Hi everyone!
I got a bit overzealous after a really great episode of PantheonPlusYou last night, and ended up taking a couple hours out of my day today to take some hard thoughts regarding the targeting/consideration systems and put them into a "design doc!" If you can stomach a bit of a read, and some pretty terrible visual examples (a UI artist I am not), I really hope you'll enjoy my ideas! This is an area that I became surprisingly passionate about after drawing from several other games to realize that targetting, and more importantly target information, could be so much more than a name and level display!
Here's the link:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-NPwGRAan0jgMWfQp-s2YuiM7QN-uNZ3/view?usp=sharing
As always, I would adore any kind of responses or feedback you can muster! I did cut myself short on account of time, believe it or not. :) But I figure there's enough there to keep the conversation going!
Thank you!
Well first and foremost putting in a system this detailed for free is very kind of you. If VR doesn't do it you should consider a career in games.
I like the idea of leveling things up. Pokemon Go proves that everyone likes leveling things up.
Enemy mastery is an excellent but not too burdensome way to let us level something up. Which I like.
As a player, I would really appreciate a reward, like the ones from enemy mastery, for taking longer to level up.
Like making sure I explore the whole world even if it isn't terribly efficient.
Or camping something that's not quite level efficient for it's loot or quest value.
The enemy mastery system would allow me to feel rewarded in a very fun way.
I could get basic knowledge for all sorts of things, or spend a real long time on a few popular subtypes of creatures for group value.
I could make sure to get masteries for things my guildies don't and group communication would get much more strategic.
VR could make me get all the masteries for an achievement or other special fluff, which collector/completionist types like.
I really like your idea of adding to mastery with player abilities.
Maybe make people cap out naturally at mastery 4 or 5 and then the spells and class/racial abilities add 1 level each.
I also like the idea of truly mastering something meaning you see it's loot.
If you've killed that many you are probably after something and will be very greatful for this once you have well past proven you can defeat the creature in very, very large numbers.
___
If I were to complain, I'd say that the tracking enemies reward may step on ranger toes.
You could fix that, though, by making rangers especially good with mastery-buffing spells.
Another complaint might be that cast bars should be really hard to get.
We will have reaction-counterspell abilities in Pantheon, I believe, and those would get a bit broken if you can see the enemy cast bar if not balanced very carefully.
I don't think enemy mastery abilities should come in until after an expansion just cuz Pantheon takes forever and that seems like a bit of a balance hassle.
____
If I were to add to your enemy mastery system, I'd like to see it tied into progeny.
You should pass some of your mastery to children, or make them level enemy mastery up faster somehow.
I'd also like to see it tie into perception somehow.
Maybe better perception means you level up mastery faster.
Perhaps most of the mastery quests you mentioned for upgrading mastery come from perception checks.
Enemy Mastery could even tie into earning your mount or ranger pet for more excitement.
This last one I'm not sure if I like or not, but a form of the enemy mastery system could also apply to the environment system.
If you click on some special indicator in the environment you learn about it based on factors like how long you've been in it and how good your resistance is to it.
Or maybe you click an enemy in the environment and if you have mastery for that enemy you can learn what his environment resistances are at to get an idea of what you need to go in there.
_____
Enemy mastery shouldn't be in until VR doesn't feel especially bogged down, IMO, it's just not that big of a deal.
That being said...
Overall I think a system like this would would certainly benefit Pantheon, and make the grinding we all know we will have to do feel much more fun/rewarding.
It's a fun read. Overall, I like the idea of getting more knowledgable about a mob the more I kill it. If that results over time in getting more info about the mob, than I would enjoy that very much. To which subtypes this should go is debatable, for sure. It's an excellent way to stear players away from using add-ons. It's a natural feeling of progression into a game design.
The Mob Information tier baseline makes a lot of sense to me. The other tiers, I would rearrange and some I would just leave out. When I get familiar with a foe, I would imagine this progression in mob information:
1) I understand if that mob is aggro.
2) I know about the social range of this type of mob.
3) I'm familiar with how strong they are (power/difficulty)
4) I'm experienced with which debuffs are common from this type of mob.
5) I can recognize when they cast debuffs. (ability casting bar for debuffs)
6) I'm experienced with which buffs are common for this type of mob.
7) I can recognize when they are casting that buff. (ability casting bar for buffs)
At what point you move into the next tier of mob info, is up to VR but can easely be fine tuned. I wouldn't touch on dispositions. Since it's already imbedded into perception. But if I had to put it in there, I would place it all the way in the end.
Enemy tracking, mastery ability, loot peek, are things that are not needed, for me at least. Tracking is for scouts or sense magic kind of spells. Master ability, well if you've advanced in the mob info listed above, you've already gained a lot of mastery in tackling this mob. And that's a sufficient feeling of mastery for me. (Not to forget about the Limited Action Slots in this game.) Loot peek, by the time you get through all the tiers of mob info, you'll know what to expect. So unless you want to know what the end mobs drop before you tackle them, it's not that valuable anymore. And if you grinded through that type of mob and you see that unknown end boss, not many players are going to turn back and say: well it's been fun. I don't want to kill this unfamiliar boss because I've seen what loot they might drop and it's not for me. It's more likely that you'll kill that end mob many times and you'll know what they drop doing so, making the loot peek thing redundant once again.
It's a fun idea to include enemy mastery xp. It could make things very complex with writers and content creators. Why not just keep it simple here and progress with (insert math equation here) % per kill of mobtype ? I would enjoy the lore of the enemies and that's all fine and dandy for a keeper. Or would you go for progression by a mix of both and this available for all?
Barin hit on most of the high points and echoed my concern of including tracking and all the issues with loot peaking including the aspects of loot assigned at spawn vs at kill.
I would like to see perception be more of a base skill that has its own progression and Keeper be a specific form of progression that focuses around lost lore and secrects rather than observing the mundane world.
Break it down like this.
Perception:
Perception is your ability to notice details in the world. This could be based individually on each of your 5 senses and could also include magical and or spiritual senses. You need to first notice something before anything else can happen. Game code wise you can use perception as a primary trigger check to say who can see and interact with certain world details.
Knowledges:
After you perceive something you need to actually know something about it to really gain any benefit from noticing it. Knowledge monster is a great example of a knowledge that goes up the more you fight a specific type of mob. This could also include geography and mining to making mining harvesting easier and better. Knowledge nature and woods craft to making finding and harvesting animals easier. Knowledge Other Races could give you hints that the NPC is giving you specific subtle social cues that may be at odds with the base text.
Keeper:
On top of pure knowledge, I guess is understanding. Keeper could be more the understanding you gain from the knowledge checks you succeed at after perceiving something. Keeper knowledges are going to be more profound then knowing that the giant striders of the silent plains really like a specific type of grass after it just rained so that’s one of the best ways to predictably find them, assuming you made the perception check and knowledge check to know where some of that grass is.
Project Gorgon has some of this. There is an autopsy skill that allows you to autopsy corpses and every bio type has it's own skill to level up. So like "You've become better at Canine pathology!" or Arachnid pathology whatever.
It sort of just turns in to another button you speedily click through as you're looting ie; click Autopsy, Skin corpse, and Take all items click click click move on to next corpse. That being said it is still kinda fun, especially when you hear the ding or when you can see more info on the mobs.
One thing about sending loot information as part of this, depending when that data is sent to the client it could be sniffed for 3rd party programs, have to be wary of that. I realize that if a mob shows the item they are holding you may be able to sniff that already and see that XYZ mob has a sword etc.
BeaverBiscuit said:
...
Wow, thank you for your kind words and thoughtful response!
I LOVE the idea of tying Enemy Mastery into Progeny! EXCELLENT idea!
As far as tying it into Perception - the thought I had after writing this doc was that perhaps some skill XP comes from Perception checks in certain areas that are meaningful to the subtypes. Perhaps your character goes into an Orcish armory, or finds a nest deep in a Gnoll cave, then giving them some Enemy Mastery XP for them!
It would make sense for Rangers to be very good at Enemy Mastery, and tie it into their kit or special questlines. Love it!
Again, thank you for reading and responding!
Barin999 said:...
Thanks for reading!
Yes, I did feel the categorization of subtypes and the semantics of what makes a subtype could get fuzzy. It would definitely require some serious thought to make it feel right.
For mob information tiers: Perfect! Yes, I wasn't set on their order, or even the ideas therein—in fact, I was very much counting on the feedback and additions in this area. There's so much you could do with this kind of progression. Love your list!
You bring up a good point about the Loot Peek: It's probably true that most players won't simply turn back if their item doesn't show up, especially if there is a chance that the Loot Peek isn't 100% accurate. It's also not especially important either, considering most things will be trade-able. When thinking of these tiers, I wanted to throw out some wild ideas just to indicate all sorts of things that could possibly added to the system, and I think you've proven that a Loot Peek may not really be necessary or desireable. Nice!
Regarding a kind of Mastery Striek ability, though—I think it would be even more interesting to have, considering the LAS, but only if it was a compelling ability to use. It just adds more choice for the player for them to adapt to difficult situations. Each class could even have its own, further differentiating them!
The idea of making this a Skill, with it's own XP, is that anyone would have access to it! I'd compare it more to how Factions work, because it's essentially the same - increasing standing vs. increasing mastery. The big point of making this feel more interesting is the ways in which you gain XP: Killing, loot drops, buffs, and inspired by BeaverBiscuit above: using Perception to gain XP from in-world items/clickies and locations that would seem relevant to a particular subtype! I don't want it to feel like it's own sphere or gameplay, not like being a Keeper itself or Crafting, but something in addition that gives you something a little extra while you're playing the game!
Again, thanks for the great feedback!
Trasak said:...
I think your idea of splitting up those systems does make a lot of sense, especially in light of a system like this. It feels very D&D-inspired and adds a lot of depth.
I do think, though, in practice, splitting it up like this might be a bit extraneous for an MMO. If anything, I think the splitting up of Perception and Keeping into sensory information and understanding could work, though.
It could be a case where you enter an area and see a statue—a person able to Perceive could see the statue is of a man in heavy armor, but a Keeper may have found a book in a library with a description of the man, and would know the significance of the statue. The player could then use that information however they will.
Regarding the target information system I was offering, though—both could lend to gaining Enemy Mastery in their own ways: XP for entering an Orc armory, for example, perceiving the weapons they have. A keeper finding a monument of Orcish history could also gain XP for Enemy Mastery. The system is meant to be it's own progression, but tertiary, an accessory to the general gameplay.
Thanks again for the response, and your Discord conversation! :)
GeneralReb said:...
I'm a HUGE Project Gorgon fan! This is definitely inspired by PG, in addition to the others I list. The main difference (and a very important one) is that the system has to be integrated. As you mention, Autopsy ends up just being another button you push every time you engage something. In that sense, ti's just like the C key situation, which I am not a fan of. That's why my suggestions are all UI elements or specific-use abilities (like buffs or a Mastery Strike). It's all passive, so it avoids the "repetition for the sake of repetition" situation.
Regarding what information the client reads: I actually started to write an Implementation section to the doc, but decided to remove it, as that kind of stuff isn't going to be of much value for the forums. I did consider the situation you're talking about, though—and it shouldn't be a problem. Because this is based on a character statistic, the query to check loot also would have to query the stat, just like any "skill check," which means your client would only be passed the data if it passes the check. Good to know that folks on the forum are thinking about these things, though!
It's also worth noting that thanks to the above conversations, the Loot Peek mechanic would likely be completely unnecessary, anyway. :)
Thanks for reading and responding. Means a lot to me!
An obvious tangent given all the recent harvesting and crafting discussions. Can knowledge of the dearly departed give a bonus if the corpse could be skinned or otherwise gives materials usable in crafting? Perhaps a mastery of spiders would allow the looter to get 5 eyes per 100 spiders without needing to trap and raise spiders in order to get eyes (reference to entertaining recent posts in a harvesting thread).
DMHarms said:Regarding a kind of Mastery Striek ability, though—I think it would be even more interesting to have, considering the LAS, but only if it was a compelling ability to use. It just adds more choice for the player for them to adapt to difficult situations. Each class could even have its own, further differentiating them!
When you design a master strike into the game. I can see that going two ways;
1) Every class gains the same master strike. Which has an important impact on that type of mob. In a way that sounds like a railroad and the player has lost some of their unique identity there. As in the group (nearly) everyone would place that master strike on their (Limited Action-) hotbar.
2) Every class gains a unique master strike. Typical to their class with a different impact on that same type of mob compared to a player of a different class. This might result in this type of mob becoming heavily 'debuffed' by the players. And the Challenge rating will need to be ramped up to provide a challenge to some degree. (which kind of sound that you're making things overly complex, based on the idea that this would a general mastery design). With every class having their own master strike for that type of mob, it might become a requirement to obtain that master strike. Bringing it back to a generalize less personalized approach of playstyle. (If you see what I mean? I'm just nitpicking here.)
DMHarms said:The idea of making this a Skill, with it's own XP, is that anyone would have access to it! I'd compare it more to how Factions work, because it's essentially the same - increasing standing vs. increasing mastery. The big point of making this feel more interesting is the ways in which you gain XP: Killing, loot drops, buffs, and inspired by BeaverBiscuit above: using Perception to gain XP from in-world items/clickies and locations that would seem relevant to a particular subtype!
It sounds very entertaining. I've always enjoyed it with ESO for example, where you read books and gain a growth of something after finishing it. That's a very nice touch.
What I fear here, is that you're designing a follow-the-dotted-line mastery mechanic. Which players might use this to get that maxed out mastery strike with the least effort and as quick as possible. In the end having extra mob info could be convenient but not a requirement or something might perceived as an obstacle leading up to a must have ability. It would no longer be about getting more knowledgable about this mob, it would be about that end reward (the master strike). In a way this master strike would cancel out the initial concept of the lore-bound mob knowledge.
dorotea said:
An obvious tangent given all the recent harvesting and crafting discussions. Can knowledge of the dearly departed give a bonus if the corpse could be skinned or otherwise gives materials usable in crafting? Perhaps a mastery of spiders would allow the looter to get 5 eyes per 100 spiders without needing to trap and raise spiders in order to get eyes (reference to entertaining recent posts in a harvesting thread).
Interesting idea! Having mastery tie in to loot, even to a small degree, is a tangible reward for spending more time with a particular creature type. The main thing that I'm unsure about is how this would be factored in for groups, since a creature's drop is technically accessible from anyone in the group. Therefore, if this was implemented, it may have to be an average mastery of a group, which could get complicated. Overall, though, I like the idea!
Barin999 said:
DMHarms said:
Regarding a kind of Mastery Striek ability, though—I think it would be even more interesting to have, considering the LAS, but only if it was a compelling ability to use. It just adds more choice for the player for them to adapt to difficult situations. Each class could even have its own, further differentiating them!
When you design a master strike into the game. I can see that going two ways;
1) Every class gains the same master strike. Which has an important impact on that type of mob. In a way that sounds like a railroad and the player has lost some of their unique identity there. As in the group (nearly) everyone would place that master strike on their (Limited Action-) hotbar.
2) Every class gains a unique master strike. Typical to their class with a different impact on that same type of mob compared to a player of a different class. This might result in this type of mob becoming heavily 'debuffed' by the players. And the Challenge rating will need to be ramped up to provide a challenge to some degree. (which kind of sound that you're making things overly complex, based on the idea that this would a general mastery design). With every class having their own master strike for that type of mob, it might become a requirement to obtain that master strike. Bringing it back to a generalize less personalized approach of playstyle. (If you see what I mean? I'm just nitpicking here.)
DMHarms said:
The idea of making this a Skill, with it's own XP, is that anyone would have access to it! I'd compare it more to how Factions work, because it's essentially the same - increasing standing vs. increasing mastery. The big point of making this feel more interesting is the ways in which you gain XP: Killing, loot drops, buffs, and inspired by BeaverBiscuit above: using Perception to gain XP from in-world items/clickies and locations that would seem relevant to a particular subtype!
It sounds very entertaining. I've always enjoyed it with ESO for example, where you read books and gain a growth of something after finishing it. That's a very nice touch.
What I fear here, is that you're designing a follow-the-dotted-line mastery mechanic. Which players might use this to get that maxed out mastery strike with the least effort and as quick as possible. In the end having extra mob info could be convenient but not a requirement or something might perceived as an obstacle leading up to a must have ability. It would no longer be about getting more knowledgable about this mob, it would be about that end reward (the master strike). In a way this master strike would cancel out the initial concept of the lore-bound mob knowledge.
Regarding the Master Strike, I'd lean toward your #2, with giving a strike specific to each class. You have a valid point in that making something too powerful would simply mean that it would be a requirement for a player instead of a choice. However, that same point is valid regardless of where the ability comes from, unfortunately. So this is simply a question of balance, like any ability. As long as a master strike's efficacy is near to that of a typical class ability, it would simply be another option. However, I'd argue that, even considering the limited action set, an ability that requires a significant amount of work to obtain (including a potential master strike) should be slightly more desirable. Emphasis on "slightly," and we end up at the same point of general balance.
As far as ESO and lore books go, I actually loved that little touch as well! Though, again, we come back to the point of balance:
Players will always try to find the path of least resistance in an MMO. For example, in ESO originally, the lore books gave a straight skill up, no matter what (they later changed this to a defined XP amount). So, players would level their skills through normal means until they were fairly high, when progression got slow. Then they would go around and read all of the books. They used the system to skip as much progression as possible.
One major goal of designing any system that involves work (time or effort), is to make it appealing enough to participate in, while not making it so essential that it no longer feels optional. This is a general rule. Players will always find the weak spots in order to do less work. The attempt I made in my design here is that instead of feeling like a completely separate progression path, it would feel like a supplemental one—something that simply adds a bit extra to normal gameplay. If the only way to move forward in Enemy Mastery was to kill creatures, it would likely feel much more "grind-y," and that's what I was hoping to avoid. I won't pretend that all suggestions are perfect, but if it was 10% easier to progress through Enemy Mastery by going around to different locations (lore books for example), I'd still call that a win. Why? Because players are mixing up their gameplay a bit. However, I believe most would simply progress through the system by killing creatures. Not because it's the min/max path, but because it's straightforward, and you get other bonuses while doing it (XP, loot, etc.). So, all of that to say, no matter what the "end" is, be it a master strike or just a full UI of mob info, having more options is a good thing. :)