Goblin Squad Member
|
It's fairly obvious that the meta-game Guild "The Seventh Veil" could create four different Settlements: True Neutral, Lawful Good, Chaotic Good, and Lawful Evil. We would not be allowed to form a Player Nation with them in-game, but we could certainly cooperate between them.
What value does a Player Nation offer, so that constraining ourselves to only having Settlements that are allowed becomes attractive?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...views/philosophy...
I am far from able to speak for everyone in TSV, but the factor I've noticed that links many of us is the pursuit of knowledge, regardless of any alignment-, or possibly even reputation-, based concerns. We truly belong in a meta environment, because each of us, at some level (again, my belief), cares more for the location, acquisition, and preservation of knowledge than anything else.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What value does a Player Nation offer, so that constraining ourselves to only having Settlements that are allowed becomes attractive?
A settlement requires that all members/citizens be within one alignment step of the settlement alignment. A player nation allows members to be up to two steps from its chartered alignment (depending on settlement alignments), so you can get a wider range of citizen.
So if your nation was chartered as LG, you could have a LN settlement and a NG settlement. You could have citizens from all alignments except NE, CE, and LN.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon, I am not up-to-date on all the posts, why is it "fairly obvious" that TSV can be divided into 4 different alignment oriented settlements?
There's nothing particularly special about those particular alignments. I was really trying to say that we were capable of building a number of Settlements which would not be allowed into the same Player Nation because of the 1-step Alignment rule.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Urman, I understand that.
My question is, why is it worth our while to only build LG, LN, and NG Settlements to fit into the Player Nation in your example, rather than building Settlements of more diverse Alignments and not grouping them together into a Player Nation.
What is the value of grouping Settlements into a Player Nation?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would think that your citizens would also find that the ability to go between settlements within a nation would mean greater trade and training opportunities.
Settlements can of course make bilateral arrangements, so you might not see much trade/training benefit with a 2-settlements nation. 3 settlements mean you'd need 3 bilateral treaties. 4 settlements would need to negotiate 6 bilateral treaties. At some point a nation looks good, if the settlement alignments are right.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see many player nations being created simply to unlock the highest level training facilities. But I can't see those nations staying viable for long periods of time, as that also means the PvP window will be open for 24 hours per day or very close to it, making that player kingdom most vulnerable.
I believe the most successful player kingdoms will grow as a kingdom, be open to new recruits and companies, but not foolhardy with admittance protocols; be a group of players that can vigorously discuss a topic, but come together on a solution; pass rules that support the intent of the player nation without succumbing to tyranny; allow maximum freedoms with minimum chaos.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You will need to have a Player Nation to unlock the highest levels of development of various buildings, and therefore to unlock the highest levels of player abilities.Thank you, sir! That's exactly the kind of answer I was looking for :)
Strictly speaking though, that wouldn't require all those TSV settlements to be in the same Player Nation...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can see many player nations being created simply to unlock the highest level training facilities. But I can't see those nations staying viable for long periods of time...
It sounds like you're suggesting the Player Nation will be formed for the express purpose of putting up the high-level Training Facilities, and then will disband once that training has been received.
I can't imagine Goblinworks would want that to be a viable strategy. I would think they would probably require you to gradually build up the ability of your Player Nation to support those facilities, and that you'd have to start over if you disbanded for some reason.
There might also be other completely arbitrary costs/penalties associated with seceding from or disbanding a Player Nation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Strictly speaking though, that wouldn't require all those TSV settlements to be in the same Player Nation...
That thought occurred to me, too. However, as confident as I am that we would be able to hold several Settlements, I'm somewhat less confident in our ability to hold several Player Nations of an appropriate size to afford us that high-level training.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A player nation of three settlements, one each of LN, TN and CN, will allow your nation to train individuals of all 9 alignments.
Then there could be the possibility (not until the map expands) that a player nation could eventually have 9 settlements, each specializing in their specific alignment.
Don't dwell on if that would make sense in the Pathfinder world, ask it it would make sense as a means to utilize the game mechanics to maximum potential.
A nation that opens its doors to all, will be a strong nation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Having a Player Nation that allows Players of Lawful Good Alignment is not the same as having a Lawful Good Settlement with all of its perks.
Does a settlement have to be LG to have training facilities for paladins, say? Or does any settlement that paladins could join (LG,LN,NG) have the ability to make paladin facilities? Or is it leveled, where the top tier training has to be in a LG settlement, but the low-mid tier training can be in the others?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
A player nation of three settlements, one each of LN, TN and CN, will allow your nation to train individuals of all 9 alignments.Having a Player Nation that allows Players of Lawful Good Alignment is not the same as having a Lawful Good Settlement with all of its perks.
I understand that, which is why I also wrote:
Then there could be the possibility (not until the map expands) that a player nation could eventually have 9 settlements, each specializing in their specific alignment.
Don't dwell on if that would make sense in the Pathfinder world, ask it it would make sense as a means to utilize the game mechanics to maximum potential.
A nation that opens its doors to all, will be a strong nation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... a player nation could eventually have 9 settlements...Each Settlement must be within one Alignment Step of the Player Nation...
So, a Player Nation cannot have all 9 Alignment Settlements.
So basically a TN Player Nation seems to have the greatest flexibility (5 possible settlement alignments) but would, presumably, not be able to gain access to the highest level of Paladin training (due to no LG Settlement). I dont think any other class/role would suffer from that as the rest tend to be restricted along an axis and not to a specific alignment (i.e. Barbarians any non-Lawful, Monks any Lawful, etc).
So basically a TN Player Nation seems to have the greatest flexibility (5 possible settlement alignments) but would, presumably, not be able to gain access to the highest level of Paladin training (due to no LG Settlement). I dont think any other class/role would suffer from that as the rest tend to be restricted along an axis and not to a specific alignment (i.e. Barbarians any non-Lawful, Monks any Lawful, etc).... a player nation could eventually have 9 settlements...Each Settlement must be within one Alignment Step of the Player Nation...
So, a Player Nation cannot have all 9 Alignment Settlements.
I think we are speculating on what buildings and training will be available to various alignment settlements with very little information to speculate upon here. I have seen nowhere any information that implies a training building for any particular alignment cannot be built in a settlement which allows characters of that alignment to be members. Nor could I find any intimation that for instance a paladin chapterhouse would offer poorer training when built in a neutral good settlement than a lawful good one.
One reason I would posit for both suppositons to be false is that it could well end up that certain alignments will be vastly underrepresented in the population which would effectively choke off training for certain skills.