Physiological fact my <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>. Someone wearing full plate and using a tower shield in game most likely has higher str thus emulating real life (like you seem to want to do all the time) unlike wizzy in robes with low str.
What it come down to if you want realism why the hell are you playing a game that has wizards and monster etc in it?
Like has been said lets leave the <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> house rules out of it. Trying to emulate fatigue in a mmo is just stupid.
Like i have said before why don't we emulate eating, pooping, constipation etc etc while we are at it, just for realism like you keep trying to ram down our throats.
As for persistence if i was really in Neverwinter and went into some caves where some monsters was hiding and killed it other hunters could not come and then kill it would they, hell maybe it might be a race to see which group of adventures found the cave first so THEY killed it.
Following your "reasoning" there should be NO instancing AT ALL.
You keep coming up with half arsed anecdotal reason why so n so would be good for the game. how about we stick to the core dnd rules and leave these house rules out if it.
Wow, take a chill pill.......
Yes, physiological, which is why I used me, the one person, to explain how both running unencumbered, and wearing excessive amounts of equipment and walking at a good pace are more fatiquing than simply walking unencumbered.
Your high Str Warriors Running everywhere in Full Plate etc vs the Low Str Wizard walking are not even comperable...Apples to oranges.
Now, since the game already has mechamics for Free Use, Encounter and Daily Use Powers, Running could easily be addressed using game mechanics. (Not familiar with 4E rules at all, using Truthseekers comments to base this on, so perhaps he can enlighten)
Default is Walking. You can run a long distance Daily, say 5 minutes game time. You can also run a couple times per encounter (30 second bursts). (To allow Bull Rush, etc)
In both cases, your Constitution Modifier (Which has more to do with Endurance and Fatigue than Strength, which is more for Encumbrance) should be what determines the number of times per day you can use it.
Say for instance, default Long Distance Running is One per Day, with +1 per Con Mod. Per encounter Run would be 2 plus 2 per Con Mod.
Look around you, do you see people running everywhere? No, you see an occasional person running a short distance to catch a taxi or such, or you might see soemone jogging several miles for exercise. You sure as hell do not see everyone running like three years old on Jolt everywhere, like you do in MMO's.
Just because a game has Wizards and Monsters does not mean that all the physical science rules are thrown out the window. Magic allows them to be altered at times, but generally the rules still apply.
Now, Instanced versus Persistent. This is one of the problems with an MMO. All the Dead keep returning to life to be slain again and again. Not just the Boss, but every single one of their minions.
You want to be able to have the same character zerg through the same damn dungeon, again and again, ad nauseum, ala WoW (You stated as much in another thread). I do not.
We will likely not find a middle ground, since you are entrenched in your belief (As evidence by your vitriolic reply above). To which I reply, go play Wow or Dungeon Siege then.
My post above was a compromise, that accounts for the fact that potentially millions of players will be playing the same world, often at the same time. Unless you have tens of thousands of dungeons, where no two are ever repeated, and the same Boss rarely reappears (True Fantasy have too many stories of Baddies coming back from sure death to say never), you have to have a compromise of some sort.
Now, if they had completely random, instanced dungeons, based on themes, including random locations on the maps, and the only constants where the Cities, towns and map itself. Well, that would work. No fixed dungeons with Boss Bob.
You could have each player have an arch nemesis for their plot line, based on some of their earliest dungeons, but it would be a scripting nightmare.
So, having some set dungeons, with set bosses, that can be encountered only once per character (unless special circumstances), is unrealistic, and will create the "Everyone has fought Bob" mentaility that already exists in MMO's, so no change there.
Like I said much earlier, in this or another thread. I would love to see set dungeons/encounters, that everyone can encounter once, in the general plotline of the game (This allows for future expansions to add, remove, change plotlines, etc...) combined with random, themed, instanced dungeons that small parties can get information about/find and complete, and which, because they are random, will never be repeated by any other characters in the world.
Maybe we should take a look at some of Cryptics other games- Champions Online, anyone?- to see what we might expect. They do have instanced missions, which you really only go to once and within those, the minions don't respawn once you kill them (unless you drop the mission and re-accept it).
Maybe we should take a look at some of Cryptics other games- Champions Online, anyone?- to see what we might expect. They do have instanced missions, which you really only go to once and within those, the minions don't respawn once you kill them (unless you drop the mission and re-accept it).
Makes sense to me. This along with the closely following 4th Ed rules from Wizards seems like it's likely how it will be done was just listed. I'm guessing the newly instanced new mission areas spawn new minions for new missions?
Currently the game is undergoing a lot of iteration and tweaking, so the design is still pretty malleable. What would be most helpful is hearing from you guys about what would make for a good D&D MMO experience.
Obviously that's a very subjective question, but one of the most difficult things for developers to do when making a new game based on a well established IP is finding the true essence of what makes that IP so appealing. How can we make a video game that captures the best aspects of D&D without just being a carbon copy of it in digital form?
For me, D&D is mostly about the DM/player dynamic... It's like being told a story by a talented storyteller that you're actively taking part in. No video game has been able to quite capture that feeling IMO, but for me that's what draws me to D&D the most.
But how is that best translated into a modern MMO? That's the kind of debate we would like to see in the community
I'm going to suggest four things, as an established Foundry author and someone who has studied D&D some in a higher education setting:
1) Ability to waive rules. For an MMO, this would mean the ability to have enemies who are defeated rather than killed, enemies who cannot be killed/injured, and maybe the ability to give an enemy an Achilles heel. Also, the ability to custom craft enemies by ability. I could accept the tradeoff that non-stock enemies don't drop loot.
2) Ability to place vendors and treasure chests. These could be tied to design quotas. (Ie. you need X number of "kill" objectives and X amount of time spent playing for the chest to spawn.) One possible way I could see to do this would be having treasure chests/doors whose key can be assigned to enemy loot tables.
3) I think an alignment system is key, even if you restrict the evils at first. In fact, I think alignments make more sense than factions for a game like this and could be a great way to gate content or open possibilities. One way I could see this working is to make a variety of enemies neutral to one group or another but player alignment would dictate whether they can attack by causing them to con neutral (ie. can attack but doesn't have to) to a number of different groups.
I will go a bit further. Tabletop games with friends don't necessarily use the classic "trinity system" of tank/healer/DPS. D&D helped popularize that system with a lot of people and while I would expect a skew in that direction, I think it might be more interesting to let alignment play a bigger role than trinity placement.
And while it might be overstepping the D&D ruleset somewhat, I think it would be interesting if different alignment combos shaped gameplay.
So that two Chaotic Good, one Lawful Good, and two True Neutral get flagged with a party descriptor... and Five Tue Neutral get flagged with a different descriptor. And Four True Neutral and One Lawful Good get a different descriptor.
These descriptor flags can unlock possible branches to a story.
Purists may say, "But that's nowhere in D&D rules."
And that's true.
But there's information that a DM would take into account like that. And it needs to be part of a video game system so the DM, whether Foundry author or Cryptic content designer, can take it into account.
I think that's a big key to getting the right feel: Finding the information that ISN'T in the D&D rules that a real life DM would notice and building an external ruleset onto the game to represent those kinds of features and facets.
Yes, physiological, which is why I used me, the one person, to explain how both running unencumbered, and wearing excessive amounts of equipment and walking at a good pace are more fatiquing than simply walking unencumbered.
No really! We are not stupid and know this already, it doesnt change anything any of us said about it not really working in a mmo..
Your high Str Warriors Running everywhere in Full Plate etc vs the Low Str Wizard walking are not even comperable...Apples to oranges.
Not true, ofc if a high level str toon wears no armor he should move faster BUT because he has a high str he CAN wear more armor and carry more items and STILL move AS fast as a wiz that has low str. Now whether con or str is used doesn't matter for this example.
Your saying we should not be able to run with out severe penalties belies the fact that maybe these toons have trained for just such occasions.
I'm sorry but i have several members of my family in the armed forces and trust me many of them can stay up several days with full gear on their back and still kick your or my <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>.
Now, since the game already has mechamics for Free Use, Encounter and Daily Use Powers, Running could easily be addressed using game mechanics. (Not familiar with 4E rules at all, using Truthseekers comments to base this on, so perhaps he can enlighten)
Default is Walking. You can run a long distance Daily, say 5 minutes game time. You can also run a couple times per encounter (30 second bursts). (To allow Bull Rush, etc)
In both cases, your Constitution Modifier (Which has more to do with Endurance and Fatigue than Strength, which is more for Encumbrance) should be what determines the number of times per day you can use it.
Say for instance, default Long Distance Running is One per Day, with +1 per Con Mod. Per encounter Run would be 2 plus 2 per Con Mod.
Look around you, do you see people running everywhere? No, you see an occasional person running a short distance to catch a taxi or such, or you might see soemone jogging several miles for exercise. You sure as hell do not see everyone running like three years old on Jolt everywhere, like you do in MMO's.
No we don't see people running because people are in cars speeding around (because it's faster ) if cars didn't exist and we were closer to medieval times which is closer to dnd FR then yes we would see people running around.
Just because a game has Wizards and Monsters does not mean that all the physical science rules are thrown out the window. Magic allows them to be altered at times, but generally the rules still apply.
Yes agreed but the whole lets limit running like you want too just doesn't work well in mmo, i have played many mmos that have both options and hardly anyone uses the /walk option
Now, Instanced versus Persistent. This is one of the problems with an MMO. All the Dead keep returning to life to be slain again and again. Not just the Boss, but every single one of their minions.
You want to be able to have the same character zerg through the same damn dungeon, again and again, ad nauseum, ala WoW (You stated as much in another thread). I do not.
What i want is not to run out of content for the sake of a few peoples "immersion" problems, don't want to run a dungeon you enjoyed again fine don't run it again ! Why should you care if others do want to run it again?
Me i would like to run it again to be able to test out builds/ armor/weapon setups etc and see how they fare against the same content.
You would like this game to be basically a single player game with multiple player capabilities ad nauseam, you have pretty much stated so in other threads.
We will likely not find a middle ground, since you are entrenched in your belief (As evidence by your vitriolic reply above). To which I reply, go play Wow or Dungeon Siege then.
I'd rather be vitriolic than passive aggressive and no i suspect we shall not find middle ground. I'll tell you what though, i do not and never have played wow or Dungeon Siege, it's funny you say this as i think 4e was pretty much an attempt to WoWify DnD.
I have been playing DDO for a long long time and so will keep playing it and continue to hope Cryptic will not make Neverwinter "according to Cyber_Troll". Perhaps you should stick to table top PnP ?
My post above was a compromise, that accounts for the fact that potentially millions of players will be playing the same world, often at the same time. Unless you have tens of thousands of dungeons, where no two are ever repeated, and the same Boss rarely reappears (True Fantasy have too many stories of Baddies coming back from sure death to say never), you have to have a compromise of some sort.
Now, if they had completely random, instanced dungeons, based on themes, including random locations on the maps, and the only constants where the Cities, towns and map itself. Well, that would work. No fixed dungeons with Boss Bob.
You could have each player have an arch nemesis for their plot line, based on some of their earliest dungeons, but it would be a scripting nightmare.
So, having some set dungeons, with set bosses, that can be encountered only once per character (unless special circumstances), is unrealistic, and will create the "Everyone has fought Bob" mentaility that already exists in MMO's, so no change there.
Like I said much earlier, in this or another thread. I would love to see set dungeons/encounters, that everyone can encounter once, in the general plotline of the game (This allows for future expansions to add, remove, change plotlines, etc...) combined with random, themed, instanced dungeons that small parties can get information about/find and complete, and which, because they are random, will never be repeated by any other characters in the world.
Hmm compromise hmmppff. As for the rest your really being unrealistic with what works in mmos and what doesn't and with what is even possible.
Ever wonder why we will never see an oblivion or skyrim mmo? Think about it.
The armor thing- there are penalties from armor to movement. That's actually in the system. It's not a house rule, it's not something someone just "wants." It's there. /sunglasses
It is entirely possible for someone who has training to be able to move at a normal speed with heavy armor. What I think Cyber_Troll is getting at though is that the average armored hulk isn't automatically going to have that training. Which I think is perfectly reasonable, since no one is BORN able to run around in full armor.
Making it something that a player has to train in or specifically talent into **at the sacrifice of other abilities** is not unreasonable, and would stick with the feat system quite nicely I think. There is something of a precident for this in Champions Online, where you take stat packs and pick specific enhancements for abilities (seriously- if you haven't tried it yet go play with champions online). If you want a character who can still run at average person runspeed while loaded up, it should be something that someone has to train in, specifically.
You say you'd rather be vitrolic- how about leaving the drama off the forums and presenting a post that shows respect for the viewpoints of another person.
The armor thing- there are penalties from armor to movement. That's actually in the system. It's not a house rule, it's not something someone just "wants." It's there. /sunglasses
It is entirely possible for someone who has training to be able to move at a normal speed with heavy armor. What I think Cyber_Troll is getting at though is that the average armored hulk isn't automatically going to have that training. Which I think is perfectly reasonable, since no one is BORN able to run around in full armor.
Making it something that a player has to train in or specifically talent into **at the sacrifice of other abilities** is not unreasonable, and would stick with the feat system quite nicely I think. There is something of a precident for this in Champions Online, where you take stat packs and pick specific enhancements for abilities (seriously- if you haven't tried it yet go play with champions online). If you want a character who can still run at average person runspeed while loaded up, it should be something that someone has to train in, specifically.
You say you'd rather be vitrolic- how about leaving the drama off the forums and presenting a post that shows respect for the viewpoints of another person.
I think what your missing is that Cyber want to limit how many times we CAN run etc. As for the training well lol i dont play new born when i roll a toon its generally adult sized and as such has been trained to walk run etc etc and presumably wear heavy armor especially when its a class that comes with that proficiency. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proficiency Some classes automatically have heavy armor prof and shield mastery to various degrees which can be trained further.
As ive said previously i don't mind some negatives to certain things but i don't want made up stuff added in like you can only run so many times per encounter or per day that just doh .
Lots of ddo's fumbles was trying to "fix" thing that were not broken.
Ive already mentioned ddo has some thing such as - to hit when your moving etc, i just didn't list all the negatives.
As for drama at least im up front about mine instead of beating around the bush about it.
As for respect it is a two way street. I may have told him to stick to pnp but that was just to return his jab to me about i should play WoW.
I really dislike the passive aggressive, but oh im just trying to help and give my viewpoint BS when its just someone repeating the same ***** over n over in multiple threads all the while trying to make someone else appear as a big meannie.
There are many posts that don't agree with my view point and yet you don't see me quoting them all saying No NO your wrong go play WoW and then spouting my diatribe.
Unless it's a coding/porting to computer/digital system issue, the devs will closely follow the 4E book rules. Meaning whatever the listed bonuses/penalties are for said armor, running, etc. is, that's it. No house rules unless it's not working in the game coding attempt. If we want something that does not directly clash with rules otherwise (with the PnP game rules,) then we're certainly going to be listened to. But it's unlikely on this to start, and less likely when we go down the trolling and flaming path. So even if we "agree to disagree," let's do it civilly please.
......
Making it something that a player has to train in or specifically talent into **at the sacrifice of other abilities** is not unreasonable, and would stick with the feat system quite nicely I think. There is something of a precident for this in Champions Online, where you take stat packs and pick specific enhancements for abilities (seriously- if you haven't tried it yet go play with champions online). If you want a character who can still run at average person runspeed while loaded up, it should be something that someone has to train in, specifically.
.....
To risk sounding like a company marketer or fanboy...
Seriously, you should try both Star Trek Online and Champions Online...both are free to play, both are using the same engine that will be used (albeit updated) for Neverwinter, and Star Trek has an earlier version of the Foundry (which will be more robust in Neverwinter by the sounds of it). Even if you do not like either game , it will at least give you an idea as to what the engine can do with both graphics and rules sets ( the games use two different rules sets). Furthermore, it will give you an idea how they are likely to implement the item shop in Neverwinter (called c-store in both those games).
Currently the game is undergoing a lot of iteration and tweaking, so the design is still pretty malleable. What would be most helpful is hearing from you guys about what would make for a good D&D MMO experience.
Obviously that's a very subjective question, but one of the most difficult things for developers to do when making a new game based on a well established IP is finding the true essence of what makes that IP so appealing. How can we make a video game that captures the best aspects of D&D without just being a carbon copy of it in digital form?
For me, D&D is mostly about the DM/player dynamic... It's like being told a story by a talented storyteller that you're actively taking part in. No video game has been able to quite capture that feeling IMO, but for me that's what draws me to D&D the most.
But how is that best translated into a modern MMO? That's the kind of debate we would like to see in the community
One thing IMO that would cement Neverwinter into a game that people would really love is the ability to join a quest as a DM (so, when queueing for a mission, if the creator enables it, one player in a group would be able to set themselves as a DM). Being able to control monsters, NPCs and traps/areas is one reason Neverwinter Nights was such a great game, and I think it could work extremely well here too.
Another thing that would really help make the Foundry missions great is at least some option to include loot. Maybe not full control over what gets dropped or anything, but some general stuff based on the appropriate level range would be fantastic.
I know some of my favorite times as a DM were setting up loot for my players, and specifically using some of the really neat random generators for D&D loot. A good example of this is the random loot generator in the old E-Tools product. You'd get a nice variety of stuff like art pieces (generated from a description, so you'd have stuff like "A painting of an elf slaying a dragon" or some such, or "A gem encrusted silver goblet with intricate filigree"), gold/silver, jewelry, weapons and miscellaneous items.
Some way to create unique items that aren't necessarily worth anything would also be amazing, since they could be used as quest items for multi-part quests, trophies of adventure etc. Even something as simple as letting the module creator pick an icon and set description text would be great.
You could easily set it up so that the module creator would have to adhere to a "converted gold-piece limit" or something. Even the ability to set up a chest or something that drops a random level-appropriate item at the end of the dungeon would be great (compared to how it is in STO).
On a completely different tangent, one thing I would love to see in the Foundry is the ability to set up an open area and have different mob groups on respawn timers. This would let module creators have a little more control of what spawns when, and also make it possible to have "waves" of enemies, such as would be assaulting a village/castle etc.
Bravo! Well written!
Yes, letting us control details that paint the game setting (over say mechanics) would go a long way if possible. As for things that reflect game mechanics like spawn of items and creatures, I do not know if said persistence is possible or not, but is a great idea too for us to step in as "DM"
One thing IMO that would cement Neverwinter into a game that people would really love is the ability to join a quest as a DM (so, when queueing for a mission, if the creator enables it, one player in a group would be able to set themselves as a DM). Being able to control monsters, NPCs and traps/areas is one reason Neverwinter Nights was such a great game, and I think it could work extremely well here too.
Another thing that would really help make the Foundry missions great is at least some option to include loot. Maybe not full control over what gets dropped or anything, but some general stuff based on the appropriate level range would be fantastic.
I know some of my favorite times as a DM were setting up loot for my players, and specifically using some of the really neat random generators for D&D loot. A good example of this is the random loot generator in the old E-Tools product. You'd get a nice variety of stuff like art pieces (generated from a description, so you'd have stuff like "A painting of an elf slaying a dragon" or some such, or "A gem encrusted silver goblet with intricate filigree"), gold/silver, jewelry, weapons and miscellaneous items.
Some way to create unique items that aren't necessarily worth anything would also be amazing, since they could be used as quest items for multi-part quests, trophies of adventure etc. Even something as simple as letting the module creator pick an icon and set description text would be great.
You could easily set it up so that the module creator would have to adhere to a "converted gold-piece limit" or something. Even the ability to set up a chest or something that drops a random level-appropriate item at the end of the dungeon would be great (compared to how it is in STO).
On a completely different tangent, one thing I would love to see in the Foundry is the ability to set up an open area and have different mob groups on respawn timers. This would let module creators have a little more control of what spawns when, and also make it possible to have "waves" of enemies, such as would be assaulting a village/castle etc.
Well, unless we hear more on what has been decided compared to what is being debated, it seems hard to continue on this request to help the devs along. I'm hoping for more info before late March/early April 2012, but that may not show up earlier.
Well, unless we hear more on what has been decided compared to what is being debated, it seems hard to continue on this request to help the devs along. I'm hoping for more info before late March/early April 2012, but that may not show up earlier.
I suspect that Stormshade has something interesting coming up for us soon- not soon(tm) but like, real world soon. I'm hoping for before the end of March, but with how excited I am about this game, I'm not going to lose my mind if some "act of god" prevents this from happening. I'm sure if Stormshade could tell us more, he would love to- there are higher powers controlling the flow of information. We just have to trust that they know what they're doing (which since this isn't their first time launching a game, I'm sure they're well appraised of what they're doing)!
It seems to me that a game really has that pen and paper feel when it has narration. There is the literary term of voice that sets the tone for what's going on, and when playing D&D, the literal presence of someone's voice setting the stage really ads voice to the events of the game. D&D has always had a kind of storybook quality that, even though it is interactive, carries a sense that the players are really just wrapped up in a larger tale. If the game is going to capture that feeling then as the quests go along the player needs to hear a narrator set the tone of the story.
I understand DDO has "DM characters" that narrate as the player plays. I think that's a good example of what works, but there might be others. What if the narration happens from the voice of one of the NPCs? Perhaps one of the principle NPCs in the quest narrates it. Perhaps the villain you fight in the end narrates it. What if the narration is biased? It sets a different tone if the narration comes from, say, a villain's henchman who twists the descriptions to cast a better light on his side of the conflict. The same could be true of a biased narrating party on the player's side of the conflict.
It seems to me that a game really has that pen and paper feel when it has narration. There is the literary term of voice that sets the tone for what's going on, and when playing D&D, the literal presence of someone's voice setting the stage really ads voice to the events of the game. D&D has always had a kind of storybook quality that, even though it is interactive, carries a sense that the players are really just wrapped up in a larger tale. If the game is going to capture that feeling then as the quests go along the player needs to hear a narrator set the tone of the story.
I understand DDO has "DM characters" that narrate as the player plays. I think that's a good example of what works, but there might be others. What if the narration happens from the voice of one of the NPCs? Perhaps one of the principle NPCs in the quest narrates it. Perhaps the villain you fight in the end narrates it. What if the narration is biased? It sets a different tone if the narration comes from, say, a villain's henchman who twists the descriptions to cast a better light on his side of the conflict. The same could be true of a biased narrating party on the player's side of the conflict.
I would like to see NO experience bar nor any experience listed on the character sheet.
All experience to be kept server side and only a pop up to tell us to seek out a trainer when we level. :cool:
^This^
.....would make me wanna punch kittens. While I can understand and appreciate that some feel that an xp bar/list somehow detracts from their gameplay for me not having it would be equally frustrating. I like to be able to see my progress so that even if I don't reach lvl I can still feel that I atleast accomplished something.
This is one of those things that I feel that at a minimum should always be there and at best be an option so the player can decided what's best for them.
^This^
.....would make me wanna punch kittens. While I can understand and appreciate that some feel that an xp bar/list somehow detracts from their gameplay for me not having it would be equally frustrating. I like to be able to see my progress so that even if I don't reach lvl I can still feel that I atleast accomplished something.
This is one of those things that I feel that at a minimum should always be there and at best be an option so the player can decided what's best for them.
It sounds like you're subjecting yourself to gameplay you don't enjoy solely for the extrinsic reward of experience points. While I am undecided on the issue of whether or not to hide experience points, I can definitely confirm that RPGs are much more fun when I'm not actively trying to level up, and am simply playing for the sake of enjoying the gameplay.
It sounds like you're subjecting yourself to gameplay you don't enjoy solely for the extrinsic reward of experience points. While I am undecided on the issue of whether or not to hide experience points, I can definitely confirm that RPGs are much more fun when I'm not actively trying to level up, and am simply playing for the sake of enjoying the gameplay.
Yet another perfect example of some ******* in a lab (not you) coat trying to tell everyone else they are doing it wrong. I play for my own reasons and enjoy it so you can take your armchair psychbable BS and cram it.
And since im off topic anyways I find your arrogance to be a true monument to the internet educated everywhere. The audacity that you can read n online article, read a post, and have some kind of deep insight to a person is ignorance in the grandest proportions. I do things my way for my own enjoyment (just as you do them your way for your own enjoyment) and if i dont enjoy something I dont do it. For example I dont enjoy people tryign to tell me 'I'm doing it wrong' when it seem to be working for me just fine. So i don't think ill do it anymore.
It sounds like you're subjecting yourself to gameplay you don't enjoy solely for the extrinsic reward of experience points. While I am undecided on the issue of whether or not to hide experience points, I can definitely confirm that RPGs are much more fun when I'm not actively trying to level up, and am simply playing for the sake of enjoying the gameplay.
Yet another perfect example of some ******* in a lab (not you) coat trying to tell everyone else they are doing it wrong. I play for my own reasons and enjoy it so you can take your armchair psychbable BS and cram it.
And since im off topic anyways I find your arrogance to be a true monument to the internet educated everywhere. The audacity that you can read n online article, read a post, and have some kind of deep insight to a person is ignorance in the grandest proportions. I do things my way for my own enjoyment (just as you do them your way for your own enjoyment) and if i dont enjoy something I dont do it. For example I dont enjoy people tryign to tell me 'I'm doing it wrong' when it seem to be working for me just fine. So i don't think ill do it anymore.
/Ignored
(From the Social Psychology person: )
nekoatl, next time, please ask, not tell others, as in, "Is it possible you're subjecting yourself to gameplay you don't enjoy...."
Jendrak. trying to say somebody's wrong because they read something in rewards conditioning that suggests a theory is falling back into the point if suggests in the first place.
(Everybody: ) It's an article, it's interesting, and it may or may not be true to (the plural) you. Please don't label it or say not to be labeled.
Just enjoy the game.
Oh, and I also came up with the concept of the pop-up/down XP bar when reading this thread, and like the choice option too. Good work Razzlin1 and all here on this thread and thank you.
(Gets that fifties stern look as if he's driving the Superego Station Wagon with a fight going on: )
Now everybody play nice and don't make me pull this thread around!
Sigh... thank you for the advice, the-truthseeker, as apparently the wording I used was misinterpreted to mean several things that I didn't actually say or intend.
I like being able to see my xp, seems like a very PnP thing as well so im not sure i get the lets not see how much xp or lets not see our xp thing and where that's coming from .
.....Jendrak. trying to say somebody's wrong because they read something in rewards conditioning that suggests a theory is falling back into the point if suggests in the first place......
My issue was not about the validity or lack there of of the theory. I took exception to the insinuation by an armchair psychologist that the way I choose to enjoy my gaming is wrong.
I try to be very careful to recognize that everyone has different ways of experiencing something and that what I would find enjoyable may not be the same for others and expect only the same in return.
That being said this wont be an issue any longer since certain posters have made the ignore list so they can make all the insuinations they want sicne I wont be reading them
I like being able to see my xp, seems like a very PnP thing as well so im not sure i get the lets not see how much xp or lets not see our xp thing and where that's coming from .
While I don't know what Zynk's reasons are for suggesting the idea, it reminds me of a post someone made about how in his experience, playing Everquest was less grindy than other MMORPGs, despite having a very slow xp curve, simply because the slow xp curve meant that players tended to not worry about getting to the next level and enjoy the experience of playing the game. From this point of view, I can see a certain advantage to not having the xp displayed prominently, as doing so is a constant reminder of your status in terms of xp gain, and really directs the focus of the game towards grinding xp.
With that said, I'm not sure that I would want to give up the experience bar, even though I can see valid reasons for wanting to do so. I often find myself wanting to have my characters evolve more quickly in order to have a wider variety of gameplay experiences, and knowing how much xp are awarded for various actions can help me plan how to most efficiently accomplish that, so in most MMORPGs I pay attention to xp gain, and adjust my actions to try to maximize it.
But, when looking back over my decades of RPG playing experiences, I have to admit that I see a pattern in which the few RPGs that I didn't pay attention to the rate of xp gain were the most fun. Were they more fun because I wasn't paying attention to the xp, or was I paying less attention to the xp because they were more fun? Or both? I don't know, but I'm glad that I'm thinking about it now.
^This^
.....would make me wanna punch kittens. While I can understand and appreciate that some feel that an xp bar/list somehow detracts from their gameplay for me not having it would be equally frustrating. I like to be able to see my progress so that even if I don't reach lvl I can still feel that I atleast accomplished something.
This is one of those things that I feel that at a minimum should always be there and at best be an option so the player can decided what's best for them.
I was thinking more along the lines that DM's never give out exp til the end of the game session.
But that would require them to use a button at end of instance to give you exp or waiting X # of hours after signing off to award experience.
I felt that not showing the exp bar to be a better option.
I do feel sorry for you, that you need the exp bar to feel you've accomplished something.
I do feel sorry for you, that you need the exp bar to feel you've accomplished something.
It's not that I need it to feel like I accomplished something, maybe that was a bad way of putting it. I like to be able to see what kind of progress I've made toward the ultimate goal and the xp bar does just that. Kind of like anyone who does restoration work of any kind always takes pictures before, during, and after the project.
P.S. I don't need you to feel sorry for me as I'm perfectly ok with how I enjoy my games.
While I don't know what Zynk's reasons are for suggesting the idea, it reminds me of a post someone made about how in his experience, playing Everquest was less grindy than other MMORPGs, despite having a very slow xp curve, simply because the slow xp curve meant that players tended to not worry about getting to the next level and enjoy the experience of playing the game. From this point of view, I can see a certain advantage to not having the xp displayed prominently, as doing so is a constant reminder of your status in terms of xp gain, and really directs the focus of the game towards grinding xp.
With that said, I'm not sure that I would want to give up the experience bar, even though I can see valid reasons for wanting to do so. I often find myself wanting to have my characters evolve more quickly in order to have a wider variety of gameplay experiences, and knowing how much xp are awarded for various actions can help me plan how to most efficiently accomplish that, so in most MMORPGs I pay attention to xp gain, and adjust my actions to try to maximize it.
But, when looking back over my decades of RPG playing experiences, I have to admit that I see a pattern in which the few RPGs that I didn't pay attention to the rate of xp gain were the most fun. Were they more fun because I wasn't paying attention to the xp, or was I paying less attention to the xp because they were more fun? Or both? I don't know, but I'm glad that I'm thinking about it now.
Ah ok i see what you mean, guess i played too many Korean grind games thought to see XP being a grind in these type of games. The XP is just being able to min max or to help have a game plan.
I like being able to see my xp, seems like a very PnP thing as well so im not sure i get the lets not see how much xp or lets not see our xp thing and where that's coming from .
Well, actually in PnP games, you got the experience at the end of the days gaming at best, and at worst, after completing the dungeon.
In an MMORPG that is based on the PnP game, I could see something similar being done. The EXP being rewarded ONLY after you get back and rest (Night at the Inn, paid for with loot from your hard earned loot, or your own house if you have one), and go over what you did in your adventures.
I could also see a diminishing EXP system for the grinding areas. How many kobolds do you have to kill, before you in fact, are not learning anything new from doing it, and just becoming a genocidal maniac?
I mean seriously, say an area has frou types of Kobolds. Snipers, Sappers, Sneakers and Sorcerers. Even if the exp dropped 1% for each on of each type killed, that would still be 400 of the buggers you would have to kill before you never got experience from going so.
With all the avalable monster types in AD&D, you would never run out of things to slay.
Of course their cousins in the next area who all have ranks in Assassin or barbarian, well, that is a whole new ball of wax.
Well, actually in PnP games, you got the experience at the end of the days gaming at best, and at worst, after completing the dungeon.
In an MMORPG that is based on the PnP game, I could see something similar being done. The EXP being rewarded ONLY after you get back and rest (Night at the Inn, paid for with loot from your hard earned loot, or your own house if you have one), and go over what you did in your adventures.
Well that pretty much how it is in ddo u get the bulk of you Xp on quest completion and when you recall it auto rests you so to speak so again im not sure what you would want to change?
You can't have it calculate XP at end of your gaming day that just wouldn't work in a mmo frankly i don't see the point of it other than gives the devs useless meaning less work
I could also see a diminishing EXP system for the grinding areas. How many kobolds do you have to kill, before you in fact, are not learning anything new from doing it, and just becoming a genocidal maniac?
Pretty much like that in ddo you get xp for explorers etc once and the more you level above the area the less Xp you get till eventualy you get none so same as above ?
I mean seriously, say an area has frou types of Kobolds. Snipers, Sappers, Sneakers and Sorcerers. Even if the exp dropped 1% for each on of each type killed, that would still be 400 of the buggers you would have to kill before you never got experience from going so.
With all the avalable monster types in AD&D, you would never run out of things to slay.
Of course their cousins in the next area who all have ranks in Assassin or barbarian, well, that is a whole new ball of wax.
Comments
Wow, take a chill pill.......
Yes, physiological, which is why I used me, the one person, to explain how both running unencumbered, and wearing excessive amounts of equipment and walking at a good pace are more fatiquing than simply walking unencumbered.
Your high Str Warriors Running everywhere in Full Plate etc vs the Low Str Wizard walking are not even comperable...Apples to oranges.
Now, since the game already has mechamics for Free Use, Encounter and Daily Use Powers, Running could easily be addressed using game mechanics. (Not familiar with 4E rules at all, using Truthseekers comments to base this on, so perhaps he can enlighten)
Default is Walking. You can run a long distance Daily, say 5 minutes game time. You can also run a couple times per encounter (30 second bursts). (To allow Bull Rush, etc)
In both cases, your Constitution Modifier (Which has more to do with Endurance and Fatigue than Strength, which is more for Encumbrance) should be what determines the number of times per day you can use it.
Say for instance, default Long Distance Running is One per Day, with +1 per Con Mod. Per encounter Run would be 2 plus 2 per Con Mod.
Look around you, do you see people running everywhere? No, you see an occasional person running a short distance to catch a taxi or such, or you might see soemone jogging several miles for exercise. You sure as hell do not see everyone running like three years old on Jolt everywhere, like you do in MMO's.
Just because a game has Wizards and Monsters does not mean that all the physical science rules are thrown out the window. Magic allows them to be altered at times, but generally the rules still apply.
Now, Instanced versus Persistent. This is one of the problems with an MMO. All the Dead keep returning to life to be slain again and again. Not just the Boss, but every single one of their minions.
You want to be able to have the same character zerg through the same damn dungeon, again and again, ad nauseum, ala WoW (You stated as much in another thread). I do not.
We will likely not find a middle ground, since you are entrenched in your belief (As evidence by your vitriolic reply above). To which I reply, go play Wow or Dungeon Siege then.
My post above was a compromise, that accounts for the fact that potentially millions of players will be playing the same world, often at the same time. Unless you have tens of thousands of dungeons, where no two are ever repeated, and the same Boss rarely reappears (True Fantasy have too many stories of Baddies coming back from sure death to say never), you have to have a compromise of some sort.
Now, if they had completely random, instanced dungeons, based on themes, including random locations on the maps, and the only constants where the Cities, towns and map itself. Well, that would work. No fixed dungeons with Boss Bob.
You could have each player have an arch nemesis for their plot line, based on some of their earliest dungeons, but it would be a scripting nightmare.
So, having some set dungeons, with set bosses, that can be encountered only once per character (unless special circumstances), is unrealistic, and will create the "Everyone has fought Bob" mentaility that already exists in MMO's, so no change there.
Like I said much earlier, in this or another thread. I would love to see set dungeons/encounters, that everyone can encounter once, in the general plotline of the game (This allows for future expansions to add, remove, change plotlines, etc...) combined with random, themed, instanced dungeons that small parties can get information about/find and complete, and which, because they are random, will never be repeated by any other characters in the world.
Maybe we should take a look at some of Cryptics other games- Champions Online, anyone?- to see what we might expect. They do have instanced missions, which you really only go to once and within those, the minions don't respawn once you kill them (unless you drop the mission and re-accept it).
Makes sense to me. This along with the closely following 4th Ed rules from Wizards seems like it's likely how it will be done was just listed. I'm guessing the newly instanced new mission areas spawn new minions for new missions?
I'm going to suggest four things, as an established Foundry author and someone who has studied D&D some in a higher education setting:
1) Ability to waive rules. For an MMO, this would mean the ability to have enemies who are defeated rather than killed, enemies who cannot be killed/injured, and maybe the ability to give an enemy an Achilles heel. Also, the ability to custom craft enemies by ability. I could accept the tradeoff that non-stock enemies don't drop loot.
2) Ability to place vendors and treasure chests. These could be tied to design quotas. (Ie. you need X number of "kill" objectives and X amount of time spent playing for the chest to spawn.) One possible way I could see to do this would be having treasure chests/doors whose key can be assigned to enemy loot tables.
3) I think an alignment system is key, even if you restrict the evils at first. In fact, I think alignments make more sense than factions for a game like this and could be a great way to gate content or open possibilities. One way I could see this working is to make a variety of enemies neutral to one group or another but player alignment would dictate whether they can attack by causing them to con neutral (ie. can attack but doesn't have to) to a number of different groups.
I will go a bit further. Tabletop games with friends don't necessarily use the classic "trinity system" of tank/healer/DPS. D&D helped popularize that system with a lot of people and while I would expect a skew in that direction, I think it might be more interesting to let alignment play a bigger role than trinity placement.
And while it might be overstepping the D&D ruleset somewhat, I think it would be interesting if different alignment combos shaped gameplay.
So that two Chaotic Good, one Lawful Good, and two True Neutral get flagged with a party descriptor... and Five Tue Neutral get flagged with a different descriptor. And Four True Neutral and One Lawful Good get a different descriptor.
These descriptor flags can unlock possible branches to a story.
Purists may say, "But that's nowhere in D&D rules."
And that's true.
But there's information that a DM would take into account like that. And it needs to be part of a video game system so the DM, whether Foundry author or Cryptic content designer, can take it into account.
I think that's a big key to getting the right feel: Finding the information that ISN'T in the D&D rules that a real life DM would notice and building an external ruleset onto the game to represent those kinds of features and facets.
see my replies in red
The armor thing- there are penalties from armor to movement. That's actually in the system. It's not a house rule, it's not something someone just "wants." It's there. /sunglasses
It is entirely possible for someone who has training to be able to move at a normal speed with heavy armor. What I think Cyber_Troll is getting at though is that the average armored hulk isn't automatically going to have that training. Which I think is perfectly reasonable, since no one is BORN able to run around in full armor.
Making it something that a player has to train in or specifically talent into **at the sacrifice of other abilities** is not unreasonable, and would stick with the feat system quite nicely I think. There is something of a precident for this in Champions Online, where you take stat packs and pick specific enhancements for abilities (seriously- if you haven't tried it yet go play with champions online). If you want a character who can still run at average person runspeed while loaded up, it should be something that someone has to train in, specifically.
You say you'd rather be vitrolic- how about leaving the drama off the forums and presenting a post that shows respect for the viewpoints of another person.
I think what your missing is that Cyber want to limit how many times we CAN run etc. As for the training well lol i dont play new born when i roll a toon its generally adult sized and as such has been trained to walk run etc etc and presumably wear heavy armor especially when its a class that comes with that proficiency. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proficiency Some classes automatically have heavy armor prof and shield mastery to various degrees which can be trained further.
As ive said previously i don't mind some negatives to certain things but i don't want made up stuff added in like you can only run so many times per encounter or per day that just doh .
Lots of ddo's fumbles was trying to "fix" thing that were not broken.
Ive already mentioned ddo has some thing such as - to hit when your moving etc, i just didn't list all the negatives.
As for drama at least im up front about mine instead of beating around the bush about it.
As for respect it is a two way street. I may have told him to stick to pnp but that was just to return his jab to me about i should play WoW.
I really dislike the passive aggressive, but oh im just trying to help and give my viewpoint BS when its just someone repeating the same ***** over n over in multiple threads all the while trying to make someone else appear as a big meannie.
There are many posts that don't agree with my view point and yet you don't see me quoting them all saying No NO your wrong go play WoW and then spouting my diatribe.
Unless it's a coding/porting to computer/digital system issue, the devs will closely follow the 4E book rules. Meaning whatever the listed bonuses/penalties are for said armor, running, etc. is, that's it. No house rules unless it's not working in the game coding attempt. If we want something that does not directly clash with rules otherwise (with the PnP game rules,) then we're certainly going to be listened to. But it's unlikely on this to start, and less likely when we go down the trolling and flaming path. So even if we "agree to disagree," let's do it civilly please.
Thanks.
To risk sounding like a company marketer or fanboy...
Seriously, you should try both Star Trek Online and Champions Online...both are free to play, both are using the same engine that will be used (albeit updated) for Neverwinter, and Star Trek has an earlier version of the Foundry (which will be more robust in Neverwinter by the sounds of it). Even if you do not like either game , it will at least give you an idea as to what the engine can do with both graphics and rules sets ( the games use two different rules sets). Furthermore, it will give you an idea how they are likely to implement the item shop in Neverwinter (called c-store in both those games).
One thing IMO that would cement Neverwinter into a game that people would really love is the ability to join a quest as a DM (so, when queueing for a mission, if the creator enables it, one player in a group would be able to set themselves as a DM). Being able to control monsters, NPCs and traps/areas is one reason Neverwinter Nights was such a great game, and I think it could work extremely well here too.
Another thing that would really help make the Foundry missions great is at least some option to include loot. Maybe not full control over what gets dropped or anything, but some general stuff based on the appropriate level range would be fantastic.
I know some of my favorite times as a DM were setting up loot for my players, and specifically using some of the really neat random generators for D&D loot. A good example of this is the random loot generator in the old E-Tools product. You'd get a nice variety of stuff like art pieces (generated from a description, so you'd have stuff like "A painting of an elf slaying a dragon" or some such, or "A gem encrusted silver goblet with intricate filigree"), gold/silver, jewelry, weapons and miscellaneous items.
Some way to create unique items that aren't necessarily worth anything would also be amazing, since they could be used as quest items for multi-part quests, trophies of adventure etc. Even something as simple as letting the module creator pick an icon and set description text would be great.
You could easily set it up so that the module creator would have to adhere to a "converted gold-piece limit" or something. Even the ability to set up a chest or something that drops a random level-appropriate item at the end of the dungeon would be great (compared to how it is in STO).
On a completely different tangent, one thing I would love to see in the Foundry is the ability to set up an open area and have different mob groups on respawn timers. This would let module creators have a little more control of what spawns when, and also make it possible to have "waves" of enemies, such as would be assaulting a village/castle etc.
Yes, letting us control details that paint the game setting (over say mechanics) would go a long way if possible. As for things that reflect game mechanics like spawn of items and creatures, I do not know if said persistence is possible or not, but is a great idea too for us to step in as "DM"
I suspect that Stormshade has something interesting coming up for us soon- not soon(tm) but like, real world soon. I'm hoping for before the end of March, but with how excited I am about this game, I'm not going to lose my mind if some "act of god" prevents this from happening. I'm sure if Stormshade could tell us more, he would love to- there are higher powers controlling the flow of information. We just have to trust that they know what they're doing (which since this isn't their first time launching a game, I'm sure they're well appraised of what they're doing)!
It seems to me that a game really has that pen and paper feel when it has narration. There is the literary term of voice that sets the tone for what's going on, and when playing D&D, the literal presence of someone's voice setting the stage really ads voice to the events of the game. D&D has always had a kind of storybook quality that, even though it is interactive, carries a sense that the players are really just wrapped up in a larger tale. If the game is going to capture that feeling then as the quests go along the player needs to hear a narrator set the tone of the story.
I understand DDO has "DM characters" that narrate as the player plays. I think that's a good example of what works, but there might be others. What if the narration happens from the voice of one of the NPCs? Perhaps one of the principle NPCs in the quest narrates it. Perhaps the villain you fight in the end narrates it. What if the narration is biased? It sets a different tone if the narration comes from, say, a villain's henchman who twists the descriptions to cast a better light on his side of the conflict. The same could be true of a biased narrating party on the player's side of the conflict.
Anybody else have a good example of narrative for NW?
All experience to be kept server side and only a pop up to tell us to seek out a trainer when we level. :cool:
^This^
.....would make me wanna punch kittens. While I can understand and appreciate that some feel that an xp bar/list somehow detracts from their gameplay for me not having it would be equally frustrating. I like to be able to see my progress so that even if I don't reach lvl I can still feel that I atleast accomplished something.
This is one of those things that I feel that at a minimum should always be there and at best be an option so the player can decided what's best for them.
Please read this article on the psychological relationship between fun and rewards.
It sounds like you're subjecting yourself to gameplay you don't enjoy solely for the extrinsic reward of experience points. While I am undecided on the issue of whether or not to hide experience points, I can definitely confirm that RPGs are much more fun when I'm not actively trying to level up, and am simply playing for the sake of enjoying the gameplay.
Not a bad idea, at least they should make it a /xp on/off toggle.
Yet another perfect example of some ******* in a lab (not you) coat trying to tell everyone else they are doing it wrong. I play for my own reasons and enjoy it so you can take your armchair psychbable BS and cram it.
And since im off topic anyways I find your arrogance to be a true monument to the internet educated everywhere. The audacity that you can read n online article, read a post, and have some kind of deep insight to a person is ignorance in the grandest proportions. I do things my way for my own enjoyment (just as you do them your way for your own enjoyment) and if i dont enjoy something I dont do it. For example I dont enjoy people tryign to tell me 'I'm doing it wrong' when it seem to be working for me just fine. So i don't think ill do it anymore.
/Ignored
(From the Social Psychology person: )
nekoatl, next time, please ask, not tell others, as in, "Is it possible you're subjecting yourself to gameplay you don't enjoy...."
Jendrak. trying to say somebody's wrong because they read something in rewards conditioning that suggests a theory is falling back into the point if suggests in the first place.
(Everybody: ) It's an article, it's interesting, and it may or may not be true to (the plural) you. Please don't label it or say not to be labeled.
Just enjoy the game.
Oh, and I also came up with the concept of the pop-up/down XP bar when reading this thread, and like the choice option too. Good work Razzlin1 and all here on this thread and thank you.
(Gets that fifties stern look as if he's driving the Superego Station Wagon with a fight going on: )
Now everybody play nice and don't make me pull this thread around!
My issue was not about the validity or lack there of of the theory. I took exception to the insinuation by an armchair psychologist that the way I choose to enjoy my gaming is wrong.
I try to be very careful to recognize that everyone has different ways of experiencing something and that what I would find enjoyable may not be the same for others and expect only the same in return.
That being said this wont be an issue any longer since certain posters have made the ignore list so they can make all the insuinations they want sicne I wont be reading them
While I don't know what Zynk's reasons are for suggesting the idea, it reminds me of a post someone made about how in his experience, playing Everquest was less grindy than other MMORPGs, despite having a very slow xp curve, simply because the slow xp curve meant that players tended to not worry about getting to the next level and enjoy the experience of playing the game. From this point of view, I can see a certain advantage to not having the xp displayed prominently, as doing so is a constant reminder of your status in terms of xp gain, and really directs the focus of the game towards grinding xp.
With that said, I'm not sure that I would want to give up the experience bar, even though I can see valid reasons for wanting to do so. I often find myself wanting to have my characters evolve more quickly in order to have a wider variety of gameplay experiences, and knowing how much xp are awarded for various actions can help me plan how to most efficiently accomplish that, so in most MMORPGs I pay attention to xp gain, and adjust my actions to try to maximize it.
But, when looking back over my decades of RPG playing experiences, I have to admit that I see a pattern in which the few RPGs that I didn't pay attention to the rate of xp gain were the most fun. Were they more fun because I wasn't paying attention to the xp, or was I paying less attention to the xp because they were more fun? Or both? I don't know, but I'm glad that I'm thinking about it now.
I was thinking more along the lines that DM's never give out exp til the end of the game session.
But that would require them to use a button at end of instance to give you exp or waiting X # of hours after signing off to award experience.
I felt that not showing the exp bar to be a better option.
I do feel sorry for you, that you need the exp bar to feel you've accomplished something.
It's not that I need it to feel like I accomplished something, maybe that was a bad way of putting it. I like to be able to see what kind of progress I've made toward the ultimate goal and the xp bar does just that. Kind of like anyone who does restoration work of any kind always takes pictures before, during, and after the project.
P.S. I don't need you to feel sorry for me as I'm perfectly ok with how I enjoy my games.
Ah ok i see what you mean, guess i played too many Korean grind games thought to see XP being a grind in these type of games. The XP is just being able to min max or to help have a game plan.
Well, actually in PnP games, you got the experience at the end of the days gaming at best, and at worst, after completing the dungeon.
In an MMORPG that is based on the PnP game, I could see something similar being done. The EXP being rewarded ONLY after you get back and rest (Night at the Inn, paid for with loot from your hard earned loot, or your own house if you have one), and go over what you did in your adventures.
I could also see a diminishing EXP system for the grinding areas. How many kobolds do you have to kill, before you in fact, are not learning anything new from doing it, and just becoming a genocidal maniac?
I mean seriously, say an area has frou types of Kobolds. Snipers, Sappers, Sneakers and Sorcerers. Even if the exp dropped 1% for each on of each type killed, that would still be 400 of the buggers you would have to kill before you never got experience from going so.
With all the avalable monster types in AD&D, you would never run out of things to slay.
Of course their cousins in the next area who all have ranks in Assassin or barbarian, well, that is a whole new ball of wax.
See my replies in red.