Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In response to the apparent limitations of the Alignment system, as it relates to both settlements and charter companies, the Unnamed Company will be forming a meta gamed, player alliance.
This alliance will be tentatively named "Brethren of the Wild Lands". It's primary goal will be to provide a social and operational network for PCs that have opted out of the rigid application of alignment and the role playing limitations that come with it.
The cost of Freedom:
The cost will be that we may have to travel far and wide to train higher tier skills, as well as pay the fees that are associated with being an "Outsider".
The Rewards of Freedom:
Our unchartered companies will have the freedom to group up with whomever we choose.
We will also not be tied to any one hex or region of hexes.
We will not incur the expenses associated with building or maintaining a settlement.
Our loyalty is to our freedom and our Brethren, and not to a settlement location.
[More details to follow]
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Totally on board. I want to be able to assosiate with whoever I want, without it being too much of an issue. I also wonder if this might be a better option for seeking training for various alignment extremes. Still dont see any signs of planned chaotic settlements'......... Guess it will be real interesting making a make shift Bandit with uncharacteristic skills.......>.>
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf, I've added this alliance to the Guild Recruitment & Helpful Links list, and placed it next to the UnNamed Company. If you have a brief description you'd like to appear there, just PM me or post a request here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf, I've added this alliance to the Guild Recruitment & Helpful Links list, and placed it next to the UnNamed Company. If you have a brief description you'd like to appear there, just PM me or post a request here.
Wow, it is now officially Nihimonized! Thank you very much, wasn't even thinking if that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Wait, Bluddwolf has founded more then one company? I'm now less then comfortable about this...Bluddwolf is Master of The Unnamed Company. He is going to form a player alliance, not another company.
@Vancent,
Companies are semi persistent, so you may actually end up in more than one, or found more than one. However, I have a more traditional view and see the company as persistent as a guild in your typical MMO.
Bringslite is correct, this is a player alliance, and not another company. It is to be the equivalent of a Kingdom, but without the settlements.
@Bringslite,
I am actually not the "Master" of the UnNamed Company, as far as being the final say leader. I view my role as more of an "example" for my fellow brethren, I see banditry on almost a spiritual level.... lol
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I view my role as more of an "example" for my fellow brethren, I see banditry on almost a spiritual level.... lol
Zen and the Art of Highway Robbery.
The interesting thing about the Brethren of the Wild Lands is that those who are part of the Unsettled Alliance may not be above skirmishing with their fellow Wildlings in the absence of more interesting things to do. Who better to practice your skills against than other folks interested in PVP? What better way to get to know the folks who you may be helping to raid some settlement next week than by beating on them this week?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually, it will be interesting to see if Players can train other Players, or if that will only be a function available within a Settlement itself.
Sort of a Mentor/Student relationship? Higher level Players can help 'train' lower level Players?
Regardless, this gets a +1 from me. Being able to work outside the 'box' of the system and still play the game without being game-breaking is always fun.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd love to be able to mentor and train and be mentored and trained. That idea should probably get it's own thread.
You should go for it. :)
I also would love such a system. Would make the game very deep in RP interaction. Finding a trainer, convincing him to train you, etc...
Two questions though. How would that affect the need for settlement buildings? How do you work around the "gold drain" that paid training provides?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My hope is that building in a PoI (say a watchtower or fort) would give you a structure to offer training without having to go to a settlement. It would be interesting to hear the dev point of view on authorizing players to grant training advances.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well there are several types of training:
1. Master / Apprentice type training where the Apprentice would learn a new skill from the Master.
2. Instructor / Student type training is where the student learns how to use the skills he/she has, to achieve a desirable goal.
3. Combination of both. You not only learn a new skill, but also how to use in in various situations.
@ Bringslite
How do you work around the "gold drain" that paid training provides?
Training as an "outsider" IMO will be cheaper in the long run, than the expense of contributing to the building and maintaining of a settlement.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not necessarily. It's been bandied around that we'll need 'kits' for things.
Gathering kits, crafting kits, repair kits, etc.
What's stopping there from being a Training Kit? And it's only available from a settlement built up to a certain level, and is rather expensive?
It allows Bandits and No-Settlement groups to still train, it just takes longer and a bit of legwork to make it all happen.
Obviously though, the 'heights' of specific training skills are going to need a Settlement or a Settlement-like structure to work. But that's a whole 'nother kettle of Kuo-toa.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would like to point out the rationale for this idea of ours.
This unsettled-character alliance is NOT meant to circumvent the game system(s).
* We will still have alignment shifts
* We will still have to visit settlements to get training
* We will still have to maintain a moderate to high reputation to enter settlements
This unsettled-character alliance IS meant to allow for:
* More freedom of alignment mixing within a player group. Without a charter, as company of pathfinders do not have to be within 1 step of alignment with each other.
* More freedom to move about the River Kingdoms. Regardless of the fact that you can move as you choose around the Kingdoms, if you are tied to a settlement, human nature will keep you in and around that region most of your time.
* More appropriate role playing for chaotic leaning groups of Bandits, Assassins, Barbarians or solitary individual characters like Druids and Rangers.
* The freedom from the expenses and responsibilities of building, maintaining and supporting a player-made settlement.
The cost of these freedoms, and many others, are:
* Organization, communication and other advantages of a Charter Company would have to be meta gamed. Although at this time we do not know the full impact of this, or even if there will be one.
* Higher training costs, because we would be "outsiders" in any of the player-settlements.
Mitigating those costs:
* For us bandits, we will be stealing the loot of others, so higher costs are paid for by others.
* The use of alt companies and characters can still provide us with some of the advantages of being settled and chartered, just not directly.
The BIGGEST ADVANTAGES....
The Brethren of the Wild Lands will be providing a social and operational network for those player-characters looking to be free from the entanglements of the player settlements and Kingdoms.
These "Wildlings"will add content to the experience of all players, through the variety of role playing and play style that we will bring to the table.
"Wildlings" will not necessarily be chaotic, and certainly all will not be "evil". We are just choosing not to be tied to a settlement or adhering to settlement rules in order to receive a charter for our companies.
We are not meant to be anti-settlement or even anti-kingdom. However, if a Kingdom should rise to become what might be considered an Imperial Power, that might bring about a different goal for the Brethren of the Wild Lands.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I do not know if you can set entry restrictions on single PoI buildings like inns, watchtowers, and forts. I'm not sure that these single structures can have PvP windows. I'm also not sure if you can hire NPC guards or workers to staff those structures (although it seems to be a logical requirement). I think that these structures would fit exactly with the ideals of the Brethren of the Wild Lands. However, if you can only have NPC staff rather than guards it would mean 24-hour player participation to keep the structures safe and operational. Even if you can hire NPC guards they may not be the strength of settlement guards.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think that The Brethren of the Wild Lands will add to the game for those that do not want restrictions. Yes there will still be a price to pay for not "belonging" to a settlement. Conversely, there are many advantages to "being free" of all that entails too. In a meta sense, I am a little concerned about a large organized "Wildling" group outside my city though... ;) Even if Bluddwolf hasn't any Horde plans, NEVER being safe will only make the game that much more exciting and deep, not damage it.
I wouldn't mind if players could train players, either. Was just curious what HalfOrc's ideas might be to make it worth changing the system as planned.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I do not know if you can set entry restrictions on single PoI buildings like inns, watchtowers, and forts. I'm not sure that these single structures can have PvP windows. I'm also not sure if you can hire NPC guards or workers to staff those structures (although it seems to be a logical requirement). I think that these structures would fit exactly with the ideals of the Brethren of the Wild Lands. However, if you can only have NPC staff rather than guards it would mean 24-hour player participation to keep the structures safe and operational. Even if you can hire NPC guards they may not be the strength of settlement guards.
If I'm understanding your underlying question correctly... Can there be individual structures, with some of the functions of a settlement and with some of the requirements as well?
I certainly hope so.
Would a fort be the poor man's settlement? Will you, Harad, be able to build your Monastery as a single structure and outside of a settlement?
I certainly hope the answer to these are "yes" as well.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not just a friends list, but a system to make the game work better for a group of wildmen who will typically struggle to find welcoming settlements, given their play styles.
One issue I foresee is that when they do work things out with a settlement, said settlement will become a target. So it better be a damned strong settlement, or they may decide such a formal "alliance" simply isn't worth it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So what you're really trying to create is a friends list with a name? :)
No, more than that. There will be perks to being considered a member.
It will be a social and OPERATIONAL network. We will train new and experienced player-characters; We will support one another through trade and other services; We will maintain each individual members freedom to act in his or her own interests, provided they are not excessively counter to the main goal of freedom of action that this alliance holds most dear.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So what you're really trying to create is a friends list with a name? :)
Equivalent to alliance in Eve. Or a nation in PFO just without the settlements.
Multiple chartered companies that are under a single banner.
Excellent idea to get this started now.
A minor correction, multiple unchartered venture companies, working together.
I will be reworking the concept in light of the new alignment Dev blog and the venture, charter , settlement plans
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So what you're really trying to create is a friends list with a name? :)
Equivalent to alliance in Eve. Or a nation in PFO just without the settlements.
Multiple chartered companies that are under a single banner.
Excellent idea to get this started now.
A minor correction, multiple unchartered venture companies, working together.
I will be reworking the concept in light of the new alignment Dev blog and the venture, charter , settlement plans
Has there been confirmation that "venture" =/= "chartered"?
The only reference in the blogs to "venture" companies says this:A "venture company" (sometimes also referred to as a chartered company; we'll get the terminology settled soon) is a social construct designed to cover the small-to-mid-sized guilds popular in other MMOs. It can be anything from a small group of friends and/or small adventuring party to a social organization several dozen strong. You can be a member of up to three venture companies, but only one of them can be a settlement-sponsored venture company (in other words, all the members belong to the same settlement).
So if you were to insert "unsponsored" into your statement in place of "unchartered", then that would fit with what the blogs have said, albeit not as a correction to what Xeen said as he said chartered, not sponsored.
Unless of course the devs have updated that terminology since then. Otherwise trying to differentiate between "venture" and "chartered" is just perpetuating a misreading of the blogs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yes, the terminology is still up in the air for both us and for GW it seems. Personally I don't know why they don't just keep what they have:
Venture Company = Not Sponsored
Charter Company = Sponsored by a Settlement
By "keep what they have" I'm not following what you mean. You follow it with a semi colon and then say that venture company in not a sponsored company, which to me reads as though you are saying that's what they have.
I will contrast that with the same quote I cited from the blogs above. At the very end of the quote there is a term used: "a settlement-sponsored venture company". Strictly speaking, that is what we presently have from them.
To the heart of the matter though: the terminology is not settled. We will do a better job of keeping communication clear from our end by not correcting people about these muddled terms until they do settle that terminology. I suggest we stick to the terms "sponsored" and "unsponsored" companies as that approach completely circumvents the ambiguity around the terms "chartered" and "venture"
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So what you're really trying to create is a friends list with a name? :)
Equivalent to alliance in Eve. Or a nation in PFO just without the settlements.
Multiple chartered companies that are under a single banner.
Excellent idea to get this started now.
A minor correction, multiple unchartered venture companies, working together.
I will be reworking the concept in light of the new alignment Dev blog and the venture, charter , settlement plans
Yeah Yeah, thats what I ment lol.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To me, it reads like "venture" is a term for all and "chartered" a term for sponsored by a settlement. Other terms might emerge that categorize other types but "venture" is for all.
Totally aware that perception is 90% of false interpretation...
The term at the end of the quote I cited "a settlement-sponsored venture company" completely unravels that interpretation.
And the part at the beginning: "'venture company' (sometimes also referred to as a chartered company" leaves no room to interpret the two terms as not referring to the exact same thing.
Creatively misread to your heart's content. People will respond, and that's how misinterpretations get cleared up. And then we all move on.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yeah Yeah, thats what I ment lol.So what you're really trying to create is a friends list with a name? :)
Equivalent to alliance in Eve. Or a nation in PFO just without the settlements.
Multiple chartered companies that are under a single banner.
Excellent idea to get this started now.
A minor correction, multiple unchartered venture companies, working together.
I will be reworking the concept in light of the new alignment Dev blog and the venture, charter , settlement plans
No it's not. You said it fine the first time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Let us not muddle this with terminology. It should be clear what the intent is, regardless if terms.
Player Groups or individuals not tied to a settlement, but instead roaming the wilderness, and supporting each other to continue in this free spirited way of life.
Will we need settlements for training? Of course we will. But, there is nothing written that would say that we need all of our training in one place. If I am a Bandit / Outlaw I need traing in both Chaotic and Neutral based skills. To some the ideal would be to find a CN settlement. I could also get the same from going to two separate settlements for the same training.
Why travel?
If I rob the same bank every Friday, and I sleep in the same apartment, the police will get me at either of those two locations.
Why is it not an advantage to be sponsored by a settlement?
Again, it inhibits our freedom of movement, it ties us to that region, and becomes a known location (the apartment). It makes us more likely to raid within that region ( the same bank). It may even make our operations predictable (every Friday).
It also brings our actions home to the settlement. Too much heat and they will kick us out anyway. Better to be an infrequent outsider, than the relative who never knows when to leave.
Finally, there is no such thing as "Renter's Remorse". If we are just visitors, and have not contributed vast amounts of time, resources and coin to the building of a settlement, if that settlement should get sacked..... We have lost little investment. We may have lost a safe haven, and might even fight for it, but not something we have directly built.
The settlements that open their doors to us, get our coin for training services or taxes from the sale of loot. They can also deny ant true connection / affiliation, and thus deflect reprisal for our actions.
It still seems like you would be better served by the over-arching alliance having it's members create settlements where convenient, perhaps spread out but nonetheless cooperative with the alliance as a whole, members whose alignments ARE compatable can be members of appropriate settlements, while other members of the alliance have their own, which all are friendly and act as part of the same alliance, sharing facilities, etc. The gains from that can enable a larger amount of e.g. Bandit Hide-Outs across a wider territory that otherwise would be too costly to fully settle and develop. Settlement members need not even be permanently 'based' geographically out of their own Settlement, if demands on their time call for otherwise. If they are needed at the Settlement they can of course go, and indeed the whole alliance may show up if it needs defending. Of course, with less actual 'investment' in the centrality of the Settlements as sole vehicle giving presence in the world to the alliance, there isn't the impetus or obligation to over-invest in each Settlement. This even lets each Settlement go for MORE specialization, and thus higher tier economic projects or special ability enabling PoI's, compared to a Settlement whose prime directive is self preservation at all costs and self sufficiency as well. When the Settlements just are seen as tools for the Alliance, you can focus on what is most useful to the Alliance.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Has there been confirmation that "venture" =/= "chartered"?Not that I'm aware of. There has been some speculation by the players, but nothing official.
I'll take that as an authoritative answer.
So in order to "not muddle this with terminology" I suggest for the second time in this thread that we begin using the terms "sponsored" and "unsponsored" company, and be it understood hereafter that when someone says either "chartered" or "venture" company that they are not differentiating between states of sponsorship or relation to settlements but are simply leaving that facet open and ambiguous.
But "chartered" does mean "sponsored" by a government.
And "venture" does not mean "sponsored" by a government.
So using them is basically a synonym for "sponsored"/"unsponsored" when used as a binary pair.
Since the terms aren't already dedicated for a non-related mechanic that would be confusing,
what is the harm in using "chartered" and "venture" to indicate relationship with a settlement, whether or not they are the 'final' terms?
It doesn't mean those are necessarily the final terms, but it serves as well as anything else for the moment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"chartered" means registered, and not exclusively, by a government.
Charter: "A document issued by a sovereign, legislature, or other authority, creating a public or private corporation, such as a city, college, or bank, and defining its privileges and purposes."
Governments do not sponsor corporations, they register them so that they have a place within their codified laws. And corporations can be "chartered" by as many governments as countries they wish to occupy.
That's the out of game definition you've misrepresented, not to mention we have quotes from devs that show you are also misrepresenting the meaning presented for in game thus far.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Mainly solitary. I will certainly seek out casual acquaintances for specific missions, but I don't intend that she be part of an established and formal party system.
A loose coven might work in so much as the members would know and trust* each other, but I have the Pratchettian view of witches in that the multiple of witch is 'argument'.
*For a given value of 'trust'. I hope that player courtesy will prevail in any such organisation, but you can't play a Chaotic character and expect everyone else to follow informal rules. My intention is to be honourable with player-player interactions, simply as a matter of necessity, reciprocity and good old-fashioned courtesy, but not to be as bound to any larger social laws.
