There has been indication it could be unlimited though.The severity of your criminal act will affect the length of the time you will be flagged as a criminal. Repeat offenses while already flagged will have additive effects. It is entirely possible that one may become so notorious that they are permanently flagged as a criminal.
Right, so anybody interested to not be permanently flagged will just wait until the first flag runs out, then subsequent ones don't compound the flagging and escalate it to permanent.
Bounties are only availble if the victem posts a bounty to a mailbox (in civilization). You are selected as an individual eligable to pick up the bounty. You are physicaly there at the mailbox and pickup the bounty. The bounties automatic timer has not automaticaly worn out....and of course most importantly, the victem has the mimimum funds available to post a bounty. Which is why these particular type of Evil griefers will probably concentrate on new characters who are known to be poor as victems for thier ploy.
I've not heard if this is possible, but I would think a bounty could be set so that anyone of a certain alignment could accept the bounty. I also don't know if a bounty could be set to where members of a certain settlement can accept and carry out the bounty, I don't see why it can't be set up that way.though.
I got to thinking, the "stand and deliver" command that Buddwolf brought up in the thread on bandits. Couldn't some command like that be used? One where when issued the other player must either agree to fight, or vacate the area. Would that be acceptable?
@ Lord Daeron : While I am aware I can still do the PVP and the alignement shift that is not what worries me. It is the fact that I am being flagged via the anti griefing mechanism at all and therefore presumably could be judged a griefer by a gm and have my account shut down.
alignment consequences of PVPing is not related to griefing.
those things that have alignment/reputation consequences have them because GW EXPEECTS them to occur, and don't have any problem with that occuring, they just say you will be flagged/given certain alignments when you do that.GM intervention against griefing is not about responding to characters whose actions have given them chaotic, evil alignments and low rep. those are supposed to be part of the game. it's more about anybody who tries to cheat the game with exploits, or just harass specific players beyond what is any reasonable value to their own Chaotic Evil character. none of the stuff you mentioned seems to cross any lines there, although some would be evil and/or chaotic.
In game, that would mean If Andius recognized the legitimacy of the Duchy of McCoolville then his forces would be acting unlawfuly when breaking thier laws in thier territory..short of a declared state of War. However, his forces wouldn't be acting unlawfuly when violating the laws of the Barony of Goonistan if Andius didn't recognize that government as legitimate...though Andius, himself MIGHT be acting Chaoticly for refusing to do so.
And in-game, it doesn't matter whether your kingdom 'recognizes' another kingdom, all kingdoms are automatically recognized by the game itself, and the game automatically tracks alignment according to the relevant rules.
The last I heard, the current plan was for alignment to be undetectable without magical aid (Detect Evil/Good/Law/Chaos) or the like.The what is all the fuss about? Or are there actually wanna be Pallys out there who plan on using detect evil on everybody they come across and hacking their heads off?
Detect Evil is a low level spell. It should be routinely available to anybody who wants to.
I'm not sure why that's controversial, unless for some reason you only want to consider mundane non-magical classes in a magical fantasy game?
Goblin Squad Member
|
You know an easier solution to this would be to let Paladins take bounties and tithe the reward back into their settlement. The bounty is in essences someone wanting something done about being harmed. A paladin would totally do this... and not want to get paid. That covers "light" evil.
For heavy evil, I suggest "enemy of *insert deity*" and "enemy of *insert settlement/kingdom*". Have criteria so that "light" evil (those that find themselves MUCH closer to neutral than absolute evil, are excluded because those aren't the "big fish" in the evil pond. These could fall right in line with the already established "flag" system.
This would of course translate over to the side of good as well. Evil would get a small boon, equivalent in effect to an alignment shift, for killing those really Good Good guys for the sake of balance.
These flags would be fairly significant in duration. A settlement would have the ability to flag one to three characters while a kingdom could flag 5 to 10 characters. Once a player kills a flagged enemy, they receive something from the settlement/kingdom and that enemy couldn't be flagged again in that manner until the others are eliminated as well AND the original enemy commits another offense against the settlement / kingdom. Justice is being extracted on those REALLY evil guys.
Another possibility is allowing the sharing of the enemy list among the CC. No alignment shift for killing someone who has wronged your friends.
I think we have all moved past the "ganking evil because it's evil and I'm good" stage. Killing in self-defense isn't evil, killing a criminal in your jurisdiction isn't chaotic.
I think the answer here isn't new "special" archetype modifications, but further expansion and use of the flagging system and enemy list. We'll see how those flesh out though.
Sorry dude, but no DM worth a grain of salt would allow Pallys to randomly detect evil on everything they see and then proceed to hack their heads off wherever and whenever. That is not a Dungeons and Dragons Paladin. Never was, never will be.
Well, it would probably be Un-Lawful in either the Cosmic sense or in the Law of the Land sense.
But in a real game, there is a vaste range of subtleties the GM can use to determine Alignment, including intent.In PFO, Alignment is totally automatically adjudicated. Death isn't even real, everything is just efficiency in economic transactions.
Everything already is reduced to a game of rules and so on, so to insist that in this one area,
that people cannot act based upon flags/categories/rules seems a bit off.
Evil in PFO is not going to be triggered by the vast range of subtleties that it could in a real tabletop game,
so far it is triggered by murder, necromancy, and slavery... So attacking somebody 'for being Evil'
is not different than if the flags for those 'crimes' simply never wore off...
And as far as I can tell, there is no objective reason for flags to persist any specific amount of time,
so if you take PFO's stated/planned flag duration for those, and add 10 seconds, what is the difference in Good/Evil terms? Not much.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Personally I think alignments should be hidden but they should still apply. So we can use our own methods for determining alignment. If our method is effective and we only end up killing evil players then no alignment loss for us. If it is ineffective and we are slaughtering a bunch of good and neutral players thinking they are evil then we take the same hit anyone else would.
Sorry dude, but no DM worth a grain of salt would allow Pallys to randomly detect evil on everything they see and then proceed to hack their heads off wherever and whenever. That is not a Dungeons and Dragons Paladin. Never was, never will be.
Paladin is Superman or Sir Percival. That's Judge Dredd, at best.
If your ideal is Archangel Michael, well yes, but only when facing the truly demonic or fiendish. Bull in a china shop fiery vengeance is not how a paladin works within the confines of civilization.
Or the DM gives a good NPC/PC a magic item that obfuscates their alignment and if the pally whacks them, smile merrily as they irrevocably lose their paladinhood for the rest of their natural life.
Wrong! For the purpose of this game, the 7 PC races are essentially "at war" with Orcs, Goblins, and the evil races. That is why we can kill them just like any other faction we are at war with.
Not quite true. Paizo has published adventures where you are supposed to non-violently cooperate with Goblins and escort them to the destination, as business partners basically. Literally, there is no stated exception to Alignment adjudications for violence against certain races. There are plenty of "PC races" which may be at war with each other at any one point, they aren't exempted either.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The what is all the fuss about? Or are there actually wanna be Pallys out there who plan on using detect evil on everybody they come across and hacking their heads off?
Not that I know of, but there are folks that want to be able to go after specific players that are evil. So "the swarthy guy in the corner" isn't a relevant example. A relevant example would be "Dauthon, a black-hearted assassin who has assassinated three leaders in the League of Iomedae."
Maybe the alignment hit to go after them is so small it's manageable within the whole of the game for paladins. Maybe declaring war on the settlement affects alignment in a way that is manageable. Not sure, so I'm hoping for more info from GW on this.
This is one of my annoyances with MMOs and playing stealth characters. 'Dauthon' ir the most elite and skillful assassin in the land...yet everyone knows him and who he has killed. No point using stealth or disguise (other than to sneak up on marks) as you have a giant flag or list telling everyone what you have done. May as well be a fighter that is even better at killing people that a rogue.
This is not a dig at you Mbando...just a rant on how I (and others I would assume) cannot play the iconic stealth/anonymous archetype.
It has been hinted that players might be able to get *Marshal* like abilities.
Yes, there seems to be no fundamental lack in being able to kill in a Lawful manner.
It's the Good that isn't Lawful that is the problem, i.e. Good NOT subsumed to Law... CG Robin Hood style Banditry.|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The last I heard, the current plan was for alignment to be undetectable without magical aid (Detect Evil/Good/Law/Chaos) or the like.The what is all the fuss about? Or are there actually wanna be Pallys out there who plan on using detect evil on everybody they come across and hacking their heads off?Detect Evil is a low level spell. It should be routinely available to anybody who wants to.
I'm not sure why that's controversial, unless for some reason you only want to consider mundane non-magical classes in a magical fantasy game?
It could simply be that casting detect alignment is seen as rude and a little anti-social. People are free to do it, but others may shun them for it - if people roleplay that is.
I see casting detect alignment on random strangers like walking up to them and asking 'Do you stomp on puppies or pick flowers for the orphans?'.
The death curse and the bounty system definately should still be in place against Characters, even Champions that act agressively in PvP. It might be reasonable to maintain reputation hits as well, if not then certainly some other mechanism might be warranted. Good characters should still take Alignment hits (pretty significant ones) for acting agressively against Good or Neutral Characters. I also wouldn't make Detect Alignment fool-proof. I'd make it a learnable skill, counterable by another learnable skill on the target (disguise maybe). Which means if the Good character were going around willy-nilly and attacking characters he believed to be Evil without provocation...he would be taking pretty significant Alignment hits as he WOULD, inevitably hit neutrals and goods by mistake some times...and those would be costly hits.
Right... And remember, there is also the Reputation axis, not any less central than Alignment.
(perhaps less important for some things, but more important for others)Some actions may well be OK to pursue while being Good/Lawful/whatever, but inact a Reputation hit.
Proactive (unprovoked) aggression against 'lower level' characters, or whose Evil/Chaos/etc isn't very 'strong' may be Low-Rep inducing.
ONLY seeking out and going after people you've never interacted with or fought with may be Low-Rep inducing. Etc.
Why would good or neutral players want to disguise their alignment as a matter of course, which could cause other good players to accidentally attack them? I would think it would only be of help for evil characters to avoid being attacked (or *very* occasionally for a neutral or good character to infiltrate an evil area)
Infiltrating Evil groups? 8-O But yeah, probably MORE used by Evil characters. So what?
That would mean that the skills to DISCERN/SEE THRU Disguises are more used by Good types. So what?
Edit: In fact, if said griefers were really smart they'd start out as LG characters themselves to maximize the alignment hit to good characters when they retaliated. However I expect most would be too drawn by the "I'm cool, I want to wear black and be EVIL" factor to do that or too i'll disciplined to remain LG for long.
Newbie players are expected to hang out in the 'high security' areas and areas patrolled by NPC Marshalls, etc. Any murders or crime in this area will have harsh repurcussions that will make it not worthwhile. Starting out LG to pretend to be so wouldn't help you vs. any of that, and by having only lived in the LG area, you wouldn't have established any trading/membership in any settlements in areas where you yourself don't face massive repurcussions for doing things you like to do.
It's part of why I wanted them to drop the whole Alignment system entirely...
They're not going to drop the Alignment system because it's a Core part of the Pathfinder/Golarion game world, and they are planning civilizational-level repurcussions distinguishing between Good/Evil/Law/Chaos as well distinguishing between various (incompatable) types of divine magic, and it's entirely integrated with the Flag repurcussions for various transgressions/etc. It's not going to be dropped.
You know an easier solution to this would be to let Paladins take bounties and tithe the reward back into their settlement. The bounty is in essences someone wanting something done about being harmed. A paladin would totally do this... and not want to get paid. That covers "light" evil.
For heavy evil, I suggest "enemy of *insert deity*" and "enemy of *insert settlement/kingdom*". Have criteria so that "light" evil (those that find themselves MUCH closer to neutral than absolute evil, are excluded because those aren't the "big fish" in the evil pond. These could fall right in line with the already established "flag" system.
This would of course translate over to the side of good as well. Evil would get a small boon, equivalent in effect to an alignment shift, for killing those really Good Good guys for the sake of balance.
These flags would be fairly significant in duration. A settlement would have the ability to flag one to three characters while a kingdom could flag 5 to 10 characters. Once a player kills a flagged enemy, they receive something from the settlement/kingdom and that enemy couldn't be flagged again in that manner until the others are eliminated as well AND the original enemy commits another offense against the settlement / kingdom. Justice is being extracted on those REALLY evil guys.
Another possibility is allowing the sharing of the enemy list among the CC. No alignment shift for killing someone who has wronged your friends.
I think we have all moved past the "ganking evil because it's evil and I'm good" stage. Killing in self-defense isn't evil, killing a criminal in your jurisdiction isn't chaotic.
I think the answer here isn't new "special" archetype modifications, but further expansion and use of the flagging system and enemy list. We'll see how those flesh out though.
I like this idea. You know that at some point groups of players will go commit acts against players of other settlements or CCs, this would be a good way to deal with them as a group, and not have to worry about who can and can't collect the bounty on them etc..
I also agree that if we can add to, and use an existing system, it'll be much easier to implement then trying to come up with a new system to deal with a problem.
You know an easier solution to this would be to let Paladins take bounties and tithe the reward back into their settlement...
That doesn't sound 'easier' to me, that sounds like fiddling with details, and fiddling with details is alot more complicated that choosing the simple solution: Evil is a valid target for Good characters (it may still be Chaotic though), which is fundamentally no different than saying that Attacker/Heinous Flags never expire... Since there is no objective reason to have any specific time limit for those tags, I don't see any fundamental objection to extending those Flags to indefinite duration, or more specifically: until you change your ways enough to become Neutral (if not Good).
...other stuff..
Yeah, that sounds rather complicated, and thus not the 'easy' solution.
This is one of my annoyances with MMOs and playing stealth characters. 'Dauthon' ir the most elite and skillful assassin in the land...yet everyone knows him and who he has killed. No point using stealth or disguise (other than to sneak up on marks) as you have a giant flag or list telling everyone what you have done. May as well be a fighter that is even better at killing people that a rogue.
Huh. Well since GW has specifically stated that they envision there will be effective means of Disguise to allow Evil types to enter Good cities, enabling them to pull off Assassinations, etc, I would say that sounds like an unjustified annoyance at this time, it sounds like they will have something to address just that scenario.
It could simply be that casting detect alignment is seen as rude and a little anti-social. People are free to do it, but others may shun them for it - if people roleplay that is.
Certainly, at minimum. Definitely if they're Neutral they may well take offense ;-)
And if they're Evil, of course, seeing you Cast Detect Evil is giving them warning of what's coming,so they may well decide to flee then and there, or decide to take the advantage of first attack against you.
This would be pretty much how it works in the pen&paper game as well.
You know an easier solution to this would be to let Paladins take bounties and tithe the reward back into their settlement...That doesn't sound 'easier' to me, that sounds like fiddling with details, and fiddling with details is alot more complicated that choosing the simple solution: Evil is a valid target for Good characters (it may still be Chaotic though), which is fundamentally no different than saying that Attacker/Heinous Flags never expire... Since there is no objective reason to have any specific time limit for those tags, I don't see any fundamental objection to extending those Flags to indefinite duration, or more specifically: until you change your ways enough to become Neutral (if not Good).
...other stuff..Yeah, that sounds rather complicated, and thus not the 'easy' solution.
The problem with leaving those flags up is those characters would then be fair game for anyone who wanted to jump on them. Also it would prevent those players from entering any area where those actions are frowned upon, like say a NG settlement. Their guards would attack the PC wearing a heinous flag on sight. That limits RP opportunities as those players can't sneak into settlements if they have flags up.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I do not agree with the idea that all killing is evil. However, my main issue is that a Good player must let Evil get in the first attack or risk reputation loss.
There needs to be one of two things done:
Good needs a method to be able to attack first, without an alignment hit. If the champion flag is basically a giant glowing sign that says "I am out to kill evil, you should probably run" and negates the alignment hit, we have a solution. If not, something else needs to be done.
Option two, which I like for the flexibility it offers: readied actions. We have been told that combat will be done in 6 second rounds, with abilities consuming various amounts of action points per round. If a Good player could could "ready" their first round of actions to trigger when attacked, it negates the first strike advantage Evil inherently gets. If we are trying to create a balanced game, saying one side *always* gets to strike first is a bit imbalancing. Further, this allows caravans to be ready for bandits etc.
Thoughts, criticisms?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It could simply be that casting detect alignment is seen as rude and a little anti-social. People are free to do it, but others may shun them for it - if people roleplay that is.Certainly, at minimum. Definitely if they're Neutral they may well take offense ;-)
And if they're Evil, of course, seeing you Cast Detect Evil is giving them warning of what's coming,
so they may well decide to flee then and there, or decide to take the advantage of first attack against you.
This would be pretty much how it works in the pen&paper game as well.
Or they may just start observing the halfling tradition of carrying a lead sheet.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Option two, which I like for the flexibility it offers: readied actions. We have been told that combat will be done in 6 second rounds, with abilities consuming various amounts of action points per round. If a Good player could could "ready" their first round of actions to trigger when attacked, it negates the first strike advantage Evil inherently gets. If we are trying to create a balanced game, saying one side *always* gets to strike first is a bit imbalancing. Further, this allows caravans to be ready for bandits etc.
Thoughts, criticisms?
Yes. Definitelly a defensive command to prime the char and allow him to better deffend himself when attacked by someone he suspects will attack, is a great idea.
If you already believe someone will attack you just activate this command (that cannot stay on all the time to prevent abuse) and the first attack your enemy does will just be very less effective. Something like a defensive stance.
It would be similar to the initiative in tabletop games, if your enemy was already detected why should him get a surprise round and/or win the initiative roll?
That works very well for me.
The problem with leaving those flags up is those characters would then be fair game for anyone who wanted to jump on them. Also it would prevent those players from entering any area where those actions are frowned upon, like say a NG settlement. Their guards would attack the PC wearing a heinous flag on sight. That limits RP opportunities as those players can't sneak into settlements if they have flags up.
ok... so what? if the durations are arbitrary, what is the Good/Evil difference between 30 seconds before the flag expires, and 30 seconds afterwards? (i'm not discussing changing Law/Chaos consequences) if the flag duration can't be defended, i don't see what's so holy about it. yes, having indefinite durations (or as long as you are evil) has repurcussions, but so what?, the currently known setup just has different repurcussions for different people. linking it to evil alignment is giving a means for players to end this 'ongoing flag' if they so choose to do stuff to change their alignment.
personally, the exact dynamics of 1st round combat are a tangential detail, not the central point.
i am talking about whether good is totally subsumed to law or not,
whether that there are actions that are good but un-lawful (chaotic).
since other PVP interactions 'inhabit' all other parts of those axes, why not CG?
it's not that Attacking/Killing is always Evil: we KNOW that GW plans to have several Flags for "It's Good to Attack/Kill me". So far, all of those seem to be subsumed to LAW type justifications, which is fine. But CG is also Good, so there should be equal opportunities for "It's Good to Attack/Kill me" WITHOUT depending on LAW.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem with leaving those flags up is those characters would then be fair game for anyone who wanted to jump on them. Also it would prevent those players from entering any area where those actions are frowned upon, like say a NG settlement. Their guards would attack the PC wearing a heinous flag on sight. That limits RP opportunities as those players can't sneak into settlements if they have flags up.
No. It only applies "game on" to citizens of where the flag originated. Not all players would be able to KOS them... just members of that settlement. Hence the settlement controlling the flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
personally, the exact dynamics of 1st round combat are a tangential detail, not the central point.
i am talking about whether good is totally subsumed to law or not,
whether that there are actions that are good but un-lawful (chaotic).
since other PVP interactions 'inhabit' all other parts of those axes, why not CG?
Ryan has stated that he expects the most common good alignment to end up being CG because it will be more in line with how most people will end up playing in PvP. I don't know any specifics, but that tells me that the Law-Chaos axis is not overriding the Good-Evil axis.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem with leaving those flags up is those characters would then be fair game for anyone who wanted to jump on them. Also it would prevent those players from entering any area where those actions are frowned upon, like say a NG settlement. Their guards would attack the PC wearing a heinous flag on sight. That limits RP opportunities as those players can't sneak into settlements if they have flags up.ok... so what? if the durations are arbitrary, what is the Good/Evil difference between 30 seconds before the flag expires, and 30 seconds afterwards? (i'm not discussing changing Law/Chaos consequences) if the flag duration can't be defended, i don't see what's so holy about it. yes, having indefinite durations (or as long as you are evil) has repurcussions, but so what?, the currently known setup just has different repurcussions for different people. linking it to evil alignment is giving a means for players to end this 'ongoing flag' if they so choose to do stuff to change their alignment.
That is why it only applies to the most evil of characters and not those who are close to neutral.
Sneak mechanics haven't even been addressed yet, so let's not speculate on those ramifications.
Ryan has stated that he expects the most common good alignment to end up being CG because it will be more in line with how most people will end up playing in PvP. I don't know any specifics, but that tells me that the Law-Chaos axis is not overriding the Good-Evil axis.
yes, he's stated that, and so I see he recognizes that CG is a popular alignment.
but every single mechanic so far stated DOES subsume Good to Law, meaning CG is merely a failure of LG.I don't see how one can, with the currently known mechanics, proactively pursue CG,
except as doing the exact same things a LG type would do, or a CE type would do, and then 'atoning' for the difference.
(you can also see CG acts as something a LG character would only need to atone for the Chaotic portion of)
but i'm optimistic there will be changes, from what Lisa on the Paizo side, and other people of the GW side have said here.
No. It only applies "game on" to citizens of where the flag originated. Not all players would be able to KOS them... just members of that settlement. Hence the settlement controlling the flag.
The problem with leaving those flags up is those characters would then be fair game for anyone who wanted to jump on them. Also it would prevent those players from entering any area where those actions are frowned upon, like say a NG settlement. Their guards would attack the PC wearing a heinous flag on sight. That limits RP opportunities as those players can't sneak into settlements if they have flags up.
Ah, so a player with one of these flags could enter a different settlement and not be hassled by the NPC guards for wearing a flag? I was misunderstanding things.
Ah, so a player with one of these flags could enter a different settlement and not be hassled by the NPC guards for wearing a flag? I was misunderstanding things.
I'm not sure if the Criminal Flag only applies within the relevant territory, or if it also applies if members of that settlement encounter the Flagged character outside that settlement (in wilderness, etc), but I strongly get the feeling that it doesn't apply for random, non-members of the relevant territory if they encounter the character with the Criminal status OUTSIDE of the relevant territory, e.g. in the wilderness.
It seems plausible that at a later point GW would introduce some 'extradition treaty' mechanism whereby settlements/countries could mutually 'recognize' certain of each other's Criminal Flags... Perhaps it could even be up to negotiation whether a Country that DOESN'T treat 'X' as a Crime would still recognize the right of members of another country to respond to Criminal Flags based upon 'X' within the territory where 'X' isn't a crime per se. (you just couldn't' gain the Criminal Flag for doing 'X' in the territory where it isn't a crime, and members of the territory where it isn't a crime wouldn't legally be absolved of attacking characters Criminally flagged for 'X' crime - probably made transparent to players based on what Criminal Flags their character sees).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Which is the point people are contesting based on their own feelings of what good/evil entails and not defined rules for the setting.Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and .Which is exactly why the current blog describes killing someone that is evil less evil but never good
We've provided plenty of evidence to the contrary you just CHOOSE to ignore it. There are good aligned gods of war, justice, battle, vengeance, hunting evil, and vengeance. It doesn't matter if you're upset they aren't core gods (With the exception of Iomedae) because they are part of the lore.
Inquisitors, a class from the advanced players guide are also described as:
Grim and determined, the inquisitor roots out enemies of the faith, using trickery and guile when righteousness and purity is not enough. Although inquisitors are dedicated to a deity, they are above many of the normal rules and conventions of the church. They answer to their deity and their own sense of justice alone, and are willing to take extreme measures to meet their goals.
And that class is not locked to good aligned players. And that is from the Advanced Player's Guide which is as core as it gets outside the core rulebook.
Beyond the fact that the ability "smite evil" even exists. And killing evil outsiders is killing a living and even intelligent being so I fail to see how it's different from killing any other evil intelligent being regardless of race.
No there is plenty of evidence working in our favor beyond "emotions" you are just clinging desperately to your interpretation of a single single part of the Pathfinder lore. Sorry but the altruism of putting your life on the line for others clearly outweighs the killing part per the lore. Altruism and self sacrifice are CLEARLY in the realm of good.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is one of my annoyances with MMOs and playing stealth characters. 'Dauthon' ir the most elite and skillful assassin in the land...yet everyone knows him and who he has killed. No point using stealth or disguise (other than to sneak up on marks) as you have a giant flag or list telling everyone what you have done. May as well be a fighter that is even better at killing people that a rogue.Huh. Well since GW has specifically stated that they envision there will be effective means of Disguise to allow Evil types to enter Good cities, enabling them to pull off Assassinations, etc, I would say that sounds like an unjustified annoyance at this time, it sounds like they will have something to address just that scenario.
I'll keep my fingers crossed!
I'm not saying I want an uber assassin that can kill people on a whim without them having a chance of detecting me before the deed is done...I just want some chance of pulling this off. It would be nice to be able to have some means of doing it so that the victim never knows who performed the act either. For example, the very very rare chance that the assassin can backstab and get an instant kill from behind or from the shadows. Dead and no idea who did the deed. This would only be for assassins/rogues that have taken years to train and spend lots of money on gear and magic to be able to perform this act.
I'll wait and see what GW say about it all.
The hurdle you have to overcome is that GW's stance is Killing = Evil. We, the other members here don't much matter in this aspect. Just like the thread on Necromancers and raising dead, no matter what logic they brought, the raising dead = evil wall continued to stand between them and their desire to have neutral necromancers. The same type of wall stands here, killing = evil. Until you can get GW to change their minds you'll just end up with tired fingers.
The hurdle you have to overcome is that GW's stance is Killing = Evil.
Unless it's 'Legally' justified (criminal, war, etc). So far. New stuff seems to be in the works.
I'm not saying I want an uber assassin that can kill people on a whim without them having a chance of detecting me before the deed is done...
I think it's been suggested that there will be 'countering' skills/abilities to DETECT/SEE THRU such Disguises, but obviously those always won't been in play in every case... But it sounds like it will come down to skill and some element of chance as to whether it succeeds or not.
The hurdle you have to overcome is that GW's stance is Killing = Evil.Unless it's 'Legally' justified (criminal, war, etc). So far. New stuff seems to be in the works.
That's true, I should have included the mitigating factors that can alter the definition, sorry.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is one of my annoyances with MMOs and playing stealth characters. 'Dauthon' ir the most elite and skillful assassin in the land...yet everyone knows him and who he has killed. No point using stealth or disguise (other than to sneak up on marks) as you have a giant flag or list telling everyone what you have done. May as well be a fighter that is even better at killing people that a rogue.Huh. Well since GW has specifically stated that they envision there will be effective means of Disguise to allow Evil types to enter Good cities, enabling them to pull off Assassinations, etc, I would say that sounds like an unjustified annoyance at this time, it sounds like they will have something to address just that scenario.I'll keep my fingers crossed!
I'm not saying I want an uber assassin that can kill people on a whim without them having a chance of detecting me before the deed is done...I just want some chance of pulling this off. It would be nice to be able to have some means of doing it so that the victim never knows who performed the act either. For example, the very very rare chance that the assassin can backstab and get an instant kill from behind or from the shadows. Dead and no idea who did the deed. This would only be for assassins/rogues that have taken years to train and spend lots of money on gear and magic to be able to perform this act.
I'll wait and see what GW say about it all.
I feel you. I want my monk to be able to quivering palm someone and have them fall dead when I'm long gone.
That's true, I should have included the mitigating factors that can alter the definition, sorry.
Sure. This is just my issue, that Good is subsumed to Law.
If you're Chaotic, you shouldn't need to worry about issues of Law, so why should Law control whether something is Good or not?But like I said, some change seems to be in the works, it seems like the issues raised in this thread have been noted by people at Paizo AND Goblinworks.
I've been concerned by GWs apparent view on the chaotic alignment. It's not just CE as we now know, but CG and likely CN as well. Personally I've always played chaotic characters. I don't know what effect this view will have in game, I'll be curious to see.
Although by definition chaotic implies disorganized and ineffective, to a degree, when it comes to playing that alignment, things might not be so... Chaotic. We will have to wait and see.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
Option two, which I like for the flexibility it offers: readied actions. We have been told that combat will be done in 6 second rounds, with abilities consuming various amounts of action points per round. If a Good player could could "ready" their first round of actions to trigger when attacked, it negates the first strike advantage Evil inherently gets. If we are trying to create a balanced game, saying one side *always* gets to strike first is a bit imbalancing. Further, this allows caravans to be ready for bandits etc.Thoughts, criticisms?
Only that I don't beleive they said combat will happen in six second rounds.
They said the player in combat gets a stamina refresh every six seconds, so if he is just spamming attacks he is going to use stamina inefficiently where the combattent who uses his stamina intelligently will optimise his use of stamina.
Big difference.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We're working on a Stamina system that somewhat mimics the rounds of the Pathfinder RPG. Every six seconds, players will receive a pool of points they'll be able to spend taking various actions, breaking down combat into a number of tactical decisions.Players who plan out their attacks to maximize their abilities in terms of Stamina will be better off than those who rely on straight speed to spam abilities as quickly as possible. The "planning player" will end each six second interval with no excess Stamina, while the "spamming player" will end up with unused points in their pool.
Actions cannot be executed simultaneously. But spam is still possible. Thus, a combat queue is required to exist. If I hit all the hotbar buttons and only 1 attack goes off, I am not spamming. But if they all get listed in order to execute, then I am thoughtlessly spamming attacks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not saying I want an uber assassin that can kill people on a whim without them having a chance of detecting me before the deed is done...I think it's been suggested that there will be 'countering' skills/abilities to DETECT/SEE THRU such Disguises, but obviously those always won't been in play in every case... But it sounds like it will come down to skill and some element of chance as to whether it succeeds or not.
Sounds perfect. I never want a lay down misere of being able to kill someone by such a method. I want my skills, my opponents skills and pure chance to play roles in the whole scheme of things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ah, so a player with one of these flags could enter a different settlement and not be hassled by the NPC guards for wearing a flag? I was misunderstanding things.No. It only applies "game on" to citizens of where the flag originated. Not all players would be able to KOS them... just members of that settlement. Hence the settlement controlling the flag.
The problem with leaving those flags up is those characters would then be fair game for anyone who wanted to jump on them. Also it would prevent those players from entering any area where those actions are frowned upon, like say a NG settlement. Their guards would attack the PC wearing a heinous flag on sight. That limits RP opportunities as those players can't sneak into settlements if they have flags up.
If you are speaking about the proposed flags I have suggested, yes, they could enter different settlements and be fine.
Again, this isn't taking into account "alliance" nor "stealth" mechanics as they have not been discussed yet.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Andius: The fact that the inquisitor hunts enemies of "the faith" and answer to their deity and their own sense of justice alone, this example has absolutely no impact whatsoever. As Dakcenturi mentions the most objective definition of evil available in PF and it has killing right in there.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Or they may just start observing the halfling tradition of carrying a lead sheet.It could simply be that casting detect alignment is seen as rude and a little anti-social. People are free to do it, but others may shun them for it - if people roleplay that is.Certainly, at minimum. Definitely if they're Neutral they may well take offense ;-)
And if they're Evil, of course, seeing you Cast Detect Evil is giving them warning of what's coming,
so they may well decide to flee then and there, or decide to take the advantage of first attack against you.
This would be pretty much how it works in the pen&paper game as well.
I support sheets of lead in PFO.
As Dakcenturi mentions the most objective definition of evil available in PF and it has killing right in there.
And yet PFO is over-riding that with 'Law' making killing non-Evil.
So they are hardly sticking to such a strict reading, although only Law gets to over-ride it so far.Explicit examples of what is considered in line with Good alignment within Golarion is more than relevant.
Even if you think that creates inconsistencies with specific wording in some places.
PFO isn't strictly implementing any PRPG rule, so what matters is not one rule somewhere, but how it works in Golarion over-all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm perfectly fine with Law overriding how evil or non evil killing is perceived. I pointed out that the example in question is irrelevant because the description does not mention the inquisitors relation to "good". The only words that are vaguely related to alignment are faith and justice. I would put them in the law-chaos axis rather then good-evil axis.
The thing i'm having an issue with is that killing is described as "good" where law does not override it. That is why Dakcenturi an I are using this definition of evil.
I am perfectly fine with different flags and hex dependent laws make killing not evil or less evil.