Some ideas for EQ2, revision 1.0
Ken Andrews
EQ2. As they are *miscellaneous*, some are contradictory. They are
roughly grouped into sections. Have at 'em.
(Something nice to read for the holiday.)
1.0 FACTION
Factions are a good idea, and allow for a fair amount of variation in
how PCs get along in the world. Alas, there are certain things that
really need to be cleaned up in them. Specifically, some new, more
general Factions need to be added.
1.1 General
Each race needs to have a race-specific Faction. Killing any NPC
member of that race (generalization, here) should produce a negative
Faction mod with all other members of the race. Kill the guards too
often, and the merchants will stop dealing with you. Inside, outside,
whatever. You kill Dwarf Guards, Dwarf Merchants won't deal with you.
Obvious exceptions would be traitors, bandits, renegades, and the
like.
Guards are an interesting group. There are Good guards, Evil guards,
Honest guards, Corrupt guards. But they're all Guards. Killing any
guard should make all other guards dislike you, at least a little bit.
It's not that the Corrupt ones look up to the Honest ones, or that the
Good ones are best buds with the Evil ones; it's that they're all
Guards. And if you're willing to kill one, who knows? Maybe some day
you'll be after them, too.
All Guards belong to the Guardian's Union. All Good, Honest Guards
belong to GU463. All Good, Corrupt Guards belong to GU762. All Evil,
Honest Guards belong to GU223. All Evil, Corrupt Guards belong to
GU666. Killing a member of GU762 would get you a large negative mod
with GU762, a decent positive mod with GU463, a small negative mod
with GU223, and a slightly smaller negative mod with GU666. The first
is obvious. Kill a member of my Union, I get annoyed with you. The
small negative with GU223 is (lose some because you killed a Guard,
gain some because you killed a goody-goody Guard, gain some because
you killed an untrustworthy Guard). The smaller negative with GU666
is (lose some because you killed a Guard, gain some because you killed
a goody-goody Guard, gain a bit more because you killed some of the
competition). Thus, killing Dwarven Guards will drop your Faction a
lot with the Honest Guards in Qeynos, and drop it somewhat with the
Corrupt Guards. It'll also drop your faction a little bit (or maybe
raise it a little bit) with the Neriak Guards.
1.2 Gods
When you take a look at history, it's astounding how much time and
effort people have put into placating their Gods. This is especially
evident in the many polytheistic societies (Rome, Greece, and Egypt
being 3 such examples). However, in EQ it's quite different. When
starting your character, you pick your God (maybe), then some of the
NPCs like or hate you, and that's it. This is a fantasy game; the
Gods should be IMPORTANT. So let's try something else...
All characters have Factions with the Gods. You can gain Faction by
doing things the Gods like; you can lose Faction by doing things the
Gods don't like. It's easy to lose Faction with Gods; it's hard to
raise it. Characters can be viewed as having Good Faction, Neutral
Faction, or Bad Faction with the various Gods. You can have Good
Faction with multiple Gods simultaneously. However, there are various
Gods who are opposed to each other. In such cases, gaining Faction
with one will almost always result in losing Faction with the other.
For our example work here, we'll use the following Faction ranges: 0 =
Perma-Bad, 1=100 = Bad, 101-150 = Neutral, 151-250 = Good, 251 =
Perma-Good. Perma-Bad and Perma-Good are just what they say; if you
can get to these points, nothing will move you away from them.
Perma-Good may never be implemented, but code for it anyway. That
way, if you decide to use it, the code's in place.
Gods can be separated into 3 groups: Good Gods (Rodcet Nife, Mithaniel
Marr, etc.), Neutral Gods (Rallos Zek, Karana, etc.), and Evil Gods
(Innorruk, Cazic Thule, etc.).
Actions taken, depending on their scope, can affect your Faction with
a single God or multiple Gods. Examples: A Cleric of Rodcet Nife,
healing a follower of Rodcet Nife, will get a small positive Faction
(+2) with his God. The same Cleric, healing a follower of Rallos Zek,
will get a small negative Faction (-1) with Rodcet Nife and a small
positive Faction (+1) with Rallos Zek. The same Cleric, healing a
follower of Bertoxx, would get large negative Faction (-5) with Rodcet
Nife and a small positive Faction (+1) with Bertoxx. The same Cleric,
gating followers of Bertoxx into Rodcet's home Plane, would get large
negative Faction (-10) with Rodcet Nife and large positive Faction
(+5) with Bertoxx. The same Cleric, killing followers of Rodcet Nife
on his home Plane would get large negative Faction (-20) with Rodcet
Nife and large positive Faction (+5) with all Evil Gods. The same
Cleric of Rodcet Nife, who kills him (or aids in such) gets flipped to
Perma-Bad (0) with Rodcet Nife, and gets large positive Faction (+10)
with all Evil Gods. Oh, and a Cleric of Rodcet Nife, healing a person
who's Perma-Bad to Rodcet Nife, gets a large negative Faction (-10)
adjustment.
Because Faction with Gods and who follows which God becomes more
important, a change gets made to how names appear in the game:
Green - you will gain Faction when helping this person.
Yellow - you will not gain Faction when helping this person.
Orange - you will lose some Faction (1-4 points) when helping this
person.
Red - you will lose lots of Faction (5+ points) when helping this
person.
Black - you will lose Faction if you even Group with this person.
For Clerics, Necros, Druids, Paladins, Rangers, and Shadowknights, you
are a follower of whatever God gives you your Mana. For all other
classes, you are a follower of a God if you have good Faction with
that God.
For Clerics, Necros, etc., the above colours are how they view
people's names all the time, as their casting on these people will
affect their standing with their God. For all others (Monks, Rogues,
etc.), other characters' names will always be Green.
Further, this should affect relations with certain NPCs, and not
always in the simplest fashion. Example: An Ogre Shadowknight who
follows Cazic Thule, and an Ogre Shaman who follows Rallos Zek. If
they both show up in front of Sgt. Slate, the Shadowknight should be
KOS while the Shaman should be Dubious (or at least close to it). The
reason is that all warrior-types (and the guards are warriors) will,
to some extent, follow Rallos Zek. Maybe not very much, but they will
respect his emissaries. The same thing even applies to the Knights of
Truth (or whatever they're called). Sure, they are Paladins dedicated
to another God, but they will respect the representatives (Clerics and
Shamans) of a non-Evil God.
People in polytheistic societies do not pay homage to only one God.
They call on whichever God is appropriate to the task or challenge at
hand. You want rain? You call on Karana. You want relief from
disease? You call on Rodcet Nife or Bertoxxulous. You're about to be
in a battle? You call on Rallos Zek. And you don't tick off a priest
if you can avoid it. (Of course, that's if you're not a priest
yourself. If you're a priest, then you generally feel less charitable
to dedicated followers of opposing Gods.)
Further discussion of Gods and their followers will be found in the
appropriate Classes.
2.0 EXPERIENCE
If it's willing to attack us, then we get XPs for killing it. I'm
getting buried in Gorge Hounds right now. None of them give XPs, but
they're willing to attack me again and again. This is not because I'm
sitting down, either. They'll attack me anywhere, any time. And yet
I get nothing for them. So again, if it's willing to attack me, then
I should be getting the XPs for it.
When we die, yes, we should lose XPs. We should not, however, lose
the level we've worked so hard to gain. Record our level and keep us
at that, even if our XPs drop. Yes, it means that if a person dies
immediately after levelling, he'll have 0 XPs showing on his progress
bar for (potentially) quite a while, but at least he won't have to
worry about suddenly being stuck, unable to get to his corpse on a
different plane. He'll still be able to improve his skills to their
new caps, thereby making it a wee bit easier to get those missing XP's
back.
And don't let a person's XPs drop below 0 total; that's just petty.
A possibility is to change the colour of the XP bar and simply show it
as a percentage of his total to get back to the correct level. That
way progress can be seen, even if it's "in the red".
You're currently using the D&D / MUD system of increasing the number
of XPs needed to achieve the next level. That's not the only
possibility out there, you know. There are other methods of achieving
the same goal, methods that might be more flexible.
Suppose instead of a continually-increasing amount, people always
needed 1,000 XPs to get to their next level. Aggressive Green
opponents would always give 10 XPs, Blues would give 20, Black 30,
Yellow 40, and Red 50 (example numbers). These might be sub-divided
such that very low Greens would give, say, 5, while very high Reds
would give 100. It doesn't matter what level you are, killing 100 to
200 aggressive Green opponents would always get you your next level.
Obviously these numbers could be modified by range of difference,
whether or not you're in a group, what your class / race is, et
cetera. It's not really necessary to use umpty-ump-million value
numbers; they mean nothing. A 1-XP increase on someone who needs
57,000,000 for his next level is a bit ridiculous as far as
micro-managing the numbers go. A simple, repetitive 1-1000 is more
practical.
3.0 CHARACTERS
3.1 Stats and Race
There should be clear and obvious differences between the races.
Stats should mean something. There should be no contest between an
Ogre Warrior and a Gnome Warrior of the same (reasonably low) level
with the same equipment. The Ogre should stomp the Gnome flat 100 %
of the time in straight-up combat. Yes, this is unfair and means most
people will choose Ogres if they want to play Warriors. What of it?
Provide incentives for small warriors. Maybe dungeons so small that
Dwarves have to bend over, like Giant Ant warrens or some such. Maybe
higher-level weapons that only Gnome Warriors can use. Maybe a
defensive bonus for small combatants against all large (substantially
larger than human) opponents.
3.2 Hit Points
Something that you've brought in from MUDs that really does make
things harder is the concept that HP must increase by some substantial
amount each level. As a result, monster HP must also expand to
ridiculous limits, and weapons and spells must eventually be doing
bizarre amounts of damage. D&D had it better in some ways. You start
with a base amount, you gain decent amounts for a while, then you
start getting only 1 or 2 HP per level thereafter. A maxxed-out L1
Fighter in D&D had 14 HP. A maxxed-out L20 Fighter had 159 HP. (If
such a thing existed) a maxxed-out L60 D&D Fighter would have had 279
HP. Because of this, creatures could have reasonable HP totals and
higher-level spells didn't need to produce hundreds of HP of damage.
The most powerful creatures in the D&D world only had about 3 times as
many HP as the most powerful characters.
3.3 Perma-Death
A MUD I played on, Apocalypse V, had perma-death in an interesting
form. It was actually quite good, and worked as follows: The MUD's
level range was 40. Before Level 15, no problems. At Level 15, you
had a 4% chance of losing a point of Constitution each time you died.
This went up, I think by 1%, each level above 15. Thus, people would
gradually get their Constitution reduced as they kept on dying in the
higher levels. Con+ equipment would, of course, keep it high, but,
when you died the death that removed your last point of Con, well,
that equipment wasn't on you, was it? And so the game would
immediately reroll your character, restarting you at Level 1.
Suppose something similar were to be implemented in EQ? Starting at
Level 20, you'd have a 1% chance of losing a point of Stamina each
time you die. This would go up by 1% each level. It would reflect
the fact that dying many, many times is hard on the body. Plus, with
the enormous base Stamina that everyone starts with (I don't think any
race starts with a Stamina below 60), it would simply add a certain
frisson to the other worries about dying.
3.4 Classes
3.4.01 Bard
Group buffs / debuffs. State-of-mind buffs.
Bards work by song. They buff / debuff by means of them. Their songs
affect things that are governed by your state of mind. Attack speed,
mana regen, movement speed... Morale. Fear immunity. Charm / Charm
immunity.
3.4.02 Cleric
Dedicated followers of Gods, they draw all of their magical power
directly from their God. Thus, Faction with their God is important;
if their God likes them, they get Mana to power their spells. If he
doesn't...
A Cleric who falls to Neutral Faction with his God drops to half his
normal available Mana. A Cleric who falls to Bad Faction with his God
gets no mana. A Cleric who falls to Perma-Bad Faction had better
start looking for another God.
Clerics should have the ability to see (possibly by some sort of aura)
who has Good / Neutral / Bad Faction with the Cleric's God. See the
notes under Gods.
Clerics gain Faction with any God by healing / aiding characters who
have Good Faction with that God. Clerics lose Faction with their own
God by healing characters who have Bad Faction with the Cleric's God.
Ideally, they should also lose Faction when healing characters who
have Good faction with the God's enemy, but that would be hard for the
Cleric to discern.
Note that "healing" above includes Bandaging.
The game has alternate Planes of reality. Some of these are the homes
of various Gods; others are not. Clerics should be the ones to have
the spells for moving characters into Planes controlled by Gods.
All Clerics can (via Quests) gain transport spells to any God's Plane.
Clerics who Gate in people who have Neutral Faction with the God of
the Plane will take a small Faction hit. Clerics who Gate in people
who have Bad Faction will take a large Faction hit.
All Clerics can (via Quests) change Gods. The basic requirements are
1) get Bad Faction with your current God (not necessarily Perma-Bad),
2) get Good Faction with the intended God, 3) Go to a Temple of the
intended God and get the Quest. Completion of the Quest will
automatically turn you Perma-Bad with your previous God (all Gods hold
grudges).
3.4.03 Druid
Dedicated followers of Gods of Nature, they follow the same rules as
other Clerics. The only difference is that they are much more closely
tied to the natural environment.
Nature-based buffs / debuffs / DoTs.
All animals (non-monster) view indifferently. Animals will not aid a
Druid who's attacking another animal, but will aid one who's fighting
a monster. If the Druid is attacking a Gnoll, for example, and a
couple of wolves wander by, the wolves will attack the Gnoll.
Druids will be the only ones with teleportation spells for moving
around Norrath.
Druids can Charm animals and non-sentient monsters. When the charm
wears off the animal, it promptly runs away. When the charm wears off
the monster, it promptly attacks the Druid.
3.4.04 Enchanter
Enchantments. Mind control. Illusions covering themselves and
others.
Enchanters should have illusion spells for all occasions, and spells
both for individual and group use. For example, Minor Illusion:
Target, which will turn the Enchanter into whatever he's targetting.
Later on, he'd get a group version of this. Target a Fire Imp, hit
Major Illusion: Target, and everybody in the group turns into a Fire
Imp until they Zone or one game day elapses. Characters will not get
any special abilities (fire attacks or whatever) of whatever they
become, but will get Indifferent Faction (before any other mods) with
other creatures of that type. It might be that they gain vision and
breathing abilities. (Imagine the usefulness of an Enchanter in
Kedge, if he can turn everybody into a fish! Imagine the annoyance if
he turns everyone into sharks, and then nobody can get out of the
water to get to a Zone line.)
Fun with newbies: Go to Everfrost, target an Ice Giant, and turn your
entire group into Ice Giants. Then go running around. Be sure to
stay well away from the guards. Also remember that you won't be able
to fit into the entrance to Halas or Blackburrow, if the guards are
beating on you.
Fun with everybody: Turn everybody in your group into Vox. Now, pick
a dragon, any dragon.
3.4.05 Magician
They stay as the masters of summoning and dismissal, but more so.
They lose all of their Damage Shields and their DD spells.
They gain the ability to use any item they can summon. Thus, they can
use most weapons, including swords and bows. They'll never be as good
as any melee type (lower skill caps), but they will be effective with
them.
For Elemental Planes, they have the only access spells. Without a
Mage, you cannot get there.
Items they summon will stay on them even when they log off the game.
Items summoned and given to others will disappear as normal. Items
they summon will immediately disappear from their own corpses. Items
will not disappear from the corpses of others.
Mages should have summoning spells for bringing others to them
(Apportation). This could be done in-game in any of several methods.
Example 1 - Mage creates a token, gives token to person. Person later
clicks on token, mage gets targetted at that person. (Token would
have to stay with person if they die, not with their corpse. Code for
this exists, viz. the keys in Kunark.) Example 2 - Mage has keyboard
command /target <whoever>. This one is, obviously, more abusable.
3.4.06 Monk
HtH Damage, self-control.
No naked character should be able to beat a naked monk.
Monks should be able to develop a range of self-only buffs, which
should be better than any Shaman buff of the same level.
Monks should be able to develop Insta-Heal (Mend), Regeneration,
Infravision, Ultravision, Feign Death, and various other
augmentations. Any internal advantage that other races have, Monks
should eventually be able to develop. They should be able to punch,
kick, slam, stun... They should be able to gradually increase their
non-penalty weight limit. An example might be one more pound of
weight for every 2 levels gained. However, every pound over their
weight limit should cost them (level/5) Agility. So a L50 Monk who's
10 lb overweight will lose 100 Agility.
3.4.07 Necromancer
Despite common belief, he is another variety of Cleric. In his case,
he is dedicated to a God of Death, Disease, or Decay (generally
Bertoxxulous).
3.4.08 Paladin
Part Cleric, part Warrior, they are the martial arm of their Church.
Like Clerics, they gain their magical powers from a God. And, like
Clerics, they must maintain good Faction with their God.
A Paladin who drops to Neutral Faction with his God loses all of his
Mana. A Paladin who drops to Bad Faction with his God can never after
raise Faction with his God. He is permanently at Bad Faction.
The most resistant to any magic. Properly equipped, should be
effectively immune to magical attack.
Immune to any form of Fear, short of a God.
Whenever they join a group with a Shadowknight, they should
immediately take a Faction hit with their own God. Check under Gods
for name colours. Paladins should always see active Shadowknights as
Black names. He should see "fallen" Shadowknights as whatever other
colour is appropriate.
It must be decided and stated straight up, before design work goes
very far. Are Paladins Mythic Paladins, exemplars of all that is
Good, or are they Historical Paladins, intolerant psychopaths who kill
anyone who their God disagrees with? Do Paladins hunt sentient
neutral NPCs and glory in their killing, or do they defend the weak
against the predations of the strong? If they are psychopaths, then
the Erudite Paladin Quest (to stop the bridge), the Ro Armour Quests,
and the killing of Frogloks for the Ghoulbane are all perfectly fine;
psychopaths will do anything for "the glory of God". If they are
Mythic (which I expect most people who played Paladins at the
beginning wanted), then all of the preceding are verboten, and the
game should penalize them for such actions.
Historical Paladins could be coded exactly as the game does now, with
little or no modification. Mythic Paladins would require a lot of
work. First, the game would need to be able to penalize them for
inappropriate action(s). Faction would play a large part in this, but
would have to be closer to ubiquitous than it is now. Second, they
would need to be far more powerful at high levels than they are
currently, more powerful even than Warriors. This would be offset by
Third, there would need to be severe penalties associated with
inappropriate action. Example: A Paladin who falls to Bad Faction
with his God is permanently disgraced. He loses all of his
spell-casting ability (well, actually he still has the spells; he just
has no mana, ever, to cast them with). He's KOS with all NPCs who
worship his God. He's Dubious at best with all NPCs who worship any
other Good God. A Paladin who' fails this badly should, properly, be
in a worse position than even a Necro, and he should have NO method of
getting out of it.
Paladins will have lower caps than Warriors, but will have a few
Paladin-only weapons which will make up for this deficit.
(For Warriors who complain that Paladins are encroaching on their
territory, consider this: Ideally, for every 100 high-level Warriors,
there should be only 1 or 2 high-level Paladins. Paladins will be
more restricted in the armour they wear, the weapons they wield, the
other equipment they may use, and the actions they may take. And if
they misbehave too much, taking the easy ways to get XPs and treasure,
they'll be worse off than a Ranger dumped naked on the Plane of Hate.)
3.4.09 Ranger
They are mostly Warriors, but with a little bit of Druid mixed in.
They are specialists of hunting, tracking, and personal travel.
Should gain a permanent SoW-like ability which gains in speed as they
rise in levels. Isn't cast on anyone; rather, it simply improves as
per combat abilities. By level 10, they should be moving at SoW
speed. By Level 30, they should be moving at SoC speed.
3.4.10 Rogue
Sneaking / Hiding / Stealth
If the following had been implemented, then Rogues would have had
several more skills to look forward to as they rose in levels.
Level 3 - Hide from People (Humans, Goblins, Dwarves, Elves, etc.,
because people are the easiest to fool.)
Level 6 - Hide from Animals
Level 9 - Hide from Monsters (Gnolls, Trolls, Ogres, Minotaurs, Evil
Eyes, Griffins, etc.)
Level 12 - Hide from Undead
Level 15 - Hide from Magic (Invisibility, Tracking, etc.)
All would be activated by the "Hide" command. For improvements, each
time a random selection would be made from the learned (and currently
allowable) "Hides". Then, the normal roll would be made to check for
skill improvement against the selected skill. Odds of selection might
be something like:
People 5 chances
Animals 4 chances
Monsters 3 chances
Undead 2 chances
Magic 1 chance
Entries would temporarily be removed from the checklist whenever they
hit their skill cap or were equal to the skill below them. Thus if you
had, for example, People 65 (maxxed), Animals 31, Monsters 31, and
Undead 17, then a selection would be made from Animals (4 chances) and
Undead (2 chances).
Each individual skill would go up slower, but with up to 5 skills
showing improvement, there would be a feeling of making better
progress.
Each time a Hide check was made, the single roll would be checked
against all of the skills, top down. Thus, a success with the above
set might report "You have successfully hidden yourself from Animals"
or "You have successfully hidden yourself from the Undead". The Rogue
would have to remember, of course, that hiding from Animals *doesn't*
hide from Griffons or Bouncers.
3.4.11 Shaman
Part Cleric, part Mage, they are the primitive "ancestor" of both.
They provide both combat and magical skills for their tribe. Their
primary abilities revolve around improving their friends and reducing
their enemies. They are the closest thing in the game to a Warrior /
Mage / Cleric.
As per other Clerics, they must have a God. However, their ties are
much looser with their God. They drop to half Mana only when they hit
Bad Faction with their God. They drop to no Mana if they become
Perma-Bad, at which point it's time to find a new God.
Best spells for increasing characters' abilities.
Best spells for decreasing mobs' abilities.
3.4.12 Shadowknight
Like their antithesis, the Paladin, they are a meld of two classes.
In this case, Warrior and Necromancer.
A Shadowknight who drops to Neutral Faction with his God loses all of
his Mana. A Shadowknight who drops to Bad Faction with his God can
never after raise Faction with his God. He is permanently at Bad
Faction.
Whenever they group with a Paladin, they should immediately take a
Faction hit with their own God. Check under Gods for name colours.
Shadowknights should always see active Paladins as Black names. He
should see "fallen" Paladins as whatever other colour is appropriate.
As per the Paladin, they are immune to almost all Fear.
They should never be quite as powerful as Paladins. Not because they
aren't as "good" a class to play, but rather because they'll be
operating under fewer restrictions. A Paladin will only be able to
advance by hunting Evil. A Shadowknight will be able to advance by
hunting Good or Neutral.
Shadowknights will have lower caps than Warriors, but will have a few
specific weapons which will make up for this.
3.4.13 Warrior
Weaponmaster
3.4.14 Wizard
Wizards lose their Teleportation abilities. They're being divvied up
between Clerics and Mages.
Wizards gain Damage Shields. They create the most powerful damage
shields, based on Fire, Cold, Electricity.
Wizards have the most powerful DD spells, both single-target and AoE.
4.0 ENVIRONMENT
4.1 Weather
Have real seasons. It'd be nice to see snowfall in winter in most
(non-tropical) zones, even if it doesn't stick to the ground. It'd be
even nicer to have no rain in desert zones. Have tropical /
subtropical rainforest zones that have rain every single day during
spring and part of summer.
Wouldn't it be nice if there were environmental effects? Winter, snow
coming down, and your combat speed is slowed 25% due to the cold, but
the grizzly you're fighting isn't! All of a sudden, Endure Cold would
have a whole new usefulness. It's a nice, sunny day in North Ro, the
sun's beating down, and your Stamina's going down like a falling rock.
Be real nice to have Endure Heat about then, wouldn't it? Can you say
Ring of Warmth or Ring of Coolth? I knew you could.
Weather. We have rain. We have not-rain. Wouldn't it be nice if we
also had snow (for winter, above), fog, high winds, and other
less-pleasant weather? Fog would provide near-zero visibility to
everybody (like the Karanas, raining at night). High winds would
provide noise, and thus hide the approach of certain creatures, and
would provide a penalty for archery and throwing. Hail, maybe, that
would do actual damage to all creatures (PC and MOB) not under cover
(in a tunnel, or in a building). Sandstorms in the desert, with
reduced visibility and damage to all non-undead, non-insectile
creatures.
4.2 Changing
Make parts of the landscape change with the weather. Suppose the tops
of the hills were to be changeable tiles. When it snows in winter,
they change to a white snow pattern for a few days (or weeks). Put
two layers of surface on lower areas and in ravines and such. When
enough rain's fallen, they change over to suddenly be water areas
(rivers, streams, ponds). Change the pass down through E Karana such
that, when it's rained for a while, it all becomes slippery, like the
invisible water area in Lower Guk. (Imagine the pure panic the first
time someone with SoW slides off the ledge!) Make a real good reason
to travel at walking speed sometimes.
Dry out Innothule Swamp during late summer, then refill it with 2
weeks of steady rain, day and night.
Have trees fall down every so often, leaving a log lying on the
ground. Have the logs gradually (over a period of, say, a real-time
month) sink into the ground. Have a new tree (maybe of a different
type) start up where the old tree was, and grow to full size in a
couple of game-time years. This would require modification to how you
store zone information, so that changes like this can be patched in
quickly once or twice a week. Once in a long while, you could have a
combination of rain and high winds, followed by many trees having
fallen in an outdoor zone.
5.0 EQUIPMENT
5.1 General
Straighten out the armours. Find out the correct sequence of armour
quality, and the correct sequence of metals, and use them. Iron is
better than Bronze. Bronze is better than copper. Steel's better
than all of them.
We have high-power Magic Swords such as the Fiery Avenger. But swords
are a human / elven thing. Where are the equally-powerful Magic Axes
or Hammers for dwarves? Where are the high-powered Magic Whips for
dark elves? What about the deadly Magic Bows or Slings for halflings?
How about the special short swords for gnomes, or the really powerful
clubs for ogres?
Don't provide magic weapons and armour early in the game. Magical
equipment should be important.
Someone gave a real good idea a while back. Instead of putting level
limits on weapons (you can't use the Uber-Weasel-Smasher until Level
20), give a penalty for using them early. Suggestion was something on
the order of -5 per level short. So, if someone twinks the weapon
down to a Level 5 Fighter, he'd be using it at a -75 penalty. Sure,
people will still be twinking, but it'll really cut down on the
effectiveness of equipment. Weapons that give a -5 cumulative penalty
to attack, armour that gives a -5 cumulative penalty to defence
(wouldn't *that* hurt!), spellcasting items that give -5 cumulative to
the success of casting their spells...
5.2 Armour - Non-Magical
All forms of non-magical armour should give penalties to AGI and / or
DEX. The better the armour (within a type), the less the penalties,
but the penalties should always be there. With magic armours, then
you can start considering no penalties or even bonuses. Examples:
Chainmail isn't form fitting, so it should penalise Agility. Plate is
form fitting, but heavy. It should penalise Dexterity. Banded should
penalise both. Leather should give slight penalties. Studded should
give higher penalties. Reinforced should give highest penalties.
Even cloth and silk should give slight penalties to Agility (silk less
than cloth).
All forms of non-magical metal armour should give penalties to save
against Electricity, Heat, and Cold.
5.3 Armour - Magical
By using a combination of metals and magic, you can wind up with a
vast variety of armours, without a lot of work. Example: Copper /
Bronze / Iron / Steel / Mithril Bracers. Magical Copper Bracers that
give no penalty to Dex. Magical Bronze Bracers that give no penalty
to Dex and no penalty to save versus Electricity.
Investigate the possibility of putting the bonuses / penalties of
various armours directly on the armour, rather than in a database.
Give them, say, 4 spots to hold data bits (type flag and magnitude, 1
byte each). When non-specific magic armour is generated as loot,
semi-randomly assign the benefits. This time, I loot a Copper Bracer
with +1 against Fire and Cold. Next time, a Copper Bracer with -2 on
it's weight. Both are identified as "Magical Copper Bracer", but I
might prefer the low weight to the save bonuses. This provides a much
wider range of looted items to trade.
5.4 Weapons - Non-Magical
Nets! We want Nets!
5.5 Weapons - Magical
This is an excerpt from my article on Quest Weapons (00/4/14). I've
removed the "usage" story and just kept the working notations.
Quite a while ago, I suggested the idea of Signature Weapons, weapons
that became associated with the wielder, and gained power thereby.
Later on, someone improved on that idea, suggesting weapons that could
be improved via Quests. Now, I've taken his idea and run amok with it.
(Tale showing how it works snipped. We're starting with a rusty axe,
then improving it to tarnished, then to Axe. Choice now is Balancing
or Enchanting.)
Once an axe has been Balanced, 8 more steps can be performed on it.
These will provide it with it's unique character. Note that the 6'th
step renders it No-Drop. Up to that point, the axe can be sold to
anyone. That person can then further customise it as desired.
Once an axe has been Enchanted, the next step is to either make it a
Defender or to follow one of the Offensive branches (Fire, Cold, Life,
Disease, Poison). Choosing the branch applies the first bonus. From
that point, 7 more steps can be performed on it. The 5'th step will
render it No-Drop. Again, until the 5'th step has been performed, the
axe can be sold to anyone, who can then do further customisation as
desired.
The Damage Shield procced by a Defender would be appropriate either to
the first Resistance applied to it, or to whichever Resistance is
highest. Actually, I tossed the Damage Shield in just because I
thought it would be appropriate for a Defender.
One of the things noted above was the idea that you actually have to
use the silly thing. So, one of the following could be implemented: 1)
Improvements can only be made at certain levels (I don't like this
choice). 2) The weapon has a counter that gets cleared when the user's
gone up 2 levels (less annoying). 3) The weapon has a counter. When
it's done damage (Level*2) times, or when it's Procced that many
times, or whatever, then it can get another enchantment done to it,
and the counter gets reset.
The expectation is that an axe can be completed, i.e., have it's final
enchantments emplaced, by Level 20 or so. An alternative would be to
allow 2 or 3 more levels (10-11 for Balanced, 9-10 for Enchanted), and
expect them to be finished by Level 30. We *do not* want them to have
many more than these counts of improvements. Why? Because then more
people would be "topping off" multiple improvement columns, and the
weapons would become more and more similar, instead of having a wide
variety of finished products. For example, if we had 16 improvements
available for Balanced Axes, then everybody could pick Max Damage
*and* Minimum Speed (Eesh! a 20/15 weapon!). However, with only 8 or
10 improvements, everyone would have to decide what trade-off to make.
More Damage, less Speed? More Speed, less Damage? A bit of each, with
some Offense thrown in? You get the picture.
Obviously, something similar could be done with all of the other
weapons in the game. The table below could be used as-is for all 1HS
and 1HB weapons. A reduced table might be wanted for weapons such as
Daggers. An upgraded table for 2HS and 2HB weapons.
The same idea could, of course, be applied to shields and armour.
Personally, I'd suggest doing it for Breastplates only. Otherwise, too
many customiseable options out there.
An important thing - ALL weapons customised in this fashion must be
used *only* in the Primary Hand. We definitely wouldn't want someone
to be able to use 2 of these at once.
The Options:
Rusty Axe, 3/44 Common drop off everything.
Sharpening Tarnished Axe, 4/42
Tarnished Axe, 4/42
Polishing Axe, 4/40
Axe, 4/40
Balancing Balanced Axe, 4/38
Enchanting Magic Axe, 6/40
Balanced Axe, 4/38 6'th improvement (of 8) becomes No-Drop
Damage 6/8/10/12/14/16/18/20
Speed 36/33/30/27/24/21/18/15
Offence Skill 5/10/15/20/25/30/35/40
Defence Skill 5/8/11/14/17/20/25/30
Magic Axe, 6/40
Fire 5-point DD
Cold 5-point DD
Life-Tap 3-point Tap
Disease 5-point DD
Poison 5-point DD
Defender +5 to one of Magic, Fire, Cold, Disease, Poison
Fire 5'th improvement (of 7) becomes No-Drop
Speed 38/36/34/32/30/28/26
Damage 8/10/12/14/16/18/20
DD 10/25/50/100/150/200/250
Damage Shield 2/4/8/12/16/20/24
Cold 5'th improvement (of 7) becomes No-Drop
Speed 38/36/34/32/30/28/26
Damage 8/10/12/14/16/18/20
DD 10/25/50/100/150/200/250
Damage Shield 2/4/8/12/16/20/24
Life-Tap 5'th improvement (of 7) becomes No-Drop
Speed 38/36/34/32/30/28/26
Damage 8/10/12/14/16/18/20
Life-Tap 5/15/25/50/75/100/125
Regeneration 2/5/10/15/20/25/30
Disease 5'th improvement (of 7) becomes No-Drop
Speed 38/36/34/32/30/28/26
Damage 8/10/12/14/16/18/20
DD 10/25/50/75/100/125/150
DoT 5/10/15/20/25/50/75
Poison 5'th improvement (of 7) becomes No-Drop
Speed 38/36/34/32/30/28/26
Damage 8/10/12/14/16/18/20
DD 10/25/50/75/100/125/150
DoT 5/10/15/20/25/50/75
Defender 5'th improvement (of 7) becomes No-Drop
Speed 38/36/34/32/30/28/26
Damage 8/10/12/14/16/18/20
Resistances (5)/10/15/20/25/30/35/40
Damage Shield 3/5/10/20/30/40/50
Someone in the newsgroup later suggested Class- or God-specific
modifications also being available. Such things as Clerics being able
to add bonuses versus Undead, or Paladins being able to add bonuses
versus extra-planar creatures, and so on and so forth.
Other possibilities (which can only be implemented once the weapon
becomes No-Drop, and thus unsalable) might be such things as low-level
AoE DoTs or DDs, or, in the case of the Defenders, AoE Resistance
bonuses to your other group members when they're close by.
6.0 ECONOMY
Change coinage to copper / bronze / silver / gold. Ditch Platinum.
There MUST be some sort of sink for equipment. With no system whereby
equipment gradually leaves the game, things will always accumulate.
And this is bad if you want to promote your economy.
All non-magical (and most magical) items, especially clothing, armour,
and weapons, must wear out. If they don't, then eventually there will
be a glut of these items on the market, and the associated trade
skills become worthless. This is obvious on older servers. Without a
sink for the items coming into the game, things accumulate.
7.0 LOOT
All creatures drop loot, all the time. No matter how puny, some
reward is better than no reward.
Animals (lions, spiders, snakes, bears, 'gators...) always drop
relevant loot (silk, pelts and / or meat).
If a creature shows an item, it drops that item. Always. If I'm
fighting a Froglok and the thing looks to be wearing chainmail, then
it always drops some item of chainmail. It doesn't matter how crappy
it is; it's always there. Let it be Rusty Chainmail, heavy as hell,
and only worth about 1GP per AC if you must, but it should be there.
8.0 COMBAT
Why do monsters simply "blip" to face the other way? Is it really so
hard to put in a "turn around" algorithm? Why was Meridian 59 able to
do it, and EQ isn't?
8.1 Monster AI
One of the big push points used to be the intelligence of the
monster's AI. It sure doesn't look like it from this side of the
game; the monsters are as thick as bricks. Wouldn't it be nice if the
monsters, especially the smarter ones, used (at least semi-)
intelligent tactics? Insects would attack whatever's hurt them the
most so far. Lions and wolves would tend to gang up on the smallest
(ergo weakest) target first. Evil Eyes would grab the nearest fighter
and send them after the enemy casters. Orcs would do exactly what PCs
do; pick one target (usually a Caster), and everybody pigpile on him
until he's dead, then switch to another target. Wouldn't it be
interesting if two monsters on one target would gradually move away
from each other, such that they wind up on opposite sides of the
character? (Except insects and snakes; they're not very bright.)
Everybody knows that monsters attack through walls and roofs. They
also, of course, walk through them. Why is this? Because the AI's
too stupid to accommodate a barrier, and PCs would 'cheat' by hiding
inside while blasting things outside. Okay, CHANGE IT. When the door
closes, PCs lose all locks on critters outside the building. The
creature, on the other hand, knows exactly where the PC is, and sticks
around for a few minutes, waiting for him to come back outside (except
insects, who forget as soon as they've finished healing and wander
off).
Wouldn't it be amusing if intelligent monsters recognized when
opponents were too fast to catch and, once the opponent was out of
range either sat down to rest and recuperate, or ran (repeat ran)
straight back to get help? Wouldn't it be fun if the outdoor guards
all had ranged weapons as well as their close-quarters weapons, and
while you're kiting Valon, he's popping 50-damage arrows into you?
9.0 QUESTS
9.1 General
A person should be able to advance with little or no fighting, simply
by doing Quests. One of the biggest arguments put up against this
idea was Brad saying that "people would then be advancing with little
or no combat skills". He's right. Guess what? It doesn't matter.
It's not YOUR character; it's MY character. If I want to advance my
character exclusively by Quests, and thereby have abysmal combat and
spell-casting skills, so what? I'm the one playing the character.
I'm the one who's gonna join a group and have them toss me out 5
minutes later because I can't hit the broad side of a mammoth, not
you.
Quests should either generate something valuable (the Stein of Moggok)
OR should generate decent XPs. Never both. But always one or the
other.
9.2 Quest Engine
Meridian 59 had a simple "quest" engine running. You could go to an
NPC and ask him if he had a job to do or if he knew of one. He'd tell
you a job he needed doing or that someone else had a job that needed
doing. You'd do the job, you'd get a reward. Simple and
straightforward. Something similar (ideally, more complex) should be
possible for EQ2.
It would be nice if more complex versions of the Mail Quests were to
be found all over Norrath, delivering items for all sorts of people.
10.0 TRADE SKILLS
The Trade Skills were apparently introduced into EQ as a role-playing
addendum; something to add flavour to a character. This was then
expanded somewhat as they were expected to be used in a "player
economy". Unfortunately, the skills weren't balanced in such a way as
to allow them all to contribute to one extent or another to said
economy. Most of the trades started out as pretty-much useless with
regards to an economy (Baking, Brewing, Make Poison, Alchemy, Pottery)
and some of those that were useful soon became less so as the servers
matured (Blacksmithing, Tailoring).
One of the biggest drawbacks to the trades in the game is that, except
for time and money invested, anybody can learn any trade (3
exceptions). When my Rogue started learning how to make Poisons, I
didn't even consider the possibility of finding a Potter to make my
vials; I simply started learning Pottery. When I decided I needed
Silk Armour for my Mage, I didn't waste time looking for a Tailor; I
simply went and bought a Large Sewing Kit and started making my own.
Why did I do it this way? Because despite the time and cost required
to learn the skills, it's still faster and cheaper to learn it myself
than to spend the time needed to find someone to do it for me. You
can never be certain that someone else is around who can make the
thing(s) you need, is free to make them, and is willing to make them.
You can be sure that you are available to do so
To really allow trades to have an RPG impact in the game, some changes
need to be made.
1) Trades must not be generally available to anyone with the money and
time to learn them. There must be trade-offs. The trade-offs can be
most easily accomplished by limiting the number of trades which a
person can learn. Thus, learning any one trade means the person won't
be able to learn some other trade. The limitation won't be placed by
the game (you learned Blacksmith, so you can't learn Pottery), but
rather by the simple fact that nobody can learn everything in depth.
2) There must be more trades. By having more trades, there can be a
wider diversity amongst the players who are engaging in trades.
3) The trades should be 'treed'. By this I mean that some trades will
require you to learn some other trade first. This seems contradictory
compared to "have more trades", but it isn't. What it does is provide
"knowledge" costs for more valuable (specialized) skills. It also
will delay a character's advancement in certain trades. For example,
if you have to learn Herbalism to, say, Very Good before you can even
start in Poison, then it's very unlikely that a L1 character will be
making Poisons. By using a tree structure, we avoid trying to put in
level limits on trades, which is a more intrusive method of slowing
the arrival of a given trade.
One of the nice things about using the tree structure is that it's
flexible. For example, learning Molding requires learning Pottery to
Average, while learning Glassmaking requires it to Master. Once the
Potter hits Average in his skill, then his Guildmaster will offer him
Molding as a new trade that he can take up. But he won't be offered
Glassmaking until his Pottery skill hits Master. Similarly,
Blacksmith at Average will open up Armourer. But Weaponsmith won't be
available until Blacksmith hits Very Good.
4) The trades should be much more interrelated. Ideally, each trade
should call upon products from at least 2 other trades.
Due to the above, it's impossible for a single character to be able to
make all of what he needs to advance in a trade. So, what does he do
if nobody's around to make some of the items he requires? Simple. An
alternate source of finished products must be made available for those
times when the PC tradesmen are not available. You have finally
started doing this with Poison. Rogues now have 3 choices. 1) Buy
vials from vendors. 2) Find a Potter to make them. 3) Learn Pottery
themselves.
Trades should not be class- or race-specific. Rogues should not be
the only ones able to learn Make Poison. Shamans should not be the
only ones able to make potions. Yes, Rogues, Shamans, and Gnomes
should get advantages in their respective trades, but the trades
should be accessible to all.
Suppose a character gets 5 trade points. With them, he can start 5
trades. So, he might start with Blacksmith and Pottery. After a
while, he'll pick up Glassmaking (ignoring Molding entirely). A while
later he starts Cooking. And finally, he goes into Weaponsmithing.
This also allows a new type of treasure to be found / quested for:
tokens that allow you to start another trade, giving you 6 or maybe 7
trades which you can follow.
10.1 Trade skills as trees:
Blacksmith - creation of skewers, studs, metal bits, sheet metal,
metal boxes (saleable containers), metal bands (for wooden boxes) and
similar. Does not allow creation of armour or weapons. Does allow
creation of field points for arrows.
Armourer (Blacksmith) - creation of armour, both normal and magical.
Resizing of armour.
Plate - Dwarves get a bonus, elves get a penalty.
Chainmail - Dwarves get a penalty, elves get a bonus.
Weaponsmith (Blacksmith) - creation of weapons, both normal and
magical. Creation of hooked and barbed arrowheads.
Axes - Dwarves get a bonus
Swords - Humans get a bonus
Daggers - Halflings get a bonus.
Hammers/Maces - Ogres get a bonus.
Tinkering (Blacksmith) - creation of mechanical gadgets.
Herbalism - creation of simple potions that give minimal bonuses to
various stats and resistances.
Poisons (Herbalism) - creation of poisons for weapons.
Alchemy (Herbalism) - creation of more complex potions. Requires a
component created by Shamans. This component can be purchased from
vendors at a much higher price.
Cooking - creation of provisions that are lighter than and
longer-lasting than vendor-bought provisions. Creation of provisions
from raw materials found in the wild.
Brewing - creation of simple alcoholic drinks. Drinkable, yes, but
also used as ingredients in cooking, herbalism, and tailoring.
Distilling (Brewing) - creation of complex alcoholic drinks. Again
drinkable, but also used as ingredients in cooking, poisons, and
alchemy.
Tailoring
Pottery - creation of simple clay-based items (bowls, jars, icons).
Glassmaking (Pottery) - creation of glass items (bottles, vials,
lenses for lanterns).
Molding (Pottery) - creation of molds for smithing (file, skewer,
various types of jewellery).
Fletching - creation of arrows of various sorts.
Bowyering (Fletching) - creation of bows.
Carpenter - creation of simple wooden weapons from (possibly foraged)
wood. Creation of seasoned shafts and bowstaves.
Cooper (Carpenter) - creation of kegs, barrels, and other fluid
containers.
Boxer (Carpenter) - creation of small and large wooden boxes.
Coppersmith - creation of items using copper and bronze. Items such
as small boxes, bowls, and other containers. Also the cheapest of the
magical jewellery.
Whitesmith (Coppersmith) - creation of items using silver and
electrum.
Goldsmith (Whitesmith) - creation of items using gold and Mithril.
10.2 The Trade Tree
Trade tree, with the other trades that they draw upon. (Remember, the
supplies can be gained from Vendors at a high price, or from other PCs
(via the trades they've learned) at a lower price.)
Blacksmith (Molding)
Armourer (Molding)
Weaponsmith (Molding)
Tinkering
Herbalism (Brewing)
Poisons (Distilling)
Alchemy (Distilling)
Cooking (Brewing, Distilling, Pottery, Blacksmith)
Brewing (Cooper)
Distilling (Glassmaking)
Tailoring (Brewing)
Pottery
Glassmaking
Molding
Fletching (Blacksmith, Weaponsmith, Carpentry)
Bowyering (Carpentry)
Carpentry
Cooper (Blacksmithing)
Boxer (Blacksmithing)
Coppersmith (Molding)
Whitesmith (Molding)
Goldsmith (Molding)
Thus, an Enchanter who wanted to be totally self-sufficient could
(barely) do it. He'd be putting all of his skills into Pottery,
Molding, Coppersmith, Whitesmith, and Goldsmith.
On the other hand, a Rogue couldn't be totally self-sufficient. He
needs to learn Pottery, Glassmaking, Herbalism, Poisons, Brewing, and
Distilling. One too many. However, if there's a questable token for
a 6'th skill...
10.3 Experience for Trades
It would be a good thing if simply doing a successful (non-trivial)
Trade Skill action would give a small percentage increase in my XPs.
Note some important terms there. 1) Successful. I wouldn't get any
XPs for failures. 2) Percentage, not flat value. I would get a
percentage increase, not, say, a flat 5 XPs. 3) Small. I'm thinking
on the order of 0.1 %. Thus, in order to get from Level 1 to Level 2
(or Level 35 to Level 36), I'd have to successfully make 1,000 sets of
5 arrows. And not trivial sets. This would have to be non-trivial,
i.e., lose a bunch in the process. But I'd be able to go all the way
to Level 50 without fighting, and cheaply, I hear you scream. So
what? I'll also be totally useless in a fight. And in order to get
there, I'd have to succeed at making 49,000 sets of arrows. What the
hell am I supposed to do with 245,000 arrows? Build a house? Or
98,000 Fish Fillets? Shingle it?
Tukka Yoot
> 1.0 FACTION
>
> Factions are a good idea, and allow for a fair amount of variation in
> how PCs get along in the world. Alas, there are certain things that
> really need to be cleaned up in them. Specifically, some new, more
> general Factions need to be added.
I'm not a big fan of EverQuest's faction system all that much. I
think that the way an NPC treats you should be based on the most
superficial and outwardly noticeable things, unless you have done A LOT
to build a reptuation for yourself.
Clothes/armor/weapons should have "character" attached to them. A
character who walks into town wielding a wicked-looking scythe, in a
black robe covered with red necromantic runes, a necklace fashioned out
of elf finger bones, and wearing a bracelet with a symbol of Cazic-Thule
on it should be treated with great apprehension in most "good" aligned
towns.
I don't think that NPCs should automatically know your god or your
class just from looking at you, unless thing in your equipment makes it
blatantly obvious (like the Cazic-Thule symbol.) The exception might be
some cleric/paladin-type NPCs who could sense your "aura." You outline
an idea for deity alignment later on in your post... I think it makes
sense that devout followers of certain gods should be able to sense your
alignment with their god.
I think that "building faction" should be pretty much unnecessary, and
faction hits should be very minimal and very local in nature, unless you
do something really heroic or villainous (such as murdering several
innocent towns people in broad daylight with many witnesses about, or
killing a dragon which plagues the nearby countryside with periodic
sheep and maiden-eating binges.) Your exploits in the deepest dungeons
of Norrath, or in the most sparsely populated plainlands should not be
etched into the minds of every NPC you encounter who might care that
you've killed a dozen gnolls. :)
I think that perhaps the ONLY way that faction should be adjusted is
through quests. I don't think that the rangers of Faydark's Champions
should know every detail about your last venture into Crushbone... but
if you come back with 60 orc scalps, then they should be suitably
impressed by your orc-hunting prowess.
I also think that faction hits should not be entirely permanent.
Faction should gradually fade back down to "base" levels if you don't do
anything to adjust your faction with a group over a long period of
time. Even the greatest deeds fade from memory eventually, especially
if greater deeds are done by others in the meantime.
> When you take a look at history, it's astounding how much time and
> effort people have put into placating their Gods. This is especially
> evident in the many polytheistic societies (Rome, Greece, and Egypt
> being 3 such examples). However, in EQ it's quite different. When
> starting your character, you pick your God (maybe), then some of the
> NPCs like or hate you, and that's it. This is a fantasy game; the
> Gods should be IMPORTANT. So let's try something else...
I pretty much agree here.
> 2.0 EXPERIENCE
>
> If it's willing to attack us, then we get XPs for killing it. I'm
> getting buried in Gorge Hounds right now. None of them give XPs, but
> they're willing to attack me again and again. This is not because I'm
> sitting down, either. They'll attack me anywhere, any time. And yet
> I get nothing for them. So again, if it's willing to attack me, then
> I should be getting the XPs for it.
Honestly, the greens attacking me don't bother me so much. I don't
think that just because gorge hounds attack you, you should get
experience, because then people would gorge hounds for easy experience.
However, if 3 or 4 gorge hounds go aggressive on you, and they are 5
levels below you, they still may make a pretty potent challenge. It
would be interesting if NPCs "grouped up," and you got some kind of
experience bonus for vanquishing the entire group. People might run
around trying to get a pack of gorge hounds to go aggro on them, but
it'd be a bit more of a challenge for that person to actually kill them
all.
> When we die, yes, we should lose XPs. We should not, however, lose
> the level we've worked so hard to gain. Record our level and keep us
> at that, even if our XPs drop. Yes, it means that if a person dies
> immediately after levelling, he'll have 0 XPs showing on his progress
> bar for (potentially) quite a while, but at least he won't have to
> worry about suddenly being stuck, unable to get to his corpse on a
> different plane. He'll still be able to improve his skills to their
> new caps, thereby making it a wee bit easier to get those missing XP's
> back.
>
> And don't let a person's XPs drop below 0 total; that's just petty.
I agree here. I don't see the point in making us lose a level. For
me, part of my joy of leveling up is dampered because I know if I die,
I'll lose the level. So instead of going out and testing my new skills
against a tougher mob, I stick with "safe" things until I get a bit of a
cushion. I wouldn't mind if we still lost experience and we had to make
it up before starting advancement to the next level... just don't make
me go backwards.
> Suppose instead of a continually-increasing amount, people always
> needed 1,000 XPs to get to their next level. Aggressive Green
> opponents would always give 10 XPs, Blues would give 20, Black 30,
> Yellow 40, and Red 50 (example numbers). These might be sub-divided
> such that very low Greens would give, say, 5, while very high Reds
> would give 100. It doesn't matter what level you are, killing 100 to
> 200 aggressive Green opponents would always get you your next level.
> Obviously these numbers could be modified by range of difference,
> whether or not you're in a group, what your class / race is, et
> cetera. It's not really necessary to use umpty-ump-million value
> numbers; they mean nothing. A 1-XP increase on someone who needs
> 57,000,000 for his next level is a bit ridiculous as far as
> micro-managing the numbers go. A simple, repetitive 1-1000 is more
> practical.
I agree with the concept of keeping the amount of experience needed to
level up fixed, and basing the amount of experience you get from kills
off of their relative level to you. I have seen this system used in
other games with success, and it doesn't necessarily even mean faster
advancement.
I don't really agree that really easy mobs should give experience
though.
> There should be clear and obvious differences between the races.
> Stats should mean something. There should be no contest between an
> Ogre Warrior and a Gnome Warrior of the same (reasonably low) level
> with the same equipment. The Ogre should stomp the Gnome flat 100 %
> of the time in straight-up combat. Yes, this is unfair and means most
> people will choose Ogres if they want to play Warriors. What of it?
> Provide incentives for small warriors. Maybe dungeons so small that
> Dwarves have to bend over, like Giant Ant warrens or some such. Maybe
> higher-level weapons that only Gnome Warriors can use. Maybe a
> defensive bonus for small combatants against all large (substantially
> larger than human) opponents.
I think all the races should be relatively balanced for all the
classes that that race can choose to me. Ogre warriors should not make
significantly better overall warriors than gnomes. You mentioned some
of the ways that being small can balance things out for the gnome. An
ogre wielding a 50 pound hammer should be able to do a lot more damage
than a gnome wielding a gnomishly proportioned "longsword," but the
gnome should be considerably more difficult to hit, thanks to size and
superior agility and reflexes. The gnome's superior intelligence and
more nimble nature should allow him to perform techniques and maneuvers
that the ogre can only dream of.
> 3.2 Hit Points
>
> Something that you've brought in from MUDs that really does make
> things harder is the concept that HP must increase by some substantial
> amount each level. As a result, monster HP must also expand to
> ridiculous limits, and weapons and spells must eventually be doing
> bizarre amounts of damage. D&D had it better in some ways. You start
> with a base amount, you gain decent amounts for a while, then you
> start getting only 1 or 2 HP per level thereafter. A maxxed-out L1
> Fighter in D&D had 14 HP. A maxxed-out L20 Fighter had 159 HP. (If
> such a thing existed) a maxxed-out L60 D&D Fighter would have had 279
> HP. Because of this, creatures could have reasonable HP totals and
> higher-level spells didn't need to produce hundreds of HP of damage.
> The most powerful creatures in the D&D world only had about 3 times as
> many HP as the most powerful characters.
I've never played D&D, but a problem I can imagine with NPCs and PCs
having smaller amounts of health is that fights end much more quickly,
and the fights can become A LOT more subject to chance. In one MUD I
played, Gemstone III, the combat system was heavily centered around
"death crits"--you could instantly kill most mobs with a sufficiently
powerful blow to a mob's vital organ and kill it instantly, regardless
of how much HP it had left. Players could be killed the same way. In
this MUD, one of the most frequent complaints players had at higher
levels was the fact that fights ended almost instantly... it is "kill or
be killed--NOW." If mobs and players can me killed in a matter of
seconds, with only a few casts and hits being exchanged, a bit
opportunity for actual gameplay is eliminated. At first I thought the
massive HP digits in EQ were very cheesy and lame, but I have to say
that I think they're a necessary evil, unless somebody comes up with an
incredibly ingenious and balanced combat system. In D&D, the GM can
always fudge a roll if they think a fight ends too quickly. Online
MMORPGs have be balanced and fun in the majority of situations without a
GM babysitter
> 3.3 Perma-Death
I personally don't see the need for perma-death. Either it should be
so unlikely to happen or so easy to avoid that it never happens, or it
shouldn't be in the game, because people get very attached to their
players, and losing your character is the worst thing that can happen in
a game. And if you're going to make it very easy to avoid, or very
unlikely to happen, what's the point in adding it in the first place?
> 3.4 Classes
>
> 3.4.01 Bard
>
> Group buffs / debuffs. State-of-mind buffs.
>
> Bards work by song. They buff / debuff by means of them. Their songs
> affect things that are governed by your state of mind. Attack speed,
> mana regen, movement speed... Morale. Fear immunity. Charm / Charm
> immunity.
Sounds about right. I would though that it would be neat to actually
be able to hear the song a bard is player if you're in range. I also
thing that bards should be able to harmonize their melodies in different
combinations to produce more special beneficial effects than if the bard
were just singing/playing alone.
I pretty much agree here.
> 3.4.03 Druid
>
> Dedicated followers of Gods of Nature, they follow the same rules as
> other Clerics. The only difference is that they are much more closely
> tied to the natural environment.
>
> Nature-based buffs / debuffs / DoTs.
>
> All animals (non-monster) view indifferently. Animals will not aid a
> Druid who's attacking another animal, but will aid one who's fighting
> a monster. If the Druid is attacking a Gnoll, for example, and a
> couple of wolves wander by, the wolves will attack the Gnoll.
>
> Druids will be the only ones with teleportation spells for moving
> around Norrath.
>
> Druids can Charm animals and non-sentient monsters. When the charm
> wears off the animal, it promptly runs away. When the charm wears off
> the monster, it promptly attacks the Druid.
I think druids should have a bit more of a "caster" feel to them than
they do in this version of EQ. They ought to be staff-carrying robe
wearers, similar to the intelligence casters.
I don't really see why they need to be the only class with teleports
though.
> 3.4.04 Enchanter
>
> Enchantments. Mind control. Illusions covering themselves and
> others.
>
> Enchanters should have illusion spells for all occasions, and spells
> both for individual and group use. For example, Minor Illusion:
> Target, which will turn the Enchanter into whatever he's targetting.
> Later on, he'd get a group version of this. Target a Fire Imp, hit
> Major Illusion: Target, and everybody in the group turns into a Fire
> Imp until they Zone or one game day elapses. Characters will not get
> any special abilities (fire attacks or whatever) of whatever they
> become, but will get Indifferent Faction (before any other mods) with
> other creatures of that type. It might be that they gain vision and
> breathing abilities. (Imagine the usefulness of an Enchanter in
> Kedge, if he can turn everybody into a fish! Imagine the annoyance if
> he turns everyone into sharks, and then nobody can get out of the
> water to get to a Zone line.)
>
> Fun with newbies: Go to Everfrost, target an Ice Giant, and turn your
> entire group into Ice Giants. Then go running around. Be sure to
> stay well away from the guards. Also remember that you won't be able
> to fit into the entrance to Halas or Blackburrow, if the guards are
> beating on you.
>
> Fun with everybody: Turn everybody in your group into Vox. Now, pick
> a dragon, any dragon.
Heh. :) I can't wait for my necromancer to hit the very high levels,
and get that Thulian Emissary spell. :) Me and my spectre are gonna put
quite a spook into those croc-hunters in Oasis!
> 3.4.05 Magician
>
> They stay as the masters of summoning and dismissal, but more so.
>
> They lose all of their Damage Shields and their DD spells.
>
> They gain the ability to use any item they can summon. Thus, they can
> use most weapons, including swords and bows. They'll never be as good
> as any melee type (lower skill caps), but they will be effective with
> them.
>
> For Elemental Planes, they have the only access spells. Without a
> Mage, you cannot get there.
>
> Items they summon will stay on them even when they log off the game.
> Items summoned and given to others will disappear as normal. Items
> they summon will immediately disappear from their own corpses. Items
> will not disappear from the corpses of others.
>
> Mages should have summoning spells for bringing others to them
> (Apportation). This could be done in-game in any of several methods.
> Example 1 - Mage creates a token, gives token to person. Person later
> clicks on token, mage gets targetted at that person. (Token would
> have to stay with person if they die, not with their corpse. Code for
> this exists, viz. the keys in Kunark.) Example 2 - Mage has keyboard
> command /target <whoever>. This one is, obviously, more abusable.
I like these ideas for the most part. I kind of think that mages
should be one of the ONLY pet classes. Change them from "Magicians" to
"Summoners." Allow them to summon a greater diversity of pets. Sort of
like the summoners in the Final Fantasy games. Let us summon demons,
spirits, golems, elementals, undead, ect. Make the pets powerful but
perhaps a bit less unpredictable and uncontrollable... especially the
more "evil" type pets like demons and undead, who may have a mind of
their own.
> 3.4.06 Monk
>
> HtH Damage, self-control.
>
> No naked character should be able to beat a naked monk.
>
> Monks should be able to develop a range of self-only buffs, which
> should be better than any Shaman buff of the same level.
>
> Monks should be able to develop Insta-Heal (Mend), Regeneration,
> Infravision, Ultravision, Feign Death, and various other
> augmentations. Any internal advantage that other races have, Monks
> should eventually be able to develop. They should be able to punch,
> kick, slam, stun... They should be able to gradually increase their
> non-penalty weight limit. An example might be one more pound of
> weight for every 2 levels gained. However, every pound over their
> weight limit should cost them (level/5) Agility. So a L50 Monk who's
> 10 lb overweight will lose 100 Agility.
I agree.
> 3.4.07 Necromancer
>
> Despite common belief, he is another variety of Cleric. In his case,
> he is dedicated to a God of Death, Disease, or Decay (generally
> Bertoxxulous).
Exactly. Don't really think we need a "necromancer" class. "Dark
summoner" or "Dark cleric" pretty much cover most elements of
necromancy.
I kind of agree, but I think there is room in the game for both mythic
and psycopathic paladins. Paladins of Quellious would be a bit more
even, fair and righteous than followers of a god such as Prexus, whose
moods (if I recall correctly) can be just as violent as the storms that
cover his oceans. Gods can be petty, so can their followers, but some
gods are more petty than others.
> 3.4.09 Ranger
>
> They are mostly Warriors, but with a little bit of Druid mixed in.
> They are specialists of hunting, tracking, and personal travel.
>
> Should gain a permanent SoW-like ability which gains in speed as they
> rise in levels. Isn't cast on anyone; rather, it simply improves as
> per combat abilities. By level 10, they should be moving at SoW
> speed. By Level 30, they should be moving at SoC speed.
Rangers in current EQ are very much a hybrid class. They are
obviously a blend of druids and warriors (or rogues, to some extent.) I
think that rangers should have a bit more character of their own. In
EQ, I think some of the ranger-ish skills are underpowered... archery
being a prime example. I also think their stealth abilities should
approach that of a rogue's when outdoors. I don't really think they
have to get any healing spells or DDs. Just because a druid has it,
doesn't mean the ranger must. I think they should be very rugged when
it comes to facing the elements. They should be excellent
climbers/swimmers, and have much higher heat/cold resistences than they
do in the current EQ implementation.
Getting tired, going to skip through these next few classes. :)
> 4.0 ENVIRONMENT
>
> 4.1 Weather
>
> Have real seasons. It'd be nice to see snowfall in winter in most
> (non-tropical) zones, even if it doesn't stick to the ground. It'd be
> even nicer to have no rain in desert zones. Have tropical /
> subtropical rainforest zones that have rain every single day during
> spring and part of summer.
>
> Wouldn't it be nice if there were environmental effects? Winter, snow
> coming down, and your combat speed is slowed 25% due to the cold, but
> the grizzly you're fighting isn't! All of a sudden, Endure Cold would
> have a whole new usefulness. It's a nice, sunny day in North Ro, the
> sun's beating down, and your Stamina's going down like a falling rock.
> Be real nice to have Endure Heat about then, wouldn't it? Can you say
> Ring of Warmth or Ring of Coolth? I knew you could.
>
> Weather. We have rain. We have not-rain. Wouldn't it be nice if we
> also had snow (for winter, above), fog, high winds, and other
> less-pleasant weather? Fog would provide near-zero visibility to
> everybody (like the Karanas, raining at night). High winds would
> provide noise, and thus hide the approach of certain creatures, and
> would provide a penalty for archery and throwing. Hail, maybe, that
> would do actual damage to all creatures (PC and MOB) not under cover
> (in a tunnel, or in a building). Sandstorms in the desert, with
> reduced visibility and damage to all non-undead, non-insectile
> creatures.
I like these ideas. Would also like to see occassional (rare) events
featuring natural disasters. Earthquakes with aftershocks (not all that
serious unless you're on precarious footing somewhere high,) hurricanes,
tornados and volcanos.
Okay, ending the post here. :) Too tired.
Sandjumper Jones
--
Sandjumper Jones
Halfling Druid of the 42nd Circle
Resident of The Tribunal
--
"Ken Andrews" <gob...@degook.com> wrote in message
news:39b03346...@news.cadvision.com...
> The following are a whole bunch of miscellaneous ideas for changes for
> EQ2. As they are *miscellaneous*, some are contradictory. They are
> roughly grouped into sections. Have at 'em.
[snip]
Alx
skills based? This would simply require removing the 'level' factor
of a character from any consideration and base encounters, trades,
etc upon their relevant skills.
Also, why doesn't a warrior get stronger over time weilding weapons
and fighting all the time? Why doesn't a wizard who twiddles his
fingers get weaker (to a limit)? This can be applied to most or all
base stats. The more running you do, the better your stamina gets,
the more you make things with trades, the better your dexterity
gets, etc.
Also, forget about zones and zone lines. I doubt we'll be seeing
games in the future from Verant or anybody else using this world
building method in all but limited circumstances. This opens up
other problems with tactics and mob behaviour.
I'm curious about your and apparently Verant's view of Enchanters.
Aren't their illusions based upon altering others minds to perceive
them in a different manner? If this is the case, they don't actually
change into what they appear, they alter the perception of those
around them. They should not therefore inherit the abilities of what
they appear to be. Then again, perhaps they could gain the offensive
abilities, as they could make what they are attacking believe they
are really being hurt by what they believe you to be.
Regards to factions, I agree. Sounds very similar to some posts I
made a year ago, particularly regarding religion and the greater
impact it should have on the game and the actions of your character.
All up, you might want to read up on Horizons if you haven't already
done so. Although it's future is not certain and it is still a few
years away from release, it addresses many of these issues. They are
also actively seeking input from the public on many aspects of its
development.
Alex
--
Remove the Z if replying by email.
"Ken Andrews" <gob...@degook.com> wrote in message
news:39b03346...@news.cadvision.com...
Dark Tyger
[SNIP]
*Railguns Alx, then smacks him around for good measure*
TRIM THE FUCKING QUOTE, MORON! That was over A THOUSAND LINES. Bad
enough that the monster post was here in the first place, don't need
idiots quoting the whole thing for a short response.
--
Dark Tyger, railgun-toting, slightly eccentric kitty kat =^..^=
Change "Tyger" to "half" to email me.
"If I go crazy then will you still call me Superman?
If I'm alive and well, will you be there to hold in my hand?"
-Three Doors Down
Alx
I realised my mistake after I hit the button but thought
it further waste of bandwidth following up with an apology.
Seems some others don't mind soaking up a little bandwidth
however :)
And look I trimmed this one... oops, too much
Alex
--
Remove the Z if replying by email.
"Dark Tyger" <dark...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:39b500ec....@news.mindspring.com...
Dilettante
>The following are a whole bunch of miscellaneous ideas for changes for
>EQ2. As they are *miscellaneous*, some are contradictory. They are
>roughly grouped into sections. Have at 'em.
>
>(Something nice to read for the holiday.)
<An orchestra of knives, scissors, shears, swords and chain-saws hacking
the forests of text to the tune of snip>
It would be fair to assume it took you some time to compose that post.
Though such effort is much appreciated I do not wish to go through it
all, idea by miscellaneous idea. I'd rather address the overall issue of
how all these changes would affect players' play and view of the game.
Depth is all very well, but you must draw the line somewhere between
exhaustive detail and accessibility. Ask any non-RPGing gamer of his
views on RPGs and MUDs, and you'll usually get a response detesting
their endless numbers, anal detail, and a vague dislike of it's bearded
aficionados.
Everquest did well in attracting gamers who don't normally go in for
such goblin-bashing shenanigans, and I believe it is mostly due to the
fact that at first glance, it is not as daunting as other games where
hours are spent poring over charts and tables, statistics and
probabilities, and all the underlying concerns which you cheerily added
in your post. Alas for RPG cognosenti everywhere, the gaming hoi polloi
do not like arsing around.
Everquest takes great pains in giving players the impression that it is
a colourful, high-character jaunt through a fantasy world, and not a
maths exam. Reading each of your proposals, excepting 3.4.13, 5.4 and 8
you extrapolated the existing game implementation to such an extent that
in my opinion would put most players off right from the start.
Though now it would be fair to push me on exactly what I would change,
forgive me if I just say that Everquest needs to fundamentally change
how gratifying and rewarding it is and on every level. At the moment,
you are routinely shit on and given the run-around for very, very little
in return, 'social interaction' aside.
--
Dilettante "Fortune and glory"
Tim Smith
>TRIM THE FUCKING QUOTE, MORON! That was over A THOUSAND LINES. Bad
>enough that the monster post was here in the first place, don't need
>idiots quoting the whole thing for a short response.
>
>--
>Dark Tyger, railgun-toting, slightly eccentric kitty kat =^..^=
>Change "Tyger" to "half" to email me.
>
>"If I go crazy then will you still call me Superman?
> If I'm alive and well, will you be there to hold in my hand?"
>-Three Doors Down
OK, I can see being annoyed at the person who quoted the whole thing for
a short response, but what's your beef with the original post? "Bad
enought that the monster post was here in the first place" implies that
you think it should not have been here.
--Tim Smith