Login to BatWeb
Forgot your password?
BatMUD Forums > Flame > Re: more about "talent" style skills
Nuane wrote:
Pick locks -skill could be trainable as a "talent" from somewhere to 1%, it
would have a non-standard but relatively harsh chance to raise by using, could
get it up to around 50% in a "medium" time, 70+ wouldn't be possible.
In other words, you would need to work on it for a rather long time to get
much use for it without help from +pl equipment.
I'm hoping that this ideas details would be a compromise enough for it not to
be a balance issue of any sort. Feel free to correct and discuss though if i'm
wrong.
-Naane
would have a non-standard but relatively harsh chance to raise by using, could
get it up to around 50% in a "medium" time, 70+ wouldn't be possible.
In other words, you would need to work on it for a rather long time to get
much use for it without help from +pl equipment.
I'm hoping that this ideas details would be a compromise enough for it not to
be a balance issue of any sort. Feel free to correct and discuss though if i'm
wrong.
-Naane
You merely once again remind me why i used to newsignore certain people.
Please go avatar for all i care.
PS. Why not?
Rating:
9
Votes:
15
Nuane wrote:
Nuane wrote:
Pick locks -skill could be trainable as a "talent" from somewhere to 1%, it
would have a non-standard but relatively harsh chance to raise by using, could
get it up to around 50% in a "medium" time, 70+ wouldn't be possible.
In other words, you would need to work on it for a rather long time to get
much use for it without help from +pl equipment.
I'm hoping that this ideas details would be a compromise enough for it not to
be a balance issue of any sort. Feel free to correct and discuss though if i'm
wrong.
-Naane
would have a non-standard but relatively harsh chance to raise by using, could
get it up to around 50% in a "medium" time, 70+ wouldn't be possible.
In other words, you would need to work on it for a rather long time to get
much use for it without help from +pl equipment.
I'm hoping that this ideas details would be a compromise enough for it not to
be a balance issue of any sort. Feel free to correct and discuss though if i'm
wrong.
-Naane
You merely once again remind me why i used to newsignore certain people.
Please go avatar for all i care.
PS. Why not?
he has been silent enough for long enough to possibly grow and mature
he spouts some verbal bullshit that reminds you he is a complete waste
of life. He was a mediocre player which became a below average wiz
- blackstar -
Rating:
16
Votes:
22
Nuane wrote:
Nuane wrote:
Pick locks -skill could be trainable as a "talent" from somewhere to 1%, it
would have a non-standard but relatively harsh chance to raise by using, could
get it up to around 50% in a "medium" time, 70+ wouldn't be possible.
In other words, you would need to work on it for a rather long time to get
much use for it without help from +pl equipment.
I'm hoping that this ideas details would be a compromise enough for it not to
be a balance issue of any sort. Feel free to correct and discuss though if i'm
wrong.
-Naane
would have a non-standard but relatively harsh chance to raise by using, could
get it up to around 50% in a "medium" time, 70+ wouldn't be possible.
In other words, you would need to work on it for a rather long time to get
much use for it without help from +pl equipment.
I'm hoping that this ideas details would be a compromise enough for it not to
be a balance issue of any sort. Feel free to correct and discuss though if i'm
wrong.
-Naane
You merely once again remind me why i used to newsignore certain people.
Please go avatar for all i care.
PS. Why not?
Anything that gives additional power to players should always have a good and
valid reason behind it. If players are constantly being made more powerful,
the actions of the past are diminished. I wouldn't like my mudcharacter
reduced to nothingness just because I have been idle for some time.
So before insulting people who actually make this game better by contributing
to its lore and engine, please think a while before starting your regular
rants.
Rating:
1
Votes:
11
Nuane wrote:
Nuane wrote:
Pick locks -skill could be trainable as a "talent" from somewhere to 1%, it
would have a non-standard but relatively harsh chance to raise by using, could
get it up to around 50% in a "medium" time, 70+ wouldn't be possible.
In other words, you would need to work on it for a rather long time to get
much use for it without help from +pl equipment.
I'm hoping that this ideas details would be a compromise enough for it not to
be a balance issue of any sort. Feel free to correct and discuss though if i'm
wrong.
-Naane
would have a non-standard but relatively harsh chance to raise by using, could
get it up to around 50% in a "medium" time, 70+ wouldn't be possible.
In other words, you would need to work on it for a rather long time to get
much use for it without help from +pl equipment.
I'm hoping that this ideas details would be a compromise enough for it not to
be a balance issue of any sort. Feel free to correct and discuss though if i'm
wrong.
-Naane
You merely once again remind me why i used to newsignore certain people.
Please go avatar for all i care.
PS. Why not?
_discussion. To me it looks like you specifically request skill "pick locks"
to be generally available.
Secondly, if this was a general idea, your random choice of skill was a poor
one. This is actually a GOOD idea, given the skill was something like fire
building, cooking or swimming as they can be easily learned by trial and
error.
Or did I misunderstand you completely and you actually meant making the skill
non-trainable for the guilds already getting it and instead you would actually
have to practice to master the skill?
If this is the case, my apologies, that actually IS a brilliant idea!
Rating:
-3
Votes:
9
Kimvais
C o d e s l a v e
10y, 303d, 15h, 5m, 19s old
Level:
35 [Wizard]
I think the part where he said "Feel free to correct and discuss" meant he
wanted to discuss it, but I've been wrong before...
wanted to discuss it, but I've been wrong before...
Rating:
4
Votes:
10
Since you specifically said 'fire building', I just have to point out that,
sadly it makes no difference if individual wizards think it's a good or bad
idea.
I posted sometime ago why the beforementioned skill isn't learnable by all.
Some wizard (who I guess happened to be the only to read it) told me 'wtf are
you fucking stupid, you fuck you think fire building is easy??? it takes years
of education and master cook-certificate to know how to start a fire, batworld
is such a highly specialized society that you have no fucking use to such
skill, thus you can't and won't learn it'.
So, all in all. I'm saying why-tf should anyone explain anything to any
particular wizard. It makes absolutely no difference if you reason it good or
bad. Why-tf do you even care, you wouldn't've coded it even if it fell in
'GOOD IDEA'-category of yours.
sadly it makes no difference if individual wizards think it's a good or bad
idea.
I posted sometime ago why the beforementioned skill isn't learnable by all.
Some wizard (who I guess happened to be the only to read it) told me 'wtf are
you fucking stupid, you fuck you think fire building is easy??? it takes years
of education and master cook-certificate to know how to start a fire, batworld
is such a highly specialized society that you have no fucking use to such
skill, thus you can't and won't learn it'.
So, all in all. I'm saying why-tf should anyone explain anything to any
particular wizard. It makes absolutely no difference if you reason it good or
bad. Why-tf do you even care, you wouldn't've coded it even if it fell in
'GOOD IDEA'-category of yours.
Rating:
11
Votes:
13
Great, we get to start this again... How is this not coded? For one piddly
level, anyone can get 5% fire building, camping, swim, and a bunch of other
crap. If you don't want to pay 1 level, then don't.
level, anyone can get 5% fire building, camping, swim, and a bunch of other
crap. If you don't want to pay 1 level, then don't.
Rating:
8
Votes:
12
Marvin wrote:
Great, we get to start this again... How is this not coded? For one piddly
level, anyone can get 5% fire building, camping, swim, and a bunch of other
crap. If you don't want to pay 1 level, then don't.
level, anyone can get 5% fire building, camping, swim, and a bunch of other
crap. If you don't want to pay 1 level, then don't.
Saldas wrote:
Marvin wrote:
Great, we get to start this again... How is this not coded? For one piddly
level, anyone can get 5% fire building, camping, swim, and a bunch of other
crap. If you don't want to pay 1 level, then don't.
level, anyone can get 5% fire building, camping, swim, and a bunch of other
crap. If you don't want to pay 1 level, then don't.
+-----------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| SkillSpell Name | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
+-----------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| Fire building | 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 |
+-----------------+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
Rating:
2
Votes:
2
Mahon just posted a textbook example of how NOT to motivate wizards into doing
anything.
If you are not prepared to explain and justify the requested feature to the
wizards, why would the wizards have any interest at all into making it into an
actual part of the game?
For the actual skill in question, how many mudders could light a fire without
the help of matches or a lighter? I would imagine less than a percentage could
actually pull it off, so no, it's not something everyone can do. And even if
it was justified by realism, you'd still have the game balance to take into
question, it would be a clear downtune to everyone who have it now, and an
uptune to everyone else.
anything.
If you are not prepared to explain and justify the requested feature to the
wizards, why would the wizards have any interest at all into making it into an
actual part of the game?
For the actual skill in question, how many mudders could light a fire without
the help of matches or a lighter? I would imagine less than a percentage could
actually pull it off, so no, it's not something everyone can do. And even if
it was justified by realism, you'd still have the game balance to take into
question, it would be a clear downtune to everyone who have it now, and an
uptune to everyone else.
Rating:
1
Votes:
7
I have also done textbook examples on how YES to motivate wizards into doing
anything. Have a wild guess on what the results were? I'll help you: 'Yeah,
that's good! I'll do it when I have time'. Have another wild guess if those
are yet in game. Won't help with that one.
So, please, save your breath and don't pretend like it meant slightest crap at
all. This is how it really works: 1. You suggest something->Ooh, how nice,
I'll do that immediately.->Done. 2. You suggest something->Ooh, please
explain.->Forget you ever said anything.
There're so many variables in that equation and how you reason your request is
about the smallest factor of them all. Bigger factors are eg. the ones you
mentioned like game balance, and since figuring game balance requires work -
which no one here is paid, no player or admin - it's unlikely to happen.
anything. Have a wild guess on what the results were? I'll help you: 'Yeah,
that's good! I'll do it when I have time'. Have another wild guess if those
are yet in game. Won't help with that one.
So, please, save your breath and don't pretend like it meant slightest crap at
all. This is how it really works: 1. You suggest something->Ooh, how nice,
I'll do that immediately.->Done. 2. You suggest something->Ooh, please
explain.->Forget you ever said anything.
There're so many variables in that equation and how you reason your request is
about the smallest factor of them all. Bigger factors are eg. the ones you
mentioned like game balance, and since figuring game balance requires work -
which no one here is paid, no player or admin - it's unlikely to happen.
Rating:
-2
Votes:
9
Nerya wrote:
Mahon just posted a textbook example of how NOT to motivate wizards into doing
anything.
If you are not prepared to explain and justify the requested feature to the
wizards, why would the wizards have any interest at all into making it into an
actual part of the game?
For the actual skill in question, how many mudders could light a fire without
the help of matches or a lighter? I would imagine less than a percentage could
actually pull it off, so no, it's not something everyone can do. And even if
it was justified by realism, you'd still have the game balance to take into
question, it would be a clear downtune to everyone who have it now, and an
uptune to everyone else.
anything.
If you are not prepared to explain and justify the requested feature to the
wizards, why would the wizards have any interest at all into making it into an
actual part of the game?
For the actual skill in question, how many mudders could light a fire without
the help of matches or a lighter? I would imagine less than a percentage could
actually pull it off, so no, it's not something everyone can do. And even if
it was justified by realism, you'd still have the game balance to take into
question, it would be a clear downtune to everyone who have it now, and an
uptune to everyone else.
without a doubt 100% of this mudding community knows the theory, the
mechanics, and the materials needed to make a fire! If by some chance you
doubt this statement, then offer each mudder 3tps if they can describe in
detail 'How to Build/Start a Fire'. I'm sure you'll be amazed at how many
KNOW how to perform this task. The fact that they can or can't properly
utilize the knowledge depends on how often they use the skill, yes?
Rating:
11
Votes:
15
Nikana wrote:
Nerya wrote:
Mahon just posted a textbook example of how NOT to motivate wizards into doing
anything.
If you are not prepared to explain and justify the requested feature to the
wizards, why would the wizards have any interest at all into making it into an
actual part of the game?
For the actual skill in question, how many mudders could light a fire without
the help of matches or a lighter? I would imagine less than a percentage could
actually pull it off, so no, it's not something everyone can do. And even if
it was justified by realism, you'd still have the game balance to take into
question, it would be a clear downtune to everyone who have it now, and an
uptune to everyone else.
anything.
If you are not prepared to explain and justify the requested feature to the
wizards, why would the wizards have any interest at all into making it into an
actual part of the game?
For the actual skill in question, how many mudders could light a fire without
the help of matches or a lighter? I would imagine less than a percentage could
actually pull it off, so no, it's not something everyone can do. And even if
it was justified by realism, you'd still have the game balance to take into
question, it would be a clear downtune to everyone who have it now, and an
uptune to everyone else.
without a doubt 100% of this mudding community knows the theory, the
mechanics, and the materials needed to make a fire! If by some chance you
doubt this statement, then offer each mudder 3tps if they can describe in
detail 'How to Build/Start a Fire'. I'm sure you'll be amazed at how many
KNOW how to perform this task. The fact that they can or can't properly
utilize the knowledge depends on how often they use the skill, yes?
first place to be able to sit hour after hour watching the mind-numbing flow
of text and even enjoy it. (Or it might not, just watching some text flow by
sounds like it requires some altistic guy to enjoy it
). Also, KNOWINGsomething is never the same as DOING something. I am yet to build a jet engine
even though I've known for years how to build one.
Anyway, this post was in no relation to anyone appearing previously on this
thread, just speculating away my morning grumpiness.
-J
Rating:
-6
Votes:
9
© 1990-2024 Balanced Alternative Techniques ry. All rights reserved. BatMUD™ is a registered trademark of Balanced Alternative Techniques ry.
The individual comments are the property of their posters, and may not reflect the views or opinions of the administration.