Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Proxima Sin
Over the long haul, not just a measure of a few encounters, how do you expect CE players to behave if they are playing true to their chosen alignment? Which, forgive another opinion, is what I except from the CE play definition from it's beginning.
Do you expect them to make chaotic choices and do evil things? Do you expect them to scoff at rules for "sanctioned" warfare and trustworthiness?
I do.
I think that it would be really much more difficult to allow all of that (real CE play, not a working the system style) and still have a reputation system that had teeth and did what they seem to want it to do.
To answer your question: If there can be a way to punish "less desired" play and preserve the vision, I am okay with it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Proxima,
It is as if they are arguing that we are breaking the system if we try to play within the system, because we also want to role play Chaotic Evil characters.
@Bringslite, would you rather those players who choose to role play Chaotic Evil, just go all out and grief as much as they can?
I mean, what do they really have to lose? If they are going to suck, no matter what, then they might as well make the crime fit the punishment.
You or even Ryan, should be careful of what you wish for. You may end up with hundreds of players, or even thousands, decide it is damn fun even with sucking.
I would think it benefits GW, and the PFO community as a whole for all players to play at an elevated standard of sanctioned behaviors.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Bluddwolf
No, I would not like that! :)
I am not sold that GW's system is the only way to do it and I would be fine if CE were not hampered JUST for being CE. I want some interesting CE villains.
There is this problem though, that many actions that are CE are actions that (while they want possible) they want to be uncommon. I also think that even though PfO is NOT PFRPG, they want to keep enough of it's core principles to make it related.
They want us to take our alignments seriously and play them sorta the way that they are defined. Even if most MMO players do normally disregard alignments in games, maybe GW wants to try and change that.
Again these are guesses and opinions. We will see what is what eventually.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is as if they are arguing that we are breaking the system if we try to play within the system, because we also want to role play Chaotic Evil characters.
I do not see anyone saying that. I am not sure how much more clearly it can be expressed than Blingslite has tried.
The actions that create low reputation are also the actions that push alignment to CE. How do you expect to be one without the other...especially if you are RPing?
It is as if you are ignoring how the system is intended to work...and more importantly, what being CE is really like...in order to force some illogical situation (I assume so you can use that to argue the system broken).
Chaotic evil is all about self aggrandizement and fulfilling the individuals desires no matter the cost to anyone else. This ranges from the mad monk, who seeks to return insane outer gods so he may rule what is left of the world, to the armored bully, who enforces his will through brute force and intimidation.
Chaotic evil can be charming and urbane, but brooks no resistance to its goals except those imposed by a stronger force. Even then, it schemes to remove the obstruction without any personal sacrifice.
You think people who behave in the manner described above contribute positively to the general community...which is what reputation measures? Granted, they will be others content...but they do not contribute as part of community.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Proxima, Your original quote was "What kind of story was ever engaging enough to pay attention to without a good enough bad guy?" I'm saying these stories do not have bad guys; they have conflict-driven narrative and protagonists/antagonists (though for the second I'd say it's a stretch to even declare an antagonist for it without getting all metaphysical), but not bad guys (in the normal sense of that phrase).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ Bluddwolf
No, I would not like that! :)
I am not sold that GW's system is the only way to do it and I would be fine if CE were not hampered JUST for being CE. I want some interesting CE villains.
There is this problem though, that many actions that are CE are actions that (while they want possible) they want to be uncommon. I also think that even though PfO is NOT PFRPG, they want to keep enough of it's core principles to make it related.
They want us to take our alignments seriously and play them sorta the way that they are defined. Even if most MMO players do normally disregard alignments in games, maybe GW wants to try and change that.
Again these are guesses and opinions. We will see what is what eventually.
You won't have interesting CE villains if they will be punished whether they are interesting or just RPKing Griefers. GW can't have it both ways.
They are not taking alignments seriously, if they are using them as a mechanic to segregate and funnel, nor are they if they are looking at alignment as a hierarchy (LG at the top and CE at the bottom).
Instead of encouraging good play by everyone, they are encouraging a gaming of the alignment system by many.
No player will set their core alignment to CE, but they will certainly play that way frequently enough to get their jollies, and then they will rubber band back to their core in time before they actually incur the suck of CE.
Even with a spell to see what someone's alignment is, you won't be able to trust they actually play that will on any consistent basis.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Reputation is not divided between player and character in the game. There is only character Reputation. You're confusing the matter yourself by insisting that there is a Player Reputation function in the game.
I don't think Prox is insisting that there is player rep, but it'd be nice if there was. It's a weakness of the system that I can create one character to use for newbie-griefing, gold spamming and antisemitic rants, but the game stops penalizing me for that behavior as soon as I switch over to my paladin. (Intentionally over-the-top example, but I suspect you'll get what I mean.)
Some, but not all, of the chaotic evil characters will be played by real-life sociopaths, and it'd be nice if the rep system could discern between the two types and consistently make one feel less welcome than the other.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Bluddwolf
No, I would not like that! :)
I am not sold that GW's system is the only way to do it and I would be fine if CE were not hampered JUST for being CE. I want some interesting CE villains.
There is this problem though, that many actions that are CE are actions that (while they want possible) they want to be uncommon. I also think that even though PfO is NOT PFRPG, they want to keep enough of it's core principles to make it related.
They want us to take our alignments seriously and play them sorta the way that they are defined. Even if most MMO players do normally disregard alignments in games, maybe GW wants to try and change that.
Again these are guesses and opinions. We will see what is what eventually.
You won't have interesting CE villains if they will be punished whether they are interesting or just RPKing Griefers. GW can't have it both ways.
They are not taking alignments seriously, if they are using them as a mechanic to segregate and funnel, nor are they if they are looking at alignment as a hierarchy (LG at the top and CE at the bottom).
Instead of encouraging good play by everyone, they are encouraging a gaming of the alignment system by many.
No player will set their core alignment to CE, but they will certainly play that way frequently enough to get their jollies, and then they will rubber band back to their core in time before they actually incur the suck of CE.
Even with a spell to see what someone's alignment is, you won't be able to trust they actually play that will on any consistent basis.
The only mechanical problem I see with what you have said above is the ability to "rubberband". I agree, if someone can go CE through a days acts...log off, and return via quick "drift" back out of CE by the time they log back on...ready for another day's CE acts...then the system does not seem to be working as intended.
I hope alignment remains a sum of all your acts...meaningful consequences. The longer your character is around, the more difficult it should be to change alignment, simply from moral momentum.
If I save puppies for 1 day, a single murder should have a large effect.
If I murder for 1 day, a single puppy saved should have a large effect.
If I save puppies for 10 years, a single murder should have little effect.
If I murder for 10 years, a single puppy saved should have little effect.
If I alternate saving puppies and murder, my alignment should end up balanced in the middle...eventually moving very little from either act.
You always remain all the people you have ever been - in a persistent world.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What kind of story was ever engaging enough to pay attention to without a good enough bad guy?Sorry to avoid the rest of the posts, but I couldn't let this one slide in good conscience.
You do writers and other storytellers a disservice, ma'am. There are copious examples of awesome stories without a big bad evil guy. In fact the stories I tend to enjoy the most are the ones where nobody's the "good guy", and everyone's merely human. Good example of such is Edgar Allen Poe's "The Tell-Tale Heart".
I would add that most great writers don't create bad guys that see themselves as the bad guy. They have the own POV and allingment if you will allow, but the are doing as they see fit not worshiping the evil act for evil's sake. The big bad wolf was innocent in his own great big eyes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No player will set their core alignment to CE, but they will certainly play that way frequently enough to get their jollies, and then they will rubber band back to their core in time before they actually incur the suck of CE.
You've already heard my objections to making such statements with such limited information, so I won't bother to restate them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Some, but not all, of the chaotic evil characters will be played by real-life sociopaths, and it'd be nice if the rep system could discern between the two types and consistently make one feel less welcome than the other.
:raises hand: Which should be made to feel less welcome? The real-life sociopaths or the people who aren't actually sociopaths, but nevertheless actually enjoy playing one?
I mean, the first set are troublesome, but it's not like they can help themselves. The second set are going out of their way to inflict suffering, while being fully aware of it. (And if they're a good roleplayer, there's no detectable difference).
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I don't think Prox is insisting that there is player rep, but it'd be nice if there was.If you figure out a way to de-anonymize the internet lmk! We'll get rich together!
Issue private keys to identified individuals, and have them sign everything.
The cost lies in identifying individuals and issuing cryptographically secure private keys.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. - Peter Steiner
Or to put it another way:
Identity
You will NEVER have a solid unique identity for your problematic players. They essentially have complete anonymity because of the Internet. Even addresses, credit cards, and so on can be faked--and will be.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Proxima Sin
Over the long haul...Do you expect them to scoff at rules for "sanctioned" warfare
My platform has always been you can have a lawful person at the keyboard following GWs rules while they run a chaotic character. I don't know of anyone that disagrees with that the other 2/3 of the time. The only way my idea is impossible is if there's no way to be chaotic character alignment without breaking GWs rules all the time, and again I haven't seen a concern about that for the other 2/3 of chaotic characters.
To answer your question: If there can be a way to punish "less desired" play and preserve the vision, I am okay with it.
I have put forward several alternatives for review. Here's another for the ubiquitous example of stabbing faces in a way that appears meaningless or random to an outside observer.
Attach a Power cost to attacking a non-hostile while you're flagged with Attacker (attacking more than once). At the company level feuds cost influence, at the settlement level wars "are expensive" and have DI implications we know, so it's consistent that the individual level should use a limited resource too. Anyone could still attack anyone anytime, but not in an unlimited thoughtless way. It's in the punishment/deterrent vein because one's ability to use best skills is diminished just by the act of attacking in a way GW doesn't want. Power cost can mirror reputation loss in a huge penalty for newer players.
Now that band of mercenary thugs loitering at the crossroads has to think more carefully out about which random passers-by they terrorize (no matter what their Core alignment is set to). Even the idiot harvesting lulz outside NoobTown suddenly has to start making more meaningful decisions about which newbies to harass if he can only get 2 or 3 before he runs low on Power and loses his ability to attack them in a way GW deems meaningless. And it works on on the turkey even if he always manipulates alignment Drift to stay out of CE. Alignment is freed from that duty and can be our role playing tool again.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Chaotic evil can be charming and urbane, but brooks no resistance to its goals except those imposed by a stronger force. Even then, it schemes to remove the obstruction without any personal sacrifice.
You think people who behave in the manner described above contribute positively to the general community...which is what reputation measures? Granted, they will be others content...but they do not contribute as part of community.
This is where I get my idea it's mistaken to think evil characters must automatically be low rep to maintain that alignment long term, but instead that GW intends to use the reputation mechanic to measure how the player behind the character follows GWs rules
Reputation is our system for measuring how a player behaves in game.
Do they mean when the character brooks no resistance to its goals except those imposed by a stronger force? Schemes to remove that obstruction?
A character with a high Reputation is likely someone who only engages in PvP via feuds, wars, or factional combat (if he engages in PvP at all), while a character with low Reputation likely attacks people regardless of those PvP structures or is rude or abusive to other players.
Okay it's only if I, as a player, ignore GWs structures or flame other players, etc. Then
Reputation has no direct effect on combat, crafting, or skills, but does limit availability of training, facilities, and social interactions.
So for anyone that chooses any particular alignment, who stays within the PvP structures, doesn't troll or flame, doesn't scam, etc. according to this recent blog shouldn't have a low reputation so shouldn't be subjected to limited training, facilities or social interactions.
No one seems worried that CG or CN will be flouting GWs PvP structures to maintain their chaotic so they must be built to suck.
So where is it that the devs get evil characters by default must be made to suck worse than any other alignments that players can flame from or pvp outside the structures and drift back to?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
.No one seems worried that CG or CN will be flouting GWs PvP structures to maintain their chaotic so they must be built to suck.
So where is it that the devs get evil characters by default must be made to suck worse than any other alignments that players can flame from or pvp outside the structures and drift back to?..
Actually I am concerned for CN. First, we are the closest to slipping into CE. Secondly, in the event that no one is stupid enough to roll a CE character, how long before GW's alignment hammer comes down on CN?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Doesn't that depend on the behavior patterns? If CN characters are engaging in the same activity that is castigated in CE but only disguised with a thin veil of deception it will be noticed, you know.
The mechanical detection and record evaluation is only part of the mix. So if you folks are thinking you'll be able to spoof the machine of it you should consider that it will not just be a machine evaluating what you do. And if the behaviors of the CN don't merit the nerf-hammer then it isn't a concern, right?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually I am concerned for CN. First, we are the closest to slipping into CE. Secondly, in the event that no one is stupid enough to roll a CE character, how long before GW's alignment hammer comes down on CN?.No one seems worried that CG or CN will be flouting GWs PvP structures to maintain their chaotic so they must be built to suck.
So where is it that the devs get evil characters by default must be made to suck worse than any other alignments that players can flame from or pvp outside the structures and drift back to?..
I honestly don't see how you will even be able to hold on to CN playing a bandit. Most of the time you will be attacking non-hostile players. Unless SAD reduces the reputation hit you take? Or can you declare war on every settlement you come across? (The whole idea of a bandit having to officially declare war sounds a bit goofy though)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
SAD makes it so you don't take any reputation hits, and your alignment doesn't swing toward Evil if they reject the SAD and you kill them; in fact, if they accept your SAD you actually gain reputation.
Don't think of "a bandit declaring war"; just like everyone else bandits need the support network of other players. A company of bandits whose settlement is at war with another settlement have free reign to attack the other group's members, but even without war, feuds, or other such mechanics bandits can always fall back to the catch-all of SAD's, which can be done on any target (as far as we know).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually I am concerned for CN. First, we are the closest to slipping into CE. Secondly, in the event that no one is stupid enough to roll a CE character, how long before GW's alignment hammer comes down on CN?.No one seems worried that CG or CN will be flouting GWs PvP structures to maintain their chaotic so they must be built to suck.
So where is it that the devs get evil characters by default must be made to suck worse than any other alignments that players can flame from or pvp outside the structures and drift back to?..
I don't think everyone who roles a CE character is going to be stupid. Some will do it to thumb their nose at the system; to test the system; to see it as a challenge; or just be plain old griefers who decide to start their career with a bang. I suspect many people are already tempted to play their DT in this manner. I'm tempted, but have too many specific goals for which I will need both my guys. Our chartered company will have a rather low reputation threshold for dealing with people-even CE if they don't attack our members.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, if you've got a group of high rep characters who've forced my group into fighting (for the record, I think that by its implementation SAD will not be usable in the way you've described, or at least not consistently) and you also have a large group of CE characters waiting in the wings to attack (and assuming you can coordinate a battle involving your mains and alts simultaneously), I'd say this example is unfair. :O Can't I at least get some attack dogs or something to keep it even?
But seriously, I have no doubt that you'll find ways to exert control over an area you don't mechanically own; I also do not doubt that people will find ways to get through it or around it. I don't even remember what the meaning of this particular discussion was anymore, but the point I was trying to make is that rolling with a low rep CE character is something players should be able to do. It's not griefing, or circumventing mechanics, or anything of that nature.
That's where you need a Q-ship of a relatively easy to take down caravan followed by your own escort force of guards kept out of sight and explicitly meant to take down Steelwings force (including the high rep SAD'ers who will be criminals...thus fair game to your escorts) once he springs his trap. You can use his own tactics against him. The question is will this end up being a fun form of play or just a royal PTA. If it's predominately the latter...then Steelwings folks will just end up playing the game by themselves...or similar minded folks. Which may end up being perfectly fine if that's what GW is going for....not like there will be any shortage of games out there to play over the next couple years.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"But they can keep a different account with their high Karma characters on it to get around that" Yeah and those characters aren't making a toxic environment for other players around them are they? Working as intended.No it is not working as intended. It is having no effect whatsoever because each character is on a separate account. There is no karma effect at all in that case
The logical counter-measure is to increase the cost in both real world dollars and/or time invested for a character on a new account to get to the point where they can engage in PvP at all. Thus using multiple accounts as opposed to using a single account for characters comes at a disadvantage. Of course if money and/or time is of no object then it can be circumvented but as with almost all counter-measures the goal is never to prevent someone with limitless resources from circumventing it...it's to raise the bar in terms of the cost/investment required to circumvent it that fewer people are willing to engage in such activity, thus limiting the effect on the user base as a whole. Again, assuming that such activity would be undesired and worth the investment of resources (and side effects) of attempting to discourage, which is entirely a decision for the Developer to make.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here's my opinion.
People will self-sort into alignments based on their playstyles. This is reflected in the idea that your alignment "drifts" from an origin based on your actions.
The people who want to be crafters are going to end up drifting towards lawful good. The actions they take are going to mostly be lawful and mostly be good. They're going to avoid combat and they're not going to spend time & energy pursuing the kinds of Achievements that will unlock combat-focused character abilities.
The people who are going to be actively engaged in PvP in a meaningful way are likely to end up with a drift toward evil. But they're also going to be trying to remain at a medium to high rep which is going to drift them towards lawful. If a client is buying mercenary services they want to work with lawful mercenaries not chaotic mercenaries. Having a reputation of strictly upholding contracts is going to be the best way for a mercenary team to attract new clients. The first time you screw your patrons, you'll find the number of new jobs dry up rapidly.
There is a whole group of players that EVE doesn't really cater too. EVE has a core of Lawful Good characters up in hisec. and a nimbus of groups in nullsec who are Lawful Evil and Chaotic Evil. But there isn't much to do if you don't want to be a crafter or an Alliance warrior.
We will have more and more interesting things to do besides craft and make war - a very light layer at first but it will get richer over time as I'm virtually certain Crowdforging will push us that way. The "Exploration" and "Adventure" components of our matrix are going to get emphasis that EVE doesn't deliver.
This is why I think the game is going to have a lot of chaotic neutral and chaotic good characters. There are a lot of people who want to adventure and are going to see anyone who tries to stop them as content - but not the content that fulfills their game objectives. They're not going to go out of their way to find PvP but they'll be good at it...
I'm curious why such individuals (as I may well end up playing one myself) would need to drift away from Lawful and toward Chaotic? I assume alot of the PvE content would be in Wild hex's and thus trespassing probably wouldn't be alot of an issue and there would be a reasonable way to access a fair amount through hex's that were freindly toward your settlement or had no tresspass rules or some other contractural arrangement to protect/assist merchants that were operating in the settlement area...thus one could restrict onself to places one lawfully could be. If I remember correctly there isn't a Chaotic shift for defending yourself or even killing people who attacked you first (e.g. had the attacker flag) is there? So if you obeyed those 2 restrictions you wouldn't need to shift Chaotic would you? Or are you saying that it will be impossible to obey those restrictions?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In the case of "Well I want to play a CN Merchant and it seems like I can't." I would argue that a CN person should probably be a bit spotty on contract fulfillment and do other chaotic and neutral things. They are not being CN if they perform a bunch of "lawful" and or "good" things. At least not any more than the natural passive pull toward CN can overcome.
Except that an automated computer system is likely able to measure less then 1 percent of all meaningfull human interaction. For example, if we looked at some of the figures historicaly that most of humanity would consider the embodiment of "Evil"....a fair number of them never pulled a trigger or took a life in person themselves. An automated computer system the likes of which PFO will likely be able to develop would likely adjucate them as "LG" based on the limited set of actions it was capable of capturing and acting upon.
That's where, IMO, we have a very large disconnect between people who are used to playing Table-Top systems where thier characters have Alignment and people who say PFO will represent what characters actualy DO and people who play MMO's simply based on mechanicaly advantage.
I think you are seeing a great deal of cognitive dissonence here based upon those different preconceptions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ GrumpyMel
There may be some disconnect or incorrect expectations. Either in my assumptions, those that I am debating with, or both. :)
What I try to remember is that Ryan started that post with "Here's my opinion." I read that as another "TBD".
It seems strange to me that there would really be a system that drags crafters toward lawful and good, possibly endangering their resident status in some places. There will have to be things that players can do, within their area of normal play, to keep their alignment where they want it. Probably by doing just a few of the things (occasionally) that reflect their chosen alignment (that can be measured by the computer) plus the passive ongoing repair.
In short: Why would a system be designed (in it's final form) wherein all crafters end up LG? Does that seem like a good design? (no pun intended) Unless the end goal really is for all successful settlements to be within the realm of LG-allowed.
I can't wrap my head around the idea that GW would so nerf all other alignments. Therefor I really believe that crafting within any alignment will be manageable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When Ryan starts with "Here's my opinion," its hard not to consider it TBD since he is running the show.
Crafting should have nothing to do with alignment unless you are crafting a specific alignment item such as a Holy Avenger. That is more of a required alignment then a changing alignment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When Ryan starts with "Here's my opinion," its hard not to consider it TBD since he is running the show.
Crafting should have nothing to do with alignment unless you are crafting a specific alignment item such as a Holy Avenger. That is more of a required alignment then a changing alignment.
I think that is why we speak up here. Not that they are probably not already considering these issues, but that we don't know for sure yet and (maybe) neither do they.
If I am a crafter that wants to be LG for RP or it's advantages, I am doing best if I take and complete contracts faithfully to the best of my ability.
If I am a crafter that wants to be CN for RP or it's advantages, I am playing CN best if I fail a few contracts here and there. Just enough to keep myself chaotic neutral. Yes, I am both assuming that you will need to play CN to be CN (or you could do nothing but that is not playing) and that there will be ways to do it. So who knows?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ GrumpyMel
There may be some disconnect or incorrect expectations. Either in my assumptions, those that I am debating with, or both. :)
What I try to remember is that Ryan started that post with "Here's my opinion." I read that as another "TBD".
It seems strange to me that there would really be a system that drags crafters toward lawful and good, possibly endangering their resident status in some places. There will have to be things that players can do, within their area of normal play, to keep their alignment where they want it. Probably by doing just a few of the things (occasionally) that reflect their chosen alignment (that can be measured by the computer) plus the passive ongoing repair.
In short: Why would a system be designed (in it's final form) wherein all crafters end up LG? Does that seem like a good design? (no pun intended) Unless the end goal really is for all successful settlements to be within the realm of LG-allowed.
I can't wrap my head around the idea that GW would so nerf all other alignments. Therefor I really believe that crafting within any alignment will be manageable.
It may well be, and even seems likely, that there will be other influences that this mechanic is intended to counterbalance.
I don't have any more insight than you what those might be, but I can construct a hypothetical case that, while probably inaccurate in detail, may shed light on the reasoning behind the alignment drift.
Say, for example, that all these daggers I am forging, fine daggers with blades that have just the right balance of hardness to hold an edge and flexibility in the core so it won't snap off the first time it is used. Constructive work, fine craftsmanship, the process helps keep the economy flowing, pays my gatherers, and keeps beans on my table, even affording me a bit after taxes to squirrel away.
I'm drifting toward lawful and good.
However my wares are being snapped up as fast as I can craft them by that nefarious scaliwag Xeen and his company, and they are Up To No Good, let me tell you. It may be that transacting with low rep evil customers dings me back off that lawful good high. Not to mention if I am buying my coal from a shady middleman off-loading stolen coal for my forge that, too, might ding me. And then the fact that my true neutral settlement has many of these low rep evil types and my settlement's average alignment also affects me.
So taking a step back we see that the craftsman can serve as a lawful and good influence on his settlement, just as his customers trend toward the chaotic (cash now, then I'll give you a dagger, just don't pull it on me afterward).
There may be other alignment influences at play.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bringslite,
We're all speculating here so who really knows. But here is my impression. If the system is working at it's best with GW putting a ton of resources into developing it well for it's size company... It will capture a very limited subset of character interaction which it can make allocations based off of, those allocations will be blunt and non-nuanced but reasonably coherent. There will be ways (hopefully) for you to grind back to where you think your character should be. That system will do a reasonable job of being able to place certain character concepts at where one would reasonably expect they should be...and an absolutely horrible job at others. Clever people will find ways to circumvent many aspects of this system that will be just too difficult/resource intensive for the Developers to try to control for.
- People who come in from TableTop role-playing will have alot of cognative disonance from such a system because there will be a natural expectation from them that Alignment is tied to the kind of nuanced moral/ethical judgements that a human GameMaster is capable of making but an automated system just can't handle well. They'll spend time "grinding"... it will be percieved as that....to get thier characters back to where they think they aught to be in the first place....if they can't do that or that becomes too onerous to play, they'll just walk. They'll be disappointment that the system doesn't support certain character concepts well. Those who do want to play CE characters but aren't really interesting in wrecking another players day, will be resentfull that the system lumps them in with griefers and rpk'ers.
- People from other MMO's such as WoW. Will not really understand the purpose of the system well....they'll probably expect for it to work like a game of grinding faction rep, and if it doesn't they'll get annoyed. They won't have much interest in the "RP" aspect of it...but will have alot of interest in any mechanical effects of it.
- People from ultra competitive games like EvE will look at the system purely from the perspective of it's mechanical advantages and disadvantages and will manipulate the intracicies of the system to give themselves best advantage and thier enemies least. They will try to figure out different creative ways to circumvent the intent of the effects.
I honestly hope the system really works to the absolute best expectations of GW and many other players here, but I'm rather concerned that it won't when push comes to shove. Anyway, we'll get to see and I hope that my skepticism is not well founded.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... will manipulate the intracicies of the system to give themselves best advantage...
Just to put this out there, "manipulat[ing] the intricacies of the system" means "not randomly murdering people all the time".
I'm fine if some folks want to spend all their time trying to find loopholes, getting banned occasionally even before they find them, and having them closed once the devs are made aware of them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ GrumpyMel
What you write makes sense and I do understand it, I believe. Can't really disagree because we won't see major trends of love it/hate it until we get a game and some real numbers trying it out.
I agree that at first, PfO will probably appeal to only a certain segment of the market. Hopefully it will evolve to be attractive to a nice large segment. If it doesn't, then hopefully it will still be viable for GW to operate it for those that do turn out to love it. Seems like that is highly possible with their smaller startup style of design.
Yeah, I think that it is pretty obvious that what we start with will be crude systems that just barely get the job done. That also leaves the most room for tweaking and less pain when some systems prove unneeded or impractical.
At the start, and possibly by the semi finished product, it will be likely that each of us is responsible for managing and maintaining our chosen alignments with whatever ways that there are provided or we can find.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... will manipulate the intracicies of the system to give themselves best advantage...Just to put this out there, "manipulat[ing] the intricacies of the system" means "not randomly murdering people all the time".
I'm fine if some folks want to spend all their time trying to find loopholes, getting banned occasionally even before they find them, and having them closed once the devs are made aware of them.
Nihimon, just to be clear. My assumption here is that GW has a certain design intent for what they'd like to accomplish with thier systems and subsystems. With finite resources and finite staff, I expect it will be a practical impossability to close or prevent all circumvention of the intent of thier systems. There will be some "loopholes" that the Dev's simply won't, for practical purposes be able to "close". Hopefully those "loopholes" won't be sufficient in nature to really damage the intent of the type of game they want to make here and the atmosphere they want to create or the controls will be sufficient to discourage such activity to limit it's impact on the game as a whole. However, I don't expect GW to be the first Developer in the history of the internet to implement controls sufficient to perfectly get user behavior to conform to what the design intent of thier systems are.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In short: Why would a system be designed (in it's final form) wherein all crafters end up LG?
In reference to:
People will self-sort into alignments based on their playstyles. This is reflected in the idea that your alignment "drifts" from an origin based on your actions.
The people who want to be crafters are going to end up drifting towards lawful good. The actions they take are going to mostly be lawful and mostly be good. They're going to avoid combat and they're not going to spend time & energy pursuing the kinds of Achievements that will unlock combat-focused character abilities.
Possibly Crafters in a 100% perfect environment for crafting are going to spend 100% of their time crafting? This might be LG environment for obvious reasons? LG could have the best buildings, items, infrastructure and defence??
Crafters not so fortunate, say for some reason, perhaps choice or variability or "someone has to do it" actually, craft in different alignment settlements, such as Chaotic-Neutral? Here they spend time crafting but the whole infrastructure is limited and sometimes dries up so they end up going out getting some goods themselves? Perhaps here, they might have to learn to kill some players or even back at Crafting HQ they have to self-defence from thieves or thugs? Then they're not going to be drifting as much to LG or at least checking that drift having to draw some cold steel on other players?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There will be some "loopholes" that the Dev's simply won't, for practical purposes be able to "close".
I completely agree this is a near-inevitable outcome. However, I think it's also true that loopholes that threaten to undermine the game will be addressed with a very high priority.
For example, an exploit that allows characters to engage some specific instances of PvE content without actually being at significant risk might be the kind of loophole that gets shoved to the back burner. While an exploit that allows a player to repeatedly kill a newbie in the starter zone without suffering consequences should be addressed immediately.
I'm confident that Ryan's been serious all those times he's talked about the critical need to ensure that PFO doesn't become a murder simulator, and I'm confident that Goblinworks will make reasonable decisions when exploits/loopholes that threaten that are discovered.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That's where, IMO, we have a very large disconnect between people who are used to playing Table-Top systems where thier characters have Alignment and people who say PFO will represent what characters actualy DO and people who play MMO's simply based on mechanicaly advantage.
I think you are seeing a great deal of cognitive dissonence here based upon those different preconceptions.
A. Perception of current state: As has been repeated several times, the balance to the mechanical advantage of Good is working outside the structures established by GW i.e. the only way for non-good to try to be on equal power footing with good is break GWs rules which was undesired behavior in the first place and makes them low rep which incurs the associated mechanical suckage.
B. Desired state: All characters that remain following GWs rules and structures are on equal mechanical footing regardless of core or active alignment. When any character starts acting outside those structures, they become mechanically disadvantaged in training etc. compared to characters of all alignments that do remain in the structures.
Does putting it like that resolve the disconnect?
Do the people here prefer the game be built to result in A or B?
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
- People who come in from TableTop role-playing
- People from other MMO's such as WoW.
- People from ultra competitive games like EvE
Some small number of players are going to keep running into the fact that their actions have crippled their characters and be intensely frustrated. That will represent the system working as intended.
Some very small number of people are going to try and see how they can stretch and warp the alignment system playing atypically and without much regard for logic. Harmless.
Some portion of people will want to play a Role with an alignment limit, mostly Paladins but maybe Monks. Some of them will not know there are alignment restrictions for those Roles and they'll either have to grind alignment changes to get to where they need to be, or they'll start over.
Experience for vast majority of players:
They're going to pick an alignment probably based on some personal character concept. Then they're going to start playing the game and never think about it again. Most people won't have any meaningful interaction with alignment unless they get in with a social group that wants to create or belongs to a Settlement that their character can't join due to alignment restrictions, they'll grind alignment to get where they want to be and forget about it again.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Ryan
And as long as players pvp within the ascribed ways, don't scam or flame etc. they will be able to role play their favorite alignment or totally forget about it either way without running into the crippled character syndrome from your first group of people?
@ Ryan,
To add to Proxima's question...
Including CE characters?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some portion of people will want to play a Role with an alignment limit, mostly Paladins but maybe Monks. Some of them will not know there are alignment restrictions for those Roles and they'll either have to grind alignment changes to get to where they need to be, or they'll start over
Will clerics be expected to stay within the accepted alignment restrictions of the deities as per the tabletop rules?
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And as long as players pvp within the ascribed ways, don't scam or flame etc. they will be able to role play their favorite alignment or totally forget about it either way without running into the crippled character syndrome from your first group of people?
It is doubtful to me if it will be possible to play a Chaotic Evil character Chaotically and Evilly without getting a crippled character as a result.