Settlement Alliances, or how to be good neighbours?


Pathfinder Online

Goblin Squad Member

Now, rather than further derail a thread that's gone so far off the rails it's a train trying to be a submarine, I'm going to cherry pick a couple of lines here that made my brain tick over in an interesting way.

Ryan Dancey wrote:
GrumpyMel wrote:
Unless I'm missing something, you would pretty much create a catch-22 here Ryan for new organizations seeking to enter the game and establish a settlement or existing organizations seeking to recover from a lost settlement. In order to be effective in the things that are needed to begin to create a PC settlement you need to be a member of a company but if you are not already a member of a PC settlement you can't be a member of a company. See the problem?
I see that people who want to form a Settlement might do the required things while being a member of a PC Settlement.

Why would a Settlement want/not want members to eventually 'bud off' and form a new Settlement a few Hexes over?

***********************************************************************

Pros:

1) Living next door to your Parents.

Assisting friendly PCs to build up a new Settlement, while still allowing them access to your training facilities, can encourage them to build a mutually beneficial Settlement of their own.

Settlement A helps Settlement B 'bud off'. Settlement A is focused on Warrior and Rogue-style training with access to a metal-rich mine Point-of-Interest (Referred to hereafter as a PoI). Settlement B opts to, rather than compete with Settlement A for the PoI and similar training halls/structures, focus on a Temple-Settlement, providing training for Clerics, with a side-line in alchemical items and reagents and even a Shrine to allow PCs to bind their spirits to a friendly Temple-Settlement. It's a win-win for both Settlements.

2) Burying the Hatchet.

Ambitious players will want to spread their wings, and rather than keeping them under your thumb, or exiling them, and either option causes bad blood, giving them supplies to start the new Settlement, as well as other forms of assistance can go a long way to building bonds of trust and mutual respect, especially if the new Settlement is allowed to self-govern, and the old Settlement just chips in with some 'Dad's advice' when a trouble crops up.

3) Leap-Frogging Settlement Building.

This might sound strange at first glance, but consider two Companies work well together, but they're just too large to conglomerate under a single Company banner, and the leaders each don't wish to relinquish control to somebody else. So Company A builds the first Settlement, while Company B assists but gathers resources for the next Settlement.

Then, Company B heads out, and Company A assists in turn, providing manpower and resources where Company B might be falling short. In time, the two Companies might be able to build multiple Settlements in their own style, selling the Settlements to Companies who may lack the time or skills to build their own, and become a powerful voice in local politics with their knowledge of each Settlement's building composition and vulnerabilities.

***********************************************************************

Cons:

1) Like butter spread over too much bread.

Maybe a new Settlement might be in order, but your own isn't quite finished yet, and those uppity bastards are poaching some of your people to furnish their ranks, while your own Settlement is losing talented players, and the nearby Hexes are coming under additional strain as the two Settlements both harvest at full capacity, outstripping the Hexes' ability to replenish their resources.

Sooner or later, Floggit and Leggit Building teams are going to pop up, and perhaps even a war might loom on the horizon.

2) Cloned!

Great, the new Settlement is starting to take shape ... and it's exactly the same as yours. What the hell. We talked about this. No, stop, don't do ... gah.

But the other guys have decided since your setup works so well, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and they'd like to be rich and well-defended just like you. Sadly that means there's going to continue to be a shortage of training halls for specific archetypes, and once again, the resource nodes and PoI's you depend upon are going to get hammered.

3) How sharp the serpent's tooth!

People clash all the time, and in a game where getting the last word in is an assassination contract away, abrasive players will find themselves in a lot of hot water, and unfortunately, MMOs have shown that abrasive players are also ambitious players, wanting to be the very best, and often that means leading the rest of the abrasive, ambitious players, who all wish to lead as well.

Maybe your Officers were a bit too houlier-than-thou to your best Gathering Squad. Maybe your Bandit Crew were complete jerk-asses to the Wizards for the last time. Maybe you're just a despot and the cream of the crop know they can't dislodge you with your army of well-bribed cronies, so they'll up sticks and shuffle over to the next building site with an army of disgruntled folks at their backs.

Oh s!@*, you've got a Settlement going up full of people who'd dearly love to see you turned into the Golarion version of a Turducken and fed to the nearest apex predator.

Have I missed any points? I fear the lack-of-sleep and coffee-driven burst of thought has spluttered and faltered again.


The point you are missing is that it gives the landrush people ultimate power over who can and cannot become opposition. How is a group like mine meant to join the game? Can't happen because we have to find a settlement that will take us in. Then we have to persuade the settlement that we should be allowed to start a settlement because we will not be any danger. This sort of deal just says to new people who look at the game frankly don't bother because you are not wanted here unless you can convince one of the ee people you are harmless.

Luckily Dancey has said this is not going to occur and people in NPC settlements can throw two fingers up at the established settlements

Goblin Squad Member

I don't believe either of of you are reading it correctly, and Ryan did not explain it clearly either. He picked up on something involving companies, instead of settlements.

Ryan Dancey wrote:
The plan as it stands now is that companies can be created and joined by anyone regardless of their membership or lack thereof in a PC Settlement.

Once a company is created, they can then clear a hex and begin to build a POI and support Outposts.

I believe it is a fort that can eventually be converted into a settlement, but I could be wrong on that.

When Ryan says you have to be a member if a settlement first, he has often not specified that includes an NPC settlement. There is never a time that out characters are not in a settlement.

Perhaps in order to start a settlement, you can't be in a PC settlement. This would be very similar to starting a new corp in EvE, you have to shift to an NPC corp first.

Goblin Squad Member

True, but there's also the point that Settlements, once they reach a certain size/level of power, should take a look at sponsoring 'Child' or satellite Settlements, if only to foster good-will amongst their neighbours.

I love the idea that a pre-existing Settlement cannot deny new settlers the right to develop their own settlement without declaring a Feud (Costing Development Index resources and Rep/Alignment, possibly) or hiring Bandits/Player Killers to run the Settlers off their land.

That also creates an interesting situation where a Settlement that's trying to keep it's Rep/Alignment/DI Resources high might be forced to wait until the new Settlement is built to the lowest possible score, and then declare a War/Feud.

Also, for the people that don't care, there could be that 'sweet spot' where the new Settlement is vulnerable to attack, but built up enough that it would be much cheaper to take over than build a Settlement for yourself.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

It depends mostly on what the limiting factor on production is (coin, raw material, or buildings). The best way to increase the inputs of finished goods is to remove whatever the current bottleneck is: If the bottleneck is "We don't control enough territory for our escalation team to work without bumping into each other." or "Enough resource nodes for our gatherers and harvesters to avoid depletion", then expansion into new hexes is the best way. If you don't have enough building sites to build the buildings that are limiting you, then a new settlement site is the next step. If you have the area to put everyone to work and the buildings to turn that all of that into finished goods, the way to expand in power is to recruit more players.

Not every settlement will intend to maximize power; many will want to establish a finite territory or playerbase and hang on to it. But expect that the groups that will do anything to become more powerful will end up becoming more powerful than groups that want something else more.

Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / Settlement Alliances, or how to be good neighbours? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Online