Vah quest tree ultra megathread
- Thread starter Thinkmeats
- Start date
Thinkmeats
War Is Good For Business
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
It's there and dropping as far as I can tell, but it's common enough that you should have seen plenty. I'll investigate.
edit: Confirmed dropping, and statistically 93% of people get one or more per clear. The RNG must hate you
Yally said:
It's there and dropping as far as I can tell, but it's common enough that you should have seen plenty. I'll investigate.
edit: Confirmed dropping, and statistically 93% of people get one or more per clear. The RNG must hate you
Syalara
Dalayan Beginner
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
Warning: spoilers in dis post!
Upon speaking with Shaylan I should have recognized these options as alignment questions however there was no warning that my alignment would actually change from one to another. In my example, Neutral, Good to Lawful, Good.
Besides the options being rather unclear as to which choices were which, I would have deffo appreciated some kind of warning similar to the one you get when speaking to the MQ Seeker that can alter your alignment. Fortunately I only lost 2% to my alignment bonus, but I truly never wanted to be lawful and am saddened that I am now stuck as such as I can not get the same dialog options from Shaylan again.
These were her options:
[D1] I will. Whatever she is, she has done horrible wrong. Whatever her plan, the ends do not justify the means when they cause tragedies like this. Your lives are not hers to play with.
[D2] I will. She had no right to uproot so many of you and use you as pawns to her ends. Her actions brand her as a tyrant even if she means to help, which I doubt.
[D3] I will. She had the strength to do what she did and none could stop her. You are a powerless toy in her hand and your child is dead because of that weakness. Your inability to save him is not her problem. She has not erred.
[D4] I will. While her ends may be inscrutable to us, she does not seem to wish you harm. She tried to save Shan and she shared in your grief when she failed. So long as her intent is not ill, we should not condemn her.
I still dont get how I went to lawful by taking D4 after rereading it several times. Maybe I am slow.
More clarity in this dialog and some kind of heads up would be appreciated.
Warning: spoilers in dis post!
Upon speaking with Shaylan I should have recognized these options as alignment questions however there was no warning that my alignment would actually change from one to another. In my example, Neutral, Good to Lawful, Good.
Besides the options being rather unclear as to which choices were which, I would have deffo appreciated some kind of warning similar to the one you get when speaking to the MQ Seeker that can alter your alignment. Fortunately I only lost 2% to my alignment bonus, but I truly never wanted to be lawful and am saddened that I am now stuck as such as I can not get the same dialog options from Shaylan again.
These were her options:
[D1] I will. Whatever she is, she has done horrible wrong. Whatever her plan, the ends do not justify the means when they cause tragedies like this. Your lives are not hers to play with.
[D2] I will. She had no right to uproot so many of you and use you as pawns to her ends. Her actions brand her as a tyrant even if she means to help, which I doubt.
[D3] I will. She had the strength to do what she did and none could stop her. You are a powerless toy in her hand and your child is dead because of that weakness. Your inability to save him is not her problem. She has not erred.
[D4] I will. While her ends may be inscrutable to us, she does not seem to wish you harm. She tried to save Shan and she shared in your grief when she failed. So long as her intent is not ill, we should not condemn her.
I still dont get how I went to lawful by taking D4 after rereading it several times. Maybe I am slow.
More clarity in this dialog and some kind of heads up would be appreciated.
Thinkmeats
War Is Good For Business
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
Spoilers in this post too!
Those dialog options won't change. Sorry fellas, but I'm not going to break immersion in half like that. The most I might do is include a MSGNOTE explaining that alignment is a bit more complex than most give it credit for, and suggest that they read up in the ToK before picking an option, in the first alignment-shove they get from the quest.
And honestly, those alignment options are far from 'russian roulette' if you actually know what the varying alignments mean. The third one is extremely cruel, so that's obvious. The rest are trickier and rely on the player understanding the moral situation.
I'm gonna repeat that because it bears repeating. It is not a game of 'which thing sounds the most X'. It--and all other alignment shoves--are resolutions of a moral quandry. The alignment bonus is there for the questly types to get a little boost out of being consistent in RP--it's not at all intended to just be a simplistic game of alignment pokemon. If those four dialog options were really hammy, it would detract from the quest in a huge way.
That out of the way, I'll explain these three so you get a better idea of what the alignments mean (especially LAW and CHAOS, since GOOD and EVIL are pretty self-explanitory), but you're on your own for the rest.
This one's first for a reason. It's a moral objection to what the traveller has done, to be sure, but it doesn't seem to have much else going for it. It seems like the sort of thing most anyone would say. This puts it very solidly in the camp of GOOD, because GOOD is not generally about farting rainbows and riding unicorns--most of the time, it's simply about being a decent person. In fact, all the alignments read as quite reasonable when presented fairly. That's why playing an alignment that you, as a person, don't agree with can be tricky. (Note that EVIL isn't exactly 'prevented fairly' here.)
Quite similar to the first one, but because it's placed next to it in what is obviously an alignment choice, the differences become more important. See the huge focus on heaping approbrium on the way the traveller treats the other NPCs like "pawns"? In fact, there's nothing in that sentence other than words yelling at the traveller for playing with the fates of the NPCs. This is the core of the CHAOTIC alignment. CHAOS isn't about just flipping coins and being random; far from it, in fact. CHAOTIC represents freedom, whimsy, lack of a strong authority, and in general the right for each person to choose--be the choice as grand as overall destiny or as minor as where they'd like to smoke.
I almost wish you guys hadsyduck: over a different alignment choice so that the EVIL would be more subtle, but c`est la vie. Shaylan is extremely weak compared to the character and EVIL just does not tend to let that sort of thing alone. The dialog option here is cruel knife-twisting for its own sake, as EVIL tends to believe that people grow stronger through adversity and EVIL tends not to like the notion of sheltering someone from what they see as bitter truth (though EVIL also tends to take an is/ought directoin--as in, "because you GOT screwed, you OUGHT to have been screwed"). The EVIL person in question would generally not say they were doing Shaylan a favor, but would tend to defend his or her speech by pointing out that they were telling the truth and that Shaylan shouldn't be hidden from reality.
The second dialog option approving of the traveller's deeds. The point it's making is simple: the traveller is obviously more powerful than we are and she doesn't seem to be trying to hurt things so we shouldn't second-guess her. It makes no comment on whether the traveller is right or wrong. This dialog choice is all about ceding the important choice (is it ok to do this shit to these people without consent?) to the traveller--a very LAWFUL thing to do. LAW isn't just about having authority, it's also about submitting to authority.
Spoilers in this post too!
Those dialog options won't change. Sorry fellas, but I'm not going to break immersion in half like that. The most I might do is include a MSGNOTE explaining that alignment is a bit more complex than most give it credit for, and suggest that they read up in the ToK before picking an option, in the first alignment-shove they get from the quest.
And honestly, those alignment options are far from 'russian roulette' if you actually know what the varying alignments mean. The third one is extremely cruel, so that's obvious. The rest are trickier and rely on the player understanding the moral situation.
I'm gonna repeat that because it bears repeating. It is not a game of 'which thing sounds the most X'. It--and all other alignment shoves--are resolutions of a moral quandry. The alignment bonus is there for the questly types to get a little boost out of being consistent in RP--it's not at all intended to just be a simplistic game of alignment pokemon. If those four dialog options were really hammy, it would detract from the quest in a huge way.
That out of the way, I'll explain these three so you get a better idea of what the alignments mean (especially LAW and CHAOS, since GOOD and EVIL are pretty self-explanitory), but you're on your own for the rest.
This one's first for a reason. It's a moral objection to what the traveller has done, to be sure, but it doesn't seem to have much else going for it. It seems like the sort of thing most anyone would say. This puts it very solidly in the camp of GOOD, because GOOD is not generally about farting rainbows and riding unicorns--most of the time, it's simply about being a decent person. In fact, all the alignments read as quite reasonable when presented fairly. That's why playing an alignment that you, as a person, don't agree with can be tricky. (Note that EVIL isn't exactly 'prevented fairly' here.)
Quite similar to the first one, but because it's placed next to it in what is obviously an alignment choice, the differences become more important. See the huge focus on heaping approbrium on the way the traveller treats the other NPCs like "pawns"? In fact, there's nothing in that sentence other than words yelling at the traveller for playing with the fates of the NPCs. This is the core of the CHAOTIC alignment. CHAOS isn't about just flipping coins and being random; far from it, in fact. CHAOTIC represents freedom, whimsy, lack of a strong authority, and in general the right for each person to choose--be the choice as grand as overall destiny or as minor as where they'd like to smoke.
I almost wish you guys had
syduck: over a different alignment choice so that the EVIL would be more subtle, but c`est la vie. Shaylan is extremely weak compared to the character and EVIL just does not tend to let that sort of thing alone. The dialog option here is cruel knife-twisting for its own sake, as EVIL tends to believe that people grow stronger through adversity and EVIL tends not to like the notion of sheltering someone from what they see as bitter truth (though EVIL also tends to take an is/ought directoin--as in, "because you GOT screwed, you OUGHT to have been screwed"). The EVIL person in question would generally not say they were doing Shaylan a favor, but would tend to defend his or her speech by pointing out that they were telling the truth and that Shaylan shouldn't be hidden from reality. The second dialog option approving of the traveller's deeds. The point it's making is simple: the traveller is obviously more powerful than we are and she doesn't seem to be trying to hurt things so we shouldn't second-guess her. It makes no comment on whether the traveller is right or wrong. This dialog choice is all about ceding the important choice (is it ok to do this shit to these people without consent?) to the traveller--a very LAWFUL thing to do. LAW isn't just about having authority, it's also about submitting to authority.
Syalara
Dalayan Beginner
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
I think the logic is more apparent to you then to anyone reading the dialog options. Kinda like having a zit on your nose thats just forming, you can see it clear as day cause you know its there but others wont notice the subtle difference.
If you want to keep it this way thats your choice and I will live with the consequences but do you really think that anyone will get out of these dialog options what you have written above?
I can make (or try to) an argument that the first one leans towards lawful simply by stating that the ends do not justify the means. That is a lawful position to take because it removes circumstances from the equation and deals only in facts. While the fourth option seems more Neutral to me because it tries not to take sides quite clearly. I could also argue that the 4th option favors good cause even while admittedly not having a F'n clue what the traveler is up to or why, they are quick to forgive her actions so long as she didnt mean any ill by it.
Point is, not everyone (likely anyone) is going to get out of those options what you expect them to. We all read into things differently and until your post, it was all guesswork on the players end.
I have literally read every line of text presented to me by everyone in the camp, both in game and in then I reread them from my logfile and still did not get what you somehow expected me to get from the dialog options. And ya, I have read the entirety of the religion thread.
What I imagine will happen is throughout this quest series players will be presented with many more such dialog options that are open to massively varying interpretations and will do one of two things. Take a best guess, like pin the tail on the alignment (cause thats better then alignment pokemon amirite?) or just try and dodge the dialog altogether if its not pivotal to the quest. Which of course dosent hurt the guy doing the quest 6 months from now, but only the ones that have to do it without benefit of anyone else getting hosed and posting about it first.
I used to care about my alignment and was proud of being Neutral from day one of my character creation and holding 19% to Jayla and openly and actively sought that last 1%. Now however I will likely just plow through any further alignment questions and see where I stand when the dust settles and deal with it way down the road when I've completed the quest series. Considering I can not guess whats was in your head when you wrote the dialog and even with your explanations it is not as clear as you may think so no matter how much thought I put into the questions the end result will just be a guess anyway.
I think the logic is more apparent to you then to anyone reading the dialog options. Kinda like having a zit on your nose thats just forming, you can see it clear as day cause you know its there but others wont notice the subtle difference.
If you want to keep it this way thats your choice and I will live with the consequences but do you really think that anyone will get out of these dialog options what you have written above?
I can make (or try to) an argument that the first one leans towards lawful simply by stating that the ends do not justify the means. That is a lawful position to take because it removes circumstances from the equation and deals only in facts. While the fourth option seems more Neutral to me because it tries not to take sides quite clearly. I could also argue that the 4th option favors good cause even while admittedly not having a F'n clue what the traveler is up to or why, they are quick to forgive her actions so long as she didnt mean any ill by it.
Point is, not everyone (likely anyone) is going to get out of those options what you expect them to. We all read into things differently and until your post, it was all guesswork on the players end.
I have literally read every line of text presented to me by everyone in the camp, both in game and in then I reread them from my logfile and still did not get what you somehow expected me to get from the dialog options. And ya, I have read the entirety of the religion thread.
What I imagine will happen is throughout this quest series players will be presented with many more such dialog options that are open to massively varying interpretations and will do one of two things. Take a best guess, like pin the tail on the alignment (cause thats better then alignment pokemon amirite?) or just try and dodge the dialog altogether if its not pivotal to the quest. Which of course dosent hurt the guy doing the quest 6 months from now, but only the ones that have to do it without benefit of anyone else getting hosed and posting about it first.
I used to care about my alignment and was proud of being Neutral from day one of my character creation and holding 19% to Jayla and openly and actively sought that last 1%. Now however I will likely just plow through any further alignment questions and see where I stand when the dust settles and deal with it way down the road when I've completed the quest series. Considering I can not guess whats was in your head when you wrote the dialog and even with your explanations it is not as clear as you may think so no matter how much thought I put into the questions the end result will just be a guess anyway.
Thinkmeats
War Is Good For Business
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
Actually, it's more that the Tome of Knowledge doesn't have an accurate description of the varying alignments. Wiz based the alignments in this game off the Dungeons and Dragons pnp game, and anyone who has a good amount of experience with that is gonna know who's LE and who's CG and so on--and I'm a huge D&D nerd. It's not "what does L/C/G/E mean to thinkmeats?", it's "what do they mean in the game?". I'll probably end up typing up a description for it, since I was surprised to learn there wasn't one already present (though most alignment choices so far have been fairly obvious, or indeed have simply told you what alignment they were a la CoI/SC/BS).
While that might work in a system based completely on the definition of the word 'Lawful', it doesn't have much bearing on the D&D/SoD alignment chart. Lawful means something specific to the exclusion of other things, and strongly worded statements like the one in the quest option can't really be interpreted multiple ways.
If you do this, you do it out of petulance in some weak attempt to prove your point in this thread. I won't feel sorry for you. And really, such threats aren't necessary and add nothing to the discussion.
Syalara said:
Actually, it's more that the Tome of Knowledge doesn't have an accurate description of the varying alignments. Wiz based the alignments in this game off the Dungeons and Dragons pnp game, and anyone who has a good amount of experience with that is gonna know who's LE and who's CG and so on--and I'm a huge D&D nerd. It's not "what does L/C/G/E mean to thinkmeats?", it's "what do they mean in the game?". I'll probably end up typing up a description for it, since I was surprised to learn there wasn't one already present (though most alignment choices so far have been fairly obvious, or indeed have simply told you what alignment they were a la CoI/SC/BS).
Syalara said:
While that might work in a system based completely on the definition of the word 'Lawful', it doesn't have much bearing on the D&D/SoD alignment chart. Lawful means something specific to the exclusion of other things, and strongly worded statements like the one in the quest option can't really be interpreted multiple ways.
Syalara said:
If you do this, you do it out of petulance in some weak attempt to prove your point in this thread. I won't feel sorry for you. And really, such threats aren't necessary and add nothing to the discussion.
Syalara
Dalayan Beginner
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
I wasnt making a threat but how on earth can I attempt to make the right choice for my chosen alignment when I i can take several meanings from each dialog option. Its guesswork. I chose D4 convinced it was the Neutral thing to do and to me it is still neutral even after your explanation of your own dialog.
I am not a DnD geek, maybe I dont know the secret code to deciphering the meaning behind the text but it is anything but clear as far as my eyes do read it. You yourself state the ToK dosent have an accurate description of the alignments so that puts players, even the ones who give a shit and read that stuff, behind the eight ball from the get go.
I absolutely love the quest line so far, you clearly have put an immense amount of time and thought into them and thats crystal clear even having only scratched the surface. But these dialog choices are waaaaaaaay too open to interpretation and present a subtlety of language far beyond what most people posses. Myself included obv as I chose wrong for what I wanted.
I wasnt making a threat but how on earth can I attempt to make the right choice for my chosen alignment when I i can take several meanings from each dialog option. Its guesswork. I chose D4 convinced it was the Neutral thing to do and to me it is still neutral even after your explanation of your own dialog.
I am not a DnD geek, maybe I dont know the secret code to deciphering the meaning behind the text but it is anything but clear as far as my eyes do read it. You yourself state the ToK dosent have an accurate description of the alignments so that puts players, even the ones who give a shit and read that stuff, behind the eight ball from the get go.
I absolutely love the quest line so far, you clearly have put an immense amount of time and thought into them and thats crystal clear even having only scratched the surface. But these dialog choices are waaaaaaaay too open to interpretation and present a subtlety of language far beyond what most people posses. Myself included obv as I chose wrong for what I wanted.
Thinkmeats
War Is Good For Business
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
I'm not sure why you're assuming I'm fine with the situation as-is. I rejected your suggestions for change, but I never said I wouldn't do anything. Behold: What alignments mean.
And honestly, how in the world could we even HAVE an alignment system without a clear idea of what LAW, CHAOS, GOOD, and EVIL mean? If we left it "open to interpretation" then it would be pointless.
I'm not even trying to say that, really. It's not particularly subtle when viewed in the lens of D&D-type alignment (hell, the CHAOS part rails against tyrants in its text). You just didn't know how to judge it, which was why I said I'd have a MSGNOTE pointing to the tok thread. When I saw that there wasn't a tok thread, I made one. EZPZ :toot:
edit: I decided against linking to the new tok post from the quest, since the Dream already explains alignment to some extent and most players check out the Tome of Knowledge from time to time. Hopefully that'll be enough.
Syalara said:
I'm not sure why you're assuming I'm fine with the situation as-is. I rejected your suggestions for change, but I never said I wouldn't do anything. Behold: What alignments mean.
And honestly, how in the world could we even HAVE an alignment system without a clear idea of what LAW, CHAOS, GOOD, and EVIL mean? If we left it "open to interpretation" then it would be pointless.
Syalara said:
I'm not even trying to say that, really. It's not particularly subtle when viewed in the lens of D&D-type alignment (hell, the CHAOS part rails against tyrants in its text). You just didn't know how to judge it, which was why I said I'd have a MSGNOTE pointing to the tok thread. When I saw that there wasn't a tok thread, I made one. EZPZ :toot:
edit: I decided against linking to the new tok post from the quest, since the Dream already explains alignment to some extent and most players check out the Tome of Knowledge from time to time. Hopefully that'll be enough.
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
Well picking option 3 is pretty cruel so it's really no surprise she doesn't want to talk to you anymore. I did it too (then belatedly remembered that I needed chaos points more than evil points) and I wasn't at all surprised that she shut down on me.
Well picking option 3 is pretty cruel so it's really no surprise she doesn't want to talk to you anymore. I did it too (then belatedly remembered that I needed chaos points more than evil points) and I wasn't at all surprised that she shut down on me.
Thinkmeats
War Is Good For Business
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
fixt
Ykari07 said:
fixt
Thinkmeats
War Is Good For Business
Re: New quest tree ultra megathread
Fixed a bug with *Mielech that was causing him to do twice normal damage, for any of you who tried him and became discouraged when he beat the tar out of you.
Fixed a bug with *Mielech that was causing him to do twice normal damage, for any of you who tried him and became discouraged when he beat the tar out of you.
