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.

All posts created by Bob

Hobson Fiffledown
Will smallholdings be given any love during the player housing additions?

We're looking into them a bit, mostly to see if we can get any long-planned work done on them while we happen to be looking at premium items.
Stilachio Thrax
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
Edit: And even better. Please have Small Holdings return to owner's vaults if the door is not touched once every seven days.

So much this^. And allow settlement leaders to pack up any smallholding from a non-settlement member in a settlement controlled hex (it returns to owners inventory).

Hexes are owned by companies, not settlements, so we do let the owning company's leaders remove unwanted smallholdings.

The biggest problem past that are smallholdings in uncontrollable hexes, and we do plan to introduce upkeep to help with that situation. Not sure if we'll also make you tag in occasionally, or figure out some other way to make it more likely that smallholdings will get torn down less actively used.
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
Would you need to change up the original DI Plan layout if all of its parts were working?

We'd probably still need to look at simplifying the DI system a bit, if only because it's a pretty detailed plan and some of those details are DI-specific and would take a long time to implement. That said, it's certainly easier to hook DI to systems that already work, so it's certainly possible that we'd make different decisions if some of those systems were already done, or if some of those systems were at least on the roadmap.
Bringslite-Dominion Soldier
I suggest that you consider placing overall support level in the hands of one building such as the keep and include a number of other criteria such as number of bannered holdings or upkeep costs of some type.

That's an interesting way to do it, though we might want to put some additional pre-requisites on upgrading the keep so that you can't just upgrade that to +5 and ignore the rest of the structures. Perhaps you'd have to have a certain amount of DI banked in other structures before upgrading to each plus.
You are a Troll
Any plan in implementing player choice in settlement layouts as was originally planned?

We still plan to do that eventually, but that's going to be a pretty big project and couldn't fit in the current roadmap.
WxCougar of KOTC
Pretty much what Bringslite said based on the old readings. I am curious how support will work when different buildings could be at different levels. Especially for people who have abilities not found at the Settlement.

That's something we're giving a lot of thought to. It would actually be a fair amount of work for us to break support apart from one overall support level to individual support levels for each family of feats, and we don't want to do that work if it would drive players apart too much. At the same time, we want to make sure that deciding which buildings to upgrade is a meaningful choice, and direct benefits (such as support) to different types of characters is a great way to do that. When we start planning out EE 15 in more detail, we'll figure out the best way to balance out those design goals.
While I am not big on Player Housing in any game, I must ask:
Why is Player Housing premium as a whole? It places (price and politics -wise) a high barrier of entry on player housing and in doing so stomps on small micro-transaction type things.

Or at least that's what it seems like to me.

What about having Settlement owned apartment buildings that settlement members can purchase apartments from with in-game currency. And then buy all sorts of premium benefits into that apartment slot. From silly twinkling curtains to personal crafting personnel.

Or maybe I have misunderstood something. But to me Pathfinder online seems like a game where most players would prefer having easy time claiming a small personal space in the world.

Ultimately we want to provide a good mix of larger and smaller premium items. The player housing we're working on now makes good use of existing assets and existing code, so it's something we were able to squeeze into the roadmap. Plus, we'd already set aside that lower part of player settlements for player housing and placed building slots there, so this will hopefully result in player settlements looking a bit more fleshed out than they do when the only option that can currently be built there is a smallholding.
Stilachio Thrax
A player should not be able to place housing in a settlement they are not a member of, an ally of, or on a whitelist that specifically allows it. Otherwise, what is the point of having settlement restrictions on anything?

Sometimes we use the "let any player do X but then let the real owner undo X" mechanic when we aren't certain the owners would always want to prevent X but don't have time to implement a full permissions scheme yet. We almost always have to include the undo part anyway, since players might have a falling out or ownership might change hands. When that seems sufficient, we sometimes save more detailed permissions for later just so we can work on other priorities before then.

All that said, I was partially being non-committal there because I wasn't 100% sure whether non-members can currently place smallholdings in settlements, and we're leveraging that same code for player housing. Turns out they can't, so we'll likely leave it that way for housing, at least for now.
The question arises as to whether you can place these company based buildings in someone else's town. In particular one where you are blacklisted or have become blacklisted after placing the structure. Can the other settlement remove it ? Can they restrict functionality, for example preventing a mule door working or close down the vaults?

At the very least, settlements will be able to tear down any unwelcome housing, and we may require that you're a member of the settlement to place it. Currently they're being treated much like smallholdings, so they have similar restrictions.
We haven't worked out the exact details for Development Indexes yet. We do plan on basing it on what's been written about it before, including the 3 different indexes and the ability to add more DI by adding Infrastructure buildings, but we'll probably have to simplify things a bit from the original plans. We also still have to figure out how this all interacts with Settlement Level, since that entire concept was really just intended as a temporary thing while waiting for upgradable structures. Getting that all figured out will be one of the first tasks when we start working on EE 15.