This issue has been brought up many times over the years. We've ultimately stuck with the status quo, but I think it's an important question that needs to be re-evaluated periodically. I'm moving this from the general brainstorm topic into its own:
NaturallyCaffeinated wrote:
1) Increase the level range. Let people play with who they want to play with! Or, at the least, give some sort of partial exp for people out of range. For example, the lower level character out of range could receive the amount of exp they would get from fighting something their level, while the rest of the group received normal exp.
IronAngel wrote:
I absolutely support the first point. I've always wanted to abolish the party level restriction. I really don't see the problem it supposedly causes: people can help their buddies level up, sure, but if it isn't made to be any more rewarding than actually contributing in your own level range, so what. If people want to waste time leeching XP, as opposed to getting the same reward (or better; the numbers can be tweaked) for participating in a balanced team, that shouldn't be our problem. I also don't see the problem with high-levels "babysitting" lowbies to keep them from harm, because that's a perfectly IC thing they would be doing. With 25 people online at a time, I think we're past such ideological concerns.
This could be achieved with a cap of some sort: XP ought to be determined by the average CL of the party, but only up to a reasonable cap (that could be around 30?) for out-of-range parties. A level 30 helping level 3s clear kobolds would mean no XP for anyone, which is as it should be. But neither would a level 3 tagging along for a giant run mean ridicilous XP, as the cap of 30-or-so per kill would come in. There would be little mechanical incentive to tag along with the 30s if you could just kill kobolds with much less risk and similar reward.
Loot would still need to be tweaked in this model. But unless there's going to be new economic changes, gold remains irrelevant on Amia and thus there wouldn't be much of a problem.
I'm not sure why there's always been such strong opposition to removing the party level restriction. The supposed "problems" it would cause are easily managed with a few restrictions. The goal should be to make in-range partying and (what is currently) out-of-range partying roughly equally rewarding mechanically, or slightly in favor of in-range partying, so people can group up with whoever they're role-playing with. Adding some kind of a party gathering tool, an IC party ball, to Cordor's Nomad or something would still encourage meeting new people too.
This is a rough sketch, and there are problems with it (particularly, with loot). But could we brainstorm some solutions to those problems and see if a viable model can be devised, before dismissing the idea off the bat again?
Our level restriction has consistently been one of the most awkward and artificial limits to RP. You can always say "you can party without XP for the role-playing" but that's an unfortunate concession. Not a carrot to encourage seamless role-playing across the level spectrum. The fact that it isn't regularly practiced shows it's not tempting enough, so we can skip that sermon here.
This could also be a way to involve new players from the go and make friends. No doubt people would enjoy being brought along to a dangerous troll adventure straight off the boat rather than grinding zombies alone for a few days before anyone pays any attention to you. The first few levels are particularly difficult, because they practically require another PC made within the last few days if you want to party.
The current system is, bluntly, not good. It works, but it could work a lot better. How could we achieve that?
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Our level restriction has consistently been one of the most awkward and artificial limits to RP. You can always say "you can party without XP for the role-playing" but that's an unfortunate concession. Not a carrot to encourage seamless role-playing across the level spectrum. The fact that it isn't regularly practiced shows it's not tempting enough, so we can skip that sermon here.
I can think of plenty of outside-of-level-range combat that could happen and be great for RP, but I've been dubious of doing it because there's a nagging concern that I might be crossing the interpretation of what "babysitting" is or isn;t for whatever DM might be on at the time, because I'm following around some character that's ten levels below me, or something, ICly giving them pointers and picking them up if they die, but not otherwise assisting.
I've had enough unintentional and misinterpretation brushes with the rules that I'm rather squeamish about how things could be construed (or misconstrued) now. A lot of it seems to stem from levels issues, too, now that I think about it. If we could do anything to ease off this restriction, I know that I would feel a lot better about training sessions and mentor-apprenticeship situations that take to the field. Even broadening it a little would be an improvement.
Apprenticeship is the problem I originally had with it years ago, when I would have loved to take Melee-Magthere people out to practice. I remember when Kalliniel (originally a ranger) was tutored in working together with his animal companion by Ohlde Mann, and in tactical archery by Fletch. Kir'nack's house weapons master showed him how to use the terrain to his advantage in the beastman caves. Luckily, in the latter case we were just about 5 levels apart, but in the former cases there was no actual XP for learning a lot of actually useful things. No matter, they were still great experiences, but stuff like that is uncommon and deserves to be encouraged. But now I think the general issue of just finding parties to role-play with is as important, so this question gains a wider importance.
But yeah, even a ten-level range would work better. I'd rather be done with it altogether, because worrying about it breaks immersion and if we modify the XP gain to cap rewards in a ten-level scale, we've already done the work to go all the way.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Apprenticeship is the problem I originally had with it years ago, when I would have loved to take Melee-Magthere people out to practice. I remember when Kalliniel (originally a ranger) was tutored in working together with his animal companion by Ohlde Mann, and in tactical archery by Fletch. Kir'nack's house weapons master showed him how to use the terrain to his advantage in the beastman caves. Luckily, in the latter case we were just about 5 levels apart, but in the former cases there was no actual XP for learning a lot of actually useful things. No matter, they were still great experiences, but stuff like that is uncommon and deserves to be encouraged. But now I think the general issue of just finding parties to role-play with is as important, so this question gains a wider importance.
But yeah, even a ten-level range would work better. I'd rather be done with it altogether, because worrying about it breaks immersion and if we modify the XP gain to cap rewards in a ten-level scale, we've already done the work to go all the way.
I think we've all been in this position, drow or not. Your mid-high level character meets a promising new arrival, takes him/her under your wing but then is unable to provide any field training, so to speak, because other than the RP, there would be no reward from it. And don't get me wrong, RP is great, but it doesn't save you from the utterly boring grind that gaining levels is.
I also suffer from a mild-to-severe case of altitis, which means that I am constantly coming up with new character concepts (fortunately most of the time I just write them down instead of actually making them), but every once in a while I come up with something that makes me go "Oh wow, this would be really fun to RP...", but then I remember the grind and the fact that all my usual buddies are higher level, and it ultimately gets shelved.
Perhaps we could take the MMO approach to apprenticeship while using our own job system? Jobs like Drill Master or Teacher (for melee inclined and the bookworms respectively, just an example!) would grant the character some "Mentor Tokens" that they could give to a certain number of other characters which would eliminate/reduce the normal penalty associated with being outside the level range? Can people exploit it? Probably. But I think it would be a nice way to promote RP between players of all levels, while keeping it IC to some degree.
Though extending the level range itself would be pretty neat, yes.
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
Extending the level range will lead to abuse (a.k.a. powerleveling).
I know it sounds blunt, but I am 100% sure about it.
I was in party with high lvl characters few times myself. In the end we were rewarded by DCs which I immeditelly burned for XP, which for me was a compensation for the xp blocked out due to level range.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
Extending the level range will lead to abuse (a.k.a. powerleveling).
It was established that the system wouldn't be more rewarding to "out-of-range" parties. If anything, it should be made slightly less rewarding (but still comparable). It should be so that taking along a lowbie would slightly decrease the XP rate, but not nuke it to the ground. The question is how to achieve that so it works. If you mysteriously divine that the above suggestion of average party CL capped to a maximum XP/kill, can you point out the problems and offer solutions?
But more importantly, I do not see how "powerleveling" is "abuse." You can get to 30 in a week already, if you're determined. Some people want to rush there before they feel they can "properly" start role-playing. I strongly disagree myself; the journey through the earlier levels is always the best part, and I have hit the level cap only once in 7 years. But it's not my place to make that determination for everyone, and I see little harm in this supposed abuse.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Last edited by IronAngel on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 12:18 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
Exactly. Powerleveling is already easy enough. Helping it by extending the level range will only resolve in server filled with 30s. And quite frankly, that will only be yet another nail into coffin.
-Dark Faith- wrote:
Guardian wrote:
Extending the level range will lead to abuse (a.k.a. powerleveling).
Yes, might as well just get summoning scrolls from someone and fly solo, right? People can "powerlevel" just fine right now.
Yes, this is the problem we should focus on.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
Last edited by Guardian on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 12:25 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Extending the level range will lead to abuse (a.k.a. powerleveling).
I know it sounds blunt, but I am 100% sure about it.
I was in party with high lvl characters few times myself. In the end we were rewarded by DCs which I immeditelly burned for XP, which for me was a compensation for the xp blocked out due to level range.
I'm entirely certain that can and will happen. But tweaking the numbers will make power leveling not worth the effort. If you're getting just as much xp or less for running with them, then is it honestly worth it?
Honestly, with a community of 20-30 people on a module as rather hugely expansive as Amia can be... do you think we should be turning down any excuse to encourage people to play together?
And another thing!!! This would encourage people making builds for RP as opposed to "how many things can I kill with this?"
These days everyone on the planet is a rogue, or a bard, or a monk just so they can get their tumble ranks. This subject might warrent an entirely different discussion, but I think rewarding people who specialize in a specific class beyond level 10 should be rewarded as well. Fighter on Amia is literally just a way to raise your AB and get your weapon specialization feats. But what is a level 30 fighter? He's just a guy with a lot of feats and no special abilities. A lot of people would say "That sucker who was to dumb to take WM."
I could go on for hours and hours on that subject, to be honest. But I won't do that here. I'm not going to be the first person to propose that idea if it gets proposed at all, but I'll offer tons of input if it does get brought up.
_________________ Gerald Edmund Discord: Metal Viking Guy #5433
The idea of tweaking the level cap restrictions is a good one because it will allow for expanded combat RP opportunities. Poopooing a proposed change because it will lead to power leveling ignores the massive amount of power leveling already possible. See Dark's point re: summon scrolls - and really, we all know where the 'choice' xp spawns are.
I would like to propose a slightly simpler method than Iron's rather baroque scheme. The DnD 3 and 3.5 xp systems were built around a certain number of level appropriate encounters being required to level up. We could do something similar - decide a number of monsters that is appropriate for someone to level up while partying with someone out of the current range, and then assign xp based on their level. So, let's say the number is 200, a level 2 would get 10 xp per kill, while a level 20 would get 100. Determine a number of monsters we can come to a rough consensus about and boom, there you go. No complicated math required.
Oh, and Bob's point about the art of building, that's a D20 problem, not an NWN problem. You won't find a PnP player that takes more than 10 fighter levels either. That's just how the game is built.
_________________ You dare mock the Tibbly one, catcherer of drowses?
Last edited by TYP on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 12:31 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
bobofwestoregonusa wrote:
I'm entirely certain that can and will happen. But tweaking the numbers will make power leveling not worth the effort. If you're getting just as much xp or less for running with them, then is it honestly worth it?
Honestly, with a community of 20-30 people on a module as rather hugely expansive as Amia can be... do you think we should be turning down any excuse to encourage people to play together?
I find it sad that we have to encourage people to play together by xp's, especially when it is so easy to gain them, as was said many times.
bobofwestoregonusa wrote:
And another thing!!! This would encourage people making builds for RP as opposed to "how many things can I kill with this?"
These days everyone on the planet is a rogue, or a bard, or a monk just so they can get their tumble ranks. This subject might warrent an entirely different discussion, but I think rewarding people who specialize in a specific class beyond level 10 should be rewarded as well. Fighter on Amia is literally just a way to raise your AB and get your weapon specialization feats. But what is a level 30 fighter? He's just a guy with a lot of feats and no special abilities. A lot of people would say "That sucker who was to dumb to take WM."
Absolutely correct. I see this as a major issue. However, level range extension is not a solution.
TYP wrote:
I would like to propose a slightly simpler method than Iron's rather baroque scheme. The DnD 3 and 3.5 xp systems were built around a certain number of level appropriate encounters being required to level up. We could do something similar - decide a number of monsters that is appropriate for someone to level up while partying with someone out of the current range, and then assign xp based on their level. So, let's say the number is 200, a level 2 would get 10 xp per kill, while a level 20 would get 100. Determine a number of monsters we can come to a rough consensus about and boom, there you go. No complicated math required.
Why should a character that is hidden under invisibility spell, hopping around with epic who do all the dirty work gain any xp?
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
Last edited by Guardian on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 12:36 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Exactly. Powerleveling is already easy enough. Helping it by extending the level range will only resolve in server filled with 30s. And quite frankly, that will only be yet another nail into coffin.
-Dark Faith- wrote:
Guardian wrote:
Extending the level range will lead to abuse (a.k.a. powerleveling).
Yes, might as well just get summoning scrolls from someone and fly solo, right? People can "powerlevel" just fine right now.
Yes, this is the problem we should focus on.
And I agree with you that it is a problem! But I don't think that's what we should focus on right now. People will always find a way to make the most out of the tools at their disposal, regardless of what restrictions you place on them, which is why I think that right now the focus should go into promoting RP between players of all levels, instead of forcing the "Well... you seem a bit too weak/strong to travel with us right now.. Perhaps another time?" or "Here, have these scrolls, they'll help you. Maybe later we can travel together" thing we have going right now.
Extending the level range and limiting the xp gain when you're partied with people far from your own level would be a good start. No one would take a lvl3 to kill beholders, but taking them to kill some trolls wouldn't be too farfetched. It really depends on people's common sense. Sure, you could argue "But they'll probably just cast invisibility on the low level and let them gain xp without moving at all", which might be true. But don't people already do that with their scrolls? At least in a group people could RP some while doing it. I think it's an acceptable gamble.
My first thought was, 'Yes, remove the level range' or expand it! But after I thought it over, I'm not for any changes. I predict we'll see a flood of people rushing the same high level hunting grounds with high level friends to level up super fast, and mid level hunting areas turning into ghosttowns.
My first thought was, 'Yes, remove the level range' or expand it! But after I thought it over, I'm not for any changes. I predict we'll see a flood of people rushing the same high level hunting grounds with high level friends to level up super fast, and mid level hunting areas turning into ghosttowns.
This is exactly what I was trying to say with my flimsy English.
Thanks, Goddess.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
My first thought was, 'Yes, remove the level range' or expand it! But after I thought it over, I'm not for any changes. I predict we'll see a flood of people rushing the same high level hunting grounds with high level friends to level up super fast, and mid level hunting areas turning into ghosttowns.
But conversely, a level 10 and a level 20 would gain level 15 XP in a mid-range hunting ground and require quite a bit of strategy for both to survive and contribute. That can all (probably) be tweaked and managed to ensure a fair balance.
Guardian: I avoided such ideological questions, because there's no consensus about them and they needn't have any direct relevance here. We need to confront the reality. It may be "sad" that people need to be encouraged to work by offering a reward (though I find it common sense, more than anything), but it's the reality. It's a fact that cross-level adventuring doesn't happen much at all. This is a real, empirical problem that isn't really debatable. And I think most of us can agree that it should indeed happen more. It's fitting, fun and immersive. Having to direct RP by mechanical OOC standards is awkward and disruptive, to some degree.
And while it may be that rushing level 30 is a problem in your eyes, it's pretty unconvincing to claim it's a problem for the server at large or a nail in its coffin - some of the more prominent PCs rushed their 30 in weeks five years ago, when the server was at the peak of its popularity. It's entirely unbelievable that Amia's current (perceived) problems have some connection to this issue.
And I'm still baffled by the notion that this would speed up leveling. The whole point of this topic was to tweak numbers and figure out ways to balance the change so that the current rate of advancement doesn't drastically change. I refuse to believe there isn't a technical solution to a technical problem.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Last edited by IronAngel on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 12:54 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Instead if increasing the level range... we could implement a system that allows high characters to debuff themselves to the highest acceptable level range of the lowest level character in the group. Possibly via negative levels or just plain old temporarily stripping them down to whatever they were at level 12.
This idea would take MUCH more work, but it would allow your level 30 paladin to go into the Bloodmoon cave with timmy toe-stabber and have fun.
Gear would still provide an issue, considering that most people would be wearing +4 gear(or worse, epics!) at level 30. But I think it's a possibility.
And it seems to be a better alternative than simply letting someone get xp for being invisible in the Beholder caves with some mage using his black blade. It offers the opportunity to level the playing field a bit and allow lower level players to not have to jaw-gape-sadface at how weak they are due to levels.
But some things may need to be worked out.
_________________ Gerald Edmund Discord: Metal Viking Guy #5433
I think this one has a scary potential for bugging out, and might be harder to RP how your epic character suddenly found himself getting cut in half by a beastman he could normally take down in a couple of hits.
My first thought was, 'Yes, remove the level range' or expand it! But after I thought it over, I'm not for any changes. I predict we'll see a flood of people rushing the same high level hunting grounds with high level friends to level up super fast, and mid level hunting areas turning into ghosttowns.
But conversely, a level 10 and a level 20 would gain level 15 XP in a mid-range hunting ground and require quite a bit of strategy for both to survive and contribute. That can all (probably) be tweaked and managed to ensure a fair balance.
isn't this what we already do with the 5 level range? I really think changing this level range would effect the balance of existing hunting grounds far more then appears at first glance. I think in order to implement what your suggesting, it's more then just expanding the level range, it would probably end up redoing all of the hunting areas on the server as we know them, and in the end, we'd be back where we started. =) thats my 2 cents.
Temporary negative levels crossed my mind. You could enter a "cross-level" mode that balances power and XP in a party. I didn't bring it up because it's somewhat hard to explain away IC, and because it keeps reminding us that it's a game. I wanted something that made worrying about other players' ECL completely irrelevant, as it's not IC. But I dismissed it primarily because I still don't see any problem in power heroes fighting alongside beginners. That's completely IC, and not something you should police OOC. Casters already sit back invisible, and nothing's stopping Mosh from adding more See Invis effects to monsters. There's nothing strange about gaining XP when you watch and try to participate in combat far out of your league, especially not in comparison to gaining better XP from beating up the same unchallenging trolls, yuan-ti or sahuagin in a daily routine. Appealing to the counter-intuitive nature of XP gain is a really poor argument considering the system is pretty ridiculous as is. (As Phalanx just posted, picking apples - or conversely, becoming a legendary painter overnight by butchering enough giants.)
Goddess: redoing the hunting areas is probably part of this, yes. But "redoing" is as simple (more or less) as tweaking their CR to offer a fitting reward. Changing a standard the server's had for years will obviously require some work, but I don't see any other way around this glaring immersion-breaker that discourages people from finding RP regardless of level. You can fix a real problem with a slight cosmetic change.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Last edited by IronAngel on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 13:06 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
IronAngel wrote:
Guardian: I avoided such ideological questions, because there's no consensus about them and they needn't have any direct relevance here. We need to confront the reality. It may be "sad" that people need to be encouraged to work by offering a reward (though I find it common sense, more than anything)
But I see the reward. Let's put your idea into action:
A level 3 wizard Trolo wants to go out and kill pirates. Out from some RP pretext (vengence) he gathers a party of heroes (OOC : his pals) and they go hunting.
Now... level 10 Big Max barbarian and level 10 Holly, a priestess, cutting pirates in half whilst Trolo is hidden behind rock, because he depleted his magic missiles ten minutes ago.
Now, my question is, why should he gain any xps? He is useless, he is hidden, and all the rp that will happen is :
After a horrible battle, Trolo walks towards Big Max and Holly, clapping : "Magnificent work, you really killed them good. But look, there is more of them. Go go go!"
No. The reward for partying with higher levels is RP. In the end, this is a RP server. You do not get xps for a little chat in town, for writting a book, for any RP when DMs are not around. But it does not mean you RP only when DMs are around, right?
I see XPs as a bonus for participating in something. In battle, it means for participating on the kill.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
Now you're just assuming the worst out of people. What if Trolo instead gathered a party of heroes to enact some vengeance upon Trolls? His newfound companions, noting that he seems rather inexperienced, give him a few potions (namely ghostly visage, a godsend at low levels) to keep him safe while they all fight together and cleave their way through the lair all the while giving the newcomer tips about the local "wildlife", points of interest and how to handle himself in a fight.
Don't wizards usually go invis and let their summons do the work? How do they get experience then? How explain earning xp when you "eat" a DC? Divine providence?
I think this one has a scary potential for bugging out, and might be harder to RP how your epic character suddenly found himself getting cut in half by a beastman he could normally take down in a couple of hits.
That is a rather ignorant perspective on things. It is a huge mistake to simply write off anything on the server as a threat just because you out level it. If you want immersion? You've got it with my suggestion! Is your guy decked out in epics? Fine! Sure! But let's give him a little bit of challenge. Just because you grinded to level 30 doesn't make Amia's threats any less of a threat.
I think treating something lower level than you as an insignificant problem that doesn't warrent your attention is just a sign that you're disconnected from the idea behind the threats themselves. Beast men? Holy crap! It's a beast man! Man and beast! And it's attacking Uhm! Orcs?! They're attacking the farms! Run!
It's rather immature behavior in my opinion and I try not to do it. The idea is all about scaling anyway.
Negative levels and an HP debuff should easily be sufficient for something like that. If you're worried about seeing your character get hurt by anything, I think you should archive him instead of risking him being insulted by another character who happened to feel rude. It might bruise his ego.
_________________ Gerald Edmund Discord: Metal Viking Guy #5433
I addressed some of your points while you were writing, but that's the kind of ideological post that I don't see much point in debating. And more importantly, I don't have to debate it - reality does it for me. You see the reward, but other people clearly don't. (Not one tempting enough to embrace in daily play, anyhow.) If they did, the people would be full of people of all levels going on adventures regardless of level, never asking ECL or checking the party ball. That just isn't the case.
Shoulds and woulds are a bit irrelevant when the fact is, the current design doesn't encourage the kind of behavior we (presumably) desire. Server design is not about what people should do if they were good enough and met our ideals. It's about what's really happening out there, and mechanically herding people the way we want them to go.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
but that's the kind of ideological post that I don't see much point in debating.
You keep calling it ideology when it's just plain and simple not wanting to see level 3 hide behind level 30s and get xp for those Mindflayers I just killed on my blackguard. Plain and simple. It's just another way of cheating the system for xp that they shouldn't have gotten for not contributing. In a PnP game, you wouldn't get xp for hiding behind a rock.
_________________ Gerald Edmund Discord: Metal Viking Guy #5433
I think this one has a scary potential for bugging out, and might be harder to RP how your epic character suddenly found himself getting cut in half by a beastman he could normally take down in a couple of hits.
That is a rather ignorant perspective on things. It is a huge mistake to simply write off anything on the server as a threat just because you out level it. If you want immersion? You've got it with my suggestion! Is your guy decked out in epics? Fine! Sure! But let's give him a little bit of challenge. Just because you grinded to level 30 doesn't make Amia's threats any less of a threat.
I think treating something lower level than you as an insignificant problem that doesn't warrent your attention is just a sign that you're disconnected from the idea behind the threats themselves. Beast men? Holy crap! It's a beast man! Man and beast! And it's attacking Uhm! Orcs?! They're attacking the farms! Run!
It's rather immature behavior in my opinion and I try not to do it. The idea is all about scaling anyway.
Negative levels and an HP debuff should easily be sufficient for something like that. If you're worried about seeing your character get hurt by anything, I think you should archive him instead of risking him being insulted by another character who happened to feel rude. It might bruise his ego.
No. I don't see immersion. I see a plot device to make something possible. Levels mean just that. Something that you killed by the hundreds when you're off the ship in cordor won't feel threatning when you're an experienced veteran anymore. When you're an upstart adventurer Kobolds sound DANGEROUS! But when you're a veteran... you're the guy telling newcomers to go kill them because you've got better things to do with your time. I'm not disconnected from the threats, thank you very much, but things have a CR for a reason. Kobolds and orcs are a threat to a village, but any city with walls and a city guard will laugh at them, unless they come in HUGE numbers, which is when they turn into a threat.
To have my character lose his abilities just for the sake of plot convinience, that doesn't work for me. That breaks immersion for me. But hey, YMMV
Get rid of it entirely and party group size cap too. People will level as and when they see fit, and this means they can do it in the boundaries of RP. A drow house can go through an area as a journey somewhere for some reason without leaving the lowbies behind. An extermination campaign by the Dwarves of Barak Runedar can have grizzled veterans running with their conscript lowbies as comrades in arms against the Fire Giant menace. Lowbies getting killed when being 'babysat' has great potential for RP and can create bonds that will mean something later on down the line.
The Level Range and Party Size caps institute an artificial glass ceiling (Oh you wanna RP? Ok well we're going to go and kill the Brog Barbarians because they're raiding the town again, it'll be some great RP... oh what, you're only level 6? Ok. We'll tell you how it went.) and their removal would smash it. Some of the BEST RP I ever had was on another server where there weren't these artificial boundaries and it was very fun, because it felt like an actual quest.
_________________
Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?
Last edited by 555444333 on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 13:23 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Think of XP for what it represents to your character; experience. If your level 10 fighter is traveling with a level 20 Weapon master, the amount of 'experience' will vary with how you implement the teaching. For example, learning Whirlwhind Attack by watching someone else will not give you much experience, but actually (attempting) to apply that yourself without your mentor as a guide will earn you a greater amount of experience.
So basically, make it so that hunting with people out of your range is not 'entirely' worthless, but earns you something at least enough to represent that your character has gained from the experience, even if it was q very, very little amount
_________________ Aoth Nathandem - Wizard of house Tholaunt and chosen of Ma'at.
What you just described is ideology, Bob. Not wanting to see something you think is unfitting. Going into great detail about who deserves or doesn't deserve a reward, who role-plays realistically enough for your standards. It comes off as contrived when, as has been pointed out, the system doesn't make a whole lot of sense in the first place. Especially when you keep making up really negative examples that, while possible, aren't very exciting for the participants and are nonetheless harmless to other players. It's this obsessive need to determine how other players should RP and level their characters that I find distracting from the point.
Ultimately this boils down to whether the DMs (and the majority of the playerbase, possibly) want to encourage cross-level adventuring and less emphasis on the OOC management ECL. If they do, I think my or TYP's suggestion has potential to be refined into something workable. If the whole concept is undesired and they'd rather keep Amia a balanced action RPG rather than a slightly unbalanced but immersive story RPG, then this is a moot point. There's no doubt a tradeoff whichever way you go, and I'm not claiming the change would exactly add to server balance - but it would add something else, and you need to acknowledge the pros and cons to properly weigh them. Some of the problems brought up here, like the desertion of some areas by Goddess, are no doubt real. But weighed against all the cool things that could happen more (like the stuff Numbers mentioned) it seems like an insignificant loss. I'm convinced it's quite possible to minimize the damage to balance in favor of a substantial gain in immersion and, most of all, interaction.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Last edited by IronAngel on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 13:29 PM, edited 1 time in total.
Given our main playerbase losses are the casual action-adventure crew, I see little need to cleave to 'server balance' as religiously as we have in recent years. Let's go back to the start and make this a place about RP.
_________________
Man, this account is over 10 years old. Where do I get my old man beard?
Think of XP for what it represents to your character; experience. If your level 10 fighter is traveling with a level 20 Weapon master, the amount of 'experience' will vary with how you implement the teaching. For example, learning Whirlwhind Attack by watching someone else will not give you much experience, but actually (attempting) to apply that yourself without your mentor as a guide will earn you a greater amount of experience.
So basically, make it so that hunting with people out of your range is not 'entirely' worthless, but earns you something at least enough to represent that your character has gained from the experience, even if it was q very, very little amount
I'm not sure the presence and guidance of mentors is as insignificant as you suggest. But yes, there is the risk-reward ratio to consider. I have no qualms about giving only 3/4 or even 1/2 XP from out-of-range adventuring, as long as it still feels like a rewarding, viable option. If you gain less XP per kill from risking beast men with your teacher than you do from trolls which you can handle safely, the potential for "abuse" seems minimal. Especially since a beastman could one-shot you with a lucky crit, even if you try to stay at a distance with your bow. It's not as if facing creatures well above your level is somehow without risk. And for the high-levels aiding lowbies in easier areas, there's an uncommon challenge in keeping them alive and teaching at the same time, which should account for their experience.
You can twist the whole thing into something unintuitive and ridiculous, but it doesn't have to. That's up to you.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Think of XP for what it represents to your character; experience. If your level 10 fighter is traveling with a level 20 Weapon master, the amount of 'experience' will vary with how you implement the teaching. For example, learning Whirlwhind Attack by watching someone else will not give you much experience, but actually (attempting) to apply that yourself without your mentor as a guide will earn you a greater amount of experience.
This is exactly correct, and is actually true to PnP DnD. Not everyone belongs in combat - the example of mages who summon and sit back is exactly correct, because they're doing the same thing that a level three with an invisibility potion is doing. Equally, a thief you bring to the Gauntlet to handle traps might hang WA-AY back when the dragons start spawning, and rightly so. I know this was explicitly stated in I believe the 2nd Ed rulebook - that everyone gets xp from a battle, even if they didn't fight, because, just as 666 says, they still gained some experience, one way or another.
5. Divide the total XP among all the characters who started the encounter. (Even if they are knocked unconscious, everyone who took part in an encounter gains experience for that encounter.)
If it makes you feel better, make the level 3's run around healing people so they can say they helped. Or, if you're into PnP, have them constantly Aid Another by shouting encouragement and warnings to their comrades in arms.
_________________ You dare mock the Tibbly one, catcherer of drowses?
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
-Dark Faith- wrote:
Now you're just assuming the worst out of people.
You HAVE to assume the worst scenario when implementing a change. Always... Because when you are painting yourself a nice picture instead, you do not see the flaws. Edit: And also, it is "easy" to implement the change, far worse is reversing it back when it proove ineffective / flawed. So yes, I will always look at the dark side first and prior.
Iron's idea is nice and I believe quite pure (as he is a solid RPer), yet impossible to implement without being abused. And arguments like " There is already enough things you can abuse " are irrelevant.
TYP wrote:
If it makes you feel better, make the level 3's run around healing people so they can say they helped. Or, if you're into PnP, have them constantly Aid Another by shouting encouragement and warnings to their comrades in arms.
See? This is exactly what I am talking about. This is a complete abuse of the situation - abuse of the fact that NPC's are stupid and will not attack the weakest link. Try to put this situation into a model when DM is controlling the enemies. Your lvl 3 will go down first with an arrow in neck. And guess what - it is only logical.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
But I see the reward. Let's put your idea into action:
A level 3 wizard Trolo wants to go out and kill pirates. Out from some RP pretext (vengence) he gathers a party of heroes (OOC : his pals) and they go hunting.
Now... level 10 Big Max barbarian and level 10 Holly, a priestess, cutting pirates in half whilst Trolo is hidden behind rock, because he depleted his magic missiles ten minutes ago.
Now, my question is, why should he gain any xps? He is useless, he is hidden, and all the rp that will happen is :
After a horrible battle, Trolo walks towards Big Max and Holly, clapping : "Magnificent work, you really killed them good. But look, there is more of them. Go go go!"
No. The reward for partying with higher levels is RP. In the end, this is a RP server. You do not get xps for a little chat in town, for writting a book, for any RP when DMs are not around. But it does not mean you RP only when DMs are around, right?
I see XPs as a bonus for participating in something. In battle, it means for participating on the kill.
You do realize that you just described a mage at any level, right? This is especially true for low-level mages that lack any real buffing or offensive capability. Hell, my spellsword spent the first 20-ish levels doing nothing but buff other party members and be invis (because he focused on protective spells). So I really do not see a point in there. It doesn't change anything.
To the broader point of 'why should a low-level get XP for doing nothing': experience by observation. It's not as good as fighting experience but it's still learning. Which is why the amount of xp you garner by being out of range should be drastically cut.
Perhaps we could remove the level restriction but then cut the XP gained to a flat 15 or 20. That's what you get by fighting something that is just below your CR (something like that). The catch: The highest level person in the group (or people if there are a few out of range) get 1 XP.
_________________ Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play: Salema Nefahri::A penny for your thots Zrae'a'stra'fryn::That which nightmares are made of Khasir::From the East a storm is coming
>>You can get to 30 in a week already, if you're determined.
Really? I'd love to know how, but I never will.
I have alt-itis, and no character over about lvl12, and it's got to the point where I assume I will *never* be able to level them and am looking at what social RP I can get with the powers of a level 3. My level 4 wizards and rogues die so often solo that even getting to 5 is an issue, and that's with knowing where to get misty potions, rods, etc.
The game is good, in that I'm useful against DM event threats or evil PCs even if I'm NOT a level 30 pvper (it looked like that wasn't the case when I first joined some years ago). The levelling and grouping is very, very bad and needs changing when there are this few players on the server, because it's got to the point where I think "I could solo kill 1000 trolls for another level, but why would I? Then it's just a solid week later and I'm level 12, having spent most of my money on potions/aid kits." I actually now want to plan some where I *never* level much, because I just can't face it.
Going on trips to dangerous locations with level 20-25s would absolutely transform the game for me (even if I'm spending the whole time hiding, stoneskinned and yelling for them to get the mobs off me the second anything turns up.)
The problems are exactly as you said: the top-end areas would become flooded, because if you can make 20xp from an Orc OR the same from a Giant, why not take the endgame one every time? That's before you look at the increased gold and loot drops. If there was some way to penalise out-of-level areas to be less rewarding than level-appropriate areas (but not zero), people would primarily do it for the grouping and RP, not the xp or gold.
But the low-mid level grind is THE major turn-off I have with Amia, and even if it can't be improved without causing problems, please be aware that for some players it's a serious issue.
_________________ Gunthar Einarsson, Skald. Also brewer of Ale. Also drinker of Ale. Marcus Tyrell, Druid of Mielikki. Julius Tarl, Sorcerer.
Last edited by steveb_uk on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 15:34 PM, edited 1 time in total.
You HAVE to assume the worst scenario when implementing a change. Always... Because when you are painting yourself a nice picture instead, you do not see the flaws. Edit: And also, it is "easy" to implement the change, far worse is reversing it back when it proove ineffective / flawed. So yes, I will always look at the dark side first and prior.
Iron's idea is nice and I believe quite pure (as he is a solid RPer), yet impossible to implement without being abused. And arguments like " There is already enough things you can abuse " are irrelevant.
And I agree with you, to some extent. But I think that the possibilities opened by this change would outweight the negative consequences. People already level fast enough, so taking a day or two off the maximum time it takes them to hit cap doesn't really concern me as long as it encourages other people to go out and RP with players who they normally wouldn't have the chance to do so with. For example, when I came back to the server I made a drow character (because drow are awesome and the people I knew that still played had drow chars), but every other drow was either at maximum level or close to it, so I was forced into soloing. And when you're a newcomer after 2 years absence and you're thrown into the dangerous new underdark... you're going to have a bad time. I got up to level 14... and then, I simply couldn't level anymore - Things were either too tough to solo or not worth any meaningful exp. And none of my character's acquaintances could help because I was only half their level. So, some people would drag me into a cave, toss me a few scrolls and invis wands and incite me to use them. Except I hate scroll leveling because it means sitting invisible while something else does the work... and when you're a warrior, that just doesn't sit well with me. (Again, YMMV). So I stopped leveling, which meant not logging in unless I saw others on, because the drow playerbase is that small nowadays. And after a while of not seeing others log, I stopped logging with that char altogether and moved on.
Now, under Iron's proposed system, many opportunities for RP would've arisen. The high levels from my character's house could've taken her on patrols, seeing the unknown places of the UD or simply keeping the place safe. You know, more than just "Here's some scrolls/buffs. Now go kill something".
Can I assume the worst out of people? Yeah, I can. I probably should. But I'm biased, since I got ****** by the OOC restrictions placed by ECL. And I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
Naivatkal wrote:
To the broader point of 'why should a low-level get XP for doing nothing': experience by observation.
I am willing to accept this in early levels. For example, you will be give xp for observation until you hit level 5.
Because quite frankly, observation is great when you need to learn something for the first time, aka. trolls hate fire. But you will not learn it "more" by watching ten trolls dying in flames.
Should this "observation" xp work, any ER junkie would be a MD.
I blame your avatar for this example, Naivy!
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
The problems are exactly as you said: the top-end areas would become flooded, because if you can make 20xp from an Orc OR the same from a Giant, why not take the endgame one every time?
I don't understand how that would be the case. Wouldn't you take the easier route?
steveb_uk wrote:
That's before you look at the increased gold and loot drops. If there was some way to penalise out-of-level areas to be less rewarding than level-appropriate areas (but not zero), people would primarily do it for the grouping and RP, not the xp or gold.
For the loot issue, I forgot to supply a possible idea:
Why not make the loot drops equivalent to the lowest party member's CR? That way, if a level 30 and 3 go to Brog, the level 3 is not getting +3 loot suddenly. They would be getting the measly crap they normally would. It would also remove the issue of epic chars using lowbies to inflate loot drop percentages. Because, after all, if you are doing it for RP and IC reasons you don't care that you are getting 1 XP a kill and drops worth 1k.
IC it is explained that other lower level people were stomped on for being there and boom, have some crappy gear!
Guardian wrote:
Should this "observation" xp work, any ER junkie would be a MD.
That's a terrible example, because ER is only remotely realistic :p lol
_________________ Whomst've'll'd'mn't I play: Salema Nefahri::A penny for your thots Zrae'a'stra'fryn::That which nightmares are made of Khasir::From the East a storm is coming
Perhaps we could remove the level restriction but then cut the XP gained to a flat 15 or 20. That's what you get by fighting something that is just below your CR (something like that). The catch: The highest level person in the group (or people if there are a few out of range) get 1 XP.
It shouldn't be as drastic as that for the high level. I don't see why we need to change the current formula much: XP is calculated for the whole party based on the average CL, but only up to a cap. That is to say, taking a level 30 with you to trolls will not give XP to anyone, but taking a level 20 with you to an area appropriate for level 15 when you're 10 should give everyone normal XP. Taking a low level with you to epic areas would normally decrease the team CL and thus boost XP, but that's where the cap comes in: you can't get more than a set amount of XP if you exceed the 5-level range, so it will always be more beneficial to go without the lowbie. I don't know the appropriate number; 20, 25? Either way, no XP boosting allowed.
And yes, the XP rate could be cut a little if necessary, but by no means more than 50%. Otherwise it becomes nothing but a token reward.
Ideally, it should be pretty seamless to to party with PCs of 6 or 7 level difference, and the differences should start showing when you're getting close to a 10 level difference. If you want training from someone higher than that, you'd have to go to risky areas and not have them clean up kobolds for you because that wouldn't give XP to anyone.
Guardian: you keep talking about abuse, but I haven't seen any example of it. Even the worst case scenarios seem uncool at most, and not something anyone would lose sleep over. I guess that's just a matter of preference and perspective; you see it as something really bad, but I really couldn't give a damn. Invoking realism (your arrow-in-the-neck example) is somewhat dubious in a game where you hunt monsters for two weeks and are suddenly able to take sixty sword stabs in the gut where previously you'd die from two. (I mean, your hit points really, effectively, multiply by 30 and then some.) If it's realism you're after, the whole concept of XP and levels in a video game adaptation of D&D is not for you.
_________________
On Joon, Kjetta wrote:
The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
IronAngel wrote:
Invoking realism (your arrow-in-the-neck example) is somewhat dubious in a game where you hunt monsters for two weeks and are suddenly able to take sixty sword stabs in the gut where previously you'd die from two. If it's realism you're after, the whole concept of XP and levels in a video game adaptation of D&D is not for you.
No no... the whole concept of xp and levels on Amia is bad at this moment from my point of view. If you lot is argumenting with " I can powergame myself to level 30 in no time " you are only prooving my point.
You have a different point of view, I have. No bad blood from my side. I just think that extending the level range will make it even worse. Because those who care for RP will always put Xp as secondary. And I know it looks impossible to some, but even a level 10 played by a solid rper can create hours of fun for big epics.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
Last edited by Guardian on Tue, Aug 28 2012, 15:53 PM, edited 1 time in total.
See? This is exactly what I am talking about. This is a complete abuse of the situation - abuse of the fact that NPC's are stupid and will not attack the weakest link. Try to put this situation into a model when DM is controlling the enemies. Your lvl 3 will go down first with an arrow in neck. And guess what - it is only logical.
I DMed a PnP game a while ago, and during the game one of the players made a very interesting point while we were discussing our most recent session. He felt that I was playing NPC's 'too smart,' both in terms of their planning for encounters, and in how they responded to player's attempts at intrigue, diplomacy, etc. And you know what? He had a point: I was using my own intelligence and experience to make NPC's act in a way that, really, wasn't in character. An experienced military officer might know to target spell casters first, but a group of bandits are just as likely to get so caught up in charging the enemy, swords swords swinging, that they wouldn't have the situational awareness to realize what was happening until it was too late.
So let's say a DM possessed a mob, and saw a level three standing in the back, minding their own business, occasionally shouting something indistinct over the clamor of battle. Why would you divert your attention from the guy trying to stab you in the guy with a sword to target some nobody in the back? No one with any kind of sense, in the heat of battle, would ever turn their back on actual threats to try to kill a nobody - the only reason to do so is purely OOC malice, to teach someone a lesson. And that's some seriously bad RP.
There is so much anger directed and people who 'cheat' or 'powergame' or 'exploit' or whatever, and that kind of hostility creates a hostile atmosphere. If you don't like how someone games, just let it be. I've partied with more than a few powergamers in my time on Amia and I've never met one who was part of any of the RP circles I found myself in. Powergamers don't bossgrind at level 30 because they don't have much use for the epic gear - the fun is in leveling up a new character and overcoming those challenges again and again. I cannot think of a single, tangible way that someone else's build impacts your RP at all, so all this fury is out of, what? A sense of 'fairness'? That you worked hard for your levels so no one else should get an easy way out? Who cares?! You're not going to RP with them so, really, live and let live.
Expanding the leveling range makes it easier for people to find parties, which means it's easier for people to RP while leveling up their characters, which makes the time you spend on the server more fun, which makes you more likely to come back. All of that is good, and the kind of people that are going to abuse or exploit these loosened restrictions are - let's be honest - not going to be in the RP circle anyway, so it's not worth working up a froth about.
Quote:
Because those who care for RP will always put Xp as secondary. And I know it looks impossible to some, but even a level 10 played by a solid rper can create hours of fun for big epics.
This has only ever been a theory in my experience - I've never seen it play out. Big epics have their own club, and that club is very exclusive. As someone who has spent the last few months trying to find people to party with in the low teens, oh my god it's a pain. If you're lucky there's one other person on, otherwise you sit around and wait for someone to show up, or get ignored by the Old Guard who have their own thing going on and you're not invited.
Open is better. Inclusive is better.
_________________ You dare mock the Tibbly one, catcherer of drowses?
Joined: 21 Jul 2005 Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
Guardian wrote:
Expanding the leveling range makes it easier for people to find parties, which means it's easier for people to RP while leveling up their characters, which makes the time you spend on the server more fun, which makes you more likely to come back. All of that is good, and the kind of people that are going to abuse or exploit these loosened restrictions are - let's be honest - not going to be in the RP circle anyway, so it's not worth working up a froth about.
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
TYP wrote:
If it makes you feel better, make the level 3's run around healing people so they can say they helped. Or, if you're into PnP, have them constantly Aid Another by shouting encouragement and warnings to their comrades in arms.
Now let's be fair...
TYP wrote:
So let's say a DM possessed a mob, and saw a level three standing in the back, minding their own business, occasionally shouting something indistinct over the clamor of battle. Why would you divert your attention from the guy trying to stab you in the guy with a sword to target some nobody in the back? No one with any kind of sense, in the heat of battle, would ever turn their back on actual threats to try to kill a nobody - the only reason to do so is purely OOC malice, to teach someone a lesson. And that's some seriously bad RP.
You ripped my example completely out of context. So let me re-phrase :
TYP wrote:
If it makes you feel better, make the level 3's run around healing people so they can say they helped.
So what would the mob see? Some tiny wizard-like fella tending wounds. I don't know... but I would cut down the tiny wizard to prevent him from healing the wounded heroes.
EDIT: Oh, Svensk, please check the quotes. I have never said these lines you have posted.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
You're looking for the "Amia, what happened?" thread if you want to talk about ideas to keep people staying. This thread is for the level cap and whatnot.
Also,
Guardian wrote:
[...] So what would the mob see? Some tiny wizard-like fella tending wounds. I don't know... but I would cut down the tiny wizard to prevent him from healing the wounded heroes
Whilst getting your arse kicked by everyone who actually can do damage while you're busy taking down a nobody
_________________ Aoth Nathandem - Wizard of house Tholaunt and chosen of Ma'at.
Joined: 21 Jul 2005 Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
The two threads are connected and both debate the issue. Whilst this thread debates one of the proposed ideas to increase population and prevent migration.
Joined: 15 Dec 2009 Location: The Sky Above The Rain.
666WaysToHell wrote:
Whilst getting your arse kicked by everyone who actually can do damage while you're busy taking down a nobody
Yeah, I forgot that taking down a "nobody" takes a lot of time.
Nevermind... those who actually wants to understand will. Others will argue.
I made my point. If there is a poll, I vote no. Nuff said.
_________________ Mercadier - *sleeps six feet under the warm sands of Khem* Alex - Life is adventure or nothing! Eddie - Sex, drugs and rock'n... more sex. ========= Obsidian (inactive)
When I say this, I say this is a player - not a DM - but I'd be willing to give a tiered system a shot.
Say,
Levels - 1-10 Levels - 11 - 20 Levels - 21+
It would be stupid, in my opinion, to have epic level characters run around with single digit characters and still expect them to learn something by watching some veteran warrior cut through monsters. It also makes an already easy server easier. I don't see the point.
_________________
<3 Maryn We are going to die and that makes us the lucky ones.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
FAQ
Search
Login
