Search Posts
Shoanti monk who carries a heavy flail and has taken a vow of silence. I'm bringing a small white board and wet erase marker so he can communicate like wile e. coyote. He's also trained in intimidate which he does by ominously swinging his heavy flail over his head while glaring.
Without spoiling anything, if you're into roleplay heavy adventures, I recommend: Spoiler:
Blackrose Matrimony and The Disappeared. That being said, I think optimization was less important than A: Having a well rounded party with melee guys to hold the line, ranged guys that can dish out damage, and an experienced healer. B: Playing the appropriate tier. Our party was lower level so we chose that option. I doubt we would have finished half of it had we gone high. Probably would have tpk'd. Personally I enjoyed it very much. Pure dungeon crawl isn't my preferred type of adventure, but it can be fun if done in moderation.
Interesting. I'd still appreciate if anyone could link a quote to the core rulebook that specifies. I'm reading it atm and it isn't clear one way or the other.
I wasn't aware that this was a problem. It specifically states that you can substitute a trip for a melee attack (as opposed to say a grapple which specifically requires a standard action) and an attack of opportunity is clearly that. Am I missing something? This appears to be pretty clearly RAW to me... "An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round. You don't have to make an attack of opportunity if you don't want to. You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round." "You can attempt to trip your opponent in place of a melee attack." These are both cut and pasted from d20pfsrd which I realize is not official, though I thought they were more or less pulled word for word from the crb.
Thanks for the quick response. I'll keep an eye on my inbox.
Similar question here. I joined the second kickstarter at the 35 dollar, adventurer level but as far as I know, I haven't gotten any code yet to unlock the Goblin Squad title. Have those gone out yet? (for people who only supported the actual game kickstarter, not the tech demo) If so, how can I get them to resend it?
Barney Blackfinger
1. Why are you a Pathfinder? Because it allows me access to greater wealth & knowledge, while providing a myriad of handy companions to stand between me and whatever is... guarding said wealth and knowledge. Since joining, I've acquired several magical items and even an artifact in addition to a healthy paycheck. 2. Do you have a name and surname that is not ripped straight out of existing Earth mythology or popular culture? Barney Blackfinger is the name, conjuration and illusion is the game. I'm a Tiefling, if the horns and tail didn't give it away. (Blackfinger was the last name of another Tiefling I played in 4th edition, I figure they're cousins or something) 3. Which nation did you grow up in? How did this nation influence you? Born and raised in the puddles district of Absalom. As a result, magic is more about survival to me than an academic pursuit. Also tends to effect my personality I expect. I'm more at home in a dive bar or a “temple” of Calistra than a wizard's tower and my cockey accent has annoyed more than a few upper crusted types I've come across. Additionally, growing up on the streets meant that sometimes my survival came at the price of another's. While I have no problem working as a member of a team, I wouldn't have a moral dilemma about casting invisibility and teleporting to safety when things go pear shaped. 4. What do you look like? What are your wearing? How does this vary when you’re stalking through forests, sewers, deserts or in glittering cities? Pale skinned with dark reddish hair, amber horns and a prehensile tail that gets me both in and out of trouble. Mostly light robes and tight breeches, preferably no shirt unless it's cold. Gotta have something for the ladies eh? On occasion, I've been known to adapt my clothing to more hostile environments, though I'd just as soon use a spell to get the job done. 5. What do you love? (Treasure and experience doesn't count) Something of a hedonist you might say. Good drink, comfortable clothing, and... enthusiastic companionship if you know what I mean. I mostly prefer the finer sex, though I've been known to dabble. When dungeon crawling, I'm usually keeping an eye out for interesting tomes or artifacts. They say knowledge is power and it's especially true for a wizard. Plus, the Ruby Prince pays handsomely for the odd bit of information from time to time. I also enjoy using spells in creative ways outside of combat. Grease in particular has a number of humorous applications in social situations. 6. What do you hate? (Unclear and irritating darkness level rules don’t count) I'm fairly laid back, but I to tend to get rather annoyed when someone talks down to me or assumes I'm unintelligent because of my demeanor. Just because I can hold my whiskey and spend allot of time perusing houses of ill repute doesn't make me a moron. It just means I've got my priorities straight. Assuming I'm incompetent or treating me like dirt is a quick way to get a flaming sphere up the arse. 7. Which other Pathfinders (PCs) do you rely on for teamwork, survival and butt-kicking? Do you have a bro? a mentor? a father figure? maybe a rival? I tend to hop around quite a bit, rarely making any lasting partnerships. There are however, a few pathfinders I've come to know a little better and would happily work along side of. Pappy is a crotchety old bastard who foolishly prefers divine magic over arcane. Still, he's useful to have around when you're bleeding out in some gods-forsaken dungeon. Lilen is a tiefling like me, though that is where the similarities end I'm afraid. Whereas I'm charming and quite likable, she's a half mad fiend perpetually out for blood. Initially I considered her a possible target of my advances, until I heard about how she once bit an ogre zombie out of spite. I'll dip my quill in most ink pots I find, but even I have to draw the line somewhere. 8. How does your race influence your views? Are you a stereotype of a certain race? How are you different from most humans/elves/gnomes/orcs/tengu? When it comes to race, you can't hope for better than a Tiefling. Sure, some of the more common peoples might see my heritage as something negative, but I shrug it off as an inability of their tiny, non-Tiefling brains failing to grasp the true majesty of this paragon of bloodlines. We can see in the dark, we have prehensile tails, and nearly every one of our females is dripping with pure sex appeal. All in all, it's probably just jealousy that makes other races distrustful. In more practical terms, I'm sure my natural affinity for darkness has influenced my arcane path. Conjuration and illusion seem like a natural choice to someone born with the ability to summon darkness at will. 9. What are you afraid of? Do you have any phobias or worries? Not much. I'm of the “live fast, die hard, and leave a smoldering corpse” school of thought. On a more practical level, since my connection to arcane magic is such a large part of who I am, the thought of losing or being cut off from it is pretty unsettling. I was nearly killed a while back by a bard who blinded and silenced me. Nothing more useless than a mage who can't see or cast. 10. What is your most treasured possession? Yes, though I doubt I'd be allowed to really go into detail on the forums here...
At a convention I attended a couple weeks ago, there was strict recording of each faction's total PP throughout the weekend and multiple references to the looming possibility of one or more of them being on the chopping block.
Clearly I need to brush up on some of my basics. Thanks for the input Jig. I'd been reading through the nerdrage flurry thread but hadn't yet seen how it was resolved.
I realize this has probably been addressed somewhere but I couldn't find it after 10+ minutes of looking. Feel free to post a link to another thread if it address's my question. Essentially, if I'm trying to use one of my flurry attacks to make a trip, disarm, or grapple(assuming maneuver master) does that happen simultaneously with my other attacks or is there a specific order. For instance, say I make an unarmed attack and a trip attempt, could I specify that the trip comes first so that the unarmed would be targeting a prone enemy? Furthermore, if the trip attempt fails and I haven't rolled my extra attack, could I substitute that for a second attempt to trip? Or would I have to declare two trip attempts and roll them simultaneously, potentially wasting one if both succeed? Finally, given the threads I've read so far, it appears that the intention is to be making half of the attacks with each weapon I'm using, ie- no making all of my flurries with a single weapon. With that in mind, if I'm attempting to make one attack and one trip attempt using a tripping weapon, would the attack have to be made with my off hand weapon/unarmed strike since I'm "using" the trip weapon to perform the maneuver? Or is simply wielding it enough to grant me the +2 bonus?
Thanks everyone, especially Jason. Not really accustomed to getting answered by the dude who wrote the rule.
Quick question here. "The ka stone tightly binds the living monolith’s mind and spirit to his body, providing him with a +2 bonus to saves against negative levels, death effects, and mind-affecting effects. A living monolith can invoke the power of his ka stone 3 times per day as a swift action, enabling him to grow in size as if using enlarge person (even if he is not a humanoid)." Does the enlarge person ability function based on the total character level or the levels taken in Living Monolith? I assume the latter, but thought I'd check to see if there was any argument for the former. Thanks.
The ogre actually stands pretty well. It's a heavy enough figure that the weight keeps it from tipping too easily. The problem with putting him on another base is that A: His feet are so far apart they'd barely be able to share a 1 inch base, and he's probably be alot less stable, and B: The sculpt is really embeded into the base of the figurine. Wherease some minis I've worked with are just standing on their flat base, this guy's feet are somewhat sunken into the base itself. I'm pretty sure I'd need a dremel to get him out and I don't currently have one. For the moment I'm planning to leave him but also bring along a small plastic mini that looks similar so I can substitute it if someone has a problem or we're fighting in a really enclosed space.
Just got a reaper mini I'd bought online in the mail and its a little larger than I'd hoped. The character himself is fairly normal but his stance is very wide and his base will probably poke a bit into one or two of the surrounding squares. In a home game I wouldn't be worried, and most of the dudes I play with in society are pretty lax, but I'm also going to a convention in a couple weeks. I'd hate to put all this effort into painting this guy if someone is gonna prevent me from using him. How big of a deal is this? Have you ever seen a society dm refuse to let a character use a certain mini for any reason? Thanks. http://www.reapermini.com/OnlineStore/ogre%20mage/latest/65140 Here's the mini if it helps.
Yeah, I'm starting out with the naginata, in part because the miniature I chose is weilding one. By the time I hit sixth level though, I'll have had a chance to play around with other options and the hammer definitely sounds promising. I might also look into the Katana or Nodachi at some point.
Played my wizard last week at a pfs table. The fighter got nailed by a fear spell near the end of a fight with an enemy caster and began running away at full speed. At the moment, I was the only one anywhere near him, but my scrawny tiefling wizard was in no mood to try to physically restrain a 6 foot tall human fighter in heavy plate. Instead, the scenario went something like this. Me(looking over my remaining spells): "Hey dude, what's your reflex score like?" Him: "um, not too good?" Me: "Sweet. I cast grease beneath the fighter. Make me a ref save." Him:"...4?" Me:*Smiles*
Can I just chime in and say that the vast majority of the replies to this thread are surprisingly well thought out given the way these alignment/ethic discussions usually go. Kudos guys. I think there are several factors that play into this. Firstly, the particular tennants of a Paladin's deity and how they interpret those tennants. Torm and Iomedae might have vastly different views on the subject. Beyond that, consider how many people in the real world who supposedly belong to the same denomination of a religion have different interpretations of how their religion is supposed to work. Granted, this would probably be less of an issue in a fictional world where one's deity can be literally and physically contacted and interacted with, but I would imagine that even in Golarion, different members of the same order might disagree on something as tricky as this. Secondly, and I'm not sure what the general mythology dictates here, but it's entirely possible that by "mercifully" ending a Demon's existence on this plane, one might be condemning it to a fate far worse than a splash of holy water. Wether at the hands of a displeased master or through the uncarring nature of the abyss itself, you could be sentencing this creature to a potential eternity of misery. And if you knew that this outcome was likely, is it any better than going into the next room while the rogue plays bad cop? Finally, and this is the most interesting aspect from a roleplay standpoint I think; Does it matter? Someone used the example of saving a thousand lives by torturing one. If we are sticking to this particular scenario, then wouldn't the salvation of a thousand souls be worth the possiblity of losing one's divine favor? I'd love to see a paladin who realizes full well that a certain path might separate him from the deity he reveres but taking it anyway because they know it will save more lives than they ever could have hoped to when they started out as a paladin. Frankly, I think many would consider it a far greater sacrifice than merely losing their life. Imagine playing along side a fighter (formerly a paladin) who knowingly and willingly severed his connection to the thing that was most important to him, in order to save the lives of others. That would make for some interesting conversations I think.
Thanks for the in depth reply dude. It's frankly more specific than I'd come up with so far. Regarding the Weapon Focus, I think I was unclear. I realize the archetype replaces my bonus feat, and I was intending to use my normal level one feat for Weapon Focus. Unless I'm misreading it, the archetype only replaces the bonus fighter feat, and doesn't effect the regular feat all first level characters start with. Since I'm gaining Endurance as an alternate racial ability, I don't need my first level feat to purchase it. Or am I mistaken? For the record, I'd considered power attack as an alternative to weapon focus and, depending on how I'm feeling after my third module, I may well choose it instead when I lock my character in at second level. EDIT: Composite Longbow was a nice touch.
Just thought I'd do a quick write up for the next character I'm running in PFS to see if there's anything I've overlooked. I'm not going for pure optimization in favor of adhering to a specific theme. It's a variation of the Redeemer archetype available to half orc paladins with a bit of Unarmed Fighter to give it a more eastern feel and to qualify for Living Monolith at sixth level. Lvl 1 Str:18, Dex:12, Con:13, Wis:10, Char:14.
Race: Half Orc
Class: Unarmed Fighter
Traits: Survivor (+1 init and sense motive, stacks I believe with bonus from snake style.)
Skills: Diplomacy and Sense Motive. Feats: Starting out with Endurance, Improved Unarmed, and Snake Style, I'm leaning towards Weapon Focus for my Naginata for 1st lvl bonus feat. I'll need to grab Iron Will at some point before sixth to qualify for Living Monolith. Other than that, I'm undecided. He's wearing Lamillar Armor at first level which leaves him with a 15 AC. Not ideal, but the Snake style should help and he's using a reach weapon so I'm not overly worried about surviving to second level where he can begin his paladin carreer and get some decent defenses. Essentially, the plan is to take Paladin up until 6 when I qualify for the Living Monolith prestige class. Initially, it'll give me a swift action Enlarge Person 3 times a day which I think will be fun with a reach weapon. Depending on how things are going, I may take more levels in LM or stick with Paladin through 12. Basically he forgoes a tradition view of good and evil for a more bhudist approach (appropriate since he venerates Irori) While not a pacifist, he prefers diplomacy to violence. He'd just as soon live out his days sipping tea and meditating under a cherry tree somewhere. At the moment however, he's walking the earth, bringing aid to those who need it and redemption to those who many would consider too far gone. As a half orc, he's seen his share of prejudice and tries to look beyond a creature's race, believing only undead and possibly some outsiders to be truly evil. Think somewhere between Kambei Shimada (the leader from 7 Samurai) and Uncle Iroh from Avatar:The Last Airbender. Here's a link to the miniature I plan to use.
Anything I've missed or am unaware of?
I tend to agree with the OP. I'm not in favor of anything that makes the world feel smaller, and introducing mounts (especially at low level) often has that effect. There are advantages too, but I don't see them outweighing the cons. Even if they are allowed at higher levels, I wouldn't be opposed to seeing limits to where you could take one. Riding along an open road or even a dirt path is very different than wandering through dense brush or a bog. I'm less opposed to fast travel, provided that A: It only connects a handful of locations, major cities and outposts for the most part. And B: GW follows through on making it vulnerable to attack. The thing I want to avoid is clicking on a vendor, paying my two gold, and wandering off to make a hotpocket while a caravan whisks my avatar safely to the next city. Fast travel should be just as exciting and dynamic as any other aspect of the game. Not just a screensaver. The exception to this might be extremely high level wizards who could specialize in mass teleports (this would need to be rare, defeats the whole purpose if everyone can do it) They could either charge for their services via gold or favors.
Right, so his extra uses will essentially be one half of his level assuming he takes the option every level. Thanks guys.
Quick question regarding the wording here. By "1/2" do they mean one half? Or once every two levels? If it's the former, then does it just mean 3+int mod+half of int mod? If it's the latter, would I need to choose this bonus every level or only the even ones, allowing me to take an extra hitpoint or skill rank at level 3, 5, 7, ect... Both the core rulebook and d20pfsrd list it using this language and I haven't been able to find any threads that address it. "Wizard: Select one arcane school power at 1st level that is normally usable a number of times per day equal to 3 + the wizard's Intelligence modifier. The wizard adds +1/2 to the number of uses per day of that arcane school power."
So I've been told that Aasimar and Tieflings no longer require a chronicle sheet to create (human ancestry only) but I wasn't able to find the exact reference under the additional resources. I figure sooner or later, someone is going to call me on running a tiefling wizard without the necessary sheet and I'd like to have an official link to back me up. Can anyone recommend one to me? Or am I misinformed?
Hey, I had a quick question regarding this archetype and I didn't want to start a new thread for it. I'm wondering what my feat options are at first level as a human monk. Based on what I've read, of my three starting feats, only one qualifies to ignore the prerequisets. Whats confusing to me is that it specifically allows you to fuse two styles at level one and I don't see how you could have two when most of them require a higher bab or several ranks in a skill. Crane style might work since all I need is the dodge feat to qualify but nearly every other style either requires a higher monk level or a minimum of three ranks in a skill. So what's the point of allowing fusion at first level if its more or less unavailable till at least second? Edit: after reviewing the other style requirements, it appears that snapping turtle style is also a possibility. So based on this, I can only fuse if I choose either snapping turtle and a different style as a bonus, or crane, using my human feat to qualify and my bonus feat to bypass another styles requirements?
Apologies if this has already been addressed, nothing seemed to come up when I searched for it. I've been working on a dwarven beast rider cavalier and had a quick question. Firstly, let me mention that I'm aware that many PFS combats will not be suited to a large sized mount and that I've built my character accordingly. He'll certainly be more effective and mobile when mounted, but will not be useless on foot. My main concern, is less with using my mount in combat, and more with getting him/her to the encounter to begin with. I'm a new player and have only run a couple of modules, but so far, I've had fights that took place within Absalom (where an exotic mount wouldn't be allowed on the streets I assume) and in a tower that required a good deal of climbing on ropes to navigate. Are there any magical items or even scrolls I could use via a magical device check to allow me to transport my mount into difficult areas? In another thread, I read about someone casting pit on a blanket and rolling it up to take with them. Would that work? Or perhaps some version of floating disk combined with a reduce creature spell so my mount could float down a cliff-side while I climb it? Or even a way to essentially create my own wondrous figurine? In a home game this wouldn't be an issue, but I was hoping for something that would be viable in society play. By choosing a medium sized race (thereby requiring a large mount) I've already limited my options in small, cramped fighting conditions. It'd be nice if I could avoid shooting myself in the other foot when it comes to transportation.
Seriously though, i like the sound of this. Clearly not a priority at launch, but something that could be potentially lots of fun if they run with it. They could even factor in literal blueprints that would allow a player access to unique or uncommon looking structures. Maybe architecture could be a legit proffesion somewhere down the line. Dibs on "vandelay industries" and "mosbius designs" if it ever does.
I like the idea of crits being something that has a more long term effect. So even if a bandit loses to a wandering paladin, he may have inadvertently killed him if he is seriously wounded in a dangerous area with no healing or sanctuaries in site. Also seems to encourage grouping which is always a good idea. A more heavy handed approach would simply require larger parties to travel abroad. A well designed game however incentivises grouping on multiple levels, allowing players to discover the benefits organically and form a party of their own volition, not because of an arbitrary rule.
Hey, I know it's been a couple weeks for this thread, but I had another thought. Given that there's little I could put in a fan site that wouldn't already be available via the blog or these forums, I was considering instead focusing on a podcast. Each episode would feature any recent updates from the devs along with a bit of speculation/commentary. Beyond that, I was thinking about doing community interviews with various outspoken members of the forums here. Given all the discussions and debates going on, I thought it might be helpful if we got to know the person behind the username on a more personal level. Maybe we'd even delve into some of the more popular thread topics and allow users with differing opinions to speak their minds and have a little dialogue, hopefully being able to circumvent some of the misunderstandings and confusion that often crop up in lengthy forum discussions. The podcasts would be available on a site that could be expanded in the future, and maybe on it's own youtube channel. At the moment, it seems like there's very little there regarding Pathfinder Online. So, worthwhile endeavor or waste of time? Would you listen? Heck, would you want to get interviewed?
These all sound really cool to me, though most of it seems heavily dependent on the feel and type of combat itself which we are in many ways still in the dark about. That being said, if the combat mechanics allow for it, any or all of these would be welcome levels of depth as far as I'm concerned. In particular I like the relationship between cover and indirect fire. In close quarters combat everyone is moving too quickly and cover is often too scarce to be of any value. I'm more interested in a siege situation however. It'd be neat to see players who could specialize in seige equipment and large scale assaults. Things like being able to land a catapult shot just inside an outer wall, or the ability to see through defenses to find clusters of enemies ripe for the killing.
In response to Hitomi's question regarding my Eve online reference, I was alluding to the fact that new players in Eve are often at a loss when presented with the seemingly limitless options with no idea which to take first or even which direction to aim. From what I've read, GW is looking to soften this experience a little and one of the ways would be giving a heads up that by choosing a certain option, they'll be missing out on something else. You also seem to imply that your problem is not entirely with Capstones per say, but more that they set a precedent for future locking out of abilities. While I'm not particularly worried about this, I'll at least agree that I'd prefer if they didn't go too heavily in that direction. Beyond that, I'll bow out of the discussion for the time being. I've stated my perspective and I believe I have a fairly solid grasp on the opposing viewpoint. Sans new information in a blog post or in response to this thread, I'll leave it at that.
I would rather the story for why I am liked/hated etc... tied to what I did in the game, and very little of it tied to a backstory that I never played.
Given that A: there will be ample warning about deviating from capstone, and B: Permanent consequences are one of the defining attributes of a sandbox game, I'm not sure how this is a problem. Anyone who chooses to multiclass early on and avoid capstone should be well aware of what they are doing. This is one of the improvements they are trying to make on Eve's approach. Secondly, there is still alot of disagreement with your assertion that both characters will be identical after a couple years. This may be one of the issues we need to wait and see about before finalizing our opinions. At the moment it seems to be an impass. You say they'll be the same in the end and thus equally deserving of an ability. I don't agree. Not much point in pushing this one till we know more. Finally, You've mentioned multiple times that being forced into a single role would suck the enjoyment out for you. Essentially you'd have to spend two years playing something you didn't like, not being able to help your allies in the ways you want, and missing out on various other rewards your multiclass might have lead you to. If this is in fact genuine and not exaggeration, then I don't see why there's that much of a conflict for you. As far as we know, it's mostly a fluff ability, so if the price you pay for not getting it is spending two years playing an awesome character who you love in a game that you love, why is it such a big deal? I can see you not being thrilled with it, but threatening to not play a game that you like everything else about simply because there is a single particle effect you don't have access to after enjoying it for a quarter of a decade?
At the same time, if it is left entirely up to the player base to create factions from the ground up, there need to be measures taken so we don't end up with hundreds of "pathf11nder s0sieti". Essentially they'd be no different than any other chartered company but have a cooler name. If the devs allow players to take on the role of lore based factions, they should take precautions to keep them true to said lore. Ideally, I'd prefer an NPC based faction with significant prerequisites that allows greater control to players who advance further in it. So maybe to join one faction you have to be living in a certain area, playing one of several classes with only good alignments and revere a specific pantheon or deity. Then you need to gain enough reputation to be eligible for membership. You'd join through an npc, but the day to day decisions of the faction would be decided or at least influenced by the players within. hundreds of different ways you could implement this.
Careful dude. You're getting dangerously close to personal attacks here. I can appreciate if you feel outnumbered or that people have misunderstood your reasoning, but there's no need for name calling. It seems to me that the two major disagreements others and myself have with your argument is that a: you claim both characters are identical when they may well not be.
Edit:
Also, just a reminder, we still don't have the final word on how multiclassing will work with regards to ability selection and progression. It seems there are alot of assumptions that single classes will have just as many advantages from their chosen rout as multiclassers and that may well not be the case. I would argue that the inclusion of a capstone ability in and of itself suggests that there may be significant difficulty in remaining pure in a single class for 1.5 to 2 years and that capstones are a way to balance that. Let's assume for a moment that all things are not equal during progression. Just for the sake of argument, assume that there are no Jack of All Trades disadvantages for multi classing during the first year or so. If it turns out that multi classes have a distinct advantage, would you be less bothered by Capstones as a reward for people who had been fighting an uphill battle for the past eighteen months? Or does that not change anything?
Gonna echo Gruffling in that there is a finite amount of speculation that can be done without the neccessary info before devolving into pure opinions and assumptions. That being said, provided the ability is not overwelming in combat or creating an elite, upper class distinction between soloists and multiclassers, im in favor of it. Personally I plan to play a single class, but im sure there will be times ill be tempted to deviate. A mostly fluff or possibly convenience ability is a nice reward to focus on when im wishing I could unlock that chest or persuade that npc. Speaking of which, that's also why i dont consider the classes identical at the end like you suggest hitome. The multi class character may have accessed more loot during leveling, had access to different armors, gained better reputation with a faction, or any number of other things that might leave him with greater resources or options beyond the strict class abilities he also has more of. Your argument is that the two players should have equal opportunities in the end regardless of their paths, but I am unconvinced they'll be identical and thus equally deserving. Even if they are, consider the following: two players are both 20 in the same levels, with the same abilities. But one played during an event and won a limited item, or perhaps began playing a month earlier before a certain armor was discontinued, or any number of other minor things that allow him access to something his friend cannot. I would not say his friend is being punished simply because he didnt log on at the same time. Its merely a minor reward for one person based upon one of his choices.
There needs to be a balance between being mandatory and being purely optional. If you lean too far to one side, it becomes extremely inconvenient to the player base and sucks the fun out of the experience. Too far to the other side and players are investing in useless professions that no one is interested in purchasing. Once that happens, everyone will switch over to the handful of successful ones and things like cooking will be completely ignored.
This. Some settlements may be planned out and organised by several chartered companies, while others may spring up organically out of necessity. It'd still be cool to build a fortress out in the badlands, but much riskier.
This isn't a discussion of the difference between atheism, agnosticism or whatever. The initial question was simply if choosing a deity was required during character creation. As far as I know there hasn't been any confirmation either way, though personally I'm hoping it won't be required for all characters.
I'd like to give a quick reminder that skills do not translate into attacks or even options you'd use on a hotbar. While some may lead to unlocking new abilities, most will not in my understanding. From what I've heard, it'll be possible to invest almost entirely in non combative skills if one chooses (crafter, merchant, ect...) So having a limited number of attacks in combat shouldn't prevent anyone from investing in exciting new skills and merit badges.
When I initially heard about multiclassing, I thought it would be a bit more traditional. The idea of being a fighter who switches up his abilities and turns into a wizard is fun, but will true hybrids be viable? Like a guy who wants to be a fighter and a wizard at the same time? My understanding was that it'd be doable, though you'd risk spell failure for casting in armor. Whether it's pure 50/50 or you only get a couple spells is unclear.
@Harrison
@Hanz
Sounds like the kind of thing a multi-game guild might try.
Thrilled to hear about the opportunity attack system. I'd been hoping there would be something like this but I'd never considered that it could be a condition with vulnerability to certain types of attack. I realize it may change before launch, though personally I hope it doesn't. I think this would allow for a character to help defend his allies, without forcing specific roles on classes. Should definitely add a new layer of complexity to combat. So given the current info, when choosing which ability to use, one will have to consider: A: Number of points it costs, and the length of time before they refresh. B: Whether it will put them in an opportunity condition and who might be near enough to take advantage of that. These are just two more considerations in addition to the expected factors like cooldowns, environmental issues, and range. Sounds like this is shaping up to be a very tactical game. @Gruffing
While I'm not opposed to other characters having more options (provided it's balanced) I'd be happy with 4-8 solid attacks and the occasional utility. As someone who's leaning towards Fighter, there is an appeal in the pureness of it. Less flash, more substance.
I'm liking what I'm hearing about utility and passive abilities. These could lead to a more refined, subtle form of multi classing. My fighter might still rely primarily on his fighter attacks, but his movement, buffs and debuffs, and various other factors might be a result of multi classing as a ranger. With regard to the interface discussion, I'm personally hoping it won't be necessary to master 18 or more skills at once to be competitive (though I can certainly appreciate someone with a different play style wanting the option, Nihimon) Since I'm leaning towards a fairly straight forward fighter, I'm hoping for a simpler, solid feel. Enough abilities to be challenging, but not requiring macros or a gaming keyboard. In a perfect world, there would be a way to do both. In reality, I'm hoping for at least a decent compromise.
Been browsing some old threads and I thought I'd toss this one back up. Maybe even get some designer perspective on the subject? So far the consensus seems to favor some sort of minimal world map with sparse details, and possibly a small minimap for immediate surroundings.
If cartography is made into a specific skill (and not just a byproduct of survival or something) I think it'll be obscure enough that not allot of people will bother with it. Between being able to swing my mace better and being able to scribble on parchment more efficiently, I think most will choose the former. This isn't a bad thing however if it means there will be a legitimate market for map making. Nothing worse than investing time in a craft skill only to find that nobody wants or needs it. Another option is to tie map making in with other literary or scribe-related skills. At the moment there is a discussion in the latest blog post thread involving spell books and libraries. If map making is considered too obscure to be it's own skill, it could be made a branch of a larger skill tree that covers everything from copying spell books, alchemical or blacksmithing recipes, and maps. Finally, I'd love to hear some confirmation on the way maps will work in an ever changing sanbox environment. Initially, I'd assume lower skilled maps would need to be redone occasionally to account for changing kingdom territories, player built settlements, ect... though perhaps an advanced cartographer could craft a magical map that changes to reflect the current landscape. These would obviously be extremely hard to craft and very rare, meaning most people would have to rely on purchasing new maps every couple of months. Seems like a decent way to ensure a healthy market. Especially with the added fear of maps being lootable. Thoughts, comments, concerns? |
