Goblin Squad Member
|
It makes way more sense to give true neutral 5000 through -5000 on both axis and lawful good +7500 to 0 on both axis than to prohibit +2501 / +2501 from joining a TN settlement and +2499 / + 2499 from joining a LG settlement.
With the confirmation that some abilities will require extremes such as +7000 in certain alignments I can't see a good reason not to do this.
I'm still not convinced we need a hard alignment system but if we do that's how it should work.
(5000,5000) is the core value for LG. (-5000,-5000) is the core value for CE. Your proposed neutral settlement with a range of -5000 to 5000 in both the law and good axes would effectively cover all core alignments and all classes. It would be the only alignment for the big settlements.
It won't be 75% of Settlements. It will be 100% of big successful Setlements. Everyone else will end up serfs.
If alignment is only meaningful based on who they will/won't let in, then yea, but if that's the case, there's not really much point to the alignment system at all (at least as applied to Settlements).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
(5000,5000) is the core value for LG. (-5000,-5000) is the core value for CE. Your proposed neutral settlement with a range of -5000 to 5000 in both the law and good axes would effectively cover all core alignments and all classes. It would be the only alignment for the big settlements.It makes way more sense to give true neutral 5000 through -5000 on both axis and lawful good +7500 to 0 on both axis than to prohibit +2501 / +2501 from joining a TN settlement and +2499 / + 2499 from joining a LG settlement.
With the confirmation that some abilities will require extremes such as +7000 in certain alignments I can't see a good reason not to do this.
I'm still not convinced we need a hard alignment system but if we do that's how it should work.
If GW caps the upper limit of training, based on the number of alignments supported by a settlement, then there would be a trade off for settlements open to many or all alignments. It really is that simple and allows for settlement leaders to make meaningful choices.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If GW caps the upper limit of training, based on the number of alignments supported by a settlement, then there would be a trade off for settlements open to many or all alignments. It really is that simple and allows for settlement leaders to make meaningful choices.
That is a humongous "if", don't you think? Your system would probably affect whatever they have planned for settlement alignment, building types, training thresholds, and likely a handful of other things.
And by the way - you might have missed this up thread:
GW has always said that an average would be used. It is a mathematical fact that when an average is used, the larger the population the less an individual unit of that population will affect the average.Bludd - I'm seeking clarification on this line. Are you saying that GW has always said that an average (of member reputation) would be used (to determine settlement reputation)?
I don't think that GW ever said that settlement reputation would be determined by an average of member reputations. But if they *did* say it, it might change my view on some things. So - any quote would be appreciated.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
(5000,5000) is the core value for LG. (-5000,-5000) is the core value for CE. Your proposed neutral settlement with a range of -5000 to 5000 in both the law and good axes would effectively cover all core alignments and all classes. It would be the only alignment for the big settlements.It makes way more sense to give true neutral 5000 through -5000 on both axis and lawful good +7500 to 0 on both axis than to prohibit +2501 / +2501 from joining a TN settlement and +2499 / + 2499 from joining a LG settlement.
With the confirmation that some abilities will require extremes such as +7000 in certain alignments I can't see a good reason not to do this.
I'm still not convinced we need a hard alignment system but if we do that's how it should work.
NG, LG, and LN already have access to every single class from the core rulebook and advanced rulebook when you look at their adjacent alignments. Correct me if I'm wrong but it's Paladin (LG), Monk (Any L), Druid (Any N), and Barbarian (Any Non-L). That's under the current 9 points and 1 step system.
You know which alignment will dominate the current system? I'll give you a hint, it's got every class, is one step from the alignment with the most bonuses. 28% of players polled from this forum say they want to play it (With the two runners up being tied at 14%) and 62% will be within one straight step.
With access to both +7500 / +7500 paladins that are confirmed to have additional abilities for being that extreme and -7500 outlaws that can use SADs anywhere on anyone with no confirmed drift from their desired axis... they've really got a strong thing going.
I do have a dog in this fight but currently my dog is looking more like a bear, and I'm getting concerned for the other mutts it will be up against.
If we switch to my system though, and the devs give some good abilities to the 5000 - 7500 range for alignments I'm still quite confident my dog can compete. I think it will make the competition more even and interesting all around.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It could wind up as something as simple as the one step rules that they have laid out for alignment relative to the settlement's core. You are out if you voluntarily switch your core beyond one step. You are out if your core involuntarily slides beyond one step. (that is speculation but I can see that happening)
Reputation is just set at a minimum and the NPC guards and vendors (training, crafting, etc...) just won't deal with you and might attack you.
All of this is up to date information and may just be IT. There may not be averages of either alignment or reputation that affect anything.
Just a simple system where you meet the two criteria for membership and facility use or you don't. I would like to see GW allow us to sell training and facility use to outsiders that meet at least the reputation criteria, but that is a speculative wish too.
I would like it to be more complex, but it may not be. Especially when settlements first get started.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And by the way - you might have missed this up thread:
I don't think that GW ever said that settlement reputation would be determined by an average of member reputations. But if they *did* say it, it might change my view on some things. So - any quote would be appreciated.GW has always said that an average would be used. It is a mathematical fact that when an average is used, the larger the population the less an individual unit of that population will affect the average.Bludd - I'm seeking clarification on this line. Are you saying that GW has always said that an average (of member reputation) would be used (to determine settlement reputation)?
Urman, you are mixing Alignment and Rep, I am not. The average I was talking about was Alignment.
Based on what has been said here, by Stephen, you will have to interpret that to mean what you wish.
I had asked Ryan about two things concerning alignment, and he responded with:
First Quote: Rubber Banding Active Alignment
Second Quote Most Common Alignment According to Ryan
So I take Stephen's quote above in this thread, along with these two by Ryan, to form my understanding of the answer to the OP question.
NG, LG, and LN already have access to every single class from the core rulebook and advanced rulebook when you look at their adjacent alignments. Correct me if I'm wrong but it's Paladin (LG), Monk (Any L), Druid (Any N), and Barbarian (Any Non-L). That's under the current 9 points and 1 step system.
You know which alignment will dominate the current system? I'll give you a hint, it's got every class, is one step from the alignment with the most bonuses. 28% of players polled from this forum say they want to play it (With the two runners up being tied at 14%) and 62% will be within one straight step.
With access to both +7500 / +7500 paladins that are confirmed to have additional abilities for being that extreme and -7500 outlaws that can use SADs anywhere on anyone with no confirmed drift from their desired axis... they've really got a strong thing going.
I do have a dog in this fight but currently my dog is looking more like a bear, and I'm getting concerned for the other mutts it will be up against.
If we switch to my system though, and the devs give some good abilities to the 5000 - 7500 range for alignments I'm still quite confident my dog can compete. I think it will make the...
Most of the other alignments just won't have access to Pallies, and their role is easy enough to fill with a Fighter. They're not good enough healers to compare with Clerics or Druids anyways.
For example, Neutral Evil, would have access to Monks (LE), Druids (NE, TN), and Barb (NE, CE, TN). I do see your point however about Chaotic alignments being at a disadvantage, because they have no way of accessing EITHER Pallies, OR Monks. This problem could be easily solved however, simply by changing the required alignment of Monks from Any Lawful, to Any Non-Chaotic. You might have a few RP'ers whine about that, but of course, then we go back to the whole "RP reasons don't make solid decisions for game mechanics" thing. Which they still don't.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my opinion the alignment system seems to be more trouble than its worth. The amount of enjoyment or benefits players get out of this system is minimal compared to the amount of work required to make it functional.
I think the Reputation system should be broad enough to accomplish anything that might be covered by an alignment system.
In my opinion the alignment system seems to be more trouble than its worth. The amount of enjoyment or benefits players get out of this system is minimal compared to the amount of work required to make it functional.
I think the Reputation system should be broad enough to accomplish anything that might be covered by an alignment system.
Let's consider that a /thread to any further discussion we might ever have about Alignment, ever.
"BUT, BUT, Alignment is important to the Pathfinder Universe!" ;(
Urging decisions uninformed is poor counsel.
Then why do you keep talking?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't imagine the alignment system is going to impact the way I play the game but it will impact who I can play the with.
Systems, be it alignment or not, that put restrictions on players is the antithesis of an open sandbox world.
The reputation system is needed to combat griefing. The alignment system seems forced.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The reputation system is needed to combat griefing.
Technically, not.
Griefing will be handled in an "arbitrary and capricious" manner, and the fact that someone is low reputation does not mean they are a griefer, nor does it mean that GW will take any action against them (punishment) for being -7500.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In my opinion the alignment system seems to be more trouble than its worth. The amount of enjoyment or benefits players get out of this system is minimal compared to the amount of work required to make it functional.
I think the Reputation system should be broad enough to accomplish anything that might be covered by an alignment system.
The reputation score wouldn't be needed if the alignment system wasn't so complicated. Because we can't definitely define what actions are good and what actions are evil etc, a reputation score is needed to complement the alignment system. Otherwise all characters would drift towards true neutral.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We could probably spends days debating the relevance of alignment in the table top game.
All I know is that if alignment didn't exist the good guys would still be good and the bad guys would still be bad. Having your alignment written down on a character sheet rarely affects any gaming session.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We could probably spends days debating the relevance of alignment in the table top game.
All I know is that if alignment didn't exist the good guys would still be good and the bad guys would still be bad. Having your alignment written down on a character sheet rarely affects any gaming session.
No, but it has a tremendous effect on the world itself. The Gods are aligned in specific ways and cultures and cities have overall alignments in the setting. Knowing where your character stands lets the system know how well you fit in to those cultures.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We could probably spends days debating the relevance of alignment in the table top game.
All I know is that if alignment didn't exist the good guys would still be good and the bad guys would still be bad. Having your alignment written down on a character sheet rarely affects any gaming session.
I was talking about the relevance of the alignment system in PFO. GW could just use a more sophisticated reputation system, but why would they, if they already have a more profound system that has it's roots in the setting and does the exact same thing. And as many discussions have indicated the epitome of the alignment system is the lawful good paladin and I wouldn't trade that for anything.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No, but it has a tremendous effect on the world itself. The Gods are aligned in specific ways and cultures and cities have overall alignments in the setting. Knowing where your character stands lets the system know how well you fit in to those cultures.We could probably spends days debating the relevance of alignment in the table top game.
All I know is that if alignment didn't exist the good guys would still be good and the bad guys would still be bad. Having your alignment written down on a character sheet rarely affects any gaming session.
The a Gods don't need alignments, they have Domains and Sub Domains. Those are far more detailed and descriptive of what the deity stands for then the two letters of their alignment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's funny reading posts from people trying to understand alignment shifts that the rest of us have known about and understood their value for decades. It's not so much the ignorance that may be agitating for some, but the appalling dismissive attitude towards others that care about such things. This game is based off an established IP. There are game designs implemented to take that into account. Making that known and clear I think will lower the amount of posts that need to be censored.
This game is called PATHFINDER online and yes alignment shifts with benefits as well as drawbacks are pivotal in the IP.
This thread is starting to read like an alignment 3.75 vs 4e debate and it needs to be stopped. These threads will continue to be made and will be flame bait for otherwise reasonable posters. No agreement will be reached. Those for and against have already made up their minds because they've had this argument for years before Pathfinder Online was even started.
This game is called PATHFINDER online and yes alignment shifts with benefits as well as drawbacks are pivotal in the IP.
Entitlement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
20 odd years of playing RPGs and never once seen anyone affected by an alignment shift.
I'm not against an alignment system. I just haven't seen a single thing from GW regarding alignment that sounds interesting. It's all very black and white and bland.
It's a sandbox game. If we want our settlement to have a paladin training center in the town square and an Assassins Guild hidden in a back alley then that should be our choice to make.
I don't mind having an alignment system but any system that forces player segregation, especially in a sandbox, doesn't sound like a good idea.
Trolls are for slaying, not forum posting.This game is called PATHFINDER online and yes alignment shifts with benefits as well as drawbacks are pivotal in the IP.Entitlement.
Lol, I was about to post the perfect retort to this, then decided I'll wait a few more days b4 getting hit with the ban-hammer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is starting to read like an alignment 3.75 vs 4e debate and it needs to be stopped. These threads will continue to be made and will be flame bait for otherwise reasonable posters. No agreement will be reached. Those for and against have already made up their minds because they've had this argument for years before Pathfinder Online was even started.
This was probably the first thing to rear its ugly head after announcement. I remember the first time it popped up... people were like, "well that was bound to happen."
245234 Thread derailments and 8923452 Alignment debates later we are only 10 feet from our original starting position.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This thread is starting to read like an alignment 3.75 vs 4e debate and it needs to be stopped. These threads will continue to be made and will be flame bait for otherwise reasonable posters. No agreement will be reached. Those for and against have already made up their minds because they've had this argument for years before Pathfinder Online was even started.This was probably the first thing to rear its ugly head after announcement. I remember the first time it popped up... people were like, "well that was bound to happen."
245234 Thread derailments and 8923452 Alignment debates later we are only 10 feet from our original starting position.
Well put Areks. Thank you. The numbers may be "fluffed" but the point is valid.
Edit: Tell me the numbers are "fluffed". Otherwise we look insane. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
20 odd years of playing RPGs and never once seen anyone affected by an alignment shift.
I'm not against an alignment system. I just haven't seen a single thing from GW regarding alignment that sounds interesting. It's all very black and white and bland.
It's a sandbox game. If we want our settlement to have a paladin training center in the town square and an Assassins Guild hidden in a back alley then that should be our choice to make.
I don't mind having an alignment system but any system that forces player segregation, especially in a sandbox, doesn't sound like a good idea.
Note you said hidden in a back alley. If you're settlement is accepting of assassins, why would they need to hide?
Regardless, there's an argument that can be made that an assassin guild could be Chaotic Good (ala The Punisher.) That would place the settlement at Neutral Good, accepting of both the Paladin's Guild and Assassin's Guild. As mentioned before, the Assassin's Guild wouldn't need to hide in this example.
BUT if you are arguing for the possibility for a more seedy type of Assassin's guild in an off type settlement, I think that's a great idea. The key is that it would have to be hidden like you said. The Paladins would probably come knocking on the door to flush out the vermin otherwise. LOL
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lol, I was about to post the perfect retort to this, then decided I'll wait a few more days b4 getting hit with the ban-hammer.Trolls are for slaying, not forum posting.This game is called PATHFINDER online and yes alignment shifts with benefits as well as drawbacks are pivotal in the IP.Entitlement.
Sure you were. I'm amazed you haven't been banned yet honestly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
20 odd years of playing RPGs and never once seen anyone affected by an alignment shift.
I'm not against an alignment system. I just haven't seen a single thing from GW regarding alignment that sounds interesting. It's all very black and white and bland.
It's a sandbox game. If we want our settlement to have a paladin training center in the town square and an Assassins Guild hidden in a back alley then that should be our choice to make.
I don't mind having an alignment system but any system that forces player segregation, especially in a sandbox, doesn't sound like a good idea.
Facebook has privacy options:
Personal
Only Friends
Friends of Friends
Public
Shroud of the Avatar has a sort of similar deal with areas and who can access your instances and vica-versa or who shows up in your "public place" instance and so on.
It's same idea I guess to make your social group functional as opposed to dysfunctional.
I think if you are creating an open world by contrast you have to employ similar concepts for players to choose the social space their avatar is operating in. That's how I see the various social systems Goblinworks is attempting to design. And that is against the comments you can readily find: "toxic online games" ; "how's the community in game x?" ; "I wish you could rate players in my mmoprg, like reddit system." etc etc.
Sure you were. I'm amazed you haven't been banned yet honestly.Lol, I was about to post the perfect retort to this, then decided I'll wait a few more days b4 getting hit with the ban-hammer.Trolls are for slaying, not forum posting.This game is called PATHFINDER online and yes alignment shifts with benefits as well as drawbacks are pivotal in the IP.Entitlement.
Oh I was, it involved a troll, someone getting slammed, and someone's guild affiliation. And I have been banned, 3 times. You didn't know that of course, since youre brand new to the forums. You and Gaymeon.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oh I was, it involved a troll, someone getting slammed, and someone's guild affiliation. And I have been banned, 3 times. You didn't know that of course, since youre brand new to the forums. You and Gaymeon.Sure you were. I'm amazed you haven't been banned yet honestly.Lol, I was about to post the perfect retort to this, then decided I'll wait a few more days b4 getting hit with the ban-hammer.Trolls are for slaying, not forum posting.This game is called PATHFINDER online and yes alignment shifts with benefits as well as drawbacks are pivotal in the IP.Entitlement.
I'm sorry, who?
I'm sorry, who?Oh I was, it involved a troll, someone getting slammed, and someone's guild affiliation. And I have been banned, 3 times. You didn't know that of course, since youre brand new to the forums. You and Gaymeon.Sure you were. I'm amazed you haven't been banned yet honestly.Lol, I was about to post the perfect retort to this, then decided I'll wait a few more days b4 getting hit with the ban-hammer.Trolls are for slaying, not forum posting.This game is called PATHFINDER online and yes alignment shifts with benefits as well as drawbacks are pivotal in the IP.Entitlement.
Think you missed the part about not getting banned Ishmell.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Maybe I'm confused, have we started Crowdforging PFO yet or does that come later. This all looks like a typical mmo forum , I don't see any difference that would make this forum Crowdforging , instead of just the same old forum debates but it's a different game.
Seriously , shouldn't something be different here ,like the rules for posting if we are doing Crowdforging. Maybe we need an actual game to discuss and then it will be crowdforging but still what will keep this forum from looking just like all the other mmo forums that don't change the game at all, not from a lack of opinions expressed about what will make the game better but what are the devs supposed to do with it? Sort thru the maze of discussion and follow every tangent of arguement to get to what they want?
Did I miss the instructions we got on how to Crowdforge and what the devs want us to do specifically? People are asking for anything that pops into their head to be put in the game, that cant be a part of how PFO is being designed and developed so can someone direct me to the Crowdforging forum or is what I read here it?
If the devs are finding this forum useful in making the game I would like to know how. It's like a pot of soup with 15 cooks putting in what they like.I would prefer they just make the game as they want and trust their ideas and vision than think they might listen to some of these so called improvements.
Did we get told we should help design the game or does everyone just do that without getting asked , no matter what game forum it is.
Anyway , any attempt to crowdforge gets endless bs added to it , that don't work for me, its the same old mmo forum drama done for personal entertainment.
Maybe I'm confused, have we started Crowdforging PFO yet or does that come later. This all looks like a typical mmo forum , I don't see any difference that would make this forum Crowdforging , instead of just the same old forum debates but it's a different game.
Seriously , shouldn't something be different here ,like the rules for posting if we are doing Crowdforging. Maybe we need an actual game to discuss and then it will be crowdforging but still what will keep this forum from looking just like all the other mmo forums that don't change the game at all, not from a lack of opinions expressed about what will make the game better but what are the devs supposed to do with it? Sort thru the maze of discussion and follow every tangent of arguement to get to what they want?
Did I miss the instructions we got on how to Crowdforge and what the devs want us to do specifically? People are asking for anything that pops into their head to be put in the game, that cant be a part of how PFO is being designed and developed so can someone direct me to the Crowdforging forum or is what I read here it?
If the devs are finding this forum useful in making the game I would like to know how. It's like a pot of soup with 15 cooks putting in what they like.I would prefer they just make the game as they want and trust their ideas and vision than think they might listen to some of these so called improvements.
Did we get told we should help design the game or does everyone just do that without getting asked , no matter what game forum it is.
Anyway , any attempt to crowdforge gets endless bs added to it , that don't work for me, its the same old mmo forum drama done for personal entertainment.
Honestly, this deserves a thread of its own, because I've been thinking the same thing. The theorycrafting and suggestions made on this forum, are no different than any triple-A MMO with big $100 million investors. At the end of the day, "Crowdforging" was a buzzword used to help get Kickstarter funds. I have to applaud GW on their cleverness though here, as a Marketer, I can certainly respect that, and it certainly worked. Well done.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe I'm confused, have we started Crowdforging PFO yet or does that come later.
Yes to both questions.
Your comments and feedback are impacting the design and have impacted the design. At this point our objective is to get basic game systems built and ready for the Early Adopters to begin to use. As time progresses and more of that work finishes we will have more and more precise systems for generating and using player feedback.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's a sandbox game. If we want our settlement to have a paladin training center in the town square and an Assassins Guild hidden in a back alley then that should be our choice to make."sandbox" is not a synonym for "do whatever you want"
RyanD
The Noun is 'game'. 'Sandbox' is an adjective that modifies the noun. A game, to be a game, must have rules. "a physical or mental activity or contest that has rules and that people do for pleasure." ~Webster's
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The theorycrafting and suggestions made on this forum, are no different than any triple-A MMO with big $100 million investors.
The difference is that the $100 million dollar game is essentially feature and content complete when you get to start playing it. Changes suggested by the players can only be implemented on the margins. Most of that $100 million is spent on theme park continent and it can't easily be changed based on player feedback. The game, by the time you get to start playing it, will have been in development for more than 5 years.
Compare that to our process. Our 2nd Kickstarter ended in January '13. If we stay on target, you'll get to start playing in Q3 this year about 18-21 months later. The game you get to start playing is going to have LOTS of core systems still awaiting implementation and they'll be implemented with the community's help in setting priorities and functional definitions. No $100 million theme park has EVER given you that level of interaction with the design process, nor can they.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You didn't know that of course, since youre brand new to the forums. You and Gaymeon.
As usual, you're wrong and misinformed. The Gayme0n community has been around for almost two years. I have been apart of the forums for over a year. I backed the Kickstarter (unlike you) in 2012.
You want to speak from a position of authority, when in reality you have no ground to stand on. All you do is fill these forums with garbage and it's time Paizo took out the trash.
The theorycrafting and suggestions made on this forum, are no different than any triple-A MMO with big $100 million investors.The difference is that the $100 million dollar game is essentially feature and content complete when you get to start playing it. Changes suggested by the players can only be implemented on the margins. Most of that $100 million is spent on theme park continent and it can't easily be changed based on player feedback. The game, by the time you get to start playing it, will have been in development for more than 5 years.
Compare that to our process. Our 2nd Kickstarter ended in January '13. If we stay on target, you'll get to start playing in Q3 this year about 18-21 months later. The game you get to start playing is going to have LOTS of core systems still awaiting implementation and they'll be implemented with the community's help in setting priorities and functional definitions. No $100 million theme park has EVER given you that level of interaction with the design process, nor can they.
I'll admit that most Kickstarter MMO's are more receptive to the feedback of their audiences than the Triple-A's (PFO being no exception), but, a lot of the Triple A's do still pay a lot of attention to customer feedback and modify their game accordingly. Look at ESO, they muddied their vision, and brought down their entire game based on feedback they received from their community. At the end of the day, game design should be a Dictatorship, if it's going to succeed.
You didn't know that of course, since youre brand new to the forums. You and Gaymeon.As usual, you're wrong and misinformed. The Gayme0n community has been around for almost two years. I have been apart of the forums for over a year. I backed the Kickstarter (unlike you) in 2012.
You want to speak from a position of authority, when in reality you have no ground to stand on. All you do is fill these forums with garbage and it's time Paizo took out the trash.
Whatever dude, we stopped talking about you 5 posts ago, let's bring it back. This isn't all about you.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... All you do is fill these forums with garbage and it's time Paizo took out the trash.
Thinking through a complex system we should be willing to seek out diverse opinions. I don't want to speak Qallz' point of view. I don't want to say the things he says. But if we bar everyone who makes things uncomfortable we will lose diversity in the community. Same for the other few who are loud and make us uncomfortable.
For the sake of the game we need diverse viewpoints examining it.