Goblin Squad Member
|
I really thought this feature needed a discussion of its own rather than getting buried in the main thread.
What Is It?
For those coming into the discussion, you get the heinous flag for doing evil deeds. Examples given are things like raising undead, or using slave labor. If you get flagged heinous too many times in too short a period then you will be given the villain flag which lasts 24 hours. Both flags open you up to attack without reputation or alignment loss for the attacker.
What is The Point?
That is the golden question I can't fully answer. Role-play is the answer for the shorter flag I agree with. Many good aligned players would find it very immersion breaking to walk by someone raising dead or using slaves, and do nothing.
What is The Problem?
The problem many evil players have, and that I even sympathize with as a neutral-good player is they are being made PVP targets, for PVE actions. As far as we know at this point raising undead or using slaves doesn't hurt other players at all. Why should someone get a 24 hour PVP flag for PVE?
What is Your Solution?
I have two possible solutions:
Solution 1: Make heinous actions greatly beneficial to the user, and harmful to others. For instance make raising undead powerful but something that will create and speed along undead escalation cycles if left unchecked. Make it so slaves are nearly free labor that have to be stolen from the hexes and camps of other players. Then other players have a reason to kill you, but the benefits can make it worthwhile. This is the preferable and more RP friendly solution to me.
Solution 2: Remove the villain flag. That way good players can still punish heinous deeds when they see them, but a necromancer who practices in secret isn't a 24 hour target. If its a big RP issue they can go to war, but it isn't like villainous characters will really effect anyone's game experience if left unchecked. This to me is the less preferable meta-game solution.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
Solution 1: Make heinous actions greatly beneficial to the user, and harmful to others. For instance make raising undead powerful but something that will create and speed along undead escalation cycles if left unchecked. Make it so slaves are nearly free labor that have to be stolen from the hexes and camps of other players. Then other players have a reason to kill you, but the benefits can make it worthwhile. This is the preferable and more RP friendly solution to me.
...
This solution seems appropriate unless it turns out the developer is right that Evil will be extremely popular.
It will be easier to dial back on the Heinous flag than it would be to dial back on the power if it is found too great.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I think solution 1 is the way it is going to be and should be.
From the beginning I haven't understood the complaints (being as I do plan to have such a character) because I always assumed the benefits you would get for committing these heinous acts would make up for the fact that you were an open target.
Of course, we don't know what those benefits are yet, but that has been my expectation all along.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Doom_Cat Because it is a whole risk and reward aspect. If you are getting a reward (free labor or whatever benefits undead/slaves bring) then to balance the system there needs to be a risk to doing it.
Furthermore, if you are going to be mainly in/around your settlement and it is NE I would assume you would have laws against people trespassing who are a certain alignment so that would resolve issues of you being a target since as soon as they came romping through your settlement, they themselves would get flagged. Plus if they attack you, they still get the attacker flag so you can fight back without any loss.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Doom_Cat Because it is a whole risk and reward aspect. If you are getting a reward (free labor or whatever benefits undead/slaves bring) then to balance the system there needs to be a risk to doing it.
Furthermore, if you are going to be mainly in/around your settlement and it is NE I would assume you would have laws against people trespassing who are a certain alignment so that would resolve issues of you being a target since as soon as they came romping through your settlement, they themselves would get flagged. Plus if they attack you, they still get the attacker flag so you can fight back without any loss.
Except that from we've seen if you've got the heinous tag, anyone will be able to attack, not just the good people. So you'd have one player raising the dead in the middle of Urgathoaville, and the guy next door who is holding a grudge decides to take him on, and the scenario is technically 'how dare you raise the dead - prepare to die under the claws of my zombie minions...
Except that from we've seen if you've got the heinous tag, anyone will be able to attack, not just the good people. So you'd have one player raising the dead in the middle of Urgathoaville, and the guy next door who is holding a grudge decides to take him on, and the scenario is technically 'how dare you raise the dead - prepare to die under the claws of my zombie minions...
It will be possible to make illegal the killing of Heinous characters in your settlement, just FYI.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It will be possible to make illegal the killing of Heinous characters in your settlement, just FYI.
Except that from we've seen if you've got the heinous tag, anyone will be able to attack, not just the good people. So you'd have one player raising the dead in the middle of Urgathoaville, and the guy next door who is holding a grudge decides to take him on, and the scenario is technically 'how dare you raise the dead - prepare to die under the claws of my zombie minions...
As much as I would love to do that if the things that flag you as Heinous have no harmful effects on other players how would I justify that as a NG town in terms of RP? Plus I want a paladin to be able to kill a necromancer who's raising undead in our territory right in front of them. I just don't want them to be able to kill someone because they raised 100 undead in their own hex this morning.
Now if raising those undead caused their neighbors to have to fight off an undead infestation, and all their slaves were stolen from other player's commoner pools... now I want them flagged in my hex. As makes sense for a neutral-good town.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It will be possible to make illegal the killing of Heinous characters in your settlement, just FYI.
Except that from we've seen if you've got the heinous tag, anyone will be able to attack, not just the good people. So you'd have one player raising the dead in the middle of Urgathoaville, and the guy next door who is holding a grudge decides to take him on, and the scenario is technically 'how dare you raise the dead - prepare to die under the claws of my zombie minions...As much as I would love to do that if the things that flag you as Heinous have no harmful effects on other players how would I justify that as a NG town in terms of RP? Plus I want a paladin to be able to kill a necromancer who's raising undead in our territory right in front of them. I just don't want them to be able to kill someone because they raised 100 undead in their own hex this morning.
Now if raising those undead caused their neighbors to have to fight off an undead infestation, and all their slaves were stolen from other player's commoner pools... now I want them flagged in my hex. As makes sense for a neutral-good town.
That would make sense for a neutral-GOOD town, but he was talking about a neutral-EVIL town! The town name of Urgathoaville (incidently, my favourite God) kind of gives that away.
As much as I would love to do that if the things that flag you as Heinous have no harmful effects on other players how would I justify that as a NG town in terms of RP? Plus I want a paladin to be able to kill a necromancer who's raising undead in our territory right in front of them. I just don't want them to be able to kill someone because they raised 100 undead in their own hex this morning.Now if raising those undead caused their neighbors to have to fight off an undead infestation, and all their slaves were stolen from other player's commoner pools... now I want them flagged in my hex. As makes sense for a neutral-good town.
So if I'm understanding you, you're less concerned about the Heinous flag than the Villain flag, right?
That seems sensible enough to me. You don't want the undead in your territory, but necromancers who leave their undead with Háma should be okay.
However, there are limits to flexibility. If a guy raises an undead army and wanders into territory where undead are hated, I don't think the paladin would be in the wrong in killing him.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It will be possible to make illegal the killing of Heinous characters in your settlement, just FYI.
Except that from we've seen if you've got the heinous tag, anyone will be able to attack, not just the good people. So you'd have one player raising the dead in the middle of Urgathoaville, and the guy next door who is holding a grudge decides to take him on, and the scenario is technically 'how dare you raise the dead - prepare to die under the claws of my zombie minions...As much as I would love to do that if the things that flag you as Heinous have no harmful effects on other players how would I justify that as a NG town in terms of RP? Plus I want a paladin to be able to kill a necromancer who's raising undead in our territory right in front of them. I just don't want them to be able to kill someone because they raised 100 undead in their own hex this morning.
Now if raising those undead caused their neighbors to have to fight off an undead infestation, and all their slaves were stolen from other player's commoner pools... now I want them flagged in my hex. As makes sense for a neutral-good town.
I fully intend to have a necromancer who crafts and uses undead labor to do so and to defend his settlement in times of war. I have zero intentions of creating undead. I just plan on taking control of undead I find in my settlements area and putting them to a postive work where they do not harm living people. (unless some idiot wanders into my no tresspassing harvesting and production camps)
How ever if I gain the heinous flag while actively defending my settlement by using undead and am now open to attack from any idiot its pretty unfair to me. If some lawful stupid, chaotic stupid or neutral stupid attacks me while I'm actively unleashing my undead horde on the evil bastards who went to war with my settlement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The heinous flag sucks. Sorry no other way to say it. It seems unnecessary to me. It breaks immersion, and role-playing for evil characters.
If a good person sees someone doing something evil why can't they just flag themselves Champion and have at it?
Does it make sense that I am in my house chastising my demonic butler for breaking my favorite gravy boat and then I leave my house (to buy a new gravy boat) and a magical flag appears over my head letting everyone know I have been naughty and can now killed with no penalty? No it makes no sense! No one even witnessed anything!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@fiendish
You make a good point re the Champion flag. There is no need to consider flags in relation to 'evilness', 'heinousness', 'villainousness', 'rep', bounties or anything else, one can just go champion and do whatever one likes to evil characters while maintaining one's rightious facade and reputation.
There is obviously a difference between in game evil and out of game bad behaviour which GW is attempting to address with the same mechanic. It seems like an awful lot of flags to me, I get tired just thinking about it.
I just want to sit in my castle, twirl my moustache, oppress the peasants, summon a devil or two.... Is that such a bad thing?
Honestly I don't get why the heinous flag exists. It seems like an attempt to punish the Necromancer class before they do anything that warrants punishment.
The only possible solution i see is to make the Necromancer OP. that at least gives them an incentive to be constantly awaiting attack. Just my opinion, being that I don't plan on running a Nec.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't have a problem with the heinous/villain flag, but I understand it bugs people who intent to be evil and are mostly interested in PVE.
There are guilds for necromancers and the like. Maybe there can be such evil settlements that they can make a law that inside the settlement no heinous flag appears. The heinous flag is basically an RP flag, so it's difficult to have an RP reason why it wouldn't appear, but maybe in some kind of settlements it would be non-existent, maybe attached to an evil temple or some such building.
My proposition: When you build a certain building(evil temple or so) to a settlement the heinous flag doesn't appear in that settlement anymore. What building it would be that would be for the devs to decide of course.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The roleplay reason for it not to appear is that if a 'good' character or group of characters wants to woop some necromancer arse they can just go champion and do it.... for ANY reason.
No matter how much the thought of some good character picking flowers and hugging babies makes my evil character ill, they don't get a 'goodie two shoes flag' so I can kill them with no rep loss. Correct me if I'm wrong but I also can't go 'Villian' and woop them with not rep loss. The situations are equivalent but the mechanics are not IMO.
Hopefully the flags system can be simplified, but maybe the whole open PvP pipe dream can't realised if people are frightened of getting a hiding sometimes, looks like things are moving to an opt in system to me.
BTW it may seem as though I am a rabid evil PvPer but to date I have had my arse handed to me far more often than I give anyone else a hiding. I don't attack people without a good reason, be it resource competition, they're just look dodgy hanging around my turf or just because they make me nervous out in the wilds (not making alignments visable would possibly reduce PvP in the last two instances).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you're going to be flagged as heinous then you might as well flag yourself as an Outlaw, Enforcer, or Assassin so you can gain the benefits of having those on for long periods of time. Otherwise, you might have to consider not using slaves or controlling undead if you don't want to be flagged. I'm not saying it's fair but it is an option.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Richter Bones
Yes you might as well take those I guess but they still don't give you Carte Blanche to beat on people of a particular alignment going about their business with no negative impact, unlike the champion flag.
@ Phyllain
Mechanically there is little to no difference between a druid or ranger having a pet, a mage summoning monster of any type and a necromancer raising undead. As Ryan pointed out raising undead is some way off so maybe it would be better to discuss later. Having said that I understand that the devs brought it up so they can only expect us to discuss it.
I don't really know what the opposite of slavery is but I would suggest doing things like making large donations to charity and taking home lost puppies should open one up to PvP with no conseqences to the attacker.
However if slavery (or raising undead) means significantly boosting ones settlement's performance at the expense of another settlement then I am totally ok with people getting upset about that.
More info please :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually heinous flag gives everyone who sees you carte blanche to kill you with zero repercussions good, evil, lawful, chaotic or neutral. So essentially its a hey come grief me flag.
Now to dispel some myths.
1. Necromancers can control undead as a class ability like Priests.
2. Necromancers can summon undead using monster summoning spells.
3. Necromancers can control undead using spells as well.
There is absolutely no reason any of the above should give you the heinous flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually heinous flag gives everyone who sees you carte blanche to kill you with zero repercussions good, evil, lawful, chaotic or neutral. So essentially its a hey come grief me flag.
Now to dispel some myths.
1. Necromancers can control undead as a class ability like Priests.
2. Necromancers can summon undead using monster summoning spells.
3. Necromancers can control undead using spells as well.There is absolutely no reason any of the above should give you the heinous flag.
Well, number 1 and 3 are in the core rulebook, but I didn't find number 2 in there. Where is it from?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My problem with the Heinous / Villain issue is that it punishes the good for what the bad might do. Let me explain what I mean.
The "lol-child" runs around and smack people over the head will get the heinous (maybe even villain) flag, and for those actions, it's very possible that he deserves to be a free kill for everyone.
Now, if you are a gang of bandints, extracting goods from those who pass by you, and killing those who doesn't pay up (you need to keep your reputation after all), you will also be flagged heinous / villain, for simply RPing out what you are.
Now, I have the mentality that you shouldn't punish something that isn't wrong by default, if you can avoid it. It feels like this system will punish some potentially really good RP.
That's not how you get the Heinous flag, Savarius, so I don't see much of a problem. Heinous is for moral absolutes, like slavery and necromancy (and rape and infanticide, but I doubt we'll be seeing much of those in this game).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, number 1 and 3 are in the core rulebook, but I didn't find number 2 in there. Where is it from?Actually heinous flag gives everyone who sees you carte blanche to kill you with zero repercussions good, evil, lawful, chaotic or neutral. So essentially its a hey come grief me flag.
Now to dispel some myths.
1. Necromancers can control undead as a class ability like Priests.
2. Necromancers can summon undead using monster summoning spells.
3. Necromancers can control undead using spells as well.There is absolutely no reason any of the above should give you the heinous flag.
Skeleton Summoner feat. (Ultimate Magic)
Adds Skeletons to your Summon Monster spells and 1/day you can summon a skeletal version of a monster on the list.
Shadow Dancers can also summon Shadows as a class ability which is a form of undead.
Also the Undead Lord has a Skeleton Companion, basically a permanent Skeleton pet which would permanently make them Villains and thus largely unplayable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
as suggested in the Slavery thread, should "free pass" for attacking the Heinous only apply to (flagged) Champions? The Heinous flag seems tied only to the good-evil backstory conflict, not to pvp disincentives. (having to declare your intentions by a flag somehow resonates with the paladin code too)
ie. assassin, slaver or necro kills a necro 'just because': should npc's regard that as 'fighting evil' or simply as a backstabbing opportunism on top of the other evil?
ie. lawful neutral enforcer kills a villain who is not criminal ("heinous non-crime"). Should npc's consider this vigilantism as a good thing or lack of self control?
ie. chaotic neutral Outlaw kills a slaver 'just because'. Should npc's regard this as a good act or as just opportunism and self-serving violence?
ie. paladin champion kills necro. Peasants cheer and everyone agrees the pala is a hero.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Honestly I don't get why the heinous flag exists. It seems like an attempt to punish the Necromancer class before they do anything that warrants punishment.
The only possible solution i see is to make the Necromancer OP. that at least gives them an incentive to be constantly awaiting attack. Just my opinion, being that I don't plan on running a Nec.
Not really. We know we are going to have a lot of NPCs working for us. Undead don't NEED to functions as pets 100% of the time. You could make ways to replace usually paid NPCs with undead. You don't even have to pay task masters to whip them, or give them stale pig slop for food.
They can serve as the guards, the the workers, the whole deal.
Of course you likely won't have enough power you can't control that many... And if you used a magical item or structure such as a necromancer's tower to control them, it's destruction would result in all your undead turning into a mindless horde bent on the destruction of everything... including you...
And clerics, paladins, and inquisitors would have a pretty strong advantage when fighting them...
So you may still be better off with slaves, that would have to be liberated one camp at a time. Or actual paid workers that won't turn on you the second they are set free.
Not really. We know we are going to have a lot of NPCs working for us. Undead don't NEED to functions as pets 100% of the time. You could make ways to replace usually paid NPCs with undead. You don't even have to pay task masters to whip them, or give them stale pig slop for food.They can serve as the guards, the the workers, the whole deal.
Of course you likely won't have enough power you can't control that many... And if you used a magical item or structure such as a necromancer's tower to control them, it's destruction would result in all your undead turning into a mindless horde bent on the destruction of everything... including you...
And clerics, paladins, and inquisitors would have a pretty strong advantage when fighting them...
So you may still be better off with slaves, that would have to be liberated one camp at a time. Or actual paid workers that won't turn on you the second they are set free.
Well to my view of things, the benefits to using either slaves or undead as an NPC resource pool would have to be pretty high to outweigh the PIA factor of having the flag, being open to attack etc.. I guess that's why I wouldn't roll a Nec or take up Slaving, just can't see the value in it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well to my view of things, the benefits to using either slaves or undead as an NPC resource pool would have to be pretty high to outweigh the PIA factor of having the flag, being open to attack etc.. I guess that's why I wouldn't roll a Nec or take up Slaving, just can't see the value in it.
Not really. We know we are going to have a lot of NPCs working for us. Undead don't NEED to functions as pets 100% of the time. You could make ways to replace usually paid NPCs with undead. You don't even have to pay task masters to whip them, or give them stale pig slop for food.They can serve as the guards, the the workers, the whole deal.
Of course you likely won't have enough power you can't control that many... And if you used a magical item or structure such as a necromancer's tower to control them, it's destruction would result in all your undead turning into a mindless horde bent on the destruction of everything... including you...
And clerics, paladins, and inquisitors would have a pretty strong advantage when fighting them...
So you may still be better off with slaves, that would have to be liberated one camp at a time. Or actual paid workers that won't turn on you the second they are set free.
I could see slaves/undead being very useful to an Outlaw CE kingdom whose primary method of income and resources is banditry. Not having to pay your workers will help you keep your buildings without nearly as much upkeep, and if you are self flagging Outlaw to keep your reputation up, then Heinous will not make you any more vulnerable to PvP than Outlaw will.
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think the idea with the Heinous flag is that there are some things not even Evil has to put up with. You can be full on Evil and still uphold the River Freedoms.
To put it another way: it's basically a regional (slavery) or cosmic (undead) version of the Criminal flag.
If a good person sees someone doing something evil why can't they just flag themselves Champion and have at it?
Because they still lose Reputation (and possibly Law):
"The player does not lose good vs. evil for killing unflagged evil characters (but will still lose law vs. chaos if the attack is a crime, and will lose proportional reputation, so don't go abusing the evil characters who aren't much involved in PvP; just because you're a crusader against evil, it doesn't give you license to be a jerk)."Losing Good isn't really the main punishment for non-consensual PvP (and you wouldn't lose much attacking an evil target in the first place). Reputation is what they're trying to use to separate griefers from legitimate PvPers. And Champions still get that hit, unless their target is flagged.
It's also important to note that, as far as they've said so far, you can be Heinous (flagged) but not Evil (alignment). Heinous stuff obviously moves you towards evil, but until you get there, you'd be doubly off limits for Champions.
Cheers!
Landon
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Part of this is based on GW deciding to use the Alignment system for BOTH RP reasons (creating distinct groups that have a reason to be in conflict with one another) and for Anti-Griefer reasons.
That being said...there ARE ways to help balance it...
1) We don't know what mechanical advantages Heinous/Villian has, so GW could easly offer mechanical advantages to balance out the other negatives, just like the other PvP flags.
2) It's entirely possible (or should be) to create a settlement where being Heinous/Villian is NOT against the law and where attacking someone who is flagged that way IS against the law...giving the attacker the <criminal> flag. Which has the same sort of penalties associated with it with anyone attacking anyone else in an unjustified manner.
So what we are really talking about is why the flag exists in uncontroled hexes and NPC controled territory. From an RP standpoint it DOES make sense that if a character is well known for doing the things that grant the flag, they would be reviled outside of thier own settlements in this part of the world. So from an RP standpoint, I'm wondering if what is really the issue here is the degree to which such knowledge of things done in private would logicaly spread about the character.
One of the defences that necromancers or evil high priests, etc have in most campaigns I've played where such characters were not living off in thier own societies which tolerated it is that they were VERY secretive about such activities and worked very hard to hide them from the rest of the populace they lived among. I wonder if that is the core of what the issue is here? The inability of such characters or even Evil in general to hide thier true nature from the rest of the world?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. Being a Necromancer does not equal evil
Its entirely possible to command undead without being evil or commiting a villainous action.
2. This is supposed to be a Sandbox game meaning Player > River Kingdoms
3. No group deserves to have a flag which makes them free kills for anyone.
I disagree. If we disregard all aspects of the River Kingdoms, why even bother playing in Golarion? The setting is always going to be a part of the game, player-driven or not.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I disagree. If we disregard all aspects of the River Kingdoms, why even bother playing in Golarion? The setting is always going to be a part of the game, player-driven or not.
So the game is never going to expand beyond the River Kingdoms?
The players will not have any meaningful interaction with the setting.The problem with this is the River Kingdoms is this:
My hex, My People, My rules.
My entire settlement is from Osirion or Cheliax which have entirely different rules beliefs. No people from the so called River Kingdoms live in my Settlement.
We expand the game oh no its Heinous in Osirion to use Necromancy now?
In Golarion slavery, Necromancy, demon summoning are all valid options in other parts of the world.
The Heinous flag prevents those areas from ever being effectively entered into the game.
I mean how would you feel if you got the Heinous flag for worshipping any diety at all?
Congratulations all Paladins, Clerics and Oracles are now Heinous Flagged good luck god speed your permanently villains and anyone can kill you with zero rep loss.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Decorus,
I'd just like to point out that the Heinous flag does not supercede the laws availble in individual PC controled hexes. It's perfectly possible for a PC settlement to impose the Criminal flag on anyone who attacks a person flagged as Heinous... which would be the same penalty applied to attacking a person without the flag.
Where it differs is in uncontrolled territory or npc controled territory...although it's also entirely possible for individual NPC settlements to have differing laws against it.
So I think you are basicaly covered in that regard.
I don't neccesarly like the way GW has used or setup the Alignment/Flag mechanics as I think they are pretty clunky and won't work very well...and mostly aren't playing the role in PFO that they really were intended for Pathfinder itself.
That aside, I don't think it's very off-base to consider anyone raising undead as pretty much a legitimate target for Paladins and Good Clerics.
The problem is that they don't have a way of really understanding context in conflicts and other alignment related activities.
For example, 1 person attacking and killing another is blanketly judged a Chaotic and Evil action (and one which causes reputation loss as well). However when you consider that there are "Good" Gods who consider the creation of undead as anathema, logicaly they aren't going to be displeased with followers of thiers who actively fight those who create undead or consider those followers Chaotic and Evil for doing so.
Also consider that there are individuals who follow a Lawfull Evil alignment where the sanctity of life is not of any great concern to them. If the followers of Asmodeus encountered the followers of Rovagug (a natural enemy) skulking about the edges of thier territory it would be a rather natural reaction for the followers of Asmodeus to attack and slay the followers of Rovagug. However the game would rule this not just an Evil action but a Chaotic one that costs reputation....even though logicaly one wouldn't expect Asmodeus to be displeased with such action.
Of course this is dealing with things from a "world logic" standpoint...it's also a game and GW has to deal with things from a "game logic" standpoint and make sure the game is fun for all players to play and has the level of PvP they want.....and they have to do so with automated systems with limited decision making capability.
It's where these systems and conflicting design goals get all jumbled up together that we get things that seemingly don't make sense.
It's probably logical from a settings standpoint that the followers of certain good dieties would make it thier lifes mission to seek out and destroy anyone who was creating undead...and they likely would be adjucated as Good and rewarded by thier diety for doing so...and admired by followers of that diety. At the same time, it doesn't make much game-logic sense to relegate all "Evil" players as 2nd class citizens mechanicaly or to hang a big PvP target tag on players who are purely engaged in PvE activities. It's a tough design problem for sure...making the type of game they want to make...in the setting they want to place it in...with the technology they have availble to him.
@Decorus,
I'd just like to point out that the Heinous flag does not supercede the laws availble in individual PC controled hexes. It's perfectly possible for a PC settlement to impose the Criminal flag on anyone who attacks a person flagged as Heinous... which would be the same penalty applied to attacking a person without the flag.
Where it differs is in uncontrolled territory or npc controled territory...although it's also entirely possible for individual NPC settlements to have differing laws against it.
So I think you are basicaly covered in that regard.
This. The Heinous flag is more about the "default" surroundings--dealing with River Kingdoms natives, who have no tolerance for slavery or the like.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Decorus,
I'd just like to point out that the Heinous flag does not supercede the laws availble in individual PC controled hexes. It's perfectly possible for a PC settlement to impose the Criminal flag on anyone who attacks a person flagged as Heinous... which would be the same penalty applied to attacking a person without the flag.
Where it differs is in uncontrolled territory or npc controled territory...although it's also entirely possible for individual NPC settlements to have differing laws against it.
So I think you are basicaly covered in that regard.
I don't neccesarly like the way GW has used or setup the Alignment/Flag mechanics as I think they are pretty clunky and won't work very well...and mostly aren't playing the role in PFO that they really were intended for Pathfinder itself.
That aside, I don't think it's very off-base to consider anyone raising undead as pretty much a legitimate target for Paladins and Good Clerics.
The problem is that they don't have a way of really understanding context in conflicts and other alignment related activities.For example, 1 person attacking and killing another is blanketly judged a Chaotic and Evil action (and one which causes reputation loss as well). However when you consider that there are "Good" Gods who consider the creation of undead as anathema, logicaly they aren't going to be displeased with followers of thiers who actively fight those who create undead or consider those followers Chaotic and Evil for doing so.
Also consider that there are individuals who follow a Lawfull Evil alignment where the sanctity of life is not of any great concern to them. If the followers of Asmodeus encountered the followers of Rovagug (a natural enemy) skulking about the edges of thier territory it would be a rather natural reaction for the followers of Asmodeus to attack and slay the followers of Rovagug. However the game would rule this not just an Evil action but a Chaotic one that costs reputation....even though logicaly one wouldn't expect...
Your outside of a settlement adventuring.
No laws protecting you.Instant Gankfest.
Your in a war.
Your own allies can kill you if they want.
Instant Gankfest.
Chaotic Evil settlement
No laws
Anyone walking down the street can gank you with zero reputation loss.
So essentially your point is a waste of time.
So Kobold when every Priest and Paladin gets the villain flag permanently for walking into the wrong place in Golarian you will be okay with that?
I mean its just flavor, because Priests Oracles and Paladins are executed on sight in this particular country...
Wanna play a priest of CC oh wait your group wants to go to Cheliax for some adventuring oops instant villain flag for you since its "flavor"...
How do all these people know what your doing?
Is there some magic that instantly informs people your doing bad things?
Do the gods strike you down with lightning?
Some one is running a slavery operation.
He has no slaves with him.
Its been going on for days.
He is miles away eating breakfast in a tavern.
But voila he's permanently flagged villain.
So Paladin can walk right up to him and murder him in cold blood with zero proof that he is doing anything remotely wrong..
I have a problem with this.
Honestly I have a problem with flavor mandated flags.
Because if the game expands it will introduce entire areas where players will be flagged heinous merely for walking into the area having done nothing wrong.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I agree with Decorus on this point, and it's what I tried to get across in my previous post though, admittedly, I did it rather poorly. If anyone could be, potentially, considered heinous at any time, I fail to see the point of even having it in the game. Sure, if you break the laws of whatever place you find yourself in, you should be open for punishment, maybe not death, but possibly a healthy beating and being thrown out.
I think trying to have a "moral compass" in an MMO that is trying to encourage roleplay is... iffy at best, and will result in more grief than joy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Your outside of a settlement adventuring.
No laws protecting you.
Instant Gankfest.Your in a war.
Your own allies can kill you if they want.
Instant Gankfest.Chaotic Evil settlement
No laws
Anyone walking down the street can gank you with zero reputation loss.So essentially your point is a waste of time.
So Kobold when every Priest and Paladin gets the villain flag permanently for walking into the wrong place in Golarian you will be okay with that?
I mean its just flavor, because Priests Oracles and Paladins are executed on sight in this particular country...
Wanna play a priest of CC oh wait your group wants to go to Cheliax for some adventuring oops instant villain flag for you since its "flavor"...
How do all these people know what your doing?
Is there some magic that instantly informs people your doing bad things?
Do the gods strike you down with lightning?Some one is running a slavery operation.
He has no slaves with him.
Its been going on for days.
He is miles away eating breakfast in a tavern.
But voila he's permanently flagged villain.
So Paladin can walk right up to him and murder him in cold blood with zero proof that he is doing anything remotely wrong..I have a problem with this.
Honestly I have a problem with flavor mandated flags.
Because if the game expands it will introduce entire areas where players will be flagged heinous merely for walking into the area having done nothing wrong.
You put it perfectly! I agree 100% on this.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How do all these people know what your doing?
Is there some magic that instantly informs people your doing bad things?
Do the gods strike you down with lightning?
Rumors. People talk. In some cases there is magic (detect spells, scry, divination, etc). In some cases gods do strike you down, yes. Or send a divine champion to take you out, etc, etc.
So Kobold when every Priest and Paladin gets the villain flag permanently for walking into the wrong place in Golarian you will be okay with that?
No, but, fortunately, the River Kingdoms have nothing against Priests and Paladins. Nor do they have anything against Necromancers, incidentally--just Necromancers who utilize a couple spells they happen to be good at too readily.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your outside of a settlement adventuring.
No laws protecting you.
Instant Gankfest.
Currently exists without the PvP Flags. CE characters can attack anyone at any time in any place. They don't care about the Alignment hit since they WANT to be CE.
Your in a war.
Your own allies can kill you if they want.
Instant Gankfest.
Currently exists if you are Allied with CE characters. Again, they can attack anyone they want at any time.
Chaotic Evil settlement
No laws
Anyone walking down the street can gank you with zero reputation loss.
CE Settlements can make any laws they want. Including ones that it is a criminal act to attack someone flagged as <Heinous>
So Kobold when every Priest and Paladin gets the villain flag permanently for walking into the wrong place in Golarian you will be okay with that?I mean its just flavor, because Priests Oracles and Paladins are executed on sight in this particular country...
Under the current mechanics, a Settlement or Kingdom can put a <Tresspaser> flag on anyone of a particular Alignment or Class that enters it's territory. Neither <Tresspasser> or <Villian> are permanent. They last a maximum of 24 hours
How do all these people know what your doing?
Is there some magic that instantly informs people your doing bad things?
Do the gods strike you down with lightning?
Yes, I do believe the Gods provide a way for people to know what you've been upto in the Pathfinder Universe. It's called Detect Evil...
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/detectEvil.html
Some one is running a slavery operation.
He has no slaves with him.
Its been going on for days.
He is miles away eating breakfast in a tavern.
But voila he's permanently flagged villain.
So Paladin can walk right up to him and murder him in cold blood with zero proof that he is doing anything remotely wrong..
Modern Rules of Evidence don't generaly apply in a Classical High Fantasy Setting. There are no Gloves of Johnny Cochrane + 3.
However, what happaned to said Paladin would depend upon the Laws of the Land in which the act took place. In his own Lands the Paladin, MAY actualy be the Law and is therefore invested with the authority to do whatever he deems right. In someone elses Land, it MAY indeed be a crime. In unclaimed land there ARE NO LAWS, nor any government to enforce them. Hence the only authority the Paladin need answer to is his own God...who being a GOD, indeed might know exactly what you have been upto.
From a game-play standpoint I do understand some of your angst...particularly given the activities that would flag you as Heinous are PvE not PvP.
I also do think that PFO mechanics as well as Pathfinder PnP mechanics do tend to eliminate one of Evil's classic defences...the ability to hide in plain side. I actualy don't use said mechanics without modification in campaigns I GM.
Ultimately though this is a heavly PvP based game so there must be SOME opportunity for PvP to occur...and leaving it SOLEY within Evil's purview to initiate AT WILL is too strong an advantage.
Although I'm not sure I entirely agree with the way Heinous is currently being implimented by GW.
GrumpyMel basically summed it up. It's perfectly possible for a settlement to be pro-necromancer and anti-paladin. But the default setting has people who loath slavery and necromancy, and you have to be willing to deal with that "prejudice" whenever you leave the safety of your settlement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Decorus on this point, and it's what I tried to get across in my previous post though, admittedly, I did it rather poorly. If anyone could be, potentially, considered heinous at any time, I fail to see the point of even having it in the game. Sure, if you break the laws of whatever place you find yourself in, you should be open for punishment, maybe not death, but possibly a healthy beating and being thrown out.
I think trying to have a "moral compass" in an MMO that is trying to encourage roleplay is... iffy at best, and will result in more grief than joy.
I kinda agree with you. In fact, I've strongly argued elsewhere (to no avail) that GW should just do away with the Alignment mechanics entirely and let people choose and RP thier alignments as they wish.
However, the other thing you have to remember is that PFO is supposed to be a very heavely PvP FOCUSED game where stepping out of your own settlement into the Wild is SUPPOSED to entail a very serious risk of attack from other players.
So I think what you are seeing is GW kinda chasing it's tail a bit trying to get some things that don't fit very well together...They want a FFA game that is heavly focused on PvP...but they don't want a "gankfest" so not TOO MUCH PvP.... they want to be true to the IP of Pathfinder (which is pretty much a "gankfest" of Good vs Evil)... they want to introduce a very "meaningfull" morale consequence for players actions that is adjucated by the system.....AND they want to do it all with a VERY modest budget and limited resources.
Given all those conflicting goals, I think they've actualy done a pretty good job with coming up with a model that tries to address them. Whether it's practical or wise to try to combine all those goals into one game is rather an open question as far as I'm concerned
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
GrumpyMel basically summed it up. It's perfectly possible for a settlement to be pro-necromancer and anti-paladin. But the default setting has people who loath slavery and necromancy, and you have to be willing to deal with that "prejudice" whenever you leave the safety of your settlement.
Except the rules as set currently prove just the opposite.
The Heinous flag serves no function or purpose other then for the Game Designers to designate groups of people to be griefed with little or no consequences for that action.