A possibility: global reset

[Dalvyn]

It is currently possible to exchange glory points into stat and feat points, but this is a system we plan to change, for various reasons. One of the reasons is that it creates characters that are good at too many things, with all stats equally high. Another reason is that we plan to add in "bonus feats" as per the 3.5 D&D rules.

Bonus feats would be given to fighters, who would be able to get more feats than others [that's what they get in place of special skills/spells]; rangers, who would be able to specialize in two-weapon fighting or archery [if we can come up with some way to make archery actually useful and efficient]; wizards, who would be able to pick a few bonus spells amongst metamagic feats and magic item creation feats; and rogues, who would be able to take special rogue feats when they are high level enough for that.

That actually raises two questions though ...

1. Should this change of rule be retroactive?

In other words, what about older characters? The simplest tabula rasa (= start from scratch) solution would be to "reset" all characters. Practically, that would mean that all glory spent to gain a stat/feat point would be reimbursed, that all feats would become untrained, that all stats would drop down to their starting levels, and that the stat/feat points would be given back. The characters would then have to go and retrain their stats/feats as they want. That would also allow them to change what they picked, if they wanted.

Before this is done, we also need to come to a decision regarding the cost of the teaching feats. Four feat points for those feats is (and I think everybody agree with that) way too much in a system where you couldn't exchange glory for extra feat points. Possible options that are being examined: maybe simply drop the cost to 2 feat points ? Another option: those feats are actually different from the other feats, because they do not make the character more powerful from a technical point of view; instead, they grant it new options for roleplay and interactions. So, maybe those teaching things shouldn't be feats after all but ... (let's say) perks. Perks would be like feats, except that they would be bought with perk points, and that those perk points would not be gained directly from leveling up but through some other system where roleplay (instead of training) is rewarded. All those side things need to be decided before the main change can happen.

2. What about long-range goals?

The option to convert glory points into extra stat/feat points was one of the long-range goals that max level characters could work towards. It's important (we believe) that max level characters still have something to aspire to. When your skills are high enough, when you can't gain a new level, you need new/other goals.

If we take away the option to exchange glory points into feat/stat points, what kind of "long-range"/"max-level character" goals could be put in place instead?

-----

If you want to give your input about questions 1 and 2, feel free to post here. Comments and ideas are welcome!

[Horace]

1: I'm for the global reset. I don't think the cons are enough to outweigh a system that ensures characters, on paper, will at least be equal in allotment of stats and feats according to classes. This to me is very important to the integrity of the game, that equality means more than how many code systems your PC has gone through. I think this especially painless because it doesn't require regaining your levels/skills/trades.

Concerns - If it goes through I think stat requirement on guilds need to be removed. They are too limiting for classes without the glory expenditure for stats.

2: As far as glory goes, I think it'd be nice to have glory auctions now and then. Whatever an IMM comes up with really. I don't see any reason to set limits to it, though it'd assumedly always be favorable to the PC, since it is "glory" points. (edited: like a real life auction, ooc, with glory as the currency)

A new option I think could be guild leader positions, especially in schools of magic. Little dinky titles that don't really mean anything mechanically but lend some weight to the PC's accomplishments, even if others don't recognize it.

I know those two aren't exactly inspired, but I can see them doing as well as the stat/feat buy option does/has done.

[Harroghty]

(In consideration for you, the reader, there is a summary of all of this at the bottom.)

I oppose a global reset as it has been proposed. Really, I am not sure that a reset of any kind is necessary, but I believe that if one is implemented then it should follow a limit on statistics instead of a reset (i.e. You may have two statistics at 18, two at 16, and so on and so forth). The reasons for this are practical: I do not believe that the current inequalities in statistics create any real issues for gameplay; I believe that this is a game and, not seeing any complaints personally about this issue, what profit is there in removing something that contributes to a player's enjoyment of the game?; there are statistical requirements for guilds to force a player to develop their character in keeping with the kind of integrity of role-play that Horace is mentioning (i.e. A squire must develop his charisma through his knighthood because knights are leaders of men, and so you suffer in other statistics).

On the issue of glory: not all characters have an equal opportunity to gain glory. It has been discussed before on this forum how certain alignments and races have limited access to quests and, therefore, to glory. The players accept this in choosing that character, but I do not think we should extend the sacrifice by making the glory exchange system overly difficult. An auction scenario would be dominated by the middle-of-the-road character who's been able to do every quest and your half-this-or-thats, evils, and -to a lesser extent- very goods will be penalized.

I believe that the glory exchange system is important for the reason that Dalvyn pointed out (progression for higher-level characters) and because it's sensible. It is a way to equate your accomplishments with the things you have done. "Glory" might be an amorphous concept but it represents achievements in the practical sense and, by achieving, you have used and learned abilities that are reflected by the ability to exchange glory for statistics or for new feats.

Now, that being said, if you want to limit the use of these kinds of things in the interest of establishing some more equal progression then I propose that you impose a waiting period. That is, you would only be able to exchange glory for a statistic or for a feat once every one month, or two months (that's just me spit-balling for the sake of an example). This kind of thing is already in place in the form of the time it takes to acquire glory, but adding a formal interval imposes more steady limitations and allows everyone to advance at the same rate.

In short, I believe that equality and the vague concept of integrity do not justify an action that runs contrary to what I perceive as the reason for a game - having fun. If someone is not having fun because of this issue, then some more moderate limits on statistics and feats might be in order. I believe that glory exchanges should remain in some more moderate (but not more costly) format.

[Isaldur]

When stats/glory/feats get reset will I be reimbursed for all the coin spent on training stats, training feats, and the coin spent on converting glory to stat points? Regretfully my characters always tend to be just barely making ends meet because I've never mastered the art of grinding for coin and none of them can afford re-spending the staggering amount (to me) of coin it took to get where they are.

Will older characters be losing whatever extra stat points they did have due to having been created with older character creation systems, yet still unable to take advantage of the perks new characters can get through the new character creation system?

[Saranya]

1. I think these are two separate issues (stats and feats)

-re Stats: Why not cap stats for given classes/races per 3.5? That would prevent, at least stat-wise from a character becoming unreasonably maxxed in all things. (If people are abusing the system that was in place, they should be dealt with individually. )

I'm VERY against retroactive changes to older PCs. It is hard to spend a lot of effort into developing something to a character to have it wiped out by a code change. Playing a PC for many years, multiply this times twenty. It seems to work against encouraging long-term character development.

Also, character choices are made with the game under current conditions. For example, I have one PC who has used glory for stat points to balance the fact that she was created when new PCs were far weaker in comparison to previous and current PCs. These extra points brought her on par with other characters, not far stronger. If characters are expected to deal IC-ly with "mistakes" and "changes" shouldn't the game as well?

- re Feats: Again, I find it very disruptive to a given PC's RP to deal with retroactive changes like this. In Saranya's case, her RP would not allow going back into certain areas to re-train some things. I recall the resets to ranger skills causing major havoc with my ranger, which was very hard to RP through. If people are willing to invest the time to keep playing older characters I do not think they should be punished by endless tinkering. (I also do not like the idea of giving everyone a blank slate to fix old feat mistakes, unless we will just allow total code restarts for all characters.)

2. I like other uses for glory, such as Horace describe, renames &c. Unfortunately most of my ideas require imm work. In general, the real fun for code-maxxed PCs are RP goals, eg. becoming a Lord, or a faith manager or other RPs to involve themselves. Those are always in supply.

[Larethiel]

I am not a real friend of a general reset of characters :s If you have a longtime character that has....grown with his/her roleplay/stats/etc., it could prove quite the loss for both player, character and the feeling for the character, at least in my opinion. (I think PCs form a union and are a "package" including stats/feats/character background/roleplay.)

What about an option of letting players choose, if they want to have their character reset or not? This way, a PC could benefit from new things, if the player wants him/her to be reset or not benefit from any new things, because he/she shall not be reset?

[Alvirin]

1) Personally I'm up for a global reset if that means that characters will be less all-mighty and the real winner is balance no in a PvP sense, but in a sense that characters must focus mainly in the strength of their classes and must cooperate among themselves, since if you place a ton of stat points in wis/int, you will no have as many stats to sink in physical stats thus making other classes more useful (hello warriors), also the free goodies would make sweeter the transition. Small reductions (1 o 2 points) in modifiers to hit or defense, or in the save dc of spells isn't as bad specially if everyone else has them, the only winner would be the usefulness of all the classes, and that would make the game more interesting.

2) In D&D there is a point when your character reaches level 20, and is supposed to be the best in what he can do, but what is next? (assuming no playing epic levesls), those "blessed" charracters that haven't to worry about GM skills or training feats any longer, are in the best postion to acquire influence in their guilds/churches/whatever and be the source of interesting rp, trying to push the agenda of their guild, that such can be as interesting as fighting a dragon (trust me).

[Isaldur]

Another thought..

If this reset is to try and bring FK more in line with how PnP works will the MUD be doing away with the headaches that are amplified from the old code now that changes are in effect? A good example being that the Intelligence skill factors in with how fast you improve your skills/spells. In PnP intelligence is required for certain feats like Expertise, but a half-orc fighter with 6 intelligence still swings his sword just as equally as a half-orc with 10 intelligence of equal level?

Or am I entirely wrong and intelligence does not effect the speed in which you improve any skill anymore?

[Nedylene]

I am against this reset. 100%.

What is done is done and many of those older characters have put incredible effort into getting where they are.. INCLUDING stats. There have been imm rps in the past which has increased untrainable stats such as luck, reduced stats as penalties, incredibly HARD dungeons that you managed to go through once to get that stat trainer at the end and "closed" application only dungeons that you will not be able to access again.

Let sleeping dogs lie and I would instead offer to some to have stats reversed to bring them to the caps and let them choose. I know some converted more then they wanted to and would be happy to get some of the glory back.

Honestly, this has nothing to do with fairness and will be forcing people who spent thousands of hours on their characters to redo things that have already done and loose some of the things gained from rp experience. The past is the past and the future will always be different. Let what is done remain done and push on ahead.

[Selveem]

I'd like to give my honest reaction to the original post, then later possibly after reading others' comments, give my changed point of view if applicable:

Please understand I won't be able to capture all my points and may edit later, but if my view changes on these, it will be in the new post.

I'm against this change about 90%.

Here is the breakdown as as I see it.

Pros:
1) Everyone will be on an even keel almost.
2) Set expectations.
3) Characters know exactly where their points are again.
4) Even older Fighters will benefit from new bonus feats instead of only new fighters.

Cons:
1) Could drastically alter your character to benefit from previous high stats.

I made a fighter who had all int, cha, and wis. I did all the quests but had weak strength, con, and dex. Now that I've already done the quests, I get to put all my points back into strength, con, and dex now that I don't need int, cha, and wis for quests.

Previously, I had high int instead of con. Because of this, my health suffered greatly but all my skills are GMed! Now, I'll be able to go re-assign all points into Con to make me more durable.

2) I don't believe Constitution is truly retroactive yet. From what I understand, if you had low con from level 1-50, then trained it to 18 at level 50, you don't get all the bonuses of having had it that high during leveling. May be HP, Movement, or both.
3) Those who did work hard to increase their stats via special RP, glory exchange, or were otherwise granted extra stats will feel cheated. I'm not going to lie, I'll throw myself in there on the glory exchange bit.
4) Some feats can only be trained at very low level. Many characters will have surpassed those levels by then.
5) (Petty alert) Platinum spent for training all of those stats are lost. (Hey, let's face it.. Some people have a hard time earning coin, including myself [this is why I still don't have a house! ])
6) Some feats took quite a bit of RP to train because of where they're located or who trains them.
7) Different trainers train stats to different amounts. Do you remember who trains Constitution to 20? (Is there a trainer?!)
8 ) This is more an all-inclusive of the above: Loss of player time and effort. Undermining of time spent on their characters.

All and all, this is like a softcore PWipe.. Not to be a drama queen or anything, but that's just how I view it.

[Mask]

Hi all,

Thanks for comments to date. Note that there are resets and then there are resets. A drastic reset would be to remove all feats from all characters and give them the correct number of feat and stat points they are alloted. A much less drastic reset would only affect people who are dramatically 'better' than what can reasonably be achieved by newer characters, and then only affect them the smallest possible amount.

For example, if a character's six (Luck would not be included) stats sum up to a number 10 points higher than what is currently reasonably achievable, we might choose to remove 3 from each stat and then re-imburse them with 8 stat points which can be spent wherever they want.

An analysis of pfiles and feat count reveals that, combined with the introduction of bonus feats, almost no-one would lose any feats, and the majority would come out ahead.

[Selveem]

For example, if a character's six (Luck would not be included) stats sum up to a number 10 points higher than what is currently reasonably achievable, we might choose to remove 3 from each stat and then re-imburse them with 2 stat points which can be spent wherever they want.

Can you please go further into this?

From what I read, I understand you are taking 3 points from each stat and then reimbursing 2.

That means:
3 points removed from Str
3 points removed from Dex
3 points removed from Con
3 points removed from Int
3 points removed from Wis
3 points removed from Cha

Reimbursed:
2 points.

3*6 = 18 points.
18 - 2 = 16 points.

Did you mean for ever three removed, 2 are reimbursed?

Does this mean all their glory spent would also be reimbursed?

Based on your example, how many people would truly be affected? I think that number is important for players to make an informed decision as to how they feel about it. If you're talking about literally 1/2 the MUD's characters, I'd be very against it, for instance.

[Isaldur]

I am going to ask something I should have in the first place.

Why is this even being considered?

[Balek]

I am in favor of a stat/feat reset. Most older characters (including many of mine) had more stats to begin with than current characters. Add in the fact that we've been accumulating glory for a much longer time and you end up with old characters having vastly superior stats to new characters. I know that many of us would like to cling to that advantage for mostly selfish reasons (I confess, that's my biggest problem with a reset as well), but wanting to be unfairly more powerful than newer characters doesn't seem like a valid argument against the reset.

The other big negative is getting to trainers that are capable of training stats and feats that you had before. The only 'solution' to this problem would be to temporarily allow characters that were reset to have easy access to trainers. I'm not sure if that's a viable solution though. Granting easy access to a feat would mean that characters who hadn't earned access to the feat the first time around could get it with no effort. Restricting access to people who were re-taking a feat would be somewhat difficult.

What I would propose for the reset is this:

Stats on a Point-Buy System
All stats start at 8. Each stat point from 9-14 costs one point. Each stat point from 15-16 costs 2 points. Each stat point from 17-18 costs 3 points. Every character would have the same number of points to allocate and a decision must be made whether to have a few very high stats and a few very low stats or a lot of mid-range stats. A 46 point buy would allow stats of 18/18/12/12/12/10 or 16/16/16/14/13/13 (or lots of other combinations). 46 points might not be the ideal point buy, but that's something we could tinker with.

Allow races with bonuses to stats to train to a higher level
Bonuses to stats should be applied after the point buy. An elf training to 18 Dexterity would cost only two points. Training to 19 or 20 would cost three for each stat. Allow elves to train to 20 dexterity on a normal, easily accessible trainer. Other races who want higher than 18 dexterity would have to seek out a special, hard-to-reach trainer. By the same token, elves training constitution would have to spend three points to get to 15 or 16 and would need to seek out a special trainer to get to 17 or 18.

Spend Glory on enchanting as an end-game goal
Instead of buying feat and stat points with glory, instead allow players to spend glory on enchanting player-created masterwork items. Add a new feat that magically-adept characters can take which allows the creation of magical items. When a character wants to spend glory on a magical item, he contacts a wizard character with the proper feat. The wizard charges for time and materials (there should be a high monetary cost in addition to glory cost) and an Imm 'enchants' the item (maybe allow a free restring with the first enchantment on an item). More powerful enchantments cost more money and glory, as do multiple enchantments on the same item.

What this system would end up doing is allowing high level characters to really have a level of customization that we don't have right now. If a fighter wants to be a wizard killer, he could have his armor enchanted to resist spells and his weapon enchanted to dispel magic on hit. On the other hand, he might decide to enchant his armor for additional dexterity, constitution and AC to be more useful against other fighters. A wizard could add AC and hitpoints to his robes, or choose to just add more spell slots and turn himself into a glass cannon. It would also make characters look significantly different. I can't count how many people I've seen wearing the same dozen or so magic items because they're clearly the best ones around.

The downside to this system is that it would require imm intervention. It would be possible to automate the process, of course. The amount of enchanting to be done would be limited by glory and money. We could simply add expensive new items like "a small/medium/large enchanting crystal" that are required in the enchanting process and account for the monetary cost. The wizard would cast a spell to enchant the item with an affect from a pre-determined list (+stat, +spell slot, +hp, etc). More complicated effects like making items cast spells x times per day might be difficult to add without imm intervention.


To Summarize
Reset feats and stats. Add a point-buy system for stats. Use glory to enchant items as an end-game goal.

[Harroghty]

To echo Isaldur: why?

What is the perceived issue here? What new character feels that a more powerful older character is a bad thing? This isn't a competition, it's a game for everyone to enjoy. If you enjoy your character the way they are then that's fine until enough other people have a problem with it that it begins to affect the game as a whole.

There are a number of potential, more moderate ideas, for a reset and people would approach these (I think) provided there is a just cause for it, but I am frankly just curious what the motivation here is? Level 50 characters from six years ago are not rampaging around and reaving up younger characters left and right. So, is the motivation a selfish one on both sides? That is: "I don't want to lose my power" and "I don't want him or her to be more powerful than me"?

[Alvirin]

Like standarising all the characters to be all (somewhat) under the same character creation guidelines? Powerful characters will be still powerful, and those who aren't it, wouldn't still be it, also to some extent all characters will be less good at everything and more centered in their field which in the end promotes cooperation.

[Mask]

For example, if a character's six (Luck would not be included) stats sum up to a number 10 points higher than what is currently reasonably achievable, we might choose to remove 3 from each stat and then re-imburse them with 2 stat points which can be spent wherever they want.

Sorry, I was somewhat distracted while writing that post and my maths were wrong . I meant re-imburse with 8 points.

[Tavik]

**DISCLAIMER** This seems to be a really sensitive topic so please note right now that I am not bashing anyone's views or opinions or anything like that. If anything I say here seems offensive, please be aware that it is not at all my intention and that I could think of no better way to put it. **/DISCLAIMER**

In all honesty, from this discussion, I am inclined to immediately spend all my glory on several characters to get more stats/feats. Why? Because it would ensure that my character will always be more powerful than ANY other character created after the change.
Because it would be absolutely necessary in order to stay on par with other characters of similar relative age.
Because it would ensure I retain the ability to solo almost anywhere and never need the help of any other class.
Are these good reasons on a RP MUD? Not in my mind.

Yes, the argument can be made that it is no fun to lose a lot of what you worked for. BUT, it is equally not fun knowing you will never have the potential to reach the same strength as someone who happened to come across the game sooner than you did and were able to reap the benefits of earlier code. To me, a level playing field is the most fun because I know that there is always a chance that I can become the top wizard/fighter/ranger/rogue/priest if I work hard enough. On the other hand, knowing that (at least mechanically) I can NEVER reach the strength of older characters is a disappointing prospect and doesn't give me much incentive to even try.

Yes, I realize a lot of work has gone into some people's characters in order to get these extra stats/feats. I also don't think that should be ignored. If you got through a now closed app dungeon or special RP then you bet I think you should have something to show for it. But gaining a reward that can never be matched by future PCs in one way or another is extremely unbalancing and again, not fun for those new players who will just have to suck it up and deal with it. For cases like this, I would propose at the very least, glory be reimbursed for all those extra stats whether bought with glory or earned from special circumstances. Beyond that, I would suggest a further reward of GMing a few skills/spells/trades or be given new skills/spells/trades that others do not have access to YET but will at some point in the future.

As for those feat/stat trainers that people wouldn't normally have access to (be it because of high level, quest areas no longer accessible, RP reasons, just plain too hard to get to again) I don't see why they can't just be dealt with via application or direct IMM help. It's an OOC change so I would say OOC means to rebuild is perfectly acceptable.

One perk people would get out of this is that they would be able to reallocate their feats/stats to where ever they want them AGAIN. This means old characters WOULD get to take advantage of new feats or maybe take advantage of a different feat that plays more into your character's RP that you didn't previously have access to. Yes, this would give older characters an advantage over younger ones, but that advantage is not one that denies potential to the younger characters. The best analogy that I can come up with is two applicants train for a job at the same school. The first gets the opportunity to retrain for the job after seeing the job first hand and refine what they need to know. That, however, does not preclude the second applicant from training for the job to the best extent possible the first time AND does not ensure the first applicant will get any better training the second time. In the end, it all comes down to the decisions those individuals make to determine who well they can perform their job and NOT that one went to a better school than the other.

Coin, I think, is a legitimate concern. I think coin needs to be reimbursed along with glory since all that training does add up to a fairly substantial amount.

Long term character development would (and really always has) hinge on the RP aspect. Could I keep developing my characters mechanics by skilling up weapons/skills/spells/etc? Sure. And I do occasionally. But is that really as important to people as the opportunity to RP something special? Well, that's a personal decision. I can say that if the RP aspect weren't such a strong part of this game, I wouldn't still be here and I have a feeling just about everyone would agree with me.

What this all comes down to (in my mind at least) is: Do we want new players or not? Do we want to tell new players they have the opportunity to become as great as anyone else or just mediocre compared to the old characters? Do we want an atmosphere in which new players feel punished for not becoming a part of the game sooner? Do we want a game where mechanics are the driving force behind characters and not RP?

I'm a HUGE proponent of keeping the playing field level for EVERYONE in a game. The only way to do this is to either reset older characters OR keep the current feat/stat glory purchase system.

Otherwise, I'm spending everything I've got ASAP to keep up with current characters. Is that wrong of me? I don't know. It feels like it is to me. But then again, I've got the time on the MUD to put all of my characters well before the implementation of a new system and put just as much work into earning (potential) stats and feats as everyone else.

I'll put the blindfold on myself now, just lead me to the wall.

[Selveem]

Tavik, if you're talking fairness that will never be the case.

One could talk about skills some have that others don't. Some could speak of spells some characters have that shouldn't. Others could talk of special items another has acquired over the years. Newer characters/players could gripe of elder characters having benefited from quests to attain glory whose areas have since been removed from the game.

The playing field will never be 'level,' so if that is the only reason to support the change (not you specifically, but anyone), I don't see it hitting that mark.

After reviewing the comments of others, the only reason why I would support this change _would_ be to close that gap a little more. As a whole, I see it has more cons than pros still. Especially knowing some people _really_ don't like their characters messed with and will be especially peeved.

[Isaldur]

New players are limited in their selections for classes, races, starting towns, etc. Wouldn't this be more a deterrant than the fact that a character from 7 years ago has 1 more strength than they can ever get?

New characters can also pick starting feats dependant on their home town, something an older character cannot get.

The way the skill and spell systems have always worked in FK favor whoever can spend the most time grinding and training them up. The largest factor for imbalance between any class, player, etc is playtime. Like in all online persistent worlds, text based or graphical, the players who have more time to play will always have better gear, better levels, and better skills.

While I do not think this is a problem, I'll toss out a suggestion just so it is constructive critisism. Limit playtimes of accounts to a set amount, say 10 hours a week. We want everyone to have a level playing field and equal fairness for all, right? That is what the general attitude for anyone that approves of this does seem to be.