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

randomwalker's page

Goblin Squad Member. 638 posts (802 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 638 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Moridian wrote:
(....)I don't see why it would be so hard for me to transfer the stats of my sword into my spear.

This is where we 50% disagree!

If you want spear to be a viable (not 2nd rate) choice: yes!
If you want looks of weapon to be independent of function: no!

What I expect is simple:
* Crafting a tier X spear will not be harder than tier X sword/axe, so finding a spear with equally good base stats would be easy.
* The difference is keywords: Different types of weapons will have a different list of possible keywords. Dagger may be 'light' and 'sharp' while glaive may be 'heavy', '2handed' and possibly also 'sharp'
* Special abilities/attacks will require specific keywords, not specific weapons. "Power attack" will need the 'heavy' keyword, a hypothetic "bleeding cut" may require the 'sharp' keyword. The glaive might perform both but a quarterstaff or pike none.
* There may be some type of weapon proficiencies/specializations, but most of the weapon (and armor) mastery would come from having trained abilities to utilize all the keywords.

The fashionista rake rogue. Instead of hiding and sneaking, I stride confidently and crave attention. Fast enough to have a dagger at your throat before your spell is cast. Offering a new insult with every stab.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sadurian wrote:
Lifedragn wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
I'm just glad that when I kill a bear in the woods, it won't drop a +1 battle ax!
This bear wants to know why he can't keep his axe.
Because there are laws restricting people running about the place with a bear chopper.

You don't have the right to arm bears?

EDIT: we are talking bearded axes here, no?

Goblin Squad Member

Stephen Cheney wrote:
So I'd like to hear what else people have envisioned keywords doing beyond that list, so I can evaluate it for the features list

1: mimic certain feats/maneuvers. Keywords used to match equipment to active abilities, ie enables special attacks.

-'heavy' weapon enabling power attack
-'light' weapon enabling combat finesse
-'hafted' or 'hooked' weapon enabling movement-impairing attack (ie.trip)
-metamagic keywords or magic school/bloodline keywords as appropriate for wands, staffse etc.

2: mimc certain magical or mundane enchantments ('pluses'). Equipment keywords may match active or passive abilities, or give flat bonuses.
-'barbed' or 'serrated' enabling (or giving bonus) to bleeding attacks
-'flaming' and similar changing damage types and enabling certain special attacks (possibly arcanae strikes)
-'defending' weapon giving bonus to parrying maneuvers and/or passive defense bonuses
-'holy' weapons giving bonuses to smite evil/undead abilities.
-'shadow' armor giving bonus (or negating armor penalty) to stealth
-'fitted' armor giving less encumberance
-'agile' armor giving bonus to dodge maneuvers or reflex defense
-'reinforced' armor giving extra defense against crits, sneak attacks, armor penetrating attacks etc.
-'fireproofed' armor (red dragon scale) giving defense vs fire damage, and similar.

My suggestion would be to give the dragon more hit points rather than all-round stat increases. Giving it great saves vs save-or-die is also recommended, but CR14 offensive stats sounds like TPK.

*A big dragon should survive a lot of beating
*you have a lot of martials in a low magic setting
*you want a prolonged fight to make it memorable. Wearing it down, giving it (and the party) time to respond to changing tactics. Almost a bit of MMO-raid boss flavour to it with different phases.
*it makes the fight a bit more predictable, which is often good for the characters and DM

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:

Most companies use the calendar year as the fiscal year, unless they're in retail and have a big XMas impact or they have a tax exposure overseas that makes calendar year accounting problematic. They're a minority of businesses.

In this case, all references we make to quarters are calendar quarters.

I realize it doesn't say so, but can we interpret it as meaning: "Development is on track for EE in Q3 (by calendar year)"

Goblin Squad Member

Several minutes already and no in-depth number crunching analysis by Nightdrifter or Decius yet?

Good stuff on escalations, but what happens if it does get out of hand? Could potentially half the map be conquered by an escalation if you fail to stop it in time? (The Worldwound already exists in Golarion, so the precedent is there)

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

A high-pitched scream comes from somewhere on the 2nd floor. It is unclear if it is of terror, pain or pleasure.

Could it be connected to the comatosis epidemic? Is it the handler of goblin cutpurses discovering his loss? Is it a fan of Jordon? A would-be assassin who accidentally poisoned herself? Has the growing number of dark corners collapsed the geometry of space and shifted the tavern to the nine hells? Has Grickin, unnoticed, snuck upstairs to try to charm a lady? Or is it just a random scream for ambience (or foreshadowing)?

In any case, the barkeep doesn't even raise an eyebrow at the sound.

Goblin Squad Member

Harneloot wrote:

Are these facilities created by players or by the *central bank* i.e. GW?

quick answer: in player-made settlement, everything will be built by the players. In the existing NPC settlements, the NPC will probably have something.

In both cases, the facility may be limited or inefficient, or they may charge outrageous fees for using it. Big difference (except location) is that in the player settlement you can work to improve the situation.

Goblin Squad Member

Hi and (even more belated) welcome, Harneloot

Deianira wrote: are complex and require a lot of meaningful interactions, so think of them as nontraditional methods of playing.

Nontraditional here of course being in comparison to standard MMOs. Harneloot, the backdrop to understanding much of the blogs and excitement is the 'standard MMO' which - if I may represent it crudely - goes something like this:

<summon wall of text>:

-Characters become powerful by killing mobs (ie monsters) or doing quests from npc's. Quests are typically kill X mobs or loot Y items from dead mobs. Mobs hang around waiting for you to kill them, then respawn a short while later. Killing mobs over and over for xp is known as "grinding".
CONTRAST: PFO gives xp/time, so there's no xp grind. You will spend your time on more meaningful stuff. When settlements are implemented, the important conflicts will be against teams of other players, rather than raids against mob bosses.

-You have a single class and a max level. The only way to become more powerful than your peers is by having better gear. The best gear is dropped from boss mobs or quest/recipe that requires you to kill boss mob. Gear may require repair but is never lost.
CONTRAST: PFO has no rigid class system. Gear will make a big difference but is easily lost, so that players will not run around in their best gear all the time.

-open world pvp typically has no reward for winning (except pride) and no cost for losing (except time/annoyance). Pvp is often in organized pvp games or designated zones, where winning gives a reward but losing has no cost.
CONTRAST: in PFO, losing will hurt more. But attacking without good (enough) cause will also have longer-term consequences. Settlement power will depend directly on PvP warfare and raids.

-dungeons, pvp arenas and raids are often instances with cap on number of players (5-6 for parties, 20-40 for raids). In practice this means a weaker character will often not be allowed.
CONTRAST: in PFO, bringing an extra (weak) friend always boosts your team. Large fights (wars, dragon boss mobs) may field hundreds of players.

-Crafting can often make useful items (consumables) from gathered/harvested resources, but typically not as good as the best drops from bosses (which are never destroyed). Your success as an adventurer does not depend on having craft skills or crafter friends. Trade is typically in large auction houses with money and items magically transported via 'mail' system.
CONTRAST: in PFO, due to item loss on death and a design expecting you to use lots of consumables, the turnover for crafters will be high. The economy game, including settlement construction, is tightly tied to harvesting/crafting system. Trade will be local, meaning you actually have to travel where the goods are, meaning people with (lootable) valuables travelling between settlements, making for all sorts of interesting niches (bandit, smuggler, caravan guard, bounty hunter, scout, decoy, etc. etc)

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sadurian wrote:

The Pathfinder Wiki is a good place to read up on background material for the Golarion setting.

Pathfinder Wiki list of deities.

Just remember that the Online version might be slightly different in approach.

the quick reference there is particularly useful IMO.

For the PFO, at least for early days, we should expect one deity per alignment. This suggests that alignment (and not domains) is the main characteristic for PFO religions. It also suggests that there will be artwork (buildings, clothing) for each religion in non-trivial amounts.
Of course, RP'ers will choose any deity regardless of what's implemented in the game.

The list of "starting deities" hasn't been discussed (?) in a long time, and presumably a sufficient documented interest for a particular deity might influence the list. Iomedae, Gorum and Asmodeus are pretty obvious as the game will be much about territory warfare. Norgober (assassins) is also near certain. Gozreh is likely to push out Nethys (and Pharasma). Irori vs Adabar, Saerenrae vs Shelyn and Desna vs Cayden are less obvious.

Goblin Squad Member

Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
One MMO I very briefly looked at was Mabinogi, which does have characters aging over time as a feature. Not sure the specifics of the mechanic though, maybe someone else knows better than I.

from a similarly very brief look at Mabinogi, I remember:

-younger got faster xp, older got better stats.
-$$ shop sold 'reincarnations' to make you young again (ie so you could train more skills before growing up again).
-i prefer my avatars to look at least legal age, not 13.

EDIT: "old" in Mabinogi is 18 (or was it 20?) where you essentially are too old to learn new tricks. Characters age from 10 to 18, over and over again. No grey hairs, just manga teenager looks.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
I think these ideas are cool. I just want to set expectations that for Early Enrollment, the Escalation cycles are all about stopping them, not aiding them. Anything done beyond that will have to be Crowdforged after Open Enrollment begins.

I'm a bit confused here:

-does the EC evolve when attacked or when left alone?
-can the EC actually be stopped/bypassed, or is it a cycle where you can you only progress faster or slower to the next stage?
-is the purpose of fighting EC to get boss loot or to stop a real threat to the players in the area?
-which is worst: ignoring the EC initially or abandoning the fight when the monsters become too tough?

According to the Bonedancer goblin EC description, the goblins up their game in response to players attacking them. That sounds a lot like "if you hack down these goblins and the next ones, we will spawn a boss for you to take down". What then is the difference between fighting and 'egging on' an EC?

But in the very early discussions (summon Nihimon??), there were also speculations about unexplored monster hexes growing bigs and strong and spreading across the land if nobody tried to tame it.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

From a mechanics/coding point of view, the simplest way to deal with religious doctrine may be to code it as faction standing.

Ie. if you join a religious (or any other) faction, you get a standing. Doing 'good stuff' increases it, while 'bad stuff' decreases it.
Higher tiers of membership may have stricter codes of behaviour.

For example the church of Adabar may reward you for making money and building settlements, but punish you for criminal acts. The church of Gorum may reward you for winning feuds and wars, but your standing may decay with time forcing you to seek battle regularly.
For druids, in the absence of defined 'neutral' actions I could suggest that any action that shifts your alignment rating too fast or too far in the wrong direction may decrease your standing, while simply maintaining a TN active alignment may give a increase over time (ie alternating between great good and great evil won't work, but being a pacifist loner will).

The nice thing about such a system is that each faction can have different rules, factions are easily added and rules/rewards can easily be tuned.

(Though I dread the thought of ads like "crusade month: in all of april, slaying evil escalation bosses will earn double Iomedae influence")

Goblin Squad Member

Tyncale wrote:
But having the xp refunded would not really get you something back. They would never allow you to spend that XP in one go on another skill, this would completely fly against how XP and skilling up works. (...)

What makes you say that?

If you have spare xp and meet the other prerequisites (prereq skills, in-game achievements, stats, possibly alignment), then you simply go to the trainer and 'cash in' your xp for skills.

Last I heard, lots of people are planning to hoard xp (on their destiny twin at least) waiting for particular class/roles to be implemented, then spending it all as fast as they can.

There could of course be cool-downs on trainers, and you could even declare that the in-game achievements must be earned after starting to train the skill (which I would think unfair). Even so, the bottleneck for skill training (at least for hardcore players) is the xp, and having 'refunded' xp would certainly make the skill training go faster and 'catch up' to those who started training your new skill branch at an earlier time.

So: of course it "gets you something back". Is it worth it? Meh... not to me. But for some people, absolutely.

I once had an abjurer who died instantly from walking into an antimagic field...

Goblin Squad Member

I'd like something simple approximating Sheldon's somatotypes ie: Mesomorph/Endomorph/Ectomorph. With customized face and height, 4 (the 3 corners plus neutral) body shapes should be plenty. Barring that, I'm very much in favour of the A-D cup range.

The idea of playing a pot-bellied gray-haired fighter in a world filled with bodybuilders and supermodels - yes, that has a certain appeal. (And so does playing the same fighter in a world filled with all body shapes).

In my dreams, the more extreme body types would be 'achievements' unlocked by extreme stats.

Goblin Squad Member

Bringslite wrote:
Probably can't go too wrong as a commoner, expert and merchant on the side. Except, expect to get beat up a lot. :)

I was more planning to go Rogue on the side and specialize in stealth and getaways...

Goblin Squad Member

Alexander_Damocles wrote:
You might want to consider another name for the Commoner role/class. Expert and Aristocrat are fairly "cool" titles, but "commoner" is just bland and unexciting. Think of alternate names for what they're doing, such as "Magnate" or some such.

I agree a more appropriate label for 'what you do' may be Foreman, Overseer, Operations Manager etc. However, in PFO this is not a label for 'what you do', as you wont have 'class and level' floating above your head.

Commoner is rather a label for the skill type: farming, logging and mining are commoner skills, weapon and armor specialization are fighter skills, etc. You could potentially rename as 'labourer skills', but that doesn't make it more glorious. Commoner skills are not supposed to be glorious - just very useful for a settlement. If you want the exciting life, become an adventurer!

From a more medieval/feudal mindset, it also makes sense. Aristocrats are nobility, Experts are burghers and everyone else is a Commoner.

'Magnate' would more likely be the Aristocrat managing a harvesting/crafting organization, or an in-game earned title.

Harad Navar wrote:
Finally got the garage ready for the painter and got the new door from the house into the garage installed. Taking tomorrow off from renovation (after some minor door details). Alk will be able to buy materials to copy the scrolls into his spell book in Darkmantle. By-the-by the last spell on the scroll was expeditious retreat. If you stay at Darkmantle for a day you can take 10 and scribe them into your spell book.

Grats on renovation. We are moving houses in 2 weeks time, so expecting lots of housework after that - but as long as the wifi works I should be ok for posting.

Vote for staying long enough in Darkmantle.

Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
See, in PfO I'd expect hauling skills to be under Commoner, as they're the manual labor type guys, so I'd expect that most merchants would invest in Commoner skills. I could of course be wrong in that.

If your game is the hauling and not economics, then yes. More truck driver and less Wall street ;-)

My merchants will be either craftsmen dealing in specialists goods, or perhaps rogue smugglers.

Goblin Squad Member

Being wrote:

The gnome says "Wait. Where's Higgs?"

btw, you don't need to see it or understand exactly how it works - as long as you have postulated the existence and believe, then you can happily have mass.

ps: Is that why they call it the God particle?

Torlandril Morninglord wrote:

This contract was used to filter potential players before they even got to us, not handed out to someone who sat at our table ready to play.

As a vetting method it seems effective, and it sets very clear expectations.

When the "unwritten" social contract you want is different from the average, writing it down is a good thing. I also appreciate the point that you are specifically looking for players who want this type of formal commitment, so even if not generally a good idea it will work for this niche of players.

I could contemplate making a 'contract' like that for a group of my own, but the content would be very different for a casual/social group than for a 'gamer' group. Also, I would never actually enforce it, just use it to illustrate my expectations on what kind of group i'd like. I've certainly played with groups where expectations were all over the place.

Formally it may be closer to a Letter of Intent than a contract. The only thing that can happen is that the GM kicks you out - which could happen just as easily without the agreement. The difference is that your players may expect to be kicked for showing up too late.

Goblin Squad Member

Question on variables in the combat system:

1- will there be special attacks that target injury meter directly (doing low or no hitpoints damage).
2- will there be special attacks that target stamina directly (staggering/stunning)
3- will there be special defense against such attacks? Will stats matter?

4- will melee weapons have different reach?
5- will slash/pierce/bludgeon be weapon keywords? Will they be meaningful? Will there be different defences (incl armor keywords) against different weapon damage types?

6- will uncanny dodge be implemented (ie immunity to flanking/unaware bonus even if not targeting the attacker)?

7- will hard cover and soft cover be implemented for archery/melee/spells? (how?)
8- will it be harder for archers to hit a running target?

Question on class Key Objects

10- feeling that classes/roles now are defined by the Key objects wielded, umm... what exactly is a Key object? Spellbooks, rogue utility belts and barbarian throphy charms? Or staff, dagger and greataxe? Can one fighter have sword and shield and his KOs while another has a greatsword and a talisman?

11- is the goal to eventually give Key objects for every conceivable niche, or do you want to force 'meaningful choice' by limiting the types of Key objects?
11- Will we eventually be allowed to craft our own customizable Key objects?

12- Does "You can have two Key Objects equipped, and you can switch between them instantly" mean switching only between those two equipped? (if so, will it be hard to replace on of them?) Does it really mean 'instantly' as in between two attacks mid-combat?

Goblin Squad Member

Pinosaur wrote:
just live in the woods until the skill tree for your class 'grows' ?

It's hard to be a woodland druid without a tree of your own.

Then again, EE druids will be there from the planting the seed to seeing the skill tree grow tall and strong, and guarding and nurturing it along the way. What could be more druidy than that?

Goblin Squad Member

Harad Navar wrote:
While I can really appreciate the intellectual contortions (....) I believe that superior social organization and planning will be the true measure of successful PvP.

Agree on both counts. The key variable for pvp remains: "you and what army?"

(hint: if you don't know the answer, you can call a friend)

PS: But that's not diminishing the value of what Nightdrifter is doing. For evaluating builds and equipment - and even more so for evaluating proposed mechanics - the analyses are valuable.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
It's just a minor cantrip...

Yes, but his was quickened (and possibly also dazing)

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BrotherZael wrote:


You are a boon to the community friend

I love how we can tell which one is the liberal sciences theory crafter type and which is the applied sciences theory tester. (....)


Nightdrifter wrote:
Pretty much all the info I have ultimately comes from Stephen Cheney (a dev) in some way, so only fair he gets credit!

That's a very well formulated disclaimer!

Nightdrifter's conclusions are obviously only as good as his information (ie assumptions and hard data), and are strictly limited to the cases he models. However the underlying methods appear very sound (robust, even) and can easily accommodate new assumptions and data.
In short: Nightdrifter knows what he's doing and has given us a very good vantage point for discussing certain game aspects.

However (over)interpreting his data should be done with a bit of caution as there are plenty of explicit and implicit assumptions that affect the answers, the corner cases are often far apart, and it is not always clear if we are discussing potential outcomes, likely outcomes, the validity of model or assumptions, etc. etc.

The "10 v 1" discussion is a prime example here. If you ask Nightdrifter "in a duel, would you rather have higher tier equipment or a friend to help you?", you may get a different picture than with the current default question which is "will normally a T3 fighter beat two T2 fighters if they stand still and autoattack each other?"

Back in AD&D days, secondary skills were in addition to class skills.

With the transition to 3E, the vague profession (and craft) skills were included because not doing so would send the message that RP is less important than game mechanics.

Personally, i could easily houserule that certain background traits gave free profession skill points.

For one-shot intrigue campaigns, profession skills could also be used to find clues, infiltrate enemy cities etc. But that is extremely circumstantial.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alternate scenario:
A Neutral Good bard is suspected of theft. A paladin and 10 guards confront him, but before he kills them all with a surprise meteor strike scroll "because they threathened me". Evil act or not?

The OP main argument seems to be "because i'm stupid and violent, you should expect me to behave bad and therefore it's not evil".
Alternatively "if the murderer is a barbarian, then murder is not evil".

sorry, but no.

He was maybe brought up in a CE society and never learned right from wrong, but that doesn't make him 'neutral'. It does however mean that he doesn't care what the last letter of his alignment is. The only problem I see here is that the player for some reason doesn't want the character to be characterized as evil, and launches this discussion to absolve himself and blame the DM.

For the record, killing evil soldiers from an evil empire attacking innocents is evil. Arguably less evil than allowing them to continue, and the morally right to do. Saving the innocents is good, killing the attackers is evil, and the good act outweighs the evil one in this example - but it is still evil.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Stephen Cheney wrote:
...And we love square roots over here, so they're pretty sharply curved.

The nice thing about square roots is that once you start thinking of them as exponents, it becomes easy to fine-tune them.

ie. if [x^(0.5)] is just a little bit too steep, try [x^(0.45)]

The general mechanics sound fair: in TT the crit confirmation chance = hit chance, but you only crit on the very highest attack rolls, so linking it to margin of success is good.

QUESTION: Will there be rogue talents allowing inflicting 'injury damage' on sneak attacks? What about assassins?

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
Bluffing is different from lying, because the expectation of your opponents is that you are not looking to reveal your true hand. A lie is a violation of the expectation that you can be trusted to tell the truth, this does not exist in poker.
I agree with this. I think the expectations of the other parties is indeed the controlling factor.

This pretty much sums it up. If the intention (of GW) is that we should expect misinformation, sabotage, infiltration etc, and new players buy into this - then there is no violation of the expectation and all is fine.

For me, until I see how GW market the launched game to new players, I will caution against these type tactics except if you know exactly who you're playing with (or rather: against).

@Decius: yes, yes, excellent argument. But you still imply that bluffing and overestimating your hand is exactly the same thing. But that is tangential to the main topic.

Goblin Squad Member

Beleriand wrote:

...and why do the dark empires always need to fall? Evil needs to prevail once in awhile.

There's always reality for that.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lifedragn wrote:
...The idea that our immortality could come with a karmic learning block...

simply: Karma?

Basically you are sacrificing to the creators of the world in order to improve your fate. Proper sacrifice will let you live long and prosper, but vile transgressions will earn smiting by the banhammer.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bluddwolf wrote:

On the issue of bringing our real world moal conventions / beliefs to an MMO, that I completely disagree with. I intentionally separate my character's actions from what I would do in real life. I separate your character from the person on the other side of the computer monitor.

If someone can not separate themselves from their characters, I'd venture the suggestion that they mat not be emotionally secure enough to play an MMORPG. I'm in no way directing this at any specific person, just making a general suggestion.

The only disagreement we have is where the boundary between game and player lies.

I prefer to err on the 'silk glove' side as I regard all interaction between characters simultaneously as a meta-interaction between players. (In tabletop gaming this is very clear and the meta-game is always more important than the game, in MMO I still tend to regard it as the same - the objective is for the players to have fun, character achievements is just a tool to achieve that).

I suppose, though, that in reality I will treat newbs and strangers with silk gloves but assume that members of certain settlement are 'emotionally secure' enough to enjoy being sabotaged.

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Bluffing in poker is not lying at all. It is making the statement "I wager this amount."

Bluffing in poker is done with the express intent to deceive and mislead others to your benefit. How is that conceptually different from lying? If your reply is to defining 'lie' as meaning strictly counter-factual statements, then you should possibly consider a career in politics or law.

EDIT: or marketing...

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:

It makes sense that people who use these kinds of methods professionally would employ their knowledge and skills in the games they play, too.

My rewrite: It makes sense that people who use these kinds of methods professionally would start thinking it is ok to use them also for private purposes.

I totally disagree with Bluddwolf that people should bring such skills into the game.
Simply put, I think lying and cheating in a game is immoral(*), that being a skilled cheater does not make cheating right, and the 'interest of national security' exception certainly does not apply in a game. Rather than bringing such skills, they should bring common decency.

(*) yes, I see that there can be other wiews here. Bluffing in poker is not immoral, and the whole premise of Eve is basically 'no holds barred'. But unless this type misinformation is clearly stated as part of the intended game, I will regard it as destructive to the game experience as well as to the community and the individuals involved.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tyncale wrote:

(description of regional trait pack)
You can choose a homeland somewhere in Golarion for your character. A Region Trait Pack provides one character with an achievement stating the country they hail from, a title, and a small bonus or special effect based on the country of origin selected when the pack is used. Select one region: Absalom, Andoran, Cheliax, Five King’s Mountain, Galt, Katapesh, Kyonin, Lands of the Linnorm Kings, Mwangi Expanse, Osirion, Qadira, Rahadoum, The Shackles, Taldor, Ustalav, and

now, I understand why Geb, Nex, Alkenstar, Numeria, Mammoth Lords, Medioganti etc. etc. are not on that list.

but.. Brevoy or Nirmathas please?

Goblin Squad Member

Forencith wrote:
(for instance, I will probably never violate a Contract...does that necessarily make me Lawful?, I will probably never kill outside of need or sanctioned mechanics...does that necessarily make me Good?)

if the core and active alignments are still on the table, you would simply set your core to NN. Your alignment would then never drift away from NN due to 'not doing bad stuff'.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Generalizing from fictional evidence is a textbook example of cognitive bias. That doesn't mean the conclusion is wrong, just that it was reached through methods that can reach any conclusion.

Generalizing from your statement, I could easily reach a different conclusion than you do...

(but that would require some type of "hollywood scriptwriters sometimes do proper research" argument which I would have problems defending, so not going to).

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:

These are my hopes and expectations:

1. Character Generation - Fairly simple, but we should be able to use a mire advanced system later if available.

Agree. Fine-tuning the nose shape is not critical to enjoying the game, but when we reach 1000s of players we'd prefer not to look like clones.

2. Each Starter NPC settlement should include a short tutorial and include all, but limited settlement services. Services: training, banking, market, tavern

agree. I'd hope for at least 3 locations with local market/storage plus crafting facilities (if they are needed).

Tutorial should IMO not be a 'geographic area' (a starting quest and info panels should be enough for EE'ers, and at OE we will have made wikis and welcome programs).
3. Immediate area outside should include an escalation + random encounters. Harvesting nodes and additional tutorial activities (exploration, travel, etc).

Systems in place for escalations & harvesting. Sufficient hexes to generate enough escalations to keep people occupied with pve content until territory can be claimed.

4. There will likely be nothing but randomly stabbing people for initial PvP. I don't expect factions, outposts, POIs, etc... for quite some time.

I fully expect companies, alliances and the first few factions (one for each settlement), as well as feuds and SAD. Company feuds and banditry should be alternatives to 'random stabbing' from day one.

5. It us better to have Alpha under strict NDA. Then a separate forum section should be created for EE.

Getting alpha info out on these (or new...) forums will have clear advantages in managing our expectations. If they decide to make radical changes during alpha, I'm sure Ryan will be perfectly able to sell us the reasoning without needing to restrict info. Whatever the alphas say, I'm already committed through KS and will play long enough to see the evolution for myself.

Goblin Squad Member

Boojumbunn wrote:
(...) their wardrobe choices can also be unique. A rogue might want to dress all in black leather(...)

A rogue wants to look unique, so he chooses... black leather?!

Dressing up should not be a problem. Dyes and dyeing (presumably Fallen Earth style) has been mentioned a long time ago and should be very easy to implement. Different necklines/sleeves etc will require new art, so expect that to start small but expand regularly.

Since clothing most likely will be destroyed on death, there will be a regular consumption of clothing and thus a real clothing market. Also, as mentioned, many groups will want to colour-coordinate outfits for pvp or social purposes.

Now just make some specific dyes (purple?) require ingredients from specific escalation boss monsters, and we may have an interesting dye market.

Goblin Squad Member

non-combat travelling speed: With mounts there is already going to be different speeds, so the issue isn't really balance but rather that being slower makes everything more boring. I don't see anyone complaining if they allow halflings to explore, trade and commute to work just as fast as humans.

combat speed: the issue is escape/pursuit, but there are more parameters to play with than run speed, e.g. opportunity, dodge and stamina costs. It should be possible to give halflings/gnomes ways to escape without making it impossible for monks to run away from full-plated clerics.

Maybe the same 'sprint' move would cost have different stamina cost for different races? Maybe halflings could have move buffs/abilities to help escape but not pursue? Or a racial bonus to negate opportunity?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Boojumbunn wrote:
What would people think if, when you hit the door to go into a shop, if your mount was put at a hitching post until you emerged?

Two simple mechanisms that could solve the issues:

1) prevent (tall) mounts to go through doors (or tight cave entrances, into deep water, up ladders, etc)

2) have stables give the mounts some sort of 'rested' buff (scaling with time stabled and quality of stables).

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Steelwing wrote:

I am sure it is merely coincidence but I cannot help noticing that there is a strong correlation between those "sheepdogs" arguing that low rep people should be consequence free pvp targets and those arguing that low rep people should be made to suck skills and gear wise by the mechanics. If I was a cynical man, which of course I am not, I might infer a thing or two from such a coincidence.

Indeed, you are not cynical but sarctastic.

'Coincidence' is strictly speaking a correct mathematical term, but this is not 'merely' coincidence but correlation. There are a lot of players who simply think low-rep behaviour should be a losing tactic in the long term. And we are willing to have asymmetric rules to make that happen.

Similarly, the people who think low-rep behaviour should be a viable/competitive playstyle have a similarly strong correlation in their arguments.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
randomwalker wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
The study itself is behind a paywall, so I can't extract the numbers (....)

(...)If I were a troll I'd lie (...)

(...) Perhaps one could account for that by (....)

If you had all the raw data you could do your multivariate analysis, identify the outliers and compare model & predictive strength with and without the outliers. But, having no access to the data there's nothing we can do except point out the lack of data.

But I find the statistics (meta-)discussion interesting. Every scientist - and especially those in social/phsychology/medical fields - should be kept on their toes when interpreting information. (In heaven journalists will understand statistics too, but teaching them will be hell).

@narcissism test-takers: I'm not going on about this because I score high on authority, but because I score high on superiority ;-)

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:

The study itself is behind a paywall, so I can't extract the numbers which indicate how strong the evidence is, but it appears that the people who didn't self-identify as trolls are roughly average.

Which leads us to the retrospectively obvious answer that people who identify as trolls have personalities very far from typical people.

Thanks to Nightdrifter and Decius for (again) crunching the numbers.

What I don't get is this: If I were a troll I'd lie in order to troll the test. Is this the narcissism streak wanting them to brag about being trolls?

"People not self-identifying are roughly average"... does that statement actually say anything at all when this group is 95% of the people?

I'd be curious to look for correlation patterns: could you make a predictive model for self-identification? Is this about trolls, about who self-identifies or about how people portray themselves when they self-identify?

Goblin Squad Member

Xeen wrote:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
You don't lose a character ability. You lose its use. As soon as you are affiliated with a Settlement that enables that ability, it is restored.(....)

Same argument can be used for theft. You can regain any losses with extra time. Its not like you permanently lose gold.

So if my LG Paladin loses his Settlement, from being conquered.... I lose access to my skills. I cannot find another settlement which I either like the way they behave, or have access to the skills... Then Im just SOL right?

The comparison with theft is flawed. Your skills are being impounded more than stolen.

If you lose your settlement and cannot find any other matching settlement to join, then you are indeed screwed. But it would be strange if all the other paladins from your former home could find a new home but not you. It would rather expect settlements to offer building new facilities in order to recruit a team of high-skill paladins.

I'm trying to imagine his mom still forcing her 20-year old to bathe for the last time before he finally ran away, forgetting his socks (or did he smoke them?) but taking the helmet.

I also wonder who buys him cigarettes, maybe his downwind neighbours?

Goblin Squad Member

Pax Keovar wrote:
unless there's alcohol prohibition in the area, I don't see why that should need to be hidden or smuggled.

taxes, monopoly situation (legal or illegal), embargo...

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Just remember, there is only one real way to avoid the "jerk DM".

Be the DM.

nah, tried that. Game just became more lethal for those that didn't play as the DM had planned...

1 to 50 of 638 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.