Eaghen-'s page

It may seem that we're getting a bit too fussy about nomenclature and semantics, but I can understand where Ryan is coming from.

I work on a day to day basis with a user community far smaller than PFO. We lose a tremendous amount of time because of confusing communication. One person refers to a dog, the next refers to a cat...do they both mean pets in general, or are they really talking about two slightly different things???

If we all insist on referring to the same thing in different ways, we force the developers to spend precious cycles just trying to interpret what the point of a concern really is.

Software releases are a messy business. Packages are as unique as snowflakes and there will always be twists and turns that throw the unexpected into the mix. ESPECIALLY when you have this fantastic environment of non-stop open design discussion, back and forth between devs and user community.

So what would you rather have? An open and active dialog with the developers about what may be possible and what we'd like to see, including prioritization, coupled with some messy releases...OR...a non-communicative group of "my way or the highway" developers completely walled off from us?

GW...ya'll are doing great.

just to be sure...water DOES eventually boil, right?

I would caution players to think of the first couple of weeks of play as a time to experiment and see how systems interconnect. Throwing away a character after a couple of days of experimentation will not be uncommon.

So it'll kinda be like dating...

I'm a kid! I just have a few more birthdays under my belt than most!

gnomes...the other white meat

Everyone has different priorities, and a love for high-end graphics is certainly a reasonable position. For my part, though, I couldn't care less about the graphics and would have no problem with them pretty close to the bottom of the development priority list.

Eaghen, I find it hard to believe that it would honestly not occur to a Lawful Good paladin that a defeated enemy just might rise up to strike back at him. For that, I think we would need a Z axis on our alignment chart to quantify how naive a character is. Then we'd have a 3x3x3 cube of 27 alignments. You could have Lawful Good Optimist, Lawful Good Realist, and Lawful Good Pessimist...

The possibility would certainly occur to a LG character. LG does not equal stupid. But their actions would be governed by the other thought...that redemption is possible.

i only have one question for the pve crowd (aka carebears ,diminishing how it may sound)

why do you play MMORPGs ?As far as i am concerned it means massively multiplayer online role playing game.

massively multiplayer , massively , mass .

if you can play for 2 hours a month ,buy skyrim

if you want to play solo at off hours , buy skyrim

if you want to play in co-op mode with 3 friends fighting the scripted AI
buy wow

if you want to chat with your friends and click at plants etc , i heard farm ville does that.

not all shoes fit all feet.

the point is there are a lot of games out there .the mmo genre was made in an attempt to have games that feel like a world .it is about immersion.

mmo is not co-op.it is not an irc channel either .many people come from wow or similar "mmo" games unable to understand probably what it means

-mmo
-sandbox
-open world

and they try to change the game to fit their views.I hope goblinworks can deliver an AAA quality sandbox mmo , so that i can play and enjoy the risks and the adventures.The rest of the people can buy wow , i heard it is pretty consensual and convenient and user friendly .you can play 30 minutes a day , do your daily quests , and join the "i found you some friends" raid on weekend. you collect "high five" badges and at the end you get a shiny epix tinfoil hat. thank you

With all due respect, this is pretty harsh, and frankly quite unfair. It seems to me to demonstrate precisely the attitude which causes the concerns I have about PvP...namely "I can kill you ha ha and I will again and again just because I feel like it ha ha and if you don't like it, go play WoW hardy har har".

If I were to lash out in kind, I might say something like "if all you want to do is fight with other people, get a job, or get married, or at least get out of your parents' basement once in a while". But, that would probably be pretty unfair too :)

So let's keep this an objective and constructive conversation, shall we?

Most of the concerns about PvP I've seen posted don't advocate a complete restriction against it, but rather express concerns about PFO devolving into a gank-fest where only the strongest (or quickest twitch fingers) survive. If that's what you're advocating, then I believe there are few on these boards (even those in favor of PvP) who'd support your position.

I think most would agree with you on one very important point though. I certainly do. We all want a game everyone can enjoy. And it must be recognized that not everyone enjoys PvP. I think the developers' goal here is to make a game that appeals to as wide an audience as possible, including those of us who 1) don't particularly like PvP, 2) understand there's a development vision of a large, dynamic and immersive world for PFO, 3) understand that this vision includes PvP for various reasons which are discussed at length elswhere, 3) are willing to accept PvP with the hope that it will at most be simply an element of a much larger game, not the central tenet.

If PvP does become the central tenet of PFO, then yes, I agree with you on another point...many of us should, and undoubtedly will leave for other pastures.

If someone else has already said what I'm about to, my apologies...I don't have the time right now to read through over 70 posts.

I'm still fairly new to PFS and have not experienced things from the GM side of the table, so my perspective may be limited, but I find myself in disagreement. Please read objectively and be gentle in your replies :)

I want my characters as powerful and self sufficient as I am able. I will pick apart the rules with microscope and tweezers to eek out every last ounce of proficiency I possibly can. I want to be ready for whatever the gaming gods throw at me.

At the same time, I understand and fully agree with the concerns expressed regarding "game-breaking" characters. I would suggest that "game-breaking" is not because of how a character is optimized, but how it is played. Whatever the nature of the table I'm playing at (balanced or imbalanced, experienced or green), I should govern my actions accordingly.

I'm sure I don't need to point out even the most experienced players can go down, sometimes quickly and unexpectedly. If that happens to a few of my co-adventurers, I'd like to have something better than harsh language to throw at the baddies. I want a howitzer...with big pointy teeth! That could be the difference between my own moment in the spotlight, and a TPK.

So in my opinion, optimize optimize optimize, if that's what you want to do...but if you're playing an enchanter, let the melee guy hack away, maybe throw a debuff or something...save the nuke for if and when the melee guy gets in trouble. And if you're playing the melee guy, maybe this time around take out the trash and let the caster have his way with the BBEG.

(And if you're the GM, I know it isn't OK, but I still say it should be OK to fudge a little here and there, though I be burned at the stake for it)

One final note. These characters we make...I won't go so far as to say there's an emotional investment in them (there shouldn't be...that's just too creepy), but there certainly is an investment in time and effort. I want to protect that investment and minimize the chances that my character will die. Having a character with nothing better than a +2 does not accomplish this. Maybe as I grow as a player, and learn to do a better job with the environment, I won't be so set on having at least my primary stat raised very high. But right now, that's my comfort zone, unabashedly so.

I am a relative newcomer to PFS. But having read through this thread, even with my limited experience, I'd like to throw out a few observations and personal opinions. Ultimately I believe I'm saying pretty much the same thing Deusvult is saying...let me try to say it in another way.

From PFS table to table, there will be wide variances e.g. player/GM experience, what classes in the party, etc... These variances do not (and cannot) foster consistent interpretation of a scenario having so many subjective elements. In any activity where so many people are involved and subjectivity plays such a large part, there will be inconsistencies. It is unavoidable. Even the most even-keeled and RAW-dedicated individual is liable to have his judgement influenced by specific circumstances of a given table.

It is also unavoidable that on the grand scale, this will extend to outright application of the rules a la "normally not allowed but you get a situational bonus for your creativity". I'm not going to bother arguing whether or not it should. The reality is that it will. With all due respect, an egalitarian ideal where all are equal and each rule is completely and consistently applied world-wide sounds great for "the society", but is ultimately naive.

Personally, I don't see inconsistency as a bad thing. There should be variances in interpretation as well as application of the rules. I'm not particularly interested in playing a punch-card game. To be perfectly honest, I don't give a rat's whisker if some guy 7 states away (or next door for that matter) has a +3 sword of kickbutt while I'm still trying to scrape up enough money to buy a masterwork. I'll know when I'm holding that masterwork that I earned it. That's what matters to me. And if I'm ever sitting at the same table with Mr. Kickbutt, it is the GM's job to try to make it interesting for us both.

In my view, that is the essence of a good PFS GM...make the games fun and entertaining for everyone, while trying not to let people die unless they do something really dumb. If the BBEG rolls nat 20's 8 times in a row (or if I do for that matter), I say fudge away...because I like a challenge and I also like this guy and want to play him again tomorrow.

Just the observations and opinions of a new player who likes the game and isn't shy about spending money on it :)

Last weekend, I learned this: Our characters are complex, with many strengths and a proportionate number of weaknesses. One needs to learn their character and be thoroughly in tune with this. In particular, know their character's strengths and use them...and not try to do things that are not clear strengths. You may only have a round or two to have an impact...hit the baddies hard with the best you've got, knock 'em down and don't let 'em get up...or you're likely to be rolling up a new character come Sunday morning.

A very important corrolary to this pertains to visions of a character who can do a little of everything. It is good to have a well-rounded character, but in my opinion even bards should single out one thing they want to be really good at, whether it is offensive casting or buff/debuff or melee or whatever...and maintain primary focus on that. I'm not advocating min-maxing mind you, jsut saying I believe a character that is mediocre at a large number of things is...well...mediocre. Next character (probably a bard) I roll up I will pick one thing to be awesome at...and every choice I make during the roll-up process will be heavily influenced by it. There will be times where I sacrifice a little awesomeness for some versatility, but that will be the exception, not the rule.