Armageddon General Discussion Board

With appropriate caps of course.

Pick and peek?  They don't match up, first off.  A subguild with one or the other?  Like the thief subguild getting peek?  Yeah, that I could do.  Or a 'locksmith' (or whatever it could be called) subguild that got pick?  Okay.  One that got both?  Ridiculous.  It doesn't make sense to me.  This subguild would be the 'city elf warrior subguild YAY!' if you ask me.

Quote from: spawnloser on March 24, 2010, 03:37:19 PM
Pick and peek?  They don't match up, first off.  A subguild with one or the other?  Like the thief subguild getting peek?  Yeah, that I could do.  Or a 'locksmith' (or whatever it could be called) subguild that got pick?  Okay.  One that got both?  Ridiculous.  It doesn't make sense to me.  This subguild would be the 'city elf warrior subguild YAY!' if you ask me.

Hmm, right I guess I should have broken them out. Durn.

I was thinking - thief gets peek.

And another subguild for pick.

A subguild with pick will be downright useless. The skill cap must be lower then ... other guilds who have it. And if you do not count burglar, the one other who can pick already has a pretty low cap. Lower it down even more and ... honestly, meh. Also, pick is kind of powerful. Pick affects "multiple" people. Do you "really" want to spread it's use even more? Considering that one of the biggest problem of a burglar, is that ... there are too many burglars for the world to sustain the number?

As for peek ... I dont see why not. I am against thief knowing how to pieek though. A thief with high enough agility, doesnt need to be a pickpocket to be pretty damn powerful.  But say ... a con artist or a bard? Awesome.

Pick no. Peek I could see belonging possibly to the guard subguild, checking for hidden weapons...etc. Maybe others.

I don't care so much for pick because I think it's a stupid skill that does the game no good, but peek should absolutely be a part of the thief subguild. The steal skill is virtually useless without it,

I voted yes for peek.  Thief.  I don't think guard should get it, because when a guard needs to check your things, he checks your things, no subtleties needed.

Pick, I think, only belongs in the guilds which currently have it.

Peek for Thief and House servant...possibly bard, but definitly the first two.

As to pick...Heh, I think Con artist should get that at a middle level. And remember, that skill is not worth much unless you can get past the guards.

Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 24, 2010, 05:42:16 PM
I voted yes for peek.  Thief.  I don't think guard should get it, because when a guard needs to check your things, he checks your things, no subtleties needed.

Pick, I think, only belongs in the guilds which currently have it.

Except for the fact that peek is the only way to check someone's inventory for things that are not obviously visible.

Quote from: jhunter on March 24, 2010, 06:50:49 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 24, 2010, 05:42:16 PM
I voted yes for peek.  Thief.  I don't think guard should get it, because when a guard needs to check your things, he checks your things, no subtleties needed.

Pick, I think, only belongs in the guilds which currently have it.

Except for the fact that peek is the only way to check someone's inventory for things that are not obviously visible.

mercy on;subdue person;kill person. You can peek into someone's inventory when they're unconscious.

Quote from: Dar on March 24, 2010, 06:52:23 PM

Quote from: jhunter on March 24, 2010, 06:50:49 PM

Quote from: FantasyWriter on March 24, 2010, 05:42:16 PM
I voted yes for peek.  Thief.  I don't think guard should get it, because when a guard needs to check your things, he checks your things, no subtleties needed.

Pick, I think, only belongs in the guilds which currently have it.

Except for the fact that peek is the only way to check someone's inventory for things that are not obviously visible without fucking them up when it wouldn't realistically be necessary.

mercy on;subdue person;kill person. You can peek into someone's inventory when they're unconscious.

Fixed.

I say yes because:

• Subguild skills aren't as robust as primary guild skills
• Simple picking and peeking skills shouldn't be so difficult to learn that only thief/pickpocket/burglars will have a moderate success rate against simple targets and contraptions.
• No matter how good subguild abilities are, a thief/pickpocket/burglar with the same stats, equipment, and off/def will almost always outclass the subguild skill.
  

It wouldn't matter if you added peek to subclass thief, because subclass steal is so shitty it's nothing but jailbait.

Thief could have decent steal+peek caps, thought it'd probably have to lose one of its other skills as it's a pretty fine subguild already. It's arguable that no (experienced) players ever take subguild thief for the purposes of actual thieving, so a change seems reasonable.

A mini-burglar subclass with pick and sneak, plus a less powerful third perk, would be decent. A ranger who explores ruins and such might take it, or a thuggish warrior, or just anyone who doesn't want to grind to pick on a sneaky class.

Yes, all skills should be spread out over the sub-guilds to make it fair.

Quote from: Fnord on March 24, 2010, 10:40:48 PM
Yes, all skills should be spread out over the sub-guilds to make it fair.

I think that Fnord's snarking now.  But I could happily live in a world in which you can get 1/3 to 1/2 of any mundane guild's skill list in a subguild, just capped lower.  And it sounds like that's not so far from the direction being taken in Armageddon Reborn.

-If- pick were added to any subguild skillsets, I believe that the base percentage for burglars should be increased. In my opinion, pick is a more specialized skill for those of the burglar class.

There should be one mundane guild with all mundane skills and people just decide how to progress their characters. 

Quote from: Sinna on March 31, 2010, 04:34:00 AM
There should be one mundane guild with all mundane skills and people just decide how to progress their characters. 

Ewwwww no.

Quote from: musashi on March 31, 2010, 08:23:49 PM

Quote from: Sinna on March 31, 2010, 04:34:00 AM
There should be one mundane guild with all mundane skills and people just decide how to progress their characters. 

Ewwwww no.

That was convincing! 

Quote from: Sinna on March 31, 2010, 08:32:12 PM

Quote from: musashi on March 31, 2010, 08:23:49 PM

Quote from: Sinna on March 31, 2010, 04:34:00 AM
There should be one mundane guild with all mundane skills and people just decide how to progress their characters. 

Ewwwww no.

That was convincing! 

TRANSLATION TIEM!

Quote from: musashi on March 31, 2010, 08:23:49 PM

Ewwwww no.

Truncates to:

Too much work with not enough reward for it-- staff-wise, that is.

Skills are broken up into guilds and subguilds for a reason. A guild that allows people to have all skills and progress from there would be stupidly overpowered-- just imagine this, if you will....

A mundane with poisoning, sneak, hide, backstab, parry, bash, disarm, and kick..... With no predetermined caps, this character would just be a whirlwind of death and destruction to anything in his path, and I know this game's not all about balancing classes, but just.... Damn, y'know?

From my understanding, most every main guild that is combat oriented gets this to some lesser degree, no?

No ... not really. Those skills are all broken up between a few classes, but staff has expressed they don't want us to get into stuff like that on the boards so, I'll leave it at that. But check the help files on the different guilds for an idea.

I always figured the proposed idea would have caps that limited your ability to pick skills. IE you have access to every skill yes, but you could only become proficient in a couple, while the rest were limited use. Or many were average, but none were proficient. Or one skill is masterable, but the rest would be very low...


Why is it, whenever an idea is proposed, people immediately think of the worst possible situation, and never administer their own logical limits to it?

C'mon people. Use your brains a bit.



Edited to add: Sure you have kick, backstabb, bash, sap, parry and bash. But none of them would be useful, because you have so many badass skills. Get the concept?

Quote from: Qzzrbl on March 31, 2010, 10:29:05 PM

Quote from: Sinna on March 31, 2010, 08:32:12 PM

Quote from: musashi on March 31, 2010, 08:23:49 PM

Quote from: Sinna on March 31, 2010, 04:34:00 AM
There should be one mundane guild with all mundane skills and people just decide how to progress their characters. 

Ewwwww no.

That was convincing! 

TRANSLATION TIEM!

Quote from: musashi on March 31, 2010, 08:23:49 PM

Ewwwww no.

Truncates to:

Too much work with not enough reward for it-- staff-wise, that is.

Skills are broken up into guilds and subguilds for a reason. A guild that allows people to have all skills and progress from there would be stupidly overpowered-- just imagine this, if you will....

A mundane with poisoning, sneak, hide, backstab, parry, bash, disarm, and kick..... With no predetermined caps, this character would just be a whirlwind of death and destruction to anything in his path, and I know this game's not all about balancing classes, but just.... Damn, y'know?

LOL.

Too much work? You don't know that and I suspect it isn't.

Whirlwind of death: I think this would balance out for the following reasons:

1. I trust my coplayers to play realistically, generally.
2. Characters, by and large, don't live that long.
3. Everyone has access to the same shtuff, so benefits would balance out.

The idea that someone can be a warrior (or a water mage, for that matter) with a background of hard living outdoors and still can't camp out there or with a background as a thief yet can't seem to remember how to pickpocket is limiting. 

The idea of skill grouping into classes is generally to promote balance but the Immortals have, a long time ago, admitted the classes are not balanced and they were not shooting for balance.  If there is no need for balance in the classes (which I think we all agree would be horrible anyway), why have classes at all?

Why have classes at all? They facilitate interaction. Because you don't have the skills, you need to find someone who does.

Also, I think in general if you want to have a ranger who grew up as a thief you need to special app it. We're generally expected to tailor our backgrounds to our guild choices I believe, rather than including stuff we know we aren't going to get and referencing the lack thereof as though it were a design flaw.

Much like you should not write into your background that you PC was stronger/more agile/smarter/tougher than any othe of their race unless you also plan on spec app that.

I don't see "we can write it in our background but it doesn't show up in game" as being a valid arguement against the guild system.

Subguild explorer
Direction sense
Pick
Scavenge (with a small cap)

Maybe climb instead of scavenge, I dunno.

Quote
The idea that someone can be a warrior (or a water mage, for that matter) with a background of hard living outdoors and still can't camp out there or with a background as a thief yet can't seem to remember how to pickpocket is limiting. 

You could just pick subguild thief; it's a pretty awesome subguild in certain cases.

Quote from: Sinna on April 01, 2010, 08:13:34 AM
2. Characters, by and large, don't live that long.

The minority that does is already very, very influential.