Will there be some/any quests that are "shareable"?
Example 1:
- I pick up a basic collect quest from an NPC. (Go gather XX number of this item and return for reward).
- While adventuring, I group up with a couple of people that are fighting in the same general area as me.
- I say "I got this quest to gather some stuff for this guy".
- They say "Can you share it so we do not have to run all they way back... just to get the quest".
- (Me) Click "Share" on my quest window to share with all party members.
Example 2:
- I pick up a go kill x number of mobs quest and return with proof they are dead. (Bring back goblin war beads as proof)
- While adventuring, I group up with a couple of people that are fighting in the same general area as me.
- I say "I got this quest to kill mobs for this guy".
- They say "Can you share it so we do not have to run all they way back... just to get the quest".
- (Me) Click "Share" on my quest window to share with all party members.
The theory behind this is: I know a guy that wants things (or wants things dead), and will reward me for them. Why couldn't those types of quests be spread via "word-of-mouth"?
I don't know if it's entirely necessary in a game not focused on questing. My assumption (I could be wrong entirely) is we aren't going to have "quest" items that only drop when a player is flagged for a quest but instead you would just tell your friend about the quest and they could gather the item(s) the NPC is after and turn them in when they make there way to the NPC later on.
Iksar said:
I don't know if it's entirely necessary in a game not focused on questing. My assumption (I could be wrong entirely) is we aren't going to have "quest" items that only drop when a player is flagged for a quest but instead you would just tell your friend about the quest and they could gather the item(s) the NPC is after and turn them in when they make there way to the NPC later on.
Point is, since we will not have in-game maps, and the world is huge... the people that the quest is shared with will have some sort of idea where to find the NPC (from the quest window description).
And where did you hear "...in a game not focused on questing."?
Bonechip said:
And where did you hear "...in a game not focused on questing."?
When he says this, he is talking about questing not being used as a primary source of XP for character level progression. VR has stated MANY times that questing will not be how you gain XP primarily. You will be killing things for XP as a primary level progression method.
I agree with others, with a game that require a quest be in your journal to get quest items (we assume as this is how EQ and Vanguard worked), then having a share button really isn't needed. People can pickup the quest later on. And as to the issue of finding the quest NPC, the fellow with the quest could just tell you, or better yet once you are done for the day maybe ask them to show you. Because hopefully you spent enough time with this person and talked enough with them that you became friends. That is the point of Pantheon, making friends. It's not like there will be a mini map with a blip on it showing you exactly where to go to find the quest NPC.
Bonechip said:Point is, since we will not have in-game maps, and the world is huge... the people that the quest is shared with will have some sort of idea where to find the NPC (from the quest window description).
And where did you hear "...in a game not focused on questing."?
Then you just do your best to tell them where or who the NPC is. If they seriously want to do the quest they can write the name down on a piece of paper or just open a tab in a browser and consult the web for the specifics of the quest and NPC.
From the Game Features page: "Discover meaningful questing that is optional, not the primary means of character advancement."
And from the FAQ: "Story and lore elements are essential to our Quest system – they need to be meaningful and give purpose. But as a player you should never feel overwhelmed with a bunch of quests that are nothing but mundane tasks. When you get a quest the intent is that it will be epic in nature and reinforce the fact that you are a resurrected hero. More specifically, Pantheon is not a ‘quest hub’ game, where you move to one level appropriate hub, do a bunch of quests in that area, and then move to the next hub; rather, you will need to search out and find quests by interacting with PCs and in a less linear and more ‘sandbox’ style setting."
Bonechip said:
Iksar said:I don't know if it's entirely necessary in a game not focused on questing. My assumption (I could be wrong entirely) is we aren't going to have "quest" items that only drop when a player is flagged for a quest but instead you would just tell your friend about the quest and they could gather the item(s) the NPC is after and turn them in when they make there way to the NPC later on.
Point is, since we will not have in-game maps, and the world is huge... the people that the quest is shared with will have some sort of idea where to find the NPC (from the quest window description).
And where did you hear "...in a game not focused on questing."?
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/game/faqs/
17.3 under Quests. Maybe he was referring to quest hubs in an area like EQ2 did it and 17.3 says there wont be quests hubs.
kellindil said:
When he says this, he is talking about questing not being used as a primary source of XP for character level progression. VR has stated MANY times that questing will not be how you gain XP primarily. You will be killing things for XP as a primary level progression method.
I was not talking about XP, and nowhere did I even mention it. The reward could be faction, food, whatever.
kellindil said:
That is the point of Pantheon, making friends. It's not like there will be a mini map with a blip on it showing you exactly where to go to find the quest NPC.
So it would be better to disrupt the party and wait for them to run to town and back... just to get a quest?
Bonechip said:Will there be some/any quests that are "shareable"?
Example 1:
- I pick up a basic collect quest from an NPC. (Go gather XX number of this item and return for reward).
- While adventuring, I group up with a couple of people that are fighting in the same general area as me.
- I say "I got this quest to gather some stuff for this guy".
- They say "Can you share it so we do not have to run all they way back... just to get the quest".
- (Me) Click "Share" on my quest window to share with all party members.
Example 2:
- I pick up a go kill x number of mobs quest and return with proof they are dead. (Bring back goblin war beads as proof)
- While adventuring, I group up with a couple of people that are fighting in the same general area as me.
- I say "I got this quest to kill mobs for this guy".
- They say "Can you share it so we do not have to run all they way back... just to get the quest".
- (Me) Click "Share" on my quest window to share with all party members.
The theory behind this is: I know a guy that wants things (or wants things dead), and will reward me for them. Why couldn't those types of quests be spread via "word-of-mouth"?
We're so stuck in thinking like how WOW works.
"In EQ" you didn't need to go GET the quest. You could stack up 100 gnoll pelts and then go turn them in. That's it. Turn in your green dragon scale and 3 blue diamonds. Done. Hopefully that's how "Kill 10 rats" quests work in this game. Hopefully quests have more significant meaning, new skills, new specializations, epic loot, and those kinds of quests should NOT be shareable. Basically, my point is that these old garbage "kill 10 rats" quests shouldn't be in the game, there are other mechanics for doing that kind of collection quest that doesn't require having a "quest" anyway, and real quests that are personal to your specific characters development don't make sense to share. This idea of having a journal to track collection quests is narrow inside the box thinking.
Bonechip said:So it would be better to disrupt the party and wait for them to run to town and back... just to get a quest?
So it would work like this, the quests requires 10 bonechips, you tell your group about it and then they can choose to loot 10 bonechips and turn it in later.
EQ2 had invisible drops that autofilled in if you had a quest, not items you can collect then turn in later like Crushbone Belts in EQ1 quest.
Zeem said:
So it would work like this, the quests requires 10 bonechips, you tell your group about it and then they can choose to loot 10 bonechips and turn it in later.
EQ2 had invisible drops that autofilled in if you had a quest, not items you can collect then turn in later like Crushbone Belts in EQ1 quest.
If that is how it will be... great.
If not, I think that shareable quests for at least some quests should be an option for the reasons I stated above.
Since we do not actually know how questing will work (at all).... Time will tell.. either way.
Krixus said:We're so stuck in thinking like how WOW works.
"In EQ" you didn't need to go GET the quest. You could stack up 100 gnoll pelts and then go turn them in. That's it. Turn in your green dragon scale and 3 blue diamonds. Done. Hopefully that's how "Kill 10 rats" quests work in this game. Hopefully quests have more significant meaning, new skills, new specializations, epic loot, and those kinds of quests should NOT be shareable. Basically, my point is that these old garbage "kill 10 rats" quests shouldn't be in the game, there are other mechanics for doing that kind of collection quest that doesn't require having a "quest" anyway, and real quests that are personal to your specific characters development don't make sense to share. This idea of having a journal to track collection quests is narrow inside the box thinking.
I don't mind those kill 10 rats but it should be clled a task and not a quest. Quest in my mind is something more epic like taking the one ring to Mount Doom. Tasks can be good for making coin, faction and the like but be called tasks. Maybe also bringing supplies to vendors so they can make some of the items they sell or increase their inventory of an item. Lots of those can be included in the functions of a city markets.
As far as shareable quests, they had them in eq2 because of the way quests works with the invisible drops and auto drops vs real drops that need to be carried and given to an npc.
Zeem said:Krixus said:We're so stuck in thinking like how WOW works.
"In EQ" you didn't need to go GET the quest. You could stack up 100 gnoll pelts and then go turn them in. That's it. Turn in your green dragon scale and 3 blue diamonds. Done. Hopefully that's how "Kill 10 rats" quests work in this game. Hopefully quests have more significant meaning, new skills, new specializations, epic loot, and those kinds of quests should NOT be shareable. Basically, my point is that these old garbage "kill 10 rats" quests shouldn't be in the game, there are other mechanics for doing that kind of collection quest that doesn't require having a "quest" anyway, and real quests that are personal to your specific characters development don't make sense to share. This idea of having a journal to track collection quests is narrow inside the box thinking.
As far as shareable quests, they had them in eq2 because of the way quests works with the invisible drops and auto drops vs real drops that need to be carried and given to an npc.
Basically, using your invisible counter example, the question can't be answered because we don't know how quests are going to work.
Bonechip said:
kellindil said:When he says this, he is talking about questing not being used as a primary source of XP for character level progression. VR has stated MANY times that questing will not be how you gain XP primarily. You will be killing things for XP as a primary level progression method.
I was not talking about XP, and nowhere did I even mention it. The reward could be faction, food, whatever.
Dude, re-read my post. I wasn't talking about what you said. I was commenting on Iksar's statement that the game isn't quest focused. You seem to be thinking WoW way of doing things. Quests are not for XP in this game and when Iksar said the game was not "quest focused" I believe this is what he was referring too (correct me if i'm wrong Ikky).
kellindil said:That is the point of Pantheon, making friends. It's not like there will be a mini map with a blip on it showing you exactly where to go to find the quest NPC.
So it would be better to disrupt the party and wait for them to run to town and back... just to get a quest?
If Pantheon works like EQ and Vanguard, which I am almost certain it will, you don't need to "get" a quest to collect items for said quest. Just as others here have said. This may be confusing for you if you never played EQ or any of the older MMOs. This was kinda the standard on how things worked until WoW came around.
kellindil said:If Pantheon works like EQ and Vanguard, which I am almost certain it will, you don't need to "get" a quest to collect items for said quest. Just as others here have said. This may be confusing for you if you never played EQ or any of the older MMOs. This was kinda the standard on how things worked until WoW came around.
Oldschool EQ Veteran here. Yep, know exactly how it was/is in EQ. (And have never played WoW)
We do not know how questing in Pantheon is going to work. Just thought I would start a dialog for ideas being as how it is still "in the works".
LOTRO did a nice job with shareable quests if I recall (it's been awhile). If it was a simple tier one quest with no pre-requisites, you could hit a button to share it with everyone in your group. If it was a quest with prerequisites, only those who had completed the prereqs could advance it. Party members could accept/decline adding the quest to their active list.
The "need the quest" model has a few advantages. You don't have to fill up bag slots for quest items you may never turn in. You can be given credit for actions, rather than just items.
Some of us old school players have a tendency to stick their nose up at anything that came out of WoW, but they had their bright moments on that dev team too.
Celandor said:LOTRO did a nice job with shareable quests if I recall (it's been awhile). If it was a simple tier one quest with no pre-requisites, you could hit a button to share it with everyone in your group. If it was a quest with prerequisites, only those who had completed the prereqs could advance it. Party members could accept/decline adding the quest to their active list.
The "need the quest" model has a few advantages. You don't have to fill up bag slots for quest items you may never turn in. You can be given credit for actions, rather than just items.
Some of us old school players have a tendency to stick their nose up at anything that came out of WoW, but they had their bright moments on that dev team too.
I'm a fan of being given credit for the action of playing the game and not being told when and where and how many. We are so_caught_up in how WOW and clones do things. This game is an exact response to the watering down of MMOs.
Eh, I don't really care one way or the other. It might be convenient in some cases, but I've never been a huge fan of quests, especially not the way WoW and just about every MMO thereafter handled them. The only quests I like are the really hard ones that require lots of time and effort and actually have a notable reward. Usually these would take anywhere from a day to several weeks (or more) to complete, but every step you completed made you want to jump out of your chair and punch a hole in the wall (you know, from excitement lol).
It was nice to have some quests like for lego pads and CB belts (EQ). Gave lower level players a chance to make a little bit of money to buy gear or turn in for a little xp boost. But that's about where I'd like to see the more "foo-foo" quests stop. Too much of that stuff and the game--to me, at least--starts to feel more like a theme park and less like an immersive, dangerous world.
As mentioned, I'm not sure there is much of a need for the "Share" function the way I imagine VR will approach questing. But it's probably an issue that they can look at internally and decide pretty easily whether it's a function that is worth implementing.
Just my 2c
Celandor said:LOTRO did a nice job with shareable quests if I recall (it's been awhile). If it was a simple tier one quest with no pre-requisites, you could hit a button to share it with everyone in your group. If it was a quest with prerequisites, only those who had completed the prereqs could advance it. Party members could accept/decline adding the quest to their active list.
The "need the quest" model has a few advantages. You don't have to fill up bag slots for quest items you may never turn in. You can be given credit for actions, rather than just items.
Some of us old school players have a tendency to stick their nose up at anything that came out of WoW, but they had their bright moments on that dev team too.
It's all a matter of opinion. I don't like the way WoW did it because I am a fan of finding a random quest item while I am out adventuring and then finding the quest that goes with it. That feels more organic to me than getting some random ass task in tow from some guy with a big ! above his head. I don't see WoW as taking a step forward with this type of thing. I see it as dumbing down and hand holding which completely kills all sense of adventure and accomplishment for me.
kellindil said:It's all a matter of opinion. I don't like the way WoW did it because I am a fan of finding a random quest item while I am out adventuring and then finding the quest that goes with it. That feels more organic to me than getting some random ass task in tow from some guy with a big ! above his head. I don't see WoW as taking a step forward with this type of thing. I see it as dumbing down and hand holding which completely kills all sense of adventure and accomplishment for me.
Completely agree.
This depends on how the quest system is implimented.
If it requires a journal entry to be created to monitor your looting, then it would be a neat feature.
But if questing is like EQ where you just turn stuff in without needing a quest entry then it would not be needed.
Given the perception system, which I suspect will be used for the majority, if not all, of the quests, based on what I have repeatedly seen and heard in the videos, will probably not be shareable. I don't think you will be able to have a character wwith a high perception skill be able to share their quests with others just because they don't have the perception skill to get them organically.
I'd prefer to not see sharable "Kill 10 rat quests" or to see those types of quests in game at all as quests, tasks, etc. Now, in my "Choose my own adventure world" you can have those quests in game without ever needing a glowing marker and/or NPC to tell you to kill 10 rats by having some sort of faction associated with X mob that you want to raise. In that world, I may kill 1000 gnolls to raise my faction and get more meaning and enjoyment out of it.
You also could have some faction related quests similar to the crushbone belts as mentioned earlier in EQ that would seem more meaningful than Kill 10 rats. And, those could "theoretically" be shared by purchasing the belts. However, I would have a caveat on it and not let them be as overpowering/power-game-able as they became in EQ once it was realized you could power game twinks/friends.
Or, for Pantheon, depending on how their quest systems/perception systems etc. are implemented, you could have shared quests based on the in-game systems that are "triggered" and if you're in the active group, perhaps you get it as well. I wouldn't be against the idea of them, but let them be meaningful.
Raidan said:I'd prefer to not see sharable "Kill 10 rat quests" or to see those types of quests in game at all as quests, tasks, etc. Now, in my "Choose my own adventure world" you can have those quests in game without ever needing a glowing marker and/or NPC to tell you to kill 10 rats by having some sort of faction associated with X mob that you want to raise. In that world, I may kill 1000 gnolls to raise my faction and get more meaning and enjoyment out of it.
You also could have some faction related quests similar to the crushbone belts as mentioned earlier in EQ that would seem more meaningful than Kill 10 rats. And, those could "theoretically" be shared by purchasing the belts. However, I would have a caveat on it and not let them be as overpowering/power-game-able as they became in EQ once it was realized you could power game twinks/friends.
Or, for Pantheon, depending on how their quest systems/perception systems etc. are implemented, you could have shared quests based on the in-game systems that are "triggered" and if you're in the active group, perhaps you get it as well. I wouldn't be against the idea of them, but let them be meaningful.
100% agreed. Not sure how confidentely we can say "Pantheon is this kinda game, or that kinda game", I do think we can at least agree that it's a game that will require more effort than your more recent MMO's. That effort, I think, should include having to do the legwork to actually pick up the quest. Especially if they approach quest dialogue as they did in EQ, where you'd have to /say certain key words in order to be given said quest.
