Goblin Squad Member
|
Do we have to be a neutral or evil guild in order to effectively fight evil? That sounds a bit crazy."Fighting Evil" is absolutely in the balliwick of Lawful Good Settlements. That is what War is for.
So what exactly does declaring War entail? Can you choose bandits that are attacking travelers, evil players that have murdered others or criminal attacks in general? What are the limits on declaring war?
"Fighting Evil" is absolutely in the balliwick of Lawful Good Settlements. That is what War is for.
ok. Chaotic Good doesn't fight evil. right.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do we have to be a neutral or evil guild in order to effectively fight evil? That sounds a bit crazy."Fighting Evil" is absolutely in the balliwick of Lawful Good Settlements. That is what War is for.
RyanD
War? Which has to be mutual?
"Good sir bandit, would you kindly accept this declaration of war, so that I might justifiably kill you?"
"Pound sand."
"Right. Well then, I'll be off. Happy banditry!"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Lawful Evil will get all the upside of being able to use force to solve problems, and will have awesome Settlements.
RyanD
This totally contradicts your blog where you say that low ratings in Law, GOOD, or Reputation will negatively impact your settlement.
So a LE settlement will have a low GOOD rating and therefor make them less effective than a LG settlement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Individual acts of random justice meted out between individuals with no social connection? That's an evil act, regardless of the alignment of the victim.
So seeking justice for those who have been wronged but we have no personal connection to is evil, but seeking vengeance for wrongs personally done to us isn't?
I thought the entire point of the good alignment was non-selfish motives. To me you just described benevolent vigilantism which is clearly the realm of the chaotic-good.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I guess the other question would be...
What is the Good way to deal with Evil? Are there mechanisms to capture and imprison? That seems like it would be a pretty poor game mechanic. Can a good character turn on 'Non-Lethal Damage' which will impose a penalty on the evil player when they are defeated?
Only being able to deal with horrible people within a short time of their offense is pretty harsh on the forces of good. We just have to sit and wait to be ambushed. :(
"Sorry, sir. We can't do anything to the person who killed your best friend. You should have told us about it 5 hours ago."
is it inaccurate to say that Chaotic Good barbarians, who can't join Lawful settlements, will be disadvantaged in terms of training?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I guess the other question would be...
What is the Good way to deal with Evil? Are there mechanisms to capture and imprison? That seems like it would be a pretty poor game mechanic. Can a good character turn on 'Non-Lethal Damage' which will impose a penalty on the evil player when they are defeated?
Only being able to deal with horrible people within a short time of their offense is pretty harsh on the forces of good. We just have to sit and wait to be ambushed. :(
"Sorry, sir. We can't do anything to the person who killed your best friend. You should have told us about it 5 hours ago."
Or like Nihimon said we just sacrifice merchants with empty wagons as bait and then pounce. I would hate to be forced to resort to such ridiculous meta-game measures.
not to mention that is extremely lawful thinking, as opposed to CG.
even though it wouldn't apparently actually give you Lawful points, it is lawful in terms of actual approach.
so GW's take is that even to gimp yourself by being CG, you will have to act in a lawful approach to do so. nuts.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How would you explain the existence creatures such as the SolarThe god that created them wants them to do that and dictates their alignment. They are intrinsically Lawful Good and their actions do not affect their alignment.
A Lawful Good God creates a being *made* of Law and Good, for the sole purpose of doing "evil". I think James Jacobs is having a fit at the moment.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
So a LE settlement will have a low GOOD rating and therefor make them less effective than a LG settlement.
It will (potentially) have less valuable buildings than a Lawful Good Settlement - less valuable to a degree not yet determined. It will not have buildings as crappy as Chaotic Evil.
seriously, i think you think should ask people at paizo if that is how it works, and if characters who are not themselves Solars act in a similar way, how it work out for their alignment. ask if them if they expect CG characters to get thru their APs simply waiting to be attacked.
otherwise, drop the pretense of having an online reflection of Pathfinder/Golarion, and just say you are making a lawfully-prejudiced Corp Wars game. if you want to appeal to fans of the former game style, you actually need to do so, and not marginalize core aspects of it (CG) as mere failures and inconsistencies.
it doesn't really require a total divergence from the Corp Wars plan... just allow some means to aggressively attack Evil flagged characters. not really too difficult. anybody expects a lawful vs. evil conflict, and a good vs. evil conflict. LG characters will be restricted by both L and G, CG as well by both poles, same for everybody. having CERTAIN alignments have less opportunities for proactive action doesn't make it a better game for anybody. this doesn't mean there is any less repurcussion for any of the alignment poles.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
is it inaccurate to say that Chaotic Good barbarians, who can't join Lawful settlements, will be disadvantaged in terms of training?
It is absolutely clear that there will be some things they will be disadvantaged at training when the highest level of that training is linked to Lawful buildings.
Just like Lawful characters will be disadvantaged at training skills taught in Chaotic buildings. There aren't many good lockpicking trainers in Lawful Good Settlements. Or rage-power teachers.
RyanD
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It will (potentially) have less valuable buildings than a Lawful Good Settlement - less valuable to a degree not yet determined. It will not have buildings as crappy as Chaotic Evil.
So a LE settlement will have a low GOOD rating and therefor make them less effective than a LG settlement.
So basically your punishing people for playing chaotic evil.
Or any other alignment besides Lawful Good.Which is unfair and damages the game.
So far from what I've seen is people in order to achieve the alignment they want will have to game the system.
This is not a good start.
ok, that makes sense, but what i had seen was that ALL training would be prejudiced to law.
barbs are required to be chaotic in the normal game, so i would expect Chaos to work well for them here,
and not be some sort of glass cieling just for being faithful to their class.
from what you're saying, chaotic settlements AREN'T over-all worse than Lawful ones,
they are just worse at lawful sorts of things, but lawful are likewise worse at chaotic types of things.
i don't see a reason why those can't be more or less balanced with each other...
(druid training being favored in neutral settlements?)
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
A Lawful Good God creates a being *made* of Law and Good, for the sole purpose of doing "evil". I think James Jacobs is having a fit at the moment.
Gods, unlike you or I, are able to perceive the true elemental nature of good and evil, law and chaos, and their minions, acting in their names, are not limited by the mysteries of the universe like player characters. When a Solar exacts justice, it is unbound by alignment; such an act by such an entity at the behest of such a god, is ALWAYS Lawful and Good.
Gods, unlike you or I, are able to perceive the true elemental nature of good and evil, law and chaos, and their minions, acting in their names, are not limited by the mysteries of the universe like player characters. When a Solar exacts justice, it is unbound by alignment; such an act by such an entity at the behest of such a god, is ALWAYS Lawful and Good.
seriously, i think you need to discuss this thing with paizo.
beings like solars are hardly limited to being 'minions' of gods.spells/abilties like detect/smite evil are easily available to mortals, and they reveal objective alignment.
beings like solars are not immune to the laws of alignment change, as evidenced by fallen/redeemed angels/demons/etc.
that they already are exemplars of good/evil alignment means they are UNLIKELY to stray from that,
but there is no exemption from alignment or free-will.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
War? Which has to be mutual?There clearly must be a mechanism to go to war against an enemy even if they don't wish it.
RyanD
Will this work the same as in games like EVE and Darkfall where this mechanic is largely used by "lawful good" RPKers to bully newb corporations without consequence and how would this deal with players that drop clan tags to avoid wars?
Wouldn't it be much easier to just make a functional alignment system based off the ideals already established in the P&P?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
War? Which has to be mutual?There clearly must be a mechanism to go to war against an enemy even if they don't wish it.
RyanD
Which makes killing lawful, not good. And declaring an unprovoked war smacks of evil. I respect what you are trying to do, but I think you may need to consider taking alignment and warfare back to the dawing board.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
it's not going to mirror the subtleties of a GM-adjudicated alignment system,
but saying 'attacking an evil person doesn't make you evil' (although it could be chaotic) is a pretty simple thing to implement.
it does seem reasonable that alignment isn't automatically KNOWN, so unless you cast a detect evil spell first, you don't really know that the character is evil or not. it would mean that CG characters going into the hexes of Evil settlements and attacking their members wouldn't know if they are attacking Evil or Neutral characters, and doing so recklessly could easily have Evil alignment repurcussions for them. if an Evil character sees somebody Casting Detect Alignment, they can know what to expect. i think that would conform to people's expectations from the P&P Pathfinder game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The way he said it, I assume certain types of training are actually chaos based, and thus the highest level trainers can only exist in Chaotic settlements, rather than Lawful settlements (where higher training for those few skills would be impossible).
Lawful settlements will probably be the only place to gain city management and formation combat skills both of which will be required to actually have a functioning settlement.
Good Settlements will probably the only place to find healing skill trainers.
Notice a problem yet?
why not have chaotic "swarm horde" formation combat as well?
doesn't have to be exactly the same, but it could have it's own benefits as well.
but yeah, there is obviously a strong bias so far to lawful groups,
i think LG would have equal benefits to LE, if they are unique.
i really hope they can have an alignment system on par with the normal game (not prejudiced to Law).
i don't see that as prejudiced AGAINST Law, and I think LG and LE settlements will have their own inherent advantages that should make them do well even without mechanical/structural prejudices in their favor. that's what sandbox is about, not favoring one outcome, but letting them all play.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
it does seem reasonable that alignment isn't automatically KNOWN, so unless you cast a detect evil spell first, you don't really know that the character is evil or not. it would mean that CG characters going into the hexes of Evil settlements and attacking their members wouldn't know if they are attacking Evil or Neutral characters, and doing so recklessly could easily have Evil alignment repurcussions for them. if an Evil character sees somebody Casting Detect Alignment, they can know what to expect. i think that would conform to people's expectations from the P&P Pathfinder game.
I am fine with this. Make it so that you screw up and kill a non-evil character you get slapped with the full penalty an RPKer would.
It gives you a lot of incentive to KNOW your target is really evil, and makes "detect evil" a very valuable skill. As well as the ability to hide your alignment.
That deals with groups that go around slaughtering everyone they merely suspect of evil.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Seems to me a lot of people are confusing "open" PvP (in other words no game mechanic preventing PvP combat but there are consequences) with a free-for-all.
I doubt anyone will convince the devs to allow any group (evil/good/chaotic/who-cares) badger them into making some other group of players NPC-style open targets purely on alignment alone.
I am fine with this. Make it so that you screw up and kill a non-evil character you get slapped with the full penalty an RPKer would.
It gives you a lot of incentive to KNOW your target is really evil, and makes "detect evil" a very valuable skill. As well as the ability to hide your alignment.
That deals with groups that go around slaughtering everyone they merely suspect of evil.
right. and if you recognize the specific player, and already know they're evil, maybe because they previously attacked you or allies/innocents, then you can make an educated guess that they are still evil... so chaotic goodness isn't wholly dependent on waiting to get ambushed. that alignment concealment may well be available (obviously not to everybody, but to those who put some effort and investment into it) is fine by me.
Seems to me a lot of people are confusing "open" PvP (in other words no game mechanic preventing PvP combat but there are consequences) with a free-for-all. I doubt anyone will convince the devs to allow any group (evil/good/chaotic/who-cares) badger them into making some other group of players NPC-style open targets purely on alignment alone.
I don't see people making this mistake at all. People playing the tabletop game using Paizo APs can and are expected to be able to proactively destroy evil, and that doesn't conflict with CG alignment. This isn't about a group of 'alignment fans' badgering them to favor that alignment, it's about debate on the nature of alignment and coherence with the normal tabletop game. As is so far described, CG is a very marginal alignment, unable to proactively prosecute Evil outside of the Lawfully inclined Criminal Flag system. To avoid both Evil and Law, they must limit themselves to a VERY lawful-feeling code of waiting to be ambushed, which is counter the Chaotic Good they want to pursue. The problem is that Chaos is not seen as a positive value in it's own, but merely as a failing of Law that you are presumed to only have pursued for selfish reasons, and that ties into how Good is subjugated to Law. That just doesn't correspond to the Pathfinder game, yet it's easily fixed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
EVE Online convincingly demonstrates that this is a false assumption.
You want the majority of this game to be player created, but the only way that will happen is to make all characters balanced.
I used to play eve a little and I am not sure how the verious factions are NOT balanced? Anything you can do in high sec you can do in low sec, just player owned instead of NPCs (Agents and such though there are a few down there too.) I will admit, I did very little in low sec as I never got in with a low sec corp and never wanted to venture down there in my frigate alone.....
I am asking because from my understanding, there was a balance and a fairness in Eve, but I am not seeing that same balance being offered here. Maybe I don't have all the info about eve or I am misreading the blogs, ect. about PFO, but there is a hugh difference to me. Please explain.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually does anyone think that Paladins are allowed to walk around, detect evil and kill everything they detect ? (My answer noooooooo)
Its actually ludicrous if they could.
I think some people see paladins as some sort of fantasy UN Peace Keeping Force acting behind enemy lines where everyone they meet is an insurgent/terrorist/evil and is fair game. It is not like that in real life why should it be in a game ?
Actually does anyone think that Paladins are allowed to walk around, detect evil and kill everything they detect ? (My answer noooooooo)
i don't think that, but killing a known evil character (which in PFO, means you know they committed the few acts which cause evil alignment, rather than the broad category potentially able to do that in a tabletop game) is NOT really an evil act (certainly not with the specific implications of PFO aligment, i.e. you know they killed somebody unprovoked), even if it may well be chaotic/non-lawful, and even if non-Lawful characters may still not routinely do that because it goes agaisnt social mores, criminal law, and general prudence and economy of violence.
as discussed, the fact that evil countries may easily have neutral citizens means that good characters AREN'T just going to roll up and start killing their citizens left and right. but somebody who seeks out known murderers to defeat them (who aren't criminals because they murder in the wilderness), doesn't seem at odds with CG. seriously, do you think CG characters are expected to get thru a Paizo AP by waiting to be ambushed, and they can't seek out combat agains those who they know did commit evil crimes even if they weren't there themselves to immediately respond when the crime was commmitted? pathfinder expects good characters to be able and motivated to kill evil characters, and this isn't limited to waiting to be attacked by them.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
spells/abilties like detect/smite evil are easily available to mortals, and they reveal objective alignment.
You appear to be under a strange misperception of how Golarion works.
People do not walk around randomly killing others because of Detect Alignment. The world (as depicted) is one where simple knowledge of another's alignment is not suitable cause for violence.
Adventurers who are somewhat outside of social norms, do not sit in town squares Detecting Alignment and then swiftly killing anyone target the results of that spell reveal to be "targets".
This is, of course, because in order to express great stories in the style and form to which we have become accustomed a lot of "logical" extrapolation of what would happen if "magic was real" must be ignored.
You must choose to accept that these concessions must be made to tell the kinds of stories people want to tell, in the kind of world they want to tell them in, or, you can go and make up your own world that obeys your own rules and then try to attract an audience of people who appreciate your work.
RyanD
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I used to play eve a little and I am not sure how the verious factions are NOT balanced?EVE Online convincingly demonstrates that this is a false assumption.
You want the majority of this game to be player created, but the only way that will happen is to make all characters balanced.
You did not say factions. You said characters.
The characters in EVE form a very broad spectrum of power and they are not balanced. What causes the emergent behavior that is so interesting in EVE (and that will also appear in Pathfinder Online) is that what those characters do has meaning to their players (and to the players that interact with them). Balance is the least meaningful thing about EVE. What is intensely meaningful is the struggle between you trying to do a thing, and me trying to stop you. Perhaps that struggle requires me to bring friends. Perhaps that causes you to respond by bringing friends as well. Occasionally, that means 3,000 people show up in one place to resolve the dispute.
Not every character in EVE can do what every other character can do. Some regions of space are more valuable than others, thus control of the space is meaningful. Not every path between two places is equally safe, thus risk & reward changes based on how you choose to travel. Not every piece of gear is available for direct purchase from the source to every character, based on how that character has acted (or failed to act in that past), thus your costs to gain desired equipment vary based on your in-game actions.
RyanD
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
you can go and make up your own world that obeys your own rules and then try to attract an audience of people who appreciate your work.RyanD
The problem is that to many of us, it seems that this is exactly what you have done, but called it Pathfinder.
read my post above. that's not my perception at all, and that's not how i ever have played or advocate playing.
i also don't play solars as acting in that manner. they're not all minions of gods, or immune to alignment rules, after all.
the idea that solars are somehow able to perceive good and evil beyond the abilities of mortals (regardless of how one acts upon that knowledge) is obviously not true.
distinguishing good from law is pretty much how i play the game.
the tabletop game doesn't seem to subjugate good to law as described for PFO.
this divergence seems prone to create a very different dynamic than that of Golarion,
which is the kind of story supposedly attracting people to PFO.
what is described in PFO is that you can know for a fact that somebody attacked somebody unprovoked,
but doing anything about it at a later point will mark you as evil, unless you are grouped with the person and can react immediately.
no trying to continue the battle later, it's over, evil won, go wait for them to attack again.
is the epitome of CG really just waiting for evil people to attack? awfully self-restrained for Chaos...
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Which makes killing lawful, not good. And declaring an unprovoked war smacks of evil. I respect what you are trying to do, but I think you may need to consider taking alignment and warfare back to the dawing board.
I think you should take your assumption about how alignment works back to a blank sheet of paper, and begin rebuilding your mental conception from scratch.
The heart of the game is territoral control. Territorial control implies that some people will want to take territory from other people who have it. That implies conflict.
Should a Lawful Good Settlement be able to declare war on any group it desires? That does not seem logical to me. Should a Lawful Good group be able to make war on any group it desires? That does not seem logical to me. Ergo, we should assume that a system of war declaration will have various checks & balances built into it to reflect this logical underpinning.
On the other hand, it seems completely logical to me that a Lawful Good Settlement would be able to declare war on a range of Evil targets. Ergo, we should assume that a system of war declaration will have various enabling features that permit rational, logical actions to be undertaken that reflect the twin goals of a game design driven by territorial control, and by the tropes of the genre.
As I mentioned earlier, one of the challenges Lawful Good Settlements will have is that they will be limited in the ways and means they can use force to resolve conflicts. But that is not the same as saying "they cannot use force to resolve conflicts", or even "they cannot use force to initiate a conflict".
The River Kingdoms is a place where it is acceptable to attempt to displace others from the territory they have claimed. If they cannot hold it, they do not deserve to keep it. A Chaotic Evil Settlement can go after anyone they wish, for any reason they wish, at any time they wish. A Lawful Good Settlement will have to operate under a number of restrictions and limits - if they wish to remain Lawful Good.
RyanD
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
The problem is that to many of us, it seems that this is exactly what you have done, but called it Pathfinder.
I have the advantage of being able to consult the creative powers that made Golarion, to ensure that our plans are in keeping with their opinion of what makes something "Pathfinder" or not "Pathfinder".
You appear to be focusing on a very, very small corner of the game system, and suggesting that to the extent it deviates from the game as you play it, our entire design work is not "Pathfinder".
To me this is like saying that a pizza is not a pizza because we made it with pepperoni, and you make it with Canadian bacon.
RyanD
I am much less worried about options for Lawful Good than I am for Chaotic Good, since the Criminal Flag exists for LG approaches, but CG doesn't really care about criminality per se as opposed to fighting Evil period. I would expect CG to act proactively against Evil in ways that LG would not. This is the whole basis of the Paladin concept, that they are especially restrictive, and that other more Chaotic Good forces (mortal or outsider) can and do act more freely outside norms of Law while pursuing Good.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
distinguishing good from law is pretty much how i play the game.
the tabletop game doesn't seem to subjugate good to law as described for PFO.
The tabletop game typically ignores the implications of law enforcement on the behavior of player characters. Except under special story-driven circumstances, player characters often take all sorts of clearly unlawful actions without consequence.
To my direct observation if defined by their actions, most player characters in most games would be chaotic good. Of course the arbiter in these things is a human GM, not a mechanical ruleset, and in the interest of facilitating play and storytelling, the GMs don't enforce any sort of meaningful alignment shifts on the characters who are constantly getting into the constantly chaotic actions they constantly take in the play of any normal Pathfinder game session.
The bar fights.
The breaking of curfews.
The use of magic that puts innocent bystanders at risk of injury.
The conduct of economic activity without payment of taxation, duties, or writs of authority.
The introduction of wild, or unknown magic into areas where innocent bystanders live and work.
The presence of wild animals, outsiders, magical beasts, and other dangerous creatures where innocent bystanders live and work.
The possession of weapons of mass destruction (and often use of same) without permission (or even knowledge) of the controlling authority in the area.
Moneychanging without prior authorization.
Meddling in affairs of state, up to and including creating conditions precedent to the establishment of a state of war between two sovereign powers.
Wearing weapons and armor without being a member of a militia or having received permission to go armed in public spaces.
Blasphemy.
etc. etc. etc.
what is described in PFO is that you can know for a fact that somebody attacked somebody unprovoked,
but doing anything about it at a later point will mark you as evil, unless you are grouped with the person and can react immediately.
This is true in the tabletop game as well, but those consequences are simply ignored by 99% of the players and GMs.
If your character was walking down the street in Absalom, recognized a murderous rogue on the corner, and killed him, by the rules as written and by the internal consistency of the world, your character committed an evil act.
Of course if the logic and the narrative of the story you are engaged in telling dictates that such an attack is appropriate, your GM is unlikely to make any alignment-related sanction against you. But that's not because the rules don't require it, it's because GM fiat overrides those rules.
RyanD
i agree, most PC adventurers tend act CG often (ok, barring evil-accepting groups). pretty much all your examples are examples of potentially chaotic behavior. great. alignment can be tracked, and the Lawful authorities will react as they can within their powers. that doesn't mean there is a Good/Evil axis alignment problem with pursuing Good in ways that violate Lawful norms.
if i was lawful evil, or chaotic evil, and knew of some powerful chaotic good adventurers in the area, I would be reasonably worried of them attacking me out of the blue for my previous evil actions, even if they didn't directly threaten the CG people or their allies and may have occured some time ago. a LG paladin would probably see a CG adventurer as a vigilante. that doesn't mean they aren't good though, it means they are CG.
that vigilante path in a real game may come closer to flirting with areas of darkness, but it doesn't mean there isn't a proactive CG path of fighting evil that may violate Lawful strictures. that's what seems missing in PFO, i don't really care what form it takes, but 'waiting to be ambushed' is just not proactive CG hero material, it's clear to me that Good is being overly subsumed to Law in PFO. distinctions like who attacked first in a given encounter are more than relevant in terms of Lawfullness/Chaoticness, but Goodness/Evilness is supposed to be independent of Law/Chaos. i really think this can be tweaked here without disturbing your overall goals.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Will flag or bounty expiration be counted in logged-in time, Golarion time, or Earth time?
Will alignment and reputation have a 'regression to the mean' effect? It seems to be that they must, because otherwise it becomes impossible to recover from losses or redeem oneself. Good/Evil, Law/Chaos, and Reputation function as economies, where the pursuit of one value may have costs in the others. Just as equipment maintenance acts as a drain to balance the influx of coin from the environment, time would erode alignment toward neutrality and erode reputation toward the average. This means that there needs to be a way to harvest alignment and reputation from the environment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I used to play eve a little and I am not sure how the verious factions are NOT balanced?EVE Online convincingly demonstrates that this is a false assumption.
You want the majority of this game to be player created, but the only way that will happen is to make all characters balanced.You did not say factions. You said characters.
The characters in EVE form a very broad spectrum of power and they are not balanced. What causes the emergent behavior that is so interesting in EVE (and that will also appear in Pathfinder Online) is that what those characters do has meaning to their players (and to the players that interact with them). Balance is the least meaningful thing about EVE. What is intensely meaningful is the struggle between you trying to do a thing, and me trying to stop you. Perhaps that struggle requires me to bring friends. Perhaps that causes you to respond by bringing friends as well. Occasionally, that means 3,000 people show up in one place to resolve the dispute.
Not every character in EVE can do what every other character can do. Some regions of space are more valuable than others, thus control of the space is meaningful. Not every path between two places is equally safe, thus risk & reward changes based on how you choose to travel. Not every piece of gear is available for direct purchase from the source to every character, based on how that character has acted (or failed to act in that past), thus your costs to gain desired equipment vary based on your in-game actions.
RyanD
This is exactly how was imaging the system. Why is it so hard for people to understand that your actions will have consequences? You can play the most evil character you want, just understand that it will be hard on you.
Heck even in Skyrim if you murder, your flagged.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But in Skyrim, I can still skill up whatever I want, whenever I want. Now true there could be limitions placed on my as far as groups I can interact with, quests available, etc. But the sky was the limit on anything I wanted to build or create.
Look Im not saying there should not be consequences to our actions and relationships. But what I want to know specifically, is what little box will I be forced to fit into in order to achieve a maxed out rogue/ranger player? If I do get them maxed out is there a way I could loose them, if so can I get them back and how long will that take? Do I have to be LG to be an epic miner? Or maybe if I am LE, its the only way to earn Dark Smithing!!! I just dont know?
What Id expect (no matter what community I am in or lack there of) Is to fully earn every skill/ability/trait and max each of those out for any school of knowledge that isnt specifically tied to a Diety or Code like Paladin or Cleric (or even Dark Paladin or Dark Cleric... dont even know if those exist)
So obviously I cant be a thiefy paladin, I get that. But I see no reason why I shouldnt be able to max out my rogue/ranger, because I dont envision that mattering to the alignment system. And seeing as its just a "job", I see no reason why I cant be any type of gatherer or crafter and max that out, as I dont really think alignment has ANY place in these activities. But I could understand me not being able to make a Holy Relic (cuz Im evil), but then I should be able to make the "evil" version of it. Then for buildings: I can see not being able to build a church and such because Im evil, but then I should be able to make a great Temple of Evil!
If the above paragraph is basically the way it will work then thats fine, but so far the information has not been specific enough.
The only thing Im cleared up on is that LG and LE can both be awesome settlements. And still a bit iffy about anything in between.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So obviously I cant be a thiefy paladin, I get that. But I see no reason why I shouldnt be able to max out my rogue/ranger, because I dont envision that mattering to the alignment system.
Isn't that the point, that if anything you probably get the best rogue training in a CE settlement, just do not expect a lot in the way of Paladin training or stuff that needs the sort of universities only a stable lawful society usually provides?
I find this whole "My mates and I want to be chaotic and random and do what I want but expected my SOCIETY to be organized just as well as anyone else" a bit odd.
If in real life you move in with a bunch of unemployed stoner types (cause you dig the advantages of a casual lifestyle)you really have no right to b$#*% if they forgot to pay the electricity or if the fridge is full of unwanted wildlife - it goes with the territory.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I dont know, thats why Im asking?......
Why would I get the best rogue training in CE settlement? What if I was a Lawful Good Rogue that only used my awesome skills for PvE in dungeons full of evil stuff. Never do PvP, Try to never do evil or unlawful things? Couldnt I be just as good at trap finding and lockpicking as CE Thief?