Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Dexinis

Nihimon's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Card Game Subscriber. 11,735 posts (11,741 including aliases). No reviews. 16 lists. 2 wishlists. 7 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 11,735 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Stephen Cheney wrote:
Direct-to-inventory drops from defeated creatures is working as designed (except for not having notifications). It serves several purposes including assuring a fair and personal distribution of loot, simplifying the PvE process, and preventing a bunch of half-looted corpses from tying resources up.

Glad to hear it!

/murmur

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Mbando wrote:
Because no human being can remember everything they have ever heard, said, done, seen, etc?

Some of us definitely strive... :)

Goblin Squad Member

KarlBob wrote:
Our opportunity to fight without reputation penalties lasted only as long as it took for all the Towers to be captured.

Very minor quibble...

Our opportunity to fight other Characters during the War of Towers was predicated on those other Characters being in the same unclaimed Tower Hex. That's practically consensual PvP.

Right now, we can engage in consensual PvP without Reputation Loss. All you have to do is attack yourself once to get the Aggressor Flag, then attack any Character with a white name to get the Attacker Flag. If your opponent does the same (which would require a 3rd party with a white name to be present), then you and your opponent can fight without either of you losing Reputation.

Goblin Squad Member

I believe there was a mechanism for matching Shieldmates in the Pledge Manager. The part that I believe is a mistake is the statement that "Shieldmate assignments are closed. They had to be done in the Pledge Manager. Right now there is no plan to re-open that process..."

The shieldmate item just doesn't seem all that clear to me...

Will you need to invite someone to be your shieldmate before Early Enrollment, before Open Enrollment, or will this option remain indefinitely after that?

@Keovar - You can wait forever to make an invitation

My wife and I both pledged in the Kickstarter the very first day. There was no point in linking to each other, and there was strong assurance that we'd be able to link Shieldmates at any time in the future.

From February of this year, a very clear indication that there would still be a way to link Shieldmates in the future:

If you're worried about how this rule ultimately works out, don't offer the Shieldmate relationship to another account until the rule is finalized.

Goblin Squad Member

KarlBob wrote:
Can we kill each other without reputation penalties during that negative time?

No. Decius and I verified this.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nihimon wrote:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
Shieldmate assignments are closed. They had to be done in the Pledge Manager. Right now there is no plan to re-open that process but we may find time to do something with it in the future closer to Open Enrollment.
I think this is a mistake.

To be clear, I mean I think Ryan is mistaken.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
Shieldmate assignments are closed. They had to be done in the Pledge Manager. Right now there is no plan to re-open that process but we may find time to do something with it in the future closer to Open Enrollment.

I think this is a mistake.

Goblin Squad Member

Stephen Cheney wrote:
(as an aside: after the next patch, you should be able to make weapon attacks during this period, just not expendables and consumables)

Very, very glad to hear this :)

Goblin Squad Member

So, I understand Bringslite's confusion earlier. I completely mangled the quote tags in this post.

What it should have looked like:

Nihimon wrote:
Bringslite wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
I don't think it's a good idea to set the expectation that every new content release in Early Enrollment will be free of bugs.
I can't speak for Xeen but I do read that he is not suggesting that new features be bug free when they are released.

First, I didn't quote Xeen because I wasn't really responding to Xeen. This is a sentiment I've expressed a number of times recently in smaller venues, and something I wanted to say here as well.

That said...

Xeen wrote:
Test the living **** out of it before adding another bit.

That seems to suggest that new bits should be fully tested in order to be as bug-free as possible.

Goblinworks has a tremendous amount of work they need to get done in the next year. Expecting them to spend time and resources polishing and testing "the living **** out of" every new content release is not reasonable.

Early Enrollment is not for the masses. It's for fans who understand it's going to be incomplete and buggy, but who want to support the development anyway.

Goblin Squad Member

The Alpha Forums are back for me now. I had been getting "temporarily unavailable" for a while...

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:

What to expect from Early Access Beta

Right here is what everyone is looking for.

Note, that it says low content and bug free as possible. Note that it also says that the Early Access Beta is not meant to be a bug hunt.

From Xeen's link:

Quote:
I can't promise that we can find all the bugs (we never will in a project this size).

There's another quote I'd like to highlight:

Quote:
I'd love to get this sort of information from day one, but it's not really useful data until players are enjoying themselves. That means we need all the basic systems in place and a reasonably bug-free, fun experience.

Yes, the words "bug-free" are right there. But if you read the context, it's pretty clear to me that Ryan is saying he doesn't expect that to be the case from day one.

Goblin Squad Member

<Kabal> Pexx wrote:
Haagen will be rewarded for his efforts =)

It's worth pointing out that, when Haagen and I tested his strategy of using Minor Cure while disengaging, he was not subject to any Basic <something> Exploit Attacks. If I had been using a Longbow instead of a Staff, he likely would not have fared as well.

Goblin Squad Member

Giorgo wrote:

@Nihimon,

If you can write up a post on PO I would appreciate it, its all confusing to me.

As for being hit by a longbow, do you suggest just "walking under fire" up to the archer and then hitting him/her with melee?

You Provoke Opportunity whenever you move faster than a Walk while in Combat. Many Attacks also Provoke Opportunity when you use them. Some Attacks apply Opportunity to you regardless of what you do.

Some Attacks do a lot of increased damage when you have the Opportunity condition. Basic Longbow Exploit is one such Attack that is especially dangerous because of its range.

There are a number of conditions that allow your enemy's Attacks to do something special. Opportunity is the one to be most aware of because it's so easy to put it on yourself simply by moving normally.

Goblin Squad Member

Leithlen wrote:
Despite Ryan's caveats that things might be rocky, that was the pitch given to everyone about EE - that it would be feature-incomplete, but the core systems would work and be fully playable.

Can you back that up? Do you have a link to a post where Ryan made that pitch?

Goblin Squad Member

Bringslite, I'm at a loss to understand why you think I'm trying to catch you in a contradiction, or that I'm even contradicting anything you've said, and I'm hesitant to get into a back-and-forth trying to "clarify" the finer nuances of what each person really meant.

It's unreasonable to expect Early Enrollment to be bug free. If you don't have that expectation, then I'm not talking about you.

It's unreasonable to think that ceasing development of new content will make it easier to fix bugs. If you don't think that, then I'm not talking about you.

If you think that nobody expects the game should be bug free, and that nobody thinks Goblinworks should hold off on new content until all the existing bugs are fixed, perhaps you should go back and read some of the prior posts in this thread again.

Goblin Squad Member

Giorgo wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
I'm hopeful that new players will absorb the information that Provoking Opportunity will have very bad consequences in PvP. Thank you for presenting me with an opportunity to further disseminate that knowledge.

@Nihimon,

Its really hard sometimes to determine if your being sarcastic, insultive, instructive or complementive. :)

In any case, what do you mean by "presenting me with an opportunity to further disseminate that knowledge"? This is the first time I recall you brining the subject of "Provoking Opportunity" before. Have you discussed this previously (if so, where)? Have you mentioned it offhand before, or did you write a post/tread covering this in detail?

I did a search on PFO Wiki and nothing solid came up...

I was partially being snarky in response to a snarky "thank you" from Cal.

I don't know if I've written about Provoking Opportunity before, but it's something I've talked about a lot with other players, and was quite genuine in my desire to inform new players that they need to pay attention to it.

Right now, if you're up against someone using a Longbow and you try to run - either towards them or away from them - you're likely to take lots of damage from Longbow Exploit.

Goblin Squad Member

Doc || Allegiant Gemstone Co. wrote:

As a programmer, I disagree with that sentiment completely.

Time constraints are no excuse to deploy buggy and/or incomplete code.

Bugs happen, but shrugging off proper QA because of a hectic delivery schedule is just bad policy.

If GoblinWorks lacks the manpower to thoroughly test, and must rely on Alpha testers, then either the Alpha testers suck at testing, or haven't been engaged or instructed enough in how to help.

As a programmer, perhaps you've heard the saying "Good, Fast, or Cheap - pick any two". We need to accept that Goblinworks has chosen "Fast and Cheap" for Early Enrollment, with a likely move to "Fast and Good" once they have an income stream able to support that.

[Edit] Understand that "Good" in this context means polished and iterated on enough to be released with a very small number of low impact bugs.

Goblin Squad Member

It's a fallacy to assume that bugs will get fixed faster if everyone else stops working on content.

Expecting the game to be "bug free" (whether you're talking about new content being released bug free, or talking about all development on new content being stopped while every last bug gets fixed) is unreasonable.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you're looking for a color for the Everbloom Alliance, might I suggest "Roseblood red"?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Leithlen wrote:
As Andius has said multiple times, EE was meant to be feature incomplete, but WORKING.

Might I suggest you pay more attention to what Ryan says?

Everyone who begins play during Early Enrollment will have to accept terms of service that anticipate many rollbacks, changes, fixes, and adjustments. It's the nature of the Early Enrollment concept that problems will be defined, and fixed, as the players and developers Crowdforge. Of course such actions will be implemented in ways that affect the fewest number of players and when there's an extraordinary circumstance some XP compensation may be offered.

We're not dumb enough to suggest we can launch, lock in, and just be perfect. That flies in the face of 20 years of MUD/MMO history.

During Early Enrollment, the only thing we're going to consider sacrosanct is XP. Everything else is subject to rollback, removal, and alteration as necessary to protect the integrity of the game.
Early Enrollment is really an experiment in community building as much as it is in game building. We will clearly make mistakes and have to roll back features and restart systems even fundamental systems like the economy. Everyone who plays in Early Enrollment will know what they're signing on for before they start, and I'm comfortable that some people will want to wait a long while for things to become more settled rather than "waste their time" playing in ways that might be rolled back.

Ryan has been making it very clear for a very long time what we should expect in Early Enrollment. Don't let the fact that some folks who haven't been paying much attention have unreasonable expectations lead you to develop unreasonable expectations yourself.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bringslite wrote:
I don't think it's a good idea to set the expectation that every new content release in Early Enrollment will be free of bugs.
I can't speak for Xeen but I do read that he is not suggesting that new features be bug free when they are released.

First, I didn't quote Xeen because I wasn't really responding to Xeen. This is a sentiment I've expressed a number of times recently in smaller venues, and something I wanted to say here as well.

That said...

Xeen wrote:
Test the living **** out of it before adding another bit.

That seems to suggest that new bits should be fully tested in order to be as bug-free as possible.

Goblinworks has a tremendous amount of work they need to get done in the next year. Expecting them to spend time and resources polishing and testing "the living **** out of" every new content release is not reasonable.

Early Enrollment is not for the masses. It's for fans who understand it's going to be incomplete and buggy, but who want to support the development anyway.

Goblin Squad Member

I don't understand the expectation that Early Enrollment should be as stable as a fully released, big-budget MMO with a large staff.

PFO is being built on a budget by a very small team. Early Enrollment is when they're going to be developing - and we're going to be testing - all the features they've been telling us about for the last three years.

I don't think it's a good idea to set the expectation that every new content release in Early Enrollment will be free of bugs.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm ready with my Oh, thank God clip if they announce it's a Go.

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Hey, I'm not arguing that. I'm only pointing out that there is, most definitely, a net negative effect on those who wish to deliberately opt out of the NAP. How great that effect is is a question for more game-savvy minds than my own. I'm just doing the math, guys. :P

Your point is technically valid, but kind of pointless. It's equally valid to say that there is a net negative effect on everyone who didn't join the Everbloom Alliance because there are some who did. Sure, but so what?

Goblin Squad Member

Doc || Allegiant Gemstone Co. wrote:
I think this arrangement is less of a Non-aggression pact, as it is actually a Mutual-Defense pact. A key stipulation is that people should band together to take towers back from an aggressor that violates the core tower zone. I can't recall in history a non-aggression pact with more than two parties.

No, that's not in the text, and was never discussed, and almost certainly would not have been agreed to.

Goblin Squad Member

Doc || Allegiant Gemstone Co. wrote:
Quote:
You know that Stationary ranged attacks are MMO standard, right?
Have you played World of Warcraft? I assume you understand or know of the term "Kiting".

In World of Warcraft, a common way to cancel your spell is to move. Kiting is most often done with "Instant" spells that don't require you to stand still. Most of the really high damage spells require you to stand still.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Ninja'd by Nihimon. A sign of success.

I'm slacking, though... I used to provide links for verification, but I'm getting lazy.

I swear, the last month has been a rougher wait than the two and a half years before it...

Goblin Squad Member

Schedim wrote:
As I will be out of my hovel this wekend it would be nice to know I I should lug my laptop around so I just can start accumulating XP at least.... Woe to lose the first weekend!

They will be back-dating XP so that you don't have to login the first day to get started. I believe they're going to set it up so that every Character that gets created in the first week or two will get the same XP.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
KarlBob wrote:
albadeon wrote:

I assume it's because even gaining points on a tower is (unlike before) now considered a violation. As I understand the mechanic, gaining points itself doesn't make a difference for another company's attempt. Only actually reaching 1000 points first would make a difference (and would constitute a violation in the original version of the NAP). How will the screenshots show that I was entering the ring (and gained a point or two in the process) to support the defenders via healing?

Imho, that is an unneccessary change from the previous version that will potentially cause unneeded controversy.

Just visiting an allied settlement could lead to scoring a couple of points on one of their towers. For example, there could be a 100% escalation in a hex, and avoiding mobs might take you within capture range of a tower. Does it really say that scoring one point on a tower is a violation?

Contesting a Protected Settlement's attempts to control one of their adjacent Towers is a violation. The Tribunal that finds the Accused credible when theey say "Hey, I was just passing through and only got like 1 Capture Point" is likely to ask the Petitioner "Why are you wasting our time?"

Goblin Squad Member

We actually do know that Goblinworks is a source-code licensee of Unity, and has made some significant changes that have precluded their use of other "standard" Unity modules.

Goblin Squad Member

Urman wrote:
Do we expect that cloaks, jewelry, and headgear count as Gear as well?

I believe they definitely count as Gear. Whether there will ever be any Utility Feats that search for Keywords on them - or whether that's even supported by code - is another question entirely.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bluddwolf wrote:
Part of the frustration might be the lack of knowing what is going on. That is resolved with putting in condition indicators or by making them more visible.

Yeah, I think this is the important bit.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
If you have to switch to a faster attack; switch to a different weapon; or break off and return to the fight, that sounds like a bug.

I don't see that.

If you're doing a slow attack over and over and getting interrupted every time, you should change something. If changing something works, that's not a bug.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
Not sure if this was supposed to be fixed, but I am still not seeing any holdings at all. Including my companies.

I'm having the same problem, and it doesn't matter whether it's the leader of a Company or a brand new Character, I never see anything listed in Holdings.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Schedim wrote:
Have I missed something, is there more intricates?

Some mistakes.

Attack Feats match Keywords on Weapons
Utility Feats match Keywords on Gear (Boots & Gloves)
Armor Feats match Keywords on Armor
Expendable Feats (Spells & Maneuvers) match Keywords on Role Features

Goblin Squad Member

LFDPrivateer wrote:
Q: I'm having system issues, and I'd like to nail down what I need to upgrade on my computer to make PFO run smoother, is there a minimum system requirements list anywhere?

There isn't, but if you start a new thread with your computer's specs and a description of the problems you're experiencing, there are a lot of very helpful folks who will be glad to share their experience.

Goblin Squad Member

Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:
The only way out of it is to disengage, flee, return, kill. It is annoying and kinda dangerous under the right combo of factors.

Switching to faster attacks, like those on a Wand, will get you out of their Interrupt loop.

Goblin Squad Member

Calidor Cruciatus wrote:
So I was interrupted 5 or 6 shots in a row in 1-1 ranged combat?

Yes. The same thing was happening to me all the time, and I was convinced it was a bug, until Ryan mentioned to me that I was probably getting interrupted. After that, I made sure to always switch to faster Wand attacks after opening with the Staff's heavy hitters, and it's never been a problem since.

Goblin Squad Member

Calidor Cruciatus wrote:
One bug I honestly feel you MUST fix prior to launch of EE is the bug where a mob is invulnerable.

This is not a bug. You're being interrupted. Yes, they need to do a better job of letting you know you're being interrupted.

Goblin Squad Member

Fierywind wrote:
... which implies we'll have settlements considered inactive before the week is up.

No, it doesn't imply that.

It implies that even if there are officially declared Inactive Settlements prior to the end of the first week, those Settlements are still protected. The protection for the first week supersedes the lack of protection for Inactive Settlements.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Zodiac107 wrote:
Turn it around and it could be read as "If you break our rules that you didn´t agreed to, then you are free game."

You were already free game.

The only thing stopping you from being free game is the NAP.

Goblin Squad Member

Zodiac107 wrote:
I would oppose the notion that non signatory settlements would be encompassed by NAP. Frankly i find it disgusting that third parties try to wield their power of "democracy" over "free" people. Just the notion of it makes me want to rebell and screw it all over.

Settlements that don't sign are still protected by the NAP. They're under no obligations whatsoever, except that the protections of the NAP can be withdrawn.

Goblin Squad Member

Fierywind, the NAP protects the Core 6 Towers of Inactive Settlements for the first week of the War of Towers. After that first week, the Core 6 Towers of Inactive Settlements are no longer protected.

Goblin Squad Member

For what it's worth, the same thing happens with Evoker slotted - every time I get a Critical Hit, I put Slow, Oblivious, and Burning on myself.

Goblin Squad Member

Phaeros places no restrictions on its citizens associations, except that they maintain a reasonably High Reputation, and that they not work against our interests.

Goblin Squad Member

Fierywind wrote:

@Pexx

That's understandable, but that's already covered in the active/inactive system, so it'd make more sense imo to say that settlements will be declared inactive if they don't claim their 6 towers in the first week.

That's not the only way that Settlements can be declared Inactive.

Fierywind wrote:
" Signatories also agree not to attempt to capture any of the Towers adjacent to a Protected Settlement for the first week of the War of Towers." Is this meant to imply that if protected settlements don't take all 6 of their core towers within one week, that signatories can attempt to capture them? I would assume not, so this needs to be rephrased.

Actually, that's exactly what it means. But they would still have to abide by the part that says they must not contest that Settlement's attempts to control those Towers.

If Settlement A doesn't capture its Core 6 Towers during the first week of the War of Towers, then those Towers are up for grabs. However, as soon as Settlement A attempts to control any of its Core 6 Towers, any Settlement that contests those attempts will be in violation of the NAP.

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:

I am sure at this point GW knows whether they plan to delay EE or not. At the very least they know if it is on the table.

Any update for us to discuss on this?

I asked Ryan about this in-game. He declined to make a statement about whether or not they were on schedule, but he did make a general statement, and I hope I reproduce it accurately enough not to cause any confusion.

They met late last week and determined that all of the "must fix" code changes were complete. Server stability issues are the only real concern they have right now. They'll meet early next week to go over where they are and make a "go/no-go" decision.

My sincere apologies to Ryan if I've misrepresented any of that.

Goblin Squad Member

The "Improved Critical +0" stuff you're seeing is there because it's easier for Stephen to write a formula in his spreadsheet that increases the Improved Critical bonus per level from a starting point. He starts it at +0 to keep it from being too large later on.

Schedim wrote:
And lastly a Implenet keyword, what effect do this have? Against what is it matched? Weapon I guess ... But to what effect?

It's a bit confusing because some Keywords have a type of "Implement" but don't actually appear on Implements.

The Keywords on your Role Feature get matched to the Keywords on Expendables (Spells & Maneuvers). When there's a match, your Expendable will be more effective (better damage, longer debuffs, etc.) It really is that simple. For the most part, the Keywords themselves don't have specific effects, it only matters if they're matched (that is, if they appear on both your Role Feature and your Expendable).

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bluddwolf wrote:
I suggest they "Look Over" the document... ;-)

I was just giggling over that same thing :)

Goblin Squad Member

<Magistry> Athansor wrote:
The most enjoyable moments in those involved dying repeatedly to find and perfect tactics that defeat the encounter. In a sandbox game I don't imagine that experience coming up, but I at least want a challenge, and again, preferably one that can't be overcome just by throwing more bodies at it.

I've said it before, but I hate combat that feels like "chopping wood". There's no real risk - unless I make a stupid mistake - but it takes a long time to grind through the mob's hit points. I had kind of assumed the Goblin Ghouls we were facing in the Escalations around us were Tier 2 mobs since they were so hard to kill.

I want my challenges to come from other players. They'll do things I never expected, and there's no guarantee at all that what I did last time will be effective this time.

1 to 50 of 11,735 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 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.