Govt building quarters.

An area to facilitate free-form feedback on systems (in-game or out) related to Arelith.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Active DMs, Contributors

Post Reply
User avatar
Party in the forest at midnight
Posts: 1384
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 4:55 pm

Govt building quarters.

Post by Party in the forest at midnight » Wed May 25, 2022 7:48 pm

Hello, regarding the latest DM announcement:
If you own a guildhouse with empty quarters, you should be actively looking to fill these and not letting them sit open, even if there's only two internal quarters and you own one of them. This also goes for properties that serve a political function, such as the district guildhouses in Andunor, barracks in various surface cities, and the large auction properties such as Darrowdeep and Gloom. If you/your faction don't have the time to fill these properties, you should let the property go so someone else can have a chance at filling it. This requires an ongoing process to keep rooms full, and if the guildhouse houses a faction, then faction members should seek residence in the guildhouse before looking for housing elsewhere.
It'd be cool if government buildings were used more, at some point I want to hold events in the Guldorand one. But I don't think requiring people to live in these spaces will do that. These aren't guild houses and don't function like guild houses. They're ephemeral. In places with frequent elections like Guldorand and Cordor, in 30 days everyone who moved in may find themselves homeless. A lot of the quarters are also really underwhelming, being like inn room quarters except a lot more inconvenient to access.

I don't think running a government should have property tied to it other than the ruling faction being able to access the government building. Turning government building properties into empty rooms without anything in them might be nice, so if people want to do themed rooms they could make them.

User avatar
Paint
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2020 5:01 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Paint » Wed May 25, 2022 8:24 pm

Adding to this, because I was maybe a little too salty elsewhere about it, there are three quarters in the hawk'in barracks.

Two of them look like this:
Image

The third looks like this:
Image

During my time on the hawk'in, we've tried countless times to incentivize owning these quarters. They're behind hawk'in security, which is generally decent, which means you have to put less coin into your own security, they're by a bunch of crafting stuff, so that's nice, and they're right next to where we keep all of our internal communications. I've tried encouraging recruits to use them, I've tried encouraging long-time members to use them, but the cons just outweigh the pros here;

-They're basic quarters with a -very- basic look.
-We have a shared fixture limit in the hawk'in barracks of 60, if I remember correctly, and all three of these quarters have to play nice with that -and- the rest of the barracks.
-Whenever you enter the hawk'in barracks, you're creating a potential security breach, making accessing your quarter a constant jump through hoops.

Nobody wants these quarters. If you gave the hawk'in barracks to any other faction, they'd have the same struggle as we do. People would just rather buy quarters that look better and give them more room to do the things they want to do, or have quarters or lockers that are closer to the things they want to do. I don't know if this is a problem with other government barracks, but it is definitely a problem in Bendir.

The guildhouse mandate also feels counter-intuitive in this case, too. We want people who are active players to use quarters so that everyone has a chance to have a quarter and be given a chance to generate roleplay there and make the space their own. But these guildhouse quarters are so incredibly non-special that you can find the exact same footprint for them all over Arelith. After learning a bit about how mapping works in NWN, I kind of understand why that's the case, but it doesn't change that there are far more attractive apartments out there. Hell, there's apartments on the second floor of the Nomad I'd sooner rent before the quarters in the hawk'in barracks.

Until the hawk'in barracks gets a face-lift, or these quarters get re-evaluated, it's cruel to expect them to be filled all the time.

BurntGnome
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:05 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by BurntGnome » Thu May 26, 2022 4:23 am

Aye, the hawkin ones are pretty awful. We've been working ideas in the mapping software to fix it, but ultimately it'll be up to the dev team if those ideas hold merit.

Its the case with alot of quarters throughout the game. Bad locations, security risks, fixture limit issues, and just bad room designs. The tilesets are what they are, but hopefully the DM team understands this lack of curb appeal when considering if we're making fair attempts to rent them out. Understandably, this is hard with some locations, so I hope they look at it that way.

Floral Shoppe
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:32 am

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Floral Shoppe » Thu May 26, 2022 4:39 am

I don't understand what the repercussion would be if Bendir couldn't fill its Hawkin barracks. Would they be expected to disband? Who would move in?

There are some factions that are built into the server like Harpers, assassins, the Grove, the arcane tower, presumably Zhents, etc, that have quarters open for members (usually with race or class requirements) and aren't going to be taken over by the trading company of the month if not enough people are playing characters who would live there. I mean the assassins guild isn't shutting down if its quarters aren't used... Why wouldn't the Hawkin, the Kuldarn and other racial settlement barracks be a similar case?

User avatar
Irongron
Server Owner/Creative Lead
Server Owner/Creative Lead
Posts: 4666
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:13 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Irongron » Thu May 26, 2022 6:47 am

While I definitely understanding where posters are coming from here, I'm not going to change this policy - we expect guildhouses to be filled, especially those associated with player governments.

There was a nasty habit for a long time (especially in the new Guldorand after launch, and also in Devil's Table in the Underdark) of those holding power to also want to control all the best houses in the settlement, and this is just clearly unfair on the larger player base, and serves to strangle the possibilty of any meaningful opposition. As a settlement, those ruling it have acces to some AMAZING content - the State House, the Galleon, the Garrison, the old Lumbermill guildhouse, for many players that's a dream come true compared to regular housing, complaining that they can't also buy up some houses in the town just doesn't sit well with me.

I want these government spaces to be roleplayed in, to be lived in and used. I understand that elections means that they may be evicted every x period, but in reality, there is way less dynamism in election results, with the same faction able to maintain power for, sometimes, RL years a time.

So yes, if you run a settlement, it comes with benefits, obligations, and of course risks. I moved actual settlement power to be held by factions, rather than players some time ago. I know some players essentially create 'dummy factions' to use in their election bid, but that too comes with a cost. Play, and take power with a real faction, share the power with them, and above all fight to win elections. In Guldorand the quarters (and space) on offer to the government, are without equal, and I won't take too kindly to those same characters buying up a mansion in the city.

Yet I did see that the Hawk'hin barracks were mentioned here, and yeah, I can only agree those rooms are seriously lacklustre. I decided some time ago that government rooms like that should be really very nice (see the more recently created Cordor barracks,r the astounding chambers available to the rulers of Brogendenstein). and the area could do with an update, to make that guildhouse, and its rooms worth the sacrifice.

So my answer? No, policy here is firm, and I'll remind DM team to take another look at it. If a ruling faction in a settlement is not abiding by this. For Bendir, I'll look at those barracks when I can though.

Though I should add, a settlement ruling faction unable to fill rooms just because they lack enough actual people won't be getting in too much hot water, unless those same characters are also controlling property elsewhere in the city, while leaving their government homes vacant.

User avatar
MalKalz
General Admin
General Admin
Posts: 3023
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 10:33 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by MalKalz » Thu May 26, 2022 12:20 pm

Paint wrote:
Wed May 25, 2022 8:24 pm
Adding to this, because I was maybe a little too salty elsewhere about it, there are three quarters in the hawk'in barracks.

Two of them look like this:
Image

The third looks like this:
Image

During my time on the hawk'in, we've tried countless times to incentivize owning these quarters. They're behind hawk'in security, which is generally decent, which means you have to put less coin into your own security, they're by a bunch of crafting stuff, so that's nice, and they're right next to where we keep all of our internal communications. I've tried encouraging recruits to use them, I've tried encouraging long-time members to use them, but the cons just outweigh the pros here;

-They're basic quarters with a -very- basic look.
-We have a shared fixture limit in the hawk'in barracks of 60, if I remember correctly, and all three of these quarters have to play nice with that -and- the rest of the barracks.
-Whenever you enter the hawk'in barracks, you're creating a potential security breach, making accessing your quarter a constant jump through hoops.

Nobody wants these quarters. If you gave the hawk'in barracks to any other faction, they'd have the same struggle as we do. People would just rather buy quarters that look better and give them more room to do the things they want to do, or have quarters or lockers that are closer to the things they want to do. I don't know if this is a problem with other government barracks, but it is definitely a problem in Bendir.

The guildhouse mandate also feels counter-intuitive in this case, too. We want people who are active players to use quarters so that everyone has a chance to have a quarter and be given a chance to generate roleplay there and make the space their own. But these guildhouse quarters are so incredibly non-special that you can find the exact same footprint for them all over Arelith. After learning a bit about how mapping works in NWN, I kind of understand why that's the case, but it doesn't change that there are far more attractive apartments out there. Hell, there's apartments on the second floor of the Nomad I'd sooner rent before the quarters in the hawk'in barracks.

Until the hawk'in barracks gets a face-lift, or these quarters get re-evaluated, it's cruel to expect them to be filled all the time.
To go over this - I was the designer around the recent iteration of the Hawkin Barracks that went through a massive overhaul. Prior to the update, the barracks were simply a version of an old Cordor outskirts home (the combined first floor living / kitchen area) with the upstairs 2 bedrooms and a side closet. The expansion saw growth to allow for a meeting area, small library section, a barracks area below, three quarters (two smaller ones), and the larger one in your picture that had a small office room in between (intended for the Commander). It also has all the necessary crafting stations present.

The things I can do though is:

Re-evaluate the smaller rooms (it's a barracks - it's not meant to be glamorous in living). But, I can try to make them a bit larger and more customizable.

Up the fixture limit to 100 from 60.

As for the entry - this is the same for any place - you have an inherent risk of security breaches on any property should you open the door. I do not see an issue where it is and how it functions - as a player you just need to be vigilant in making sure it is safe to proceed before doing so. No place should be immune to such.

So the first two are things I can look into. But I do not think the property requires any more changes beyond that.

Discord: @malkalz
Determine your Public CD Key here
Can't see your vault? Have you migrated your accounts? If you have tried, and still can't see them, message me.


Arienette
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Arelith Platinum Supporter
Posts: 352
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2019 12:56 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Arienette » Thu May 26, 2022 11:42 pm

For the Hawkin Barracks, I would recommend sticking a Source Portal in there.

Kuldarn barracks have a similar issue. Due to them being empty so long, we started using the rooms as storage.

With the recent announcement, we have cleared them out and actively encouraged characters IC to rent them.

There DOES seem to often be an OOC issue with these quarters sometimes.

The new recruit's player says to themselves "Im the new guy! Lowest on the totem pole! I Surely this quarter isnt meant for me!"

It can take some time and effort to overcome this reluctance.

User avatar
Marsi
Posts: 549
Joined: Mon Sep 08, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Marsi » Fri May 27, 2022 2:22 am

Staffing a government is pretty difficult.

A faction attracts players through inspiration, charisma, by being "happening". Generally speaking this is a very finite resource and even the most inspired group of players is going to have their moment and then for their numbers to dwindle. A freestanding faction should be able to fully populate a guildhouse or not have one at all, because the forces that bring a faction in to existence usually draw players towards it. Of course, this is not so for a settlement, which exists in perpetuity, and there is only a finite amount of players interested in government/military RP at one settlement at any one time. It seems like this text asks settlements to maximally hold the interest of other players at all times, always, forever. If not, I guess they lose the structure? Honestly, I don't think it would be the worst thing if government buildings could revert to the civilian market, so long as there was a way for the government to expropriate a guildhouse of their choice.

I have been involved in government RP, and I found it very difficult to recruit. Players aren't motivated to join a faction for practical or rational reasons. The pay doesn't matter, nor does getting a quarter, because Arelith isn't a job simulator and the player characters don't need to "work" - for the government, or for anyone.

What worked was deputising *other factions* to function as autonomous branches of government and setting them up in the various government buildings. Selling a faction on getting to be a private military contractor is more exciting than trying to convince a bunch of people that being a government bureaucrat can be fun. Though, this was awkward and annoying given that all the various incredible Cordorian civic buildings were linked to (iirc) the same set of key/access rights.

So it would be cool if governments could be comprised of like, "internal factions" which are recruited by the settlement itself to fulfill basic roles. Instead of the Cordor Guard, for which numbers and interest wildly fluctuate, Cordor would instead hire a popular mercenary group to be their guards. Maybe an evil government would contract the local Banite chapter. There would be juicy internal striving and conflict between these subfactions. If those factions weren't performing numbers wise, it would be in the settlements interest to kick them out and find a more active organisation. Of course, this can happen already, you just have to work around all the quarter/settlement infrastructure that only really has direct employment in mind.

Why should the great bell of Beaulieu toll when the shadows were neither short nor long?


Floral Shoppe
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 11:32 am

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Floral Shoppe » Fri May 27, 2022 4:44 am

I'm just going back to Bendir because I'm very familiar with the town.

Let's say the current Hawkin captain can't find enough recruits to fill the quarters. What then? The barracks go up for sale, the mayor gets sacked, what?

There are only so many people playing hin and only a fraction are into being Hawkin and there's no competition for those slots. There's almost never going to be a "group B" of wanna-be Hawkin wanting to fill the the place. If enough hin aren't interested will it be open for characters of other races to take and turn it into something else entirely?

I 100% understand neutral guildhouses that are adaptable to different factions needed to be full and active but this seems draconian for the earthkin barracks. It also seems unenforceable unless there's going to be a huge shift in how those settlements operate.

Definately Not A Mimic
Posts: 216
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:29 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Definately Not A Mimic » Fri May 27, 2022 2:13 pm

Seeing this, I have to say, it would make me hesitant to try for a government position if I already owned a home I liked, either because of ideal location, nice lay out, what have you.

Obviously I get not wanting guild houses sitting unused or being one person's personal mass storage. That isn't fair to other groups. But if it a requirement to give up something you already owned and struggled to get (yes the bidding system can feel like a struggle) I don't know if it would be worth the headache. It isn't as if running a settlement is a stress free walk in the park. Taking all that on fully knowing that at end of term or sooner do to assassins you'll lose your house and storage makes it a turn off for any already established character. My opinion only mind you.

User avatar
Flower Power
Posts: 493
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:02 am

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Flower Power » Fri May 27, 2022 3:17 pm

Definately Not A Mimic wrote:
Fri May 27, 2022 2:13 pm
Seeing this, I have to say, it would make me hesitant to try for a government position if I already owned a home I liked, either because of ideal location, nice lay out, what have you.
Nobody is saying that the government leader/bigshots themselves have to personally occupy said quarters. Just that said quarters need to actually be occupied.

Branch out. Find small groups you think you can trust. Win their loyalty by guaranteeing them a halfway decent quarter (because apart from the tiny halfling barracks, most of the gov't-linked quarters are pretty decent) to base out of that they don't have to play the auction game for.

Networking, negotiation and making new allies are all important parts of the IG political system: or should be, when it's running properly and isn't just being predecided by extant groups sitting on places - though Cordor's the only settlement that usually has regular upsets or outsiders stepping in to take over on a regular basis (as IG said, the worries about being evicted in 30 days are, in most places, being greatly over exaggerated.)

Plus, frankly, it's usually only 2-3 places that you need to fill up for most of these gov't-linked guildhouses. If you can't find 2-3 people who want to be basically handed a free storage chest, you've probably got bigger problems.
what would fred rogers do?

BlueRadish
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2021 7:03 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by BlueRadish » Fri May 27, 2022 6:40 pm

I appreciate that the team wants to see these quarters used. That said, I would never choose a government or guildhouse quarter over a regular quarter because of the many cons discussed here.

I feel that requiring their use is well intentioned but unreasonable.

Aelryn Bloodmoon
Arelith Supporter
Arelith Supporter
Posts: 2028
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2014 4:57 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Aelryn Bloodmoon » Fri May 27, 2022 7:32 pm

Marsi wrote:
Fri May 27, 2022 2:22 am
*Good stuff*

The part I'm focusing on
Though, this was awkward and annoying given that all the various incredible Cordorian civic buildings were linked to (iirc) the same set of key/access rights.

*Some more interesting ideas*
I remember this time period fondly- all except for the part where we changed the locks like 6 or 7 times in less than a month and then I got super anal about who could make keys and hand them out. In a settlement like Cordor where a well-run guard faction can break 30 members, all the government buildings using one set of access rights for keys is an almost unforgivable security lapse, and there's no way to change it IG.
Bane's tyranny is known throughout the continent, and his is the image most seen as the face of evil.
-Faiths and Pantheons (c)2002

User avatar
Aradin
Arelith Silver Supporter
Arelith Silver Supporter
Posts: 363
Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 10:26 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Aradin » Fri May 27, 2022 7:50 pm

It's tricky, isn't it? I get the dev team's perspective.
Irongron wrote:
Thu May 26, 2022 6:47 am
...if you run a settlement, it comes with benefits, obligations, and of course risks.
And the same goes for owning guildhouses. The trouble is no player wants to be obligated to do anything in a game that they play in their free time for fun. So when you introduce mechanics that have obligations, you have to make them fun and interesting enough for those obligations to be worth it. Otherwise players just won't do them. In this case, that means filling government quarters. And quarters like the Hawkin Barracks aren't fun or interesting enough to be worth the obligation of having to adhere to the various rules and cons of living in a government quarter/guildhouse.
Heck, my character currently owns the Red Tower in Andunor; a spacious, high-end guildhouse with 6 quarters, run by a faction of a dozen active players, and we're still having trouble filling the last quarter. Players just want to live somewhere nice without worrying about leaking security and screwing their faction over, getting evicted by their own faction leader, getting evicted by the government whose settlement the guildhouse is in, getting evicted by DMs because we didn't fill the guildhouse, shared fixture limits, and the other cons mentioned here. Why would you submit yourself to worrying about all that when you could get a quarter elsewhere that doesn't have any of those drawbacks, and is nicer?

My two cents if you want guildhouses and government quarters to be full of active players: Make all such quarters across the server really stellar. Make them much better than properties you can get as an individual. If that makes players only want to run governments to have access to those nice things? Great, that's IC corruption and can be a fun plot hook. There are undoubtedly other ways to make government quarters and guildhouses more attractive as well.

Was Lloyd Grimm, Sai Aung-K'yi, Stink Spellworped, Ikarus, and Revyn the White.


Guerra
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2021 11:41 pm

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Guerra » Fri May 27, 2022 8:57 pm

Something not mentioned yet is a lot of players have alts and only one character can have property.

So let's say their main is active and has a house they like. Then their underdark alt wants to join a faction with a guildhouse or their Cordor alt wants to join the guard. They aren't going to be able to take a quarter in that faction house without releasing the other.

I know the dev team answer would be "you should release the property on the main and join the faction". But that's not always what happens. Faced with the choice of "rent a quarter or you can't be in the faction" the alt often gets shelved instead because they don't want to give up their main's quarters. Then the faction has empty rooms and loses a potential member.

I'm not saying this is ideal behavior. But it's something I have seen a few times so I think it is a factor in why govt quarters go empty and I think it's worth putting out there.

User avatar
DM Wake
Posts: 586
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 5:16 am

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by DM Wake » Fri May 27, 2022 10:17 pm

Many of the points here are ones I've already considered and talked to Irongron about already. I agree that the internal quarters of some guildhouses could do with some sprucing up.

But consider what a guildhouse is. It's a property with internal quarters meant for multiple people to own. One (purely theoretical) idea I had was if guildhouses are too much hassle for players, then we remove all but one internal quarter from them and the corresponding storage. Another (again, purely theoretical) idea was to de-guildhouse-ify some properties, making them an open common space for people to come and go as they please. This has already been done to several guildhouses in the past year. Some players even make their guildhouses public for people to live out of.

For civic guildhouses, I refer to Irongron's statement here:
Though I should add, a settlement ruling faction unable to fill rooms just because they lack enough actual people won't be getting in too much hot water, unless those same characters are also controlling property elsewhere in the city, while leaving their government homes vacant.
Leadership guildhouses and even auction castle/sites like Darrowdeep that are won come with a responsibility to fill them with people. If you take up the mantle for the position of government official/auction winner, then you should be wiling to fill these places yourself if you have to. There's an issue of finding people who want to live there, but often times too it's also about the level of trust that the owner requires to let people in. If they only let people in that they trust completely, then it's going to be even harder to do. It is also an option to let a third party manage these properties, likely one that cooperates very closely with the government.

And when asking about leadership change, I understand that players want to mitigate risks. But to that I say, a change in leadership shouldn't be risk-free. Settlements that lose major property bids are required to vacate the premises that they held, and if an official that holds government property is fired, they'll be expected to vacate their property. Just the same, a change in leadership may mean having to move properties. If you want to control the guildhouse, you should be prepared to accept the responsibility and risks of it.

User avatar
Edens_Fall
Arelith Supporter
Arelith Supporter
Posts: 1066
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:45 am
Location: North America

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Edens_Fall » Sat May 28, 2022 1:21 pm

I'll add in too that the issue with finding properties has pretty much been eliminated by the auction system. Changing homes is pretty easy these days as we don't have to worry about factions holding a property for RL years by passing it along.

Take that chance! If your forced to move out of a government building when loosing power there no great loss. Resources can be gathered again and new fixtures made.

User avatar
Baseili
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2017 6:09 pm
Location: England

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Baseili » Sat May 28, 2022 2:20 pm

That is very generous wishful thinking, especially when you consider the bidding system had to be introduced because people didn't want to give up properties. Do you believe that people are going to voluntarily give up a sure thing property for one that is not only limited in time, probably smaller and lesser in quality but can also be removed from them should the leadership/gov be removed potentially quickly via assassination?

I am not seeing a single upside to that bargain.

User avatar
Edens_Fall
Arelith Supporter
Arelith Supporter
Posts: 1066
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2019 7:45 am
Location: North America

Re: Govt building quarters.

Post by Edens_Fall » Sat May 28, 2022 8:43 pm

My main has changed homes several times the past year within several settlements with no issue. Even managed to score a nice place in Andunor. I would also mention a prime Andunorian manor, formerly owned by the same persons for awhile, has changed hands as well. Though I think it could be more as a guild hall then home.

Eitherway I see it as a good thing.

If a property isn't being used by the owning player they can release it, or If they try to camp it while not being active, a report can be made and the property released by the staff if warranted. If it is being used by an active faction for RL years then no worries as the property is serving its purpose. The issue has always been giving others a chance to own prime locals, which would have been impossible for a player as myself before the change.

Post Reply