Klandaghi's page

Just noticed that the job postings for:

Animator
Combat Systems Programmer
Game Systems Programmer
Graphic System Programmer
PvE Systems Programmer
Visual FX Artist

All have a job responsibility of "Recommend middleware to implement those systems." Definitely makes me think that there is a swap or at least a rethinking of middleware going on.

Or, mayhap they are trying to keep the engine a surprise/secret.

And for fun, let's just throw the Abyssal Engine out there.

Actually, the engine that they get/select will more then likely influence time to release, depending on what is already built vs. what needs to be developed... Perhaps the Engine is picked and this Kickstarter is helping to secure it instead of taking a path requiring development of parts of the engine that could otherwise have been purchased. I don't mind that idea so much.

Ah, heh see, my point on requiring more support is that, ensuring that the open level of complexity works and is something that can be maintained, it will need to be looked at and reviewed over and over again. With the PVP environment being what it is, I imagine a small task force dedicated to handling the situations that arise from that. In a theme park world support is more "I didn't get X item" or "Y quest is bugged." I'm thinking more customer support then developmental support. I'll admit I'm drawing assumptions on an industry I'm not in, so I could be completely off basis.

Not all companies open their books to the public or state how much they are getting. Say the release was GoblinWorks Receives $4 mill. in backing from X investor to make Pathfinder Online. They've made projections and the team feels that with that funding they have secured, they will have to increase the time in production from what they would like to be able to make the game properly. They start a Kickstarter, but the average joe sees the announcement. "Wait, you want another Mill. to make the game, faster? That's sounds absurd! I wish I could ask my boss for more money to do my job faster. Shoot...." I know the company I work for doesn't throw numbers around until they know what they want to say and how they want to say it. I expect we may hear book numbers after all is said and done, but in the mean time, I'm not expecting to see GW closes 2 Mill. to make Pathfinder Online.

@Drakhan
Lightning Bolt is a better example, I was trying to write quick and didn't think about what I was saying, HAHA. While I've had experience running, I've always been more of a Classic World of Darkness and Minds Eye Theater guy.

@Jameow
I really like what WoW did with the monk class in that there is a training case that you can go and do daily on top of that, they have a "master" train you with a specific mechanic and avoiding it. Really like that.

@TheDarklord
Drakhan got the exact example, Cone of Cold would be awesome if the example wasn't supposed to be a single file corridor with no room to dodge. I may not have explained my example well, again writing quick. And to another point at the time, drunk... not a good combination. I intend on staying away from drunken posting in the future.

I really want to know alot more on how the magic system will be handled now. I can already see people spamming Detect Evil/Good on everyone they meet outside settlements.

I think I liked the way my Favorite DnD GM put it. The disabled bum at the side of the street can be pure evil, with the inability to do anything or a man can be convinced to perform an act of evil "For the greater good" which one is more evil? The bum that can do nothing but sit there, or the person who can act even if it is in a misguided way. I think running around and detect evil, if evil, kill is not really going to be a thing, even if they are evil you are suffering a rep hit. On top of that. If the game keeps true to the idea of Spells Per Day, you may not have the casts for everyone you meet :-p I have no clue what is intended for magic and I'm sure that's what you're getting at. I agree, it will be interesting :-)

Most F2P games I've played heavily restrict the ability of F2P players to contribute the economy by limiting trades, inventory, etc. I haven't played every one, though. Which ones are F2P-friendly?

APB:Reloaded is one I would call F2P friendly, now that said it's also been deemed Pay2Win and is a hot bed for people that hack the game. I think their team is about 2/3rds hack control and 1/3rd content and support. It's effectively an Over the Shoulder shooter with an INSANE level of customization, almost a sandbox concept with a heavy gearing towards PVP. Missions you do without opposition can be observed by the other side and start a mission. Missions that are opposed have multi-layered defined goals to lead to winning the match. I find it to be a lot of fun from time to time. If I find myself wanting to grief in a video game and having been ganked in other games, or annoyed at the honor system (Vanilla WoW) had this idea that killing a lower level player was dishonorable, even in your home land. So, if you had a high level character and were playing a lowbie with friends and had griefers come to your area to gank you. You couldn't retaliate by bringing your high level down and slaughtering them to get them out of your zone, you'd get negative honor for it... that sucked. Back to the point, I'd hop APB where you can't really greif. If a person is fed up with being killed in a mission by you, they can give up and leave and not get killed anymore. In wow or a pvp environment, the result is needing/wanting to log out to wait for them to go away.

@Ryan
I like the idea and concepts that you mention here. You've planned to take X level of Risk and that entails the possibilities of Y. In the game world that would be like I'm going to stay on the road and take the longer safer path because I'll get there in 1 piece instead of taking the short cut through the Mines of Moria which has recently been taken over by that PK guild that rose up out of a desire to play Chaotic Evil. You access the level of risk you are willing to tolerate and then go for it. In the end, I think it allows for more styles of game play, which as far as I can tell you and your team have been trying to maximize. Loving it!

I hope this is the case but we just don't know enough details yet. Like, will there be any reputation hit for killing someone out in the wild?

I understand its difficult for GW to nail down specifics at this stage of development but if they could it might help alleviate some concerns and boost the Kickstarter.

I'm speculating here mostly, but that's just it. It seems like the reputation and build of settlements will be different. It seems like a lot of people have it in them that reputation being good only goes the one way, toward good. But if they are keeping with the levels of freedom and sandbox that they are reporting. I think the reality is that it's opposed. Good rep is good for good players. Bad Rep is good for evil players. I suspect we will see Evil Reputation settlements. In fact I imagine Evil players would have to come together to make them in the face of all the overwhelming good or we potentially end up loosing and missing an aspect of the game that could be quiet rewarding.

It sounds like Bandits would have to place themselves in higher risk areas, meaning that other high risk players are more then likely on an equal footing.

Trust me, I understand what you mean about mitigating loss as after loosing stuff cause you got ganked, you then need to put up money for a reward, losing more. That was something I really did not like about Eve. I could work for years and in a few minutes I could loose it all because someone else wanted to be a jerk or found and exploited a bug of some sort, or what have you. Yes I know the rule to Eve was don't fly it unless you can replace it, but I couldn't build the ISK to get there. I got ganked early on. I think Ryan is stating there will be areas you can go to build yourself up before running out into the wilds so you don't have to worry about going to areas of high risk with not but a loincloth and a dagger.

The lack of character classes and Pathfinder RPG mechanics at all from this title has severely diminished my excitement for it. It is beginning to sound more and more like a Pathfinder "skin" stretched over a sandbox MMO framework. Everything has sounded like talent trees and the same MMO architecture that the industry has thrown at people for decades now.

I was really hoping for a (close to) faithful transition of the Pathfinder RPG rules into a game, like how Baldur's Gate was back in the day for 2nd edition D&D.

This feels like something else entirely, and I'm not fond of it.

Hhhmm sorry this doesn't seem to be shaping up to what you would like it to be. They've stated that the game was going to be a Sandbox from the start. It's in the title of the Kickstarter. To understand better, would you want a turn based MMO in dungeons with movement squares and the like? You're action in the game is only as fast as the player that takes the longest to determine their action? I think that the table top game uses classes to help prevent an overwhelming feeling of "wait, now how do I learn and excel at the awesome things I want to do." Classes are just a planned and expected advancement path with trained abilities attached to them. This works in the cookie cutter, apply new skin in different modeling engine and release, world of present theme park MMO's each dungeon and quest is it's own show and attraction that players all get to relive over and over again. The Sandbox concept, as I understand it, makes the classes you know and enjoy, an achievable goal that comes in the form of a badge/achievement when you meet the requirements. You can be a rogue or a wizard or a sorcerer, you may even have a title for it, but the game isn't trapping you into that. Multi-classing would start looking like Final Fantasy 11. Which while probably "truer" to the books, is not really true to the world.

As far as the stigma of classes, there is an assumption that is out there. Warrior = tank, cleric = healer, rogue = DPS. That's a very narrow scope of thinking when the classes have so many more possibilities. In effect this is also a way to be able to make your own class. People could get disappointed that their specific class wasn't created and put in the game. With no classes defined, past achievement markers, you can now make the other classes by gaining the right skills, maybe it gets added later as a badge/achievement. Maybe it's in there to start, but in the end, The devs don't have to program out the Death Kinght class for you, because you can plan it out for yourself. You can make your character what you want with the skills and abilities that you want. You just have to work towards it. That in and of itself, gives me goosebumps in anticipation.

I for one, can not wait to start playing. Every update has brought wonderful thought and speculation and I'm loving every minute of it.

*walks away from computer to stop trolling tendencies and to address obsession issues :-p*

So with evil being a possibility, would it be possible to unlock races to play if you are evil enough? You make that pact and perhaps undergo a quest of some sort that allows you to reincarnate as something else? I'm playing in an evil tabletop campaign presently with races from the Advanced Race Guide, are those races something that may be added later? I'd love to play a Tiefling or a Strix (yes I know these are not excessively evil) at some point later down the road. Then again. I'm the kind of person that looks at a game and says, "I have to play a human? I'm already a human, I want to be something else in my fantasy world." There are probably issues under that, but still. I'm not likely to play a game where the race choice is only and mostly humans. And changing the size, shape, or adding pointy ears, doesn't make them less human. I'll be happy with the game to start in a classic sense, but I'd really like to play an monstrous humanoid or outsider at some point.

One thing I've always liked about WoW was that originally the game gave you a new made you very aware of getting it and then gave you easy stuff to try it on. In a sense the game was a tutorial where they gave you the right weapon to kill what you were going up against next. That was Vanilla days sure, but it was a great idea. That was in a structured system with classes being there.

As I understand it, classes will be more of a badge/achievement that you earn once you fulfill certain requirements on your character. This leaves a feeling of starting the game as "Adventurer" and then working towards a class, is it planned, or would it be possible to have schools for teaching the paths to those class achievements?

To use a WoW anology. Player X decides to play a rogue (yes this has different connotations, keep with me :-D) He makes this rogue a walking combat death machine and it never occurs to him to stand behind his target in a group because he gave up on the mechanic solo of stun target, circle, backstab. Would it be possible for a starting player to "enroll" in class quests to work towards the end goal of the class they desire?

If someone generalizes, will they be uber gimped or potentially able to pick and choose from the best of each "class"? I've been milling the idea over for a while. I've been designing a table top system by myself for a while and I still feel that having the option of a starter learning set of quests is ideal.

Moving to a traditional table top wizard with Spells per day, that system is meant to make you think about how you cast your spells. You don't just blow them cause they do more damage, I mean you can, but then you are probably screwed later and didn't use it to max effect, you wait for the opportune moment. Ray of Frost, aimed at a single goblin in an open area, not so much. Ray of frost down a narrow corridor with a host of angry goblins coming at you single file, now there's some max effect.

Will there be something in the game to point this kind of thinking out and prod players to play smartly?

I'd love to have the option to go to some form of training academy to learn my desired class as well as to have some place to return to later for more advanced lessons and even practice for training. Target dummies only really help your rotation improve if you are dedicated to it and someone is watching you to correct you. Both Dueling and perhaps practice courses would help raise in game awareness, which is what WoW PVE seems to have devolved into for a long time. Is everyone alert? No? Raid wipe :-p

Eh, I don't think I've seen the debates and hostility that you are depicting, or maybe I didn't put the same tone behind your words. There is an issue with the written word, without prompting the emotion behind them is lost and left to the interpretation of the reader, and their emotions, at the time. If you feel the need to apologize, then I'm guessing you felt your words were with bad intent and not what you wanted.

Passion is a good thing, it creates wonderful things, sometimes it leads to conflict and sometimes it can destroy the goal instead of completing it.

Putting it all out there, I apologize as I feel like I've been trolling the boards lately. As any of my friends will tell you, I'm obsessed. I have intentionally taken the opposite side to see and understand what the community is expecting this game to be.

It sounds to me like there has been some great Crowdforging. It isn't the CrowdAssemblyLine. I think the term crowdforging is appropriate, if not dead on. This game will be forged in the fires of the community with Goblinworks as the master smith to shape it into a fine master worked product for us all. If there wasn't at least 1 or 2 spats, I don't think that people were being 100% honest with their input and passion for the game. I honestly think that Ryan's comment, @All, really was @All. Those posting then and people posting in the future. Perhaps our master smith saw the kiln getting too hot, and that was part of the work to correct it. In the end, the fires of well meant, and from this point forward hopefully, mature and level-headed debate will shape this game.

As I state in a lot of my posts, this is generalization, this is not aimed at anyone and certainly not at Andius. Ignoring the fact that there is negative in the world only helps it to rise. Addressing it in ourselves and one another is the only means to keep it at bay. I think this is a great thread and a perfect way to cool the flames of the kiln for a time. I expect we will get to a point where the kiln gets hot once more.

Thank you for being able to open up in this way to the community and apologize honestly. It's not an easy thing to do.

So, would it be possible to have a bounty system in game? Say EvilNLovinIt is a Chaotic Evil Fighter and is playing Chaotic Evil so much that players from another settlement get fed up and they've died enough that they want to enlist the aid of others, could they contribute to a bounty pot that People could then hunt for that particular player? The Bounty growing as more players have issue with that character? Collection is a matter of returning with some player drop that represented having killed said character?

What I see is combination of WoW and EVE.

I see it more like, Mix equal parts WoW + EVE + Minecraft season with Pathfinder Adaptation then serve to the community. I throw Minecraft in there as it seems like players will be able to create and build where they like, I worry a little bit about players trying to build everywhere and eventually there being no wilderness left, that or there only being X number of "settlement sites" so you have to fight over having those spots. It will be an interesting balancing act to say the least. I also worry about building an Inn and then having it burned to the ground while on a camping trip or something.

Maybe you could have some sort of web interface where you could record a pre-scripted line and submit it. It would be in the format they want and go directly to them. They quality is the issue so they would have to have final say on if its used or not. Nihimon mentioned something about this a couple posts up.

Heh, the quality you would want to use, only people that are hobbyists would have. You'd need compression and super high quality for it to be a usable sound file, and you want that to be at a standard that you can mix and work with across the board. It's best for it to all be recorded in one studio where the settings are controlled and maintained and no random elements are introduced. I decided not to include a voice acting option as logistics on getting the actor out and on-site as well as ensuring that the quality of skill was to a level desired for the game, and making sure the person paying was happy about the character they were voice acting for, it's too many possible points for conflict/drama. It sounds cool, but in practice could go horribly wrong.

I'd love to do voice acting, it's something I've wanted to do for forever. But I don't think buying your way in, is going to ensure a level of quality that we're expecting from the end product.

I still think it would rock to have seats at a table for 1 weekend of gaming with one of the writers would be awesome :-p Imagine being able to say you played in a game run by Lisa Stevens or Keith Baker, etc. I think that'd pull some money.

This sounds like an awesome idea, at first I thought this was a "Getting to know you" post. But this sounds like more fun. While my posts may not be popular, I'd love to have a chance to introduce myself and add tone and inflection to my words as opposed to just flat black and white text, which I'm told, I come off horribly in. 15th is good for me. :)

Villains are villains and heroes are heroes. Trying to set a series of guidelines for behaviors, just opens the door for people that are immature players that like to greif to target griefing behavior. In all honesty, evil and good come in all flavors and sizes. Trying to tell people how to play their characters is not good in any sense of the word. At a table I'd call it meta-gaming. If a player is playing an alignment that doesn't match what's on paper, it's up to the GM to correct, here I'm guessing it will be handled more in something like Light Side/Dark Side from SW:TOR/KOTOR kind of setup. It would be like setting guidelines that in a duel the good player should never land a finishing blow on an evil character because that isn't the right and good thing to do.

Good and phrases like "for the greater good" are all up to a level of interpretation, as such, I think trying to force this kind of outline on someone, or a guild of evil is not really something that will work. Players will do what they want, when they can, if they feel like it. That's a part of the beauty of the sandbox concept. The end goal is that players will unite and there will be more good then bad, the good will have better rewards as I understand it, and to top that off, it sounds like a hard thing people will be striving for.

While evil, is expected to be in smaller number and can have a hefty price to it if you grief in certain areas. But still, having an evil super power that opposes a good super power or super powers, is that so bad? To have antagonists that can be more clever then a planned script can be? Is that not more the ultimate challenge and part of what you are looking for in the game? It seems like this post is asking those that would like to play evil to tie their hands, that's not much of a challenge, that's being idealistic. That evil will bend to the wills of the good. This is not an attack on anyone, but in all actuality, as someone that has run a few games, players will do what they want and normally it's up to the GM to show them the errors of their ways with the harsh realities of the world striking back. For this kind of game, it almost feels like it's left to the players.

A Good example of this mentality would be an anime still releasing in Japan called Sword Art Online. I think they do a great job of capturing the psychology of online gaming. Though you'd have to find the fan subs to watch, unless you are fluent in Japanese. It sort of highlights this kind of thing in it's story. There's a goal to the game but still evil players/greifers still arise.

What makes what one player finds to be fun wrong in comparison to another? I agree greifing can be super annoying. I've played on PVP servers on multiple games and when someone gets it in their head to continuously attack you, it can be a pain. But some people find that to be fun. When does one person's fun get to impede on another's? When is it OK? This post seems like it's trying to draw the line on that. Sword Art Online addressed it by having characters have a Sim's like marker above their head, Green means no crimes committed, Orange meant a crime was committed and Red was out right murder, or PKing. From there, players could decide how they wanted to respond to players that were marked. This isn't meant to say this post isn't a good idea, it's more to argue in the other way and refine what is attempting to be said.

Evil comes in all shapes and sizes. The things stated here are great for around a table. I agree with a lot of them very much so, in MUCS and chat rooms, but once you add real time high action, if it's a PVP setting I would be surprised if someone commented OOC "I'm evil, no hard feelings, you were just in the wrong place at the wrong time." They're probably going to be fighting off someone else or something. Personally I expect a sort of Horde Vs Alliance mentality from WoW, good will claim it's better to be good and evil will claim it's better to be evil and the lines will slowly be drawn by players, not the game. Someone that kills often, as they like, and continuously kills a character, while griefing, would fit Chaotic Evil in my book. It is a type, certainly not the only way, but a type none the less. Honestly, I think it would be great if there was a wanted/ransom system in the game where, if someone is bad enough, players can put a price up for that person, it's a targeted level of balance and something that would happen in the setting, wouldn't it? Just as well, Evil settlements could have their target's of good. I think having systems in the game as a deterrent as opposed to stating player behavior should be to X standard. In an MMO you will find immature players. That's a sad fact, and unless you can find something to make them want to change, they're not going to. I'm going to stop rambling now. Sorry for the wall of text. Nice topic though. Really gets one thinking.

As someone who has no intention of playing the MMO the only incentive that would prompt me to contribute to this Kickstarter would be if they offered some sort of unique and tangible reward for the RPG. I imagine we'll start seeing those pulled out when we're getting close to the end date and the project has only raised $500,000.

I'd be surprised if the momentum stops that drastically, They're been getting a little over the $20K/day that they need for the project to succeed at present and for some people I know, it's a matter of waiting for their paycheck to roll in. I know that Kickstarter's don't charge till the due date, but I, like a few other friends, want the money to be in savings so I know I have it before I commit to a pledge.

I think it would be awesome to see some of the adventures that are planned for the MMO to make it to a table top starter set of some sort so you could start a game in a similar setting if desired.

One half wonders if a sort of online group of role players might spring up in the game, somewhat like a virtual Camarilla, leaning more concept, not what it became.

Perhaps a conversion book to take your online character offline and into a Table Top game? If level progression will be slowed as drastically as they are stating, would be cool to take my MMO char and play in a tabletop game too. Not sure it would be possible to make a solid translation back though.

Simple one...

I cant afford the higher levels unless I can pay installments over a monthly basis - some sort of tiered payment scheme would be nice to have as an option.

I believe that Kickstarter has rules about doing this particular thing, not 100% sure. To my knowledge, all fund have to be raised by the deadline, or no funding is released at all, those that pledged get nothing. In this case the game still gets made, but takes longer to make. This Kickstarter just being a way to decrease time in production

What I would really like to see some crowdpower on is ideas for rewards that are not directly related to the game itself. We are already putting everything into it we possibly can so we can't promise more in-game type stuff (we have lots of stretch goals that have those kinds of things but we need to get the million in the bag first).

$15,000 - A trip to play a Pathfinder table top game with one or more higher ups that are willing to run a game for 1 weekend. Limited to however many seats the potential Host is willing to run a game for with air fair, hotel, and meals included (Basically a $10,000 level but with expenses included) Tier, or increase as you like for higher levels up in the company.

Could also have multiple weekends if more then 1 person is willing to step up to assist this level from the development staff.

This thread is being started as a method to not spam a wall of text into the comments section on the Kickstarter for the game. I feel comments should be short, sweet and to the point, while forums are designed for conversation and friendly debate. That stated, this post is a response to a comment regarding pricing scheme for Pathfinder Online, pay.x then for want.play.months repeat(pay.y)

I personally think that a good number of companies are trying to make the next WoW with their small tweaks, SW:TOR is a good example of this, Star Wars Skinned WoW with choices that effected the immediate outcome, but not the long term. Suddenly the game was choice:

• Yes, I agree completely.
• Yes, I don't like it but I'll do it.
• No, Here's something witty cause I wanted to say yes, but no sounded like more fun.

It's like they said during the Kickstarter for the Tech Demo, We're flooded with Theme Park games set in their own theme worlds, but really it's all different skins to the same rides. That's why I'm backing this project, I want to see them change the game industry. The things I have seen so far all feel very much like the next level of MMO, not a rehash/skin of what we've already seen. I've played in a lot of Betas and the games I felt had a good chance to compete with WoW all had 1 major disadvantage, people had already sunk their time into WoW. If the new game was fantastic enough, it would "dethrone" WoW or at least stick around. So far only 1 sticks out in my mind, Eve.

I think the sandbox concept they are going for will require more support then most games in the past. To take a world, open it to an almost "do what you will" and the game continues kind of feel and be able to support players giving input, that's labor intensive. As they stated during the Tech Demo, People are the most expensive part of the project. Now hire those people full time and have them support lots of people, a good number of which take a "I paid for it, so you should treat me like I'm royalty" stance on getting support. Those in support take the brunt of every gamer's frustration and attempt to do right by the players in the end, day in and day out having to support people behaving like children, it's not fun. Ask any Government worker. Given how they get treated, I'd pay subscription on a game I like to support the people supporting my good time.

With the Kickstarter, based on today's pricing scheme for subscription based games, I think that $50 - 60 up front as long as there isn't new hardware needed to play the game is reasonable. Say they elected to support use of the (Oculus Rift) for Pathfinder Online, I'd pay more to get the hardware with it as well, but I'd want to try it without the hardware before paying a large chunk to step in first. Personally, regarding the Oculus Rift, I'd wait for a few other companies to release and learn from their downfalls on the device, which I expect there will be a few.

The basics of it all are, $35 for the game and a badge on the forum, totally worth it with the perception of being half off. I feel that the higher levels are ultimately more awesome with this concept then most other Collectors Editions. Grats you bought Collector's Edition, here are some things that you may or may not use a lot but look cool, Really Collector's became "Swag" Edition. Sure you can say you were in Beta or Alpha on other games, but what that meant was testing the bugs and pointing them out. Not "I think that this encounter could be better with X change" and the Dev's saying "OK enough of you said as much, let's try it and see." That's having input, which to a degree puts the success or failing of the game on the original group that steps up to work on it in the beta as the crowdforgers. This is an ultimately risky move, but one I like and think will greatly improve games in the future.

I like it, I'm interested, and I'm happy to say I'm a Crowdforger
Comment/reply as you like.