Progression

Peace420 · Post by **Peace420** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 9:49 am

Wyrmwrath wrote: I am FOR a slower progression. Actually I am for a steady and continous progression where advanced/higher level skills get more expensive. I believe that there is no point where somone cannot learn new things as easily as when they were young. Mastering anything is hard (expensive in skill points) because on any topic, the more you know the less new things there are to learn.

That's the Nero and CARPS systems. FH was designed with a cap in mind, not because people can't learn new things but because eventually there is a huge disparity between long time players and newer ones causing the GM's to run 3 games, a n00b game, a mid level game and an |_|b3r |337 |-|4x0r3d game.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 9:57 am

Why is it that I start getting a carps feel for most of these suggestions? Personally, I like the progression, since people are going to die. If you build a pc for years and then they die, you tend to be a lot more attached if it takes years to re-build, and may not return. This way in two events you are back up and running. Thus if I lose a character, eh, I've got another I can play right away (since I played a second character for two events).

Nelkie · Post by **Nelkie** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:06 am

I like the cap concept becasue it forces you to roleplay and rely on other PC's. No uber characters that can do everything and ruin it for the rest of the players. I also like the 4 events a year. I currently have trouble making it to all 4 events in a year as it stands, and when I get a child, than who knows. I support the curent way we level righ now. I totaly agree with both Eric's.

Donovan Thynedar · Post by **Donovan Thynedar** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 1:55 pm

I wouldn't mind seeing a few more things for higher level folks, but nothing drastic. I think the progression system is great the way it stands, and it definately encourages people to come back for that second event. I've always said that one of worst thing for a player to have is a feeling of uselessness/helplessness, and this prevents that from being a factor.

Wyrmwrath · Post by **Wyrmwrath** » Fri Aug 13, 2004 2:33 pm

My personal opinion is if a player is so attached to thier PC that if it dies they don't return, then they were not good for the game to begin with. That kind of attacjment makes people metagame and cheat when the PC is alive.
Now dont go no a rant about how long it takes to get powerful again, cause when you say that its just the powergamer talking. Any argument about how tough a PC is or isnt is all about powergaming, not role playing.

I understand that a "big" PC takes a great deal of investement, but its that investement that is supposed to be the journey you play the game for, anyone playing to be a badd ass isnt role playing.

Now, as for ubber PCs, the system I proposed would allow for PCs taht are very powerful in thier chosen focus area, but weak or useless in any other area, OR PCs that are knowledgable in many areas and masters of none. For example, a PC warrior that (in FH terms) swings for 4 crush, but that is all it can do, compared to a warrior that can swing for 1 vorpal or 2 crush or 2 magic. When faced with a golem that is immune to non-magic blows, warrior A is useless without help. Warrior B can handle the golem, and the gargoyle that needs vorpal to effect it, but not the demon that has a damage reduction effect of 3 (I.E. takes 3 off any melee attack).

I have played in systems that had constant progression but then made the mistake of NOT making the higher/more powerful skills crazy expensive. I had a "kill the town" Pc at SL, so I know what yo umean, but "town killers" are that way because they are allowed to diversify and have high level skills. THAT I am against. And no NERO isnt like that, the skill point progression drops to less than 1 per event, and the skill costs remain the same.

Donmayo · Post by **Donmayo** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 5:38 am

Eric R. That’s because I have played carps for 10 years.
Eric ...2?? last name slipping - I am not suggesting that we hinder lower players, just slow the progression a bit.

I REALLY like both Jux(oog name at 6am gone)'s idea and Brad L’s

Making lv 0 = current 4, is by far my favorite! I really think that event 1 players feel board. Eric and Aaron both want people to like their pc quick. So if we gave them the Exp for lv's 1,2,3,4 currently and come in that way. WOW that solves a lot of issues. First they get to have something beyond lv1 path, lv1 discipline coming in. But then we take the rest of the totally exp. up them a bit, NOT a lot, and progress them a even pace.

I NEVER said get rid of the cap. I said up it, but spread it out.

If it seems I only suggest this because I have two characters who are both at or very near 20th lv each, then fine. I will have a cataclysmic event and start over, to prove I care less about the mechanics. I just think it would even things out better, and quite frankly get people more attached to their character. Under the current system, I die? eh oh well, I get 4 levels for the event I die in cause I paid, as long as I start a new character that event, so by the next even coming in I'm already at 4. Which is a huge chunk of my points. One or two more events, and I've build my character as big as he is going to get, everything else is just extra skills that I get told to take by my guild.

Post by **GM_Chris** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:17 am

Well not saying I like upping the points, but if we did that then I would be in favor of removing hero points.

People seem to forget that after level 20 people get hero points and more political power.

Chris

Post by **GM_Chris** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:20 am

Also dont forget that one thing will not change in FH...we will not come up with anything that changes the system meaning we will not, for the sake of getting more cool stuff, make all disciplines go to 5th level and add a bunch of skills.

We will also not do things like up the damage people can swing. I can tell you right now we use to have a few people swinging 4 and it is WAY WAY too much.

Chris

Lao · Post by **Lao** » Sat Aug 14, 2004 11:01 am

So if 4 is way way too much...

wouldnt that mean 3 is still way too much

If you figure each way is equal to 1 pt of damage then logic would follow that 3 damge is still way too much.

Evan

P.S. Sorry I just couldnt help myself.

dier_cire · Post by **dier_cire** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 9:32 pm

Actually, some of us could swing 8...

4 and 5 are way gross in this system. 8 was ridculous. Damage should never go up.

Honestly I don't see a reason to change anything in the exp system. In FH, it takes very little time to get powerful again after a death. Does it matter? I don't think it does. I think it only matters to those that dislike new people being as powerful as they are. Thing is the older player know the tactics better, they have minor items to help, they have bero points, possibly house powers, and they will generally have more things/buddies stashed away. Powergaming in this system has very little to do with a single character's abilities.

As for people liking their characters quick, this is true that it's good, but I feel that giving people a session to get aquinted with the world is good first.

Corbyn · Post by **Corbyn** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 9:41 pm

I really like the current exp. system and progression. Particularly because we are continually having a stream of new players. It adds a lot to the game intensity to have the new people be instantly useful or threatening.

Tonia Glowski · Post by **Tonia Glowski** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 11:33 pm

Here's what I suggested some time ago:

http://www.finalhavenlarp.com/phpBB2/vi ... .php?t=274

Kidwynn · Post by **Kidwynn** » Sun Aug 15, 2004 11:53 pm

I agree with Vince on this one.

We are getting in a lot of new players, which is awsome. The fact that they feel really involved with stuff right off the bat is great as well.

Think the progression is fine where it is. I mean after you get into the higher levels it becomes more about the role-playing and less about the points and all, which I am finding to be a whole lot of fun.

Post by Ug » Mon Aug 16, 2004 8:39 am

However, here is my question. DO the new people feel instantly involved and useful?

My first event with Ug, I felt pretty instantly invovled, however I've been LARPing for over 8 years, so it was easy for me to figure out how to do that.

Did I feel instantly useful? Not at all. I actually felt like the most useless lump of clay on the field. On my second event I felt VERY useful however because I became instantly empowered. Which actually kind of hurt my RP a bit.

Peace420 · Post by **Peace420** » Mon Aug 16, 2004 11:01 am

Soco, It's Erik and the last name is Temple

Would I like to be able to do more stuff? Of course but then I'd pretty much be self sufficient outside of gathering resources. The game the way it is pretty much makes you have to rely on others for some things, a part of the game that I really like.

It's really hard to feel useful your first event at a LARP, hell it took me a year to feel useful at all at CARPS, then I stopped spending my points.

But I'm wierd like that.

I don't think the progression needs to be messed with really, it does make people feel useful quickly, and it keeps players close enough that you don't end up with 3 different games. Is it perfect? probably not since very very few if any things in this world are. Does it work for this game? Very much so IMO.

Progression

Leveling

RE

RE