Example: Let's say we adopt something of a quest-based advancement scheme.
For trade, let's say a trader needs to see as many markets as he has levels to
advance (ie. by level 10 he needs to have visited 10 different Markets). Well,
this means the character now will need to do more less-productive travel. To
support himself, he'll need more money at his tasks than an balanced system
without quests, and the returns need to justify the effort. So, we up the
ante on some skills. For equestrian, if I've got to fulfill some quests before
I can reach level 3, I can't make money at all until after the quests are done.
So, other skills at lower levels need to be productive enough to support
themselves and their equestrian allies. Hence, lots of re-tuning. (BTW, all
of this is referring to a balanced system with more modest growth than the
current Olympia).
Specifically, I think it'd be valuable to make some hard priority choices. What
needs to be done when. Another example is lore sheets - we've got all these
nifty new subskills, but most people don't know how to use them. I think
the game dynamics will be much different after these lore sheets are out, and
fine-tuning a system now will give the wrong balance later.
Another for-instance: you mentioned implementing the 6-8 school magic system.
My memory of this indicates that many of the proposals included combination
spells, ie that for "Summon Fire Elemental" you'd need levels in both fire
magic and animal control. This means you can't have a subskill suystem with
just a single parent.
I guess the easy way to sum my point up is that I think we should back off a bit
on the nitty-gritty, have Rich give us an idea of the master-plan of where
things are going, and discuss the best way to get there.
Scott Hauck
hauck@cs.washingotn.edu