Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > WarCraft Discussion > World of WarCraft Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-08-2012, 02:56 PM
AndyJP AndyJP is offline

Eternal
AndyJP's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,971
BattleTag: AndyJP#1205
Send a message via AIM to AndyJP

Default What Should Be Account-Wide?

Account-wide mounts, achievements, pets and possibly titles are coming. What other things should be account wide?

Heirlooms? Gold? Honor Points? Reputation? Mail? Legendary Items?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-08-2012, 03:08 PM
Cantus Cantus is offline

Ethermancer - Admin
Cantus's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: DC, U.S.
Posts: 8,478
BattleTag: Cantus#1700

Default

Heirlooms and Achievements should both be account wide. Gold should be server bound, but cross-faction so you aren't restarting everything if you want to play the other side of things. Vendor based pets and mounts should be account wide, but anything that requires an achievement (Glory of the Raider deals) should be character specific (keeps the "I was there vibe as well as encourages players to run older dungeons). (Non-trade good) Item transfers between servers should be via the Ethereals, similar to void storage, and just throw in a blurb about using multi-dimensional wormholes.

Rep and Honor both should be earned on a per-character basis, but having a "Oh you know that guy? Great, here's a boost," option for prior exalted factions (especially old ones like tBC) wouldn't be a bad idea.
__________________
Rationalizing the irrational since 2005.

The Mad Admin
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-08-2012, 03:08 PM
Bolvar Bolvar is offline

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Get Off My Lawn!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Get off my lawn!
Posts: 17,971

Default

Heirlooms.

Stupid that I can't roll up an alt on another realm with them unless I pay to copy a character over with them.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:47 PM
Millenia Millenia is online now

Elune
Millenia's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,796
BattleTag: Millenia#1386

Default

Any mounts and pets that are class and profession specific should be account-wide.
__________________
"All right, I'll get that kid to eat. Where's my screw driver and my plumber's helper? I'll open up his mouth and I'll shove it in."


The Alliance's three rules on faction conflict:
1) You can't win.
2) You can't break even.
3) You can't leave the game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mustrum View Post
Because if a storyteller is doing his job, he makes you care. And if that storyteller then says "I dunno, then they stopped fighting, I guess," without any explanation or clarification, his audience has every right to be pissed off. Because they were given reason to stay interested, reason to keep up with his tale, only to be shut down just as things were getting good. A waste of time, a waste of emotional tension, a waste, if you fail to grasp the significance of narrative, of money.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:49 PM
Porimlys Porimlys is offline

Elune
Porimlys's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,327
BattleTag: CptCarrot #1688

Default

I disagree, I think class and faction mounts should not be account wide. (Faction and class wide, maybe).

Profession mounts are another matter, I have no problem with that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:50 PM
Leviathon Leviathon is offline

Elune
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 17,204

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Porimlys View Post
I disagree, I think class and faction mounts should not be account wide. (Faction and class wide, maybe).

Profession mounts are another matter, I have no problem with that.
They should just treat faction mounts the same way they are with transfers and just make it give the corresponding mount on the other faction.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:50 PM
Frostwolf Frostwolf is offline

Elune
Frostwolf's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,379

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Porimlys View Post
I disagree, I think class and faction mounts should not be account wide. (Faction and class wide, maybe).

Profession mounts are another matter, I have no problem with that.
Agreed 100%.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:52 PM
Shaman Shaman is offline

Site Staff - Moderator
Shaman's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Kel'thuzad was right
Posts: 8,574

Default

I'm cautious to this idea of making everything important account-wide. You've got to leave some incentive to make new characters.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:56 PM
Leviathon Leviathon is offline

Elune
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 17,204

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarahmoo View Post
I'm cautious to this idea of making everything important account-wide. You've got to leave some incentive to make new characters.
To play a different character. Just now you can re-roll without going 'But I don't wanna lose the achievements or mounts!'
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-08-2012, 06:46 PM
AndyJP AndyJP is offline

Eternal
AndyJP's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,971
BattleTag: AndyJP#1205
Send a message via AIM to AndyJP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarahmoo View Post
I'm cautious to this idea of making everything important account-wide. You've got to leave some incentive to make new characters.
Account-wide skills!

I think it gives more incentive to make new characters. As it is right now, your main might only be your main simply because he/she has all the best stuff (achievements, mounts, titles etc.)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-08-2012, 11:59 PM
Sa'danak Sa'danak is offline

Arch-Druid
Sa'danak's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,456
BattleTag: Lyvef1re#1109

Default

I mostly agree with the current implementation.
I don't agree with seeing Horde/Alliance riding mounts not available to their faction normally. (It diminishes the accomplishments of getting one of the rare drops that breaks the rule, like Kaels Hawkstrider)
I don't agree with Class mounts being ridden by other classes because it creates a precedent of needing to roll that class to get those mounts. It also tends to look silly.
I agree with profession based mounts being able to be used by other characters but only if all of said mounts are made available to those who do not have the profession (auction house etc) otherwise you again set a bad precedent.

I also disagree with rep being account wide purely on the lack of sense involved. The idea of running into the Timbermaw for the first time and them just loving you for no reason is silly. Although I am definitely not looking forward to grinding 50 reps to exalted on my Monk now that I'm rerolling...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leviathon View Post
What matters more, Ashenvale or Lordaeron? The debate of 2013 between Financial Adviser Archdruid Sentinel Kyalin Raintree the Tree Hugger of Ashenvale and Supreme Commander Archmage Fojar von Lordaeron the Highlord of Undead Slaying.

Two enter...and both probably will leave but everyone will be facepalming.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:53 PM
Ashendant Ashendant is offline

Elune
Ashendant's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Portugal
Posts: 14,239
BattleTag: Ashendant#2130

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Porimlys View Post
I disagree, I think class and faction mounts should not be account wide. (Faction and class wide, maybe).

Profession mounts are another matter, I have no problem with that.
They should appear on the list like every other mount, but not usable.

You know for the collection freaks like me

Legendary should be turned into account wide stuff, i mean those things are LEGENDARY and a really pain in the ass to get
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:57 PM
HalfElfDragon HalfElfDragon is offline

The draconic Titleless - Mod
HalfElfDragon's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 15,508
Send a message via AIM to HalfElfDragon Send a message via MSN to HalfElfDragon Send a message via Yahoo to HalfElfDragon

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Porimlys View Post
I think class and faction mounts should not be account wide. (Faction and class wide, maybe).
I think that all mounts should be, with no restriction.
__________________
Quote:
Lucio Benado be wanting to say, Hey, what's up?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Porimlys View Post
See! Not everyone on the internet is so stubborn they can't have their opinions changed
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-08-2012, 05:19 PM
Crazyterran Crazyterran is offline

Eternal
Crazyterran's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 3,124
BattleTag: Crazyterran#1213

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HalfElfDragon View Post
I think that all mounts should be, with no restriction.
I don't want to see a Orc Death Knight riding a Alliance Charger.

I think Class/Faction mounts should stay seperate. Other than that, whatever.
__________________

"You always were a cunning linguist, James"
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-08-2012, 05:24 PM
Nazja Nazja is offline

Trade Baroness
Nazja's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 22,897

Default

Reputation? only after the character get to a certain point with that factions questline
Heirlooms? check
Gold? check
Profession mounts? get rid of the stupid restrictions... the only one with a restriction which, remotely, makes sense is the Flying Machine
Class mounts? sure. Why? Because we already have members of each class riding around on Deathchargers.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-08-2012, 05:29 PM
Porimlys Porimlys is offline

Elune
Porimlys's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,327
BattleTag: CptCarrot #1688

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HalfElfDragon View Post
I think that all mounts should be, with no restriction.
A warlock on a paladin mount just doesn't sit right with me. The class mounts are part of one classes kit and flavor, I think it should stay that way.

Same with faction specific mounts like Gryphons and Wyverns


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashendant View Post
They should appear on the list like every other mount, but not usable.

Yeah, I agree.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-08-2012, 05:37 PM
Falarson Falarson is online now

Arch-Druid
Falarson's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Asunción, Paraguay
Posts: 1,893
BattleTag: Falarson#1968

Default

Cosmetic items, like the Arakkoa trinket or the Archaeology rewards.
__________________

RIP Ronnie James Dio (1942 - 2010)

Long live Rock n' Roll!
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-08-2012, 05:38 PM
HalfElfDragon HalfElfDragon is offline

The draconic Titleless - Mod
HalfElfDragon's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 15,508
Send a message via AIM to HalfElfDragon Send a message via MSN to HalfElfDragon Send a message via Yahoo to HalfElfDragon

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Porimlys View Post
A warlock on a paladin mount just doesn't sit right with me.
Sits fine with me.




I really don't like profession restrictions on mounts either.
__________________
Quote:
Lucio Benado be wanting to say, Hey, what's up?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Porimlys View Post
See! Not everyone on the internet is so stubborn they can't have their opinions changed
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-08-2012, 04:58 PM
Foppish Foppish is offline

Ranger
Foppish's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 303

Default

I'd love for reputations to be account wide. It would make gearing up my alts much more quicker. Of course my main gripe was needing to do Therazane rep for the god damn millionth time on my alt that hits 85.

Mounts definitely should be; at least random drop rare mounts. I had wanted the Headless Horseman's mount on my Death Knight; of course it drops for characters that I don't give two shits about, but never for my Death Knight.

Heirlooms most definitely should be (and not limited by server). I want to roll Alliance on another server, and it sucks starting over from scratch. Gold being account wide would be nice as well.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-08-2012, 05:21 PM
Garotar Garotar is offline

Site Staff - News
Garotar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 6,557
BattleTag: Greyhame#1747

Default

I think all mounts should be account wide, except for faction and class mounts. Class mounts should be one character only (since every character of that class can get it anyway) and faction mounts should be faction specific. If the later is achieved via transforming the mounts to their Alliance equivalent, that works for me.

Reputations I don't think should be account wide, but I do think you should have a way to buff your rep with a faction if you've already done it once to exalted.

Heirlooms should be as well. Gold would be a nice to have, but I don't think it's needed.
__________________
I used to take Warcraft lore seriously, then the lore took a Rule of Cool to the knee.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 05-09-2012, 05:39 AM
Lon-ami Lon-ami is offline

Elune
Lon-ami's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Spain
Posts: 11,787
BattleTag: Lonami#2916

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJP View Post
Account-wide mounts, achievements, pets and possibly titles are coming. What other things should be account wide?

Heirlooms? Gold? Honor Points? Reputation? Mail? Legendary Items?
-Pets.
-Mounts (some would be restricted to specific classes).
-Achievements.
-Professions.
-Faction reputation.
-Gold and other types of money.

Hard to get bind to account items should replicate across all the characters in the account, too.
__________________


Metzen: They are one of the ancient races of Northrend that we haven't spoken of before... because we hadn't made them up before. (laughter)

~Main: Expansion theorycrafting, Expansions list, The Age of Nightmare, Empire of the Tides (coming soon)~
~Fan ficton: Anachronos Journey: The Timeless Heir~ ~Geography of continents series: Old Kalimdor (original), Pandaria~
~Locations as zones series: Azjol-Nerub, Barrow Deeps, Zul'Aman, Demon Hunter zone, Caverns of Time~
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-09-2012, 07:13 AM
ScytheRexx ScytheRexx is offline

Loremaster
ScytheRexx's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 6,490

Default

Here is my list.

Obviously, we already know we are getting account based pets, mounts, achievements, and titles. We know decently how the achievements will work.

When it comes to mounts, keep all the restrictions. You have to be a Paladin to ride the Charger, you have to be Horde to ride the Dire Wolves, and you need to be an Engineer to ride the Flying Machine. I just think this is fair. Now obviously if you have two of the same class, and one has a class specific mount and the other does not (example, the Argent Charger) then it should be open to the second Paladin that didn't have it originally.

Now for the new stuff.

Reputation - Let's be honest here, Reputations rewards were designed as a way for characters to get some decent items to help bridge the gap between normal dungeons and heroics dungeons. The issue, even more so with MoP, is that it's often easier to just jump into heroics and buy Justice gear rather then grind out a reputation, so after a patch or two the reputation rewards for the most part become useless. The only time you ever want to grind out a reputation is for the shoulder/head enchants, and most of those are account tradeable anyways. By making it account based, it can better do it's job for alts and wouldn't be overpowering (most reputation gear is mediocre after the first content patch, so it's not like having it's going to make your alt a golden god.)

Secondary Skills - As I am on the fence about professions, I decided to focus on the ones I think should be account based no matter what, Secondary Skills. Let's face it, Cooking, First Aid, Fishing, and Archaeology can all be time consuming and boring as hell. Great way to fix this? Just make them account based. I wouldn't mind leveling fishing if I knew I only had to do it once. Archaeology might even get more usage since your characters will more quickly get to the races you care about. If they are worried about losing it as a money sink, keep the fact you have to BUY the skills. Example, I have a 525 Cook. I make a new character and learn cooking, his cooking skill is automatically 75 and I can now buy all the recipes in that level range, however I can't buy the 150 skill until I reach the proper level, at which point I learn that and my skill jumps up to 150, so on and so forth till I get to my max on my other character (525).

Heirlooms - This one is difficult to do properly, since it would require some method of cross-realm mailing in the current form. I was trying to consider ways to alter the system to make it work without mailing, and I think the best way might be to turn them into some type of passive buffs. Basically, when you buy the "heirloom" rather then giving an item, it flags your account so that new characters gain a buff that lasts the proper level range, and gets more powerful as you level. This will do two things, First, it will make it so we actually get to use some of those quest rewards again, you know, the ones that we were constantly selling or throwing in storage for transmog because the heirlooms were always better for the slot. Second, it will make it so you don't have to play the trade game around characters just because you change the alt you want to focus on. The only downside is this change is the buffs might have to be more expensive, and since we will be getting the buff with equip-able items, the buffs themselves will have to be slightly weaker (having a full lvl 70 PVP set and all the heirloom buffs at the stat level they are now would be a bit overpowered.)

Currency - People seem to hate this idea, and I don't really understand it. I earned all those Marks, all those Justice Points, all that Conquest. Who cares if I decide to use the 4000 JP sitting worthlessly on my decked out Mage if I can make it useful for my recently dinged Druid? Why is that so bad? If we need to have a limiter on it, fine, let's keep it server limited, but at least let me use it.

Tabards - This seems to be hard for them to do, something about how they can't get tabards with special effects (rep gain, click-cast muscle flexing, etc.), but why not just leave those alone? Let me explain... Make a new "tabard browser" that pops up when you click the tabard slot, and you can pick any tabard design you want from the tabards you have "learned" (aka, WORN), and it will overwrite the design of the one you are wearing, just like what transmog does. What does this mean? Well, after I am done gaining Stormwind reputation, I can toss the tabard itself and just use the browser to get the Stormwind look. If I want to keep the "click-cast" ability of my Protectors Tabard, I just wear that tabard and apply, say, the Hand of Argus tabard over it because I prefer that design. Why not do it this way rather then trying to revamp it? I don't mind keeping a few tabards in my bank for click-cast bonuses, I keep much worst in there.

There are a few other things I would love to see at the account level, but I don't know how well it would work. Example, I would love RIDING SKILL to be account based, so I wouldn't have to fork out the thousands of gold for each character. However, I realize that is an important money sink, so I may just have to let it go.
__________________

Last edited by ScytheRexx; 05-09-2012 at 07:17 AM..
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.