Poll - What factions do you want Open for Players to play

[Davin]

I selected Bandits and Pirates, but think they should just be independent.  An NPC pirate or bandit is just an "independent" clan run as an NPC that has been labeled as a pirate or bandit -- at least as I see it.

I agree that Bandits and Pirates should be "independent", and they'll show up as Independent on scouting reports.  But I'd like to give them a name to keep them identified in the programming.

I also think they should be NPC-only.  Anybody can act like one if they want to.

I like the idea of playing Guild.  I'm not sure if players should play the Guild senior positions -- at least at the start -- because everyone depends on the Guilds and they would have to be truely neutral.  But it might be fun playing a Guild clan running around defending their interests and building Guild offices and acting as ambassadors for the Guilds.

I worry about the neutrality aspect of that.  But I don't see any problem with clans running around helping them in any of those ways, and they might even ask for specific help and provide rewards.

[Davin]

I would like to see the Guild faction defined. I did remember seeing a Guild declared clan once and even saw a Brotherhood clan as well too!

Can you give me specific game reasons why?  What would be the benefit there?

[Davin]

I have given this a lot of thought over the years and have talked to a number of GM's about what skills they might actually have and here is what I have come up with:

So what do you mean by "skill sets"?  Is that something they get automatically, or a list from which they get to choose to train?

I don't like the idea of the former - it's too much for any given clan/person to have all those skills.

[DreamWeaver]

I have given this a lot of thought over the years and have talked to a number of GM's about what skills they might actually have and here is what I have come up with:

So what do you mean by "skill sets"?  Is that something they get automatically, or a list from which they get to choose to train?

I don't like the idea of the former - it's too much for any given clan/person to have all those skills.

 The "Skill Set" are th set of factional skills that a faction are know to have. Basically in all the other versions of the game when someone spin's up a clan, they start off as a Independent clan and are given (10) Skill points to then choose a set of skills for their clan

Leader:
Follower F1:
Follower F2:
Follower F3:

So then you get to apply what ever skills and up to max level-2 in any skill to add up to a total of (10) points to the clan. Here is a example of what maybe you might do:

LDR: CMD-2, STR-1, SGE-2
  F1: TAC-2
  F2: CTA-1, SCT-1
  F3: SGW-1

Now you choose from a list of skills, then you start the game with some skills. Next you decide to declare for a specific faction, and maybe you then train in some of the factions skills that they are known for. Say the player decided to declare for the Cymru faction, and then they are looking at the following skill set that they can train from:

CMD - Command
STR - Strategy
TAC - Tactics
ORA - Oratory
REC - Recruitment
ENT - Entertainment
PCB - Personal Combat

So then at the players choice maybe they might start training in some of the factional skills that they want to add to their own skill list.  This way no two clans will ever be the same but eventually they will have all of the skills that their declared faction offers but that will take time to pick up all the skills if they wish them.

[Davin]

Ok, fine so far. But I don't see this as doing anything but encouraging specific skills to be learned. Every skill should be available (if training is handy) to everyone in the game. So maybe you could word this as "recommended skills for clans in this faction"?

[DreamWeaver]

We can or I can do that, but the practical always works into game play.

Also remember that Zan, and Stephen Wier after him and Andy all were setting up having each character having (10) skills each and as well as also allowing to add other characters to the clan as well (up to 10) followers. Two of my clans had a 4th follower under Zan's game.

[Davin]

I haven't bothered broaching the subject yet, but what would you say to a variable number of potential followers based on your clan size?  As your clan got bigger then you needed (and could get) more followers to help manage it.

[FutureSojourner]

I haven't bothered broaching the subject yet, but what would you say to a variable number of potential followers based on your clan size?  As your clan got bigger then you needed (and could get) more followers to help manage it.

I like this idea!  I think three to start is fine, but as a clan grows to have more followers would be helpful.

[DreamWeaver]

I agree with what Oliver said above, (3) Followers to start and then as the clan gets bigger then it opens up the possibility to find a new Followers via using Special Actions to look for someone. Note my Cymru clan had a Cult Priest (that allowed my Non-Religious clan) to use the Preach command, and I saw her skills too of PRE - Preach, REC - Recruitment, RES - Research, ENT - Entertainment. My other Cymru clan had a peg leg Pirate (Buccaneer) named Bob that had NTA - Naval Tactics, TAC - Tactics, PCB - Personal Combat and Alchemy.(He knew the secret to Greek Fire, and worked on Explosive Powder ...aka...Gun Powder). I had to look for and find these two NPCs and then recruit them to join my different clans. I was at that time doing that with all my clans at the time the game ended. My Rank -5 Skelt would have been the next clan to get a 4th Follower, the NPC had CMD - Command, TAC - Tactics, SGW Siege Weapon, and SGE - Siege. That clan would have been a awesome combat monster, and it was coming to Midgard to play with the Imperials.

[Davin]

If we can increase the number of followers, then is it necessary to have 3 with such a small starting clan, or will 1 do and you can grow from there as retainers increase?