And now choose your path, my friend!

[Mr. Cromwell]

Hopefully the title caught your attention.

Now, this proposal might be somewhat controversial. However, all the numbers below are just examples and not necessarily true (even if this ever was implemented).

Okay: the issues:
-The present inability to truly specialize your character.
-The lack of any benefit for a character/player in choosing just one field of focus instead of doing everything (and maybe even excelling in everything).

I do not like this. I would like to see a system in the game which doesn’t restrict the “illa-freedom” which is really important for some people, but at the same time would reward people who wish to focus on one field in particular (instead of penalizing them as presently in certain cases). The present situation, as we all know, is such that a “Craftsman” and a “Warrior” are on the same line regarding the development and level of their fighting and crafting skill throughout their game-lives if their initial stats are the same, and if they players invest equal amounts of time in developing both character’s fighting and crafting skills. They can cross over as much as they want without any restraints, meaning that in the end as both have maxed both skillsets, we have a craftsman who can smith excellent silversteels and wrestle down demon skeletons, and a warrior who can smith excellent silversteels and wrestle down demon skeletons. For all intents and purposes, the two characters are alike (though, they 'may' be played differently).

This is of course good for both players and characters, the players have more things to do with their characters, and the characters pwn. There is also an additional benefit to this: Should the character die for any reason, there is a chance that the “secondary skillset” will be the one which is lowered, preserving the “main skills” (i.e., the warrior dies and his smithing skill is lowered, a shitty thing at level 100, but this still leaves his “main skills” untouched).

A warrior focusing ‘only’ on fighting-skills has no benefit. If he dies, his “main skills” are lowered for sure, thus making him directly worse at what he is supposed to be good at. This means that in the case of death, both the multi-doers have a direct advantage over this character. Furthermore, no amount of roleplay will save the “dedicated warrior” in the hands of a powergaming jack of all trades if the former has suboptimal stats (which not everyone maxes out at the best possible way, nor this should be expected from them!), even if the skills are comparable.

So, what I am suggesting is this:

“The Path” – System

There are initially three, later four paths.

These paths are Crafting (Excluding primary sector = Gathering professions), Fighting and Magic (& as the dust settles down with the new system and more features are implemented, Druidism). Each character can choose one (1) path which he or she will focus on. The decision is not final, however the cost of changing will be considerable. You can only revert from one path to the other, and cannot become pathless again after you choose one.

These paths, and the effects of the choice, will cover ALL skills of the specialization choice AS WELL as the other skill groups. The effects of specialization would be as follows:

Your skillgroup of choice:

- All skills +20 levels immediately up to the level of 90. This means that at level 50, your skills will be increased to level 70. At level 85, your skills will be increased to 90. This, because it would be unfair to give a benefit at the later levels when the gain is truly enormous (the 90 and above). Thus, the best situation is to choose your path when you ‘really’ know what you’re doing instead of when you are already a champion.
- The skillcap for all the skills of the skillgroup is increased to 120 instead of 100. This will allow the dedicated fighter to beat a craftsman of the comparable stats and PG-investment, because his maximum skill exceeds that of the craftsman.

The skillgroups you didn’t choose! (both (all three ))

- -20 to ALL other skills, except language ones. Permanent skillcap of 80, except language ones.* If possible, the skilling for those skills you didn’t have yet will begin at level 20 instead of level 1, when it comes to experience requirements.
- Thus, you can still be good, but the dedicated craftsmen or warriors will beat you in skill and quality. (*If possible, it is also harder to gain skill due to the theoretical higher starting point).
- Gathering skills are excluded from the deduction, as it is in the advantage of even dedicated craftsmen that there is a supply of raw materials.

Some notes:
- There should be a minimum skill-level before one can choose a focus. 30-50 for one non-language skill, in order to prevent the noobs from making choices they will regret later (or at least diminish the chances of that happening )
- I tried to consider all parties here: Those who suck at skilling their characters will appreciate the +20 bonus to their skills of choice, and those who are like matt will appreciate the increased skillcap which allows them to reach even higher. Everyone wins.

Note, that the dedication is completely voluntary. However, the intention is to give those characters which do choose a focus an advantage in their respective focus-field on those who choose another field or wimp out (i.e. choose nothing). This will lead directly into them being better, and I assume that some who have gotten used to being extremely good at everything cringe, but I’m not sure if this is the group we should cater to. Roleplaying should be supported, and thus the adoption of a dedicated role for a character is optimal development. Furthermore, it offers everyone something.

I somehow feel that this kind of system would be realizable with the current know-how and technical resources, but I would like to hear what the community thinks about the idea?

[Sundo Raca]

I endorse this. Personally i hate the idea of jack of all trade characters.

[Julius]

If you can have multiple professions in rl, you can ig. Simple as that. As much as I hate Orlando Bloom and the movies he makes, Turner was a smith and bad ass swordsman in the pirates series, and the same in Kingdom of Heaven. In excess, sure, it can be fairly idiotic but I've hardly seen any character ig that is (master craftsman, master swordsman, master cook, master smith, master lumberjack, and master miner.) what someone would actually coin *jack of all trades*.

Three to four skills that are pged the smile out of (such as a great warrior who makes his own armor and cooks his own soups from a long life on his own) and rped accordingly with a few basic sub - skills (minor knowledge of cooking for basic needs, lean muscular tone equals the ability to mine and chop wood when needed) is alright in my mind. I have a fairly pged warrior with high smithing skills but I've never rped Jewls as ever making a market out of his smithing wares. The ability is rped just as a simple hobby and a steady supply of his own, branded equipment.

If you could tell me 10 characters ig (through pm as to not offend someone, or if your like me, you could just post the names here ) who fall under the category of *jack of all trades* then you have my full support in this matter.

The system above only offers complicity and a headache for those who have acquired skills over a long period of time and those who DO rp having multiple skills accordingly.

P.S.

Your system also promotes the idea that "Great warriors, who learned to fight, could not ever learn to cook. Simple breads and pastries were impossible for them to even make. Also, for some odd reason, maybe because of the handle of the sword, when trying to pick up a axe to chop wood, many of them complained that it was if they were picking up a hot torch." Limiting the number of skills that characters are able to maintain just seems plain ignorant in my mind because it separates the freedom of rp that makes the game seem real, and replaces it with GM restrictions and large walls that a game system can create.

After reading your idea more thoroughly I also see that you propose boosting skills you already have. Seems like to me your another one of those "Please boost my skills because I want to rp instead of ctrl clicking." Because with 80 percent smithing, you can still damn well make just about anything and do it at a high rate and high quality.

[Sundo Raca]

Jewls:

He's not saying prevent people from learning more than one skill, more that they become more effective at a certain skill 'path' they travel down. So, a proffessional smith is naturally more talented than someone who does it as a hobby.

[Vern Kron]

Hrm... I like the idea, but I want to make a few changes.

I like having to pick a path, but I don't like the rest of it.

Perhaps allowing all other skills to go up to 50 would be alright, and just leave it at that? The rest of it seems to be overkill.

[Julius]

Jewls:

He's not saying prevent people from learning more than one skill, more that they become more effective at a certain skill 'path' they travel down. So, a proffessional smith is naturally more talented than someone who does it as a hobby.

I know exactly what he is saying. However, as stated further on in my post it seems like he simply wants an alternative to PGing. The difference between level 80 and 100 in a skill is large, mind you, but you could and probably would still be a revered and/or professional to other folks around the island.

[Kranek]

@ Jewls:
Please! Never ever use a movie as argument!

@Cromwell:
I like this idea! I really do!

[Sundo Raca]

Jewls:

He's not saying prevent people from learning more than one skill, more that they become more effective at a certain skill 'path' they travel down. So, a proffessional smith is naturally more talented than someone who does it as a hobby.

I know exactly what he is saying. However, as stated further on in my post it seems like he simply wants an alternative to PGing. The difference between level 80 and 100 in a skill is large, mind you, but you could and probably would still be a revered and/or professional to other folks around the island.

Honestly though, you sorta shoot yourself in the foot with your argument. Yeah orlando bloom's character in a movie is a kick ass knight and smith, but guess what.. its a movie. In reality knights/proffesional warriors would nearly always be superior to drafted warriors whose main profession was tailoring or candlemaking or what have you. You think a knight like Julius in real life would spend time smithing? Of course not, because most of these trades were lifetime things. Knights focused on skills useful for combat, and devoted their lives to it. Likewise for a crafter. In medieval england the only possible way to use a longbow was to grow up with it, so as to allow your back muscles to adjust.

I've known plenty of master smith/master warrior characters over the years, eg: konrad, behemoth, mark strongarm, Altrix, plenty of others. You can say these people do it to be self-sufficient, but it basically eliminates the idea of 'jobs' people can focus on. I always purposefully refused to have wolf learn any other skills apart from combat, because it made no sense to me (apart from being useful) in terms of his character. I think this kind of thing would make characters more distinctive in their roles ig.

[Salhari]

im not gonna make a long post or anything about it, but, i do like this idea

[Julius]

It's a hobby and I rp it that way. When your a 30 something noble whose done fighting in large wars for the most part, I have no doubt that a few of them didn't take to other crafts in their *retirement* homes.

[Larien.]

myself (being the typo police) is wondering if he meant path..instead of patch..

[Kranek]

@Jewls:
A 30 year old noble would'nt do that. If he ever had free time, he would enjoy it relaxing, not swinging a big hammer, working near a hot spot.
And: he would never be a good smith. I already smithed. It's so f****** hard to even make a small knife...

[Llama]

I don't really agree with the idea. I think you're trying to solve the facade when actually the underlying problem is much greater.

The reason for 'jack of all trades' is:

I) Some crafts are utterly useless unless you're high skilled -
(See: Tailoring). So you become a good tailor, and discover that its crap, change to something else.

II) Skilling up at later levels is *vein pops and blood gushes out*. You need a LOAD of resources, and a LOAD of time.

Now there's a reason there are attributes. The attributes are your path. Its as simple as that. If I want a good crafter, I put a lot into dex and perception, but that means he'll be less competant in fighting, or magic.

If I want a good mage I put a lot in intel, will and essence. If I don't, I'll suck as a mage.
---

Now if you want to give me free skill points I'm all for this suggestion

--

Also oh great cromwell, you just murdered Archery - unless you expect them to buy their own ammo.

[Magdha Tiefenerz]

If I remember correctly this topic has been discussed before and the answer of the staff was that they do not want to limit the possibilities of the characters. But looking at the magic system this does not seem to be the case with all parts of the game.

[Tinya]

I agree, magic characters are definitly limited, however in a way so are crafters and warriors simply due to the attributes Hadrian mentioned.

[Mr. Cromwell]

It seems that there is certain confusion here:

You can still get ALL skills up to 80, despite whatever you choose. Anyone who says that 80 is not a good skill needs to stop hanging around with Matt, Lucius and others. That's perfectly good to be self sufficient in most everything and represents those awesomely roleplayed hobbies quite adequately, though it also means that others will be better than you (and I suggest certain players start dealing with the idea already ) when they have the nuts to actually choose a focus.

myself (being the typo police) is wondering if he meant path..instead of patch..

It was 4 am. Gimmeh a break.

@Magdha

I actually ran this suggestion through two gamemasters (not devs!) beforehand who liked certain aspects of the idea.

@Hadrian

Even when you focus on dex and perception, you have plenty of statpoints to assign on other stats. Furthermore, dex and perception happen to be 'very' important for certain kinds of fighter characters, meaning that it's very much possible to be pretty damn good fighter if you put your effort in weapons which play to your stats, wisely assign the rest and the with the right equipment you can still own a non-matt/lucius warrior.

Do tell me Hadrian, do arrows require level 80 or above in carpentery? If not, how does this mean that I'd be "killing" it? Do you understand the basic suggestion? Your example with tailoring seems to suggest that you don't. Please, read it through again.

The bonus goes to all skills of the group (So if you want to cook instead of tailoring, you can do that - Simply because I do not have a logical system at this point which I could offer for you to use in splitting crafts to two or more groups, though this might be desirable). Furthermore, you can still 1.) Change 2.) There actually is a skill requirement before you can choose 'any' path, so you must have done 'something' already.

@Jewls

The reason why you seem to be upset is that you'd have to make a choice on focusing on something, well you don't have to. You have the freedom. Of course, you'd then be upset that you are no longer the most badass knight and blacksmith around, as others are focusing.

To even suggest that a cap of 80 means "You think a knight who is great can't learn anything else" is nonsense. 80 is 'impressive' skill, more than enough to be self-sufficient in most crafts, and you can get "all" your crafting skills, hobbies or whatever, up to that level. However, you can't be the best anymore. If you can't see the stupidity of your own argument, then you're not really worth of my time. Sorry mate, 'you' on the other hand are breaking the game.

[Hawkmoon]

I have suggested a choice of path (not exactly those words but still) as well before and fully agree that it is necessary. I really think all chars should be able to learn everything but in that case they really should be worse in what they do. I mean it really should be a big difference between a char who have spent all his life to learn a profession and a char that do something for fun as a hobby.

What this should mean IG should be that a multiskilled person should be able to do quite good in the different areas if not specialised whilst the specialised char should be able to become great in the chosen path and considerly worse in the rest - but still be able to do other things of course.

IRL there are people who are mutlitalented genious but they are really rare. I mean my parent knew a man who played soccer and hockey on really high levels, created a musical that the Swedish television wanted to send (he refused though since they wanted a professional choir to sing it and not the choir he created the musical for...), he created instruments in his basement for fun, got a degree by study everything the last week before the exam and nailed it, could play pretty much every instrument he got his hands on right away, etc... Well, you get the picture...

These people do exist but are very rare.

For the sake of the game I believe it is very important to make crafters and so to be able to live on what they do I believe. Then we need to give those a boost compared to hobby crafters... Simple as that I believe...

[JonathanSmith]

I like your proposal but I would differentiate the "paths":

With your "path" system "multi-master" characters are still possible:

Example 1)
Craftsmanship: A smith who makes his own handles (carpentry), cooks his meals (cook) and makes his own dye (tailoring), goes mining (miner) and cuts his gems (gem cutter) would still be possible.
Analogue for carpenters, tailors, glassblowers, etc.
Such multi-crafters completely destroy the economics of the game and ruin the "crafting/trading" RP, because they make economic, resource planning, trading with others, etc. unnecessary.

Example 2)
Fighting: A fighter how masters more than one fighting skill (slashing, puncture, distance attack, wrestling, etc.) is also common and in my opinion completely nonsense.

Example 3)
Magic: I would like to see specialized mages, like "fire mages", "ice mages", "healers", etc. At the moment, every (full) mage with all runes has all possibilities. This means currently all mages are more or less equal (from the skills view ).. really boring in my opinion.

Proposal:
Define your own path in the character settings menu.
Enable the players to select up to N skills, which can be maxed to 100%
Enable the players to select up to M skill, which can be increased to 70%
All other skills (all unselected skill) can be increased to max. 20%
I propose N = 2, M = 2.

Additional and optional proposal for those who need more than 2 max. skills and can't live with the proposed limitations (for the real powergamers):
If a character has maxed his selected skills, he can "buy" additional skills: the first skill costs 5 gold, the second 25 (5*5) gold, the third 125 (5*5*5) and so on ...

[Hawkmoon]

Not that sure of the last part of post about bying extra skills. What is the RP-reason for that possibility? And 5*5*5 is 125 - not 75. A bit picky I know but thought it should be mentioned... =)

[JonathanSmith]

Fixed my proposal.

There is no real RP reason for the last additional proposal
Does there exist a RP reason for the whole engine?
What is the RP reason, that a crafter suddenly (after a swirlie) can make new items? What the hell is the RP reason for a swirlie???

Just joking Hawkmoon.

[Juliana D'cheyne]

One of the problems I see with the suggestion right now is...it is practically impossible to earn much coin in any craft unless your skill is over 80. Normal circumstances this may not be a problem..but there can be exceptions. My Druid char is first a Druid, then a tailor. As of now it cost a LOT of coin to be a Druid which some/a lot don't have. Using your plan would knock out the only other profession she could possibly earn coin eventually in which is tailoring that she has done since first made.

Suppose also you decide to change your mind..you want to excel in something totally different for your char..not just get to 80... will people be asking the GM's to change? IMO if this takes place.. to be fair to those older players that DO have higher skills in other professions I would suggest allowing their skill as it is now and not lowering it.

My other concern with the original suggestion is it will be nerfed eventually as proposed by JonathanSmith (no offense) severely limiting the fun/RP of the basic profession. Again using my fighter char.. she is high in slashing yet wants to learn archery... basically you can't do much unless VERY high if even then in archery. I would NOT like her to be limited to 80.

[Mr. Cromwell]

One of the problems I see with the suggestion right now is...it is practically impossible to earn much coin in any craft unless your skill is over 80. Normal circumstances this may not be a problem..but there can be exceptions. My Druid char is first a Druid, then a tailor. As of now it cost a LOT of coin to be a Druid which some/a lot don't have. Using your plan would knock out the only other profession she could possibly earn coin eventually in which is tailoring that she has done since first made.

Well, firstly I hope that she will be able to make coin with druidism someday.

Secondly, I toyed with the idea of splitting crafting into two groups: Smithing, Goldsmithing, Gemcutting and Glassblowing (1=Dead material). Cooking, Tailoring, Carpentery and Druidsm (2="Living" material). This is because druidsm does, presently, require 'a lot' of dough to play around with and thus some supplementary crafting skills might not be 'that' bad. However, I'm also partially uncertain of this arrangement because the exact power and nature of the druid system is relatively uncertain at this point (and might make this unbalanced in the future).

Suppose also you decide to change your mind..you want to excel in something totally different for your char..not just get to 80... will people be asking the GM's to change? IMO if this takes place.. to be fair to those older players that DO have higher skills in other professions I would suggest allowing their skill as it is now and not lowering it.

I thought I wrote.. yep, there it is:

You can only revert from one path to the other, and cannot become pathless again after you choose one.

You are free to choose the focus. You don't have to. However, I'm unwilling to cut any slack to new chatacters/old characters/PO Julius' characters/Characters with "perfect RP background and explanation for their uberskills" and so on. You're either willing to pay the price or not. Like it has been emphasized, your druid-tailor can continue playing just as she has been. There's no forcing. If you don't want your old character to lose his/her skills, then you don't do this. Simple. It's just that someone who will do this, will end up better at something than your character (which might suck if you're pretending to be really focused and dedicated with that character. Then on the other hand, if you're not willing to make sacrifices for the character's 'career', the character isn't that dedicated, now is he/she?).

My other concern with the original suggestion is it will be nerfed eventually as proposed by JonathanSmith (no offense) severely limiting the fun/RP of the basic profession. Again using my fighter char.. she is high in slashing yet wants to learn archery... basically you can't do much unless VERY high if even then in archery. I would NOT like her to be limited to 80.

"Fighting skills" would be "Figthing skills".

I'm not really fond of JonathanSmiths proposal either, simply because there are too few players around. It's a pain in the ass to find a tailor capable of producing quality goods sometimes as it is now, and if you 'really' start limiting people's skills then some crafts will cease to exist. The intention of this system is not to punish, but to reward those who dedicate their characters and give them boost and potential above those who don't.

[Vern Kron]

I actually don't see why a crafter can't just do whatever crafts he or she so pleases, and why a warrior can't do whatever fighting he or she so pleases.

Crafters are born into a world where crafting is all around them, outside the castle. Warriors are born outside the castle, but are usually isolated then to within the castle to train. Two seperate circles. Sure there may be an overlay with a craft for the warrior here, and many peasents probably could fight atleast a little bit, but wouldn't stand a chance against a knight. But in a contest of crafting, the warrior would (or should) surely fail.

[ogerawa]

My opinion based on the original proposal... I only dislike the idea of giving some boost to the skill just because someone chose a path. Going over 100% of a skill, I'd say is more than enough as the compensation of losing skill on the other paths. Since obviously they will be much better than those who don't choose a path, even though they still have to gain it.

If it's possible to make chars get more than 100% skill, I only hope we won't be weaken after the system implemented. For example, a char can kill troll with current system, after the path thingy implemented the same char would still be able to kill troll as easy as it used to be, before the new system implemented without having to choose a path. Else it's like a hidden penalty for those who won't choose a path.

EDIT:
PS: it will make the PGer who focus on fighting be literally untouchable in a fair duel because not many even has 100% in a fighting skill

[Mr. Cromwell]

The skill boost encourages people to choose their path 'before' maxing out (and possibily utilizing other skills for a long time before doing so). There's no incentive to choose the path at skill 50, if you gain no benefits except in the (distant) future which means that a path will be chosen only by those who are near the max, thus distorting the current situation.

A PG'er who focuses on fighting (or magic) already is literally untouchable in a fair duel. I challenge you try against the worst of them. The status quo doesn't change that much, to be honest (in that respect). onE!1

1.) The dedicated warriors who are not powergamers will gain a hefty skill-boost as long as they focus early enough, which makes them at par or above the best craftsmen-warriors.
2.) The PG-warriors will max themselves out again, and the balance of power within the warriors remains. The skill-oriented players who have ~100 skills again will soon have skills at 120, and they keep on owning the lazy/rp/no-time/bad stat warriors (as they do now). Same with mages. Same with craftsmen.

[ogerawa]

What I was trying to say was that... going to 100% is hard... and not many even go that far. If the limit is raised in this example to 120%, the so called non-PGer will certainly be left behind even further. Just because the non-PGer basically will take years to even reach 100%. In other words, it's only good if you PG... with this path thing. If you don't PG then the current system is actually better since it's easier to get to 100% than to 120%.

And since I don't like the idea of the skill boost, so I didn't bring that part to my arguement Thus it results with non PG'er still around 70-90% and the PG'er 120% instead of 100%.

[Mr. Cromwell]

Yes, well: If I don't like either the skill boost NOR the increased skillcap, it's pretty easy to dismiss the idea as complete hogwash, isn't it? I mean, if you take out those two, then you have a path which gives you minuses to every other skill and no bonuses whatsoever.

It's rather pointless to make a dismissive argument over a system after you first remove the internal balancing-features because you don't like them, which then directly results in a screwed up situation that you don't like and then dismiss the system because of that situation.

[ogerawa]

I only dislike the skill boost, I never said I don't like or disagree with the increased skillcap. I'm okay with it and just said it's more than enough as the compensation for the minuses of other skills. Since mostly the people who will choose path won't have much of the other skills.

In conclusion, I'm fine with the path system if and only if the skill boost isn't there, because we don't really have to choose a path.

EDIT:
I only said something about the increased skillcap as something to think about rather than disagree-ing with it.

[Mr. Cromwell]

Without the skill boost the system will not work as intended, because then it will 'only' attract (and benefit!) those people who have already maxed their skills or who are interested in doing so, causing the disparity between warrior/craftsman/mage characters as there's nothing which diminishes the intergroup skillgap resulting from the different playing styles. Quite honestly, I wouldn't recommend that kind of path system to anyone.

[Julius]

My point exactly. It really seems like to me you want a skill boost out of your idea. Then we'd have too many overpowered warriors (which we already have). Fact is, the attribute system limits characters from being the best warrior and the best craftsman/smith. That's our path. As I stated before in my earlier post, level 80 smithing is fairly great and considering there are only a few that have that number ig anyway, they'd still be considered "one of the best."

Stopping the skill gain at level 80 really doesn't stop jack of all trades characters, nor does this path system.