Goblin Squad Member
|
On the issue of Griefing, Anti Griefing, Judging What is Griefing, Supporting Suspected Griefers and Supporting Known Griefers......
The UnNamed Company is an Non-Griefing Company. Simply put, "We Don't Do It". We have our definition of what griefing is, and we believe it is within the realm of being the most commonly held definition (No Noob Farming; No Corpse or Respawn Camping; No tracking down and killing the same character X number of times for no legitimate reason other than to cause grief.
I'm sure some will pick up on the new term "Non-Griefing" as opposed to "Anti-Griefing." Anti-Griefing implies that the UNC will actively seek and and hinder or destroy griefers, and that is just not our policy. The only Anti-Griefer activities that we will participate in will be against those who directly harmed UNC, our Contracted Employer or our friends.
Judging Griefing(ers) is not something that the UNC will do as a third party. If we do not have direct knowledge that someone is a griefer, they get the benefit of the doubt. The UNC will not look at someone's reputation, no matter how low, and make that assumption. We will only trust in our own experiences or that of our most trusted friends (not necessarily allies).
Supporting suspected griefers, as stated, may occur because we will not make the assumption that they are in fact griefers.
Supporting known Griefers, implies that we would be supporting players that have harmed the UNC or our friends. This will not be our policy. You will notice I left out our Contracted Employers. Our Anti Griefing activities or denial of support only exists for as long as the term of the contract.
In my view, this supports our concept of Meaningful RP-PVP as it relates to the issue of griefing. In the shortest of descriptions, The UnNamed Company is:
A Mercenary-Bandit / Assassin Company, that is motivated primarily by Self Interest and Greed. We are definitely Chaotic at our core, and likely Neutral along the Good and Evil spectrum. We practice an NBRI (Not Blue Rob It) policy. Our company is not an NBSI policy group, but this is not to be misconstrued that we will not rob or even kill someone out of sheer boredom (camping a road at 3:00 AM can do that to you).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest I think the game will end up somewhere in between what Andius, myself & my comrades of the 7th Veil want and what Bluddwolf is describing. The realist in me says that is not only fine, it's the best we can hope for.
I'll repeat, we need the "bad"guys" to at least play within the sandbox. It's every bit as important to the goal as what the good guys try to do. I'll take non-griefing, Rovagug worshiping baddies any day over what I have seen out there in PvP games.
Let's all please try to get along a little bit because the true test to the game we want to create will not come from anybody currently on this message board. We want bad guys like Bludd and Bludd wants good guys like us. The alternative is a game ruled by hordes of roaming, mindless gankers and spawn campers. Nobody here wants that.
To Bludd: Feel free to use the Rovagug lore however you want. But please, use it. Even if it's just a battle cry on teamspeek while your actually playing. It will make your company better, it will make the game better.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting to me that of the two poles arguing (or are they Romanian?) it is the more pro-PvP that contend the anti-griefing mechanisms will be inadequate and the less pro-PvP who think it will be sufficient. I would have thought it would be the other way 'round, that those who would like to have more latitude would be arguing that the regulatory controls are going to be too restrictive.
Except that we need to explore this issue and suggest enhancements or articulations I would recommend trying it out in EE to see the reality of it rather than merely bicker now.
There has been one suggestion of what it would take to convince a random player killer to moderate himself (Doggan)and that solution is anathematic to a sandbox game, namely to remove the ability to PK altogether
That's the dynamic that's going to exist. Unless they remove the ability to RPK, in which case they've just taken away the fact that they're a player based sandbox game.
.
So I am curious whether anyone can imagine anything other than the reputation system, or any modification of the reputation system that seems it would be effective, given the flat power curve as Xeen pointed out?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Great post Being and I think the only possible answer to it must be Community. Goblinworks can help us in two major ways. The sales pitch about meaningful player interaction and an alignment system with teeth (not fangs, teeth). The rest is up to us, because if despite the pitch and system a bunch of griefers buy the game in droves and dominate it, there is nothing as a for profit company that they can do about it.
So it's up to the community to establish from day 1 that the good guys play like "this" and the bad guys play like "that" and that we are having so much F'ing fun with the arrangement that anybody who joins will want to play by our rules.
That's going to be hard sell with too many forum wars.
The other half of it is, of course, actually being good at the game. The top guilds are the ones that define the pervasive tone of the game (Goonswarm/EVE for example)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As I wrote earlier, the Rovagug part was to create an emotional reaction. Rovagug does not include the domain of Greed. Calistria has both Thievery (Greed) and Revenge.
Just as alignment does not match well with my character's complexities, neither do the Dieties. I would fall somewhere in between Calistria and Rovagug, a bastard child that is nihilistically greedy. As I interpret that to play out is through the belief that "Your stuff is really my stuff, I just haven't taken it yet." I can further explain it by saying, "When you acquire something, you have stolen that opportunity from me, and therefore I'm morally justified in taking it back through threat of force or by force."
I read a description of Chaotic Neutral and it had to variations. One was that of a potentially good person who sometimes does really bad things; the other was simply a Lunatic. I figure I will bounce back-and-forth between the two of them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So it's up to the community to establish from day 1 that the good guys play like "this" and the bad guys play like "that" and that we are having so much F'ing fun with the arrangement that anybody who joins will want to play by our rules...The top guilds are the ones that define the pervasive tone of the game (Goonswarm/EVE for example)
I like the idea of a game culture (culture = ideas passed from generation to generation) that bad guys play somewhere within a ubiquitously known choice of character-on-character badness that doesn't include players being douchnozzles to other players.
It becomes culture when it's reinforced from all sides.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
..."When you acquire something, you have stolen that opportunity from me, and therefore I'm morally justified in taking it back through threat of force or by force."
Bludd this is a magnificent concept element for the character of a truly great villain, given the balance of his personality can be sufficiently integrated with it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As I wrote earlier, the Rovagug part was to create an emotional reaction. Rovagug does not include the domain of Greed. Calistria has both Thievery (Greed) and Revenge.
Just as alignment does not match well with my character's complexities, neither do the Dieties. I would fall somewhere in between Calistria and Rovagug, a bastard child that is nihilistically greedy. As I interpret that to play out is through the belief that "Your stuff is really my stuff, I just haven't taken it yet." I can further explain it by saying, "When you acquire something, you have stolen that opportunity from me, and therefore I'm morally justified in taking it back through threat of force or by force."
I read a description of Chaotic Neutral and it had to variations. One was that of a potentially good person who sometimes does really bad things; the other was simply a Lunatic. I figure I will bounce back-and-forth between the two of them.
Good stuff. Feel free to contact me if you ever feel the itch to play some of this out.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bludd, for clarity what happens in these situations?:
A member of UNC has habitual griefing tendencies.
A known griefer wants to hire UNC for one of your stated endeavors.
Someone wants to hire UNC for what is obviously/can easily be reasoned as griefing under a thinly veiled excuse of being something else.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The actual Devs already had to come in and do damage control over Ryans statements...
You keep saying that. I think you may have it 100% backwards.
(based on a true story)
Imagine I designed an Inventory System that required a supporting document for each and every item movement. Then the CEO of the company I work for announces at a public meeting something to the effect of "I keep saying this and people keep ignoring it - human beings should be able to move the items they know they need to move, and tell the system they've moved them, without having to jump through hoops first creating some supporting document". Then I gave a quick recap of my design for requiring supporting documents. And then neither of us made any more public statements about it.
You might consider it reasonable to think that I came in and did "damage control" on what the CEO said. Or you might consider it reasonable that the CEO took me aside and made it very, very clear that when he said "people keep ignoring it" he was talking about me, and I really needed to reconsider the design I proposed that is contrary to his desires.
I don't know which of those cases is true in this instance. And I'm pretty sure you don't either.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I can expand on that a second Nihimon, I don't think the folks at Goblinworks know! They are literally making this up as they go at this stage. So Ryan might come in and say something he wants about the game and then a dev comes in and says "wait a sec, we can't promise that".
They are giving us waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more information than is normally available at this juncture in the development of a game. The absolute best way to be thankful for that transparency is to not take them to the shed over comments they end up retracting on or leave in limbo. They have said things for both sides of the argument that may or may not end up in the final product. The only thing that is certain is that we will get a lot less info if we keep fighting over their pencil sketches.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or they might have been encouraged to come give their actual opinions and their interpretation of plans. They have stated multitudes of times that anything said is subject to change.
As such, conflicting ideas would not be a surprise, I think as time goes on we will see the ideas converge somewhere either in the middle, or...way off to the side as they are forced to change base assumptions to find their own internal common ground (and fix concerns they find).
Either way, what probably will not change is design philosophies...and the recommendation of what we should be doing now.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bludd, for clarity what happens in these situations?:
A member of UNC has habitual griefing tendencies.
A known griefer wants to hire UNC for one of your stated endeavors.
Someone wants to hire UNC for what is obviously/can easily be reasoned as griefing under a thinly veiled excuse of being something else.
First a disclaimer, these will be my honest answers at this time, but may still encounter many variables that you may not see "clarity".
Obviously, the first question is the toughest, has the most variables and I will save it for last. I will not give you the "case by case" cop out answer, even though that might be somewhat legitimate.
A known griefer wants to hire UNC for one of your stated endeavors.
First I will assume that the UNC also recognizes this person as a known griefer. So the questions that we will have is:
1. Was his/her griefing activities against us or our friends (outside of game friends)? Yes = No Deal; No = Maybe a deal
2. Is this person looking to hire us to grief (according to our definition)? Yes = No deal
3. Is this person offering so much money, "it's an offer we can't refuse."
We as a company have decided that Greed is our primary RP motivation. However, short term windfalls will not get in the way of long term profits (ie Breaking Contracts).
Honestly, what would I do if offered One BILLION!!! Gold to grief someone... I'd take the gold. (I'll let you wonder who might get griefed ;))
I think I should also point out the distinction I came up with, just this morning, between "Non Griefing" and "Anti Griefing". The UNC is a NON Griefing company, not an Anti Griefing company. What this means is that we will not act as the "Judge" of what is griefing with others, for others or against others. We will not do GW's work of enforcing their rules, other than to follow them ourselves.
We will not impose our definitions on anyone else, for anyone else. Our definitions are our own, they apply to just our actions or responses.
This I believe answer both of your questions.
A member of UNC has habitual griefing tendencies.
Short answer, Investigate internally (and here come the variables):
1. Who is the accuser? This will matter, whether they like it or not.
2. What is the accusation? Does it meet our definition of griefing.
If it did not meet our definition, but it did meet GW's, then they already got their consequence from GW, nothing further on our part would be needed.
3. Who is the accused? This will matter, whether the accuser likes it or not.
4. How did the accuser approach me or one of our officers with the allegation?
[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgcA8WUK1qM]The wrong way to ask for help, and the right Response to that wrong way/url]
5. What remedy(ies) did the alleged victim pursue on his/her own? Did he/she hire Guards, a Bounty Hunter, an Assassin, issue a Death Curse, Petition a GM, or the first remedy was to approach UNC leadership.
I don't mean to imply that any of these or all of them are not the correct approach or not. It just may matter in our decision process.
6. What remedy is the alleged victim requesting?
Reasonable requests, if we agree the victim was in fact griefed, would be entertained.
This type of investigation would be conducted by the Council of the UnNamed, and a majority decision will decide the consequences.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So I am curious whether anyone can imagine anything other than the reputation system, or any modification of the reputation system that seems it would be effective, given the flat power curve as Xeen pointed out?
I've been an advocate of the Bounty System not only being (no pun intended) very complex, but also giving it more teeth.
A Bounty should be open ended, remaining active until the person is hunted down and punished.
I have also advocated, instead of death being the only punishment, make the punishment match the crime + death if the Bounty Hunter so chooses.
What do I mean?
If someone is found by GW to be griefing, a Global Bounty is issued by GW. While this bounty is in effect, the griefer can not enable any PVP flag. He/She can of course defend themselves when attacked, but without any of the advantages provided by the PVP flags.
As a mechanic of the Global Bounty system, the griefer can not thread any items.
This would prevent continued abuse in the short term (can't flag PVP), place the griefer at a disadvantage (no PVP enhancements) and have a greater equipment loss potential (no threading), plus the regular Player based consequences of hiring an Assassin or placing a Death Curse.
Some may say, "The griefer will just reroll a new character". That is a good result. Eventually rerolling will become tedious. The would-be griefer will be paying a monthly subscription and his/her characters will never develop beyond a starting toon (because of the constant rerolling).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Is there a mechanism in game to restrict a character without killing?
Can a character be subdued; removed of equipment (not all of which is loot-able), but is no no longer available to character; and the character physically restrained in a hard to escape structure?
For my concept of the game this has positive and negative concepts. However, if there are those held to be griefers by community, bondage would be worse that death. On the other hand, Bludd would find bondage more lucrative than SAD.
8-)
Lam
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Is there a mechanism in game to restrict a character without killing?
Can a character be subdued; removed of equipment (not all of which is loot-able), but is no no longer available to character; and the character physically restrained in a hard to escape structure?
For my concept of the game this has positive and negative concepts. However, if there are those held to be griefers by community, bondage would be worse that death. On the other hand, Bludd would find bondage more lucrative than SAD.
8-)
Lam
Other than the /ignore, or the use of Bounty Hunters, Assassins, Death Curses, Fueds or Wars, the "community" should have no role in deciding and or punishing a supposed griefer.
Identifying or labeling someone as a griefer is the sole responsibility of GW, not the player community.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If the person is being such an obvious pain that GW would turn off their PvP ability, why not just ban their account? True, they can make a new one, but it's more hardship for them to have to start a new account (and lose all their alts, destiny twin, etc.) than it is to simply reroll that one character.
I could also envision a group of griefers using their PvP banned member for several purposes we would rather not promote. First, he could become a practice dummy for PvP, since attacking him would likely earn his friends no penalties. This perma-red toon (old UO term) could also become a scout for their work, since he would likely carry nothing valuable and would have nothing to lose (you mentioned no threading) if he got killed. Actually, since there would likely be some way for people to tell he was perma-red, he might become a perfect piece of bait for a griefer party...ride through an area, do-gooders chase after him, and get led right into a trap.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...the "community" should have no role in deciding and or punishing a supposed griefer.
Identifying or labeling someone as a griefer is the sole responsibility of GW, not the player community.
Admirable and, by the way, extremely lawful of you to say.
Allowing the community to judge another player 'Griefer' and taking action on that judgment is vigilantism.
The problem with Vigilantism historically is that the vigilante is often wrong. Innocents are deemed guilty. Communities can be swayed by self-interested 'political action committees' to divert their ire incorrectly. Characters whose only crime is being 'different' get lynched.
Consider: If settlements determine that their universal response to a griefer is to ban them from affiliation (as appears likely), how close is that to deciding that any soloist unaffiliated with any settlement is therefore a griefer?
So, Bludd's recommendation that we simply '...let the gods sort them out' (even if prefaced with the phrase 'kill 'em all and...') has some justification.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Consider: If settlements determine that their universal response to a griefer is to ban them from affiliation (as appears likely), how close is that to deciding that any soloist unaffiliated with any settlement is therefore a griefer?
I've been a griefer all this time and never knew it. Thanks Being. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Considering what we believe to be available to us in the realm of PVP, we have combined the ideas of: Contracts, POIs, Settlement Controlled Hexes, Faction Warfare, PVP Flags, Feuds and the Alignment / Reputation Systems into the following "Meaningful, RP-PVP" concept.
Note: He said Meaningful, RP-PVP
This is an MMORPG, if we find a meaningful RP reason, thats good enough to PVP.Interdiction Contracts - These contracts will be accepted by The UnNamed Company, which will be specifically trained to intercept cargos of contraband, resources taken from Employer controlled hexes without authorization, or resources passing through Employer controlled hexes for possible delivery to parts unknown. Interdiction Contracts will also cover the investigation and potential interference, dismantling or the pressing into the service of the employer’s company or settlement, any unauthorized POI placed within the employer’s area of influence.
Good stuff. This will be a very useful tool to any employer dealing with trading.
Privateering Contracts: The UnNamed Company will accept a Letter of Marque from any company or settlement that is in our neutral or good standing. A Privateering Contract differs from an Interdiction Contract in that The UnNamed Company will be operating, potentially, outside of the employer’s controlled hexes. Privateering Contracts may also include the use of the Feud System (awaiting details).
If you want a group attacked, but dont want them to know it was you? Look no further.
Faction of The UnNamed Company: Rovagug
The UnNamed Company will be devotees to the faction conflict, on the side of Rovagug. However, as a predominantly Chaotic Neutral company, we will be focused more at the idea of destroying companies, settlements or philosophies that look to limit the freedom of action of any company (Good, Neutral or Evil).
Bludd may have said this is not completely going to happen. There is no reason any company could not do this... Role Playing can be fun.
Settlement Capture Policy of The UnNamed Company:
If and when the UnNamed Company captures a settlement, our objective will not be to run it as our own. It will not be to sell it to others. We will exploit its resources, destroy its Lawful and or Good aligned structures, and throw open its gates, welcoming in all player characters of any reputation . We will spend a week or so in total lawless debauchery,...
Now this sounds like real fun. Exploit every coin this settlement has to offer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
[
Bludd may have said this...Faction of The UnNamed Company: Rovagug
The UnNamed Company will be devotees to the faction conflict, on the side of Rovagug. However, as a predominantly Chaotic Neutral company, we will be focused more at the idea of destroying companies, settlements or philosophies that look to limit the freedom of action of any company (Good, Neutral or Evil).
Yeah this was more of a tactic to get a certain response. Bottom line is Rovagug does not present "Greed / Lust" or "Thievery" to the description that I would like for The UnNamed Company.
Calistria (CN) = Thievery, Lust and Revenge which I believe is more suitable for a group of Bandits and Assassins.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Last night my group came across a lone adventurer, grinding Gnolls in the danger zone. We sneaked in on him from two directions. It of course turned out that he had like 50k more points then we did, almost combined.
He killed every one of us, although we did get him to half health. He then inspected us and then revived us. We immediately saluted him for his prowess and he wished us luck in our hunt.
On another occasion the roles were reversed. We came upon a lone gatherer, we ganked him. We established that he was alone and had little of value to loot. WE revived him, and sent him on his way. Once he realized we were not hunting him down again, he shouted back in Global a "Thanks".
How did you inspect the body before performing the gank?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How did you inspect the body before performing the gank?Last night my group came across a lone adventurer, grinding Gnolls in the danger zone. We sneaked in on him from two directions. It of course turned out that he had like 50k more points then we did, almost combined.
He killed every one of us, although we did get him to half health. He then inspected us and then revived us. We immediately saluted him for his prowess and he wished us luck in our hunt.
On another occasion the roles were reversed. We came upon a lone gatherer, we ganked him. We established that he was alone and had little of value to loot. WE revived him, and sent him on his way. Once he realized we were not hunting him down again, he shouted back in Global a "Thanks".
We did not perform the gank, our group let him live and revived him. I did not inspect him, our group leader said he was wearing noob gear. The point was that on both occasions, the losers were spared.
This afternoon, I looted my first fallen PC. He must have been Adkins and a mob killed him. I looted everything from him but his cloth armor. Unfortunately he has no gold, or someone else just took his gold and left everything else behind.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...the "community" should have no role in deciding and or punishing a supposed griefer.
Identifying or labeling someone as a griefer is the sole responsibility of GW, not the player community.
You have the right to try to destroy settlements that you believe "limit freedom" and we have the right to destroy ones that promote toxic behavior (Which includes but is not limited to griefing).
• If our actions are considered griefing by GW, we may be subject to administrative action.
• If our actions have us routinely have us doing things that lower reputation, our characters will suck.
• If our actions fall outside our alignment, our alignment will shift.
But if the actions we use to enforce our ideals are actions that fall within the restrictions set forth by Goblin Works, then we are within our right to pick our enemies however we see fit. What we see as suitable reason for our organization to enter a conflict is:
• If we decide the target is a griefer.
• If we decide the target's behavior is toxic.
• If we decide opposing the target is best for the community.
• If we decide the target has provoked us.
You have no more right to tell use we cannot use those reasons to start conflicts, than we have right to tell you why you can start conflicts. If you come against us because of that, you are opposing us because of our behavior. I believe that is within your rights, but isn't that also what you're trying to say we can't do?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Andius
Everything you wrote is correct. I fully support it. I fully support it for one very basic reason. You are speaking for you and your company / settlement.
You have finally dropped the "The Community", as if you or Nihimon speak or spoke for "The Community".
So, you have the right to fight whatever personal battles you wish, I've never argued otherwise.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
The "the community" that I have understood Andius and Nihimon to be referencing is "the people who {they} consider to be peers", and not "players of PFO" nor even "posters and lurkers on the forums".
The word choice was a step away from the assertion of unilateral self-interest, and sometimes an intentional implicit invitation for input.
Andius hasn't typically spoken for others; most of what I have seen is him speaking his mind about the way things should be, and people joining him because they agree. That's also the reason I think he cannot become a tyrant- if he goes overzealous, his support will evaporate.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Focusing back on the OP, particularly what faction UNC might end up belonging to......
Calistria is appealing for some of the domains that she represents, however a question of limitation(s) comes to mind.
Calistria is a Goddess that I have no doubt will be represented in PFO. My question is will she be represented in all of her glory, or limited ?
Will PFO have prostitution? PF RPG obviously does, so will that find its way into PFO?
I'm certainly hoping it will, because it will give The UnNamed Company yet another unsavory method of generating revenue. I am obviously not talking about PC prostitution, but I could see NPCs depicted as commodity items that can be crafted and then sold.
These commodities could have an impact on a settlement's DI (positive, neutral or negative). The importation of prostitutes could be made illegal, but that too can be circumvented through the act of smuggling.
This way the UnNamed Company could add to its repertoire:
Banditry
Assassination
Interdiction (raids)
Smuggling
Prostitution
Poisons / Drugs (crafting and sale)
As you can see, nothing but the most wholesome activities are within our interests. We are also fighting for the "Hearts and Souls of the Community", we just don't care how tainted it needs to become to make us a steady coin faucet.
You may notice, I have left slavery off our list (for now). I feel slavery is within the Lawful Evil sphere, and the business of the Hell Knights.
Slavery is the absence of freedom, and the UNC has always been built on the foundation of freedom (bordering on anarchy, but not always).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I dare someone to give an example of real RPK, bet you cant.
I knew some younger (teenage) guys who played WoW that managed to work out all a particular girls alt characters and thought it was funny to pounce on her whenever she logged in regardless of what character she used.
Is that the sort of thing you are talking about?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Will PFO have prostitution? PF RPG obviously does, so will that find its way into PFO?
I highly doubt there will be any issues related to sex in PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Will PFO have prostitution? PF RPG obviously does, so will that find its way into PFO?I highly doubt there will be any issues related to sex in PFO.
But it is in PF RPG, which has roughly the same target audience. Ryan's personal beliefs notwithstanding, Lisa Stevens does not seem to share the same concern with the PF IP.
I'm not under the impression that PFO is being developed to be a rated "G" or even "PG" title. I'm not advocating a rated "R", but PFO probably would be, and should be "Mature".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not advocating a rated "R", but PFO probably would be, and should be "Mature".
The Pathfinder brand will not appear on products targeted for mature audiences only. Period.
I am not sure at this point if we'll even bother with ESRB or other ratings. They're only necessary if you want to sell a game through traditional Rick & mortar retailers.
ESRB rating or not, Paizo will not be approving content that would be inappropriate for the average 13-year-old.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not advocating a rated "R", but PFO probably would be, and should be "Mature".The Pathfinder brand will not appear on products targeted for mature audiences only. Period.I am not sure at this point if we'll even bother with ESRB or other ratings. They're only necessary if you want to sell a game through traditional Rick & mortar retailers.ESRB rating or not, Paizo will not be approving content that would be inappropriate for the average 13-year-old.
And so, by virtue of this, we should assume that the Hell Knights will not be associated with slavery?
There will be no drug or alcohol use; No prostitution or skimpily clad Priestesses of Calistria; nothing too scary or violent, certainly not the depiction of bloodshed in combat... I guess they are shooting for the D&D Cartoon TV series?
I do hope they realize that was is considered PG-13 now, would have been rated "R" in the 1970's, so perhaps there may be some hope that we won't be playing My Little Pony Online in a Pathfinder skin.
I don't even expect Age of Conan, but how about the Elder Scrolls series level of mature themes?
Oh...and then there is this....
Are they really sure they want to market PFO to the target audience of 13 and up?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not advocating a rated "R", but PFO probably would be, and should be "Mature".The Pathfinder brand will not appear on products targeted for mature audiences only. Period.I am not sure at this point if we'll even bother with ESRB or other ratings. They're only necessary if you want to sell a game through traditional Rick & mortar retailers.ESRB rating or not, Paizo will not be approving content that would be inappropriate for the average 13-year-old.And so, by virtue of this, we should assume that the Hell Knights will not be associated with slavery?
There will be no drug or alcohol use; No prostitution or skimpily clad Priestesses of Calistria; nothing too scary or violent, certainly not the depiction of bloodshed in combat... I guess they are shooting for the D&D Cartoon TV series?
I do hope they realize that was is considered PG-13 now, would have been rated "R" in the 1970's, so perhaps there may be some hope that we won't be playing My Little Pony Online in a Pathfinder skin.
I don't even expect Age of Conan, but how about the Elder Scrolls series level of mature themes?
True Bluddwolf. "Prostitutes" exist in days time television shows. I will not be surprised if they are in game, but I do not think they will have training options, and I do not think they will be "clickable" by PCs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
True Bluddwolf. "Prostitutes" exist in days time television shows. I will not be surprised if they are in game, but I do not think they will have training options, and I do not think they will be "clickable" by PCs.
They exist in Second Life and apparently can make OK real life money:
In fact I recall there was some sort of scandal because one of the well known Second Life sex chat prostitutes turned out to be something like a 14 year old British school girl in real life.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While I don't expect any graphic mature things, the Pathfinder canon has plenty of references to some. My two favorite works from Pathfinder are the Classic Monsters revisited which explicitly states that Ogres and Orcs and some others are avid rapists and capable of cruel tortures and the guide to Katapesh, a truly brilliant campaign fantasy setting built around a drug addicted city.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I dare someone to give an example of real RPK, bet you cant.
I knew some younger (teenage) guys who played WoW that managed to work out all a particular girls alt characters and thought it was funny to pounce on her whenever she logged in regardless of what character she used.
Is that the sort of thing you are talking about?
Thats not RPKing, thats griefing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are they really sure they want to market PFO to the target audience of 13 and up?
There are all sorts of legal considerations for age groups when putting content online; 13 years old is a huge number that area. Along with 18 and in some states 21. THe less legal mush you have to wade through the better.
Also I don't recall a Prostitute Table or mentions of brothels at all in the PF manuals so I'm not sure the Pathfinder franchise supports it. Players can easily work that in to the game structure on their own accord but that's different than PF giving all the details on a saving throw vs. chlamydia. How would parents react if the online game had so much more lasciviousness and debauchery than the PnP game they were used to?
As a business they probably just decided to keep their content scandal levels consistent across all products in the franchise for customer relations and legal reasons.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thats not RPKing, thats griefing.
I dare someone to give an example of real RPK, bet you cant.
I knew some younger (teenage) guys who played WoW that managed to work out all a particular girls alt characters and thought it was funny to pounce on her whenever she logged in regardless of what character she used.
Is that the sort of thing you are talking about?
You're learning! Correct!
Griefing= Doing something where your main intent is to detract from another player's experience.
RPKing= Killing someone for the sake of killing itself.
To answer Xeen's original quote.
I'm wandering through neutral territory, I see someone I don't know from an organization I'm not familiar with, or even better I see Hobbs, knowing he's a pacifist, and that he belongs to no organization other than The Guide Program. This person is clearly not aggressive, and I have no reason to suspect he has good loot on him, and even if I did I could SAD him. I'm just passing through and have no reason to defend this area. In short, there is not a single meaningful reason to kill this this guy other than. "Because I want to." I kill him.
That is RPKing.
If I had been at war with this guy's group, if I had issued a SAD, if this guy was wearing a PvP flag, if this had been inside territory I own and we had exiled him / ran a NBSI policy then not only would it not be RPKing, but I would take no rep hit. However with none of these, or any other condition met, I take a well deserved rep loss.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not advocating a rated "R", but PFO probably would be, and should be "Mature".The Pathfinder brand will not appear on products targeted for mature audiences only. Period.I am not sure at this point if we'll even bother with ESRB or other ratings. They're only necessary if you want to sell a game through traditional Rick & mortar retailers.ESRB rating or not, Paizo will not be approving content that would be inappropriate for the average 13-year-old.And so, by virtue of this, we should assume that the Hell Knights will not be associated with slavery?
There will be no drug or alcohol use; No prostitution or skimpily clad Priestesses of Calistria; nothing too scary or violent, certainly not the depiction of bloodshed in combat... I guess they are shooting for the D&D Cartoon TV series?
I do hope they realize that was is considered PG-13 now, would have been rated "R" in the 1970's, so perhaps there may be some hope that we won't be playing My Little Pony Online in a Pathfinder skin.
I don't even expect Age of Conan, but how about the Elder Scrolls series level of mature themes?
Oh...and then there is this....
Are they really sure they want to market PFO to the target audience of 13 and up?
I think there's something to be said for this imo. I think younger players want to learn and explore themes and value "honesty" - you can't hide the darker side of things in life forever. That does not mean glorifying them, but certainly showing tensions and unease in a fantasy land that is in the full throes of civil wars where looting and larceny and pillaging and murder all occur. A lot of fairy stories as per The Brothers Grimm were particularly gory in their details to delight their audiences - so long as they were fair and it was clear who was good and it was over there and not "here". :)