Conflict Amidst Subtlety: A Discussion on Tuluk's Culture

[Semper]

A number of certain well written posts (and quite frankly, some bad) posts had me look through the GDB database and I found an interesting thread from 2003. I think some folks will be surprised at their views since then (whether or not they changed).

I'd like to discuss two aspects of conflict and subtlety which I'll break into two parts.
Part 1: The Necessity of Conflict
Part 2: Conflict Amidst Subtlety

Part 1: The Necessity of Conflict

http://www.zalanthas.org/gdb/index.php/topic,6033.0.html
(don't know how to turn lines into links with this version of the GDB)

I'm going to summarize some points made by others and some of my own on the topic of conflict, for reference sake.

What Arm really needs right now is an opposition.  I feel that this whole "Behind the Scenes" stuff has been way over promoted.  Subtlety and finesse are good things, sure, but Arm really needs some events which all and sundry can be aware of.  It also needs a higher level of strife and struggling, I think.  When I read a novel the best points are when the "heroes" reach a nearly impossible problem to solve.  How the hell are they going to get through this, I ask myself.  And just when they overcome their hurtle, a dozen more are waiting on the other side, facing them.

[What to keep in mind is that the post is talking about Tuluk a bit after the Liberation. The current times of Tuluk would be different, but doesn't negate some of the points made here.]
Tuluk, for example, is a prime choice for having troubles, I should think.  Do they really have time to erect statues, delve into the art world, and so quickly return to glory?  What I think would be fantastic is for a separatist group to arise, but this cannot be done by one single character, nor a group of PCs.  It takes a large cult following.  During the Rebellion one of the largest supporters to the cause were the Blackmoon, and though they were eager to liberate the Northlands, they weren't all that happy to see another structured government take its place (we're talking about raiders and bandits after all, thieves).  It's just an example.  The worker shortage could also be developed.  Ever play a Civilization game?  Building a city means you are always struggling to find a balance between unemployment and worker shortages.  You don't want to start grinning once you've reached 1% unemployment because you're not that far away from hitting 0%, at which point you can very quickly run out of workers.  If you don't have enough people to employ at the local fire department, suddenly fire erupts, sometimes so much it threatens to engulf your entire city.  The same burdens can arise from high unemployment.  Either way, it's a lot more fun when difficulty is faced in every direction you take.

So what about opening another Rebellion of sorts (I really like the idea of a group of Tuluki separatists), or a Liberation Army in Allanak, or a Blackmoon revival?  I think minimizing the number of clans is a good thing, but which clans remain active and which close are of vital importance.  The game needs a very clear opposition.  What character right now, on a day-to-day basis (nevermind the occasional RPT where the real fun stuff happens) gets to do anything other than sparring or taverning (we'll say MUDsexing falls into the second category )  The pleasures of scheming can only go so far.  How much conflict can you really find between competing merchant houses and nobles?  Whatever amount that may be, it's nothing compared to open war.  I'm very much in favor of opening an opposition clan, this can allow both sides of the opposition (Allanak and the Librators, for example) to strive towards very concrete goals and work on tasks other than casual scheming and gossiping in the tavern or just plain sparring.

So who's with me?  Vive la revolution!

Two different kinds of conflict were brought out in this post. Internal conflict (conflict within an organization or geographic location) and external conflict (wars between organizations and power-houses). Heroes and epics exist when conflict and opposition exist. In other words, you cannot have heroes when there is no need for a hero, and we all have an inherent desire to see our characters become heroes/heroines (in one way or another). My summary: Wars are good. Global wars are grand.

Here is another ticket to throw out into the hat. Wars are fought over something. I like the idea of the North and the South at war. What I would like to see is something that they are fighting for.

A great amount of water...perhaps the Northerners have a secret magick artifact that Tek has been searching for forever...whatever. There is something other than solely world-domination that these two have been fighting over for so fucking long.

Something of this nature happened with the Copper Wars and we can see the results, both positive and negative, of it. M summary: Conflict needs a driving motive or reason.

Now one of my more well-liked posts. I also think this is a perfect example of how cyclic human reasoning is. When something is missing, we want more, when we have that, we want what we used to have. Ironic, eh? 2003, people could use less of the power figures. 2008, with the lack of power figures, we want them back. I'm exaggerating a bit, but more or less this can be the case.

I imagine a lot of people might violently disagree with me, but I personally would like to see more low level and low/no fantasy conflict.  Don't get me wrong, I like the occasional spawn of darkness and what not assaulting the city, but to me those things are just there for the awe factor.  I like awe, but that cool city invasion lasts for me 12 hours and then it is over.  There might be repercussions to it, but it doesn't alter the type of conflicts my character has.  Most of the time for most characters massive plots are things they simply can not put their hand into on a regular basis.  They can be cannon fodder when the chance arises (which is always fun), but it isn't a source of steady RP.  You can't play cannon fodder every day.  It is something happens then is over.

More mundane conflict on the other hand offers the chance for constant RP and interaction, but I think the general trend has been away from this.  If you look at the clan roster, the majority of clans are merchant houses, noble houses, and other massive and powerful organizations.  These are organizations that wield terrible power, and when they fight the results are not pretty.  In fact, the results are so devastating that they generally never openly fight.  They have their political bickering, backstabbing, assassinations, frame ups, and such, but as a general rule rarely openly fight.  When they do fight openly, it general it is one single instance where one side overwhelms the other.  While this is fine, these events are defined by massive overarching events that only people of power and drive ever realistically will even touch.

If you bring conflict down lower, suddenly the conflict is a little more present and, a little more day to day, and far more able to sustain itself.  Imagine if you took the player numbers we have to day in clans, but instead of stuffing them into noble houses, merchant houses, and other such large organizations, were instead put into clans that were smaller and had less power.  Instead of joining a merchant house, you join smuggling ring or a tavern.  Instead of joining a noble house, you join a large extended commoner family (think of the opening scene Godfather, or the family in My Big Fat Greek Wedding).  Instead of joining Kurac, you join a small band of mercenaries and spice dealers.

Now conflict revolves around small scale conflicts.  Two mercenary groups meet in the desert trying to accomplish the same mission and come close to blows.  Within a commoner family someone's daughter is screwing an elf and family members need to stop her either by threatening/beating up the elf or talking her out of it.  A commoner takes out more money then she can afford to pay back from a local group of thugs and now needs to find money to pay it back.  A turf war breaks out between two gangs.  Two commoner families feud over some offense.  Spice smugglers need to go silence an informant.  A commoner family is mortified to learn one of their children is a drovian.

These are all mundane things.  The fate of the world does not rest in the balance.  The noble houses don't give a shit.  The Templars likely are not going to put much effort in investigating any of this.  No powers that be are going to bother poking their head in because they simply don't care.  However, for the people involved in these lower level conflicts the implications are serious.  The Templars might not care that one commoner family is warring with another so long as they keep the blood from being seen in public, but people in those families sure as hell care.  A woman who owes money to criminal organization might not attract the attention of a merchant house, but as far as she is concerned she is living life on the edge.  The best thing about these conflicts is that they naturally more persistent then over arching conflicts for most people.  The common soldier can't do much about the war once the war is over.  Certainly, a driven individual might make a daring raid into enemy territory, but such things are far and few in-between.  However, warring gangs might always have their eye open for the chance to strike a blow.  At any time they can decide to grab their thief and try and break into the opposing gang's hideout and do some damage.  The conflict is less meaningful to the world in general, but far more meaningful to the people participating.

Granted, this is all just my personal wet dream and I don't really expect to see all of the noble houses closed tomorrow.  That said, I think it wouldn't be bad to see the MUD move a little more towards lower level self sustaining conflicts.  No one is going to disband House Tor over night, but it might not hurt to open up a new commoner family before opening up a new noble house. 

Hell, you don't even need to disband current organizations, just consider changing the focus of the PCs within those organizations.  Instead of stationing Kuraci in a Kurac stronghold, shuffle over a group of bad ass Kuraci regulars with dirty uniforms and grim under their nails to Red Storm to compete with a local gang of thugs and muls.  Instead of bringing in a group of super secret assassins of death every time someone scores a point against this unit of Kuraci, let them languish with limited resources while the merchant house focuses on more important thing elsewhere.  When they request a new kank, send an old crippled kank and say it is the best they can do for such a low priority.  Kurac might not care about one puny little gang causing them trouble so long as it doesn't get out of hand, but the few Kuraci struggling to keep things and check and keep the Kuraci larger organization from stepping in and handing out punishments might care.  We are still talking about Kurac, but the PCs are serving with a different view of conflict.  Instead of constantly training for that one big mission, they have constant small missions to take out a small threat.

The idea is to bring conflict down to a level where people care and can sustain it once the imms have all logged off.  It is very hard for commoner Joe to sustain the conflict around the dark orb of evil two months after the event.  Commoner Joe on the other hand is perfectly able to sustain the conflict over how he can't pay back his lone to a group of thugs.

Pretty well written. My summary: If War is grand, then family feuds are change. [Excuse that, couldn't help myself. In other words, the everyday problems your character faces is more realistic and affordable than running huge scale wars.]

I've seen recently someone playing a tavern server, and have seen it before. I'd like small things just like this extended a bit. Maybe have tavern 'bouncers' of sorts. Usually a common occurrence when things might get rowdy. Just having it so he doesn't get crim flagged while working in his own tavern would be nice. Would at least give some realism to the big loud discussions people have that just trail on because neither one wants to get crim flagged. At least if a PC bouncer is about. He can put an end to the problem. Either dealing with both of them or one or the other.

To myself, I think the taverns and such would have SOME sort of thing like that. Even in a military run city... It's good to have at least a minor form of control within your business and such. Heck, all the Merchant Family shops seem to have guards and such, but these large taverns don't have any sort of martial force? It's just odd. Let a few interested PCs have hold of it. Even if it takes coding some small clans for each tavern and giving them partial reign in the tavern. If the get too uppity I'm sure a report to a local templar can handle it, but if they are just doing their job?

Eh. I think a lot of the small time conflict, at least concerning PC to PC isn't necessarily because people are in big organizations. But no matter what, rather a recruit or a 30 year old veteran these PCs have FULL backing of their clan. Too often you see Nobles taking offense because someone insulted someone they pay. Or nobles back a persons claim that someone calling them a 'kank fucker' is an insult to the whole clan. Or whatever it is. And honestly it's all pretty much bullshit. Even low ranking nobles have more to worry about then making sure their employees don't get insulted.

BULLSHIT! Gah! It's worse then autobowing.
Creeper will repeat himself and call it bullshit again if needed!

My summary: Small time conflict isn't possible because power figures have their heads too far up their butt to see what they should actually be doing. *cough* In other words, for small scale conflict to be successful at the lower (and other) levels of society, there needs to be some measure of distance of influence between each rung of influence and power. i.e. What a noble does should be able to influence the aide and the loyal bodyguard and the mercenary and the servant and the sewer rat, but whether or not the sewer rat steals the crumbs from the table or gets picked on by others shouldn't affect the noble very much if at all, due to the gap in the power gradient.

What if business establishments were responsible for their own policing?  If they had a huge troublemaker who got away...he'd get reported to the authorities.  But within the tavern...the soldier would stay away.  The bouncer dictates when things are out of the control...it'd be more jobs for the common folk, so that not -everyone- is employed by the merchant/noble houses, and the people -trying- to play the commoner have more to resort to than the byn [or other prominent organization].

Adding to the previous point made. The only thing that I'd want to add to this is that Tuluk has the patronage system that more or less makes this possible. Although employed, you aren't Employed.

I think that Houses generally offer too little variety of conflict.  What we have is about ten clans that's differences from each other can be counted on one hand.  I want to see more regular commoners, who just don't have what it takes to be a noble's aide.  I think that a less severe crime-code would be a small step in the right direction.  I don't think that Allanak should become a duplicate of the rinth.  An analogy such as that is useless for what I'm trying to suggest.  I want something along the lines of having half as many NPC guards about the area from dusk to before dawn.  There's already a script in which NPC guards patrol a specific route.  Maybe some could be programmed to retreat to their barracks when night rolls around?  This wouldn't take away the need for stealth and skill, but it might just encourage a few people to prowl around and cause some havoc.  Maybe some people in favor of subtle plots that take months and years to see to fruition, but I'm not.  The only conflict that really hits the spot for me is the struggle to survive.  And I'd like a day to come where desert elves are just as reluctant to enter a city as city-dwellers are to enter the desert.

I think this makes a good conclusion for this part. My summary with my own thoughts interjected: Inherently, we'd like to see our characters become heroes or heroines, or at least be apart of a grand story (with heroes and heroines). Heroes and heroines and epics cannot exist within conflict and opposition. Conflict is good, a LOT of conflict is grand. yet, it's the small, personal conflicts [on all levels of society] that give the larger conflicts meaning. The street level conflict is as necessary as the noble level conflict. Coding helps to some degree in enforcing and encouraging the more gritty, street-level conflict. And each region or aspect of the game should provide their own amounts of unique conflict, whether in the alleys, or amongst the rich and fabulous estates, or out in the vast wilds of untamed Zalanthas.


So, with that done away with, Part 2. With Tuluk having its own unique cultural differences and backgrounds and experiences, what does conflict look like in a setting where subtlety and art pervade the society. How do the nobles play a role in the affairs of the common citizen, and how does the common citizen play a role with the nobles in order to create conflict? How do commoners interact with each other to bring about conflict? How do nobility interact with each other to bring about conflict? All the while embracing Tuluk's culture? I think the biggest question is: What make's conflict in Tuluk different from conflict in Allanak, or from any other place for that matter? Conflict in Tuluk is uniquely Tuluki. Why, or rather, how?

[Gimfalisette]

With Tuluk having its own unique cultural differences and backgrounds and experiences, what does conflict look like in a setting where subtlety and art pervade the society. How do the nobles play a role in the affairs of the common citizen, and how does the common citizen play a role with the nobles in order to create conflict? How do commoners interact with each other to bring about conflict? How do nobility interact with each other to bring about conflict? All the while embracing Tuluk's culture? I think the biggest question is: What make's conflict in Tuluk different from conflict in Allanak, or from any other place for that matter? Conflict in Tuluk is uniquely Tuluki. Why, or rather, how?

I think examples will serve your questions better than explication.

-- Bribery in Tuluk is not overt. An artful bribe is a simple "gift" of something valuable...such as an elaborate box containing a piece of jewelry. And oh, guess what, there also happens to be a silk bag in the box that's got a couple large in it. Whereas bribery in Allanak is often as simple as, "Here's a bribe." In Tuluk, you don't say the word "bribe" while making the exchange, and yet everyone knows what it is.

-- Dasari noble to Lyksaen noble (paraphrase from actual RP): "Oh, how droll, you brought a -book- with you." Lyksaen noble's reply: "Leave it to a Dasari to poison the conversation." Those were strong insults there, but they were subtle. In Allanak, insulting one's enemy is more overt. Yes, there's subtlety in Allanak too, but if you're talking to your enemy it's often just more in-your-face.

-- The artfulness of assassination in Tuluk is a little misunderstood. In order to really do the job right, you want to kill your enemy, and then make sure everyone in the city KNOWS you did it...without being able to prove a damn thing from evidence. If you're a noble who can eliminate your enemies so that everyone knows without a doubt that you did it, and yet you're untouchable based on evidence, then you gain status. In everyone's eyes. In Allanak, it's just not quite the same; AFAIK, you'd need everyone not to know the truth in Nak. In Tuluk, you want everyone to know the truth, kind of.

-- The same kind of thing is true of use of bards. Ideally, you'll use bards to character-assassinate your enemies. But you'll do it so artfully you and the bard can't be held accountable.

-- And same with rumors. Rumors are ultra, ultra-important in Tuluk. Rumors should be flying all over the place, all the time. Artful, purposeful use of rumors is critical. Yes, there is an art to rumors

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

Here is another ticket to throw out into the hat. Wars are fought over something. I like the idea of the North and the South at war. What I would like to see is something that they are fighting for.

A great amount of water...perhaps the Northerners have a secret magick artifact that Tek has been searching for forever...whatever. There is something other than solely world-domination that these two have been fighting over for so fucking long.

Something of this nature happened with the Copper Wars and we can see the results, both positive and negative, of it. M summary: Conflict needs a driving motive or reason.

Because this is something I still agree on, let me offer a bit here, and perhaps this is not so much about Tuluk as this thread is, so I beg derail for a moment.

If global PC conflict is hampered, suppliment it with staff-backed NPC conflict related to whatever might be happening to keep combative PCs occupied, ala the gith of the late 90s and early 00s.

It can't replace PC conflict, certianly on a political or inter-city level, but it can certianly help. Clearing the North Road was always a good reason for military PCs to log on.

Pardon the minor derail.

Editted for potential IC information. Sorry.

[Nyr]

Here is another ticket to throw out into the hat. Wars are fought over something. I like the idea of the North and the South at war. What I would like to see is something that they are fighting for.

A great amount of water...perhaps the Northerners have a secret magick artifact that Tek has been searching for forever...whatever. There is something other than solely world-domination that these two have been fighting over for so fucking long.

Something of this nature happened with the Copper Wars and we can see the results, both positive and negative, of it. M summary: Conflict needs a driving motive or reason.

Because this is something I still agree on, let me offer a bit here, and perhaps this is not so much about Tuluk as this thread is, so I beg derail for a moment.

(edited out to come close to player's edit -Nyr)

Pardon the minor derail.

Please do not walk the line of revealing anything in-character that isn't publicly available either in documentation or helpfiles.  I understand that your post is your perception as a player, and it may be the perception or assumption of other players.   Oftentimes, players are not correct in their assumptions and even their perceptions about things, and while in some cases it is acceptable to fling such things to the fore for discussion, this is not one of those times.

Revealing some insight into the differences between Tuluki culture (interaction between nobles and commoners) and Allanaki culture and ways to create conflict and intrigue are well and good and helpful for players (and staff members) interested in learning more about it and applying it.  Please make sure this thread goes along those lines, and not along the lines of recent IC events.

[Gimfalisette]

Potential Tuluk-Specific Plots

-- You are Amos Negean. You note that your house's status, not to put too unsubtle a point on it, sucks. You decide you want to raise Negean's status. So you put into motion a few-part plan: 1. Do enough awesome things that the Sun King decides your house needs a raise, 2. Make noble and templar friends who will help you accomplish your awesome things in return for you helping them accomplish their awesome things, 3. Make sure your select noble enemies are foiled in their attempts to do awesome things that the Sun King might notice so their houses fall in rank, and 4. Make sure a Triumvirate meeting gets scheduled and held so that status can be recalculated. None of those things will be easy to do. Yes, house status can change in Allanak too, but it's much more fixed. Tuluki status has a lot of potential fluidity and is much more open for players to affect. Case in point: What I did with my Tuluki noble helped raise my house status from #7 to #4. It can be done again.

-- You are Talia, Hlum Chosen. Being Hlum is cool, but you lust for more. Did you know that Lyksae didn't even used to be a Chosen house? Hmm. Maybe it can be done again.

-- Malik Dasari has just been granted a qynar or two. Malik wants more qynar, and he's willing to deal, threaten, manipulate, steal, or kill to get them. Go, go, Malik!

The common thread here is that in Tuluk, status is potentially much more fluid than it is in Allanak. Houses rise and fall, PCs rise and fall much more easily. And there are actual economic benefits at stake.

[flurry]

Conflict in Tuluk is uniquely Tuluki. Why, or rather, how?

I think Tuluki conflict, like the culture, would be more layered. It might take on one quality near the surface, but an entirely different one beneath.

I associate Tuluk with widespread paranoia, where you're never quite sure who's lying to you, who's on your side, what is real and what is not.

So I think there would be a heavy dose of psychological, internal conflict along with the other forms of conflict.  I think of works of fiction where the protagonist is not only dealing with external conflict, but also haunted by deeper and deeper questions about reality and their own sanity.  It's the kind of environment where it's hard to distinguish between up and down, and I think that uncertainty and paranoia would serve as a key element in Tuluki conflict.