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

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Goblinworks Blog: RESPECT: Find Out What It Means to Me!


Pathfinder Online

151 to 200 of 229 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Onishi wrote:
I wasn't intending to criticize him for having an opinion...

Sorry if I sounded harsh. It just seemed like he was getting picked on by having his examples twisted around back on him.

I can easily see an even more compelling case, where someone has two groups of friends and, depending on which group is online and wanting him to play with them, he could very reasonably want to be playing in very far-flung places.

For my part, I think that the idea that "long travel times make the world seem larger" is completely off base. Rather, it's the ability to go off the beaten path and discover vast new areas that makes a world seem large. And that's completely compatible even with simply opening my map and clicking on a town to instantly travel there. (Please note, that's not what I'm hoping for in PFO, that's just an example)

Obakararuir wrote:
If we are only going to be using the River Kingdoms, why would there be more than one main map?

Introducing the Crusader Road.

Have you seen the little red square on the map of the River Kingdoms that represents the "main map" that PFO will start with?

What Ryan is saying is that the first expansion might be something about that same size, but centered on Gralton instead. In that case, there would be two "main maps" which are not connected at all, but which players could go between via a gate of some sort.

Perhaps if you understand that, then you'll understand also why the rest of your argument doesn't really hold up.

AvenaOats wrote:
To extend this thought, a horse might x4 speed on road (aka fast travel), x2 on fields, 1/4 in woods...

I really hope they do something like this, where roads allow quicker travel rates than forests.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is no doubt that instant travel can add alot to player convenience and it's not an illegitimate position to desire it. However it nullifies and trivializes whole swathes of other game-play elements.

Imagine a WWII strategy war game where you can instantly teleport your tank division from London to just outside Berlin. It would essentialy destroy very significant elements of play in the game.

The same, I believe, would hold true for PFO. Alot of what I've read so far about the game implies that it's ALOT different then most other MMO's out there...who's primary gameplay elements seem to revolve around hoping from dungeon to dungeon consuming the PVE content there. PFO seems to be a game designed around the idea that logistics matter, economics matter, territory control matters, decisions about where you go and how you get there and what forces you can bring with you, and who might be able to interfere with that matter. Instant travel as a general gameplay mechanic pretty much destroys those things.

Again, fine with fixed point to fixed point travel between major maps, IF GW feels they need to spread out the game maps a bit more. Those kind of limited instant travel options wouldn't have much effect at all on overall play. But instant travel as a general gameplay mechanic would come at the cost of nullifying alot of other important gameplay mechanics.

Goblin Squad Member

GrumpyMel wrote:
... it nullifies and trivializes whole swathes of other game-play elements.

Not if it's done the way Ryan is considering doing it.

GrumpyMel wrote:
Imagine a WWII strategy war game where you can instantly teleport your tank division from London to just outside Berlin.

If there's actual map between London and Berlin that you're bypassing, then it's a problem. However, if there's just a map of London, and another map of Berlin, and there's no map for any of the territory in between, then there's no problem.

GrumpyMel wrote:
Again, fine with fixed point to fixed point travel between major maps, IF GW feels they need to spread out the game maps a bit more. Those kind of limited instant travel options wouldn't have much effect at all on overall play.

Okay, you're obviously aware of this already.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Have you seen the little red square on the map of the River Kingdoms that represents the "main map" that PFO will start with?

So we are back to asking rhetorical questions... regardless, the answer is yes I have. So I ask again, what OTHER main map are you referring to? You said travel between main maps, and now you are naming two locations on the same map. To get from the Crusader Road to Gralton your main map is still the River Kingdoms. You know, the one with the little red box on it ;) Obviously our definitions differ there. My main map is Earth while yours are North America, South America, Antarctica, Europe, Africa, Australia, and Asia. Got it. Moving on.

Nihimon wrote:
What Ryan is saying is that the first expansion might be something about that same size, but centered on Gralton instead. In that case, there would be two "main maps" which are not connected at all, but which players could go between via a gate of some sort.

Got it, roger, tracking... so why not a gate to the moon? That is the question I ask. And systemically, there is no good answer. Why not a gate to Katapesh? Dyinglight? Zirnakaynen? In game... there is no reasonable answer, no believable answer. The truth is the only acceptable answer is that the game is confined to the River Kingdoms.

Why not develop Lockridge? Same topography. The River Kingdoms was chosen for it's malleability. Shape it with some critical thinking and forward planning. I'm not saying that those things AREN'T happening, but the first things that come to my mind with the whole "gate" idea is what happens when the map fills out?

So a gate between the Crusader Road and Gralton has been established. There is no longer any strategic reason to occupy Daggermark, Thorn, Hawk's Nest, etc. No one is going to be traveling through your territory because there is a gate. Less random player interaction, marginalized sale of goods and services, high probability for griefing because now you have a choke point.

If forces in Gralton are advancing to Daggermark, the occupation of Thorn should provide a strategical advantage either way. Even if it is just reconnaissance, you have forewarning of an approaching OPFOR. You know how long it takes to travel that distance. If someone can access my region from their region by clicking a gate, you circumvent all of that. Realistically, if a friendly force is in your region and you are established close to the gate, the enemy force could reach you before your support does. That does not make sense and leaves gaping holes to be exploited.

Nihimon wrote:
If there's actual map between London and Berlin that you're bypassing, then it's a problem. However, if there's just a map of London, and another map of Berlin, and there's no map for any of the territory in between, then there's no problem.

There will be a map between the locations eventually. I don't seriously think they will leave, for example, the entire region between Gralton and the Crusader Road empty. According to you, once you place Daggermark in between the Crusader Road and Gralton it becomes a problem.

Perhaps if you understand that, then you'll understand also why the rest of your argument doesn't really hold up.

Goblin Squad Member

Onishi wrote:

How does dimmension anchor, allow any risk in teleporting from friendly town one, past wilderness/hangout, into safe ally 2 on the south side. As written in core, this is implying the ambushers within line of sight of the person teleporting, vs along the path such as ambushes from hideouts are designed. As written dimension anchor solves 0 problems, does it prevent say 5 wizards from bringing in parties past your defenses at once? As well as immidiately returning to every battle after dying once, IE extra lives. Does it balance risk/reward for goods transportation? Dimmension anchor solves a problem that hasn't even been brought up, which is people who want to teleport away AFTER being attacked, it does not solve people who want to ensure they are never attack-able, or people who want to lead an attack.

Now hypothetically lets make up a spell that pops people out of teleport by casting it in advance. The issue with this, is it takes away every part of choice in targets that an ambusher would need to differentiate whether it is actually a good idea or a horrible idea to ambush this person.

No, it doesn't do any of that. What it does is prevent teleportation into or out of the area effect of the spell. That means if you are defending your town, and you have a caster that can cast it, you can choose where the teleporting attackers arrive, or at the very least limit where they can arrive. Teleport will choose the nearest safe spot closest to the destination. It also means you can drop one to prevent them from leaving, making such hit and run attacks not so hit and run. These are just other options that I think would make playing the game fun, having to plan for these contingencies as you would if you actually lived on Golarion.

I agree teleport would mostly be used to 'fast travel' but if you're going to have a version of that anyway, why not play it up?

Goblin Squad Member

Obakararuir wrote:
... what OTHER main map are you referring to? You said travel between main maps, and now you are naming two locations on the same map.

Sorry, I thought I was being clear. If you didn't get it, it's probably not worth trying to explain it again.

Goblin Squad Member

Kryzbyn wrote:


I agree teleport would mostly be used to 'fast travel' but if you're going to have a version of that anyway, why not play it up?

Because fast and instant are 2 very very different things, with drastically different consequences. If you are at war, is the difference between the people you killed coming back 5 seconds after you kill them, and 10 minutes after you kill them noticeable? even if it is to a slightly less dangerous area?

If you are using a hideout to ambush, is the difference between having a 2 minute window of time to examine and debate whether to trigger the ambush, or either having no option to trigger, or possibly an ambush that auto triggers instantly but cannot distinguish the merchant carrying diamonds, and a team of reknown bounty hunters carrying little of value?

Goblin Squad Member

These are difficulties you would face living in a world that has magic.

Goblin Squad Member

Kryzbyn wrote:

These are difficulties you would face living in a world that has magic.

Certainly, in a world with magic that was 100% true to the pathfinder ruleset, in which every settlement has more than 50 level 15+ PCs, we have a virtually unworkable world. Almost everything GW is intending for the game goes by the wayside rather quickly when we carry over every spell and ability from pathfinder entirely on the basis of because it is in the tabletop game. The pathfinder world itself dosn't hold up with potentially hundreds of level 20's in any city, let alone in almost every city.

Not everything that works well when 2 people in the story have the ability, works well when you scale things up and have 10,000 people with that ability.

Goblin Squad Member

It doesn't need to follow the rule set in order for this to be a neat addition to PVP combat. The idea of teleport is such a vanilla one.
I realize it's not going to work exactly the way it does in the CRB, becasue they aren't using the CRB for the ruleset for the game. But having a teleport, is part of the setting, and should be there. I suppose they could do the same thing every other MMO does and key it to certain/specific areas, or they could try to make it work as close to it does in the book without going overboard, but it should be there.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

"this is not thematically appropriate" is a complete explanation for why you can't do something. If the road south from one point connects instantly to the road north from another point far to the south, because there is no play area between them, that is not a reason why all such combinatons of two roads should be zero distance from each other.

Goblin Squad Member

Kryzbyn wrote:

It doesn't need to follow the rule set in order for this to be a neat addition to PVP combat. The idea of teleport is such a vanilla one.

I realize it's not going to work exactly the way it does in the CRB, becasue they aren't using the CRB for the ruleset for the game. But having a teleport, is part of the setting, and should be there. I suppose they could do the same thing every other MMO does and key it to certain/specific areas, or they could try to make it work as close to it does in the book without going overboard, but it should be there.

Ryan Dancey gave a good eg for the idea of adding a gameplay feature and if it were added at a range of frequencies eg 0.0%, 0.00%, 0.000% the differing effects these would cumulate to result in... I think if you have teleport it's a question of how frequent it's use is, how long is it's maximimum possible range, how many and any other limitations required to "contain" it's use so it does not make redundant inferior modes of movement or make physical barriers irrelevant.

It could be an interesting skill for one of the magic using archetypes but perhaps a "costly" spell?

Goblin Squad Member

Perhaps. I jsut really like the idea of the tactics both defenders and attackers would have to work into their plans to accomodate for it. Then you know you've hit the big time :P

Goblin Squad Member

Kryzbyn wrote:

It doesn't need to follow the rule set in order for this to be a neat addition to PVP combat. The idea of teleport is such a vanilla one.

I realize it's not going to work exactly the way it does in the CRB, becasue they aren't using the CRB for the ruleset for the game. But having a teleport, is part of the setting, and should be there. I suppose they could do the same thing every other MMO does and key it to certain/specific areas, or they could try to make it work as close to it does in the book without going overboard, but it should be there.

Agreed there, my main point is the spell has to work with the stated goals of the game, the viewpoint of oh well that's what happens in a high magic world is what I disagree with. If implimented, teleportation has to be put in a way that it does not eliminate or negate most ambushes, does not unbalance pvp to an extreme level, etc... and that includes scenerios where 40% of a settlement is wizards (as if a settlement having 40% wizards has a huge advantage, you can pretty much guarantee many people will make one). Biggest thing to keep in mind, in a PVP MMO, if a blatently poewrful chain or combination exists, you can't go by the PNP thought of well the roleplayers won't abuse it, as the roleplayers will just be getting steamrolled by the power gamers, or be forced to remain completely in high sec.

as I've mentioned on the last teleport debate, to really make teleport work, we need to start with figuring out what is desirable for teleport to be used for. Attempting a general All use spell, and then trying to slowly remove each undesirable use, is IMO backwards.

Goblin Squad Member

What about putting a distance limit as well as a recast cool down on any teleport spell, if you have them in game? That way no one can skip entire regions or hop across them but it would add a decent ability for the squishy magic folk.

Or maybe a summon group member or summon corpse spell where the person has to be within a certain distance to the summoner?

A game with magic should have classes with some sort of magic movement spell whether its teleport or a speed buff or whatever. Its just one of the basic bread and butter things in a magic world in my own mind. So is the ability to shape shift for bonus effects, invis occasionally, float, etc., as well as being a benefit to a group by being able to cast those things on others.

I really don't see anything wrong with using teleport to go from one particular, very specific and small area in a very large region to another specific, very small area in another very large region. Say, like going from the original game area created to the next major game area created in a future addition to the game.

Goblin Squad Member

Misere wrote:
What about... a distance limit... ?

If we're going to go with arbitrary limits, I'd rather there be an arbitrary limit on bringing along any Commodities. But I'd prefer no arbitrary limits at all.

It seems to me the real trick is getting the cost right. I'd like to see the caster's skill determine 1) the number of characters that can be ported; 2) the distance; 3) how familiar the caster must be with the area (from having been there and studied the area all the way down to having seen it once via Clairvoyance). I think there ought to be a significant but not too great cost to teleport the characters and their equipped gear. Beyond that, I think there should be an extremely heavy cost for every pound of un-equipped inventory - on the order of ten times its weight in the most precious metal or gem in the game.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Misere wrote:
What about... a distance limit... ?

If we're going to go with arbitrary limits, I'd rather there be an arbitrary limit on bringing along any Commodities. But I'd prefer no arbitrary limits at all.

It seems to me the real trick is getting the cost right. I'd like to see the caster's skill determine 1) the number of characters that can be ported; 2) the distance; 3) how familiar the caster must be with the area (from having been there and studied the area all the way down to having seen it once via Clairvoyance). I think there ought to be a significant but not too great cost to teleport the characters and their equipped gear. Beyond that, I think there should be an extremely heavy cost for every pound of un-equipped inventory - on the order of ten times its weight in the most precious metal or gem in the game.

The PVP side also still needs to be addressed on that, I suppose a long cooldown or something along those lines could work to address it to avoid people rapidly returning to battle 10 times in a row. the equivalent of an "Extra life" in a PVP match is still a bit risky, but still 1 extra life is far more tolerable than infinite lives.

How is distance an arbitrary limit? there's no shortage of spells that have range limitations, I see no reason that adding some spells that didn't use to have them for the sake of balance in a game with open PVP as a bad idea, rather it is a necessity.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

There are several proposals under discussion here:
Fixed-point to single-fixed point: you can teleport between a permanent teleportation portal and its destination. (multiple pairs are possible) This simply makes distance determinations non-Euclidean but not smaller. Any zone boundaries are technically examples of this type from a gameplay standpoint if not a lore standpoint.

Fixed-point to any fixed point- each portal is linked to every other portal. This includes any system in which fixed-to-fixed portals have a small central hub, and what any sufficiently powerful system of player-created portals will be. Distances are smaller in ways that ate hard to calculate. This is the system used for silt striders and guild mages in Morrowind.

Any point to fixed points- players can travel instantly from arbitrary locations to defined loci. Distance to these loci is always short, which means distance to anywhere close to them is also short. This is the fast travel system used in Oblivion and Fallout 3.

Any point to any point- this is the Teleport spell in the SRD.

Goblin Squad Member

RE: Teleport and PvP

My general feeling for something like teleport or limited teleport is that sort of tactical mobility is a HUGE advantage in combat and therefore needs to be balanced out with equaly large disadvantages or it will simply become one of those "must have this in every fight or you loose automaticaly" type things. I'd suggest if it is implimented, in addition to manna costs and distance limitations that there is a reasonable chance of spell failure AND that the attempt leaves the teleporting party vulnerable to attack (say a strong debuff) for a certain amount of time.

What you don't want it to become is the auto "I escape whenever I want to do so with 100 percent success".... or the auto "I bypass your defenses, regardless of what they are whenever I want to with 100 percent chance of success". You also don't want the only counter or foil to it to be a caster that can cast a counter. There are many different classes in Pathfinder and each one of them should bring something to the table that provides an advantage in a fight. However none of them should bring things to the table which are generaly uncounterable or unfoilable to any degree to the majority of other classes in the game. That's, IMO, what needs to be considered when designing a well functioning combat system for PvP.

If you look at the Fighter in the Pathfinder PnP game, that, IMO, is an example of a class that's pretty well balanced for PvP. They have excellent physical offensive abilities and excellent physical defensive abilities. Probably in a stand up, toe to toe fight using just melee attacks and nothing else, the fighter would beat other classes. However, MANY other classes have physical offensive and defensive capabilties that come close (if not equal) to a Fighters and virtualy ALL classes have something that they inherently can do to counter the Fighters physical advantages. Rogues and Assasins can counter with stealth, backstabs, traps, poisons.....casters can blast or disable fighters from a distance, etc. Those classes may not always be able to pull those things off, or be setup in the best situation to utilize them, but they all have them...and that's where tactics come in.

There are, however, certain types of spells and other abilities within the Pathfinder ruleset that are not well balanced or suited to PvP, because there are very limited, if any, counters to them and those counters are not widely availble. I believe teleport is an example of that. So, as Onishi has already pointed out, when you start looking at bringing those types of abilities into PFO, you really need to start carefully considering how they will effect combat...and how they can be countered by a VARIETY of other players.


DeciusBrutus wrote:
There are several proposals under discussion here:

Thanks for laying it out.

You raised some interesting points, primarily the idea of player-made portals. A player-made system could be very problematic. Who could use them--anyone, your faction, your settlement? Can they be destroyed? Are they difficult to make (possibly giving hardcore settlements an insurmountable advantage)?

My feeling is any "public portal system" should be dev-made. This would ensure their availability for common use without creating wierd social dynamics in the game (ie: warring factions collaborating to build them). It would also let them retain control over travel. If any portals ever need to be changed or removed, it would be far easier if the devs didn't have to intervene in player activity to do so.

Quote:
Fixed-point to single-fixed point: you can teleport between a permanent teleportation portal and its destination. (multiple pairs are possible) This simply makes distance determinations non-Euclidean but not smaller. Any zone boundaries are technically examples of this type from a gameplay standpoint if not a lore standpoint.

Setting aside the problem of how to expand the map, this is more limited than I had in mind.

Quote:
Fixed-point to any fixed point- each portal is linked to every other portal. This includes any system in which fixed-to-fixed portals have a small central hub, and what any sufficiently powerful system of player-created portals will be. Distances are smaller in ways that ate hard to calculate. This is the system used for silt striders and guild mages in Morrowind.

This is what I want for portals. It allows a powerful system without resorting to a PoK type zone (which I think would have no place in PFO). With the right number and placement of portals, you could use this system to travel anywhere in the game as though you were only one or two maps away. To me, that is the sweet spot. Getting from one far-flung area to another would still be a trek (of 30-60 minutes), but not one that could literally take all day to make otherwise.

Quote:
Any point to fixed points- players can travel instantly from arbitrary locations to defined loci. Distance to these loci is always short, which means distance to anywhere close to them is also short. This is the fast travel system used in Oblivion and Fallout 3.

This is how I think teleportation spells should work. Spells are a different story from portals--they could be limited by skill, a maximum group size, material cost, etc. I don't really see spells as being problematic because their power is so easy to curtail. As such, the distance isn't always as short as you say, because you have to account for the availability and limitations of the caster and the spell. For small group travel, this could be very convenient. For large scale PvP, this could be a very limited option.

Quote:
Any point to any point- this is the Teleport spell in the SRD.

I don't think this is appropriate for the setting. I'm not sure how it would even work in an MMO, unless it was limited by line-of-sight.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Any form of instant travel will ruin the game. People who are complaining saying that they wouldn't enjoy the game if it took time to travel somewhere have been spoiled but existing mmo's that have instant and fast travel networks setup in the game.

One of the main features of this game is going to be virtual communities and virtual economies. You could have an auction house, however removing fast travel and removing an all encompassing auction house will help the economy grow. Large areas of commerce will develop where players show up to trade their goods. If it takes significant time to travel across a world, and you go to purchase goods at an auction house, or in a bazaar like area where players have set up shops then it introduces another good factor into the economy.

Goods from far away places become worth more. Players who set up trade routes, and are willing to take the long treks involved to far away territories and get goods which may be plentiful there, but not plentiful where they are selling them, will then be able to influence the market. resource "A" may be plentiful in region "1" and sell for not much coin, however in region "5" this good may be very rare and therefore can be sold for much more money.

Sure everyone likes convenience. I wish that I could step out of my house and teleport anywhere that I wanted in the world. However once I can do that a significant portion of reality will be taken for granted. Far away places that you always wanted to travel are just as close as the corner store, they no longer have as much value for you because they are easily accessed. It totally removes supply and demand out of the equation for a number of issues. Instant travel would completely reform our economy. Think of all the implications. So yes, it would be nice for us, but it would completely spoil us. It's the same in a game, it's just like using cheat codes. You can do everything you want super easy. Instant travel is a game cheat code. Adding an element of not only time but also the difficulty of travel gives worth to travel. How much of a game environment in any given game do most people skim over just to get where they want to be?

I implore the developers not to add instant or even significantly fast travel into the game.

Imagine that you don't have a built in instant travel system, or auto mapping system. You actually have to go out there and figure out where you're going, or purchase a map that doesn't have a magic dot telling you where you were...

When you were able to actually do something, it would be an accomplishment. Even the skill system in this game is being designed so that players will not devour it in a matter of days. It's being based similar to the Eve skill system, one that takes time to use. So no matter how many monsters you bash over the head or how fast you do it, or how much of a life you don't have, you cannot simply devour the content and be done with it instantly. Why should the developers compromise this value in the travel system when they are painstakingly going out of their way to stop this from happening with character development?

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
I'm not sure how it would even work in an MMO...

I see it working in a very straight-forward manner.

When you cast Teleport, you're presented with a list of Destinations. You can add a Destination by using a Spell or Ability while you're either in the area or while you're viewing it via Clairvoyance. The number of Destinations should probably be limited by your Skill or something. There should probably be a chance of failure based on your Familiarity with the Destination - how recently you've been there, how long you studied it, etc. And, of course, there should be plenty of Spells to Ward an area against unwanted Teleportation.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pannath wrote:
Any form of instant travel will ruin the game.

Sorry, but that's hyperbolic nonsense.


Nihimon wrote:
When you cast Teleport, you're presented with a list of Destinations.

Sure, but technically that would be any point to fixed point.

Goblin Squad Member

The developers are concerned about people absorbing and finishing all of their content in a short period of time. You think that they should compromise on this point where they weren't willing to compromise on character progression because of the same reason? People only truly appreciate something that they've had to earn. If it's handed to you on a platter and made easy, it becomes boring.

If I'm policing my territory, or a bounty hunter for a kingdom, and hunting down criminals who have violated laws, and I go to track them, but they are teleporting all over creation, I'm not going to have much luck. However if they're forced to move around conventionally, that is a completely different game.

People of higher level will congregate in specific areas, and there will be large trade centers that develop because of geography that way. Because it is the best place to have them due to environmental factors. Lower level areas will be full of lower level characters, to see a big bad higher level character won't be as common. Certain goods will naturally flow to certain areas. Granted there will be people who go out of their way to travel, since it's hard. They'll hire guards for caravans, or escorts through nasty areas to move their goods, the economy will work much better.

If you could just go where ever you wanted, or go to an auction house and purchase something where the guy who put it up was on the other side of the world, the virtual economy wouldn't be as good.

Goblin Squad Member

Hudax wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
When you cast Teleport, you're presented with a list of Destinations.
Sure, but technically that would be any point to fixed point.

Well, you'd want to pick someplace you know... and you know should be 'safe'.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/teleport.html#teleport

There is, after all, a chance of mishap and all that. If you're trying to go someplace that is owned by another group and the little forest glade you've chosen to arrive in has been cut down or there's a watch tower sitting there now, then you're much more likely to screw it up in some way.


Pannath wrote:
Goods from far away places become worth more.

There is literally nothing the devs could do to prevent this from always being the case. Even if you could instantly travel anywhere without limitation, that wouldn't ensure success in your goals.

Quote:
Sure everyone likes convenience.

Believe it or not, it's not so much about convenience as it is about the game being playable. An all day long trek might sound fun, and might be fun in certain situations, but in others it's an incentive to turn off the game and do something else.

Nostalgia is always sweeter than the reality. Renew your EQ account with your buddy and come back and tell me how much fun it is spending hours getting ready to play instead of playing.

Quote:
The developers are concerned about people absorbing and finishing all of their content in a short period of time.

Since their content will be dynamic, they really aren't. It won't be like WoW or EQ where you will play for two months and be "done."

Quote:
If it's handed to you on a platter and made easy, it becomes boring.

Yes, but nothing I've said suggests that's what I want. Portals won't be necessary for who knows how long. Port spells could be skill based and not even in the game at launch. We're talking possibly years into the game. Things that will make the game at that time playable instead of unplayable.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The game is still playable even with it taking a long period of time to move around.

In games like wow, there are main cities back near the beginning of the game, so people use those as central commerce points, and travel between them and other higher level zones that are far away.

If there are other player settlements or npc settlements that are farther away from the starting areas, stronger characters will congregate near them, and travel out from those areas, instead of making constant unneeded transit around the world multiple times per day.

There are other things that could also be done to help this, you could take ideas from different games. Have your character anchored to a player party before you log out, so it though it isn't in game, it essentially "follows" your other party members around, then when you log back in, you log in with your friends.

And I don't think that you're going to be bored if you have to worry about being killed or ambushed by other players or npcs or monsters while you're traveling. I'm not saying to not add in mounts to travel faster, I'm just saying that instant teleportation wouldn't be good.

People would adapt.

Goblin Squad Member

Hudax wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
When you cast Teleport, you're presented with a list of Destinations.
Sure, but technically that would be any point to fixed point.

Depends on how you define "fixed point".

I got the impression Decius was referring to Destinations that were "fixed" by the devs. The way I see it, I can add a new Destination via Clairvoyance and immediately Teleport to it. That doesn't count as "fixed" to me.

Goblin Squad Member

Yeah, I am with Pannath...although I think they will implement something in the middle.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
There are several proposals under discussion here: ... Fixed-point to any fixed point- each portal is linked to every other portal. This includes any system in which fixed-to-fixed portals have a small central hub, and what any sufficiently powerful system of player-created portals will be. Distances are smaller in ways that ate hard to calculate. This is the system used for silt striders and guild mages in Morrowind.

The fast-travel system described in the blog entry "Time is the fire in which we burn" works as fixed-point to any fixed-point. Just not instantaneous:

Quote:
To engage in fast travel, you'll need to start at a defined location; you can't just be wandering in the wilderness. And you'll need to know the location of your destination. These locations are discoverable as you explore the world, and can be shared by members of social organizations as well. To initiate fast travel, you'll access the in-game map, find your destination, and select it.

Goblin Squad Member

I'm with Fornecith and Pannath. Quick travel will be 20x normal speed, setting a reasonable speed of 80mph. Farthest point from farthest point is roughly 550 miles, clearing the whole map in 7 hours. Staring off in the Crusader Road, you could be from corner to corner in no time. You want to add teleportation and gates to that? That's ridiculous.

I could see a gate to a distant area of the River Kingdoms, but doing that multiple times, the most I could see is four, and then you have to expand the areas around each portal out. Each portal would have to be in an NPC established area so no one could gain control of it. Any more would be excessive. I can understand not wanting to go through 3 to 4 hours of travel to get across the River Kingdoms but more then four would really be excessive. And limit teleportation to the hex. I think that'd be a decent mix of convenience and necessity.

Goblin Squad Member

One of the things Ryan has said about PFo is the interaction that will have to happen for mutual sucess. I can easily see teleportation falling under this umbrella. When people reach a sufficient level or skil lrank where teleport becomes a combat tactic, then you're going to have to make friends or work with people that have that ability, or the ability to counter it.
I see nothing wrong with this.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just think regional effects (economy, politics, social, resource availability, etc) are necessary for global conflict (which is our content, being a sandbox...and hence good)...global effects diminish global conflict (except where arbitrarily enforced as with faction systems). So anything that increases regional development as opposed to global development is a good thing; anything that decreases this is bad. Easy and fast travel definitely supports the latter (specially instant travel).

I have no problem with people making or having friends/playmates/guildies/whatever all over the map, nor do I have any desire that they not be able to enjoy each other. I do not witsh to limit this for anyone. But, imo, the effect of fast travel is a decrease in regional development in favour of global....imo, bad for the whole community and outweighs the need to allow the few to make global housecalls to all their friends spread across the map in the 30 minutes a week they can play.

Those who want to play together should do so...get together (even if in different guilds or communities) and develop a shared region.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In games like WoW there are central cities that everyone goes to and travels from daily. For example, if you're Alliance you'd be in Stormwind, and people go to and from there many times per day all the way out to the higher content.

In PFO there will be player settlements farther out in the wild. People will create settlements near content, and players won't have a need to travel across the world multiple times per day. You will have things to do while you are traveling or progressing out into the wild, you could be ambushed by bandits or other encounters. It will not be boring.

Also if you work for a player kingdom enforcing the law, or if you are a bounty hunter (as I previously brought up), how could you track down players who have prices on their head or have broken the law if they can travel across the world instantly. That sort of screws over the track ability. If they know they have broken the law so badly in an area, they just teleport away without having to make their way out of the area naturally, then they're away without any consequences. If they teleport to somewhere where you can't collect the bounty without becoming a criminal yourself without having to legitimately get away, that totally destroys that system the dev's wanted to put in.

If you're forced to move around without the benefit of fast travel, then you will also be forced to think before you act about seriously having to deal with the consequences of your actions. If you could break the law in real life then teleport to a non-extradition country instantly, don't you think more people would do that?

Or you could have areas that are of equal difficulty on completely different sides of the game, they have different types of resources available in these areas. You don't need to take the long trek to travel across the game regularly between the two areas, you could stay in one. However a character who is willing to travel between the areas could sell his wares for more. The difficulty in the travel, and the time needed to transport the goods adds to the value of the resources. Let alone if the player needed to hire guards for his caravan, or purchase maps, or whatever else he had to do to get the resources in the first place. These are the sort of things that create a virtual economy in a sandbox world.

Goblin Squad Member

Criminals don't get fast travel, but in war killing isn't a crime. That's why I stuck to that portion of the argument.

Goblin Squad Member

Obakararuir wrote:
Criminals don't get fast travel, but in war killing isn't a crime. That's why I stuck to that portion of the argument.

Minor correction, people who currently have a criminal flag, cannot fast travel. Considering bounties can be re-upped, Someone may still have bounties on their head, long after their criminal flag has gone.

Goblin Squad Member

Pannath wrote:
"Also if you work for a player kingdom enforcing the law, or if you are a bounty hunter (as I previously brought up), how could you track down players who have prices on their head or have broken the law if they can travel across the world instantly. That sort of screws over the track ability. If they know they have broken the law so badly in an area, they just teleport away without having to make their way out of the area naturally, then they're away without any consequences. If they teleport to somewhere where you can't collect the bounty without becoming a criminal yourself without having to legitimately get away, that totally destroys that system the dev's wanted to put in."

I don't see it totally destroying the system. Might make it a little harder which isn't necessarily a bad thing. But the same argument could be made for any number of abilities. Like hide, sneak, invulnerability, etc. Imo, these things have their place in a game world based on magic. Its just a matter of balancing them well.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Look at the fast travel system in SWG- it's all fixed point to fixed point, on two different networks (one planetary and one interplanetary) and player cities can add points to the planetary network at significant capital and operating expense.

If we shift the fast travel from 'instant and uninterrupted' to 'x times faster and interrupted under specified conditions', then we can retain the idea of ambushes and distance between cities while also keeping fast travel possible. Since all of the legal fast travel sites will be predetermined, the roads which are possible to be built (the legal fast-travel routes) will be able to be described completely.

Goblin Squad Member

Misere wrote:
Pannath wrote:
"Also if you work for a player kingdom enforcing the law, or if you are a bounty hunter (as I previously brought up), how could you track down players who have prices on their head or have broken the law if they can travel across the world instantly. That sort of screws over the track ability. If they know they have broken the law so badly in an area, they just teleport away without having to make their way out of the area naturally, then they're away without any consequences. If they teleport to somewhere where you can't collect the bounty without becoming a criminal yourself without having to legitimately get away, that totally destroys that system the dev's wanted to put in."
I don't see it totally destroying the system. Might make it a little harder which isn't necessarily a bad thing. But the same argument could be made for any number of abilities. Like hide, sneak, invulnerability, etc. Imo, these things have their place in a game world based on magic. Its just a matter of balancing them well.

I'd also like to point out that the ability to log off after getting a price on your head has all the same negative effects he seems to be worrying about. I'd really love to see all of our characters be in-world all the time, even after the player has logged off. That will prove far more effective in making characters accountable than will removing everyone's ability to Teleport - and it does it without punishing honest people.

Goblin Squad Member

But my personal feelings aside, it's also worth pointing out that what Ryan is talking about with Gates can't really be called "instant/fast travel". If the only way to get from the Mosswater area to the Gralton area is via a Gate, then it's silly to call it "fast" travel since there's no way to get there via "slow" travel.

Goblin Squad Member

Logging out doesn't matter, because when you log back in you'll still be stuck in the same area where you broke the law and that you need to get out of. Also if we're taking my point into account with this, even if there person then logs back in and makes their way out of the area that they're a wanted felon inside of, they're still restricted to conventional movement. Since the character in question can't blip across the world, they may stay nearby because of a number of other factors that could be virtual economic centers, or environmental content suitable to their play style and they may not know where to easily locate other such locations. If they could instantly travel around the world, they would be able to more easily find other places that would be suitable for them, that they could use to avoid the consequences of their actions.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
But my personal feelings aside, it's also worth pointing out that what Ryan is talking about with Gates can't really be called "instant/fast travel". If the only way to get from the Mosswater area to the Gralton area is via a Gate, then it's silly to call it "fast" travel since there's no way to get there via "slow" travel.

Agreed there, if a gate is the only way from X to Y, it is no different than if X and Y were beside eachother, it is more or less just a flavor fix to eliminate the issue that comes from say a sweltering desert and a snowy mountain being next to eachother.

As far as the topic of logging off etc... being equally bad, I agree. I also agree that an instant log off anywhere shouldn't work, and it sounds to me like GW thinks similar. A feature of the inn being "you can log off safely", implies that outside of the inn you cannot. Most likely they will do something along the lines of, if you sign out you don't vanish, your character is left standing there for a few minutes, standing there vulnerable, this one wouldn't likely overly punish people when say DCing etc... as if they are in a safe place, then all is well, if they are in a dangerous place with friends, their friends should cover them (unless of course there's a wipe caused by the persons DC, but the rest of the group is going to feel that pain regardless, no reason the person who actually DCed shouldn't share it).

Even in the wilderness on your own, you aren't likely to hit danger in a couple minutes unless you started something.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
I'd also like to point out that the ability to log off after getting a price on your head has all the same negative effects he seems to be worrying about. I'd really love to see all of our characters be in-world all the time, even after the player has logged off. That will prove far more effective in making characters accountable than will removing everyone's ability to Teleport - and it does it without punishing honest people.

Having all of the characters that are ever created remain in the world could make things a little cramped.

To solve the problem of criminals logging off to escape justice - in a high magic world we just need a summoning spell that can be cast within 20m of a criminal's log-off point to drag the character back into the waking world. It's magic, anything is possible. It should be possible for a criminal to get to shelter, but if they can disappear into the ether by logging off, they will. And they'll use an alt to determine when it's safe to return.

Goblin Squad Member

Urman wrote:

To solve the problem of criminals logging off to escape justice - in a high magic world we just need a summoning spell that can be cast within 20m of a criminal's log-off point to drag the character back into the waking world. It's magic, anything is possible. It should be possible for a criminal to get to shelter, but if they can disappear into the ether by logging off, they will. And they'll use an alt to determine when it's safe to return.

I could see that as a valid means, though I'd still think simply a few minutes for a person to dissapear unless they logged out in an inn. Inns themselves could have options for who would be allowed to vanish, people wouldn't tollerate a criminal hiding inn, near a city with low tolerance for criminal behavior.

Goblin Squad Member

Pannath wrote:
Logging out doesn't matter, because when you log back in you'll still be stuck in the same area...

But, the people who were hunting you are no longer hunting you, so it does matter.

Urman wrote:
Having all of the characters that are ever created remain in the world could make things a little cramped.

Inactive characters could be logged out after an hour, a day, a week, a month, three months... Any of those would serve well for the purpose of making the characters remain accountable and reachable by Bounty Hunters.

But this is just a pet idea of mine. Ryan's already stated that they won't be having NPCs in the world since it takes too much resources. That means they're not likely to have PCs in the world either, unless the player is logged in.

Goblin Squad Member

Some expectation setting:

We need to have some form of travel faster than actually moving from place to place at the speed of the fastest mount.

First, it's just common sense - we know that the tolerance for people to manually move their characters from A to B is limited. IF we go past that limit we will fail. Ergo, we need to have a way to reduce the tedium of travel. The goal of the design is for travel to be meaningful as a time sink, but not a reason not to play or to quit. Finding that balance will require testing.

Second, fast travel is a method of load balancing. We gain some control over the server load by being able to block or delay arrivals at hot spots. This may allow us to avoid a server crash, or a situation where people attempt to use massive numbers to degrade the play experience for others as a tactic of greifing. (Many locations may still be able to be reached simply by manually traveling to that point so this is not a pancea, but it is likely that most people attracted to a flashpoint will be far enough away that fast travel is their only real option.)

Third, fast travel creates interesting game play dynamics. A whole host of options open when considering character abilities to enter into, or block, fast travel depending on circumstances. Detecting characters engaged in fast travel and forcing an exit from that mode is also mechanically interesting.

I doubt we'll ever see an MMO that doesn't have some form of distance compression. Such a thing is just as likely as an MMO with a standard permadeath system - i.e. not probable.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
Third, fast travel creates interesting game play dynamics. A whole host of options open when considering character abilities to enter into, or block, fast travel depending on circumstances. Detecting characters engaged in fast travel and forcing an exit from that mode is also mechanically interesting.

This is EXACTLY what I was speaking to. Right on!

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:

Some expectation setting: [-snip-]

Third, fast travel creates interesting game play dynamics. A whole host of options open when considering character abilities to enter into, or block, fast travel depending on circumstances. Detecting characters engaged in fast travel and forcing an exit from that mode is also mechanically interesting.

I doubt we'll ever see an MMO that doesn't have some form of distance compression. Such a thing is just as likely as an MMO with a standard permadeath system - i.e. not probable.

I think if Fast Travel INCLUDES part of the gameplay that is a big difference. Oc, some form of fast travel is necessary.

BUT, I'm wondering if Fast Travel is restricted to roads or some other feature or blocked by another terrain type? I think this might keep some parts of the map "wild" and others more built-up and allow convenience?


I've had spaghetti sauce and pepsi on my mind for the last couple days.

Ryan Dancey wrote:
First, it's just common sense - we know that the tolerance for people to manually move their characters from A to B is limited. IF we go past that limit we will fail. Ergo, we need to have a way to reduce the tedium of travel. The goal of the design is for travel to be meaningful as a time sink, but not a reason not to play or to quit. Finding that balance will require testing.

Perhaps consider allowing people to self-select how meaningful they want travel to be to them, by way of skills. If the teleport spell is limited by skill, people who want it will invest in it and people who don't won't.

Maybe a sweet spot shouldn't be the goal, but rather sweet spots?

Quote:
Detecting characters engaged in fast travel and forcing an exit from that mode is also mechanically interesting.

I wonder if the same could apply to teleportation. Force field traps set up to snag people out of their port or interrupt its casting. Or maybe regular game mechanics would bring this about naturally--bandits would certainly camp out portals just as they would paths of fast travel, seeking to interrupt casters at the origin point or ambush people zoning in to the destintation point.

Maybe the ire toward teleportation isn't so much its existence as it is that people might be able to do it safely.

151 to 200 of 229 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Paizo Licensed Products / Pathfinder Online / Goblinworks Blog: RESPECT: Find Out What It Means to Me! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©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.