After watching "In Time" (it isn't good, but that isn't the point).

What if, instead of losing con when you die, your character aged prematurely? The effect would essentially be the same, you can permanently die by dying too much, but the mechanic would change to not hurt prime stat con races and classes as much. Dying in the mid ranks wouldn't feel like it permanently crippled your char as much, so you might end up with less race-to-hero type characters, since the only stat loss you would see would be the stat loss from age, which makes more sense.

Just a thought.

>not hurt prime stat con races and classes as much.

>Dying in the mid ranks wouldn't feel like it
>permanently crippled your char as much

I think your "permanently crippled" statement is a bit extreme, but I'm guessing this boils down to regen rates & saving versus poison & disease?

One thing to look at as well making con something nobody needs to train anymore is that everyone you fight is going to have ~100 more hit points from training hp with all those extra trains.

I think your "~100 more" statement is a bit extreme, since that would be every single train from level 5 - 50. You don't have to spend any trains on anything but hp now, but I'm guessing that isn't how people spend their trains (it certainly isn't how I spend mine).

If you don't want to answer my questions I won't spend any more time on it.

>I think your "~100 more" statement is a bit extreme, since
>that would be every single train from level 5 - 50. You don't
>have to spend any trains on anything but hp now, but I'm
>guessing that isn't how people spend their trains (it
>certainly isn't how I spend mine).

Most players end up with a lot of extra practices at the end that they convert into trains for con later in life. Those count to. And don't forget all those folks who get more than 3 practices each level, they get to keep piling those on for more hit points to.

>If you don't want to answer my questions I won't spend any
>more time on it.

Sorry, it was late at night and I felt like it wasn't so much a question as an attack that the idea was stupid. I knew I should have waited until morning. I apologise.

That said, yes it is about regen rates, even more than con related saves, though having high con and making those saves better seems like a temporary benefit to a high con race more than say, high int is, since eventually, pretty much no matter how good a player you are, you are eventually going to lose that high con bonus.

>>I think your "~100 more" statement is a bit extreme, since
>>that would be every single train from level 5 - 50. You
>don't
>>have to spend any trains on anything but hp now, but I'm
>>guessing that isn't how people spend their trains (it
>>certainly isn't how I spend mine).
>
>Most players end up with a lot of extra practices at the end
>that they convert into trains for con later in life. Those
>count to. And don't forget all those folks who get more than
>3 practices each level, they get to keep piling those on for
>more hit points to.

I don't have access to data about how players spend their trains other than myself, you do, but I don't spend trains on hp all that oftern. Basically if I'm not playing a mage where I can convert a lot of practices I don't tend to spend my trains on hp. I do fairly often end up deleting a mid-ranked character because I've dropped enough below max con that I don't think it is worthwhile to continue to level up. There isn't any reason you couldn't still allow exchanging trains for more deaths even if that wasn't a direct for con exchange.

If everyone really had an extra 100hp, but "con died" faster, and didn't suffer from terrible regend rates as they get closer to death, would that really be so terrible a thing? It isn't like damage output hasn't increased over time and only berserkers and warriors are getting more hp than in the past AFAIK.

>Sorry, it was late at night and I felt like it wasn't so much
>a question as an attack that the idea was stupid. I knew I
>should have waited until morning. I apologise.

FWIW, Zulg and I were talking about this last night, leading to questions such as "Well, wait, what are we actually trying to get at here?" and "Is there a better way to accomplish the same goals?"

>That said, yes it is about regen rates, even more than con
>related saves, though having high con and making those saves
>better seems like a temporary benefit to a high con race more
>than say, high int is, since eventually, pretty much no matter
>how good a player you are, you are eventually going to lose
>that high con bonus.

Playing devil's advocate on that, I think having a high INT is partially a temporary benefit as well -- once the skills you care about are 100, how much do you really care what your INT is? (It's good for other things, just as CON isn't only good for HP, but... )



>I don't have access to data about how players spend their
>trains other than myself, you do, but I don't spend trains on
>hp all that oftern.

I don't have numbers on it, but based on watching players, I think it's safe to say that if you exclude maybe characters who delete before level 10 from the sample, you'd find that easily a majority of all trains are spent on HP. Among heroes only it's probably higher.

I also asked the "What if you couldn't train HP anymore?" question. I can imagine most of the players going for torches and pitchforks at the very suggestion.

To possibly include a history of trains in PBFs?

Just for the record, I'm not wasting my Santa Zulgh on this, but I think it would be cool to see.

I think mana regeneration rates are a long term benefit of high intelligence. How much fun would playing an elf mage be if you had 1500 mana but a max int of 15.


Leaving phone internet area so that's all I have for now.

>I also asked the "What if you couldn't train HP anymore?"
>question. I can imagine most of the players going for torches
>and pitchforks at the very suggestion.

I wouldn't mind this. It would make it so I don't feel so compelled to game the aging system by, say, leaving str and int at max-1 and wis at max-2.

Perhaps training hp three or four times gives the standard 10, then it scales down from there (I have no idea how often people train hp)

This would also somewhat mitigate the overwhelming numbers of gnome shifters.

If I am 5 or more below my max before I hit 40, I feel like I will be at a disadvantage in the high ranks. I usually just pk until I con die then. Maybe it wouldn't matter that much in the long run. I just hate the idea of losing several hps because I like to pk at mid-ranks. I don't know what the solution (if there is one) is. I don't care much about the saves and all that, just the losing hp on ranks. What about having hp on rank go by racial max no matter what your con is? Then everything else could stay as is.

People wouldn't throw trains into con at lower levels.
Consequently those trains would get used elsewhere.

If everyone benifits equally and the fun stick get's bigger, then hooray for us all.

I for one delete when I start spending trains on con rather than HP/mana. I am probably alone in that, but who knows?

Edit: Basically what I mean is if I can't maintain high con. I delete.

Edit 2: I'm not sure why there is so much resistance against the idea of doing away with con loss in some form or another, but as a sort of compromise, maybe just have it affect HP gains but you still get regen rates and con bonuses?

Vets who dont die as much are likely already putting all those trains into the HP already.
This would really help newbies more than anyone else. Thats just how I feel about it.
Which I would not have a problem with. This would also help with trying new builds which
always seems to get you to get your ass kicked more than normal.

The only real problem I see with this is that you have some sense when you are going to con die.
That and it doesnt make sense for you to get older after you die. It would have to remove from the end of the life.
Which means you would have no idea when you would essentially con die.

A more different idea:

If it is just regen and saves that people are worried about, you could take those off max possible con. (Flaws would have to take from max con).
New saves would have to be reconfigured so it would be max con - affects (so abilities that still affected con still could affect your regen).
This would still mean, you can still con die (as that still goes off your normal con value which drops when you die).
Which means people could still horde con to live longer. Or spend points in HP if they would rather.
This would likely be a lot of work though. Especially if you wanted to make con crippling abilities stronger
to affect regen (which I dont have a problem with).

I realize this would be a lot of work and I'd rather see other cool changes.
But I see where other people are coming from. I hate slow HP regen. :P

Edit: Last idea is just adding +con to already existing low/mid/high-level items in the game. Doesnt even have to be in huge amounts.
Just more of it in general to items would also fix this. Armor probably should give more Con anyway. Especially the chest piece.

This could also solve the potential aging issues.

I considered it but ultimately decided it was better to have some idea you were about to die than no idea.

Just use the Con as a Marker for the number of deaths you can take before going kapudt!

Something like

Con : healthy 17(17)<13>

With the 13 here being your remaining life so to speak. It might even be kept hidden if people like surprises. You still lose 1/3 con per persay, (Or less for leaders) but it's not affecting HP loss of con checks.

Aging would have some problems, namely gaining edges,faster learning, more powerful spells loosing a lot of stat (-6 net loss) gaining a lot of stats for wisdom.

I could see people gaming your way but my way would preserve CON benifits while still maintaining a semblence of tougher races being able to remain battle ready longer.

>Just use the Con as a Marker for the number of deaths you can
>take before going kapudt!
>
>Something like
>
>Con : healthy 17(17)<13>
>
>With the 13 here being your remaining life so to speak. It
>might even be kept hidden if people like surprises. You still
>lose 1/3 con per persay, (Or less for leaders) but it's not
>affecting HP loss of con checks.

People have suggested this or something very much like it before...

>Aging would have some problems, namely gaining edges,faster
>learning, more powerful spells loosing a lot of stat (-6 net
>loss) gaining a lot of stats for wisdom.

1) I'm not sure that age related perks are related to your age category. I'm more inclined to believe they are based on hours.
2) I have not problem with people who die a lot getting some edges, faster learning, and wis increases at the cost of -6 stat loss in other areas.
3) More powerful spells? I have never heard such a thing being attributed to age... Purple crack, or something an Imm has actually said?

>I could see people gaming your way but my way would preserve
>CON benifits while still maintaining a semblence of tougher
>races being able to remain battle ready longer.

You could easily adjust the amount of "aging" due to dying being porportional to con and basically make it the same. The idea here is that it makes a certain amount of sense and somewhat hides when you are about to con die, but you still know it is soon due to age.

I like your thought process, but mine is much more stream lined and (seemingly) easier to impliment.

Everything I wrote in my reponse to you has been posted on the officials, either in announcements or by Imms strait up saying it.

It makes sense that your constitution decreases when you get repeatedly beaten. It decreases but doesn't really decrease isn't good for RP immersion. Also, your suggestion would make people unable to train constitution to lengthen their characters lives.

Seriously.

Edit: You could still train up you con to extend your life or max out the stat if it wasn't already.

But seriously...

Nevermind, not worth it.

Not sure if you need to spell out how many deaths they have left.
Mine just kept the current con system in place, just uses max con for everything first.

g

nt

nt