Armageddon General Discussion Board

I don't have any remaining appreciation of the initial struggle to not suck. It's a slog and a roadblock endured only to achieve the promise of a playing a role.  I'm wondering if I'm in the minority -- if the majority of the player base prefers that most everyone start at day 0, for the sake of fairness perhaps.

I put my vote into "Yes, as a function of age," but with some conditions. Non-mundane, combat skills, steal and pick might not deserve as big of automatic bumps as skills that are less prone to be used to grief other players.

Yes, but only on the basis of karma level. Karma represents a player's trust to roleplay properly and with realism. Those players are trusted to follow the rules and guidlines of the game and trusted not to abuse the code. This is the only way that I feel it is acceptable.

Quote from: jhunter on March 25, 2010, 02:28:11 AM
Yes, but only on the basis of karma level. Karma represents a player's trust to roleplay properly and with realism. Those players are trusted to follow the rules and guidlines of the game and trusted not to abuse the code. This is the only way that I feel it is acceptable.

+1

I'd like to be able to start with a somewhat more experienced character though I'd probably restrict it to warriors, rangers and merchants. Arm can be a pretty demanding game on your time and being able to just jump in with an averagely skilled character would be a draw for me. At the moment with my limited time the idea of having to spend a good chunk of time to become not useless is quite off-putting.

Maybe these experienced characters could have lower potential or skill progression speed as well as a trade-off. If you're somebody who thinks that they don't have the time to put into skilling up a character to a high level or you just want to hop in and be able to contribute from the get go to a clan or whatever then this shouldn't be a concern. If you want to be the best of the best skill-wise start from the base and work up. If you just want to be decent and have time for other stuff then maybe go the experienced route.

I like the idea of it being based on karma, because it will probably encourage karma players even more to play mundanes (not that this is a problem, but it is a bonus), but I don't like that it will also widen the gap between karma players and newer players. Having it based on age is an interesting idea, though for certain classes it makes no sense to do this, from a playability standpoint.

I think for Merchants, at least, it should go by age. A 37 year old merchant would know more than a 13 year old merchant.

If you would like to play a PC that starts out more experienced, you can submit a special application for it.  You may or may not be granted the request, depending on the usual guidelines for special application acceptance and rejection.

Quote from: kuhfelsen on March 25, 2010, 08:49:57 AM
I think for Merchants, at least, it should go by age. A 37 year old merchant would know more than a 13 year old merchant.

Crafting subguilds. :D

Quote from: Niamh on March 25, 2010, 09:03:37 AM
If you would like to play a PC that starts out more experienced, you can submit a special application for it.  You may or may not be granted the request, depending on the usual guidelines for special application acceptance and rejection.

I thought the official policy was that you couldn't use the special app process for skillgains that can be acquired in-game.  I -know- I've seen other staffers post that before.

Also, this:

Quote from: jhunter on March 25, 2010, 02:28:11 AM
Yes, but only on the basis of karma level. Karma represents a player's trust to roleplay properly and with realism. Those players are trusted to follow the rules and guidlines of the game and trusted not to abuse the code. This is the only way that I feel it is acceptable.

Quote from: Cutthroat on March 25, 2010, 07:39:47 AM
I like the idea of it being based on karma, because it will probably encourage karma players even more to play mundanes (not that this is a problem, but it is a bonus), but I don't like that it will also widen the gap between karma players and newer players. Having it based on age is an interesting idea, though for certain classes it makes no sense to do this, from a playability standpoint.

More mundane, karma-required classes, please.  I would love to see classes that simply have modified skill ranges than their lower karma counter-part (higher starting point, higher max), but also classes that bring skills together in new ways.  Warrior/assassins, ranger/merchants, etc.  Or perhaps just karma-based subguilds that work as mini-classes.  Assassin subguild might give you a full backstab, hide and sneak skills, or a Krathi subguild might give you fireball, big fireball, and bigger fireball skills.

OK.

I wish it was based on age only and wasn't so much of a difference that it makes someone uber.  If that's how it worked, I'd be behind it.  Otherwise, special app only.

Quote from: spawnloser on March 25, 2010, 10:53:15 AM
Otherwise, special app only.

As synth already stated. Staff don't allow spec apps to be used for this purpose.

I voted yes, but as a function of age. I believe that by apping an older character you should get the stat advantage as well as a skill advantage. Ie, an 18 yr old n00b warrior should be < a 25 yr old n00b warrior in skill. (Though - I will caveat this by saying the game is not suffering without it).

However - the system should be structured so that if you played an 18 yr old and survived to 25 - you should be WAY ahead of a new 25 yr old char. *shrug* Seems a lot to code and think through for little pay off.

I don't know why people are so upset about the "grind."  Skilling up on Arm is so ridiculously easy if you don't intentionally put obstacles in front of yourself.

Quote from: Synthesis on March 25, 2010, 12:04:13 PM
I don't know why people are so upset about the "grind."  Skilling up on Arm is so ridiculously easy if you don't intentionally put obstacles in front of yourself.

I wonder if people realize how lame it would be to be a noob if everyone could start better than you. Or that if everyone started with higher skills... Well, I'm sure you're all smart enough to decipher that.

Making it a proponent of age is a bad idea. Everyone would just app older people.

I have to say no.

I don't really want to say no, but I have to, there is simply no fair way to go about it.

Sure, as a player I think I am far beyond the whole skilling up part of play. I don't need that time spent to figure out who my PC is, I don't need it to make IC contacts and such. I would love if I could bypass it, but at the same time, it is so silly silly easy to advance a PC to master levels, no matter the guild or race.

But, like I said, there is no fair way to put such a thing in. Improved skills by age? Meh, I would hate that, Oh great, I could trade stats for improved skills....Nah. Karma? Hhhmmm...no, Some people go ages being karma overlooked even though they are as good and trustworthy of players as many high karma players.

So...fun thought, but no.

Staff policy is that you can't get stat gains for RP through a request.  I don't remember anything about there being no skill gains, and this goes especially for special apps.  It seems kinda stupid to give sponsored roles boosts but not special apps.

Quote from: Synthesis on March 25, 2010, 12:04:13 PM
Skilling up on Arm is so ridiculously easy if you don't intentionally put obstacles in front of yourself.

What is it about "skilling up" that thwarts people, then?  Trying to be too clever in the wrong direction?

Yes, but...

I think it should be a function of the starting skill levels being randomized.  Based on my experiences, the starting skill levels are static.  A pickpocket starting with steal is always going to start with steal at (hypothetically) skill level 1, unless they choose a subguild with it, in which case it might bump up to (hypothetically) skill level 5.

I would make it so that a guild's base skills have a chance to start from currently level to subguild starting level (or slightly higher).  Adding a subguild would cause it to choose the max of the range.  Age would increase the skew of the curve towards the upper end (but still a random pick, not static) or possibly increase the upper cap (although wisdom or something could do this too).

Are you going to come in as "skilled"?  No, and I never want to see that.  But you could come in as slightly better, and there would be more differences between starting players.  And I wouldn't see all these thread about guild x coming in with strength y being better than guild z with crappy stats at combat...because you would never again know where your starting level in relevant skills would be.

Special Apps, for the time being, but in the future I'd like to see something karma-related for overall skill boost options on start.  Perhaps a 5, 10, 20, and 40 day (these numbers are up for debate of course) skill levels for karma levels 2, 4, 6, and 8 respectively where we can choose either no boost at all or any level of boost we have the karma for depending on the background of the character we're rolling.

Sometimes it is fun to grind.  Other times I want to play someone who is already established so I can focus on social roleplay without need to go sparring or training my skills frequently.

Sephiroto, that's where you and others, like myself, disagree.  Karma giving you skill boosts is wholly unfair to new players.  It should be only by staff approval only, and you'd better explain to the staff why they should approve it, imho.

Quote from: spawnloser on March 25, 2010, 02:25:55 PM
Sephiroto, that's where you and others, like myself, disagree.  Karma giving you skill boosts is wholly unfair to new players.  It should be only by staff approval only, and you'd better explain to the staff why they should approve it, imho.

I simply disagree with you.  Being able to play a mul or a sorc is also unfair to new players.  Isn't karma about the responsibility?  With 8 karma one can app sorc after sorc after sorc, but that isn't the case.  It goes without saying that I trust "trustworthy" players to use options responsibly.  Those who don't usually have them taken away.

Yes, but everyone playing a human ranger starts in the same boat.  Everyone playing a city elf whiran starts in the same boat.  Everyone playing a dwarf sorcerer starts in the same boat.  Karma may be a measure of trust, but it shouldn't be a mark of favoritism and privilege, which having it allow experienced characters would do.

I fail to see how "you can now play a special race!" is any less privilege or favoritism than "you can now begin with increased skills!"

In both cases,  you're giving some benefit in return for proven trustworthiness.

And newbies will get over it.  Just like they get over the fact that they can't play a Krathi right away.

Eh, whats fair got to do with it?  We play roles.  These roles are not intended to be equal.  If they were we would not have social castes, muls, magickers etc.  You still have to get through chargen.  Your character still has to be approved and if you abuse the power your karma grants, you lose it and possibly more.

That's the same with karma races, gickers, templars, nobles.  Everything.

I don't personally think tossing a 40 day skilled warrior is any more abusable than a newbie psion or mul.  So long as they receive the same oversight.  The grind DOES get old.  It may be easy, but it is still time consuming and many roles require some level of competence.

Furthermore, that sort of reward serves to positively reinforce proper roleplay, OOC, and GDB conduct.

I also realized that it would almost certainly help keep mundane numbers high by giving us more incentive to choose the base classes with boosts over a no-boost magicker or karma race.  I'd be much more likely to play a human warrior or pickpocket over a whiran or drovian if I didn't always have to start at the minimum skill level.

I like the idea of having skills based on age. Much like stats are.

You're still going to have people who like playing people young and choose to do so (they do so now). Plus, it would allow for new players to have the same advantages that karma players have. And it's not only that, but if a small boost was given to the starting skills for all guilds, there would be less of a 'grind', period.

I don't know. I get aggravated by the 'grind' also, but so long as a skill branching system is set up, I see it being an issue. I think it might be better if perhaps skills stayed where they were, but skills you branch were started at, say, 1% and made harder to get up, that would allow people to have only moderate skill at various things and you wouldn't see people who purposely skill certain things up to branch other things. I don't know, that's just my thoughts.

Quote from: AmandaGreathouse on March 25, 2010, 02:52:24 PM
I like the idea of having skills based on age. Much like stats are.

You're still going to have people who like playing people young and choose to do so (they do so now). Plus, it would allow for new players to have the same advantages that karma players have. And it's not only that, but if a small boost was given to the starting skills for all guilds, there would be less of a 'grind', period.

I don't know. I get aggravated by the 'grind' also, but so long as a skill branching system is set up, I see it being an issue. I think it might be better if perhaps skills stayed where they were, but skills you branch were started at, say, 1% and made harder to get up, that would allow people to have only moderate skill at various things and you wouldn't see people who purposely skill certain things up to branch other things. I don't know, that's just my thoughts.

No. Skill is the product of a person's motivation to actually learn and improve. I've met plenty of old people in the same field as me, who I would consider intelligent at the bar, yet simply had no interest in bettering themselves.  The stat adjustment are biological, skills are learned.

Karma/Special App.  Or nothing.

If anyone got to start a character with the equivalent of a 40 day char in skills because of Karma, I would straight up quit this game and so would alot of other people that havent played for 10 years. So do whatever.

In short, I agree with the majority of voters at the time of this posting:  leave things the way they are.  If you're worried about your skills, and how skilled your PC is, you're probably going about things wrong in the first place.

Quote from: Kastion on March 25, 2010, 03:51:35 PM
If anyone got to start a character with the equivalent of a 40 day char in skills because of Karma, I would straight up quit this game and so would alot of other people that havent played for 10 years. So do whatever.

I don't think anyone has been advocating a boost equivalent to 40 days of playing time, but... why would you quit?  This game isn't about fairness or balance.  How would it change your enjoyment of the game?

Quote from: Old Kank on March 25, 2010, 04:42:51 PM

Quote from: Kastion on March 25, 2010, 03:51:35 PM
If anyone got to start a character with the equivalent of a 40 day char in skills because of Karma, I would straight up quit this game and so would alot of other people that havent played for 10 years. So do whatever.

I don't think anyone has been advocating a boost equivalent to 40 days of playing time, but... why would you quit?  This game isn't about fairness or balance.  How would it change your enjoyment of the game?

The game is already stacked up against new players, due to the secretive nature of IC information and knowledge of the code that comes with experience. Having players being able to roll up characters with much more "time" put into them straight out of chargen just makes things come across almost as an old boy's club type of thing. The fact that it'll take a new player years to attain that amount of karma is just ridiculous.

I just don't see this as anything meaningful whatsoever to the game. Yeah, it sucks when you play another warrior after your uber one got killed. Oh well. That comes with the turf of perma-death. Armageddon isn't about badass characters with max skills fighting off the new evil NPC of the week. It's a player-driven gave that focuses on plotting, betrayal, intrigue, and struggling to stay alive.

Quote from: Synthesis on March 25, 2010, 12:04:13 PM
I don't know why people are so upset about the "grind."  Skilling up on Arm is so ridiculously easy if you don't intentionally put obstacles in front of yourself.

It's more to do with the timesink required to become reasonably competant. That's usually the primary factor, even in mmo's.

I can spend eight days (re: 200 hours) on a character, just doing my thing (which includes regular training) and that character still won't be good enough to survive some of the random critters in the wastes.

I can do this with one character, two characters, by the third, it becomes too much effort by the third.

---

Anyways, here is a my suggestion.

How about an overall starting boost to combat skills? That way we could reasonably put down a skeet or a vestric without losing a limb in the process.

As it is right now, playing a one to three day hunter is an excerise in pain.

Quote from: Old Kank on March 25, 2010, 04:42:51 PM

Quote from: Kastion on March 25, 2010, 03:51:35 PM
If anyone got to start a character with the equivalent of a 40 day char in skills because of Karma, I would straight up quit this game and so would alot of other people that havent played for 10 years. So do whatever.

I don't think anyone has been advocating a boost equivalent to 40 days of playing time, but... why would you quit?  This game isn't about fairness or balance.  How would it change your enjoyment of the game?

they were talking about it earlier in the post. I know the game is about RP and not about fairness or balance. But those are taken care of IG with social castes, prejudice against races stuff like that. Making it to where someone who has played for 8 years in r/l can just roll up a character that is uber strong is retarded. It waters down perma death which waters down the RP and unfairness and unbalance. They lose their 60 day warrior so they roll up a 40 day assassin and just jump right back into the plots and run the show. That makes it even more retarded for new players who have enough trouble moving up in their guild and getting into the plots and being able to contribute to things (other then being the newbie retard who gets killed or fucks stuff up) Like I said its just a ridiculous OOC way of benifiting the vetrans and ruining everything for the newbies.

Quote from: Kastion on March 25, 2010, 05:41:59 PM

Quote from: Old Kank on March 25, 2010, 04:42:51 PM

Quote from: Kastion on March 25, 2010, 03:51:35 PM
If anyone got to start a character with the equivalent of a 40 day char in skills because of Karma, I would straight up quit this game and so would alot of other people that havent played for 10 years. So do whatever.

I don't think anyone has been advocating a boost equivalent to 40 days of playing time, but... why would you quit?  This game isn't about fairness or balance.  How would it change your enjoyment of the game?

they were talking about it earlier in the post. I know the game is about RP and not about fairness or balance. But those are taken care of IG with social castes, prejudice against races stuff like that. Making it to where someone who has played for 8 years in r/l can just roll up a character that is uber strong is retarded. It waters down perma death which waters down the RP and unfairness and unbalance. They lose their 60 day warrior so they roll up a 40 day assassin and just jump right back into the plots and run the show. That makes it even more retarded for new players who have enough trouble moving up in their guild and getting into the plots and being able to contribute to things (other then being the newbie retard who gets killed or fucks stuff up) Like I said its just a ridiculous OOC way of benifiting the vetrans and ruining everything for the newbies.

Do not worry. Staff will never do it. I am almost 100% positive on that.
Special app for a boost, and even those boost are not nearly to 40days. Not even 10 or 20days.

Quote from: jcarter on March 25, 2010, 05:15:50 PM
I just don't see this as anything meaningful whatsoever to the game. Yeah, it sucks when you play another warrior after your uber one got killed. Oh well. That comes with the turf of perma-death. Armageddon isn't about badass characters with max skills fighting off the new evil NPC of the week. It's a player-driven gave that focuses on plotting, betrayal, intrigue, and struggling to stay alive.

It's not about owning the evil NPC of the week. I've never been in that position and never will, because repeated sparring sessions is the #1 cause of suicide among my characters.  It's about basic skills (skinning, climb, contact, craft skills, ride, sneak even) and not wanting to grind them up. Again.  For some of these skills, if you don't devote time to grinding them, they will fail the first time you try to use them, and possibly end your character as a result.

The idea of starting off a PC as somewhat experienced is an end-run around the bazillion failures of zero to ten day characters. (5 day character = 120 hours, or about as long as it takes for an average bloke to grind a WoW character from 0 to 80.)  My actual preference would be for a system that assumes success in unopposed situations, rather than failure. The old school direction-sense of rangers and the cure mixing of physicians are examples of skills that assumed success. You got the skinning skill? The gortok gets skinned. You have contact? If there's no barrier or other factor at play, you contact the other bloke. Bandage-making on the skill list? Alright, you make a bandage.

The game's not going to change to remove assumption of failure. It's ingrained into the system and the culture. Next best thing would be a method of skipping past the worst of the carnival of failure. Something with less uncertainty than the special app process would be nice. Bonus points if the system could involve trade-offs, and therefore be available to a person with little to no karma.

At 2-3 karma, have the option of starting with all your skills at 50%...

Quote from: A Dry, Quiet War on March 25, 2010, 08:28:56 PM
At 2-3 karma, have the option of starting with all your skills at 50%...

...in exchange for never branching anything, ever.

I don't think you quite understand how retardedly uber that would be.  No.  Dear god, no.

5%.  Whatever, man.

What if, instead of limiting casting calls for roles to those with blood/family ties, the staff were willing and able to recruit players into 'experienced' characters to fill clan needs.

For instance, what if House Kadius kept a sticky up that looked like this:

Master tailor, northern branch - 20 day merchant (6 karma required)
Commander of the guard, southern branch - 30 day warrior (10 karma required)
Kadian hunter, northern branch - 5 day ranger (2 karma required)

Players with the appropriate karma would apply directly to the clan staff and hopefully get into the role quicker than they would with the special app process, and they would start out with some purpose other than being a certified B.A.M.F.  The staff would have some oversight and there could be various OOC restrictions on the character to keep them in that role and to keep them from abusing that role.  Players would get to skip the skill grind and be better able to take part in the game world, and maybe it would reduce the "too many Indians, not enough chiefs" problem.

Would something like this alleviate some of the anxiety over players playing pre-buffed characters, or would it make problems worse?

From another thread:

Quote
Maybe one subguild choice could just be "extra experience".

This would take the form of modest boosts to a guild's core skills.

Staff don't recruit people with a specific guild as a requirement.  They recruit people to play characters that have a certain job.  Your character's guild is not your character's job.  A warrior/hunter or a ranger/guard can both hold the same job.  I don't see your suggestion flying, Old Kank.

So, do you have any suggestions, Spawnloser, or are you only here to be the voice of negativity?

Quote from: Salt Merchant on March 26, 2010, 03:40:29 AM
From another thread:

Quote
Maybe one subguild choice could just be "extra experience".

This would take the form of modest boosts to a guild's core skills.

I rather like this idea. Subguild: Veteran. You would give up having an additional skillset in exchange for a boost to your starting skill levels of your main guild. Seems fair to me, it would be accessible for even new players as well. Something like a 5-10% boost maybe.

Quote from: jhunter on March 26, 2010, 11:20:23 AM

Quote from: Salt Merchant on March 26, 2010, 03:40:29 AM
From another thread:

Quote
Maybe one subguild choice could just be "extra experience".

This would take the form of modest boosts to a guild's core skills.

I rather like this idea. Subguild: Veteran. You would give up having an additional skillset in exchange for a boost to your starting skill levels of your main guild. Seems fair to me, it would be accessible for even new players as well. Something like a 5-10% boost maybe.

I vote on this... Good idea in my opinion

Definitely the best idea I've heard so far. +1

Not that I think there is anything wrong with the current system, I think something like this would pretty much please everyone and leave no sad faces in the crowd.

Quote from: Majikal on March 26, 2010, 03:48:10 PM
Definitely the best idea I've heard so far. +1

Not that I think there is anything wrong with the current system, I think something like this would pretty much please everyone and leave no sad faces in the crowd.

I'm sure there'd be an angry thread if it happened. 

I'd like it to be based on specific skills and only skills that are on the bottom tier for that guild / sub-guild. For example,

At creation a player rolls up his character and after choosing his guild and sub-guild another selection process is brought up. In this menu are the qualifying starting skills for the guild / sub-guild the player has chosen. The game gives the player the option to enhance one or two of these said skills. Now, there is a caveat and that is - if you do decide to enhance any of these skills, your other skills will start at a lesser % than they normally would. Now, the player is by no means forced to enhance any of these skills and if they choose, can leave them as they would before this option was introduced to the game. Just a thought.

Though I get frustrated sometimes when I start a new character at Day 0...I really don't condone any of these ideas.

I definitely don't like the 'Veteran Subguild' or karma-sponsored-guild roles. As spawnloser said, Staff doesn't dictate what your PC will be. They see if your concept fits within their guidelines, and go from there. If you apply to be a psion in that role, it would definitely require greater scrutiny and might be denied flat out due to the amount of psions already out there, the sensitivity of that guild in such a role, etc.

I also think that newbies should be encouraged to start from the ground up. It's a great learning experience. I've been here for close to eight years, and I don't think I would've developed my ability to play this game as well if I had the chance to start as a "Veteran". I stopped making character concepts that were grizzled badasses because I realized that characters start off very weak and incapable for the most part. I would hate to encourage newer players to keep with such concepts, instead of playing the nobody-that-becomes-somebody.

Quote from: Jingo on March 25, 2010, 05:30:18 PM

Quote from: Synthesis on March 25, 2010, 12:04:13 PM
I don't know why people are so upset about the "grind."  Skilling up on Arm is so ridiculously easy if you don't intentionally put obstacles in front of yourself.

Anyways, here is a my suggestion.

How about an overall starting boost to combat skills? That way we could reasonably put down a skeet or a vestric without losing a limb in the process.

As it is right now, playing a one to three day hunter is an excerise in pain.

I feel what your sayin, but honestly the boosts are already there, you just got to choose the right combinations of race and prime/secondary guilds. Mix and match then you will stumble upon it, but of coarse you will have to sacrifice one aspect for another, which I think is fair.

and i could swer Staff has posted about boosts and not giving them out, or accepting apps of it.. but maybe that was only stats.

I'd like something like this to be based off of a combination of age and karma, or a "veteran" subguild or somesuch.

Buuut, that's just me. I'm weak.

I don't like grinding for 10+ days just to be able to sneak with -any- degree of success.

Quote from: a strange shadow on March 26, 2010, 09:28:41 AMSo, do you have any suggestions, Spawnloser, or are you only here to be the voice of negativity?

In the case of this suggestion, no, I am only the voice of negativity because I think it is a poor one from the ground up.  I think it is, as I said, unfair to new players.  The grind, as suggested, isn't as bad as some people try to make it out to be.

If the grind isn't that bad, how unfair could the idea possibly be?

That's the sound of cognitive dissonance, in case you were wondering.

QuoteShould PCs be able to start as 'experienced'?

Only if they are named Jimi.

Special Application:

Name: Jimi
Sdesc: the dreadlocked, long-fingered elf

Guild:  Assassin
Subguild:  Bard

What I want:  Jimi is "experienced".  Please set his assassin skills to 50% of max, or 40 days, whichever is higher.  Please set his Bard type skills to 100% across the board.  Being "experienced", Jimi should be set permanently with hallucinations, ala skellebain.  A way to load infinate edible skellebain tablets would also be nice.


Errrr...not to derail, but characters getting significant bumps to starting skills (other than sponsored) the sorts of which some of the people in this thread have talked about, should get a -serious- detriment as well.  This is a game about conflict.  I can't see how people could advocate coming in routinely with a "20 day" character (whatever that really means skillwise) and then engage in conflict with people who did not get that opportunity, when lots of times conflict comes down to those skills.  The point of skill progression (and really, even social position power) is that you have to survive the different sorts of conflict in this game (PC, NPC, combat, political, etc), and not everyone survives.

Not only that, but I thought skill branching is closely linked to skill training. So you're talking about completely reworking the skill tree system. Let's say I have a pen-making character. I ask for "nib-cutting" to be set at a 10% boost up from noob level. Great! I got the boost. Except, "ink-making" branches once you hit 12%. So I'm not just getting a boost to nib-cutting. I'm also getting ink-making at a much faster rate, without having to do hardly any of the work, than someone who didn't ask for that boost. And since ink-making branches poison-ink-squirting, I can become a master assassin a whole lot faster than any of y'all who didn't know which skills branch from which other skills. This is where it all turns into min-maxing, and this is where the game stops being a RPI and reverts back to the Diku H&S it came from.

It's already at the point where people have spreadsheets and formulae detailing which skills branch from what, and when exactly that happens, and what exactly is the minimum required to get there at the most efficient rate. I would prefer to -not- encourage this kind of thought process. Giving people the opportunity to start out better at chosen skills is too much of an encouragement to min-max, and not enough encouragement to learn how to enjoy discovery.

Quote from: Twilight on March 26, 2010, 11:44:24 PM
I can't see how people could advocate coming in routinely with a "20 day" character (whatever that really means skillwise)

I'm advocating coming in with a 5 day character, with some basic skills trained, not a 20 day combat monster.

A more elegant solution would be a system that assumes success of most uncontested actions (as brew does currently) with a shallower power-curve, such that the differences between a 5-day and 20-day character would be noticeable but not extreme.

QuoteThe point of skill progression...

The point of grind is to extend content.  It isn't easy for a MUD or MMO to create a novel situation for a player for every hour of play, so repetitive tasks are rewarded.  Because this is a permadeath game, time spent also creates a risk. You'll lose 240 hours of progress if you lose your 10-day character.  This is not a bad thing -- the sense of risk is part of what makes Arm exciting.  However, we're talking about 240 hours here, for a modest 10-day character.  It's not really inline with the number of hours of 'work' required to enjoy the interesting bits of more modern games.

Problems here is that repeated activities are braindead simple. As others have indicated, it's pretty easy, though time consuming, to get your character skilled up.  But an easy game isn't necessarily a fun one, or everyone would be hopelessly enthralled by Tic-Tac-Toe. In essence, you have to play a minigame you've played literally a few thousand times before in order to participate fully in the interesting, exciting bits.

Apparently not too many other players of this game, or the 10 million subscribers of WoW for that matter, consider the above to be problematic. *welp*  

Make a subguild "veteran" that doesn't give any extra skills, but gives a like a.... +5% to group of selected starting skills dependent on the guild?  Mundane only.

I know I've posted about why the "veteran" subguild would be a silly idea.

Here's the nutshell:

1. If you gave a high percentage boost, people would cry about newbie characters coming in too powerful.

2. If you gave a low percentage boost, people would soon realize that it wasn't worth taking it, because it's the upper-middle range of skill progression that is difficult to get through, not that initial 5, 10, or even 20 percent.

If it were set at around 10% to all starting skills, newbie Armageddon players might use it.  I'd bet that most veteran players wouldn't start using a veteran subguild until it were set around 25-30%.

That being said, I wouldn't necessarily be against it.  There are plenty of subguilds I never use because they're mostly useless, and this would be one of them.

However, I'd much prefer a karma-linked system.  If you have enough karma to play a half-giant or a mul, there is no reason you shouldn't be able to start with the equivalent of a 10 or 15 day character, because a half-giant warrior right out of the box can probably kill any 15-day mundane character with less than three attacks.  It's assumed that high-karma players are responsible enough to handle this sort of thing without breaking the game.

If newbie players don't like it, they can special app for karma levels and prove themselves worthy.  Every one of us veteran players had to do exactly the same thing, so it isn't unfair at all.  It's simply a matter of proving to the staff that you are just as interested in maintaining the quality and atmosphere of the game as they are.

I'm not into the idea of a karma-based system. The karma system already has its flaws (people being missed), but what's great about the karma system is all those roles require playing the game from a very different angle, which restrict the powerful classes (in an awesome cage of RP). If someone can just go and create a master warrior, it's just jumping the que. They can create any concept they like, without having to put the work in. If I was a new player and I saw this system in place, I wouldn't stick around for very long.

As for the skill grind as it's called, I think this really helps people snap out of their previous role. Somehow I have a feeling that if people could skip this there might be one or two instances of revenge within 24 hours for a dead character.

Quote from: Synthesis on March 27, 2010, 10:52:15 AM
That being said, I wouldn't necessarily be against it.  There are plenty of subguilds I never use because they're mostly useless, and this would be one of them.

You need to remember that just because you might find it useless doesn't mean that others would. One man's garbage is another man's treasure and all that.

I figure it would be worth it just to be able to create a warrior character with a background of having fought in the past that doesn't totally get his ass kicked first round in the Byn. Or a pickpocket that can actually begin to exercise his craft without all the crap that comes from starting being utterly hopeless at it. Etc.

To whoever said you should just special app: special apps should be for special characters, not marginally adjusted characters, given how laborious the process is.

Quote from: Salt Merchant on March 27, 2010, 01:27:54 PM

Quote from: Synthesis on March 27, 2010, 10:52:15 AM
That being said, I wouldn't necessarily be against it.  There are plenty of subguilds I never use because they're mostly useless, and this would be one of them.

You need to remember that just because you might find it useless doesn't mean that others would. One man's garbage is another man's treasure and all that.

That's why I said I'm not against the idea.  I simply think the "starting experienced" idea is better served by optional karma-related bonuses overall.

In a nutshell:  the subclass is a fine idea, but it doesn't really go far enough to address the problem.  Then again, I don't really see it as a terrible problem, either.

I suppose I'd have to say that, if you think it's a problem worth fixing, karma-based bonuses is really the way to go.

Quote from: Synthesis on March 27, 2010, 10:52:15 AM
Something about special apping Karma

You can special app for Karma points?

Quote from: Saellyn on March 27, 2010, 03:51:40 PM

Quote from: Synthesis on March 27, 2010, 10:52:15 AM
Something about special apping Karma

You can special app for Karma points?

IF you think you can play a karma role resposibly, spec app it and if you do well you'll probably get the karma level for it.

Once anybody gets the karma to start characters with higher skills I can't see them ever starting a character at a base level.  I know I never would.  Maybe that's a problem, maybe it's not, I don't know.

Either way, by the time you've played long enough to have karma skills aren't going to slow you down too much because you know just what a new character is capable of and how to get their skills up efficiently.

If something like this was implemented I'd like to see it go to new accounts.  Give the poor bastards a hand up to help the learning curve out.

Quote from: roughneck on March 27, 2010, 06:26:50 PM
Either way, by the time you've played long enough to have karma skills aren't going to slow you down too much because you know just what a new character is capable of and how to get their skills up efficiently.

Experience helps.  But if you play 20 days a year, period, you're plain and simple going to spend a large fraction of your time with low-skilled PCs.

A karma-restricted subguild roughly equivalent to ten days play time is something I would use...sometimes.

Quote from: A Dry, Quiet War on March 27, 2010, 06:51:50 PM
A karma-restricted subguild roughly equivalent to ten days play time is something I would use...sometimes.

I think most people would use it 100% of the time.  Simply because if you had the option, why wouldn't you?

Quote from: roughneck on March 27, 2010, 11:19:50 PM

Quote from: A Dry, Quiet War on March 27, 2010, 06:51:50 PM
A karma-restricted subguild roughly equivalent to ten days play time is something I would use...sometimes.

I think most people would use it 100% of the time.  Simply because if you had the option, why wouldn't you?

You might want to supplement the skills of your guild with a subguild? Such as a ranger/tailor or mage/scavenger, assassin/physician or a warrior/hunter etc etc etc.

I think it would be great for new players and handy for those folks who play character concepts that only last a day or two.

As for what more experienced players would do ... I would personally never use it.  A short-term starting boost pales in comparison to skills that might add new possibilities for play and survival months down the road.

Quote from: Thunkkin on March 28, 2010, 12:04:39 AM
I think it would be great for new players and handy for those folks who play character concepts that only last a day or two.

As for what more experienced players would do ... I would personally never use it.  A short-term starting boost pales in comparison to skills that might add new possibilities for play and survival months down the road.

my thoughts exactly. though it does of course offer a good option for those who'd be willing to sacrifice one for the other. (IMHO)

Quote from: roughneck on March 27, 2010, 11:19:50 PM

Quote from: A Dry, Quiet War on March 27, 2010, 06:51:50 PM
A karma-restricted subguild roughly equivalent to ten days play time is something I would use...sometimes.

I think most people would use it 100% of the time.  Simply because if you had the option, why wouldn't you?

As Amanda said, the grind isn't too bad and I would rather have the supplemental skills than having a piddly boost, because that's all this could give.

I think it would be fine if there was no possibility of growth beyond that point. Fine, your grizzled warrior is a grizzled warrior, and that's all they will ever be.

Save the excellence for those who are willing to take a PC and grow skill wise with them from the ground up.

My vote was save them for the special apps. That limits accounts to having at most three boosted PC's per year. I think that is a perfect enough limitation as is.

Karma players getting any more goodies, such as complete rule over the mundane world, makes me cringe.

What if the experienced started with 0 coins, no food, no water, a loincloth, and a skinning knife (or maybe 200 coins for a merchant)?  Okay, so maybe not that bad, but you get where I'm going with this idea.

I like the idea of using karma and age both to determine starting skills. With each karma level, you might have the choice to gain x amount of across the board skill, but you would have to be x age. So the more skill you wanted, the more age you would have to accept. Thusly, a person with an 8 karma boost would be accepting the dip in stats that comes with being 50-60 years old, or the eqivilant per race.

That seems the most fair. I don't see it as being unfair in any scenario, but ... this makes it a double edged sword. I hate the grind, myself.

Starting at age 50 or 60 would be less of a bother to mages than combat based classes. In a way, that makes it unfair.

Quote from: Akaramu on March 28, 2010, 10:21:28 AM
Starting at age 50 or 60 would be less of a bother to mages than combat based classes. In a way, that makes it unfair.

When don't mundanes get the short end of the stick?

Quote from: Akaramu on March 28, 2010, 10:21:28 AM
Starting at age 50 or 60 would be less of a bother to mages than combat based classes. In a way, that makes it unfair.

I thought the whole idea of skill boosts was aimed at mundane classes only........  Every time I've discussed it, that is what I had in mind.  Mages bulk up so fast I wouldn't feel very comfortable having them start with extra skills in the current Arm incarnation.

Quote from: Akaramu on March 28, 2010, 10:21:28 AM
Starting at age 50 or 60 would be less of a bother to mages than combat based classes. In a way, that makes it unfair.

Except for the fact that they're taking a nice hit to endurance meaning that they're even easier to kill by some newbie combat-class in even fewer shots.

Quote from: Qzzrbl on March 28, 2010, 10:45:41 AM
When don't mundanes get the short end of the stick?

When they stop bitching about how unfair it is, maybe?  (sigh)  Honestly, the magicker-hate on these boards is depressing.

None of my mages has ever even been hit even once by some newbie combat class. :P Except the 5 day one who cast 3 spells all her life and ended up in jail, but that was different. And I don't hate mages, I just don't think they should be able to start out as older / more experienced.

Mundanes, by all means, why not.

Quote from: Sephiroto on March 28, 2010, 12:08:41 PM

Quote from: Akaramu on March 28, 2010, 10:21:28 AM
Starting at age 50 or 60 would be less of a bother to mages than combat based classes. In a way, that makes it unfair.

I thought the whole idea of skill boosts was aimed at mundane classes only........  Every time I've discussed it, that is what I had in mind.  Mages bulk up so fast I wouldn't feel very comfortable having them start with extra skills in the current Arm incarnation.

I must be doing it wrong: My mages tend to advance at the same speed as my merchants.

My rangers, however, take ages to advance.

However, I've got to disagree on the point that mundanes get the short end of the stick on everything. They're actually superior to mages in a lot of things, albeit, most of them don't involve skill vs skill, but instead involve things like social power, ability to get work, and the like.

My impression is that mages have been getting beaten with the nerf bat to some extent over the past couple of years anyhow.

the Impression is FROM the nerf bat.

Definitely no to a karma-based bonus system.

Karma restrictions on class and race are feasible not only because of their coded power, but also because their roleplaying difficulty. You can look a newb in the face and tell him with confidence "we don't trust you to play a sorcerer, but we trust that other player."

Can you really do the same with "we don't trust you to start with a character that doesn't utterly suck right out of the box, but we do trust this other player"? No, I don't think you can. You've turned karma from a trust system to a perks system, and frankly at that point you're a step away from the "free" pay-for-perks MUDs that we all despise.

Quote from: spawnloser on March 28, 2010, 12:12:49 PM

Quote from: Akaramu on March 28, 2010, 10:21:28 AM
Starting at age 50 or 60 would be less of a bother to mages than combat based classes. In a way, that makes it unfair.

Except for the fact that they're taking a nice hit to endurance meaning that they're even easier to kill by some newbie combat-class in even fewer shots.

Quote from: Qzzrbl on March 28, 2010, 10:45:41 AM
When don't mundanes get the short end of the stick?

When they stop bitching about how unfair it is, maybe?  (sigh)  Honestly, the magicker-hate on these boards is depressing.

I wasn't hating on magickers. :p

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 28, 2010, 04:32:30 PM
Definitely no to a karma-based bonus system.

Karma restrictions on class and race are feasible not only because of their coded power, but also because their roleplaying difficulty. You can look a newb in the face and tell him with confidence "we don't trust you to play a sorcerer, but we trust that other player."

Can you really do the same with "we don't trust you to start with a character that doesn't utterly suck right out of the box, but we do trust this other player"? No, I don't think you can. You've turned karma from a trust system to a perks system, and frankly at that point you're a step away from the "free" pay-for-perks MUDs that we all despise.

I don't think any character should suck out of the box. But, we can (in theory) trust players with high karma not to use experienced characters to zerg other PCs.

Quote from: number13 on March 28, 2010, 04:45:12 PM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 28, 2010, 04:32:30 PM
Definitely no to a karma-based bonus system.

Karma restrictions on class and race are feasible not only because of their coded power, but also because their roleplaying difficulty. You can look a newb in the face and tell him with confidence "we don't trust you to play a sorcerer, but we trust that other player."

Can you really do the same with "we don't trust you to start with a character that doesn't utterly suck right out of the box, but we do trust this other player"? No, I don't think you can. You've turned karma from a trust system to a perks system, and frankly at that point you're a step away from the "free" pay-for-perks MUDs that we all despise.

I don't think any charater should suck out of the box. But, we can (in theory) trust players with high karma not to use experienced characters to zerg other PCs.

Having boosted starting skills isn't really something that can be abused. Do it across the board or not at all.

I do think that we could stand to give starting characters slightly more competence than they currently have. Maybe pick a few key skills in each guild, and give a small but notable boost for every new character of that guild. Rangers already have this. Why not make it common to all (mundane) guilds?

Wait, since when did rangers get a boost for being newbies? o-O

Quote from: Qzzrbl on March 28, 2010, 05:04:36 PM
Wait, since when did rangers get a boost for being newbies? o-O

They don't.  They start with at least 2 skills much higher than everyone else.  Which two you can easily guess if you've ever played a ranger and paid attention.

Quote from: Synthesis on March 28, 2010, 05:39:25 PM

Quote from: Qzzrbl on March 28, 2010, 05:04:36 PM
Wait, since when did rangers get a boost for being newbies? o-O

They don't.  They start with at least 2 skills much higher than everyone else.  Which two you can easily guess if you've ever played a ranger and paid attention.

Oh.... Misunderstood. x]

*Has never played a fully-committed ranger that didn't get killed in under <insert shamefully short period of time here>*

Quote from: number13 on March 28, 2010, 04:45:12 PM

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 28, 2010, 04:32:30 PM
Definitely no to a karma-based bonus system.

Karma restrictions on class and race are feasible not only because of their coded power, but also because their roleplaying difficulty. You can look a newb in the face and tell him with confidence "we don't trust you to play a sorcerer, but we trust that other player."

Can you really do the same with "we don't trust you to start with a character that doesn't utterly suck right out of the box, but we do trust this other player"? No, I don't think you can. You've turned karma from a trust system to a perks system, and frankly at that point you're a step away from the "free" pay-for-perks MUDs that we all despise.

I don't think any character should suck out of the box. But, we can (in theory) trust players with high karma not to use experienced characters to zerg other PCs.

"sucking" is almost completely subjective to the other players skills around you.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 28, 2010, 04:57:00 PM
Having boosted starting skills isn't really something that can be abused. Do it across the board or not at all.

This is not true.

A 10-day dwarf warrior can walk into any tavern (that doesn't have NPC soldiers) and kill a sitting, unarmed PC in a couple rounds.  Will the player get spanked?  Probably.  Will his victim get resurrected?  No.

I don't want someone to have that kind of power until he's actually invested 240 hours in the game.  He doesn't have to invest it over and over and over...but please, no instant pwn0rz for n00bz.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on March 28, 2010, 06:25:09 PM

Quote from: number13 on March 28, 2010, 04:45:12 PM
I don't think any character should suck out of the box. But, we can (in theory) trust players with high karma not to use experienced characters to zerg other PCs.

"sucking" is almost completely subjective to the other players skills around you.

Not entirely.  Sometime's it's not offense vs. defense, it's just offense vs. hitpoints.  If everyone's combat skills were doubled, we would see even more terrifyingly brief takedowns.

Quote from: jhunter on March 25, 2010, 02:28:11 AM
Yes, but only on the basis of karma level. Karma represents a player's trust to roleplay properly and with realism. Those players are trusted to follow the rules and guidlines of the game and trusted not to abuse the code. This is the only way that I feel it is acceptable.

Only read the first few posts but felt I should respond to this.

Please, NO. While karma is a good idea, I'm sure there are plenty of people in my boat. I play quite a lot, adhere strictly to rules, solo RP like crazy etc etc BUT, I still only have 1 karma. I put this down purely to my off-peak playing time. That and I bet the staff always watch when I'm just trying to run somewhere to quit out.

I just feel the karma system is unfair as it is. I've been playing this game for years and have been told many times by different players that I should have more karma. I would feel personally cheated if people were allowed to come IG with higher starting abilities just because the staff watch them more than they watch me.

Quote from: Nile on March 28, 2010, 06:49:26 PM
Please, NO. While karma is a good idea, I'm sure there are plenty of people in my boat. I play quite a lot, adhere strictly to rules, solo RP like crazy etc etc BUT, I still only have 1 karma. I put this down purely to my off-peak playing time. That and I bet the staff always watch when I'm just trying to run somewhere to quit out.

I just feel the karma system is unfair as it is. I've been playing this game for years and have been told many times by different players that I should have more karma. I would feel personally cheated if people were allowed to come IG with higher starting abilities just because the staff watch them more than they watch me.

Sorry about the derail, but I feel I have to chime in here. I am also an off-peak player, and I went 2 years without karma, until a rather puzzled Highlord gave me some and told me I should have had that much long ago. It IS possible to slip through the cracks... I would suggest you submit a request to have your karma reviewed.

Quote from: Akaramu on March 28, 2010, 07:39:13 PM

Quote from: Nile on March 28, 2010, 06:49:26 PM
Please, NO. While karma is a good idea, I'm sure there are plenty of people in my boat. I play quite a lot, adhere strictly to rules, solo RP like crazy etc etc BUT, I still only have 1 karma. I put this down purely to my off-peak playing time. That and I bet the staff always watch when I'm just trying to run somewhere to quit out.

I just feel the karma system is unfair as it is. I've been playing this game for years and have been told many times by different players that I should have more karma. I would feel personally cheated if people were allowed to come IG with higher starting abilities just because the staff watch them more than they watch me.

Sorry about the derail, but I feel I have to chime in here. I am also an off-peak player, and I went 2 years without karma, until a rather puzzled Highlord gave me some and told me I should have had that much long ago. It IS possible to slip through the cracks... I would suggest you submit a request to have your karma reviewed.

Do this.

Also, turn your review flag on.  Join a clan and communicate regularly with your clan staff, or failing that, communicate with the independent staff.  Involve other players as much as possible, whenever possible.

And a reminder to other players:  If you see someone do something awesome, don't track them down OOC to give them a high-five.  Send them a kudos so the staff gets to read how awesome that player is too.

OK

As the others have said. You might slip through the cracks but it doesn't mean that if you deserve it and request a review of your play in regards to karma that the staff won't check you out and award you/or not fairly. I think the whole arguement about karma basis being unfair is flat out bullshit. If you deserve it, and communicate to the staff, you will get it. I don't know of anyone that has the karma and doesn't deserve it. If they show themselves not to deserve it after the fact, it gets taken away.

The arguements against it being karma based almost feel more to me like ignorance or flat out jealously. It's pretty ridiculous. The staff award karma based on trust and roleplaying ability, to argue that it is unfair is, IMO, insulting to both the staff and the fellow players that have proven themselves and earned their karma.

I was thinking back to a time, about 12 years ago, when there were very few skilled PCs around.  At all.  The Byn wasn't open.  Merchants didn't have craft skills, if I remember right.  And there was this perception that if you worked skills...at all...you would likely be viewed as a twink.

Consequently, most people seemed to suck, skillwise.   Sure there were a few notables (I remember one Kuraci that had a reputation...a few others). And there was hardly anyone on.  But the RP was fun.

So, perhaps we are going in the wrong direction with this entire thread.  The MUD was kind of more interesting, when there were very few PCs that were actually quite skilled, and many, many more (even long, long lived) PCs that were not.  At least, that was my perception of that time period.

Quote from: jhunter on March 28, 2010, 09:41:03 PM
The arguements against it being karma based almost feel more to me like ignorance or flat out jealously. It's pretty ridiculous. The staff award karma based on trust and roleplaying ability, to argue that it is unfair is, IMO, insulting to both the staff and the fellow players that have proven themselves and earned their karma.

What's insulting is your misrepresentation of the karma system, and your misplaced accusations of karma envy.

The karma restricts roles that have heavy roleplaying baggage attached. It's not just about coded power. A karma-based skill boost would have no such roleplaying baggage. There is no reasonable example why someone with karma should get to skip the early skill building phase while one without has to play it out, besides a misplaced sense of entitlement (which I suspect exists, especially given your wording).

The example of a 10-day dwarf is extreme and rediculous. Brand new players can already do a lot of things to screw with the game, and I'm not convinced at all that giving a slight boost to starting characters would be something so potentially game breaking that it would have to be regulated by karma.

Eh, Twilight - that had to be more than 12 years ago.

I think the time Twilight's thinking of is more recent than that, actually, because of the mention of a particular Kuraci Merchant (that seemed to have eventually branched every freaking craft skill available to merchant guild characters).  It was a perception thing, she said, that caused people not to train much, not that the skills weren't available or whatever.

The numbers seem obvious, getting rid of "I like voting in polls" as extraneous, you end up with a heavy lean towards no change or no possible gain ever.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 29, 2010, 02:18:55 AM
The karma restricts roles that have heavy roleplaying baggage attached. It's not just about coded power. A karma-based skill boost would have no such roleplaying baggage. There is no reasonable example why someone with karma should get to skip the early skill building phase while one without has to play it out, besides a misplaced sense of entitlement (which I suspect exists, especially given your wording).

The example of a 10-day dwarf is extreme and rediculous. Brand new players can already do a lot of things to screw with the game, and I'm not convinced at all that giving a slight boost to starting characters would be something so potentially game breaking that it would have to be regulated by karma.

All the fun exciting rancor aside, I suspect that we're not thinking about the same level of skillboost.

Option I:  If you want to be able to ride, skin, successfully fry a kalan fruit, and have time to flee before that large black beetle bites your head off, I'm okay with that being unrestricted.  For someone who is new to the game or plays short-lived characters, that's a useful trade for a subguild.  In fact, I'd encourage newbies to go for this option if it were available.

Option II:  If you want to stay mounted in combat, hurt people with arrows, and kill a scrab without getting touched...that's more power than I'm willing to give someone on his first character.  That's about the level a ten-day ranger should be at if he isn't X-D.  That's also about the earliest point that I'd be interested in jumping to.  If you're going to play a character for many hundreds of hours, skipping the first couple days (Option I) just isn't that big a deal.

Quote from: hyzhenhok on March 29, 2010, 02:18:55 AM

Quote from: jhunter on March 28, 2010, 09:41:03 PM
The arguements against it being karma based almost feel more to me like ignorance or flat out jealously. It's pretty ridiculous. The staff award karma based on trust and roleplaying ability, to argue that it is unfair is, IMO, insulting to both the staff and the fellow players that have proven themselves and earned their karma.

What's insulting is your misrepresentation of the karma system, and your misplaced accusations of karma envy.

The karma restricts roles that have heavy roleplaying baggage attached. It's not just about coded power. A karma-based skill boost would have no such roleplaying baggage. There is no reasonable example why someone with karma should get to skip the early skill building phase while one without has to play it out, besides a misplaced sense of entitlement (which I suspect exists, especially given your wording).

The example of a 10-day dwarf is extreme and rediculous. Brand new players can already do a lot of things to screw with the game, and I'm not convinced at all that giving a slight boost to starting characters would be something so potentially game breaking that it would have to be regulated by karma.

Did you even read my whole post? I don't think that I misrepesented anything. I don't believe that I pointed out any specific people in regards to my opinion so therefore I cannot be misplaced in that regard. What I was saying is that -some- of the people arguing against it being karma based sound to me as if they don't believe those with karma have earned it or that the staff awards karma to people unfairly. I don't believe I ever said it was just about coded power. (Reread my post above thank you.)

QuoteThere is no reasonable example why someone with karma should get to skip the early skill building phase while one without has to play it out, besides a misplaced sense of entitlement (which I suspect exists, especially given your wording).

The karma system isn't solely based on RP baggage either, it is based in part on coded power and the responsibility of the player not to abuse it. In this way you are misrepresenting the karma system. There is the reasonable example, as I have already stated, karma players are trusted to some degree or another -not only- to deal with the role difficulty but not to abuse the coded power that comes with some of them.

The bolded portion right there is part of the attitude I'm seeing with the people that comes across as: "I don't think karma players deserved their karma and cannot be trusted any more than players that have not proven themselves."

The problem with it being karma based is that it would be highly unlikely for anyone with the sufficient karma to create a normal PC. I don't think anyone's being jealous or having karma envy, jhunter, I think they are afraid of creating an elite. That's one of the problems with pretty much every other mud out there. Arm's current karma system is good beacuse of the responsibilities and restrictions drawn from the docs when playing those roles. It's less of a reward and more of a safety mechanism in my eyes.

Quote from: Twilight on March 29, 2010, 12:06:50 AM
I was thinking back to a time, about 12 years ago, when there were very few skilled PCs around.  At all.  The Byn wasn't open.  Merchants didn't have craft skills, if I remember right.  And there was this perception that if you worked skills...at all...you would likely be viewed as a twink.

Consequently, most people seemed to suck, skillwise.   Sure there were a few notables (I remember one Kuraci that had a reputation...a few others). And there was hardly anyone on.  But the RP was fun.

So, perhaps we are going in the wrong direction with this entire thread.  The MUD was kind of more interesting, when there were very few PCs that were actually quite skilled, and many, many more (even long, long lived) PCs that were not.  At least, that was my perception of that time period.

I'm of the same frame of mind, where I'd rather see the skill progression slowed down even more than what it is now.

Quote from: mansa on March 30, 2010, 04:06:20 PM

Quote from: Twilight on March 29, 2010, 12:06:50 AM
I was thinking back to a time, about 12 years ago, when there were very few skilled PCs around.  At all.  The Byn wasn't open.  Merchants didn't have craft skills, if I remember right.  And there was this perception that if you worked skills...at all...you would likely be viewed as a twink.

Consequently, most people seemed to suck, skillwise.   Sure there were a few notables (I remember one Kuraci that had a reputation...a few others). And there was hardly anyone on.  But the RP was fun.

So, perhaps we are going in the wrong direction with this entire thread.  The MUD was kind of more interesting, when there were very few PCs that were actually quite skilled, and many, many more (even long, long lived) PCs that were not.  At least, that was my perception of that time period.

I'm of the same frame of mind, where I'd rather see the skill progression slowed down even more than what it is now.

And if that happens, I forsee a handful of nameless jakhals exploiting a vastly skill-less playerbase who is unable to defend itself.  And it is because of this perception that I gind: so that I won't feel like I'll be insta-pwned by the first turd furgeson who doesn't like my PC.  If I started skilled and relatively safe then I could simply spend that time RP'ing.  That is why I'm of the frame of mind that I would like to start with more skills.

But, as you can see, we're really advocating the same thing: removing or decreasing the skill gap.  By suggesting skills progress slower to make us more or less on the same level (to promote RP) you're basically putting us at the same place as having trustworthy (karma) newb PC's starting with more skills to better match higher skilled, less-trustworthy (no/low karma) players for the same RP promoting reason.

Quote from: Sephiroto on March 30, 2010, 05:36:12 PM

Quote from: mansa on March 30, 2010, 04:06:20 PM

Quote from: Twilight on March 29, 2010, 12:06:50 AM
I was thinking back to a time, about 12 years ago, when there were very few skilled PCs around.  At all.  The Byn wasn't open.  Merchants didn't have craft skills, if I remember right.  And there was this perception that if you worked skills...at all...you would likely be viewed as a twink.

Consequently, most people seemed to suck, skillwise.   Sure there were a few notables (I remember one Kuraci that had a reputation...a few others). And there was hardly anyone on.  But the RP was fun.

So, perhaps we are going in the wrong direction with this entire thread.  The MUD was kind of more interesting, when there were very few PCs that were actually quite skilled, and many, many more (even long, long lived) PCs that were not.  At least, that was my perception of that time period.

I'm of the same frame of mind, where I'd rather see the skill progression slowed down even more than what it is now.

And if that happens, I forsee a handful of nameless jakhals exploiting a vastly skill-less playerbase who is unable to defend itself.  And it is because of this perception that I gind: so that I won't feel like I'll be insta-pwned by the first turd furgeson who doesn't like my PC.  If I started skilled and relatively safe then I could simply spend that time RP'ing.  That is why I'm of the frame of mind that I would like to start with more skills.

I agree with that. But I think the real solution is that skills levels are somehow linked to how long your character has been "in existence" (not time played or age) so that uber douches can grind out maxes in 5 days.

Personally, I'd rather just keep it at special application.

If the problem is that the early days of a character are too tedious, I'd rather see some across the board remedy for that. For instance, we've seen the ride and contact skills change. Those changes helped, I think, and maybe similar changes would be helpful too? I can't think of any at the moment, but I'm suggesting maybe that route would be effective and more achievable.

Yes, per Karma.

I honestly don't see how incompetent characters don't fit into plots as well as competent ones.  Many good stories have bumbling, incompetent, unskilled, naive, and inexperienced characters.  It's those characters that really shine in a plot, especially when surrounded by six-packed, chisel-jawed bad-asses.

Just thought I'd chip in with my two cents, for what they're worth:

As it stands I'm currently playing my first character whose been alive for just about 3 days now, and the biggest challenge I face every time I play is getting to grips with how to improve my skills, how to level, how to make myself useful when alone. There are so many things in this game that I don't know how to do yet and the process by which I can learn them is tough but ultimately rewarding because I know that in the grand scheme of things once I've learned them I can use them for future characters. But this seems to be a real bone of contention here: the act of utilising something you have learned in a previous life to the benefit of a current character seems frowned upon because some people labour under the misguided impression that this is twinking. Even though all of us undoubtedly do it.

I refer back to what I said about Magickers in the gemmed thread: that if you start a new Magicker having played one hundred similar characters before, and I start a new one having never played the class before, who do you think is levelling their skills faster? Here's a hint: not me. This idea for a starting skill boost (whether karma or age based) is - while a nice idea for those who want to just jump in and play a badass - a totally uneccessary game mechanic that will ultimately make me feel further from everyone elses level than I already do.

Yes karma is a privelidge that is earned and I have enough faith in the staff to make sure that the people who have access to karma-restricted roles play them properly, so I'm not going to go off on one about this being unfair. It's not unfair. It's just pretty stupid. All that knowledge that you store up in your head over your characters can, if you so choose, be exercised to make each new character slightly better than the last. These players already have the luxury of being able to choose to play a badass because they have the in game knowledge to back it up and the nuance to know how to level their skills quickly. As a new player I have no such luxury; every skill I earn is based on time-consuming trial and error which sets me well behind those of a similar playing time.

No one needs a skill boost from the start. If you've been playing the game for ten years then you already know enough to turn your guy into the King of the Known without needing a little skill boost to help you along. Meanwhile, spare a thought for the newbies who are going to get left in the damned dust. Because mark my words, that will happen.

Your example, devilboy, demonstrates clearly why it's a -bad- idea to start with more experience.

You, as a player, don't know enough about the game, the ins and outs of things, to understand the significance of what you want your character to do at any given moment. You, the player, are in a learning phase. We all are, but you as a newcomer in particular, because you're still learning the syntax of -basic- stuff, while others who've been around awhile are learning more complex things.

If your character shows up already knowing Advanced This, Advanced That, and Advanced The Other Thing, how will YOU, the player, know how to use it? I"m not talking about the syntax. I'm talking about the context.

If you have never played a magicker before..and show up with your spells halfway to branching, and have had no opportunity to learn how the magick system works before this character, how will you know how to DEAL with those branched skills, once you get them? You'll be getting them FAST..so you now have 2 RL days to figure it out, instead of the 10 days most other new players have (for example, it's hypothetical, it's not an accourate number). New players NEED time to learn stuff.

Veteran players already know stuff and can react accordingly, because they have spent the time learning all the stuff that you don't know yet.

I agree with that. Sometimes I think (could never happen but..) it would be cool if all new players had to start at < 18 yrs old to indicate they were young an inexperienced. And if you survived to 30, you would be grizzled and hardened, but it would be real game time that made that.

That's why I REALLY like that other RPI's "karma" system.. You have "roles" like these:

Role Title:   Budding Warrior
Point of Contact:   Some Staff
Date Posted:   Tue Jul 20 19:33:07 2006
Karma Point Requirement:   2 karma

Your character is no bumbling novice with a blade; they know their weapons from surviving using them. And so, with a few weapons tucked in to their belt, they have wandered off towards their chosen part of the gameworld, where rumours of work for the unafraid warriors abound in the land they come from. Your character can be of any race, and will start with bonuses to three weapons skills of your choosing (including ranged weapons), slight bonuses to defensive skills and combat styles you pick. Your character will also start with 2 free weapons, or a weapon and shield, of above-average quality.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Role Title:   Budding Crafter
Point of Contact:   Some other Staff
Date Posted:   Tue Jul 11 19:33:22 2006
Karma Point Requirement:   3 karma

Starting anywhere in the gameworld, your character is no skillless peon; they have received at some point in their lives some formal training regarding the production of goods and objects. You will start with no boosts to skills, but two extra crafting skills of your choice and extra coin to help you out.

I like the idea of something along those lines more, Malken.

To refer to what Lizzie and jmor said: I play my first character as inexperienced because I'm inexperienced, and it would be totally incongruous (not to mention immersion-ruining) to me if I could claim to be a master with swords only hours after learning the syntax for fighting. Obviously some 'new' players aren't really that new at all, but this is my first MUD: life is hard and playing an inexperienced rookie is the only way to ensure I learn things. On the other side of this, those who have been playing for years have the benefit of experience when they decide they're going to play some anti-social badass, because they have the knowledge required to make that character a true badass long before I do.

I can understand that when someone has played for ten years they're not too keen on the early grind, but life's hard enough for newbies on Zal without making those with experience codedly better than them.

Another slight aside: the early grind makes players (experienced and new) stay in the Gaj for a while as they find a place for themselves in the world. This can lead to newbies chatting with more experienced gamers and thus learning and having fun. However, if every player of a certain karma level instantly gets experience then they can just head out into the wilds and circumvent the whole newbie-grooming thing.

I know some players will go out of their way to help a newbie, but from personal experience I've found as my character's angle has become more defined I've had a lot less time to chat to others in bars. I imagine this will only become more true as I get older and more advanced. In short, we don't need to speed up this process anymore than we already have, unless we want to run the risk of possessing a stagnating player base.

Good god, but I hate the SoI RPP system and it's "roles" -- it's one of the things that makes me not want to play there. I don't think a system would integrate well with Armageddon, as SoI -heavily- encourages your character to get clanned (AKA, as a newbie, playing a character that doesn't immediately join one is walking barefoot up a steep mountain, as armor, weapons, and crafting supplies/materials aren't going to drop in your lap, and you just CAN'T afford them with your newbie money).

But anyway, I don't think karma players need any particular advantage over a newbie when making a fresh new character. Just my personal opinion -- I've never felt the need to "grind" up my character.

Why do you hate it?

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 16, 2010, 06:16:59 AM
Why do you hate it?

Yea...+1 why? It's pretty much the sponsored role system here. Replace Experienced Warrior with "Byn Sargeant" needed. (I'd hope new Sarges are pumped a bit skill wise - if not doing so might help with fairly awful FNGBMR (F@cking New Guy Bynner Mortality Rate).

Quote from: jhunter on March 25, 2010, 02:28:11 AM
Yes, but only on the basis of karma level. Karma represents a player's trust to roleplay properly and with realism. Those players are trusted to follow the rules and guidlines of the game and trusted not to abuse the code. This is the only way that I feel it is acceptable.

I vote "yes", but based off of karma, as well.

EDIT: My apologies, I misread the context of the question. I'll put in an actual post that doesn't read "blargh SOI" when I'm not playing Arm.

blargh soi

I am pretty against the idea of a similar system for Arm, though.

Seems all your problems are inherent to SOI. Is it really hard to imagine staff calling for roles like they are now for Bynners and house members, only making it a little more tailored to flavoring the gameworld more, and providing clan leadership less?

WWYD, please analyze the idea as it is, and not related to SOI. Forget SOI when you analyze that idea.

I didn't mention the mud because I didn't want people to have that damn, "If it belongs to another RPI, it's crap." mentality that we often get here.

So, just ponder that idea as if it wasn't from any other mud out there..

(I've noticed that many people here are quick to shoot down an idea from another mud, but when Morgenes codes it up here, it suddenly becomes gold and the greatest thing ever.)

Quote from: Malken on April 16, 2010, 03:11:29 PM
WWYD, please analyze the idea as it is, and not related to SOI. Forget SOI when you analyze that idea.

I didn't mention the mud because I didn't want people to have that damn, "If it belongs to another RPI, it's crap." mentality that we often get here.

So, just ponder that idea as if it wasn't from any other mud out there..

(I've noticed that many people here are quick to shoot down an idea from another mud, but when Morgenes codes it up here, it suddenly becomes gold and the greatest thing ever.)

Can someone explain the RPP system to me?

I've never played SoI. >_>

Quote from: Qzzrbl on April 16, 2010, 03:34:57 PM

Quote from: Malken on April 16, 2010, 03:11:29 PM
WWYD, please analyze the idea as it is, and not related to SOI. Forget SOI when you analyze that idea.

I didn't mention the mud because I didn't want people to have that damn, "If it belongs to another RPI, it's crap." mentality that we often get here.

So, just ponder that idea as if it wasn't from any other mud out there..

(I've noticed that many people here are quick to shoot down an idea from another mud, but when Morgenes codes it up here, it suddenly becomes gold and the greatest thing ever.)

Can someone explain the RPP system to me?

I've never played SoI. >_>

Gah, no, why, the whole point isn't SOI, grrr, it's the idea I wrote about!

GG WWYD

I'm kind of against the RPP system, but I do like the idea of having the choice between more skills, or better starting levels.  Atonement, a recent RPI upstart, does this.

The problem is, it doesn't work with a class-based system.

I changed my vote to: Only via special application.

Think one thing I like about this mud is that you can not become uber out the box.
I've seen muds where if you pick 4 skills, can get uber out the box, and its lame.

"0day 0hour dude just beat 40day warrior... wat?"

Quote from: BlackMagic0 on April 16, 2010, 03:48:18 PM
I changed my vote to: Only via special application.

Think one thing I like about this mud is that you can not become uber out the box.
I've seen muds where if you pick 4 skills, can get uber out the box, and its lame.

"0day 0hour dude just beat 40day warrior... wat?"

I doubt that would happen.  40 days is plenty of time to adequately develop combat skills for a warrior.  And, in my experience, you don't start "uber", but more at the high end of average.  All this does is give the player a choice between starting as  a "specialist" and starting as someone with a broader arsenal of undeveloped skills.

Again though, it's a moot point, because Arm doesn't have the infrastructure to support a system like this.

I still say no. One the appeals to me is you gotta work your characters up.
Challenge. One reason I tend to make my characters younger, so makes sense.

And its how it happened on another mud. Simply saying. I don't want that.


If you want to start experienced, special app it. They tend to get accepted easy, the boost characters. Since its not much at all!

I actually had a spec-app denied for "trying to circumvent the grind". Just for reference. Something about how the system is in place to lend reality to a character, not to get passed the stressful early days. Which is why something like this probably wont ever go in.

Quote from: Qzzrbl on April 16, 2010, 03:34:57 PM
Can someone explain the RPP system to me?

I've never played SoI. >_>

I've never played SoI either, but I remember RPP being explained on their site.  It's spendable karma, essentially.  You earn brownie points, and then spend them to take roles, unstore characters, and boost stats on existing long-lived characters (with qualifications on each activity.) 
....

Quote from: BlackMagic0One the appeals to me is you gotta work your characters up.
Challenge.

It would be fine if it were a challenge.  It's not. It's time consuming, and only a challenge to one's patience and available time-to-play.  The scarcity of patience and time-to-play should preclude someone from fully participating in Armageddon?  Maybe, but be aware that philosophy costs something -- active participants.  Might be a fair trade for the atmosphere desired; there's plenty of other aspects of Arm that would seem to cost active participants (such as the ban on OOC information trading), but are actually essential to the character of the game.

Quote from: RogueGunslinger on April 16, 2010, 04:23:44 PMI actually had a spec-app denied for "trying to circumvent the grind". Just for reference. Something about how the system is in place to lend reality to a character, not to get passed the stressful early days. Which is why something like this probably wont ever go in.

If all you're trying to do is avoid the grind, I understand this.  If you can give a good reason why your character and the world would be a better place if you avoided the grind, they may let it through.  That's effectively what it is happening for sponsored roles, like the example given of the Byn Sarge.

Just going to say, the votes still strongly favor no change.

I wouldn't say strongly but it does appear to favor it. Which doesn't really mean much since people can just log into their many accounts and vote in favor of their opinion multiple times to skew the results and make it appear as if things lean more one way than they actually do. Because of this, polls on this board are totally unreliable.

Well, the "no change" option is inaccurate, since you can't special app. -only- for higher skills.

Sponsored roles != special apps.

So really, all those votes should be in the "yes, but..." column.

Or the no never.

Quote from: Kryos on April 17, 2010, 09:29:00 PM
Or the no never.

If they said yes to, "by special app only," that kind of excludes "no, never" by definition.

Quote from: Synthesis on April 17, 2010, 09:49:23 PM

Quote from: Kryos on April 17, 2010, 09:29:00 PM
Or the no never.

If they said yes to, "by special app only," that kind of excludes "no, never" by definition.

The important part I think would be the "as it is now."

WTF kind of option is "I like to vote in polls"?  If you have no decision on the issue at hand, then don't vote.

I play this game less because I have to grind to get good with skills.  I don't always want to start out a newb.

What if mundane characters were able to forgo a sub guild choice, and simply select an "Experienced" sub guild instead.

Choosing the "Experienced" sub guild would provide that character with varying boosts to their skills that would help eliminate a portion of the grind many people dislike and make them feel a little more productive.  They would have to forgo the ability to customize their character with the extra languages or non-guild skills/crafts provided by the regular sub guilds, but would have the ability to begin their characters at a slightly higher skill level.

If everyone had the same ability, and that ability didn't grossly unbalance the relationship between the two starting characters, it might go a decent ways toward bridging the gap and offer a compromise to people that want an option to start their characters with a little more experience.

-LoD

Already been suggested, probably within the first 2 pages.

Someone else had suggested the same and I think it's about the best idea regarding this matter overall. You have to give up something to cut down on the early grind. I could see myself using it some of the time but not -all- of the time since some of my concepts would -require- a subguild. Sure, it would probably actually be better as far as the learning curve for new players, but for those that have done it a hundred times or so, it would be nice to use sometimes.

Why, exactly are we looking at this like "grind."  It's not like we have to be a certain level to commence roleplay.  The whole "grind" contributes (and often is) the entirety of the character's story/life.

At what point did the game become about hitting caps in our guilds?

What happened to creating a personality, to experiencing the world? 

Am I a lone voice crying out in the wilderness?  (cue violin music)   ???

Quote from: Sinna on April 19, 2010, 03:31:29 PM
(cue violin music)

At the lowest skill levels, everything can kill you and you are useful to no one.  Some folks find this endlessly enjoyable; others don't.

Don't do things alone.  Create a story.  Is this RPI or what?

I'm just going to have to agree with Sinna.

Sure, there have been times I think I should be able to start out with maxed skills just so I can get right into the game at a certain point, but then I realize that is what sponsered roles are for.

Besides, I don't notice any grind...if you RP your PC you will find they will have reasons to use skills as part of that RP and then there is no grind.

Gentlemen, you're making a compelling argument for the renerfing of starting contact.

Sinna and X-D make the best points. For me, I've never noticed the 'grind' get in the way. I actually find the initial few days quite exciting... However, I've only had 12 PCs in about six or seven years, so maybe it's because it's quite novel for me.