Daniel Powel 318

Daniel Powell 318's page

Goblinworks Executive Founder. RPG Superstar 6 Season Star Voter, 8 Season Star Voter. Organized Play Member. 337 posts (5,178 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 3 Organized Play characters. 1 alias.


1 to 50 of 866 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Animate Dead, Robe of bones, Haste, a combat spell, and a monster in hand is almost a sufficient win condition for any character with arcane or divine.

Use Animate dead, instead of discarding it, banish a monster. Draw at least two monsters from the box. Repeat until you have enough monsters, and resupply as needed.

Have enough monsters in hand to absorb the worst-case damage.

Not quite sufficient to be a win, since it's possible to lose to a villain and lose cards directly from the clock and lose, or to have encounters that place conditions on the cards that may be discarded as damage, or have effects that end your turn, or even to be at a location that you mathematically cannot close or meet the requirements to move from.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mike Selinker wrote:
And I promise never to include a puzzle in any of my games again.

That's a really odd way to announce your retirement.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you want to stay in, I'll buy a package of goblin balls for you. Because I'd rather have a KC in PFO than have more dice.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You don't die until you need to reset your hand, so I'd use it every time I was rolling a check that would win the scenario.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I see lots of germs of ideas for great MMOs here, but I don't see much that wouldn't require writing off a huge part of work already done in order to incorporate into PFO.

Are you sure that you're not designing a MMO based off of Crusader Kings or Europa Universalis? There's probably a niche for that somewhere, but I think that there are some pretty hard problems to solve first. What would the players' goals be in a MMO succession game, and how would a player that spent only 12 sessions with a character (semiweekly for 6 months) feel that they were accomplishing something?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sign me up for a half-orc brain, if you have one. I'm on a diet.

I'll me there as Decius Brutus.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

This thread is for the discussion of the EBA territory and polices. Please take discussion of policies that you imagine some nominally Lawful Good group created to a different thread.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Phyllain wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:

I love how

Gol Tink wrote:


We had no intention of beginning a war with Keepers' Pass or Brighthaven. We still have no real intention of being in a war with Keeper's Pass or Brighthaven, which is why we have been keeping the vast majority of our operations close to Phaeros lands.

is equivalent to "2 hexes from Keeper Pass, in the mountains".

I get the tactical reasons perfectly, it is way easier to get targets if you sit in the main access to KP, where your target movement is restricted to a single hex and the ogre help you. But I find that that beavyor make the statement "we want to fight only Phaeros" blatantly false.

Not a surprise as this is as much a propaganda war as a guerrilla war for Golgotha.

I liked this response, the first night of our interdiction campaign we in point of fact did not attack anyone up on the mountain we only operated in the area around Phaeros. The next day the entire brighthaven alliance mobilized to take all of our towers. The next day I opened up the area of engagement to include the mountain that PK and Brighthaven reside on.

I am willing to provide prof of the original set or orders to my members if anyone would like to see it. There is some profanity in it how ever.

If you didn't want a war but felt forced into one because we defended a tower for a day, would you be willing to settle for a state in which there isn't a wave that sweeps up from the south and wipes all of EoX's towers, and EoX generally respects EBA territory and doesn't try to inderdict anywhere outside its own borders?

Or is one tower important enough to go to war over, but all of them not important enough to be an important part of peace?

Phaeros believes that the principle of punishing gank squads, regardless of how effective they are, is important enough to war over, but that the cost of total war leaves every participant worse than a more limited war.

"Limited war" was the reason why we took only one tower, and the fact that it wouldn't result in any loss of training or support was a factor. After EoX started ganking in retailiation, the amount of damage that I intended to cause increased significantly.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lifedragn wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
Gaskon wrote:
Its almost like T7V claimed they were going to try and keep non-combatants safe in an open PVP game, spent two years being called naive carebears on the forums, and are now accomplishing exactly what they said their goals were all along.

This would not so easily be accomplished if it were not for the incompleteness of the game.

Bottom line is this, PFO would be a very different experience for all parties concerned if only partial threading (as was planned by GW) were actually a thing.

Item decay 1/5th (5% not 25%) of what was also described as the plan by GW.

A character needs to die 20 times before having to concern themselves with new gear, that is a tremendous altering factor to the desirability of PVP, both pro and con.

Tier 2 advantage over T1 has made combat far more gear centric than was originally advertised. So those who focused on Crafting are seeing a short term advantage over those that concentrated on combat. I say short term because eventually all will have T2 gear, and crafters will have little or nothing to do.

I agree to some extent with the durability being a little too lenient, but would perhaps take a more moderated approach. Leave tier 1 as it is, give T2 items 10 durability and T3 items 5. This provides a more lenient atmosphere for novices and grows less forgiving as you gain play experience. It also makes sure that T2 and T3 crafters are kept a little more busy.

That would also require making t3 costs a fraction of what they are.

Seriously, look at the amount of raw material in t3 equipment, most of which nobody has seen anywhere yet.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Tink wrote:

You know, it's strange, Decius, we have been saying the exact same thing about you and Nihimon since pre-Alpha. We believe that you are toxic to a cohesive community, and that you will do everything you can to undermine positive influences while hiding behind the pretense of being "the heart and soul of the community".

So how about this. We will hand Callambea off when you and Nihimon unsubscribe form the game.

That would satisfy me as well and anything that I can tell you to do.

That was not an opening position. I can not negotiate my beliefs.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Phyllain wrote:
You really need to make up your mind man. Did we have a ceasefire or didn't we?

Brighthaven was having talks, and Phaeros advised that we would not agree to any written terms but would like things to cool off. Things cooled off for a while, then there was aggressive action against us, then we responded to the heat with a measured move, then the murderhobos came down and we responded to the escalation.

Had it been only the two towers we lost that night, we probably would have taken them back, noticed the removal of the offending base camp, and cooled back off.

And you knew all of that, but if you gave the order to not attack, it would have been ignored, so you bought off on the consequences of recruiting players who want to advance "player killer" more than they want to meaningfully interact.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

TEO took five, HFL took two, HRC took one, ROS took four I think? I'll have to check my strategic notes.

I used sharpie instead of wet-erase, so now I have a permanent record.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Tink wrote:

Well then, let's be clear.

The EoX believes that our ceasefire with Phaeros ended when they attacked one of Kruez Bernsteins towers on... Tuesday night I think it was? Our talks with the Cheatle at the time made us believe that our ceasefire with the rest of the SE still stood.

The EoX believes that our ceasefire with the rest of the SE ended when they cooperated with Phaeros on Saturday night to attack the rest of our towers. Until we heard reports that Cheatle himself was a part of those attacks, we still hoped that there was a chance that it was a rogue op, and that the ceasefire held.

Edit: Cheatle, that is not what we agreed upon. I have told you, explicitly, that we would attack Phaeros on their lands. I made attempts before our ops to contact you, so that you could pull your people out of the Red Zone. Unfortunately you weren't online. You broke the ceasefire, not us.

For the record, this is an excerpt of our internal SOP prior to your tower attack:

"It should be noted that our agreement with the rest of the EBA still stands. We are operating under the assumption that Cheatle is good to his word, and that though they will assist in the defense of Phaeros, as long as we do not go into Brighthaven lands and begin attacks, we will not face aggressive reciprocation.

Make every reasonable attempt to avoid the mountains in the SE. Keep your attacks within the immediate area around Phaeros, and Phaeros controlled lands. I do not want to hear reports of obvious attempts at attacks within Keeper's Pass or Brighthaven controlled lands. "

I assume that if you don't have the authority to speak on behalf of EoX Phyllain will step in and say so.

The detente was over when AGC was observed to have established a base camp for the purpose of farming t2 escalations in EBA territory. It could have been resumed after their tower was taken in retaliation and then retaken. However, there was further escalation afterwards. When EoX forced resumed attacking random targets around Phaeros, there was no way to offer a measured retaliation. So we organized for a total retaliation, even coordinating with other groups to make the response as overwhelming as possible.

If EoX continues with their policy OR the actuality of hit and run attacks anywhere outside of their own borders, Phaeros will not entertain any softening of their stance towards EoX. Any EoX member state that wishes to seek a separate peace should consider disavowing their imperial alliance.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Tink wrote:
Can I be your Minister of Stabbing? I'm not sure I'm down with the way the Xeilian Empire is headed.

After reviewing your qualifications, I'm afraid that you did not make the "very well qualified" list.

If you wish to be upgraded, submit a video of your character stabbing five different Golgothans and/or UNC characters to death.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

3 people marked this as a favorite.

There are four important parts to an awesome sandbox.

First, there's the sand. There has to be something that produces emergent behavior and a medium in which it can happen.

There also has to be a box: the limits and boundary conditions set on the sand.

There also have to be people, to make the sandbox distinct from driftwood on a beach.

And the hardest bit is the buckets. It's hard to provide buckets without subtly discouraging doing the things that buckets don't make easier. Providing a mechanism for PvP combat at designated times and places has the effect of making attacks outside those boundaries less accepted. Likewise having the ability for a company to remain intact and move to a different settlement discourages any settlement from taking members for granted.

Generally I find that the buckets we have for the sandbox shape PFO towards the product that was described all along, even though in retrospect I notice that I used to think that it would be several different mutually incompatible things at once.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

He'd bring in his network guy, the tech conversation would go like:
"Here's what we have to do and have already done. What libraries do you have that do this, and how quickly can we adapt them to our needs?"
"The libraries don't exist."
(Up to the director)
"Shifting the networking code will take six months and three people."

"Here's the requirements for the shaders that we use."
"You'll have to redo all of that."
(Up)
"Graphics will take ten months, four people, plus art."

After a few more cases of "you'd have to redo that entirely", the time allotted for the meeting is over.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
Mikaze wrote:

Just watch out for unintentional blockages, like when you're trying to %#* & notice up that there's a raid coming on Sa#%*+ay.

has actually seen those examples, even in NPC text

I hit this problem in two different online games. One wouldn't let me use the word "Klondike" (despite the epithet being spelled with a y), and another wouldn't let me say "accumulate"

Some filtres really are too sensitive.

That's a very clbuttic outcome of using a cheap filter.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

5 people marked this as a favorite.
DeciusBrutus wrote:


Any policy statements made by the EBA would be irrelevant to the current situation, because the EBA does not have the authority to make policies which are binding to individual Phaerites.

Sorry; I said something here radically different from what I meant. I meant to reiterate that Phaeros does not make demands of citizens, and that no delegated authority of Phaeros can make affirmative demands of her citizens. To clarify, within those limits, EBA polices are as binding on Phaerites as the polices of Phaeros are.

Citizens of Phaeros who consistently act against the values of Phaeros and TSV will find themselvess no longer citizens of Phaeros.

Generally adhering to the friendly/enemy list of Phaeros is a neccesary part of adhering to the core values of Phaeros, specifically including not taking unprovoked attack actions against neutral parties.

Phaeros is a member of the Everbloom Alliance because the values that inform the EBA are largely the same as the values of Phaeros. Polices of the EBA are also policies of Phaeros, which have very limited ability to bind Phaerites to a course of action. For example, an EBA/Phaeros policy that purported to require any specific individual or individuals to train a specific craft skill to a specified level would be invalid, since it would violate the principle of individual freedom. However, a policy that simply described some groups of characters who were to be considered hostile and some others that were to be considered neutral would be in a sense binding; while no particular Phaerite would be required to log on to attack a particular hostile at a particular time, nor to escort a particular neutral party at a particular time, providing intentional aid to enemies or intentional harm to neutrals runs counter to the ideals of positive gameplay and is in a very real sense prohibited of Phaerites.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Most people are much more predictable than they think they are. But there's a major difference between knowing what someone is about to do and being able to do something about it.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cloakofwinter wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:


Now, to discuss the matter of honor:
You Have What You Hold: Once it falls from your cold dead fingers, you don't hold it anymore; once you pick it back up again, you do. Trying to lay a claim to goods which you don't hold is in direct contravention of the River Freedoms.

Which is fine. The thing that concerns me throughout this thread is what I am hearing from various players is tales of you saying "you tried to help the victim until the victim (myself) started being a jerk." If this is some rumor you are trying to spread in roleplaying terms throughout your settlement and the world, that's fine. But it seems like you are spreading this out of play, and both you and I know exactly what happened - it's pretty simple. You found my corpse, looted it and bailed without saying a word.

When we talked later in whispers, you said you ran because you would have decimated me in combat and I'd just be dead again.

I'd like to keep things clear.

Which means Thod wasn't trying to extort anyone. He was simply asking for me to be made whole, and you refused. A valid choice. But lets not poison player's ears with OOC rhetoric.

I never claimed to try to help you, to anybody. I also took exactly zero action to spread it. Thod spread that story, presumably based on your story to him, and Thod has caused this to spread further.

And to be clear, I left because I couldn't get anything more without attacking you, and I chose not to.

I didn't even think that you would consider fighting an option, considering your experience (specifically, that you were carrying lots of stuff when you decided to PvE). I stand behind what I actually said, which was "You didn't want to fight me."

Which is not what Blodwulf said he would say, which was "hey", but apparently that makes all the difference.

Also, I also stand behind my characterization of Thod's actions as extortion (or, if you want to be a pedant, possibly blackmail). Across multiple channels of communication, to multiple different players, Thod strongly implied that a payment from myself personally, from Phaeros, or from the Everbloom Alliance would cause him not to make this post.

Thod wrote:


...Needless to say that Decius right now won't come out well in the comparison. ...

... I wanted to give you an ahead warning as Theodum will try to squash Decius Brutus intergity in character as hard as possible. Some players will take this as personal insults as they will read it ooc. Especially as I expect other parties to throw oil on the fire after I post. ...

... Should Phaeros want to make repatriations(sic) for one of there(sic) members - let me know. I won't have time to write the piece today - and something like this needs a little bit of word smithing.

I don't hold it against Thod; it is a PvP game after all, and it isn't clear enough to him that I actually want the site that Emerald Lodge occupies held by a strong group that is neither affiliated with the EBA nor aggressive towards it. It would have been great if EL could have been neutral, but it is equally strategically valuable to have EL independent but non-expansionist.

And to reiterate, I will not pay any form of blackmail or extortion, even when the price to be paid appears less than the cost of not paying, because the actual cost to me is the nominal cost plus the ability to credibly precommit. That is because it means that anyone who considers blackmailing me should notice that it has an expected negative outcome for them, causing them to not perform blackmail.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gol Phyllain wrote:
I mean the deal I made with Nihimon where we wouldn't engage in tower swapping. In that conversation I told him that we would still come south to fight and you guys where more then welcome to come north to fight us. Just wanted to be completely clear that you guys where breaking that agreement. Which I'm sure you will now say was never formal or lasting and that we some how broke it by killing people. It's your typical method.

That wasn't a deal; it was simply an acknowledgement that tower swapping wasn't fun.

What wasn't fun for the last week was a pattern where Gologthans camped out around Keeper's Pass in moderate numbers, killed a few individuals until word spread and a small response could arrive, and then ran away.

So, we're doing something different and expecting a different result. With the shorter PvP window, fewer towers to defend, and better capture mechanics, I expect that tower PvP will either be fun enough to satisfy the Golgothan PvP contingent, or that we will be able to provide specific feedback on what is wrong with it that can be incorporated into the system where Holdings change hands.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

After wrestling with various software, the recording is finally up here.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Broadcasting from now until complete here.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lisa Stevens wrote:
Yrme wrote:

I'm not sure why crafter settlements are expected to thrive at this time, compared to other settlements? All settlements have some crafting capabilities; crafting settlements have the advantage of all crafting stations *plus* an auction house.

Just speaking as a EBA member, I have spent more time in KP than in any other settlement during the last 6 weeks. I don't need to belong to Keeper's Pass to use their crafting stations or auction house.

I think this is a big part of it. You don't have to belong to a crafting settlement to use their resources right now. Keeper's Pass is absolutely overflowing with activity right now, but it isn't all from their citizens. Members of EBA are spending all their time there gathering, crafting, and foraying into the field.

I don't think pure numbers of members is going to be a good indication of the health of a crafting town. I think the other non-crafting settlements around it are going to use it as a base for their trade, help those settlements with defense, and basically ally with them for mutual benefit.

-Lisa

Indeed. If Keeper's Pass needed resources and labor to improve at being a crafting settlement, they would have it despite not having many direct citizens.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sissyl wrote:
How was it "rejected cleanly"? There is probably a good reason you can't replicate it, I'd say.

It's rejected because in the initial data sets, the series that should have a max and mode of 98 has one of 79.

The problem is that we cannot replicate how to get those results. In many circles, the presumption would be to consider it a failure to follow procedure and move on, instead of asking if there might be a bug related to updating keywords when weapons are changed out.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravenlute wrote:
*Sprays a can of Raid on the thread*

You need acid or fire at this point.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Which attack feats have been seen to exhibit the behavior where base damage appears not to change properly, and which ones have been tested and appear to work?

I consider a critical hit against an opponent to be sufficient to observe that full damage should be displayed. The OP described behavior is obviously a bug, and now we can look at how that bug is expressed and how to replicate it.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There's a reason that the invites are limited and that the only way to get more is for your guest to convert. Those who give theirs out to strangers who give up after ten minutes will only send two invites ever; anyone who sends a lot can do so only because they added new paying players.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

2 people marked this as a favorite.

But, are they always glad you came?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've spent too many marathon math sessions trying to work out the ideal cycle; I can't find the minimum number of players with main and off-hand weapons such that every character has a trigger that can be applied with the fewest people needing to apply it.

Also, since there is a cap to the stacking debuffs that is fairly easy to reach, large groups can't rely on using the same debuff on their alpha target; and crowd control is more effective when distributed than when focused, and several other deep theory issues that I've scratched but not yet identified.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Two gatherers who coordinate properly already get twice the yield per time.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pyronous Rath wrote:
Kadere wrote:
Kyutaru wrote:
Pyronous Rath wrote:
Neadenil Edam wrote:
Kadere wrote:
Neadenil Edam wrote:

Keepers regularly hunt red and purple ogres in Wizard only parties. If he "cheats" and takes a +2 staff and +2 heavy armor he is a low level NPC genocide machine.

This makes my Cleric-ness feel very inadequate. :D
They are not particularly GOOD at it, a party of dedicated archers with some cleric healing would almost certainly kill purples far far quicker. It is fun though. Point was they can do it. Which for me is what matters.
You just made my point for me thanks.
He also just made my point. Archers kill better than Wizards. Working as intended.
He also just made my point. *sobs holy tears*
Dono why you are crying cleric's have the highest dmg feat's in game AND get to wear armor AND have great healing ability.

Are you referring to Basic Longbow Exploit?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What meaningful human interaction occurs when you gank an unequipped AFK character?

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

1. Yes
2. Meet-greet for the GW staff. A demo station with screens visible from the hallway might help convert other Pathfinder players into PFO.

This also is the best chance for in-person crowdforging and observing the new player experience; give new players a copy of the new player guide, and watch/talk to them about whether or not it tells them what they need to know.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Illililili wrote:

"Thornguards now attack PCs with the attacker flag and the Thorngurad aggro range has been increased."

Don't hit yourself by accident in town. Assault on one's self is now punishable by death!

Attempted suicide is punishable by summary execution.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The stealth feats have almost nothing to do with wether or not someone sees you coming or has you targeted.

I suggest hanging behind your teammate, with cutthroat class feature. When the enemy engages the bait/tank/bluff, move up and engage with daggers. Drop feint first, to get a couple of attacks with the ff bonus, then have your ally drop feint, then consider maneuvers. If the target shifts to the cutthroat, disengage with evasion, drop a tanglefoot bag on the target, and make hi choose.

Against ranged targets, slot opportunist. Cycle feints for the time being, until sneak attack is working properly, to get maximum benefit from things that trigger off of ff.

I'm not telling you secrets here; this is the first-order strategy such that anyone who doesn't understand at this basic level is acting in a manner that is games-theoretically "random". Not that genetic algorithms don't work, just that they will take much longer.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:


Thod wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

...did you just call me kobold beaver.

I will end you.

I think he was calling you a Koblod B-leaver, a form of Kobold Believer.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pyronous Rath wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Pyronous Rath wrote:
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

Don't do that. You're gonna die a lot.

Try using shorter duration attacks, if you can't maintain enough disciple to use attacks only when you want to. Failing that, start to run away a couple of seconds sooner than you currently do.

Adapting is important.

oh you must have not read or understood my post. I cannot run away I am rooted a shorter cool down does not mean I wont be rooted in fact I would be rooted more as you are not rooted for the cool down you are rooted for the animation. Reading is important ;-).

Yes it is. Faster attacks have shorter animations. Which you know, because you've tried a variety of tactics before settling on the one that was broken OP before the immobile fix.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pyronous Rath wrote:
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

Don't do that. You're gonna die a lot.

Try using shorter duration attacks, if you can't maintain enough disciple to use attacks only when you want to. Failing that, start to run away a couple of seconds sooner than you currently do.

Adapting is important.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

According to the terms of the deal, you must designate as your advocate... A Shrubbery.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bluddwolf wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Once it's pried out of your cold, dead hands you aren't holding it, so at that point is not your anymore. I see no contradiction there.
Actually, sooner than that... Once you are dead, you are no longer holding it.

You need to practice your death grip.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gol Phyllain wrote:
I'm sorry if t2 escalations are suppose to be out of reach of us right now why have they been in the game sine EE launched?

So that it could be tested whether or not we could kill them, of course.

Testing requires attempting to do some things that should fail, to try them.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Blaeringr is everybody.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Atheory wrote:

Antagonists? Perhaps, but I can't see where we object, in our own way, to one thing (the NAP) causing us to have that label full time. Then again, only time will tell.

Damn, and I thought i'd be post #300

I thing that you're intending to be antagonists, and that's why you did what you did.

If you don't intend to be antagonistic, there's something I don't understand about your motivations. Since the last time I asked specifically about that I was ignored, I assume that it's something you might be holding for advantage; that implies that you see the interaction as adversarial, making you the antagonist party.

When it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I think duck, even though there are other possibilities.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

When you smell ogres' breath you get stunned. Someone needs to go in there with some toothpaste.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think that the difficulty of mass transport is about right.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hope that we can declare people Persona Non Hrata at PC settlements soon, at least outside the PvP window.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Spraga "The Bird Caller" Uhuru wrote:

"Pissing too many people off can be game-ending".

Or game-on...

Who gets to decide?

Reality. Reality arbitrates all of the things in the end, and it's not like the illuminati get together and talk about who is going to ragequit PFO.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Doc || Allegiant Gemstone Co. wrote:
Quote:
Meaningful choices. Meaningful human interaction. If it can't do serious inconvenience to you, it's not meaningful.
Considering people suggested in this very thread that blacklisting AGC from joining a different settlement is a legitimate punishment, you might see why I tend to think the prevailing mechanics (or lack thereof) create an environment when the "meaningful interaction" you speak of becomes a form where Settlement leaders can effectively "grief" companies they do not like.

That would be players getting a bad reputation for doing bad things. That's a core mechanic of the world and an emergent behavior in PFO.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I will be spending a lot less time with a browser window covering most of the game window except the minimap as I run from point to point.

1 to 50 of 866 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>