Goblin Squad Member
|
Here is what I think about climb/swim. I think there should be areas you cannot get too without these skills or having an appropriate spell/potion.
So perhaps the Hapry nest is up the side of a mountian and is the only place to get the old mother harpy feather material you would need either to 1) have high climb skill 2) have cast fly/levitate 3) drink a potion of fly/levitate in order to reach there.
Sure you might need someone who can open locks and disable traps to access the dungeon section of that old ruin or perhaps you need someone who has a high STR to bash down the door and just take the damage head on, but thats fine.
I have no issues with areas requireing skills to access them, in fact i think it can add to the game to do so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Swimming (in the simplest form) is already included in the Environment experience.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I love the way that Guild Wars 2 tackles swimming, although maybe the automatic aqua breather thing is a tad too gimmicky.
The underwater environment is easily as good as the surface and I find myself just swimming about like a tourist. Another nice feature is the 'wet lens' when you surface. A simple idea but absolute graphical genius.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...maybe the automatic aqua breather thing is a tad too gimmicky.
I can easily imagine the designers' conference that day:
"What's fun about having the players have to push a button to equip their breathers?"
"Okay, make it automatic. Next topic."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My thoughts are simple. If climbing and swimming are going to be skills you can learn then we should be able to climb and swim. I would like to think they'll have climbing and swimming in fairly early since it could be somewhat problematic being a rogue (one of the 4 base careers) if you can't climb up to the 2nd floor balcony...or swim across a moat.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...maybe the automatic aqua breather thing is a tad too gimmicky.I can easily imagine the designers' conference that day:
"What's fun about having the players have to push a button to equip their breathers?"
"Okay, make it automatic. Next topic."
You misunderstand. I am talking about having SCUBA at all. I prefer the DDO system where you can hold your breath according to your modified Swim skill.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sitting in chairs, like capes and cloaks, present art challenges. These may be resolved by now, but back in the day it was almost as rare as horseback riding in an MMO.
And yet, a game as ancient as Ultima Online (I just saw an add stating it has reached its 15th birthday) had both sitting and horseback riding. I would certainly agree that it requires extra art to accomplish, but the question also seems to be one of designer intent - do the developers of the game value more role-play based actions? In GW2, it seems not. In LOTRO, an older game, not only can you sit, but you can smoke a pipe, create whole songs for the instrument you play, etc. So I don't think it's as much of a question of can it be done, but is being able to do it meaningful for the type of game the designers are making.
Originating from a table top fantasy RPG, I hope PFO has quite a few elements that cater to role-playing, but would I expect GW to implement these in EE or even early on in OE...no...but I do hope they arrive eventually, in that being able to more realistically interact with my surroundings makes the world a more real-seeming environment for my role-played character.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Being,
But that the designers listened goes back to whether they think these actions are meaningful and worthy of development. I mentioned UO and Korvak used SWG as examples of games that included the ability to sit. In both, the designers thought that action was meaningful. Not surprisingly, these two games had the same lead/main designer - Raph Koster. Looking at similar social features in both of these games (sitting, playable instruments, player owned/decorated housing, player owned vendors to facilitate owning a shop, etc.), its clear to see how the vision of the designer shapes the "flavor" of the game and which role-play based actions, if any, that they make available for players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I wasn't in beta for SWG so wasn't privy to the work put in during that phase. I did start on day one of launch though. SWG is still one the best experiences I've had in an MMO. It's tied with Pirates of the Burning Sea's & City of Heroes. In all three the RP community was strong and creative...if not particularly large.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, being able to sit down with other players was lobbied for very persistently and eloquently, and the developer chose to make it happen. There was much they didn't do and much they did.
I suppose it comes down to whether the player base really intends to RP or not what priority should be placed on it. While role players in SWG made full use of sitting (in Cantinas) many players never or seldom did.
Some of this may have been involved in how well that team listened to the community later. If the cost of implementing seating greatly exceeded the return then there may be a significant lesson there that points out the possible relation between how intently the developers listened to the vocal community before sitting was enabled and how poorly they listened later over arguably bigger issues.
We have a wonderful opportunity here: I hope that we can maintain a good grasp of all that we ask for and prioritize our 'wants' well. It could be an offshoot of project management (and business analysis) to document what all we ask for and prioritize them for emphasis.
That said, and subjectively, I certainly understand the desirability of sitting across the table over an ale and a wholesome meal with my people discussing the location of resources and planning our next venture.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Being,
I agree - we are being provided a wonderful opportunity. I can't think of a game where players have been 1.) kept informed about pregame production as often, 2.) provided this degree of transparency, 3.) encouraged to post their own ideas and promised that designers actually read and consider those ideas, and 4.) will be allowed to participate in polls, the results of which will potentially help guide some aspects of game development.
I also agree that we as a player base need to be responsible not only in in voicing our wants, but in curtailing those desires based on the style of game that PFO is intended to be. In too many past games, it seems that some design changes have been implemented to cater to the most vocal, even if this group was in the minority. I'm thrilled that we are being asked our opinion, but I also want the designers to stay true to the game they have set out to make, regardless of whether some players will be upset about not getting everything they want. For example, there have been quite a few threads posted that propose game elements that would increase the PvE content of PFO. Some of these might be very nice additions to the game. However, the more of this that occurs, the less of a sandbox GW creates.
So as much as I hope that well constructed polls allow GW not only to garner our opinions, but to be able to accurately determine what percent of players feel a particular way, I equally hope that the weight of those results will be counterbalanced as much as needed by the description of the game as proposed in the kickstarter and the current vision of the designers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If there is Climbing and Swimming (Athletics?) can we also have Acrobatics? I would really love to play as a rogue that can do short wall runs up or across a wall to get to hard to reach areas (nothing crazy like a Wuxia fantasy, mind you).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If there is Climbing and Swimming (Athletics?) can we also have Acrobatics? I would really love to play as a rogue that can do short wall runs up or across a wall to get to hard to reach areas (nothing crazy like a Wuxia fantasy, mind you).
Not that that is terribly out of theme: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateCombat/classes/ninja.html
Wall Climber (Su): A ninja with this ability gains a climb speed of 20 feet, but only on vertical surfaces. This ability cannot be used to scale perfectly smooth surfaces or to climb on the underside of horizontal surfaces.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would agree that chair sitting is an extremely important feature for OE. And that Athletics would be an interesting skill. It would be nice if folks with high athletics could swim faster, hold breath longer, and climb more swiftly than their untrained peers. Acrobatics would be cool, but harder to program for in a fluid sense. Other less software challenging uses would be reduction of falling damage and perhaps some form of non-aggressive movement mode for avoiding lock-downs (but not damage).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I've posted quite a few times about wanting 3-dimensional movement, not only for things like swimming and climbing, but also the flight spells present in the PFRPG. Unfortunately, the somewhat recent blog about managing expectations said that they're not adding flight any time soon. If the game is built with the assumption that limited vertical movement is a significant challenge or absolute barrier, then we're likely to end up with a flat world that must remain flat.
The difference between flight and swimming mostly come down to different art assets. Some differing confounding factors could apply as well, so while underwater you'd have a 'holding breath' debuff which counts down and converts to a 'drowning' debuff which starts harming you (by percentage rather than straight HP). In the air, you might find certain actions more difficult because you're not grounded and that impairs your ability to apply leverage or to stop rotational movement (such as issues ISS occupants experience), and there's always the potential for sudden death if your flight expires or is dispelled.
I don't see any point in having a skill (with continual range of skill ratings) for climbing/swimming/flying.
You can only train one skill at a time, we don't even know how long it takes to max a skill yet, AFAIK it could be the full 2.5 years to reach class capstones. The tabletop skill system for this is kind of dubious as-is, Swim DCs simply don't scale enough to matter, having an official "Swim Speed" is more useful than whatever rating you could get.
If anything, having some Feats which enhance the base mobility in these scenarios seems reasonable,
something for swimming tied to CON, something for climbing tied to DEX, that sort of thing.
Having holding breath for underwater swimming tied to CON doesn't require skills.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't see any point in having a skill (with continual range of skill ratings) for climbing/swimming/flying.
You can only train one skill at a time, we don't even know how long it takes to max a skill yet, AFAIK it could be the full 2.5 years to reach class capstones. The tabletop skill system for this is kind of dubious as-is, Swim DCs simply don't scale enough to matter, having an official "Swim Speed" is more useful than whatever rating you could get.
If anything, having some Feats which enhance the base mobility in these scenarios seems reasonable,
something for swimming tied to CON, something for climbing tied to DEX, that sort of thing.
Having holding breath for underwater swimming tied to CON doesn't require skills.
There aren't any capstones. You get a dedication or focus bonus when you only have skills specific to one role (and whatever nonspecific stuff you have) slotted. If you have only fighter and nonspecific abilities slotted you'd have the fighter focus, while replacing the fighter-specific abilities with holy symbol ones would give you cleric focus. Mix & match some of each and you'd have no focus bonus, but you'd have wider diversity in currently-available abilities. Go somewhere that changing your slotting is allowed and you could pick up or lose whatever focus bonuses are available to you. The focus bonus scales during your whole career, rather than having it all kick in at the end.
Skills will likely come in a series, so you could have rank 1 run speed, which would be a prerequisite for rank 2 run speed, etc. Different aspects of a skill could be divided into separate skills. For example, you might have a series of skills for swim speed and a series for breath-holding. The former would make you faster on the surface even if you can't stay under long, and the latter might help you escape a poison gas trap that has nothing to do with water.
The current plan is to have everyone start with a default stat for their race, which increases with the skills you train. Maybe a simple strength-based skill gives you .2 more strength, while a more advanced strength-based skill farther up the chain gives you .8. Some skills might be tied to multiple stats, like something could give you .1 STR and .1 CON at its base level.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would love to see as much environmental interaction as possible in game. I think DDO has done a decent job working in climbing and swimming. Using that games methods as a base might work well. I think that social interactions such as sitting on chairs benches and thrones certainly need to be added later on. However I don't think these things are needed for MVP.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Creating animation for sitting is hard to do well. Most games that have sitting don't bother to do it well; they use a jump cut to hide the initial positioning, and allow for clothing to clip the chair (or float over it).
I'd rather have a TODO:Sitting done well than DONE:Sitting (good enough).
I would also rather have "good enough" than "not planned". Seeing how AAA titles choose "good enough", it's probably a good business decision.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To be honest the argument that "certain things pose challenges" annoys me when it is directed at features that have been around for a decade or more.
Imagine a car manufacturer saying that adding wheels poses certain challenges.
See, we don't disagree about everything...(that was an endorsement btw).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
See, we don't disagree about everything...(that was an endorsement btw).
"I disagree!".......
Lol.....
It is very difficult for us or anyone to disagree on everything because we are all gamers and have certain common interests and goals.
What I expect is that whatever game engine GW is going to use will come with a number of common game functions as a default. But if they are not, there are certain functions that should be a part of the "minimal working model" that is not too outdated.
The minimal of today needs to be leaps and bounds ahead of the fully polished of 10 years ago, in my opinion.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
To be honest the argument that "certain things pose challenges" annoys me when it is directed at features that have been around for a decade or more.
Imagine a car manufacturer saying that adding wheels poses certain challenges.
When you buy a car, you have to pick from a small set of all possible wheels. If you want monster truck tires on a DeLorean, you need to put them on yourself; not because it is impossible, but because it poses challenges.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When you buy a car, you have to pick from a small set of all possible wheels. If you want monster truck tires on a DeLorean, you need to put them on yourself; not because it is impossible, but because it poses challenges.To be honest the argument that "certain things pose challenges" annoys me when it is directed at features that have been around for a decade or more.
Imagine a car manufacturer saying that adding wheels poses certain challenges.
You do realize I was using an analogy, right?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Instead of having avatars interact with existing chairs, why not simply add the chair when the PC sits. Typing in '/sit' or whatever, pushes a small animation whereby the avatar pulls up a previously invisible chair and sits on it.
It would avoid the programming difficulties in interacting with scenery, but also allow the avatar to sit on a chair rather than on the floor or table. I realise that this would allow chair-sitting in dungeons and in fields, but I don't see that as a major issue - players who choose to sit in the middle of a cowfield will be less common than those wanting to sit in a tavern.
Ideally, if possible when the character is outside the chair could be replaced by a piece of tree-trunk or bundle of sacks, something that a character could conceivably have pulled up to sit upon.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Instead of having avatars interact with existing chairs, why not simply add the chair when the PC sits. Typing in '/sit' or whatever, pushes a small animation whereby the avatar pulls up a previously invisible chair and sits on it.
City of Heroes did that. Characters could pull laptops, protest signs, boomboxes and other stuff out of thin air as part of certain emotes.
Ideally, if possible when the character is outside the chair could be replaced by a piece of tree-trunk or bundle of sacks, something that a character could conceivably have pulled up to sit upon.
In addition to a slash-command, certain types of objects could be 'sittable' when used. Clicking on a chair could cause the targeted chair to become invisible and intangible (it seems to disappear) at the same time your avator performs the emote to sit in a chair. It would give the impression that you pulled the chair over and used it rather than just having it come out of nowhere. I think that's how LotRO did it. Logs and other objects could be made sittable as well, and would only be usable within a limited range. If you do a /sit emote the system could use whatever sittable object is within range, but if nothing is available you simply sit on the ground.
There aren't any capstones. You get a dedication or focus bonus...I don't see any point in having a skill (with continual range of skill ratings) for climbing/swimming/flying.
You can only train one skill at a time, we don't even know how long it takes to max a skill yet, AFAIK it could be the full 2.5 years to reach class capstones.
I'm aware there is no longer EXCLUSIVE capstones*, but I was using the 2.5 year timeframe as the basis of comparison because AFAIK that continues to be the time required to achieve the maximum rank in a single role. The correlation of skills with class/role ranks isn't particularly crucial, I just chose that as a long period of time with a concrete achievement to compare the progression to.
My question is how many skills can you max out in that period? (or any given period) Since you can only train one skill at a time, if you can continually train stealth or perception for that entire time period, that results in extreme specialists who give up other skills to achieve that, and that dynamic influencing everybody else who wants to compete.
If the skills max out faster, such as if somebody could reach the top tier skills in 6 different skills by the time they reach the peak of one class role (OR reach 2/3 level in 9 skills or so,) then the norm of the game is pushed much more towards multi-skilled characters, as well as allowing 'lower level' characters to achieve top rank status in a given skill... Which is why I also suggested Feats which synergize or modify a skill, since that can differentiate between low and high level characters both of whom reached the skill cap itself (not that every skill would even need such auxiliary Feats, e.g. unique abilities for Level 20 Swimming Masters might not be needed, but Stealth/Perception could have quite a few advanced Feats). That some of these Feats could require (Class) Role Ranks allows establishing a 'Class Skill' correlation, even if it doesn't work quite like tabletop.
Skills will likely come in a series, so you could have rank 1 run speed, which would be a prerequisite for rank 2 run speed, etc. Different aspects of a skill could be divided into separate skills. For example, you might have a series of skills for swim speed and a series for breath-holding. The former would make you faster on the surface even if you can't stay under long, and the latter might help you escape a poison gas trap that has nothing to do with water.
Yeah, I expect that due to the fact you are continually training the selected skill, it would be modelled as a continuously increasing variable, as is tabletop Pathfinder's skill system. I don't think it's particularly useful to think of how many different, specialist skills we can add, WITHOUT the basic information of how long it takes to max a skill out, which is the necessary context for determining opportunity cost and the overall mechanical dynamic of skills as a whole. Super-Cool-but-Extremely-Niche skill #347 might be great, but if that means you can't adequately train Basic-Survival-Skill #1, then it's value shifts alot.
Shoving a hundred different functions under a game mechanic that limits people to training one continual progression ranking at a time doesn't seem the best approach. Which is why I mentioned Feats, some of which may be continual progression, but many of which are stand-on-their-own abilities that don't directly lose their viability if you don't continually keep training that Feat chain until the end. Feats that just provide a numeric bonus to skills can certainly have their place, but ultimateley they aren't that much different than just extending the skill progression, ones that enable UNIQUE functionality are the ones that really validate the Feat mechanic. Mechanics based off of Ability Scores (CON, STR, etc) also are convenient to use because those are scaling 'for free' alongside whatever specific Feats you are training.
I'm almost certain GW is planning that you will be able to max multiple skills by the time you max a Class Role out, but the exact (or rough!) number is still rather important to understand the dynamics. Could you max 6 skills out? 15 skills? Out of how many skills? That's what I'm hoping they'll answer. And each skill doesn't need to be equal, so some could be maxed out relatively quicker, and some relatively longer... Depending on the desired stratification from low to high skill characters, the desired 'exclusivity' with other skills, and whether or not the skill is usually 'opposed' by another characters' skill or primarily just interacts with the 'environment', could all be factors in determining a given skill's time to reach maximum skill cap. Regardless, there would still be an 'average' or typical time to max out a typical skill.
* The term 'capstone' is used in tabletop Pathfinder to refer to Level 20 class abilities. If you choose to continue character progression past Level 20 (as PFO does), there is no obstacle to gaining that capstone while taking other classes, potentially getting several capstones.
With a continual background skill training system, I think it would be useful to allow players to select several skills to train at the same time. If you select 2, both train at half speed... probably don't need to train more than that at one time. If the skills are capped relatively low, then reaching the end of a very long progression ASAP is not as much of an issue, and many players could be happy to evenly train two skills at the same time.
There's also the idea of having a 'queue' to automatically start training a new skill when one skill hits it's cap... GW has made clear that just skill-training a character will not be at all comparable to actively playing one and gaining Feats, but it seems like a convenient feature for people who may not be able to play the game for a period of time, and one which could justify them continuing to pay the subscription during that time. The skill progression is useful on it's own and for qualifying for new Feats, and the queue helps make sure they are getting their value out of the subscription they are paying.
[Feats] that enable UNIQUE functionality are the ones that really validate the Feat mechanic. Mechanics based off of Ability Scores (CON, STR, etc) also are convenient to use because those are scaling 'for free' alongside whatever specific Feats you are training.
I think one could argue that things like Attack Rating, Resistance Rating, Hit Points, etc, are generic enough that they don't really deserve to be advanced via Feats which are also used for unique abilities... Perhaps a few Feats to give some limited bonus there (like Tabletop), but they really seem like they should work more like Ability Scores: Depending on the Feats you select, that will advance your Attack/Resistance Rating and HPs, e.g. depending on whether they are a Melee Feat, Ranged Feat, Magic Feat, Skilled Feat, or depending on what Ability Stat or "Class" Role is a pre-requisite for that Feat. (Those are just general guidelines, each Feat could advance whatever is appropriate, some 'melee feats' could advance magical Resistance while others don't)
This leaves Feats for actually unique things (which means the number of Feats or the rate of Feat progression can be scaled back). I guess the question is how much is gained by allowing people to totally neglect some core areas i.e. build very far outside the norm... Beyond the point that is justified, the 'baseline' might as well just be baked into the system rather than present non-viable choices (but which could perhaps be exploited in corner cases).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
With a continual background skill training system, I think it would be useful to allow players to select several skills to train at the same time. If you select 2, both train at half speed... probably don't need to train more than that at one time. If the skills are capped relatively low, then reaching the end of a very long progression ASAP is not as much of an issue, and many players could be happy to evenly train two skills at the same time.
There's also the idea of having a 'queue' to automatically start training a new skill when one skill hits it's cap... GW has made clear that just skill-training a character will not be at all comparable to actively playing one and gaining Feats, but it seems like a convenient feature for people who may not be able to play the game for a period of time, and one which could justify them continuing to pay the subscription during that time. The skill progression is useful on it's own and for qualifying for new Feats, and the queue helps make sure they are getting their value out of the subscription they are paying.
One thing about PFO training which differs from Eve is that you don't choose a skill and wait for it to fill up, you accrue training time while your subscription is active and then pick a skill to spend it on. Besides having enough training built up, you'll need to find an appropriate building which has an open training slot and any money required to pay for your use of it. After that, you'll be assigned an action to accomplish. Once the deed is done, you'll have a new skill to slot.
That's my current understanding of the training system. Of course, details may have changed by now, or could in future, but I think the idea was to make it so GW didn't need to build a queue system or have to deal with customer service complaints about lost training time caused by a player not being online the moment their skill(s) finished.
OK, I had the impression that in-game Trainers were for Feats, and Skills were able to train up automatically (or after 'spending' accumulated Skill Training, as you explain, which obviates the need for queues). So that e.g. Settlement-Alignment-specific Trainers would offer unique Feats, not just higher ratings in a continuous skill advancement... But perhaps they both use Trainers, or Feats don't use Trainers, by your understanding? Clearly if they aren't meant to work similarly, it isn't a good idea to use the same terms like "training" for both of them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
OK, I had the impression that in-game Trainers were for Feats, and Skills were able to train up automatically (or after spending accumulated Skill Training, as you explain, which mainly just obviates the need for queues). So that e.g. Settlement-Alignment-specific Trainers would offer unique Feats, not just higher ratings in a continuous skill advancement... But perhaps they both use Trainers, or Feats don't use Trainers?
I think every type of advancement is being called a skill at this point, even things like HP progression. Instead of a blanket BAB, you might have Swords 1, Swords 2... on to Swords 20. That covers your proficiency (normally a feat) and the types of attacks/keywords you can use with that weapon group. Advancing another Fighter rank might require a certain amount of weapon skills, armour skills, toughness (HP) skills, and some elective stuff that is on the Fighter list in PFRPG. Each skill is useful on its own, but it also acts as stat training and a prerequisite for other skills. You could spend all your training on Stealth up to a point, but upper echelons of Stealth might require more Dexterity than Stealth training alone can give. You might want to push sneak attack above all else, but that's Rogue-specific so you might need Rogue 3 before Sneak Attack 2 becomes available.
This has drifted so much that few are likely to see it in here, since the thread doesn't have a title which refers to the skill system as a whole. You might get more response in a thread specifically created to present the skill/feat system you're envisioning.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There's also the idea of having a 'queue' to automatically start training a new skill when one skill hits it's cap... GW has made clear that just skill-training a character will not be at all comparable to actively playing one and gaining Feats, but it seems like a convenient feature for people who may not be able to play the game for a period of time, and one which could justify them continuing to pay the subscription during that time. The skill progression is useful on it's own and for qualifying for new Feats, and the queue helps make sure they are getting their value out of the subscription they are paying.
As one who recently played eve i pretty much presumed that there would be a skill queue...