septembervirgin's page

18 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


I don't think saying it was invented by really, really powerful people would make as much sense as saying it was a really, really good idea. And goodly people would go to lengths to prevent misunderstandings and to prevent suffering to others.

Valkenr wrote:

This can be solved by having companies/settlements/kingdom/people be able to flag ownership of goods. These goods cannot be sold or traded as long as they are owned by that group/person(could be a contract). If the contract is terminated, they have X amount of time to return to items to a drop location, or they become open for attack by any party hired by the owner. This gear cannot be destroyed by the game death mechanic, it is preserved on the body along with the random items, and until everything is returned(if they are keeping things in storage) they are still open for attack. It also gives something to...

What of alignment and faith? Would evil deities have a desire to wreck havoc and give their followers bonuses in doing so? The sort of havoc needn't be immediate but could involve raising undead armies to pester good communities and trade lanes. The damage of an army of wraiths generated over a hundred days might be unimaginable but it might be possible to do! While this might seem expensive, remember that an entire community of high level evil characters can afford quite a bit of evil.

Now, what if some areas can be imbued with evil or good, with law or chaos, or even neutrality? This might demand large area, long duration community abjuration spells. I'm not sure there's pre-existing rules for such things.

Gregg Reece wrote:

You're also allowed to start out at a settlement that best matches your alignment. There is the chaotic settlement (Thornkeep) in the woods, the good settlement (Fort Riverwatch) in the north, and the lawful settlement (Fort Inevitable) in the south. So, any evil characters would likely be split between Fort Inevitable and Thornkeep depending on your variety of evil.

Fort Inevitable and Thornkeep will be bloated with conflict between good and evil; with both holding Neutral Evil and Neutral Good characters as well as their own permissive allowance of Good and Evil. Fort Inevitable will also have paladins who might gang together to oust Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil characters.

I understand why there's no Evil settlement to begin with -- after all, evil will want to lay low til they have power. Still, wouldn't it be an interesting expansion to have a Neutral community as well as Evil community?

Nihimon wrote:
That's a really interesting idea to have Divination spells reveal information about what existing groups have done. In essence, Divination becomes a way of gaining in-game intelligence on your enemies.

Even more interesting, it could gain information on trade, resource location, and investment suggestions! Gates and Trump would love these spells.

I keep thinking maybe armed forces movements should be revealed by some spells, maybe even strategic plans should such things be actual in-game objects, crafted via Strategy skill.

What role will knowledge skills have in the game and what will be the functionality of knowledge skills, Contact Other Plane, Speak with Dead, and Divination?

Knowledge can be useful in an easily coded manner. Each knowledge skill should provide bonuses to a community but only with one character per knowledge skill (the character assigned by the community leader).

Arcana might assist in a cost reduction for creating magical items at its very basic use. Should the item be very powerful and require rare components, the Arcana knowledge skill would be needed to know these components at all.

Dungeoneering might help in avoiding diseases, could help combat a movement rate reduction (with higher skill necessary for higher level dungeons), and even to identify hard to notice creatures (like oozes, rot grubs, and dangerous molds) that are "hiding in plain sight". Without dungeoneering, a character might stumble across green slime thinking it's just unsafe water or assume that rot grubs are just large maggots.

Geography can present a bonus to mapped area size of wilderness regions including caverns but not dungeons.

History might permit a potential chance at learning a very high level character's most recent adventures and rewards and also an increase to mapped area size of civic regions and ruins and dungeons (but not caverns).

Local might provide a history of a player or NPC community, its longest term and most powerful (in terms of level) residents, and also give a brief description of any powerful or high ranking resident if the skill is used on their home. However, it might be that a character would have to acquire the Local skill for specific areas in which communities are built or might be built. This local knowledge skill could span several communities if they're built in the same "hex".

Nature can help in agarian efforts, providing basic bonuses to collection in a community (for both herds and plants), and also help indicate where some sorts of monsters might be coming from.

Nobility might be very useful in interacting with nobility, such as to gain land grant and title from nobles. This would further the power of local governments in extension of existing protected lands. Knowledge Nobility might work in tandem with a title grant and (maybe) Leadership to allow access to chivalric men-at-arms to protect ones land. Leadership might not be necessary to access these special granted henchmen.

Planes would of course help in identifying the names of individual demons, devils, and other outsiders, which might help in using the spell Gate to gather more powerful beings. Also it might help in identifying the source and dwelling of an Outsider presence.

Religion might help in identifying undead presence and origin and also provide a bonus for community blessings from the divinities.

The spells that seek knowledge aren't always difficult to include. Also, each should be helpful in learning more about communities and individuals, even information these entities are trying to hide. It should not reveal private information about players nor their accounts, OF COURSE, even unto "last login".

Contact Other Plane might access a large amount of census, community, or individual information to assist a spellcaster in making decisions for themselves or for a community.

Divination might be difficult except as a summarized potential. "How many resources will <group> likely have in one week?" could work. Also, "What monster attacks will be likely on my community in one week?" These sorts of questions, which could be selected from a menu, might be offered and answered and if they give inaccurate summation, it's only because there was unpredictable behavior or action upon the information which precluded the predicted result.

Speak with Dead might help identify *where* a character is in relation to their corpse, might also help in finding out what or who killed that corpse. If cast in a cemetery, it might assist in finding out where the necromancer is that summoned undead to disturb a community.

I'm most interested in playing a human ranger/paladin. If there's a Feat to multi-class from paladin then I'll probably level up as a ranger more than I would otherwise, but it's not necessary to the build I have in mind.

Nihimon wrote:
I also want to be clear that I'm not talking about generally requiring Video Voice Chat just to join. I'm talking about requiring it for a very small subset of members who are asking to be given access to extremely high value assets.

I think that if you asked for retina scans it would be well within your purview, given that you're talking about what you do with your guild, presuming that's what you're describing.

I mean, they could always refuse and not have high responsibility. I'm not sure if the player base en masse will want to submit to security checks of that nature, but I think you're forward thinking to consider the value of "time played" and the sadness that irresponsible behavior can cause.

Waruko wrote:
Because last time I checked NPC bandits in a pen and paper RPG and bandits played by PC's in a computer game who will have just as much skill training and equipment as you

Waruko, you're claiming that super-tough bandits will be jumping everyone, all throughout Pathfinder Online, so we'll have to walk in groups unlike every MMO, CRPG, and PnP I've played. You might be right, if Pathfinder Online wants to fail.

I think a person could walk from a relatively safe position to another relatively safe position. I think you're just feeling a bit hectic lately. Try a nice warm bath.

Waruko, your words are so much like a person in a panic. What, how, what, where. Why are you all of a sudden concerned? Why does my idea of gold having weight suddenly move you to inquire so deeply? Do you feel I am deep in falsehoods, scampering to steal your weightless gold?

Waruko wrote:
So there is no precedence in ANY game ever to support this speculation. You can reason all you want but you have no evidence that supports it. If what you said were true it should of happened already in another game with weightless gold. Like say Darkfall.

Darkfall isn't Pathfinder. And limited builds do happen on MMO all the time. I'm not going to go seeking into memory and webpages and cite references for your sake. I actually do not care about a total stranger today; maybe not tomorrow nor for years to come.

Waruko wrote:
Tested what? Playing a multi-class Pally? Began cheating how? In what? Where?

What, how, what, where. Jeez.

Oh and if you've never played Pathfinder, I'll let you know something: a lone high level fighter can defend himself fairly well. Even against numerous bandits. Sorry, it's true.

COOL! Thankyou for reassuring me. :)

Historical. Ha. It's reason.

Look at it this way.

The way the game is structured, we'll be protecting settlements (static points) and our movements between settlements (mobile points).

If movement between settlements is to protect necessary gold, they'll need two types of fighter: swift moving archers and heavy armored guards. The swift moving archers will be mounted (probably as the attackers are mounted) and be able to harry the gold-thieves from afar and spread out so that area effect magic can't hit them all. The heavy guards are to make sure the bandits don't get grabby while they're being harried.

You could conceivably give a medium dexterity fighter a magical lightning breathing bag, set them flying with spells, and make them a danger -- but this is costly spell-wise. And it uses up charges in the magical lightning breathing bag.

Monks are good at swiftly attacking then running away, but they have to close with an enemy, making them resource drains (on healing spells & potions). Yes, they can heal themselves at higher levels, but this goes away quickly. Better to stay distant and fire from afar -- monks don't gain bonuses and many multiple attacks with archery.

If infinite gold can be held by one character, a single guard can walk around unbeknownst to all with a million gold pieces and there's no trouble whatsoever. They make it from one point to another. Easy. And that guard should be strong (to cause damage and hit more easily) and wear heavy armor (to protect herself).

A character can have high dexterity and high strength but usually other attributes are not so high then. Other builds are possible.

Now, in protecting static points, we'll need heavy fighters and light mobile fighters but for different reasons than in protecting a mobile point. And I'll not go into that right now.

Of course, the best fighters to use (and I give this advice freely) would be ranger/paladin who gain the basic bonus of rangers to archery then switch to paladin class so they can heal themselves (and stay paladins unless Pathfinder permits a Feat to let paladins multi-class).

Not only will the paladin have a special mount, not only do they gain paladin spells, they can heal themselves better than a monk and they can take quite a few riding & archery related feats too.

I tested this out several times in D&D games, some online, but when I tried online the people I was playing with began cheating. So I guess it's a good build!

Multiple user accounts. For example, if Ted and Fred know each other, they might both buy six user accounts under their own names. If they both have multiple computers, they could play the game as several characters using pre-scripted software to run their extra characters. They can gain alot of gold this way. It's been done in several places, most notably Everquest.

Anyway, I already insinuated that I felt gold-farmers, account sellers, and power-trippers might want to purchase several user accounts and "pwn the mmo".

They're only going to let 4500 people in the first month anyway. Should a band of people wish to cheat with multiple user accounts, it will take up extra space.

Wait, but you're claiming people aren't asked to play the game as designed? Even unto cheating?

On the official blog for Pathfinder Online, they stated that their current concept of gold is weightless. A person can carry infinite gold in their tiniest pocket.

Wouldn't third generation warfare just be including quests that cause "status effect" to units targeted by these quests? That is, some quests could attack all (or some) enemy units with poison. Other quests could reduce leadership benefits to all (or some) enemy units. Yet other quests could cause demoralization effects to some enemy units, causing individuals to attack a seen hostile randomly and without relenting unless a Will save is made. There's really no limit to what could be done with quest structured assignments and bonuses being given by these.

There's stories always about lone heroes or bands of heroes that direct enemy effort away from a key point. Teleportation, hasted monks, invisible flying characters, and other magical implementation can provide the equivalent of insertion vehicles.

In City of Heroes, in war zones heroes and villains could do quests to cause minor damage, accuracy, or defensive problems. I think a more dramatic effect would be in keeping with Pathfinder style game-play.

Ryan Dancey wrote:
We won't try to stop it but we won't design the game assuming that you're doing it.

Ryan, you didn't quote the statement you're replying to. The reply seems vague to me. You won't try to stop multiple user accounts but you won't design the game assuming we're doing it?

I'm sorry, I don't understand the reply. :(

It's my opinion that gold should have weight.

If gold has weight, theft is limited to how much the thieves can carry (never millions). The more people are required to carry piles of gold, the easier that cheating is to detect. Also, gold with weight presents an importance to mutual assistance (or hiring NPC and pack mules). In battle, gold with weight demands realistic "supply train" protection, and in turn this makes light cavalry and light infantry more important. If light cavalry and light infantry are important, suddenly multiple character builds become options. Not all fighters wear heavy armor, you know.

If gold does not have weight, theft can be far more extensive and so loss is greater. Cheating is harder to monitor. Growth of communities is uncontrolled (bad idea in games and in reality). Limited builds exist because everyone wants high strength, heavy armored fighters. Because limited builds exist, limited strategies exist, and the game becomes predictable.

Gold should have weight? Think of it as a regulation of character growth, community growth, and an indicator of fair play.

I think Goblinworks states in their blog that they wish to limit the spread of economic reputation to mutual contacts. If this is an intention, the spread of reputation should be through contacts who:

1. Are of same alignment
2. Have known each other for a time (even if they don't adventure together)
3. Show no signs of being pet accounts (run by the same identity or credit card)


1. Are of similar alignments
2. Have adventured or traded together extensively
3. Have known each other for a time
4. Show no signs of being pet accounts


1. Are of markedly different alignments
2. Live in the same community
3. Have adventured or traded together extensively
4. Have known each other for a time
5. Show no signs of being pet accounts

You may wish to permit free mutual access to reputation reports in a guild or community, but this might make things easy for gold farmers and account sellers.

I hope that you do not permit a person to purchase multiple accounts for her or himself. If several people acquainted with each other purchase several accounts under false identities, they can use this leverage to overcome a sizable portion of the MMO. Gold farmers, account sellers, and power-trippers do that; these people are often rude and don't play a game in a way that is conducive to an entertaining MMO.

If you wish to establish fair dealings, please ask for State or National ID numbers. I know that might sound totalitarian, but it could be important for the sanity and fairness of your MMO. And other corporate entities ask for such sanity and fairness too, using the same method.

Checking IP doesn't work because multiple computers can be had. Checking credit cards don't work because illicit dealers can have access to employee credit information; families sometimes will provide credit card usage to each other. If you want a teen to be able to play the game, require that they use the parent's account. At least this cuts down on multiple user accounts.

This multiple account use has been a problem before on other MMO and it reduces immersion and trustworthy social interactions.