Goblin Squad Member
|
After reading the newest blogs , i don't feel like this will be pathfinder at all. i understand that" not all things from the table top move to a MMO well". You can only add so many spices to soup be for it becomes chili.
I understand the skill and that's not so bad i guess but the way leveling is described it sounds like the leveling from Elder Scrolls Skyrim with the added bonus of Vanilla WOW; where i have to find a trainer and spend all my gold on training. Leaving PFO being made with the idea of having no "end game" but will have the "end game" of not having to spend all your money on hp and class ability's and finely being able to use my gold on some player goal. i would like maintaining my class to be an after thought. i know what i get as a level 5 rouge in PFRPG, i don't want to save up after killing X things with sneak attack and save up 50gp to be a level 5 rouge in PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Pathfinder is a campaign setting using a slightly modified version of DnD game mechanics. PFO is a MMO that uses that campaign setting, it is just as much Pathfinder as PF:RPG is.
I wouldn't worry about having to constantly focus on leveling, after you blow through the first few badges in a line, they will become exponentially more spaced out. If you set a straight path to the 20th rogue badge, it will take you at least 2.5 years.
A big part of this game will be making a ton of coin, but only spending a small part of it. If you play PFO and constantly empty your bank you will have a bad time. Keeping reserves for training will be part of the game.
CEO
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I understand the skill and that's not so bad i guess but the way leveling is described it sounds like the leveling from Elder Scrolls Skyrim with the added bonus of Vanilla WOW; where i have to find a trainer and spend all my gold on training.
I can tell you that many of my D&D campaigns and Pathfinder campaigns have forced characters to find a trainer and pay them to level up, and also spend time training. This was something that Gary Gygax mentioned in early Dragon magazines. So I don't see why paying for training makes PFO any less "Pathfinder" than just having you miraculously level up in the middle of a dungeon romp.
-Lisa
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
After reading the newest blogs , i don't feel like this will be pathfinder at all. i understand that" not all things from the table top move to a MMO well". You can only add so many spices to soup be for it becomes chili.
I understand the skill and that's not so bad i guess but the way leveling is described it sounds like the leveling from Elder Scrolls Skyrim with the added bonus of Vanilla WOW; where i have to find a trainer and spend all my gold on training. Leaving PFO being made with the idea of having no "end game" but will have the "end game" of not having to spend all your money on hp and class ability's and finely being able to use my gold on some player goal. i would like maintaining my class to be an after thought. i know what i get as a level 5 rouge in PFRPG, i don't want to save up after killing X things with sneak attack and save up 50gp to be a level 5 rouge in PFO.
I can't compare to pathfinder, until I read up on my pdf sent from the kickstarter :).
But the above is very condensed summary, almost a sentiment. So every individual will have their version of this. The way to look at the mmo is indeed: These systems across many many players sharing the same space at the same time. Hence "character development" via skill progression HAS to be complex and deep number of paths that many many different players can take. I think if you want to follow an archetype, that's part of the pact goblin works are making, that it will be "clear" to associate related skills for ease of use??
I personally found Keovar's small summary very succinct:
This is just another case of PFO inverting the causality of the tabletop game.
In PFRPG, you choose a class and that determines what you can train.
In PFO, you choose what to train and that determines what class(s) you can be.
In PFRPG, you choose an alignment, and that tells you how to act.
In PFO, you choose how to act and that determines what alignment you are.
In PFRPG, you choose your stats and that determines what skills you're best at.
In PFO, you choose your skills and that determines what stats you have.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's entirely possible Golarion Online would be mildly more accurate...Well, in the beginning, River Kingdoms Online might be more accurate. After many years, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see map areas added that aren't even on Golarion.
Yup, in lore there are portals to every other world in Golarion's solar system, and Cthulu sends dreams to cultists in Golarion, even though R'yleh is here on Earth.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I understand the skill and that's not so bad i guess but the way leveling is described it sounds like the leveling from Elder Scrolls Skyrim with the added bonus of Vanilla WOW; where i have to find a trainer and spend all my gold on training.I can tell you that many of my D&D campaigns and Pathfinder campaigns have forced characters to find a trainer and pay them to level up, and also spend time training. This was something that Gary Gygax mentioned in early Dragon magazines. So I don't see why paying for training makes PFO any less "Pathfinder" than just having you miraculously level up in the middle of a dungeon romp.
-Lisa
Exactly what I was thinking when I saw the OP's post. Some people have required training, others have hand-waved it, but it has always been a part of DnD (ie. PFRPG). No worries, we are good! =)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's entirely possible Golarion Online would be mildly more accurate...Well, in the beginning, River Kingdoms Online might be more accurate. After many years, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see map areas added that aren't even on Golarion.
Except the Heinous flag would be extremely difficult to have.
Cheliax
Instant Villain for following a chaotic god.
Slavery and Necromancy are fine.
Nidal
Anyone who doesn't worship Zon Instant Heinous flag
Human Sacrifice = A okay...
Rahadom
Paladins Priests Oracles = instant permanent Villain Flag...
Get the picture?
I don't see them expanding to other areas of golarion with the way the game is suppose to be pvp. Expanding to Kyonin, Galt, Brevoy, Numeria ect. Those things are heavily pve since everything is already there. The governments and cities, towns, people. They are all there. Technically the river kingdoms are filled with small kingdoms already. Just the Stolen lands being untaken. I don't see GW doing that. Not with a build your own nation thing. Now they may in fact do something stupid like hey you can invade and expand into Galt! then Taldor! or whatever. Most likely expanding into Iobaria. But I don't believe they would take the time to build a pve environment into all of avistan. Any other locations would be the under dark which would be more of a resource location where people duke it out for whatever resource rather than a pve environment. Same for any Planetary locations.
Now PFO from what I have read from blogs, posts ect, the game mechanics will not be anything like pathfinder. I read some weird story written by ryan dancey about hanging out at a pub/tavern whatever telling stories is what pathfinder really is about. Whatever. The game concept is a nice little pvp ,fantasy eve, minecraft, total war(mind set not actual mechanics) thing with a bunch of pathfinder golarion setting names written over it. You could change the names of the gods and locations and probably noone would recognize it was pathfinder.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It will be Golarion, but not the Pathfinder system. Golarion is Paizo's IP, but the d20 system license allows it to be used in tabletop RPG products, not computer ones.
Also, if anyone directly ported the tabletop rules to a computer game, gameplay would be fast enough for you to be 20th level in a day. In Pathfinder Society (a more standardized campaign ruleset for PFRPG), there are 4-5 encounters in a scenario, and 3 scenarios to a level. Say that's 15 encounters to make one level in 12 hours of gameplay. If a computer were handling all the calculations, and making decisions for each creature, how many encounters do you think you could blaze through in 12 hours?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I understand the skill and that's not so bad i guess but the way leveling is described it sounds like the leveling from Elder Scrolls Skyrim with the added bonus of Vanilla WOW; where i have to find a trainer and spend all my gold on training.I can tell you that many of my D&D campaigns and Pathfinder campaigns have forced characters to find a trainer and pay them to level up, and also spend time training. This was something that Gary Gygax mentioned in early Dragon magazines. So I don't see why paying for training makes PFO any less "Pathfinder" than just having you miraculously level up in the middle of a dungeon romp.
-Lisa
I am humbled that you replied
I see that then is just a DM point then. I never played that way ,I have always forgo XP and had my PC level as a reward after a chapter then had them level out side of the game time so it did not take a way from the role playing. role playing the leveling is just alien to me but it appears I am in the minority. but i still would like to pick a class and level in a class or make a knowing decision to multi-class rather then see(even years down the line) a level 20 fighterbardmonkwizard.(also so not to confuse any one I not talking about the Setting i never played in it. so if there are fly hippos every where that are not suppose to be i would not know )
If I log into PFO and see goofy looking floppy eared purple elves, or cartoonified cows and pandas walking around then I'll agree that it's not Pathfinder. To me the setting, lore and backstory are what makes the realm/world more so then the mechanics of the game, or leveling.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Setting is what the dm give to the game. mechanics do in fact make the game I like pathfinder not because of the setting I use my own I like feats, skills, archetypes, the way magic works, the 18 classes and so on if i did not like the mechanics i would still play 3.5 but i do and i would like PFO to at lest fill the same in the smallest sense. I still backing this I will mostly still play it and get my friends to play it but it will never be "Pathfinder" online with out some of the bare mechanics. I also know what the OGL says will keep a good portion of it a way from that.
Like I said "Will this be Pathfinder at the end of the day?" I have not heard or read anything saying it will be. The art and the setting will be there but not the bones of what makes pathfinder, pathfinder I have been with pathfinder since the first print of its core roles book and will be for some time but this what i was looking for in PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The answer to the question 'Will this be Pathfinder' supposes a shared understanding of what 'Pathfinder' really is.
If 'what pathfinder is' is subjective then we will get about as many answers as people. If the definition of 'what pathfinder is' is specific to the creators then Paizo is present and has final say.
Since PFO is partly in the hands of Paizo then of course PFO will be Pathfinder at the end of the day.
But if 'what Pathfinder is' is up to each individual then almost necessarily the answer will be 'No' for almost everyone except Paizo.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Setting is what the dm give to the game. mechanics do in fact make the game I like pathfinder not because of the setting I use my own I like feats, skills, archetypes, the way magic works, the 18 classes and so on if i did not like the mechanics i would still play 3.5 but i do and i would like PFO to at lest fill the same in the smallest sense. I still backing this I will mostly still play it and get my friends to play it but it will never be "Pathfinder" online with out some of the bare mechanics. I also know what the OGL says will keep a good portion of it a way from that.
Like I said "Will this be Pathfinder at the end of the day?" I have not heard or read anything saying it will be. The art and the setting will be there but not the bones of what makes pathfinder, pathfinder I have been with pathfinder since the first print of its core roles book and will be for some time but this what i was looking for in PFO.
If your question is "Will it be Pathfinder:RPG rules using the d20 OGL?" then the answer is emphatically no. There is only a superficial resemblance between the game mechanics in Pathfinder Online and the mechanics of the game in the core rulebooks. This has been discussed ad nausiem.
If the question is "Will this be Pathfinder at the end of the day?", then the answer is yes. Pathfinder at its core is the setting, and the Pathfinder setting was out long before there was a Pathfinder:RPG. That setting is what makes this game Pathfinder, not the minor changes to 3.5 D&D that is the rule set of the Pathfinder RPG.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Players have certain expectations that come with the use of a well known IP and those expectations are not always the same in each player and they have different tolerances for deviation from those expectations.
Officialy the IP owners (Paizo) get the call on whether it's Pathfinder or not. So there is not much question there.
However, I do think it's reasonable to say that alot of players with no prior knowledge of the game (i.e. haven't been here on the boards for a year) are going to experience a pretty rude shock when they walk into something named "Pathfinder Online" and see what the game actualy is.
That's no disrespect to Lisa, Ryan or anyone else at GW. The simple fact that the "Pathfinder" game that folks are used to playing is really a cooperative, PVE experience played with a small group of friends off exploring dungeons whereas PFO is a heavly PvP focused experience of Kingdom building and economics, etc shared with thousands of players is going to be really tough for many people to wrap thier heads around. There is going to be so much that is different that I do think that some people will have difficulty seeing it as the "Pathfinder" that they know.
I think managing player expectations is going to be criticaly important for Ryan and anyone else involved with marketing or providing public information on the game, as well as folks involved with the New Player Experience. One of the worst things (IMO) a game can do is have players expect one thing walking in and get an entirely different experience when they actualy get there. Even if they might otherwise had found that experience fun, the simple fact of it not being what they expected will cause alot of folks to walk away disapointed.
So I think there is going to be ALOT riding on how the game gets communicated and presented to the players out there who aren't already familiar with it. YMMV.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
stuff
This is the point i was getting at and i agree whole heartily with what you said.
I would hope that some thought has be put in to this as well if PFO and PFRPG have to be starkly different then make that way and with that in mind. I believe GrumpyMel's worst case is already coming in to play I diffidently fell that way. I saw PFO as the Pathfinder that was online and am now getting EVE in Golarion so now I have invested in something I no longer have any connection with other then the money I put in it, as i put i do not play nor have played any thing having to do with Golarion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Doesn't PvP sorta grow out of the player liberty necessary for it to be sandbox?
My sense is that PvP was the sticking point why RP cannot really work well in an MMO. Ryan came along and pointed out that PvP doesn't have to be completely out of control, and could even enhance the RP.
Problem then would have been that PvP is not easy to control, hence all the emphasis on systems designed for it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
huh? wrong thread?
I think Being was responding to Mel's comment.
The simple fact that the "Pathfinder" game that folks are used to playing is really a cooperative, PVE experience played with a small group of friends off exploring dungeons whereas PFO is a heavly PvP focused experience of Kingdom building and economics, etc shared with thousands of players is going to be really tough for many people to wrap thier heads around. There is going to be so much that is different that I do think that some people will have difficulty seeing it as the "Pathfinder" that they know.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
stuffThis is the point i was getting at and i agree whole heartily with what you said.
I would hope that some thought has be put in to this as well if PFO and PFRPG have to be starkly different then make that way and with that in mind. I believe GrumpyMel's worst case is already coming in to play I diffidently fell that way. I saw PFO as the Pathfinder that was online and am now getting EVE in Golarion so now I have invested in something I no longer have any connection with other then the money I put in it, as i put i do not play nor have played any thing having to do with Golarion.
From the very beginning, it has been said that the mechanics will not be the same due to the medium, though the setting will be used.
If PF is only the mechanics, then it will only have a spiritual connection. If PF is more than mechanics, if it is also the setting, then it will feel familiar.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Doesn't PvP sorta grow out of the player liberty necessary for it to be sandbox?
My sense is that PvP was the sticking point why RP cannot really work well in an MMO. Ryan came along and pointed out that PvP doesn't have to be completely out of control, and could even enhance the RP.
Problem then would have been that PvP is not easy to control, hence all the emphasis on systems designed for it.
I don't think PvP is necessary for having a "sandbox". You could have an entirely cooperative play game that was a "sandbox". With the right GM, PnP Pathfinder is essentialy that.
"Sandbox" is simply the expression of player creativity in the game, it doesn't mean that there are no Rules or Direction (e.g. the "box" portion of "sandbox") nor no GM/Dev involvement in the story of the game whatsoever.
What Ryan did say (I believe) was that PvE content took a TON of Developer Resources....and that wasn't going to be possible (even if it were desired, which I'm not sure it ever was) for this project.
I'm not really dissing the Developer choices...just mentioning the type of game-play people typicaly are going to associate with the word "Pathfinder"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I see your point, but I don't think you would get away from PvP where players of many parties are adventuring at liberty in Golarion. PvP would manifest somehow. The question will be whether the rest of us are able to respond adequately.
True, you could disable the ability to attack another player. Would that be a sandbox? You say yes, but I think you are moving away from 'sandbox' when you do that.
Incidentally my earliest memory of an RL sandbox coincided with my first experience with PvP. In preschool another kid didn't want to share his little plastic shovel and discovered that if he threw sand in other kids' eyes he got the whole thing for himself. At least I think he did I couldn't tell: I was getting my eyes washed out.
If you have a sandbox then players are at liberty to do what they wish, given there are consequences.
If you can throw sand in the eyes of the competition you gain advantage. It is going to happen one way or another.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From the very beginning, it has been said that the mechanics will not be the same due to the medium, though the setting will be used.
If PF is only the mechanics, then it will only have a spiritual connection. If PF is more than mechanics, if it is also the setting, then it will feel familiar.
Right but there is a difference between mechanics not being the same do to the medium and lets copy paste the mechanics from this other thing because its easier then tiring to work around the problem with barely a head nod to what PFRPG is.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Right but there is a difference between mechanics not being the same do to the medium and lets copy paste the mechanics from this other thing because its easier then tiring to work around the problem with barely a head nod to what PFRPG is.From the very beginning, it has been said that the mechanics will not be the same due to the medium, though the setting will be used.
If PF is only the mechanics, then it will only have a spiritual connection. If PF is more than mechanics, if it is also the setting, then it will feel familiar.
I concur with you, and I disagree with what you are alluding to with the "copy and paste" comment. But that is neither here nor there.
GW have been explicit from the very beginning. They have been 100% open about the design. Folks can choose to make an educated choice based on that design. The information is readily available (Goblinworks Blogs).
Additionally, as GrumpyMel mentioned above, GW will need to manage the expectations of those who do not choose to educate themselves. But, I'm thinking they are well aware of that, have already been doing it, and plan to continue to do so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I see your point, but I don't think you would get away from PvP where players of many parties are adventuring at liberty in Golarion. PvP would manifest somehow. The question will be whether the rest of us are able to respond adequately.
True, you could disable the ability to attack another player. Would that be a sandbox? You say yes, but I think you are moving away from 'sandbox' when you do that.
Possibly true...although rarely is any game 100 percent liberty...even in PFO, our characters can't travel to Mendev for example.
With Cooperative Play games, it's easy enough to say....yes your character COULD kill another player on your side....but since, BY FAR, you are not the most powerfull being around...that would simply mean that you would inevitably be hunted down and PERMANENTLY imprisoned or killed without chance of resurrection. Since that effectively removes your character from gameplay permanently, we don't really feel it's worth spending Development resources on supporting.
It's a perfectly rationale explanation for why PvP could simply be turned off...even in a sandbox game...depending upon the specific setting of the game.
But then they'd have to throw enough resources into building enough stuff that was fully engaging and fun for players that didn't involve any PvP and actualy figure out a way to make it responsive or dynamic in nature to the players actions...along with probably a pretty heft Live Events staff.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm starting to see the question though.
Take the way skills are evolving. Initially there were to be classes, then that evolved into archetypes and the capstones were replaced with dedications. Now what appears to be happening is we are just getting skills that out commoner, expert, or MBA gets to add to their character.
How could that not be Pathfinder? You've got your impoverished, your so-called middle class, and um.
ah.
The 1%?
Okay so the question is good. However we should all have a grasp of what analysis is and why it is used. Pen and Paper sytems do not map well to an automated system so have to be broken down into consitutent elements. If your analyst is any good he is keeping track of everything he is breaking down so it can be rebuilt in the synthetic phase. But between the time we lost even archetypes and the time they start putting it all together much of it is not going to look much like anything we would recognize. Face it. We aren't going to recognize it as pathfinder until it is being put back into a synthesis that they intend to look very much like pathfinder.
You have to trust your analyst. Now just relax on the couch there and tell me: when did this all begin for you?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Right but there is a difference between mechanics not being the same do to the medium and lets copy paste the mechanics from this other thing because its easier then tiring to work around the problem with barely a head nod to what PFRPG is.From the very beginning, it has been said that the mechanics will not be the same due to the medium, though the setting will be used.
If PF is only the mechanics, then it will only have a spiritual connection. If PF is more than mechanics, if it is also the setting, then it will feel familiar.
I concur with you, and I disagree with what you are alluding to with the "copy and paste" comment. But that is neither here nor there.
GW have been explicit from the very beginning. They have been 100% open about the design. Folks can choose to make an educated choice based on that design. The information is readily available (Goblinworks Blogs).
Additionally, as GrumpyMel mentioned above, GW will need to manage the expectations of those who do not choose to educate themselves. But, I'm thinking they are well aware of that, have already been doing it, and plan to continue to do so.
Agreed!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Did not mean to add venom to the commit.
I have been up to date with every thing they post in there blog and before that. i was really excited about it when they first brought pop up I still fill like more could be done to keep closer to the PFRPG but we don't see that. We see a lot of influence from other MMOs but not from the core game. Yes GrumpyMel is right but there getting to the point where back peddling or badge changing will become necessary.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I understand the skill and that's not so bad i guess but the way leveling is described it sounds like the leveling from Elder Scrolls Skyrim with the added bonus of Vanilla WOW; where i have to find a trainer and spend all my gold on training.I can tell you that many of my D&D campaigns and Pathfinder campaigns have forced characters to find a trainer and pay them to level up, and also spend time training. This was something that Gary Gygax mentioned in early Dragon magazines. So I don't see why paying for training makes PFO any less "Pathfinder" than just having you miraculously level up in the middle of a dungeon romp.
-Lisa
Personally I don't beleive in leveling up during a dungeon romp as well, but rather leveling up after an 8 hour rest.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Some people don't realize that neither Paizo nor GW can simply port PFRPG into an MMO. Paizo created PFRPG via the OGL used by WotC. Some things, therefor are under copyright, and since GW isn't part of the OGL agreement, certain things will have to remain outside of the MMO experience. The result will be Golarion flavored MMO, as Golarion is wholly owned by Paizo. So will this be Pathfinder at the end? Not exactly, but a close approximation. Some things just can't be used, as WotC owns the right to them, not Paizo. So expect some spells to be changed, some feats and skills not to be there or changed, and some creatures to have different names, or not to show up at all. It is just the reality of living in a time when companies sue at the drop of a hate to protect what they claim is their IP. Anyone see what Games Workshop tried a week or two back, claiming they owned the rights to "Space Marine", even though the first use of the term was back in the 1930's?
Simply put, Paizo and GW will put all they can into PfO but have limitations due to the OGL. This is why things are being changed, so as not to have WotC come in and shut the whole thing down. Bear in mind they own competing MMO's: DDO and the upcoming Neverwinter.
@Cronge - My personal opinion on this matter is that I shouldn't level until i have found a person who can train me, and have gotten many of my GM's to agree to this, as they see it as new possibilities to add hooks. A few balked, at least at first, but in PfO, you need a trainer to advance your skills, and I love that. Back in 1980 when I started playing D&D and AD&D this was how things were done, and I am a throwback to the Old School.
I understand the skill and that's not so bad i guess but the way leveling is described it sounds like the leveling from Elder Scrolls Skyrim with the added bonus of Vanilla WOW; where i have to find a trainer and spend all my gold on training.I can tell you that many of my D&D campaigns and Pathfinder campaigns have forced characters to find a trainer and pay them to level up, and also spend time training. This was something that Gary Gygax mentioned in early Dragon magazines. So I don't see why paying for training makes PFO any less "Pathfinder" than just having you miraculously level up in the middle of a dungeon romp.
-Lisa
To continue PFO's close development to many of EvE Online's methodologies, instead of buying the skill books upfront (EvE), you pay them when you get your badge (PFO), as I understand.
One concern with all these badges and trainer requirements is this: will there be a long-term "training queue" available? Sometimes the RL Monster demands extended time away from a keyboard (although not usually for a month at a clip). Will PFO allow an extended training queue for those accounts/characters that have paid for the time?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Mulling this over it seems to me that in the end whether the product looks like Pathfinder is misdirecting the question a bit. It will look like pathfinder if we play it like pathfinder, and not if we don't.
I think the OP is presenting a sentiment. That is purely subjective. The question then is how many players and which type of players tend to share similar sentiments: IE I think that is what you are saying (the players - all/most of them = the game). It's a big part of it, agree.
That is as you say Being: In the table-top I have this EXPERIENCE because of a) b) c)... . In PFO, it looks more like EVE Online EXPERIENCE because
of 1) 2) 3)... .
a cooperative, PVE experience played with a small group of friends off exploring dungeons whereas PFO is a heavly PvP focused experience of Kingdom building and economics, etc shared with thousands of players is going to be really tough for many people to wrap their heads around.
All experiences have a subjective element to them. Objectively how much of that subjective sharing of common elements can we expect to see when PFRPG (tt) -> PFO (mmo) ie Table-Top -> MMORPG?
One eg is from previous excellent IP's such as: Warhammer -> Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning (WAR)the MMORPG. Warhamme-IP > WHFB (fantasy battle), WHRPG (role-playing), (+ more: Hero Quest, Mordheim, Siege, Campaign, novels, Epic-Fantasy-Battles etc)
WAR > MMORPG > Themepark > 2-Factions > 6 Races > PvE (public quests) n PvP (RvR, scenarios).
If you know anything about the mmorpg and warhammer, you can spot the severe limitations of the mmorpg as well as what was successfully transitioned: Amazing character models, realisation of quintessential character skills and classes from the FB system, environments realised of the WH world map in sumptious detail, NNPC present (eg Gotrex), some decent lore in the quests: Namely the VISUAL WORLD.
But out of the above eg Fantasy Battle: NOPE: never felt like an army, never felt like a campaign to conquest of territory, you could never fight over resources or if you were an Orc fight a Dark Elf, public quests were fun but limited variety of these compared to the role-play type of quests a GM can come up with (eg death on the river reik) KEY: Warhammer: "War is everywhere and danger is ever present" was not achieved. THAT EXPERIENCE.
(Too much was homogenised into a themepark system eg splitting pve and pvp because of anti-social incidence vs an Orc creating a Waaagh and destroying another guild's/human race's kingdom.)
=
So with PFO, I think you have to question how the design decisions will be conducive to EXPERIENCES and how those may not be the same as the TT, but at different scales, eg the geopolitics combined with the adventure of RP (In warhammer: WHFRP + FB-Campaign system = in x1 game). So I see real potential in the equivalent of PFO. Ideally the combat of adventurers would be a sort of "mordheim Skirmish rules" :) Meanwhile the WAR system would be similar to "The Epic system" for fantasy battles ie units and castles/fortifications.
Anyway I use a different IP that aims to show what sort of experiences might be captured without getting all the heat and technical difficulties of pathfinder - which I know less about.
To Sum: The biggest concern as with Warhammer: Is a virtual environment that is too homogenous and does not allow different types of player-driven/created stories to keep emerging. Eg an economy that means each settlement has a ton of trade and interaction that has people connecting would be a positive step for eg.
/2 cents.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Pathfinder RPG is a few players and some or even many NPCs controlled by a GM.
Pathfinder MMO is a few players and many other players controlled by themselves.
Well yeah, thats a difference.
But also would "a few players and many very limited and scripted NPCs" be a vast difference - and I say even larger than the former solution.
But if PFO will be Pathfinder is more determined by the Pathfinder fans playing PFO than by this mechanical difference.
The discussions here all have merit. But what we don't see, and can't see until EE begins and perhaps not even until release, are the visual aspects and contextual aspects that serve as a bridge between PFRPG and PFO. Add in the lore, the "known" famous and infamous characters and references that no doubt will be included in the text that the players meet with through interactions with NPCs and by visiting areas within the game.
I'm fairly sure that GW will tailor the NPC starting cities so that a new player, familiar with PF lore will recognize and feel at home with what they encounter when joining the game. The main differences between PFRPG and PFO are predominately things that can't transfer ah la. cut and paste from the PF rulebooks like the turn based combat system, the dynamic encounters players experience wandering through town, even the ability to instantly travel to all points within the game world (which isn't the same as the fast travel system).
Players, being human (for the most part :p), will spot the differences and some will be unable to see past the things that separate the online game from the PnP game. I'm fairly sure, judging from past game sequels and licensed online versions of offline games like D&D online, that once we get into the game, the majority of players will accept the things GW had to alter to put PF into a MMO form as necessary and acceptable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One concern with all these badges and trainer requirements is this: will there be a long-term "training queue" available? Sometimes the RL Monster demands extended time away from a keyboard (although not usually for a month at a clip). Will PFO allow an extended training queue for those accounts/characters that have paid for the time?
They've said, in the "Are You Experienced?" blog, that what'll happen while we're off-line is XP-accumulation, while it'll take in-game actions to use those XP on anything. It sounds, to me, as if they've eliminated the need for queueing and "uh-oh, I'm going to be at a wedding when I finish my latest"-type worry.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If this game wasn't classless but would still use the action bar system to limit abilities it probably wouldn't be much different in my opinion. Hopefully a sandbox game without classes/levels, where characters evolve, mirrors infinite advancement and progression.
As long as feats, skills, spells, etc have same names as in PnP and their function corresponds to that of PnP, I think it will still feel like Pathfinder and to my joy D&D(Anyone heard the song: "D&D, it's dynamite!").
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If this game wasn't classless but would still use the action bar system to limit abilities it probably wouldn't be much different in my opinion. Hopefully a sandbox game without classes/levels, where characters evolve, mirrors infinite advancement and progression.
As long as feats, skills, spells, etc have same names as in PnP and their function corresponds to that of PnP, I think it will still feel like Pathfinder and to my joy D&D(Anyone heard the song: "D&D, it's dynamite!").
Unfortunately I don't think they can have the same names, or not in all cases.
One concern with all these badges and trainer requirements is this: will there be a long-term "training queue" available? Sometimes the RL Monster demands extended time away from a keyboard (although not usually for a month at a clip). Will PFO allow an extended training queue for those accounts/characters that have paid for the time?They've said, in the "Are You Experienced?" blog, that what'll happen while we're off-line is XP-accumulation, while it'll take in-game actions to use those XP on anything. It sounds, to me, as if they've eliminated the need for queueing and "uh-oh, I'm going to be at a wedding when I finish my latest"-type worry.
Not so sure I'm a big fan of this since they're also burning up your XP to thread your stuff along with who knows what else.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not so sure I'm a big fan of this since they're also burning up your XP to thread your stuff along with who knows what else.One concern with all these badges and trainer requirements is this: will there be a long-term "training queue" available? Sometimes the RL Monster demands extended time away from a keyboard (although not usually for a month at a clip). Will PFO allow an extended training queue for those accounts/characters that have paid for the time?They've said, in the "Are You Experienced?" blog, that what'll happen while we're off-line is XP-accumulation, while it'll take in-game actions to use those XP on anything. It sounds, to me, as if they've eliminated the need for queueing and "uh-oh, I'm going to be at a wedding when I finish my latest"-type worry.
I'm pretty sure the intent is that you will use XP to 'skill up' your 'threads' skill, giving you permanent access to more threads. Just like you 'skill up' your hitpoints, giving you a permanent boost to max hitpoints.
I don't think XP will be used for anything except for skilling up your character.