Of Sticks, Carrots, and Wallets (Guild Wars 2)

Last night the ArenaNet blog updated with a post by John Hargrove, Guild Wars 2 game designer, presenting an overview of some of the reward and upgrade schemes in Guild Wars 2. There are five main design points followed by a look into how they incorporated that point. These are some pretty cool concepts incorporated in to the game. For example, a player’s loot roll is personalized. If there is a dungeon boss chest, the player gets her own roll on the loot table to find out what that she earned.

This one concept is resounding, and can be a dual-edged sword. The loot distribution at the end of a dungeon was almost a kind of bittersweet celebration. It was exciting to see what we as a group had won, but then often times others would get some of the loot I wanted. Instead they use a system similar to Dungeons and Dragons Online where the group after-event is gone in place of a personal moment with the chest. Hopefully they can find some way of taking back a little of that group reward by perhaps allowing a person to donate an item in-chest (before it gets bound) to another player.

The blog post then leans heavily in to the most iconic rewards in the MMO genre, gear. With gear players become walking trophy cases of accomplishment, and coming off of the excellent dye post, we know ArenaNet wants players to look exactly how they want to. However, this luxury is not without cost anymore.

Stepping back from that dark edge for a second, the blog post is 95% positive and exciting. There will be a light, medium, and heavy armor set created thematically for each dungeon. The concept pieces look amazing. Each of these armor sets are heavily customizable not only with up to 4 dye channels but also by adding stat changing crests.

Crests are the next iteration of Guild Wars insignia and runes system, but some will act in the manner of having a set bonus. So if a Tailor (subtle nod to crafting, ArenaNet) made a player 6 Crests of the Legion, the player could assign the 6 Crests of the Legion to his 6 armor crest slots (presumably 1 for each armor) to get the full set bonus on top of the armor stats. Or, the player could choose to use 4 Crests of the Legion and 2 crests from another set. I think it’s a pretty decent nod to NCSoft’s City of Heroes/Villains armor system.

The sticky issue, which caused a lot of heat in the forums last night, was for the use of Transmutation Stones, which are purchased in a cash shop. The T-Stones allow a player to take the stats of one item and the visual look of another item and combine the two items into a final item having the stats of the first item and the look of the second. Basically players are paying extra for the privilege of the way they want to look if they want to “break” the rules to wear a low-level item with high-level stats. I think that’s pretty fair. The subscription-based Aion uses the same mechanics (for free, I believe), and the freemium Wizard 101 sells this feature in their cash shop as well.

I think paying for this feature is fine, even if the way ArenaNet presented it was a little underhanded in the blog post. What I don’t like is the mechanic itself,* which is amplified by it becoming a microtransaction. In view of both Lord of the Rings Online’s outfit system and ArenaNet’s own Guild Wars costume system, it’s a less elegant solution. First of all, I can guarantee that some players will transmute their item the opposite of what they intended. Second, as presented it destroys the stat item allowing for reduced flexibility. Finally, in view of a microtransaction it has the appearance of milking the fashion-conscious player. If a player loves her level 20 dungeon armor she either has to wait until level 80 to buy the T-Stones to finally wear the armor or continually buy T-Stones as they are presumably used as she levels and needs to upgrade her armor.

My armchair solution is to keep the costume / outfit system of Guild Wars and Lord of the Rings Online, but make it so that T-Stones destroy the items stats and give the item the Costume tag. Then allow only items with Costume tags to be placed in the Costume slots. This would be my ideal solution, but I doubt NCSoft and ArenaNet would go for it because players would believably buy fewer T-Stones.

With the good possibility of dyes being sold in the Guild Wars 2 cash shop and knowledge that Transmutation Stones will be for sale in the cash shop, I think it is pretty apparent that the Guild Wars 2 cash shop will be more intertwined than it was in Guild Wars. Yet, I think fans are getting a bit antsy as to what products will be available in the cash shop, and with the small forum fires that caught over this small luxury, I think it would be best for ArenaNet to set a good, thorough foundation for what they want and don’t want to sell that way.

ah, I knew you by your voice

* To be fair, I didn’t like it the moment I first saw it in Wizard 101.

49 thoughts on “Of Sticks, Carrots, and Wallets (Guild Wars 2)”

  1. I do hope this example is how they are going to maintain and fill their cash shop system, as long as nobody can get any real advantage over another player, be that +dmg or even just +%exp via some potion, i can go happy and smiling. Then again even if they should start out like that, it is hard to believe it would forever stay that way, the ammount of discipline needed to keep this up and commercial gain ArenaNet would lose is just too high in the end.

  2. Definitely feels like the Allods cash shop is on the way with this kind of stunt. Certainly nothing that extreme, most likely, but if the players are fine with this step, I’m sure potions are up next and crests and who knows what. We’ve already seen way overpriced storage in GW1, which I had a feeling was just the beginning of seeing how far they could push RMT.

    And yes, this feature is free in Aion, although now they’ll probably switch it to RMT if the GW players accept paying extra for it. We already have cash shop pets in Aion.

    GW2 just went from my “will absolutely buy” category to “I still feel ripped off by the lies NCSoft told about Aion and would probably be better off avoiding anything else they make”. Well, perhaps not that bad, but certainly GW2 has just gone to “will wait and see but am expecting the worst”.

    After the XTH bit (“we have everyone’s picks and will sort it out” to “sorry, we’re just giving everyone 50 points”), when I had picked all 10 slots exactly in order, on two accounts… which left a really bad feeling towards ArenaNet in my case, I was willing to keep an open mind about GW2. Will see how this pans out.

    1. I do want to point out that in Aion you do have to subscribe to use the feature, but in LOTRO, now, the similar feature is free.

      I wouldn’t expect the worst, but I do think that a post on their cash shop plans is in order. I don’t expect them to change T-Stones based on the community reactions, but I do hope they will respond with blog posts on RMT plans.

      1. Granted, Aion is a subscription game. With a cash shop on top of that. But I’m about to the point of not renewing my subscription, even though I enjoy the game and they made some needed changes in 2.0 that have improved things quite a bit.

        But this just has a total bad vibe to it. It is like the entire gaming industry is becoming like the banking industry, extra fees for everything, always trying to squeeze every cent out of you they can, for worse and worse service.

        Or maybe I’m just becoming a grumpy old man. Get off my lawn!

        1. You must realize, ANet is the designer, not NCsoft. NCsoft (to my understanding) does have some say in the way of cash shops, but ANet has the say in what goes in it (NCsoft seems to be able to pick the prices though… :O )

          1. NCSoft owns ArenaNet lock, stock and barrel. While I would hope they give ArenaNet as much free will as possible, I’d point out two of the ArenaNet founders took over all of NCSoft’s western operations and turned that into NCWest. NCWest has been a prime example of how NOT to run things (much as NC Austin bungled things before them). How much of that was from the ArenaNet people or the guy that NCSoft sent over from Korea to actually run things? Note: both ArenaNet guys left the company entirely since.

    2. Don’t you think its a bit unfair to bash a company for selling optional cosmetic items when they don’t charge you monthly subs? And on top of that you compare it to a game that takes from you mandatory $15 every month.

      In FF 14 you can have only 1 player slot without paying extra, WoW has an in game shop, EQ2 has an ingame shop, SWToR will also have an ingame shop, and they all still charge you monthly fees. But no, lets attack ArenaNet for being greedy.

      1. There is some question as to just how cosmetic these are, for instance, will you have to pay every few levels to have the armor set you like the looks of but with the higher stats? And where does it stop, will potions be next? Crests? Knowing how NCSoft has handled Aion and then to have something that could possibly be considered a consumable item pop up as cash shop only, well, that sets off alarm bells for many.

        Part of this whole thing is having an article where ArenaNet basically says they are trying new ways to improve their game, how players shouldn’t be stuck with mismatched or ugly armor (although I doubt any of the GW armor would probably actually be ugly) and then they say you’ll have to pay extra for this to be fixed? Not so cool. Will there be cash shop items for crafting materials for better looking items? Where does it end?

        I’m fine with charging for extra character slots. And for the costumes. Unlock packs for stuff (as long as those things can be gotten through reasonable game play). Those kind of things. But once you start along this path it becomes all to easy to end up being the next Allods. You get the, “Well, they accepted $10 for a tiny storage pane, how about $15 or $20 for one in GW2. And I’m sure we’ll be able to get more for character slots. We’ll just keep slowly increasing prices like the gasoline companies!”

        1. Wow…. paranoia in its prime. :) You have totally unfounded fears… nice… :P

          1. I’m an Aion player. Paranoia is a normal state after all the lies NCWest/NCSoft told. :)

  3. Is there any advantage that relatively complex stat-swapping systems like this have over the seemingly much simpler “Appearance Items” system?

    1. Advantage to Anet:

      A microtransaction item to sell for money. ^_^

      Possible advantages to players:

      > Incentive to replay dungeons & other content, at all levels, for matching gear – in an appearance tab scenario players of a certain disposition will just drop the co-ordinated starter set in there and equip whatever oddments come their as they bee-line for L80, way rather than replaying for full sets.
      That is the kind of thing that social and/or PUG-starved players tend to lament on forums.

      > If armor is used to fill the costume/town clothing slots, then logically players with a favorite armor set have to forgo having costumes/town clothes on hand.
      Presumably it’s a toggle to switch between the 2 forms of attire, so players wearing costume armor have to sacrifice that convenience – plus a few inventory slots to carry their favorite costumes/clothes since they can’t just equip them 24/7.
      It’d also be quite a disincentive to pursue & collect all the many town clothes if a character’s costume armor is integral to their theme (e.g. starter rags, HoM reward set) – simply never going to get any use out of them.

      > I imagine the in-game economy will be rather impacted by whether or not gear has to be sacrificed in this process.
      I’m more of a “everything for everyone!” player myself, but I see plenty of forum-goers bemoaning that the supply of desirable items just grows & grows in GW1 with no mechanics to eliminate them – such economists should no doubt be pleased to have a] L80 gear gobbled up and b] constant demand for said gear for the purposes of gobbling up.

  4. I don’t see a reason not to use a LOTRO like system. I suppose there would be less inventory clutter, but I can think of a ton of scenarios where it is just annoying to deal with comparatively. The main problems are you have to destroy items and you can’t share the same stats across multiple looks at all. The only benefit to using a transmutation system is there is less inventory fiddling.

    I’d modify your armchair design to make a copy of the item that is the costume and make them both bound to you so you wouldn’t necessarily loose the item for stat purposes.

    I don’t like it being a microtransaction thing , particularly if I have to buy something every time I want to change looks.

  5. The advantage is that NCSoft gets more money. Of course, that doesn’t help us players!

    If you’re paying real money for a stone, neither item should be destroyed or stripped of stats. I’d prefer it if the item was made non-tradeable or something, but kept the stats; that way you could transfer the skin of the old item to any new ones you get, instead of just once.

    Of course what I’d *really* prefer is an appearance item/costume/outfit system like LOTRO/EQ2 (probably others) have. If they’re *actually* committed to letting you look how you want, this wouldn’t be a pay service, or it would be a one-time fee to unlock ‘appearance slots’ for your account.

  6. If they wanted to be fair to the players they would make it have unlimited uses. Stripping the stats and making it a costume is also a great idea.

    If I pay for something I should f*cking own it. Not have one use.

    1. Yeah, you pay for food that shit should full your stomach forever.
      [a little too strong here –Ravious]

      1. As one of the people who has been flying sparks on the forum…

        Paying for an “everlasting” stone that could be used across all characters I think I would accept (as long as the price wasn’t ridiculously high), as that would be more along the lines of an account upgrade than the milking constant purchases of stones would be. Done that way, it would be similar in behaviour to the costumes we have now. (Mind you, one difference is that costumes don’t raise the spectre of being stuck in armour you hate because you need the stats and can’t justify the price, while the transformation stones do.)

        As I did say in the forum, however, the stones also strike me as something that would have been GREAT as a gold sink (much better than paying for waypoints, which I fear will serve as a disincentive to crossing the map in order to help someone), so I feel ANet may be missing an opportunity here.

        Still, I’m glad to hear that it apparently hasn’t been set in, hahah, stone yet – that suggests that it’s possible that they deliberately put it in to gauge the reaction.

  7. 1. There is no reason to think that the UI for T-stones will be complicated or hard for players to use. If players still transmute the wrong items even with clear indications on how to use the system then that is on them, not the system itself. You don’t blame the “item deletion” system when people throw out the wrong stuff.

    2. I find this system is just as elegant if not more so than a costume system because it removes the clutter of having different costume sets while allowing the same functionality. It also adds value to the gear itself as it is custom gear, rather than just putting on a full body mask. It also limits how much/often people can change their look, making customization a more meaningful choice.

    3. The only bad part about this system is that T-stone seem to be cash-only items which is a bad restriction on such an awesome system. Everyone should have access to customization, with cash only being required if the player wants to transmute items willy-nilly. Hopefully Anet realizes this and allows players to gain T-stone through gameplay as well(gold, karma, PvP, etc)

  8. The CMs posted in the guru thread several times (check the DevTracker section for the direct links). I believe that at least twice, someone explained that they have not finalized what will be included in the in-game store (cash shop) or what the pricing structures will be.

    The reason that T-stones were mentioned in this relatively early article was due to their connection to the subject. ArenaNet felt that not mentioning that the source will be the in-game store would be dishonest. I agree with this stance. If they had talked about the T-stones but not mentioned their cost, I would have been very angry at being misled. Like the news or not, ArenaNet has always been as upfront as possible.

    1. I don’t need finalizations or a catalogue. I need goals. What are they trying to achieve with the products sold in the cash shop? How will these products affect players in-game? No in game advantages? What’s an “advantage?” Is extra storage an advantage? What is the sacred ground?

      I think ArenaNet can write a blog article or two on these subjects and questions.

      Clearly even though T-Stones are a vanity item, they were done in such a way that people were not expecting this given the context of GW1 and what little we know about GW2 business model. And thus the forum fires.

  9. I just don’t have a problem with the system as it stands. It avoids the pitfall of letting you buy your way to elite/vanity armor and diminishing other player’s achievements. It doesn’t effect stats. And frankly, I personally kind of like the elegance of just having a piece of armor and being able to give it another piece of armor’s stats, rather than having “the item you wear for stats” and “the item you wear for looks”, which just feels weird to me.

    I also like the fact that sometimes you just have ugly armor for a while, and you deal with it. I don’t think everyone should just look perfect all the time. Now that’s just my opinion, so it doesn’t count for much, but with this system it still feels a little special to look a certain way… I dunno.

    I certainly understand how people who really feel strongly about how they look feel singled out by this. And I think it could stand to be improved a number of ways – make the items also available in game some how, or not make them limited use through some mechanic. But I think in general it’s a perfectly inoffensive way to try to increase the revenue stream and support more development.

    Unfortunately at some point someone is going to pay to subsidize content being developed for someone else. I did it to the tune of hundreds of Dollars when I played WoW (never set foot in the raids my sub went towards making), you just have to find a way to cope and make the best of it…

    I find these days more than ever if you want to be treated well by a game company, and really get catered to as a customer and gamer, you just you need to go indy. The industry is at a rough place, and there are a lot of problematic things happening with the big developers.

  10. On the 8th day Grench created whiners and sent them all on GW 2 fan sites so they can rant to their hearts content and trash the very artists that they’ve been worshiping for the past 5 years.

    In GW 1 we couldn’t do all these thing and now that we can but with a fee you act like cry babies? Who says you have to buy any of it. You all sound like chances are there’s only one armor or weapon you gonna like, as if? Personally I would not buy one unless I’m level 80 and most of us will get there within the first month. If you are against the concept of micro transactions fine but stop trashing the company that is offering so much for so little.

  11. The only thing I have to complain about (and I do fear the backlash from this, lol) is that there doesn’t seem to be any focus on “how does this make sense in the real world?” going on with ANet. Even as a kid, using your imagination, if you were smart about it, you’d imagine all the details and how it’d work if it were really happening.

    So many fantasy games’ functions go completely unexplained, “they just are” or “it just happens” and people like to say “it’s a fantasy game, who cares?” Well, I do. I love the fantasy genre, eastern or western, when it’s well-written and well-executed.

    Guild Wars 1 & 2 are still my MMOs of choice thanks to ArenaNet’s outstanding principles and fan-focus. I just wish they’d also start considering the “how it would be in the real world” side of their games’ content. Is it just me? :P

  12. For all of those happy with the transmutation stones and cash shop items, how about you lobby for more cosmetic only items:

    Boss Stone – bosses appear as mostly gray blobs, not affecting actual game play. Want an “enhanced” experience? Buy a Boss Stone. One use per stone. Elite bosses may require several stones.

    Landscape stones, weapon stones, skill effect stones, town stones, housing stones; we’re talking unlimited options, all “optional”, “cosmetic”, and not affecting actual game play. Woo hoo! Can’t wait! (I want a royalty for the idea!)

    Stretching things to extremes to make a point. Where do you draw the line? No, I don’t think ArenaNet would go to such extremes. But just put these things in the regular game and/or add stuff in expansions we can buy. Don’t nickle and dime us like every other cash shop game; and more and more subscription games are doing.

    I don’t mind spending money on games. If you could see my collection (don’t even ask how many GW accounts I have for extra storage) you’d know I support game companies. All I ask is a decent product at a decent price, please!

  13. I see little difference between transmutation stones in Guild Wars 2 and costumes in Guild Wars 1. A costume changes your appearance but leaves your armor stats alone. The stone lets you keep the look you like and the stats you like. Both are mico-transactions which take the place of subscription fees. I would never play a game that requires a subscription. I have purchased just about everything you can from the Guild Wars 1 online store and will no doubt make purchases from the Guild Wars 2 store.

  14. “In GW 1 we couldn’t do all these thing and now that we can but with a fee you act like cry babies?”

    actually, we could. as pointed out @ guru, the gw1 armor system was much more flexible in terms of customization – all armor had was an armor rating inherent, prefix & suffix were player controlled.

    i have no clue why anet would discard this system and i’m really curious to hear more about how armors (and inherent stats) will function in general.

    we may have crests but, in my opinion, those are nothing more than infusion-on-steroids. for each infused armor piece i was granted a defense buff vs mursaat || with each additional crest i gain stronger buffs vs everyone.

    i’m really more concerned with the way their armor system is starting to sound (ie, set stats/reduced customization – statwise) than some silly “stone” (please no more damn stones…). you wanna pay 5 $ to change the look of your shoes, go ahead.

    i also think that alot of the people that are vain enough to want to purchase this may be in for a surprise when they’re constantly acquiring better stats and having to constantly buy more stones…imagine if they keep 3 or 4 different “sets”. it’s gonna add up but if you got the cash to burn, go nuts.

    my solution:

    revert to the gw1 system. allow me to salvage any inherent stat drops and utilize runes/insignias/crests/whatever to fully customize my armor how i want (ie do away with static inherent armor mods). allow me to acquire an item or access a vendor (possible cash shop utilization) that will change armor i equip to have an armor rating reflecting my level (ala hero armors in gw1) or that will “enhance” lower AR armors to max AR (must have access to max AR level to use)

    cons: less potential $ for anet

    pros: tons more customization for players (those who use cash shop AND those who don’t/can’t) and everyone can still look like a diva whilst having the best stats.

  15. I think it’s a nice idea with these transmutation stones and the like. Don’t really care about the cash shop aspect either. I’m just a little worried that this will be ‘required’ to wear nice looking armor with decent stats.

    Also as some other people have said, it would be nice if these stones were a 1-time purchase, just like Skill/Pet unlock packs in GW1. I don’t feel like buying 20 stones a la 5€ each just to have some nice armor(with decent stats on it).

    1. There’s no way Arena Net is going to front load the first dungeons with the nice looking armor, and back load the last dungeons with stats.

      The elite armor in Guild Wars looks great, and you can’t get it until you’re at or very close to the end of a campaign. End game armor in Guild Wars 2 will look great. This is for people who get wedded to something early on. Just a cosmetic sale.

  16. I’m just honestly amazed at the flip, and I have to shake the GW2’s team on this, because it’s brilliant in a Machiavellian sort of way.

    With this system a particularly bad looking piece or set of armor (and this is not a comment on the artists; every game has some visuals players don’t like), instead of doing its tiny part to drive sales down will now tend to do the opposite and generate a tiny increase in sales as players seek to change it.

    It’s fucking brilliant. Just to think that the worse armor looks, the more money they’ll eventually make. I’m -not- saying they’ll go ahead and make some pieces look bad on purpose, but on the other hand you have to understand that we’ve had years of precedent on this kind of thing.

    1. I actually see this the opposite. If they did something like sell costumes as they do in GW, then there would be a perverse incentive to funnel the best artists and the most effort into those pay-exclusive items at the expense of stuff available in game. At least with this system the incentive is to make all the armor available in game (just not with the stats you want).

      More than that, the incentive is to spread the coolest work throughout the game’s levels, rather than just put it at end game. And I simply don’t see anything wrong with that – barring them purposefully making all the top-tier gear the crappiest, which is simply never going to happen in practice.

      Again, I see the merit to a lot of the arguments being made, but I think these sorts of cash shop items are always going to be judged based on the specific nuances of their implementation, not broad-brush analogies and hard-line ultimatums.

      1. I see what you’re saying. I suppose yeah, we’ll have to wait and see the implementation unless they have a change of heart about this (and they won’t, because it’s the accountants running the show, not them, and accountants have no heart).

        On incentives, yes I agree. There’s always been incentives on the dev side to make some things sub-optimally in an attempt to goad something out of the player, usually time or money. That’s always been there. But the two main problem I’m having with this idea are:

        1- It’s a system clearly designed -for- the shop instead of the other way around, which would be the shop ‘filling in the gaps’ of the design. There’s no valid reason for the system to be as it is unless you factor in the shop. I for one would appreciate some honesty and candor (which the GW team does have, in spades) and I’d like to hear them say “Yes, we designed this for the store. That’s how it is, that’s where the hook is, take it or leave it.” and be done with it.

        tl;dr: it’s a system that’s sub-optimal from a player’s perspective just to respond to the existence of the store. Doesn’t leave a good taste.

        2- It does create an incentive for them to keep this system sub-optimal as long as it feeds the store. Now, whether they will do it or not I don’t know, but the fact is that now there is a monetary incentive for the devs to keep the system running as it is regardless of how it’s seen by players or how constructive it is to the game as a whole.

        Yes, I think it’s fantastic that you can take one item’s looks and one item’s stats and combine them to get what you want. But it’s much, much less than fantastic that this is being tied to the store, specially considering how there are mechanics out there right now (or soon to be out) that allow players to either get the stats they want (Cata’s reforging) or the look they want (LOTRO’s wardrobe/cosmetics) without a store having anything to do with it.

        I’m one of the main proponents of letting people pay for fluff here at KTR, but I can also smell an artificial, tacked-on “solution” a mile away. There’s no reason for this to be as described if it wasn’t for the store’s existence. So, they’re designing for the store, not for the player or the game’s sake.

  17. Good, constructive blog once again. You wrote:

    “This would be my ideal solution, but I doubt NCSoft and ArenaNet would go for it because players would believably buy fewer T-Stones.”

    I don’t think that it’s so simple. If they keep the inferred pay-per-use model they won’t get a cent from me. However, if they also/instead provide the option that you describe (which I agree is optimal) then they’ve got a customer right here.

  18. Speaking of Hall of Monuments, I wonder if some of the unique rewards that transfer through it from GW1 will be armor pieces. Low level armor pieces of course, but with unique appearance.

  19. Well I’ve always liked to change my equipment a lot, so I doubt I’ll even use this thing. However, I wish it was free. that’s where it seemed like they were going with the blog post. If it’s just a dollar or something, or you get a whole bunch of stones for 5 bucks, then I’d be happy and possibly use it when I’m further along.

    1. The problem is not the T-Stones, the problem is that how far will they go? as someone stated in an earlier comment, appearance customization might get out of the hand, boss appearances etc.
      Also again, how far will they go, cosmetics only might not be a problem, but what if they add armor and weapons to the shop that are extremely overpowered, or how about attack power potions.
      People aren’t afraid of the cosmetics, they are afraid of how far Anet will go with the variety of the cash shop.

  20. The item skin remodeling is probably the ONLY thing I love about Aion. For one thing, it makes some low-level items valuable instead of vendor trash. It avoids the problem many have already mentioned of ‘the good looking set you wear in town, and the ugly crap you wear on missions.’ From a strategic POV, it also makes it slightly harder for enemies to guess your stats/class/abilities based on your armor appearance. (I can’t be the only one who remembers you could actually disguise yourself as another class pretty well in DAoC.)

    I would be sad if this is cash-only, though. It would be better to use the system NCsoft already sort of uses for PvPing; you can grind up, or you can pay cash if you don’t care to spend the time, your choice. Let people farm T-stones if they want, and buy a ‘remodel set’ if they don’t care to grind.

  21. I don’t know what you mean by group reward? Clearly it wasn’t a group reward by how you even note others get what you want. It’s not something you got together. There is no group reward element so there is no ‘getting it back again’. Individual loot rolls are just taking what was already the case – an individual reward mechanism – and stream lining it.

Comments are closed.