Goblinworks Blog: Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves


Pathfinder Online

1 to 50 of 322 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Digital Products Assistant

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Discussion thread for new blog entry Goblinworks Blog: Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves

Goblin Squad Member

I think I got this one. =)

Goblin Squad Member

Quote:
Season's freetings to all...

Is that a joke that I'm not getting? Or a typo?

Fantastic blog! I love the threading and the 6-second timer, and especially that the Death Curse can only be "claimed" by trusted agents.

Goblin Squad Member

+78 Pharasma love!
+10 Encumberance!

The "threading" concept peeks my curiosity a bit. I'm worried it might be complicated.

The Death Curse thing sounds hardcore! I kinda like it as an anti-ganker tool.

I wonder about getting the "thief" flag for looting someone elses husk. Will rogues have some type of ability to avoid or minimize that?

Goblin Squad Member

Quote:
Season's freetings to all...

I vote for "Season's free things to all!" (Xmas gifts? or more KS bonus goodness?)

I rather hope rogues have ways to get the 'thief' flag without having to kill their target...

Thread system is very very interesting. Would it be possible for crafters to make gear require less threads?

Goblin Squad Member

I like the threads.

Goblin Squad Member

Can bags like Bags of Holding/Handy Haversacks/Backpacks/etc. be looted as well?

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

Awesome Blog. I like the Threads system. Means I can suit up in worst gear if I want to protect something very valuable. Might also help with Balencing since the guy sporting all High-end gear becomes a really big target.

Goblin Squad Member

I really like the direction you went with the 'threading' system! Helps new-moderately experienced players mitigate the costs of losing in PvP combat; something that we sorely needed.

I like that some equipment slots can be used for other purposes, depending on what a character plans on doing (like your cloak vs. backpack container example).

I'm also glad you brought more attention to death-curses and clarified how damaging they will be.

One question immediately came to mind:

Goblinworks Blog wrote:
When a player is killed by another player, the killer (and his group if he is in one) has looting rights to that player's husk; if anyone else loots it, they get the Thief tag and become a more desirable PvP target.

Does this mean that you will get the thief tag even if you loot a consensual enemy combatant (like from a declared war)?

Wondering how the 'thief' tag makes you a more desirable target for PvP is killing me already...

Thanks!

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

While the threading system seems to have been primarily designed as a way to allow a player to retain some, but not all, of their gear it ALSO seems like it may replace the level requirements on items prevalent in many other MMORPGs. That would be a VERY welcome change IMO. If you manage to acquire a bit of loot well above your level you ought to be able to enjoy it. Most games don't allow that because they want to avoid guilds giving end game gear to brand new characters. Threading might allow the brand new character to receive (and use) high level gear... but they wouldn't be able to hold on to it if they died.

If the threading system were extended to pick-pocketing or other forms of theft (as randomwalker alluded to... other ways to get the 'thief' flag), such that you could only steal non-threaded items, then the low level character decked out in high level gear becomes even less likely. Might have something similar to protect some items stored in personal homes/chests, but not all... that is, the structure has a 'thread level' to determine items which can't be stolen similar to the way it works with characters. So a thief might pick the lock and break in to your place, but only be able to make off with your non-threaded possessions. Better structure = higher thread level.

Possibly a complicated system to balance, but a lot of potential there.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

ScoutmasterChip wrote:

I wonder about getting the "thief" flag for looting someone elses husk. Will rogues have some type of ability to avoid or minimize that?

Why would they? The goal is to provide a disincentive to looting people's husks, especially if you weren't the one that killed them.

Goblin Squad Member

I just wonder if the thief tag will have a mecanical effet...

I don't think so. The thief should have a time limit. It will be very boring if you being attack, kill the bandit and loot the chaotic evil. Three year later you always the thief tag.

I understand that a lawful player will not loot. (it will be very difficult to be lawful. I like it!)

Does some items won't be threadable? Like components? Because I imagine that the kill teleport will be very interesting.

Goblin Squad Member

Is it planned to have a "retrieve all" button when looting corpses in general. If so will that mechanic be intelligent enough to claim as many items from your kill up to just below your encumbrance allowance or will it just pop a message saying that there is too much to pick up, thus you have to drag/drop loot.

Additionally will their be varying levels of encumbrance that slow your run/walk speed in relation to how encumbered you are? Will encumbrance affect melee combat? Crafting? Casting?

Goblin Squad Member

Interesting approach. I like how you are taking an issue, and creating a new dynamic for a variety of interactions.

Goblin Squad Member

Just a little nuance I noticed: Player A kills Player B, and as a result both Player A and Player B have looting rights to Player B's corpse. Player A's group (if he is in one) also have looting rights. But I read nothing about Player B's group having any looting rights. In fact the scenario laid out there is that Player B's group will be expected to guard his husk until he can make his way back and loot it himself.

So within the limits that have been painted of that scenario, a group who is attacked in PvP and witnesses the tragic death of a trusted friend will be labelled and branded as thieves if they take the thoughtful action of recovering his stuff for him.

Curious.

Dark Archive Goblin Squad Member

V'rel Vusoryn wrote:
Is it planned to have a "retrieve all" button when looting corpses in general. If so will that mechanic be intelligent enough to claim as many items from your kill up to just below your encumbrance allowance or will it just pop a message saying that there is too much to pick up, thus you have to drag/drop loot.

I hope this is only available for the owner of the corpse/husk and not for the looters of said corpse. That means just click and loot. Let the owner be able to loot everything (or have it the same for all) but having a loot all button for the looter, no please!

Overall, this is an interesting thread, this should keep some worries away from those afraid of losing gear in PvP/PvE.

Goblin Squad Member

Psyblade wrote:
V'rel Vusoryn wrote:
Is it planned to have a "retrieve all" button when looting corpses in general. If so will that mechanic be intelligent enough to claim as many items from your kill up to just below your encumbrance allowance or will it just pop a message saying that there is too much to pick up, thus you have to drag/drop loot.

I hope this is only available for the owner of the corpse/husk and not for the looters of said corpse. That means just click and loot. Let the owner be able to loot everything (or have it the same for all) but having a loot all button for the looter, no please!

Overall, this is an interesting thread, this should keep some worries away from those afraid of losing gear in PvP/PvE.

I don't know that I have a real strong opinion either way. I had no issue, once I got my "technique" down, of looting others in Ultima Online where you had to drag/drop anything you wanted. Reagents were a pain in the rear, though, and people learned to bury their most prized items under stacks of junk which made it interesting. The packs were free placement, not neat little slots like modern MMOs (which I think I like better.

It doesn't seem like, based on the encumbrance bit, that a given player will be able to full loot non-threaded items from much more than one or two near full encumbered persons. Course that is a guesstimate and will have to wait and see real numbers. But if that were true I don't think I'd mind a "retrieve all" button. After all they still have to wait 6 seconds before they can start looting anyway.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Blaeringr wrote:

Just a little nuance I noticed: Player A kills Player B, and as a result both Player A and Player B have looting rights to Player B's corpse. Player A's group (if he is in one) also have looting rights. But I read nothing about Player B's group having any looting rights. In fact the scenario laid out there is that Player B's group will be expected to guard his husk until he can make his way back and loot it himself.

So within the limits that have been painted of that scenario, a group who is attacked in PvP and witnesses the tragic death of a trusted friend will be labelled and branded as thieves if they take the thoughtful action of recovering his stuff for him.

Curious.

What makes you think that 'looting rights' exist? Player A's group is already flagged as murderers, so being murder/thieves isn't a big penalty for them.

Scarab Sages Goblinworks Executive Founder

I would say if there were a loot all button it should be a timed thing like 2 sec per item being looted so again, it could be interrupted.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
Blaeringr wrote:

Just a little nuance I noticed: Player A kills Player B, and as a result both Player A and Player B have looting rights to Player B's corpse. Player A's group (if he is in one) also have looting rights. But I read nothing about Player B's group having any looting rights. In fact the scenario laid out there is that Player B's group will be expected to guard his husk until he can make his way back and loot it himself.

So within the limits that have been painted of that scenario, a group who is attacked in PvP and witnesses the tragic death of a trusted friend will be labelled and branded as thieves if they take the thoughtful action of recovering his stuff for him.

Curious.

What makes you think that 'looting rights' exist? Player A's group is already flagged as murderers, so being murder/thieves isn't a big penalty for them.

What makes you think it was a murder?

You do realize that for it to be murder it has to be a kill by the aggressors inside lawful territory, outside of a declared war, don't you?

Goblin Squad Member

Blaeringr wrote:
You do realize that for it to be murder it has to be a kill by the aggressors inside lawful territory, outside of a declared war, don't you?

Didn't we already clear this up?

Does killing another player in the wilderness give me the Criminal Flag?.

The Alignment and Reputation shifts for killing someone outside of declared wars, etc. happen whether you're in "lawful territory" or in the wilderness.

Grand Lodge Goblin Squad Member

Blaeringr wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Blaeringr wrote:

Just a little nuance I noticed: Player A kills Player B, and as a result both Player A and Player B have looting rights to Player B's corpse. Player A's group (if he is in one) also have looting rights. But I read nothing about Player B's group having any looting rights. In fact the scenario laid out there is that Player B's group will be expected to guard his husk until he can make his way back and loot it himself.

So within the limits that have been painted of that scenario, a group who is attacked in PvP and witnesses the tragic death of a trusted friend will be labelled and branded as thieves if they take the thoughtful action of recovering his stuff for him.

Curious.

What makes you think that 'looting rights' exist? Player A's group is already flagged as murderers, so being murder/thieves isn't a big penalty for them.

What makes you think it was a murder?

You do realize that for it to be murder it has to be a kill by the aggressors inside lawful territory, outside of a declared war, don't you?

Looting rights are mentioned multiple times in the blog post, with the suggested difference between having the 'right' to loot the corpse or not being whether you are marked as a thief or whether you, ah...earned the right to loot the corpse through killing the player. To the victor go the spoils, right?

One important thing to note is they didn't specify what exactly being tagged as a thief does, but it does suggest that killing a player and looting their husk does not tag you as a thief.

Goblin Squad Member

@Nihimon We weren't talking about alignment shift. And that's only relevant if you're making an assumption that Player A and his party weren't defending themselves.

Goblin Squad Member

I believe I effectively quoted and highlighted the misconception I was trying to correct.

Grand Lodge Goblin Squad Member

I wonder if the Thief tag would have a similar effect to the Death Curse, but to a lesser extent maybe? Reduced Threads would make you a better target.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
I believe I effectively quoted and highlighted the misconception I was trying to correct.

The part you highlighted says nothing about avoiding an alignment shift, so what did you correct? Brute and I were discussing the criminal flag, not alignment or reputation.

Maybe it will be more clear if I quote with higlights:

Blaeringr wrote:

What makes you think it was a murder?

You do realize that for it to be murder it has to be a kill by the aggressors inside lawful territory, outside of a declared war, don't you?

You can also reference that same thread you just linked for a quote I posted from the blogs about the definition of 'murder' in PFO.

You can also reference this thread for a review of the first time you and I had this conversation.

Paizo Employee Chief Technical Officer

Nihimon wrote:
Quote:
Season's freetings to all...
Is that a joke that I'm not getting? Or a typo?

Typo on my part. Fixing now. Thanks fery much!

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Blaeringr wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
I believe I effectively quoted and highlighted the misconception I was trying to correct.

The part you highlighted says nothing about avoiding an alignment shift, so what did you correct? Brute and I were discussing the criminal flag, not alignment or reputation.

Maybe it will be more clear if I quote with higlights:

Blaeringr wrote:

What makes you think it was a murder?

You do realize that for it to be murder it has to be a kill by the aggressors inside lawful territory, outside of a declared war, don't you?

You can also reference that same thread you just linked for a quote I posted from the blogs about the definition of 'murder' in PFO.

You can also reference this thread for a review of the first time you and I had this conversation.

I made an assumption that wasn't clear from the scenario.

What do you mean by 'looting rights'?

Goblin Squad Member

Rights to loot without being tagged a thief. Same thing the blog meant by looting rights.

The assumption you made ruled out the majority of scenarios to focus on the least likely, without any context to lead you there, and context (from the blog and thread so far) to lead elsewhere.


DeciusBrutus wrote:
ScoutmasterChip wrote:

I wonder about getting the "thief" flag for looting someone elses husk. Will rogues have some type of ability to avoid or minimize that?

Why would they? The goal is to provide a disincentive to looting people's husks, especially if you weren't the one that killed them.

If that is the case, then remove the whole losing of gear when you die in pvp sense pvp is being forced on you.

Goblin Squad Member

Gayel Nord wrote:
Blaeringr wrote:
Rights to loot without being tagged a thief. Same thing the blog meant by looting rights.
I was thinking that if you loot, you are a thief automaticaly. (make sense).

The blog says otherwise, not to mention my post which he quoted was discussing that same point from the blogs.

Quote:
When a player is killed by another player, the killer (and his group if he is in one) has looting rights to that player's husk; if anyone else loots it, they get the Thief tag and become a more desirable PvP target.


What do you mean by 'looting rights'?

taken straight from the blog entry: "When a player is killed by another player, the killer (and his group if he is in one) has looting rights to that player's husk; if anyone else loots it, they get the Thief tag and become a more desirable PvP target." that is what he meant by looting rights.

Really looking like PFO is going to support gank fest pvp more and cooperative PFRPG style game play against monsters less. Thinking i should cancel my kickstarter pledge. liking the idea of this MMO less and less now.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darsch wrote:


What do you mean by 'looting rights'?

taken straight from the blog entry: "When a player is killed by another player, the killer (and his group if he is in one) has looting rights to that player's husk; if anyone else loots it, they get the Thief tag and become a more desirable PvP target." that is what he meant by looting rights.

Really looking like PFO is going to support gank fest pvp more and cooperative PFRPG style game play against monsters less. Thinking i should cancel my kickstarter pledge. liking the idea of this MMO less and less now.

This idea of player looting was expressed very early on in this project.

As has been the idea of meaningful player alignments, a more intelligent bounty system, and other methods of controlling random ganking.

This game will present some risk but the risks will be controlled. You might enjoy this game even if you disliked Ultima and Darkfall.

I encourage you to really read up on thier plan before you withdraw. But GoblinWorks won't be backing down on thier vision, and there are just as many of us who would withdraw if they did.

Threading is a far more gentle system than I would advocate and it's about as gentle of a system as I'm willing to call a good compromise.

Goblin Squad Member

I don't see how you're drawing that conclusion, Darsch. With all the alignment/reputation issues, and the addition of being a PK opening you up to the death curse that makes you more lootable, the life of a ganker is only getting harder. Instead of saying "no, never" they're saying "go for it and you'll wish you hadn't".

Goblin Squad Member

Blaeringr wrote:

So within the limits that have been painted of that scenario, a group who is attacked in PvP and witnesses the tragic death of a trusted friend will be labelled and branded as thieves if they take the thoughtful action of recovering his stuff for him.

Curious.

The blog didn't say it explicitly, but it seemed like the consequence for your teammates looting your corpse wasn't that they would be branded thieves, but it did explicitly say instead that there would be some amount of permanent item loss: anyone looting your corpse gets a random assortment of items from it (equipment and threaded items exempt), the rest are destroyed unless you pick it up yourself. Hence the game of King of the Hill your friends are playing while you hustle back; they just don't want to destroy some of your items.

It is mentioned here in the To Live or Die blog from earlier:

Ryan Dancey wrote:

However, until you return to your husk, you are in danger of losing the rest of your inventory. If you get to your husk before anyone else, you'll be able to get all your stuff back. However, if another player finds your husk before you do, they'll be able to loot it. They won't recover everything that you had in your inventory—just a random selection—but the rest of your inventory will be destroyed and removed from the game. If you die surrounded by allies, they can't just pick up all of your equipment for you, as doing so would cause some of it to be removed from the game, but your allies could attempt to defend your husk until you return to it, so that you lose nothing but travel time.

Sounds like there are three potential consequences to the action sequence of killing and looting a corpse: reputation loss, criminal flagging, and item loss.

Reputation loss comes from the killing act under certain circumstances. This is getting into the 'unlawful' or 'murder' aspect of killing when you aren't just following a bounty. Does rep loss come from looting a corpse you have no claim to as well?

Criminal flagging can come from looting a corpse you don't have 'rights' to; meaning you didn't kill the target yourself and don't get to enjoy the spoils of victory. If you were the killer, you don't get a flag for looting, but I imagine if it was an 'unlawful' murder you've got other flags to worry about.

Permanent item loss as a result of looting hasn't been brought up by anyone on this thread yet and it seems to be the main cause for needing your friends protect your husk since the only person who can loot your corpse without causing some amount of permanent item loss is you.

I'm not sure how I feel about this random selection looting system. Let your friends grab your stuff, or else make there be item loss when you pick it up yourself as well; I'm not sure I understand the function of the double standard except to put your friends out and hear them sigh over teamspeak even louder when someone goes down. I'm exaggerating, but the consequences for not reaching your body in time seem a little too arbitrary and inorganic.

Goblin Squad Member

Blaeringr wrote:
Quote:
When a player is killed by another player, the killer (and his group if he is in one) has looting rights to that player's husk; if anyone else loots it, they get the Thief tag and become a more desirable PvP target.

I just read this, Blaeringr. Seems to indicate you might have been right and friends looting for you will get tagged. The permanent item loss still stands though.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think there should be a sort of friendly loot option you can use to send someone's gear back to them. I know I like to recover people's gear and send it back to them, though it is sometimes a pain to find them, especially if they log off in rage.

I think seeing a message saying "Andius Meuridiar has recovered your gear." Followed by having their gear end up back in their inventory, will be something that will really resonate with the PVE crowd. It may be the difference between them rage-quitting, and finding new friends who will help and protect them while they adjust to the Open World PVP aspect of the game.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If friends cannot recover your gear, there should at least be a body-dragging mechanic, so that you can grab your ally's body and run, or load the bodies of dead caravan guards onto the carts so that they can meet you at your destination to recover their gear.

Then you would have to fight over an ally's body in battle to drag it back across your lines to somewhere safe, just like in the Iliad, which would be awesome.

Silver Crusade Goblin Squad Member

Yeah friends in your group/nation etc being able recover your loot would definitely go a long way towards my enjoyment. Adds value to travelling and working in groups and disincentivizes loot and runs.

Goblin Squad Member

Maybe there could be an option to send loot to someone through a mail system? I mean when you click on a husk, you get a menu of things to do, with 'loot' and 'recover' being on the list of options. If you choose 'recover', a bundle of gear is picked up but you have no access to the stuff in it. It remains as a weight in your inventory which you can only get rid of via sending it to its owner. I guess to keep a scrawny character from being immobilized by recovering the gear of an ally who was carrying a lot, the system would choose the lightest and most expensive stuff, leaving the rest on the husk where another ally could 'recover' it.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

You guys are really digging into the details of the systems GW are presenting to us. :) I for one am already glad that features like Encumbrance are making it back into the genre. Let us just hope that this little feature at least stays in.

That is how sceptical I have become about the whole genre, after seeing how every developer in the last 10 years catered to the common denominator, simplifying mechanics, blanding up their game, just to hit bigger subcribernumbers.

I know GW is telling us that they know they are catering to a niche, but I can't help but think that at some point they may want to attract the "I hate encumbrance" crowd too.........

Off course we are not talking about *just* encumbrance: we are talking about encumbrance that has a reason and is tied into, and important for other game-systems (PvP and looting). This make me a bit more hopefull that they can not easily dismiss a feature like this, unless they are willing to simplify (or remove?) other systems too.

I reallly hope GW will be sticking to their guns. It will be very hard.

Goblin Squad Member

Keovar wrote:
Maybe there could be an option to send loot to someone through a mail system? I mean when you click on a husk, you get a menu of things to do, with 'loot' and 'recover' being on the list of options. If you choose 'recover', a bundle of gear is picked up but you have no access to the stuff in it. It remains as a weight in your inventory which you can only get rid of via sending it to its owner. I guess to keep a scrawny character from being immobilized by recovering the gear of an ally who was carrying a lot, the system would choose the lightest and most expensive stuff, leaving the rest on the husk where another ally could 'recover' it.

Uhg. You just made me realize a catch in my system of automatically sending their stuff back to them. That would interfere with meaningful trade. As would any kind of mail system.

I like the rest of your idea though. You could make it so when you recover someone's gear they get a message with your name on it. And you could have a loot recovery system kind of like a mail system that is localized (So you can only pick it up from the same location where it was dropped off.)

@Goblinworks. The more I think about threading the happier I am with it. I originally was concerned about griefers with nothing but threaded items but I just realized death curses handles that.

Goblin Squad Member

Tyncale wrote:

You guys are really digging into the details of the systems GW are presenting to us. :) I for one am already glad that features like Encumbrance are making it back into the genre. Let us just hope that this little feature at least stays in.

That is how sceptical I have become about the whole genre, after seeing how every developer in the last 10 years catered to the common denominator, simplifying mechanics, blanding up their game, just to hit bigger subcribernumbers.

This was my reaction and I did not realise it: It's another form of making decisions and sticking with them; even some simple games have this and it's imo fun.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:
I originally was concerned about griefers with nothing but threaded items but I just realized death curses handles that.

I had the same insta-reaction "people will use unthreaded gear only if they don't expect pvp", but it probably becomes a question of unthreaded vs naked. If you have just enough threads to bind your uber weapon, then the death curse makes all the difference.

What I wonder now is if I can be a "naked stealth courier" or trader using all my threads on carried valuables and making a run through enemy zones without risking more than my time.
The "naked gatherer" is more tricky since gathering spawns mobs.

Goblin Squad Member

Like the threading for the simple fact that you can not safely carry full set of über-gear as a veteran, you have to choose to either be very strong but when killed a nice pinata, or just quite strong with easy to replace gear in a few slots instead of the best of the best.

This also creates the incentive to pick and match your equipment instead of the mindless "I just wear every piece of my class armor that I have, always".

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:
Keovar wrote:
Maybe there could be an option to send loot to someone through a mail system? I mean when you click on a husk, you get a menu of things to do, with 'loot' and 'recover' being on the list of options. If you choose 'recover', a bundle of gear is picked up but you have no access to the stuff in it. It remains as a weight in your inventory which you can only get rid of via sending it to its owner. I guess to keep a scrawny character from being immobilized by recovering the gear of an ally who was carrying a lot, the system would choose the lightest and most expensive stuff, leaving the rest on the husk where another ally could 'recover' it.

Uhg. You just made me realize a catch in my system of automatically sending their stuff back to them. That would interfere with meaningful trade. As would any kind of mail system.

I like the rest of your idea though. You could make it so when you recover someone's gear they get a message with your name on it. And you could have a loot recovery system kind of like a mail system that is localized (So you can only pick it up from the same location where it was dropped off.)

@Goblinworks. The more I think about threading the happier I am with it. I originally was concerned about griefers with nothing but threaded items but I just realized death curses handles that.

Yeah, I realize the issue that a mail system presents, but how else would we keep 'recover' from being abused as a griefing tool? Say someone 'recovers' your stuff and drops it off somewhere you can't reasonably get to... then what?

Maybe not a mail system that could affect trade goods, but a system specifically for recovering gear... but what's to stop someone from loading up a naked alt and having a buddy kill it, and another buddy 'recover' it?
I was hoping to figure out a way that we could lawfully help someone recover their gear if we found a husk in the wilderness. Can we do that in a way that doesn't create opportunities for abusing the system? I wouldn't want to stand over a random husk for an hour, but that seems to be the only help I could give.

Also, did they mention if one can un-thread an item? If you only get a limited number throughout your career, and you can't release your claim to an item (or if the item becomes irreparably broken) then it seems like they would end up being conserved to the point that they're practically out of the game until you've capstoned a path.

Goblin Squad Member

Kakafika wrote:

One question immediately came to mind:

Goblinworks Blog wrote:
When a player is killed by another player, the killer (and his group if he is in one) has looting rights to that player's husk; if anyone else loots it, they get the Thief tag and become a more desirable PvP target.

Does this mean that you will get the thief tag even if you loot a consensual enemy combatant (like from a declared war)?

Wondering how the 'thief' tag makes you a more desirable target for PvP is killing me already...

Returning to this, I think players should be able to loot husks of characters they are at war with, regardless of whether or not they aided in killing the owner of the husk.

It would be another form of economic warfare. In destroying enemy combatants' husks (and taking a portion of the wealth for themselves), characters not involved in the PvP aspect of warfare can help out.

I imagine battles might have some less-progressed players hiding nearby, waiting for the enemy combatants to be pushed back so they can run out and try to get some gear. Of course, they had better be careful (or keep some combatants around to protect them), as the enemies have respawned and may return at an inopportune moment.

While they wait, they are presumably seeing how battles are fought (and won). That's an easy way to incentivize people to learning more about the warfare PvP of PFO when they otherwise wouldn't.

Allowing this rule would also increase the importance of supply logistics to warfare and increase the effect that war has on speeding the engines of economic activity.

I suppose I could understand if the devs thought that the downsides of this outweighed the benefits. It would be disappointing to kill somebody, move on to kill the rest of the group, and then get back and find that some character not aligned with your settlement but also at war with your enemies snuck in and took your husks. Also, if they felt that putting more costs on individual soldiers during wartime was unwarranted, given the specifics of the economy they develop, I would understand.

Goblin Squad Member

The crows on the sidelines could just carry bows or javelins and 'tag' enemies that way, giving themselves looting rights, but probably not doing enough to attract much attention to themselves as a threat.

Goblin Squad Member

I suppose that's true, Keovar. That might work out just fine, then.

I guess then we have to wonder what constitutes a 'group' in the example on the blog. Is 'group' just a term used to describe all the people that helped kill the target, or is it an actual 'Group' set up in-game.

If it is a 'Group', then which group gets looting rights? The one that makes the killing blow? The one that does the most damage? etc.

1 to 50 of 322 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Goblinworks Blog: Gypsies, Tramps, and Thieves All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.