Goblin Squad Member
|
I believe that Lawful entities can use either type of mechanic, because they understand what is chaotic. They may be willing to slip a bit towards their enemy's tactics in order to gain some kind of an advantage.
A chaotic entity may not be able to do the same. They may not be disciplined enough or even have the concept of lawfulness to even use such a tactic.
In warfare, lawful will generally have an advantage, especially in tactics. Chaotics should have the advantage, when the strategies or tactics of their opponents begin to fail. They would then capitalize on the ensuing chaos of their enemy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm just wondering how many different ways warfare will be able to be waged.
It would be interesting to see some separate mechanics for warfare based on the alignments.
The Lawful being more inclined or just have options for more negotiable situations. Prior declarations being important.
The Chaotic having more of a "loose" approach. A massive, undisciplined Horde at the gates. "Surprise! My horde is passing through. You are at War!!!"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I generaly expect that fighting in a formaly declared War (within whatever bounds GW sets for such activity) will have no effect on Alignment.
Declaration of War may have some but I would expect that might be the Alignment of the Settlement or at most the Leaders of the Settlement rather then individual members.
I would hope that Settlements would have some method of being able to declare war without major negative impact to Alignment....assuming appropriate pre-conditions were in place and process was properly caried out....but that may be a bit too complex a mechanic for GW to want to get into?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see it being very difficult for the game to sense when a war is 'just', there can be obvious triggers, like group A killing X members of group B outside of group A's territory over Y days, where X and Y are outside of normal interactions.
Alignment should play a role. Good and lawful shouldn't be able to declare war against anyone with no drawback. Good organizations should only be able to target evil organizations with no/little penalty, and lawful should only be able to target chaotic with no/little penalty.
I think the op was more about how war was to be declared.
For example Lawful good would give advance notice of at least 24 hours and give a sad style option. For instance pay 500 coin or face war
whereas
Chaotic evil may get away with sending out the war declaration with 30 seconds warning before they attack
That was my interpretation anyway
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Good question: We're due a full blog on "Declarations of Warfare"! And I suspect Alignment/Reputation will hold a powerful bearing on that?
Of all the topics running through my head, I'm looking forward to whatever blog post (sooner or later) in which they delve deeper into the alignment ideas, plans, potential hazards for different game mechanic options, etc. and how that relates to cultures "sharing" their traditions with each other in Warfare (large and small). So yea...I'm looking forward to a full blog of this topic as well AvenaOats :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I doubt it would be restricted mechanically, but likely surprise attacks without declaration of war and lack of adherence to civilized rules of war would be distinctly chaotic, perhaps evil, and unreputable acts. I would assume they would affect the alignments and reputations of those involved accordingly.
It will be up to lawful players and factions to keep their own actions lawful.