@Hobs - That system may well work! Thanks for a well-considered answer. :)
If it is more like a resource node that is 'mined' and then decamped, then I suspect it would work very well. But it doesn't have near the 'feel' of the first system.
@Being - I guess I don't see how I'm focusing on the negative. I just providing my POV on the OP's question. I'm sure that GW is doing everything they can to make griefing as difficult as possible, and I applaud them for it. But let's not pretend that griefing won't happen, and a remote farm is the perfect place to cause mischief.
I like Hob's suggestions on how you could make a farm less mischief-prone. It lacks some of the romance of a homestead, but I suspect that is how they will do it.
And I hope Bluudwolf is right that the NPC guards will be fast enough to prevent slash and run tactics if there is some way to have small personal structures out in the 'controlled hexes.' As long as they don't teleport in...that would stink for immersion!
Hopefully I'm wrong (and yes, I'm aware that GW is going to do their level-best to avoid anti-social behavior.) There are plenty of people who will relish their 'outlaw' status, so that is of absolutely zero deterrence. Like locks, 'outlaw' tagging will only keep honest people honest. The jerks will still be jerks. It's how they roll.
Look, I'm all for playing PfO and participating in the PvP game. I just don't think a detailed farm mechanic has much chance of working unless the farm disappears while the farmer is off-line. Unless there are very strong NPC guards, I fear that the sheep will live in constant fear of unwanted attention while the shepherd is away! :)
Wiping out a relatively undefended farm is just too tempting a target for people who are out for a little "fun", particularly if it is just a matter of getting three or four like-minded mischief-makers together.
Since farming should take a full season to produce, I doubt many farms will survive long enough to be satisfying for the player who runs it.
I agree with Hobs...communal farms have some chance of making it if they are indeed a POI for a hex. At least then you'll get some active defense. But the lone farmstead would be toast I'm afraid.
I think Bluud is right...real Bandits won't bother with farms. But the 'lets go cause mischief' crowd will be all over them. And don't fool yourself...there will be plenty of that crowd in PfO unfortunately.
And is there any hope for the poor farmer protecting his stuff when the world is literally flooded with bandits that never seem to die.
I love the idea, but I think there will be soooo many people wanting to 'roleplay evil' that you have no hope of preventing your sheep from being violated daily. This is all a consequence of the 'massive' part of the game design...too many people on the server means there is no real social consequence for being a jerk, so the world will be rife with them. Think Mogadishu with tights and capes. On a smaller server (of a couple hundred people) the jerks would become obvious and eliminated quickly.
So no, I don't think farms can work in PfO as it will be essentially a third-world country. People starve in third-world countries largely because the jerks gank the farmers.
I agree Sepherum, no targeting circles (for the wizard or the opponent.) Just a targeting point and you'd best have a good idea of what 30' looks like before you cast. This is supposed to be a skill-based game. Since AoE takes the least amount of skill then we should take away all of the training-wheels (like targeting templates.)
If...there is a concept of diminishing returns associated with magical AOE...AND there is friendly fire with concurrent alignment/rep permutations...AND any bozo in the world can see where AOE is targeting beforehand...AND AOE spells take longer to cast and are easier to interrupt...what the heck does Goblinworks have against evokers? A staple of D&D, Pathfinder, MMOs, and lovers o' magic everywhere? Apparently the devs think AOE has the potential to be REALLY overpowered and needs to be REALLY nerfed.
The big difference between PfO and TT in regards to AoE is the Vancian resource limitation of the level-relative 'big' AoE in TT.You can't chain-cast Fireballs in TT due simply to the limited number of uses you get per day. If you go with the as-designed four combats per rest period, even at 9th level I only get one 3rd level fireball per combat in TT! You could always use wands and such to spam it a bit more, but it is a pretty expensive proposition until you are high enough level that your enemies pretty much shrug off Fireballs anyway.
Since PfO will not use Vancian magic, there must be some limitation on the power of AoE spells. I love that AoE are the "nuclear option" spells in TT, but they are only pulled out when appropriate since they are precious resources at that point in the game. To give them the same relative power in PfO and then allow them to be cast-at-will would be bad design.
Pathfinder Modules Subscriber
Ha! I would have said "Okay".
Then at the table I would have said "Andy wants to steal stuff from the loot and asked that I hide it from you guys. Since we don't treat other players that way, I'm going to be transparent and give you all a chance to catch him. Everybody roll."
Then, at Andy's loud indignation at my revelation of his douche-baggery, I would just smile and say "Oh. That was me role-playing an incompetent GM...just like you were role-playing a thief. But I'm not in character now. Please roll."
Hopefully, he would get the point.
Everyone keeps trying to get GW to go against their promises. I'm hoping the GW stays good to its word when I pledged.
Based on that promise, we should expect to see a mechanical advantage that reflects the fantasy assumption that Lawful and Good settlements will be more effective. It's one of the reasons I pledged so much.
I think we have the right to expect them to keep the foundational promises that they made to generate their KS funding. To do otherwise will reflect badly not only on them, but on the Pathfinder and Paizo brands as well.
As I stated earlier, my company already has an anti griefing pledge in our own charter. It actually predates this treaty idea.
This proposal is not talking about how you manage your company or what you agree to do (or not do) during 'normal times.' TEO is just asking who out there will agree to be there if the future of the game is at risk. Clearly you guys aren't. No biggie.
We are motivated by greed.
You and everyone else, my friend. You and everyone else.
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
Yay for Charles II.
Um...celebrating intolerance isn't cool usually. Particularly from someone who is loudly demanding tolerance.
Anyway, this has nothing to do with that, so quit using straw men arguments. I don't care about how skimpy it is, I don't care if it offends others, I don't care what rating it gets.
I do care that the game be built with verisimilitude and the attending consequences of choices related to it. It is a game design question and has nothing to do with how free-minded anyone considers themselves.
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
You should allow choice and if people wearing stripper armour in a fantasy game offends you write a mod that puts everybody in realistic armour.
It is just as possible for you to run a nude mod, no?
Actually, it just looks like an honest attempt to decide collectively, as those who have invested early with time and money, that we will work together to keep the world a great place for all to enjoy within the design intents of GW. If you don't agree with GW's design intents, then I'm really confused why you are here.
We've all seen games ruined by groups whose primary enjoyment in a game comes from reducing the enjoyment of others. They aren't even acting with indifference towards how others feel about the exchange. They can only be pleased when they know that others are unhappy.
Yes, it will be dangerous to stand against such groups. I understand that it is easier to pretend philosophical indifference or (even better) outrage than to take a stand. History is replete will well-meaning cowards who watch quietly on the sidelines as tyrants rise. And they all learned that eventually the focus of the tyrant that was 'not my problem' becomes 'my problem.' But, by then, there are no allies left to help them.
The method of the destruction of the game is immaterial. It could be anything, but 'kill everything in sight' is a very common tactic of these anti-social bullies.
What is being asked is are you willing to take a stand when the time comes to keep the game enjoyable for multiple play-styles. That's all. Nothing more. Can you be counted on if the worst happens?
Will you join in our crusade?
It's simple. Consequences.
If you want sexy middrif-baring armor, then it will have less protection than armor that actually works.
I can see a case for some mitigation of that 'realism' rule if it is magical armor. But it has to be much easier to create equivalent protection armor if you start with some real protection underneath the magical layers.
Basically, if you are too sexy for your shirt, then take it off. You can always get a ring of protection if you like. Or you can take your chances. But people who wear more armor should get more protection, all else being equal.
Yeah, the dupe idea would be a disaster.
I think threading is a great idea. In fact, it is the best idea I have seen from the GW.
It makes it possible for people who aren't too excited by PvP to accept it, and those whose sense of worth comes by taking stuff from others can still get their jollies on.
I'd like to see items only be threadable once, however.
In other words, once you thread and item, if you sell or trade or lose that item it is not threadable by subsequent owners. This only happens if you thread it. The original 'threader' can still re-thread the item, but only one character can ever thread an item.
Of course, the PvP monkeys who take items won't be able to thread them if they've been previously threaded...but the like 'high risk, high reward' game play. So I'd expect no counter from that quarter.
The largest complaint will likely come from those who plan to pass the best gear down from character to character. But I think it's okay to demand that each character earn their own Threadable stuff.
I've wanted to run a DFRPG game for a while, but I just don't get/like the FATE system. I'd do it with GURPS, but no one with a job and a social life can create a GURPS game from scratch...just too much custom work to do (but everything does work beautifully when you take the time!)
Are you guys using the system in the DFRPG books? How is it going?
Thanks Uthreth! Nice summary of the mechanics. I'm sure I read all of that someplace, but the old grey matter ain't what it used to be! I do remember some reference to 12 mile diameter hexes (but see previous grey matter caveat...)
I'm concerned along with BlackPhx about how many empty hexes will survive. I hope it hard enough to build things that every hex doesn't have several PC structures, even if it isn't a settlement.
I agree with the OP's overall curiosity regarding population density.
Will there really be any 'wilderness' area where you are unlikely to run into other people? Or will there be a 'bandit' around every corner and people running everywhere? If I am 'exploring' and see someone every three minutes it will really ruin the immersion for me.
I'm really hoping for the former. I'd like to think I could explore a hex and perhaps not even see another person for a while. I don't think that is likely, however, given the number of hexes and the number of people. I'm sure GW would say that a certain restriction is needed to ensure meaningful interaction, but I'd counter that a feeling of true wilderness is needed too.
My big fear is that there are a lot of people who want to 'explore', but that there just isn't enough explorable area to scratch that itch for all of them.
In addition, I wonder if there is a mechanism that can restrict the settlement of hexes so that people don't go out and just plop down settlements in the middle of nowhere without roads or other infrastructure to actually support them. Will hexes need to be 'developed' including linking to other settled hexes? Or can sprawl just go crazy with random 'pop-up' kingdoms?
Just posted over on KS (I assume from Ryan, but can't be 100% sure.)
I hope you are right, Steve. But I decided to back in a big way since I think I'm getting my value with all the swag, even if it is just a supplemental revenue stream to off-set development costs.
I'm more concerned at the complete absence of GW during this critical period. No posts to KS from them today, I don't see any Paizo forum posts yet either. That's what causes me to question how much the REALLY need this KS to fund.
I have a principle issue with GW breaking their word. Just me, I guess, but promises should mean something.
I'd not complain either way and don't really give a rats behind about the stupid DD (which I have most, but not all.) But I don't want to reward the whiners. It only encourages their entitlement mentality.
What if people could pledge $1/day for any item they wanted. The Goblin Sword would be $30. The last item $1. If they really want to help the KS they can get the thing they want. If they just want to whine...well, I'm not sure we need them.
Great idea, Leperkaun! Seriously. If they'd get that in soon it would be awesome! I doubt they can. I don't think they'll even see this until tomorrow.
I worry that they took the weekend off. Unbelievable, if you ask me, that they'd not be 100% focused on this KS at the end here. Star Citizen ran a 24 hour marathon with Chris-freaking-Roberts on videocast the whole time. GW doesn't even show up on the message boards. Not a single post on the KS comments from them today. Wow.
I really want this to go, but I can't express how very disappointed I am in their senior leadership...or lack thereof.
Actually, the name is the last thing I would copy. It's an anachronistic reference to someone else's intellectual property, and no one would pronounce it right.
Agree, not the name. Way too out of place. But I'd love to throw a subtle nod of respect that way :)
Someone should call Jim and see if he'd pitch in to help fund the game!
+1 for naming the tavern after Mac's, this just so happened to remind me I have his latest book laying around that I haven't started, seems like a good time for that now :).
It's a good read. I liked it a lot more than Ghost Stories. I think we are finally getting to see the main arc of the story.
Could we eliminate name tags all-together? I mean the float above the head things? Or maybe set it up so that you and a person had to 'friend' each other for the name tags to be perma-float?
I'm sure there are a million reasons this won't work...but name tags cause a lot of issues and I'm not convinced they are worth the trouble. I really don't care that some stranger named his character "Atoon Forme"..the only things I care about are the things I shouldn't know at a glance anyway: Friend/Enemy, Relative Strength, Organizational Affliation, Alignment.
I do care about my friends, so maybe only your friends are identified with a tag.
Must be just me, then. I never felt it was worth it to start crafting once the market was saturated with low-level items (before the advent of soul-binding in MMOs solved the problem.)
Without soul-binding (read: PfO) items and some type of item drain, things will just circulate.
Yes, the 'normal' low-level items will fall out of circulation since no one will bother Threading them. But the 'nice' low-level items could well stay in circulation longer, as owner after owner Threads them.
Eventually, there will be enough 'nice' low-level items being passed down (twinking, trading, theft) that the demand for both 'normal' and 'nice' low-level items falls significantly.
I'm working under the assumption that crafting should be meaningful and rewarding along the whole path. If we are assuming that a race to the top is the only viable path for crafting success, then forget about it. Crafting is busted anyway.
The whiners have used dubious, at best, logic...as whiners usually do. Their self-centered interpretation of the DD is that it is 'punative' to late pledgers. Stop. No. Let's examine.
My opnion...we are probably better off without them in the game. I'll pledge more right now to make up for the OP doing something else with his time.
EDIT: @OP. No worries mate. I just upped my pledge to make up for your unwillingness to join without getting un-earned rewards.
I wonder how stealth will work? Will it be a 'skill', or will the game engine only render you if the opponent's perception beats your stealth.
If the latter is the case I can see a race to the top of the stealth/perception trees really quickly....it will be a very valuable skill for thieves, assassins, rangers, etc. But if you don't build in that kind of mechanic, a lot of those roles lose some of their appeal when you are simply using a weakly disguised 'invisibility' skill for 10 seconds.
I'm in favor of a contest-based stealth skill system, but make environmental factors very strong in the equation. Moving should be (like in F2F gaming)a huge negative to stealth. Once someone locks onto you it should be very difficult to re-stealth unless you can break LOS first, etc.
I bring this up because it has such an impact on solo play. As Being said, moving stealthily through the woods is a very druid/ranger thing. If stealth is simply a combat mechanic then it becomes a lot less useful for those roles.
EDIT: After I wrote this I thought "I'm sure this has been discussed before." After a year of idleness, of course, it has. Here is Ryan's comment on the very topic:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
Oh well, so much for that.Here's the thread for the curious. Worth the read as Ryan talks about the problem of key packet hacks in MMOs as the reason we can't have better stealth.
Here is Ryan's ending comment on the hack programs:
Ryan Dancey wrote:
Oh - you're not using these tools? That sucks, because the people you're playing against are and that gives them an advantage you don't have.
A plague on evil hackers and all their progeny!Curious-Stealth-Mechanics
Potential Problem Statement: Crafting is a limited path, usually dominated by the first players to rush up the crafting tree. In a game without soul-bound items, the game will eventually fill up with low-level crafted items, making it difficult to become a successful crafter later.
Possible Solution: Make crafted items able to be 'Soul Threaded' only once. After the first threading, any subsequent owners (either through trade or looting,) cannot thread that item.
This would have the effect of ensuring there is an ongoing demand for crafted items, as un-threaded items can be lost (out of the game) upon death. It is a nice item-drain for crafted items!
Also, it kind of already is a rich kid's hobby. The books are expensive, the play mat, miniatures, and heaven knows what other accessories you might have. Of course, you get what you paid for (I enjoy Pathfinder WAY more than video games now.)
Rich kids hobby? Compared to what? Tiddly-winks? The fun-hours per dollar for role-playing is superb compared to most other hobbies. Let's see:
Golf - Nope, not even in the ballpark cost-wise
So yes, if you mean 'Rich Kids' as those who are willing to actually pay more than the $7.99 for a deck of cards , then I suppose it is. :)
@OP: LOL. So you are angry that other people were rewarded for committing earlier than you? Well, I committed right away BECAUSE of the Daily Deals, and I've been active in recruiting others to commit ever since then. But you, coming in at the last minute, expect to receive all the rewards with none of the work or dedication. Did you always get a trophy as a kid, too?
That's not a 'mini-game', that is the tactical game!
Auto-target is the lamest form of 'easy mode' you can make. You might as well just eliminate the other players and let each person have their own automated bunch of drones.
Assist targeting is mechanically automated team-work.
I'm sick to death of games that remove all the skill, and I'm not talking about 'twitch' skills here either. I'm talking about making smart choices, individually. Not just pressing number keys when abilities come off cool-down. I can play WOW/RIFT/GW2/etc/etc/etc if I wanted to do that.