[crossfire] classes & guilds

[Juergen Kahnert]

On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 06:11:38PM +0000, Lalo Martins wrote:
> Also spracht Juergen Kahnert (Wed, 04 Jul 2007 15:16:11 +0200):
> >> The comparison with an untalented black-belt vs. a talented one is
> >> IMO not fair.  A better way to think about it is comparing two
> >> fighters who were given black belts by the same, rigorous master,
> >> in which case they should have more or less the same skill.
> >
> > I can't confirm that.  They won't have the same skill.  In fact
> > there can be huge differences between them, even with the same
> > master teaching them at (and over) the same time.
>
> Then I'm sorry, we seem to have a fundamental difference of philosophy
> wrt. the real life.  I don't believe in that.

<OT>
Maybe you don't see that with karate.  Than look into education
institutes.

There are people learing all the same, writing the same exam, getting
the same mark.  But as soon as they encounter something new, they never
saw / learnt before, some of them (with the natural talent) are able to
combine the learnt stuff and solve the problems, the others not.

I'd once a professor who said an exam is just another lesson to learn
something.  Lot of students complained about that it's far to hard,
because they never learnt to solve such kind of problems.  That was
wrong.  It just separated the wheat from the chaff...

There was, there are and there will be always people doing better than
others on the same [education] level.
</OT>


> Finally, there has been talk of redistributing spell levels, and I'm
> taking for granted that this *will* be done for 2.0.  The current
> spell levels are artifacts from when the highest level was, I don't
> remember exactly, 40 or 50.

Yes, this needs to get fixed, too.


> I'm just saying, an untrained person will use the tools (weapons in
> this case) that are easier to grasp, while someone with formal
> training will have more breadth.

Agreed, I also think that a level on items would be a good thing.


> > On the one hand you're saying, that you should be able to master
> > every skill by your own to the same level as others with a teacher.
> > On the other hand you deny that for the praying skill.  I think
> > that's inconsistent.
>
> Er, no, I never said that, where did I?

In fact, you never said that, it just sounds like that.  I can't see the
special thing why changing the cult needs help from others...

Just watch your steps if you're running around in valriel or gorokh
before you pray. ;-P


> Only by joining an "advanced" society as I described later, one that
> only admits you if you are a warrior and then teaches you some magic
> -- making you the equivalent of today's "warlock".

And you end up with characters looking all the same, because they will
make a tour through all the guilds to achieve all the skills...


> > Besides that, I think CF needs much more party support to make this
> > work well - if ever on a tiled 2D map.  I don't see much parties
> > going deeper at raffle2 after the trolls are dead.  A CF party is
> > just used to level up a character fast, nothing more.
>
> That is at least partially true, maybe completely.  But I'm assuming
> we'll address that for 2.0 as well.  Even if we don't, it's worth
> making it easier to party, if the cost isn't very high, because then
> we're more encouraged to improve partying later, in 2.x :-)

But how?  I've no good ideas how to improve the party support on a tiled
2D map game that it will really work.  Which doesn't mean that it can't
be what I can't imagine. ;-)

    Jürgen