ScoutmasterChip's page

Greetings Good people of The Seventh Veil.

I can see that you have started to recruit members, but also that your website is down, which is why i am sending this message to express my interest in your guild.

I am a huge fan og dungeons and dragons, and through there i have turned out to be fond of the Pathfinder RPG, so when i saw this game being on a kickstarter i immediately went to back it!

As i wish to get a good start into this game, and get some allies to play with, i contact you. My friends whom also plays table top RPG does not seem to be interested in this game, therefore i am looking for new people to play with.
This lead me to your guild, since this seems the guild who lets people evolve the most, while still being a serious group

I hope you will consider me in your guild

Best Regards

Daniel

Daniel,

I'm able to navigate there without error.
http://www.khaiognos.org/phpBB/viewforum.php?f=1

LOL, I remember reading my first DnD book where it was explained that asking another his alignment or attempting to discover it without permission was considered great rudeness.

Now everybody is just going to Detect Alignment instead of handshakes.

Keep in mind, ya'll, even if you figure out Henry is evil, you still take a rep and alignment hit if YOU attack first.

Hmmm, I wonder how that's gonna work in a settlement? If I attack someone first, I get a hit. What happens if I set the settlement rules so that NPC guards attack all evil. Does the settlement take a hit?

A'ight!

You're all in time out for 15 minutes. Go to your corners and come back when you're ready to discuss Minority representation in PFO.

A Scout is Obedient! Go!

:)

+78 Pharasma love!
+10 Encumberance!

The "threading" concept peeks my curiosity a bit. I'm worried it might be complicated.

The Death Curse thing sounds hardcore! I kinda like it as an anti-ganker tool.

I wonder about getting the "thief" flag for looting someone elses husk. Will rogues have some type of ability to avoid or minimize that?

Though I've already pledged my Benjamin...

It might encourage more pledges to give a list of what's in "Player Packs", "Alliance Packs" and "Guild Packs".

Other than that, I suggest a $10,000 level where Sean K. Reynolds participates in a debate on the Pantheon of Golarion with the contributor.

Crystal...just come back to the original topic.

It's not worth encouraging the derailment. :)

To help....

Do you think they should narrow racial minorities body features by nation or origin, or should we be able to make pale Mwgambians?

I'll selfishly say this...

I'd LOVE a game that had devs activly involved in maintaining name conventions. (I think this has been mentioned for PFO)

You don't have to be the worlds best role player, but my GOD, at least have the dignity to not walk around with BieberF33ver187 above your character model.

Please? lol

ScoutmasterChip wrote:

I guess the question is, why would you want to be chaotic evil whilst avoiding an opportunity to cause suffering on another person?

If you're gonna be CE...BE CE! hehe

I may want to be a thief, or a slaver, or..... a crimelord that doesn't dirts his hands. I mean .. I have goons for that kind of things.

That's fine Scarlet, and perfectly acceptable to want to play that. But let me ask you this:

Is it not equally as sinful to send a brigand to murder than to do it yourself?

I'd say the answer is yes it's equally sinful, but I don't know if they can make a computer understand that concept.

Then again, if there's going to be contracts, maybe some type of kill contract put on another would shift you to evil as you take more and more out on good aligned folk?

Sorry EDIT: That's what I'm talking about causing suffering on others. There's gotsta be a way.

I don't know how the devs plan to work this out, but I want to address the "what if you heal a thief" statement from a Dungeonmaster perspective.

Player Bogan is a cleric of Saerenrae, Good Aligned, and studied in the Healing Domain.

As a DM, I would NEVER challenge or punish Bogan for healing another entity who was in need. I don't care if this guy has just been beaten down by the parties barbarian for ambushing the party and killing the ranger. I further don't care if Bogan saw him decapitate a nun. Healing is a life-enriching action. In my opinion, life-enriching actions tend to be good rather than life-diminishing actions.

Now if Bogan called for his torture after healing mortal wounds...THERE'S the life-diminishing action.

If Bogan healed him to convince him to beat the rouge that stole from him last week...again, life-diminishing action.

Now what makes it difficult in a computer game is this:

If Bogan heals the bad guy while the bad guy is currently attacking Bogan's friends? He's now enriching the bad guy's life and diminishing his companions. This requires a degree of subjectivity that is extremely hard to create algorhythmns for. You have to be able to consider intent, and computers aren't real intuitive there.

Same situation presents with the CG thief that steals from a wealthy merchant to feed a pauper's child. Stealing is bad, but charity is good. Now you have to weigh the sins and virtues.

I guess the question is, why would you want to be chaotic evil whilst avoiding an opportunity to cause suffering on another person?

If you're gonna be CE...BE CE! hehe

We can use the iconic cleric of Saerenrae (I wish I wasn't forgetting her name right now).

WAR's artwork and the Reaper miniature are done in a VERY unisex way. Her armor is by no means "comic book babe". Which is nice, because that model is fantastic and if you paint on facial hair it passes as a great male cleric mini.

That style is what I mean when I'm talking about having "Heroic" disabled. Her chain shirt falls flatly down and the robes are loose.

If she had "heroic" enabled because the player wanted more alluring lines, maybe that same outfit would accentuate her curves a bit more and have more of the comic book flair.

@ Jameow: If they went with the UO option, how would you want GW to handle the following situations?

Alice has Boob Plate. Barbara defeats her and can loot her armor. Barbara does not want Boob Plate.

Alice has Boob Plate. Barbara wants to buy it, and Alice is willing to sell it, but Barbara does not want Boob Plate.

Alice has Boob Plate, but now Bob loots/buys from her. Does he have to take a Magical Mankini? In other words, if there is a sexualized version and a realistic version of the armor, does it transfer when given back and forth between characters of differing sex? Or is the sexualized armor specific to the gender that wears it?

Cliff crafts plate. Does he have to declare he is crafting Boob Plate/Magical Mankini before her starts? Can the customer decide whether to change the appearance of the good at the time of purchase? Is the sexualized gear easier or harder to create?

That's easy...

I kill a goblin and he drops a shortsword but I only use gnome pickaxes...I sell the sword.

The goblin tries to trade me a shortsword...I tell him I only use gnome picks and if he wants my money he'll go craft a pick.

Third is IMO too far in the weeds. (Now that I think about it, the whole idea of tactical vs. sexual armor is too far in the weeds) This is a case against making Tactical vs. Sexual options for armor.

So is the fourth.

I understand the principle of the discussion. Maybe this would be a compromise...

Item (Studded Leather) is armor.
Characters have a selection in options to enable/disable heroic outfits.
With it enabled, equiping Studded Leather turns a woman into Kate Beckinsale from Underworld or a man into Thor.
With it disabled, they both look sorta plan unisex.

Still that requires four image maps for each set instead of 2.

ScoutmasterChip wrote:

(Prophesy): Unless the mechanics are not implemented...

Dispite predictions to the contrary, settlements will be formed WELL before anyone would have expected.

Never underestimate the power of mountain dew-fueled gaming folk. :)

Except GW isn't putting them in the release(beta) game, they are 'content to be added'. Hopefully they will come out when people are getting the necessary skills and materials together.

Correct. I just chuckle when I read people that make statements as to how long such and such will take when we all know otherwise.

Granted, if they're not implementing it, then yeah, it's hard to establish a settlement when the code ain't there. :)

It's all speculation that this point but what about this...

Nation A Caravan has unaligned mercs escorting.
Nation B attacks the beligerents of the caravan whom they are at war with, but not the mercs to start.
Mercs retaliate and get flagged (and THEY get the evil points for not being at war with Nation B.

Another option,

Caravan is unaligned but supplying Nation A.
Nation B can declare war (if the caravan is from a nation) on them, or send diplomat characters to work out a solution. (Imagine that!) LOL
In the former case, should they choose to just attack without war declaration, they're technically attacking a non-aggressive group and thus deserve negative rep and alignment. If the caravan people aren't directly attacking you, you don't really have cause to attack them if you're purporting yourself to be "good".

OOG Note: Wouldn't it be cool if real life nations had to both agree to war? LOL. "I'm sorry, Mr. Hitler, you cannot attack Poland because they don't agree to your war. Please return to your bunker and try again."

EVE has a queue that you can set skills in up to 24 hours in advance. If you have 5 skills that each take 7.5 hours you can slot them all. This is because there is no upper limit to the queue, however all training in it must start within 24 hours. E.g. You can set as many skills as you want to fill it up to 23 hours and 59 minutes, then put a 50 day long skill at the end.

That's right, thanks, was having a brainfart on that.

@Kakafika: Word! TvP (Trade vs. Player) is just as, if not more, cutthroat than PvP anyday.

(Prophesy): Unless the mechanics are not implemented...
Dispite predictions to the contrary, settlements will be formed WELL before anyone would have expected.

Never underestimate the power of mountain dew-fueled gaming folk. :)

Since there are a couple of EVE folks on the dev team.... lol

In EVE I think you could finally queue a couple skills to train in succession. Once the clock was done on one the next started immediately.

This is nice for times when your skill is a quickie or when it's scheduled to complete at a time you're not in game (sleep, school, work, zombies, or aliens). I wouldn't want it to go haywire and allow more than three skills queued, but it made life a lot more convienient in the EVE world.

I'm excited to see how the system fleshes out in PFO.

I would like armour to look different on females and fit their curves appropriately. I do NOT want bikini-plate/chain/leather. Huge turn-off.

Drakhan...Gygax just rolled over in his grave. You take that back immediately! haha

Hmm, maybe I missed that part. So we're not selecting a class at the get go?

So if you're familiar with the PFRPG, you'll know how a character's class (fighter, rogue, wizard, etc.) defines the number of skill points per level they recieve.

Now I know PFO is using an EVE-style skill system (which I love, btw), so has anything been mentioned or does anyone want to debate/discuss the idea of your class having an affect on the speed at which your skill points accrue?

Let's step back for a quick second...

We're gamers...mostly pen and paper gamers...

Trust me, we're repping minorities solid.

LOL

The joker was CE, yes. There's a reason "Crimminally Insane" starts and ends with CE. :)

Keep in mind, LG, TN, and CE are VERY difficult alignments to play, and don't really match real life personalities.

LG is the caracature of valor, TN is completely apathetic about anything, and CE are monsters.

As a TT DM, I normally refuse characters of NE, CE, and try to encourage my players away from LG, TN, and LE (though I'll allow them). I know some will skoff at that, but honestly, it's a pain in the party. LG in a party of non-LG has to contend with the others not being lilly-clean, and the party has to avoid him calling the law on them for minor offenses. TN in a party are lumps that shrug their shoulders toward any decisive choice. LE characters are always looking for ways to bend the rules to get something extra from a treasure haul that should be equally divided.

But if/when a situation arises that challenges that ethos, the player will need to make a choice as to why they're reacting as such.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree then. I see a CG town as making up for that efficiency loss by being more free and open both economically and socially.

The way I see it, the most quintessentially Chaotic thing you can do is to perform civil disobedience when you see an injustice. That is not selfish, that is principled. When that is the Civil Rights movement it is CG. When it is wide-scale contempt for copyright and intellectual property law, it is probably CN. In every case, chaotic people are happy following the vast majority of the laws, only breaking the ones that they think are stupid or wrong. I have always seen the law-chaos axis of alignment as the difference between Deontological and Utilitarian ethics respectively, not any broad generalizations about who is selfish and who is more civic minded.

I think this is where the disconnect is. GOOD towns are free. EVIL towns are oppressive. NEUTRAL towns would be in the middle. The LAWFUL-NEUTRAL-CHAOTIC distiction is in the view of and acceptance to follow community standards. LAWFUL characters (GOOD/NEUTRAL/EVIL) support the idea of rules. CHAOTIC don't.

LG towns are the most ethical. They have laws, the laws are good natured, and people follow them because they are ethical in nature. If there is a problem with a law in a LG town, it's brought up for peaceful consideration and a ruling is made. If the law is truely unethical and yet the community sustain it...they would risk losing LG status. A LG town would not have a death penalty (by the book) and killing would be a crime under all but the most narrow of circumstances. I.E. The attacker was bent to kill me and in my defence the attacker fell on my sword and died. Otherwise the question would be, "Once you subdued the attacker, why didn't you call for the guards?"

CG towns are still GOOD, meaning they side with ethics, but there administration is less ordered.

If you're looking for Free Market solutions, you need to turn your gaze toward X-NEUTRAL towns. Probably either LN or TN. If you're an Atlas Shrugged fan... CN towns are all the rage.

Ya'll, CE is like Hannibal Lector, Ed Gein, Dalmer, Manson, and the GE Board of Directors.

You gotta understand, this alignment is bad even to the bad guys. The problem is we're trying to apply rational constraints on an alignment that was 1. never envisioned to be playable by a PC, and 2. is outside rationality.

A CE "lone wolf assassin" would just as likely kill the contractee and take his purse than waste time hunting the mark. And once word got out that you roll CE-style, no body would offer you contracts for fear of you betraying them. You'd be lone-wolf for sure...unemployed. LOL

Assassins are calculated and precise. CE is not that. CE is a hurricane of suffering unable to feel empathy and remorse for anything.

"Chaotic Good can be a vibrant community. A hippie community that drinks ayahuasca all day and lives off the land like the Radical Faeries is a pretty good modern day example of Chaotic Good community. A group of artistic squatters can be chaotic good. "

Vibrant...yes
Viable...Mmmmm
Victorious....doubtful.

And that same hippie redoubt could be Lawful or Neutral Good. Even hippies and free-thinkers understand the need for rules, as long as they don't require bathing or prohibit patchouli.

Caleth,

No, not all chaotic are anarchists. Many just don't even consider laws or rules. Hence they tend toward chaos.

A CG town could exist, yes, but I'd suspect it would change the rules often (for GOOD reasons) and operate less effectivly because of the ever changing chaotic nature of their community.

Anarchist would lean towards evil in my opinion. They break the rules in defiance of others to claim they are not subject to the wants and needs of the community. It is one of the pinnacles of selfishness, really.

I don't really agree with your point on law vs. tradition either. I don't think chaotic characters value either much at all. Nor do they consider themselves bound by many.

My idea of a LG town is one where there are set rules, everyone knows what they are, and those found breaking them are counceled to encourage rehabilitation while being given a voice as to why they chose to break the rule. As I see it, there is no real world example. The Good, don't tend to whip people with canes. I'd rank Singapore as LN.

Just my opinion here, but...

If a character provides a non-threatening service to another that is of evil alignment, since the first character will not inherently know that person is evil, then there should be no penalty from say trading or healing that character. Otherwise, you encourage avoidance really.

This is where it gets really hard to create a gaming system for alignment interactions because you have to translate so many factors into the code.

If I sell you a knife because people use knives to cut rope, whittle toys, or prepare food. That's not evil. If I sell you a knife because I know you want to stab Elminster behind the Tasty-Freeze...then yeah...

If I heal you because I find you dying in a ditch, that's actually a GOOD act. If I watch you attack a nun and heal you after she whips you with her ruler...evil.

Unless we can inherently see alignment (which I don't think we'll be able to) then I don't think mundane actions should have effects on alignments.

Let's keep in mind that being "Chaotic" is in itself disregarding rules and laws. Without adherance to some form of rules or laws you don't have a society and without society can't have a settlement per se.

I think that's what the devs are getting at by saying the more chaotic a group is, the less their settlement will function effectivly.

I see no possiblity that a chaotic evil character would even function in a settlement or company for that matter. They ignore laws and seek only to cause suffering on others. What place could they possible have in a community, and what group would want them? Even another CE character wouldn't really want to be around them.

Chaotic Neutral, IMO, wouldn't seek community because they don't agree to rules and don't care for others success. Chaos is not evil inherently, and their neutrality is not evil. I see them more as true loners.

Lawful Evil would be the only option I can see as viable to communities. They enforce their edicts with heavy hands and strive to cast their dominion over their surroundings. Most of these should be ruled by an individual or single evil family poised to use their subjects to their own ends and silence opposition quickly. They know that laws are tools to enable their reign and use them accordingly.

These are the nations we'll need to stand against.

Still, I think we need to wait for more info on this. I mean, if we're going off the Kingmaker rules, we could say each hex is 12 miles. Now if there are only a certain number of build anchors in the hex, then I'm wondering how they'll be distributed.

I would hope the ones for settlements are reletively close together. Historically, and just plain rationally, you don't see too many settlements where the breadmaker is 7 miles away from "town square".

I'm imagining settlements that grow to look like villiages and cities. Maybe even with later options to enclose within walls.

V'rel pointed me to you. I'd like to become a part of the group.

Crafting and building are my favorite activites. If it's possible to play a dedicated crafter/builder, look for incessant request from me to all the sellswords for protection while I'm off gathering resources and such.

You can have your PvP...give me TvP (Trade vs. Player). It's far more vicious. :)

Oh, as far as alignment, I won't be evil, that's for certain. Probably lean toward Lawful.

Very exciting read. I have been missing the builder/crafter experience since the demise of Star Wars Galaxies.

Can't wait to see how PFO continues to expand the crafter game.

ScoutmasterChip wrote:

The activity should be considered for prohibition on servers marked NON-PvP, if such should exist.

It is about 99% certain that there will not be non-pvp servers. It is improbable that there will be multiple servers, and the general ideas of the game, pretty much all require PVP to exist for the game to have any meaning or much depth.

Time will tell, I was just listing it as an, "If you're gonna have non-pvp servers, you should consider prohibiting this idea there along with bashing heads."

And I can see that type of varied crafting professions fitting perfectly into PFO.

Blacksmiths (metal items) Specialize into Weaponsmiths and Armorsmiths
Carpenters (wooden items) Specialize into Fletchers, Siege Engineers, and Furnishers
Weavers (cloth goods) Specialize into Tailors (cloth armor and goods) and Tanners (leather armor and goods)
Alchemists (chemicals) Specialize to Apothecaries (medical goods) and Draughtsmen (poisons, etc.)
Masons (structures) Specialize to Stave Singers (wooden structures) and Stone Fitters (stone structures)

Some recipes would be interconnected at higher levels. To build a grand keep for your city, the items of Stone Fitters, Stave Singers, Carpenters and Blacksmiths might be required for completion.

Where a carpenter can build you a cheap quarterstaff, a carpenter's staff given as material to a weaponsmith would return a greater item.

Certainly. We actually had a doctor in our city that would hire out other players to "escort" him on safari to gather materials. He didn't even carry a weapon, but his items were top notch.

I'm open to discussion, but my opinion on the most enjoyable and satisfying crafting system I've ever played was from Star Wars Galaxies.

Say what you want about the game, but crafting was a blast.

Materials and their stats were varied.
Material stats played into item's power.
Players could label their items as a marketing device.
Non-craft players formed repeat business with crafters they knew took care to do things right.

I literally played the game for 4 years and raised my blaster in anger maybe three times. That's what made it cool. I could become a master crafter without having to be a combat god.

Thoughts?

I would normally agree with the OP, but playing EVE in the past and seeing a power house corp like Band of Brothers facing attacks and usurpation by many different upstart corps, I don't see much of an advantage for the first-launchers.

Besides that, if they form and govern well, why replace them? Who says everybody needs to be a king?

I'm not completely against the idea of housing thievery, but let me list a few thoughts.

Given the idea that a player would be able to infiltrate another player's home and remove items that would be permanently lost to the home owner.

Given this can be viewed as a form of PvP aggression.

Therefore if allowed:

There should be methods of protecting a structure against the thieving "attack". (Traps, pets, guards, etc.)

Since there is a risk of the homeowner losing items and currency permanently, there should also be a risk of the would-be thief losing items and currency. If the thief should flee or die within the structure, they would leave a corpse for the owner to find upon return to their home.

The idea of encumberance should play a part in how much loot a thief could potentially remove from a home.

The activity should be considered for prohibition on servers marked NON-PvP, if such should exist.