Looking for more active discussion? Join our Discord at https://discord.gg/x2s7fY6
Best Of
Re: Pathfinder RPG
His DM isn't telling other people not to play Pathfinder, or at least that wasn't said anywhere I saw. He's running the rules he likes. By your logic any campaign not played in several rulesets simultaneously is 'ruling with an iron fist', including your own, presumably. Pathfinder to me personally felt like the stripped down, munchkin implied version of all the editions. Instant gratification throughout. It's the Honda Accord with back seats removed for weight reduction. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not for everyone... and that's okay!
Furtum
0
Re: Pathfinder RPG
It's like 3.5 DnD but BETTER. They tried to fill in all the empty levels in classes with EXCITING NEW FEATURES, a lot of stuff is streamlined and more balanced, and they have a genuinely awesome default setting.
Serrice
1
Re: Roles and Reasons
What? No way.
The heroic position isn't awkward at all. There's bad shit going down and you're opposed to it and you're gonna fight it and stop it. There is nothing awkward about that.
Where it gets awkward is when you're the nominal villain who learns that that your part in this event is going to be siding with the Chaotic Evil Slavers who are clearly going to betray you as soon as it is convenient and you have to come up with some way to justify such an obviously terrible decision.
The light has it easy. If the darkside wants to do something, you don't let them do it because it's probably evil. You can pretty much take that to the bank. The darkies, on the other hand, are in a position where they're sitting around going "Okay. This evil mage, Traitor McTreachery, aka Betrayer the Untrue, aka Liar von Fierypants... he has a plot to destroy all civilization and bring about the end of the world. And we've got to help him with it. How are we going to justify this one?"
The heroic position isn't awkward at all. There's bad shit going down and you're opposed to it and you're gonna fight it and stop it. There is nothing awkward about that.
Where it gets awkward is when you're the nominal villain who learns that that your part in this event is going to be siding with the Chaotic Evil Slavers who are clearly going to betray you as soon as it is convenient and you have to come up with some way to justify such an obviously terrible decision.
The light has it easy. If the darkside wants to do something, you don't let them do it because it's probably evil. You can pretty much take that to the bank. The darkies, on the other hand, are in a position where they're sitting around going "Okay. This evil mage, Traitor McTreachery, aka Betrayer the Untrue, aka Liar von Fierypants... he has a plot to destroy all civilization and bring about the end of the world. And we've got to help him with it. How are we going to justify this one?"
Vaskar
1
Re: Roles and Reasons
I've also done both, and someone in between and I agree 100% that it is a lot more challenging to play the good guy. You've got a game that's stacked against you, because of course it is, Midnight Age says it all, you know?Hahahaha. No way.
Villainy is almost always harder in games like this because the good guys always have it easy. You're a good guy so you take the good guy option, and it pays off for you in the end because that's how the event has to end if the game is going to continue. Yeah, sure, maybe it seems rough but everybody knows how things are going to go down.
Being a villain in these games is always harder because you almost always get handed the short end of the stick. You're handed the most cliche stereotypical evil goal and you're expected to run with it until its inevitable failure. You're never going to get ultimate power, the world is never going to end, they're always going to betray you, and you're never going to destroy the good guys. But you're expected to pick up that crappy storyline and run with it during every single event. You are going to ally with the slavers, burn down the orphanage, and you're going to side with the guy trying to bring about the apocalypse, despite knowing damn well that it will fail, you will be betrayed, and that the good guys will squeeze out the win at the last minute.
And you will do all that again and again and again, because without you there is no event. You're basically Skeletor jobbing for He-Man every week because there's no cartoon if you back out of it.
Vaskar
7
Re: If you could change anything about shops in Aetolia, what would it be?
If I could change anything about shops, it would be limiting how many shops a single player can own. As it stands between Bloodloch and Spinesreach, a few people have anywhere from 2-4 shops each. Add in Esterport and some people have 3-5 shops.
Letting a single person own multiple shops stops people who want to be a shop owner from owning a shop, let alone even letting a new person TRY shopkeeping.
And for all you crafters who would get upset about this: Stop crafting 500 pairs of bras/panties as if their going out of style. Cycle through your designs.
Letting a single person own multiple shops stops people who want to be a shop owner from owning a shop, let alone even letting a new person TRY shopkeeping.
And for all you crafters who would get upset about this: Stop crafting 500 pairs of bras/panties as if their going out of style. Cycle through your designs.
Zsadist
5
Re: AFK
Because not nearly enough people are that conscientious (and some are even pretty honest about that). A player activated flag has already come up several times in this thread (and other threads I dug through) and it's just not something that is going to work. The people who get how awkward and frustrating it can be to talk to someone who may or may not even be there, seem to already go out of their way to not look like they might be at their keyboard when they aren't, going by several posts in here.
I did cover what the passive flag system might look like on the last page, including some of the things that could keep you "active". I do think it's important to at least start to think about how it might actually work and look in practice.
The reason the current situation is unacceptable, is because it has a lot of ambiguity built in unintentionally. With a passive flag, if I talk to you when you are NOT gray, all it really means is that if you don't answer, and I give you another shot a bit later, I can and should take it as you not wanting to talk to me - instead of wondering if it is that, or if you are AFK, and having to give you more chances later, and making sure I wait long enough to do so... and wondering if I'm being super bothersome the entire time, or if you are just seriously AFK.
To be clear, this could be something as simple as "Hey Coryn, what's up"? If I do that when I log in, and sometimes you are there, and sometimes you are seriously AFK, even if you and I are friends, I am going to start to think "meh". It's also sort of crappy if you know I am pretty reliably NOT AFK. Because when you try to interact with me, you know I am going to be there when you say "Hey Jules, have you seen my new bug collection?", and I will probably reply almost immediately. See how shitty that is? That is why I call the guys who are pretty reliably not hard core idling "suckers". It is. It's the sucker position. It gets worse though. If I DO ignore someone, I have to actually deal with it. They probably KNOW I am ignoring them. There is no ambiguity because my prior behavior always makes my intentions pretty clear. It actually creates a situation where the smart thing to do (habitually AFK, at least sometimes, but no one can really know when you are or aren't) is pure poison for the game community.
I did cover what the passive flag system might look like on the last page, including some of the things that could keep you "active". I do think it's important to at least start to think about how it might actually work and look in practice.
The reason the current situation is unacceptable, is because it has a lot of ambiguity built in unintentionally. With a passive flag, if I talk to you when you are NOT gray, all it really means is that if you don't answer, and I give you another shot a bit later, I can and should take it as you not wanting to talk to me - instead of wondering if it is that, or if you are AFK, and having to give you more chances later, and making sure I wait long enough to do so... and wondering if I'm being super bothersome the entire time, or if you are just seriously AFK.
To be clear, this could be something as simple as "Hey Coryn, what's up"? If I do that when I log in, and sometimes you are there, and sometimes you are seriously AFK, even if you and I are friends, I am going to start to think "meh". It's also sort of crappy if you know I am pretty reliably NOT AFK. Because when you try to interact with me, you know I am going to be there when you say "Hey Jules, have you seen my new bug collection?", and I will probably reply almost immediately. See how shitty that is? That is why I call the guys who are pretty reliably not hard core idling "suckers". It is. It's the sucker position. It gets worse though. If I DO ignore someone, I have to actually deal with it. They probably KNOW I am ignoring them. There is no ambiguity because my prior behavior always makes my intentions pretty clear. It actually creates a situation where the smart thing to do (habitually AFK, at least sometimes, but no one can really know when you are or aren't) is pure poison for the game community.
Jules
1
Re: If you could change anything about shops in Aetolia, what would it be?
If I could change anything about shops I would make it to where you automatically forfeited your shop after 1 week of it no longer carrying items that it says it carries when you check the directory. >.>
Draiman
0
Re: AFK
If someone's marked afk, and you need or want them, send a tell or leave a message. They respond when they get back or ignore you. If some newbie goes up to them, they know they're afk and probably won't get a response and it won't be a mystery why if they poke at them. Same for anyone who's not familiar with said person marked afk.
If you're marked afk often or frequently, make it known to your crowd and those around you to poke you as they're inclined and you'll get back immediately since you're right at your comp or when you return from what you're doing, provided you don't want to miss out on the myriad of intense RP that totally happens always in this game.
That's it.
If you're marked afk often or frequently, make it known to your crowd and those around you to poke you as they're inclined and you'll get back immediately since you're right at your comp or when you return from what you're doing, provided you don't want to miss out on the myriad of intense RP that totally happens always in this game.
That's it.
Ingram
14
