Sean Byram's page

Alternatively, they're for whatever you want them to be for. Whatever you can think of yourself being able to accomplish with many people working together (that is to say, anything), that's what guilds are for.

It is true that most quests hand out XP rewards.

That's nice for the games where that is true. From what I've seen, it appears that what they're planning does not do that, at least not directly.

Much. Someone sticky this.

Could do with better formatting, but thank you.

I used to be on team "Keep PFO d20!" until I realized they had already decided they were going to use a system I was very happy with. Skill based is the way they're going.

It's also interesting to note that some people who hate "stereotypical MMO" systems (vagueness for everyone!) simply have problems with things that are minor details, development-wise. For example, if you were to remove the visual bar that shows you cooldown time on a melee attack, and simply make the animation for the attack itself slower, so that they can only do it so fast, they often don't have a problem with it. Give them some flimsy description like "You're heaving back for a stronger swing!" and they're content. This kind of distinction IMO is petty, but I guess we all have things we look for.

I can't really articulate what I look for in a game's mechanics, but it seems like I don't have to. What the team has said so far is pleasing to me.

Also, someone seriously needs to sticky the FAQ.

EDIT:

Siege warfare can be a lot of fun in a roleplaying game (even though it really SUCKS IRL)

What? Sieges are awesome IRL.

This thread is not what I thought it was.

Yeah, I thought we were going to hear from the astral deva demographic for once.

I would love to play a Dwarf Fortress MMO.

Check out Shores of Hazeron for some Fun, sci-fi style.

I certainly hope that PFO is nothing like Eve.

A rather empty hope, considering what the devs have confirmed about their plans for the game. It's not going to be "fantasy EVE" per se, but "nothing like Eve" will certainly NOT be the case.

I'm not criticizing your desire, just telling you what's being planned.

Jeez. That is a most excellent idea, sir. I hope someone who can do that sees that, and does that. I think it would solve a lot of problems.

I'm on the side of gritty realism, and I've gotten what I wanted before. I liked it. Shores of Hazeron is an excellent game. My problem with it is that it puts you in charge of an empire to start with, and leaves much to be desired graphically. Wandering the countryside slaying monsters isn't much in it, but then again, it's sci-fi. It's basically 3d, MMO, first person, sci-fi Dwarf Fortress. And it's okay, for me. Which is saying a lot considering that I can't stand most MMOs.

On the other hand, I'm not a one-game guy. I don't require specific parameters to be met to necessarily enjoy a game. Everything I've heard about this game from the devs tells me I will love the game.

I feel like reading the FAQ should be a requirement for coming here. I made the mistake of not doing enough research before I cam here, and it seems like many others do as well.

Which is why I don't engage in overt PvP in MMOs. All of my somewhat robust knowledge of PvP comes from IRL. Personally, I'll be sticking to mostly philanthropic activities.

Okay, that helps a little. I always feel super shady because I have a tactical mind occupied by covert activities and violence. But in game (and IRL) I'm the nice guy. When I use the term scam as it refers to characters interacting, I think of what things would be considered a scam "in-world", by the characters themselves.

For example, I'm some guy in a tavern who is telling new adventurers that I'll pay for bear pelts or something, because there's a cave of bears near the town. Problem is, my buddies already cleared that cave out and are now just lying in wait for new guys to come in unprepared to get jumped by 10 psychos with knives.

Or I play an alchemist who is selling dud potions. Or enchanting weapons with a teleportation-return ability before I sell them. Et cetera.

PvP insinuates that there are players who are my enemies in some form. We are opposed. I'm not sure what you think enemies do to each other, but even in the vaguest sense of opposition or competition, you have deprivation of resources. In a PvP setting, other characters will seek to deprive my character of resources, either by keeping me from gaining them, or causing me to lose ones that I already have. It might help if we had a common definition of what constitutes a scam. Am I scamming you out of healing potions by pelting you with arrows? If I engage in misinformation by telling people there are resources where there aren't any, so I can have the good areas to myself, is that a scam? If bandits ambush a caravan, is that?

Even though I don't engage in combat PvP (at all) in EVE, I feel like the scumbag in the room as a regular EVE player. How many people here play EVE, and how long have you played? Also, I'd like to know exactly what is meant by abusive misbehavior. Is a thief I make somehow only compelled to steal from NPCs? Some people here are implying misbehavior is the same as PvP, which I know can't be right from what I've heard of the game so far.

Scamming a player is not the same as scamming a character. If my character loses resources, that's fine. This is a game and losses to some extent are to be expected in any game. I play a game because I don't want these terrible things happening to me IRL, but they can be fun in a game. Loss is part of the life of an adventurer. My swordsman has been swallowed whole, lost body parts, gone insane, died and been brought back, been lit on fire, and robbed blind. I don't want that to happen IRL, but in a game it's simply what happens on the way to victory.

I do not believe that EVE is a cesspit. Perhaps you did not mean to imply that, sorry if I misunderstood. One of the key ideas at work here (AFAIK) is that though there are systems in place to stop IRL damage being done, and systems to give your character some moderate protection as well, the welfare of your character is largely your responsibility as a player. Such is the core concept of PvP, despite the terminology. In my opinion, it should be CvC.

You might be missing my point. I meant to illustrate that despite a system developed for giving quests, it's still very doable.

As for my specific example, you'd be surprised what some brand new players will do for a little direction. Personally, I like to make my own way, but others need that order. Also, with the possibility that every creature has some token loot that is unique to it's creature type or the individual (for unique NPCs), like goblin teeth, that possibly have little market value (unless you had the player connections to access niche markets) there's the strong likelihood a new player would trade a "worthless" item for a weapon, or several weapons that they can perhaps hand out to all their (also new) friends.

As for doing quests for xp, this game has a skill based mechanic. Meaning that reporting back completion of a quest is not necessary for character advancement.

Anyways, again, the original intent of my example was to illustrate that despite a system developed for giving quests, it's still very doable.

Being a nasty character and a nasty player are two different things. I don't believe (not sure, I could certainly be wrong) that by "scamming", he meant a character thieving or cheating another character out of in-game resources. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm curious about this.

I think what was meant was a case of nasty players who scam other players for IRL resources such as account info, micro-trans shop tokens, etc.

I'm curious what the feelings about jerk characters who trick, bamboozle, or otherwise trap other characters for purposes of robbing (or something similar) the character. Is this what the scamming was referring to?

As far as I know, quest giving doesn't need a built-in feature. Let's say I recently sacked a caravan of daggers. I'm disappointed, because seriously, who the heck just has a caravan of all daggers?

I tell players that I'll give them a dagger for every set of goblin teeth they bring me. The way I do this is likely very easy. Every 5 or 10 minutes I say it in the town chat channel or whatever. Or I make a post on the game's forums. I do this because not too far from the town I'm staying in, there's a den of goblins. I do this mainly for giggles, and because I can't offload the daggers. Or maybe I know an alchemist who'll give me mucho gold for goblin teeth. Who knows.

Anyways, as a character I've just used a non-existent quest giving system to give a fairly stereotypical MMO quest.

monster play where one can create some sort of monster or evil humanoid and attempt to organize counter-human kindgom

I think it's interesting that it's being brought up in this light, but I'm curious what people think the difference between doing the above and this PvP related griefing I've been hearing so much about is.

That said, I'm all for monster play.

I almost exclusively DM, but I'm not one for direct leadership roles in RPGs. Maybe a King's wizard-advisor. I'd love the ability to draw up plans for fortresses and watch over time as NPCs and players turn plans into reality. Don't know how doable making underground structures will be, but that would be excellent. Player created content, even in the vaguest of senses, will be what brings me to this game.

I'm posting here mainly out of paranoia that this thread will be used heavily in determining playtesters. So uh..

Oh yeah, AND MY AXE! That's the code for getting in, right?

Mark Kalmes wrote:

One great thing about playtesting a PvP game is that we will need folks to test out the high-level kingdom gameplay. I hope it will make for a much more fun beta time :-)

Oh noes, you can be quoted on calling PFO a PvP game. *Starts building an Anderson shelter to protect him from the tsunami of ass-hats*

This aside, I can't wait :)

I think it's been heavily implied if not outright confirmed. Anything modeled after EVE without PvP is somewhat... odd.

On the topic of alignments, I think it's a possible way to control PvP. As a very general and brief description of what I mean, if you're chaotic evil, you have the freedom to attack anybody. Guards at town gates might have detect alignment items and will keep out evil characters. If you're good, you can only attack someone who's attacked you first. If you're a paladin, maybe you can attack evil characters without provocation.

It might take some work balancing out the various options, and I don't even know if I think it's a good idea. But it's definitely worth thinking about, however briefly.

He didn't say they would be PCs. He said they'd be in the game.

This is a simple problem masquerading itself as a complex one. Let's assume you believe item creation in itself is balanced. The problem for you is the transaction among players. Before I tell you why, the answer is that it's not a problem. Here's why.

For a group with an item crafter, crafting an item for half price is equivalent to a group without an item crafter purchasing the item at full price. A comparable situation then would be as follows, and works for a group with or without an item crafter:

Party obtains item for an acceptable price, balance-wise. Player A gives Player B a sum of gold.

Is that unbalanced? The only thing of question is that one player gave another player what could be considered a gift in the form of gold.

We play games that we enjoy. We also make the assumption that because we enjoy something, that makes it a good whatever it is. This is a poor assumption. It's quite obvious from what I've read (and from common sense) that there are games I like to play that many others do not (this is no new revelation). But from a purely selfish standpoint, I'd like PFO to be a game I'll like. This hypothetical game may be terrible (from whatever objective standard determines that kind of thing), but if I like it then I'll play it. From the standpoint of wanting Paizo to be successful, I want them to make a game which will both get them lots of acclaim and lots of profit.

The way I balance these conflicting desires is taking the more easily produced of the two. I think the hypothetical game I'd like to play is easier to produce than the one that gets them lots of acclaim and lots of profit. And there might be the possibility (however remote that is), that producing my desired product will also get them the "Paizo being successful" option. Maybe I'm a jerk for this selfish desire. I don't think I am, because most consumers' wish is that someone will produce the product they want, even if it's not profitable.

Zychon wrote:

Is it that hard to make a game that can spontaneously and conditionally generate persistent content or -God forbid -get the hell out of the way and let the players generate their own content? Instead of hand coding the thing one brick at a time? Seriously?

YES IT IS THAT HARD.

Not so much. For inspiration, check out Shores of Hazeron. It's a difficult concept to market, and it's somewhat risky. Shores of Hazeron is sci-fi, and the graphic design... well, it leaves a lot to be desired. But it's doing some very core things correctly, things that are sometimes claimed to be prohibitively difficult to accomplish.

Hey now, think reasonably. Don't the game, hate the players.

I have no expectations for this game, other than it being an MMO based on Pathfinder. Projects can change direction very easily. I'm also aware of the difficulties facing a development team and I sympathize. The list I gave was a wish list. There are two MMOs that I play, and I wouldn't say I'm very "into" them. They're just my favorites among many others that I care absolutely nothing for. EVE and Shores of Hazeron.

Mainly, I hope to see a truly sandbox experience of an MMO, done with Pathfinder flavor. That would make me happy, though there are additions that could obviously make me happier.

A blank slate is what I'm looking for. I do not believe NPCs are incredibly necessary, as is perhaps evidenced by my MMO choice. Empty wilderness suits me fine. "Content" is replaced with a canvas and a toolset that allows me to paint a small part of a larger picture. I'll fill in what gaps I think need to be filled in myself. Others can do the same.

As far as game mechanics, I'm aware that turn-based is not the way to go. I think Pathfinder's mechanics can be converted to real-time. And if not, that's fine. I simply don't want a "power-based" mechanic, where I have cooldown abilities. I want spell slots, prepared spells (for appropriate caster classes), spells known, spell research, skills, an option for first person, and as few invisible walls as humanly possible.

There are things that I want for this game that I'm almost certain NO ONE else wants, and I did not list those things for sake of manners. I think that what I posted has flaws and you made some good points, but I also believe that I'd like the game more with those things and that they are within the capabilities of the developers.

Final Fantasy 11 was an MMO on the 360.

Darwinism, more constructive criticism would be appreciated. What about the things I suggested did you not agree with?

All of these options and more are covered by already existing spells.

1.) Don't rush production of the game.

2.) Use the PFRPG rules, verbatim. If you don't, use something as close as possible. Every action my character has should not be a power with a cooldown, and cooldown abilities for all characters should be kept to a bare minimum.

3.) Open economy. Meaning I can make transactions with players easily. This allows players to create their own businesses, perhaps under the radar. Try to leave the business making out of the hands of NPCs.

4.) Few NPCs. Have one outpost where there are NPCs. It's up to PCs to create civilization. This also allows PCs to capitalize on lack of certain player needs being met, and can make their own businesses. A player sees something that other players need, that player charges for the service. Get that gold moving around.

5.) One persistent and changeable world. All players are in the same world. Trees can grow back over time, but if I have the manpower and saws, that forest is SOL if I don't want it there. If I want to dig out an underground fortress or mine, I can.

6.) Gritty micromanaging realism. NPCs and PCs must eat and drink to survive. They must sleep. The day should go by at real time. If I put an object in a flowing river, it should be carried by the current. Everything I can carry has a weight (and volume, please don't have inventories of infinite space).

7.) A first person version of Dwarf Fortress crossed with EVE.

8.) Permadeath, or something close to it. Of course, if I cast raise dead on a corpse, it's back to life. If that player gives up that character anyways, it's now an NPC.

9.)Creatable and semi-controllable NPCs. I want to be able to get the equivalent of the Leadership feat, and make a group of NPCs. I want to be able to assign these NPCs to tasks (like building, mining, hunting, patrols, assaults, etc).

10.) As large a world as possible.

EDIT: Also,

11.) Character face and body customization during creation, with as much control and variance as possible.

Use the tabletop rules to develop real-time rules. If a round is six seconds, and I can attack once and move 30 ft in that time, you now have a frame of reference for what my movement speed and attack speed are. I'd like to see combat done in a way that uses the tabletop rules, and perspective can be switched between first person and adjustable third person.

If there is permadeath, it's official what my character concept is. I lead a cult of mercenary healers. Bring you back for less gold than those dirty Sarenrae-lovers.

I think whenever you get the equivalent to the Leadership feat, you should be able to make your followers and cohort. Make them warriors, crafters, goblins, whatever. Use them as a warband, to found a city (with them as the guard, guild members, etc), or to staff your castle (which maybe they built). Also, I firmly believe that NPCs should be created with the same mechanics as PCs.

Because assuming that this entire forum is useless as a development tool as your given model suggests is unrealistic. The purpose of this forum is to contribute to the development of the game, and I believe that most of those here wish to do that even if they do it poorly sometimes.

I think it's interesting that someone felt it necessary to dedicate an entire thread to insulting an individual involved in bringing us a PFMMO. Not a critique on the game outlines themselves, or any constructive criticism on the project.

When did ad hominem become a publicly acceptable form of debate among critical thinkers?

How will it work, you go to the blacksmith, you say "I want to forge here", and your character stays here for two weeks?

Who will want to play a MMO like that?

That's an option, but certainly not the only one in what I suggest.

Let's say you want a sword. You could buy a sword. Or, you could buy metal, then go to a blacksmith and pay him to make you a sword with it. Or, you could go to a mine and mine for metal, then ask a blacksmith in town to use his forge for a small fee, and make your own sword. Depending on how skilled you are, this might take a little time, or a lot. Or, you could build your own forge (or commission one) to do the work with. Or any combination of these choices and more, really.

If that's too much to think about, you can always leave it to an NPC or another PC who does crafting to get your supplies from.

Choose the ONE favorite MMO you've played.
EVE Online.

Explain no more than five reasons why you greatly enjoyed it.
1.) One world. All players inhabit the same place.
2.) A mostly player run world. While NPCs do exist, they don't influence much of the actual organization or operations of the world.
3.) PVP. While I do not care to engage in PvP unless provoked (which is a topic which deserves it's own post), I believe it should be an element. Players themselves are capable of creating controls on this.
4.) Sandbox. I want to get out there and think outside of the box. I want to create something which hasn't necessarily been suggested as something that can be done. In Shores of Hazeron, another favorite MMO of mine, I'm trying to build a courier and bank system. No one else is doing this. For competitive reasons, I will not state publicly my goals in EVE.
5.) Economy. For someone who has observed the workings of the beautiful creation that is EVE's economy, I must say that it's rather simple in its workings. You must put forth significant effort to gain significant reward. PVP ties into this, but not in the way you'd think. The threat of violence keeps people minding their Ps and Qs.

Explain no more than five reasons why you got bored with it / didn't like about it / thought could be done better.
1.) Spaceships. I'm a fan of sci-fi, but I'd like to run around on solid ground with my character, for most if not all of my playtime. With EVE, you don't really do that. I want to run and jump around, swinging a sword, climbing mountains, and swimming through underwater ruins.

That's about it.

Give one or two specific and major things you are most afraid of seeing take place or implemented in this potential MMO and why. Does not have to relate to your favorite MMO.
1.) I'm "most" afraid of a big departure from the mechanics of the PFRPG. I would be ecstatic if they simply kept the current system, for everything. Why? It works. There's a reason we're all here, isn't there? This, I believe, is the common ground we all share. We all like Pathfinder as it currently exists.
2.) I'm also a little afraid of, but not really too worried about, multiple servers. As with EVE, I would love to see all players in the same world. If PFO doesn't decide to go that way, I won't be too disappointed, but I'll think "It could have been better". A life size recreation of the river kingdoms is plenty of space I think for all the players the game will have.

I'm aware that it isn't the goal of most MMOs, but it is of some. I also must admit to not caring much for most MMOs. I usually far prefer my tabletop adventures to that. I think there's a lot of potential to what PFO is aiming for, and hope that it retains the things I like about the PFRPG.

I believe they've already stated they're making a sandbox experience in the River Kingdoms where PCs can mass armies, build nations, and explore. While that certainly doesn't demand what I've outlined as my desire, it does imply that it wouldn't be unreasonable.

I think when you make gathering resources a time-consuming activity, not many people will wish to engage in it. In the frame of a Pathfinder economy; even with the aid of magic, resource gathering is going to be something of a hassle. That's not to say I think it should be made annoying or frustrating simply for the sake of being so, to discourage players. I think a pragmatic approach, using what the PFRPG has already provided system-wise, and adding what little needs to be added should suffice.

EVE is an excellent case, and is my MMO of choice. If PFO could be a fantasy, terrestrial EVE with d20 mechanics, that would just make my day. More than my day, but you get it.

As far as finite vs infinite in EVE, there is technically infinite resources (respawning minerals), but resources can be destroyed in rather large quantities, for example a ship being destroyed in combat (although, a very minor amount of resources from the wreckage can be recovered).

I think to an extent, respawning resources might be acceptable, if there's permadeath, of if characters at least lose their gear when they die.

If crafting took realistic amounts of time, as it does in tabletop format, I think it's clear that few people would be interested in crafting. They would likely wait until they have followers that can do it for them, and would take a supervisory role. Maybe a handful of people would be willing to do it all themselves: the gathering (mining, deforesting (term?), hunting, etc), the crafting, the transporting, the selling.

I think that's fine, actually. That simulates a balanced environment.

You use gold to buy materials, and character skill to turn those materials into items, over the span of days, weeks, or months, depending on the building. Maybe you're building a sword, maybe furniture, maybe a house, maybe a castle. They all take character skill, resources, and time. Gold is a fast and more enjoyable way of attaining resources, rather than sitting in the woods chopping down trees, and lugging those back to town.

I don't see why a sandbox MMO in the River Kingdoms wouldn't have upstart armies and kingdoms. That's inherent in the system. Also, as I said, helping others can benefit everyone.

Well, if you were talking about me, it was unintentional on my part. I think many people would be interested in a fantasy economic simulation, especially given the sandbox nature that it looks like this game will have. And to run a shop, group of shops, caravan, trader's guild, or mine would not take an exorbitant amount of time.

You could always be a blacksmith or something. Check in on your shop once a week, tell your followers to do stuff, trade some supplies, and set a week's worth of crafting to be done.

How many people here have played EVE? All players in the same world, PvP is completely open. It's amazing how organized and thoughtful players can be in it. It's also worth noting that selfish doesn't always mean screwing everyone else over.

I'd like to see the MMO use the same system as the tabletop RPG. It already has all the rules you need for the MMO.

RENT:
And for a mid-level PC who owns property, and possibly has followers, paying rent shouldn't be a problem. If management of budget is a problem, there should be an option to automate the monthly gold. You have to think of this from the landlord's position as well, who may be a PC. If a PC owns land, he or she would probably want to charge tax for other PCs using it.

EXPERIENCE:
Why can't the already established rules of xp and advancement be kept?

As far as item condition goes, any specific reasons? Why can't I sunder anymore?

I really hope (and this goes for most if not all game mechanics) the system for crafting is entirely based off of the tabletop system. I see no good reason to change it. One reason (not a good one, mind you) is to appease the "casual crowd". I feel like electronic gaming has suffered huge setbacks doing this. There are rules already in the Pathfinder RPG for crafting, and making money doing it. It's a good system, keep it.

As far as I can see, all 21 files are there, and were there on Monday when I downloaded it, including "Seltyiel - Magus.png".

I don't remember there ever being a different iconic picture for him than is present in the pack.