This maybe is the most pertinent question arising from streamlining spells to fit the system in use for all roles.
Goblinworks blog wrote:
"In general, we expect spells to be better than maneuvers due to the other tradeoffs required to use them, but they're not so much better that a Fighter would rather use a Spellbook than a Trophy Charm, Banner/Warhorn, or Holdout Weapon. That is, you'll usually want to slot implements appropriate to your role for the best effect."
What are those "other trade-offs"? Also spells presumably will be non-physical damage and interact with the power-pool differently? Etc?
"Mavrickindigo, I have been expecting you."
If you have any other questions fire away.
I wonder. Lots of considerations.
It could be not-connected initially so new characters get a chance to grow their own viable settlements possibly? Then add interchange connections? This would work with both eg initial barrier or sealed gate. The buying new characters of established guilds might be a problem but then it might not.
A new area either adds new materials to the economy or more of the previous.
Another consideration is the expense and danger of travel could become much higher eg early sea voyage failure rate?
Finally as alluded to what sort of variations on te rules o the river kingdoms might occur? Pharasma's Favour and otherwise that may affect gameplay a cold land needing furs, a tropical area with strange diseases that our chars immunity is not prepped for?
I'd like rivers and waterways traffic to forge the way forwards along the rivers of te river kingdoms and further out to sea even.
Hmm, good thoughts Salazaar Slaan.
Skill-training a longer/higher jump would be good maybe? That "opens up" more terrain as possible vantage points.
I feel guilty for jumping back on my favourite hobby-horse but the possible Druid "warg/mind-transfer" ability to guide a bird would be a proxy genuine flight just avoiding the issue of flight bypassing travel / trivialising content ie economic repercussions. *_^
I think devs said in a FAQ blog flight might never make it. Though proxy flight would work or "chicken flight" / weight of a feather ; feather flight could compromise.
What I'm saying above is that terrain that allows jumping and positions to be useful in combat then it's not real jumping puzzles or climbing but it's effects are as enjoyable and possibly even more useful.
A smaller dug-in group being able to take on or hold-up a larger group would be a result for instance.
Idk, this sounds like a nightmare to develop.
I am a fan of wider interaction of avatars + environments.
But it needs to be abstracted in a form that fits the wider game design itself.
To negate jumping puzzles, this is I think expensive Themepark stuff to design? It's also a mini game?
So to convert it to a meaningful interaction, generic terrain that affords the opportunity to "dig-in" for say an ambush. That could be archers finding large rock or sloping scree or jump onto a tree below which looks over a narrow path in a ravine. That affords perhaps further range and defence to get to. Positioning in such a combat therefore confers an advantage that immerses te environment into the players reckoning.
Again separate climbing animation could be a hassle and bugs getting stuck in terrain. I think again if the devs generically make the terrain then craft areas for the above for players establish positional advantages in anticipation of combat that "wait & ambush" advantage of "setting-up"'would be appropriate for everyone and include everyone and not require additional feature creep.
Perhaps this suggestion is a cop-out, however?
...There is no good reason to play a chaotic evil character except if you like being other people's content.
This can be interpreted as you will be mechanically affected and socially afflicted.
It can also be interpreted as sharing the game area with similar like-minded scum. That could turn out to be very fun microcosm.
I've not played pathfinder TT yet. I hope to do so. I've skimmed the core rule book and have to say I'm happy with all the classes which will become roles in PFO.
Keovar provided a list of the additional ones and I have to say on first impressions I'm not a fan of most of those making it to PFO.
What I'd prefer is having the core ones and expanding the other types of skill-training going on in the game around the core as much as possible.
I know I'm not directly answering the question above, but if setting out for the TT game a Druid catches my eye the most: Talking to animals, flying like a bird, breathing underwater like a fish... these capture my imagination!
Hobs (or Jobs as my spell-check would prefer!) is 100% on the ball. Play the ball not the player.
Talk and exchange. If you see an idea you think it is worth sticking your kneck out for on a rare occasion back it up with your best shot! Aka "insistence". :)
For eg Bluddwulf has gone up in my estimation with his consistency (I'll avoid the temptation of saying "consistently wrong" as a sort of personal jibe!) and overall expanding discussion. GJ.
I like that Bludd. Some sort of Scoville Scale for how "hot" any given mmorpg is.
Of course chilli is a spice not the actual good and so it is/should be with PvP
Yes, the Racial bonus eg Encumbrance for Dwarves (I like Tolkien's spelling) and oc Night Vision Perception for Elves. These are really cool and of course quirk-bonuses not insurmountable. :) Although who gets Sylvain Perception/Stealth bonuses, that's a ton of skill-specific training right there for context.
Well I'm no Owl (wise or nocturnal?), so it's time for me to flutter off.
I hope there isn't a stealth buff at night, but a perception penalty for races that don't have low light vision or darkvision. They can see just fine in darkness, so they shouldn't have a more difficult time seeing someone stealthed at night than they do in the day.
Hrm. That's making for a little refinement to the system. Definitely worth considering. Either a stealth bonus or a perception minus, which ever makes sense. Perhaps a stealth bonus and no perception minus for said races? It's another turn/twist for the devs to think about.
@Nightdrifter - that seems the most practical implementation in my eyes as well.
I'd add Hex modifier (bonus/minus) for woodland too per hex categorized as another form.
In terms of day/night it could even be mid-night game world time eg smaller window than 50-50. Etc. Unpredictable "Weather effects" could further add to this down the line.
Yeah if you can wait on the video-card nearer PFO that saves a lot of money or otherwise it means you get better specs for the same price (much better).
If not there's plenty of good advice on choosing video-cards sloshing around. ask eg Reddit (gamingpc / buildapc etc) or one of the techies on these forums?
Not the same 'Brax' as Forged by Chaos by chance?
PvP = energy/heat added to the system by players
Naturally rep is some sort of valve or gear on PvP. It's absence lowers efficiency and it's presence improves.
Naturally energy added to the system must be balanced "heat entering" and "work done".
Lol, maybe that sketch isn't any good either?
All this back and forth I'm forgetting what Reputation was and currently is tbh.
What I vaguely recall is that any PvP will lower reputation over time. The reason being to regulate PvP Frequemcy of gameplay variable according to: Who, Where + How Often.
Obviously a little opportunistic PvP from a high Rep you can get away with by them why do so after time expense and following rules to spend it so frivolously? Contrasting high PvP and indiscriminate targets and times then you are pressuring your group and ultimately if you continue you end up with similar players and why not? That gameplay is telling the game to allow similar players to go by similar rules or preference for certain rules of play.
Coming finally on to Bludd's +ve Reputation for proactive PvP my guess it fits an outlier case for specific context eg under the guise of a Paladin or something? For what use? Perhaps GW provide the Paladin with "good work" to be done... Idk but I feel it would be a separate system and possibly more closed and hence (proportionally powerful but contained). Somewhat spewing ideas here as they surface.
At some point a blog on how GW are finding the Unity engine would be good. Maybe when more of those tech considerations are nailed down that Stephen mentioned re cover and or night/day or a long those lines mostly.
It piqued my interest not only but also as well as the recent art blogs and so on. Also GameMaker standard is free to download atm and the get a studio licence for free to mess with. I did download Unity for iOS before but a bit too big for my feet to fit in so far.
@Deinira: Just some good old-fashioned sabre-rattling going on... the traders will trade, the sailors will sail.
Be that as it may,
I was reading this earlier: CCP Six Month[s] Update
So I think it's a two way street.
Hobs the Short wrote:
Recently, there has been an attempt - not always successful, but noticeable - to reduce the toxicity of the forums by keeping arguments focused on the topic, rather than on the posters - to respect a fellow player, even if you greatly dislike their position on a given subject.
These forums are 9.5/10 very good. Compared to other forums dropping to 5/10 and even 2/10. That said I look forward to the Goblin Squad sub-forum so that this high standard can continue either due to larger numbers of forumers or drop in standards for some reason.
^I love that post *boom!* .
I imagine once again it depends on context. The rogues will be useful for scouting the van of a force. Meanwhile the bulk of combat will be likely a fighter's domain supporting by some casters, who themselves would be perfect for a rear surprise attack from rogues to break support/artillery.
Rogues might also delay fighters if need be. Or even if favourable soften them a bit and flee back to their own fighters?
If rogues 'mobility' is their strength you choose your "ground" to fight the enemy, not theirs ideally.
Thanks Imbicatus. So seems a lot of potential scope for Arcane which itself seems a mega-archetype as it were.
No doubt we'll get answers on this in the futures. ;)
That was my understanding also. I was not sure where Keovar was thinking towards, if perhaps another eg of Arcane casters would be mentioned additional to dps-glass-cannnon-spellbook => dps spells.
Nihimon seems to indicate some egs "Divination and Abjuration." Any others that Arcane casters might use?
Ryan Dancey wrote:
I know very little about Pathfinder atm (I hope to start playing it at some point convenient for me in the future, so bear with me) but from what we know about Arcane Spell-casters, isn't it that they'll,
as Ryan mentions above,
you may not have the suitable potent spells for the situation and/or you have limited windows to use your potent-dps-specific-spells, as an arcane spell-caster?
I think the key is "likely be a glass cannon" with a suitable devastating effect in a given combat?
What has changed from that suitable specialization in PFO and pathfinder PnP/TT, I am wondering? Thanks in advance. :)
Stephen Cheney wrote:
Due to how we're splitting different hexes onto different server processes and plans to include more tree cover than is common in other MMOs, our vision range isn't going to be hundreds of yards. But that's likely a whole other discussion that we'll talk more about when we have the tech for hexes developed further, and I probably shouldn't have used hard numbers in the blog since it's still somewhat in flux.
Well there are posters who know there stuff so I shut-up and listen to them in these mechanics threads. I think the current stealth system is robust and flexible for interesting gameplay variable outcomes from players and in particular forcing skill-training choices with consequence that narrows down how intense belt any given part of gameplay you want to be more effective at, at a cost.
If you add the above terrain and time of day CONTEXT modifiers you have all the power and flexibility between different situations you need meaning good tactics sometimes win and sometimes the context tilts favour to stealth or perception but NOT ALL THE TIME is the key and players can make interesting decisions and counter decisions according to where and what time they are on the move.
Night + Forest = Stealth >> Perception
Modified by Stealth Skill value VS Perception value; where equal the above applies roughly.
So knowing the lay of the land and the timetable of your target or "who is aiming at you" messes with which people you have in your group for or against.
That's my take-home. Seems to me stealth is going to be more effective investment when conditions of combat are more ad hoc, given other investment in skill-training and organized, groups will have at least one rogue to spot stealth and alert?! Also what avari3 said in reply. On my smart phone so need to re-read te blog and Stephen's response again, to be sure.
A general sentiment:
I'm a bit circumspect on making a social grouping transfer or accumulation of "social credit" just a form of PvE or grinding at a system. Some sort of expensive series of player-set contracts with obvious onus (aka in any other circumstance: raw deal) on the neophyte? And final pardon/grading on the masters/leaders (highest ranked players) of the council of a particular faction. I know in EVE goons set up "pay us x money to join" and other dubious shenanigans such as that, but player-bespoke quest-contracts would be preferable I think.
Responding to the OP:
For factions those all seem suitable checks and balances and hoops to jump through. I like. I think for severe reversals perhaps the above "raw deal" contracts would be useful "player discretion" tools to test and challenge the resolve of the "turn-coat" and even add a final deterrent to a clear attempt at a mole embedding in a faction etc. also brings an element of "faith" vs "conned".
Yes, if one major choice is shown it seems obvious that everyone would pursue that choice (present) but if a whole load of opportunity choices occur later and each player is yet to make a single choice it becomes much less obvious (future). And in fact te range of choices makes each choice made by each player more specific.