Goblin Squad Member
|
@Vailla, I had to literally be on my bike and don't like using time excuses if can be helped. ;)
It depends how "brutal" CE turns out, if too repugnant then the option to have my character correct their core alignment towards Neutral Evil (next up?) then I'd make that change.
The only thing I'd be worried about, is if I revel in CE and my progression is limited AND I'm providing extraordinary content for other players, I might be concerned on that front. But it' more likely that CE would be the sort of low on resources, low on social ladder, but high on criminality, CE's ganking each other and attempting various transgressions against other Alignments if they can. A strong challenge but an exciting one for determined players even if the odds are against them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You can be a CE crafter that never sets foot outside of his shop, and has never griefed or ganked anyone. He just sets his Core Alignment to CE and he will be CE. Since he will only interact with others via local chat or within a trade window, no shift of alignment or reputation loss or gain.
How can he be role played CE, he could be verbally CE with his customers (ie. "No Soup For You!") for arbitrary reasons.
If he is the best soup maker in all the world, he will still have customers even though he is CE.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If there is a way to play CE without griefing there shouldn't be penalties.
Does the fact that some forms of killing - namely self-defense - are valid mean there shouldn't be any penalties for any killing? Of course not.
Players who choose to play CE do so knowing that CE will suck, and that most CE Characters will get that way by being a!@#%!@s.
If you still choose to play CE, that's fine, no one's trying to stop you. But the idea that Ryan should reverse a major aspect of the game design to suit you is just ridiculous.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For military units I see no reason why limited formations (such as a shield wall) wouldn't work for Chaotics. It is all about self-preservation, after all, and is not dependent on intense drilling. I would hardly class C10th Vikings or Anglo-Saxon warbands as Lawful, yet they were experts in the shieldwall.
It's actually the opposite--shield walls only work if you you drop self-preservation in favor of other-preservation. That's why in Spartan culture it was a forgivable sin to drop your sword, but unforgivable to drop your shield, because doing that makes you a Blue Falcon.
Shield walls--cohesion in general--functions to increase collective security to the degree that individuals are willing to sacrifice personal security. It's a kind of cultural paradox, where increased willingness to give one's life means saving it.
So CE characters by their very nature can't use cohesion-based TTPs--they're selfish #$%-&%^@s.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bludd: Won't his contracts cost more? Isn't (s)he insane, won't he have limited resources from the "this is slaves/captives/zombies work" lack of quality gathering materials?! ;)
@Vailla: If you are CE you have full freedom to PvP, I suppose is your reward and gameplay preference? If you don't make use of that that's your business, but if you have the potential to engage in minimal consequential PvP then you also earn the penalties that go with that. Maybe I'm twisting what you're suggesting: That there should be a way to play CE in-character ? But what about your settlement/CC you're a member of?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Players who choose to play CE do so knowing that CE will suck, and that most CE Characters will get that way by being a!%~~*~s.
I think most players who choose to play CE characters do so knowing that they will have to role play them as being Chaotic Evil.
The assumption that they will "suck" should not be expected because that is the result of an arbitrary game mechanic and a juvenile and narrow view of what playing chaotic evil can truly be like. It ignores what CE can contribute in an interesting way to the content of the game.
That interesting content does not have to be the result of greifing, ganking or being an a-hole. It requires knowing how to role play imaginatively and intelligently.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm seeing the same cries about alignment equality that I hear in the game. All alignments are not created equal. Some alignments naturally engage in behavior that make people hate you. Some engage in behavior that make people love you, admire you, and want to help you. And sure, you could be a closet CE who helps people and builds social bridges his entire life, but if he dies before he ever gets to reveal that he was faking it...what's the practical difference? He was LG.
Each alignment has its own challenges. LG has to follow rules. CE has to do a lot of things by themselves. CG has to deal with upstart paladins who murder their hellhounds. LE has to strain their eyesight to look down on everyone else from their skull throne from which they rule. Different challenges.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Min Maxer Progression of Alignment Based Skills: Future CE AssassinCN to LE to CE
Learn your Rogue based skills first (maxed). The shift to LE and maximize your Evil based skills. Then when both Chaotic and Evil are maximized, switch alignment core and you are now a max skilled CE Assassin with little or no concern for Rep, because you have all of your training anyway.
In the end that will probably work, but i guess it will be a hard way to go.
First, if a lot of your thief skills are considered chaotic, you won´t be able to slot them when you are LE.so, you might essentialy start more ore less from the bottom up again.
second, it was already said that you will not be able to train high level skills when you are low rep, correct?
;) if i had to decide a way to conter this kind of metagaming, i´d say that as a low rep character, you can´t slot skills that require a higher rep to learn then your actual rep.
For me, the main disadvantage I want to see CE settlements have is little to nothing in the way of formation combat skills. I mean honestly, what kind of chaotic evil group can line their guys up in a well ordered formation and work in perfect harmony with the guy next to them? That takes discipline, trust, patience, and a whole slew of other traits I don't think many CE character's posses.
I think this could be the main balancing factor. If CE settlements have a disorganized mob while other alignments have a well organized army it's going to make it very hard for them to take or defend their settlements.
They'll still be able to be good bandits / assassins / generally bad people but their towns will have to hold on through overwhelming numbers and/or not ticking any large and organized forces off enough to come root them out.
Lesser crafting / economic skills would be fine too as a chaotic evil settlement is the kind that would have an economy propped up on stolen goods as opposed to one run by hard work and sound policies.
What I really don't want to see is (high reputation) chaotic evil settlements not have the skills they need to operate well on their own, or in a disorganized mob.
Regarding combat formation: it could work if there are strongmen bullying the troops, or perhaps bullying and providing incentives. You may find organization and cooperation distasteful, but if you have a modicum of intelligence you might stomach it because you realize that you can get more out of your raping and pillaging that way.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The assumption that they will "suck" should not be expected...Being Chaotic Evil in Pathfinder Online will suck.This is why we simply cannot find common ground.
I do not accept every belief that Ryan Dancey says as gospel. I disagree with his view of what alignment means. He is no better an authority on meaning than any of us.
Does he ultimately have the power to include the mechanics that gimp an alignment, yes he does. Does that legitimize his beliefs, not one bit!
If GW is designing an aspect of the game to suck, that is poor gaming design.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Btw i wasn't aware that playing LG = auto win is major part of the design.
Were you aware that your attempt to twist my point into a lame shadow of my real point is both obvious and transparent? It's clear to everyone that you do this because you can't make a passable argument against my real point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If GW is designing an aspect of the game to suck, that is poor gaming design.
You do realize that's about on par with the people who come here wanting a Theme Park saying that an Open PvP game is "poor gaming design".
Ryan has consistently been describing it a certain way. You want him to change that, that's fine. In fact, I commend you for stating it so clearly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You can be a CE crafter that never sets foot outside of his shop, and has never griefed or ganked anyone. He just sets his Core Alignment to CE and he will be CE. Since he will only interact with others via local chat or within a trade window, no shift of alignment or reputation loss or gain.
How can he be role played CE, he could be verbally CE with his customers (ie. "No Soup For You!") for arbitrary reasons.
If he is the best soup maker in all the world, he will still have customers even though he is CE.
I think that these CE crafters will form a good chunk any high-rep CE settlement. And there's no requirement to role-play in PFO; with core alignment a CE character is assumed to be doing nasty stuff in the background, like setting dogs on fire before making them into soup.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can't make a passable argument against your real point , because i can't see you point.
Why do you think that handicapping CE alignment benefits the game?
I didn't say it did.
I said the CEO of the company making the game has declared it will suck. The fact that CE will suck is the point I'm trying to get to sink in.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Vailla: CE's catchphrase could be then, "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn!" ;)
What kind of skills would you like to see them have / not have?
How should their alignment effect their development indexes?
What kind of things should the have that lawful and good settlements won't?
1. Skills: Obviously lore/flavour skills eg poisoning, cursing type of weapons to have, necromantic, demonic. Perhaps in trading, illicit materials, stolen goods can be laundered(?), again poisons or narcotics that harm the common folk etc.
2. Probably lower, but if they can sacrifice slaves' souls or something they might get a boost, have zombies doing the common folks work but less efficiently. Definitely DI should be lower
3. They may even have monsters working at things there or as guards ie chained to their posts with binding spells? Perhaps access to other planes eg the hells if they worship those gods. Assassins. I mentioned before, that if they kill a character, a purchasable update from the cash shop would be to take their head/likeness and put it on spikes outside their settlements to "decorate". Alliances with CE NPCs idk which these are: Goblins in their settlements might work eg Thornkeep??
I'll think up some more on these questions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If GW is designing an aspect of the game to suck, that is poor gaming design.You do realize that's about on par with the people who come here wanting a Theme Park saying that an Open PvP game is "poor gaming design".
Ryan has consistently been describing it a certain way. You want him to change that, that's fine. In fact, I commend you for stating it so clearly.
False argument..
If the Devs say they are making an Open PVP game, and there is no open PVP, then that is poor design.
The Devs have said that they are implementing an alignment system that represents the tradition of what was in Pathfinder,but they will make one of those alignments suck.
Is that a genuine representation of the alignment system?
The real issue is, does it sound like a good idea for the CEO of a gaming company to say that they are including something in their game that will suck and that is by design?
Then go on to say, "If you still choose to play it, it is your fault because you should have expected that it would suck."
I wonder is Lisa Stephens agrees that if you play CE you should expect to suck, or that only a-holes play CE characters?
I'm no big proponent of the alignment system, but I don't like parts of the game I'm playing to suck.... Call me silly I guess!!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the Devs say they are making an Open PVP game, and there is no open PVP, then that is poor design.
You really have to work hard to ignore a lot of statements about consequences in order to believe that Ryan promised you the kind of PvP you seem to expect.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Regarding combat formation: it could work if there are strongmen bullying the troops, or perhaps bullying and providing incentives. You may find organization and cooperation distasteful, but if you have a modicum of intelligence you might stomach it because you realize that you can get more out of your raping and pillaging that way.
I could see that used as an argument for basic formation combat but not for advanced formation skills.
The guy holding the whip might be able to get you to march as a unit, but he isn't going to do it nearly as well as the commander who people follow out of respect, while fighting alongside people they trust with their lives.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do not accept every belief that Ryan Dancey says as gospel. I disagree with his view of what alignment means. He is no better an authority on meaning than any of us.
Does he ultimately have the power to include the mechanics that gimp an alignment, yes he does. Does that legitimize his beliefs, not one bit!
If GW is designing an aspect of the game to suck, that is poor gaming design.
You will pobably tell me i got this wrong, but anyway.
What i got from the dev blog´s and even before from Rians KS-post is,- the devs have the impression that any game so far that had non consequential pvp turned into lord of the flies online.
- they don´t want a new lord of the flies online.
- so they designed it so that all the unwanted pvp actions force you into the CE-low rep corner.
- because that is so, CE-low rep will acumulate all the players showing unwanted pvp behaviour will.
- becasue they show unwanted pvp behaviour they get punished by the system, as long as they don´t change their ways.
- if they don´t change their ways, that is their decision.
i don´t think that is poor game design, i think it is brilliant.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I do not accept every belief that Ryan Dancey says as gospel. I disagree with his view of what alignment means. He is no better an authority on meaning than any of us.
Does he ultimately have the power to include the mechanics that gimp an alignment, yes he does. Does that legitimize his beliefs, not one bit!
If GW is designing an aspect of the game to suck, that is poor gaming design.
You will pobably tell me i got this wrong, but anyway.
What i got from the dev blog´s and even before from Rians KS-post is,
- the devs have the impression that any game so far that had non consequential pvp turned into lord of the flies online.
- they don´t want a new lord of the flies online.
- so they designed it so that all the unwanted pvp actions force you into the CE-low rep corner.
- because that is so, CE-low rep will acumulate all the players showing unwanted pvp behaviour will.
- becasue they show unwanted pvp behaviour they get punished by the system, as long as they don´t change their ways.
- if they don´t change their ways, that is their decision.i don´t think that is poor game design, i think it is brilliant.
You put that brilliantly. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I set my core alignment to CE, will I automatically begin to lose reputation as if CE is a long term flag or do my actions actually count?
I was under the impression that Reputation is the measure of player interaction along the lines of what the devs wish to see and what they do not wish to see.
Is the Reputation system different for CE characters?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I set my core alignment to CE, will I automatically begin to lose reputation as if CE is a long term flag or do my actions actually count?
I was under the impression that Reputation is the measure of player interaction along the lines of what the devs wish to see and what they do not wish to see.
Is the Reputation system different for CE characters?
Who said anything about that? Or said that?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think the impression I'm getting is for CE there is a lot more freedom for what is considered legitimate PVP by the reputation system.
High rep CE is supposed to make you sacrifice a bit of power for that freedom.
Low reputation players aren't really considered legitimate PVPers, and the game is basically supposed to suck for them to the point that someone who maintains low rep for a long time is actually intended to just give up and leave.
LG high rep players face restrictions far more extreme than that of high rep CE or even high rep CG and LE players.
So more restrictions = more power.
More freedom = less power.
I think if that's the way the system is going to work, that what I'm favoring is probably one of the most beneficial ideas for CE, as it doesn't leave them weakened on an individual level.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
There's an interesting assumption I've seen in this thread that I wanted to mention.
The assumption is that a character can gain X ability while a member of one Settlement, and then keep using it when they change Settlements to one that doesn't have the necessary perquisites to provide and/or sustain that ability so that a character's total available abilities are disassociated from thier Settlement affiliation.
That's an assumption, not a fact.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So more restrictions = more power.
More freedom = less power.
That sounds like... balance.
Low reputation players aren't really considered legitimate PVPers, and the game is basically supposed to suck for them to the point that someone who maintains low rep for a long time is actually intended to just give up and leave.
That's an interesting take on it. If you don't play inside the sandbox, as GW defines the sand and the box, you (might) end up a low rep, low skill thug with a few options. You can continue to play as a thug. You can rage quit. Or you can moderate your behavior and climb out of the low rep, low skill hole.
(edited)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There's an interesting assumption I've seen in this thread that I wanted to mention.
The assumption is that a character can gain X ability while a member of one Settlement, and then keep using it when they change Settlements to one that doesn't have the necessary perquisites to provide and/or sustain that ability so that a character's total available abilities are disassociated from thier Settlement affiliation.
That's an assumption, not a fact.
Now that will spark this up a little! ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Who said anything about that? Or said that?If I set my core alignment to CE, will I automatically begin to lose reputation as if CE is a long term flag or do my actions actually count?
I was under the impression that Reputation is the measure of player interaction along the lines of what the devs wish to see and what they do not wish to see.
Is the Reputation system different for CE characters?
The questions I asked are based on the assumptions that all CE characters will have low reputation. Since Reputation is a measure, primarily based on PVP, how else would a CE character generate a low reputation if the player does not partake in PVP, or raise the undead, or use slaves?
The only possibility is that having a CE alignment automatically generates negative reputation.
There's an interesting assumption I've seen in this thread that I wanted to mention.
The assumption is that a character can gain X ability while a member of one Settlement, and then keep using it when they change Settlements to one that doesn't have the necessary perquisites to provide and/or sustain that ability so that a character's total available abilities are disassociated from thier Settlement affiliation.
That's an assumption, not a fact.
Ryan based purely on the fact that you are sort of hinting here that you need to remain a member of a settlement to benefit from the training received there can I ask for clarification on the issue of settlements selling training to non members which you have also stated in the blogs will be possible. The two statements seem contradictory.
Apologies for the derail from strictly talking about CE
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's been no change on this front from what we've told you about alignment and rep previously. That is, we expect the majority of CE characters to also have very low reputation, because ganking lowers all three axes. So Ryan's shorthand is "CE will suck," because we genuinely believe that there won't be very many CE players that maintain high reputation.
There are a few of you that plan to play CE as a roleplaying choice, and try to make sure you're only doing it in a way that doesn't cost you too much rep. That's awesome, and we really hope you succeed. If you have a high-rep CE town, the penalties are the minimal ones that we've mentioned before; it's the low-rep that really hurts you. But we still expect that CE will be very strongly correlated with low-rep, because we don't expect that the majority of players coming in outside of the forum community will be choosing CE for roleplay, just drifting there due to behaviors that also lower rep.
If the early enrollees manage to set up enough high-rep CE settlements to create and maintain an expectation of "playing CE but not being a jerk about it" among later players, that'd be great. Just don't get your hearts set on pulling it off :) .
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The questions I asked are based on the assumptions that all CE characters will have low reputation. Since Reputation is a measure, primarily based on PVP, how else would a CE character generate a low reputation if the player does not partake in PVP, or raise the undead, or use slaves?
Reputation is driven down by attacks on unflagged players, not for PvP in general. The one exception I've seen is that Outlaws can attack an unflagged player after a refused SAD demand. In that case the Outlaw doesn't take a rep hit for killing the unflagged character (but might get the Attacker flag/Aggressor buff and take an evil hit for the killing, but if you're CE, is that a problem?).
So if someone is CE and can limit or avoid attacking unflagged characters they can probably keep their rep up.
I think a high-rep CE settlement seems doable, but sifting through all of the CEs to find those with self-moderation might be the challenge.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the early enrollees manage to set up enough high-rep CE settlements to create and maintain an expectation of "playing CE but not being a jerk about it" among later players, that'd be great. Just don't get your hearts set on pulling it off :) .
HA! I see your reverse psychology and I raise you with... wait, no, I'll have to think about that for a bit longer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There's been no change on this front from what we've told you about alignment and rep previously. That is, we expect the majority of CE characters to also have very low reputation, because ganking lowers all three axes. So Ryan's shorthand is "CE will suck," because we genuinely believe that there won't be very many CE players that maintain high reputation.
There are a few of you that plan to play CE as a roleplaying choice, and try to make sure you're only doing it in a way that doesn't cost you too much rep. That's awesome, and we really hope you succeed. If you have a high-rep CE town, the penalties are the minimal ones that we've mentioned before; it's the low-rep that really hurts you. But we still expect that CE will be very strongly correlated with low-rep, because we don't expect that the majority of players coming in outside of the forum community will be choosing CE for roleplay, just drifting there due to behaviors that also lower rep.
If the early enrollees manage to set up enough high-rep CE settlements to create and maintain an expectation of "playing CE but not being a jerk about it" among later players, that'd be great. Just don't get your hearts set on pulling it off :) .
This is very much different than the way it was presented, making it sound like "It will suck" by design, without any player action required.
Question:
Do we start with our core alignment or are we presented with a variety of steps to "earn" it during character creation?
The reason I ask is that if we start with our core alignment and a clean reputation slate of zero, then a CE character will start with a zero reputation, and by avoiding PVP or by only using the flag system for it, may not ever end up with a low Reputation at all.
If on the other hand, they have to earn it, then maybe a bit of griefing is the quick way of getting there?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What kind of things should the have that lawful and good settlements won't?
"spit-balling" a few random ideas: I don't know how much "horror" is in Pathfinder? But I'd assume some of these places could be more geared towards horror eg the Torture Building that perhaps a captured player could be towed away to put in and "tortured " for some gain before they expire? I know that's going into edgy territory, but I've always assumed CE settlements might turn out hellish places? Some people like horror too. Obviously the above would delight the CEs and the tortured player would be bound perhaps for no longer than 5mins or even the body could taken "alive" without the actual player requiring to be bound to this old one? It certainly should not be a "themepark horror ride", but it could be one direction perhaps in line with one of those dark dieties' temples? As mentioned before a hub for the black market.
Another consideration is rivalries between the dark deities and any way to enhance options for CEs to make each other their own best targets (ie strong buffs or rewards for attacking each other)? Perhaps the above capture & torture could only be done on other CEs? the pit with the monster in it and throwing other players in with betting for the community could be the settlement's local entertainment. There might be harsh skill "points" reductions for the losing victim to add spice.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@AvenaOats: Regarding torture - rather than making it so explicit, evil settlements could have the ability to upgrade their fortress/command post with a torture chamber to increase their intelligence gathering capabilities. Assume that commoner prisoners from other settlements are being questioned, rather than PCs. Maybe it generates grab-a-commoner missions as well - grab a commoner from settlement X to get a snapshot of settlement X's status.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Question:
Do we start with our core alignment or are we presented with a variety of steps to "earn" it during character creation?
That has been asked several times by several of us, and the question sparked some interesting threads. The way that looks to me likely is that we will all begin neutral/neutral and unknown, other than whatever advantages we may have signed up for in the Kickstarter goody bag. Then our behavior and choices for self-limitation (I don't want my alignment to percolate automagically toward lawful and good, and we have been told we can self-limit).
Personally, in the matter of advantages accruing to Chaotic settlements, I think that the highest level illusionist spells should be trainable in a CE, CN, or CG settlement. Likely I would also put such skills as 'sleight of hand', 'disguise', 'stealth' and similar should find domain in Chaotic settlements. Considering Barbarians, perhaps also survival skills.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There's an interesting assumption I've seen in this thread that I wanted to mention.
The assumption is that a character can gain X ability while a member of one Settlement, and then keep using it when they change Settlements to one that doesn't have the necessary perquisites to provide and/or sustain that ability so that a character's total available abilities are disassociated from thier Settlement affiliation.
That's an assumption, not a fact.
Interesting. That's going to hand A LOT of power to the owners of powerful settlements.
You'll need to strike a good balance between skills available to everyone, and skills granted by settlements to keep the larger factions from absolutely overpowering everyone else.
That makes me curious though. Say The Empyrean Order forms a player nation with a Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, and Lawful Good settlement.
Would a member belonging to a The Empyrean Order have access to all of the skills in each of those settlements, or would they have to declare residency in one, and be restricted to that settlement's skills only?