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

Bob
This thread and at least one other post elsewhere veered pretty heavily into personal comments, so I deleted a bunch of posts here and made a small edit elsewhere. Some of the deleted posts weren't all that problematic on their own, but were difficult to separate out, so I apologize for any over-correction.
Bob
For those of you looking to turn in event items for prizes, send email to customer.support@pathfinderonline.com to make arrangements. In general, the easiest way to handle things will be for you to put all the event items in a shared vault (company or settlement, secure or not, but can't be a personal/party vault) somewhere so I can join your company and exchange the items for prizes in that vault. If you don't have a convenient vault for doing that, or at least not one secure enough from other players, we can arrange to make the exchange in-game through a trade.
Bob
Flari-Merchant
Might be very interesting and possibly even subscriber attractive if the alignments actually had some "meat" on their bones. I'm NOT talking about depictions of torture or baby killing for "evil" types. If Evil types could seek out and bust escalations of "good" NPCs and both could attract NPC guard/soldier types more representative of alignment. Spells and crafted items tied to aligment and actually system enforced, etc…

Let Evil play their natural bad side a lil bit and let Good be their more direct opposition.

Just an idea but might be a great way to make the game more exciting and open up more definition to play styles. Would be kinda unique too and might attract more TT players, if done well.
We definitely have longer-term plans to incorporate alignment into the gameplay in meaningful ways. Adding it into a few of the enchantments was a first step, hopefully we can find other convenient places to make more use of it.

Technically, I think I could make some spells and feats alignment-dependent without any additional code, though not all effects/feats can currently handle conditionals. Those feats would effectively get rebalanced as a result, with whatever effect becomes alignment-dependent getting a boost because it doesn't always apply. Probably work out great for those characters whose feat choices matched their alignment story well (and that of their enemies), less so for those characters with less consistent choices. One possibility would be to just create new feats with alignment dependencies, but there are probably several existing feats where alignment would make sense to include. Another would be to just create a feat variant that's automatically learned whenever the original feat is, giving players a choice of which version to use, but that does increase the ability to bypass alignment whenever it's inconvenient, making it a less interesting/ongoing choice. Definitely worth considering though.
Bob
NightmareSr
I think it could add to new players trying the game if there was more info available to them on how often PvP actually occurs. Maybe with some published stats or just with less emphasis on the open world PvP function in the player guide. (Not to mention that guide is horribly outdated and I don't think it requires any coding from Cole to update it) smile
That is in fact one of the things I'm hoping to work on over the next few months. PvP risk is a little tricky because I can't really keep updating that info as it shifts dynamically in-game, but I think the current text doesn't even take into account some of the mechanical changes we've already made to PvP risk since it was written, like Security Settings and making Thornkeep completely safe.
Bob
Flari-Merchant
Is coming across a character pulling a mule along and killing the character and mule to see whats in there a "random" gank?
Is coming across a character alone and killing her to see what is in backpack inventory a "random" gank?

Is it just the word "gank" that is the problem?
Part of the problem is that you'd get different answers depending on who you're talking to. For a fair number of players, it doesn't really matter whether or not a particular kill would qualify as "ganking," they just don't want to be killed by other players unless they've specifically accepted that risk at that moment. Our goal is to let them play as much as possible, while still acknowledging that they can't do everything without flagging for PvP. Fortunately, there are a lot of activities available in Pathfinder Online that would only need reasonable restrictions to be allowed without flagging.
Bob
Harad Navar
Suppose when a player creates a character they can choose non-PvP or PvP as an option? The non-PvP character would spawn in Fort Inevitable (which would require FI to be put into game). This would make that character under protection of the Hell Knights, making the roving bands of Hell Knight bounty hunters a more believable part of the game story.
I suspect there will always be players who change their minds and want to switch, but it wouldn't hurt to make an initial decision upfront that could be changed later.
Bob
Harad Navar
Even though the coding load may be prohibitive, what if the penalty for killing non-PvP flagged characters would be to become a wanted criminal with random roving bands of Hell Knights attacking on sight. If they kill the PC in question, the PC husk is collected by the Hell Knights with a percentage of the value (or loot) given as a wergild to the killed character.

May not satisfy most players who want no chance of PvP. But they might appreciate the payback.

That particular idea would definitely be a lot of code work, but I do think that payback mechanisms in general can go a long way toward making players who are at least somewhat accepting of PvP more willing to flag for it more often, and we do want players to be available for PvP as much as possible. I suspect anything like that wouldn't be part of the initial implementation, but would be some polish we could look into afterward.
Bob
Rynnik
I can't stand MMOs with pvp opt in flags as it destroys the only truly interesting element of a virtual world, the unpredictable interaction with other players.
We haven't completely finalized the exact way Flag for PvP would work, and it's probably not worth a deep-dive until we're closer to working on it, but a couple quick points that might make you feel better about it.

First, one option we've been talking about is the ability to permanently flag yourself for PvP, so for those who do enjoy that unpredictability, it's not something you'd necessarily have to do manually each time you log in or every time you want to start a fight.

Second, we do still plan on putting restrictions on players who don't flag for PvP, though we haven't decided on the exact restrictions. The more an action or its benefits feels connected to Territorial PvP or risky behaviors, the more likely that we'll require explicitly flagging for PvP. In particular, gathering/looting in unfriendly territory is likely to require flagging for PvP. We may also restrict influence based on being flagged, since influence is used to claim territory and start feuds. This all still requires a lot more thought, don't take any of it as written, but do know that any unflagged character you run into will be restricting themselves in some way in order to avoid PvP.

At its core, the real question is whether you'd rather run into X other characters each session, with Y of them unflagged, or X - Y (or less) characters each session. The ability to remain unflagged really is focused on those players who won't play the game at all if there's any risk of PvP, and we'd like to make it possible for those players to enjoy a reasonably-complete form of the game wherever doing so doesn't interfere with the enjoyment of those players more willing to engage in PvP. Where it does interfere, we'll put in the necessary restrictions.
Bob
Azure_Zero
Some of use would like to have the escalations pop into hexes other then the settlement's hex, since a settlement's hex could change.
The original idea was that this feature would be used to attract escalations near your enemies as part of territorial warfare. Kind of funny that now the idea tends to be attracting the escalation nearby in order to loot it. Regardless, we certainly wouldn't have to restrict launches to only assigned hexes, provided the rules were posted well enough in advance.

Azure_Zero
And I also put fore the idea that calling in a escalation could also be put into a home hex to shake things up from the normal stagnant state.
That's a little more problematic because the home hexes are supposed to be dependable places to find their home mobs. In particular, all the current kill quests point to home hexes and say you can always go to those hexes to find those mobs. At minimum, we'd want to reward those kill quests a bit to allow for the possibility of other escalations running there.
Bob
The Eternal Balance
I also wonder what the mysterious Effort Bonus column in the Official Spreadsheets next to the different Outpost types refers to?
The long-term plan is for characters to assign themselves to outposts somehow and then base Effort on the skills of the assigned characters. That's pretty far out in our plans, and probably needs some rethinking. For now, we just assign a set Effort value to all outposts.