Average Joe

[Rathlord]

As the main proponent of the "average joe" argument over the last few years, I should probably pipe up.

 

I definitely agree with RoboMat that professions should vary in meaningful ways, however I don't think this dismisses the average joe concept for the game.

 

In regards to this specific point, just imagine that every character starts as "bland, average skill guy" and then you paste the profession onto him, adding extra skills. This could add more specialized stuff like harder carpentry, electronics some people could never learn on their own, etc.

 

What it wouldn't add, though, are things like bullet casting, laser crafting, sword smithing, and other talents that are in general represented by a minuscule amount of the population. I wouldn't give a second thought to finding a carpenter or doctor or electrician hanging about in this scenario.

 

However, I would certainly be shocked to find a sword smith (complete with tools and hardware for plying his trade) in this situation. If you would give a certain profession a second thought (like "wait, what, this guy is a swordsmith?") then even if your reaction is "AWESOME" that probably means it's not what PZ is about.

 

In more general terms, as Lemmy enunciated above, the idea is for PZ to be the everyman's zombie apocalypse simulator. It's supposed to be about normal, unexciting people making it against all odds (and then not making it) in a harsh, unforgiving environment. If people want a supersoldier zombie apocalypse game, or an arcade zombie apocalypse game, or even a soldier zombie apocalypse game- those games already exist and are out there. That's just not what PZ is going for, again as Lemmy clarified above.

 

Hope this clears up a bit some of why I fall back on that argument frequently and helps expand what Lemmy was saying for newer members as well.

[deprav]

It does !

Also, something just hit my mind, a new angle on professions and average-joeism. There's one thing that goes completely against it : Skill books, or more precisely the fact that anyone in the game can simultaneously learn 5 different professions in a short amount of time, only by reading books & little practice (or even without reading those books)
That is NOT something that comes within the competency of Joe's brain imo.

Maybe your initial choice of profession should determine what you can do, but also what you can't.
I think leveling up in X skill tree (that isn't your profession) should be restrained to a certain level (1 or 2) if you don't find someone to teach you, or the corresponding skill book.
Maybe you shouldn't be able to learn/read two different competences/books at the same time.

If no limitation is set, the average joe could quickly turn into a super-human encyclopedia in a few months !

I think it should get closer from classic RPG multi-class situation. The more you want to multi-class, the weaker each of the class you'll choose will be.
You can either be a strong Warrior ; or a stronge Mage. Or an average warrior doubled by(or with?) an average mage (but a cool warrior-mage). Or a poor warrior, doubled by a poor mage, tripled by a poor thief (and be dead) etc...



 

How it could work ingame concretely :
You chose your initial profession, start with a bonus on the corresponding skill tree + profession special capacity.
You can't level up past level 2 on any other skill tree except if you find the corresponding books or teacher.

From the moment you start XXX suite of skillbooks (or being taught by another character), it's considered to be your second "class" with no learning malus. You're now Multi-class : your pre-apocalypse profession + your post-apocalypse studying that can go up to lvl 5, without the "special capacity" of that profession you're now learning.

If you start reading a second suite of skillbooks, both your post-apocalypse studying will suffer from "learning overload" ; you can learn both at a slower rate and only up to lvl 4.

if you choose to start learning a third competence, your learning slows even more and you can only level-up those three skills up to level 3.

 

etc...
 

[Impetiso]

I know devs want the survivors to be Average Joes and all, but if I have to be honest I have to say i don't like the Average Joe idea at all.

If you like the idea, you can just ignore the rest of my post, as it could turn to be some kind of rant.

 

For me, the idea of all survivors being Average Joes is... boring. They will be all the same, even if their traits and occupations are different. You can be a Waitress, a Military Soldier, a Farmer and all of them will be able to get to level 5 farming, because all of them will be average joes, and average joes can get to level 5 farming... and that's what I don't like about Average Joes. If all of them can learn just the same skills,  the occupations are just free traits. If all survivors can do the same, why taking care of a friendly NPC or player if you can replace him with any other you might find? If you can learn everything by yourself the interactions with other survivors are minimal, as you can survive the same way without them. If you can't do everything by yourself, you will need the aid of others to accomplish (other things not included in scavenge a lot, farm a lot or kill a lot), and that will make your decisions harder because consequences will be bigger... and that would keep me playing for more time, because even if it's sometimes infuriating, challenge it's always fun to me. I just want to need other survivors, not just use them to be a little better, and not only because of there are zombies. 

 

Well, that's my honest opinion. If you don't like it at all you can just ignore it, it's just what some guy thinks of something somewhere on the internet.   

[EnigmaGrey]

However, I would certainly be shocked to find a sword smith (complete with tools and hardware for plying his trade) in this situation. If you would give a certain profession a second thought (like "wait, what, this guy is a swordsmith?") then even if your reaction is "AWESOME" that probably means it's not what PZ is about.

 

In more general terms, as Lemmy enunciated above, the idea is for PZ to be the everyman's zombie apocalypse simulator. It's supposed to be about normal, unexciting people making it against all odds (and then not making it) in a harsh, unforgiving environment. If people want a supersoldier zombie apocalypse game, or an arcade zombie apocalypse game, or even a soldier zombie apocalypse game- those games already exist and are out there.

Yet, there's no requirement that the game somehow devolve into unrealistic proportions of awesome skill, if more advanced acts (such some basic metal working) were added. Being able to put a an edge on a piece of metal, or fit the tang of a blade into a handle, reinforce a wall with metal strapping .etc certainly aren't out of the bounds of the "average Joe," and having them wouldn't somehow turn the player character into a 00' agent of survival. Of course, merits for having tasks like this can be debated, but why limit what the game can be to an unquantifiable definition as "average Joe?"

 

The only way to even describe it is to tell people what it's not, and even that will cause disagreement based on the personal belief of what someone thinks is possible or impossible for them to learn.

[Rathlord]

I know devs want the survivors to be Average Joes and all, but if I have to be honest I have to say i don't like the Average Joe idea at all.

If you like the idea, you can just ignore the rest of my post, as it could turn to be some kind of rant.

 

For me, the idea of all survivors being Average Joes is... boring. They will be all the same, even if their traits and occupations are different. You can be a Waitress, a Military Soldier, a Farmer and all of them will be able to get to level 5 farming, because all of them will be average joes, and average joes can get to level 5 farming... and that's what I don't like about Average Joes. If all of them can learn just the same skills,  the occupations are just free traits. If all survivors can do the same, why taking care of a friendly NPC or player if you can replace him with any other you might find? If you can learn everything by yourself the interactions with other survivors are minimal, as you can survive the same way without them. If you can't do everything by yourself, you will need the aid of others to accomplish (other things not included in scavenge a lot, farm a lot or kill a lot), and that will make your decisions harder because consequences will be bigger... and that would keep me playing for more time, because even if it's sometimes infuriating, challenge it's always fun to me. I just want to need other survivors, not just use them to be a little better, and not only because of there are zombies. 

 

Well, that's my honest opinion. If you don't like it at all you can just ignore it, it's just what some guy thinks of something somewhere on the internet.   

 

I get where you're coming from, and even wrote a long-winded post once about how it's incredibly important that characters should be differentiated from each other. As I posted above, I certainly don't think every character needs to be the same- that doesn't work out well for multiplayer or singleplayer with NPC's; as long as said system is limited to probable, realistic differences I'm all for it. The average joe argument doesn't have to mean everyone is the same, it's just that no one is a superhero.

 

 

Yet, there's no requirement that the game somehow devolve into unrealistic proportions of awesome skill, if more advanced acts (such some basic metal working) were added. Being able to put a an edge on a piece of metal, or fit the tang of a blade into a handle, reinforce a wall with metal strapping .etc certainly aren't out of the bounds of the "average Joe," and having them wouldn't somehow turn the player character into a 00' agent of survival. Of course, merits for having tasks like this can be debated, but why limit what the game can be to an unquantifiable definition as "average Joe?"

 

The only way to even describe it is to tell people what it's not, and even that will cause disagreement based on the personal belief of what someone thinks is possible or impossible for them to learn.

 

 

To be fair, that isn't sword smithing just because your outcome is a sword shaped object. I meant literally the art/profession of smithing swords using hammers, fire, and the technique of smelting. Yes, this would be acceptable. I'd also be okay with people being able to install lights (even though I said no lasers). Simplified, realistic things as above are obviously fine.

 

You're right that there's no concrete line, but no concrete line can ever be drawn as to whether a suggestion is good or bad inherently; that doesn't preclude the usefulness of arguments like average joe. It's obviously supported by the developers and is a meaningful and useful criticism for many suggestions that don't fit the spirit of the game as outlined by the developers. So, yes, the lines are fuzzy, but that doesn't mean that it's not worthwhile to discuss it in my opinion.

[EnigmaGrey]

You're right that there's no concrete line, but no concrete line can ever be drawn as to whether a suggestion is good or bad inherently; that doesn't preclude the usefulness of arguments like average joe. It's obviously supported by the developers and is a meaningful and useful criticism for many suggestions that don't fit the spirit of the game as outlined by the developers. So, yes, the lines are fuzzy, but that doesn't mean that it's not worthwhile to discuss it in my opinion.

Hence why every "it's good/bad" conversation forms itself into verbal fisticuffs.

Instead of being a discussion about the suggestion, it becomes an argument over the limits of modern, with each member in the discussion starting at a different conception of what average means, never seemingly able to find a consensus. Instead of talking about solar panels, we discuss whether people can read the safety prompt on their shredder about objects becoming entangled in the mechanism.

It speaks only of limiting the game to the most basic mechanics, many of which are already beyond "average," such as the ability to keep plants alive (and long enough to bare fruit), build traps, spear fish, and create multi-story dwellings. Sure, these are skills that can certainly be learned, but they're not present in what is by-far an urban population, even in the remoteness of mufti-thousand person towns. And, even if you disagree with my assessment of the average Joe, well. Too bad, it's a very useful criticism, you see -- even a developer used it.

[Kirrus]

mufti-thousand person towns.

 

*wanders in* <offtopic> Mufti Day! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mufti_%28dress%29#Mufti_day </offtopic> *wanders out*

[Rathlord]

Every time I think I've seen all of the unique British words...

[Batsphinx]

Mufti is so unique that a lot of the British population is unaware of it too. Bit of a posh school thing really.

[Connall]

Mufti is so unique that a lot of the British population is unaware of it too. Bit of a posh school thing really.

 

Mufti? Posh? How dare you good sir, I demand retribution for such an accusation! We shall have our butlers draw cutlasses at dawn, we will have the battle at my daddys castle. We shall drive up there in my Porsche, then we shall see who's posh!

 

I went to a "posh" school. Can confirm, we used mufti. I despised every second I spent in that school.

[Rathlord]

In posh schools in the states, we don't say "posh," "mufti," or "the states." My God what am I becoming.

[Kirrus]

Mufti is so unique that a lot of the British population is unaware of it too. Bit of a posh school thing really.

 

My school was very definitely not posh

[eblackthorn]

I am a little torn on the 'average joe' argument.  First off, it is not hard to grow plants.  It is difficult to treat plants if they start having problems (this i think is fairly well reflected in the current skill system).  It is not hard to do basic carpentry, and with time I could see those basic skills evolving to the point where you could make your own bookshelf or fence that is more or less sound and straight.  Fishing if anything is harder to master in this game then in the real life.  Trapping might be a little too easy as initially it would be almost impossible to learn how to do it effectively without prior knowledge.

 

I think the skill system works as it is but could be tweaked a bit.

Each time you level a skill you could add a time modifier to learning any other skill, for example if you have a point in blunt and a point in carpentry this could add a .1 increase on learning a new skill (.05 modifier from each.  time modifier 1.1), as you learn more and more skills the modifier gets larger and larger until eventually skill progression moves to almost a crawl.  This forces you to choose which skills you really do want be a specialist in and concentrate on those.  It would also encourage players to stop putting all skills up to 5 and add diverse character builds.

 

You could expand this to the initial player class build as well, perhaps if you are a police officer you never get penalties leveling ranged weapons, if you are a construction worker you don't get penalties on carpentry etc.

[ColonelSandersLite]

Remember gameplay over realism sometimes does have to be taken into effect. For instance how fun would this game be if you could only barricade some doors and windows well how fun would it be after what would you do to raise your carpentry level up all those extra planks and wood it's boring. So how do you fix this average joe wouldn't be able to make a house out of planks and nails (it would be possible but not plausible)

 

Well, it might be interesting to prohibit things like that for characters without the appropriate pre apocolypse skill set.

 

I've been involved in carpentry (with a focus on houses) since I was a child and *I* could build something like that.  On the other hand, I doubt that most people could without a lot of help from a skilled carpenter, just like I know next to nothing about masonry and couldn't build a very good brick wall without help.  I work on cars but know very little about welding.  I know several programming languages, but don't know crap about growing food.  I know how to shoot but don't know how to play an instrument.  I'm thinking of learning how to distil hooch, but I don't personally have a need to learn how to bake.  None of those are particularly rare skills, but like everybody else, I have some skills and don't have others.  Get what I'm saying?

 

 

I do have to say that I agree with the OP to an extent.  It sort of seems like people around here get the idea that an "average joe" has no skills at all, but nothing could be further from the truth.  The average joe has a set of skills and is *not* incapable of learning more skills.  What the average joe doesn't have is *all the skills*.  I don't really think it's a workable idea until npcs come along, but that sort of thing is really what community is all about imho.

[ColonelSandersLite]

An average joe can do the things you can do, and I can do, and the majority of people on this forum can do, and if you just so happen to be a bullet manufacturer then you are not AVERAGE in your ability to do so. The % of people that can do that in America probably doesn't touch 0.000001%.

 

Just something to think about here.  In my experience, reloading brass has recently had a huge revival.  With the amunition shortage we had recently and the rising cost of living being the main reasons.  Of the shooters I know, I would say that reloading brass has hit a rate of between 1 in 5 and 1 in 10.  Considering that reported household firearms ownership rates in the south are 40%+, that would put the number of people that reload brass in a southern state like kentucky between 8% and 4% (roughly).  Even cutting that number in half to 4-2%, that's nowhere near the 0.000001% you're talking about.  Also noteworthy, people that reload will natrually have at least one, but usually multiple reference books with their reloading supplies.

[Rathlord]

Eh, I lived my entire life in the Deep South immersed in gun culture, and I've only known 2 people who did reloading. Both of them were of the generation that's on the way out, and neither had any reference material.

Now, this is obviously somewhat anecdotal, but I also used to sell reloading supplies up until last week when I quit; it wasn't a hot item by any means. Probably only sold reloading stuff once a week and it's a huge store.

So, take it or leave it, I'm not sold on reloading being *that* popular.

[ColonelSandersLite]

That's interesting.  I've seen a *lot* of forum posts saying that they want to get into reloading but the gun stores can't keep the equipment in stock long enough for them to get it.  I've also seen and heard plenty of comments from plenty of gun store workers saying they just couldn't keep the stuff on the shelves as well.  Locality maybe?  I know I've seen surveys from before the ammo scare that said the percentage of shooters that reload was about 6% (which is lower than my 1 in 10 estimate) but that was pre ammo scare.

 

I have trouble imagining a reloader without references of some sort.  Even just charts of powder makes and calibers with reccomended loads.  Then again, if a shooter has been doing it for decades and only shoots the same 3 rounds he's always shot...

[EnigmaGrey]

Now, this is obviously somewhat anecdotal, but I also used to sell reloading supplies up until last week when I quit . . .

All this time, I had thought you worked in farm supply?

[Rathlord]

Aye, that's kinda the thing of it. A lot of reloaders are of the older generation and were just taught it from their family. My grandad did it, but my dad doesn't and I don't.

There's certainly been a bit more interest since the ammo scare, but high caliber bullets (which seem to sell the best as far as reloading goes) are the ones selling, not the .22s (which is pretty much the only thing that's still impacted).

So, it's certainly something that some people do, but I'd still say it falls outside the "average joe range", if you will.

[Rathlord]

Now, this is obviously somewhat anecdotal, but I also used to sell reloading supplies up until last week when I quit . . .

All this time, I had thought you worked in farm supply?

We sold all kinds of stuff, but farm supply was my focus still kept track of everything, especially the gun stuff since I hunt/shoot.

[Dryke]

I think it's important to keep in mind that what we should all be really looking at is NOT the 'average joe' that goes to Starbucks every morning before going to the office.  We should be thinking about the 'average joe' that has just found himself in the zombie apocalypse.

 

That distinction is crucial to the atmosphere of this game.  Your average 'starbucks' joe would have neither any idea nor any motivation to learn how to reload bullets or turn some kind of metal scrap into a weapon or figure out how to build some type of rudimentary body armor to protect himself from some lunatic trying to bite him.  Your average 'zombie apocalypse' joe would be VERY motivated to figure out how to do all of these things - right alongside trying to learn how to hunt, or fish, or grow crops, or build shelter.

 

So getting back to what the OP was trying to point out:  It is completely inadequate to cite 'average joe' as the sole reason that an idea is not feasible.  First and foremost, because as I pointed out average joe himself is going to undergo a radical change once the dead start getting up and attacking people.  Secondly, because the game itself has already deviated from 'average joe' in a number of important and significant ways (such as master carpenters building their own homes and furniture) that it at least validates the idea of suggesting further changes without having those changes dismissed with a blanket 'average joe' argument that isn't really supportable by the evidence.

 

Lest there are those who think I support EVERY conceivable anti-zombie-apocalypse survival skill:  Gameplay, gameplay, gameplay.  Realism is not and cannot be the only factor in determining whether or not something makes it into the game.  It has to be something that can be balanced and is feasible to code without detracting (or distracting) from the vision of the game that the devs are trying to produce. 

 

Maybe as we move forward we can agree that we aren't really bound to average joe any more.  What we're really bound to is something that is realistically possible - both in a 'put it in the game' sense as well as a 'if this were really happening' sense - in a zombie apocalypse setting (in rural Kentucky).

[okeer]

made this suggestion:

http://theindiestone.com/forums/index.php/topic/10631-age-counts-into-ability-to-learn-more/

 

was inspired by this thread...

[Rathlord]

I don't think that's really an applicable broad spectrum takeaway Dryke. The developers and a considerable portion of the PZ community disagree. I'm certainly in agreement that gameplay should always come first, but that's not entirely applicable when talking about adding entirely new features that aren't related to anything in the game.

 

Edit: At any rate, we have the devs opinion laid out clearly (and everyone else's) and I don't think there's anything more to be gained by continuing the discussion so I'm going to lock her up.