I've been lurking these boards for much longer than I've been posting, so I know about the friendly fire conflict that's been unfolding since the beginning. We've all seen the fiery posts this way and that way, and as an extremely opinionated prospective player with my own ideas about what constitutes the ideal game, I feel as though I should know what the developers have planned. To be honest, it's a real drag getting this emotionally invested in a project that I know I will immediately loose interest in if the game's combat philosophy is discordant with my own.
This isn't a guilt trip or a complaint. I'm just asking, Mr. Dancey- Will you let us know any time soon what you've been thinking in regards to friendly fire? You know as well as I do that this is an extremely contentious issue. My main concern is not that I agree or disagree with your decision, but that I can know weather I wish to continue following the project. There are a good amount of us that have been asking about this for a long time, and a few of us whose interest in the game hinges on this issue.
Your interest in pathfinder online hinges on FF? I can see certain issues being important to people, but something that you'll rarely encounter like FF just seems an odd thing to base the whole game on.
Are you talking about PvP or PvE? Begging that large scale battles will have some different rules, they could make FF be on in PvE while disabling it for large scale battles. Not saying they will, but they might.
Goblin Squad Member
|
-snip- so I know about the friendly fire conflict that's been unfolding since the beginning. We've all seen the fiery posts this way and that way,-snip-
Refresher please... ?!
This post probably comes before Friendly Fire:
1) Option to attack other players (status: Friendly, Neutral, Hostile)
2) Friendly Fire
=> From that post/discussion, my quick opinion is that FF should ONLY occur in WAR-Battles with Units: I mean only for super-powerful attacks between many units/players.
And in the same vein, what happens when the LG pally whacks my heinous necro who is grouped up with a CG barbarian. How do group dynamics interact with alignments when it comes to combat? Will formal grouping even be possible? Maybe someone here can tell me.
@Zol - sorry not tryin to derail.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How is friendly fire handled in the PF RPG PnP game?
Many don't allow or discourage purposeful attacks on fellow players of the same adventuring group because it can lead to players going out of their way to hurt each other instead of pursuing the storyline.
However there are always accidents as well as some purposeful exceptions. Certain area affect spells tend to be the biggest culprits.
In short, Friendly Fire is active and possible in the PnP game though it is avoided by most as best they can.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It usually comes accidentally from a party Mage casting a fireball at a group of enemies and not considering the room layout and party member positions. Sometimes it is done intentionally because the party member who is caught in the blast has evasion and high reflex saves, or because the caster is a jerk. The last one is uncommon, but it does happen from time to time.
Friendly fire in the PnP game is basically friendly fire in real life. There's the wizard insisting the fighter "shouldn't have stood in a straight line with five other enemies", and the fighter insisting the wizard "shouldn't have gotten in the way of completing the cleave". Not to mention the idiot who insists on using obscuring mist just because he doesn't want to feel like the Weather domain is useless. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How is friendly fire handled in the PF RPG PnP game?Many don't allow or discourage purposeful attacks on fellow players of the same adventuring group because it can lead to players going out of their way to hurt each other instead of pursuing the storyline.
Funny, in my games, player interaction is the purpose of the storyline (and in many cases is the storyline).
Disallowing FF prevents valid forms of player interaction; the actual attack, as well as the myriad of future interaction possibilities resulting from that FF. Not that I encourage it, but I want my player to play their characters: good, bad, and ugly.
I am in no way advocating that level of realism or darkness in PfO, but I hope we can do what we want with what is there.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is an open world PVP game, so it seems to me that there is no way for the game to tell if it is FF or a NE rogue who lied is way into a party to take out a specific member. Much less any other player that happens to get hit. Since the game can't determine intent of the player it would seem to me that FF would have to always be on.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
FF in on in PnP, yes. Typically it varies by spell, most area spells simply hit everyone in the designated area, and particularly bad misses with ranged weapons into melee can leave you hitting teammates.
In Pathfinder PnP ranged attackers take a minus 4 if they don't have any mitigating feats. This ensures that you don't hit your fellows (I don't think this is optional either).
For spells there are feats and abilities that let you exclude a number of people from various effects such as burst healing and ae damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In Pathfinder PnP ranged attackers take a minus 4 if they don't have any mitigating feats. This ensures that you don't hit your fellows (I don't think this is optional either).
Not quite. The -4 is against hitting your intended target, and applies if the target is in melee. It doesn't prevent friendly fire, because friendly fire from arrows isn't technically possible by RAW. In general, friendly fire is limited to area effects.
There are a lot of common house rules, though. For instance, people in the way of your target give the target cover, and some GMs rule that there's a chance of you hitting the guy in the way if you miss the intended enemy. GMs who use the Fumble system also like to incorporate the risk of friendly fire.
This isn't really relevant, though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
FF doesn't really fit into a real time environment, and more often than not, will be an unavoidable accident attributed to lag/latency. FF is fine in the PnP because you have a good chunk of time to decide what is going to happen and analyze the results, in an MMO everything happens instantly as far as you are concerned.
This does not mean that you can't specifically target friendly players.
There should be a safety in place to prevent friendly fire, but that safety should have an override. Earthrise had a system where you couldn't damage players unless you held down a button, I think something similar, or a toggle, could work here.
You still have the RP deapth of attacking anyone you want, but don't have to deal with accidental situations due to your inability to process information on a conscious level faster than a computer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
FF doesn't really fit into a real time environment, and more often than not, will be an unavoidable accident attributed to lag/latency. FF is fine in the PnP because you have a good chunk of time to decide what is going to happen and analyze the results, in an MMO everything happens instantly as far as you are concerned.
This does not mean that you can't specifically target friendly players.
There should be a safety in place to prevent friendly fire, but that safety should have an override. Earthrise had a system where you couldn't damage players unless you held down a button, I think something similar, or a toggle, could work here.
You still have the RP deapth of attacking anyone you want, but don't have to deal with accidental situations due to your inability to process information on a conscious level faster than a computer.
Personally I disagree slightly. I think friendly fire could have benefits.
Yes in many situations it would be very difficult to hit enemy targets without hitting friendlies. That however, adds strategy into spell selection. Personally I think the whole, best strategy to kill a bunch of things quickly is to tangle them and your tanks up into one big clump and then drop bombs on their head, is getting a bit overdone. IMO fireball could be a very awesome opener spell IE bomb the hell out of them before distance is closed, and once that distance is closed, switch to single target spells and aid your team into picking things off, for both PVE and PVP.
Secondary options could be specific buffs etc... to protect from elements. IE have your team buffed to the brim with fire resistance, via spells, or have them plan ahead with fire resistant armor etc... or lightning resistance, or cold resistance etc... Adds a bit of depth to PVP when your enemies may be choosing their own elements etc...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Another example of FF would be smartbombs in EVE. Not only will you damage absolutely everything around you when triggered, youll even wipe out your own drones.
Could definately be interesting to see how it works out. From a flavor perspective Id like to see it in game, but from a computer game perspective there may be some implementation concerns. Im going to wait for more details before forming an opinion, but either way I dont expect it to be deal-breaking for me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
IF implemented, hurting someone with FF would likely be a chaotic act and the hurt party should have the option of giving a (high) reputation hit.
(yes, that can be abused by running into fireballs in order to tarnish casters reputation, but that is better than allowing deliberate killing with FF).
Hurting your allies should put your reputation at stake.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
FF doesn't really fit into a real time environment, and more often than not, will be an unavoidable accident attributed to lag/latency...
Certainly friendly fire fits into a real time environment. Construe how you will, if you fire four times through the bathroom door it will not matter whether you love the person behind it. If you are going to fire you have to be sure of your target or you are criminally negligent.
Power entails responsibility. Pretending that a fireball cast at a creature in close proximity to your friend wouldn't also harm that friend is a patent absurdity.
I will argue against teaching inconsequential responsibility in any game, because it is through play that humans most naturally learn. That is the function of play in all animals that can.
The ability to play is arguably a measure of intelligence.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Power entails responsibility. Pretending that a fireball cast at a creature in close proximity to your friend wouldn't also harm that friend is a patent absurdity.
I have yet to play a MMO that doesn't include positional deficiencies. There are always unexpected results when using AOE, I always see some damage go where it wasn't expected. For every online game I have played while physically next to another player(using same internet connection) we are never in the same positions on each others screens. My friend can be well out of harms way on my screen, but right in my line of fire on their screen.
Full FF seems to have more possible negative than positive effects. Selective FF insures intent, and keeps a good portion of the positive effects.
Any form of FF will see more abuse than proper use, and I'm ok with that potential abuse. I want to avoid accidental, not negligent, friendly fire. Your spouse firing up Netflix and causing a temporary latency spike shouldn't punish your character. A cat walking over your keyboard shouldn't kill your party.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Look: It isn't a good thing when some big kid takes his AR-15 into a kindergarten class and starts shooting little kids. I would be the last to argue that games cause violence, but I would also very much urge that we avoid even the possibility that our beloved games are contributing to such incidents because they teach us through repetition that there is no need to check your fire.
If we apply some simple self-control we avoid the possibility of additional regulation. Can we not just apply a little bit of common sense?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I suppose one would also have to consider aoe healing spells in the problem also.
This would bring more dynamics into combat. It would be lame to cast a fireball into a crowd and not have full effect of it even though my compatriots would be in the crowd. Also there can be spells that target everyone in the area, friendlies or hostiles, don't remember if that's the case in PnP though. I think friendly fire is a big issue that turns this game for more like other MMOs or of it's own genre. I support friendly fire thoroughly.
Personally I disagree slightly. I think friendly fire could have benefits.Yes in many situations it would be very difficult to hit enemy targets without hitting friendlies. That however, adds strategy into spell selection. Personally I think the whole, best strategy to kill a bunch of things quickly is to tangle them and your tanks up into one big clump and then drop bombs on their head, is getting a bit overdone.
I agree. Thought has been removed from gameplay by developers due to the whole "everybody wins" mentality that's seized control in MMO creation lately. I disagree with the "no one can lose" concept. Is wormed it's way into all levels of society. I think GWs returning consequences to player actions is a needed, and great, thing.
For every online game I have played while physically next to another player(using same internet connection) we are never in the same positions on each others screens. My friend can be well out of harms way on my screen, but right in my line of fire on their screen.
Thankfully PFO will operate on a pulse system for combat (6 seconds I believe). This will eliminate the majority of lag related issues with AoE. In a combat situation where you have melee along with casters operating at the same time, the casters have no business lobbing AoE spells into the area, the same goes for archers using multiple arrows along with a volley skill. This should apply equally in PvE to the actions of NPC mobs, say a Gnoll Wizard that starts tossing AoE spells should damage their own compatriots as well as players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Valkenr: your position seems to be "I don't want friendly fire because it allows unintentionally hurting allies".
Would that be solved if you got a warning (colour code) before casting that allies might be affected? (ie: if you didn'd get the warning you would be guaranteed they were not)
The other common argument against is: "I don't want friendly fire because it allows intentionally hurting allies". The same warning could be used here to gauge intent: "accidentally" killing allies despite being aware of the risk should risk reputation loss (and sounds chaotic to me).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ "FF is in PnP"
The huge difference between MMO and PnP is that in PnP, pissing off the player next to you has very different consequences! Simply: there are no griefers in PnP play!
If using PnP FF as an argument, you at least have to look at how this is handled in 'random stranger games' at conventions (which I don't know), not how it's run in a typical home game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ "FF is in PnP"
The huge difference between MMO and PnP is that in PnP, pissing off the player next to you has very different consequences! Simply: there are no griefers in PnP play!
If using PnP FF as an argument, you at least have to look at how this is handled in 'random stranger games' at conventions (which I don't know), not how it's run in a typical home game.
There are griefers in PnP play, but they just get banned more immediately than they do online. Whenever you have a social interaction there is the chance that someone will be a jerk. Maybe it's because they want to be the star of the game and take away from others to make themselves bigger. Maybe its because they have some personal issues they are bringing to the table. That may bring a pass, but if someone is being disruptive to the game, the get asked not to come back. Greifing is more prevalent online because of anonymity, but that doesn't stop people from being a jerk in person.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I suppose one would also have to consider aoe healing spells in the problem also.Selective channeling ? Ie just the people in your current party? I imagine the fun to be had if your bubble heals ended healing that dragon the party was fighting for the last 20 minutes.
Well, people WANT to hit the undead with the aoe-channeling positive energy. Evil clerics will be even worse since they channel negative energy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is another one of the 'real-time vs. round based' problems.
In round based combat, you have a good amount of time to decide where to place your spells to avoid friendlies. In real-time combat, not so much.
This is also a 'are we clinging to TTRPG mechanics for a good reason, or just because' question. Would the benefit of having FF in a real time combat (whatever that really is) outweigh the probable headaches? Will it still be fun?
No, in my opinion, to both.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I support FF because in RL and in PnP it exists and as it was mentioned before, It forces people to make decisions and exert control over their power. Someone once said "With great power comes great responsibilty" and I fully believe in that. The point is, WOW and some others were a bit boring cause the tank would just gather them all in a group, then everyone AOEs the group down and tank is fine. I say that is crap. I want a challange and FF adds that challenge as it forces thought and consideration to the game. Games should be mind engaging, not mindsless acts. This, IMHO is just one way to accomplish this.
Besides, as someone else mentioned, what about those of "us" who want to use decite and "cloak and dagger" tactics? This might require gaining someone's trust (IE parting with them) as to get close and make the kill that much more personal. <evil grin>
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Your two points are unrelated, as far as I can tell.
Also, the nightmare of getting flagged as an attacker or other unforseeable consequences just because you accidentaly hit a friendly?
Will you take an accidentla hit to your reputation and alignment? Now the real enemy can attack you without consequence to reputation.
Related things we don't know:
Will being in a group be another flag? Will it prevent the above scenario? Will you be able to backstab someone you are grouped with?
Again, IMHO, the cons way outweigh any possible pros on this topic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...
Again, IMHO, the cons way outweigh any possible pros on this topic.
To the contrary the possible RL cons to not implementing FF vastly outweigh any conceivable IG benefit.
In my evaluation it is beyond question that FF should be enabled. What is in question, for me, is whether and how it can be done well, such that people playing the game know to watch out where they are pointing that fireball, yet also can selectively use that fireball as it was intended without incurring collateral damage.
Can it be done well?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This doesnt really matter either way to me. But if FF is implemented, all that means is ill probably avoid even bothering with AoE attacks and focus on single target attacks. Leaving others that are too cautious due to fear of hitting their allies to hesitate. Just choose a nice squishy mark like a mage and keep htting til its dead.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I land on the side of FF being a positive thing. It means folks have to pay attention to what they slot and AoE may not be the spell or feat of choice. It means thinking before spamming, it encourages alternative spell/feat uses. It encourages you to act within certain alignment strategies. It opens up possibilities and improbabilities that add flavour to the game. It takes nothing away, it only adds. Personally I'd like a game where spamming fireball isn't all there is to do. And if that's all I do, or want to do, well there's an alignment for that.
If you do hit a friendly, well, shame on you. Learn to play your char better. (no flame intended...or pun) Besides, depends on what you hit 'em with. Mass heal with undead around sounds sweet. Burning hands when they are trapped in a web, not a bad thing maybe. Elemental druids burning down a gate while mages spam fireballs at the ramparts, cool...err, hot! Tank has to pull off the dragon to get some TLC, time for that "jack of all trades, master of none" to step up.
As for the align/rep hit, I guess that's dependent on if you kill them, and even if you do, you're probably getting it back from all the bad guys you're killing. Just like a pally needs to be very careful about how he/she dispenses justice, so do you. As for the real enemy attacking you without consequence, if war is declared, or you are in an unsettled hex they could have anyway. (Curious choice of words tho...is your real enemy the group you're in? - 'cause yes they could choose to turn on you. Maybe)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One thing I will mention, is that in all my time gaming, whenever I been in a TPK either as a GM or a Player, I'd estimate 70% of the time the point were things went pear shaped was due to friendly fire.
If there is FF in game, I will be lobbying to make casting an AoE attack spell like Fireball or Lightning Bolt a Criminal offense in my settlement. If you fireball a team member in civilized lands, you will be hunted by NPC guards and PC enforcers. The potential harm to allies outweigh the benefits to killing mass enemies at once, especially when you can be just as effective by casting movement killers like web, entangle, sleet storm, or spike growth and then safely hitting them from range with single target attacks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In my evaluation it is beyond question that FF should be enabled.Why?
As I said earlier in this thread:
- Providing people with power without an entailing responsibility for the consequences is not just deceitful, it is irresponsible.
- If you have a weapon ensure it does not damage your ally.
- It isn't a good thing when some big kid takes his AR-15 into a kindergarten class and starts shooting little kids. I would be the last to argue that games cause violence, but I would also very much urge that we avoid even the possibility that our beloved games are contributing to such incidents because they teach us through repetition that there is no need to check your fire.
- If we apply some simple self-control we avoid the possibility of additional regulation. Can we not just apply a little bit of common sense?
- Defend Liberty: Be Responsible.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What possible RL cons are there to not implementing a system in game that will be abused by griefers to either kill party members, or to cause party members to attack them in order to kill their reputation score?
We should reinforce the notions that:
[list]|
Goblin Squad Member
|
One way of dealing with AOE with FF on would be to allow the ranged characters to mark a few targets as either friendly or hostile before using the AOE. This would allow certain AOE spells to only hit the enemy. This would not make sense for something like fireball but it could for something like chain lighting, call lighting or an AOE version of magic missile.
I think this is a great discussion. I'm neither for or against FF, but reading some of these posts makes me sway from one side to the other, then back again, lol.
I really like the idea that yes there should be FF, but also have a system for elemental affinity/resistance so that your party can largely mitigate its own damage to itself.
My biggest problem with FF (and unfortunately this is a HUGE concern), is the bounty hunting system that this game will feature. What I don't like is Bounty Hunters who wiggle their way into a group, with the sole intent of backstabbing a party member to claim a bounty. Maybe this will be a really cool 'feature' and I'm not entirely against it. But my concern is that it becomes the go to strat for Bounty Hunters, and all of a sudden, you have a community who doesn't like socializing/grouping with people they don't know out of fear of either Bounty Hunting or even just to grief someone - maybe for personal reasons outside of the game, or political reasons inside the game. While I'm aware there are reputation and alignment mechanics in place to discourage random/senseless killing; I don't think this is something it would prevent. If there's a legitimate motive to kill a player, I'm guessing most people would be willing to deal with the consequences after doing it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In my evaluation it is beyond question that FF should be enabled.Why?As I said earlier in this thread:
- Providing people with power without an entailing responsibility for the consequences is not just deceitful, it is irresponsible.
- If you have a weapon ensure it does not damage your ally.
- It isn't a good thing when some big kid takes his AR-15 into a kindergarten class and starts shooting little kids. I would be the last to argue that games cause violence, but I would also very much urge that we avoid even the possibility that our beloved games are contributing to such incidents because they teach us through repetition that there is no need to check your fire.
- If we apply some simple self-control we avoid the possibility of additional regulation. Can we not just apply a little bit of common sense?
- Defend Liberty: Be Responsible.
Sorry, but this argument is irrelevant to the game. It's a straw-man slppery-slope of the highest magnitude to use the possibility of kids shooting up a room in RL being linked to a Fireball not hurting your allies in a fantasy game.
If you allow that all that is going to happen is that people will fireball their team-mates because they want to be a jerk. Reputation won't matter to them. It will also cause those that want to bring everyone down to their level run right into the spells or blades of their "allies" to cause themselves to be attacked by friendly fire, causing massive reputation damage to the character that was attacking a legitimate target but ended up hitting the griefer because they put them self in the way of your attack.
If you want to teach kids a lesson about safety and responsibility, then do so. The place for that is not a Fantasy MMO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
'It is only a game' ignores the fact that every hunting creature including man learns behaviors through play. It is what we do, and what we have always done. Cats do it. Dogs do it. Every hunter learns by playing.
If you let children play, or frankly some adults, and they grow used to the idea that it is their weapon's job to sort out the good guys from the bad guys, then you are potentially contributing to a great tragedy.
Teach responsibility. Teach responsibly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Sorry...Yes, Imbicatus, be very sorry. Taking the slightest chance that habitually expecting your weapon to be selective in its targetting is irresponsible.
Be very VERY sorry.
I agree with this statement, completely. I just don't agree that casting a fireball in a fantasy game has ANY relevance to RL weapon safety.