Quests for new skills

[jagg]

For axample, a supremely-skilled fighter (ahem) might acquire skill with two weapons, or a paladin might become proficient in circling, for example, as a result of completing an exceptionally difficult and arduous quest. Not really thought about all the classes, but I'm sure there would be appropriate things for them to also learn.

[Kampfer]

perhaps only something to gain when you got proficient.. like a DK could gain "FEAR AURA" skill

paladin could get "Bless Aura".. its giving +1 to touch attack to the person in the group they are in.

so.. add skills for proficient only is more reliable than quest.. because its too easy to do a quest.. need potions.. protections.. so everyone will get special skill and it won't be special if everyone have them.

to reach proficient it take alot more than couple of potions and protections... trust me.. and almost everyone here know what i'm talking about.

[Scorpion]

Hmm, i do agree on getting new skills at higher lvls, but i think it should be class related, and not just a skill that other classes has.

thiefs allready have that, they can learn there skill to avoid blows and attacks at lvl 7. Monks too (TOD). But why not make all skills lvl related.

For example a paladin. in the beginning (lvl 1) the basic skills like learning spells from scrolls and casting magic. Then at lvl 3 they learn to pray and at lvl 7 they learn to turn undead.

I don't think a player, when he chooses a guild, he knows all the skills (most of the time you know all of them). I think more lvl related.. Like lvl 3,7 the lvl restrictions don't have to be that high, but just more realistic i think. Or doing a quest and then as reward learn a skill.

[jagg]

so.. add skills for proficient only is more reliable than quest.. because its too easy to do a quest.. need potions.. protections.. so everyone will get special skill and it won't be special if everyone have them.

to reach proficient it take alot more than couple of potions and protections... trust me.. and almost everyone here know what i'm talking about.

Congratulations on your recent 'proficient', by the way, Kampfer

This wouldn't...er...have any bearing on your opinion, at all, would it?

[Kampfer]

This wouldn't...er...have any bearing on your opinion, at all, would it?

Not at all.. I always believe people who get proficient shouldn't only get extra cash from selling but special skill.. something only the top players can have.

its like in one of my other post.. paladin should get some kind of resist-disease or immune to disease and fear spell when you are proficient. that is only one exemple but everyone understand.

[Scorpion]

I have an idea that might be something when you reach proficient is that when you creature a char, you have to choose stats. After reaching high lvl and proficient you might see that you have choosen wrong stats, well, all of my chars have wrong stats (wrong could be replaced with: Not the best).
So when you give people a chance for 'correcting' their stats when doing something special (proficient).

This idea might not be that good, but creating a 2nd char of the same guild (example: Elnor and Kampfer) only because stats could be better isn't really fun. Offcourse with every stats you can get to lvl 18, but if you have no knowlegde of what to choose for stats, your char could be a lot better.

Offcourse this idea came up to me cause allmost with all of my chars i can choose better stats.

[Valiant]

Yes... enhance your character for the best stats...

We'll have an army of clones walking around eventually. I say these 'mistakes' add to diversity. Better to keep it the way it is.

[kestrel]

How about an option to change stats where you lower one stat by 2 points to increase another stat by 1 point. Also, only allow stat changing in certain locations, like clanning is only allowed in certain spots.

[jagg]

This idea of adjusting stats has occurred to me as well, though I never bothered to post it because I didn't think it would be implemented. Anyway, I do agree with Valiant that a particular set of stats can give you a good basis for a chracter's persona. And as regarding the 'perfect' stats for a class...that must surely be a myth?

However, I would like the opportunity for some tweaking. Here are some suggestions:

Every three or six levels (depending how much you wish to allow), you could switch a point from one stat to another. This would allow a bit of tinkering but you aren't going to completely change a character with a point here or there.

Alternatively, what about some control over the level-based increases? Perhaps specifying which stat(s) you would prefer the increase to be in. Or, specifying which stat you definitely don't want any more of.

And as a third alternative, perhaps one DM-approved stat rewrite per character. This might be taken early, for those classes you aren't familiar with, to rescue those which otherwise aren't going to do any good, or later (I keep using the word tweaking but it's appropriate). For example, Jagg's stats wouldn't be out of place on a barbarian, and that's what he is - except to everyone's great surprise not least his own he can cast a bit as well. However, I feel that I've basically wasted some points on Con (not knowing what it did when I made the char) - now taking 20 points from con to other stats would be silly - it would transform him into someone entirely different - but a point or two transferred to piety say would be much appreciated. That's why I suggest changes requiring approval, to make sure the level of modification is not extreme.

I don my asbestos underwear in case the tone of replies is unsympathetic, and throw it open to discussion.

[Scorpion]

offcourse changing stats means changing stats which you choose when you start, else you can get 25 str/int easily, which would be nice, but just impossible without changing stats. So still max 18 at changing (without the extra point you get from lvling).

[Kampfer]

This idea might not be that good, but creating a 2nd char of the same guild (example: Elnor and Kampfer) only because stats could be better isn't really fun.

Nah you missed the point.. I tried alot of combinaison with elnor.. suicided him 3-4 times.. as the only REAL dark-knight I had to perform against scorpion/ghandi and valiant.. so my strong point should be stats instead of anything else... the fact is last time I suicided Elnor I asked to remove the name from the creation. So never again Elnor... and I leaved LOS for about a year... when I was back I start Kampfer in one shot and he is what he is.. he could have more AC with his dex but I choosed him like that.. so changing stats is more unreal.. I know casting a fireball is unreal too for our little humans brain but changing stats... especially when you are lvl 16+ is just cheating... remove some of your body resistance (con) to add to your intelligence is just non-sense.... OR get a f*cking good RP about your disease (for scorpion) which aweaken your body for months.. and you had only the possibility to study from your bed and you got some logical sense about more stuff.

For Jagg con isn't bad.. you got poisonned not too long and you gain a pack of HP from ticks... which again Kampfer lacks in.

We'll have an army of clones walking around eventually.

Even is a paladin is build on the stats of Kampfer he won't be as strong as Kampfer and i'm sure of it.. so it will be clones in stats but the reaction vs abitilies won't be the same at all.... plus the RP implented from player do the personnality (but everyone know that.

FINALLY... my point of view is.. no.. the idea of changing stats shouldn't be allowed but the system of every 4/6 (or whatever lvl) it could ask you where you want to put a point... like that it will increase the strength of our character by not losing a lvl of getting a unwanted stat.


P.S.: Wow.. one of my longest post

[Ghandi]

Here a reaction from my side.

Now before i write the rest of my post which i still have to make up, i think changing stats can be allowed (limited though) in some cases.

Why? For example Ghandi or Scorpion. It were our first mud char ever and we didn't knew anything about stats. Of course, of some like strength and intelligence, you know a bit what they do, but not of those other 3. So Ghandi is made out of random picked stats. I believe you can get lvl 18 with every chosen stat, though with some you will die more than with others.

Ghandi has too much con. You may recover 10 sec earlier with a high con, but usually he gets poisoned more than once, so the effect of a high con can hardly be noticed and cure-poison items are hard to get and rare. Like Jagg, Ghandi would prefer changing some con stats to piety as he now usually mends from 20-25 with rare high ones, but it's not enough.

I also believe there are perfect stats. Watch Kampfer for example. Even when he was lvl 16 i had really much trouble and now i can only beat him with crits since confusing not always lasts 5 secs or more against him.

Now i know a bit more about how stats work and what effect they have on a char (not all though) so with my latest chars i have thought more about dividing those stat points. But for my first chars a little change could be allowed.

[Kampfer]

I think its only up to you.. suicide Ghandi and make him again.. starting from lvl 1 to lvl 18 with new stats is something else than just changing 2-3 stats points at lvl 18.

and think about it.. how many player can really build their character like I did... else than me.. duel and perhaps you and meglaz.. I don't think you will see someone else. (oh.. probably erynn and kylan but their are elite

[erynn]

Elite?! I like it
My opinion on stats is that we should not be allowed to change them, because as Jagg, Valiant and Kampfer point out, it changes the character in question. For example, Erynn's main stat is intelligence. Never mind that when she was created int was not very important other than for stun duration: she's meant to be a thinker and a thinker she is. My ranger has stats that the DMs have goggled at, since she started off all dex and int and this was in the days where int did not help your spell success and rangers could barely cast no matter how clever they might be. She's got extremely low strength because I pictured her sneaking about through the trees watching things and firing arrows when appropriate... She was absolute murder to level but I chose the stats for her character, not to be powerful, and I think that's the way it should be.
However, I don't like what I know about stat bands and bonuses - where 9 for e.g. is in the same band as 13 (say). I feel that every stat point should count for something. If this was the case then I think people would not mind so much about "wrong stats" because there would be clearer benefits from "misplaced" numbers. For example, some clear benefits for mages who don't choose to maximise piety and int would mean that there is less of a "good stats/bad stats" situation and more genuine "different styles" - as Valiant says, who wants a game of clones? I like the recent changes, and I hope things continue to increase in subtlety.
As for new skills, I'd love to see any new skills in any class - something else to play with, but I imagine that such big changes must be very difficult to achieve and balance, so I'll quietly keep my fingers crossed on that one.