[crossfire] xp gaining

[Mark Wedel]

Juha Jäykkä wrote:
>>   IMO, adding new regions when characters reach the cap is completely 
>> unrealistic, so I dismiss it as an option.  Sure, it sounds great, and
>> could happen, but past experience shows it won't happen.  Making a
> 
> Ok, you're more experienced on that, I trust your judgement. How about
> the kingdom and politics side? Could that be implemented? Or researching
> new spells or items?

  I'd need to see more details.  It really comes down to effort.

  To come up with a new high level area, you probably need around 50 maps - that 
is a lot of work - especially if you want good maps, and not just things with 
scaled up monster and no plot.

  I'd think researching new spells and items is more modest.  New items can be 
pretty easy - we'd need to extra work for spell research, but for new item to be 
created via players, that is really just adding some new formula - figuring out 
a good formula may not be easy, but one could probably come up with 5 new 
formula in the time it takes to do a map.

> 
>>   the other problem with this, and the other idea of limiting exp gain
>> based on overall level, is that it really means you need balance your
>> skill usage as you advance your character.
> 
> It does not have to be overall level, it could equally well be the
> highest skill level as well. Or, when killing monsters, it could even be
> the skill you use to kill it (although then we again will have high level
> characters in low level maps when they start a new skill).

  Right - so if the goal is to prevent high level characters from gaining exp in 
low level dungeons, exp gain has to be based on overall level, not skill level.

>>   I personally dislike games that force some style of playing.  I'd
>> dislike crossfire if I say 'I must improve my evocation skill right
>> now, because if I don't, I won't ever be able to get very good at it'.
> 
> That's true, it's not very nice. But "if I do not improve my evocation
> now, improving it later will be more difficult" is ok with me. It's like
> growing older: it's easier to learn new things when you're young and
> becomes harder with age. (At least that's the common belief, I do not
> know if it's true.)

  I don't mind if it is harder, as long as it isn't so much harder that it is 
near impossible.

> 
>> Whenever a character gains exp through any method, some portion (<10%)
>> goes into a reserved pool - these exp don't go into any specific skill,
>> but do count for overall level.
> 
> That might be a good solution. Anyone any objections or other thoughts on
> this?

  Just a note on this - I do believe that as part of a revamp, it should be 
possible to get to high level in every skill.  Right now, for some skills, there 
is basically some practical limit (literacy gets hard at some point - there just 
are not enough books about, and spellbooks are a good source, but eventually you 
know all the spells).  Those things need to be rebalanced - it should be 
something like 20 books at current level equals a level in literacy (which means 
level 100 literacy would be 2000 books, presuming they are all of the 
appropriate level).  That is actually a lot of books if you think about it.

  That said, the ability to shuffle some experience gives a way to get exp in 
harder to advance skills - it shouldn't be the only way to do it, but does help 
out.  In a sense, it is sort of like the AD&Dv3 idea of skill points you get 
each level.

> 
>>   And maybe the game should be that way - really focus on just a couple
>> skills per character.  But that really has to be clearly documented - I
> 
> I think it should. It should not enforce it, but it should make it much
> more difficult to be exceptionally good at very many skills. This fosters
> both class distictivity and multiplayer adventuring.

  I agree that should be rewarded.  I think some previously suggested 
adjustments (broader range of spell levels) might give more reason for this.

  But a good way to do this is tricky - the problem if you give less exp for 
lower level skills (so that if you are level 50 overall and level 5 in sorcery, 
it is now more difficult to get to level 6 sorcery than if you were level 6 
overall) is that this just adds the needs for those characters to go into low 
level dungeons to level up those skills.  Or if the idea of a pool of experience 
that can be shuffled, it means that the point at which it is worthwhile to go 
into dungeons to kill creatures is now lower levels than if the exp gain was the 
same.

  It is sort of competing needs - there is the desire for high level players not 
to level up their skills in low level dungeons.  But there is also the desire 
for players to concentrate on fewer skills and not be generalists.