Announcement

Collapse
1 of 5 < >

Forums Reversion

The cloud server that hosts the main Skotos web site and the forums experienced a hardware failure on Saturday morning that unfortunately led to severe database corruption. Several attempts to restore it failed.

This led us to our backups, but the timing was a bit unfortunate. Since the failure occurred on a weekend morning, we didn't see it until after a new backup occurred, which contained the corrupted data, and which removed our previous daily backup. This forced us to our weekly backup, which was unfortunately at the end of its time: six days old.

So, the forums are back, but we had a six-day reversion.

This should not have affects on the rest of the site, since the majority of our data is saved in our main-user-database or our games, all on remote machines.
2 of 5 < >

Forums REversion

The cloud server that hosts the main Skotos web site and the forums experienced a hardware failure on Saturday morning that unfortunately led to severe database corruption. Several attempts to restore it failed.

This led us to our backups, but the timing was a bit unfortunate. Since the failure occurred on a weekend morning, we didn't see it until after a new backup occurred, which contained the corrupted data, and which removed our previous daily backup. This forced us to our weekly backup, which was unfortunately at the end of its time: six days old.

So, the forums are back, but we had a six-day reversion.

This should not have affects on the rest of the site, since the majority of our data is saved in our main-user-database or our games, all on remote machines.
3 of 5 < >

Forums REversion

The cloud server that hosts the main Skotos web site and the forums experienced a hardware failure on Saturday morning that unfortunately led to severe database corruption. Several attempts to restore it failed.

This led us to our backups, but the timing was a bit unfortunate. Since the failure occurred on a weekend morning, we didn't see it until after a new backup occurred, which contained the corrupted data, and which removed our previous daily backup. This forced us to our weekly backup, which was unfortunately at the end of its time: six days old.

So, the forums are back, but we had a six-day reversion.

This should not have affects on the rest of the site, since the majority of our data is saved in our main-user-database or our games, all on remote machines.
4 of 5 < >

Forums REversion

The cloud server that hosts the main Skotos web site and the forums experienced a hardware failure on Saturday morning that unfortunately led to severe database corruption. Several attempts to restore it failed.

This led us to our backups, but the timing was a bit unfortunate. Since the failure occurred on a weekend morning, we didn't see it until after a new backup occurred, which contained the corrupted data, and which removed our previous daily backup. This forced us to our weekly backup, which was unfortunately at the end of its time: six days old.

So, the forums are back, but we had a six-day reversion.

This should not have affects on the rest of the site, since the majority of our data is saved in our main-user-database or our games, all on remote machines.
5 of 5 < >

Forums REversion

The cloud server that hosts the main Skotos web site and the forums experienced a hardware failure on Saturday morning that unfortunately led to severe database corruption. Several attempts to restore it failed.

This led us to our backups, but the timing was a bit unfortunate. Since the failure occurred on a weekend morning, we didn't see it until after a new backup occurred, which contained the corrupted data, and which removed our previous daily backup. This forced us to our weekly backup, which was unfortunately at the end of its time: six days old.

So, the forums are back, but we had a six-day reversion.

This should not have affects on the rest of the site, since the majority of our data is saved in our main-user-database or our games, all on remote machines.
See more
See less

New National Lores

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    For me it was always the basic free skill (cook, fish, bandage) while great these require no rank to use with these lores, they require no rank without them either.
    Give the love, bring on the goat catapults, increase ability to insult cinerans, and a waffle iron for all!
    "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Rupert View Post
      Not all nations have the same starting point. Some nations start with huge stat boosts to awesome combat stats before traits are ever even picked (Altene, Parcines), other nations start with no combat stat boosts and mediocre mental ones(Iridine, Safelands). Unless you find another way to balance this specifically, there will still be an S tier choice.

      If Cinerans didn't also come with great base stats, people would rarely pick them just for the blade mastery, even with the other free trait. These choices are largely made with investment in mind.
      True, nations have different starting bonuses to different attributes. But, once no traits are race-locked, everyone has the same max potential. So that 'bonus' is only short-term in regards to course-trainable stats. And anyone who thinks having a +10 to Dex at the start of the game is better than having a +10 to say, Empathy (something you can't raise at the courses), once the physical stats are maxed was not thinking 'with investment in mind' unless they'd planned on buying a lot of StoryPoints to flesh out that build.

      Originally posted by TEC_Ghuan View Post
      If I choose Cineran and get my free Blade Mastery + Steady Hands, when I go to re-trait, if I want to keep these, but add upon what I already have, will the total value of my traits automatically change or will it still view these as 'free'? We know under the new system Blade Mastery will become an actual trait instead of a national advantage.
      If you used the trait reset command to re-select traits, you would start trait selection from scratch. You wouldn't 'keep' anything, You would have to re-select the traits you wanted - in your example, Blade Mastery + Steady Hands, at their new price points. You would then have to select the appropriate amount of negative traits to balance the point total.
      Game Master Tale
      Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad. Creativity is putting tomatoes in a fruit salad to make mango salsa. Philosophy is wondering if that means ketchup is actually a smoothie. Common Sense is knowing that no, ketchup is not a smoothie.

      Comment


      • #48
        Can we get an explanation on what Empathy helps with?
        .

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Syden View Post
          Can we get an explanation on what Empathy helps with?
          Speaking of empathy..I've put like a LOT of Story Points into raising one of my characters empathy. He currently has negative traits toward empathy. If i @re-trait and pick the same negative empathy traits is it going to reset my empathy back towards the original levels or will the invested STP counteract? STP are expensive and take forever to accumulate so this is a large concern i have.

          Comment


          • #50
            No. Trait modifications are just a + or - percentage from the actual stat value. The actual stat value does not change. If the modification percentage changes then the word level from your stat sheet will change, but the base stat will remain the same.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by jkidd View Post

              Speaking of empathy..I've put like a LOT of Story Points into raising one of my characters empathy. He currently has negative traits toward empathy. If i @re-trait and pick the same negative empathy traits is it going to reset my empathy back towards the original levels or will the invested STP counteract? STP are expensive and take forever to accumulate so this is a large concern i have.
              As Lantraste said, here is a visual explanation:

              You currently have average empathy. You used to have very poor. You have the Provincial Attitude trait which gives a Major Penalty to Empathy. While your current empathy shows up as 'average' which could mean anywhere from 100-110 in point value, you have in fact something probably closer to 115-125 empathy. 'Penalty' is generally -5%. Significant Penalty is generally -10%. Major -might- be in the 15% range, but I've never tested it. If you remove your Provincial Attitude trait, you will now receive a +15% (or whatever the actual value is) on top of what is currently shown in your stats sheet.

              Your character's base attributes are -always- in the 1-200 range. The system will take your base attribute and then add the modifier, whether it is positive or negative, to your base attributes.

              If you can no longer increase your stats via the attribute increase potential, then it means that your character has 200 in base attributes.

              Nimble feet's maximum output: (+5% to agility, +5% to speed)
              Speed: 210
              Agility 210

              Steady Hands maximum output: (+10% dexterity)
              Dexterity: 220

              Provincial Attitude maximum output: (-15% empathy)
              Empathy: 170

              Now if you lose that trait, your maximum empathy output will become 200 since you do not have any penalties associated with it.

              Any and all RPs/StPs spent on stats will -never- be lost. You keep everything that you have earned.

              ---

              On another note, a long time ago when the stats changes happened, some characters under the old system already had 200 in stats and had overcome their traits. Meaning that some people managed to get 200 dexterity even with Ox's Grace. Or that people managed to get 200 strength with Finesse which is no longer possible. If such a character goes through the new @re-trait option (or whatever it will be called), what will happen? Will they lose that grandfathered bonus? This is something that I feel is really important to a lot of older characters and that they should be aware of before moving on to the new system. If they lose this benefit, then it is clearly -not- advantageous for them to use this new @re-trait option unless they severely messed up with their traits.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Tale View Post
                If you used the trait reset command to re-select traits, you would start trait selection from scratch. You wouldn't 'keep' anything, You would have to re-select the traits you wanted - in your example, Blade Mastery + Steady Hands, at their new price points. You would then have to select the appropriate amount of negative traits to balance the point total.
                Thanks for the explanation, Tale. This will definitely help people consider if the new system is worth it for them and leave us some room for discussion with such regards.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by TEC_Ghuan View Post



                  On another note, a long time ago when the stats changes happened, some characters under the old system already had 200 in stats and had overcome their traits. Meaning that some people managed to get 200 dexterity even with Ox's Grace. Or that people managed to get 200 strength with Finesse which is no longer possible. If such a character goes through the new @re-trait option (or whatever it will be called), what will happen? Will they lose that grandfathered bonus? This is something that I feel is really important to a lot of older characters and that they should be aware of before moving on to the new system. If they lose this benefit, then it is clearly -not- advantageous for them to use this new @re-trait option unless they severely messed up with their traits.
                  This is a bug and should have been reported. Trait bonuses are applied after everything is calculated. If said character had Finesse and 200 strength before, he or she -should- have a working stat level of 180 now. Anything besides that is buggy. This is probably tied to the same bug that was keeping people from seeing upgrades when they could all of the sudden buy more potential points. I seem to recall two or three people who had Ox's Grace being able to buy another 20-ish points of strength but the stat never changed and a GM had to manually reset something to correct this problem.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Tale View Post

                    True, nations have different starting bonuses to different attributes. But, once no traits are race-locked, everyone has the same max potential. So that 'bonus' is only short-term in regards to course-trainable stats. And anyone who thinks having a +10 to Dex at the start of the game is better than having a +10 to say, Empathy (something you can't raise at the courses), once the physical stats are maxed was not thinking 'with investment in mind' unless they'd planned on buying a lot of StoryPoints to flesh out that build.
                    You misunderstand what I mean by 'with investment in mind'. I don't mean least investment towards the maximum possible top of the grind, I'm sure a cursory glance of the character sheets for the vast majority of the player base would demonstrate readily that isn't a goal practiced by many. What I mean is the least investment for the best possible results, which you would similarly find is very common.

                    For at least the first decade of the traits system, outside of a few very obvious candidates, nobody really knew what traits were good and weren't. We knew that there were at least 4 good stats: Speed, agility, dex and strength. We knew that some nations started with higher base point values in these specific departments than others, and that's how we picked. That will 100% resume again if the knowledge we have about traits (The current meta's reason to pick) gets flipped on its head, and nations STILL start with these higher bases in the most desirable stats, because it will be the only semi-reliable information we have.

                    To be clear here, the reason I'm explaining this is because you specifically said you'd like to change the habit of people picking nations based on these factors. If that's your goal, then this is something you need to keep in mind. If it's not, then disregard.

                    Cheers
                    Originally posted by MrSelfDestruct
                    I thought it was just a rumor that it was all number-crunching and competitive training in a game with no logical endpoint since characters are ostensibly immortal and can always get better.

                    You mean it's true?
                    Originally posted by Phwoar
                    Maybe I'm just becoming some tea-sipping hippy, or maybe I'm sour because my main uses cesti, but, why sacrifice a character idea for the sake of some hypothetical edge in some imagined combat situation in the distant future?
                    Originally posted by Elowynn
                    Rupert is like the Snowden champion of TEC.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      With the available information before me, I am disappointed in the upcoming change, and therefore I am not looking forward to it. This is a massive change to the game and is not necessary. Just like the last large change to traits and stats.. Both of these changes affect the game on a huge level and petty much change the game on a whole, thus making it a different game; from a mechanics point of view.

                      National bonuses and the free traits/skills do not to be changed. They are solid, for the most part. Traits do not need a huge overhaul. They need help; they need a little more balance. We need traits that affect every stat, both positively and negatively. We don't need a huge amount of new ones that do weird things.

                      I've been waiting for what seems like 15 years now for an opportunity to change my traits; in one of two ways. Ever since that unforeseeable change known as vital areas was put in. I've wanted to exchange my negative trait for a different one, or remove the negative and the corresponding positive, thus leaving me with my free trait and neutral trait.

                      I got screwed over badly when vital areas were put in, and like I said, I've been waiting for an opportunity to change my negative trait. And now(based on the available information), if I choose to get rid of that negative trait, I'm going to lose my free trait as well? Or if I want to keep my free trait, I'm going to have to take some negative trait that prevents free from being 200 in a stat? Or something weird or worse?

                      I have worked long and hard to get my stats to where they are now. And now I might have some of my hard work reversed just so I can finally get rid of a trait that I have been screwed over by an unforeseeable change? That doesn't sound right to me. That doesn't fair to me. But I'd like to hear arguments that say it is.


                      Staff, look, alot of us have been playing for at least 5-10 years, I personally have been playing for 20 (With the same character mind you). We come from a time we could be 200 in any and all stats. That was TEC. Now you've made TEC into a different game by almost forcing us to chose which stats we cannot max. The mechanic that allows characters to not be able to achieve 200 or go above 200 due to a trait should been implemented when traits were put in. Not 19 years later. Due to the nature of stats, it really does boggle my mind that you thought this was a good idea. I understand that alot games are like that. If your strong, then your not fast, and vise versa, etc. But TEC is, well was, not like that. I implore you, please put it back.
                      Can you handle a different opinion?
                      Can you handle the truth?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        I'm guessing you picked a negative trait that had no negative consequence to you, because it had no consequence to you. And now that it does, you're complaining. Choices have consequences.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Full speed ahead with these changes. Your doing great.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            That's a very narrow summation of what he was saying Archmagi. I don't know which he is referring to but there are some that have changed the way a person plays radically that wasn't accounted for at inception and to say tough is a crappy way to treat players.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              And how many people picked superstitious fears, because there wasn't anything magical in game that would affect them, who then complained about having superstitious fears once cadae came around? Or already had max stats, so weren't affected by having a trait that gave a negative to a stat, then suddenly that trait actually meant something? Choices should have consequences, you shouldn't be able to pick negative traits, that have zero consequence. Traits are optional, and if you take negative traits, they should have a negative impact. Not just have no consequence, so that you can be better than others.
                              Besides, I was just guessing that was the issue.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Thank you for keeping the conversation going.

                                I wanted to mention superstitious fears in my previous post, but I refrained. First, cadae were around when superstitious fears was introduced. Now the part I'm unsure of (because it was 19 years ago) is that I do believe you could not use cadae when superstitious fears was introduced. If not, it was made that way VERY shortly after.
                                I do not understand why people continue to use this trait as an example. Additional magic was completely and totally a FORSEEABLE change/addition to the game. Now, not the specifics, but more? 100% a possibility. It's why I didn't take the trait 19 years. Also, if silly ole Raja could figure it out 19 years ago, well, need I say more?

                                Choices do have consequences ArchMagi. My negative trait always had a negative consequence, but since that one change, the trait has became a game changer. It became debilitating. I doubt any other character, let alone another combat character, has this trait. It's a horrible trait to have. I don't want to get into the specifics and my experiences of having this trait. Please take my word that it's a very bad trait to have.

                                I guess my overall point is that I wish that these huge game changing changes would stop. And if they absolutely have to be implemented, then consider existing characters. Offer something. For example, when that last change to traits/stats came out, if a character that had a negative trait that affected a stat, and you were not already 200 in said stat, said character should have been given an opportunity. Because there is no way in hell, any of us could have foreseen that happening. Said trait always had a negative aspect to it, but now, said trait has an additional negative aspect to it, which was not originally there and could not have been foreseen.

                                Lets say hypothetically that 19 years ago, you had a character from the Safelands. You've had this character long enough to become a good combat character. Then traits are introduced. Is this a tough cookies situation? What if national bonuses were forced? Regardless if you used the command to add traits to your existing character? Is it still tough cookies?
                                Now hypothetically, lets apply it to today. What if, along with the all the 'positive' lores and such that the staff want to implement, they put in some negative things for some or all nationalities? What if they forced these new negative national 'bonuses' on existing characters? (Because they have the capability to do that.) Again, is it too bad so sad?
                                What if the staff decide to put in some information and background/lore to nationalities and make it where certain nationalities can't learn or even USE certain skills. Is this also too bad so sad?

                                We all could go on and on about hypotheticals and thinking of possible things that could be added/changed to affect any trait. But I'm going to stop here. I hope I cleared something's up from my previous post, and I hope I made sense.
                                Can you handle a different opinion?
                                Can you handle the truth?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X