Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem I'm having is that as a member of the NPC settlement you can't get your skills taken away from you. While I may be mistaken in the interpretation of this Rayn, hinted at the fact that a character only has access to the higher level skills he trained ( not only the training of them ) as long as he is a member of the correlating training facilities.
If a settlement gets taken over the former defenders are not members of that settlement anymore and there fore no longer have access to the higher level skills. aka. the way it looks to me you can take away a characters skills by taking away his settlement. This is not the case with NPC settlements IIRC.
Wow if there is only one settlement that offers Paladins their advanced training, you take out that one settlement you take out every Paladin in the game. They all become glorified fighters.
Same goes for any of the classes that require a specific alignment, but Paladins most of all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd love to see the rationale for this...
Wizardly type: Hurry up and get that lock open!
Rogueish fellah: Well I have my picks with me, but ever since they burnt down Home-town I seem strangely unable to remember how to use them.
Brooding fightery dude: Yeah, same here. Now if only I could work out how to bash that door down like I used to...
Rogueish fellah: Well I can pick locks, but I only have these crap tools that I got in starter town, since I got kicked out all the decent places. And the facilities for keeping my skills current are lousy. Back before my rep went south, I was training 4 hours a day to keep my skills fine tuned. And they had some really fancy training locks for that. I was able to do some serious thieving then. :Gazes wistfully at something on the wall:
Wizardly type: We're not getting through that lock today, are we?
I'd love to see the rationale for this...
Wizardly type: Hurry up and get that lock open!
Rogueish fellah: Well I have my picks with me, but ever since they burnt down Home-town I seem strangely unable to remember how to use them.
Brooding fightery dude: Yeah, same here. Now if only I could work out how to bash that door down like I used to...
Rogueish fellah: Well I can pick locks, but I only have these crap tools that I got in starter town, since I got kicked out all the decent places. And the facilities for keeping my skills current are lousy. Back before my rep went south, I was training 4 hours a day to keep my skills fine tuned. And they had some really fancy training locks for that. I was able to do some serious thieving then. :Gazes wistfully at something on the wall:
Wizardly type: We're not getting through that lock today, are we?
A christmas tip for just such situations...If you equip a dwarf with a steel helmet he can be easily swung by two other characters and makes an excellent makeshift battering ram
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It seems to me very unlikely they would removed skills you have already learned. Losing a town with a high rank trainer would be crushing enough as it is.
Dateline: Oz
After ten years of building and defense the Kingdom of Emerald City has fallen. Emerald City was know for their magnificent Wizard trainer, highest in all the lands. In interviews the mayor of Emerald City broke down in tears lamenting it would be "ten more years of rebuilding the City's DI" before he would be able to train a higher wizard spell.
It seems to me very unlikely they would removed skills you have already learned. Losing a town with a high rank trainer would be crushing enough as it is.
Dateline: Oz
After ten years of building and defense the Kingdom of Emerald City has fallen. Emerald City was know for their magnificent Wizard trainer, highest in all the lands. In interviews the mayor of Emerald City broke down in tears lamenting it would be "ten more years of rebuilding the City's DI" before he would be able to train a higher wizard spell.
If I can point you at....
I would like to know what disadvantages they would get from training first THEN going chaotic evil.I'm speculating because we're way off the blank sheet of paper here and this is stuff Lee and Stephen have just begun to think about.
Access to some character abilities could be linked to Settlement features. If your Settlement loses that feature, or you lose access to a Settlement with the necessary feature, you could find that your character can't "do that thing" anymore.
note bolded part below
---snipped non relevant part
Alignment: A character's alignment dictates what kind of Settlements they can belong to. A character's Settlement dictates what kind of training, resources, markets, allies, and potentially character abilities that character can use. The more grief you cause, the worse your alignment, and eventually you'll only be able to access the worst sort of Settlement. That will have a direct influence on your character's relative power vs. other characters of a similar age.
-----more snipping
admittedly a while ago but couldn't find anything newer contradicting
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The most logical way to make your settlement central in gaining certain abilities is to have crafting facilities that require your settlement to be of a certain alignment. Those crafting facilities are the only place some items and items with certain keywords can be made.
The skills that can only be trained in settlements of that alignment/reputation should be for the creation of those item or require their use.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
note bolded part below
admittedly a while ago but couldn't find anything newer contradicting
---snipped non relevant part
potentially character abilities that character can use.-----more snipping
Potentially is the relevant word here. This early in development, everything is still in flux, and games systems have changed. I think the current design is settlements are required to train high tier abilities, but not to use them. If you loose your settlement, I don't expect you to loose the ability to slot skills you trained there unless you also have an incompatible alignment with the skills (like an evil paladin, or good assassin).
Potentially is the relevant word here. This early in development, everything is still in flux, and games systems have changed. I think the current design is settlements are required to train high tier abilities, but not to use them. If you loose your settlement, I don't expect you to loose the ability to slot skills you trained there unless you also have an incompatible alignment with the skills (like an evil paladin, or good assassin).
note bolded part below
admittedly a while ago but couldn't find anything newer contradicting
---snipped non relevant part
potentially character abilities that character can use.-----more snipping
I was merely reposting something I remembered...frankly not fussed either way but someone was asking and as I have some free time while we assemble the bomber wings to deliver presents to our null sec neighbours I thought I would be neighbourly and dig out the quotes
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not familiar enough with pathfinder but I am sure if I say something provocative enough I will be quickly corrected. I know in the olden days when knights were bold a Paladin who was not lawful or not good would become a mere fighter. A druid who strayed from neutrality would lose his druidism and become a mere, well, possibly not even a cleric. And a Ranger... weren't rangers required to be of any Good alignment? Monks had to be lawful (and could not take more than the minimum profit, IIRC). These may be relevant considerations when we think about losing powers because of choices we make.
For myself, though, I will play my character and let the chips fall where they might. He would rather be judged for who he is than for who he pretended to be.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If the settlement is lost, so is access to higher level training is lost. Training access is lost, not the results of previous training.
If character alignment is lost (shifts, drifts) then this potentially <effects> character abilities <(skills)> that character can use.
My edits (additions) to ryan's quote.
Not only does loss of settlement mean loss of access to truing, it is also loss of access to certain markets. Mages may loose access to backup copies of books, ….
--
For the arguments for role-play, there may be need for some to create cache in wilderness of spell books and duplicate items to be accessed it settlement falls.
If a member of a settlement, can the character have a "safety deposit bow" elsewhere? Other settlements in same nation? Allied nations? NPC settlements?
Who has key to these besides the character (e.g. allied nations allows for box, but they have alternate key or secondary required key).
Can a character operate a safety deposit box business. Well yes OOG, but in game?
Should this have been a new thread after "--"?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I could see a True Neutral settlement observing the political landscape (wars) and be perched (ready to jump) on the opportunity to shift its training facilities to the alignment of the settlement that loses. This would provide a place of training for the suddenly displaced, until they can find another means of getting their training elsewhere and more reliably.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would love to see a True Neutral settlement that functioned something like Tanelorn from the Michael Moorcock multiverse. It's government would view itself as removed from the struggles of Law and Chaos, it could offer sanctuary to those wishing to leave such struggles behind who do not feel that they fit in any other settlement, and it could work (perhaps even earn part of its living) by being a go-between when other settlements find themselves at odds. True, it would need to have other means of gaining settlement upkeep resources and income, but perhaps being True Neutral, it would be a major trade hub similar to Pax Aeternum.
But again, it's just an interesting consideration, since we aren't even sure yet if GW will allow TN settlements, let alone whether one could survive without being more actively competitive.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would love to see a True Neutral settlement that functioned something like Tanelorn from the Michael Moorcock multiverse. It's government would view itself as removed from the struggles of Law and Chaos, it could offer sanctuary to those wishing to leave such struggles behind who do not feel that they fit in any other settlement, and it could work (perhaps even earn part of its living) by being a go-between when other settlements find themselves at odds. True, it would need to have other means of gaining settlement upkeep resources and income, but perhaps being True Neutral, it would be a major trade hub similar to Pax Aeternum.
But again, it's just an interesting consideration, since we aren't even sure yet if GW will allow TN settlements, let alone whether one could survive without being more actively competitive.
Agreed, but it is important to remember that there is another form of neutrality, that which advocates balance as opposed to apathy or tolerance. The TN who advocates balance has chosen to participate in the war. They have a stake in insuring no side becomes overwhelmingly strong.
This is the role I intend to play.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It is important to remember that there is another form of neutrality, that which advocates balance as opposed to apathy or tolerance. The TN who advocates balance has chosen to participate in the war. They have a stake in insuring no side becomes overwhelmingly strong.
This is the role I intend to play.
A balance of power usually leads to more conflict as settlements continue to try to upset that balance to become The One. Frequent conflict is good for those who chase coin. It is good for those who keep their blades sharp, or who makes the blades. It is good for those who get a thrill from combat and enjoy the shedding of blood.
War is where the holy defending Paladins, the tainted souled Necromancers, the justice seeking vigilantes, the dark overlords, and all of those in between will all find their common home, on the fields of battle.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Another mention of Moorcock, his Grey Lords serve neither Law nor Chaos. They travel about their own plane somewhat nomadically in a camp of grey tents and always struck me as somewhat mercenary - deciding when and if they chose to join a battle or not, to aid in a cause or not, though if memory serves, they did help (in some fashion) with the protection of Tanelorn.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Losing skills you have trained, if even only the use of them, is a pretty lame mechanic.
I hope that is one thing that falls off the shelf.
Some people may play for a couple years doing settlement stuff and decide that they dont want to be a part of it anymore, but they do enjoy other aspects of the game... Just for that they lose the ability to use certain skills?
Id happily deal with the alignment and reputation issues we have been discussing then that nonsense.
Agreed there, it's nonsensical for skills to disappear or even 'turn off' just because your house burned down. You're already taking economic risks by using a settlement: contributing coin & materials, storing stuff in their bank, or listing things for sale in their market.
Since many skills would require some item to use (such as a kit for Disable Device) then being homeless would present problems getting replacements, but the skill itself should remain there and functional until supplies run out.I would love to see a True Neutral settlement that functioned something like Tanelorn from the Michael Moorcock multiverse. It's government would view itself as removed from the struggles of Law and Chaos, it could offer sanctuary to those wishing to leave such struggles behind who do not feel that they fit in any other settlement, and it could work (perhaps even earn part of its living) by being a go-between when other settlements find themselves at odds. True, it would need to have other means of gaining settlement upkeep resources and income, but perhaps being True Neutral, it would be a major trade hub similar to Pax Aeternum.
But again, it's just an interesting consideration, since we aren't even sure yet if GW will allow TN settlements, let alone whether one could survive without being more actively competitive.
Agreed, but it is important to remember that there is another form of neutrality, that which advocates balance as opposed to apathy or tolerance. The TN who advocates balance has chosen to participate in the war. They have a stake in insuring no side becomes overwhelmingly strong.
This is the role I intend to play.
Sure, there's apathetic neutral and ambivalent neutral, but the latter group seems like it would be considered a liability by everyone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Extremists are unreasoning fanatics.
How is Cayden Cailean fanatical, except perhaps about ale? He's CG and thus one of the corner alignments. Or is it less extreme to have two concerns rather than a single one? Would Sarenrae be more 'extreme' than Iomedae because she's only concerned with Good, in terms of alignments?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When I think of losing skills from a settlement being destroyed I think of it like this. Imagine you are a Roman legionnaire. You are the best of the best at being a Roman legionnaire. You live in Rome. Rome supplies you with the specialized equipment of a Roman legionnaire, trains armies using Roman tactics, uses Roman style logistics to keep your legion supplied with the equipment and level of comfort a Roman legionnaire has come to expect.
Rome falls to barbarians with their own culture, weapons, tactics etc. they either cast aside the accumulated Roman knowledge or take it for themselves. You are now a Roman legionnaire cut off from Roman equipment, supplies, comforts, and recruits trained in a Roman tactics. You may still be a very dangerous man, but not as dangerous as you were while you were in the Roman legions.
I do however think that simply cutting your group off from the training and crafting facilities of Rome is probably the best way to simulate this.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Andius
You are trying to use real world circumstances to justify in game consequences, but you are not even using the real world example properly.
Real World: I left the US Military in 1999. I have no access to military equipment or continued training since then. I left the military as a Sharpshooter with an M16 and a Marksmen with a 9mm pistol.
I own an AR-15 and a 9mm pistol. I'm a sharpshooter, with both now. This past summer I went to a clay pigeon charity shooting event. I had never fired a shotgun before in my life. I never shot clay pigeons before either. I hit 57 out of 100 pigeons, better than a number of the guys on my team.
Just because I have been removed from my formal traing, removed from access to the weapons I used to use, doesn't mean I lost my training or could not easily transfer much of it over to another weapon type.
Having characters lose their skills or the ability to equip what they used to, isn't based on any kind of rational reasoning. The Devs simply want to make settlements of primary importance. Your suggestion that there is any kind of real world connection is baseless, founded in a lack of personal experience in such things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are things common to various longarms and things which are quite different about an assault rifle and a shotgun, right? I think those would have some keywords in common and some different, so there would be AR skills that wouldn't be useful if you didn't have access to an assault rifle.
I guess in Eve there are weapon skills that become useless when you don't have access to reloads, right? If they are specialized enough to only be made by players, your home facilities are gone, and you're cut off from other sources, then that skill is still there but useless.
If there were some kind of buff that takes some daily or weekly maintenance to keep yourself sharp, then that could wear off and you'd effectively be 'a bit rusty' without it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Really, really, really bad comparisons with modern firearms aside there was an incredible ammount of difference between the weapons of those time periods even if you confined it to a category like swords instead of the much broader category of melee weapons.
There were obvious differences such as length, shape, and weight and more subtle ones such as the sharpness and flexibility of the blade. A master with a gladius would use a fighting style that was incredibily different than a master of a Viking longsword, scimitar, or katana. Weapons made from bronze, iron, steel, and crucible steel would have entirely different properties and thus the approach to fighting with each would differ a fair bit.
A master of one type of sword would probably be more deadly than someone untrained in swordfighting with any blade but they would not be nearly as effective as they could be with the blade they mastered. Not until they mastered the new blade.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If there were some kind of buff that takes some daily or weekly maintenance to keep yourself sharp, then that could wear off and you'd effectively be 'a bit rusty' without it.
That's the way I envision it. A settlement's training buildings represent (a) the training space, like lists, targets, practice rings, (b) a NPC training master (or several) who coach the character to achieve their best performance and clean up bad practices that creep into their techniques, and (c) the controlled market of specialized gear. I just assume the buff is automatic if we have access to the facilities.
I think the military firearms training analogy isn't as apt as a high-performance athlete, one that trains several hours a day in a good gym. College level gymnast or team sport. Take away the facilities, coach, and access to some of the gear and the athlete's skills will degrade.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Real World: I left the US Military in 1999. I have no access to military equipment or continued training since then. I left the military as a Sharpshooter with an M16 and a Marksmen with a 9mm pistol.
I own an AR-15 and a 9mm pistol. I'm a sharpshooter, with both now. This past summer I went to a clay pigeon charity shooting event. I had never fired a shotgun before in my life. I never shot clay pigeons before either. I hit 57 out of 100 pigeons, better than a number of the guys on my team.
Just because I have been removed from my formal traing, removed from access to the weapons I used to use, doesn't mean I lost my training or could not easily transfer much of it over to another weapon type.
Given your shotgun experience... I'd suggest that maybe you have a good amount of raw ability with the weapons, and that shooting sharpshooter with modern weapons isn't as much a trained skill as an inate capability once you know a few basic things like breath control and the proper sight picture.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't think the in-lore justification for taking away a learned skills is the problem. PF has a ritch enough lore to pull out an explanation for what ever. I think that taking away a learned skill in itself is a problem.
I actually do not have a problem with it until I consider the fact that I paid RL cash to train that skill. But, I think as long as it is implemented such that access to the proper gear/facilities re-enables use, I will improvise and adapt.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm actually kind of a fan of it. Pathfinder Online is not a game where you are supposed to cling to safezones or "high sec" type areas forever. You are supposed to get out there and interact with people. I think as long as there are settlements like Brighthaven that allow for very casual members and don't shove many obligations on you the system will be fine.
If every settlement expecting to be able to call you at 3 am if a siege is going on, then there will be a serious problem.
As long as GW incentivizes settlements to accept casual members as much as they incentivize casuals to join settlements then things should work out.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And how do you feel those casual members will feel about loosing 2 years of training they paid for if Brighthaven falls? Think they will continue to pay for training...aka pay to play the game?
But, I admit I am not really sure of the point you are trying to make. I am not sure what being casual or not has anything to do with loosing skills when your settlement falls...or did I miss another tangent?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This whole thing is really a silly premise. Is the loss of a settlement going to deny you access to every Roman short sword in the game? Isn't it reasonable to be prepared as a combatant to have your own stockpile of your commonly used gear?
In Darkfall we had what we called "Go Bags". It was a bag filled with every piece of replacement gear and consumables you needed. For a siege, we would drop temporary chests filled with everyone's go bags.
In EvE you would have a fitted replacement ship at every location you had a jump clone installed. Every significant PvP focused corporation had an alt corp to supply it with all of its needs.
PFO will have the same capabilities. Alt companies will be common place, especially with those with DTs. The markets will have their shelves filled with common and even not so common gear and consumables. Hideouts can be used to store emergency gear. Banks will store our back up gear.
The real threat of loss of a settlement that provides upper tier training is those classes that requires a specific alignment. Because LG is difficult to maintain, it is conceivable that there could be few or even one settlement that offers the highest Paladin training. Take out that settlement and you may very well gimp every Paladin in the game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@KitNyx
In Darkfall casual players tend to live in safezones because of the hassle of belonging to an alliance. In EVE they live in high security space both because of the abuses they have to endure in null sec and the demands alliances put on them when they live there.
People want to log out, sleep soundly and not be concerned that they aren't fulfilling their obligations to their alliance.
The solution is generally to not join one. In PFO I'm hoping that it's viable to play a much more casual role and still be accepted into the major settlements.
As far as losing skill training I hope the skills lost will mainly revolve around filling roles not needed outside large settlements. Think titan flying skills in EVE. Entirely useless unless you are in an alliance capable of producing and defending a titan. And what's the point in advanced formation combat skills unless you belong to a group large enough to use formations regularly? What's the point in being able to smith in adamantine if you don't have a forge hot enough to let you work with it?
I think the main reason for skill loss is so that you can't train up to max skills in a lawful good high rep settlement the move to a chaotic evil low rep settlement and still have all those abilities.
I think there may be better ways to do that but the idea of losing something when you lose a good settlement or move to a crappy one seems sound to me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So your saying it will not effect the casuals. What about the non-casuals then? What about the people who spend the time to train to pilot a titan of dreadnought...or any other specialised behaviour. All I care about is whether you get access to those skills again when/if you join another settlement that can "empower" them, or do you need to retrain them?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Andius
Then ask yourself, how casual friendly is limiting skill training slots?
Imagine you are running a settlement and you have 500 slots of training and 520 citizens. Some casual player you rarely see, and contributes less than most, logs in once in a while and takes one of those slots.
It will not be long before your citizens, the active ones say to expel the dead weight that is the casual player.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Extremists are unreasoning fanatics.How is Cayden Cailean fanatical, except perhaps about ale? He's CG and thus one of the corner alignments. Or is it less extreme to have two concerns rather than a single one? Would Sarenrae be more 'extreme' than Iomedae because she's only concerned with Good, in terms of alignments?
How? By means of imbalance. By seeking to oppress, suppress, overthrow, or destroy those who think or feel differently than they. By repressing the darker sides of their own personalities. By seeking to deny that death is as necessary as life, that negative should balance positive. By asserting that their way is the one true way and no other way should be chosen. By asserting that Law is oppressive or chaos is madness.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Andius
Then ask yourself, how casual friendly is limiting skill training slots?
Imagine you are running a settlement and you have 500 slots of training and 520 citizens. Some casual player you rarely see, and contributes less than most, logs in once in a while and takes one of those slots.
It will not be long before your citizens, the active ones say to expel the dead weight that is the casual player.
As I've said before, our contributing members will get first rights to anything that is limited in quantity.
I would imagine if we are capable of training 500 and have 520 that I would get a choice as to who the 500 that get to train, and the 20 that don't are. If only 400 of those members are contributing they will get full time access and the other 120 will have to share what's left, so we'd likely rotate who among them gets the training each month.
How? By means of imbalance. By seeking to oppress, suppress, overthrow, or destroy those who think or feel differently than they. By repressing the darker sides of their own personalities. By seeking to deny that death is as necessary as life, that negative should balance positive. By asserting that their way is the one true way and no other way should be chosen. By asserting that Law is oppressive or chaos is madness.Extremists are unreasoning fanatics.How is Cayden Cailean fanatical, except perhaps about ale? He's CG and thus one of the corner alignments. Or is it less extreme to have two concerns rather than a single one? Would Sarenrae be more 'extreme' than Iomedae because she's only concerned with Good, in terms of alignments?
Clearly neutrality can be taken to an extreme as well. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How? By means of imbalance. By seeking to oppress, suppress, overthrow, or destroy those who think or feel differently than they. By repressing the darker sides of their own personalities. By seeking to deny that death is as necessary as life, that negative should balance positive. By asserting that their way is the one true way and no other way should be chosen. By asserting that Law is oppressive or chaos is madness.Extremists are unreasoning fanatics.How is Cayden Cailean fanatical, except perhaps about ale? He's CG and thus one of the corner alignments. Or is it less extreme to have two concerns rather than a single one? Would Sarenrae be more 'extreme' than Iomedae because she's only concerned with Good, in terms of alignments?
Exactly, as a seeker all forms of knowledge, I must oppose any censor. I think I can safely assume every non-neutral position on the plane seeks to censor it's opposite and therefore I must strive to keep any one (or more) side(s) from growing strong enough to universally do so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Am I misunderstanding what was said? I thought what Ryan mentioned is that if you stop being lawful good then you cannot slot your smite evil ability. This whole loss of skills seems to come out of nowhere to me. Loss of access to new training was said but I missed loss of access to already trained skills being tied to home settlements. Why are we on this topic?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I misunderstanding what was said? I thought what Ryan mentioned is that if you stop being lawful good then you cannot slot your smite evil ability. This whole loss of skills seems to come out of nowhere to me. Loss of access to new training was said but I missed loss of access to already trained skills being tied to home settlements. Why are we on this topic?
I could certainly see losing access to a shiny new top tier training building will be plenty punitive for losing your settlement. With on going exp gain, you will really miss those immediate training opportunities.
Some "skills" tied to an on going, functioning building (for whatever reason), I can also see.
I am not sure where or why all of the wildly speculative tangents are coming from either. Except boredom, anxiety, and lack of information.
Edit: I also don't see GW designing roles without equivalent top tier abilities and ways to train them. They don't seem big on coding things that they suspect very few will choose to use.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure how we got on it in this thread, but for background on skills being tied to settlement citizenship, back in August Ryan said this:
There's an interesting assumption I've seen in this thread that I wanted to mention.
The assumption is that a character can gain X ability while a member of one Settlement, and then keep using it when they change Settlements to one that doesn't have the necessary perquisites to provide and/or sustain that ability so that a character's total available abilities are disassociated from thier Settlement affiliation.
That's an assumption, not a fact.
We've had other clues. I'm not sure if it's set in stone, but it seems they've been considering that if players could gain uber skills when at high rep, then go to low rep and retain all their capabilities... what are the consequences in the rep system?
edit to add: isn't this the truth:
I also don't see GW designing roles without equivalent top tier abilities and ways to train them. They don't seem big on coding things that they suspect very few will choose to use.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Andius
Then ask yourself, how casual friendly is limiting skill training slots?
Imagine you are running a settlement and you have 500 slots of training and 520 citizens. Some casual player you rarely see, and contributes less than most, logs in once in a while and takes one of those slots.
It will not be long before your citizens, the active ones say to expel the dead weight that is the casual player.
I think this is a valid concern for some groups. However, the nature of player we are hoping to draw is going to be more casual friendly. There will be a good deal of discussion to have on the topic as Brighthaven comes to fruition but I have a degree of confidence that something can get worked out. Purely hardcore settlements may not be able to. This will definitely provide for different advantages and disadvantages from settlement to settlement based on their policies ultimately becomming training vs. Size tradeoffs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not sure how we got on it in this thread, but for background on skills being tied to settlement citizenship, back in August Ryan said this:
There's an interesting assumption I've seen in this thread that I wanted to mention.
The assumption is that a character can gain X ability while a member of one Settlement, and then keep using it when they change Settlements to one that doesn't have the necessary perquisites to provide and/or sustain that ability so that a character's total available abilities are disassociated from thier Settlement affiliation.
That's an assumption, not a fact.
We've had other clues. I'm not sure if it's set in stone, but it seems they've been considering that if players could gain uber skills when at high rep, then go to low rep and retain all their capabilities... what are the consequences in the rep system?
edit to add: isn't this the truth:
I also don't see GW designing roles without equivalent top tier abilities and ways to train them. They don't seem big on coding things that they suspect very few will choose to use.
Thanks for that! I can see the reasons to avoid a game where people mind their rep until they get the skills they want then go wild. But I think it might be unpopular enough to cause significant subscriber attrition from players who find settlements destroyed that it may not last.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I misunderstanding what was said? I thought what Ryan mentioned is that if you stop being lawful good then you cannot slot your smite evil ability. This whole loss of skills seems to come out of nowhere to me. Loss of access to new training was said but I missed loss of access to already trained skills being tied to home settlements. Why are we on this topic?
I think that the sentiment comes from the idea that a clerical power, or a Paladin's power, is a gift of that character's god. If there is a god giving you power and you offend him/her/it they may well withhold your ability to use that gift until you figure out what is what and straighten yourself out.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Am I misunderstanding what was said? I thought what Ryan mentioned is that if you stop being lawful good then you cannot slot your smite evil ability. This whole loss of skills seems to come out of nowhere to me. Loss of access to new training was said but I missed loss of access to already trained skills being tied to home settlements. Why are we on this topic?I think that the sentiment comes from the idea that a clerical power, or a Paladin's power, is a gift of that character's god. If there is a god giving you power and you offend him/her/it they may well withhold your ability to use that gift until you figure out what is what and straighten yourself out.
That being said, it seems a whole lot of suffering on the part of everyone to accommodate the very limited application needed for just one class. Then consider that class is likely not to appear until two years or more after the start of EE, and the loss of a settlement may only effect high tier trained skills, perhaps another two years after that.