COMMUNITY - FORUMS - SOULS, TALENTS, & REINCARNATION
The Old Soul

From what I remember, the developers talked about each copy of the game coming with three randomly generated souls, ranging from new souls to souls that may have experienced 1-3 lifetimes. While I understand a more experienced soul could build up certain skills it has already invested in much more quickly than a new soul, what is the downside to using an old soul?

What if someone got a REALLY old soul in their randomly generated pack of souls (like 4-10 lifetimes)?


11/15/2016 2:14:52 AM #1

Maybe that is where the 5% of people that are magic users come from.


11/15/2016 2:35:36 AM #2

As i understand it, the initial "range" of past lives on our starting souls will probably be initially limited and slowly expanded over time.

We probably won't see more than something like 1-3 past lives on any soul on release, but in a few years when new players come in and and everyone else is on their 4th or 5th life, it might be more common for them to see more "old souls" when they start than when we start.

New players joining 3 years post release of the game might buy their spark and start the game with multiple souls of 2-4 past lives, giving them a chance at the skill ramps the rest of us likely already have.

11/15/2016 2:37:28 AM #3

Dev Journal did say that they would be aging forward the pool of souls available as we get further into the game, so as not to put players who join later on at an obvious disadvantage.


Also known as AvA in Discord.

11/15/2016 3:00:52 AM #4

I could see the kings/queens getting an automatic extra past life or two on their totals for one of their souls just as a representative of the lifetimes it took to setup their kingdoms. But on just one of their souls (the one that's intended to be the King/Queen life)


Count Ruthgar Rugharin, County of Bragen Veld, Duchy - Conclave of Aritaur, Kingdom of Vornair.

11/15/2016 3:09:44 AM #5

Not trying to hijack the thread but what do we know about the 3 random souls. Will one be more specialized in an an area of the game than the other two, say more geared towards crafting where the other two may be geared towards combat and management (nobility) respectively? Or will they just have different stats that you can choose to complement your play style, like one of the three mentioned?


"Count Eldric Blackmoore of The Haven, offering direct support for the Hunters, Explorers and Gathers of Elyria" the

11/15/2016 3:22:24 AM #6

Posted By Sullen at 9:09 PM - Mon Nov 14 2016

Not trying to hijack the thread but what do we know about the 3 random souls. Will one be more specialized in an an area of the game than the other two, say more geared towards crafting where the other two may be geared towards combat and management (nobility) respectively? Or will they just have different stats that you can choose to complement your play style, like one of the three mentioned?

I am not sure. Even though they are random, I hope everyone will have access to at least 1 "new" soul they can choose to mold in their own image.

@Ruthgar: I could see starting nobility having their oldest soul be more aged than others based on their title. For example, if the oldest soul you will see during exposition has experienced 3 lives, I could see Barons/Mayors having access to a soul that has experienced 4 lives, Counts having access to a soul that has experienced 5 lives, Dukes having access to a soul that has experienced 6 lives, and a King having access to a soul that has experienced 7 lives. Yes, it might grant nobles a mechanical advantage, but I see this as more akin to rewarding those who invested in the game's development rather than a "pay to win" scenario.

Perhaps I am wrong in thinking this, but souls are one of the few things we take with us when our characters die. We cannot take our DE items or titles or land. All we can take with us is the memories of the lives we have lived. It seems rather poetic in a sense that our leaders, once departed, should reincarnate with a depth of experience that serves them in their next life, whether they choose to lead once more or explore another path.


11/15/2016 2:02:13 PM #7

Nobility are already rewarded enough. Rewarding them even more in such a way crosses the pay2win line.


So I have a thing now! 📣Also this is my signature until Sieraen gives me one. 🤷1 Like 👍 = 1 Prayer 🙏

11/15/2016 2:45:42 PM #8

Posted By Apaukolypse at 08:02 AM - Tue Nov 15 2016

Nobility are already rewarded enough. Rewarding them even more in such a way crosses the pay2win line.

They certainly are rewarded by being able to shape the world and name things and build things, but these things can be reshaped, renamed, and destroyed by players. Just because you start as king doesn't mean you will remain king. The immense amount of spirit lost makes being nobility a dangerous gig with nothing to take with them when they die. Why would a 1-4 life experience gain for paying hundreds if not thousands of dollars be "pay2win", especially when there is no "win" condition for the game?


11/15/2016 3:10:18 PM #9

Not having a win condition is a rather poor argument. Most MMORPGs do not have a set win condition either but that does not stop them from becoming pay2win. The reason being is that players themselves define their "win" condition, which often times is becoming the best XYZ. When it becomes apparent they have to spend alot of money to be competitive for said goals, it becomes pay 2 win.

As it stands right now, in addition to all the design experiences and resources nobility get, they get exposition which is in essence a 3 month unwiped headstart, which is absolutely massive when it comes to MMOs. The only reason there is not a whole lot of uproar about it is because it is more or less necessary for the game, but it does not change what it is.

So CoE really is already flirting with the pay2win line. It hasn't quite crossed it yet, as giving out titles and massive amounts of unwiped early access is necessary for a truly player built world, but if it pushes it too much more it will cross it.

As for nobility being a dangerous gig, it is also the most powerful gig. Nobles will face more risks than your average Joe, but they also wield massive amounts of power to counteract that risk, power that normal players don't have access to. So I won't be getting my violin out for the poor noblemen who take more spirit loss in the event they die.


So I have a thing now! 📣Also this is my signature until Sieraen gives me one. 🤷1 Like 👍 = 1 Prayer 🙏

11/15/2016 4:27:55 PM #10

I will possibly getting out my dagger for them.

Or out of them...


11/16/2016 5:19:15 AM #11

Posted By Apaukolypse at 09:10 AM - Tue Nov 15 2016

Not having a win condition is a rather poor argument. Most MMORPGs do not have a set win condition either but that does not stop them from becoming pay2win. The reason being is that players themselves define their "win" condition, which often times is becoming the best XYZ. When it becomes apparent they have to spend alot of money to be competitive for said goals, it becomes pay 2 win.

As it stands right now, in addition to all the design experiences and resources nobility get, they get exposition which is in essence a 3 month unwiped headstart, which is absolutely massive when it comes to MMOs. The only reason there is not a whole lot of uproar about it is because it is more or less necessary for the game, but it does not change what it is.

So CoE really is already flirting with the pay2win line. It hasn't quite crossed it yet, as giving out titles and massive amounts of unwiped early access is necessary for a truly player built world, but if it pushes it too much more it will cross it.

As for nobility being a dangerous gig, it is also the most powerful gig. Nobles will face more risks than your average Joe, but they also wield massive amounts of power to counteract that risk, power that normal players don't have access to. So I won't be getting my violin out for the poor noblemen who take more spirit loss in the event they die.

So, what you are saying is the game still has a "win" condition because players are going to set that condition for themselves (typically by being the best at whatever they want to be the best at), design experiences and exposition are a necessary evil that flirts with the "pay2win" line, and the risk nobles face is already offset by the power they wield within the game. Furthermore, any additional benefit given to nobles would cross the "pay2win" line.

When you say that players make their own win conditions, I can agree with that because I know I will sometimes personally set goals for myself and feel a sense of accomplishment when I achieve those goals. However, saying that there is a "pay2win" line is subjective to each individual player. If my personal win condition is to build a settlement and run it as mayor then, yes, I paid to win by backing the game above Baron/Baroness tier. If my personal win condition is to obtain legendary tier in the brewing skill then, no, I cannot pay to win because that is something I have to work towards in-game. Regardless, neither of my personal win conditions affect any other player's personal win conditions and a communally recognized "pay2win" line never manifests itself.

Likewise, is the proposed talent system "luck2win" because people with talents will be able to do things people without talents cannot? Granted, I don't believe talents are tied to souls anymore, so that is a bit divorced from the original topic but still a valid comparison.

How about role specific benefits? What if starting nobility (barons, counts, dukes, and kings) have "Noble Blood" as an additional trait passed down through their bloodline, granting them quicker skill growth in "aristocratic" skills used by nobility but slower growth in "commoner" skills used by laborers. This way being born a noble would mean something different than someone who gained their noble title through conquest or appointment.

On that same note, what if starting nobility (barons, counts, dukes, kings) had a starting "Noble Soul" with 1, 2, 3, or 4 extra lives worth of experience, respectively. These souls could have skill ramps geared towards noble pursuits, making them ideal leaders, skill-wise, but making it difficult for them to transition to more mundane pursuits if they lose their nobility.

There is a lot of RPing potential that can be backed up by mechanics in-game, but I don't see either of these suggestions crossing some illusory "pay2win" line.


11/16/2016 10:10:56 AM #12

Posted By Honeybrew at 12:19 AM - Wed Nov 16 2016

So, what you are saying is the game still has a "win" condition because players are going to set that condition for themselves (typically by being the best at whatever they want to be the best at), design experiences and exposition are a necessary evil that flirts with the "pay2win" line, and the risk nobles face is already offset by the power they wield within the game. Furthermore, any additional benefit given to nobles would cross the "pay2win" line.

Precisely, yes.

Posted By Honeybrew at 12:19 AM - Wed Nov 16 2016

When you say that players make their own win conditions, I can agree with that because I know I will sometimes personally set goals for myself and feel a sense of accomplishment when I achieve those goals. However, saying that there is a "pay2win" line is subjective to each individual player. If my personal win condition is to build a settlement and run it as mayor then, yes, I paid to win by backing the game above Baron/Baroness tier. If my personal win condition is to obtain legendary tier in the brewing skill then, no, I cannot pay to win because that is something I have to work towards in-game. Regardless, neither of my personal win conditions affect any other player's personal win conditions and a communally recognized "pay2win" line never manifests itself.

That's not entirely true.

For the first part, nobody defines their "win condition" as just "running a town" for the same reason nobody defines their win condition as "fighting other players". Running a town is a play style. Where players will set their win condition is what they do with their town, whether that is become a successful trading hub, tourist paradise, or whatever they want to do to become the "Best town at X Y or Z". This leads me to the next part of my argument.

For the second part, if your personal win condition is to obtain legendary tier in brewing skill, a skill level limited to only a certain percentage of players, then it may be necessary to do things like buy into exposition or buy EP to get those crafting packs on the EP store. Giving nobility more experienced souls, as was how this argument originally started, would only increase the competitive advantages allowed to those who spend money. See, many games out there that are "Pay2Win" don't just give you a trophy saying "You won!" if you spend money. They give you advantages for spending money, advantages that other players either A. Have to work incredibly hard to gain access to or B. Don't have access to at all. So as I said earlier, when it becomes apparent that to be competitive you MUST spend money, the game becomes "Pay2Win". The same holds true for my example with becoming a "Best town at X Y or Z" I used in the last part of my argument: If you have to spend a lot of EP to develop your town, then to be competitive at becoming the "Best town at X Y or Z", it will be necessary to spend that money.

Posted By Honeybrew at 12:19 AM - Wed Nov 16 2016

Likewise, is the proposed talent system "luck2win" because people with talents will be able to do things people without talents cannot? Granted, I don't believe talents are tied to souls anymore, so that is a bit divorced from the original topic but still a valid comparison.

We have yet to see the impact that they would have, but I personally don't like RNG based souls, I don't think it adds a whole lot to the "skill-based gameplay" they are marketing. I'm fine with increasing the level of starting souls for beginning players later down the line, but I think player's should all start out on equal footing skill wise. I would not be pleased if I wanted to create the best brew in all the kingdom, and I started out with a level 1 soul that knew literally nothing, and someone else started out with a level 3 soul that had possessed 3 legendary brewmasters.

Posted By Honeybrew at 12:19 AM - Wed Nov 16 2016

How about role specific benefits? What if starting nobility (barons, counts, dukes, and kings) have "Noble Blood" as an additional trait passed down through their bloodline, granting them quicker skill growth in "aristocratic" skills used by nobility but slower growth in "commoner" skills used by laborers. This way being born a noble would mean something different than someone who gained their noble title through conquest or appointment.

I wouldn't really be for that. I don't like anything that would restrict players ability to do whatever they pleased, and so I am equally opposed to letting Noble's get bonuses towards leveling up certain skills as I am to penalizing them when they try to level up other skills. So if I was a noble and I decided "Hey, I wanna be the best at X" and it was a commoner skill, they would be kinda SOL.

All that would do is penalize nobles who want to become commoners/do commoner things and penalize commoners who wanted to become nobles/do noble things. Might force Nobles/Commoners to RP the role abit more, but it would detract from gameplay overall I feel.

Posted By Honeybrew at 12:19 AM - Wed Nov 16 2016

On that same note, what if starting nobility (barons, counts, dukes, kings) had a starting "Noble Soul" with 1, 2, 3, or 4 extra lives worth of experience, respectively. These souls could have skill ramps geared towards noble pursuits, making them ideal leaders, skill-wise, but making it difficult for them to transition to more mundane pursuits if they lose their nobility.

I don't think that would add anything but just make a bigger gap for commoners wishing to become nobles.

Commoners wouldn't start out with any bonus exp towards anything unless they got lucky (nobles can get lucky too and negate any closure of the gap in skills that might have created tho), meanwhile Nobles would just start out with a whole bunch of bonus exp for being nobles. Depending on how much bonus that could be, a commoner may never be able to make up the difference in their skills if they wanted to become a noble themselves.


So I have a thing now! 📣Also this is my signature until Sieraen gives me one. 🤷1 Like 👍 = 1 Prayer 🙏