TOGBALLSAVANT
Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/09/2018 08:40 PM CDT
It is widely accepted that Lore is a pretty lackluster skillset, and that lore primary guilds (Traders, Empaths, Bards) are a bit underpowered when it comes to competition against other guilds. That is not to say that any of those guilds cannot succeed, just that they have to work harder and/or have more time invested or experienced gained to do the same thing as a more mainstream guild. I'm also aware that being lore primary is absolutely lovely for those super into crafting, but I would argue that that is a very small minority, and that most people are not seriously interested in it. In order to address this problem, and bring those guilds up to par as well as increase their viability and representation as a main rather than just a support character/alt slave, I'd like to propose two different solutions:
Mastery is a Lore : I've felt for some time that mastery skills belong under the Lore skillset. Taking the principles of one skill, analyzing the information, and applying those lessons toward a related but different skill
has lore written all over it. While I'm certain it would be wildly unpopular, Melee Mastery, Missile Mastery, Defending, and Primary Magic should logically all be lore skills. This would give lore primaries a much needed
bump to general effectiveness, in addition to giving practical usefulness to the skillset. It also plays into the "Jack of all trades, master of none" archetype that embodies the principles of the skillset.
Versatility : Due mostly to what I'm sure would be an extremely negative reaction to the shift above (It makes perfect sense, but I'm certain those guilds benefiting from the somewhat silly placement would cry hot tears of
rage) I would like to propose an alternative that achieves a very similar effect. A brand new skill, available to lore primary guilds only, a new skill, "Versatility", would represent a scholarly-based, research and analysis
driven understanding of things which would augment your real-world skill. It would function as a blanket mastery, improving virtually all other skills by a small percentage which would stack with buffs. I picture a scale of
0- 10% on a scale of 0-1750. It would be trained by learning a wide variety different skills, which a steep learning timer on each. The bonus would give the skillset a nice general boost, while still not bringing their ranks
beyond that of an equally trained guild member of a higher skillset placement. (Which it shouldn't)
Again, I don't feel any of the lore primary guilds are "weak" or bad by any means, but I think we can agree that compared to the other skillsets, they are a bit weaker and beneath the power curve. I think this would go a long way toward addressing that, without being wildly OP, while also adding some flavor and making someone actually excited about their primary skillset, rather than regarding it as a throwaway and focusing their excitement on their secondary and tertiary skills.
Thanks for reading.
-Thife
TEQUILASUNRISE
Re: Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/11/2018 04:28 AM CDT
> While I'm certain it would be wildly unpopular, Melee Mastery, Missile Mastery, Defending, and Primary Magic should logically all be lore skills.
Tactics in lore never made sense to me, logically. Magic/weapon/armor are all self-explanatory, and survival works alright if you think of it as "DnD thief stuff/ranger stuff." Lore had a niche but concrete definition before: it represented skills of trade and craftsmanship, everyday "jack of all trades" stuff like item creation, learning from lessons, teaching, playing instruments, knowing an item's value, how to spot a tough monster, etc. Moving Tactics into lore just mucks it all up, and the Tactics skill itself is a hodgepodge of two wildly different functions (bob/circle/weave and the tactics v. defending contest).
What is Tactics, even? "It's combat tactics!" Well yes, but what is it specifically? Does it mean intuitive knowledge of offensive positioning, like footwork etc.? No, that's already represented with skill in the weapon you're using. You don't get better at footwork while doing HEMA primarily by watching youtube videos, you get better primarily with mock spars and actual practice. And if for some reason tactics represents combat footwork, in what world are Empaths and Clerics better at it than Barbarians?
The reason Tactics is in lore is this: arbitrary game design, and that's it. The reality is that over half of the skills in the game and like 3/4 of the abilities in the game are designed solely for combat, so the GMs decided (rightly, IMO) that lore needed a combat skill. For arbitrary game design reasons, I think it's a horrible idea to move Defending, because the armor skillset is even worse than the lore skillset. Primary magic makes no sense to me, and honestly I'm not even sure why missile mastery and melee mastery exist, but if they do exist they don't make sense anywhere but weapons, because it involves mastery of... using weapons.
Tactics in lore never made sense to me, logically. Magic/weapon/armor are all self-explanatory, and survival works alright if you think of it as "DnD thief stuff/ranger stuff." Lore had a niche but concrete definition before: it represented skills of trade and craftsmanship, everyday "jack of all trades" stuff like item creation, learning from lessons, teaching, playing instruments, knowing an item's value, how to spot a tough monster, etc. Moving Tactics into lore just mucks it all up, and the Tactics skill itself is a hodgepodge of two wildly different functions (bob/circle/weave and the tactics v. defending contest).
What is Tactics, even? "It's combat tactics!" Well yes, but what is it specifically? Does it mean intuitive knowledge of offensive positioning, like footwork etc.? No, that's already represented with skill in the weapon you're using. You don't get better at footwork while doing HEMA primarily by watching youtube videos, you get better primarily with mock spars and actual practice. And if for some reason tactics represents combat footwork, in what world are Empaths and Clerics better at it than Barbarians?
The reason Tactics is in lore is this: arbitrary game design, and that's it. The reality is that over half of the skills in the game and like 3/4 of the abilities in the game are designed solely for combat, so the GMs decided (rightly, IMO) that lore needed a combat skill. For arbitrary game design reasons, I think it's a horrible idea to move Defending, because the armor skillset is even worse than the lore skillset. Primary magic makes no sense to me, and honestly I'm not even sure why missile mastery and melee mastery exist, but if they do exist they don't make sense anywhere but weapons, because it involves mastery of... using weapons.
TOGBALLSAVANT
Re: Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/11/2018 02:13 PM CDT
I think Tactics represents strategy, which indeed fits in the lore skillset. To contest your point, weapon mastery is directly related to weapons yes, but it is an academically based conversion of lessons toward another skill. The skill could just as easily be named Weapon Lore. I do agree armor skills are lacking but the amount of actually trainable lore skills is similar. Pretty much boils down to appraisal, tactics, scholarship, and performance which is on par with armors. Crafting skills require too much time investment to be worth training for most people. The opportunity cost is too high.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/11/2018 02:24 PM CDT
>>I think Tactics represents strategy, which indeed fits in the lore skillset.
To be fair, I could easily see combat strategy being a weapon skill. Or an armor skill. I think it being in lore is fine, for various reasons, but AFAIK the lore skillset isn't explicitly the "thinky brain skills" skillset, even though it's understandably regarded that way.
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.
To be fair, I could easily see combat strategy being a weapon skill. Or an armor skill. I think it being in lore is fine, for various reasons, but AFAIK the lore skillset isn't explicitly the "thinky brain skills" skillset, even though it's understandably regarded that way.
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.
TEQUILASUNRISE
Re: Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/12/2018 12:32 AM CDT
>I think Tactics represents strategy, which indeed fits in the lore skillset. To contest your point, weapon mastery is directly related to weapons yes, but it is an academically based conversion of lessons toward another skill. The skill could just as easily be named Weapon Lore.
Think about what you are doing when level a weapon rank (as an example). You're learning the "lore" or "strategy" of that weapon. Footwork, positioning, timing, angles of attack, ways to make yourself deadlier with that weapon.
If it's not that, then what exactly is it, and why do you get better with weapon ranks? The reason is gameplay mechanics uses weapon ranks to calculate attack power, but if you try to separate shortbow ranks from "the lore/strategy of using shortbow," it makes no sense to me in-universe, so I don't see any logic in creating separate weapon and armor lore skills.
Think about what you are doing when level a weapon rank (as an example). You're learning the "lore" or "strategy" of that weapon. Footwork, positioning, timing, angles of attack, ways to make yourself deadlier with that weapon.
If it's not that, then what exactly is it, and why do you get better with weapon ranks? The reason is gameplay mechanics uses weapon ranks to calculate attack power, but if you try to separate shortbow ranks from "the lore/strategy of using shortbow," it makes no sense to me in-universe, so I don't see any logic in creating separate weapon and armor lore skills.
TOGBALLSAVANT
Re: Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/12/2018 07:52 PM CDT
The first few times you try splitting a piece of wood with an axe, you'll probably miss. After you start getting more accurate, you still won't be able to channel your power or get the rhythm right to actually split the thing. After several days you will be splitting logs like a champion. That's not to say that you're gotten better at wood cutting strategy, you're just getting more proficient at handling the weapon. Mastering a sword requires you seeing it as an extension of your own body. That's what I see weapon ranks as. Whether to come at an opponent from the right or the left, based on his footing, whether to go for a sweep or a lunge or a feint, where to best place your hands for the balance of speed and power you're after, those are tactics and melee mastery.
TEQUILASUNRISE
Re: Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/13/2018 09:57 AM CDT
>That's not to say that you're gotten better at wood cutting strategy
Yes it does. Even if you don't consciously recognize it as "wood cutting strategy," practice means you have refined your technique regarding timing, angles, recognizing the grain of the wood and where to strike, etc. to make yourself a more proficient wood cutter.
> you're just getting more proficient at handling the weapon.
And what does "getting more proficient" entail? And how does it differ from "strategy?" Don't use esoteric words like "strategy," give me black-and-white concrete examples.
>Mastering a sword requires you seeing it as an extension of your own body.
...And this involves getting better at practical application of strategy.
Look, I get what you're saying on a general level. A basketball player's job is different from a basketball coach's job, but you're drawing an artificial distinction between them, saying application doesn't involve strategy at all. The difference is a degree of focus, there isn't some barrier between the two.
Basketballs players who don't understand where they are supposed to be on defense, or when to rotate on defense, are crappy basketballs players. Weapon ranks already involve getting better at "weapon strategy," and we already have a skill for more high-level combat application called Tactics.
Yes it does. Even if you don't consciously recognize it as "wood cutting strategy," practice means you have refined your technique regarding timing, angles, recognizing the grain of the wood and where to strike, etc. to make yourself a more proficient wood cutter.
> you're just getting more proficient at handling the weapon.
And what does "getting more proficient" entail? And how does it differ from "strategy?" Don't use esoteric words like "strategy," give me black-and-white concrete examples.
>Mastering a sword requires you seeing it as an extension of your own body.
...And this involves getting better at practical application of strategy.
Look, I get what you're saying on a general level. A basketball player's job is different from a basketball coach's job, but you're drawing an artificial distinction between them, saying application doesn't involve strategy at all. The difference is a degree of focus, there isn't some barrier between the two.
Basketballs players who don't understand where they are supposed to be on defense, or when to rotate on defense, are crappy basketballs players. Weapon ranks already involve getting better at "weapon strategy," and we already have a skill for more high-level combat application called Tactics.
TOGBALLSAVANT
Re: Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/13/2018 11:09 AM CDT
What I meant, was weapon ranks represent improving your physical muscle memory, whereas melee mastery and tactics are in your head.
TEQUILASUNRISE
Re: Idea for improving Lore as a primary skillset
05/13/2018 04:49 PM CDT
>What I meant, was weapon ranks represent improving your physical muscle memory, whereas melee mastery and tactics are in your head.
Only melee mastery is learned by using melee weapons just like weapon ranks, so if anything it's some common understanding of muscle memory for fighting at melee range, and not some high-level mental understanding of weapons.
Only melee mastery is learned by using melee weapons just like weapon ranks, so if anything it's some common understanding of muscle memory for fighting at melee range, and not some high-level mental understanding of weapons.
