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
harneloot
Can "unflagged Bart" follow me around, like a henchman, and heal and buff me whenever I decide to defend a holding, or attack a holding, or attack another player?

Just as we currently use rep hits when uninvolved characters do that kind of thing during a PvP window, we'd definitely like to discourage/prevent such behavior by unflagged characters. We'd rather not completely block them from interacting that way with their flagged friends when not engaged in PvP, but we can probably put some limits on it, like not allowing unflagged characters to heal/buff flagged characters in the presence of an unfriendly flagged character, or when damaged recently by a player character.

harneloot
Seriously, besides the idiotic Forever War, when has there EVER IN THE WHOLE LIFE OF THE GAME been a problem with PvP? And, if it is an *image* problem (as you seemed to have indicated), then changing the game's raison d'etre seems to be a very poor/heavy handed way to go about fixing that.

For the players who are open to an occasional PvP encounter, we've largely met our goal of making it possible for those least interested in it to minimize their risks. We're also pretty successful at reassuring players that they can largely avoid PvP, to the point that they likely won't engage in any at all. However, it's not just an image problem when it comes to those who simply won't play the game if they can't do so meaningfully without completely avoiding any risk of PvP. There's too little of the game available without going to monster hexes or joining a settlement, each of which opens you to at least some PvP risk, no matter how small. If we can integrate them into the game, with enough restrictions to protect the PvP side of the game, that's a win.
Bob
harneloot
Shields are not armor in PFO so they should not be able to be enchanted with Armor Only enchantments. If you want to do so, then you need to reevaluate the entire shield attack tree. I have PvP'd against a high level shield user and I can tell you first hand they do not need any more advantage smile

I tend to call them armor enchantments, but technically their enchant groups include Armor, Neck, Ring, and (in 2 cases) Helm.

In terms of balance, the shield attacks do look reasonably powerful, and though technically attacks, they offer some interesting defensive results compare to other weapon choices. Aside from the PvE bugs for some of those effects, they probably don't need much in terms of major advantages, but could certainly use more differentiation for flavor.

The balance could also get a little interesting when enchanting is taken into account. Since Block doesn't actually do any damage, you might not get as much mileage out of putting several weapon enchantments on a shield as you would putting them on other weapons, so it might have a disadvantage there. I'd have to compare the attack/enchantment combinations for shields with those from a couple other weapons to see whether giving them some other enchantment possibilities makes things more or less balanced overall.
Bob
Edam
I just realised you can already enchant armor, neck and two rings so my analysis is flawed. The existing slots would give you 3+2+1+1 or seven of nine (Voyager anyone? if you wanted to devote all those slots to resistances. Adding a shield would allow 1 more (due to doubling up) so eight of nine.

The sneaky exception that would make it possible to cover all nine relevant resistances with shields added in is that Resist Sonic and Resist Psychic can be put on helms as well. On the other hand, that also opens the door to putting these enchantments on some alternate equipment, so there's a good chance we'd eventually have provided a path to covering them all anyway. At least putting all the effects in the same channel keeps them from doubling up.
Bob
Edam
Many other games have pop up screens that appear while the game loads that give little bits of lore and some helpful hints (usually taken from the FAQ) about gameplay. That could work here.

Certainly possible with a little codework for the user interface, and it's always good to have something going on during longer load times.
Bob
Bringslite
I belong to company X which does PVP but I simply never "Flag Up". During holding/outpost conflict, can my character count towards "take over counter points" in the positive or negative (either way)?

You wouldn't count positively or negatively for PvP-based capture games (Raids, Takeovers), but you would count against NPC Invasions, since they're basically PvE. We're doing the exact same restriction on Free Trial Mode characters.

Bringslite
Can I, (not flagged) just stand in the way annoyingly with my 3 non-flagged brothers?

Ideally we'd want a mechanic to keep players from doing that, but at the very least it sounds like taking advantage of a mechanical shortcoming during development, and thus a ToS violation.

Bringslite
Can I help loot a raided holding more swiftly if in the raiding company/party?

This sounds like something we can more easily put a mechanical block on, and probably want to do so for husks in general. We could probably say that any husk you can only loot from slowly, because you don't fully own it, requires being flagged for PvP.

Bringslite
Can I help unload stolen mules? Stuff like that etc…

We can probably restrict non-PvP characters from claiming stolen mules relatively easily, but there'd likely be some loopholes, like having a PvP character claim the mule, then grab everything, then trade things off to non-PvP characters. Basically, it's hard to track those items once they're off the mule, so we might also need to look into further restrictions on mules in general. For example, we could put a timer on a stolen mule, during which they can't be unloaded at all unless reclaimed by the original owner.

Bringslite
As "Unflagged Bart" I certainly won't be able to attract the attention of hex guards will I?

As Unflagged Bart, we'd probably want to block you from attacking or being attacked by guards during PvP windows. I wouldn't be surprised if that would in turn cause some other weird issues, so this probably opens a can of worms that we'd need to sort through before tackling it.


Bob
Harad Navar
It occurs to me that a true bandit settlement would attack anyone, flagged or not, because they are bandits. Would true bandits care about reputation loss if it would not affect their use of their own settlement (or did I missed a game mechanic to the contrary)?

We have a variety of mechanics in mind to make life a little harder on settlements that support characters with low reputations, but our assumption was that there would usually be at least one such settlement on the map. Our larger assumption was that even those settlements would make some effort to police their members a bit. After all, neighboring powers may not be able to convince individual bandits to reform, but they can go after the settlement supporting those bandits.
Bob
NightmareSr
Out of the 4 sections mentioned, it seems Flag for PvP is the most controversial and that makes sense. Will these items be prioritized in a way that the other items can be worked and implemented sooner or is there a danger of Flag for PvP debates to delay the other improvements? Just curious here and very excited about some of the proposed features.

Yes, for the moment we're prioritizing these features in the order they're listed, so we've already begun work on Free Trial Mode. The caveat there is that a lot of the Onboarding feature doesn't involve code, and the other features require far more code work than design work, so I'll probably be able to fit in a little work on the website and such throughout the process.
Bob
Edam
Temp protection is actually fire and cold but I get the point.

Dangit, glanced over at the wrong row in the spreadsheet, meant Contingency Protection from one row down. Fixed that in my original answer, now nobody will ever know my shame.

Edam
Slightly off-topic - but have you considered allowing the various armor protections to also target shields (with no stacking obviously)? It would go someway towards making shields more useful.

That's an interesting question. I think letting shields have armor enchantments would make it possible to have a little bit of every resistance, where now you have to accept at least one resistance that's not getting boosted. However, it seems like shield users are generally using heavier armors, and thus getting less energy resistance out of the deal, so maybe that's all right. I'll file a feature request to at least consider it. Assuming it seems reasonably balanced, it's a pretty easy change.
Bob
Smeltbane
Holdings are not safe login locations, you may well login to find a bunch of raiding ninja's tromping on your head.

If you make holdings a shrine, rather than just a login spawn, it is going to seriously mess with feuds as friendly sides will simply respawn after death at the holding they are defending. Also, how could feuding even work at all if shrines are meant to be PvP free zones and you have a shrine right there at the holding you want to attack.

Outposts would work better.

Things do get complicated very fast when picking login/respawn points. Holding shrines might need to go inactive during PvP windows, or possibly just when enemies are nearby. We'll definitely take time to talk through all that when we're closer to making some login/spawn changes.
Bob
The enchantments don't look at the item tier when calculating their effects, so there wouldn't be a direct loss from putting a T2 enchantment on a T3 item. The usual downside is just opportunity cost, since T3 enchantments are generally better than T2 enchantments, so you're not getting as much of a bonus as you could. For example, Superior Weaver (bonus +25 to +50) is clearly better than Greater Weaver (bonus +11 to +26), and Contingency Protection (resist acid and sonic) is clearly better than Resist Acid (identical resistance bonus numbers, but only to acid).

However, it's not as clear that T3 weapon enchantments are always better than T2 weapon enchantments, since they can rarely be compared directly. The best weapon enchantment for you is the one you can take the most advantage of, regardless of tier, but you still want to put it on the highest tier weapon you can use. We've made some attempt to match the tier of each weapon enchantment to the likelihood that characters wielding that tier of weapon will find it most useful, but that's based on very rough generalizations. If you've got attack feats that match the Fire keyword, then you probably want a Flaming weapon, regardless of tier.