Only one character slot? (Please answer poll)

Well, you are in the majority. What i read is, that most peple want the single character. That will be the reason, that the game most likely will aswell have only one character slot in the online part. Well people like me who want to test around with characters, would have to use the single player part of the game. I hope, this will at least have multiple slots. But i couldn't imagine something other for single player.

 

Honestly I don't think it would be a bad thing to have only one character since they are breaking up the skill points between combat and crafting. We still can't become masters of everything, but we will most likely be able to do more than we did on a single character in UO for example.

 

I can live with a single character slot. I'm more unhappy about one race, but that's a different thread.

 

Maybe in one of the next few episodes there could be some story-line scenario that can change our nature from humanity to something different completely.

Since the character is supposed to be you I can see why human would be the only race for now. However I don't see why we have to stay that way since we are immortals. if there was something that can corrupt our nature to become more animal-like, or bind our humanity to something more elegant to become angelic or something elf-like. who knows... that would be something for a different thread!

 

great comments everyone! thanks for the responses, i expected to come back tonight and see a couple flames and hope for maybe one or two good comments. this shows me this game already has a great foundation of players waiting to get started!

from the comments i am gathering that if it were to be a single character game that we will be able to take on more than the role of simply a crafter or a tamer which makes me happy.

i understand one person cant nor should be able to do everything, but hopefully if we are restricted to one we can do enough to have fun and switch up our daily activities. one of the things i loved most about UO was the freedom to do anything and it was such an expansive world that if you worked hard enough at leveling your characters you could spend a whole week playing and not do the same thing twice.

i can't think of any other game or in real life that i have spent hours running around looking at vendors shopping for items and provoking or taming stuff in between to level up.

 

@stvnkrs 10 : Your post is garbage ! Your gonna get one character and love it !! NO ALTS FOR YOU !!

Feel better now?

 

I like the single character option. It definitely sets SOTA apart from most MMOs.

 

lol +1 for Gunga Din!

 

If they ever release a new playable race, I suspect they'll allow extra character slots at that point. So while I also support the single character limit, it can become impractical and limiting when other design choices come into play -- especially when it comes to roleplaying. Or, just buy a new account but that's cumbersome.

 

talking as a player who had 3 accounts and 15 characters in UO im all for a single character, in uo i was 100% self sufficient and never traded with anyone coz i could play every role and multi account with scripts i played solo 80% of the time and if lots of people are doing that it kills community. we need one character so people like me are forced to interact with other players and contribute to the games economy.

 

Two Words. Siege Perilous.

 

Single character all the way for me. I want to dedicate my time on this one single avatar I play as myself. It's good for the economy as well.

 

I like the one character idea, as long as you have a sliding skill/job tree like in UO and don't have to delete your character and start over if you change your mind or choose poorly and gimp your selfe.

I've been playing hardcore Diablo 3 lately and just having one character on my account at a time (when he dies I re-roll) and found that it seems way more immersive and personal. Normaly I'm an altaholic and have trouble focusing on one toon for too long before getting distracted and it's hard to really progress when you are juggling characters.

 

Personally, I have feelings for and against the single character idea, then I have my own opinion so here goes

For:
Sometimes you can spend so much time with alts that you never actually get anywhere.

Works well with singleplayer offline, gives you that room to breath.

Against:
I'm a roleplayer, I assume roles, not just one, and also as a GM, it makes life difficult if I cant assume another role for the good of the story. Am I to be trapped playing the knight commander forever, or will I get the chance to play one of the squires secretly on occasion to further the storyline?

Botters have to buy other accounts anyway so that's a zero impact, and they will find a way to script anyway, they always do.

I don't really want my character to be butcher, baker and candlestick maker, i'd very much rather have a character as a lowly serf do that, rather than my knightly self. In UO, even with all the alts possible (7 at one point i think, maybe more) you could spend your whole life creating every different type of character, but in all honesty, if that's what you want to do, should anyone stop you? If you want to play an online game to be completely self sufficient, that should be seen as admirable rather than reclusive. I had a 7xgm crafter, but I didn't craft everything i needed, I bought the majority of it from other crafters, and crafted a lot for my guild.

Oh yeah, and I'm a roleplayer, I assume roles, didnt say that before did I? just making sure I voiced it loudly enough I don't really play online games to be me in another universe, my body is too limited for that, i'd very much rather play my fantasy self in his varying different flavours: the Knight, the Cleric, the Artisan, the Sage, the Sailor, but not necessarily the same person. Good luck hiding your avatar status if you are incredibly multi skilled hehe.

That's my 1gp worth

Azaran/Dargalin.

 

i have a multiple personality disorder so i neeeeeeeed more than one character but only want one acc.

lol no but in all seriousness i do think we need the option to have more than one character

 

I see many pros to the single character side of things, but for the sake of argument, here are some reasons why I think multiple characters should be considered:

Game longevity / replayability - No game out there can keep you online and playing for 6+ months solely on the same character. Say you are given a single character, and you max him out over the course of 3 months. You've smashed all the content you can, geared yourself up, bought a house. Things are looking good. Now you are either going to start getting bored, or you are going to want to try rolling a mage and playing through the game that way. You are going to want to play with a bunch of new skills you didn't have before without trashing your high level character.

Storyline options - In a game with SotA's deep decision driven storyline, you are going to want to see what happens when you choose to join forces with the evil wizard instead of vanquishing him. What happens when you accept the magic ring as a reward instead of turning it down because "justice is it's own reward?"

Just a few thoughts to think about because a single character sounds wonderful to me and many others now, but how will we feel 6 months after release?

 

If the game turns out to be even half as richly storied and detailed as advertised, I don't see how having just one character will be a problem. Be yourself, and bollocks to the other choices, just relax and play the game, know what I'm sayin'? hehe

P.S. Everybody keeps comparing this game to "UO", "WoW", and other MMOs. It's not going to be an MMO... You will only be playing with either your r/l friends or "10's to 20's" of characters live at a time, based on your social demographics... At least that's what I got from the info given out so far...

 

I think there's two things to keep in mind. It's not that people are necessarily making comparisons, its that they are talking about features they like from other games because there are features they liked and are what they feel are successful components of a game. Also things they did not like.

As far as the MMO aspect.. The most people I interact with in say LOTRO, a full blown MMORPG, at any single given time in game is 24.. and that is ultra-rare. Typically 12 max. So the ability to interact with 10's to 20's of people in the game at one time, but have of 1000's to connect with, is an MMO.. So all 1000's+ aren't all on YOUR screen at the same time, does not change the fact that you never interact with all those people in game at one time.. That is where this is innovative - it accomplishes the same thing as an MMO but its done in a way that will let us get more out of the tech, such as single server. You will have ways to talk to, connect with, interact with tens of thousands of people, and in game events bring 10-20, etc.. together at the same time.

So you can call it something else, but in essence, yeah.. its an MMO if you want to play in that mode. Its just being done a little differently. What you accomplish for in game playing of the game, will still be in essence extremely similar to other MMO's, such as WoW... except you don't have to worry about 300 people crowding out everything when in reality you just are not capable of interacting on the screen with that many people at once.

 

Well said Stile, and point taken! Yet even RG is saying this won't be an MMO, so the misnomer is kind of confusing. Maybe the industry will have to coin a new phrase for this genre? I guess whatever the game morphs into by release time, it will definitely be unique and fun

P.S. I still side with the "one character" crowd though; it just seems like a player could get so much more out of a game like this if they have a personal commitment to their very own "avatar" (i.e., we will be apt to make choices more in line with our actual personalities if the consequences are persistent).

 

I'm all for the single player as LB described it and for the same reasons. For the first 4 years of UO, I had just one char. Eventually I found the need to have more because I ran out of points to try some skills I needed.

I have a friend in UO who has a "soul stone room" and ONE CHARACTER. He worked up all those skills himself. So if he wants to go out and slay dragons, he loads up those skills and off he goes. If he wants to hop on his boat and go fishing, he loads up those skills and he's sailing the open seas. To me, this is a nice compromise. Is he self sufficient? Yes. Because he took the time to learn those skills. What is wrong with that? If I don't have any friends who play and I want to be able to have 100% of the skills, I would like the chance to experience those skills for myself.