Passive or active rep gains?


Pathfinder Online

101 to 150 of 203 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Pax Charlie George wrote:


I am not as confident a lot of groups on these boards will have Eve nullsec alliance numbers anytime soon. I am hopeful that might end up the case, but I don't see it right now.

I think you are correct in that, if for example my group comes it will be the corporation with maybe a few curious members of other alliance corporations added on not the whole eve alliance.

Just quickly totting up the top 10 eve alliance member numbers comes to around 45k players(biggest 11600, tenth biggest 3100). It will be a while before PfO has that many players let alone that many in the 10 biggest alliances

Shadow Lodge Goblin Squad Member

Steelwing wrote:
. I am quite surprised that I haven't been accused of being a goon precursor as yet :)

I hold that distinction, and I say my connections to Goonswarm's are largely exaggerated.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

EVE alliances may have lots of numbers but not 100% are going to join a new game when asked to. Especially not in EE when you have to have paid over twice the going rate for most games years in advance to get in.

Some organization on these forums aren't going to make it through EE. Some of then only have a tiny fraction of the numbers they'll have coming out if EE. I think the ones that come out the other side larger and stronger, with player skills, connections, and characters that they've been building up all EE will be strong enough to face the shadows from EVE that rear their heads here.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:

EVE alliances may have lots of numbers but not 100% are going to join a new game when asked to. Especially not in EE when you have to have paid over twice the going rate for most games years in advance to get in.

Some organization on these forums aren't going to make it through EE. Some of then only have a tiny fraction of the numbers they'll have coming out if EE. I think the ones that come out the other side larger and stronger, with player skills, connections, and characters that they've been building up all EE will be strong enough to face she shadows from EVE that rear their heads here.

While I would love to feel comfortable in our collective positions as EE players, I have to keep in mind that the Eve players coming to OE might not be inept.

Ryan Dancey wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
Ryan specifically suggested Formation Combat would be a powerful balancing tool against goon-style hordes, which was the topic of conversation when I made my post.
Assuming reasonably skilled players, formations should always defeat mobs. That said, the Goons made a strategy out of fielding huge fleets of low-powered characters and ships with excellent fleet command, not simply chaotically flying all over the battlefield. If the Goons fielded a huge army of low power characters in formation, they will likely have a lot of success.

If Eve players come here with larger numbers, good tactics, and train enough to have effective formations they will stand a chance of defeating any one of our current organizations.

Goblin Squad Member

I'm not saying they won't be a threat. I just feel like the current attitude among a lot of players is that these EVE alliances are unbeatable. They're mortals like us, and they can be beaten.

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:
I'm not saying they won't be a threat. I just feel like the current attitude among a lot of players is that these EVE alliances are unbeatable. They're mortals like us, and they can be beaten.

Oh, alright. That is fair.

If the organizations coming into EE either aggressively recruit from the less outspoken backers, or more organizations merge under an alliance, I could completely agree.

Goblin Squad Member

Pax Charlie George wrote:
If Eve players come here with larger numbers, good tactics, and train enough to have effective formations they will stand a chance of defeating any one of our current organizations.

True, but it is more likely that they would absorb all but the largest, unless the 15 EE settlements are all incorporated in two or three kingdoms.

Any lone settlement is doomed. Most if not all unaffiliated companies will meld into the new arriving wave. It reminds me of the old thread about EE politics....

Goblin Squad Member

Despite our... history I won't consider the option of us backing Pax in a war effort off the table if they come up against a major opponent I feel it's in the best interest of the community to defeat.

A merger with TSV is also something I've always considered to be an option if times get tough.

Worst case scenario I'm extremely experienced at waging guerrilla style campaigns against significantly larger opponents. And winning. The longer the chain, the more weak points to exploit.

That's as much as I'm willing to say publicly about our plans.


As a rough guide I am currently estimating that the number of players we as a group should be aiming at to make control and maintenance of a settlement viable at OE is in the range of 250 to 450.

The range is wide currently and highly inaccurate and there is much unknown as yet which will affect that number but I had to start estimating somewhere.

Information that will modify that figure are

a)details on how mass warfare works (example if we can never bring more than 100 to a battle then the lower figures get adjust downwards)

b)Player retention amongst early enrollers and player recruitment during early enrollment ( currently the only model I can use really for forcasting to do this is the eve model which has been the subject of academic studies such as this one eve player retention and growth). Again I will be adjusting my estimate during EE as figures become available so when I take it to the guys I can give a more accurate figure of the numbers we need.

c) Number of players that decide to live in the npc towns and not become part of player settlement culture (in eve this number is about 70% of characters but less of players) in PfO hopefully this number will be lower due to the need for training and crafting done in player settlements

to show my workings for the top end value therefore I was predicting roughly 15000 players come OE. 45% living in the player settlements.15 settlements known of to start with

-> 15000 * 0.45 = 6750
-> 6750 / 15 = 450


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andius wrote:
I'm not saying they won't be a threat. I just feel like the current attitude among a lot of players is that these EVE alliances are unbeatable. They're mortals like us, and they can be beaten.

Eve players are definitely beatable, don't let anyone else tell you otherwise. But only if you organize yourselves. Part of the reason I abandoned lurker status frankly was I felt (personal opinion incoming) that there seemed to be a certain unwillingness to start organizing. Now is the time to do it. When that big Eve alliance comes it will be to late to start consolidating.

Look at the estimate of numbers* I gave you for settlement numbers. Anyone who has aspirations to be running a settlement should be looking at those and asking "How are we going to reach that number? Who have we common cause with that may be willing to share a roof with us? What alliances can we be building?". Not only that but you should be asking those questions now and continue asking them all through EE until settlements come in

*bearing in mind those numbers need constant adjusting as more information comes out

Goblin Squad Member

Andius wrote:

Despite our... history I won't consider the option of us backing Pax in a war effort off the table if they come up against a major opponent I feel it's in the best interest of the community to defeat.

A merger with TSV is also something I've always considered to be an option if times get tough.

Worst case scenario I'm extremely experienced at waging guerrilla style campaigns against significantly larger opponents. And winning. The longer the chain, the more weak points to exploit.

That's as much as I'm willing to say publicly about our plans.

Pax has always left open the possibility of alliances of necessity. That is not the optimal goal for us, but it is a possibility.

Otherwise we have not veered from our goal of attempting to create and staff a BigTown (or OtherBigTown, or AnotherBigTown, whatever term you like).

I hold the belief that the most successful settlements and later nations will be the ones that join under game mechanical structures, like settlement or nation alliances.

While meta alliances are neat and serve a purpose, I look at them as secondary on organizational planning.

Goblin Squad Member

I strongly feel that any of this "history" that is coming up tends be more on personal levels and not at faction-wide levels anyways. And a lot of that may yet change in the months and year ahead.

Goblin Squad Member

Steelwing wrote:
I am sure Pax Charlie George who I believe is one of the higher level Pax officers will probably confirm that a lot of intra guild disputes and bad feeling is caused by things that occurred in chat.

Just caught this thanks to Hobs. To be honest more organizational drama is caused by a lack of communication than chat grief.

I have noticed this in every guild or multi gaming community I have been apart of. Reign, Valdyr, Phoenix Trading Company, Kardia Enclave, and Pax Gaming.In every group I have been a member, officer, or lead of.

Unless I misunderstood what you meant by intra guild.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
If player A decides player B is a griefer and begins taking action against player B in order to change their behavior, it's quite possible the mods might decide that player A is the real griefer.

Are you meaning only on forums and in chat channels?

Goblin Squad Member

Lifedragn wrote:
I strongly feel that any of this "history" that is coming up tends be more on personal levels and not at faction-wide levels anyways. And a lot of that may yet change in the months and year ahead.

We also all have the goal to be stand alone powers, and are thus currently competitors.

There are a lot of factors involved, but I agree any or all of them could change in the time we have ahead.

Goblin Squad Member

EE Community is Brought Together


Pax Charlie George wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
I am sure Pax Charlie George who I believe is one of the higher level Pax officers will probably confirm that a lot of intra guild disputes and bad feeling is caused by things that occurred in chat.

Just caught this thanks to Hobs. To be honest more organizational drama is caused by a lack of communication than chat grief.

Unless I misunderstood what you meant by intra guild.

Forums, chat channels, voice. More often on alliance channels it is true because you are often bringing together groups with different cultures in one set of social channels. I assumed you would probably experience that effect to some extent in Pax with your many divisions.

It is not as frequently as I have had to talk with leaders of other guilds about behaviour of their players it is fair to say. I was using intra guild more as a demonstration of the problems between even people that get on (at least theoretically) let alone strangers in a video game.

The reason I push the verbal griefing line so strongly is because in my experience the physical griefing tends more often to be one off incidents like spawn camping someone for a couple of hours whereas the verbal griefers tend to pursue their victims over days and weeks once they realise they have found a target that doesn't manage to shrug it off.


Bluddwolf wrote:
EE Community is Brought Together

Awww, how sweet.

Goblin Squad Member

Ah, then I did understand you.

The number one issue with every gaming group I have been in is lack of communication or community involvement.

We have a charter that covers offenses like chat grief. It is investigated by our Inner Sanctum and if the person is deemed guilty, they are banned from our divisions and our forums.


Btw, what was the beef between TEO and PAX?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Qallz wrote:
Btw, what was the beef between TEO and PAX?

I won't discuss that. We have just recently gotten back to at least making an effort to try relating to each other with a level of civility.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Qallz wrote:
Btw, what was the beef between TEO and PAX?

There was a beauty contest a while back and an unforeseen accident took place and PAX's bathing suit was ripped off while on stage. PAX blamed TEO for it and ever sense they have hated each other. :P

Goblin Squad Member

Banesama wrote:
Qallz wrote:
Btw, what was the beef between TEO and PAX?
There was a beauty contest a while back and an unforeseen accident took place and PAX's bathing suit was ripped off while on stage. PAX blamed TEO for it and ever sense they have hated each other. :P

I thought we agreed to stick with the Hatfield and McCoy story?


Banesama wrote:
Qallz wrote:
Btw, what was the beef between TEO and PAX?
There was a beauty contest a while back and an unforeseen accident took place and PAX's bathing suit was ripped off while on stage. PAX blamed TEO for it and ever sense they have hated each other. :P

U guys are just lucky I wasn't there for that beauty contest. I'm the beautiest one here.

Goblin Squad Member

Pax Charlie George wrote:
Qallz wrote:
Btw, what was the beef between TEO and PAX?

I won't discuss that. We have just recently gotten back to at least making an effort to try relating to each other with a level of civility.

And hopefully we can continue this trend. :) But then again, I tend to be one of them peace-loving sorts that seem oh-so-out-place in a game like this.

I would like to add that many of us on both sides have been civil for the majority of time. But the nature of disagreements tends to lead to more vocal reactions where they exist than do the places where we get along. It seems to be human nature that we tend to remain quiet about good things and vocal about our contentions.


Lifedragn wrote:
Pax Charlie George wrote:
Qallz wrote:
Btw, what was the beef between TEO and PAX?

I won't discuss that. We have just recently gotten back to at least making an effort to try relating to each other with a level of civility.

And hopefully we can continue this trend. :) But then again, I tend to be one of them peace-loving sorts that seem oh-so-out-place in a game like this.

I would like to add that many of us on both sides have been civil for the majority of time. But the nature of disagreements tends to lead to more vocal reactions where they exist than do the places where we get along. It seems to be human nature that we tend to remain quiet about good things and vocal about our contentions.

I can't wait till these little disputes will be settled by razing someone's entire settlement to the ground, instead of insults going back and forth until both sides just kiss and make up.

Goblin Squad Member

I imagine you will see razing of settlements for much less than that.


Pax Charlie George wrote:
I imagine you will see razing of settlements for much less than that.

We can only hope. :-D

Goblin Squad Member

Possibly for weaker factions, but it has been stated that War and Settlement Assaults are meant to be costly operations. Not something to undertake lightly.

Goblin Squad Member

Pax Hobs wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
If player A decides player B is a griefer and begins taking action against player B in order to change their behavior, it's quite possible the mods might decide that player A is the real griefer.
Are you meaning only on forums and in chat channels?

No. What I'm saying - and this is my own intuition, not really based on Ryan's posts - is that if you're in the game harassing another player because you've decided they're a griefer, then you might end up being chastised by the mods for being a griefer yourself. It's best to leave the punishment of griefers to the mods.

Goblin Squad Member

Pax Hobs wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
If player A decides player B is a griefer and begins taking action against player B in order to change their behavior, it's quite possible the mods might decide that player A is the real griefer.
Are you meaning only on forums and in chat channels?

And just in case you were trying to make a different point, yes I'm positive - to a metaphysical certitude - that the same thing is true on the forums. If someone were take it upon himself to unilaterally decide that another poster was a griefer, and then began to harass that other poster, I expect he would find himself on the receiving end of some moderation. Same principle behind the point I was making.

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
Pax Hobs wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
If player A decides player B is a griefer and begins taking action against player B in order to change their behavior, it's quite possible the mods might decide that player A is the real griefer.
Are you meaning only on forums and in chat channels?
And just in case you were trying to make a different point, yes I'm positive - to a metaphysical certitude - that the same thing is true on the forums. If someone were take it upon himself to unilaterally decide that another poster was a griefer, and then began to harass that other poster, I expect he would find himself on the receiving end of some moderation. Same principle behind the point I was making.

When committing a crime against a criminal, you often become a criminal yourself. This is particularly true once you are outside the realm of physical self-defense against bodily harm.

Just another way to view the perspective.


it may be me but why should i care about what a ramdom guy in a f*ing game says? also, its a game where i can attack or take action( hire mercs, plotting against, badmouthing him, etc) against him any time. we dont need any special mechanic for that beyond reporting, i think this is why ryan said that the community role will be crucial to the success of the project.

Goblin Squad Member

Agreeing with Kabal362. There's a difference between griefing and being a nuisance. There's also a difference between harassing a nuisance and taking action against him. I think the game has some ease built into the alignment and reputation system so we can solve lesser problems as a community, which sometimes will mean with game violence or the threat of game violence. It saves on GM pay.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Urman wrote:
I think the game has some ease built into the alignment and reputation system so we can solve lesser problems as a community, which sometimes will mean with game violence or the threat of game violence. It saves on GM pay.

I agree with this, and didn't mean to imply that we shouldn't take action against someone who was bothering us. My concern is more about situations in which players go out of their way to track down and harass a "griefer".

Goblin Squad Member

Has there been any talk of having a Company or Settlement based Justice system where a member can be called (arrested, warranted, summoned) before authorities of said Settlement and distributed justice? From all appearances most players will be part of some group to one level or another and this would give that group the ability to met out justice (maybe the court has an area for those it designates to preform executions without rep or alignment hits? Could also be used for training PVP within the community without the side effects to rep and align).

Also, possibly a Company/Settlement probationary setting for offending members where they pay more taxes, can't access as many benefits or are at least not considered a full settlement member until they pay their dues and reestablish full membership so if they are griefing and considered so by their own community they are then not banned but have an opportunity to correct themselves and if not even their own community wouldn't see them as allies if they pull a stunt and get someone to attack them though griefing more than once.

This may be a dead point or completely confusing but just a thought. I'm sure Nihimon can find the holes in it.

Goblin Squad Member

People have voiced desires for justice beyond just killing someone and/or taking their stuff, but so far I don't think actual ideas for court-like systems have been discussed. Could be worth mulling over in a new thread (unless I'm wrong and a thread has already been started for it).


Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
People have voiced desires for justice beyond just killing someone and/or taking their stuff, but so far I don't think actual ideas for court-like systems have been discussed. Could be worth mulling over in a new thread (unless I'm wrong and a thread has already been started for it).

Court systems won't work for one of the following two reasons and probably both

1) People do not like having their character control taken away which is a necessity for court systems especially if some form of prison is one of the punishments

2) A court system can be mandatory or optional. If optional no one will take any notice of anything other than their own settlements court. If mandatory (while I can't speak for all groups only ours but I suspect we aren't alone) any attempt to use your court system on the member of any other group would be regarded as an act of aggression and would result in a war

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Steelwing wrote:
Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
People have voiced desires for justice beyond just killing someone and/or taking their stuff, but so far I don't think actual ideas for court-like systems have been discussed. Could be worth mulling over in a new thread (unless I'm wrong and a thread has already been started for it).

Court systems won't work for one of the following two reasons and probably both

1) People do not like having their character control taken away which is a necessity for court systems especially if some form of prison is one of the punishments

2) A court system can be mandatory or optional. If optional no one will take any notice of anything other than their own settlements court. If mandatory (while I can't speak for all groups only ours but I suspect we aren't alone) any attempt to use your court system on the member of any other group would be regarded as an act of aggression and would result in a war

1) The only control that should be forced on another character is expulsion from the group.

2) I think that a court system that tries to exact a fine from another group -should- be allowed to result in a diplomatic incident or worse.

That said, I think that any court system should fall into the strange region where player discussion and in-character interaction intersect, rather than being primarily 'avatars in courtrooms'.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
People have voiced desires for justice beyond just killing someone and/or taking their stuff, but so far I don't think actual ideas for court-like systems have been discussed. Could be worth mulling over in a new thread (unless I'm wrong and a thread has already been started for it).

Court systems won't work for one of the following two reasons and probably both

1) People do not like having their character control taken away which is a necessity for court systems especially if some form of prison is one of the punishments

2) A court system can be mandatory or optional. If optional no one will take any notice of anything other than their own settlements court. If mandatory (while I can't speak for all groups only ours but I suspect we aren't alone) any attempt to use your court system on the member of any other group would be regarded as an act of aggression and would result in a war

1) The only control that should be forced on another character is expulsion from the group.

2) I think that a court system that tries to exact a fine from another group -should- be allowed to result in a diplomatic incident or worse.

That said, I think that any court system should fall into the strange region where player discussion and in-character interaction intersect, rather than being primarily 'avatars in courtrooms'.

Court systems are purely rp constructs. Most players do not rp and have no wish to. Try and put any of ours on trial and it wouldn't be a diplomatic incident we would be kicking your doors down. You want to rp fine...leave those of us who don't out of it.

Our lot won't go out of our way to disrupt rp but if it starts impinging on us we will soon lose that leave it alone attitude

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Steelwing wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
People have voiced desires for justice beyond just killing someone and/or taking their stuff, but so far I don't think actual ideas for court-like systems have been discussed. Could be worth mulling over in a new thread (unless I'm wrong and a thread has already been started for it).

Court systems won't work for one of the following two reasons and probably both

1) People do not like having their character control taken away which is a necessity for court systems especially if some form of prison is one of the punishments

2) A court system can be mandatory or optional. If optional no one will take any notice of anything other than their own settlements court. If mandatory (while I can't speak for all groups only ours but I suspect we aren't alone) any attempt to use your court system on the member of any other group would be regarded as an act of aggression and would result in a war

1) The only control that should be forced on another character is expulsion from the group.

2) I think that a court system that tries to exact a fine from another group -should- be allowed to result in a diplomatic incident or worse.

That said, I think that any court system should fall into the strange region where player discussion and in-character interaction intersect, rather than being primarily 'avatars in courtrooms'.

Court systems are purely rp constructs. Most players do not rp and have no wish to. Try and put any of ours on trial and it wouldn't be a diplomatic incident we would be kicking your doors down. You want to rp fine...leave those of us who don't out of it.

Our lot won't go out of our way to disrupt rp but if it starts impinging on us we will soon lose that leave it alone attitude

Absent some kind of extradition agreement, nobody should try to bring one of you in for trial.

That's one example of what a 'diplomatic incident' can be: A threat from one group to start a war (or just send in the police to somewhere outside of their jurisdiction- same thing) if the other doesn't turn over the person that is accused of some crime.


DeciusBrutus wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
People have voiced desires for justice beyond just killing someone and/or taking their stuff, but so far I don't think actual ideas for court-like systems have been discussed. Could be worth mulling over in a new thread (unless I'm wrong and a thread has already been started for it).

Court systems won't work for one of the following two reasons and probably both

1) People do not like having their character control taken away which is a necessity for court systems especially if some form of prison is one of the punishments

2) A court system can be mandatory or optional. If optional no one will take any notice of anything other than their own settlements court. If mandatory (while I can't speak for all groups only ours but I suspect we aren't alone) any attempt to use your court system on the member of any other group would be regarded as an act of aggression and would result in a war

1) The only control that should be forced on another character is expulsion from the group.

2) I think that a court system that tries to exact a fine from another group -should- be allowed to result in a diplomatic incident or worse.

That said, I think that any court system should fall into the strange region where player discussion and in-character interaction intersect, rather than being primarily 'avatars in courtrooms'.

Court systems are purely rp constructs. Most players do not rp and have no wish to. Try and put any of ours on trial and it wouldn't be a diplomatic incident we would be kicking your doors down. You want to rp fine...leave those of us who don't out of it.

Our lot won't go out of our way to disrupt rp but if it starts impinging on us we will soon lose that leave it alone attitude

Absent some kind of extradition agreement, nobody should try to bring one of you in for trial.

That's one example of what a 'diplomatic incident' can be: A threat from one group to...

My comments were directed purely at why I felt a court system would not work and therefore why they may be better off using that development time elsewhere.

The only game coming to the west that I believe has some sort of court system is archage. I think if we watch carefully we will probably find that part of the game silently dropped

Goblin Squad Member

Not sure how feasible having a 'court' system would be. I do agree putting a freeze/imprisonment on any character is bad and is a no go.

But how but putting in some type of penalty. Maybe a reduction in attack/defense strength or some other mechanical penalty that last a short time.

However the penalty will only apply to the character as long as he is in the territory of the Settlement's court system.

Not sure how to prevent this from being abused though. Some courts might force penalties on characters that are unjust. Though that could fly for LE settlements.

Goblin Squad Member

Courts as an RP construct would run counter to the setting..... River Freedoms.... Courts are for Kings....

The only courts we need are the judge, jury and executioner that comes with wielding a blade or other weapon of choice.

GW have so far resisted all suggestions short of killing those who you have a vendetta against.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Courts as an RP construct make perfect sense for the River Freedoms:

Quote:

Courts Are For Kings

One of the most basic freedoms of the River Kingdoms, this one holds that all laws within a river kingdom are flexible, and that rulers of a kingdom may do as they wish. Visitors to a river kingdom —be they king or commoner—are bound by the (often arbitrary) laws of that kingdom. Consequently, rulers of the different kingdoms infrequently visit each other, and instead rely on liaisons and intermediaries.

It means that the local laws are for the local kings; the laws are not something that normal people can appeal to, and when the local rulers decide that there should have been a law, there is nobody who would try to argue that they don't have the right to create an ex post facto law or create a writ of attainder.

Goblin Squad Member

Indeed; the River Freedom seems to mean quite the opposite, Bludd. The king is your judge and jury, he decides whether you live or die. The freedom doesn't mean there's no penal system, or no penalties expect death, it means that the rulers of the land have total control. Basically you can't appeal to a court because the king is having you executed; the king holds court, and there aren't any other courts to appeal to than that.

All that being said, the River Freedom should if anything direct design toward electing/appointing a single person as the head of a settlement; according to the freedom you need a king to hold control of the land. Having one person with Aristocrat skills designated as the settlement's leader would lend itself nicely to the assassin skills that GW has said they intend to implement later...

Goblin Squad Member

Steelwing wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
People have voiced desires for justice beyond just killing someone and/or taking their stuff, but so far I don't think actual ideas for court-like systems have been discussed. Could be worth mulling over in a new thread (unless I'm wrong and a thread has already been started for it).

Court systems won't work for one of the following two reasons and probably both

1) People do not like having their character control taken away which is a necessity for court systems especially if some form of prison is one of the punishments

2) A court system can be mandatory or optional. If optional no one will take any notice of anything other than their own settlements court. If mandatory (while I can't speak for all groups only ours but I suspect we aren't alone) any attempt to use your court system on the member of any other group would be regarded as an act of aggression and would result in a war

1) The only control that should be forced on another character is expulsion from the group.

2) I think that a court system that tries to exact a fine from another group -should- be allowed to result in a diplomatic incident or worse.

That said, I think that any court system should fall into the strange region where player discussion and in-character interaction intersect, rather than being primarily 'avatars in courtrooms'.

Court systems are purely rp constructs. Most players do not rp and have no wish to. Try and put any of ours on trial and it wouldn't be a diplomatic incident we would be kicking your doors down. You want to rp fine...leave those of us who don't out of it.

Our lot won't go out of our way to disrupt rp but if it starts impinging on us we will soon lose that leave it alone attitude

Absent some kind of extradition agreement, nobody should try to bring one of you in for trial.

That's one example of what a 'diplomatic incident' can

...

My main reason for thinking in this direction was not to try and police everyone with your Settlement's court system, but to give a way for Settlements to deal with their own members without having the only option being exile or death and putting that power, the real power to do something in game, in the hands of the players of that Settlement. You couldn't effect another Settlements members with it. When you join a Settlement or group of any size you agree to follow the laws of that group. This might give a way to handle those players who break the rules without removing them from the group/settlement in full or whatever level the leaders think correct based on their laws/rules. It also give the ability to PVP those within your own group without rep/align loss if only in a certain area so designated. At least that is where my thoughts were going.

An example would be if you added a new member to your group/settlement and one of your groups rules is not to verbally harass others. This member ignores this rule and mouths off to someone at an Inn. That person could report it to the group\settlement and if they so chose they could issue a summons, hold the players status in the settlement, and charge a fine or if it was a more serious issue even execute the rule/law breaker without rep/align penalty as a member of their own group/settlement.

This may not even be needed at all as a system, but it does give a wanted option of inner settlement PVP as an option (without rep/align hits) and also other options than kill or exile. Just something for thought.


Wexel Daventry wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Steelwing wrote:
Pax Shane Gifford wrote:
People have voiced desires for justice beyond just killing someone and/or taking their stuff, but so far I don't think actual ideas for court-like systems have been discussed. Could be worth mulling over in a new thread (unless I'm wrong and a thread has already been started for it).

Court systems won't work for one of the following two reasons and probably both

1) People do not like having their character control taken away which is a necessity for court systems especially if some form of prison is one of the punishments

2) A court system can be mandatory or optional. If optional no one will take any notice of anything other than their own settlements court. If mandatory (while I can't speak for all groups only ours but I suspect we aren't alone) any attempt to use your court system on the member of any other group would be regarded as an act of aggression and would result in a war

1) The only control that should be forced on another character is expulsion from the group.

2) I think that a court system that tries to exact a fine from another group -should- be allowed to result in a diplomatic incident or worse.

That said, I think that any court system should fall into the strange region where player discussion and in-character interaction intersect, rather than being primarily 'avatars in courtrooms'.

Court systems are purely rp constructs. Most players do not rp and have no wish to. Try and put any of ours on trial and it wouldn't be a diplomatic incident we would be kicking your doors down. You want to rp fine...leave those of us who don't out of it.

Our lot won't go out of our way to disrupt rp but if it starts impinging on us we will soon lose that leave it alone attitude

Absent some kind of extradition agreement, nobody should try to bring one of you in for trial.

That's one example of what a

...

You don't need a coded mechanic to hold your own people to account. Guilds that care should have internal procedures for such things anyway and it is not down to game manufacturers to second guess them and I suspect most would say no thanks we will use our own procedures and ignore yours. Guilds that don't care would never use them anyway so all in all it would be a waste of coding time

Goblin Squad Member

Steelwing wrote:
The only game coming to the west that I believe has some sort of court system is archage. I think if we watch carefully we will probably find that part of the game silently dropped.

I don't believe the court system will be dropped for the western release. But then again ArcheAge's court system does not provide punishment but a reward in game and a reward in the metagame.

Goblin Squad Member

PFO is going to have slavery which will REALLY piss the River Folk off. I think every settlement announced so far is selectively ignoring at least one of the River Freedoms or using an interpretation of them that is more meant to suit their needs than stay true to the original intent.

I kind of think if we want to pay any attention to them at all, we should just make it so that when a settlement sets laws that violate them, it raises their unrest level a bit.

101 to 150 of 203 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Passive or active rep gains? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.