It's a really entertaining idea. I wouldn't mind, since I usually carry a none combat outfit with me anyway. But it might be perceived a hard barrier to some that are running back from a dungeon, to first undress if they want to sell their recent winnings.
Are you suggesting there would be such a thing as costums and cabins to change clothing?
Or is everyone going to stand in a line at the border of a town, searching their inventory for their casual cloths?
Or in case you don't change between casual and combat clothing yourself, would the game automatically put you in temorarily casual cloths as you trespass a certain border/line in the town?
Keno Monster said:cant tell if srs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MK5KXb-wOU
I'm not against the sheathing of weapons, but I'm not a fan of 'casual/town' clothes and I wouldn't want to 'force' it on people.
I don't think adventurers would take off their armor, since they are rarely doing anything more than buying/selling and heading straight back out. Even longer activities like training would not really preclude adventuring gear (might even need it).
Maybe crafting would be more comfortable in civilian clothing. Maybe there's a case for banks being uncomfortable with armed/armored folk, but really, unless you make it automatic it would be annoying and if it *is* automatic it would be quite weird and immersion breaking in itself.
Also, what about mages that wear light robes anyway? How do you disarm them? Would you really insist they change into something 'more casual' on the outskirts of town?...
Town Constable: "Sir mage! The embroidery on you robe hem is too 'aggressive'! We insist you change into one with more flowers and less lightning or be banished! Also, empty your pockets! I smell guano, and that's a fireball spell component! Oh... my apologies... that's you..."
Holy Moly.
I've seen more insane requests, but c'mon with all this dictating every facit of how people must play.
At some point we have to accept that fact that this is a fantasy video game and not a simulator. If we try to enforce every minute immersion breaking action it will get out of hand. I for one do not want to continue down this rabbit hole.
I argue making a Rogue take off his armor in town is immersion breaking in and of itself. I can imagine some classes / personalities might not ever leave their bedroom without being in their armor.
Kass said:Holy Moly.
I seen more insane requests, but c'mon with all this dictating every facit of how people must play.
At some point we have to accept that fact that this is a fantasy video game and not a simulator. If we try to enforce every minute immersion breaking action it will get out of hand. I for one do not want to continue down this rabbit hole.
I argue making a Rogue take off his armor in town is immersion breaking in and of itself. I can imagine some classes / personalities might not ever leave their bedroom without being in their armor.
In a dangerous world like Pantheon is bound to be, I would sleep in my armor, nevermind take it off in order to sell the goblin ears I've 'gathered'.
HemlockReaper said:Automatic or a button to swap
But that would break my immersion! OMG how can you possibly say that people can change clothes INSTANTLY?! At the click of a button? I don't have any buttons to change my clothes except the ones I have to undo to take off and put on my shirt! It should take players a full 20 minutes to put on their platemail! And that's assuming they have a squire that can help them with that!
/sarcasm
I'm sorry, but I'm really tired of people who want every little thing to be as cumbersome as possible in the name of immersion.
this was a question, since I was curious if others felt the same about battle gear in town. I usually have a set of cloths just for town, because I personally feel it enhances the Roleplay aspect of MMO’s.
I m not for a wardrobe specific, but I would like sheating/unsheating to be an active action of consequences.
It could take time before you can attack, reduce your run speed by 10 or 20%, and trigger some guard warning. All that would make sheating/unsheating part of the gameplay like not sheating between pulls, pre unsheating in pvp to react quicker, sheating for long travels but not when travelling throught dungeon areas, beeing sheated in town and cities.
Edit : in fact it would show your intentions which is exactly how it works in real life. A drawn out weapon is a sign of imminent combat or defensive measures, but can be a handicap if you don't need it in a close timeframe.
HemlockReaper said:this was a question, since I was curious if others felt the same about battle gear in town. I usually have a set of cloths just for town, because I personally feel it enhances the Roleplay aspect of MMO’s.
There is a HUGE difference between enhancing your personal roleplay experience and forcing everyone to roleplay just like you do or even roleplay at all in terms of a tabletop/real life aspect. Roleplaying is something that should be encouraged, not forced upon people.
If there was some form of NPC interaction/disposition system that sits on top of the standard faction system I could see worn gear playing into that. Basically have diplomacy, crafting and trading run on a different set of stats and itemization and those items would have more appropriate appearances for in the Market, Workshop, Civic Center, Ball Room. If you are dress completely inappropriate then you take a negative hit to interactions as well as not getting the bonus you actually want, though not getting a bonus is most likely enough.
It would require the game have a completely independent non-combat progression and I just don't see Pantheon having that in the first 3 years after launch.
HemlockReaper said:Should town be restricted to players who are dressed appropriately?I feel like it would be more immersive to not allow players “ready for War” with weapons displayed and wearing battle gear in town, while also creating more demand for casual wear.
One of the things EQ2 failed to capitalize on (I know there are many) is the NPC dispositions of NPC's in town.
NPC's great you differently according to the status of your chracter. But they didn't take it much further than just "Looks at you" "Salutes you". It could have been a great opportunity for NPC's to ignore you in stores, not show you all their goods, buy stuff or sell stuff at different prices according to your status. EQ2 never fully fleshed this out IMO.
With Pantheon's already somewhat implemented NPC disposition, I'd like to see those same dispositions applied to town NPCs.
As OP said, if I'm dirty and wearing rag's maybe I shouldn't even be allowed in certain parts of a city. Or if I'm wielding my weapons, maybe I shouldn't be allowed in other parts of a city, or in certain buildings. This would add immersion.
Souldrake said:HemlockReaper said:this was a question, since I was curious if others felt the same about battle gear in town. I usually have a set of cloths just for town, because I personally feel it enhances the Roleplay aspect of MMO’s.
There is a HUGE difference between enhancing your personal roleplay experience and forcing everyone to roleplay just like you do or even roleplay at all in terms of a tabletop/real life aspect. Roleplaying is something that should be encouraged, not forced upon people.
So your saying you would rather NPC’s just reacted to players brandishing their weapons or parading around in battle gear either by running away or refusing service?
HemlockReaper said:Should town be restricted to players who are dressed appropriately?
I feel like it would be more immersive to not allow players “ready for War” with weapons displayed and wearing battle gear in town, while also creating more demand for casual wear.
I dont think this is over the top crazy, but it does seem like weapons sheathed should be the extent of it outside of exceptional circumstances (Opinion).
@Trasak , interesting take on the topic there. That does seem like a nice option to design around X-time after launch. Especially if diplomacy is in the game in such fashion.
Perhaps the sheating of weapons could be your way out there, HemlockReaper. Let's say that after combat has ended, your weapons will become sheated and remain visible. If however a certain amount of time has passed before another battle breaks out, your sheated weapons could 'vanish' from view all together. And this would be the case when traveling long distances, camping or when spending time in towns. For those that want their weapons visible again out of combat, they could just /brandish and the timer starts again.
Now this option could be a clicky that the player can choose to opt out of, meaning the standard setting might be that these two stages of weapon visibility are active, but if the player chooses to, they can view their sheated weapons all the time. They'll have to go to UI-settings and such, but it's manageable.
@Kittik, another nice take on it. Dispositions for none combat npc's. That does smell like a lot of work, but it could indeed be worth it as it adds depth. The environment reacts to your presence and not only in the wild dangerous world. It does make sense.
Just one bard's opinion but I don't consider this a problem that needs solving. On role play servers it will likely be done manually (if the RP community prefers). On all other servers I would adopt a laissez-faire attitude.
I prefer not to ask the limited dev team to put in code forcing something globally on all players, and then having to additionally code more UI settings to allow other players to turn off the global things the new code forces. Let them focus on class details, game mechanics, art assets / world design and basic quality-of-life issues.
@Barin: It is another opportunity to build in some non-combat progression. Anyone who is not doing anything in the diplomacy, trading, crafting sphere can just keep on their adventuring gear though the guards might act funny.
In history only the nobility could remain armed and armored in public and even there there were rules of propriety. So it could even be another path of progression to be allowed to wear combat gear in non-combat areas without penalty. The blackmarket areas and frontier towns it might be a benefit to mix the intimidation factor of adventuring gear with non-combat interactions but those are the locations with the highest sell and lowest buy prices.
@Vandraad: Oh the murderhoboism. Having the option to raid a merchants shop is an interesting idea but the lack of long term consequence in most video games and tabletop RPGs drives me crazy. Unless done as a professional hit where your identity is either hidden or conveniently forgotten (see bribes) murder of an unarmed civilian or a guard on duty should have heavy and basically permanent penalties.
This minor faction hit for killing a merchant is one of the most immersion breaking for me. In terms of faction killing an NPC should be like a -10,000 faction and killing an orc that threatens the city should be like +1 or +2. An NPC should have a Family faction, business faction, city faction, and nation faction. The family will basically never forgive you and will try to have you killed in return. The business will ban you, try and have you arrested and fined for 10 times their losses. The city will expel you until you pay for your crimes and then you will be marked as a felon. The nation will treat you as a felon until you perform some meritorious service then you start back at neutral faction.
Should changing into "town clothes" be required? No.
Should it be possible? Yes.
I was very much a fan of how Vanguard handled it with separate equipped sets for adventuring, crafting, gathering, and diplomacy. You weren't ever forced to change out of your adventuring gear to run around town, but if you wanted to, you could switch to your diplomacy or crafting set just for the look (and they usually looked pretty nice!). People often collected and built diplomacy sets simply for the look to use when they were in town, as a roleplaying thing. Apart from that though the only needed to wear a particular set if you were doing the particular thing that it mattered for. The rest of the time, how you looked was your choice.
As for sheathing weapons, I would like the option to auto-sheathe my weapons when not in combat. But it should be an option that can be toggled off. If someone really wants to walk around with their sword out all the time because they think it makes them look more menacing or whatever, they should be able to.
city guard: please check in your weapons of mass destruction at the gate. spellcasters must wear magic shackles upon entering the city. if you're a victim of a crime, please do not take matters into your own hands. report all grievances to the protectors hall filling out this form 32a, 17b, 4bi and insure you have proper identification.
(demons ransacks entire city)
mayor: well guess we need to rethink our laws.
city guard captain: welp there goes my taxpayer funded house.
citizens: there goes our city and most of our beloved ones.
adventurers: there goes all our gear and most of our friends.
spellcasters: (oh right they are all dead now because demons eat magic casters)
criminal adventurers like vandraad would have a field day in a population of unarmed citizens. just saying, crime happens in places where people can't defend themselves.
@stellarmind
As usual your posts come at a concept sideways and even the snarky satire has a few golden nuggets.
So for example peace bonding weapons (physical or magical) in a neutral city makes sense from a city governance standpoint. Breaking the peace bonding isnt prevented but doing so has other consequences. Your political clout might be able to get you out of a certain level of trouble. It would also help if there was a mechanic for winning combat that did not need to end in death, so that choosing to kill would have greater meaning.
The type of weaponry the average citizen has could be a function of its crime levels with higher crime cities having weaker commerce levels. The lower the crime rating then the higher level and gear the guards have. Combat zone cities would have their own unique balance based on the level of threat. If a deamon invasion is likely then its unlikely the city would be peace bonded, if the deamon invasion is unexpected then there is not much that can be done to prevent it.
Trasak said:@stellarmind
As usual your posts come at a concept sideways and even the snarky satire has a few golden nuggets.
So for example peace bonding weapons (physical or magical) in a neutral city makes sense from a city governance standpoint. Breaking the peace bonding isnt prevented but doing so has other consequences. Your political clout might be able to get you out of a certain level of trouble. It would also help if there was a mechanic for winning combat that did not need to end in death, so that choosing to kill would have greater meaning.
The type of weaponry the average citizen has could be a function of its crime levels with higher crime cities having weaker commerce levels. The lower the crime rating then the higher level and gear the guards have. Combat zone cities would have their own unique balance based on the level of threat. If a deamon invasion is likely then its unlikely the city would be peace bonded, if the deamon invasion is unexpected then there is not much that can be done to prevent it.
ooo now that would be great. different laws for different cities? actually i'm okay with hemlock suggestion if it's only for specific cities and not a global deal. maybe a place that would have strict laws as suggested would be uhh the ashen elf city? that way it would be lore friendly and elves really arent' subjected to the type of corruption i'm talking about.
there would be some technicalites, but i there are mods for skyrim that does this. it's pretty interesting gameplay.