Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lore Basis:
The Outlaw Council was suggested by the twin guilds of Daggermark (the Assassins’ Guild and the Poisoners’ Guild) ninety years ago. Following the upheaval caused sudden death of the last king of Daggermark, they sent emissaries to the other regions of the River Kingdoms, suggesting a council be established to address the issues affecting the Kingdoms.
The other regions agreed, and the following the year the Outlaw Council, as it was dubbed, met in Daggermark. Its first act was to officially codify the River Freedoms. [1]
Since then, the Council has continued to meet each year in Daggermark. The meeting hall is considered to be neutral territory.
The rulers of all the kingdoms are entitled to attend, but most weight is given to the leaders of the more established regions – currently considered to be Daggermark, Gralton, Lambreth, Mivon, Pitax, the Protectorate of the Black Marquis, Sevenarches, Tymon and Uringen. A lord must attend personally in order to have a voice – proxies are not allowed to address the council. [2]
Purpose of Council:
The Outlaw Council is not a governing body, it is a council that discusses common interests of the Venture Companies of PFO that are dedicated to Banditry, Assassinations, Theft, Slave Raids (if this idea sees its way out if Gen Con) and Smuggling (also if in-game).
Focus: The focus of the Outlaw Council will be on iIn-Game issues and interests.
Membership:
The council will be made up of the leaders of the Venture Comoanies, and each will have one Second. As per lore, the Second or Proxy will not have a voice in the council, but is just a listener for his / her company.
Alignment / Reputation: Although it is likely going to be primarily the Chaotics and the Evils, Chaotic Good might be a tough fit.
Reputation will likely be more lax then other organizations, but the Outlaw Council will not support blatant, Griefer companies or individuals.
Communication:
The Outlaw Ciouncil will use this thread, PFOFan TS and Private Messaging to communicate with each other.
Registration:
To be placed on the list as a member of the Outlaw Council, you must post the following information in this thread:
1. Company Name
2. Company Focus
3. Leader Name + Proxy Name
4. Time Zone
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'll happily move this discussion to another thread if you'd prefer, but since it's very Bandit-centric, I thought it might be appropriate here.
I've been thinking a lot about your contention that there's something unsportsmanlike about Caravans transporting large quantities of resources without flying a PvP Flag. I think you have a very strong argument here. I can see the wisdom in making Caravanning inherently flag you for PvP, because if it doesn't, and attacking unflagged characters causes a Reputation slide, then all Bandits would have Low Reputation and this is clearly not desirable.
So I agree with you on that point.
I would like to counter-propose that being a Bandit should impose a long-term PvP Flag. If Bandits are able to attack Caravans without losing Reputation, but are only subject to retaliation for a very short period of time after a particular act of Banditry, then the Risk/Reward calculation shifts much too far in the Bandits' favor.
Bandits should not be allowed to hide from PvP, either.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'll happily move this discussion to another thread if you'd prefer, but since it's very Bandit-centric, I thought it might be appropriate here.
I've been thinking a lot about your contention that there's something unsportsmanlike about Caravans transporting large quantities of resources without flying a PvP Flag. I think you have a very strong argument here. I can see the wisdom in making Caravanning inherently flag you for PvP, because if it doesn't, and attacking unflagged characters causes a Reputation slide, then all Bandits would have Low Reputation and this is clearly not desirable.
So I agree with you on that point.
I would like to counter-propose that being a Bandit should impose a long-term PvP Flag. If Bandits are able to attack Caravans without losing Reputation, but are only subject to retaliation for a very short period of time after a particular act of Banditry, then the Risk/Reward calculation shifts much too far in the Bandits' favor.
Bandits should not be allowed to hide from PvP, either.
My understanding of the flagging mechanics (Outlaw Flag) is that this PVP flag is what allows for both the SAD and an Ambush, if the SAD is not initiated by the Bandits.
If that is a correct interpretation, or that is what the flag system do (Flag Revamp), then Bandits will only be able to commit acts of banditry while PVP flagged.
Once they have used their Outlaw Flag benefits in an attack, they lose their stacked buff (up to 10 hours worth). before they can return to banditry and begin generating a new stack, they have to reflag Outlaw (30 second delay).
The caravan, that accepts the SAD, gets a 20 minute "protection" from SADs or Ambush, otherwise the bandits get double reputation hit. The Caravan that is SAD'd does not have to reset their Traveler Flag, it is unknown if they have to reset on death (but probably so).
If Bandits are not flagged as Outlaws, they are the same as any other unflagged character. Flagging is used during the time of the PVP activity. Otherwise you would be calling for all flags to be long term, in order to be balanced.
The perception seems to be that Bandits, including myself, will only be involved with banditry. There will be times that we help our settlement, in reducing an escalation cycle. There maybe times that I use the traveler flag myself. Or, I may shift my alignment enough to use the Assassin Flag.
There is much to be revealed in the Flag revamp, and perhaps you can bring up some of your ideas in that thread.
My goal has always been to have balanced PVP, and to have a system that encourages the use of PVP flags and rewards their proper use.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My goal has always been to have balanced PVP, and to have a system that encourages the use of PVP flags and rewards their proper use.
I think that's a noble goal, and I support it.
Thinking back on this proposal, though, I think that, in addition to a long-term flag after an act of Banditry, Bandits should be required to be flagged for a significant period of time prior to the act of Banditry in order to make that act effective. I think you alluded to this with the Outlaw flag, and you're right there's a lot we don't know, but it seems reasonable to me that an Advance Scouting Party should be able to "clear the path of Bandits" prior to the arrival of the Caravan.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My goal has always been to have balanced PVP, and to have a system that encourages the use of PVP flags and rewards their proper use.I think that's a noble goal, and I support it.
Thinking back on this proposal, though, I think that, in addition to a long-term flag after an act of Banditry, Bandits should be required to be flagged for a significant period of time prior to the act of Banditry in order to make that act effective. I think you alluded to this with the Outlaw flag, and you're right there's a lot we don't know, but it seems reasonable to me that an Advance Scouting Party should be able to "clear the path of Bandits" prior to the arrival of the Caravan.
The advanced scout parties already have the opportunity to "detect" the bandit's hideout. It has been described as not being easy, but can be done with great skill.
The Hideout features are also not yet known. But I will trust that GW will make an effort for there to be a balance. No one should have a "Low risk, High reward" by mechanical default. If on the other hand a merchant decides to present him/herself as a low risk, high value target (because they are too risky or cheap to hire guards), then that was their choice.
I thank them for that choice!! ;)
I believe that GW does not want to make it too easy for gatherers to get their goods, unhindered to market.
I think that they want to encourage merchant / gatherers to hire PC guards for their operations.
I think they want Bandits to provide that element of PVP content, but have to be selective of who their targets will be.
I hope that, outside of the settlement hexes, everyone has more reason to flag for PVP, than they have a reason not to flag for it.
I just finished listening to the audio of GenCon from DakCenturi... "This game will be heavy on the PVP side" (paraphrased)... I will re listen and find the exact spot where that was stated (and un paraphrase it).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not sure if this comment belongs here, maybe we could start a new thread specifically concerning the upcoming flag revamp. I think the flag system, in an attmept to fine tune player behaviour, is clunky and untenable. Why isn't your pvp status based on what you do instead of trying to negotiate an inorganic obstacle course of possible flags? I've always thought there ought to be a meaningful alignment and rep system OR a pvp flag system-not both. This being Pathfinder I'd prefer alignment/rep. There'd be one flag-your pvp eligible or not.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not sure if this comment belongs here, maybe we could start a new thread specifically concerning the upcoming flag revamp. I think the flag system, in an attmept to fine tune player behaviour, is clunky and untenable. Why isn't your pvp status based on what you do instead of trying to negotiate an inorganic obstacle course of possible flags? I've always thought there ought to be a meaningful alignment and rep system OR a pvp flag system-not both. This being Pathfinder I'd prefer alignment/rep. There'd be one flag-your pvp eligible or not.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
1. The Order of the Bloody Hand
2. Content generation
3. Phyllain and Alku
4. N/A
To expound on the content generation. We will basically try to do anything that the game mechanics allow us to so that we can find the activity we enjoy the most. For example, " Well we have tried being bandits and that was fun but they just patched in the ability to create monster escalation cycles via demon summoning. That sounds cool lets see if we can go make money doing that."
So basically we will be trying most aspects of this game unfettered by alignment concerns while we look for the activity that we find the most fun. And if we make some gold stealing from someones apple cart along the way so be it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
update:
3. Blaeringr/Shadowblade
Tha is for the info, now we can begin focusing on identifying criminal activities that are know or suspected to be in PFO.
If we feel there should be more, we can then advocate for their inclusion.
Remember, this is a criminal enterprise and not just an evil one.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Remember, this is a criminal enterprise and not just an evil one.You might be interested in this:
49. Players can go about a settlement breaking laws. If they are not captured and can get away doing so they are also lowering the Lawfulness of the settlement.
Thank you for the quote....
I'm hoping that there are a variety if criminal deeds that can be either permitted or prohibited, based on the settlement tolerance for such things.
Then based on tolerance, these could then have alignment and or reputation impacts based on that level of tolerance. Obviously I would not want not expect that crimes versus NPCs should have an impact on Reputation, keeping that purely a PvP measurement.
I'm so hoping that risk vs reward is also factored into the various levels and types if crimes.
I keep on envisioning Shadizar The Wicked's seedier neighborhood known as The Maul. It would actually vert cool if certain neighborhoods within a settlement could have a different level of law / lawlessness, instead of the settlement having an overall rating.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How do you stop people from breaking laws? Assuming murder is outlawed, will the criminal flag be enough to kill them without breaking any laws yourself?
I certainly hope there is balance and a bit of common sense built into the system.
If I steal something, I hope there is a chance if getting caught, and being chased by PC enforcers or NPC wardens. What I hope it doesn't amount to is, "Hey everyone, its a free for all". What that would lead to is, instant death, and no one would commit crimes in a settlement anymore.
Perhaps GW can build the system within the faction system?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Mostly I was concerned that a group of outlaws could lower a settlements lawfulness while the citizens of that settlement have no way to stop them, other than killing them and becoming criminals themselves (further lowering the lawfulness of the settlement)
If a settlement is finding that petite theft is making its alignment shift from lawful, they could just make petite theft legal. This would solve the crime problem, and improve their lawful rating.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Purely speculative, but making theft legal seems in itself a determined step towards lawlessness.
Just think, what happens to crime statistics if they make certain drugs, legal. We are talking about perception, not reality. A crime not reported does not skew the perception of a community as being crime ridden.
Now consider, what would be considered crimes in the River Kingdoms?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Purely speculative, but making theft legal seems in itself a determined step towards lawlessness.
Does it even begin to compare though to making mass murder legal by simply renaming it "war"?
If it still bothers you though, we'll simply call the thieves "bankers". There you go, all the legitimacy we need to make it work.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Purely speculative, but making theft legal seems in itself a determined step towards lawlessness.Does it even begin to compare though to making mass murder legal by simply renaming it "war"?
If it still bothers you though, we'll simply call the thieves "bankers". There you go, all the legitimacy we need to make it work.
Oh I was not trying to state it was problematic by any means. I was just speculating that removing certain laws might by its very nature make the town less lawful. Especially staple laws like theft or murder.
Like I said, it is highly speculative, because there is no real reason to think settlement management will relate to reality that closely. It was just a counterpoint :)
Game mechanics do not always have relevance to a real world, so I admit on the front end the solution to a mechanical shift away from lawful might involve removing the laws being habitually broken.
Really no way to be certain until there are settlements to test the theory , and even during launch I imagine mechanics will be tweaked.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"Removal" is perhaps not the correct word, but rather "replace".
Let's replace 'don't steal' with 'don't get caught stealing', or 'take only what you have the power to'.
Yes, I think we're beginning to discuss the tyrant of a LE settlement - a void I think sorely needs to be filled yet by this community.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"Removal" is perhaps not the correct word, but rather "replace".
Let's replace 'don't steal' with 'don't get caught stealing', or 'take only what you have the power to'.
Yes, I think we're beginning to discuss the tyrant of a LE settlement - a void I think sorely needs to be filled yet by this community.
Oh yeah, totes. If you are not caught, no one is the wiser. Again who knows how the mechanics will turn out long term, but it makes sense.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No, you're still missing the point: it's not taking what you are strong enough to take that is the problem - it's being weak enough to be caught.
If people know you're a thief, but have never caught you stealing, then you are strong and respectable.
If you steal the same things as the above strong and respectable thief but are caught, then you are punished for getting caught and for not having completely earned the take.
Laws exist to make the strong stronger and to remind the weak of proper order. Or you can go ahead and make the laws in your settlement protect the weak and even the little butterflies. But laws are still laws, it just depends what aim a ruler has in mind when creating them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No, you're still missing the point: it's not taking what you are strong enough to take that is the problem - it's being weak enough to be caught.
If people know you're a thief, but have never caught you stealing, then you are strong and respectable.
If you steal the same things as the above strong and respectable thief but are caught, then you are punished for getting caught and for not having completely earned the take.
Laws exist to make the strong stronger and to remind the weak of proper order. Or you can go ahead and make the laws in your settlement protect the weak and even the little butterflies. But laws are still laws, it just depends what aim a ruler has in mind when creating them.
Ah, we are talking two different subjects then. I have since my first reply been talking about possible mechanics, or lack thereof.
It seems like you are talking about how leaders make laws for their settlements, and the motivations behind those laws.
I read what you are saying, but I can not identify with it directly. I don't plan to lead a settlement or kingdom in PFO.
I do agree with your prior point of the game community needing a strong lawful evil presence, though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Gentlemen,
In the River Kingdoms in PFRPG, I don't believe there was more than two lawful settlements. Most are Chaotic Neutral, which explains the existence and legitimacy of the Outlaw Council.
In game, it is my hope that the Outlaw Council will meet and conduct a review of criminal activity that is it has taken place over the previous month. Perhaps there could be an effort to territorialize (new word) the Kingdoms.
I'd also like to see this council become a type of shadow government, pulling strings and fermenting wars. Wars are always good for our business.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
An outlaw council seems like it would be LN in-lore. Breaking laws is not inherently chaotic, and the Mafia is a very Lawfull organization.
This is why I make the point that the Alignment System is woefully inadequate and too simplistic to have any real application to the realities of role playing.
However, chaos does not necessarily mean lack of organization. A majority of the settlement leaders in the River Kingdoms are Chaotic Neutral.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
An outlaw council seems like it would be LN in-lore. Breaking laws is not inherently chaotic, and the Mafia is a very Lawfull organization.This is why I make the point that the Alignment System is woefully inadequate and too simplistic to have any real application to the realities of role playing.
However, chaos does not necessarily mean lack of organization. A majority of the settlement leaders in the River Kingdoms are Chaotic Neutral.
Most of the time I like alignment about as much as I like THACO. Which is basically like saying not at all.
It is an unpopular opinion I am sure, but I share it even when it is just the dice that are rolling.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
LOL THACO... I always found it funny when people complained about it but said how much they like Base Attack...
They are really the same thing, but with THACO your dealing with negative numbers instead. Which does confuse people.
Changing it to BA did make the games flow a bit better over all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I had an interesting thought. If the Outlaw Council loosely represents criminal enterprise, that should basically cover all crime.
That being said, how would we represent the criminals and crimes of good aligned characters within the legal systems of evil settlements, particularly Lawful Evil settlement?
Example: let's say the LE settlement of Hell's Chasm has made random acts of kindness a crime. How might the Out Council represent or support these criminals?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If there was coin to be made smuggling random acts of kindness into Hell's Chasm im sure we would find a way.
Smuggling is definitely a "crime" I'm hoping GW actually builds a system for. I detailed my idea for it several months ago. Once I get home tomorrow night, I will actually raise that list or thread from the dead.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"Removal" is perhaps not the correct word, but rather "replace".
Let's replace 'don't steal' with 'don't get caught stealing', or 'take only what you have the power to'.
Yes, I think we're beginning to discuss the tyrant of a LE settlement - a void I think sorely needs to be filled yet by this community.
I'd like to help form a LE settlement but other than friends I'm going to bring in from other games just haven't seen much interest on the boards. Basically, in time we want to invite peeps to our little Mordor and hear them gush, "Hey, like what you've done with the place".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The hell knights consider stealing slaves to be a crime; and lots of lawful good characters will do so. What's the position of the outlaw company on liberators? Are they represented equally?
First I would think your Chaotic Goods would be liberators of slaves. Lawful Goods would probably take a shift in alignment for interfering with laws, even Lawful Evil laws.
Secondly, it really is an interesting question. I personally would say, if you steal slaves and then resell them yourself or have them work as freedmen for your settlement ( personal gain), I'd say yes, I'd support the action. If you had stolen them to liberate them, without personal gain, then perhaps not. Then if the original owner placed a bounty on you for the theft, I'd be back to supporting you, regardless of the former slaves disposition.
As a chaotic neutral the easy answer is, "If I feel like it" is always the default answer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The hell knights consider stealing slaves to be a crime; and lots of lawful good characters will do so. What's the position of the outlaw company on liberators? Are they represented equally?
My answer would depend on if we are supporting the settlement they were liberated from.
If we are supporting the settlement, and the settlement needs to reduce its slave population.... Im in support, but if the settlement does not have slave over population then I will look for retribution.
If we do not support the settlement, then I support you.
Oh and what Blaeringr said