Go back to previous topic
Forum Name Gameplay
Topic subjectRegarding wither - Move longevity?
Topic URLhttps://forums.carrionfields.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=74009
74009, Regarding wither - Move longevity?
Posted by Adrigon on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Hello,

After playing Antaluvion and loosing some 100+ hours due to failing the save against one (1) wither, I have pondered if there are any creative ways of altering this.

I know there are several voices for change of the commune itself, but I propose that we simply move the elixir of longevity from the area which it is in now, which cannot be accessed by anyone, to a place that is reachable. Say to Tiamat. Or we open up something else that is in character and try to make this an opportunity to further improve upon the game.

Here Daevryn writes that the elixir undoes the aging of wither (if he recalls correctly) http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=49351

Since it is created by someone who, to my knowledge, is absent from the game I understand it can be hard to get their approval.

But perhaps we can do that or altogether remove that age loss?

Looking forward to your thoughts!
74010, RE: Regarding wither - Move longevity?
Posted by Ishuli on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
You didn't lose that many hours.

I'm not familiar with the elixir and it's likely meant to be that way.

I'm fine with wither having age penalty consequences.

But I'm always game to read others' thoughts too.

-Ish
74015, I don't understand the upside of the age penalty.
Posted by Java on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
I agree that obstacles and challenges are good for the game. If permanent con-loss wasn't a thing, dying (especially to mobs) would lose pretty much all meaning, and the challenge of trying to stay alive would be meaningless and boring. So that's where I'm coming from. Challenges are good. Obstacles and disincentives to risky behavior are very much necessary.

But the age-loss of wither doesn't actually do that, because its so rare to actually land, and even rarer for that to truly impact a character (since age-deaths are so very rare). It's a non-obstacle, because no one is concerned that it will land. Nor should they be, because the chances of it actually mattering are so close to zero it isn't worth it. Just do the math.. how many times is the wither commune used, and how often does someone age-die prematurely because of it? It isn't even worth considering.

So if it doesn't provide that feeling of "risk" and make the game more fun by introducing a different challenge, what DOES it provide to the game?

All it really does is make it possible that a long-lived and established character will disappear somewhat earlier than normal. Typically, I think we all WANT these long-lived and established characters around. We celebrate characters like Gilversplitz that lived for years, don't we? Wouldn't we have done the same for a well-respected character like Andaluvion? So I don't see how that character disappearing earlier (even if it isn't as dramatic difference as we think) can be seen as a positive.

In short.. the only actual result of the current aging aspect of wither is a negative for the game and for the players. So why keep it as-is?
74025, RE: I don't understand the upside of the age penalty.
Posted by incognito on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Think age loss is quite common if your saves suck.

But the main reason for not changing it is probably a lack of coding resource.