|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Master of Shadows wrote:
it is functionally the same as spontaneously forgetting how to tie your shoes because you moved in with housemates who only know how to use Velcro. This is poor design and needlessly punitive.
Losing access to a Feat because you no longer have Settlement Support for it is no more irrational than only being able to slot (in a single Weapon Set) three of the four Primary Feats you've trained. It's how the game imposes balance.
The PvE in Alpha so far has been mostly against low-level mobs - as in, level 1 or 2. The last Adventure Time with Bonny had us up against a higher level Escalation, and it's a very good thing we had as many people as we did. Some of those mobs were very hard to bring down.
You'll be able to pick your way through a hex if you're careful, but there will be significant danger if you aggro a group of mobs that includes ranged attackers that are near your level (ish).
Personally, I really like the idea of respawning closer and closer to your primary bind point the longer it's been since you logged out, with all your unthreaded gear in escrow at the shrine nearest where you logged out. I think this accomplishes the objective of avoiding Trojan Horses while also avoiding Offline Logistics.
<Tavernhold>Malrunwa Soves wrote:
I meant it as a term of art. We need some way to say "you can kill them without losing Reputation or Alignment". I had hoped "Sanctioned Target" would catch on, but Ryan asked us not to use that. "Consequence-Free Target" is the next best thing.
NBSI has several problems in PFO: You'll run out of people to charge for training. Caravans have to be able to get close enough to give all their goods to your settlement members, who will haul those goods the rest of the way to the Forbidden City (assuming you can convince people to volunteer for that job). Shooting every trespasser will probably tank your reputation (especially if your enemies make a bunch of newbie alts and repeatedly trespass). You'll have no shoppers stopping in to restock on their way to someplace else. I just don't see it working very well at the EVE level.
It's important to point out that NBSI as a mechanic just means that everyone who enters your territory is a valid target. It doesn't mean you have to shoot them.
To my understanding, during your Settlement's PvP Window, anyone in your territory who is not a member of your Settlement will be flagged as a valid target. That doesn't mean you have to shoot the friends that show up to help you defend against any aggression.
<Tavernhold>Malrunwa Soves wrote:
What if the feud stayed on the members of said company if they disbanded? Would that solve the problem. Like hunting down members of a scattered gang into old west.
That's half of what Guurzak suggested. I'm torn on it, but my gut reaction is that it's a short-sighted solution. I expect most Feuds will be used to change behavior - politics by other means and all. In those cases, it may well be your intent to cause a loss of membership in order to pressure the leadership to change their stance, or the company to change their leadership. I also worry that any mechanic which makes someone a consequence-free target will be abused, so it seems like there ought to be an "escape clause" of sorts.
Andius the Afflicted wrote:
Those are things unlikely to change over a few hours.
I wouldn't expect the devs to send you back home after only a few hours.
What I think would be kind of cool, though, is if they put all your unbound stuff in Escrow until you returned to the shrine near where you logged out, at which point you'd have to move it overland to get it back home.
Characters who don't bind themselves to a social organization will be at a significant disadvantage to those who do.
I think we need some new terminology. I propose we use "Outcasts" to refer to Characters who are members of an NPC Settlement even though they've trained beyond what's available there. That should be enough of a "bright line" definition to distinguish them from newbies.
I would have no problem whatsoever if Outcasts were always flagged. They've chosen to forego the consequences of playing in the Settlement game, and I don't think they should reap the benefits that are intended for new players.
Ryan had previously expressed an opinion related to this, that those characters who remain in NPC Settlements would forego some of the protections of the system. I expect there's an ongoing struggle between making it difficult to use throwaway alts, and making the game accessible to new players.
Andius the Afflicted wrote:
I expect that time would be long enough that market conditions could significantly change.
Nope, never heard of it, and I'm certainly not the designer :)
I did quite a bit with Triggers in ZMud back when I was playing ArcticMUD, but they were very touchy about having multiple characters online at the same time so it was really only useful for things like automatically filling my waterskins when I walked past a water fountain in town.
I find it an interesting exercise in programming to create, in essence, an NPC AI. I think eventually some company will come along and announce a game like this where creating player-scripted NPCs is actually part of the vision for the game, but I don't really expect that to happen in PFO. It probably reeks of "pay-to-win" to a lot of folks, but I don't really think that's accurate, since the real alternative is "socialize-to-win". I actually think it would be quite cool for it to be possible for a player willing to spend the money to do so to build up an "army" of mindless minions.
But regardless of how cool I think it would be, if it's remotely outside how the devs want us to interact with - and in - the game, I'm not going to touch it. As I long-suspected, the key to being successful in PFO is going to be having lots of friends around so you can all help each other succeed. This lesson was borne out during the first Darksiders' event, where the fact that four friends and I managed to stay together and work together meant we were very, very difficult to take down.
The only other mention of teleportation I've heard of from GW was the possibility that they might expand into other areas of Golarion and use portals to let players get there.
A couple of months ago, Stephen gave us this gem:
Yeah. We're going to be very careful with Teleportation, and it will be highly restricted if and when it gets in. Safely getting valuable goods across the map is also a major concern, on top of instant deploy of strike teams. If nothing else, it will probably heavily restrict how much gear you can travel with, probably very similar to resurrecting at a shrine (i.e., you may show up with only threaded gear).
Three monitors is right, but no, I would never mess around with multiple input devices and such. I'm a programmer, and once I realized it was "accepted" in Vanguard, I went all in and wrote my own bots that would automatically assist, damage, and heal as needed.
I expect Goblinworks' policy will be similar to a lot of other MMO companies, in that sending manual commands to various clients will probably be okay, but any kind of automated action will be forbidden. That's fine. I don't think what I want will come about unless a company explicitly approves fully automated botting. As it stands now, I won't bother with it in PFO.
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
At various times in the past I have been quite vocal about not wanting any of those things. I have, though, come to accept that my position was unreasonable, and that the risk will contribute to a better experience for most of us. I'm sure there are still lots of people who embrace my original position, though perhaps not as vocally.
I'm extremely glad that you were able to stick around long enough to evolve your stance. I hope the others in your position continue to be welcomed into the community, and given the soft encouragement to really consider the issues. I expect many will not only come to accept the PvP in PFO, but also to, eventually, embrace it. I truly believe that most folks' negative experiences with PvP are actually negative experiences with griefing. PvP is fun.
There are a couple of different threads going on right now about some of the "problems" different Settlements will face.
For my own part, when making my own choice about which Settlement location I would recommend for Phaeros in the Land Rush, I made the judgment call that the problem of recruiting would not be a long-term problem for every Settlement that was distant from a particular NPC Settlement because that seemed like the kind of problem Goblinworks would not allow to be a real problem. I'm extremely pleased to hear they've been talking about ways to ensure it's not a real, ongoing problem. But I accept that I made that judgment call, and I might have been wrong.
On the other side, I believed that being close to an NPC Settlement would likely lead to large numbers of unaffiliated newbies harvesting in "our" territory. I made the judgment call that this was not the kind of "problem" Goblinworks would go out of its way to solve. And again, I'm willing to accept the possibility that I might have been wrong.
Although it's not part of an ongoing discussion, I'll also add that I considered, and highly valued, the fact that the layout of the map gave TEO and T7V easy access to control the only choke points leading into a fairly large area of the map in the southeast. I recognized then that this would only last until the map expanded. While I hope the map doesn't expand too quickly because I want us to have time to capitalize on that advantage, I also accept the fact that the map might expand almost immediately after Early Enrollment begins.
We all made our own assessments and our own judgment calls. How the devs eventually decide to play things out was and still is, to an extent, unknown. In various degrees, we will each be proven right or wrong.
I'm pretty sure there has been an official response, because you are not the first person that wanted to make an 1-man-army. Search the boards.
Actually, I don't recall an official response from Goblinworks on this. I've been asking about it for a long time, and have been waiting for a response as well.
I will say that the Terms of Service for the Alpha included language about not intercepting network packets.
That settlement chose its place already knowing where Riverwatch was planned to be.
Not really. They might have joined the game well after the "core" had already consolidated. Perhaps the map had even expanded significantly to the south and east, resulting in the only frontiers being further and further away from Fort Riverwatch.
TEO Cheatle wrote:
I have encountered that message in two situations:
1. I was still technically in a Settlement hex because I hadn't been fully handed off to the wilderness hex server yet. The hex type icon next to my mini-map showed the pyramid with the light at the top on a yellow background. If I moved further into the wilderness hex until that icon changed, then went back to the same resource node, I was able to harvest it.
2. The resource node was bugged. One of my friends on TS was asking why he couldn't harvest some mining nodes just outside of Sotterhill. I made a new char and ran out there with no skill because that didn't sound right. When I got there, I too was unable to harvest. However, when I ran further up into the mountains, I was able to harvest the mining nodes there with no problem. I logged in Nihimon to go get the "bugged" nodes, and got low-level T1 resources out of them.
Again, I'm not sure how they're supposed to work. I just had the impression that any node could be harvested by anyone, and that the resources in it would be determined when the harvesting was complete.
Not to restart an old argument, but something seems obvious to me. The map will get much bigger. There will be a Lawful Good Settlement on the frontier at least as far from Fort Riverwatch as the farthest Settlement in Early Enrollment. It is nonsensical for that Settlement to be at a significant disadvantage in recruiting because of that distance.
With respect to logout timers, I hope Goblinworks keeps in mind the social aspect of it. It's much more conducive to saying "good night" when there's a 20-second timer after you click Log Out, which also gives your friends an opportunity to say "good night" in return, or even to say "hey, wait a minute, can I ask you something before you go?"
Cheatle, you keep talking about T2 nodes. Are you sure the system works that way?
I never got high enough in any Gathering skills to get T2 resources, but Decius did. As I recall, he just started getting T2 resources out of the same resource nodes he used to only get T1 resources out of, while continuing to get T1 resources out of them as well. I was under the impression any resource node could be harvested by anyone, but what you got out of it would be determined by your Skill and the drop tables for the hex.
TEO Cheatle wrote:
That is how most MMOs are actually...
I think it's very reminiscent of the old MUDs, but not really true of something like WoW or SWTOR. In those games, it's very easy to just jump on and start playing because you don't really have any meaningful decisions to make along the way - at least not more meaningful than "what class?"
I believe Wizards will eventually consume Charge Gems every time they use a Cantrip, much like Arrows will be consumed for Bow Attacks.
We haven't heard much about that system, and I'm very curious if the entire Charge Gem is consumed for every Cantrip. If so, that will make the decision of whether to use a Wand or a Staff... well... meaningful :)
The first comment reminded me of the second.
As far as we've been able to tell in Alpha, each hex will only drop a single kind of chemical. So, my assumption is that having a distinct rating for Cinnabar is equivalent to just having a rating for Chemical.
Lord of Elder Days wrote:
Lisa's comments about banning undisireable players was completely in reference to those abusing exploits and griefing other players. The example given was a player in the alpha who was camping the new player spawn in the starter town.
I have a hard time accepting that excuse at face value. It really rubs me the wrong way that someone thinks they need to demonstrate the exploit so ostentatiously in order to pressure the devs to fix it. It should be enough to submit the information to the devs and leave it at that. It's not like this is a security vulnerability where an unsuspecting user can suffer real-world harm if it doesn't get fixed, which is the only thing I can think of off-hand that would justify such a public display of the problem.
A couple minor ones, no equipment to utilize the my character's potential. Crafting is complicated enough that getting it that way wasn't an option for me and no Bonnie to gift any.
Bear in mind that when it comes to keywords what matters is what your abilities and gear have in common. So if we all get tons of free xp but still only have starter gear then that xp won't do us much good for the test.
Two things I wanted to add along these lines:
1. If you're Cantrips are only Level 2, then you're reaching your maximum potential with a +1 Staff or Wand. Having a +5 Staff does you no good whatsoever.
2. Except that if your Staff or Wand is Tier 2, you get the middle roll of your 3d100. (I may have this slightly wrong, you might have to actually be utilizing a Tier 2 Keyword on your Staff in order to get the middle roll.) Similarly, Tier 2 Armor is good because of the +50 to all Defense Bonuses, even if you're not utilizing the keywords on it (again, I think).
-Aet- Charlie wrote:
Xeen got it, actually... repeatedly and powerfully shock the system and all :)
-Aet- Charlie wrote:
Feel free to message me if I said something potentially controversial. It wasn't my intent.
No, it was nothing you said directly. I was just trying to resist the urge to point out that some of us saw this coming from a mile away - PFO is going to be different that most Open World PvP games. I'll leave it at that.
Navigable rivers and player-operated boats were a significant part of Vanguard's potential, but alas they never really developed it.
Seems to me that the Sellen being included is more of a way to cover their bets and leave the door open for really cool stuff like that down the road. Having a river that's several hexes wide is fantastically exciting to me. I'm glad I'm patient :)
-Aet- Charlie wrote:
Are T1 nodes calculated when the game figures up depletion or does the hex deplete by type?
I may have been misinterpreting this:
Gathering - Each hex has a rating from 1 to 10,000 for each material type. When a node is harvested, it produces materials proportional to the hex’s rating, and then decreases the ratings slightly.
I suppose it depends on how granular "each material type" is.