Daeglin's page

Most fun gaming I've ever had. Awesome community that lives up to the Paizo tradition (even those on the other end of the pointy things coming at me).

There are sporadic reports of this. Some people get stuck with tremendously long downloads for various reasons. Best thing to do is just leave it, overnight if need be. If it is actually timing out or other issue, contact customer support at the Goblinworks site.

For those new to the lore of the main Pathfinder setting, Golarion, there is an ongoing class series by Cheatle looking at the background of some of the main Escalations and how they tie into the broader world's interest into the River Kingdoms that we play in. Examples such as the Razmirian threats and the Ustalavs. Obviously the classes are available in game, but also in Mumble and are often reposted on YouTube.

While it's regrettable in a sense, most people who are actively playing don't frequent these boards anymore. They spend more time on the GW forums. Those looking for answers regarding the current game would best be served asking there. The most frequent posters here now often seem to be those the game literally left behind...

I can't believe this thread is still going. Somebody call the dead horse guy.

However, simply saying "go play with others" to justify a lack of content is a big cop-out. I'm not saying that's what the devs are saying, but it appears to be your argument.

This is where we won't connect. I'm not justifying a lack of content, I'm promoting it. I specifically chose this game because I was tired of being presented content. I don't want content to come from the devs, I want a game where it comes from players. In my point of view, the less PVE elements, the better. However, I realise that they intend to create more as the game develops, and Crowdforging may accelerate that. In the meantime, as they introduce more tools to facilitate player-created content, such as the upcoming Holdings and Outposts, feuds, caravans etc. it may help satisfy both us.

It's a backpack. Pretty sure they've said no plan to change. Makes reasonable sense with the lore they've set up - your body is whisked away by Pharasma to a nearby shrine for rezzing but your backpack gets left behind with some of your loot.

I'm so sorry to hear this too. This is the first incidence of account theft I'm aware of, and it's such a disappointment as this is otherwise such a good community compared to most. While GoblinWorks will likely say they cannot intervene, I would strongly encourage you to send an email to Ryan Dancey anyway. He may be able to flag the account for "special attention" especially if the quality of that individual becomes apparent in other ways. On behalf of the rest of the PFO community I apologize for that persons behaviour and thank you for supporting the kickstarter in the first place.

It seems backwards to me to have the PVP stuff in place before the safeguards are in place or whatever needs to be in place to prevent this kind of thing from happening...

I honestly can't tell if you really don't understand or are deliberately exaggerating. Nothing "wrong" happened. The game played out as intended. Pvp occurred with consequences (not rep loss due to open pvp status, but social consequences such as increased aggression against Golgotha from neighbors), and rewards (loot drops). Some players on both sides changed how they play the game, and others quit because they finally experienced a major component of the game. This will happen again and again and again all across the map because it is the game. Hopefully, there wont be the rage as the people who have so far ignored information from the developers will now understand it better. The echo chamber is never a good place to learn things.

I am amazed and disappointed even, by the people who still don't know or accept what the design of this game has always been proposed to be. GW and Ryan have been remarkably consistent in stating their vision of open world pvp with consequences. I come from a tabletop background going back to the blue box, I've played some themepark WoW. I read the kickstarter, I read the blogs describing the overarching goals of the game. I joined expecting to have to learn to protect myself and my settlement at all times. I expect to learn to pvp. I expect to die. I expect to lose gear and resources. I just don't understand the willfull attempts to ignore everything that Goblinworks has always said this game will be.

A friend of mine who is in BWG but is not active on the forums asked me to post this.

My guildmates and I discovered why PvP outside of The Window is fundamentally broken last night.

We're a small guild: half a dozen players who go on PFO once a week as a group; we chat, joke, kill mobs, gather mats, and craft. We enjoy it, even with some of PFO's rough edges.

Last night, we discovered that we'd lost the game.

A party of PvP-ers waited around until we'd spent about an hour killing and harvesting, and were heading back to town. They killed and looted each one of us at least once, even when we were all together in an 8-person-strong quasi-party. They were able to do this because PvP is the winning strategy in PFO.

How is PvP the "I Win button"?

1: their build is more XP-efficient: our 8 characters have spent XP in combat areas, gathering areas, and crafting areas. We're "well-rounded" characters. They spent all of their XP on cranking up pure combat effectiveness. Thus, in a fight, they are more powerful and will win virtually every time.
2: we've "wasted" XP that can never be gotten back: no one in our party will ever be able to stand toe-to-toe with one of the PVP-ers we encountered. They have the edge now, and we will always have thousands fewer XP to spend on combat abilities due to having spent it on gathering and crafting.
3: we had discovered a handful of new-to-us recipes and spells, which they now have
4: therefore, PvP-ers can kill PvE-ers basically at will, with very little chance of repercussion. Because they can do so, they needn't spend XP on gathering skills; thus, they have more XP to spend on combat abilities, thus they can more easily kill PvE-ers and bring their ill-gotten mats back to town where one or two characters can fulfill all of the refining/crafting roles.
5: we can also never catch up because we can't learn the spells or recipies we need to become powerful enough to defend ourselves.

This is a positive feedback loop for the PvP-ers: the more PCs they kill,...

I'm sorry, but so much of that is wrong

While the loss of any players is unfortunate, if their play experience was ruined by 2 nights of banditry, I can only imagine how bad they would feel months from now at the loss of everything they had built when more rigorous and consequential settlement level pvp comes in. I can not fault Golgatha for playing as they do; that is the role they are playing in this game and it is necessary*. We cannot have a game of all good players getting along and living happily ever after. Otherwise we may as well all disband our settlements now and all join TEO...

*wheee! italics!

In the thread where Ryan announced the Freeholder trainers were accidentally replaced with goblins

I, for one, welcome our new goblin overlords.

@Harneloot Since husks, the reason is always apparent. Player=mobile node.

From your name, I would have thought you'd be aware of that ;)

Personally I think this whole thread is, pardon my French, stupid. As the guy involved in the NPC starter issue, I suffered no permanent harm, no adverse effect other than interruption of recruiting and some irritation. I reported it to GW when I thought the attack might be a predator looking for new players. When communication revealed I was specifically targeted for a specific reason, I contacted GW again and indicated I was no longer concerned about the safety of new players. At that point, i attributed it to a poor choice of location for the player to have attacked, but not something to ruin his name or his opportunity to play this game.

It may not be fair, but I will admit that when I found out the person was a member of TEO, I was more irritated then if they had been a member of a group I would naturally suspect. But as I have told Cheatle, I don't hold any ill will towards anyone, and I don't think the player should suffer any consequences for making one wrong decision (or forgetting the rule about starter settlements). I feel sorry for the player that any of this became public, and for that I apologize. I think the event could have made for some entertaining in game future content rather than this mess.

This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion and all involved should be allowed to get on and play this game.

Pyronous Rath --> CROWDFORGER!!

If there are ranged bandits, almost guaranteed that once melee reach you the ranged are interrupting you. Your animation will play in most cases. You may get a small print "attack interrupted". A solo player with T1 +2 gear can still die easily to a few Bandits once they switch to interrupt attacks.

Edit: unless you change your strat to deal with interrupts - 0.6 attacks, keeping out of range, having a partner who takes them out ;)

How about pine? I'm mostly finding yew.

Lots of pine in the northwest, as well as wool and coal. We lack yew, hemp, and iron. Let the trade roads flow!

Oh, that's very, very interesting. Fascinating. I'm curious though, how will you accomplish all this when you can't even defend you're own towers? Hmmmmm? :)

With the change in base training at PC settlements, they don't have to. I believe they implied they would much rather be on attack then defense. And unless their foes committed to holding those towers they can take them back easily. There is no inherent value to the core 6 towers above any other tower in your possession, unless you consider it a matter of pride. A nation of bandits may not be concerned :)

Don't expect rogues to perform well against enemies that see them coming.

Last I checked, stealthed characters still show on minimap. So players will always see them coming.

My most recent experiment of stealth vs perception:
Rogue stealth 86, perception ~50
Wizard stealth 10, perception ~80

Each tested approaching the other to see how much closer the character trained in stealth could approach and be seen/targeted compared to the "untrained". Rogue could get 3 steps closer than the untrained. To be clear, that is trained stealth vs trained perception, and untrained stealth vs. trained perception. 3 steps difference. I believe in illustrates some value in training perception, and the lack of value in training stealth - unless of course you are a rogue and gated by it.

Stealth is not viable for player interactions.

ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK *try to run f f f im still rooted f f f dead OR attack wait attack wtf i pushed the button why no spell ... overwelmed dead. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF stop FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF rooting me!!!!...

I know this isn't the answer you're looking for but I'm gonna give it anyway.

tl;dr
if what you're doing isn't working, change it up

I said "Hey Mike?"

Mike said "huh. That's not supposed to be in there."

It's a prop from the Tech Demo.

You should have stayed quiet and let us get all worked up for a while :D

To clarify, Takasi is still a member of Stoneroot who is crafting and supporting the startup economy at Guardheim. We are trying to support as many neighbours we can in their endeavours. While most of our crafters are based out of Talonguard, we have a few who work from Guardheim, Takasi being one. We negotiated a trade agreement with Alderwag prior to EE and it was a favoured site for one of our crafters during Alpha, and may be again if they become active.

Personally (not necessarily the official opinion of Stoneroot Glade) I see an interesting opportunity for the development of a trade corridor across the North - Talonguard-Guardheim-Callambea-?and further?

Given the upcoming change bringing PC settlements up to the level of starter settlements, losing some of your core 6 is no longer as big a deal. Settlements that have NAP status stripped, or small settlements under constant attack could focus on just defending 2 or 4 and still see relevant training improvement at this point in the game.

And if you have a Destiny Twin, deleting could lose you the perk also. Talk to customer service.

This is The Game.

PFO combat has one mechanism that might reward people for writing shorter macros: Percent chances to inflict conditions.

If a player launches an eight keystroke macro, and a condition like Dazed or Distressed is applied early in the fight, then the player probably won't have time to launch a follow-up attack that takes advantage of the condition. The player has to plan the rest of the macro based on the odds of applying the condition.

If a player launches a three keystroke macro, and places an attack with a chance to apply a condition last in the sequence, then the player can choose between two different macros to launch next: one with a follow-up to the condition, or one without a follow-up.

Very good points. Especially given the synergy of group dynamics since the system is designed for you capitalising on conditions your ally can apply, more often than you can do yourself.

Bunibuni was not in the hex at the time. The Holdings tab showed an Alderwag company in possession of a tower we had previously controlled and a time remaining apparently (3 min). The question would be, was that the time remaining in PvP window which would not matter because tower points already captured, or time remaining before capture completed. Obviously if it is the latter, then the Holding tab would be a useful tool for monitoring during your pvp window. Unfortunately I suspect it was the former.

I don't think it's really a problem with the crafting settlements. I think the problem is we have 4x as many hexes and 2x as many settlements as we should have started with...

An example of "Watch what you crowdforge for, you just might get it" ;)

His skill is evident in what he has done with the choices he's made, how he uses his mobility, and how he decides to engage and withdraw. The actual abilities are almost irrelevant and can be replaced with others as needed. That's why I will keep watching :)

Gale wins one of his objectives no matter BFKs actions at this point. If they become active in game, he has succeeded in drawing then in. If they become completely inactive, GW redistributes the settlement. If they remain minimally active, they enter the main game with minimal resources, angry neighbors, and easy pickings to be destroyed or conquered.

They have some interesting decisions to make.

Oh My!!

Sounds like fun was had by the parties involved. Grats and I look forward to more reports and rumours in the taverns!

All else is either deliberate or just meh.

I still can't believe you managed to keep a leather-wearing, bow-wielding rogue tank alive for so many of those scrums :D

For GW to believe that PFO could somehow match that success, with their current vision is not likely. PFO is far too generic to be considered a trend setting or ground breaking product.

Three more years of the five to complete initial development, then another ten years of iterations to correlate with current EVE before a comparison can be made. I don't know, seems a bit early for any predictions to have good validity. Personally, I think all that can be said is "time will tell".

Every time I see that avatar now, I want to reach out, give him a comforting little scratch behind the ears, and see if it makes his hind leg shake.

<Kabal> Daeglin wrote:

an acceptable strategy for pvp-averse settlements?

Strategy #1: Have someone else do your PvP for you.

Strategy #2: Be a company instead of a settlement and see #1.
Or, my personal favorite,
Strategy #3: Get rearpained.

Those are the only strategies of which I'm aware. ;P

I don't mind if a settlement does better cause of member numbers. I do mind if they do it by finding ways to hide. Glad that loop hole is closed :D

In Alpha, one company in a settlement could accumulate points in a tower during its pvp window that was previously claimed by another company in the same settlement. If this remains the case, and companies can "flip" ownership back and forth in order to close the pvp window as soon as possible, would that be considered an exploit to bypass the intent of WoT (more towers = longer pvp window for defending settlement) or an acceptable strategy for pvp-averse settlements?

Bluddwolf wrote:

I do not buy into the phantom flatfooted condition that some claim exists. If I don't see the Flatfooted icon on my target, my target is not flatfooted. "Acts as a flatfooted condition" was an excuse used in another thread, and that is BS as far as I'm concerned.

I'm with ya there on that one Bludd.

My understanding is that it does not exist yet, but it is the eventual intent as described. Story of the rogue ;)

...Daeglin, all that stuff you mention is just players clamoring for the stuff that was promised during the Kickstarter. Asking for a schedule and getting one? How can you think that is the same as

Quote:

enabling you to directly influence our designs and the prioritization of features.

?

DT was pretty important for the success of the Kickstarter: off course this was a prioritized feature from the start and I always felt that Ryan planned on giving us that feature asap. No crowdforging, just players clamoring for their stuff.

I have no illusions that the players can just Vote for stuff and if 75% wants something, they get it. How can you read that from my post?

I am hoping for more clarity on the "crowdforging proces" as we start EE.

But hey, if crowdforging is just clamoring for stuff on the forums and then hope and wait to see if it goes in, then fine.

Perhaps we have a different understanding of what crowdforging is. I believe any conversation we have, either with each other or the devs, that results in the devs changing their plans or their priorities, or actually confirms they are on the right track, is an example of crowdforging. The schedule? That wasn't information they were sharing with us, but after people "clamouring" back and forth, Ryan shared an aspect of how GW operates that I don't think any of us had any inkling of back then. Kind of like letting us audit a course at Goblinworks U. for a day. Was it a ground shaking new feature of the game, or a massive change in GW policy? No. But it was an example of GW listening to us and making a change - and in that example, they actually went with the "minority" (back before Rath was focussed only on grass :P ).

Sometimes clamouring can be productive, sometimes it is just noise. For example, the AH interface keeps coming up, despite GW saying they would revise it. I suspect most people raise it again because they simply don't know that. I don't know how much of what you said you meant literally, and how much was hyperbole, but I do believe crowdforging started long ago and is ongoing. If you would like to see a more formal approach, then a thread like this is one way to crowdforge it.

@Ryan When you put a GWU hoodie up on the GW store, make sure you save one for me.

Crowdforging
"We want a bigger initial map"
- got a bigger map

"We want some time to build economy before full pvp/WoT
- ok (though that was probably a relief to then giving them time to work on stuff before husks

"We want the Mac client in Alpha rather than EE"
- got it in Alpha

"We want to know schedule of development"
- thread posted showing priories that week/month/year

"We want class packs and DT for EE"
- got them

This is off the top of my head without checking forums. Crowdforging had been going on for quite sometime. What it sounds like is that your are asking for more accountablity in the Crowdforging process, such as "how many of us does it take to ask for something by such and such a date to get it". They won't do that. The description of the Crowdforging process was never going to be "mob rule" or "survey says". They were never putting control of the project in our hands, only the ability to influence it. I think you could find a number of people who feel their efforts have affected some part of the game.

When I really want an idea reviewed by the devs, I put it up on Ideascale because I know they monitor it. Same goes with GW forums. We get a lot of information about what priorities they are working on, what's next, when things are ready but it most often comes as a dev reply either here or at GW or in chat in game which means that most people aren't aware of it. I agree that GW could do a better job of keeping us informed in a more formal manner of their schedule and what they have changed due to the crowd forging process

Ryan stated that the backdating only happens ONCE. (With the exception of the DT)

Lee Hammock wrote:

Please submit shrines where this happens as a bug and we'll get them sorted. With hundreds of shrines we've tried to keep them all clear, but with such a large area of procedurally based terrain we have missed some.

Every time you say this you should add "to email address x@x.x" So that repetition helps people to memorize it.

I think he means the ingame bug report tool. It automatically notes your location when submitted so stand at shrine, open ticket, select submit bug, say "mobs at shrine", submit, and they'll know which one to fix.

There will not be any settlement that does not offer starter gear, if not Tier 1 +1, to recruits or even possible recruits. Any settlement that doesn't or can't will be at an extreme disadvantage in recruiting. There will not be any need to farm them. It also reinforces behaviour GW wants - make social ties, make them early.

Kabal is currently a wizard/rogue settlement (Stoneroot Glade), with associated crafting trainers for those roles. We are located up in the northwest near Rathglen, where I've seen you (Ember) around. We're a member of the High Road Covenant alliance with Talonguard (crafting) and Tavernhold (fighter/cleric). You can find more information on us at our Kabal website.

Some settlements who aren't wizard focussed may well have an alliance with one that is for training purposes, so you don't necessarily have to restrict yourself. We are probably one of the larger mid sized guilds here, not large enough to get lost in, not small enough to seldom have anyone else around. If you have any questions, send me a pm. I'm not our recruiter, but I am on these forums fairly reguarly.

One of the challenges with adapting to the auto target is that, while it is consistent in how it functions, in practice it operates in two different scenarios resulting in inconsistent targeting by the player. By this, I mean for example:

Scenario One
- Player (ranged attack) fighting two goblin scouts (ranged attackers).
- Player initiated fight by manual tab target.
- Aggros both. They return fire.
- Player kills one, second goblin is auto targeted and combat concludes with two dead goblins

Scenario Two
- Player (ranged attack) fighting two goblins warriors (melee attackers).
- Player initiated fight by manual tab target.
- Aggros both. They attempt to close, prompting opportunity, should be easy kills.
- Player kills one, waits for auto target to target second goblin but it doesn't because goblin has not actually attacked yet. Player shrugs, hits tab to target it and gets... a node. Goblin has closed and attacks, but by this point the player is panic smashing tab target cycling through targetable objects, goes past goblin, keeps key mashing.
- Player dies.

There are many variations of scenario two, most common being large group of attackers and Player trying to down them in specific kill order.

The frustrating part of the challenge is when one adapts and develops reflexes for scenario two, then finds himself back in scenario one, he will work against the auto target and lose his target.

I don't have a solution, it's simply one of the vagrancies of auto target that forces me to fight against conditioned combat reflexes.

Edit: argh long post results in easy ninja subjecting

While running from Kindleburn to Rathglen on my first day, I passed by Thornkeep and was struck by the view. Thought I'd share.

Screenshot

And my new lock screen on my phone

Which equipped feat determines if you call yourself a cleric? Is it the Class Feature, the Armor Feat, or Implement? Or do you have to have all three? I ask this because in one of the groups I was in, I saw heals and buffs being thrown around by 4 of the 6 members at some point, cloth wearers leather wearers plate wearers, bow wielders, stealthed, and I have no idea which one was the cleric.

*sitting in the corner at a New Years Eve party, typing on his phone, wishing he was in the River Kingdoms*

The adventures are what you choose to do, so yes they could always "adventure" with you. If you commit all your xp into one combat role, you will do that much better than them IF you also have the necessary gear to match what you have trained. If you spread your xp around between crafting, gathering, combat roles, there may be very little time to get them caught up in one of those areas.

Given how socially dependent this game is, the biggest advantage you might bring your friends is the ability to immediately plug into a settlement you have gotten to know. That and you already having gotten used to the quirks of the Keyword system and being able to get them familiar :)

*sigh* Now I remember why I chose not to go into psychiatry.

...PVPers will continue to PVP, but I think after the initial buzz of killing AFK bots wears off, the PVPers will prefer to kill people who are at their keyboards, rather than away from them...

Yes. To be more specific, I was referring to those who kept playing and actively PvPing during Alpha not only to test the system, but to increase their skill in this particular system,and primarily because they enjoy it. For example, I dont think anyone who has fought with or against Haagen can miss feeling his enjoyment radiate across the Internet :)