Posted by Proud Blade(VIP) on April 22, 2000 at 11:07:22:
In Reply to: Sorry, i was drunk, let me rephrase that. posted by LaggedAnDangerous on April 22, 2000 at 10:13:51:
> Sure, Sure so you mean someone is going to focus twice as fast on skills cause of his great moral/ethical issues. Like a super moral/ethical RP guy/gal.
I'm not a psych major, but I have seen how people perform on the job during times of crisis. Presumably, someone who is "in transition" with respect to alignment will be under these same sorts of stresses. An elf who realizes that he is about to turn his back on all he was ever taught, all who walked be before him... just isn't going to be as focused on the finer points of swordplay. The system wouldn't stop them from learning, just simulate someone trying to learn under mental duress.
>
>
> > > Pros: Scalable. You could make the "good-to-evil" penalty twice as big as the "neutral-to-evil" penalty, and the second alignment change could be twice as big as the first. Applicable to all characters. Fully automated. Reversible.
> >
> Ok, i'm half lost(they lost there specs? skill? communes?. Second alignment change meaning they've already changed it?
As I stated in the first paragraph, this would -replace- losing specs, camo, and other arbitrarily chosen skills.
Yes, second alignment change means a character who has changed alignment once, who is trying to change yet again.
> > > Cons: Has no effect on heroes (who should feel the most pain upon devoting such a career to their trade, then suffering such a change of heart). Also will not bother level sitters.
>
> How can heros really feel pain at gaining experience when there already heros, unless they want to immort.
> Gaining experience, level sitters, are you a level sitter? Why mention them? At least make then lose 1 con for every 3 kills they gain while there at the same rank. Until after 40 maybe.
You see, that's why it's a "con" of the system. Penalties to earned experience don't effect heroes at all.
The reason I mention level sitters is that they too are not bothered at all by penalties to earned experience. They're level sitting, see? This is another "con" of that part of the system.
>
> > 3) A skill learning penalty. Again, based on the idea that the character's emotional state would disrupt their concentration. Characters learn all skills/spells/songs/powers slower..
>
> So there would have to be people that learn things super fast to balance it out. There for some giants would equal the knowledge of some elfs.
Why? Are you making this up as you go along? If you don't change alignment, none of this applies. You don't "gain" by keeping your original alignment.
> > > Pros: Scalable. Universally applicable. Fully automated. Reversible, though it leaves a mark.
>
> Fully automated? man the code... hope your writing it. Leaves a mark, not on my good sheets.
The coding would be fairly simple- there are a number of variables that universally hurt learning. Here's a psuedocode example:
Line 1: Characters with alignment changes learn as if their int was one point lower than it is.
There. Done. Options can even be included:
Line 2: Characters who undergo a severe alignment change (good to evil, law to chaos, or both ethics and morals) learn as if their Int was two points lower.
Wow! It's a scalable system. Damn, I'm good at psuedocode.
> > > Cons: Again, a character who is very well practiced can ignore this to some extent. Zomerseis could have gone through all nine ethics/morals combinations, and it would have meant he'd learn pen slower.
>
> And how would have known if he had? I think you'd need 90 times as many immortals as there are now, unless it's fully automated. hah.
I can't even answer that one. I really have no idea what you're asking.
>
> >
> > > 4) Increased spell failure. Those darn lapses in thought make even the best-practiced spells (100%) fail every once in a while. Ditto for songs.
>
> Man the detail the immortals would have to go into for that, i RP good once i'm set for weeks, i RP badly i'm ruined and delete in a couple of days.
Again, the detail of coding could be quite simple.
Line 1: 10% chance of spell failure, before skill/spellcraft/whatever is ever checked.
Line 2: If the 10% chance doesn't happen, proceed as normal.
Why is this hard?
>
> > > Pros: Scalable. Fully automated. Never stops reminding a character to go quest for an IMM to make the change "approved". Reversible.
> >
> Still, it's not that alot of people know there's quests. It's just you have to know someone that knows someone that talked to someone that found one.
Actually, no. I don't know anyone, and I've had no problem with IMMs. Bitter, anyone?
>
> > > Cons: Only bothers those classes with spells/songs.
>
> So what you said before bout skills we can learn like normal? not good RP can make'em learn quicker?
Again, I have no idea what you're talking about. Yes, this would be cumulative with the above penalties.
>
> > > 5) vuln_mental. With all the dilemmas, the character's willpower isn't what it used to be, and they have trouble standing firm in the face of attacks on it. Affected abilities would include many bard songs, spells like hold person, and supps like damnation and demonfire.
>
> So say, instead of becoming anathemed i become so weak against my mortal enemies mainstay attack i may as well delete.
What does Anathema have to do with it? Again, if you roleplay your alignment change well, an IMM can approve it, as I explained, and all of these penalties leave you. If you aren't up to roleplaying, than yes, please delete.
>
> > > Pros: Fully automated. Never stops without IMM intervention. Fully reversible. Universally applicable. Reversible. Very appropriate.
>
> Fully automated? So your going to write programes to read RP standards?
No. Of course not. The fully automated part is:
Line 1: If a character changes alignment, give them special_flag.
Special_flag is then defined elsewhere in the code, but would be similar to vuln_mental, like cloud giants have.
>
> > > Cons: Might be a bitch to code. Don't know if it would be scalable. Lots of judgement calls as to what skills/spells/songs/supps/powers would work better on a character with alignment problems.
> >
> Ok, so your not going to write the code.
Um, you expect me to log on with my Level 60 and do it? I'm happy to write psuedocode. See? I did it above. But I don't know the first thing about the language CF is written in.
>
> > > I would suggest a combination of all five, as they often nicely balance each other's weaknesses. (A level 10 character isn't going to face many mental attacks, but those learning penalties would be awfully rough. A hero isn't fazed by an XP penalty, but isn't going to like being vulnerable to fiend and hold.) None would be overwhelming on its own, but the combination would be a pain. Also, an IMM can approve the alignment change in stages- if the character shows some progress, but hasn't fully redeemed themselves, the XP penalty could be lifted, and the other stuff left in place.
> >
> I think heros can hold others heros mate(1/10) like always.
> And i wouldn't want to be a hero giant getting fiended.
If you don't want the penalties, don't change alignment at hero. If you do, do it with a sokid roleplay reason, and all the penalties fade away.
>
> And this my friends is half drunken logic.
>
> time for a cig.