Permanent Item Damage and Death Penalty changes

[Hendrik]

QFT

I hate XP debt! I've got two capped characters and I've been learning to ignore debt on them, but when I was working through levels 9-12, oh it hurt. It hurt because it cost time to replace, and time is the one commodity neither Turbine nor I can make more of.

Only time xp debt hurts capped players is when the cap goes up and then only for a short time.

[Justicesar]

Also as far as binding an item goes how about giving toons free stones based on the level of their toon so they can bind a few key pieces of equipment. I really don't want to see 10 LFMs up for people looking to run all thier toons through WW with their level 14's for easy stones....blahhh

[Mad_Bombardier]

According to Eladrin, the reason the new death penalty is being implemented is NOT because of capped characters. It's because of complaints from newbies that xp debt is a turnoff for them and making them drop the game.

While much of our conversation is basically about how to make death cost something for capped characters, that's NOT, at least according to the devs, the reasoning behind the change.

While it may not be the main reason, it does compound the problem as the two go hand in hand. XP debt was tough on new players who die a lot at all levels. It is also irrelevant to capped players. So, it negatively impacts new players at all levels and has no effect on capped characters. That's not good and the new system fixes that discrepancies by applying universally to all characters.

[xman26]

According to Eladrin, the reason the new death penalty is being implemented is NOT because of capped characters. It's because of complaints from newbies that xp debt is a turnoff for them and making them drop the game.

While much of our conversation is basically about how to make death cost something for capped characters, that's NOT, at least according to the devs, the reasoning behind the change.

Again, doing something because people would rather not have to work for what they earn. They are listening to the wrong people. These same "complaintents" propably dont understand there is no save option in this game or that the XP debt is only a temp thing. So either they dont know how to play and think their characters are GODs or die way to often because they keep zerging off on their own. This game has a team based concept, apparently to many people dont understand this.

[moorewr]

Also as far as binding an item goes how about giving toons free stones based on the level of their toon so they can bind a few key pieces of equipment. I really don't want to see 10 LFMs up for people looking to run all thier toons through WW with their level 14's for easy stones....blahhh

They've indicated we will have them more or less coming out of ears - somebody mentioned having 300 fall out of one box in a harbor quest...

[xman26]

Thank you for posting your view.

Nothing wrong with using /death for a means of travel?

Nothing wrong with throwing bodies at a boss over and over to win in a battle of attrition?

Nothing wrong with no penalty for death to capped individuals? Even with off line regen of xp!

Nothing wrong with using death as a means to advance in a quest or gain access to areas?



You know that is exactly what they are doing. They posted ideas here, put it up on Risia to test, read feedback here and are looking at making changes. So they are doing exactly what you want them to do.

It takes so much time to make new content because it is all hand done.

Your conspiracy theories are not holding up to well.

Read my post #858, I give some very good ideas to fix alot of the issues.

[xman26]

Only time xp debt hurts capped players is when the cap goes up and then only for a short time.

And the reason this is so is because
1. They haven't raised the cap
2. Have out of dungeon and offline XP debt relief
3. You can still earn 10k+ on PoP on elite after 12 runs

[Ciaran]

What's another system that provides a penalty that matters to all players, regardless of level?

Fair question.

As I mentioned, keeping or halving XP debt while adding the negative levels/will save penalty would probably be better. I'd much rather see them cap item damage. Maybe even if they had the percentage apply to a random piece of gear. That seems more realistic in a sense. "Your platemail sustained a breach from where that ogre magi cleaved into you...you need to have that repaired".

I keep seeing the argument that XP Debt is unfair and is a permanent loss...I just don't buy this (or have yet seen it effectively argued as to why it's a problem).

If you get XP debt but can
A) Gain it back by repeating the same quest or running another quest or two (or whatever)
B) Log out and let it dwindle over time

How is it anything but a temporary set back? You can always get XP. Yes, you might behind where you would've been otherwise, but isn't that how it works in PnP? Isn't that what keeps people you know, playing the game? "Ah geez, we really had a string of bad luck in VON3...let's try it again tomorrow night when we're all fresh" "Good idea, I like that quest anyway, so I don't mind doing it again".

The XP death penalty was absolutely permanent because you were always behind where you would've been if you hadn't died.

When you cap at level 14.4 or 16.4 as the case will be a few weeks after MOD6 is live for many people, what does it matter if you "could've been there a day, a week or a month ago?". You stop advancing at that point. XP debt has never prevented anybody I know from reaching cap or posed any significant setback for the progression of any character. For those who like to take their time and don't have capped characters, they obviously aren't overly concerned with progression, so why would the argument "XP debt limits my progression" hold any water?

XP debt isn't permanent. It makes you have to work a little more to get where you would've been without it, but so what?

Death penalties should effect character progression, not character gear. Death has an impact on the character. Maybe capped characters are exempt from the 5 minute cap on death.

[Caelan]

didn't read all 22 pages... but did have a thought after reading some of the beginning ones and now some of the last couple.

why does the system have to be across the board? can't the rules for high levels vs low levels be different?

1st lvl players don't get an xp hit... why not extend that a couple levels? new players would have more time to learn the game without too many negative side effects. experienced players don't get hit by these things at low levels cuz they know the quests well enough to avoid dying.

why not have the rules for players above a certain level... say within 2 levels of capped... have more stringent rules. they have more experience and should be able to play smarter. right now that would be lvl 12 - 14. (levels being based on not including any temporary negative levels so if you are hit for 3 neg lvls and are thus lvl 11, it would still apply.) then as the cap is raised, this too would be moved up.

i just would rather see any change be a real fix and not just another problem in the making.

[Ciaran]

While it may not be the main reason, it does compound the problem as the two go hand in hand. XP debt was tough on new players who die a lot at all levels. It is also irrelevant to capped players. So, it negatively impacts new players at all levels and has no effect on capped characters. That's not good and the new system fixes that discrepancies by applying univerally to all characters.

I just don't see how this can be the case. I mean really, did they actually review the penalities at those levels and find them to be grossly out of balance?

At level 10, where you lose 1k XP you are typically running quests that give something like from 3k to 9k base XP. As long as you don't die multiple times in the quest, which we all agree is avoidable in most cases, you're are coming out ahead of the game.

Before level 10, you aren't losing a significant amount of XP versus what you are gaining in the quest. This is true from level 10 to 14 too.

Can you point me to something that spells out how losing -50, -150, -200, etc XP in quests that give 1.5k, 2k, 3k, and more has a significant impact on character progression? Also, if you're a new player your are going to die a lot...I dare say you're "supposed" to! We all went through that and guess what, we got better! We stopped dying as frequently as we did (off days/nights excluded).

Again, capped characters should feel the sting of death, but targetting gear is going to have more of an effect on casual players than anybody else. If new people are dying alot at all levels and having to repair their gear constantly and/or having it go redline, that's going to be more upsetting than temporary XP debt. I know it would be for me and from just taking a temperature among people in my guild, it's upsetting to them as well.

If I'm in a guild, I'm not going to be selfish enough to bind mid-level gear that I could pass on to a guildie rolling an alt or a new player who's joined our guild. As a matter of course we hold on to nicer stuff that is useful across all levels. This change stands to fundamentally change that dynamic, and I'm against it.

[Marabias]

It's interesting to see people's take on what's permanent and what's temporary. To me, XP was always permanent. You lost XP forever. You could earn other, new XP, but it's always XP you would've gotten otherwise anyway. The XP death penalty was absolutely permanent because you were always behind where you would've been if you hadn't died.

Item damage, for me, is much less permanent. Even if I get permanent damage, they're already putting in ways to deal with or avoid that (binding items). And honestly, even if I don't bind my items, chances are I'm going to find another item that's equally nice, if not better, by the time death destroys any of my equipment for good.

But perhaps most importantly here, the new binding system allows you to create a scenario where Death has absolutely no permanent effects what-so-ever. You guys just don't want to accept that because you want to have your cake and eat it too.

This is just a view point thing but I only ever seen XP loss as permanent before being capped. XP loss after being capped was a temp loss. The reason was the "You repeated this quest X times" counter never goes up once you are capped. For instance if you are capped and you loss a bunch of XP you can go to lets say POP and loot run it till your exp is back and you never increase the repeated quest counter because lost XP does not count the same. So if you did POP 3 times before becoming capped every single time after that is like the fourth time. Infact this is a tatic used by some of us. When new content comes out and the level cap goes up you spread out the exp so you still get large chunks back from the quest once capped if its needed or level on the older content some. Now if the repeated quest counter kept going up even when capped maybe this would change the value of capped exp. I never really understood why it was like that but maybe something along those lines should be looked at instead of item damage. I like the neg level thing. And XP loss is an MMO standard I am used to. So if the quest counters kept going up till you got very small amounts of exp from quests then we might see XP loss when being capped mean more.

[Dariun]

I keep seeing the argument that XP Debt is unfair and is a permanent loss...

XP debt is a permanent loss:

If a quest gives 1000 XP. First time in you get 1250, and you die and get -400 XP and then complete the quest, you get 850 XP total.

You do it again and don't die -- 1000 XP.
You do it again and get 10% repetition penalty and don't die -- 900 XP.
You really like it and do it again and get 20% repetition penalty and don't die -- 800 XP.

Total XP for 4 runs: 3,550

But, a friend of yours did all the same quests with you, but he didn't die in the first mission.

How much XP did he get? -- 3,950

If you always quest with this friend, what can you do to catch up with him in XP? Nothing. Because you lost that 400 XP forever.

[Dariun]

Can you point me to something that spells out how losing -50, -150, -200, etc XP in quests that give 1.5k, 2k, 3k, and more has a significant impact on character progression?

My rogue is over 50,000 XP behind the other 3 members of my static group, and he has definitely done more quests than one of the members.

[MysticTheurge]

This is just a view point thing but I only ever seen XP loss as permanent before being capped.

Right, I guess I should've been clear about that too.

XP loss pretty much becomes irrelevant to me once I've capped a character.

[Hendrik]

XP debt is a permanent loss:

If a quest gives 1000 XP. First time in you get 1250, and you die and get -400 XP and then complete the quest, you get 850 XP total.

You do it again and don't die -- 1000 XP.
You do it again and get 10% repetition penalty and don't die -- 900 XP.
You really like and do it again and get 20% repetition penalty and don't die -- 800 XP.

Total XP for 4 runs: 3,550

But, a friend of yours did all the same quests with you, but he didn't die in the first mission.

How much XP did he get? -- 3,950

If you always quest with this friend, what can you do to catch up with him in XP? Nothing. Because you lost that 400 XP forever.

Excellent example of how XP debt is harmful and a negative impact on lower levels.

Emphasized Eladrin thoughts;

"If you're looking for a hidden agenda, it's "Make DDO more palatable to new players, try to bring back those that left after ending a night at a lower XP total than they started at, and prevent people in the future from having similar experiences."

Death has a (monetary) cost when capped now, true, but essentially having no death penalty at cap really wasn't healthy for the game."

[CSFurious]

the reason these changes are being made is to make the content last longer

According to Eladrin, the reason the new death penalty is being implemented is NOT because of capped characters. It's because of complaints from newbies that xp debt is a turnoff for them and making them drop the game.

While much of our conversation is basically about how to make death cost something for capped characters, that's NOT, at least according to the devs, the reasoning behind the change.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

It's interesting to see people's take on what's permanent and what's temporary. To me, XP was always permanent. You lost XP forever. You could earn other, new XP, but it's always XP you would've gotten otherwise anyway. The XP death penalty was absolutely permanent because you were always behind where you would've been if you hadn't died.

XP debt stopped being permanent when they allowed regen. If I have a bad day playing A I can just play B for a while (unless I'm the "I only play 1 char" type)

There is also an unlimited supply of XP in the game so the loss is a temporary setback to your char only. (Hense the sting, you do have to do some work or leave yourself in the penalty box). However, once the XP is made back up your char is no worse off than before they didied.

Item damage, for me, is much less permanent. Even if I get permanent damage, they're already putting in ways to deal with or avoid that (binding items). And honestly, even if I don't bind my items, chances are I'm going to find another item that's equally nice, if not better, by the time death destroys any of my equipment for good.

But perhaps most importantly here, the new binding system allows you to create a scenario where Death has absolutely no permanent effects what-so-ever. You guys just don't want to accept that because you want to have your cake and eat it too.

See now that's all based on your play style. I don't want to grind at 14 so once I cap I tend to build new chars and I may one to pass on a thing or two once they reach L10+ so binding is out. I apparently also don't have as much nice stuff as you because if my vorpal, +5 holy ghost touch etc dies I'm not as confident that I can find a good replacement so easily.

Any death penalty system that does not apply to a significant portion of the questing public (capped characters) IS broken. The new death penalty applies to all characters.

And the debuff does that nicely... but I still don't want them to break my equipment.

Thank you for posting your view.

Nothing wrong with using /death for a means of travel? Well I don't do it but if you aren't a roll player than actually no, I don't see the problem with that. What is the problem with it in your opinion? How does it harm the game?

Nothing wrong with throwing bodies at a boss over and over to win in a battle of attrition?Hmmm...kind of like real battles are often settled Actually I know what you mean here, I like the Giant Tor & Abott prequest shields to prevent reentry without restarting the encounter.

Nothing wrong with no penalty for death to capped individuals? Even with off line regen of xp! The debuff sounds like a good idea here

Nothing wrong with using death as a means to advance in a quest or gain access to areas? I personally don't believe in being in someone's pocket to get by a quest objective. I'd rather die in the cruicible swim than to be carried to the chest so on this point we agree. I liked the /death changes for this reason.
.

According to Eladrin, the reason the new death penalty is being implemented is NOT because of capped characters. It's because of complaints from newbies that xp debt is a turnoff for them and making them drop the game.

While much of our conversation is basically about how to make death cost something for capped characters, that's NOT, at least according to the devs, the reasoning behind the change.

Thanks for reminding us of that... and if that really is the problem, it can be solved by eliminating XP debt below L5.

[Ciaran]

XP debt is a permanent loss:

If a quest gives 1000 XP. First time in you get 1250, and you die and get -400 XP and then complete the quest, you get 850 XP total.

You do it again and don't die -- 1000 XP.
You do it again and get 10% repetition penalty and don't die -- 900 XP.
You really like and do it again and get 20% repetition penalty and don't die -- 800 XP.

Total XP for 4 runs: 3,550

But, a friend of yours did all the same quests with you, but he didn't die in the first mission.

How much XP did he get? -- 3,950

If you always quest with this friend, what can you do to catch up with him in XP? Nothing. Because you lost that 400 XP forever.

Why would this matter unless you were fast-tracking your character to the next level (at which point you are going to be capped and then XP doesn't matter). Don't many people decry this as powergaming?

I just don't see how this is something to get up in arms about. People are saying "dying should sting", "dying should be bad". Well, if you die, you are "behind on XP" (until you cap). Isn't that penalty enough?

The fact is you can make up that XP easily. Go solo WW, go do the explorer areas...stop dying so much in quests to the best of your ability.

I mean honestly, if upon death you lost all XP for the level you are currently at and "de-leveled" you'd have a point (because you'd have to make that level again). Something isn't adding up with these arguments about "death should sting and "it's not fair to "permanently" lose that XP".

[jmelanie7]

I am not aware of what "true resurrection" is as a spell, but it would be nice if the higher level ones gave less penalty (I guess we'll have to check it out on risia)

In PnP, the only use for True resurrection is that only a piece of the corpse is used to resurrect, like a hair, a nail, a leg, etc. The other use is that you can rez a person who died as long as one year ago, raise dead is no more than one day i think, both still gives you a negative level, or if you're level one, a point of charisma penalty.

[totmacher]

The arguments over the semantics involving permanent and temporary are ridiculous.

If you consider these things (items, XP) as traits to be gained by characters, then they are comparable.

Well how do we go about comparing them? We use traits that they have in common as a basis of comparison.

One of these traits is time invested. XP is a constant, linear investment. You gain a set amount of XP for time accrued in a quest. This XP can be modified upwards and downwards due to various factors but it is mostly constant and doesn't vary too much over or under a norm.

Items, on the other hand, are a very random time investment. Given an infinite timeline, you will acquire every type of item in the loot tables due to the randomness of things. But due to the extreme randomness of item drops, their variation is very, very large compared to XP.

Therefore it can be said that XP gain and loss is more steady than items.

However you can also say that since XP doesn't deteriorate like items do (in the sense that you can never PERMANENTLY lose XP you've gained), you can also say that items have less permanence than XP.

There are a lot of basis for comparison and you can muck with them based on your opinion. But comparing them on your own basis' and then assigning "temporary" and "permanent" to them is in the eye of the beholder.