Goblin Squad Member
|
Since a few of these are some things I said (thought not 100% accurate wording quotes lol) I will respond as well.
Sure, i'll try with a few, though with the holiday looming closer i'm off to bed for tonight after i try this. I'll try to read up current in the morning if there's not 1500 more posts by then ;)
Things that fall flat to me.(not 100% accurate wording quotes, but what i get in general impression)
(1)"There's no difference between a PC and an NPC"
(2)"There's no way a PC 15 levels over a party would bother attacking someone(s) that far below them"
(3)"Being killed repeatedly by rushing into a dragon's lair is the same as a PC hunting you down and killing you over and over."
(4)"Because NPC's and monsters are killed as a mechanic in the game, every PC is basically evil thus PVP should be allowed and looked forward to because its the same thing."
(1) I used to play a MUD(SH) called Shadow Siege. It was RP enforced (as in, the only way to 'level up' (skill based) was by roleplaying, and getting roleplaying points (RPP) granted every hour. NPCs were limited in existence, and were brought in on occasion and controlled by the moderators when some in-world event was happening. PCs were the shop owners, who might need you to go collect wolf pelts, or go fishing for them. The world wasn't one PC with the rest NPCs. And when the NPCs were present, they were still characters, designed perhaps by the mods, sure, but that didn't make them less of a character, and therefore expendable. So what if they aren't the stars? My wolf animal companion fell into a volcano after missing a jump during the escape. I'm not ashamed to say that hurt me. I've published a book, and killed off one of my characters. Doesn't matter that he wasn't the, or even a main character, he was still my character. I put a lot into making him, and even though I know it's coming, when I read through the scene...
EVERY character matters, to someone. Even the NPCs were meticulously put together by someone, and I'm sure they were (or will be, I guess) proud of their creation. Only for PCs to go and repeatedly kill it because it's /only/ an NPC.
(2)People/Players will be jerks. Can't stop that. My point, which I guess I didn't make as clear as I thought, was from the perspective of someone actually playing their assassin character as their character, not Jimmy the 13-year-old wanting to grief people. I'm trying to stay in-game here, with all my comments. Sure, murder is evil, stealing is bad, raising undead it [evil], but if I'm not allowed to do it, what's going to make this the living world built by PCs that's different from other MMOs that they want it to be? Even in TT games, some NPCs get class levels and level-appropriate gear. Playing a TT one player instead of grouped is signing your own death warrant, which is one of the points Ryan Dancey was trying to get across.
(3)The dragon comment wasn't mine, however, you can also choose to get a party of adventurers together to go with you, hiring them as protection, so you can pass through that area, or even take them with you. Now you just brought more people into the game, made the first donation to the coffers of the newly formed faction, "The Griefer Hunters", and enhanced the game for a number of players, by becoming a quest-giver, and getting to do what you were trying to do.
(4)History is written by the winners. The bad guys think they're doing something heroic as well. A king tells you to go kill some bandits, so it's okay. Except they're not really bandits. They're a group of guards surrounding the rightful heir to the throne while they try getting into the city to prove the claim. Someone hires you to go kill a bunch of kobolds who are taking cattle, and it's okay. But it's not, because those kobolds showed the people of the town the secret of growing crops in the normally infertile land in trade for some beef and peaceable relations, which the townspeople have renegged now that they have the secret.
Hope that helps clear things up a bit.
***
Damn these threads, eating into my Skyrim time...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Whelp, one good way to tell when you're getting tired of the topic is when you start taking it way off course.
I'm going to give this thread a rest, maybe watch some old black and white slapstick comedy before bed.
Good luck guys.
*laugh* I think you are right. Good to meet you and thank you for your perspectives.
I might have disagreed with Kyrt's gaming style, but otherwise he seems to be a fine guy. My anger was mostly fueled by real-life events that happened to a friend of mine...
Anyway, I still think there should be some limiters to prevent destructive PvP behaviour getting out of hand.
I understand I am arguing for a realistic perspective, I agree that it might also warrant realistic deterrents to unsavory behaviors. This I have never disagreed with. I just do not want my options limited because I have no intent of running around griefing people.
That's fair. To clarify, would you not want your options limited from the get-go (i.e. not being allowed to kill whomever you want outright because they're mysteriously intangible through the power of the video game) or in a "big picture" sense (i.e. being limited from killing whomever because the eventual consequences are what you would consider to be too severe)?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To me the sad part is the failure to account for defenses at any event in a world at war. Did they just RP not RPing? Did they forget they were on ...whatever Warcrafts world is called? So no, I do not think it is sad their enemies took advantage of their stupidity. What I think is sad is what you have players who are supposedly on the same side, aka not attackable, yet they do everything possible to grief these type of events.
I remember something like this also, but it was a player who died and the "funeral" included both sides and for that event they set aside the factional fight. And that was a PvP server full of evil gankers.
Actually his example was also about a PvP server full of evil gankers (your words) who set out to destroy the in game funeral of a real life person. So, your second paragraph seems to indicate that you completely missed the point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
(3)"Being killed repeatedly by rushing into a dragon's lair is the same as a PC hunting you down and killing you over and over."
Very good points Runnetib. To address the above, since I said it. I was taken out of context. I was trying to compare the dragon to a group of powerful players. This falls into your category 1...the dragon is a character no different from the perspective of the characters as a group of high level humanoids. What I was trying to illustrate is that the low level people have the option to go establish their home somewhere else. They have this option in both cases.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually his example was also about a PvP server full of evil gankers (your words) who set out to destroy the in game funeral of a real life person. So, your second paragraph seems to indicate that you completely missed the point.To me the sad part is the failure to account for defenses at any event in a world at war. Did they just RP not RPing? Did they forget they were on ...whatever Warcrafts world is called? So no, I do not think it is sad their enemies took advantage of their stupidity. What I think is sad is what you have players who are supposedly on the same side, aka not attackable, yet they do everything possible to grief these type of events.
I remember something like this also, but it was a player who died and the "funeral" included both sides and for that event they set aside the factional fight. And that was a PvP server full of evil gankers.
Misread and Conceded, you win?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Roleplay is pretending you exist in the world and acting as your character would. How does treating PC and NPCs different follow from this? What feature should NPCs (or PCs) have that YOUR CHARACTER would perceive that warrants different treatment?You bring up an excellent point Kit. It seems really dumb to distinguish between PC's and NPC's in terms of how you are able to interact with them. If you can attack a goblin you can attack a halfling.
I don't know anything about graphicky games, but have spent a few thousand hours on a couple of MUDs which doesn't seem too different. I'm firmly against involuntary PvP based on what I saw there.
FWIW, it's not anything to do with my in game experience, nor fear of losing my stuff (i played pkiller characters almost as much as peacefuls) I think it's purely about empathy. There is an inescapable and fundamental difference between PCs and NPCs in that there is a real person who cares about the PC - often very deeply. The guy who just wants to be left alone to mine for gold may be functionally identical to the wandering goblin as far as your interactions with them in game - ethical obligations don't leave us just because we're playing a game though. We have an obligation to respect the player that doesn't extend to the CPU.
I think segregation of the two styles of gameplay is the best solution. (the MUDs I played on had pkiller areas and peaceful areas and it was all but impossible for a pkiller to attack a peaceful, presumably that's easy to organize with pictures?) I don't see who loses if there are basically two worlds - the dangerous kind and the safe kind. Then you know what you're getting and the only people missing out on what they want are these "griefers".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And Kit, the sad fact is that the the reasonable people are an exception more than the norm nowadays. As for that other topic, while I might be an adult, that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to be utterly disgusted by stuff like that. Please don't say my response was venomous when I think it should be a natural response to that kind of stuff.
Not to drag this thread even further off-course, but it strikes me as odd that you would single out rape as being particularly disgusting, and to call your response to it "natural" in the same paragraph where you bemoan the death of reason. In most circles, murder (especially cold-blooded murder) is considered a viler offense than rape (not to minimize the vile nature of rape, but merely to point out that it shares the company of other vile acts). Presumably, however, you would have no such venomous reaction to the cold-blooded murder of a PC - after all, that's what bad guys do. In fact, it's likely that you've either witnessed or taken part in the cold-blooded murder of an NPC, regardless of how justified you may have thought it at the time.
Having belongings stolen in real life is a tragedy and can be an emotionally-scarring act. In a game, it might have a place.
Watching someone you care about die in real life is a tragedy, and can be emotionally-scarring. In a game, things happen.
Rape will never be an option in Pathfinder Online. You don't need to worry about that. There is a less-than-zero chance of that happening. The most you might have to worry about is some inelegant, ad hoc teabagging of your character's corpse, but that's par for the course.
But you are no more justified in hating (or even disliking) someone for addressing your pet peeve adult theme with their group than someone else would be justified in hating you for addressing the theme of murder.
I take back the word hate (actually, I already kinda did that earlier) but like I said above, my hatred was mostly fueled due to what happened to a good friend of mine and the memory coming back to me after reading Kyrt's posts.
Thinking about it a bit, I MAYBE could bare that kind of stuff in a campaign given there are chances to avoid it, lots of chances to make the one who did it pay, and a very clear warning before the game starts (though I think a DM would deliberately target me if I played a female in such a campaign, so I would rather play a male anyway).
Anyway, yes, murder is bad. But you should also consider that I don't see anything wrong with death sentences, especially when it comes to people like serial killers and serial rapists (who usually feel nothing for their victims, or get some sick twisted pleasure from these things) but I think we shouldn't jump into a touchy subject like that. Let's also try not to mix real-life moral expectations with those of the ones present in video games, alright?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And who are those enemies? The other guild of 1 month old players they destroyed last week? Most of them have quitted the game.
People playing that kind of game generally don't need to own structures. It can be taken for granted that when you log off your worn gear will disappear with you, so they will be practically invulnerable when off line.Sure one guild out of 10 will find the strength to endure and strike back strongly enough that they will leave them alone, but the majority will fold.
Sorry, I missed the part that the clan of veteran players was composed of all the veteran players. I don't believe that is a realistic scenario. But, in a way I agree with you, the world needs to be big enough to move to a new region if you constantly find yourself fighting an unbeatable foe for resources. This to me is a bonus, not a negative. I must also disagree with you concerning the defensive structures, any established clan needs a place for storage or defense against even bigger clan or group of clans. These will always be vulnerable if a clan extends itself too far.
Would you make the devs remove a dragon from the game because your clan has decided to make a home at the opening to its cavern and you keep getting eaten? But it is griefing you...over and over...
You can chose not to believe what you want, but that is a common situation in EVE and from the few things we know the Pathfinder MMORPG will follow a similar pattern.
I am not speaking of gathering a rare resource in the dangerous corners of the universe.That kind of guys pick a new corporation formed by new players playing in what is theoretically the safe corner of the universe, gathering the most common minerals and declare war to them.
The goal is to gather killmails to put on show, not to fight dangerous opposition.
The kind replies if the attacked corp ask for help range from:
- disband the corp, as long as you are single players in high sec you are safe;
- get a backbone and stop whining;
- play with an alt for a month;
- leave your friends and join an established corp, if they are willing to take you;
- some good suggestion about how a larger force of less skilled player can fight a small force of vastly more skilled players.
Note that the above cited replies are the kind ones.
I have very little faith in the helpfulness of the average internet player.
The attacker has no need of a stronghold simply because they aren't interested in developing that part of the game. they live in the same public structures used by the players not interested in PVP.
In EVE nothing force you to build a Player Owned Structure if you have no use for it and I doubt anything will force you in the Pathfinder MMORPG.
If you don't want to sell stuff you will have no use for a shop.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have faith in the community that there will be those who PKer/Grief and those who rise to fight them as PKKers/Defenders. I've experienced it for over a year in UO. No game I've played has given the community a chance to police themselves except maybe EvE which I never really got into. Most MMOs place strict boundaries to cater to the squeaky wheel.
Anyone who thinks it is impossible is ignorant.
Anyone who thinks maintaining a balance is easy is naive.
"Z"
Police yourself in EVE mean:
"you aren't one of us, you die"
Anyone that is not part of your group is a potential spy or a potential hostile. As you have no way to be sure you kill them on sight when you meet them outside the safeish high sec.
If you are slow on the draw because you don't like to kill other players character you simply are at a disadvantage.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For all the pro PvPers, I have a few questions.
Are you saying that at your tables you have no problems if each of the players decide to consitently kill each other, and get revenge for it?
Do most of your campaigns revolve around fighting other PC's, or warring factions run by each player?
Do you like the type of 'immersion' where each player has free reign to kill anyone you come across, just to prove that you can, or that it can be done?
The reason I like Pathfinder is the world and stories, and I have yet to see one AP where the story revolved around running around killing other PC's. To me the TT game is about working as a group to follow a story and be the hero. I do not see how expansive PvP accomplishes this most basic groundwork of the game I have loved for so long.
I haven't played in any TT where PvP was common or glorified, and most that do are complained about as bad tables. So, why is it that as soon as the game goes electronic, PvP is expected to be the norm of it? Just because the other MMO's do it? Why don't we want to see an MMO become as close to PF as possible, instead of Golarion becoming as close to other MMO's as possible?
EDIT: and playing an Assassin in PF, is that PvP or PvE? Do you kill other PC's or story relevant NPC's?
I play MMOs and TTRPGs for completely different reasons and I expect different things from them.
In other words, enjoying PvP in an MMO does not mean I like it in TT games. In fact, I actively discourage it in games I run and let my opinion be known in games I play in.
The thing is, if this game works on a similar level to EVE, it will feel more 'real' than any other fantasy MMO on the market. That's a good thing, IMO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What no one has considered so far (at least in this thread) is that Pathfinder the MMORPG will be a window into Pathfinder the Pen and Paper game for a lot of people.
If the message is "you will be killed on sight by any other player as soon as you leave the town" I doubt Pathfinter the P&P game will benefit from Pathfinder the MMORPG. Similarly I doubt we will see a lot of people playing Pathfinder the P&P subscribing to Pathfinder the MOORPG if your adventures in it were centred around surviving the other players.
The thing is, if this game works on a similar level to EVE, it will feel more 'real' than any other fantasy MMO on the market. That's a good thing, IMO.
But it will not feel like Pathfinder or Golarion.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What no one has considered so far (at least in this thread) is that Pathfinder the MMORPG will be a window into Pathfinder the Pen and Paper game for a lot of people.
If the message is "you will be killed on sight by any other player as soon as you leave the town" I doubt Pathfinter the P&P game will benefit from Pathfinder the MMORPG. Similarly I doubt we will see a lot of people playing Pathfinder the P&P subscribing to Pathfinder the MOORPG if your adventures in it were centred around surviving the other players.
Except that at the table, all the other players are leaving town /with/ you, and all the other players doesn't add up to the thousands at your table in a world shared. Cuz of all those NPCs in that table game (who can now be played by people, switching them to PCs) some are going to try to kill you.
I'm getting invaluable intel........
This week, I've learned about "care bears," "suicide ganking," and "HULKAGEDDON."
