A few of us were discussing this in a Discord earlier today, and I thought I would broaden the discussion and see how more folks feel about the subject. There's no wrong answers here, just interested in how people feel about these aspects of character progression personally. Anyway, three (sets of) questions, all related to each other:
How important are skills to your sense of character progression? Do you enjoy seeing skillup messages when you get better at a skill on your character? Do you actively go and try to work on improving those skills? How fast or slow should it be to train up a skill? Or, does it just seem like a chore and something that should come automatically as you level up?
If characters do have skills that must be trained or improved, should each character be able to improve all skills they have access to up to their maximum? Or should there be limits such that you have to pick and choose how you will focus? If there are limits, how easy or hard should it be for you to change focus?
When you think about character diversity, or the idea that characters of the same class should have something that sets them apart from each other and distinguishes them from each other, where do you see that diversity coming from and how important is it to you? Is it just a cosmetic thing where people should be able to have different looks if they want, or should characters of the same class be able to play differently and still be effective? Should the primary source of diversity be from gear, for example weapon selection, or should there be other factors that players should have to tune along with their gear, such as skills and/or abilities? Should progression within a class be set up so that you have to make some choices along the way, that determine what's available to you at maximum level, or should everyone get the same exact set of abilities and options as they level up without having to leave any behind?
All IMHO:
How important are skills to your sense of character progression?
--Tangible daily personal power growth is the most important aspect of playing an MMO, to me.
Do you enjoy seeing skillup messages when you get better at a skill on your character?
--Yes
Do you actively go and try to work on improving those skills?
--Yes
How fast or slow should it be to train up a skill?
--Depends, but for in-combat offensive melee, somewhere in the 10%-25% of the level.
Or, does it just seem like a chore and something that should come automatically as you level up?
--Sometimes it does, especially for defensive skills like "Defense" in EQ1, where leveling it up required being potentially killed, at higher levels, just to get a chance at a skillup, for casters. But it was still very valuable to try and max.
If characters do have skills that must be trained or improved, should each character be able to improve all skills they have access to up to their maximum?
--Yes. Unless it's limited by credit card, one player is doing it all anyway. Why does it matter if it's one character or one player? What's the design goal?
Or should there be limits such that you have to pick and choose how you will focus?
--Nope.
If there are limits, how easy or hard should it be for you to change focus?
--Hard. Through gear customization, skill/spell customization, by spending XP, gold, sacrificed items, or similar reward channeling.
When you think about character diversity, or the idea that characters of the same class should have something that sets them apart from each other and distinguishes them from each other, where do you see that diversity coming from and how important is it to you?
--Through gear customization, skill/spell customization, by spending XP, gold, sacrificed items, or similar reward channeling.
Is it just a cosmetic thing where people should be able to have different looks if they want, or should characters of the same class be able to play differently and still be effective?
--Everyone should be able to have both customized gear and skills that set them apart or allow them to be specialized by encounter/zone.
Should the primary source of diversity be from gear, for example weapon selection, or should there be other factors that players should have to tune along with their gear, such as skills and/or abilities?
--Through gear customization, skill/spell customization, by spending XP, gold, sacrificed items, or similar reward channeling.
Should progression within a class be set up so that you have to make some choices along the way, that determine what's available to you at maximum level, or should everyone get the same exact set of abilities and options as they level up without having to leave any behind?
--Everyone should have the same potential, your choices that set you apart should be through gear customization, skill/spell customization, by spending XP, gold, sacrificed items, or similar rewards.
I always liked seeing skill up messages. I love the feel of advancement, whether it be by gear, levels, action skills, passive skills, what have you.
Not concerned with speed as long as devs are somewhat reasonable. Yes on being able to max skills, absolutely no on pick and choose skills. I always hated that in EQ2 AAs that I could not get them all, EQ was so much better.
Absolutely no on diversity. I very much would like to know what a class is capable of when in group and not need to wonder what diversity options they choose. Inherent diversity is bad imo, let them choose to differentiate via gear and playstyle and their avatars' looks. (I am assuming this is like an archer ranger, melee ranger, beastmaster ranger type thing, smaller non important things are not so bad)
I am also kind of against racial traits, Vanguard was terrible in the racial traits department, some races were so much better that others because of how poorly balanced they were.
Everyone shouold be the same, potential wise, at the end game. Let people separate themselves with gear and skill. I get high playtime peeps will have a better chance, but I am ok with that.
Really, I probably should have just said "What vjek said". It is close enough and already written.
Nephele said:How important are skills to your sense of character progression? Do you enjoy seeing skillup messages when you get better at a skill on your character? Do you actively go and try to work on improving those skills? How fast or slow should it be to train up a skill? Or, does it just seem like a chore and something that should come automatically as you level up?
If characters do have skills that must be trained or improved, should each character be able to improve all skills they have access to up to their maximum? Or should there be limits such that you have to pick and choose how you will focus? If there are limits, how easy or hard should it be for you to change focus?
When you think about character diversity, or the idea that characters of the same class should have something that sets them apart from each other and distinguishes them from each other, where do you see that diversity coming from and how important is it to you? Is it just a cosmetic thing where people should be able to have different looks if they want, or should characters of the same class be able to play differently and still be effective? Should the primary source of diversity be from gear, for example weapon selection, or should there be other factors that players should have to tune along with their gear, such as skills and/or abilities? Should progression within a class be set up so that you have to make some choices along the way, that determine what's available to you at maximum level, or should everyone get the same exact set of abilities and options as they level up without having to leave any behind?
@Nephele it's funny how you posted this thread, I posted a similar one in pantheoncrafters.com without knowledge of this one.
https://www.pantheoncrafters.com/threads/skillpoints-and-crafting-levels.252/#post-3288
1) If the skills result into something (higher yield chance, higher damage chance, resist etc.), it does hold value to me. Especially if there are skillpoint treshold/-titles to showcase. Seeing the skill message pop up, makes your character feel more alive. When I have the time to explore and venture out to raise those skills, I will do so. Some would just be more pressing then others, I remember maxing out my safefall by flying/dropping to the ground for long periods of time. If skills are tied to levels, it should flow parallel with those levels. If they don't, I'ld rather have several skill point day, then all 10 in 10 min's. A level up does not garantee my character or the player being more skilled. So that would be a no-no for me. Skills are earned through practice, trial and error, succes and failure.
2) It depends on what kind of skills you're talking about, but let's say adventure/combat skills. I think it should matter and possibly visible if two players have different amount of skillpoints from one skill. (If 1 player has 200 pray skill points, and another has 50 pray points. Although they might have the same adventure level, it should be noticeable that player one has a bigger boost coming from those 200 points.) It should be something, players need to consider and keep track off. Slacking on a skill, could have consequences. And that's fine. Characterbuilds, could be a thing. I'ld welcome that in the game. I can definately see how playstyles can differ. Allowing the option to differentiate between players of the same class, by decisions on skillpoint investement (be that earned points or chosen skillpoint trees) has it's worth. It allows for different scripts and encounters to be written by the dev's. If everyone can max out on all, it leaves very little flexibilty for combat encounters. A reroll should have it's price, meaning..time needs to be invested to relearn your different playstyle. Not a 100% timeloss, but rather a heavy rollback. If a player has 200 skillpoints in prayer, but wants to switch to feral assistance, they'll roll back up to the point where they met that fork in the road. And instead of automatically having 200 points to spend, they only have 50 and need to build up again. The impact of change should not kill the character's chance of being beneficial after the switch, but should still have plenty of room to grow and improve. A time investement requirement, seems a fair solution, to prevent player from switching for one build to another in a heartbeat.
3) Weapons and armor, will have an impact on player diversity. There is a lot of room for other factors to stimulate this diversity as wel. All classes should in most cases be effective. Allowing class specific encounters or scripts, add more dept to classes and to the world. I'ld rather not see steamrolls happening on every encounter. Carrying a tome, a mace or a buckler could have a different outcome; statwise but also on what abilities are available. When you link that to skillpoints, it could work very well together and it could result in nice playstyle differences. Where a player invested/or earned a lot of points in "Lore" and wielding a tome, allows that player to use abilities better or uniquely, compared to a player of the same class and level, but who has invested in blunt weaponry skill points. I hope, Pantheon will offer different strats and scripts as the game expands and grows. One should not be punished and possibly be shut out from content based on their chosen skilltree. If that player still wants to access certain abilities in other skilltrees, that should be available. But as mentioned in 2), it should not go automatically/instantly. Allowing players to test out different playstyles within their class, might stimulate replayablitiy of content, which is a good thing.
Pantheon will be game where decisions have weight, so let chosing which skills to invest time or points in, be as meaningful.
How important are skills to your sense of character progression? Do you enjoy seeing skillup messages when you get better at a skill on your character? Do you actively go and try to work on improving those skills? How fast or slow should it be to train up a skill? Or, does it just seem like a chore and something that should come automatically as you level up?
I mean a good example is look at Runescape's revival. A lot of people play that game and it's nothing short of getting skills up. It's fun to see your characters growth. The speed I would say is decent is probably midish gameplay you should see atleast one improvement every hour if grinding during that hour.
My first character never seems like a chore with the skills being leveled up...but the second one usually feels like a chore..unless it is a different type..like a melee vs caster and the different skills you level up.
If characters do have skills that must be trained or improved, should each character be able to improve all skills they have access to up to their maximum? Or should there be limits such that you have to pick and choose how you will focus? If there are limits, how easy or hard should it be for you to change focus?
They seem to have limits already with the type of weapons/armor that you wear for each class..so no they shouldn't have to pick and choose based off of that. In terms of maximizing your skills whenever....probably not. I think the limit should be based on levels, like I said with the restriction of only certain weapons and gear types classes can wear I don't see why you need to pick and choose how you will focus since the developers have already picked for you.
When you think about character diversity, or the idea that characters of the same class should have something that sets them apart from each other and distinguishes them from each other, where do you see that diversity coming from and how important is it to you? Is it just a cosmetic thing where people should be able to have different looks if they want, or should characters of the same class be able to play differently and still be effective? Should the primary source of diversity be from gear, for example weapon selection, or should there be other factors that players should have to tune along with their gear, such as skills and/or abilities? Should progression within a class be set up so that you have to make some choices along the way, that determine what's available to you at maximum level, or should everyone get the same exact set of abilities and options as they level up without having to leave any behind?
For your first question, it is important and the easiest way I can see diversity among the same class revolves around stat distribution in the beginning, and your race. Races should start with different stat allocations, which means that they will ultimately be going for different pieces of gear to fill out stats that they have less of because of their race. So each race should have different priorities on gear.
I don't think you should limit anyone to choosing abilities. This usually ends badly anyways since every game I have seen do this can't balance the ability choice at all. One will always be a better choice than the other, and if you choose the wrong one you handicap yourself in the end. Giving players access to all the abilities is fine, the diversity comes from how you as the player want to handle certain situations with the 8 gem slots for spells you have..or however many thay allow you to have at once.
Nephele said:How important are skills to your sense of character progression?
Do you enjoy seeing skillup messages when you get better at a skill on your character?
Do you actively go and try to work on improving those skills?
How fast or slow should it be to train up a skill?
Or, does it just seem like a chore and something that should come automatically as you level up?If characters do have skills that must be trained or improved, should each character be able to improve all skills they have access to up to their maximum?
Or should there be limits such that you have to pick and choose how you will focus? If there are limits, how easy or hard should it be for you to change focus?When you think about character diversity, or the idea that characters of the same class should have something that sets them apart from each other and distinguishes them from each other, where do you see that diversity coming from and how important is it to you?
Is it just a cosmetic thing where people should be able to have different looks if they want, or should characters of the same class be able to play differently and still be effective?
Should the primary source of diversity be from gear, for example weapon selection, or should there be other factors that players should have to tune along with their gear, such as skills and/or abilities?
Should progression within a class be set up so that you have to make some choices along the way, that determine what's available to you at maximum level, or should everyone get the same exact set of abilities and options as they level up without having to leave any behind?
Skills directly related to the primary purpose of your class are very important, the rest not so much. Maxing out 1hb on a wizard is not as important as making sure your casting skills are all at their limit. Seeing those message gives that little kick to your sense of advancement. I do look forward to see those and would be quite disappointed if they were not shown to us. Other than trade skills, I've never really taken the time to focus on a primary skill as they would quickly go up just through normal adventuring. Ancillary skills like swimming or alcohol tolerance would be examples where I would devote time to raising them. I once swam the length of OoT to get my swimming from 1 to max...mostly because I had just fallen off the boat.
As for how quickly skills should go up, I'd like to see them coincide with the speed at which you level. If the skills go up by 10 each level then, on average, you would expect to see a skill up every 10% of a level if you were out adventuring normally and using that skill regularly and every skill you have should reach the maximum cap if you put in the effort to get it there, regardless of race or class. In EQ1 casters could pick a primary casting school skill (alteration, conjuration, evocation, etc) and only that skill to go to the maximum while the other were capped at a lower value. Wizard would focus on Evocation. I didn't have issues with that design decision and wouldn't be against it appearing in Pantheon though it should apply equally to melee.
Skills available to a given class should have skill caps equal across all races that can be that class. Gear and player skill should be the things that differentiate one person from another. Too often I've seen games where you have to pick and choose what skills/abilities you want and invariably it leads to gimped builds if you didn't follow the meta.
Nephele said:How important are skills to your sense of character progression? Do you enjoy seeing skillup messages when you get better at a skill on your character? Do you actively go and try to work on improving those skills? How fast or slow should it be to train up a skill? Or, does it just seem like a chore and something that should come automatically as you level up?
Skill-up messages are nice and do feel rewarding, but only if it takes a signficant amount of time to get them. It's fine though if at lower skill levels, progression is significantly faster. Simply to make sure you're not going to be stuck in perpetual skill check failures early on, which is discouraging.
If characters do have skills that must be trained or improved, should each character be able to improve all skills they have access to up to their maximum? Or should there be limits such that you have to pick and choose how you will focus? If there are limits, how easy or hard should it be for you to change focus?
If everyone can simply master all skills given enough time, then they eventually lose all meaning. Skill ranks are a good way to personalize your character (arguably the BEST way when it comes to your characters abilities outside combat, imo) and it'd be a shame if that potential was wasted. Changing focus should be far more involving than simply swapping out one skill for another. A good way to do it in my opinion would be to allow players to select skills to 'unlearn' once they reach the overall skill cap, which would not immediately reset that skill to 0, but instead allows them to continue to develop other skills that would gradually take points away from any 'unlearn'-flagged skills.
When you think about character diversity, or the idea that characters of the same class should have something that sets them apart from each other and distinguishes them from each other, where do you see that diversity coming from and how important is it to you? Is it just a cosmetic thing where people should be able to have different looks if they want, or should characters of the same class be able to play differently and still be effective? Should the primary source of diversity be from gear, for example weapon selection, or should there be other factors that players should have to tune along with their gear, such as skills and/or abilities? Should progression within a class be set up so that you have to make some choices along the way, that determine what's available to you at maximum level, or should everyone get the same exact set of abilities and options as they level up without having to leave any behind?
Skill choices should absolutely be impactful in terms of gameplay, but they ideally should not impact a character's combat prowess. That's what class and racial spells and abilities are for, which are much easier to balance if they don't differ too much between characters of the same class. It also makes it a lot easier to avoid cookie cutter builds that everyone has to go for to remain viable in combat.
Where skill choices should come into play the most in Pantheon in my opinion is through the perception system and possibly other environment-based interactions. It'd be wasted potential to simply have one 'perception score' that's tied to your class that everyone eventually maxes out.
I want to see skills for similar purposes like you'd see them in D&D, where skills add a good amount of utility to an adventuring party. I'll list a bunch of examples here to give you an idea.
- Detect traps
- Disarm traps
- Pick locks
- Track
- Animal handling
- Diplomacy
- Intimidation
- Deception
- Sense Motive (see if someone is lying)
- Listen
- Spot
- Climb
- Jump
- Swim
- Various fields of knowledge (religion, magic, nature, history, politics, etc)
- Performance (dance, music, etc)
There should be some overlap with regards to which classes gain access to what skills. Tank classes for example should be kings of physically oriented skills, and get limited access to social/knowledge skills (intimidate for Dire Lords, religion for Paladins). Rogues should get most of the dungeoneering skills and some of the physical stuff like climbing, while the options for Enchanters revolve around knowledge and social skills, etc.
A way to make it visible to other players that you're capable at a certain skill could be the ability to earn titles based on skills you have mastered. So if a group would like to take a specific approach to a dungeon for which they need a rogue that's able to scale a slippery wall and open a gate for them in order to bypass a certain chamber, or an Enchanter who is able to smooth-talk her way past an NPC that might otherwise turn hostile, they can check beforehand if a player who offers to join is capable of doing that.
I won't actually answer - I think you are getting plenty of good answers. I will give two concerns.
1. Skill increase of the type that some of the single player Elder Scroll games featured is a negative not a positive. I do not want to jump off a table thousands of times to injure myself so I can cast cures to raise those skills. Any skill increase should require a *real* use of the skill and this distinction can be almost impossible to make in a game.
2. LOTRO has a system where if you use certain class skills you gain deeds which give useful abilities. Not quite the same idea as raising the skill but not entirely off topic. There are limits to how often a day it counts to use the skill and when you can use it (e.g. hitting a trivial mob does not count for an offensive skill). It is endlessly excruciatingly boring to grind many of these deeds using skills you have no real need to use in the first place. Similarly using a skill 10,000 times in Pantheon because you want it maxed out just in case you need it some day will not be fun. Not even remotely.
By skills do you mean class abilities or crafting skills?
For class abilities/spells, I'm generally fine with them ranking up as you level, but I agree with Dorotea in that I don't like having to just spam an ability over and over again to level it up. Also not sure how I feel about something like leveling weapon skills. While I have a proud/fond memory of punching zombies to death to max out unarmed on my main character in WoW, I'm not so sure I want to relive that experience. If I earn a new weapon upgrade that happpens to be a different weapon type than what I've been using, I don't think I'd enjoy having to go out and smack mobs mindlessly with it for hours just to be able to make proper use of it in my current content.
One form of ability/spell "level up" that I was okay with was ability points in WildStar. You gain Ability Points as you level, and you can spend those points to upgrade specific abilities. You can reset those points whenever you want out of combat. It synced up well with the LAS system, which is something Pantheon is set to also have.
Other kinds of "skills" are fun to have to level up. Crafting skills, lockpicking, gathering, etc. They give you extra things to work on and progress beyond your character's power level. In the interest of letting people always have something to work on (and because I'm quite a completionist haha), I don't think you should have to choose between, say, leveling lockpicking and leveling fishing.
Here is my own personal opinion. I didn't put it up top because I wanted people to feel free to talk about how they personally feel on the subject, rather than feeling like they needed to respond to that crazy Neph person's opinions :)
Note: This is not in the same order as the questions above but does cover all of them.
In an MMO environment, it's very important to me that my character really feel unique. If I find that I look the same and play the same as every other character of my class/race, it really starts to diminish my enjoyment of the game. At the same time, I also want to see a lot of depth and complexity in terms of how my character grows over time. I really thrive on meaningful choices, where I can take different paths in my character development compared to other players, and still end up being "effective".
Thus, when it comes to skills, I feel like skills are, or should be, a really important part of character progression. If a class broadly represents what your character does, skills very specifically represent the different tools and methods your character can use to accomplish that goal. I like the concept of having an array of different skills that I advance in semi-independently of my level. It's nice to see those skillup messages and feel like your character is getting better at a very specific aspect of the game.
However, I also want those skills to really be meaningful. This means two things: First, I want them to have a real impact on gameplay. If a skill is there, but doesn't really do anything tangible, why have it? Second, I really want to be forced to actively invest in skills in some manner. If every single skill I have will eventually end up capped even if I do nothing special at all, then at the end of it all, it really feels kind of wasted.
This doesn't mean that I think advancing skills should be a chore, and I certainly don't advocate for things like putting a padlock on my keyboard to keep swinging at a training dummy (UO) or wedging my character into the corner of a pool of water and turning on autorun (EQ) in order to advance skills. However, I do very much support raising skills through use, as long as that use makes sense and can be done in a way that isn't prone to abuse by players.
When you combine my view on skills with the value I place on diversity however, what it means is that I actually appreciate systems that force me to make choices - so that in the end, my character won't be able to do everything equally well. I know that many games have attempted to do that, and then messed up the balancing, such that only one or two options ended up being effective for players to use - in my mind, that's not because the concept of enforced choices was bad, but because the implementation was poor. I might be a naive optimist, but I still believe that a smart dev team can set things up so that players HAVE to choose, and so that all the available choices are effective, in unique and different ways, when it's all said and done. I also feel that these sorts of choices should occur throughout character progression, not just at max level, and that they should be things that players can't easily back out of. You should be able to change your character's focus or specialization, yes, but not in the span of a few seconds or minutes. It should require work, and take time, so that the choices that you make really are meaningful and somewhat sticky.
I'll close by saying that my opinions on this have been formed over 21 years of playing many, many different MMORPGs. It's not a reaction to what I think any one game did really badly (or really well), but instead it's sort of the culmination of all those different games and experiences over time. I say this just so that no one thinks "Oh, Neph just feels this way because he played that one game". I'm not sure anyone would think that, but I felt like I should mention it all the same :)
My opinion :)
I'm going to be that annoying guy in this thread. (hush those of you who want to say I'm always the annoying guy in any thread I post in)
To put it simply Pantheon is being built on the platform that all characters of X class with Y gear at max level are exactly the same. Yes you need to gain ranks in your different skills but it is just a chore built in to make you more effective at the end of your level than at the beginning.
If there is no choice or true commitment to gaining skill ranks then I really don't see the point of wasting everyone's time. Sure the seeing 1 Hand Blunt has risen to (42)! is fun in the moment but it really has no long term purpose or meaning so just ditch it.
Now a built your own class by a combination of talent web and the skills you use type game is all about the skill ranks and I look forward to a developer willing to tackle that kind of game system, poor poor pre-NGE SWG.
How important are skills to your sense of character progression? - Very, back in the days i wouldn't go out to venture untill i had atleast maxxed my class skills (defense as a warrior, alteration as a healer)
Do you enjoy seeing skillup messages when you get better at a skill on your character? Yes and no, can't wait to see the message 'you've become better at fizzling'
Do you actively go and try to work on improving those skills? Yes, atleast the core skills for the class. The rest is for end game downtime.
How fast or slow should it be to train up a skill? slow, in an average group it should take atleast 20% of xp to gain it.
Or, does it just seem like a chore and something that should come automatically as you level up? It is a chore, but it is a chore that rewards you.
should each character be able to improve all skills they have access to up to their maximum? no, aside of core skills being different from class to class which should be maxed no matter the choices the player makes, there should also be secondary skills that have caps where only a maximum can reach a certain level cap. For a warrior defense 255, riposte 255, dodge 200. For a cleric 200 defense, 200 riposte, 255 dodge. etc.
Or should there be limits such that you have to pick and choose how you will focus? Limits all the way, if you say have a choice between dodge and riposte, only one of both should be able to pass the 200 mark.
If there are limits, how easy or hard should it be for you to change focus? it should come at a hefty cost, especially if there was some confirmation box selecting your choice.
where do you see that diversity coming from and how important is it to you? Mainly from gear choices and the textures that go with that gear. Aside of this i don't really care much if all clerics look a like, it is about the player in the end, not about the character that's being played.
Is it just a cosmetic thing where people should be able to have different looks if they want, or should characters of the same class be able to play differently and still be effective? i've never really been in favor of cosmetic skins, i like to know when i'm looking at a wizard or mage for PVE purposes. PVP i can understand why people would want to look like something they are not. Colouring i'm okay with.
Should the primary source of diversity be from gear, for example weapon selection, or should there be other factors that players should have to tune along with their gear, such as skills and/or abilities? primary source should be gear yes, i do see some options where you could pick specializations for skills and abilities, but in the end there will be one 'ultimate' build that everyone will largely follow or be forced to follow as per guild requirements.
Should progression within a class be set up so that you have to make some choices along the way, that determine what's available to you at maximum level, or should everyone get the same exact set of abilities and options as they level up without having to leave any behind? This is a good question, If there is a reset option than i can see a variation happening as you level up. But like stated above, eventually guilds (or content) will require you to respec to a certain specialization so i think it would be a bad move as the other options won't be used very often once the 'ultimate' things have been determined.
I like the idea of people of the same class specializing in different skills (for example, one warrior going the 1h slashing route, while another goes 1h blunt), but there are some things working against this. First, we have the concept of vulnerabilities of NPCs, so being only skilled in one weapon type may make you ineffective in some situations. Second, the game would have to make suitable gear available for all level ranges. That can of course work out, especially if crafting allows to fill gaps. And of course, many people are just completionists and will want to have all their skills maxed!
Then there's the question if everyone will be able to max out all of their skills at all. Maybe there are specialisations or something like that in place already. I think artificial limitations on how quickly you can gain skills are not going to work, people will find workarounds (like swimming in circles in a pool, or fighting your friendly summoner's pet to gain skillups).
If skills and skill-ups work mostly like EQ, I will be happy. Just make them a little more consistent: In EQ I often felt that I would gain quite a few skillups directly after leveling up, then nothing during most of the level, and then a few more shortly before level up again. Subjective, I know...but that's how it felt.
I will only comment on skill diversity because this is the only thing I care for .
Yes there must be a significant skill diversity in all classes depending mostly on race and eventually on deity or faction . It has been already said by VR many times that the race choice will matter - factions , abilities , skills , stats will and must be different because otherwise the notion of "lore and racial cultures matter" makes no sense . If Brad wants to create a world and not just a game as he says he can't have everybody in Terminus just a reskinned human . Races will have racial skills that few or none other races will have and I could imagine how worshipping a deity would provide skills that worshippers of another deity wouldn't have .
There are many obvious examples of diversity .
An elf is better at sneaking and hiding than an ogre . A dwarf is better at smithing than a halfling . A Myr is better at swimming than everybody else . An Ogre is better at 2H weapons than a gnome . Etc .
I want this virtual world feel consistent and a good amount of skill/ability diversity goes a long way to immersion and belieavability .
Allow me to make this suggestion here;
A class has two abilities, each requires a different skill. Stab (envolves piercing skill) and wack (envolves blunt weaponry skill).
1) Stab does 1-5 bleeding damage over time with a piercing skill of 1. As the player equips a piercing damage weapon, they are able to use the ability Stab. As that player uses the ability Stab, their piercing skill advances. It accumulates up to 20 skill points. This unlocks the improved ability; Stab II. Now that Stab ability does 7-12 bleeding damage. And so on.
2) Wack does 1-5 stun damage for X duration with a blunt weaponry skill of 1. The same process is required as with Stab, only the player needs to have a blunt weapon equipped, if they want to advance that skill...and thus also unlock improved abilities.
The restriction here could be, that one can only use gear that correlates to their current level.
This leaves players of the same class with different options and playstyles. They can choose to use piercing or blunt weapons. As they please. This is just a simple example, but hopefully you get the concept I'm laying out here. The idea would be to have a series of abilities players can choose from, that if they use them will define their playstyle. Using different abilitysets would not have the same result so it would have to depend on how the player wants to "advertise/display their class" using their own playstyle. You might have a shaman who has invested more in maximum heal amount-skills or another shaman who focused on using debuff abilities and mitigation. This again, by using primarely their preferred abilities and unlocking "improvements" of that ability. Players can try and max out on all, but that for the most of their gametime, would render them with a mediocre-skill set. So they'ld have a bit of everything, but nothing exceedingly well. Which is fine, for those that prefer that playstyle. Others however can really dig deep and focus on certain abilities, that will become outstanding compared to other players of the same class. This difference in skill and thus ability performance, will make players stand out and allow them to go all out in their chosen playstyle. If you tie this with gear and stat choice, things get really juicy for those that seek out the challenge/difference in a game.
It will leave all abilities available, but the performance will start to differ in time. And this active playerchoice, will start to show over time. Which again feels organic and makes sense. It requires no hard rerolls to switch to another play- or gearstyle. It just means you'll have to start using those other abilities more often. By allowing all abilities to be used, the skill choice will not render a player unable to influence a mob. They would just be less or more effective, if they chose to skill up in certain directions. The difference might be subtle at first, but it would be up to the player to go for this win/lose balancing act or maintain that win/win by maxing out all skills at the same time. This would require significantly more time and "catching up" with other more focused players would be near to impossible (unless that other player is not using those abilities). No player would be imcompetent in an encounter, just less effective in certain scenarios.
Another plusside: each skill up message would directly impact your ability performance, so it's not a meaningless ding.
It's not the same design as in other games, where as you reach a new level, your ability has gained a 2.0 version. The suggestion here, would require players choosing to use certain abilities more then others, and by doing so improving skillpoints related to those abilities with those improvements as end result. A character level up, could result in an overall or specific increase of stat that is unrelated to this suggest skill mechanic.
Deadshade said:There are many obvious examples of diversity .
An elf is better at sneaking and hiding than an ogre . A dwarf is better at smithing than a halfling . A Myr is better at swimming than everybody else . An Ogre is better at 2H weapons than a gnome . Etc .
I'ld agree, as long as those racial differences grow with the player and are not just a static thing one gets at character creation.
In time those racial differences might vanish if they do not scale with the player.
Vandraad said:1) As for how quickly skills should go up, I'd like to see them coincide with the speed at which you level. If the skills go up by 10 each level then, on average, you would expect to see a skill up every 10% of a level if you were out adventuring normally and using that skill regularly and every skill you have should reach the maximum cap if you put in the effort to get it there, regardless of race or class.
2) Skills available to a given class should have skill caps equal across all races that can be that class.
3) Gear and player skill should be the things that differentiate one person from another. Too often I've seen games where you have to pick and choose what skills/abilities you want and invariably it leads to gimped builds if you didn't follow the meta.
1) Would it still hold value to you, if you know in advance that you will get 10 skill points with each adventure level? Is it really a skill or rather a mechanic that blindly follows your class's level? Do you feel more skilled if you know in advance you'll have earned another skillpoint at 10 -20-30 % of a level?
2) Do you mean that a level of a class wil determine the skill cap? This could mean that every level 40 cleric will cap out on 200 skillpoints, no matter what race. Or do you mean to say that dwarves, dark myr and humans all have the same skill cap related to the cleric class? This difference could allow a dwarf cleric to have 200 skillpoints at level 40 and a dark myr (who hasn't reached the skillcap of 200 yet) 150 at level 40, purely based on the frequency they have used the ability and thereby triggered a skillincrease. The first could feel more "forced mechanic" while the second could leave space for diversity, depending on how that dwarf or dark myr reached level 40. (If you see what I mean)
3) Gear could impact a player intensly. Do you mean by player skill, the playstyle or actual use of skills related to their class? This again is a difference, because if two players have the same options in abilities and have the same amount of skillpoints, indeed the person behind the character will define the difference. If you meant to say the choice in ingame skilluse, it's the character itself that will define the different outcome compared to the same players of the same class. (a combo is possible here ofc)
dorotea said:I won't actually answer - I think you are getting plenty of good answers. I will give two concerns.
1. Skill increase of the type that some of the single player Elder Scroll games featured is a negative not a positive. I do not want to jump off a table thousands of times to injure myself so I can cast cures to raise those skills. Any skill increase should require a *real* use of the skill and this distinction can be almost impossible to make in a game.
2. LOTRO has a system where if you use certain class skills you gain deeds which give useful abilities. Not quite the same idea as raising the skill but not entirely off topic. There are limits to how often a day it counts to use the skill and when you can use it (e.g. hitting a trivial mob does not count for an offensive skill). It is endlessly excruciatingly boring to grind many of these deeds using skills you have no real need to use in the first place. Similarly using a skill 10,000 times in Pantheon because you want it maxed out just in case you need it some day will not be fun. Not even remotely.
1. If you don't want to cure yourself 1000 times then... don't. Just level up your skills through actual adventuring and all is peachy.
2. Again... don't? If you don't need a skill then don't level it up. If you might need it some day then level it up when the time comes.
If you dislike spending direct attention on the leveling of skills there's nothing wrong with letting them level up more organically, passively, through everyday adventuring.
Akilae said:dorotea said:I won't actually answer - I think you are getting plenty of good answers. I will give two concerns.
1. Skill increase of the type that some of the single player Elder Scroll games featured is a negative not a positive. I do not want to jump off a table thousands of times to injure myself so I can cast cures to raise those skills. Any skill increase should require a *real* use of the skill and this distinction can be almost impossible to make in a game.
2. LOTRO has a system where if you use certain class skills you gain deeds which give useful abilities. Not quite the same idea as raising the skill but not entirely off topic. There are limits to how often a day it counts to use the skill and when you can use it (e.g. hitting a trivial mob does not count for an offensive skill). It is endlessly excruciatingly boring to grind many of these deeds using skills you have no real need to use in the first place. Similarly using a skill 10,000 times in Pantheon because you want it maxed out just in case you need it some day will not be fun. Not even remotely.
1. If you don't want to cure yourself 1000 times then... don't. Just level up your skills through actual adventuring and all is peachy.
2. Again... don't? If you don't need a skill then don't level it up. If you might need it some day then level it up when the time comes.
If you dislike spending direct attention on the leveling of skills there's nothing wrong with letting them level up more organically, passively, through everyday adventuring.
Until you get to that high level / end game area where that skill is actually useful and can't get invites because "bro, you need skill x level 25 to do this" is the meta...
Zyellinia said:Until you get to that high level / end game area where that skill is actually useful and can't get invites because "bro, you need skill x level 25 to do this" is the meta...
If memory serves, there was a raid zone in EQ1 (Omens of War expansion I think) where you needed a maximum alcohol tolerance to avoid or at least minimize the effect. That was quite funny to see the reaction from people when we first experienced it.
Deadshade said:An elf is better at sneaking and hiding than an ogre . A dwarf is better at smithing than a halfling . A Myr is better at swimming than everybody else . An Ogre is better at 2H weapons than a gnome . Etc
Sneak/Hide would be more a class specific skill than a generic skill would you not agree? Alchemy for a Shaman, PoisonMaking for a Rogue, etc. And why should a dwarf be better at smithing? Because Tolkien says so or everyone just thinks they should be? Same does for 2hd weapon skills. The only difference between the 2hd weapons of the gnome and ogre is the size. Race has no bearing in any of this. A warrior is a warrior when it comes to skills.
Instead, I'd say that races should learn different skills quicker or slower than other races. The gnome, with its higher intelligence and wisdom, should learn skills at a faster rate than an Ogre. A Dwarf should learn smithing faster than all other races while the Dark Myr would start with swimming at the skill cap and if that cap ever goes up they learn swimming faster.
Vandraaad said:Instead, I'd say that races should learn different skills quicker or slower than other races. The gnome, with its higher intelligence and wisdom, should learn skills at a faster rate than an Ogre. A Dwarf should learn smithing faster than all other races while the Dark Myr would start with swimming at the skill cap and if that cap ever goes up they learn swimming faster.
This statement gave me a thought: If you left race out of this altogether, but made the attribute scores matter to everyone, would that actually help encouarge people to care about attributes that they normally wouldn't?
Example:
Intelligence influences the rate of skill gain for Knowledge-Type skills (Languages, some Perception skills, etc)
Wisdom influences the rate of skill gain for Awareness-Type skills (Tracking, Senese Heading, other Perception skills, etc)
If you were to take all the potential skills available to a character, and sort them into governing attributes, would this then make some of those attributes matter more to players? For example, if Dire Lords had a bunch of skills that were governed by Intelligence, would this result in Dire Lord players making different gear choices than, say, Warriors or Paladins?
Again, just a thought that I had when I read your post.
If different abilities have different primary attributes then I would suggest getting better at that skill is based on that primary attribute. Hack and Slash would likely both be strength based skills and disarm would be dexterity based. Taunt likely would charisma based and battle sense might be wisdom.
I don’t really see how an ogres lack of high intelligence would make it more difficult for an ogre warrior to improve his muscle memory for a specific skill.
Vandraad said:Sneak/Hide would be more a class specific skill than a generic skill would you not agree?
I don't think it needs to be specific to one class. Sneaking can still be an iconic ability for rogues while other classes get limited access to it.
For instance, Rangers and Druids could get to learn Hide and Sneak skills that only work in natural outdoor areas. While monks could have the ability to learn Hide, but not Sneak (so moving would always force them to come out of hiding right away) or the other way around (if enemies can 'hear' movement from behind a door or a wall and come searching, a sneaking monk could avoid detection as long as they remain out of sight). Wizards could cast invisibilty, but enemies with invisibility detection magic could still see them.
Poison application does seem a lot more fitting as a class ability that isn't tied to secondary skills, but I think Alchemy is more suitable as a craft accessible to anyone (like smithing).
I agree with you that dwarves shouldn't have the unique ability to be better smiths than anyone else, because then there's just no incentive for characters of other races to invest in it at all. I would however be interested in seeing some limited racial recipes for each craft. And maybe dwarves could get a few more of such recipes for smithing in particular.
Nephele said:Vandraaad said:Instead, I'd say that races should learn different skills quicker or slower than other races. The gnome, with its higher intelligence and wisdom, should learn skills at a faster rate than an Ogre. A Dwarf should learn smithing faster than all other races while the Dark Myr would start with swimming at the skill cap and if that cap ever goes up they learn swimming faster.
This statement gave me a thought: If you left race out of this altogether, but made the attribute scores matter to everyone, would that actually help encouarge people to care about attributes that they normally wouldn't?
Example:
Intelligence influences the rate of skill gain for Knowledge-Type skills (Languages, some Perception skills, etc)
Wisdom influences the rate of skill gain for Awareness-Type skills (Tracking, Senese Heading, other Perception skills, etc)
If you were to take all the potential skills available to a character, and sort them into governing attributes, would this then make some of those attributes matter more to players? For example, if Dire Lords had a bunch of skills that were governed by Intelligence, would this result in Dire Lord players making different gear choices than, say, Warriors or Paladins?
Again, just a thought that I had when I read your post.
EQ1 had something like that where either INT or WIS determined how fast you learned a skill (depending upon which stat was higher). But once it became easy to reach the stat cap, it all became quite pointless.
Combinations of these approachs would be a better option where Race affects the learning of some skills and Class the other. Take the DireLord, for example, that only uses slashing weapons. Any Direlord should raise the slashing skill faster than any other class that can also use slashing weapons even if that other person decided only to use slashing weapons. Rogues learn 1handed pierce faster than any other class, etc.
You can then add in some modifications for INT/WIS to further, but only slightly, differentiate between the race/class combinations. Continuing with the DireLord where you can choose Dark Myr, Human, Ogre, Skar we might assume that (going from lowest INT/WIS to highest) we order them Ogre, Human, Skar, Dark Myr. A Dark Myr DireLord would learn the slash skill faster faster than all the others but all would eventually reach the same skill cap. So a Dark Myr might reach the new level cap by the time they get 15% into a level the Ogre might need 70% of a level to reach the level cap, on average (assuming all other things being equal).
Vandraad said:
Sneak/Hide would be more a class specific skill than a generic skill would you not agree? Alchemy for a Shaman, PoisonMaking for a Rogue, etc. And why should a dwarf be better at smithing? Because Tolkien says so or everyone just thinks they should be? Same does for 2hd weapon skills. The only difference between the 2hd weapons of the gnome and ogre is the size. Race has no bearing in any of this. A warrior is a warrior when it comes to skills.
Why would races matter ?
Because of the obvious common sense ?
Who hides/sneaks better ? An elephant or a puma ? If you said elephant , it is not the right answer . What is better for smithing ? Strong arms and wide chest to wield this 10 kg hammer with accuracy or stick arms that can't even raise it high enough ? Who uses a 30 kg 2H hammer better , faster and hits with more devastating power ? A 3 m , 250 kg ogre or a 1m , 40 kg Gnome ? Who swimms better and faster ? A dolphin or a rhinoceros ?
The race has no bearing in these and many other skills ? Of course it has , at least in a Universe where different races have VERY different corporeal and intellectual abilities what we hope will be the case for Pantheon . Otherwise why bother with creating a fantasy world and all the lore and races - VR can just copy the Earth with a single playable human race .