I like the gist of this idea.

Honestly, I'd prefer it if most training was done this way. You know ... like actual training. Then the difficulty/consequences of actual combat could be raised significantly, to make each battle a more memorable experience rather than just crushing hordes of generic monsters ad nausea. Combat is pretty meaningless in DR as things stand, like it is in most games. S'why I find it one of the most boring parts of the game. Moving training exercise to actual training fields/rooms would free up combat to revolve around more meaningful events than simply, "I need to practice my sword arm, time to go cleave 100 more goblin skulls."

Somehow knew that was coming. I think we are just simply philosophically opposed on that, Tev. I know that in RL training meant a heck of a lot- like live or die heck of a lot. Also, combat could be made a lot more dangerous and thus interesting with more things like this, too- fine point, there. Added perks are that its Order houses that get it (yay for reasons to visit an Order house!) and this would bring people together in a severely-far-too-solo (IMO) multiplayer game.

That said, the punishment to prevent exploitation could stand to be tweaked. I'm not trying to propose a total freebie here.

ICly... its a training yard. Optimally, you shoot targets to learn archery there, you use the sand pits to spar and learn Brawling, and you cast spells at crystaline dummies while roleplaying talking to elder mages about ways to cast said spells better and why one elder prefers lightning and the other fire.

To be clear, I do not want to make this MORE appealing than learning in combat. That is definitely the better teacher in any world. I don't mind if the TM Research projects take a really darn long time. 'Combat only' as a rule about learning is just..... limiting, right now.

Sometimes combat is downright boring- especially alone. It becomes magnitudes, and I mean magnitudes, more entertaining, at least for me, in a group but that is often not possible. With this you could talk to fellow mages and learn some combat together even if your ranks are too far apart to be able to hunt together yet.

Again, any potential coaching-type RP for the Orders themselves, too, is also a plus.

This was thought up after listening to lots of folks talk about wanting some kind of TM Research after all - my pallie learns plenty Rebuking things still but I'm far, far from uber TM ranks yet. It didn't really cross my mind initially at all. I don't make such assertions up. I was a little surprised by this request for thought.

I suspect at least some will have fun with it and, philosophical design principles aside, I would like to know if enough people would have enough fun with this to justify a Return On Investment.

>The reason there's no TM Research is because combat things should be trained in combat.

Why is it you can learn TM from a class without being in combat? Riddle me that.

As far as TM practice dummies/targets, the WM guildhall has that already.

- Starlear, Warrior Mage and Lieutenant of Ilithi's Crystal Vanguard -

- I maintain the Warrior Mage Beginner's Guide at:

https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Beginner%27s_Warrior_Mage_Guide

>The more strong reality is just that there's a disinclination to allow people to train combats without risk outside of teaching.

Except, of course, if you learn it in a class. That way is perfectly fine to allow people to train combats without risk.

> >The more strong reality is just that there's a disinclination to allow people to train combats without risk outside of teaching.

> Except, of course, if you learn it in a class.

Ahem.

I suspect the reason for this is a combination of not wanting to devalue Scholarship and not objecting to something that encourages some player interaction.

<Yep. Keep in mind that clerichax isn't really doing anything but trying to argue with me because I said something, though, so it's not like he really disputes this point.

I don't think this is the case. I think he's got a good point.

It's a good point; Combat skills really shouldn't be teachable.

<Combat skills really shouldn't be teachable.

I don't understand how anyone can come to this conclusion.

<combat skills should only be able to be taught while in combat. Just like non-combats are only able to be taught while not in combat.

I agree that performing certain actions while in a class probably shouldn't be possible. For example, it makes zero sense to be in a class about heavy edged while you're also focusing on a runestone, casting augmentation spells, and collecting rocks. The only actions that should be available while in a class are actions related to that class, or perhaps performing outside actions will cause a penalty to the learning rate of the entire class (William! Stop disrupting class! Don't make me get the yardstick!)

That said, regarding combat-oriented classes, it really shouldn't matter whether you're slicing at a live goblin or at a target dummy. I'd actually propose that the target dummy would be better for instructional purposes (bonus to teaching if using appropriate teaching tools?)

<Because DR is a competitive game.

That logic in regard to learning speed only really works if there is no skillcap. If the game were a race to get to the skillcaps then there'd be a game over, you win screen when you do get there.

Unless you're playing The Fallen, of course. Isn't that what it's there for?

>I think its as simple as this. As a general rule, you need to be in combat to learn a combat skill. Teaching is a rare exception because requires another character to spend time teaching, and removing combat skills from teaching would overly devalue the Scholarship skill.

The whole argument of why you shouldn't be able to learn combat skills such as TM and Debilitation via Research because it poses no threat and combat skills should be done in combat is invalidated because that's exactly what teaching does. The fact that it requires another person or it would invalidate Scholarship doesn't remove the main point of the argument, "Zero risk."

It's contradictory.

"Hey Mom, can I walk across the street to 7-11 for a slurpee?"

"No, it's too dangerous on these streets at night."

"OK, I'm going to walk over to the basketball court instead."

"That's nice dear, have fun."

>>I don't understand how anyone can come to this conclusion.

I think the point being made is that treating "yeah well you can listen to a TM class and that isn't risky so there" as a gotcha moment of hypocrisy (instead of a grandfathered thing with its own justifications) is more likely going to cut off learning combat skills via a class than make GMs reverse a decision that is a lot more modern and agreed upon by staff.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>It's contradictory.

Yes, exceptions usually are. The point I think Tev is trying to get across is that the current Dev team seems to be following this rule, and suggestions for training combat skills out of combat are likely not going to get much traction with them. I know this isnt the first suggestion of this type to ever have been made, and its most certainly not going to be the last. But, barring our debated teaching exception, none of them have produced systems to allow combat training outside of combat to date. That said we can continue to argue about it more if it makes you feel better.

Elusive
mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur

>> The point I think Tev is trying to get across is that the current Dev team seems to be following this rule, and suggestions for training combat skills out of combat are likely not going to get much traction with them.

Yep.


>>It's a poor argument when a reason is given yet it's contradicted by something that already exists.

As I said, if you're going to use "but teaching can do it!" as a cudgel, you're most likely going to just convince the GMs to revisit allowing teaching to be a grandfathered exception, not open up more options.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

The teaching system is a system with a skill largely dedicated to it that many guilds require to circle (That use to be two skills, one specifically dedicated to it, that many guilds required to circle...) that is entirely about passing experience from Player A to Player B. It is one of the small actual mechanical benefits to spending time with other players and it does the job of letting Player A pass experience to Player B fairly well.

-Raesh

"Ever notice that B.A.'s flavor text swells in direct proportion to how much one of our characters is getting screwed?" - Brian Van Hoose

Teaching is self limited to a single skill (plus scholarship).

Imagine if you had a way to train 40 combat skills at once, risk free, outside combat. You'd see every character sitting there spamming the same scripts while teaching.

Currently you can learn one, single, combat skill outside combat at a time. That's apparently not game breaking. Each combat skill you allow to be learned outside combat, has to account for teaching in addition to its use.

---

I'm a badger, I be badgerin'

The issue of being able to train combat skills without the risk of combat isn't why targeted magic and debilitation are excluded from the research system. It's because they're not what the research system was originally designed to address.

The research system (and symbiotic casting) are intended to fill in gaps in spell trees. (Granted, there may be other functions down the road.) Often, guilds do not have sufficiently difficult augmentation, utility, and warding spells to cover the entire training ladder. This is especially true at high levels, where learning requires you to cast esoteric spells with as much mana as you can pull off. Rather than releasing a bunch of poorly developed spells just so people can continue training, they added the research system.

Research also addresses another issue that players have complained about: having to spend spell slots on spells that they don't really want just so that they can train magic skills. For a much smaller spell slot investment, you can use research and/or symbioses.

Targeted magic and debilitation lack these issues, because difficulty is increased simply by casting at a more challenging opponent. There are enough rungs on the hunting ladder to train those skills at any level.


"As noted in other places, RESEARCH should help close the gaps where you can't or don't want to use a spell for training." --GM Socharis (12/14/2013)

"For now, at least, I think TM, Debil, and Sorcery are in a good enough place that we don't need to enhance them with 3.1. That doesn't mean that there aren't enhancements to RESEARCH or additional Symbioses that could be used to enhance them in the future - Just that right now, they're good enough." --GM Socharis (12/14/2013)

"Yeah, but [targeted magic is] trainable, which is more than can be said about aug, ward, and util right now. I'm not saying we're done with TM, just that adding new stuff to RESEARCH and the Symbiotic Magic system to support TM isn't something we plan to do right now." --GM Socharis (12/14/2013)

---

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!

Vote for DragonRealms on Top MUD Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/vote-DragonRealms.html

>Isharon's response

See, now that's a legitimate reason! That's a perfectly non contradictory answer which actually makes some sense!