Goblin Squad Member
|
A basic comparison of a capped system versus an uncapped system.
System One: Uncapped
There are a few ways this could go so it is the harder of the two systems to speculate on but I shall try based on some posts in the thread.
As per the blog:
"...you usually begin at "first level" in that class with some basic abilities (racial traits, class features, skills, and feats), a limited capacity to resist certain effects (Fortitude, Reflex, and Will saving throws), a few hit points that represent the amount of damage a character can withstand, some basic starting equipment, and a little bit of money. If you've chosen a spellcasting class, you'll also have access to low-level magic spells."
Of these things we have some that will be a one time number such as racial traits.
The remaining are things that can increase in number when achieving a "level up" such as class features, skills, feats, resistances, hit points, and magic spells.
It has already been stated that you will, given enough time, be able to attain "level" 20 in each and every class. This is where the deciding factor is unknown as to how these increases work in conjunction with each other.
As an example, let us say the system allows for certain things to stack (even if it is at a reduced multiple for the preceding same type bonus.) While it has been stated that it is expected for a player to take 2.5 years to reach "level" 20 in one class the number is not known for other levels prior to that point. An assumption can be made that the lower levels will take far less time than the upper range. For this example we will say that level progression is as follows.
2.5 years = 912.5 days but for ease of numbers I will go with exactly 866 days.
1-2: 1 day
2-3: 5 days
3-4: 10 days
4-5: 15 days
5-6: 20 days
6-7: 25 days
7-8: 30 days
8-9: 35 days
9-10: 40 days
10-11: 45 days
11-12: 50 days
12-13: 55 days
13-14: 60 days
14-15: 65 days
15-16: 70 days
16-17: 75 days
17-18: 80 days
18-19: 85 days
19-20: 100 days
1-5: 31 days
5-10: 150 days (181)
10-15: 275 days (456)
15-20: 410 days (866)
Now with stacking for each "level" we can see that even if Player 1 only goes up to level 5 in all 11 classes (in essence a total of 55 "levels")it would take them a total of supposedly 341 days, which would be equal to Player B reaching "level" 16 in a single class. If stacking in some form exists, there is a chance that even if they are on paper a max of "level" 5 in any single class, that they could in fact game the system and be somehow far more powerful than even a locked 5/5/5/5 multiclass (see System Two) would ever be due to those extra 5/5/5/5/5 class levels and corresponding number increases. Even if just feats, for example, from every "level" which provides one were in effect all at once we can clearly see that Player A would have far more than Player B. That doesn't even take into account all the other "resources" 55 levels worth of gains would be compared to 16 levels worth if stacking is in effect.
System Two: Capped
As per my previous post about having a 20 "level" locked system, a situation like above can be avoided while no one is restricted to the class combos they wish to have. They can only ever use the benefits gained from a total of 20 of them at one time is the limit from a balancing viewpoint. The playing field at the "end game" content would only ever need to be based on a 20 "level" assumption as opposed to trying to somehow sort out anything over that number.
-----------
For a dev team, it is easier in the long term to balance most game systems with a capped system as I have stated in the previous post.
The thing that makes most fantasy characters notable is usually their limitations as well as their exceptional abilities. There is a line between reasonable and ridiculous though.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Why do you assume that racial traits will be constant, instead of scaling? Something like a 10% increase in weight/bulk carrying capacity, instead of +2 strength, or that are only numbers in the computer science sense, like low-light vision or a climb speed?
A balanced system isn't one that ensures that all characters of a given 'tier' are roughly equal. A balanced system is one that ensures that any given character can be defeated by some character with a significantly lower overall power, and that any given character can defeat some character that has a higher overall power.
In other words, there are advantages and disadvantages to each character. Learning to use the advantages and compensate for the weaknesses IS the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I only lumped racial traits like that due to the wording in the article as far as what increases are given on a "level up". The overall concepts I post are just that, concepts since nothing is written in stone yet. Right now, until more info comes out or Ryan replies with more information on the various subjects, it is all speculation. I am mostly trying to point out what I see as the benefit of a "level" capped system as it relates to overall "end game" balance as opposed to a viewpoint of an endless stacking system due to no "level" cap. Until we all know which way the system goes in this regard, it is all just speculation anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I am going against a team of 5-20 others in say a battle ground I know we are about an even match, in open world PvP the same is usually in place for the most part.
This doesn't make sense to me. How can you claim to have "about an even match" in open world PvP where the system isn't putting roughly the same number of players on both sides?
I'm really not arguing that their should be God characters in-game. It's been said we'll be roughly equivalent to level 6-10 in the tabletop RPG. I'm fine with that.
What I'm arguing against is the mindset that there has to be a perfect balance. That mindset is too prejudiced, and ends up throwing out very, very good RP things because it *might* not be balanced perfectly.
All I'm arguing is for the onus to be on the other side. Allow RP things (like Necromancers raising an army of undead minions), unless there is a very, very compelling reason that can't be done. And that it would be unbalanced in 1v1 is not even remotely a compelling reason to me.
Ultimately, the player with the most resources is going to have a very significant advantage over other players. Nobody (I hope!) is arguing that we should cap gold so that everyone has roughly 100 gold pieces all the time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Once you reach level 20 Fighter, I seriously doubt the only advancement avenue left open to you will be to start leveling another Archetype.THIS!
I highly doubt we will see 20/20's anywhere!
Class skills (aka Merit badges) are simply not the only ways to enhance your character but simply a way to specialise in a distinct way.
So two 20 Fighters may be very different because they trained different skills but they both have basically the same "special Fighter skills" on top and no chance to get any "special Wizard skills" which might NOT mean that a 20 Fighter can never cast spells.
IF it adds significantly to the characters power, it will be the first thing that the MAJORITY of players do.
IF NOT...and it really does boil down to more flavor, not more power, then I believe you are correct.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
more stuff...So what? Name an MMO nowadays where you get to start at the level cap, or the characters are all equal in power. I'll wait.
This is a level of QQ that is mind boggling.IMHO, of course.
It's not about where you START it's about where you END UP.
Name me an MMO these days that doesn't have a Level Cap or skill or Ability Cap?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I am going against a team of 5-20 others in say a battle ground I know we are about an even match, in open world PvP the same is usually in place for the most part.This doesn't make sense to me. How can you claim to have "about an even match" in open world PvP where the system isn't putting roughly the same number of players on both sides?
I'm really not arguing that their should be God characters in-game. It's been said we'll be roughly equivalent to level 6-10 in the tabletop RPG. I'm fine with that.
What I'm arguing against is the mindset that there has to be a perfect balance. That mindset is too prejudiced, and ends up throwing out very, very good RP things because it *might* not be balanced perfectly.
All I'm arguing is for the onus to be on the other side. Allow RP things (like Necromancers raising an army of undead minions), unless there is a very, very compelling reason that can't be done. And that it would be unbalanced in 1v1 is not even remotely a compelling reason to me.
Ultimately, the player with the most resources is going to have a very significant advantage over other players. Nobody (I hope!) is arguing that we should cap gold so that everyone has roughly 100 gold pieces all the time.
Nihimon,
I don't think anyone is arguing for "perfect balance" or that it's unreasonable for people who really put in the time/effort into advancement shouldn't see some small advantage in raw combat capability over the core of the "end game player base". That's fine as an effect.
What people are concerned about is that with open-ended advancement one has to be really carefull about the mechanisms in place to handle how such advancement scales...or you DO end up with the God vs Peon scenario...even though you didn't intend to do so. Developers, routienely underestimate how thier systems scale over time.
I'll give you one example. I played an MMO for many years, run by a VERY experienced Development house. For many years, it had a level cap (I believe it was 50) and everything was fine. One day the Developer decided to make some changes to the system and one of them included removing the level cap. Since at 50, each level involved a very significant investment in experience points to increase (and I think there was even an diminishing return mechanic in place where each level had an increase in exp required over the next)....they anticipated there wouldn't be much of an issue if there were a few levels of difference between players at the top of the advancement curve and the core of the rest of thier long term players. They were absolutely right...INITIALY.... a few levels difference was no big deal...and everyone accepted it. What they didn't anticipate is the degree to which a very, very small fraction of the player base were willing to grind in order to gain levels over time. A system that worked perfectly fine when there were maybe 5 levels of difference between the core long term player base and the top end of the curve a couple years later was seeing a 250+ level difference between those groups. The mechanism completely broke over that scale...because the Developers had never anticipated that it would get there.
The game wasn't really a PvP focused game...but quite literaly if one of the dozen or two players that had ground thier way to the top of the curve happaned to be on...they could EASLY have defeated the entire rest of the server population that was on COMBINED.... including players that had been playing thier characters for 10+ years on a regular basis (but weren't doing the 80+ hrs per week power grinding that the very small fraction were able to put in). It completely broke the game.
It's definately not the case that I'm trying to insist on perfect balance.... that's probably a futile goal to chase in a game like this anyway.... but as someone that has had first hand experience of open-ended advancement systems and how they can break games. I definately want to see that the designers at Goblinworks are aware of such issues....and I want to see the details of the mechanisms that they put in place to deal with those sort of power scaling issues to understand that it won't end up breaking PFO as well.
The Level/Ability/Skill cap is a very simple and effective mechanism that we know can work to deal with those issues of scale. If they aren't doing that...the design starts to get alot trickier...and I really want them to think about the details of the mechanisms that they are going to put in place to handle those sort of problems.
Now, when they are starting to work out the details of those designs, is (IMO) the perfect time to make sure they have awareness of those issues.... because they get ALOT harder to fix once the core design has been settled....and you start having other systems dependent upon that design working in a certain way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't think there's any danger of PFO developers not being aware of the dangers in an open progression system.
I think there is a very real danger that they'll do what every other MMO has done and create, in effect, a Talent Tree that's got a hard cap of what I can do "right now", and that I can't quickly change.
I hope they don't do that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't think there's any danger of PFO developers not being aware of the dangers in an open progression system.
I think there is a very real danger that they'll do what every other MMO has done and create, in effect, a Talent Tree that's got a hard cap of what I can do "right now", and that I can't quickly change.
I hope they don't do that.
Games (not just MMO's) do that for a VERY good reason..... it actualy puts some MEANING behind the choices the player makes in character building and advancement.
Without that, there is pretty much no point in having a character building or advancement system and every player should just be given every ability from day one...and no differences between character "class" or "archtype".
You'll note that even FPS style games with NO ADVANCEMENT or persistence don't tend to do what you propose. Generaly in those games, the abilities/type are based upon the "Kit" the player is running at the moment...and you typicaly have to do something significant (like RESPAWN or goto a specific control point on the map) in order to switch Kits.
Without that...there is very little point in having a "Bazooka" equiped as opposed to a "Sniper Rifle"... and you might as well have the generic "Best attack for EVERY situation" ability vs "Best defence for EVERY situation" ability.... and I suppose it's a contest of who can click thier button the fastest.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This doesn't make sense to me. How can you claim to have "about an even match" in open world PvP where the system isn't putting roughly the same number of players on both sides?
That is an issue in itself though which usually more of an issue in games with predetermined sides. An example of this would be how mega guilds affected Warhammer Online. This in part is avoided in PFO, at least to the point of not having "cool sides" to initially join and be locked into. Player Guild/NPC Faction allegiance have their own issues also depending on how the interactions between others of each kind are implemented.
I'm really not arguing that their should be God characters in-game. It's been said we'll be roughly equivalent to level 6-10 in the tabletop RPG. I'm fine with that.
There have been posts, not necessarily by yourself, that concern how stats will effect a character though which from my stance could lead to an issue. As for comparing PFO "level" feel to the table game is concerned, that is something we can not really compare as they should stand on their own merits in all but flavor of the games in both flavor and character.
What I'm arguing against is the mindset that there has to be a perfect balance. That mindset is too prejudiced, and ends up throwing out very, very good RP things because it *might* not be balanced perfectly.
All I'm arguing is for the onus to be on the other side. Allow RP things (like Necromancers raising an army of undead minions), unless there is a very, very compelling reason that can't be done. And that it would be unbalanced in 1v1 is not even remotely a compelling reason to me.
I disagree with this for the simple reason that character mechanics in an mmorpg should not impress upon the roleplaying options a player can choose to follow up on. It is a PvP based game which has to include balance on various levels or it runs the risk of being shot down by a certain player base for that reason. As for pet classes, depending on the implementation of the power of the owner and pet, you can end up with varied degrees of power when compared to a non-pet class. On one side is that the owner/pet combo acts just like 2 players, and the other side is that they are equal to 1 player when combined. Usually the latter is rarely seen to be the choice most companies make.
Ultima Online for example gave all players the choice of the same skills at the same number cap. That did not stop us from roleplaying orcs (most notably Shadowclan), undead, picts, knights, pirates, etc. The only thing that limited that was the options we had in the usable item department. You would be surprised at what some people pulled off with those limited options even if they were not supported by the base game. Something that has seen all but disappeared in games to even come close to matching such a grand roleplaying environment.
Ultimately, the player with the most resources is going to have a very significant advantage over other players. Nobody (I hope!) is arguing that we should cap gold so that everyone has roughly 100 gold pieces all the time.
Another issue that arises here is that it is once again an mmorpg and a sandbox designed one at that. Individual and group power has many factors beyond just basic resource ownership. Surely it never hurts but I have seen the "have" types easily become the "have not" types when a smaller group of opposing players defeated them due to player skill alone within various "balanced" character system games.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon, what you seem to want is a system that allows uniqueness to exist.
The only limits here are how expansive or limiting the options in Skills and Merit Badges is set at.
As an example we will just go with the following.
Merit Badges:
1: Kill x NPCs (of equal difficulty) with skill y. - This could be a great place to allow for many options and bonuses against specific enemy types within the world.
2: Parry/Dodge x times against NPCs (equal difficulty) - This could allow for a lower general defense ability that relates to the specific base system used to open the badge or for a higher specific defense ability against a specific NPC type which increases the options manyfold.
3: Resist x effects (poison/fire/cold/negative energy/etc.) x times (equal difficulty NPC) - These each could have their own entry to spread the diversity out. This would help avoid flavor of the month situations when it comes to spell casting in the game.
This is only 3 examples of how merit badges could be used to create diversity within a class as compared to others of that same class. Under my "20 level cap" concept this would give multiclass players more options of specialization.
Example of this would be the following types that decide to lock in the following class levels which would limit them to having the active merit badges associated with what they picked when they had the choice.
Sorcerer 10/ Wizard 10 A: Pyromancer style caster and pursues the merit badges that improve fire offense/fire defense options from both classes.
Sorcerer 10/ Wizard 10 B: Goes fire/ice by pursuing sorcerer merit badges that effect ice offense/fire defense and wizard merit badges that effect fire offense/ice defense.
Sorcerer 10/ Wizard 10 C: Goes fire/ice by pursuing sorcerer merit badges that effect fire offense/ice defense and wizard merit badges that effect ice offense/fire defense.
Sorcerer 7/Wizard 7/Cleric 6: Pursues fire on sorcerer and wizard with healing options for cleric.
With this template style system of "locking 20 levels at one time" in place it sets the upper bar for balance in many aspects of not only PvP but in the world design as a whole such as NPC design, Notable Site difficulty and so on. At the same time is does not remove the ability to be unique. Under this system as I have pointed out before you would be able to mix and match as you wish based on what class "levels" you have earned or are currently working toward. How often you could change your template though is for the designers to decide.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nihimon, what you seem to want is a system that allows uniqueness to exist.
As you adventure, you accumulate experience points (XP), and at various thresholds, your character "levels up," getting better at specific skills, gaining new abilities, better resistances, more hit points, and—for spellcasters—access to more powerful spells. Every few levels, you're able to increase your basic abilities as well. Each level that you gain in your chosen class provides a somewhat predetermined package of improvements. You always have some choices to make, but for the most part your character's development in a particular class is structured by the game design itself.
The italicized portion is what Ryan Dancey said PFO would not be.
In the blog, he also says that we'll be able to train many skills in other archetypes, or general skills that aren't in any particular archetype's tree.
I don't know what some of you think I'm asking for, so I'll try to state it as clearly as I can: Please don't make us have to choose which set of skills we have "equipped". If my character knows how to use a shield effectively, and he also knows how to fight with a two-handed sword, I should be able to switch between the two without having to go back to a trainer or whatever to change my spec. Expand that to *all* skills, and you'll understand what I'm asking for.
What I'm decidedly not asking for is the ability to sneak or cast spells in plate mail. In fact, I really hope I can't swim in plate mail...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon, what you seem to want is a system that allows uniqueness to exist.
As you adventure, you accumulate experience points (XP), and at various thresholds, your character "levels up," getting better at specific skills, gaining new abilities, better resistances, more hit points, and—for spellcasters—access to more powerful spells. Every few levels, you're able to increase your basic abilities as well. Each level that you gain in your chosen class provides a somewhat predetermined package of improvements. You always have some choices to make, but for the most part your character's development in a particular class is structured by the game design itself.
The italicized portion is what Ryan Dancey said PFO would not be.
In the blog, he also says that we'll be able to train many skills in other archetypes, or general skills that aren't in any particular archetype's tree.
I don't know what some of you think I'm asking for, so I'll try to state it as clearly as I can: Please don't make us have to choose which set of skills we have "equipped". If my character knows how to use a shield effectively, and he also knows how to fight with a two-handed sword, I should be able to switch between the two without having to go back to a trainer or whatever to change my spec. Expand that to *all* skills, and you'll understand what I'm asking for.
What I'm decidedly not asking for is the ability to sneak or cast spells in plate mail. In fact, I really hope I can't swim in plate mail...
For the most part I agree with you, I do think to some extent some attacks etc... may also need to be covered by weapon even where the game normally would not discriminate, mainly because a few different things would just be too broken to stack, like say a smite evil on your favored enemy mixed with sneak attack, would be broken as heck, and the easiest way I could see to combat that, would most likely be weapon requirements for SOME skills. I am not saying that a wizard/rogue should not be able to sneak, but possibly require the wizard to swap between a staff or spellbook and a dagger to be able to cast spells and sneak attack. As well I think there should be a limit to equipment hot baring, and possibly a retrieval time for weapons not set as easily accessible.
Lets say we permit 2 weapons to be your ready weapons. IE they are on your belt and you can switch from one to the other in about a second. Any weapons that are not on your belt are in your haversack/bag of holding, and may take 30 seconds to 1 minute to retrieve. Enough time that you can switch mid battle (as in say a war if you sneak to the back lines), but not fast enough that when you suddenly realize the guy attacking you would be weak to X (X being an item in your bag) you can reliably switch to X while he is casting/charging at you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... mainly because a few different things would just be too broken to stack ...
I agree. If I remember correctly, D&D had a pretty simple way to deal with this. If you had multiple +X bonuses, only the largest actually had effect. So if you had a ring of +1 Intelligence and a necklace of +2 intelligence, you had +2 intelligence.
Lets say we permit 2 weapons to be your ready weapons...
This makes me think of the battle scene in Excalibur when Lancelot and Arthur first meet and fight each other. Lancelot takes several opportunities to saunter back to his horse and pull out a different weapon. I'd like to be able to do something like that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't know what some of you think I'm asking for, so I'll try to state it as clearly as I can: Please don't make us have to choose which set of skills we have "equipped". If my character knows how to use a shield effectively, and he also knows how to fight with a two-handed sword, I should be able to switch between the two without having to go back to a trainer or whatever to change my spec. Expand that to *all* skills, and you'll understand what I'm asking for.
What I'm decidedly not asking for is the ability to sneak or cast spells in plate mail. In fact, I really hope I can't swim in plate mail...
I understand what you are asking for but I feel that essentially removes the purpose of classes at all and is more along the Ultima Online system. If that is the case, why even have classes listed at all and just make one large tree of skills and associated merit badges? While I enjoyed the heck out of that I expect certain things with a d20 based game representation, class differentiation is core to that for me. A main thing is where are the lines drawn between tabletop and PC versions. Checks and balances are used on the basic level in mostly any "game" unless the goal is to portray absurdity itself. While I appreciate the want of being a unique snowflake in an mmorpg, the game itself is based on a tradition of limited quantities in various areas, 20 levels maximum, no matter the combo, is currently one such thing in Pathfinder. To not have a similar system like that makes it feel like another game altogether, not only in design but in spirit as well which is truly the thing that counts most.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bah, I had a well-written (IMO) response to this ready to go, but the site went down. I'll try to rebuild it.
... why even have classes listed at all...
I see it exactly the opposite. If it's all going to get boiled down to a static number of Talent Points or whatever that I'm allowed to distribute, why even bother leveling? Why have a persistent character in a persistent world, if that character doesn't grow?
Onishi reminded me in another thread that Attributes will have a significant impact on our characters, so that the character who tries to be the best Wizard will maximize Intelligence, while the character who tries to be the best Fighter will maximize Strength, and the character who wants to be good at both will have to compromise between Strength and Intelligence. That will ensure that the character who specializes in being the best Wizard will be a better Wizard than one who also tries to be a good Fighter. Do we really need to include a hackneyed, arbitrary Talent Tree capping system on top of that?
My middle name is "beating a dead horse", but even I don't want to rehash this tired argument all over again.
I don't know how else to say it than that I want to be able to do the kinds of things a "normal" character in a "normal" fantasy novel would reasonably be able to do. If I spend the time to learn to Smith some iron greaves, and Tailor a cloak, and Brew a heady stout, why should the system even think about requiring that I only "equip" one of those skills at a time? Or choose between one of those skills and being able to use a shield effectively? It just seems silly to me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I see it exactly the opposite. If it's all going to get boiled down to a static number of Talent Points or whatever that I'm allowed to distribute, why even bother leveling? Why have a persistent character in a persistent world, if that character doesn't grow?
My proposed system is not restricting you from learning anything new. It just puts a limit on what you actively know at any one time to 20 levels of knowledge. Otherwise everyone becomes the same given enough time since they have no reason to "label" themselves as a specific thing, be it single or multiclass. One of the key aspects of sandbox games is having a wide cross-section of specialties both in the combat and profession arenas. If you remove that aspect, you in turn remove many things that rely on interdependency of the player base. I really can't think of much more than the old standby, you can't have your cake and eat it too, no matter how much we want to. Limitations are put into games not to stifle players but because they are an inherent evil of the design process.
Onishi reminded me in another thread that Attributes will have a significant impact on our characters, so that the character who tries to be the best Wizard will maximize Intelligence, while the character who tries to be the best Fighter will maximize Strength, and the character who wants to be good at both will have to compromise between Strength and Intelligence. That will ensure that the character who specializes in being the best Wizard will be a better Wizard than one who also tries to be a good Fighter. Do we really need to include a hackneyed, arbitrary Talent Tree capping system on top of that?
Attributes: These correspond to the classic six abilities of the tabletop game (although we may rename one or two just for the sake of clarity given the way they'll work in the online game). In Pathfinder Online, these attributes have two aspects: The first is that they determine how long it takes to train a skill that uses that attribute as a base. The higher the attribute score, the faster your character can train those kinds of skills. The second is that they determine how effective the character is at resisting certain types of effects. Instead of the tabletop game's three saving throws, in Pathfinder Online there's a resistance bonus or penalty associated with each of the six attributes.
Attributes will let a player focused on "leveling" as a wizard a way to speed that up as opposed to someone that wants to do a more jack of all trades leveling method. The time disparity between the 2 options though is unknown so we are unable to go further there.
-----
Until someone, Ryan most likely, comes along and answers some of the questions not presented in the skeleton that is the current character design process we can only speculate and weigh in on how we feel that such a system could be presented in our own minds based off the blog post, previous game designs, and ideas which have never been presented/implemented in the past.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bah, I had a well-written (IMO) response to this ready to go, but the site went down. I'll try to rebuild it.
... why even have classes listed at all...I see it exactly the opposite. If it's all going to get boiled down to a static number of Talent Points or whatever that I'm allowed to distribute, why even bother leveling? Why have a persistent character in a persistent world, if that character doesn't grow?
Onishi reminded me in another thread that Attributes will have a significant impact on our characters, so that the character who tries to be the best Wizard will maximize Intelligence, while the character who tries to be the best Fighter will maximize Strength, and the character who wants to be good at both will have to compromise between Strength and Intelligence. That will ensure that the character who specializes in being the best Wizard will be a better Wizard than one who also tries to be a good Fighter. Do we really need to include a hackneyed, arbitrary Talent Tree capping system on top of that?
My middle name is "beating a dead horse", but even I don't want to rehash this tired argument all over again.
I don't know how else to say it than that I want to be able to do the kinds of things a "normal" character in a "normal" fantasy novel would reasonably be able to do. If I spend the time to learn to Smith some iron greaves, and Tailor a cloak, and Brew a heady stout, why should the system even think about requiring that I only "equip" one of those skills at a time? Or choose between one of those skills and being able to use a shield effectively? It just seems silly to me.
Well lets understand the difference here...being able to pound out a set of Iron Greaves or Tailor a Cloak....is NOT the equivalent of having "20 levels" of Smithing or Tailoring....those tasks are probably the equivalent of Level 1 tasks in each ability.... you could easly do 20 of those different abilities within one character (assuming crafting is even included in any adventuring level limit).
Having "level 20" in something is near the limit of mortal abilities in that field. It's like being able to play the piano like Mozart, play basketball like Michael Jorsdan, Fight like you are on Navy Seal Team 6, paint like Monet.
I'd respectfully submit that no "normal" or even "extraordinary" character from most fantasy novels has "level 20 capabilities" in more then one or perhaps 2 of those areas....not unless you are dealing with real Gods & Goddesses or the novel was purposefully trying to lampoon itself.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I will have to side with GrumpyMel here. If we use fantasy novels as the basis we see that usually most characters fall within a given range of acceptable abilities. Fantasy tropes exist for a reason, the characters exist in a usually fixed point in time and due to the mix of environment/politics/birthright/etc. are limited to what they accomplish given a set amount of time.
As much as everyone wants to be Raistlin/Drizzt/whoever (all of who are limited in knowledge anyway when you tear them down) we need to look at the harsh reality that an mmorpg is not casting those parts for the players really. It is casting the bit players who aren't as exceptional when you look at the grand picture. If all the players were able to reach that status in an mmorpg, are they really powerful or did they just raise the bar on what average is considered to be. At the tabletop you can become those legendary people but you usually have limits based on the rules in effect as to how diversified you can be. The main reason you can achieve it there is that the player size in a campaign is a small minority of the total population.
My template based 20 levels active at one time system has the illusion of a knowledge limit when in actuality it only has a representational limit at any given time. You could still learn every class but to benefit and actively exemplify a class you have to make a choice, even if it requires a cooldown/specific area until you can change the template to portray another persona so to speak.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier to better explain it.
What I do not want to see is an extreme gestalt character system where instead of 2 classes you have up to 11 classes in use. For me it wouldn't feel like Pathfinder, even if their are restrictions placed on what gear you can equip, what abilities are available at the same time, and other effects associated with how all the classes interact with each other. I could imagine the code required in a capped system to limit certain things (armor bonuses/penalties, weapon use, etc.) would be tough enough to implement but with a gestalt system it would practically be a nightmare to code such restrictions by the basis of how 11 classes reflect upon each other in this regard.
This is why I proposed the 20 max levels active template system as it allows you to avoid what would be essentially a gestalt system while still allowing freedom to advance all of the classes on one character if you choose to do so but within reason, mainly game balancing of various systems that rely on the class level system. Under this system it is easier to code in restrictions of the things above to reasonably represent any multiclass combo in the game especially if you limit how many classes can be active under multiclassing situations.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In staying with the flavor of tabletop Pathfinder, but limiting the overall power of even long-time characters, I would assume the capstones would go something like this: if you have 20 'levels' of Fighter, your BAB is maxed at +20, your fort save is maxed at +12, you have feats, ftr bonus feats, armor training, etc. Then you go up in Wizard-the new progrssion can't add to your fort save or BAB because they're maxed; you can however get the will save to +12 eventually, you get spells and a familiar or bonded object, bonus metamagic feats but not normal ones-you've maxed those already. Then (apparently you're really committed to this one guy or gal) you go up in Rogue; you get backstab, evasion, rogue tricks, you can get reflex to +12 but no feats at all that don't mimick Rogue abilities. Probably your hit points or health or whatever has remained what it was when you reached 20th level Fighter (right? as a further limiting mechanic your health can never rise above the max of your highest HD class modified by con at level 20). Of course, as Ryan stated, you'd only receive the special capstone level 20 ability for one class, in this case Fighter. Now we have an extremely powerful, versatile 20/20/20. I have absolutely no problem with this if someone wants to take the time to build such a character rather than work on several different ones. This build would still find it useful to play with a level 20 Cleric or Monk or Bard or whatever. Real world time is the coinage we spend on an MMO. It can be casual or an actual hobby for some people. If you want to do this instead of restoring the '69 Mustang on cinderblocks on your front lawn, fine.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Of course, as Ryan stated, you'd only receive the special capstone level 20 ability for one class
Unless there is something major and new I missed, Ryan stated the exact oposite of that, I'm pretty sure the way he described it was you get a capstone for every archtype that you took all 20 levels in consecutively. In other words if you did go 20 fighter, then went 20 wizard, then went 20 rogue, you would have all 3 capstones, if you went
5 wiz, 5 fighter, 5 rogue, then went back to wizard to get the next 15 levels. you would get no capstones for any of them. Essentially starting an archetype, but not following through with it, permanently voids its capstone.|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Actually, the most recent position I saw was that all capstones were theoretically attainable by the same character. I believe that the total time for that is ~40 years, so nobody will actually get to that point.
Why not extend the equipment limits: Arcane casting is inhibited by heavy armor or heavy weapons, divine casting is inhibited by bladed weapons, nature magic is inhibited by metal, stealth is inhibited by armor, sneak attacks do more damage with finesse weapons...
There's a lot of games theory in deciding what inhibits each class, and what enables each class. In general, only one class should have a given feature as a primary enabler, and there should be no three classes such that none of their primary enablers are among their inhibitors.
If rogues are inhibited by heavy armor, and enabled primarily by light weapons, and wizards are primarily enabled by robes and inhibited by heavy weapons, then every other archetype needs to:
A: be inhibited by robes or light weapons
B: be enabled by heavy armor or heavy weapons
With 11 archetypes, that's a minimum of 11 unique equipment features; If everyone is inhibited by two different features, there are 33 viable dual-class combinations if the factors are distributed perfectly. (6 for each class, each dual-class has 2 classes) If each class is inhibited by thee features, then there are 22.
Either way, the second weekend after release, I'm going to spend a day crunching numbers and making interesting discoveries. Monk/wizard, rogue/wizard, and monk/druid spring to mind.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I don't think there's any danger of PFO developers not being aware of the dangers in an open progression system.
I think there is a very real danger that they'll do what every other MMO has done and create, in effect, a Talent Tree that's got a hard cap of what I can do "right now", and that I can't quickly change.
I hope they don't do that.
Games (not just MMO's) do that for a VERY good reason..... it actualy puts some MEANING behind the choices the player makes in character building and advancement.
Without that, there is pretty much no point in having a character building or advancement system and every player should just be given every ability from day one...and no differences between character "class" or "archtype".
You'll note that even FPS style games with NO ADVANCEMENT or persistence don't tend to do what you propose. Generaly in those games, the abilities/type are based upon the "Kit" the player is running at the moment...and you typicaly have to do something significant (like RESPAWN or goto a specific control point on the map) in order to switch Kits.
Without that...there is very little point in having a "Bazooka" equiped as opposed to a "Sniper Rifle"... and you might as well have the generic "Best attack for EVERY situation" ability vs "Best defence for EVERY situation" ability.... and I suppose it's a contest of who can click thier button the fastest.
Wait, why is the consequence of not being limited to the number of abilities you have the absence of situational abilities? If there is a 'best attack for every situation' power, why wouldn't I just take that tree and use only that power- all the other powers are worse! There's no reason to have a 'win' spell at all, and having all the spells on your spell list doesn't mean a 'win' spell exists. It does mean that you don't have a dagger (forbidden to clerics) or armor (forbidden to wizards), so the magic-resistant barbarian is going to hit your head so hard it flies off in three different directions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Of course, as Ryan stated, you'd only receive the special capstone level 20 ability for one classUnless there is something major and new I missed, Ryan stated the exact oposite of that, I'm pretty sure the way he described it was you get a capstone for every archtype that you took all 20 levels in consecutively. In other words if you did go 20 fighter, then went 20 wizard, then went 20 rogue, you would have all 3 capstones, if you went
5 wiz, 5 fighter, 5 rogue, then went back to wizard to get the next 15 levels. you would get no capstones for any of them. Essentially starting an archetype, but not following through with it, permanently voids its capstone.
Yeah, you're right; I misread an answer by Ryan to an earlier post. Gotta say I throw my hat in the ring with the people who say that if you multiclass, you should still get one capstone ability, that of the class you finished to 20 first. And I don't buy all this math about how many years it'll take to get to certain high levels; remember, some clowns in a dorm room solved WOW Cataclysm in 16 hours. I'm not saying POL will be 'the same', it's just that when developing a game for everybody it's hard to gameplan for the pros with time on their hands.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
more stuff...So what? Name an MMO nowadays where you get to start at the level cap, or the characters are all equal in power. I'll wait.
This is a level of QQ that is mind boggling.IMHO, of course.
It's not about where you START it's about where you END UP.
Name me an MMO these days that doesn't have a Level Cap or skill or Ability Cap?
I'll do ya one better.
Name me an MMO that has had the same cap years late as it had at launch.Someone who is starting WoW for the first time today is 85 levels behind a cap level toon, where as if you joined the game 2 years ago it was 80, two years prior it was 70, etc. etc. EQ2 started with a cap of 50, now it's 95.
New players will always have lesser characters than players who started at launch and played consistently. Even if they reach cap level, they will be behind those that raid. Yeah, there is a window between expansions where they could catch up, I suppose. But they'll need the support of those existing players and guild that can raid the toughest content to contend.
It will be the same in PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
remember, some clowns in a dorm room solved WOW Cataclysm in 16 hours. I'm not saying POL will be 'the same', it's just that when developing a game for everybody it's hard to gameplan for the pros with time on their hands.
Well actually that is one thing that PFO can't have happen at all. Skill training is entirely time based, regardless of how many hours are spent online or offline, IE you have 2 people, they start at the same day, player 1 signs on for 1 hour a day, sets his skills, player 2 is actually 10 people swapping seats at the keyboard keeping the player perma-running 24/7. The real time skill system, means both of these players will hit the cap at exactly the same time, in 2.5 years. (now the 24/7 crazy guy probably has far better gear, alliance standings, money etc... but the 1 hour a day guy literally would reach the capstone at exactly the same time, real time based is the one system that, beyond literally hacking the server and editing your character, cannot be broken.
remember, some clowns in a dorm room solved WOW Cataclysm in 16 hours. I'm not saying POL will be 'the same', it's just that when developing a game for everybody it's hard to gameplan for the pros with time on their hands.Well actually that is one thing that PFO can't have happen at all. Skill training is entirely time based, regardless of how many hours are spent online or offline, IE you have 2 people, they start at the same day, player 1 signs on for 1 hour a day, sets his skills, player 2 is actually 10 people swapping seats at the keyboard keeping the player perma-running 24/7. The real time skill system, means both of these players will hit the cap at exactly the same time, in 2.5 years. (now the 24/7 crazy guy probably has far better gear, alliance standings, money etc... but the 1 hour a day guy literally would reach the capstone at exactly the same time, real time based is the one system that, beyond literally hacking the server and editing your character, cannot be broken.
One slight clarification. In PFO, you earn skills over time, and those allow you to begin the process of earning the merit badges for levels. So, Goblinworks can set a minimum advancement time by knowing how fast the skills advance. But there is then some player-effort needed to actually earn the levels as they are available, and the power gamers will get that done faster.
I'm guessing they'll set the skills at say 24 months to get enough for a level 20, assuming that some players will actually hit it around month 30. And then find the power gamers hit it at month 25, because that's what they always do. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
remember, some clowns in a dorm room solved WOW Cataclysm in 16 hours. I'm not saying POL will be 'the same', it's just that when developing a game for everybody it's hard to gameplan for the pros with time on their hands.Well actually that is one thing that PFO can't have happen at all. Skill training is entirely time based, regardless of how many hours are spent online or offline, IE you have 2 people, they start at the same day, player 1 signs on for 1 hour a day, sets his skills, player 2 is actually 10 people swapping seats at the keyboard keeping the player perma-running 24/7. The real time skill system, means both of these players will hit the cap at exactly the same time, in 2.5 years. (now the 24/7 crazy guy probably has far better gear, alliance standings, money etc... but the 1 hour a day guy literally would reach the capstone at exactly the same time, real time based is the one system that, beyond literally hacking the server and editing your character, cannot be broken.One slight clarification. In PFO, you earn skills over time, and those allow you to begin the process of earning the merit badges for levels. So, Goblinworks can set a minimum advancement time by knowing how fast the skills advance. But there is then some player-effort needed to actually earn the levels as they are available, and the power gamers will get that done faster.
I'm guessing they'll set the skills at say 24 months to get enough for a level 20, assuming that some players will actually hit it around month 30. And then find the power gamers hit it at month 25, because that's what they always do. :)
At least from the way I hear it, the skills will be trained, but you are still training for the next one while you earn the first one. So basically in both cases they will be training the skill to unlock the next one, the highly active player will just have more downtime between earning his badge and the next. Odds are at 19 before the next skill up both will be tied on merit badges as they will have had plenty of time to catch up, the only difference will most likely be a few days when the power gamer may take 1 day to unlock the badge while the casual may take a week.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Wait, why is the consequence of not being limited to the number of abilities you have the absence of situational abilities? If there is a 'best attack for every situation' power, why wouldn't I just take that tree and use only that power- all the other powers are worse! There's no reason to have a 'win' spell at all, and having all the spells on your spell list doesn't mean a 'win' spell exists. It does mean that you don't have a dagger (forbidden to clerics) or armor (forbidden to wizards), so the magic-resistant barbarian is going to hit your head so hard it flies off...I don't think there's any danger of PFO developers not being aware of the dangers in an open progression system.
I think there is a very real danger that they'll do what every other MMO has done and create, in effect, a Talent Tree that's got a hard cap of what I can do "right now", and that I can't quickly change.
I hope they don't do that.
Games (not just MMO's) do that for a VERY good reason..... it actualy puts some MEANING behind the choices the player makes in character building and advancement.
Without that, there is pretty much no point in having a character building or advancement system and every player should just be given every ability from day one...and no differences between character "class" or "archtype".
You'll note that even FPS style games with NO ADVANCEMENT or persistence don't tend to do what you propose. Generaly in those games, the abilities/type are based upon the "Kit" the player is running at the moment...and you typicaly have to do something significant (like RESPAWN or goto a specific control point on the map) in order to switch Kits.
Without that...there is very little point in having a "Bazooka" equiped as opposed to a "Sniper Rifle"... and you might as well have the generic "Best attack for EVERY situation" ability vs "Best defence for EVERY situation" ability.... and I suppose it's a contest of who can click thier button the fastest.
If the character has access to ALL abilities in the game...then they will ALWAYS have access to the best ability in the game for any given situation. There is no gameplay decisions involved in Character Building.... since you don't need to figure out what decisions get you the type of character you want to play or what your character is good at...they are good at everything. Hence no real point to advancement.
The only gameplay involved is figuring out ability works best for your current situation...you always have access to that ability....and no need (i.e. no gameplay decisions involved) to try to figure out how to compensate for or avoid situations your character isn't ideally suited for...since you NEVER face such situations.
Now if taking a character level or ability actualy INHIBITS/PROHIBITS you having access to some other ability (which BTW is the exact thing the people I'm debating with in this thread seem to have a problem with) then you may have a point....but I'd argue you are facting an incredibly complicated and daunting design task in figuring out the exact details of what should inhibit what with that volume of abilities/classes in the game...and remember you want the game relatively viable for the straight 20, the 10/10 and the 5/5/5/5 (assuming they put in roghly the same amount of time) but the 20/20/20/20 not overpowered.
Also I'd like to point out that what you've mentioned does NOT reflect what has so far been described about how the PFO design will work. Which is train in a skill allows you to earn you a "merit badge" which gives you a "level" which in turn grants the character an "ability". No where in there is there anything about you taking anything which inhibits your ability to use anything else. The only thing that is ever mentioned as being inhibited is the capstone ability and ONLY if you happen to learn a level "out of order".
Finaly if what you are suggesting in your previous post effectively means it's counter-productive to level more then 3 classes to max (or to use certain classes in combination with each other) I'd argue that you are introducing whole lot of complexity in design and points of failure then simply hard-capping adventuring levels at 60 or putting a check in that prevents the player from leveling certain combination of classes. You are probably looking at tens of thousands of man hours worth of work and multiple bugs for pretty much the same effective result you could get with 50 lines of code and a small lookup table.... and for what usefull gain?
At least from the way I hear it, the skills will be trained, but you are still training for the next one while you earn the first one. So basically in both cases they will be training the skill to unlock the next one, the highly active player will just have more downtime between earning his badge and the next. Odds are at 19 before...
You could very well be right. I was assuming that skill advancement within an archetype path would stop until you had earned the merit badge that was currently available for earning. But there's no real reason for me to assume that.
I do think that the requirements for earning the merit badges will be much more difficult than people expect, especially at the high levels. I base this assumption on Ryan's indication that he wants capstone characters to be rare. I'm thinking level 20 will be something more along the lines of assembling a legendary weapon in WoW, as opposed to a short series of quests you could do in a few hours.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
more stuff...So what? Name an MMO nowadays where you get to start at the level cap, or the characters are all equal in power. I'll wait.
This is a level of QQ that is mind boggling.IMHO, of course.
It's not about where you START it's about where you END UP.
Name me an MMO these days that doesn't have a Level Cap or skill or Ability Cap?
I'll do ya one better.
Name me an MMO that has had the same cap years late as it had at launch.Someone who is starting WoW for the first time today is 85 levels behind a cap level toon, where as if you joined the game 2 years ago it was 80, two years prior it was 70, etc. etc. EQ2 started with a cap of 50, now it's 95.
New players will always have lesser characters than players who started at launch and played consistently. Even if they reach cap level, they will be behind those that raid. Yeah, there is a window between expansions where they could catch up, I suppose. But they'll need the support of those existing players and guild that can raid the toughest content to contend.
It will be the same in PFO.
1) As I understand it PFO is not intended to be a "RAID based" equipment treadmill game. The design goals I've heard so far seem to indicate the designers want it to be pretty much the opposite of that.
2) The designers have SPECIFICALY stated that thier INTENT is that new players catch up and be able to compete with the older players in terms of raw power. So if they stick with their STATED goals PFO will NOT be the sort of game that you are describing.
3) Most MMO's specificaly tend to time thier expansions so that the MEDIAN player (generaly fairly casual) tends to complete all the existing content just in time for the new content to be released. The "top guilds" are most hardcore power gamers are indeed usualy left spinning thier wheels with NOTHING new to achieve for month's (at least) on end while others catch up.
4) No one has a problem (not me) with systems that periodicaly increase thier caps with future expansions that build in or modify the game mechanisms that can handle those cap increases. Not also, that such updates often also incorprate "streamlining" the new/low level "player experience" to allow new players to achieve those early levels more quickly and with less effort involved. Point is, they all impose a mechanism for controling the top end of the power growth...so that they can absolutely predict with no uncertainty the maximum level any single player can possibly be at any point in the games existance. Entirely different design implications from open-ended or infite advancement systems.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well actually that is one thing that PFO can't have happen at all. Skill training is entirely time based, regardless of how many hours are spent online or offline, IE you have 2 people, they start at the same day, player 1 signs on for 1 hour a day, sets his skills, player 2 is actually 10 people swapping seats at the keyboard keeping the player perma-running 24/7. The real time skill system, means both of these players will hit the cap at exactly the same time, in 2.5 years. (now the 24/7 crazy guy probably has far better gear, alliance standings, money etc... but the 1 hour a day guy literally would reach the capstone at exactly the same time, real time based is the one system that, beyond literally hacking the server and editing your character, cannot be broken.
remember, some clowns in a dorm room solved WOW Cataclysm in 16 hours. I'm not saying POL will be 'the same', it's just that when developing a game for everybody it's hard to gameplan for the pros with time on their hands.
Onishi,
I hope that proves the case. What I haven't heard anything about is whether there will be any mechanism for an "active player" to reduce the amount of time involved in learning a skill (as opposed to earning a "merit badge") and if there would be any controls around such a mechanism. I know I've seen ALOT of people lobbying for just such a system...and I haven't seen a reaction one way or the other to it from Goblinworks. That's one thing that has me really concerned when considered in conjunction with a system that doesn't impose a hard cap on "levels".
If GoblinWorks doesn't give in to such pressure and keeps a hard real time cap on the rate of advancement....at least we'll have a predictable maximum level that a character can be at any point in the games growth...and the only issue then becomes do the designers accurately account for the shelf-life of the game in thier designs (i.e. the mechansims are planned out to work well for 5 years of character growth but the game is around for 10).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Heh.
When I said "It will be the same in PFO" I meant that new players will need the aid of older players or guilds to compete or catch up. That won't change.Also, PFO will not have infinite advancement. There will only be so many classes to get to 20.
Well that is still advancement past the expected life expectency of the game, and also not counting the non archtype dependent skills. in archtypes alone you are looking at 27.5 years worth of advancement. throw in another 5 or 6 years worth, and assuming the game actually lives for 30 years, you can pretty much guarantee prestiges etc... will be added in that sort of a timeframe, bumping this expectancy up considerably higher.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
At least from the way I hear it, the skills will be trained, but you are still training for the next one while you earn the first one. So basically in both cases they will be training the skill to unlock the next one, the highly active player will just have more downtime between earning his badge and the next. Odds are at 19 before...You could very well be right. I was assuming that skill advancement within an archetype path would stop until you had earned the merit badge that was currently available for earning. But there's no real reason for me to assume that.
I do think that the requirements for earning the merit badges will be much more difficult than people expect, especially at the high levels. I base this assumption on Ryan's indication that he wants capstone characters to be rare. I'm thinking level 20 will be something more along the lines of assembling a legendary weapon in WoW, as opposed to a short series of quests you could do in a few hours.
I expect them to be difficult, but 1. I don't expect the skill advancement to stop, I see no reason to expect the skill advancement to stop while you earn the merit badge. 2. I do expect the badges to be difficult to earn, possibly take weeks or months, but I also expect the 19-20 skill advancement to take close to 2 months, assuming each level takes longer than the previous, and a total time of 2.5 years with everything added up. I'm not certain what the overall requirements will be for a merit badge, or the general ballpark of the concepts, actually I can't say I'm even sure what they are planning on that, I really hope it isn't something dull along the lines of "kill 200,000 boars/kobalds, to me it would make much more sense to have one big very difficult event, rather than a huge tedious grind fest of simple events.
No matter what capstone characters will not be extremely common just because of people who can't decide what they want. I'd say about 80% of the MMO community will take a "this makes you stronger today, but it will limit your potential in 2 years" I would bet at least 80% will take the power now, and then most likely flood the forums with very whiny posts explaining that while they completely ignored the 4 warnings the game gave them, they are still furious that it let them do it.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
If the character has access to ALL abilities in the game...then they will ALWAYS have access to the best ability in the game for any given situation. There is no gameplay decisions involved in Character Building.... since you don't need to figure out what decisions get you the type of character you want to play or what your character is good at...they are good at everything. Hence no real point to advancement.
The only gameplay involved is figuring out ability works best for your current situation...you always have access to that ability....and no need (i.e. no gameplay decisions involved) to try to figure out how to compensate for or avoid situations your character isn't ideally suited for...since you NEVER face such situations.
Now if taking a character level or ability actualy INHIBITS/PROHIBITS you having access to some other ability (which BTW is the exact thing the people I'm debating with in this thread seem to have a problem with) then you may have a point....but I'd argue you are facting an incredibly complicated and daunting design task in figuring out the exact details of what should inhibit what with that volume of abilities/classes in the game...and remember you want the game relatively viable for the straight 20, the 10/10 and the 5/5/5/5 (assuming they put in roghly the same amount of time) but the 20/20/20/20 not overpowered.
Also I'd like to point out that what you've mentioned does NOT reflect what has so far been described about how the PFO design will work. Which is train in a skill allows you to earn you a "merit badge" which gives you a "level" which in turn grants the character an "ability". No where in there is there anything about you taking anything which inhibits your ability to use anything else. The only thing that is ever mentioned as being inhibited is the capstone ability and ONLY if you happen to learn a level "out of order".
Finaly if what you are suggesting in your previous post effectively means it's counter-productive to level more then 3 classes to max (or to use certain classes in combination with each other) I'd argue that you are introducing whole lot of complexity in design and points of failure then simply hard-capping adventuring levels at 60 or putting a check in that prevents the player from leveling certain combination of classes. You are probably looking at tens of thousands of man hours worth of work and multiple bugs for pretty much the same effective result you could get with 50 lines of code and a small lookup table.... and for what usefull gain?
Acquiring all the abilities in the game on one character will take upwards of 27.5 years, real time, according to the current wild mass guessing. That is longer than the life of the game, so nobody will ever get there, even if there is no age mechanic which limits the life of the character.
Now, if you realize that learning an ability has the opportunity cost of not learning a different ability, the system is still finite-sum.
My proposal was to make an effort to actively balance the requirements and drawbacks of each archetype. You would still be allowed to have a fighter/druid/rogue/cleric 80th 'level' character, but your class abilities would have very little synergy, since they require mutually exclusive equipment. A wizard/monk/druid, on the other hand, would have pretty good synergy, as far as I can tell. They would still be run over by an iron golem that a straight fighter could handle alone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well actually that is one thing that PFO can't have happen at all. Skill training is entirely time based, regardless of how many hours are spent online or offline, IE you have 2 people, they start at the same day, player 1 signs on for 1 hour a day, sets his skills, player 2 is actually 10 people swapping seats at the keyboard keeping the player perma-running 24/7. The real time skill system, means both of these players will hit the cap at exactly the same time, in 2.5 years. (now the 24/7 crazy guy probably has far better gear, alliance standings, money etc... but the 1 hour a day guy literally would reach the capstone at exactly the same time, real time based is the one system that, beyond literally hacking the server and editing your character, cannot be broken.
remember, some clowns in a dorm room solved WOW Cataclysm in 16 hours. I'm not saying POL will be 'the same', it's just that when developing a game for everybody it's hard to gameplan for the pros with time on their hands.Onishi,
I hope that proves the case. What I haven't heard anything about is whether there will be any mechanism for an "active player" to reduce the amount of time involved in learning a skill (as opposed to earning a "merit badge") and if there would be any controls around such a mechanism. I know I've seen ALOT of people lobbying for just such a system...and I haven't seen a reaction one way or the other to it from Goblinworks. That's one thing that has me really concerned when considered in conjunction with a system that doesn't impose a hard cap on "levels".
If GoblinWorks doesn't give in to such pressure and keeps a hard real time cap on the rate of advancement....at least we'll have a predictable maximum level that a character can be at any point in the games growth...and the only issue then becomes do the designers accurately account for the shelf-life of the game in thier designs (i.e. the mechansims are planned out to work well for 5 years of character...
In the case of earning merit badges, Ryan wrote 'some also require that you do something in-game, such as harvest a certain amount of resources,or slay a certain number of monsters, or explore a portion of the map', you not only have to train rogueish skills you have to 'do rogueish things'. So while skilling up in real time and the ablity to queue up the next skill even while logged off will even the score greatly, a power gamer will certainly reach levels quicker. Especially since I figure these 'threshold quests' will become harder as you progress. That is why I hope GrumpyMel is right and there will not be a mechanic to skill up faster. The gap between casual and hardcore players will be much less than other MMOs, especially if you concentrate on one 'main', which seems to be a POL objective. Hardcore players would also be happy, they can just work on multiple characters (something I hope will be allowed).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well that is still advancement past the expected life expectency of the game, and also not counting the non archtype dependent skills. in archtypes alone you are looking at 27.5 years worth of advancement. throw in another 5 or 6 years worth, and assuming the game actually lives for 30 years, you can pretty much guarantee prestiges etc... will be added in that sort of a timeframe, bumping this expectancy up considerably higher.Heh.
When I said "It will be the same in PFO" I meant that new players will need the aid of older players or guilds to compete or catch up. That won't change.Also, PFO will not have infinite advancement. There will only be so many classes to get to 20.
I still fail to see how this is a problem.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I still fail to see how this is a problem.Well that is still advancement past the expected life expectency of the game, and also not counting the non archtype dependent skills. in archtypes alone you are looking at 27.5 years worth of advancement. throw in another 5 or 6 years worth, and assuming the game actually lives for 30 years, you can pretty much guarantee prestiges etc... will be added in that sort of a timeframe, bumping this expectancy up considerably higher.Heh.
When I said "It will be the same in PFO" I meant that new players will need the aid of older players or guilds to compete or catch up. That won't change.Also, PFO will not have infinite advancement. There will only be so many classes to get to 20.
I wasn't calling it a problem, I was refering to the fact that while technically advancement is finite, it is so high that it may as well be infinite.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ahh ok.
I have no problem with the idea that those who put in the hours have characters that will be impossible to catch up to.
You get out what you put in.
Me as well, though I am hoping that there is a weapon/armor based mechanic of some kind to actually live up to the statement that a 20/20/20 is more versatile but not directly more powerful than a 20/1. Similar to how in eve, in a year or 2 you can be tied with a 8 year vet at piloting X class of ships, not that vet is also a master of piloting Y class of ships, Z class of ships etc... but in a 1v1 match where you are both in X class ships, the only advantage the 8 year vet has is perhaps knowledge of tactics and terrain.
Note: I am not in favor of a skill lockout system, or anything that involves seeing an NPC trainer, but I am in favor of certain abilities being tied to weapons, and the amount of weapons ready for hot swap being limited to possibly 1-3, (non ready weapons should take about 1 minute to switch out via backpack). Also with a weapon breakage/sunder factor, it may be strategically advantageous to have one of your hot swap spare be the same as your primary in some cases, to have a backup you can pull out quickly if your weapon gets smashed mid-fight.
Also I am in favor of SOME overlap, I see no reason why a wizard should not be able to stealth, but I do think he should have to pull out a dagger to sneak attack. A rogue with ranger should be able to stealth and track, but probably switch to some other weapon, maybe dual short swords or a bow to use favored enemy bonuses (IE not allowing sneak attack and favored enemy to function together).
Mainly the utility abilities should mostly be available, but the damage dealing abilities should not be possible to stack to use all of the bonuses at once.
Increasing options and making more tactical choices available = good
Allows the vets to have more tricks up their sleeves and feel continual progress, while not directly increasing their power to the point that a 6 year vet will be 1 shotting a 2.5 year player.
Allowing stacking of multiple forms of damage through one hit = bad
This would pretty much kill the game for people who are at the middle/bottom of the pack, It will make power players more or less own the battle field, and people who didn't get in at the ground floor decorative pieces that are best to sit on the sidelines.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're still stuck with the concepts of "Higher level characters do more damage with the same weapon." and "Higher level characters can take more damage."
Shift that to "Stronger people do more damage with some weapons." and "Skilled fighters/rogues/rangers can perform maneuvers with some weapons that nobody else can." Some of those maneuvers would have improved accuracy or damage as their primary feature, while some would be armor piercing or inflict status effects.
Class benefits don't have to be passive effects that modify all attacks, especially when all of the bookkeeping is being handled by computer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You're still stuck with the concepts of "Higher level characters do more damage with the same weapon." and "Higher level characters can take more damage."
Shift that to "Stronger people do more damage with some weapons." and "Skilled fighters/rogues/rangers can perform maneuvers with some weapons that nobody else can." Some of those maneuvers would have improved accuracy or damage as their primary feature, while some would be armor piercing or inflict status effects.
Class benefits don't have to be passive effects that modify all attacks, especially when all of the bookkeeping is being handled by computer.
Yes and they should, I never once implied that higher level or even better geared characters should not do damage. However there is a curve that should be contained. There is the difference between a top epic geared player being an even match for 4 poor geared characters, and an epic top geared player being able to steamroll 400 poor geared characters without slowing down. There is a curve, and it should exist, but how far it goes means everything.
If poorly geared characters can win with favorable numbers, tactics and strategy, that is good. If the poorly geared characters have about as much impact on the fight as a fly on the windshield at the indy 500, then only the best will enjoy the game, everyone else gets forced to be bystanders.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... as Ryan stated, you'd only receive the special capstone level 20 ability for one class.
I don't believe that's what he said at all. I believe he said you could receive the capstone for every archetype in which you gained 20 consecutive merit badges, without learning any skills in any other archetype tree while doing so.
I believe it will be theoretically possible to receive the capstone for every archetype, although I seriously doubt it will ever happen.