Is it too hard to spirit forge and/or race change?

norman b

Squire
Marshal
Agreed. Only thing I'd want hammered out would be how this interacts with playing other chapters, and pay-no-play.
He did mention that it was weekends that were PC'ed so I assume played only benefits. Also, I don't see why playing in another chapter would be any different. You are still playing your character.
 

norman b

Squire
Marshal
I would change exactly one thing about Mike's suggestion: make it a benefit of NPCing.
Why? At that point, they aren't playing their character. They aren't learning new skills. They aren't seeing what skills are not working for them. It also takes away from their amount of games they PC, which means they reduce the amout of build to be reassigned (15 build per game PC'ed).
 

norman b

Squire
Marshal
Sure? But again, that means it now takes the player twice as long to get a 15 build change. Why not just lower the amount you can respend?
 
I'm a big supporter of NPCs (and good NPC awards), but I definitely feel that PCs should gain this benefit (whether or not NPCs also gain it or a lesser version of it).

My biggest concern with NPCs is that they won't be able to use the build they strip. The policy at HQ (which may or may not be Alliance wide) is that you can get one teacher card when you NPC a weekend. If you strip 15 build, you may not be able to spend all that build because you don't have the appropriate teacher cards. In the example I showed above, a fighter went to a scholar in 7 games. That is, at bare minimum, 11 teacher cards (1st - 9th slots, R&W, Read Magic) and more if you are going earth or want formal. Over 7 games, at HQ at least, you simply couldn't learn all those skills from NPCing, so a lot of that build would have to go unspent (which is not fun for the player).

If you want to make this a reward for NPCing (as well as a standard rule for PCing), I suggest 3 build per day NPCing. It is slower, but I still think it is fair. And, it is more likely that a player can keep up with teacher cards.

-MS
 

KyleSchmelz

Fighter
So, to make it more fair to NPCs, you're giving them less? I don't get it. For the most part NPCs are given the same rewards as PCs for playing - why not just allow the same 15 build buyback for both PC and NPC events?

I would prefer a change like this to give an option to make minor changes to your card here and there, not to provide a slow Spirit Forge. I don't think it needs to be designed for someone to completely rebuild their character, nor specifically for one chapter's NPC reward system.
 

norman b

Squire
Marshal
What about characters get one free respec of 15 build a year? Possibly 30? This puts it soley in the characters home chapter. Make it the same span as buy backs (3 months) and have it be a set part of the year (summer, first 3 months, last 3 months, etc). If mid level characters save their build, after a year, they could use the respec and their saved build to get roughly 30-45 build spent elsewhere.
 

Muir

Fighter
I suspect the "why" is to give more rewards to NPCing and therefore encourage NPCing more across the playerbase, especially for people who historically only PC.
I disagree with this stance wholeheartedly, because frankly not everyone cares to NPC, or has time to do so. I think I've NPC'd three events in the last decade, simply because I don't get to play that often, so when I can swing time off I PC. I've also had tens of thousands of goblin stamps over that period from building out requested weapons, props, and other donations.

There are a lot of people who make strong contributions to the game but don't NPC. Gating parts of the system behind NPCing is very much not something I think we should be encouraging.
 

MaxIrons

Squire
Oregon Staff
Marshal
*raises an eyebrow* Perhaps this is something worth putting down as a national Goblin Stamp purchase cost? 2 GS per build "slid"?
 
People who don't "care" to NPC frustrate me. I'm going to try very, very hard to word this diplomatically: The game cannot run without NPCs. This is not hyperbole, it is a fact. It's impossible. Because it is impossible for the game to run without NPCs, the attitude that some people have that they are above NPCing makes me, frankly, furious. If you love the game, if you want to see it thrive, you should be willing to help out and NPC. We are not a for profit organization, we rely heavily on donations, and the most valuable donation by far is taking the time to NPC.

This is an issue that I am extremely passionate about, and consequently also somewhat volatile. I will not be returning to this thread for that reason.
 

Muir

Fighter
I'm sorry you feel you need to leave the thread, but let's be honest. Not everyone has the same set of skills to offer to better the game. It's not a matter of being above anything, it's just a matter of what they are willing aND able to donate.
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
It's not a matter of being above anything, it's just a matter of what they are willing aND able to donate.
Ehhhhhhhh.

Okay. I'll agree that not everyone cares to NPC. That's true. It's unfortunate, because, as Dan said, this game doesn't happen without NPCs. Some of the worst games I've ever had coincidentally had the worst PC - NPC ratios. I'm glad I NPC in Oregon, because it makes me aware of some of the very real issues that can exist on the other side, that PCs are blissfully ignorant of.

That being said, saying that some people just aren't able to NPC is a load of hogwash, to put it nicely. If you don't want to NPC, fine, own it, but everyone who plays this game has something to contribute as an NPC, to improve their chapter and their game, they just need to be willing to do so.
 

Inaryn

Knight
Back on topic..

I generally prefer easier answers over complicated ones. A system for unlearning skills is vastly more complicated than a quick change to an already existing one.

Which is to say, changing the formal scroll in some manner similar to what I mentioned is vastly simpler.

I think fixing build mistakes should be easier, changing everything more resource intensive and harder, and I think race change is fine as is.
 
That's the main difference between our opinions. You think it should be easier than it currently is. I think it should be easy. Formal Magic is never easy. There is easier and harder Formal Magic, but it simply isn't easy. It requires very specific circumstances, specific components (including the scroll as a component), a character with a specific build, etc. Whenever Formal Magic is a solution to a problem, it excludes a portion of the player base. I want a build re-spending option that doesn't exclude any portion of the player base.

For the record, I understand your reasoning and even sympathize with it. I just don't agree.

-MS
 

Draven

Count
Seattle Staff
Marshal
Back on topic..

I generally prefer easier answers over complicated ones. A system for unlearning skills is vastly more complicated than a quick change to an already existing one.

Which is to say, changing the formal scroll in some manner similar to what I mentioned is vastly simpler.

I think fixing build mistakes should be easier, changing everything more resource intensive and harder, and I think race change is fine as is.
I'm not entirely confident that the difference is "vastly" more complicated, and while I don't do character updates on the Logistics team, I've seen them done, and 15 Build an event would be pretty much a non-issue. Actually, I'm not exactly sure what's complicated about it. This wouldn't be any more or less difficult than any other character update.

More importantly, I'd much prefer a series of minor build changes being done -between events- than being done -during events-, which is what would occur if we put it on rituals.
 
Top