Relative Safety In Starting Cities


Pathfinder Online

Goblin Squad Member

Interesting tidbit in the Thornkeep book about the relative lawlessness of starting cities. I had already that presumed that starting in each one had a correlation with alignment:

Thornkeep Sourcebook wrote:
The righteous and lawful Knights of Iomedae oversee the northern portion of the area, operating from a stronghold known as Fort Riverwatch. The ruthless Hellknights guard the southern approach, enforcing their rule from Fort Inevitable. And from within the depths of the Echo Wood, the lawless den of villainy called Thornkeep exerts control over much of the forest.

But apparently this extends to the practical mechanics of relative safety of the starting cities. There's a whole section on how to make Thornkeep both a lawless place, but also playable:

Thornkeep Sourcebook wrote:
Because Thornkeep is a location that players will start in, we also have to make sure there are clear delineations between safe areas of the town and places where players may encounter hostile NPCs. While the occasional ambush is fine, players whose characters are killed without warning, or who don’t understand why they died, tend to get very frustrated.

So their answer is to make the dangerous/safe parts of the city fairly visible, but then also offer the safety of Forts Riverwatch and Inevitable as alternatives:

Thornkeep Sourcebook wrote:
Another solution is letting starting players choose their own risk level: Thornkeep will be the starter town for characters wanting a more chaotic, dangerous experience; other starter towns will have more guards and stricter laws. So if players want the full River Kingdoms experience from the start, they can begin the game in Thornkeep. (Offering multiple starting locations also avoids cramming thousands of characters into a single starting location, which could bring servers and computers to their knees.)

I like the idea of making starting cities a meaningful choice beyond flavor/character concept.

Goblin Squad Member

In Everquest I liked how different parts of a city would be dangerous based on your class. Necros were safe in the sewers, not so much near the paladins guild.

I would like it if we could choose an affiliation early in the game that affected how we were treated in certain parts of the city. It helps me with immersion if I'm a thief and I know I can travel safely through areas that others can not and that there are areas I must avoid.

Goblin Squad Member

Rafkin wrote:

In Everquest I liked how different parts of a city would be dangerous based on your class. Necros were safe in the sewers, not so much near the paladins guild.

I would like it if we could choose an affiliation early in the game that affected how we were treated in certain parts of the city. It helps me with immersion if I'm a thief and I know I can travel safely through areas that others can not and that there are areas I must avoid.

I partly agree, though IMO it shouldn't be a starting point. IE popping into a town with no notable links to any major organization that your character has been with, no big deal, no new pro's or cons, you are treated just the same as anyone else. Now perform a few quests for the thieves guild.. well the thieves will see you in a better light, get caught or seen thieving, you may be unwanted by anyone in the town except the thieves. In the case of an MMO, I would rather the story for why I am liked/hated etc... tied to what I did in the game, and very little of it tied to a backstory that I never played.

Goblin Squad Member

Onishi wrote:
Rafkin wrote:
I would rather the story for why I am liked/hated etc... tied to what I did in the game, and very little of it tied to a backstory that I never played.

This. "Adding Story to MMO's" has been a big selling point of many recent games. The Old Republic and Guild Wars 2 are the first that come to mind. And while I do prefer the limited options they allow over something like WoW, I feel that shoehorning a character into a specific back story and story line is a mistake. It's fine for a single player experience, but it sucks when you're leaving a quest hub in an mmo and see twelve other dudes in the middle of it, all enjoying the same "unique" experience you did. Kills the immersion for me.

Since there's no way to write a different story for everyone, I'd rather the dev's left that up to the players and focused more on creating a world that reacted to their choices and decisions as opposed to defining them. I'd love to see hundreds of NPC's and factions that start off relatively neutral (though initial class and alignment might have some effect) that would become friendly or hostile based on the characters actions. New areas, quests, and merchants might be unlocked or permanently cut off based on how a character chooses to interact with the world. My only caveat is that these are at least mentioned to the player early on and notify him when approaching a moral event horizon so we aren't constantly angering people we weren't even aware of.

Goblin Squad Member

Quote:
Thornkeep will be the starter town for characters wanting a more chaotic, dangerous experience; other starter towns will have more guards and stricter laws.

Genuinely sounds like it is nod to different in-game cultures springing up.

Goblin Squad Member

Yea, it sounds like people who choose different starting cities will have genuinely distinct gaming experiences.

Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Relative Safety In Starting Cities All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Online