Forums » News and Announcements

Added 2 Dev Diaries

    • 610 posts
    October 4, 2019 6:34 PM PDT

    So, obviously I'm focusing on this thread because a lot of intelligent questions were present and also some very keen answers from regular people, not devs.  I think that's cool, although I am not dissing other threads.  I happen to have more free time today and maybe over the weekend (although you are never truly free making one of these games).  Plus I do have M:TG tonight.  Again, don’t really plan on the weekend but can at least one of you post something I just can’t not respond to.  Perhaps one of you being clever enough will draw me back in. Back in the days, when I was just as famous as infamous (and that still may be true), we did get to the point where some crazy intelligent people participated (heck, maybe they are already here).  Regardless, I’m not sure they were less gifted elsewhere or were truly genius and intelligent all the way around – you know what I mean.  Anyway, wow, those guys challenged us. Some issues they brought up made it into the game and I’m very happy they did.  Quick note: I don’t want to read through code snippets and such here – if you have some uber algorithm or other something that can’t really be explained in English -- describe them the best you can, and I will ask the programming team, even though they are crazy busy, to try and respond.  No promises how fast I can do that, because everyone is pushing so hard on PF.  Lastly, please, rudeness, attacks, general meanness, basically being a ‘troll’ and trying to create problems – just don’t.  And if you do, I’ll make sure not only that I by no means respond to you, but that you’ll be banned from the boards forever and, quite possibly, from playing the game.  Forever.  Oooh, big threats from Brad.  Yeah, true, but only because I really want this to work. I likely will become very busy again as early as next week and therefore respond more slowly then. So, let’s do this.

    This community has grown, not just in size, but in variety in terms of people.  Again, I don't have time to answer all of the threads all of the time.  Linda is increasing her load, or so I've heard.  The Community Team is doing their best with a very small team.  Anyway, we have a smarter and more mature community than, say, 1-2 years ago.  I really don't mean that as an insult btw.  We've also attracted more skeptics.  Perhaps they were just lurking before.  Perhaps they realize that, sadly, Pantheon is the only game that comes close to what they're looking for.  There may have been others... I won't say competition... but others within the bubble which sits within MMOs in general.  That bubble, assuming I'm right, that Pantheon is within, tells the public via FB or this site that Pantheon is pretty much defined by our tenets, FAQ, etc.  The skeptic is looking at the other indie studios working on MMOs and he or she is trying to rediscover where they want to spend a lot of their time once they have access to the games, or at least most of them.  Sadly, they may have to compromise – there’s simply not a lot of us.  But I want to pose a challenge for all of us:  can we take (realistically, not silly) the stronger comments and desires of some of these people and accommodate them.  No, I’m not talking about making a total system for one person – that would be, well, gross mismanagement and probably dereliction of duty as an officer of the company.  No, I’m talking about ideas, tweaks, adjustments, simple changes to hopefully accommodate even more player types.  Don’t just think of yourselves, but others as well.  If you respond, but I don’t care about other players then 1. You almost for certain are not compatible with Pantheon (a HIGHLY social game by design), as much as it pains me to say.  But consider 2. I bet you, that if you throw that desire, playstyle, mojo, whatever you call it on the shelf for a while, and then contribute to this ‘think tank’, sooner than later you’ll realize that you do want a multiplayer game, even a co-op one where you really need to make friends.  Oh, and do keep in mind Alternate Ruleset Servers – they’re really the answer for someone who likes the core of Pantheon but would rather play in a PvP setting, or an RP setting, or in a style that does sit upon the game neatly but that we never thought of and would both be cool and, potentially, reach an even broader audience. 

    The skeptic who is starting to be more active in our forums, well, most of them are great because they're asking questions, some of which are really making us think.  And that's what we really want out of a message board anyway.  If it's just a bunch of fans speculating about some high-level concept (shall my unicorn be white or black, or perhaps in-between?) or wondering what the first expansion will look like, and so on – you get it, you’ve been reading it – it’s nice but we also need areas where we can dig deep.  And then with the other posts just telling us that we're doing awesome, keep up the great work, we believe in what you are doing... those kinds of comments are actually great.  They help encourage us and they validate what we're doing.  And sometimes, when you're swamped, have a nearing deadline, etc., they can really keep you going.  But, and please no offense meant, as awesome as that support is, and it really is, leave that to other threads as well.  No, I won’t ban you forever like I would do the other guy if you broke this rule (once).

    Message boards mature along with the game making forward progress.  I think it's safe to say we're not where I just described above.  We're somewhere else, and that somewhere is populated by more people who have serious questions, concerns, etc. I used the term Skeptic and I think it's mostly a good term -- if you have another let me now.  Skeptics can range from people who are simply smart and are asking questions we haven't answered yet or wondering about a minor or major system that we haven’t revealed much about (yet).  On the other extreme, and I really don't see many here -- they prefer to occupy these gloomy fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) ecosystems and feed off each other. Those people, btw, will be returning to their gloomy eco-system if I must.  So don’t be that guy.  The middle ground Skeptic is one who was drawn here because he or she reads the webpage, goes through the FAQ, etc. and finds that most but not all how we've described Pantheon to-date gels with the MMORPG he is looking for.  Again, some indies sharing our bubble have unfortunately gone by the wayside.  I'll say this, Start Ups are hard, really hard.  Better than the publisher deals developers had to accept 10, 15, 20 years ago?  Yes, startups are still not that bad.  But anyway, they're here and they like a lot of what they see, but they also have concerns and doubts and that's not just fine, it's welcome.  Please be nice to all these people.  Remember this is the Pantheon community, and community is paramount to Pantheon.  It's gotta work here and then it has to migrate to the game when the game is ready.

    Anyway, I just ran through a decently long series of questions, some skeptical, most well thought out.  I answered the best I could.  If you haven't yet, do it!  It's just one post up from here :)

    As I said, I don't have time to read this complete thread, though I browsed it enough to pick it (sorry everyone else).  Again, other than the questions/concerns one message above, I haven't addressed anything else yet.

    What I would ask is that someone who cares about this thread to take on the task of summarizing the top or key questions and then giving me a reader’s digest version.  I'll happily take those and wiz through them the best that I can.  Usually there is at least one if not more people who really enjoy helping us compile information, make spreadsheets, etc.  We’d hire somebody like that if we didn’t run lean and mean like we do – we honestly have no ‘fat’ here.  If you’re a VR person, you are someone who fits neatly into what we are working on right now and into the future.

    In choosing, please leave out the obviously silly or obscene ones.  Let's get talking about real issues, areas of concern, what you guys feel you need to know at this point, questions about PF and where we're at (although I did address this with a decent detail level 1 post above), questions about alpha and beta and why we chose to do things pre-alpha, alpha, and then beta.  Or, similarly, why did we choose to first build a solid, working MMO? Or why does it make sense now to layer Pantheon-specific system and content on top of that foundation we already worked on so hard. Or, related to that line of thinking, what is taking so long?  We know your team is remote so communication must always be worked on, keeping things clear to each other and trying to keep the right people depending on the task, get together and form a squad, totally focused on one task, small or large.

    Anyway, I think by now all of you understand where I'm coming from and what I'd like to do.  A digest would make things so much easier.  And then the plan is to visit other threads in, say, 1-2 weeks from now (oh no, you got a date from me, sort of), sticking to the deep ones, or the one with some good skepticism, and certainly the one that shows maturity, the ability to dialog not monolog.  The more intellectual ones (should I say erudite ones? ha!).  

    Is it mean and discriminatory to look for these kinds of threads and there try to address questions, especially if I get a digest?  Yes, it is mean and not fair, much like life.  It’s the best I can do right now – I can’t monitor and then sometimes even contribute to more than one thread.  That said if you never hear about the threads I'm on, perhaps ignorance is bliss.  But really, even those people will hear about this or that thread and migrate over to take a look-see.  They’ll probably learn a lot and more quickly than those of us contributing now, because the thread will be over.  And I think that would be absolutely great.

    -Brad (in one of his shorter, but probably not nearly short enough, message board thread intros) (I'm lying)

    ps. please don't 1. try to get a date out of me for anything 2. try to pressure me into revealing more than that is ok. 3. Commit to something I cannot, myself being a big softy.

         I know, rules suck, but these will make an even better environment where not only you feel more at ease, but so do I.  Lastly, for real, everything you've heard now, the depth depending upon your interst level, even if you have been following like a hawk.  Even then there are things that don't fall under #2 above that haven't been asked, or at least I haven't seen them.  My hope is that we find some of these and can talk about stuff that really isn't talked about here or elsewhere as it relates to Pantheon. It would be amazing to blaze a new trail related to something only recently brought up (to the best of our knoeledge) and to enjoy that trail, and to talk about things that should or could become part of Pantheon, given of course sufficient time, resources, and bank account.  Worst case, it goes into an expansion.  Hows that for making the community part of the process, eh?


    This post was edited by Aradune at October 4, 2019 6:44 PM PDT
    • 610 posts
    October 4, 2019 6:49 PM PDT

    Hokanu said:

    Cheers Brad, the proof of your passion is clearly laid out in the way you speak mate, it is great to hear your thoughts like that.  Looking forward to the next reveal

    Thanks mate -- I type similarly like I speak, long, oftentimes taking far too much time to make a point, interupting a lot, not because I'm rude but because I just thought of something cool and if I don't say it now, I'll most likely forget it. I use a lot of words.  My vocab isn't bad, but most often what I'm trying to say could be done many times smaller.  I am blessed to have on the team people who can help, especially Ben Dean, who somehow understand me and as Producer can relay my thoughts to the directors.  And then when it comes to something writtten that is critical, or needs to be in a certain layout or format -- well, Ben is there to the rescue again.  He somehow reduces and edits my thoughts such that when I read his edited version I'm almost always like "yeah, that's exactly what I was trying to say!".


    This post was edited by Aradune at October 4, 2019 6:49 PM PDT
    • 1412 posts
    October 4, 2019 11:59 PM PDT

    Aradune said:

     

    What I would ask is that someone who cares about this thread to take on the task of summarizing the top or key questions and then giving me a reader’s digest version.  I'll happily take those and wiz through them the best that I can.  Usually, there is at least one if not more people who really enjoy helping us compile information, make spreadsheets, etc.  We’d hire somebody like that if we didn’t run lean and mean like we do – we honestly have no ‘fat’ here.  If you’re a VR person, you are someone who fits neatly into what we are working on right now and into the future.

     

    Challenge accepted.  I (and I am sure others) will do our best to gather the major areas of concern and repost them here for you.

     

    Starting the list here based on recent conversations.  I will try and add to this every day based on what I read in these forums, in the VIP discord, and in the unofficial discord.

    1) General Challenge Level - People are concerned about whether gameplay will truly be challenging throughout the lifetime of the game, or whether that challenge will fade as players learn the ins and outs of Pantheon and devise tactics to bypass or minimize risk.  How can Pantheon ensure that even the best-prepared player is still met with an appropriate level of tactical challenge as they play?

     

    2) Multi-boxing - The community has long debated multiboxing and whether it is good or bad for the game.  With some classes having heavy utility aspects such as buffs or teleports, there is concern that many players will maintain a second account solely to provide these services for themselves when they're playing or to enable themselves to more easily solo content with their main character, and that this will detract from the social aspect of gameplay.  While many players favor restricting multiboxing, there are also many players who enjoy playing that way.  Has the team given thought to how to handle this when the game launches?

    3) Balancing contested content with exclusive content - As you know this has been a hotly debated topic among the community.  One of the big concerns that many supporters have is whether content will be designed such that competing with others for kills is a common occurrence, or whether that type of competition will be limited to more rare and special things.  At the same time, many people also are concerned that the pendulum might swing too far in the other direction as well, and achievements won't feel as meaningful.  How is the team designing the dungeons and zones we'll adventure in to ensure that some content is contested without introducing too many bottlenecks that pit players against each other?

    4) Race Identity and Distinctiveness - The community continues to debate the merits of the current race/class matrix that's published on the website.  Many supporters believe that the matrix should be adjusted slightly by giving a few more options to the races that don't have many, but also by reducing the number of options that races like humans have - which would potentially lead to race choice mattering more in character creation.  There's also concern about race choice mattering less and less as a character progresses through the game, whether due to the faction system or something else.  Has the team thought about how to keep race choice, home cities, and racial cultures very meaningful for players as they progress?

    5) Class Diversity and Meaningful Choice - Overall, people are generally happy with the class definitions as they've been shared, although there will always be disagreement on the details.  However, many of us are concerned that there won't be very many meaningful choices within the classes themselves.  While very few people want to see a talent tree system akin to WoW, many supporters would like to see some diversity within classes as well - where for example one dire lord may operate differently from another dire lord (and still be effective).  Has the team thought about how this will play out as players progress their characters and are there any methods you're considering (AA, specializations, or something else) that might help with this?

    (10/5 AM edit:  Adding a few more below this point)

     

    6) Meaningful travel and a large world vs. Accessibility - There are concerns among the community that the implementation of group ports as the primary method of fast travel could potentially have negative consequences over time - namely, the creation of a large number of characters for the sole purpose of being personal taxis, and the rise of a culture where obtaining a teleport is viewed as a requirement by players whenever someone has to travel.  Given the goal you've expressed of supporting a 2-hour play session, how does the team envision balancing between keeping travel meaningful in the world as the average level of players increases and as the game matures?  (Note:  Dorotea also asked about travel in her reply below.)

    7) Ability to have meaningful experiences without a group - While many supporters are looking forward to the emphasis on group-oriented gameplay there is also concern that sometimes people will either be unable to group for some reason (RL interruptions, etc) or simply want some "alone time" while still being able to experience the game they enjoy.  How can Pantheon provide meaningful and engaging experiences for players in those situations without sacrificing its focus on group content?  (Note:  Dorotea also asked about solo play in her reply below.)

    8) Value and utility of consumable items (potions, etc) - In many current MMOs, consumable items are viewed as a requirement for high-level gameplay, and players often feel like they are required to go out and grind cash or work up a crafting skill solely for the purpose of supplying themselves with these items.  As a result, many supporters would like to de-emphasize consumable items in Pantheon, or potentially consign those items solely to out-of-combat utility effects.  However, there are many other supporters who feel that consumable items should be useful during combat situations, though not to the point of being a requirement for every encounter.  What does the right balance look like and how will Pantheon handle these types of items to achieve that balance?

    9) Kill credit, content denial, and tactics such as "zerging" encounters - You spoke to this some already in your blog post about Instancing, but many supporters are still very concerned about how this will work out, especially for higher-level contested encounters (whether group or raid).  There are many in the community who feel that while the idea of the encounter "escaping" in the face of a vastly superior force makes roleplay sense, the behavior could be exploited as a griefing tool.  Likewise, there's also concern that in those situations you have an entire group or raid full of players who now don't get to do the thing they were there for, just because they brought a few people too many.  There's also concern about locking encounters, whether through a first-to-engage tag or because of a quest, preventing other players from experiencing those encounters.  Most of us understand that this is a balancing act and the system may never be perfect, but could you speak more about how the team is approaching building content with these potential issues in mind?  (Note:  Dorotea also asked about kill credit in her reply below.)

    10) Climates and making the environment matter, long-term - Many of us are very excited about the climate system in Pantheon.  However, as they have been described to us in the newsletters, they seem very much like a keying system in that once you have acquired the appropriate Glyphs, you essentially negate the effects of the climate.  If that's the case then it simply becomes another hurdle players have to clear to access content freely, and the environmental effects cease to matter as soon as that hurdle is cleared.  What will the team be doing to ensure that the environment stays meaningful even when players are walking around with full sets of high-end Glyphs?

    11) Progeny - Everyone wants to know more about progeny, and how it will be implemented, and whether it will enable things such as access to nonstandard race/class confirmations.  We have heard about the general concept for years but the team has never released more information about it.  Is there anything you can share about progeny, even if only to get community feedback?

    12) The interconnectedness of the world and economy - Many supporters are concerned about how the game economy will function, and whether it will be able to avoid some of the social and economic pitfalls that we have seen in other MMOs.  You have previously talked about the concept of regional markets as a step towards this, and Ceythos explained the concept further in his recent Developer Roundtable.  However, the community is still concerned (and somewhat divided) about whether Pantheon's approach will be innovative enough to really make a difference.  With the understanding that this is a HUGE topic, and encompasses several systems and aspects of the game, can you talk more about some of the goals the team is working towards here, or some of the pitfalls that you've seen in previous MMOs that you really want to avoid in Pantheon?  (Note:  Dorotea asked about mail, banks, and trading in her reply below - I'm lumping all of that into a single topic because it's all related)

    I think I've captured most of the major topic areas on this list but I could very easily have missed or forgotten some.  If that's the case I'm sure other posters will add them for me :)

    PS:  I didn't bring up housing because you have said in the past that it would likely be an expansion feature - but as you can see from Dorotea's reply it's definitely on people's minds.


    This post was edited by Nephele at October 5, 2019 8:00 AM PDT
    • 106 posts
    October 5, 2019 1:15 AM PDT

    Love the new dev diary addition and the time spent responding here Aradune the transparency is paramount, have fun at M:TG!!


    This post was edited by Grime at October 5, 2019 1:21 AM PDT
    • 153 posts
    October 5, 2019 5:08 AM PDT

    "No, I’m talking about ideas, tweaks, adjustments, simple changes to hopefully accommodate even more player types."

     

    I am not necessarily opposed to this statement. However, I do remember hearing a while back that VR was designing Pantheon for a niche player base. I really liked that mindset.

    Am I conflating two separate ideas or has VR's mindset changed? If so, how will incorporating "new ideas, tweaks and adjusments" prolong development or change the core identity of this game, if at all?

    Lastly, I encourage change and new forward thinking ideas to make a better game and to be more inclusive. But not at the cost that it waters down the game so much that I don't recognize what I pledged for.

     

    I wish I had a productive idea to add to the conversation!

     

    Thanks for your candor Brad, sincerely appreciated!

     


    This post was edited by WarKnight at October 5, 2019 7:58 AM PDT
    • 2500 posts
    October 5, 2019 6:42 AM PDT

    I agree with the points Nephele put in the summary of important points. I will raise some more.

    1. To what extent should Pantheon seek to limit undesirable player conduct such as griefing, and to what extent should this be left to the community to self-police. Can community self-policing work if guilds or other groups of players form that do "bad" things but are internally self-sufficient so that they need not care about the reaction of others. How can policing by VR or its representatives be done in an effective manner without it taking too many resources. Can volunteer "guides" carefully monitored by VR personnel be used to help. If so what functions can validly be filled by "guides" without too much risk of abuse. There is *always* a risk that the "bad" people will eagerly volunteer to get more power to grief others. Can "guides" even be given such limited powers as to suspend access to chat temporarily while reporting the perceived abuse to VR for official determination. Such as blocking a goldspammer (they are rather easy to recognize after all and if a "guide" misuses this power it is probably deliberate calling for sanctions against the "guide". ) Failure to mention specific conduct as "bad" other than goldspamming is entirely deliberate - we do not all agree.

    2. To what extent should solo play be provided for. Clearly this is secondary to group play and few if any people feel that playing solo should generate levels of experience or loot comparable to group content. Otherwise people have no great incentive to group. On the other hand, most of us probably feel that there should be some things that a player should be able to do if he or she only has an hour to play, or expects many interruptions, or just is not in the mood to be social that day. Developing specific content for solo players, as in quest lines, is quite likely unfeasible or undesirable or both after early levels. Should solo play consist primarily of going to areas that the character is overleveled for and killing enemies designed for groups at-level? This will take no developer effort - a plus. It will make it harder for people at-level to do the content as intended - a minus to some a plus to those that like maximum competition. Should MOBs that are soloable at level be placed relatively near towns or other "civilized" locations so that a player with 30 minutes on-line can go out and kill a dozen or two of them - getting some gain for his or her time in Pantheon and not interfering with content designed for groups. At least one Dungeons and Dragons type game in development that also focuses on group play intends to go that route to give soloers some reason to log on.

    3. To what extent if at all should fast and convenient travel be provided for. Should there be ways of traveling rapidly to an area one has gone to before. Does this make the world too small or does it reduce tedium. What if there is a travel stone as in Vanguard and one has to "tag" it on 10 different days in order to teleport there. What about intercontinental travel. Instantaneous or slow boat ride with possible attack by pirates or sea monsters. If fast travel to adventuring areas - or from them - makes the world too small - does the same apply to quick travel between starting areas so that players can group with friends of other races, but still have to get to the action the slow way. Importantly - what limits need to be placed on player teleportation or summoning abilities so that the world is not made too small. Is it fair that the world be large and difficult - but only for those that can't get a druid or mage to move them around.

    4. Buying and selling. Should this be all player-driven using whatever forms of chat the game provides? Such as standing around in a tunnel yelling out offers to buy and sell. What some call the bazaar approach. Should there be a broker or auction house that is worldwide. Should there be regional markets? 

    5. Mail. Should it be instant or slow. Should it be regional - mail from one spot controlled by a faction or its friends to another spot controlled by such - but no mail from a location within its territories to its blood enemies or to spots that the faction has never even *heard* of. Or is this too much player inconvenience for the sake of realisim or having a large world.

    6. Banking. Should it be regional or worldwide. Should there be shared storage for all characters on an account (or designated friends akin to housing permisiions in other games). Should a character have to visit the branch where money or items are deposited to get them - no magical access to all items in any bank in the world? If access to items is limited should deposited cash be more freely available by letter-of-credit type devices.

    7. Housing when this is added (if it is not there at release). Should it be "real world" which necessarily requires large housing areas scattered all over the world, with likely competition for the most desirable spots? Or should it be instanced. The community is not of one mind on this but there is *more* support for instancing here than for any other purpose.

    8. Who gets credit for killing a mob - either for purposes of doing a quest or in terms of loot. Is it the person or group who pulls it. Is it the person or group that does the most damage. This has been hotly debated.  What about sharing? Does giving credit to anyone that "tags" a mob make the game too easy and generate too many resources? On the other hand does giving credit to only one person or group encourage cutthroat competition and outright griefing especially if a high level comes into a low level area and kills mobs quickly and in job-lots. What about shared credit for any person or group doing at least 25% of the damage? Does this solve any problems or does it just have the disadvantages of all of the other systems rolled into one. What credit is given for killing a mob you severely overlevel - a "gray" mob as many games put it. If you get no xp or loot is it too hard to spend any productive use of solo time (see above). Or accomplish things you had bypassed earlier. On the other hand if you *do* get xp or loot is that an encouragement for high levels to dominate low level zones making life very difficult for starting players. Do we want a new player's first experience to be waiting an hour to be able to kill a wolf because level 50s can generate real in-game money by doing it since they can do it so *fast*.


    This post was edited by dorotea at October 5, 2019 7:01 AM PDT
    • 3153 posts
    October 5, 2019 7:51 AM PDT

    Aradune said:

    ps. please don't 1. try to get a date out of me for anything 2. try to pressure me into revealing more than that is ok. 3. Commit to something I cannot, myself being a big softy.

    I know, rules suck, but these will make an even better environment where not only you feel more at ease, but so do I.  Lastly, for real, everything you've heard now, the depth depending upon your interst level, even if you have been following like a hawk.  Even then there are things that don't fall under #2 above that haven't been asked, or at least I haven't seen them.  My hope is that we find some of these and can talk about stuff that really isn't talked about here or elsewhere as it relates to Pantheon. It would be amazing to blaze a new trail related to something only recently brought up (to the best of our knoeledge) and to enjoy that trail, and to talk about things that should or could become part of Pantheon, given of course sufficient time, resources, and bank account.  Worst case, it goes into an expansion.  Hows that for making the community part of the process, eh?

    I have been following the game like a hawk for quite a while now and there are definitely some topics I would like to share that I consider low hanging fruit at this point in development.  At the same time, some of these questions may violate some of your above-stated rules and if that is the case, I would ask that you kindly skip over them and maybe put them on a shelf for later.  The most recent newsletter had a "Burning Questions" feature that really seemed to resonate with the community that might be more fitting.  I appreciate your willingness to engage the community and hope that you will indulge us where possible.

    #1)  Competition is often viewed as an inherent aspect of open-world MMO's, and it's been suggested that resources can and will be hotly contested in Pantheon.  Could you provide an overview of how you view competition fitting into the spirit of the game for the world you are building?  How would you describe fun/healthy competition in the context of Pantheon, particularly when it comes to "kill credit"  --  will this be handled with FTE (First-To-Engage) like Vanguard, or MDD (Most-Damage-Done) like EQ?
     
    #2)  With group/player interdependence being embedded into the core philosophy of Pantheon, there has been a high amount of interest in playing on a no-box server if one were to become available.  Most players understand that there will be folks who attempt to circumvent the rules, just like with RMT, and while it's known that multi-boxing most likely couldn't be completely stopped, would it be possible to have a special ruleset server where it's strictly forbidden, and enforced as much as possible?
     
    #3)  Do you feel that "The Pantheon Difference" page still provides an accurate description of features that will set Pantheon apart from other MMO's?  We haven't heard much about progeny, the living codex, or colored mana.  How do these features fit into the current vision, if at all?
     
    #4)  It has been suggested that Project Faerthale will allow players to experience Pantheon in a way that is consistent with the minimum caliber of game that you are targeting for launch.  Do you imagine there being a potential follow-up at a later stage of testing, where players might be able to experience an evolved version of Project Faerthale (Project Syronai's Rest?) that is more feature-complete, perhaps in beta?
     
    #5)  One of the catch-phrases that really resonated with me was #ChallengeReborn  --  while many of us are thrilled about the idea of open-world gameplay, we also understand the need for systems, features, and mechanics that can help maintain the integrity of what "challenge" actually means in this kind of game.  What kind of systems can we expect that will help solve the issues associated with zerging, power-leveling, and other cheese tactics that serve to cheapen the experience of legitimately overcoming challenges in Pantheon?  (You recently doubled down on a previous statement that mobs would either summon additional NPC's or even run away when overwhelmed by a zerg.  I feel that this kind of mechanic, as explained, would be used as a griefing tool and would really appreciate a thorough explanation that takes this into account.  If raid team X engages boss Y, and gets it down to 20%, but then raid team Z jumps in ... if this causes the boss to run away, this would effectively be worse than intentional training.  If players can force a mob to flee or summon additional NPC's ... without having any intention of actually trying to beat the content, how would this concept work?  Is there any chance we may see encounter locking instead, similar to what was used in Vanguard?)
     
    #6)  Is there any updated information available regarding the "Guild Pledge" idea that has been floating around since May of 2017?
     
    #7)  Is Pantheon going to feature a meaningful deity / sacrificial altar system  --  if so, could you please describe a brief overview of what that might entail?
     
    #8)  Can you talk more about how the game handles characters in combat vs. out of combat?  Are there some actions that may only be useable while out of combat?
     
    #9)  Would VR be willing to consider organized PVP that would be accessible to PVE servers, similar to battleground and arena matches from WoW?  I have always staunchly opposed the use of instancing in Pantheon but this is one area where I feel it may be worthwhile to consider.  Instanced battlegrounds/arenas provide a ton of replay value and align with the idea of offering something fun/accessible to players, even if they have less than an hour of playtime available.
     
    #10)  When it comes to the disposition feature, is this exclusive to regular NPC's, or could they also affect major boss fights?  If so, could you provide an example of how this feature would help alleviate groundhog day, even when it comes to the big bad bosses?
     
    #11)  There have been rumors that Pantheon may only launch with 2 continents, and we still haven't seen at updated atlas that includes Whitethaw.  Are 3 continents still planned for launch?  If not, what does that mean for the races that live there?
     
    #12)  It was stated in the 01/2019 newsletter that we would be getting a new website this year.  Is that still accurate?  I understand that this may cross the line of asking for a date ... but if a new website isn't feasible for this year, it would be nice if players were made aware of such in order to better manage their expectations.
     
    #13)  Are race/class restrictions set in stone?  Some may recall that they were originally planned in EQNext but had to be removed later on due to their own version of a progeny-like feature.  This topic was responsible for the largest-ever-mega-thread on the EQNext forum.  Depending on how progeny is supposed to work, and only you and your team truly know at this point, there could be some significant complications to the system that end up hurting players who choose to play a race that has fewer classes represented in the matrix than others.  If possible, please take the time to review this transcript as it may shine a light on issues that could also come up in Pantheon:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1iGyUx9a4FYiQkBPCLJq2H928jKUQYK38hFIo_OWdzXQ/edit?usp=sharing
     
    #14)  Pantheon has amassed quite the community and following over the years, and many awesome content creators have been trying to do their part when it comes to promoting the game and keeping people engaged.  An updated fan kit would certainly go a long way toward helping them improve the quality of their content  --  is this something that is being worked on?
     
    #15)  You have suggested in the past that you are casting a broader net, so to speak, as it relates to the target audience for Pantheon.  Can you share any information that would help clarify the type of gamer that you are looking to attract?  What message do you have for those who feel like an outsider for never having played EQ1, but still believe in the project due to the game tenets and vision?
     
    #16)  Joppa mentioned "raid tier single group content" in a stream last year, as well as 12 man raid content, and 24 man raid content.  Can you elaborate on what these terms mean, and the rationale behind their distinctions?  Will it be possible for players to trivialize this kind of content by engaging it with more players than it is designed to be challenging for?
     
    #17)  Is there any chance that level requirements for gear could become a thing in Pantheon?  I have provided a detailed explanation of why I think they are important, how they can complement the game tenets, alleviate mudflation, and ensure that the lower tiers of content remain relevant even years after launch.  I have spoken with both Joppa and Ceythos about my concerns (several of which have been aligned with comments from you in the past) and look forward to any information that could help me better understand why they will or will not be used in light of that dialogue.
     
    #18)  Can you share any information about horseback riding or boats, and how they fit into the vision for meaningful travel?  You referred to these as "vehicles" in the past.  Would caravans potentially fall under this same category?
     
     
    This list could go on and on but I don't want to wear out my welcome any more than I probably already have.  I appreciate you taking the time to field some questions and interact with the community.  Again, if any of these do not meet the criteria that you were looking for, please feel free to skip them over or possibly consider passing them to a team member for follow-up in a future burning questions segment.  Thank you!

    This post was edited by oneADseven at October 5, 2019 7:59 AM PDT
    • 1171 posts
    October 5, 2019 7:58 AM PDT

    I'll just put the rest of my questions here from the Oct 2 diaries, as well as some larger questions that have come up over the years:

    1) With "trainers being scattered across the land" is there any chance the Vanguard-esque learning-by-combat method, and other ability acquisition methods, will be implemented concurrently in Pantheon?

    2) Regarding Alternate Ruleset servers, are you inclined, at all, to have a No-Box Server Ruleset, at launch?

    3) Currently, as a design goal, what's the point of Pantheon PvP?  If you don't know or it hasn't been decided, are you inclined to use a forum-iterated player-made solution?

    4) Will Dynamic Threat Assessment only be used during Quests, or at other times as well?

    5) Is there any inclination on the part of you and your team to implement an entirely Barter economy? (no coin)  If so, would you be open to use a forum-iterated player-made economic barter-only solution?

    6) If a coin economy is going to be your goal, without question, in what practical ways is the production or generation of coin over time going to be limited or controllable, in real-time?  Is it a design goal that Taps > Sinks, or Sinks > Taps, or something else?
    --
    7) Feign Death for pulling.  Is there any inclination to change FD so it will -not- be used for pulling, in Pantheon?  Or will this simply be a guaranteed feature of the class, for as long as you can foresee?

    8) Malicious training.  Is there any inclination to fundamentally change "being chased" such that training is no longer possible, without shortening leash lengths? If so, would you be inclined to use a forum-iterated player-made solution to this issue?

    9) It seems like Crafters being able to master all crafting professions, concurrently on a single character, through increasing time demands per mastery, is now on the table as a possibility.  True?

    10) Will the goal, design, concept, idea, philosophy, practice, implementation or anything remotely similar to MQ'ing (Multi-Questing) be in Pantheon?


    This post was edited by vjek at October 5, 2019 8:35 AM PDT
    • 927 posts
    October 5, 2019 10:00 AM PDT

    i guess we are consolidating questions here?


    summary for pvp concerns:

    1.  faction based or flagging battle royale style?

    2.  botb(best of the best) party based ladder system and battlegrounds?

    3.  pvp progression(thinking about this hopefully a civil discussion thread can be had with this later)?

     

    i can understand if the questions can't be answered because the pve foundation isn't there for pvp to be built yet.  if this is the case, would like clarification :D appreciate the consideration.

    • 339 posts
    October 5, 2019 10:33 AM PDT

    Thank you Brad for this update and pasionate words. I cannot wait four you to share this amazing world with us.

    • 55 posts
    October 5, 2019 4:23 PM PDT

    My post got all chopped up. Don't know why. So I deleted it and just don't care to fix it or retype it. :)

     

     


    This post was edited by Vander at October 5, 2019 9:49 PM PDT
    • 922 posts
    October 5, 2019 9:27 PM PDT

    Two topics that I like to think are interesting:

     

    1. Slot/Weight Grid inventories vs Volume/Mass List inventories.  Is the restriction on the total number of unique items inherent to the grid inventories a desired character choice limitation, a data storage volume safeguard or a game engine limitation? What would it take to switch from grid inventories to list inventories and all the quality of life improvements that come with list inventories?

    2. Logarithmic Character Power Growth By Level. I have been told to say diminishing returns for each level gained but I think in math as my primary language. Log growth front loads the magnitude gains of a character but still allows for growth over time. Log Growth is also very efficient when developing zones, as long as the zone is tuned for the plateau area of the growth graph then that area will never be trivial at any level. This will effectively make any area tuned to the plateau region end game. When an exponential increase in the number of even level kills in order to advance in level is combined with the log growth model a character will spend more than 95% of their play time in plateau zones. In terms of Pantheon you could effectively make one large zone for each race to advance from level 1 to the beginning of the plateau levels and 152(8 x 19) zones for the plateau regions and all zones would get even use across a characters play time. How if at all has Log power growth made it into Pantheons system design?

     

    • 32 posts
    October 5, 2019 9:56 PM PDT

    I think a binary conversation about PvP gets it wrong.  WoW Classic servers (and WoW Vanilla itself) are a good example of this.  I think that the hardcore pvp community is pretty small.  I think there is a decent chunk of community who isn't too into Pvp, but is willing to be on a pvp server if it has certain features.  Basically, one of the largest problems MMO's have had is that they run out of content and lack challenge.  To some extent I feel like wow classic pvp servers attracted a population larger than the hardcore pvp people because of this.  Why?  Essentially running into some world pvp raised the difficulty level and gave the option of something to engage in when people were bored.  The key with WoW Vanilla's design though I think, is that it offered a large amount of what were essentially safe places (instances and fairly safe cities) combined with a very active GM population hindering outright chain griefing.  It's one thing to run into some pvp and have a death or two - it can be a great challenge - it's another to just be griefed non-stop.  I fall into that category myself - I am not a huge fan of Pvp (its ok sometimes and I do sometimes fire up a FPS game), but I played on several WoW pvp servers in vanilla and tbc because of the increased challenge and because it gave me something to do in the game when I'd otherwise be bored.  WoW did have some advantages in providing this environment (namely, alliance/horde base design in all aspects of the game), but it could be worth thinking about this dynamic when thinking about PvP options in Pantheon.

    • 8 posts
    October 6, 2019 9:56 AM PDT

    Brad, you should release the game unfinished and just let people play in the game while the world is being built. No Alpha, no Beta think outside the box and release now. Release as a semi-chat room that's being built into an MMORPG around everyone. Do you know how much fun that could be? I used to play Second Life and half the zones there are broken or incomplete for various reasons *player build zones) but it was always so much fun exploring. Fun > Complete Game. Rlease bare-bones as it stand now and charge a standard monthly fee of $14.99 and let the community have some fun. The disclaimer for subscribers is that they consent that what's in the game may or may not be there tomorrow. All they're guaranteed is that they will have their character. They need to click "I Agree" to a logon disclaimer saying they aree to play a broken and unfinished game but if they agree that they can log in. You could get quite a cult following for Pantheon doing something like this. I'm telling you, Second Life broken zones with extremely fun to explore. 

    What's the alternative? String people along a few more years only realizing they abandoned any hope of playing and have no interest in playing anymore?

    Release it tomorrow all gimp and unfinsihed. Who cares, it won't cause Pantheon to be viewed in a lesser light that's for sure.

    • 24 posts
    October 6, 2019 10:22 AM PDT
    I faith in your choice of mechanics, and I don’t mind waiting for the game as long as you make it with its integrity intact. I would love to play the game sooner than later of course, but not by asking to have the game vision compromised.
    What worries me the most is economical concerns for the studio and the slow progress. I know it has been stated several times that you are financed to at least release and further funding will only speed up the process. But building software, and most likely especially games, is hard to predict and estimate, hence saying you have enough money to finish it without knowing what effort it requires doesn’t make sense to me. Unless of course you are funded way over the target, which would act as a very good buffer.
    I assume at least part of VR staff salary is paid in stocks or shares, but I assume they still need some cash to pay bills, not to mention server cost, license, office space etc. costs. Extending internal deadlines must come at a cost.
    We on the outside of course don’t know if the initial plan has slipped at all, but a lot of speculation suggests it has which to me must mean that the budget is slipping too.
    • 71 posts
    October 6, 2019 6:29 PM PDT

    dnvr said:

    Brad, you should release the game unfinished and just let people play in the game while the world is being built. No Alpha, no Beta think outside the box and release now. Release as a semi-chat room that's being built into an MMORPG around everyone. Do you know how much fun that could be? I used to play Second Life and half the zones there are broken or incomplete for various reasons *player build zones) but it was always so much fun exploring. Fun > Complete Game. Rlease bare-bones as it stand now and charge a standard monthly fee of $14.99 and let the community have some fun. The disclaimer for subscribers is that they consent that what's in the game may or may not be there tomorrow. All they're guaranteed is that they will have their character. They need to click "I Agree" to a logon disclaimer saying they aree to play a broken and unfinished game but if they agree that they can log in. You could get quite a cult following for Pantheon doing something like this. I'm telling you, Second Life broken zones with extremely fun to explore. 

    What's the alternative? String people along a few more years only realizing they abandoned any hope of playing and have no interest in playing anymore?

    Release it tomorrow all gimp and unfinsihed. Who cares, it won't cause Pantheon to be viewed in a lesser light that's for sure.

     

    I wouldn't speak on behalf of the community and or future pledges with your "It won't cause Pantheon to be viewed in a lesser light" because that's simply not true. You are asking a small indie company to release an unfinished product to the public with the achknowledgement that it is still a WIP. The issue with this is between bugs, glitches, server side coding etc. That is a lot of working gears for a small company to take on, on top of players being in the system and flooding that data as well. Comparing Half life to this isn't a fair comparison as Valve has roughly 300 devs to work on a product. That includes but not limited to players in the game. 

    I get it's just a suggestion of something you've done before which is fine, but it would almost certaintly cause possible pledges and viewership of a much more tightly ran gaming company to be more negative than a positive one.

    I also don't believe they are stringing people along. People posted their concerns on multiple forum posts this last month and spoke about what they'd like to see and tbh I'm impressed with VR's responses. Brasse spoke up about the merch store, Kilsen spoke up in some threads about concerns and Aradune spoke up in the dev diaries saying hes going to try and make a better commitment to posting on forums. It doesnt get much better than that next to when they start releasing dates. People who "abandon hope" would probably not play this game for very long anyway tbh. 

    It's a tough pill to swallow but we've got a few years to go. However, with the devs posting on forums I think thats silenced some of that doubt for the time being. All we can hope for is they remain active on the forums and let us know more in depth ideas and plans when they can.


    This post was edited by OGTomkins at October 6, 2019 6:44 PM PDT
    • 2500 posts
    October 6, 2019 6:48 PM PDT

    I agree that the suggestion - if it was even serious - to release the game in pre-alpha condition is not a good one. In fact it is a *really* bad one. I would not even comment except that it reminds me of something another game in development was doing - or at least promising to do which is far from the same thing. Ashes of Creation perhaps.

    They were making alpha available beyond the testing phase. As a place for people to play. Not necessarily with any fixes or any maintenance other than simply maintaining it in alpha condidition. Until the game actually released.

    While my reaction to doing this with a build that isn't even through pre-alpha is highly negative - doing the same with a build that VR has signed-off on for closed testing by the public is a different matter entirely. Keeping the alpha build available for us to play around with - perhaps if we upgrade our pledges to add a continuing alpha perk - may actually be a good idea. Make it available to any pledge level for a monthly fee for that matter. I'll pay a lot more to play an early test version after the test ends than I will for a shirt.

    VR is entirely correct not to release anything NOW beyond a limited cadre of pre-alpha testers who paid well for pledges that included that option. 

    Once a much more polished version has gone through months or more of alpha testing - the same suggestion is far from ludicrous.

     

    ((What's the alternative? String people along a few more years only realizing they abandoned any hope of playing and have no interest in playing anymore?

    Release it tomorrow all gimp and unfinsihed. Who cares, it won't cause Pantheon to be viewed in a lesser light that's for sure.))

     

    The negativity, almost hostility, shown by this wording is not calculated to elicit a positive reaction here. Or from VR. But change the tone to one that is more constructive - and move the timeline to after alpha testing - maybe *that* has some merit.


    This post was edited by dorotea at October 6, 2019 6:50 PM PDT
    • 71 posts
    October 6, 2019 7:10 PM PDT

    dorotea said:

    I agree that the suggestion - if it was even serious - to release the game in pre-alpha condition is not a good one. In fact it is a *really* bad one. I would not even comment except that it reminds me of something another game in development was doing - or at least promising to do which is far from the same thing. Ashes of Creation perhaps.

    They were making alpha available beyond the testing phase. As a place for people to play. Not necessarily with any fixes or any maintenance other than simply maintaining it in alpha condidition. Until the game actually released.

    While my reaction to doing this with a build that isn't even through pre-alpha is highly negative - doing the same with a build that VR has signed-off on for closed testing by the public is a different matter entirely. Keeping the alpha build available for us to play around with - perhaps if we upgrade our pledges to add a continuing alpha perk - may actually be a good idea. Make it available to any pledge level for a monthly fee for that matter. I'll pay a lot more to play an early test version after the test ends than I will for a shirt.

    VR is entirely correct not to release anything NOW beyond a limited cadre of pre-alpha testers who paid well for pledges that included that option. 

    Once a much more polished version has gone through months or more of alpha testing - the same suggestion is far from ludicrous.

     

    ((What's the alternative? String people along a few more years only realizing they abandoned any hope of playing and have no interest in playing anymore?

    Release it tomorrow all gimp and unfinsihed. Who cares, it won't cause Pantheon to be viewed in a lesser light that's for sure.))

     

    The negativity, almost hostility, shown by this wording is not calculated to elicit a positive reaction here. Or from VR. But change the tone to one that is more constructive - and move the timeline to after alpha testing - maybe *that* has some merit.

     

    Agreed Dorotea, the track they are on with how they are handling Pre-alpha I think is a smart choice, even if I want them to release alpha tomorrow lol. I'd like to add what you were saying about what Pre-alpha testers paid for to get that privilidge is by doing an "unfinished" release would also be a smack to those who paid that much to get in and would probably be a very negative backlash to VR. Although I do agree, I'd pay a monthly sub of some sort to get in vs paying X cash for a t-shirt.

     

    • 466 posts
    October 8, 2019 1:01 PM PDT

    Have to agree with Dorotea here. This would pretty much be the same approach that many survival games, and by that extention, many early access games, that find themselves on Steam operate. Here's a constant problem I find with that. First, you only get one chance to make a first impression. You blow that on early access, you're going to have a good swath of people wholly excited to log in and play only to log out in dissapointment and never return. So very many games hit this early access alpha type release and just shoot themselves in the foot and never leave there. Some keen examples of games that have done this include H1Z1, which was rebranded about 3 times before finally settling on H1Z1 Just Survive, the Black Death, DayZ, and there's a long list of others that either stalled out in early access because early access by it's nature is incomplete but still sold. And regardless of how clear you make that, people expect value and quality in gameplay regardless of how clear you make that. And those same people will leave and mark scorched earth behind them as they burn a trail through your future prospective customers.

    Now one game that seems to have turned this sort of thing around a bit, albeit they were technically in early access without the name, was No Man's Sky. People seem to really like that game now that it's had a chance to flesh things out a bit. But recall that firestorm of bad press at launch? How might that game's playerbase be now if it wasn't so poorly received out the gate? That's the pros and cons of an early access type release. You blow your hype wad right then and there. It doesn't matter what you do on the weeks or months leading up to launch. The new shine is gone before you even get to the stage of new game release. And for better or worse, your official launch is early access release. You can't unring that bell.

    • 1 posts
    October 8, 2019 1:04 PM PDT
    How about all these side tracking, time wasting, posts/questions you and your team keep doing and we use it to get into Alpha.
    • 610 posts
    October 8, 2019 7:46 PM PDT

    Man, version 1 sucked.  I just essentially re-wrote it.  Check out v.2 if you have the time, thanks!

     

    https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/188/much-to-do-about-pantheon-cco-update

     

     

    • 610 posts
    October 8, 2019 7:53 PM PDT

    dnvr said:

    Brad, you should release the game unfinished and just let people play in the game while the world is being built. No Alpha, no Beta think outside the box and release now. Release as a semi-chat room that's being built into an MMORPG around everyone. Do you know how much fun that could be? I used to play Second Life and half the zones there are broken or incomplete for various reasons *player build zones) but it was always so much fun exploring. Fun > Complete Game. Rlease bare-bones as it stand now and charge a standard monthly fee of $14.99 and let the community have some fun. The disclaimer for subscribers is that they consent that what's in the game may or may not be there tomorrow. All they're guaranteed is that they will have their character. They need to click "I Agree" to a logon disclaimer saying they aree to play a broken and unfinished game but if they agree that they can log in. You could get quite a cult following for Pantheon doing something like this. I'm telling you, Second Life broken zones with extremely fun to explore. 

    What's the alternative? String people along a few more years only realizing they abandoned any hope of playing and have no interest in playing anymore?

    Release it tomorrow all gimp and unfinsihed. Who cares, it won't cause Pantheon to be viewed in a lesser light that's for sure.

    Well, that's definitely thinking outside the box.  And an interesting idea too.  I wonder if it could be done, given sufficient resources.  Develop an MMO and everytime you make a new build you push it publicly. 

    I'm sorry that, whether I truly agree it's a good idea or not (I *did* say interesting), we don't have the additional resources it would require.  We're pedal to the metal right now, the team working their butts off.  We need to build our more unique and/or distinct systems into the game so that playing it truly feels like we want Pantheon to feel.  The playable foundation was great and we learned a lot.  One thing we learned was there was no time to relax, we needed to start building on that foundation immediately.  

    -Aradune

    • 610 posts
    October 8, 2019 7:55 PM PDT

    vjek said:

    I'll just put the rest of my questions here from the Oct 2 diaries, as well as some larger questions that have come up over the years:

    1) With "trainers being scattered across the land" is there any chance the Vanguard-esque learning-by-combat method, and other ability acquisition methods, will be implemented concurrently in Pantheon?

    Aradune: Haven't given it much thought.  Some skills will be easier to acquire than others.  We want to proactively encourage exploration and adventure.  We're not going to hide them where you're spending all of this time looking for them (well, there could be a few exceptions to this rule).  Again, get out and explore and you'll find your trainers.


    2) Regarding Alternate Ruleset servers, are you inclined, at all, to have a No-Box Server Ruleset, at launch?

    Aradune:  Haven't even thought throught that -- let me process.

    3) Currently, as a design goal, what's the point of Pantheon PvP?  If you don't know or it hasn't been decided, are you inclined to use a forum-iterated player-made solution?

    Aradune:  PvP is an important part of Pantheon with somewhere between 10% and 30% interested to verying degrees, depending on ruleset, etc.  It's also something important to several people on the team who played a LOT of PvP.  The only point I was trying to make is that we're going to create a PvE foundation first, and then build other systems (including PvP and all of its varations) on top of that foundation, some of it before launch, and some of it post-launch.

    4) Will Dynamic Threat Assessment only be used during Quests, or at other times as well?

    Aradune:  The system is largely theory right now.  Plus it's not time to devote creative resources to it.  I debated whether I should bring up systems that won't be worked on for a while -- there are pros and cons.  The con is that I can't tell you much about it outside of what I already said, sorry.

    5) Is there any inclination on the part of you and your team to implement an entirely Barter economy? (no coin)  If so, would you be open to use a forum-iterated player-made economic barter-only solution?

    Aradune:  Have honestly never given it any thought.  My inclination would be no.  The reason why currency was invented in RL was that what you had to barter and what the other guy had were not what the two of you wanted.  You had to try to find someone who wanted your stuff who also had stuff you wanted.  Money solved that issue very well.   I'd love to hear more -- especially how you'd address the issues I just brought up, the frustartion of not being able to get what you want and having to hold onto what others do not want.


    6) If a coin economy is going to be your goal, without question, in what practical ways is the production or generation of coin over time going to be limited or controllable, in real-time?  Is it a design goal that Taps > Sinks, or Sinks > Taps, or something else?

    Aradune:  We will control the taps and sinks, especially in the beginnnig where an MMO economy often has to be booted into gear.  We'll also introduce new consumables.  Some consumables might be turned off for a while.  Or moved.  Location is a big thing.  Don't expect everything to stay put.

    7) Feign Death for pulling.  Is there any inclination to change FD so it will -not- be used for pulling, in Pantheon?  Or will this simply be a guaranteed feature of the class, for as long as you can foresee?

    I think that's up to the community ultimately, although I need to ask Joppa how he feels about it.  He has quite the vision for abillities and classes and the Monk may end up a bit more sophisticated than you might think.

    8) Malicious training.  Is there any inclination to fundamentally change "being chased" such that training is no longer possible, without shortening leash lengths? If so, would you be inclined to use a forum-iterated player-made solution to this issue?

    Well, I do like trains, at least in many cases.  It does make it harder to stand by a zone line, using that zone line as an escape mechanism.  In any case, I don't really have an answer for you.  We'll cross that bridge when we come to it.  I am sure you can imagine that we have a lot more core, fundamental system level decisions and implementation to worry about at this point.

    9) It seems like Crafters being able to master all crafting professions, concurrently on a single character, through increasing time demands per mastery, is now on the table as a possibility.  True?

    Undecided as far as I know.


    10) Will the goal, design, concept, idea, philosophy, practice, implementation or anything remotely similar to MQ'ing (Multi-Questing) be in Pantheon?

    Hrm. I would need a more detailed explanation of what you mean by multi-questing -- there are so many examples and opinions.

    I will say that the Perception system, which is part of the greater Questing system, i *believe* allows people to join at different points along the tree.

    Anyway, we're getting basic questing and Perception in now.  


    This post was edited by Aradune at October 8, 2019 8:09 PM PDT
    • 1412 posts
    October 8, 2019 11:39 PM PDT

    Aradune said:

    Man, version 1 sucked.  I just essentially re-wrote it.  Check out v.2 if you have the time, thanks!

     

    https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/blogs/151/188/much-to-do-about-pantheon-cco-update

     

    The new version is a lot easier to read, thank you!  There are still lots of topics we'd love to see you talk about a bit (with the understanding that many things simply aren't decided or set in stone yet) - see my post above.

    • 1171 posts
    October 9, 2019 6:42 AM PDT

    Aradune said:  10) Will the goal, design, concept, idea, philosophy, practice, implementation or anything remotely similar to MQ'ing (Multi-Questing) be in Pantheon?
    Hrm. I would need a more detailed explanation of what you mean by multi-questing -- there are so many examples and opinions. ...
    This is what I'm referring to, primarily.
    The loot and questing implementation whereby a player not present for and/or not participating in a fight can reap the benefits of that fight, at all, in any way.
    In EQ1, for example, Epic Quest pieces from competitive open world mobs are and were looted by players who were not the classes involved, and then sold to those players, in the worst case, for RL cash.
    NPC's accepted 1 or more Quest items from any arbitrary player not on the Epic quest, then the questing player turned in the last item, and obtained quest credit.
    If, in Pantheon, there is no intention of re-creating the EQ1 quest system implementation with respect to lootable quest items, then MQ'ing will be impossible, as it is in more modern MMO's.
    However, if Quest items will be lootable by non-questing players, then MQ'ing may be possible in Pantheon, depending on how NPC's require and accept items.  Especially true of LORE, NO-DROP, and NO-TRADE items.
    Essentially, it would require coding (by today's standards) a very broken loot and questing system to permit MQ'ing, again.  Yet, it is possible to do, if it's a design goal for Pantheon.
    So, it comes down to:  Is it currently a design goal to implement a loot and questing system that permits MQ'ing, as it was permitted in EQ1 from launch until at least 2004?