
![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

We've been given only a little bit of info about factional sects and conflict, and the system gets very little discussion. But from what I've seen, this mechanism will actually have a lot of impact on how we play, how we train, and how often we fight. I think the factions will turn out to be pretty important.
Here's what I've gleaned so far:
* NPC factions will provide specialized training not available at standard role trainers
* Accessing more advanced faction training will require you to raise your standing in the faction via unique quests/achievements
* Raising your standing high enough in any faction will put you in permanent hostility with high-standing members of any opposing factions.
* You may also opt-in to factional hostility at any standing if you wish.
* Faction support will be minimal in the NPC cities.
* Standing quests for evil factions will often put players in conflict with other evil factions.
* Religions and several Assassin guilds were presented as two specific examples of NPC factions. Eagle Knights, Hellknights, and Aspis Consortium have also been mentioned.
Here are some of the points I'm curious about:
* Are faction houses small or medium? Or are they upgrade forks for other buildings?
* Has the design progressed to a stage where a list of first-phase factions could be published?
* Does each faction have exactly one permanently-opposed faction, or do some or all have multiples?
* Will faction opposition lines remain generally static, or will there be ongoing storyline changes which alter the hostility map?
* Will clerics be forced to raise religious faction standing to attackable levels in order to unlock high-level cleric training?
* Will clerics be forced to raise religious faction standing to attackable levels in order to unlock high-level deity-specific training?
* Would a Temple of Norgorber (or a Cathedral with Norgorber support) also count as a Skinsaw faction house for assassin training, or is that two different investments?

![]() |

"Standing quests for evil factions will often put players in conflict with other evil factions. "
This I hope they do not do. This is "evil light" and not try evil. I want to do very bad things to very good and innocent people (NPC or PC).
I don't want to just kill these good people. I'm a cannibalistic Necromancer. I want to enslave them, eventually kill them, eat parts of them, use other parts of them for evil potions or dark magics, and then I want to animate their dead corpses and have them do my bidding.
I want evil to be really evil and not done kind of Disney version of evil.

![]() |

I want to do very bad things to very good and innocent people
Why would you care which alignment they are? If you're evil you're evil, doesn't matter who your evil to, does it? Especially if you're Chaotic?
Perhaps I could understand if the "good" meat tastes sweeter than "evil" meat (eeew), or some such thing, but outside of that is there some reason you'd not be evil to evil people?
And your evil is definitely NOT Disney evil, dude. Whoa!

![]() |

"Standing quests for evil factions will often put players in conflict with other evil factions. "
This I hope they do not do. This is "evil light" and not try evil. I want to do very bad things to very good and innocent people (NPC or PC).
Evil that only targets good is "evil light." Evil that targets good and evil is true evil.
Also, the reason Good or at least Neutral outnumber evil is because Evil feeds on evil. It is uncommon for Good to go after Good.

![]() |

Harbinger of Chaos wrote:"Standing quests for evil factions will often put players in conflict with other evil factions. "
This I hope they do not do. This is "evil light" and not try evil. I want to do very bad things to very good and innocent people (NPC or PC).
Evil that only targets good is "evil light." Evil that targets good and evil is true evil.
Also, the reason Good or at least Neutral outnumber evil is because Evil feeds on evil. It is uncommon for Good to go after Good.
I did not mean to make it seem that I was excluding evil from my possible victims. I'm just hoping that GW does not go down the road that Cryptic did with City of Villains, where Evil vs Evil was just about the only evil that there was.
And your evil is definitely NOT Disney evil, dude. [/b]Whoa!
Yeah, that is the kind of evil I want. The kind of evil that makes you say "Whoa! Now that was evil!" I want Clive Barker kind of evil, HP Lovecraft kind of evil. Even Gargamel vs. the Smurfs was evil vs. innocents.

![]() |

Evil societies in the game should have unique and cool things they could accomplish. But accomplishing those things should require betrayal, deception, murder and pain & suffering inflicted on others.
The "others" should often be members of the evil society.
So getting ahead in an evil Settlement means that you're constantly making enemies out of your peers. Sure, you may be strong enough to keep squashing them when they seek to take you out, but you're going to be forced to keep dealing with challenges to your power. The more 'evil' you do, the more those challenges should spread.
Want to advance that Temple to Rovagug so that characters that cast divine spells granted by Rovagug can get a new spell level? Well Rovagug wants blood on his altars. A lot of blood. And it turns out that the blood of the worshipers of Asmodeus is PARTICULARLY desired by Rovagug...
I have no problem with this idea. Good, by nature, opposes evil. Evil, by nature, opposes anyone who gets in its way. Playing evil should not just be playing a mirror image of good reskinned from blue to red; it should be qualitatively different, and it makes sense for part of that difference to be infighting.

![]() |

Yeah, that is the kind of evil I want. The kind of evil that makes you say "Whoa! Now that was evil!" I want Clive Barker kind of evil, HP Lovecraft kind of evil. Even Gargamel vs. the Smurfs was evil vs. innocents.
It might be just me, but this is the type of evil that I picture you bringing to the game.