>There are two main systems for levels gains that I'm aware
>of
>
>CF uses what I would call the old-school D&D style of levels
>gains where the value of your stat at the time of your level
>gain determines your permanent bonus for that level. The other
>system is the one where your max hp calculation includes a
>factor like level * statbonus and therefore may change if the
>stat changes.
>
>I bring thing up to ask what the staff thinks of this second
>system.
>
>I'm not convinced myself that it would be right for CF given
>all its nuances, but generally speaking I prefer the second
>system. I find that bonus-on-gain creates illogical
>incentives. For example, a human invoker who rolls minimum
>int, wis and con and doesn't train them will have somewhere
>around 12% more hp (via trains) than one who does train those
>stats while maintaining equal mana stores.

Sure, but is the 12% more hp worth the cost? I'm not sure
what is illogical about choosing to focus so strongly on one
element of the character that you handicap it in other ways.

>Secondly, I find that the spectre of con-loss is a
>disincentive to pk pre-hero. Now this only applies to those
>of us who suck, but I know that if I go out PKing regularly
>I'm going to die more than 3 times in 5 levels, which means
>I'm going to either have to increasingly gear for con to make
>up for it, or will end up with a small, but permanent
>disadvantage. This means that in the long run I'm better off
>just racing to hero.
>
>There are a lot of repercussions of going to a system where hp
>maxes are calculated continuously, but it would fix the
>problems I've mentioned here and make the outcomes of stat
>choices more logical.
>
>Any thoughts?

I can't tell if this reads "People shouldn't be able to train hp."
or "People should lose more con dying in hero range." Maybe both.

Either way, the second scenario isn't more fun the way people
actually play the game.

Qaledus