EoX Hobs's page

Perhaps not all are resurrecting immediately upon their deaths. There might be room for someone's story to have him dying 200 years ago, and reappearing only now; quite a bit of fun you could have with that.

Having mulled this over last evening, I'm liking it quite a bit, and it solves my time-gap problem.

I suspect that whatever has caused the Mark to pop up and start doing its thing is a recent event, thus only those dying after point-in-time "X" (the start of EE) would be resurrected. Those who had died previously will have already visited the Boneyard, been judged by the Lady of Graves, and moved on to their final destination.

However, what if a lingering soul - say a ghost or a spirit bound to the beginning area of the game map - was present at this time? Then like the spirits of the newly dead, could it be resurrected as well?

Nice idea. I try not to have my toons sound too "magical"...at least not more so than the norm (even for a fantasy setting).

I do, however, tend to like player made lore and reasons for how things work as much or better than what comes prepackaged in most MMOs. I just don't want to seem to purposefully clash with the lore, so I'm asking questions in advance. :)

The possibilities are endless.

But only if they fit the lore GW is providing.

Not being much of a Pathfinder lore buff, I was trying to do a little research to tie one of my characters into the actual lore of the area. I found something I liked, but the pivotal event occurred over 200 years prior to present date. This character being human (rather than one of the longer lived races) I had wondered if he could have been wandering about the River Kingdoms for that long, already resurrecting over the years when killed, due to the Mark.

From Stephen's comments, that's not going to work. I can roll with that. It's certainly not the first time I've had to tweak a character to make something happen.

Thank you both. I haven't been keeping up on the forums as closely, so I missed the more recent Stephen info.

Seems I'll need to tweak a few character's stories. :)

We do have a plan for what's going on, and Paizo has approved at least the generalities, if not yet all the particular plots we want to tie to it. We're planning to treat it as one of our lore mysteries that will guide our development of PvE content over time.

So it seems we shall have a reason for the mark, and one that Paizo will stamp as acceptable lore when complete.

When considering character back-story, my question is - for how long has the mark been doing its thing with our characters?

Here's why I ask. When considering our character's back-story, I doubt most of us are envisioning that they burst into existence on day one of EE (unless that's the plan mentioned above by Stephen). Certainly the local geography, and at least Thornkeep, precede our character's arrival.

From a back-story, lore-ish point of view, I'm assuming most of us are planning at least a little history of where our characters were prior to appearing in Thornkeep.

So if our back-stories include having been in the River Kingdoms before that moment, how long have we been immortal? Is this a recent event, or could this have been happening for years, centuries, etc.?

I know if we say that the mark has been in effect for any lengthy period of time, it begs the question of our lack of skills. But then, even if the mark hasn't begun its resurrectionist work until recently, unless we really did just burst into existence with the start of EE, any amount of back-story begs that same question. It's one bit of disbelief I can suspend as a RPer.

As a possible start, somebody could create a public list, then be sure to add any posts of note to it.

Was that a volunteer I heard? :)

Thanks Dario. We'll keep that in mind as an option.

As much as possible, I would like the group to help make the decisions (the Code of Conduct, what voice chat location to use, what website to host the Program data, etc.).

At this point, what would be really useful is a relatively easy way to tell how many of the people listed above are actively reading this thread to know that we're trying to get rolling, and how many listed still have an interest. Unlike a guild/Company/Settlement website, we can't easily track activity here.

I would like to get a Guide meeting together in the not to distant future so that we can talk about several other basic program structure ideas/issues. As EE approaches, more of the people listed below will likely be chiming in and provide us a more complete Guide pool for these discussions.

Our last Guide meeting (long ago) was held on PFO Fan TS - which at the time, presented a nice, nonpartisan location. Having just checked it a minute ago, it seems there is a particular settlement's channel hosted there. I'll look into it.

----------------------------------------------------------

Given the announced changes to EE starting times, I have changed the old "month 2" starting times to month 1. Moving forward, those purchasing the Explorer Access Package will be designated as "month 2".

Note - If, after reading this thread, you decide that you would like to be Guide, please reply below. Likewise, if you originally voiced interest, but for whatever reason no longer wish to be listed, reply below and I will remove your name.

In order of original reply...

Hobs - month 1
Deianira
BraxtheSage
Bluddwolf
"The Goodfellow"
Ixiolander - month 1
Jazzlvraz - month 1
Harad Navar
Ezekial Krows - month 1
Gedichtewicht
Blaeringr
Lhan
Rufus UK
Shane Gifford of Fidelis - month 1
stagehog81
T7V Wexel Daventry
jericho616
Guurzak - month 1
Banesama - month 1
Duffy - month 1
Ragerock
Proxima Sin of Brighthaven
Sunnfire <Kabal> - Month 1
Gol Morbis - month 1
Aet Kard Warstein - month 1
Dario - month 1
Snorter - month 1
Aet Khorvak McTiernan - month 1
Harad Navar - month 1
Giorgo - month 1
FMS Quietus - month 1
Feydred of Aeternum - month 1
Augir - month 1
DeciusBrutus - month 1
Kobold Cleaver - month 1
Thannon Forsworn - month 1
Aet Therea Warstein - month 1
Aet Glaucopide - month 1
Thod - month 1
Caldeathe Baequiannia - month 1

Thannon,

I'm sure we will accumulate all kinds of handy resources for our work, including a listing of all the settlements and likely each ones website url. As long as it's unbiased/nonprejudicial information for the new player to investigate, I don't see a problem. If asked, "Which one would you suggest," or even, "What have you heard about them," our answer needs to be, "As a member of the Guide Program, my job is to provide impartial information. I'm afraid I can't answer that question."

Caldeathe,

Seeing as I envisioned that the Guide Program wouldn't be up and running until after month one, we'll all likely have things we can help with by then. Until that time, we'll still be the new players. And welcome aboard!

Given the announced changes to EE starting times, I have changed the old "month 2" starting times to month 1. Moving forward, those purchasing the Explorer Access Package will be designated as "month 2".

Note - If, after reading this thread, you decide that you would like to be Guide, please reply below. Likewise, if you originally voiced interest, but for whatever reason no longer wish to be listed, reply below and I will remove your name.

In order of original reply...

Hobs - month 1
Deianira
BraxtheSage
Bluddwolf
"The Goodfellow"
Ixiolander - month 1
Jazzlvraz - month 1
Harad Navar
Ezekial Krows - month 1
Gedichtewicht
Blaeringr
Lhan
Rufus UK
Shane Gifford of Fidelis - month 1
stagehog81
T7V Wexel Daventry
jericho616
Guurzak - month 1
Banesama - month 1
Duffy - month 1
Ragerock
Proxima Sin of Brighthaven
Sunnfire <Kabal> - Month 1 (Alpha)
Gol Morbis - month 1
Aet Kard Warstein - month 1
Dario - month 1
Snorter - month 1
Aet Khorvak McTiernan - month 1
Harad Navar - month 1
Giorgo - month 1
FMS Quietus - month 1
Feydred of Aeternum - month 1
Augir - month 1
DeciusBrutus - month 1 (Alpha)
Kobold Cleaver - month 1
Thannon Forsworn - month 1
Aet Therea Warstein - month 1
Aet Glaucopide - month 1
Thod - month 1

With pleasure, sir.

While we wait for EE, there are several things we can work on. The first (and hopefully easiest to draft) is the Guide Program's Code of Conduct. Some may think that GW's Terms of Use agreement should suffice, but I believe Guides should hold themselves to a higher standard than a game's minimum required behavior. Remember, as possibly the first people new players meet - and thereby, their first impression of the game community - we have a very large responsibility to set a good impression.

In preparation, I've read EVE University's Code of Conduct as well as several major corporations' guidelines for their customer service employees. I think that with our combined common sense and gaming experience, we can craft something sensible for our use. This is just a rough draft, so feel free to chime in with suggestions.

Be Friendly & Courteous

Guides need to be welcoming, positive, and polite. After all, we will be the greeter at the front door, the information booth attendant, and the tour guide all in one. To do that well, we need to convey to new players that we are happy to meet them and that we will do all that we can within our capacity as Guides to help them better understand PFO.

If we find that we cannot assist a client (e.g. they are asking us to do something we shouldn't) or a client is being abusive, obviously, the Guide is not obligated to continue servicing that client. Guides are volunteers, and no one deserves to be abused. However, if there is a graceful means of removing yourself from the situation, for both your own reputation as a Guide and for the sake of the Guide Program, use the more graceful means.

Finally, we are all human and we all have bad days. If you know you cannot be your usual bright, cheery, Guide Program self today, have the self-awareness to not go on duty.

Be Mindful of Language

It goes without saying that Guides should not use profanity while on duty, but being mindful of language goes beyond this. PFO will be a one server game with a population including people from all different countries and cultures. Especially for those for whom English is not their first language, keep your language as clear, concise, and simple as possible. Actually, this is a good practice when communicating with anyone. Also, avoid slang and jargon. At the very least, such terms may hold no meaning for some players, so assuming they know what you mean would be falling short of providing the useful information we hope to impart. In the worst case scenario, one country's harmless slang may be taken as an insult by the member of another.

Be Attentive

We all will experience unexpected distractions while playing PFO - the /tell from a friend, the call to arms from your settlement, etc. However, as much as possible, plan your times to be on duty when you can be reasonably assured that you can devote your full attention to being a Guide. If a distraction arises while you are with a client, if possible, it is better to transfer the client to another Guide than to provide poor service. Again, seeming the constantly distracted Guide will reflect poorly on you and the program.

Be Honest

Hopefully, having self-designated Categories of Service will help avoid this, but there are bound to be times when Guides are asked questions that they cannot answer. This doesn't necessarily make you a bad Guide. Sandboxes are notorious for having huge learning curves and tons of detailed information. It's one of the reasons for having a Guide Program. As stated in the original post of this thread, no Guide is expected to know everything. Rather, if you find yourself without the desired answer, inform the client that you will do everything within your ability (refer to another Guide, ask a friend in-game, reference an on-line guide, etc.) to get them the answer. More times than not, your willingness to find the answer is just as greatly appreciated and demonstrates your commitment to helping.

Be Nonpartisan

Though this guideline has been present since the initial post of this thread, there are some who question whether being impartial will be possible. I've been able to remain nonpartisan in past games when playing the community servant (even when I had extremely strong views about certain players) and I trust the others who have placed their name on the list above to be able to do the same. Like so much else on this forum, it's all just typed words for now, so there's really not much else to say until we get in-game and prove it.

Simply put, Guides need to be nonpartisan when on duty. Their job is to help new players better understand the game, not to sway opinion, recruit for any Company or Settlement, etc. When you put on your Guide hat, you need to set aside all the other crap - the in-game politics, community drama, forum feuds, etc. If you can't, don't be a Guide.

--------------

In several of the proposed codes above, I've used the phrase "for the sake of the program". I'll be working hard as we press forward to ensure that each Guide can still be their own unique person, and serve as they wish to serve, rather than becoming Guide clones who all have to approach being a Guide the exact same way - so I don't want to seem like the program is more important than the individual. However, one of the main reasons for having a Code of Conduct is to help ensure that an individual member's behavior doesn't end up reflecting poorly on all the other participants. In that everyone who has currently signed up is willing to donate some of their valuable play-time to this cause, I suspect we all want it to succeed and will keep the reputation of the program in mind as we perform our service.

Given the announced changes to EE starting times given in (this) blog, I have changed the old "month 2" starting times to month 1. Moving forward, those purchasing the Explorer Access Package will be designated as "month 2".

Note - If, after reading this thread, you decide that you would like to be Guide, please reply below. Likewise, if you originally voiced interest, but for whatever reason no longer wish to be listed, reply below and I will remove your name.

In order of original reply...

Hobs - month 1
Deianira
BraxtheSage
Bluddwolf
"The Goodfellow"
Ixiolander - month 1
Jazzlvraz - month 1
Harad Navar
Ezekial Krows - month 1
Gedichtewicht
Blaeringr
Lhan
Rufus UK
Shane Gifford of Fidelis - month 1
stagehog81
T7V Wexel Daventry
jericho616
Guurzak - month 1
Banesama - month 1
Duffy - month 1
Ragerock
Proxima Sin of Brighthaven
Sunnfire <Kabal> - Month 1 (Alpha)
Gol Morbis - month 1
Aet Kard Warstein - month 1
Dario - month 1
Snorter - month 1
Aet Khorvak McTiernan - month 1
Harad Navar - month 1
Giorgo - month 1
FMS Quietus - month 1
Feydred of Aeternum - month 1
Augir - month 1
DeciusBrutus - month 1 (Alpha)
Kobold Cleaver - month 1
Thannon Forsworn - month 1
Aet Therea Warstein - month 1
Aet Glaucopide - month 1

Lam asked me in a PM to remove him from the Guide Program listing. I asked him to please post that he wished to be removed so that I don't appear to be deciding who is and is not in the program.

I'm not sure where the publicly **** himself came from. I did not ask that he reveal why he wished to be removed - that's his business, and I don't see why it should be anyone else's.

Let me clarify to avoid future issues. For anyone else on the list or thinking of joining, if at a later date you decide for whatever reason that you no longer wish to participate, that's fine. I'll take no offense to it and I don't see why anyone else should either. This is simply a community service (like many that will hopefully pop up for PFO). If you have time and desire to participate, do so. However, no one should feel like they're bound to this. If you decide, after signing up, that you don't have time, desire, whatever, that's also up to you. I don't see why anyone would hold that decision against you or seek to read more into it.

Let me also state to Lan and the community that my attempt to keep the Guide Program as transparent as possible has been the norm since the original post. For instance, when PMed by people asking to be added, I've asked that they post their desire, so this doesn't become a PM/behind-the-scenes organization. Likewise, if you wish to be removed, I've asked the same, both for the transparency of the program and to avoid other possible issues. Unfortunately, given how politically heated this game has been even before EE, I have no intention of putting myself in the position of seeming like I'm deciding who is and isn't in the Guide Program. I don't believe Lam was attempting to place me in that position, but setting precedents that lead to being placed there are something I'll continue to avoid.

Giorgio,

Is this the post?

I too worry that those who are not truly new players will reside in starter settlements for all the wrong reasons - to avoid the risks of being affiliated with player settlements (and thus subject to feuds, wars, etc.) while reaping certain starter settlement benefits. However, I have some concerns as to how the Guide Program would be impacted by this debate.

Here is a potential Catch 22 between affiliation and trained skill level that the Guide Program could find itself caught in with the suggestions already made:

1. Affiliation - My hope is that Guides will have membership to the Guide Program Company via their third company choice. This way, they can still play the "settlement game" with their first and second company choices. However, some may question the Guide Program's (and thus its participant's) ability to remain nonpartisan - I suspect because of certain members' affiliations. This would seem to indicate that if Guides are involved in the "settlement game" when not on duty, that they may be be held suspect of favoring their own settlement (such as recruiting the new players they meet) when they are on Guide duty.

2. Level of Training - If Guides are affiliated with a settlement, they're free to have higher level training, but may be held suspect, as described above. If they remain unaffiliated, by Nihimon's suggested solution, they would either need to keep training to starter settlement levels (which I doubt many players would wish to do), or be always flagged for PvP because of their "Outcast" status. Either of these seem too strong a consequence for desiring to help new players.

So in short, if you're a Guide with an affiliation, you may be held suspect for that affiliation. If you decide not to be affiliated so as to be in Guide Program, you are stuck with starter town level skills or free PvP target status.

I realize this is a very corner case to the debate at hand. I also do not hold it against Nihimon for having suggested the "Outcast" status nor how it might affect the...

Giorgio,

I can, though I have a feeling that we'll get spread all over the place with multiple topics under the same general heading. Wish we could have sub-threads. :)

Though we're still too far out to be gathering exacting information from prospective Guides, there is a topic I would like to kick around. I stressed in the original post that Guides are not expected to be experts about every aspect of the game. However, in an effort to network Guides so as to better help our "clients", it would help to know in what ways each Guide is interested in assisting new players.

Here's the basic idea:

1. There are a number of different ways (let's call them Categories of Service) that Guides could help new players.

2. I would like Guides to specify which categories they wish to cover within the Guide Program. This information could be listed on a Guide Program website and made available to all Guides.

3. If a Guide is assisting a client, but finds that the client needs something they cannot provide (i.e. it's not their category), they could check the listing, and via the Guide Program Company (I'm hoping this will be a thing), they could hook the client up with another Guide who can better service them.

Categories of Service:

Greeter - requires basic level knowledge of the game, starter town building locations and feature usage, and a willingness to be that friendly face welcoming new players to the game. I would expect most (if not all) Guides would fit into this category. Certainly, any experienced player could fill this role, but Guides are players who are willing to set aside chunks of their own playing time for this effort. They will also be armed with their network of contacts for further assisting new players, which not every regular player may have.

Companion - a friendly tour guide of the immediate outlying area around the starter town, to help explain node harvesting, provide tips on initial PvE, etc.

Librarian - a Guide who knows far more in-depth knowledge about specific game mechanics, skill, etc. For instance, if someone wants to learn more about the advantages of a particular "class" build, these are the people to send them to. We can get far more granular on specific subject area expertise per librarian later (e.g. "Bob's the rogue guy...if they want to know rogue stuff, send them to Bob.").

Escorts - a Guide willing to spend the overland travel time to escort new players to participating settlements. In that the Guide Program will not be providing "guards", "participating settlements" are those that do provide guards for a safe round trip. The Guide is present to ensure that all players are aware that this is a party of new players. I know several have posed concerns on how this might be abused, but we can work out those logistics/rules/etc. in another thread devoted to just that topic. For the Guide, especially for longer trips, this is a considerable devotion of time, so just how often such trips take place is yet to be determined. It's possible that multiple settlements might be scheduled for the same "Guide Tour" - so new players wishing to visit all participating settlements in the Northwest might be pooled into one group on a given day. This will also need to be tweaked when other starting towns come into play and Guides start associating with a particular one based on geography, alignment, etc. Again, more on this later.

If you have other possible Categories of Service, questions about the ones suggested, etc., feel free to post.

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:

EoX Hobs wrote:

...there is no way to practice PvP without running the risk of damaging your reputation.

Once feuding is in, we currently believe we'll be able to establish "friendly feuding" between Companies for practice, correct?

I think people have also bounced around the idea of joining competing factions and flagging "for the cause" in order to fight. That has the advantage of costing no Influence. My guess is that it might also allow the practicing combatants to complete faction missions and achievements.

Of course, that's certainly not possible before factions are in.

That's a possible answer for some, though I'm not sure how many (given the possible price) that would wish to spend their hard earned influence for practice, even if they thought such practice might be handy. I still think it would be very useful to have a relatively simple mechanic to allow individuals within the same company, as well as multiple whole companies, to be able to practice with one another. I could see the value in a whole settlement being able to schedule war games to be able to better prepare for the real thing.

An "Ally" feature similar to the one we had in UO might be an easy mechanic. The company leader searches and finds the name of the other company he/she wishes to be allies with, the leader of the other company accepts, and bang, you have Rep free PvP for practice purposes. Someone abuses it...kick them out, or provide either leader the ability to toggle off the allied status. You'd only ally with groups you trust, so I doubt it would be readily abused.

Another thought - I know Ryan once mentioned that all characters need to be members of a settlement, even if it is a starter settlement, and that if you are booted from your player settlement, you default back to a starter one. In that latter scenario, you might have a character as a resident of a starter town with higher than starter town training, but what if skills temporarily reduced to starter town level until you gained membership in another player settlement?

I'm sure this can be abused somehow, but I'll leave it to those better skilled at finding the loop holes.

Jazz and Duffy,

Thanks for the Guide Program suggestions and enthusiasm. :)

Personally, I have even considered not gaining training over what is available in the starter towns for Hobs. Though I would want several levels of Cleric to help heal new players during their first steps outside the starter town, I don't foresee the need for very elevated skills in my case. Likely, a broad range of lower level skills will be more beneficial for what I plan to spend the vast majority of my play time doing. However, I realize I have a very "corner corner case" play style, as any number of friends have reminded me. I certainly don't expect anyone else in the Guide Program to follow that lead, but rather to fully experience and enjoy the whole game while not "on duty".

Back on OP - what if you are simply not able to gain training over a set amount while still a member of a starter settlement? Sure, there may be some real abusers who purposely keep an alt at low level to take advantage of the situation (e.g. running out from a starter settlement's NPC safe zone to quickly ninja-harvest, then run back in for guard protection), but most people won't care to hobble their paid account characters in that way. Hopefully those who do will be few enough to name and report, or am I being too naive?

I too worry that those who are not truly new players will reside in starter settlements for all the wrong reasons - to avoid the risks of being affiliated with player settlements (and thus subject to feuds, wars, etc.) while reaping certain starter settlement benefits. However, I have some concerns as to how the Guide Program would be impacted by this debate.

Here is a potential Catch 22 between affiliation and trained skill level that the Guide Program could find itself caught in with the suggestions already made:

1. Affiliation - My hope is that Guides will have membership to the Guide Program Company via their third company choice. This way, they can still play the "settlement game" with their first and second company choices. However, some may question the Guide Program's (and thus its participant's) ability to remain nonpartisan - I suspect because of certain members' affiliations. This would seem to indicate that if Guides are involved in the "settlement game" when not on duty, that they may be be held suspect of favoring their own settlement (such as recruiting the new players they meet) when they are on Guide duty.

2. Level of Training - If Guides are affiliated with a settlement, they're free to have higher level training, but may be held suspect, as described above. If they remain unaffiliated, by Nihimon's suggested solution, they would either need to keep training to starter settlement levels (which I doubt many players would wish to do), or be always flagged for PvP because of their "Outcast" status. Either of these seem too strong a consequence for desiring to help new players.

So in short, if you're a Guide with an affiliation, you may be held suspect for that affiliation. If you decide not to be affiliated so as to be in Guide Program, you are stuck with starter town level skills or free PvP target status.

I realize this is a very corner case to the debate at hand. I also do not hold it against Nihimon for having suggested the "Outcast" status nor how it might affect the Guide Program. In most cases, "Outcast" status does seem like a plausible solution to the problem. Again, I suspect developers don't consider game mechanic issues with such a corner case situation in mind.

Also, "private roleplays". If you wanna RP ingame, acknowledge other people who try to play with you.

Exactly. I don't care for scripted or private RP. Even if there is a core activity/person/item/conflict that got the RP going, I've never seen any problem with it growing naturally from that point. As the RP touches people beyond that initial impetus, their spontaneous involvement, at least for me, adds to the genuineness of the ongoing interaction. After all, our characters live in a world, just like ours, where unpredictable things happen and people we've never met can interject themselves into our lives and change the course of even the best planned event. To roll with it, however your character would naturally react based on their established personality, is to reinforce how "real" seeming your character is - to oppose it and try to control the situation as a player, rather than your character, is for me, far more immersion breaking.

I should like to think that the Guide Program could help with the issue of introducing new players to prospective settlements without bias - based solely on the new player's stated goals and interests.

When I ran a community center in Ultima Online, one of the center's features was a book containing descriptions of all the prominent guilds in the area so that new players could be better educated about their choices. The only missing element is the means by which new players could be transported to the settlement, but I have a couple ideas in mind, and others in the works.

Call me Blaz.

Welcome, Blaz.

Actually I think the biggest killer to RP is discussion/insult contests about role playing. On the one hand you have the RP police trying to impose their will on how others do or don't it, and on the other you have the jerks belittling those who attempt it.

Politics and Religion are too often subjects of passion rather than reason, and as such grow passionate and unreasonable awfully quickly.

Being,

You and I have been around MMORPG's long enough to know this can be the case. Hopefully PFO can be large enough, and inclusive enough, to allow for all different play styles without anyone trying to tell others that their way of playing is wrong. Hopefully.

Jazz,

I had not thought of that. I suppose that might be possible, but given the possible expense (though we don't know how much influence will be required to declare a feud), I don't know if people will find it too costly for a friendly practice session. It's a system we would still need more information about to be sure. Thank you, though, for bringing it up.

A reality it took me some time to learn from Low sec piracy in EVE, when everyone you fight is ready for that fight and you are all using essentially the same builds and equipment, it gets boring.

There is no risk in fighting in an arena. There is also no mystery or intrigue either. There are no meaningful choices, such as, is this target worth the reputation loss?

I'm not saying that this is a bad idea, it isn't. It is also not the best means for creating the opportunity for reputation neutral PVP.

Get Faction, SADS, Feuds and Wars in first and then arenas can come in later.

I certainly understand and even agree with some of your points. Though the OP was about arenas, the other uses I mentioned above - training yards and practice fields - are the two I would like to see implemented most.

Though I have had several very experienced PvPers tell me that the best way to learn to PvP is in the middle of real combat, I've worked with new players enough to know that before they're thrown into that environment, they would like to train in a more controlled setting, so that they might to learn how to use their weapons, feats, etc. before their life is on the line. Likewise, I can see more seasoned PvPers still desiring a place to practice new maneuvers, spells, etc., also before clashing with real opponents.

In both cases, what these groups need is a way to practice with one another where, if they should happen to kill their sparring partners, they are not losing reputation for it. Why would you want to kill them if you're only sparring...because unless you do, you may not be learning how to make those killing attacks that will matter in real PvP. Unless there is a mechanic I am currently unaware of, there is no way to practice PvP without running the risk of damaging your reputation.

Not to mention reputation consequences. Unless GW codes in an exception for arena combat the contestants will have to spend a lot of time in the wilderness before their rep recovers.

I think the idea would be a no-go without such an exception. You should also likely have a player warning pop-up of some sort to make sure players know they are entering a space where you can be killed without reputation loss so as to avoid misunderstandings.

Jazz,

I recall this post, but thanks for digging it up. In it, Ryan does state that an area/building like an arena might be considered. The bulk of his points are aimed at why duels likely won't be added to the game. If the area where this takes place (training field, dueling pit, arena, etc.) allows for reputation free kills, weapons and magic would be doing real damage and contestants would be killed. I'm not sure that should be as evil sounding as some might take it, since in a world where at least its "heroes" (characters marked by Pharasma) are instantly resurrected, death may be viewed differently than we view it. If we bring in the non-reputation affecting lethal results, many of Ryan's concerns about nonlethal dueling are negated.

1. Immersion breaking:

In this case, the damage is real, so all the issues with attacks magically seeming to do nonlethal damage would be nonissues. Likewise, the concern about other character types (crafters, diplomats, etc.) seeming out of place or having no skills to engage in a spontaneous duel would be nonstarters, since only people seeking training, practice, combat for sport/renown/coin would be entering such areas.

2. It sucks to be bothered about it:

Again, taking place only in a set location in a settlement, only those interested in the activity (either as combatants or spectators) would be present.

3. It's a resource drain with no reward:

Resource Drain - If such an area were used as a training ground (to teach new players the basics of PvP) or practice field (allowing skilled PvPers to hone skills with one another), I can see that participants might use low-end practice equipment. This means harvesters/crafters/refiners depleted some resources (and likely made some cash) making items for a product their users thought worthwhile. If this area were used for duels between champions (maybe company-vs-company or even settlement-vs-settlement competition) or actual gladiator/pit-fighting for profit, participants would likely use their best equipment. That equipment might be threaded or not, just as it would be in regular PvP or PvE encounters, so no real difference there.

Reward - In that the participants are all mutually interested, I think we could assume they see value in the activity. Brand new players are learning pvP skills, skilled PvPers are practicing new techniques, champions are winning fame and perhaps prizes for themselves and their sponsors, and gladiators win fame and perhaps a purse.

4. It devalues real combat:

This would be real combat with death on the line and possible equipment damage. True, no one in these situations will likely be looting your corpse, but besides that, you actually have some larger things at stake - loss of face in front of a crowd, loss of face for the group you are representing, loss of money if you placed a bet.

5. Sounds cool initially, but then nobody does it:

Given all the ways that this could be used, I think you would see real continued use of such facilities, unlike duels, which likely only feed the winner's ego.

6. Annoying people:

Again, being a set location, this does not provide an annoying person a way to take his annoying form of combat on the road, so to speak.

The largest concerns would be how you warn unsuspecting newer players about wandering into such buildings and being potential targets, and how to stop people from abusing the facility (using it as a lure for attacking whomever they wished inside or disrupting a scheduled practice or event). Specific coding for management of such a facility would likely be needed and may not be MVP for some time.

As once discussed in a much older thread, I agree there needs to be some place where consensual PvP can occur without reputation loss. Whether attached to weapon training schools to help new players learn to PvP better, practice fields to keep the skills sharp, sparring pits for champions or contestants to square off (perhaps for a prize and a title), or bloody gladiator pits complete with betting, this would be a very nice addition with and could find a use in any alignment settlement.

Thank you to Andius for bringing the topic up again.

If they are Company-only, then some of my fears would subside...

Or even a limited number of people, such as a friend's list like the UO houses used to have.

Thanks for all the work, Harad, and all the fun to the whole group. If I could have Cat in PFO, I surely would. ;)

I'll be IC (in-character) pretty much all the time with any character. Tells, party, Team Speak, etc. are all handy for the OOC (Out-Of-Character) stuff without needing to break character.

I will also be spending quite a bit of time attempting to start several RP initiatives to try to wrap the pragmatic "playing the game" activities in a RP feel to help promote more RP in-game.

It falls to we who have enjoyed it in many other games, and know that it is possible in this kind of game, to model it for those who have yet to discover the same enjoyment. Nothing helps promote RP like seeing others already doing it.

Thanks, KC, for starting the thread.

Be well, Keovar. Thank you for all the work.

always hated the fact that usually the evil guys looks cooler than the good ones.

Yet another reason to join. Forget all the trade and training access, the protection, and the cooperation and coordination of the EoX and NC...join to look cooler. :)

We will do safe escort from Fort Inevitable.

Sounds good, and thanks you again.

Thank you, Duffy. Does that include providing safe escort from the nearest starter town to your settlement, or just open doors if they can manage to get there?

Given the announced changes to EE starting times given in (this) blog, I have changed the old "month 2" starting times to month 1. Moving forward, those purchasing the Explorer Access Package will be designated as "month 2".

Note - If, after reading this thread, you decide that you would like to be Guide, please reply below. Likewise, if you originally voiced interest, but for whatever reason no longer wish to be listed, reply below and I will remove your name.

In order of original reply...

Hobs - month 1
Deianira
BraxtheSage
Bluddwolf
"The Goodfellow"
Ixiolander - month 1
Jazzlvraz - month 1
Harad Navar
Ezekial Krows - month 1
Gedichtewicht
Blaeringr
Lhan
Rufus UK
Shane Gifford of Fidelis - month 1
stagehog81
T7V Wexel Daventry
jericho616
Guurzak - month 1
Banesama - month 1
Duffy - month 1
Ragerock
Proxima Sin of Brighthaven
Sunnfire <Kabal> - Month 1 (Alpha)
Gol Morbis - month 1
Aet Kard Warstein - month 1
Dario - month 1
Snorter - month 1
Aet Khorvak McTiernan - month 1
Harad Navar - month 1
Giorgo - month 1
FMS Quietus - month 1
Feydred of Aeternum - month 1
Augir - month 1
DeciusBrutus - month 1 (Alpha)
Lam - month 1
Kobold Cleaver - month 1
Thannon Forsworn - month 1
Aet Therea Warstein - month 1
Aet Glaucopide - month 1

Once we get a few more answers about game mechanics, we'll be moving forward with Guide Program planning.

Good luck to you.

For all those who were not fortunate enough to find a home during the Land rush, in the Lawful Empire of Xeilias, we have four homes to choose from.

Callambea
Golgotha
Kreuz Berstein
Mystical Awakening

So Sally was turned, eh?

The sad part is, I'm old enough to remember using those books in school. :)

I'll watch for your message. Sleep well.

If I did have questions, where would be the best place to direct them? I know how to reach various Pax related groups, and I'd go to Hobbs for EoX matters, but I don't have a contact for the NC.

As always, thank you for being respectful enough of other players to make that effort. As Ambassador, I know you have an account on the EoX forums. We can direct you from there as to where you can ask your questions and receive answers.

I'm fine either way. I doubt he would mind if we benched his character until he can come back.

As always, nice work Mr. Navar.

Good luck with it, Virgil. :)

Congratulations, Vogas. I hope you have an excellent time.

Seconded.

Thank you, Mr. Zombie.

My favorite idea for cash shopping is still building skins. Have the settlement leader be able to choose the building skin the settlement wants, add it to their "cart" and thereby begin a kickstarter-style purchase. When enough cash is donated by your settlement members, the skin goes into the settlement leader's governing UI and poof - your generic looking smithy now looks like a sturdy Dwarven smithy.

Given the buying power of hundreds of people in a settlement, these could be sizable ticket items, but when dozens of people are pooling their money,it's not a huge individual contribution.