Some Thoughts on Factions and the Game

Home Forums Factions Some Thoughts on Factions and the Game

Viewing 7 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #675
      KarlPrie
      Member

      So I have some thoughts and concerns about the suggestions that have been made so far. So here they are in no particular order:

      1) Penn’s Proposed Faction Changes
      This is not a personal attack on Penn. I know how much he loves the game, and how much support he has given it over the years. But I don’t think that someone with a huge investment in two Factions (the Seekers and Cymru) should be writing Factional information for other Factions. That’s why there has always been an impartial GM in charge, someone who can assess proposed changes without prejudice.

      2) The Direction of the Game
      The whole purpose of Midgard is to create tension, strife and, if necessary, warfare between the various Factions. The propositions that have been made so far seem to be leading towards a huge bloc of allied or neutral Factions, and then a few fringe Factions that are likely not going to have many players.

      3) Allowing Secular Clans to Declare for a Religion
      I see this as being a double-edged sword. On the one hand it gives players another option to make their clans unique, and perhaps solidify alliances between Factions. On the other hand it might give secular clans access to sensitive religious information. There is a huge potential for conflict of interests, especially if clans are allowed to keep their religion a secret. What if a Roder clan declares for the Banner secretly? In my opinion, the only religion that should be allowed secret declaration is the Cult of the Dark One, purely based on its nature. I also don’t believe any religions should be allowed to be allied with each other, at best I would allow neutral relations with the Gift based on their pacifism. But more aggressive religions like the Banner, Cult of the Dark One, Blood & Fire probably wouldn’t even allow that.

      4) Unlimited Positions
      I know this will probably not be a very popular opinion, but allowing unlimited positions within the game allows people with more disposable income to buy success. In my own experience, this was a real concern for a lot of players in the UK game, and it would have affected the player base if I allowed it. New players don’t see a reason to invest in the game if they can just be outnumbered 10 clans to 1 by a single opposition player.

      5) The Cult of the Dark One Religion
      I have made no secret of the fact that I am going to be playing in the Cult of the Dark One Religion, and I have a couple of proposals for consideration:

      a) The Dark One is The Dark One, who may or may not be Moorlock. No-one knows for sure except The Dark One.
      b) The Cult of the Dark One has no allies, and is not neutral towards any other religion.
      c) If there isn’t going to be a Society of Arms Faction in the game, can the Cult steal their hooded cowl emblem? 🙂
      d) As I mentioned earlier, I think only secular clans that declare for the Cult of the Dark One should be allowed to do so secretly.

      That’s everything I can think of for now. No doubt I’ll remember something else five minutes after I hit submit. 🙂

      Stephen

    • #677
      DreamWeaver
      Participant

      Stephen, I like everyone else have my own opinion on topics and have every right to voice my thoughts on any topic. I do so to get peoples talking and it looks like I have been successful in that. I have never said my proposed thoughts were cut in stone, I am just trying to get the ball rolling. Someone has to be first, and I took it on myself to start talking. Now it is true that yes I plan to play both Cymru and Seeker clans, but I also like the Guilds, and Naval Mercs as well. I also like the Gift, Ring and yes the Cult of the Dark One. Oh and the Dark One under Zan’s game that predates the other versions, was Moorlock and “she” was one of the Old Gods. Yes Zan told me Moorlock was a Goddess not a God, Jon knows and can see Zan’s humor in that fact…being a true Zanism.

      Another point on the number of positions, Zan had allowed most players to play up to (9) clans. This would mean you could also play (9) EFs and (9) Cities as well. Now a number of us on this current forum were allowed to play more that the (9) clans as well. I am willing to go with what ever Jon would like to allow people to play. Maybe (9) is the magic number on this, the final say on this is Jon the GM.

      As to factions, they are being limited by Jon the GM. He is the one that set what will be played, read his own words. As to what factions will make it, well I think players will play what they want to play. What one person likes, another may not consider as being valid. I know there are a few factions that I liked and played that are currently moth-balled like; Sea Kings, Skelts, SOA, Merc Verk, Buccaneers to name a few.

      Fear not Stephen I do appreciate your comments and hope more people will speak up on the forum. I like the Cult as well too, and it is my description that I think has a real bite to it. Not the Tree Huggers of before. Now it was Jon that lumped both Blood & Fire and Serkeanar under the Cult.

      Penn

      • #682
        KarlPrie
        Member

        “The game as it sits does not limit Clan Positions, City Positions (except you earn these), or EF’s – which are based on Characters (formerly known as Followers). Characters in the old game were also limited, there is no limit in the new version.”

        After I get the first round of positions out the door, I will be making more revisions to the rule book. The faction descriptions will be changing – so if you for or against the changes, say so on the Forums. Silence (or a lack of posts) for the version that Penn has shared will be considered as agreement. I appreciate the amount of work Penn has put into this and while I will be making some small changes of my own, I expect the folks who have played the faction in the past to have some say in this!

        These are taken from Jon’s posts on the forum.

        Stephen

      • #890
        Talisman
        Keymaster

        Let me take a stab at this –

        1) Penn’s Proposed Faction Changes
        This is not a personal attack on Penn. I know how much he loves the game, and how much support he has given it over the years. But I don’t think that someone with a huge investment in two Factions (the Seekers and Cymru) should be writing Factional information for other Factions. That’s why there has always been an impartial GM in charge, someone who can assess proposed changes without prejudice.

        — I appreciate the time and trouble that Penn has gone through to start the discussion on the various Factions. Penn and I don’t agree on most of the proposed changes. After the first set of “startup” turns goes out, I will turn my attention back to the rule book.

        2) The Direction of the Game
        The whole purpose of Midgard is to create tension, strife and, if necessary, warfare between the various Factions. The propositions that have been made so far seem to be leading towards a huge bloc of allied or neutral Factions, and then a few fringe Factions that are likely not going to have many players.

        — The Faction goals were set up to create tension, strife, etc. between the Factions. I intend to adjust them, but only to get them up to date. I have not had time to address this in the rule book. I believe Kingdoms will add to the general mayhem. Remember that I asked Penn to post his thoughts for discussion. He has no control over the final product and all blame for that rests with me.

        3) Allowing Secular Clans to Declare for a Religion
        I see this as being a double-edged sword. On the one hand it gives players another option to make their clans unique, and perhaps solidify alliances between Factions. On the other hand it might give secular clans access to sensitive religious information. There is a huge potential for conflict of interests, especially if clans are allowed to keep their religion a secret. What if a Roder clan declares for the Banner secretly? In my opinion, the only religion that should be allowed secret declaration is the Cult of the Dark One, purely based on its nature. I also don’t believe any religions should be allowed to be allied with each other, at best I would allow neutral relations with the Gift based on their pacifism. But more aggressive religions like the Banner, Cult of the Dark One, Blood & Fire probably wouldn’t even allow that.

        — I would tend to agree with you. Religions by their nature should be opposed to other religions, as it would hurt their ability to increase their followers. Today, the turn sheets show the religions as a Faction, but in the future, it will be a secondary field and not shown with the Faction. Perhaps we can show this on the turn sheet in some other fashion? The Cult should have the Religious ability to keep their religion secret.

        — As far as conflict of interest goes, it has always been an issue. Your friend could be one faction and you in another and you could share information, there is simply no way to enforce secrecy in the game system. The GM’s play the level zero position and can mitigate this to some extent.

        4) Unlimited Positions
        I know this will probably not be a very popular opinion, but allowing unlimited positions within the game allows people with more disposable income to buy success. In my own experience, this was a real concern for a lot of players in the UK game, and it would have affected the player base if I allowed it. New players don’t see a reason to invest in the game if they can just be outnumbered 10 clans to 1 by a single opposition player.

        — Are you concerned that a player with 10 clans will gang them all up on a single player? As a GM, we would see this coming a mile away and wouldn’t it be a surprise if the single player won the combat? The rule book mentions a penalty under clans for mismanaging a “brother-clan”; we would invoke this penalty against the offending player.

        — We could also simply require them to be spread out – no clan run by the same player can enter the same Province where another of his clans are, or *poof*; the gods are angry.

        5) The Cult of the Dark One Religion
        I have made no secret of the fact that I am going to be playing in the Cult of the Dark One Religion, and I have a couple of proposals for consideration:

        a) The Dark One is The Dark One, who may or may not be Moorlock. No-one knows for sure except The Dark One.
        b) The Cult of the Dark One has no allies, and is not neutral towards any other religion.
        c) If there isn’t going to be a Society of Arms Faction in the game, can the Cult steal their hooded cowl emblem? 🙂
        d) As I mentioned earlier, I think only secular clans that declare for the Cult of the Dark One should be allowed to do so secretly.

        — I have no issues with this. The “secret” part needs to be defined on the turn sheets; I will put it on the to-do list.

        • #993
          KarlPrie
          Member

          Let me take a stab at this –

          I appreciate you taking the time to respond Jon.

          I appreciate the time and trouble that Penn has gone through to start the discussion on the various Factions. Penn and I don’t agree on most of the proposed changes. After the first set of “startup” turns goes out, I will turn my attention back to the rule book.

          You did also say that Penn’s proposals would be used if no-one disagreed (silence would be seen as agreement), which concerned me. It’s not that I’m opposed to everything Penn has proposed, it just seemed like an odd way of doing things. I would also say that it’s very hard for me to comment on proposed Faction changes, or propose some myself, because I come from the UK game which was very different in a Factional sense. If we have some official write-ups it would be much easier to offer amendments and suggestions. I also understand that you’ve been mostly concentrated on the programs, and that everything will come in time. 🙂

          As far as conflict of interest goes, it has always been an issue. Your friend could be one faction and you in another and you could share information, there is simply no way to enforce secrecy in the game system. The GM’s play the level zero position and can mitigate this to some extent.

          That is very true, I was merely pointing out that one clan could have access to Factional information from two Factions without having any friends.

          Are you concerned that a player with 10 clans will gang them all up on a single player? As a GM, we would see this coming a mile away and wouldn’t it be a surprise if the single player won the combat? The rule book mentions a penalty under clans for mismanaging a “brother-clan”; we would invoke this penalty against the offending player.

          Not exactly, although I wouldn’t see using all of your clans to attack a single clan as mismanagement, especially if Regiment use will be limited. My concern is that someone with ten clans, has ten times the number of actions, and ten times the number of Special Actions, allowing them to do so much more, and gather a huge amount of information. They could have clans assigned to trade runs, clans assigned to gathering maps and CVRs, whilst the person with a single clan has to do everything themselves.

          I have no issues with this. The “secret” part needs to be defined on the turn sheets; I will put it on the to-do list.

          Yeah, I had thought it might work something like an alias, but it really doesn’t. I like the idea that using the KnightGuild system can make Midgard a much better game, the programs really needed to be updated, and if this works we’ll have a better game all around.

          Stephen

    • #681
      Parmenion
      Participant

      Perhaps in the number of clans a single player is allowed to control, a policy of allowing no more than 2/3rd of their clan can be of their primary faction.

      For instance, if we were allowed 6 clans to play, and my primary faction was Imperial, I could have no more than 4 Imperial clans, and the other two could be a Guild clan and a Getham clan. Thus fostering activity in other factions (in the US game we had major players in other factions playing a single Imperial clan which was welcoming as playing Imperial is not everyone’s cup of tea).

      In all my Midgard gaming (Australian, US and British versions), I played across several different factions and for me, this greatly enhanced my enjoyment of the game. Especially when interacting with other players I might normally not have due to factional politics.

    • #683
      Parmenion
      Participant

      On another note, hopefully we will get some bard-arse Banner players on board. I’ve often wondered why they haven’t taken a more aggressive stance as their profile dictates. Obviously Fanglan in the US game was a bloodbath for them, but they had some time to rebuild and re-emerge as a truely potent force.

    • #685
      DreamWeaver
      Participant

      I know both Robert Morris, and his brother Jerre are around. I will email them both again and ask them to join here.

      • #686
        wordsmith
        Participant

        Penn, I saw a post from Jerre. He registered under his old clan name, Davod Skolem.

    • #689
      DreamWeaver
      Participant

      Awesome, now if we can get them to post something about the Banner!!! I have stayed away from the Banner and the Blood & Fire too. Hoping others would speak about both of them.

    • #727
      Daniel
      Participant

      Ouch. I posted something then hit edit and now submitted again… its disappeared

    • #728
      Daniel
      Participant

      Try again..

      1) Penn’s Proposed Faction Changes

      Agree with what you have to say Stephen with the caveat, if I see a post that changes a faction too much it really needs commenting on.

      I recommend that approach, however I can understand it might end up with information overload.

      The way to get good ideas is to get lots of ideas and throw the bad ones away…

      I suspect most wont comment until the play test starts, just hope it isnt too late by then.

      2) The Direction of the Game
      3) Allowing Secular Clans to Declare for a Religion
      4) Unlimited Positions

      I think it is great you could share some insights into the game. Appreciate what your saying and hope other GM’s consider agreement.

      Jon, isn’t there multiple GM’s you mentioned lots of help for special actions, does that too mean on the direction of the game also so are you the executive decision maker?

      5) The Cult of the Dark One Religion

      a) The Dark One is The Dark One, who may or may not be Moorlock. No-one knows for sure except The Dark One.

      Yes the Dark one

      b) The Cult of the Dark One has no allies, and is not neutral towards any other religion.

      Yes, with the only faction that would be closer would be if they secretly make the cult a official factions religion.

Viewing 7 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.