((I can't believe anyone would defend this. It circumvents core values/tenets of the game. One of the most important decisions we make, where to start in the world, now has no consequence? This is catering to the lazy at the highest order. ))
If asked to vote I would probably vote against a one-use teleport scroll. I might even vote against against an EQ2-like system allowing a character to start in one of several friendly places, with no option whatever to teleport once he or she arrived on Terminus. But I am not at all sure I agree with your analysis. Especially if the player had a one-time only option to start in another racial starting area so he or she could play with friends - the purpose the OP was trying to accomplish - without any change in the normal transportation or faction options for that player or anyone else.
Assume for the sake of argument that elves and dwarves are friendly to eachother. What core value or tenet does it violate for an elf to start his or her adventuring life in a dwarf town. Sure the first elf quest might be to kill 10 pigs and the first dwarf quest might be to kill 10 rabid cows. Sure the character might learn more about dwarven history and less about elvish history. But do these implicate core values? I ask genuinely not as a debating device to support the OP - maybe there *is* some core value I simply am not focusing on.
Your second sentance is somewhat unkind. The motivation for the OP was the thought that it would benefit the game if new players could play together from the start. The thought that more people would try Pantheon if they could begin together. The knowledge that without something like this it might takes days or weeks for a character of one race to get to the starting area for another race and if three friends are debating whether to subscribe to Pantheon together or subscribe to Ashes of Creation together this might well be the decisive factor. I would not call this laziness.
Does Pantheon's success depend on mechanics like this one? Maybe.
It won't be just this one mechanic that leads to failure or success, but Pantheon is going to have to give a little on some EQ game tenets if it wants to attract enough players. They have to find the areas they can tweak to attract new players, without destroying the core game mechanics.
________________________________________________________________
I agree with Hegenox's original idea that bringing friends together at the start, can be good for the game, but I don't like the idea of a teleport scroll. The scroll has too many possible negatives, including people finding creative ways to use it for exploits. - - You have to find a way to get friends together with the least impact on core tenets.
I like dorotea's ideas
- The character creation screen has information about nearby friendly/KOS cities and races to help new players travel to each other to group up.
or
- A character can choose to start in another friendly city at the character creation screen. ** With ample warning that some things, like finding trainers or skills/spell could be harder. **
No other changes to the game or factions or quests, just the ability to get with friends at the start of the game.
I don't feel like this change would hurt core gameplay.
________________________________________________________________
Why might this be the key to Pantheon's success?
Pantheon is going to have to attract the largest demographic possible to be a success. Yes, Pantheon is a niche game, but even niche games need to work to attract the largest demographic, while still staying true to core tenets. The question really is about what mechanics can you change to attract the next generation of players while still staying true to those tenets? I think that this is an example of a small change to make the game new player friendly with no appreciable negative impact to the core game.
What do we gain?
The ability to play with friends. This is good is in so many ways. More players deciding to try the game since they can play with friends from the start. Longer retention of new player because their friends are still playing ... and longer retention leads to addiction, which most of us understand well. More people playing the game leads to others trying it from word of mouth, that is how I got into EQ. These are things Pantheon needs, if it wants to grow beyond it's dedicated base of fans.
What do we lose?
Players might miss out on the newbie experience of their racial starting city. What's to say that starting in another racial city won't be a great game experience. We all have unique stories to tell of our start in EQ, and maybe for Pantheon, some of those stories will be leveling up with a group of friends in a foreign city.
You might lose some players. If a dwarf goes to play with his friend in the elf city, it might be hard to find skills and spells for certain classes. Some people will quit over these things, other's will find the challenge rewarding. Do the players you lose from this situation outweigh the players who you gain, because they can play with friends? It's hard to say, but my thought is that getting more people to try the game is critical to longterm growth, even if some of those players don't stay.
dorotea said:((I can't believe anyone would defend this. It circumvents core values/tenets of the game. One of the most important decisions we make, where to start in the world, now has no consequence? This is catering to the lazy at the highest order. ))
If asked to vote I would probably vote against a one-use teleport scroll. I might even vote against against an EQ2-like system allowing a character to start in one of several friendly places, with no option whatever to teleport once he or she arrived on Terminus. But I am not at all sure I agree with your analysis. Especially if the player had a one-time only option to start in another racial starting area so he or she could play with friends - the purpose the OP was trying to accomplish - without any change in the normal transportation or faction options for that player or anyone else.
Assume for the sake of argument that elves and dwarves are friendly to eachother. What core value or tenet does it violate for an elf to start his or her adventuring life in a dwarf town. Sure the first elf quest might be to kill 10 pigs and the first dwarf quest might be to kill 10 rabid cows. Sure the character might learn more about dwarven history and less about elvish history. But do these implicate core values? I ask genuinely not as a debating device to support the OP - maybe there *is* some core value I simply am not focusing on.
Your second sentance is somewhat unkind. The motivation for the OP was the thought that it would benefit the game if new players could play together from the start. The thought that more people would try Pantheon if they could begin together. The knowledge that without something like this it might takes days or weeks for a character of one race to get to the starting area for another race and if three friends are debating whether to subscribe to Pantheon together or subscribe to Ashes of Creation together this might well be the decisive factor. I would not call this laziness.
The simple fact honestly is that you know that if you pick a dwarf you will be in a dwarven city and venture into areas influenced by the dwarves or their enemies, and if their friend decided to play an Elf than you alrdy knkw you aren't starting where he is, regardless of why you choose that race either for looks, or a class or whatever it doesn't really know because before you even finish the creation of that character you know you will be somewhere different, so to pick your character than to complain about something you've known to at least most of us in this forum could of been at least 4 years doesn't really require a change for the game to make, but maybe the player base to change to some of the challenges the game is actually trying to achieve even if it becomes a little bit inconvenient at times, like someone once said if you don't have some negatives in a game all the positives don't mean anything.
as much as I want to say yes, I have to say no.
Starting cities teach you how to be your race, what it means, lots of RP, lots of Lore, yadda yadda, specialties, what makes you, you- in game.
you make friends of strangers, and adventure out, you have RL friends and speak about it outside of game, perhaps yearning, sharing stories. you all make independent friends of strangers.
keep traveling. friends make friends.
then you meet! horray! look at all your friends! they are your friends? they are frinds of mine! hey.....(guild tag)
friends of friends group, original friends group and share stories, organic.
Ima go with the No crowd. Not that I hate your idea, it's just, that was part of the game (in EQ).
I remember making a gnome Necro and running it all the way to Neriak just to group up with family. It was honestly really fun trying to take a lev 1 across the world and not die.
I don't like "hubs". I don't want a Dalaran. I want everyone to go back to their home cities. I absolutely LOVE Neriak the city. I still enjoy running thru it today, 20 years later.
I reaaaaaalllly want them to make some special home cities. Make us need and want to go back. I liked my vendors being in my home city in 3rd gate. way at the back. I also didn't mind doing the first 3-5 levels by myself before heading out to group up for Befallen Dungeon. Also loved having a lev 5 Dungeon too.
but hey, I am old and nostalgic, so what do i know?
I say no to this idea. I do believe you can create more than one Char at the start of the game. If you need to group with friends have them all start different chars that can group together in different races, you might fine out you like that race! There will be a lot of time befor you make a char that will not be deleted by VR.