering substance you bin smokin'.
(blink)
(blink blink)
wtf? Are you saying that these statements don't agree?
Quote from: "mansa"So, modifiers get added -after- the stats are picked?
I imagine that must be how it will work. It would make no sense to apply the modifiers first.
This is a derail, but what do we think the chances of roling an Absolutely Incredibly are. I'm hoping they are around 1/30, or something like that. Frankely, I think average stats aren't so average. I find that somewhere between average and good is kind of average.
Quote from: "Aldiel"This is a derail, but what do we think the chances of roling an Absolutely Incredibly are. I'm hoping they are around 1/30, or something like that. Frankely, I think average stats aren't so average.
It's impossible to say because we're missing two vital pieces of information.
1) What the numerical range of stats are.
2) Whether rolls are completely random or weighted.
I dunno, guys, this sort of freaks me out. I'm trying to read through the thread, cutting through the crap, but this is all still a little over my head.
My very first thought to reading this:
Morgenes wrote:
Stat ordering will be going in soon.
was something like this:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
And I'm sure Yokunama can confirm that.
I know just as well as anyone just how much you can have "the perfect concept" totally screwed over by two shitty rolls in a row. Oooh, how I know. I've been working myself into this "Stats don't matter" mentality ever since starting to play, but every so often, something comes up and I am reminded all over again about how they DO work into gameplay, no matter how much I want to pretend they don't.
But what I'm afraid of seeing are the cliche stat roles.. you know, magickers/merchants with wisdom as a primary, and warriors picking strength or agility.
While I'm all up for making everything in the game as customizable as possible, I still like there being an element of randomness and realism to the world. I honestly doubt there are that many people who purposely will pick low stats for PCs they intend to play for a very long time. I still prefer the wish-up-and-ask-nicely method and just sitting back and reminding yourself its about roleplay and not stat-rolls, but I know a lot of people are pushing for less work on the imms.
Maybe someone can put my fears at ease with less mumbo-jumbo. Obviously, I expect that racial mins/maxes will always be observed -- that's not what I'm worried about. If we really are going to allow a great deal more control over what stats get rolled in what order, maybe we can add in some balances -- actual negatives for having a high score in a particular stat. (People who are particularly beefy IRL are often easily exhausted because of a blood-flow problem to muscles, for example). Of course, that would mean MORE work.. heh.
Er, I guess to summarize:
I'm really afraid of this idea. I don't want to see (or be allowed to fall into) warriors-are-strong and mages-are-wise roles.
[/code]
Quote from: "Aldiel"Frankely, I think average stats aren't so average. I find that somewhere between average and good is kind of average.
As I've noticed with all RPGs, the characters we play somehow deviate from the norm, at least enough to make the story interesting to tell. I would guess that the stat values are actually relative to what is considered the average in this campaign's society. So "average" may not be so average amongst the playerbase, but rather, in that society, yes.
Just my thought, don't flame me or anything.
That might be an idea.
To preserve the randomness, perhaps giving priority to a stat would give that stat a slight penalty, so picking Random stats would give overall higher stats.
Do you want to try for the AI, or would you settle for an EG/Exceptional?
Quote from: "Vesperas"But what I'm afraid of seeing are the cliche stat roles.. you know, magickers/merchants with wisdom as a primary, and warriors picking strength or agility.
I fail to see how this would be cliche, rather than simply make sense. Allowing stats to be chosen gives you more flexibility in shaping your concept
before you submit a background.
Quote from: "Vesperas"While I'm all up for making everything in the game as customizable as possible, I still like there being an element of randomness and realism to the world.
In the "real world," a merchant with below average wisdom and extremely good strength will invariably end up working construction. :wink:
Quote from: "desert_spider_eater"Quote from: "Vesperas"But what I'm afraid of seeing are the cliche stat roles.. you know, magickers/merchants with wisdom as a primary, and warriors picking strength or agility.
I fail to see how this would be cliche, rather than simply make sense. Allowing stats to be chosen gives you more flexibility in shaping your concept before you submit a background.
It makes sense, from a tactical point of view, but thats what makes it cliche. You're going to find that a large number of applied warrior characters are going to have a focus on strength. Afterwards, you are probably going to see some sort of effects of this shift in-game -- it will become EXPECTED that warriors are beefy, unless they are wiry, in which case, people are going to automatically assume to see them have higher agility (and if they don't, one can assume their other stats have a good probability of sucking).
Quote
In the "real world," a merchant with below average wisdom and extremely good strength will invariably end up working construction. :wink:
You say that like 'below average' means retardation. Hehe, to my knowledge, 'below average' is perfectly capable of working on par or exceeding 'absolutely incredible' folks. :) ESPECIALLY in academia.
I used to be against ordered stats, but the idea is starting to grow on me. It's frustrating making that scrawny, piss-stain of a character and ending up with exceptional strength and AI endurance. There have also been times when I've said to myself, "Gee, I really want to play a strong warrior-type, so I can expirement with using big weapons, like halberds and such." But I don't want to bother with a special app, so I just roll up a warrior and hope for the best. And, almost invariably, the poor feck will end up with below average strength.
So, yeah, I'm looking forward to making my next character with this change in place.
Quote from: "desert_spider_eater"
Quote from: "Vesperas"While I'm all up for making everything in the game as customizable as possible, I still like there being an element of randomness and realism to the world.
In the "real world," a merchant with below average wisdom and extremely good strength will invariably end up working construction. :wink:
Thats not true, desert_spider_eater.
It just means that the merchant will not be as smart as other merchants. Maybe the merchant cant do their taxes as well as the others. Like in the real world, some people tend to do things they are not fit for - They just have to work harder and put in a little more effort than those who are.
Quote from: "Vesperas"It makes sense, from a tactical point of view, but thats what makes it cliche. You're going to find that a large number of applied warrior characters are going to have a focus on strength. Afterwards, you are probably going to see some sort of effects of this shift in-game -- it will become EXPECTED that warriors are beefy, unless they are wiry, in which case, people are going to automatically assume to see them have higher agility (and if they don't, one can assume their other stats have a good probability of sucking).
I can see what you're saying, but I still want to think it's random, simply because the statistics are still rolled randomly.
EDIT: Stat ordering would give a lot of freedom to the people who want to do a concept that is not so cliche, on the other hand, too. That was my thoughts when this was going to be put in. Rather than waiting for the right character to get the right roll.
Quote from: "FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit"I used to be against ordered stats, but the idea is starting to grow on me. It's frustrating making that scrawny, piss-stain of a character and ending up with exceptional strength and AI endurance. There have also been times when I've said to myself, "Gee, I really want to play a strong warrior-type, so I can expirement with using big weapons, like halberds and such." But I don't want to bother with a special app, so I just roll up a warrior and hope for the best. And, almost invariably, the poor feck will end up with below average strength.
nLike in the real world, you do not eed to be a beefy brute to have good strength.
I can understand where you are comming from, when you make those characters whom -need- certain characteristics and end up with a complete mess.
As an example, let's say you want to make that tactical genius who is fascinated by the lore and art of war. Though by no means you have to be, let's say you pick a warrior guild. Now, you get your rolls, and you get blah blah strength, endurance and agility, but you end up with poor wisdom. But you wanted to be Rommel, not Patton. Great. Do you ditch this concept, and play your run-of-the-mill sword swinger? Do you waste a stab at playing this concept on someone who could never be even close to good at it?
Stat ordering makes this quandry irrelevant. That's what I like about it. The freedom to play well what you wanted to play.
Quote from: "desert_spider_eater"Do you waste a stab at playing this concept on someone who could never be even close to good at it?
I usually roll with the punches.
With a lot of hard work and effort, your character will more than likely become 'a lot' better than
"exceptional joe". IMO, skills come before stats, unless there is something I'm aiming for before the concept.
Yeah.. but...
What is wisdom except a measurement of your coded learning curve? You can still play the calculating general without wisdom -- its not really a requirement. You're tactician just had to work a little harder to become what he's become.
Quote from: "Vesperas"Yeah.. but...
What is wisdom except a measurement of your coded learning curve? You can still play the calculating general without wisdom -- its not really a requirement. You're tactician just had to work a little harder to become what he's become.
So basically, you're saying you don't like stat ordering because of the people who will use it solely for a coded advantage.
No.
I'm saying that I'm praying I don't see this shift in the mentality revolving around "What is a <insert class here>?" where the 'primary' stat choice becomes so popular for that said class, that it becomes expected to have that stat ICly -- a parallel to this (although not the best example in the world, since the effects are different) is how people OOCly know that merchants have Cavilish, and except in the instance where someone learned this langauge manually or special apped, Cavilish == Merchant.
By my previous post, I was trying to point out that not getting your primary stat in that instance would not have destroyed the concept.
Quote from: "Vesperas"a parallel to this is how people OOCly know that merchants have Cavilish, and except in the instance where someone learned this langauge manually or special apped, Cavilish == Merchant.
Which is why it truly bothers me that Cavilish isn't in a subguild.
Personally, I'd much rather just see the guild and subguild pages rewritten to present them as skillsets rather than pre-set roles than all this trouble with changing how stats are done, but then that would open up a whole new can of worms for people trying to figure out branching. :P
Quote from: "Vesperas"
I'm saying that I'm praying I don't see this shift in the mentality revolving around "What is a <insert class here>?" where the 'primary' stat choice becomes so popular for that said class, that it becomes expected to have that stat ICly -- a parallel to this (although not the best example in the world, since the effects are different) is how people OOCly know that merchants have Cavilish, and except in the instance where someone learned this langauge manually or special apped, Cavilish == Merchant.
I may be misunderstanding, but it sounds like you're worried about guild-sniffing based on what a PC's dominant stat seems to be? If so, I don't think that's something to worry about. For starters, trying to gauge someone else's stats seems to be a difficult endeavor (except maybe a particular stat or two in limited situations). Also, I think people playing the same guild are going to make different choices. Also, one person could pick strength first, and still have a lower strength than someone who picked strength last. Bottom line: I think this would be a difficult and unreliable way for someone to guild-sniff.
Quote from: "Delirium"Quote from: "Vesperas"a parallel to this is how people OOCly know that merchants have Cavilish, and except in the instance where someone learned this langauge manually or special apped, Cavilish == Merchant.
Which is why it truly bothers me that Cavilish isn't in a subguild.
I'd rather keep it as is. There are other skills and abilities unique to other mundane guilds, and I think it would be bad if they were available in subguilds as well. And those can't be learned, like Cavilish.
Let's not hijack this thread to rehash the Cavilish debate for the fourty-seven thousandth time.
-- X
I dig what you're saying, Vesperas, and I agree that it has -potential- to affect the game the way you say, but I'm idealistic, and want to think this stat change would open up the possibility for people to try something different than the norm for some, or something very simple and mundane. When you break it down, for me it ends up being about enjoying the ability to choose.
- Marduk
Quote from: "Vesperas"I'm saying that I'm praying I don't see this shift in the mentality revolving around "What is a <insert class here>?" where the 'primary' stat choice becomes so popular for that said class, that it becomes expected to have that stat ICly -- a parallel to this (although not the best example in the world, since the effects are different) is how people OOCly know that merchants have Cavilish, and except in the instance where someone learned this langauge manually or special apped, Cavilish == Merchant.
Speaking very personally, I have a large number of character concepts written up. In them, I have a lot of warriors. Of my warriors, 5 have strength as the primary stat, 3 have agility as the primary stat, 4 have endurance, and 2 have wisdom.
I think it's safe to say that they'll be little railroading of stats. You'll continue to see plenty of characters with varied good stats, except now, you'll be much more confident of that hulking character's ability to lift the couch, or the wiry fellow to be slick with slipping away from things unharmed.
The majority of my character concepts are not tied to stats because I have trained myself to write them that way, in order to adapt to the current system.
My characters in the future will likely be the same way, which means that in most cases, I will only be using certain setups:
one for dwarf, elf, mul, half-elf and human warriors, rangers, and assassins.
one for burglars and pickpockets of all races.
one for merchants of all non-half-giant races.
one for half-giant merchants.
one for magickers.
Figuring out which orders to apply where is an exercise I will leave to the reader, but it's exceptionally obvious in my mind which stat is the most important overall, and how the remaining three ought to be ordered in specific cases. Will I ignore my powergaming instincts and not order my stats and all? No, probably not.
Everyone likes to think that that's bad. I don't.
I'm not so weak as to succumb to temptation, however. I'll stick with the concept, and I'm sure plenty of other folks will as well, who appreciate the added creation power the new system will allow.
I personally enjoy the thrill of rolling random stats and wondering if I'll finally get that buff set.
Stat ordering, in my opinion, just seems to take away from the overall experience of a harsh mud. It's not about the stats, it's about the roleplay. If you want a buff warrior, then roleplay it out and train - you don't have to have insane strength to be destructive.
One of the most powerful warriors I've ever seen in the game (over 100 days played and even stronger than a certain Byn Sarge so many of you seem to remember) reportedly had only average strength, yet he could tank anyone in the game.
Seriously guys: Stats do not matter. Only the experience and roleplay does.
P.S. I suppose if stats will help to better augment your play and perpetuate an improvement in the overall quality of the mud by everyone having the ability to micromanage their characters, then it's a good thing. I doubt, however, that this will be the case.
If you want random stats still, then I'm sure that if you don't choose any stat ordering it'll still be random, no?
Both sides can be happy with it.
Now if you're worried about what other players will do or won't do, instead of worrying about your own character, I think that's an admin job and I'm sure they'll fix it if it causes any problems.
Normally I don't do this, even view this as a waste of GDB space but...
Quote from: "Malken"Now if you're worried about what other players will do or won't do, instead of worrying about your own character, I think that's an admin job and I'm sure they'll fix it if it causes any problems.
Stats are not all-important to me, but it annoys me when I roll a warrior who is at "manageable" with just his armor, weapon and a full waterskin. It annoys me when I make a pick-pocket with the agility of a paralyzed salt worm. It would annoy me to make a magicker with 84 mana. I'd be able to play these characters, and it wouldn't be impossible to get anywhere, but I enjoy my characters more when my concept's main stat is decent. I can't imagine why a person born with poor strength would choose to become a warrior in the first place, for example.
Edit: deleted some stuff that wasn't really on topic.
This could already be answered, but I'm just curious:
Rerolls will still be in effect, and affected by the stat ordering, yes?
yes
I will be happy as long as I am not required to order my stats.
Quote from: "Jakahri"I personally enjoy the thrill of rolling random stats and wondering if I'll finally get that buff set.
Stat ordering, in my opinion, just seems to take away from the overall experience of a harsh mud. It's not about the stats, it's about the roleplay. If you want a buff warrior, then roleplay it out and train - you don't have to have insane strength to be destructive.
One of the most powerful warriors I've ever seen in the game (over 100 days played and even stronger than a certain Byn Sarge so many of you seem to remember) reportedly had only average strength, yet he could tank anyone in the game.
Seriously guys: Stats do not matter. Only the experience and roleplay does.
P.S. I suppose if stats will help to better augment your play and perpetuate an improvement in the overall quality of the mud by everyone having the ability to micromanage their characters, then it's a good thing. I doubt, however, that this will be the case.
Remember that the system we are talking about means you can still get all below average rolls, as well
as all AI rolls. It won't change the randomness of the rolls just allow you some freedom with your character.
Plus if I wanted a wiry looking thief then I should be allowed to say
I want his agility to be the focus of his life up to that point. Also the rest of
the stats can be unimportant so I leave them alone and just see what happens.
I will admit I was hesitant to jump on board with this idea, but I consider myself open and
willing to read the ideas posted and facts stated by the staff. Currently my opinion is that this is a great idea
that will not allow twinks some magick hold on the world or ruin rp in any way. If anything, when you see
some uber buff guy then damn it you know he can carry your chest from the bazaar to your apartment.
p.s. maybe a person's preferences could be saved with the character so that "if"
some person is just being unrealistic (i.e. making a scrawny lithe desc and making
str and end the main stats) They could be commented to since
the whole point of stat control in a RPI is to better rp and make it more realistic.
What's the deal with all the people who dislike, or are unsure about the stat ordering feature? It's as if that mentality is this unshakeable religious faith that the way things _were_ in the old testament of Armageddon is some kind of representation of what is right in the universe of roleplay. How can ANYBODY who puts work and detail into making a character, tailoring their life history, their personality, and their physical traits in more detail than ANY video game ever does, say that having ANOTHER TOOL to tailor your character is something they find no use for, or is something that takes away from the roleplay experience?
I just can't see how making the hulking, muscular gladiator with below average strength benefits the roleplay experience. If I wanted to make a crippled or injured gladiator, I can make strength a lower priority with the stat ordering system to go with his background and desc. If I wanted to make an unintelligent brute gladiator who is all muscle and no brains, I can put strength as high priority with the stat ordering system. For someone to tell me that these two examples of the stat ordering system being used are twinkish or affect my RP experience in some negative way, I'm be left confused as to what the argument is. What is the argument for how those two examples are either a) twinkish in char design or b) negatively affecting someone's roleplay experience?
The reason we're here playing Armageddon is because of the code. If we wanted an RP experience without code, we'd be in a MUSH writing up our dramatic beginnings and ends, without the fear of being magically summoned and paralyzed on some character's whim, with no opportunity to roleplay or participate in the scene. Code is what dictates a lot of what is possible or impossible for a character to accomplish in this game. I know that sentence is blasphemy to some, but anyone who wants to argue otherwise is denying the fact that Armageddon is still a lot of dice rolls with HnS fundamentals beneath the story pages. Allowing players to tailor every coded aspect of their char in some way, from race, to class, to age, to height and weight, all of which have a coded impact in the game, seems to suggest that players have been given the freedom to decide how their character fits in the code. So where was stat ordering? Someone's first instinct might be that.. wow, if Armageddon didn't have stat ordering for over thirteen years, it must be because stat ordering is BAD. Over a decade of no stat ordering must mean that a higher power has recognized the badness of stat ordering. How can you cheer and praise a missing feature for that long, and then have someone like Morgenes drop down from the sky and say, "stat ordering will only make things better"? Pretty jarring, huh? Well, those ancient years apparently are over. Some of you were worshipping something that limited character tailoring, and didn't even know why you were worshipping it, and I expect the whole "old habits die hard" saying applies to a lot of the uncertainty that exists around the proposal of stat ordering.
We'll be okay, I think. When the first characters step out of their pods, it might be a little scary at first. Muscular men that are codedly muscular, nimble elves that are codedly nimble.. it'll take a bit of getting used to the idea, but as a community I'm sure we'll get through the initial confusion, and eventually everything will seem as normal as it was before.
An endearing post that was codedly endearing. I agree.
- Marduk
QuoteWhat's the deal with all the people who dislike, or are unsure about the stat ordering feature? It's as if that mentality is this unshakeable religious faith that the way things _were_ in the old testament of Armageddon is some kind of representation of what is right in the universe of roleplay.
Whats the deal with all the people who assume that disagreeing with a proposed change is always motivated by some irrational attachment to the status quo? For every change that people have problems with there are several more that are welcomed wholeheartedly. Mind your perceptions, please.
My main argument against stat ordering is that it's not neccesarily realistic. I don't believe that everyone should have natural affinity (stats) for their chosen profession (guild). I think people who have great stats that support their guild should be somewhat rare. I've elaborated on this further in the past.
QuoteMy main argument against stat ordering is that it's not neccesarily realistic. I don't believe that everyone should have natural affinity (stats) for their chosen profession (guild). I think people who have great stats that support their guild should be somewhat rare. I've elaborated on this further in the past.
I tend to see it the other way around. Your character is not born with a guild, but they're born with at least the foundation for their stats. Someone born with the genes for poor strength and very good wisdom is simply more likely to become an aide, jeweller, clerk etc., whereas someone who is massively muscled and has the intellect of a kank is destined to be Byn material or street thug. Those were examples, but that's my opinion.
Not only do people tend towards the profession that suits them, so that explains why their stats 'fit' their profession, but some are suited to their profession in different ways. A smart thief rather than an agile one. I know I've played that character before. How about the smart and agile knife-fighting warrior? Yeah, done that too.
Just because you're scared that everyone will be picking stats in the same way again and again doesn't mean that it will happen. We can also rest assured that many of us won't, thinking about the character rather than the numbers, just what fits better.
Quote from: "spawnloser"Not only do people tend towards the profession that suits them, so that explains why their stats 'fit' their profession, but some are suited to their profession in different ways.
The code, to my knowledge, already reflects this upon creation of the character. Perhaps I am wrong, but it seems that the warriors I usually pick and age/height/weight factors in to their strength. And with assassins, I seem to notice a trend of my pc's having low strength and high agility. Again, perhaps I am wrong, though I do strongly believe the code reflects this. Because of this reason, I really don't see the need to order stats.
Quote from: "spawnloser"Just because you're scared that everyone will be picking stats in the same way again and again doesn't mean that it will happen.
*snicker* And you honestly believe that this won't happen? I doubt that bub.
I'm out of this discussion. As long as I'm given the choice on whether to order stats or not, everything is gravy. That's all.
Quote*snicker* And you honestly believe that this won't happen? I doubt that bub.
I notice a lot of rocket scientists are smart, a lot of boxers strong, a lot of wrestlers agile, a lot of runners very fit, too.
Just because there's a 'cookie-cutter' form of a guild that most will go into doesn't mean that it's inaccurate or bad.
Ahh, the good ol' smell of, "I'm probably better than you because I play hardcore" Armageddon threads.
I am going to derail completely so I apologize.
Why do our discussions break down into "Your afraid of change/You want to twink easier" arguments?
I sometimes feel it is completely friggen useless to post on here because no one reads your post and writes
a reply. They just read the topic post make a reply and nothing else. For f'n sakes people why not use the
General Discussion Board for general discussion? If you don't like the idea state reasons why that maybe
someone else hasn't thought of but, don't bitch about things being easier or how others just won't change.
Both of the previous examples of people don't read the boards to discuss anything anyways so quite making them
your target audience. Instead think of people like me that are willing to listen and make a decision based
on ideas and facts stated (as I stated on a previous post I am sure the complainers didn't read: I wasn't
on board for this idea but I didn't shoot it down either. I listened to ideas and also posted a question to the staff
and things were explained out.) Now lets either
A.) Discuss this (which I feel there is no more need to do since
the staff have stated the facts on it) or
B.) Someone just lock this thread since many of the posts aren't on
subject discussing the pros and cons at all.
p.s. Before anyone yells about I shouldn't moderate the board or the imms will take care of it own. Please
notice I am not telling anyone what to do, just stating what I notice and hopefully bringing it into view
to a few others so in the future. Discussions can be discussions, if you have no intention of listening or arguing
the about topic (not about the posters) then your really just wasting the readers' time.
Quote from: "Jakahri"Quote from: "spawnloser"Just because you're scared that everyone will be picking stats in the same way again and again doesn't mean that it will happen.
*snicker* And you honestly believe that this won't happen? I doubt that bub.
I don't. I know quite a few people that play this game and have discussed concepts before. I know people that have both a concept for a smart but not strong warrior and a dumb but strong warrior, or agile warrior, or tough warrior...etc.
Me, I know what different stats give to you, and I can assure you that I will almost NEVER play the 'strong warrior' concept. What this, basically, allows is for you to play someone that you'll know the strengths of beforehand and thus tailor your background to that, giving further depth to the character, instead of having to append once you get the stats or simply just be vague.
I want stat ordering for what it will allow you to do for the character, not with the character.
Editted to add: From what we've been told, yes, you will be able to choose whether to order or not.
Quote from: "spawnloser"Quote from: "Jakahri"Quote from: "spawnloser"Just because you're scared that everyone will be picking stats in the same way again and again doesn't mean that it will happen.
*snicker* And you honestly believe that this won't happen? I doubt that bub.
I don't. I know quite a few people that play this game and have discussed concepts before. I know people that have both a concept for a smart but not strong warrior and a dumb but strong warrior, or agile warrior, or tough warrior...etc.
Me, I know what different stats give to you, and I can assure you that I will almost NEVER play the 'strong warrior' concept. What this, basically, allows is for you to play someone that you'll know the strengths of beforehand and thus tailor your background to that, giving further depth to the character, instead of having to append once you get the stats or simply just be vague.
I want stat ordering for what it will allow you to do for the character, not with the character.
Editted to add: From what we've been told, yes, you will be able to choose whether to order or not.
QFT. Also, if I was shooting for coded advantages by stat ordering, I would have a different order for each guild. That order would also be affected by what profession or lifestyle I wished for my character.
All I know is I'm not to thrilled about the stat ordering.. every mage and mage wannabe is gonna be ordering there stats wis first, thieftypes with agi first, warriors could go any way as well as rangers.. but it takes away alot of the looks can be deceiving and changes the chance of ending up with a mage or pickpocket being gimpy. I'd rather see just an option for a second reroll rather than ordering of stats.
random stats is one of the things I liked most about character creation.
Quote from: "Majikal"All I know is I'm not to thrilled about the stat ordering.. every mage and mage wannabe is gonna be ordering there stats wis first, thieftypes with agi first, warriors could go any way as well as rangers.. but it takes away alot of the looks can be deceiving and changes the chance of ending up with a mage or pickpocket being gimpy. I'd rather see just an option for a second reroll rather than ordering of stats.
random stats is one of the things I liked most about character creation.
'
Uhh, personally, I would be willing to experiment with different sorts of stat arrangements. Every stat is important. Though I will say that it
really sucks to have the stat your job depends on to be your lowest.
If you like random stats, you will have the option to choose random stats.
Personally, I rarely care how my stats fall, but there are times when it would be nice to select preferences in alignment with a character concept (and yes, I'm aware that you can make an entire character without selecting stats, but there is the rare smart weakling or buff stupid-head, etc, that stat ordering would be convenient for). My most compelling example would be, perhaps, a concept I had for a chronically sick vivaduan who relied on their magicks to keep them alive - being able to put endurance last on the scale would be great for that one.
Quote from: "Majikal"random stats is one of the things I liked most about character creation.
Still gonna be in. :lol:
Quote from: "Delirium"If you like random stats, you will have the option to choose random stats.
Personally, I rarely care how my stats fall, but there are times when it would be nice to select preferences in alignment with a character concept (and yes, I'm aware that you can make an entire character without selecting stats, but there is the rare smart weakling or buff stupid-head, etc, that stat ordering would be convenient for). My most compelling example would be, perhaps, a concept I had for a chronically sick vivaduan who relied on their magicks to keep them alive - being able to put endurance last on the scale would be great for that one.
I like this perspective, a lot. Picking what you're worst at.
If choosing random stats is your preference, why not also have random weight and height? Random age? You could make a little boy character, and be pleasantly surprised with him being 62 years old and taller than most of his race, when your description has him as a short and chubby kid.
The idea that random stats benefits the process of character design just doesn't make sense to me. You tailor a character concept with such detail, only to praise randomness at the same time. Making detailed chars is great, but having randomly generated aspects is also part of that detailed process, right? How does that make sense? Let's look at the character creation process.
You spend time thinking of a background for your character. What kind of person is he or she? What do they do in life? What are their goals? Where do they come from, and do they have a family? Most of us are familiar with the system.
You spend time thinking of a physical description for your character. This is highly influenced by your character's background. If they are an ex-gladiator slave, you can imagine there may be some scars or muscle or injuries, but if there isn't.. why? The character doesn't have to be some "cookie-cutter" gladiator, but you need to think of the details on why they don't appear like the normal gladiator. They need details, details, details.
You spend time thinking of the polishing touches for your character where the code is concerned. How tall will they be? How heavy? And how old a character fits the character background that was made? What class/guild will the character be? Sub skills? Do you special app for particular skills that fall outside the normal classes/guilds if this is a special character role?
Everything is done to tailor the character, except determining stats. What kind of stats is my character most likely to have based on their life history and physical description? Um.. actually.. nah. On second thought, I don't want to do this last part of my character design. DICE ROLL PLEASE!!!!!
Why? Why so much detail, and then this throw away aspect of stats when everything else has been tailored? I've read arguments that:
Quote from: "Marauder Moe"My main argument against stat ordering is that it's not neccesarily realistic. I don't believe that everyone should have natural affinity (stats) for their chosen profession (guild). I think people who have great stats that support their guild should be somewhat rare. I've elaborated on this further in the past.
First problem with that argument is that it isn't the character choosing their statistics. Character creation has nothing to do with what the character feels would be best.
Second problem with that argument, is that whatever reasons could be applied to why choosing stat priority isn't realistic, can also be applied to why choosing your height and weight isn't realistic. So unless someone with this argument wants to argue that height and weight should ideally be randomly determined, this argument doesn't hold any weight.. or height.
Quote from: "Jakahri"The code, to my knowledge, already reflects this upon creation of the character. Perhaps I am wrong, but it seems that the warriors I usually pick and age/height/weight factors in to their strength. And with assassins, I seem to notice a trend of my pc's having low strength and high agility. Again, perhaps I am wrong, though I do strongly believe the code reflects this. Because of this reason, I really don't see the need to order stats.
The fact that you realize you "could be wrong" here is a reflection of how inconsistent stats tend to be, regardless of guild/class choice. If you made 10 assassins characters in a row, what do you think the chances of 5 of them having agility as their highest stat would be? Would you be willing to bet money on it?
And anyway, the problem with this argument is that if you want to make an assassin who's strongest stat isn't agility, or a warrior who's strongest stat isn't strength, what do you do? Even assuming the code already picked stat priorities based on your guild (which it doesn't), why should character guild reflect what your stat priorities _have_ to be? Also, this argument clashes with anyone who adores the philosophy of random stats, because it suggests that stats have never been randomly ordered. That isn't relevant to my argument, but I thought I'd point that out.
Quote from: "Majikal"every mage and mage wannabe is gonna be ordering there stats wis first, thieftypes with agi first, warriors could go any way as well as rangers.. but it takes away alot of the looks can be deceiving and changes the chance of ending up with a mage or pickpocket being gimpy.
Could you give an example on how stat ordering would remove the "looks can be deceiving" aspect of character, and how this would present itself in an in-game situation? My interpretation of the argument right now is:
"When you ran into another PC, and he tried to do something with the code and failed, it was cool to know he might have failed the attempt because of a low stat. Even if you couldn't be sure that was why he failed, there was a certain "looks can be deceiving" aspect of knowing that maybe he failed because his stats were low. Now, with stat ordering, if someone succeeds at something in the code, you can attribute their success to their stats. Assuming of course, the action that was done is actually related to the stat that the player chose as a stat priority for their character. This is why stat ordering ruins the "looks can be deceiving" aspect of characters."
If this is the argument, and I've accurately captured your definition of "looks can be deceiving" where stat ordering is concerned, then you're right. It ruins your aspect of "looks can be deceiving", and you'd be the first person that actually has convinced me that stat ordering will negatively affect how you previously were playing the game. But while the notion of muscular men being codedly muscular may be a bit boring, and not quite as cool as OOCly knowing their description may reflect absolutely nothing where their stats are concerned, I have a feeling that there will still be plenty of surprises to look forward to.
What he/she said.
Quote from: "Flaming Ocotillo"Stuff.
Quoted for truth.
Quote from: "Flaming Ocotillo"Quote from: "Jakahri"The code, to my knowledge, already reflects this upon creation of the character. Perhaps I am wrong[....]
The fact that you realize you "could be wrong" here is a reflection of how inconsistent stats tend to be, regardless of guild/class choice. If you made 10 assassins characters in a row, what do you think the chances of 5 of them having agility as their highest stat would be?
Very high.
Quote from: "Ocotillo"Would you be willing to bet money on it?
This bears no true relevance to the discussion at hand. I was attempting to be humble and courteous in my post, rather than come off as a pompous bigot who "knows" he is right.
To humor you though, my answer is "yes": I'd bet money on my hypothesis.
Quote from: "Ocotillo"And anyway, the problem with this argument is that if you want to make an assassin who's strongest stat isn't agility, or a warrior who's strongest stat isn't strength, what do you do?
Wish up and ask for staff to lower your incredible roll if it bothers you that much. Otherwise, just roleplay around it. I did this exact thing
very recently with a somewhat crippled and aging man who had to use his staff for support on many occassions, even though code-wise he had incredible agility and strength.
Quote from: "Ocotillo"Also, this argument clashes with anyone who adores the philosophy of random stats, because it suggests that stats have never been randomly ordered. That isn't relevant to my argument, but I thought I'd point that out.
I didn't know I was arguing that point. Alrighty then.
Quote from: "Ocotillo"Could you give an example on how stat ordering would remove the "looks can be deceiving" aspect of character, and how this would present itself in an in-game situation?
Absolutely. My previous character serves as an
excellent example of how looks can be deceiving. I initially created a concept of a man who was aging and half-crippled due to sustaining countless wounds in battle over his years of service. I, however, rolled AI strength and amazing agility as well. Everyone I ran into most likely viewed my character privately as a weak and pathetic individual.
However, I think I clearly removed all doubts of the pc's potential when I layed absolute waste to anything that stood before me. This would not have happened if stat ordering were in place and was utilized for my character. I can't imagine the look on people's faces when they saw a hunched over and aging man obliterate his foes within seconds.
My conclusion: Stat ordering will essentially eliminate this "looks can be deceiving" attitude because we all know through common sense that everyone who now has "muscular" in their description likely chose strength as a high end roll for their concept. There will be no more uniqueness. There will be no more secrets. Everyone will now know that nearly
every (and I say every because I do not feel like making an erroneous statement and declaring that 100% of the pbase will follow this route) player will pick wisdom as their main attribute for mages, agility for assassins, strength for warriors, strength/endurance for d.elves, and so on.
The thrill of rolling an invisible die and crossing your fingers that you finally roll that amazing stat is now taken away because you can increase your chances of rolling that stat by simply ordering stats. Meh, I say.
QuoteI can't imagine the look on people's faces when they saw a hunched over and aging man obliterate his foes within seconds.
Is that realistic?
Edited to add some more:
Edit: Edited to remove the "some more" and make it a reply instead
Quote from: "Hymwen"QuoteI can't imagine the look on people's faces when they saw a hunched over and aging man obliterate his foes within seconds.
Is that realistic?
That is not realistic.
Quote from: "Hymwen"QuoteI can't imagine the look on people's faces when they saw a hunched over and aging man obliterate his foes within seconds.
Is that realistic?
Why wouldn't it be? The man was incredibly skilled in all forms of weapons. You don't have to be big and burly to be strong.
Besides, I still played the character as rather weak and crippled. Only when in times of dire need did he call upon his reserves and other sources to truly unleash hell (or Drov, mind you).
Quote from: "Hymwen"People who want their Byn warrior to be physically strong (and where is the problem in that?) can have that. People who want their agile d-elf thief (again, how is there anything wrong? It's only fitting) can have it their way. I simply cannot see why anyone finds it wrong that you can now choose to have stats that fit your description, and is it so unrealistic that warriors become strong, merchants are smart and thieves have quick fingers?
The "cheese" factor of this new implementation is my main gripe, as I have stated before. Cookie-cutter characters are simply not fun. I'm sorry not everyone shares my view on this matter. *le sigh*
Quote from: "LauraMars"That is not realistic.
Yes, it was, for various reasons. Check your pm please. I will not divulge any further on this board, and I'm done for sure this time (I swear.
No, REALLY, I swear double this time).
Thanks,
Jakahri
Should there really be the option of being that deceiving? Sure, you can be a somewhat lean guy who knows how to make use of his muscles, or the surprisingly quick fat lady, but should a crippled old geezer have the strength of a mul on aggros, and should a crone with no arms and half a leg have the agility of a d-elf? With stat ordering, you'll still have the option for the "looks can be deceiving" approach, only you can choose it if you want to instead of thinking of a concept, rolling lopsided stats, and being forced to either ignore it or play in a way that you wanted when creating your character. How can it possibly be a good thing to have to avert from what you originally wanted?
I personally cannot see the problem in stat ordering. People who want their Byn warrior to be physically strong (and where is the problem in that?) can have that. People who want their agile d-elf thief (again, how is there anything wrong? It's only fitting) can have it their way. I simply cannot see why anyone finds it wrong that you can now choose to have stats that fit your description, and is it so unrealistic that warriors become strong, merchants are smart and thieves have quick fingers?
In my opinion, if your character is crippled and can hardly walk, and the description does not match the attribute somewhat, you simply shouldn't be that strong. It can happen by accident because of dice rolls, but if you plan to play a crippled man and roll an AI strength, IMO you should either wish up to have it lowered, or if your character is not likely to ever have it affect them (I.E never fights) you should just ignore it and play as if you were weak. I haven't seen your description so I don't know if your PC was described as weak, or simply a strong man who was crippled beacuse of old injuries, but if you're that strong, you will have large muscles, you don't magically gain the strength of three men just because you were a warrior before you became crippled. If you have twig-like arms and a spine made of jelly, you won't lift a wagon.
This is an unrealistic game.
(which is part of its appeal)
I keep seeing the "cookie cutter character" phrase being tossed around.
Are all bynners warriors? Some of the best merchants in the Game aren't
even merchants. I have played a sneak assassin that wasn't an assassin
also a dangerous "ranger" that was a pickpocket. So people haven't
started using guilds for "cookie cutter characters" I doubt they will use stats
and so the hell what if they do? Damn it I asked a buff guy to carry a chest for me
once and he couldn't lift it. My little girl on the other hand could, now the stats
rolling is still random so that could happen. It won't happen all the time
though. And in a world as harsh as armageddon I would expect anyone that
plans to be a warrior or fighter to spend every waking moment training
their body. In a world where you could lose your hand or head for taking
some bread, I would expect some thief to be developing his speed almost
his entire life. Again though I see everyone worrying about this ability
being twinked out. We are in an RPI mud and as I have stated before
I was hesitant but, this idea is getting better I think. I would just like a
person's preferences saved with the character so any imms that look
over them can see if the frail old man actually did str agi end wis.
Arguing for the random system because everyone is forced to OOCly surprise people with stats that don't reflect their char concept, is a valid argument. I don't agree that it helps contribute positively to the game world, but it will be something that will change after stat ordering is implemented, so anyone who does enjoy the universal OOC surprise element will be forced to say goodbye to it, even though you can still choose random stats. Therefore, the argument is sound for anyone who is upset about the change.
Just out of curiosity, for those players who support the above argument, would you agree that:
a) muscular men being specifically coded as muscular is bad
b) muscular men being randomly coded as muscular is good
c) aging cripples being randomly coded as muscular is good
d) aging cripples being specifically coded as muscular is good
If the aging cripple is specifically coded as muscular by choice, that is still a "surprise" element to other players, right? So the surprise element of stats that don't match a character concept is retained, which is the entire basis of the argument that stat ordering eliminates the "looks can be deceiving" factor.
Ultimately, the argument would appear to conclude that:
a) muscular men being coded specifically as muscular is bad
b) aging cripples being coded as muscular is always good
If anyone wants to propose a _logical_ reason in a logical post why my logic here is faulty with the proposed argument, please do.
Quote from: "Yamako"I would just like a person's preferences saved with the character so any imms that look over them can see if the frail old man actually did str agi end wis.
I don't see any problem with that. I honestly don't suspect -any- stat ordering choice will be sufficient to make the char out-of-line with its other attributes. In the case of the frail old man, his low weight will hinder his strength, and his age will nerf both strength and agility. (Note: this is why I, personally, never thought that stat ordering was really necessary in the first place: age and weight yield -very- predictable results. I have always gotten roughly the stats I expected when I apped my character.) Ordering stats as mentioned above would be -perfectly- appropriate to portray a character who was very fit in his heyday but has declined since then. Since age is already taken (heavily) into account in determining stats, I would regard the stat ordering to be basically timeless, reflecting the individual's innate potential.
Quote from: "joyofdiscord"In the case of the frail old man, his low weight will hinder his strength, and his age will nerf both strength and agility. (Note: this is why I, personally, never thought that stat ordering was really necessary in the first place: age and weight yield -very- predictable results. I have always gotten roughly the stats I expected when I apped my character.) Ordering stats as mentioned above would be -perfectly- appropriate to portray a character who was very fit in his heyday but has declined since then. Since age is already taken (heavily) into account in determining stats, I would regard the stat ordering to be basically timeless, reflecting the individual's innate potential.
Being that AI is basically the roof, how does an aged cripple end up with AI strength in the first place? Any takers?
Like Joyofdiscord.
I have ALWAYS gotten the stats I wanted with the correct choice of age/weight/height.
If you want agile, make em young, strong, young adult, that normaly gives end as well, wise mature to old, well rounded, middle of the age range.
Which is why way back when, many threads ago on the subject. I posted that stat ordering was already in.
Otherwise, I agree with Jakhari.
QuoteMy conclusion: Stat ordering will essentially eliminate this "looks can be deceiving" attitude because we all know through common sense that everyone who now has "muscular" in their description likely chose strength as a high end roll for their concept. There will be no more uniqueness. There will be no more secrets. Everyone will now know that nearly every (and I say every because I do not feel like making an erroneous statement and declaring that 100% of the pbase will follow this route) player will pick wisdom as their main attribute for mages, agility for assassins, strength for warriors, strength/endurance for d.elves, and so on.
The thrill of rolling an invisible die and crossing your fingers that you finally roll that amazing stat is now taken away because you can increase your chances of rolling that stat by simply ordering stats. Meh, I say.
And to stat ordering, Blah I say.
Simply will feel less like Arm..sigh.
X-D and JoyofDiscord, I suspect you have both been lucky, bucause I assure you ... not all of us have experienced the same.
Quote from: "desert_spider_eater"Being that AI is basically the roof, how does an aged cripple end up with AI strength in the first place? Any takers?
I don't understand. You are saying that putting Str at the top of the stat priority list will give the aged cripple a chance of AI strength? Not by a long shot. I'm willing to bet that if you roll a min-weight, elderly-age human character, with STR as main pref, you could reroll it a hundred times and never hit AI. I'd be surprised if you hit very good more than once in twenty. Frankly, I think you misunderstand how stat generation works. Stat ordering will not facilitate twinking because the stat generation system as it exists is sufficiently robust as to guarantee realistic stats in all cases. Stat ordering will -not- make it possible to roll any stats that couldn't have sprung up randomly anyway.
QuoteX-D and JoyofDiscord, I suspect you have both been lucky, bucause I assure you ... not all of us have experienced the same.
I'll definitely admit that possibility. I've only had fifteen characters, so it's -possible- that it was just luck. Fifteen times in a row. Or maybe I also have more open expectations of stats. I'm not disappointed with "above average", and when it comes, it always comes in a stat where I was expecting somewhere around below average - good. It's just as often that I'm expecting very good - AI in a specific stat, and I practically always get it.
But my point here is not against stat ordering at all. To the contrary. I'm countering those that think it will provide some sort of special opportunity to manipulate the character in unrealistic ways to fool people. It will not. It will only provide some customization room -within- the bounds of the existing system. This is clear to me by how it has been described by IMMs. This is a
very good thing for character customization and I completely support it.
Quote from: "joyofdiscord"Quote from: "desert_spider_eater"Being that AI is basically the roof, how does an aged cripple end up with AI strength in the first place? Any takers?
I don't understand. You are saying that putting Str at the top of the stat priority list will give the aged cripple a chance of AI strength? Not by a long shot. I'm willing to bet that if you roll a min-weight, elderly-age human character, with STR as main pref, you could reroll it a hundred times and never hit AI. I'd be surprised if you hit very good more than once in twenty. Frankly, I think you misunderstand how stat generation works. Stat ordering will not facilitate twinking because the stat generation system as it exists is sufficiently robust as to guarantee realistic stats in all cases. Stat ordering will -not- make it possible to roll any stats that couldn't have sprung up randomly anyway.
Actually, I was curious how this would go about happening (since it seems you missed it):
Quote from: "Jakahri"My previous character serves as an excellent example of how looks can be deceiving. I initially created a concept of a man who was aging and half-crippled due to sustaining countless wounds in battle over his years of service. I, however, rolled AI strength and amazing agility as well.
20 chars on this account,
my fifth had bad stats, but he also had a bad age for his race, my mistake.
so, the account is 5 years or so old, thats a lot of good rolls.
Of course, maybe like joyofdiscord I'm more open to what I consider good stats.