I haven't done every quest on the server, so this could already be the case with some of them, but I think there should be conditional quest rewards. For example, you can complete the quest for just killing the boss, but you get bonus gold on return if you've also deciphered his texts or something. Another idea could be 100/50 gold/exp per hostage saved from a hostage situation. Basically, anything that gives you a reward determined by your performance.

As an additional suggestion, perhaps quests could be made slightly easier, so they're doable with even pretty poor parties, but they still get the basic reward (which will also now be reduced accordingly from what it is), just not all the great bonus rewards), so that people can still quest during European and Australian times when the player counts are low.

Neat idea.

As far as making quests easier, many quests have extra areas you can explore. I know the Clowns Quest has its original quest area, plus an extra mirror maze for those who are daring. The Hoar Crypt quest has some sort of hole you can climb down to meet some unhappy spirits. So while it's not precisely what you proposed, we do offer something along those lines!

Oooooo this is a neat idea. It would really discourage the thought process behind "well we killed the boss in that wing, so let's just head back with 75% of the spawn intact and tell them we cleaned it out!"

Edit: Also, I know exactly what you mean about not being able to quest during the low population times. I used to work 9-5 ish mon-fri, but now I work 4-midnight mon-fri, so....if I manage to get some meaningful RP at all in a given night, I consider it a win.

I'd love to see more quests get their limits nudged closer to 2-3 men, while still having the ramping challenges to elicit up to 7-8. Topped off with the urge to go 'one more room' deeper for better rewards, and enemy-laden ways to learn more 'IG secrets'... I can see Mary's house alone dripping with awesome, even with just a hidden trapdoor/tunnel or two. 8) Heck, it'd just be nice seeing the level limits get more lax.

I know as far as low level quests are concerned it doesn't take many people for a good number, 3-4 people can be a very effective quest group, as far as high level quests go I'm not sure what party sizes you need really, but if players in time zones with few players need small party high level quests, come up with a quest idea and submit it to the DMs.

As far as conditional rewards go, I think it's a good idea, but I wouldn't say to set conditional rewards based on whether or not you killed everyone or just the boss, unless it's a bounty collection or something. In many cases you are hired to clear an area, the boss makes a good way to trigger an end rather then having to program a trigger when all enemies in the area are dead.

Also, there are a lot of quests with rewards you can only get if you have someone to pick a lock or notice a trap door, that sort of thing. I don't see any major problem with adding more conditions, exept for the fact that people will always set out to meet the conditions, which could quickly unbalance quest rewards.

How is the suggestion that people will always set out to meet quest conditions a major problem? That's the whole point of a quest in the first place.

Well, okay, I think I might have jumbled things a little bit in the first post so disregard most of that. I'll be clearer here:

If this system were implemented, people would be encouraged to go and try and get all the conditions filled e.g. rescue all the hostages, protect all the slave caravan from the drow bandits, etc. Not, for example, just doing the quest and then having an extra optional bit plonked on the end.

The meat and potatoes of the idea is this: it's a situation where you can fail to meet the conditions, and with the two examples given above. The hostages could be executed, the slaves could be slaughtered or captured. It's not the case that you get to a certain point and then think, cool, we're done here, let's go back. You're encouraged to do it all, and if you're incapable, well that's the whole point. It's a challenge and it isn't optional. Of course, the main quest could be to kill the hostage takers, with secondary objectives being the rescue of hostages. Or the safe passage of a slaver-merchant, with the protection of his goods being secondary.

None of these things are optional as such, at least, not in the same way that a secret room is, or unlockable chests that need a rogue, or whatever. That's just a way of beefing up current quests. But they are optional in that even if you fail, you'll still get a basic reward.

I tried adding a quest with multiple stages of completion, and there are two old, infamous quests which also attempted this. They are the most broken quests in EFU (and as a result don't give proper rewards - read: usually don't give rewards at all). Unfortunately, properly implementing them would require massive changes to the design of our quest system.

Hmmm.... It seems to me that those quests of which you speak have never been completed, not even close, by any party I ever did them with. I will freely admit I've done them both a lot, too. Perhaps a slightly less completely deadly insurmountable challenge for the sub-quests? A little less damage immunity on those *******, peraps?

AScottBay I tried adding a quest with multiple stages of completion, and there are two old, infamous quests which also attempted this. They are the most broken quests in EFU (and as a result don't give proper rewards - read: usually don't give rewards at all). Unfortunately, properly implementing them would require massive changes to the design of our quest system.

It could be done similarly to the way gnolls is done, with an extra quest giving NPC or placeable inside the QA, that adds in the equivalent of a new boss somewhere (possibly even a different area connected to the QA if it has to be done that way) and "beating the boss" (which could mean killing something else, or could trigger if the PCs open a certain lock or pull a certain lever) adds the completion entry to your journal for the new quest.

dragonfire9000 Hmmm.... It seems to me that those quests of which you speak have never been completed, not even close, by any party I ever did them with. I will freely admit I've done them both a lot, too. Perhaps a slightly less completely deadly insurmountable challenge for the sub-quests? A little less damage immunity on those *******, peraps?

This is what makes them fun. And the rewards are generally worth it if you make it through the sub-quest area. Plus, it gives you a sense of accomplishment. One thing I like about these areas is that they are not necessarily designed to be fair ... beating them really means you had to fight for victory, rather than mindlessly mow down enemies. What I often see is that groups will take time out for RP sessions, every bit as desperate as they should be, during these bonus areas, whereas in the normal quests the emotes tend to be more one-liners and battlecries, etc. Getting that mentality of desperation going can be quite fun, from an RP standpoint.

I had seen one once that was about missing children in a town. The children were being held in pens and experimented on with a lycanthropy drug. The majority of the monsters in the scenario were mixed lycan types that were smaller than normal (because they were the missing children). Plot line was there was a cure that could be found and used to remove the disease from the kids and the less lycan-children you killed the more you could save with the antidote the more XP you received. Plus there were the few in pens that were not affected yet that can be saved. So at least some XP would be gained for those players that killed all the lycan children (that were aggressive). The trick here wasn’t just getting to the end and getting the antidote. Once you had it you needed to go back and while being attacked, use a touch ability of the item to make the lycan friendly. For each one you did this to, you got extra XP. The antidote was in a small keg that held just about enough to only cure the infected children so you had no leftover lycanthropy antidote.

Imagine the look on the paladins face when the first lycan he kills changes back into the six-year-old girl she once was. :?