Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

10 days

Caldeathe Baequiannia
Chidar
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Chidar
6. I don't care about politics, I don't want anything to do with company stuff, i just want to pvp.
Unfortunately, this is the specific attitude that the developers are working hard to avoid in game.

"politics and company stuff" are PvP. PvP is not only about people fighting each other with weapons. You are saying you are only interested in a particular bit of PvP that the developers are intent on making sure doesn't make up the bulk of the game. You may never be satisfied with PFO.

ok alf your post is wrong the other part is right.
1. Just wanting to pvp is NOT an 'attitude', its just combat against a player, hence 'player verses player'.
2. The developers are not trying to avoid non-consensual pvp, you should read their pvp mission statement properly. You are a role player right? then consider me a murderer, hope that helps.
3. You want to know my attitude? Ok here is my attitude towards players regarding pvp. I will combat anyone for the challenge, if they are not challenging or surrender (stand still) i cease fighting them. If they are a worthy combatant i might loot them, more often i will leave the husk unsullied.
4. On your point of 'pvp is not all about fighting people with weapons', no sometimes i use words like 'your dead lay down' or 'please fall over this banana skin and play dead' or 'give me your settlement without a fight'. This works for you?
5. It is painfully clear to anyone who knows anything about pvp that you have confused your words or what you are trying to convey. Let me help you:
PvP is tactical combat (fighting stuff), player killing is another term for it.
Politics and company stuff - are strategic stuff / organisational non combat stuff.
I think you have incorrectly generalized your understanding of pvp.
Try reading this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_versus_player

So the bit i may agree with you on is PFO may not be the game for me if they continue to listen to the 'crowd' who know little about pvp or confuse it with something else, and vote this development into a mediocre product. But then again it might be the Dev's know what i have said already, and are trying to strike a balance.

No. My post is not half right, you are not understanding my post.

Your point number 1: I never said PvP is an attitude. The attitude I referenced is thinking that PvP means exactly one thing, which is players fighting with weapons. That is the attitude that Goblinworks is attempting to change for this game. Player versus Player means real people contesting (or, as you prefer, combating) over something they value, whether it is politics, mining or trade rights, or property. Chess is Player versus Player. Monopoly is Player versus Player. Individual people fighting with weapons is player versus player, but will not be the "bulk" of the content, it will be a significant, important, portion of the content.

Your point 2: If I thought of you as a murderer, I'd be calling the police, not debating you on these forums. I "think" you want to play a murderer in a game that has little (not no, just little) room for people that want to play murderers. If you haven't grasped the intent behind the reputation mechanic, then you are grievously misunderstanding the point of this game.

Your point 3: I'm sure that's a perfectly fine attitude to take in fighting other players. It is not remotely relevant to what we're talking about.

Your point 4: No. It still displays a complete misunderstanding of the meaning of Player versus Player in the Pathfinder online context. "I got you to sell me your copper for less than half of what I got for it two minutes later from the guy standing next to you" is as much player versus player as 'your dead lay down'

Your point 5: No. It is actually you who have brought an incorrect, and unacceptable, assumption about what the words "Player versus Player" mean into this sandbox. You simply have not grasped what PFO is trying to accomplish. Wikipedia and it's article on player versus player is not Pathfinder Online. This game will not be primarily about players fighting each other with weapons one-on-one. They will be fighting trade wars, and contesting against each other with siege engines and politicians, and, yes, sometimes small groups or individuals will also fight each other with weapons. And most of it will be non-consensual.

To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Chidar
Holy shazbuttly! Guurzak defending my position! *feints*.
Wow, seriously my opinion of you has greatly shot up.
I'm sorry for you if your opinion of Guurzak wasn't already pretty high. He's one of the best things that could happen to this game.

(edit: technically, that would be the person behind Guurzak. Guurzak itself is a different story)
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Chidar
Decius
Player(s) versus player(s), or PvP, is a type of multiplayer interactive conflict within a game between two or more live participants.

That seems to cover both killing random PC characters and the unreleased settlement warfare modules.
I agree with this 'conflict' - as an expression of a fight of some magnitude whether it is 1v1 or 100v100.

I don't agree that talking politics or company management has anything to do with it. Those strategic things may result in pvp, which is different than actually being pvp.
Chidar
@Caldeathe Baequiannia

Ok you and i are on different planets.
I live on the traditional one, you live on the new 'goblinworks' one. I get it.

Your vision for an end product will be niche. My vision will not.

We can not compare apples with oranges.

Don't feel sorry for me, I am big enough and ugly enough to take my knocks.

I propose a truce to each others posts.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Chidar
@Caldeathe Baequiannia

Ok you and i are on different planets.
I live on the traditional one, you live on the new 'goblinworks' one. I get it.

Your vision for an end product will be niche. My vision will not.

We can not compare apples with oranges.

Don't feel sorry for me, I am big enough and ugly enough to take my knocks.

I propose a truce to each others posts.

Do you get a lot of positive results from insulting people and then saying "but lets agree not to say anything else."?

The intentionally niche product outlined by "planet Goblinworks" several years ago is what people like me gave a million dollars to see developed. Now "traditional people" (Because the notion that leisure games between friends require killing each other on a constant basis has been around for such a long time that it somehow meets the definition of "traditional" while people that want to compete without necessarily killing each other constantly is "from another planet" ) turn up and say "This would be so much better if it was like all those other games that you people don't want to play, so you should just move over and write off your losses or stand still and be quiet while I kill you again. If you're a good victim, I might not even take your stuff 'cause I'm such a good guy."
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Chidar
Do you get a lot of positive results from insulting people and then saying "but lets agree not to say anything else."?

The intentionally niche product outlined by "planet Goblinworks" several years ago is what people like me gave a million dollars to see developed. Now "traditional people" (Because the notion that leisure games between friends require killing each other on a constant basis has been around for such a long time that it somehow meets the definition of "traditional" ) turn up and say "This would be so much better if it was like all those other games that you people don't want to play,5o you should just move over and write off your losses or stand still and be quiet while I kill you again. If you're a good victim, I might not even take your stuff 'cause I'm such a good guy."

I take it no truce then?

No idea you would feel insulted. My intention was to identify we are of two differing camps with respect to our views. That is all. I still have no idea which bit has upset you.

My understanding was you as you stated yourself are backing a product focused on a vision by 'goblinworks', which as you explained in an earlier post is not intended to be traditional but specific to the crowd forge community. I think I got that right. Who presently are a niche peoples. There is nothing bad about having an independent vision for a specific group of people. Which is what I think you are representing. This is not an insult.

I am here with a more 'traditional' view on pvp (as this is the subject of this discussion). You are reading far more into it.
You express yourself with a disdain for pvp. Like you don't want it in this game. Do tell if this is incorrect.
Your paraphrasing is a little awkward but i do get your point. My views are an apposing threat to your view of the game development.

I must however correct you on one thing, you have misquoted me:
"This would be so much better if it was like all those other games that you people don't want to play,5o you should just
move over and write off your losses". I have never once said this, and i never ever would say it.

If pvp'ers went down this road non-pvp'ers (you?) would quit the game. That is definitely not our intention. If this happened there would be a population decline. Then where would the predators be! We could get to the point of not being able to say "If you're a good victim, I might not even take your stuff 'cause I'm such a good guy". Which would end non consensual pvp.smile
Thod-Theodum
There is a lot of miscommunication happening here. People post one think - other people read something different.

Example - I followed Chidars link with the Wikipedia explanation of PvP. So why was there a discussion about what PvP is and if politics is part of it or not?

Because I use the more encompassing defintion: PvP can be broadly used to describe any game, or aspect of a game, where players compete against each other
while Chidar uses the more narrow one:
In computer role-playing games, PvP is sometimes called player killing or PKing.

Neither of us is right or wrong - but by using the same term for something different we miscommunicate.

There is more of this going on. All I can say - I tried to help you Chidar to enjoy the game more. I seem to fail and it results in the opposite. So best if I leave it as that.
Thod/Theodum are the OOC/IC leaders of the Emerald Lodge - a neutral settlement in the center of the mal that tries to the first to explore the Emerald Spire - should that part of the game ever become available. We have a strong in game and out of game relationship with the Pathfinder Society.
We welcome both hard core players as well as casual players with or without tabletop experience. We have a strong group in Europe and are slowly expanding into the US. We are predominately PvE as our neutral political stance means that we tend to use PvP only in self-defence. We are not anti-PVP - but expect limited PvP opportunity with us.
Chidar
Thod
There is a lot of miscommunication happening here. People post one think - other people read something different.

Example - I followed Chidars link with the Wikipedia explanation of PvP. So why was there a discussion about what PvP is and if politics is part of it or not?

Because I use the more encompassing defintion: PvP can be broadly used to describe any game, or aspect of a game, where players compete against each other
while Chidar uses the more narrow one:
In computer role-playing games, PvP is sometimes called player killing or PKing.

Neither of us is right or wrong - but by using the same term for something different we miscommunicate.

There is more of this going on. All I can say - I tried to help you Chidar to enjoy the game more. I seem to fail and it results in the opposite. So best if I leave it as that.
Ok Thod, good idea, I am also stopping now, its getting us tied up in knots. Not good for morale.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
If your intention was for that to be an innocuous separation of us into two roughly equal groups, it failed, and I can only presume you are not fluent in English, which is not conveyed in your other communications. There is zero ambiguity in claiming the high ground by labeling yourself "traditional" and someone else as from another planet.

Further, by no stretch of imagination has players killing players been around long enough to fall under any definition of "traditional." Contests for entertainment between people have been going on for thousands of before the notion of "PvP" ever appeared on Wikipedia. There is nothing traditional about EVE or WOW or any other MMO. They are recent innovations that are still barely acceptable in polite conversation to a huge segment of civilization. The even smaller segment that accepts people in such games deliberately killing each other for entertainment is probably not larger than the percentage of Romans 2,000 years ago that would have labelled the throwing of Christians to Lions as a traditional way to deal with them.

Setting aside the definition you insist on for PvP, you are mistaken in thinking I have expressed a disdain for PvP. Certainly not in your presence. There was a time in the past when I thought any players killing players was too much. I changed my position on that a long time ago. I do, however, proudly maintain an absolute disdain for random killing of other players' characters. I have even, in this conversation, said that there is probably a place, albeit a very small place, for someone that wants to play a murderer. Murderers are rare in the universe, and if handled well, could add some terrific colour to the game. What have been telling you, again, and again, is that there won't be room for very many murderers in this game, and that a person who wants to play one, should not be upset by mechanics that make it hard for them to do it often. There will be bandits, there will be murderers, there will be generals. There is limited room for all of those things, and the game will not tolerate people being killed casually on a daily basis. If you expect to be able to log in daily and kill two or three other player's characters, you will have an uphill battle unless you get into a company with an active feud or war underway.

I don't think you understand me at all. For some background, I have killed six characters since the game went EE, and have been killed by other players 14 times that I recall. One of those deaths bothered me more than I should have let it, because I was followed out of a starter town by a group, and it caused me to fail in a trust I'd taken on for other people, costing one of them a new player pack and two of them their role-quest packs. Most of the deaths and kills have been on a character that only one or two people would ever associate with me. Mostly over towers, more often than not, not initiated by me.

I did not misquote you where you reference, because the quote did not say, nor intentionally imply, it was you. It was an amalgam of the expressed opinions of several people, who want killing frequently to be a way to win. What I wrote is that "traditional people" turn up and say [those things in aggregate]. You are merely one of those "traditional" people who is telling me that my definition of PvP is wrong but that if you like how I die you'll let me keep my stuff.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
Caldeathe Baequiannia
If you'd like to have a truce, I'm all for it.
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post