[crossfire] classes & guilds

[Juergen Kahnert]

On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 04:57:16PM -0700, Mark Wedel wrote:
> Juergen Kahnert wrote:
> > Doesn't show the level itself the knowledge about a skill? Is having a
> > "master level 1" better than "basic level 50"?
>
> No.  If you are master level 10, and basic level 10, the skill
> operates the same.

I would say, no, the master should be better.  How?  Just use the
"affinity" value to modify the effect of a skill.

A warrior with a high affinity to one handed weapons should be able to
do more and "better" damage than a clumsy one.

You could use it as a divisor for the damage.  The lower the affinity
value the higher the damage and vice versa.  This won't work for every
skill, but most.  If not the damage, than the chance like for alchemy.
Or the duration like hiding.


> The difference is that it may take a character 4 times as much exp to
> get to basic level 10 as it takes a character to get to master level
> 10.

For example, if you compare two karate black belt fighter, both have the
same level (black belt), but they could have a totally different skill,
because of the natural talent / ability (here called "affinity value").

Someone who trained really hard may be able to beat someone with a high
natural ability who spent less time training.


> Reducing the exp gain is a very easy way to add some difference to the
> classes/skills.  Level caps would be another way (I know that this may
> not be liked, but if you instead say 'this class just doesn't get a
> skill', that is basically the same as a level cap of 0).

I don't say to deny a class a specific skill.  Just make it harder to
master and without advice of the guild masters, no chance to discover
the deepest knowledge.  This is because the guild masters have access to
the studies of generations.  If someone has to learn it all by himself,
he has to live very, very long. ;)


> > Every skill level you're able to read one skill scroll to decrease
> > the "affinity" value. And make skill scrolls a rare item.
> >
> > Only the class skills will be allowed to decrease below 1. And
> > skills unlikely to the class not below 2.
> >
> > This could be fine tuned if you like the idea.
>
>   One problem with this approach is that skill scrolls now become
> value for all classes and all levels (until such point as you've
> minimized the affinity for all your skills).  Which I'm not positive
> is a good thing

Ok, no problem.  Use a marker on every skill.  This marker will keep the
xp of the skill a character has by reaching a new overall level.  Now
calculate how much [overall] xp was gained through which skill.  And
those skills above e.g. 15% will decrease the affinity value.

This needs some tuning as well, and is independent from skill scrolls.


>   I have no problem with the general idea, but I think that any
> reduction in affinity should be done through quests (guildmaster
> teaches you something after completing quest, or some quest item
> reduces it).

This could be also done.  Add a flag which will decrease the affinity
value after reaching a new value.  Either by reaching a new overall
level or after reaching a new level of the skill.  This flag could be
set by the guild master, quest reward or whatever.


> I don't think having it changed on the whim of random treasure showing
> is that good.

As always, I just offer options how it could look like.  I'll never say
it has to be like this. ;)

Hopefully we're able to find a good solution for more fun with CF. :)


> So it is a matter of modify the treasurelists as needed to have
> different sets of skills for different classes.  Right now, there is
> something like a 'basic skill' treasurelist, which contains all of the
> basic skill everyone starts with (search, disarm, melee weapons, etc).
> Those need to get altered, so fighters get good versions of the combat
> skills, and mages get the bad versions, instead of everyone getting
> the same.

Or just stack them.  For example, if a fireborn gets 20 advances of the
skill pyromancy and the pyromancer also 20, stack them together and
advance the skill 40 times.  Starting with an affinity value of 5 with
an reduction of 0.04 * affinity value per advance, you end up with a
starting affinity level of ~1 for pyromancy as a fireborn pyromancer.


> I don't see any reason that every character should be able to learn
> every skill.  And in fact, right now there are a few special class
> limited skills (meditation comes to mind as one that can not be
> learned later)

Good example.  I've no idea why meditation shouldn't be learnable.  Even
if you never meditated so far, you'll be able to learn it (in the real
world).  Same for other things.  You're able to join a karate club and
learn karate, ...

Only because other role playing games have hard limits for races and
classes doesn't mean you also have to implement them.  Yes, copying
things is easier than develop new ones and may be more safe, but it's
not the case that it has to be always the same.

Same for weapon / armor restrictions.  Extend the bonus malus system on
weapons and armor.  A mage shouldn't like to use heavy armor because
this makes him fumble the spells more often and heavily reduces the
spell points regeneration.  A fighter wouldn't care nor notice the
malus, but a mage.


> The idea of skill/class reform in terms of archetypes doesn't
> need/have to conflict with the idea of guilds.  With all the changes
> above, there is nothing to prevent there from being fighters guild -
> but instead of it being based on class, it is really based on your
> skill level.

Sure, I thought we already agreed with that.  A guild will be based on
the skill level (way of living) instead of an initial class.  With the
initial class you are a member of the specific guild of that class, but
that doesn't mean you can't change if you follow the rules of another
guild(s).

Do you like to see me writing a summary / draft concept of the new skill
/ class / guild system?  Or do we need more discussions about specific
parts?

    Jürgen