[crossfire] race/class lacks distinctions

[Mark Wedel]

Nicolas Weeger (Laposte) wrote:

> 
> What about limiting skills in which you can get over level 20 (or 30, or 
> whatever)?
> So if you're fighter you can get one/two handed weapon and punching to 50, 
> smithery to 40, use magic item to 30, but can't have sorcery/pyromancy over 
> 20?
> Of course that's arbitrarily limiting skills one can use. But this thread is 
> about that, I think ^_-
> That'd also require quite many balance changes.

  That is sort of what I also said in the original message.

  However, I certainly don't want to have lines in the code of things like 'if 
player class if fighter and skill is pyromancy, max level is 20'.

  That just gets really messy, and has to be updated whenever a new class may be 
added.

  I'd much rather that all that information be stored in the skill object 
itself.  Which then goes back to having different skill objects, and characters 
getting these different objects based on if they start with the skill or learn 
it later on.

> 
> More global idea, limit player to having p high level skills in a group of p + 
> n (ie: 2 of one/two handed weapon / karate / sorcery / pyromancy / evocation, 
> 2 of smithery / alchemy / bowyer), the remaining having some cap or penalty.

  I'm not sure if that is good method, however.  For one, it means some skills 
will always be second class skill.  Granted, it is hard to get some skills 
pretty high, but I doubt many people would ever want a high singing skill if it 
now prevents them from getting a high spellcasting skill.

  The other problem here is just ordering.  Maybe you want a high alchemy skill. 
  But in the course of adventuring, your combat/spellcasting skills go up, and 
now you've reached your cap on the number of high level skills you can have, so 
you can never get a high alchemy skill.

> 
>>   In terms of these issues, I think the first could be fixed by adding new
>> items and a little code - use a key/value to store what class/race can use
>> an object, and add some code in the apply logic to check for it.
> 
> For races it sure makes sense (the armor is designed for a human, how can a 
> troll think about wearing it? size issues!).

  That wasn't my main concern - I really don't need to see 20 different types of 
armor (but how that titan can wear the same plate armor as you is a little odd).

  But most RPG's have some items that can only be used by certain classes/races, 
and it adds a nice little touch IMO.

  It may also add some more player interaction, especially if these items are 
somewhat rare but still findable at low level.  If you are a human but find an 
item that can only be used by a dwarf, it has zero use, but may have lots of use 
to a dwarf.


> Another idea is to add a skill requirement. Using eg Chaos Sword would require 
> level 40+ in one handed weapon. Complements item power, and if spellcasters 
> can't reach 40 in one handed weapon, well, they can't use CS, which seems 
> reasonable - you're a spell caster ;)

  That's possible.  I think we should be careful on the number of requirements 
that may be in place to use an object.  but having class/race/skill level 
requirements could be yet another way to help balance things.

> 
>>   What exactly these differences mean would have to be worked out.  At a
>> most basic level, it could determine the rate of exp you gain in the skill
>> (basic gets 25% of normal or something). There could also be level caps -
>> mastery caps at 110, advanced 75, expert 50, basic 25 (however, the fact
>> there really aren't many spells above level 20, this may not mean a lot).
> 
> Ideally, here's how I'd see the separation.
> 
> All players would have access to basic versions of healing, word of recall, 
> town portal, some spells here and there (identify, let's say "useful non 
> combat spells"). Higher versions would be reserved to specific classes (if 
> you're a fighter, don't except to be able to cast "regeneration" or "party 
> healing" or "meteor swarm", or with big disadvantages).

  It sounds like your basically trying to tie the spells to a class, and not a 
skill then?

  I'm not sure if this is the right approach.  If you read tchize's method about 
new character creation, he is proposing the idea that there are no classes 
really - you just choose the skills you want.

  While I don't think that is necessary good for new players, I think that is a 
valid option fo experienced players.  So under such a method, you really have to 
tie this to the players skill level, and not class (which actually sort of also 
means that item use perhaps needs to be tied to skill level also, and not class).

  But IMO, most of this balance should probably be driven by skills, and not 
classes.  Really, all that classes should determine is what skill (and quality 
of that skill) you get, and perhaps starting equipment.  So I think we have to 
be careful with tieing things to classes, as that is likely to not really work well.