So piggybacking on what I wrote previously.
If we assume 8 characters max per server.
You could have a scaling percent buff shared with the alt and the main.
At low lvl maybe the alt only gives 1% increase in only one stat. But at high level it gives 3% to one stat.
Lets say you level a third alt. Now all 3 characters can have two stats at up to +3%.
I could see somebody leveling up specific classes that benefit from the chosen increase only to choose a stat later to benefit another alt down the line.
This sounds like a small family turned into a large family.
Sent via mobile
-Todd
tehtawd said:So piggybacking on what I wrote previously.
If we assume 8 characters max per server.
You could have a scaling percent buff shared with the alt and the main.
At low lvl maybe the alt only gives 1% increase in only one stat. But at high level it gives 3% to one stat.
Lets say you level a third alt. Now all 3 characters can have two stats at up to +3%.
I could see somebody leveling up specific classes that benefit from the chosen increase only to choose a stat later to benefit another alt down the line.
This sounds like a small family turned into a large family.
Sent via mobile
-Todd
I'm against percentage based increases just because of how they would scale. At level 1 a 3% boost is no big deal. At level 50 a 3% boost may unbalance a class.
This does bring up some interesting questions and a host of ideas both practical and absurd come to mind.
Such as:
- Can you create a progeny from a progeny? And if so what then?
- At what point would you be allowed to create your progeny?
- And how would death work?
This thread really got my theory crafting bug going. So hopefully this doesn't turn into a wall of text but here goes.
Premise
Max Level: 50
First Character: Cleric
It occurs to me, that if as Brad says, "one of its primary goals is to reward a player who has leveled up a character to max level by encouraging him to create alts and experience the game again"
Then perhaps what is being described here, is growing older and passing along one’s knowledge and possessions to their offspring. This doesn’t happen all at once and it ends with the death of the parents. At which point the final transfer of possessions can be completed.
Triggering Progeny:
If we put it in that context, then the trigger for when progeny can occur would be at some normal level of advancement given level and/or completed content (such as all epic quests for the class), unlocking the progeny system for the player’s first character only.
So, if we were to only allow a new player a single character slot, then this could be pretty good incentive to create a progeny, where the progeny would become your second character slot.
Furthermore, this could go on for quite some time by unlocking a 3rd character slot when the progeny decides to pro-create.
To stay within the lore then, one would need to know the age/race at which said race would be likely to pro-create, thus allowing a progeny to come into existence.
For Example: Elves might not think about children until much later in life than say humans because they age slower than humans. But humans, dying younger would complete the progeny cycle faster.
Creating a progeny does not mean that the parent (your main) just dies, it can go on to live a fruitful middle aged life; meanwhile the progeny is growing up and it has gained at least one important trait from one or both of its parents Assuming that starting the progeny track might be as Evoras describes, then you would have two parents.
Creating the progeny
The progeny can be born with any name not taken by another player but can have the same name as the parent.
The progeny is born with any faction the parent has maximized, also maximized for the progeny, positively or negatively.
Factions that are not maximized would be pro-rated to the progeny positively or negatively. Where the more neutral the faction the less effect it would have on the progeny.
The factions related to the progeny’s home city would start as normal, unless these factions are also shared with the parent, in which case maximization or pro-ration rules would apply.
Training the progeny
The progeny can pick one trait from one parent every 10 levels until it becomes the same level as its parent. Thus if the parent is not max level then the parent would need to level up in order to impart higher knowledge.
The progeny could opt instead to pick one item, but it would be scaled to the player and taken permanently from the parent.
Where traits are:
These traits would be scaled to progeny’s level and any skills required to use a spell or ability would have to be practiced to become proficient with it, thus capping it to your level.
More important traits, such as resurrection, might not scale to more than half of max level ever depending on the class of the progeny.
For example:
Assume the parent is a Cleric with 90% resurrection spell and at level 10 the progeny selects this trait.
Completing the Cycle
When the parent becomes max level and the player chooses to complete the quest of last rights, then final transfer to the progeny can be completed. The parent then becomes immortalized in some hall of fame, statue or what not, perhaps even brought out for special occasions but never to fight again.
The progeny if not already max level, but at least at the appropiate stage of life to begin pro-creation could start the cycle again if they choose to do so.
IE: The progeny might have to complete the epic quest for their new class first before unlocking progeny for the progeny.
Conclusion
The progeny has become a MAX level character, with much of their parent’s traits, but not all and is now a type of hybrid to what they once were. Giving a new dimension to character advancement.
I kind of like this because, while many games have introduced the concept of multi-classing, and it is compelling on the surface, in reality it doesn’t work very well. Doing it this way however I think would keep the trinity in-tact for the most part and give us some pretty interesting progeny classes without over powering the lower level content and still making the progeny relevant in the raid content.
The more the player plays, the better their progeny can be.
At the same time, since the parent does not die immediately you still get to play with friends and raid as usual.
Only when you have completed your journey and choose to take the final step will your main toon transfer to the progeny. To whom you have hopefully imparted the knowledge required to be as good and perhaps better than you were originally.
It provides continuity for the player to raid even when they switch to the progeny, and makes it a desirable long term goal at the same time.
-Az
bigdogchris said:tehtawd said:So piggybacking on what I wrote previously.
If we assume 8 characters max per server.
You could have a scaling percent buff shared with the alt and the main.
At low lvl maybe the alt only gives 1% increase in only one stat. But at high level it gives 3% to one stat.
Lets say you level a third alt. Now all 3 characters can have two stats at up to +3%.
I could see somebody leveling up specific classes that benefit from the chosen increase only to choose a stat later to benefit another alt down the line.
This sounds like a small family turned into a large family.
Sent via mobile
-Todd
I'm against percentage based increases just because of how they would scale. At level 1 a 3% boost is no big deal. At level 50 a 3% boost may unbalance a class.
I understand you are against this Chris, but to be honest I think what you mean is you are against imbalance. And I would agree with that 100%, and I share your fear to some extent. Using percentages is an easy way to explain my idea, also percentage based increases have long been a tool for developers of many games. I would shy away from any developer who can't get their numbers right when using percentages-it's game breaking. However, I trust Brad and am sure he knows what 3% would do to a lvl 1 character and what that same 3% would do to a lvl 50 character. Brad will get it right with or without percentages.
I'm also going to put this out there. I do NOT in any way want the progeny system to 'retire' my main character. Playing an MMORPG is in large part about collecting things, gaining levels and 'building' yourself up. I don't want to invest in something I am just going to throw away.
-Todd
The Progeny System would be an interesting way to try and solve the problems that come with veteran players stuck sitting on high level characters while the lower level population of the game world dwindles. However, providing bonuses that would otherwise be unobtainable through other means of play (such as a Half-Elf Race or Warlock Class type) can be a slippery slope for the game to travel down. If the bonuses are too great then the playerbase will feel pigeon-holed into using a system they might otherwise not care for. This could potentially lead to increased toxicity amongst veterans who then feel forced to participate in Progeny for various reasons (Guild requirements, Flavor of the Month class unlock, PvP potential, etc.) and could actually contribute to a feeling of burnout over the amount of replayability neccessary to unlock the desired classes or races.
I am not sure that the bonuses provided with the Progeny System would need to be anything as substantial as races, classes, or flat stat increases. Veteran players will be creating alts in the game as it is. Sure, you will have those players who prefer to only play one main character and forget the rest, but I feel that is perfectly fine. While it may be exciting (particularly from a roleplay perspective) to lock races, classes, items, etc. behind Progeny I feel that such a system would be more detrimental to the desired effect on the game as a whole. The view of Progeny (from the playerbase) would shift from a neat mechanic to entice alts to something that is meta-gamey, forced, and overwhelming to a player.
Keeping that thought in mind, having to sacrifice a high level character in order to participate in the Progeny System seems just as ill-advised as providing too great of bonuses. I am an altoholic. I love to play my high level characters, but I do prefer the journey through a game world rather than the destination. However, the prospect of not being able to play my high level characters when I desire or when the guild I am in is running an event, or even to take a break from the journey in the game is rather disheartening. Imagine being a new player, leveling through the game which is intended to be a lengthy journey, only to discover that if you want the full benefits of the game experience (new races, new classes, etc) you need to start all over again and essentially delete your current high level. Again, sacrifing a character is more exciting from a roleplay perspective than from a game perspective as it would simply provide players with more heartache than benefits and would be detrimental to the overall game experience.
I am more in favor of a player needing to experience a lengthy quest chain (as an example, one that would take the player across the game world and through many group events) to obtain an epic item which would then be sacrificed so a player can provide bonuses to an 'alt' character. This would allow players to still play their high level characters, ones they have spent much time on and developed in game relationships with and would also provide another avenue of content for those high level players to persue at their leisure.
Let us say the Progeny System makes its way into the game. Why not have titles, pets, mounts, cosmetic items (such as visible items, auras) etc be provided by the Progeny System instead of potential game altering bonuses as races or class unlocks. This would provide some incentive to veteran players without feeling forced or overbearing. The effects on the game world would be minimal; however, the effects on the individual player would still be felt and would also allow other players to see and understand that character is an alt and that particular player is a veteran.
One quick note at the end; not wanting races to be a bonus from the Progeny System is coming from the assumption that each race will have racial bonuses. If their are racial bonuses them I am against having them locked behind Progeny (and of course, I am even further against this system if a character is sacrificed). If the races are purely cosmetic, then my position would change on this point.
tehtawd said:
I understand you are against this Chris, but to be honest I think what you mean is you are against imbalance. And I would agree with that 100%, and I share your fear to some extent. Using percentages is an easy way to explain my idea, also percentage based increases have long been a tool for developers of many games. I would shy away from any developer who can't get their numbers right when using percentages-it's game breaking. However, I trust Brad and am sure he knows what 3% would do to a lvl 1 character and what that same 3% would do to a lvl 50 character. Brad will get it right with or without percentages.
I'm also going to put this out there. I do NOT in any way want the progeny system to 'retire' my main character. Playing an MMORPG is in large part about collecting things, gaining levels and 'building' yourself up. I don't want to invest in something I am just going to throw away.
-Todd
I'm not against the percentage increases of stats because of balance issues. I'm against it because its simplistic, gimmicky, and limitations to make it believable (like giving only str/con stats to the offspring of a warrior) almost ensures that there will be a host of people min/max'ing in order to get the best possible stats for X-class they intend to actually play in the end-game content. You'd end up with formula that are followed to get the N-th generation warrior/cleric/mage/etc., that is best suited to raiding. And anyone whose family tree didnt look at particular way would be considered gimp.
In your example, 3% more hitpoints for the main tank is a big deal. 3% more mana for the healers is a big deal. 3% more regen, or avoidance, or haste, or perception is a big deal. Can you design the game to remain balanced with those increases in existance? Absolutely. But the fact that the possibility of hitting those makes them nearly required, and stacking them based on premeditated heritage mandatory in the minds of a large portion of MMO players.
I'm not really an alt person, so I tried to find out what kind of "bonus" I would like to receive in order for me to create an alt. While I don't see many, it would be nice if it's could make trivial and repetitive things, actually... less trivial and repetitive.
Example:
Grinding / farming : I do remember back in EQ with my main character I would go in lower level zone to farm or grind stuff. I would literally wipe the whole zone, making it hard for lower level to actually play in the zone (I would check if people was in the zone before doing so - but that's not the point). The thing is, this task was just to trivial. I would have gladly played a toon that actually match the zone level to do this work. Same things apply for getting back XP after death in EQ. I was getting bored and a bit depressed at redoing the same high level dungeon again and again to actually get things back.
So, as stated by few people above, I think sharing stuff (faction, items (no-drop item are bound to the account not the toon), skills (like if you have a cleric on the account you can rez your other toon), XP(?), etc) across toon of the same "familly" seems more fun and less game breaking than most of the opions I have seen above.
I will make alt in a game when I'll be able to play the toon that I'd like to play that day and not the toon I need to play. The difference is subtle but it's there.
The idea of hitting those benchmarks being required is something brad would avoid. We need to be more prepared that this very argument will be coming up a lot, and that it doesn't need to. We are assuming balance gone wrong and I won't be doing that for this team.
Sent via mobile
-Todd
tehtawd said:The idea of hitting those benchmarks being required is something brad would avoid. We need to be more prepared that this very argument will be coming up a lot, and that it doesn't need to. We are assuming balance gone wrong and I won't be doing that for this team.
Sent via mobile
-Todd
I didnt bring up balance as an issue. I dont think it is an issue. It's entirely possible to plug in any numbers and still balance the game. That's not what I was addressing.
What bothers me is that if there's a way to make sure that a character has the maximum statistical advanctages thru a specific set of progeny, then you'll have a notable portion of the playerbase who will follow that prescribed formula to the letter to maximize benefit.
Example:
A warrior's offspring gets +1 to strength. (Why this is inherently a thing, I dont know. This seems something more associated with race than class, but whatever.)
Classes that benefit most from strength stats are melee's. So... WarriorV2?
WarriorV2 has offspring, that gets +1 strength. This means a cummulative +2 strength for WarriorV3.
So now you have a person who has level 3 warriors in order to gain +3 strength? Is that fun?
Now obviously it's possible to use different classes, stats, etc to skew this paradigm and introduce any number of rules or path limitations to mitigate the rather ridiculous extreme that I've used as an example. But in the end the result is a system that says, "You must play classes X, Y and Z in order to get a baseline for classQ that will have the maximum power to contribute at end-game".
It seems to make a hell of a lot more sense to me to instead have a system that says, "So you love classQ, you've played for a year, you're max level and have every piece of ideal gear you could possibly want and there is no path to advancement left for that character. In order get an extra notch or 5 toward additional power, play classX for 3 months off and on. And then maybe try classY for a while. ClassQ, the character you would really rather be advancing, is benefited, and in addition you're given something to do for that time until maybe an expansion comes out.
In the former the only people that really find any benefit are the end-game raiders who will min/max the hell out of everything. While in the latter everyone that can reach max level on a character can find some degree of benefit.
I also believe it's really pretty much a cop-out to increment a few stats to provide advancement. I think it's much much more challenging to build new systems that can be unlocked or entirely new paths of advancement that can be pursued than it is to give a +1 strength. Because my offsrping has helped secure my family name as worthy of honor, let me unlock a new trainer that grants access to a new spell line. Because my family as a whole has prestige across the land, let the master of a new weapon technique offer to train me. Harder to balance? Hell yes. But like you I have faith in VR. And it just sounds a LOT more fun than +1 to whatever.
[Edit] Even if the system allows you to pass a trait on from the sire to the offspring, you're passing on something you've already seen. You're not unlocking anything new. Great. My rogue now has the 2handed weapon skill I used for 50 levels on my warrior. Helpful? Yes. Interesting/compelling/new? No.
[Edit 2] My issue doesnt relate at all to the amount of power one might eventually obtain. My issue is in systems that require you to play specific race/class combinations in order to create a baseline for a class you actually want to play as your main and advance to the maximum capability.
tehtawd said:I understand you are against this Chris, but to be honest I think what you mean is you are against imbalance.
You're right. I'm not against percentages themself. I would only be against percentages left unchecked that would scale exponetially unbalanced at higher levels. If there were a way to impliment balanced percentage based increases rather than static then I could support that becuase I do believe in the progeny system.
OK, buckle up guys, I am going to talk Maths. (technically Mathematics or Statistics).
QUESTION:
Should bonuses (Eg: for things like progeny systems) be 'flat bonuses' or 'percentage bonuses' for stats etc?
Would they affect lower levels and/or higher levels?
Would multiple bonuses make the system worse?
EFFECT:
A 'flat bonus'
This would have large impact both at lower levels *and* at higher levels, unless you impose a 'cap' of some kind. Caps tend to be cut-off points (a maxuimum value allowable) and, by their nature, are artificial. In addition a 'flat bonus' is 'linear. This means adding it produces the same 'difference', though the percetange 'improvement' lessens as levl increases. Having multiple 'flat bonuses' will merely make this more felt at both ends of the level spectrum.
A 'percentage bonus'
This has a small imapct at low level and a much larger effect at high levels - the direct opposite of what games strive for. Multiple 'percentage bonuses' would make this much worse.
ANSWER:
Neither of these works, if you take a standard 'stat' model emplooyed by most MMOs.
Generally, in MMOs, your 'power' is based on your stats. These are usually a total of 'character stats' + 'item stats'. They also, usually, generate what is called a 'stat bonus' (you will be familiar with this concept if you have ever player any pen+paper D&D/RPG).
So games may have:
AGility = 75 (base from character) + 40 (items) = 115
Perhaps giving 'stat' = +115 (or +15, say, if a 'bonus' is used) to be applied to any in-game checks, eg added to 'pick locks' skill.
With carefully balanced paper games these work since the world is completely integrated. In may MMOS they fail to work properly.
POSSIBLE SOLUTION:
As many (newer) Pen and Paper RPG games do explicitly (and which older ones did implicitly) you have to have a non-linear relationship between the 'stat' and the 'bonus' you apply for any given skill check. This can be done in one of two ways: Changing the 'points needed' for stats, or lowering the 'stat bonus' gained by a stat. We will consider the 1st.
As you spend points towards a 'stat', you start to need to add more and more 'stat points' for an actual 'stat' increase as the value rises.
STAT ... Total Stats points spent
89 ... 89
90 ... 90 (note 1 points to get from 89 to 90)
91 ... 91 (note 1 points to get from 90 to 91)
92 ... 94 (note 2 points to get from 91 to 92)
... ... ...
97 ... 139
98 ... 154 (note 15 points to get from 97 to 98)
99 ... 171 (note 17 points to get from 98 to 99)
So you can see this is 'simple' from values 1-90 (1 point increase for 1 point spent) but then it gets progressively harder to increase the stat.
Why do this you ask?
Because now we have a system whereby you can have 'flat bonuses' allowed for (eg progeny) systems in the game, which can be added multiple times and will have, at most, a 'larger effect' on lower levls with a negligeble effect at higher levels. It also removes the need for a cap for stats. It also lowers the impact of 'item bonus inflation'.
This (type of) system is particularly powerful when used in conjunction with 'stat bonuses' - a 'bonus' derived from the stat.
Stat Range ... Bonus
60 - 63 ... +1
64 - 67 ... +2 (large stat range for small bonus)
... - ... ... ...
87 - 89 ... +9 (small stat range for larger bonus)
90 - 90 ... +10 (smaller stat range for larger bonus)
91 - 91 ... +11
... - ... ... ...
98 - 98 ... +21
99 - 99 ... +23 (single stat range for even larger bonus)
100-100 ... +25
Why do this you ask? I mean seriously? Why, why, why?
Reasons as follows:
1. Character see/feel the gain of stat points (give them 4-5 to spread across all 8-10 stats)
2. Characters see the lower bonus immediately, but they are not unbalancing
3. Higher stats dont 'break the system' for skills
4. 'item bonuses' can be applied to (i) stat or (ii) stat bonus for more flexibility
5. All direct-impact is focused about the lower end to involve players
OK, but we were talking about 'progeny' ... what does this mean for that?
a. A Progeny system can easily allow 'progeny alts' to have an extra X stat-points to spread about.
b. These will have 'some' impact at low-mid level, but remarkably little at 'end-game' levels.
So, in answer to many people who talk about the incentive to 'min/max' if the progeny bonus was in the form of a stat bonus .... this addresses that problem. Here the stat bonus you get will be worthwhile for Alts ... but only while they are low-level. It will have little or no impact once they get to end-game level. Thus the 'return on investment' is not sufficient to cause a player who only play a Main to use the system to re-create a progeny just for the bonus. He would be able to acheive more in the time just playing his main. But for a progeny Alt, the bonus *would* be impactful .... *while* they are low-mid level.
TL;DR : (shame on you)
A system of stats and bonuses can be found/used that provides significant incentive (in the form of extra starting stat points) for progeny alts without causing 'dedicated min/max-ers' to run the process of progeny a few times in order to ensure they maintain/ensure later 'competitiveness' or 'superiority' at end-game.
Evoras said:QUESTION:
Should bonuses (Eg: for things like progeny systems) be 'flat bonuses' or 'percentage bonuses' for stats etc?
Neither. It's the simple copout solution for a team unwilling to build a unique, compelling system.
That being the case, unlike I normally do when I see an Evoras post, I didnt read further. Sorry. :(
@feyshtey
Since my post was effectively ...
'IF you think it should involve a stat bonus, then .....'
and, clearly, you do not...
Feyshtey said: Neither.
Then you don't need to read further (than the TLDR if you wanted).
-Evoras
PS, I actually took your post as a compliment.
Earlier in this thread I attempted to offer an alternative to just straight up stats, which IMO wouldn't amount to enough for me to want to retire a main. Clearly everyone was stuck on stats, stats stats though.
So thinking in terms of what would make retiring a main worth it, I think that a minimal amount (3-5) chosen traits, items and bank space, transfered from the main to the progeny; with some rules of course would make for a compelling reason to actually retire a main and play a new character.
At least I can't think of how simply stats would make it worth while to me. Your going to Min/Max with just gear anyway.
-Az
azaya said:Earlier in this thread I attempted to offer an alternative to just straight up stats, which IMO wouldn't amount to enough for me to want to retire a main. Clearly everyone was stuck on stats, stats stats though.
So thinking in terms of what would make retiring a main worth it, I think that a minimal amount (3-5) chosen traits, items and bank space, transfered from the main to the progeny; with some rules of course would make for a compelling reason to actually retire a main and play a new character.
At least I can't think of how simply stats would make it worth while to me. Your going to Min/Max with just gear anyway.
-Az
The focus of this discussion does seem to be stuck on stats and I am not sure why. Applying just stat boosts to a character after you Progeny seems boring, and way too meta-gamey in my opinion. The system would just become something you try and min-max, and would be a forced mechanic instead of something that feels natural for players to engage in. New players would forever be at a disadvantage over veterans (exponentially increasing as the game ages) in terms of just raw stats or gear. Stat rewards would also throw a wrench into future development of the game and cause constant balancing issues between new players/veterans which would only get more difficult as time increased.
Rewarding cosmetic rewards such as mounts, titles, pets, gear modifications (auras, glow effects, costumes) would prevent the progeny system from becoming a forced mechanic which alienates new players from veterans and would instead simply provide veterans with unique (hopefully) rewards while not affecting the balance of the game (stat wise). To me, that is the best of both worlds.
Aradune said:Anyway, that's pretty much what I wanted to bring up in hopes that people keep talking about this proposed system and how it might work (or how it might not). The big question being, of course, is retirement really a necessary part of the system? It's certainly a big negative to many people and I have to ask, what is the positive? What does the system lose or what breaks or what doesn't make sense if the original character is still around and playable? Or, if a sacrifice must be made, perhaps it’s not about retiring a high level character but rather sacrificing powerful items in a ritual that results in their alts (offspring) having special advantages. This could be a great item sink, and while it would sting to lose some great items, you still get to play your old character if you want to.
It is interesting that this system is brought up as often as it is. I didn’t expect it to be. It’s an old MUD concept that I’ve wanted to bring to MMOs for some time as I’m always thinking about ways to encourage and reward long term play, about ways to keep people playing an MMO even years later. Really, that’s all the system is: a way to reward players who've put a lot of time into the game and who might want to experience the game again, as an alt, but would be even further incentivized to do so if that alt had some small but noticeable advantages. It's like a rite of passage and a recognition and a measure of respect shown to older players. Everything else is just detail, context, and flavor.
Thoughts?
An epic quest could be done by the main character and repeated by the succeeding alts when they reach max level. could be anything like collecting some rare artefacts from all around the world that give a nice item but if you decide to sacrifice it, your next character that you create could start with some augmented stats.
If I think of EQ most characters had maxed stats with items by the end of velious so it would only affect your character in it's early life.
Meldor said:An epic quest could be done by the main character and repeated by the succeeding alts when they reach max level. could be anything like collecting some rare artefacts from all around the world that give a nice item but if you decide to sacrifice it, your next character that you create could start with some augmented stats.
If I think of EQ most characters had maxed stats with items by the end of velious so it would only affect your character in it's early life.
This kinda reminded me of the movie Lady Hawk. In it, Rutger Hauer's character has a sword with insets for crystals. The sword had been passed down from generation to generation, and each one had the responsibility of filling one of the slots after completing a quest.
It might be cool to have some items like this in game which get 'powered up' each generation by completing some sort of long quest.
Well the way the Progeny system sounds to me...it's like that age old gaming argument about Perma-death characters, there was even talk of having (ruleset perhaps?) certain servers where people could perma death their mains. On the other hand from what I witnessed in the past, it really wasn't a popular idea. Then there's Lotro, get your main to level 50, and you can create a level 50 pvp character which is contained in the Pvp only area on each server. So that pvp character is actually progeny, sprung full blown at level 50. There should be ways of doing this progeny system without the major sacrifice of your main that you have lovingly built over a period of a year or two. I think that's too harsh a result...perhaps blending this so that it a worthwhile thing to do...somehow? I still have my original character in EQ..started in 1999...old as EQ, and not deleting her any time soon.
Cana
Yarnila said:What if the character is temporarily "retired" ? Meaning it becomes maybe an NPC in your Guild Hall or House or an NPC of the City or a NPC for starting out with maybe a little tip to help new players along or maybe becomes a "rent a char for beginners"