[MUD-Dev2] [DESIGN] Removing the almighty experience point...

[cruise]

Thus spake Caliban Darklock...
> On 8/30/07, Vincent Archer <archer at frmug.org> wrote:
>> Make it so that killing a level A mob is a level A+5
>> achievement, reduce the visual level of all mobs by 5, and, at level6,
>> killing a level 2 mob gives you an achievement, while killing a
>> level 1 mob won't.
> 
> Now you're just replacing parts of the XP system. Eventually, you're
> going to end up with a convoluted series of rules that add up to an XP
> system just like the one we've always had.

In other words, the reward systems are very similar - because the 
argument is really about how the rewards add up - it's about what the 
rewards are given /for/.

In an XP system, killing a level 6 Orc might give you 1/6th of the XP to 
get to level 7 (from level 6) - or it might count as a "level 6 
achievement", of which 6 will reward you with level 7.

Whcih way you do it doesn't really matter because *each achievement 
counts only once* - killing another level 6 Orc gives you nothing. Even 
at level 6.

Why the hell would we want to do this?

Because the level is not the reward. Because the XP/achievement is not 
the reward. The player level is simply a marker of the player's competence.

The fun should come from the game itself - you defeat an Orc because 
it's fun to fight, not because it gives you XP. If the fight is fun, 
that's the reward, not the XP.

>> The question is: why? Why do you NEED to kill a level 1 mob *and* be
>> rewarded for it, at level 2.
> 
> The corollary question is: Why not?

Because if you're killing the mob because it's fun, then that's the 
reward. Technically, you are being "rewarded" still.

> "Why" is easily answered. I should be rewarded for killing a level 1
> mob because I used to be rewarded for killing a level 1 mob. A level 1
> mob produces a reward.

Only if you enjoyed the fight. The "level 1" achievement the game takes 
note of when you do is /not/ a reward any more than the game noting you 
moved forward. It's simply a state.

> That is the standard. The reward may be minimal
> or even negligible, but it should by all rights be the same reward all
> the time. That is what I expect from an online world: predictability.

It is predictable - if you enjoyed fighting the mob before, you probably 
will the next time. The reward has not changed. Your "level" is no more 
a reward than, say, the amount of mana left over after the fight - sure, 
you can use it to see how you're improving, or how well the fight went, 
but having more after the fight than last time isn't the reward. Ditto 
your level or achievement count.

> I think this is more likely to be accurate self-assessment than some
> sort of failure. Most people figure out whether they can fight mobs
> above their own level by looking at how well they do against mobs *at*
> their own level. If they do badly, they tend to back up and look to
> lower level mobs. I don't think anyone's out there killing termites
> because they simply don't know they can kill bears; I think they've
> more likely either tried and failed to kill bears, or decided they
> just plain aren't interested in killing bears. While you and I may
> think killing bears is ever so much fun and everyone should try it, we
> really don't get to tell everyone else how to play the game.

That's what most people do now because that's how the games are 
structured - that doesn't mean that's the /only/ way it can work.

Players can kill whatever they want, as much as they like. Their level 
is merely an indication to them and others of what strength of creature 
they can likely handle. Gaining a level doesn't "powerup" the player in 
any way - that happens through normal play. Being able to defeat a bear 
when you couldn't before is the reward because the player has improved, 
not because they've killed enough termites they've outleveled the bear.

>> It's a problem of perception. You perceive content "below
>> your level" to be worthy, and "just below your level" to be good, and
>> content "above your level" to have to wait until you're ready.
> 
> I perceive content that looks like fun to be worthy, and I don't
> recognise any authority on your part to tell me otherwise. If I'm too
> low a level to do something, that's a goal. If I'm too high a level to
> do something, that's your game sucking.
> 
> The main reason people do low level tasks is usually because higher
> level tasks are either too difficult or not fun. Forcing them to do
> those tasks anyway is not a model for success.

No one's "forcing" them to do anything. You can fight whatever you like. 
Levelling up is /not/ the reward. XP/achievements are /not/ the reward. 
*Playing the game* is.