Having different types of NPC e.g. healers and mages, and even up to 5 of them is not even a balance issue, but a dramatic change to the game's foundation.
Basically you're trying to replace the need of players with an NPC and turn MO into a mount & balde kind of game. I'm not saying that this won't be a game that a lot of people would enjoy playing (see the fanbase of mount & blade), but it doesn't fit with the idea behind mortal and a "player driven world".
Having different types of NPC e.g. healers and mages, and even up to 5 of them is not even a balance issue, but a dramatic change to the game's foundation.
Basically you're trying to replace the need of players with an NPC and turn MO into a mount & balde kind of game. I'm not saying that this won't be a game that a lot of people would enjoy playing (see the fanbase of mount & blade), but it doesn't fit with the idea behind mortal and a "player driven world".
I certainly do see what your saying and also realistically if it is away from the design of the game it will never happen which is fine by me.
perhaps if devs read these kinds of posts they can see something useful in them but I get what you mean and I also agree that this isn’t the kind of game we would want every person running around with their own personal army that would not fit the game at all.
I have also suggested player contracts with an npc that hold the money in collateral for protecting players as well.
the main point stands I think that currently there are a decent chunk of players who play that are in a limbo state where they must either join a guild that will actually help them, or they have to trust that another player will actually protect them and not trick them and kill them.
while some of this is a part of the experience I also agree with them that it’s highly weighted against these players to a degree I feel can be improved actively.
perhaps this suggestion would go to far in the other direction in your opinion and that’s fair but I am of the mind that we do want players in the game who just want to play as crafters/gatherers without any specific ties to other player groups.
not necessarily solo gaming because it’s a multiplayer game and if people want that I say go play another game, but certainly giving them the independence to pick and choose who they want to associate with I think is a valid thing to ask for .
these players should be given the tools to survive if they take advantage of the tools in an effective way.
And that is really what this suggestion is aiming to address, how can we give players who are “solo” or independent the ability to control some slice of their social interactions so they can enjoy the game.
maybe some would say they should have no control over those interactions other than choosing to talk to someone or not, but I disagree and feel other styles are given more by the nature of the game play.
a bandit for instance is going to have the ability to choose what time and place they want to kill another player and their escape routes. They can choose to stalk a target from town without their knowledge. They can even change their minds and just gather along side that player if they don’t feel safe killing them.
a villain in most cases has an extreme upper hand, and the key point is that they don’t need to say a single word to another person in order to take advantage of these strategies.
That’s basically 5 choices/strategies vs 1-2 that a gathering player has without having to trust/interact with anyone.
I don’t think the answer is to remove those advantages from villains
Instead I want to see gatherers given options to push back against those odds.
each play style should progress in time ideally in their strategies.
