OOC level restrictions change

[TakenByVisions]

I'd like to suggest a way to remove the OOC level restrictions on all of the         - group - quests. I have personally always found it to be a silly mechanic that could be avoided with the right scripts in place to prevent abuse. I also think that such a system would actually be less abusive than the current that provokes high levels to "buffbot" lower levels before they take off for their quests, something I see quite often.

In short, the following changes would be the heart of the suggestion -

- Level restrictions removed from -group- quests

- Restrictions changed to an "optimal" level range
   - A character above this optimal range will function as a maximum level PC for the purpose of spawns
   - A character below this optimal range will function as a minimum level PC for the purpose of spawns

- The number of characters above or below the optimal range must never meet or surpass the number of optimal range characters. A confirmation dialogue will be offered so that these characters cannot simply "sneak" onto your quests.

- Characters above the optimal level range will induce a penalty on the scripted gold reward, scripted end experience, and monster experience gained by the entire party. This will be a stacking percentage of some sort that applies to the entire party and even more so to the person above the optimal level range.

 (A level 7 joining a Goblin Granary run would reduce everyone's experience by 40% and the reward in gold by 30% or something, for example. A level 9 would reduce it by 90% gold payout and 100% experience!)

Character advancement in this method would be nearly impossible, yet it provides many opportunities for a wider range of interaction between the level ranges.

 It allows a character down on their luck to slowly recover in a less risky environment and without "leeching" on higher end quests.

 It would allow a higher level character to help out a lower level group that struggled or died on a quest. (They could of course demand their own rewards ICly depending upon the character!)

It quite simply offers something to do at times, especially in the wasteland of the late night where DMs are very scarce and server population is quite low.

[Coldburn]

tl;dr but how about items? I'd love to spam some level 2-4 quests for infinite Barkskin potions with a level 8.

[Coldburn]

Alright now I have read it; so what you're suggesting is interesting, but what I said above still stands. A certain quest that has level 2-4 range and requires between 1 and 4 players, always has a minimum of 2 levels in the quest, and a maximum of 16 levels in the quest. So according to that, 2 level 8s could do it, or 1 level 16, to easily farm consumables.

I'm not sure how to fully implement this idea without massive runs on certain quests some characters can solo even within the current settings. No need to extend the amount of characters who can do that.

[TakenByVisions]

Alright now I have read it; so what you're suggesting is interesting, but what I said above still stands. A certain quest that has level 2-4 range and requires between 1 and 4 players, always has a minimum of 2 levels in the quest, and a maximum of 16 levels in the quest. So according to that, 2 level 8s could do it, or 1 level 16, to easily farm consumables.

I'm not sure how to fully implement this idea without massive runs on certain quests some characters can solo even within the current settings. No need to extend the amount of characters who can do that.

The first issue is the only one I know of that I don't have a real solution for. The second thing you mention is just a misunderstanding. What was meant is that on a 2-4 level range quest, you would still require two characters (or more) for each single PC above that level range. A level 6 and a level 2 could not even accept the quest for example, but a level 4, a level 3, and a level 7 could.

[Egon the Monkey]

It's a interesting idea in that on a higher level PC, it can be a bit all or nothing with quests. Do the big high-risk stuff, or sit around. It is indeed hard to recover from supply drain without the supplies to take on a 4-9 quest and can be frustrating to watch everyone else going off questing when your PC doesn't have anything to do. However EfU:M is much better for inclusiveness in that the max level has been upped on many quests, giving you more choices at L6-8 and a greater range of PCs to quest with.

The issue is that balancing this idea would be a nightmare. If it's advantageous to take a higher level PC along on some quests, players will find a way to exploit it to powergame. Take a L7 Ranger into Bug Cellars to beat all the search and heal checks. Have a high level cleric solo a quest for the single endchest item, then collect your share of the reduced reward you put in no effort to get. Tack lowbie quests onto your quest run and do them in 5 minutes flat. It'll show most where having L4 or 5 spells or higher level class abilities are a complete gamebreaker for the quest and worth the loot or XP cut because they save so many supplies.

On the other hand if you're penalised too much for having a higher level PC along, there's little point taking them as they'll be a millstone round their allies' neck, sucking up loot and XP. I can understand it in the case where your faction wants to quest together when one's just leveled to above his buddies' quest range. However, there's going to be players who feel like they should be let in on lower level quests, and could create OOC pressure to be inclusive at a cost to everyone else. For example a PC bringing his L8 buddy on Granary, with the rest of the players not wanting that because they could use the XP. Or a L7 PC selfishly running a quest train along 3-6 quests. You'd have to make adding an off-limits PC only available from the quest tool.

It could be very cool if more quests were balanced to be the same challenge irrespective of PC levels and party size, but that's difficult enough now as DMs have even agree that Orcs counterintuitively gets much harder with a bigger force. I think if it could work at all, it would work best by making penalties apply most to the high level PC. Ensure they get no reward in XP, only let them do this maybe once a reset so they're not using it for a quest train but they can always have a chance to quest with IC buddies. Or restrict this as an option to certain quests, but that that's an extra layer of complication already.

[TakenByVisions]

A separate option on the quest tools would work, and a limitation on them doing something out of their range (once / reset?) could likely be added as well. I understand it would take a hefty amount of scripting changes / additions to even be possible, but I really think it could add a lot of flavor to certain events and really has little poor effects if the checks are put in place against these abusive behaviors that would make it unwanted.

[Ebok]

Higher level Pcs do not need to be doing these quests. Sure they could tag along, but if there is this extreme penalty to the other characters you create an additional problem.

A Quest is called, three people show up in the level range, 4 show up how ever many levels higher. You now leave the lower leveled characters with the "easy run" with no experience gain, or send all the higher levels away. This added choice is completely immersion breaking. Its an out of character choice which then needs support from everyone else there. Right now this is limited by the fact that the sending normally has the level limits named. So if a quest is called that you cannot do, or have already done, you find a reason not to show up.

Honestly, this is only an issue because almost all of the quests near mistlocke are max 5-6 and most within a jaunt further are ranged up to 7. So your level 8+ characters have a very limited choice without crossing into withered lands, a place you wont find to many lower level characters. So there is a divide at that point, but really, I do not believe this would be an appropriate response to it.

[TakenByVisions]

This added choice is completely immersion breaking. Its an out of character choice which then needs support from everyone else there. Right now this is limited by the fact that the sending normally has the level limits named. So if a quest is called that you cannot do, or have already done, you find a reason not to show up.

Actually I think you are completely wrong. The new choice could be made in a way that is fully in-character. The one hiring may state that they cannot afford such a prominent adventurer's wages, or does not think they need to meddle in such mediocre affairs, or whatever else. Then, should they still persist (assuming the party even wants them after listing the optimal range just as they would have before AND hearing an actual IC reason) they can continue on with an IC expectation of decreased wages or whatever else.

The current system actually forces people to create the most idiotic IC reasons on the spot as to why they can't join you here or there because of an ooc restriction, and it happens constantly throughout every day on Ymph!

Instead of being forced to suddenly make an excuse on your epic level 9 barbarian as to why you can't help this new arrival kill some bugs in a cellar, you can instead just be quite honest about it, and yet possibly even help them if it's the last resort and you want to swing your axe a few times.

[Drakill Tannan]

I must say for the most part, i love the level restrictions. IC there are little reasons why to deny help, but it takes away all the fun when some idiot level 9 wants to tag along a level 4-6 quest, it happened on my last PW was it was like "duh, what's the point of even doing the quest now?"

So no. I dislike the suggestion and don't support it. The idiotic IC exuses are a lesser evil compared with the implications of what i've said above.

I wouldn't be against a secondary option for the quest. Say you can take the quest in easy mode (Level range 4-6) or in hard mode (Level range 5-9) so if high level PCs show up, you can bring them along, but it'll be a high level quest, not a low level one. For example, in the wolves quest you could have, on the easy mode wolves and black wolves and on hard mode black wolves and dire wolves, or something along thouse lines.

But the OP? no.

[xXCrystal_Rose]

I like the idea. It's better than the current options of either sitting around twiddling your thumbs or getting withered but being unable to buy withering reductions because for some reason or another your character thinks they're too good to help other people (people who are in such desperate need of help that they would ask you, a legend and hero at your level, rather than another adventurer that is more in their league) with something as lowly as an invasion of evil monsters trying to break through the veil to rape and pillage everything they come across. Screw things like the Ley Lines too, those aren't important enough right? H'bala can have them because defending them is too easy of a task for you.

As well, sending higher level characters away is no less immersion breaking than sending lower level or same level characters away. The character who is leading the group picks who works best together, taking some and leaving others. Our adventures on Ymph all have one theme in common: one mistake made means somebody is -dead-. Tailoring an adventuring team to work together is very important.

[Kinslayer988]

An interesting idea. Well said, though I do not like the idea of somebody like the mayor doing simple: Privy quest. Or even some lv9 warrior doing it.
EDIT: We have used the current system for over 5+ years too. It reminds me of the removal of the party system.

[Relinquish]

If this change gets implemented high levels still will have a hard time finding a group to quest with, no one wants to do a quest and get 0 xp and gold.

[Ebok]

The current system actually forces people to create the most idiotic IC reasons on the spot as to why they can't join you here or there because of an ooc restriction, and it happens constantly throughout every day on Ymph!

The restriction as it stands is announced, and people for the most part do not show up trying to take the quest if they are outside the level range. This suggestion takes it from the ooc personal restriction and puts people into situations where they may lose all the reward cause someone else randomly showed up and did not announce his level. Thus prompting the .. are you above level6? Okay? Then please don't come. I have no IC reason why you shouldn't come. Your we cannot afford you statement is bogus, since money is actually being deleted, not given to the higher level PC.

It takes the responsibility from the gatheree and puts it on the gatherer. Normally, it is 8 people show up, and 8 people decide their own excuses or reasons for being there. With this suggestion it would become, 1 person has to sort through 8 people before they can go or not.

I was moderately against this before. After thinking it over for awhile, I can now say I am 100% firmly against this. I see nothing gained, and tons of new problems.\

Just the one example: As it stands, when someone levels up on a quest, their new level effects spawns thereafter. Spawns are triggered not just on quest entry, but as the group moves through the areas. If this suggestion cuts exp shared, then the second that person levels up, all the exp from everyone is cut drastically for the remainder. Fair? Logical? No.

[Ebok]

The current system actually forces people  to create the most idiotic IC reasons on the spot as to why they can't  join you here or there because of an ooc restriction, and it happens  constantly throughout every day on Ymph!

The restriction as it stands is announced, and people for the most part  do not show up trying to take the quest if they are outside the level  range. This suggestion takes it from the ooc personal restriction and  puts people into situations where they may lose all the reward cause  someone else randomly showed up and did not announce his level. Thus  prompting the .. are you above level6? Okay? Then please don't come. I  have no IC reason why you shouldn't come. Your we cannot afford you  statement is bogus, since money is actually being deleted, not given to  the higher level PC.

It takes the responsibility from the gatheree and puts it on the  gatherer. Normally, it is 8 people show up, and 8 people decide their  own excuses or reasons for being there. With this suggestion it would  become, 1 person has to sort through 8 people before they can go or not.  

I was moderately against this before. After thinking it over for awhile,  I can now say I am 100% firmly against this. I see nothing gained, and  tons of new problems.\

Just the one example: As it stands, when someone levels up on a quest,  their new level effects spawns thereafter. Spawns are triggered not just  on quest entry, but as the group moves through the areas. If this  suggestion cuts exp shared, then the second that person levels up, all  the exp from everyone is cut drastically for the remainder. Fair?  Logical? No.

[Nuclear Catastrophe]

By the time you get to level 9, 10, your character is mature, and shouldn't really be doing goblin granary under any circumstances.  Throws balance off kilter.

A caravan system, or something repeatable over and over might be neat for a simple gold reward.  I will consider making a high end quest/bounty thing for supply replenishment akin to the purple crystals quest :)