Page 1 of 1

Soloing small group play in 2.0

Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:09 pm
by Naled
I wonder what will happen with soloing and small group play in 2.0, hence the topic. With the current pbase a lot of the time it's hard to find a group, or a big enough group, to do things. Currently, I must say despite hard work to prevent this, there are still some things to do. Items can be twinked, quests can be done, and xp can be soloed. Without this the mud would have died off long ago.

Reading shev's posts i gather that it will be made much harder to solo or small group things. XP will be geared more towards grouping, mages will be more vulnerable, etc. This fits with the current policy to prevent small groups doing (part of ) zones already.

What will 2.0 do to make gameplay outside of the peak-hours viable? Or will the game die with the introduction of 2.0 because half of the pbase will no longer have the possibility to play?

Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:04 pm
by Gormal
The more you're allowed to specialize, the more powerful your character. Who says that mages are going to be weaker than they are now? You're going to have the option to add defensive feats to your mage and make it as soloable as you want. You'll be able to pick from a broader spell list, and choose the ones that best complement your mission. Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if all mage specializations have the ability to solo now.

Re: Soloing small group play in 2.0

Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 4:13 am
by Tasan
Naled wrote:I wonder what will happen with soloing and small group play in 2.0, hence the topic. With the current pbase a lot of the time it's hard to find a group, or a big enough group, to do things. Currently, I must say despite hard work to prevent this, there are still some things to do. Items can be twinked, quests can be done, and xp can be soloed. Without this the mud would have died off long ago.

Reading shev's posts i gather that it will be made much harder to solo or small group things. XP will be geared more towards grouping, mages will be more vulnerable, etc. This fits with the current policy to prevent small groups doing (part of ) zones already.

What will 2.0 do to make gameplay outside of the peak-hours viable? Or will the game die with the introduction of 2.0 because half of the pbase will no longer have the possibility to play?


Many of the current non-playing trolls on these boards would at least come back for a test-run at the new code. Who knows who is lurking in the shadows waiting for 2.0...

Re: Soloing small group play in 2.0

Posted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 7:33 am
by Cirath
Naled wrote:...mages will be more vulnerable...


I must have missed that part. Care to provide reasoning for this assumption?

Tasan wrote:Many of the current non-playing trolls on these boards would at least come back for a test-run at the new code. Who knows who is lurking in the shadows waiting for 2.0...


*peeks out from the shadows*

Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 6:40 pm
by Naled
Cirath wrote:
Naled wrote:Naled wrote:
...mages will be more vulnerable...

I must have missed that part. Care to provide reasoning for this assumption?


I can't find the exat quote, but I recall Shev mentioning that mages would require protection from warrior types in fights. I don't know anything about DnD3.5 so I'm just guessing on this part. It's not that important though.

What is noticable is that small group play on the mud is not exactly promoted. A lot of the things you can do with a small group are "fixed". Even some medium level zones with mostly quest items get changed so you need a larger group now.

Since Shev's coming up with a new and improved Toril it's no use in fixing this in the current incarnation. I am a little concerned however that this issue is being overlooked in 2.0

Posted: Fri Nov 03, 2006 9:09 pm
by Cirath
Naled wrote:I can't find the exat quote, but I recall Shev mentioning that mages would require protection from warrior types in fights. I don't know anything about DnD3.5 so I'm just guessing on this part. It's not that important though.


Mages will always require protection from physical dangers most of the time. If they could tank and rain down firey doom upon entire cities, then why would anyone bother playing a warrior? Though, it is possible to make the fabled "tank mage" in 3.5 with enough supplemental resources (or for very limited periods with the standard books at high levels), I doubt that they will skew the balance of the mud so far in the favor of magic users.

I do, however, agree with you on the point that the game does lack somewhat in activities for groups smaller than ten or so.

Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:08 pm
by Tasan
Naled wrote:Since Shev's coming up with a new and improved Toril it's no use in fixing this in the current incarnation. I am a little concerned however that this issue is being overlooked in 2.0


I'm sorry, but at this point how can anyone still believe that things will remain so close to what they are currently that they can get worried about things like this?

The game's fundamental mechanics are changing, hence it is impossible to know what sort of power players/mobs will have in the new system. I'm sure the areas sphere will be under a lot of duress to get things figured out during the beta period so that a general sense of balance comes together.

Shev has a good idea of how many people are going to be around if this thing turns out to be well done and I wouldn't be the least surprised to see at least a 25% increase in overall playerbase during the beta period. If you want to be worried about something, run through the sample progression material for the main class types in 3.5 and try to figure out which skills/feats you'll want :)

Posted: Sat Nov 25, 2006 11:38 pm
by daggaz
Umm... his point is entirely within bounds, hell I'm just trolling here but you all should pay a little more attention to the god posts.

I play(ed) a high AC soloing mage, as many of you well know, so I payed special attention to some of the things said, at least.

It was mentioned that AC items would be much harder to aquire for mages, even more so than after eq changes (laugh). It was mentioned that mages would be much more dependent on warrior types for protection, as their battle prowess, or lack there-of, would better reflect their actual class choice. I'm pretty sure there were a few other tidbits (IE buff spells) mentioned that warranted my shortspanned attention as well. All having to do with mage soloability.

Perhaps you are reading a bit too far into 3.5 rules, I mean, how much of that is even going to be imped, and of the parts that are, how closely will they resemble (in terms of both flexibility and straight up word for word exactness) what happens in a d20 game? Do you even know? I doubt it, the gods have been rather vague as to the exactness of what is going in, talking more about general things and being specific pretty much only when talking about stats and skills and how we would exchange our characters.

*a mage in the shadows, waiting for his chance*
-daggaz out.

Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 9:03 am
by Tasan
daggaz wrote:It was mentioned that AC items would be much harder to aquire for mages, even more so than after eq changes (laugh). It was mentioned that mages would be much more dependent on warrior types for protection, as their battle prowess, or lack there-of, would better reflect their actual class choice. I'm pretty sure there were a few other tidbits (IE buff spells) mentioned that warranted my shortspanned attention as well. All having to do with mage soloability.


I can't tell if you are talking about previous changes that didn't exactly hold to what we were told or the new stuff, but I'd have to lean towards old changes since:

Shevarash wrote:There is a huge amount of variety possible with these new systems, and will allow you to play the kind of character you envision. If you want to be a mage wearing chainmail and wielding a greatsword - you can do that. A Warrior with nunchuks and mixed leather and hide armors? Sure. The possiblities are near endless.


daggaz wrote:Perhaps you are reading a bit too far into 3.5 rules, I mean, how much of that is even going to be imped, and of the parts that are, how closely will they resemble (in terms of both flexibility and straight up word for word exactness) what happens in a d20 game? Do you even know? I doubt it, the gods have been rather vague as to the exactness of what is going in, talking more about general things and being specific pretty much only when talking about stats and skills and how we would exchange our characters.


It's fairly safe to say that when Shev mentions the entire thing is being based upon 3.5 and that he hopes to get Wizard's own seal of approval that much of the 3.5 rules will be implemented here.

If you want to be negative nancy, fine... but try to read and understand what is written before you start throwing doubt upon the process.

Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 5:48 pm
by Shevarash
Hmm.

As I think I've done a good job of indicating, Toril 2.0 is essentially a total rewrite of the game's core systems using the d20 rules. Obviously, translation and modification is required to make some of those rules work on a computer game, so there are some small differences.

As for D&D, 2.0 is based on 3.5, but is not a clone by any means.

There really haven't been any precedents in the MUD's history of a change of this scope. It is therefore safe to assume that "the game's fundamental mechanics are changing".

I hope that clears up any confusion.

Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 2:23 pm
by moritheil
Cirath wrote:
Naled wrote:I can't find the exat quote, but I recall Shev mentioning that mages would require protection from warrior types in fights. I don't know anything about DnD3.5 so I'm just guessing on this part. It's not that important though.


Mages will always require protection from physical dangers most of the time. If they could tank and rain down firey doom upon entire cities, then why would anyone bother playing a warrior? Though, it is possible to make the fabled "tank mage" in 3.5 with enough supplemental resources (or for very limited periods with the standard books at high levels), I doubt that they will skew the balance of the mud so far in the favor of magic users.

I do, however, agree with you on the point that the game does lack somewhat in activities for groups smaller than ten or so.


FWIW, let me point out that the end product of mage tank min/maxing in 3.5 is no better than a cleric (and usually worse, if a similar amount of time is spent min/maxing the cleric.)

The main problem with making an area for 3-5 people is that nothing ensures it won't get crushed by an army of 15 - unless one cares to involve limited entry portals like certain quests. Of course, you might ask, "Who cares if 15 people want to reap the rewards of 5?" It's arguable whether or not that in any way detracts from other peoples' experience of the zone. I do think that the perception of it as a problem remains, however.

Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:17 pm
by Todrael
Shevarash wrote:There really haven't been any precedents in the MUD's history of a change of this scope. It is therefore safe to assume that "the game's fundamental mechanics are changing".


Will there be any changes to the group size limit?

Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 8:31 am
by Mirlantharn
Hrm. Here's an idea:
Inventive RP code. Hey, there's a random chance that some ally of the protagonist is visiting, or on the way there, or some such.

Mirlantharn