How? By not allowing healers to rez any longer.
Every group in EQ and VG and soon to be Pantheon most often requires a certain setup. If you want to do group centric content that is hard and requires a good full group usually this consists of at least a tank and a healer. Then usually there is some type of CC class and the rest is filled with whoever. Now, some times you can even get by without a proper pure tank, maybe a good geared monk or bard can handle some tanking duties. But the one thing that is hard to replace is the healer. Almost any time you get a nice group together you will have to have a pure healer, at least if you want to do the group worthy content. What does this mean for death?
It means 99% of the time a group is constructed the group will have rez because the group will always have a healer. But if the healers can't rez, it means the group has to decided whether or not to fill a spot with a class that CAN rez. There really is no decision on whether or not you need a healer or even a tank, but group content COULD be done without a rezzing class. So do you look for one or nah? What if Necros, Dread Lords, and Druids were the only classes that could rez and none of those classes were LFG when your group was constructed? You would have to play things differently because even though you have a healer, it doesn't mean you have rez. Now you will try even harder NOT to die, but what if you still do die?
Now death has much more impact.
I was reading another post and I tend to agree that lorewise it could fit. It could be considered unholy for a cleric to 'raise the dead'. Why does healing seem to always go hand in hand with rezzing anyways? Healing is the act of mending the body where rezzing is the act of returning one's soul. There really is no link here. When I think of raising the dead I think of necromancy but I'm sure there are many ways to spin the topic.
I think this would add more depth to death and its mechanics. What do y'all think?
Sure ressurection doesn't have to be in the game at all.. or even a "run back" feature. But I think ressurection or not will not really have much of an impact on whether you take that healer or not due to the fact that by not having a res you could also be more inclined for that pure healer if thats the case (to make certain you don't die). What really matters is the punishment(xp loss)/recovery time. The only way they could really make death more impactful is with perma-death... anything else are you're talking with-in the realms of perma-debuffs/punishments... which would just force a rerole anyway.
I think it should be in the game. I still like the way EQ handled it with the vary degrees of how much it restored you 50%, etc up to epic doing 95%. Make the cast times long it should not be an in combat option. The problem is if you dont have it people will quite and leave groups and raids would be pointless. The impact of death should be in lost xp, recovery time etc.
There are a lot of different death mechanics out there. If you have a harsh penalty, then give some class, any class, the ability to mitigate that penalty, then that class becomes the "must have" class for adventuring. If the death penalty is so severe that the difference between a 90% rez and a 96% rez is an hour of killing monsters to make up, then the class with the 96% rez will be the must have class.
If a number of classes can restore a certain percent, then you give additional reason to include from among those classes in your group and you dont make one class the be all end all for resurrection.
I like a meaningful death penalty just so people are a bit more attentive. But not so bad as to make you lose hours of experience by joining the wrong group for a little while.
I think other non-experience penalties can be useful. Like really taking a toll on your armor durability. Maybe even to the extent that it is a permanent decrease in durability that cannot be repaired. This also can potentially have a positive impact on the economy if players make sought after armor. Save the really good stuff, and use player made stuff for your normal adventuring. Something like that.
Romulus said:There are a lot of different death mechanics out there. If you have a harsh penalty, then give some class, any class, the ability to mitigate that penalty, then that class becomes the "must have" class for adventuring. If the death penalty is so severe that the difference between a 90% rez and a 96% rez is an hour of killing monsters to make up, then the class with the 96% rez will be the must have class.
If a number of classes can restore a certain percent, then you give additional reason to include from among those classes in your group and you dont make one class the be all end all for resurrection.
I like a meaningful death penalty just so people are a bit more attentive. But not so bad as to make you lose hours of experience by joining the wrong group for a little while.
I think other non-experience penalties can be useful. Like really taking a toll on your armor durability. Maybe even to the extent that it is a permanent decrease in durability that cannot be repaired. This also can potentially have a positive impact on the economy if players make sought after armor. Save the really good stuff, and use player made stuff for your normal adventuring. Something like that.
We should make sure every class has taunt and can port too. Of course you make one class be the best at something. That's what creates the awesome class inter-dependency dynamic. And if there are multiple classes that can restore EXP loss, and I can only ge the "worst" of them to help me, that sure is a hell of a lot better than nothing.
Krixus said:Romulus said:There are a lot of different death mechanics out there. If you have a harsh penalty, then give some class, any class, the ability to mitigate that penalty, then that class becomes the "must have" class for adventuring. If the death penalty is so severe that the difference between a 90% rez and a 96% rez is an hour of killing monsters to make up, then the class with the 96% rez will be the must have class.
If a number of classes can restore a certain percent, then you give additional reason to include from among those classes in your group and you dont make one class the be all end all for resurrection.
I like a meaningful death penalty just so people are a bit more attentive. But not so bad as to make you lose hours of experience by joining the wrong group for a little while.
I think other non-experience penalties can be useful. Like really taking a toll on your armor durability. Maybe even to the extent that it is a permanent decrease in durability that cannot be repaired. This also can potentially have a positive impact on the economy if players make sought after armor. Save the really good stuff, and use player made stuff for your normal adventuring. Something like that.
We should make sure every class has taunt and can port too. Of course you make one class be the best at something. That's what creates the awesome class inter-dependency dynamic. And if there are multiple classes that can restore EXP loss, and I can only ge the "worst" of them to help me, that sure is a hell of a lot better than nothing.
I dont think I said give every class rez but if thats the way you want to read it have at it. I was just making an observation based on my experience. I think if anything, my suggestion was to widen the thinking about death penalty to include more than just experience loss.
You had multiple points, one of which, imo, was a poor one. If the devs are able to capture the magic of their past endeavors, people will play classes they have the most fun with, and will group with PEOPLE they like and have the most fun with. People won't be be denying X class a spot in the group because their rez is 90% instead of 96%. To suggest that there shouldn't be one class that is the best at something goes against the root ethos of this game.
NoobieDoo said:What if Necros, Dread Lords, and Druids were the only classes that could rez and none of those classes were LFG when your group was constructed? You would have to play things differently because even though you have a healer, it doesn't mean you have rez. Now you will try even harder NOT to die, but what if you still do die?
Now death has much more impact.
I think this would add more depth to death and its mechanics. What do y'all think?
Having a rez class or not in gropu would not require any difference in play. The rez only comes into play after you've screwed up. A group comprised of knowledgable players, that means players who know the strengths/weaknesses of their own class plus those of all the other classes, players who have a strong grasp of game mechanics, do not need the crutch of a resurrecting glass to be part of their group.
Players need to remember one thing: You never need a rez immediately. There hasn't been a game yet with a resurrection ability which didn't have a long timer associated with it. If memory servers, you could leave 1 item on corpse in EQ1 and had 2 hours before the timer expired on that corpse.
Remember, even if the Cleric class gives 96% and is the best, like in EQ1; Don't forget, the cleric giving the ress, doesn't have to be in the group.
Most clerics, like myself, are willing to ress anyone for free when time and mana permits.
heck, I will make a cleric.... Cleric LFG at the Dead Vault...
Vandraad said:
A group comprised of knowledgable players, that means players who know the strengths/weaknesses of their own class plus those of all the other classes, players who have a strong grasp of game mechanics, do not need the crutch of a resurrecting glass to be part of their group.
Aneadorn said:I think it should be in the game. I still like the way EQ handled it with the vary degrees of how much it restored you 50%, etc up to epic doing 95%. Make the cast times long it should not be an in combat option. The problem is if you dont have it people will quite and leave groups and raids would be pointless. The impact of death should be in lost xp, recovery time etc.
I may be completely missing something here, but what good is a rezzer in-group when the entire group is dead? You still have to do all the things you would do without a rezzer such as 1)run back to the zone where you died, 2) buff up naked and invis/invis undead run back to your corpse, 3) remove bodies to, hopefully, somewhere safe, 4) loot up. It's only here, at step 5, where having a rezzer is different than not. Because at step 5, with a rezzer you now rez, then wait and slowly regain mana, rebuff, regain mana then start XPing again. Rezzing right then could be dangerous, even groups with rezzers will probably not take the rez right then and there because of the additional downtime you experience. Plus you might have got a few buffs back at your bind point you do not want to lose.
Vandraad said:I may be completely missing something here, but what good is a rezzer in-group when the entire group is dead? You still have to do all the things you would do without a rezzer such as 1)run back to the zone where you died, 2) buff up naked and invis/invis undead run back to your corpse, 3) remove bodies to, hopefully, somewhere safe, 4) loot up. It's only here, at step 5, where having a rezzer is different than not. Because at step 5, with a rezzer you now rez, then wait and slowly regain mana, rebuff, regain mana then start XPing again. Rezzing right then could be dangerous, even groups with rezzers will probably not take the rez right then and there because of the additional downtime you experience. Plus you might have got a few buffs back at your bind point you do not want to lose.
Good points. We should keep in mind there are many different situations potentially in play here.
I can understand trying to shift some of the importance from the cleric (best healer) onto another, "less critical", class via the ressurection ability. Lore-wise, Necromancers might make sence (raise dead an all). The problem with that is Feign Death. If necros retain that ability and have res, then the game is pretty much trivialized fromt he start. Necro could just feign death before every encounter just in case disaster strikes. Not much threat of a serious deep dungeon CR if your resser can just lie on the floor unaggro the entire time. Same goes for the SK.
If I were to shift the Res-line to another class, it would be to the Shaman. Shamans are the oogie boogie medicine man that dabbles in the raise dead zombie arts. They would be secondary healers, with great stat buffs, and the ability to revive/ressurect a fallen party member.
First post, here we go. So, death is always a big one for me, I need a game where death is something avoidable, as opposed to the sooooooo many games that actually make it beneficial at times. However, I think that although I want death to be avoidable, maybe it doesn’t need to be the nightmare that EQ1 was. I was thinking, why not instead have a death system that actually opens up content within the game as part of the penelty. For example, let's say you get mauled down by a pack of wolves, you would then receive a small negative effect "rabies" along with xp loss and a note to "Seek out Local Healer". This in turn would lead to a quest trail where difficulty and length would vary depending on your level and would restore all your xp loss and remove the effect and maybe open up new abilities or item access (maybe a potion that can be crafted to avoid this very death penalty or at least negate part of it). You could then leverage resurrection a bunch of ways to mitigate the need to do the quest. "Project Gorgon" has implemented this to some effect, but in order to always keep us challanged and on our toes it would need to be used more universally.
I would also be okay with using RND for death penalities, heck it's used everywhere else. Maybe having a 33% chance for XP loss, 33% you get quest to restore xp loss, 33% no loss, 1% uber quest, making death a problem but sometimes you get lucky.
geatz said:I would also be okay with using RND for death penalities, heck it's used everywhere else. Maybe having a 33% chance for XP loss, 33% you get quest to restore xp loss, 33% no loss, 1% uber quest, making death a problem but sometimes you get lucky.
As much as you think 1% is a small chance, over the many thousands of players across a dozen or more servers playing 24/7 1% represents a huge quantity of "uber quests" that VR would need to create..unless of course you want the same 'uber quest' over and over and over again. Not to mention they would need such a quest to span the entire span of levels. Sorry, but not even remotely feasible.
Hieromonk said:Death in early EQ had it right. (before nerf)
Problem is, only a few remember it, or can recall the respect one had for wilderness.
Naked, weaponless, corpse run, and with a healthy exp loss?
I started EQ1 in March 1999. that's how I remember it.
How was death handled in Vanguard?
Vandraad said:geatz said:I would also be okay with using RND for death penalities, heck it's used everywhere else. Maybe having a 33% chance for XP loss, 33% you get quest to restore xp loss, 33% no loss, 1% uber quest, making death a problem but sometimes you get lucky.
As much as you think 1% is a small chance, over the many thousands of players across a dozen or more servers playing 24/7 1% represents a huge quantity of "uber quests" that VR would need to create..unless of course you want the same 'uber quest' over and over and over again. Not to mention they would need such a quest to span the entire span of levels. Sorry, but not even remotely feasible.
Yeah 1% isn't realistic for that, maybe 1% you just recover and standup or lower it to .1 percent for the quest, these numbers aren't realistic for actual usage, more just a reference for the pros to get it right. I was thinking either one type of quest per class or 1 in general this would be a one and done type of thing. Once completed you wouldn't get another one of these again.
Medjai said:Hieromonk said:Death in early EQ had it right. (before nerf)
Problem is, only a few remember it, or can recall the respect one had for wilderness.
Nakid, weaponless, corpse run, and with a healthy exp loss?
I started EQ1 in March 1999. that's how I remember it.
How was death handled in Vanguard?
You lost 23%(?) of your lvl, it was then nerfed to 18%(?) 4 months later...? But again.. that was at the beginning for the first 3~4 months when no cleric had rez, because they were all the same lvl as you and dieing too.. getting a lvl back then was a moment of global worthyness... thus /ooc "Ding..!"
Vanguard you became a spirit/ghost..
But, I suggest the EQ style that while you lay there dead, you have a limited UI with limited camera movement w/ respawn timer... before you respwn at Bind point. Also, I believe the Rez timer on a corpse should be tied to their Character's lvl. (minutes ~ weeks.)
Medjai said:Hieromonk said:Death in early EQ had it right. (before nerf)
Problem is, only a few remember it, or can recall the respect one had for wilderness.
Nakid, weaponless, corpse run, and with a healthy exp loss?
I started EQ1 in March 1999. that's how I remember it.
How was death handled in Vanguard?
There were different stages to death in VG but the most common was you died and left a tombstone if you released, you then gain a debuff (stage 1 -10% to all stats/gear) and left most of your items/equipment on your TS, so it was pretty important to get it back and loot it to regain some lost exp and your items that were not soul bound, you also had a decent experience loss but you could never lose a level, you could, however, go deep into negative experience making it very hard to gain a level, as you had to work that debt off before you could make progress towards the next level.
The debuff progressed to level 5 and -50% stats/gear etc. if you continued to die while having the debuff active, it was pretty brutal but it only lasted 5-10 mins.
Vandraad said:I may be completely missing something here, but what good is a rezzer in-group when the entire group is dead? You still have to do all the things you would do without a rezzer
Homercles said:I can understand trying to shift some of the importance from the cleric (best healer) onto another, "less critical", class via the ressurection ability. Lore-wise, Necromancers might make sence (raise dead an all). The problem with that is Feign Death. If necros retain that ability and have res, then the game is pretty much trivialized fromt he start. Necro could just feign death before every encounter just in case disaster strikes. Not much threat of a serious deep dungeon CR if your resser can just lie on the floor unaggro the entire time. Same goes for the SK.
If I were to shift the Res-line to another class, it would be to the Shaman. Shamans are the oogie boogie medicine man that dabbles in the raise dead zombie arts. They would be secondary healers, with great stat buffs, and the ability to revive/ressurect a fallen party member.