Changing Betrayal

Though not all the results are revealed yet - the attendees are still doing their write ups - we do have some information from some sources. While I will not go through all of them, we are seeing some information on possible AA's (if you're a former EverQuest player you'll know what I'm talking about), armor differentiation, old world revamps and even revamps to the betrayal quest.

The last item, and I'm sure everyone is in the same boat, is one that really has me interested. Those of you who have done or at least tried that quest - I'm sure that's just about everyone - knows that the quest is well done but has room for serious improvement.

So what exactly could be changing?

From what I've gathered we could possibly see factions being revamped so they play a role in the quest, having the quest doable at any level and a complete re-working of the quest dynamics. That's a whole mouthful so let's go at each item one at a time.

Faction Revamps

I will make it no secret: factions, before the Desert of Flames expansion, really didn't mean much. So what if you were hated by one faction over the other? It really didn't affect you at all, save some mob aggro in the world outside the cities.

Although, when the Desert of Flames was released we saw factions mean something in the desert city of Maj'Dul. What we saw, essentially, was real, dire consequences for choosing one faction over the other if you went somewhere that you weren't suppose to.

This idea, just by itself, would be fantastic to see when it comes to the betrayal quest.

To fully understand why this is so it's essential to understand the third change that I mentioned which deals with a complete re-working of the quest.

Consider this: once the betrayal quest is activated all you do (in your home city) is go into an instance and defeat the enemies that are presented to you. Yes, from a lore point of view your banishment makes a lot of sense: you tried to kill loyal citizens and soldiers of that city's military. With that said, it isn't all that involving.

What was in all likelihood proposed, which I agree with completely, is to change the quest fundamentally by making the player take actions against NPCs in the cities themselves. For example, perhaps add in a series of quests that is counter-productive to the city's inhabitants. This kind of thing definitely fits the lore correctly in reference to the betrayal quest and makes it that much more involving.

This is how, as well, factions become far more important.

Depending on which quests you take on to drive a negative attitude towards your character, NPCs will react differently to you perhaps to the point of wanting to kill you. For a potential betrayer this is something that would really make the experience interesting: you could really feel the hatred being boiled against you.

Funny how something as trivial as factions, to some at least, can make such a big impact eh? This is definitely something to seriously consider.

Betrayal at any Time

To me, and many others as well, this is one of the largest, single issues that plagues the betrayal quest at this time. The fact that the quest can only be done in between the levels of 14 and 17 can be problematic at times for a couple of very simple reasons: 1) those levels are easy to accomplish and it's too early to beg of such a decision from the player base and 2) just because a player doesn't want to betray in the first month, doesn't mean they won't want to in the fifth and sixth month.

I understand as well the reasons why it is set up as it currently is: some final sub-classes are only meant for good and evil, speaking strictly from a lore perspective. The easiest example of this is the Necromancer: to see one living in luxury in Qeynos seems a little odd. At the same time it would be strange to see a nature-loving Ranger living in the corrupted filth of Freeport.

Despite that I think we need to change the quest.

Often times in MMORPGs we must sacrifice lore for fun and forcing players to decide whether they will betray or not between levels 14 and 17 is certainly not fun at all, especially if factions really start to mean something down the road.

In fact, truth be told, we've already seen the fun versus lore debate prevalent in EverQuest II already: ARAC sound familiar to anyone? ARAC simply means "Any Race Any Class" and it sparked a lot of controversy back in the day. An Ogre healer? A Ratonga tank? These things certainly go against the lore but we have them anyway. Why? In the name of fun.

It is about time, for reasons I've already listed, that we change the betrayal quest, in terms of level requirements, simply because it will make the game more fun.

Fundamental Changes

I've already discussed the possible emphasis on factions in regards to how the betrayal quest would be carried out so I won't mention it again. But, however, I will touch on the post-banishment phase of the quest and a part that I don't know whether or not anyone on the summit commented on.

I've done most of the betrayal quest so I can speak from experience that the Orc or Gnoll slaying part of the quest can be mundane, repetitive and frustrating at times. I've also been of the opinion that it doesn't really re-inforce "proving yourself loyal to the city" simply by slaughtering Orcs, something that loyal city members can do. In my mind, you need to do something so much more persuasive.

What, exactly?

We saw the introduction of sabotage missions months and months ago but it really wasn't too successful, or at least I didn't find it to be. But when we think about the premise of the sabotage quests - to do damage to the other city - it gives you a good idea on how the betrayal quest can be fundamentally changed.

What I propose then is as follows: instead of slaughtering hundreds of Orcs have the betrayers run missions where they sneak into the city, deceive the citizens (so they believe they are one of their own) and do substantial material damage inside the city.

Obviously this idea needs to be thought out in practical terms as it would be difficult to implement but it will create an enhanced player experience that reinforces factions and most importantly the betrayal part of the city betrayal quest.

The rest of this week should be interesting to say the least as we'll be receiving more and more information from the summit. Needless to say, so much as I've heard already, there's been a lot of positive feedback and ideas and the betrayal quest suggestions is proof of this.

We'll just have to wait and see what exactly will be revealed.

«« Back to Main Editorial Page

Posted by Elemeno at 2005-10-04 20:30:55

given the convenience of qeynos the nicer housing and the general po*beep*tion difference if a blanket betrayal quest is implemented why even have 2 cities it seems to me that people would prefer one over the other. although id be an assassin in qeynos if they implemented it or fixed the invis buying

Posted by Kaiser Kibosh at 2005-10-05 11:36:41

Well the character would have valuable knowledge of their former home so them lending that knowledge to try and gain the trust of the new city makes sense. Perhaps there could be missions with Splitpaw-like level scaling instances that send you to assassinate a high ranking official or find and steal intelligence do*beep*ents tc. Definitely sounds a lot more enjoyable than Murder 500 of these and a couple named things with horrible spawn times. Those nameds are definitely the most annoying part of the betrayal seeing how they can end up being killed by other players can despawn and from what Ive experienced have a couple hour respawn Glan Mostyn for example took us around 3 hours of waiting before he finally showed up. What does waiting around for hours have to do with pledging loyalty to the new city I do not know but Id sure like to see THAT part of the betrayal changed a bit.

Posted by Stugein at 2005-10-05 13:56:07

This is a joke right Ha ha very funny. Ya got me. I actually thought this was an idea that had merit for a minute or two. Good one.

Posted by Chilidog at 2005-10-06 11:41:24

Very nice write up Magi. Thats one thing thats always made me question. Why wouldnt a Neutral class be allowed to go back and forth between cities or at least revoke citizenship to one or the other. Ive never RPd my Druid from Freeport as being an evil character. Ive just aways said im a druid that is a citzen of Freeport. I guess in one way I dont like the idea of big cities for myself either. Id love to go back to some older times where there is a grove full of druids and rangers to protect their grove. That to me is whats missing. The ARAC is great but in all honestly there nothing to differentuate some classes but citiesregions for classes would be welcome. Ive spent the first year or so in Freeport and even though qeynos is a big city id love to be able to make a change.

Posted by Tsurugi at 2006-02-01 19:33:46

I do not care what some of you believe this new betrayal revamp would be awesome. Lvl 40-60soon 70 players and those lower could have become sick with their classes. Necros in qeynos what is so wrong with that they would be like registered sex affenders or in other words some npcs would not service you but others would respect you out of fear. Also it would ruin lore but make the game much much more enjoyable Toxxulia server