I was thinking of a sort of bonus/penalty for groups.
It should depend on the variance of the alignments within your group.
(I.e. if you group with people with an alignment similar to yours you get a bonus.
If you group with people of different alignments, for example necromancer and paladin you get a penalty).
Non idea what those bonuses will consists and how hard is to code them.
But I guess it will make sense and add role play to the game.
Alignment group bonus
Hey, that sounds like a great idea. . . with the removal of most grouping restrictions, I think that such a penalty would be a good idea. . . classes that are typically alignment specific (AP's, rangers, P's, necro's, etc) could suffer an XP penalty when resorting to trying to overcome a task (zone) with those of differing ethos. Perhaps, if everyone in a group is of good alignment, Paladins could gain some kind of bonus to their saves / etc. but loses it when grouped with anyone of differing alignment.
Just wanted to say that sounds like a good idea, with many possibilities. As a ranger, I wound'nt mind the penalty, as it would create a more 'realistic' feel. I always was of the opinion that a ranger would group with say, a necromancer, if it was to cleanse the world of the evil in a Cave City, or something. Simply grouping with one to slaughter Elite guards in BG would be .. . questionable at best and should incur some penalty. Just some thoughts =)
lost
Just wanted to say that sounds like a good idea, with many possibilities. As a ranger, I wound'nt mind the penalty, as it would create a more 'realistic' feel. I always was of the opinion that a ranger would group with say, a necromancer, if it was to cleanse the world of the evil in a Cave City, or something. Simply grouping with one to slaughter Elite guards in BG would be .. . questionable at best and should incur some penalty. Just some thoughts =)
lost
I think this may work well with alignment also. You would have less of a penalty to alignment for killing neutrals if you are with a bunch of goodies than if you were with a necro and anti. This would mean rangers would have to avoid grouping with evil align people otherwise thier alignment would suffer.
Hrm. I believe that one of the ideas behind things like no group restricts and necros being able to go into town 'n such was that you can't know a person's alignment by looking at them (okay, if they're drooling acid and coming at you with a dagger, that's one thing). Anyhow, I think an exp penalty/bonus based on alignment is unrealistic. Does a ranger learn less about fightning when they're within 10' of a necromancer? Is that caused by the necros ranger-exp-sucking magic field? That's a purdy neat trick!
That's not to say that I'm against any kind of penalty for (at least some classes) being with opposite alignments. I could believe a god not granting so-n-so goodie elf cleric their spells when they're with a lloth worshipin drow. That at least would make sense.
While I agree with Waelos' point about it being strange for rangers going around BG killin guards for exp, I'd point out that it'd be strange to have any world where, in most large cities, rag-tag groups of people to go around killing the same groups of guards and citizens over and over. It's a mud and its all about gettin exp, baby!
But it all comes back to what Nilan said: Whats the point of this when they just took out group restricts?
That's not to say that I'm against any kind of penalty for (at least some classes) being with opposite alignments. I could believe a god not granting so-n-so goodie elf cleric their spells when they're with a lloth worshipin drow. That at least would make sense.
While I agree with Waelos' point about it being strange for rangers going around BG killin guards for exp, I'd point out that it'd be strange to have any world where, in most large cities, rag-tag groups of people to go around killing the same groups of guards and citizens over and over. It's a mud and its all about gettin exp, baby!
But it all comes back to what Nilan said: Whats the point of this when they just took out group restricts?
let me clarify...
My idea was to have a sort of bonus (for example lets say +%5 damage in combat)
for groups which have pc of the same alignment.
This bonus decrease with the variance of the alignments in the groups.
I guess the effect of this will be:
People will care more about alignment (which is good)
You will not see Waelos grouping with Liches for XP (which is good)
You will see Waelos grouping with Liches to kill big mobs and do some Equip.. (which is fair)
I believe that there MUST be some penality in having a lawful good and a lawful evil character in the same group. As well as it should be some advantage in having a group of lawful Paladin grouping togheter.
I dont see any backfire in it. Just add some dimension to the game. Obviously the bonus/penality would have to be small.
My idea was to have a sort of bonus (for example lets say +%5 damage in combat)
for groups which have pc of the same alignment.
This bonus decrease with the variance of the alignments in the groups.
I guess the effect of this will be:
People will care more about alignment (which is good)
You will not see Waelos grouping with Liches for XP (which is good)
You will see Waelos grouping with Liches to kill big mobs and do some Equip.. (which is fair)
I believe that there MUST be some penality in having a lawful good and a lawful evil character in the same group. As well as it should be some advantage in having a group of lawful Paladin grouping togheter.
I dont see any backfire in it. Just add some dimension to the game. Obviously the bonus/penality would have to be small.
Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with what Nilan said. I was constantly shut down for groups because of a ranger or paladin. Since a large portion of the goodies were rangers or paladins, I had a hard time finding folks who would group with me constantly. In the end, I had a little click of people such as Myre, Crumar, Cirath, and a few others who I grouped with a lot because all the others had their ranger/paladin buddy. I felt like the goody's penalty for grouping with evils was really my penalty, not theirs. They could still get groups. All in all, I look forward to the removal of those restrictions.
Yayaril
Yayaril
Some other kind of bonus/penalty? Okay, it could work, but not exp. My only request is that it make sense. As I stated above, affecting exp would be unrealistic IMHO. You learn by seeing and experiencing stuff and that wouldn't be affected by the alignment of who is near ya.
I agree that it would add another dimension to the game. In the same way that spell combos do, you'd have to think about who you're grouped with. Of course, it would need to be balanced such that it doesnt overpower some groups and make others obsolete. Ranger X should be able to group with Necro Y if he/she really wants to accomplish a goal, but them being together all the time detracts from the RP aspects of the game.
Okay, so what can be affected?
1. Vyniqumba suggests mild hit/dmg bonuses. I could believe that with paladins maybe. In PnP AD&D they radiate auras. Perhaps Paladin auras can grant bonuses to those of the same align (AC, hit/dmg, whatever) and penalties to those who are extremely evil? That would make sense to me. More than hit/dmg bonuses reguardless of class anyhow.
2. Clerics. Clerical spells are granted by their deities and they could certainly refuse spells if their followers were working with those of conflicting aligns/classes. Could a goodie cleric get in trouble for working with an anti-pal? I'd think so. No spells for you today! (Perhaps not that harsh, but you get the idea)
3. Reputation. I don't know how this would work, but its an obvious thing to be affected. Hey, that halfling runs around with those evil drow! Maybe some shopkeeps wont sell to him? Prices higher? I'm not saying justice/outcasting, but milder RP penalties may be in order. Maybe assassin mobs that seek them out? Oooh, wouldnt that be fun? What about rogues and stealing? Certainly people would be more wary around someone known to run with evils.
4. What else can people think of?
My point is that a) the penalties shouldnt be so much that they should act the same as the old group restricts. I, for one, am looking forward to being able to work with assassins and necros on occasion. b) they should be logical from an AD&D RP point of view. It should affect different people/classes in different ways.
Izzy
[This message has been edited by izarek (edited 03-13-2001).]
I agree that it would add another dimension to the game. In the same way that spell combos do, you'd have to think about who you're grouped with. Of course, it would need to be balanced such that it doesnt overpower some groups and make others obsolete. Ranger X should be able to group with Necro Y if he/she really wants to accomplish a goal, but them being together all the time detracts from the RP aspects of the game.
Okay, so what can be affected?
1. Vyniqumba suggests mild hit/dmg bonuses. I could believe that with paladins maybe. In PnP AD&D they radiate auras. Perhaps Paladin auras can grant bonuses to those of the same align (AC, hit/dmg, whatever) and penalties to those who are extremely evil? That would make sense to me. More than hit/dmg bonuses reguardless of class anyhow.
2. Clerics. Clerical spells are granted by their deities and they could certainly refuse spells if their followers were working with those of conflicting aligns/classes. Could a goodie cleric get in trouble for working with an anti-pal? I'd think so. No spells for you today! (Perhaps not that harsh, but you get the idea)
3. Reputation. I don't know how this would work, but its an obvious thing to be affected. Hey, that halfling runs around with those evil drow! Maybe some shopkeeps wont sell to him? Prices higher? I'm not saying justice/outcasting, but milder RP penalties may be in order. Maybe assassin mobs that seek them out? Oooh, wouldnt that be fun? What about rogues and stealing? Certainly people would be more wary around someone known to run with evils.
4. What else can people think of?
My point is that a) the penalties shouldnt be so much that they should act the same as the old group restricts. I, for one, am looking forward to being able to work with assassins and necros on occasion. b) they should be logical from an AD&D RP point of view. It should affect different people/classes in different ways.
Izzy
[This message has been edited by izarek (edited 03-13-2001).]
-
Galok Icewolf
- Sojourner
- Posts: 510
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 6:01 am
I completely disagree. I belive experience variance for grouping with those that are close to your alignment make sense. Some simple examples...
A paladin tries to dispatch his foe as quickly as possible as to not cause an exhorbent amount of damage e.g non-torture.
A anti-palading would try to tear apart his opponent and make him suffer, this is just the way of things.
If you are good aligned, e.g. good natured then you are probably going to take a liking to the paladins style and hence pay more attention or follow along slightly more. If your watching the anti-paladin tear someone apart, a "good" aligned char would maybe be revolted or less in sync with his methods and so not pay attention as much.
Experience is good... Experience is not gotten from "killing things". Its gotten from battles.
Now, paladins get bonus exp for killing good aligned chars, is that far different from a paladin, a ranger, and a cleric of torm killing evil undead somewhere? Not in my opinion so a small exp bonus would be fair.
On the flip side, a ranger and anti-paladins methods might very well cantradict so things won't work right, and experience should be hindered, but not alot.
In conclusion, antis and rangers and paladins will still group, especially for zones, but for experiencing your not gonna go search for a anti and a paladin at the same time. I don't think this will cause a gap in different alligned peoples getting in the groups that matter.. (e.g. zone groups).
A paladin tries to dispatch his foe as quickly as possible as to not cause an exhorbent amount of damage e.g non-torture.
A anti-palading would try to tear apart his opponent and make him suffer, this is just the way of things.
If you are good aligned, e.g. good natured then you are probably going to take a liking to the paladins style and hence pay more attention or follow along slightly more. If your watching the anti-paladin tear someone apart, a "good" aligned char would maybe be revolted or less in sync with his methods and so not pay attention as much.
Experience is good... Experience is not gotten from "killing things". Its gotten from battles.
Now, paladins get bonus exp for killing good aligned chars, is that far different from a paladin, a ranger, and a cleric of torm killing evil undead somewhere? Not in my opinion so a small exp bonus would be fair.
On the flip side, a ranger and anti-paladins methods might very well cantradict so things won't work right, and experience should be hindered, but not alot.
In conclusion, antis and rangers and paladins will still group, especially for zones, but for experiencing your not gonna go search for a anti and a paladin at the same time. I don't think this will cause a gap in different alligned peoples getting in the groups that matter.. (e.g. zone groups).
I don't agree with this idea... It's a good idea, but with the grouping restricts having just been removed, I think it would detract from the 'community' feeling.
You'll get groups that are formed solely for the purpose of getting this bonus. not to mention evils would have it easy... All they GROUP with is evils.
Mal
You'll get groups that are formed solely for the purpose of getting this bonus. not to mention evils would have it easy... All they GROUP with is evils.
Mal
For the record, I have no problem with alignment bonuses or penalties for the people you're grouped with.
I don't think people really understand how LITTLE alignment matters in this game. The only purpose that alignment carried on Sojourn 2 was to force rangers and paladins to waste time in graveyard or split shield to maintain a 350. There was no practical difference between 351 and 1000. And given the choice between sitting on my thumb 3w while a group with an assassin does Jot, or spending an extra 20 minutes slashing orcs, it's a pretty straightforward decision.
The grouping restrictions being removed means people will group with each other regardless of penalties. If a trip to Seers with Aktosh means I have to spend 3 hours in Split Shield then ok, fine.
What I disagree with is the way alignment is actually calculated. A good aligned player killing a good mob loses 4-6 points, whereas the same player killing an evil mob gets half a point or MAYBE a full point. All this means is that good aligned players have to spend exorberant amounts of time killing level 1 -1000 align mobs to recover from a good zone. I think this is both unnecessary and unrealistic, and ask that SOMETHING be done about it.
Gaining bonus alignment for grouping with Paladins would do just fine, even if that means taking an alignment penalty while grouped with evils.
I will support ANY idea that means less Split Shield time for me.
- Ragorn
I don't think people really understand how LITTLE alignment matters in this game. The only purpose that alignment carried on Sojourn 2 was to force rangers and paladins to waste time in graveyard or split shield to maintain a 350. There was no practical difference between 351 and 1000. And given the choice between sitting on my thumb 3w while a group with an assassin does Jot, or spending an extra 20 minutes slashing orcs, it's a pretty straightforward decision.
The grouping restrictions being removed means people will group with each other regardless of penalties. If a trip to Seers with Aktosh means I have to spend 3 hours in Split Shield then ok, fine.
What I disagree with is the way alignment is actually calculated. A good aligned player killing a good mob loses 4-6 points, whereas the same player killing an evil mob gets half a point or MAYBE a full point. All this means is that good aligned players have to spend exorberant amounts of time killing level 1 -1000 align mobs to recover from a good zone. I think this is both unnecessary and unrealistic, and ask that SOMETHING be done about it.
Gaining bonus alignment for grouping with Paladins would do just fine, even if that means taking an alignment penalty while grouped with evils.
I will support ANY idea that means less Split Shield time for me.
- Ragorn
Galok, first off, I think you meant palies get a bonus for killing EVIL aligned mobs, not good ones =p
Second, antis aren't the same as beserkers or ravagers. Since they're lawful and orderly like paladins, just evil, they're quite likely to have a similar way of fighting with a few dirty tricks thrown in here and there.
I do think a small hit, dam, or AC bonus between compatible group members could be nice though. But it shouldn't give a penalty to those not benefiting. Since every little bit helps, this means that a ranger would be a little bit more effective if they were in the same group as a paladin (and possibly a druid as well), but they wouldn't be wiffing all the time if there instead was an anti in the group so that they'd prefer to be with a paladin, but they won't have a reason to not group with an anti or necro or whatever is sufficiently evil enough to radiate an aura of sorts if they can't get around it. Obviously there should be a cap on bonuses if they're cumulative at all for balance.
Just for some examples of what might give bonuses to whatever classes . . .
Paladin - benefits rangers and good and neutral warriors (possibly good clerics too by maybe increasing quick chant a bit).
Druid - benefits rangers.
Rangers - benefits good and neutral aligned rogues (both use ranged weapons, are supposed to be more lightly armored than warriors and palis/antis and hence would probably use more movement oriented fighting styles so a flanking bonus of some sort seems applicable).
Antis - benefits evil and neutral warriors, evil rogues, evil clerics and necros.
Just my two copper on the subject.
Second, antis aren't the same as beserkers or ravagers. Since they're lawful and orderly like paladins, just evil, they're quite likely to have a similar way of fighting with a few dirty tricks thrown in here and there.
I do think a small hit, dam, or AC bonus between compatible group members could be nice though. But it shouldn't give a penalty to those not benefiting. Since every little bit helps, this means that a ranger would be a little bit more effective if they were in the same group as a paladin (and possibly a druid as well), but they wouldn't be wiffing all the time if there instead was an anti in the group so that they'd prefer to be with a paladin, but they won't have a reason to not group with an anti or necro or whatever is sufficiently evil enough to radiate an aura of sorts if they can't get around it. Obviously there should be a cap on bonuses if they're cumulative at all for balance.
Just for some examples of what might give bonuses to whatever classes . . .
Paladin - benefits rangers and good and neutral warriors (possibly good clerics too by maybe increasing quick chant a bit).
Druid - benefits rangers.
Rangers - benefits good and neutral aligned rogues (both use ranged weapons, are supposed to be more lightly armored than warriors and palis/antis and hence would probably use more movement oriented fighting styles so a flanking bonus of some sort seems applicable).
Antis - benefits evil and neutral warriors, evil rogues, evil clerics and necros.
Just my two copper on the subject.
I don't like this whole 'bonus for the group' thing...
How often will rangers/paladins be grouping with antis/necros? Not much I guess. Hell even as evils last wipe, we rarely if ever had a nec or anti in the group. That would mean an almost permanent bonus for the group, be it from paladins or antis.
I think being able to group with each other is benefit enough
Don't tell me they suck, a properly equipped ranger or (anti)paladin kicks serious ass...
How often will rangers/paladins be grouping with antis/necros? Not much I guess. Hell even as evils last wipe, we rarely if ever had a nec or anti in the group. That would mean an almost permanent bonus for the group, be it from paladins or antis.
I think being able to group with each other is benefit enough
Don't tell me they suck, a properly equipped ranger or (anti)paladin kicks serious ass...Chezra, heh, in most of the groups I was in, we didn't take paladins along =p Not that many that were high level and sometimes you just need shieldpunch =p Having them grant some kind of bonus to the group is just a way to make them a bit more useful, though granted being able to load up on the damage gear due to the bonus to hit with two handers would make them really useful after a while as hitters AND rescuers regardless.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests