Elynor's page

Hi, I supported this project in kickstarter.

I know I have several months of game time, but Im currently too busy to play (working and studying at the same time for a few months...)

So, when I logged into my goblinworks account, it shows that I am signed up for early enrollment... but i don´t remember signing up for that.

So.... is there any way that I can save my game time bought in the kickstarter and not spend it just yet?

Thanks all.

(Sorry if this has been discussed already but as I have previously explained I´m extremely busy at the moment and have no time to browse forums. Thank you for your understanding and help).

Well, since I know for sure that permadeath is not going to be implemented, Id like to talk about something similar.

To have warfare make more sense, to not have people respawn inmediately and then throw themselves into battle, the minimum thing I would implement would be a heavy death penalty in the form of a huge respawn timer.

I imagine that in the current state of the game you can respawn almost inmediately and then throw yourself into the same battle.

Wouldn´t it be better (and a lot more bearable for everyone) to have a 24 hour (or similar) respawn time?

Yes, I am saying that if you die, you cannot play the same character (or the whole account) in the next 24 hours (or a similar time a lot bigger than instant respawn, ¿12? whatever). Pharasma takes his/her time.

This would make a lot more sense to me, although I would prefer a permadeath system, this might be something in between that might

And of course, you could still play sooner if you actually get a resurrection spell... oh, now a cleric´s role makes a lot more sense in the outcome of the battle of the day.

As you might see, I´m trying to be flexible here to the teddybear attitude. Yes, pun intended, but don´t get offended as it´s just a joke.

I think that you waste the same time and money in a character that dies than with a character who doesn´t

What you earn is a better experience through the real threat of real virtual death.

What you lose is a world filled with lvl 20 (or whatever the cap is) character.

Yes, I do think it is good to reroll and retrain, it is that threat what will make everyone try and behave, why? because being flagged as a criminal when killing someone will make your character simply not last much longer.

What strategy there is in warfare where no one can actually die?

Endless war is, therefore coming.

OFC with this system implemented, as I said before, the whole leveling should be rethought, as it makes no sense anymore to cap in 2-3 years (it should not be easy anyway ofc).

To the one who spoke about settlements getting weaker after a war.

That is the idea, that war has a lasting effect on the land...

Easy pickings? yeah, thats a reason why a king might not wage war, to not weaken themselves... then comes natural peace.

Rather than calling this permanent death, lets call it, not-respawning... you see, there already ARE forms of resurrecting in this game.

As far as I know, a level 9 cleric in TT Pathfinder can do the job, if you pay the price.

If you don´t pay the price, then you can reroll a heir character, with everything that is left over in the bank.

All of this talk about "investing" in characters to then lose them is simply amazing. Are you all really happy about the idea of play your own immortal D&D character that can NEVER die like in a Drizzt´s tale?

What is the point in being powerful when every one else also is?

You talk about leaving a lasting impact in the world, here is your chance to actually make a game that does just that without forced mechanics to please your ever lasting fantasy.

Eventually everyone will be capped right.

We will have tons of lvl 20 characters (or whatever the max is) roaming the world.

If this is what you want then fine, but I think the other way around would be a lot more interesting.

I see a lot of hardcore concepts in this game, I am just suggesting another one, which, well executed, imo would make it awesome, and badly executed would obviously ruin the experience. Yes, its a huge gamble.

I agree that, with this concept in the game, the whole game mechanics would have to change around it.

Obviously it should take a lot less than 3 years to cap, but it would be extremely dificcult for anyone to do so.

I like the idea that a murderer can be chased by the community and lose the character eventually.

Crime does not pay then :)

It depends on what your definition of playable is.

For me, being lvl 20 should be extremely rare, and being below level 10 common, in a realistic fantasy world.

Playing as a citizen of a large town that is afraid of the wilderness and only travels in a caravan for safety is a playable concept. Just more risky.

I am not going to play a permadeath way in a world without the feature, I will play this game gladly within its rules.

Just wanted to share my thoughts and those of my close friends, buddy crowdforgers as well, about Permanent Death.

We think that Permanent Death is an extremely hardcore rule that makes things extremely interesting, even if so, sometimes frustrating.

We also understand that this kind of punishment is not fit for everyone, but interesting for many, as games and mods like DayZ and Z-Day which include this feature are growing in popularity and being cloned in a monthly basis.

As far as I know, there will only be one shard of pathfinder online, a single world/server. We think this permadeath mode would make it worth it to create a more hardcore one as an option.

In a world in which there is actually real resurrection spells, there is even more reason for this to be implemented, as since there is a tool to fix a permanent unbearable thing, makes it not so punishing after all (if you can manage to carry the body to the appropiate priest... imagine if the player decides to make a living dead out of it... imagine the extra layer of possibilities).

In case of permadeath, a heir system should be implemented so you do not have to start over 100% and, and at least have the stuff you stored safely.

We do not like at all this whole Mask of Pharasma thing. Makes everything extremely fantastic. D&D is a fantasy setting, yes, but if Game of Thrones has tought us something is that fantasy settings with loads of mundane content and tiny bits of fantasy here and there, makes things a lot more interesting as fantastic things become rare and interesting to find, rather than being mundane fantastic.

Another game that I mentioned before and that I would like to draw attention from is Mount & Blade, the more stuff that you copy (or are inspired) from this, the better (except for the bad graphics), specially its combat system... mundane but real and interesting.

Hope this was useful.

I´m being asked for an avatar name for my buddy in the crowdforger buddy tool to get all the stuff.

So I just wanted to be sure, If I would be the buddy, I would have to write "Elynor" and then click Find?

I know it is obvious but I want to be sure before making a mistake that might be final and not reversable.

Thanks

I disagree. The most important thing to develop is the game system itself, extra races (core or not) are not important if the gaming experience does not feel right. And to give a BAD example I´ll say that whatever Blizzard game you pick up, you start having fun from second one and it doesn´t ever stop... it´s a good game system that doesn´t bore you (like, for example I could not stand Warhammer Online) what is most important. Let the extra races suffer.

Immersion is also critical, and a feel of realism.

What I´m trying to say here is that what is important is what you feel from the game when playing it, and other things, due important, are very easily added, once you do it right with less features.

I don´t like the idea of having teleporters around like it´s a mundane thing. Too much high fantasy for my taste, makes the world feel small also.

Long distances and travel times are cool I think.

I agree in one thing Andius, which is that when they release mounts, they should release them fully. Not just a speed buff and then mounted combat months or years later.

However, in a medieval setting, fantastic or not, I think that mounts should be a core feature of any game.

As I´ve said in the crowdforger poll, the more they lean towards a system like in the mount & blade game, the better. And the more they lean towards a WoW system (speed buff / cosmetic buff) the worst.

Again, I´d rather wait for the whole thing than have a speed buff to "feel" like I´m on a horse.

Mounted combat (proper is not so difficult, just look at the game that I mentioned above which has simple but realistic and awesome feeling mechanics) is a must whenever horses (or any mounting something feature) are available.

We are too early in development, but anything you can gather from pen and paper sources and these forums / website is the most accurate information you can find now... so I would just focus on a concept rather than a build... that will come later on, although you can try and do pen and paper builds but I imagine it will get you nowhere towards PFO

Elynor wrote:

...

I already messaged the devs about this before, but I thought it would be interesting to know what other people think about this, if there is interest about it....

I think what Val was saying above is true: the developers have plainly shown they are reading our posts avidly to get a better grasp of what we want to see and how we think things should work.

So posting t your ideas here also gives opportunity to brainstorm with the rest of us, and then when the devs start reading it we should have overcome most of the problems that will spring to mind.

These boards have been very positive from the community as well: please share with us too!

Not that I didn´t want to share, it just occurred to me later that I could sign up to the forum after sending the message ;)

Recently I have heard that the developers are thinking on implementing bonuses for being in a formation in pathfinder online.

This has got me imagining all sorts of situations from a small formation in a dungeon to regimental blocks in battles between player kingdoms.

However I find a big issue which is average player low discipline and fun factor maybe decreased due to being forced to stick in a position.

I think it is actually one of the design goals to decrease the amount of players running around in a battlefield like crazy.

---------My suggestion--------

I have been very influenced by the videogame "Mount & Blade" and amongst other great mechanics (like it´s combat) the important part for this thread is where you can marshal a small group of troops and give basic orders to up to 10 regiments.

There is a feat in D&D called "Leadership" that lets you handle roughly the same amount of troops.

Well, my suggestion is to let a player be the sergeant of a small group of NPCs, being able to give basic orders like in this game, and as long as he is within the regiments, also gives and gets some bonuses.

---Pros---

1.- Potentially great battles since every player can bring to the table an additional amount of NPCs to leader in-game.

2.- Fun factor of being in a formation won´t be diminished, as everyone will want to ensure that their hardly earned soldiers do their part correctly and will have fun ordering them around.

---Cons---

1.- Every moving NPC gives an additional input to strain the system, which might be difficult to implement (or maybe not...).

---------- Other uses ------------

In a game with player kingdoms I see it essential to have all sorts of NPCs that can be ordered to do stuff, from chopping wood, to run your shop, to patrol your town, to fight your battles.

---------- ---------- ----------

I already messaged the devs about this before, but I thought it would be interesting to know what other people think about this, if there is interest about it.

Hope you liked the idea and if not, feel free to discuss :)

I would not worry about this...

As you know, in D&D we have synergy bonus, and I think Goblinworks and Paizo do give synergy bonus to each other...

It can actually become + a lot to Paizo if the online version is very successful.

Basically I can imagine a common thought in someone´s mind, when some things are not reachable within the world.

"Look at this jerk who thinks he is so cool because he got this flashy <enter cosmetic upgrade item name here> with his real money"

I can imagine a common thought in someone´s mind, when everything is reachable within the world.

"Look at this guy who managed to gain <enter cosmetic upgrade item name here>... he is so cool ! I have to get one to myself, it can´t be so hard...".

Not that this would be my own thoughts, but I imagine that people normally reacts this way to these different situations. I for one, started hating WoW a bit, when some items where only available through the shop... even if they were some silly pets... and then some awesome mounts... and then... well it is frustrating even though I always had plenty of money for it, I didn´t feel comfortable getting it that way... it felt against my principles, so never bought anything and it didn´t feel cool when seen in-game worn by someone else (*golfclap*).

Everything should be achieved in-game, except for the idea of training offline, but that´s actually instructing your character to work while you are away anyway, so it is not technically out of it. It is actually pretty cool and encourages casual players to not be stressed due to not playing all the time and being unable to keep up with others.

In response to Ryan Dancey:
"Our microtransaction system will also allow you to buy some consumables that will make playing the game a bit easier, items that you'll be able to use to make your character look different and interesting, mounts that are distinctive, and other ways of making you stand out from the crowd. Our commitment to the players is that nothing you can purchase with microtransactions will be mechanically superior to the materials created in-game through character activity."

-----------------------------------------------

I have to say that I am 100% against the idea of have any kind of upgrade outside of the game only available through money.

Even if it is cosmetical, it is good to feel that everything within the world is available through gameplay and not through one´s wallet.

Even if gametime is gained through a subscription or other form of payment, I would leave any gains that are shown in the world, within itself.

If you cross this border, you are also breaking immersion. Just my opinion.