Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
I have to say that the cost suggested - be it lessons for switching or credits for the artifact - is quite painful, particularly when you take into account the need to learn all the new skills. I do think that you'd see a lot more use of this, and therefore a lot more expenditure on credits for the sake of learning skills/buying affiliated artifacts, if you didn't have an extremely high cost to get into it.
If it were a fairly cheap cost to take another class (100 credits, or whatever) and then inexpensive to swap classes (normal skillflex costs, even if the swap in class also incurred a delay as you jump from this skill to that, and can only assume one guild skill a day) I'd be quite willing to do so. Even with the additional lesson cost to learn the skills.
As things stand now, I'd hesitate to even consider it. I'd not want to jump classes until I could guarantee the extra 500 lessons (or artifact) to jump back to my own, in case I couldn't learn enough skills quickly enough. You're looking at... 2058 lessons per trans skill in that second class. That's 1029 credits. Plus another 84 to switch to the class. That's a good amount right there, without even needing an artifact. You're looking at an extra cost of 1529 lessons (255 credits) beyond the normal cost of 1715*3 lessons to tri-trans.
For those who would want to do this often, allow them to purchase an artifact as suggested, to increase ability to classflex. Let that be a high-end bonus, rather than a more basic requirement to really make this reasonable.
So please, make the basic ability to switch classes inexpensive to do, a one-time purchase. Then have normal skillflexing costs. You'll find that a lot more people will be willing to spend money to buy credits if you make this accessible, rather than obscene in cost.
Yeah, making it not cost lessons to switch doesn't magically make those skillsets jump to trans. You're already talking about a massive lesson (and therefore credit) pay-in, more if you're looking to become a high-tier fighter with more than one class. Not being able to touch a 5145+ lesson investment without a surcharge of 500 lessons upward is extremely offputting.
Hiriako touched on it, but it also means that I wouldn't be likely to swap classes unless I could immediatly trans all the new skillsets. Why should I turn off my access to tri-trans in exchange for access to not-tri-trans? This means I'm going to want to have all 850+ish credits on hand before even considering a change. If I could slowly build up my skills in the alternate class, stretching the cost out over a long period of time, it would be more palatable.That's heavily penalized in the proposed system.
okay my question here is, does this go cross org? like, I'm mag, can I go hit up some Glom guild to teach me their skills so I can get their version of something like alchemy?
The soft, hollow voice of Nocht, the Silent resounds within your mind as His words echo through the aether, "Congratulations, Arimisia. Your mastery of vermin cannot be disputed."
I'd rather make multiclass not an easy (cheap) thing to do so; rather, more of a path for those who truly wish to pursue it. I want to keep the lesson cost but I'd be open to negotiate the amount if people think 500 lessons are 'obscene'.
I would personally like it if a guild could choose what other classes they allow people to have. Sometimes a guilds roleplay is inclined so that they may disapprove of the way another guild in their city interprets particular teachings, and I feel like blanket allowing individuals to multiclass to whatever will blur those lines of roleplay that make guilds attractive.
Whoa, I missed the part that also mentioned that on top of the overhead cost, it will also cost additional lessons to trans (up to 20%). That seems like more than enough overhead, that's already a cost over a thousand lessons to tritrans. Wowza.
A thousand credits, Enyalida, not lessons. I think the extra lesson cost alone makes it far from being an easy and cheap thing to do. I do think 500 lessons is too much. Consider these examples:
A Celestine class-flexing into a Paladin:
Forget Cosmic/Celestialism Temporarily
Forget Healing/Astrology/Tarot Temporarily
Skillchoice Activate Knighthood/Specialization
Skillchoice Activate Athletics
That's 100 lessons from the flex cost alone. That's with a guild that can keep Rituals/Sacraments as a guild skill, thereby providing the absolute minimum. Yes, there are doctoral cords to lessen the cost, but for the average user without a cord, you have a 100-150 lesson cost just to flex. If you have a class-switch cost of even just 100 lessons, you're looking at 200-250 each time you want to flex, dropped to 100 for someone with a Doctoral Cord.
500 lessons is just too much, particularly when you consider the necessity of skillflexing as well. I'd say 200 lessons would be a reasonable ceiling for a class-flex. That's 34 credits each time, basically. Maybe...200 for any guild, 100 for one you possess a covenant with?
Keep the artifact with other benefits, faster flexing, a removed lesson cost, the lowered cost of learning skills. Those are worthwhile.
Hiriako makes a pretty good argument. I'd vote for 200 lessons too.
TBH, I would suggest reducing the multiclass learning cost to 10% (5% covenant) as well. You want to encourage the average Joe to multiclass so they'd be more willing to spend a little bit of their paycheck to slowly work their alternate classes up, like Enyalida said. You want it to be affordable.
Making multiclass something only the super wealthy can do kills a little bit of that IMO.
No, I meant lessons: It normally costs 5145 lessons to bring three skillsets to transcendent. It will cost you an extra 1029 lessons to tri-trans with this multiclass system, on top of the currently stated cost of 500 lessons, bringing users to a total of 1529 lessons cost of access to this new mechanic - before any switching back and forth takes place. That's a ~255 credit cost added to the ~860 credit cost of learning three skillsets. This seems extraordinarily pejorative, and will effectively price out the vast majority of players, which will drop the number of participants and the total amount spent by players via this mechanic.
Why assume that players using this mechanic will trans their skillsets? The question is, why would they not? Any flat rate cost to enter will provide pressure on users to maximize the efficiency of their spending. For instance, spending 500 lessons to then spend 10 lessons in a skillset not only will fail to unlock a meaningful amount of abilities, it will increase the cost versus value ratio you achieve, the value being game effects: abilities. In that situation, for every 1 lesson you gained value from, you've spent 50 lessons you haven't gained value from. If you learn 500 lessons, you've only spent 1 extra lesson per lesson you've gained value for, and so on. I think it's safe to say that this pressure, even if reduced, will mean that the people using a multiclassing with any flat usage/swap cost will only be people who can safely afford to tritrans their new skillsets immediatly, which will reduce the number of users - making this worth less effort to pursue and manage.
For an alternate (already successful) model, you can look to Aetolia's profession system (Imperian also has multiclassing, but I'm not familiar with it. I wouldn't call Achaea multiclassing. Don't do that.). Once a player has gained high skill ranks in their core class, they are allowed one extra profession, which maps onto the idea of a guild's grouping of skills. Additional profession slots start at 100 credits and go up the more you already have. To make use of this slot, you need to find a non-novice member of the guild that teaches the skills, who has sufficient proficiency in the skills and request that they help teach you the new skills. There are some limits on how many outsiders any one given guild person is allowed to 'unlock' their skills for, and some other limits on who can do the unlocking. Once you have skills learned, you may swap back and forth between professions with no additional cost (beyond learning the skills, of course), with a limit of twelve hours, as long as you haven't engaged in any combat for a while, and you lose all your defenses upon doing so. There are also limits equivalent to national requirements: You can't be a priest of the Light and have vampire skills at the same time.
Why can't we adopt something like that model? None of the pressures on our system are totally foreign to Aetolia's, and vicea versa. Instead of (or in addition to) the restrictions Aetolia places on their systems, we could add in the planned guildleader requirements, and other more stringent restrictions. Instead of life/death tether profession requirements, we could simply require that both guilds be in the same nation!
When Aetolian Multiclassing came out, there were a lot of questions, including "What will happen to guilds?". Much like Lusternia, a lot of Aetolian identity is tied up in the guild structure, which is in turn at least partially tied to skills. Concerns about guilds losing their relevance or losing RP identity were raised and mulled over. Several years later, guilds are probably stronger than ever, in my experience with that game. Instead of guild identity being established merely by the equivalent of dungeon master fiat, guilds were forced to come to understand themselves as more than merely a collection of people with the same powers to smite their enemies, because they no longer could depend on that excuse to fall back on.
My Anecdote on the subject:
I have a character that made use of this, and has two classes at pretty high levels, effectively having spent twice as much on lessons as I would have if I had stayed in one class for one simple reason: I felt like my credits were buying me value. I could have spent those lessons on common skills, but common skills are generally boring/auxillary. Instead, I had a series of RP sessions convincing another guild to teach me their mystical ways, and countless others explaining my choice to others, which I made obvious by customizing my class entourage and commissioning unique designed armor from a forger to reflect the skill addition, and gained another class worth of value for my credits.
I simply don't understand the drive to attach additional pricetags onto access to the game's features. If the (high) costs are intended to prevent people from flip flopping willy-nilly, there are more definite methods to employ to that end. For instance, you could limit the skill swapping to once per six IG months or longer - as long as there is never a limit to swapping back into your 'native' guildset. Instead of a cost to use these skillsets (Swap into them), the cost could be moved to the front end, as a one-time investment. This movement from a 'soft-capping' deterring method to a hard capping one is a good move that accomplishes the same goal without needlessly (or at least feeling that way) taxing the pocketbooks of players - more fun that way!
If the intent is to increase cashflow into the game (which does feel unlikely, though it is a remote possibility), I'd refer you back to my previous anecdote. I play/played Aetolia, but it wasn't my main squeeze. I wasn't shooting for top-tier combatant, and was therefore not particularly interested in spending big credits to learn the high levels of common skills required for high combat, but worthless to me. However, being able to play around with the mechanical and roleplay ideas of another guild, and how that guild would connect with what I already had established with my character (instead of rolling a new alt) enticed me to spend more credits than I otherwise would have. If there was a big hump/cost of entry to get over before I could do that, I would not likely have gone to the effort or expense.
Basically, please reconsider the requirement to have any increased costs to participate in multiclassing, and similar costs to skillflexing. It causes both roleplay/fun and financial considerations to suffer, in my opinion. With easier flexing/classing, players will have more fun, be happier, and the game will be all around better for it.
Apprenticing to learn a guild's skills should cost 100 credits, half of which should go to the guild reserves.
/hides
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
Whilst I am still reticent about the idea of multiclassing at all, I appreciate that it's something a lot of people want and to be honest I probably will use it when it implements. I appreciate the lengths that are being gone to in order to preserve RP and the degree to which player input is helping develop the concept. My concerns are as follows, and I think they're mostly chorusing with others but here we go:
- I agree that the 'multiclass-for-free artefact' should be an upgrade to the doctoral cord (obviously preserving the initial powers of the cord!).
- I'm concerned about the overall cost of multiflexing, like many others. Whilst I am happy to cough up an initial cost for the artefact, I'm not sure I'd be able to then afford 1k credits to tri-trans - and that's before you consider potentially wanting multiple tertiary options from the multiflexed guild, or guild-specific tradeskills, or needing to take lowmagic/highmagic if you don't already have the right one.
Whilst I absolutely agree that it should be an expensive thing to do, I fear that the current price is beyond expensive and into the realms of 'only a very small number of people can afford to do this'. I do not personally buy credits beyond my membership; I rely on Bardics and the suchlike to provide an 'income'. It would take me a very long time to be able to afford to multiflex this way.
BTW, just to draw attention to Arimisia's question, I hope cross-org multiclassing is not going to be allowed. Or if it is, make it require permission from all three guild leaders of the org that the person wants to gain skills from to agree.
Also btw, does this affect rogues in anyway, or will it be a system entirely denied to them? (I'm fine with that.)
What about those that already have multiclassed skills, and they quit whatever guild they are in (to become a rogue)? Will they be able to switch between the skills that they have multiclassed in?
Why not make it a gold-sink cost to switch instead of a lesson cost? You already have the lesson cost baked in with skillchoice activate so there is not a great need to add more. Plus, more gold sinks will just do good things for the game. Make it give 25% of the gold to the guild you flexed to (in their main bank account) and simply trash the rest.
So many lessons are going to be spent on transing All The Things that a switching cost in addition does just seem unnecessary. A gold cost will give the people who do use it incentive to get out and do things, too- another thing that would be great for the game too!
I have a question: how will racial specializations work with this? Like, if I learn Druidry, will I be a Shadowlord with druid skills, or a Shadowcaster in the Ebonguard?
Regardless of whether or not it is a simple fix, it would still need to be considered and addressed in that case. Hence raising it as a concern early in the coding process.
Personally, I'd prefer it if all three guild leaders have to give permission for someone to be allowed to multiclass. That's how serious I think it should be taken.
Personally, I'd prefer it if all three guild leaders have to give permission for someone to be allowed to multiclass. That's how serious I think it should be taken.
At the same time you're looking at a popularity contest again with this.
Actually, having this as a high cost gold sink to switch classes is a brilliant idea.Would be a massive improvement to the in-game economy - 200-300k gold a switch would be awesome.
Actually, having this as a high cost gold sink to switch classes is a brilliant idea.Would be a massive improvement to the in-game economy - 200-300k gold a switch would be awesome.
Would bring credit prices down and raise esteem prices. Indeed
Personally, I'd prefer it if all three guild leaders have to give permission for someone to be allowed to multiclass. That's how serious I think it should be taken.
At the same time you're looking at a popularity contest again with this.
And having to become chummy with just one leader in order to allow you to multiclass isn't?
Also, I think it was said before, but I just want to reiterate: We also need a cancel-button for allowed multiclasses.
Comments
I'd rather make multiclass not an easy (cheap) thing to do so; rather, more of a path for those who truly wish to pursue it. I want to keep the lesson cost but I'd be open to negotiate the amount if people think 500 lessons are 'obscene'.
It normally costs 5145 lessons to bring three skillsets to transcendent. It will cost you an extra 1029 lessons to tri-trans with this multiclass system, on top of the currently stated cost of 500 lessons, bringing users to a total of 1529 lessons cost of access to this new mechanic - before any switching back and forth takes place. That's a ~255 credit cost added to the ~860 credit cost of learning three skillsets. This seems extraordinarily pejorative, and will effectively price out the vast majority of players, which will drop the number of participants and the total amount spent by players via this mechanic.
/hides
Also btw, does this affect rogues in anyway, or will it be a system entirely denied to them? (I'm fine with that.)
What about those that already have multiclassed skills, and they quit whatever guild they are in (to become a rogue)? Will they be able to switch between the skills that they have multiclassed in?
So many lessons are going to be spent on transing All The Things that a switching cost in addition does just seem unnecessary. A gold cost will give the people who do use it incentive to get out and do things, too- another thing that would be great for the game too!
So how will it decide?
But you'll not be a Knight in the Ebonguard, you'd be a Blacktalon in the Ebonguard.
He's asking if you'll remain a Shadowlord Faeling or if you'll become a Shadowcaster Faeling.
The divine voice of Avechna, the Avenger reverberates powerfully, "Congratulations, Morkarion, you are the Bringer of Death indeed."
You see Estarra the Eternal shout, "Morkarion is no more! Mourn the mortal! But welcome True Ascendant Karlach, of the Realm of Death!
Also, I think it was said before, but I just want to reiterate: We also need a cancel-button for allowed multiclasses.
I'm also all in favour of using gold to multiclass-switch. I've always wanted more gold sinks.