AMIA ARCHIVE :: View topic - Theory XY - Factions on Amia

Then they should bond and not have simple dislike mean they need to move apart.

Getting various factions to bond together is almost impossible. Because everyone's got their own huge ego and healthy dose of immaturity to go with it.

I think the Troika (which is officially ic not yet a real "faction") is a good example of what I mean. You have three faiths in one small area, we share a forum, however it does not mean that the faction leaders need to hand over their positions or power.

The Kelemvorites are lead by Sharina
The Hoarites are lead by Chaplain Luthor
The Lathanderites are lead by Si'neela

Kohlingen is another good example:

Yaston leads the Triadic Knights
??? leads the Defenders
??? leads the Platinum Knights
Justicar leads the Reg. Guard and City

What would for instance, in theory, be the problem if Tarkuul expanded to hold more groups. They dont need to merge their forums, but what if they were in one place?

- Nathano leads the Velsharoonites
- Frey leads the Magistrat
- Katsumi leads the Banites

Getting Nathano, Frey, and Katsumi in the same room witohut that room exploding and all three dying is a feat in itself. Good luck getting any of them to work together.

Getting Nathano, Frey, and Katsumi in the same room without that room exploding and all three dying is a feat in itself. Good luck getting any of them to work together.

I find that just fine. FYI: Tarkuul is not "Baneland", and Tarkuul is no more sympathetic to Banites than it is to any religion in the world.

This is contrary to a lot of what I promote and preach, but faction system reformation has been on my mind for a long time. Haven't the faintest idea where to begin, but I think the more rigid and organized the OOC mechanic governing factions, the more people are going to have to an impetus to consider how to make them work and, more importantly, how to make them viable or indispensible in the IC universe. Things like, "You must maintain an active membership base of this much. You must raise this much money a month." Or, better, "If you achieve or accomplish this, you gain this perk. If you achieve or accompish this, you get that perk."

If a DM wants a faction they can step forward and give a lovely rousing speech saying on why they want it, but they probably have enough on their plate with putting up with us lovely RP-ers and handing DC's as if it was candy, plus keeping order in Cordor(Weeee! A rhyme! Or atleast sounds like one).

I think the more rigid and organized the OOC mechanic governing factions, the more people are going to have to an impetus to consider how to make them work and, more importantly, how to make them viable or indispensible in the IC universe.

Another idea would be to have a sort of thing in-between PC and DM, where leading a (DM-supported) faction is something you have to be accepted for like being on the staff (which makes sense because a lot of running a faction seems to be handling OOC crap).

(EDIT: DM involvement could be be limited to occasional 'guest appearances' and still be sufficient).

For my part, I'm hoping to foster some RP with the few remaining Sunites, the Sharessin and any Lliirans who might be lurking in the wings - as well as anyone who wants to argue with them - by promoting the Temple of Love (coming soon!).

That is part of my imagined overhaul, but now, seeing you say something about having DMs leading factions as PCs makes my head spin. Because you said the opposite a long time ago, and so I urged a "let you be responsible for everything in your own factions" with no unwanted influence from DMs and yet then the argument comes up that only DM favored factions get anywhere and...

No, you, as in the entire playerbase. Who keep stating different wants at different times instead of getting together and presenting a uniform consensus of opinion.

Author:	Pony [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:27 AM ]
Post subject:	Theory XY - Factions on Amia - The big (uber)Gasp
After putting some thought to it, I think the following is one of the causes or at least a large contributor when the player numbers are falling. There was a server I once played on, a very successful one at that, which stated that it only wishes a certain set of religions for a certain race because if this would not be the case, it would be like a soup with too many ingridients. Now, no, I am not suggesting to restrict religions. Some of the best rp is not the large differences, but the small ones like the mulans and kellies (both good aligned) or lothite verus lothite. However, on amia, which I often see as a very positive thing, you have a huge amount of roleplay hubs which are drawn apart. Do you want to be a druid? You have the possibility of going to: a) the Grove, b) the Hidden Glade, c) the Glade if Forstakkrr and now starting these days d) the Grove in Caraigh. This seperates the playerbase extremely, thins out the numbers and makes it less likely to have constant rp at once spot, which also means new people have a hard time finding the group. While for instance Bendir Dale and the Grove contribute to eachothers activity to the close proximity, the Banite Temple is far off and in solitude (which would also normally mean the -City- of Kohlingen shouldnt have a problem to destroy it. There is a reason people stick together.). The Velsharoonites dont want anything to do with Tarkuul because of political reasons and that cuts down activity there, and they have a harder time staying active as they seldom have but eachother to interact with on a daily basis. The only reason such small temples and faction bases of mostly evil nature are not yet destroyed, is the rule that they cant be unless the faction agrees to it. So instead of making the benefit of a soft rule be the reason of survival, move together, have conflicts but know that exile will most likely mean destruction. What the Mulans vs West can do in Khem, is hardly something the evil people cant do, especially as they dont nitpick as much as the desert dwelling factions. So in other words, in my theory, small splinter groups are a cause of concern and also the spread out geography. May also be true for the underdark, cant speak to it, as the activity gets spread out too much. Suggestion of Solution: - Work to minimize split parties such as the Grove/Hidden Glade & Banites/Banites & Tarkuul/Velsharoonites. - Bring together more factions in closer geographic proximity, such as having more evil factions come together in one spot because out of the lack of defense against the wave of goody two shoes.

Author:	TormakSaber [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:28 AM ]
Post subject:
I'm not going to OOCly force factions to work better because "We Say So." No, if you want to argue and split off ICly, you do that. That's your perogative as IC action taking players.

Author:	Pony [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:33 AM ]
Post subject:
How about because they choose to be lonely and almost defenseless because of that to apply -ic- pressure upon them to come to the sense that in a hostile world it might not be best to just stick to yourself when everyone wants you dead?

Author:	Selvec Darkon [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:36 AM ]
Post subject:
Phearun has a point though. Faction mashing (As I've named it), is pretty bad. Lots of different factions for everything, that would be better off as one large faction. In saying this though, it's not viable, given we can't force things on players like that. It's there choice how they rp, what they rp and why they rp. RP shouldn't be forced, in any form, even if it wuld make things better.

Author:	Dev Disco [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:37 AM ]
Post subject:
I think the observation is right, but the difficult part is that if we restrict people they will also leave. The staff isn't too keen at all on splinter groups, but in the end it's the players who want them for their own entertainment (which translates in playing time).

AMIA ARCHIVE https://www.amiaworld.net/phpBB3/

Theory XY - Factions on Amia - The big (uber)Gasp https://www.amiaworld.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=42234	Page 1 of 3

Author:	Pony [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:41 AM ]
Post subject:
Lets just apply the normal ic penalties on that then instead of full protection. You can be alone, but it means you will be an easy target for both good and evil. Make your own hippy tree hugger club in the Skull Crags, dont cry when an army of banites hack you apart and burn your holy site. IC actions -> IC consequences.

Author:	Dev Disco [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:45 AM ]
Post subject:
Urrr - well, I am not sure if that would prolong the staying power of a lot of players who aren't so interested in PvP.

Author:	Pony [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:50 AM ]
Post subject:
Then they should bond and not have simple dislike mean they need to move apart.

Author:	Burgo [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 8:56 AM ]
Post subject:
I can see the point he is trying to say. Though, I am not sure it can be corrected in a server that has such a large , and versatile, fanbase as Amia does. People want to start factions. People want to lead factions. They want their character to be a notable figure of power, not only in the mechanical sense, but in the sense of precense troughout the places. This sort of visibility would be cut down severaly if the factions were to be united into few larger factions. As there would come the question, who leads these factions? Every leader of the smaller factions that have been united would want to be leader? Feelings would be hurt. People would leave. It's a vicious cycle. One which, unfortunatelly, there is not much the DM's can do without severaly hurting the freedoms of the players.

Author:	Pony [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 9:03 AM ]
Post subject:
I think the Troika (which is officially ic not yet a real "faction") is a good example of what I mean. You have three faiths in one small area, we share a forum, however it does not mean that the faction leaders need to hand over their positions or power. The Kelemvorites are lead by Sharina The Hoarites are lead by Chaplain Luthor The Lathanderites are lead by Si'neela Kohlingen is another good example: Yaston leads the Triadic Knights ??? leads the Defenders ??? leads the Platinum Knights Justicar leads the Reg. Guard and City What would for instance, in theory, be the problem if Tarkuul expanded to hold more groups. They dont need to merge their forums, but what if they were in one place? - Nathano leads the Velsharoonites - Frey leads the Magistrat - Katsumi leads the Banites

Author:	Yurell [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 9:13 AM ]
Post subject:
Since there are a lot of these threads going around, my reasoning on why it is going down is because as far as I've observed it's done this every summer since I joined (this being the third), so it seems an annual trend to me.

Author:	Nekhy [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 9:13 AM ]
Post subject:
I like the idea. But as said above, it's something the players should decide to work on, on both IC and OOC level. It won't work otherwise. So... what are you waiting for?!

Author:	Pony [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 9:16 AM ]
Post subject:
I already did, dont ask me!

Author:	Mr Mago [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 9:18 AM ]
Post subject:
This has been brought up before, and tried before. And it's still being tried today by certain individuals. Getting various factions to bond together is almost impossible. Because everyone's got their own huge ego and healthy dose of immaturity to go with it.

Author:	Gunz [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 9:44 AM ]
Post subject:
Nice thought, but doubt it'll take. Too much bad blood between some of these factions/people. It certainly is something to consider though.

Author:	Burgo [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 9:29 AM ]
Post subject:
Some people just don't want to give up their independency. Sharing close quarters with another, especially when looking at the evil aligned people ,would mean conflict. Evil, like good, just isn't, in my opinnion something, that work well together, of course there are exceptions. Evil is Evil. Evil isn't necessarily good with other evil. They are still their same murderous scumbags, be the other one an evil aligned scumbag, or good aligned priest. They are selfish, vile tempered, dangerous, thugs, murderers, conquerers, tyrants, Necromancers. Of course, evil, if in a group, like a church of Velsharoon, or someform of Assassin guild, would work together for the common wellbeing of said group.

Author:	Pony [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 9:31 AM ]
Post subject:
I lead a faction that is not very good with other good people either and it works.

Author:	Burgo [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 10:02 AM ]
Post subject:
Mr Mago wrote: Getting various factions to bond together is almost impossible. Because everyone's got their own huge ego and healthy dose of immaturity to go with it. What I tired to say, in a nutshell.

Author:	TormakSaber [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 10:04 AM ]
Post subject:
Phearnun wrote: I think the Troika (which is officially ic not yet a real "faction") is a good example of what I mean. You have three faiths in one small area, we share a forum, however it does not mean that the faction leaders need to hand over their positions or power. The Kelemvorites are lead by Sharina The Hoarites are lead by Chaplain Luthor The Lathanderites are lead by Si'neela Kohlingen is another good example: Yaston leads the Triadic Knights ??? leads the Defenders ??? leads the Platinum Knights Justicar leads the Reg. Guard and City What would for instance, in theory, be the problem if Tarkuul expanded to hold more groups. They dont need to merge their forums, but what if they were in one place? - Nathano leads the Velsharoonites - Frey leads the Magistrat - Katsumi leads the Banites Getting Nathano, Frey, and Katsumi in the same room witohut that room exploding and all three dying is a feat in itself. Good luck getting any of them to work together. I find that just fine. FYI: Tarkuul is not "Baneland", and Tarkuul is no more sympathetic to Banites than it is to any religion in the world.

Author:	Selvec Darkon [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 10:16 AM ]
Post subject:
The Order of the Flaming Balde is a very old combo faction. We have Red Knight Worshippers, Tempurians and Uthgardians. So it's not uncommon, just doesn't happen much. Now our faction is dying off. So even big combo factions die.

Author:	Lutra [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 10:31 AM ]
Post subject:
Phearnun wrote: I think the Troika (which is officially ic not yet a real "faction") is a good example of what I mean. You have three faiths in one small area, we share a forum, however it does not mean that the faction leaders need to hand over their positions or power. The Kelemvorites are lead by Sharina The Hoarites are lead by Chaplain Luthor The Lathanderites are lead by Si'neela Kohlingen is another good example: Yaston leads the Triadic Knights ??? leads the Defenders ??? leads the Platinum Knights Justicar leads the Reg. Guard and City What would for instance, in theory, be the problem if Tarkuul expanded to hold more groups. They dont need to merge their forums, but what if they were in one place? - Nathano leads the Velsharoonites - Frey leads the Magistrat - Katsumi leads the Banites Yaston had to lead the Defenders too.....then we have decided to disband the faction and made a completely new system in Kohlingen with new and new-old groups.

Author:	mairacle_ninja [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 10:33 AM ]
Post subject:
TormakSaber wrote: Getting Nathano, Frey, and Katsumi in the same room witohut that room exploding and all three dying is a feat in itself. Good luck getting any of them to work together. Tormak, you pretty much just suggested the solution to some of the troubles of the Good aligned population of Amia. And, while bringing factions together works in theory, I doubt it would work in practise. I personally cringe when I see people trying to start a new faction that's pretty much the same as the last one. Such as the scores of mercenary factions we've seen crop up. It irks me, because it seems the only reason they want to start a new one is so that they can lead it and not join a faction under someone. That's what factions are about.

Author:	Azrael [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 11:33 AM ]
Post subject:
TormakSaber wrote: Getting Nathano, Frey, and Katsumi in the same room without that room exploding and all three dying is a feat in itself. Good luck getting any of them to work together. I find that just fine. FYI: Tarkuul is not "Baneland", and Tarkuul is no more sympathetic to Banites than it is to any religion in the world. Not anymore anyway....it 'used' to be a bane-land months ago...yea know, before the faction explosion. Tormak's right though, now-days they won't work together. On an ooc level it 'could not' be forced..someone would leave. In a nut shell: ooc issues divide a lot of factions, and if people were forced to be in the same area, there would be problems oocly and then, regrettably, translated ICly. I'd give a real example...but it would cause all sorts of problems. Just know there 'are' examples.

Author:	soundofastream [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 12:46 PM ]
Post subject:
I've offered for the Ghaunadaurians (of which, there are only two players left anyway) to join the Dark Alliance...so I'm doing my small lil' bit for the server. I think the faction might die a death unless it merges with a slightly larger faction. The other players might come back (busy with exams etc?) or the might not come back to the server. Factions die out or become inactive. That's just the way it is...

Author:	Silvarus [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 13:05 PM ]
Post subject:
The very weakness of evil factions should be their inability to work together. And that is why they will all be destroyed in epic crusades, one by one! BWHAHAHA!

Author:	Uncle-Opustus [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 13:07 PM ]
Post subject:
Amen.

Author:	Pony [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 13:08 PM ]
Post subject:
No they wont. As it has no penalty to hang around alone.

Author:	Vaylek [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 13:12 PM ]
Post subject:
Yeah, getting factions to work is pretty complicated, IC and OOC. As I remember it when Vaylek brought a surge of activity to the cyricists, it was kinda like building a really tall, shaky tower out of cards, and needing to hold it all the time because it could fall apart at any time. Leaders gotta be active as hell, providing everyone with rp and sating their egos. If people cant be leaders, they want to feel important and have LOTS of contact with the leader, or else they... 1. Try and overthrow them because as a player theyre more active so they believe they can do more for the faction. Or they start a new faction or splinter faction (see OP). Their IC reason for this is that they find themselves questioning their loyalty to the absent leader. Perfectly reasonable. 2. Make a new character to try and be inspired by. Again perfectly reasonable. But yes I agree with all the posts so far. People always believe they can make a better leader, and they want to have a level of fame or infamy in the community.

Author:	J.G. [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 14:21 PM ]
Post subject:
The Crimson Arcanists and the Horsemen are working together! for now...

Author:	Yossarin [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 16:24 PM ]
Post subject:
There is away to make this happen, but it requires an overhaul of how Amia treats factions. As I've said before, some of you verteran server and online server hoppers talk about how factions make or break a roleplay hub. I've noticed factions in places I've roleplayed online in the past, but never considered them a big thing. More often than not, they were laughable, mostly OOC cliques. I see, though, the use of factions. They do increase the opportunity for interaction that leads to character development and plot motion. That said, factions, to me, are steeped in OOC. They stand out like giant neon signs reading, "OOC Convention to Promote IC Interaction! Step right up!" Accepting that as fact, factions should be utilized as a game mechanic, rather than a fluff piece. I like to think you would have less faction splintering if there were a huge, legitimate, mechanical reason for factions to stay together. We already push the factional forum thing - you break yourself apart, and both sides may lose their private forum privileges due to lack of numbers and interaction. This is contrary to a lot of what I promote and preach, but faction system reformation has been on my mind for a long time. Haven't the faintest idea where to begin, but I think the more rigid and organized the OOC mechanic governing factions, the more people are going to have to an impetus to consider how to make them work and, more importantly, how to make them viable or indispensible in the IC universe. Things like, "You must maintain an active membership base of this much. You must raise this much money a month." Or, better, "If you achieve or accomplish this, you gain this perk. If you achieve or accompish this, you get that perk." Then again, I may be entirely wrong. That's how I would think about it, but not necessarily how other people would see it. If such a rigid system made factions less popular...I'd like to think of that as a kind of victory. I like lone wolves. But at the same time, if factions are what really attract and drive people, it would be a bad thing. I don't know the plot.

Author:	Falling Spider [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 16:33 PM ]
Post subject:
Well, the thing about factions is.. The imply a lot of dedication, especially to new members or casual players, who must either prove themselves or familiarize themselves with the faction itself and all the members, before they really feel like they "belong" in the faction. Then each faction has their own set of rules, what sorts of interaction you can have with /other/ factions, etc, etc. Some people either don't want to take the time, can't, or would rather wander, RPing with who they will. Factions always seem a bit restrictive to me, but I've enjoyed them in the past. Some sort of definite "thing" for each faction would be nice. If only a guildhouse with shops, or something. That said, like a lot of the rest of Amia, joining a new guild is a little.. Big? It's a big looming /thing/ a player needs to do, and it's a bit intimidating. Any way to make this easier will increase faction membership, I think. Knowing that you can get more/better RP with a faction than you'd get in say, Cordor, is also helpful.

Author:	BloodNAshes [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 18:31 PM ]
Post subject:
Quote: This is contrary to a lot of what I promote and preach, but faction system reformation has been on my mind for a long time. Haven't the faintest idea where to begin, but I think the more rigid and organized the OOC mechanic governing factions, the more people are going to have to an impetus to consider how to make them work and, more importantly, how to make them viable or indispensible in the IC universe. Things like, "You must maintain an active membership base of this much. You must raise this much money a month." Or, better, "If you achieve or accomplish this, you gain this perk. If you achieve or accompish this, you get that perk." I agree, but if PCs promote strict rules no one joins the faction. Every time I tried to get something going with Lathanderians (and also a similar-type group with Ukre) I was pretty adamant about people having the appropriate classes, limit themselves to 2 characters or so while active in the faction, be active such and such a number of hours and crap like that. As such, I was never successful getting people in, because they rather just hang out with their buddies, do their powerbuilds, and not have to commit to a character for an extended period of time. What would basically need to happen, and I kind of find it hard to believe I'm saying this, is that all the aspects of a faction like rank, activity level, overall organization, etc. would have to be run by a DM who handled any OOC or borderline OOC stuff. The Dale was actually sort of like this for a while, because it was both a town and a faction. The DM(s) who ran the town also ran the militia so they controlled things over all. Now, there were a lot of problems with this that need to be worked out, because while it did lead to a huge boost in hin RP for a long time it also made a lot of people bitter once it kind of descended into cliquishness. What I'd suggest is that the DM who runs the faction/area doesn't also have a PC in that faction/area but I doubt that suggestion would go over well either. shrugs EDIT: Another idea would be to have a sort of thing in-between PC and DM, where leading a (DM-supported) faction is something you have to be accepted for like being on the staff (which makes sense because a lot of running a faction seems to be handling OOC crap). People could still do independent stuff, but they wouldn't get an area and faction guards and crap like that. That will also likely make people mad too however.

Author:	Mr Mago [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 19:04 PM ]
Post subject:
DMs leading factions can be an awesome thing. Provided they're as active doing it as a PC leader is expected to be.

Author:	QPR [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 19:55 PM ]
Post subject:
Having each faction lead by a DM is something I support as well. That would (hopefully) lead to more faction events, and give more activity and thus members. Also it would make fewer factions, as there are not unlimited DM's.

Author:	Ramika [ Fri, Oct 16 2009, 19:58 PM ]
Post subject:
I support DM lead factions as well, but I disagree with the server being the main cause of inactivity. I've discovered on other servers that having a DM be the 'head' of a faction does indeed make it more fun, so long as they have a PC underling to help out as well.