Guildhouses: Looking for Playerbase Opinions

[Scurvy Cur]

A rule suggestion, I guess

Wrong metric, Astral, because you've identified the wrong symptoms.

An inactive guildhouse is not inactive because not all the quarters are filled, and nor does filling all the quarters make an active guildhouse. A guildhouse can be actively used when, for example, it is used to house regular meetings, pool supplies, share intelligence, or even just to be a hang out space routinely used by members who stop there and RP, even if not all quarters within are owned, and a guildhouse where all quarters are owned, can still be disused if each character within uses it as a place to toss their stuff and nothing more.

As above, I'd rather have a faction own a guildhouse that they routinely use to host meetings/events/gatherings/whatwever, but in which no side rooms are filled than a faction which fills a guildhouse, but never does anything but store stuff there.

I'll pick on the Cordor barracks as an example, because it's a guildhouse I've owned four times across 15 years on the server. I can't think of any time any quarter was filled save the commander's quarter. There are a few reasons, but the biggest one is something Xerah pointed out earlier: The other three rooms are objectively dogshit. They have a chest, 6 child sized bunks, and not enough floorspace to decorate. They're among the worst quarters on the server. I don't think, under your rule construction, anyone would ever own the guard barracks, because doing so would require three players other than the guard commander to basically sacrifice their ability to own any halfway property in order to check the rule's boxes, and there would probably need to be some level of OOC agreement between parties to keep the guildhouse occupied.

As another example, the last guildhouse I personally owned was home to a faction of 5-7 active people for the duration of my ownership. It was routinely used for meetings, to share information, to invite friends over, and as a general purpose faction base of operations, etc because it had a very nice conference room-y area. I couldn't get anyone to buy the side room though, because all 5-7 of those people had already bought a better quarter (while the side room was better than a guard barracks room, it was a somewhat plainish square with a bed and a chest and not a whole lot of space for decoration).

Then there's the point Xerah mentioned. There's an extra level of vulnerability to guildhouse houses. The owner can always just change the locks on you and you're out.

tl;dr: Failure of a bright line rule, 101. The way guildhouses are set up discourages them from being filled. The quarters usually are pretty mediocre, they're vulnerable, and we don't actually have such a housing shortage that people are willing to consider a crappy quarter a good deal (contrary to OP's assertion, I don't think we've got a "housing shortage". It seldom takes me more than an hour of searching to find a quarter, so long as I'm not too choosy. What we've got is high demand for specific quarters, and an associated and perfectly natural sense that it is unfair that some people appear to own a lot of good things, especially if you want one of those good things for your own).

[Scurvy Cur]

I personally care a lot less about a faction owning two guildhouses (particularly if they are properties with entirely disparate functions, like a castle and a chapel) so long as both guildhouses see at least some beneficial use than I do about a small low-activity faction owning a single guildhouse and using it basically as bonus chests.

If the small faction is on the decline or is dead but they won't admit it yet, sure. But I think we should be encouraging small factions to make an effort for the sake of diversity and creativity and small factions by the nature of fewer members will always seem less played than the big guys. It's also really easy to think a property owned by a small faction is unused if you don't know the members and they play at times you don't.

I wholeheartedly agree with your point, which is another reason why I think that bright line rules should be avoided in guildhouse situations, in favor of DM discretion. A hard and fast "rule" is more likely to squash groups trying to get off the ground (or even small, but steadily active factions who are not close to dying out) than is simply empowering the DMs to go ask guildhouse owners what they're doing/attempting with the quarter.

My first point was more directed to the people arguing that, for example, a single faction owning more than one guild hall is incomprehensible as anything but an obvious rulebreak. Suppose a faction owns a temple in which they regularly hold sermons and attempt to convert people to their cause and, let's say, the desert fort in which they routinely hold military training/meetings/staging operations. I'd consider this a happier state of affairs than one in which one dead faction owns the temple and another dead faction owns the castle, but some posters in this thread would view the first arrangement as "probably a rulebreak" and the second arrangement as "just fine".

[Flower Power]

tl;dr: Failure of a bright line rule, 101. The way guildhouses are set up discourages them from being filled. The quarters usually are pretty mediocre, they're vulnerable, and we don't actually have such a housing shortage that people are willing to consider a crappy quarter a good deal (contrary to OP's assertion, I don't think we've got a "housing shortage". It seldom takes me more than an hour of searching to find a quarter, so long as I'm not too choosy. What we've got is high demand for specific quarters, and an associated and perfectly natural sense that it is unfair that some people appear to own a lot of good things, especially if you want one of those good things for your own).

Discounting the Guard Barracks and Cordor's ships as guildhouses (as they're usually just de facto military property):

3 factions (although the line is pretty blurry between two of them, so you could even argue it's just 2 factions) own, between them, 5 of Cordor's 8 guildhouses.

Two of those factions also each own a guildhouse elsewhere on the server, and one of the remaining 3/8 guildhouses in Cordor is owned by a member of one of those three factions (who uses it as a private residence instead), and the other two are also being used (functionally) as private residences.

Those numbers don't lie. Guildhouses are, in fact, being hoarded by a relatively small and entrenched number of factions.

[Scurvy Cur]

tl;dr: Failure of a bright line rule, 101. The way guildhouses are set up discourages them from being filled. The quarters usually are pretty mediocre, they're vulnerable, and we don't actually have such a housing shortage that people are willing to consider a crappy quarter a good deal (contrary to OP's assertion, I don't think we've got a "housing shortage". It seldom takes me more than an hour of searching to find a quarter, so long as I'm not too choosy. What we've got is high demand for specific quarters, and an associated and perfectly natural sense that it is unfair that some people appear to own a lot of good things, especially if you want one of those good things for your own).

Discounting the Guard Barracks and Cordor's ships as guildhouses (as they're usually just de facto military property):

3 factions (although the line is pretty blurry between two of them, so you could even argue it's just 2 factions) own, between them, 5 of Cordor's 8 guildhouses.

Two of those factions also each own a guildhouse elsewhere on the server, and one of the remaining 3/8 guildhouses in Cordor is owned by a member of one of those three factions (who uses it as a private residence instead), and the other two are also being used (functionally) as private residences.

Those numbers don't lie. Guildhouses are, in fact, being hoarded by a relatively small and entrenched number of factions.

And if this is, in fact, correct, it can be easily resolved by a DM inquiry into whether each of the aforementioned guildhouses is being used appropriately.

Numbers may not lie, but interpretations of numbers are made by people, who often do (or more innocently, may be mistaken).

[Talvenlapsi]

Agreed.

I believe a big faction with a lot of active members can own two guildhouses or more properties, for sure. But there's limit to it, which I think starts easily to break the Be Nice rule. If you have say, three guild houses, smaller places possibly added to that, and like five shops, you're.. Going above what should be allowed.

I think faction with shop and like 10+ active members CAN occupy the space of two guildhouses. No doubt. But I'm not sure if it's good behavior to hog the houses and not use them.
Do you /have/ to buy every shop that is available? Get every guildhouse that is available? Are you sure that is needed? I'm not sure it is. It's more about thinking of others, too, and giving others their share and place to shine.

If you have.. Less than 5 active members, you don't need guildhouse.
If you have around 10 active members, I think guildhouse is good.
15+, I think you can perhaps acquire two shops or bigger halls.

Or, like stated above; if you use the halls well. IF you hold two guildhouses, use them both. Give them meaning. If you have chapel and guildhouse and both have their fair share of use? Great. I'm glad you have them!
But anyone with more than 2 guildhouses for faction? I have high doubt all of those get active use, and perhaps you could prioritize what type of things to store in the chests, if you /really/ occupy that many chests.

Just my 2 cents. Don't hog guildhouses. Or shops, in that manner. Please don't. Others want possibility to get those things too, since they're not that plenty currently.

[Gouge Away]

Maybe.. settlements could have a cool meeting hall with a locking door that citizens (and only citizens) can rent for an hour or two. Ideally you could even reserve it up to a week in advance, dunno if Arelith's timekeeping is solid enough to handle that though. Instancing them might be another option so two factions could meet at the same time on a Saturday afternoon.

Often what small factions want from a guildhouse is a place to meet that has some gravitas (a big table to gather around, cool decor, something more than a tiny quarter that feels like someone's bedroom) and enough privacy to conspire. A reliably rentable hall for the meetings would free them from taking a guidhouse that's rarely used between times.

[Talvenlapsi]

Maybe.. settlements could have a cool meeting hall with a locking door that citizens (and only citizens) can rent for an hour or two.

Some places do already, kinda?. Not all, though? Cordor has one in the Fickle Finger, and Dis has one if you're more comfortable for ebil. Anyone can rent those, though.

[AstralUniverse]

A rule suggestion, I guess

Wrong metric, Astral, because you've identified the wrong symptoms.

An inactive guildhouse is not inactive because not all the quarters are filled, and nor does filling all the quarters make an active guildhouse. A guildhouse can be actively used when, for example, it is used to house regular meetings, pool supplies, share intelligence, or even just to be a hang out space routinely used by members who stop there and RP, even if not all quarters within are owned, and a guildhouse where all quarters are owned, can still be disused if each character within uses it as a place to toss their stuff and nothing more.

As above, I'd rather have a faction own a guildhouse that they routinely use to host meetings/events/gatherings/whatwever, but in which no side rooms are filled than a faction which fills a guildhouse, but never does anything but store stuff there.

I'll pick on the Cordor barracks as an example, because it's a guildhouse I've owned four times across 15 years on the server. I can't think of any time any quarter was filled save the commander's quarter. There are a few reasons, but the biggest one is something Xerah pointed out earlier: The other three rooms are objectively dogshit. They have a chest, 6 child sized bunks, and not enough floorspace to decorate. They're among the worst quarters on the server. I don't think, under your rule construction, anyone would ever own the guard barracks, because doing so would require three players other than the guard commander to basically sacrifice their ability to own any halfway property in order to check the rule's boxes, and there would probably need to be some level of OOC agreement between parties to keep the guildhouse occupied.

As another example, the last guildhouse I personally owned was home to a faction of 5-7 active people for the duration of my ownership. It was routinely used for meetings, to share information, to invite friends over, and as a general purpose faction base of operations, etc because it had a very nice conference room-y area. I couldn't get anyone to buy the side room though, because all 5-7 of those people had already bought a better quarter (while the side room was better than a guard barracks room, it was a somewhat plainish square with a bed and a chest and not a whole lot of space for decoration).

Then there's the point Xerah mentioned. There's an extra level of vulnerability to guildhouse houses. The owner can always just change the locks on you and you're out.

tl;dr: Failure of a bright line rule, 101. The way guildhouses are set up discourages them from being filled. The quarters usually are pretty mediocre, they're vulnerable, and we don't actually have such a housing shortage that people are willing to consider a crappy quarter a good deal (contrary to OP's assertion, I don't think we've got a "housing shortage". It seldom takes me more than an hour of searching to find a quarter, so long as I'm not too choosy. What we've got is high demand for specific quarters, and an associated and perfectly natural sense that it is unfair that some people appear to own a lot of good things, especially if you want one of those good things for your own).

I dont think it's beyond the realms of reason that three people will have to sacrifice their "quarter slot" to own something like Cordor's Barracks. And also, you say that it doesnt matter if the quarters are occupied or not and that it matters more where the faction members RP. Well, if they are 'forced' to own the rooms in their guildhouse they will use rooms/halls elsewhere less, by definition, I think. But overall I understand your point and I admit it does encourage more ooc because the risk of losing the entire guild becomes tied to everyone's activity and not just the owner.

[mjones3]

I personally would love to see a limit on shops owned by factions too. I think half? of the shops in cordor are owned by 2-3 factions. When you can set it so all of the money goes to a faction bank account, and anyone in the faction can set wares and set prices, you shouldn't need 2+ shop locations.

[WJLIII3]

I like this generally in concept, but it might need more elaboration on what a guildhouse is. I'm thinking here of the Barracks in Sharps District House, or the Cordor Guard Barracks. Both of these are technically guildhouses, because they open into a wide space which has a smaller, separate locked "office" in the back. Two quarters are not quite what a faction is looking for if they want a guildhouse, and disallowing someone from owning a real guildhouse because they have 30 slots of storage in two doors someplace would be mean.

[Cybren]

I like this generally in concept, but it might need more elaboration on what a guildhouse is. I'm thinking here of the Barracks in Sharps District House, or the Cordor Guard Barracks. Both of these are technically guildhouses, because they open into a wide space which has a smaller, separate locked "office" in the back. Two quarters are not quite what a faction is looking for if they want a guildhouse, and disallowing someone from owning a real guildhouse because they have 30 slots of storage in two doors someplace would be mean.

Mean in what sense? What’s stopping them from just ditching the two storage chest property?

[WJLIII3]

Presumably a person lives there. If someone else in their faction gets a real guildhouse, they would, by this system, be forced to move out of their house which hardly qualifies, and into the guildhouse. The simplest and most obvious version being, if any member of the Cordor Guard buys a mansion, the Guard has to abandon their barracks they've had since the dawn of time.

[Cybren]

I'd assume that settlement-claimed quarters like the guard barracks wouldn't be put under such a policy, given there's already an established mechanism for turnover (winning the election/convincing the settlement leader you'd make a better head guard). For other factions and guildhouses i agree it does require clarification as to where a 'large quarter' ends and a 'small guildhouse' starts.

[AstralUniverse]

There's an approved suggestion that doors will have lower DC to unlock but chests will be entirely unbreachable.

This means all those empty unoccupied rooms in guildhouses which are used for storage only, will soon see their storage LOCKED unless someone actually owns the quarter. At least that's how I HOPE it will work.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

This is actually a bunch of different issues depending on which guild house you are talking about. The problem with the guard guild house in cordor for example stems from the problem with the guard in cordor as it is now, since it tends to be an extension of the current chancellor as opposed to a fixture faction in the city that outlasts any given elected official. This not only makes the guard faction a bit meh, since any given election can just end your career as a guard, it also leaves on the floor a potential great rp tool in situations where the current elected officials and the guard don't get along. I could get into ways to fix that, but it would stray a bit further from the original topic then even I am comfortable with, even though these solutions could cover any guild house in a town or city.

As for Arelith, the real estate game...Yeah, that's an issue. But honestly, I can't blame the players for this one. It's the only way a faction can "win" that doesn't involve pvp, so it makes sense that long standing factions gravitate in that direction. And before someone says "we are here to tell great stories, not win or loose" I would counter by saying almost every great story has a winner and looser. Certainly every fantasy one. While I would add here that loosing can often be a better story then winning by far for your character and if people realized that there would be a lot less meh on the server, the story still needs a winner and a looser.

Another issue that is way bigger then this conversation but touches on it somewhat is that a lot of the mechanics of arelith favor ooc cliques more then ic groups, which often leads to collaborations that don't make sense. Again, its a different topic, but it can create the illusion of mega groups owning multiple properties across the server even if its actually a few smaller ic groups that come together because they are all "pvp players" and they need to keep the "second lifers" from gaining too much power or vice versa. I personally don't break down people into these groups, just using the labels that have been tossed about in previous conversations that have touched on this subject.