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

PaizoCon 2014!

Goblinworks Blog: Begin the Beguine


Pathfinder Online

51 to 100 of 174 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:
The details are not as important as the core of the idea.

Is the core of the idea to start everyone as a generic Archetype without actually having implemented the 11 Archetypes described in Your Pathfinder Online Character?

I would think it would make a lot more sense to implement every Archetype and enough of the Skill Trees to keep everybody busy for 6 months or a year.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Andius wrote:
The details are not as important as the core of the idea.

Is the core of the idea to start everyone as a generic Archetype without actually having implemented the 11 Archetypes described in Your Pathfinder Online Character?

I would think it would make a lot more sense to implement every Archetype and enough of the Skill Trees to keep everybody busy for 6 months or a year.

...6 months worth of skill trees for each archetype???

..................................................

Ryan Dancey wrote:

This is my model:

List of Runescape updates

(for those of you who don't know it, Runescape is the 2nd largest western MMO. It has over 5 million players and over 1 million subscribers)

Why would they do anything six months in advance until the game is well past launch stage, given that?

Goblin Squad Member

None of us know what Ryan's road map looks like.

But having 6 months of Skill Training ready to go at launch means they have 6 months to work on bug fixes, finding out what the community wants next, and building it.

I don't think they're going to want players to be sitting around waiting for a new Skill because there aren't any attractive options for their character.

Goblin Squad Member

Something tells me they can find plenty to occupy your skill training for a couple months. Remember this is not comparable to a normal game release. They are not giving us what most MMOs would consider a finished product. That is the entire point of the first few blocks.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

I hope that there is enough of an outline for me to plan at least six months out.

If they can't have 11 archetypes ready to go when everything else is done, they should delay and eat the extra costs. I could see reducing the in-house playtesting stage to less than ideal if that pipeline needs to catch up; it's the end of that pipeline and is recursive. If, however, it comes to the point where the choice is between skipping the process entirely and slipping release date, the release date needs to slip.

Frankly, having the archetypes and core mechanics worked out is something that needs to be done very early in the development process. I think the decision to include exactly the 11 base archetypes was made after figuring out the very basic concepts of how they would interact.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:

That's not really the point. The point is a single class you work into your archetype from. You can call it peasant, adventurer, person-of-non-specific-background-with-non-specific-objectives, or whatever you want.

The details are not as important as the core of the idea.

Why even try to get them to change their developement plan ? Your idea won't work , each character has 6 basic attributes like strength of 18 ,wisdom of 6 and skill tree progression is faster for higher attribute scores. The skill trees for each archtype will be in place at launch. You are flogging a dead horse here , it ain't gonna run.

Goblin Squad Member

Notmyrealname wrote:
Andius wrote:

That's not really the point. The point is a single class you work into your archetype from. You can call it peasant, adventurer, person-of-non-specific-background-with-non-specific-objectives, or whatever you want.

The details are not as important as the core of the idea.

Why even try to get them to change their developement plan ? Your idea won't work , each character has 6 basic attributes like strength of 18 ,wisdom of 6 and skill tree progression is faster for higher attribute scores. The skill trees for each archtype will be in place at launch. You are flogging a dead horse here , it ain't gonna run.

You're making assumptions. Nowhere has it ever been said attributes will be determined on character creation. There are numerous good reasons to NOT make that the case. In fact I outlined a plan for not doing so for entirely different reasons months ago.

IMO no horse is dead until one of the devs says it's dead. Incase you didn't notice there are some people who agree with me.

Goblin Squad Member

this is from, Your Pathfinder Online Character

posted by Ryan Dancey on Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Leveling Up on the Tabletop

For those of you who have never played the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game or any of its ancestors, a quick description of how characters work in the tabletop game is in order. Your character begins with a set of six ability scores that define your character: Strength, Dexterity, Consititution, Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma.

Character Development in Pathfinder Online

Now that you've got the background you need, let's take a look at what we're currently planning for our game. Your Pathfinder Online character will be described by four primary types of information.
•Attributes: These correspond to the classic six abilities of the tabletop game (although we may rename one or two just for the sake of clarity given the way they'll work in the online game). In Pathfinder Online, these attributes have two aspects: The first is that they determine how long it takes to train a skill that uses that attribute as a base.

Give it a read,https://goblinworks.com/blog/

Goblin Squad Member

Yeah, I have to agree that it is very unlikely that we will be doing any Skill training before we have our Attributes set.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

You will define attributes at character creation. That's Pathfinder.

There may not be 11 "roles" (we're changing the term to avoid confusion with archetypes in the tabletop game) on release. Everything needs to be designed to unfold over time and that's a great place for some design origami.

We're like an Apollo mission in reverse. We'll start with the bare minimum to land in the ocean and add the rest of the rocket as time passes.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
... we're changing the term to avoid confusion with archetypes in the tabletop game...

Good call :)

Ryan Dancey wrote:
There may not be 11 "roles"...

Are you thinking of going the EQ2 route and starting out with Fighter, Rogue, Mage, Cleric and then branching from there? I could see that giving you breathing room and still giving us a clear path to our Capstone without having to switch roles.

Or are you considering something more like: Wizards, but not Sorcerers; Paladins, but not Barbarians; etc.?

Goblin Squad Member

We're honestly still discussing what we can put into that initial target. I don't think we're going to have roles be variants of other roles. So, for example, if we decided that there just aren't the resource available to deliver the "Jester" role on day one, we would not say that Jesters are a "type of X". We'll just say "we're aware people want to play Jesters and we'll implement them as soon as that's appropriate given the community's input on priorities and our own sense of what is possible on what timescale.

Obviously we want to make that timescale "short" for the 11 roles from the core book.

Goblin Squad Member

I'd have assumed that the basic pyramid of low level skills, there will be a lot of overlap anyway, so the question of "role defintion" does not need to be very rigid at all?

Eg it should be clear that a basic "handle animal 1" skill is going to be an outdoorsy skill that no doubt tends towards rangering activities? The peeps who do a bit of "weapons handling 1" (a general pick up a heavy bladed object and use it skill) would probably be useful to anyone who has so far zero magical ability, even though it would no doubt be a start for "Fighter" to access "Competent Halberd 3" skill, later on.

I'm curious if there will be a base level of skills that are pretty much uniform in use between characters eg "search area for food" or something like that?

In that respect I see what Andius is saying by using the 'umbrella term' of "peasant" (iykwim). If you know there are long-term goals the early steps even if basic can be quite fun, at least most mmorpgs I've tried where this stage actually requires the most (absorbing) learning have ended up being the most fun in my experience.

Goblin Squad Member

Here is my question. I believe I heard it said somewhere else that the only way to reach capstone is if you pick an archetype and follow it to the end of it's progression. That mixing in other classes or switching to another class will remove your capstone ability.

So lets say the game releases with:

Fighter, Wizard, Rouge, and Cleric. And you must choose a class on character creation.

If I join at start with the full intention of being, a monk, a paladin, or a bard... am I going to lose out on my capstone ability because I was forced to take one of those four roles?

Goblin Squad Member

There could be exceptions made for the first generation or two of characters. While the skill system makes respecces essentially mute, they could allow an option after the first couple months to anyone who didn't have access to some of the later options.

There would need to be a cut off point however. If they continue to add new classes over the years, older players can either multiclass to take advantage, or create a new character if they want capstone.

Goblin Squad Member

@Andius: I'd assume or speculate, there would be a base level of generic skills.

Eg the phantom example plucked from thin air of "animal handling 1", well it might be "rangery" with respect to roles, but as a basic skill that could be used to go into the woods to find a wild pig and bring it back to a settlement for grazing, selling or butchering of in return for money, that would be a nice skill to have? It depends how granular the skill training trees are intended to be I guess? But it sorta makes sense and makes more sense if food rations are part and parcel of adventuring, with respect to this hypothetical example?

I keep visualising Sierpinski Triangles when thinking about the skill tree. As said, how granular does it need to be? The base of the triangle, could shared or at least level 1 skills for eg? Tbh I don't know the reference to Pathfinder so perhaps that's important.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan, thanks again for taking the time to answer our questions. I have another question in the same vein as the one Andius asked.

Will it be possible to advance some skills as a role-less character? Or perhaps as a character without an "adventuring" role?

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:

So lets say the game releases with:

Fighter, Wizard, Rouge, and Cleric. And you must choose a class on character creation.

If I join at start with the full intention of being, a monk, a paladin, or a bard... am I going to lose out on my capstone ability because I was forced to take one of those four roles?

The way I understand Capstones...

If you start play as a Fighter, and then switch to Paladin before getting your Fighter Capstone, then you should still be able to get your Paladin Capstone, but you won't be able to ever get your Fighter Capstone.

Goblin Squad Member

The Role-linked skills will be specific and unique to the Roles. They might even simply be named after them. Until you can start training those skills you can't start down the path of one of those Roles. There may be other skills that are beneficial to a Role, and perhaps merit badges that have more than one Role skill as alternate pre-requisites.

If you got into the game on Day One, and all we had were Jester characters, and you really wanted to play a Chef, you'd face no penalties to reaching Chef capstone if you started with Jester and switched exclusively to Chef when it came available. But you couldn't dual-track Jester and Chef. You might find some of the merit badges and trained skills you got as a Jester overlapping with the pre-requisites for Chef merit badges, but there's no guarantee.

And of course there will be a wide range of skills that are Role agnostic that you trained in pursuit of an ability related to your character concept, not a Role.

Goblin Squad Member

Well it sounds like if anyone loves character developement they will be quite happy with the mix of skill trees available.Most skills will branch off into something else after you train it I assume. You can be as focused or as spead out as you want to be.

Grand Lodge Goblin Squad Member

I am excited.It does seem that there will be a growing amount of options.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan, if there are only Jesters on Day One and I want to wait until I can play the Chef role, will it be possible for me to train only the role-agnostic skills? Or will I be required to pick Jester as my starting role?

Goblin Squad Member

@Nihimon - I have no idea.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ryan, no worries and thank you very much for taking the time to respond.

Goblin Squad Member

Yes, I think that all of us thank you for respond in a week-end and reply with honesty when you have no idea.

That why you're a great CEO.

Lantern Lodge

Why select roles? Let your skill and badge selections implicitly add role "levels" when the prerequisites are met.

I.E. You pick a combat feat at character generation, and your first badges are a martial weapon badge and an armor badge. The game the goes "Ding! You are now a first level fighter!." (or say you have unlocked the fighter badge and can do X to earn and activate the badge)

Edit: This also makes the most seemless method for adding new skills, badges, and roles. As they simply update and tag the new items for what they require and what requirements they need. You could start out learning various weapon skills and then when they add the fighter role, you log in after patching and suddenly get a "grats for acheiveing the fighter role!" though they might require additional tasks to activat badges once they are unlocked.


i would like to see one class for each race, then add more as time goes on.

for instance:
a dwarf makes an amazing monk and fighter so we will tag that as monk
an elf makes an amazing wizard
a gnome makes an excellent bard or sorcerer, so we will tag bard
a half orc makes an amazing barbarian so tag barbarian

ect.. that way each race will have a class it favors without bing over whellming to the developers.

Lantern Lodge

NO! that is the biggest mistake of modern MMOs. If there is no storyline (sandbox = lack of) or technology related reason to limit player's, then don't.

The big thing about sandbox is player choice, so allow player choice.

There is no reason to limit players that way. There is no reason for race and "class" to have any effect on each other. Despite my hatred of classes, at least they serve to make things easier on players despite the limits they impose. Your suggestion however does not have any benefit, neither for players nor for developers.


I don't think limiting race/class combinations (initially or ever) is a good idea. The developers need to make all said races and all said classes anyway, so it wouldn't save development time. I think it falls into the trap of 'how might it be possible to make the game playable sooner'.

DarkLightHitomi wrote:
Why select roles? Let your skill and badge selections implicitly add role "levels" when the prerequisites are met.

Making that choice may be informative and not restrictive. You can train skills outside your role. Probably choosing roles will just make it easier for players to know what they need to train to unlock badges/level those roles up.

DarkLightHitomi wrote:
If there is no storyline (sandbox = lack of) or technology related reason to limit player's, then don't.

I do agree with you about not arbitrarily limiting player choice. Keep in mind that the plan for PFO is not pure sandbox.

Goblin Squad Member

Hate to jump on the bandwagon here Jupp, but I gotta agree with the above replies. Having played both games that allow for racial advantages to some classes and games that didn't, I prefer the latter. In a game with open world pvp, people will go for every single advantage they can find, especially if it's as easy as choosing a perfect race/class combination. Nothing worse than rolling up a dwarven monk only to find twelve more standing around in the starting area.

I'm not entirely opposed to racial modifiers and abilities, (this is pathfinder after all) but they should be beneficial to multiple classes. Some abilities, like dwarven poison resistance or halfling luck can be class agnostic, benefiting a wizard as much as a fighter.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

What I read is that there will be one or more skill trees which are "monk", and those skill trees, along with possibly some generic skill trees, but no skill trees which are any other "role", will unlock all if the "monk" merit badges.

That might be hard to parse; basically, the role-specific skill trees will let you meet all of the prerequisites for the role-specific merit badges. There may be other ways to meet those prerequisites. For example, 'unarmed fighting' merit badge might be opened by 'monk 1' and 'weapon use: unarmed'. 'monk 1' would also unlock a few other merit badges, taking less total training time than picking all of them up, but taking the monk skill just to learn fist fighting would be a poor use of time.

Goblin Squad Member

Skills training in real time can be a tad difficult to to wrap one's head around at first. One of the biggest complaints from ppl who've tried eve online is the learning curve for how the skill system works is to steep.
I think that's only part true. It's more that the concept is a tad bit alien to the old "kill stuff and grind" till you reach the next lvl style. Even skyrim had a bit of that in the XP for each skill type system.
Looking at eve as an example of how it well work makes it a bit easier.
As I understand it, merit badges with have a similar in game use as eve's certificates. A group of skills relevant to a specific part of a casas/role. Mind you space ships and fantasy charters are vary different things.
But the basic structure, I'd assume, would be the same. So there well be a fair amount of general skills, combat or other wise that would be useable/important to all classes/roles. And some specialized skills for each class/role. At low level, combat classes and spell cater classes might look the same until they start to reach their respective special skills.
I guess with a set up like that you could see 4 (or so) basic roles that diversify into the classeswe all know and love from the same start point. But again, it could be confusing without a good tutorial.
This is my understanding of it anyway...


EVE does have a incredible skill system.
HOWEVER.
It is one of the most daunting skill systems for a new player to come across.
Furthermore, I don't like the idea of a... we're applying levels here, simply to make a point...
a level 20 fighter to be able to use the spells a level 20 wizard can use.

I'm all about the multiclassing and customization, but I think doing things like putting a point in martial fighting should put a negative on spell casting fighting.
That way, a fighter could still be using spells, but not the top tier spells.
That is just a very basic example,and will not stand up to whatever scruteny that will be tossed at it.
I'm sure I read that multiple characters will be supported.
With that in mind, I'd see little problem with putting caps on skills.

Racial bonuses could simply say "raise the cap on this skill by this much"
or
"receive this much less penalty to spell casting skill when raising a martial skill"

Assuming whatever bonuses to attributes received racially aren't good enough.

Goblin Squad Member

Darkren wrote:

EVE does have a incredible skill system.

HOWEVER.
It is one of the most daunting skill systems for a new player to come across.
Furthermore, I don't like the idea of a... we're applying levels here, simply to make a point...
a level 20 fighter to be able to use the spells a level 20 wizard can use.

I think GW has already got a plan for that in general. They aren't going to prevent a 20/20 ftr wizard combination, but it does sound like when in fighter gear, the fighters wizard skills will be lackluster at best. As well as ryan mentioning that swapping between gear will not be a quick hotbar button.

Basically someone can be the ultimate fighter, and wizard, but he will not be great at both of those roles at the same time. This is intended to carry over for all archtypes so likely even things that tend to go together in P&P, won't necessaraly perfectly mix in PFO (I find it unlikely that a character will say be able to deal sneak attack damage, and favored enemy damage with the same weapon etc..)

This allows one character to take and master whatever classes he has time and motivation to do, but he can't steal the thunder of any class other than the one he is equipped to be.

Goblin Squad Member

That works.

Class based restrictions for specialized skills could work as well. Or some kind of penalty system for skills that work against each other.
It's really all up to the guys at GW(our DMs) in the end.

Just speculating on how it might be set up I guess.

(personally, I'm interested in setting if I can make healing potion infused beer with my cleric of Cayden Cailean idea. That be some interesting skill mixing.)


so then basically you dont want this mmo to have any roots to pathfinder other then in name.

hate to break it to you guys, but when you play the table top every class has a race that is favors, does that mean its a bad thing? no it not at all.

races will have stat modifiers, if i correctly understood what they said, and if that is the case all races will favor a class no matter what. whether its "this race is the best at pvp because" or " this race is the best fighter because" its going to happen. unless they strip everything away from races and make them purely asthetic it will happen.

at least by "pairing up" the class and races it allows ALL races to excel at atlease one role. and if you dont care about a +2 to a stat, then why should that stop you from playing that elven barbarian, a very bad race class choice.

the last thing i want, is for this mmo to have no connection to the tabletop game, and the table top game has racial stats. so i would expect this "pathfinder" mmo to also have them.

Goblin Squad Member

Jupp wrote:

so then basically you dont want this mmo to have any roots to pathfinder other then in name.

Last I heard nobody was opposed to the idea of races having +2 to a stat, the opposition is saying they don't want a finite set unavoidable cap. There is a pretty significant difference in both of those things. Having a +2 to str certainly will speed up how fast the race levels as a fighter, which accomplishes all of the goals of matching the tabletop, a rule that says say, dwarves don't get 9th level spells if they are a wizard on the other hand... is nothing like table top.

Now the way stats work in PFO is drastically different than in tabletop. An elven barbarian with say, 12 str, 14 con, will take significantly longer to train vs a 18 str, 16 con dwarf or whatever, but their attacks will be exactly the same if they have the same merit badges.

What people are opposing isn't that racial advantages can/will exist. They are opposing arbitrary walls saying "This race cannot learn this class ability ever, if you want it roll a new character". I am certainly in favor of say after getting say my gnomish bard to level cap, that it will take him a longer time to level up druid as his second role. I strongly oppose the idea of, his druid will have a brick wall where it can only progress to X.

Goblin Squad Member

One of the biggest reasons that EVE's skill system is confusing as hell is that some skills are per-requisites, some skills give bonuses or change the way certain game mechanics work, and some skills do both.

And even worse there are skills that are basically the 2nd and 3rd tier of other skills but they don't have the same names, or do exactly the same thing so its not necessarily obvious to the player when and why you'd train them.

Another reason EVE's skill system is confusing is that there is a very, very confusing combat mechanism in the game when it comes to projectiles, and a galaxy (no pun intended) of skills that can help improve combat effectiveness when firing projectiles, none of which are very clearly named or described, and the core mechanic itself is basically undocumented (except for entries on the EVElopedia wiki, which didn't even exist until 2010). You're constantly feeling like there's something you should have trained or should be training that would have a meaningful effect on your combat effectiveness but it's buried in a welter of options about hulls, weapon modules, ammo, target speeds, target resistances, etc.

A lot of this is honestly a byproduct of continuous iteration, which is what we want to do with Pathfinder Online as well. The trouble EVE has created for itself is that different designers at different times had different strategies on how to implement systems and there was no centralized guiding force that imposed harmony on the implementation. CCP is slowly harmonizing its game in reverse but every time they want to change anything now the first step they have to undergo is tracking down every single thread of impact that a change has on the rest of the system, most of which is undocumented (or worse, has incorrect documentation). Before they can make a change they have to figure out what effects that change will have, and when they change something and an unintended negative consequence appears, their community goes b+##$~~.

And all that is just a part of why people say EVE has a learning "cliff" not a learning curve. Other things like a totally unintuitive and undocumented UI, a method of directing a ship in flight like nothing else in videogaming, an inventory system where the qualities of items do not follow a correlation between "tier" and mechanical improvement, and a toxic community that likes to piss on new players just for laughs are the other parts.

So, lessons learned.

Goblin Squad Member

@Jupp - It's extremely important to understand that in Pathfinder Online your attributes aren't mechanical bonuses. They are throttle settings on the speed that you train skills. And skills don't have mechanical benefits, they are per-requisites for earning achievements which usually but not always will give your character a mechanical advantage.

A character with a high Strength in Pathfinder Online does not get a mechanical advantage to hitting things or inflicting damage or encumbrance. That character will train skills that are linked to Strength more quickly than a character with a lower Strength attribute.

In turn, that means the high Strength character will qualify to earn certain merit badges that relate to things strong characters do, and as those merit badges are earned, the character will gain abilities which provide bonuses to things related to using Strength.

On creation a character with a Strength of 18 and a character with a Strength of 3 are equivalent. But very quickly that STR18 character will likely start earning mechanical advantages that the STR3 character won't, or if it does, will require much more time to earn.

Your character is as much a reflection of what that character has done as what your character's attributes are.

This is a big difference between the online game and the tabletop game.


That sounds like it has ALOT of good potential.

so, say a 3 str char could have every skill a 18 str char does, BUT it would take a year for that 3 str char to have those same skills at the same level end game?

Or will there be skills that you have to have X str to even begin to learn?

That in and of itself could be the limit imposed on multiclassing.

Assuming Attributes are pretty much anchored and hard to change, other than gear bonuses.

I'm not 100% how I feel about Attributes not having a mechnical effect in game.

I would assume that goes for Spell DCs and tactical combat DCs as well, assuming DCs will be in PFO.
I think it's workable, but there is the 20 point arguement...
Meaning, if you got over the d20 range, everything would be either auto fail or auto pass.

And I personally don't like the concept of one character being able to be everything.

Goblin Squad Member

I think it is likely that there will eventually be attribute per-requisites but not in the beginning where everyone needs to have some leeway to figure out how to play the game.

Goblin Squad Member

We're planning on having your attribute affect your resistance when making a save. But the attribute component of that effect will not be dominant.

Goblin Squad Member

Back from extended break from forums (required to suspend excitement for game I can't play yet).

Thanks again for the blog update; looking forward to the upcoming video of the technology demo! Enjoying the updates and all the best on the investor hunt.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
I think it is likely that there will eventually be attribute per-requisites but not in the beginning where everyone needs to have some leeway to figure out how to play the game.

Can I assume this means that we will be able to increase our attributes through gameplay? Will some merit badges increase attributes?

Will it be possible (ignoring the time requirement) for a single character to train every skill, without having a very specific starting attribute set?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Darkren wrote:

That sounds like it has ALOT of good potential.

so, say a 3 str char could have every skill a 18 str char does, BUT it would take a year for that 3 str char to have those same skills at the same level end game?

Right concept, wrong timeframe.

It would take the 20 STR character about 30 months to reach the capstone in a role with strength-linked skills; at a rough order of-magnitude guess the lowest attribute will take at least three times as long to train those skills, so figure the better part of a decade for the weakest characters to learn the top strength-based abilities.

I could be wrong about some of the assertions, but 2 1/2 years to capstone seems like a decision which has been fully discussed and is not likely to change.

Goblin Squad Member

Valkenr wrote:
Can I assume this means that we will be able to increase our attributes through gameplay? Will some merit badges increase attributes?

I would not make that assumption - or it's reverse.

Quote:
Will it be possible (ignoring the time requirement) for a single character to train every skill, without having a very specific starting attribute set?

Unknown.

Lantern Lodge

Personally I see no reason to have the abilities of one role limit the abilities of another. Skyrim demonstrates quite well that magic, crafting, stealth, and swordplay can work together quite well.

I would suggest that "level" be based on total training time, but each level can unlock only one role badge (which still needs the other prerequisites to be met as well). Each role badge grants certain abilities and is a requisite for the higher ranks of that role.

I.E. A 20th level fighter can use her next level increase to unlock the first wizard badge (this would not allow 9th level spells since it's only one badge in wizard, the same way 20ftr/1wiz in PF gets only 1st level spells) Also each level would take longer then the previous thus reaching 20th wizard badge after getting 20 fighter badges would take longer then getting those fighter badges, making there be effectivly a soft cap on power, players still feel like they are improving their skills. This also gives a reference for achieving feats and ability score increases. Also HP would be seperated from badges in roles however, instead tied to con score and feats (allow taking toughness multiple times. and it caps @ +20 HP)

However not all badges are tied to a single role and may not be tied to any role however. Anyone can take the "Simple Weapon Training" badge for example, but you need the "Rank 1 Fighter" badge to take the "Tower Shield Training" badge. And the "Martial Weapon Training" badge is unlock by taking the appropriate feat or having a badge in any martial class.

I would also not limit everything by what outfit is being worn. Some abilities need a certain weapon equipped or a free hand for example (thus a fighter/wizard needs an empty hand to cast a spell which is limiting because that means she isn't holding a shield or a second weapon) but other abilities that do not need anything particular should stay that way. Sure the fighter is casting spells, and losing several to the Spell Failure Chance of her armor. The Mnk/Src doesn't need weapons or armor but can't move well when casting a spell, thus giving an opening for a fighter to exploit.

Even standard action cast time spells would give a fighter 3 seconds to move up and atk, which depending on how far the fighter is, can be done since a simple swing of a sword doesn't really need 3 seconds. This keeps meelee and spells somewhat at balance, tweak cast times a bit for online play and you don't have to worry about it.

Basis for how I would do it anyway (since no would let me remove classes completely)

Goblin Squad Member

I hate to say this, but I'm only just now beginning to feel that this is actually happening. I'm so excited to hear about the progress being made, and can't wait to having a Pathfinder experience with my friends online, and not just around the table.

I have a couple questions/concerns which I'm sure have been addressed in one thread or another, but I thought this might be a good place to inquire regardless.

1. Confirmation yet that we'll have a robust character model creation system. Something more like Guild Wars 2 and less like DDO. Want to see humans with different heights and builds, and in a lot of games you'll see wizards and barbarian types that look the same shaved and naked.

2. In-game voice chat? So much more convenient than using a free third party system. Really loved that feature in DDO, and hating that it's not around in most other MMOs.

Goblin Squad Member

DarkLightHitomi wrote:

Personally I see no reason to have the abilities of one role limit the abilities of another. Skyrim demonstrates quite well that magic, crafting, stealth, and swordplay can work together quite well.

I would suggest that "level" be based on total training time, but each level can unlock only one role badge (which still needs the other prerequisites to be met as well). Each role badge grants certain abilities and is a requisite for the higher ranks of that role.

I.E. A 20th level fighter can use her next level increase to unlock the first wizard badge (this would not allow 9th level spells since it's only one badge in wizard, the same way 20ftr/1wiz in PF gets only 1st level spells) Also each level would take longer then the previous thus reaching 20th wizard badge after getting 20 fighter badges would take longer then getting those fighter badges, making there be effectivly a soft cap on power, players still feel like they are improving their skills. This also gives a reference for achieving feats and ability score increases. Also HP would be seperated from badges in roles however, instead tied to con score and feats (allow taking toughness multiple times. and it caps @ +20 HP)

However not all badges are tied to a single role and may not be tied to any role however. Anyone can take the "Simple Weapon Training" badge for example, but you need the "Rank 1 Fighter" badge to take the "Tower Shield Training" badge. And the "Martial Weapon Training" badge is unlock by taking the appropriate feat or having a badge in any martial class.

I would also not limit everything by what outfit is being worn. Some abilities need a certain weapon equipped or a free hand for example (thus a fighter/wizard needs an empty hand to cast a spell which is limiting because that means she isn't holding a shield or a second weapon) but other abilities that do not need anything particular should stay that way. Sure the fighter is casting spells, and losing several to the Spell Failure Chance of her armor. The...

I don't think having multiple roles will diminish a character. It will just take longer to get each role's skills learned than if he had focused on one role first.

Goblin Squad Member

Question about the in game player economy:

Would prices for player made goods (or even player gathered raw materials) inflated over time?
I ask this because I see time between skill increase growing larger over time, therefore playersmay spend more time grinding for money and loots, upping the amount of disposable income quite a bit; so my fear is that asking prices may go up dramatically, even for low level goods.

It's not really something that can be easily regulated by GW, but I see out as a possibility, and it could discourage new players later into the release of the game.

51 to 100 of 174 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Paizo Licensed Products / Pathfinder Online / Goblinworks Blog: Begin the Beguine 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.