New Crafting System Exploration

[DM Elessar]

For several months there may have been some rumours regarding UTT2 changing our current crafting system, to a version that will allow characters to harvest resources, as opposed to finding them randomly, and one where crafting skill will be gained slowly by practicing the trade, rather than using skill points on when gaining character levels to gain mastery.

Some of the different major crafting skills we are looking to add are: Weapons, Armor, Tailoring, Bowyer, Herbalism, Jewelry. Some of the different minor crafting skills would be: Mining, Blacksmithing/Smelting, Gem-cutting, Leather-working, Fletching.

So far, we have just started looking at three different systems:

CNR: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Scripts.Detail&id=340

Ambrosia: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Scripts.Detail&id=98

Abigail's: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Scripts.Detail&id=2281

We are hoping that some of our player base may have experience in any of these systems and could share the general pluses and minuses of each. Also, if you know of other public crafting systems that may be available for us to look at, please bring those to our attention as well.

I need to emphasize here, we do not wish to make this thread a discussion of: crafting resources we will use, recipes, types of items, placement of resources, enchantment power/balance, item descriptions, or any of the minor details. These are things we already have a good idea of how we want to implement. What we would like assistance with, is actual experience in these other systems that may be help in choosing the right crafting engine for our server, that we can customize to our unique setting.

Please try to stay on topic here, to make it as constructive for the Admin and Dev's as possible, at least in this thread.

[Kyle Morgan]

I have made some experiences with different crafting systems on other servers. I guess it was Ambrosia engine, but i can't say for certain what was used. I think the major problem with using a fresh crafting engine is, that you need lots of modifications for a mod to provide the resources (trees for lumberjacks, silver veins for miners etc.). Such changes mean really a lot of work until you can use the new crafting system.

Personally i am happy as long there is any system to use. I can adapt quite easily. :)

I would expect lesser workload in using the existing system and provide more varieties e. (http://forums.wireplay.co.uk/showpost.php?p=3301963&postcount=10) g. (http://forums.wireplay.co.uk/showpost.php?p=3304818&postcount=23).
I am of course not familiar with the current used scripts, but i can offer to have a look at them and do modifications.

Unfortunately your links provide little information themself and need indeed someone who has used them. Especially of the least one i have no idea what to expect.

[vulpex]

I have used Abigails one. It was there modified for epic play, i have impression it is originally quite low on magic. It has quite a lot ingredients and work needed to get things done, getting it to work might be major work. But admittedly it is fun stuff to play if you have time to spare.
If someone has plenty of time to get such crafting system work in UTT go for it. But i have no idea how much work it actually would be.

[DM_Morgoth]

I have only been playing with the CNR; I liked it because it is slow progress and you need many ingredients to create something. I think a slow progress crafting system is what we should look for in MERP, it should match the lvl progress.

//Just a thought as a player.

//JO

[SpymasterGend]

I have experience only with CNR. I enjoyed it, but I think there are probably a large number of things to look at, for this server, in terms of balance and deployment.

Each recipe, I believe, has a crafting experience payoff and a standard xp payoff, at least until that recipe can be completed with no chance of failure. Typically, the payoff is based on somewhat arbitrary "difficulty" of the recipe itself--e.g., polar bear pelts are harder to cure, tan, and work than, say, rat pelts. If the resources for a given recipe are plentiful, though, progress in that craft (and attendant standard xp) can be very rapid, especially if it's a "harder" recipe. Lower chance of success yields higher payoff. So, if resources for a hard recipe are readily available, expect crafters to challenge themselves with it--and progress quickly. You might also see characters who are ill-suited for a craft based on their abilities (recipe difficulty also takes into account ability scores) take it up, since the extra challenge produces more xp. Oh, and the xp payoff is entirely independent, as far as I know, of the character level--could be a way to fill activity for those chars in tough level-quest situations, but easily exploited as well.

That said, I like the CNR generally, and I believe it's generally pretty low magic output. That would depend, obviously, as well. In terms of quality of magic, it depends mostly on the recipes available. In terms of quantity, it depends more on resources. Enchanting craft, if used, depends on a couple of key products. But for anyone to take it up seriously as a craft those resources would need to be at least somewhat available.

In short, I like CNR, but in a world where the play-balance, magic and economy is already pretty finely tuned, it's going to to introduce a big steaming pile of disequilibrium. And balancing it is a question of resource deployments, experience payoffs, and individual recipes as well. To a degree, I guess, on how easy the crafting stations are to access. Oh. And I hadn't thought until just now of resource availability across the good-evil spectrum. Though I'm not at all sure Tolkien envisioned a black market in the West for Haradrim palm oil, or in the South for Hobbiton honey. Might make for fun rp, though.

Just some quick thoughts there, probably stuff you already know--most of my experience with CNR has been Tailoring (inc. leather), Cooking, and Gemcutting, but I've dabbled pretty much across the board. That's actually one of the things that makes CNR fun--recipes going across crafts. For example, you're a tailor and want to make studded leather, you either need someone else to make studs for you, or you start learning some smelting and tinkering on your own. Can result in some rather developed player-to-player trade and barter as well. Which would probably be a good thing--our players don't have much economic interaction with each other at this point, at least as far as I've seen.

So, having said there's a lot to consider, there's also that nagging thought floating around my head. Cold War's over, capitalism won, free markets rule. You can always deploy a crafting system and adjust it on the fly, seeing what players do with it. But this, I think, would really just transfer work from up-front and offline time to online time. Time when you'll probably be fixing as many bugs as exploits. So, I appreciate the thread and the opportunity to lay these things out in advance.

Hope any of that rambling helped.

[Golodh]

What the above-mentioned crafting systems have in common is that all crafting recipies are unlocked *automatically* upon reaching the appropriate level in a certain craft. This means that progress is predictable, un-exciting, and wholly dependent on grinding away at a craft. It can be spiced up though.

For that reason I would like to draw attention to an aspect found in yet another crafting system: the system that's currently in use on Aertheca (See here (http://www.aertheca.com/mediawiki/index.php5?title=Crafting_Guide))

I'm not proposing to adopt it wholesale since it's not available as code in the NWN vault, but I propose that its unique distinguishing feature is adopted.

The distinguishing feature of Aertheca's crafting system is the concept of a "crafting recipe" (termed "blueprint" on Aertheca). A "blueprint" is a scroll that, once "used" on a "crafting book" permanently unlocks a specific crafting recipe for a character. The "crafting book" lists which recipies are known; empty crafting books are available in stores.

Blueprints can be traded like any other item. The basic ones (e.g. refining ores to produce bronze, copper, and iron ingots, basic weaponry) are available from shops, but the more advanced ones (steel, mithril, adamant and superior weaponry, various potions) are only available as (rare) drops. Only when a recipe is known will a crafter know with certainty what ingredients go into a specific item. Blueprints can't be copied from crafting-book to crafting book, or from crafting-book to scroll. They are not transferable.

This has several results:
- sometimes a lucky PC can stumble upon a blueprint that would allow it to make (modulo skill checks etc.) something an experienced crafter without that particular blueprint cannot
- the more sought-after "blueprints" can be fantastically valuable; more so than the produce they allow one to make
- a competent crafting character represents a huge investment in time and effort which will not easily be abandoned for a new character.

Another result is that the Aertheca server in some respects resembles a big Easter-egg hunt, which is very entertaining.

[SpymasterGend]

Goodness! Discovering and unlocking recipes...that's brilliant! Sounds dangerously close to scripting persistent storage or journal, but I like it!

Oh, and for CNR at least, recipes are unlocked not just by crafting level, but crafting capability (i.e., that same combination of craft level and ability scores I mentioned above). Seems a little strange that you would learn new recipes (for Food crafting, for example) just because a certain ability (like CON, for most Food crafting) is high, or even buffed. But that's the way it works. At least "out of the box."

Cheers.

[SirPrice]

I've played on Aertheca as well, and the crafting system is a big plus there.

However it's based on skillpoints, therefore favouring wizards and rogues with their many skillpoints. But if you can figure out a way to be independent on skillpoints and have learnable recipes that'd be great ;)

[MilouOpo]

Would it be possible to tune crafts according Middle Earth setting in any way?

Eg. metal & stone work progression easier for dwarves, wood crafts easier for (wood)elves & druedain, jewelry (specially "enchanted" or magical) for noldor(elves)?

I personally would find it extremely odd if dunlendings started to be better blacksmiths than dwarves or hobbits better at making "magical" jewelry than noldor(elves).

In addition I feel that some amount of knowledge of magic would be needed to create those items that have inherit "magical" abilities (rings / necklaces). Sharp swords imdued with various mixtures of metals etc would be totally different thing... Right?

*throws few pieces of hard earned copper to the pile*

[Golodh]

@Sirprice

Yes, the Aertheca crafting system makes substantial use of skill-points, as described in the link I posted. Practically each craft has its own non-standard, craft-specific skill associated with it.

Skillpoints in a craft are only part of the equation however. There are skill checks on e.g. intelligence, strength, and dexterity that play a role and then there is crafting experience.

And yes, rogues have an edge when it comes to learning crafts because they can allocate more skill-points than, say, a fighter. And mages have an edge because they have naturally high INT stats (used in most crafting checks), and by consequence a fair number of skill points too.

Neither condition strikes me as particularly unreasonable though, since fighters tend to be, well, strong but fairly dumb and not very agile (correctly reflected in low INT and DEX stats and high STR and CON stats). If they were good at learning things they generally wouldn't be fighters. They would be rogues. If ones wishes to build a smart fighter, one can always increase the INT stat at the expense of CON and STR.

Notwithstanding that, even fighters can spare 1 skill point per level to learn e.g. prospecting and/or smithing, so that even fighters can (by dint of much effort) master a trade, but will generally not be able to excel at two. In addition, having a fighter know how to brew potions, distill essences out of roots and flowers, or to cut and polish gems would be anomalous to say the least.

In addition, it seems reasonable that a low-level mage who specializes in, say, potion brewing, gem-cutting, or jewelry crafting should be able to be far more proficient at that than a high-level fighter.

This is one of the things I dislike about CNR: it's much less intimately tied to the _characteristics_ of your character than on how much play time you make your character put into crafting.

Now I'm aware that setting up non-standard skills takes a fair amount of work, so I'm not sure if that part of the set-up will appeal. Especially if you want to apply it on top of CNR or something else.

What might be an idea though is to add
- a race-dependent bonus (e.g. dwarves having a natural edge in smithing, crafting jewelry, and mining but having a negative bonus when it comes to potioneering or woodworking; elves have an edge in potion brewing and gem-cutting, Men are equally good at everything but have no special aptitude for anything, Halflings have an edge in wood-working and jewel-crafting but fare poorly at mining and potioneering)
- a profession-dependent bonus (Wizards have a substantial edge in potion brewing and extracting essences from plants and suchlike but aren't so great at mining, fighters have an edge when it comes to mining but do poorly at alchemy, rangers have an edge in extracting essences ann wood-working, etc.)

As I see it, this would make a PC's crafting ability much more tied in with its general characteristics, and less with the amount of time a player invests in grinding away at crafting. I think this would make characters more consistent and credible.

[the-small-print]

I know this isn't strictly on-topic, but I think a system that did not favour crafting skill points, or one that gave skill points as part of the bonus for creating items would be preferable.

There is always conflict between the game engine and roleplay, but I totally disagree with Golodh's evaluation of the fighter class-stereotype. A good fighter is not stupid, or he would be fairly useless, except in big formations. To say that he would be a rogue otherwise misses something fairly obvious about the build balance; I don't know if you've ever met any blacksmiths, but they tend to be a little on the bulky side, and if any style of fighting could be applied to your typical smith, it would not be sneak-attacks with a short sword.

Also, the dependence on skill points would have an obvious drawback for dwarves, who would have to sacrifice their 'dwarfish' traits - strength, constitution etc. in favour of higher than usual intelligence because the skill points of their favoured classes is so low. Yes, dwarves were intelligent, but with a whopping two base skill points, your average fighter dwarf is going to have to shell out more ability points than most on INT to be half as effective as say, a human rogue.

Addressing the point about fighters grinding gems etc., aside from my above comments about class stereotypes being unhelpful, again, where would that leave dwarves? A lot of craft is learned through your physical memory, and *anyone* hoping to be a competent melee class must have a good level of physical intelligence, or they would die, even barbarians. (though I discount ologs from this; being big and scary, and wielding a weapon bigger than your average human has a lot to do with their fighting ability, along with thick skin and a lack of pain receptors).

An ideal system would, I believe have about the same balance of skill points attributed to skills that will help you with combat, which is after all what the game engine is based about, and a separate lot of skills, much more even (though still affected by abilities and race), exclusively for Roleplay stats; persuade, bluff, perform (for non-bards) etc. I wouldn't bother proposing this just now, but it can be done, and maybe it would be worth thinking about in the future, once some of the more immediate issues are resolved.

[DM Elessar]

As good as the Aertheca system sounds, the requirement of skill points to make it function may be a deal-ender for us. Would prefer to find a system, where your class level, and the abilities you get from your class (namely skill points), are not so closely tied to the crafting system. I have seen several systems that allow the character to advance high in a crafting skill, without gaining any class experience at all. In such systems, you could have a true crafter/merchant character that does not need to adventure, but spends time crafting. They would need to purchase and barter raw components many times, but for some there is an appeal to that sort of rp.

[MilouOpo]

Skill points, feats, BAB, spells. Those are all things that represent character's time consumption on training and the preference on that training. As I see it at least. In perfect game engine any combinations (within game world limitations) would be available. ...but in the world of UTT2 we are tied to use NWN.

Warriors tend to have big amounts of feats where other characters have bigger amount of skillpoints. Matter of class choise and ability point allocation. Many fighters can not be stupid nor non-agile, if they want to study any more complex fighting techniques (expertise, improved knockdown, disarm or two weapon fighting etc). Some choose to train only their biceps and pecks where they at the same time choose more barbarisque road. I think these choises should somehow reflect the inherit ability or talent to learn crafts.

With muscles one can bash certainly harder than one without them, but without an idea or mind behind the muscle, the whole process is meaningless.

Ps.
I can not see such situation where eg. dwarven fighter should feel any less dwarvish if he doesn't take maximum strenght and thus sacrifises few points to intelligence. That would only represent his capabilities to learn and exel in more complex tasks (at ones that need more than just brute power).

Pps.
So in conclusion, an ideal system in my opinion would be one that takes skillpoints, abilities, race and training into account. If skill points allocated for crafts could be separated from the ones allocated to other skills it would nice but not very realistic to be honest. I like the idea of non-adventuring crafters with low levels, but high professional competence. But, that enabled it could lead to a mindless troll that just has beaten the same anvil for seven decades and is one of the most skilled craftsmen in Arda.

I am making edgy examples, but only to enlight the idea behind my words. :)

[SpymasterGend]

I agree generally on dissociating crafting ability from skill points. Class and skill points are engine-based, traits of a character as defining his role and occupation inside the restrictions of that engine. Since crafting as we're contemplating it is outside the engine, it shouldn't depend on that at all.

I believe it makes sense to tie crafting to race and abilities, which are more world-based character traits than engine-based, but primarily to crafting experience. In terms of abilities, for example, it is uncommon but not unheard of for, say, an NFL lineman to do needlepoint. And if dwarves are "the best smiths" that's not to say that human, elven, hobbit or other smiths aren't good, and possibly even better than some dwarven smiths. Just that on average, dwarven smiths end up better at it, and, possibly, that the very best dwarven smiths are without peer. But certainly you'd expect an experienced human smith to be more proficient than a novice dwarf, right?

Whether that's coded to race or merely a result of racial ability bonuses and the links between abilities and certain crafts is a subject for discussion, as well as evaluation in terms of ease of implentation.

Whether the crafting system feeds back into the engine-based system of class and XP is a more intriguing question, really. Is XP a measure of training and practice in a field solely, or is it a measure as well of "life experience"? Quest rewards generally, by their very existence, sort of indicate the latter. Rewards for killing things and disarming traps sort of indicate the former.

And what of classes and levels, anyway? Our world does not have a training regimen, where you must take some special effort or time to level up. The engine forces arbitrary level boundaries and a class chosen at each boundary, but it's also entirely reasonable, at any given point in time, to blur those arbitrary boundaries in your character conception and say, "My name is Popeye. I am what I am." Which is to say, "My classes and levels give me certain capabilities, and taken altogether, it's those capabiltiies that define what I do and what I am, not those arbitrary levels and labels."

Sorry, that turned a bit philosophical. My point I guess is that if you do abstract your character from the engine-arbitrary class and level system in terms of concept and rp, you will probably be all for XP rewards from crafting as "life experience". In terms of play balance, as noted above, I think that does need to be pretty finely tuned, through the system itself and through resource availability, etc. A smith who only smiths, and has customers acquire the components for his works, should not progress quickly in engine terms of class and level, right?

Anyway, I appreciate the further chance to ramble. I know I mentioned no alternate crafting system in this post, but I do think this thread is ideal for establishing the parameters of what we want from a crafting system, if that's not already set in stone. Those parameters, coupled with technical evaluation of adaptability of existing systems, ought to produce the best results.

[the-small-print]

I think what's being proposed is Crafting XP; as I understand it, XP which does not add to your overall level, but is solely useful in your progression as a crafter. So you could craft for years and not move past lvl 1, but be an excellent [insert name of craft here].

As for dwarves, I understand that Aule made them in his own image; naturally excellent and apt at creating things; single-mindedly focused on skill of creation and on possession of clever and beautiful treasures. In answer to your hypothetical point about the best human smiths being better than a dwarven novice, I would imagine the answer is 'Yes, but not for long"

[SpymasterGend]

Right. I understand the separate system of crafting experience and crafting levels. CNR, as I mentioned, feeds normal XP back, as does our current system. So, my point was to encourage discussion--is that normal xp a good thing? And if so, at what point is it too much of a good thing?

[Kyle Morgan]

In my opinion xp have just one purpose: Motivation.

Reward a crafter with normal xp and the motivation is to advance in general power and development.
Reward with crafting experience and the motivation will be to advance in crafting power and development.

In the current system my dwarven smith has done a lot of crafting and in overall performance may have gained 1/20 of his overall xp through crafting. For me the xp reward was not working as motivation or else i might have sold most of his work to local peddlers.

For crafting xp to be a motivation they should have some direct impact on crafting essentials like unlocking recipes or raising crafting skill ranks.

[Golodh]

There never was any question of adopting Aertheca's crafting system wholesale. The reason is that it's not on the vault, and Aerthca isn't likely to hand over the code. What was proposed is the adoption of a specific element of this system: blueprints.

The adoption of an element of Aertheca's crafting system doesn't necessarily require you to implement craft-specific skills. That all depends on how you implement the roll for crafting success. If you don't code that roll to include craft-specific skills, the craft-specific skills don't enter the picture.

As long as you're prepared to custom-code the success-roll, it's completely up for grabs what skills, traits play a role. And as put forward by various posters, you can make racial characteristics contribute to crafting success too.

[DM_Morgoth]

Right. I understand the separate system of crafting experience and crafting levels. CNR, as I mentioned, feeds normal XP back, as does our current system. So, my point was to encourage discussion--is that normal xp a good thing? And if so, at what point is it too much of a good thing?

Note: That can be turned of very easy in CNR