Poll: Proposed Proficiency System Modification

[Sujitation]

Regalia v5, a completely new race or two to still do, AND a new proficiency system?

Staff, do you just like torturing yourselves?
That seems overwhelming and time consuming on your parts. You all should slow it down and probably do one thing at a time.
You guys are doing amazing work but try not to overwork yourselves and stress over anything!

 

[Lizmun]

a completely new race or two to still do,

Click to shrink...

Sihai when

 

[GoodDreamer]

I like this system, but I have a slight problem with the strength modifier correlating to your body build. You can't "level up". It forces your body build to be static unless you decide to withhold points, which prevents any sort of significant physical change. Otherwise I think it's fantastic, but is there a possible solution to this? Perhaps two body builds can be fit in each point with some skill buff-debuff depending on what you choose. For example, if you put 4 into strength you can be Ripper or Muscular, but to go Muscular you must sacrifice half of your new skill points to maintain it. I can expand on this when I'm not on a phone.

 

[onlyathot]

add a charisma base stat

and won't this lowkey make all mages & silven como se dice OP ?

 

[FireFan96]

and won't this lowkey make all mages & silven como se dice OP ?

Click to shrink...

Given that both are trustee perms, I don't think abuse will happen.

 

[onlyathot]

Given that both are trustee perms, I don't think abuse will happen.

Click to shrink...

alriiiiiiight. second note,
if we're going full d&d might as well allow character growth to influence base stats. by which i mean age/experience should factor in to how many starting points ppl have. maybe 1 point per 10 years? per 20?

 

[GoodDreamer]

So, to explain my idea in a more understandable way with fewer misunderstandings, I have two examples.

Spoiler: Ripped: Standard

Arnold Smithe, Ailor without cultural boosts
Base Points: 3 Str, 1 Agi, o Cre, 2 Int

Spoiler: Ripped: Standard

• Strength Proficiencies
  
  • 6 Heavy Blunt
• Agility Proficiencies
  • +1 All
• Creative Proficiencies
  • None
• Intellect Proficiencies
  • +4 Statesman Knowledge

Body Shape

• Ripped

The above is the standard build following the standard rules. His +3 Strength puts him at Ripped and gives him 6 points to spend in the Strength Skills. This is normal.

Spoiler: Muscular: Proposed addition

Arnold Smithe, Ailor without cultural boosts
Base Points: 3 Str, 1 Agi, o Cre, 2 Int

Spoiler: Muscular: Proposed addition

• Strength Proficiencies
  • 3 Heavy Blunt
• Agility Proficiencies
  • +1 All
• Creative Proficiencies
  • None
• Intellect Proficiencies
  • +4 Statesman Knowledge

Body Shape

• Muscular

In the above, there are some major differences. The most important is that, despite having 3 Strength, Arnold only has 3 Strength Skill points rather than six. The other is that his body build is Muscular despite 3 Strength only qualifying for ripped. The proposal is for characters to be able to ascend one tier of strength without editing their actual base stats in exchange for half of their Strength Skill points.

 

[BogeyBanshee]

This change is everything I ever wanted! I tried making a racial body build sheet but in the end it was just a matter of muscle and fat. I didn't even recognize these as a problem but all of my characters ended up weaklings if I didn't purposely make them a fighter. Downside is I have to make character apps again.

 

[Arendan]

this is a great improvement and i am very much a fan!

 

[Magivore]

alriiiiiiight. second note,
if we're going full d&d might as well allow character growth to influence base stats. by which i mean age/experience should factor in to how many starting points ppl have. maybe 1 point per 10 years? per 20?

Click to shrink...

By doing this, a human can only be a strongman build by 50 years old. The point of eliminating age was because it became a problem with designing characters since people were pressured to make absurdly old characters that logically aren't in their prime anymore, solely so they can win the measuring contest when story is what should be prioritized. I'm also hoping the "alriiiiiight" is acceptance and not sarcasm, especially since 1/3 of those Trustee are staff members. That's a can of worms I don't think you'll want to open on this thread.

So, to explain my idea in a more understandable way with fewer misunderstandings, I have two examples.

Spoiler: Ripped: Standard

Arnold Smithe, Ailor without cultural boosts
Base Points: 3 Str, 1 Agi, o Cre, 2 Int

Spoiler: Ripped: Standard

• Strength Proficiencies
  
  • 6 Heavy Blunt
• Agility Proficiencies
  • +1 All
• Creative Proficiencies
  • None
• Intellect Proficiencies
  • +4 Statesman Knowledge

Body Shape

• Ripped

The above is the standard build following the standard rules. His +3 Strength puts him at Ripped and gives him 6 points to spend in the Strength Skills. This is normal.

Spoiler: Muscular: Proposed addition

Arnold Smithe, Ailor without cultural boosts
Base Points: 3 Str, 1 Agi, o Cre, 2 Int

Spoiler: Muscular: Proposed addition

• Strength Proficiencies
  • 3 Heavy Blunt
• Agility Proficiencies
  • +1 All
• Creative Proficiencies
  • None
• Intellect Proficiencies
  • +4 Statesman Knowledge

Body Shape

• Muscular

In the above, there are some major differences. The most important is that, despite having 3 Strength, Arnold only has 3 Strength Skill points rather than six. The other is that his body build is Muscular despite 3 Strength only qualifying for ripped. The proposal is for characters to be able to ascend one tier of strength without editing their actual base stats in exchange for half of their Strength Skill points.

Click to shrink...

The issue with doing this is now players have a way to be stronger and smarter/faster at the same time by having an extra point to spend. Not as good at weaponry, perhaps, but that's another complicated step to a system that wants reduce time consumption and become simpler while also providing a loophole you can milk for 'better stats.'

It overall becomes quite a bit more convoluted and intricate even in a shorter explanation, and perhaps it needs a longer explanation for people to get it better. And honestly you can't say it's super easy to understand when so many people don't understand it. If it was a few, maybe they're just slow but I think enough people don't get it for it to be a problem with the explanation/system, not the individual person trying to understand it

Click to shrink...

The good thing with this is there will be plenty of space on the wiki page to expand upon it. If you still don't understand, that's okay, you really just need to understand the basics since it's all conceptual and viable to change. There are examples on this thread that, I personally feel, help out bunches. It might need a read through or two, but so did proficiency since it had so many rule exceptions on branched pages that I still don't even know a thing about to this day. This is all my opinion, however.

 

[onlyathot]

By doing this, a human can only be a strongman build by 50 years old. The point of eliminating age was because it became a problem with designing characters since people were pressured to make absurdly old characters that logically aren't in their prime anymore, solely so they can win the measuring contest when story is what should be prioritized. I'm also hoping the "alriiiiiight" is acceptance and not sarcasm, especially since 1/3 of those Trustee are staff members. That's a can of worms I don't think you'll want to open on this thread.

Click to shrink...

i think u missed my point, im saying if characters START with 6 points they should gain ADDITIONAL points as they age, at either a rate of 10 yrs or 20 yrs. 20 yrs might make more sense tbh.

 

[Conflee]

i think u missed my point, im saying if characters START with 6 points they should gain ADDITIONAL points as they age, at either a rate of 10 yrs or 20 yrs. 20 yrs might make more sense tbh.

Click to shrink...

That still functionally creates the same problem of people making old characters that dont act old for extra points.

 

[onlyathot]

That still functionally creates the same problem of people making old characters that dont act old for extra points.

Click to shrink...

so the issue is the player and not the system by this logic.

which means apps should be under higher scrutiny for acceptance so there aren't 50+ year old grandpas lugging around a great sword.

 

[Magivore]

i think u missed my point, im saying if characters START with 6 points they should gain ADDITIONAL points as they age, at either a rate of 10 yrs or 20 yrs. 20 yrs might make more sense tbh.

Click to shrink...

That does make sense, understudy on my end and I do apologize for that, oop. I thought you mean 0 and up, which was an assumption on my end. While interesting, this opens up room for 400 year old Yanar that act 14 and 150 year old elves once more unless you put the cap to be only a 2-3 point difference, which at that point, it's such a minor addition that it doesn't matter all that much, in my eyes.

I've pinged this thread a lot, so I think I'll cease and desist for now!

 

[Conflee]

so the issue is the player and not the system by this logic.

which means apps should be under higher scrutiny for acceptance so there aren't 50+ year old grandpas lugging around a great sword.

Click to shrink...

The issue then becomes: Why let points go that high anyway?

A character over 40 points is a grandmaster, meant to be a teacher, hence the points values being allowed. The issue comes when players write the character as an elder teacher then play them without any of the natural issues age brings up. Or they just make the character an elf to bypass everything, min-maxing. Hence, this entire thread, and the proposed solution to make it basically impossible to game.

 

[onlyathot]

The issue then becomes: Why let points go that high anyway?

A character over 40 points is a grandmaster, meant to be a teacher, hence the points values being allowed. The issue comes when players write the character as an elder teacher then play them without any of the natural issues age brings up. Or they just make the character an elf to bypass everything, min-maxing. Hence, this entire thread, and the proposed solution to make it basically impossible to game.

Click to shrink...

u just,,, reiterated the issue being the player and not the system. the reason I proposed an increase in points per 20 years is bc,,, it makes sense. a 20 year old character fresh out of knight school or whatever shouldn't be just as experienced and capable as 40 year old veteran. HONESTLY, same thing for mages. BUT that's not the point atm.

the point is people were taking advantage of the old system by having older characters that weren't acting as they should, meaning their apps should have been rejected. the issue isn't the system but the players, which goes back to the applications.

if applications are approved solely for the purpose of making said character lore COMPLIANT & their proficiencies APPROVED, then honestly just make the standards or rules for the applications more strict. if players aren't following their own application, then they shouldn't be approved. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Conflee]

the point is people were taking advantage of the old system by having older characters that weren't acting as they should, meaning their apps should have been rejected. the issue isn't the system but the players, which goes back to the applications.

if applications are approved solely for the purpose of making said character lore COMPLIANT & their proficiencies APPROVED, then honestly just make the standards or rules for the applications more strict. if players aren't following their own application, then they shouldn't be approved. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Click to shrink...

Theres also all the other issues Marty laid out.

• The system has grown convoluted. Each time we added something, Magic, Vampires, Race boosts, the system got more complicated. The current system is really intimidating and daunting, despite the fact of how easy it is when you actually understand it. The learning curve is too high.

• Schools are restrictive. They almost act like Ailor culture boosts in a way that are not friendly to non Ailor races. Furthermore, they don't respect racial themes. For example an Ailor could get the same level of Khoptar as a Drowdar by following the same School, even though the Drowdar from backstory should be a lot better at handling this kind of weapon.

• Cultural proficiency completely lost their value because everyone has them up the nose, and they are usually so niche that they don't actually have a long term rewarding impact on role play.

• Backstory for characters seems to be 80% dictated by Schools and proficiency. Players are so busy bending their backstory backwards to validate their proficiency points that most characters have really dull backstories without actual creative content.

• Intellect skills are severely underrated, and often completely useless in Regalia because of progression dependency. Some players designed as generals for example would not see a battle where their points got used once every 3 months, resulting in most players abandoning these themes for more rewarding combat points.

• Age and racial design in many ways was a problem because you either get punished when playing a younger character, or playing an older character depending on the situation.

• Most players do not respect body shape mechanics for schools, backstories and sensible character designs. The amount of characters with chiseled six-pack abs who should not realistically have them by their life style is astonishing.

• Proficiency stacks often got so complicated that players could no longer compare them in live combat IRP. How do you compare a 27 year old with 23 long sword against a 21 year old with 40 axes? This lack of contextual understanding meant that the greatest strength of Proficiencies: factual numbers, went completely unused.

Click to shrink...

I was just honing in on one aspect of it because it was the one you focused on.

Beyond that, you can't blame the reviewers when they review what seems to be a standard application that looks fine, when the issue is the players going IN GAME and ignoring the negative effects, which the reviewer has no handle on unless its reported.

This system fixes a lot of issues at once, and mitigates others, and is only mildly more complicated to explain.

 

[onlyathot]

Theres also all the other issues Marty laid out.



I was just honing in on one aspect of it because it was the one you focused on.

Beyond that, you can't blame the reviewers when they review what seems to be a standard application that looks fine, when the issue is the players going IN GAME and ignoring the negative effects, which the reviewer has no handle on unless its reported.

This system fixes a lot of issues at once, and mitigates others, and is only mildly more complicated to explain.

Click to shrink...

oh im not blaming the reviewers im blaming the players, as i stated multiple times. make applications stricter, which will prune players, and leave the remaining who use their application for more than just a crp reference and as a point to begin, or add t0, a story.

 

[Conflee]

oh im not blaming the reviewers im blaming the players, as i stated multiple times. make applications stricter, which will prune players, and leave the remaining who use their application for more than just a crp reference and as a point to begin, or add t0, a story.

Click to shrink...

Player action is always influenced by how things are designed and presented. If you give people a bunch of big numbers they naturally try to tweak them to fit a vision. Theres nothing wrong with wanting to make a fighter, as there isnt anything wrong with designing a character to be a doctor. The issue is the current system leads to issues where players want to, and even have to, age their characters up to feel like they are on a level with one another. Then one person is like "I want to make an even greater doctor!" and raises the average for everyone else.

It becomes a hindrance that leads to the undesired behavior. This new systems cuts the fat, polishes it up a bit, and reorganizes things in a way that better reflects how staff wanted proficiency to be used.

 

[MonMarty]

Despite sufficient popular support base to move ahead with implementation, we've decided against further implementation as this currently stands due to underlying issues and more-than-expected resistance. This thread is now locked and the idea discarded.