The World of Layonara
The NWN Persistent World => Layonara Server => Topic started by: Shrowd Umbra on March 05, 2009, 03:52:49 PM
-
Old thread I know but I feel this fits with the age old conversation and as a new player I can tell you exactly what it is like starting out in Layonara as of late.
It is overwhelming to try and take it all in at first logging. You know where nothing is, what things do, or where to look for quests to begin building your character. Layonara is a lot to take in. Players are helpful though. Within the first day or two I had received a brief tour of the craft house and an invitation to a quest that was part of the main campaign. There I stood, little level 3 Shrowd next to people that had seen years of this game and not a single condescending comment from any of them. Shrowd was just another heroine helping out like the rest of them. (Not that she made much of a dent in the encounters but it's the thought that counts right?)
The one thing that will likely be my gripe until the end of time is not the veteran players but the fear of the new players. Not just any player, but the new hack and slash players. The fear that a band of upstarts will be able to upset the world is so prevalent that the Soul Mother seems to be taken as a perfectly acceptable trade off. People are willing to risk losing their characters to feel safer about new players.
I find that almost as stunning as the mention of the Soul Mother having taken a break at one point. My fondest dream for Layonara came true at one point, no risk of losing a character that represented months or even years of time spent. Somehow new players came in and managed to disrupt Layonara enough that the Soul Mother came out of retirement. Not only did she come out of retirement but there is a whole forum eating up GM time and energy dedicated to compensation for lost Soul Strands if you meet the very exacting criteria.
I can understand this problem. I have played other servers that allow PvP at a whim, non-NWN servers true. I learned to love playing a ranger because rangers have the excuse to not interact with other players. I could disappear into the wilderness legitimately and not risk players bullying me. Thankfully this turns out to not be needed here. Only once did I feel bullied by Layonara players and forced into a PvP. It's the only PvP I've been a part of and rather than take 2 to 1 odds I used my abilities to escape.
I will likely never take the Soul Mother as a good solution to the problem. Players being mature adults (legal ages be darned, we all know right from wrong in treating others and -that's- how I define adults) is the only surefire method. Failing that, I'd rather loose large amounts of Experience than a Soul Strand. I lost a Soul Strand due to IRL circumstances cropping up in the middle of a fight I didn't intend to pick with the monsters. Life doesn't wait for you to get to a town but because I don't meet the criteria to be reimbursed for this, I'm one step closer to losing Shrowd and all the work that goes into her. I'm closer to it because of fear of bad players. With all the good players in as high levels as they are, do we really need the Soul Mother? I'd like to see her go. I think Layonara is hardy enough to weather a few rotten eggs. There's some already here anyway.
-
Shrowd, the thread you originally posted in was not about the Soul Mother, but abusing AI in temples. I know the discussion moved a bit to that, but I didn't want that thread getting bogged down with arguments for and against, so I created a new thread.
-
I don't think I'll venture reasons for and against, there'll be contributors to this thread far more garrulous than I willing to do so i'm sure .. however I sometimes do ponder how many people, now gone and now likely never to discover/experience the MMO when it is released, would still be here if they hadn't had their character perm. Would it be more than those few who wouldn't remain if there was an alternative introduced?
-
Now, I still bear the bitterness of losing my favorite character, along with 2 of Tyra's soul Strands, but I actually like the fact PCs can die permanently due to bad luck (because hell, otherwise it takes away any fear of being dumb, any point to trying to use strategy to survive, and any risk to try something new). Without that CENSORED we would just run up to Fisteron and slap him, laugh, die, and do it again (so to speak). Besides, it's helped me become a better player. (Tyra doesn't die NEARLY as often as Shiff did) :)
Aside from that though, I hate these threads about things that are the way they are for a reason. and for that reason, I'll leave it to the people who are more proactively trying to kill her/keep her to continue...
-
http://forums.layonara.com/general-discussion/179562-dts.html
http://forums.layonara.com/nwn-ideas-suggestions-requests/117282-put-soul-mother-rest-maybe-perhaps.html
If we're going to discuss this again, may I just ask people to read through the threads that have already discussed this topic, so we aren't rehashing the same arguments (of which there are many good ones on both sides) over and over and over.
-
And over....
And over....
And over....
-
Well, this has nothing to do with Layonara, but as a GM, whenever I had player characters die on me that I found sufficiently entertaining, I would bring them back some time later in the campaign.
It wasn't a right. It was a privilege. And when it happened, I usually did it in conjunction with an in-game rebuild that furthered my plot lines in some way. Of course in Runequest this was a lot easier to justify, since the Gods are always so involved in their worshipers dealings anyway.
- - - - -
Translating to Layonara, I wonder if any GM has ever thought of some type of CDQ whose prize is somehow wresting a few Soul Strands back from the Soul Mother? That might be an interesting game to run, not just from the RP side of things, but from the inherent danger of risking your life to get some of it back.
-
Look up Athus :)
-
The suggestion in the above post is the reason for the Soul Mother's vacation and the one-time return of permed characters from yore. It wasn't a reward that got taken away because of bad attitudes, it was a reprieve granted by a cleric's Epic (Athus, as I see in post preview that Alatriel has mentioned!), and always known to be merely temporary. It actually went on longer than expected.
As far as her returning because of new players (original post), this is an inaccurate assumption. As stated above, it was always to be temporary, and if there was anything considered to be poor RP or exploitation of that fact, it went as much for old players as new ones.
No comment on the death system that hasn't already been hashed and rehashed and so forth. Ycleption links previous discussions.
-
While admittedly when most characters perm they have already past thier Sell By Date and should have retired anyway, but sometimes perma death can be upsetting to new players (Ive been on many servers where its gold or XP loss, soul strands as you call them here or merely deaths untill deletion *normally based on constitution*) and from what Ive experienced in the last dozen years or so of roleplaying is that the players themselves would rather choose whether their character dies or not!
On other servers and even in long running PnP campaigns I have been known to 'retire' characters when they become too powerfull! Not because I was on my final 'soul strand' (I use the term loosely for any kind of perm kill) but because the character was billions of generations old and no longer suited to adventuring... HecK! some of my characters have become NPCs in future campaigns!
Thats the type of thing I like to see rather than a level ten character ceasing to exist and causing the player to take an extended leave of roleplaying, Its really sad when something like that happens (all the more reason to party up with strangers)
-
The suggestion in the above post is the reason for the Soul Mother's vacation and the one-time return of permed characters from yore. It wasn't a reward that got taken away because of bad attitudes, it was a reprieve granted by a cleric's Epic (Athus, as I see in post preview that Alatriel has mentioned!), and always known to be merely temporary. It actually went on longer than expected.
Actually, that's incorrect.
It was supposed to last through the end of the Bloodstone plot finale as a special treat to those who stepped up to end his menace. However, due to the heavy abuse of the lack Soul Strand losses during this time (yes, by a rather active minority, sadly), the Soul Mother returned to her usual ways a couple RL months prior to the actual finale event.
-
Do remember that the Perma death system favors lower level PCs! It's a d100 vs your current PCs level+1, so you really have the advantage as a new character/player. It's when you keep getting yourself killed over and over that you start to see low levels perm out. Basically, if you don't get the idea that every death is a risk early on, the higher level your PC becomes the bigger chance of the fated loss of a Soul Strand
Also remember that at the first 4 levels your immune to it... which is usually when a new player should be getting the run down from the veterans... should...
-
Actually, that's incorrect.
Weird - I had heard it was a favor for the Blood plot (which actually made it somehow less cool almost, like it was all planned), but while there were of course some requests to end it already, I had also heard that it was originally asked as a shorter or perhaps just more determined length of time.
On the other hand, maybe it was the plot that went slower than expected. Heh. Or just too many mouths not connected to the same brain :D
-
I'll agree with you all that the risk of a true death makes our heroes and heroines much more heroic in the end. And there are some characters that become so ridiculously powerful that they're no longer as much fun to play. Since I've gotten to play I've met older players with low level characters started for that reason. I've also visited the Tomb in Weeping Willow, which I think a very nice addition to the world, though perhaps disturbing in the number of vacancies left open.
While it is true you should know by level four roughly how not to die, it can still be a bother finding older players to teach you. In some respects I got lucky my first few levels, and in others I'm still making up for mistakes made through early ignorance with her. And then there's just plain misfortune with lag spikes, one of which nearly killed me today with no forwarning and a relatively simple single griffon.
Rather than just state old suggestions can I put a new one forth? One of the more successful game mechanics I've seen for dealing with death and reanimation was insanity rolls. If your character dies and comes back, they make a save to not go insane, or lessen the severity. We have a whole listing on a series of tables for real psychological disorders ranging from obsession with objects to homicidal behaviors. Granted this works great around a table top with paper and pens but maybe that might be translated to Layonara's scripting? Likely not for the NWN version but something to consider for the MMO? It could be just as simple as the characters suffer a fear effect in combat if they fail a will save.
Eventually through magic and therapy (yes we have some psionicists in our group that specialize in this for very good reasons) Characters recover from the ordeal months of time later. Like real life though, success is not guaranteed. Making deaths prolonged hassles for players rather than perming them I think is a good deterrent, especially if it eats up in game time so they can't just log and come back fine the next day. It lets us keep the work we've invested in the game while still making death something to be hated and cursed and generally feared. And inspires others to quest for a means to save their favorite fighter's shattered mind.
-
I'm pretty sure that the MMO is intended to include some method of reattaching broken Soul Strands, which is something that will likely take time and effort and have no guarantee of success. It's almost the same as what you're suggesting, except it will still be possible to die and no one has to be forced to roleplay insanity.
-
The issue I have with reattachments is that you:
1) Can't make it CR based
2) Can't make it GM-intervention based
Neither are fair. If you CR base it, that is, if you make it some wildly dangerous journey into some place where it's possible to reattach a strand.. then who benefits? The dude who could walk up and mechanically win the fight against the soul mother? Now, if you GM base it, then you're talking about the issues of social fairness. If an event is required, then it hinges on manpower/ availability, which is fickle. If it becomes submission based, then you develop the silver tongues who can convince you of basically anything in written form. Ultimately it loses any semblance of 'fair for the entire community' as it becomes a social dynamic - which is never balanced.
I'm still waiting to hear of a viable solution. Obviously it needs to be an in-game mechanic. That is, hands free for staff. But whatever system that is, it can't be leveraged off the same scales all other progression is leveraged off of. That just ends up enabling mechanical power, and beyond that, another unfair social dynamic of who is favored by those mechanically powerful.
I hope someone comes up with something both clever and fair someday. I know I haven't.
-
For NWN, I think what we have right now is the best we can get. You get 10, with the level-variable based chance of lose with each death (leaving it completely to chance) and the only way to get more/reattach SS is by taking the feat if you become epic. Sure it still limits the benefit to those who can make the jump, but it's a one time thing, and if you can get there and get the extra, good for you.
For the MMO, I think it should be some sort of equation based on a percent chance modified by the number of times you die, with the same base of 10 SS. Ever time you die, the risk increases, either exponentially or linearly. But it could probably also work that the time between deaths works in your favor. If you die less often, the increase in risk is minimized by the lack of stress on the soul. If you're an idiot who dies everyday, well, you get the idea...
-
It's been (roughly) designed, just not released. At one point I almost worked on it for NWN, but never got beyond working out the precise guidelines.
But it wouldn't have been DC-based, nor would it have required GM intervention.
-
So, more on the equation... (pardon my lack of mathematically forumlaic skill)
Base chance = 1%+([d^2] /8 )%. d = the number of deaths So, you die 4 times, the percent chance of SS lose is 3% You die 10 times, its a 13.5% chance. You die 20 times, it's 51% chance...
Now... take that first part and put it over (divide it by)..
D= # of days since last death ( cap can be placed on the maximum # you can benefit from
So... last time you died was 5 days ago when you die for the 20th time...
1%+([20]^2 /8 )%/5 = 10.2% chance of lose of SS..
So.. ycleption... How does my math look?
The virtue of this I think is that you still have the risk, but benefit from surviving the time inbetween deaths. So yeah, if you die multiple times a day, you have a problem... But if you die once, and then then stick it out even for 2 days, you cut your chances in half again.
EDIT: Fixed the math... but I noticed a downside... This makes dying an exponential disaster... Once you you get passed dying 60 times, you have close to a 100% chance, even after 5 days. you die 28 times, and one of those is right after another, you lose 2 due to the high percent chance...
I think I need to work on my formula
-
I think I've made my view on this abundantly clear in other threads, so I'll just say that I'm in favour of the permadeath system and leave it at that.
-
The 'times you die' concept favors certain play styles and build choices over others. Dying more shouldn't make it easier to lose strands or die permanently. What if I want to play a not-so-clever charger who has a good chance of dying multiple times per day? Should I be punished with a greater chance of permanent death for my character beyond the chances that are already stacked against me simply because I'm playing a not-so-clever charger? What if I want to play the heroic type who stands and dies to hold the passage long enough that his friends can run away to safety? Should I be punished with a short-lived character because I choose to make him selfless and he dies more often?
Also, building in a mechanic that makes not logging in or parking a character out of the way overnight (or for days at a time) into viable strategies doesn't sound like a great plan.
-
Should I be punished with a greater chance of permanent death for my character beyond the chances that are already stacked against me simply because I'm playing a not-so-clever charger? What if I want to play the heroic type who stands and dies to hold the passage long enough that his friends can run away to safety? Should I be punished with a short-lived character because I choose to make him selfless and he dies more often?
As a player, no, you shouldn't be "punished." As a character, yes, you should eat those consequences everytime. So it boils down to, which is more important? The OOC factors of perma-death or the IC factors? Most of what's been raised here (and in all the other threads) are the OOC issues. Right now we do have a system that's got an IC explanation for its existance, and a pretty darn good one (at least I like it, heh) at that. We also have an OOC explanation, which is what was initially in question by the author of this thread, that we should get rid of the death system because the OOC reason is "invalid" or "not strong enough."
WARNING: The remainder of this post touches on arguments previously presented, and as such you may not wish to "waste" your time reading it.
But for me, I want every OOC mechanic to also make sense IC. I know that's just not possible 100% of the time (or even 50% of the time, it seems), but even so, to use the example given, if I purposefully choose to play a character I know will die many times, I'm also purposefully choosing to suffer a higher chance at perma-death, because that's the IC consequnces of playing that character type. In other words, the fact that the character is short-lived would be part of the "fun" of playing that character (yes, downsides can be fun :p), else why would I choose to play it? Translating this to the incorporation of more "balanced" OOC ways of handling IC death, I would still prefer that those "balanced" methods also make sense IC.
It seems to me that it should be IC for death to be scary and avoided, and that should your character choose not to avoid it, that he/she pays the piper. If not, if it was known IC (not to mention OOC bleeding into IC) that death could not hold PC's, then that changes the whole dynamics of the world. How did PC's gain such power; why do they have it and not the "common" person; maybe nobody dies, not PC's or NPC's? In order to give a world a sense of danger and suspense, you must have death, and a real chance to suffer from it. How that works out mechanically in an OOC sense can be made more balanced, or fair (because of deaths due to the lag-monster or other wierd OOC ways to die), or fun, or whatever, but I would suggest that no matter what OOC purpose the death system serves, it is the IC reasoning that is most important and is why the death system should remain in place.
Finally, I can say that what we have in mind for the MMO should satisfy (or at least come closer to satisfying) both camps, those of us who can't stand the OOC pain associated with character death, as well as those of us who actually enjoy the IC consequences surrounding perma-death.
-
to use the example given, if I purposefully choose to play a character I know will die many times, I'm also purposefully choosing to suffer a higher chance at perma-death, because that's the IC consequnces of playing that character tyope.
This is exactly what I'm saying, that it's already built that way and shouldn't be worse. Because I would have chosen to play a character that dies more often, the normal mechanics already make my character more likely to die permanently. There's no need to add greater hardship on the player or to limit the viability of certain character types by making it more likely that a character loses strands simply because they die more often.
-
Yeah, sort of re-did that whole post, Gulnyr.
-
I'm still waiting to hear of a viable solution. Obviously it needs to be an in-game mechanic. That is, hands free for staff. But whatever system that is, it can't be leveraged off the same scales all other progression is leveraged off of. That just ends up enabling mechanical power, and beyond that, another unfair social dynamic of who is favored by those mechanically powerful.
I hope someone comes up with something both clever and fair someday. I know I haven't.
I am sure it would be hard to automate this idea but it would take the subjectiveness out of the equation.
Idea:
SS reattachment cost = all the XP it takes to get to the next level. So to get one back you have to have enough XP to level but not level, instead you ask a GM to take it all away leaving back at the start of the level and post for a SS back.
Why does this work?
1. It is based on the same difficulty framework put in place for leveling so a SS is worth what ever level you are at.
2. The argument that the soul mother values higher level SS supports it (this is the argument that has been given many times as to why, as a PC gets stronger it is more likely to lose a SS)
3. It will slow down leveling.
4. It will be become a new way to reduce the number of PCs that make it to epic since many will use the 19 to 20 level to gain back SS. Of course those that do it right will enter epic with a lot of SS back.
5. We can abolish SMD as an added benefit.
6. Takes no (zero) code change.
7. The cost is high.
As for how I feel about the death system, well, the community knows full well where I stand. Mostly unsupported and fully against it as it is now.
-
As an added note, another good thing about this idea is that is does not negatively affect anyone. Those who like to play under the death system, as it is, just dont have to use the reattachment process.
I am sure it would be hard to automate this idea but it would take the subjectiveness out of the equation.
Idea:
SS reattachment cost = all the XP it takes to get to the next level. So to get one back you have to have enough XP to level but not level, instead you ask a GM to take it all away leaving back at the start of the level and post for a SS back.
Why does this work?
1. It is based on the same difficulty framework put in place for leveling so a SS is worth what ever level you are at.
2. The argument that the soul mother values higher level SS supports it (this is the argument that has been given many times as to why, as a PC gets stronger it is more likely to lose a SS)
3. It will slow down leveling.
4. It will be become a new way to reduce the number of PCs that make it to epic since many will use the 19 to 20 level to gain back SS. Of course those that do it right will enter epic with a lot of SS back.
5. We can abolish SMD as an added benefit.
6. Takes no (zero) code change.
7. The cost is high.
-
I like the idea that Jrizz proposes, but there should be something added in game. If its just about XP, its easy to get it back. But to have a test or some thing. The results will be discussed by the GM team it will cause people to have a bit of hope but think twice about doing silly things.
There should be a time duration before people can reapply for SS reimbursement.
-
But to have a test or some thing. The results will be discussed by the GM team it will cause people to have a bit of hope but think twice about doing silly things.
Completely disagree due to points I brought up in my previous post. We have so many subjective measures in place already that it ends up spreading the results unevenly. And when the staff is backed into the corner of keeping things even across the board on subjective measures... it is overly stressful and ultimately forces them into sweeping measures that nobody really wants.
That said... xp basing it is tying it back to standard progression channels. So while I think jrizz's suggestion is admirable, I definitely don't want to see it in the MMO.
I mean... what am I afraid to lose.... hmm. How do you bring in viable loss if we get away from permadeath? Well, here's what I'm afraid to lose.
- Obviously the character outweighs it all, but that's not the topic here.
- XP loss? Meh. I'm upset for maybe a night's sleep.
- Stat points? Yeah... that'd freak me out a bit.
- Level loss? Maybe two night's sleep. 2 levels? Kinda getting into downer-ville. 5 levels? Ugh. 10 levels? A fresh start and a new story suddenly seems intruiging on the side while I gather my head. 40 levels? Hrm... not sure I'm up for going through with it again. Consider me benched for late night convos with old friends.
- Item loss? Hmm. Wouldn't care early in life. But if I lost the special blade with the troll ear, the vampiric tooth, acid resistance, a strength tome, a spellcraft tome, an acid elemental rod, a titanium rod, and a sharpening stone applied? That's fast approaching the 'years worth of good luck' mark. I'd probably retaliate by donating my wealth and playing naked for a while. But hey, I'd have my character, and it'd likely warp itself into good places for development. As long as I knew I didn't have to worry about losing my 'edge' for survival and would be at perm risk.
I mean, what else can you lose that *you* would feel a deep pang of loss for? Think it over. Doesn't have to be an actual mechanic. That's probably the terrain people should be brainstorming in. My head usually gets bogged down thinking NWN - which is not exactly growth of the idea really. Every MMO dev I'm friends with wants to hear good ideas on everything under the sun. Sure - they can't all be good ideas... but there's only one way to find out.
-
I think I've made my view on this abundantly clear in other threads, so I'll just say that I'm in favour of the permadeath system and leave it at that.
You know... I feel like we should one-hit it sometimes. One death = gone. I'd like to see how it plays out for immersion, friendships and social development, continuity of plotline, and moreover player retention and player (not character) lifespan. And I don't mean that sarcastically. I'm really interested to see what it'd do. At least we could then speak intelligently about our systems and their effect.
My instinct is that it'd shallow the server down. But I can't say for sure because I haven't played in it. Now... if I'm right, and it does shallow the server down - what does that say? Does greater immersion occur through continuity of your own storyline and it's impact around you? I dunno. I think so, but I also wonder about the obvious. Growing tired and apathetic of your life because change grows dimmer on the horizon. So what's that say? That we need to put a timestamp on it? That there's a magic number that keeps you valuing your moments? Heck, if I knew that, I'd be a wise man indeed. Put it to the test in real life and there's no magic number. It's all based in the moments and whether or not you're still bothering to figure out to use them with some vigor. Some burn out quick on that note quick... some are still kicking it at 100. So... more confusion here on my end.
All that said though... if immortality is the issue, why not race base it? Defined age timeline, then you die. Expectation and roleplay of that expectation. More depth. We'd probably learn a lot more about ourselves in this system. Not a bunch of junk about some abstract dice roll mostly accumulated during lag spikes or quests carrying varying opinions on what 'difficulty' and 'investment' is. You want to be around a longer time? Play an elf. You don't think that sort of thing counts to you? Play whatever you want. Seems fair to me. You want loss, bring us back to age maybe. At least nobody could whine after the fact about crashes, bad luck, subjective actions made by whoever... anything that takes the game and makes it too much like your house just burned down because a lightning bolt hit. I mean... you picked it. Fair's fair. You're 340 and it's time to start talking to your close friends about where you want to be buried.
-
I really like age based for the MMO of course that will mean a world populated by elves unless you are able to show real value to other races (you live a shorter life but you gain skills faster). But perma death in the MMO is really a business decision. Do you want a viable business meant to grow or do you want a hobby.
-
How do you bring in viable loss if we get away from permadeath?
Jrizz's idea would not be getting away from permadeath. Not only could you choose not to give up the xp for your level, and everyone values each level they get even if you can get the xp back seeing as how for most players it might take 3 or 4 weeks...or more for some, to get enough xp for that level, but you could also lose enough soul strands inbetween leveling to permadie. So this idea is by no means getting away from permadeath.
-
Now on my xp based idea I really meant that for NWN layo not the MMO since I am sure the MMO wont be xp based. To explain it a bit more:
- The starting number of ss would have to be reduced to say 4 and have 4 be the upper limit as well.
- Get rid of SMD
This means that anytime a PC loses a ss the player has to decide do I try to get it back the next level or do I risk moving forward with only, really two more chances before you are on deaths door step.
-
I think the best sort of penalty for the MMO, if we moved away from Permadeath, would be some sort of deterioration of skills, abilities, etc
-
4 isn't enough. We don't want to have a world filled with 8-12th level characters, the level area where lots of character are starting to do more risky things, because they are afraid to go on to the next level and risk getting closer to permadeath. Stopping people from doing risky thing shouldn't be the goal, thats part of the fun of playing here. We need a world where you can continue on into the higher levels but the risk continues to grow. The more xp you need to level, the higher the risk of getting more than one lost strand between levels. There is still a risk involved even if you still have 10. At lower levels people will likely forgo giving up xp in order to get those precious levels they worked hard at. At higher levels, when you can do more fun things, you'll have a choice to make.
Lets face it. Everyone loves to level. When someone levels they send tells to all their friends to report it and get "yahoo", "congrats". This is because at some point leveling gets to be an accomplishment for most players. Something you look forward to for maybe as long as a month. This starts around level 10 when the xp necessary to level starts getting to the point where its not a day or 2 to level unless your a real grinder. From level 10 on it starts taking longer and longer to get those levels for most players.
Maybe there are some people who don't care about xp loss. I think most, like myself, do care.
The other day I was playing my monk Ash. I was doing things alone because at the time it was quiet, but all I was doing was collecting relatively simple things for crafting. I had a few runs of bad rolls and died twice, getting back to my gravestone both times. When someone asked me to go do something I was so happy to have someone to rp and travel with that I forgot about how much time had passed in the previous deaths and went out and died again resulting in the loss of 16000 xp. I was thinking about it for days afterward. Yes I was stupid and forgetful to let it happen. But I was having fun when I finally had a companion. Isn't that what its all about here really. Everyone is here to have fun.
Sorry for rambling on but I think Jrizz's original proposal is great with no changes. Still keeps risk, but allows characters to get to those levels where you have more choices of things to do and don't have to keep killing goblins and such.
-
6. Takes no (zero) code change.
- The starting number of ss would have to be reduced to say 4 and have 4 be the upper limit as well.
You have contradicted yourself.
-
You have contradicted yourself.
LOL is that all. Well that is not a code change it is a db edit or at least it should be.
-
It's a lot more than that because something would have to be done for all the characters that exist prior to the change. Even if that's only edits, it's still a huge decision on how to handle things and a huge number of edits. And if SMD is eliminated, then every character that has it would need to be rebuilt to get a replacement feat.
Changing the number of strands is a big deal.
-
It's a lot more than that because something would have to be done for all the characters that exist prior to the change. Even if that's only edits, it's still a huge decision on how to handle things and a huge number of edits. And if SMD is eliminated, then every character that has it would need to be rebuilt to get a replacement feat.
Changing the number of strands is a big deal.
Another good reason to keep it at 10 then. With the original proposal it requires no additional coding and doesn't effect existing characters much.
-
It's a lot more than that because something would have to be done for all the characters that exist prior to the change. Even if that's only edits, it's still a huge decision on how to handle things and a huge number of edits. And if SMD is eliminated, then every character that has it would need to be rebuilt to get a replacement feat.
Changing the number of strands is a big deal.
Well the number issue would not be so bad, just set everyone to 4. As for the feat issue I guess if all the current epics really felt the need to get the extra feat then you are right something would have to be done. Adding a extra feat on what ever the next level is for anyone that took SMD would do it or we can take the good with the bad a just say "it is ok I dont need to be retro fitted" so the team would not have to do the work. Sure that gives the up and coming PCs a bit of an advantage but I am not one to bemoan that, heck more power to them. If another PC being more powerful then my PC had a negative affect on my fun on layo I would be a sad fellow :P
-
It's not that simple, jrizz.
We can't just "add a feat" as you say, as NWN won't let us without making illegal characters.
Out of the 62 active (logged in within the last 6 months) characters over 20th level, many of which have taken SMD and most of those, I'd guess, would want something instead, which would be a whole lot of work.
For sake of analysis, setting everyone to have 4 available soul strands would actually greatly favor those of higher levels simply from the fact that they have less of a hill to climb, having gotten all the way up to whatever level they're at with effectively zero strand loss, while new characters have the same weight hanging over them with a much longer path.
GMs don't currently have the ability to return strands, so either this would remain an administrative action, increasing the workload of those who manage them, or it would require additional code to sacrifice XP for Soul Strands.
There's been some very interesting suggestions, but there are valid reasons for the Soul Mother doing what she does, and they're deeply rooted in world lore. We're sensitive to how this is a contentious issue with some players, and we're absolutely keeping that in mind for the MMO.
-
OK so on thinking about it the best way to do this would be to make no changes to number of SS and not to remove SMD and just implement the reattachment policy as is. Then set some rules around it like:
1. levels can only be repeated once
2. Once a level is past the opportunity is past
3. It is not open to PCs under the level of 12.
something like that.
-
It's not that simple, jrizz.
We can't just "add a feat" as you say, as NWN won't let us without making illegal characters.
Out of the 62 active (logged in within the last 6 months) characters over 20th level, many of which have taken SMD and most of those, I'd guess, would want something instead, which would be a whole lot of work.
For sake of analysis, setting everyone to have 4 available soul strands would actually greatly favor those of higher levels simply from the fact that they have less of a hill to climb, having gotten all the way up to whatever level they're at with effectively zero strand loss, while new characters have the same weight hanging over them with a much longer path.
GMs don't currently have the ability to return strands, so either this would remain an administrative action, increasing the workload of those who manage them, or it would require additional code to sacrifice XP for Soul Strands.
There's been some very interesting suggestions, but there are valid reasons for the Soul Mother doing what she does, and they're deeply rooted in world lore. We're sensitive to how this is a contentious issue with some players, and we're absolutely keeping that in mind for the MMO.
Yeah good points Dorg that is why I made my above post. As to reattaching yes it would be a admin action but there is already a process for that and for removal of XP all it would take is a GM to remove it and then post for the SS return. But I hear ya as it comes to NWN layo.
One little thing:
For sake of analysis, setting everyone to have 4 available soul strands would actually greatly favor those of higher levels simply from the fact that they have less of a hill to climb, having gotten all the way up to whatever level they're at with effectively zero strand loss, while new characters have the same weight hanging over them with a much longer path.
Not really as at lower levels you have more opportunities to get ss back then you do at higher levels.
On the MMO as I said it is about if you are making a business out of it or a hobby. To make a business then I suggest strongly that you dont put in a forced perma death system. Remember the current community here is a extremely small sample of the customer base you will need to make a viable and sustainable business.
-
Your first idea was alright. The 4 Strands part just made it extra messy.
One problem with your initial idea is that Soul Strand attachment shouldn't be trivial (at least in my opinion). That just seems like a big deal, since Strands are an IC thing, not just a mechanic. Making reattachment available via xp exchange basically makes it possible to gain Strands back without doing anything at all in a totally OOC way. That's because quests are a huge source of xp (the most efficient source for most characters), a lot of quests involve no danger at all, and anyone can basically just tag along on a quest for the full xp reward at the end. The more quests you can make, the faster you can buy a Strand back by chatting up a DM on irc. There needs to be something to bring it back IC, but I don't have any ideas right now.
Another problem is that leveling is supposed to be done as soon as possible. If your character levels in the middle of combat, you should be leveling as soon as the battle is over, not two hours later after everyone is out of the dungeon. If we are suddenly able to trade xp for Strands, that rule is going to get shoved aside a lot, and anything that makes an exploit common practice or clearly counters an established rule is bad.
A tangent problem is that DMs would be bugged to remove xp. Not a big deal, but I'd rather they were logging in to create atmosphere and promote RP rather than handle accounting.
For the MMO, it's possible the free-for-all server could have no chance of permanent death while the world-changing RP server would have it. It's not much to ask that players who want to change the world buy into a little risk for their characters.
-
Dont convolute a great idea....its simple and a solid idea as originally stated. It lets people enjoy their characters for longer still with the chance of death. People will just have to make decisions when leveling.
Even with quests most people still take quite a while to level. Taking away a level is not something as trivial as it is sounding like.
-
Yay risk!
-
The MMO is going to be tricky since it is a business as well as a game. On that I am with Chongo how do you make it dramatic and scary to die while not losing your customers. The idea of the two worlds is a interesting one. As a experiment it will show where the user base wants to be by where the most usage is. It will be good to see what happens after a bit when players/customers start to lose their PCs.
-
Taking away a level is not something as trivial as it is sounding like.
Yeah it is. And the fact that we're so far from each other on that opinion is the problem.
I'll say it again - tying strands to progression is a bad idea for this very reason. It penalizes in the same direction every other progression based system does.
-
Yeah it is. And the fact that we're so far from each other on that opinion is the problem.
I'll say it again - tying strands to progression is a bad idea for this very reason. It penalizes in the same direction every other progression based system does.
I think I am starting to get what you mean. If you look at it from the POV of all the different play styles you get very different views of progression and its affects. So it is really hard to find a way that can work without leaving some group or set of groups out in the cold. Of course that also means the reverse is also an issue. Meaning you cant find a perma death system that does not leave some group or set of groups out in the cold. So if I get your meaning there is no good/fair for all way to create a death system or to create a system that "counters" a death system.
-
At least not one that Chongo has figured out. And it's exactly those concerns that we carry into the MMO.
-
At least not one that Chongo has figured out. And it's exactly those concerns that we carry into the MMO.
If you are saying that we have great concerns about the idea of a forced perma death system in a pay to play world then I share those concerns deeply.
-
If it's a PVP server, necromancers and evil clerics should get some chance to steal other people's strands via bloody sacrifice. What's the point of evil bloody sacrifice if you can't even live forever in some soulless undead husk of ultimate power?
-
Taking away a level is only trivial for people who can go get a boatload of xp in a night. That isnt the majority of the people here.
-
Taking away a level is only trivial for people who can go get a boatload of xp in a night. That isnt the majority of the people here.
You're missing the point completely Stolen.
Many of our problems of server inequity come from the fact that most tangible gains derive from the same progression line. Therefore, we should avoid any further ties into the same old problematic system.
I've been neck deep in the issues of server inequity due to varying progression rates for a good while now. And I've got good visibility on the issues. What ends up happening is that we develop the same old spread of the lowest and highest denominators. This has to do with all manner of things - and I cringe when people simplify it to one issue. More then anything else, time and availability impacts this. Time is the single most variable issue in our game and it's amazing folks still like shouting playstyle. Playstyle impacts this as well of course. Luck in finding groups when you're on impacts this. Luck in having a good group develop. Social skills impacts this. All sorts of things come into impact this. And due to the highest common denominator existing, the balance of anything in progression ends up being forced upward.
So when we tie SS reimbursement into XP progression - we add to the problem. Now, the instinct of those that maybe haven't been around long enough or been given enough visibility to see the reality behind the game - they often like to say that it's the people at the HCD that are the problem. Folks that have been dealing with it on the standard roller coaster ride of a PW, whether it be an oldtimer player who's just wisened up, or a dev who's gone back and forth on balancing to all the different variables of inevitable inequity.... they often come to see that while there are 'problems' with certain individuals, the HCD as a whole is far more complex. The issue of time alone breaks everything.
It needs to be outside of this measure. Otherwise we end up walking the same old path of futility. And that is policing the people in manners that are rarely objective or with any backing data (i.e. criticizing someone who's gone from 1 to 20 in less then 9 months as having poor playstyle when in fact they've played the equivalent of 17 of your years in game). Or we establish systems within progression that end up unfair to the HCD. For example, let's say SS reattachments were given a xx per month limit. Well - how is that fair for the person who plays more in that month then others will play that year? It goes both ways. Any system that bases itself around survival should seek to veer away from standard progression tracks that are already too difficult to pull off fairly for the community as a whole.
-
I do get your point and I cant disagree that its not fair to everyone. Nothing ever is. I just think its the most fair to the most people.
If anyone ever finds some solution that fair for everyone, that might be the first time it has happened. :P
-
@Chongo I am getting your point now. As for the use of play style in my above post I use the term to encompass all the variables (time, luck, grouping, time zones, social skills) you mention. So what needs to happen is that PC progression needs to be decoupled from the above "play style" variables. Also any death/life force system also needs to be decoupled from the same list especially time and most of all luck.
I would say that the one single largest issue with the current death system is luck. And if that is true there really is no good way of dealing with ss reattachments since luck good or bad is still the driving force. And this is due to NWN layo being a XP based on kills or quests progression system. Luck is a random thing and you can die 100 times and never lose a ss or you can die 10 times and lose one each time. Furthermore it stays completely random for the life of your PC. So you can have a great run of luck and get to high levels and invest years in your PC and then have a very bad run of luck and lose the investment completely.
My question now is - Is luck fair?
As a side note: I really cant find much on the Soul Mother and the deeply invested in world lore of why she does what she does. But one thing about her is for sure based on how the system works she is Chaotic :) So a question on the Soul Mother formation in game creation terms - What came first the death system or the Soul Mother?
-
My question now is - Is luck fair?
Depends on which side of the luck you're on. Ask anyone who goes to a casino and plays slots. Ask the guy who hits a nice payoff. Ask the guy who loses every coin he put in. Same "luck" but different distribution.
Luck is neither fair nor unfair. It can, however, be cruel or forgiving.
As a side note: I really cant find much on the Soul Mother and the deeply invested in world lore of why she does what she does.
Nope, and you won't find it, as there's parts of the Soul Mother that are unknown even to most of the GM Team.
-
So what needs to happen is that PC progression needs to be decoupled from the above "play style" variables.
No. How would that work? The progression of a character has to be closely linked to how much time the player puts in. No one should be able to start a character, go on vacation, and come back to find that character is more powerful. No one who has time to play should have their character's advancement held back by some arbitrarily assigned progression limit. That'll just make him mad.
Luck is also a big part of it. Luck is just a word for the randomness of things - if you find a cool rare drop or get ten lumps of ore from the vein instead of one you're "lucky", and you're "unlucky" if you don't. The randomness makes the world better. If everything is the same for everyone - with no randomness or luck - that's pretty boring.
For the other things you mentioned, like time zones and social skills... I don't know. It's not Leanthar's fault if you're too shy to ask to join a group. It's not Ed's fault if the server happens to be kinda dead when you can log in so you have fewer chances to find groups. Not everything should be soloable, but solo play should be possible in a many cases, sure. That doesn't mean a soloer should necessarily be just as quick at progressing as someone with a good group to hook up with regularly.
You can't separate these things from progression.
My question now is - Is luck fair?
You know there's already a whole thread about this, right? I think the system is fair because it doesn't discriminate but treats every character the same way, even if some end up more "lucky" in the end. Others think it's not fair because some get to die more times than others, even though equal deaths for all would discriminate against certain builds, roles, and classes. I can see value in both positions (though I still prefer one over the other). It's not a simple question with a black-and-white answer.
-
Oh I have to disagree that luck is neither fair or unfair but as to cruel or forgiving you are right on ;)
Fair - free from dishonesty or injustice:
Unfair - disproportionate
Using these two definitions and your subject of gambling we have to find that luck is disproportionate. Gambling works as a business because most people lose, that is why the house always wins.
So truly luck favors the few.
Any system based on luck cannot be fair and balanced and equitable to all. To achieve fairness a system has to have set rules free from randomness and be the same progressively for all invested.
Now this brings up more questions and thoughts - Do we really want a fair death system? Do we really want to know before hand when our PCs will die? Perhaps luck/gambling is part of the fun, perhaps the drama of losing a good friend is part of the fun, perhaps we all secretly want the chance to die heroically and be remembered fondly by those we leave behind.
-
Luck is also a big part of it. Luck is just a word for the randomness of things - if you find a cool rare drop or get ten lumps of ore from the vein instead of one you're "lucky", and you're "unlucky" if you don't. The randomness makes the world better. If everything is the same for everyone - with no randomness or luck - that's pretty boring.
Yes you are right, in some senses of the game randomness is very fun, such as in drops and collecting CNR. But for me my PC is much more important to me then a lump of coal so it is hard for me to see it that way when it comes to permanent loss of my PC. And maybe I am just too invested in my PC and really need to divest myself of the emotional attachment I have to him. I know some players are like that, they still have great fun and deep immersion without the emotional attachment.
If we are going to have a forced perma death system in the MMO then maybe we need a grief management forum as well :P
-
Gambling works as a business because the games are designed to be unfair in favor of the house. Everyone knows that going in (at least they should), so choosing to gamble and coming out a loser is not unfair - the loser knew what he was getting into.
For this:
Yes you are right, in some senses of the game randomness is very fun, such as in drops and collecting CNR. But for me my PC is much more important to me then a lump of coal so it is hard for me to see it that way when it comes to permanent loss of my PC. And maybe I am just too invested in my PC and really need to divest myself of the emotional attachment I have to him.
I was responding to the statement that progression should be separated from luck. Someone who gets more resources to practice with will progress faster, right? From the back-end perspective (that one person ends up with more resources from the same effort as another person), that's not really fair, right? But you agree that the randomness is okay. So do I. Not only is it fun and realistic, but from the front-end perspective (that everyone had the same opportunity even if it worked out differently in the end) it's also fair.
Don't try to not care about your characters. I think the emotional attachment can be important. I love Jennara and I'd be pretty upset if she permed. She's definitely more important to me than CNR coal. Emotional attachment doesn't have any bearing on the death system's fairness, though. It would feel unfair if she permed when someone else didn't (maybe), but that doesn't mean it actually is unfair. And, again, that's not a simple question.
-
I'd be pretty upset if Jennara permed too :) The world would be a lesser place indeed.
-
The thing that irks me is seeing somebody with more SS Reimbursements than Soul Strands. It seems a good many people go from 1-9 quickly, and then dance from 9 and 10 and back again over and over for years on life support. I never requested SS Reimbursement before, never saw the need to. Lag spiked before and I just accepted the penalty.
In the end though, my characters will die at 10 lost, and others will die on their 20-25th lost. Not a very fair system to those who don't happen to have a GM witness in the group. Why I've always been a fan of absolutely no SS reimbursements no matter the case. Of course, I'm also a fan of no soul mother for this very reason too.
Permadeath for a lag spike is the PnP equivalent of a table-top gm spilling soda on your character sheet and saying "oops, guess he's dead".
-
Permadeath for a lag spike is the PnP equivalent of a table-top gm spilling soda on your character sheet and saying "oops, guess he's dead".
*falls over laughing*
-
i had a brisk read through this, could it be possible ( and this is just an idea) to remove a SS via temple bindstone?
example : 1 SS via a temple bindstone ONLY (unless your godlesss, then it either non compliant, or a neutral bindstone, i perfer temple diety idea mostly because your diety has a say kinda, you know what i mean ... heh)
: not only traded for xp, but a lump sum of gold is involved, the higher the pc lvl the more xp and gold is needed
: only once per say 6months to a year IG or RL
: only at a temple of YOUR diety, a toranite cannot goto shadon temple etc etc etc...
: and also perhaps a bunch of the dietys stardust....not many ppl use these that i travelled with or seen in quests, so storing some away may become uselfull in the future and would cost alot more in time.
: its a toss up on godless characters tho, i mean you follow a diety for a reason, you expect your diety to protect you in some way, either in a drastic way, or very minute way, but all in all you have FAITH in your diety and to you that what counts. With godless characters, they mostly dont believe in them or care less about them, so why would a diety say speak on your behalf to the soul mother parsay..the ups and downs of a distyless PC.
just my thoughts on this.
just an idea i had of course this could be modified by discrection of the layo team, but an idea at least, i mean isnt that why we have dietys and faith??
-
and why druids have the oak
not all follow a diety and are called godless
just more enlightened knowing gods are parts of the whole,not above and beyond
you know i just had a way to fix it
im going to submit to be the new soul mother with a good boy and girl list and a bad boy and girl list
which die is cast for which, depends on which i grab out the drawer
perma death works in the way it is supposed to
we evolve as players just as our characters evolve
without drogo perming i would never have had khuren to be angry enough to kill the chicken poacher human johan
every path has its set length, and how we manage the next fork is why we have fun
-
Permadeath for a lag spike is the PnP equivalent of a table-top gm spilling soda on your character sheet and saying "oops, guess he's dead".
Funny, but sadly true as well. I have encountered spawns where the massive spell effects that go off killed my computer and subsequently my character.
Losing a DT to such a spawn hardly feels rewarding. For me it destroys my enjoyment, my immersion and will to put in an effort.
I have read the arguments for and against. I know I will always be against the current DT system for the simple reason that when my character perms then I won't be thinking of the 3-4 DTs I got because of my own actions, I will remember the 6-7 DTs I got because of lag or bugs.
I know people may argue it's the same for all. I cant speak for others but for me its deeply unsatisfying and that is all that matters for me. And no we are not all equally affected by lag - some suffer less either due to better computers, better connections etc.
I accept the system as it is because this server is run, worked and paid by other people in their time. At the same time I know that I probably wont have the time, energy nor wish for another go if I loose Galathea to lag or bugs.
-
i had a brisk read through this, could it be possible ( and this is just an idea) to remove a SS via temple bindstone?
...
i mean isnt that why we have dietys and faith??
Not really, no. Deities do different things than the Soul Mother. It has been said before that the gods aren't involved with the Soul Strands (even though there are bindstones dedicated to them) or what the Soul Mother does, except for claiming some souls after they've paid her a postmortem visit. The gods aren't more powerful than the Soul Mother, though they aren't necessarily weaker, either - they just don't mess with each others' business for whatever reason.
EDIT: By the way, I actually considered this for a moment when I was trying to think of some way to make the 'pay xp' idea more IC. The separation between the gods and direct Soul Strand manipulation cut that short, though, heh. It's a good idea generically, but it doesn't fit with the specific world lore.
-
Alright, I'm not sure if L or Dorg or Ed or whoever will be okay with me posting this. I made a sort - of promise that I wouldn't talk extensively about other servers while technically not playing here. But I think that because this is a favorable comparison, that the exception will be made
ANYWAY. I've played at Layonara for about 2.5 years. Some people may remember the Mad Mage Rhynn. Whatever. I've since left and played on 3-4 other servers, two of which extensively. These servers did not and do not support a permanent death system outside of rare Admin (Think Dorg, Ed, Orth and of course, Leanthar) approved conditioning.
It isn't a good thing, people.
People do whatever they want because they have no fear of death. There's no way to take out one's enemies (Good and evil are supported on these servers so of course there is player conflict) Because if you're evil you're just exposed as what you are , but can't do anything about the goodies that are thwarting you every step of the way because you can't perm them.
if you're good, then well, your evil arch nemesis just won't die, so they keep coming back.
Of all the things I've actually missed in leaving Layo, was the finite impermanacy of the characters here. They die. They fear death, and because they fear death, they treat situations differently then characters who can technically live forever.
Trust me guys, I never thought I'd say it either, but the Soul Mom is not a bad thing :)
-
I'll always be in favor of the Soul Mother and perming, despite the heart ache and problems that it causes and that the system has.
I've also played on servers where PCs never run the risk of perming, unless they choose it to happen (ie You get tired of your PC). Suffice to say I am still here, and will stay here, Soul Mother and all.
-
I don't think I'll venture reasons for and against, there'll be contributors to this thread far more garrulous than I willing to do so i'm sure .. however I sometimes do ponder how many people, now gone and now likely never to discover/experience the MMO when it is released, would still be here if they hadn't had their character perm. Would it be more than those few who wouldn't remain if there was an alternative introduced?
I stopped reading the thread after this, and clicked "quote."
Short and sweet? Though I tried really hard to stick with Layonara after Pyyran permed, some of the magic was gone for me... Especially with the troubles I ran into, trying to have his son carry on his final wishes. I still adore and wish the best for the community, and I'm glad that Pyyran's tale had a conclusion... But he was the character that could really, solidly keep me here. Now he's gone, and I wouldn't bring him back if I could - he died legitimately, and I (albeit not intentionally) moved on.
I may give Layonara another go - I know I'll try the MMO when it comes out. But... That's my bit for now.
-
It isn't a good thing, people.
People do whatever they want because they have no fear of death. There's no way to take out one's enemies (Good and evil are supported on these servers so of course there is player conflict) Because if you're evil you're just exposed as what you are , but can't do anything about the goodies that are thwarting you every step of the way because you can't perm them.
if you're good, then well, your evil arch nemesis just won't die, so they keep coming back.
Of all the things I've actually missed in leaving Layo, was the finite impermanacy of the characters here. They die. They fear death, and because they fear death, they treat situations differently then characters who can technically live forever.
Trust me guys, I never thought I'd say it either, but the Soul Mom is not a bad thing :)
Short and sweet? Though I tried really hard to stick with Layonara after Pyyran permed, some of the magic was gone for me... Especially with the troubles I ran into, trying to have his son carry on his final wishes. I still adore and wish the best for the community, and I'm glad that Pyyran's tale had a conclusion... But he was the character that could really, solidly keep me here. Now he's gone, and I wouldn't bring him back if I could - he died legitimately, and I (albeit not intentionally) moved on.
Its the roleplaying paradox.
It order to create an environment where roleplay thrives (and you don't have a lot of munchkins(1) running around with no fear of death) you have to have permadeath. However, the price of that is that in the end you kill the the characters you have grown to love (and you lose some of the roleplayers with them).
Alas, it seems you can't have your cake and eat it, even in a fantasy world...
Regards,
Script Wrecked.
(1) By the way, we probably all have a bit of munchkin in us.
-
By the way, we probably all have a bit of munchkin in us.
Indeed we do.
-
Just would like to point out that Jrizz's idea does not get rid of permming, just overhauls the idea.
And there have been other ideas that don't get rid of it, just overhaul it and make it a bit more "player friendly".
-
As a side note: I really cant find much on the Soul Mother and the deeply invested in world lore of why she does what she does.
Correct, as Dorg stated, most has not even been disclosed to the GM team, or the MMO team for that matter.
But one thing about her is for sure based on how the system works she is Chaotic
Please don't try and put her into a D&D alignment box based on NWN mechanics :)
So a question on the Soul Mother formation in game creation terms - What came first the death system or the Soul Mother?
Considering Layonara started as PnP campaign long before the advent of NWN, that would be the Soul Mother.
And I'm pretty sure you could perm during Leanthar's years of PnP sessions (which were without soul strands).
There's no reward without risk ;)
-
Correct, as Dorg stated, most has not even been disclosed to the GM team, or the MMO team for that matter.
Please don't try and put her into a D&D alignment box based on NWN mechanics
Correction, D&D mechanics!
Soul mother = lawful (all creatures have to observe the laws of life and death apart from liches) & chaotic (random chance of loosing a soul strand).
Its hard to define her really imo. Both obeying universal confines and being random in her methods :)
-
Who says the Soul Mother's methods are random? Sure, we see an Out-Of-Character die roll, but that's OOC. In Character it might be explained that she simply didn't think a strand was ripe for the plucking yet.
As for the question of whether the Soul Mother is still nescessary, my answer is an absolute "yes". I've had a couple characters die off since my start here on Layonara, and though I often miss playing them and have nostalgic thoughts about them and their past exploits, I wouldn't enjoy Layonara nearly as much if there weren't a risk of losing a character involved.
-
The Soul Mother - Still necessary?
Yes.
:D
*chuckles and runs away*
-
Indeed we do.
we represent, the lollipop guild....
-
I am hard pressed to pick a side in this, all because both make good points and that there is possibly a viable solution that hasn't been seen yet.
one, When I started, I lost SS like no one's business in the first few months because it was my first time playing on a RP server, and RPing in general, not to mention that playing on a server where the word easy on a creature description actually means "IMAH FIREIN" MAH LAZERS!" was very disorienting.... especially the killer deer. Even then, he got locked away, blah blah blah, so on and so forth (Which has the same effect of Perma-death, imho)... But then I made others, all whom I like much. I simply moved from one to the next. I learned from other players, and subsequently lost less SS. Idoran was ment to be a rush-in kinda guy, and he has lost less than my first PC, whom was supposed to be the careful type. a dice roll partially affected that, but we all have our days, yes?
I can't see a character perm-ing as a reason to stop playing, but then again, I haven't had a PC above lvl nine, and I seriously doubt I will ever reach 15. (and if I do, I'm likely to be 60 years old.)
Personally, I'd like to see distinction between the progress of a person training, and their status in society. as I understand, a level 4 PC is some john doe off the street, and a level 38 is this fantastic fellow that everyone knows. but I really don't know any of these high level PC's... I just know most of the lower level ones.
as far as the SM goes... of course, because she is cemented shoulder deep into the LORE.
oh, an Idea. if any have played the expansions for NWN, there was the "relic" and the rogue stones. You could drop any rolls for SS loss, and every time you dies, you lose one. -BUT- the orb has the ability to whisk one away before death's eternal grip takes hold, provided that some variable is provided, either hard earned XP (because as I see it, I couldn't catch a good chunk of XP, even if it's thrown at me), or something is "paid", such and such... this might (likely, I think. very likely) be illegal, due to copyright... so I'll just shut up now, and go do my work.
*falls asleep halfway down the stairs to get his work*
-
Sure, I'm 2 1/2 months late on this, but I always have an opinion even if I don't make it known. So, do we need the soul mother?
In the NWN version of Layo, I think she is necessary because the game IS an xp based progression system. However, I can't say that I don't want her gone. If she were not in place, there would be a LOT more level 40 characters than there are. And a lot of them would be shallow characters that lived in a constant grind for xp in the toughest areas they could barely survive through. On the other hand, we all know that server lag and client crashes account for a lot of deaths, for some players/characters the majority of them. Fact is, the Aurora engine is NOT an MMO engine, which is what PW servers try to be, just on a smaller scale than the commercial MMO's. It doesn't handle tons of people and tons of items well. In that light, the soul mother can be a slap in the face when you die due to things that are hardware and software related. I can recall 1 occasion that I lost a SS due to server lag. Luckily, I was on a player led quest where that player happened to be a WL who could verify the lag along with a few other players. I don't recall if a GM witnessed it, but the strand was returned anyway. Had the WL not been present and suggested I make the reimbursal request with his support, I wouldn't have bothered. I would have been bitter about it for a good long while though. Since there is not CONSTANT GM presence on the server to watch for things like lag spikes, the return system is a flawed bandage. The graceful pleas help, but the system will never be ideal. Ultimately if the choice were given to me, I would retire the SM despite my suggestion that she is necessary for the system at hand.
For the MMO version of Layo, I would have to say that the soul mother should absolutely be gone. I can understand that it is the MMO team's right to create the game as they want it to be. I can understand the desire to keep everything IC and maintain the idea of immersion. Beyond that, I have 2 big problems with the soul mother in a commercial venture. First, I don't feel that it's acceptable to force permadeath on a paying customer. Personally, I don't care for alternate characters. Once I've decided on a character concept, I want to play that character until I decide I'm finished with it, not when someone else does. I have 2 others, but I don't play them, and I probably never will again. The second problem deals with things like hardware and software issues. In NWN, we deal with things like lag and crashes because we have to. The game just isn't any better and it can't be. When you're the creator of something though, you have to make it work correctly, especially in the case of a subscription. Denying a SS return because there wasn't a staff witness to a lag spike or a client crash just isn't a good business decision in that case. Unless lag and client-side crashing could be prevented [not possible] or at the least logged for the purpose of grievances, I, as a consumer, would not be satisfied with a permadeath system that can be influenced by hardware or software failure. As much as it is an OOC idea, it can't be ignored in a business venture.
I know this thread wasn't necessarily intended to involve the MMO, but I feel it's a relevant issue since it will still be Layonara when all is said and done.
-
For the MMO version of Layo, I would have to say that the soul mother should absolutely be gone. I can understand that it is the MMO team's right to create the game as they want it to be. I can understand the desire to keep everything IC and maintain the idea of immersion. Beyond that, I have 2 big problems with the soul mother in a commercial venture. First, I don't feel that it's acceptable to force permadeath on a paying customer. Personally, I don't care for alternate characters. Once I've decided on a character concept, I want to play that character until I decide I'm finished with it, not when someone else does. I have 2 others, but I don't play them, and I probably never will again. The second problem deals with things like hardware and software issues. In NWN, we deal with things like lag and crashes because we have to. The game just isn't any better and it can't be. When you're the creator of something though, you have to make it work correctly, especially in the case of a subscription. Denying a SS return because there wasn't a staff witness to a lag spike or a client crash just isn't a good business decision in that case. Unless lag and client-side crashing could be prevented [not possible] or at the least logged for the purpose of grievances, I, as a consumer, would not be satisfied with a permadeath system that can be influenced by hardware or software failure. As much as it is an OOC idea, it can't be ignored in a business venture.
I know this thread wasn't necessarily intended to involve the MMO, but I feel it's a relevant issue since it will still be Layonara when all is said and done.
First off, excellent comments, questions and concerns.
I can only address some of these questions/comments at this time, but the mechanics behind the Soul Mother will be different for the MMO. The permadeath issue is one upon which we've had several lengthy conversations. There are going to be other dynamics in play in the MMO, many of which are not finalized to the point where we feel comfortable discussing them. One thing I will say, though, is that there are plans for an in-game, in-character, lore-accurate, mechanical system by which anyone will be able to reattach lost Soul Strands for any reason (or no reason).
There is more, potentially anyway, but again, that is among the "unfinalized" and subject to change drastically.
Hope that helps.
-
Part of the function of perm-a-death is to stop everyone running around like deathless munchkins. Deathless munchkinism has a certain roleplay style... all of its own. If there was another mechanism, I'm sure we'd all love to use; there is and has been and will be a lot of heartbreak over lost characters. However, without such a mechanism, your roleplay server becomes a roll play server.
Regards,
Script Wrecked.
-
Actually, it becomes more of a Rofl-Lol Play Server... If you know what I mean...
-
I've probably said it before, and I'll probably say it again. I like the soul mother system. I like perma death. If I didn't like it. I'd play WoW. and... obviously... I don't want to play WoW.
-
I concur on the need for the soul mother. As much as I hate seeing that banshee hovering over Vrebel's head the system prevents people from running around with no cares of dying. The soul mother adds realism to the game, consequences for your actions, bravery becomes true bravery, and it forces characters to group together which promotes rp and benefits the server.
-
From another thread:
I think we should draw the following conclusion: a permanent death based on a bugged system is a bugged system of permanent death. Three gracious pleas do not change it, they only postpone it.
Wow! There are a lot of other threads on this subject and this just about sums up in a nut shell one of the biggest "against" arguments. Well said!
-
Gamasutra: Rethinking Player Death (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=25951)
"In an editorial originally published in Game Developer magazine's November 2009 issue, editor-in-chief Brandon Sheffield considers whether traditional player death conventions have worn out their welcome, asking "why is death even part of the equation?" for games if meaningful consequences aren't built in."
Interesting read, to say the least.
-
Great article and sections can be used to support arguments on both sides of the perma-death issue on Layo. But the short of it is that the subject games of that article were not ones where a player invests years in a single character only to lose it permanently.
If I were designing a game in which perma-death was a major part of the world make up I would work it out something like this.
1. It takes a lot to advance in power in this game (even though advancing in power is not the focus it is still a big part of any game).
2. It is a RPG and people tend to invest emotionally in characters.
3. There will be a end of life for the characters.
To make end of life work it must be fair, stable, well known, predictable, and even. This way players can plan for it, be ready with back up characters, understand their story, act in a appropriate way, and enjoy the time with their character without feeling robbed of anything. (I am sure much more can go into this)
Then I would try to find ways to meet those goals. Such as:
All characters retire/pass on/wander off into the desert (Player choice)
- one year after they top out in progression.
or
- After x amount of time
or
- after completing some life goal
or
Well you get the idea, base it on something that is the same for everyone.
The key here is to take randomness out of the equation when hitting end of life of the character. (NOTE: randomness is still part of mini-deaths and there can still be penalty attached to mini-deaths).
-
I just want to preface this by saying I can see the pros and cons on both sides of the argument, and am not intending to make this confrontational... :)
I totally disagree with the "end of life concept." Part of the beauty of this game is you can take a break at any point in time and then jump back into it when RL allows. To invest so much time and personal energy into a character with a finite life time line would ruin the game for me. Besides, it seems like it would be a pain in the rear and a resource gobbler to reconcile and track something like this, particularly with variables such as differing natural lifespans for various races, etc. etc. Also, regardless of how it could be done or implemented there would be hurt feelings, anger, and people would definitely feel robbed.
The perma death system for me works, and I know I'm probably the minority. It forces me to think, manage my risk, and make decisions accordingly. I have played one character for over three and a half years now and I believe I may have only one or two DT's, and I still have had tons of fun, and continue to do so. I don't sit on the benches all the time, I have been into the rift at least 50 or 60 times, and I have been to Firesteep many times as well. A game like this without any serious consequences or risk would just cheapen the experience from my viewpoint. I enjoy my booty puckering up when faced with danger, knowing it could be a piece of my character's life. Will I perma death at some point in time... Probably.
Mandating a set time period of character life, or time after you "top out", would be the wrong thing to do. As players we already do this for the most part on our own already. There are very few people that have not retired a character because they were bored with it, or it was just the right time to do so. I think we should leave it to the players to make these decisions.
I guess what I'm saying is the perceived danger and chance of loosing my character enriches the game for me, and if I make wise choices and am not foolish with my character's life, I want to enjoy the fruits of those labors for as long as possible.
-
I retired Earl just short of 90. His best friend Cass is dead, so he's just biding his time with a mug of whiskey counting the days till ol' Harvester whisks him away to that tavern in the sky. Till then, git off'n mah lawn! *shakes his fist at the whippersnappers*
-
Most of it has all been said before, but I still agree that it is not really the system that is at fault, but rather the margin of error for player and hardware. I feel that once an IC system of returns is implemented as it has been said to be in the MMO, that some of that will be alleviated - no paperwork or accusations, and it's in character.
My biggest thing, and I was really saying this to someone else and decided it was good here, is that it should be an integral part of the game and not a tacked on mechanic that can be argued over. Just the fact that we can even have this discussion (permadeath or no permadeath?) and have so many people saying that it can not only be eliminated but SHOULD be eliminated, means that it is really not tied in deeply into your game. Your lore, sure - soul mother and so on. But the game? Eh. Not really.
Make it matter, make the risk worth taking, and make something that's just cool on both sides of the fence. I mentioned a long time ago that content unlocked by how many tokens you have would be kind of cool. Certain areas that only those on their last strands may enter, equipment related to death and the soul mother that only those characters could use, alternate pathways in general that open the further down that road you go.
And ones that close. Make it a part of the experience and something that people, even when there is an IC method of returns available, may still choose to try. Imagine a guild whose only entry is to either have never lost a strand, or be on your last - with themed equipment! Their own styles of hardcore groups... never die, or be an inch from death.
I didn't take SMD, and I know Acacea is on her last strand, and I know I said I would only GP her back once because I had a good story reason for that one time. But that doesn't indicate a complete support of an awesomely implemented system. There's nothing that she or anyone else gets out of being a strand from death - it's just an eventuality for most, and it bums out the people who care a lot. It's character development, certainly, if you choose to accept it as much and roleplay accordingly. But that's all player-side. That's not enough for most people, you know?
You know she has been searching for something in particular about the soul mother for over half a century now after having stared at her on Athus' epic? Eh. She'll never find it. I wouldn't bother asking. That's not why I didn't take SMD.
But it does indicate a lack of anything related to... well, anything outside of the player with regards to death as more than just an unavoidable end of the road with nothing to see on the way. It doesn't even occur to think, "Hm, I wonder if she would have better luck now?" It's just not the mindset of the system to change with the character.
-
One of my favourite characters has just lost a DT and it has left me feeling really bad. I know this is sad, but it's a measure of how much I am attached to my characters. She has now lost 5 DTs in around 15 deaths or so (she doesn't get killed often), and I have read the chat here and am not playing the percentage game in any way, but I am annoyed by the sheer unfairness of a random roll.
Then I started to return to a normal frame of mind and an idea occurred to me.
Some people have been killed lots of times and lost a few strands.
Some people have been killed a lot of times and lost a lot of strands.
Some people struggle to not get killed, yet due to a 'bad' roll, lose strands.
So I wondered this: what about making some sort of mechanism that actually restores your soul strands if you don't get killed. This way, if you get killed a lot, you will lose soul strands and eventually perm out. If however, you learn some lessons and do not die for a certain length of time or xps gained for instance, you will recover your latest loss. If you get killed and lose a strand before recovering the previous one, the counter starts from scratch again.
This would allow people with 9 tokens to realistically continue to play with the possibility of recovery, rather than the likelihood of perming. It would also, although belatedly in her case, allow characters to join Acacea's suggestion of the "Zero SS" club.
Thoughts?
-
There is certainly precedent for the restoration of SS from the SM. But it would severely belittle the great achievement of the WL who made that occur on a mass scale. Yes it was long ago and that player no longer plays here but we should still honor the achievement none the less.
That being said I do agree with you that a restoration system based on merit (SS meritocracy) would be great but it is very clear that a SS restoration system for NWN layo will not occur. I think we can rest assured that in the upcoming MMO we will see a very different death system but still based around the SM.
NOTE: GDC is next week! I will be there whoo hooo. Good time to unveil a new MMO ;)
-
Thinking exercises are good for us. Even if it doesn't help NWN, it's worth talking it through. Like this part:
If however, you learn some lessons and do not die for a certain length of time or xps gained for instance, you will recover your latest loss.
There are two systems there, the length-of-time system and the xp-gained system.
For length-of-time: - How is the time measured? Real life months? In-game hours?
- Does the character have to be active for the time to count or will it be possible to simply not log in with a character and safely regrow strands?
- What constitutes "active?" For example, if a character were required to be in-game for X hours without dying to regrow a strand, would it be okay to park the character in a forgotten corner of some town overnight while the player sleeps?
- Is the solution fair to both highly active and casual players? Is it fair to those with many alts and those who focus on a single character?
For xp-gained: - Is the xp required constant or does it vary by level?
- How is quest xp balanced against "bashy" xp? Quests are often peaceful and by far the fastest way to gain xp for most characters.
- Would the xp solution be fair to those players who can make lots of quests and those players who can make very few?
The main ideas to keep in mind are that details are good (though loose frameworks like the idea here are a good start), simple is better than complex (though some complexity may be required), and the fix for an "unfair" system should be sparklingly fair (if not for the sake of fairness, then at least to avoid hypocrisy).
-
If you look at them together then you can start to address some of the great questions you raised.
In a meritocracy you gain position by participation and achievement. So to address this I would look at a formula that takes into account:
time played (in a period of time, overall, consecutive)
XP gained (in a period of time and overall)
then you could gain merit based on a few different play types. Questers gain merit for questing, bashers for bashing, casual RPers for being there ;)
My point being that no one play type is better or more worthy of merit then another. Wow equality, what a concept LOL.
-
It is a great concept, heh, but it's complicated and there aren't many details.
- How is who does what tracked? Does someone have to watch? Is there a script that has to be writen to monitor every character?
- Is time or xp more important, or do they vary based on how much of each is used/gained? Is more xp over less time more or less meritorious than more xp over more time? Is less xp over more time "better" than more xp over more time? Are we going to need a chart or an equation to work it out?
- Does "being there" include parking in a corner overnight? I'm guessing no, but it goes back to how things are tracked.
-
Probably the easiest thing to do if the team was anywhere near taking this seriously, would be to make the number GPs available dependent on the length a character has been active. For example, award one every 5 levels. Or base it on real time, one every 4 months etc.
You get the idea.
-
1. Yes it can all be coded. I am hoping the MMO is created on a game engine that opens C or C++ coding up to the builders and is not script based.
2. A mix of both xp and time but set to archatypical play styles.
3. Activity is trackable.
This is just coding really and as long as you have a model you can code to it. So that means the real hard item is number 2, setting the models.
-
(http://seps1816.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/bob-ross.jpg)
Just lightly blend it, one hair and some air.
-
Lol--
-
I miss that guy.
-
"We'll just put pretty little bushes next to these trees." :D I miss that guy too. :mad: Stupid cancer!
-
Aahh right, thanks cb.. now I remember who that guy was... yeah it was a shame.
-
After declining to travel with someone tonight (the only other person on the server) because I feared getting killed and having another crappy "random" roll. I decided to do a forum search for the most current lengthy debate on Soul Strands (my search simply was Soul Strand)... after 7 pages of SS return grievance posts I found this thread from 2009-2010.
Is the SS system still working as intended on a server not near as populated as the days it was put in place? I had this discussion with someone in tells... their question was... do you have a better idea of a fair system? And I told them no I did not... if I had they would have already been reading about it on the forums ... LOL.
I do understand the concept of the system... make people respect death. make them think before they act. Let me be clear too... I dont think we should just be able to "smack" anything and not fear loosing something. We cant go with XP loss on death that will punish the casual player and be a speed bump for the grinders. We had XP loss on death... it was removed. So im still at a loss for a solution that works for both demographics but sadly I think that is impossible to find such a balance.
When the day comes that I loose a multiple year investment character... It will be the end of my time here sadly. I dont mean to use that as a threat.. its just how it will be.
When my choices are go try something risky or not play. Or do something that has little to no reward. Hmm... doesnt seem like its best system to keep a place a float, or keep me interested in staying. Now granted... one player does not a server make. I could vanish tomorrow and this place would keep chugging right along with out skipping a beat. But is this place growing or dieing? if its dieing.. why? Does it get addressed or just "fixed or addressed in the MMO" Ive always envisioning the core of the MMO player base being those who hung on thru all the NWN years. But as the numbers here dwindle and the choices of alternate play grow (many of which are now free or free'sih) what will be the draw for Layo? the chance to perma death your characters? i think not. ;)
I wonder how many are gone because of the SS system taking away something they invested years of their lives into? impossible to tell, but I still wonder. How many have came here because of the SS system? again impossible to tell. But I would kind of wager more have left because of it... that have came (and stayed) because of it.
Ive come close to deleting this rambling babble im spewing several times now.. but instead im going to hit reply and just see what comes of it. ;)
.
-
All the points that you make are totally valid.
A contrary point is, if no character ever dies, you get server stagnation due to a totempole effect. All the characters who got to the top first get entrenched and become part of an established (static) hierarchy. No character who comes along later can ever get to the top of the totempole because all the preceding characters attain a seniority due to having been on all the prior world shattering events.
Another contrary point is, that if you are afraid of losing your one established character, you aren't investing enough into your alternates. If you are always sidelining your alternate so that your main character can attend the big events, you are depriving your alternate the opportunity to grow (as your main did) and become as much entwined in the fabric of the server as your main has.
We do learn to love our characters, and the price we pay for love is grief, but don't be afraid of it.
-
I can't think of a better deterrent than death. It's what makes the game more real to me and forces me to make hard decisions. It's what makes me learn more about the mechanincs and learn more about what items are beneficial. It gives the "Adventure" (notice I didn't use basher; I dislike that term) player credibility in a RP world. It's what brings the more RP sided characters and the Adventure players together in a symbiotic relationship. The RP'r needs the Adventurer to stay alive and accomplish goals, and the Adventurer needs the RP'r to make the game more fun and interesting. Maybe they both learn from eachother and grow their characters into an Adventurer/RP'r combo.
It's too bad you (G-452) missed out on an opportunity to join with this other player and explore, but maybe that's the most realistic result? Maybe your character made a wise in-game decision? I think that's what we're shooting for is realistic/wise conduct, not some oh what the heck, lets just run in there and try because there aren't consequences. It makes it difficult with less folks on because you want to get in game and go places, but maybe just pick a different place with less risk and that way you still get to spend time ingame with this player.
Other than that, maybe once a character perms, they turn into the undead. They are hated by all the living and its pvp-on-site. The living vs the undead! (although that might make them more powerful..yikes...maybe have to not give them all the undead benefits)
-
This is an old thread and obviously always relevant. Thanks for bringing it up again. I've dealt with this on a philosophical level by purely accepting the fact that without death, there is no life. They are different sides oof the same coin. If you try to create one without the other it is hollow and unfulfilling (i.e. WoW, Mist etc)
Do you want to be immortal? Think hard about your answer.
-
[...]
Other than that, maybe once a character perms, they turn into the undead. [...]
[derail]Or maybe not into the undead, instead just the "undying". Now, combined with elves, the al'noth, and the Shining Hand I see something interesting there...
Now, where did I put my insane-ish elvish watchm- guard... [/derail]
I think the death system in Layo offers a great chance to players: Nothing is worse than a world being inconsistant about death. Good characters might get statues or stories about them after death, and death that comes closer because a character is down to her or his final strand surely makes for good motivation.
Characters are puppets on strings, meant to play a role in a story. There are so many stories out there, good and bad, happy and sad, tragic or comical but dramatic all of them (so I hope) - and eventually, a good story comes to an end, and so do characters. And good stories and a consistant world is what makes Layo strong and something different than "grind-and-loot-to-win" mmorpgs.
-
I have seen full on undead systems implemented on other servers, however I believe the team on layo have already decided against implementing undead when the desire to create a lich PC as a part of a WLDQ or CDQ came up. It would require alot of scripting, the death system would no longer apply in the same way and basically, a lot of new rules, factors and stuff in general would go into it.
If you took it to apply to more than just the one person and not everyone would have someone raising them from the dead (could be done RPwise for an individual if DM oversees and its apart of a plot.. chances are your char will be an NPC though); it'd probably be considered and I'll say in advance I only skim read the comments on the oldest two pages so I am probably misinformed or misunderstanding some stuff.
On the subject of the Soul Mother, keep the miserable cow; infinite respawns are nice but.. there should be a system by which perma death can happen, against the player's will. I have played servers where everyone can just keep hitting respawn and the end result is silly. Oh my god brought me back to life, for the 80th time, oh I am favoured by this that and the other, oh a random cleric passed by my corpse and raised me yada yada yada. It gets ridicolous, and death gets taken less seriously which I believe was mentioned before.
True you can lose an SS through lameness, which is why GPs exist for every character, three chances whenever your not elligible to regain a lost SS from DM error, massive lag or whatever else might've caused you to die, lose your SS and through no fault of your own.
-
Still and all, I must admit (since I have just lost a Strand) that the present system seems a little unfair. Let me paint the picture and some thoughts I have had to see what the group thinks.
I was in a party of three and got jumped by two nasty monsters and got killed i double quick time. I rolled under my SS roll %age and lost an SS.
My chagrin is not aimed at the way my SS was lost, but the fact that this is the FIRST SS he has lost and is at level 18. Why so few? Because he has only been killed a few times and this is what is annoying. When you get killed, no account is taken of how many times you have been killed, and this seems not to benefit the cautious character. So whether you have been killed a few times or 50 times, it is still the same level %age roll.
So I wondered if this might not be a way to balance out the careful, thoughtful character - the one who doesn't get killed a lot.
It would work like this:
- When a character has to roll vs the Soul Mother, they get a +40 to their roll, which is given at the start of the new character.
- Every time the character visits The Void, the 40 is reduced by 1.
- This new stat is stored on the character and not on the server to reduce lag.
So how would this work? Two illustrations to explain:
Level 5 character, soloing, gets killed by the Red Light Goblins. This is the first time they have been killed so the roll goes like this...
%age roll +40 vs %age SS loss 5% (for level) and so cannot lose an SS.
Level 30 character, soloing, gets killed by the Red Light Goblins. This is the 20th time they have been killed so the roll goes like this...
- %age roll +20 (40 - number of trips to the void which is 20) vs %age SS loss 30% (for level) and so needs to roll 10 or over to avoid an SS loss.
Now these numbers are conservative, I would suggest as some characters out there get killed a lot and some don't. One character I came across had died over 100 times and only lost 3 SS.
The advantage this process would offer is:
- It would encourage party play since if you are raised from death, you do not pay a visit to The Void.
- It would encourage more use of Rasie Dead scrolls etc. and make them worth crafting.
- It would encourage parties to take clerics with them.
- It would reduce the chances of a straight %age roll failure so make it fairer.
- It would not penalise the careful player.
- It would make no difference to the reckless player.
- It may actually reduce the amount of work needed by the time to sort out SP reimbursements for SS loss.
Thoughts?
-
Without touching on the idea itself, I am just gunna point out that the benefit to a cautious character comes in staying alive, not in having less chance in attracting the gaze of grandmama death. If you are a reckless character at level 20, the number of times you roll will be greater than the number of Ss rolls a careful, cautious character will take. That in itself is the unwritten benefit which tbh applies to real life as well. You are statistically as likely to get hit by an asteroid as you are to be in a plane crash, the reason one is more likely is becaus eplanes take off many times per day, but asteroids are not knocked out of their orbit nearly as often. Thus our roll for getting turned to re pulp is taken more for planes than asteroids.
Like I said, just pointing out where the benefit is for the cautious character, not putting down your idea or any tweaks for the system.
-
Im neglecting my alts? You're right I do neglect them, mostly due to they can't solo and when no one else is on they sit and collect dust. Rather than try to do something they prolly cant handle and suffer a "bad luck" roll. No thanks
Xaltotun has hit the sorest part of this issue for me right on the head. For me it isnt the system itself I dislike, its just the "bad luck" of it.
My newest character picked up his 1st SS at level 5! and a second SS at level 8! 6 Deaths.... 2 tokens! Chalk it up to bad luck of course. I should have said more clear in my last post. I wasnt afraid of going to "x" location and dieing.... I was afraid of after dieing getting yet another rotten roll. I've never liked the "random" number generator (d20) of NWN it jsut plain stinks. But its what we have I know.
I like your pitch Xaltotun but.... when no one else is playing (as happens far more often now) encouraging party play is then discouraging people to play when no one else is on. And forget about being selective for a cleric when your choices are no one and nobody. ;)
I do think we need a system that works differently... it shouldnt just be a blind 1d100 across the board on every death. But any change will favor some classes and hurt others. Front liners will be hurt by a system that takes into account how many times you have already died. Because front liners are the 1st to die. The archers and casters in the back who have time to act when things go bad (time to act = run, use invis potions items etc) will always die less.. I know this from playing both sides of this coin here.
-
It probably isnt possible but a system that takes into account how often you roll vs soul mother as in your last roll against the soul mother was 4 hours ago and thus you are at a higher risk to getting a SS vs another who last rolled against the soul mother was 44 hours ago. This IMO would keep people respecting death so they dont just try and die, try and die, try and die. But... if someone wants to risk it with increasing %'s against the Soul Mother... go for it!
This system would give me the person running the puppet a choice of taking this known added risk on or not.
Hey "Joe Adventurer".. want to go to the Rift for diamonds? Might be risky if those giants tear into you! Mmm I havnt had any run in's with the soul mother in a while so yeah Im game!.... or... Eh... I was just down in "x" and had a quick trip back to my bindstone just the other day.. so I better sit this one out.
With this system sure you can still have a Bad Luck SS... but those who "respect death" will have better odds of living longer. Instead of todays everyone has the same dumb luck. Carefull or careless it doesnt matter with a blind 1d100 How many here have been carefull and still are racking up the SS losses? Or even Permed but werent a fearless hard charger?
-
I think maybe Xalt has a workable new system in theory. I don't think a level five should be able to run around willy nilly though. Maybe a second roll could come into play to save the day? If you haven't had five deaths since your last SS loss, then you get a reroll on the soul mother roll. Kind of like slippery mind feat gets a reroll. Once you get a fifth death after a SS loss you dont get the reroll.
-
I'm offering the next comments in the spirit of debate, so please take them as such.
A system that applies the same set of criteria to all characters is, in fact, inherently fair. It's more fair than one that gives preference to specific characters due to specific circumstances. For the sake of argument, I am calling it "fair" in the sense that it is egalitarian and blind to circumstance. That does not necessarily equate it with being "just" or similar, less quantitative descriptors. I shall explain...
Our current system is based on one primary parameter (level), and the aggregate results of the system are affected by one secondary parameter (number of deaths). The very simple math here is that the more a character dies, the more rolls there will be against the Soul Mother. The more rolls there are against the Soul Mother, the more likely a character is, over his/her lifetime, to lose Strands. That's the math of it, anyway.
This system already favors the cautious player.
A character that dies less loses fewer Soul Strands overall, on average...not necessarily on a per-death basis but definitely on a per-level basis.
Now, before anyone says it, I'll go ahead and say it myself. The random nature of the die roll does seem to "clump" on some people more than others. Some characters seem to get lucky and roll well, while others seem to fall on the "unlucky" end of the spectrum. It could be argued that this is unfair, but then we can also start a discussion on statistical distributions and random clustering and all sorts of other 300-level mathematical concepts. In the end, the system seems "unfair" on a microscopic level (i.e. for any given character compared to any other given character) but it's actually very fair on a macroscopic level (i.e. the average of all characters taken together).
I get it...truly. I seem to have fickle dice whether I'm doing tabletop or online gaming. Electronic dice seem to have the same twisted sense of humor as physical dice. However, NWN in specifics and gaming in general are often based on randomness. Therein lies the element of chance, and it's core to the mechanics of this sort of game.
Moving on...
The mechanics of the death system are meant to reflect the mechanics of the Soul Mother herself. To put it simply, the Soul Mother doesn't care how cautious you are, so a system that takes the number of deaths into account doesn't fit well with lore.
There's also another issue. "Cautiousness" is not the only way to die less often. I can think of three right off the top of my head: superlative equipment and/or builds, fighting only against easier challenges and/or gaining the bulk of one's experience through quests. So in this way, the proposal would favor those who better know the system, have access to greater resources and so on. Different classes and builds, and their accompanying options for durability/survivability, are not evenly distributed, and yes, sometimes that can change based on level. In other words, it favors those who know how to play "the game", and more than simply knowing the game would benefit the character. It gives a bonus to knowing the game over and above the normal advantages that such knowledge brings. One could argue this is actually less fair because it effectively penalizes those with a lesser knowledge or ability. One could also argue it encourages the power-build as being more important than RP factors.
This is not to say the idea is "bad" or unworkable, but it needs to be looked at in a broader sense than what was proposed, because the game can't tell the difference between being cautious and just being lucky or being well-protected (or even cowardly).
That aside, there would be one further factor that would need to be considered...OK, actually two. First, if we started this right now...today...there would immediately be a whole class of characters who would reap an immediate benefit. This next statement is not meant as an accusation by any means, but the proposal was crafted around a character and those like her who have not died much, thus that character and those like it would stand to benefit the most and somewhat significantly. Again, one could argue that's unfair, particularly to those people who had no knowledge of such a system up to this point, and thus may have 10...20...40 or more deaths under their belt. Had they known about it before that, perhaps it would be different...in other words, if this had been our system from the get-go, then at least everyone would know the situation. That would not be the case if we switched to this right now as designed.
It's possible there are some options to mitigate this latter factor...meaning to start the +X bonus out even for everyone, regardless of the number of deaths up to this point and let everyone start out on a more even footing.
Anyway, that's all for conceptual debate. I have comments on specifics, which I'll do in the next post.
-
My chagrin is not aimed at the way my SS was lost, but the fact that this is the FIRST SS he has lost and is at level 18. Why so few? Because he has only been killed a few times and this is what is annoying. When you get killed, no account is taken of how many times you have been killed, and this seems not to benefit the cautious character. So whether you have been killed a few times or 50 times, it is still the same level %age roll.
The first one's always the hardest. *winks* But yes, that is correct, it's the same percentage roll no matter who the character is or what the character has (or hasn't) done. It's blind. It affects everyone equally.
It would work like this:- When a character has to roll vs the Soul Mother, they get a +40 to their roll, which is given at the start of the new character.
- Every time the character visits The Void, the 40 is reduced by 1.
- This new stat is stored on the character and not on the server to reduce lag.
Since we're being conceptual, +40 is probably too much. That said, it's what's known as a "tuning" parameter, so I won't dwell too much at this point.
(fwiw, where the stat is kept is fairly immaterial in this case. Death isn't a frequent thing anyway, so any additional lag to storing this in the database is fairly minor, especially since other (more laggy) things are stored at death anyway)
I do have an issue with using the Death Void as the trigger point. The key thing is what's been said before in this debate (and similar ones): The Soul Mother pays attention when the character dies, not when it respawns. Again, there are lore reasons for this. Beyond that, visits to the Death Void have not yet been tracked in any accurate way, so this pretty much necessitates that everyone start with the maximum bonus regardless of level and regardless of however many times they may have died already. Level 40 characters will get a huge boost to their durability vs. the Soul Mother that may never return to any sort of meaningful level. Brand new characters will have the same benefit but they'll also be more likely to use it up. Seems kind of skewed to me.
That said, I'm interested to hear opinions on how to mitigate this disparity.
So how would this work? Two illustrations to explain:
Level 5 character, soloing, gets killed by the Red Light Goblins. This is the first time they have been killed so the roll goes like this...- %age roll +40 vs %age SS loss 5% (for level) and so cannot lose an SS.
Level 30 character, soloing, gets killed by the Red Light Goblins. This is the 20th time they have been killed so the roll goes like this...- %age roll +20 (40 - number of trips to the void which is 20) vs %age SS loss 30% (for level) and so needs to roll 10 or over to avoid an SS loss.
Effectively what you're doing here is extending the "free" period from three levels to something with the potential to be significantly more.
The advantage this process would offer is:- It would encourage party play since if you are raised from death, you do not pay a visit to The Void.
Again, I have an issue with using the Void as a counter, but also it has long been lamented (even when server populations were higher) that not everyone can be lucky enough to travel with a cleric...or to put together a reasonably balanced party.
- It would encourage more use of Rasie Dead scrolls etc. and make them worth crafting.
Not going there. The death system and crafting are not interrelated. I don't think it's good practice to prop up crafting and profit by selling the avoidance of death.
That sounds like the plot to a movie, doesn't it? *rubs chin sinisterly*
- It would encourage parties to take clerics with them.
See comment above on clerics and parties.
- It would reduce the chances of a straight %age roll failure so make it fairer.
A weighted percentage, which is what you're ultimately proposing, is not any more "fair", though I suppose it depends on how you define "fair". Is "fair" equal for all (i.e. fair treatment under the law) or is "fair" more like what is "right" or "just" or "rewarding good behavior". I suspect you mean the latter?
- It would not penalise the careful player.
It would benefit the careful player, the player who hides behind those of higher levels, the character with the highest AC and other protections (including HP), to a lesser degree the character with the highest rate of damage and the character who gains more XP though non-adventuring and the cowardly player. The "penalty" would come in not being one of these things.
- It would make no difference to the reckless player.
True, but again, that is not the only factor that keeps people from dying.
- It may actually reduce the amount of work needed by the time to sort out SP reimbursements for SS loss.
Not likely, especially when people claim the calculation is buggy and I have to track that data down. Nice thought though. To be honest, the workload there is not much overall. It only gets sticky when people claim the death and subsequent loss was due to a bug. Nice thought though.