Goblin Squad Member
|
Are we all forgetting about the Bounty system and the Champion flag?
Bounties were mentioned at least twice. I did not include Champion because I was allowing ZenPagan the premise that the ex-criminals he had stumbled across had managed to PVE grind their alignment back to good (though this assertion seems less likely to me).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Rules 1-3 rule, IMHO. For every one person trying to RP their character according to the character's imagined conscience, there will be multiple people playing a computer game, with no concern for back story or in-character motivations. If those people are going to be held to any sort of alignment system at all, the computer absolutely has to arbitrate it. If it's possible for paladins (or monks, or druids, or clerics of good, neutral or lawful gods) to hang around the starter zones and smite newbies without repercussions, then someone will.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you fell in a day, you should be able to return in a day...So, you go on a killing spree and kill a bunch of newbs and fall to CE in a day. You really think you should be able to go back to LG the next day? That doesn't sound right to me.
I think a lot of people are thinking of the alignment system as a neutral center with equally valid spokes radiating out from it. I don't think that's the right way to look at it. Lawful and Good are inherently "better". That's why you talk about "falling" to Chaotic or Evil. You don't "fall" back to Lawful or Good. You have to "climb" back, and that should require effort and commitment.
But people are saying how they are all worried that one little indiscretion will take weeks to recover from. Slaughtering a bunch of noobs unprovoked hardly qualifies as an indiscretion, and certainly not little.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am talking about the day to day rp causing alignement shifts causing you suddenly to become not welcome. If you design a character obviously incompatible that is something you have chosen to do.
Killing a bandit harassing our merchants can make me unwelcome alignement wise in my settlement type rp. I view your example as much the same using for example wow terms as deciding to go horde when all your friends are alliance.
We all get together as friends and agree what we as a settlement are aiming towards and create characters accordingly. That I don't see as limiting. However if everyday things can come up whereby playing your character as he should be played rp wise means you suddenly find the settlement kicks you out then that is unacceptable to me as a player. I suspect I am probably not alone in that either.
However my question appears to be answered so there is no need to keep replying to me and I wish you and the game well
I don't want to keep harping on about this, but I also want to make a plea to you, ZenPagan. You seem an intelligent person and you seem to care about and want to RP. Qualities that I really want to see in PFO.
Roleplaying is governed by rules - including alignment. Even though you want to play with your friends, all in a specific settlement, you all need to adhere to the rules/mechanics of the game for this to happen. Yes, those rules might seem oppressive to your style of roleplay, but from a meta perspective, you have to modify your actions to fit in and subsequently stay part of your settlement and hang out with friends. This is all part of RPing.
I might want to RP a NG rogue that hates elves (for whatever backstory reason) and hunts and kills them whenever possible. The game rules will let me do this, but they will eventually shift me to evil and perhaps even chaotic eventually. GW have given PFO a meta-reason as to why this is the case (the pantheon stating killing is evil) and as such, your roleplay must fit this.
As previously stated, I would be happy to see no alignment mechanics and would like people to set their own alignment and run with it just as we do in TT games. This however does not work due to a variety of reasons. Thus, rules andmechanics need to be put in place and we all need to conform to them. Sure, it's a modification of our RP, but I honestly do not see it as a huge impost.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure why he's always afraid killing a handful of bandits would kick him out of his settlement.
Since it scales to how evil they are, if he's, say, NG, and they're NE, last time we got numbers, even killing two, three, or more, and he still shouldn't drop out of NG, or to NN at worst. Now, if they're somehow bandits that are good aligned, there could be an issue. Unless is happens so fast that them killing good merchants knocks them into neutral, and then he may or may not be fine.
...
This all requires a lot more thought, and testing ingame, I think.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Jiminy
Yes you often do know it is them.
They may have attacked you before.
You may come on them two minutes after they have sacked your harvesting camp which means in a wilderness hex they will have only received the attacker flag which lasts 1 minute. RP wise the smoke is still rising, the blood on the ground is still fresh and the attackers are still tending wounds. The mere fact they are not flagged now is irrelevant.
You may have come on them with the flags still on. You are chasing them as they are running from your superior force. Oh hang on the minute long attacker flag has run out. Can't be them then can it?
The alignement system if as stated by several people means that I could change by a whole unit from either lawful or good by the mere act of killing two people(think it was Nihimon amongst others that came out with that) and that this in turn means that I may be flagged in my own settlement and attacked by npc guards is an inhibition to proper rp.
What it does not do however is stop griefers it just gives them even more ways to grief you. Congratulations you are arguing for a system that puts off legitimate players whilst giving griefers even more ways to enjoy ruining your day.
You can still attack them. You will just become the attacker (chaotic) and a shift to evil, if you kill them. If you are a good aligned character, you can make up for it in your other activities.
The only question you should ask yourself is, "Was this action meaningful PvP?"
If your answer was "yes", because it was reasonable to assume that those guys had committed an injury to you or your settlement, in the last few minutes, then you should not be labeled as a griefer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The questions that have been raised about the mechanics, durations, and effects of alignment shift will be unknown until we see what the consequences are in context of play, and that will require playtesting.
I still stand by my contention that alignment is completely unneeded as part of an MMO, and it was unneeded in D&D PnP back when it was first introduced.
It is completely arbitrary, artificial, simplistic, limiting, unnecessary.... In my gaming (as DM and player) in AD&D PnP, we completely eliminated alignment. Even as it relates to Deities, it was easy to do. Deities have spheres of influence, emotions or actions attached to their beliefs and as long as those were adhered to (usually), you were alright in their eyes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...and I still disagree. It is not arbitrary at all. It is no more artificial than role-play itself. It is limiting in the same way that all rules are limiting, and for the betterment of the game as a game. Unnecessary? Unless you somehow have full grasp of the game design how in the name of the little gods do you presume to know what might be necessary?
If your gaming circle abandoned alignment altogether it says more about you and your players than it does about the game. Many find great meaning in interactions with deity. Scan the bookshelf of fantasy fiction and sort out those with alignments from those with none and tell me how it balances for you.
I think there is an argument to be made that leaving out alignment only responds personal preference and not for the good of the game. Including alignment permits those who prefer the richness of story it offers and is instead for the good of the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Scan the bookshelf of fantasy fiction and sort out those with alignments from those with none and tell me how it balances for you.
I can name you more fantasy fiction, PnP RPGS, PC RPGs, and MMOs that don't have an alignment system than those that do.... probably hundreds in fact.
The only notable franchise that uses / used alignment system is D&D. Now with all of the D&D clones out there, over the past 40 years, why is it that the one element that is found is D&D is the only one that virtually no one else bothers to use?
No alignment in Lord of the Rings (books). Gary Gygax may have modeled alignments after the actions and behaviors of characters in those novels, but the novels themselves had no alignment system. None in Robert E. Howard's works either.
There are your two Fathers of Fantasy Fiction, and neither used a formal alignment system.
As for games (PnP): No alignment in Call of Cthulhu, Star Frontiers, Sword Bearer, Conan RPG, Twilight 2000, James Bond RPG, Star Wars RPG, etc...
As for PC RPGs: No alignment in Elder Scrolls series; Fall Out series; Sid Meirs Pirates Series; etc..
As for MMOs: I can't name one that has alignment system, and I've played dozens... Earth & Beyond, Star Wars Galaxies, EVE, WoW, Age of Conan, Anarchy Online, Fallen Earth, Pirates of the Burning Sea, Rift, The Secret World, Auto Assault, Tabula Rasa, Guild Wars 2, etc...
I could name dozens more, in each category....
You one contention, that alignment is for the "betterment of the game as a game" is an untested theory for Pathfinder as a video game, let alone an MMO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Could someone summarise the functional role of alignment and the alternative for that role, in either games in general (PnP eg) or specifically mmorpgs?
The reason I ask, is what is the benefit of including such a system in PFO and why have mmorpgs not done so, and what alternatives have they chosen and how does that compare?
As already said, I see it as adding a social dimension. What other ways could be used? And how does tying it into a metaphysical/cosmological/lore aspect of the world impact on it?
Imo, I'm happy alignment (+ reputation) is being used for the above purpose. It seems exceptional in mmorpgs and the fact it is fluid is also interesting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ AveneOats
My concern about the apparent role that alignment will play among the player base, is that it is too limiting to their "natural" actions.
In quite a few posts, there has been a greater expression of concern for suffering a minor alignment shift over suffering the death of a character.
In one post, someone was concerned that if an army with siege weapons amassed outside their settlement gates, but not under a war flag, should they risk the loss of their settlement or their alignment?
At which I responded, a Paladin or a Cleric of Lawful Good can not pray from the smoldering hole that was once their church! Defend yourself, kill them all, and let your Deity sort them out.... Atone later for the sins that save your butt now.
Alignment is not being thought of as just an added social dimension as you suggest. I agree with you it should be a social dimension, and remain as that. But as it stands now, the perception of alignment is that it is more important than anything else in the game (other than perhaps Reputation).
As for, why haven't any other games incorporated an alignment system? I stand by my thesis, because it is unnecessary to develop a sense of purpose for a character or for that character to project what kind of a "person" he or she is.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm on board with consistency from the PnP pathfinder regarding alignment. That is one of several reasons, which is suitable. Especially as the world of gods and mortals interconnect so much.
I think apart from anything else alignment foments conflict also. Again a good thing. But actually, alignment or a system of sorts that does the same job eg 2-faction pvp, IS INTENDED to limit player actions from FFA PvP. I just think Alignment is a system that allows more choice on the matter without descending into FFA pvp. I don't know if comparing to EVE Online's Corporations is worthwhile: But it's possible that leads into MAJOR blocks based on power/economy? Perhaps with the alignment system it will force player alliances to be more shifting? And the fact the players might be able to carve up the map in a natural way whereby exposure to open-pvp can be easily understood by the swath of alignment hexes in any given area?
Is the fact there is intended to be a development skew ie LG, another interesting facet of providing players with different priorities. Finally the good-evil axis syncs with the RP/lore aspects of the pathfinder IP, which is good cross-over between pvp and pve systems.
1. Consistency with the PnP game
2. Generating conflict
3. Limit player pvp
4. heterogenous player groups to break up power blocks?
5. Risk of pvp conflict reflected in the map logically?
6. Differences in development index maximum skewing towards constructive player interactions over time?
7. RP aspects with influence on pve content
I think it might be interesting to paint each of the aligments with colors and as the map changes see THOSE colors change. Just as much as different player settlements/kingdoms. Of course the reputation system blurs the former's effect, but I think that's the point of alignment: To show the player and their actions effects on the world or at least it's proportional representation?
I hope players can create their own banners/sigils etc. Perhaps aligment rules for that also?! /rambling thoughts cobbled together
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can name you more fantasy fiction, PnP RPGS, PC RPGs, and MMOs that don't have an alignment system than those that do.... probably hundreds in fact.Scan the bookshelf of fantasy fiction and sort out those with alignments from those with none and tell me how it balances for you.
Name one where there is no such thing as good or evil.
The only notable franchise that uses / used alignment system is D&D. Now with all of the D&D clones out there, over the past 40 years, why is it that the one element that is found is D&D is the only one that virtually no one else bothers to use?
No alignment in Lord of the Rings (books).
False. Do you mean to tell me you thought Sauron was not depicted as evil? That Gandalf the Grey becoming Gandalf the White had nothing to do with the fall of Saruman into darkness?
Gary Gygax may have modeled alignments after the actions and behaviors of characters in those novels, but the novels themselves had no alignment system.
No alignment? There weren't good characters or evil characters? There were no lawful paladins? You are asserting falsehoods and passing them off as if they prove your point.
None in Robert E. Howard's works either.False. Conan was confronted with evil sorcerers every time he turned around.
There are your two Fathers of Fantasy Fiction, and neither used a formal alignment system.
Only two, and one of them Gygax? You are confused. Nothing of T.H. White? What of Terry Brooks Shannara series? What of C.S. Lewis, friend of Tolkein? Alignments of good and evil, law and chaos are all through fantasy, and in almost every work.
As for games (PnP): No alignment in Call of Cthulhu, Star Frontiers, Sword Bearer, Conan RPG, Twilight 2000, James Bond RPG, Star Wars RPG, etc...
Ah, yes. The last few decades are familiar territory, but once, before the "anti-hero" became all the rage, authors generally assumed the reader understood the alignment of the hero. Those were times when people could walk alone at night without fear. Parents didn't worry about predators when their boy went off to the river for the day. All heroes in fiction were reliably good and provided role models for young people to emulate. There was no need to present an explanation why good is good and evil is bad: everyone took it for granted.
But now this juvenile relativism has made it necessary to actually explain a system of moral and ethical alignment. It is pitiful what we have become. It is also wonderful, because we are so much more aware of evil now, and are less blind.
You one contention, that alignment is for the "betterment of the game as a game" is an untested theory for Pathfinder as a video game, let alone an MMO.
To the contrary, the alignment system is proven by many thousands of years of human culture. It is your trope that there is no alignment system that is suspect, utterly unproven, and arguably disproven as a preferable 'good'.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One more thing: this modern romantic infatuation with the anti-hero is a hackneyed literary device, a tired literary cliché.
Successful authors are evolving the art beyond it. Were it not so, J.K. Rowling would not have had Harry break the fatal wand rather than become the dark lord himself. I would argue that had Harry been an anti-hero the Harry Potter fans would have abandoned the series.
Evil is not admirable, nor does it promote success in literature. I believe the game needs an alignment system simply because people like goodness.
Heroism plays well.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My concern about the apparent role that alignment will play among the player base, is that it is too limiting to their "natural" actions.
Self discipline and moderation limit 'natural' actions, but self-discipline is beneficial. Limiting 'natural' actions will be beneficial for the game.
In quite a few posts, there has been a greater expression of concern for suffering a minor alignment shift over suffering the death of a character.It may be that there are things more important to a person than their own life. This may be baffling for you, but some identify the quality of life more important than the quantity thereof.
Which is of course untrue: many clerics have prayed from the bombed out ruins of their church.In one post, someone was concerned that if an army with siege weapons amassed outside their settlement gates, but not under a war flag, should they risk the loss of their settlement or their alignment?
At which I responded, a Paladin or a Cleric of Lawful Good can not pray from the smoldering hole that was once their church!
Alignment is not being thought of as just an added social dimension as you suggest. I agree with you it should be a social dimension, and remain as that. But as it stands now, the perception of alignment is that it is more important than anything else in the game (other than perhaps Reputation).Did it ever occur to you that what a person values most might be their 'character', their alignment?
As for, why haven't any other games incorporated an alignment system?
It may be that in this particular those other games were less insightful in their design. It may also be that in this particular those game were a la mode, transitory creatures of a changing culture. It might further be that in this particular point those other games were failures as works of art.
I stand by my thesis, because it is unnecessary to develop a sense of purpose for a character or for that character to project what kind of a "person" he or she is.
Hate to break it to you but that ain't no thesis. It is an hypothesis.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Then explain why few if any other games (PnP, PC or MMOs) use an alignment system?
I know you have said, maybe they are not as insightful, but imitation is the best form of flattery. So why, if it was so insightful, no one has imitated it in an MMO?
On another point. There is a difference between a fictional story discussing the differences between good and evil and there being an alignment system.
The alignment system I am discussing is the one that will prevent you from an action, not because you don't feel that action is what your character would do, but because you would not want to lose some skill or spell that is dependent on that alignment system limitation.
So I will clarify my position, since you want to blend every possible application ( real world or fictional), alignment as a game mechanic is limiting, unnecessary and is rarely used in role playing games. If this is not true, please list more than just a few of RPGs that use an alignment system.... I could easily double that number of those that don't.
Ironically, even Dungeons & Dragons Online does not have an alignment system.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Whether everyone likes it or not, the alignment system is here. It is one of the things that they are using to try and stay "somewhat" similar to the PFRPG.
Just because a lot of other games do not have AS (alignment systems) or it is not shoved in your face in fantasy fiction does not mean that PFO should not include it. GW is trying to pioneer into new ways of doing things, and to be innovative in the way that they implement them.
Seems to me that the AS is necessary for many of the mechanics that GW wants to include. The current version of the classic D&D paladin class. The assassin. The ability to play bandits/robbers/murderers and still get some training somewhere; or not if you can't find that CE town to meet your training needs.
The AS does not forbid any character from taking any action. The fear of AS drift may be a deterrent though. Actions have consequences and the AS is a way of recording, measuring and adjudicating PC actions.
The AS is going to be used to make sure that PC's do not stray too far from the ideals of their settlement or thier class. It is balanced with the Rep system and PVP flags to enable open PVP without excessive griefing. The AS system is slightly biased toward the "good" and the "law" to encourage those play styles. A world of chaos and evil (while fun for a few) is not really what most players want.
It may be true that the AS will not be popular with all MMO players. Neither will open PVP, banditry, serial killing, etc.... but the AS lets players play those ways and still be viable styles.
It is here. Get used to it. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not tacking issue with the alignment system per say, just the fact that it is more concerning then character death or the loss of a settlement.
I will be perfectly happy being Chaotic Neutral or even Chaotic Evil. I fully anticipate that the way I will play my bandit, that is where I will end up.
There is the difference. I will be playing my character the way he would behave, and whichever alignment he ends up, he will end up. I'm not playing a character to an alignment, the alignment is being brought to me by my actions.
On the other hand, my Monk-like character will have to remain "Lawful" in order for him to be trained to the upper tier of the lawful skills tree. In this case I will have to have to remain conscious of his actions, limiting them in some cases, to remain within the range of the game mechanic. At least I will be able to decide which secondary axis he will behave within, probably Neutral but perhaps he may lean towards Good. I will let that flow naturally, as I play him.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What metric would you use to determine how successfully a player role plays a character if not alignment? When we create our characters we will do so inside the rule structure of the game, not from our personal and gaming experience or our personal agenda. If players do not play their characters by the alignment rules as set by the game, those players should expect that there will be repercussions. The game mechanics for these repercussions are in the form of an alignment shift. I see this as a quantitative rather than a subjective measure for how well one plays their character.
I am generating really strong narrative background stories for my characters to guide me in making game choices that match the moral and ethical flavor I have chosen for those characters. I, for one, see the impact on alignment that results from my choices in game as a challenge. The intent of PFO is for PvP to provide content. In this case, it will be PvP with myself that I must master.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As for it seeming more important (to some) than death or the loss of settlement control: Not sure I follow what you are saying there. Hopefully, settlement owners will be able to set and reset their settlements alignment as they wish and as need arises. The death part I don't get.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think Bludd is getting at the statements made in some posts about how there is more of a concern about alignments not drifting to chaotic or evil because of specific actions, measured against not being able to attack and kill a bandit you know is robbing member of your settlement but is not currently flagged, or not defending yourself/your settlement against a massing army with siege equipment.
The statements have been along the lines of 'but my alignment will shift if I do that!. This really makes it seem some people care more about their alignment rather than defending themselves or seeking vengeance upon someone.
Me, I like it this way. Conflict is all about decisions and combat/war is a hard road to journey along. Fun times!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes: Alignment is providing rules of context for combat.
It seems perfectly good, to actively contest the conditions that imposes on combat. IE the outcomes and if they represent both sound logic and even more importantly sound gameplay.
For eg an early idea was not being able to attack bandits 1 minute later than the action of robbery they just took. Needless to say, this "accused of banditry" flag (or whatever it was) duration could be too short or too long and needs iteration in game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then explain why few if any other games (PnP, PC or MMOs) use an alignment system?Because these games have only been in existence since it became comfortable, common, and popular for ideals to be believed relative rather than absolute. They are the product of a culture that deems itself in a position to pick and choose what is convenient for the moment rather than revealed by deity, or as in Golarion, deities. Had these games been designed fifty years ago their heroes would have emulated Roy Rogers. Instead they emulate Bruce Banner.
...On another point. There is a difference between a fictional story discussing the differences between good and evil and there being an alignment system.
You are now trying to restrict the definition of 'system' into a rhetorical contortion in order to serve only your assertion when 'system' is much more broad in meaning. An alignment system identifies good, evil, chaos, and order (law). Where there is a confrontation between these ideals there is an alignment system whether it is a game created in the last thirty years or a book written in the thirteenth century.
The alignment system I am discussing is the one that will prevent you from an action, not because you don't feel that action is what your character would do, but because you would not want to lose some skill or spell that is dependent on that alignment system limitation.
You will not be prevented from taking a 'meaningful', non-griefing action in PFO at all except that you accept the consequences of that action, which is fair. You must and should be responsible for the consequences of what you do.
So I will clarify my position, since you want to blend every possible application ( real world or fictional), alignment as a game mechanic is limiting, unnecessary and is rarely used in role playing games.
On the contrary alignment as a game mechanic is not restricting. Instead it identifies the nature of your choices. You can choose to behave irresponsibly but your character's actions will be identified as good, evil, chaotic, or lawful and these identifications will be accurate and meaningful rather than arbitrary and confused. Thus for a meaningful PvP game alignment is indeed necessary, and it is about time game designs matured enough to introduce responsibility for your behavior.
.Ironically, even Dungeons & Dragons Online does not have an alignment system.
Bluddwolf your contention is absurd and, in my opinion, egocentric.
On the contrary alignment as a game mechanic is not restricting. Instead it identifies the nature of your choices. You can choose to behave irresponsibly but your character's actions will be identified as good, evil, chaotic, or lawful and these identifications will be accurate and meaningful rather than arbitrary and confused. Thus for a meaningful PvP game alignment is indeed necessary, and it is about time game designs matured enough to introduce responsibility for your behavior.
On the contrary the proposed system is totally arbitrary and the people being protected from consequences are the original attackers
I kill someone because they have done something to me or those in my settlement
I kill them now and everything is fine
I kill them in 5 minutes and it is suddenly a chaotic and or evil act because some arbitrary timer has ticked down.
Remember the person being killed in both cases is the same person and they have done something to merit being killed.
In the second case I either get an alignement hit or I choose to let them go in which case where is the consequence for their action.
That alignement hit may then mean I am removed automatically from my settlement roster.
The punishment is so potentially disproportionate when you consider I am reacting to the agression of the person I killed that I feel the system totally inhibits how my character reacts to such an extent that it makes any reasonable rp on my part an exercise in futility. Defend the system all you want but accept that you will drive people like me away from the game. I will keep monitoring these forums in hope of some change but frankly there are enough games coming out that I can afford to be choosy
@ZenPagan
I think you're taking a rare, edge case (that is solved by the bounty system anyway) and blowing it up into something it isn't. Further, if your worst case occurs, the devs will fix it.
You're probably freaking over a non-problem.
Nope the bounty system solves nothing as it is only 24 hours it is just another arbitrary timer. This is not an edge case it is something that happens all the time in Eve. You are pootling round the place minding your own business when you bump into someone who killed a corp member a couple of weeks ago. You kill them.
Why do you think this is an edge case. It didnt become an issue to me until grumpy mel did the maths earlier in the thread and pointed out how big the alignement hits actually were. If they were toned down to the point it took 10 or so kills to move you from good to neutral I wouldnt be so worried. As I don't kill that often my alignement would have time to recover. However with one kill potentially enough to shift me from neutral to evil and potentially kick me out of my settlement roster then it is a deal breaker.
It is not the only thing I have problems with but by far the biggest
You can call it a non problem all you want and it may be for the way you play but you do not have the ability to judge if it is a non problem for anyone else.
I can assure you though there will be griefers out there who will get their kicks not out of killing you but out of causing you alignement change. Killing you only annoys you for a short time causing you to lose your class due to alignement change or be kicked out of your settlement will provide them lols for hours
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Being,
You are trying to make it sound like I want to avoid the consequences of my actions. This could not be further from the truth, and I quote myself here:
"I will be playing my character the way he would behave, and whichever alignment he ends up, he will end up. I'm not playing a character to an alignment, the alignment is being brought to me by my actions."
We obviously look at alignment in the context of role playing games differently. I see playing a character the way he or she would behave, regardless of whether there is an alignment system or not, and with no consideration to what alignment the character may become as a result.
But, as I described above, if I play a Paladin then I must consider his actions in the context of what the alignment demands and less so, what would he do in this situation?
The example of another forum members concerns springs to mind. If there is an assembled army outside of our settlement, but they are unflagged, do I risk an alignment shift or risk possible loss of life and settlement if they decide to attack unflagged?
The other example was, you come across your gathering camp and there are corpses strewn about. A few paces away you see a company of known bandits, licking their wounds and dividing up loot. But, it has been more than a minute since the fight had ended, and they are not flagged as attacker or outlaw. Do I risk the chaotic shift in becoming the attacker, and the evil shift if I kill them or do I just walk away because I did not catch them during their flag?
In both cases the concern over even minor shifts in alignment had raised a question in the players's mind, that shouldn't be there, in my opinion.
If alignment is supposed to be an added social flavor as some have suggested, then it is having far too much impact on player actions for it to be just a flavor.
As I have said repeatedly, I have no personal concern for my own play style with my bandit. He will be played chaotic and neutral with a touch if evil likely happening from unplanned circumstances.
If I were a character that is dependent on Lawful Good alignment as a game mechanic, I'd be more concerned about doing what is a common sense choice or even more a dilemma, a conflict between lawful and good.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ZenPagan
There is some merit to what you say. Some of the timers are too short as proposed. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water though.
The timers are just values in the code and can easily be adjusted if necessary. They will be adjusted, I am sure, if it seems needed.
@Bringslite
My only real concern is the kicked out of settlement one. If it wasn't for that I could happily play and just ignore the inadequacies of the alignement system. Frankly I think having a game system which dictates which "guilds" you may belong to is a supreme stupidity. People play these games in large for the social aspect. Part of that social aspect is being part of the same grouping. The people who should dictate who are part of the settlement should be the people of the settlement.
Apart from anything else it doesnt even make sense from a social perspective. Show me any town either in real life or fantasy literature which doesn't have a wide range of alignements. A town where there are people who you can hire for dirty deeds as well as your benevolent priest to cure your ills
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf
The approaching army and getting flagged as attacker for defending your settlement thing was slightly addressed by, at least, one Dev already. I don't feel like linking it. The Dev did not offer a solution but wrote (paraphrased) "we will not allow things like that to happen". Now I have already just written more about it than they have to address it but you can bet they will not code in such a flaw.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Being, You are trying to make it sound like I want to avoid the consequences of my actions.
No, I'm not trying to make it sound like you anything. I am making the point that heretofore those other games imposed no systemic consequence to a player's actions. PFO appears to be trying to put consequences for player character decisions into the game, which should encourage responsible, meaningful behavior and discourage irresponsible meaningless behavior. Yet you are objecting to there being responsibility attached to your character's actions and decisions, and objecting on the grounds that there will be alignment consequences to some of the decisions the player makes, as if that were a bad and unnecessary thing.
We obviously look at alignment in the context of role playing games differently. I see playing a character the way he or she would behave, regardless of whether there is an alignment system or not, and with no consideration to what alignment the character may become as a result.
But, as I described above, if I play a Paladin then I must consider his actions in the context of what the alignment demands and less so, what would he do in this situation?
The example of another forum members concerns springs to mind. If there is an assembled army outside of our settlement, but they are unflagged, do I risk an alignment shift or risk possible loss of life and settlement if they decide to attack unflagged?
The answer is in who you wish that character to be. If your character values law more than justice (law moderated by good)then he or she will refrain from an illegal act. If your character values justice more than law he or she will recognize the consequences and do what needs to be done anyway. That can be a characteristic of heroism, by the way. You would play your character as you understand that character to be, and alignment consequences will be a lesser concern than the integrity of the character. It isn't the game that is imposing a greater valuation on alignment than life or honor, it is the player and, in your case, you. Your character doesn't have to be enslaved to what is alien to your character's nature, you can recognize your character's true nature and embrace the consequences because they are more integral to who your character is than whatever you initially imagined.
One point you may not have considered is that actions really do speak louder than words. You might decide arbitrarily that your character is Chaotic Neutral when really the way you play him he is Neutral Good. You should discover that, at least in terms of the metrics GW embeds in PFO, your character is NG after all, and your intellectual decision to pretend he was something else was a simple error.
The other example was, you come across your gathering camp and there are corpses strewn about. A few paces away you see a company of known bandits, licking their wounds and dividing up loot. But, it has been more than a minute since the fight had ended, and they are not flagged as attacker or outlaw. Do I risk the chaotic shift in becoming the attacker, and the evil shift if I kill them or do I just walk away because I did not catch them during their flag?
Your character should do what your character would do in that circumstance. He might reference his avowed alignment, perhaps undergo some self-questioning or doubt, but where his characteristic impetus differs from the dogma of his alignment he should (IMO) follow his nature honestly and let the chips fall where they may. If however his dedication is strictly lawful he would suppress his natural inclination and follow the alignment's dogma.
In both cases the concern over even minor shifts in alignment had raised a question in the players's mind, that shouldn't be there, in my opinion.
Indeed the character's decision should not be enslaved to a mistaken alignment, in my view. But then I am not strictly lawful. Instead the character should discover his true alignment and become more authentic thereby.
If alignment is supposed to be an added social flavor as some have suggested, then it is having far too much impact on player actions for it to be just a flavor.
I argue alignment is far more than mere social flavoring. It is essential to the sense of meaningfulness, responsibility, authenticity, and the personal liberty that is empowered by recognizing your character's character as more significant than min/max intellectual calculation.
As I have said repeatedly, I have no personal concern for my own play style with my bandit. He will be played chaotic and neutral with a touch if evil likely...
And with the alignment system you will find out whether the way you play your character actually fits the hole you have tried to cram him into.
@Being no that is the mechanic which means Goblinworks will not be getting money from me and I will instead take it to a game without such a stupid mechanic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Bringslite
My only real concern is the kicked out of settlement one. If it wasn't for that I could happily play and just ignore the inadequacies of the alignement system. Frankly I think having a game system which dictates which "guilds" you may belong to is a supreme stupidity. People play these games in large for the social aspect. Part of that social aspect is being part of the same grouping. The people who should dictate who are part of the settlement should be the people of the settlement.
Apart from anything else it doesnt even make sense from a social perspective. Show me any town either in real life or fantasy literature which doesn't have a wide range of alignements. A town where there are people who you can hire for dirty deeds as well as your benevolent priest to cure your ills
"The system" of alignment ranges are chosen by the guild or the settlement. They can make them whatever range that they like. You by your own actions, will decide whether you fit into the parameters of the social grouping you are afraid of being kicked from.
Yes there have always been people and places in groups/cities where you can find people to do dirty deeds. The alignment system will not be "smart" enough to prohibit that if the shady characters are "smart" enough in how they go about these dirty deeds.
Bottom line is the alignment system is very intrinsically tied into and integral to the entire system to just throw out because a few people feel restricted by it. It is not really a restriction anyway. It is simply this game's way of measuring and adjudicating a given character's actions.
It allows for a full range of play styles that would otherwise not be included or banned from most MMO's. It also generates decision making and conflict potential. Both good things.
The system of alignement throws out a huge amount of rp for as far as I can see little benefit. A mechanical system cannot be good at deciding alignement as it is incapable of considering the rp behind the action when making a decision.
You end up not rp'ing on what the situation actually is but on how some system will view it which is in most cases will be bad rp as it will cause characters to react other than how they naturally would.
To give an example of what I mean which will be close to Being's heart.
A group of lawful neutrals (5 or so) move into a wood and set up a logging camp. This wood happens to be under the protection of a druid.
The druid wanders up and tells them to cease and desist in their desecration. They laugh and continue
RP wise does the druid go home and cry or does he do stop them? In game terms stopping them will require killing them. However killing them will be enough to shift the druid (according to Grumpy Mel's cals on page 2 of this thread) to Chaotic evil. Probably halfway through killing them he changes alignement enough to stop being a druid and be kicked out of his druids circle,perhaps when that happens he should stop killing them as he is no longer a druid and therefore no longer has an rp reason.
Personally my view is what he has done is perfectly consistent with being a druid, however the system says not. Therefore he either rp's his character or he fails to rp his character and adheres to the system.
I would rather he felt free to rp his character personally and ignored the system
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Perhaps there will be a "Druids Grove" building that actually gives the druid some say over the happenings in the hex.
We don't really know what the final balance of systems will be. They will be tested and stressed and adjustments will be made that adhere to the Dev's vision and make the most sense possible in a fantasy world.
Yes some people will be unhappy and they will go. Hopefully, there will be enough enjoyable systems in the game to keep a nice happy base of players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Being:
"PFO appears to be trying to put consequences for player character decisions into the game, which should encourage responsible, meaningful behavior and discourage irresponsible meaningless behavior"
This is the function of the reputation system, which I have no argument with, not the alignment system.
As you put it, if a character is following a lawful path (values the laws of a settlement, but is also concerned with justice (Good), then the decision to choose one over the other in certain circumstances would not be a behavior that should be discouraged, nor labeled irresponsible or meaningless.
The Alignment system will punish that choice by denying training or by switching off a skill that the character had already been trained in. It is the concern over this possibility that some have said they may pay too a steep price for making a logical or common sense choice. Therefore they would just ignore the common sense response, because the mechanic of the system not the nature of their choice dictates their action.
Why would a character dependent on Lawful and Good based skills, ever choose justice over law? Or law over justice?
They get punished either way. So the only thing they can do is stand by and be killed or to walk away.
In PnP RPGs the DM has discretion to weigh this moral dilemma, but a game mechanic can not do that. In a PnP RPG the DM can create a whole series of minor steps, to whole new adventures to justify the return of powers or the justification as to why they are not lost to begin with. The game mechanics can not do that.
You don't find many, or any MMOs that I know of, that use an alignment system because it does not translate well. That alone is an indication that it is not needed or desired as a tool to control player choices.
That is not a sign that newer games (new meaning 30 years or less old) don't have the insight that the original D&D had, but perhaps it is the sign that D&D and all of its new iterations have continued the mistake.
If I were considering playing a Lawful Good character,I'd feel, like I'd have to count beans before taking any action.
This last point is the key for what I'm trying to say... That is not role playing, that is accounting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you're murdering people so frequently that you aren't balancing it with the appropriate acts, then your alignment should change. I don't believe killing 5 neutral people in a group is enough to throw you from solid neutral to another alignment. Besides, I doubt the druid could take them all out by his lonesome.
@Bringslite I have given examples of why I believe this system is bad.
Can you actually give a single benefit of this system other than "It will deter random player kills" because frankly it won't do that and will just give griefers another avenue to annoy you with.
This is one of my big issues I fail to see one positive of the system and I know I am not alone in this as others have expressed doubts. So rise to the challenge and give us a list of the benefits show me a scenario where it will enhance the game
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My primary concerns regarding the current alignment mechanics (some of which have already been expressed by at least GrumpyMel, ZenPagan and Bluddwolf):
Segregation
To me it does not make any sense for the game to (potentially) automatically kick characters from chartered companies (or settlements) in case their alignment has drifted (in whatever direction) too far from the CC's (or settlement's) ”native” alignment. Any game mechanic that prevents players from playing together is just bad and should be avoided.
This does not mean that the alignment shift of a single characters should be meaningless for their CCs/settlement. You could for example calculate a ”true” alignment for each CC/settlement as an average of all members (to avoid easy exploits just leave entirely out characters with less than one month of training time and thereafter use weighing, e.g. characters with 1 month of training counting as 1, those with 2 months as 2 and so on). This could then impact upkeep etc. in a similar manner as the currently planned ”native” alignment.
If characters are going to be kicked out of CCs/settlement because of their alignment, it should be done by the players, not the system.
Complexity
Mastering all the ins and outs of the current alignment and flagging system is going to be a challenge, particularly for newer players. As the alignment system would be one of the core gameplay elements this could really hurt the new player experience (and thus also the game in the long run), particularly if the consequences for failure to correctly use the system would be harsh.
Consequences
I do not mind certain alignment restricted ”character concepts” (aka classes) suffering direct negative consequences (such as loss of certain special abilities), but such losses should never completely cripple the character.
Grinding
I do not believe it is a good idea to force someone primarily interested in PvP activities to grind PvE to maintain their alignment. The more severe the consequences of an alignment slip are, the more difficult it probably is to expect players being patient enough to wait a long time to recover from such a slip. However, the easier it is to recover from slips, the less meaningful the alignment system is to begin with. I personally would prefer a system where the alignment would be fairly stable (which would mean that changes would feel meaningful and take time to recover from) but where the consequences of alignment changes in general would not be too severe.
Just to be clear, I have no issue with implementing an alignment system in game. I actually think it can be a significant asset, if properly implemented (and have no beef whatsoever with the reputation system).
@Fruben
"If characters are going to be kicked out of CCs/settlement because of their alignment, it should be done by the players, not the system."
This is my real bugbear and I agree totally with this statement. No problem with a settlements alignement being an average though that sounds reasonable.
But given no one has challenged Grumpy Mel's calculations I have to consider they are probably correct and therefore it is far to easy to drift if the result is exclusion from your "guild"