Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Angazhani (High Girallon)

Ettin's page

112 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

A fighter who rolls a 1 for HP should be fine with enough paper towels anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly the part that confuses me is that people think SKR is a game designer.


We could have Christian RP servers, maybe. Servers for everyone! A Muslim RP server for multiculturalism, why not.

That might be confusing though. Maybe we can make it the one server but make special areas for ERP and Christian RP (CRP?) and such?


So how much will monocles cost?


Shifty wrote:
I like how getting into seedy cyb0rz sessions in an MMO is artfully platformed by the smutty basement dwellers as 'sexuality' and some sort of legitimate bulwark of diversity that they can hide behind.

But there could be gay porn.

Interested?


"Special roped-off area" doesn't have to be public! I mean, that's why it's roped-off, right?

Or do you mean, like, rope play? I'd be down for that.


AM NOT HELPING wrote:

make it real time

spell per day means SPELLS PER DAY. 8 hours rest means 8 HOURS REST

SAME GOES FOR REMOVING FATIGUE AND SUCH

Don't forget an hour-long "study your spellbook!" minigame.


I don't know, I see plenty of legitimate posts!


JMecha wrote:
Although I am wildly curious what Sexy Rovagug artwork would look like.

Let me see if I can get a PG-rated version I could post to the board.


Right now I'm wondering about something unrelated to whether you will implement my stupid ideas. You can start crying in relief... now.

Seriously though: A big part of many game communities is the body of creative work surrounding it. Fanart, fan fiction, etc. etc. Some companies are fine with it, some actively encourage it and put the best stuff on their website, and some people would rather take legal action against it.

Where does PFO stand?

Example - let's suppose I post my fanfic exploring the possible romantic tensions between Pharasma and Groetus, or my sexy Rovagug-tan artwork. Are you going to be mad?


MicMan wrote:
Ettin wrote:
...wait, those are theme park games! UH OOOOOOOOOOH
Yeah, exactly.

I was being sarcastic! That reply is really stupid, especially when the game you're using as an example isn't even an MMORPG. Hope that helps!

Vic Wertz wrote:
(Also, I'm *not* saying we're shooting for a 13-month development schedule—we are not. I'm just saying it has been done.)

I was mostly pointing out to the thread that licensing a game engine is not a magic bullet! Some games with existing engines don't take much time at all, some do.

On the other hand I don't exactly see you spending millions of dollars on stuffing George Lucas' fat face with tortillas. I don't think anyone here is made of straw and under the impression that you're aiming to be a huge-budget game (or hoping you fail, or at least I'm not), but I still think this is kind of jumping into the deep end. Especially since Dancey apparently wants PFO to be the WoW to EVE Online's Everquest!


kyrt-ryder wrote:
I actually rather like that idea. It would probably be a TON of work to try to set up a custom avatar creation system or whatnot

Well, really it's just one bulge between the legs. Not too difficult.


Maybe we could have "sex appeal" sliders, like Saints Row 3. I'd be able to more realistically model the difference between my elf wizard and dwarf paladin, at least.


Rift and Warhammer Online used someone else's engine, too (specifically the Gamebryo engine).

Rift took ~5 years (!), Warhammer a little over 3. Rift's developers claim to have spent US$50,000,000+. Just one zero away from an accurate topic!

The engine helps a lot and you certainly don't need Rift's incredible budget, but it's not a -- wait, those are theme park games! UH OOOOOOOOOOH


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not charge $70 for monocles.


Sexy armour is immersion breaking.

However, if we have to have it, I am putting in my vote for a plate thong for men.


If they put a bit of thrust into it, as it were.


KitNyx wrote:
what is the logical conclusion of a sandbox in which anyone can easily build anything anywhere?

Don't you mean... erect?


Derek Vande Brake wrote:
Adamantine. Big blocks of adamantine. With Prestidigitation and Permanancy to color it properly.

If you want to be elegant, marble comes in pink.


Unfortunately, unlike Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, I doubt the magic system is going to be a clever derivative of D&D.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Derek Vande Brake wrote:
I want to build a structure that can be seen from Castrovel...

Well, this is the internet, so.

"...What the hell did you guys build?"

"Well, the guild needed something to do, and we had all these stones lying around, so..."

"Is that..."

"Yes. That is a penis."

"You built a gigantic dong out of stone that can be seen from Castrovel."

"No other material was hard enough."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KitNyx wrote:
Building structures anywhere is a good idea, but it will be abused. The only way to keep it from being abused is to make the crafting of it slow and difficult. Then the only ones who will go through the effort are those who REALLY want to build something, such as

Goons.


Coldman wrote:
Your arguing your point within the confines of conventional theme park MMOs, to what this game claims to differ from.

The only time I referenced a theme park MMO is in response to your post. Everything else was in more general terms.

Natural 20, strawman trap disabled, if you don't want to talk about theme parks don't bring them up.

Quote:
Who's to say that said dragon or 'Ragnaros' boss should not be attempted as a server wide thing than that of a raid or guild? Lineage 2 did this...ish. Plans would be made and the server would come together to fight the evil that threatens them and would be something that might take many attempts and take a considerable period of time. This makes more sense than a hundred groups killing it 100 unique times, then farming it?

People who still miss out: Anyone who isn't online at the time, anyone who joins the game afterward, anyone who is around but unable to participate for any number of reasons, anyone who has net trouble and times out halfway through... I don't think most of them are going to accept "Well, it just makes sense that you don't get to experience this cool encounter in full."

Quote:
Who's to say such a villain would drop an item of uberness to which he would then dominate?

The post I was replying to! But yes, not making it an item with a gameplay effect would help a little. It's still going to cause a lot of problems, but power creep isn't one of them.

Quote:
Even if one did acquire such an item, PFO will exist under partial or full loot systems, where would he take it and where would he go with this one single unique item that the whole server would happily gang bang him for?

And that is why you are going to end up with frustration and hurt feelings.

EDIT: Also: What if someone grabs the item and logs out just to keep people from getting it? You could have a timer or something where if you don't log in for X time the item re-appears somewhere in the world and vanishes from his inventory, but what if he logs in for a few brief seconds every once in a while to stop that? What if he isn't griefing, just on vacation?

GMs could probably handle that, though. I mean, if it's a cool unique item, they should keep an eye on it, right?

Quote:
I don't see a place in this game for a seriously overpowered weapon given what Ryan and Mark have said thus far.

Me either! I liked the idea of gold most.


KitNyx wrote:
If you have the thousands it would take to build a wall overnight

This building system sounds fun and playable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Silphael wrote:
I'm not wanting to launch any alignement debate, but


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KitNyx wrote:
And if a legendary dragon is killed, and its treasure taken...it is dead and the treasure gone...but now a group more powerful than the dragon has the items of uberness the dragon once guarded. If you can find out who, you can know where to go to get them for yourself.

If you have a player base of any decent size this is going to end more in frustration and hurt feelings than anything else, especially if some goons get their hands on them. Not to mention power creep - add more encounters like that later, chances are the people with "items of uberness" are going to have an easier time grabbing later items before anyone else and everyone else will have a harder time getting them. Or they could just log out, forever.

Also, it would require designers and programmers investing time and effort into designing a dragon encounter they think is fun (and the associated treasure), only for one group ever to enjoy the experience of killing them and taking their stuff. Your closing thoughts as a designer would be "man, I wish more people got to have fun with that dragon and his stuff."

It's an interesting idea but there are a lot of problems you'd have to address. There's a reason Ragnaros could be punched in the face for his hammer every week.


Sticks? Really. Bloody sticks.

Use your hands, man. Verisimilitude!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Pfft. Chainmail was just an MMRPG version of the Battle of Hastings.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

2E was a glorified online board game. It ruined 1e forever.

For.

Ever.


KarlBob wrote:
Immersion breaking behavior is going to require the most policing on the part of the Goblinworks team. A certain amount of "metagame harassment based on gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, political or religious affiliation, favorite college football team, or participation in other MMOs" is likely to happen in any MMO.

... I don't think "it's immersion breaking" is the problem with those.


Zesty Mordant wrote:
My friend, I've never built a video game before in my life, but I find it hard to believe that it's much more difficult than a adjusting slider in the world builder program.

Programming is kind of like that, only the slider is a little gremlin that hates you and his neighbours are jerks.


Scott Betts wrote:
I've never played a F2P MMO that limited my interaction with paying clients to such a degree. Typically, they limited inventory/bank space, but that's more of an inconvenience than a genuine barrier to economic participation.

Off the top of my head, WoW limits your level and gold, prevents you making trades altogether and you can't join a guild. (but it's a themepark MMO! Holy s@#&!)

Aside from TF2 (which is more an FPS/RPG than an MMO) most of the ones I can recall right now mostly limit inventory and sometimes access to the really cool items, though.


Scott Betts wrote:
A non-paying player is not simply a potential conversion into a paid customer. He also helps support the in-game economy that is necessary to drive paid customer participation. MMOs thrive off large player bases, but the F2P model assumes a (relatively) moderate number of paying customers. The rest are non-paying, but still contribute to the game world - they harvest, they purchase, they craft, they group up for dungeons, they join guilds. MMOs are well-served by having a large and diverse player base, even if a substantial portion of that base is not directly responsible for your revenue.

Most F2P games I've played heavily restrict the ability of F2P players to contribute the economy by limiting trades, inventory, etc. I haven't played every one, though. Which ones are F2P-friendly?


sieylianna wrote:
This is also a concern of mine, since one of the principals was responsible for the demise of Living City, the first D&D organized play campaign and the great grand daddy of Pathfinder Society. I see signs of the same mindset that caused 4e to degenerate into a boardgame to attract the MMO audience.

There's something amazing about people trying to fit mindless "4E sold out to MMO fans!!" talking points in a Pathfinder MMO forum.


Elth wrote:
You have got to be joking. Anonymity is the only thing keeping those psychopathic griefing types from knocking on your door in real life.

Also, plenty of women have problems with creepy dudes making unwelcome advances or straight-up stalking them in-game.

Why would you want to broadcast their personal info?


Simon Hayes wrote:
I know is off topic, but I can't resist.

Poster takes a slow motion dive towards Simon, "NOOOOO" forming on their lips.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Elth wrote:
Point taken. All of these things should be punishable by full body release massage by a 300lb half orc hooker.

"Punishable"?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bruunwald wrote:
I think it's great that Paizo is stretching out and all, but it's starting to seem like Pathfinder Online is quickly eclipsing the tabletop game, and it hasn't even been developed yet!

Boy are you going to be mad when actual information about this MMO comes out.

Seriously, you are going to poop yourself inside out.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Scott Betts wrote:
I outlined numerous reasons why obscuring the most basic identifying information is an awful idea. If you think I'm just bashing new ideas, you're not paying attention. I'm taking exception to poor ideas, and then explaining why they're poor.

But you're not taking immersion into account. Immersion is like a morbidly obese woman squeezing into a seat beside you on a cramped train. You could get up and move to another, much nicer carriage, but that is an old, tired solution thought up by people who haven't looked at other solutions.

The secret to an efficient, effective solution is realising that fat girls are beautiful.


Starfell wrote:
You probably would be better off not bothering further as you are arguing against the wind. Until they can give examples they won't be taken seriously. If Alouicious wishes to debate how good of a game Ultima Online was, I will certainly comply. ...

I don't know what they teach people in school these days but how can you expect to be taken seriously with a statement like this? Too general and provides for nothing constructive. Your claims have potential merit but the generality prevents anyone from taking your comments seriously. If we want to make this the best game it can be, then you need to provide more than what you've provided. So if you wish to be taken seriously by development then provide something substantial and measurable.


KitNyx wrote:

I would say griefing is entirely subjective. Since we attribute motives to peoples actions, unless in a previous agreed upon confrontation, a victim attributes negative intention to any action taken by another which makes them loose something, be it time, energy, experience, gear, etc (and including fun).

Restated, griefing starts when we decide someone someone is out to take something from us. At which point we declare that person a griefer.

This is actually really close to describing what "troll" means on the internet, too!


Coconuts.


Immersion!


Wait wait wait.

How to bridles figure into this?

Oh man, I can't believe we missed that.


Ultima Online was actually pretty terrible though.


And that neatly solves the problem of what loot you'd find in a Horse Dungeon. Obviously, magical horseshoes and brushes. Of course, people might intentionally mistreat their horses to send them into a Horse Dungeon, which would destroy immersion. Perhaps they could be a group thing, so people would be encouraged to help other people find and care for their horses in exchange for these magic horse items.

This sounds great. A casual player could just log into Pathfinder Online for the ponies, and have as much fun as someone adventuring and slaying dragons.


Well, no sense in making it unnecessarily complicated. We could streamline it a little and maintain verisimilitude by setting up a series of Horse Dungeons.

Your horse has escaped, and trapped itself in one of these instances! Which one? Well, if you knew where your horse was, there'd be no point in looking, would there?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

How realistic should we make the feeding? I think we could maintain a strong player base if you had to feed horses in real-time, requiring people to log in at least a couple times a day lest their mounts starve. It would also encourage roleplaying.


KitNyx wrote:

Certainly, and there are lots of diseases developed for fantasy worlds such as Lycanthropy.

Although, arguably most of the common ailments we in RL suffer from would be easily fixed by magic. Even the neurological disorders are due to tiny lesions or other damage to the neural system, things that would be fixed with a simple healing spell or potion.

It would mess with immersion if everything was curable with a snap of the fingers, though. Maybe it's a magical dysentry?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Get thicker skin.

1 to 50 of 112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.