Should we decouple awards from XP/Level?

[AstralUniverse]

I completely in agreement that the DEV team has done anything possible (within the current system) to help those with limited gaming time and different priorities than dungeoning.

1. Adventure exp system - exp gain based on general playing time, rather than killing mobs.
2. writs - limited to 3 per day. Reducing the gap between grinders and heavier RPers.
3. Most importantly, awards lesser than major. Playing a rare concept has never been more accessible.

I'd be truly anxious if I was a staff member in a world where awards are tied to human judgement.

[Nitro]

So you feel that people playing these classes, classes which exist to support other players, and give life to cities and towns, and create fixtures and gear that you as an adventurer will lose, are less deserving and need to work harder to be eligable for any form of reward?

Yes. The system is made to encourage two things; Adventuring, and character turnover. A character that does not adventure therefore does and should progress slower.

This is also not a zero-sum equation. Commoners making gear and fixtures does not mean adventurers can't make gear and fixtures. There's nothing inherent about commoners that makes them deserve a freebie to skip the hard work to get an award by just existing.

[Kuma]

So you feel that people playing these classes, classes which exist to support other players, and give life to cities and towns, and create fixtures and gear that you as an adventurer will lose, are less deserving and need to work harder to be eligable for any form of reward?

considering commoners are in prime position to make hand over fist cash, i'd say they're in a pretty comfy position to rack up the raw gold to net yourself a +5% to your best reward roll with little effort.

as a player who's gone from being able to chuck dozens of hours a week at this game to barely that a month (or less), and back again, several times: removing it from level and making that "time spent playing" is simply making it the same problem from a different angle. if i don't have time to "grind to 26", then i also don't have time to "play x time" to hit the reward threshold.

i cannot see a single other useful metric.

time logged in? see above, but also, was that time spent productively? how do we define productive RP? do we try and tie that to RPR as a multiplier? i know plenty of 30s and 40s who also enjoy PvE content and optimisation (look up the stormwind fallacy if this seems alien to you). if we do that then we return to the bad old days where higher RPR meant access to unusual races, and then we re-open the floodgates to people coveting RPRs. further, you are almost guaranteed to hit 26 if you play for long enough regardless.

alright then, what about age of character but not time logged in? this is silly for obvious reasons - people's vaults are full of ancient throwaways, half-forgotten concepts that never reached the light of day.

some strange algorithmic combination of time logged in, age of character, perhaps RPR, and maybe DM fiat and (as someone for whatever reason suggested earlier) anon player voting? i just. no dude. this is infinitely too much effort, things to go wrong, and straight up nonsense especially since now the coveted 5% award doesn't even give you anything truly, truly unique any more - it's far more stratified now than it has ever been, and perhaps that's a good thing in the long run for precisely this reason.

apart from all of this, meanwhile, there's the simple and transparent "hit 16/21/26". everyone can do that. arelith isn't a hard server to level in. if you do have a high RPR, then you gain a natural ECL bonus to help there, but nothing hugely substantial, and everyone's on the same playing field there. it's easy to police around from a DM/dev perspective.

it's not the perfect system, but i truly struggle to see a better alternative. i'd love to be convinced otherwise.

EDIT: actually, just to take a second look at the original quote: there is no inherent greater or lesser value in playing a "supporting" character, nor is there any greater or lesser value inherent in playing a class or build that is somehow "less optimal" than another. the implication that quick-levelling, optimally-built characters are unable to also breathe immersive life, thoughtful fixtures, and produce supportive & believable roleplay while also hitting 26 faster than others is utter nonsense to me.

This is also not a zero-sum equation. Commoners making gear and fixtures does not mean adventurers can't make gear and fixtures. There's nothing inherent about commoners that makes them deserve a freebie to skip the hard work to get an award by just existing.

this hill i will die on.

[Void]

Any sort of "old buildup", in my opinion, would encourage advanced form of idling. You may end up having a lot of what I call "campfire roleplay".

I like current system, by the way. It encourages you to kill your character and try something else. I feel that this is a good thing.

Commoners exist to do 'Campfire Roleplay', as a class they literally can't do anything else.

Why should they not be eligable for rewards?

Did I say they shouldn't be eligible for rewards? No. They have their own way to get to 26, and they can be rolled like everybody else.

Why are you making strawmen and trying to put words into people's mouths?

They also aren't made for "campfire roleplay". They're made for "craftsman roleplay". Which is obvious from their bonuses.

[Zavandar]

let's not laud commoners as self-sacrificing heroes making cities "feel alive" and crafting things

The only thing that separates a mechanical commoner from someone rping one is xp/tick and crafting skills

cities felt plenty lively before them

[JustMonika]

Any sort of "old buildup", in my opinion, would encourage advanced form of idling. You may end up having a lot of what I call "campfire roleplay".

I like current system, by the way. It encourages you to kill your character and try something else. I feel that this is a good thing.

Commoners exist to do 'Campfire Roleplay', as a class they literally can't do anything else.

Why should they not be eligable for rewards?

Did I say they shouldn't be eligible for rewards? No. They have their own way to get to 26, and they can be rolled like everybody else.

Why are you making strawmen and trying to put words into people's mouths?

They also aren't made for "campfire roleplay". They're made for "craftsman roleplay". Which is obvious from their bonuses.

Commoners gain slightly increased XP from crafting.
That's it.

To get a commoner to epic levels is an immense effort. Getting a commoner to level 16 is a hugely significant effort, far harder than it is to get a normal character to 30. No writs. No XP from kills. No adventure XP from kills. Getting the materials to craft is an effort all by itself - It's not like you can go dungeoning for them.

And I was using 'Campfire Roleplay' as short hand for 'Non-Adventuring roleplay' which I assumed is what you meant as idling adventurers rarely set up literal campfires, and instead tend to work bar, participate in politics, socialise with their friends, teach/take classes and any number of things, which I feel players should be rewarded for.

Do you geninuely think someone that organises language classes at the arcane tower for twenty players is less deserving of 'Rewards' than someone who repeatedly solos Avernus?

[Void]

Commoners gain slightly increased XP from crafting.
That's it.

They get 10x increased adventure xp from crafting, they get extra 20 xp per tick, and you can couple that with mark of destiny to boost it further, given that you can avoid combat.

Do you geninuely think someone that organises language classes at the arcane tower for twenty players is less deserving of 'Rewards' than someone who repeatedly solos Avernus?

Nobody deserves anything by default.

If you picked commoner, you knew what you were getting into, and now you should roll with consequences.
If you want a reward - work for it.

That's how I see it.

If someone organized language session to demand benefits, I'd question their motive if anything.
You were supposed to pick this class for fun, and not to say "I built fixtures, I now deserve stuff".

[Kuma]

Do you geninuely think someone that organises language classes at the arcane tower for twenty players is less deserving of 'Rewards' than someone who repeatedly solos Avernus?

i've seen some mind-numbing, CBT-inducing, boring, dull, and thoroughly insipid roleplay that took the form of lectures/classes.

i've also had some of the greatest, most immersive, genuinely moving, and in-depth roleplay experiences while engaging with PvE content.

context applies here far more than one may think at first glance. because this context is unquantifiable via purely mechanical methods, we must rely on a method far simpler (at present, the level-based system).

a reward already exists for what you're saying, though, it's the RPR system that we have. this is a human- and opinion-based metric that itself has its advantages and issues, but because it's reliant on human interaction (DMs), it's not fit for purpose when it comes to who is "more or less deserving" of a unique race, or background.

the epic sacrifice system is fairer than any other metric the server has its disposal that i can see.

looking at it more as a lootbox mechanic rather than a reward for someone's "contribution to the server" (whatever that means) is probably the healthiest way of going about it. nobody "deserves" any of the rewards. they are explicitly to encourage character turnover, and do not fill the same role as RPR has in years past.

[LichBait]

As much as I dislike the fact that the Epic Sacrifice system favors those who grind up fast and roll until they get one, it is still a far sight better than the alternative which opens up perceptions of favoritism and worse. It's the most automated, and fairest metric to judge by as it puts everyone on a relatively equal playing field for it.

[cowboy]

As much as I dislike the fact that the Epic Sacrifice system favors those who grind up fast and roll until they get one, it is still a far sight better than the alternative which opens up perceptions of favoritism and worse. It's the most automated, and fairest metric to judge by as it puts everyone on a relatively equal playing field for it.

[DangerDolphin]

Just wanted to add, I agree that making awards RPR or application based would be worse than the current automated system. But that wasn't the original suggestion.

[Zavandar]

everyone being guaranteed majors just for being online is bad. Everyone would eventually be playing one

[Kuma]

Just wanted to add, I agree that making awards RPR or application based would be worse than the current automated system. But that wasn't the original suggestion.

i sort-of addressed the original suggestion in my earlier word-vomit- this recreates the existing problem in a different dimension. it still only really benefits those with the most time to dedicate to playing.

i guess it would be more "fair" to some degree, but there's a part of me that gets dopamine-rush tickled at the thought of having a few days off to rapidly level up a character i may not otherwise play to have a go on the suicide slot machine and see what i get. it's absolutely a gamified achievement that some may see as out of place on the server (an argument i'm not getting into unless pressed), i totally admit, but one i'd be sad to lose.

an actual issue i forsee with it, though, is where is the line drawn? how many hours is worth a shot at a major award? i honestly couldn't tell you. remember that the initial intent of the epic sacrifice system is to encourage character turnover, and discourage the staleness of "wandering epic" syndrome (and also function as a gold/valuable item sink to boost server economy, though in this it is less effective). a character whose story is done can happen much quicker than whatever utterly arbitrary number of hours you set the roll thresholds at, but then they're encouraged just to hang around until their death alarm rings and they can finally, finally die.

also, if it were to be as transparent as the current system is, we'd have to be able to see how many hours we've clocked with each character and my brain is not prepared to deal with that without alcohol

[JustMonika]

also, if it were to be as transparent as the current system is, we'd have to be able to see how many hours we've clocked with each character and my brain is not prepared to deal with that without alcohol

Why would you need to track it by character? That'd be needlessly silly.
It'd be playtime per CD Key, not character.

You could preserve the existing system alongside it, so there remained the 'Encouragement to delete', but alongside a system that means you can be rewarded for more than just PvE play.

[Kuma]

Why would you need to track it by character? That'd be needlessly silly.
It'd be playtime per CD Key, not character.

You could preserve the existing system alongside it, so there remained the 'Encouragement to delete', but alongside a system that means you can be rewarded for more than just PvE play.

ah. i didn't understand it was to be given to players just for playing, as opposed to encouraging turnover. well, that's not the intent of the sacrifice system but i guess is a legit suggestion.

so, if it went alongside the normal system, then that just doubles some peoples' chances. giving everyone rolls every so often just for playing seems counterintuitive from a population control point of view as well, since races are gated by reward tier not just by mechanical strength but also in terms of how many/how few of the weirder races are tolerated as a % of the playerbase.

(and, predicting a possible suggestion further, if one went for a compromise where you were given this time-allotted award-lootbox to roll after a very long time automatically, and epic sacrifice percentages were halved, then all one would do is please nobody)

[CptJonas]

To say a true...
I was complaining about reward system for years...
But now I know that there is no much better alternative...
But after that time thinking about this...I had revelation...I know what actualy bothers me...
And its that literaly gambling stuff what is worked into this system...its basicly slot machine...investice your time and push button...and you can something worth it or something not...

That just leaves bad taste in my mouth...

I would be fine with 5 being where it is...but I would love remove that random element from other rewards...

Just make it 16/21/26 minor/Normal/greater
So people who are actualy aiming for other rewards then 5% would not need to play slot machine and just normaly have clear goal in sight...

[JustMonika]

ah. i didn't understand it was to be given to players just for playing, as opposed to encouraging turnover. well, that's not the intent of the sacrifice system but i guess is a legit suggestion.

so, if it went alongside the normal system, then that just doubles some peoples' chances. giving everyone rolls every so often just for playing seems counterintuitive from a population control point of view as well, since races are gated by reward tier not just by mechanical strength but also in terms of how many/how few of the weirder races are tolerated as a % of the playerbase.

(and, predicting a possible suggestion further, if one went for a compromise where you were given this time-allotted award-lootbox to roll after a very long time automatically, and epic sacrifice percentages were halved, then all one would do is please nobody)

That's why I'd propose hardlimiting people to 1 5% PC, and say, 2 Greater, per CD key. So once you've used your 5%, you then have to roll that character to try out another 'rare' concept.
That encourages turnover of rare characters, doesn't harm people using the current system, stops the 'hoarding' of rewards we see, and gives the possibility of rewards to those people who for whatever reason, might not have 20 level 27 characters to throw away. [Statistically.]

[Void]

ah. i didn't understand it was to be given to players just for playing, as opposed to encouraging turnover. well, that's not the intent of the sacrifice system but i guess is a legit suggestion.

so, if it went alongside the normal system, then that just doubles some peoples' chances. giving everyone rolls every so often just for playing seems counterintuitive from a population control point of view as well, since races are gated by reward tier not just by mechanical strength but also in terms of how many/how few of the weirder races are tolerated as a % of the playerbase.

(and, predicting a possible suggestion further, if one went for a compromise where you were given this time-allotted award-lootbox to roll after a very long time automatically, and epic sacrifice percentages were halved, then all one would do is please nobody)

That's why I'd propose hardlimiting people to 1 5% PC, and say, 2 Greater, per CD key. So once you've used your 5%, you then have to roll that character to try out another 'rare' concept.
That encourages turnover of rare characters, doesn't harm people using the current system, stops the 'hoarding' of rewards we see, and gives the possibility of rewards to those people who for whatever reason, might not have 20 level 27 characters to throw away. [Statistically.]

Total playtime is likely a worse indicator than level.

And in situation when somebody is limited in number of rewards, rather than playing along they'd be more likely to quit or sit on their character forever, creating a "dragon player".

It is also important to keep in mind that chances of reward are not that great. If you feed 14 level 26 to the abyss, chances of one of them triggering a major award is only 50%. And that's a lot of time investment here.

I also think that no award should be given based on TIME played. TIME does not mean effort.

[JustMonika]

Total playtime is likely a worse indicator than level.

And in situation when somebody is limited in number of rewards, rather than playing along they'd be more likely to quit or sit on their character forever, creating a "dragon player".

It is also important to keep in mind that chances of reward are not that great. If you feed 14 level 26 to the abyss, chances of one of them triggering a major award is only 50%. And that's a lot of time investment here.

I also think that no award should be given based on TIME played. TIME does not mean effort.

Well if they want to keep their one 5% PC forever, that's fine? But they can do that now, anyway, so this system wouldn't change that.
There's not a lot of incentive to roll your 5% reward for a 5% chance at the same reward.

Level 27 does not mean effort, either. I have been repeatedly told Arelith is an easy sever, full of copypaste build guides and grindable circlable dungeons and that you can get to level 16 in -hours-. [I do not exagerate, that's what I was told.]

Time seems as a good an indication of roleplaying skill as gaining XP as any other, the only difference is it equalises across everyone. No matter your skill at mechanics, your timezone [and thus ability to find friends to grind high level dungeons with], or your class, everyone has a measurable, equal, reward track.

I don't understand what people see as the 'downsides' here? That more people might get a chance to access the reward system? That you can't hold your 5% awards so we can suddenly go from 0-20 Firblogs in a week?

[Ork]

I really dislike that idea. A lot.

[JustMonika]

I really dislike that idea. A lot.

I mean, everyones entitled to their opinions, and we're likely going to disagree.
But it would help if you post at least contained which of the many ideas discussed you disagreed with, and why.

[Zavandar]

So we can play on an arelith where everyone is guaranteed to be playing characters with wings and tails..

Nty

[JustMonika]

So we can play on an arelith where everyone is guaranteed to be playing characters with wings and tails..

Nty

I am told we are already garenteed this.
Either the current rewards system is easy to access for everyone, in which case this situation is happening as much as it is likely to be.
Or the current rewards system is hard to access for everyone, in which case it's not a very fair system.

[Zavandar]

who told you you were guaranteed this

levelling characters and rolling them with the hopes of rolling a 20 is intentionally prohibitive

my false dichotomy senses are tingling

[JustMonika]

Many, many players on Discord whenever the subject of "levelling" is mentioned.
Indeed, I am sure if you seach this very forum you will find people discussing how they've made it to level 30 within a month.
[And this is with normal characters, rather than normal reward gift of humility goblins.]