AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

BrainSplitter wrote:

I imagine said DM probably gave you DCs for the RP if it was worthwhile.

Last I checked, Dream Coins have a "Trade for XP / Gold" option, which basically says "Here, we'd give you XP, but in case you'd rather put it towards something else; enjoy."

I forgot to add "not" below! This is what you get for writing at work when customers are coming. -.-

BlackDahlya wrote:

Ever since I started self-rebuilding Rizzen as a monk, I RPed with different players he learning the basics and even though nudging people at the DM channel specifying that "Hey, RPing learning this and that"", a DM was watching.

I meant to say that no DM was watching, or if it was, it was not enough to grant XP or DCs, which also makes me wonder if I am a bad RPer, or maybe my fellow RP friend is a bad RPer, or if we both are bad RPers; or if I was in very bad luck and no DM was watching; or if, in the worst situation, I somehow triggered some hate from the staff. Mind, the people I was RPing learning was Khylaria once, Sakkran another and Tyger Lily yet another. None of them I would consider bad RPers.

Mind, I am not complaining that I did not get any DCs or XP. What I am trying to say is that it is not easy to get XP through RP, unless if you get DCs for the RP and mean to use it to get XP (as you mentioned).

It is particularly complicated if, as Yurell already pointed out, you are in a Timezone with no DMs on, or with DMs that seem to always be busy with their events. Again, not saying this is bad! Just saying that, whether you like it or not, leveling up is part of playing a game like this and it might be somewhat hypocritical to think you will have fun forever being a low level because:

1) Even if you are careful to not get into PvP, if you do you will lose. Sure, losing a fight is a possibility to start RPing character development. However, losing too many times in a row might utterly destroy RP simply because after some time it might not be fun anymore to play that character. Again, it is alright to lose some, win some, sometimes. But losing ~all~ the time is not fun.

2) DM events, or maybe interactions with other PCs depending on dice rolls against high level characters will, more often than not, be bad for you. Even if you roll a 20 in a skill you have.. say... 4 points, you will never beat that player that rolled the same 20 + the two digit number on their skill or counter skill. I can think of a situation that, if both players agreed on, will always have a known end: a low level trying to intimidate a high level. Since the counter to intimidate includes the character level... well, you already start at a disadvantage.

So, more often than not, since you cannot rely 100% on the fact that a DM ~might~ be watching, if you want to be of an, at least, reasonable level (yes, I know Tormie, you do not need that 'must be level 30' mentality!), you have to go hunting even if the way you get XP and the level is considered an OOC tool.

Not sure if you got what I meant.

And, also, I did not mean to flame, insult or sound like a whinner in my previous post.

The only recent complain I have does not involve leveling up or lack of DCs.

EDIT: Typos. Grammar. Structure. Stuff.

Yurell wrote:

"You seem to good at this for us to learn anything."

I've told that to my teachers for years. Bastards never go away!

On a serious note, that's a pretty silly statement, imo.

ShortSlasher wrote:

Unfortunately, this seems the main mentality of the server. I for one enjoy my low levels, and think the most important RP happens then! I mean your suppose to develop into a great hero/villain. Not show up in Cordor in rags one day, then powerlevel to 30 and be one of the most powerful people on the island...

Agreed. I'm a player who hates hunting and grinding for long periods. But, it's actually kinda fun at low levels. I actually enjoy it from levels 1 till about 15ish. After that, it starts getting kinda "eh" for me. I like the slower, more realistic pace of the lower levels than the lightening fast craziness of the high levels. And of course, the RP development is always fun.

o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote:

Yurell wrote:

"You seem to good at this for us to learn anything."

I've told that to my teachers for years. Bastards never go away!

On a serious note, that's a pretty silly statement, imo.

I agree, and yet it is empirically true.

I like the whole experience from level 1 through to level 30... albeit for different reasons. In the beginning, I go into a character with a rough hash of that character's personality and a rough background story. As the character levels, so do the rough edges of who the character is get chiseled away until a shining diamond is left. This process usually takes until about the time the character is reaching epic status. After that, it becomes a mission to make the character's life interesting enough to enjoy throughout the rest of the leveling process and even much longer afterwards. Finding a good arch-nemesis is always a top priority for me, because who would any hero or villain be without their counterpart?

ainjyll wrote:

Finding a good arch-nemesis is always a top priority for me, because who would any hero or villain be without their counterpart?

Good arch-nemesis are like gold dust.

You know, I've never considered actively finding a nemesis. Nor have any come my way, other than a playful rivalry here and there.

I think that might make a difference to my play, in a positive way. To shake things up, giving less time for monotony.

MoshingChris wrote:

Thats wildly contradictory. You say remove the party member cap, all of you, to make it more IC and then encourage the DM's to impose OOC rules on folks out of range of each other who level by sitting under invisibility.

You do realise that a Level 30 in the abyss with a level 3 nets that level 3 53xp a kill. . .or that level 3 in spires does the same thing, or that level 3 in Yuan-ti. In that case you may aswell just make everyone level 15 when they create a character because it'll be around two hours of grinding to get everyone to that level.

The only way I'd agree to this is if the xp is capped to 10xp if the party is out of Range 5+ levels and Gold drop is capped to ten aswell and loot drops don't happen.

A person only learning so much watching and not doing afterall, and the epic doesn't learn much babysitting the newb.

Theres a reason combat veterans are a more valuable commodity to a Military than green fodder.

Well, some kind of restrictions were explicitly stated in my suggestion. What exactly they are is of course open to debate. As I already said, you could forget calculating XP by average party level, but instead give it to PCs individually. Start capping XP downwards from (say) +/-5 CR monsters so that the ideal XP comes from something in your range. You can tag along in an epic area, but you won't get as much XP as you would in something of your CR. Or you can go with lowbies, but you won't get XP from the low-level spawns. (Which still leaves the possibility of helping lowbies grind faster in something of their own level range, but who cares.) You could also just cap the XP to something reasonable if the range is exceeded, yes. That might actually be the easier solution.

There's nothing contradictory in banning just sitting back under invis without even buffing. If you take part in a risky fight, you can get XP even if it's out of your range. If you just sit back, you're exploiting the system. It's common sense, and no different from sitting back in the corner of a map while your party goes grinding (which surely is illegal now).

My point is not that I have a polished sytem ready to replace what we have now. It's that there's plenty of ways to work around the problems without keeping the irritating 5-level cap we have now. It's the biggest boo-boo in Amia design for years now.

I agree with everything IronAngel said. It would be great if exp could be given individually, i.e if the creature that a level 30 character and a level 15 character are fighting is level 25, then the level 30 would get exp for a level 25 creature, while the level 15 character would get the exp equivalent of killing a level 15 creature. It makes no sense whatsoever that none of these should get experience. I mean, even if the level 15 character can not put a dent in the creature, he can still gain experience from contemplating what he did wrong, what he can do better, etc.

If XP and level are occ and don't matter, just have everyone start at level 30. This would also remove the need to grind for xp and let players adventure for the adventure's sake. (or gold and treasure I suppose).

IronAngel wrote:

MoshingChris wrote:

What Mosh said

What Iron said.

Current system is fine imho. The party and level cap does not require DMs to babysit even more.

hendrack wrote:

Current system is fine imho. The party and level cap does not require DMs to babysit even more.

Neither would another well placed system. That's kinda the whole point. What we have in place works, but is it the best?

One must not discard a new idea out of hand because the present one is satisfactory - there is always room for improvement. Is the new idea better? Pointing out the virtues of the old is pointless as an argument to keep it if the new shares those virtues.

I see too much abuse and too much babysitting to seriously consider any of the new ideas.

The current system is not fine, obviously. There is a reason why there is whine of not being able to get a party in every other thread. Out of the few people that are on at certain times, you have to pray that there are those who are compatible with your level in order to find a party. If this silly cap was removed, chances of finding a party would increase by alot.

And abuse would skyrocket. And implementing any sort of cap to prevent it puts you back at square one.

Why don't we make it simple and vote for it, see how it does amongst everyone?

TormakSaber wrote:

I see too much abuse and too much babysitting to seriously consider any of the new ideas.

My thoughts on the matter as well.

Also, most polls ofthis sort are quite ineffective. It's akin to voting for everyone to get 100 free DCs, or voting for World Peace.

Just use that green wand. When you think a DM might be on, and you are in some good RP, just use it.

It's not like you will receive more attention with a new system, in a server of 65 people., and it doesn't matter the amount of DM's unless we were to have like 20 DM's on at once.

BrainSplitter wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

I see too much abuse and too much babysitting to seriously consider any of the new ideas.

My thoughts on the matter as well.

Also, most polls ofthis sort are quite ineffective. It's akin to voting for everyone to get 100 free DCs, or voting for World Peace.

Out of curiousity, do you two make the descisions?

They are two of the team that makes decisions, and are veterans of DMing on Amia.

Grymia wrote:

They are two of the team that makes decisions, and are veterans of DMing on Amia.

I see. Well, on that team, I can count 1 who is for removing the party limitations, and 2 who are against. It'd be nice if the rest of the team could be equally loud and voice their opinions on the matter.

Edit: Also, Ron, about the voting matter, do you really believe that we players are so selfish...?

I believe a majority are, yes, however that is not my point;

My point is this. If a vote was made, say, "Would you like free money?". I doubt anyone would vote 'no'. It's not a selfishness issue, so much as a "Well, duh, Yes is the vote". However, that doesn't mean it's a good idea, just because alot of people woud like it.

For example, 'free money' would destroy the economy. Even if the average person would just be focusing on the free money component.

You're working off the assumption that we, the playerbase, do not want what is best for the server. Instead, we only seek to benefit our own characters.

Polls really don't work, it's the same reasoning as to why we elect people to govern us, instead of holding a referendum for every decision. The DM team are in charge because they know what they're doing.
And Neso, it's not so much that we, the playerbase, don't want what is best, it's that we don't know.

ShortSlasher wrote:

Just use that green wand. When you think a DM might be on, and you are in some good RP, just use it.

It's not like you will receive more attention with a new system, in a server of 65 people., and it doesn't matter the amount of DM's unless we were to have like 20 DM's on at once.

That's a problem many people are pointing out with the current DC system - there are timezones that don't see DMs, so even with 11 people on your chances of seeing a DC are still zip.

Neso wrote:

You're working off the assumption that we, the playerbase, do not want what is best for the server. Instead, we only seek to benefit our own characters.

Having been a DM it's not entirely unreasonable to go with that approach. Presume the worst and happily be proven wrong, so long as you're willing to listen reasonably

BrainSplitter and Tormak ARE.

Grymia wrote:

Neso wrote:

You're working off the assumption that we, the playerbase, do not want what is best for the server. Instead, we only seek to benefit our own characters.

Having been a DM it's not entirely unreasonable to go with that approach. Presume the worst and happily be proven wrong, so long as you're willing to listen reasonably

BrainSplitter and Tormak ARE.

Except in this thread, it sounds to me as if they are presuming the very worst and not giving the chance to be proven wrong.

Neso wrote:

Grymia wrote:

Having been a DM it's not entirely unreasonable to go with that approach. Presume the worst and happily be proven wrong, so long as you're willing to listen reasonably

BrainSplitter and Tormak ARE.

Except in this thread, it sounds to me as if they are presuming the very worst and not giving the chance to be proven wrong.

They state they see problems for abuse, but instead of alleviating their concerns, you ask it to be brought to a vote - that sounds remarkably like the problem you are describing the DMs of having.

Last edited by Neso on Tue, Apr 27 2010, 23:18 PM, edited 2 times in total.

Yurell wrote:

They state they see problems for abuse, but instead of alleviating their concerns, you ask it to be brought to a vote - that sounds remarkably like the problem you are describing the DMs of having.

I don't quite follow.

To be frank, I do not even think this would be the abomination of abuse that some seem to make it out to be. First of all, what self-respecting higher level character would run around with a lowbie killing goblins all day, unless to roleplay a tutor, mentor or whatnot? And even if they were doing it with no roleplay at all, there is still two people "paying" for it with their time, and only one is getting something for it, and they are not even gaining enough to make it worth it.

So you're thinking: "But oh, you ignorant bastard, what if the lowbie simply downs an invs potion and leeches of an abyss trip?"

Well, for the sake of discussion, let's go ahead and assume that the monsters with see invisibility will not tear the lowbie a new one. And let's assume the party is actually willing to waste a party slot bringing someone who will significantly reduce their chances of survival. The lowbie still wouldn't get more exp than he would for killing goblins, and let's be honest, goblins are faster and easier kills.

The whole point of removing the cap would not be to make it more attractive xpwise to roll with higher levels. The point would be to make doing so viable for those who have no other choice, and those who wish to roleplay with their lower level friends or apprentices. Going with a party your own level would still be the better option if you want fast leveling.

Edit: Also, sorry. I just realized that I have not even posted how I have imagined it to work. Technically, I do not think we should remove the cap completely. Instead, all of those in the party who are more than 5 levels below the highest level partymember would recieve the exp they normally would from mobs their own level.

For an instance, a level 25, level 20 and a level 15 are killing giants. While the exp for the level 25 and 20 would be calculated the same way as it is now, the level 15 character would recieve the exp he would get from killing a level 15 mob.

And they're wise to presume the worst in this case. Sorry to say, being nice and being a "cool person" doesn't make you not selfish. I can totally see people abusing that system if it was put in place. I'd be voicing my opinion against it if I were them too. Well, I guess I just voiced against it without being them, but you get my point.

@ Neso:

First off, it's ridiculous to assume bringing along an xp puppy lowers your chance of survival - they don't.

Secondly, wouldn't the larger abuse being the epic lvl 30 buddies killing things that are the same level as the lowbie?

make it so no one gets xp if the enemy is too far below the highest lvl player on the party.

Yurell wrote:

@ Neso:

First off, it's ridiculous to assume bringing along an xp puppy lowers your chance of survival - they don't.

... Are you serious? Are you telling me that bringing 5 level 24 characters and 1 level 3 character to the abyss gives you an equally high chance of survival as you would have with 6 level 24 characters?

Yurell wrote:

Secondly, wouldn't the larger abuse being the epic lvl 30 buddies killing things that are the same level as the lowbie?

If not roleplay, what exactly would the level 30 buddies be gaining from this, other than wasting their own time? If the lowbie parties with people in his range, he can get experience from higher level mobs, which means quicker exp and thus quicker leveling WITHOUT a level 30 having to OOCly waste a bunch of time, doing crap that is boring for him. If they on the other hand are roleplaying, then all is well, is it not?

Neso wrote:

Yurell wrote:

@ Neso:

First off, it's ridiculous to assume bringing along an xp puppy lowers your chance of survival - they don't.

... Are you serious? Are you telling me that bringing 5 level 24 characters and 1 level 3 character to the abyss gives you an equally high chance of survival as you would have with 6 level 24 characters?

No.
I'm saying a lvl X is just as likely to survive whether it is just four lvl X's running the place, or four level X's and one or to X-20's. Your statement was "waste a party slot bringing someone who will significantly reduce their chances of survival". The player being there does not reduce your chances of survival at all. The lowbie's chances of survival may be low, but not the rest of the party's.

Neso wrote:

Yurell wrote:

Secondly, wouldn't the larger abuse being the epic lvl 30 buddies killing things that are the same level as the lowbie?

If not roleplay, what exactly would the level 30 buddies be gaining from this, other than wasting their own time? If the lowbie parties with people in his range, he can get experience from higher level mobs, which means quicker exp and thus quicker leveling WITHOUT a level 30 having to OOCly waste a bunch of time, doing crap that is boring for him. If they on the other hand are roleplaying, then all is well, is it not?

I agree with you. Unfortunately the DMs don't like that.

Quote:

If not roleplay, what exactly would the level 30 buddies be gaining from this, other than wasting their own time?

Another level 30 character for their faction, to push people around, work towards goals with ,engage in PVP with, etc, and at record time and fully geared out.

Same reason Epic Loot gets twinked to lowbies, despite the cost and time put into acquiring them.

good point...didn't think about the twinking bit.

Okay, then BrainSplitter. Let's remove epic loot, because it gets abused.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

Wow, I've never seen someone on a -roleplaying- server so reluctant to make a change that would get rid of limitations that make no sense in character whatsoever, and bring something new and fresh into the roleplay sphere.

And BrainSplitter, this is a bit more obvious than twinking. If you see it abused, hand out a ban and see how many continue to do so.

But okay, I give up. Go ahead and don't give this opportunity to those who would genuinely make something out of it, because a small number of people would level faster.

Just reading throught his post make me lose faith in mankind.

Really people crying cause they can't find anyone around their level to party with. Obviously your doing something wrong perhaps you have the social skills of an ape?

The 5 levels difference cap is a beautiful thing. Otherwise just as Tormak said I would go hey all you new War Knights come stand around and watch me fight for the next five hours then we'll be strong enough to take on the banites (Example only)
This is not encouraging RP as much as you try to justify it is. You stand there arguing about it long enough you'll justify anything.

Please please don't get rid of the 5 levels difference cap.

It's not a small number. I have seen other servers and other games. It is what happens.

Quote:

But okay, I give up. Go ahead and don't give this opportunity to those who would genuinely make something out of it, because a small number of people would level faster.

Yup. Sometimes 3 people break it for everyone. That's life.

Quote:

Yup. Sometimes 3 people break it for everyone. That's life.

3 the first week.

6 the next

Half the under level 30s the next week.

Hurray everyones level 30

I'm not going to be quite that dramatic about it but it is a fact that in games where there isn't a sort of level tiering system for character advancement, what happens is the lowbies tag along to higher levels to powerlevel, or the higher levels otherwise hire themselves out for this purpose, etc.

Sorry its just how I feel.

Leveling on amia is already piss easy don't make it any easier.

Last edited by IronAngel on Wed, Apr 28 2010, 13:28 PM, edited 1 time in total.

The point is not to make levelling easier.

The point is to look for alternative solutions to a major design flaw that runs contrary to the intention of the game (that is, to combine RP and action).

Nobody has presented a polished suggestion. There have been some discussion openers to see if something can be worked out. So no, one-liner rebuttals are not wise policy or eloquent argumentation. It should be in everyone's best interest to see what's the best solution we can possibly think of, and then see if it's something we want to replace the current cap with. It's quite possible to work out a solution that doesn't particularly reward babysitting but enables it with some compensation if you're in it for the RP. We don't even have a finalized alternative yet, so how could we possibly know whether it's good or not?

Also, to no one in particular and to everyone:
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html

Stop using it.

Edit: link fixed.

IronAngel wrote:

Also, to no one in particular and to everyone:
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.htm

Stop using it.

Because it's a 404 link?

correct one is html, not htm

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html

Ha! That goes to show just how fallacious a straw-man is. Even links go wrong when you use it.

Yeah honestly I'd simply say leave it as is.

Many of us older players had the same kind of complications as we were going through our levels.

Life is nothing but complications. In a game those complications should enhance the RP, even if OOC the rule makes no sense to you.

We had the same rules applied to us for a long time. We all made it just fine. And no...it wasn't as easy back then to find a good party either.

I honestly can't believe these same three or four threads are still going

Uhh, I don't think the difficulty of finding a party is a motivation for anyone who's posted suggestions about this here. That it would even cross people's minds tells me more about their mentality than my motivations. I have always been in opposition to unnecessary OOC garbage in rules and design, and I've held this stance on the level cap for years, irrespective of whether I played a lowbie, an epic, or didn't play at all.

And really, this is not a vote. Considering you don't even know what the alternative is, it doesn't make your argument look very valid when you just say to leave it as is. We're not there yet. We're just raising awareness and motivation to tackle a real design flaw and problem that could be improved on if people agreed to want that.

Many have said that "some" would abuse it (even if we don't yet know what "it" is and if it's even abusable to begin with). But you must acknowledge that "three people ruin it for everyone" is not a fact. It's a mentality, an opinion. And I'm of the opposite opinion: three people save it for everyone. I'd sooner let seven out of ten people abuse something if it means a wonderful improvement for those three people who don't, than to stop those seven people and in the process punish the three as well. This has been my general stance on Amia, and it's the philosophy behind our lack of subrace rules and other freedoms we are renowned and popular for.

Actually the phrase "takes one rotten apple to spoil the bunch" isn't just something we say for s**ts and grins.

We say it because in every instance that's exactly what occurs.

Your two or three rulebreakers will eventually turn into every other person abusing the system. Then DMs will have to babysit. Since I'm no saint I could safely say I might not be able to trust myself with such an easy system of leveling..where one player watches the other player do all the work(In ANY high lvl/low lvl scenario).

Honestly I could sit and chat all day as I watched someone hunt...and gain xp from it.

As far as the alternatives go...many have been voiced....most of them corrupt.

As far as "raising awareness" and "design flaws":

Firstly, we have had MANY threads along the same lines...so this is more like a non essential, unimportant, and detracting raising of awareness. Something that seems more a distraction than any real good.

Secondly, the whole system of XP was implemented this way with the thought of removing methods of abuse (such as me being able to practically sit around while others do work and I get XP for it).

Iron...your logic is flawed because it is based on the idea that ONLY three people or such will abuse it. If everyone just decides to abuse it(and someone always shows up to do just that), DMs will have to watch double time...to make sure every party is good and not cheating.

Seems like extra work with no real good reason. Between creating a new system, and in this case even maintaining it on a daily basis....I think would actually hinder the DMs ability to help us when it matters.

I don't want the DMs having to run around watching hunting parties(which I LOATHE hunting anyways), when they could be watching our RP and rewarding us for it...not just with DCs but with their presence, an ear, maybe even an NPC monster or two...heh.

One more thing......honestly I get peeved seeing posts that.........well...no offense....make every player on Amia look like they are some angel or saint that can do no wrong and never has anything but good intent.

Amia's players...like much of the people of the world, are flawed, fallible beings. Having a system based on the idea that every player is a real life paladin that doesn't cheat is pure folly IMO.

About hunting, metagaming and IC wars

Who is online