World Interaction - 1 of 4 (Tribes)

[LoD]

World Interaction – 1 of 4 (Tribes)

The last few years have given rise to some changes in Armageddon's code, administration and policy that I wanted to discuss with both the players and Staff.  These changes have almost all been for the better, yet I see a few issues that are potentially dangerous as trends, and I am interested to hear the observations and views of others.

:arrow: The player base has become diluted by too many tribal clans.[/b]

Tribal Clans

The number of coded and available human and elven tribes has significantly increased over the last few years, allowing for many new additions.  While this adds some variety and a chance to flesh out and pursue a new tribal unit, I believe that it begins to erode some of the benefits provided by having (2) major tribes; one elf, one human.

Years ago, there were (2) main tribes for players; the Blackwing (elves) and the Tan Muark (human).  Both of these clans were well documented and developed through many generations of characters.  They were as different from one another as one could hope, and these differences provided a great background for conflict, trade and other forms of interaction between them.  While player created clans popped would pop up now and again by pockets of players trying something new, there was a stable and definite presence by these two tribes that provided many benefits to the player base.

> Violent (conflicts of interest) and non-violent (trade) interaction between tribals.
> Peoples with respectable resources that did not depend or owe loyalty to a city.
> Stable player bases due to the lack of competition in other non-city tribes/clans.
> Chance for good elven/human tribal similarities and differences to manifest.
> Unique cultures and goods to trade between the two major population centers.

The territories of each group were well defined, almost seeming like entire worlds unto themselves.  This allowed each clan to develop without the direct need for interaction, even though geography, access to resources and travel lanes would often force the subject.  With two distinct, well documented and purposeful clans in the game comes a great vehicle for plot generation and plot involvement at many levels.

Current Issues

It feels now as if there have been so many tribes introduced into the game through the documentation (some player formed, others created by the Imm Staff), that meeting them is a lackluster and varied thing.  I rarely meet two PC's at a time from the same tribe, and the amount of options for PC's almost ensures that they will not develop into a presence capable of contributing a reliable and visible chapter to the story that benefits the most people.  I am sure that the level of RP within these tribes is wonderful, but this is partially an issue of playability and maximizing the level of interaction for the entire MUD.

The location of these two tribes used to create a perfect zone of tension that didn't need to rely on coded NPC's or mysterious sorcerers in order to feel dangerous and adventurous.  Blackwing, Luir's Outpost and the Tan Muark all shared a great amount of space that forced three very different cultures to interact and become involved with one another.  It also fostered an almost symbiotic relationship whereby any large scale events would directly affect all three clans, thus demand some form of interaction from each of them from three groups with very different morals, priorities and values.  To me, this relationship has all but deteriorated from the game in lieu of variety, which I don't feel it was a worthwhile exchange.

No other tribe in the game has made an impact on my characters the way the Tan Muark or Blackwing of old would.  Very rarely have I ever seen three members of another tribal clan consistently together, nor have I had their culture  imposed on me by their consistent presence and relationships with the other clans in the game.  There is a level of play which now feels absent from the game, replaced by many short-lived and inconsistent attempts to replicate a tribal culture, but without the same weight behind it and what you receive are weak attempts at interaction trying to navigate a (in terms of depth created by players) fledgling clan.

I am sure there will be some of you who respond with the notion that you have had some of your very best RP sessions in the company of a small isolated tribal clan, and feel that the game would miss their presence.  I don't doubt that, but my contention is that moving to the previous model would do more good than harm for both the game and tribal players.

Suggestions

> Choose to support one desert elf tribe in the tablelands.
> Choose to support one human tribe somewhere near Luir's Outpost.
> Examine the boundaries and roles of each to allow for conflict and trade with each other, as well as with non-tribals.
> Allow for nomads and other tribes to exist, but make the process to join these established and supported clans much easier.

While still being written, part 2 of 4 will address the same issue of the diluted player base with respect to the Great Merchant Houses and how changes in its administration could improve interaction, RP and fun on multiple levels.

-LoD

[Larrath]

World Interaction – 1 of 4 (Tribes)

While still being written, part 2 of 4 will address the same issue of the diluted player base with respect to the Great Merchant Houses and how changes in its administration could improve interaction, RP and fun on multiple levels.

I just got an sjanimal flashback.  Teehee.

I agree, though.  I believe that a tribe needs a lot of people in order to be interesting.  Less is more.

[Olgaris]

LoD if you spent half as much time trying to recruit players as you do formulating opinions about what is wrong with the game world, your problem would be solved.

Not to say you don't have some good points in there, but... sheesh.

[LoD]

LoD if you spent half as much time trying to recruit players as you do formulating opinions about what is wrong with the game world, your problem would be solved.

Not to say you don't have some good points in there, but... sheesh.

I'll give that ole recruitment thing a try, because I agree -- if we had 150-200 players online each night, this would be a moot point.  But we don't.  So it's not.  :wink:

-LoD

[bloodfromstone]

Pro tip: Don't introduce recruited players to the board until they're already addicted.

[Forest Junkie]

The player base has become diluted by too many tribal clans.

This statement is simply untrue and incredibly one-sided.

Years ago, there were (2) main tribes for players; the Blackwing (elves) and the Tan Muark (human).

Having only two tribes can become stale after a time. People want to try new things, new concepts. The Blackwing and Tan Muark both have specific mindsets that do not allow for as much free will in designing a concept for a pc as other tribes might. The concept if duality: ie Blackwing vs Tan Muark is stable, yet I'd personally hate only being allowed to play in Blackwing as a tribal elf, or the Tan Muark as a human.

Both of these clans were well documented and developed through many generations of characters.

So are the other player run clans/tribes and new staff sponsored tribes in the game. Be fair.

This allowed each clan to develop without the direct need for interaction, even though geography.

I thought you -wanted- more interaction? If there are only two tribes living "a world apart from each other", where's the clash? Where's the pc to pc interaction? The random "hi and bye" on the road is not what I would consider interaction.

With two distinct, well documented and purposeful clans in the game comes a great vehicle for plot generation and plot involvement at many levels

I played in one d.elf tribe before (Not Blackwing) who played a MAJOR role in an HRPT, helping drive the plots that led up to that event and after. Perhaps there are things going on behind the scenes you are not aware of.

I don't understand what's wrong about your meetings with tribal elves being "varied". Why is this bad? I find it rather neat to have several different tribes in game. This allows different, unique cultures to clash, and thereby creates tons of plots due to pvp interaction, either through trade or disagreements in their beliefs.

My response won't change your opinion; I'm sure of that. How about trying out one of those player run tribes or, perhaps, even one of the newer staff sponsored tribes/clans. Maybe then you can form a well balanced opinion, because at this point it seems as if you are taking an approach that is far too conservative in wanting to go back to the original "status quo". Think about the other countless players who actually enjoy the varied relations between numberous tribes. Maybe they don't want things to go back to the way they once were.

[spawnloser]

Personally...I would prefer NOT reducing it to one human and one elven tribal community.  I would prefer at least two of each, one pro-magick and one anti-magick.

[amoeba]

It feels now as if there have been so many tribes introduced into the game through the documentation (some player formed, others created by the Imm Staff), that meeting them is a lackluster and varied thing.

I would have to respectfully disagree.  I've been in the tribes when it was knee deep in delves and played when I was the only one around for days on end.  These things ebb and flow.  But through all of this the number of tribes has never bothered me.  In fact I enjoyed the different flavor of the tribes.  Often much of the strife and backstabbing was intertribal.  I think the documented tribes have a very rich background.  I would hate to see that lost for the dubious return of stuffing everyone onto one tribe.

When desert elves work best is when there are long lived characters that help to keep the traditions alive and direct the newcomers.  As with any other aspect of the game it is really about leadership and opportunity.

[Jherlen]

If it meant more interaction for the larger portion of the playerbase and more players around in the cities to get newbies involved and make them stick around, I would be all for reducing or eliminating the number of tribals.

[Angela Christine]

If it meant more interaction for the larger portion of the playerbase and more players around in the cities to get newbies involved and make them stick around, I would be all for reducing or eliminating the number of tribals.

The problem is that removing one type of role doesn't mean that those players will move to the new type of role you were hoping for.  Suppose that I love playing . . . say, half-giant sorcerers.  And a group says, "hey, there are too many half-giant sorcerers, and they don't interact much with the rest of the playerbase, lets get rid of them."  So half-giant sorcerers are eliminated.  So do all the players that enjoyed HG sorcerers go and become merchants and warriors, go and get city jobs and impress the newbies?  Some of them will, some of them may get angry and quit playing for a while, or go find another RP mud where half-giant sorcerer-type characters are available.

If you knock 20 players out of the kind of tribal roleplay they enjoy, maybe only 10 of them will switch over to city characters.  Is the game better to have 10 more city characters but 10 fewer characters overall?  I just don't know.




As for the proliferation of tribes, I'm not sure that was ever a goal, it is just a natural consequence of allowing tribal characters to not be in an established clan.  In other words, play a tribal character without a special application.  As soon as you can be an independent tribal with a virtual tribe, you get a proliferation of tribes.  Then, if the tribe is "successful", lasts a while and interacts with other people, more players want to join your virtual tribe.  The coded tribal encampments really just provide minimum support to semi-in dependant tribal characters.  

When I started playing I was interested in the Tan Muark, but the special or sponsored application process was daunting.  "Sponsored application," how do I get a sponsor?  I've had one special application and one or two sponsored roles, but honestly the process still seems too daunting to bother with.  So I've played tribal characters, but never played in the Tan Muark.

[bloodfromstone]

Down with tribals!

[Matrim]

I think LoD's main point is that we just don't have a large enough player base to run the dozens of tribes out there properly.  I'm sure they are all well thought out, rich in history, and serve their own purpose uniquely from one another, but for all of them to be successfully run, it would require a large portion of the game's player base.  I would love to see more playable clans, a larger world, and more centers of civilization, but unfortunately we lack the PC population needed to make that work.

I think there is definitely room for more than just two tribes out there(Blackwing/Tan Muark), but I think it should be regulated so that the Big Two have an active playerbase first, as with the other clans in Zalanthas that make the world we know the way it is.  Most application roles are already regulated in this way for the exact same reason--so that the percentage of PCs in those role reflect the ratio of their actual numbers in the world's overall population.  

I'm not saying I don't want to see change or new playable clans, hell, if somebody can take down those damn Blackwing i'll be thrilled, but I think the feel of the world is affected when a tribe of 30 elves have five active PCs playing in it while the Blackwing have none.  The imms have closed down many cool clans because they have felt the playerbase is spreading too thin.  I'm not saying any more clans should be closed down, but I think the numbers should be looked at when a player applies to play in one of the newly created clans.  I'm all for the emergence of new clans, especially PC created ones, but not at the expense of neglecting established clans just because we as players are bored and want to see new things.

Obviously the activity rates of all clans vary over time and go through highs and lows, but it seems like for some time now i've been seeing people from tribes i've never even heard of before, let alone am able to pronounce, having far more activity than the two tribes that (as far as I know) have the largest populations.

Now having said all that, I must admit I have very little experience playing tribals.  Maybe the Tan Muark and Blackwing are buzzing with activity, but just never get out much, and the player ratios are all good.  
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Okay, I just came back from the bathroom and realized how long this post is getting, and the worst part is I can't even remember what my point is, so I apologize but there will be no fancy conclusion to my post.  It's late, and i'm going to bed.  g'night!  

[Hot_Dancer]

Oohh.. I don't have a lot of time to comment but..

I do enjoy the the mix of tribes available, it appears at best you'll only have one or two doing well per period with a scant few greetings from a few solo runners making their attempts at bringing another of the supported tribes to speed. Which typically makes for some political throw away play among the tribes when they come into contact with eachother, but it atleast offers inter-tribal interaction to bring some interest to slower times in isolation. The tribe to tribe interaction with such a number of groups really helps give things more variety. I know I will always prefer roleplay with another local tribe over the encounters with outsiders.

Players -are- interested in having opportunities to play tribals, I know our group has been getting pretty surprising increases in size over the last couple of weeks to where we're consistantly having 3-4 elves on an evening. I mostly credit it to people hearing of the tribe's activity in game and jumping on the opportunity should they be shown the mantis head. With every clan in game you have to monitor how active they are at the time..and the flux within the tribes gives players a chance to sporadicly pump them into action. Even when the Blackwing were open (though I wasn't around for their glory days) it was a rare opportunity to join a desert elf tribe when it wasn't at idle.

Culture doesn't grow on trees though.. and even though the Blackwing were glorious: I doubt there's many active players of that era to revive that culture should it be brought back. A revival would probably just display them on the same level of crudeness among the tribes currently in game. A couple of the new tribes are going to become (hopefully) dominant in the years to come.. and see the most advancement in their culture and documentation. Then maybe you'll see another Blackwing-Tan Muark age.

Hot_Dancer

[Maybe42or54]

I have a limited view on Tribes, but they look to be set up a lot like the noble house clans with out many of the bonuses the noble clans gets.

You get more politics that make sense.
You have the grittiness of trying to keep your tribe fed.
You have goals you can work to.
Things you do affect the tribe.

On the other hand, you don't get free water, free food, free coins, you have to earn everything by hunting or trading.
If you piss off another tribe, your tribe might kill you to stop a war and save a lot of the tribes.

Besides, there are too many noble houses that need the same exact Pc.

[Morfeus]

I see a huge difference between tribes and Noble Houses. Even bigger difference that between Noble and Merchant Houses.

[Maybe42or54]

Besides the bankroll? They are very different, but alike in a lot of ways, which makes both fun.

[Boggis]

The player base has become diluted by too many tribal clans.[/b]

I'd say that the playerbase has become too diluted since the rise of Tuluk. I'm not bashing Tuluk. I like the place when I've played there but I remember the level of daily politicking and tension back in Allanak four years ago and I think this has been adversely affected by spreading the players out amongst the houses north and south - something which you're going to cover in a future post I think so I won't derail further.

Getting back to the tribal situation I'd guess that more or less the same proportion of the playerbase have always played tribals and the like. Thats what they enjoy to play in Arm just like I mainly play city-based characters. I remember seeing some numbers posted by the Imms a while back and the numbers playing tribals were not large compared to those playing in the two main cities so I'm not sure that consolidating the tribes would really affect the dilution of the playerbase.

I do agree with you though about how the quality of the tribal experience could be improved by limiting the number of tribal clans available in order to get more meaningful interactions with your clanmates, deeper inter-tribal RP, better interaction with worldwide plots, etc.

[LoD]

Thanks to those with the constructive posts.

Just a few points of clairification:

:arrow: Tribes don't need to be Blackwing and Tan Muark.[/i]

I simply mentioned that I think the game would benefit more from a 2 main tribal clans (one elf, one human) and there are other candidates.  I merely referenced these two older clans because they were both in a position that I am describing at one time and, thus, would be good candidates for it again.  I really wouldn't mind it being two different, but equally well developed and fleshed out clans.

:arrow: I'm not asking to limit player options, but encourage one over the other.[/i]

Some people have responded in a defensive manner, as if I am asking to strip away their rights to choose other tribal characters, and that's not the point.  I would like to see more people encouraged to join one of two (or perhaps 3-4 if there are enough players to serve) tribal clans to allow for both a deeper environment for the tribal PC's as well as a consistency that allows them to be a near constant source of interaction for the rest of the gameworld.

There were tons of small groups of players in pick-up tribes over the years when the Blackwing and Tan Muark were the largest, but they didn't have nearly the resources (Imm-wise or code-wise) that these two clans had, and so people naturally gravitated toward the ones that made life a bit easier to play day-to-day.

:arrow: Tribes should have some presence that travels often.[/i]

In the purest form of the game, it'd be perfectly acceptable to have many groups of people you would never see from what we call "civilization", however, this is a game that benefits much from interaction.  When the gypsies were first introduced to the game, I loved the concept because they were constantly travelling, interacting with all of the major population centers of the world and getting into the thick of things.  I've always been disappointed to see that aspect of their culture dwindle to hardly anything over the years and feel that something like it would be well received.

Desert elves may not enter the two major city-states as a group, but it'd be nice if a culture would have some section or group devoted to stealing..er...trading from the people there.  This allows characters to see that tribe, learn of it and then perhaps meet more of them when they travel outside of the city.  When it's almost always from the same clan, then you can begin to work them into your plots and gameplay because you know they are going to be a consistent presence, not a group of 3-4 players who are here "until the PC leader dies" and then disappears again for another few months before another group of players joins up.

Matrim has hit most of the main points I am tryng to get across, which is that the tribal clans available now are great, but we really just don't have the player base to support 4+ tribal clans and have all of them operate on a level of sophistication, depth and consistency that could be achieved by encouraging more people into joining 2-3 of the more unique ones.  I've enjoyed some interactions I've had with the Soh and wouldn't mind seeing them as one of these 2-3.  I can't say, however, that I've met a whole lot of Benjarri, Arabet, Seik, Silt Winds, Sunrunners, Leaping Sands, Akei Ta Var, Anyali or Jul Tavan that manage a consistent presence or convey a feel of why their tribe is different than the others.

It isn't that the tribes don't have unique qualities, rich histories or quality RP, it just doesn't have enough of a consistent presence to convey them t the degree they could if we were to shift the focus of play from many small clans to a few large ones.

-LoD

[Obsidian Lord]

I agree.  The playerbase is too spread out.  I've always thought we have had too many tribal groups and one to many cities (Tuluk).

A friend of mine was looking over the game and said "Why should I join, the last time I played I sat in a tavern for several hours and there was no one to RP with."

Our player base is low, this we know.  Sparse population in the sands is great, it does give that feeling of desolation, but in the cities and tribes there should be a larger number of players to interact with and breath life into the groups, factions and political processes.

Closing a majority of the tribes and leaving one well-defined elven tribe and one well defined human tribal (not gypsy, please) would create the energy that would create the culture that would create the conflict and history.

Addi tonally, closing an entire city (I should pray more, perhaps) would move all of the stress and tension of political and social maneuvering to one locale - it would be an adrenaline rush from the moment one logs in.

The current layout would be great for a base of 100 or so players, but we don't have that.  We have low to mid fifties on good nights.  I think we can only improve the game by restricting access to various clans.

All that being said, I would not restrict membership in the merchant houses at all - their styles are so diverse and the IG need to work with them (trade, employment, whatever) is so very important that these should be left as they are (just all their staff moved south).

[Rindan]

I play very few tribal characters personally, so I won't comment on the quality issue.  What does bother me a little is that we have a pile of imm supported tribes out in the isolated wastes that elves can just point to and become apart of.  On the other hand, there are no open city elf tribes with imm support that anyone can point to and join.  Certainly there are city elf tribes, but they are all either secret or closed.  

While letting people play in the wasteland is fine and all, I think that imm attention and focus should also be given to the major centers of civilization.  At the very least, I would like for there to be an open city elf tribe that doesn't require special application above and beyond what is required for desert elves.  Hell, make it karma 1 for all I care, just give the city elves a little support.

[Maybe42or54]

By moving all the nobles houses and merchant house pcs south, you are really hurting the people behind the Pcs. Bards in the south Aren't very supported.

Not counting the 'rinth.

There are 3 Noble (with templars included) clans, 1 mercenary ran clan, and 2 merchant houses in the south that want fighting PCs.
Redundancy kills.

For aides (including merchants), there are 4 Noble clans, 1 bastard noble-led clan, and 2 merchant houses.

Last I heard, those 4 noble houses require life service.

The problem isn't that there are too many tribal clans, it is that there isn't enough diversity within the cities with too many choices.

2 bars in allanak that commoners can frequent.
8 choices as to where they work.


As it looks "Tuluk attacks" is going to be a common saying pretty soon in the south. So closing Tuluk's nobility and houses could be very bad. Especially since they are getting a new templar.

[amoeba]

I agree.  The playerbase is too spread out.  I've always thought we have had too many tribal groups and one to many cities (Tuluk).

Same argument, different day. I call this the "field of dreams" effect.  Close it and they will come.  It is a niave approach and in truth can have a detrimental effect on the game population as a whole.  If it came to a point where there was one city state, one human tribe, and one desert elf tribe, I seriously doubt I would log in much. I doubt I am alone in this.  I look for different experiences when I play characters, one thing I enjoy about the desert elves is the variety of beliefs and traditions amoungst the differing tribes. If my choice was limited to one or two tribes, my experience would be diminished.

Our player base is low, this we know.  Sparse population in the sands is great, it does give that feeling of desolation, but in the cities and tribes there should be a larger number of players to interact with and breath life into the groups, factions and political processes.

Closing a majority of the tribes and leaving one well-defined elven tribe and one well defined human tribal (not gypsy, please) would create the energy that would create the culture that would create the conflict and history.

You folks are still ignoring one aspect of tribal life, that is intertribal conflict.  This is a large aspect of tribal life, not elves verses the cities.  Reducing the number of tribes to one or two, virtually eliminates this.  

In terms of numbers, I have seen large groups with nada to do for many people as a select clique cherry picks interesting plot lines.  I have also seen very small groups have a very rich and varied set of RP.   It's the quality of the players involved, not the quanity. Tribal/merchant/noble/city consolidation is not a panacea to the problems at hand.

One thing I will say is that there needs to be a sense of continuity in each of the tribes.  Roleplay and plots are driven off a collective experience.  For the tribal to get the full experience they need at least some interaction and direction from thier elders.  I have no problem if the elders are IMM driven, in some ways this is preferable as it keeps a continuity to the smaller groups.  I see too many delves running around without a good feeling for how they should act within the expectations of the tribe.  In this area more work needs to be done IMHO.   I do not however buy the arguement that less is more.

[Obsidian Lord]

You folks are still ignoring one aspect of tribal life, that is intertribal conflict.  This is a large aspect of tribal life, not elves verses the cities.  Reducing the number of tribes to one or two, virtually eliminates this.  

While by and large your post makes good points, it seems to hinge on this tribal conflict idea.

I ask you - what kind of conflict can you have if each tribe is made up of one or two players?

[Maybe42or54]

Trade. Confusion. Suspicion.

Now, I ask you- What kind of RP can you get from forcing more people into jobs that mainly consist of sparring and tavern sitting?

There is a lot.

[amoeba]

I ask you - what kind of conflict can you have if each tribe is made up of one or two players?

Been there done that quite well. It is too IC to go into details, but even a one two player tribe with the right mix can make for a very interesting experience.

[X-D]

Trying to pack people all together even more? Bad idea I think. Myself, when I join a clan, I'm happy if there is 4-6 active players.

When I join a clan that has more (6-14) It simply gets to be too much.

Same for cities, if I'm playing in nak and I walk into the gaj and see 4-8 pc's then walk to the barrel and see the same numbers, if possible my char will probly try and find an IC reason to move to redstorm or something till the pc numbers in that city subside somewhat.

This is purely a playability issue for me, 5-15 pc's routinely in the same area makes for a rather insane amount of spam on the screen and actually takes me out of the scene, I'm no longer able to immerse myself into my char or the scene. 50 pc's in nak, at peak, don't be silly.

Last I heard, those 4 noble houses require life service.

The problem isn't that there are too many tribal clans, it is that there isn't enough diversity within the cities with too many choices.

I agree as to that being the major problems.

And lets go farther on the life service issue since I really think it has simply gotten out of hand.

First, all tribal clans can be considered life service clans, So, thats at least four I can think of right there.

Now, legions, militia, two more.

All the noble houses, thats another five.

One of the three merchant houses pushes it, and the other two will accept them.

The Byn being the only clan that to my knowledge does not.

So, thats basicly 15 clans, 11 of which require life service, well 12 really since one requires it to get anywhere at all in the clan.

Want more people in clans, reduce the number that require life oath, personally I think it should only be the noble houses, and even then, only certain ones and or certain positions.

I've actually found that life oath causes more silly and basicly OOC problems then it is worth, normaly causing PC suicides/desertions etc. In general dispersing the pc pop either by death or simply making the players make indy chars.

[Maybe42or54]

Noble houses should take life oaths depending on the job.
And Elven tribes need life oaths since they are born into it.

[Morfeus]

All the noble houses, thats another five.

Without going into details, you are wrong in this point.

[mattrious]

This discussion confuses me, the issue at hand was that there are too many tribal clans and not enough PC's to fill them. Spreading the interaction to thin - at least that's the way I interpreted the first post.

I think it's honestly hit and miss - some players move through different roles. Playing a cit type PC and then moving out to playing in a Tribe the next. While others just stick with one or the other. Last night during prime time I saw something like 70+ players on. I am sure a large majority of that was tribals. Why fix something that is not broken? You're in a tribe with no current PC's? Fix it. Make a post, it's that simple. You'll have people looking to play with you in no time, I can promise you that. If you don't feel like doing the leg work to get it up and going  - I am sure I can recommend a great tribe for you to come and play in.  :wink:

As Hot_Dancer also said it's alot of in-game people seeing that a Tribe is active with members - and then when they do hear the infamous *beep*. Think hey, "That might be an interesting group to play with. Let's give it a shot."

Instead of trying to get clans closed down - why not just try to fix your current situation and get more PC's to play with you?

- Matt.

[X-D]

X-D wrote:
All the noble houses, thats another five.


Without going into details, you are wrong in this point.

Stand corrected on that, after posting I remembered at least one that does not "require" the life oath, though, like one merchant house, it is required to advance.

[LoD]

Been there done that quite well. It is too IC to go into details, but even a one two player tribe with the right mix can make for a very interesting experience.

The arguement is not whether quality play exists amidst several tribal clans with 1-3 players, but whether the MUD would be better served by having 2-3 clans with 5-7 active players consistently, than 4+ random tribes with 1-3 active players rotating between a large pool of 8.  (might be Benjarri for 2 months, then they die and make some Seik)

With a 1-2 player tribe, you almost have to seek inter tribal conflict to have any conflict at all, because you don't have anyone else to get that RP from save your partner, and how exciting can that be day in and day out?  With a larger clan of 5-7+ you begin to have a lot of inner tribal conflict that doesn't require as much conflict from other 1-2 player tribes.

As for intertribal conflict, this will still exist.  Simply because players are encouraged to play in one of 2-3 tribal clans doesn't mean they still cannot create and play out smaller ones.  My contention is that the benefits to having 2-3 tribes with a consistent player base of about 5-7 players would do more for the game than having a pool of 8 tribes which player groups of 1-3 pop up now and again.

-LoD

PS - There are other threads coming, and this one is primarily for tribal discussions.  Noble House discussions will probably be more pertinent to one of the other threads.

[X-D]

(moved from other post, LoD posted too damm fast)

Oh, and I happen to somewhat agree on LoD's post, I do think there are simply too many open tribal options, both coded and uncoded. But I really think that playing a Desert elf who is -not- in a coded clan should be a special app. I think that the play of what basicly amounts to indy tribals should be restricted.

[Cuusardo]

It seems some tribes get left high and dry, with times when there is one active PC in the clan.  I'm guessing that this comes and goes, just like with other things in the game.  (Lots of half elven PCs around, or virtually none, for example.)  I could see temporarily shutting down a tribe for a while if it has consistently very low players on average, and reopening it if more people started showing an interest again.  

And as some of you recall, there was indeed one tribe that was closed to players.  Did that really make that big an impact on where the playerbase is located?  It didn't seem to.  I can't say whether this is a permanent thing or n ot, because I don't know.  But, I know that I do miss interacting with PCs from that tribe.  It made for some really fun and interesting times.  I'd miss interaction with any tribe that was suddenly closed.

As far as Tuluk goes, yes, it would make a huge difference in where the playerbase would be.  However, a LOT of roleplay opportunities and plots would be lost.  I for one have always enjoyed the struggle between Tuluk and Allanak.

[Forest Junkie]

With a 1-2 player tribe, you almost have to seek inter tribal conflict to have any conflict at all, because you don't have anyone else to get that RP from save your partner

Wrong. I created a d.elf tribe around a year and a half to two years ago, nearly. In that time many people played in it. Starting out, though, I was the only elf. I created and helped drive several plots, both in the desert and out. When I had another tribemember join me, we hit it off and really fleshed out our documentation. We even went to war with a group of elves who were harassing people. All of this conflict, and there were only two players in my tribe.

Same instance, different story: While playing in a staff supported tribe myself and another member were thrown into a series of insane world changing plots. Again, I repeat: there were only two of us. I had some of the most fun I've ever had on ArmageddonMUD. I never sought any conflict. It came to me.

how exciting can that be day in and day out?

I enjoy this over socializing and tavern hopping. I prefer the sands to the city any day friend. It's exciting to me.

With a larger clan of 5-7+ you begin to have a lot of inner tribal conflict that doesn't require as much conflict from other 1-2 player tribes.

A tribe like Soh Lanah Kah or any of the smaller tribes does not -need- 5-7 players to have inner tribal conflict. If there were that many players in the tribe, or in any tribe, their numbers would not be properly reflecting the true population of the pbase, and in turn would destabilize the world. That's just silly to see only 10 players in the world, with 5 of them being from your tribe. It's that simple. Having too many people in a tribe will not properly reflect their true population to the playerbase. That is unfair to others who live in or around the cities.

You simply can't throw numbers around when discussing tribes. Most don't have a population over one hundred. As I have stated already, having more than 4 active players in a tribe is really too much. You cannot properly display their vnpc population if their pc population is suggesting the tribe is procreating like rabbits.

We'll just have to disagree on this issue. Consolidation is not the key. It worked in the past, but the game has evolved too much in the sense that consolidating the player base will only hurt conflict, and might even cause some players to leave.

[amoeba]

With a 1-2 player tribe, you almost have to seek inter tribal conflict to have any conflict at all, because you don't have anyone else to get that RP from save your partner, and how exciting can that be day in and day out?  With a larger clan of 5-7+ you begin to have a lot of inner tribal conflict that doesn't require as much conflict from other 1-2 player tribes.

All fine and good, but it does not negate my former argument.  Besides, conflict is conflict, be it inter tribal, inner tribal, or tribal vs. outside world.  Inner clan conflict is not inherantly superiour to other types of conflict.

As for intertribal conflict, this will still exist.  Simply because players are encouraged to play in one of 2-3 tribal clans doesn't mean they still cannot create and play out smaller ones.  My contention is that the benefits to having 2-3 tribes with a consistent player base of about 5-7 players would do more for the game than having a pool of 8 tribes which player groups of 1-3 pop up now and again.

Your proposed numbers keep flutuating.  Much of what you are stating here does not make a lot of sense.  One, I think delves should be in an established tribe.  When players start randomly creating thier own little virtual tribes, they lose that sense of continuity and history.  This dillutes the game, and even your base premise.  I remember a time before Bhag clamped down where 4 out of 5 delves were not in an established tribe.  It was chaotic as each one came up with thier own set of tribal rules, 90% of were along the lines of "we raid the piss out of everyone".   Now I'm not saying 8 tribes are essential to function, but 1-2 tribes squeezes options way too tight.  It sees to me with this dissusion  that you are far more interested in creating  inner tribal conflict than anything else.

[LoD]

We'll just have to disagree on this issue. Consolidation is not the key. It worked in the past, but the game has evolved too much in the sense that consolidating the player base will only hurt conflict, and might even cause some players to leave.

You seem to be particularly defensive about your singular clan experience.  I'm not trying to take it away from you.  Small tribal clans will always be possible, all you need are willing players and an approved background.  None of these changes would effect you.

But I will disagree with your notion of the game, because my opinion is that the levels of consistent interaction between tribal-city, city-city and north-south have all devloved.  It's worse, not better.  My suggestion isn't to make your small clan obselete, but to make a select few tribal clans more consistent entities in the gameworld.  This is to improve their ability to interact over the course of many RL years with the rest of the gameworld rather than in spurts when 1-3 -players decide to go ahead and flesh it out for the time being.

-LoD

[Vesperas]

While I havn't actually played a tribal, I think the MUD would be better off served with fewer tribes than it is now.  We simply don't have the playerbase, and personally, I'll never RP a tribal until I hear of an active tribe.  I don't like being on my lonesome.

[X-D]

You simply can't throw numbers around when discussing tribes. Most don't have a population over one hundred

But yet you are throwing numbers out FJ:)

And which ones? Last coded (d-elf) tribe I played in, docs stated several hundreds and the camp room descs backed that up.
And even the human tribes are showing a few hundred to several hundred per camp.

[marko]

My own view about the tribes:  There are too many.

I'd love to see a couple of them destroyed the same way as some of them were created - ie, through player actions and interactions.

I think it's a little extreme to reduce the number to two - but I would like to see a more dynamic existence out in the wilds.  Too many of these tribes have become permanent no matter what the tribe members actually do.

[amoeba]

I'd love to see a couple of them destroyed the same way as some of them were created - ie, through player actions and interactions.

Now that is a damned good idea.

[Jherlen]

I agree with marko. The next time a couple raider-happy d-elves try to attack a group of Kuraci or Salarri or Borsail or whoever, I would love to see their entire tribe get crushed and slaughtered or enslaved and wiped off the game.

Fewer tribes would mean the remaining tribes would be bigger and have more of a noticable presence. Two might be too few, but I think the number we have now is too many. I'd really like to see tribals having more meaningful interaction (read: besides raiding everything) with the rest of the game instead leading a mostly isolated existance out by themselves.

[Forest Junkie]

But yet you are throwing numbers out FJ:)

And which ones? Last coded (d-elf) tribe I played in, docs stated several hundreds and the camp room descs backed that up.
And even the human tribes are showing a few hundred to several hundred per camp.

I gave those numbers to prove my point. Shoot me in the back why don'tcha!  :wink:

SLK have around a couple hunred I believe.
ATV have around a few hundred.
Most player created tribes have a hundred or fewer.

I'd love to see a couple of them destroyed the same way as some of them were created - ie, through player actions and interactions.

I see nothing wrong with that.

[X-D]

marko wrote:
I'd love to see a couple of them destroyed the same way as some of them were created - ie, through player actions and interactions.


I see nothing wrong with that

Me either

[Intrepid]

There is a point about possible consolidation.  Quite a few tribal roles can
be utilized as resources for independent players who want an in-game
source for their pcs, and this works reasonably well.  However, the tribes
least appropriate to remain are the ones mentioned: Blackwing and Tan
Muark.

I won't go into detail about the level of RP in these clans--suffice to say, I
never understood why some of the players felt they were so...legendary,
I guess is the word.  I never felt they were any better or worse than the
great roleplay that was going on elsewhere in the game.

The most important aspect to keep in mind is the fact that these are iso
clans, despite their occasional forays into the rest of the world.  They
could be on a whole different server and no one would notice they were
gone other than a drop in the total player count.

Consolidation can sometimes be necessary...but it should be done
carefully, as you are altering the ic face of the gameworld with an ooc
hand--it has to be done as an improvement.

[LoD]

The most important aspect to keep in mind is the fact that these are iso clans, despite their occasional forays into the rest of the world.  They could be on a whole different server and no one would notice they were gone other than a drop in the total player count.

The Blackwing weren't isolated as much as they were "not in a city".  Their village was approachable, the lands were hunted by non-tribals, the area was travelled semi-frequently by hunters, merchants in wagons, etc...  The presence they held in the Tablelands created a good amount tension, conflict and opportunities for trade because you could bet on the fact that if you were there long enough, you'd get some interaction.

The Tan Muark I'm referring to were not isolated at all.  In fact, they were somewhat dependant upon the goodwill of formed civilizations for their day-to-day safety.  They travelled around the world in a wagon, with all of their members and peoples included.  Now perhaps they did have a camp that far back, but the bulk of their PC's were almost always in a city or village somewhere, performing, selling, swindling, smoking, drinking and otherwise having a good time interacting with everybody and anybody.

If you think that either of these two clans (from this time I describe) could disappear and no one would notice, then I'm sure you we're thinking of the same game.

My point is that when these two clans were operating in-game, there was a lot more consistent tribal interaction than there is today in either city or general travel between them.  These two clans may not be prime candidates now (and I agree), but what they were able to provided to the gameworld in interaction, dependability and consistency was important.

I do like Marko's idea of wiping out some of the exta tribes ICly, but I'd be interested to see how that happens with random tribes of 1-3 people serving as the main participants.

-LoD

[Intrepid]

In all the time I played in the game, I never saw Tan Muark interaction
until after the consolidation.  If they were around as undercover and
secret pcs, then that's not really much of an improvement.

Blackwing, on the other hand, has had a policy of restricting pcs in the
past from wandering and roaming outside their territory.

Without getting into too much detail, the Blackwing interaction you
described was primarily with npcs.  Most of us found, to our chagrin, that
pcs were treated differently when encountered--in some cases, the
situations became ridiculous.

Blackwing and Tan Muark have their own territories and compete with
no one for those territories.  Getting into these places from outside often
requires defeating nearly impossible odds or traversing particularly nasty
terrain.  As a consequence, they are disconnected from the game.  In a
clan where you can spend the vast majority of your time in game never
meeting an out-of-clan pc, you are in fact in an iso clan.

I believe that the Arabet and the Seik in particular offer far more to the
gameworld and a sense of economy and ecosystem than the Tan Muark
and the Blackwing.  The desert elf tribes are ATV and SLK, which should
be just fine for the moment.  Four clans should be more than enough to
represent the tribal pcs on Arm, in my opinion.

[Hot_Dancer]

After, rereading LoD's post: Too many tribes is a viable concern, especially when it appears the staff has trouble keeping up with all of them. I wouldn't bother myself overtly over it though, these things have ways of working themselves out in game.

For a while desert elves basicly had the 'Independent' tag on them. Blackwing were closed and there were very few, if any good tribes to join. A few decent tribes started showing up, and they're still fairly young by Armageddon timelines of play. I think that eventually, a small number (2-3) of these tribes will naturally rise to the top and those hoping to represent the lesser tribes will be of such a small number that it'll be difficult to accuse them of anything past stealing your kank.

I don't have any opinions as to the humans.. and if I was told to predict the future: The Sun Runners and the Soh Lanah Kah will become the two most active, contributive and consistantly player represented desert elf tribes in the future. I think they offer the most diverse, Armageddon loyal types of elf play available between them.

Hot_Dancer

[mansa]

I value the desert elf tribes more than the human tribes.
Just a minor point.

[Delirium]

I don't have any opinions as to the humans.. and if I was told to predict the future: The Sun Runners and the Soh Lanah Kah will become the two most active, contributive and consistantly player represented desert elf tribes in the future. I think they offer the most diverse, Armageddon loyal types of elf play available between them.

I have to agree.  They are also in the same general location, which provides better opportunities for roleplay than, say, between the Silt Wind and the Akei'Ta Var.  Still - the other tribes provide for different experiences that the Sun Runners or the Soh Lanah Kah may not be able to offer.  

It is difficult to rule one out in favor of the other - I would use "do they have reasons to interact with the playerbase" as a very heavy considering factor.  Yes, they are tribals, but yes, you are still playing a game where we are writing a cooperating story; you can write a brilliant chapter all by yourself, but what's the fun of it, if no one else gets to read it or add to it?

As for human tribes, I think the Al'Seik and the Tan Muark have shown the most consistant activity during the time I've been able to observe them.  I would hate to see the Jul Tavan, Anyali, or Arabet be abolished, because they have a colorful history and culture that took some sweat and blood to flesh out.  At the very minimum, four tribal human tribes would be ideal - the Tan Muark, the Al'Seik, the Jul Tavan, and the Arabet.  They all have plenty of reasons to interact with the gameworld's populace.  

The Anyali's customs keep them too separate from the cities, and the Benjari are not coded, and they are very inclusive, so it's unlikely they ever will be represented by more than a rare PC - which lines up with how often they should be seen by the gameworld.

[jhunter]

MMm...I'd like to see some of the elf and human tribal options limited. Then, I'd like to see halfling and gith opened up for play.

[Intrepid]

the Benjari are not coded, and they are very inclusive, so it's unlikely they ever will be represented by more than a rare PC - which lines up with how often they should be seen by the gameworld.

As a particular note on the Benjari: The tribe appears to be dying out, if
you read into the docs a bit.

[ale six]

Reading over this one, I just wanted to make the comment that possibly aside from the absence of the Tan Muark, if all the coded tribes were removed from the game tomorrow I would never have known the difference.

I honestly could not tell you what the difference is between an Arabet and a Seik and a Benjari and a Jul Tavan. I've seen so few PCs played out as parts of these tribes that to me they are all blurred together. Desert elf tribes are even worse -- I have no clue what an SLK or ATV or whatever else is. It's all "WTF" to me.

In this sense I'm not sure why the tribals are around, if they're having so little interaction with the rest of the game outside other small tribes and their own isospheres. It seems like a lot of people enjoy playing tribes and playing desert elves, and maybe I'll try it some day too. I would just like to plead that if you are playing a tribal, find more reasons to interact and make yourself and your tribe known to the rest of the game. I would be in favor of any changes to support that, even if we had to close a few.

[EvilRoeSlade]

Reading over this one, I just wanted to make the comment that possibly aside from the absence of the Tan Muark, if all the coded tribes were removed from the game tomorrow I would never have known the difference.

Same here.

[Intrepid]

Good question.  The tribes exist because either they are/were a pc
clan or they were put into an area to represent an option for pc's wanting
to play from a tribal culture.  They don't have to be abolished in any effort
to consolidate the playerbase; they just need to be limited as a player
option.

As it stands, those human tribes that do have coded support travel around
the Known World, so they do provide links of interaction between the
various settlements and bring everything together.

The desert elf tribes have become necessary because you can't make a
desert elf (correct me if I'm wrong here) who is tribeless without a very
good reason to and approval from the imms.  As there are only two
"whole" tribes being supported, with possible pcs from four others, the
choices are limited enough.  The clan structure is less necessary for
humans and city elves.

I do recommend trying a tribal pc with some friends if you get the chance.
I had a blast myself.  And for human tribals, interaction with the rest of
the race is a good thing.  With elves, it would be nice to see those tribes
amassing together somehow too.

[Angela Christine]

Some players like to play something different than other roles they have played recently.  If you happened to have recently had major roles in both cities, you might want to keep playing but want to play in a completely different area.  That's got to be worth something.



Angela Christine

[Seeker]

I'm completely with Forest Junkie on this, LoD.

I don't agree with your premise that the current options for tribal PCs somehow damages the rest of the gameworld.  I think it is -better- than it used to be, when we instead had "tribes of one" or every other tribal player being a nomadic cast-off of some type.

I think the well-detailed, interesting, staff-approved tribal options offer the game far more depth and richness than anything you claim they take away.  We strongly disagree on the need to hobble player options and on the value of mandating a narrower world for our character's stories.


Seeker

[Cale_Knight]

I have no clue what an SLK or ATV or whatever else is. It's all "WTF" to me.

That's actually a clan of tribal half-giants.

[Sanvean]

As far as the tribes go, many of them were put in because people were already using them as backgrounds and we wanted to provide some support for that.  For example, the human nomads as well as a number of desert elf tribes.  My feeling is that closing these down will not change people's desires to play them, nor do I want the headache involved of trying to force people to play only in standardized clans.  One of the joys of Armageddon is the wide range of roles.

In creating the DE tribes at least, we tried to make them distinctive: one with a reverance for magick, another with an emphasis on comabt and raiding, and another with an existence centered around swindling and stealing.  Even with them available, though, we still see a number of people wanting to create their own clans, although that desire may range from a simple line in the background to a few friends playing out a common tribe together to wanting to create a coded tribe.

One thing people might want to consider is that tribes differ in the amount of staff support they need.  For example, the Benjari et al. don't need much, if any, support once they're set up and turned loose in the game.

My impression is that a lot of people pick tribals because they want to be able to play solo without worrying about when their Lord Commander is going to log on.

We have, in the course of the game, removed a number of the iso-clans in order to try to consolidate players, with some success.  What I mean by an iso-clan is a clan where the players have a base of their own and stay there, ignoring the rest of the mud.  I can see the argument for removing some tribes, but like others I think the solution is to recruit more heavily, rather than to remove choices from the game.

LoD, you say:

I would like to see more people encouraged to join one of two (or perhaps 3-4 if there are enough players to serve) tribal clans to allow for both a deeper environment for the tribal PC's as well as a consistency that allows them to be a near constant source of interaction for the rest of the gameworld.

Could you elaborate on what form that encouragement would take?

Marko said:

I'd love to see a couple of them destroyed the same way as some of them were created - ie, through player actions and interactions.

Why do you think this isn't possible now?

[LoD]

I would like to see more people encouraged to join one of two (or perhaps 3-4 if there are enough players to serve) tribal clans to allow for both a deeper environment for the tribal PC's as well as a consistency that allows them to be a near constant source of interaction for the rest of the gameworld.

Could you elaborate on what form that encouragement would take?

I would reduce the number of tribes available for PC's to apply for directly to a number that would profit from the current size of our player base.  Select the clans which either have the largest home "territory" that non-tribals may have cause to travel though, or by the largest potential for interaction with non-tribal PC's and other tribes.

There are presently 16 tribes listed under the clan "Tribal People".

Based on the feedback from other players in this thread, I would select between 4-5 of these clans as "playable" clans, where players will begin in the village/home of that clan, have a citizenship there and expect there to be a living and breathing atmosphere sophisticated enough to support the play of 5-7+ players.  Have the description read something like:

Active Tribes of the Known World

The Known World of Zalanthas hosts a variety of tribal kinship groups - some settled, some nomadic; some reclusive, others more worldly. Most engage in limited trade with the outside, and a modest proportion of the world's goods can be traced to crafters or looters from one of these groups. While not exhaustive, this list contains descriptions of several human and elven tribes found over the broad face of Zalanthas.

The following tribes will provide you with an opportunity to experience life amidst one of Zalanthas' many desert cultures.  Players wanting to immerse themselves in a supported culture that includes the potential for inner and inter tribal play, territorial dispites and trade negotiations with foreign civilizations should send their application to the designated Staff Member for application.

Unsupported Tribes

Take the remaining 10+ tribes and identify them as unsupported tribes, some of which may be used for your background if you choose a "Nomad" subclass and wish to play it out, and some that would need to be special app if you feel that you have something to bring to the game that one of the other 5 doesn't provide.

As more players are recruited to the MUD and the Imm Staff feels the tribal player base is large enough to maintain another unique desert culture that will add to the gameworld something that the other 5 do not provide, then you can simply move them up from the Unsupported to the Supported section.

Hopefully the process would encourage players to opt for one of the 4-5 current tribal clans that are listed "active" and provide the following:

:arrow: Increased player base for each active tribe.
:arrow: Consistency in their interactions home and abroad.
:arrow: Deeper social potential for horizontal and veritcal play because of more players.

There are a lot of great tribal clans in the game, but I don't think it's necessary to support every single one as a playable option.  I think encouraging players to select from a finite list of tribes tha are "supported" will do more for the game overall than spreading them thin over a larger pool.

-LoD

[marko]

Marko said:

I'd love to see a couple of them destroyed the same way as some of them were created - ie, through player actions and interactions.

Why do you think this isn't possible now?

I've seen tribals of coded tribes act in totally irresponsible ways - attacking everyone that moves turning other tribes and organizations against them so they were hunted down one by one and yet... the tribe continued to exist only because it was coded.  If the actions of the players had impacted the tribe fully then the tribe would have been wiped out or been reduced to such a small number that it would effectively have vanished as a tribe that players could play.

I would like to see a tribe get shutdown, even if it is briefly, to account for massive losses after players royally mess up.  Again, this isn't just a few PCs dying but when the tribe members manage to get a few other tribes, houses, and independents literally tracking down every member of the tribe and killing them on sight - well, the tribe would have to take a few years to recover from that.  As it stands now, the PCs will all get wiped out, and a couple weeks later the tribe is repopulated by PCs.  There isn't a lot of lasting consequences for the stupidity of not just one member but of a group.

Individual tribals shouldn't cause the closing of their tribe unless they do something exceptional.  But, if say there are six tribals who are all acting incredibly stupid in terms of being a tribal (attacking everyone, making enemies of everything that moves, etc) then after people start hunting down everything of that tribe and the six are destroyed - I would like to see the tribe closed for awhile.  Not necessarily destroyed - but closed to reflect that the tribe is now in a significantly weakened state.

If a tribe has a total of one hundredish members and six of their hunters, warriors, and/ or shaman are lost - that's a huge loss.  Over the course of a year if that same tribe loses fifteen to twenty of these then the number of hunters and warriors that are of age would be almost non-existent.  The tribe is down to 80ish members but of that, how many are capable of hunting now... In other words, the tribe would be slowly dying because it cannot gather the resources it requires.  But, because tribes are coded, they continue to exist even in these situations.  

Beyond that, there is an impression that once a tribe is coded, it is a forever thing.  I believe that this exists because there seem to be so few IC consequences for anything.  I've seen tribes at war with one another and yet even after years of raiding - neither tribe seems to have suffered other than losing a bunch of PCs.  

I think a lot of people don't even bother making an attempt to harm a tribe because they feel it is a fruitless endeavor.  A lot of effort goes into the making of a tribe and thus there appears to be a reluctance to make a tribe a transient thing.  I don't think it should be easy to destroy tribes but I'd like to see them shutdown regularly to reflect the losses that they sustain by the continual death of PCs that join them.  Maybe a rotation of having a tribe open for six months or a year and then shutting down to recover from the loss of all the PCs that make chars and promptly died.  If a set number of PCs die before the six month mark then shut the tribe early to reflect the losses.

I could be mistaken of course since this is mainly a perception thing.  

[Dakurus]

Touching on marko's point, I do kid other staff sometimes that, the population of zalanthas should be ever decreasing, because if the PC population is a sampling, it's tough to explain how these folks lived to 20-30 then walk off and die, with no offspring.

There is a booming virtual world/population out there though, which is tough to quantify and get our minds around. But yes, especially in small tribes, there should be more of an impact as PC's die, to the tribe.

We do have to take into account OOC that the game is for fun, and players play to have fun. And we can't exactly say, don't DIE, don't do anything stupid.

Most tribes do have the feeling of being small, and the number of PC's that can and do play in one at a time, are often small, that is always seems tribal. There isn't a strong support or backing for them, in the wild, or anywhere else. Like an independent they do live that feeling of being pretty much alone. But yes we encourage all tribals to do their best to take into account what their actions may do to their tribe.

I'll certainly as a D-Elf staffer, consider some of the things you said. But it's unlikely (though it'd be fun) that we'll make each tribe into a full simulation, with aging, birthrates, good years, bad years, and PC deaths have an effect.

[Maybe42or54]

Also, as another point, I would love it if there were tribes that would raid other tribes for women, healers, etc, and it would be accepted that once you are "Captured" you are now the new tribe, owing all of your support to them.

Or something along those lines.

[spawnloser]

Also, as another point, I would love it if there were tribes that would raid other tribes for women, healers, etc, and it would be accepted that once you are "Captured" you are now the new tribe, owing all of your support to them.

Or something along those lines.

Who says this doesn't happen?  By PCs?  Probably very very little...but it probably does happen virtually by one tribe or another.

[Angela Christine]

Also, as another point, I would love it if there were tribes that would raid other tribes for women, healers, etc, and it would be accepted that once you are "Captured" you are now the new tribe, owing all of your support to them.

Capturing adults doesn't really work, the adults always remain captives.  They have to be treated like property, otherwise they want to go home and be with their own family.  (The cultures where stealing adult women works are generally ones where women are considered property anyway.)  If you kidnap adults you are trying to get slaves, not new members of your tribe.  It will be decades before they can really be trusted.

Stealing children is much more practical.  A child, say 2-8 years old, is young enough to be fully assimilated into the clan, and too young to make a good attempt at escaping back home during the assimilation process.  Infants are rarely accessible and are fragile, a kid that makes it to toddler age is probably healthy.  By the time they are in their teens (old enough to be allowed outside the camp without adult supervision) all of their friends are in the new tribe, the people they consider family are in the new tribe, and even if they run into their former tribe those people are mostly strangers now.  


Angela Christine

[Maybe42or54]

There we go. Stealing Children, even better.