View source for Talk:StendhalRPProposal

[21:33:14] <danter> hmm, so dex is used both for dodging and hitting<br>
[21:35:16] <danter> in RO they had one skill for dodging (agility) and one skill for hitting (dexterity), agility was also used for attack speed there, noted that we don't have any thing for attack speed<br>
[21:35:38] <danter> maybe we sholdnt have that either<br>
[21:36:20] <Athana_> What about a beastmaster? He can tame, invite creatures to get more food, make creatures join and help, transform in beasts with extra powers etc?<br>
[21:37:42] <danter> if we have a thief class thou, I think something should alter attack speed, cause that is a class I relate to a "ninja" class, depending alot on dodge and speed<br>
[21:37:52] <Oslsachem> you mean agility means legs/bodily coordination while dexterity means hands/arms coordination?<br>
[21:38:50] <Athana_> And stealth danter. All based mostly on agility. And luck to earn more money or items etc<br>
[21:41:52] <danter> hmm, we are not going to use the idea that you can only be human I see<br>
[21:42:38] <danter> should we still be able to make a rebirth, into a "higher beeing" formely a good or evil angel?<br>
[21:42:44] <Athana_> I think also about second 'job' advancement to choose like(for thief)bandit, killer or something,... . Ninja can be a job advancement for Monk warriors(they are great on unarmed attack). Mages will choose to advance to wizards of fire/poison, ice/lighning. Priests to clerics... Hmmm nah maybe it's too much<br>
[21:43:59] <danter> im more for the idea that you can become any class you want actually... what class you are depend on what armors and weapons you equip...<br>
[21:44:01] <kiheru> ninja sounds more like an advancement of a thief (with the stealth etc).<br>
[21:45:02] <danter> well, even if it is an advancement for thief, you still need those attributes that class depends on mostly<br>
[21:46:23] <danter> I don't want to copy too much from RO thou... where ninja is exactly an advancement from thief...<br>
[21:46:26] <Athana_> Yes kiheru, I guess u r right<br>
[21:47:05] <kiheru> I like an open class system too. You advance the skills you use<br>
[21:47:38] <kiheru> but if everybody else wants the traditional approach, I'm fine with that too<br>
[21:47:43] <Athana_> What about that gear system danter?<br>
[21:47:57] <Oslsachem> then the *class* would be the consequence of your actions rather than the cause<br>
[21:48:21] <mblanch> Good thing is that it can be a graph<br>
[21:48:35] <mblanch> so ninja can need both thief and Monk<br>
[21:48:40] <mblanch> you need to develop both skills<br>
[21:48:45] <danter> yeah<br>
[21:49:04] <mblanch> Remember to write down conclusions at the wiki :P<br>
[21:50:02] <danter> thats the idea I mostly like... then you need to go to those trainers, learn the skills they can learn, to later find that secret teacher far out in the bushes, to gain the speciallised class<br>
[21:50:58] <mblanch> danter: that and perhaps by using yourself the skill<br>
[21:51:04] <danter> but, you still have the chance of scrapping all your formor work, to gain a completely new class<br>
[21:51:06] <mblanch> danter: although later would be slower<br>
[21:51:38] <kiheru> a some sort of combined system? that sounds pretty good too<br>
[21:51:38] <danter> yeah<br>
[21:51:54] <danter> well, a combined system was what I wanted from the start...<br>
[21:52:27] <mblanch> BTW should gaining some skills disable your another set?<br>
[21:53:26] <danter> http://arianne.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php?title=StendhalRefactoringClassBasics<br>
[21:53:46] <Athana_> So figher advances to the kind he has more 'declension'?<br>
[21:54:03] <kiheru> probably not, or maybe degrade the skills slow: gaining 2 xp for skill X removes 1 xp from skill Y<br>
[21:54:03] <kymara> what did you decide about where to put this stuff?<br>
[21:54:09] <kymara> sf or wiki?<br>
[21:54:09] <danter> yes, some skills might work "directly" against eachother in nature, thus they won't be able to be used togheter<br>
[21:54:13] <Oslsachem> About the "forgetting old things in order to learn new ones", I think that something of the old knowledge should be always kept, like when you learn to ride a bicycle.<br>
[21:54:35] <Oslsachem> wiki kymara, to keep it more organized.<br>
[21:54:54] <kiheru> yep. it feels quite odd that you'd completely forget your old skills<br>
[21:55:29] <mblanch_away> Oslsachem: wiki for results, SF for discussion<br>
[21:56:02] <danter> not if you have some powerful magic that an NPC casts, that make you loose your old progress... in order to open your mind to other advantages :)<br>
[21:56:21] <kiheru> ugh<br>
[21:57:02] <kiheru> possibly with some magical skills (have white and black magic conflict), otherwise it sounds just bad<br>
[21:57:26] <Oslsachem> in that case he could put her magic to better use simply by making your mind more capable of retaining knowledge :)<br>
[21:57:28] <danter> well, anyways, the entire idea is that sometimes I think the classess is too locked in games... you make a choice but can never rewert it if you learnt that you don't like it<br>
[21:59:01] <Athana_> Yes, but some like more to be magicians or Monks or bowmen, and also different specialties is needed for parties<br>
[21:59:06] <danter> in reality, you almost always can change your way of life by taking a new education, but you hardly gets as specialised as someone who took that line from the beginning... if you arn'nt a very talanted pesron that is<br>
[21:59:34] <danter> and in arianne, everyone is a hero... meaning they are a prodigy never seen before conserning talent<br>
[22:00:15] <Athana_> Oh check Vechs. He looooves to be a thief<br>
[22:01:10] <Athana_> But something like Robin Hood<br>
[22:01:52] <Athana_> Underlaw, but still on the good side<br>
[22:02:51] <Athana_> But even a Necromancer(drow maybe?) can fight in a party for good cause in RPGs<br>
[22:03:17] <Athana_> Necromancer=dark priest<br>
[22:03:58] <Athana_> ...or he belongs on same magic school<br>
[22:05:11] <Oslsachem> what are classes going to be used for? are they merely an informative title? why not compute the current player's class using her current attributes?<br>
[22:06:21] <danter> well, a class is still based on what skills you have I presume<br>
[22:06:55] <Oslsachem> I mean, what entitles you to a class? choosing it?<br>
[22:07:12] <Athana_> Hmm maybe in what you are most good<br>
[22:07:21] <danter> maybe going to a hunters guild and sign upp to work for them?<br>
[22:07:26] <Athana_> Like for example you can be a battlemage<br>
[22:07:43] <danter> then you are a hunter, and gain the possibility to take quests from them<br>
[22:07:57] <Athana_> Battlemage is good in close combat but using spells from dinstance too<br>
[22:08:52] <Athana_> Yes, a mages guild to accept you, you must have good magic skills<br>
[22:08:54] <danter> anyone can get thrown out of a guild thou... and if you don't follow the guild standards... well... by by... your out of here<br>
[22:09:19] <danter> and in that way, we have a very good thing the karma can be used for<br>
[22:10:08] <danter> an acolyte (priest) hardly would be accepted if you had too bad karma for instance ;)<br>
[22:10:55] <danter> anyways, back to the real thing that started this discussion, namely base attributes<br>
[22:10:56] <Oslsachem> so the purpose of the classes is restricting quests/guild access to players?<br>
[22:11:18] <Athana_> And if you have bad carma? You are welcome to thieves or Heretics guild :-P<br>
[22:11:21] <danter> yeah, something like that<br>
[22:12:03] <danter> I would probably call it the warlocks guild and not heretics guild thou :P<br>
[22:12:41] <Athana_> Hmm but dark priest and Necromancers? Why not to a heretic guild<br>
[22:12:58] <Oslsachem> if that was the case, it could be delayed until stendhal has a class specific quest/guild by virtue of the YAGNI principle :) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YAGNI<br>
[22:13:02] <kiheru> yep. they would not call themselves heretic, knowing they are right! :-P<br>
[22:13:57] <danter> but still... what we first need, is a robust base system<br>
[22:14:17] <kiheru> yes. build the foundation first<br>
[22:14:32] <danter> all classes and the likes can come after we have decided on the base attributes<br>
[22:14:41] <Athana_> Yes, and mages who use very much black magic<br>
[22:15:00] <Athana_> Yes danter<br>
[22:15:30] <danter> so... <br>
[22:15:31] <danter> http://arianne.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php?title=StendhalRPProposal<br>
[22:15:59] <Athana_> And for guilds, we need big interiors, NPCs, quests from that guilds, games and offers only for guild members<br>
[22:16:07] <Oslsachem> I think we should define the classes in terms of percentages of the player's attributes<br>
[22:16:57] <danter> I was reading on that... and noticed that we only have one skill for hitting and dodging, namely dex... wich means that the thief class is missing alot of it's base <br>
[22:20:28] <danter> Oslsachem: if you are out in the forest, shooting a bow... even if your not shooting in that really good... cause you normally use your sword arm... what class are you then?<br>
[22:20:59] <danter> I would say that for the moment... you are a hunter<br>
[22:21:32] <danter> even if you might be an apprentice hunter<br>
[22:21:49] <Oslsachem> well, attributes are perhaps oversimplified because then intellingence includes cunning and wisdom too<br>
[22:22:15] <Oslsachem> you're a fighter using a bow?<br>
[22:22:26] <danter> well, can happen right?<br>
[22:22:35] <Oslsachem> of course<br>
[22:22:55] <danter> maybe I decided it was too dangerous... beeing soo close to your target... so I wanted to... stay a bit away from it<br>
[22:23:16] <danter> thus I started using a bow... but I can't shoot it that well... yet<br>
[22:23:38] <danter> but I would still consider myself as a hunter at that moment... just that I am an apprentice hunter<br>
[22:24:01] <Oslsachem> ok, you're a hunter wannabe so what? :)<br>
[22:24:04] <danter> well, conclusion:<br>
[22:24:24] <danter> attributes dosn't say a thing about what class you are, but what you see yourself as<br>
[22:24:34] <Oslsachem> there's a difference between what you consider yourself and what you're best at in that moment<br>
[22:25:10] <Oslsachem> when you ask for a task, they ask you to prove your skills with the sword and bow<br>
[22:25:18] <danter> yes, but I still left that warriors guild, so im an ex-warrior now, but a hunter apprentice aswell<br>
[22:25:19] <Oslsachem> what do you think they would think you are?<br>
[22:25:29] <Oslsachem> what you tell them or what they see you are?<br>
[22:26:23] <Oslsachem> oh well, let's say then that you are 95% warrior and 5% hunter<br>
[22:26:28] <Oslsachem> it's fair<br>
[22:27:04] <Oslsachem> we could have a main, second and third class at a current time<br>
[22:27:23] <Oslsachem> *given<br>
[22:27:39] <danter> id still say that you decide what class you are by yourself... namely by choosing guild, just that there is grades to how much of that class you are, apprentice, journeyman... expert, master etc etc<br>
[22:28:31] <danter> then, if someone comes up to you and ask... so, what do you work as....<br>
[22:28:42] <danter> then you can answer... well im an apprentice hunter<br>
[22:28:54] <Oslsachem> then there would be a "current class" and a "target class" what you actually are and what you would like to be<br>
[22:29:01] <danter> but you can still hide the fact that your a master swordsman aswell<br>
[22:35:12] <Oslsachem> well, I'm a bit lost with all this. We should get sure that everything can be put to good use in the game. There's not much point on being a fighter if you're the only one who knows it for sure by seeing it in your stats.<br>
[22:37:23] <danter> in pvp something like that is very... _very_ handy<br>
[22:37:34] <danter> cause you normally want to hide your true power<br>
[22:38:17] <Oslsachem> but then the other player must believe in your word? :/<br>
[22:39:11] <danter> well, if they don't belive in your words... you can still show them by yourself?<br>
[22:39:31] <danter> just equip a sword and warrior armor, and beat there assess<br>
[22:41:23] <Oslsachem> so class will effectively limit the equipment you can use? or the bonuses?<br>
[22:42:55] <danter> the main idea I had, was that armor and weapons should decide entirely what class you are... for the moment... just that you can't change your entire gear out in the woods to change from warrior to priest<br>
[22:43:25] <danter> http://arianne.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php?title=StendhalRefactoringClassBasics#Open_System<br>
[22:44:45] <danter> Oslsachem: that is the main idea I had for the class system... not certain that will be the system we will have thou... but you see the details there<br>
[22:44:56] <Oslsachem> but then, you are classless until you get a class specific armor which doesn't let the player choose the class from the beginning<br>
[22:45:14] <danter> exactly<br>
[22:46:47] <danter> and then you really start from scratch... you are that little boy that hunt rats down in the basement for the old lady with the rats problem, for a few gils, and later decide that... hmm im good with swords, I should join the warriors guild<br>
[22:46:56] <Oslsachem> anyway, that reminds me of the saying: "The Cowl Doesn't Make the Monk" :)<br>
[22:47:15] <danter> FF style on money :P<br>
[22:48:45] <danter> but still, making the class choices ingame (and not before you start playing) is the best way in my opinion... cause then you can check with other players, and read in books in the library about the specific classes<br>
[22:49:02] <Oslsachem> That's fine for a single player but in this case, the rats problem of the old lady will look insignificant compared to her little boys problem in the basement :P<br>
[22:49:03] <danter> before you make a decission<br>
[22:50:09] <danter> well, we have a pretty nice rat dungeon in semos... Id say it's rather big... so the old lady in this case is the old mayor, <br>
[22:50:17] <Oslsachem> I agree that your class choice should reflect your behaviour in game, but I thought you wanted to allow the player choose the class from the beginning<br>
[22:51:55] <danter> well, if we make it in a nice way, you will be able to... just go to that veteran solder who has tryed the most in his life, and he will give you a few pointers on what yhou should increase in order to become that class<br>
[22:52:34] <danter> maybe he can teach some very basic class skills from most classes aswell<br>
[22:53:47] <Oslsachem> so you suggest the class isn't chosen directly but indirectly through attributes?<br>
[22:54:41] <Oslsachem> what are class skills? I thought class and skil were the same according to the wiki<br>
[22:57:21] <danter> http://arianne.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php?title=StendhalRefactoringClassArcher#Archer_Class<br>
[22:57:39] <danter> some we probably will have for archer as it's named<br>
[22:58:06] <Oslsachem> anyway, organizing skills in a tree prevent a player from being in more than one class at the same time, like 50% fighter 50% hunter<br>
[22:58:32] <danter> hrm... mblanch_away have named the classes skills on that new page o_O<br>
[23:00:12] <danter> well, the tree is intended so that you need to learn some basic skills, before you can learn the more advanced skills<br>
[23:00:15] <Oslsachem> hmmm... so this would be the equivalent to spells in the mage class?<br>
[23:00:21] <danter> yeah<br>
[23:00:43] <Oslsachem> but these should be learnt after you are an archer not before<br>
[23:00:51] <Oslsachem> they presume you're one already<br>
[23:01:18] <danter> well... did you read that Open class system idea?<br>
[23:01:31] <Oslsachem> yes, but I've forgotten :P<br>
[23:01:39] <danter> it's a rather crucial part of this entire idea<br>
[23:05:14] <Oslsachem> what are opposing skills?<br>
[23:05:29] <durkham_laptop> white and black magic<br>
[23:06:17] <durkham_laptop> blacksmith and knitting :)<br>
[23:07:04] <danter> skills that entirely is against eachother in nature<br>
[23:07:53] <Oslsachem> "change the gear to fit the opponent they are currently fighting" -> you mean classes are like the "Rock, paper, scissors" game?<br>
[23:08:44] <danter> well, if you are fighting an elemental, that hardly takes damage from melee damage, you sholdnt be able to suddenly become a mage to fight it better<br>
[23:09:11] <danter> thats what a party is for, one play the mage role, one the tank/warrior role and yet another the healer/priest role<br>
[23:10:28] <danter> and some dungeons should probably have a mix of magically strong creatures, and physically strong creatures, so one alone woldnt be able to clear it<br>
[23:11:29] <Oslsachem> well, I wouldn't disable skills, you could still be a mage but the armor you're wearing would put a penalty to your skills<br>
[23:13:46] <kiheru> we probably need a magic channelling attribute for items. So that wizards would naturally prefer robes and a staff for instance<br>
[23:14:28] <danter> the thing is that you still sholdnt be able to use a skill like "Quick Strike" when you are a warrior<br>
[23:14:56] <danter> or the skill "Falcon Eyes"<br>
[23:15:37] <danter> well, the skill "Falcon Eyes", probably should be possible to be used...<br>
[23:16:09] <kiheru> so limit a quick strike to light weapons. a warrior would not like to use those anyway<br>
[23:16:30] <danter> quick strike should be limited to ranged weapons<br>
[23:16:40] <danter> Quick Strike - Waste some MP to fire a few fast arrows towards one opponent<br>
[23:17:19] <danter> i defently would like to be able to use such a skill as a warrior... doing a few fast sword attacks instead<br>
[23:17:37] <Oslsachem> maybe quick shot is a more appropriate term as it implies that something is thrown<br>
[23:18:25] <ChadF> danter: the tricky part is "when to use it and when not to" and avoiding a complex interface<br>
[23:19:13] <danter> yeah... thats the biggest problem about all classes I belive<br>
[23:19:14] * Oslsachem hears mblanch_away saying KISS...KISS...<br>
[23:23:30] <Oslsachem> I think the "when to use skill" should be related to the player's attributes and armor/weapons should alter/require some of those attributes and skills at the same time<br>
[23:38:06] <ChadF> Oslsachem: for my idea, there would be a set of skills groups associated with each weapon/shield/whatever, each having a percentage of the whole skillset.. so a short sword might have (from an atk perspective):  atk:20 stab:10 swing:20 sword:25 close_range:25   ... a long sword: atk:20 stab:5 swing:25 sword:25 medium_range:25   and a dagger:  atk:20 swing:10 stab:20 dagger:25 close_range:25<br>
[23:40:29] <ChadF> each skill contributes based on it's ratio, and as you learn, they up those levels based on the same ratio.. and lets some skills traverse weapons.. and any sword ups sword, swing, and stab skills, but others may have other common "learned skills"<br>
[23:41:35] <ChadF> (in this case I used ratio values that add up to 100%, but in impl it would just figure out the ratio itself  (each / sum{all})<br>
[23:44:39] <ChadF> in the end someone that has mastered a sword will be rather bad at a bow/arrow at first (only the general "atk" skill giving them any base skill)<br>
[23:49:06] <Oslsachem> and how do you implement the penalties/requirements? with negative ratios?<br>
[23:51:11] <ChadF> so a penalty would be "unlearning" a skill?<br>
[23:52:29] <ChadF> if you mean for things like HP or MP, thos would be handled differently.. this would just be for learned skills, not energy levels<br>
<br>
[00:45:23] <danter> http://arianne.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php?title=StendhalRefactoringClassMage#Mage_Class<br>
[00:45:58] <danter> first skill tree made... nothing is writtened in stone yet, but atleast my idea of a skill tree is there<br>
<br>
[01:06:29] <Oslsachem> ChadF: why do you normalize the skills associated with each item?<br>
[01:09:24] <ChadF> each skill would contribute a certain amount to the full potential of the item. But that can't be more than 100%, so their ratios are used to build their contributions toward it<br>
[01:15:34] <Oslsachem> I don't understand what the full potential of an item is... You mean the strongest blow/shot before it breaks?<br>
[01:26:06] <ChadF> A weapon has a certain about of potential damage that has to follow the [game] laws of physics.  A wood club (for example) should never be able to inflict damage above a certain point, no matter how good a player is. So it's limit would be directly tied to it's atk value (assuming mastered player skill).<br>
[01:26:33] <Oslsachem> dagger:  atk:20 swing:10 stab:20 dagger:25 close_range:25 --> how would you calculate how much potential does the player get from the item?<br>
[01:27:10] <ChadF> so if a player has reach 100% on all skills that contribute to using a wood club, then that would end up (give or take) 100% of it's max atk.<br>
[01:28:15] <ChadF> wisdom(skill[atk]) * 0.2  +  wisdom(skill[swing]) * 0.10  + wisdom(skill[stab]) * 0.20 + ...<br>
[01:28:40] <ChadF> wisdom is a value from 0.0 to 1.0 based on a level<br>
[01:31:57] <Oslsachem> but atk, swing and stab are supposed to be based on level too<br>
[01:32:18] <ChadF> they aren't based on levels.. they are levels<br>
[01:32:47] <ChadF> so basically atk is split into functional atk values, not just one general one<br>
[01:36:36] <Oslsachem> what's the relation between a player's level and skill levels then?<br>
[01:40:40] <Oslsachem> I was thinking that if wisdom() was al inear function you could call it just once? :)<br>
[01:44:13] <ChadF> it's an exponential curve (but precomputed in a lookup table), like xp <-> level  is<br>
[01:49:08] <Oslsachem> when do you reach wisdom 1?<br>
[01:53:51] <ChadF> at the maximum level<br>
[01:54:56] <ChadF> but it's an inverse curve.. so you gain wisdom faster at first, then more slowly<br>
[01:56:03] <Oslsachem> so there's a level cap<br>
[01:57:02] <Oslsachem> yes, I see it's a logarithmic curve but capped<br>
[01:59:24] <Athana_> I'll read last logs tomorrow cause I'm sleepy. But so far I red about danter and hunter. Hmm we can name them as hunter, if he is good in bow and close combat, bowman if he is great in bow and not good in close combat, archer if are very good on bow and almost useless and weak on close combat, Ranger(preferably elf)if you are good in bow, sword, with very good survival ability in harsh environments and with bonus in forests, etc<br>
[01:59:32] <ChadF> right.. so if a player was to make out their level for each skill that contributes to an item, they get it's full potential (or some scale.. perhaps a *really* experienced player could find ways to utilize an item to 120% of it's potential)<br>
[02:05:02] <Athana_> And a berserk skill for Barbarian warrior...<br>
[02:08:53] <Oslsachem> Anyway, ChadF, what you suggest with the wisdom modifier is that two persons with the same set of skills wouldn't take the same potential out of the same item but that seems quite improbable because the set of skill levels should reflect the wisdom level of the player<br>
[02:09:22] <Oslsachem> In other words, how could a player gain wisdom without increasing her skills?<br>
[02:17:55] <ChadF> they can't.. the skill levels will be low to start (just like atk & def are now), and as they use items that relate to skills, those particular skills get raised<br>
[02:19:35] <Oslsachem> so what do you try to address with the wisdom modifier? I mean, if a player has more wisdom then she necessarily has higher skills already<br>
[02:20:21] <ChadF> a way to map a skill level to a usable scaling factor<br>
[02:21:25] * ChadF would personaly prefer that most skills increase from use/practice, unlike now where it only raises special conditions (not that that can't still exist for certain skills)<br>
<br>
[02:48:06] <danter> http://arianne.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php?title=StendhalRefactoringClassMage#Skill_Tree<br>
[02:48:40] <danter> there, fixed that skill tree a bit... noticed that it went outside screen on lower resolutions... and it will probably continue in that direction aswell<br>
[02:51:41] <danter> this is a way that I want the classes to progress (should be similar skill trees on other classess) even if we decide that you choose the class at character creation or not<br>