Only one character slot? (Please answer poll)

@Grayhawk
but thats not a "slot" problem, thats a system Problem in the existing UO is nearly no item loss and its impossible to be a sucsessful smith/miner without a fightchar.. Back in the days it was MUCH easyer to be a 7GM crafter... but still the most people where not self sufficent...


yea.. i remember Joop.. hehe

 

Actually it is a difference.
There will be a time where you maxed out something and where it perhaps won't make any difference if you put another hour into your first character or not; and then you start the second character and he will be maxed out in something and you start the third and so on. After a while alot of people have alot of different characters with different specializations and from there on no one needs anyone anymore since everyone can do everything by himself.
From my point of view that kills the economy and the atmosphere in every RPG game and especially how the people interact with other people.
Think about it!

 

does everyone who posts here ignore the fact that multiaccounting is REALLY common in MMO's since they came out? ...

players have multiple... Guilds have crafting accounts... and so on.. u need other ways to make the econemy good.. except just "1 slot servers" ..

the days of 16 year old players without money, or monthly charges of 20$ are over. And the acceptance of "pay to play" is extremely high today.

 

That makes the assumption that the limiting factor is level/skill points cap but RG has said that he wants to limit people not by level cap but by giving them so many options that you couldn't possibly get time to take them all.

Think Path of exile's skill tree rather than the 8 skills? in what 4 characters in Diablo 3

 

For me one character slot is absolutely fine, since I want to play myself in SotA and not just a role.

I know, multiple characters per account is common since old Diablo times. But in many RPGs and MMOs I played, I don't really like the possibilities of multiple characters, since players tend to create characters, that are confined to specific roles (one armorer for armor crafting, one jeweler for amulets, one storage character for keeping the loot of the other characters, one asocial character for PKing, etc. etc. etc.). I know it's not an exploit, but for me it feels like cheating to create support characters for your main character, that can never be on the map at the same time, but still interact with each other all the time. It nullifies the consequences of your acting a bit, when you know, that you have several other characters, that can act completely different (as an example: why should you care for the consequences of your PKing character, when you can switch to your goody Paladin guy in a second). And I don't think, that it's good for the economy, when each player has several crafting characters for different tasks, that can fulfill most of the players needs.

With this said, I support the plans of Lord British for one character per account, that can retrain and change his specifications during the game (not suddenly, off course).

But if multiple characters on one account would be allowed, I'd like to see the interaction between this characters completely prohibited (no living in the same house, no mailing/sending items to other account characters (difficult to achieve, since players may send their items/gold, etc. to another player, that sends it to another character of your account), no shared storage, etc.).

And if someone really wants to play multiple characters, no one can stop him from creating multiple accounts.

Cheers,
Andreas

 

One of the alluring story points of this game from a role-playing perspective is that you are forced to make choices. Choices that matter. Open some doors, and close others. Being one thing means you'll never be something else. I will always find it more interesting to interact with players of this type than the 6 clones of John Doe who are only trying to tweak the gameplay mechanics to get ahead and "do everything" in the game.

I support this game not because it caters to every taste but because it has a story and a perspective on how a roleplaying game can be played. For those of you who are soooo strident about multi-accounts, as Bulveigh said, there are literally dozens of games out there for you to play. If not just going back to play UO. Have fun!

 

i hope i get you right.. but i am not "strident" about multiaccounting... all i say is: 1slot will not solve the issues pointed out here...

 

When I read this my first instinct was to like it as I agree with most, but I very much do *not* agree with the bolded part. I want EVERYONE to play this game, making it the most successful game ever, but I want it to be the game the designers want to make, for the reasons they want to make it that way.

There are many good reasons for multiple character slots, and I am confident that RG and the team know them, and yet he still believes that for THIS game it may be best to have a single character. And he's already said not everyone on the team agrees with that idea! So I would hope that if it is decided that the devs choose to make, at least, this first episode with a single character slot that it does not drive people away; I hope they trust the team and give it a try and see if maybe it's not as bad as they feared. And if it is, the devs can always change it with a patch, or perhaps giving another slot with the second episode. And if the devs just decide that's the way it's going to be, and the 'must-have-multis' people have tried the game and just feel there is something crucial missing because of that, then I would wish them well in playing other games.

 

There are a lot of things in this game that could be said about. I'm hoping you're wrong.

Multi-characters removes some of the attachment to a character. To your story in the world. You play the evil guy over here, and do all the evil options. And play the good guy over here and play all the good options. But they end up feeling 2 dimensional and you never really have to live with the consequences because the other guy is going to go do the other thing.

Yes, people could buy a second copy of the game, and do it that way. But it's obvious at that point that it's not the intent of the game. When you create multiple character slots, what I said above becomes the default way to play the game in people's minds. It's a very subtle design decision that has a very large impact on a game about choices, virtues and exploring who 'you' are through it.

 

@Phraedicon: My point was not to push people away from this game - but to say that for those who really want the multi account experience - there are many, many ways to satisfy it. They can play those that way and SoTA a different way. For those of us who support single character? How many other MMO's take this approach? Limited options.

It's also unrealistic to think that everyone would want to play this game. Taking a stand on any particular issue by the devs is going to disgruntle some - maybe to the point of even deciding not to play. However, I'm pretty sure that the participants in this forum are not going to be deterred by anything....

 

This is a great discussion with a lot of good points!

Here is what it boils down to for me

• In the end, you can't stop Multi-Accounting. People will have multiple character if they really want them.
• Start the game with 1 slot for the persistant online world.
• Allow people to buy an additional slots, if they choose, so they don't have to Multi-Account.

I have no problem paying more for additional accounts / slot. Those who truly want to play this game would still do so if the game had a monthly fee. Paying once for an addition account or character slot would still be less than paying a monthly fee for a few months.

 

The 1 character per account model doesn't change this.
In fact, as soon as someone decides that having a second character is worth more than $60, then they get access to multiple accounts, which means *simultaneous* connection.

The question basically goes from "Do I want to spend $60 for multiple accounts?" to "Do I want so spend $60 for multiple characters?".
For people who really value playing multiple characters, this gives them multiple accounts "for free". (cue semi-dramatic music).

 

@Thoreandan - I think that is a good summary.

Justifying a slot purchase can over come any costs on Portalarium's side for data storage for the new character and related assets, yet still be cheaper than buying a new copy of the game. It also decreases the chances of people just making a bunch of characters just for griefing: well unless they are really motivated to pay extra for it.

One thing is that I think you would have to allow all characters on one account access to bought items which right now would be houses/deeds, but may expand to however they handle real money stuff in-game. In essence they could just give themselves access to the house and items via permission anyway. I am not opposed this, but its something people would expect if they dropped a large sum for a deed: even if that ends up only being for KS and SOTA pre-release investors.

I definitely think any multiple character slot system should not allow more than 1 character to be played at the same time. That should require multiple copies of the game. In EVE Online only one character can train a skill at any one time even though you have multiple slots. To train to characters at the same time you need 2 differently accounts at a monthly fee. That cost is extreme, but I think for a game like SOTA requiring a second copy is fair.

 

And how exactly do you propose to do this in a non-subscription based game with a design that requires people who want multiple characters to have multiple accounts?

 

If they allow multiple character slots on one account then they will know when you are logged into to an online mode and not allow you to login a second time. That is a pretty simple concept and is even used on websites. If you want to play 2 character at the same time then you would need a new copy of the game which would allow you to create a second account.

I am sure there will be some sort of CD key for registering your game with the persistent world which would be linked to your online account. Obviously none of this would matter for DRM-free single player offline.

 

I think we might be miscommunicating here.
To me, your reply can be rephrased as "No proposal, besides change the design".

 

I voted for more then one character slot. Although actually not really needed it would come in handy for role playing. That you can tune different characters for different roles. Although you could do it with one character of course.

 

I would prefer only one character slot for online. But multiple for single player, depending on the games mechanisms which i am unaware of atm (skill points etc). But if what I'm thinking is near its mark then having multiple slots on single player would allow for experimentation. In any case i think multiplayer should remain with one slot since this will create a much more immersive world. -imagine after a year you come back to the game, and can still recognize some people-

 

Definitely more than one slot. I wish to have an evil character and a good character.

Also, I am not yet sure how the skill mechanics will work, will we be able to master every single skill in the game on a single character? If so then two slots (just for evil and good) would be sufficient. However, if we are limited to what you character can become (ie: cannot be master of every skill under the sun) then I very much want to create a fighter, a mage, an artisan, a theif etc etc.

Part of the fun in UO was creating multiple characters with different backstories and skill sets.

 

I'm for the one character slot.
But if you have to have another then I agree, allow people to buy additional slots.
And yes they should all be able to be online at the same time.
These slots should also have some parental controls.
And for those with multiple accounts it would be nice to see a reputation for both their character and their account.
So if character 1 is good and character 2 is bad then at least I can tell the account is like neutral.
Just in case their good character is a spy to get their evil character some work or something.