Forencith's page

Since making judgements by looks is a bad policy in reality...

You keep claiming this...I guess I don't see this as the truism you do. All we have is sensory input to make judgements...and judging by the size of our visual cortex in relation to the other sensory processing centers...we as humans are specialized in using our vision. So, are you claiming we should not be making judgements at all? If so, should we just abandon any semblance of meaningful behaviour since we are not allowed to make conclusions about our environments?

But those things should also effect people on the ground. My non-flying bard should have to worry about "Wind, air currents, creatures in the air, other players, traps, skill/ability based" in addition to the ground -based content..so you are still bypassing all the things limited to the ground.

The other two, "time limits, range limits" are not content or challenges, they are simply limitations to your content defeating abilities.

<-- Gnome-wannabe

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, I am asking for some stereotypes to be used to communicate information about that character. I want a high-STR character to have an above average muscle tone/mass. I want a high-DEX character to have a smooth rolling gait and perhaps some distinctive static actions. Likewise, perhaps high-IQ characters, when not being actively controlled by their characters make bend down and appear to sample the ground/wall. Etc...I see nothing wrong with this.

Speaking of which, I would have no problem compromising with these static emotes. Let you look like what you want (although I much prefer characters only have options available that are reasonable for their "stats"), and give me what I want through these static emotes. As I said, I am open to other solutions, I had not yet thought of any.

Well, I am a huge fan of a consistent and logical world (with reasonable causality) as opposed to realism for realisms sake. However, our ideas of reality are drawn from our understandings of the consistency and logic of the world.

What I am actually asking for is for the consequences of ones decisions and state of being to have some effect on an avatars visage. I am not asking for this as a means of stereotyping or pigeonholing people...I want visual ques that represent all the things we are able to perceive in RL...that makes RL so much richer, for the sole goal of making the virtual world more rich. If it were possible to have my computer replicate pheromones, smells, voices, and all the other identifying features real people have, then I would be arguing to let everyone look like whatever they want....and just have those things logically bound to stats. Since they are not in game, I still want those clues albeit in the only way we have possible, visually via the avatar.

I still think that the best idea from those threads was the idea of having an unseen 'character ID' that you could choose to share with people if they wanted to have a 'friends' list or directly message you. A person could assign that ID a 'nickname' to use for ease of communication.

Then, one character could introduce himself as many different names in different places.

There is the problem of people impersonating others, but I think that could allow for some pretty cool investigation into a character's background (sense alignment, look at the character's reputation... if it is low, don't trust him/her!). Much like in the real world and in the fantasy genre.

EDIT: And if the person that is being impersonated is also low-rep... well, there's another downside to randomly killing people! One that I could certainly agree with.

Yay!

Björn Renshai wrote:

Rafkin wrote:

Ok, you guys are focusing entirely too much on the chaotic evil aspect of the question. It's my fault. Let me re-phrase...

Is there any way other than pvp to affect your alignment?

I believe, and correct me if I am wrong, but certain spells, can change your alignment as well. Like necromancy, for example...

That might be one way to drop your alignment without pvp.

It's the other way around, your alignment affects the spells and items you can cast.

Actually, (for non-cleric abilities/spells) I think Björn had it right...at least as far as PfO goes.

My only concern with removing flying is that it removes a huge portion of those obstacles...and those obstacles are the content. All the things I have read that suggest new obstacles for flying are all obstacles that should also be there for people not flying as well...so the end result of flying, nullifying content.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So, amusingly we have illustrated that half of the people in this debate believes nature trumps nurture and the other half the opposite. Personally, after reading how goblins were created, I tend to support the nature > nurture position and that Evil behaviour (destruction and mayhem) is inherent to being a goblin. I think their brains are wired such. These behaviours activate the pleasure centers of their brains, reinforcing that behaviour. I agree a Good deity could probably rewire a goblin or few, but then they would no longer be goblins, imo.

And then, as Ryan says, if you make something available to the players, everyone will do it...it will no longer be the rare creature that all the nurture > nature people are asking for.

GW/Paizo, please do not cheapen your iconic beasties.

The portcullis is a good example of choices. Break it down, pick the lock, Knock spell, whatever it takes to get it open. And if you don't have what it takes to get it open now, it doesn't mean you can't get something (or someone) you need and come back and open it later.

Same with a crevass. If a fighter type doesn't have a way to cross, what's to prevent him from finding/ buying something, like a rope or fly potion, and returning later. A thief could climb a wall to a cave 30 feet up and drop a rope to the rest of the party to join him.

Saying that only climbers need to apply for adventuring anywhere off a paved road is like saying only fighters need apply for combat or clerics tackle undead. There should always be choices to do something outside your main specialty, but without diversity in character abilities then everyone is the same and your class is just a name.

I'm not a big fan of PUGs in MMOs, especially if forced, and prefer to go solo a lot, but a party does have its benefits.

I agree with you totally. All problems should have a variety of solutions...but if you do not have a solution (or cannot think of one) you do not get past that point. Also, I agree someone should be able to go get a solution if possible, but here is where we need to remember that most dungeons will be temporary affairs created when found.

I was using climbing as an example case.

Ok, you guys are focusing entirely too much on the chaotic evil aspect of the question. It's my fault. Let me re-phrase...

Is there any way other than pvp to affect your alignment?

I hope there are.

SOrry, I think most of you are missing the point. No, CHA (as an example) does not necessarily tie to appearance...but it does tie to something(s) that makes you more able to influence people. These somethings might be pheromones, voice quality, posture, demeanor, body language, color of tie, or even appearance...whatever this something is, the most efficient way to replicate it (or the lack of it) is through visual markers on your avatar. Your appearance/gait/posture/body type/musculature/etc is a marker for these things. If someone has a better way, I am excited to read it.

For the record, I have always argued that there should be customization within the ranges set by those conditions. I have not (and nor has anyone that I have seen) argued that these features should be the sole determiner of one's appearance. A

Forencith wrote:

I would much rather see time spent making climbing and swimming available to all characters (to varying degrees based on skill/badges and encumbrance) than flying.

So people who aren't good at climbing because they don't have much in the way of physical stats or skills get to be the ones stuck to the floor, right...

Yeah, it is called consequences of your choices. I don't see the problem illustrated by your sarcasm, I would call that a feature that enables everyone to be good at something.

Forencith wrote:

Likewise, I would like to see non-combat and non-flight uses of magic, such as teleport, within visual range.

That's dimension door, not teleport.

Opps, thanks for the correction...point still stands.

Forencith wrote:

I hope dark, gloomy forests have trees with branches

There is no true darkness because lighting is handled client-side, and therefore, is hackable.

I have two problems with this, one) lighting is handled client-side with all current games...there is no reason it must be this way, and two) the point was the ability to utilize branches (hence z-axis), the dark and gloomy was only atmosphere.

Forencith wrote:

I hope progression is not linear

...except when it comes to leaving a solid surface. It would be better to nail everyone's eyelids to the floor than to considee flight.

When it comes to negating the huge effort to make the ground game work as intended....yes.

Forencith wrote:

let us explore the dungeon as we are able.

...as long as that doesn't include a flight spell.

I am obviously not against a very limited flight/levitation as illustrated here. Do I want to see Golarion look like Aseroth with flying mounts everywhere...no.

Forencith wrote:

Did not bring either a grappling hook or wizard with teleport (or other similar effects)

...unless that effect is flight or levitation.

As above.

Forencith wrote:

well you do not get to see what is down the wing of the cavern with the entrance 30ft off the cavern floor.

...because only rope-climbers need apply for adventuring anywhere off a paved road.

As above.

Forencith wrote:

Don't bring a rogue who can pick locks? Well you do not get to get past the part with the ancient portcullis.

Since there's no way in hell a knock spell or the ability to break an "ancient" (and likely rusted) gate should be included.

I was only illustrating a point, in the specific case given, those spells would also have the desired results, an open portcullis. Either way, the effect is still that certain challenges have to be met of you do not get past.

But also creatures. It annoys me seeing a harpy that flies 3ft of the ground, a harpy would fly up and swoop down, not come charging at you hovering just above the ground.

Very good point, I agree that flying creatures should have a vertical pathing.

Basically if your lawful-good goblin paladin goes riding into a lawful good town (Player or NPC) the guards will assume he is a raider and attack him on sight. Also he can't speak common without considerable training.

This sort of makes goblin players segregate into their own societies which will not be good or lawful.

This makes one wonder where the goblin was able to receive training for his/her Paladin skills.

Sidestepping a little bit to the main z axis question - most computer rpgs/mmos usually have a spell list that focuses mainly on combat spells, leaving a lot of noncombat spells from the books out of the picture. I'd like to see classic spells implemented that would use the z axis - rope trick, jump, levitate, maybe telekinesis, and floating disk among others. The more options to solve a problem the better, and the more the spellcasters can do out of combat or combat buffing the better.

Climbing was a prime ability for rogues and could be useful in PFO, broadening his usefulness in a unique direction from other characters.

For underwater, some spells are changed a bit - lightning bolt amoung others was very different underwater compared to open air. Airy water actually changed the water around you compared to waterbreathing spells and spells with one might work normally but not with the other.

Awesome point, I would much rather see time spent making climbing and swimming available to all characters (to varying degrees based on skill/badges and encumbrance) than flying. Likewise, I would like to see non-combat and non-flight uses of magic, such as teleport, within visual range.

This plays into much earlier discussions about the types of non-combat challenges we would like to see in dungeons. I hope cave systems are not 2-dimensional, I hope dark, gloomy forests have trees with branches...I hope progression is not linear, here is the beginning of the dungeon, here is the end...instead let us explore the dungeon as we are able. Did not bring either a grappling hook or wizard with teleport (or other similar effects), well you do not get to see what is down the wing of the cavern with the entrance 30ft off the cavern floor. Don't bring a rogue who can pick locks? Well you do not get to get past the part with the ancient portcullis. Etc...Etc...

Good call Randomdays.

Right, so play your character and deal with the consequences of your characters behaviour.

Although, I certainly hope the game is not so one dimensional that it lacks consequential interaction options other than PvP.

Personally I think frequently flying characters should be no more common than bards or characters that can breathe underwater.

*laugh* Are bards so uncommon?...or are water breathers so common? I cannot tell.

Why would anyone "seek" an alignment? Why not play the way you enjoy and live with the consequences of doing so?

I have not read anything that suggests all (or even any) members of a CC sponsored by a settlement have to be residents of that settlement. So, I think I have to agree with Blaeringr on this one.

I would really like clarification on this point because it has huge organizational implications.

To answer your questions Blaeringr, I do not think there should be basic mechanical advantages. I hope there are options available to allow the greater organization to create/set benefits such as tax breaks, storage options, housing options, contract access, etc for official members only as a means of incentive to get people to join...as the greater organization sees fit.

Games come and go but the Pax Gaming community is always there. This could be the last guild you ever need to join.

Well said Rafkin.

While I appreciate the gesture...and accept the apology if it makes you feel better. In my case it is entirely unnecessary. Usually, we are offering opinions for GW to use in making their own decisions about game design. As such, I am glad there is a plurality of opinions and more importantly, whatever arguments/justifications we can each make for our respective positions.

And...I have found that I do not know what it is, by my particular style of forum writing tends to "inflame passions"...or just piss people off. At this point I just accept it as an inevitable response to my posts and try to step away when it occurs. I actually blame myself...how can so many who I have upset...and who are otherwise friends be wrong.

GW previously said no to dueling, but they might like the idea of the practivce gear.

Stats, abilities, and merit badges are all so conflated now that I've given up on keeping them straight in casual discussions.

Agreed...I am talking about whatever mechanic (or combination of) has the same basic semantic content as the attributes in the PnP.

And I still say it's an unrealistic expectation because everyone REQUIRES a minimum amount in various stats to have a functional character mechanics wise. So you may as well just not offer a ghandi option, because no one can use anything at that str level. Which is why I say eventually everyone will look the same, all mages will have the same mass, all warriors will have the same mass (depending on body type) all dexxers will have the same mass because you only have so many stats to assign. All it will mean is that if you see a rival faction/alignment and you're inclined to attack them, you'll know which are the newbies and kill them first.

If you start adding scars and suntan, eventually everyone will have them all because EVENTUALLY you'll be exposed to the sun at some point and eventually you'll get hit enough times.

I disagree, especially if GW uses something equivalent to the point buy system to choose initial stats, there will always be the min/maxers who are only out to optimize for a single use/class/stat. With the point buy system I use for my PnP, the only way it is reasonably possible for base character (no races) to have an attribute of 18 is to take penalties on other stats...like Raistlin Majere, INT 18/19, STR 8/9, CON 8/9.

I actually think more people would choose class/function based extremes than balanced.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Interesting. I suppose that highlights a difference between us, I envision a playstyle and everything else including appearance evolves from that based upon needs and eventually story. You envision an appearance (and story?) and evolve everything else including playstyle from that. I guess it is just a difference of tastes.

So you would sit inside for a few hours waiting for nightfall just to play your character?

You'd be perfectly happy with "I only have 2hours to play today, but I can't play that character as its not night time"? When this is your usual time slot?

That's all well and good for rp, but to have your character's development hindered on such a way I don't think is at all fun or interesting.

And then we have a basic truth of skill based systems- there is a "most efficient" attribution of stats for particular skill sets, so you end up looking like everyone else who uses that skill set. As for scars, presumably those would come from injuries, so those of us not so fortunate to live near the server will be more scarred, and anyone playing for 3 years will all be about the same maximum peak of scarring and all look the same. They'll all be the same sunburnt hue.

To me it sounds more like a way to make everyone look almost identical, and you might as well do away with customization altogether.

No, I gave myself two options...the other being protection. I would end up a light armor wearer so I can wear long ropes/hood/goggles, etc. for when I do play during the day. Hence, my character's development was not hindered, the environment helped shape it. Maybe I would choose a profession that relied on stealth so I could do my "work" at night.

As for "most efficient builds"...I enjoy a spreadsheet as much as the next guy, but I am always the one trying to find alternate uses for my class...tell me I have to have a certain build to be effective and I will never utilize that build or anything like it.

And again I must disagree. In current MMOs, even with all the sliders you have two types of characters, mains who all look identical because they are the epitome of beauty/masculinity...and alts which either follow the same template as mains or end up at the other extreme...all of them. So, it seems giving people choices actually ends up in less variation; to me any ways...but we are just tossing out opinions right?

For me? I enjoy RPing, even if in action only. If I felt the need to play an albino, yes I would either play at night or protect myself sufficiently. This for me would be the the challenge of playing that role. And I do RP to face challenges that are outside the realm of my mundane world...so that would be my reason for playing. Or maybe I did not understand your question...

I don't agree, because that has no real bearing on musculature. A blacksmith might have hulking arms, a fencer, acrobat and sailer might have very strong legs, while only having moderate arm strength, yet stats wise have the same strength, how do you reflect that? There's no reason they couldn't have started from the same body type. So really for me, I just don't think that sort of stats based influence works very well when translated to appearance.

Sure, and this is a simple problem of limited information for simplification of a system...in this case either the PnP game or MMO. We do not keep track of the strength or mass of each muscle in the body...as would be necessary to truly address your concerns. In any case it would be a simplification...but the goal again is to transmit information about your character to the rest of the world via visual clues.

I for one am up for listening to better ideas on how this could be done.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think change during gameplay is also a problem. I don't want to log in one day and go "Who the heck is she? She isn't the girl I made!"

Not that I believe such would be literally overnight, but hopefully you understand what I mean.

I do and I don't. I can understand your desire to have something you have set the way you want it...to stay as you want it. I however must disagree for myself. I want as close to a living breathing character as I can get. I want the world to affect my character as I am able to effect the world. To me, the two go hand in hand...my greatest fear with PfO is limitations in my ability to affect the world. I guess to me it just feels unbalanced to not also have the world shape my character as I am trying to shape the world.

And, likewise, I want to be able to see hints about how others have shaped their in game environment and in turn their environment has shaped them (since this is really one mutual shaping).

I am an artist, I spend a lot of time on deviantART checking out people's ideas of perfection. I would prefer PfO characters tell me about the players choices and behaviours in game then their nubile fantasies or ideal masculinities (not aimed at anyone here, just a common case).

For myself, I hope it was never taken that I was arguing that appearance should only be based on stats and in-game actions. I hope they allow us the ability to choose within a logical range...either fundamentally based off our stats and/or modified my our actions/accomplishments.

A human male fighter should be able to be a 5ft 5inch scrawny guy with zero percent body fat and toned muscle...or a 6 foot 7 inch obese guy...the obese guy still has that toned muscle...it is just not visible under the "natural armor". I am simply arguing a STR 18 guy should have well-developed muscles, always. I hope there are also sliders that allow you to customize this with amount of fat, height, thickness, etc...all within lore tolerances, but fully customization. The difference is that a STR 8 character would not have access to a build that was all bulging muscles, and this is irrelevant to whether the STR 18 guy who does have access decided to minimize or hide the appearance of the bulging muscles they have access to.

So, I see the argument that this will make everyone the same, very narrow visioned and inaccurate. There is a multitude of other variables that can be added to the system and still use this consequence based appearance system.

Bobthebiobitan wrote:

...PFRPG stuff...

Welcome to the PFO forum, your TT mechanics have no meaning here. There is no such thing as a '6th level wizard' or flight time per level.

Sure they do, even if the implementation/mechanics are not the same, I understand what he was describing as how he thinks the mechanics for PfO should work. Since Ryan said PfO cap should be about equivalent to 12th level characters (I might be wrong here, but that just changes the scaling), suggesting an ability become available at about 6th level means half way through your levelling in the relevant archetype. Likewise, "flight time per level" can easily be understood in PfO terms as each additional merit badge or skill training track. I had no problem making the semantic equivalences.

Forencith wrote:

Bottom line, ANY attacks should only be used when certain to hit 'enemy' targets....or face the repercussions of your gamble/stupidity.

Fixed that for you, unless you're intending to be an anti-spellcaster bigot.

Nope, I would I use the same argument for flask throwers and even some melee weapon uses such as whirlwind. If my character is swinging a single sword in non-acrobatic combat, I hope it is because he/she has the skill to use it and enough control to avoid hitting friends who might be fighting around him/her. Where I start having concerns is when people are tossing about splash weapons or other forms of AoE...and being selective with targets within the radius of effect. I just don't get it.

(I would actually prefer it as you have said it...but asking for AoEs to be logical is pushing many too far.)

The Seventh Veil use to have a scribe only application that does not require you to join the guild, but allows you read/write access to their library (after agreeing not to plagiarize and other unfavourable stuff). Anyone interested might want to check that out...

Bottom line, AOE attacks should only be used when certain to hit 'enemy' targets....or face the repercussions of your gamble/stupidity.

lol, I just added that to my post Valkenr.

Totally agree, I hope there is a huge array of wearable items, the ability to mix and match as desired (or even layer pieces), and perhaps even the ability to customize pieces of clothing and armor.

And this is all in addition to your previously mentioned hair styles and lore appropriate colors and tattoos.

I would actually prefer all of this require getting in-game as opposed to at character creation. Let players be tailors/barbers/tattooists and allow them to make money off our desire to be unique.

I am actually more concerned with the ability to swim underwater than fly. I actually tend to think flying is more trouble than it is worth.

Hence the disadvantages like near 0 encumbrance...how good a warrior are you with no armor, how good a bandit when you cannot carry loot?

Hey, who's to say I don't have a touch gnome of gnome blood that gives me pink skin?

Oh, btw, magic, magic, and magic, with lots of time and history, and a world with so many holes it makes a sieve jealous. We can fill in those holes with whatever we like, so we should have the option of filling in those holes with what we want.

Interesting, I have never heard of a half-gnome. Do you have lore precedence for gnomes being able to breed with the more mundane races?

With Half-Orcs and Dwarves every option is the rough/ugly option. Compared to elves atleast.

Actually, Paizo is quite proud of how cute they got their female half-orc inquisitor...

I am in NZ...for 2 more weeks anyways! Hopefully I will be PST by the time this game comes out.

patronizing stuff...

And...what is possible here is limited by what exists elsewhere? I sure hope not. If PfO is those games you listed...well if I wanted to play them I would go do so.

cattu wrote:

I am against a challenge mechanic that causes your attacker to not be flagged without requiring consent. Going AFK in a dangerous area SHOULD get you killed, but not freely or without consequences to both of you. The attacker would still need to get flagged/alignment hit if you did not give consent, but they'd still get the looting benefits of killing you as well. Who goes AFK in unsafe areas without expecting possible repercussions?

EDIT: =D I realize I tend to sound blunt to the point of rudeness at times. That is not my intent.

We're talking about using AoE to grief in lawful areas, so more or less safe areas. The game won't suddenly shift the setting to make it more convenient for the target of the griefing, so your loophole ridden arguments shouldn't either.

It is stupid to use grenades or nukes in areas in which you are concerned about collateral damage. Consider that before using a fireball in town. If a wizard is that stupid, they deserve the full repercussions of their actions.

I am however confused about points brought up by Blaeringr, while always evil, I thought killing others is only illegal in areas with laws...like civilized areas. I am not sure why using an AoE on anyone should tag someone criminal outside these zones (or in battlefields for that matter). The only repercussion you should have for nuking your buddies in battle is their anger later and the attrition of your army caused by you.

In a game with Open World PVP making it require considerable time to retrain a fallen animal companion or familiar is just cruel to the classes who use them.

This is exactly what I would like to see. But your claim of cruelty is assuming these classes are not viable without their companions...and that the act of catching and training an animal is not the "fun content" the person who chose that class signed up for. I would hope for the opposite to be true.

To me the problem seems not to be in the FF AoEs, but in the criminal flagging system. The long cast time does change things a bit (for the better), making the spastic lobbing of AoEs less likely. I do hope however that they are given longer range to make up for this.

I think you would be surprised about how much we faithfully perceive and unconsciously act upon. But I am happy I was able to express and argue my thoughts, at this point I will have to just respectfully disagree and be satisfied with that. I trust GW will do as they think best.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I 100% support friendly fire being a reality in PfO.

Think through the consequences of your actions before you act.

"Smells like victory." ?

With finite development resources, it is a zero-sum system: Any time spent improving the UI for touchscreens is time not spent on something else. We can argue about when improving the UI for touchscreens is the best use of the finite time=money available, but I'm going to point to market penetration of touchscreen controls in PC gaming as my primary evidence. When touchscreens are or will shortly become as common as gamepads currently are on gaming PCs, then spending resources to provide specific support will be worthwhile.

Hence, why I was suggesting they spend a little bit of time considering the benefits of optimization for touchscreen interfaces at the foundation of the system, so it always remains an option. Later, as the tech matures, they can implement it if they so decide. If they do not optimize it at this point, it will never be an option because the cost of redesigning the system to allow it would be prohibitive and as you suggest...at the cost of other things.

But, as usual I am not sure if you are expressing an opinion (I do not trust my ability to discern what might be subtle connotations on your part), or just lecturing me on basic economics.