Goblin Squad Member
|
So just like in EvE, bandits (pirates) will have secret contacts (alts) to take care if their business in the settlements. Been there, done that, no real hinderence.
I hope you all wage war against each other, you will need plenty of materials and coin to do that. Gives us plenty of targets as well, because we will always pick a side in any war, we would be foolish not to.
I'm glad that you're finally starting to see things more my way in terms of how bandits should operate.
I've never said I would not take contracts from settlements, to join their side in wars.
@Ulfgang,
Picking a side means you are not neutral. A temporary agreement to join their settlement as a mercenary / privateer will open that settlement's training to us as members of that settlement. If we SAD often, raise the Traveler flag occasionally, and help out with escalations from time-to-time, allowing us entry into a settlement would probably improve their DI index more so then take away from it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No, you are just failing to put the alignments into the proper context. In the River Kingdoms, stealing through force (robbery) or the threat of force (extortion) are not Evil acts, they are neutral. You have to change your belief that stealing from you must be evil because you have been harmed.
No, the River Kingdoms are part of Golarion. Golarion is part of a universe with real Deities which define and personify good, evil, order, and chaos. Morality might be relativistic in RL, but in the River Kingdoms it is not. The fact that you do not want it to be evil, does not mean the Deities which define the nature of the universe do not think it is evil. Theft of any sort is Chaotic, the use of force is Evil. Combine the two if you wish...but expect to be judge appropriately by the gods.
The Reputation system has nothing to do with how you feel or what has happened to you. It is how the player plays within the rules of the game.
Agreed, which is why many of us are asking for another system which does let us collectively act upon "how you feel or what has happened to you".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In the River Kingdoms, stealing through force (robbery) or the threat of force (extortion) are not Evil acts, they are neutral. You have to change your belief that stealing from you must be evil because you have been harmed.I don't think that's totally true. Robbery appears to be evil:
Killing other players without flags results in loss of good vs. evil...
That evil shift is for killing an unflagged victim, without having SAD'd and having it rejected.
Bandit vs Unflagged:
1. Attack = Chaotic and Evil shift + loss of Rep.
2. SAD but rejected = Chaotic but no Evil shift or Rep loss.
3. SAD and accepted = Chaotic + Rep Bonus
Conclusion, always SAD an unflagged traveler.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That evil shift is for killing an unflagged victim, without having SAD'd and having it rejected.
Bandit vs Unflagged:
1. Attack = Chaotic and Evil shift + loss of Rep.
2. SAD but rejected = Chaotic but no Evil shift or Rep loss.
3. SAD and accepted = Chaotic + Rep Bonus
Conclusion, always SAD an unflagged traveler.
It doesn't say that, Bluddworth, regardless how much you wish it did. It says:
"If the victim was offered and rejected stand and deliver, the Outlaw loses no reputation for killing the target within five minutes of the rejection."
It says nothing about an evil drift there; it talks about the evil drift in general for killing an unflagged victim. The outlaw section - at this time - makes no exception to that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That evil shift is for killing an unflagged victim, without having SAD'd and having it rejected.
Bandit vs Unflagged:
1. Attack = Chaotic and Evil shift + loss of Rep.
2. SAD but rejected = Chaotic but no Evil shift or Rep loss.
3. SAD and accepted = Chaotic + Rep Bonus
Conclusion, always SAD an unflagged traveler.
It doesn't say that, Bluddworth, regardless how much you wish it did. It says:
"If the victim was offered and rejected stand and deliver, the Outlaw loses no reputation for killing the target within five minutes of the rejection."
It says nothing about an evil drift there; it talks about the evil drift in general for killing an unflagged victim. The outlaw section - at this time - makes no exception to that.
Even if there is an evil drift, I'm not worried about that. There will be times I want to fly the Assassin Flag anyway. Then my core alignment will shift it back to CN anyway. But I recall the Devs saying once, how many kills it could take to move someone who was solidly in one alignment, into a new one.
I only look at alignment as the access to the flags that I want, and the skill types that I need. I couldn't care less about the Deities or how the alignments are supposed to direct my actions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Kitnyx,
Any God that my bandit would follow, would be a Chaotic Neutral one that has a focus in thievery (Besmara for example).
As I would expect, theft is an inherently Chaotic act. I don't think it has a Good or Evil component. Of course, the use of force and killing does...which is why Besmara is Neutral and not Good.
EDIT:
I only look at alignment as the access to the flags that I want, and the skill types that I need. I couldn't care less about the Deities or how the alignments are supposed to direct my actions.
That is because you are a munchkin roll-player. Unfortunately I think most people would agree with you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
2. SAD but rejected = Chaotic but no Evil shift or Rep loss.
Urman is absolutely right.
You slip toward evil whenever you kill someone while you have the Attacker flag or gain the Heinous flag.
These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.
You gain +Evil when you kill someone while you have the Attacker flag.
You will have the Attacker flag if you attack an unflagged merchant who refuses your SAD.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since we're talking about it...
- If the victim and Outlaw completed a stand-and-deliver trade, the Outlaw loses double reputation for killing the target within 20 minutes. (If they pay, you should let them go.)
- When an Outlaw receives a ransom from stand and deliver, they get reputation up to a daily max.
It seems like the "loses double reputation" penalty isn't really that big considering they gained reputation when their victim accepted the SAD.
I would rather see them lose double the Reputation gained when their vicim accepted the SAD - in essence, losing that Reputation instead of gaining it - plus double the normal Reputation loss for killing that target.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Since we're talking about it...
- If the victim and Outlaw completed a stand-and-deliver trade, the Outlaw loses double reputation for killing the target within 20 minutes. (If they pay, you should let them go.)
- When an Outlaw receives a ransom from stand and deliver, they get reputation up to a daily max.
It seems like the "loses double reputation" penalty isn't really that big considering they gained reputation when their victim accepted the SAD.
I would rather see them lose double the Reputation gained when their vicim accepted the SAD - in essence, losing that Reputation instead of gaining it - plus double the normal Reputation loss for killing that target.
Hehe. Me too, but there would hardly be a reason to offer SAD then.
With all the ways to gain rep, it should not give them more. Should be a zero gain.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But I recall the Devs saying once, how many kills it could take to move someone who was solidly in one alignment, into a new one.
...killing a player with Reputation 0 who has no flags will cost about 500 Reputation, while killing an average low-reputation player (-5,000 reputation) will cost about 16 reputation and killing an average high-reputation player (5,000 reputation) will cost about 2,400. ... Killing other players without flags results in loss of good vs. evil along the same scope as losses in reputation described above.
So you pick up about 2,400 evil for killing someone who is solidly good, and 500 evil for killing someone solidly neutral. If you start your week at 0 on the good-evil axis, you'll likely be at -7500 by Tuesday evening if everyone refuses your SADs and you kill them.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Moving on to item decay: I'm trying to do the expected value loss calculations for PvE losses where it is almost certain that you will be able to recover your own corpse; right now I've come to the conclusion that (even if a broken item has some value), there's a point where the expected loss of having a specific item threaded (and losing a durability) is greater than leaving it unprotected (and losing .25 +.75/-.25 of it), unless an item with N durability is always worth more than 75% as much as an item with N+1 durability. (and in general, worth more than (3/4)^X as much as an item with N+X durability.)
My gut feeling is that the breakpoint will be at 1 or 2 durability, based on the thought that (all other things being equal, including max durability), two unbroken items of durability N>0 should always be worth more than one of durability N+1; there's some deeper thinking that leads to the thought that as current durability (>0) decreases, value per unit durability should also increase; it's better to have 10 durability 9 swords than 9 durability 10 swords. I intuit that there's are significant breakpoints near durability 1.
So, for information's sake: what's the difference is expenditures between repairing a broken item and building a new one from scratch? How much is that broken item
worth?
(I assume most agents are rational and refer only to utilitarian worth throughout.)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... what's the difference is expenditures between repairing a broken item and building a new one from scratch?
I got the impression that Repair Cost = Replace Cost * (1 - Current Durability / Max Durability).
... repairing it will take a proportional fraction of the original materials for making the item.
How much is that broken item worth?
For most items, I believe the answer is effectively zero.
If it's a fairly standard item, you'll probably just want to trash it at that point because it'd be just as expensive to get a new one as to repair it. But if it has some rare enchant or other customization, it may still be worthwhile to repair it from zero rather than replacing it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
2. SAD but rejected = Chaotic but no Evil shift or Rep loss.Urman is absolutely right.
You slip toward evil whenever you kill someone while you have the Attacker flag or gain the Heinous flag.These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.You gain +Evil when you kill someone while you have the Attacker flag.
You will have the Attacker flag if you attack an unflagged merchant who refuses your SAD.
I read this differently, and it needs clarification from Devs:
These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.
This tells me that there is no reset because an Attacker Flag is not triggered, unless the kill takes place 5+ minutes after the SAD Offer was rejected.
You slip toward evil whenever you kill someone while you have the Attacker flag
Again, if no Attacker Flag is triggered because a SAD was offered and rejected, than no shift to evil takes place.
Questions:
1. Does a rejected SAD offer followed by an attack (before the 5 minutes) lead to an Attacker Flag?
The fact that there is a five minute timer also tells me that the Bandit is not obligated to attack if rejected, and is also not under the Attacker Flag at that time. It is at that moment still a failed negotiation.
2. If the cavalry arrives, and the bandit had still not yet attacked, if he is attacked the cavalry would gain the attacker flag. The outlaw bandit would become "Involved"? Probably not suffer any rep loss for killing the cavalry or the original traveler, as long as it is still within the 5 minutes.
What you could have is a classic Mexican Stand-Off if both sides are really concerned about Rep Loss or Alignment Shifts.
The first question is really the important one to get an answer to. Does a rejected SAD trigger the Attacker flag if the bandit decides to attack?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I read it as: the bandit gets Attacker flag when he attacks the unflagged target. Because the bandit had offered a SAD and it was rejected, the bandit's Outlaw bonuses are not reset to the minimum, despite his gaining the Attacker flag.
As to point 2. The cavalry arrives and attacks the outlaw. They do not gain an Attacker flag, because the Outlaw was already flagged for PvP. Likewise, if the cavalry were flagged as Enforcers or Champions looking for PvP, the Outlaw could also attack them without gaining the flag.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking as a a guy who can see the game designers in their room, not as an actual game designer, I'd say that the cost to repair a fully broken item should always be less than the cost to make that item from scratch. That's a harder equation to compute than you might think, given that the cost to make the item and the cost to repair that item are variable due to the market.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Speaking as a a guy who can see the game designers in their room, not as an actual game designer, I'd say that the cost to repair a fully broken item should always be less than the cost to make that item from scratch. That's a harder equation to compute than you might think, given that the cost to make the item and the cost to repair that item are variable due to the market.
Yet the cost to build a new one is variable since your broken one was built before. Markets change. Materials cost differently at different times. Buy and store repair mats when the cost is low. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, the River Kingdoms are part of Golarion. Golarion is part of a universe with real Deities which define and personify good, evil, order, and chaos. Morality might be relativistic in RL, but in the River Kingdoms it is not. The fact that you do not want it to be evil, does not mean the Deities which define the nature of the universe do not think it is evil. Theft of any sort is Chaotic, the use of force is Evil. Combine the two if you wish...but expect to be judge appropriately by the gods.
Alignment is above even the deities. If Sarenrae starts dropkicking kittens, she doesn't make the action good, she shifts herself toward evil. The GM/dev is who determines the alignment of an action.
Being a shoplifter is likely to be chaotic, but extortion should have an evil component as well. Less evil than just killing someone outright, but still evil.
|
Goblinworks Game Designer
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
We're sorting out some other recent, interesting PvP ideas internally that will likely have an impact on the PvP flags, so we're not ready to talk about Outlaw right now in case we said something misleading without the whole picture. But stay tuned.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We're sorting out some other recent, interesting PvP ideas internally that will likely have an impact on the PvP flags, so we're not ready to talk about Outlaw right now in case we said something misleading without the whole picture. But stay tuned.
Thanks Stephen,
I will be waiting on this with a great deal of anticipation. Maybe we can get a few hints bout hideouts along the way as well?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Pancake
Please no killmails....all they do is encourage carebear pvp where people don't engage unless they are sure of winning. The end result in Eve was a lot of people concentrated on easy targets to pad their killboards. Killmail or its equivalent aren't needed and add absolutely nothing to the game except for giving idiots the means to wave their epeen.
In PfO the only thing that counts for war is did you destroy/defend the settlement sucessfully thats how we can tell who won not some meaningless coin destroyed metric.
I disagree, it can be used as a combat training tool. You can also see who in your company is letting their stuff be looted constantly and also see who will never accept a SAD but loses their fight and loses everything instead.
We can also use it as a tool to see who is making a profit in banditry.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Speaking as a a guy who can see the game designers in their room, not as an actual game designer, I'd say that the cost to repair a fully broken item should always be less than the cost to make that item from scratch. That's a harder equation to compute than you might think, given that the cost to make the item and the cost to repair that item are variable due to the market.
It could be easier then you think. Make it require a percentage, based on Durability totals, of the materials to create it. No need to be an actual coin cost, just a materials cost.
I guess it could be difficult to code that as well, but should be easier.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Xeen Repairing in a settlement smithy and paying an NPC in the starter town to do the repairs might be two valid ways to fix a damaged item. So they have to figure both methods, and consider the costs with or without materials. We might also have to pay the laborers in a settlement smithy for each item made or repaired. I assumed they'd be full time workers, but that might not be the case.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
2. SAD but rejected = Chaotic but no Evil shift or Rep loss.Urman is absolutely right.
You slip toward evil whenever you kill someone while you have the Attacker flag or gain the Heinous flag.These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.You gain +Evil when you kill someone while you have the Attacker flag.
You will have the Attacker flag if you attack an unflagged merchant who refuses your SAD.
You will not gain the attacker flag when you attack an unflagged merchant who refuses your SAD. Hint: it will be the involved flag
***These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.***
Says nothing about the targets flag and is not a concern. If the target has a flag up, no SAD needs to be offered, just attack.
And if Im wrong about that, they may as well not bother with the Outlaw flag. Its only use will be a stealth bonus.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Xeen Repairing in a settlement smithy and paying an NPC in the starter town to do the repairs might be two valid ways to fix a damaged item. So they have to figure both methods, and consider the costs with or without materials. We might also have to pay the laborers in a settlement smithy for each item made or repaired. I assumed they'd be full time workers, but that might not be the case.
The way I read it was that it would require a crafter that either made the item or can make the item to repair it.
NPC blacksmiths will probably only be able to repair non magical items.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I the only one that thought, this is absolutely absurd and illogical, when I saw this:
Pouches take up your waist slot (and prevent you from wearing a belt).
No. You are not alone.
I'm amazed that nothing has been said to address such an excellent point.
I hold GW in such high esteem that I can only surmise that something hasn't been fully explained about this. But to sacrifice one's belt for the sake of wearing beltpouches makes about as much sense as sacrificing your head because you want to wear a hat.
Someone please help us out with this!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I the only one that thought, this is absolutely absurd and illogical, when I saw this:
Pouches take up your waist slot (and prevent you from wearing a belt).
No. You are not alone.
I'm amazed that nothing has been said to address such an excellent point.
I hold GW in such high esteem that I can only surmise that something hasn't been fully explained about this. But to sacrifice one's belt for the sake of wearing beltpouches makes about as much sense as sacrificing your head because you want to wear a hat.
Someone please help us out with this!
Maybe it will be multiple pouches lol
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You will have the Attacker flag if you attack an unflagged merchant who refuses your SAD.You will not gain the attacker flag when you attack an unflagged merchant who refuses your SAD. Hint: it will be the involved flag
*sigh* I'd try to explain it to you, but I'm reminded of that old saying: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink."
Suffice it to say that's a very thorough misunderstanding of what the Involved flag means...
We're sorting out some other recent, interesting PvP ideas internally that will likely have an impact on the PvP flags, so we're not ready to talk about Outlaw right now in case we said something misleading without the whole picture. But stay tuned.
This probably makes it a moot point anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You will not gain the attacker flag when you attack an unflagged merchant who refuses your SAD. Hint: it will be the involved flag
...
And if Im wrong about that, they may as well not bother with the Outlaw flag. Its only use will be a stealth bonus.
That doesn't make any sense.
The Involved flag description specifically says "This flag is only gained when a character attacks a character with a PvP flag up". The example are all of situations where a flagged character is attacked, not where an unflagged character is attacked.
I think the more obvious reading of Outlaw gaining Attacker is clear if you add a comma to separate the clauses:
While Outlaw is active: These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag[,] unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.
When you gain the Attacker flag, your bonuses are reset unless your target had recently refused your SAD offer. If your target had refused the SAD offer, you gain the Attacker flag and your bonus are not affected.
Maybe Outlaw works best if you make reasonable SAD demands. Or can limit yourself to killing only a few noncombatantants every day. Or embrace your inner Murderer flag. PvP has consequences for everyone else. Why not Outlaws, too?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You will not gain the attacker flag when you attack an unflagged merchant who refuses your SAD. Hint: it will be the involved flag
...
And if Im wrong about that, they may as well not bother with the Outlaw flag. Its only use will be a stealth bonus.That doesn't make any sense.
The Involved flag description specifically says "This flag is only gained when a character attacks a character with a PvP flag up". The example are all of situations where a flagged character is attacked, not where an unflagged character is attacked.
***So if you come upon a paladin with the Champion PvP flag active who started a fight with an evil bandit, if you want to get in on that fight and help the paladin, you will have to flag yourself as a Champion as well to avoid getting the Attacker flag for attacking that bandit, since the bandit will have the "Involved with Paladin" flag (assuming the bandit doesn't have Murderer, Brigand, etc, or such a low reputation that killing him doesn't really matter).
I think the more obvious reading of Outlaw gaining Attacker is clear if you add a comma to separate the clauses:
While Outlaw is active: These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag[,] unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.
When you gain the Attacker flag, your bonuses are reset unless your target had recently refused your SAD offer. If your target had refused the SAD offer, you gain the Attacker flag and your bonus are not affected.
Maybe Outlaw works best if you make reasonable SAD demands.
We can reword those any way we want I guess...
To me it says: If you gain the attacker flag the bonuses reset. So with your thought of adding comas, try this one with a period instead.
These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag[.] Unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade within five minutes of the attack.
SO, You lose bonuses when gaining the attacker flag. You lose no bonus if a SAD was offered and rejected.
It does not say you gain the attacker flag if the SAD offer was rejected and then you attack.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
***So if you come upon a paladin with the Champion PvP flag active who started a fight with an evil bandit, if you want to get in on that fight and help the paladin, you will have to flag yourself as a Champion as well to avoid getting the Attacker flag for attacking that bandit, since the bandit will have the "Involved with Paladin" flag (assuming the bandit doesn't have Murderer, Brigand, etc, or such a low reputation that killing him doesn't really matter).
Nope. The bandit won't have Involved unless he started the fight.
It does not say you gain the attacker flag if the SAD offer was rejected and then you attack.
It doesn't have to. The definition of the Attacker flag itself specifies how it's gained.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
***So if you come upon a paladin with the Champion PvP flag active who started a fight with an evil bandit, if you want to get in on that fight and help the paladin, you will have to flag yourself as a Champion as well to avoid getting the Attacker flag for attacking that bandit, since the bandit will have the "Involved with Paladin" flag (assuming the bandit doesn't have Murderer, Brigand, etc, or such a low reputation that killing him doesn't really matter).Nope. The bandit won't have Involved unless he started the fight.
It does not say you gain the attacker flag if the SAD offer was rejected and then you attack.It doesn't have to. The definition of the Attacker flag itself specifies how it's gained.
Bolded the part you missed.
And the Attacker sections says nothing about SAD. So at best we need it clarified.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bolded the part you missed.
What makes you think I missed it? You only get the Involved flag if you initiate an attack. In your example, the Paladin initiated the attack. Therefore, the Bandit doesn't have the Involved flag.
And the Attacker sections says nothing about SAD. So at best we need it clarified.
The Attacker section doesn't say anything about Elves, either. Do we need to get clarification on whether Elves get the Attacker flag, too?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So basically what you are saying is that we get the most significant penalty, the attacker flag and the aggression stack, whether we SAD you or not, even if you reject that SAD offer.
Why would any traveler bother to fly the Traveler Flag? Why would they ever accept a SAD offer, knowing that eventually we would be forced to accept the 24 hour Murderer flag?
There is no balance in this, which leads me to believe that the rejection of the SAD does not trigger the Attacker Flag. If that is not the case than the devs should devise a penalty that stacks in similar fashion, for rejecting SADs by unflagged travelers. Those stacks eventually leading to a similar 24 hour flag, that does not dispel upon death.
Then we have a return to the comments that Chaotic Evil settlements will be severely gimped and not be able to support advanced training, regardless of reputation.
Why include an alignment that no settlement no settlement will support?
Why have PVP rules that discourage PVP?
"Maybe Outlaw works best if you make reasonable SAD demands."
Not if reasonable SADs can be rejected without consequences in addition to just having to fight to keep your loot. You have that ability even if we don't SAD.
Minimally, rejecting a SAD should cost the unflagged traveler reputation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We can reword those any way we want I guess...
To me it says: If you gain the attacker flag the bonuses reset. So with your thought of adding comas, try this one with a period instead.
These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag[.] Unless the target was offered and rejected a stand-and-deliver trade...
Well let's keep this silly semantic argument in one thread then...
I'll try to break this down in easy chunks for you.
"These bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag": When do the bonuses reset? When you gain the Attacker flag.
"unless the target was offered and rejected a SAD within five minutes of the attack.": Do you *always* reset the bonuses when you gain the Attacker flag? No, in the specific case that the target was offered and rejected a SAD within five minutes of the attack, the bonuses will not reset when you gain the Attacker flag.
The implication of combining the two sentence parts is that an Attacker flag was gained when attacking following the SAD rejection - otherwise, the conditional "unless" is totally useless, because it's referring to exceptions to "these bonuses reset to the minimum upon gaining the Attacker flag." If there's no Attacker flag being gained, the whole sentence is nonsense.
The only way to read that sentence that makes proper grammatical sense is that attacking a SAD refuser can result in an Attacker flag.
Refer to the actual definition of the Attacker flag, from the same blog:
"The character has attacked another character outside of a war situation, and the target character did not have a PvP flag. It denotes which character is the aggressor in PvP combat."
Offering a SAD to an unflagged character does not give them a PVP flag. Thus, attacking them for refusal will still result in the aggressor gaining an Attacker flag.
My bad. I see it now. The Paladin and the Bandit both get the "Involved with <whatever>" flag.
Actually that example is all kinds of confusing. The description of Involved says that the PVP-flagged target of an unprovoked attack gains "involved" - but in the example, the bandit is NOT PVP-flagged, rather the attacker is a Champion who (from the description of Champion) gains the benefit of "Attacking unflagged evil characters gives the player the Involved flag instead of Attacker". So really the Bandit shouldn't have the Involved flag (or any PVP flag), and the Paladin should.