Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope there are two main types of Player-given missions. The first is similar to the bounty system but could extend to not only PKs but to acquisition of materials. In fact, I think the latter would be the stronger type. The second type of mission would be related to association to specific factions of religions and the ability to give out missions to further the causes of that faction.
The player-based bounty system would allow players to offer rewards for the completion of any trackable event such as the killing of other characters (PC or NPC). Or the crafting and delivery of specific item(s). This would allow players to request unique gear (perhaps with unusual stats for a specialized purpose) or even items for use in crafting.
The other type of mission giving is based upon unique access to the goals of a faction; perhaps, up to and even including dictating those goals as the faction leader. Religions on one hand would always have NPC leaders as the leader is the deity. Depending upon ones "rank" or "reputation" in the religious faction, the player would have access to ever more detailed understandings of the gods plans and as such can request players to act upon it. Societies on the other hand may or may not have necessarily NPC leaders. PC leader(s) could create a caste system based upon the creation of a set of missions and dictating which rules are available to which players within the faction. This keeps players who wish to be part of these societies going to those with ever more power.
In the case of all missions, and depending on the amount of immersion vs. ease of gameplay the devs decide upon, I think players who can give missions have the option to toggle a "mission available icon". Choices for this icon would include "public" or "only members of my faction". Additionally, I would hope that there is a way to post missions on public boards (but also I would not want to require this).
Complex social structures such as spy rings can even be created depending upon the level of freedom of association allowed by the game (for instance, how many not-directly at war factions can one be part of at once)?
Finally, I think mission givers should have the option to place the reward for a given mission in an "escrow". This would allow people who are taking a mission to demand the reward be put into escrow if the giver in not known to be trustworthy. I would not wish to require this though.
...Religions on one hand would always have NPC leaders as the leader is the deity. Depending upon ones "rank" or "reputation" in the religious faction, the player would have access to ever more detailed understandings of the gods plans and as such can request players to act upon it...
Overall I think this is a great idea. The specific part I put in above to bring up that, even in Golarion, I don't think deities regularly interact with mortals. Therefore, it could be that two high ranking priests of the same god might interpret something differently and start two different churches that agree in some areas and oppose in others.
Reminds me of a joke I heard once...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...Religions on one hand would always have NPC leaders as the leader is the deity. Depending upon ones "rank" or "reputation" in the religious faction, the player would have access to ever more detailed understandings of the gods plans and as such can request players to act upon it...Overall I think this is a great idea. The specific part I put in above to bring up that, even in Golarion, I don't think deities regularly interact with mortals. Therefore, it could be that two high ranking priests of the same god might interpret something differently and start two different churches that agree in some areas and oppose in others.
Reminds me of a joke I heard once...
** spoiler omitted **
This is very true, maybe gods only provide a direction for the "church" and the highest level of priests create the missions based upon their interpretation of the gods "word". The problem with this is I am not sure how then to create oversight and keeping the religion true to the deity (I like systems that are self sustaining and self correcting).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Bah, I just added a big section...but it did not post evidently.
So, the idea above outlines how a faction can work top-down. But this rarely works because no one likes being the peon. So, the people at the bottom will tire of being at the bottom and eventually leave...then the top has no foundation and falls apart. What is necessary to add is a system for players to join a faction based on voluntary association and have a say in the structure of that faction.
This is where my previously posted idea about a reputation system comes in. Each character has a reputation in every faction he/she is part of. This includes religions, nations, player made factions, and as I previously argued there should even be a local general reputation.
Reputation is entirely independent of alignment and represents the amount of loyalty or respect you have in a given faction. The leader of a faction is the persons with the highest reputation. The higher the reputation, the higher the rank within the faction. Being negative in a faction means you are in varying degrees in disagreement with the faction...ranging from distrust, dislike, angered, hate and war.
As per the missions system above, the higher rank you are, the different missions for your faction you are able to distribute. This represents a better knowledge of the factions plans and intents.
There are two ways to gain reputation for a faction. Completion of missions and player awarded [+ Rep]. Players can also give [- Rep] to those who act in ways the player feels are inappropriate. Players are able to award reputation for any faction they belong to. And all players belong to the local "faction" even if they belong to no others. This system also allows factions such as guilds to exist purely on the [+/- Rep] system without need for missions.
As previously mentioned, leaders of a faction are those who have the highest reputation. This is logical because a community would reward that which they respect most. A community that respects strength of arms would make the most powerful character [+ Rep] resulting in their lead. A community that was "Good" would make the most helpful player leader.
One of the most interesting aspects of this system is that the more reputation with a faction you have, the more your [+/- Rep] awards mean. The leader of a faction gracing a new player might be a knighting ceremony. Likewise, leaders are able to stop internal rebellions by [- Rep]'ing the leader of the revolution. However, the amount of power is relative, two equal standing characters, no matter how much rep they have, would have the same effect on each other. So, if the leader of the revolution had almost as much reputation as the current leader, the leaders [- Rep] will not have much effect.
On the other hand, leaders can also limit [+ Rep] by limiting missions (which was the alternate manner of gaining rep). Doing this would limit the revolutions movement to the number of characters who are part of the revolution.
This allows guilds to remove leaders who are poor as well as those who are absent. If someone is technically the leader of a guild, they can still make the choice to follow the commands of another, so if players want a certain guild structure, it can be artificially created.
Of course it is important to note that reputations are not universal and "relatively" static like alignments. As time goes by without reinforcement, reputations slowly creep back to zero.
This is a brief outline of a bottom-up method of building factions. NPC factions would have NPC members and usually NPC leaders with static positions and missions, but this system in addition to the top-down system described up top would allow the creation and self maintenance of any character associations. It would also reduce the demands on the GM/CSRs for things such as replacing missing GLs.
In the spirit of governments gaining the right to govern by the consent of the governed. And, in kind, treating all associations and organizations as a form of governance. Even equal representation could be replicated by this system if the leader sets it up as such, and of course if the faction wants this and the leader does not, the governed will no longer consent to be so.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The local reputation works under the same system as factional reputation, but its mechanics work a bit different. Local reputation is localize in its range, centered upon the geographic location people [+/- Rep] you.
To illustrate, if a reputation wise neutral character (say a new player) refused to pay a decently known merchant. That merchant would [- Local Rep] him/her and those in the immediate local area (say the corner of the market) would see this character with a slightly less than 0 Local Rep. Local reputation is a sign of how the others in the local community see you. In the example above, the merchant would have started yelling at the character who would not pay and the characters around would know that person was untrustworthy. On the other hand, if a new character attacked a well loved factional leader and was subdued (or the leader got away) the leader could [- Rep] the individual and it would take a huge hit as the factional leader also has a very high [+ Local Rep]. This in connection with the [- Rep] that would be awarded by those who saw the event would result in a War status with Local...leading to attack by any NPC or PC guards.
However, if this player could escape to another nation, he would not be recognized and his Local Rep would be 0 (although if he went back to the locale of the crime he would still be at war).
There would be various penalties for negative reputation such as higher prices at merchants, the demand for escrows for the reward of any given missions, or even merchants who will not do business with characters with [- Local Rep]. For instance, if the character who refused to pay the merchant in the first example then went to other merchants...they could see the negative rep and refuse to sell to them. It would all be up to the players, but other player merchants might not take kindly to another merchant selling gear to a known criminal, resulting in [- Local Rep].
[Local Rep] like all Rep fades with time.
To better illustrate the mechanics end of [Local Rep], each award thereof has a geographic location and magnitude. It would create a density map with a diffusion function. A mobile criminal (or do gooder) would create a map with spreading dots of [+/- Local Rep]. Over time these fade to 0; all deeds, good and evil, are forgotten in time.
This also requires that evil actions and plotting occur in secret to avoid [- Local Rep] from those players around you.
Bringing this thread full circle, access to public missions such as those for harvesting/crafting or even bounty would be based upon [+ Local Rep]. As a good crafter, I would not hire someone who I do not trust to work for me. This trust is represented by a certain [+ Local Rep].