1st Vid-FAQ

[Elorebaen]

<<Did not see a specific thread to comment, so made this one.>>
Thank you for the responses.

I like the way in which you are incorporating meaningfulness into alignment decisions. This is one aspect that has me really excited and I hope you stick to your guns on this one.

I find it interesting how a barbarian who may want to join a LG guild will need to be strategic about the decisions he/she makes, and may end up needing to join another alliance in order to train barbarian skills. These sort of scenarios based on meaningful choices have me excited.

[Mbando]

I'm a little bummed in an immediate, personal sense, in that our settlement can't support a wide range of roles. That being said, I can see why you might want to make settlements have to be interdependent, or at least make trade-off choices.

One implication of this I think is that it gives settlements at the corners a comparative benefit. That is, I think the NG settlement will have an absolute advantage in that they can have a broader/bigger base: members and training facilities for both paladins and barbarians. But as we get higher up the settlement complexity index (forget the name for that), my guess would be that "pure" settlements will be the only ones who can build higher end buildings, the ones with celestial or elemental beings guarding it. So if you want to be a high skill paladin you'll have to train at a LG settlement, and if you want to train in the finer points of being a barbarian, you'll need to be allied with a chaotic settlement.

[Vendis]

I think you have the right of it, Mbando. Meaningful choices is pretty much PFO in a nutshell, and there should be no settlement alignment that is the best. There should just be varied effects that are not easy to compare.

[Rafkin]

I never liked the idea of trainers. If there are a dozen highly skilled masters of their crafts standing around town then why aren't they saving the town instead of us scrubs?

[Marthian]

Rafkin wrote:

I never liked the idea of trainers. If there are a dozen highly skilled masters of their crafts standing around town then why aren't they saving the town instead of us scrubs?

retirement comes to mind and raising the next generation.

[Zidash]

I'd like to request subtitles in the future xD

[Areks]

Mbando wrote:

I'm a little bummed in an immediate, personal sense, in that our settlement can't support a wide range of roles. That being said, I can see why you might want to make settlements have to be interdependent, or at least make trade-off choices.

While your settlement may not be able to support a wide variety of roles, a Kingdom should. Hence not all settlements have the same things within them, requiring some folks to travel and along with that comes other encounters and discoveries.

[Drakhan Valane]

As I understand it, A kingdom can have settlements a step away, and each settlement can have characters a step away in alignment. So!

Kingdom: LG
Settlements supported: LG, NG, LN
Characters supported: LG, NG, CG, LN, TN, LE

So with your LG kingdom, you could have CG characters in a NG settlement and LE characters in LN settlements. In theory you could have:

Kingdom: TN
Settlements supported: NG, LN, TN, CN, NE
Characters supported: All

There was some dev talk about disallowing TN Settlements and Kingdoms, but it was a while back, so maybe it has changed.

[Valandur]

Is this a new vid? Or one that's been out for a while?

[Drakhan Valane]

New as of a couple days ago.

[Valandur]

Drakhan Valane wrote:

New as of a couple days ago.

Where is it posted?

[Drakhan Valane]

Kickstarter main page just before the "What is Pathfinder Online?" image/heading.

[Valinar]

Front page of the Kickstarter.

[Valandur]

Cool that they are answering questions.

I like the alignment variance between settlements and who can be a part of them. Well thought out.

[leperkhaun]

at first i didnt like it. However the more i thought about it the more it makes sense. It can provide for a wide variety of settlement types and more importantly allow for a wide variety of different people in a player nation.

[Valandur]

leperkhaun wrote:

at first i didnt like it. However the more i thought about it the more it makes sense. It can provide for a wide variety of settlement types and more importantly allow for a wide variety of different people in a player nation.

And I "think" it'll prevent someone from being able to just attack another player just because one is good and one is evil. It prevents a lot of problems and really opens up the possibility for all kinds of things to happen.