Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've searched the threads and while I see many comments on how difficult it will be to run (and stay) a lawful good character, I haven’t seen a thread on how to play lawful good successfully based on what we know now about Pathfinder Online. That is what I’d like to see discussed here. To keep the thread a little more focused I would like to see comments based on the following premise:
“The Nettles are a small chartered group of lawful good monks (supported by a few lawful good clerics, fighters, and magic users) who earn a living as gatherers of herbal resources for medicines, potions, and condiments. They also are always on the lookout for new ingredients for their side business of brewing ale and beer. [Blue Monk Ale is in demand all along the Crusader Road, but they are always looking for the next great brew.] They have made it widely known to members of the PC settlement where they are based that they will answer any call for help in the wild around and within the settlement’s territory.” (This presumes that there will be a mechanism for calling for help in PC territories, possible as a corollary to alerting wardens in NPC territories.)
Scenario A: Can the Nettles be successful (that is, continue to grow as a group and as individuals and stay lawful good) if they were aligned with (and based in) a lawful neutral PC settlement? What would they have to do to maintain their lawful good alignment in this case?
Scenario B: A group of 4 Nettles (let’s say 3 monks and a cleric) hear a call for help in the wild just outside the territory controlled by the PC settlement. They rush to the scene and find 2 groups of PCs engaged in combat. Each group has 4 PCs each. Among the following options how would they conduct themselves in each instance and not severely damage their lawful good alignment?
- try and stop the fight to determine who is the aggressor and who called for help (which might be the same group) [this would be a good argument for non-lethal combat];
- join one of the parties in fighting the other (assuming they can determine which side to support);
- fight both parties, or
- run away.
Running way is a poor option as abandoning people in need of assistance would not be very good.
Scenario C: The Nettles have completed a contract to procure a number of poison substances for the manufacture of antidotes. They discover that the material is not being used as such. It could be that the poisons were stolen by thieves, or they discover that they have been duped in providing them to a client who plans to use them as poisons. What would be their possible courses of action and how would these actions help them maintain their lawful good alignment?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Opinion
Scénario A Yes You can be part of 1-aligement step settlement. ( It will influence the settlement toward good not the contrary.)
B. If it is a contract. you will lose some loyal points and reputation if you don't respect it. If not. Those who attack will have the attacker flag. (So you will know who is) Even if those who call help and being are some low reputation chaotic evil character. Initiate a combat is chotic at best and evil at worst. So if you aid the chaotic evil team, it will stil be a good action.
Scenario C. I don't think that creating poison will be an ingredient to create antidote. (maybe some ingredients of poison and antidote have the some in common)
Now there the catch the B could be the result of C. Those attackers could be doing it because the chaotic evil have the poison...
Mostly the attackers are neutral good or someting lower. If the ng tell the problem. The lg could help (kill a chaotic evil a much lesser impact in alignement and reputation)or help the ce or doing nothing. Those three options should not change the alignement of the nettles. (lg could call ally who don't have the restriction of law)
You can run. You can be good and loyal and be a chicken.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Scenario B doesn't make complete sense unless there is a mechanism to call for help in the wild. It would be nice to know if there are plans to allow HELP!!! in the wild.
in Scenario B I'm not sure that a contract would be in force as the second party (the ones in need of help) haven't actually put it in writing. The contract could be implied but I'm not sure if there will be a game mechanic to track that.
as far as scenario c goes, i see no alignment shift unless the person they took the contract from was directly opposed alignment ( could be the contract was issued by a nuetral party to fill an order to complete a seperate contract) in which case, MMO mechanics, this is null and void, complete your contract and profit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In Scenario C the Nettles have already completed the contract. The question was about the affect of not dealing with indirect acts that result from the Nettles direct actions. Granted, this would be more of a tabletop gaming plot twist. Healing a murderer is a criminal act, but the game will show the criminal indicator in that case to warn the player. How far does responsibility for acts extend if the act made a criminal act possible? There may be no MMO mechanism to track that. How does the game warn a chartered company that its actions may be criminal as it does for PCs?
I think it will only depend and affect on pc interactions. Keeping in mind while healing a murder in PFO may be criminal, healing said murder in a table top session might actualy be a pious and good act depending on your god. pretty much, avoid contracts from low rep suppliers or anyone that tests as evil when you detect alingment. the only actions you have to worry about is your own during the course of gameplay and said contract, what that contract enables someone else to do is not your problem or concern. no way a mmo mechanic could do anything about it anyways. Ignorance is bliss my friend. what you and the game dont know wont shift your alignment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
With all the discussion about how the expected game mechanics with hinder how some people wish to play LG, I thought it would be a good time to bump this thread.
To begin discussion I have a few premises to consider:
1) Alignment is not an integer value:
It seems clear that alignment is not a +1, 0 -1 issue, e.g. (+1,+1) = LG, (+1,0) = LN, (-1, -1) = CE, etc. It appears that alignment along the axes is intended to be a real number scale (see post in this thread). So actions that affect alignment will slowly (depending on the magnitude of alignment impact) shift an alignment. For example a mostly-lawful/slightly-evil character with an alignment coordinate of (+0.8, -0.2) does a chaotic act. This might shift their alignment coordinate to (+0.75), -0.2). Still mostly lawful but now a little less so.
2) Regardless of motive, attacking a character that does not have a flag will nudge your alignment to chaotic
Irrespective of your position on this mechanic, let's assume for the moment that it is the way the game is played. The example in 1) above applies to this assumption if we assume that the chaotic action is attacking someone who has no flags.
3) Shifts in alignment are reversible
This is a very important assumption. Without it a lawful character is doomed to become chaotic in the long run. This assumption requires that there is a way in roll playing the game to discover what are the actions that can cause reverse shifts in alignment.
4) We need to know how close to neutral a character's alignment needs to get to stop being lawful/chaotic or good/evil.
This is important to know. Is a character still lawful if their alignment coordinate is (+0.5, X)? How about (+0.1, X) or (+0.01, X)?
With these assumptions, I still think it is possible to play lawful good successfully. It may require that some actions that shift alignment back to LG will need to be taken to "return to the path" so to speak. This would mean we will need to be informed when we are nearing the crossover point in our alignment, regardless of what that is. Restoring shifted alignment could be done by taking on a specific quest/contract from an NPC or PC. It may be required to go on a retreat to a holy sanctuary or monastery for a period of time. The point is that we have to play within the mechanics of the game. As my primary character will be LG, I look forward to the challenge these constants impose. It's just more grist for the background story mill for me.
What do you think?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
Scenario B: A group of 4 Nettles (let’s say 3 monks and a cleric) hear a call for help in the wild just outside the territory controlled by the PC settlement. They rush to the scene and find 2 groups of PCs engaged in combat. Each group has 4 PCs each. Among the following options how would they conduct themselves in each instance and not severely damage their lawful good alignment?...
- try and stop the fight to determine who is the aggressor and who called for help (which might be the same group) [this would be a good argument for non-lethal combat];
- join one
They can choose to stop the fight without trying to determine the aggressor, especially since there is no aggressor flag showing in the scenario. Since there is no aggressor flag showing in the scenario one party agreed to a contest by force of arms and were getting shellacked, so they called for help. Nevertheless there may be more involved than meets the eye. They cannot know whether the two groups may be actually in cahoots, hoping the LG group will be stupid and attack first, opening them up for a 2:1 fight when they gain the aggressor flag.
Recommended course of action: walk between the two parties with weapons sheathed. If one strikes you they will have the aggressor flag and you are free to dust them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Harad Navar
But still, the mechanism is very easy to be exploited.
A LG char could be used in hundreds of evil and/or chaotic actions and always, before reaching a chaotic or evil shift, the player does wichever action(s)that are lawful or good and shifts his alignment back to a safe position in the LG axis.
So even being LG in game all the time, in a long run (lets say an year) he could have randon killed hundreds of chars (two per week for example) and/or robbed or breaking contracts dishonestly hundreds of times too.
So how could this system prevent an aberration like that?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Harad Navar
But still, the mechanism is very easy to be exploited.
A LG char could be used in hundreds of evil and/or chaotic actions and always, before reaching a chaotic or evil shift, the player does wichever action(s)that are lawful or good and shifts his alignment back to a safe position in the LG axis.
So even being LG in game all the time, in a long run (lets say an year) he could have randon killed hundreds of chars (two per week for example) and/or robbed or breaking contracts dishonestly hundreds of times too.
So how could this system prevent an aberration like that?
You're not taking into account reputation and the fact that character reputation changes the reputation of ccs, settlements and nations. Other players will have a lot to say how this game will be played and that is a good thing.
Edit. It seems the latter might not be the case, but if it isn't I suggest it to be implemented so that ccs, settlements and nations have reputations that correspond directly to their members' reputation as it is with alignment.
Edit. Edit. It seems settlements etc have reputations.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A LG char could be used in hundreds of evil and/or chaotic actions and always, before reaching a chaotic or evil shift, the player does wichever action(s)that are lawful or good and shifts his alignment back to a safe position in the LG axis.
There are several possible mechanisms to prevent this;
1: Make game actions which move the character towards 'lawful' and/or 'good' uncommon.
2: Make the degree of movement partially dependent on current alignment. So, committing ONE 'evil' act while at the pinnacle of 'good' might then require a dozen 'good' acts to get back to the prior standing.
3: Incorporate time as a factor. You not only have to perform 'lawful' / 'good' acts to recover your standing, but you have to NOT perform any 'chaotic' / 'evil' acts for some number of days. If this factor grew over the life of the character then it would take longer and longer to 'recover' from doing evil.
4: Various combinations of the above.
It should be possible for an 'evil' character to repent and eventually make their way to a 'good' alignment, but it should take a long time and be seriously set back by any 'backsliding'. Likewise, a good character should not be able to remain 'good' while regularly committing 'evil' acts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A LG char could be used in hundreds of evil and/or chaotic actions and always, before reaching a chaotic or evil shift, the player does wichever action(s)that are lawful or good and shifts his alignment back to a safe position in the LG axis.There are several possible mechanisms to prevent this;
1: Make game actions which move the character towards 'lawful' and/or 'good' uncommon.
2: Make the degree of movement partially dependent on current alignment. So, committing ONE 'evil' act while at the pinnacle of 'good' might then require a dozen 'good' acts to get back to the prior standing.
3: Incorporate time as a factor. You not only have to perform 'lawful' / 'good' acts to recover your standing, but you have to NOT perform any 'chaotic' / 'evil' acts for some number of days. If this factor grew over the life of the character then it would take longer and longer to 'recover' from doing evil.
4: Various combinations of the above.
It should be possible for an 'evil' character to repent and eventually make their way to a 'good' alignment, but it should take a long time and be seriously set back by any 'backsliding'. Likewise, a good character should not be able to remain 'good' while regularly committing 'evil' acts.
You have a bunch of good ideas here.
However (unless the champion flag come to solve it) the problem of proactive fighters of evil in need of keep their good alignment (the basic purpose of several chartered companies) is in jeopardy. If you make redemption too easy you have abuse, if you make it too dificult you have unbalance towards evil, sacrificing a very valid RP possibility, that is the active fight of evil forces. One can argue you could do it by declaring war. But how will a company declare war against an idividual or a group of individuals that band together to do evil acts, without formal organization affiliation, and no war can be formally declared to stop them?
We have a paradox here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It should be possible for an 'evil' character to repent and eventually make their way to a 'good' alignment, but it should take a long time and be seriously set back by any 'backsliding'. Likewise, a good character should not be able to remain 'good' while regularly committing 'evil' acts.
I think it should eventually be impossible for an Evil character to become "Good" if they've repeatedly "fallen" from Good once they attained it. In other words, if they're just "grinding Good" as a means of perpetrating more Evil.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It should be possible for an 'evil' character to repent and eventually make their way to a 'good' alignment, but it should take a long time and be seriously set back by any 'backsliding'. Likewise, a good character should not be able to remain 'good' while regularly committing 'evil' acts.I think it should eventually be impossible for an Evil character to become "Good" if they've repeatedly "fallen" from Good once they attained it. In other words, if they're just "grinding Good" as a means of perpetrating more Evil.
I am forced to disagree, Nihimon.
I understand, I believe, what you are trying to prevent and I support that objective, but I further think it is to the detriment of the game in the long term to make it impossible for a character to convert alignment.
If I have been playing Neutral Good for my character's entire career, possibly a decade of the same alignment lets say, if I feel like moving to the dark side I should be able to do so somehow. It may not be easy, it may be very difficult. But it should be possible.
You have a bunch of good ideas here.
However (unless the champion flag come to solve it) the problem of proactive fighters of evil in need of keep their good alignment (the basic purpose of several chartered companies) is in jeopardy. If you make redemption too easy you have abuse, if you make it too dificult you have unbalance towards evil, sacrificing a very valid RP possibility, that is the active fight of evil forces. One can argue you could do it by declaring war. But how will a company declare war against an idividual or a group of individuals that band together to do evil acts, without formal organization affiliation, and no war can be formally declared to stop them?
We have a paradox here.
I hope that today's blog will shed some light on these issues. Despite the one very specialized situation that we've heard about recently, I doubt that proactive fighters of evil will have much trouble finding ways to combat evil while still remaining good. I have every confidence that GW can, and will adjust the duration of flags, the ease or difficulty of repentance and whatever other applicable factors might apply to ensure that good characters won't be unduly punished when assisting others to prevent evil characters from using game mechanics to allow them an unfair advantage in the struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil.
There have been a number of good suggestions on how to tailor the method that good characters use to cover from a mistaken evil deed, I council patience. Lets wait and see what the Devs come up with, I doubt we will be disappointed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I have been playing Neutral Good for my character's entire career, possibly a decade of the same alignment lets say, if I feel like moving to the dark side I should be able to do so somehow.
Nothing I said would stop that.
And note that I didn't say that "being Evil for a long time" should be what stops you from becoming Good. I said "repeatedly becoming Good and then going back to Evil" is what should eventually stop you from becoming Good again.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I have been playing Neutral Good for my character's entire career, possibly a decade of the same alignment lets say, if I feel like moving to the dark side I should be able to do so somehow.Nothing I said would stop that.
And note that I didn't say that "being Evil for a long time" should be what stops you from becoming Good. I said "repeatedly becoming Good and then going back to Evil" is what should eventually stop you from becoming Good again.
So what about someone playing both sides to be neutral, who occasionally drifts across the line one way or the other?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Dario, thanks, I wasn't seeing that.
First, I fully expect the devs not to permanently block access to anything to any character, including alignment.
Beyond that, I have a personal distaste for a vision of Good that requires Good to be blind to the very real Evil of Wolves in Sheep's Clothing, and I don't want to be bound to that vision of Good in a Role-Playing game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Beyond that, I have a personal distaste for a vision of Good that requires Good to be blind to the very real Evil of Wolves in Sheep's Clothing, and I don't want to be bound to that vision of Good in a Role-Playing game.
The problem is, all the proposed solutions involve giving Good FFA access to kill someone who's evil whenever, just for being evil. How do you distinguish a group walking down the road from one patroling looking for a caravan to ambush? How do you distingish an individual showing his sword to a newbie because the newbie wants to see what cool, high end gear looks like from one who's drawing his sword to gank the newbie? Yes, there is the case of the character standing in the town square screaming about how he's going to burn down the orphanage and raise the children as his undead minions. He could be evil and fully intending to carry out his declarations. Or he could be the homeless town drunk who has had a bit too much moonshine. Punishing people for crimes they haven't committed, based on nothing but your quick read of a situation is not a Good trait. This isn't Minority Report.
The real problem that people are trying to deal with is someone who has comitted punishable acts in the past, but their flags have lapsed. Which is a valid concern, but not one we can address until we have more information about how flags like Criminal or Champion will work. It's already been stated that getting Criminal repeatedly can make the flag permanent. And at some point, you may just have to accept that it's enough of an edge case that some people will get away with things. Sometimes the bad guys win.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem is, all the proposed solutions involve giving Good FFA access to kill someone who's evil whenever, just for being evil.
I never proposed that, and specifically tried to be clear that I was generally supportive of the devs' general plan. I have repeatedly pointed out that I understand that Good can't just attack Evil anywhere it sees it. So please try not to let other people's suggestions color your response to mine.
How do you distinguish...
I cut off the rest of the quote because it meandered off into a subject that I have specifically avoided, but I wanted to address it with respect to my particular proposal.
I think that "repeatedly becoming Good then becoming Evil again" is a pretty bright-line distinction. I don't expect you'll be able to become "Good" without devoting yourself to the attempt. I could be wrong, but I'm working on that assumption now since the devs have repeatedly said that staying Good would be difficult.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Alright, if we have to live with this sort of Alignment system here is an idea...
"A claim of Protection" - Claims of Protection can be placed on individuals or upon structures/camps and may be held by individuals or by Chartered Companies.
When a target which is under protection is attacked. The attackers IMMEDIATELY gain a hostile flag (and get put on the Protectors Enemy list). The hostile flag lasts even after the Attacker flag wears off. It allows the Protectors to attack those who are flagged hostile without being flagged as Attackers themselves. The Hostile flag persists for upto 2 weeks, regardless of whether those under it have been killed. Those who are flagged Hostile, however, may remove it early by paying a FINE which goes directly to to the VICTEM of thier origional attack. The severity of the FINE is increased if the victem was killed in the attack and increases to the value of goods lost by the victem if they were looted as a result of the attack. The Protector(s) recieve no financial reward, unless arranged for privately by those under protection.
Claims of Protection are visable upon inspection of Protected targets.
Essentialy it's like a Bounty but it's Proactive in that it's placed upon targets BEFORE they are attacked (rather then requiring the victem to go all the way back to civilization and do something after the fact).
Doesn't require money on the part of the victem and can be held by Chartered Companies and can be placed on structures/camps as well. It lasts MUCH longer but it can be IMMEDIATELY removed by the perpetrator by paying financial restitution to the victem of thier attack. Unlike Bounties, it's not something which the Protector benefits from financialy...at least directly.
The result is here that villians may be able to get away with attacking someone ONCE but they won't be able to repeat the offence again often...even in uncontroled territory....and there is no burden placed on the victem of the attack to make thier way back to freindly territory and then come up with the funds for a Bounty.
Would be villians are proactively warned that the hammer is going to fall upon them if they strike this individual...and they can't play go hide in the woods and wait a few minutes for things to go away before hitting the next poor sap.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@GrumpyMel If you are running all over as fast as you can plopping down resource-harvesting installations, asserting they are under your protection, and then running off to leave them untended such that they clear cut forests, produce mountains of mining schist, polluting the water and, by the way, remove resource production away from anyone else who wants to mine or engage in productive forestry, then someone is going to have to clear your harvester spam blight. That service shouldn't give you a two week license to kill them.
Make it one claim of protection at a time. I'd prefer, personally, that you simply had to be there to defend your property but I don't think I'd be fair asking for that because you have to log off sometime.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that "repeatedly becoming Good then becoming Evil again" is a pretty bright-line distinction. I don't expect you'll be able to become "Good" without devoting yourself to the attempt. I could be wrong, but I'm working on that assumption now since the devs have repeatedly said that staying Good would be difficult.
This doesn't actually do anything but shift where the lines are, though. It means that instead of waiting til I fall into the depths of evil to climb back out, I just have to start grinding my alignment back up while I'm still a just high enough to be neutral.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Dario, I appreciate your comments, but I'm hesitant to get drawn into a long back and forth about this. I generally think it's a bad thing when a couple of people are dominating a thread for page after page as they continually try to "clarify" their position.
From my perspective - and this is something I've posted about extensively in other threads - I think that someone's 1,000th Evil Act should have a much larger impact than their 10th. If someone is repeatedly becoming Good-Aligned and then doing Evil, by the time my suggestion actually kicks in, I would hope a single Evil Act would put them well back across the line to Evil.
I'm going to leave it at that.
From my perspective - and this is something I've posted about extensively in other threads - I think that someone's 1,000th Evil Act should have a much larger impact than their 10th. If someone is repeatedly becoming Good-Aligned and then doing Evil, by the time my suggestion actually kicks in, I would hope a single Evil Act would put them well back across the line to Evil.
I'm going to leave it at that.
I support this as a method to curb outright gaming of the alignment system. It's not a cure all but I think it would help. We need to allow a way for a good character to recover from a accidental evil or chaotic act, while preventing people from using a repentance mechanism to act evil yet maintain a good alignment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@GrumpyMel If you are running all over as fast as you can plopping down resource-harvesting installations, asserting they are under your protection, and then running off to leave them untended such that they clear cut forests, produce mountains of mining schist, polluting the water and, by the way, remove resource production away from anyone else who wants to mine or engage in productive forestry, then someone is going to have to clear your harvester spam blight. That service shouldn't give you a two week license to kill them.
Make it one claim of protection at a time. I'd prefer, personally, that you simply had to be there to defend your property but I don't think I'd be fair asking for that because you have to log off sometime.
So effectively you are limiting each non-evil person to only one resource camp at a time? With ZERO options for defending, seeking recompense or imposing any consequence upon those who would destroy any of thier camps beyond that.
Is that your design intent? Fine if it is, but it doesn't sound much for the competition of resources aspect of the game. Although, I suppose CE individuals will be unhindered in that regard.
What other aspects of the game would you like to minimize LG characters ability to participate in?
Perhaps we should impose an Alignment shift penalty on them for attacking and killing Evil NPC's afterall? I think that would just about do it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For the issue of 'good characters killing evil characters' my preference would be for that to be either a neutral or evil act. If the 'good' character is unambiguously the aggressor killing an evil character who wasn't doing anything 'wrong' then it is murder and the good character should take an alignment hit. Otherwise, in the many cases where the code will not be able to determine who is in the right it ought to have no impact on alignment.
Your 'good' rogue sneaks up and backstabs an evil old man feeding pigeons in the park? Evil act. Your good character comes upon an ongoing melee and jumps in and kills an evil opponent without knowing 'who started it'? Neutral act.
Yes, there could also be times when killing an evil character should logically be a 'good' act, but that can be difficult for a computer program to identify.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For the issue of 'good characters killing evil characters' my preference would be for that to be either a neutral or evil act. If the 'good' character is unambiguously the aggressor killing an evil character who wasn't doing anything 'wrong' then it is murder and the good character should take an alignment hit. Otherwise, in the many cases where the code will not be able to determine who is in the right it ought to have no impact on alignment.
Your 'good' rogue sneaks up and backstabs an evil old man feeding pigeons in the park? Evil act. Your good character comes upon an ongoing melee and jumps in and kills an evil opponent without knowing 'who started it'? Neutral act.
Yes, there could also be times when killing an evil character should logically be a 'good' act, but that can be difficult for a computer program to identify.
So effectively "Evil" characters get rewarded with the Alignment shifts towards the aligment they want to play when participating in PvP as the agressor and are not penalized when acting as the Defender.
Good characters get penalized when acting as the agressor and recieve no rewards as the Defender?
At the very least Lawfull characters should get a Lawfull shift when defeating someone with the CRIMINAL tag and Good characters a Good shift when defeating a character with the HEINOUS flag....
and probably deserve a Good shift when defeating an Evil ATTACKER, especialy if the Good character was not an origional party to the combat (i.e. came in and SAVED someone from murder).
But who cares about fairness or logic...PFO seems more about finding ways to minimize the participation of Good characters, especialy LG characters.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
At the very least Lawfull characters should get a Lawfull shift when defeating someone with the CRIMINAL tag and Good characters a Good shift when defeating a character with the HEINOUS flag....
and probably deserve a Good shift when defeating an Evil ATTACKER, especialy if the Good character was not an origional party to the combat (i.e. came in and SAVED someone from murder).
I actually think these are good suggestions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
So effectively you are limiting each non-evil person to only one resource camp at a time?
The effect of your suggestion is that a player should be able to occupy all resource nodes with their harvesters and if anyone else wants to harvest resources they are either out of luck or they have to suffer your 'protection' racket's license to kill with impunity for two weeks.
Or, your gang can run around confronting resource harvesters offering to 'protect' their property. If they don't pay up then you tip off your buddies over in CE to target these individuals until they comply, then you give the CE 'enforcers' a cut of the profits.
Really sweet job if you can get it, Capone.
Also didn't say anything about alignment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
So effectively you are limiting each non-evil person to only one resource camp at a time?The effect of your suggestion is that a player should be able to occupy all resource nodes with their harvesters and if anyone else wants to harvest resources they are either out of luck or they have to suffer your 'protection' racket's license to kill with impunity for two weeks.
Or, your gang can run around confronting resource harvesters offering to 'protect' their property. If they don't pay up then you tip off your buddies over in CE to target these individuals until they comply, then you give the CE 'enforcers' a cut of the profits.
Really sweet job if you can get it, Capone.
Also didn't say anything about alignment.
Could be done anyway as long as the enforcers are CE. CE suffers no penalty from killing anyone any time they like...as they WANT CE alignment shifts (or at least they have nothing further to lose from it). Good however has nothing they can do about attacks on thier resources unless they want Alignment shifts. Bounties aren't a possibility since bounties only apply when an individual is killed not a resource destroyed. Ditto for death curses. In fact, I'm even making a big assumption that the ATTACKER flag applies to attacking a resource. GW hasn't even come out and said that so far, so you could potentialy come out and destroy a good persons resource right in front of thier face and there would be nothing they could do about it without shifting CE.
Bottom line CE is free to use force to destroy others resources any time they like and use threat of force as a deterrent to prevent thier own resources get destroyed. LG is unable to do either and has no means of protecting thier resources short of MAYBE sitting on top of one 24/7/365.
If I'm wrong tell me exactly how LG can protect thier own resources or compete for resources?
Under the proposed system, at least Evil either takes on some risk or pays some economic cost (FINE) to destroy LG's camps. Remember LG already had to sink a pretty significant economic investment to build the camps in the first place.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I actually think these are good suggestions.At the very least Lawfull characters should get a Lawfull shift when defeating someone with the CRIMINAL tag and Good characters a Good shift when defeating a character with the HEINOUS flag....
and probably deserve a Good shift when defeating an Evil ATTACKER, especialy if the Good character was not an origional party to the combat (i.e. came in and SAVED someone from murder).
Agree, curious what the devs think of this. IE evil/chaos get their alignment shift (if they want to become those things) from proactively attacking. But Lawful/Good don't have the equivalent option of proactively doing that. "Or do they?" *conspiratory voice*.
Is that the price to pay for being good/lawful?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I actually think these are good suggestions.At the very least Lawfull characters should get a Lawfull shift when defeating someone with the CRIMINAL tag and Good characters a Good shift when defeating a character with the HEINOUS flag....
and probably deserve a Good shift when defeating an Evil ATTACKER, especialy if the Good character was not an origional party to the combat (i.e. came in and SAVED someone from murder).
Agree, curious what the devs think of this. IE evil/chaos get their alignment shift (if they want to become those things) from proactively attacking. But Lawful/Good don't have the equivalent option of proactively doing that. "Or do they?" *conspiratory voice*.
Is that the price to pay for being good/lawful?
Heck forget Proactively Avena...at this point Good doesn't get a favorable Alignment shift from REACTIVELY defending/saving someone that's been attacked.
...
So effectively you are limiting each non-evil person to only one resource camp at a time?The effect of your suggestion is that a player should be able to occupy all resource nodes with their harvesters and if anyone else wants to harvest resources they are either out of luck or they have to suffer your 'protection' racket's license to kill with impunity for two weeks.
Or, your gang can run around confronting resource harvesters offering to 'protect' their property. If they don't pay up then you tip off your buddies over in CE to target these individuals until they comply, then you give the CE 'enforcers' a cut of the profits.
Really sweet job if you can get it, Capone.
Also didn't say anything about alignment.
Could be done anyway as long as the enforcers are CE. CE suffers no penalty from killing anyone any time they like...as they WANT CE alignment shifts (or at least they have nothing further to lose from it). Good however has nothing they can do about attacks on thier resources unless they want Alignment shifts. Bounties aren't a possibility since bounties only apply when an individual is killed not a resource destroyed. Ditto for death curses. In fact, I'm even making a big assumption that the ATTACKER flag applies to attacking a resource. GW hasn't even come out and said that so far, so you could potentialy come out and destroy a good persons resource right in front of thier face and there would be nothing they could do about it without shifting CE.
Bottom line CE is free to use force to destroy others resources any time they like and use threat of force as a deterrent to prevent thier own resources get destroyed. LG is unable to do either and has no means of protecting thier resources short of MAYBE sitting on top of one 24/7/365.
If I'm wrong tell me exactly how LG can protect thier own resources or compete for resources?
Under the proposed system, at least Evil either takes on some risk or pays some economic cost (FINE)...
Nihimon's idea for a challenge command, or a trespasser command would work here. Basically it would allow someone to issue a command saying "leave this area or else" and if they didn't leave, there wouldn't be any (or not as severe) flags or hits for the fight that would ensue. It would work if someone was in your resource area and wouldn't leave, nor attack.
That's the only thing I've heard of that would help in this situation. I do agree that something should be in place to allow good character to protect a resource.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Could be done anyway as long as the enforcers are CE....
So effectively you are limiting each non-evil person to only one resource camp at a time?The effect of your suggestion is that a player should be able to occupy all resource nodes with their harvesters and if anyone else wants to harvest resources they are either out of luck or they have to suffer your 'protection' racket's license to kill with impunity for two weeks.
Or, your gang can run around confronting resource harvesters offering to 'protect' their property. If they don't pay up then you tip off your buddies over in CE to target these individuals until they comply, then you give the CE 'enforcers' a cut of the profits.
Really sweet job if you can get it, Capone.
Also didn't say anything about alignment.
True. But if the CE are putting a 'protection' marker on their harvesters all around your settlement then you will be much SOL trying to gather resources to arm your people unless you choose to go out and destroy their property.
CE suffers no penalty from killing anyone any time they like...as they WANT CE alignment shifts (or at least they have nothing further to lose from it).
Other than lowering their reputation, true.
Good however has nothing they can do about attacks on thier resources unless they want Alignment shifts.
Depends. If they have to eliminate you to reach your harvester then they will get the attacker flag and you can try and kill them. Of course if you aren't there then, yep, you wouldn't be able to defend your property without help of some kind... maybe hired PC guards?
Bounties aren't a possibility since bounties only apply when an individual is killed not a resource destroyed. Ditto for death curses. In fact, I'm even making a big assumption that the ATTACKER flag applies to attacking a resource. GW hasn't even come out and said that so far, so you could potentialy come out and destroy a good persons resource right in front of thier face and there would be nothing they could do about it without shifting CE.
They probably haven't firmed up their position enough to say yet, Mel. I would recommend that if my Druid wants to destroy an untended harvesting operation then he should get a temporary 'vandal' flag similar to an attacker flag. Possibly an alignment hit toward chaotic.
Bottom line CE is free to use force to destroy others resources any time they like and use threat of force as a deterrent to prevent thier own resources get destroyed. LG is unable to do either and has no means of protecting thier resources short of MAYBE sitting on top of one 24/7/365.
If you are a merchant prince sitting in Safetown maybe you should have to hire some player characters to perform guard duty, contributing more to the economy and providing a content opportunity for other players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Being,
All the Protection mechanic would do is allow LG characters some capacity to FIGHT BACK against agressors that have attacked persons or property under thier protection without placing an additional burden on the VICTEMS of said agression.
Is LG not supposed to be able to fight back against agressors without asking for pay in return according to your schema of what LG should be?
The agressor can very easly avoid conflict if they wish by simply making restitution to the victem.
If the Merchant Prince wanted to, he could already hire CE thugs to kill you infinitely for messing with his resources. They won't care about the Alignment hits or reputation hits because they are already as low on that scale as they can get.
This allows the relatively poor character. One that can't afford to hire thugs all day a venue for detering attackers from making them a victem.
That sort of character will probably even have problems scraping up enough coin for 1 resource camp let alone two.
Anyone with lots of cash and a willingness to deal with disreputable characters ALREADY has the capacity to have anyone attacked anywhere, any time they like, as often as they like.
Why would CE even bother putting a protection marker on anything? It gains them nothing. They are already free to do everything it would allow without any penalty or hinderence. At best it would be an advertisement for them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yet without limitation your protection mechanic is exploitable: I can accept you don't intend it to be and only intend for it to help LG, but if a team of players can run a coordinated, reasonably well funded operation your mechanism would allow them to lock up all resource nodes within practical range, thus denying resources to others. Without your 'protection' scheme they could take some of those back. With your protection scheme it also lays on them what amounts to a kill-on-sight license.
If you limit the number of 'protection' sites per player that potential exploit is ameliorated and would also regulate the potential for 'protection' racket schemes.
Could the protection mechanic be altered in a way that prevents abuse from being possible? I've no ideas on how that could be done, but it's worth considering. It's a good idea IMO if it could be managed without abuse.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, I'm trying to see how it is any more powerfull or would allow anyone to do anything that a CE organization couldn't already do without protection.
Honestly I'm less concerned about being able to protect multiple resource nodes then being able to protect multiple individuals.
With the resource node thing ALOT kind of depends on how many are expected in order to run a reasonable crafting operation for an individual crafter. The protection at least needs to scale with that. If that's one at a time fine...if that's 10 then it needs to be 10. Whatever it takes to be a full time crafter and not starve is where it needs to be at.
Note also that a target flagged by Protection can remove it at any time they wish by paying a simple fine back to the victem of the take. Given that it likely takes a significant economic investment to build an individual camp in the first place...an investiment that is destroyed with the camp...I'm not seeing how asking an attacker to reimburse part of that investment or face consequences is overly exploitive.
I read what Being as saying is essentialy that anyone with a vast amount of wealth and a powerfull and highly organized support team can monopolize an area. That strikes me as pretty much a non-sequitar. It doesn't really seem exploitive as pretty much in keeping with how the game was designed. This simply allows characters who aren't CE some participation in that.
I'm still waiting to here how CE characters couldn't do exactly the same thing now without Protection. Is that an exploit? If not why?