The World of Layonara
NWN Discussions and Suggestions => NWN Ideas, Suggestions, Requests => Topic started by: Chnmmr on December 02, 2006, 05:26:57 PM
-
I'll probably be flamed for this, I dont care. I really suggest that people are limited on the number of quests they can take part in. Why? Some people (example myself) because of timezone can only attend very few of the planned quests. And when I need to fight 10 other people for places on a limited slot quest it is -very- aggrevating when I see the people get in already involved in other quest.
I would -love- to attend quests but sadly my time zone AND people's want to be in every quest possible means I always miss out. And I don't think its fair at all. Today I wasnt able to make the roll on a quest that I wanted to attend... which happened to be the only quest line that was suitable for my timezone... so this is another month I am questless.
Feel free to call this whining if you really want to. I am stating a fact for me. Currently the fact people can join however many quests they want means I get into none. And on a server where quests mean alot and provide much of the xp for higher levels... and a big opportunity to meet people and do things that affect the world. I really feel left out.
Also how about more one off quests? Less quests that stretch 3,4 10 sessions long each asking for returners only. Opens up a lot more quest slots for people.
-
I disagree with your suggestion that people be limited on number able to join. Because speaking as someone who formerly could attend a lot and now can attend very few due to work scheduling, I have seen both ends of the spectrum. I would *not* want to limit someone else just because I can't go. But I do agree, I'd prefer to see fewer of the "10-week-long and closed party" quests and more spontaneous and short-term quests. If there were more shorter ones, then people who miss one get more chances to attend another, even if they did end up closed. I dislike the idea of putting a penalty on others just because their amount of time and geographical position simply happens to be advantageous. I do, however, like the idea of more opportunity. I realize that this puts more on the shoulders of the GMs, but hey... they're there for a reason. ;)
EDIT: left out a "not" where there should've been one. thanks Rev!
-
You are simply caught in a bad time. There is not alot of GMT timezone quest atm. 6 months ago, there was nothing -but- GMT timezone quests. It fluctuates alot, and you just need to carry on forward.
-
In the end I would have to vote no on limiting quests. With that said sometimes there seems like two worlds on Layo with the regular world and the quest world in which many things happen but only a few are in on it.
-
Blackguy's right; a while ago, I couldn't find a quest that I could make for the life of me, as everything was GMT, with one or two on AEST.
I didn't end up getting to go on last night's quest anyhow, due to some seriously aggrivating connection issues; I have to apologize for filling that slot. I'd been looking forward to going, but... Things happen. The only reason I wasn't rolling with the rest was because I PMed Nova before the first one, stating my hopes to come.
I really think the solution here is fewer long-running quests that are closed at whatever point, and more short, 1&2-shot non-closed quests. Coyote's Non-Lawful quest was good example of that - nay, a GREAT example of that. As was Ogzuhimmal's Mind-Flayer/Beholder one-shot... Though that was about a year ago.
The following equations will demonstrate, SCIENTIFICALLY, how the closed status of a quest, and the number and length of quests, affects fun.
Open Quest = Fun.
Closed Quest = Not nearly as fun.
Fewer, Longer Quests = Fun-ish
MORE MORE MORE, Shorter Quests = FUN TO THE MAX.
See? Scientific PROOF.
-
Even though I have some of the same frustrations, I would vote "no" on limiting the quests as suggested. While Stephen's post has a certain mathematical flair, there should be room for all types of quests or quest series, to meet the desires of all members of the community. Short and/or sponteneous quests would give more players the chance to participate, and that's a good thing. But they shouldnt have to be at the expense of long running quests consisting of weekly (or so) sessions, which I would imagine gives the players involved a lot more "PnP feel".
However, as a suggestion to my fellow players (and to the DMs), if a (non-plot) quest has more people trying to join than are allowed by the DM, consider letting those who don't get the chance to participate in many quests have first priority before resorting to dice rolls.
-
We can't have both without more DMs. As it stands now the majority of quests are multi-session ones which tend to be closed in some respects and have far more people intested in them than there are places. To make things worse some people are getting on many quests while others can't even manage to get on one.
Whats the point of a server advertising lots of DM run quests when people can't even get into one?
if a (non-plot) quest has more people trying to join than are allowed by the DM, consider letting those who don't get the chance to participate in many quests have first priority before resorting to dice rolls.
On all the servers I've been on, this has never ever worked. Unless rules are put in place players -will- do what they want; which is currently getting into as many quests as possible without care that others are trying to get into even just one.
So ask yourself this. What is more important? More people being happy that they got to be in a quest? Or cater to the fewer that manage to get into all the long winded quests.
-
Looking at the last month I can count:
Open Sessions: 1111111111111111
Closed Sessions: 1111
CDQs (or similar): 111111
And stopped checking at the 18th of the month. As it was quite pointless to continue. I just don't understand what you mean with "the majority of quests are multi-session ones which tend to be closed in some respects".
-
Yeah, I've noticed it's been going on for a while now. Think most of the quests being run now are closed-party, long-running series quests where 3-5 people can get to join every few weeks with a lucky roll. The whole thing is a double-edged sword in quite a many ways. Perfect quests for some, and for some it can be pretty frustrating to find a quest to join and have some fun.
Anyway, here's a GM's (well a former Layonara lead quest GM anyway) view on the matter. So nothing official... just me being bored and typing out something!
Easier to run, way more interesting and enjoyable for all the participants. It's easy to see why most quests are the series type. They are usually far more enjoyable for both the player and the GM running the quest. Having the same players and NPCs and so on adds depth to the quest and the character development happening during the quest. It's easier for players to get into the plot when it's the same thing going on for weeks, but it's also significantly easier for the GM to weave the story further based on the earlier events on the series and not having to create a new base story every time you start running a quest makes the whole GM job more enjoyable in general.
In the end it's a lot like running a PnP campaign, where people get familiar with each other and there's a lot more space for interesting roleplaying during and between the quest sessions. Also quests like this can have an effect on the world... which a short one session quest would never even hope to achieve.
Now the 3-5 hour single session quests can be pretty difficult and stressing at times. Sometimes they're great fun, sometimes nothing goes right and it's just one great headache. I used to run a lot of these back in the day, for example if anyone can remember my insane gnome quests... heh. Simple quests with crazy gnomes and mindless plots.
With a single session quest you have several things making it difficult. First you have a time limit... Usually about 5 hours max since after that it gets kind of tiresome and people usually have to leave. So within the 5 hour or so limit you have to get the setting for the quest done... Get the players on the quest to understand what's even going on or why they would all of a sudden want to travel to a dangerous mountain cavern full of deadly traps to recover a poor gnome's lost lucky screwdriver.
So you see the story has to be short and simple... but at the same time dynamic and enjoyable. And it can't be too difficult to figure out... Often on long quest series you see the great adventurers (or misadventurers rather) following what they *think* is a clue for hours and hours... Which can lead to some fun RP and adventuring and so on but on a single 5 hour quest you can't afford that.
So all in all it's really no wonder why I don't see that many shorter quests. They can be a pain at times... With possibly new players, new NPCs, new setting, new plot, and less time to manage it all. Also the level of roleplaying usually doesn't get close to what you can achieve on a series of quests... since there's a lot more feeling of involvement in that case.
However for some players it's the only kind of quests they can join. And it can be quite frustrating to play on a roleplay server with a lot of quests being run but nothing you can join.
Now it would be ideal if the GMs could balance the quests they run, and I think it's being done anyway... Just it can easily get out of control when your quest series span a lot more events than you originally intented to. I'm sure almost any GM could mention a quest series they intented to be a single session or a few parts but lasted far longer.
Perfect balance there would be some quests for the community, the single session quests for those people with a bit less flexible schedules. Then of course there's the CDQ's which are a different type of quest on their own. And then there's the third kind of quests... long-lasting series with much more feeling of involvement for both the GM and the players.
This was kind of attempted before. When there were a few GM's focusing on CDQ's, some focusing on more important quests/events and some focusing on just ordinary quests. But I think it should be all the GM's splitting their questing time between the different quest types.
Then about the actual topic of this thread... Quest limits might be a good idea really, if it could be done in a reasonable and fair way. But there can be quite a few opinions about what's reasonable and what's fair.
Then again not sure how fair it is to have a few players join every possible quest and then some who can't join the few they actually could manage because someone else already has the spot on that quest and a few others too. Don't think I can really say whether I agree or disagree with it.
Having more quests in all the timezones would be the ideal solution really... there's just the matter of getting the people to run the quests, which isn't all that easy.
-
I think I've been on a total of four quests, one spontaneous, including someone else's CDQ. In the case of the two regularly scheduled quests, I went prepared to wander away cheerfully should too many people show up. However, I don't think there were more than five for either of those. Certainly not the twenty-some who had signed up.
Perhaps the real problem is that the quest "descriptions" on the calendar are not very descriptive. Some of them list level limits, group size limit, RP vs. hack & slash, and have a short paragraph describing the premise. Those are the only ones I would consider signing up for. Some are "details to come later," although the details never show up on the calendar at all. A lot of them seem, to me, to give some very basic idea of what the quest is about, but don't state whether it's open or closed, what the level limits are, how big the party can be, or any other details that might help to decide whether or not the quest is appropriate for YOU. Only the first type of description I mentioned is particularly inviting to someone who's just looking for a quest to join. The others tend to leave one with the impression that they're aimed at someone else, who already knows the details. Maybe they are; in that case, there DO need to be more open quests. Otherwise, I think quest descriptions should be required to conform (at least somewhat) to the situation-levels-groupsize-type format.
Thank you. That is all. *bows*
-
Weeblie - 12/4/2006 3:23 PM
Looking at the last month I can count:
Open Sessions: 1111111111111111
Closed Sessions: 1111
CDQs (or similar): 111111
And stopped checking at the 18th of the month. As it was quite pointless to continue. I just don't understand what you mean with "the majority of quests are multi-session ones which tend to be closed in some respects".
Surely you are not taking into account that many of the quests are 'open' but preference given to returners from part 1 or whatever of the quest. Essentially thats a closed quest as maybe there is one or two available places sought out by 5 or more non-returners.
-
I'd like to chime in here.
First, the broad strokes with which the quest situation is being painted is not really looking at the whole picture. And in reality, this stuff goes in cycles. Some other points
A series does not mean "closed".
Many series started out as one-shot or short-run quests.
Don't look at who is all signed up for a quest and decide not to attend. Often, many people don't show. Take the chance.
In most cases, the length of a quest series is determined by the players, not the GMs. In almost every case of which I am aware, the GMs planned for a quest series of a particular length, and the actual length ended up being significantly longer because of the actions of players and their characters.
A good example of this is the Angel's Tear series, which has now been running for over a year. It's been open to anyone (preference given to those who have shown dedication to it, of course) for its entire length except for the few times where due to geographic and/or temporal necessity the party was locked into a particular configuration. It is currently in such a state right now, because the party is in Voltrex. Having someone just show up fresh on a continent that is restricted just would not make sense. There are several people who are on the quest now who were not at the beginning and who indeed had a lot of catching up to do, and there are several who were with the quest for a very long time but who no longer participate. There have also been a few who have come for a few sessions, contributed and left. And this is certainly one of those quests that has been elongated by the actions of its players and their characters, though it was never designed to be short.
Just some things to think about.
-
My two true
You cannot please everyone.
My Explorers series is just that , a series.
Why? As IDii stated so well, it is because that is what makes it enjoyable for me as a DM to run. A story that can change the world as well as have an impact on the characters that participate in it. It is open to new players at any time, you just need a reason to be there RP wise.
In an effort to make it available to more people I split the quest into two groups. Now Geryon and I have 24ish questers to participate instead of 12. A dozen more spots. Not every one can make every quest. This leads the possiblity of open spots for new people. In the last series only once did I have so many returning players that they had to roll spots. Broad generalization but there is ususally one spot or more up for grabs.
All that said:
I have some free time Fri am. The saga of Iona Woodenspoon continues.
-
Chnmmr - 12/4/2006 5:00 PM
Weeblie - 12/4/2006 3:23 PM
Looking at the last month I can count:
Open Sessions: 1111111111111111
Closed Sessions: 1111
CDQs (or similar): 111111
And stopped checking at the 18th of the month. As it was quite pointless to continue. I just don't understand what you mean with "the majority of quests are multi-session ones which tend to be closed in some respects".
Surely you are not taking into account that many of the quests are 'open' but preference given to returners from part 1 or whatever of the quest. Essentially thats a closed quest as maybe there is one or two available places sought out by 5 or more non-returners.
Yes, I do indeed count the quest series giving preference to returns. And I also do disagree with your last statement.
On the quest series I've been too, I have only seen the dices been used ONCE! It was... well... a really large amount of people showing up at that time. And, as with most cases, people only attend a few sessions, so the free spots were available again shortly afterwards.
In my own experience (which might be because I'm mostly playing at Aussie times when the server has low traffic), it's not the "there is too many" that's the problem, but rather "there is too few".
Don't be scared away by the number of sign up. Usually, 50% or less actually shows up. Also, don't be afraid of the "previous attendants have preference". Not everyone can attend every single session in the quest series. The chance for at least some spot to be free is extremely high.
I've been to many quest serie sessions, spontanteous quest sessions, short sessions quests, etc. I've only seen the dices been rolled twice: Once at that time I mentioned, the other, on the Defence of the Great Oak quest (one of the end plot quests).
If you haven't had the opportunity to attend quests due to the fact that there was no slots left, just keep trying. It was most probably simply bad luck. :)
Edit: Forgot to mention that even though the dices were used on the Defence of the Great Oak quest, no one was rejected still (due to some IC choices)!
-
Good points all around, but I really only have one point to make... I've been here over a year, now, and I've seen the cycles they're talking about. Many of the people posting in this thread have been here much longer, and have seen those very same cycles. The answer really is to just stick it out; your time will come. This goes for everyone.
-
In my own experience (which might be because I'm mostly playing at Aussie times when the server has low traffic), it's not the "there is too many" that's the problem, but rather "there is too few". - Weeblie
I've seen that a few times. 30 people have signed up, and only 5 attended. As I recall, the GM's had to quickly replan, making it a little easier.
But on a side note....keep glancing at the Calendar. I've just spotted 3 new quests available to join which must have been put on tonight. Poor Woodenspoon.
-
LordCove - 12/4/2006 5:53 AM
In my own experience (which might be because I'm mostly playing at Aussie times when the server has low traffic), it's not the "there is too many" that's the problem, but rather "there is too few". - Weeblie
I've seen that a few times. 30 people have signed up, and only 5 attended. As I recall, the GM's had to quickly replan, making it a little easier.
__________________________
I have to agree with this. I often have planned elaborate single session quests expecting the number of people signed up to attend and when we get to it only a handful show.
I think another concern might be the people who sign up to every possible quest they can without even thinking about them and then don't show up to half of them anyway. I have noted over time that some people do this on a regular basis. Not always the same people mind you. When this happens people look at the numbers and don't even bother attending..especially if it would require them to maybe get up and hour earlier or stay up an hjour later in order to make the event if there is a chance they will have done it for nothing.
Also in chmmnr's case if you show up for a quest that you can actually get to only to be turfed out and half the group going on the quest have already been on a number of quests that month...well thats got to smart a bit. So I think there just needs to be a bit of consideration for peoples concerns and a realisation of where they come from before everyone starts voicing objections to their opinions.
-
As someone that very, very rarely is able to make it to quests, I'll add the following: If you are an infrequent quest goer, don't be afraid to say this OOCly during the dice roll portion. Everyone on the server is pretty friendly and I suspect you'd get someone to offer you a spot. Also, if you PM the GM running the quest ahead of time with your reasons for wanting to join the quest (either IC reason or OOC reason) you may get in anyway. That said, use this wisely and be respectful of others that may be worse off than yourself.
Also, you may just have to face the reality that you won't make any GM quests. There is a player event calendar too: No XP, but the RP is often on par.
-
Awww... I thought I had made a good point.
*gets ignored*
*sulks*
-
*Pets Bunny.* That's okay, you did make a good point. Have a brownie.
-
I am inclined to agree with Lord Cove and Dezza. The majority of the time, not a lot of people show up for quests that they sign up for. I remember seeing your character Kyoro on that quest from Steverimmer when we were nearing the end.
Look who signed up for the fist event:
http://www.layonaraonline.com/forums/calendar/event-view.asp?eventid=2412&year=2006&month=11
http://www.layonaraonline.com/forums/calendar/event-view.asp?eventid=2531&year=2006&month=11
(and this was who actually turned up...there was two or three more)
The point all of us here are saying is turn up.
I thought that I will never get a chance to play a quest at all. But just meeting new people looking at the calendar you'll get there.
Oh and look out for spontaneous quests they are around :)
-
I've been in two spontanious (to my knowledge anyway) quests so far ... neither of which started with me ... I just happened to be at a spot where a DM showed up and started running something nice and small. Both were fun and im still looking for someone on account of the first one. oh and i just got my character on the 2nd so *shrugs* it's all luck and placement.
By the way having more descriptions for the quests WOULD be really really apreciated especially as some are level limited. Thanks :)
-
I know theres no way to do this but I do kind of wish there was repercussion to signing up for a quest and not showing up for it. Like after a few times of not showing you are not allowed to sign up on quests again for a month, or if you have a habit of signing up and not showing you aren't allowed to roll the dice for an empty slot.. just anything to keep the list of names from being so long if half or more of them have no real intention of being there
I say this because when I see that long, long list of names every time a new quest shows up my impulse is simply not to bother (I'm also not such a good role player yet that i want to be a part of a group at the expense of someone else who might have added more to it, so i don't want to get in by a lucky roll of the dice or have people wishing someone else was there but i took her slot) if most of these people are just signing up and not showing up and have a habit of continually doing this then how many more (probably newish like me) players are also being scared off?
Remember I said I know this isn't possible (or probably popular) so you don't have to list the millions of reasons why. I'm just venting.
-
Memiles: We all had to start somewhere, please do not discount your role playing abilities. If you are trying, that is what matters. I highly doubt others would be "wishing someone else was there but i took her slot" but more.. "cool ... a new person to get to know".
-
*gets ready to duck*
If you go look at the quests, you will see the same names for every single quest. I think that the xps given for quests might need to be looked at and lowered/removed. It fixed a major part of the CDQ quests.
I think this would make DM quests more for people who want to RP and be apart of Layo and weed out the few who are signing up for every single DM Quest. IMO some do that for the easy xps at the higher levels.
Just my opinion.
-
Wouldn't that make people then just bash for XP and levels?
-
hmm Drizzlin is not altogether wrong. But I always wonder what I would do if I had time to make all quest?
-
I'm pretty sure the same-name signups thing has been addressed repeatedly. They often don't even show up! If you actually ATTEND--you, yourself, attend many quests and see the same names every time, number one, hey! You're one of them! Two, assuming that they do it just for XP is a gross generalization. Maybe they don't like grinding and like, I don't know, stories and plots and roleplay and influencing the status of the world? XP is granted for quests because it is FAR more character impacting and skill using than hitting a zombie over the head until it falls over. IT IS HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE. Sorry I can't help but be a little annoyed at this line of thought--it just keeps coming up and while some might say, "that means its a real problem!" it's really just because it is the fundamental nature of most to, when unable to have something for whatever reason, wish to ensure that no one else does either. Some people go on quests just to leech XP, fine, they sit there and do nothing except stare at a wall or something and get XP at the end. Whatever. There aren't THAT many, and most of those can be coaxed into involvement with some effort from the more outgoing characters. But wait! That person has been all over the world, gone back in time, fought Blood, recovered artifacts, been a spy, become a vampire, taken over a legacy, defeated the lich, been transformed into an orc, foiled the soul mother, helped a merking, saw a goddess, saved a port, redeemed a fallen paladin, realigned the planes, used their skills in combat and mental battles and has gotten a lot of XP for it! Clearly they should be level ten like my character because questing is a really silly way to level! Please tell me how exactly it makes sense to give XP to grinders that hit the same spots over and over again amassing wealth and levels without ever attending world events, but nix actual skill usage and world influence as a means of advancement? Uh... Perhaps I'm just defensive as well as incredulous because my character's advancement has been almost totally from quests. Yeah! Powerquester! Wait, not. She's been involved in a LOT of things and if she got there because she killed the same spawn of giants 3948572938754203852 times I would not be playing on this server.
-
ouch! this thread is cutting close to the bone. Im out.
-
Heh right, after I had a snack and a PC Screen Headache eased the rant remains unedited but rather added to here--the frustration was not actually targetted to someone suggesting something or even idly considering it, but rather the fact that the same things keep being repeated and I'm not sure why. People in any of the many camps (there are not just two, as implied earlier) paint what they see as the problem in very broad strokes that lump the good in with the bad no matter who is being talked about.
My character hasn't been in all the quests I listed; I just tossed some out that I could think of to demonstrate that questing XP is granted for a reason--it's earned, and usually involves more of the raking over the coals than simply running at something, dying, running back, etc.
Ah! But see, does that imply that people who DON'T quest all just run die run die? No, they don't--I didn't actually start questing until some of my friends left the server and a lot of her development and fun went out the window. She was never meant to be a leveller and people giggled at the thought of her ever being epic. There are many different ways to advance legitimately that are encouraged, whether with roleplayed adventures that have no need for GMs at all (what's better than being able to have your own fun?)--which can be simplified to just bashing and grinding over and over again, questing (dynamic and world impacting)--which can be simplified to simply gaining huge lumps of XP for playing tagalong or 'powerquesting' etc.
It's just not that simple. Everyone is going to screw something up and not everyone can ever be happy. If we take out one means of doing something, which is arguably the most likely, also we would have to take out the others.
The post was not made to actually slap anyone but was more of a waspish "gaaaaaaaah not agaain" from someone who does try to make reasoned responses that can be read for their merit rather than ignored for their tone. I just read too many forum posts to not occasionally shake my fist and cry to the heavens, "WHY?!"
Just usually I do it without typing it, which can get funny looks from neighbors.
-
Dorganath - 12/5/2006 6:27 PM
Wouldn't that make people then just bash for XP and levels?
Maybe, but the "bashers" already bash. What it would do is also remove the leechers from DM quests, opening up slots for more people who want to RP and contribute to the world of Layonara. Do not get me wrong, I love xps just as much as the next, but I have been on this server for almost three years with the same PC for a reason, the RP.
I want to make more DM events, I have always loved them. I love the time and energy the DMs put into them, and the RP I get out of them. I also love the XPs....but if I had to get rid of one of the things I loved, to keep the rest...I choose the xps.
-
Acacea-But wait! That person has been all over the world, gone back in time, fought Blood, recovered artifacts, been a spy, become a vampire, taken over a legacy, defeated the lich, been transformed into an orc, foiled the soul mother, helped a merking, saw a goddess, saved a port, redeemed a fallen paladin, realigned the planes, used their skills in combat and mental battles and has gotten a lot of XP for it! Clearly they should be level ten like my character because questing is a really silly way to level!
I surely do not wish people shouldn't be able to join quests. But I am jealous that they have done all those things to help shape the world. I am jealous that I have been here for over two years and active for at least 80% of that time and not been on one world changing quest. It gets frustrating at times and you might get tired of it but people need to vent a little. The author of this post brought up points in a friendly way. We love this server and want to be more involved but find it hard to be. The DM team is top notch and when I read something about a awesome quest I get excited and try to join quests. I might get to sign up for a couple and am even more lucky to be able to attend. Not the DM's fault, not Leanther's fault, not my fault. It just happens that way.
I understand that you are sick of seeing posts like this, just look at as someone who is a tad upset that he/she isn't lucky enough to get to be involved. Being sarcastic doesn't help much at all.
We do need to remember that on very regular occasions the Layonara team announces something new, something cool, and new ways to help us get involved.
-
That's not a fix at all, though, which was the point--it's not a case of "would you rather go on the quest for roleplay and take out the xp or refuse and be a powerquesting leech?" because that is the kind of biased question that is in the original topic. The response to, "sure, but the bashers already bash" would obviously be "well the leechers already leech." And I don't think there are nearly as many as is painted, especially if one is judging solely by signups which is not an accurate sample.
That's just removing the reward for shaping the world and giving it only to things that are, in-character wise, less rewarding. If it would be done it would have to be done on BOTH sides, because to take it out of the "ideal" creates a picture in which the character who have been in the quests for stories and have their hands in the world's development can be taken out with a single fireball from the guy that "will just bash anyway." Good. Let them bash anyway, maybe that's just what they like to do. But remove the XP reward.
To turn it around--Don't get me wrong, I love XP just as much as the next guy, but I've been on the server here for over a year with a single PC for a reason! The roleplay! I like going out in groups outside of quests and having fun in the dungeons and encounters of the world, and the roleplay I get out of them...I like advancing too but hey if I had to remove one thing to keep the rest (though the times I've actually been able to go are few), I'd choose the XP. :)
I'm not suggesting to punish the people who can't make quests by removing their means of advancement. Actually, the opposite. Don't remove the advancement on the other side, either, but if that's something you are really attached to then in order to make it even it's clear that both would need to be done. And then no one levels. And we can say "oh I don't care about levels" all we like, and for most of us we're not super attached to them, but for everyone progress is nice. The ones fighting the wars of the world are the last ones I would punish in terms of progress. I don't want to punish either side, I want any character to be able to do whichever they like and advance doing it, not be stagnate because they can't do either, because one or the other camp doesn't like the other.
I -want- more people to be able to go on quests and I would like additional means of advancement to choose from. That is, at least from where I'm sitting, a large difference from shutting off each of them because someone can't fit into existing ones.
-
Etinfall the rant was not even at the author of the topic--which was originally desiring to limit the number of quests a single PC could attend, which while not really practical still has the basic motivation of "let others advance, too." The frustration is not born of others wanting to participate--in the past I've tried to make suggestions that would help put more people on the wagon for doing things that are in the 'spirit of Layonara,' as it is so elusively called--but rather taking it away from everyone, whether good players and roleplayers or not. I am always in favor of "help others get there too" way way before "make sure no one gets there regardless of earnings." Both sides really need to be looked at before making sweeping changes.
Edit--And in the end your post acknowledges a certain type of person needs to vent sometimes...but misses that it was essentially undirected venting that you were responding to. As with the topic, things do not just apply to a small few.
-
Drizzlin - 12/5/2006 9:53 PM Dorganath - 12/5/2006 6:27 PM Wouldn't that make people then just bash for XP and levels?
Maybe, but the "bashers" already bash. What it would do is also remove the leechers from DM quests, opening up slots for more people who want to RP and contribute to the world of Layonara. Do not get me wrong, I love xps just as much as the next, but I have been on this server for almost three years with the same PC for a reason, the RP. I want to make more DM events, I have always loved them. I love the time and energy the DMs put into them, and the RP I get out of them. I also love the XPs....but if I had to get rid of one of the things I loved, to keep the rest...I choose the xps.
I'm sorry...I just don't follow this reasoning.
Bashers will bash. What I'm saying is that those of us who don't want to bash their way through levels *raises his hand* would be eternally at Level 5 or whatever. That pretty much turns everyone who wants to advance their character's levels into a basher. My point had nothing to do with the current group of "bashers" but rather those of us (who I consider the majority here) who wish to both RP and see their characters grow, advance, become better than they are, and in a mechanical sense, gain levels. I'm not saying that gain should happen quickly. I'm not saying it should come from RP only or bashing only, but more likely a healthy mix of both as it applies to each individual character.
I see your point here, about how it helped the CDQ problem (which was one of abuse and GM shortage, really), but what this does not address is the basic question of: Without XP for GM quests, how does one advance without bashing?
You're missing one other part of the equation here.
This world needs people to advance their character levels. Take the last campaign's finale that happened in late June of this year. a small group of characters held off hoards of demons pouring from a bloodwell (not a bloodpool, but a bloodwell), while another small group infiltrated Sinthar Bloodstone's fortress and killed him.
This could not have been done by a group of low-level adventurers who concentrated more on questing than mindless bashing. Taken one step further, the "basher" crowd who didn't really ever go on quests would probably not have been interested in going on a plot quest, especially since it wouldn't give XP.
A corollary point here is that not all quests are pure RP. My character is in an RP-heavy quest series that has been going on for a long time, but for very reasonable and plot-important reasons, there have been periods of EXTREME combat, and these situations could not have been handled by characters who care more about participation than bashing for XP.
As for leeches...as a GM, I'd say that the leeches are the minority. People who go on quests, by far, wish to participate and be involved. In doing so they improve themselves, gain experience and become better....more than they were.
Let's face it...advancing in levels is fun, it's rewarding, and it's a decent, if rather discontinuous way of indicating relative skill, ability and prowess. However, by taking XP out of all quests, you essentially force the only means of advancement to be bashing....and at that point, we might as well call ourselves WoW.
-
Did I say I needed them? Did I say it was why others went? No, that is an inaccurate assumption based on something more like, "People like to quest, quests give XP, people must go on quests to get XP."
If you took away the XP from grinding, by definition they wouldn't be grinders anymore, now would they?
It's really easy to get self righteous about things like removing rewards from people who deserve it, because it implies that one has the correct values and sacrifices where anyone who argues to give credit where credit is due is merely an XP craving fanatic.
Great, you don't need it, fantastic. Donate it to the people who can't make quests and would like to advance in a way that makes sense for their character, instead of presuming to take it away from everyone who has earned them.
Edit--Obviously this post was a direct response to the one quoting me, not the one quoting Dorg.
-
My wife is banned from my PC. She apparently logged in on my PC to fix the post issue she had. I made the last posts from her log in on my PC. Do not hold her accountable for me!! hehe
I will have to have her delete those posts and I will cut and paste them into a new post to avoid confusion in the future.
-
We all want to be the protagonist (sp) so we all want to lvl asap to keep pace with the others. This is normal and healthy I think. people go on quests for a lot of reasons but EXP is one of the main ones. No ? you say? well ask yourself how many quests you would do for no DM exp?
First time I went on a quest I thought the DM was drunk for giving so much XP. 90% of the characters did nothinging because the other 10% yapped all the time. So I sat there, bashed 2 things and got a wild amount of EXP. Reduce the quest EXP gain from DMs, that will stop a lot of the quest leeches from making quests a dull (because they yap all the time) and make people who want to RP stay on the quests. No need to reward the fast type crowd and further more there is often plenty of EXP just bashing on a quest. The DM exp award is great, I love it, but I see no reason for it.
-
Acacea - 12/5/2006 11:17 PM
Acacea - 12/5/2006 11:17PM
That's just removing the reward for shaping the world and giving it only to things that are, in-character wise, less rewarding. If it would be done it would have to be done on BOTH sides, because to take it out of the "ideal" creates a picture in which the character who have been in the quests for stories and have their hands in the world's development can be taken out with a single fireball from the guy that "will just bash anyway." Good. Let them bash anyway, maybe that's just what they like to do. But remove the XP reward.
The reward in itself is the shaping of the world. I would rather have the name of my PC hanging from a sign in Prantz and talked about through the world by PCs, than 50k xps. If you need XPs to make you want to be apart of the world that we play in, it is a bit sad. While I understand people want the xps (even I do) for quests, all I am saying I don't need them. As far as the "leechers" others have mentioned, if there are no xps to leech, by definition they wouldn't be leechers now would they?
Dorganath - 12/5/2006 6:27 PM Wouldn't that make people then just bash for XP and levels?
I'm sorry...I just don't follow this reasoning.
Bashers will bash. What I'm saying is that those of us who don't want to bash their way through levels *raises his hand* would be eternally at Level 5 or whatever. That pretty much turns everyone who wants to advance their character's levels into a basher. My point had nothing to do with the current group of "bashers" but rather those of us (who I consider the majority here) who wish to both RP and see their characters grow, advance, become better than they are, and in a mechanical sense, gain levels. I'm not saying that gain should happen quickly. I'm not saying it should come from RP only or bashing only, but more likely a healthy mix of both as it applies to each individual character.
I see your point here, about how it helped the CDQ problem (which was one of abuse and GM shortage, really), but what this does not address is the basic question of: Without XP for GM quests, how does one advance without bashing?
You're missing one other part of the equation here.
This world needs people to advance their character levels. Take the last campaign's finale that happened in late June of this year. a small group of characters held off hoards of demons pouring from a bloodwell (not a bloodpool, but a bloodwell), while another small group infiltrated Sinthar Bloodstone's fortress and killed him.
This could not have been done by a group of low-level adventurers who concentrated more on questing than mindless bashing. Taken one step further, the "basher" crowd who didn't really ever go on quests would probably not have been interested in going on a plot quest, especially since it wouldn't give XP.
A corollary point here is that not all quests are pure RP. My character is in an RP-heavy quest series that has been going on for a long time, but for very reasonable and plot-important reasons, there have been periods of EXTREME combat, and these situations could not have been handled by characters who care more about participation than bashing for XP.
As for leeches...as a GM, I'd say that the leeches are the minority. People who go on quests, by far, wish to participate and be involved. In doing so they improve themselves, gain experience and become better....more than they were.
Let's face it...advancing in levels is fun, it's rewarding, and it's a decent, if rather discontinuous way of indicating relative skill, ability and prowess. However, by taking XP out of all quests, you essentially force the only means of advancement to be bashing....and at that point, we might as well call ourselves WoW.
I agree with you on all points Dor. There is nothing to argue in what you said, nor am I trying to argue. Originally I was agreeing with the person that said the same people sign up over and over. I never called them leechers. In fact most of them are super active on the quests they go on, but I agree they go on every quest they can. Is that a problem? I'm not sure. Is it an issue to some people, apparently. As far as needing higher level PCs for certain quests...that is why there are level resrictions set by the DMs for each quest. I was around when 20 was unthinkable here. The difficulty of the quests were tailored for the level of the PCs out there.
I am really a 3rd person in this "debate" if you will. I play a rotten, hated, nasty drow. I get voted out or asked to leave just about every single quest I go to, both IC and OOC. Mainly by the same PCs that sign up for every single quest out there. I don't blame them nor am I disgruntal. It is not their fault,and I accept the negative affects of the PC I choose to play. In fact I love the treatment from a RP prespective. The only solution for the dilema of my personal problem is to hope and wait a DM to run some "shady" quests that Paladins and goodys would not want to go on.
I am also big into crafting, and I really do not go out and "bind/grind" for xps. I go out and collect my CNR, which brings in the xps for me. Sure when i'm close to a level I might go out and finish it up, but I hate grinding and xp. EQ killed the grinder in me =)
Either way I am happy with the way things are. I was just trying to add and give my opinion on how to get rid of what others called "leechers". In doing so I said I don't need xps for DM quests.
EDIT: I hope I fixed this.
-
ThrainSil - 12/5/2006 9:18 PM
We all want to be the protagonist (sp) so we all want to lvl asap to keep pace with the others. This is normal and healthy I think. people go on quests for a lot of reasons but EXP is one of the main ones. No ? you say? well ask yourself how many quests you would do for no DM exp?
First time I went on a quest I thought the DM was drunk for giving so much XP. 90% of the characters did nothinging because the other 10% yapped all the time. So I sat there, bashed 2 things and got a wild amount of EXP. Reduce the quest EXP gain from DMs, that will stop a lot of the quest leeches from making quests a dull (because they yap all the time) and make people who want to RP stay on the quests. No need to reward the fast type crowd and further more there is often plenty of EXP just bashing on a quest. The DM exp award is great, I love it, but I see no reason for it.
I also agree completely with what you are saying here. I am one of these kind of people that call foul, even when I am recieving the insane rewards from the foul. I feel dirty when I line up at the end of a DM quest, but it is a good dirty. Is it rewarding? Yes. I love the quests and I love the XPs from them, but I know when something is "too" good.
I don't go to quests for the xps, but I also do not avoid them because of the xps.
-
I'll say this again one last time...and it's not directed at anyone in particular at all.
Don't pay attention to who signs up. Just sign up yourself and show up. Unless there are some sort of restrictions placed on the party, take the chance. It's about all I can say.
It seems to me that most people who complain about people who quest a lot or who advance quickly or whatever have a bit of jealousy invading their thoughts. Before anyone comes down on me for saying that, let me just assure everyone that I have fallen into that line of thinking in the past. I've seen people who had been here for less time blow right past me in levels, I see people who are half my main character's level who have 10 times as much gold in the bank as my character ever had at his account's peak. I see people dropping insane amounts of gold for rare items...things I can really only hope to find sometime or get as a gift.
But guess what....it doesn't really matter. The only real metric that matters is comparing your character to itself. But I tell you this, my character didn't get where he's at today by sitting back and lamenting everyone who's gone past him by some measure or the other.
What's my point? Take the chance. Sign up, and more importantly, show up for the quests. And once there, be a part of things. It doesn't get any simpler than that.
No, you won't always get to go, but you'll never get to go if you look a the calendar, see the same names every time and think, "oh there's no room for me."
Try...maybe it won't work out this time, but at least you have a chance.
I believe I've now truly said all I have to say here. Though I've been known to be wrong about such things. :)
-
Also have to add that the XP from quests are meant to be (at least, until you reach really high levels) as much as from killing monsters.
Actually, if you are bashing in the efficient way, you can get 200% of the XP you get from a quest of the same length!
-
Absolutely! 75,000 on a two series quest, in which only 5 people showed out of 15 people that signed up? :hehe:
And to back up Dorganath story. *I* was one of the last people to sign up for the Dragon of Mystery. I was the third person there.
Weeblie - 12/6/2006 9:20 PM
Also have to add that the XP from quests are meant to be (at least, until you reach really high levels) as much as from killing monsters.
Actually, if you are bashing in the efficient way, you can get 200% of the XP you get from a quest of the same length!
-
Tanman - 12/6/2006 5:27 AM
Absolutely! 75,000 on a two series quest, in which only 5 people showed out of 15 people that signed up? :hehe:
And to back up Dorganath story. *I* was one of the last people to sign up for the Dragon of Mystery. I was the third person there.
Well... Dragon of Mystery got postponed so many times (quite understandable given the circumstances), it's not really a good example. I had signed up for it, and had shown up, only to find it had to be postponed for a RL emergency. Unfortunatley, when it was finally held, I wasn't available. :(