Goblin Squad Member
|
One quick note about "raising undead". That implies that we have a system where you have pets. It semi-implies that you have more than one. And it quasi-implies that your pets are able to meaningfully interact with the game world and other players.
Many of these things will have to be prioritized by crowdforging and may not be implemented for a long, long time (if ever).
In general, I'm not in favor of characters having pets that meaningfully interact with the world except maybe for Druids.
But that's just one man's opinion.
RyanD
What do you mean by 'meaningfully interact?'
I wouldn't expect pets to be able to do the actions of a player, just be tools that take up ability bar slots. I would see undead as being a way for evil characters to get a workforce for harvesting camps or refineries, and combat tools.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oh, I was thinking something else - my mistake. But to address the original point: Champion flag is optional. It's essentially "looking for trouble." I would argue against the idea of raising/controlling undead being "looking for trouble." To me, gaining Heinous/Villain over a matter of PvE, only to suffer unprovoked PvP consequences in which there are no benefits whatsoever for the defender... seems a bit unfair. But to throw a "Champion" flag up and tell people, "Bring it on!" seems a deserving target.There are "NO consequences" for an Evil character attacking a Champion...Why wouldn't there be? There would be reputation loss for the attacker? Am I mistaken?From the blog:
These flags work like other PvP flags: A person targeting the character unprovoked gains the Involved flag and does not lose any reputation or alignment upon fighting/killing the target.
Summoning undead is optional. It isn't a class feature of ANY pathfinder class, it's a spell. You can make a Negative Energy Cleric, an Undead Bloodline Sorc, or a Necromancer specialist Wizard who never creates a single undead. Assuming the Pet system is in place and the spell is available, you do not need to cast it or have an undead at your side constantly to be effective. It's a choice, and from a lore perspective, that choice will cause you problem if you are not in an area that has laws in place protecting Undead and those who use them.
If you want to create a zombie horde, you need to be in secret or create and hold your own settlement in where such practices are accepted. That is what Geb did, after all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ pets undeads etc
I believe a solution to simplify, the pet implemention is allownig just one pet per char.
Instead of having a lot of pets chars should have access to stronger ones with skill increment.
So a druid could tame a wolf in the beggining but later he could tame a dire wolf , and later a bear etc, but never lots of pets.
Ranger the same but having access later and to less powerful ones, simmlar to the P&P game.
Same to undeads. No lots of undeads, but just one with increasing power as he increases his skills. So a necro would , for example, start with raising an skelekton and in the end he could be able to raise a lich or something stronger.
I Don't think that would be unbalancing or too hard to implement. But I coul'd be wrong.
But still, IMO raising undead should have a different flag than heinous. I'd suggest a "profane" flag, with advantages and disadvantages as well.
Just my two copper...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...IMO raising undead should have a different flag than heinous. I'd suggest a "profane" flag, with advantages and disadvantages as well.
I like profane, would go good with someone who summons evil outsiders too. Maybe the bonus for being flagged for a long period of time could be the ability to summon/create more or a boost to the stats of either the undead or the outsider.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have seen a few posts saying that the Traveler flag is not useful in war. There are uses to it just not apparent at first glance.
This is for war not open world PvP. You do not need to worry about flags in war. Anyway here is the Traveler. I highlighted a couple of items that I want to talk about.
Traveler (Neutral)
This flag is for people who are primarily crafters or merchants, but want to be involved in PvP and get some extra speed and carrying capacity for the extra risk.
This flag can be activated if the player is neutral in regards to either axis (i.e., as long is the player is not LG, LE, CG, or CE).
This flag is automatically disabled by gaining the Attacker, Criminal, or Heinous flag.
This flag cannot be activated while the Attacker, Criminal, or Heinous flag (or any of their 24-hour versions) is active.
While Traveler is active:
The player gets a bonus to Encumbrance so he can carry more items. This increases each hour the flag is active up to ten hours.
The player gets a bonus to Move Speed. This increases each hour the flag is active up to ten hours.
The player gets a bonus to all Profession skill totals, improving his ability to harvest resources. This increases each hour the flag is active up to ten hours.
The player earns reputation at the end of the first hour this flag is active. This award increases each hour up to a set maximum. This count resets whenever the bonuses from the flag reset.
So in war they will likely not lose much of the bonuses given. This is a main point that I think the "War" flag should replace and of these flags during war.
What can you do with more speed and weight limits? Well depending on rules
Carry more items for the creation of siege equipment
Kite, kite, kite
Respond to enemy movements quicker
Get to phalanx formations quicker
So basically in war the "Traveler" will be roaming gank squads, rapid response, and combat engineers. Not all of the flags are even close to equal in war. The Enforcer and Champion get a counter to Assassins stealth and crit, but nothing even comes close to the Assassin ability to have you spawn further away.
Depending on the amount of spawn points this could remove you from battle for 10+minutes. Kind of like in some game PvP battlegrounds when one side has a close spawn. Who normally wins those fights? Now granted there could be plenty of spawn points or maybe anyone getting killed once might remove them from any real influence on the fight.
I really am looking forward to more info on this. Still compared to last week I really think this blog has given most something to be happy about.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...IMO raising undead should have a different flag than heinous. I'd suggest a "profane" flag, with advantages and disadvantages as well.I like profane, would go good with someone who summons evil outsiders too. Maybe the bonus for being flagged for a long period of time could be the ability to summon/create more or a boost to the stats of either the undead or the outsider.
Indeed, that is the way I see that could work too.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Sir, do you have a license for that zombie? Aha, yeah..this is a class 2 license. A non-humanoid zombie requires a class 3 and an insurance waiver...
Look over here Sir, this forelimb is about to come off. See, it's hanging by a thread. That's very dangerous. That's a moving violation. I'm going to need you to step up onto the curb."
You think Champs are bad...wait till you run into some Enforcers ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Ludy I don't think that flags are created for war, on the contrary they are created to allow PvP without war. IMO those flags should not work with someone you are at war with.
No clarification on that yet. I do not want any of these flags to be active. There is some big balance issues if you allow them. Still if they are allowed I wanted to point out that the traveler is not as bad as people think. It would also be good for hunting flagged people. The ability to kite when done right is pretty damn good.
If SAD cooldowns are for more than the involved bandit, there will be a token bandit, or strings of low level bandits that offer a cheap SAD to keep you flagged as off limits.
Uh... this is exactly what my suggestion was meant to avoid?
Stephen Cheney already stated here in the forum that that the SAD 'protection pass' WILL apply to ANYBODY flagged as a Bandit/trying to use SAD tactics, which is exactly what prompted me to see a problem in 'exploitation' from any old bandit (i.e. your buddy) charging the minimum for a SAD protection pass valid vs. every other bandit.Also regarding S.A.D., to combat the "conga line", perhaps, like the "killed" flag, there could be a "protected" or "fleeced" flag for traders that pay their toll.Almost certainly the case. If you've paid already, within that window other bandits won't get to hit you up again.
An alternate approach to a group having some level of control over what their members are charging for SAD in their group's name (and which affects the entire group's ability to charge that same person again) is instead of worrying about 'receipts', is just for the group to be able to set a SAD policy(price) that automatically applies to any member issuing SAD passes in the name of that group.
Traveler (Neutral)
This flag is for people who are primarily crafters or merchants, but want to be involved in PvP and get some extra speed and carrying capacity for the extra risk.emphasis mine: they want to be involved in pvp? But there is nothing in the description that have anything to do with pvp! My first impression is that this is what I want to avoid pvp.
Is the intent just to have a flag saying "i have goods, get me if you can"? Sure they might have sacks full of gems but the only thing you know is they cost the same to attack but can run away faster.
Should there some incentive for Outlaws or other bandits attacking flagged Travellers over random people?
on a related note: should Enforcers get free reign to attack declared Outlaws (and vice versa)? Should champions get free reign to attack declared assassins (and vice versa)?
So far there's no downside with any of the flags.
ALL of the PVP flags can be attacked by ANYBODY (PVP flag or not) without alignment/reputation repurcussions.
i mentioned that fact in my earlier post, and the ironies of two Good characters attacking each other out of the blue just because one has the Champion flag.if you put up a Traveller flag, there is no Chaotic/Evil/LowRep repurcussions for attacking you, by ANYBODY, PVP flag or not.
that is why it is a PVP flag, because you are inviting PVP against yourself by lowering the repurcussions.
you move faster, so may be harder to catch, and you can pass thru more hexes in the same duration of a SAD protection passes you buy, so your efficiency goes up in terms of protection pass money paid : hexes travelled.
actually, i'm NOT clear on what the consequences of Travellers' larger inventory is, if it means that anybody who loots them can loot more, or if the looting stays the same and so that larger inventory ISN'T accessable to be looted...?
incidentally, re: SAD protection passes, instead of a given duration, it may be better to say it is valid for a certain area of surrounding hexes, in case you get held up by random battles (/random non-Bandit-flagged bandit attacks) or something else that takes time to resolve... not sure how that would fit into the Traveller speed-bonus dynamic I mention above, which seems like an intentional synergy to me...???
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure I understand this SAD protection idea.
Are people saying that once you pay SAD to one bandit, no one else can accost you in a certain area for a period of time? If so ... whats to stop you meeting up with CG types from your own settlement and setting up an SAD with them to gain protection on the cheap ? Or have I got that all wrong ?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am not sure I understand this SAD protection idea.
Are people saying that once you pay SAD to one bandit, no one else can accost you in a certain area for a period of time? If so ... whats to stop you meeting up with CG types from your own settlement and setting up an SAD with them to gain protection on the cheap ? Or have I got that all wrong ?
That is a good question.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Indeed, that is the way I see that could work too....IMO raising undead should have a different flag than heinous. I'd suggest a "profane" flag, with advantages and disadvantages as well.I like profane, would go good with someone who summons evil outsiders too. Maybe the bonus for being flagged for a long period of time could be the ability to summon/create more or a boost to the stats of either the undead or the outsider.
I think I might be able to get behind something like that. Would like to see some detailed thoughts on the idea first.
The Stand and Deliver amount could be decided by the game system. Say 10 to 50% of the value of the merchant train, with bonuses to the merchant if they have a good bluff/diplomacy/slight of hand skill to simulate haggling, lying about the value of goods or having a holdout box, and bonuses to the outlaw for a good appraise/intimidation/perception skill to know the value of the goods, squeeze out more money, and find the holdout box.None of that changes the fact someone could ask for unreasonable amount and force the merchant into non-compliance. Gaining the right to attack with no reputation loss.Question on "Stand and Deliver". Who decides the amount? If I was a bandit and wanted to force combat could I ask for 1mil gold. When they don't give it do I then get to "If the victim refuses, the Outlaw gets to carry out his threats of force without losing reputation."? If there is a set amount could a bandit company set a congo line up with every member doing "Stand and Deliver"? Eventually the merchant runs out of gold that bandit kills him and splits loot with rest in congo line.
I like the mechanic but feel it needs to be fleshed out.
It is a trade window mechanic. The Bandit starts with a figure, and the merchant tries to haggle it down.
A bandit may value the double bonus to reputation for accepting a SAD, thus keeping his/her demand reasonable.
The merchant, who is probably already getting the Traveler's Bonus for encumberance, is weighing his or her chance of surviving the attack and losing even more.
It is in fact a negotiation by both parties.
The congo line, may fall within the GMs definition of griefing. There is also the 20 minute timer, where the caravan should be left alone.
If the victim and Outlaw completed a stand-and-deliver trade, the Outlaw loses double reputation for killing the target within 20 minutes. (If they pay, you should let them go.)
They could add an 'Give it all!' option, so that if the Outlaw makes a demand the victim genuinely can't meet they can choose to give everything they have, and the transaction will be considered as if having been met, so the outlaw would not be able to kill him without taking a rep hit
Overall I found the blog, and their approach highly interesting! I am not sure however about the short-term flags though. In particular the heinous crimes. Working slaves or using undead, these actions can supposedly have results drawn out over a long period of time, unlike the other short-term flags which are the result of an instant action. I feel that their villain flagging should be more long-lasting than 24 hrs as, unlike the others, it's a premeditated long term evil-action and definitely not an act of impulse.
Another 2 questions I wanted to ask are:
1. By 24 hrs, you meant 24 hours of game time not real time, right?
2. with the long-term flags in mind, which have a buff that improves over time, what happens if for e.g. players flag themselves before going for work or school so when they come back to play their characters will be at peak buff? Will their flag go off if they're afk for too long? (mind you, leave enough chance for a big dump pls)
And how will you catch afk'ers? It's pretty easy to code something to make ur toon jump every 5 mins.
Don't want to be paranoid but I want to raise awareness that it might be exploitable
Are people saying that once you pay SAD to one bandit, no one else can accost you in a certain area for a period of time? If so ... whats to stop you meeting up with CG types from your own settlement and setting up an SAD with them to gain protection on the cheap ? Or have I got that all wrong ?
what Stephen Cheney wrote does indeed suggest that possibility, barring further additional limitations (which I suggested a few variations of).
but note that what he said about SAD only has implications for SAD... which may be only available to Bandit PVP flagged characters, or it could be available to anybody (without specific benefits of Bandit flag), but if there are (lower case 'b') bandits NOT using the official SAD system, they would always be free to attack you for loot, or even open a NORMAL (non official SAD) chat/trade window and ask for money not to attack you. anybody who does that outside of the SAD system of course faces full consequences (reputation/alignment) if they DO end up attacking you, of course. (albeit if the open a chat/trade window and you give them loot, it doesn't seem like there will be any consequences on reputation/alignment)
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What do you mean by 'meaningfully interact?'
I mean that if a Player Character can do it, then ONLY Player Characters can do it. If you want an army, you need to assemble one run by humans, not by AI. If you want to harvest something you need to assemble a crew run by humans, not an AI. If you want to haul stuff from place to place, you need a caravans run by humans, not an AI.
We're going to focus our efforts and resources on maximizing meaningful human interaction. That means there won't be a lot of time or money spent on AI driven behaviors.
I could see Undead Common Folk. They're sims, not characters. So if somewhere there's a description that says you've got undead, or genies, or mephits or whatever in your Settlement, that's harmless; they're just going about their lives adding some flavor to the world.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What do you mean by 'meaningfully interact?'I mean that if a Player Character can do it, then ONLY Player Characters can do it. If you want an army, you need to assemble one run by humans, not by AI. If you want to harvest something you need to assemble a crew run by humans, not an AI. If you want to haul stuff from place to place, you need a caravans run by humans, not an AI.
We're going to focus our efforts and resources on maximizing meaningful human interaction.
Excellent. Stay on target,is all I have to say =)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The blog unfortunately didn't mention how one moves their alignment towards Good... some examples of that would be nice.
oh yes it does ....
... stand around for a few days and do nothing ;)
Maybe I'm just missing it in the massive 9-page blog, but I can only find a reference for Lawfulness increasing over time, not Good.
so if you have Slave Common Folk, is that just flavor, that also wouldn't have repurcussions?
when exactly would the Heinous Flag for slavery and undead use actually kick in, then?
i see use of slaves and undead as common folks as having certain specific benefits, along with penalties (including but not limited to heinous/evil status).
i don't really see the strong benefit to the game in adding art resources, including UI selection modes, to allow 'genie common folk', if that in the end has no other effect on game play... at the least, that seems VERY low on the priority list.
i can see the value in not getting too deep into AI... albeit you've also stated that NPC/Monsters will play a role in the game, and having them be relevant/interesting encounters seems like it would require AI code (which can then be refactored for many things). i think pets are central to alot of people's ideas of many classes (druid, ranger) and if the code is there for those things, it doesn't seem too far out to also apply it to necromancer undead minions (which is also a trope pretty central to necromancy).
one thing about undead minions (or druid pets, etc) is that they can effectively require close player control, so it isn't avoiding human interaction then... i believe it's already been stated that some harvesting/crafting/building activity will in effect be PC 'supervision' of Common People doing the grunt work of those tasks, so PCs 'supervising' some NPC doesn't seem out of wack for the game as we know it so far... as long as they are on a tight leash for the most part, it doesn't seem to reduce human interaction. (of course, there is also the NPC marshals, but i 'get' and agree with the general focus on human interactions)
also, things like undead can have low 'life spans' so they won't stick around forever (of course, you can always create new undead). that can be implemented thru automatic duration limits, or just making 'healing' undead be much effective than normal healing for living creatures.
i don't see any problem if that stuff isn't available in the initial iterations of the game though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry if I missed this is the blog write up or in skimming these posts -
Alignment shifts and reputation are one thing, but it seems like the bigger issue they are trying to address is griefing. They want us to PvP, but they don't want one player to ruin the experience for another for no reason other than that one player enjoys making other people miserable.
To that end, I have a question about the attacker flag. It gets set to the person who initiates attacks. In theory, this means the aggressor gets flagged, and takes on the consequence of his or her actions. But if I have learned anything from years of player MMOs, it's that a player who wants to game the system will. And here it seems fairly easy.
The 'griefer' (for lack of a better word) waits for his target(s) to engage in combat with NPC enemies, then puts himself in the line of fire by catching an AoE. (This is a pretty common practice to force a flag on a PvE player in past games.) Now the non aggressor is flagged as an attacker, and can be killed with no regard for reputation.
I assume this is where we get past what the game's mechanics can handle, and get into GM intervention?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The blog unfortunately didn't mention how one moves their alignment towards Good... some examples of that would be nice.
oh yes it does ....
... stand around for a few days and do nothing ;)
Maybe I'm just missing it in the massive 9-page blog, but I can only find a reference for Lawfulness increasing over time, not Good.
It seems you are correct, only lawfulness specifically gets mentioned as increasing not reputation or good. Moving towards lawful over time is still annoying but far less so than moving to LG.
It has also been clarified that you can reject the automatic daily LAW points if you wish to remain chaotic or neutral.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The blog unfortunately didn't mention how one moves their alignment towards Good... some examples of that would be nice.
oh yes it does ....
... stand around for a few days and do nothing ;)
Maybe I'm just missing it in the massive 9-page blog, but I can only find a reference for Lawfulness increasing over time, not Good.
It seems you are correct, only lawfulness specifically gets mentioned as increasing not reputation or good. Moving towards lawful over time is still annoying but far less so than moving to LG.
It has also been clarified that you can reject the automatic daily LAW points if you wish to remain chaotic or neutral.
Still weird.
No offline time should affect char alignment at all. Online time ok but offline means that if someone is unable to login for a couple of days, he can login someday and find that his CN barabarian just shifted to LN loosing several benefits. No way that is gonna work.
But apparently we will be able to say " no thanks I wanna still chaotic" or something like that, if it works that way ok.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Stand and Deliver amount could be decided by the game system. Say 10 to 50% of the value of the merchant train, with bonuses to the merchant if they have a good bluff/diplomacy/slight of hand skill to simulate haggling, lying about the value of goods or having a holdout box, and bonuses to the outlaw for a good appraise/intimidation/perception skill to know the value of the goods, squeeze out more money, and find the holdout box.
I have never been a fan of pvp to me it always meant someone blind siding me as I try to find out where the shot came from. In most I would just do a dance emote rather then fight back cause I KNEW I would lose. Now reading this I have reason to hope.
If the bluff/diplomacy/slight of hand skill to trick the bandit actually makes it into the game I may actually look forward to a pvp encounter for the first time in my life. For the first time there may be a way for me to come out of a pvp encounter feeling like a winner, even if it only the fact that I paid 10 gold instead of the 100 gold he could have gotten from me.
For the first time I may actually look forward to a pvp encounter rather then try to hide from it.
Way to go GW!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The blog unfortunately didn't mention how one moves their alignment towards Good... some examples of that would be nice.
oh yes it does ....
... stand around for a few days and do nothing ;)
Maybe I'm just missing it in the massive 9-page blog, but I can only find a reference for Lawfulness increasing over time, not Good.
It seems you are correct, only lawfulness specifically gets mentioned as increasing not reputation or good. Moving towards lawful over time is still annoying but far less so than moving to LG.
It has also been clarified that you can reject the automatic daily LAW points if you wish to remain chaotic or neutral.
Still weird.
No offline time should affect char alignment at all. Online time ok but offline means that if someone is unable to login for a couple of days, he can login someday and find that his CN barabarian just shifted to LN loosing several benefits. No way that is gonna work.
But apparently we will be able to say " no thanks I wanna still chaotic" or something like that, if it works that way ok.
Also ... from a roleplay point of view, it makes more sense that in the wilderness you gradually become TN whilst in a settlement you slowly become closer to the alignment of the settlement.
it's not just people who DON'T want to be LG or whatever.
it's been stated that it would be optional/player controlled, so that isn't an issue.
but why should somebody who does nothing but evil acts, be less evil than their actions dictate?
offline alignment shift means that to have a good alignment, you don't really have to act GOOD,
you just need to act NEUTRAL or NOT VERY EVIL, for offline alignment shift to move you towards Good.
that just reduces the relevance of alignment repurcussions for actions,
and means players care less if their actions cause the alignment to 'go over the line', because it will drift back.
i think having 'atonement' mechanisms, spells from appropriately aligned casters that have costs due to material components involved, etc, is a better mechanism than offline alignment drift (and it is applicable to ALL alignments one may desire, after all, evil or chaotic may well be desired alignments for somebody). Instead of just 'pushing' your alignment one direction, Atonement can increase the point value for any action which does push that direction... And it can be applied non-linearly, increasing low value actions alot, while not really affeting the strongest aligned actions, which already push your alignment strongly on their own.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Stand and Deliver amount could be decided by the game system. Say 10 to 50% of the value of the merchant train, with bonuses to the merchant if they have a good bluff/diplomacy/slight of hand skill to simulate haggling, lying about the value of goods or having a holdout box, and bonuses to the outlaw for a good appraise/intimidation/perception skill to know the value of the goods, squeeze out more money, and find the holdout box.
I have never been a fan of pvp to me it always meant someone blind siding me as I try to find out where the shot came from. In most I would just do a dance emote rather then fight back cause I KNEW I would lose. Now reading this I have reason to hope.
If the bluff/diplomacy/slight of hand skill to trick the bandit actually makes it into the game I may actually look forward to a pvp encounter for the first time in my life. For the first time there may be a way for me to come out of a pvp encounter feeling like a winner, even if it only the fact that I paid 10 gold instead of the 100 gold he could have gotten from me.
For the first time I may actually look forward to a pvp encounter rather then try to hide from it.
Way to go GW!
I really like the idea of bluff/diplomacy affecting the SAD. That should be one thing worth to work in GW team!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really like the idea of bluff/diplomacy affecting the SAD. That should be one thing worth to work in GW team!The Stand and Deliver amount could be decided by the game system. Say 10 to 50% of the value of the merchant train, with bonuses to the merchant if they have a good bluff/diplomacy/slight of hand skill to simulate haggling, lying about the value of goods or having a holdout box, and bonuses to the outlaw for a good appraise/intimidation/perception skill to know the value of the goods, squeeze out more money, and find the holdout box.
I have never been a fan of pvp to me it always meant someone blind siding me as I try to find out where the shot came from. In most I would just do a dance emote rather then fight back cause I KNEW I would lose. Now reading this I have reason to hope.
If the bluff/diplomacy/slight of hand skill to trick the bandit actually makes it into the game I may actually look forward to a pvp encounter for the first time in my life. For the first time there may be a way for me to come out of a pvp encounter feeling like a winner, even if it only the fact that I paid 10 gold instead of the 100 gold he could have gotten from me.
For the first time I may actually look forward to a pvp encounter rather then try to hide from it.
Way to go GW!
I like it also. I really hope they can implement something with this intent.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
it's not just people who DON'T want to be LG or whatever.
it's been stated that it would be optional/player controlled, so that isn't an issue.
but why should somebody who does nothing but evil acts, be less evil than their actions dictate?
offline alignment shift means that to have a good alignment, you don't really have to act GOOD,
you just need to act NEUTRAL or NOT VERY EVIL, for offline alignment shift to move you towards Good.
that just reduces the relevance of alignment repurcussions for actions,
and means players care less if their actions cause the alignment to 'go over the line', because it will drift back.inicidentally, concerns about what your alignment are would tend to mean that people's alignment will 'cluster' in different parts of the alignment spectrum, people who don't want to be evil will strongly try to avoid that, so there should be relatively less people who are 'a little evil' because they will do something to make sure they don't get in that position to start with or will do something to change that once they get there. people who don't care if they are evil are not likely doing many good acts, and will just let the evil points rack up until they are 'deep' into evil alignment.
i think having 'atonement' mechanisms, spells from appropriately aligned casters that have costs due to material components involved, etc, is a better mechanism than offline alignment drift (and it is applicable to ALL alignments one may desire, after all, evil or chaotic may well be desired alignments for somebody). Instead of just 'pushing' your alignment one direction, Atonement can increase the point value for any action which does push that direction... And it can be applied non-linearly, increasing low value actions alot, while not really affeting the strongest aligned actions, which already push your alignment strongly on their own.
You have a point I agree. Based on that, I'm completely against any kind of offline alignment effect. Even if it is optional
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
i think having 'atonement' mechanisms, spells from appropriately aligned casters that have costs due to material components involved, etc, is a better mechanism than offline alignment drift (and it is applicable to ALL alignments one may desire, after all, evil or chaotic may well be desired alignments for somebody). Instead of just 'pushing' your alignment one direction, Atonement can increase the point value for any action which does push that direction... And it can be applied non-linearly, increasing low value actions alot, while not really affeting the strongest aligned actions, which already push your alignment strongly on their own.
Could work.
However you would need VERY strict limits on how often atonement can be done per day with perhaps a sliding price scale if you do it too often as well.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Still weird.
No offline time should affect char alignment at all. Online time ok but offline means that if someone is unable to login for a couple of days, he can login someday and find that his CN barabarian just shifted to LN loosing several benefits. No way that is gonna work.
But apparently we will be able to say " no thanks I wanna still chaotic" or something like that, if it works that way ok.
Well one comperable system I know of. The browser based game pardus had something like that, there were 3 factions in the game in which you could have reputation with, one of which you were most likely to be a member of. I don't believe there was a hard cap for the reputation, but most stayed within the -2,000 to +2,000 range. Above or below that was effectively extremely difficult because each day, they drifted by 2% towards 0. There were also 2 syndicates, one that required you to have an average rep above 500, one an average below -500, the added bonus for each of those, was a daily shift of +10 for the one that needed positive, -10 for the one that needed negative. Essentially changing the average drift to end you around 510 or -510, if idle for a very long time.
The point being, something like that could work in pardus. The daily drift could converge towards neutral, but skills/archtypes with reason for maintaining an alignment, could offer a bonus, to change the inactivity drift to pull towards "Just enough" (IE a paladin's rep would be at 2,550 on law/chaos and G/E if inactive for 2 months, a barbarian who needs chaos would end at on chaos -2,550, 0 on G/E
yeah. i think if there is a cost to Atonement, it's allowing it for people who want to change their ways, but they may need to get several Atonements if they are really far the opposite direction, and/or can't manage to do any actions that are 'strongly' aligned in the direction they want. but the cost to do it is making it so there is SOME disincentive to doing it in the first place, if you don't need Atonement you should have some advantage over somebody who does need/want it. putting up gold pieces is the real proof there. It could also involve Reputation somehow, since this is a 'new' less-deserved Alignment at-odds with your Actions (to some extent), it makes sense that the increased alignment shift from Atonement would be 'trading off'/converting from high Reputation...?
also, if Atonements towards X alignment can only be cast by a Cleric (/Paladin/Inquisitor/Druid) of appropriate alignment (i.e. the alignment you want to move towards) then it is forcing you to be on good terms with somebody of the alignment you want to move towards, creating more human-human interaction context and a more grounded basis for the alignment shift... not just automatic alignment drift in opposition to all your own actions and human-human interactions.
Could work.
However you would need VERY strict limits on how often atonement can be done per day with perhaps a sliding price scale if you do it too often as well.
agreed. and with a very long duration in terms of how previous atonements affect the price of future atonements. i'm talking month-long durations, or longer. even permanent. there could even be a hard limit on the 'increased alignment shift' that atonement grants, so whether you use many atonements or one atonement, it can only 'help' you so much regardless of whether you are doing lots of 'little good' actions or few 'big good' actions, the rest will be up to your actions alone. if the multi-month-long duration of previous Atonements' alignment shift is still in effect, than further Atonements shouldn't help you shift your alignment any further... you squandered the Atonements and demonstrated your intent by acting against that Alignment after given the benefit of the doubt, so you should now be stuck with the consequences of your own actions.
Discussion thread for new blog entry Goblinworks Blog: I Shot a Man in Reno Just To Watch Him Die.The heinius flag needs a little work. I love the idea but I do not think it is fair to be able to kill the pve focused necromancer with no reprocussions if all the do is raise a zombie ro kill npc monsters and never attack other players. Maybe it should be a combination of things that cause the heinous flag? But then again I could be wrong but it does seem to be detrimental to a few players.
Yeah, I agree. It makes me think of killing an evil guy just because he's evil. Animating dead is bad, yes, but is it really always a huge deal? I think it'd be more interesting if killing a necromancer still bears consequences--like attacking a worshipper of Rovagug without provocation.
Will issuing a Stand and Deliver give the outlaw the attacker flag? If not people are just going to spam everyone they meet. If denied they just move on to the next person without attacking.
If someone demands my money or my life I should be able to beat them down without consequences.
Agreed. This system as-is seems waaay too kind to people who are threatening to kill me and/or take my stuff.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
i think having 'atonement' mechanisms, spells from appropriately aligned casters that have costs due to material components involved, etc, is a better mechanism than offline alignment drift (and it is applicable to ALL alignments one may desire, after all, evil or chaotic may well be desired alignments for somebody). Instead of just 'pushing' your alignment one direction, Atonement can increase the point value for any action which does push that direction... And it can be applied non-linearly, increasing low value actions alot, while not really affeting the strongest aligned actions, which already push your alignment strongly on their own.
I tend to agree with this approach, and I hope "atonement" is available regardless of whether or not the auto-drift is used. I really need to hear more details on the drift, before I make my complete judgment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Agreed. This system as-is seems waaay too kind to people who are threatening to kill me and/or take my stuff.Will issuing a Stand and Deliver give the outlaw the attacker flag? If not people are just going to spam everyone they meet. If denied they just move on to the next person without attacking.
If someone demands my money or my life I should be able to beat them down without consequences.
You will be able to attack them without consequence - they will need to have the Outlaw flag enabled to be able to issue a stand-and-deliver request. As the Outlaw flag is a long-term PvP flag, anyone can engage them in PvP. To quote the blog from the "Long-Term Flags" section:
These flags work like other PvP flags: A person targeting the character unprovoked gains the Involved flag and does not lose any reputation or alignment upon fighting/killing the target.
Of course, that may not be much consolation for the probably-much-weaker specific victim of an Outlaw :)
Right, right, sorry. That'll teach me to post complaints before I finish reading. ;D
I like this. Im guessing you would be able to refuse positive alignment shifts, but not negative. So if you want to stay neutral you could refuse positive points, but youd still have to behave yourself to avoid negative points.
I'm planning a CN cleric of Rovagug who generally acts like a nice guy, so this would be ideal for me. It'd certainly make things easier if I didn't have to run into a nearby town and murder kids just to keep my spells. ;D
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Pets shouldn't be too much of an issue if they're just some pixels that do extra damage. If people want their pets to be PCs, then they may have some issues. :-)
SAD sounds like it will be great.
Alignment should start at whatever you want- simple setting when you create the character.
Alignment should not change when you're offline.
To maintain that alignment, you should work for it though. If you do not live up to your alignment it should drift.
And it should drift to True Neutral.
Paladins and Monks should work to be Lawful, not drift there by doing bugger all.
Meanwhile, good/evil Druids and Barbarians shouldn't be losing their mojo just because they had some R and R.
If you don't want to be 'punished' for having a certain alignment, don't display it in an inappropriate place.
Lawful Good Ville will be the safest and easiest place for the peaceniks, but Mr Evil can expect to get hammered there.
Mr Evil should be spending his time at Chaotic Evil Town, where he can gank whoever he wants at the risk of being ganked himself, and where Ms Good will get hammered by everyone solely because she rocked up without a Heinous flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One quick note about "raising undead". That implies that we have a system where you have pets. It semi-implies that you have more than one. And it quasi-implies that your pets are able to meaningfully interact with the game world and other players.
Many of these things will have to be prioritized by crowdforging and may not be implemented for a long, long time (if ever).
In general, I'm not in favor of characters having pets that meaningfully interact with the world except maybe for Druids.
But that's just one man's opinion.
RyanD
Aren't you forgetting the Summoner character class with there Eidolans?
Witch Familiars?
the Summon Monster / Natures Ally line of spells
the entire necromancy line of spells (raise dead, command undead to name a few)
Meaningful pets have been an integral part of Pathfinder since the beginning and in all honestly this won't be pathfinder without them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One quick note about "raising undead". That implies that we have a system where you have pets. It semi-implies that you have more than one. And it quasi-implies that your pets are able to meaningfully interact with the game world and other players.
Many of these things will have to be prioritized by crowdforging and may not be implemented for a long, long time (if ever).
In general, I'm not in favor of characters having pets that meaningfully interact with the world except maybe for Druids.
But that's just one man's opinion.
RyanD
Aren't you forgetting the Summoner character class with there Eidolans?
Witch Familiars?
the Summon Monster / Natures Ally line of spells
the entire necromancy line of spells (raise dead, command undead to name a few)
Meaningful pets have been an integral part of Pathfinder since the beginning and in all honestly this won't be pathfinder without them.
Exactly.
And We are no speaking of raising an entire army of ghouls we are speaking of having one companion, raised undead, summoned animal or a single familiar. Not that big issue in balance or mechanistics.
All those flags look like some kind of deiety bless to me , maybe they should be related to some of the PF gods. Each one may be included in the aspect of some god, so that would be easy to relate and add flavour to the gameplay.
Instead of using "traveler" flag use "name of travele's god" (bless) flag.
Edit :Same for the bad flags, but instead of bless "curse" could be used
The reason I don't like this is that it just gives a feeling of worshipping gods you wouldn't. I'd like to keep flags fairly neutral.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The tricky part with Chaotic Good characters will be finding in-game stuff to move you towards chaos that is not also criminal.
In PnP a Chaotic Good character can just be a do-gooder freedom and peace loving 1960's hippy type ... "If we are all good and love each other we can just dig the vibes and don't need no fascist laws" that sort of thing.
In theory if everyone is good aligned and working together for the benefit of a settlement it could be Chaotic Good with minimal rules and regulations and still function well.
Chaotic Evil settlements however should only function at all when an external threat forces the inhabitants to unite.
However so far it sounds like the majority if not all, the ways of becoming chaotic will involve breaking laws.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Aren't you forgetting the Summoner character class with there Eidolans?Witch Familiars?
the Summon Monster / Natures Ally line of spells
the entire necromancy line of spells (raise dead, command undead to name a few)
Meaningful pets have been an integral part of Pathfinder since the beginning and in all honestly this won't be pathfinder without them.
I'm not familiar with Pathfinder so I don't know the classes you are mentioning, but as far as Summon Monster and similar things generally go, I doubt summoning completely AI-controlled allies as extra bodies in a fight counts as "meaningfully interacting with the world" per Ryan's definition. To me that's merely a special effect for a damage-over-time-plus-hitpoint-buffer spell. But I could be wrong.
The heinous / undead rules are fully in keeping with the setting of the game. Now, if PFO were set in Geb it might be a different story.I think that if players want to be able to create a settlement based on Geb in the game they should be able to. Settlements can instate their own laws, so if a LE settlement states Undead an Slaves are okay, and Heinous flagged people are off limits, then if you gank someone who IS under the Heinous Flag, then you should still get the Criminal flag and the Law/Chaos alingment loss, even though you would be immune to Rep loss and Good/Evil alignment loss.
Good settlements should want to declare a war on evil settlements who say this is ok to bypass the criminal flags, and that is a desired effect, because large scale player wars are a desired goal of the game.
I absolutely agree. Undead control should be something that certain towns allow and certain towns definitely do not. Not everybody sees recycling dead tissue as taboo. ;D
This is nothing to do with game balance for me. I don't plan on playing a necromancer. But I think there should be Geb-style settlements where undead are common-place, ordinary settlements where dark necromancers are shunned and perhaps killed when possible, and maybe even settlements that are actively at war with the undead-tolerating towns.
The game is acting like undead control is automatically despised by everyone, and that's just balderdash. As people have said, ever been to Geb?
