Character customization?


Pathfinder Online

201 to 250 of 383 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Azure_Zero wrote:


I don't think that level of customization will be avaible.

Right now they are only going with;
CORE RACES ONLY,
CORE BASE CLASSES ONLY.

So Unless your willing to pledge over $10K+ or more correct 100K+,
I don't think they'll have that number of races and classes before or at release.

I think the extra options you want will be Micro transactions,
and not the eye patch or sun tan.

That's 7 races and 11 classes.

The 7 races need to be available by launch (preferably beta). Within 24 hours of launch there will be multi page petition threads for Tieflings and Drow. After that expect the clamour to begin for a couple monstrous races (goblins/gnoll) and one of the bizzaros (tengu?). The Snirfveblin and Duergar are pretty popular too.

The core classes are one of the biggest things that make Pathfinder, Pathfinder. It's really not Pathfinder without witches and gunslingers, just DnD.

I want all of this in the game before I want cumulative suntans. This stuff is essential to the Pathfinder brand. Pathfinder is called 3.75 for a reason. It's the free for all of the races and classes that make it 3.75.

Goblin Squad Member

avari3 wrote:
Azure_Zero wrote:


I don't think that level of customization will be avaible.

Right now they are only going with;
CORE RACES ONLY,
CORE BASE CLASSES ONLY.

So Unless your willing to pledge over $10K+ or more correct 100K+,
I don't think they'll have that number of races and classes before or at release.

I think the extra options you want will be Micro transactions,
and not the eye patch or sun tan.

That's 7 races and 11 classes.

The 7 races need to be available by launch (preferably beta). Within 24 hours of launch there will be multi page petition threads for Tieflings and Drow. After that expect the clamour to begin for a couple monstrous races (goblins/gnoll) and one of the bizzaros (tengu?). The Snirfveblin and Duergar are pretty popular too.

The core classes are one of the biggest things that make Pathfinder, Pathfinder. It's really not Pathfinder without witches and gunslingers, just DnD.

I want all of this in the game before I want cumulative suntans. This stuff is essential to the Pathfinder brand. Pathfinder is called 3.75 for a reason. It's the free for all of the races and classes that make it 3.75.

You want the all;

the base classes(11 Core + 8 Advanced + 3 Alts = 22 total)
the ARG races (7 core + 16 featured + 14 uncommon = 37 total)
the PrCs (10 core + 68 other paizo PrCs = 78 PrCs total)

Well guess what, I'm a game Dev Grad, and I've talked with people who were in the game industry.

You can't have it all period.
The triangle of (Features/Content vs Time vs Money) is a hard beast that all game companies know of.
You give to one you take from the others, and time and money are the least flexible ones.
So if you want more content either quality will drop for everything or it'll take more time and or money.

So guess what, everyone will have to live with what is given.
They can petition all they want, but they will have to be patient.

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

The game will expand over time. What makes Pathfinder is more than the races and classes. If you want that Gunslinger it may take some time to get there. So while your waiting maybe you should play a wise archer so you can make an easy switch when the time comes.

I am hoping some prestige classes will make it in eventually but, at the moment I think what they are aiming for is pretty reasonable.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Azure_Zero wrote:
The triangle of (Features/Content vs Time vs Money) is a hard beast that all game companies know of.

It's not just game companies. Any software company, and probably any engineering field at all.

"Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick any two."

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:

"Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick any two."

LOL. That's a good one. I'll be sure to use it.

I expect this game would have to have a really good long run to get to 15 races and all 17 core/base classes with a couple PrC thrown in. Just saying that Pathfinder fans will be constantly asking for more classes/races because that is probably the most defining aspect of the Pathfinder brand.

Gaining scars, sun tans and tattoos over time as a system doesn't get my vote as something I would want the devs to be spending resources on when there is something much more important to Pathfinder that needs tons of work. That's all i'm saying.

Goblin Squad Member

avari3 wrote:
Gaining scars, sun tans and tattoos over time as a system doesn't get my vote as something I would want the devs to be spending resources on when there is something much more important to Pathfinder that needs tons of work. That's all i'm saying.

That sounds right to me, too.

Goblin Squad Member

good fast cheap (quality, time/deadline and expenses) is the holy trinity of the real world, regardless of field. i happen to be in engineering (i build light rail trains for commuters), and it hold here as everywhere else.

otoh, my personal favorite holy trinity (and the one i'm currently wrestling with) is:

beautiful, single, sane.

pick 2.

so far, i seem to gravitate towards the first 2.

Grym

on-topic: i would prefer a greater choice of races, though classes i'm ambivalent about. alchemists and witches seem (with nothing but a passing glance at them) to be sub-archetypes, or... whatchacallum, alt-arch's?
whatever. given what we know about archetypes in PFO, not sure that those classifications are that important, as long as the skill sets they represent are implemented (even gradually, or as expansions, etc.)

race, and appearance, however, are cornerstones of character development. they are the base model to which we apply all other characteristics (including aptitudes, formerly known as attributes, or stats). so the greater variety (and personally within lore, though i do appreciate the melting-pot reference made earlier, especially given our starting locale in the River Kingdoms) the more happy more people will be. this, then, simply boils down to dev time (meaning launch date) and money (which means you should all pitch in more if you want more! especially if you want it 'on time'!)

Grym

Cognates Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Azure_Zero wrote:
The triangle of (Features/Content vs Time vs Money) is a hard beast that all game companies know of.

It's not just game companies. Any software company, and probably any engineering field at all.

"Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick any two."

I was just thinking his description sounded a lot like a version of the "Good, Fast, Cheap. Pick any two." adage. I've only heard it applied to restaurants before, but yeah, I think it would apply to most products.

-------

The Dragon Age appearance customization options were pretty good, but adding a bit more range to available body types would be nice.

I would hope for a high degree of customization, but I hope there are factors to guide people, so 'average' doesn't become an 8-foot tall super buxom/muscular blonde.

There are quite a few human ethnicities in Golarion, most of which map to an ethnic background for Earth. Some ethnicities could be created for the other races if they don't already exist. A suggested look could be provided that's based on the race and stats, with some random variation that isn't too far off the averages. You could choose an ethnicity to adjust where the averages are (so if you want to be tall and have light hair, go Ulfen, since they're essentially Norse). You could reroll the randomizer as much as your patience allows, and then you have a pool of customization points; enough to fix a few details, but not enough to reshape you entirely.

Facial structure and colouration could be handled the same way. If you get a face that mostly fits what you like, but with a nose or chin you don't like, spend customization points to alter it. Same goes for eye and hair colour. The cost to take things too far off what is typical for your ethnicity may be expensive to your customization points.

I think that would encourage more variation without taking away creative options. If you absolutely must have every feature 'just so', you could reroll your build and features as long as it takes to get as close as you can, so it only takes a few customization points to finish off your look, or you could just jump into the game with someone that is unique but still relatively typical for your ethnic background.

-------

Oh, and when it comes to setting colours for eyes, hair, and skin, please give us the RGB numbers for what we're setting. Some games like DDO have really bad 'lighting' in their character creation zone, so one can't be sure what you're getting, and the tiny little squares you click on to set the colours are small enough that someone with poor vision has a hard time telling a lot of them apart.

Goblin Squad Member

Kevin C Jenkins wrote:

...

Oh, and when it comes to setting colours for eyes, hair, and skin, please give us the RGB numbers for what we're setting. Some games like DDO have really bad 'lighting' in their character creation zone, so one can't be sure what you're getting, and the tiny little squares you click on to set the colours are small enough that someone with poor vision has a hard time telling a lot of them apart.

I agree.

Please don't make us use YUV color space,
let us use RGB color space for color edits.

Goblin Squad Member

grymrayne wrote:


beautiful, single, sane.

pick 2.

so far, i seem to gravitate towards the first 2.

Grym

on-topic: i would prefer a greater choice of races, though classes i'm ambivalent about. alchemists and witches seem (with nothing but a passing glance at them) to be sub-archetypes, or... whatchacallum, alt-arch's?
whatever. given what we know about archetypes in PFO, not sure that those classifications are that important, as long as the skill sets they represent are implemented (even gradually, or as expansions, etc.)

race, and appearance, however, are cornerstones of character development. they are the base model to which we apply all other characteristics (including aptitudes, formerly known as attributes, or stats). so the greater variety (and personally within lore, though i do appreciate the melting-pot reference made earlier, especially given our starting locale in the River Kingdoms) the more happy more people will be. this, then, simply boils down to dev time (meaning launch date) and money (which means you should all pitch in more if you want more! especially if you want it 'on time'!)

Grym

LOL. so funny and true on that one.

Yes i also expect the gunslinger, witch, Magus, etc. to be introduced as prestige classes. I think it's the right way to go if your going to introduce them later on for a game that really revolves around playing your main for a very long time.

But the point still stands, it's not really Pathfinder until those archetypes are in the game one way or another so it will be a constant challenge for GW to keep the flow of these options coming as the game goes on.

Goblin Squad Member

avari3 wrote:
Yes i also expect the gunslinger, witch, Magus, etc. to be introduced as prestige classes.

Gunslingers might never make it into PFO. I can't find the quote right now because he didn't use the word "gun" or "gunslinger", but Ryan said some time ago that they weren't appropriate for the River Kingdoms.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd very much like some small-bosomed female options for the races, please. I'm thinking A-cup here; some of us would like thin/wiry characters and that build isn't usually large-breasted. I still grind my teeth over City of Heroes' idea of what moving the chest slider all the way to "small" meant.

Also, adding my vote for the RBG color values. I have less than optimal vision and that would be a help.

Goblin Squad Member

With respect to the RGB sliders, it would be really great in general if there were a fairly easy way to save designs and easily return to previous versions. I remember designing my Paladin in Vanguard and I had the perfect look, and even saved it, but one of Vanguard's many bugs overwrote the save and I was never able to reproduce it.

Goblin Squad Member

Chiassa wrote:
I still grind my teeth over City of Heroes' idea of what moving the chest slider all the way to "small" meant.

If the game is not capable of creating a Keira Knightley or a Cobie Smulders, then I suggest you're doin' it wrong.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
avari3 wrote:
Gaining scars, sun tans and tattoos over time as a system doesn't get my vote as something I would want the devs to be spending resources on when there is something much more important to Pathfinder that needs tons of work. That's all i'm saying.
That sounds right to me, too.

If I get a character that is a scarred up, sunburnt, tatoo covered......

Yeah no. Don't force those choices on people. Especcially tatoos. And I can't see any reason you shouldn't be able to start the game that way if desired.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
avari3 wrote:

So when my str increases my biceps get bigger but when my Int increases I get...thicker spectacles?

I think you guys are talking about something that works in theory MUCH better than it really would in practice. Don't waste the designers' time with such nonsense they need to put like 10-15 customizable races in there and balance 17 classes with multi-class options and prestige classes to boot.

You don't increase your stats, your stats determine the rate of increase. A usage = looks system is already in the pipeline.

Expect the core book, 10 races, 11 classes, then a period of making sure the game is well polished, then adding features that fell behind in priority. Then expect more classes coming in very slowly.

Taking a slider away from the player and giving the control to the game is trivial. You just pick actions that take away and add to that slider.

Lantern Lodge

But I have no desire to look like I act, they did this in Fable, and I hated the glowing blue veins that showed up from being a will user.

Why should I be punished (by being ugly) for playing?

You should never punish a player, unless you don't want them to do it, and thus you should never punish a player for playing their particular style.

If a player is punished for being a caster then that player will likely not enjoy the game and thus spend less time and money on it, if they even continue to play.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DarkLightHitomi wrote:

But I have no desire to look like I act, they did this in Fable, and I hated the glowing blue veins that showed up from being a will user.

Why should I be punished (by being ugly) for playing?

You should never punish a player, unless you don't want them to do it, and thus you should never punish a player for playing their particular style.

If a player is punished for being a caster then that player will likely not enjoy the game and thus spend less time and money on it, if they even continue to play.

You may hate it, others might my like it.

I rather enjoyed seeing the effect of your choices impacting the player in the fable games, and the glowing markings

Lantern Lodge

At the very least they need to publish what actions will do what. In Mabinogi, I got fat from eating a bunch of meat, so I stopped eating meat and ran around a lot and did other things to get skinny but nothing worked. Eventually I figured out that only eating certain foods would make you skinny, and not simply avoiding the fattening foods. You would think starving would shrink you, but they didn't include that.

They could just make it optional, doubt they will, but they could. Simple enough to just lock the values.

Goblin Squad Member

I don't particularly like the tying stats to appearance much either. Everyone will end up looking the same depending on their class. All warrior types will be one size, all mages another, all hybrids another, all one big uninteresting sameness. The weaker people will be easily targeted in a fight just by looking at their size (an expert Mage will still have more strength than a new swordsman) so it'll be easy to pick off all the weaklings in a fight first. That and not everyone who is strong IS the same size. Has anyone read the joe Abercrombie books? "The blade itself" etc? In that there's a great swordsman who is tall and thin, yet he is strong enough to world a large sword. I've forgotten his name... Wirren or something, believes he knows when he will die.

Compare him to a song of Ice and fire's strong belwas. A big obese man. Body type is as important to musculature as strength is. And what will intelligence do? What's the star cap and how does it relate to the balancing of appearance? If I have high str and high agility, will I be the same size as someone with equal str and less agility? Or more? In any game where your stats matter, people need to put a fair chunk into whatever gives you hp. So does that mean all veterans will have a similar appearance?

How will it apply to different races? Will an elf be the same size as a human at the same strength? Will an elf focused on strength be a hulking brute? Are we condemned to a world where everyone looks like he-man after a while?

Goblin Squad Member

For myself, I hope it was never taken that I was arguing that appearance should only be based on stats and in-game actions. I hope they allow us the ability to choose within a logical range...either fundamentally based off our stats and/or modified my our actions/accomplishments.

A human male fighter should be able to be a 5ft 5inch scrawny guy with zero percent body fat and toned muscle...or a 6 foot 7 inch obese guy...the obese guy still has that toned muscle...it is just not visible under the "natural armor". I am simply arguing a STR 18 guy should have well-developed muscles, always. I hope there are also sliders that allow you to customize this with amount of fat, height, thickness, etc...all within lore tolerances, but fully customization. The difference is that a STR 8 character would not have access to a build that was all bulging muscles, and this is irrelevant to whether the STR 18 guy who does have access decided to minimize or hide the appearance of the bulging muscles they have access to.

So, I see the argument that this will make everyone the same, very narrow visioned and inaccurate. There is a multitude of other variables that can be added to the system and still use this consequence based appearance system.

Lantern Lodge

I think change during gameplay is also a problem. I don't want to log in one day and go "Who the heck is she? She isn't the girl I made!"

Not that I believe such would be literally overnight, but hopefully you understand what I mean.

Goblin Squad Member

I don't agree, because that has no real bearing on musculature. A blacksmith might have hulking arms, a fencer, acrobat and sailer might have very strong legs, while only having moderate arm strength, yet stats wise have the same strength, how do you reflect that? There's no reason they couldn't have started from the same body type. So really for me, I just don't think that sort of stats based influence works very well when translated to appearance.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DarkLightHitomi wrote:

I think change during gameplay is also a problem. I don't want to log in one day and go "Who the heck is she? She isn't the girl I made!"

Not that I believe such would be literally overnight, but hopefully you understand what I mean.

I do and I don't. I can understand your desire to have something you have set the way you want it...to stay as you want it. I however must disagree for myself. I want as close to a living breathing character as I can get. I want the world to affect my character as I am able to effect the world. To me, the two go hand in hand...my greatest fear with PfO is limitations in my ability to affect the world. I guess to me it just feels unbalanced to not also have the world shape my character as I am trying to shape the world.

And, likewise, I want to be able to see hints about how others have shaped their in game environment and in turn their environment has shaped them (since this is really one mutual shaping).

I am an artist, I spend a lot of time on deviantART checking out people's ideas of perfection. I would prefer PfO characters tell me about the players choices and behaviours in game then their nubile fantasies or ideal masculinities (not aimed at anyone here, just a common case).

Goblin Squad Member

Jameow wrote:
I don't agree, because that has no real bearing on musculature. A blacksmith might have hulking arms, a fencer, acrobat and sailer might have very strong legs, while only having moderate arm strength, yet stats wise have the same strength, how do you reflect that? There's no reason they couldn't have started from the same body type. So really for me, I just don't think that sort of stats based influence works very well when translated to appearance.

Sure, and this is a simple problem of limited information for simplification of a system...in this case either the PnP game or MMO. We do not keep track of the strength or mass of each muscle in the body...as would be necessary to truly address your concerns. In any case it would be a simplification...but the goal again is to transmit information about your character to the rest of the world via visual clues.

I for one am up for listening to better ideas on how this could be done.

Goblin Squad Member

I understand the appeal, and part of me does like the idea of your decisions affecting your appearance, but in the end those systems are never robust enough to REALLY reflect your decisions. You raised your dexterity because you use a weapon and you can't use it without some, you raised your constitution because dying in one hit is no fun. You raised your intelligence because you need that much mana for that spell. You didn't make decisions, you fulfilled requirements and it made you look a certain way.

What if I'm ginger? I shouldn't tan. What if I'm an albino? Do I have to only play at night to reflect that? I think in the end it's far more limiting than it is reflective of anything.

I liked that in vanguard, at any time you could go back and modify your charcter's appearance, it was great because I was playing an elf who's eyes change colour. I could actually do that.

Goblin Squad Member

For me? I enjoy RPing, even if in action only. If I felt the need to play an albino, yes I would either play at night or protect myself sufficiently. This for me would be the the challenge of playing that role. And I do RP to face challenges that are outside the realm of my mundane world...so that would be my reason for playing. Or maybe I did not understand your question...

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jameow wrote:
I don't agree, because that has no real bearing on musculature. A blacksmith might have hulking arms, a fencer, acrobat and sailer might have very strong legs, while only having moderate arm strength, yet stats wise have the same strength, how do you reflect that? There's no reason they couldn't have started from the same body type. So really for me, I just don't think that sort of stats based influence works very well when translated to appearance.

I want to force players to be honest. I never want to run into a hulk that focuses on dexterous combat. I do not want to play in a Anime MMO. I want to look at a player, and I want everything to make sense. No 12 yr old girls with 200lb swords.

I want players to be allowed to chose a body type that corresponds to their starting body. The starting attributes define the types of bodies you can choose from. If you want a small lean body, you won't be able to have high strength or constitution, If you want a big bulky body you will need to have high strength and constitution.

From there your stats determine how fast you gain the appearance tied to each stat. Strength can be muscle girth, dexterity can be tone, and constitution can be give a 'hardend' look. Each race would see changes in a slightly different way, and in different magnitudes. Such as elves not gaining visible bulk as fast as humans, or to the same end.

Goblin Squad Member

So you would sit inside for a few hours waiting for nightfall just to play your character?

You'd be perfectly happy with "I only have 2hours to play today, but I can't play that character as its not night time"? When this is your usual time slot?

That's all well and good for rp, but to have your character's development hindered on such a way I don't think is at all fun or interesting.

And then we have a basic truth of skill based systems- there is a "most efficient" attribution of stats for particular skill sets, so you end up looking like everyone else who uses that skill set. As for scars, presumably those would come from injuries, so those of us not so fortunate to live near the server will be more scarred, and anyone playing for 3 years will all be about the same maximum peak of scarring and all look the same. They'll all be the same sunburnt hue.

To me it sounds more like a way to make everyone look almost identical, and you might as well do away with customization altogether.

Goblin Squad Member

Jameow wrote:

So you would sit inside for a few hours waiting for nightfall just to play your character?

You'd be perfectly happy with "I only have 2hours to play today, but I can't play that character as its not night time"? When this is your usual time slot?

That's all well and good for rp, but to have your character's development hindered on such a way I don't think is at all fun or interesting.

And then we have a basic truth of skill based systems- there is a "most efficient" attribution of stats for particular skill sets, so you end up looking like everyone else who uses that skill set. As for scars, presumably those would come from injuries, so those of us not so fortunate to live near the server will be more scarred, and anyone playing for 3 years will all be about the same maximum peak of scarring and all look the same. They'll all be the same sunburnt hue.

To me it sounds more like a way to make everyone look almost identical, and you might as well do away with customization altogether.

No, I gave myself two options...the other being protection. I would end up a light armor wearer so I can wear long ropes/hood/goggles, etc. for when I do play during the day. Hence, my character's development was not hindered, the environment helped shape it. Maybe I would choose a profession that relied on stealth so I could do my "work" at night.

As for "most efficient builds"...I enjoy a spreadsheet as much as the next guy, but I am always the one trying to find alternate uses for my class...tell me I have to have a certain build to be effective and I will never utilize that build or anything like it.

And again I must disagree. In current MMOs, even with all the sliders you have two types of characters, mains who all look identical because they are the epitome of beauty/masculinity...and alts which either follow the same template as mains or end up at the other extreme...all of them. So, it seems giving people choices actually ends up in less variation; to me any ways...but we are just tossing out opinions right?

Goblin Squad Member

I think you are right, but often that is because the sliders don't give you much options, they let you look like the hulk, or like the hulk on steroids, with no real options given by those sliders. That's one of the nice things about swg, your character sliders actually meant something.

In second life I have 14 different avatars, all different shapes and sizes, all using the in game sliders, not meshes built externally. Each one is distinct. Yes some of them are quite similar based on my own aesthetic sense, but some are tall and slim, others are short and curvey, or just an average build. When sliders do more than just thickness of your muscle mass you can get quite a diverse selection, but there is the problem, most games opt for sliders that really don't do much.

But I often make a character with a visual concept in mind, even now I have several ideas for skills and appearance and personality of a character. That would be utterly ruined if I can't get the appearance I'm after, as a different one would change the nature of the character. Sure, I can come up with something else, but that's not who I wanted to play.

I also tend to diverge from the most efficient form, because I tend to hybridise or choose odd combinations for an interesting set of abilities (for example, in my head is a tailor who knows his way around a double bladed staff, for quick, light hits and evasion and a touch of sorcery for a few unexpected magical blasts thrown in... Do any of these things exist? I have no idea, I could substitute for some other martial weapon comfortably enough, but if the appearance I have in mind can't be translated into the game, the whole concept falls apart.)

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Interesting. I suppose that highlights a difference between us, I envision a playstyle and everything else including appearance evolves from that based upon needs and eventually story. You envision an appearance (and story?) and evolve everything else including playstyle from that. I guess it is just a difference of tastes.

Goblin Squad Member

Indeed so, I envision a character, as though I were writing one into a book, I know what they look like and I know their personality, the rest comes out of what happens in the game. I know how they'll react to a situation, but I don't know what situation will come about. It does show a difference in play style between us, which is interesting, it would be terribly boring if everyone thought the same way.

Goblin Squad Member

Forencith wrote:
DarkLightHitomi wrote:

I think change during gameplay is also a problem. I don't want to log in one day and go "Who the heck is she? She isn't the girl I made!"

Not that I believe such would be literally overnight, but hopefully you understand what I mean.

I do and I don't. I can understand your desire to have something you have set the way you want it...to stay as you want it. I however must disagree for myself. I want as close to a living breathing character as I can get. I want the world to affect my character as I am able to effect the world. To me, the two go hand in hand...my greatest fear with PFO is limitations in my ability to affect the world. I guess to me it just feels unbalanced to not also have the world shape my character as I am trying to shape the world.

And, likewise, I want to be able to see hints about how others have shaped their in game environment and in turn their environment has shaped them (since this is really one mutual shaping).

I am an artist, I spend a lot of time on deviantART checking out people's ideas of perfection. I would prefer PfO characters tell me about the players choices and behaviours in game then their nubile fantasies or ideal masculinities (not aimed at anyone here, just a common case).

I agree in that the world should have an impact on the character and the player's choices also have an impact.

Goblin Squad Member

Valkenr wrote:
Jameow wrote:
I don't agree, because that has no real bearing on musculature. A blacksmith might have hulking arms, a fencer, acrobat and sailer might have very strong legs, while only having moderate arm strength, yet stats wise have the same strength, how do you reflect that? There's no reason they couldn't have started from the same body type. So really for me, I just don't think that sort of stats based influence works very well when translated to appearance.

I want to force players to be honest. I never want to run into a hulk that focuses on dexterous combat. I do not want to play in a Anime MMO. I want to look at a player, and I want everything to make sense. No 12 yr old girls with 200lb swords.

I want players to be allowed to chose a body type that corresponds to their starting body. The starting attributes define the types of bodies you can choose from. If you want a small lean body, you won't be able to have high strength or constitution, If you want a big bulky body you will need to have high strength and constitution.

From there your stats determine how fast you gain the appearance tied to each stat. Strength can be muscle girth, dexterity can be tone, and constitution can be give a 'hardend' look. Each race would see changes in a slightly different way, and in different magnitudes. Such as elves not gaining visible bulk as fast as humans, or to the same end.

I agree in forcing players to be honest, as it breaks the immersion factor for me when I see a hulking Character with little STR and lots of DEX, or thin Halflings welding medium greatswords.


DarkLightHitomi wrote:

I think change during gameplay is also a problem. I don't want to log in one day and go "Who the heck is she? She isn't the girl I made!"

Not that I believe such would be literally overnight, but hopefully you understand what I mean.

I fall on this side of the spectrum. I'm fine with having different basic builds for different classes (rogues tend to be more slender and nimble; casters tend not to be muscular), but I'd hate to discover that my ranger, say, was suddenly too heavily muscled to realistically draw a bow because I used a sword a few times too often.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If women toons are allowed to have A-cup breast size, I want male toons to have Z-cup belly size.
That's gender equality ;p

Goblin Squad Member

aerendhil wrote:

If women toons are allowed to have A-cup breast size, I want male toons to have Z-cup belly size.

That's gender equality ;p

lol well actually women with A-Cups would be ones more likely to be competent on the battlefield. (I believe amazons actually would cut a breast off to improve their archery abilities), while a male with a Z cup belly, is far more likely to never set foot in a battlefield.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I, like Forencith, have less fear of bodies being identical when they are influenced by environment than when people simply choose the exact specifications, Jameow.

I believe I am correct in stating that what we (those in favor of bodies changing over time) are arguing for is not that all 18str characters have massive muscles, but that a character with 18str not look like Gandhi. That would be unrealistic, after all.

A character that might have 1-10 str could look like Gandhi, a character that has 4-18 str could look like Bruce Lee, and a character from 12-18 str could look like a young Arnold Schwarzenegger.

There is a lot of overlap in there, as you can see. There is a lot of room for people to choose to look however they wish, within reason. Note that I have never played the PnP and so have no clue what the actual numbers mean, I more or less just used those ones as an example of overlap.

Body shape would then also be affected by various other sliders (overall fat content, body proportions, body type, limb size, etc) and other stats.

The point of this idea, if I understand everybody's intention correctly, is to limit the extremes only in extreme cases. Gandhi's body cannot physically support more than 'x' strength. Gandhi may very well still be a melee fighter, and may be quite strong.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Onishi wrote:
while a male with a Z cup belly, is far more likely to never set foot in a battlefield.

He would make one hell of a merchant though.

Goblin Squad Member

And I still say it's an unrealistic expectation because everyone REQUIRES a minimum amount in various stats to have a functional character mechanics wise. So you may as well just not offer a ghandi option, because no one can use anything at that str level. Which is why I say eventually everyone will look the same, all mages will have the same mass, all warriors will have the same mass (depending on body type) all dexxers will have the same mass because you only have so many stats to assign. All it will mean is that if you see a rival faction/alignment and you're inclined to attack them, you'll know which are the newbies and kill them first.

If you start adding scars and suntan, eventually everyone will have them all because EVENTUALLY you'll be exposed to the sun at some point and eventually you'll get hit enough times.

Goblin Squad Member

Jameow wrote:

And I still say it's an unrealistic expectation because everyone REQUIRES a minimum amount in various stats to have a functional character mechanics wise. So you may as well just not offer a ghandi option, because no one can use anything at that str level. Which is why I say eventually everyone will look the same, all mages will have the same mass, all warriors will have the same mass (depending on body type) all dexxers will have the same mass because you only have so many stats to assign. All it will mean is that if you see a rival faction/alignment and you're inclined to attack them, you'll know which are the newbies and kill them first.

If you start adding scars and suntan, eventually everyone will have them all because EVENTUALLY you'll be exposed to the sun at some point and eventually you'll get hit enough times.

I disagree, especially if GW uses something equivalent to the point buy system to choose initial stats, there will always be the min/maxers who are only out to optimize for a single use/class/stat. With the point buy system I use for my PnP, the only way it is reasonably possible for base character (no races) to have an attribute of 18 is to take penalties on other stats...like Raistlin Majere, INT 18/19, STR 8/9, CON 8/9.

I actually think more people would choose class/function based extremes than balanced.

Goblin Squad Member

I suppose it does depend on how it works and how you would split up things like the muscle mass "tiers" if there are enough options for HOW is is distributed, I guess it could work. I HATE it when my character is stuck on some ridiculous body type that doesn't fit what I was going for at all. Just because my sorceror knows how to use a sword doesn't mean he has to be built like a swordsman, but if the cutoff for "muscled like someone who has trained with a longsword all his life build" is at the same point as using a sword becomes viable damage wise, it kinda ruins the effect.

But here's another point- some martial arts systems are not based on strength, but on using your opponents strength and momentum against them- yet the mechanism for damage is strength stat. Granted, such a character probably would be toned, or at least not fat if they were an expert, but they wouldn't need to be very muscular either. She might just be a barmaid in the unsavory part of town who needs to be able to put down an over zealous customer, yet in this system, assuming unarmed, she would look like that woman she just served a drink who carries a great sword on her back and some hefty axes on her belt. Again they could both still be the same initial body type.

So yeah, I can see the advantages, but also I can see plenty of options that wouldn't work because of a mechanics-play style conflict. But as I said, I think in character concepts that include appearance.

Goblin Squad Member

Will stats directly affect those things? I may have misheard most likely, but I thought I saw someone say stats only affect training time for relevant skills.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Stats, abilities, and merit badges are all so conflated now that I've given up on keeping them straight in casual discussions.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Stats, abilities, and merit badges are all so conflated now that I've given up on keeping them straight in casual discussions.

Agreed...I am talking about whatever mechanic (or combination of) has the same basic semantic content as the attributes in the PnP.

Cognates Goblin Squad Member

http://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Human#Ethnicities

Race/ethnicity + stats (Strength, Dexterity, Constitution) would provide the midpoint of a range. A randomizer would roll within that, and afterward you have a number of adjustment points to tweak things.

That ensures that Ulfen humans look relatively tall and pale, while Kelishites are smaller and swarthier. Strong people would look strong, etc.

Then the randomizer keeps everyone from looking the same. You could randomize again as long as your patience allows, perhaps with a 'save' you could revert to if you decided to reroll and couldn't get a look you liked better than your last save. People who don't care about fiddling with details would just go with the first random look.

Then there could be a few points to adjust the sliders, so you could break the above rules a little, but not in every area. Costs to tweak looks could depend on how far out of your ethnic background they are, so a short, skinny or gold-skinned Ulfen is possible, but expensive enough that you couldn't break the norms in all ways.

Goblin Squad Member

I dislike this idea of random, uncontrolled appearance, yes I'm fine with racial traits limiting how far you can go, but how do you apply that to a half elf? Which human and elf races are you going to pick as your racial limits? Or does being a half elf just open it up so you have ten times the customization of a human? Same with half orcs.

But if you're going to play the nature and genetics game, why not apply it to stats too? You don't get to choose how intelligent you are, you can't gain intelligence, what you get is what you get, but you can raise wisdom. Wanted to be a wizard, but not smart enough? Too bad, you don't get to choose irl either. Randomly people could be born with birth defects like a crippled hand or club foot, or randomly throw in blindness and reduce the character's accuracy. Why stop there? Why choose your race or name? Those aren't chosen by you either. You could add permanent death too. You only get one life, after all.

No I'm not serious about them, just trying to demonstrate that to me, that loss of control of my own character's physical attributes is very unappealing. I am the one creating the character, not the pathfinder world. If they wanted to do it as an option like swtor's "show sith corruption" fine, but I'm really not interested in having my character's appearance dictated to me by mechanics.

Cognates Goblin Squad Member

How would you lose control? Pick the ethnicity (or pair of them for human/other mixes) that's closest, reroll a few times to hit close to what you want, then tweak a bit.


Ryan Dancey wrote:

More dextrous people should move more smoothly, make less sound when they move. Their gestures should be more graceful. They might do interesting things while idle like juggling, flipping daggers or using butterfly knives in interesting patterns, or rolling coins across their fingers.

People with good constitutions should have brighter eyes, more bounce in their steps, longer and/or more lustrous hair, straighter backs, etc.

Of course all of this has counter points for lower scores. And some of it could be hidden or suppressed by character abilities.

And much of it might not be possible given the size limitations of the avatars, the animation time required to achieve it, and the rendering capabilities of the engine.

RyanD

I'd really hate to feel like I had to adjust my stats to get my character to look the way I wanted -- rather than build a character to play the way I wanted, and tweak appearance to my whim.

All the people going, "BUT MY IMMERSION" are kinda being busybodies imo. Names I can see because they'll be floating over people's heads (I presume) and it's hard NOT to see them. But why do you care if I want my mage to be built like a refrigerator, or my paladin to be a skinny, flat-chested androgynous lady? Are you really going to be obsessively checking my stats to see if they match my appearance? lol

This is supposed to be fantasy. I can't fathom trying to enforce how others' characters look as long as it's not a truly grotesque creation that looks like it's from another planet entirely, a la Aion.

As for female clothing/armor options which was mentioned in the OP, I always advocate for a variety. I happen to enjoy some of the skimpy options for some of my recurring characters -- but others are very conservative dressers. I notice a lot of caster classes seem to get way cooler options in online games in general, which is kind of a bummer. More diversity for all armor types is good.

Imo the "full plate armor" crowd and the "chainmail bikini" crowd should both be able to find something they want to wear.

201 to 250 of 383 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Character customization? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.