Governed Settlements and "Prison Rules" Settlements

[Ninjimmy]

This is kinda spinning out of the Conflict and Surface feedback thread but it did occur to me that we sort of have two kinds of settlements on the Server and that if we re-arranged things a bit it might help with the feeling that certain factions are wielding too much power.

So to my mind we have established settlements that end up trending Lawful because that's how they operate, Cordor, Bendir, Brog, Myon, etc - and these all have Settlement Leader situations, governments, guards, etc. Then we have other settlements like Sibayad, Dis and Skal which are what I am dubbing "Prison Rules" - you have no formal leadership but the biggest kid in the playground or the kid with the most friends ends up running the shop. Which in Skal has historically been a slight issue because its intended for lowbies but that's a different topic.

Maybe it would help if these settlements that use "Prison Rules" (or if we're being more generous Chaotic VS the Lawful of established settlements) were a bit bigger and better integrated into the server so that they serve as what feels like a viable alternative? Much as I love these kinds of settlements, barring Crows Nest (which is still a bit small) they're all on server jumps from Surface so maybe that could be looked at?

Also, since this is feedback, does anyone else have thoughts on whether there even ARE these two types of settlements or am I reading too much into it after the much longer thread? And if you do, do you think more love for Chaotic Government could address the conflict strangle issue?

[-XXX-]

I don't think that they are supposed to be viewed as such.
Dis and Sibayad are primarily NPC markets, Dis being more akin to the Shadovar Trade Post - the first thing that you bump into when you get there is this big sign that makes it abundantly clear that the PCs are mere visitors there and ought to behave in a civil fashion (if you angle your camera just right, you might even see the Erinyes archers posted on top of the battlements).

[CNS]

Dis exists as a sales funnel.

You start at the top coming for the exciting and exotic goods and you finish at the bottom as another soldier in the blood war, property of Dispater.

Why go to all the trouble of tempting mortals on the prime when you can just open up a marketplace and have all those juicy souls come to you.

Also it being in Baator it should, incidentally, be one of the most, if not the most, lawful places on the server.

[Bunnysmack]

Unless this has fallen by the wayside, Sibayad is also a fair degree removed from being lawless, by virtue of a PC merchant establishment that is kinda like a neighborhood watch. If someone causes trouble in Sib, they will have a lot of consequences coming their way because that trouble is bad for business.

I once was hired by one Sib local to kill another Sib local but they made deathly clear I was NOT to touch a hair on the target's head until after they had left the boundaries of the town. Was told that I would get in all sorts of hot water if I tried to skirt that restriction, even while disguised or otherwise hidden.

[Ninjimmy]

Hmm. It seems my meta assessment has run into some flaws.

Still, worth knowing!

Anyone think lawless/non-governed settlements are a way forward?

[Gouge Away]

I'd prefer semi-governed as the way forward. Players can rise to the middle ranks of government and leadership but can't run the whole show and power in a settlement is distributed in a way that there is room for an opposition party to have some pull without being shut out. Retain disinterest NPC leaders above it all who are only called out occasionally and never favor player interests (Mila Brown style.)

It's more complicated but the current system is pretty constricting. There's little hope in doing something against the grain since it will likely get squashed before it's even a story.

[Xerah]

I actually did have this exact conversation yesterday about that.

Wharftown failed for a few reasons, but one of the issues was that there were no "checks and balances". While it is kind of silly how disinterested the King of Cordor is, he does exist as a way to "right the ship" if needed, but as a whole, the place is left to be run by PCs. If instead there was a Thayan Enclave build around Wharftown, we'd probably still have it now.

[AstralUniverse]

I actually did have this exact conversation yesterday about that.

Wharftown failed for a few reasons, but one of the issues was that there were no "checks and balances". While it is kind of silly how disinterested the King of Cordor is, he does exist as a way to "right the ship" if needed, but as a whole, the place is left to be run by PCs. If instead there was a Thayan Enclave build around Wharftown, we'd probably still have it now.

I recall reading back in the day that a big part of why Wharftown was removed was because it generated a kind of RP that didnt fit the spirit of the server in the eyes of the staff. Apology, if I got it wrong, it's been few years now. Do you think if Wharftown had it's own version of King Edward or Amn Embasy it would promote a different kind of RP?

[Xerah]

I recall reading back in the day that a big part of why Wharftown was removed was because it generated a kind of RP that didnt fit the spirit of the server in the eyes of the staff. Apology, if I got it wrong, it's been few years now. Do you think if Wharftown had it's own version of King Edward or Amn Embasy it would promote a different kind of RP?

I think a Thayan enclave, or an Amn Embasy would step in and be like "Yo, you cannot declare war on Cordor, that's silly".

As it was, the players were told OOCly that if they keep doing this, Wharftown would be destroyed, which they likely said to each other "LOL lets see what happens". If this happened ICly instead, and the [dude] came in and removed them from "office", then there would be that little bit of a control that would stop silly things like a fishing village declaring war vs. a castle town.

[AstralUniverse]

I recall reading back in the day that a big part of why Wharftown was removed was because it generated a kind of RP that didnt fit the spirit of the server in the eyes of the staff. Apology, if I got it wrong, it's been few years now. Do you think if Wharftown had it's own version of King Edward or Amn Embasy it would promote a different kind of RP?

I think a Thayan enclave, or an Amn Embasy would step in and be like "Yo, you cannot declare war on Cordor, that's silly".

As it was, the players were told OOCly that if they keep doing this, Wharftown would be destroyed, which they likely said to each other "LOL lets see what happens". If this happened ICly instead, and the [dude] came in and removed them from "office", then there would be that little bit of a control that would stop silly things like a fishing village declaring war vs. a castle town.

Okay, fair point.
But since settlements take a LOT of time to design.. do you think maybe a more simple solution would be to take this train of thought and project it on the NPC population on the already existing settlements? This has already been done by the removal of the triad temple in Cordor, making it more shady... but maybe it wasnt enough, while still being the right idea? To me it sounds entirely like a cultural problem in us, the players.

[The GrumpyCat]

I recall reading back in the day that a big part of why Wharftown was removed was because it generated a kind of RP that didnt fit the spirit of the server in the eyes of the staff. Apology, if I got it wrong, it's been few years now. Do you think if Wharftown had it's own version of King Edward or Amn Embasy it would promote a different kind of RP?

I think a Thayan enclave, or an Amn Embasy would step in and be like "Yo, you cannot declare war on Cordor, that's silly".

As it was, the players were told OOCly that if they keep doing this, Wharftown would be destroyed, which they likely said to each other "LOL lets see what happens". If this happened ICly instead, and the [dude] came in and removed them from "office", then there would be that little bit of a control that would stop silly things like a fishing village declaring war vs. a castle town.

I susspect this may be true.

[DM Rex]

...moving back to the proposal at hand.

I'm not really certain alignment has anything to do with any justice system in any settlement.
Lawful does not equal MUST FOLLOW DE LAW. It means having a standard of some kind, a code for all intents and purposes.
And chaotic doesn't mean LMAO RANDOM WAHOO, it means not necessarily being the most predictable individual. And yes that can be shown in being defiant of the laws.

But there isn't anything prohibiting a CE from becoming guard commander of Cordor.
He gets paid, he gets to cave some skulls for his entertainment, he's happy. He might take bribes, but his alignment has in no way changed the duty he's perceived to be occupying.

We allow settlements to (short of absolutely making it hells on earth to be a lowbie, example a human kill on sight law for a district of Andunor) make their own laws. Mercantile, spiritual, it otherwise really is meant to be a player agency choice. That doesn't necessarily mean that all players enjoy the laws made by the leaders or whoever is in charge of making said laws in a given jurisdiction, or that the guard force of said jurisdiction is going to be even extremely efficient or inefficient, or even "fair" in enforcement. That comes entirely down to player characters doing what their characters are going to do based on personal faith, alignment, biases, etc etc.

If there is some kind of OOC abuse that translates into IC actions, these matters should be reported to the DM Team. But for the most part the rest is IC. It's not all pleasant, but it was never assured to be. It's important that players are wary of assuming OOC involvement when there isn't any, and if suspected reaching out to us to research and handle it if found to be so.

[Best Rich Face]

I recall reading back in the day that a big part of why Wharftown was removed was because it generated a kind of RP that didnt fit the spirit of the server in the eyes of the staff.

Player driven and enabling character agency?

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

I recall reading back in the day that a big part of why Wharftown was removed was because it generated a kind of RP that didnt fit the spirit of the server in the eyes of the staff.

Player driven and enabling character agency?

Every settlement is player-driven. Wharftown was very laissez-faire on oversight, because it asserted its independence from Cordor. That's fine. It was a fishing village. No one really cared.

Then the player-driven government invited monstrous races into a surface city, declared war on Cordor, and the hostilities escalated to the point that Cordorian city officials were being slain in the street in broad daylight.

This kind of player agency comes with repercussions - a group of us were actually in a position to possibly avert the naval bombardment- no one chose to. I'd played a Wayman for more than an IC decade before that, and I was really attached to the settlement- Chester the Cheetah was the best guard cat ever. Props to Amadeo for getting him out.

Wharftown could have been avoided- but a long, long chain of IC, player-driven decisions caused it not to be. It was regrettable, but it was also the result of player agency, not in spite of it.

Prison-rule towns are fine- so long as the people running them realize if they make too much of a ruckus their neighbors will take notice. Historically, we haven't shown a lot of restraint in that department- on either side.

[Ninjimmy]

...moving back to the proposal at hand.

I'm not really certain alignment has anything to do with any justice system in any settlement.
Lawful does not equal MUST FOLLOW DE LAW. It means having a standard of some kind, a code for all intents and purposes.
And chaotic doesn't mean LMAO RANDOM WAHOO, it means not necessarily being the most predictable individual. And yes that can be shown in being defiant of the laws.

This may be down to how I phrased it in the OP, but it wasn't the vibe I was shooting for that settlements were either Mechanus or Limbo, it was more the mechanical nature of areas where the biggest fish runs the shots VS having an election felt like a Chaotic functional government and a Lawful functional government.

Which I realised is still glossing over elements like Dispater/Merchant League/Hovding but whether players felt that gave more room to have (phrasing delicately) questionable character types parading openly. Necromancers on Skal being an example, they tend to have some wiggle because there isn't an established IG authority like the Guards and this has pros and cons for play, but would be what I mean by a Chaotic settlement - player agency still sets the rules, but it's not mechanically enforced/doesn't come with actual resources.

I assume this kinda management is enjoyed by some cos Skal seems to have a new "government" every couple months, it might be just having more love spent on those areas of the server might give evil/disreputable characters a place to go besides Sencliff and Andunor, and could give us more inter settlement conflict potentially?

... though so far not getting that vibe from the thread so maybe I'm on my own with that one.

[DM Rex]

Skal presently, intentionally does not have a settlement government.