Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Nortar View Post
    This also is a good example of how subjective perception of good and evil could be.
    I, for example, see no differences between 2 and 3.
    In both cases it's a LN act of enforcing the law by punishing criminals.
    And punishment is severe enough to ensure there won't be any more bandits, you just explain it in different words.

    In order to be "clearly evil", it should to be something like that:
    "Even though these bandits are obviously just starving peasants, I'll kill them all just because I'm bored today."

    So, if there is no difference in outcome, I would be glad to stick to alightment I want my main-character to have, by being able to see marks in the dialog.
    well... as far as subjective perception of good and evil, I see Grifta's number 3 as LN as well.
    But Nortar's 'clearly evil' option is more CN or CE in my opinion.

    A LE option might be "Hunt them down! My rule is not to be questioned. They will be put on stakes for the public to be stoned!"

  2. #12
    Senior Member Pathfinder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Stolen Lands
    Posts
    651
    I really believe that because these changes are kind of small if you ARE playing your char aligment (not what YOU want to do in game but what your char really would do in the game there is an difference) all will work out just fine.

    I mean: if you as an player want to get every possible item and kill every possible "monster" then there will be some penalties. But if you try your best to play that neutral good ranger who listen for bandit or even goblin kids and women who ask for mercy... On the other hand that lawfull evil fellow who want to get every coin and item would maybe let them run but without any clothes and taking pack mules with him while that chaotic evil person would just slay everyone, including pack mules and burn them while laughing, sleep nearby that huge fire and when there are only ashes left she would go and look more to kill and burn.

    I think bit harder is to play medium ground. I actually did once had (in Runequest rpg around late 80's) true neutral more or less thief thug "you pay I do" to play with. I used in most decicions an coin. "Ah, road have 2 possible ways to go, left or right? Well, let's flip a coin". True I bet I did take some from "Joker" (batman's arch enemy in Tim Burton movie acted by jack nicholson). So if someone would live and I would be mercifull.. ..coin decide it. That char even died because of it. Coin decide to stay and fight against too big horde of angry pesants. He would easily run and survive but that would be me, not "true neutral mentally bit questionable char I made" :)

    Allso one thing to remember: only at first your char is like you plan him/her to be. But things are not carved in stone.

    Let's say my young fellow "Red", true neutral young ranger from small town have spear, sword, small shield and some luck. He tumble in his first adventure with his few (let's say 3) friends to some fearsome beast.. ..wild boar. He try to use his spear, happen to put it against his leg and pointy head against boar. IF he truly get lucky and he manage to be hero of the day and single handed slay that scary beast who run using all it speed and mass to that pointy edge of the spear killing itself. It seem our valley have new hero who protect small town and is becoming "good". His friends like him, after all he might have even save some of they lives against that boar. Young Red will keep using that spear long time, that will become his main weapon and he will keep telling that story long time

    But on the other hand, if he happen to have bad luck. Spear miss, wild boar go around him and kill half of party, he manage to kill it using his sword and small shield. Shamed and listening (or atleast thinking to hear) rest of the group blame he will never use spear again. He start using his sword and small shield, maybe even try and take out every wild boar in valley while moving toward evil without realizing it even. He become more of hermit, quit job as protecting small city, make petty crimes to get more beer, spend most of his days drunk avoiding his only remain "friend" (who become his new nemesis after some time) and so on...
    Last edited by Pathfinder; 07-20-2017 at 08:04 AM.
    "Road to the man's heart go through the chest"

  3. #13
    Member Skull-ogk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Stellenbosch, South Africa
    Posts
    52
    So far the only times I've replied to an NPC and it meant something other than I intended was playing a malkavian in Bloodlines, in my defense: they had really cryptic lines. (Which is why I loved the clan).

    I think neverwinter had the occasional "how is that chaotic" moments, but never enough to influence my alignment away from what I was striving for.

    From what I hear, this will be the case here as well. I love that your alignment will be influenced by how you make decisions. As all good RPG games should be.

  4. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    30
    Great idea. In Pathfinder a GM is required to tell you if the action you're about to take will change your alignment, so I think the game needs to have a warning system of sorts as well.

  5. #15
    Senior Member Wraith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by howard035 View Post
    Great idea. In Pathfinder a GM is required to tell you if the action you're about to take will change your alignment, so I think the game needs to have a warning system of sorts as well.
    In PFS, if it would drop your alignment to evil they are required to tell you. That is specific to PFS only.
    [I]Vivat Grendel![/I]

  6. #16
    Member Nortar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Frazzlerunning View Post
    well... as far as subjective perception of good and evil, I see Grifta's number 3 as LN as well.
    But Nortar's 'clearly evil' option is more CN or CE in my opinion.

    A LE option might be "Hunt them down! My rule is not to be questioned. They will be put on stakes for the public to be stoned!"
    Aye, I agree. I should have changed "coz I bored" part for the line to not sound chaotic.
    Your example is much better.

    But still it further adds to the main point - description, or at least perception of description, can be subjective.
    And because of this, there should be an option to show alightment tags for dialog lines.

    Some people want to play it by how their heart tells and see where it would leads them,
    some people want to stick to a chosen role and follow a determined course,
    and sometimes it's a mix of both.

    If I want to see the plot for, say a LE tyrant, who rules with an iron (and perhaps spiked) fist,
    I will care not as much about particular wording, as about the general spirit of my actions - i.e. stick to alightment.

    On the other hand, if I want to do right things throughout the game, guided only by my very own inner moral compass,
    then I will choose responses regardless of their alightment.

    So I fully support the original poster.
    Please give us an option to show/hide alightment tags as we like, insterad of forcing it one way or another.

  7. #17
    Senior Member Grifta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Victoria, BC, Canada
    Posts
    324
    What is alignment conversation:
    I agree that my examples weren't perfect and still leave room for interpretation, but we're getting to the point where we're using words to communicate concepts. Until humans figure out direct mental communication, then you have to accept that the writers can do their best, and we will have to figure out their understanding of this, or you can enable the bracketed (this is a LE action) statement.

    This conversation is hard enough with a group of 6 that hasn't played together before, and we're talking about 18,351+ players, and a dozen GMs. I'm not saying that this isn't a worthwhile conversation, but there will be limits to the solution.

    OP "This dialogue will shift alignment in an unspecified way":
    Sounds good. With good writing, we should be able to figure out their interpretation of alignment pretty quickly.

    Also, just saying...

  8. #18
    Senior Member Pathfinder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Stolen Lands
    Posts
    651
    BTW in many games there are not REALLY change to be evil. Sure you can steal stuff but in long run if you were nice, polite, evil or bad at the end there is NO real difference in big picture.

    So some ideas:
    - IF in the start you end up in frontier station where is shop, stores and so on.
    Let's say you decide to sell everything you have except one sword, then use that sword and kill shop keeper and everyone in that little place, rob all you sold back and all what they have in there, set it on fire and let others think some bandits did it (true, in some point)

    What will happen next?
    When you deal with some more monsters, go on with story and try to get back in that store you notise that oops.. ..they all ARE dead but allso there are some soldiers inside. You can not get in, they tell you how they are investigating what happen there.

    So in short term you lose a place where to trade and sell stuff. Not really THAT bad, after all you DID get plenty of stuff, even some magical items and so on.

    Later you have your own city and are ruler. Now you notise that still that place is under different ruler, it is military base and it might well be that if they are not happy with you.. ..they can easily attack you or atleast prevent all trade from around there. Not so good..

    Allso when you did sold some of these items you get before it might be that there will be diplomat who was related to that shop owned. Who either see some of these items (if you use them) or hear from other shop keepers (who you sold these items) where they get them and come back to you. That easily complicate things and can even lead to war.

    Now let's say you did not do that but instead help that shop keeper and did some quests he might have had for you. Later he might become tax payer and you rule that area where that frontier shop is. Keep your soldiers there and so on. That person might even become your friend or one of the ministers / helpers to rule your kingdom.

    So I am saying it is good to have options. Even stupid ones. Because let's face it. Just reading news papers we do have people out there who do most idiotic things. So if someone want to be as bad and evil as they want to, why not? Game most likely will be short for them but I hope it is possible to make some of choices like that.

    Or even in short idea: you and your party are in hay barn, surrounded by enemies. You decide to use mighty old fireball at your feet and what happen? Hay burn, enemies burn, you burn, barn burn. You all die and barn collapse top of you. End of game. Shocking? Maybe, easy to make (even just putting text options like we see in some of videos example trying to help gnome with horses and river) yes. Making game more interesting and fun. I think so yes.

    Who ever told us that what ever you do, even if you play as bad as possible and make as terrible choices as possible you WILL get 100% game experience and see everything because game do not let you "die"? (Just reload and keep trying that one fight untill you do it right, after complaining how game "was too easy")

    In older RPG (in p&p but allso in computer) there were options to just.. ..die. That was part of the game, no just "I try every option and choose what give most profit" but if you choose to do stupid thing game end so start new one.

    I believe it would be more interesting and fun to take it back for real (c)rpg games. I do realize that in big AAA games there are tests and developers look how most players choose. Based on these things games end up having only few options, more things are based on player reaction speed (reflexes) instead of "random" roll of an die and game is done more of "just keep clicking and text go away so you can keep on playing and killing all what move".

    But this is kickstarter so we can try to make something different. It do not have to mean "really hard core, one wrong step and you die" but more of "your own choices matter. If you just keep clickin "1" and press mouse something what you did not want or expect most likely will happen". It allso mean that "wow, I have played this game 10 times all all the times this have been REALLY different and here are plenty of options to try not just variety of one thing. One time game last for 100 hour, another only 5min untill I died and game ended because I answered rudely in start from person who was supposed to send me in this epic quest". OR maybe when you encounter thas big bad bandit leader he give you option to join him. If you agree game will end. You are now part of these bandits. Good for you, start a new game if you want different ending.
    Last edited by Pathfinder; 07-22-2017 at 12:32 PM.
    "Road to the man's heart go through the chest"

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Pathfinder View Post
    But this is kickstarter so we can try to make something different. It do not have to mean "really hard core, one wrong step and you die" but more of "your own choices matter. If you just keep clickin "1" and press mouse something what you did not want or expect most likely will happen". It allso mean that "wow, I have played this game 10 times all all the times this have been REALLY different and here are plenty of options to try not just variety of one thing. One time game last for 100 hour, another only 5min untill I died and game ended because I answered rudely in start from person who was supposed to send me in this epic quest". OR maybe when you encounter thas big bad bandit leader he give you option to join him. If you agree game will end. You are now part of these bandits. Good for you, start a new game if you want different ending.
    Hey if that's the way you like to play more power to ya. And really it's easy to do, just don't reload after something bad happens or turn off auto-save, or even click on Ironman (if that's an option) so you have no choice but accept what happens. But not everyone likes that kind of hardcore experience. For some gaming is much more casual and they're more interested in following the story. Hardcore gaming can and does get frustrating. If you screw up at a major point two thirds of the way through not everyone is going to go "Oh rats! Well I'll just start over." Not everyone is a Dark Souls or Nioh player. Hardcore is much more of a niche then a mainstream and I really hope that if there's a hardcore side to Kingmaker its optional.

  10. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by Grifta View Post
    This is one of those things that every good group will discuss before getting to deep into a campaign. You, the DM, and the other players, all have to agree what it means to be "good" or "evil". Same with "lawful" or "chaotic". Basically this forum is that conversation.

    I'm trying to remember if it was Planescape Torment, or Temple of Elemental Evil that has a great set of dialogue options around this. Things along the lines of:
    1. I pledge to help you.
    2. (lie) I pledge to help you.
    3. I'm not touching that with my collapsible pole. (requires collapsible pole)
    4. Sod off.

    This is an easy example of what the OP was talking about, but basically, the ideal situation would be that each dialogue option had enough to explain the thought behind it.

    "Bandits are stealing my crops"
    1. Kill them all! Their thievery will cause starvation and untold suffering to the peasants.
    2. Kill them all! If an example is not set, then banditry may escalate.
    3. Kill them all! Show the people that my rule is not to be questioned.

    3 options with the same result, but fairly clear intentions. 1 clearly has "good intention", 3 clearly "evil", 2 is a little unclear, maybe an LN?


    The writers have tons of free time, right? ;P
    i like this. this is in the same vain as Jade Empire, where the true path of the closed fist was gaining strength. so if you refused to give a poor person money, it wasn't because you are mustache-twistingly evil, it is because you believe they must strive to get stronger through their own power. as they said, "the devil is in the details."

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •