Skill limitations

[Dyson]

I think the concept of skill limitations is one of the most important aspects of any MMRPG, both for issues of fairness and theme. Though I like the skill-based system, one of a totally unfettered nature is an open call to excessive min-maxing; this, in turn, leads to the destruction of the "fantasy" element. To put it another way, if everyone can become a Grandmaster Fighter/Mage, who's going to be anything else? Even players who don't dedicate their lives to powergaming will be forced to obtain certain levels of proficiency in specific skills just to survive, since all the bad guys are supermen. Therefor, I propose a pseudo-hybrid skill "class" system. This doesn't mean you pick a class! The skills are simply devided into three or more "disciplines" (I suggest Fighting skills, Magic skills, Indirect skills and Trade skills). Achieving an average-to-high level of proficiency (if using the 1-100 standard, something like 40), imposes no limitations, so you could concievably have Fighter/Thief/Mage with relatively kickass stats. However, you can only have 40+ in two or more disciplines simultaneously, and 60+ in one. This system can be tweaked; I'm envisioning something like:

All skills: 1-40
Secondary & Primary Discipline: 40-60
Primary Discipline: 60-90
Primary Discipline, (no other disciplines above 30): 90-100

Disciplines break down as follows:

Fighting- all swords, weapons, armor, etc.
Magic: Druidism, Magery, Psionics, making potions/enchanting weapons/etc.
Indirect: Picking pockets, disarming traps, tumbling, etc.
Trade: Pottery, cooking, tailoring, etc.


Bear in mind, this won't effect most players at all, since just getting to 70-80 in anything should be extremely hard; Players in the 100s are legendary heroes, possibly on their way to godhood. Note that this system imposes no in-discipline limitations; you might want to institute some sort of skill cap overall (maybe 300, so an awesome, asskicking high-level wizard would have something like- 80 Pyromancy, 60 Aeromancy, 70 Abjuration, 20 Necromancy, 30 in Two-handed sword, 10 in Cooking, 10 in Tailoring, 10 in Pottery, and 10 in Climbing walls.

Anyway, I think this is a pretty well-balanced system. Anyone like it? Hate it?

[toray]

Rather than impose skill limitations, I'd work along the lines of skill trees.. you can only progress down branches that you've opened...

I.e. Melee Combat opens all the weapon and armor skills, one handed weapons opens mace, hammer, one-handed sword, club, and like weapons that have the same style of combat. One-handed Sword would open broadsword, short sword, and rapier. Etc... As you get more specialized, you spend more of your skill points on those skills. That way it's pretty much impossible to become obscene at multiple disciplines. I would make some skills mutually exclusive (ie, anything above say 3 levels of specialization in melee combat is mutually exclusive with anything above 3 levels of specialization in magic)...

Leaving the top end of the skills open is important to me because inevitably, you discover that players are more willing to powerlevel (call it what you will) than you'd imagine, and I don't like a closed system... if I want to specialize in rapier and dagger to the exclusion of all else, and I spend all my copious free time (assuming I had copious free time) in-game, then I shouldn't have to take dozens of other skills I'm not interested in simply because I've topped out rapier and dagger combat :)

[Scrote]

Adding to this discussion I believe a form of skill decay should take place. However I don't advocate that this should be to the extent where players are forced to kill stuff mindlessly in order to maintain their skills at their current level.

Like everything else a happy compromise should be reached between realism, balance and enjoyment. I do think that after a certain amount of time of not practising his skills even the most badassly slick rapier + dagger Grey Mouser type would become a little rusty. It just makes sense for that to happen. It's also important for game balance: it automatically keeps in check - up to a point - those crazy crazy powerplayers we all know and love. Otherwise, like it or not, you will find people defeating even the toughest foes within a surprisingly short space of time. Maybe this isn't such a bad thing though, it bears some thinking about.

If this system were to be used, I would advocate that it measures game time and not real time since that would definitely be unfair to the more casual players. And maybe it should only happen when a player reaches a very high skill level in something, again to prevent the casual players from suffering.

It's not hard to avoid the "killing stuff to keep my skills peaked" syndrome either. Duels, tournaments, competitions, sudden attacks, constant action, friendly requests, services demanded can all keep people on their toes without requiring them to go on a monster-bash.

I'm using simple terms here because I'm a simple man so let me disclaim the above with the fact that I realize the Arcanity dev team has stated that they're not into "monster bashes". Arcanity won't involve the stupid repetitive chores that other games demand. This is a good thing. But I used the term because it's an easy way to express what I was getting at. You all know what I meant by it.

Don't you?

S'right,
Scrote

[Dyson]

I like the idea of skill trees, especially with mutually exclusive specializations. Perhaps a modified skill tree / point system might be useful? Also, some form of Point Decay should be a given, I think... I agree that nothing major should occur, either. Perhaps a minimal level of proficiency? Maybe a cutoff point {again, this is out of 100}- 30 (at 60), 60 (at 90). Ie, a wizard with 92 in Pyromancy won't ever decay below 60, no matter how long he leaves it (that field of study has simply been part of his life too long).

One other thing we haven't touched upon yet is player knowledge of game mechanics; personally, I'd like to allow the players to pick what skill they want to use and see relative titles to gauge their effectiveness (ie, novice, journeyman, master, etc), but no flat numbers. As soon as you give the player knowledge that they have "98.4," the game instantly is reduced to point-watching, with the accompanying lame conversations ( "yeah, I gots .2 points more LongSword skill then you. Watch out, bitch!" ). These really kill the fantasy setting, in my opinion.

[Rolfe]

This is a complicated thread. Requires a little more thought than the others.

We argued a lot and I was really against a skill decay. We all agreed that it was realistic, but I advocated that it was frustrating and that with our current skill system, it wasn't necessary. What I mean by this is that it seemed to me that players wouldn't have skills just laying around that they never use with the current system. You fight monsters, do quests, go on expeditions, find treasures, and explore new areas. All of these things give you experience. I don't think we specifically stated this in the skill system, though I know it was hinted at that you wouldn't just be bashing monsters for XP. Hinting at it without specifically giving detail on it wasn't purposeful. It's just that there is so much information that sometimes I forget to include some of the details. Back to the point. You gain experience, redeem your experience points for training or learning. This training or learning expands your potential in a chosen skill. Then to actually REACH that new potential, you practice that skill in "real life" situations, and that will increase your skill points up to your potential. There will also be ways to unlearn skills; it's not so important how as much as that it WILL be possible. So my point is that if you have skill points just sitting around in underwater basket weaving, and you never weave baskets underwater, you're going to unlearn those skills and put them into something that you DO use ASAP. In other words, all of the things you have skill points in will be things that you constantly use.

"But, Rolfe, unlearning skills just by pressing a button? Or what? How realistic is that?" Well I think it's more realistic than it seems at first. In reality, if you don't practice underwater basket weaving for a long time, it's because you're spending your time doing something else (Tae Kwondo or watching TV or something). In the game, you say to yourself, "Self, I don't use underwater basket weaving skills AT ALL. I'm going to, from this day forth, use the time that I would normally spend practicing that useless skill to instead practice sword play." So that is represented in game by simply unlearning a skill in order to make room for another skill in your time schedule.

Some of the other questions and suggestions here are fairly well explained in the "Skills and Stats" section under the "Game" page. So check that out and point out anything that could use clarification.

[gagaliya]

This is a touchy subject, it really require very careful balancing and testing. Because changing(nerf) a skill due to its overpower after the game is released is one of the worst things you can do to a player. One problem as stated previously no class, free skill system leads to is a super combo that everyone uses, like in asheron call. It was warrior wizard(i think, forgot long time:P). Basically you have about 80% of the players with that combo, which breaks the game. The skills need to be balanced and yet different and unique each of them, i think despite what is said, blizzard did a great job with skills for d2. Skill cap does not make sense imho, it is generally accepted the higher your skill the more time is needed to increase it further and you need to fight higher level monster, but it should never cap out. I really dont think there is any easy way of doing it but to first make up the skills we want, and then a lot of hardwork with testing and betas to balance them, hopefully.


Gagaliya, GNOME!

[Dyson]

I like the idea of unlearning skills, but there should be limits on how many XP you can "siphon" from one area to another. Otherwise, a Supreme Lord Cook (or whatever) could just decide- "hmm, today I think I'll be a Supreme Lord ighter" (or wizard, or whatever). I'd be very cautious about allowing unfettered Unlearning, though I do like the idea that it can be done, and the logical justification. Maybe a time implementation? IE, you select your skill- Underwater Basket Weaving, to use the example- and transfer it to Magical Theory. Rather then a straight "drop" of XP, the XP is doled out to the skill over the course of many game days. There is no apparent change at first, but over the next few weeks of play, the Skill in Basket Weaving will peter out, and the skill in Magical Theory will recieve its boost (hopefully, the player will be practicing Magic anyway, so it just seems to her/him that the skill went up unusally fast).

[Dyson]

Ooh, that should read "Figher," not "ighter." hehe..
Though I wonder what character class that would be...?

[Rolfe]

Please read carefully the steps above. Here's a summary:
1) You get XP
2) XP enables you to learn or train in a skill. This extends your potential in the skill you train.
3) Now you must actually REACH that potential by fighting or casting or whatever.

Learning a skill from a teacher, master, or out of a book isn't the same as actually practicing in the field. You can learn Jujitsu out of a book all day long. What happens though is that you only retain the basics. You may not even understand the more intermediate stuff until you've practiced the basics in combat. Simulated combat can help, but even THAT isn't as good as real combat usually. Once you actually can apply those basics, you read the book again and begin to retain and understand the more intermediate stuff. You practice that in combat and the cycle continues. In the game, you're going to go to your guild and learn the basics, then you must go and practice them in combat before actually being able to apply those basics effectively.

So you unlearn Basket Weaving and you get the XP from it. That doesn't mean you can instantly become better at magic because you haven't actually practiced or even LEARNED any magic yet. You take those XP points to the magic guild and say, "Teach me some magic". They teach you magic, your POTENTIAL goes up, then you must actually go cast spells to have your skill go up.

Hope that clarifies everything.