Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Conviction on faith without evidence is a standard trope of Tyranny of the Good stories.... you're willing to convict some proportion of not-guiltys to make sure you get all of the guiltys...I'd say that I'm not willing to let the "guiltys" get a free pass because of a hypothetical case that some exceedingly small number of them might not be guilty.
They're Reputation is evidence.
In more practical matters, if you're doing this not at the moment they're lowering their Rep how do you expect them to internalize action and consequence to actually make the feedback loop you want?
The more important question is, if I'm only allowed to do something about it when I catch them in the act, how will those who are good at doing things in the shadows ever have any feedback?
If some jerk is careful enough to only be a jerk when there's no one around who can do anything about it, why should he get a free pass? The whole point of the Reputation system is to help the community identify folks who are doing bad things, yet you seem to want me to ignore this information and only base my actions on what I see with my own eyes.
Otherwise, this just becomes a war simulator with no role-playing aspect at all. Good and evil will have no consequences and it just a game of resources.
Exactly the point I have been making come OE most players are going to be regarding it as that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Honestly...I don't know what the best system would be. Having NBSI or NRDS is probably just an added layer we don't need. But I can see the merits of being able to set rules for your own settlements. But if there are alignments in the game, and a reputation system in place, I would like to see the same rules that are applied to alignment/reputation applied to NBSI. Otherwise, this just becomes a war simulator with no role-playing aspect at all. Good and evil will have no consequences and it just a game of resources.
And I would still play that game as well...but if we are playing a game of greed...kill for stuff....then do...
Those aren't really an extra system, just a description of how your settlement handles grey people. Your options are kill them (NBSI) or don't kill them (NRDS). However, I hope if we have an automatic way of tracking individuals (like EVE's standings with setting blue, grey, red characters) that both options would be present; it would be pretty annoying to start with either and try to work toward the other one (for example, start with every players set to grey, then go through setting every person in the game as red to effect an NBSI).
Yes...you can do all of this. By opening new accounts and such. If you want to pay more money and spend time leveling alts at a pace to keep up with other peoples mains all because you want your paladin to be able to murder people, but can't get away with it...be my guest. But if a paladin kills someone over them walking on their lawn....bye bye paladin powers IMO.
Well as we already intend to do this because we do not plan on being limited to where the mechanics say our settlement territory end but instead will consider our territory ends where we can no longer exert force to control it then it really isnt a hardship.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That being said...I am trying to point out that while everyone is so focused on single player griefing...I fear that an unregulated, unrestricted NBSI system is just griefing at a guild level. A year after launch...if a group of 4 high school friends decide to make their own little guild...and can't travel anywhere and even the LG guys are wiping them out for walking on their lawn...we are going to have big community problems.
Yes this might be a resource warfare game...but I do not think that some alignment restrictions are crazy to want if a nbsi system goes into place. Steelwing wants to kill anyone who enters his land. No questions asked. That is great...I have no problem with that. But when he rolls his character...he shouldn't be good. That is not a stretch or too much to ask, I don't think.
That's what the first post of this topic is about. The first section is a list of fairly major incentives to open up your territory to all. The 2nd part is a list of ways to control that territory.
Without some form of controls though, it's not really your territory. Also it is not evil of a nation to control access to it's own borders. In most real world nations, you can't get across the border without getting checked out by the border patrol and showing some kind of passport. That passport is what makes you blue (Not Blue Shoot It). So most nations run a policy of Not Blue Don't Let it In or Not Blue Deport It. It's in no way an evil policy. That's their soil and they want to make sure their citizens are protected from the dangers that letting just anyone who wanders up with no background check and no cargo screening can present.
However in Pathfinder borders tend to be more open because Pathfinder is a game focused on adventure and it would really suck if your character needed a background check every time they crossed the border of one kingdom into another. Not to mention the technology is not a friendly toward those types of things in PF.
That's why the first...
I agree with some of what you are saying. But since this is online gaming, we really can't have border security and luggage screening. I either want no NRDS or NBSI system...or one that make sense. Implementing financial rewards for opening your borders is great...makes sense to me. Maybe there could be other perks to the evil guys who close their borders (increased slave labor). All I am simply asking for, pretty consistently, is that the various alignments, in the context of a settlement, have restrictions on what laws they can and can't set.
No where do I state that people shouldn't be able to defend themselves. But anyone is hard pressed to show me a logical reason a Paladin..or heck, any good aligned character would have a border policy that allowed them to murder anyone they saw fit, which is what this boils down to.
No community would tolerate the theft of their resources...but I think appropriate responses should be for minor crimes like resource farming
LG-SAD warning or fine-refusal escalates to violence
LN-Steep fine. Refusal=violence
LE-die die die.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well as we already intend to do this because we do not plan on being limited to where the mechanics say our settlement territory end but instead will consider our territory ends where we can no longer exert force to control it then it really isnt a hardship.
Yes...you can do all of this. By opening new accounts and such. If you want to pay more money and spend time leveling alts at a pace to keep up with other peoples mains all because you want your paladin to be able to murder people, but can't get away with it...be my guest. But if a paladin kills someone over them walking on their lawn....bye bye paladin powers IMO.
Neat.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well as we already intend to do this because we do not plan on being limited to where the mechanics say our settlement territory end but instead will consider our territory ends where we can no longer exert force to control it then it really isnt a hardship.
Yes...you can do all of this. By opening new accounts and such. If you want to pay more money and spend time leveling alts at a pace to keep up with other peoples mains all because you want your paladin to be able to murder people, but can't get away with it...be my guest. But if a paladin kills someone over them walking on their lawn....bye bye paladin powers IMO.
I hope you bring some numbers and/or some pro multi boxers. With very many fewer choke points, that is going to be a tall task! Of course, I am assuming that you can't usually see all the way to the border of a hex from the center.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Those aren't really an extra system, just a description of how your settlement handles grey people. Your options are kill them (NBSI) or don't kill them (NRDS). However, I hope if we have an automatic way of tracking individuals (like EVE's standings with setting blue, grey, red characters) that both options would be present; it would be pretty annoying to start with either and try to work toward the other one (for example, start with every players set to grey, then go through setting every person in the game as red to effect an NBSI).Honestly...I don't know what the best system would be. Having NBSI or NRDS is probably just an added layer we don't need. But I can see the merits of being able to set rules for your own settlements. But if there are alignments in the game, and a reputation system in place, I would like to see the same rules that are applied to alignment/reputation applied to NBSI. Otherwise, this just becomes a war simulator with no role-playing aspect at all. Good and evil will have no consequences and it just a game of resources.
And I would still play that game as well...but if we are playing a game of greed...kill for stuff....then do...
You know what one of the coolest things about Age of Conan was. The ranger could track people. You had a tracking skill, and you could click on a persons name that was in your zone, and they would show up as a blip on the map. I loved that....made the ranger a lot more interesting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hope you bring some numbers and/or some pro multi boxers. With very many fewer choke points, that is going to be a tall task! Of course, I am assuming that you can't usually see all the way to the border of a hex from the center.Well as we already intend to do this because we do not plan on being limited to where the mechanics say our settlement territory end but instead will consider our territory ends where we can no longer exert force to control it then it really isnt a hardship.
Yes...you can do all of this. By opening new accounts and such. If you want to pay more money and spend time leveling alts at a pace to keep up with other peoples mains all because you want your paladin to be able to murder people, but can't get away with it...be my guest. But if a paladin kills someone over them walking on their lawn....bye bye paladin powers IMO.
Well we have a settlement full of people. We will have patrols out constantly. When they spot someone they just shout out and we send the sad people out or the monsters in the basement as necessary.
Lack of chokepoints actually makes things a little more interesting in many ways because instead of asking people to sit in static gate camps we keep them moving. We are currently looking at various search patterns used by coast guards and search and rescue to see if we can learn anything from them for making the most efficient use of manpower.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're 100% wrong. I don't think it will be infallible, and I don't think it has to be. I think it's a simple system that will work as part of a complex, layered approach to a very serious problem. I think my planned actions are in-line with that approachIf you don't think the Reputation score is infallible how can you tell the difference if you're justified or making a mistake to attack them based on it?
And I'm only speaking to the doctrine you've put forward already and advocated everyone should do, which only included action against hostiles.
People are also fallible. The goal should never be zero errors, the goal should be to reach a point where spending more resources (here, time) on reducing errors starts to result in a worse expected outcome, considering the benefits of being correct, the risks of being wrong, and the costs of being right more and wrong less.
Perfection is for people who can assign infinite value to something. Assigning infinite value to something means falling for Pascal's Mugging every time.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
And now my point has been made. NBSI is a mechanic high-rep/good characters are going to exploit so they can slaughter people consequence free.We don't need to justify it alignment is merely a mechanic. Choosing one gives you mechanical advantages or disadvantages that is all. Justification on moral grounds is merely rp and therefore totally unimportant
On the other hand...if you are a LN, LG, NG, CG or N community, I think that the use of NBSI against any person or guild other than low-rep should garner a reputation hit for the entire settlement....unless someone wants to explain to me how a LG Paladin decided that it was morally justifiable to enable a law (NBSI) that permitted the murder of any of the NG merchants who lived in a neighboring...
NBSI is not a mechanic. It is a behavior.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Remember, if you can only be 99.999% certain, you should just let the convicted murderer walk.
If I'm only 99.999% certain that a given murder was committed by a given person, I can't condone convicting him.
That level of certainty means a false conviction once every hundred thousand trials, and convicting an innocent person is a million times worse than acquitting a guilty one.
At 99.99991% certainty, I convict. Because convicting an innocent man on only a million times worse than acquitting a guilty one.
Thus endeth the sermon on how to multiply to find expected outcomes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And if people like Steelwing are using ALTs to murder and SAD in their own land that is owned by LG characters or whatever...I have a mechanic for that as well. Eve had a very simple tool that allowed any player to monitor how many pilots were killed in a given place over a period of time. So what Pathfinder Online could do is simply set up a system that monitored banditry and deaths in every hex. LG communities who have either lost control or exploiting game mechanics by using evil alts to do their dirty work would incur the wrath of Adolfo the High Fiber Ancient dragon who flies into their hex and craps on their resources.
And if people like Steelwing are using ALTs to murder and SAD in their own land that is owned by LG characters or whatever...I have a mechanic for that as well. Eve had a very simple tool that allowed any player to monitor how many pilots were killed in a given place over a period of time. So what Pathfinder Online could do is simply set up a system that monitored banditry and deaths in every hex. LG communities who have either lost control or exploiting game mechanics by using evil alts to do their dirty work would incur the wrath of Adolfo the High Fiber Ancient dragon who flies into their hex and craps on their resources.
Using unaffiliated alts is not an exploit
Or it may require the Settlement to have a small cadre of unaffiliated characters on standby to do the dirty deeds when required. These might be characters of players unaffiliated with the Settlement who serve as a fast-reaction force that the Settlement can call on when necessary in exchange for some in-game benefit like mercenaries, or they might be alt characters of Settlement members that are kept idle to be switched to when needed.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And if people like Steelwing are using ALTs to murder and SAD in their own land that is owned by LG characters or whatever...I have a mechanic for that as well. Eve had a very simple tool that allowed any player to monitor how many pilots were killed in a given place over a period of time. So what Pathfinder Online could do is simply set up a system that monitored banditry and deaths in every hex. LG communities who have either lost control or exploiting game mechanics by using evil alts to do their dirty work would incur the wrath of Adolfo the High Fiber Ancient dragon who flies into their hex and craps on their resources.Using unaffiliated alts is not an exploit
Or it may require the Settlement to have a small cadre of unaffiliated characters on standby to do the dirty deeds when required. These might be characters of players unaffiliated with the Settlement who serve as a fast-reaction force that the Settlement can call on when necessary in exchange for some in-game benefit like mercenaries, or they might be alt characters of Settlement members that are kept idle to be switched to when needed.
I didn't say it was an exploit. I just don't understand why it would be done in the first place. I'm not judging the fact that you want to kill intruders at will. I'm fine with that. I just don't understand why you wouldn't roll your main as LN or LE to begin with instead what it sounds like you are doing...making good characters who don't really want to be good characters then doing those characters dirty work with other characters. Seems like a lot of work. Heck, if you multi-box, why not just create two evil characters that can both do what you want in the first place?
I didn't say it was an exploit. I just don't understand why it would be done in the first place. I'm not judging the fact that you want to kill intruders at will. I'm fine with that. I just don't understand why you wouldn't roll your main as LN or LE to begin with instead what it sounds like you are doing...making good characters who don't really want to be good characters then doing those characters dirty work with other characters. Seems like a lot of work. Heck, if you multi-box, why not just create two evil characters that can both do what you want in the first place?And if people like Steelwing are using ALTs to murder and SAD in their own land that is owned by LG characters or whatever...I have a mechanic for that as well. Eve had a very simple tool that allowed any player to monitor how many pilots were killed in a given place over a period of time. So what Pathfinder Online could do is simply set up a system that monitored banditry and deaths in every hex. LG communities who have either lost control or exploiting game mechanics by using evil alts to do their dirty work would incur the wrath of Adolfo the High Fiber Ancient dragon who flies into their hex and craps on their resources.Using unaffiliated alts is not an exploit
Or it may require the Settlement to have a small cadre of unaffiliated characters on standby to do the dirty deeds when required. These might be characters of players unaffiliated with the Settlement who serve as a fast-reaction force that the Settlement can call on when necessary in exchange for some in-game benefit like mercenaries, or they might be alt characters of Settlement members that are kept idle to be switched to when needed.
I havent actually specified an alignment as yet. We will select an alignment based on what is mechanically best for us is all. That may be LG or it may be LE or any of the others.
What we won't be doing is going well does the way we intend to play make us be lawful or chaotic, good or evil. These are just labels and are totally without meaning to us. We don't care you might as well ask us whether we want to be in the pink fluffy bunny faction or the slime dripping slug faction they are just as meaningless to us.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn't say it was an exploit. I just don't understand why it would be done in the first place. I'm not judging the fact that you want to kill intruders at will. I'm fine with that. I just don't understand why you wouldn't roll your main as LN or LE to begin with instead what it sounds like you are doing...making good characters who don't really want to be good characters then doing those characters dirty work with other characters. Seems like a lot of work. Heck, if you multi-box, why not just create two evil characters that can both do what you want in the first place?And if people like Steelwing are using ALTs to murder and SAD in their own land that is owned by LG characters or whatever...I have a mechanic for that as well. Eve had a very simple tool that allowed any player to monitor how many pilots were killed in a given place over a period of time. So what Pathfinder Online could do is simply set up a system that monitored banditry and deaths in every hex. LG communities who have either lost control or exploiting game mechanics by using evil alts to do their dirty work would incur the wrath of Adolfo the High Fiber Ancient dragon who flies into their hex and craps on their resources.Using unaffiliated alts is not an exploit
Or it may require the Settlement to have a small cadre of unaffiliated characters on standby to do the dirty deeds when required. These might be characters of players unaffiliated with the Settlement who serve as a fast-reaction force that the Settlement can call on when necessary in exchange for some in-game benefit like mercenaries, or they might be alt characters of Settlement members that are kept idle to be switched to when needed.
I havent actually specified an alignment as yet. We will select an alignment based on what is mechanically best for us is all. That may be LG or it may be LE or any of the others.
What we won't...
Sounds Chaotic Neutral to me.
Sounds Chaotic Neutral to me.
If you don't like it talk to Dancey it is all his fault. The moment he decided alignments would not be mechanically equal he ensured that min maxers will select alignment based purely on mechanical advantage.
All we are doing is playing within the mechanical limits imposed on us. Want to complain *points at Dancey*
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You only raise the issue of semantics, what an ability is called.
Not so. Except that both involve stopping someone to interact with them, IC appears to be nothing like a SAD in form or function. There is no demand for their loot in exchange for letting them go, for example.
Whether it is called a SAD or Apprehend or Trespass versus Exile is not important. The issue you avoided is the issue of cost and or trade offs.
I didn't avoid cost and trade off at all. Had you bothered to read for content rather than blocking the meaning out with your presumption you would have seen that it describes that there are similarities and differences, and that those differences should be accommodated for non-bandit needs if the SAD accommodates bandit needs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sounds Chaotic Neutral to me.If you don't like it talk to Dancey it is all his fault. The moment he decided alignments would not be mechanically equal he ensured that min maxers will select alignment based purely on mechanical advantage.
All we are doing is playing within the mechanical limits imposed on us. Want to complain *points at Dancey*
I'm not blaming anybody for anything. I just don't get why someone is going to go through all that trouble to and roll up an alt to play the way they wish they could play their main. If you want to play a LG knight. Fine...an bandit, fine. A psychopath...fine. But I guess I'm just trying to understand the mindset of having a main that obviously doesn't suit your play style. It's not that I am against multiple accounts...I get bored and like using different characters as well. But this is different. Just seems like a waste of money and time when you could just do what you wanted in the first place by rolling a character that suits you and your goals.
I'm not blaming anybody for anything. I just don't get why someone is going to go through all that trouble to and roll up an alt to play the way they wish they could play their main. If you want to play a LG knight. Fine...an bandit, fine. A psychopath...fine. But I guess I'm just trying to understand the mindset of having a main that obviously doesn't suit your play style. It's not that I am against multiple accounts...I get bored and like using different characters as well. But this is different. Just seems like a waste of money and time when you could just do what you wanted in the first place by rolling a character that suits you and your goals.Sounds Chaotic Neutral to me.If you don't like it talk to Dancey it is all his fault. The moment he decided alignments would not be mechanically equal he ensured that min maxers will select alignment based purely on mechanical advantage.
All we are doing is playing within the mechanical limits imposed on us. Want to complain *points at Dancey*
1) I and my group are eve players we are used to multiple accounts, my household for instance currently has 19 paid Eve accounts
2) I am not here to play a knight or a bandit I am here to play a game of territorial domination and control and to do so successfully
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But I guess I'm just trying to understand the mindset of having a main that obviously doesn't suit your play style. It's not that I am against multiple accounts...I get bored and like using different characters as well. But this is different. Just seems like a waste of money and time when you could just do what you wanted in the first place by rolling a character that suits you and your goals.
Because their goals are to win the settlement domination game at all costs. That means their "mains" are LG with all the best gear and training for when they go to war and take over settlements. Their "alts" are for when they want to do things that are deemed toxic by the game but further their domination goals. Such as controlling territory they can't legally claim or harassing targets when the cost of feuds/wars isn't worth the reward.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm not blaming anybody for anything. I just don't get why someone is going to go through all that trouble to and roll up an alt to play the way they wish they could play their main. If you want to play a LG knight. Fine...an bandit, fine. A psychopath...fine. But I guess I'm just trying to understand the mindset of having a main that obviously doesn't suit your play style. It's not that I am against multiple accounts...I get bored and like using different characters as well. But this is different. Just seems like a waste of money and time when you could just do what you wanted in the first place by rolling a character that suits you and your goals.Sounds Chaotic Neutral to me.If you don't like it talk to Dancey it is all his fault. The moment he decided alignments would not be mechanically equal he ensured that min maxers will select alignment based purely on mechanical advantage.
All we are doing is playing within the mechanical limits imposed on us. Want to complain *points at Dancey*
1) I and my group are eve players we are used to multiple accounts, my household for instance currently has 19 paid Eve accounts
2) I am not here to play a knight or a bandit I am here to play a game of territorial domination and control and to do so successfully
1) I played Eve for 6-7 years.
2) Having 19 paid Eve accounts all at once is probably not something to brag about even in the geekiest of crowds.3) Ok....you want to play a game of domination and control. Why the debate? That type of character could easily be defined by the alignment system as LE, N, LE or maybe a few more. I am not trying to limit the way you play...I just don't know why someone would roll a character with an alignment they had no interest in playing in that alignment?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But I guess I'm just trying to understand the mindset of having a main that obviously doesn't suit your play style. It's not that I am against multiple accounts...I get bored and like using different characters as well. But this is different. Just seems like a waste of money and time when you could just do what you wanted in the first place by rolling a character that suits you and your goals.Because their goals are to win the settlement domination game at all costs. That means their "mains" are LG with all the best gear and training for when they go to war and take over settlements. Their "alts" are for when they want to do things that are deemed toxic by the game but further their domination goals. Such as controlling territory they can't legally claim or harassing targets when the cost of feuds/wars isn't worth the reward.
My understanding, and it could be wrong, is that the only people who are gimped as far as training and/or gear are low-rep people. I don't see how being LG as opposed to LN would affect gear. But I get what you are saying.
I'm not blaming anybody for anything. I just don't get why someone is going to go through all that trouble to and roll up an alt to play the way they wish they could play their main. If you want to play a LG knight. Fine...an bandit, fine. A psychopath...fine. But I guess I'm just trying to understand the mindset of having a main that obviously doesn't suit your play style. It's not that I am against multiple accounts...I get bored and like using different characters as well. But this is different. Just seems like a waste of money and time when you could just do what you wanted in the first place by rolling a character that suits you and your goals.Sounds Chaotic Neutral to me.If you don't like it talk to Dancey it is all his fault. The moment he decided alignments would not be mechanically equal he ensured that min maxers will select alignment based purely on mechanical advantage.
All we are doing is playing within the mechanical limits imposed on us. Want to complain *points at Dancey*
1) I and my group are eve players we are used to multiple accounts, my household for instance currently has 19 paid Eve accounts
2) I am not here to play a knight or a bandit I am here to play a game of territorial domination and control and to do so successfully
1) I played Eve for 6-7 years.
2) Having 19 paid Eve accounts all at once is probably not something to brag about even in the geekiest of crowds.
3) Ok....you want to play a game of domination and control. Why the debate? That type of character could easily be defined by the alignment system as LE, N, LE or maybe a few more. I am not trying to limit the way you play...I just don't know why someone would roll a character with an alignment they had no interest in playing in that alignment?
I said 19 for the household there are 4 of us in that household I was merely making the point that multiple accounts is something we already do and shifting those over doesnt cost us a penny.
As to the alignment why given that I really don't care about alignment would I choose an alignment for myself that starts me with a handicap?
I have absolutely no interest in playing any alignment whatsoever that is what you seem to be failing to grasp
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds Chaotic Neutral to me.If you don't like it talk to Dancey it is all his fault. The moment he decided alignments would not be mechanically equal he ensured that min maxers will select alignment based purely on mechanical advantage.
All we are doing is playing within the mechanical limits imposed on us. Want to complain *points at Dancey*
I'd point out that this is exactly what he wanted to happen. You're being bribed, and the bribe is working.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But I guess I'm just trying to understand the mindset of having a main that obviously doesn't suit your play style. It's not that I am against multiple accounts...I get bored and like using different characters as well. But this is different. Just seems like a waste of money and time when you could just do what you wanted in the first place by rolling a character that suits you and your goals.Because their goals are to win the settlement domination game at all costs. That means their "mains" are LG with all the best gear and training for when they go to war and take over settlements. Their "alts" are for when they want to do things that are deemed toxic by the game but further their domination goals. Such as controlling territory they can't legally claim or harassing targets when the cost of feuds/wars isn't worth the reward.
Alignment in PFO will bear no resemblance to Alignment in Pathfinder TT or Dungeons & Dragons. In PFO it is solely a mechanic to be viewed in terms of which alignment will give the greatest advantages, there will be no impact on how most people will actually play their characters.
I'd point out that this is exactly what he wanted to happen. You're being bribed, and the bribe is working.Sounds Chaotic Neutral to me.If you don't like it talk to Dancey it is all his fault. The moment he decided alignments would not be mechanically equal he ensured that min maxers will select alignment based purely on mechanical advantage.
All we are doing is playing within the mechanical limits imposed on us. Want to complain *points at Dancey*
I have already said on numerous occasions that we would use the mechanics we were given. You won't find me anywhere on these boards asking for extra mechanics to help us out. You will find a couple of occasions where I am arguing against things that would actually benefit us.
We will achieve what we want either by using whatever mechanics we are given or by finding ways around those mechanics no skin of my nose really and I do not see why you think I am succumbing to bribes by doing something I always stated we would do.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd point out that this is exactly what he wanted to happen. You're being bribed, and the bribe is working.
This is not "working as intended", it is "failing as expected". There are obvious work arounds and gaming of the alignment system, and GW knows there is nothing they can do about it. Meta Gaming and Alts defeats almost every system once the player base sets their minds to it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alignment in PFO will bear no resemblance to Alignment in Pathfinder TT or Dungeons & Dragons. In PFO it is solely a mechanic to be viewed in terms of which alignment will give the greatest advantages, there will be no impact on how most people will actually play their characters.
Repeating it often does not make it true. You need to stop stating things that aren't true as if they're absolutes.
Alignment in PFO will bear no resemblance to Alignment in Pathfinder TT or Dungeons & Dragons. In PFO it is solely a mechanic to be viewed in terms of which alignment will give the greatest advantages, there will be no impact on how most people will actually play their characters.Repeating it often does not make it true. You need to stop stating things that aren't true as if they're absolutes.
The only thing we know active alignment currently matters for (when you have joined a player settlement) are paladin and cleric abilities. Other than that all that matters is that your core and active alignments are within one step of a settlement you wish to join.
Apart from those exceptions Bluddwolf is correct according to the information that the devs have currently given
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Alignment in PFO will bear no resemblance to Alignment in Pathfinder TT or Dungeons & Dragons. In PFO it is solely a mechanic to be viewed in terms of which alignment will give the greatest advantages, there will be no impact on how most people will actually play their characters.Repeating it often does not make it true. You need to stop stating things that aren't true as if they're absolutes.The only thing we know active alignment currently matters for (when you have joined a player settlement) are paladin and cleric abilities. Other than that all that matters is that your core and active alignments are within one step of a settlement you wish to join.
Apart from those exceptions Bluddwolf is correct according to the information that the devs have currently given
I'd further add that Ryan Dancey had said, "for most people they will just set their core alignment and then forget it."
The operative word in both Ryan's statement and my previous statement is "most". As Steelwing points out, the only solid corner case is Paladins. Even Clerics will have some flexibility, because Deities allow for several alignments for their worshipers. Monks will likely have to be Lawful, and Druids Neutral, Assassins Evil. It is only the paladin that must be both lawful and Good.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Alignment in PFO will bear no resemblance to Alignment in Pathfinder TT or Dungeons & Dragons. In PFO it is solely a mechanic to be viewed in terms of which alignment will give the greatest advantages, there will be no impact on how most people will actually play their characters.Repeating it often does not make it true. You need to stop stating things that aren't true as if they're absolutes.
Emphases mine. If there is no resemblance, then paladins, clerics, monks, druids, etc. will not have alignment restrictions.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Emphases mine. If there is no resemblance, then paladins, clerics, monks, druids, etc. will not have alignment restrictions.Alignment in PFO will bear no resemblance to Alignment in Pathfinder TT or Dungeons & Dragons. In PFO it is solely a mechanic to be viewed in terms of which alignment will give the greatest advantages, there will be no impact on how most people will actually play their characters.Repeating it often does not make it true. You need to stop stating things that aren't true as if they're absolutes.
From what I understand, the plan us for Core to grant access to training very select skills. Active alignment allows you to slot those skills. There is currently no downside for your core and active to be out of sync with each other. Certainly not one step, and if I recall the debate was if it is even worth it to bother with penalties for being even more out of sync.
It's not really that important for many. I'll pick the core that serves my needs best, and then forget it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
From what I understand, the plan us for Core to grant access to training very select skills. Active alignment allows you to slot those skills. There is currently no downside for your core and active to be out of sync with each other. Certainly not one step, and if I recall the debate was if it is even worth it to bother with penalties for being even more out of sync.
It's not really that important for many. I'll pick the core that serves my needs best, and then forget it.
But in that way, isn't alignment in PFO a whole lot like alignment in PF or D&D? Does a fighter or wizard or rogue in D&D need to really worry about alignment?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well if alignments as a whole are mostly meaningless...I would prefer not to have them. But if that were the case then why call this Pathfinder at all? Alignments are a core concept in D&D and table top Pathfinder. Regardless, I still want to play this, but gosh darn it, I'm just a stickler for things that make sense.
And to me, it doesn't make sense that LG characters should be able to murder just because they own land. I also think if a community is LG and the owners who are trying to circumvent their mains alignment by SADing people or murdering people in the land of their with alts....that community should be penalized with unrest. It just doesn't make sense to me that the lawful good citizens of a settlement would be content with their masters allowing assassins and berserkers run around their lands killing foreigner, trespassers, and minor criminals with impunity. Actually...it's stupid. Most good citizens wouldn't stand for it.
If there are, indeed perks for playing certain alignments...like maybe a faster work pace for their citizens...loyal NPC guards that train up faster...whatever the devs can come up with...then I as a player want being good to have meaning. I want it to be harder than being neutral if it does in fact give a benefit.
At least with a war system...which would still be flawed in that LG characters would be fighting LG characters over material wealth, we can still make sense of it since both sides are notified, and both sides can now fight with no rep hits. It becomes at least a honorable.
As I said ealier....everything that I am saying is balanced on whether or not there is a NRDS or NBSI game mechanic introduced. If their isn't one...I am content with just a simple reputation system where anyone engaged in murder of any type is penalized. But if we are going to introduce mechanics for settlements to pass it's own laws...then it should be restricted in the laws they impose by the founders core alignment. Also, to make sure people aren't circumventing alignments, NPC guards shouldn't be able to be select which of the laws to enforce against only certain individuals. It's either all foreigners are subject to the same laws...or the whole settlement is penalized for not enforcing their own alignment.
I really think this is fair. Like I said...I just want things to make sense. The crowd that I am usually at odds with says they don't mind PVP, that they just want it to be meaningful. That is what I want as well.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@valtorious
Because at the end of the day having a mechanical alignment that mirrors anything even close to accurately is nearly impossible.
A paladin killing someone who mines his node is the result of there only being three possible actions the character can take in the game 1) kill the person to show them there is a consequence for mining your resources 2) Get walked on and let them keep mining your goods 3) SAD them (rob).
2 and 3 ends up that your settlement will get walked on by everyone. If they know all they have to do is hear your character go "you shouldnt do that, thats mine" but doesnt have the teeth to enforce it, you might as well just give up and let people do what they want in your territory.
The issue of people engaging in murder and getting penalties, well they are. killing people who are flagged is not considered murder under the game mechanics.
The basic issue is this: it is a video game, more than that its an MMO. You cannot code moral choices into the game as intent cannot be determined. its one of the failings of transporting an alignment system that depends on players/DMs and replacing people with computers.
I would stop looking at alignment as a moral choice, its a set of mechanics that provide benefits to players and enforces social structures in that your alignment decides what kinds of settlements you can join.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Valotorius, In a game with limited territory, where your group has to fight for their right to hold land, I scarcely see how a LG group as you envision them would be able to cope with the disadvantage of not being able to kill anybody. What mechanical benefit could you possibly give them to make Good a solid choice?
EDIT: I reject the idea that a Good group could enforce laws through fines via SAD instead of killing, because of the way SAD works. It's saying, give this to me or I will kill you. So if you aren't going to kill them, what exactly makes them accept your SAD?
@Valotorius, In a game with limited territory, where your group has to fight for their right to hold land, I scarcely see how a LG group as you envision them would be able to cope with the disadvantage of not being able to kill anybody. What mechanical benefit could you possibly give them to make Good a solid choice?
While this is not meant as any disrespect to Valtorius so apologies if it comes across as such
He is treating this as an extension of D&D or tabletop and not as an mmo.
The two hobbies have some crossover but it is by no means a large one
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Paladins should behave like Paladins, whether the system forces them to do so or not. I get that, I think we all do. Unfortunately the alignment system is not being used as a role playing or even a social device. It is being used as a mechanic to segregate characters into camps. Some of those camps are going to suck by design, and others will have advantages. Because of that fact, alignment will not be thought of or used as it is in TT.