Should you lose experience when you die?, revisited
by Elizabeth Harper 
Apr 8th 2007 at 4:13PM
Yesterday we talked about the death mechanic in World of Warcraft and how gameplay might be changed by making death mean more to your character. Today, as a point of comparison, we're going to take a look at death in the MMO Vanguard -- and how it's about to be changed.
Currently, death in Vanguard involves loss of experience (15%, and if you have no experience, you could go into debt -- i.e. you would need to gain 15% of the experience towards your next level before you could actually gain any experience again) and your body (tombstone) would remain where you died -- along with all of your soulbound items. Options upon death were to (1) be resurrected by another player, which causes minor experience loss and minor item damage, (2) to recover your body from where you died, which causes minor experience loss and minor item damage, or (3) summon your body, which causes the 15% experience loss and major durability damage. Though it sounds quite a bit harsher, this isn't that different from World of Warcraft's current system of "run back to your body and all is well" -- it has just added experience loss to the equation.
However, on their test server, the death system is changing. First off, you no longer leave a corpse behind when you die -- you leave an "essence." No items are left on the essence, so retrieval is less important. However, if you retrieve your essence, you regain a large portion of your lost experience. And to top it all off, experience loss has been decreased. So while casual-friendly World of Warcraft players wonder if the death penalty isn't harsh enough, hardcore Vanguard reduces its death penalty to one not terribly harsher than World of Warcraft's.
Forum poster prencher makes the obvious connection, "...we're back to 'wowified' raiding, where you just keep chain wiping until you get it right."
Note to Vanguard players in the audience: I do not presently play Vanguard, so my information has come from IGN's Vanguard Vault and VanguardSphere's forums. I've done my best to understand how the death mechanic works in Vangaurd, but as I have no first-hand experience, I could be wrong -- so if you see any inaccuracies, I welcome corrections.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Krianna Apr 8th 2007 6:19PM
... Maybe this is a hint?
Personally, I don't raid, so my guild doesn't do the zerg thing. It is very rare for us to wipe more than twice, even when we're new to an instance.
Me thinks that the folks complaining might want to find better groups, rather than trying to change the game to force folks to play their way.
Jaison Apr 8th 2007 6:49PM
WoW death system definitely appeals to the causal fan base…the light penalty given to death will not discourage new MMO players as the learn the mechanics of the game.
brian Apr 8th 2007 7:15PM
have you played ffx1?? eh
do you know what it feels like to de-level? ill tell you how it feels, it fucking sucks.
the first time i de-leveled over 2 years ago i quit ffx1 and i havent played a new mmo (WoW) till a couple weeks ago. WoW rocks
de-leveling sucks
robot rock Apr 8th 2007 7:35PM
I think xp loss should only occur on pvp servers when people gank players less than 7 levels beneath them. A lack of honor simply isn't a deterrent. Punishing 'bad behavior' makes sense in this case.
Harsh punishment of people who die in a dungeon because someone in their party doesn't know how to pull...well that would definitely cause me to play less and probably quit entirely (I'm only a casual player).
robot rock Apr 8th 2007 7:36PM
I meant to say more than 7 levels below...not less than.
I think the gist was carried over tho :D
garuktaag Apr 8th 2007 9:33PM
Maybe they could introduce the death penalty but only for the new hero classes. Would make them truly heroic, only for the hard core, and a rare sight around Azeroth.
Anduu Apr 8th 2007 9:46PM
I came to WoW straight from Diablo 2 and was amazed by how light the "penalty" was for dying.
In Diablo 2 you lost gold,Experience(...a portion of which was regained if you retrieved your corpse...) AND you had to pay for repairs.You would never delevel but believe me going from halfway to level 91 back to the start of 90 really hurt.If you happened to play Hardcore dead meant dead forever...
Blizzard could have made the penalties for dying harsher without ruining the experience of the game.Why they didn't is beyond me butd suffice to say it is far too late to be discussing this now.
daveyp Apr 8th 2007 9:06PM
your body (tombstone) would remain where you died -- along with all of your soulbound items
It was the oposite, when you die anything not soul bound to you remain on your tombstone. You could make any bindable items soulbound by purchasing a fairly cheap binding stone and using it on them.
It was a pretty good system but if you forgot to bind your gear then you'd have to get back to where you died with no gear which was a bit ilogical. if you managed to die with your gear, how are you going to do any better with out it.
Tumnus Apr 8th 2007 10:11PM
I really want to keep the death system the way it is... I don't need to have the frustration of dying added to. The game is supposed to be fun.
As for zerging instances and raids...
Instances: that's we have respawns
Raids: They are on multiple day resets, allowing for this kind of thing.
Let's just leave well enough alone.
Dave Apr 8th 2007 10:12PM
I think that the death penalty should be an option... like a general "hardcore mode" for the game that you select when you start your character.
Speaking for myself, I enjoy the fact that there is very little stress in playing WoW. I'm the very definition of a casual player and if I kept getting my XP/gold/gear smacked down when I died, I might feel less inclined to fire the game up when I want to escape the real world.
A "hardcore mode" option could be toggled for truly hardcore players, those who go into a game like WoW for reasons more complex than "I don't want to think about my crappy job right now."
Big.Daddy Apr 8th 2007 10:29PM
I don't think a change is needed. If it is needed, perhaps we can adopt the way City of Heroes does it? Any death = a certain % of 'debt'.
You don't have any XP deducted, but any future xp is basically cut in half. Half going towards your next level, half going towards your XP debt.
The higher your level, the higher your debt. The more deaths, the more debt.
We already have rested XP... as an XP bonus. Debt XP could work as the opposite and fit in nicely w/ WoW.
If you have rested XP, it cancels out that much of your Debt XP.
Shiver Apr 8th 2007 10:33PM
k... More importantly... look at the subscriber base size of vanguard. Case Closed.
Wow has it right. Vanguard has it wrong. If Vanguard had it right, more people would be playing it now wouldn't they?
Jason Apr 8th 2007 11:22PM
To those of you who want a harsher death penalty, remember who Blizzard's target audience for WoW is, and that that fact it why there's nearly 10 million subscribers current, not counting trials, cancellations or anything else; 10 million people who are currently paying for WoW. They wanted casual players, designed the game for them, and if their sub base is any clue, they succeeded in a way noone else has.
As to the current death penalty, I'm find with it. I played FFXI for a while. When I was working on Artifact Armor(AF1) for my Dark Knight, I lost 4-5 levels. For those who aren't familiar with FFXI, your AF1 is a set of armor, outstanding in most cases(Mine wasn't so great, but I wanted it anyway :P) that you start collecting around level 50. The amount of XP from 50-60 isn't a whole lot, maybe 300k. The catch lies in that the most XP you'll ever get from a mob when I played was 200. It didn't matter how many levels above you it was, 200 was it. The idea then was to fight the toughest mobs you could, while being able to chain pull them for as long as possible. Now, the catch was that in order to level, you HAD to have a group. 6 people, just for leveling. Depending on who was on, simply getting a group could take hours.
So, what did 5 levels worth of experience represent in the form of time commitment on my part? Best case, 30 hours. Worst case, a month or longer. Do I have a problem with WoW's death penalty? Not in the least. Am I interested in a game with a death penalty? Well, it'd have to be one hell of a game for me to want to play it. I'm certain I'm not the only one.
shiberving Apr 9th 2007 12:07AM
I agree with Dave - Post #10 wholeheartedly. Great post.
kitterz Apr 9th 2007 2:45AM
I disagree with the new "death penalty." yes i agree raiding is an exciting aspect to the game of WoW but the penalites will affect the social aspect of the game as a whole (one aspect Blizz holds in high regard). If there is a loss of xp upon death then i forsee a decrease in good will assistance and an increase in high level toons taking lower levels on "runs." Who would want to group with characters of the "appropriate level" when that means a higher chance of death and xp loss? it would be much safer to call in a 70 guildie and just blaze thru. There would also be a growing number of toons who would avoid going on instance runs that they have already completed (i did the quests why risk dying to help anyone out?). As a sad result, many new players would find themselves at the end of an alt's hate stick because he made a mistake. Rather than "fun and social," instance runs would be "risky" and in the hands of cliques and guilds. It would shy new players away from asking for help and make the learning process difficult and too often, filled with guilt.
That would also hold true to any quest in the game. Why go to the aid of anyone if there is a risk of taking a loss? The game would sadly turn into characters protecting their hard earned experience and not willing to venture out to help someone in need. And as a result, the only alternative would be high level toons (with minimal chance of dying) taking their guild buddies on quest runs to ensure that no one dies. In other words, if the quest says "group," it would translate to "bring a 70." "Need help killing Sin Dall? Sorry i just made a level and dont wanna lose it."
Tyler Apr 9th 2007 3:56AM
Dying in itself is enough penalty to the player. It shouldn't take away your hard work. Taking exp away as a penalty sounds like a crappy developer was too lazy to think of something better!
John Apr 9th 2007 7:44AM
really though, who is complaining about the death system now? ridiculous. i'd quit playing....if it ain't broke....
Aiggan Apr 9th 2007 8:13AM
Losing XP would suck for WoW. It was one aspect of FFXI that I disliked (that and de-leveling). Imagine now after 1 wipe in a lvl 70 raid everyone delevels and has to grind! They'd have to let us gain XP all the way up the brink of 71 to avoid that.
In FFXI a lot of times 1 death would break up a PUG party. In WoW you can generally forgive a small mistake that leads to your death or a wipe (at least you can once...).
We already have to grind for gold and materials to do instances, adding the extra component of also having to regrind your lvl would be too much.
jason cavatorta Apr 9th 2007 8:46AM
As for gold loss - I think you should be able to put gold in the bank. You should lose a portion (maybe 50%) of the gold that is on your person. If killed in pvp that 50% should be loot for the opposite faction.
Madjap Apr 9th 2007 9:01AM
Maybe a death penalty when you are soloing...but to me that would be a stretch. If you're grouped, I dont see how it would be fair to penalize a person.
I play a priest and if I pull healing aggro, because the tank can't hold good aggro, should I get penalized, and vice versa, if I'm too slow on a heal should the tank get penalized?
@19
That sounds VERY familiar. Doesn't Dragon Quest have that same penalty for death?