• I agree that we could do more with the current character advancement, but I've been to other MUDs before (none long term), but through all of the 'set this, this and this.. now set some more stuff' it just seems very over the top, and more complex than it needs to be. I didn't like the 'You have x experience to gain for your next level' much, either. It would also assume that you'll forget significant amounts of crafting while you try to get more combat, and then you need to raise your crafting again, through which you lose the combat you just worked for.
• I think character advancement could be improved, but I'm not sure I agree that it must be this way. There seems to be a fear around the game currently of training 'cheap levels' which are determined as skills which a player doesn't use. Creating ways for each skill to be used for a player irrespective of their guild would add more depth, such as crafting ones own weapons, or perhaps fishing for food which may then be sold, building a house with tools and after chopping down trees. If you decided that today you felt like doing something new, you may come back and find yourself unable to fight very well, in which case I think most people would become frustrated with always having a skill drop while they try to get back the last one which dropped.
• Teaching another player? this would involve repetitive use of said command/skill, and would probably be beneficial to the teacher. Teaching/learning through whichever means should also be dependant on stats. An ogre with little intelligence may fail to grasp the concept of a new ability compared to a gnome with high intelligence. Also physical abilities (possibly only dependant on stats) are a factor, such as again a heavy ogre trying to dropkick. Do our current races have known abilities which are non dependant on stats (ie eyesight)? -- ProdigY - 14 Jun 2004

I'm sorry to say that, but I don't feel much like making an area that won't be used by the players....I think that the exp system/combat system should be fixed first before people worry too much on other things. -- DonaldKincannon - 22 Jan 2003

• • This is my idea on teachers having a role when there is no exp that you can invest with them to raise the skills directly, and it would be dangerous if teachers would give you money->skill-exchange right out, so this was the medium way I found. - PumaN

• • I didnt mean percentage since start, but in the last 'half-hour' (any good value, doesnt need to be timebased). Though, if you only have a few skills, it will ofcourse be possible to keep those at higher levels. - PumaN

-- PumaN - 14 Jan 2003

I like this categorisation concept. Would you suggest that the scale of naming be different for each skill.

Wrt to the main design

• I don't especially like the idea of a "current maximum". I'd suggest that skills follow a standard curve wrt to how hard it is to advance to the next level.
• We currently have the concept of restricting access to the individual branches below a top level, eg stopping training in co.me before enough co is known. Would just hiding the existence of all subskills in which you can not directly train be a means of implementing this?
• I don't think stats should alter much during normal use. How about having a set of "base stat levels", which you set during rearrange. This defines your character. Then through training you can raise them to new heights. Maintaining them at their new levels would require further training (tho less than the amount required to raise the stat in the first place) and possibly use of the stat.
• The percentage of use determining degeneration is a little dangerous - it implies that you MUST have something degenerate. Also if we have 200 skills but you just train 20 of them to new hights then they will probably never degrade. A purely time-based system is probably not ideal either tho.

-- FantoM - 14 Jan 2003

Fully fledged skill advance idea:

• Each skill is a leaf, on branches, on the skill tree (like now). To get access to individual branches you need to learn them (similar to LearntCommands).
• To advance a skill you need to use it, the more difficult the situation it is used in, the more likely it is to raise (see discussion below).
  • When a skill is raised above its maximum, it will develop a lot slower.
    • The maximum of a skill can be raised by having someone else teach you a higher maximum. (similar to LearntCommands).
  • The more branches you have access to, the slower does skills develop*
• Stats (str, con, dex, wis, int, cha) should function like skills and raise and lower like they do, with use
• Degeneration of skills could be based on what percentage of the total use that you have put into that one skill?

*Optional

-- PumaN - 14 Jan 2003

To give an extra psychological boost, skills could climb through skill-levels, such as novice -> master, and a skill would display the percentage you are to reaching the next level, this could be used directly in coding as well. If a certain command can not be learned until the 'master' grade, this gives a better feel than if it cannot be learned until the sixhundred-and-sixtie-fifth skillpoint. This should add more incentive to raising skills than pure numbers do.

-- PumaN - 14 Jan 2003

I'd happily move to a no-exp mud with just skill usage counting towards individual skills - but as Jubei says people like to see progress.

If we move in this exp-per-skill direction I'd like to see it pretty much equated to "use of a skill gets you experience in it which automatically raises the skill over time".

I'd like to see skills degrade over time. Rate of degradation being related to how high the skills is - retaining a basic knowledge in a skill should be automatic while maintaining level of 1000 could require at least 1 usage per 1/2 hour online time.

-- FantoM - 13 Jan 2003

%META:TOPICINFO{author="PumaN" date="1042426358" format="1.0" version="1.1"}% %META:TOPICPARENT{name="WebHome"}% Short discussion on skill-advancement I didnt feel like losing

Puma: Question is whether you want exp at all, as opposed to a system solely based on AAs...
Jubei: nod...we want some exp I think
Jubei: but moving to aa's isn't a bad idea
Puma: Why do you need it...?
Jubei: psychology...so you get a progressive linear reward for playing as well as one by chance
Jubei: people like to know they're getting close to progressing to something else
Puma: Ah, interesting...what about skill-exp...?
Jubei tells you: hmm?
Puma: Each skill gains exp individually...
Jubei: nod...that's what I think
Jubei: that'd be a good idea
Puma: Ive also seen systems based on money, buying time with teachers...
Jubei: as a skill gets used it should have a likelihood of advancing
Puma: Ah, that ones good...

-- PumaN - 13 Jan 2003