theworldofdreams.com

Tamla Tamara wrote:

Joram Lionheart wrote:*flames*

atei sUks.

Hahhahha that was my FIRST thought! USUCK!

But I didn't think it would be helpful to post that hehehe

Actually Tamla, I was just messing around Atei doesn't suck (though he may stink a little when he gets all sweaty and stuff )

Well of course silly, we all love Pau, just sometimes I don't agree with his posts :OP

Eldric wrote:[6) Drastically reduce spell buffing, there were some minor tweaks a while back but they never went nearly far enough to put any level of challenge into the game.

You want challenge, try soloing several dragons at the same time. Get rid of all your uber gear and rely only on your wits to hunt as you used to. If that doesn't quite do it, stop wearing any armor and stop buffing yourself, and try casting spells without scrolls. I'd wager that'd be some challenge

I would either make only one stat buff spell effective at a time + protection or reduce the duration to something like 5 minutes. Make buffing something that is done as part of a tactical decison not something that is done as a matter of course after breakfast and before leaving the house.

If something like this is ever implemented, I would rather tanks have their own type of "buffing" that is particular to non-mage characters. I really dislike that ALL KINDS OF CHARACTERS--whatever they may be-- have to make use of the same skill. You don't see this happening in other games. Warrior-oriented classes have other ways to improve their stats/skills temporarily. Perhaps, alchemy should stop being a carbon-copy of magery and alchemy potions should give specialized benefits for different types of characters (e.g. if your three primary skills are fighting skills, you should either drink a potion designed specially for you or the potion should have different effects on you than say, a mage character).

Tamla Tamara wrote:

Atei wrote:Preface: I recognize that these changes are pretty radical. I respect everyone's right to disagree, but please do so in the same fair and balanced way I am attempting to make this post. Also, if you are going to disagree, please explain why you disagree.

1.) Shard wipe. One day Drocket posts that on a future date, he will wipe the shard of everything. That means gear, gold, houses--everything. The biggest positive I see out of this is allowing everyone to start on "equal footing." We will all be newbies, again. We will have to work together, again. I see this as a major way of "shaking up the status quo," getting the Oldbies re-interested and making us all one big happy family, again.

If you do that then we lose a lot of the history of Wod. We would lose Homer's Tower for example.

Perhaps then just a character wipe? Or leave certain "landmarks." Or maybe someone could come along after the Wipe and re-do Homer's Tower in his memory. There are lots of possibilities.

Atei wrote:2.) Make player-made mean something, again. How? By making player-made BETTER than monster-dropped, and then significantly reduce the number of monster-dropped magics. For example, a full set of player-made exceptional armor would actually give a higher a/r than a full set of invulnerability armor. An exceptional maul would be better than a destruction maul. This might be the end of Benson, or it could make his potions that much more valuable. It would certainly make the crafter a viable playing option.

Then why bother hunting for any cool magics? That and virtue are why I hunt.

Magics would still be available, just in much shorter supply. And since we can't craft magical clothing or shoes, those items would still be worth finding.

Atei wrote:3.) Make dungeon spawn dynamic. Why does Destard have to have Ophidians? I agree we need to have easier dungeons, but can't the spawn be more than just lizards or orcs? Rather than knowing what is in Wind or Despise, wouldn't it be cool to have to find out? We keep certain dungeons easy, some medium, some hard and at least one unsoloable.

How will newbies know where to go? I don't want to spend a lot of time trapsing around the country looking for what I want to hunt. I might as well just do the smithing deal and/or guard quests to get the virtue I want.

Certain dungeons would still be designated "easy," then "medium," then "hard" and finally "unsoloable." Newer players would learn, as we all did, what dungeons to go to first.

Atei wrote:4.) Regarding treasure maps: Drocket's changes were cool, but they didn't go far enough. A successful cartographer should also have to have mining to dig up the chest. And here's more: maps should have multiple spawns, all should be locked and most should be trapped. Let me give you an example: my carto-miner gets a frayed map. He goes to dig it up (because he has mining he can find it) and when he finds it, he "stirs" the chest by trying to open it. Out pops the first layer of protection, and they need to be defeated. The chest is tried again, and out pops another layer of protection. In fact, all layers of badness must be defeated before the chest can be opened by a locksmith. And even when the chest is finally ready to be opened, it will probably be trapped.

Too much trouble then, might as well let them decay and I'll go do nets and mibs. Why should Tam have to give up magery so she can have mining to be able to dig up a map occasionally?

This isn't a big deal. Prime Cartography and Lockpicking, use Mining as your trade skill.

Atei wrote:5.) Finally, magery should be intelligence-based. Just because you can throw 120k into training shouldn't allow you to cast circle 8 spells. It needs to be based on intelligence. Check out any other game-system, and mages don't get to use the hardest spells until they have been a mage for a long, long time.

I thought it already was. I mean, you need the appropriate mana to cast a higher circle spell, ie, intel.

Mana isn't the same thing as intelligence. If the players had to start over from new, they would have to build their intelligence, not their magery skill, to cast higher-level spells.

There is another suggestion that I left out, and this one has been discussed before, as well.

What if we reduced the number of character slots from 5 to 3 per account? Instead of being able to make everything you need, you would have to get it from other sources (unless everyone had a mule, yuck.) Then, if player-made goods are equal to or better than the ones you find while hunting (again remembering that we can't make exceptional clothes or shoes), that should make the crafter a very valuable asset.

Cut it down to two: a crafter (secondary) character, and a "main" character: either a mage or a tank, or something like that.

Those who have crafters as their favourites would have it in reverse. Just enough versatility to keep interest, but not enough to be a one-man (or woman!) resource empire.

I would venture at a guess that most people only play one or two "main" characters anyway.. but watch all those who don't come out and prove me wrong.

-M

I hope that I am not intruding, basically because I am rather new here. But I feel as though I do have a little experience in this. I left a shard recently that worked pretty much like you have suggested here.
Lets start with craftable items-Doing what was suggested here ruined the economy-it became non-exsistant.Blacksmiths made great armor, so much so monsters had to be turned up and gm's were constantly making new adjustments-Note made players and staff unhappy!
No one bought anything because they all made it.
So many adjustments in Cart skills caused someone looking for treasure to need 120 mining/120 cart/and a major fighting skill to fend off monsters.
Magery ended up being completely out of control!!
A wipe was suggested and done-most older players never returned.
As I posted when I started-I found this to be one of the best thought out shards I had seen, I still believe this to be true.
I dont want peeps to think I am comparing here to there, but I do know that scripting is a lot tuffer then it looks. If I have learned anything over the years, changes sould always be considered, but implimented slowly. Just an opinion from a newbie-LOL
Thanks Kindred

Oh THANK YOU Lee :O)

Why try to fix something that is NOT broken? Why does everyone want to change WoD so drastically? I love the WoD just the way it is. I really would not want to start over from scratch. I am self sufficient because I was taught to be as independent as possible. I would really hate to bother someone else to drop what they are doing just so they can fix my armor or color my hat. It would be very discouraging.

Ok Im a sucker. How about this for a change of pace?

Inert all the current magic items in the world. They still exist, just no longer have a usable magical power, they would be for all pratical purposes regular weapons.

Then from that point forward require certain skills sets to unlock the magic power. Maybe even requiring up to 3 different characters.

For instance say you find an Indestructable Silver bow of destruction and achery. Make it so you need a woodcrafting archer to release the Indestructable and archery. A Woodcrafting Tactition to release the Destruction. And a Necromancer to release the power of the silver.

Heh, but I'm sure this might not be possilbe under POL, but what the heck, there is an idea to be beat up and tossed around

Noooo! I'm too attached to Aegeus, Swind, Mandaris, and last but not least, Xanola to be able to bear anyone telling me I COULDN'T play any of them anymore such would be devas tating to me emotionally.... those who want only 3 chars can... miracle of miracles... have only 3. And, by all that is holy STOP IT with the shard wipe bit! Those who WANT to be newbs again can be.... such a decision shouldn't be forced on everyone else... That, I think, is worse than PKing, which is against the rules, by the way. At least you can recover easily enough from a PK; the char still exsists...



PS: I re-read this post and what I intended as an air of playfulness reads as hostility... do not take offense. while what I said I was serious about, the mood relayed behind the post in general was a bit... off.

I believe that it should be an individuals choice as to whether or not to wipe out his\her characters and all their possessions and start over again. I on a regular basis have deleted my characters and started over again changing skills and trade skills in the time I have been here. If you want to start over again it should be the individuals choice and should not be forced. The only character I have not wiped out is Belle Remings and why should I be forced to wipe her out with a shard wipe? I have been working long and hard to get her to glorious and it would not be fair to have to start over to say the least. As far as putting a limit of just three characters goes that can be done already you just don't have to make more than three if you want it that way. I may have five characters but I still need the help of other players for things I need that my characters can not make. For example I do not have an alchemist therefore I can not make the potions required to make manastones which my tinkerer can make. As far as buffing goes that should be an individuals choice. The buffing system works now so why not just leave it alone. If you want to use just one buff at a time then that should be the individuals choice not forced. Each one of us on the WOD has a choice in the matter of what we want our character to be and how many we create. I personally play all of my characters. The only one that I have not played with that much is the character that I created a few days ago but the rest do play. I worked hard and long to earn there stats up and it would be unfair to have them just wiped out. Should be choice not forced. As for dungeons I agree there should be one or two dungeons that are unsoloable.But all of this has been brought up before so why bring it up again? Having player made objects be better than the magics that are found, tell me then why would we need magic items at all.

I have to say that Belle has saved me a lot of time and thought by putting pretty much my own ideas into words .. Thank you, Belle.
Most of the things proposed here fall into the category of things that a player can *choose* to do for themselves (buffs, magical items, number of characters, character skills, 'muleing', and so on), so once again the question arises of "Why make it mandatory for *everyone* when YOU can choose to do this for yourself and not affect others' playstyles and desires?".
The only thng a 'level playing field' does for me is make me feel like I'm in competition with the other players to have the biggest, baddest, most skillful character(s) and the most things .. and I don't want to feel that way. I play to reach my *own* personal goals and standards, and try to NOT compare my playing goals with those of the other players. The only person I'm in competition with here is my own inner self.

Atei wrote:What if we reduced the number of character slots from 5 to 3 per account? Instead of being able to make everything you need, you would have to get it from other sources (unless everyone had a mule, yuck.) Then, if player-made goods are equal to or better than the ones you find while hunting (again remembering that we can't make exceptional clothes or shoes), that should make the crafter a very valuable asset.

Three characters per account is still too much I'm afraid. I'd say that at MOST two would be the max limit for this to be effective at all. It is also something that would make a lot of people unhappy because they enjoy the ability to play with different kinds of characters, not just the crafter and the tank or the mage and the tank.

The most reasonable and intelligent solution to the "mule" problem is to limit tradeskills per account somehow. That way everyone can still have as many characters as they want but they could not make all the items in the world on their own. Simple solution? Perhaps, but Drocket has expressed the opinion that it is not umm . . . it cannot be justified from a fictional perspective. Well, I think where there is a will there is a way The many benefits far outweigh that one drawback, and right now I fail to see what would be so terrible about having a real player economy.

Like I said, the problem is not that the product is not needed. Everyone needs player crafted items sooner or later (whether that be armor, furniture, weapons, tools, etc). The real problem is that there is no market demand.

Some rambling ahead, be warned, it's probably too early for me to be attempting this kind of post.

One of Tamala's posts last night stirred up one of my mostly dormant brain cells and perhaps approacting the discussion from another direction might be helpful.

I think a large part of what's being discussed here is a difference of opinion on wether or not most people being an island unto themselves is a good thing.

Take the economy, Tamala sees it as a case of "hate to bother someone else to drop what they are doing just so they can fix my armor", and yet I know there are people out there who would love to run a crafter as thier main character (in some cases possibly as thier only character), but there is little to no demand for it so thier choices devolve to not staying, playing a crafter with no customers, or making a hunter. In the few cases where it is actually possible to sell things, namely potions and scrolls, there is so much competition that prices have dropped nearly to the point of being non profitable.

In the case of my pet change I'd like to see, namely buffing, it is so overpowering that it's nearly impossible to find a place to hunt alone that offers some sort of challenge, this is compunded even more if you are hunting with others which is my preferred mode of play. More than one person has suggested "If you dont like them, don't use them", which sounds reasonable enough, except it means I have to make a councious decision to play a character who does not want to live, which is something I cannot do. I am big on minimising risk, If I have to put myself in harms way, I will do everything possible to minimise the possible risk.

I would not go quite so far as to call the shard broken, but when you have a multi player game where for the most part nobody actually needs anyone elese, I do think its possible that something might be wrong.

Eldric wrote:I would not go quite so far as to call the shard broken, but when you have a multi player game where for the most part nobody actually needs anyone else, I do think its possible that something might be wrong.

And there IS something inherently wrong about not wanting to depend on anyone else in a multiplayer game. This is going to sound harsh to some but you cannot have it both ways. You either have a community of people who actually need each other, or you don't have a real community at all. Right now, the latter seems to be mostly the case.

[I would even go as far as to say that every single player should be forced to be interested in what is going on in world RPing-wise. In other words, if there is a world-wide invasion of killer-bunnies, you should be REALLY concerned about that even if you are a solo'er. It makes no sense that the world is about to end and you can find yourself at home going about your business like nothing's going on. World-shaking events should be just that--affecting the entire world (and everyone in it) one way or another.]