Ugh, in retrospect, that's a terrible thread title.
Having read through all of the stuff at Goblinworks, I have my concerns about the amount of player control described in the paragraph below:
"Pathfinder Online's robust trading system puts players in control of the world's economy with player-created items, consumables, fortifications, and settlements. Character-controlled settlements can grow into full-fledged kingdoms that compete for resources as they seek to become the dominant force in the land, raising vast armies to hold their territory against the depredations of monstrous creatures, NPC factions, and other player characters."
I'm all for players actively participating in the future of the game world, but being able to eventually establish full-fledged kingdoms fills me with apprehension. I realize, of course, that pen-and-paper Golarion and Pathfinder Online are separate continuities, but that being said, I'm not sure I'd want to play in a game world based on Golarion where there are more player-created nations than canonical ones.
That's why I'm wondering what sort of attention the established factions will be receiving. I've never done Pathfinder Society, but from what I understand, even though the players are all Pathfinders, their allegiances play a large part in motivating their adventures and determining what sorts of rewards they receive, etc.
If the River Kingdoms has (*have?) a whole mess of unclaimed territory that's up for players to grab, then why not keep it more "in setting" by having players allied with factions (Red Mantis Assassins, Andoran Eagle Knights, Chelish imperialists, the Arcanamirium, Pathfinder Society, the Whispering Way, etc.) act in the interest of their organization? That way they could function as developer-controlled "guilds" that maintain the verisimilitude of the established Golarion setting while still catering to MMO players who want guild allegiance. For that matter, maybe players could establish their own guilds within these factions, where a requirement of guild membership is faction membership as well?
There could be faction-exclusive quests and rewards/items, but then also quests/items that are open to anyone (maybe even others that require certain character alignments, were that even to be included).
Furthermore, such attention to faction would also allow players to feel invested in Golarion as a whole and not just the River Kingdoms. Besides, I'd much rather adventure in a settlement controlled by the Eagle Knights than some guy (theoretically) named Drizzz'ztDoUrden86.
Haven't thought it over much but it seems to me player built communities should be city states rather then massive nations. That way the they could still be involved in wars and trade and whatever while still leaving the established factions as the major players on the international stage. Then you could maybe have city states pledge their loyalty to a nation or have them fully independent. I dunno. /shrug
Goblin Squad Member
|
So along with factions from the Faction guide there's also the Pathfinder Society factions out there as well. Personally I can see some factions sponsoring towns, Cheliax, Quadira, Aspis Consortium, Prophets of Kalistrade and so on. Even the Hellknights could start a new order and have a citadel there. So the question remains...How would these towns be based? Faction sponsored then left to grow by number of faction members, more members more services? or like the conan mmo and is there going to be only a few available spots on the map you can make towns and other factions can ride in and besiege your town to take it and remake it. Cause if so I can see some factions growing huge, Pathfinders and Aspis Consortium, and dominating the landscape. Would religious factions be a secondary factor in the towns? Good town only having good temples and vise versa. Just something to mull around, along with the other billion or so ideas your probably trying to work out.