Goblinworks Blog: Evil Minds that Plot Destruction


Pathfinder Online

1 to 50 of 259 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Digital Products Assistant

Discussion thread for new blog entry Goblinworks Blog: Evil Minds that Plot Destruction

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wooo Clicking Refresh paid off xD, And is that a Black Sabbath War Pigs reference ?

Shadow Lodge Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Vereor Nox wrote:
Wooo Clicking Refresh paid off xD, And is that a Black Sabbath War Pigs reference ?

Indeed it is.

I think that this blog really shows that the devs are paying attention to the discussions on this forum, and that they are recognizing our concerns and consider them valid.

I like the mechanics laid out here. Still not so keen on the Settlement restrictions, but at least we still get to determine who gets stabbed for trying to buy some potatoes at our market.

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

Sounds like Atonement might have an obvious in game effect: return you to your core alignment.

I'm curious what alignment specific skills/feats there will be. Smite Evil is mentioned and presumably some cleric powers (channel energy). Perhaps some of the necromancy spells labelled as evil will actually be alignment restricted in terms of whether you will be able to use them instead of just using them periodically and hoping it doesn't make you slip too far towards evil.

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I admit, this bit:

In an early draft of our system we were considering an approach in which you gained chaotic alignment by breaking laws, and the longer you didn't break any laws, the more lawful you became. Needless to say, it would be a nuisance to suddenly discover you had to go find laws to break in order to prove your chaoticness. Instead, we'll just assume you're thinking chaotic thoughts and being chaotic in ways we can't see.

made me giggle.

Goblin Squad Member

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Any reason to try to max out the alignments to 7500 in either direction, apart from creating a buffer (Paladin with 7500 good can kill more "innocents" than one at 5000 before turning evil, evil warlords can... adopt more homeless kittens before turning good?)?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thanks for clarification. I have high opinion about Rich Baker's wisdom (since his Birthright work) - and now I'm reassured about this game. All my worries about alignment are alleviated now :)
Thanks GW! Another good blog!

Goblin Squad Member

Nice blog, thank you. :)

Can we assume all is as already written concerning alignments and settlements, since there was nothing different?

Edit: Will core or active alignment be the measure for settlement/CC citizenship?

Liberty's Edge Goblin Squad Member

I like this blog's approach better than the previously proposed one, and it seems to address many of the concerns I have seen posted. Good work GW!

Goblin Squad Member

While you may deviate from this standard, over time your natural tendencies assert themselves, and you slowly return to this core alignment.

I've always wondered how "the drift" should work. This is a lot better than a slide towards LG for the other half of alignments N->C/E and that half using a "pause".

Characters who spend a lot of time with their active alignment and core alignment out of sync may find it easier to change their core alignment to match the alignment they're actually demonstrating.

I'm wondering if the Active is significantly more reflected than the Core if there could be any further negative side-effects additional to skill slotting? Maybe some sort of flag to the changed Core Alignment "Traitor/Sullied"?

Goblin Squad Member

Great blog! I love that I can train core alignment skills even if my active alignment is out of whack for a bit.

Goblin Squad Member

I'm pretty happy with this.

My only problem is 500 evil points seems a bit low for murder. A fresh good character would have to kill 15 people in cold blood before they'd be considered evil, and any single good act could up that to 16 or more.

I know you have to make allowances for an MMO, but it still seems a bit too forgiving.

Goblin Squad Member

Bravo GW there was alot of discussion on the forums about alignment grinding and the inability to be true neutral and other issues with "Fixed" alignment growth.

Presenting this system where we the player choose the alignment that we passively drift towards is a wonder and elegant solution to this problem.

I understand the need for alignment restricted settlements for residents and citizens of that settlement. But I think there should be the ability to "white List" specific individuals who don't match the alignment of the town, to come into the town freely and use services that they've been white listed and allowed access to.

Lets say for example there is a LG town and a NN druid. The druid wonders in the wilderness nearby with his own little POS in that wilderness block who often travels to the town and provides useful information about Escalations in Wilderness. In return the LG settlement white lists him to come into the town freely and use the services and training. Its a mutually benefit.

In the event that they cancel his white list status then he is treated a s trespasser like all other people that do not fit the 1-step rule.

Shadow Lodge Goblin Squad Member

Unless they are soloing (not likely) they will be participating in killing parties, so they would be getting several "murders" in at once.

@Vereor: The 1-Step rule is for membership, not entrance. Or at least it better be.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

So more info on post-Kickstarter pledges, stretch goals and the return of formal Crowdforging is being postponed until next week?

Goblin Squad Member

Loving how alignment drifts towards the middle of the Core Allignment, rather than the extreme.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that having characters automatically drift towards their Core Alignment is an excellent solution to a lot of problems that have been brought up.

Goblin Squad Member

Nice solution!

Goblin Squad Member

Vancent wrote:

I'm pretty happy with this.

My only problem is 500 evil points seems a bit low for murder. A fresh good character would have to kill 15 people in cold blood before they'd be considered evil, and any single good act could up that to 16 or more.

I know you have to make allowances for an MMO, but it still seems a bit too forgiving.

This is a valid concern but its hard to say whether or not it would be an issue without knowing how slow or steady the passive drift back to good would be. Plus at a rate of say 50 good points per good quest. It could take you 10 "good deeds" to make up for that 1 kill.

Its definitely something that could be concerning that GW should keep an eye on (all alignment drifts for that matter, make sure its not too easy for a LG to be CE using the system maintain a LG status) But this is something that we will have to wait until we see it in action and if it is a concern GW could easily adjust the values.

This base system for the alignments they set forth looks solid and I am very pleased with it.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vereor Nox wrote:
Vancent wrote:

I'm pretty happy with this.

My only problem is 500 evil points seems a bit low for murder. A fresh good character would have to kill 15 people in cold blood before they'd be considered evil, and any single good act could up that to 16 or more.

I know you have to make allowances for an MMO, but it still seems a bit too forgiving.

This is a valid concern but its hard to say whether or not it would be an issue without knowing how slow or steady the passive drift back to good would be. Plus at a rate of say 50 good points per good quest. It could take you 10 "good deeds" to make up for that 1 kill.

Its definitely something that could be concerning that GW should keep an eye on (all alignment drifts for that matter, make sure its not too easy for a LG to be CE using the system maintain a LG status) But this is something that we will have to wait until we see it in action and if it is a concern GW could easily adjust the values.

This base system for the alignments they set forth looks solid and I am very pleased with it.

I hope that it isn't just a flat 500 now. I liked how the alignment of the victim factored into the alignment hit as described in I Shot a Man in Reno Just to Watch Him Die.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Kakafika wrote:
Loving how alignment drifts towards the middle of the Core Allignment, rather than the extreme.

I especially love the fact that everyone doesn't drift toward lawful good by default any more.

Maybe lawful good won't have quite as many advantages as it was earlier projected to have over the other alignments. Certainly, if players can set chaotic good as their core alignment, it makes sense that they should be able to get advanced training without switching to lawful good.

Is the idea that settlement alignment will react to changes in the members' alignments (now their core alignments, I guess) gone?

Goblin Squad Member

@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."


Overall a very encouraging blog. Core alignment is a much better way to handle the issue of alignment drift and training restrictions and ability use being restricted by your actual alignment makes a lot of sense.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Vancent wrote:
@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."

Maybe the exact binary value of the character's active alignment, and the number of points gained or lost for each action, won't be displayed to the player. Add a small random factor to the drift back toward the core alignment, and those kinds of calculations might be more trouble than they're worth for the average player.

Edit: If the exact value is calculated on the server, and only the active alignment name is transmitted to the client, and there's a small random factor to every gain or loss, then ferreting out the gain or loss for each action will be pretty challenging.


Vancent wrote:
@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."

I do agree that having it always be the same flat value for an act would make the system much easier to game.

Goblin Squad Member

@kakafika Ahhhh yes I completely forgot about that, that would definitely help balance the systems. With 500 as a base average, you could potentially only lose say 50 or maybe lose a value as high as 2500 depending on how good the person was. Of course those numbers are made up but yes Great point Kakafika!

Goblin Squad Member

Call me crazy, but this sounds like it may be one of the coolest/best alignment systems I've seen yet.

Goblin Squad Member

Vereor Nox wrote:
@kakafika Ahhhh yes I completely forgot about that, that would definitely help balance the systems. With 500 as a base average, you could potentially only lose say 50 or maybe lose a value as high as 2500 depending on how good the person was. Of course those numbers are made up but yes Great point Kakafika!

Don't forget you also get reputation loss for unsanctioned PKs, but less if the victim has low rep. Also, alignment is "hidden" to other players (no mention of e.g. detect evil spells in the blog though). Thus, killing innocents is not only a matter of alignment but also of reputation. Hopefully this system will avert discrimination of good players playing evil characters.

Goblin Squad Member

Nightdrifter wrote:
I'm curious what alignment specific skills/feats there will be. Smite Evil is mentioned and presumably some cleric powers (channel energy). Perhaps some of the necromancy spells labelled as evil will actually be alignment restricted in terms of whether you will be able to use them instead of just using them periodically and hoping it doesn't make you slip too far towards evil.

I'd say the solution to this would be a matter of training. You can only learn evil spells or abilities in a settlement that allows evil training, and that to train evil abilities you will have to be at least somewhat evil.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Great Blog. I definately like this alignment system better than the old one.

That being said Im still worried about lack of training due to unpopular alignments. Maybe between this blog and the settlement indexes a dev could clarify something for me. I know certain indeces and good reputation will be required for training certain classes.

What I dont know is if every archetype class will also require specific alignment or if that only applies to classes like Paladin? Put another way, will a settlement have to be chaotic to offer rogue training or just have to have good civilization index?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Vereor Nox wrote:
Vancent wrote:

...

My only problem is 500 evil points seems a bit low for murder. A fresh good character would have to kill 15 people in cold blood before they'd be considered evil, and any single good act could up that to 16 or more.
...

This is a valid concern but its hard to say whether or not it would be an issue without knowing how slow or steady the passive drift back to good would be. Plus at a rate of say 50 good points per good quest. It could take you 10 "good deeds" to make up for that 1 kill.

Its definitely something that could be concerning that GW should keep an eye on (all alignment drifts for that matter, make sure its not too easy for a LG to be CE using the system maintain a LG status) But this is something that we will have to wait until we see it in action and if it is a concern GW could easily adjust the values.

This base system for the alignments they set forth looks solid and I am very pleased with it.

I agree that the precise numbers will be easy to tune in EE if needed, so long as the underlying design is sound. I think this underlying design is sound. In particular I like the drift towards a player-set core alignment, while using character behavior to set an active alignment with in game consequences.

Goblin Squad Member

It sounds similar to what I proposed a while back. Link

Cool. Although wouldn't be surprised at my lack of reading forums if someone else did too.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
KarlBob wrote:
Vancent wrote:
@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."

Maybe the exact binary value of the character's active alignment, and the number of points gained or lost for each action, won't be displayed to the player. Add a small random factor to the drift back toward the core alignment, and those kinds of calculations might be more trouble than they're worth for the average player.

Edit: If the exact value is calculated on the server, and only the active alignment name is transmitted to the client, and there's a small random factor to every gain or loss, then ferreting out the gain or loss for each action will be pretty challenging.

In response to the I Shot A Man in Reno blog, I suggested a probabilistic approach:

Mbando wrote:
I'd like to offer a suggestion though: if gaining a flag X times makes you get the stack flag, you'll have players work that by going to X-1 times of the base flag, i.e. 9 heinous acts, 9 crimes, etc. What if instead there was a random chance of getting the stack flag that was tiny at X=1, and relatively high at X=10? So at X=1 the stack flag chance is 1%, by X=5 the stack flag is 15%, and by X=10 the stack flag chance is 70%? (And obviously don't publish the percentages, just that the expectation). Something like that, where as your behavior gets worse, you run more and more risk, but you can't game the risk. You're still disincentivizing certain kinds of behavior, but removing one way of countering that disincentive.

However this sort of stuff gets done, I don't want players to be able to calculate with precision how many times they can do X without it triggering a mechanic.

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

KarlBob wrote:
So more info on post-Kickstarter pledges, stretch goals and the return of formal Crowdforging is being postponed until next week?

They mention on the Kickstarter page that there will be an update soon. Not sure when that means though.


Ace-of-Spades wrote:
Call me crazy, but this sounds like it may be one of the coolest/best alignment systems I've seen yet.

That's not saying much since Alignment, as a game mechanic, has always been absolutely horrible.

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

Aunt Tony wrote:
Ace-of-Spades wrote:
Call me crazy, but this sounds like it may be one of the coolest/best alignment systems I've seen yet.
That's not saying much since Alignment, as a game mechanic, has always been absolutely horrible.

At least it's not 1st edition where alignments had their own language.

"Anyone know what this creature is saying?"

"No, sorry. I only speak Common, Elven and Chaotic Neutral."


Nightdrifter wrote:

At least it's not 1st edition where alignments had their own language.

"Anyone know what this creature is saying?"

"No, sorry. I only speak Common, Elven and Chaotic Neutral."

Game design, as a discipline of knowledge, has improved and grown more sophisticated with time. As is usual for most areas of human endeavor.

Goblin Squad Member

Vancent wrote:
@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."

I hate to say it but weather they have it set or not, or even make the numbers known or not, there will ALWAYS be people who make it their life to "figure out the numbers" and min/max the game. Don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you and would like to see that sort of thing minimized, but it will be there.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Nightdrifter wrote:
KarlBob wrote:
So more info on post-Kickstarter pledges, stretch goals and the return of formal Crowdforging is being postponed until next week?
They mention on the Kickstarter page that there will be an update soon. Not sure when that means though.

I asked because last week's dev blog said that those things would be in this week's dev blog. They probably need some more time before they're ready to announce something. I wanted to confirm that the info wouldn't be added to this week's blog later today.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Milo Goodfellow wrote:
Vancent wrote:
@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."
I hate to say it but weather they have it set or not, or even make the numbers known or not, there will ALWAYS be people who make it their life to "figure out the numbers" and min/max the game. Don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you and would like to see that sort of thing minimized, but it will be there.

Sure, that sort of thing will always be gamed to some extent, but it would be nice if even the people gaming the system had to act carefully, because they couldn't lock alignment shifts down to precise numbers.

Goblin Squad Member

I read the blog and am very happy with the changes to the system. Stopping the grind, or being forced to turn off the auto gain was just stupid, but having 2 "alignments" I think will work well.

I do have a question. If you can "change your Core Alignment" how does that effect your currently active/trained abilities/feats? I don't want to assume anything, which is why I am asking. I would assume you won't "Loss" anything you have trained, you just can't train it further or use it unless your active alignment meets the requirements.

This brings me to another question. If abilities being used go off of active alignment, what happens if you preform an action that changes the alignment in the mists of combat or other use of a feat/skill. For example, if a pally goes nutz and starts killing everyone, he starts with smite evil (as he starts LG) but once he shifts neutral mid-fight, does the power just turn off? self removed from the bar? replaced with another ability? Does nothing happen until "out of combat" or something like that? I know this is a bit extreme but I am curious as to how it will be handled.

Side note, even if the devs don't read every post or every thread, I am glad to see that they read enough to know the hot issues and are finding ways (either taking our suggestions or making them up themselves) to implement things to calm fears and avoid situations that games don't want. GG

Goblin Squad Member

KarlBob wrote:
Milo Goodfellow wrote:
Vancent wrote:
@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."
I hate to say it but weather they have it set or not, or even make the numbers known or not, there will ALWAYS be people who make it their life to "figure out the numbers" and min/max the game. Don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you and would like to see that sort of thing minimized, but it will be there.
Sure, that sort of thing will always be gamed to some extent, but it would be nice if even the people gaming it had to rely on pretty fuzzy estimates.

I definitely agree. I have no issue with elements of chance or faith to turn the tide.


This blog seems to be more reasonable numbers wise than earlier blogs, part of the problem I had with the whole alignement thing was indeed down to the size of the shift from a single killing. This should allow people to kill when they feel it fits what their character would do due to circumstances whilst still preventing them going on a full on spree for the hell of it.

I still feel that the removal from settlement should never happen mechanically but be down to player choice where the settlement has to choose to keep on bob the no longer lawful or let the settlement alignement shift down a bit, however it now sounds as if it is not going to be as common as the early numbers they gave indicated at least

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

Milo Goodfellow wrote:
KarlBob wrote:
Milo Goodfellow wrote:
Vancent wrote:
@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."
I hate to say it but weather they have it set or not, or even make the numbers known or not, there will ALWAYS be people who make it their life to "figure out the numbers" and min/max the game. Don't get me wrong, I 100% agree with you and would like to see that sort of thing minimized, but it will be there.
Sure, that sort of thing will always be gamed to some extent, but it would be nice if even the people gaming it had to rely on pretty fuzzy estimates.
I definitely agree. I have no issue with elements of chance or faith to turn the tide.

Even something with an element of chance that you don't explicitly know the details of can be gamed. First you gather a decent statistical sample to get a rough feel. Then you analyse that in order to get rough estimates of how things work. Then play with numbers to see how much you can safely game it before you really have to worry about the random elements affecting you.

It just takes longer to figure out how to game the system when there's randomness.

Goblin Squad Member

Milo Goodfellow wrote:

I read the blog and am very happy with the changes to the system. Stopping the grind, or being forced to turn off the auto gain was just stupid, but having 2 "alignments" I think will work well.

I do have a question. If you can "change your Core Alignment" how does that effect your currently active/trained abilities/feats? I don't want to assume anything, which is why I am asking. I would assume you won't "Loss" anything you have trained, you just can't train it further or use it unless your active alignment meets the requirements.

This brings me to another question. If abilities being used go off of active alignment, what happens if you preform an action that changes the alignment in the mists of combat or other use of a feat/skill. For example, if a pally goes nutz and starts killing everyone, he starts with smite evil (as he starts LG) but once he shifts neutral mid-fight, does the power just turn off? self removed from the bar? replaced with another ability? Does nothing happen until "out of combat" or something like that? I know this is a bit extreme but I am curious as to how it will be handled.

I am not with Paizo or even a game developer, but I can surmise what may be done. I am a bit curious about how this will be handled as well.

The rules in Pathfinder pen-and-paper are very clear about alignment changes within certain classes. Paladins can only be lawful good, for example; if a paladin character permanently shifts away from that alignment, he/she becomes an ex-paladin and loses access to most paladin abilities. Same goes for barbarians, monks, and clerics - the specifics are slightly different, but the effect is the same.

I would guess that if your active alignment drops below the correct threshold for your class you would no longer be able to use those alignment-based abilities. Using the paladin as an example, if you go on a murder spree and reduce your Good-Evil alignment below 2500, you would no longer be able to Smite Evil until you spend some time not murdering innocents... or maybe until an atonement spell is cast. (Devs, please feel free to ninja-copy these ideas if you haven't gone this far!) It would be just like being out of mana while playing any other MMO... you'll get an error message (that ability has been disabled, your alignment does not match, etc.) and the ability does not work.

That leads me to my question regarding alignment restricted classes: If a character starts off in one class but ends up changing his "core alignment" so that he no longer can advance as said class - a paladin becoming lawful neutral, evil, or worse, for example - does he immediately become "a lousy fighter" until he can pick up new abilities?

Goblin Squad Member

Will it be possible for the unlawful paladin to convert to an anti-paladin?

Sovereign Court Goblin Squad Member

DFT wrote:
Will it be possible for the unlawful paladin to convert to an anti-paladin?

Would absolutely love to see this!

Goblin Squad Member

DFT wrote:
Will it be possible for the unlawful paladin to convert to an anti-paladin?

Remember there are no "classes" in PFO. When classes are mentioned, they are used in reference to a path of skills and feats following that archetype. In other words, if you begin play LG and following the way of the paladin, then decide you no longer wish to follow the path of good and righteousness, then yes you can become an anti-paladin by following that path. Weather that ends up being a "archetype" or not is up to GW, but the idea is still there. Either way, when you do fall (as everyone does) There are a few bandit companies around that are more than happy to take you in. :-)

Goblin Squad Member

Sorcerers of death's construction.

~

I think "finding laws to break to prove one's chaotic nature" isn't weird, it's just roleplaying. If your character's persona didn't have a streak of defiant thrill-seeking, then you may not have been chaotic in the first place.

~

With the difference between 'active' alignment drift and 'core' alignment, might there be a "cognitive dissonance" effect that causes penalties with alignment-based powers but also provides a bonus to shifting one's core alignment?

~

Oh, and here's the obligatory Batman's alignment reference.

Goblin Squad Member

Nice. I like their thoughts on alignment. I also like that we will be able to change the core alignment.

I would hate to be 'stuck' with a core alignment chosen at the start that ended up at odds with the way I played in game.

1 to 50 of 259 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Goblinworks Blog: Evil Minds that Plot Destruction All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.