[Housing] Andunor/underdark in dire need of additional housing

[White_935]

Greeting!

I'm a rather new player all honestly who's taken to enjoy the underdark with my current character(s), it's generally an unstable political environment, but with plenty action and roleplay happening in a rather concentrated area which is generally quite good .

However trying to acquire a house, a room, or even a shop is generally a daunting task, as most are either directly or indirectly owned by the 3-4 largest factions, and its members. It doesn't really make all that sense that half of the city's adventuring(pcs) + is homeless in my opinion?

There are plenty of doors that simply aren't use for anything in and around the city and the districts... but in general housing seems limited to the few older elites.
It can't be intended at people should be spending most of their time checking all the houses "hoping" to find one that's not been renewed to get themselves a home.

I'm not here to suggest the solution, but i would like to give the feedback that... since the underdark only have one city, rather than several areas like the surface, additional housing in some fashion for the UD races seems sorely needed.

PS: same would be for boats, but i imagine that's intentionally and thus understandable..wouldn't mind a more small boats, and perhaps some temporary ones (similar to the temporary stores).

Thanks for taking your time to read this feedback, and if you agree, or disagree leave a comment

[Rebel4ever]

Pretty much its a monopoly. It doesn't bother me so much just now but i can see why anyone who just wants a place might be wondering where they can get one. It does seem very ill divided but i am not sure how the whole system works...if indeed it works at all.

[Irongron]

There is a ton throughout the module, but the recent increase in numbers has definitely put a strain on that.

I'm currently working on one of the surface settlements, but I can see that the Underdark could definitely do with more.

There are really three options here.

One is that I increase that in Andunor, in areas like the Rothe Fields, hub and Districts.

Another is that I introduce housing to the Outpost, Shipyard & Zurkhwood.

Third that I begin to gradually 'settle' an area elsewhere in the Underdark.

While I'm sure the third option would be popular with many, it is also the most work. There is also a good deal to be said for keeping players together, and has been one of the reasons for the ongiong success of the Underdark.

Once again I should emphasise how much time goes into area work. Many suggestions I see in this regard often amount of many weeks of work, and I don't like having areas added on the fly, or to be rushed. The quickest, and perhaps best solution here is just to add more houses/quarters to the existing areas on Andunor.

Happy to hear input.

[BegoneThoth]

Two but preferably three.

A simple area like the surfaces 'cricket caves' with some wilderness housing would be sufficient, particularly if they cannot be 'evicted,' as in the UD if you get on someones bad list it can be very very difficult for you to operate at all.

Andunor, in my opinion, does not need to be any bigger or have any more influence over new areas.

[Durvayas]

I my humble opinion, Andunor is lacking in new turf to even add quarters into unless the districts are made even more densely populated. The city started with the two districts, with each district having its own little 'apartment' type area. The table had the colloseum attachment, the sharps had the communal caves. And the sharps had a bonus space which was the bank of andunor's vaults.

The wheel could support some housing, and did, but that is full.
Then the upper hub had housing added, and is also now full.
Then the port district got added, and that too, is now full.

Expanding the city's non-district controlled areas isn't a great idea at this point, there are already 4 'areas' of the city with unevictable quarters and shops. An expansion to the districts themselves might be a good idea to keep more of the population under their sway and involved in their RP, rather than making it easier and easier to just ignore the districts each having a government altogether. Andunor is built in a cavern. It may be better and easier to start building tiers to the city Udith Che style over both districts in the short term, but honestly, the UD has the numbers to 'settle' another area, and that is the best long term solution as it'll make the most RP.

Building Udith Che style would give Andunor more of that underdark city feel, since most UD cities build up on stalagmites and stalagtites to increase their density without having to expand city defenses.
Additionally... if a guildhouse was built for the melee magthere somewhere(an old suggestion was the rothe fields by the new gate) in or near table holdings(or if a new good guildhouse was added to a tier above the table to attract the first house and the mansion in the table itself converted into the melee magthere ), you could count on it absorbing most of the warrior drow who hold storage and them moving in to concentrate that RP, freeing up holdings elsewhere in the city.
The same effect could be achieved if the sorcere(which is multi-racial at this moment) was given a proper guildhouse elsewhere, or simply expanded. The one in the library has no quarters of its own at all. The old Udos Dro'xun sorcere, if I recall, had a great design for quarters, and could probably be ported to the wheel somewhere to maintain the sorcere's neutrality, while also concentrating most of the independent magi of the city, drawing them from their holdings elsewhere, and freeing some up.

If the UD is to have expanded housing without the city itself growing absurdly large, we need to concentrate the population further into more large structures if we want to maintain urban population density. I don't think expanding Andunor to Cordor levels of 'wide', where most of the city's horizontal space is purely for quarters, will be beneficial in the long term.

[Phoxly]

I've also seen and heard some of those monopoly factions use alts and other sketchy things to hold way more housing than they could feasibly need. Which is a bummer.

Is there a rule against using alt characters in the same faction but same CDkey for holding houses?

[cptcuddlepants]

I've also seen and heard some of those monopoly factions use alts and other sketchy things to hold way more housing than they could feasibly need. Which is a bummer.

Is there a rule against using alt characters in the same faction but same CDkey for holding houses?

I think the rule is that each CD key can only own one shop and one quarter across all its characters.

[Gods_Kill_People]

I will personally say I do think there needs to be some kinda rule in place that factions can only hold X amounts of Shops and properties at a time....Factions that get up to 30+ members...could literally hold every shop and every house in a matter of days. Which I think would be highly detrimental to the server.

[Blood on my Lips]

I will personally say I do think there needs to be some kinda rule in place that factions can only hold X amounts of Shops and properties at a time....Factions that get up to 30+ members...could literally hold every shop and every house in a matter of days. Which I think would be highly detrimental to the server.

People with factions hunted down and waited for those properties just like anyone else would. Unless you are saying that factions that hold settlements should not be permitted to kick out everyone and claim the properties for themselves, I can't agree with your opinion.

I think a real issue that should be looked into is housing and shops that are being held by players that only log in once a week to refresh them, a very real problem on Arelith, as well as guildhouses that have un-rented rooms in them because the guildhouse owner is hording all the rooms for storage. And yes, that's a real thing. I've seen it many times.

[Gods_Kill_People]

I think a real issue that should be looked into is housing and shops that are being held by players that only log in once a week to refresh them, a very real problem on Arelith, as well as guildhouses that have un-rented rooms in them because the guildhouse owner is hording all the rooms for storage. And yes, that's a real thing. I've seen it many times.

This I agree with very strongly, especially guildhouse hoarding, honestly this is an OOC pet peeve, if your gonna rent a guildhouse, use it as a guild, not as a warehouse for your personal pc.

I still stand that factions with mass members, there should be a limit to how many a faction can officially hold. If a faction owns every house and shop in Cordor...there would be nothing for any other player..which is a problem...

[Blood on my Lips]

I still stand that factions with mass members, there should be a limit to how many a faction can officially hold. If a faction owns every house and shop in Cordor...there would be nothing for any other player..which is a problem...

I still disagree. Each player has the right to own a home if they are able to find one. You can't tell someone, "Well, ten people in your faction own a home so you aren't allowed to".

It's the player's choice to open up his house and share it with his faction or not. He is not required to.

Factions, with the exception of those in settlement leadership positions, don't have easier access to housing and shops than anyone else.

[Cortex]

I can understand the desire for more.

[BegoneThoth]

And as Cortex's signature proves, good property can sell for a whole hell of a lot on the secondary market.

[Anatida]

Those hypothetical 30 faction members have as much right to own housing and shops as any other player.

Quarters and shops are limited to one per player (not character). If you know of people using alts then report it to the DMs.

I agree that expanding the districts would be better at this point than independent area(s).

[flower]

I would like to see a minor change in ownership and that be, to have guildhouses actually being owned by FACTIONS. Not single characters.

I understand it is cool to own large estate and stuff but it kills whole purpose of having these special guildhouses present IG. We then come to the state where a single character owns gildhouse with quaters inside supposed to house faction and actual factions are left with single-room quaters.

So in my oppinion it is time to tinker with faction systems and tie it to the ownership of gildhouses. Make the guildhouses no longer owned by single player but by whole faction and set it with required activity of its members. Also in this way we avoid situation where a single player can screw his faction by selling it out or when some glitch / reset happens and faction looses its base despite being active.

[Rebel4ever]

I would like to see a minor change in ownership and that be, to have guildhouses actually being owned by FACTIONS. Not single characters.

I understand it is cool to own large estate and stuff but it kills whole purpose of having these special guildhouses present IG. We then come to the state where a single character owns gildhouse with quaters inside supposed to house faction and actual factions are left with single-room quaters.

So in my oppinion it is time to tinker with faction systems and tie it to the ownership of gildhouses. Make the guildhouses no longer owned by single player but by whole faction and set it with required activity of its members. Also in this way we avoid situation where a single player can screw his faction by selling it out or when some glitch / reset happens and faction looses its base despite being active.

I agree completely. If the guild houses aren't big enough for a faction perhaps they could be made bigger?

[WinkinBlinkin]

What about - if factions could own guild houses, and players could own rooms within them, but the outer door could only be purchased by the faction if at least 50% of the rooms inside were owned by players of that faction, otherwise, the front door remained open?

[White_935]

Those hypothetical 30 faction members have as much right to own housing and shops as any other player.

Quarters and shops are limited to one per player (not character). If you know of people using alts then report it to the DMs.

I agree that expanding the districts would be better at this point than independent area(s).

Currently thou, for instance only Ezra may permit you to have a shop or house in the Sharps.
Expanding the district would limit the potential users of said expansion.
I would generally believe expanding both the districts, and the neutral sections, such as the hub, and the port's selection.

[Durvayas]

I think you run into a serious problem if you automate it like that winkin.

What happens if a member that owns one of two occupied quarters in a guildhouse that has only 3 interior quarters goes inactive? Should the outer door suddenly be unlocked due to something so OOC and out of control? Should the players of said faction be forced to buy the third quarter and leave it unlocked as general storage purely so that the front door does not become unlocked because of turnover, which is a natural part of faction play? No, it opens it up to sillyness.

Sillyness like a building being temporarily open, and indeed being used as storage for an entire faction, with 3/5 rooms being occupied(so 2 being used as general storage for a faction, a common practice). Suddenly number 3 goes inactive, and an entirely new faction rushes in while the front door is unlocked, possibly not even in a time zone that meshes with the faction(An EU or australian faction rushing an EST faction's HQ while they're all offline and unable to react), and buys the 3 (now publicly) available quarters, siezing the structure because they suddenly have a greater than 50% stake in the building, and locking the faction that had been using the building out of their own headquarters. They keep this faction locked out for a week until the other quarters time out, and sieze everything the previous faction had been storing.

How is that any different than the voterushing of old where team good would rush banite settlements and exile them en masse by taking it over by voting? This would not contribute positively to the server, because it would be too troublesome for those owning guildhouses, and too abusable by hostile parties. Experience tells us to expect the worst of the playerbase when these kinds of things are automated with no way to respond. Even writs require roleplay to occur between the evicted party and the evictor.


I get where you are coming from, trying to encourage factions to have to buy quarters within a guildhouse and make full use of it, but realistically, that can be encouraged better(in my opinion) by ensuring that rent from the quarters within goes towards the bank account of the building holder, allowing these buildings to be self sufficient if the rooms within are being rented out to members of the same faction, lightening the requirement to gold-farm in order to hold guildhouses in the first place.

[Void]

I've also seen and heard some of those monopoly factions use alts and other sketchy things to hold way more housing than they could feasibly need. Which is a bummer.

Is there a rule against using alt characters in the same faction but same CDkey for holding houses?

One player (not a character one player) is allowed to own only one quarter(quarter or a guild house) and one shop.

http://wiki.arelith.com/Quarter_rules

Also see:

Property Auctioning
"This isn't something I generally approve of, if players wish to sell property then there is a tool to do so. Limited periods of auction are likely fine until there is a ruling otherwise, but I will be advising DMs to release these should they feel the auction is lasting too long.

One thing I am forbidding now is purchasing shops/quarter with the sole purpose of auctioning them off. I've started adding a lot more shops, and dropping the price so as to facilitate entry into the economy by new players.

If a shop is bought, left empty, and offered via the shop sign for auction it will be immediately released by one of the team."

[flower]

.....

Interesting...

...vote rushing was always way of evil characters (the only way they took over Wharftown or by killing candidate and winning with very few votes versus strong playerbase in city) or outcasts etc in Sharps / Devils. It was not invented by team good.

[WinkinBlinkin]

I think you run into a serious problem if you automate it like that winkin.

What happens if a member that owns one of two occupied quarters in a guildhouse that has only 3 interior quarters goes inactive? Should the outer door suddenly be unlocked due to something so OOC and out of control? Should the players of said faction be forced to buy the third quarter and leave it unlocked as general storage purely so that the front door does not become unlocked because of turnover, which is a natural part of faction play? No, it opens it up to sillyness.

Sillyness like a building being temporarily open, and indeed being used as storage for an entire faction, with 3/5 rooms being occupied(so 2 being used as general storage for a faction, a common practice). Suddenly number 3 goes inactive, and an entirely new faction rushes in while the front door is unlocked, possibly not even in a time zone that meshes with the faction(An EU or australian faction rushing an EST faction's HQ while they're all offline and unable to react), and buys the 3 (now publicly) available quarters, siezing the structure because they suddenly have a greater than 50% stake in the building, and locking the faction that had been using the building out of their own headquarters. They keep this faction locked out for a week until the other quarters time out, and sieze everything the previous faction had been storing.

How is that any different than the voterushing of old where team good would rush banite settlements and exile them en masse by taking it over by voting? This would not contribute positively to the server, because it would be too troublesome for those owning guildhouses, and too abusable by hostile parties. Experience tells us to expect the worst of the playerbase when these kinds of things are automated with no way to respond. Even writs require roleplay to occur between the evicted party and the evictor.


I get where you are coming from, trying to encourage factions to have to buy quarters within a guildhouse and make full use of it, but realistically, that can be encouraged better(in my opinion) by ensuring that rent from the quarters within goes towards the bank account of the building holder, allowing these buildings to be self sufficient if the rooms within are being rented out to members of the same faction, lightening the requirement to gold-farm in order to hold guildhouses in the first place.

You're pretty much describing the status quo - which unfortunately leads to empty guildhouses. The problems you raised with my idea are real, but could easily be resolved by giving a weeks grace after dropping under the halfway mark, during which active members would receive a warning every time they opened their doors.

[WinkinBlinkin]

You could give a warning - Guildhouse expires in X days - until they get the right amount of people in again.

[WinkinBlinkin]

Sorry for the chain posting - just digesting Durvayas' complaints. If a guildhouse with 3 rooms drops down to only 1 room being occupied, then ABSOLUTELY the guild should be forced to rent the other room or get out.

[Xuuldar]

As for the 3 options given by Irongron, 3 would be awesome but may not be feasible from a workload perspective at this point so maybe a combo of 1 and 2. Hit the low lying fruit across the districts, rothe fields, hub etc and a few in zurkwood, outpost, and shipyard. Scatter in housing where they can fit with as little major rebuilding as possible.

Not sure if EE opened any options but I would really love to see something suggested in the past, some sort of bank storage. Would allow people to have storage that maybe don't care about owning an actual house freeing up houses for folks that want them more for an RP reason.