Re: Cordor Elections & Assassinations
Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 5:24 am
Kill the King. Sleep with Amn. Marry the Chancellor.
A Neverwinter Nights Persistent World -- Register using the -forum_pwd command in-game.
https://forum.nwnarelith.com/
No humans tho.
I agree. My dream settlement system of the future would allow for players to totally shape the economic/ideological/legal policy of their realm (and be heavily tied into some sort of faction vs. faction struggle rather than an impotent and anti-climatic vote). Sliders and utilities rather than preset conditions allow the government to craft monarchy or socialist state or anything in between. There are those who think that politics aren't important in the game and it's influence should be nullified, but in my opinion it's the ultimate expression of Arelithian™ values, namely player agency and organisation, and so it should be a very carefully considered, free-form suite of mechanics.Seven Sons of Sin wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 1:12 am ... which is a political clusterfuck. It always has been, it always will be, and it's great because it allows the Leadership of the Day to come in and try to craft some political machination in their own image. It's really cool. Settlement politics should be a sandbox that let creative players play politics as the way they (and the community) at the time, fits, and sees appropriate. There should be some broad thematic strokes (it's not a rights-based democracy and leaders are not appointed by the gods) but otherwise, let players define and redefine.
Councils are, it's safe to say, a pretty awful idea. You only need to look at the Devils' Table for concrete examples as to why.MissEvelyn wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 4:36 pm I'm in the other camp. I feel that an NPC figure above the player leaders is important. Like, no, you cannot wage war with the King's troops without permission. You're here to make the city prosper, not fulfill your own personal agenda.
Naturally, there's plenty of characters who WILL have an agenda and that's great, it makes for an amazing story with tense conflict, opposition, and so on. But even leaders should have some form of limitation - and in my opinion even more than there is now. It shouldn't be THAT easy to exile people or evict properties for no reason at all other than "my character doesn't like that character". It's almost like we're breaching into the 'Be nice' rule. Almost.
Furthermore, I partially agree with Cortex's suggestion, at least the part where he mentions a council. I do believe a council is necessary for settlements. The size could depend on how many citizens there are, and so forth.
The reason being is that right now we're seeing officials getting elected, then evicting people left and right whom they aren't buddies with just to make room for their own buddies - and then using some poor excuse in-game for it. Excuse me, but we already have a property counter in place that puts your property on sale if you aren't using it. In my eyes, it borders close to griefing when a leader has the option to one-click evict or exile someone without being accountable to anyone in any way or form.
Evictions should cost a lot of money, especially if said property belongs to a citizen of the settlement. It should also be a corporate decision where a single leader mechanically won't be able to do it by themselves (not sure how you would mechanically implement this). The same idea goes for exiling, though I know the builders have restricted it over the years with sharp limits to how many people a settlement can exile - which is something I appreciate.
We are debating that simply putting in contract for an assassination of someone hinders them from running. Yet, they still get to roam around in their city. They still have their property. If you want to debate something being too easy, let's talk about how easy it is for a chancellor to evict property. Let's bring up how easy it is for someone to exile people.
Evicting and exiling should come at a cost. Citizens should be able to dispute this and bring it to court.
Without certain degree of stability you cannot tell stories of factions because noone sane would settle in city where leaders change like socks and where you can loose guildhouse overnight. What you would gain from a settlement where almost no chancellor lasts more than month and everything changes each month? It is maybe good for stories of villains how They murder people, rob them or corrupt city, but what about, majority of people who want to play story of their faction, have a shop, or decent house in Cordor? Who are not interested in political mess but want to adventure, have guildhouse and hold faction related things inside?Nekonecro wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 5:45 pm You have to consider the setting from an aspect of story telling, not keeping stability.
Yes it's easy to exile, there isn't a set of upheld rights in place as there is in real life to prevent the goverment from kicking you out.
There needs to be room for govermental corruption. That makes more exciting stories than life as a paper pusher.
As an official you want your friends and allies in positions and properties, it builds a base of power.
Consider stories like Robin Hood, some say he was a noble kicked out of his lands and properties by a corrupt king and his court.
Do you really think it would be as exciting if he stayed at home and lived happy families?
The server is supposed to be for adventure stories rather than second life.
While the "scorpion pits" are a thing of a part of Arelithian mythology, the infrequency of DM intervention is outweighed by how the political system is detrimental to fostering roleplay.DM Titania wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 11:15 am There is a bit of usefulness in having an NPC Figure in Cordor for DM use when things enter problem territory. Rarely used, but it allows us to shift things back IC. Both major starting places (Cordor and Skal) are like this for that reason. I don't see that ever changing.
I echo this sentiment. There are some people who aren't interested in playing the politics, and that's fine. They should be welcome to continue to run their tavern, playhouse, merchantile, magi guild, and etc. if they wish to, without having some fear on an OOC level that they aren't able to do so because of how chaotic and wild the political system can get.flower wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:10 pmWithout certain degree of stability you cannot tell stories of factions because noone sane would settle in city where leaders change like socks and where you can loose guildhouse overnight. What you would gain from a settlement where almost no chancellor lasts more than month and everything changes each month? It is maybe good for stories of villains how They murder people, rob them or corrupt city, but what about, majority of people who want to play story of their faction, have a shop, or decent house in Cordor? Who are not interested in political mess but want to adventure, have guildhouse and hold faction related things inside?
Please read my post over again. There are no personal attacks there, simply statements and a few suggestions. If someone was hurt or caused grief by any words I wrote, then I'm sorry, for they were never meant to hurt anyone.sad_zav wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:09 pm i'm going to have to step in MissEvelyn because that's at least twice now you're either playing a really bad game of telephone or deliberately misinforming people
i hope it's the former
either way, you seem to believe these accusations and they're very hurtful. i think you should take a step back.
umMissEvelyn wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 4:36 pm
The reason being is that right now we're seeing officials getting elected, then evicting people left and right whom they aren't buddies with just to make room for their own buddies - and then using some poor excuse in-game for it. Excuse me, but we already have a property counter in place that puts your property on sale if you aren't using it. In my eyes, it borders close to griefing when a leader has the option to one-click evict or exile someone without being accountable to anyone in any way or form.
Again, not a personal attack, merely an observation based on what I've seen and what others have told me. And in the post I'm arguing that something like that should be harder to pull off. If the devs and builders disagree, then that's fine. This is the feedback forum and we're free to give our input, and the devs are equally free to take it or leave it.sad_zav wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:22 pmumMissEvelyn wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 4:36 pm
The reason being is that right now we're seeing officials getting elected, then evicting people left and right whom they aren't buddies with just to make room for their own buddies - and then using some poor excuse in-game for it. Excuse me, but we already have a property counter in place that puts your property on sale if you aren't using it. In my eyes, it borders close to griefing when a leader has the option to one-click evict or exile someone without being accountable to anyone in any way or form.
While I agree with your sanity argument's premise, I feel this is a flawed perspective of Cordor. I can name more than three chancellors off the top of my head who have held power for consecutive terms in the last year and small change- some who wanted it, and some who desperately wanted a replacement. I can say the same of guard faction leaders.flower wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:10 pmWithout certain degree of stability you cannot tell stories of factions because noone sane would settle in city where leaders change like socks and where you can loose guildhouse overnight. What you would gain from a settlement where almost no chancellor lasts more than month and everything changes each month? It is maybe good for stories of villains how They murder people, rob them or corrupt city, but what about, majority of people who want to play story of their faction, have a shop, or decent house in Cordor? Who are not interested in political mess but want to adventure, have guildhouse and hold faction related things inside?Nekonecro wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 5:45 pm You have to consider the setting from an aspect of story telling, not keeping stability.
Yes it's easy to exile, there isn't a set of upheld rights in place as there is in real life to prevent the goverment from kicking you out.
There needs to be room for govermental corruption. That makes more exciting stories than life as a paper pusher.
As an official you want your friends and allies in positions and properties, it builds a base of power.
Consider stories like Robin Hood, some say he was a noble kicked out of his lands and properties by a corrupt king and his court.
Do you really think it would be as exciting if he stayed at home and lived happy families?
The server is supposed to be for adventure stories rather than second life.
the "observation" that people are "evicting people left and right whom they aren't buddies with just to make room for their own buddies - and then using some poor excuse in-game for it" is stated much like a fact. the only part of that post that's an opinion is "In my eyes, it borders close to griefing when a leader has the option to one-click evict or exile someone without being accountable to anyone in any way or form", but even then, you're talking about how you think people are borderline griefingMissEvelyn wrote: Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:28 pm
Again, not a personal attack, merely an observation based on what I've seen and what others have told me. And in the post I'm arguing that something like that should be harder to pull off.