Goblin Squad Member
|
.... dormant if we don't maintain the prerequisite alignment we needed to learn it in the first place?
This may lead to a serious design flaw for an MMO being designed for players to play a game for a number of years. We may end up with quite a few dormant skills due to alignment shifts.
If GW says that we need to be a certain alignment to learn a skill, but not to maintain its use, that would be inconsistant with their alignment system.
I have a can of worms here, anyone want to open it?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, it makes sense the way it is... at least for some of the skills. If a paladin learns a skill that only a Paladin can learn, but then falls towards either Chaos or Evil, it makes good sense that he cannot continue to use the skill as it is a skill given to a deity's divine champions. If you no longer meet that deity's standards and no longer follow the code of ethics required, why should said deity continue to grant you a portion of his power?
On the other hand, you still know HOW to use that power. You just don't have access to it any longer.
Hopefully, any skills that require a certain alignment will fall under this kind of category. I think a lot of skills(especially the rogue-ish ones) may be easier to find training for if you're aligned a certain way(not many lawful people know how to pick pockets or pull a second story job) but don't require a certain alignment to use.
As long as skills are divided up this way, I'm fine with the system. From what I've read in the blogs, I think this is what they have in mind anyway.
So short version, if it's a skill that merely require knowledge and talent, alignment shouldn't affect it. If it's something that requires you to gain power from an outside(i.e. a god or perhaps other good/evil aligned outsider) source, then maintaining a certain alignment in order for that 'power source' to continue to provide you with juice makes sense. Even clerics should have to deal with this a bit, though it's likely easier for them as opposed to paladins. If a lawful good cleric becomes lawful evil, they can just worship a different deity. Though I would like to point out that gods can be worshipped by clergy and people 1 alignment step away from the deity's alignment. So a lawful neutral deity can have lawful good, lawful neutral, lawful evil AND true neutral clergy. The Hell Knights, a major faction in the Pathfinder and PFO setting are a perfect example of this...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure I see the problem. If a particular skill requires a particular alignment, the system would simply check for that condition before allowing you to toggle that skill. If the alignment is no longer appropriate, the system checks, you don't match up, and the skill doesn't fire. You can still have the skill listed and retain the experience spent on learning it - it just won't fire. In a game where your alignment can change, and then change back, I would think they plan to allow for a relatively simple "on/off" switch.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure I see the problem. If a particular skill requires a particular alignment, the system would simply check for that condition before allowing you to toggle that skill. If the alignment is no longer appropriate, the system checks, you don't match up, and the skill doesn't fire. You can still have the skill listed and retain the experience spent on learning it - it just won't fire. In a game where your alignment can change, and then change back, I would think they plan to allow for a relatively simple "on/off" switch.
That and some form of penance tasks eg Paladin.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure I see the problem. If a particular skill requires a particular alignment, the system would simply check for that condition before allowing you to toggle that skill. If the alignment is no longer appropriate, the system checks, you don't match up, and the skill doesn't fire. You can still have the skill listed and retain the experience spent on learning it - it just won't fire. In a game where your alignment can change, and then change back, I would think they plan to allow for a relatively simple "on/off" switch.That and some form of penance tasks eg Paladin.
This seems reasonable to me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
DeciusBrutus,
Do you mean to learn the skill or to keep/use it? I see the point with Paladins, since they have to be in harmony with their deity to keep/use their powers. I don't see the same issue with factions. To get a faction trainer to teach me a faction skill, I would need to convince him that I'm a member of his faction. I don't see why I can't use the skill even if I drop out of that faction. The catch would be, I can't train any higher, since the faction trainer won't teach me now that I'm not in his faction.
Now, with an assassin's need to remain evil in alignment, I think it makes sense, but I may have a slightly different take on why. I see hiring yourself out to kill people as evil. If you are no longer evil, it is your new found conscience (your "no longer evil" conscience) that keeps you from using the skill.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Now, with an assassin's need to remain evil in alignment, I think it makes sense, but I may have a slightly different take on why. I see hiring yourself out to kill people as evil. If you are no longer evil, it is your new found conscience (your "no longer evil" conscience) that keeps you from using the skill.
This is a good way to rationalize the loss of alignment based skill, outside of falling out of grace with a Deity.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Im not really sure I like the idea of dormant skills. If I have put in the effort to learn them, I should be able to use them. This is from a time/money standpoint.
From the alignment standpoint I grudgingly have to admit it makes sense. The only thing I can think of is ditch alignment and rep, but instead use a faction or guild points system. And in this way get points that go to you/your guild and the way you spend the points and what things you get for yourself or your guild are up to you. Come up with a different system for tracking and dealing with the non-existant (game isnt even out yet) griefing. But I know a lot of people wouldnt like this so.......
How about this? Im still for ditching alignment as it works now and have positive and negative degrees of each alignment. And the extreme degrees dont punish you. They just have a ballance of taking away some things but gaining others. The way the alignment and reputation system work now seem to make it harder on bad guys and in some cases punish them for being bad guys. This design was due to the griefing paranioa.
In other words, Alignment = Reputation.
Good-----------Neutral-----------Evil
Lawful---------Neutral-----------Chaotic
Where your reputation is on either alignment would determin your alignment. 0 being absolute neutral for either scale, and 7500 and -7500 for each extremes. And instead of punishment for playing evil or chaotic you just have tradeoffs.
Sorry for the slight derail Bludd, but I thought it kinda tied in and I got carried away.
To everyone else, you may procede with the your torches and pitchforks. ;b
Hmm. Another idea that just popped into my head. How about powers that require you to be using a certain flag.
i.e. All of those really super ridiculously spiffy assassin skills won't even work at all unless you have the assassin flag turned on.
Maybe do the same thing with certain skills aligned with the other factions/alignments. It takes away confusion about what you can and can't use, because if you can't activate the flag(because it says under the skill when you buy it, requires Champion flag or Assassin flag, etc.) you can't use the skill.
It might be a little extreme, but if you make these top end skills, the very best of the best then it makes it worthwhile. It also makes the flags stronger without directly buffing them. Perhaps, you could even make buying these skills less expensive that other similar 'level' skills that don't require a flag to use, since the requirements for these skills is higher in other ways?
In other words, Alignment = Reputation.Good-----------Neutral-----------Evil
Lawful---------Neutral-----------Chaotic
Where your reputation is on either alignment would determin your alignment. 0 being absolute neutral for either scale, and 7500 and -7500 for each extremes. And instead of punishment for playing evil or chaotic you just have tradeoffs.
Sorry for the slight derail Bludd, but I thought it kinda tied in and I got carried away.
To everyone else, you may procede with the your torches and pitchforks. ;b
Errr.... hmm. It doesn't sound like you've played pretty much any MMO with open PvP, like ever. Fearing something that has happened in the past isn't paranoia. EVERY SINGLE GAME that has had open PvP has had tons of griefers. It's one of the big reasons that saying a game has open PvP is such a turn off to such a large segment of the gaming community. In the past few years, a few games have done a better job of dealing with this unfortunately VERY large section of gaming society, but it still doesn't get rid of them.
GW has talked about this in their blogs. Alignment isn't going anywhere. It's a huge part of Golarion. Good and evil, law and chaos aren't abstract concepts. They're living, breathing, INCREDIBLY powerful things. The reputation system is an entirely different thing. I honestly wish we had different reputations for each segment of society. One reputation score for everyone in the entire game seems kind of... shortsighted.
While that church full of lawful good and lawful neutral people might think the world of your lawful good fighter/champion of justice, the thieves guild on the other side of town whose drug smuggling ring you just busted probably won't have such a high opinion of you.
Anyway, saying that people are 'paranoid' about griefers in an open pvp game is simply ludicrous. It's like saying your paranoid of getting wet when it's raining outside and you're about to have to run out to your car in said rain. Definitely not paranoia.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ AvenaOats
/thumbs up
@ Zanathos
No offense dude, but like I said game isnt even out yet. Also, I have played plenty OPEN PVP MMOs. The devs can put in other systems and measures to prevent griefing. I just dont like the current direction of these meathods. And I beleive in the ability of the community to police itself. Also Id be interested in your definition or examples of actions that qualify as griefing.
P.S. You have failed to convice me of anything other than that you are probably one of the more paranoid. No offense intended.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Greedalox,
First, this isn't aimed at you, just the argument you brought up - the "I paid good money" or "I've devoted 'X' amount of time" argument that tends to raise my hackles.
If you know the system and it's rules ahead of time, you take the chance that you may lose those skills if you allow your character to do actions which slide your character away from that skill's use criteria. Crying foul after the fact, and demanding satisfaction due to your time spent or money paid when you knew the rules up front seems pretty pointless. Strikes me as some of my more entitled students who think every school rule should include exceptions just for them because, well, they're just that special.
For example, if you play a Paladin, then allow your Paladin to take actions that will clearly move them away from LG and suspend your Paladin skills, you knew the ramifications of those actions up front. If you put all that time and money into building Paladin skills, but then don't role-play in a way that is in keeping with a Paladin's alignment code, maybe the real problem is that you shouldn't be playing a Paladin.
Greedalox,
First, this isn't aimed at you, just the argument you brought up - the "I paid good money" or "I've devoted 'X' amount of time" argument that tends to raise my hackles.
If you know the system and it's rules ahead of time, you take the chance that you may lose those skills if you allow your character to do actions which slide your character away from that skill's use criteria. Crying foul after the fact, and demanding satisfaction due to your time spent or money paid when you knew the rules up front seems pretty pointless. Strikes me as some of my more entitled students who think every school rule should include exceptions just for them because, well, they're just that special.
For example, if you play a Paladin, then allow your Paladin to take actions that will clearly move them away from LG and suspend your Paladin skills, you knew the ramifications of those actions up front. If you put all that time and money into building Paladin skills, but then don't role-play in a way that is in keeping with a Paladin's alignment code, maybe the real problem is that you shouldn't be playing a Paladin.
Well said.
I think there are plenty of "roles" for people who don't want to chance their actions causing them to lose access to abilities, even though it seems very easy to bump your alignment back to where it was if it were to change.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Hobs
I see where you are going with this, and I do understand. I apply this type of thinking only to goods and services that I have payed real money for. And in game I will be working for it. Just as in real life I work for a living, Im not on welfare. Im not one of the millions of people in this world who thinks the earth revolves around them and owes them a livving or special exceptions. Sorry if I gave you this impression. I do expect quality service for what I have paid for according to contract.
In this case you are right in that, if I know the system ahead of time, then I have no room to complain. However, this game is a bit different from others as it has the whole crowdforging angle. And to my knowledge nothing is set in stone. So that tells me that on certain things until the devs say that its locked in place, I will continue to push the debate on issues. When they do say that an issue is locked to further debate, then I will accept that as the final decision, and not complain later. And no matter what, I will likely play and enjoy the game, even if I dont agree with every single thing.
I hope this cleared up where I stand on the issue, and maybe given you a better impression of me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
*grins* Like I said, I wasn't passing judgement on you. I assume you're a well-meaning, stand-up kind of crazy goblinoid. :)
I wholeheartedly agree that on those topics which do not yet seem set in stone, we should all voice our opinion...even on those that are. This forum is a place to share ideas, and who knows - an idea we share here might provide a new take on a topic that the dev. team never considered. My reply was based on people who complain after they know the way the system works. You and I seem to be in agreement on the futility of that practice.
*leans in closer and says in a hushed tone*
Personally, I have misgivings about the whole alignment system, but I doubt it's going to change what GW tries to do. I would rather that alignment were judged by others based on our actions and not a game mechanic at all. Likewise with reputation, though NPC's might track reputation based on your interaction with various groups/factions/etc., but alignment...I don't think it's needed. I know that makes certain classes tougher to run - how do you make certain a Paladin is worthy of his powers if we don't have an alignment to track - but I see an alignment system causing more headaches than such "class" requirements warrant. Either way, I don't think my opinion is going to change the trajectory of the game much, so I'll just learn to live with GW's decisions. After all, I plan for Hobs to be neutral to neutral-good, and given how I plan to play him, I don't think I'll have any trouble remaining that alignment.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
DeciusBrutus,
Do you mean to learn the skill or to keep/use it? I see the point with Paladins, since they have to be in harmony with their deity to keep/use their powers. I don't see the same issue with factions. To get a faction trainer to teach me a faction skill, I would need to convince him that I'm a member of his faction. I don't see why I can't use the skill even if I drop out of that faction. The catch would be, I can't train any higher, since the faction trainer won't teach me now that I'm not in his faction.
Now, with an assassin's need to remain evil in alignment, I think it makes sense, but I may have a slightly different take on why. I see hiring yourself out to kill people as evil. If you are no longer evil, it is your new found conscience (your "no longer evil" conscience) that keeps you from using the skill.
One thought would be that the ritual required to do the extra-extra dead assassination ability requires something only acquired from that faction that must be fresh. The gameplay basis would be "only one faction's abilities may be available at any given time".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thanks for the understanding Hobs. And I fully agree with everything you said in your reply. Im just the stubborn type, I like to push it even when it seems a fools hope. I will say this though, the last few weeks of blogs have shown the devs to be fairly open-minded and they have re-examined and revisited certain systems and game mechanics. I think this mostly due to feed-back and discussion from the forums.
I like you Hobs, you are the kind of fellow I would tip with reputation, after you killed and filched me. XD
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
If it looks like I'm stretching to find a lore reason to justify why faction abilities can't be used after you break from that faction, it's because I am. I think there's a very compelling game design reason why there should be abilities which are always mutually exclusive, and having them potentially locked to faction as well as equipment opens up a new dimension for meaningful interaction of abilities.
It also opens up the possibility that there should be a different thing that some other faction has access to that is as powerful as assassination.
What should the Pathfinder Society allied characters be able to do that no one else can?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The reputation system is an entirely different thing. I honestly wish we had different reputations for each segment of society. One reputation score for everyone in the entire game seems kind of... shortsighted.
That's an interesting thought. When you say, "each segment of society" how do you envision that? I think the rep system still has more info to come, which may include more specific contexts for reputation change?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
DeciusBrutus,
I agree. I like a system that is rich with possibilities and different factions, though in past games, I don't care for automatic "teeter-totter" faction changes. That is, let's say Faction A is enemies with Faction B. I've always disliked that gaining rep with Faction A automatically loses rep with Faction B. It locks out the chance for a person playing both sides of a conflict.
That you need to get in good with a particular faction to learn their exclusive skill, I have no problem with at all. However, if there isn't an alignment or religious criteria that links the skill to that faction, I don't see how you justify needing to remain in that faction to use the skill, unless that faction has some special control over the skill - they are the only one who sells the components used for a special spell/branch of magic, only they have a special poison used for that special buff/debuff skill, etc. If they teach me how to use a weapon in a new way, and I still own the weapon but no longer belong to that faction, how can they keep me from using it as trained. As I stated earlier, I can't train to the next highest skill "level" in it without membership, but what stops me from using it to my present ability level?
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Here it's not the lore which has already been established that matters, but the new lore that is created. When the evil cult develops a partial countermeasure to the Mark of Pharasma, what requirements does that act have? Does assassination send the souls of the victim to a domain other than Pharasma's? Is the extra step which turns the killing into an assassination an invocation to a god which seizes the soul away from Pharasma and forces it towards a realm where Pharasma's mark has a different, less powerful effect?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A question about lore: Will Or should Pathfinder Online develop its own lore, alter the PnP lore or become a hybrid of the two?
Will GW treat PFO as if it is an alternate universe of the various PFRPG setting(s), much in the same way that Cryptic / CBS did with Star Trek Online?
Even with a hybrid, PFO could break some PFRPG rules and still not become unrecognizable.
DeciusBrutus,
I agree. I like a system that is rich with possibilities and different factions, though in past games, I don't care for automatic "teeter-totter" faction changes. That is, let's say Faction A is enemies with Faction B. I've always disliked that gaining rep with Faction A automatically loses rep with Faction B. It locks out the chance for a person playing both sides of a conflict.
That you need to get in good with a particular faction to learn their exclusive skill, I have no problem with at all. However, if there isn't an alignment or religious criteria that links the skill to that faction, I don't see how you justify needing to remain in that faction to use the skill, unless that faction has some special control over the skill - they are the only one who sells the components used for a special spell/branch of magic, only they have a special poison used for that special buff/debuff skill, etc. If they teach me how to use a weapon in a new way, and I still own the weapon but no longer belong to that faction, how can they keep me from using it as trained. As I stated earlier, I can't train to the next highest skill "level" in it without membership, but what stops me from using it to my present ability level?
If it were done correctly, allying with a faction to learn it's skills then leaving that faction to go somewhere else would be enough of a disadvantage all on it's own. I know this is a cliche example, but when a ninja abandons his clan in order to help someone the ninja's clan doesn't like, they normally get sent to the very top of the clan's hit list. When Drizzt Do'Urden leaves the Underdark, he got promoted pretty high on the Drow's list of 'things to do'.
If the penalties for doing this kind of thing are stiff enough, allowing the player to keep the skills would be fine.
It might be tough to keep that under control in the game, however. In tabletop, that kind of thing could lead to awesome RP. Dunno WHAT it would do in a game like PFO.
Might be interesting to explore....
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
If, as you say, every assassin still allied with the faction would be provided a permanent reason to hunt and injunction from being on friendly terms with a betrayer, it might serve as a deterrent.
I'm not sure how to excommunicate everyone still not hostile to the betrayer without getting a lot of false positives.
If, as you say, every assassin still allied with the faction would be provided a permanent reason to hunt and injunction from being on friendly terms with a betrayer, it might serve as a deterrent.
I'm not sure how to excommunicate everyone still not hostile to the betrayer without getting a lot of false positives.
That is certainly the problem. Likely the response would have to be different for each faction group. The obvious answer for an assassin's guild would be a permanent contract placed on the head of the PC who had left the guild. That would be a large enough penalty to discourage it in the first place, but it would still be players providing other players content.
Not sure if this works as well for other groups. It seems it would work best if the penalty for leaving a group had something to do with the group. i.e if you learn skills from a merchants group, anything bought in the game would automatically be 15% more expensive, and guild merchants wouldn't sell to you. If you leave the Hell Knights, you get them on your case with bounties. Maybe some organizations just wouldn't care.
The penalty would likely have to have something to do with how rare and powerful the skills are.
Its nice to see all this bantoring about things in this game, as if any of you will have any say at all ..about this game. I have yet to see any kick start..ever really involve players. If path finders does.. it will be a first.
I'm sure they read all this free information you share here among your selves. Most real investment in any business is a trade off for money. Have any of you received a written agreement, a written garrentee to anything involving this game? I think not. THe game will be what its going to be, requradless of any discussion here. It will more than likely effected by costs etc..follow the path of many games into oblivion. and anything here..will fall on dead ears.
Oh I did not intend to piss on your camp fire..but give you warriors a wake up call.
I do enjoy listening to great minds..., but reality is ....Like all young voters in America, you do not have a dog in the race, so what ever happens is simply by chance.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Capt LuCas,
You make a valid point, that it is infrequent at best that even in beta phase, consumer driven changes are made by game designers.
Perhaps what the Devs could do, considering this project is even further back than your typical beta, is explain what ideas of our's they have adopted.
But then there is this other reality we must consider. There are over 9000 crowd forgers and less than 100 very active posters (I used 100 to not under state the actual number, but I think it is probably half that amount). How much should our voices count considering we represent such a small, but vocal minority?
Now back to alignment based skills please........
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Its nice to see all this bantoring about things in this game, as if any of you will have any say at all ..about this game. I have yet to see any kick start..ever really involve players. If path finders does.. it will be a first.
I'm sure they read all this free information you share here among your selves. Most real investment in any business is a trade off for money. Have any of you received a written agreement, a written garrentee to anything involving this game? I think not. THe game will be what its going to be, requradless of any discussion here. It will more than likely effected by costs etc..follow the path of many games into oblivion. and anything here..will fall on dead ears.Oh I did not intend to piss on your camp fire..but give you warriors a wake up call.
I do enjoy listening to great minds..., but reality is ....Like all young voters in America, you do not have a dog in the race, so what ever happens is simply by chance.
While I hope your wrong, there is a good chance your not. The fact of the matter is that if GW does what they advertised they would do, then they are getting ideas of things to add, things not to add, directions to steer, and features their players want in the game and the game wil turn out better for it. It is very possible the GW is just sitting back, posting here and there to show they are keeping true with their claim of crowdforging, but are really doing their own thing and not listening to us. I REALLY hope they arn't, but they could be.
However, as you said, if they are doing as they said they are, they WOULD be the first. They are trying to make a game that will last, the new EQ or Eve or WoW or whatever, though different from all above. I appreciate the "wake up call" but I for one, don't think you are correct. If it turns out you are, then GG, but it doesn't change the fact I still think this is turning out to be a solid and enjoyable game. Sure they have a few things I don't care for but that will happen. Now back on topic.
1st, why does everyone hate on the assassins? Yes, I plan to be primarialy an assassin, but even if I wasn't, I fully intend to push the agenda that if assassins are to be in game, that they be the feared and deadly characters they are ment to be. Yes, they need to be balanced, but that shouldn't be hard to do. Just like how a mage gets balanced to a fighter in TT, where the mage is the most powerful character in the game....till they run out of spells, then a simple commoner can end their life, where the fighter can fight for days without stopping and still have HP to spare. I see the assassin, in PFO, as being a character that uses stealth and disguise/bluff skills to get close to his target (unless it is a ranged kill but there can still be limits to that) and then powerful enough to dispatch his target quickly, maybe 1-2 blows, and they given THE CHANCE!!!! to get out safely (Either by running for his/her life, or by using the same skills that guy him/her to the target in the first place.) I say the chance because otherwise, even with a time limit (cooldown) for this "1 shot kill" power woudl lead to abuse and being deemed OP. I think the focus on level skills instead of the art of combat would help to balance the assassin more than limiting his ability to kill quickly. After all, I for one, would either drop being an assassin, or make it extreamly (More then reasonable) expensive if I have to get into a city where I am not welcome to track down and get close to my target, only to stand there and trade blows for 5 mins while he calls for help in game and out and then it is no longer me vs target, but me vs settlement and even if I do kill the target (which I doubt I will) I won't take another step before I die and lose my prosessions. The contract reward would end up just paying to replace gear I lost. It defeats the purpose of being an assassin, making a living and profit. Also, it makes the fear of being assassinated minimal because since I can't one shot you and walk away, just keep friends close and I have to bring an army with me to kill you.
As for the OP, I agree that some skills, expecially those tied to a deity, special faction, or even something alignment based (such as the ability to 1 shot assassinate people) would definately be tied to the corrisponding alignment/faction/deity and loss of said alignment/faction/deity would lead to loss of said ability. Now, that being said, you still retain current skill level and retian the ability itself, but are unable to use it due to the "power" behind the ability has been stripped from you. I would definately be ok with, and support only a few skills, maybe even just the very powerful ones, to fall into this "catagory", and that ost skills (like weapon and armor skills) to fall into the anyone can learn and use no matter changes in alignment/faction/deity.
@bludd
Not to play devils advocate, but if capt lucus is right, and GW is just playing us and leading us with the proverbial carrot, wouldn't they just "claim" to have gotten ideas from us if they were ideas already intended for the game but one of "us" vocalized it before they announced it? Just saying LOL, but I do like it and even if it wasn't true, i'd like to get an idea of ideas they really like and are doable from the forums.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Where appropriate for the Faction involved, a bounty placed by the Faction on your head for leaving seems feasible. Could you have a criminal flag visible to only those of the Faction you left for a set period? Not sure, I'm not a programmer, so I don't know how difficult that could be to code.
If you leapfrog from one Faction to another, the natural consequence of pissing too many Factions off might be that you've limited the number of Faction related towns, merchants, etc. that you can interact with by your actions. Burn too many bridges and you have few bridges left to use. If whole settlements can be aligned with these Factions, that might become very limiting indeed, especially in a game that your character hopes to exist in for years to come.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
They would have to limit the game design of necessity, and will surely prefer what fits with what is already in progress. Yet think of what you would do in their place: if you had a complex task to have a creative engineering team perform and approached a decision point where the direction is in question is it not standard project management practice to consult the customer? Yes, it definitely is standard PM practice. Consequently, Capt LucaS, your point that 'real business' trends toward profit argues more strongly for the opposite of your intended point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It could just be coincidence, but Ive noticed a bunch of the last few blogs were revisiting or rexamining game mechanics the devs had previously laid down. And this mysteriously coincided with forum chatter. So while they might not be using our exact ideas, I do think that our opinions go into the decision making process to some degree.
Also Im sure as crowdforgin goes along, we will see more focussed groups as stated in kickstarter, as well as voting polls for various issues. Even if its as simple as moats or no moats around a castle.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Its nice to see all this bantoring about things in this game, as if any of you will have any say at all ..about this game. I have yet to see any kick start..ever really involve players. If path finders does.. it will be a first.
GW has a lot of successful/proven experience in this industry. I think this is something people in general forget or underestimate; I refer to new posters who make a declarative statement about some fragment of information they had an emotional reaction to. It's why I'd always insist that people read the available information first before posting. That's not to say an unfriendly response, far from it, but there's a difference between an amateur understanding and a professional one, and it suits BOTH if the former works WITH what is already provided by the latter. Obviously the lack of links or faq on these forums do not help. But if someone can start from a statement of fact as opposed to opinion or what they feel would make the game better...
Questioning assumptions of game design does not harm, however once a few facts have been laid out. But understanding those comes after being aware of them in the first place (!)and also lets other forum users (not to mention devs) know that the questioner is: Sincere, has a mind to learn and access and is productive where it is needed/indicated.
Long preamble: I think this simple description also applies to crowdforging. Where players can really help the dev team is for eg:
1) Volume of players and input in testing eg combat iteration and feedback esp. the very best mmorpg experienced players.
2) Working to harmonize a community that self-organises and participates along lines of eg filtering input all the way from grass-roots upwards to the dev team.
3) Providing specific feedback when the devs directly ask for it, eg Stephen Cheney asked just recently concerning attaching the assassination skills to an npc alliance (to keep assassin skills cool, they have to selective involvement in the game world in some way).
4) Providing general background buzz to the general direction the company is going: Any serious spikes in response likely notify GW of a major reaction eg "Capstone abilities".
5) Obviously people who take an especial interest in the game can further spread the game ideas that the devs have added additional commentary to in the forums eg where those ideas take people out of their comfort zone "open pvp" and the difference between "ffa pvp" by comparison with other games designs and results.
6) The devs have mentioned some prioritization of features to vote on, which might feel more relevant during EE when players can actually get a feel for what is lacking/needed the most to what is currently working or working in too limited a fashion.
7) Player-made resources eg fansites, combat calc. tools etc
8) Players as last quality control check ie 'polishing' the cleavage window sensibility for the game.
etc.
Sure a lot of this is not as sexy as we're 50:50 partners in developing this, but as said, to interact with these professionals on such a LARGE commercial project is v awesome and I'm sure can be v valuable to the devs, especially as there are plenty of experiences/povs and intelligent collaborators in these forums already.
Coming back to that initial preamble, not just the strength of the design ideas, but how well the devs have been able to communicate them, as evidenced by the responses in the forums, is almost equally significant - and a good reason why it is a good idea for people to read the available information to inform their reaction: Then the devs can equally access their communication as much as the quality of the ideas proposed. Eg that that mathematics blog was a real doosey!
I do enjoy listening to great minds..., but reality is ....Like all young voters in America, you do not have a dog in the race, so what ever happens is simply by chance.
You would have to actually read the past threads to know this, but off the top of my head I can think of one pretty large change the Devs made as a direct result of a forum members suggestion. That is the SAD mechanic that Bandits will use to waylay caravans. That came as a result of a suggestion by Bluddwolf, a member of the forum.
There are several other things I've seen, but honestly they escape me at the moment. Suffice to say that in a normal game studio I would say your correct. It's cool that GW isn't a "normal" studio. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You would have to actually read the past threads to know this, but off the top of my head I can think of one pretty large change the Devs made as a direct result of a forum members suggestion. That is the SAD mechanic that Bandits will use to waylay caravans. That came as a result of a suggestion by Bluddwolf, a member of the forum.
There are several other things I've seen, but honestly they escape me at the moment. Suffice to say that in a normal game studio I would say your correct. It's cool that GW isn't a "normal" studio. ;)
I'm flattered that you believe this, but I can not confirm it. I would certainly be honored if it is true, but I'd only want credit if it works well.
Otherwise.... "Bluddwolf, who?.....Never heard of him"
I did however coin two phrases that I am proud of:
The acronym SAD for stand and deliver. The other is the "1 Copper piece" exploit scenario associated with the SAD system.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
....Like all young voters in America, you do not have a dog in the race, so what ever happens is simply by chance.
Patently untrue political assertions have no place on the forums. If you have a bone to pick with representative democracy as expressed in 'America' vote the bums out and elect your own changes. That will still leave Mexico, Canada, and all the nations of Central and South America, but one step at a time, k? Thx, bye.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it were done correctly, allying with a faction to learn it's skills then leaving that faction to go somewhere else would be enough of a disadvantage all on it's own. I know this is a cliche example, but when a ninja abandons his clan in order to help someone the ninja's clan doesn't like, they normally get sent to the very top of the clan's hit list. When Drizzt Do'Urden leaves the Underdark, he got promoted pretty high on the Drow's list of 'things to do'.
If the penalties for doing this kind of thing are stiff enough, allowing the player to keep the skills would be fine.
It might be tough to keep that under control in the game, however. In tabletop, that kind of thing could lead to awesome RP. Dunno WHAT it would do in a game like
...
http://www.goblinscomic.com/07112005/ seems relevant :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am hoping that from an RP stand point if you lose the use of the ability through whatever circumstance. Example (Paladin hunting goblin children) That said Paladin maybe Rping on his way to anti-Paladin, and once his alignment gets to CE he can trade the Paladin abilities in for Anti-Paladin abilities. Example (Detect good for detect Evil)
The part for factions being able to trade abilities I could only see fitting if you so outrage your original faction the enemy faction would do the same thing, but at a reduced amount like maybe 50% of your previous faction. This being because they are leery of you maybe being a double-agent.
The best example of faction dropping I can thing of is Eando Kline. He found a serpent burial chamber while on a pathfinder mission, and saw it was to dangerous for anyone to explore further. He lied to the Decemvirate, and was actually found in the Serpent Skull adventure I do not remember why though. I know he does not join the Aspis Consortium though. He has just made it his mission to stop anyone from unleashing the serpents.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really, really do not like the concept of alignment restricted skills.
If "skills" includes things like a Paladin's Lay on Hands, or a Barbarian's Rage (examples someone mentioned above), then okay. But it should be a very limited number of "skills."
Barbarians, Clerics, Paladins (basically divine casters), etc. If its table-top analog doesn't have an alignment restriction, don't give it one in PFO. The alignment system is supposed to be a driver of social interaction, and I think it would be best not to let its influence go much beyond that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I really, really do not like the concept of alignment restricted skills.
If "skills" includes things like a Paladin's Lay on Hands, or a Barbarian's Rage (examples someone mentioned above), then okay. But it should be a very limited number of "skills."
Barbarians, Clerics, Paladins (basically divine casters), etc. If its table-top analog doesn't have an alignment restriction, don't give it one in PFO. The alignment system is supposed to be a driver of social interaction, and I think it would be best not to let its influence go much beyond that.
The problem there, I think, is that PFO will probably have skill subsets and possibly new skills not defined in TT rules. It isn't that I think TT rules are somehow incomplete, but because of the increased granularity of computer models compared to dice-based models, coupled with the fact that selling training in these skill subsets will be a significant source of GW's bread and butter, there will be many more trainable skills in PFO than make sense in TT.
So if we limit the alignment-dependent skills to those cited in TT rules, you are asking for all new skills and skill subsets must not be afforded to alignment-dependent character types such as paladin, druid, etc..
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But if a skill is a subset of a skill that has an alignment restriction, then it would make sense for that too to have an alignment restriction.
I just see a lot of people really excited to put way too many rules and restrictions into everything and make alignment affect everything.
I guess its an extension of the "all discussions end up about alignment" thing that happens here.
[EDIT] What i'm getting at, is you should ask yourself if a person of a particular alignment would be incapable of using a particular skill because of their alignment, or are they just unlikely to use it?
If its the later, do not place a mechanical restriction where one is not necessary.