>>2) Barbarians can now only teach & listen to other Barbarians for the following skills: Inner Fire, Augmentation, Debilitation and Warding.


I'm curious here. Why? I understand the abilities function differently for different guilds, but sometimes realism or reason is sacrificed in exchange for playability. This, in my opinion, is excessive and completely unnecessary.

And, to clarify, this is coming from someone that has maybe listened to a couple debilitation/warding classes in the last near 150 circles. It is not a method I utilize for learning, but forcibly taking this option away seems a bit much.

Skinning was allowed in combat before yesterday--did this change?

Someone on the gweths was talking about how bards can no longer teach everything in combat. I don't have a bard to test with, but it might need to be looked into.

> Was this a bug that was corrected or introduced?

Neither. Just a chance in abilities.

> Any chance we can get confirmation that this change was intended?

http://forums.play.net/forums/DragonRealms/The%20Bards/Bugs%20-%20Bards/view/1329

> Skinning was allowed in combat before yesterday--did this change?

Can bards and other lore primes still teach anything in combat, or is it now restricted to the same skills as the rest?

Also not a thief, but it looks like at least part of this was already accounted for.

> 1. Thieves (maybe through a confidence khri) should be able to listen to any class, but they just don't learn anything more than scholarship from the class. This helps protect identities.

Thieves can apparently "listen" to any class they can't "learn" from.

>>but is it really so different that some of the lessons the Bard knows can't be used

Reading over what I wrote gave me an idea that might be a workable compromise between the GMs who want this and the players who don't...

How's about you open listening back up (excepting of course skills that the class can't use) but people learn at a decreased rate?

Ex;
> Thiefypants listens to Magicdude teach "Holy Magic."
> Thiefypants only ends up getting about 0.5 times the normal experience from listening to this class.
> Thiefypants instead listens to Muscles McGee teach "Inner Fire."
> Thiefypants instead gets 0.75 times the normal experience.
> Thiefypants finally finds Sneakerdoodle, who is teaching "Inner Magic."
> Thiefypants gets full experience from this class, because it's totally compatable.

This idea could further be applied, if desired, to teaching the various Magic skills. Cleric listening to Lunar gets 0.5, but gets 0.75 from Life (or whatever; I'm not up to date on mana spectrum theory). The closer the "source" of the teacher's skill is to yours, the more experience you get from the class.

I

Alright let's start at the top.

>>Right and I came back to DR after over a decade. Not sure what that ship has sailed is supposed to mean.

What I mean is that the discussion about if thieves will be able to use runestones moving forward was a debate that was held over a decade ago, and in that time the horse has been beaten so many times the equine cemetery has stopped allowing visitors.

>>Skinning is a pretty combat-related-thing. Could skinning maybe be allowed in combat?

Skinning was actually one of the top examples of a skill that makes no sense to be teachable in combat. Just think about it a moment.

>>Someone on the gweths was talking about how bards can no longer teach everything in combat.

This is not a bug and it was covered in my initial post. Bards are a subset of everyone. I was asked to even out the teaching perk to all lore primaries instead of benefiting just Bards.

>>I was pretty upset with the 3.0 changes with Magic for Thieves. The changes made it impossible to learn TM, MD, and Sorcery, which limits the number of skills to learn and generate TDPs for these non-magic using guilds.

This were never an effective source of TDPs. Even if you manged to grind out 100 ranks in TM, ranks that did nothing for you and were certainly not learned in an efficient way, that;s all of 25 TDPs. That same time invested in almost any other skill that you have a at a reasonable rank is going to return far more TDPs.

>>Thieves (maybe through a confidence khri) should be able to listen to any class, but they just don't learn anything more than scholarship from the class. This helps protect identities.

/sigh. You try not to give away all the secrets to the masses...

>>Thieves of a pretend guild can (poorly) teach the skills associated with that pretend guild substituting a portion of their scholarship for the skill in question.

There is zero chance of this happening. You cannot create knowledge from nothing.

>>Thieves should be able to safely teach thievery to other thieves if the teacher and student are in hiding.

Hmm. Yeah, I can see that.

---

So. Why did these changes happen? (And yes, we had very much the same debate going on in this thread internally).

Teaching in combat - I touched on this in another thread, but combat remains by far the most efficient way to learn many skills at once. Learning even more skills while in combat is the reverse of what we want to be encouraging. As for the specific skills, that was just a lore consistency thing. How well can you really teach someone about advanced mathematics while fighting for your life?

Thieves/Barbarians - Learning the skills they aren't suppose to learn was a bug. It should have been blocked from day one, and it wasn't. So why isolate them to learning from their own guilds? Because of lore consistency. Do I wish we had a better balance of non-magic user guilds and magic user guilds so it didn't feel like we were isolating these two so much? Yeah. I do.

Removing unused ranks - Again, this was a bug fix. And it's not just cosmetic - systems are being written with certain assumptions in mind and the concern here is those ranks do not match those assumptions. Were they breaking any systems? I don't know.

-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

>>Learning even more skills while in combat is the reverse of what we want to be encouraging.

I disagree. Combat has the inherent risk of death. Plus the added chaos of 2 hunters in a room. Personally, the only time I ever die is when I've got someone distracting me/adding to the scroll.

Removing a benefit for multiple hunters to go out on a trip together for the sake of removing the ability to learn an extra 2 skills does not seem worth the necessity or removal under your argument(debate argument, not drama argument).

Which is more important, waving a hand for the benefit of people working together or encouraging the gain of fewer skills at one time?

If we're going with the realism debate about teaching in combat, remove the ability to learn or teach while doing anything else that gains experience actively, and boost the amount learned per teaching pulse by a very significant amount to compensate. Like 5 mind states per pulse.

---

"Game balance is sobbing over in the corner as it considers the ramifications of AoE Blufmor Garaen. Your spell slots send their condolences." - GM Raesh

More like 10 seconds. Elanthia time is 4x perfect skinning skill means you're going to be quick, so skin a goblin in half a minute sounds about right.

Oh, but don't forget to add time based on size and/or hide toughness.


/lol

---

"Game balance is sobbing over in the corner as it considers the ramifications of AoE Blufmor Garaen. Your spell slots send their condolences." - GM Raesh

>>Right and I came back to DR after over a decade. Not sure what that ship has sailed is supposed to mean.

What I mean is that the discussion about if thieves will be able to use runestones moving forward was a debate that was held over a decade ago, and in that time the horse has been beaten so many times the equine cemetery has stopped allowing visitors.

I'm not asking to be able to use runes, I am stating that ranks I have were from actual use not some bug.

>>Skinning was actually one of the top examples of a skill that makes no sense to be teachable in combat. Just think about it a moment.

I have thought about this and wouldn't the perfect time to teach skinning be actually to show someone how to skin something you just killed? Practice and instruction at the time of actually doing it instead of some abstract lesson some time in the future makes more sense to me.

>>This were never an effective source of TDPs. Even if you manged to grind out 100 ranks in TM, ranks that did nothing for you and were certainly not learned in an efficient way, that;s all of 25 TDPs. That same time invested in almost any other skill that you have a at a reasonable rank is going to return far more TDPs.


It's not all about effective ways to gain TDPs. This is, at least I thought, a roleplaying game. Titles are tied to ranks. There are guild specific titles and general titles where you need ranks in magic skills to get the titles. Quite a few thieves chose to spend time to gain these titles for rp reasons and now poof they are gone. Besides the point of efficiency people DID spend time to learn a skill and even if it is "only" 25 TDPs it was time already spent not gaining those TDPs another way and you're just wiping them away. That's not really fair at all.

>Thieves/Barbarians - Learning the skills they aren't suppose to learn was a bug. It should have been blocked from day one, and it wasn't. So why isolate them to learning from their own guilds? Because of lore consistency. Do I wish we had a better balance of non-magic user guilds and magic user guilds so it didn't feel like we were isolating these two so much? Yeah. I do.

Can you explain the lore consistency? Trying to use different magic/mana other than your own can blow your hands off but it's logical that thwey can cross teach the separate skills to each other but Barbs and Thieves can't even teach each other when both can learn Debilitation through intimidation which seems inherently more similar than cross mana theories. Secondly, with the lore changes Barbs won't even teach each other that well since they are lore tertiary. And as long as you wish it could be different that you are isolating two guilds it's okay you don't have to worry about that pesky balance. Nice.

>>The rate of learning will depend on the lore skill set placement of the teacher (ie: Empaths/Traders/Bards can teach in combat far better than Barbarians and Rangers).

What happened to the "a rank is a rank is a rank" dogma?

With the change to allow thievery to be taught/listened from hiding, mean that being pointed out of hiding and pulsing brings criminal charges? Hehehehehe.

>>Muleherd: What happened to the "a rank is a rank is a rank" dogma?

"This is not unique. Magic primes recover mana faster than magic terts. Armor primes can arm-wear larger shields than armor terts. Lore primes can pick up more careers/hobbies than lore terts." --GM Raesh (04/04/2015)

"A Paladin/Ranger/(Trader)'s Attunement is worth less than a Cleric/Moon Mage/Warrior Mage's Attunement. It literally does less per point based on skillset, and it has for a long time." --GM Armifer (04/04/2015)

Other examples of skillset-based perks: https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Skillsets#Skillset%20Placement%20Perks

---

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!

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

>>"This is not unique. Magic primes recover mana faster than magic terts. Armor primes can arm-wear larger shields than armor terts. Lore primes can pick up more careers/hobbies than lore terts." --GM Raesh (04/04/2015)

"A Paladin/Ranger/(Trader)'s Attunement is worth less than a Cleric/Moon Mage/Warrior Mage's Attunement. It literally does less per point based on skillset, and it has for a long time." --GM Armifer (04/04/2015)<<

You understand how that's only further illustrative of the problem, yes?

Some changes are rationalized as because dem rules say, "A rank is a rank! So we just made this consistent with the rules..."

Other changes use the handwavy rationale of, "Well.. there are other exceptions to the rule..."

There's no overarching design methodology being consistently adhered to. Arbitrary changes are explained away with whichever arbitrary excuse du jour is needed.

>>Some changes are rationalized as because dem rules say, "A rank is a rank! So we just made this consistent with the rules..."

When was the last time we gave that as an explanation?

-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Calvino Italo

Only while teaching during combat.

>>1) Teaching in Combat has been overhauled. Anyone can now teach the following skills in combat: All weapon skills, all armor skills, targetted magic, debilitation, warding, evasion, and tactics. In addition Barbarians, Paladins and Thieves can teach their respective guild skills in combat. The rate of learning will depend on the lore skill set placement of the teacher (ie: Empaths/Traders/Bards can teach in combat far better than Barbarians and Rangers).


Still doesn't make much sense that an Empath, who is armor and weapons tert can teach armor and weapons IN COMBAT better than a Barb/Pali could who are experts at weapons/armor and their uses. This whole "bug fix" was poorly planned and ill thought out.

>Still doesn't make much sense that an Empath, who is armor and weapons tert can teach armor and weapons IN COMBAT better than a Barb/Pali could who are experts at weapons/armor and their uses. This whole "bug fix" was poorly planned and ill thought out.

Sure it makes total sense. Forget about the subject being taught and think instead about the teacher who is doing the instructing. Lore primaries should be better at this because Lore is "thier thing"

Who would you rather learn welding from, a welder who teaches or a teacher who welds?

---

*************
Your time for being forced PvP OPEN has ended. You have been set back to DON'T MUCK WITH ME UNLESS YOU TELL ME FIRST! and will not be able to change it for 24 hours.
*************

>>Still doesn't make much sense that an Empath, who is armor and weapons tert can teach armor and weapons IN COMBAT better than a Barb/Pali could who are experts at weapons/armor and their uses.


Teaching, like Crafting, is not about how well you can swing the sword, but how well you can show someone else how to swing that sword the same you you do. There are plenty of experts in fields that couldn't teach the basics to someone without a good grasp of what they are doing to begin with, and there are other people who are not so good in a field, but can teach talented people to be better than them in that same field.

In short, teaching someone to kill/defend is not the same as killing/defending for yourself.

<<I have thought about this and wouldn't the perfect time to teach skinning be actually to show someone how to skin something you just killed? Practice and instruction at the time of actually doing it instead of some abstract lesson some time in the future makes more sense to me.

Except that the next eight fire-breathing dragons aren't patiently waiting on the sidelines for you to finish your lesson before they attempt to clean you and your student's bones of their fresh meat.

---

Elanthipedia - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page
Epedia Admins - https://elanthipedia.play.net/mediawiki/index.php/Elanthipedia:Administrators

>>Lennonjon: I would like to see the skill placement of the skill being taught also affect the teaching rate. In my mind a Paladin who is lore secondary and armor primary should teach armor better than an Empath who is lore primary and armor tertiary. I don't care how eloquent you are as a teacher, if the topic isn't your thing and you aren't well-versed in it, you are going to do a terrible job at it.

This is already somewhat true in that teachers who have more ranks in the subject being taught are less effective than teachers who have fewer ranks, and your primary skillset placement means that you are likely to have more ranks than secondary or tertiary characters (for the same amount of time spent).

---

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!

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