Search Posts
I know that offering three models per type (male, female, sexualized female) is a 50% increase in resources per outfit. I would rather see 20 outfits with three options each than 30 with two options each. You're forgetting "sexualized male". We're actually talking four models, not three, as male characters should also have choices on the spectrum between Conan and medieval knight.
Ultimately we want to know what you think and want, and I'd specifically love to hear from more women who want to play female characters in the game... on either side of the liberal/conservative dress argument. I think we all want a more balanced male/female player base in the game, so my goal is to provide everyone options that makes them enjoy playing their character (keeping in mind our relatively small team and timeline). Wow, I get pulled away by Real Life for a month, and look what's waiting for me when I make it back to the forums! Mike and Ryan, thanks for the posts. As a female gamer planning to play female characters, I'll take you up on that request for feedback. Please bear with me; I can be a bit long-winded (texted?). I'll work from Ryan's "desirable" versus "exploitive" framework, and I'll reference the iconic character art where illustrations are needed. Let me also add, here, that I'm happy with the pictures from the blog; I like the layered look, and while I definitely hope you get to add some different body types (and heights, please; and also PLEASE don't make all female characters big-breasted!), that's actually less important to me than getting the gear on the "desirable" side of the equation. Good start so far! (1) I tend to think "exploitive" when there is far more female skin on display than male skin. That's not so much in evidence in the blog pictures, but if you look at the eleven iconic characters, it jumps out: only one of the five male characters - Sajan - is showing any sizable expanse of skin, while three of the six female characters - Amiri, Seoni, and Merisiel - are. (Merisiel actually isn't showing much at all in total amount, but the bare skin is that very focused "boob window" area... which is pretty much drawing attention right to her cleavage, so I've included her here. My opinion; others may disagree.) So, half the female characters, but only one in five male characters, are clad in "revealing" outfits. As specific portraits of specific characters, that's not an issue... but if that's the ratio of female-to-male revealing clothing in game, that's what I'd consider exploitive. It would tend to mean that I would find a higher propertion of revealing armor than my husband would, meaning it would be harder, or at least more time-consuming, for me to assemble a non-revealing outfit than it would be for him. I'd be edged toward being eye candy just by the proportion of skimpier armor pieces available. That's not a "desirable" outcome for me. (2) I tend to think "exploitive" when the graphics for a particular item are gendered. Early WoW was bad about this (plate chestpiece on a male character was full coverage, but looked like a bra on a female character). There's no evidence you've even thought of starting down this path, but I just thought I'd throw it out there. However, this can be a problem when you design skimpier armor. Sajan's bare-chested robe probably wouldn't fly at all on a female character, and Seoni's robe would look odd on a male character. Which is why my strong preference would be to get a good selection of non-gender-specific armor out there for each armor type, and start adding the gendered "sexy" stuff later. And finally, just to head off any complaints about my taste, here are a couple of links to my WoW characters; WoW has an Appearance Tab system so these are custom outfits I've selected myself. Note that while I do have a full-coverage warrior I've also got variations (purely by chance) of Amiri's bare midriff and a more prominent version of Merisiel's boob window. Choice is good. Choice is very definitely, to use Ryan's term, "desirable". As long as it's choice.
While subcategories organizing the topics are certainly a good idea, I would much rather the developers focus on the game design and getting that playable first hex built ;) Game developers aren't generally the people managing a game's forums. And in this case, the forums belong to Paizo, not GoblinWorks.
Apparently it is too much to ask, as various members of the community have repeatedly done so! Both AvenaOats and Eloebaen have offered some good starting places. As a temporary fix to Paizo's lack of subforums, I recommend marking the first post of any topic you want to follow as a "favorite"; that makes it easier to find later, as you can scroll through your favorites list.
I look forward to your next Comic Relief for PFO... and I'll be holding you to that bakeoff once there are Golarion recipes to use!
Quite the poetic name - I like it!
Hmm... Nihimon must be busy. Try this handy link for all kinds of info, including a list of guilds.
Smoothies are better for you. As one chef to another, try this: 1 cup low-fat milk or vanilla soy milk
This is fake? I'm disappointed.We are real, we just are not the other group of goons, come join us we have cookies! you can be minion number 626 and can hunt down those silly paladins and druids and assimilate them into us. I promise you will be paid rather well, your own pocket plain with a thousand elf maidens! Wait... you have cookies?! <grabs mixing bowl> We're going to need some good nibbles at the tavern. Care to have a bake-off?
I'd add a caveat to (2), (3) and (4): Skimpy armor should be equally skimpy on both genders, and full-coverage armor should be equally full-coverage on both genders. Armor should not be skimpy on females/full-coverage on males or vice versa.
I Don´t know about you but in my perspective working as a guard in a caravan may be something boring (unless it gets attacked of course) and may not be exactly something attractive for players to engage. Hired guards will be earning money for their work; the coin may be attractive in itself. The guards may also ask for payment in goods and services, such as a piece of finely crafted armor that they have no other contacts for. The reputation gained for being a well-known, respected hired guard is also a possible benefit. There's also the RP element. Chiassa would make a terrible guard, but having the chance to RP with different groups while escorting them through dangerous areas is certainly something to consider.
I think you need to check yourself. No one is saying that your actions post character creation won't affect your alignment. This topic is about adding a questionnaire during character creation to help determine your character's alignment. And not everyone will want or need that advice. Some will actively resent having it forced on them. Providing the option to take that advice is great; insisting that you do so before you can play your character will create just as many frustrated players as will post-creation alignment shifts.
No one has objected to "skimpy" Terms, Trikk. My entire post (of which you quoted only a snippet) was about avoiding value-laden terms.. No one has objected to the use of the terms skimpy or full-coverage; these seem to be neutral terms to use. Use of value-laden terms beyond that (and I'm not going to list any as that will simply open another can of worms) doesn't move the discussion anywhere and fosters a negative environment.
Let's please all refrain from judgment-laden terms here. No one has objected to "skimpy" (it's in the thread title), nor to "full-coverage", but beyond that, let's try not to imply values or motives to others by characterizing their preferences with loaded terms.
I remember the gypsy lady in Ultima IV (yeah... I'm old...) that basically did what the OP is asking for. I think that would be a great option for players that chose it. However, I am very much opposed to forcing players to go through any particular method of creating their character. If this kind of thing is forced on players, they will simply repeat the process with different answers until they get the alignment they wanted - but they'll be getting frustrated with the game the whole time.I don't think you understand the proposition. Gaming the answers to get your preferred alignment as a result would be incredibly stupid, as you would then turn to whichever alignment your actions take you eventually anyway. All you would be doing then would be cheating your self. The whole point of this is to instruct you how to act while revealing who you will become by your actions. And there are still going to be players who (a) don't want to have to fill out a survey before they play the game and (b) if forced to, will simply force the system to give them the answer they want. Stupid or not, that's human nature. Forcing a one-size-fits-all approach, be it survey, tutorial, or sidebar, is going to anger people unnecessarily. (As is "instruct(ing) you how to act", so you may want to reword that.)
@Harad From my understanding the actions you take in the game will adjust your alignment, so if someone does pick the wrong alignment they should start drifting to whatever alignment they actually should be, simply through game play. Good point, and it should be made clear in game information that alignment shifts, in and of themselves, are not a Bad Thing to have happen to your character (unless you are aiming for an alignment-restricted archetype, in which case a shift could close off that option).
Most players aren't going to want to fill out a questionnaire before they can play; they're excited, they've just installed the game, and they want to get to the fun stuff! I could see including a sidebar description of the alignment you just selected, though. Not intrusive and not something you HAVE to interact with/click through.
Stealth is probably a must for soloing, and a good hide out, and good scouting skills and survival. Sounds like a ranger :). Ranger and druid were specifically mentioned by Ryan as being "solo-y", yes. I suspect it's a combination of their wilderness-oriented skillset and the ability of both to pick up animal companions. Hubby and I plan to do a two-ranger or ranger/druid pair for times when guildmates aren't available, so we'll see how well that works.
Hey there, Sebastian! Please feel free to poke around the forum, take a look at the application, and ask questions (here or there), which may help clarify things for you. I suspect you're not the only one still mulling what you'll be playing; a lot of Chiassa's personality only came into focus during my application process (these guys ask great questions). For me, finding a good fit with my personality, goals, interests and outlooks was paramount.
I've been told it's because they're "fat." I love them. (I have three, but the other two are heavy-armor wearers, and I like my plate wearers to actually be wearing plate. My rogue, on the other hand, just finds armor too restrictive for sneaking.) When female pandaren were first released, there were a LOT of complaints that they were "fat" as well.
Eleanor Roosevelt. Ugly as homemade sin, but one of our most influential and charismatic First Ladies. Compare and contrast with the equally charismatic, and conventionally pretty, Jackie Kennedy.
I suspect he was trying to avoid using "nagged". After all, I know where the kitchen knives are and he has to sleep sometime!
Hahaha skimpy armor+ugly= hilarity. I Definitely would like for it not to be tied to a stat particularly charisma. Oh, it's totally worth it - you should see the reactions my female dwarf rogue in WoW gets, and she's only in a low-cut shirt/bodice plus full-coverage leather pants! Also, agreed on not tying looks to charisma. Chiassa will likely have a high charisma, but I really don't want to play her as a beautiful flower - just a charming, gotta-love-me type.
In five-star ranking systems I've seen, even the best-behaved people end up at four stars, the worst at two, and most people around three. I've no idea how sensitive PFO's system will be, but I suspect it will ultimately wind up the same way. Malicious (and sycophantic) votes could be minimized by: (1) Incremental shifts in reputation per vote, so that it takes multiple votes to change a ranking. (2) Disallowing votes by your guildmates. These people, after all, can be counted on to view you favorably regardless of circumstance. (3) Allowing other people to see the number of votes cast for/against you. (4) Allowing you to see the ranking given you by others. If Being, for example, downranks me and I feel I did a great job for him, I'll know not to accept work from him in future.
Hear, hear!
@ Tirithael: Once Andius posted this thread on a public forum it became a public meeting. That's the purpose of the forum, after all: discussion. Had he truly wanted a private discussion, then the proper diplomatic path for that would be to send a PM to targeted guild leaders; those leaders could then have guided in-guild discussions and come to a closed-door meeting with part of the work already done. It's worth noting that the major dissenting voice - Bluddwolf - is the voice of The UnNamed Company, so this wasn't some random person raising objections, but instead one guild's representative taking part in a discussion for guild representatives.
Both sides are arguing for their own fun. Basically for some the metal thong detracts from the amount of fun they have while others, the lack of t&a armor ruins their fun. Which is why most of us have said some variant of: "Choices are good. Just don't MAKE me wear X!" (I also believe that if there's going to be skimpy armor in the game, it should be equally skimpy for male and female characters. But that's me.)
If the Goonswarm has caused this much strife without even making their presence known, we have no chance to oppose them. I'll echo Decius here: in your zeal, you've conflated "inaction" with "not doing things Andius' way". No one in this thread is advocating inaction, nor are they advocating unrestrained griefing. They do, however, disagree on method - inevitable, given that we don't yet know much about game mechanics. At this point, healthy discussion - without paternalistic overtones - is probably impossible within this thread, though.
The very nature of these forums is discussion. By posting here, rather than sending private invitations to interested parties, you opened the door to debate - including debate with those who may not agree with your ideas; and, after all, the existence of such a treaty affects them as well. While I'm not going to debate the issue (it's up to my guild leaders to guide private discussion and form a public response), I find the healthy discussion - even from viewpoints I disagree with IC and/or OOC - a good thing, and certainly not a waste of time.
+1 For me, it's always felt more comfortable to have my movement keys on the right (number pad or mouse, which I use with my right hand) and ability slots on the left. I hope we'll get at least limited keymapping functionality to account for preferences like these.
Paizo won't make a subforum unless there will be enough traffic to justify it. I don't think that there is enough to justify it for player organizations alone. Besides, I'd likely ignore all of them if I had to go to a separate page to see them. And by contrast, I'd be more likely to read them if they were neatly grouped together and not randomly spread throughout one massive list of forum topics.
Good to hear! I pledged at the guild level which covers my regular pen-and-paper group, but found out last night that my nephew is also interested. Although he's an avid gamer, he missed the Kickstarter thanks to his post-graduation job interviews and then starting/training for his new job. I'll let him know that y'all are working on some ideas.
Hmm. I pledged at the guild level (6 accounts). I then pledged an additional amount for add-ons at my own expense, as a gift for them. I know what add-ons I budgeted for in coming up with that extra pledge and it doesn't necessarily break down evenly per account - some of my group love fancy titles, some are all about the region packs, etc. So letting each person allocate an even amount of pledge money isn't really what I'd planned on doing. Couldn't I just give you their emails (or forum accounts) and a list of the add-ons for each one?
We don't get to decide anyway. I suspect the company has a pretty good idea whether they want to sell a Victoria's Secret catalog or a 'Prim and Proper' vision anyway. Being, usually I really enjoy reading your posts, but I'm very, very tired of non-sexualized female (and it's almost always female) armor being characterized as "prim" (or "puritanical", as another poster characterized it).
OK, gave my Crowdforger Guild people a talking-to, so with luck they'll be signing up in the next few days. Will make hubby sign up today, definitely!
If you don't like "sexy" armor then don't wear it. I have yet to see a game where multiple options are not available. But taking away the options for others is never a good thing. Live and let live, don't try to control how other people want to play. I'm all for options. What I do not like - and sincerely hope GoblinWorks doesn't implement - is the practice of the same piece of armor having gendered appearances: chainmail hauberk on a male character and chainmail bra on a female. Each piece of armor should have the same representation (coverage, practicality/sex appeal) regardless of which gender is wearing it. Skimpy armor should be skimpy on both genders; full-coverage armor should be full-coverage on both genders.
As someone with compromised vision - subtle contrasts give me great difficulty - I'd find a "dark-night" setting virtually impossible to play in. I'd vote to make it a purely optional setting, but I strongly oppose an enforced darkness setting.
WOW's gotten a bit better in that department of late. Yes, it has, but it took six years and 14 forum threads (two of those extended many, many times) to get it changed. I really don't want to have to go through that fight again.
I still remember my shock and horror in WoW when my female warrior (the "tank" for our group) got a piece of quest-reward plate that was (a) a BIG step up in armor and adds, meaning I really needed to equip it, and (b) basically bikini bottoms and thigh-high boots, while my friend's male paladin wore the same piece and was fully clothed. Bad enough for non-roleplayers; for roleplayers it can be not only frustrating but completely immersion-breaking as well. I agree that no one should have to equip that type of armor. On the flip side, of course, no one should have to equip head-to-toe armor either. I can see barbarians in particular wearing minimal armor, and non-combat types like my bard might find showing some skin to be advantageous. Ideally, I'd like to see a variety of armor skins available at roughly equivalent power levels. But at minimum, armor shouldn't be gendered; a piece's artwork should have the same representation on female as on male characters.
I'm not at my home computer and thus can't easily find it, but there was a developer blog discussing names. I believe "bad names" included obvious anachronisms and names designed to spark strong (usually negative) emotions in others - the examples given were Jesus and Hitler - as well as famous people and copyrighted/trademarked names. The blog also indicated that all names should be considered probationary until approved; I'm guessing since we will be reserving names prior to the game's release that the reserved names will end up being approved before release. Also, do we just get one name reservation, or two? I know originally it was one, but that was before they added the Destiny's Twin enhancement.
I agree with Slaunyeh, in that first person doesn't feel quite right, and that not-quite-right feeling actually detracts from my ability to lose myself in the world. I much prefer a close-in third person view, one in which my POV is slightly behind and above my character so my character is in view but I'm not seeing anything behind her. To me, that's the best balance between real-life field of view, and compensating for lack of non-visual sensory input. I then feel more immersed in the world.
I'd rather see all the "class" abilities (using the term advisedly as there will be no classes per se) added before additional races. Then the crafting system. Then more races.
Well part of the Kickstarter incentive was that your first two characters get the same experience as either of them earn it. It wa presented like you can have one combat character and another non-combat character and they both 'level' together. So I am assuming there is going to be lots of non-combat related skills. That was an example. Ryan later clarified that the two characters can both be combat, both non-combat or one of each.
Now that the fast-tracking is officially funded, I really need to get the rest of my Crowdforger Guild people on here. I'll bug them about it this weekend!
+1 This is in line with the first crowdforging vote on races, as it keeps all choices to the same type of feature.
Question: I apparently have TWO Paizo forum accounts - one with the same email account as the Kickstarter, and the other (this one) with a different email address. Is there a way to simply delete the other account? It's never been posted with. I could then rename this account with that email address.
Thanks for starting this thread. Chiassa here will be a bard, but I'm planning a ranger or druid for her Destiny's Twin, and frankly I'm appalled that something which is a signature component of several classes is being lumped into a popularity contest with things that are not.
|
