Attribute-based Missions (sorry if already req.)

[Jey Walkr]

Hi,

I'm relatively new to the game and I haven't ever looked into mods or anything, so excuse me if this has already been suggested.

So here's my idea...

How about a chance to get missions from the trader based on where the skill points have been spent. For example if the player has invested points into Strength and Fortitude skills then the trader should have a chance to offer an attribute-based mission, and there would be a 50-50 chance of getting either a Strength or a Fortitude mission.

The missions could be something like these:

Strength: You have to defend an NPC(s) at a POI against a mini horde night. Maybe you can only use the resources at the POI to do any building, so that it isn't easily cheesed.

Agility: You have to lead a horde of slow-moving zombies from one location to another while fighting off some zombies that break away from the horde or maybe zombies attracted to the horde.

Intellect: You have to solve a puzzle in a POI and grab the loot before a timed device unlocks all the zombies in the POI, who swarm to your location if you don't get out.

Perception: You have to find multiple items hidden within a POI. Once you have all of the items you can use them to craft a valuable item that you can keep or sell back to the trader.

Fortitude: You have to sow a field, or indoor farm with seeds and then bring them to harvest, while zombies are attacking. Maybe you have to repair an irrigation system while you are awaiting that will help with the growing.

Anyway, I just wanted to share these ideas.

Thanks for reading.

Jey.

 

[Jost Amman]

Those are all excellent ideas in my opinion, but... why tie them to attributes?
It's much more fun to be free to try them all, right?

 

[ALEXZANDER]

immidiatly can say its bad idea

 

[Jey Walkr]

Those are all excellent ideas in my opinion, but... why tie them to attributes?
It's much more fun to be free to try them all, right?

Thanks for your reply @Jost Amman.

The reason I suggested tieing it to Attributes is because I think that it will feel like you are getting the mission because the trader feels you are suitable for the job. So if you have been spending all your points in Strength alone, it makes sense from the trader's point of view to offer you Strength-based jobs.

I also think that choosing what build to go for will be more exciting, and not mostly based on the weapons you want to use. This could increase the replayabilty of the game too.

 

[Jost Amman]

Thanks for your reply @Jost Amman.

The reason I suggested tieing it to Attributes is because I think that it will feel like you are getting the mission because the trader feels you are suitable for the job. So if you have been spending all your points in Strength alone, it makes sense from the trader's point of view to offer you Strength-based jobs.

I also think that choosing what build to go for will be more exciting, and not mostly based on the weapons you want to use. This could increase the replayabilty of the game too.

Yeah, that makes sense, absolutely.

However, I can already see how this approach could potentially upset many players if implemented.

People HATE being excluded from "things", so a player who likes (e.g.) to almost always play an INT build, will never be able to experience the quests tailored for the STR build (and vice versa), even if it's not your intended result. That's why my reply before.

However, there may be a way to fix that by implementing sort of a "soft lock" on those jobs. Like for example making ALL jobs available to everyone, but if you're getting a mission of the "wrong" type for you, it'll be much more difficult to complete. Just an idea.

 

[theFlu]

People HATE being excluded from "things", so a player who likes (e.g.) to almost always play an INT build,

I'm kinda in the opposite boat .. I hate that re-speccing exists. It's "handy", but it takes away the character. Having different classes do different things in a game makes them actually significant. Having them have their own class-related things to do, gives them personality.

Like in WoW classic, hunters would learn to tame wild animals for pets, figure out how to train them; search the wilds for new animals to learn different abilities from. Even while these were the same mobs everyone else was dealing with, all of that was completely "invisible" to other classes; for others a bear was a bear, for a hunter, that's the bear that knows "Bash". Rogues would do quests for poisons, gather unique materials for them.. warlocks for their demons etc etc. It wasn't nearly as "complete" as one would hope it was, but there was plenty of good flavor to each class. Same world (literally), but different game.

In some cases, like current WoW's artificially scaled raiding, where tryhards need to tryhard; respeccing is a necessity.. in 7dtd? Nah. Just a blanding effect.

 

[Jost Amman]

I'm kinda in the opposite boat .. I hate that re-speccing exists.

I wasn't talking about respeccing, I was talking about "liking".

If I don't like the Strength build, I will never respec into it just to play those STR missions OP is talking about.
If I'm that type of guy, I may end up hating the devs for excluding me from those missions that can be played by "the others".

 

[theFlu]

I wasn't talking about respeccing, I was talking about "liking".

Likewise; if I was talking about respeccing as such, why would my examples be of class structures?

If I don't like the Strength build, I will never respec into it just to play those STR missions OP is talking about.

Then you mustn't like the idea of the mission that much either? And why wouldn't you, it'll cost you couple kilodukes, and you can still play as INT while doing it (depending on level, of course).

And, you know, how bitterly excluded do you think wow players were feeling of the warlocks demon quests? .. They weren't. And if they wanted to experience those, they'd automatically decide to level one. It's largely a matter of design.

 

[Jost Amman]

Likewise; if I was talking about respeccing as such, why would my examples be of class structures?

Unless I missed your point...
You cited respeccing as a way that 7D2D has to avoid being stuck in a specific class? Did I understand that correctly?
If so, you were indeed talking about respeccing to support your stance that locked classes (without respeccing) are better.

Then you mustn't like the idea of the mission that much either? And why wouldn't you, it'll cost you couple kilodukes, and you can still play as INT while doing it (depending on level, of course).

What does have me liking the proposed mission ideas from OP, have anything to do with enforcing or not enforcing them class-wise?

Also, to clarify, barring the cost to respec from one attribute specialization to a different one, it would be wasteful and silly to respec back and forth each time you want to try a mission for a different attribute. Respeccing is also not only about attributes, it's also about having to reassign skills every time you change. On top of that, if you really have played most of the game (i.e.) as INT, all your gear (armor, weapons, mods, tools) will be custom fit for that attribute tree. So you can imagine how inconvenient would be to switch "classes" every time you need to.

Now multiply that by 5, and you can understand why people would never use respeccing to try out different missions.
As I said previously, I like the mission ideas, but I don't think they should be tied to the attributes.

 

[theFlu]

Unless I missed your point...

I guess you did; sorry, was aiming for brevity, but I guess another round of lawyering would've been required.

You: "People HATE being locked out of things"
Me: I kinda like it. Exclusion is what enables things to be designed special. Me liking it makes me hate that respeccing exists, and like a good class structure.

it would be wasteful and silly to respec back and forth each time you want to try a mission for a different attribute.

Wasteful; if the quest is "worth" something (even just as an experience), then that's obviously not waste. They might also be rewarding enough to cover for the resource costs (any current high tier quest already is).
"Silly"? Less silly than 3 crates of 7.62 looking for a purpose...

So you can imagine how inconvenient would be to switch "classes" every time you need to.

I can, which is why proposed doing them when you can still play as your main spec (as in, have enough talents not to make it miserable; whatever that means for you).

Now multiply that by 5, and you can understand why people would never use respeccing to try out different missions.

5 Respecs, "people would never" ... I'll respec for a shopping trip if I want to optimize my life. Couple k dukes, 30 secs in the skill menus, not exactly an inconvenience.

And honest to god; I'd prefer such quests wouldn't be achievable via a simple respec anyway. Maybe a rare drop that'll only drop while 9-10/10 in an attribute to start one.

 

[Jey Walkr]

I haven't played for long enough that I have needed to re-spec yet, but I imagined that missions to match your spec would make the playthrough more interesting. If someone was mainly interested in just "trying" all of the missions, and wasn't interested in how they affected the playthrough then of course the option to reset skills is there.

My main point I was trying to make was that I wanted missions related to my player build, to give quests more purpose.

Jey

 

[theFlu]

My main point I was trying to make was that I wanted missions related to my player build, to give quests more purpose.

You made the point well; we just tend to instantly derail on this forum ...

I do like the idea. I'm pessimistic about getting them, as they'd kinda require more of a strict class structure and TFP doesn't want that. Even if they do try to implement it. (Your guess is as good as mine .. )

Dunno if the quest system directly supports checking for player builds; but at the very least the loot system does. Having for example a zombie bag drop "an item" to bring to Rekt, which would start a class quest. Those items could be limited to high levels of an attribute (and hopefully made "unique" so you won't have stacks after a couple weeks).

 

[Jost Amman]

I guess you did; sorry, was aiming for brevity, but I guess another round of lawyering would've been required.

You: "People HATE being locked out of things"
Me: I kinda like it. Exclusion is what enables things to be designed special. Me liking it makes me hate that respeccing exists, and like a good class structure.

Oh, now I get why we're not understanding each other... you're talking about PERSONAL preference, while I was talking how, in my opinion, this kind of change would be received by the players IN GENERAL.

Wasteful; if the quest is "worth" something (even just as an experience), then that's obviously not waste. They might also be rewarding enough to cover for the resource costs (any current high tier quest already is).
"Silly"? Less silly than 3 crates of 7.62 looking for a purpose...

I understand that YOU are willing to spend some in-game gold, plus all the time necessary to reskill, switch armor, weapons and other stuff, and you still would feel like it's worth it. But since I was talking in general that's your personal opinion is not so relevant to me, especially since you're a veteran player and, honestly, kind of a niche example of the vast player base.

That doesn't mean that I'm right and you're wrong of course. I'm just saying that I expect the average non-veteran and, in many cases, casual player, to be much more disappoint than you if they had to do all that stuff each time they want to experience a mission only available for a different attribute level.

I can, which is why proposed doing them when you can still play as your main spec (as in, have enough talents not to make it miserable; whatever that means for you).

That's what I said in my first reply basically, did you miss it?

5 Respecs, "people would never" ... I'll respec for a shopping trip if I want to optimize my life. Couple k dukes, 30 secs in the skill menus, not exactly an inconvenience.

And honest to god; I'd prefer such quests wouldn't be achievable via a simple respec anyway. Maybe a rare drop that'll only drop while 9-10/10 in an attribute to start one.

Again, I said "PEOPLE would never" and you replied with "BUT I", you're talking about personal preference, I'm talking in general.
In any case you can play any way you want, but since this is an idea to possibly add something to the game, it seems fair to me to give to OP my own educated guess on how this implementation could be received by the player base at large.

My main point I was trying to make was that I wanted missions related to my player build, to give quests more purpose.

Yes, that is clear. What I think would be bad for the game in general is to "restict" the job list at the trader, based on the type of build you have. That's also because you may be interested, for example, in acquiring and item (as quest reward or to find in the POI) that is only given in a job for a different build.

Also, in my opinion The Flu is downplaying how annoying it would be, for the average player, to "switch classes".
If I normally play a Stealth Build with a crossbow and Assassin's gear, having all my skills and perk books associated with that type of build, and for that other job I need to be heavily protected, wield a Steel Sledgehammer and preferably have also all the associated perks typical of a "Brute" character, then it's not just a question of spending time and gold to do all the switching, it's also not likely that you have acquired all the gear and perks (not skills) that you may need even after respeccing.

In any case, I really like you mission ideas, regardless of what restrictions would be in place to be able to get them.
And also, what Flu said... as veteran players, we tend to derail topics and talk, talk, talk, about our most liked game.
Hope you didn't mind.

 

[4sheetzngeegles]

I often read a lot of good ideas on the forum, but they all share the same missing element.
.
If they were able to tie into other aspects of the game, probably all of them would work.

I alt play a simple game, I don't farm, or build or mine normally, but they bound and looped
all of those aspects into one thought. Default I explore, but I have to explore, in order to find
seeds indigenous to a certain region, to make a concoction or tool or weapon, so I have to farm,
and build shelter for the people I found on quests, so they can produce other things I need to
progress, farther. Then dig specific ore to make armor necessary to survive in a deadly region.
But they are so tightly woven that it just feels like a part of the game, instead of just a good
individualized idea. Enshrouded.

 

[theFlu]

you're talking about PERSONAL preference, while I was talking how, in my opinion, this kind of change would be received by the players IN GENERAL.

In other words, you're talking about EVERYONE, while I'm providing that single "not all" that disproves the generality. And while certainly I am a unique individual, I'm not alone in hating the generic all-inclusive slop; I follow quite a few people who discuss modern media and games, and the sentiment seems rather common.

That's what I said in my first reply basically, did you miss it?

I did; I still can't find it, but it isn't that relevant anyway (Your first reply to the thread was two lines, wasn't there, your first reply to me doesn't seem to refer to playing them "double specced" in any way)

it seems fair to me to give to OP my own educated guess on how this implementation could be received by the player base at large.

Certainly, but please do grant the same right to the parts you exclude from your guess

Also, in my opinion The Flu is downplaying how annoying it would be, for the average player, to "switch classes".

Downplaying? Flaunting; taunting their absolute laziness for being unwilling to click a couple buttons and their selfish need to be spoon-fed the content slop, all of the content slop for all of the FOMO. Flexing with my incredible ability to press a button on the mouse 50 times at will. Not even Eddie Hall would be able to, I'm sure ...

And I'm not even arguing about an exact implementation, I was referring to making it basically impossible to obtain these without actually playing the spec - I can't predict how annoying swapping would be when my proposed implementation would make the swapping impossible. And I can't really care when I want it exclusionary.

 

[Jost Amman]

In other words, you're talking about EVERYONE, while I'm providing that single "not all" that disproves the generality. And while certainly I am a unique individual, I'm not alone in hating the generic all-inclusive slop; I follow quite a few people who discuss modern media and games, and the sentiment seems rather common.


I did; I still can't find it, but it isn't that relevant anyway (Your first reply to the thread was two lines, wasn't there, your first reply to me doesn't seem to refer to playing them "double specced" in any way)


Certainly, but please do grant the same right to the parts you exclude from your guess


Downplaying? Flaunting; taunting their absolute laziness for being unwilling to click a couple buttons and their selfish need to be spoon-fed the content slop, all of the content slop for all of the FOMO. Flexing with my incredible ability to press a button on the mouse 50 times at will. Not even Eddie Hall would be able to, I'm sure ...

And I'm not even arguing about an exact implementation, I was referring to making it basically impossible to obtain these without actually playing the spec - I can't predict how annoying swapping would be when my proposed implementation would make the swapping impossible. And I can't really care when I want it exclusionary.

Ok, I tried to have an honest conversation with you, but all I see is a condescending tone and someone who twists the meaning of my words.

You're implying that by explaining why I gave my opinion I'm trying to EXCLUDE the others? WTF man??
Since YOU replied to MY opinion, all I did was counter reply from MY point of view. But all you did is react like I attacked you?

You also completely ignored the part where I explain WHY it's not convenient to switch classes, so good job at deflecting.

I already got a bad vibe on you some time ago, you talk like a politician or, at best, like an attorney at law, and that's not a compliment.
Talking with you is time wasted.

Now feel free to have your last word to "win" the argument, since it's all you seem interested in. Cheers.

 

[theFlu]

You're implying that by explaining why I gave my opinion I'm trying to EXCLUDE the others? WTF man??

Not trying, you are; by making any statement about "the general playerbase", you're talking about something like 90% and excluding the rest. By definition, from the generality. Do realize that there are necessary forms of exclusion, it's not a dirty word.

Since YOU replied to MY opinion, all I did was counter reply from MY point of view.

I still don't know if I've even heard Your opinion of this. All I've heard is "the general player likes this or that lazy thing". I've replied to such, but you seem to take it personally? Are you just phrasing your tastes as the general tastes then?

You also completely ignored the part where I explain WHY it's not convenient to switch classes, so good job at deflecting.

I ... did? I literally agreed it's inconvenient, and said it'd be nice to do the swapping later on in a game where you have enough skills for a double spec. What else did I not react to with appropriate respect?

Now feel free to have your last word to "win" the argument, since it's all you seem interested in.

I don't need to win an argument, but I'd like to understand one ... are you talking about the lazy general players, or yourself? I might be polite to someone who's present, but I have no chill towards imaginary ambiguous human shields.

 

[Adam the Waster]

If i understand this correctly. Im thinking like something like fallout 76 were you use your stats to basicly solve a problem. Like say level 6 intelligence you use it to fix a power pannel or something.

 

[ALEXZANDER]

If i understand this correctly. Im thinking like something like fallout 76 were you use your stats to basicly solve a problem. Like say level 6 intelligence you use it to fix a power pannel or something.

In fallout series it fits well because they are pure RPG with survival elements where u meet lots of various NPCs!

 

[Jost Amman]

If i understand this correctly. Im thinking like something like fallout 76 were you use your stats to basicly solve a problem. Like say level 6 intelligence you use it to fix a power pannel or something.

Yeah, and my idea for OP is that you can make those jobs doable by different builds even if ONE of them will have it easier.

Example: in one job you have auto turrets shooting at you, so you need to have a special electronics skill to disable them, OR, you're a brute with heavy armor, so you push through and heal yourself several times until you get to the "other side".