What would entice you to play more in the cities?

[Mellifera]

Good templars are already reporting up to the moment of PK, wishing up prior to PK and reporting after PK.

Yes, and it's not just a case of 'good templars do this', it's a case of 'if you don't do this there are consequences'.

[Master Color]

Every time a Templar killed my character I was sitting in a tavern more or less minding my own business before I got the ole' Allanaki high five and sent to the cells. One time I was there because I was literally looking for a Templar to bribe and build a rapport with. It's about as infuriating as you might expect.

I really don't care about the Templars skirmishing in the sands or dealing with big bads. And for what it's worth I don't think I've seen a Templar kill an elf on the first offence either. None of that is even marginally close to the poor faith play that I think me and other players are talking about.

[Dune Bunny]

Despite having not lost a PC to a templar since about 2004, I can say that I feel for a lot of the people putting that reason out there. I killed a tiny amount of pcs during my time in the role, and only one was an outright kill (to be fair, he was pushing for it, so he got it XD). But those players not knowing the intricacies of why they died in the way they did is something I completely understand them being jaded on, especially if they've lost several pcs, and at times to actual nonsense.

I don't know the solution to making templar pcs not kill indiscriminately, but finding something that works might certainly make people feel more comfortable playing.


My thoughts on this, despite being a 90% city player, are along the lines of others poking at there being less to do in comparison to the wild.

About a year or so back, I was inspired by what I saw going on in the Den of Wonders, and put in a request with some pretty constructive discussion on something that could help alleviate that problem. I need to re-open that conversation eventually when I stop failing at playtimes. It revolved around adding mundane roles to the city that would foster rp for players that want to exist in roles that don't really require PC boss oversight as clans do.

My specific idea was a server role in the Gaj. The character in question would app for the role (or it could be automated in time!), and be 'clanned' into a role of 'server/wench/attendant/watev' with the City-State of Allanak. The character would then be expected to play their role, and rp as a server in the Gaj for a reasonable amount of their time online if wanting to keep said job.

Perks of the job were discussed, and if I remember right, pay would have been minuscule so far as 'sids went, but the server would have the advantage of a discount on Gaj items, and could charge a little closer to listed price (but still a little cheaper maybe) to pcs that utilized their rp to order instead of buying directly. That would let the pc make a few coins on every order. Additionally, I was inquiring about more perks, such as a hole in the wall apartment for the pc so long as they were employed. It'd be literally a tiny hole with room for a few things, but would have the character right there to report to work.

I think such roles as this would not only give bored pcs that don't want to spam dung/salting, or leave the city ever (why would most ever WANT to risk the sands?), but it could attract players that would love to interact with those roles. Giving a rowdy group of byn an actual waiter to color their evening with interaction might be a memorable experience that keeps them coming back. (or the waiter messes up the order and gets pummeled into a pulp!)

This could lead to several different roles around the city-states, maybe even roles in smaller towns as well.
-Courier: NPC generates a package to deliver to random places, gets a token for delivery to bring back and cash in for necessities/small coin/etc.
-Bakery workers: Practice cooking while stocking the shelves of X place.
-Brothel Worker: A certain outpost has a perfect setup for this one already. Get nice clothes, perfumes, etc to sit around and FTB disappointed fools for an hour a day!
-Rat Assassin: Help clean up the streets, get a stipend and a hole in the wall/tent on the roadside to be on alert for rats in the way. Bring it back to X to be ground up and fed to orphans!
-Wagon Wiper: Get fed/paid to clean up the wagonyard weekly. Dust off the wagons so those rich jerks that could actually afford one come back to their rolling home proud, blah blah, have some food, or a tent of your own in a corner of the yard.

Likely not great examples, but I'm sure some pretty awesome rp-based roles could be dreamed up for sure, that might entice people!

[DesertT]

I know that I already said my piece, but here's another point:

During role calls for the larger clans (like Byn, AoD, Garrison, Legion, what have you), maybe hire the top two folks.

In the case of the Byn, offer one the role of the Sergeant and the other the role of a Senior Mercenary or First Trooper, someone who is literally in the wings, waiting to lead their own unit.

This way, when a leader dies or is killed, whatever, there is an IMMEDIATE replacement available instead of numerous players waiting around for a month or so for new leadership to arrive.

That is a detriment to any clan like the Byn (imho) whose subordinates count on said leader to provide fun RP experiences like contracts, patrols, escorts, combative training, and things like that.

Yes, they can still RP on their own, but we've seen how well that's worked a few times.

[WarriorPoet]

I would like to see sideshow areas get a real push. Rolecalls and rpt's combined to inject some activity and fun. Maybe every other month or so we could see staff say, Yo, April is going to see the Rinth get seriously pushed. We will have several small or med RPTs, gang fights, a fire, blahblah. In preparation for this, we are wanting a few roles filled in the Guild, eastside elves, etc. Everyone else who is in between roles, you should consider getting rrrrreal dirty because there is going to be an effort at lots of animations, opportunities both staff-pushed and grassroots, and lots of chaos. Nothing WURLD CHENGING or whatever but an effort at bringing these fringe areas to life, with a dedicsted staffer or two to stir stuff up and hopefully hook a few long-lived characters to maintain the activity after the Push is over and the focus moves on.

In June, we'll do the equivalent in Tuluk's Upper crust.  August, the Nakki Commons, etc.

[valeria]

My specific idea was a server role in the Gaj. The character in question would app for the role (or it could be automated in time!), and be 'clanned' into a role of 'server/wench/attendant/watev' with the City-State of Allanak. The character would then be expected to play their role, and rp as a server in the Gaj for a reasonable amount of their time online if wanting to keep said job. ...

I love everything about this idea, except for the 'reasonable amount of time' part. It could be fun for people with low playtimes as a thing to do, since it would have a lot of built in interaction. It would also allow PCs in these RP-heaving commoner roles to have a very legitimate reason to hang out in bars, do a lot of interacting with other players, and maybe run tiny bar-based events like cockroach racing or card night.

Staff can already set it so that certain clans get discounts at specific shops.  Apping into the role like you would a delf clan and having staff put you into a "server" clan that gets deep discounts in bars seems like it would be already supported by existing code and quite doable.

It wouldn't just have to be Allanak in terms of setup.  It could be a "server" clan in general, with the discounts applied to any barkeeper anywhere, to keep it simple.  Someone could in theory codedly go from serving at the Gaj to serving somewhere in Tuluk, but also the rule could just be 'don't do this' and it would be pretty easy to enforce.

[Pariah]

My specific idea was a server role in the Gaj. The character in question would app for the role (or it could be automated in time!), and be 'clanned' into a role of 'server/wench/attendant/watev' with the City-State of Allanak. The character would then be expected to play their role, and rp as a server in the Gaj for a reasonable amount of their time online if wanting to keep said job. ...

I love everything about this idea, except for the 'reasonable amount of time' part. It could be fun for people with low playtimes as a thing to do, since it would have a lot of built in interaction. It would also allow PCs in these RP-heaving commoner roles to have a very legitimate reason to hang out in bars, do a lot of interacting with other players, and maybe run tiny bar-based events like cockroach racing or card night.

Staff can already set it so that certain clans get discounts at specific shops.  Apping into the role like you would a delf clan and having staff put you into a "server" clan that gets deep discounts in bars seems like it would be already supported by existing code and quite doable.

It wouldn't just have to be Allanak in terms of setup.  It could be a "server" clan in general, with the discounts applied to any barkeeper anywhere, to keep it simple.  Someone could in theory codedly go from serving at the Gaj to serving somewhere in Tuluk, but also the rule could just be 'don't do this' and it would be pretty easy to enforce.

I've always thought flavor type roles like this would be sweet to have.

Server, Cook, Stablemaster etc.

Would be cool and flavorful.

[JustAnotherGuy]

I do agree with flavor roles, it really is what the Entertainer roles of Kurac in Luir's are for, and also the role of the Atrium, they really were there for flavor.  Could easily setup Vennant as a paymaster in the Gaj.  Only issue is it does require staff work to do the role call or application process.  A GMH should come in and buy out the Gaj and come up with a role for it that the GMH Agent can handle.

Another note on Taverns, I personally think the prices are too high for drinks.  Where I'm playing I don't see folks buying drinks.  It's a RP construct in most cases, basic Ale should be cheap in all bars to allow for just basic RP drinking.

I do like the idea of shrinking Allanak, Tuluk's shrinkage is AMAZING.  My question here would be for everyone, would it be alright if some areas didn't get shrunk down and maps become a bit asymmetrical in places?  Lets take the sprawling areas of the Rinth, personally I think it's fitting the way it is.  We could have the exits of the Rinth still line up with the same spots in Allanak proper if it was shrunk down, but now it wouldn't be symmetrical, would that be alright?  I'm okay with some areas being asymmetrical, as long as it isn't jarring and disorientating (unless its supposed to be).

[Nao]

I know that I already said my piece, but here's another point:

During role calls for the larger clans (like Byn, AoD, Garrison, Legion, what have you), maybe hire the top two folks.

In the case of the Byn, offer one the role of the Sergeant and the other the role of a Senior Mercenary or First Trooper, someone who is literally in the wings, waiting to lead their own unit.

This way, when a leader dies or is killed, whatever, there is an IMMEDIATE replacement available instead of numerous players waiting around for a month or so for new leadership to arrive.

That is a detriment to any clan like the Byn (imho) whose subordinates count on said leader to provide fun RP experiences like contracts, patrols, escorts, combative training, and things like that.

Yes, they can still RP on their own, but we've seen how well that's worked a few times.

This is a great idea. I've seen plots grind to a halt so many times because one key figure dies, and everything stands still until that PC is replaced and finds their footing. Rolecalls don't pop up as soon as someone dies (I don't see this changing, the news of the death should spread ICly), they're open for a week or so, the new PC takes some time to get started - that's easily a month  or so. Often, the clan empties out because nobody wants to stick around, waiting for a new leader. Hiring a second in command for empty clans that steps up when the first dies would fix this, as long as the second in command is replaced. The replacement could be done ICly or through another role call.

[FantasyWriter]

Another note on Taverns, I personally think the prices are too high for drinks.  Where I'm playing I don't see folks buying drinks.  It's a RP construct in most cases, basic Ale should be cheap in all bars to allow for just basic RP drinking.

God yes. Have cheap <10 coin booze in all bars that aren't actively trying to keep out the rift raft.

[Mellifera]

My specific idea was a server role in the Gaj. The character in question would app for the role (or it could be automated in time!), and be 'clanned' into a role of 'server/wench/attendant/watev' with the City-State of Allanak. The character would then be expected to play their role, and rp as a server in the Gaj for a reasonable amount of their time online if wanting to keep said job.

This could lead to several different roles around the city-states, maybe even roles in smaller towns as well.

I ADORE this idea, and I'm super for the others too. Coded and/or supported roles that are city centric and RP heavy would be a great way to encourage people to spend more time in the cities, and they'd be perfect for disseminating rumours in a more natural way, creating plots, encouraging active networks between players, making the cities feel more active, alive, and dynamic, creating buckets of RP in general... the list goes on, and I think personally I would love to play a character like this.

I don't know how common this feeling is but if there were actual codified roles to fill, I'd be so much happier to play mundane insignificant characters, and characters inside the cities. I know a lot of players want there to be less magick and more mundanity, and obviously, given the nature of this thread, more people playing inside the cities, so it's killing two huge birds with one stone.

In certain cities or establishments you could have people who are codedly members of specific clans, like GMH's or MMH's, but of course you could also have more general or independent roles too. Servers/tavernkeepers specifically could have a stock to sell and have to cook food, maybe they're even tasked with paying/hiring hunters and grebbers to collect ingredients, and I know staff are all for any role or playstyle that encourages cooperation and dependency between different players.

[Pariah]

Another note on Taverns, I personally think the prices are too high for drinks.  Where I'm playing I don't see folks buying drinks.  It's a RP construct in most cases, basic Ale should be cheap in all bars to allow for just basic RP drinking.

God yes. Have cheap <10 coin booze in all bars that aren't actively trying to keep out the rift raft.

Agreed as well, also think food needs a look at.  I can go greb for a whole day and make let's say 50 coins, have to pay for my mount so that's minus 20, then get hungry and eat a scrab steak, 30 coins.  I've broke even.

[Supified]

I loathe to post since I don't even play, but if you want exit interview material, I'll give my two cents.

I feel a lot of talk and rules seem to be around killing or not killing.  This is a binary problem that plagues this game.  Staff and players in power positions seem to have more grey, or maybe no rules regarding anything short of killing.  Remove all limbs so a character is essentially dead? Fine.  Complete disfiguredment?  Cool.  I get that the game's harshness is appealing to some, many no doubt of the players that still play it, but if you want an honest exit interview you need to talk to the people who don't. 

I think any permeant altering action should have rules similar to pking, because losing a char vs losing an aspect of a character can be very much the same thing.  If your concept for the character is a hot courtesan and torture porn loving templar with full staff support carves up their face cause they love ruining players days (and my experience is these players absolutely exists) and the whole experience is met with gleeful smiles about how metal it is and then for some weird reason that player doesn't want to play any more (It's a mystery), than thats a problem for retention.

What I find particularly troubling about this discussion is two things. First, how much of a broken record it is.  A lot of times people bring up these sorts of problems that stem from more or less the same roots.  The rules allow for just too much grey and wiggle room and since staff have a pretty hard no retcon policy, the tie always goes toward the one doing the stuff.  Considering how long people can spend building up stuff this can be positively crushing. 

The second thing is the lack of nuance between killing and literally anything less.  I saw just I think one person mentioning a crushed hand.  Now you could say that most things done to a pc is merely cosmetic, but that's only if the staff decides it is and they can change their mind there on a bloody wim.  Oh missing a hand?  Well it really doesn't make sense for you to be able to do this or that activity.  If I'm wrong I would love to see the staff policy that states otherwise and what recompensation occurs for a player when it is violated, and it better be more than you get a free noble role.  No one wants that when the thing they built up from nothing is snatched from them.  Once again, you might not like my words, after all the people readaing this are the people who still play the game as is.  But if you really care about bringing people back into roles, you'll try to keep an opened mind.

Finally I think that the fact things are final due to no retcon, means that all actions that affect players in a permenant manner should have the breaks put on them where ever possible.  If a templar kills or maims a char or takes something away they cannot get back abruptly when they absolutely do not have to (ie no reason imprisonment leading up to a sentence shoudn't have worked) than that templar should not be in that role and actions should be taken.  This is because characters are on a wide range of time zones and some would but cannot act.  The rules certainly do say you are in violation if you say, attack the salarr post when you know all the defending players are offline.  Well then how the hell come templars are allowed to do it.  Because they are and they do.

Finally I find the wishy washy responses to be kind of troubling.

If I were personally to take a hard look at returning to the game and cities, I would want to know what the ooc rules were and the consequences for both players and staff and I even wonder if there shouldn't be a mediator position created between players and staff of someone who is both trusted, well known and not on staff cause if I'm frank I don't trust staff to police themselves and I think I'm not even close to alone on that.

Edit: I grant some things require to be done quickly, IE murder and subterfudge, but that's not what we're talking about.  I'm talking about times that a templar does have a choice and chooses not to exercise it.  Also even in murder it would be generally considered questionable if someone played with timezones to make it easier to accomplish.  (IE can't do it while This person is online lololol, they'd stop me).

Anyway, my two cents.  I probably won't read this for replies because arm has a very long tradition of tearing down anyone not toing the party line.

[Mellifera]

I think any permeant altering action should have rules similar to pking, because losing a char vs losing an aspect of a character can be very much the same thing.

So, you said you weren't reading the replies, but to clarify for anyone else... it does? Like, you need consent to disfigure or dismember. OOC consent. Like, not only do you need to request OOC consent to do a torture scene, you also need to request separate OOC consent if you want to disfigure or dismember someone in any permanent fashion, and if they say no, there's absolutely nothing you can do about it, you just have to not disfigure them. This applies for everyone, including templars.

Maybe you stopped playing before this was implemented? I'm not even sure if there was ever a time that wasn't in place. The rules are definitely not grey on that matter, they're very black and white. If you violate this somehow (which is essentially impossible to do under any circumstance but essentially one, since staff or the player in question need to directly implement the disfigurement themselves) the punishment is very harsh, up to forced storage and beyond if I'm not mistaken.

[Tranquil]

I hope the large reaction to this thread will show staff that some poking about in cities is needed for the well-being of the game.

[Krath]

Maybe you stopped playing before this was implemented? I'm not even sure if there was ever a time that wasn't in place. T

There was a time, and I remember when and why it was implemented.

[Brisket]

I know that I already said my piece, but here's another point:

During role calls for the larger clans (like Byn, AoD, Garrison, Legion, what have you), maybe hire the top two folks.

In the case of the Byn, offer one the role of the Sergeant and the other the role of a Senior Mercenary or First Trooper, someone who is literally in the wings, waiting to lead their own unit.

This way, when a leader dies or is killed, whatever, there is an IMMEDIATE replacement available instead of numerous players waiting around for a month or so for new leadership to arrive.

That is a detriment to any clan like the Byn (imho) whose subordinates count on said leader to provide fun RP experiences like contracts, patrols, escorts, combative training, and things like that.

Yes, they can still RP on their own, but we've seen how well that's worked a few times.

Yo do this.  Maybe even *gasp* connect the players and let them chat a bit about the interactions/etc.   Templars could come in with slightly skill-boosted aides who help them! Byn Sarges can have a First Trooper they have some sort of story/past with! The former wouldn't be a replacement character but you'd get to skip that first month of being a Templar/Noble where you're like 'do i hire this random idiot I just met or keep going without an aide'?

Then let them hire at least one more person once they get IC so it doesn't prejudice against the population that *want* to be Aides but have extant characters.

[Armaddict]

I was a city player, through and through.  I made occasional deviations from this for the sake of whatever whims I had at character creation time, but for the most part, nothing beats the intrigue and danger of a mostly player-run minefield of decisions to make.  Inside the cities is where the skill-grind matters a bit less, and character goals mattered more.  You are forced into interactive scenes of alliance and forced to accept that some decisions and actions make enemies.  You prepared for it. You tried to maneuver around or within that space.  And sometimes, you got outmaneuvered and were swept up in a current that you're -not- in control of.

The idea of control over the character is the driving force behind most complaints of death, pvp, and interaction. '-I- just want to make beautiful scenes, but everyone else just wants to take my character away.'  I'd assert that this control over characters and their plots is the main element behind a migration away from the political atmosphere that is fraught with danger.  Danger is not desirable in a control-oriented atmosphere.  The extensive supposition of longevity is that it enables stories to come alive, so instead we focus on evasion of danger.  This is the main reason that I believe the large cities suffer; they have extensive hierarchies that can take your controlled environment and take that control away from you.  Being 'swept up' is only fun if it doesn't cost us anything.  This is the symptom of the character-oriented view of story development rather than the world-view, which makes sense, but deprives the game of players willing to lose control, willing to gamble, and willing to accept that endless character plots of vengeance, struggle, and lofty goals come from a world of misfortune, not predictability.  I realize that will not sit right on first inspection, and is often hard to handle in the heat of the moment.

As far as templars in the city, I have to ask:  Do we consider templars antagonists?  Do we consider them paragons?  Do we want them to be lawful good characters?  I can't vouch for or even read every action taken by a templar, but I do know they're trying to play a templar in their own mind's vision of it.  I believe that some templars will be any one of those things we consider at any given point.  So I must say that the problem with templars, I think, is not the player, but the lack of regulating IC force ON templars; they only suffer on a staff down level.  I believe that the best way for templars to be 'made to act like templars' in a generally accepted sense is for there to be an actual check for them in the game.  I believe that documentation needs to be reinforced rather than left behind to emphasize the power of the templar and their scariness: nobles should be able to make or break a templar's career, and nobles should be more invested in the actions of and on the populace.  Not because the citizens are their equals, or because they care, but because citizens and the various roles they fill are what give the NOBLES their power in the first place via their assigned duties of the city.  Yes, this is a nakki-centric point of view, because that's where I play.

The long tradition of 'favors' between templars and nobles is inherently flawed, because it becomes completely optional on one side, and only one side.  I don't have an implementation of how this works.  But I do know that playing a noble was often a near-helpless feeling of being casually swept aside.

I believe all of these quality of life improvements did indeed improve quality of life, but only under the circumstances that are not present in the in-city narrative.  We've buffed starting skills.  We've made the wilds much more predictable.  We made storage space plentiful, we made independent-based long-term goals hard coded, we made it so that ultimate character freedom is relatively in-grasp outside the city, but not within.  I've long been a proponent of cutting or hedging some of those indie-boons, but the overwhelming majority see that as a negative, so I will just say that you need to return the balance to what's actually true: The wilds and small outposts are just as efficient at delivering the sheltered safety of civilization now, particularly to any player who's braved them for a decent amount of time across however many characters.  If you want to entice people back to the city, you can't just keep stacking boon over boon in each place to make them all equally desirable.  If you want the city to be populated, you need to keep the intrigue/political danger present, but make the wilderness danger much harder to navigate predictably.

In the past, cities weren't more crowded because all the plays in them were just incredible.  It's because they genuinely granted the best shot at living long enough and maintaining enough control over scenarios to get a narrative going that was addictive to the player.  Because more people were there to try and make their mark, that's where the plots were, and they were very centralized, and thus much more visible.  The wilderness should be a vast expanse of opportunity and unpredictable misfortune, and completely SCARY.  The side outposts/smaller settlements need their own internal dangers to be made very tangible and completely SCARY.

In a giant desert wasteland, the oasis is where everyone has the best chance to prosper.  That includes predators, prey, and all those symbiotic relationships and pests.  You gotta make the cities the oasis with all its boons and dangers.

Those are my immediate thoughts on it.  They are likely flawed in some places.  But I'm trying to look underneath here, instead of just piling on a bunch of happy thoughts and ease-of-use statements that essentially try to block off misfortune.  The struggle is the game.  Everyone's struggle is the game.  Everyone interacting in their struggle is the game.  Being subject to other people's struggles is the game.

[LindseyBalboa]

good points

Agreed.

I'm still a newer player, and when I started a few years ago, cities were bustling.

Agreed with a lot of points. And just want to drive them home:

The plots were in the cities.

It was safer in the cities.

It was easier to get food and water in the cities.

There are very few city-based clans when compared to wilderness clans. i only know of one possible clan being revamped currently for the third or fourth time.

There are many new clans with cool stuff outside the cities. More are coming with new things to do. There is a completely new concept about to come to the wilds right now, and every d-elf clan was opened up after being touched up, with a huge world-spanning plot.

There is more to achieve outside the cities.

There are things to hunt and things to improve your combat skills upon, outside of cities, whereas inside cities there are not many things to hunt or improve combat skills on. And much less, if you are not a murderer.

There are not new things to explore inside the cities. There are frequently new things to explore outside of the cities.

Suggestion:


add new stuff to cities.

add new areas to cities to explore.

make food and water really affordable for people that are city classes, and really expensive for outdoor classes.

make new city clans.

make the wilderness more dangerous for individuals.

make the wilderness REALLY FUCKING SCARY at night, forcing people into cities. that'd be thematic anyway.

make water and food outside of cities harder to get, or have a negative malus. worms, diseases, less filling. it's really easy to survive forever on your own in the wilderness. it should not be easy unless you are the mountain man that has hidden away for 20 years learning the ways of the sands.

have more staff-run huge plots that start, continue, and end inside cities.

have stuff-run-plots inside cities appeal to groups that have left. combat. exploration. achieving. social characters are already most likely to be inside cities, and they need people to be social with.

add things to accomplish when players are bored inside the city, that do not require them leaving the city.

see above, then add more stuff that isn't for crafters.

connect the rinth and city in a manner that gives both groups a space to interact with in-game reasons not to fight, break the peace, steal, arrest, etc. suggested this earlier.

do the same with tuluk? tbh i don't know anything about it, it was completely empty every time I've been there, including npc shops. (edit: I haven't been there a lot, maybe three times, but it was completely empty. Not attacking anyone's fav city etc etc so please don't tell me I needed to look harder for people or shops with items or whatever lol)

either the two cities need to be improved SO MUCH BETTER than the small villages or tribal tents or outposts or camps outside that people are clambering to get in. or the rest of the places people are at, outside of the two cities, need to be way harder to live and survive in.

i have played a lot of wilderness people and it is so much easier to make money if you're not a crafter. d-elf camps are displays of wealth that templars and nobles don't have. the outpost was beginning to look like a castle last time i saw it, half an RL year ago and i bet it's cooler now. luir's has cheaper pricing for food and drink, armor, weapons. spice is legal and cheap. red storm is more affordable, too, and they don't have templars walking around stepping on criminal types, and it's like 25 rooms away from Allanak (I find this ironic because when I started Red Storm was the place where you'd go and maybe see two people in a week, but have great RP with two people, whereas Allanak was full as at any given time). there are just way better places to be for almost every character, if that character is thinking about themselves, and able to leave a city.

it's way too easy mode out there. the only reason besides PK anyone really dies outside is because they're new, get bored, or become careless, excepting the random freak occurrences with like 7 aggro npcs jumping you diagonally.

tl;dr stuff outside is cooler and gets more attention, add more stuff in cities to make them safer, more affordable, and more palatable than living outside in the sands of an armageddon world with dangerous monsters.

[Mellifera]

nobles should be able to make or break a templar's career,

I know this is a suggestions thread, not some sort of debate, and you made some good points imo otherwise, but I have to say I think this fatally misunderstands the place of Templars in Nakki society (Nakki since you said that's what you were talking about). They are given the direct power of the immortal, terrifying sorcerer-dragon-god-king which the unending fear of is what the entire society and structure of the city is built around, it makes zero sense for mundane nobles to have influence over their careers as some central controlling factor. Templars are Teks main way of controlling his city, and he gives them (potentially, if they reach red and black) the most senior positions in his society. Templars are the ones who enforce his laws. Inquisitors execute nobility, not the other way around. I would advocate for closing the templar role entirely and permanently before giving nobles the ability to control them.

You also said that templars should have some check for them in game to make sure they're playing well, and they do! Templars are beholden to staff NPC's (in the form of more senior templars) more than any other role, they have to check in with them constantly, and are constantly receiving criticism, praise, punishment, or reward from them, at least in modern arm. If a templar is playing badly they WILL be told, and they WILL suffer for it, as will their career.

Edit: To clarify as well, with all that said, nobles already can have quite some influence on a blue robe templar's career if they really try. Playable templars and playable mobles are relative equals in Allanaki society, with nuance depending on the specific noble or templar in question, and what area of influence we're discussing. I just strongly disagree that this should be some sort of core duty and power of nobility over the templarate as an institution.

[Halcyon]

In my opinion, almost nothing.  I still mostly have trouble keeping characters alive.   At some point they get angry or trapped by some situation, and I cease perfectly careful play.   At that point, my pcs have a very short lifespan.   

I minimize character skillup time to recover, by playing outside and fairly solo.

The last few pcs I have picked fights with, refused extortion or engaged in consensual pvp with have died at 20-24 days played.  This makes me inclined some days to avoid risks until the next character has 30d played.   I recognize this is a failing of mine, and not the game.  I just want to see new experiential territory.

[Bebop]

The long tradition of 'favors' between templars and nobles is inherently flawed, because it becomes completely optional on one side, and only one side.  I don't have an implementation of how this works.  But I do know that playing a noble was often a near-helpless feeling of being casually swept aside.

I believe all of these quality of life improvements did indeed improve quality of life, but only under the circumstances that are not present in the in-city narrative.  We've buffed starting skills.  We've made the wilds much more predictable.  We made storage space plentiful, we made independent-based long-term goals hard coded, we made it so that ultimate character freedom is relatively in-grasp outside the city, but not within.  I've long been a proponent of cutting or hedging some of those indie-boons, but the overwhelming majority see that as a negative, so I will just say that you need to return the balance to what's actually true: The wilds and small outposts are just as efficient at delivering the sheltered safety of civilization now, particularly to any player who's braved them for a decent amount of time across however many characters.  If you want to entice people back to the city, you can't just keep stacking boon over boon in each place to make them all equally desirable.  If you want the city to be populated, you need to keep the intrigue/political danger present, but make the wilderness danger much harder to navigate predictably.

This is a great post and a lot of what I was trying to say.  +1

I also get what Mellifera is saying too.  Templars are valid and powerful, and they should be treated as such.

Having played a Fale for a real life year in the past few years, there were times I felt completely and totally powerless.  But also Fale has no real purpose or collateral other than being "the people's noble" and being there for political intrigue.  But, yeah.  I really don't think people realize how isolating, challenging the sponsored roles of Noble and Templar are in a lot of ways.  It's sad there's not as much appreciation for them as they should be.

It's been years so I think I can say this now, my Fale was actually killed by a Templar and it was a great Game of Thrones type ending.  I had requested a store and staff led me down an IG path for "dismissal."  I personally, have been killed by a few overly cavalier Templars in my day.  One in particular was so pointless, so I do empathize there, but I think people are over generalizing that this is the reason they don't play in cities.

More and more it seems like people just want to "win" Armageddon.  I've really enjoyed some of the batshit and cool as cucumber Templars over time. Samos.  Elithan.  Eunolia.  Feliya (sp?).  Validos.  Lyvren.  Nektol.  Sahtuk.  Etc etc.

Continuing to act like Templars are where all characters go to die is silly.  They are arbiters of the two city-states.  The two most powerful factions in game.  The players that enter these roles are held to a high standard.  Are they always S tier?  No.  But if you can't play in a city because of a thematically corrupt overlord, do you really like Armageddon thematically or do you just need to win in your own power personal fantasy that Arm just happens to be the vessel of?

[Halcyon]

...  or do you just need to win in your own power personal fantasy that Arm just happens to be the vessel of?

Is it possible that the game could be richer with longer lived characters offering more player lead story?  I dont think power fantasies are the only drivers of a wish for character longevity.

[Bebop]

...  or do you just need to win in your own power personal fantasy that Arm just happens to be the vessel of?

Is it possible that the game could be richer with longer lived characters offering more player lead story?  I dont think power fantasies are the only drivers of a wish for character longevity.

I totally get wanting longevity, and less of a grind in the face of a lack of longevity but I also think acting like playing in a city-state is an impossibility because of the hierarchy structure is both odd and incorrect.  Templars and an authoritarian hierarchy are thematic to Armageddon.  Republics and democratic factions out populating those things are not.  People say they want to play Armageddon because of its harsh landscape but seem to also want to reduce Templars to mere city administrators and mediators.

[Armaddict]

They are given the direct power of the immortal, terrifying sorcerer-dragon-god-king which the unending fear of is what the entire society and structure of the city is built around, it makes zero sense for mundane nobles to have influence over their careers as some central controlling factor.

It's old documentation that is no longer on the site, but there was a blurb, paraphrased, that stated: "The templars need the nobility and they know it."  It was based off of the idea that the populace doesn't 'like' templar-magick any more than any other magick.  Templars command via fear and oppression, but the populace is far more comfortable being governed by the nobility.  Essentially, while the Senate itself is a giant front to this end, it does not make templars all-powerful.  The current 'What you know in Allanak' blurb reiterates this by telling how Tek himself does not trust his templars or his populace; the nobles manage the people that are needed for the city to function.

Your viewpoint on that matter, I think, is conducive to the problem.  Nobility are not a useless appendage that just sit there doing nothing.  Some of them will languish in the extravagant lifestyle, certainly; but those nobles involved in their Family business are performing the exact service that is -required- for the city state to function.  A templar who is not backed by a noble is no big deal.  A templar being condemned by nobility -is- a big deal.  So they have to keep this from happening, and that is the entire world of politicking between nobles and templars.  This is the entire illusion built specifically by that same templarate.  This is already built into the game, into the relationship, and into the workings of the city.  It just requires some actual 'unf' so that it's not just a thing that can be casually tossed aside.

I'm not speaking about nobles lording over templars.  Nor am I bashing on any templars.  I'm talking about simple acknowledgement of that fact, that this is a thing that requires maintenance, and that it's not a nobles+templars team vs populace.  It's nobles and templars and populace in a relatively delicate balance.  Upsetting the balance results in...ta-dah, empty cities.  Not just from a PC standpoint, either.  This relationship where each templar is actively garnering support of noble backing is essential to the movement of organic plots and the checks and balances of the behavior of power.

Is it possible that the game could be richer with longer lived characters offering more player lead story?  I dont think power fantasies are the only drivers of a wish for character longevity.

Longevity as a desire has literally been built into the karma system.  That's unfortunate in my opinion, but it's there.  I'm not saying that longevity is in itself bad, but I will say that avoiding the components of good stories in order to find longevity in hopes of good stories is often a thing, consciously or unconsciously, and while you may enjoy a small part that you've built for that long-lived character, if it comes at the expense of plots that interweave between more players (which inherently draws more risk), and that is extended to a larger scale, then that longevity becomes a detriment rather than a bonus.  If you want interaction, you're gonna need plots and things to be involved in.  If you want plots, you need proximity and people willing to risk being a redshirt.  Without redshirts, no plot -really- has any weight.  And without redshirts, no amount of longevity is going to actually be that valuable.  It becomes a bunch of people pursuing their own small stories with little consideration for making the world exciting and moving it forward enough for other people to be swept up in with that die-hard dedication that makes addicts of people.

That may sound harsh or judgmental, it really isn't.  It's more just an appeal to this thing we have going on where people are simultaneously bored and yet insisting that this is fixed by being as uninvolved with things as possible, or only being involved in things they can control enough to ensure that survival.  Of COURSE that doesn't lead to stories.  Of COURSE that leads to people going off and doing their own thing, there's no 'cause' to be part of.

Regardless, even though I've responded to those two things, I'm not actually pushing to argue hard over those points.  These are just thoughts I have had on the state of the game for quite some time, leading to a sort of malaise as players drifted further and further into their own stories rather than the collective ones.  I still believe the cities suffer from suddenly becoming the easiest place to die, or at least the place for the struggles for control over things made them the least desirable to many just because they can just go outside those cities and basically nothing but predictability to contest their control.

The possibilities for changes and improvements and ideas are pretty endless here, but the ones that say 'just make everything easier', or 'just let me make things in my sandbox' are ignoring some of the greater drives of both enjoyment and accomplishment.  You gotta have hardships to make the victories worthwhile.

ETA:  I apologize for the essays.  I do still think about Armageddon quite a bit.  These are untargeted ideas, I'm not trying to crap on anyone, since I'm normally thinking of Arm in a black box making pieces fit together.  When I explain that, it comes out in long expositions, and I am often unwittingly abrasive.