Sennajin's page

My hopes and dreams for web based guild management are crushed by the fact that GW doesn't have their own forums for PfO, yet, and we're still just attached onto the Paizo boards.

Granted GW is busy making PfO, but I've never run into an MMO developer that had their forums setup like this.

House Karnath, formerly Crimson Guard, lead by Deacon Wulf.

Posting this at the request of the Paxians (both Aeternum and Golgothan).

The name "Xeilias" that we are using for the Empire has a lot of meaning for us. Pagan put it like this "a war memorial is meaningless if you don't tell people what war you're memorializing." So, I'm going to share with you all the origin of the name "Xeilias".

As you all know, Pax Gaming has been around for a good long while, now. We were founded in 2001 as a PA for SWG. Our roots are in the sandbox genre of MMO's. Some of our players got so hooked on the sandbox that they couldn't find any fun in the theme park games. One in particular, Ktara Xeilias, was one of our biggest "we need to play more sandbox game" advocates.

She played SWG until the servers shut down. She dabbled in EVE (her significant other played EVE a lot more), and was let down everytime a new MMO released and *wasn't* a sandbox. She pointed us at The Repopulation last year and I think she would have really loved PfO.

Ktara's surname in most games was Xeilias.

Pathfinder Online is one of the best looking sandboxes on the "upcoming" list of MMO's. It's one where Pax Gaming is putting all of our cards on the table (or, at least, we'll put all the cards on the table closer to EE). We want to leave our make, in a big way, a positive way, in a Paxian way and naming our Alliance/Kingdom/Empire after her is our tribute to her memory.

We lost her to cancer this past summer. We weren't even aware she had it. We miss her dearly and for those of us who have been in Pax for more than a few years, we'll have a noticeable void in the membership because she won't be in PFO with us.

Areks wrote:

Good to hear. I like Andius, couldn't see it going any other way either.

Something tells me you missed a comma...

I lol'd

Armistice Day and Remembrance Day.

Sennajin wrote:

... they get das boot from my organization.

Pax is giving away copies of a truly great German film? Where do I sign?

I lol'd. Hard, hehe.

I personally see no reason the collective 'we' can't grief the griefers-as long as this, even, has some cost to us.

Because by griefing anyone, even a griefer, you become a griefer, and griefing is not cool. Any members found to have been griefing in my organization, even if it's griefers they're griefing, they get das boot from my organization.

Nihimon and Andius, it takes a big person to admit fault, and I won't lie, we're had our fair share on the pax side, as well, and I'll apologize, as well, for any instances where I've stepped across that line.

I know we don't always see eye to eye on what we think are good ideas, but i assure you, we want the best possible game and the best possible community to game with in PfO.

Pax will never support anything that would be detrimental to PfO or the PfO Community as a whole. So, while we may have different views on how to get there, I promise you, the end goal (great game and a great gaming community to play it with) are the same.

Sennajin wrote:

...back in the Age of Sail.

You've reminded me it's time to re-read Patrick O'Brian. The Aubrey-Maturin series is well worth its time.

A friend of mine actually gave he the whole set a few months back. I haven't started reading them, just yet, but I'm really looking forward to them. I really enjoyed Master & Commander, and books are always better than movies, so woo.

randomwalker wrote:

Lam wrote:

However can companies own colors, prohibiting to others?

they can make a public policy of killing anyone "impersonating" them by wearing their colours. They would have to face the consequences though.

I'm sure there will be your typical mmo indicators, so if someone hostile is dressing up like your company it should be easy enough to spot if you actually target them.

Given Ryan's previous statements about attempts to deceive, I would expect repeated use of enemy colors might be considered "griefing" and handled by the mods.

If GW considers wearing the same colors as another group griefing... nm, words can't even express the idiocy of a move like that. There are only so many colors and combinations of colors in the world, more than one group *will* have the same colors, regardless of the intent.

To top it off, I'll use a historical reference, since folks on these boards think that RL = a game world. Privateers flew enemy colors *all the time* back in the Age of Sail. I don't think the Spanish called the British griefers or yelled "OMG HAX" at them, it was likely more along the lines of "Son of a ****, GG Brits, GG."

Awesome guys, what a great idea =)

Really looking forward to seeing what you guys build!

Bringslite wrote:

... proclaimed it's self as anti-griefer. Repeatedly.

Andius is about as rabidly anti-griefer as anyone could imagine. And yet, when he started talking about using griefer tactics against griefers - specifically by his definition, not by Goblinworks' - then I spoke out just as adamantly against that.

If you claim to be "anti-griefer", and then turn around and clearly support all manner of things that most people understand is "griefing" and make specious arguments about how they're not "really" griefing or how they don't match your definition of griefing, then what does it really mean?

Reputation is a measure of how much of a griefer you are. That's its intended purpose. Those who are vocally stating that they won't care if they're Low Reputation or if they associate with Low Reputation people are manifestly pro-griefer.

I'm sorry if you don't like my definitions, but I think they're a lot more in line with Goblinworks' than are UNC's or Pax's.

I don't know how much more in line with GW Pax's definition can get, since the Pax definition includes strict adherence to the EULA and any definitions of griefing GW itself publishes.

Let me be clear, I ban people from Pax Gaming yearly for griefing and exploiting, we are zero tolerance with it. But, what you describe as griefing is not griefing by even GW's definition.

Banditry and gank tactics *are not* griefing. What Bluddwulf says he and UNC intend to do (use the crap out of SAD's) *is not griefing*.

It's time for your misrepresentation of Pax Gaming's intent and what Pax Gaming does or does not support to stop.

You don't know us. You've never taken interest in getting to know us. You can not speak for us, because you are not one of us.

Right below this post box: "The most important rule: Don't be a jerk. We want our messageboards to be a fun and friendly place."

There's a Paizo rule for you there. You talk about people not sticking to GW's definitions, that Paizo one is pretty clear, you should maybe think about following it.

Nightdrifter just blew my mind....

Lifedragn wrote:

Do we need to hijack yet another thread with this fight? Come on folks, this thread is about what causes players to earn points towards Law/Chaos/Good/Evil. I would imagine frequently assaulting/killing other players is a tilt towards evil, but let's take the reputation talk and comparisons to Eve, which has no alignment system to my knowledge, to more appropriate threads.

I think what the problem is is trying to tie an alignment system, which is role playing, to a point system which is game mechanics. Then there is the "soft demand" that players will role play their alignments, and at the same time favoring certain alignments over others.

My contention is that the Open World PVP community will not conform to that.

In PFO you will have a zerg company of 1500+ members named "The Devil Went Down to Georgia" led by a Necromancing - Paladin named "Luke Skywalker" living in a settlement named "Barbie Princess's Crystal Palace".

This is what you get from the Open World PVP culture. I personally would rather have a little bit of RP remain sacred, but I've learned to accept the realities of this genre of gaming.

So if there is a system that has you earn points towards one alignment or another, what is GW's response if a vast majority of the server population ends up being Chaotic Evil (for example)?

Here's hoping that GW puts out a naming policy for characters, companies, settlements, etc and sticks to it, at least.

ヘ(_ _ヘ)

Nihimon wrote:

Chris Lambertz wrote:

Removed some off-topic posts, their replies and some sniping.

Chris, there was a gentleman who introduced himself in this thread as a lurker. Whatever else may have happened around that post, I don't think anyone would suggest that his post deserved to be deleted. Is there any way his post can be restored? I don't remember his name exactly, but it was something like "Martin" and his avatar was mostly green - perhaps a dragon?

This has been fixed :)

You rock Chris, thanks a ton =)

Here's hoping they don't ban all Korean IP's. Most Koreans speak English (as they are required to have English classes from grade school on up), I have several US Service memebers stationed in Korea with an intent to play, and even some Korean citizens that intend to play.

My main will most definitely be a human. But, my Destiny's Twin... dwarf ^_^

I'm pretty sure the definition of lurker is someone who visits, yet doesn't post.

Sennajin/Rawn, Member of Aeternum, Leader of Pax Gaming. I post on occasion, lurk almost daily.

Lord Regent: Deacon Wulf wrote:

The Serenity references made me extremely happy.

Quote:

[Sheriff Bourne has caught Mal returning stolen medicine to a plague-stricken town]

Sheriff Bourne: You were truthful back in town. These are tough times. A man can get a job. He might not look too close at what that job is. But a man learns all the details of a situation like ours... well... then he has a choice.
Mal: I don't believe he does.

And that is why Malcolm Reynolds stands next to Batman in the pantheon of American Heroes.

We disagree more than not, it seems, but when we do agree... man, do we agree =)

Harad Navar wrote:

Can't take the light.

Can't stop the signal.

Guy killed me with a sword...

I have to say, I'm impressed, I honestly didn't know what to expect, but man, keep up the great work! This is awesome!

@Sennajin

Sennajin wrote:

Running merchants away from Callambea is bad for business. If Callambea isn't having merchants come in, we can't grow, if we can't grow, UNC gets no training, so on and so forth.

That's not what I have said. You are essentially running merchants away from other hubs of trade, not Callambea. Of course you want the area around your own hub to be safe. But by providing the UNC a haven you are effectively making other centres less so, which in turn is a form of strong arm tactic to make merchants use your market.

I'll say it again, even bold it, so nobody misunderstands what I am saying: I do not think there is anything wrong with what you are doing. I do, however, violently disagree with the spin that is being put on it.

You're right, I missed that context, and great point. All I have to say to that is, we've made sure our hub is safe from UNC(and I'm sure we'll be reaching out to other similar organizations as well, in the future), what the other settlements do to ensure the safety of merchants in their areas of influence is on them.

Safer for whom, Xeen?

It's safer for those who choose or are forced to trade with PAX, even though they might get a better price elsewhere. I don't need to refute Areks' bolded point above (which I can't, as he is correct in what he says) for that to be the case. Unfortunately for him, his point does not refute mine made above either.

It's also safer for you, which means you have a safe haven from which to raid the rest of the River Kingdoms. Are PAX guards going to protect you the moment you enter their territory, even if you are being chased by those that you have raided? I suspect they will.

With respect, you'll both have to forgive me for disagreeing with your conclusion as to what message I am receiving, even if it isn't the one you want to give out. As I said, it's a good move for both of you, but trying to dress it up as good for the rest of us is stretching things more than just a bit. It's pure self-interest, as Areks himself has said (and I respect him for saying it). Trying to present it as beneficial for others in all but a case by case incidental way is all smoke and mirrors.

I see your logic, but disagree with. See my last post. Running merchants away from Callambea is bad for business. If Callambea isn't having merchants come in, we can't grow, if we can't grow, UNC gets no training, so on and so forth.

While we can only enforce laws inside our own hexes, I would think the hexes immediately in the vicinity of Pax hexes, for a reasonable distance, will be relatively safe from UNC bandits. I say relatively, because we can't dictate what they can and can't do, but again, if UNC is hurting the bottom line by running off potential business in the region where Callambea is, then that's not good for Pax *or* UNC.

I think something a lot of you guys are failing to see if the very obvious.

UNC wants to work with Pax, and thus Callambea.

If UNC is popping every merchant *not* doing business with Pax, at the moment, that just happens to just just outside, or within a reasonable distance of Callambea, that's bad for business.

That's bad for Pax *and* UNC. For merchants *not* doing business with Pax, but in the general vicinity of Pax held hexes, I wouldn't stress too much about UNC.

We want folks coming to our city to trade, to have our ally running off the potential merchants we may not even know about, yet, is bad for business.

Not saying it won't happen, it may on occasion, but how is killing every merchant in the vicinity of Callambea, or other Pax cities, good for business? It won't be. You guys all have very valid concerns, but please, keep in mind, we *want* people to go to our cities to trade, UNC *wants* Callambea to be successful (for their own self interest), and Pax *wants* people to feel like they can come to our city to trade.

KitNyx wrote:

My only concern is that "as intended" is speculation and wishful thinking at the moment.

Really? I thought it was clearly spelled out by Ryan and the devs.

KitNyx wrote:

Why not just encourage GW to continue with their intend and let the low-rep suffer their justice in the end?

Isn't part of their intent that other Low Reputation characters will be shunned and distrusted by other players?

KitNyx wrote:

Technically, no one has griefed, rpk'd, nor "jerked" yet...

I disagree.

It's obviously *not* clearly spelled out, otherwise people wouldn't have such varied views in regards to it.

For instance, you take sanctioned PVP to mean that is the only PVP that is "allowed". All other PVP is being a dick (as all other PVP is unsanctioned).

I take it to mean something very different.

Sanctioned PVP is consensual PVP. You'll both have certain flags that will allow you to PVP without taking rep hits.

Unsanctioned PVP is non-consensual PVP, you will not have those flags and will, therefore, take a reputation hit (the initiator).

They both have their place, they're both valid, and they both work within the system that was created. Sanctioned PVP, obviously, is encouraged, in that you don't take a rep hit. Unsanctioned PVP is discouraged in that you do take a rep hit.

However, unsanctioned PVP is still ok, and *not* being a dick, no matter how you want to dress it up, or who you want to misquote. Will people who participate in unsanctioned PVP be dicks? Sure, absolutely, but so will some of the folks who participate in sanctioned PVP.

If GW didn't want people participating in unsanctioned PVP, they wouldn't even have it. They would just have a toggle system like SWG had. But, they don't. Why don't they? They don't have it so people who *want* to do unsanctioned PVP (and get all the rep hits that go with it) can.

Sennajin wrote:

KitNyx wrote:

I do not see anyone who is hating on those who will have low-rep. I think the case is more about resisting calls to remove the repercussions of low-rep (Calling the system broken might not be an explicit call, but it is definitely implied).

I don't recall actually seeing anyone wanting those repercussions. What I've seen is people *accepting* them as being worth it to participate in unsanctioned PVP. They're *embracing* those repercussions as a fact of life.

Out of curiosity, what would the realization of the differences between our two positions be and/or what would it look like?

Sorry, I mis-typed. The first line should have read, "I don't recall actually seeing anyone wanting those repercussions removed."

Forgot to tack on removed in my haste =)

I do not see anyone who is hating on those who will have low-rep. I think the case is more about resisting calls to remove the repercussions of low-rep (Calling the system broken might not be an explicit call, but it is definitely implied).

I don't recall actually seeing anyone wanting those repercussions. What I've seen is people *accepting* them as being worth it to participate in unsanctioned PVP. They're *embracing* those repercussions as a fact of life.

Like I said on TS, Deacon, anytime you guys want to pow-wow, the doors of Pax Gaming are wide open. I've been a leader in Pax for 11 years and I've been the "top dog" for about 5, now, and it warms the heart to see other gaming communities cropping up with similar ethics. Professionalism, exceptional-ism, and just plain ol' having fun with friends.

I wish you guys all the best and I will always have a PM box open. Looking forward to many years of enjoying your guys company.

Sennajin wrote:

I think you'll be surprised how many people in the EE play the game first and RP second.

If you listen to Ryan, we'll be RP'ing because we're playing the game and accomplishing our own goals.

RP means different things to different people. I think a lot of people assume that all RP is "Performance RP". There's a lot more to it than that, and I think most players will do it naturally without even thinking about it.

Eh, whatever man. You're getting into semantics, now and that's just silly (and a *huge* problem on these boards, in my opinion).

Of course, by playing the game and attempting to reach our self set goals we'll be playing a role in the world.

But *role playing* in MMO's is playing the game *in character*. That's how it's been in MMO's since the 90's, nothing has magically changed today.

Everyone plays a role, but not everyone role plays. Big difference between the two. I'm talking about role playing, not playing roles.

Alignment is neither a means to an end (unless your ends are tied strongly to aligned behavior) nor a restriction on character persona.

Alignment in PFO is a primarily a summary of your past actions. It describes what you have done.

If there are no mechanical benefits to alignment other than it just being a representation of actions, like reputation in EVE, then alignment doesn't matter to me.

I could care less what people's in character personas are. I could care less what their alignmetns are, either. A mechanical based alignment has no bearing on the individual on the other side of the keyboard. I have friends that want to play good, I have friends who want to play evil, and I have friends who, like me, don't give a crap.

In a mechanical based system, the way it keeps being described, it sounds like it's EVE's reputation system, with some extras. Something may have gotten lost in the translation over the months between the blogs, podcasts, forum posts, and convention interviews and Q&A's for me, which is understandable, because the game is an ever evolving WIP, but if that's all the alignment system ends up being, then it becomes much like EVE's rep system is to me, which is "whatev's".

If that means I get auto-flagged when crossing into another settlement or kingdoms lands, oh well, let's hope they bring a bigger sword or group of friends than I do, or I'll just walk around, if they do.

If that means I can't go to NPC cities or lands, again, oh well, I'll just go around.

The mechanical benefits are secondary, and people who seek only those mechanical benefits have to make the meaningful choice to engage in the behavior which allows them.

That sounds a lot like a means to an end, to me.

Basically, what I'm saying is, at the end of the day, folks are going to game the game, like they do every other MMO. Will there be RP? God, I hope so, because despite my last two posts, I like some good RP and RPers bring life to MMO worlds. However, to think that this will be a roleplaying game before anything else is just silly, in my opinion. The days of MMO's being RPG's before Massively Multiplayer went away a long, long time ago.

This. In EE most of the players seem pretty dedicated to the PnP aspect of RPing and that is amazing.

Eh... maybe the more vocal posters on these boards, sure. Most of the people I know that are intending to play this game (of which there are many, and most of them don't post here, and they will all be in EE)could give two craps about alignment as it relates to an in character persona. Alignment is a means to an end and that end is to be successful in whatever it is they want to pursue in the game, be it PVE, PVP, Crafting, Trading, etc.

I think you'll be surprised how many people in the EE play the game first and RP second. A lot of folks on these boards have it the other way around, they think people are going to be RPing first and gaming the game second. I think that is a mistaken line of thought.

Japan was a NBSI country until the US forced them to open their ports in the 1800's. They sure weren't very threatening (at the time, at least).

Disclaimer: this is my sarcasm post, because I see a lot of quoting actual history thrown around. It's vidya games! ^_^

We have a member in Pax (not in our PfO guild, atm) that will be helping with the MMO track: http://www.dragoncon.org/?q=MMORPGs_track

In addition to that guy we usually have about 10 members at D*Con (I usually go, but I can't make it this year). I'll poke around, see if any of our Aeternum folks will be there.

CHUCK JORGE!

(Pax Gaming)

Simply stated, I love EVE. I think EVE is a great game. I know PfO isn't "fantasy EVE" but it's similar enough that it drew me in. I love sci-fi games, but I've been playing EVE for 10 years, I'd like a change of pace for my sandbox game of choice and PfO fits the bill.

I want a game where I can leverage the Pax community to build cities, work together to harvest resources and make things from them, have the occasional party with our friends and the general community as a whole, and in my downtime, have some good fun, meaningful PVP in the mix, as well.

The attitude of "This game isn't for you" toward everyone who has a slightly different take on PVP than the "kill everything that isn't an ally" crowd is what has turned most of these people off to Open World PVP titles, and created highly toxic communities in them.

What we need to be doing instead is giving these people reasons PFO will be different because it will be different. I know some of these people can be stubborn and frustrating but if you don't have any comments more constructive than telling them to go away, it's time to step away from the debate.

Let the record show, I completely, 100% agree with you on this. I will get behind any effort to show people that you can have a fun, open, and engaging community in an open PVP game. Just because some folks do kill everyone they see doesn't mean everyone kills everyone they see, or even the majority of folks kill everyone they see. Getting that message across in a constructive way, just like you said, is key.

If a person or group has thousands of paid subscriptions, they should (theoretically)be able to do anything that thousands of players with one subscription each can do.

I think the case 'only people who currently have a settlement can ever take one' is bad.

+1

I completely agree. If I'm paying for the game, or even if it's F2P, TBH, I fully intend to do whatever I want, so long as I'm not breaking the EULA.

New CC called The Posters. Everyone who actually has a forum presence joins and we just run around with our hair on fire accomplishing nothing but making a lot of noise doing it. :)

I lol'd ^_^

A lesser or greater degree makes a world of difference. EVE may have some suicide gankers in high sec, but until you've defended territory in null sec you aren't having the same experience that Freelancer, Darkfall, and PFO will offer.

LOL, Freelancer again.

Anyway, yes, pax has extensive experience in living in nullsec space and we've been there since 2004. And no, not all of Pax is out there, we have two corps for the purpose of segregating out our lowsec (note, not highsec, lowsec) from our nullsec players.

No, you won't see that on the Pax site, because of the nature of EVE. I figure our PFO boards will start getting closed to the public once OE starts, as well.

No need, simply answer this. How many of those veteran members are represented in Aeternum leadership, and have joined your PFO group?

Also how much time have they spent living in null sec?

We have one of our long term EVE leaders (he's still a leader in EVE) involved with the Aeternum leadership council. However, Dak cann correct me if I'm wrong, all current Aeternum leaders (Reds) have played EVE to a greater or lesser degree.

Our other EVE leaders and some EVE players have a direct line to Aeternum leadership as well. They've been in null sec for years (and remain there to this day).

I got a PM update on what they're doing, today and the alliance they're in has managed to retake the systems the Goons took from them late last year. So things are going well on that front.

I'm intrigued by Ryan's recommendation to dry-run some organisations in other mmo environments. My broadband is currently not up to it, which is a right spanner in the works for me, but I'm interested if others see something in that direction? I know avari3 gave a perfectly sound alternative, but what about TEO, PAX & The 7th Veil?

Pax already operates guilds in several other games. We're fine doing what we're doing, thank you kindly.

Nothing Ryan has stated in the past 24 hours has come as a surprise to me or the rest of my leadership team. PFO will be a brutal game and if people don't want that, they ought to look or something else.

I got all excited until I realized you weren't talking about the Penny Arcade eXpo at all. :(

We actually get that alot. The first Penny Arcade Expo was in 2004, Pax gaming was founded in 2001, so it's been a kinda of "meh" thing for me. People see us in games all the time and either know that we're Pax Gaming from other games they've played and seen us in or we get asked if we're from Penny Arcade.

Anywho, to my point for posting, I wanted to remind (or impress upon) everyone that the Pax Gaming Annual Meeting is not just a Pax Aeternum thing, it is the yearly get together we do with all of our members from all the games we play. our entire Community (or as much of it that can make a TS meeting).

Now, at the end we do a QA with our members (we usually announce Community changes at these meetings) and they will have priority on the list of questions we answer, so I'm honestly not sure how much, if any, time we'll be able to have for Aeternum specifics this time around, but I would certainly love to see if we can squeeze that in there.

This is the first year we've ever opened up our Annual Meeting to non-Paxians, so it'll be a trial by fire, so to speak.

I'm looking forward to it, as I do every year. I keep tabs on each Division and Guild of Pax Gaming throughout the year, but some of our members stick to one or two guilds and general community, so it's nice to see and hear their questions and reactions to their fellow Paxians achievements in their various games.

A year and a half? I'm already playing. As long as the would be players continue to congregate here, I'm gonna play with their heads.

+1 for truthiness

Sandbox games begin the moment a community rallies behind it and starts interacting.

Love it.

I tried to leave a comment, but got this error message:

ERROR: That reCAPTCHA response was incorrect.
Input error: Invalid referer

Never got the reCACPTCHA option

on a related note, I've never been fond of that Image recognition thing, I'm slightly visually impaired (semi color blind, and scrambled lettering is hard to read).

Pax actually has a voice assist attached to their's, first time I've seen that and very helpful!

Should be fixed, now. Thanks for pointing it out!

Yeah the first episode was just me recording them on my machine locally. The next one I will walk them through setting up Audacity to record themselves and then send me the .wav's to I can mesh them all together.

I used to do this all the time, but it was years ago (back in the early days of WoW) so I'm a bit rusty on some of the details. Thanks again, Papaver for all the tips!

I think I figured out our audio issues. The version of Audacity I was using was almost a year old, so when I exported the .wav to .mp3 it got all sorts of messed up. I installed the newest version last night and did some test recordings (using Audacity to record rather than TS3) and when I exported it sounded much, much better.

Thanks again to everyone for the feedback, comments, suggestions, and support!

Wait, does that mean we're on the list of people that need to be crushed under the boot of TEO for being a detriment to the PfO community, now?

Awesome!