Every piece of an attack is modular. For example, "Stuns for 2 Seconds" is just a mechanic that can be added to any attack. They all feed into a formula to output the final costs and results of the attack. But that's likely to just be the starting point for playtesting. We can expect situations where "Effect A is worth X... except when it's coupled with Effect B, in which case it's worth Y and really also needs to have Restriction C."
It would be a fun system, but you're right in that it would be very difficult to balance. If there is a wide enough variety of attacks with a modular system under the hood that sounds like a good formula for engaging combat.
From the blog it sounded to me like a "build-your-own" system was what you guys were going for, so I had to ask.
@Milo, I agree with you about min/maxing getting out of hand, but rock/paper/scissor can be dull unless there's enough variety, and this sounds like there will be enough variety.
In regards to how the stories of Escalation Cycles are advanced, would it be better for the game to make it obvious, or for the process to be a bit nebulous? How much should the players have to figure out?
Realistically you'll be able to go to a website and read some fan's breakdown of the whole cycle. There won't be much mystery. It seems more important to me that we make the whole escalation experience reasonably fun through gameplay rather than through storytelling.
Good point.
Quote:
Will the location of monster hexes ever change? Should they?
Will the type of mob/EC that comes out of a monster hex ever change? Should it?
Monster Hexes are a part of the geography of the game space. People will make decisions about where to fight for territory to build Settlements based on the kinds of monster hexes in the area. So I think that it becomes a problem if they arbitrarily change.
On the other hand, it is a part of the design that the world should react to the actions of the players. So that implies that the actions of the players should have an impact on the Monster Hexes. Maybe that means that over time, they slowly morph from one kind of monster to another.
That will be a delicate balancing act to avoid screwing people especially if they build an economic engine off the material drops from that Monster Hex....
But at the same time monster hexes that never change may (perhaps years down the line) make the geography of the game stale and predictable in regards to PvE.
Quote:
Will certain ECs advance and then stagnate, leaving an area of the map permanently monster controlled until something is done about it? (It sounds like it, but that also seems...a little absurd, maybe?)
If left unchecked an Escalation should result in a very dangerous area developing. It may be so dangerous that the nearby Settlements are unable to deal with it on their own and that will tend to degrade them. In a very advanced state, an Escalation might make an area essentially uninhabitable.
I think that's fun. It gives advanced characters something interesting to do with their power besides fight over...
Oh it sounds very fun, my reaction was one of reflex, and now that I've had some time to think about it, the possible scenarios that might evolve out of that could easily become the source of compelling stories outside of PvP.
Thank you for your responses, they have been illuminating.
Very interesting, consider me intrigued and a little excited.
In regards to how the stories of Escalation Cycles are advanced, would it be better for the game to make it obvious, or for the process to be a bit nebulous? How much should the players have to figure out?
Would it be better for the effects of the artifact to be known ahead of time, or for those effects to be somewhat random?
Will the location of monster hexes ever change? Should they?
Will the type of mob/EC that comes out of a monster hex ever change? Should it?
Can the entirety of an EC be thwarted by simply killing enough mobs? Should that be possible?
Will certain ECs advance and then stagnate, leaving an area of the map permanently monster controlled until something is done about it? (It sounds like it, but that also seems...a little absurd, maybe?)
Will it be necessary for players to participate in ECs in order to claim "critical" merit badges?
Not sure at all of the validity of this but isn't going to war going to cost some amount of currency (M) where periodically a fixed amount of money is removed from your organization's coffers?
Disguise could be useful for so many people: Spymasters and their agents, bounty hunters, black marketeers, and anyone who wants to be the mysterious stranger in the back of the tavern. For the cost of a suit of armor, it sounds like a wizard or a monk could pose as a fighter until combat begins, then unexpectedly start slinging spells or swinging deadly fists. An elite army unit disguised as grunts could do a lot of damage when they're underestimated and engaged.
That may be possible, but if I understand how it works, one's armor will be severely impaired since the Disguise has to be equipped in lieu of your usual gear.
@Harad, thanks for laying out what it can do. Who knows if I'll be able to do any of that by the end of the quarter, but that all sounds very intriguing.
Hmmm, I'm taking an ArcGIS introductory class this quarter, and will have access to the software for a year. I've barely begun but it has made me wonder how the software can interact with PFO.
I think I recall it would be four real hours to a day in game.
Far as I can tell that's correct.
GW Blog wrote:
We're also creating a Refresh system. Characters can use particular abilities a certain number of times per four-hour in-game day, or until the player uses a Refresh—a special action characters take to refocus, rest, and regain abilities.
-----------
Stephen Cheney wrote:
...keywords are an optional bonus for a spell (but an important bonus to become competitive at the expected level you're using the spell), and won't prevent you from using the spell entirely if you're missing a keyword.
An arcane caster could eventually get all of them by progressing down multiple class feature paths, but you can only have one Class Feature Passive feat slotted at a time, so you'd have to switch to a different build to most effectively use drastically different spells. That is, you might have the highest level of both Evoker and Necromancer, but you still have to pick one or the other for a given encounter.
That sounds like a reasonable balance between power and flexibility.
The main thing the level of the spell indicates is how many keywords it supports, and thus its potential base damage. Unlike cantrips, which read the keywords on the wand or staff, a spell reads the keywords on the caster.
To clarify this means that certain spells, especially higher level ones, will require the character to possess certain keywords in order for them to be cast?
For example: A high level diviner may not have the "Archmaster Transmuter" keyword, preventing them from casting Transmute Blood to Acid.
Would an arcane caster, with enough dedication, be able to obtain every possible keyword?
Are certain keywords exclusive based on school/bloodline choices?
Concerning divine magic, in my experience the thing that sets divine casters apart is the flexibility of their spell list from day to day. Essentially they neither rely on an object nor a fixed set of learned spells.
During Prayer/Refresh periods, maybe a good approach would be to allow access to a menu from which a divine caster can choose their spells?
For domains, maybe the keyword for each domain is attributed to the character at a certain point in the archetype/class progression? Once you get to a certain point in divine spellcasting (depending on the flavor of your choices) you are required to make a mostly permanent choice for domains.
I don't think Skwiziks was suggesting that Chainmail shouldn't look like Chainmail, but that it should be possible to have a set to Tier 3 Chainmail that looks like a standard Tier 1 Chainmail instead of a obviously magical high-quality Chainmail.
It should go without saying that stats relate to appearance; low quality equipment looks awesome, while midrange equipment looks awesomer.
I hope there will be a way to have armor appearance separated from armor stats. Is it so wrong to want to look less fantastical while still being fantastic?
Perhaps. Or perhaps the gods are perfect expressions of alignment, and alignment is ontologically more basic than gods are.
Blasphemy!
:P
In all seriousness though, the full implications of the alignment system will probably be addressed in a blog far in the future. And then will have to be calibrated in EE.
Considering its the most constant sound you hear in MMORPGS, it would be much appreciated if its more than the same sound file played over and over.
(bare, leather, chain, plate, hoof, etc) with diminutive sound levels from stealth or additional ones from movement speed, weight and terrain.
I loved being able to hear someone coming before seeing them in UO.
Now that you mention it a blog about sound (effects, music, etc) in general would be great. Seconded on the footsteps.
However, I do understand that those designs are fine for plenty of people, even desirous, and I'm certainly not wanting to pull out the torch and pitchfork over this. I'm just hoping that in the final game there will be options for cloth that also fill more modest tastes, and that I wouldn't be embarrassed to show off to my daughter. :)
Seconded. The concepts in this picture from the blog, especially the left side of the third and last rows, are good examples of what I'd want any female bodied characters I make to wear.
What concerns me about the way it's presented (the combat round system) is that you would basically figure out the most economical attack sequence and spam that combo until target drops. If the different attacks cost different amounts of Sta, then 1 combo should result in the least wasted points at the end of the round.
This is true if my only options are to deal damage to my opponent. However if I can also disrupt them (debuffs, status conditions, etc) and more significantly counter or thwart their attacks, then it becomes more involved.
How can I act or respond to my opponents at this moment in time such that I can regain or continue to have the advantage?
That's the kind of question I want to be asking while in combat.
I'm very curious about the way Archetypes and Skills will play out. One of the big draws to this game for me is the flexibility that comes from a skill-based system. That fluidity is far more interesting than a fixed-class system.
Will the archetypes be mutually exclusive?
Will abilities derived from those archetypes be mutually exclusive?
How strong of a presence will traditional roles be in the game?
Will there any kind of encouragement to specialize? Why?
...and etc.
Architypes do not appear to be mutually exclusive per se. It is possible that some skills may not be available to some alignments.
Traditional roles will be as strong or weak as the players choose to make them, as nearly as I can tell.
It looks like there will be an advantage to focusing your slotted skills within an archtype to gain a 'focus bonus'. How significant that will be remains to be seen. Why it is so I bleieve is to try and keep the game more like Pathfinder than less.
Hmm, right, that is what we've heard so far. I don't mind a small bonus for mimicking a class from the p&p game, I just hope there's room for the player that says "I want to play a Fighter" and those who say "I want to make my own thing".
@Rafkin, one on one I doubt newbies will have a chance, nor would I expect them too. But if that newbie has a few other friends, well now it gets interesting.
I'm very curious about the way Archetypes and Skills will play out. One of the big draws to this game for me is the flexibility that comes from a skill-based system. That fluidity is far more interesting than a fixed-class system.
Will the archetypes be mutually exclusive?
Will abilities derived from those archetypes be mutually exclusive?
How strong of a presence will traditional roles be in the game?
Will there any kind of encouragement to specialize? Why?
...and etc.
But we will know your biggest weakness based on the armor type we see you wearing.
It does look like that will be the case doesn't it? Hopefully there will be means of inverting expectations based on someone's armor type, either by glamer or enchantment.
I would rather be on the edge of my seat in every combat situation, never feeling truly safe.
Isn't that still possible with the proposed system? There are still wide ranging variables, and the if the pacing of combat is fast, then I can still see it being exciting.
It's probably best to think of hit points not as blood loss, broken bones, or other traumatic injuries necessarily, but as one's ability to keep fighting. An attack will miss, but the effort to dodge/block/parry the attack will still take something out of you.
Stamina will be an interesting factor, as it will be the "currency" of combat. I wonder what will be better, a pool that stays fixed for all players, or a pool that can be improved through effort?
We don't currently have a concept of item degradation/repair. You'll use consumables to temporarily boost certain gear in effectiveness, which likely expire when you die, and we're hoping that will cover enough of the intended effects of a degrade/repair cycle to not require such a system. But we'll be able to say more for certain later, once we get a better picture of the actual usage patterns for items.
Sounds like a good plan.
Also, this system reminds me somewhat of Ryzom, which isn't a bad thing at all.
It also means coordination between characters specialized in exploration/finding and those specialized in crafting/gathering will be all but necessary.
Enchanting doesn't sound like it has a lot of utility, but neither does it sound like it's had a lot of attention. Curious to see where that goes.
A bit concerned about the way settlements can hoard/control training.
Otherwise, very happy with what is being planned.
I don't know, I can see an organization existing that might put their effort into creating training facilities over anything else, and opening them up to the public and/or a large number of friendly allies.
I'm sure those allies would defend such an organization with great fervor.
There is an apparent imbalance in the nature of settlements as described. I'm not sure that "freedom of action" will be a legitimate incentive for Chaos/Evil if all of the tangible benefits go to Law/Good.
Maybe certain parts of the settlement (citizenry, certain buildings, etc) function slightly better for Law/Good cities, or depending on the settlement's alignment it can have access to certain buildings; with positive, negative, or mixed connotations to the structures depending on the settlement's alignment.
And as always, any hard system can be exploited and undermined. A strict alignment system, if not properly managed and calibrated, could be turned on its head.
----------------------
I would advocate for the bounty system to have more flexibility in regards to time.
Instead of making a bounty post last 24 hours, allow the player to determine the length from 24 hours to, oh let's say, a week? Longer times may require a surcharge in M-Currency, and a renewal could be placed at the end of the term set by the player.
Additionally, allow for the player (or maybe the bounty-hunter) to set the amount of time any one actor (or group of actors I hope) can hold the bounty. As little as a day or as much as the entirety of the term. Bounties should be able to be abandoned by bounty-hunters at any time.
Lastly, a good MTX-currency item would be something that allowed the posting of bounties from a remote location. A specialized "Sending" scroll essentially. One-time use consumable item that gives you full options for setting up a bounty from anywhere in the game. Maybe an advanced version could allow a specific bounty-hunter (or group) to accept the bounty immediately from a remote location.
Giving the system more utility will allow it to have a more prominent role in the day-to-day events of the game.
Below is a short list of answers to questions that would presumably be asked at some point.
Here You Go!:
Quote:
1.) What's the difference between The Seventh Veil (T7V/TSV) and Caerux Khaiognos (CK)?
T7V is the name of the meta-organization that acts as an out of game community hub. CK is the in-game organization affiliated with T7V.
Quote:
2.) If I join, then does T7V have a say as to what happens in my organization?
Not at all. T7V has no authority over the workings of affiliate organizations.
Quote:
3.) Then how do you get anything done?
Voluntary mailing lists, job boards, word of mouth, etc. T7V doesn't actually do anything itself, its members work together to accomplish personally and mutually beneficial tasks.
Quote:
4.) If T7V has no authority what's to keep anyone from following the rules?
We would hope that the benefits of working with other friendly organizations is a strong enough motivator, but if an affiliate is a continued problem for the organization as a whole the most that could be done would be removing them from the organization. Essentially, a name is taken off a list.
Quote:
5.) If my group wanted to join, but also wasn't a formal in-game organization, would that be alright?
Formal in-game organizations are preferred, if only because they are easier to identify by other players, however that should work just fine as long as the rest of the requirements (points of contact especially) are still followed.
Quote:
6.) What would be the benefits of having my organization join your group?
Being a part of a larger community of people who can become friends, business contacts, or what have you. Disputes within T7V can be mediated through neutral parties, allowing for a smoother diplomatic process. Out-of-game communication can be better facilitated through forums, messaging, and emails that can be provided by T7V.
The benefits are all about community and communication.
Quote:
7.) Does this mean that you won't be working with other Chartered Companies outside the T7V umbrella?
Caerux Khaiognos will still be working with all Chartered Companies and other organizations who have the desire to work with us, and affiliates of T7V are not at all required to work only with other T7V affiliates.
Quote:
8.) What happens when an external organization declares war on an affiliate?
At the moment, there is no formal process for such a situation, as the details for such systems in the game are still in the works. A discussion of this question will certainly be necessary. At the very least, if your organization is in trouble, you'll have a network of groups to request aid from.
- Said by someone older, wiser, and who sold more books
Loosely translated:
"If you know your enemy and you know yourself, your victory will be assured. If you know yourself, but not your enemy, for every victory you achieve, you will also suffer defeat. If you know neither yourself, nor your enemy, you will succumb in every battle"
But if it fits the region in the setting, go crazy.
We're in luck then, as the River Kingdoms are so decentralized and open that the phrase, "Anyone, anywhere, at any time" points to the truth. Sure there will be a notable majority, but encountering a traveler/resident of a minority group shouldn't be unexpected, even if it may also be mildly surprising.
I think the appropriate action/attitude is a policy of mindfulness rather than deliberateness. Be mindful about how you are choosing to structure the content of the game, but any deliberate inclusion or exclusion risks cheapening the experience for all parties involved.
I don't think it's required to join an alliance, so wouldn't a Free City just be a city without alliances? Or are you asking for an NPC City that is the base for a "Free City" alliance that players and Settlements can join?
Even if a Settlement isn't pursuing an Alliance, it still has an alignment requirement according to earlier blogs, and characters still have to be within one step of that alignment.
I'm talking about having a PC or NPC Settlement that has no alignment requirement, a "Free City". Maybe it has no ties to any Alliance, but it feels thematically appropriate to the region.
@Kakafika, that seems a bit more flexible of a system. I'd be okay with that.
Skwiziks
Goblin Squad Member
