Diggfinger
Arcane
Might and Magic 6 learning skill
so satisfying to use at each and every level
so satisfying to use at each and every level
Should a smart person actually get XP faster?
In other words, Tyson had a level 0 perk "Natural born boxer: gives +50% exp when learning boxing and +25% when learning melee combat skills".
The Leadership and Wisdom stats in Jagged Alliance 2, which complement each other. The higher your Leadership stat, the better you are at training militia and other mercs. The higher your Wisdom stat, the quicker you learn: your stats increase faster, whether through regular gameplay or when being taught by other mercs. It's probably the most interesting implementation of this trope there is.
It always kind of surprised me that that system really wasn't used anywhere else, even though that was a highly regarded game and the whole system worked pretty well. Then again, maybe it could be said that it was just an extension of Dungeon Master or such. Advancement based on use, with the ability to customize.I can't say I've played any CRPGs that do this. In Betrayal at Krondor, skills are advanced through usage. The player can select skills to emphasize, which will increase their relative rate of improvement. The fewer emphasized, the greater that bonus is. I think the bonus for only one skill selected is +50%.
You are missing the point of stats. In initial rpgs, you selected your char off the stats you rolled. Mike Tyson is a victim of his natural stats - no player with a 3 str could ever become Tyson. All the XPs in the world woundn't make a char with bad stats Mike Tyson.Here's a fun question:Intelligence in Fallout 4 gives +XP (because they removed skill points), and it's utterly inconsequential. Because each level requires more XP than the last, even something like 20% bonus XP might only net the player a couple levels over the course of the entire game. You have to use ridiculous numbers for it to feel like the investment is worth anything.
Intelligence for bonus SP feels more important in Age of Decadence and Dungeon Rats, perhaps just because you're always under the gun and looking to eke out a little edge.
Should a smart person actually get XP faster?
If you took a random PhD student, would he have become a top-tier boxer faster than Mike Tyson did?
This isn't actually a good thing, this is just tedious and annoying since now I have to break out my disassembly tools or consult a guide just to figure out how to play your game. A game that only relies on the player having no idea how to play to pretend to be good isn't actually good...although JA2 doesn't actually depend on this, which is why knowing exactly how it works doesn't "ruin" the game.1. Stats in JA2 don't specify effects. Wisdom doesn't just say "+30% XP gain rate", so unless you actually delve into the code you don't know exactly how strong it is.
And that's why it ultimately doesn't matter. Plus, it's not like there's a shortage of cows to punch.2. Characters in JA2 are very much a "take it or leave it" affair. There's no character creation (outside of for 1 IMP) where a player has to judge whether +20 wisdom is better than +20 marksmanship.
Well, he offered money for fighting a gorilla...Tyson probably a bad example. Definitely not an idiot, and developed* unique training techniques (accelerated EXP gain?) to develop his strength in the places where it counted most.
* - benefited from all-time great trainer, like Might & Magic?
EverQuest was known as EverCrack back in the day because it was so addictive to play, and I think the XP from killing enemies was one of the biggest parts of that. The game just naturally rewards you each time you get a new level, which seems like good design if you do it right. The devs had to make new spells every 4 levels, but each individual level was a big improvement just because of how it played for you vs whatever you are fighting. Each level your character got slightly better at defense, offense, etc. And just being a level higher than the enemies you are usually fighting makes a big difference.
I think what made it so addictive though was how long it took to get a new level. At first it's easy but going from 32 to 33 could take some people several days... It was off the charts long compared to todays games. And yet when I play todays games which throw levels at you every 2 minutes, it just cheapens the whole thing and makes it seem a lot less meaningful.
It encouraged me to do swarm kiting due to the time-to-ding.EverQuest was known as EverCrack back in the day because it was so addictive to play, and I think the XP from killing enemies was one of the biggest parts of that. The game just naturally rewards you each time you get a new level, which seems like good design if you do it right. The devs had to make new spells every 4 levels, but each individual level was a big improvement just because of how it played for you vs whatever you are fighting. Each level your character got slightly better at defense, offense, etc. And just being a level higher than the enemies you are usually fighting makes a big difference.
I think what made it so addictive though was how long it took to get a new level. At first it's easy but going from 32 to 33 could take some people several days... It was off the charts long compared to todays games. And yet when I play todays games which throw levels at you every 2 minutes, it just cheapens the whole thing and makes it seem a lot less meaningful.
It also wouldn't succeed on those premises today because the modern gamer is no longer so easily attracted to bashing pinatas for barely anything when they could be playing some other game that pays out better for their efforts. The truth of the matter is that grinding mobs that pay only tiny amounts of XP was only interesting back when people had no other options to choose from. Also, because you paid for an entire month of this shit so you're gonna USE the entire month of this shit. And while I often question how just how much the modern gamer is willing to tolerate a much slower playflow, like whether a modern gamer is willing to spend hours watching Mr. Radar until a contact appears to spring into action against, even with the companionship of Mr. Coffee to pass the time, somehow, I don't think repetitive mob-grinding for very little XP and not a whole lot else is gonna be making a comeback. Even Diabloesques at least distract players from the tedium with showers of blood, gore, and loot.EverQuest was known as EverCrack back in the day because it was so addictive to play
I mostly disagree, I am sure many of the players were happier in WoW or whatever once it came along, but EQ never would have been popular at all if it was just bashing loot pinatas and grind. It had so much more going for it I don't even know where to begin.It also wouldn't succeed on those premises today because the modern gamer is no longer so easily attracted to bashing pinatas for barely anything when they could be playing some other game that pays out better for their efforts. The truth of the matter is that grinding mobs that pay only tiny amounts of XP was only interesting back when people had no other options to choose from. Also, because you paid for an entire month of this shit so you're gonna USE the entire month of this shit. And while I often question how just how much the modern gamer is willing to tolerate a much slower playflow, like whether a modern gamer is willing to spend hours watching Mr. Radar until a contact appears to spring into action against, even with the companionship of Mr. Coffee to pass the time, somehow, I don't think repetitive mob-grinding for very little XP and not a whole lot else is gonna be making a comeback. Even Diabloesques at least distract players from the tedium with showers of blood, gore, and loot.EverQuest was known as EverCrack back in the day because it was so addictive to play