XP Loss - Why?

Felix wrote:

Professor Plum wrote:
Just as an example; It might take an hour to obtain a +1 CON armour, but it takes 10 to obtain a +1 CON armour that can poly-morph you into a chicken. Effectively the same thing, but one's better (It's not, but, you know which one you'd want - unless you hate chickens, then you don't know).

We would either have people posting about how 10 hours just for a polymorph chicken add on isnt right. People who want to be chickens dont have that much time. Or people would look at it and laugh saying 10 hours for a polymorph chicken!? Pssh I would rather go mining right before a server reset.

I'd never sneer at even more shapes to play with.
Does this chicken have infinitive 'lay egg' spell/feat?
Do these eggs when eaten give a bonus of some kind?

Can i have a cow shape instead?
Casts infinitive Milk and this milk gives a bonus of con because its healthy!
------------------------------------

No but seriously, maybe there is a point with the whole less xp/less xp loss mentality... but we don't want to get spoiled.
-The xp got raised a bit, not back to the ammounts before... but y'know can't really complain.
-Xp being lowered or completely removed as a solution to balance this out?

Why can't the solution be; Try not to die.
In some cases death is enevidable;
-In rare cases its the fault of the server/internet through lag or crashes, or another player dragged a tough monster to a spot considered safe or not all that dangerious.

-In most cases its the fault of the player;
doesn't pay attention, doesn't care about xp loss.
(Which always leaves me wondering why they bother playing to begin with...)
Other players pull mass amounts of mods or lure a monster to them purposely running by them so that the monster targets them... -Know who you chose to adventure with!
First time playing on the server and tries to go at it alone without help or guidance; sort of trail and error method.
(Its their choice and trail and error has error in it, which in this case is possible deaths.)


Realisticly, (yes its a game i know that you know that but our chars don't know it... or at least shouldn't!).
So realisticly apon death we keep all our items, except for gold/potions and we come back to life.
I've seen servers, didn't really bother investing a lot of time in them... but i've seen servers with a set up where if you die, you teleport to a church butt-nakid and have to go to your corpse to retrive all your things.

Theevals, whats your point!?
- my point is why are we getting all 'uppity' about xp loss on death when its not the worse possible penalty. This server has a way around losing excessive amounts of GP on death -bank tokens. Sure there is a cost for the sake of saving, seems fair.


-----
But i've never been big on powergaming, especially if its solo. I dislike the chores of grinding the same mobs over and over again. I lean much more towards powercrafting/rp-afking. xD
So i'm not the best judge of xp/lvl gain.

my point is why are we getting all 'uppity' about xp loss on death when its not the worse possible penalty.

I, for one, am not uppity. I like to be clear and repeat myself when needed. My point is to ask the question of what XP loss adds to the game when it basically equates to wasting the player's time, not penalizing the character as such.

The answer to that question was "to make getting to lvl 40 more rewarding" so I gave an example of an alternative to XP loss that would keep this rewarding feeling by adding productive (rather than deductive) obstacles linked to character death.

This is where things stalled. I'm just monitoring this thread because no resolution seems forthcoming to the question, and as a reasonable person I can't accept "it has to be" as an argument. Also to keep it on track, amid all the tangents and "you're doing it wrong" stuff.

TheeVals wrote:but i've seen servers with a set up where if you die, you teleport to a church butt-nakid and have to go to your corpse to retrive all your things.

Avlis!?

XP would be around 300% less for me, at least what I've experienced.

It's alot less even when travelling with one other.

About the same with 2.

I know a whole bunch of people that are playing on Amia, who dislike any sort of reward that isn't earned as well as the atmosphere that 75% of the server being afk generates.

We could just give everyone level 40 when they login then people with very little time could participate in hig level PvE and PvP.

Yes, you could, although that removes any achievement associated with it. As well as accentuates all the balance problems.

We would either have people posting about how 10 hours just for a polymorph chicken add on isnt right. People who want to be chickens dont have that much time. Or people would look at it and laugh saying 10 hours for a polymorph chicken!? Pssh I would rather go mining right before a server reset.

Remember that completely useless orb, that people spent ages getting?

So, any news as to why death wasn't proportionally decreased?

PS. Rhine, I understand completely what you mean. You're not alone buddy.

Traditionally nwn has used xp loss, since xp loss is pretty common with PnP (Then again in PnP you don't need to fight hordes of monsters for it). Most other successful RPG's don't. They use a method that doesn't remove what you're trying to gain - which is the cause of frustration.

I'm sure we can agree on that, at least?

It seems like the only logical solution is to introduce a new penalty.

Penaltys could influence time, combat performance, gold and items.

Perhaps instead of XP loss, you are given a random debuff that lasts 30 minutes. That you can spend XP on, to remove. (The key model here is choice - you aren't forced to directly lose what you've spent awhile getting)

Rhine Jive Click wrote:This presupposes that the fun part of the game is grinding the same areas over and over and over and over. I dare say it's something people do just to get to 40, and not out of the sheer enjoyment of making the same series of clicks several hundreds of times.

Following this line of argument, why don't we simply remove PvE from the module and throw everyone in at level 40, fully geared?

I am, of course, being facetious. As it's not an arena module we want to run here, or even an arena module with RP.

The PvE aspect of the mod is something we want to focus on. If you find it inherently dull, then I can understand why the stakes may not have much meaning to you. But if that's the case, then why are you playing here and not on a server more conducive to your playstyle?

Rhine Jive Click wrote:I'd also like to know what is the fun of a strategy when it only involves, as said before, making the same few series of clicks over and over and over and over on the mobs. Oh, but this time I'll do it around a corner! Sorry, the challenging strategy is in PvP.

Should I try to down the bandit boss for that sweet quest item, or ignore him and move on to something else? Should I try the hive alone at level 15? If I do, then what about the founder? Does the loot involved make it worth it? Even though it will cost me a lot in consumables, even if I succeed? Should I aim to gather gold early, and make a run to Daron's at a fairly low level? Or should I simply work with what I have? Should I go for the Lich King's Railer at level 30ish, or wait until I'm level 39 and have tumble? Now that I'm at the bottom of Iron Hold, should I make a go for the master and his loot, or leave and play it safe? When fighting Mithral Keepers, should I attempt to tackle lots at once in order to level faster? Or should I take it slow, fighting a few at a time? When Axfell assaults, should I make a go down center field, even though I'm fragile and might lose XP? Or should I stick to the wall and cast dispels? When I attack them, should I charge the gate right off even though there's an enemy mage about, or should I play it safe?

These are a few of the decisions I made from levels 1-40. None of them would have had any meaning if there weren't a penalty involved. I daresay it would have all been extremely dull.

Rhine Jive Click wrote:PvM can be seen as a way to reach 40 and get loot. Getting loot can (and is) frequently more efficient with a sanctuary cleric with no risk involved. That leaves getting to 40 as the goal for players, which is hindered by a significant time barrier.

Again, the game is (or should be) just as much about the journey as the end reward.

Rhine Jive Click wrote:It's the only way to go about it because you say it's the only way to go about it; that's begging the question, or begging the answer, I'm not sure in this case. The discussion is not at all about a choice between losing XP/time and losing permanent attributes. It's about an alternaive to losing time from your life because the engine eats all but 50 000 gold and takes out thousands of XP which is the thing you were fighting monsters to get in the first place.

Arguing toward a conclusion is not "begging the question". If that were so, then every argument ever would be an example of "begging the question".

To clarify, here is my argument:
1. The only meaningful ways to penalize someone are permanently or temporarily (time lost).
2. Permanent penalties are not an option here.
3. Ergo, any meaningful penalty will be, by necessity, something that penalizes you on time.

When you break it down, your proposition simply results in more time spent. Maybe spending time fetching a bucket of urine would be more exciting for you, but I'd rather just get the XP again. Both are ways of "doing something", but the latter allows me much more flexibility with how I spend my time.

Professor Plum wrote:I'm also unsure of the purpose of prolonging people reaching 40. Attracting a crowd that hasn't much time to play seems like a good thing.

The bumped up XP rate on Exodus was fun for a while, but eventually everything began to lose meaning. I grew bored. I know that not everyone shared my feelings, but I do know that at a least a few did.

Which is not my way of saying "more XP is therefore worse". It's just my way of saying that bumping up XP isn't necessarily going to attract more players in the long run or be "better". There are a lot of factors involved when maintaining a server; it's never so simple as ramping up the XP scale and hoping for the best.

Professor Plum wrote:XP would be around 300% less for me, at least what I've experienced.

It's alot less even when travelling with one other.

About the same with 2.

Bear in mind that if you have an ECL, you'll see a much more significant difference. The reason is two-fold: 1) the old XP system did not account for ECL, and 2) there was a bug in the XP script that caused ECL not to be taken into account for some variables. This has been fixed.

That said, I'd be interested in investigating the differences thoroughly and once more, for curiosity if nothing else. But in order to do that, I'll also need to know where the XP slider was set previously. Star?

The PvE aspect of the mod is something we want to focus on. If you find it inherently dull, then I can understand why the stakes may not have much meaning to you. But if that's the case, then why are you playing here and not on a server more conducive to your playstyle?

It is dull! PvE isn't inherently dull for me though. It just is here.

No monster has anything out of the ordinary, even the super-bosses are just massive hp guys with some epic spells and funky oversized appearances. Nothing is that tough to beat, with a couple of people, it just varys in the amount of time it takes. Nothing requires significant tactics, planning or forethought - at least beyond the norm.

Most of the areas are dull, excluding Condors. They're either ridiculously long and maze-like or barren expanses. There's nowhere with a non-linear progression, or anything that's engaging.

Grinding is simply going through the motions, until you get to 40 so you can PvP. Anphillia is alot like BoW in that respect (Although I'd argue that getting to 40 on BoW was alot more fun, as it was engaging).

It would be nice if grinding was at least engaging... I'm running out of movies.

Yeah; I'm not going to argue. I find the PvE here much duller than on other servers. I would like to fix it, though. I believe that focusing on PvE is a worthwhile goal.

Totally.

Lich king, Ogre king, Xeno boss, Myria Shackless...Those guys/gal can be smart...

But yea, rest is brainless.

Following this line of argument, why don't we simply remove PvE from the module and throw everyone in at level 40, fully geared?

Because that would take away the reward of reaching 40.

Should I try to down the bandit boss for that sweet quest item, or ignore him and move on to something else? Should I try the hive alone at level 15? If I do, then what about the founder? Does the loot involved make it worth it? Even though it will cost me a lot in consumables, even if I succeed? Should I aim to gather gold early, and make a run to Daron's at a fairly low level? Or should I simply work with what I have? Should I go for the Lich King's Railer at level 30ish, or wait until I'm level 39 and have tumble? Now that I'm at the bottom of Iron Hold, should I make a go for the master and his loot, or leave and play it safe? When fighting Mithral Keepers, should I attempt to tackle lots at once in order to level faster? Or should I take it slow, fighting a few at a time? When Axfell assaults, should I make a go down center field, even though I'm fragile and might lose XP? Or should I stick to the wall and cast dispels? When I attack them, should I charge the gate right off even though there's an enemy mage about, or should I play it safe?

I did say "challenging strategy is in PvP" not "PvE involves no decisions at all". Your examples that aren't from PvP involve the same thing: to tackle the boss or not to tackle the boss.

To clarify, here is my argument:
1. The only meaningful ways to penalize someone are permanently or temporarily (time lost).
2. Permanent penalties are not an option here.
3. Ergo, any meaningful penalty will be, by necessity, something that penalizes you on time.

The first premise claims only two options are possible when there are more. There are two alternatives that were suggested so far that refute that premise, and therefore the conclusion that draws from it: death tax with tasks, temporary (undispellable) debuffs.

When you break it down, your proposition simply results in more time spent. Maybe spending time fetching a bucket of urine would be more exciting for you, but I'd rather just get the XP again. Both are ways of "doing something", but the latter allows me much more flexibility with how I spend my time

More time spent? Who was it who said the reward should be the journey and not just the end result? Teehee.

Time spent doing a mini quest would indeed be more fun for me, and I realize that's a matter of taste. However, when you say XP loss allows you for more choice, I suppose you mean you are left with the choice of where to grind to get the XP back, or to idle? Having a quest to do wouldn't block you from killing things if you're doing it for the fun of it rather than for the XP - nor will it block you from taking it easy roleplaying in the fort, assaulting, etc. Having temporary debuffs, as the other suggestion says, adds to the challenge for the end reward and leaves all the same options open as sheer XP loss.

Lastly, once again, my suggestion is only a suggestion embedded in a question. That question is the real point of this thread, which people have only indirectly answered with "we like XP loss". I'm not pushing for this-or-that change, I'm just wondering if there's a reason people's time is being tossed in the sink instead of something else.

Rhine Jive Click wrote: it becomes head-buttingly frustrating to die and lose more than what you were able to gain.

Rhine Jive Click wrote:
Other penalties than sheer wasted time can make hitting 40 rewarding without that icky feeling that you were doing it just to spite the game engine for screwing you out of 2 days of your life (if you add up the time catching up XP, I'm sure I'm in the ballpark there).

Rhine Jive Click wrote:
I'd also like to know what is the fun of a strategy when it only involves, as said before, making the same few series of clicks over and over and over and over on the mobs. Oh, but this time I'll do it around a corner! Sorry, the challenging strategy is in PvP.

First your complaining about xp loss on death and saying things that would make me think you die a lot. Than later on your saying how PvE isn't challenging. Seems to me your being challenged. It also seems that there are more underlining issues. Yes this mod isn't perfect and we want to spend time to try and fix it and therefore we encourage discussion on new ideas/the solutions of problems. However it seems like your talking in circles out of your personal frustrations that don't intrinsically have to do with us or the server. I don't know if your upset that people didn't flock to Exodus after you made your other post or if your just frustrated with D&D

Rhine Jive Click wrote:
given the imbalances, bugs, and flat out crap potential of the d20 system

What ever it is we cant convince you that playing this game is fun nor should we have to. Take a break if the game only causes you frustration and your not having fun. If you have ideas for changes the best way to discuss them is surrounded with positivity where as I feel that your posts in this thread draw on everything negative to procure change.

I don't see where I contradicted myself. You said yourself you assumed I died a lot from what I said, so using my dying a lot as a counter argument to my argument that the sheer scope of repetitiveness (not that there is any, that's inevitable, but how -much- repetition is involved) can be uninteresting to the point where having time spent doing it boils down to a waste (when you die) is not valid.

Besides, difficulty and repetitiveness are two different things.

More to the point, arguing that I'm a tool with issues is not valid as an answer to the question i'm putting forward. You're assuming some kind of attack in what I'm saying. I'm saying what some of the playerbase agrees with, evidently.

That in itself is a tangent, because the point of the thread is a question.

If you have ideas for changes the best way to discuss them is surrounded with positivity where as I feel that your posts in this thread draw on everything negative to procure change.

What you're saying boils down to, as far as I can tell: "I don't like your tone so you're an ass". I can live with that, even if I don't see how criticism is intrinsically negative. But I'd like to restate that I'm not pushing for change; I'm just dissecting people's answers to my question when the reasoning seemed flawed for the point that was being made in answer to my question, or I was too vague in previous posts.

To say it another way the challenge of PvE is not dieing. Try to go out to various places and stay alive! That's a challenge. I hear you saying I die a lot and that PvE isn't challenging. I don't see how you can say both. At least you would have to say its challenging but repetitive.

I never said you were a tool. I said there seems to be underlying issues and that you seem to be frustrated. After you boil down what I say your in fact making it say something other than what it does. No, I'm not saying I don't like your tone or that your an ass. I am saying that your effort in discussing issues like this on a forum would go further if you were a little more positive.
I think many people have given you more than sufficient answers to the question you posed. To summarize... Any solution you have purposed still is reduced to lost time. Fundamentally there is no way to remove loss of time from the equation and still have a sense of achievement at the end.

After you boil down what I say your in fact making it say something other than what it does. No, I'm not saying I don't like your tone or that your an ass. I am saying that your effort in discussing issues like this on a forum would go further if you were a little more positive.

How do you put a question forward that challenges something in place without sounding like you're against that thing? Because I just asked a question, and everything after that was either specifying my position or, what could be interpreted as negativity, pointing out to people who thought they were answering my question that they were either off the topic as I was bringing it up, or that the argument they used was illogical.

hear you saying I die a lot and that PvE isn't challenging. I don't see how you can say both. At least you would have to say its challenging but repetitive.

I said I have died to silly things that aren't related to anything the game grants me control over, which was in repsonse to someone saying "the game is fine but you need to be careful" which was entirely beside the point I was bringing up. I die, but not that often.

My problem is with the principle that the penalty must equate to lost time.

I think many people have given you more than sufficient answers to the question you posed. To summarize... Any solution you have purposed still is reduced to lost time. Fundamentally there is no way to remove loss of time from the equation and still have a sense of achievement at the end.

This again is circular reasoning in the same sense as what I've refuted in the last four posts I made. It's possible to have alternatives. In other words, the question has not been answered.

To put it explicitly (without all the tangents I probably spawned with my rambling):

Q: Why is there an XP loss on death? It adds up to wasting time; why can't we look at alternatives that are productive instead?

A: There is XP loss on death because it gives a sense of achievement when you reach 40.

Q2: Can other forms of penalty that do not equate to wasted time be considered?

A: No because (here is where we are, and I'm saying the reasoning isn't sound).

Note that alternatives were mentioned that, in one case, make the player spend more time doing something (taking more time to reach 40 than if they had not died, without it being a pure loss) that can add to the story and journey of getting to 40; in the other case, add to the challenge of fighting without putting much more of a constraint on the player than having a temporarily gimped character.

I think maybe people who say that time lost is the only way are misunderstanding the equation I see when I think of these things. Time grinding = XP; Death = XP loss = time loss. No side benefits. I'm saying, why can't we consider alternatives that are productive (in that the added time the player has to put in for having died is something constructive in RP or what have you) instead of pure loss.

I'm only here still arguing because the fundamental principle I deduce from people who find something wrong with my question seems to be: The risk of pure loss gives more of a sense of achievement than anything productive associated to death. The reason this seems so unacceptable to me as an argument is that the people saying this are the same ones saying "the journey is its own reward" and "we want to promote RP".

So, I have to go catch a train right now, but I hope that clarifies some things.

Rhine Jive Click wrote:
My problem is with the principle that the penalty must equate to lost time.

Name a penalty that could be implemented that doesn't equate to lost time.

Honestly simply playing a game online itself can be seen as a waste of time.
Death in the game has nothing to do with it.

So its more so a focus on an enjoyment of that wasted time, personally I think its up to each individual player to find a way to enjoy the their time they are wasting rather than depend on others to make a game more enjoyable for them.

hmm maybe i can explain better;
You play nwn, on this server, its up to you to find a reason or something in particular about it that makes playing here worth while. Something actually obtainable, and you have to be willing to put in the effort and work to get it without cutting cornors.

If rp is your thing, -YOU- go forth and creat that rp and hope others join in -willingly-. No one is forced to rp, don't complain if there is a lack of it.
If pging is your thing, -YOU- go gather fellow players willing to also pg and hope they join in, etc...
If crafting suits you best, -you- ask others to help you gather matterials or simply solo for those matterials yourself.
If pvp is where you want to be then you can pvp at any given lvl, if you want to succed in pvp then it goes without saying that -you- need to lvl up your character -just like everyone else.

--------------

Now when i use the word -you- i am not directly speaking to anyone in particular. I am talking to everyone/anyone in general that finds themselves bored and questioning what the purpose of continueing to play is.

but feel free to quote me and take offense as if my post is a personal attack singling people out, its assumed that people skim through posts rather than reading them. xD

Name a penalty that could be implemented that doesn't equate to lost time..

Two have been named, and reiterated several times as examples.

But I had to leave in a hurry when I made the last post, so I'd like to amend something.

Q: Why is there an XP loss on death? It adds up to wasting time; why can't we look at alternatives that are productive instead?

A: There is XP loss on death because it gives a sense of achievement when you reach 40.

Q2: Can other forms of penalty that do not equate to wasted time be considered?

A: No because (here is where we are, and I'm saying the reasoning isn't sound).

Should read:

Q: Why is there an XP loss on death? It adds up to wasting time; why can't we look at alternatives that are productive instead?

A: There is XP loss on death because it gives a sense of achievement when you reach 40.

Q2: Can other forms of penalty that do not equate to wasted time be considered?

A: No because losing time is the only way.

Q3: Why is it the only way and why are the alternatives mentioned not valid?

A: Pending.

Note that the alternatives mentioned, along with any alternative that promotes added activity rather than nullifying that which has been done already, will not follow the equation of Time grinding = XP; Death = XP loss = time loss, because the penalty will be to do something else. If doing things in itself is considered lost time, then maybe I'm not the one who should be asking themselves why they play here.

In other words, the question is still not answered. There are other ways of keeping that rewarding feeling for reaching level 40 (two have been described) by adding barriers associated to death, without tossing spent time into the trash bin.

Let me ask, then: why is XP loss, and therefore time loss with no positive or stimulating side effects, the most rewarding obstacle among those mentioned? That seems to be the underlying assumption.

Rhine Jive Click wrote:
Note that the alternatives mentioned, along with any alternative that promotes added activity rather than nullifying that which has been done already, will not follow the equation of Time grinding = XP; Death = XP loss = time loss, because the penalty will be to do something else. If doing things in itself is considered lost time, then maybe I'm not the one who should be asking themselves why they play here.

I don't see any time difference between the penalties of loosing xp and having to complete some death quest that takes a while in the fugue. Both are taking your time when you would rather not have them do so.The fugue quest unless it was dynamic would get old fast. On the other hand when you have lost your xp you have a choice as to how you will go about acquiring it back.

.. wow this thread needs like.. locked or deleted.

On the other hand when you have lost your xp you have a choice as to how you will go about acquiring it back.

You mean you can get xp at a decent rate by doing something other than killing monsters?

.. wow this thread needs like.. locked or deleted.

I'll keep that in mind next time you express an opinion? Seriously, I don't get people who post this junk. That is what I call pure stifling negativity, which criticism is not.

I don't see any time difference between the penalties of loosing xp and having to complete some death quest that takes a while in the fugue. Both are taking your time when you would rather not have them do so.The fugue quest unless it was dynamic would get old fast.

You obviously didn't read any of the things you object to, since my last 3 answers to you were restating what I already had said. No offense, but that's really the impression I get when the crux of the thread is explicitly stated, then left aside for focus on a debate on how to play the game. Clearly we just enjoy different things about the server.

The suggestion was for a quest the character would have to do on respawning in order to progress past a certain point. Something like crafters have to do to get resources, like some RP trips that are being planned, etc. If the answer is that that gets old fast (something a character would have to do a handful of times in its existance) then how can you call me negative when I say that grinding gets old? Especially since death guarantees you have more of the same to do, instead of something that conduces a number of other possibilities, depending on the specifics of the quest.

So, again, why is loss of XP and time preferable to any of the options suggested where one adds to the things a character can do and the other adds to the valued feeling of challenge in leveling up?

You know what's awesome about this XP argument?

I don't actually think that death xp needs to be lowered, or xp raised.

I do think that Rhan has alot of valid points and that the whole xp loss thing is outdated, as a system.

Why not cater to everyone?

Give people a simple craft-menu choice between taking a 30 minute supernatural -6 to all attributes (Or something to that effect), or xp loss as it is. (Edit: And an 80% reduction in xp gain on top of that, to stop people respawning and just tagging along in groups) (Edit 2: Effects would stack up, if someone died more than once in the same period and extend to 40 minutes if they respawned)

People who have more time to grind, will get more in that time. People who don't have so much time wont lose as much.

Though overall fear of death is the same and everyone's a happy bunny.

Professor Plum wrote:You mean you can get xp at a decent rate by doing something other than killing monsters?

No. But you do have a choice as to where you will go. And practically speaking, it'll probably be much easier to gather a group to go to "Really Cool Place X" than "I-Died-So-I-Have-To-Go-Here Place Y".

Rhine Jive Click wrote:So, again, why is loss of XP and time preferable to any of the options suggested where one adds to the things a character can do and the other adds to the valued feeling of challenge in leveling up?

One gives you something more to do while forcing you to do a very specific task.

The other gives you something more to do while allowing you to choose from many different options. Really, if the trouble is that there isn't anything "new" with this route, we could add more dungeons.

I get the impression that's entirely missing the point, but honestly, I fail to see the distinction. We can add more quests. Adding more quests would probably be a good idea. But we don't have to (and likely shouldn't) make them available only when dying.

One gives you something more to do while forcing you to do a very specific task.

The other gives you something more to do while allowing you to choose from many different options. Really, if the trouble is that there isn't anything "new" with this route, we could add more dungeons.

Not quite, since one doesn't cost you your time and puts you on a task you "need" to do in order to get past lvl 30 (for example) but leaves you the option of putting it off to do other things. The other takes away the thing you invested your time to get and allows you all the same options, only starting at a loss of the time you put into that very thing already. That's the distinction. Losing time isn't fun, and while some think it's the best dissuasive method against death, I disagree. I also disagree that all other options equate to losing time, for reasons already stated.

We can add more quests. Adding more quests would probably be a good idea. But we don't have to (and likely shouldn't) make them available only when dying.

Adding more quests to do doesn't even address the situation of XP loss on death, so adding quests for everyday doing doesn't perclude adding a quest for death.

And practically speaking, it'll probably be much easier to gather a group to go to "Really Cool Place X" than "I-Died-So-I-Have-To-Go-Here Place Y".

I understand you're opposed to my suggestion, but try to consider that the quest doesn't have to suck, and can be anything really, just so that there's involvement rather than loss as the result of death.

But thank you for answering my question! My next one would be why a constraint on being able to progress (i.e. having a quest to do) would be bad while having a the constraint of grinding longer for what you lost would be better? As stated, the quest can be put off and doesn't block you from going anywhere - just from getting XP past a certain point. This is all about productive vs. deductive in my view, and I'm not seeing why loss remains the top choice to those opposed.

If the third option just mentioned by Plum is possible (i.e. similar to second option mentioned, but with choice) and pleases more people, then why not? I realize there's scripting time involved and that's why I'm not arguing for any specific change - rather arguing that, in theory, I think a productive (adding a quest, or more challenge) approach to death is preferable to feeling like your time spent playing is nullified (the roleplay stays, but if you did an hour of grinding inbetween, that's sure gone).