Making Commoner RP

[Rindan]

An idea I have been kicking around for a while is some way to 'solve' the problem of Armageddon's lack of commoners.  Taking Allanak as an example, you can basically split the population between people working for a house (noble or merchant), 'rinthers, Byners, and the odd lone wanders / hunters.  What is missing in there are normal old Joe commoners.

The problem with playing a commoner is two fold.  

First, you can't be apart of an organization.  If you join a House, you have just set yourself above the average commoner.  If you nix joining a House, you have absolutely no in game organizations left to join.  This is a problem because there is little point in playing a commoner if you never get the chance to role play with other commoners.  The fun of being a commoner would be the relationships and struggles of commoner life.  Those don't exist if you are the only Joe commoner around.

Second, even if there were other Joe and Jane commoners, there is a lack of activities and goals for commoners.

Solution

The solution is to build an in game commoner organization.  It needs to offer some level of livelihood, but you defeat your purpose if it ends up making people rich.  It needs activities, struggles, and all the things that exist in any other clan.  It needs to be fluid and open to recruiting ICly.  If the organization is going to be stable, it can't infringe on the authority of noble houses and the templerate, and it can't infringe too much on the monopolies of the merchant houses.  It also would be nice if it takes little to no staff support.  If a core of commoners started playing, it might very well spawn other commoner roles.  Playing a loan shark in a world of noble houses and 1 day old 'rinthers doesn't make sense who vanish over night, but it does make sense if you have struggling commoners to pray on.

I have some thoughts on what might work, but I am curious to hear what others think.  What type of organization fits the bill?  How do you keep people entertained?  Where do you start?  Anyone have any thoughts?

[Salt Merchant]

Commoners tend to do common tasks, I suppose. What if various objects (statues, the outside of the temple, and so forth) became dusty over time in the manner that clothing does? A templar could employ one or a few commoners to clean continuously. The same with the city streets if they could have multiple descriptions, one for being dusty or sand-clogged (especially after a big sandstorm), one for being clean, and the characters can push the status from the former to the latter using brooms.

Similarly, there could be water hauling tasks available from the templarate. Field work in the farms outside the city. Hauling rubbish and refuse. Slaves would do a lot of this, but maybe commoners are hired to supplement them when the backlog gets too high.

[rishenko]

Commoners could also band together in loosely formed groups to go out and get salt/mine, watching each others backs.  This is not to say that somebody may not get screwed over, but you could end up with non-affiliated groups of people holding together like miners do on the east coast of the US.

It would also be nice to see some loan sharks and bookies in the game.  Granted, being a newbie, these people might already be here and I just not see them.  If they are not there, I think that would be yet another interesting flair, having the occasional high stakes Kruth game with people from the Houses or independent traders who participate.  People who gamble their lives away, borrowing money to cover the debt, hiding from the loan shark as he/she sends out their muscle to take you down.

[ale six]

So I'm not really sure I see the "problem" here...

First of all, I kinda think your definition of 'commoner' is a little too narrow. Everybody who isn't a noble or a templar is a commoner. There are probably a dozen of those characters between both cities, versus lots lots more of everyone else. That's plenty of commoners.

Your post seems to be asking where the "poor" commoners are, so we can go ahead and shave the richer people off as well. Let's set the twink hunters who pull in 1500 sids a week aside for now and only talk about the people who are supposed to be rich:
- Merchant family members
- Prominent and well-respected bards (mainly in Tuluk)
- Senior/trusted advisors to nobles
- House guard officers and sergeants

That's a wider group of people, but it's still not everybody. I think that if your character isn't in one of the above categories, you really aren't that far above the average commoner, and shouldn't act like you are.

If I'm reading Rindan right he's saying that that you're somehow not a commoner if you work for noble House X. The thing is, just because your House gives you a nifty cloak and some food and water doesn't mean you're anything special. You have a job, sure. That means you're better than people who don't. But you aren't good enough to strut around on a high horse because you made Private in Borsail or Tor. Think of it this way: the House values you about as much as they pay you per month. If you're only getting paid 400 sids a month (which isn't even enough for a cheap apartment usually), they don't value you all that much. You're not that far above the average Joe. Maybe too many people act like they are.

Working for the merchant Houses is even a step below working for the nobles. Kuraci mercenaries or Salarr/Kadius hunters are really only a step above Bynners. They get paid, and they're cleaner (usually), but they're still very very common.

But, for the sake of argument, let's even toss away everybody who works for any organization. There still seems to be plenty of independents around in both cities, whether they're hunters, merchants, or pickpockets. If these people aren't the Joe Commoners of Zalanthas... then exactly who is? I'm just not sure how there is some lack of commoners in the game, because I can list examples of them up and down the entire social and poverty spectrum.

I also don't understand how if you join an existing organization in the game, you are no longer a commoner by Rindan's definition, but the proposed solution is to make more organizations for people to join? What would be the difference? Less pay? Recruits in most houses are paid practically nothing, so I don't see how you could make a group that pays even less. So would a new group have different (more 'common') goals? Still not sure that's possible - the Byn is about as common as you can get, whereas Salarr or Kadius pay people to go kill critters for a living, which ain't exactly a glamour job.

With all that said, I guess that if somebody thinks they see a niche for a new organization that nothing else fills right now, there's nothing wrong with going in game and working towards forming it. I just don't know if it's absolutely necessary, seeing as how the range of clans we have already covers a very broad spectrum.

[Larrath]

Real Zalanthan commoners can barely afford food and water, let another luxuries like a new sandcloth greatcloak every month.

I think that farm work will be best for this - allow PCs to go to the villages around Allanak and do labor there.  Its advantages over salt and obsidian mining being in the security of the walls, and the present Militia.

This is an excellent idea, really.  We need something between the 'rinthi scum and the peasants who are merely worthless.  If the commoners go to the farm and, after spamming their movement points completely away and doing dehydrating labor (and only being able to buy overpriced water inside the village), their 'sids can be shaved away to let them bring in a profit of 50 'sids at most per haul, which is a perfect amount; enough for a bit of spice or ale or a prostitute, or for an apartment if someone works constantly or in a group.

Allanak can have farming villages while Tuluk can have logging villages, the work in Allanak being sowing, grinding or planting and in Tuluk hauling, sorting, tying logs together and removing large branches.

[JollyGreenGiant]

Allanak can have farming villages while Tuluk can have logging villages, the work in Allanak being sowing, grinding or planting and in Tuluk hauling, sorting, tying logs together and removing large branches.

I'm not really going to address the issue of whether or not there's enough "commoner" RP out there. I think that the majority of what people think of as commoner work - the underlying backbreaking labor of society like farming, construction, quarrying - would be done by SLAVES not commoners. Instead, I'll assume for the moment that roles like farming were available.

1. You'd still be working for either the templarate or a noble House. They own all the farmland.

2. You can already go logging, mining, gathering, and in short, choose to live a subsistence existence.

3. Most people don't choose to do this, not because it isn't possible to do so in the game, but because it's dull, dull, dreadfully dull. If you want to play a logger who barely makes enough sid to stay in food and water, feel free but just be aware that most people don't find that terribly entertaining.

[LoD]

This is one of the issues that I wanted to help solve when I proposed this idea earlier in the year:

http://www.zalanthas.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=14382&highlight=automated

Some people thought that such a thing would further dillute the already small playerbase into "clans" - but my belief was that these small atmosphere generating clans would simply allow players to better play out life as a commoner by providing them a "work" environment for different professions as well as a place to sleep that isn't a bar or a rented apartment.

Zalanthan civilization would probably have a lot of co-op style arrangements simply because of crowded living arrangements and a setup that allowed someone to join one of these union style groups would provide minimal benefits: place to sleep, place to sit and talk, some goals toward working, added source to sell natural resources, profession specific equipment, etc...

The reason I suggested they be automated (and not run by a PC) is to encourage people to participate in them loosely and as a means for them to play out a common role without having to wait for a recruiter.  PC's could get a "job" right away mining obsidian, lumberjacking, foraging for stones, gathering salts or clay, etc...  There would be a consistent presence leading these people and Imms could use these vehicles as a potential staging ground for RP and/or quests.

This would also create a nice middle man IC supply chain for these goods that players could actually participate in and perhaps work on contracts for Merchant Houses to procure certain levels of these goods.  Lots of possibilities here for someone to play a simple commoner role and actually have the basic necessities.

-LoD

[Armaddict]

I'd prefer it not be a 'spammed' event but rather a 'clocked in' event or some such.

Check in, work is closed at night...you're paid for how long you were there in the day.

Spamming leads to priority on getting that command in as many times as possible, rather than interacting with any others that happen to be there.

I'd rather see people check in and idle and become like an npc than a room full of people spamming farming commands.

[Dalmeth]

Hey, if anyone wants to start a logging crew in Tuluk, they should, you know, do it.

[Cuusardo]

I always figured that NPCs and vNPCs accounted for the poorest part of the population.  That isn't to say that no PC should ever be poor and live in squalor.  There are ways to do it, and you can have fun while doing it.

[Vanth]

One of the things I've always thought there should be more of is 'odd jobs'.

As it stands, you either work for someone, or you don't.  But it seems like there's a lot of opportunity for nobles and other 'boss' characters to not hire someone, and just give them an odd job.

The corpulent, pasty-faced noble says, in sirihish, beckoning to the pimple-faced lad, "You, spotty.  Want to make a handful of coin?  Fetch me some incense from the shop around the corner.  The purple kind."

[EvilRoeSlade]

If I'm reading Rindan right he's saying that that you're somehow not a commoner if you work for noble House X. The thing is, just because your House gives you a nifty cloak and some food and water doesn't mean you're anything special. You have a job, sure. That means you're better than people who don't. But you aren't good enough to strut around on a high horse because you made Private in Borsail or Tor. Think of it this way: the House values you about as much as they pay you per month. If you're only getting paid 400 sids a month (which isn't even enough for a cheap apartment usually), they don't value you all that much. You're not that far above the average Joe. Maybe too many people act like they are.

Just about everyone does, it seems.  You can't so much as scowl at a clanned character without their superior threatening you and calling for the militia.  Because of this, it's nearly impossible for an unclanned character to engage in any meaningful conflict with the rest of the playerbase.  I think that the problem stems from people placing too much value on their employees for OOC reasons.  For example, if you're a noble, you know that if something happens to your aide, it might be months before you find someone else to replace him, so it's understandable if you get overly protective in regards to things that you really shouldn't give a shit about.

I don't know if a commoner clan is the solution though.  I was in such an immortal-sponsored clan once, and it was probably harder to survive than it would be as an independant in a similar role, since I had restrictions on my actions but no increased survivability to compensate.  Furthermore, templars and nobles were wantonly slaughtering our NPC leaders for no reason other than they could get away with it.  In the end, we were still more or less marginalized and ignored by the rest of the playerbase, just as we would have been had we chosen to play independants.

[amoeba]

3. Most people don't choose to do this, not because it isn't possible to do so in the game, but because it's dull, dull, dreadfully dull.

My thoughts exactlly when I first read this thread.  This is not a direct accusation to anybody specific, but it seems others want to see this IG, as long as it's someone else.   Me, I want to see plots, plots, and more plots. The world is awash with commoners and slaves.

[Dakurus]

This really does emphasize the issue that currently PC's cover such a wide spectrum of social classes, positions, ranks, races, tribes, houses, clans and what not that it's difficult to have enough with our current playerbase to create a consistent, deep, detailed level of interaction among these organizations or even in them that some people might like to see.

Just my opinion

[Xygax]

There aren't plots in farming?  Wasn't Tevia from Fiddler on the Roof a farmer (well, some sort of menial laborer)?  And yet that story is one of the most successful and acclaimed plays/musicals that I can think of off the top of my head.

If you don't think there is a plot to be found in the an "ordinary" life, you may be missing out one of Armageddon's strongest points.  The actual coded activity (be it farming, mining, training as a mercenary) matters far less than the character you choose to portray in it.  Additionally, some of the greatest events in history have been related to resources like grain, salt, etc.  Building the infrastructure to codedly emphasize resources like this is, in my opinion, a very good thing.  It just takes a while.

-- X

[Medena]

One of the things I've always thought there should be more of is 'odd jobs'.

How about a couple of locations where people could go line up at dawn in the hopes of getting dispatched on a one-day job?  It wouldn't be a sure thing of getting one because there might not be any jobs on a particular day or perhaps you weren't far enough up in the queue.


Examples of jobs:

House Rennik hires a crew to go unload kank shit at its greenhouses.

House Jal hires a crew for road repairs.

The slaughterhouse hires a few to clean up and haul away an unusual surplus of guts.

House Salarr hires a few people to clean the garbage out of a new work area it has acquired.

[EvilRoeSlade]

Examples of jobs:

House Rennik hires a crew to go unload kank shit at its greenhouses.

House Jal hires a crew for road repairs.

The slaughterhouse hires a few to clean up and haul away an unusual surplus of guts.

House Salarr hires a few people to clean the garbage out of a new work area it has acquired.

There are a lot more interesting things to do than clean up shit.

The game would definitely benefit from more odd jobs, and there doesn't need to be any additional coding to do them.  This really lies upon the responsibility of nobles, templars, merchants, and even military officers.  Hire an assassin to kill somebody.  Hire a thief to steal something.  Hire a ranger to scout out a new encampment for you to raid.  It's really only limited to your imagination.

[Armaddict]

The corpulent, pasty-faced noble says, in sirihish, beckoning to the pimple-faced lad, "You, spotty. Want to make a handful of coin? Fetch me some incense from the shop around the corner. The purple kind."

A noble can just -make- them go do that, if they're so inclined.

But assuming they don't...what sort of tip should be given?  15 coins?  It -should- be reasonable, but yet everyone thinks of that noble as a cheapskate afterwards.

Me, I think a 100-150 'sid bounty would be good.  That's half a year's pay for the 'average' commoner, I believe.  But yet, that's so insignificant to the average PC.  You can't really do much with 150 coins, except for buy cheap flour to make travel cakes for a long time.  Too bad they don't fill you that well.

PC's are the drive behind inflation, along with high prices in all the stores.  Though it makes sense for a commoner to have to save up for new gear/clothes/whatever, no one actually -does- it.  Noble houses should be able to pay their employees more than average, yet when they do, all the other clans instantly up their pay as well to match it, otherwise they don't have the PC strength.  I think we are our own problem in this.  The 'commoner rp', or rather 'not wealthy rp', is only there when the player -wants- it to be there and actually makes efforts to promote it.  If at all possible, that should be the other way around, methinks.

PC's who are given stipends...start with you.  Start tipping less.  Heh.

[cyberpatrol_735]

There aren't plots in farming?  Wasn't Tevia from Fiddler on the Roof a farmer (well, some sort of menial laborer)?  And yet that story is one of the most successful and acclaimed plays/musicals that I can think of off the top of my head.

If you don't think there is a plot to be found in the an "ordinary" life, you may be missing out one of Armageddon's strongest points.  The actual coded activity (be it farming, mining, training as a mercenary) matters far less than the character you choose to portray in it.  Additionally, some of the greatest events in history have been related to resources like grain, salt, etc.  Building the infrastructure to codedly emphasize resources like this is, in my opinion, a very good thing.  It just takes a while.

-- X

Superman was a farmer before he moved to metropolis to work for the daily planet. -laugh-

On that note, I think a real farming code would be cool. You water your plants, (if you can afford it) and in time, they grow, you cut them, etc.. plant them, etc.. skip a day? oh dang.. but I don't know how realistic that would be for the game, it would be sort of cool, but maybe not used so much because of it's complexity.

[Intrepid]

I have a few unusual commoner job ideas, if anyone is interested:

- Courier/messenger: With the cutthroat nature of the Known World, I
imagine this would be trusted to either a formidable house aide or a
mysterious third party who doesn't ask questions--a la The Transporter.

- Tax Collector: Yep.  For those times the templarate has a sense of
humor or just doesn't want to do it themselves.

- Slaver/Bounty hunter: Criminals on the run?  Mul give you the finger on
the way out of the Main Gates?  Call on these guys when you don't want
to risk your own crew getting mangled!

- Ambassador: Heh...ok, maybe not.

Another thing to consider is slave.  Yes, I said the S word.  These are
really the most down and out pcs in game, but they have a variety of
functions.  There are even scholar slaves.  Maybe I haven't been looking
in the right places recently, but I haven't seen any in game since my
return.

[ale six]

There aren't plots in farming?  Wasn't Tevia from Fiddler on the Roof a farmer (well, some sort of menial laborer)?  And yet that story is one of the most successful and acclaimed plays/musicals that I can think of off the top of my head.

It's a great musical, definitely. One of my favorites. The plot has more to do with Tevye the Milkman and his family's struggles to hold to their traditions and Jewish beliefs in the face of Tsarist oppression than it does about how hard his life is as a peasant. I'm not sure how much of a connection you can draw, other than to say that, sure, people from all walks of life have lives and feelings and emotions and struggle, which is a valid point... but I don't think it would make life as a Zalanthan farmer any less dull day to day.

Simply put, I'd rather play the game for action and intrigue and scheming rather than playing it so I can have my little peasant log in and struggle against the harshness for two RL weeks so I can finally buy myself a sandcloth cloak with the 75 sids profit I made. Meanwhile, there will be some guy who's made himself 500 sid in 4 hours of playtime who's decking himself out in full armor.

Which leads me to another point: unless people want to redefine the game's economy drastically, I feel like in order to play a poor, sidless commoner like everyone is describing, the players would have to voluntarily restrict themselves.

Now if there are people who would really like to do this, I say go for it. I certainly won't stop you. But I think roles like this are really voluntary ones, for players who enjoy the fun of handicapping themselves. And hey, I might do that sometime for fun -- but I don't think the game would be lacking anything without people doing it. I think all the mechanisms for this are already in the game anyway, as JGG said: you could just go be a miner or a logger or a hunter. Farming would be cool sure, but it's no different than any of that.

And to answer the thing about rich PCs giving out odd jobs, I'm certain they already are. The thing is, just like in the real world, if you want work you have to try and earn it some how. If you want to get odd jobs from people, approach them (or maybe their aide, in the case of a fancypants noble) and say hi, I'm Joe the assassin, if you ever have need of my services let me know. I'm very certain most people will try to make use of you somehow if they have any smarts.

I also have to say I disagree with Armaddict about PCs with stipends tipping less. PCs with big stipends are one of the biggest money sources in the game, and they're not being given thousands of sid per RL week so that they can sit on it in the bank or buy themselves 50 different outfits.  Stipend money isn't money that you've earned and can save, it's money you're being given so you can throw it around and generate plots. I think it's kind of backwards and silly to turn around and tell those PCs to save their money so that everyone can roleplay being poorer. Again, if you really want to keep yourself poor, hey go for it, but it means you're going to have to stay away from the 'rich' clan jobs and the rich nobles who throw money around to stay that way.

Edited to add: I agree with what Dakurus said about the game's scope being wider than the playerbase we have to support it, but I think narrowing the scope to encourage poorer and less influential PCs is going in the wrong direction.

[jhunter]

I think flushing out farming and the potential to raise mounts and such would be great "commoner" work.

I've always wanted to make a pc that breeds animals for mounts or some such thing.

[Dalmeth]

Commoner RP doesn't mean you have to be dirt poor.  It's primarily a mentality.

It's a bit boring that all the RP revolves around a templar, noble, or crimeboss.  Why not have a group that goes out to the mines regularly and one of them gets fired by the universally recognized boss of the group because that person is always showing up drunk?  Maybe nobles or merchant houses could hire this group on to fill in orders from time to time.

They could be reasonably successful at it and they'd still be commoners, but they wouldn't be caught up in the high-class world of rich nobles, templars, and merchants.  Nor would they quite be the hard-edged dune hoppers that wander in from time to time.

That sort of interaction sounds fun to me.

[amoeba]

Since a few IMMs chimed in let me clarify one players perspective.  

First I agree that having the PC population representative of the world population as a whole is a good thing, you'll get no argument from me there.  The devil however is in the details.  Take for the example  Xygax gave of Tevia from "Fiddler on the Roof".  Yes a classic about a farmer.  But lets be realistic, if the musical consisted of Tavia and crew wandering about the fields pulling up beets and dropping them into a basket and not much else, the audience would walk.  The fact that he was a farmer is background to the real story. And unlike Tavia, we don't come equipped with a supporting cast and a well developed storyline.  Often these type of roles are loners, and solo monologues can only take you so far.

The problem often times with mundane lives is the limited opportunity for any true conflict.  Most times a task such as going to shovel shit, will be just that, going to shovel shit. That is not to say that there can not be conflict with these lives, but there is nothing within the role that inherently drives it.  I don't log in to virtual farm, if I wanted to farm, I would go putz around in my much neglected garden. Being a farmer IG is fine, but as with Tavia, the interesting thing about the story is not how damn good a beet puller he is, but rather all the "stuff" going on around him.

The point is why do people join clans? A few reasons, one the opportunity for roleplay with other PC's is higher.   Two: IMM interaction is considerably higher on a regular basis in a clan. Three: many built in plots, or plot opportunities.  Independents are not privy to much of what is going on out there.  I know, I tend to not play a clannie, just a regular commoner.   You try to pick up on any interesting news in the tavern, but the seat warmers don't do much more than idle gossip, usually sexual inuendos, and the tandu and scrab are downright usless for information on plot lines to follow.

Saying that all would be wonderful in the RP world if there were more commoners, is all well and good, but it does not discount the fact that often the RP is rippingly dull in time.

[Cuusardo]

Because of this, it's nearly impossible for an unclanned character to engage in any meaningful conflict with the rest of the playerbase.

That is so not true.  It simply takes more work on the part of the player, because indies have to actually LOOK for things to get involved in rather than having a clan throw them into plots.

[LoD]

Plots and conflict are neither unique to the wealthy nor solely the province of the powerful and high borne.  In fact, some of Rindan's other posts mention that some of his best times were spent in an environment that boasts the highest amount of "common" people in the gameworld, the T'zai-Byn.

What I interpreted from his words was that he would like to see more vehicles for this style of "common" RP where personal relationships and lower class goals motivate play.  Give them an environment where they can play out roles within common groups of people and you will find plenty of action.

Have none of you ever watched the Jerry Springer show?  Never been forced to watch the Lifetime channel with one of their "kill your entire family and friend's system because I like your man" plots unfold amidst middle class Americans?  Our "common" people are riddled with strife, conflict and plots involving theft, abuse, murder, assassination, loss and heartbreak.

Someone mentioned that people wouldn't want to play a lumberjack, miner or other profession because it would be "boring".  Sitting in taverns is boring.  Standing guard at a gate is boring.  Following around a merchant is boring.  All of these "actions" are boring - it's the people you're with, the gameworld and the interaction that make all of these jobs interesting and bearable.  That doesn't change simply because you're doing something that resembles a real job.

There's conflict, plots and interaction galore to be had in a number of common "jobs" that could be fleshed out and given life within either city-state.  I've only started 4 new clans and led 3 existing ones, but they were all fun, different and interesting because of the people involved.

Obsidian miners might be contrated by the City to work a special resource in a distant location, only to find that they're secretly being used to unearth something important.

Lumberjacks may find themselves hired by the Templarate to pave the way for a roadway allowing for better troop movement in an upcoming assault.

Salt gatherers could be informed of a unique substance found in the far reaches of the gameworld important to the Kadians for some reason and are hired to fill a few crates with it and return through a hard journey.  On the way, they are help up by raiders whom take the salt shipments and wonder at what could've been so important about a little salt.

No one says that these "common" groups couldn't be used by many of the other entities within the game, nor that their regular chores have to be so mundane and boring as to make a person dig their eyes out with a spoon.  Have a little imagination.

-LoD

[Nao]

how are jobs like farming different from a different job that is already in game, like hunting? I think work is the most boring thing you can do with a pc... Whether it's farming, or hunting, shoveling shit for the Byn or crafting nice stones into nice jewlery... Work is never goign to be the exciting rp that I play this game for. But all of these roles that involve that kind of work also involve other stuff outside of work that makes them interesting.

So if we have hunters, we can also have farmers. Cause they do stuff other than hunting and farming, too.

[EvilRoeSlade]

Because of this, it's nearly impossible for an unclanned character to engage in any meaningful conflict with the rest of the playerbase.

That is so not true.  It simply takes more work on the part of the player, because indies have to actually LOOK for things to get involved in rather than having a clan throw them into plots.

Read that snippet I wrote again, carefully this time.  You will discover that we are not talking about the same thing.

[Medena]

There are a lot more interesting things to do than clean up shit.

... Hire an assassin to kill somebody.  Hire a thief to steal something.  Hire a ranger to scout out a new encampment for you to raid.  It's really only limited to your imagination.

I agree. However, the jobs you suggest presuppose that the person hired has some skill.  They may not need skill in order to take the job but in order to complete it, and presumably to collect the whole fee,  they would.  And probably to continue showing their face around town, too.

The jobs I suggested were a one day unskilled deal. A way for a "commoner" to get a few sid now and then to survive while they RP'ed all the stuff that it's very difficult  to make a real living at  -- a sculptor, a pimp, a street performer, an armor repairer, etc, etc.

[amoeba]

Have a little imagination.

Okay, I tend to run the contrary view, that is just me, so here goes. In this world and and ours there are leaders and there are followers.  LoD, from what little I know of you, you tend to fall into the former, most fall into the later category.  I often find leaders are often incredulous that others have a diffucult time "making things happen", with well intentioned comments such as this or "only boring people are boring".    Face it, a good leader could make something happen in the middle of the salt flats equipped with nothing but a spoon and a couple of followers..."Everyone ready to dig to Setinal?".  For many others, it is much more work to make something from nothing.

It is wrong to read into this that I don't think there should be more commoner roles, people should play them, but give a little incentive to those  people not as creatively inclined, someway to make it somehow interesting for all involved.

btw. Thanks for the post, it remined me of something from my second character, giving me an idea for my commoner current.

[Rindan]

I think LoD hits the nail on the head.  There is constant conflict at every level.  The scale of the conflict changes, but not the intensity.  If anything, dropping the scale of the conflict might encourage conflict.  

If weapons crafter Amos gets pissed and punches a rival weapons crafter in the face, the world doesn't end.  Their rivalry can simmer without the earth falling apart.  Amos can hire a pick pocket to harass his rival, and his rival can try and sleep with Amos's sister, just to piss him off.

If House Borsail does the equivalent of a punch in the face to House Tor, the consequences are much more sever.  Because of the severity of the consequences, there is a strict chain of command.  The chain of command is, in general, very conservative.  That isn't to say that cool stuff doesn't happen in the upper echelons of the game all of the time.  It is to say that conflict tends to be more at a careful simmer then a full boil, simply because when the most powerful organizations in the world fight, serious damage and lost lives is the consequence.

This leads into the next point.  All the conflict that exists in the upper echelons of the game can exist in the lower echelons of the game.  It is just a scale shift.  Instead of merchant houses fighting, you have neighborhood stores fighting.  Instead of hiring the Byn to escort your caravan, you hire a handful of thugs to make sure you receive a backpack's worth of supplies from a shady 'rinth dealer.  Instead of noble houses vying for power, you have commoner families and elven tribes vying for power.   Assassination and intrigue still exist in plentiful supply.  Assassinating a House Lord is hard.  Assassinating the head of a commoner family on the other hand is much in the realm of possibility for most people.  

Without breaking a sweat, you could easily shrink the entire game down to just Allanak, get rid of every single clan the game has, and replace them with a near identical equivalent that operates on the commoner level.  That isn't what I am suggesting though.

Realizing that the game IS built for upper echelon conflict, what I am pondering over is building some kind of small structure in the lower end of the game.  The idea isn't to build a massive commoner infrastructure and get rid of all the top tier clans.  The idea is to build a small commoner infrastructure that can cope with a limited supply of players and still be interesting.

[Cenghiz]

Forgive me if I have missed something... But it's 1:21 am here and since I'm going to meet Eska tomorrow after a long travel of 2 hours in the morning city traffic, I want to sleep soon.
The best approach to make commoners is being an employer.. I have met many many good 'commoner's in my Allanaki lifetime.. Everytime I was an employer seeking to have a few folks around having his odd jobs done.
Overbid, buy more than five pieces and pay bonuses for business done swiftly. Let's say, ask for five large chunks of obsidian and remember to add you'll buy small chunks, too. Offer 75 coins for each chunk, which's more than anyone else would pay.. You rest in a tavern waiting for your chunks and let the man do his job.
Depositing 5000 coins in the bank account is nothing.. You get bored easily.. Earning a bit less and asking others to collect raw goods for you creates many forms of interaction.

[Rindan]

There has been a fair amount of discussion, so let me throw out the idea that had been mulling around in my head.  Granted, this might be wishful thinking, but I am curious what other people think.

Picture this.  Imagine two rival 'clans' in the commoners.  The 'clans' would be structured roughly like a Merchant House.  They would have blood members, but would liberally hire out non-blood members.  The clans could be based around old tribes that have moved to Allanak, and could either be human or elven.  Think of them as being modeled off of House Kurac.  There is a core family with tribal traditions that hires out piles of people.  Positions are given based upon merit, and people of merit can slowly integrate themselves into the core family.  

The 'mission' of these clans would be to continue existing in the Allanaki commons.  Consider for a moment the implications of this mission.  They are trying to exist as organized entities under the eye of the templerate and the merchant houses.  This means that they need to intentionally limit their wealth and refrain from overt illegal activity that would attract templar attention.  If they grow too wealthy, a noble house or merchant house will soundly crush them for rising above their place.  If they become too criminal, the templerate will purge them.  They exist in a position where someone above them can easily step on them at any time.  Such an organizations would likely avoid dealings with noble houses like the plague for fear of making enemies with another noble house.  In this way, you could have a culture that is built around self regulation of wealth and power.  Such organizations would intentionally segregate themselves from noble house dealings, and so insolate the players of these clans from being tempted to take a large pile of coin to get involved with noble house politics.  Cutting themselves off from the rich as a source of money would help to ensure that they remain squarely as commoners, unlike house employees who begin to diverge from normal commoners as they get wealthy.  The constant strive to remain prosperous without being rich and powerful builds into these clans a method of sustainability.

Now, place these two clans in rival positions.  Have them compete in the same trade.  Maybe one group owns the Gaj and the other owns the Barrel.  Maybe they compete selling commoner clothing, butchering, cooking, or whatever.  Make it some trade within Allanak that isn't going to piss of a merchant house.  Then just let the two have at each other.  The threat of being crushed from above will moderate conflict to an extent, but the fact that it is a struggle of a few commoners should keep the templerate from wading in and killing everyone if conflict does occur.

As to how to go about implementing these two clans, there are two methods.  First, with imm support, you could probably have them up on their feet in no time and running like normal clans in short order.  Barring imm support, it just takes two leaders and a small core of players (say two followers each) willing to commit to the role and not decide suddenly that they want to be 'rinth warriors or desert hunters.  The roles themselves are inherently fairly safe due to their purely city nature.  With a small core of players, they could create conflict and slowly draw people into interesting commoner roles.

[amoeba]

Realizing that the game IS built for upper echelon conflict, what I am pondering over is building some kind of small structure in the lower end of the game.  The idea isn't to build a massive commoner infrastructure and get rid of all the top tier clans.  The idea is to build a small commoner infrastructure that can cope with a limited supply of players and still be interesting.

Well stated and focused statement, I like it.  It is very true that conflict/plots is/are driven top down.  

One of the reasons is a "brain drain" issue.  As people become better in the game, it would be no suprise that they move up the power ladders. Hell the game is structured for this, you can't get many roles until you have become more experienced.  Would it be any wonder then that the people better at driving conflicts are at the top?  

The established clans also have a sense of continuity, the orginization has a collective memory.  Take the most prevalant and destructive conflicts in current societies, namely turf battles, retaliation and counter-retaliation.  In the poorest of societlies this is a rampant, daily event.  Take the Iraq Shite/Shia conflict, the crips vs. bloods, the Hatfields vs. the McCoys.  The problem is, each PC starts anew, they may have a virtual background with conflict, but there is no collective memory.  This mutes the conflict there that should be rampant.

What you need to have commoner on commoner conflict is a way to have shared identites IG.  Non-virtual elven tribes in the rinth/allanak/tuluk would be a help.  And gangs, where the heck are the gangs? Cites this big should have them.  Rather than hiring an individual to kill a noble, hire a gang.  Then have a rival gang's spy learn of it and get hired by the noble to kill the other person. Let the gangs get pissed that they got taken advantage of, and retaliate.  People should run for cover when two members of an opposing gang show up in the Barrel it the same time.

In short, as long as commoners are simply a bunch of individuals, without a communal memory, the upper echolons of society, where this does exist, will have the upper hand, and at the same time attract the talent that furthers it along.

I hope this makes sense.

edited for content:

Think of it this way, which of these senarios is more interesting?

1. Amos Streetsweeper gets a sweet deal from Lord Fancypants to clean the overflow of guts from the slaughterhouse.  This will give him that extra twenty sid to get that shinny new belt, but Joe Guttercleaner is competing for the same job.

2. Amos Streetsweeper overhears that Jane Bigboobs wants to have Lord Fancypants whacked, his gets with his tribemates to negotiate a sweet deal, which will get all of them shiny new belts, but Joe Guttercleaner's tribe it turns out is in negotiations as well with Jane Bigboobs.

Both senarios involve common folk.

[ale six]

If anything, dropping the scale of the conflict might encourage conflict.  

If weapons crafter Amos gets pissed and punches a rival weapons crafter in the face, the world doesn't end.  Their rivalry can simmer without the earth falling apart.  Amos can hire a pick pocket to harass his rival, and his rival can try and sleep with Amos's sister, just to piss him off.

If House Borsail does the equivalent of a punch in the face to House Tor, the consequences are much more sever.  

*snip*
This leads into the next point.  All the conflict that exists in the upper echelons of the game can exist in the lower echelons of the game.

Here's my spin on this from the opposite angle.

If weaponscrafter Amos punches his rival in the face, nobody cares outside Amos, Amos' rival, and Amos' sister and other immediate close friends.

It is precisely because the consequences are more severe when noble Houses squabble that I like that atmosphere better. The stakes are higher, the effects are wider reaching, and the plot has the potential to involve far more people.

If Jenny Borsail snubs Joey Toe, these two nobles can, using their servants, allies, and resources, wage a quiet petty little war against each other for months. Jenny and Joey are both vastly powerful PCs, and they're given thousands of sids per week to use however they like.

I ask you: Which plot has the potential to become more interesting, two nobles squabbling and using their 5000 sid bankrolls to fight one another, hire thieves and assassins to harass and kill each other's servants, compete with each other for favors from the templarate, hinder each other's allies, and so on...
... or two two-bit weaponcrafters who might get into barfights now and then, or sleep with each other's sisters, or do a lot of things that won't echo to anywhere outside their own little corners of the game? Yes, they can hire all the same thieves and assassins and everything else, but not to the same extent.

Conflict can exist anywhere in the game, but we should encourage it to start at the top echelons and trickle down. I'm fully confident that two competent noble players can do nothing but fight each other over petty little things and still involve a half dozen players on each side and keep things interesting and fun. Nobles have nothing better to do. Weaponscrafters and nobody commoners, on the other hand, will have a harder time creating and sustaining plots of comparable scope and scale. I think that conflict will have a much easier time trickling down the food chain than climbing its way up.

From reading the GDB I almost feel like some people have some sort of stigma attached to clans in general and noble houses in particular, and I don't understand why. All the tools we could possibly ever want to create and sustain conflict at any level of the game already exist, it's simply a matter of knowing how to do it, and having people around you to fight with. If there is some kind of stigma and a lot of people don't like high end conflict, as I said before everyone is free to go ahead and start whatever they like. I really don't know if I like the idea of committing staff resources to it, though, and I don't really understand why anything else needs to be added, when as Rindan himself has admitted it's just the same exact thing in different (more common) clothing.

[Xygax]

The stakes are higher, the effects are wider reaching, and the plot has the potential to involve far more people.

Oftentimes this stems from or leads to a disproportionate sense of importance among PCs in so-called "high profile" roles like this.  In reality, a low-ranking brat noble from Borsail punching another low-ranking brat noble from Tor isn't all that significant.  It is often blown out of proportion by the players on both sides inappropriately attempting to weild the full weight of their House (or even the full weight of a portion of their House) against the other player or the other players House.

I'd personally prefer lower-level retaliation at both eschelons of society and think that overall this broken sense of scope breaks the world away from the grittiness that it should have.  I'm not sure what you think the advantages are of your petty bickering having the "potential involve far more people", but it strikes me that this suggests too much OOC consideration for your activities.  You shouldn't be thinking in terms of, "if I smack Fancypants Tor, all the PCs in my clan will be kept busy for a month!" but instead in terms of, "if I smack Fancypants Tor, and I can get away with it, without him smacking me back, I can save face for myself while personally embarrassing him...  so... how do I get away with it?"  Or, "That bastard Borsail smacked me...  what would be an appropriate measure of vengeance, and how can I best exact it?"

If you confine yourself to smaller scope details like these, you'll find that the mesh of interactions with other PCs in the game will actually be pulled far more smoothly.  You'll involve more people because the flow of the plot-line is natural, and not forced (by forced, I mean: motivated by an OOC consideration).  These natural plot-lines are the ones that genuinely resonate across the MUD (some of the threads you may encounter even now might have resonance from the actions of players two years ago).

More on-topic to the original thread, this lower level, grittier set of activities for more-common PCs would, I think, offer more opportunity for natural plotlines like this to emerge.  I think it's a worth effort, personally.

-- X

[Kalden]

Rather than hiring an individual to kill a noble, hire a gang.

The crime code would have to be reworked somehow. Besides, what sorta commoner labor is there for these gangs to subsist on if they can't shakedown businesses and deal drugs? Who here can play these sorts of characters effectively?

A gang that gets drunk/mugs at night and hacks sid during the day might be the most realistic equivalent in Armageddon, but somehow it doesn't have the same flavor as the real criminal gang.

Somehow I'm sure that I've read this idea of Rindan's before - more than once, even. While it's a nice idea, it's clearly never going to happen.

The next best thing is the 'rinth.

[jstorrie]

I'm playing a commoner right now, and I'll tell you flat out that it's harder than it looks. Not being a commoner - it's fairly easy for an independent to maintain whatever lifestyle they want, if they're familiar with their setting - but staying a commoner. All of my commoner's acquaintances are clanned. The lowest that they know is a handful of Byn; everyone else is aide to so-and-so, bard whatsherface, noble guard x, etc.

On top of this, they all offer this PC jobs constantly, so to stay a commoner you have to come up with some pretty well-thought out excuses. Why wouldn't you move up to a cushy House job with free food, water, board and respectable friends? Why would you stay on the street, grubbing twigs out of Ye Halfling Woode?

Ironically, playing an undesirable like a rinther, gemmer or elf doesn't help much, because they get involved in semiprestigious little undercultures of their own. You can guarantee a life of low-standing by playing half-elf, but you can't have all your characters be half-elves!

[ale six]

Oftentimes this stems from or leads to a disproportionate sense of importance among PCs in so-called "high profile" roles like this.  In reality, a low-ranking brat noble from Borsail punching another low-ranking brat noble from Tor isn't all that significant.  It is often blown out of proportion by the players on both sides inappropriately attempting to weild the full weight of their House (or even the full weight of a portion of their House) against the other player or the other players House.

I'm fully aware that personal conflict between high profile clanned PCs isn't the same as conflict between their two clans, and this isn't what I was suggesting at all when I talked about higher stakes. Just because a Borsail and a Tor are squabbling doesn't mean their Houses are, or that they should expect their House to back them up somehow. But they can still fight and squabble with each other in the ways I listed, and, being nobles with personal influence and resources, these squabbles have the potential to become much bigger than two Johnny nobodies fighting would. Even if the two nobles never try to bring their Houses into it, they're still getting large stipends of money, which they can use to give people work, and they both have servants they can use against each other. These are advantages that lower class PCs lack.

I'm not sure what you think the advantages are of your petty bickering having the "potential involve far more people", but it strikes me that this suggests too much OOC consideration for your activities.  You shouldn't be thinking in terms of, "if I smack Fancypants Tor, all the PCs in my clan will be kept busy for a month!" but instead in terms of, "if I smack Fancypants Tor, and I can get away with it, without him smacking me back, I can save face for myself while personally embarrassing him...  so... how do I get away with it?"

I was kind of surprised at this statement, honestly. The situation we're talking about is all hypothetical, and being used as an example to illustrate differences in the same type of plot being acted out by different social levels of people. I have no stake in the hypothetical plot beyond this discussion, so how could my supporting it be motivated by OOC considerations for a clan I don't even have?

Regardless, if a PC was thinking exactly along the IC lines you listed, the point remains the same, and the plot stays valid. Nobles are certainly capable of getting into feuds with each other by themselves without having to do it just as an excuse to get things moving in their clan. And again, when they -do- feud, they have the resources to be an engine to push that plot all the way down the social spectrum, in ways that less important people can't do in reverse.

No, players in these positions shouldn't expressly go out thinking "Hmm, how can I make waves to get the most people as possible involved", but I think that just by being around, playing intelligently, keeping things moving and making things happen, they will naturally create more plotlines than everyday commoners would.

Why do we want plots to involve more people? I guess I thought that was the point of having sponsored characters in high level positions in the first place, to generate plots. Everybody likes to be involved in things, conflict is good for getting people involved, and I think the more action people are exposed to, the more fun they can have. Again, to me, two rich PCs feuding with each other and throwing around money while doing it is a lot more interesting than two common nobodies who get into a fight. This is why I don't see why we would need lower level clans created, when the same amount of staff energy applied to a position higher up the ladder has the potential to affect a wider amount of the game.

[EvilRoeSlade]

I repeat, though it's a good idea, in my experience (and I have had experience in just such a clan that Rindan describes) a commoner-oriented clan will not work.  Powerful PCs will stomp on them just because they can and conflict will be impossible because they will find themselves unable to do so much as fart without being slaughtered.

[Anael]

Not meaning to derail this thread, but Id like to hear what people consider 'reasonable' pay for those odd jobs mentioned earlier in this thread. How much would a bit richer person pay someone for doing some simple task (fetching item X from a shop, polishing shoes...)

[Rindan]

If weaponscrafter Amos punches his rival in the face, nobody cares outside Amos, Amos' rival, and Amos' sister and other immediate close friends.

That isn't exactly true.  If one weapons crafter was apart of one commoner clan, and another weapons crafter was apart of another, you have suddenly involved two clans.  While it is true that a noble house involves more people in whatever conflict they stir, all people don't need to be involved, just the PCs.  The number of VNPCs involved are of no consequence for our purposes.  The only reason why this might not immediately strike us as becoming a 'large' conflict involving a dozen PCs is simply because we are used to seeing commoners as lone independents.  The truth is that commoners have real ties and bonds too, it just isn't very well represented currently.

I ask you: Which plot has the potential to become more interesting, two nobles squabbling and using their 5000 sid bankrolls to fight one another, hire thieves and assassins to harass and kill each other's servants, compete with each other for favors from the templarate, hinder each other's allies, and so on...
... or two two-bit weaponcrafters who might get into barfights now and then, or sleep with each other's sisters, or do a lot of things that won't echo to anywhere outside their own little corners of the game? Yes, they can hire all the same thieves and assassins and everything else, but not to the same extent.

To be honest, I think the weapons crafters are going to be the more interesting of the two.  The chances of one weapons crafter hiring a group of thugs to beat the piss out of the other weapons crafter is dramatically higher then Lord Inbreed hiring the crack team of special forces like soldiers that it would take to breach Lord Crosseyed's body guards' defenses and beat him up and escape with their lives.  Further, I imagine the weapons crafters are in a much better position to broadly drawn people in.  Torch a weapons crafter's shop or even have him killed, and the consequences are minimal.  At worst, a militiaman might take an interest and you might have to have put yourself in debt to someone unsavory to bribe him off.  Burn down Lord Inbreeds estate or have him killed and everyone involved ends up dead, your house is disgraced, and you are in very deep trouble.  While that might be interesting if it happened, it is far more unlikely due to the severity of the consequences.  

Pissing off an organization so large and powerful in a game of revenge is in most cases very unrealistic.  For our two weapons crafters, their little feud can involve the same number of people, become far more intense, and be much looser in terms of the bonds which the conflict must be bounded by.  As far the 'sid aspect which you bring up, I think you exaggerate the difference.  Sure, Lord Inbreed has much more money then Joe Amos.  However, if you want me to steal Lord Inbreed's lucky steel dagger with his two body guards watching, you better believe I am going to demand a few orders of magnitude more in terms of compensation then if you want me to steal Joe Amos's lucky obsidian dagger.  Sure nobles have more 'sid to throw around, but they also ask people to take more insane risks and get involved in things far more likely to leave them dead.  In the end, I think nobility have just as much 'sid to throw around as any Joe Commoner after you scale how much they need to spend to get people involved.

From reading the GDB I almost feel like some people have some sort of stigma attached to clans in general and noble houses in particular, and I don't understand why.

I'll be honest, I do attach a stigma to noble houses.  I like Zalanthas for Zalanthas.  I like playing a dirty and vulgar character.  I like to worry about food and water a little.  I like a character that spends his time around other equally crude, vulgar, and common people.  What goes on in the noble houses represents only the tiniest fraction of what happens in Zalanthas, and, in my opinion, is the least interesting fraction in terms of setting.  I like Zalanthas because it is a massive desert.  I like Allanak because it is a wretched city in that desert.  I personally don't like playing in positions where those aspects of the game are easy to forget.

If there is some kind of stigma and a lot of people don't like high end conflict, as I said before everyone is free to go ahead and start whatever they like. I really don't know if I like the idea of committing staff resources to it, though, and I don't really understand why anything else needs to be added, when as Rindan himself has admitted it's just the same exact thing in different (more common) clothing.

My personal belief, and this is completely unsubstantiated so take it with a grain of salt, is that Armageddon has a pile of independent folks who are not in a clan because they don't want to be apart of high society or an isolated clan.  I would like to see those people have a place that lets them avoid high society like the plague while at the same time letting them get involved with interesting plots and interactions.  Pooling a few of these people into a small clan or two could only enhance the game.

As far as staff resources, they would be nice, but I think this is something that could be done without them.  I personally am most interested in ideas that avoid using staff resources all together.  In my ideal world, something like this would be pulled off by a group of players and if latter it was deemed a success staff intervention would ensure its perpetuation.

Personally, I think that I have said all I can about the merits of this idea I am kicking around.  At this point, I am really just curious if anyone else has anything to add, keeping in mind that the goal of any such clan structure would be to foster conflict and keep players entertained.

[Cenghiz]

This time I read the whole thread and I can say I would love to have groupings.. So.. I'm wondering if these steps are possible to accomplish a clan..

1. Start as a ranger or merchant.
2. Up your skills to a comfortable degree.
3. If merchant, start making hunter friends - if ranger, start making merchant friends.
4. Be real friends with your customers.. Drink and smoke together, try to pick nice women together, after being drunk invite them to your home and cook them dinner.
5. One day collect all your friends and speak big. Tell them that you want to hire a big apartment where all work will be done and all profit will be shared with the most trustable ones.
6. Report the last speech's log to the imms and tell them that the independant clan of 'laughing jakhals' is open, but yet no imm support is needed.
7. Manage to keep the clan alive for 3 IC years, try to grow. Possibly Kadius or Salarr will be pissed of ICly.. Bribe and gift your way through the troubles.
8. Now possibly the staff would be willing to spare some time to the living PC-clan. Write the background and the general description of the clan.. Send them to the imms.. Possibly it'll not be added yet, but let the imms check it.
9. After all chars involved at the beginning are dead and and the clan's still up and running, ask the imms that the clan's still up and running and this clan's now possibly general information. Ask for getting added to the clans page.

Bingo! You have a clan!

Note: I believe a new Merchant House may arise.. It would be 'commoner' in the pre-House state but.. It'll eventually be either crushed or it'll be a rich merchant house which's no longer 'commoner'.

[Jherlen]

I think ERS has it right, Rindan. Organised groups of commoners who try to avoid high society like the plague will just get crushed by it sooner or later. If they were going to exist, they would need alliances with powerful people to keep them around. Avoiding the powerful groups is one of your stated goals here, but if you do that you won't last long.

There are commoner families like the ones you described in existance. The four most well-known ones are called Kadius, Salarr, Kurac, and Nenyuk. There are other smaller ones too. There may even be room for more - but if there is, expect them to exist in a like vein. That's the setting, the powerful groups stomp on the poor people. Don't expect to create a group of poor people who will have any sort of significance and simultaneously still remain poor. I just don't think it will work.

As far as conflict? A good leader anywhere will generate conflict. I just wish more people would give it a chance and buy into it instead of saying "Clans, ewwwww..." and running away. As has already been pointed out the spectrum of clans we already have covers everything and is quite wide. The best thing we could do for conflict in the game is to shuffle more people into that system. I think you can remain very Zalanthan while working in a clan: your superiors are rich but you sure still won't be in some roles. I think giving the current system another hard look is in order before attempting to remake or add to it.

[LoD]

I repeat, though it's a good idea, in my experience (and I have had experience in just such a clan that Rindan describes) a commoner-oriented clan will not work.  Powerful PCs will stomp on them just because they can and conflict will be impossible because they will find themselves unable to do so much as fart without being slaughtered.

In my experience, which is with several independant clans (come coded as clans, some not) over the years - this is entirely possible.  The problem is that when the leader dies, the followers splinter.  The only reason every major clan in the game hasn't performed a similar vanishing act is they have an NPC leadership structure that disallows their complete destruction in times of overwhelming opposition and a low PC count.

Rindan is asking for this same structure to exist for a couple common level clans/groups that would allow players to cycle in and out of them without a leader player to start it up everytime.  Just like the Merchant and Noble Houses, the PC's who join these clans aren't going to be the guys calling all the shots.  They are going to be lower level members going about their business and occasionally running into trouble with a rival or competing organization.

Noble and Merchant Houses caring much about how the common people act in their dirty streets and low ambitions isn't something I see being very realistic.  Even so, these clans would likely form loose ties with larger clans (i.e. Merchant House backed) that would protect them from sheer political suicide if they happen to step on the wrong toes.

Here is one such area for which this would have been great:

Before its destruction, Tuluk had an elven quarter in the southwest part of the city.  There were two entrances to the quarter and almost all of the NPC's there were elven, with very few soldiers.  The area was relatively small, but it had a great sense of atmosphere and added a level of danger that was somewhere between the streets of the city and the 'rinth in Allanak; it was not quite the gutter, but not a completely safe place either.  A gang that operated out of this area would be a lot of fun to be a part of and their ambitions would be smaller than that of the great Merchant Houses and Noble Houses of the city.

This is the kind of "clan" that I believe Rindan is suggesting.  Rivals that have a NPC leadership structure that allows PC's to participate and work toward smaller goals.  Those goals may still involve many other clans and upper eschelon organizations, but it won't be as constrictive.  It would be a lot of fun, and I think it would be successful given the appropriate support.

-LoD

[flurry]

I like the idea of having working-class clans, with my reservation being that I think the playerbase is already spread fairly thin.  

The idea of having a tavern that functions as a commoner clan has come up before, and I really like that idea.  It seemed like there was some immortal interest in it, too, so maybe something like that has potential.   I noticed someone up the thread mentioned having two player-run taverns like this competing, which seems like a really cool idea.  Maybe especially for Tuluk this would be good, to draw people away from the Sanctuary.

Intrepid mentioned something I've thought about before:

- Courier/messenger: With the cutthroat nature of the Known World, I
imagine this would be trusted to either a formidable house aide or a
mysterious third party who doesn't ask questions--a la The Transporter.

I was trying to think of how to make a courier concept work, but I think it would be hard because it requires a certain amount of trust.  (Nevermind whether there would be enough demand for that service in the first place).   Some random person on the street might not inspire enough trust for this, but if it's a well-established business, maybe so.  So it might be the kind of thing where the concept has a better chance of working if it's part of a clan.

But then it goes back to how many people would use that?  I think the tavern(s) idea would have a wider appeal if it were implemented.

[Xygax]

There are suitable "commoner class" taverns in both city-states.

-- X

[ale six]

I think we've debated upper-vs-lower echelon plotting all over, and I guess it settles down to be an issue of taste. I have no doubts that the right people, given the right conditions, can create plots that will entertain themselves and other PCs no matter what their roles are.

I'll still stick to my argument that conflict more easily moves down the ladder than up. In the extreme example, nobody else at all is going to care about two sidless rinthers fighting over pieces of bread. Lots of people will likely be paid or coerced or otherwise encouraged to care about struggles between two wealthy and influential people. The higher up you go, the farther the seeds can scatter down to.

I was never arguing that nobles should start attacking each other or trying to burn each others' estates - that's unrealistic and unlikely as Rindan pointed out. Because you can't simply take the direct approach, the plot becomes more complex. Not many sane thieves would try and steal a noble's steel dagger, and crack assassin squads are hard to come by. Cheap assassins are far easier to come by, though, and conveniently, servants of nobles are far easier to kill, and their things are far easier to steal. These kinds of services don't cost nobles premium rates, and nobles have more money, so I think my point about resources is still valid.

This sort of indirect struggle is what I've been arguing for.  The direct methods that might work on commoners, while certainly fun, violent, and interesting, also seem to tend to be rather final. Once your thugs stomp Amos and all his friends, you're done fighting. These methods won't work at higher levels, so conflict requires more subtlety and intrigue, making things more prolonged and complex. That's where I think the best plots come from, and that's why I'm happy enough with things as they are.

[flurry]

There are suitable "commoner class" taverns in both city-states.

-- X

Well I'm not that unobservant.   I didn't mean it would be good if commoner taverns existed, which of course they do, but that those would make potentially good PC clans.  Which, as far as I know, they are not (though some are owned by existing clans).

If you weren't responding to me, then...um...nevermind.

[Xygax]

Maybe I'm being thick.  Tavern-clans?

-- X

[flurry]

Maybe I'm being thick.  Tavern-clans?

It was an idea that someone (I forget who) started a thread on in the Clans forum, maybe about a year ago(?).

Basically, instead of just NPC employees, the tavern would function as a kind of working-class PC clan.   Bartenders, servers, entertainment, cooks, etc.  It would be neat to see a clan like this, or even two in competition.  (My comment about the Sanctuary was just that I thought a tavern like this might be an incentive to draw people away from the Sanc).

Maybe someone with a better memory than me can add to what I've said, but I think that's the basic idea.  Maybe it's a step above what Rindan was getting at in the original post, but it would be a notch below the noble and great merchant houses.

[amoeba]

First I apologize the length of the post, hopefully you'll stick through it.

I'll still stick to my argument that conflict more easily moves down the ladder than up. In the extreme example, nobody else at all is going to care about two sidless rinthers fighting over pieces of bread. Lots of people will likely be paid or coerced or otherwise encouraged to care about struggles between two wealthy and influential people. The higher up you go, the farther the seeds can scatter down to.

I think what you are describing is more of a symptom rather than a cause.  I think that both sides of this argument are a bit oversimplified. Hopefully I can clarify my points. For this argument I want to talk about substained and meaningful conflict, not as ale six stated "two sidless rinthers fighting over pieces of bread".  Interpersonal conflict does not nesessarily lead to anything larger than two people arguing.  For the sake of this discussion, that is not what I am refering to.

First lets look at what the common commodity required for conflict to thrive. I would argue that this is information.  If a noble pays an assassin to whack a different noble what is really of value here is not sid, but rather information.  Certainly the money is the IC motivator, but in terms of what makes the game enjoyable it is the information that the noble passed on to the assassin that is truly of value.  With the act of passing this information down, another person has been involved in the plot, another set of variables has been introduced.  

As with any commodity, it is the rarity of the commodity from which it derives it's value.  I think everyone will agree if the fact that assassin x was contracted by noble x to kill noble y was posted on the tavern boards, then that commodity becomes worthless.  On the flip side, if that information is horded, it is not as valuble as it could be.  It needs to be invested, used to it's maximun potential.  Taking our example, if a spy overheard the conversation betwen the nobel and the assassin, then our information has payed off a dividend, namely more information to be used.  

So, we have determined that information has to get out to further conflict, but not too much so as to degrade it's value.  If you think about it, one of the major qualites of this mud is the importaince that is placed on keeping secrets, secret.  Now that I have bored you with this, let me go on as to why this matters in terms of this discussion.

Why is it that conflict seems to trickle from the top down? In simple terms, they have more information than Joe Blow hunter on the street.  They are weathly with information.  They have far more access.

If you look conflict in this way you will notice that this can be very easily driven bottom up.  A very knowledged rinthi scum could be a powerhouse of secrets.  If he spends that information wisely, a nothing could easily drive many interesting plots.  The diference here is that if this indivudual dies, his information dies with him.  In the top down organizations, the information is more often passed down, inherited if you will.  This is what I mean by the collective memories, it is really accumulated information.

Now leadership (in an ooc sense)  plays into this as well.  A good leader knows how to spend this information wisely, he also knows more importiantly how to make new information to be used.  Take the assassin example, in this, the noble *creates* this information.   I have seen cases where information was mishandled, often ignored, left unused until it died of atrophy.  I have also seen the type who were greedy with information. They saw a cool new plot, and didn't want to tell anyone else, so it could belong to just them.  They horded it and it never gained in value. A great leader knows how to manage secrets well.

There is also the issue of access.  Face it, an anti-social hunter living mostly in the wilds has considerably less information to spend than a house aide.  However a hunter could create information. If a hunter goes to raid someone along the road, and the person survives. Inforamtion, a potential plot was created.  If the hunter just kills the party outright, it's a zero sum gain.  Once aagin an active, agressive raider that makes mistakes will generate far more plots than a passive loner hunter.

I know this all sounds rather acedemic, but I think it is importiant to understand that in terms of game dynamics, information is what matters, not economics so much.  An assassin could be hired by a noble for 20 large for a hit, but a starving rhithi could offer 3 slices of bread to a low end assassin to kill an enemy. The sid is irrelevant, the passed on plot line is what is importaint.  Thinking about things this way sometimes helps figure out a different angle to approaching conflict.