UNC Policy Discussion Thread


Pathfinder Online

451 to 500 of 687 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

new recruit to UNC, glad to be with such an organized group

Goblin Squad Member

Welcome aboard

Goblin Squad Member

Yebng wants to make poisons. I predict great wealth in his future!

Goblin Squad Member

I just hope GW implements poisons as a consumable as opposed to an "class" ability

Goblin Squad Member

Stephen Cheney wrote:
Initially, consumables include a few buff/heal potions (for the buffs we have working; more coming as we get more effects programmed) and several "grenades" (like Alchemist's Fire). We've also got plans for weapon coatings/poisons and misc items (yes, like sunrods), but those require a bit more tech so will come in later.

Goblin Squad Member

T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
Stephen Cheney wrote:
Initially, consumables include a few buff/heal potions (for the buffs we have working; more coming as we get more effects programmed) and several "grenades" (like Alchemist's Fire). We've also got plans for weapon coatings/poisons and misc items (yes, like sunrods), but those require a bit more tech so will come in later.

Thanks for that. I was about to start digging for the answer.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Hellow folks. Just jumping in.

Goblin Squad Member

Welcome to the new recruits, but I just want to ensure people understand, this is our POLICY thread. We have a Charter/Recruitment thread that is better suited for this discussion. Not being a prick, just keep the thread as intended.

Back on topic: It has been about 2 weeks or so since I last asked for any further questions concerning the policies of the UNC. Am I to take this silence as a "no more questions" reply? After all this time of discussing and confusion with the UNC and what we stand for and our policies, is it finally over? LOL

Goblin Squad Member

"The Goodfellow" wrote:

Welcome to the new recruits, but I just want to ensure people understand, this is our POLICY thread. We have a Charter/Recruitment thread that is better suited for this discussion. Not being a prick, just keep the thread as intended.

Back on topic: It has been about 2 weeks or so since I last asked for any further questions concerning the policies of the UNC. Am I to take this silence as a "no more questions" reply? After all this time of discussing and confusion with the UNC and what we stand for and our policies, is it finally over? LOL

Well, I admit that I miss the drama a bit when this forum is slow. :P

Your threads are seriously like 75% commercials now. I guess that I can't blame you. It seems to be working! :)

Here you go:

Will the UNC be purchasing air time on the Tele or radio?


Hi.
'Sup?
Yeah, just chilling out here.
Alright, well, it's been real, but I think I hear a mountain lion.
You better get to your car. Later.

Goblin Squad Member

Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:
"The Goodfellow" wrote:

Welcome to the new recruits, but I just want to ensure people understand, this is our POLICY thread. We have a Charter/Recruitment thread that is better suited for this discussion. Not being a prick, just keep the thread as intended.

Back on topic: It has been about 2 weeks or so since I last asked for any further questions concerning the policies of the UNC. Am I to take this silence as a "no more questions" reply? After all this time of discussing and confusion with the UNC and what we stand for and our policies, is it finally over? LOL

Well, I admit that I miss the drama a bit when this forum is slow. :P

Your threads are seriously like 75% commercials now. I guess that I can't blame you. It seems to be working! :)

Here you go:

Will the UNC be purchasing air time on the Tele or radio?

This is because there hasn't been a game play blog in weeks, and so there hasn't been a policy issue to discuss.

I of course miss the controversy of a little forum chaos as well, I'll see what I can drum up over this weekend. ;-)

Goblin Squad Member

Bringslite of Fidelis wrote:
"The Goodfellow" wrote:

Welcome to the new recruits, but I just want to ensure people understand, this is our POLICY thread. We have a Charter/Recruitment thread that is better suited for this discussion. Not being a prick, just keep the thread as intended.

Back on topic: It has been about 2 weeks or so since I last asked for any further questions concerning the policies of the UNC. Am I to take this silence as a "no more questions" reply? After all this time of discussing and confusion with the UNC and what we stand for and our policies, is it finally over? LOL

Well, I admit that I miss the drama a bit when this forum is slow. :P

Your threads are seriously like 75% commercials now. I guess that I can't blame you. It seems to be working! :)

Here you go:

Will the UNC be purchasing air time on the Tele or radio?

Purchasing?? I will say "no" because we are poor. This is the reason we are bandits. Also since the game isn't out yet we haven't been able to rob anyone yet.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Bluddwolf wrote:
I of course miss the controversy of a little forum chaos as well, I'll see what I can drum up over this weekend. ;-)

I can make up some controversy if you want, in exchange for a price. What about full immunity from Aragon on all my characters, in exchange for five polemic post a week ?

Goblin Squad Member

Audoucet wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
I of course miss the controversy of a little forum chaos as well, I'll see what I can drum up over this weekend. ;-)
I can make up some controversy if you want, in exchange for a price. What about full immunity from Aragon on all my characters, in exchange for five polemic post a week ?

I'll bid 2 Ptolemic posts, 2 opinionated posts, 1 controversial post and 1 eristic post and even throw in a half-litre of maple syrup* a week

* Finest number three virtual, hand collected by 14 virgins in northern Quebec

Goblinworks Executive Founder

I'll bid french insults with Marseille accent + Quebec insults with fake Quebec accent.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
...14 virgins in northern Quebec

Are there that many?*

* - you truly required it to be said

Goblin Squad Member

I'm out of the auction. I can't match french accents, fake or otherwise.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
...14 virgins in northern Quebec

Are there that many?*

* - you truly required it to be said

Many many more. You just have to recruit heavily among male* gamers.

* Made an assumption there, didn't you?

Goblin Squad Member

It doesn't pay to assume anything about anyone :-).

Goblin Squad Member

Some things we don't have to assume....

Goblin Squad Member

After going through this thread again I came across a link provided by Drakhan Valane that interested me and could use greater detail.

Quote:


Murderhobo (or murder hobo, etc.) is a term used (originally pejoratively, but occasionally affectionately) for the player characters in RPGs, both in video games and tabletop games. The term arises due to the fact that most adventuring characters and parties are technically homeless vagrants, generally living on the road and sometimes in temporary accommodation, and the default solution to problems faced by the typical adventurer boils down to killing things until the problem is solved or treasure is acquired. In many games (especially older pure hack and slash-types of the type that Gary Gygax despised) killing things and taking their stuff is simply the order of the day, all morally acceptable and proper, either because that's all the players are interested in doing or all the GM can come up with. In more nuanced settings, "Murderhobo(s)" is used especially to refer to characters (or entire parties) of looser morals who tend to regard massive collateral damage as an inevitable and unremarkable consequence of their actions, or who are quite happy to slaughter otherwise friendly NPCs at slight provocation or the prospect of financial gain (basically, munchkins).

Although it is a fantasy standard that adventuring parties are welcomed into towns and villages and hailed as saviours, there is a small trend for this to be inverted in some games and stories (usually for comedy's sake) and have the protagonists be treated as the homeless serial killers they actually are, either by having them rejected from civilised society or by having the NPCs/minor characters respond with pants-s!~&ting fear whenever the heroes present themselves. Murderhobos left to their own devices are bad news for the region they occupy, so they are often dealt with by giving them quests that take them to dangerous places in distant locations, where they can kill some other monsters (or at least some foreigners).

Although some may view the CE Exalted Bastards as Murderhobos, they really are not envisioned to be so. The EB are focused shock troops that will slaughter everything in their path within the lands of a feud, faction or war target. They are not motivated by greed, but by the desire for carnage.

However, the UNC will seek to employ / have join its ranks an adventuring group that would match the definition of "Murder Hobos".

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Good for you

Scarab Sages

In the end, Exalted Bastards will behave as a murderer-like CN, as long pure CE bahevior are tagged as low-rep and griefing? I think it's fair and well fitted in Game Design.

As long UNC can control the impredicably destruction and murderer from Chaotic Evil alignement by constant war, all the fuzzy in the forum by the "OMG they will be evil" will vanish.

Indded I still will see, after EE, some of the CG/NG/LG with a big stick smashing the head of another CG/NG/LG for territory or goods...

Goblin Squad Member

Audoucet wrote:
Good for you

You are obviously not seeing the less negative aspects of the description, nor the role playing potential of such a division or company.

I envision this group as being escalation specialists, and that being more PvE oriented, but willing to quickly switch to PvP if needed to fend off others who may be pursuing the same treasure or escalation boss.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Audoucet wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
I of course miss the controversy of a little forum chaos as well, I'll see what I can drum up over this weekend. ;-)
I can make up some controversy if you want, in exchange for a price. What about full immunity from Aragon on all my characters, in exchange for five polemic post a week ?

I'll bid 2 Ptolemic posts, 2 opinionated posts, 1 controversial post and 1 eristic post and even throw in a half-litre of maple syrup* a week

* Finest number three virtual, hand collected by 14 virgins in northern Quebec

Bah... who wants virgins. Give me 14 experienced women.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Bluddwolf wrote:
Audoucet wrote:
Good for you

You are obviously not seeing the less negative aspects of the description, nor the role playing potential of such a division or company.

I envision this group as being escalation specialists, and that being more PvE oriented, but willing to quickly switch to PvP if needed to fend off others who may be pursuing the same treasure or escalation boss.

Sorry, maybe I missused the expression ? It was meant to be positive ! I intend to play a crusader, so I will need people like you, otherwise I won't have anything to do.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Banesama wrote:
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Audoucet wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
I of course miss the controversy of a little forum chaos as well, I'll see what I can drum up over this weekend. ;-)
I can make up some controversy if you want, in exchange for a price. What about full immunity from Aragon on all my characters, in exchange for five polemic post a week ?

I'll bid 2 Ptolemic posts, 2 opinionated posts, 1 controversial post and 1 eristic post and even throw in a half-litre of maple syrup* a week

* Finest number three virtual, hand collected by 14 virgins in northern Quebec

Bah... who wants virgins. Give me 14 experienced women.

I could send you to a rest home, but this action could be tagged to loss reputation... So I won't make that joke...

XD

Goblin Squad Member

Banesama wrote:
Caldeathe Baequiannia wrote:
Audoucet wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:
I of course miss the controversy of a little forum chaos as well, I'll see what I can drum up over this weekend. ;-)
I can make up some controversy if you want, in exchange for a price. What about full immunity from Aragon on all my characters, in exchange for five polemic post a week ?

I'll bid 2 Ptolemic posts, 2 opinionated posts, 1 controversial post and 1 eristic post and even throw in a half-litre of maple syrup* a week

* Finest number three virtual, hand collected by 14 virgins in northern Quebec

Bah... who wants virgins. Give me 14 experienced women.

Nah, 1 experienced will do fine, train the rest.

Goblin Squad Member

Audoucet wrote:
Sorry, maybe I missused the expression?

Compliment or agreement, as irony, is often difficult to discern in internet-style writing. I believe folks should give one another the benefit of the doubt when multiple interpretations are possible, but that's--for many reasons--not always going to happen.

When one has to also cross a language-barrier (or maybe only a speed-bump [casse-vitesse?]), I perceive potential difficulty in clear understanding increasing exponentially. I personally believe you're doing just fine :-).

Goblin Squad Member

Audoucet wrote:
Good for you
Audoucet wrote:
Sorry, maybe I missused the expression ? It was meant to be positive ! I intend to play a crusader, so I will need people like you, otherwise I won't have anything to do.

Yes, you did misuse the expression. When it is said "Good for You", it carries a negative connotation as being condescending and or mixed with an element of disdain.

However, as a self proclaimed crusader, UNC sponsored murder hobos would likely not be your primary target.

For me a crusader is someone who is trying to thwart a major, oppressive, evil. The UNC is envisioned to be a moderate nuisance throughout the River Kingdoms, at our worst. For our feud, faction and war targets we hope to be a major thorn in the side. As for being oppressive, that is a lawful trait, and one that we do not possess. I think it is pretty clear, we on balance are neutral, with perhaps a slight leaning towards evil.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
...it carries a negative connotation as being condescending and or mixed with an element of disdain.

I have to disagree. I believe those nuances are conveyed in the tone of the words when spoken; in writing, additional context's required, and here we had none.

Easier to assume the best, but, as I said above, there are many reasons why that might not happen.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Bluddwolf wrote:

However, as a self proclaimed crusader, UNC sponsored murder hobos would likely not be your primary target.

For me a crusader is someone who is trying to thwart a major, oppressive, evil. The UNC is envisioned to be a moderate nuisance throughout the River Kingdoms, at our worst. For our feud, faction and war targets we hope to be a major thorn in the side. As for being oppressive, that is a lawful trait, and one that we do not possess. I think it is pretty clear, we on balance are neutral, with perhaps a slight leaning towards evil.

Well, this is acceptable for a paladin, but I don't play a lot of Lawful Good characters, actually. I'm more into LN, and the destruction of chaos !

Goblin Squad Member

This is mainly directed at The Goodfellow because he is a good fellow from what I've heard. :P

In effort to not further derail FMS's post...

You mentioned NC's NAP. I'm assuming UNC has agreed to this. I also assume NAP stands for Non-Aggression Pact. If those are true my ultimate question is did UNC require all the members of the NC to sign a contract with them to not SAD or otherwise be aggressive toward them?

Was wondering how that part was worked out. I don't frequent these forums much preferring to stay in my own little corner of the PFO world.


"Good for you" is one of those phases that is almost always used ironically, at least where I live. You might be able to pull it off sincerely in-person, but in-text, it just looks very sarcastic to me.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
V'rel Vusoryn wrote:

This is mainly directed at The Goodfellow because he is a good fellow from what I've heard. :P

In effort to not further derail FMS's post...

You mentioned NC's NAP. I'm assuming UNC has agreed to this. I also assume NAP stands for Non-Aggression Pact. If those are true my ultimate question is did UNC require all the members of the NC to sign a contract with them to not SAD or otherwise be aggressive toward them?

Was wondering how that part was worked out. I don't frequent these forums much preferring to stay in my own little corner of the PFO world.

NAP = Non-Aggression-Pact

We did not form a contract per se, as this is more of a "grand scale" agreement along the same lines as one would sign an alliance or declare a full out war. The UNC deal more with smaller, or lower level and more intimate affairs. The NAP was agreed to by the settlement of Aragon, as well as all of its members, including the UNC, with the idea of "Not crapping where we sleep." In the NC thread, there is some more details, but as far as the UNC is concerned for this NC membership, we won't actively pursue NC members as our targets for any of our activities. We won't raid them, we won't SAD them, we won't ambush them.

It is important to note, as I think it was stated in the NC thread, that if a 3rd party owns a caravan and is ambushed by the UNC, while it is being guarded by a NC member, that would not violate the NAP for that combat to occur as the guards are considered members of the 3rd party while they are employed by them.

To clarify:

PAX is hired to guard a TEO caravan. UNC ambushes that caravan. PAX guards and UNC fight, and go about their respective day's. No violation of the NAP has occurred.

If PAX is guarding a PAX caravan and UNC ambushes it, BAD UNC!!!! :-)


Of course, aside from the exception Goodfellow just noted, nobody seems to quite agree on how strict the NAP really is. The particulars will be determined in-game—perhaps even on the battlefield. ;D

Goblin Squad Member

At this moment in time the spirit of the agreement is much more important than the letter. We don't know enough about how the game will be played to write something in blood. The NC allows signatories to go about their business without, for the most part, worrying about the other signatories.

Goblin Squad Member

Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Of course, aside from the exception Goodfellow just noted, nobody seems to quite agree on how strict the NAP really is. The particulars will be determined in-game—perhaps even on the battlefield. ;D

This is true, but again, it is the idea of the NAP, while loosely defined at the moment, to be understood by all that sign it and join its ranks:

We are neutral without being hostile. Some people feel this means complete protection from hostile actions of the others, and others feel this means no wars and no raiding/destroying POIs but the occasional small scale skirmish is ok. But the main thing is, we shouldn't need to worry about hostilities from those who sign this pact. Small or large. Exact details, as cleaver stated, will likely be determined in better detail in EE and evolved throughout EE.


Yeah, I think the bottom line is "don't do anything important". Stealing the life-saving medicine on its way to Golgotha's PoI, Orphantown? Not cool. Robbing some random UNC bandit? Eh, that's more of a gray area.

Goblin Squad Member

4 people marked this as a favorite.

If I'm guarding a 3rd party caravan, and UNC comes and attacks that caravan, I have once choice, to fight them with all the steam I got. Whether I live or die is secondary to the joy of the fight itself. My only stipulation is whoever wins is buyin' the booze during the after party.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Stealing the life-saving medicine on its way to Golgotha's PoI, Orphantown? Not cool.

And if you found out that that box you stole was Orphantown medicine after the fact, you take the medicine back, and then you return your fee to the guy who hired you to steal it. And if he doesn't want to take it back, you kick him into the engine intake, and give the money to his second in command.

Goblin Squad Member

There was nowhere near enough Firefly to provide quotes and references for all the situations we're going to need them :-(.

Goblin Squad Member

"The Goodfellow" wrote:


NAP = Non-Aggression-Pact

We did not form a contract per se, as this is more of a "grand scale" agreement along the same lines as one would sign an alliance or declare a full out war. The UNC deal more with smaller, or lower level and more intimate affairs. The NAP was agreed to by the settlement of Aragon, as well as all of its members, including the UNC, with the idea of "Not crapping where we sleep." In the NC thread, there is some more details, but as far as the UNC is concerned for this NC membership, we won't actively pursue NC members as our targets for any of our activities. We won't raid them, we won't SAD them, we won't ambush them.

It is important to note, as I think it was stated in the NC thread, that if a 3rd party owns a caravan and is ambushed by the UNC, while it is being guarded by a NC member, that would not violate the NAP for that combat to occur as the guards are considered members of the 3rd party while they are employed by them.

To clarify:

PAX is hired to guard a TEO caravan. UNC ambushes that caravan. PAX guards and UNC fight, and go about their respective day's. No violation of the NAP has occurred.

If PAX is guarding a PAX caravan and UNC ambushes it, BAD UNC!!!! :-)

Thank you for the information. Speaking personally I think that NAP (as discussed above) and our "mutual benefit" clause have many points in common and was a concern I had during the UNC signing RA beginnings. The idea of having to sign a contract and pay was my disconnect.

Anyway, once again thanks for taking the time. It is appreciated.

Grand Lodge

Gol Morbis wrote:

At this moment in time the spirit of the agreement is much more important than the letter. We don't know enough about how the game will be played to write something in blood. The NC allows signatories to go about their business without, for the most part, worrying about the other signatories.

Genius! Wait this sounds... familiar... :p

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aet Kard Warstein wrote:
If I'm guarding a 3rd party caravan, and UNC comes and attacks that caravan, I have once choice, to fight them with all the steam I got. Whether I live or die is secondary to the joy of the fight itself. My only stipulation is whoever wins is buyin' the booze during the after party.

This is in the spirit of what the UNC had signed up for. It places any incidental combat into its proper place of "mutually entertaining". We have been using the following line (promise) in our recruitment thread:

"We are a Positive Game Play community, making every effort to deliver Mutually Entertaining and Meaningful Interactions with Friends and Foes alike."

Goblin Squad Member

V'rel Vusoryn wrote:
The idea of having to sign a contract and pay was my disconnect. .

The suggestion that UNC participation in the RBA being contract based was only after our offer to adhere to it freely was rejected, we were subjected to questions others were not, the goal posts were moved, and then we saw the writing on e wall and withdrew.

It was not until there was some backlash against those that subjected us to that unique treatment, that we were then told "if we do this ...... You can join", that I said, only as part of a contract.

If "mutually beneficial" is no longer the goal and if banditry is now seen as within the loose definition of "positive game play" (As the Devs have always supported), then I can see our revisiting the conversation of signing such a promise.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
V'rel Vusoryn wrote:
The idea of having to sign a contract and pay was my disconnect. .
If "mutually beneficial" is no longer the goal...

I am not aware that this is the case nor do I attempt to speak as one who has any say either way. Just had a personal question that was graciously answered and one that helps form my opinion for when I express my opinion in other venues.

I personally don't see banditry as not being positive gameplay however logic keeps me from agreeing that taking from one in such a manner is mutually beneficial. C'est la vie. Note that doesn't mean I view UNC as a whole in any manner. I take each individual as they come.

Thanks as well for the reply.


I've heard it said that "positive gameplay" is being defined differently from "meaningful PvP"—I assume this means that any unprovoked assault, while meaningful, is not "positive".

If this is so, fair enough, but I have to say...really? That is not what I assume when I hear "positive gameplay". When I hear "positive gameplay", I'm all like YEAAAAH, I'M REALLY POSITIVE ABOUT THAT, and when I hear "negative gameplay", I'm all BOOO, MY FEELINGS TOWARDS THAT TEND TO BE NEGATIVE. Positive gameplay makes me think of things that are positive for the game, not for the dude who doesn't like getting swords in his gullet.


T7V Jazzlvraz wrote:
There was nowhere near enough Firefly to provide quotes and references for all the situations we're going to need them :-(.

...darn.

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.
V'rel Vusoryn wrote:
I personally don't see banditry as not being positive gameplay however logic keeps me from agreeing that taking from one in such a manner is mutually beneficial.

You are correct, it is positive gameplay, but it is not mutually beneficial. However the same can be said for all PVP. In PVP there is always a winner and a loser, the loser will have the toughest time seeing the benefit in losing.

However, if we use the phrases of "mutually entertaining" and "meaningful interaction", then perhaps the lose of the conflict can begin to understand their benefit. Similarly, if the winner of the conflict can see that by striving to make the encounter both entertaining and meaningful, then they too may see the benefit in engaging in positive gameplay.

We understand (UNC) that we are "speaking" to a great number of people with limited Open World PVP experience. I don't mean that as a jab in the least bit. We understand that there is a certain amount of trepidation concerning non consensual pvp and the loss of loot / time for your efforts. This is why we as the most vocal of all pvp / bandits have said we will not "over fish the pond".

We will try to ease you into the realities of Open World PVP. We will be open to conversing with those that we victimize and if they ask for advice, it will be given without mockery or any sort of ridicule. When we take in new characters, wishing to dabble or fully dedicate themselves to banditry, we will impress upon them the virtues of "Doing Banditry Right".

451 to 500 of 687 << first < prev | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / UNC Policy Discussion Thread All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.