Training "Level"

[Jezz]

Dalvyn,

A little misinterpreted. Your point "D" was similar to what I meant but it kept the system as to who gets what skills and just requires one point to go from open to close.

[Alvirin]

If this system ever gets implemented cross-class skills should have a maximum level like adept or expert, otherwise eventually a character could GM all the skills in the game.

I don't see anything wrong in a priest putting effort into learning to hide, but he should assume that he will never would be as good as rogue at it.

(In D&D characters can buy cross-class skills but two characters of different classes with the same level, the one that is putting points into the class skill will have the upper hand against the other character who puts skill points into this skill that is cross-class skill for him)

Also this could mean that certain classes could be displaced since their unique skills (that made unique the class in itself) could stop being unique.

[Jaenoic]

Also this could mean that certain classes could be displaced since their unique skills (that made unique the class in itself) could stop being unique.

But it would make characters much more individual because now you could have three fighters, one is a swashbuckler type who can maybe hide and use roguish skills, but is a duelist and fighter at heart, another is the stereotypical brutish fighter who can hit hard and take hard hits so learns how to bash down doors and fully trains his various levels of attacks, and the third has an RP of being a wizard slayer so has skills in spellcraft and those sorts of things.

I wholeheartedly support such a system because it brings a whole separate level of uniqueness and depth to individual characters, and also is a step toward making our mud more D&D oriented.

Also, I don't see the potential of characters GMing all skills because you have only X amount of skill points and in theory could only learn and GM X amount of them because of the finite amount of skill points each level.

[Alvirin]

I'm up for the closest possible approximation to D&D skill point buy, but I wasn't speaking against it, I was speaking against the following system that could have a negative impact in the mud.

D) Characters can spend weapon/skill/spell points to move a weapon/miscellaneous/spell skill from Closed to Open. Only one point is required to open a "favoured" skill; two points are necessary to open an "unfavoured" skill. Skills that are Open can be trained (and then used).

Once you can use a unfavoured skill, with enough time you can GM it, it is just time. In the other hand if you had to spend skill points, you are redirecting a good amount of your skill points (since you need 2 skill points for an "unfavored skill") and so, you have to be really careful about where you put your points, specially with those classes that don't get a good amount of them, and so you can have your roguish fighter that can hide, but knowing that stepping in an area that isn't yours isn't cheap or easy.

As a side note, I would say that others classes being able to train lockpicking or disable trap, will do a great harm to thief class, but again if someone wishes to spend a load of skills points to not be as nearly as good at disabling traps than a thief of the same level, that seems fine to me, everything is fine if it has its right price.

[Dalvyn]

Actually, possible amendments could include:

• Classifying some skills as "Guild-specific"; those skills could only be opened by a given guild. This would for example be the case for "layonhands" (specific to paladins).
• Capping "unfavoured" skills, as Alvirin suggested is a good idea too, yes.
• Reworking skills that are success or fail in a purely random way.

A word of explanation about the last point. I'll take "lockpick" as an example. Currently, there is absolutely no setting to indicate whether a lock is harder to pick than another one. A lock is a lock is a lock, be it on a door, or on a closed container. That means that, even with a skill level of 1, you'll eventually succeed at opening any lock (though it might take a huge number of attempts). This means that, with an average skill level, you'll succeed at opening any lock with a very reasonable rate of success. And thus... that means that simply capping this skill is not enough to make rogues shine, because it won't do much better than a warrior with a very average skill at lock picking.

Alternatively, we can set up a team of builders and rebuild the world of FK as a Neverwinter Nights or Neverwinter Nights 2 server.

[Glim]

Do eet. Right now.

Btw... why does this whole thread look awfully familiar?

[Zilvryn]

<off topic>
Incidentally, I think i'd enjoy FK less if it was a graphical game a la Neverwinter Nights. I'm only limited by my twisted mind the way it is now
</off topic>

[Kregor]

You can't smote on NWN

It's good for what it is, it's Massive, it's Multiplayer, it's Online, but it's really not Role Playing

[Belose]

I think that smote's CAN help RP a lot.. IF you're willing to take the time and effort it takes to do that and like carpal tunnel syndrome for having to type so much more.... I say just use socials and a few emotes once in a while....

[Zilvryn]

I smote pretty much all the time, probably too much lol

[Dalvyn]

You can smote on NWN(2).

Most people do it by surrounding their "smote" with asterisks.

*bows down with a flourish then troddles happily away.*

You can also trigger an emote and actually see your character actually bow down.

*coughs* Plus, you don't have to spend hours doing the same thing again and again just to be able to cast a spell decently *coughs*

But... a NWN2 screen is harder to hide at work than a mud window.

[Lathander]

FK in a graphic format. If only it could be done without losing our style.

Fantasy:
FK Oblivion

[Kregor]

Sadly though, Mac and Linux users would be SOL on a NWN2 perpetual world. At least with a good terminal window I can enjoy the MUD.