Suggested Improvements on the New Quest / Party System

[Meldread]

These are suggestions I am putting forward based on actual play.

When getting quests, especially since the system is very new, I have noticed that it leads to a lot of OOC chatter.  This is impart because it is new, and impart because there are some OOC things every PC needs to know or do.  This is more or less how it goes:

Player1:  "//Everyone gather around the quest giver."
Player2:  "//I can't get close enough."
Player3:  "//Hold on I'll move over some."
Player2:  "//Okay, I'm ready."
Player1:  "//Okay, I got the quest, everyone added?"
Player4:  "//Um.  No.  Was I too far away?"
Player5:  "//Hold on, I got it and I'll move.  Player1 get the quest again."
Player1:  "//Okay got it now Player4?"
Player4:  "//Yes.  Thanks."
Player1:  "//Okay does everyone now have the quest?"
Player2:  "//Yes."
Player3:  "//Yes."
Player4:  "//Yes."
Player5:  "//Yes."
Player1:  "//Okay, back IC let's go."

Suggestions:

-  Allow one person to get any quest.  However, in order to actually enter the quest area they must have the minimum number of players added to the quest list.  They can do this via the quest tool they receive.  I'm assuming this can be done through the repelling that takes place when you try and enter a quest area, but don't have the quest.

-  Allow people to use /c setally regardless of radius.  I am not sure if there is some IC reason for people to have to be standing next to each other to be marked as allies.

-  Create a /c allylist command, that would display all the allies currently tagged by the character.  That way the character can then use /c setally again to remove any they don't want on the list.

These are the only three suggested improvements I can think of right now.

[Listen in Silence]

I spammed a different thread with one of these suggestions mere minutes ago.

I agree with all the above, though.

[Mort]

You can do it IC. Why does it have to be OOC?

[Listen in Silence]

What? How can you have a conversation in character about whether your journal has gotten an entry or not?

[Mort]

I meant the initial part. This:

Player1:  "//Everyone gather around the quest giver."
Player2:  "//I can't get close enough."
Player3:  "//Hold on I'll move over some."
Player2:  "//Okay, I'm ready."
Player1:  "//Okay, I got the quest, everyone added?"
Player4:  "//Um.  No.  Was I too far away?"
Player5:  "//Hold on, I got it and I'll move.  Player1 get the quest again."
Player1:  "//Okay got it now Player4?"
Player4:  "//Yes.  Thanks."
Player1:  "//Okay does everyone now have the quest?"
Player2:  "//Yes."
Player3:  "//Yes."
Player4:  "//Yes."
Player5:  "//Yes."
Player1:  "//Okay, back IC let's go."

***

Doesn't Player 1 (The Speaker) receive a list of the players added to the quest? If not he should.

The "make one person get the quest" requires a lot of work and modification to efuqs. Took me 10+ updates to squash all the bugs.

I might make the range slightly larger.

[Meldread]

For a few reasons.

1.  People quickly go OOC because the system is new and they are confused and have questions.  Such questions are obviously OOC.  (I.E.  "How do I set someone as an ally?")  As typically happens, when one person goes OOC, lots of people go OOC all at once.

2.  I'm not sure if there is a logical IC explanation to get so many people to surround a placeable / NPC to get a quest.  You have to be -very- close to get the quest, and if you have more than two or three people, there is going to be a lot of bumping and crowding and stuff going on.

3.  Whoever takes the quest has to know who didn't get the quest, or if everyone got it.  This is obviously something OOC, and can't be done ICly.  They either need to use the tool to set them as a member of the quest, or get them closer to the placeable / NPC and use the "add another to the quest" feature in the dialog.

These are just a few, among the several, reasons people go OOC.  I'm just reporting on my experiences so far!  I read why the radius is so small for getting quests, so I thought it'd be easier just to have one person receive the quest, and then use the tool they receive to give the quest to others.  That would solve 95% of the issues with OOCness I think.

Once the quest has been received by everyone, and all OOC questions / issues solved, people go back IC.  It's not a -huge- issue, but I do believe it is an unintended consequence of the new system.

[Meldread]

I meant the initial part. This:

Player1:  "//Everyone gather around the quest giver."
Player2:  "//I can't get close enough."
Player3:  "//Hold on I'll move over some."
Player2:  "//Okay, I'm ready."
Player1:  "//Okay, I got the quest, everyone added?"
Player4:  "//Um.  No.  Was I too far away?"
Player5:  "//Hold on, I got it and I'll move.  Player1 get the quest again."
Player1:  "//Okay got it now Player4?"
Player4:  "//Yes.  Thanks."
Player1:  "//Okay does everyone now have the quest?"
Player2:  "//Yes."
Player3:  "//Yes."
Player4:  "//Yes."
Player5:  "//Yes."
Player1:  "//Okay, back IC let's go."

I was just giving an example of what it sorta looked like, that's not an actual in game conversation. :p  Most of the OOC that went on was much more messy, with a lot of, "What?  I don't understand."  and "Why isn't it working?" and "Am I doing something wrong?  Am I close enough?"  :p

Doesn't Player 1 (The Speaker) receive a list of the players added to the quest? If not he should.

I will check this as soon as I can in game, and then report back on it.  Maybe someone else will do that before I get the chance, but I do not recall off the top of my head.

The "make one person get the quest" requires a lot of work and modification to efuqs. Took me 10+ updates to squash all the bugs.

Then it probably isn't worth it.  It's a minor thing, and should probably be given another week or so to play out.  I just thought I'd report on my initial experiences with the system, and where I thought it could be improved.

[Mort]

The speaker should get a list of the people he added to the quest. If he doesn't get it, I'll double-check.

[Meldread]

I just check it.  Yes, it works fine.

[FleetingHeart]

Maybe to speed things up the Add Player to Quest tool could also have an Add Group to Quest? Essentially adds everyone in a radius to the quest, just like the initial quest pickup?

[Listen in Silence]

Would still need a dialogue of "Do you accept" otherwise human error could lead to people involountarily getting the quest.

[The Beggar]

- Party Invites have been disabled.
- Getting Quest Requirement is done through proximity and a tool ended by the Quest-Giver.
- XP is handed based on proximity to the kill.

Mort, I have no doubt these changes represent a lot of work on your part in an attempt to make the game environment more realistic, and I don't doubt they are scripting wonder, but:

1. They are annoying.

On getting quest - Annoying because of the aforementioned "gather around the quest giver" scenarios.

No Party Invite On DM impromptu events or large scale events, no parties will be able to form, meaning overall XP is reduced and the DM is more likely to leave people out of the end XP. If you can not invite to party, you can't party up to explore, or do non quest PC driven plot material.

2. They take away from having fun.

Reduced XP for distance Bowyers, arcanists (who need to be away from the fight), or other characters who may load the screens slow may loose out on XP. Makes ftrs and other frontliners level faster, and so will support less range of character classes seen in game.

The other two afrementioned as well. The more hoops I as a player have to jump through to get the quests or events moving, the less fun I have. Isn't that supposed to be the whole purpose of the game engine, to take all the little things and do them for us so we can focus on questing and RP interactions?

Sometimes you have to forgoe a little reality and a little 'abusability' to make the game more streamlined, approachable, and usable. The more you change it (game mechanics wise) the less approachable it is to cross over from other existing PWs, and creates and enforces a 'niche' game environment with a steeper learning curve.

Ease of play, Character Advancement, Fun Interactions are hallmarks of good, multiplayer platforms. Please lets not move away from this environment and further isolate ourselves.

In the end, I as a player don't support these changes, and if need be I will vote with my feet and play elsewhere.

[Verybigliar]

I myself find that the exp gain has stayed quite fair as it is. I have not found to be gaining any less exp even if I stayed behind or further, but this time you do not get exp if you stay on the other side of the map in quest area.

In DM events you actually gain more exp since you can get it through kills done by everyone in the battle scene that you can see, atleast. DM experience on other hand, even with party it's the same. It doesn't change the fact that if DM's are too busy to go and give exp, then they are and you get left out. Happened a lot of time in the past with party system all together.

Quest taking and such might need a bit tuning, but I am sure it can be worked out. It can't be a total buzz kill, I am sure.

On the matter of making party for exploring, I am objecting that completely. Now it is more easier. You just go together. Simple as that. You can get exp where as before, by being part of the group exploring out there.

Have you tried these changes a lot, Beggar? I think quite many thought the worse but after trying it's not bad at all, in my opinion it gave a good flavor and I don't even think about it anymore.

In the end, and this is just my opinion, the changes sounded a lot more harsh and difficult than they are. You just play your character normally, and you won't after a while even think about changes anymore.

[Snoteye]

Have you tried these changes a lot, Beggar? I think quite many thought the worse but after trying it's not bad at all, in my opinion it gave a good flavor and I don't even think about it anymore.

Many players don't quite understand just what these changes mean. Beggar has raised some extremely good points which I, frankly, had expected would have been raised sooner.

[Verybigliar]

Indeed he did. They are very valid points. And yes, surely not everyone will like them, but perhaps some can come to find them interesting after keeping at it for a while. Or then we can discuss of some alternative options in time.