Discussion thread for new blog entry Goblinworks Blog: I Fell into a Burning Ring of Fire.
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmmmm.
Not sure exactly how I feel about this yet. Probably need some time to digest and think it over. I don't mind the magical turbulence (makes sense and seems a clever way to make the balancing work) but the friendly fire has me a bit wary. Seems excessively easy to grief others and start PvP simply using stealth...and with that said, not sure how they could make it better either, though. I do hope mages have options to invest in perception and abilities to negate that or at least have a chance of detecting the sneaky sorts.
I do also really hope we see more than just outright area of effect attack spells and some more tactical options like obscuring mist, solid cloud, black tentacles, ice storm, and so on (selectable by both wizards and sorcerers!). Hard to say either way based on what has been presented so far though.
Also now that I think about it if someone runs into an ongoing spell like above, I really don't think you should be flagged and so on for it...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Discussion thread for new blog entry Goblinworks Blog: I Fell into a Burning Ring of Fire.
Summarized:
1. First strike most effective
2. AOE is burst damage
3. Diminishing return on subsequent strikes
4. Friendly Fire.... "Fire in the Hole!!"
5. Tactical - Must be planned out with care
6. Targets may have some warning?
My questions are to the last point.
How much warning?
Can the caster not fire it off if all targets have left the area?
Can the caster move the target zone, at least slightly during the casting?
General Question:
Will AOE effects damage environmental structures; the contents of a caravan; equipment worn... etc..
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Off the cuff, I don't like the AOE protection bit. Instead of granting protection, make them obvious that they are about to be fired off. If the players have the sense to scatter, good for them. If they don't....get out the marshmellows.
It doesn't make sense to me to penalize one type of play. Should we next have melee damage resistance, because a group of people could suddenly use melee AOE swings?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Formations shouldn't clump together anyways if there is a potential for AoE damage. That's just bad tactics.
I thought a tightly packaged Roman Tortoise Formation was exactly the right tactical choice to defend against a rain of arrows...
[Edit] But you were probably talking about 'explosive' types of AoE, so feel free to ignore this :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like the idea of diminishing returns on AoE damage. I'm worried about friendly fire, stealth, and flags/alignment.
It seems like it would be very easy to create situations where you force flags and alignment hits on other players. For example a character with high stealth hiding near a pack of NPC monsters. This in turn could make AoE attacks highly impractical/undesirable outside of instances.
I think it makes AOE highly tactical. AOE is not the type of an attack you just throw around willy nilly. It is typically used as a first strike and a last ditch strike.
A good commander is going to have his "friendlies" in some sort of communication. Do a count down and then strike.
Unintended consquences, the stealthed guy you did not know was there, is collateral damage. Your Rep hit for killing friendlies will likley be minimal, and it can be mitgated by the friendly you did kill if they choose to.
When killed a player will end up with you on their enemies list. If you were part of the same team and the result was from FF, then he or she will praise you, granting you positive Reputation. No real worries I would think, uless like I said, you are throwing AOE around without a care in the world.
If that stealthed guy was not of your group, and minding his own business, I'm sure you could compensate him some way if you are truly Good, and he may forgive you and praise you anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Formations shouldn't clump together anyways if there is a potential for AoE damage. That's just bad tactics.I thought a tightly packaged Roman Tortoise Formation was exactly the right tactical choice to defend against a rain of arrows...
[Edit] But you were probably talking about 'explosive' types of AoE, so feel free to ignore this :)
Well the roman shield is similar to a tower shield, so that formation would provide cover against a fireball.
Besides that it gives rogues and other people with evasion a meaning!
I also feel the diminishing returns approach here is the best bet.
On the topic of coherence with the tabletop game, MOST tabletop AoEs are Evocation where Spell Resistance applies, Magical Turbulence could be seen as some variant of that (that applies to everybody, with or without their own Spell Resistance, or, having your own Spell Resistance is just your own inherent Magical Turbulence).
I'm don't understand the game balance reason why melee or ranged 'mundane' AoEs would not have diminishing returns, though...?
Another balancing factor I thought of is: have the damage scale based on distance from center, with the center having 100% damage, and the damage dropping continually towards the edges. This makes it so hitting MANY targets with the AoE is more likely to do less damage per target (but should still be worthwhile vs. many targets), and the further away from each other given targets are located, the less damage you will do to AT LEAST one of them (you can choose to center the effect closer to one than the other).
I think having the possibility of 'friendly fire' is a great design decision that will distinguish PFO from other MMORPGs, and give it more grounding and coherence with tabletop Pathfinder...
The only details that seem unresolved seem to center around 'flagging'/rep/alignment and so on.
The blog mentioned that characters in your party would be exempt from flag/alignment/rep consequences (and that seems like it should extend to settlement/nation and there could possibly be a 'treaty' mechanism between different groups, one option of which includes extending this 'protection' from AoE consequences to allied parties/settlements/groups). Outside the scope of a small adventuring party, it seems like it may be desirable for all these flag/alignment/rep-exempted AoEs to be 'logged', so there is an objective basis to deal with 'in-group griefers' who are abusing this mechanic within larger, more anonymous settlements/nations or allied groups. That log could also include details like how many 'valid' non-ally targets were in the area of each AoE (along with how many 'non-valid' allied targets were in the area).
Otherwise, it seems like the scope would have to be kept very small (adventuring party), but that seems overly restrictive to me. Perhaps keep it based on 'adventuring party', but allow adventuring parties to spontaneously 'ally' with other adventuring parties (irrespective of settlement/nation). (any aggression against this 'temporary alliance' seems liable for heavy alignment/rep repurcussions, although the alliance can be dropped at any time, probably with a cool-off period for the change to take effect)
About the 'red circles on the ground will give you some early warning to try to escape before you get hit', I have to say that just doesn't sound like a good idea, at least as an across the board feature for AoEs (perhaps I could see it for 'column' effects like Flamestrike, but not for Fireballs). At the very least, it is introducing MORE latency into the chain of events... For something like a Fireball, I think the 'warnings' people should have are:
- seeing you Cast the spell (which doesn't indicate where you will cast it, but they can still spread out, etc)
- an animation of a Fiery 'bead' flying towards the center of effect, from where an exposion travels outward, all the animation times in total would give characters on the EDGE of the effect a little bit more time to move out of the area.
But if there simply isn't any specific warning of an AoE being cast or targetted on a specific area, I would be happy with that as well.
Also, it wasn't really addressed since damage seemed the main focus, but I do hope that AoE buffs/debuffs are possible as well... That includes non-magical ones, like Intimidate, although for this class of effect I think NOT using the 'friendly fire' system (i.e. it applies to enemies or allies, not both) would usually make more sense. I think many 'multi target' spells/effects in the tabletop game (Haste, Bardic Performance, etc) could be implemented as AoE in PFO, or combining an AoE mechanic with a limit to the character effected, i.e. using the AoE mechanic you designate the center of the effect (or it's automatically centered on yourself, e.g. Bardic Performance?), and the buff applies to all valid targets 'heading outward' from that center point, until the maximum target # has been reached, with a maximum radius as a secondary limit for the effect.
I like the posted idea that if they are Stealthed/Invisible, you can't be penalized (alignment/rep) for AoE'ing them... Although it seems like it should still FLAG you as attacker (which if they SUBSEQUENTLY get killed accidentally, would have further consequences, but if you kill them in that first AoE while they are stealthed, there shouldn't be alignment consequences... although that seems abusable to some extent).
It does seem like the ability of allies/friendlies to 'forgive' you seems like a pretty good basis for handling alignment/rep penalties for AoE'ing them. If you throw AoE's around too much with 'allies' who don't know you and your tactics don't seem appropriate to them, they may not forgive you, and you would take a rep hit (or possibly alignment, if you kill them).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Otherwise, it seems like the scope would have to be kept very small (adventuring party), but that seems overly restrictive to me. Perhaps keep in based on 'adventuring party', but allow adventuring parties to spontaneously 'ally' with other adventuring parties (irrespective of settlement/nation), which lasts for a given duration and needs to be 're-initiated' every so often. (any aggression against this 'temporary alliance' seems liable for heavy alignment/rep repurcussions)
If I read this correctly, I could be forced to be an ally and subject to the attacks of your enemy. I can't attack you for sucking me into your fight, otherwise I get heavy Rep / Alignment hit. And, if your opponenet kills us all, that is my tough nuggies?
Why don't you just be careful with your AOEs and deal with the consequences of when you're not?
where did you read 'forced to be an ally' in that quote?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On casting times and targeting templates, I would hope that you'd activate the ability, spend some time casting, during which an obviously magical animation plays, probably breaking stealth if applicable. People with the Spellcraft skill would be able to tell what you're doing and how long it will take. At the end of the casting time, the area template appears under your mouse and you can press a button to fire or cancel the spell. Most spells would need to be fired within a certain amount of time or fizzle, or you'd end up with groups of wizards standing around chokepoints with all of their magical doom preheated and waiting for someone to walk through.
On AoEs vs. Formations, you might differentiate a few different kinds of AoEs and the formation tactics that would work best against each. If your formation has shieldbearers, a turtle formation would work well against a rain of arrows or (potentially) effects that are directional in nature like dragon breath. On the other hand, if all you've got are swordsmen and spearmen and nobody's got shields equipped, being clustered would probably make things worse (unless you want a "human shield" mechanic). On the other other hand, there's probably not much defense against a grenade-like effect other than scattering, assuming that it hits where the caster wants it to hit. Fireball is described as starting off as a bead-like projectile that detonates early if it hits something, so a shield wall might be of use against it (ranged touch attack vs. openings between shields). Flame Strike, on the other hand, is just a column of holy death wherever the caster wants it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing to also keep in mind, in the tabletop Pathfinder RPG spell casters can often utilize the 3D world to better place their AoE spells in places that will hit the most enemies and the least friends. Things like centering fireballs 20 feet up so their blast extends down to ground level only in a specific area, or angling your cone of cold up into the sky so you only blast the heads of the giants while missing all your medium sized companions.
If the online game is only going to have ground targeting systems (like all other MMO's that I've played do) for your AoE effects it is effectively nerfing the ability of spell casters to use clever targeting to avoid friendly fire like they can do in the tabletop.
Will characters be able to Fly? If so, simple ground-based targetting doesn't work.
If we have complex and steep terrain, that also brings into play 3-d targetting issues.
I think having 3-d templates for appropriate effects is reasonable,
players can use things like mouse scroll wheel to change vertical component, etc.
(Flame Strike-like effects don't need independent control over 3rd dimension)
Although in the heat of a battle, fiddling with 3-d targetting could well take more time...
Somebody mentioned targetting the AoE spell AFTER casting is complete... IMHO, the targetting template should be initiated as soon as casting begins, but simply not become 'armed' until the spell is complete... but you should have been able to already TARGET the location you want, so that can immediately just 'click' and fire the spell off...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
where did you read 'forced to be an ally' in that quote?
Spontaneous ally... Was that meant to be a choice and one that happens after the fact?
What if the player caught in your AOE was killed by it. Could they then join your group after respawn? Why would they be compelled to? You will have already received the alignment / rep hit for hitting an unflagged target anyway, so why ally?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
On casting times and targeting templates, I would hope that you'd activate the ability, spend some time casting, during which an obviously magical animation plays, probably breaking stealth if applicable. People with the Spellcraft skill would be able to tell what you're doing and how long it will take. At the end of the casting time, the area template appears under your mouse and you can press a button to fire or cancel the spell. Most spells would need to be fired within a certain amount of time or fizzle, or you'd end up with groups of wizards standing around chokepoints with all of their magical doom preheated and waiting for someone to walk through.
I was wondering about this also. Stephen mentioned this previously, is good to see:
We're currently thinking that most AoEs, particularly spells, will have longish activation/animation times. This allows them to have a better risk (you're provoking opportunity attacks longer and can possibly be interrupted) to reward (decent damage against a bunch of targets) tradeoff. And it means that it's going to be even harder for the caster to precisely place an AoE (as combat conditions will likely have changed by the time it goes off).
& seems to echo in the recent blog:
- All-caster artillery squads should not find it easy to flatten an equally matched group just by synchronizing their AoEs for a surprise attack.
- We're looking into various technical features like how exactly targeting will look, what the animation timing is like, and whether red circles on the ground will give you some early warning to try to escape before you get hit.
=
Very good to see all the FF threads bearing fruit. Looking back I was against FF! Guess I was wrong and know v little about AoEs. ^_^
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Diminishing return makes sense. The "Pebbles in the pond" explanation makes sense. Magical energy saturation leads to a magical energy vacuum.
Another possibility to this is bumping the potency of the spells up a bit but compensating on the back end by temporarily making the casters other spells less effective.
Then again, the "Alpha Strike" scenario is a viable tactic and should be embraced on some level. Maybe make it an option, but it has to be synchronized or it deals minimal damage and costs double the mana.
The Magical Turbulence path of resolution infers that AOE magic is somehow a different strand of magic and if true, then why not have specific resistances against it?
Yet another possibility is magical distortion. The more AOE in one area, the higher the probability of the AOE target location shifting and either missing, or possibly landing on allies. This also falls in line with "Magical Turbulence".
All in all, it's an acceptable answer to a problem in the short term and has long term potential.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't know how it should work with NPCs, but with PCs, if you get hit with friendly fire you ought to have some sort of message in your queue that says,
"Hey, you got hit by your ally XYZ. Choose one:
1. I don't blame XYZ.
2. I suspect XYZ might have done it to hurt me, but it could have been an accident.
3. I saw it as a hostile action.
Your decision will affect XYZ's reputation."
Also, I like the idea that fireball does some damage up front, but does most of its damage over time because you're on fire. S hitting someone with a fireball when they're already on fire is kind of inefficient, but it does at least some damage.
where did you read 'forced to be an ally' in that quote?Spontaneous ally... Was that meant to be a choice and one that happens after the fact?
I was meaning a mutual decision/agreement by both parties to ally (which is a mutual relationship). Just as you can't be forced into a party or settlement without your consent, the same would apply here. Just like allying in a party or settlement, this decision would be done 'before the fact' (of AoE) for it's parameters to apply to subsequent events. The spontaneous part was based on the idea of deciding to ally with another adventuring party while exploring an area, etc, even though this alliance may not last for any serious length of time (you may not ever deal with the other party again), unlike 'permanent' player groups who have rules of governance and shared wealth, etc. Not anything that would automatically kick in when an AoE goes off or anything like that.
I just felt that some means to expand this 'agreement' beyond the 'party' was desirable given that parties will have a fixed size... Expanding it to settlement/nation is fairly easy (although more anonymous itself), but I figured why limit it to that, especially if these 'ad hoc ally' relationships may be formed and ended as needed without affecting other persistent interests (settlement wealth, etc).
Or, as I wrote in response to other posters, it can all just be based off of a 'forgiveness' mechanism (after the fact of AoE), although that has temporary dangers for Alignment-linked Classes like Paladins.
What if the player caught in your AOE was killed by it. Could they then join your group after respawn? Why would they be compelled to? You will have already received the alignment / rep hit for hitting an unflagged target anyway, so why ally?
If they are already allied to you, they are already allied to you, I don't think death/respawning changes that.
If they are not already allied to you, they MAY decide after the event that they want to be allied with your group, and can do so... Aside from this issue, being allies should have certain other benefits, e.g. being valid targets for Bardic Performance and similar buff spells. But if they weren't allied with you to begin with, you're right, there is no special protection from flag/alignment/rep repurcussions of AoE attacks.Perhaps that is a small argument in favor of the 'forgiveness' approach, since that isn't as dependent on strict rules applicable in the exact moment of the AoE. Maybe the most flexible approach would be to have the 'forgiveness' mechanism for anybody (non-allied), but also have it so 'allies' automatically are exempt from the flag/alignment/rep consequences. (Since it doesn't really make sense to be flagged as both ally AND attacker/enemy of the same person simultaneously, the flag exemption seems the minimum exemption, which inherently rules out evil consequences for killing, and given that, I don't see why Law/Chaos and Rep really need to uniquely have consequences in that scenario.)
Ultimately, this is just such a narrow niche of the game dynamics, that I don't want to much complication injected here just to handle this issue, the solution should be simple. (Given that 'allies' is potentially useful for other functions like valid AoE buff targets, linking it to that feature does seem like it isn't introducing further complication)
My biggest concern for friendly fire is people purposely hitting other people in the MMO world.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Maybe there could be a Teamwork feat that allows multiple casters to drop an AoE simultaneously for a reduction in how much Turbulence affects the blast. That might be interesting.
Still, I like these suggestions. For the online version, AoEs definitely need to be handled a bit differently. And friendly fire is a good way to connect with the source.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
6. Targets may have some warning?
My questions are to the last point.
How much warning?
I think a really great way to solve this problem would be with Perception and Sneak checks.
Say you have a Wizard off to the side, ready to fling a Fireball onto a nearby group's head.
If the Wizard is clearly visible and the group is aware of the Wizard, the group should be able to see the "Red Circle" that marks the Fireball's AoE very clearly on their screens and be given a fair amount of time to dodge out of the AoE.
If the Wizard is hidden and the group is aware there's a Wizard, there may be a faint Red Circle, which would give them less time to react.
If the Wizard is invisible and the group has no idea there's a Wizard nearby, they don't see the Red Circle at all or it's extremely faint, meaning the group will almost assuredly get hit with the Fireball.
This makes the AoE a GREAT opener, if the Wizard can be stealthy enough with Invisibility or something, giving the target players fair enough warning based on their perception.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't know how it should work with NPCs, but with PCs, if you get hit with friendly fire you ought to have some sort of message in your queue that says,
"Hey, you got hit by your ally XYZ. Choose one:
1. I don't blame XYZ.
2. I suspect XYZ might have done it to hurt me, but it could have been an accident.
3. I saw it as a hostile action.Your decision will affect XYZ's reputation."
Also, I like the idea that fireball does some damage up front, but does most of its damage over time because you're on fire. S hitting someone with a fireball when they're already on fire is kind of inefficient, but it does at least some damage.
I have seen this in another MMO, just can't remember which one. As for the fire ball doing less burst and more dot, that kind of defeats the purpose.
The Alpha Strike is a practical military tactic and should not be eliminated from possibility. As it stands now, a starting character will have 400 HP ( I read that somewhere). A long sword does base 40 damage + effects. That means it would take minimally 10 opponents to alpha strike 1 new toon to instantly kill him. Not very realistic if you ask me.
I'm not saying a fire ball should be a nuclear bomb. But it is traditionally one if the most powerful and feared spells in the AD&D genre and always had to be used ith great care to void friendly targets.
I don't know how it should work with NPCs, but with PCs, if you get hit with friendly fire you ought to have some sort of message in your queue that says,
"Hey, you got hit by your ally XYZ. Choose one:
1. I don't blame XYZ.
2. I suspect XYZ might have done it to hurt me, but it could have been an accident.
3. I saw it as a hostile act.
Your decision will affect XYZ's reputation."
Delaying the consequences until the target responds is a way to remove the problem of Alignment-linked classes like Paladins or Clerics potentially having problems (losing class features) until the target forgives them. The only problem here is the time limit allowed to respond... If it's short, events of battle may prevent responding in time. If it's very long, then people will be responding when they are no longer in the area of the 'offending' player, that player has no means to directly respond to however they choose to vote... If they KNEW the target would give them a big fat alignment/rep penalty, the AoE caster would probably be more likely to NOT continue acting as an ally putting themselves in danger, but just abandon the target as an ally. By delaying the judgement, the target can escape the obvious consequence for their OWN acts of 'judgement'.
I would like to see something along the lines of a "piercing feat" for primary casters to improve AoE's later on. Possibly even a chain of "feats" to obtain this quality.
I think this slots in nicely to the idea that Magical Turbulence and Spell Resistance are somehow related.
This does make me wonder if having Magical Turbulence from AoE spells should reduce the effect of NON-AoE spells (that are subject to Spell Resistance). That would set up a dynamic where lots of AoE usage would conflict with other (single target) magic. Hmmm....Maybe there could be a Teamwork feat that allows multiple casters to drop an AoE simultaneously for a reduction in how much Turbulence affects the blast. That might be interesting.
There is supposedly an organized mass combat sub-system, and having a mechanism to reduce Turbulence/Diminishing Returns/Spell Resistance seems very suited to that... It can have it's own unique limitations to keep it balanced, e.g. possibly not allowing or making more difficult 'first strike novas', and that sort of thing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The avgerage Joe should not be able to see where a fire ball is going to be landing...
If anything a wizard with a high spell check might be able to.
Lets not make this game easy and obvious, reward skill and cunning.
Is having a party walk not in a clump that hard a tactic to employ when you think you are in territory where a PvP attack is likely?
What about sending your rogue/stealthers ahead to scout the area you are walking into. There are tons of ways to avoid a mass AOE attempt on your party.
Also +1 to 3D AOE, that is important in the pathfinder world.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think if you stick with the AOE buffs, then there should be no "circle" on the ground to warn anyone.
Enemies can only be blasted once with any meaning, so make it a bit more useful. If they can get out of the way, then yeah you can fire another... but seriously, only in themepark games are you going to have a notice of where the AOE spell will hit.
You can know one is coming, just by the caster casting, but you shouldnt know where its going to hit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What's the expectation of how AoE attacks interact with formations?
That would probably depend on the formation. Each formation will probably give bonus' and negatives to certain things. For instance, The Roman turtle mentioned above... Bonus to AOE resistance, and negative to speed.
Or something like that
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If...there is a concept of diminishing returns associated with magical AOE...AND there is friendly fire with concurrent alignment/rep permutations...AND any bozo in the world can see where AOE is targeting beforehand...AND AOE spells take longer to cast and are easier to interrupt...what the heck does Goblinworks have against evokers? A staple of D&D, Pathfinder, MMOs, and lovers o' magic everywhere? Apparently the devs think AOE has the potential to be REALLY overpowered and needs to be REALLY nerfed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Harrison
You may not be aware that their is a Wizard present, because wizards may not look like wizards. In a classless game, anyone can have kills from a number of different classes, so that makes it more difficult to say, "That one is the wizard, that one is he cleric, that one is a rogue." Etc...
I would say detecting the magic energy building up may be based on a perception roll check, but it should not give you a visual warning. Perhaps you will get a text warning like " you sense a magic aura in your area and it is building".
No time for texts... You may say.... But Ryan Dancey had said in his recent panel discussions, and I get this second hand at the moment, that the 6 second round in PFO will allow for typed chat during the combat round.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So much to comment on, but I suppose I'll go with the early warning mechanic.
I would be okay with that if the only folks that get that early warning are folks with a reason to be able to notice it. That would be people with Spellcraft and people with Evasion. Spellcraft to represent magical knowledge - you've IDed the spell, and know to get out of the way. Evasion to represent the Spidey Sense that rogues get.
In any case, keep the info flowing!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I support the idea that hitting a foe your character wasn't aware of shouldn't carry any major penalties.
Goblinworks Founder
|
Discussion thread for new blog entry Goblinworks Blog: I Fell into a Burning Ring of Fire.
First of all I must say I am impressed with the blog. It is very risky but if you guys manage to pull it off I believe it will add some amazing depth to combat.
Regarding magical turbulence, I loved the pebble in the water analogy and It immediately sparked the idea that explosive energy needs fuel to work. Fireballs and Lightning bolts consuming oxygen is an obvious reaction, but also spells such as Ice Storm which would require humidity or moisture to form the ice and Poisonous vapour clouds become too dense and liquify.
As someone who generally plays a light armoured melee character I have some trepidation, I'll be the one getting toasted after all. That being said I welcome the challenge as it will make combat so much more interesting, especially if siege weapons have the same or similar friendly fire problems.
I think that this should extend to certain slashing weapons as well. If you plan on wild slashing arc to hit several enemies in front of you and an ally gets in the way, it's his fault for breaking formation or getting in the way. This is why pike and spear formations were superior over unorganised axe or club wielding barbarians, spears only point in one direction, so the pikemen rarely injured their comrades. Imagine the friendly damage an olympic hammer toss style barbarian would cause (similar to the fanatic goblins in warhammer FB).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I support the idea that hitting a foe your character wasn't aware of shouldn't carry any major penalties.
It won't, it would only trigger an attacker flag, that is unless you killed him with your hit.
In the case of accidentally killing the unintended target, especially if the target was not flagged to begin with and or was neutral or good, you would end up with the following: Chaoitc Shift (Attacker) + Evil Shift (Murder) + Loss of Reputation + Lists your name as Enemy and subject to a Bounty and or a Death Curse.
If it were truly accidental, and the player agreed that it was, he or she could "salute" you, and you would recover some of your reputaion. This of course would only happen if you did not go ahead and loot the person's husk while you were waiting around.
Of course the player might also demand some form of compensation as a settelment for your gross negligence, but then again, what is your good name and reputaion worth to you? ;)
Bottom line, don't drop the nuke if your not sure you can handle the consequences. Traditionally in PnP RPGs, the use of fire balls was always a dicey business. They are incredibly powerful and do freindly fire damage. Typically used as a first strike and a last ditch strike attack.
AOE attacks require communication, coordination and care in their deployment or use.
But merely gaining the Attacker flag makes your Alignment more Chaotic.
Killing is linked to Evil and Reputation, but there is a repurcussion for being flagged Attacker.
If a 'neutral' PC is stealthing/invisible and wanders thru the area that you decide to AoE (vs. other players, NPCs),
gaining the Attacker flag would be imposing a repurcussion for an act (targetting the 'neutral') that you didn't know you were doing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But merely gaining the Attacker flag makes your Alignment more Chaotic.
Killing is linked to Evil and Reputation, but there is a repurcussion for being flagged Attacker.
If a 'neutral' PC is stealthing/invisible and wanders thru the area that you decide to AoE (vs. other players, NPCs),
gaining the Attacker flag would be imposing a repurcussion for an act (targetting the 'neutral') that you didn't know you were doing.
Yes, there is always repurcussions for negligence. Even if it was largely out of your control.
As I said "AOE attacks require communication, coordination and care in their deployment or use."
You will get the attacker flag for attacking your intended target anyway. Even if it is flagged, the attacker flag is for all combat... anywhere, any time. When we log off, the automatic shift is to Lawful, unless you turn that off.
GW uses this system of Chaos from attacking and Lawful when inactive, to encourage players to interact (in combat) frequently. That is for both PVE and PVP.
What GW has not detailed yet is how else can players looking to be Lawful, gain Lawful alignment other than logging off.
How could 'communication, coordination, and care' possibly be used before AoE'ing Monsters whom an undetectable (invisible/stealthing) PC happens to be near by? I'm pretty sure that attacking monsters doesn't result in Chaotic alignment shift in itself, in any case you would be gaining more Chaotic shift from attacking somebody not grouped with the Monsters. I'm just exploring a possible exploit scenario, utilizing attacks against other PCs/Monsters to get somebody to Flag as Attacker vs. you (either simply for the Chaos effect, or so you can 'fight back' with no repercussions) seems like a potential downside of this approach.
In either approach there will be 'repercussions for negligence' since the person targetted could very well decide to fight back (you Flagged as Attacker first, even if Chaotic repercussions of that are removed, so they face no Alignment repercussions in fighting back), and probably this invisible/stealth PC you were unaware of is NOT much lower level than you if you can't detect their presence. This is presuming this is an undetectable player you weren't aware was in the area. If you see a player enter stealth, I would say there should be a radius from that location where you are still considered to see/be aware of them, for this purpose.
Anyhow, nice blog, looking forward to next week's...
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly do not think that hitting someone whose presence was unknown to you merits any sort of alignment shift or penalty. That would never fly in a tabletop game, so why include it here?