Vancent's page

That's a point, Ughbash, I was thinking more if you took one move action in a round then your maximum movement that round would be 30 feet. If you double move then it would be 60 feet. Depends, I guess on if they meant your potential maximum or your current maximum.

Stone Dog, I've seen that opinion around the forum, it doesn't really appeal to me personally. To me if you make a jump, then you make the jump. You don't just float in the air while everyone else runs around below you. If you end your turn mid-air aren't you supposed to just fall to the ground?
However, I have to admit, that method is rather fitting for making a final fantasy dragoon like I wanted. I will give it further consideration.
How would that work as part of a charge though? Would the charge just be completed the next round? What kind of action would it be considered in the subsequent round?

Okay, I finally found that line, "No jump can allow you to exceed your
maximum movement for the round."

They didn't include that line in the SRD I normally use, so I had to dig out the old rulebook. Anyhow, I guess that line means you can't use a jump to extend a distance charged. However, you can still gain the high ground benefit I'd say.

That rule seems dumb to me though, that means that no matter how good at jumping and no matter how many magical enhancements are piled on top of them, a normal human can not jump more then 30 feet without also enhancing their move speed too. Even if they roll high enough they can't jump a 22 foot gap because they already moved 10 feet before making the jump.

As a GM, I'll follow the SRD's example and ignore that line. As a player, I'll leave it up to my GM.

I'm resurrecting this thread because recently I've been looking into recreating a final fantasy style of dragoon. Unfortunately, so far I have found no way to gain the High Jump ability or something similar without taking 5 levels of Monk. (Maybe 2 levels of Barbarian to get me Raging Leaper, but that seems unsatisfactory.)

Anyhow, I disagree with concerro and his link entirely.

Personally, I'd say jumping changes the line/path to the opponent, by jumping over the obstacles you avoid their hindrance to your movement.
However the rules do say any line, so I'll give you that maybe hindrances you can jump over do still prevent a charge. (Although it also doesn't say any straight line, so if you follow the wording literally then you'd have to consider every infinitely possible line, and no one could ever charge.)

Regardless, Tandriniel didn't ask if you could jump over an obstacle as part of a charge, he asked if you could jump in a charge at all. To which I say yes, no where does the rules say otherwise.

This gives the benefit of extending the distance he can charge. Of course, if he fails to meet the jump DC then the charge would fail, if he fails the check by 5 or more he could potentially fall prone at his target's feet.

I also agree with DmRrostarr, you can also gain the benefit of attacking from the high ground. However, I'd add the condition that you'd have to jump at least 5 feet higher then your target's position, so a DC 20 acrobatics check would be needed to gain the benefit against a target at the same height as the space you jumped from.

As for Death from Above, I'd say as long as you meet the high ground requirements stated above, then you also meet the requirements to benefit from the feat.

Finally, as DmRrostarr said, if you have pounce and successfully completed the charge, there is no reason that you can't do a charge-jump-pounce and get a full attack. It's more fitting anyways.

I'm all for ambient NPCs. Particle system like NPCS moving around settlements would really help with the barren look in less player-visited parts of towns (players mostly gather in one place, usually). Since they're just there for show the ambient NPC-particle's movement and look can all be calculated client-side so the server wont have to track them. People can thusly adjust client-side settings to scale the quantity of NPCs their computer will process, or turn them off completely. The NPCs can also have lower rendering priority and be reduced the more PCs are present. They can also run off or disappear when combat starts, to save processing and memory for combat particle effects and the like.

I'd definitely like to see the NPC workers in my resource gathering camps and in crafter's workshops, busy working away. Those should be more solid NPCs though, tracked by the server, because you'll need to defend them if they come under attack.

@Andius
I don't know if that was your intention, but that Helsing link does capture the feel of being a semi-soloing PvEer in this forum.
"We don't take kindly to PvEers around here..."
"I don't want any trouble, I just want to enrich your experience."
"We don't need your enrichment!"

Heheh, get some Sweeney Todd stuff going on. Food crafters secretly putting people meat into their pies and selling them back to the populace.

Giants could make true on the claim, "I'll grind your bones to make my bread."

Also, I want to see heads on pikes.

I'm interested in giving this a try. Depending on my availability at the time, of course.

I do read the dev blogs, I have since they first started posting them.

I'm well aware of what GW currently promises for the store. I sincerely hope that they stay true to that. However, I am speaking from my experiences with other MMOs.
It's easy to make promises now, but once the game comes out profitability and sustainability and become the main issues, especially if subscription counts are low.
Even if they are high at first, eventually the numbers will start to drop and alternate sources of revenue will be explored, either that or they just shut the servers down. That's the unfortunate fate of any MMO, either fade and die with honour or delve into unethical profit schemes to scrape out a living.
I can't really blame them if they introduce pay-to-win stuff far down the line. It does let the fans continue playing at least. I just hope they hold off on it as long as possible, the chances of that are not good however. That's just the state of the industry today.

The 'xp over time' mechanic is so people with more free time cannot 'grind' a huge in game advantage over people who go offline for more than 15 minutes a day. A balance that is important because Players control the world in PFO.

I'm well aware of what the mechanic is for, but that doesn't make it any more engaging. It's still boring. Furthermore, I feel that players willing to put a lot of time into a game should be rewarded for that effort.

Player made settlements will control the higher levels of skills, because the whole game is about players controlling the world. So ,want to train 'archery' or w/e ? Found a city and put that craft hall up !

I was talking about unpopular skills, not high level ones. Skills business owners won't bother offering in favor of more profitable ones. Just because no one else wants to learn how to I shouldn't have to start up a business empire just to teach myself how to fire a bow better.

Not a lot of PFRPG translates to MMO world. PFRPG is made for a party of a few people, PFO is a player controlled world with thousands of players. Feel free to tell GW how they can make that happen.

I do tell them, bit by bit, with every post in this forum. However, just because I can see that something is wrong doesn't mean I have the solution to fix it. Perhaps you have some ideas?

It's the combination the XP and the merit badges together that allow you to train new skills, looking at them individually is like asking how the sausage is made.

Heh, interesting metaphor. To expand on it however: if the sausage tastes funny then I'm going to question what they put into it.

This is still accurate. The system as it currently stands is:

1. Accumulate XP over time (as long as you're subscribed, but whether or not you're logged in).
2. While you're accumulating XP, go out and get achievements/merit badges.
3. Browse a training hall to which you have access. See if they have anything you want, can afford with XP, and meet the prerequisites for (achievements or sufficiently high ability scores). The building owner might also set a coin fee for the trait, which you have to pay.
4. If you see something you want, select it and press Train. The coin and XP is deducted from you, and the trait is added to your character. Additionally, the associated ability score goes up by a fraction of a point (meaning after buying several traits from the same score, you now have a higher ability score to qualify for better training).

That...that just sounds terrible to me. Seriously.

1. Automatically accumulating XP over time is just incredibly unengaging. Not terrible on it's own, but not great.
However, experience with other games suggests this will also be circumvented in the game store, allowing wealthy players to purchase instant XP. That part is terrible.
2. Getting merit badges. I can't for the life of me understand why you would take the absolute worst part of questing in MMOs (do X task Y times) and make it a core game mechanic. Other then to sucker in those easily addicted to small meaningless rewards.
Also, if you ever sell these in the store, or you'll create a true pay-to-win game and complete your path to lawful evil.
3. Limiting character customization and development to supply and demand...at this point it's not just terrible but almost insulting.
Want to train in a certain archery skill? Too bad, that skill trait isn't popular, no one sells that training. Had all your gold robbed by a bandit? Well he owns the local training hall and has an oligopoly with the surrounding hexes, guess you can't learn how to swim better today. Need a higher climb skill to get into that limited duration event dungeon? It's sold out, better luck next year.

Also, in all the material released, I apparently missed the part where Golarion's education system is based on magically injecting skill downloads into people's brains.

For a Pathfinder MMO, there isn't a lot of Pathfinder in it, is there? It's more like some other MMO is wearing the dead skin of Pathfinder as a mask.

I generally find the use of macro's in MMO's to be quite cheaty, so I support anything that makes them more difficult to use.

*Starts a list called 'Known Cheaters'*

I also support choice, the ability for players to name their characters what they want, if that makes it difficult to PM them and such then that's a risk they should be allowed to take.
Also, most MMO's let you click on a character's name in a chat box or on the character themselves and initiate PMing with their name already filled in in the message field. Similar mechanics are available for inviting to groups and such. So a name being hard to type is not a huge problem, and when you're just chatting with them you can simply invent a nickname that is easy to type.

Having the pass-through delay also gives a blocker a moment to decided if they want to initiate combat or not and react.

Oh yeah, acrobatics is a good thing to consider too, I was mostly thinking about combat maneuvers up till now.

The problem with different rules for in and out of combat is that the game is full PvP, there will be little to no difference between being and combat and not being in combat because combat can happen at any given moment. It'll be hard to differentiate between when people should be blocked and when people shouldn't be.

I support there being a difference, but not sure how they'll pull it off.

@Kakafika: Yeah, it should also be hard for players to calculate just how much things are affecting their alignment. I don't want people going, "Okay, so at the currently recovery rate, if I do these three actions, I can murder someone every 38 minutes without loosing my alignment."

I'm pretty happy with this.

My only problem is 500 evil points seems a bit low for murder. A fresh good character would have to kill 15 people in cold blood before they'd be considered evil, and any single good act could up that to 16 or more.

I know you have to make allowances for an MMO, but it still seems a bit too forgiving.

Anyhow, mentor stuff, woo.

It is great for merchant type characters, and frees up RPing time. I don't think it's a good thing overall though.
With fixed character progression, that leaves accruing wealth and factional power as the main reward for actually playing the game, just like EVE Online. That's great and all in EVE Online, but this is supposed to be Pathfinder Online. I want a Fantasy Adventure RPG, not a Corporate Economy Simulator! I want a Pathfinder MMO!

*Storms around flailing in frustration.*

I don't know, I don't really like the entirely controlled and time constrained advancement. I think people should be rewarded for hard work and dedication with faster progression. Helping each other to advance should also be encouraged and rewarded.
Advancement should not be determined by how much real money you spend in the store.

I also want Nihimon to be able to name his character Nihimon Vhane'Sylvan.

Oberyn Corvus's suggestion seems pretty good. I support it.

I can see I had previously fundamentally misunderstood how XP and skills and such works. I thought it was only inspired by EVE Online, but mostly it's own thing, then filled in blanks on my own. I think I've got a handle on it now though, it's almost exactly like EVE Online...which makes me sad.

I'm for allowing accents, apostrophes, and some punctuation. I do not think they are bad on their own, only when misused. I see no reason to limit people without them.
There aren't going to be any strict RP servers or the like, they re are going to be people with stupid and immersion breaking names no matter what restrictions are in place.
If you want people to be restricted in name then make that a requirement for your guild or faction. Not for the whole game.

I recommend a mechanic I remember from way back in Final Fantasy IX. When you first walk into another character you will collided with them and they'll block your path, but if you keep walking in the same direction for one or two seconds the collision will turn off and you can pass through them. This way people can't get stuck or permanently blocked by other players.
In combat though full collision should be on all the time, allowing defenders to hold choke points and attackers to push formations forward and more effectively divide and conquer and such.
I'd also suggest having some physics based knock back, allowing larger or charging characters to knock people aside, though that should really be handled by CMB and CMD and using maneuvers.

Karl has a point, gear threading should help keep things in check.

@Wurner: I'm not sure I'm remembering this clearly, but I think your skill progression drives your attribute progression. Therefor the more time you spend working on one class/roll the more your attributes will improve to support that roll. I don't think your attributes will change as soon as you swap in some abilities and skills from another role.
Thus, if you concentrate on fighter stuff for a while and then suddenly switch to wizard you will be a pretty cruddy wizard, at least until you've trained up that role as much as you have the fighter role. Then you will be the same level of effectiveness in either role, but not as effective as someone who focused the same amount of time purely on one role.

@Dario: Obviously this is getting into semantics, but I would like to say there is a big difference between swapping out entire classes and switching around a few abilities. I think you're aware of the difference, your wording just getting kind of vague on which you're talking about.

I agree with Kalmyel, I'd much rather be able to blend classes then have to swap them. This will result in the same balance that multi-classing has in table top.

A mutliclassed fighter/wizard at level 6 might be more versatile then a pure level 6 fighter or wizard, able to melee and cast some spells. Yet the pure fighter will have more feats and deal more damage and take more hits, and the pure wizard will cast more spells, more powerfully, as well as have access to higher level spells.

It's all a matter of generalization vs. specialization, quantity vs. quality. An issue you will encounter in real life as well. Which one is better? Well, that's often up for debate; but generally jacks of all trades will fair well on their own, while a specialist will need to depend on others to cover their weaknesses. A team of specialists will generally out perform a team of generalists in typical situations, but generalists will better adapt to changing or unfamiliar situations.

Anyhow, yeah, as someone who often solos in MMOs I definitely want to be able to mix and match classes up the wazoo.

From my experience with Unity, the default GUI objects are a pain in the butt to work with. Easier to create a custom object in the environment that is parented to the players camera. Regardless either object can then include a hitbox area (that can be toggled off and on from another menu or button) that can be clicked and dragged around the view area to move the GUI element. The trick is having it properly scale it's size and position with different window/fullscreen resolutions. It will definitely require some programming, but I don't think it'll be anything an experienced professional can't handle.

Yeah, this would give me an actual reason to socialize and interact with other players. I usually end up soloing in MMOs...

I'm afraid I'm not really familiar with the current proposed training facilities. Regarding the XP gain though, since development is mostly time-based, from my understanding, becoming a student would simply increase the rate you gain XP. A +15% boost or so, maybe stacked with a +1-2% per ECL difference. +15% is a small boost, but with it supposed to take several years to master a role it should be rather significant in the long run. The bonus per ECL difference will allow new characters to power up faster as the game progresses and will put high ECL characters in high demand as mentors. Allowing them to charge higher rates.
For mentors the XP gain bonus would be lower, something like +5% for being a mentor and +1-2% per student. Being already powerful, their main benefit would be income and renown. To that end, mentoring could also improve reputation.

I definitely want multi-monitor support and a fully customizable GUI.

As Dario says, your character won't be truly maxed out until you've mastered every role. Which, from my understanding, should take over a decade of real time (it's supposed to take like 2-3 years to master one role). If a player drops out after that amount of time, I don't think anyone will mind.

We seem to be mixing character training and player training in this thread.

In terms of character training, I hope there is a mechanism, but I suspect that it might not be part of the "minimally functional" game at EE.

Assume for pretty much everything I say ever that I'm talking about things I'd like to see for the final official release of the game, not early enrollment (which is mostly just glorified pre-alpha/alpha/beta testing).

Also, for this thread the intention was to talking about character training.

---
Regarding player training though; I think it is way too heavy handed now days. I don't want to run through a tutorial every time I start a new game/character. I prefer to learn through trial and error.

...but I learned things in E Uni classes that would have taken me months to discover by trial and error.

True, learning on your own can take a lot of time. That seems fitting though with the time-based skill training. Regardless, this is an MMO, if you don't know how to do something, or need help understanding some functionality, you can simply ask someone.

---
Anyhow, back to character mentor training.
I would like a system where a more experienced character can officially take on a student/apprentice character via contract or the like. The benefits seem obvious, a mentored character would train up skills faster then un-mentored. Furthermore they could learn abilities and such from their mentor instead of having to go into town, allowing them to power up on the go if their mentor is with them.
The benefits for the mentor are a little harder to nail down. They could maybe include regularly paid fees in the mentor/student contract, or a % of the students earnings. They could also maybe train up their own skills a bit faster. Thus the fastest way to advance a character would be to mentor a student while being a student to another mentor yourself.
Mentors should probably also be able to take on more then one student. The game may be level-less, but an ECL can probably still be calculated. The number of student possible could then be some fraction of the ECL.

Actually, it will be interesting to see if Players can train other Players, or if that will only be a function available within a Settlement itself.

Sort of a Mentor/Student relationship? Higher level Players can help 'train' lower level Players?

(Originally from this thread.)

I loved this idea and decided it needed it's own thread. I'll chip in my own two cents on the topic in a little bit, once I've thought on it more.
In the mean time, please share your ideas and opinions on implementing a mechanic like this.

I'd love to be able to mentor and train and be mentored and trained. That idea should probably get it's own thread.

I have seen the first and last name featured in several games. It definitely helps but doesn't eliminate the issue.

I believe I've played at least one game (I don't remember which) where they pretty much eliminated the issue by allowing you to name your character whatever you want, even if someone else is using that name. Just like in real life, it is possible for more then one person to have the same name. Private messages and the like were handled by sending to the account name, not the character name, since the player could only be logged into one character on their account at a time anyhow.

This would of course create some other issues, PMing would be a bit more of a clunky process for one, and it would be distracting while RPing.

I would imagine animal handling should be used the same way it's meant to be used in the game, to rear and train animals. Mounts would be a player provided commodity just the same as weapons and armor and food. Animal handlers would have to breed or capture young animals and raise them to adult hood with handle animal checks to domesticate them. Then they would have to use handle animal to teach them tricks. The higher the skill, the faster and better they can rear and train their mounts to prep them for sale.
This would all apply to pets as well, not just mounts. Besides, any trained pet can be used as a mount if it's strong enough to carry you and at least one size category larger. It could also go more in depth and allow handlers to select feats and stat focuses for the animals so that they can specialize their merchandise.
More intelligent or exotic animals could/would also require higher skill to be able to train or rear at all.
If players can capture people's mounts then it would also be used to calm the animals and get them to allow the new rider.

Wait, Bluddwolf has founded more then one company? I'm now less then comfortable about this...

I agree with KarlBob.

(I would point out though that the Pathfinder werewolf template is only CR+1, which equals LA+1. LA+1 becomes negligible around level 5 or 6 for PCs.)

I really want to preorder this, but I have no idea where I'll be in august. Is it possible to change the shipping address between now and then?

EDIT: Some FAQing around has revealed that I can.

I agree with the half-orc.

I like this Wild Alliance... (as I will be calling it)

This is what I was planning to be anyways. Though I don't really have a problem with the alignment system, yet.

SWtOR is an MMO that has a lightside/darkside system, which is like a one dimensional alignment system. It doesn't affect much beyond what high tier gear you can get though.

Deciding what alignment your faction should be is easy, you're free to tell people your alignment, leaders/founders of a faction can simply go:
"We should be neutral good."
"I agree."
"Alright, it's decided then."
Of course it'll be more complicated with various character alignments and such, but simple discussion will generally be the means of deciding such things.

But, I'm not a bandit, I'm a hermit. I don't want to associate with scum and villainy.

I am pretty much satisfied with the currently stated death penalties. It's a difficult issue to tackle in MMOs.
There should be good reason to fear death though, it should never be a minor inconvenience. Without penalty for failure or a sense of danger there is no real challenge, combat becomes insignificant and meaningless. It all just becomes bland and boring.

I for one would like to be able to run off into the wilderness and build my own little house without having to be tied to any settlement. That's not likely to happen though. It would be hard to keep and defend such a place without the resources of a settlement and constant vigilance. You wouldn't be able to go adventuring without risking mob escalation destroying it or PCs ransacking the place.
I guess I'll have to leave such ideals in Minecraft..

I'm not sure if I condone or condemn these alignment restrictions over all. However, I do support diversity in settlements. I would say that ideally settlements and faction leaders would be able to choose if they want to restrict alignment or not, and by how much.

A problem I foresee though is that alignment is supposed to be rather unapparent to others without the use of spells and the like, but having settlements and factions with mechanically enforced restrictions will kind of make that a null point. Trying to enter or join a restricted place or group will at least partially reveal your alignment.

@Vereor Nox: I am aware of this. Though there is a big difference between single-shard and no servers. I know what you mean though.

@Hobs the Short: That's pretty much exactly my opinion and a reflection of what I want as well.

@cartomancer: Well this is where it becomes a matter of taste, exploration, discovery, and even getting lost, is fun for me. Having my hand held and having the game think and observe for me isn't, it's boring.
As for you getting lost, yes, you probably will at first. However, directional navigational skills in both real life and videogames is a skill you can develop with time. Just like a real new adventurer, you will start off not great at it and get better with time.
You're not going to develop those skills if you're following a mini-map all the time though.

@froggalpha: Yeah, some of those things can get expensive and not everyone can afford them. There is a minimal barrier though that people playing will need a computer new enough to at least be able to run the game. In general, with exceptions, that'll mean you'll probably need to have a computer new enough to come with a wide-screen monitor; and pretty much any computer that wasn't built in the 90's or earlier should come with a sound card capable of at least rudimentary 3D sound.

Oh yeah! I read that. That should totally be in the game. Also, wiffle scrolls.

At most, I'll agree that the presence or absence of a mini-map is a matter of taste. They suit my taste, and they apparently don't suit some of yours. What's inherently wrong with my suggestion that you can play without it, while I play with it? The argument seems to be "I don't want it, and I don't want anyone else to have what I don't want."

Because it's not just a matter of having to look at it or whether or not I use it. The decision to include a mini-map will have effects on how the entire game is built. It represents the direction of the ideals of the entire game design. It affects not only the themes and atmosphere experienced while playing the game but the themes and atmosphere built into the game. A little change can mean a whole hell of a lot.

Besides all that, yes, I don't want other people to have it if I don't have it. I can't do anything about cheaters that hack it into their game, but the average fairly playing person shouldn't have undue advantages over either.

If turning it off is just an option, I will never turn it off, because that would put me on a playing field below the other players. I'd like everyone, on my sever at least, to be on the same playing field.

I assume you're aiming for facetious and funny rather than deliberately insulting?

Eh, a little of both. I'm rather passionate about the issue apparently (surprised me too, but there it is) and KarlBob is starting to get on my nerves.

@Vancent - I think the best very best argument for not splitting the server is as follows:

If inter-player interactions are supposed to provide most of the thrilling, story-worthy moments in PFO, then diluting the population into multiple servers means reducing the opportunities for epic moments to happen.

That seems like the worst argument to me. Being able to select a server that only contains like-minded people that want the same things out of the game as I do will only enrich my experience. Also, I'm talk about making two different servers, not 50.

Also, what has replaced mini-maps? Guild Wars 2 came out this decade, and it has one. Elder Scrolls Online will come out this decade, and I believe it has one, too. I'm not saying that PFO has to have everything that other MMOs have. I'm just responding to the idea that mini-maps are so last decade, by pointing out examples from this decade.

A) Those games all started development last decade.

B) Just because they're afraid of change doesn't mean we have to be.

C) The oft' referenced World of Warcraft came out 4 years into it's decade, and changed everything.

D) The whole point of the two kickstarter campaigns this game has already had was so that GW could get away from the corporate restrictions that those other games were under and be something different.

E) I did not enjoy those games.

Also, if wide screen and 3rd person still isn't peripheral enough for you, try getting a multiple monitor set up, you can get 180 or even 360 degree vision! Just like mini-maps magically give you!

Okay, Being. I'll just say that until the game can replace my peripheral vision, directional hearing, sense of smell and ability to feel vibrations, I don't want to play an MMO without a mini-map.

Peripheral vision: Wide-screen and third person. Covered.

Directional hearing: 3D sound and surround sound, also headphones. Covered.

Sense of smell: You really want smell-o-vision? Games don't even use smell, and mini-maps usually don't either. Not covered but not needed.

Vibrations: Rumble controllers, force feedback chairs, low bass and/or sub-woofers. Covered.

Guess you don't need mini-maps!

EDIT: You must have a really hard time reading books.