introduction of ginka-points / which House is the best?

[theebie]

Hi,

In order to reflect the status/progress of the various Houses and the PCs
within them, I thought about the following concept:

Lets take House Salarr as example, lets say the northern compound is
at its actual state worth 5000 'ginka-points' a month.
These points will have to be earned by the PCs in the clan by solving
different tasks that will be given out by the imms/advisors/sergeants.

Example:
- bring in 5 mantis shells, lord fancy-pansies new guard needs a new set
 of armour, reward: 700 ginka points
- craft a whole dozend of plain agafari longswords. There's been a bigger
 order by the Byn, reward: 450 ginka points

If there are the 5 mantis shells / the dozend agafari longswords put into
a certain crate/chest in the garrison, the imm/leader will take them out,
junk them/put them somewhere and credit the unit the gained points.
 
If the PCs in the clan manage to solve enough tasks and manage to gain the
garrisons worth of 'ginka-points' the garrison will stay in the shape it
has been in the last month.
If there's a big plus in points the unit has done exceedingly well and
might get that new marble-fountain with the freshest of all water, and the
cost of the monthly upkeep will raise from 5000 to maybe 5500 'ginka-points'
If too few tasks have been done the garrison will be in bad shape, it
could be reflected by something like changing the descs of the gate,
displaying it a little rotten and dirty, or the npc guards having dust/blood
on their gear, you get the idea.

Why do that ?
- there could be some active competition between the various Houses that would
 be clearly displayed to everybody. "Have you seen House Kadius new shining
 armour ? The ones with all the feathers ? Way more cool than those dirty stuff
 them Kurac have, ain't it ?"
- even more important: it would give PCs stuff to do, and leaders stuff to
 give their PCs to handle. There could be all kinda things to get 'ginka-points'
 for, it would vary from clan to clan.
 

comments welcome :)
regards ---theebie---

[theebie]

what do you mean with 'you'd have to recode 3 or 4 sets' ?

and i dont think it'd be much work for the imms, most of the part
will be on side of the advisor/sergeant/lieutenant PC, he'll take
record about was has been done, and will just give the imms
status reports

regards, dwor

[Morrolan]

For me, I would never take a leadership position again.  I already have a full time job (well, sort of), and adding another is not on the schedule.  Do others agree?  Or it just me?

Morrolan

[theebie]

Actually it wont be as much work as you guys might think right now.

Create the task, look once in a while if its solved, add points to a text file ...

Whats the big deal ?

[EvilRoeSlade]

Rewriting room descriptions would be a big deal.

[theebie]

...which would have not to be done very often though.

There could be one set for

garrison-in-bad-shape
one for
garrison-in-normal-shape
and one for
garrison-in-pretty-shape

if the imm wants more, could be more :)

[Cale_Knight]

This is entirely unrealistic, though. Even if there are only 2 active PCs in a clan, there are hundreds or thousands of vNPCs doing all the work that needs doing. PCs perform such a tiny percentage of what goes on that they'd never have a real impact on the condition of the garrison.

And under this system, I pity the poor bastard who ends up being the only active member of his clan.

I like the idea of giving clan members things to do, but I don't like the idea of essentially punishing low playerbases. Arm isn't exactly overflowing with PCs as it is.

[theebie]

two things:

first, i see the active players in a clan as the average of what the
npcs/vnpcs would do.

if you have 4 out of 10 skilled hunters, there'd be 400 out of 1000
skilled vnpc hunters.

second:
the measurement for the 'ginka-point' rate to be sufficient for
keeping its state could be set regarding to how many players play.

if you have just 2 active players in a clan, you might get 1500
ginka-points for your dozend agafari swords, whereas you'd get only
350 in a clan with 15 active players.

[ale six]

I really don't like this at all, for a number of reasons. The overhead some people mentioned is one.

I play this game to roleplay, not worry about how many points my clan has. That's another.

I think plots should be driven by something far less mechanic, that's another reason.

This seems too materialistic. People shouldn't be motivated to go do things so they get the niftyest clan gear and the coolest clan perks.

What this would do is cause a few clans to get really big and sustain their awesome superperks, while the rest would deteriorate and then die out because no one wanted to play with them. If Salarr has no points and only has wooden swords, but Kurac has the steel swords of doom, where will all the players go?

Nobody is against more goals for pcs, more plots, more staff-driven stuff, etc. The thing is this already happens to an extent. PC leaders are given goals from their npc superiors, which they can either accomplish and get rewards, or not, or fail miserably at and maybe screw something up for the whole clan. This all happens, even if it doesn't happen in the blatant "go collect 50 million scrab shells and you get a prize!" sense.

Really really really really do not like this.

[Cuusardo]

I see absolutely no reason to implement something like this.  Each House already has its own goals and motivations, and installing OOC ideas like this would be a serious detriment to roleplay as well as the game world.  Armageddon is not a contest.

[WarriorPoet]

I see absolutely no reason to implement something like this.  Each House already has its own goals and motivations, and installing OOC ideas like this would be a serious detriment to roleplay as well as the game world.  Armageddon is not a contest.

This sums up my feelings on this idea perfectly.

-WP

[Rhyden]

Good idea, but not for Armageddon.

[Tamarin]

To me, this just sounds like some micromanaging real time strategy game, but in Zalanthas.

[Moofassa]

No. Like Morro. I would run from leadership positions. Becoming a leader would pull you further out into OOC waters if you had to watch for OOC points. Ew.

[Tarx]

Yeah, I'd hate figuring out how many points my clan needed or had.  That's...well, a lot of micromanaging, as people have said.  I'd rather just play.

[Gaare]

Heh.. Well, with a couple of small additions why not.

Both Tuluk and 'nak will have two mobs at the center of the cities. Their name can be Muk and Tek. When you go to them and type "ask tek points", in a channel all players in the city may hear the current clan points.

Also, I think another addition as clan points, can be player points. Same mobs can announce those as well..

Ah.. lastly, after a period of time, like 1 year or so, IMMs may reward the most point winner player or clan.. Think of all 'nak clad with Tor color flags... It would be cool.

[Folker]

It's ironic so many people dislike the idea for the harsh requirements it might demand, even though failure will give you nothing but a different roleplay.

You work on your skills, you craft/hunt/work all the time, you get lots of coin that is unusual for a person of your class, you spend all that coin on silks and uber armor. Twinkish? Perhaps, but fact of life that a character who spends all his gaming time working will have more expensive things.

Can you not do that? Absolutely, so what if you wont be dressed up in silks, so what if your weapons dont cut other's armor like butter. You are still roleplaying your character, and possibly even better and more interestingly then whomever's holding all the uber stuff. Moreso, through roleplay itself you have a chance to be noticed and given opportunities and experiences , a person who only plays for database numbers will never have. And majority of the players echo each other, saying that skills and wealth is not what the game is about, and that it's much more fun to play as a half starved commoner, then a well fed twink.

Absolutely similar situation appears with the houses if this idea was implemented. Can you, as a leader drive all your members to activity. Continiously set up gathering times in order to go out perform some kind of house-like activity. Continiously force yourself and your PC members to hunt, guard, dance, or whatever it is your house would have as tasks. And in reward, you'll get better descriptions of youe estates, merchandise and so on.

Can you not do that? Sure, you can not drive everyone so hard, take it easy, roleplay. Do something independant, perform power struggles within the house, allow those of your members who do not want to perform tasks by another's bidding, but acting on their own initiative to do whatever they like. Aaand maybe, your point attaining will not be as high, the estate descriptions will be poorer, or maybe even very poor. But on another hand, your house will be a unique one amongst all those richly described ons, and opportunities and offers that would doubtfully arrive to a richer house, would come to you instead, for your house is more desperate.

In short, only because there is a mechanism that involves improving the state of your house, doesnt mean you HAVE to do that. It just means that if you wont, your roleplaying experience will be different then those who do do it. Barring roleplayed out exceptions that cant be predicted. There is a specific likeness between character improvement and organization improvement. And I am suprised that so many people disliked the idea basing their opinions on number crunching, instead of roleplaying side of it.

So, I would like a similar system of this sort. But it must flexible, 'extremely' flexible. So if some predetermined task is completed and gives your house 100 points. A performance that was NOT predetermined, and appeared only due to some PC initiative, should give a 1000.

Also obviously, such things should not relate only to gathering of halfling hides or whatever. It must revolve around anything that the house tends to do, which becomes rather complicated. What will Oash/Borsail do ? They have no coded backing to perform what they're famous for. Though it's clearer for the merchant house I suppose

[Jherlen]

alesix and Cuusardo put this best. Making people jump through OOC hoops to get OOC points would be about the worst thing for roleplay I can think of. If you want to do that, you may as well make skill points visible and give everybody back levels and experience points too.

PCs who are smart and who know how things mesh with the game world and the virtual aspects of Zalanthas can affect big changes. A clan leader motivated enough to get a big fancy addition built onto his estate can certainly try for it. House status can (to some extent) fluctuate up and down based on PC actions. None of this requires any sort of numbers to do. Constricting plots to some sort of mechanical number would just be awful.

[Tamarin]

I am so vehemently against this.

If you want to improve your house, go out and and gather a bunch of coins, then find the proper IC channels to make additions.  Keep in mind though, that all the existing Houses already have lengthy histories, and a whole bunch of virtual population that may not necessarily want a fountain stuck in the middle of their complex/estate/manor/compound.

But getting updates automatically just because you racked up points...that's fucking retarded, I'm sorry.  That's EXACTLY like improving your clan hall from stock DIKU muds.

[Jarod550]

It's ironic so many people dislike the idea for the harsh requirements it might demand, even though failure will give you nothing but a different roleplay.

You work on your skills, you craft/hunt/work all the time, you get lots of coin that is unusual for a person of your class, you spend all that coin on silks and uber armor. Twinkish? Perhaps, but fact of life that a character who spends all his gaming time working will have more expensive things.

Can you not do that? Absolutely, so what if you wont be dressed up in silks, so what if your weapons dont cut other's armor like butter. You are still roleplaying your character, and possibly even better and more interestingly then whomever's holding all the uber stuff. Moreso, through roleplay itself you have a chance to be noticed and given opportunities and experiences , a person who only plays for database numbers will never have. And majority of the players echo each other, saying that skills and wealth is not what the game is about, and that it's much more fun to play as a half starved commoner, then a well fed twink.

Absolutely similar situation appears with the houses if this idea was implemented. Can you, as a leader drive all your members to activity. Continiously set up gathering times in order to go out perform some kind of house-like activity. Continiously force yourself and your PC members to hunt, guard, dance, or whatever it is your house would have as tasks. And in reward, you'll get better descriptions of youe estates, merchandise and so on.

Can you not do that? Sure, you can not drive everyone so hard, take it easy, roleplay. Do something independant, perform power struggles within the house, allow those of your members who do not want to perform tasks by another's bidding, but acting on their own initiative to do whatever they like. Aaand maybe, your point attaining will not be as high, the estate descriptions will be poorer, or maybe even very poor. But on another hand, your house will be a unique one amongst all those richly described ons, and opportunities and offers that would doubtfully arrive to a richer house, would come to you instead, for your house is more desperate.

In short, only because there is a mechanism that involves improving the state of your house, doesnt mean you HAVE to do that. It just means that if you wont, your roleplaying experience will be different then those who do do it. Barring roleplayed out exceptions that cant be predicted. There is a specific likeness between character improvement and organization improvement. And I am suprised that so many people disliked the idea basing their opinions on number crunching, instead of roleplaying side of it.

So, I would like a similar system of this sort. But it must flexible, 'extremely' flexible. So if some predetermined task is completed and gives your house 100 points. A performance that was NOT predetermined, and appeared only due to some PC initiative, should give a 1000.

Also obviously, such things should not relate only to gathering of halfling hides or whatever. It must revolve around anything that the house tends to do, which becomes rather complicated. What will Oash/Borsail do ? They have no coded backing to perform what they're famous for. Though it's clearer for the merchant house I suppose

I applaud you sir or madam, for actually thinking for yourself and not following the mainstream of groupies.

Jarod bows down low to the ground, showing his respect

[Maybe42or54]

*shoots Jarod for being a kiss ass*

Along the original post, how would making 4 hunters hunt more and bring in more thing affect how the garrison looks? They aren't the ones maintaining it.

Making 1 hunter hunt by himself in the south is just as crazy as you can get. You are literally sending him to his death, for what? 15 coins. So then you have to lose money by waiting for a new hunter to fill his position


I just don't see how realistic this is. At all.

[Jarod550]

*shoots Jarod for being a kiss ass*

Along the original post, how would making 4 hunters hunt more and bring in more thing affect how the garrison looks? They aren't the ones maintaining it.

Making 1 hunter hunt by himself in the south is just as crazy as you can get. You are literally sending him to his death, for what? 15 coins. So then you have to lose money by waiting for a new hunter to fill his position


I just don't see how realistic this is. At all.

*evades the arrow and spins, landing a crushing blow on Maybe42or54's neck*

Being a hunter in previous roles, and some strong ones at that, unless you're stupid and go slap a mekillot, you can live quite a long life by hunting by yourself.  Stop trying to push people into joining houses and clans, you don't "have" to do everything in a group.

Peace,

Jarod

[Folker]

*shoots Jarod for being a kiss ass*

Along the original post, how would making 4 hunters hunt more and bring in more thing affect how the garrison looks? They aren't the ones maintaining it.

Making 1 hunter hunt by himself in the south is just as crazy as you can get. You are literally sending him to his death, for what? 15 coins. So then you have to lose money by waiting for a new hunter to fill his position


I just don't see how realistic this is. At all.

Well, other vnpcs do it, that's realistic?

I think we're getting too hang on the example mentioned that involved hunting up some scales or whatever. It's not only about hunting some set amount of whatever critteri. It's about giving an incentive to people who're playing a specific role within their house to go and do that role. The jobs can differ with the house obviously, but some will indeed be have to go out there and hunt up some critter. How well organized that deed will be is up to the players obviously. And if your players cant do that, or dont want to, or arent lead and ordered by their lazy leaders ... then the house would deteriorate. Doesnt mean it'll stop existing, doesnt mean you wont be able to play anymore, it's just you'll play your character that is employed by a house that's less lavish then another. That's all there is to it

A question to the one who posted this idea originally. Alright, you gave one example of a merchant house. What will be the tasks of other houses? Borsail/Oash/Tor for example?

[Maybe42or54]

Well, other vnpcs do it, that's realistic?

Do they do it? I don't think they run on ginka points or any other points for that matter.

I don't see how this isn't being used IG anyway.

Good leaders always reward good followers. If they aren't good leaders, then that is great. Noone is perfect.

Forcing them to be good leaders Ic through OOC means would be bad.
Noone is perfect.

And I forgot the rest of what I was typing, so bah.

[Folker]

Do they do it? I don't think they run on ginka points or any other points for that matter.

What does this have to do with ginka points?  What I meant by my earlier statement, is that vnpcs DO hunt. All those scales for the armor dont just magically appear supposedly. So sending a hunter ... to hunt 'is' realistic. Yes, sending a single hunter to hunt some huge beast is moronic, well then ... dont send him alone, organize something. Set up a hunting party, or whatever. It's already being done.

Forcing them to be good leaders Ic through OOC means would be bad.
Noone is perfect

Well, first of all. Chances are they are being forced somehow. But even if they're not, they're not being forced by those ginka points either.

They dont 'have' to do it, they can aswell not do it. All that ginka points concept provides are the symbolic cosmetic consequences of doing it or not. Nobody is forcing anyone. Nobody is forcing a character to work or do anything except sit in a tavern enjoying himself and experiencing various roleplayed out encounters. But this doesnt mean that this character should be immune to hunger, only because he chooses not to perform any currency attaining performances