Rafkin's page

It's still Paizo. Every possible way to build a character will exist eventually.

Well if Hero Lab Online sinks Lone Wolf you can always come back to WA!

I guess I'm confused. Its been stated that guilds can buy votes, bargain for votes, do whatever they want for votes.

But then its also been said you shouldn't vote for a guild that you're not going to play with.

How are those both true statements?

Even if stealth as it applies to combat were to have limited usefulness it's still an immensely useful skill in this game.

Being able to dictate when or whether there will be a fight or not by evading your enemy or waiting for the right time to jump him is of obvious value.

Let's not forget that this is a game for control of territory. Having the ability to covertly recon an enemy encampment would alone be enough reason for a number of characters to train it.

So they make good scouts. Which usually work alone. But they can't kill a moss snake solo so if caught by even one enemy sentry the rogue dies or has to run.

The only benefit to having a stealther scout is so the enemy doesn't know they are being scouted. But anyone on sentry duty will have just as many points in perception. Even if they don't the attacking party should assume that they will.

So knowing your scout will probably be spotted attackers will have to come up with a plan that doesn't involve stealth. Just to be safe.

So while your raid leader will humor your scout because he feels bad for him, his actual plan of attack won't rely on stealth at all.

Which is why I'm wondering why we haven't heard a thing from GW in regards to this thread.

*Resumes tears of anguish, and assumes the new name Qallaz*.

They occasionally take days off.

Am I the only person here who thinks it's possible--maybe even likely--that the dev team at GW aren't complete morons, and might, you know, have some kind of plan?

And maybe, just maybe, Qallaz's hand-wringing tears of anguish are a bit premature? Going out on a limb here, but wouldn't "Uh, hey, am I understanding this right? This sounds like a problem because of...," be way more reasonable than "OMFG devs FAIL obviously stealth is teh suck and no one will ever use it!"

Well said. This is exactly what I wanted to post but I couldn't figure out a way to say it that wouldn't get me in trouble .

I believe one of the adventure paths had a vampire pumpkin familiar for witches.

What happened that made MMOs $100 million dollar projects? EQ surely didn't spend that much and the only real difference is graphics. Is it just inflation?

I personally prefer the subscription model. I tend to spend more money on F2P games....but maybe that proves your point.

Tigari wrote:

If they have it, and use it, wouldn't it be gone then?

(in line with Potions and Scrolls, Not weapons and armor)

There's a chance of it. But I'm tired of defeating something and finding 3 healing potions and thinking why did you let me kill you so fast without even trying to use those?

Maybe he had 4 and they were on cool down?

I believe your jump distance is based off strength, going off memory here.

Edit: nevermind. I'm thinking of climb

The are not banning any countries IP so let's move along lol

He said "yes separate cities". :o)

I found the real problem is with the Summon Monster ability. Granted mine is level 13 now but being able to summon d3 "angels" ( forget the name) that can lightning bolt and heal and fly and cast blur at will has really trivialized some encounters. And 7 times a day for 13 minutes each.

I've gone entire sessions with no eidolon at all.

I think the idea of "bulk" vs normal crafting supply is more in how they are stored and traded. As for skills, I would suspect that they use the same skills, after all chopping wood is chopping wood, weather you it in logs for use in buildings, or chopping it down to size for woodworking tools and weapons. So basically, you would have "LUMBER" as the bulk wood, and then "Wood Planks" or something for the crafting bit. When lumber gets harvested/gathered and taken to a mill for refining, I would assume that it is a choice as to what it gets turned into, crafting or Bulk.

This is how I see it working and what makes the most sense.

You can't choose to take lumber and make it bulk or use it for crafting. The type of node you got the wood from determines which it can be refined into.

Ah yeah, I forgot about the alignment hit on the settlement.

I wonder if there are mechanics for smuggling there will be a way to take those goods from caught smugglers without getting hits for banditry.

Just to clairify, Pax will not be conducting bandit activities. Banditry will not be allowed within Aeternum territory....

I assume Pax will have bandits they just won't be doing it within Aeternum territory?

@Sintaqx Sounds like I have to practice my singing. Wonders if the person sang off key if that would double the amount of the SAD offer.

They might pay you to stop.

I assumed people were clicking Favorite for the mod post that removed it.

Even though it's been stated I think maybe people are forgetting that we (Pax) didn't created the UNC. As a merchant they were already a threat to you prior to this alliance.

The only thing that has changed is now there is one small part of the world where they are not a threat. People say we are supporting them by letting them train, well they were going to get training anyway, somewhere.

If you didn't want to business with Callambea before the alliance then UNC was a threat. If you still don't want to do business in Callambea after the alliance then the UNC is still a threat.

I don't see any negatives for traders.

At what point will a merchant be defined as "doing business with Aeternum" and thus be safe from the UNC?

If a merchant visits Callambea once a week but trades elsewhere the other six days will he be safe all week or just when he is going to/from Callambea?

It seems that the more successful Callambea is the less content there will be for the UNC. If Callambea becomes the Walmart of PfO and everyone trades there what will become of the UNC?

So GTA Online just released and of course the servers are kaploot like every online game in the history of Man. I'm not even mad about it anymore. It's become an acceptable and expected situation.

It just seems odd that in today's world a problem that has plagued this industry for a decade hasn't been fixed.

Does the industry have some technical breakthrough in the pipeline so our grandkids will be able to play Pathfinder 4 on launch day?

So if I'm in town A and I pay someone to transport goods to town B do I still need to travel to town B to actually place those goods on the market?

I suppose this is more of a mechanics question than anything that relates to the APS. It may work out that APS frequently just buys the goods, at a discount, then takes them back to Town B to sell themselves?

Or what if I'm in Town B and I need some metal bits that are for sale in Town A. Will APS travel to Town A, acquire the metal bits, then return them to me in Town B?

(assuming APS is based in Town B)

I dread the implications inherent in a game-related organisation with a charter so complex as to require decimal points. I can almost see the point of a charter generally, but even that's a bit murky; it feels on the depressing road from "fun game" to "real life".

You should see our No Pants policy

@Rafkin First: Killing of unflagged people is not always griefing. I imagine griefing might occur in the context of killing unflagged people, killing flagged people, or not in the context of killing at all. It's deliberately not a hard definition.

Second: People can start the game as CE. They can become CE by alignment shifts over time - some combination of criminal/chaotic acts and evil acts. Killing unflagged peole will likely be a common path towards CE, but not the only one, I expect.

I did not think people could start as CE. I thought I read it would take some work to become LG so I assumed we couldn't pick a starting alignment.

Nihimon wrote:

Areks wrote:

Nihimon wrote:

Items 1 & 2 seem entirely consistent with pretty much everything that's ever been said about PvP in PFO. The only real change I see is item 3, and that seems perfectly reasonable to me as a way of getting people to quit wanting to play Chaotic Evil as an RP choice so that Goblinworks could follow through on their plans to make it suck to be Chaotic Evil.

I really hope this isn't the case. We've talked this over and over, I really hope GW treats all players desired playstyles equally.

There may be subtle nuances in my wording that conveyed unintentional meaning. I think Tork Shaw's words can stand alone, and clearly convey Goblinworks' ongoing commitment to this utterly consistent message.

Tork Shaw (Goblinworks Blog: The Man in the Back Said "Everyone Attack!") wrote:

Attacking a player without provocation or sanctions will result in reputation and alignment loss. It's basically murder. Players who engage in a lot of this behaviour will find their reputation is adversely affected, and so is the reputation of their company or settlement. Eventually their company or settlement will suck.

See, I totally interpreted this as CE will be fine as long as they aren't a bunch of griefers. I greatly appreciate the clarification Nihimon! I'm sure GW is will land it somewhere between our opinions that we both find suitable.

But how do you become CE unless you've been "griefing"?

Awesome....until I realized it was open PvP....then I used some four letter words combined with Ryan's name to make some colorful sentences....but I stuck with it and blog after blog brought me around to understanding this might be fun.

Feuds need a reason to get started. One group takes a PoI, declares war, assassinates a leader, etc. Maybe something as simple as being neighbors. As long as there is some prerequisite to declaring a feud.

Can I have an alt in my own guild to spy on my friends?

I do like the limit on company sizes. 10-50 people is big enough to do something, but small enough to know everybody. Settlement leadership can focus on managing companies, not individuals.

I didn't read that as a limit. I hope there isn't a 50 person limit on company size. I see no reason to do that.

I just wish I could build something of my own. I appreciate coming together as a community to build a settlement too but I'd like a small plot to do my own thing.

It seems to me that PfO is only a sandbox for the handful of people that manage your settlement.

But that goes back to me having a different definition of "sandbox".

I like The Repopulation. It's development closely resembles PfO, in my mind at least. You're the only two companies really interacting with the community from the ground up. And not just some community mod, actual people responsible for decisions are listening to us.

Rafkin wrote:

I'm all for a council but I'll vote for someone based on what they contribute in-game, not on an Internet forum.

What to you is a 'contribution' in a game? If it is their kill/death ratio or possibly their skill level in crafting comforters you might be biased. ;)

Well their kill/death ratio vs. me might come into play :o)

But seriously, I think the game will force enough interaction and community building that good representatives will stand out. And it's just not the "good" guys.

Players can be "evil" and not come off as jerks. Someone who ganks me and says "suck it noob" is different form the guy who ganks me and says "better luck next time".

I'm all for a council but I'll vote for someone based on what they contribute in-game, not on an Internet forum.

Carrying capacity is an obvious skill mounts could have. Either mounts with different stats or mounts that change stats based on the flag you are using. Flagged as bandit your mount has a speed boost, traveler mounts can carry more, during a siege your mount gets a charge attack, ranger mounts obviously should get feign death...

I'm a member of Pax Aeternum and I check the forums daily. I'm not a fan of the open PvP nature of the game so sometimes I come off as sounding negative. I've stuck around because I like Pathfinder and I have a lot of respect for the way Goblinworks is approaching design.

EQ is going for a much broader audience so PvP takes a back seat. PfO doesn't want millions of players and their PvP focus ensures they won't get them.

Mostly I was concerned that a group of outlaws could lower a settlements lawfulness while the citizens of that settlement have no way to stop them, other than killing them and becoming criminals themselves (further lowering the lawfulness of the settlement)

/gems

And by open /pizza

You want a sub-forum for another game? I don't see that happening.

How do you stop people from breaking laws? Assuming murder is outlawed, will the criminal flag be enough to kill them without breaking any laws yourself?

But when you get tackled they don't get to steal your shoes

Two first names! Unacceptable!

Bottleneck Badges

If its about one persons opinion then it should be handled with private messages.

Honestly, trying to change someone's opinion on the Internet is futile but if you must, then do it privately.

Xeen wrote:

Bringslite wrote:

*sets up his fact squeezer"

Step up people and dish out the goods! ;)

We were sworn to secrecy by Stephen.

Seen, who from the forums were you able to meet?

Auto-correct strikes again!

I think the community has expressed it's desire for this thread to end. So if you really cared....

This thread needs to die. Go play something.

Don't be a jerk. That's the only rule we need.

Once we get in game and we find bugs or exploitable mechanics then this topic would become relevant. Until then the "don't be a jerk" rule should suffice.

I think it's going to be difficult to define any rules of behavior. The games design is such that there are not enough resources to support everyone's goals. It's going to get nasty.

Any such rules should be common sense and those that don't already know them won't be likely to follow them just because we wrote them down.