Search results for query: *

While I'm sure there are plenty of people working on different things, it does seem somewhat counter productive to balance something before adding things that will change the balance once again. For example, it shouldn't matter that people are making gold too easy. That's a good thing in many cases because it lets people quickly do things like lead armies and kindgoms that stress the system and help test for bugs that need to be ironed out long before anybody worries about 'balance'. So while it's fine to tweak a little bit, grand sweeping changes to balance are pointless when they will need to happen once everything is in place once again. It's like adjusting the thermostat in the house you're building before you put the windows in.

bigbalzzz said:

Kafr Hatif: a screaming infedal !(what the ...)

Click to expand...

I wish I would have known that before I made this forum name. XD

Revenant342 said:

For peacetime to be a thing... there needs to be... Feasts

Click to expand...

Holy ****, found Harlaus guys. I'm with you, though buddy.

NO FEAST, NO PEACE!

OP, you are the hero TW needs right now. They need to sticky this and find some way to get you on staff as their community liaison. This is exactly the information I'm looking for to decide whether to start another run. I've decided to wait, now, before I get ten hours in and quite again out of frustration. Now next time I play I know I'll be happy because I'll be sure the things got fixed that I was waiting for.

Greetings from Ontario!

pandoraarodnap said:

In fact, we Chinese players have a lot of good Suggestions and ideas for the game, and we discussed them very enthusiastically on our own social media. Due to my English level and network environment, I could not accurately and timely respond to tw.

Click to expand...

I think your English is pretty good!

SmattlePattle said:

I critique things I love.
If you come work with me on a job site and I critique you, it means I think you're a good guy with potential.
If you come work with me, and I don't talk to you at all, its because I think you're useless.

M&B can be critiqued to death because the game has incredible potential. TW game design/model is bolder and more experimental and more promising than most things on the market. People critique high-end chefs, nobody critiques a hotdog. Its a compliment.

Click to expand...

So very, very true.

crewsk8200 said:

But let us remember that we don't have all the information, or complete knowledge of what was changed, how it changed, and what it will effect in the future.

Click to expand...

I think that's what many find frustrating. TW could be communicating better in terms of what's happening and what they mean in patch notes. The recent changes to xp gain come to mind. Nothing in the statement resembles the actual mechanic change. It could be a nerf, could be a buff, who knows? Looks a like a nerf according to a tuber I seen, but again, without extensive statistical modeling over several level ranges, who knows? Who is gonna do that? Why not just give us the exact algorithm the game uses and see what people say? Perhaps we spot something that's a problem that the dev didn't see - or maybe we are silenced by the pure genius of their solution as would probably be the case quite often tbh. Instead 'balancing' happens without warning or any real interaction with the community. They seem to read the forums, but rather than post and ask questions about the issues people are having and actually interact with the people having the issue they instead push something to beta and see what people ***** loudest about next.

A lot of indie devs are more transparent in these things and spend way more time directly talking to members of the forums and their communities are a lot more tolerant of shortcomings. There is a correlation there.

While there might not be an excuse to be outright intentionally cruel in one's criticisms, a lot of the angry posts you see come from TW doing very little to manage expectations. Having an actual dev come in and say you know, 'this is what we feel is working best in terms of things to do in game, these are safe strategies and behaviors right now, these are broken maybe avoid them unless you're trying to feed us bug reports, these other features aren't even in the game but we have the GUI ready and wanted to test that with the graphics during sieges or whatever, etc.'

That would go so far it wouldn't even be funny.

LEEKING2005 said:

The 1st drawback of the "freedom" character progression system you mention in that game is it lack of different viewpoint in game, aka depth. You know why Monster hunter and Diablo 2 so successful in it's fan base? Because it provide very different playthrough in game with significantly different experience and viewpoint of how the game world design. (E.g. You might find some boss extremely difficult in archer playthrough and might want to cheese it with kiting and find it easy in other classes like warrior if you know how to block/make equipment. )

Seriously why should I do multiple playthrough if the experience is the same and I can just max anything I want? You may argue that has better "freedom" but in the end it hampered the game potential, replay-ability and depth. Just like in a game it can make you want to go to toilet every half an hours or if you press F5 you will automatically win a battle etc... They can give you that freedom but it WILL kill your gameplay experience and significantly limited their game potential.

Now that we make it clear it's not better in any sense the 2nd mistake you make is you should know this is large scale faction war simulation in it's core, so you are in the wrong genre compare it with "adventures" "open world" action RPG.

Why don't it let you change classes at the fly on battlefield? Or eat potion? Or generate a boss or some sort of thing in a battlefield? Why don't it let you 1 v 100 when all of your skill is maxed? Or even unleash a mosou on a battle field?

The answer is simple, because they want to create some tactic/strategy feels in an action game since this is not a 1v5 RPG grinding or bossfight etc. By creating tactics feels it's essential for it to let you feel, every choices you make before the battle had a consequences, like bring all 2 -hand infantry vs archer, Spec all your point in 2 hand sword and no shield unit, spec all your point in trading then go 1v10 with 2 hand sword etc.

(Now you know why 1st thing after I create my kingdom I take all the town & castle with horses village in Khuzait, and not some random weak ass def town. it's called use your brain and plan well.)

The 3rd mistake is about perfectionist player, if you don't intended to let people max everything why bother set an unrealistic softcap + make it meaningless so you can provoke your fans base? Isn't it a little bit evil and straightly bad design if it's not worth the time to level up a bad system you design and claim it you give them "freedom"?

Click to expand...

Starting with 1, Your character still can't be good at things you don't train for. One game I made a Xbow user. Next I made a sword guy. You get bored of the playthrough eventually, map is already mostly painted or going to be, or you just want to write a different story. It's not like your guy can pick up a weapon they've never used and dominate with it. Considering that the rest of the group who specializes will be able to fight way harder guys than the dude who tried to be a martial artist - xbow user. But, the martial artist - xbow user can run really fast and dodge well, so there is a class unto itself, not as good at shooting as pure xbow, or at fighting as martial artist, but good enough at shooting to be ok and able to keep alive long enough for help to arrive.

What you're looking for in variety is better served by more meaningful alternatives to being a mercenary/slaver/farm pillager/venture capitalist until you become king. What if they fleshed out banditry and there were legitimate reasons to use throwing weapons and have a bad reputation, that this could be another path to being king and ruling through fear instead of honor. Or maybe you can 'redeem' yourself in the eyes of the people and turn your life around depending on what you do. That would be really interesting for reasons that have nothing to do with focus point allocations.

Making it so because you are good at managing a settlement and fighting you can't also be good at running an army too because running an army and running a settlement use different stat points but for some unknown reason you can be a good medic is a fairly obtuse way to force 'unique' characters.

Actual gameplay variety is the order of the day to get what you desire here, and there are much better ways than simple character stats.

2 Technically Kenshi is a large scale warfare game in many of the same ways that M&B is. Battles can easily feature a similar number of onscreen combatants as in Warband in some areas. Both games have rudimentary strategy in terms of positioning and attack orders, but nothing to the level of a tactical wargame or a CRPG. So I make a very fair comparison. Especially considering you can have any number of 'castles' and villages that you can build and defend against sieges while destroying other factions. Its a lot more similar than you think. We certainly seen a lot of Warband refugees hungry for something similar while waiting for Bannerlord on reddit when Kenshi came out. They all made the same comparison - not exactly the same but quite similar feeling of starting a nobody and becoming whatever you want if you work for it. The interface is certainly different, and Kenshi is just giving orders not action like M&B, but very similar in a lot of ways.

Also consider that you get actual quests in Bannerlord. With actual dungeons no less! - bandit lairs - that you clear for loot(!). That's pretty 'open world' and 'adventure' to me. Hell, M&B has a lot more in common with most adventure style games than you're letting on.

3 The softcap is more of a way to make reaching 100 a challenging quest in itself. You'll have to capture at least 1 of the strongest boss type characters in the game and fight them arena style. It's not undoable, but it's not something that you're like 'OK, gotta go get the hardest guy and fight him for skillups before I leave the beginning area.' Type of thing. Think of it this way, if you conquered essentially all of Calradia, the last challenge you might decide is to reach level 63. So you might keep a kingdom alive just to farm xp till you get there. Not something that will define the playthrough, but something to do before you reroll. If you're into that sort of thing. I don't see how the softcap in WB enraged anybody, I don't think that's a very fair point.

One final point, addressing your changing classes on the battlefield, that is actually kinda realistic. To some extent. Depending on how liberal your interpretation. In medieval Japan samurai would first dual with bows, then fight with spear and sword. So they change from archer to spearman with backup sword. They were also the ruling class who were able horsemen that practiced horse archery. So very high level archery, spear, sword, horse riding and settlement management. Oh, and many of them were talented poets on top of it all. That this is impossible in Bannerlord is very unrealistic, at the very least. Certainly very disappointing that it isn't even an achievable long term goal like ruling the world.

Because it being easier to literally conquer the world than be good at leading an army, fighting in close quarters, engaging in archery and managing your community even though people did those very things in real life and it was no more or less uncommon than talented university students. That's good gameplay?

LEEKING2005 said:

Yeah, die and "Respawn" into stronger version, much like the Dark Soul way or roguelike game probably the only method player will accept, cause everyone like to be immortal and OP XD.

But that's not very realistic and complete unrelated with age mechanism actually. You could just let them up classes like many RPG games.

Click to expand...

That is probably what they are going for, and if that's a way to boost all of your starting skill caps and your total skill caps regardless of stat/focus point allocation then that'll probably be good enough for me. It's still a very ass backwards system that's far more confusing than the original and I cannot wait to see it changed or modded out.

I urge you to check out the leveling system in Kenshi. While it is certainly possible - in an absolutist sense of the term - to get a character who has max every skill, that is in itself a goal to extend a playthrough past 'endgame'.

Essentially every skill and stat can go from 1-100, however as you pass 90 and approach 100 you slow down greatly, to the point where you need to create special circumstances to level more - fight the strongest boss again and again, knocking him out but not kill him, etc. The practical limit for most skills is 80-90 as progress beyond that requires fighting the toughest opponents while greatly outnumbered just to gain xp. This leads to most people having fairly specialized characters because why bother making an all 100's character? It's boring AF and takes forever and the benefits are meh outside of saying you did it which isn't exactly something that's gonna get you laid at the club.

While your first few Kenshi runs you may want to become a living god as a goal and have all sorts of milestones you grind toward, by the 3rd or 4th run you just wanna get the show on the road and so start using underleveled characters and flying by the seat of your pants just for fun. Even my wife watched a few of the harder fights riveted to the screen, where I was kiting around really tough enemies while most of my team is down and the few that are up are running or healing and trying to distract the enemy. It leads to really exciting circumstances that wouldn't happen if you were worried about leveling according to some focus or whatever and reaching certain levels to get certain 'key' skills. It becomes more like real life (but mad maxish) - you and your buddy are starving and that guy just got killed by a wolf. You take his sword and your buddy takes his pack and viola! swordsman and trader classes unlocked! lol. Then you go try to fight some bandits when you really shouldn't, but you could get some fast skill ups and some loot, so it's worth the risk, etc. You get strength xp for carrying the heavy loot, you get athletics xp for running, toughness xp for taking damage. No need for focus or level ups. No practical way to get to 100 in even 1 skill, nor any real need to grind beyond what you naturally do with your character. Still plenty of consistent, believable progress. Plenty of OP enemies to pound your head in and remind you that you are not special, and all your skills and stories and great works are but a transient expression of your inability to accept the absolute and total insignificance of your being in a world that couldn't care less about you. Really makes you appreciate that starving beggar you just recruited at the bar and his rusty metal club you can now bring to bear against your likewise starving, scrap-wielding enemies.

That style of leveling leads to players behaving in a way that is far more organic. Rather than having a specific build you work toward attaining you instead simply deal with whatever the environment throws at you and kind of evolve along with it. That sword you found and use is the reason you have sword skill, not some childhood dream or innate proficiency, but (simulated) real-world circumstances that forced you to survive, adapt, overcome. That's what I was hoping for here. Not a worse system than what was in Warband. Hell, at least in WB I could use proficiency points to level things like archery till they were useful, not here though. Gotta grind it all baby.

LEEKING2005 said:

Actually now that you get to a point of something important, i don't think many game out there implement ages issue in a game and they actually have a very very good reason behind it.. ...I'm still don't think it should be implemented in game, unless you particularly create a whole system designed around it to make it fun, but that's a very low reward and high risk moves.

Click to expand...

Yes. This I completely agree with. However, if you are able to pass a portion of your skills and abilities on to the next generation and can get some cool traits or perks that would otherwise be unavailable, I think it could be neat. Dying would definitely have to not reset your skills or people are gonna freak, myself included.

Making this system is very high risk on their part, as the only game I can think of where it is interesting and fun is Crusader Kings 2, but only because of how zany the game itself actually is, and the fact that you play as the lineage not the individual person/people who die but the family as a whole in some sense. Making Bannerlord too much like this would definitely spoil some of the flavour of M&B.

All that being said, if dying is made into a process of preparing the way for a newer, stronger version of your old character, it could be an interesting way to reach ever higher levels without a disgusting grind or obfuscated stat focus system. As well, it could serve as a way to keep characters from getting all 250's while still allowing you to recover what your dead character had stat wise fairly painlessly. If they can pull it off then it could be quite a good addition and may just make the whole leveling thing work.

But considering the **** show the current level cap system is... I think you're right about the risk lol.

LEEKING2005 said:

1. I think it's not a bad design at all, it simulate the "talent" portions of human life. E.g. Why do some peoples can't really learn math and some learn math like rocket speed? it's because talent, so the game simulate that.

Click to expand...

I agree with the majority of points. I will say there are more creative ways to make the game tactical than skill caps, but leaving that aside, the thing is you don't need focus or stat points or anything else to achieve the charm of M&B or what you are going after. Since your character is already going to grow old you already can't be master of everything. Without all the focus and stuff, that alone is enough to prevent all skills at 250 characters every generation. You do not have the ingame time to accomplish it.

Balancing the skills around a player only having about enough ingame time to get 1 or 2 to really high levels, or 3-5 to moderate levels in a character's lifespan is all that is necessary to simulate people being good at certain things. A law of diminishing returns past a certain skill level would accomplish this by forcing somebody to literally specialize to get to really high skill levels, or accept being about average in a few useful things. Current system has no real way to do this without seriously kneecapping yourself level-wise.

Main thing that sucks with new system is jack of all trades characters are SOL. You literally can't be average - you can be amazing at 1 or 2 things or terrible at everything, no in between what so ever.

EDIT: Let me ask you a question - did you ever feel bottlenecked in progression playing WB while leveling? All that happened was later levels came slower and slower.

Michael Bolton said:

Raise that point with the people who can actually do something about it and move on.

Click to expand...

Well, I mean, this is the thread for talking whining about the leveling system while we desperately await the next update.

Michael Bolton said:

If you'll forgive my saying, it sounds like you're a bit confused as to what you're upset about.

Click to expand...

You are the only one who doesn't grasp what the issues I raised even are, yet you say I'm confused.

You literally just spelled it out while trying to be snarky. But I'll pretend you really don't get it and go slower for ya.

There are level caps based on arbitrary point allocations. These caps shouldn't exist at all. They serve no purpose. Why do you need to allocate points on some screen in order to play the game differently? If you wanted to use a spear this run just use one. Why need to put points into it?

I'm genuinely curious as to why you can't just... play differently and level those skills instead? Why do you need to pull up the character screen, assign a point to whatever, just so you can go back to lancing people from horseback or trading or whatever and continue to grow in skill? What is the purpose of this extra layer?

What about pressing 'C' and then clicking somewhere on the screen, then closing the screen just so you can get back to what you were doing before makes this system appealing over just getting better without the BS?

I have so far provided several reasons why the system is bad:

1) You need to min max when assigning points to even reach the highest possible level with your character. Balanced characters, therefore, cannot reach the same level as min-maxed characters. Do you really not understand that this is not just counterintuitive but also extremely bad game design? Really? You are actually fine with this? Actually address this for once if you're going to keep responding to me instead of just repeating that you 'like the new system' and passively aggressively refusing to understand this problem, at the very least, is a problem.

2) Some skills will invariable suck to level because it isn't fun to click through screens and that is essentially what you have to do to slowly level them - Trade comes to mind - which is further amplified by how you level in general. If you want a character who uses some of these skills as well as combat skills then you will have to play the clicking through screens minigame to level those skills just so you can go back to leveling the combat skills.

Example: You are a trader who fights with a sword. You've just started so you have crap money and you are out there fighting bandits and suddenly your combat skill plateaus at your current cap. So now you need to go and grind trade to level up, but you still need the money from bandits to do this or else it will take forever. So now you aren't getting skill ups for fighting but you must still keep fighting bandits for money for leveling trade so you can level up and raise the skill cap on your combat skills so you can fight bandits to level your combat skills. But because you forgot to level trade at all, now you need to grind that till M&B III comes out or until you get enough points to raise the cap on your combat skills. So you grind that out ignoring other things because it bottlenecks your progress. You avoid fights that in Warband you would have fought just because your progress is stalled. But hey, you say, now you know the system, no more bottlenecks for you! From now on you make sure you grind trade at the same rate as whatever else! ...which ends up limiting how you respond to world events because you are being dragooned between tasks. See, now you have to grind in very specific ways to maximize leveling progress. Gee, that sure sounds like you're being forced to play the same way every time. Huh, thought that was the problem with the old system that this was supposed to fix by letting you 'level by doing'. It looks like the opposite is the case. You level by focus point application and then by doing very specific things to unlock further focus point applicaiton! So much better, right?

There is no reason to lock leveling sword fighting behind grinding out one more level of trade, or vice versa, yet that is what happens currently. It makes no sense. It's dumb. It leads to boring outcomes for the player. Does that make sense to you? I think it makes a lot of sense. Boring = bad. See? Easy!

3) If skill caps weren't there none of these gripes would exist.

What I'm saying is if you could level any skill from start to finish without ever assigning points or leveling up, then there would be no problems with the system. The aforementioned example wouldn't exist. A player could bounce between trading and sword fighting as the mood took them instead of following a careful regime.

You could also play however you wanted in the moment and that would be what your build organically became. No jumping around between leveling skills, no need to assign points. Just like it is in Kenshi. The only thing necessary to fix the current system is to make it like this.

Do you understand now? Is that clear enough for you? Let me spell it out again just in case. You can screw yourself and make it impossible to get the points you need to progress in the ****ty level up system which is further exacerbated by the bottlenecking of progress around leveling boring skills and finally there is no reason for any of this to even be a problem because they could just remove focus points and stat points and just keep the skills and have a largely perfect framework to just finish tweaking.

Michael Bolton said:

That's literally the way it is. Focus points simply increase the level rate (and influence the skill cap).

Click to expand...

No, that is not the way it is. In Kenshi the only level cap is the highest possible level to take a skill which is wholly impractical for about the last 10-15% outside of focusing entirely on doing so. In Bannerlord the highest you could take a skill - therefore it's absolute cap - is like 3/4 of the way to the end of the bar. How can you think that's the same? It is literally completely impossible to even reach the last perks lol.

In Bannerlord there are level caps that you must repeatedly reach and then raise for no reason what so ever, and it is possible to leave yourself ****ed completely. In Kenshi if you want to be better with Crossbows, just grab one and use it. It doesn't matter what you did before stat-wise, everybody is just as capable as everybody else to reach max proficiency if they train long enough. No magic hard cap whatsoever, nor any real soft cap until extreme skill levels.

There is absolutely no comparison between the skill system in Bannerlord and the system Warband or Kenshi. The Bannerlord system is garbage. It is complex with bizarre halts and starts in the progression of skills for no reason other than to be different and to arbitrarily increase the grind to stretch content.

I absolutely do not believe the person in charge of this aspect of the game could be so incompetent as to not realize that 1/4 or the perks are actually impossible to attain without cheating. I don't care how early the access is, that is inexcusable. It would be like inventing a new card game except you forgot how many cards are in a playing deck. Honestly, the Math you need to take to get a degree in programming covers the exact type of problem that the current system has - if you spread your attribute points to evenly you make it impossible to reach the same level as if you min-maxed.

Because, you know, there was this problem in previous games where the majority of players didn't min/max as Horse Archers enough. /s

The skill system made me go back to Warband until either they change it COMPLETELY, or there are mods that do so.

As in get rid of the stupid focus system and attribute points and just let me level skills like in Kenshi. You use it, you level it. Bam. Done.

If they keep it as is, it will be a deal breaker for me and many, many others. I sincerely hope the good will they're finding in the steam reviews doesn't lead them to conclude most things are fine and just need some tuning. This skills system is the worst in any game I've ever played.

If you think it's fine or good, then that's because you don't understand how the skill system currently works. You are unable to level very far, or in any direction outside of optimal or you literally make it so you can't level anymore.

Hope you enjoy using excel to plan your character like in WB, except the math is like 2nd year university this time...

bwc153 said:

In all previous Mount and Blade games, and spinoffs, the player was never given enough skill or attribute points to level everything.

Click to expand...

Nobody is asking to level everything to max. Your character already has a finite lifespan to prevent this. No need for VIG, CNG, etc. or skill caps. The stat system they used is an artefact of old turn based RPGs where raw stats determined outcomes rather than manually controlling your character. Outcomes in this game are based on real-time events where the manipulation of your character is what matters.

So explain why I need to play D&D in my M&B?

kwando said:

Configurable Experience Multipliers - Updated for e1.5.4

Gives you full control of skill progression for the player or non-player characters by allowing modification of the experience added on a per skill / skill group basis as well as allowing the modifica

www.nexusmods.com

There's already people editing .xml on nexus go use them.

Click to expand...

Nice.

The best solution would be to make it so it's like you have max focus points in everything and max stats, but only basic skills. That mod would make the game 100X better in the character progression department.

To everyone saying it's better than warband - you are wrong. Straight up. If you think reaching a level cap and then having to get some points by practicing bartering just so you can get a 'level up' so you can then go back to practicing... horse archery, you are wrong. You are trolling and you are wrong. No reasonable person would agree that it's more realistic or better to require this roundabout way to level. You literally need to have a leveling build to use just to get the points to unlock skill caps to level your real build. No sane person would think this adds immersion because it is entirely counter intuitive and unrealistic.

Leveling by doing is better, yes, because then your character reflects how you've played. I see the logic there. Want a new build? Trying playing differently. That's a good way to approach things. However with the current implementation the only result of level caps is to ensure that not only is there an optimal way to level based on how easy it is to acquire certain kinds of xp, but also what order to flesh out your stat points to achieve optimal skill growth. Which makes it far more grindy and gamey than WB could ever hope to be.

stevehoos said:

And people are claiming this system is better than the prior lol. This gimmicky RPG stuff, It's horrible, I want to manage my troops, not this.

Click to expand...

Yes, exactly. I have no idea how the restrictions on what your character is good at adds 'immersion'. Just the different skills with nothing else is fine. That way you get a sense of progress as you develop them and unlock perks but you don't feel locked into a 'build'. Your character will still grow old and die and get good at the things they spent their time doing. Pretty realistic in all honesty. Much better than your characters development being based around a stat point you got for stabbing a guy this one time when you were a kid or whatever your backstory is supposed to be as an explanation for the stat system.

Your companions shouldn't be all filling in for everyone else's disabilities, either. I shouldn't need to find some engineer in some bar before I can build X, I should be able to train my character to do so myself. Just starting everybody with an aptitude in some areas and an inability to learn in others just to prevent people from having uber characters is pointless when your character has a finite lifespan - your lifespan is already your skill cap lol.

Agree with everything. I thing I speak for everybody when I say the character attributes and level up system is genuinely terrible in it's current form. Why not just let the player progress as far as they want? Why, if I'm becoming more skilled with polearms, do I need to now quit fighting with them and run around on foot for cardio so that I can get the points I need to... keep getting better at fighting with polearms? Why do I have skill caps that prevent me from being good at building walls, shooting a bow, fighting with a spear and stealing to the same extent that I can be good at haggling, leading armies, managing settlements and performing first aid? Why would somebody who jogs also be good at riding a horse and being a blacksmith - but not good at swinging a hammer, say, at a person?

Get rid of the skill caps and it would be the best one ever.

I love the game so far, but I hate the leveling system with a passion. A much better alternative would be to remove all restrictions on skill and therefore perk gain.

Get rid of VIG, CTR, END, CNG, SOC and INT and all associated focuses. Just let the player level the skills and when they get a new perk that's it. No reason to get this many skills to get a point for this to get another level for more focus points but LOL ONLY LIMITED ATTRIBUTE POINTS. That's the DUMBEST possible decision because all this does is limit character growth AWAY from what one naturally does and toward boring gameplay routines all in some grindy pursuit of a 'build' they were going for that doesn't suck at recruiting lords during the endgame.

Why not just let us become skilled at the things we do in game without any ridiculous level-up-stat based barrier? Why can't I be good at schmoozing with a lord just because I was a steppe farmer and therefore a good horseman? Maybe he likes my raunchy jokes, and my moonshine. I don't see the point of a 'level up' in the first place since everything is based on raw skills and perks. The whole system exists solely to make your characters suck for longer than they should and in ways they in which shouldn't.