|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
The Pathfinder Video Games session went generally well, with the exceptions that Obsidian Special Guest Chris Avellone was stuck in convention (foot!) traffic and was unable to attend, and the event in the next room was excessively loud.
As expected, no real new information about PFO was released, but the game was explained to new people with an extended Q&A session. Overall reception was positive.
Afterwards, I and Pino ware able to show Nihimon's alpha twitch feed and provide some general information about the great player community we have, do a little bit of shameless recruiting, and elaborate a few points in more detail, to about 8-10 people.
I believe Harad Nevar was able to complete an additional interview with Jason and Erik in a marginally better sound environment, but I think that both the seminar and interview require significant postproduction before release.
KoTC Edam Neadenil wrote:
Leaving out the time cost of returning home, the buyer if the wagon is going to use it to transport something.
The art being in is part of MVP, and the art pipeline doesn't gradually iterate up to high-quality.
That said, each armor has five permutations for two sexes and four races already; that's a freaking lot of unique meshes that have to be in before certain features are implemented. Props to the art department for not holding up features or release.
The real problem with implementing a flaking check in PFO is that it requires that "enemy" and "ally" be somehow codified.
At the tabletop, the DM can make a ruling regarding how three mutually hostile parties flank with each other. Writing the complete set of rules for when any combination two player characters can flank with each other is not feasible; when my friend the cleric steps up behind me and prepares to cast a spell on me, he shouldn't cause me to be flanked. When the same character steps up behind my foe and prepares to cast a spell on him, he should cause my foe to become flanked.
Suppose that said cleric is a friend to both combatants who are hostile to each other; should he flank with them, or not?
"Untargeted" closely approaches the same behavior, but replaces all of the complicated friend/foe logic by checking the target's target.
I hope for effects conditional on the weapon having a keyword that isn't looked for by the damage, but that pretty much requires that an ability be usable by two weapons that have different keyword progressions.
That might be a very strange path to take; I imagine a things like elven curve blades that are one-handed fencing weapons, but have a different keyword progression from rapiers, and attacks that are legal with both, but work better with one or the other.
I'd be really freaked if a steel longsword could get Cold Iron, because that's one of the automatic Keywords that cold iron ingots are used to produce.
As it stands, there's no abilities that use more keywords than a +3 t3 weapon. I can't even guess what the +4 keyword would have to be to make it better than nothing.
Now, account for how likely it is that the conditional would be met this combat, adjust for how effective possible status effects might be, and the whether or not an otherwise suboptimal DPS might finish off the opponent.
Rotations are descriptive of systems where there is little variance in tactics. I hope that at least PvP ends up not having that characteristic.
Raw, refined, and crafted goods that people want will be easy to turn into coin. It might be hard for a while to turn them into enough coin. (Especially before the loop gets established; in the first days, those who train combat skills will go out and kill stuff and get both coin and materials; until the refiners start selling, they have no coin with which to buy materials to process and sell. Ditto with the crafters, and until there is equipment to buy the adventurers have nothing to do with their coin.
I suspect that this will be made somewhat easier by social structures that operate under communism at least for a few days. At least they won't have deadlocked supply chains that need to be jumpstarted somehow. Other options I see are generalism (everybody puts their cup in the faucet directly to get seed funding) and capitalism (some person or group jumpstarts the system with credit, either borrowing or lending).
There are probably emergent dynamics that my basic knowledge about economics doesn't suggest.
And in any case, lower transaction costs make the entire process easier to start. Ideally at the start of EE the transaction costs will be mostly coin, rather than time and communication.
The first person to craft any given item in EE will be someone who spent all of their experience towards crafting that category of items.
It will not be possible to be producing the best stuff while also being a competent adventurer. It remains to be seen if it is possible to produce enough to influence the economy using little enough xp to be reasonable, and I think it is very likely that the most effective gatherers will invest significantly in not dying.
Dorgan Berkham wrote:
+5 Tier 1 gear, with the perfect selection of keywords and feats, and attack skill 6 or armor skill 10, has as many keywords as +2 Tier 2 gear with a armor skill of 6 or attack skill of 4.
T1 Weapons will do about half damage from missing when used against T2 armor, after all damage reduction from armor, depending on defense and attack values.
Yes, that's what the discussion is about actually. If you can select your bind point (and not just go to the nearest one), then a scout is forced to struggle out of hostile territory. If you can just select your bind point all the way back in your own settlement, you're home and ready to gear up. Of course with instant communication, the scouts job is done whether or not he makes it back anyway...
Alternately, if the scout has to struggle out of his area of operations, it is hard to force him out.
@ DeciusBrutus Going by the thread topic "Fast travel by suicide" the discussion got started as a way to stop people from using death as a quick way back from a scouting mission or some such thing. Having most of your items left on your corpse and 25% destroyed is adequate to stop this from being used to bring things back from dangerous areas, etc, but there's still some chance of suicide being used as a travel mechanism back from a scouting mission (if you have all of your equipment threaded, or just don't take much with you in the first place). Steven Cheney stated that GW doesn't want this to become a common activity or strategically important, so they're looking at spawn options and how it will affect this situation. People here were offering some ideas to curtail suicide deaths from being advantageous.
Any solution that involves said scout respawning at a location far from his support and then struggle to get out of hostile territory seems like it would be worse than allowing the defending forces to send him all the way home.
"Skills" isn't a term of art that refers to a trainable of PFO. The things that you purchase at trainers are "Feats", some of which improve the part of the character sheet labeled "Skills".
Sorry if the pedantry is too much, I've been spending time trying to organize the wiki namespace for simple automated updating, and it's a pain.
That's too many skills to specialize in. Select fewer skills, and specialize in a smaller aspect of construction.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
I would say that at this point sending more emails to Paizo's customer service team is not going to help you. Once we give an "all clear" indicating that we think all problems have been resolved, and if your problem has not been resolved, that would be a time to try and escalate. Right now you're just putting more load on a system that's already overloaded.
A "your issue is being worked on, no ETA on a resolution yet" email would be comforting to those people.