Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Losing your settlement is traumatic enough without having the devs pile on you like that. It ends up being a double whammy for the loser who can't even fight to regain his kingdom at full strength anymore. I'd say a settlement bonus for your skills is much more reasonable.
So what are player characters expected to do when their settlement finally falls after a prolonged struggle? Everyone belongs to a settlement. So when my settlement falls I automatically revert to belonging to an NPC settlement. (Maybe if I belong to a player nation I might switch to a sister settlement instead.)
Then what? I'd venture that GW wants us to get back into the game. So I start looking for a settlement to join, hopefully with my entire company. Someplace with the right alignment, the right minimum rep, facilities that will restore my precious feats. And most importantly - a place that is willing to take me in.
If there is no suitable settlement to join, then my company is going to have to head to the frontier and start again - and we'll be competing with raw new players. So in a way, it's probably a good design to have my powers cropped for a while - providing some balance on the frontier.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thanks for that! I can see the reasons to avoid a game where people mind their rep until they get the skills they want then go wild. But I think it might be unpopular enough to cause significant subscriber attrition from players who find settlements destroyed that it may not last.
Ryan has said he is not concerned about significant numbers of subscriptions. If players quit because they lost their settlement, so be it. It is all for the cause of limiting so called "toxic behavior", and if he can't do that he'd rather shut down the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If there is no suitable settlement to join, then my company is going to have to head to the frontier and start again - and we'll be competing with raw new players. So in a way, it's probably a good design to have my powers cropped for a while - providing some balance on the frontier.
You are very much assuming here that there will always be new places to set up a settlement on the frontier. While Goblinworks havent said anything on the subject except that they do intend to expand the land mass from time to time I personally would expect them to keep the number of settlement hexes a far lower number than the number of player groups looking to set up a settlement.
The reason I think that way is that settlement conflict will be largely driven by scarcity of land and resources. If everyone who wanted to start a settlement could there would be no need for anyone to coalesce into larger groupings.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So what are player characters expected to do when their settlement finally falls after a prolonged struggle? Everyone belongs to a settlement. So when my settlement falls I automatically revert to belonging to an NPC settlement. (Maybe if I belong to a player nation I might switch to a sister settlement instead.)
Then what? I'd venture that GW wants us to get back into the game. So I start looking for a settlement to join, hopefully with my entire company. Someplace with the right alignment, the right minimum rep, facilities that will restore my precious feats. And most importantly - a place that is willing to take me in.
If there is no suitable settlement to join, then my company is going to have to head to the frontier and start again - and we'll be competing with raw new players. So in a way, it's probably a good design to have my powers cropped for a while - providing some balance on the frontier.
The problem with that is your CC would have to find a settlement with ALL of the EXACT same facilities the old settlement had or it's a non starter for half the members. Between alignment and settlement choices made the pool could be very small or non existent. The losers of the settlement are already suffering because they can't CONTINUE to train on top of that you taking away the training they had.
You are even suggesting that these poor blokes who maybe spent years on their settlement which they just lost should be dwarfed all the way down to noob status to "make it fair" among all the other losers.
You're pretty heartless dude.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with that is your CC would have to find a settlement with ALL of the EXACT same facilities the old settlement had or it's a non starter for half the members. Between alignment and settlement choices made the pool could be very small or non existent. The losers of the settlement are already suffering because they can't CONTINUE to train on top of that you taking away the training they had.
You are even suggesting that these poor blokes who maybe spent years on their settlement which they just lost should be dwarfed all the way down to noob status to "make it fair" among all the other losers.
You're pretty heartless dude.
Thank you. :)
Seriously though, once a settlement falls, what do you expect/propose happens to its subordinate companies and citizens? Because settlements will fall; we can bank on that.
I think it is on the companies to find new homes - and degradation of skills provides huge incentives for them to do that. What do you want to see instead?
edit to add: We seem focused on settlement losses here. But the same mechanism will be in play when a company leaves a settlement because of internal politics or when a player gets booted from a settlement because his core alignment changes too much, or if she's too low rep and gets booted for that. The mechanic has to cover all of those cases.
|
CEO, Goblinworks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We're talking a lot about what happens when a Settlement is destroyed, what happens to a character's abilities when it changes Settlements, and how to provide some manageable transitions without unrecoverable setbacks. I'd say at this point that I think the direction of the discussions is good, and we will likely blog about it when it is more developed,but I can't give you an eta on when that will be yet. Suffice it to say: we don't want you to be able to become awesome by being a good member of the community, then become toxic and remain awesome. And we don't want you to lose everything you've gained without a path to recovery in a reasonable timeframe if your Settlement is lost or you are kicked out of a Settlement (for whatever reason). We're working on it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thank you. :)
I think there is punishment enough in being displaced, not having a home to feel safe in, maybe losing your spiffy storage space, not being able to craft your upper items and most of all for anybody who hasn't capped yet, you are falling behind. Limited to horizontal training and not the vertical training that actually makes you more powerful. So there is PLENTY of incentive to get back into a settlement as soon as possible.
I don't see any reason to degrade the characters even further than what I just described. It almost creates a situation where the character doesn't get played until a new home is found. That's not a big problem for the individual character, but it's a big problem for the CC who might not find a good fit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We're talking a lot about what happens when a Settlement is destroyed, what happens to a character's abilities when it changes Settlements, and how to provide some manageable transitions without unrecoverable setbacks. I'd say at this point that I think the direction of the discussions is good, and we will likely blog about it when it is more developed,but I can't give you an eta on when that will be yet. Suffice it to say: we don't want you to be able to become awesome by being a good member of the community, then become toxic and remain awesome. And we don't want you to lose everything you've gained without a path to recovery in a reasonable timeframe if your Settlement is lost or you are kicked out of a Settlement (for whatever reason). We're working on it.
In an open class game, awesome is never on a plateau. Eventually, everyone wants to get more awesomer. So I don't see this as a problem unless the character is capped at something so at the most perhaps the punishment could be on cap abilities.
I just don't believe in triple punishment for the single crime of losing your settlement. It's like the NFL where a single flagrant foul gets you 15 yds, a 2 game suspension and then a fine.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The problem with that is your CC would have to find a settlement with ALL of the EXACT same facilities the old settlement had or it's a non starter for half the members. Between alignment and settlement choices made the pool could be very small or non existent. The losers of the settlement are already suffering because they can't CONTINUE to train on top of that you taking away the training they had.
You are even suggesting that these poor blokes who maybe spent years on their settlement which they just lost should be dwarfed all the way down to noob status to "make it fair" among all the other losers.
You're pretty heartless dude.
Thank you. :)
Seriously though, once a settlement falls, what do you expect/propose happens to its subordinate companies and citizens? Because settlements will fall; we can bank on that.
I think it is on the companies to find new homes - and degradation of skills provides huge incentives for them to do that. What do you want to see instead?
edit to add: We seem focused on settlement losses here. But the same mechanism will be in play when a company leaves a settlement because of internal politics or when a player gets booted from a settlement because his core alignment changes too much, or if she's too low rep and gets booted for that. The mechanic has to cover all of those cases.
I'd say one mechanic that might make it easier for those recently displaced would be if their settlement leader(s) had the ability to enact a scorched earth trigger to relinquish the settlement control to the victor at tier 0, with its DIs obviously bottomed out as well.
Now the new settlement owners have to build up for nearly scratch and the former owners may have some chance to round up additional support to retake the settlement themselves.
One way to limit the loss of higher tier training that took you years to attain, is to make it so that few if any around you have high tier training. A constant cycle of balancing to the middle or lowest common denominator through never ending conflict, conquest, destruction, rebuilding, and so on.....
"King of the Hill" with an never ending wave of challengers to become king, only to be displaced almost immediately.
That kind of sounds like the River Kingdoms to me, very Chaotic Neutral in fact. Since Paladins can't be Chaotic Neutral, who gives a crap about Paladins!!!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@avari3 The lack of training progression is serious, but a player can just accumulate XP. The XP doesn't have to be spent on horizontal progression unless the player decides it helps the character. It will accumulate and can be spent on the vertical training when you're in your new home.
A compromise I thought of during the back and forth: when a character leaves one settlement and joins another (even if it's an NPC town) some of her skills are still supported and some are not. What if the character could retain a limited number of uses of the now-unsupported skills? So the character has some ability to draw on his old skill set, but it's limited to maybe 100 uses of a feat before the skill is totally dormant.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ Urnamn,
What if you had to fall back on your faction to support those skills, at an added cost of dedicated time working within the faction or at a substantial cost of coin to maintain those upper tier training.
This way being members of Factions will also be meaningful as a potential fall back. It will also make settlements that share the same faction to work together to prevent either from falling, otherwise they also lose their potential fallback.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And how do you feel those casual members will feel about loosing 2 years of training they paid for if Brighthaven falls?
No one loses training. They'll just lose the ability to slot particular abilities until they have access to the support facilities again.
(( Sorry if this is not on point, I'm just skimming, but this jumped out at me ))
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And how do you feel those casual members will feel about loosing 2 years of training they paid for if Brighthaven falls?No one loses training. They'll just lose the ability to slot particular abilities until they have access to the support facilities again.
(( Sorry if this is not on point, I'm just skimming, but this jumped out at me ))
Right, got that. I was only saying that compared to the above, the fact that you temporarily loose access to skills is...less horrible. Then the point got debated by a tangent. Sorry for throwing more wood on that tangent. I am comfortable with the plan as initially announced and even better with the few official "thoughts" mentioned.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And how do you feel those casual members will feel about loosing 2 years of training they paid for if Brighthaven falls?No one loses training. They'll just lose the ability to slot particular abilities until they have access to the support facilities again.
(( Sorry if this is not on point, I'm just skimming, but this jumped out at me ))
This will primarily effect Paladins who will probably have few, or perhaps one settlement, that can actually train them to have maximum skills slotted.
Take out that settlement, you reduce every Paladin! I guess the Gods are subservient to the Settlement, for there is where their power truly lies.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We're talking a lot about what happens when a Settlement is destroyed, what happens to a character's abilities when it changes Settlements, and how to provide some manageable transitions without unrecoverable setbacks. I'd say at this point that I think the direction of the discussions is good, and we will likely blog about it when it is more developed,but I can't give you an eta on when that will be yet. Suffice it to say: we don't want you to be able to become awesome by being a good member of the community, then become toxic and remain awesome. And we don't want you to lose everything you've gained without a path to recovery in a reasonable timeframe if your Settlement is lost or you are kicked out of a Settlement (for whatever reason). We're working on it.
Perhaps in order to change your slotted abilities you need to have ACCESS to a trainer capable of training it, even if you already know it? This would represent skill atrophy when you haven't used a skill in a while and ability to brush up to use it at full ability again. Perhaps if you do not have access to a trainer, you need to do it yourself which starts a Practicing cooldown of 24 hours from when you slot the ability. Having access to a trainer at your home settlement would make the skill instantly available. This allows people with awesome skills to remain able to use them, but their ability to re-slot their skills to adapt to changing circumstances becomes fairly limited. Being awesome at what you do can get you pretty far. But being a one-trick pony means that knowledge about how to deal with you will spread more quickly than you can adopt new tricks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And how do you feel those casual members will feel about loosing 2 years of training they paid for if Brighthaven falls?No one loses training. They'll just lose the ability to slot particular abilities until they have access to the support facilities again.
(( Sorry if this is not on point, I'm just skimming, but this jumped out at me ))
This will primarily effect Paladins who will probably have few, or perhaps one settlement, that can actually train them to have maximum skills slotted.
Take out that settlement, you reduce every Paladin! I guess the Gods are subservient to the Settlement, for there is where their power truly lies.
This seems extremely unlikely to me.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps in order to change your slotted abilities you need to have ACCESS to a trainer capable of training it, even if you already know it? This would represent skill atrophy when you haven't used a skill in a while and ability to brush up to use it at full ability again. Perhaps if you do not have access to a trainer, you need to do it yourself which starts a Practicing cooldown of 24 hours from when you slot the ability. Having access to a trainer at your home settlement would make the skill instantly available. This allows people with awesome skills to remain able to use them, but their ability to re-slot their skills to adapt to changing circumstances becomes fairly limited. Being awesome at what you do can get you pretty far. But being a one-trick pony means that knowledge about how to deal with you will spread more quickly than you can adopt new tricks.
I like it. If a player has some skill he doesn't want to lose, he can leave it slotted - but that limits his other options. I'd leave out the ability to reslot it once it was dropped.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This seems extremely unlikely to me.And how do you feel those casual members will feel about loosing 2 years of training they paid for if Brighthaven falls?No one loses training. They'll just lose the ability to slot particular abilities until they have access to the support facilities again.
(( Sorry if this is not on point, I'm just skimming, but this jumped out at me ))
This will primarily effect Paladins who will probably have few, or perhaps one settlement, that can actually train them to have maximum skills slotted.
Take out that settlement, you reduce every Paladin! I guess the Gods are subservient to the Settlement, for there is where their power truly lies.
You are basing this on the assumption that there will be many Lawful Good settlements, that dedicate the resources of time, materials and coin to build maximum tier structures. All for a class that is uncommon to be rolled and difficult to maintain.
I find that extremely unlikely.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I like it. If a player has some skill he doesn't want to lose, he can leave it slotted - but that limits his other options. I'd leave out the ability to reslot it once it was dropped.
That has been the suggestion that I have been making on Pax TS whenever we have talked about this. I like the thought that by taking out a settlement you can drastically hit their ability to be versatile, while keeping them capable of being as strong as before.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like it. If a player has some skill he doesn't want to lose, he can leave it slotted - but that limits his other options. I'd leave out the ability to reslot it once it was dropped.That has been the suggestion that I have been making on Pax TS whenever we have talked about this. I like the thought that by taking out a settlement you can drastically hit their ability to be versatile, while keeping them capable of being as strong as before.
I like that, I see what you did here... Make them wary to switch up to some other build, and keep the skills they had when you already beat them while they were using those skills.
That is twistedly evil oh Dark Lord Pax Morbis!! /salute
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I like it. If a player has some skill he doesn't want to lose, he can leave it slotted - but that limits his other options. I'd leave out the ability to reslot it once it was dropped.That has been the suggestion that I have been making on Pax TS whenever we have talked about this. I like the thought that by taking out a settlement you can drastically hit their ability to be versatile, while keeping them capable of being as strong as before.I like that, I see what you did here... Make them wary to switch up to some other build, and keep the skills they had when you already beat them while they were using those skills.
That is twistedly evil oh Dark Lord Pax Morbis!! /salute
That's what I saw.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Alternately, and building a similar system, have a skill switching time cost. This is similar to the old flag system, the longer you leave a skill slotted, the more effective it becomes until at some point it reaches it's 100% effective plateau. Being part of a high tier settlement for your skill increases your ERB (effectiveness regeneration bonus) to almost instantaneous (95-100%). Being part of a mid level settlement with a facility of your alignment/role/skill even if you cannot train due to being too high level brings your ERB to 50-75%. Finally, a low level settlement might give a 40-50% ERB.
This leaves NPC settlements and POIs and even pre-settlement forts as another means of increasing ER above the base 0% bonus (in addition to other aspects lik other skills, training, or even races or classes).
Finally, as someone "unsettled", I have a 0% bonus to the skill switch cost, the base being whatever GW deems significant enough (and might even be variable based upon other options such as race, I can definitely see humans getting a higher based skill switch cost than elves (say base 10% for humans, 0% for elves).
But, the point of this system is that you can use any skill slotted, even one just slotted, an "unsettled" character will only be at 25% effectiveness for that ability after x hours. It will just be near useless until "re-learned". Eventually, after slotted for y time, they will be at 100% effectiveness. Being part of a settlement greatly reduces this time (even down to nil).
Of course, I think the skill switching cost time should be tied to the level of the skill, low level skills have a short base time, high level skills - long base time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How? By means of imbalance. By seeking to oppress, suppress, overthrow, or destroy those who think or feel differently than they. By repressing the darker sides of their own personalities. By seeking to deny that death is as necessary as life, that negative should balance positive. By asserting that their way is the one true way and no other way should be chosen. By asserting that Law is oppressive or chaos is madness.Extremists are unreasoning fanatics.How is Cayden Cailean fanatical, except perhaps about ale? He's CG and thus one of the corner alignments. Or is it less extreme to have two concerns rather than a single one? Would Sarenrae be more 'extreme' than Iomedae because she's only concerned with Good, in terms of alignments?
Oppression, suppression, repression... you clearly have not a clue who Cayden Cailean is.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oppression, suppression, repression... you clearly have not a clue who Cayden Cailean is.How? By means of imbalance. By seeking to oppress, suppress, overthrow, or destroy those who think or feel differently than they. By repressing the darker sides of their own personalities. By seeking to deny that death is as necessary as life, that negative should balance positive. By asserting that their way is the one true way and no other way should be chosen. By asserting that Law is oppressive or chaos is madness.Extremists are unreasoning fanatics.How is Cayden Cailean fanatical, except perhaps about ale? He's CG and thus one of the corner alignments. Or is it less extreme to have two concerns rather than a single one? Would Sarenrae be more 'extreme' than Iomedae because she's only concerned with Good, in terms of alignments?
Right, and democracy gives every person a say, but the masses can be just as tyrannical as a tyrant. Point being, Cayden Cailean opposes tyranny and oppression, fine...but what if I am trying to study the effects of tyranny on a society, can I do so if Cayden Cailean (or followers) keep killing my tyrants? Admittedly, you happen to pick a god that is very difficult to argue against, but were it within his power do you think he would remove all tyranny and oppression? First, wouldn't that be censorship which is what I claimed my fight was against, and second, what if the people choose to live that way for whatever reason? Is it still wrong?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...if their settlement leader(s) had the ability to enact a scorched earth trigger...
I'd never've expected to see you propose that, Bluddwolf, given your reaction to the idea of travellers destroying their cargo to avoid giving it to you. I've never developed the ability to say reliably "oh, look, a Bluddwolf post. I know what I'm about to read" :-).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right, and democracy gives every person a say, but the masses can be just as tyrannical as a tyrant. Point being, Cayden Cailean opposes tyranny and oppression, fine...but what if I am trying to study the effects of tyranny on a society, can I do so if Cayden Cailean (or followers) keep killing my tyrants? Admittedly, you happen to pick a god that is very difficult to argue against, but were it within his power do you think he would remove all tyranny and oppression? First, wouldn't that be censorship which is what I claimed my fight was against, and second, what if the people choose to live that way for whatever reason? Is it still wrong?
He's also a god of travel and bravery, so if an area was subject to tyranny he'd encourage his followers to either fight back or escape, but he wouldn't take away their opportunity for adventure either way. If you're setting up tinpot dictatorships to see how people suffer, then you're not 'balanced', you're just an a$$#@+. Problems like that develop all the time, there's no need to create more.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you're setting up tinpot dictatorships to see how people suffer, then you're not 'balanced', you're just an a$$#@+. Problems like that develop all the time, there's no need to create more.
I am not saying we should, I was just proposing a hypothetical...but you did illustrate my point. On that note, I agree with you...I personally lean toward opposing tyranny. As I said, you have a very difficult god to disagree with.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If you're setting up tinpot dictatorships to see how people suffer, then you're not 'balanced', you're just an a$$#@+. Problems like that develop all the time, there's no need to create more.I am not saying we should, I was just proposing a hypothetical...but you did illustrate my point. On that note, I agree with you...I personally lean toward opposing tyranny. As I said, you have a very difficult god to disagree with.
Well, I'm not planning to play a cleric any time soon, but I like Cayden more than many of the others because he's an ascended mortal and would know what it means to have mortal limitations, understanding the many absurdities of the human(mortal) condition. Pharasma is okay too, since all things are ultimately equal in death.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...if their settlement leader(s) had the ability to enact a scorched earth trigger...I'd never've expected to see you propose that, Bluddwolf, given your reaction to the idea of travellers destroying their cargo to avoid giving it to you. I've never developed the ability to say reliably "oh, look, a Bluddwolf post. I know what I'm about to read" :-).
Never expect what I might write, or be thinking... I confuse myself sometimes, because I throw sh@t at the walls to see what sticks.
In theory it does make sense to destroy your own structures, rather than have them fall into your enemy's hands.
As for the merchant throwing their stuff on the ground, that should not destroy it. If they threw it on the ground and I could still pick up some of it, I wouldn't mind the tactic. It just didn't make sense that they could instantly and completely destroy their entire cargo.
The same goes with the scorched earth of a settlement. It should take time, deliberate action and should be able to be interrupted.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Oppression, suppression, repression... you clearly have not a clue who Cayden Cailean is.How? By means of imbalance. By seeking to oppress, suppress, overthrow, or destroy those who think or feel differently than they. By repressing the darker sides of their own personalities. By seeking to deny that death is as necessary as life, that negative should balance positive. By asserting that their way is the one true way and no other way should be chosen. By asserting that Law is oppressive or chaos is madness.Extremists are unreasoning fanatics.How is Cayden Cailean fanatical, except perhaps about ale? He's CG and thus one of the corner alignments. Or is it less extreme to have two concerns rather than a single one? Would Sarenrae be more 'extreme' than Iomedae because she's only concerned with Good, in terms of alignments?
Try thinking it all the way through rather than assuming the first position that suits your intent. The oppression, suppression, and repression of oppression, suppression, and repression is still a form of extremist tyranny. It is not an expression of the nature-state but an enforcement of will. Hence he can only tolerate Gozreh, natural balance, and neutrality.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Try thinking it all the way through rather than assuming the first position that suits your intent. The oppression, suppression, and repression of oppression, suppression, and repression is still a form of extremist tyranny. It is not an expression of the nature-state but an enforcement of will. Hence he can only tolerate Gozreh, natural balance, and neutrality.
Now you're just doing semantical gymnastics. Opposing tyranny is not itself tyranny. A is A and not ~A.
What does Gozreh have to do with anything?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we suspend the Constitution in order to defend it we have lost it. If we become a tyranny in the name of freedom we are still a tyranny. It isn't like a seesaw where the dominance of one side is the submission of the other: both sides can be and too often are tyrannical.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
To think I've read through all 43 pages...See what you caused, Nihimon?
Do I get bonus points for starting both the longest thread and the oldest active thread (So, how many times have YOU clicked refresh on goblinworks.com / blog?) on this forum?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do I get bonus points for starting both the longest thread and the oldest active thread (So, how many times have YOU clicked refresh on goblinworks.com / blog?) on this forum?To think I've read through all 43 pages...See what you caused, Nihimon?
Maybe if this were a D&D 3e or 3.5e forum. But Pathfinder doesn't offer Synergy Bonuses, sorry.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Do I get bonus points for starting both the longest thread and the oldest active thread (So, how many times have YOU clicked refresh on goblinworks.com / blog?) on this forum?To think I've read through all 43 pages...See what you caused, Nihimon?
No, but I suspect that your total post count should be in that list...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
No, but I suspect that your total post count should be in that list...Do I get bonus points for starting both the longest thread and the oldest active thread (So, how many times have YOU clicked refresh on goblinworks.com / blog?) on this forum?To think I've read through all 43 pages...See what you caused, Nihimon?
I won't start worrying about my post count unless I catch Vic Wertz. I am averaging a little over 11 posts per day for the past 742 days. Vic's averaged a little under 5 posts per day over the same time period, and a little over 3.5 per day since his first post (that I could find on these forums) on January 1st, 2001. So, I think I have 4 or 5 years before I'm likely to catch him :)
______________________________________________________________I'd still like to know if there's simple term that we can use to refer to "acts which normally carry Alignment shifts towards Chaotic and/or Evil as well as Reputation loss, but which don't in this particular case". I thought I kind of understood Ryan's aversion to the term "sanctioned", but then I read this:
Ensuring that people know that becoming Chaotic and Evil will seriously degrade their character's powers is a way of communicating that arriving at that alignment indicates you've been bad.
(emphasis in original)
It seems like such a term would be useful.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... a settlement dies and we lose our ability to use the skills we can no longer maintain. That makes the death of a settlement also an Alzheimer's event for its citizens until they can reconstruct, if they ever can, or until they join a comparable settlement to replace the old.
So in a way settlement death is a form of character death or reduction, and so should provide impetus for community spirit as we haven't seen, at least in America, since the days of the pioneers when to have all needs supplied we had to take care of one another.
This should be a good thing. It should foster a sense of teamwork, a sense of 'love my neighbor as myself', because his loss is in a more direct way also my loss, and perhaps his gain is similarly my gain.
Radical.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
My only worry with that is this: if we start with 6 big settlements, and then one of them is crushed, the citizens of the crushed settlement now have incentive to join one of the 5 remaining big settlements. I worry that such mechanics could indirectly lead to the "one massive kingdom" scenario where you're either with the one big group or a fringe element, with no in-between.