Ancient Right of Passage Requirments Change

[Spyrioyo]

Nope. That elial does not work anymore. The only Elial that should be used for ARoP should be in the rift. Bipeds should not be able to help out with a dragon only questline. Certainly considering the lore around it and the dragons in general. RoP and ARoP are something very personal to dragons and by lore, they don't particularly like bipeds sniffing around in their affairs nor are they very open about it with non-dragons. (mind you this is from the game lore only)

I'll agree that I miss the lore from the old RoP and ARoP. Everything now is pretty much in the same places so it feels like you don't need to do much to get to it and get it done. It makes both questlines seem very short and not as grand as they should be.

Despite this, I am still not in favor of changing any requirements to the ARoP. Add lore to the RoP/ARoP questlines and spread out the mobs again so players have to do some travel and exploration. I'll agree to that, but not the requirement changes.

I wish to know your reasons for why it shouldn't be changed.

[meepsa]

I wish to know your reasons for why it shouldn't be changed.

I think it's been stated enough times already:

"It's not the ARoP that's broken, so there's no need to fix it"

which actually is pretty much my sentiment too, the only thing I'm for is a lvl 80 craft requirement tbh.

[Arzel Rashemi]

I wish to know your reasons for why it shouldn't be changed.

I am still waiting for your reasons why it needs to be changed. You started this thread and as the OP, the chore falls to you to give better reasons than merely, "becuase i think its too easy." As the OP the ball is in your court to give substance and weight to explain why and where there are imbalances in the ARoP requirements that make this change necessary. So far all we hear you saying is that you want change for changes sake. The changes you want won't improve or enhance the ARoP in any significant way. Other posters to this thread have already said the same reasons i would as to why not to change the ARoP requirements including a sucessful counter argument to your only given reason why this change would make any sense. That being that changing the ARoP requirements would not change players rushing to and through it and then quitting, because that has little to do with requirements and more to do with that player's attitude. A reason not to change it that you fully agreed with and then decided to ignore when you said you were going to work on a new set of requirements. So you took a majority of the feedback here that you said you were open to, and threw it back into the faces of those who kindly gave it to you and you choose not to listen to it. That is not being open to feedback or the reasoning of others. No matter what reasons we give, you'll want what you want regardless of what reasons we give you, and your response now is only to say to your fellow players that they need to explain their reasons why this change shouldn't happen when they collectively have already done so.

TL;DR - you do not want a proper discussion on this. You want your ideas to happen as you want them to happen regardless of the input and feedback of your fellow players. Any reasons and opinions that I or anyone else could and have given won't and hasn't been enough for you.

[Spyrioyo]

I am still waiting for your reasons why it needs to be changed. You started this thread and as the OP, the chore falls to you to give better reasons than merely, "becuase i think its too easy." As the OP the ball is in your court to give substance and weight to explain why and where there are imbalances in the ARoP requirements that make this change necessary. So far all we hear you saying is that you want change for changes sake. The changes you want won't improve or enhance the ARoP in any significant way. Other posters to this thread have already said the same reasons i would as to why not to change the ARoP requirements including a sucessful counter argument to your only given reason why this change would make any sense. That being that changing the ARoP requirements would not change players rushing to and through it and then quitting, because that has little to do with requirements and more to do with that player's attitude. A reason not to change it that you fully agreed with and then decided to ignore when you said you were going to work on a new set of requirements. So you took a majority of the feedback here that you said you were open to, and threw it back into the faces of those who kindly gave it to you and you choose not to listen to it. That is not being open to feedback or the reasoning of others. No matter what reasons we give, you'll want what you want regardless of what reasons we give you, and your response now is only to say to your fellow players that they need to explain their reasons why this change shouldn't happen when they collectively have already done so.

TL;DR - you do not want a proper discussion on this. You want your ideas to happen as you want them to happen regardless of the input and feedback of your fellow players. Any reasons and opinions that I or anyone else could and have given won't and hasn't been enough for you.

The reason I wanted it changed was that I wanted better ARoP that represented hard work. I also thought that changing the requirements might stop power leveling and encourage more hard work. I have time and time again seen people just power level their way into 100 then do the quests. I wanted it changed so people could appreciate the hard work and thought maybe adjusting the requirements to better represent that. It seemed easy cause of the lack of requirements but before dragons were weaker and it was harder back than and that's probably why it seems easy now. The purpose of the hoard requirement is so people can have a goal and motivation to reach the max armor bonus. The day limit I reduced cause I thought it would make more sense for something closer to 3 months. I have been thinking about it and your right Arzel it won't change that people wanting to rush threw it. Changing the requirements won't fix that. I have been listening and been thinking about it. Also, I thought it didn't make sense that RoP has craft and hoard and ARoP didn't, but it doesn't matter. Most don't want a change I can see that.

I think it should be kept as 100 days and 100 Adventure. Only thing I think could be changed is maybe most IX Dragon Quests cause it makes more sense to have most of them required instead of those 3, unless there is reason why only those 3 are needed. Drain Bolt quests need a biped help almost every other one so they shouldn't be included.

[Calyndrell]

I am still of the opinion that crafting shouldn't be a requirement but after alittle brain storming i came up with an Idea that is actually fairly valid and even based within the lore

Hatchlings require an obsidian statue to complete their RoP so shouldn't adults?
So following this Idea have Adults required to build a Mithril/marble statue (or be really evil and have it be travertine).

Hatchlings also require a phylactry so why don't adults.. problem solved, they have to build a phylactry from the gem that drops from the guardian in the fiery rift. (thanks miira for that idea). Then the Statue must be presented to an altar of drulkar in the fiery rift.

Ooh forgot the phylactry needs charging.. well theres a good series of bosses in the normal rift you have to fight anyway.... maybe you have to use their corpses to get their essense.

just a quick brain storm.

[LOVWYRM]

Hey Calyndrell- thats..phantastic!!!

I sign that- sounds like a lot of additional fun!!!

[Racktor]

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the 'statue/phylactory' idea. Not because of the crafting, but because it'd make the ARoP more like a repeat of the RoP.

Right now, the ARoP's story is that the Council of Ancients has returned. You're trying to follow in Ellean's (Elian's?) footsteps as he tries to open the Rift. Now I can't remember exactly why, but I know in the end your goal is to kill Elial in revenge for what he has done to dragonkind and to prevent him from being a threat to the world once more.

In the RoP, your main goal is to become an adult because the time ripple has disrupted your growing process. You go to the pool up on the Peak of Storms to see yourself as you would be at that time normally.

From what I gather, you normally would grow to adult without the ripple. However, even without the ripple, you would achieve ancient as a sort of status. You wouldn't 'know' what you look like as ancient to model yourself off of.

I like how the ARoP is now with its lore and story. Yes, it could be a bit less 'you are the chosen one!', but it's unique and a change from the RoP. I don't want to end up doing 2 RoPs for the sake of adding in crafting to the ARoP questline.

The ARoP is meant to be an adventure and discovery questline, while the RoP is about maturing and crafting yourself to where you belong. We shouldn't model anything of the ARoP off of the RoP.

And again, I still stand by the 'dont fix what isnt broken' phrase. If we want something that's tough and completionist-esque, I'd say there should be something new rather than changing the working old.

[meepsa]

In the RoP, your main goal is to become an adult because the time ripple has disrupted your growing process. You go to the pool up on the Peak of Storms to see yourself as you would be at that time normally.

From what I gather, you normally would grow to adult without the ripple. However, even without the ripple, you would achieve ancient as a sort of status. You wouldn't 'know' what you look like as ancient to model yourself off of.

From what I always understood it was because of the dragons not being actual creatures of the prime that caused them to stop growing normally, not the time ripple, though that bit of lore has been kinda retconned to "the first dragons aren't creatures of the prime, player dragons pretty much are"

just hopping in to drop that hehe.

[Arzel Rashemi]

. I have been thinking about it and your right Arzel it won't change that people wanting to rush threw it. Changing the requirements won't fix that. I have been listening and been thinking about it. Also, I thought it didn't make sense that RoP has craft and hoard and ARoP didn't, but it doesn't matter. Most don't want a change I can see that.

I think it should be kept as 100 days and 100 Adventure. Only thing I think could be changed is maybe most IX Dragon Quests cause it makes more sense to have most of them required instead of those 3, unless there is reason why only those 3 are needed. Drain Bolt quests need a biped help almost every other one so they shouldn't be included.

ok, well I've been through that and seen it too, and yes it is frustrating when people just powerlevel to 100 like that. I think maybe tho give the new changes to perching and group xp gain at a distance a chance and see if that doesn't slow people down and fix the problem you see?

After much discussion with others, the original ARoP required you to have ability quests up to 70 or 90. So I can bend a bit on that requirement if needs be, and the craft requirement due to Calyndrell's idea because it then has a reason to exist.

Hatchlings require an obsidian statue to complete their RoP so shouldn't adults?
So following this Idea have Adults required to build a Mithril/marble statue (or be really evil and have it be travertine).

Hatchlings also require a phylactry so why don't adults.. problem solved, they have to build a phylactry from the gem that drops from the guardian in the fiery rift. (thanks miira for that idea). Then the Statue must be presented to an altar of drulkar in the fiery rift.

Ooh forgot the phylactry needs charging.. well theres a good series of bosses in the normal rift you have to fight anyway.... maybe you have to use their corpses to get their essense.

just a quick brain storm.

I love this idea! It gives a good reason for the basic dragon crafting requirements to exist as an ARoP requirement change. And it also closes up a rather major break and discontinuation in the lore for dragons. RoP makes it really clear that dragons can not ascend or grow on their own due to the effects of the gift upon them, so they need to use other means to do so. This requires items which allow their soul and essence be held within a magically imbued item (phylactry) as their body is then transmuted via an enchanted statue into the next stage of a dragon's lifecycle, and their soul/essence reintroduced into the new body. That lore breaks completely in its continuity when it comes to ancients. A similar methodology should have been done for the change from adulthood to ancient if the lore was being kept accurate and linear.

It need not necessarily be a statue and phylactry again, but a similar method that gives the same result in the lore. That the dragon soul is taken out, the body transmuted, and the dragon soul reinstated into the body.

(seriously... thinking about it, that makes all dragons dracoliches.... kinda creepy!)

[Calyndrell]

ok, well I've been through that and seen it too, and yes it is frustrating when people just powerlevel to 100 like that. I think maybe tho give the new changes to perching and group xp gain at a distance a chance and see if that doesn't slow people down and fix the problem you see?

After much discussion with others, the original ARoP required you to have ability quests up to 70 or 90. So I can bend a bit on that requirement if needs be, and the craft requirement due to Calyndrell's idea because it then has a reason to exist.



I love this idea! It gives a good reason for the basic dragon crafting requirements to exist as an ARoP requirement change. And it also closes up a rather major break and discontinuation in the lore for dragons. RoP makes it really clear that dragons can not ascend or grow on their own due to the effects of the gift upon them, so they need to use other means to do so. This requires items which allow their soul and essence be held within a magically imbued item (phylactry) as their body is then transmuted via an enchanted statue into the next stage of a dragon's lifecycle, and their soul/essence reintroduced into the new body. That lore breaks completely in its continuity when it comes to ancients. A similar methodology should have been done for the change from adulthood to ancient if the lore was being kept accurate and linear.

It need not necessarily be a statue and phylactry again, but a similar method that gives the same result in the lore. That the dragon soul is taken out, the body transmuted, and the dragon soul reinstated into the body.

(seriously... thinking about it, that makes all dragons dracoliches.... kinda creepy!)

I'd a said Draco-golems but yeah no less creepy

[Guaran]

If you want Dragons to have more feeling of accomplishment, just put all the RoP bosses back where they originally were: Selenia the Brilliant off the southwest coast of Western Deadlands. Kaa at the center of the Western Deadlands spiral. Lem in the Eastern Deadlands trenches. Shadow Dragon on Draak. And put them all at their original strengths (HP, Damage output) if they have been weakened in that respect.

ARoP I don't think needs any changing. Patch notes already mention a new title come in Delta 281 for Dragon Master crafters:

Relstaroth, the Lairshaper trainer, now offers a quest called ‘Mark of the Grand Master Dragon Crafter’. When you are 100 Lairshaper, 100 Crystalshaper and 100 Dragon Crafter you will be offered this quest to obtain the Grand Master Dragon emblem.

This is the perfect place to add something extra, like a small particle effect on the players talons. There can be 2 versions for someone who is also Ancient, of the effect. The effect is added separately from the title effect, perhaps once title is used, it spawns the appropriate effect. Then the player can change titles and still show the particle effect, because who will want to run around always as "Guaran, Master Dragon Crafter". The effect can spawn separately like the Spirit of the Rift/Focus of the Rift effects do.

See how easy that was?

[meepsa]

See how easy that was? [/COLOR]

If only haha.

From what I'm aware (and I'll be honest, I'm not -that- into the know, most of what I know just happens to be me putting 2 and 2 together and just happening to be correct) of what the game can currently handle/manage, two seperate effects based on player "race" (as ancient and adult are counted as seperate races) on one item/ability wouldn't be possible, which would mean it would have to be two seperate titles, one for hatchling/adult, one for ancient.

The effect persisting even throughout title changes should work, but heck, might as well award an ability or spell that does the same, instead of having to switch to the title to get the effect.

Adding the particle effect shouldn't be too bad though, unless the particle editor decides to be a pain in the bum (which I've heard it is.... a lot)

[Arzel Rashemi]

While that might be a nice idea I don't know how feasible it is as an addition just for being a completionist.
This is going off topic for a moment and I apologize....

See how easy that was?

Pfft, you wish. Someone with more experience than I have can correct me if they want! From what I've gathered just going through files for my own mods and little personal projects...

I am going assume that the effect on a title like you are suggesting would work similar to the Rift Form Effect that dragons get when they use their Rune of Teleportation(or the ability) as an example here. There are FOUR files that go into that one effect.

First you'd need to use the particle editor, which is such a headache that I won't even touch it. If you were successful and the particle editor did not cause you a case of baldness, you would then need to create at least three more files to go alongside that for just that one item/ability to get that single effect. No, its not easy to just churn all that out because I know at least two of them is going to be an .ENT and .SHA file. Those are touchy files. Mess it up and you crash.

But you can't just create a bunch of files that has an effect attached to an item, and expect it to work. The item/ability you want that effect on would need be set up so that it worked like the Rune of Teleportation or its equivalent ability, which is not something that can be done player side. If I am not mistaken that requires database changes. No idea how much time or effort that would take to make sure that is working properly.

Given meeps' reply that we would need two different types for hatchling/adult and ancient, (possibly all three) and adding to that you want 2 different particle effects, you are talking about needing a total of 16-24 files in total. Most of which are touchy to create and require much testing and fiddling with to get working correctly. I'm not including any database changes because I don't know what those would entail or how much work.

So no. Its not that easy.

... i apologize for the tangent... back to the scheduled thread topic.

[Guaran]

Instead of sitting there speculating about what you think will or will not work, why not let the dev's give that kind of input.

Thanks.

[Arzel Rashemi]

Well you speculated that it was easy. I'm not speculating, I know that's how it works from modding files.

[Calyndrell]

Instead of sitting there speculating about what you think will or will not work, why not let the dev's give that kind of input.

Thanks.

You know that what down right rude and out of order.

Not being a dev doesn't mean someone doesn't have any knowledge on how files go together, there are alot of very talented modders for this game of which aren't Devs, Some of them have contributed concepts that become official. Your assuming devs are even reading the thread (which i will be fairly surprised if they are considering the lack of official response).

The simple truth i you spoke up with absolutely No concept of how effects get applied and two modders who have played with particle effects told you it wasn't that simple.

[LOVWYRM]

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/shoot...n-16420792.jpg

please

[awdz]

I understand that traditionally to ascend, dragons have to prove themselves in battle, thus the adventure level requirements with lesser crafting requirements. I have to wonder, though, would having the higher requirement of crafting level with lesser adventure requirements be feasible? Or is that just 'not dragon'?

[Arzel Rashemi]

I understand that traditionally to ascend, dragons have to prove themselves in battle, thus the adventure level requirements with lesser crafting requirements. I have to wonder, though, would having the higher requirement of crafting level with lesser adventure requirements be feasible? Or is that just 'not dragon'?

oh, i don't think that's not un-dragon at all awdz. There are some dragons i've known who don't want to level adventure and in place have done only their crafting schools. Granted, they can't ascend higher than adult at the moment, but that's an interesting concept for an alternative to the ARoP requirements.

[Spyrioyo]

oh, i don't think that's not un-dragon at all awdz. There are some dragons i've known who don't want to level adventure and in place have done only their crafting schools. Granted, they can't ascend higher than adult at the moment, but that's an interesting concept for an alternative to the ARoP requirements.

I just got an idea why don't we make the requirements 100 Adventure or 100 Craft? That will give people more choice.