Gorum

Aizom the Tiefling II's page

57 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

pretty good. the one thing I would like if it were possible to add is the fact that they are technically supposed to be immune to illusions, not resistant. it's hard to make that point buy work though.


I want to be able to wield a spear like a bo-staff.


Is LOTRO free to play? Nvm, I'll just check on interwebs.


I'll make early enrollment. Wasn't a sure thing, but finally got a job and chipped in $75 to upgrade my brother's account to $175.


Bluddwolf wrote:
This is what I would hope makes the sound track PFO Theme Song Suggestion

*shakes head while rubbing his eyes and trying to get that image/sound out of his head* It's a good thing I can cast mind blank at will.

On a serious not, to reiterate what I said on PFO Soundtrack: Who's Doing It?, I would like to hear Stravinsky's Symphony of Psalms, in places that have hauntings and undead and other macabre things.


DeciusBrutus wrote:
Eldurian is also Blaeringr!

......He's a better role-player than me.....But I'm actually pretty new to it so no surprise


Nihimon wrote:

I'm not 100% sure that Spells will be learned like other Skills, but if they are, it's significantly more of a problem because it's the act of gaining Skills that increases your Attributes.

Yes, it's a can of worms, indeed.

I would almost assume based on GW's blog post I Put A Spell On You where they say "New spells may enter the game as loot, or through spell research," that the answer is kind of yes. I don't want to put words in their mouth. It could be similar to a fighter's weapon training but with spells, idk.


*mutters* just wait 'til Aizom shows up.....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dario wrote:
You will gain XP in realtime, as long as you have training time (subscription or goblin balls)...

Just had to throw in goblin balls


Question pertaining to the general economy of the game: Can we hire npcs to gather resources for/with players? It seems to make sense from the perspective of being able to do anything we could do in the TT, but it seems to destabilize the easy acquisition of power to people who can afford to hire a handful of workers to drag a cart around for them and gather resources for/with you. If the purpose of the game is to get players to work together over long periods of time to forge items and kingdoms and what-have-you, it seems like the gatherers have a leg up compared to the rest of the professions in that their tasks can be easily outsourced to some guy with a pick or axe. An alchemist can't have some npc right by him brewing the same potion he's making, nor can a blacksmith have some npc duplicating his efforts. Even if you could, the level of cost would have to be increased for them to have the level of crafter required, when gatherers only need menial laborers swinging tools and pushing carts, etc.

Then there's the leadership skill, which essentially give you free helpers. This one could be ok if the workers had to be applied to just settlement stuff in some ways, but it seems unrealistic to not be able to recruit them as workers from the simple logical perspective of that's what they are supposed to be there for.

Just some thought, kinda curious about other's opinions.

I'm not totally against the idea, I can just see issues stemming from it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This is a tangent thought and I apologize, but I didn't really think it was worth a thread.

You all brought up resupplying during siege, which made me think about broken weapons. The way things look like they are going to go, things like weapon crafting and re-forging will take a fair amount of time, so I think it will be interesting to see siege smiths whose sole job is to supply the army with weapons and armor when theirs break, or a group that can rapidly re-forge weapons and armor with penalties.

Carry on.


I won't even be buying the frickin' horses, and I really don't mind them having an item shop, because it makes them money that can then be applied to making the game better. So what if your red horse has a unicorn horn, or you house is over on the other side of the mountain, if you wanted the house for a view, you have it, and probably didn't intend to sell it, so regardless of the size of the neighborhood, it won't take away from the value that you placed on the house, by building it there. the only part about the other people being on the mountain that I would even care about is that I might have to interact with them. I hope this hypothetical mountain is big.


Being wrote:

Truckin'

Got my chips cashed in
Truckin'
Like the Doo Dah Man
Together
For the best in life:
Just keep Truckin' On and on-n-n!

One of my favorite things to play on guitar


I suspect goblin death metal would sound something like (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FWMyTCVuqc) this. Bladecatcher by Mastodon. Although this may be to complex for them.

Forgive the sad ignorance that wouldn't allow me to jus make a link.


I know this might be a bit cumbersome for paizo, but I think it would be awesome to see Adventure Paths and modules based on the game. I know it may enter the lore, but to be able to go down the same path in a TT setting is a different experience than reading about an occurance.


Stravinsky's Symphony of Psalms. Perfectly haunting music.

Or something very similar, not necessarily for the whole soundtrack, but for parts.


Being wrote:
ZenPagan wrote:

...

Instances (I haven't seen anything specifically saying the dungeons will be instances yet)...
My understanding of the current proposal for player-built dungeons is that they will be temporary instances. Something like the foundry quests in Neverwinter, only hopefully better.

And judging simply by the diligence and effort they are putting into listening to the crowdforgers and their attempts to make a great game, I get the impression they will be better.


Probably C/N and for the other axis N/E. Haven't decided yet.


@ZenPagan
I do have a question for you. You said you wouldn't trust a third party to settle your differences with other party members, but if someone were to make a Chartered company or guild or what have you, that was solely designed to help mediate disputes, would you trust them?


ZenPagan wrote:


@Aizom
Not sure what you mean with that and if it is due to my questioning, I wasn't trying to be confrontational just trying to understand why you thought it was a solution and what it was solving. If it was my questioning sorry if I offended you it wasn't meant to

No offense taken. Just didn't want to make unnecessary outbursts.


It could help us who couldn't/didn't contribute during the original KS if we knew somebody who did and could give the money to them so we had our own account and could be part of early enrollment. The only thing is it doesn't seem fair for me to get all the stuff somebody else paid for.


All I know is I can no longer post on this thread without breaking the primary rule set forth at the bottom of the posting section.


ZenPagan wrote:

So basically you want to replace the squabbling over loot division with squabbling over who is a fair arbiter?

Slightly tongue in cheek I know but frankly I can see as many issues with this system as just deciding to divide the loot between you.

For a start what happens if you decide as a group to use me...you take a long time before you are done only to find in the meantime I have gone off line. You now have a contract agreement for me to divide your loot but no me there to actually do it.

What happens if a member decides he isn't happy with the valuation being placed on one or more parts of the loot which is bound to happen. As I understand it the third party gets to keep all the loot and hands out coin.

I do not have anything against the system as long as it is not the only way to do it and it is a system that cannot be unilaterally decided on. (Many games, such as wow, allowed the party leader to unilaterally change the loot division method). Personally however I cannot see myself joining any endeavour with a group that wanted to do things this way it leaves far to much to the integrity or otherwise of some other player

Understanding your point, if you have TN in the game, their job should, at least in part, be to play the fair arbiter. If you hold the transaction in a town where they can't steal from you without getting killed, you then gain some level of insurance to protect your investment.

I'm not trying to sell it to you, just trying to explain how I think it could work. If another system seems to work better for you, then you do that.


Bringslite wrote:

@Aizom

I missed the kickstarter, also. You are not alone and the rewards look cool but the game should still be pretty awesome even without them. :)

Agreed. wouldn't be here if I didn't think so.


DeciusBrutus wrote:
I wouldn't like it if KS rewards were available for less than or even the same price as they originally were; but it also wouldn't be fair or good business to make the regional trait packs forever unavailable to anyone who hasn't already bought one.

I understand your point, and to be honest that seems fair. I just hate the "Oh, you weren't here from the very start? Well, sucks to be you" mentality.


Xeen wrote:
Gloreindl wrote:

I understand GW's need for more cash flow, but the cash shop should not be selling anything that gives either advantages or items that the KS donors paid for - those are our's for donating to the crowdfunding.

In most games, the Kickstarter type (usually founders) stuff becomes available to everyone. With few exceptions.

I hate not being able to get things other people can in a game just because I didn't know of its existence from the beginning.


@DeciusBrutus Yes. Furthermore it gives the TN a reason to live.

I think I just invoked that law again.


Bringslite wrote:

@Aizom

Actually some of what you propose is similar to what I proposed previously.

Only when the party can't agree on a different division.

*Coin is auto divided
*Items are "looted" into a loot sack/box/crate/whatever. The weight/encumbrance is distributed between members as you go.
*At the end of the adventure, the party opens the sack and it is displayed for division (however the party chooses)in a "loot" window. For kicks give the window a border that looks like a tavern table top. =P

Only really necessary in a PUG, most likely.

One problem that I see is a lack of rogue like opportunities...

Edit:Keep the pleading, arguing, begging, bargaining at the end of the adventure where it belongs.

I would say rogue opportunities would be in looting, you try and be the first one to all bodies and sleight of hand anything you can get away with.


Bringslite wrote:

@Aizom

I don't think your idea will fly Sir. Unless I am mistaken, you are proposing a situation where the "loot" is magically transported to a third party? That seems like it would go against the Dev's design that item's have to be physically moved. It seems like it might be open to serious abuse in getting things quickly to far places with little or no risk.

If that is not what you are getting at. Then it sounds like a real hassle, all around.

You may be right about the hassle part, but I tried to make it clear I meant that there was essentially a trust for the group loot container where no one could take anything from it until they had physically transported it to a merchant.

It's somewhat likely that you will sell some of the loot anyway, this doesn't really add an extra step, it just ensures that the whole party benefits from the sale of items, and that no one feels slighted if someone gets all the dragon fangs this run.

It's just an idea. I'm not saying it has to be in place, just that it could work. You might even be able to take and implement pieces if you wish.


@ZenPagan

The third person pc doesn't necessarily have to physically be present. The idea is that if everyone isn't happy about loot distribution, where one person gets "all the good stuff," there is a majority vote to have either some or all items sent to this third party, who then gives each member of the party a fraction of the overall value in gold, so if there are 2 people, one gets half, the other gets half.

The third party, in accepting the item, essentially completes the transaction and gives you the money. The game automatically transfers the money when the item is given to him.The players could then go and attempt to buy the item from him, assuming he hasn't sold it, and he could sell it in whatever manner he sees fit, since he bought it.

As for what to do with the item in the time it takes to get to this third person, I would propose some kind of mutual loot box that people have to pay dire consequences to loot from, which no one has access to without group consent.


Nihimon wrote:
Ticket to Ride - Purchase tickets which grant temporary access to Theme Park elements. The value should be more in the fun of the experience than in the loot that drops, which should be no better than that you could get from an Escalation of similar difficulty.

Thank you. That was the thing about WOW, the rides were all the game was. A ride can be cool a couple of times, but it's boring to go through the same one 30 times for relatively worthless loot.

I wouldn't mind a run through the dungeon to fight memorable villains and monsters, just don't make me run it 100 times for the Socks of Infinite Power.


ZenPagan wrote:
Carbon D. Metric wrote:
Aizom the Tiefling II wrote:

This might seem like an odd idea, but maybe a merchant char. could, if people aren't entirely happy with the way loot was distributed, take it all, and then see everyone was given the equivalent amount of money the entire venture earned. the problem would be resting the loot from the one who benefitted...

Afterwards you could attempt to buy it back, but then you might have to pay exorbitant fees to get it back....

The system might need work. Thoughts?

That sounds like a great idea for a slotted ability for Expert type characters, or even a major ability for a cohort your hire to use, great thinking!

Not sure I get what the idea is here. Are you suggesting I can get a skill which means I can decide to get all the loot and just pay the rest of the party a sum of coins? If so I hope this is something the others have to agree to and can refuse the offer and decide to split the booty up anyway.

If it is an npc char then I believe this is not good for the game as it just creates a coin fountain whereby items are converted directly to conjured coin

I'm suggesting you bring along a third party pc with the gold to pay what the item is worth, or what the party thinks it is worth, and give them gold for it. And that was the problem: if somebody can just pick the item up and say "Mine" and because of this the rest of the party feels they got the short end, how do you determine whether to go for the gold for the item. it's harder to rest it from the owner after the fact.

While you could potentially have a majority vote to make the item into gold so that no one can claim the best entirely for themselves, but I kind of dislike the idea of taking something that you already have either via game-mechanic or mutual agreement.

I would also add a short loot timer in which people would have to decide to pawn the item. I don't think the system is fundamentally flawed, it just needs some work. but they may even have better ideas, idk.


Economics ftw


This might seem like an odd idea, but maybe a merchant char. could, if people aren't entirely happy with the way loot was distributed, take it all, and then see everyone was given the equivalent amount of money the entire venture earned. the problem would be resting the loot from the one who benefitted...

Afterwards you could attempt to buy it back, but then you might have to pay exorbitant fees to get it back....

The system might need work. Thoughts?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bluddwolf wrote:
Better yet, limit playable Goblins to Goblin Squad members and make it a KS add-on.

I understand why you might want that, but some of us were short on funds when the kickstarter was rolling. Plus I found out about it late. Don't you already get a bunch of stuff without making it harder for me to be a goblin?


I'm just glad I learned about this law. The more you know!

Because knowing is half the battle.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Being wrote:
Indeed. I think I shall rage quit and go back to WoW over it. Or not.

Greatest. Sarcasm. Ever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've seen alot of people on this thread say they don't think chaos will work because there will essentially be no unifying force to make things work. to that I bring up an oft-repeated saying of my friend "It's Chaotic Neutral, not Chaotic Stupid." Chaos in general does what's in it's best interest, and if that means working together, fine, but laws won't play a part in decisions.


Milo Goodfellow wrote:
Am I sensing an interest in joining, or are you just "window shopping?"

already joined


Tigari wrote:
I say let people use their real money to buy "plex" then sell for gold, just to turn around and buy some of the best gear. Then, when they become an assassination target, because the enemy knows they "buy" top of the line gear, and I bring my fellow assassins to assist (better to be safe then sorry with tough targets) and he loses it all, we can all just sit back and thank him for spending the actual money to help equip my assassin with ( or resell if its not gear I can use)

An excellent point.

Another thing: some people don't have alot of time to play, and there are some people who don't have great demands on their time and will play alot. If I want something and percieve it to have value, but don't have the ingame resources to acquire it, why can't I pay some person who will spend hours working on something I want? I percieve their time to be valuable and have a need/ want i wish to see fulfilled, they spends their time to fulfil it and I pay them. Why attempt to punish me because some jerk just bought all his gear to attempt to power-game?


Hobs the Short wrote:
In theme parks, the same things happen over and over.

I would argue that too much in life things happen over and over that shouldn't. Wars, carbon copies of WOW being made over and over, traffic accidents... the list is endless.

not to detract from your point.


Oklahoma City. State an country are then a given. Thought I'd be the first from the state 'til the end.


Actually, to further that point, if you allowed us to research with spellcraft (say I wanted to be able to teleport non-willing creatures, which is not doable under the TT game's rules) in order for me to do damage to a person by dropping them from a great height, and giving them a will save to ignore my teleport (though I'm sure you would limit the height I could teleport them to below a point where they would reach terminal velocity so it wouldn't be almost 100% lethal.) It would be like meta magic but specifically applied to a certain spell, and it would function like a feat. It would be great for people who want to be the masters of a certain spell.

Clearly it can't be designed in a way that it would overcome weaknesses specifically designed to keep characters from being overpowered (as with AOEs could be if they could overcome the magical resonance,) but it might lessen the penalties in some slight way.


Swashbuckler wrote:
*clickaroonie!*

that word *shudder*


There aren't archetypes in the sense of variations on classes like we see in the TT. From what I understand of the word itself, it just mean a representitive idea. A wizard is technically an archetype as it exemplifies an arcane spellcaster. But I'm arguing semantics, I apologize.


I want to see spellcrafting that actually makes new spells. I know that's a pipe-dream, but it is something you can do in the TT. but I doubt I will get it, just like I won't get to teleport into the air with people then cast fly as they fall to their doom. :(


I understand, was just curious about makeup, like percentage of archetypes you desired. Wasn't looking for a full-on tactical analysis


I know it's early yet, but have you considered what you want the average band of outlaws to consist of?


Maybe a round-robin system where you go "okay, that guy hasn't gotten anything in a while, it's his turn."


Greedalox wrote:
I said it before, but with a craft centric nature I doubt there will be a need for a need/greed or token system. And yes this is a sandbox and token systems are very themepark. But seriously I don't care how bad any of you think a token system is, because you have obviously never encountered the true horror of rare drop rates. I did 1 endgame activity with a friend for 3 years (2 times a week for 3 hrs) and he NEVER got his drop. I never want to see this insanity in a game ever again. If anyone has a better idea than tokens, that's not the RNG Im all ears.

That's part of my point. We are lucky that most of the good gear will be player made, because if we had to rely on drops and tokens we'd be SOL (screwed of loot.) And further, I couldn't even get to the super rare loot drops because I couldn't collect enough tokens to get good enough gear to get to those rare drops.

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>