Search Posts
The only thing I'm worried about name choices is the possibility of restrictions could "kill" the roleplaying of some people. An example: Somebody named "Joern Green Lantern". Everybody knows Green Lantern is a DC superhero, and people would say it is a copyrighted name. However, the player uses this family name due the fact that in the background he created to his character, his family was reffered as Green Lantern, because there was a big green lantern in the front door of their house. I hope in such cases if the player appeals, explaining the reason he/she chose this name, it will be reconsidered.
I'd like to know how/if the different races will differ from one and another. Will a orc have higher max strength, but forever lower charisma than the elf? Will they have different traits? Or will you perhaps avoid the issue of balancing by purely making the races a visual feature? Do you read minds? I came here just to ask this question!
Combat wise, the problem of power balance in relation to pets maybe can be solved by the need of material components, in order to summon/raise them. So, for example, you will need some kind of rare and expensive gem to raise a powerful undead and it will be consumed after use. Also you may need a certain period of time (maybe in some cases just once a day) to cast the same animating/summoning spell. Also it could cause drawbacks. You could be fatigated after raisng some kind of undead, for example. Time + Component costs + drawbacks, that would be a good way to balance it IMO. Raising dead and animate bones is evil because they're not cute. Skeletons are ugly,scary and sometimes stinky, so people are afraid of them! what you think about that reason (excuse)? LOL.
This is indeed a problem I forgot to weight. Maybe only if the bonus/penalties are not so foccused and impactating (just ones that add some flavour without affecting combat, diplomacy etc) it could work.
Attacking NPCs in a first thought could incite them to attack later, but should take some time to them to recompose. If you keep attacking them it should prevent their increase in power. However, in a second thought, the goblins tribe your settlement always attack could call for reinforcements from another stronger tribe, and attack you anyway and with stronger forces. So the idea of escalation, even if you keep attacking npc groups is not absurd. IMO both attack or let them unbottered sooner or later will result in hostile activity from them. They are the bad guys so attacking is in their nature, and they will find a way to do so.
The EVE-like party (fleet) concept sounds perfect to me. Especially as it allows the leaders to give bonus from their group skill to the rest of the party (fleet, wing etc). So if the leader(s) have learned the leadership skill he/she would grant a certain bonus for all his group. Example: if he has a skill like "army defensive strategy" he grants a bonus in defense for the entire party, if he has a skill such as "bowmen commander" the archers in the group would have an ofensive bonus, etc.
One thing I think that could be cool is to allow people chosing a faith and this faith giving them a bonus and a penalty in different stats and/or skills. For example: a deity that favours battle giving a bonus to some martial skill but a penalty in a social skill. If you choose to worship no deity no change will occur. Of course it would be implemented further in the game and not for EE. Just an idea that came up in my mind.
Maybe a way to solve the size/shape issue is the devs making armours in different sizes/shapes and creating a possibility/need of converting armors to other shapes/sizes to fit different characters (such as a human armour adaptation being required to be used by dwarven, for example). This adaptation would be performed by skilled people (armoursmiths, leather workers etc).
Your character is also immortal and *agelessIntending to play an elf, this actually adds to realism for me ;) Immortal? OK... *start sharpening my axe*
I know this is an old discussion related to an old blog post, but as I was reading stuff to see how game developpment advanced. Reading this topic some issues came to my mind. Sorry if I'm bringing questions already discussed here. 1- Would't be interesting if we could, in some cases, be able to keep our association to a faction in secret? Maybe having some skill for that? For example, there is no reason to everybody know I'm member of the pathfinder society, if I don´t tell them so. Of course that would not be possible for all factions, but for some ones that would make sense and provide interesting stuff for gameplaying if we could keep it secret. 2- Scenario: I am member of a faction and a buddy from my company is member of an enemy faction, how it will work? Of course we can make an arrangement and decide not attacking each other, but a way to flag a buddy to avoid attacking him accidentally would be interesting. Maybe the flag would display differently (different colour/symbol for example), or a "buddy flag" could be displayed simultaneously if we choose so. 3- How will npcs react to that factional division? Will all them attack me if I am a ranked member from an enemy faction?
I'm Back after a "thousand years" absence from the forum, and still in for the green cloacks! Ah! And changed my avatar too, as the one I was using is too popular and I find myself meeting my own avatar all the time having an "I'm cloned!" feeling.
If it is applied to steathy characters you will be always risking to suffer the penalties, so most people that don't want shift alignment will rarelly or probably never use AoE. Does not sound fair to me. Hidden chars hitting should not cause penalties in a fair and balanced system, or we will end up with evil and/or chaotic player characters havin a clear advantage as they will not care about reputation losses.
I really like this idea. That solves one of the problems of friendly fire concept, and allow the system to distinguish attacker's intentions and apply or not the penalties.
... item decayng... adds a lot to realism.There are swords made hundreds of years ago, that have been used in battle, that are still perfectly functional. Decay makes sense if the item is not properly maintained, but it isn't an absolute. Indeed, but that is true for masterwork weapon and armor, however, the ordinary ones are not of the same quality. And, at least in the beggining, we will be using ordinary stuff most of time. Armor, even the best ones, were constantly being repaired and shields are the itens that need more frequent repair after combat, especially the wodden ones. Maybe they could do masterwork itens long lasting but the ordinary itens needing constant repair.
I hope they change their minds, because item decayng is not just an economic issue but also adds a lot to realism. In relation to wagon cargo and SAD, maybe bandits can use extra mounts such as mules or donkeys to carry it. Or they will carry just what they can carry with them and let the rest untouched.
I read somewhere that we can create bank account and determine who can handle it, so you could in theory let your twin to access it. In that way coin certainly will be shareable. And I bet itens too. Even if not, you could ask someone you trust to carry it and give your twin after you log it on. Actually, if we will be able to log both twin and main char, as is said it may be, so you can trade anything from one to the other.
You definitelly has a point.
Hunting creatures for pelt and other products (maybe bones, teeth, venon etc) will be an important part of the game and vital to economy. Hunting is basically PVE activity. Any gathering opperation is going to attract npc attackers, so we have more PVE content. Even farms could attract creatures as, for example, a chicken farm attractibg foxes, a honney farm attracting bears or a sheep farm attracting wolves. I see lots of PVE opportunities in the way GW is designing PFO, and still think even who hates PvP can have fun and play PvE content most of time, as we can do in other sandbox MMOs such as EVE.
SAD has nothing to do with "balancing economy" it is basicaly extortion. Banditry is part of the game, is a legit roleplaying style, but is not "necessary to balance economy", or any public utility activity. The only benefit I see banditry bringing to economy is to create a market for security. So bodyguards can make a good profit by protecting caravans. The only way stuff is going to disappear is loot after death or to sell it for npcs (what may be very disadvantageous economically to the seller). People forget that weapons, armors etc will also need repair, and even if the market is saturated with low level stuff, crafters will still have profit by repairing people's equipments. Also, GW guys did not tell us what happens with the stuff inside de caravan wagons, if the trader that owns it dies. The only thing we know is that what you carry with you in your inventory will disappear after being looted. It is very unlikely (and incoherent) that caravan goods are going to disapear as well.
I really hope they change their minds in relation to that shift in alignment while off line. That is a nonsense. I, and most players as well, would hate to stay out game for about one month due real life issues and come back to play and find my CG ranger changed into a N char. So I would need to do stuff to change him back to the alignment I want him to have. Come on! That will be a pain in the ***!
Very nice post, I like the way Fort inevitable is being created. I wonder if the seven foxes resistance movement will allow us to ally with them, serve as mission/adventure hooks and stuff like that. I would love to feel like being part of a resistance movement against oppression. If seven foxes want (and allow us to) help I'm willing to help them!
Actually that was the way I made my char join a P&P party once. The GM was out of ideas of how he would include me in the group and I made my CN warrior just look at the party cleric on the street shouting: - Hey man are you looking at me? Do I know you? - No I´m not looking at you at all. -So you are ignoring me! Who do you think you are to ignore me like that? I'm going to kill you! - *granted power > calm emotions * - *sucessful saving throw* Stay calm?! I am calm,very calm! If I was not you'd be dead by now! -*granted power > Calm emotions* - *sucessful saving throw again* Priest, can you stop saying me to calm down and fight me like a man? In the end, the party´s bard used his charisma to convince him to not fight, and follow them to get some gold by searching a missing guy. -------- Back to the thread subject, I look foward to know details on combat mechanics such as how weapon range will work (for lances, spears halberds etc), how bows and crossbow attacks are going to work etc
I bet territory is going to expand east at first and maybe south as well, as River kingdon is the right place to have lots of small kingdons, if we follow Golarion lore. Any expansion to north, for example, reaching numerian territory would be technically an invasion and the logical thing to happen is an armed response from Numeria.
I hope we have really dangerous NPC threats, that will recquire big groups of players to get rid off. Latelly,I would like to see harder stuff, that will recquire enormous aliances, even among enemies, as evil + Good settlements/kingdons to fight it. A demon legion leaded by a high power demon, or a dragon with powerfull minions, a big army of undeads leaded by a powerful lich etc. It would be a rare event , once or twice a year, and would only happen after the developpment of settlers and estabilishment of well organized kingdons.
Make that two of us. Eliminating all chances of random results, and not allowing total miss or enhanced success makes the combat too much predictable, very far from reality. I would like to see an arrow miss totally the target or a mace hit breaking a helmet and turning it into some uselless piece of metal, and stuff like that. Predictable combat is boring and many times the players will just know the results of combat ahead of time. For the tiers, I'm a bit worried about that (as I said before) the difference seem too high when you change tiers. Can't see how we will have a flat power curve with such big difference. Maybe, as suggested by other people above, a more gradual change with more tiers could work much better.
Ok , but buy her a decent armor first, with no belly hole. Because if not, I will aim all my hits at her belly, and be sure I will fight her from a good distance using my bow, out of the reach of that gargantuan sword of her! LOL
Great, thanks Keovar for the linking. So basically, xp will be proportional to time (and eventually some money you expend), you use it to buy skills, so in this way the system really is simmilar to EVE's. We just have the need of trainig facilities as a difference. I like it this way.
Wasn´t the skill system going to be similar to EVE's (time dependent)? This xp buying system is very different, so unless GW has changed their original plans, I don´t think we will be able to buy skills and train it immediatly. Maybe the xp just brings acess to the first level of a skill training. I, particularly, would like to see a system where we could get rid of xp at all. I don´t like it, don´t think it is necessary to acumulate xp to play in a meaningfull and balanced system. Xp is good for WOW-like games, not necessary in a sandbox IMO.
Funny how female characters more often "prefer" to wear less leather armor as their preference, isn't it? Especially bearing in mind she is from cold mountains filled with snow, the "bellyless" armor makes no sense at all. If she was a rogue I could accept that, as she could use the sexy appearence to her advantage and would relly more in agility to avoid hits, but a barbarian using almost a bikini? no way. The art is ok, but the concept is wrong. Edit
Another example is this this site has many examples as well.
|
