Because as a (newish) player I've thought about playing one...
What are the ups and downs IC & OOC of playing a GMH Hunter?
Quote from: nauta on April 06, 2015, 10:38:29 AM
I do see Dman's point, and if I may summarize it a bit:
Quote
Even without the change, a hunter in a GMH felt a bit like a flavour role; compared to independent hunters, a GMH hunter doesn't need to hunt, neither (a) to provide for themselves nor (b) to provide for their crafts/merchants. The move to NPCs would just amplify this feeling.
I think this might be right but I wonder if it is a bad thing. After all, there's a lot more plot-wise going on in a GMH than hunting - and in fact the basic "go hunt me a tok hide" plot gets dull pretty fast. Hence, the change might encourage GMH plots to move in the other direction (whatever they are).
I think this might be worth a thread of its own, frankly, so it doesn't get confused with the awesomeness of the proposed changes, because let's be honest: on a whole, it is far more frustrating to be stuck in the "my lord ordered that fancy handkerchief three years ago, you are telling me you haven't been able to get the material for it yet" plot.
I overanalyze... apologies in advance.
The "Problem" - There aren't enough skilled hunters in any GMH to meet the IC demand. As a result, materials needed to craft aren't present. Merchant PCs get frustrated because they can't find what they need to craft. Customer PCs get frustrated with the Merchant PCs. Merchant PCs get more frustrated because now in addition to demands they "should" be able to meet as a member of a GMH, they are catching shit about it over the Way, while also getting more orders streamed into their head. Orders they know they won't be able to meet, because... see above.
Why aren't there enough skilled hunters in the GMHs? Because you need a magickal combination of an experienced player that knows where to go to "safely" get these materials and a character that has been alive ICly long enough to have the skills to reliably retrieve these materials. Oh. And that player/character combination needs to come in a package willing and able to play primarily to meet the needs of another PC while also constantly training new hunters that come and go because they don't have the right mix of luck/skill/dedication to the House.
Reality is, those Players/Characters who are totally dedicated to playing with one House are few and far between. Merchants/Agents stick around. Hunters? Not surprisingly, not so much.
So what's the fix? To me? The "fix" seems to be to ditch the concept of GMH Hunters. Have the Houses outsource their Hunting to Indy Hunters. Get what you can IC for whatever price you can IC. If you can't get it IC, pay a set cost for that resource (probably more than you would pay IC) to get it from another (OOC) source. If someone comes along that a GMH can readily get supplies from on a regular basis, they'll naturally give that Hunter discounts in an effort to retain them, but there wouldn't be an expectation of a GMH House Hunter role.
MMV, but my experience (which might've just been a random fluke) as a Corporal Hunter in a GMH last year was more or less this (I think I was in the GMH clan for five or six months): there were usually 2-3 hunters in the clan, and very rarely would all the hunters be on at the same time. We had a rule that you couldn't go out of the gates without a Corporal - and for a while without being three-people thick - and we didn't have a Corporal for about 2-3 months. The merchant would ask for certain neat items which I couldn't possibly get on my own. Every once in a while a giant would show up and we'd totally get that item. Every once in a while the other GMH's hunters (who seemed to have the same problem) would team up with our hunters and we'd totally get that item. But I think in like five or six months, we managed to actually acquire material to make like one helmet or something. Every once in a while we got a hunter who would just go out and hunt on his or her own despite the house rules, and they usually ended up dead (although productive until then!). We would go on 'hunts' now and then as mini-RPTs but very rarely did we actually get anything useful.
I can see how this might feel futile to some people, but I actually thought playing a hunter was fun even if all the hunting we did that was useful occurred virtually. There were other things going on in the GMH to keep me entertained, and other aspects to being a GMH hunter that distinguish you RP-wise from your regular independent hunter (swag, getting invited to dinner parties, getting involved in House politics, promotions).
I have no suggestions on what to change, or even if anything needs to change - although I'd be curious to hear what other experiences were like.
I just don't think we have a large enough player base to allow for that kind of micro-managing.
Almost every organization requires the virtual population to fill in the gaps where it would make IC sense for them to do so. Tenneshi? Virtual/NPC labor to cover the building, sort of not allowing PC laborers or artisans. Borsail? Virtual slavers/slaving, to account for the lack of PC slavers and slaves. And so on. The virtual world is represented, but PC's fill a different niche.
I think there's always room for the GMH hunter...I played a First Hunter in Kadius, and perceived none of the problems Desertman mentions with playing a Hunter and feeling 'useless'. I had political savvy, sway, and could go hunting with my bros when I wanted to, bring back the kills, turn them over to the crafters to make some shit out of, and rinse and repeat. If anything I felt over-valued for my position.
The contractual basis with the GMH is also an appeal for certain PC types -- Not needing to life-oath-swear, like almost every other organization, though that seems to be changing.
One of the major appeals of a GMH Hunter is freedom -- So I definitely see 'You can't go hunting unless you have a Corporal' as draconic and self-defeating to the purpose of the role. Hunters are by their nature the 'explorer' type, and like roughing it on their own. Your hunters are likely not going to have a high life-expectancy -- That sort of rule applies much better to an Aide or someone you need alive, within the walls. Having a dangerous job description isn't aided or alleviated by having restrictions to city limits.
The GMH also shouldn't make big investments in hunters until they reach a certain rank, and have proven they won't get eaten by Gortok #212 once they're given a full suit of leathers and a longbow. Give them a cut of the profits of stuff they bring in and let them build their own 'suit of armor' and 'longbow'. Then give them some swag when they're promoted.
I haven't really seen/had any problems with the role of GMH hunter as it is perceived.
Going hunting with other people is just as likely to get you killed as going alone.
True story: I was hunting in a dangerous area with a GMH hunter and one partner. Said partner got wounded a bit and panicked. And typed flee self at least three times. That random movement caused partner to run straight into a huge mob of 10+ deadly npc monsters that had originally been at least three or four rooms away from our position before he got wounded. His continuous spam fleeing brought him closer to me again before the massive mob cut him down. Because said monsters have hunt, before long they were onto my PC and then my PC died too.
Lessons: flee self is by far the stupidest strategy imaginible. You obviously want to flee in the direction you rode in from, to avoid getting caught by more badguys. He went straight ahead, not back, by at least two or three rooms. Totally inexperienced move.
His inexperience got us both killed.
The model of forcing GMH to work together in hunts is not always, but sometimes is a death sentence. And not necessarily a fun one to RP because my above story all started and ended in less than 30 seconds. My partner somehow managed to pull over ten enemies onto my head.
Frustratingly, the same partner insulted my PC incessantly a few weeks before that and claimed someday my PC would be getting people killed. The whole experience with that GMH was bad enough that I m pretty sure I won't be playing GMH at all for the next few years if ever as a hunter. I agree completely with Dman's assessment that paying indies makes as much if not more sense.
But you get free water and a locker!
lulz
I remember when I was playing an indie hunter in Tuluk and I was constantly seeing this poor Salarr hunter/corporal dude.. Holy crap how happy I was not to be him on a daily basis.. The guy had to bounce back and forth between Tuluk and Allanak to take care of daily drama and idiotic recruits while everyone was banging his mate in his back. I think he finally drove himself to a suicidal edge and I don't blame him one second for it.
There are ups and downs. If you want to hunt unrestricted, play an indie. You will feel too constrained in a GMH hunter role. But if you want an opportunity to be involved in plots, probably be more respected and "respectable" IC, and don't mind some restriction at first, give GMH a try.
I had a really good time with my short-lived GMH hunter and would totally do it again. Like a lot of semi restricted city ripples, you have to make sure you're playing a characte that has things they can do during downtime. Going out recruiting is usually a good one.
An interesting point is that "inexperience" is obviously both IC and OOC/meta. I'm sure I'm not the only player of this game who has rolled up over a dozen hunters and had over a dozen deaths in the wilderness. Those deaths all accumulate in my, the player's skillset. Obviously, not -all- of those skills should belong to every one of my PCs.
..Unless I give them the background that backs up the combined experience and skills that I have as a player, that is.
How do I do this? I would probably role app for a GMH private (i.e., one step above recruit) level hunter, right off the bat. In my background, I would put in all the OOC/meta stuff that explains why, as a player, I actually know my shit (essentially, my past PCs in GMH roles), as well as the IC reasoning for why my PC knows his or hers. For example, my role-apped GMH hunter has been trained since the age of 12 to hunt. This is not a novel concept. I've seen various PCs in game that have this exact background -- they were adopted or born into the house at an early age, so they know their shit.
What -doesn't- work is forcing GMH to recruit from the ranks of already alive PCs all the time. That gets you -some- good PCs, but also plenty of bad ones. Then, PCs argue with each other because they feel entitled to since they're the same rank. There is frustration over the restrictions placed on recruits by players who have done the cycle so many times it gets old.
Is it elitist to allow players to role-app into an auto-promotion in GMH? I don't think so. If I have a few karma to back up that I can, indeed, play a role, and if I have the player history that shows that I've been playing dozens upon dozens of characters, many of whom were warriors/hunters/rangers, then I don't see what's elitist. You're just saving the whole game world time by letting me auto-load in my Private-level hunter, instead of forcing me to roll up from scratch, struggle to find a GMH hiring hunter, and or go to the Byn to get the coded skill to back up my future application, etc etc.
TL;DR: Let us role-app into GMH as private-rank hunters, give us as many skill boosts as our karma allows (or an extended subguild, yum), then watch the GMH hunting divisions start flourishing again. The reasoning is the same as the change to the vNPC/NPC item loaders: get the economy of GMH back on track, and the mechanism is simple: trust that players with hundreds of reports and thousands of hours played as hunters know what they're doing and get them in game, ready to start hunting.
This may already be possible, but I think it should be advertised more. Kadius and Salarr should be accepting roles all the time for already promoted hunters. The simplest requirement should be, if you've been promoted to that rank at least once before in that GMH, and you are an experienced player, then you should generally get the spot (assuming spots are open and there is a need for this, of course). That'd allow someone like me to hop back into GMH, as well as many, many other players, while filtering out those who didn't follow the rules with past PCs long enough to make it to their first promotion.
I would much rather see something like the above happen rather than having hunters become obsolete because of NPCs.
Quote from: valeria on April 06, 2015, 12:52:12 PM
There are ups and downs. If you want to hunt unrestricted, play an indie. You will feel too constrained in a GMH hunter role. But if you want an opportunity to be involved in plots, probably be more respected and "respectable" IC, and don't mind some restriction at first, give GMH a try.
I had a really good time with my short-lived GMH hunter and would totally do it again. Like a lot of semi restricted city ripples, you have to make sure you're playing a characte that has things they can do during downtime. Going out recruiting is usually a good one.
The thing about being an "experienced" Armageddon player is that at some point you know exactly where to hunt and what to hunt so that you don't get yourself killed AND get mighty great at doing it. I mean, when I play hunters, I can guarantee on a 90% chance that I won't get myself killed stupidly AND that I can probably (if unrealistically so) clean up the whole grasslands and scrublands or the beetles land in a pretty quick way. I'll be in great demand and people will get to know me and I'll have plots a plenty. Now put me in a GMH where I'm stuck waiting for people or I'm stuck with idiots and you've shut my productivity down by 100% and I probably won't have the patience to stay in your House long enough to get productive. Also I don't face the "jealousy" that indie crafters often get from GMH because I'm actually useful to the GMHs by selling them what they need while their own House hunters can't really deliver due to said restrictions I've mentioned.
But that's me.. I mean, when I played with you in Winrothol we had an awesome group and we did awesome things together but that sort of group dynamic only happens (and happened) RARELY to me so this is why I prefer to play my hunters solo (or at least if I'm going to work for a House, I -always- wait till I can at least look like I know what I'm doing and then negotiate a clause where I'm free to do as I wish as long as I'm productive)
Right, different people will have different levels of aversion to IC restrictions. You as an experienced player have good reasons for wanting to play indies. I as an experienced player don't mind the restrictions because they're usually short-lived and I can do city things like hang out, tavern sit, or recruit in my downtime. I wouldn't recommend a GMH hunter to anyone that can't handle the downtime without going stir crazy. But if you're the kind of player who can, the role can be really rewarding.
Quote from: Harmless on April 06, 2015, 01:00:29 PM
TL;DR: Let us role-app into GMH as private-rank hunters
Why not just role app into a position like Sergeant/First Hunter (and maybe even: Crewleader/Overseer, Agent)? I'm not sure if you are only allowed to do this once a rolecall goes out, but I know that these positions are quite often dormant (and maybe even always dormant if we take into account North/South divisions - has there ever been two Crewleaders/Overseers or two active Sergeants in a GMH?).
That'd be fine too, but my assumption was in line with yours, that leader-level positions were on a role-call basis. So, my proposal is we let hunters in more often (i.e., anytime a player wants to), but at a slightly lower level. Then leadership is just one promotion away, instead of two or three promotions away, for an experienced player.
Quote from: valeria on April 06, 2015, 01:07:14 PM
Right, different people will have different levels of aversion to IC restrictions. You as an experienced player have good reasons for wanting to play indies. I as an experienced player don't mind the restrictions because they're usually short-lived and I can do city things like hang out, tavern sit, or recruit in my downtime. I wouldn't recommend a GMH hunter to anyone that can't handle the downtime without going stir crazy. But if you're the kind of player who can, the role can be really rewarding.
Valeria, I would never claim it was the restrictions that sucks about being a recruit again. I don't mind restrictions on going out the gates. What I mind more is that because my PC is a recruit they are treated like a recruit. If I was in the mood to play someone young and inexperienced then it would all be fine. But it gets kind of ridiculous having a background of an experienced hunter or soldier, then being treated like any other recruit because my PC is new.
I'd much rather just app into a higher rank so that I don't have to be treated like a kid, if my concept is not for a kid. If my concept was for a kid, then I'd rather start as a recruit. But I don't always want to play kids (sometimes I do). Other times, I want to play vets.
The role app, for me, means the political clout a promotion offers, more than gate restrictions. For example, if the caveat to role-apping a private hunter was that I still couldn't leave the gates alone, then, for me, that'd be fine. At least I don't get treated like a kid, or have people lord it over me that I was a recruit under them, etc etc. My PC was a private for several years virtually before they became non-virtual, that lends a certain respect and honor that I enjoy having.
Anyway, that's what I'd like. I'm basically asking for something in exchange for playing GMH again. So take it with a grain of salt.
When I played one, the biggest problem I had, was I signed up to hunt stuff, and I wasn't allowed out the gates. They made me go a year in the Byn before I joined up, I did enough ruff circle, I can manage to not die, let me go hunt scrabs or something. Even more so now that there are all those easier things to hunt in the south. I know it sucks to lose a hunter who you put money into training up, but if you don't let him hunt, he'll never make you any money. Change how recruit hunters work for the houses. They get some barebones gear to keep them alive, they bring in what they kill, and once they've brought in enough then really gear them up and start pointing them at bigger things to hunt.
There could even be ride alongs, where a more experienced hunter just follows you while you're hunting, asking occasional questions, and if you do well, they tell whoever is in charge and you might get accepted into the house as an official hunter. IMO, anything is better than training for a year, finally getting to be a hunter, and then -having- to sit in a tavern until someone else logs on.
If you are a GMH recruit and you're capable of not dying like a newb, demonstrate that to your leader and ask for an exception.
Unless something has changed, they have the power to make that call.
So I guess my question is, what does the GMH get out of having "in-house" hunters that they couldn't get from out sourcing to the broader pool of Indy Hunters?
OOC - being able to communicate needs via Clan Board (if that's even allowed)
IC - Allegedly trustworthy hunters who will put the House's priorities first?
I can see more opportunity in opening up competition with the Indy Hunters.
OOC - Short of being trapped off-peak and when there is no hunter, find a source of material that works for your times to communicate ICly.
IC - Allegedly trustworthy hunters who will put the House's priorities first, because they are consistently paid to do so.
IC - Potential for conflict between the Houses by way of proxy skirmishes between Hunters/Mercenaries/Assassins. No longer does killing someone's hunter have to be a huge slight against the other House. (on a both IC and OOC scale)
IC - The raft of Hunters who avoid working for Houses just because of other restrictions (no leaving the gates) can become available resources to the merchants as the merchants are no longer expected to only buy "in house".
IC - Potential for all sorts of interplay between rival hunter groups, Tuluki/Allanaki operations squaring off on the other side's "turf"
IC - Dynamically formed hunting teams that form up and break up (probably sometimes violently) based on who's available to do the work without being a hit to GMH clan resources.
IC - GMH agents/merchants visible outside the compounds as they need to gather a network of trusted Hunters and meet with them for deliveries and etc... creating opportunities for even more intrigue.
I understand there is some reason why folks might like the role of GMH Hunter. I also see where the concerns stem from. I think, I see a lot more opportunity if the GMHs went outside the House.
When I played a GMH leader, I frequently used my hunters for non-murder related plots/jobs that outsourced labor could never be trusted with. New hires who could demonstrate that they weren't idiots and had a modicum of proficiency at the art of not dying horribly could leave the gates alone during their recruit period, and even the shit--for-brains redshirt recruits could leave if they took a buddy.
Clans could benefit from a style of leadership that has less micromanagement, especially when it comes to new hires. I'd let people leave the gates and die all they wanted, I wouldn't have to pay them. Those that surived, well they'd just be better off, so would the clan, so would I.
Quote from: Harmless on April 06, 2015, 01:34:55 PM
That'd be fine too, but my assumption was in line with yours, that leader-level positions were on a role-call basis. So, my proposal is we let hunters in more often (i.e., anytime a player wants to), but at a slightly lower level. Then leadership is just one promotion away, instead of two or three promotions away, for an experienced player.
I don't see why an interested player couldn't ask clan staff for this. We do this on occasion in the AoD, for example (allow someone to role-app in at Private). As long as the player has experience, understands the role and the limitations and responsibilities, and can be expected to play it well, then I don't see an issue, especially if the character concept is intriguing.
Quote from: Talia on April 06, 2015, 02:19:13 PM
We do this on occasion in the AoD, for example (allow someone to role-app in at Private). As long as the player has experience, understands the role and the limitations and responsibilities, and can be expected to play it well, then I don't see an issue, especially if the character concept is intriguing.
Just an FYI, please let the Sergeant or Agent know before hand or else they might wind up murdering the poor spec-app on suspicion of them being a spy ;)
Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 06, 2015, 02:20:26 PM
Just an FYI, please let the Sergeant or Agent know before hand or else they might wind up murdering the poor spec-app on suspicion of them being a spy ;)
lawl, so true
So far I've been thinking Indie hunting is best 2018 and the most fun.
From an IC perspective of kind of disliking people and being held down, it seems great.
From an OOC perspective, not having any major cool kids equipment is kind of not fun (But thats the fun in it), but being held down more seems poopier.
That being said I havent had a GMH hunter yet.
Oh well.
Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 06, 2015, 02:20:26 PM
Quote from: Talia on April 06, 2015, 02:19:13 PM
We do this on occasion in the AoD, for example (allow someone to role-app in at Private). As long as the player has experience, understands the role and the limitations and responsibilities, and can be expected to play it well, then I don't see an issue, especially if the character concept is intriguing.
Just an FYI, please let the Sergeant or Agent know before hand or else they might wind up murdering the poor spec-app on suspicion of them being a spy ;)
It would seem a bit suspicious when this shit hot hunter turns up and expects to be treated as one of the crew. Or he says he is a vet hunter from way back. Trying to take over our job is he?
Quote from: Talia on April 06, 2015, 02:19:13 PM
Quote from: Harmless on April 06, 2015, 01:34:55 PM
That'd be fine too, but my assumption was in line with yours, that leader-level positions were on a role-call basis. So, my proposal is we let hunters in more often (i.e., anytime a player wants to), but at a slightly lower level. Then leadership is just one promotion away, instead of two or three promotions away, for an experienced player.
I don't see why an interested player couldn't ask clan staff for this. We do this on occasion in the AoD, for example (allow someone to role-app in at Private). As long as the player has experience, understands the role and the limitations and responsibilities, and can be expected to play it well, then I don't see an issue, especially if the character concept is intriguing.
Awesome! I am encouraged that this already happens and that it could happen. When I next want to do GMH hunting I'll likely be doing this.
As for AoD, I've never played it before, so naturally what I prefer to do there is make a fresh PC and get recruited, and build the PC up from scratch. I just say this to emphasize that the point of role apping into a private spot, for me, is to "pick up where I left off" in the kind of plots I was working towards, rather than feeling like I need to keep starting from the very beginning. After all, GMH hunting is one of the most ridiculously dangerous roles one can have, even if skilled/experienced, etc etc.
Quote from: solera on April 06, 2015, 02:32:11 PM
Quote from: BadSkeelz on April 06, 2015, 02:20:26 PM
Quote from: Talia on April 06, 2015, 02:19:13 PM
We do this on occasion in the AoD, for example (allow someone to role-app in at Private). As long as the player has experience, understands the role and the limitations and responsibilities, and can be expected to play it well, then I don't see an issue, especially if the character concept is intriguing.
Just an FYI, please let the Sergeant or Agent know before hand or else they might wind up murdering the poor spec-app on suspicion of them being a spy ;)
It would seem a bit suspicious when this shit hot hunter turns up and expects to be treated as one of the crew. Or he says he is a vet hunter from way back. Trying to take over our job is he?
Why? I don't see a problem with this, especially if there's a vacancy in said crew, GMH/Milita/Merc whatever. Stick this in line with your skill-bump app and I'd say it's justified.
A player has a character concept in mind, but there's no guarantee that Dorf Malik with the foci of killing that grumpy shit in friels and taking his luxurious place is ever going to get into Kurac in the first place. So he writes up his concept, spends a skill-bump app to get himself up to where he would be at that point in his said career, and gets into game.
Malik rolls in, looking around with purpose in his eye, this is where he's worked to get to, this is his moment to shine!
"Who the fuck are you?"
"Malik, I'm yer new panty-sniffer, transferred in from the 4th's cock-block squad."
Happens in military forces all the time. Most clans in the game have a pretty militant structure.
Yeah, it's a fine practice. I just kind of throttled someone who might have been doing it because my PC wasn't forewarned of a sudden addition by any superior (and my PC was a paranoid asshole anyway).
Considering you probably meet and go past countless nameless npcs one of them stepping up and being your boss/a good hunter isn't unheard of I would think.
I kind of talked about this before, but I think this is just another thing that supports my particular view. Gunna make yall suffer through my logic again. :)
Currently (even more so with the changes) the only real difference with gmh vs indie hunters are:
GMH (who get these benefits right from the start)
-established compound and relatively safe storage
-pcs to interact with
-other people to help keep your pc busy (crafters, agents, boss hunters)
-some rules to follow to keep your pc alive
-free equipment and tools
Indie (must build everything you get from scratch unless you join an established indie group)
-On your own and can do whatever you want
As an experienced player, the indie option seems so much more appealing. If you already know how to get everything that a gmh can provide, what other incentive is there for you to join them in exchange for your independence? With the new changes, house hunters have even less of a real reason to be hunting, since they make their coins on a salary. No matter how much you work as a gmh hunter, other than a few bonuses you might get if your boss is nice, it doesnt matter how much you bring in.
What I think joining a gmh should actually be providing is safety and security. Not only physical safety/security, but political and social. If you are an indie, you should have to be looking over your shoulder no matter where you are, and to feel a real threat to your well-being if you are not on top of things.
If the game has more conflict between groups, where there is a real threat for pcs unless they are associated with someone in power, then I believe gmhs can be a way to attract more players, and really drive plots along. If the center of power and plots are between large groups, then this should appeal to players of all experiences.
Ultimately, I say the game could be more dangerous for everyone. Then coded power (how good your twinking skills are) becomes less of an issue, and that political and social interaction comes to the forefront. Breeds, muls, non-gammed mages, all of these fringe characters feel more threatened because they don't have a powerful group to protect them. Indies without association to a person in power are vulnerable to the political machinations of group conflict. Staying in a mob of other pcs (and being accepted by them, or even becoming a leader among them) is appealing because alone you are vulnerable.
But right now, that is not really the case. I could probably be way more successful than a gmh family member if I avoid interaction for a while and twink up, and then make more coins than even nobles without a threat to my pcs safety or wellbeing.
I say make the cities more dangerous. Give having a political connection more weight and power. Then let everyone consolidate into two or three really big powers who compete against each other for limited resources left remaining both inside and outside the city. More than anything, make safe zones such as apartments limited resources and "Dark Places" in the city be actually dangerous. Consolidate safe zones then pcs will be forced to gather together and interact with each other. Thise who don't fit in are forced to live out in the wilds.
Kill indies, hide behind your PC leader. If they're a good leader, they'll thank you before they throw you to the wolves. If the wolves even care.
If you're a leader, you should be encouraging these activities. It ensures that, even if it's just rumor, the next generation remembers that working for a GMH is safer than striking out on your own to step on toes.
If you're not a leader, why are you not doing everything your leadr tells you while searching for that opportune moment to stick a dagger in their back?
If you're an indy, well.....hope your purse is bigger than a GMH's.
I played in GMH houses periodically over the last several years. My experiences both as an employee and as a leader have been all over the board. In 2002 or 2003 I played in Kurac, and watched a plot unfold where a couple of people betrayed the house and were hunted down and killed. That was so awesome.
I didn't play in Kurac during the liberation of Tuluk, but I got captured by them and I think I was the last person they killed at a bout 6 in the morning after staying up all night. You could tell those people were having fun.
I played a GMH leader who was at times subpar, at times mediocre and at times hit moments of magic. There are times when things come together and everyone is involved and working together and the flavor is just Armageddon. There's an experience just peculiar to clans. There's something about being part of something permanent and important (icly at least important) that makes the great merchant houses really close to my heart.
But you have other times when it's just eh. No one is connected. You just all eat the same food. Those times just suck.
Quote from: Semper on April 06, 2015, 04:57:53 PM
stuff
Pretty much the same discussion as the noble discussion, really. It would be nice for there to be a crimcode revamp, so that we could take care of the lack of desire for clans and other 'little' things like the discussion of brawling at the same time. Essentially...as you climb the social ladder, the 'safety' of the city becomes more secure. Or at least the city response to threats to that safety.
That and warring clans. I really want warring clans. This was, again, the gist of what I was going for with my 'gate village' thing and required wait time to get into the city proper. Turn that into a more populous, crime-ridden, capitalist-price-gouging area that indies and low-ranking members of society just...have to go through, due to the bureaucracy of security at the city gates. Some people would just live and make their living out there. Crim code remains intact inside, but getting inside is a pain, and patrols outside are less common and usually more for directed incidents of worry. Merchant houses, on the other hand...have special dealings. They don't wait at gates, they get waved on through. Noble houses, likewise, don't wait, and they're the only ones that can escort indies and such through.
Things like that. I derailed into my idea, but essentially...crimcode. Yeah. It's late and I rambled.
Quote from: Jihelu on April 06, 2015, 04:53:35 PM
Considering you probably meet and go past countless nameless npcs one of them stepping up and being your boss/a good hunter isn't unheard of I would think.
It doesn't stop you being antsy when they land in the middle of Your crew. That's what I find in a similar situation in my RL.
A lot of people seem to be saying that GMH's are good for special plots or whatever. That hunters can also be used as makeshift assassins or spies and you get invited to dinner parties or whatever and everything is cool.
And I say, fine, but that's not a GMH person thing, that's an everyone thing.
If I want to do all of that, I can just as easily roll up a soldier, a partisan in the north, or join the amber wyverns. Hell, if I make an independent hunter and start passing random political people coin, chances are they'll like me a hundred times better than any GMH agent out there. Saying GMH hunters are fun for the connections and activities about it is like saying the byn is fun because it has people inside it: it's not exactly a unique feature.
So, if GMHs are to have crews of multiple PC hunters, actually let them hunt for a reason.
So basically this thread was started b/c Indie Hunters want to get in on GMH plots and fun?
Everybody wants Cake and wants to eat it too.
If you're bored in your GMH House, leave. The Rebel command is used too little.
Hint to pc leaders in GMH
Junk stuff once a month. Have minions sell excess and give them sid. Use all you can. But when that's done and there is still too much stuff, quietly, when no one can see, junk it in huge batches. Don't tell the hunters you're doing it.
Not that it will fix everything. It won't. It would be good to make the hunters feel more crucial. But I don't think anyone in the game feels crucial all the time (with exceptions for the spectacular players.) Junking things will only make them feel less redundant.
I've pretty much only had good experiences with hunters of any type. Clanned, unclanned, it's a great role, and the few drawbacks for clans or for indies are hardly ever enough to trump the inherent fun that being a hunter gives.
Quote from: Patuk on April 07, 2015, 04:30:49 AM
A lot of people seem to be saying that GMH's are good for special plots or whatever. That hunters can also be used as makeshift assassins or spies and you get invited to dinner parties or whatever and everything is cool.
And at the same time, GMH focus should be on completing tasks. There's "room" for plotting, but nothing is more annoying as a GMH mil leader than to roll in to find that you have 5 assassin-types picking doors on the regular and trying to murder people instead of hunting.
GMH hunting crews are for hunters first and foremost, not femme assassins.
Quote from: Dakota on April 07, 2015, 04:59:49 AM
So basically this thread was started b/c Indie Hunters want to get in on GMH plots and fun?
Everybody wants Cake and wants to eat it too.
If you're bored in your GMH House, leave. The Rebel command is used too little.
Um, no.
This thread was started to discuss what the benefits are of having GMH Hunters versus the GMH using indie hunters. To the Houses, to the players, and to the game.
I think this is pretty much the same issue as the Noble Power thread. Gmh should have certain advantages that appeal to players over being an indie hunter, but that just isnt the case in a lot of situations. Whether that is accurate or not is up for debate.
I thought this thread was started as a way to propose ideas to make being a GMH hunter more appealing.
Most notably, by making what they do....hunt....actually matter in terms of the success and progression of the House/the specific unit they are part of.
As it stands, nothing they gather matters in any meaningful way because everything would get produced no matter what by staff-loaded items anyways if the hunters didn't exist (and often times even if they do).
Once the NPC with all of the items goes in, hunters will actually serve to slow down the process if anything. If the hunters didn't exist, there would be a valid excuse on behalf of the merchant to just auto-instant load everything.
Nothing a GMH hunter does matters in terms of hunting in reality. For me personally, it has always made the role unfulfilling.
My proposal:
Provide the crafters in the Houses once they reach a certain rank with a list off all craftable items and their recipes. This way they can tell hunters exactly what they need and tell clients exactly what they can make. This produces things for people to do that matter.
Put the auto-load NPC in but only with items that are not craftable. This way it doesn't screw with the meaningful things the PC's are doing. There is also no "instant alternative" if the hunters didn't exist.
Use the list on the NPC's as a go-to list of items, "We need to make crafting recipes for.", when staffers have free time, or possibly the new builders as well? This could be something great for them to work on that would actually help the game world, the economy, and the fun/usefulness of these roles.
Right now the mindset is, "They will only use the NPC if there are no hunters and crafters available to make the items, or the hunters and crafters they have aren't good enough to get them what they need.".
While I see why that is the case, I also see that it makes playing a hunter, or a crafter in a lot of cases, feel like a secondary flavor role where nothing you do matters. It doesn't matter if I exist or not, and in fact, if I didn't, this order would get filled much faster.
I much prefer the idea of leaders having (because no other options) to scramble to produce actual productive crews instead of producing productive crews being something they have the option to do for success. If they can't/are having too hard of a time of it....they just use the NPC for success.
One of these creates plots and pushes the idea of branching out and scrambling to come up with new inventive ways to be successful. The other just lets them have a fallback if their "best efforts" aren't fruitful.
In the end, this is the scenario you have when playing a House hunter.
The Merchant House Merchant says to you, "I need you to figure out a way with your crew to harvest me four kryl shells First Hunter. I have to have these.".
The character is saying, "Absolutely Merchant House Merchant, I will do my best with my crew.".
The player is thinking, "But we both know if I don't, it doesn't matter, whatever it is will just get made anyways.".
It is compounded further with the new NPC system, "We both know if I didn't exist at all you would have the order already filled.". That doesn't make me feel good about what I'm accomplishing with my role as a House hunter and I think players like to feel good about what they are accomplishing.
Adding that my way seems just as fruitful in terms of cutting down the staff's workload without leaving a bad taste in the mouth's hunter PCs in regards to their actual meaningful usefulness.
They still will not have to load any items into the game. The players have an entire list of everything they can produce through their own IC efforts.
They have an NPC to load everything they can't.
Either they are successful by the sweat of their brow, or they aren't. If they aren't, staff can animate the right higher ranking NPC's to come kick some ass.
If they are, staff can animate the higher ranking NPC's to come spread some praise and possible rewards.
What staff doesn't have to do? Ever answer another question about loading items.
You have the sandbox and all of the tools you need. It is up to you now.
Will there be some nobles or Templars along the way that want, "This specific item that is craftable and not on the instant-NPC.", that might have to wait because your crew needs time to get the materials/you need time to IC'ly figure out how? Yes. But, that creates plots and drives production and makes people feel useful.
You know what doesn't? Walk to NPC. Get item. Walk back to Templar. Walk to bank.
I just see so much potential and so much awesome to be had here and I feel like we are missing an opportunity.
I would love to play the House hunter that got told, "Look Amos, Lord Templar Borsail wants this breastplate. I can make it, but I need this shell. If you get it or not determines if we make this Templar happy. There is no other way. Go be awesome.".
Welcome to my dream hunter role sign-me-the-fuck-up.
(I'm not trying to poo poo on staff's idea of making the NPC have everything. I'm just trying to make a few roles a lot more fun in terms of what I enjoy personally and that I hope other people will enjoy. I just want to make the game better for everyone. I only have my own experiences to work with in terms of providing those ideas.)
Quote from: Desertman on April 07, 2015, 10:06:46 AM
In the end, this is the scenario you have when playing a House hunter.
The Merchant House Merchant says to you, "I need you to figure out a way with your crew to harvest me four kryl shells First Hunter. I have to have these.".
The character is saying, "Absolutely Merchant House Merchant, I will do my best with my crew.".
The player is thinking, "But we both know if I don't, it doesn't matter, whatever it is will just get made anyways.".
It is compounded further with the new NPC system, "We both know if I didn't exist at all you would have the order already filled.".
I think the above is a reasonable view of things. However I think there are a few assumptions in there.
First, that there is no limit to the amount of resources that can be requested from the NPC suppliers.
Second, that the the cost to the merchant would be negligible to get the resource from the NPC supplier.
Third, that there is no delay between asking for and receiving said resource.
If instead the conversation played out as:
The Merchant House Merchant says to you, "I checked and it'll take a month to get these four kryl shells I need and cost me two large to have someone escort the shipment here. I need you to figure out a way with your crew to harvest them sooner, First Hunter. I have to have these for Lady Whatsername and Lord Whosit."
The Hunter Character is saying, "Absolutely Merchant House Merchant, I will do my best with my crew.".
The Hunter Player is thinking, "I should be able to get one or two, I'd have to do nothing else to get all four and Amos would almost certainly get eaten."
The Merchant House Merchant is thinking, "If they get me one... I can get started, two I can fill Lady Whatsername's order and three gets me almost all the way there. I'll order two now just to be safe."
It is supported by the new NPC system, "We both know if I didn't exist at all you would have the order filled, but it would have been another RL week and you'd have spent more sid getting those tiles, so how about you throw your hunters a bone."
I'm still not sure what the GMH gains from using a GMH Hunter instead of outsourcing hunting to independent hunters / groups.
Quote from: whitt on April 07, 2015, 10:41:44 AM
I'm still not sure what the GMH gains from using a GMH Hunter instead of outsourcing hunting to independent hunters / groups.
Fun, and the perpetuation of tradition and structure of the game world.
For a while Nenyuk was open with a vastly reduced ability to recruit. It was hard to fill those roles. And the last one that lasted more than a couple of months was in 2001. (Several years before they closed.) No one wants to be king of an empty kingdom.
I think whitt and Desertman are both correct, even if their positions might seem a little mutually exclusive.
Making hunters truly useful by ensuring their produce is the only way items can be created makes sure being a hunter is fulfilling.
Conversely, if hunters become too useless through this added NPC, I think outsourcing your rare GMH hunting needs becomes useful. It's a way for independent groups to naturally form and compete over things.
Right now we're kind of stuck in the middle of things where GMH hunters are apparently needed enough that every House keeps a cadre because reasons, but not so needed that they actually will be getting shit people want most of the time.
For what it is worth, we do not provide crafting lists. At this time, the plan is that the auto-load NPCs will load stock items regardless of whether they can be crafted or not. We generally make decisions about the game based on past behaviors, using facts. In this case, we know item orders are not that fun for those that have to do them. This includes staff and players. Many players suggested this as a solution to the problem of item orders. It can be implemented with some not-insurmountable work. However, we generally do not make decisions about the game based on slight concerns about future clan leaders making completely OOC decisions that they shouldn't be making. It is far easier to just say "this is the policy, this is what should happen, please refer to these docs," and deal with the (likely rare, knowing our playerbase) case-by-case situations that might occur in the future. Players are generally pretty good about sticking to documentation and working their staff when there are issues.
GMHs have gotten along just fine thus far without crafting lists. Hunters get to do cool shit in a crew, like explore dangerous places with a (generally) better survivability. What's cooler than that?
Getting ginka fruits with your badass companions. What's cooler than that?
Hunting the fabled roc which I STILL HAVE NEVER EVER SEEN SO IT MUST NOT EXIST.
What's cooler than that?
Not a fucking lot, and you can't generally do that kind of shit alone.
I assume then that customers are still expected to wait a rl week or two for an order, but if a hunter can get the item and a crafter fix it up before the time frame, then the customer can get the item sooner? And if the staff load up craftable items, isnt that pretty much providing a merchant with a list of all craftable items? They would just have to analyze the item to know if it is craftable, and know the recipe like that.
Quote from: Nyr on April 07, 2015, 11:12:31 AM
For what it is worth, we do not provide crafting lists. At this time, the plan is that the auto-load NPCs will load stock items regardless of whether they can be crafted or not. We generally make decisions about the game based on past behaviors, using facts. In this case, we know item orders are not that fun for those that have to do them. This includes staff and players. Many players suggested this as a solution to the problem of item orders. It can be implemented with some not-insurmountable work. However, we generally do not make decisions about the game based on slight concerns about future clan leaders making completely OOC decisions that they shouldn't be making. It is far easier to just say "this is the policy, this is what should happen, please refer to these docs," and deal with the (likely rare, knowing our playerbase) case-by-case situations that might occur in the future. Players are generally pretty good about sticking to documentation and working their staff when there are issues.
It's just a preference thing I guess.
I would enjoy the idea of actually working IC'ly to fill orders through the IC efforts of either myself or my employees. I guess most people don't like having to do that with their merchant roles(fill orders that is). I wasn't aware obviously.
That isn't for everyone I guess. Just putting in my two cents for what I would like if it were me. (And I'm apparently in the minority. Meh. Sadness.)
I'm a prick though. My next "old man shaking his fist on his lawn" response would be, "If they don't like doing what merchant Houses do, fill orders, they shouldn't app those roles". Obviously, that wouldn't be productive, but, it is how I feel.
It'd be cool if GMH merchants just disciplined themselves and waited 1 RL week to load items that could otherwise be made through GMH hunter/crafter efforts. You got 1 RL week to do it by normal means, if you can't make it in that timeframe, tough shit, the customer has been waiting and they get their shit now. No bonus for you.
I think that's totally fair. And requires absolutely no staff intervention, so I can totally see why it's been added.
I also have a habit of playing roles that aren't horribly newbie friendly. In retrospect, it would be pretty difficult for newer players to be successful on an IC level with my system. I guess staff has to consider the full spectrum of playability and enjoyment and not just the abilities of veterans.
As a vet, I could rock that roll.
Thinking back to when I was a newbie, I would be lost and could never make that work and would never be able to fill orders. :(
I had not considered that.
Quote from: Desertman on April 07, 2015, 11:56:01 AM
I also have a habit of playing roles that aren't horribly newbie friendly. In retrospect, it would be pretty difficult for newer players to be successful on an IC level with my system. I guess staff has to consider the full spectrum of playability and enjoyment and not just the abilities of veterans.
As a vet, I could rock that roll.
Thinking back to when I was a newbie, I would be lost and could never make that work and would never be able to fill orders. :(
I had not considered that.
D-man...
The wife took over your account.
Time to change your password.
;)
Quote from: whitt on April 07, 2015, 12:08:19 PM
Quote from: Desertman on April 07, 2015, 11:56:01 AM
I also have a habit of playing roles that aren't horribly newbie friendly. In retrospect, it would be pretty difficult for newer players to be successful on an IC level with my system. I guess staff has to consider the full spectrum of playability and enjoyment and not just the abilities of veterans.
As a vet, I could rock that roll.
Thinking back to when I was a newbie, I would be lost and could never make that work and would never be able to fill orders. :(
I had not considered that.
D-man...
The wife took over your account.
Time to change your password.
;)
The weak should perish. Get off my lawn. I've no considerations for those that can't stand alone. Garble garble grable stuff and things!!! *Shakes Fist*
Why not just get rid of [the need for] GMH hunters altogether? Make it as a flavor role if someone wants to play a House Hunter (like a Noble House guard is presently), and push the actual hunting-type PCs into independent groups. I think group dynamics would be more interesting that way.
[added] It should be more of a political/social move to join a GMH for a hunter, rather than a motive to actual do hunting. If you just want to make a living as a hunter, then joining an independent merchant who actually needs your services would be more rewarding (which it should be). Perhaps once you are an experienced hunter, then joining a GMH allows your character to focus on politics rather than having to go out and risk your life all the time in order to make a living. And make it so only a limited few can join a division, so it's actually some status your character gains by making it into those select few.
It would turn Salarr and Kadius into Nenyuks. Nenyuk didn't work.
Quote from: Semper on April 07, 2015, 12:45:30 PM
Why not just get rid of [the need for] GMH hunters altogether? Make it as a flavor role if someone wants to play a House Hunter (like a Noble House guard is presently), and push the actual hunting-type PCs into independent groups. I think group dynamics would be more interesting that way.
[added] It should be more of a political/social move to join a GMH for a hunter, rather than a motive to actual do hunting. If you just want to make a living as a hunter, then joining an independent merchant who actually needs your services would be more rewarding (which it should be). Perhaps once you are an experienced hunter, then joining a GMH allows your character to focus on politics rather than having to go out and risk your life all the time in order to make a living. And make it so only a limited few can join a division, so it's actually some status your character gains by making it into those select few.
Quote from: Barzalene on April 07, 2015, 12:54:22 PM
It would turn Salarr and Kadius into Nenyuks. Nenyuk didn't work.
How so?
Because the hunters are the best part.
D-man, did you consider how many more obscure materials will be used when craters mcrafters have access to more recipes via the analyze skill... because there are models available to analyze now that could be pulled off of npcs for that purpose? Instead of having to constantly fetch the same neverending supply of easily craftable stuff. Maybe crafters will actually dog into the knobby fuckwood pile, making it necessary for hunters to get more four the first time in ever. This could actually be a good thing for hunters.
I think any problems of overusing npcs to the detriment of pc hunters and craters can be addressed by staff.
So, what again is the objection to giving high crafters/sponsored dudes recipe lists?
Quote from: Patuk on April 07, 2015, 01:18:04 PM
So, what again is the objection to giving high crafters/sponsored dudes recipe lists?
Probably for the same reason the spell and skill lists aren't given? I figured it's a staff policy.
keeps the newbies down
Quote from: Patuk on April 07, 2015, 01:18:04 PM
So, what again is the objection to giving high crafters/sponsored dudes recipe lists?
find out ic
Quote from: valeria on April 07, 2015, 01:03:24 PM
D-man, did you consider how many more obscure materials will be used when craters mcrafters have access to more recipes via the analyze skill... because there are models available to analyze now that could be pulled off of npcs for that purpose? Instead of having to constantly fetch the same neverending supply of easily craftable stuff. Maybe crafters will actually dog into the knobby fuckwood pile, making it necessary for hunters to get more four the first time in ever. This could actually be a good thing for hunters.
I think any problems of overusing npcs to the detriment of pc hunters and craters can be addressed by staff.
If you can pull the items off an NPC to get the recipe, that means you can pull them off the NPC to market them. It still makes hunters an option, not a necessity, and not even necessarily the best option in terms of making clients happy.
The NPC will only hold one of each item, and once you buy it to hand it out (unless it's nucraftable), it's gone. Better get your crafters working!
Quote from: Saellyn on April 07, 2015, 01:28:02 PM
The NPC will only hold one of each item, and once you buy it to hand it out (unless it's nucraftable), it's gone. Better get your crafters working!
I don't see where this was said.
Quote from: Desertman on April 07, 2015, 01:26:14 PM
Quote from: valeria on April 07, 2015, 01:03:24 PM
D-man, did you consider how many more obscure materials will be used when craters mcrafters have access to more recipes via the analyze skill... because there are models available to analyze now that could be pulled off of npcs for that purpose? Instead of having to constantly fetch the same neverending supply of easily craftable stuff. Maybe crafters will actually dog into the knobby fuckwood pile, making it necessary for hunters to get more four the first time in ever. This could actually be a good thing for hunters.
I think any problems of overusing npcs to the detriment of pc hunters and craters can be addressed by staff.
If you can pull the items off an NPC to get the recipe, that means you can pull them off the NPC to market them. It still makes hunters an option, not a necessity, and not even necessarily the best option in terms of making clients happy.
Which is why I say just get rid of the need for PC GMH hunters to actually hunt, and instead have them fulfill a different primary function in their respective clan. With all the additional free time that I assume merchants/crafters might have, put it to good use interacting with other clans/groups, rather than sitting around waiting for hunters to kill NPCs.
Free up PCs to actually make plots happen, instead of every plot being "fulfill this or that order for templar/noble hardnose".
Quote from: Semper on April 07, 2015, 01:31:11 PM
Quote from: Desertman on April 07, 2015, 01:26:14 PM
Quote from: valeria on April 07, 2015, 01:03:24 PM
D-man, did you consider how many more obscure materials will be used when craters mcrafters have access to more recipes via the analyze skill... because there are models available to analyze now that could be pulled off of npcs for that purpose? Instead of having to constantly fetch the same neverending supply of easily craftable stuff. Maybe crafters will actually dog into the knobby fuckwood pile, making it necessary for hunters to get more four the first time in ever. This could actually be a good thing for hunters.
I think any problems of overusing npcs to the detriment of pc hunters and craters can be addressed by staff.
If you can pull the items off an NPC to get the recipe, that means you can pull them off the NPC to market them. It still makes hunters an option, not a necessity, and not even necessarily the best option in terms of making clients happy.
Which is why I say just get rid of the need for PC GMH hunters to actually hunt, and instead have them fulfill a different primary function in their respective clan. With all the additional free time that I assume merchants/crafters might have, put it to good use interacting with other clans/groups, rather than sitting around waiting for hunters to kill NPCs.
Free up PCs to actually make plots happen, instead of every plot being "fulfill this or that order for templar/noble hardnose".
I would argue there really is no "need" for them to hunt right now (and in a lot of ways hasn't been for a very long time) and that will be compounded by the new NPC feature.
Quote from: whitt on April 06, 2015, 10:59:31 AM
So what's the fix? To me? The "fix" seems to be to ditch the concept of GMH Hunters. Have the Houses outsource their Hunting to Indy Hunters. Get what you can IC for whatever price you can IC. If you can't get it IC, pay a set cost for that resource (probably more than you would pay IC) to get it from another (OOC) source. If someone comes along that a GMH can readily get supplies from on a regular basis, they'll naturally give that Hunter discounts in an effort to retain them, but there wouldn't be an expectation of a GMH House Hunter role.
Hi Witt!
I think it is a neat idea, and some of it happens already IG. I know that my indy hunters often sold things to GMH merchants, although some of them were chased down by GMH thugs (for doing just that).
Just to comment on your suggestion, I think there might be two things to consider:
1. It is pretty radical as a fix. I think there's still plenty of room for GMH hunter PCs in the game world, even if OOCly you know you are not actually doing anything but have to pretend that you are (after all that's what nobles and, well, pretty much all of us have to do anyway - there are, after all, other virtual hunters in the House). PC hunters can still go on hunts with their "bros", wear the swag, get easily involved in house politics/plots, have social standing above the average independent (if people play the docs right), have stressful jobs that prevent them from giving enough love to their dimwitted honies back home who will cheat on them with some disgusting no-rank indy, get let out of jail for a lesser bribe or no bribe at all, etc. etc. In general it offers a different RP experience than that of the average independent hunter.
2. The very thing that makes GMH hunter PCs redundant/unnecessary a fortiori makes independent hunter PCs unnecessary to a GMH Merchant PC, namely: that items purchased and their raw materials can be 'virtually' obtained either (as it was before) a request to staff or (as it will be nowish) an NPC vendor. And from what I understand, the NPC vendor is basically the most awesome thing ever in every regard other than that it amplifies the feeling of redundancy/non-necessity for a PC GMH hunter.
3. Some people have pointed out that one fun dynamic is that between indy hunters and GMH hunters, and it'd be a shame to lose this.
In the end if we have a choice between losing a meaningful and longstanding part of the game (GMH Hunters) either by proposed change or attrition (due to reduced fun ) or brainstorm something new to enhance the role I want to advocate what's behind door number 3. I don't want to lose hunters. I do want the merchant order process improved. What can we add to the equation to make it balance.
Quote from: Barzalene on April 07, 2015, 03:11:58 PM
In the end if we have a choice between losing a meaningful and longstanding part of the game (GMH Hunters) either by proposed change or attrition (due to reduced fun ) or brainstorm something new to enhance the role I want to advocate what's behind door number 3. I don't want to lose hunters. I do want the merchant order process improved. What can we add to the equation to make it balance.
I still like my idea of giving the kids the tools and letting them play in the sand instead of just handing them finished sandcastles.
It appears most people prefer finished sandcastles however, which saddens me, but, I can't argue with the numbers.
My view of GMH's is probably an issue also. I really do view them as having the goal of creating and marketing those items they are known for to PC's and that being their primary goal. Apparently this is not such a huge concern on the PC front and is not necessarily their entire focus.
I view doing exactly that as the measure of their success, while it seems most people view the marketing and selling of those goods as a secondary inconvenience to the role, and not necessarily the primary function of the role.
Learning most people view taking orders and filling orders in a GMH as a pain made me really re-think my entire standpoint behind what I am shooting for with my idea.
My idea was meant to enhance part of the game that most people seemingly don't even prefer to do.
Thus, it is a failed idea from the start.
With this knowledge, I actually fully support the idea of an NPC that can fill all orders. It means I'll probably never play one of those roles since it doesn't really cater to my preferred "objectives" I like when playing a role, but, if it makes most people enjoy it, I'm elbow deep two-thumbs up.
I think you are right about hu terms having work that feels crucial. Its worth discussion.
Quote from: Barzalene on April 07, 2015, 03:29:24 PM
I think you are right about hu terms having work that feels crucial. Its worth discussion.
This is going to be a great change for non-crafter House merchants and House Family/Agents who aren't crafters who want to get their orders filled and go back to playing politics.
In my opinion, it is going to serve to further hurt how meaningful playing a grass-roots crafter and hunter in a House feels. I also speculate it is going to make filling those roles even more difficult than they already are at times now.
We will see how it goes.
I'm all for making it possible for merchants to fulfill orders without relying on staff intervention - freeing up staff time can only be a good thing.
That isn't a problem.
The larger problem, as I see it, is that the GMH have won. They have nothing to struggle for. They're top dogs. They don't need to fight each other. They don't need to use their "hunters" as assassins, thugs, and guardsmen. They don't need to compete with (most) small indie outfits. You don't "need" to guard the wagons. You don't "need" to make caravan and supply runs. There's little to no real danger presented by the coded world. They have little left to do except for relatively sparse politicking and jockeying for position that is ultimately meaningless due to the lack of ability to affect real change - for better or worse. If you degraded relationships between the Houses, I about guarantee they'd shut YOU down rather than the opposing house, in favor of profits. While sensible, that leads to stagnation and lack of any real, meaty conflict, and keeps most of that conflict behind meeting-room doors.
The only House which has ever felt like it has a reason to keep fighting and struggling is, on occasion, House Kurac - and even then, those occasions are rarer than I'd like.
When you've won, the story becomes far less interesting, because there's far less immediate conflict the players can sink their teeth into.
Fix that, and the GMH will be more interesting. It isn't about being able to fulfill orders. It isn't about needing to go hunt gortok #8978.
It's about conflict, and that's what the GMH lack.
From what I'm getting through all of this, are GMH hunters babied? Hunting when it's only fun or something.
Quote from: Delirium on April 07, 2015, 03:49:23 PM
I'm all for making it possible for merchants to fulfill orders without relying on staff intervention - freeing up staff time can only be a good thing.
That isn't a problem.
The larger problem, as I see it, is that the GMH have won. They have nothing to struggle for. They're top dogs. They don't need to fight each other. They don't need to use their "hunters" as assassins, thugs, and guardsmen. They don't need to compete with (most) small indie outfits. You don't "need" to guard the wagons. You don't "need" to make caravan and supply runs. There's little to no real danger presented by the coded world. They have little left to do except for relatively sparse politicking and jockeying for position that is ultimately meaningless due to the lack of ability to affect real change - for better or worse. If you degraded relationships between the Houses, I about guarantee they'd shut YOU down rather than the opposing house, in favor of profits. While sensible, that leads to stagnation and lack of any real, meaty conflict, and keeps most of that conflict behind meeting-room doors.
The only House which has ever felt like it has a reason to keep fighting and struggling is, on occasion, House Kurac - and even then, those occasions are rarer than I'd like.
When you've won, the story becomes far less interesting, because there's far less immediate conflict the players can sink their teeth into.
Fix that, and the GMH will be more interesting. It isn't about being able to fulfill orders. It isn't about needing to go hunt gortok #8978.
It's about conflict, and that's what the GMH lack.
At first I thought, 'Delirium is absolutely right.' But as I continued to ponder my second thought is that there is a lot of stress and obstacles for the GMH. The problem is that its not inclusive or visible enough most days. For the purpose of this conversation that may come down to the same thing.
The problem I see is that the NPC merchant that sells craftables takes a commodity that is essentially infinite (coin) and creates a product that is in short supply normally. From infinite supply to short supply --> now your formerly rare, hard to create item is essentially infinite.
I totally agree with Dman and Delirium, that sucks.
How's this? Instead of taking mundane obsidian coins, the NPC merchant only accepts "House credit." In order to gain "House credit," you need to supply a NPC merchant (maybe the same one) with something in finite supply --> crafted goods.
This could all be "simulated" with regular coins. Again, it requires discipline on the part of the GMH merchants, but with no additional coding your merchants and hunters will still be invaluable.
On week 1, Hunters and Crafters produce 10 Durrit-hide armor pieces, 10 mekillot bone weapons, and 10 salt worm tooth daggers. These commodities are all fairly common but are also House only recipes that people generally like.
However, on Week 2, Lord Templar Brannigan wants a custom made, Kiyet-hide red skirt to wear. And he wants it YESTERDAY.
Sadly, on Week 2, Hunters and Crafters are busy with RL shit, or there's just a few of them, and there's NO KIYET HIDES IN THE STORES. There's no plans for any hunting trips soon, so that's bad!!
What does GMH merchant do? He exchanges some of Week 1's surplus for "House Credit."
He brings some of the durrit-hide armor pieces and the weapons into the special NPC merchant area only senior merchants and agents have access to. He looks at the Kiyet-hide red skirt that Lord Templar Brannigan desires, and sees its cost of 1500 coins.
**RATHER THAN DIGGING OUT THE COIN FROM HIS POCKET,** he then /sells/ the durrit-hide armor pieces and the salt-worm tooth daggers to the merchant to accumulate at least 1500 coins. Then he buys the kiyet-hide skirt.
//Instead of selling, if the NPC merchant doesn't accept the sale, he could then simulate selling by using his value skill on the durrit-hide armor and weapons and simply /junking/ them until he's junked a total of 1500 to virtually exchange for the skirt.//
Takers?
From a staff perspective, and what's more the perspective of single staffer who has not worked over the GMHs in any capacity (so maybe take a few grains of salt with this opinion), I have to say that this change to put orderable objects onto NPCs is very exciting to me because it has been difficult for GMH staff to find time and energy to do plot-running and animation stuff when they need to spend so much time on the routine of item orders, building mastercrafts, and the other basics. Freeing them up to do the stuff that is actually fun--bringing the world to life for the hunters, setting gith on the caravans, animating clan NPCs, and running plots--will, I think, make this question of "But what will the hunters and crafters DO now?" a moot point.
The GMH staff role appears to be one of the most draining we've had. I want to see these creative and dedicated people be freed to actually help you guys tell the stories of Armageddon.
I'm just always in support of reducing the routine and make-work aspects of any role in the game, player or staff. Hunters will still hunt if that's fun for them to do, crafters will still craft, Storytellers will still tell stories. But the "oh my god I have to log in and do a fucking job" pressure will be reduced.
Imagine you're playing a normal GMH hunter dude. Not an assassin with a grudge wanting to kill all X and a spice addiction.Not a guy trying to pay off his family's debt to an elf loan shark whilst coping with his hidden anxiety over maybe being a vivaduan. Just a dude who now works for a merchant House.
Sometimes you'll have a new crafter who needs practice materials, but a bunch of hunters gather enough material to level any crafter up way high in a matter of days. Sometimes people order a thing, but that's easy. Dude wants a hammer? Cut a tree and forage stone, takes twenty minutes tops. Some noble has a favorite exotic fruit? Take 3 or so guys or a ranger and a giant, get the things. Templar wants a blade with four gems, a bahamet-shell crossguard, and an yypr handle wrapped with gizhat leather? Psi the agent in the north, ask for some things, bam.
Materials never decay. People's weapons, clothes, furniture, whatever don't break. If you're Kadius, you might sell food since it doesn't last, most of which is loaded up by staff. If you're Salarr, you might maybe occasionally sell arrows if people run out, though every clan with a ranger will also have a fletcher. Kuraci can sell spice, which doesn't involve its hunters at all.
The only reason people are going to ever really need what you get by hunting is if the big box o' shards and sapphires runs low, or if some dude needs kryl shell or mantis claws for a mastercraft. And even then, you're looking at a weekly RPT/special hunt at best, leaving six other days in the week for doing fuck all.
Go with what Desertman says and make hunters useful by expanding crafting, or eliminate the role whitt-style and let everyone live the indie life. I genuinely think either solution would beat the current situation.
I haven't played any merchant types yet and have no idea how GMH work. So speaking as someone with no experience with it, I guess making things easier and less busywork for staff is a good thing. However, I guess I'm sort of confused about why the system is the way it is to begin with. Why does stuff need to be loaded by staff? I understand mastercraft submissions require vetting, but having to load individual items, even through an NPC, is an extra confusing bit for what is already a fairly unintuitive crafting system.
Is overhauling the crafting system something staff is looking at at all?
Quote from: Patuk on April 07, 2015, 04:54:14 PM
Go with what Desertman says and make hunters useful by expanding crafting, or eliminate the role whitt-style and let everyone live the indie life. I genuinely think either solution would beat the current situation.
If there's a significant portion of GMH stuff that needs loaded and isn't craftable, this seems like the most logical option, rather than automating everything. Or a hybrid system where the npcs will still sell 'all of the things' and they can be gotten, but that with all the stuff craftable (which seems like a good project for dedicated builders, I would think), you could buy what you can't figure out how to make, analyze it, and sell it back, etc, but still have pcs contributing. Especially if merchant/crafter pcs in the houses could trade up to 5 of the finished good to them to create a backed 'stock' of each item.
Quote from: aeglaeca on April 07, 2015, 05:01:06 PM
However, I guess I'm sort of confused about why the system is the way it is to begin with. Why does stuff need to be loaded by staff? I understand mastercraft submissions require vetting, but having to load individual items, even through an NPC, is an extra confusing bit for what is already a fairly unintuitive crafting system.
There are many, many, many items that each GMH has the "secret recipe" for (they may be craftable or not, but the objects are only sold by these clans). These are the items that can be ordered through GMH PCs. Currently, when these items are ordered, they have to be requested (by an Item Order through the request tool) and then a GMH staff member has to load those objects onto an NPC in game, then resolve the request. There's no other way for the GMH PCs to get the items to sell.
The change will make these objects available on NPCs to the appropriate GMH PCs without staff intervention. Much like you go to the Bazaar to buy something, GMH PCs with access will be able to go to the NPCs in their warehouse and purchase the objects which can then be re-sold to the PCs who want them.
It really has nothing to do with crafting other than the fact that some items sold by the GMHs are craftable by those clans.
Quote from: aeglaeca on April 07, 2015, 05:01:06 PM
Is overhauling the crafting system something staff is looking at at all?
No.
Yeah, idk. I asked why crafting lists aren't made available and got purposefully ignored. Similar things seem to happen with makingeverything craftable. They seem like good ideas, but it also seems like neither idea is due to happen soon.
Oh, okay. Thanks for the explanation!
I highly approve of this change, and I forsee a number of benefits. Old recipes lost under the sands of time will now be easily discovered again through use of the analyze command, and house hunters will be better equipped, as a number those rare and not so rare materials coming in will be freed up to be used for making gear that, otherwise, would raise the question "But what happens if we get a big order in in the near future?". There will be less concern about failing a craft roll, so a newbie crafter will feel more involved in plots involving rarer materials. Further, if there is a need for "hunt X of Y" plot, staff can simply work out an RPT plot, while leaving the crippling reality of not being able to access the virtual resources of the house to gather the materials somewhere in the past.
Quote from: Patuk on April 07, 2015, 05:09:38 PM
Yeah, idk. I asked why crafting lists aren't made available and got purposefully ignored. Similar things seem to happen with makingeverything craftable. They seem like good ideas, but it also seems like neither idea is due to happen soon.
Crafting lists aren't made available as a matter of policy. That policy is pretty simple: you can discover it in-game, so that is where you should do it and that is where you should leave it. Any limitations of that policy are made simpler by the planned NPCs mentioned, as common stock would be available to then analyze, in order for crafters to learn the recipe. Some people don't agree with that, but it is what it is.
"Make everything craftable" is like saying "get everyone off of fossil fuels". It would be nice; we'd love to get to that point. It is not an insurmountable task and we do slowly move towards it. However, it is still a large task. With that said, having builders would make it more doable.
Quote from: Talia on April 07, 2015, 04:43:59 PM
Freeing them up to do the stuff that is actually fun--bringing the world to life for the hunters, setting gith on the caravans, animating clan NPCs, and running plots--will, I think, make this question of "But what will the hunters and crafters DO now?" a moot point.
The GMH staff role appears to be one of the most draining we've had. I want to see these creative and dedicated people be freed to actually help you guys tell the stories of Armageddon.
Having made it clear that in my opinion at least, GMH hunters are crucial, I'll go on to say this. We asked Staff to fix the feeling of being a the gumball machine everyone kicks while playing GMH Merchant types or agents without merchants to take all the kicks. GMH staffers didn't like being virtual and unpaid stock boys. I think that's fair. So, they fixed that. Now, Talia says they'll have more time. They'll'll be doing more stuff. I believe her. And we've brought the problem of hunter redundancy to their attention. When they say the issue will be a moot point, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Quote from: Talia on April 07, 2015, 05:05:50 PM
There are many, many, many items that each GMH has the "secret recipe" for (they may be craftable or not, but the objects are only sold by these clans). These are the items that can be ordered through GMH PCs. Currently, when these items are ordered, they have to be requested (by an Item Order through the request tool) and then a GMH staff member has to load those objects onto an NPC in game, then resolve the request. There's no other way for the GMH PCs to get the items to sell.
The change will make these objects available on NPCs to the appropriate GMH PCs without staff intervention. Much like you go to the Bazaar to buy something, GMH PCs with access will be able to go to the NPCs in their warehouse and purchase the objects which can then be re-sold to the PCs who want them.
It really has nothing to do with crafting other than the fact that some items sold by the GMHs are craftable by those clans.
Put in perspective, I think what players are worried about really isn't as big of an issue as we're putting it out to be. Let's give the PC merchants/crafters in the GMH clans more trust, and let them dictate how to best use the efforts of their hunters. Even if GMH PC hunters are no longer crucial for a GMH to function, I think the benefits overall outweight the loss.
One very important caveat to manage the changing economy of clan items is to put a hard limit on how many special items can be bought from the NPC per RL week. If the PC hunters can get that specific item sooner, or if it's already in supply, then that limit can be bypassed.
There are still a lot of non-clan-specific items that can be crafted which are not allowed for GMH houses to sell, and that is where independent merchants and hunters can really shine.
If you want to play a hunter that wants to be in a crucial role as a hunter, then go make your own independent group. That is the biggest difference you will find with GMH vs independent hunters in the game presently.
The benefit for GMH hunters: They have all their basic necessities taken care of, and other PCs to help get them involved in plots. In this sense, it would appeal to a relatively new player. For the veterans, they don't have to worry so much about day-to-day maintenance required being independent and can focus more on politics.
Merchants/crafters don't have to worry about how skilled their crew is anymore. Rather, the -quality- of their crew will be more important with these changes. Overseers and Agents worry more about the political impact that their crew can have, rather than -requiring- the crew to be skilled in order to get anything done.
Bottom line: If you change the primary role of a hunter from being a hunter, then a different purpose must be implemented or the role will disappear. The GMH that is best able to provide that will attract the better quality PCs, and that alone should be able to drive plots.
Change "Hunter" to "Field Operations". No longer are they tied by the role applied by the word "hunter" but are now just "Salarri Field Operatives" which means they don't do their work in the Compound so much as in "the field".
This way, vets aren't tied to "You are a hunter and can never leave", newbies can still feel free to hunt, and a "Field Operative" can be more like that squirmy, greasy assassin that just listens in on everyone's conversations and steals their favorite cloaks, drumming up business. Hunter? Nah. FIELD OPERATIVE.
Your terms may vary.
Quote from: Riev on April 07, 2015, 07:17:42 PM
Change "Hunter" to "Field Operations". No longer are they tied by the role applied by the word "hunter" but are now just "Salarri Field Operatives" which means they don't do their work in the Compound so much as in "the field".
Nice!
The nice thing about that idea is that it expands the idea of who a GMH might hire into those positions, changing it from 'hunter' to 'someone who represents the interests of the House abroad'. That could include hunting, or aide work, or spying, or 'acquisition of resources'. Or snubbing out the competition.
Thank you for giving me an answer, Adhira. If anything, it's made me wonder how big the list of crafting recipes really is.
Quote from: Semper on April 07, 2015, 06:49:49 PM
Quote from: Talia on April 07, 2015, 05:05:50 PM
There are many, many, many items that each GMH has the "secret recipe" for (they may be craftable or not, but the objects are only sold by these clans). These are the items that can be ordered through GMH PCs. Currently, when these items are ordered, they have to be requested (by an Item Order through the request tool) and then a GMH staff member has to load those objects onto an NPC in game, then resolve the request. There's no other way for the GMH PCs to get the items to sell.
The change will make these objects available on NPCs to the appropriate GMH PCs without staff intervention. Much like you go to the Bazaar to buy something, GMH PCs with access will be able to go to the NPCs in their warehouse and purchase the objects which can then be re-sold to the PCs who want them.
It really has nothing to do with crafting other than the fact that some items sold by the GMHs are craftable by those clans.
Put in perspective, I think what players are worried about really isn't as big of an issue as we're putting it out to be. Let's give the PC merchants/crafters in the GMH clans more trust, and let them dictate how to best use the efforts of their hunters. Even if GMH PC hunters are no longer crucial for a GMH to function, I think the benefits overall outweight the loss.
One very important caveat to manage the changing economy of clan items is to put a hard limit on how many special items can be bought from the NPC per RL week. If the PC hunters can get that specific item sooner, or if it's already in supply, then that limit can be bypassed.
There are still a lot of non-clan-specific items that can be crafted which are not allowed for GMH houses to sell, and that is where independent merchants and hunters can really shine. If you want to play a hunter that wants to be in a crucial role as a hunter, then go make your own independent group. That is the biggest difference you will find with GMH vs independent hunters in the game presently.
The benefit for GMH hunters: They have all their basic necessities taken care of, and other PCs to help get them involved in plots. In this sense, it would appeal to a relatively new player. For the veterans, they don't have to worry so much about day-to-day maintenance required being independent and can focus more on politics.
Merchants/crafters don't have to worry about how skilled their crew is anymore. Rather, the -quality- of their crew will be more important with these changes. Overseers and Agents worry more about the political impact that their crew can have, rather than -requiring- the crew to be skilled in order to get anything done.
Bottom line: If you change the primary role of a hunter from being a hunter, then a different purpose must be implemented or the role will disappear. The GMH that is best able to provide that will attract the better quality PCs, and that alone should be able to drive plots.
It's not enough. They need to be important. They need to feel important. Indies are great. Indies drive stories and have things to strive for. The Great Merchant houses are the establishment and provide something for the indies to strive against and something to fear. All the interesting stuff shouldn't belong only to the unclanned.
I don't know if it's implemented yet, but if the NPCs that sell to GHM employees only loaded a small random subset of everything that's orderable, then...
- GMH employees that stuck around for a while would have access to more orderable gear, and thus know more recipes.
- GMH employees would get to play the fun game of discovering new items in their database.
- Gear wouldn't be necessarily available 'on demand' unless an enterprising merchant went to the effort of keeping a backstock. It might take a day, or a week, for an order to come in -- unless the GMH member has the recipe and hunters to get the items.
So, staff would remain uninvolved, but there'd still be a bit of challenge and discovery.
Also, another thing to take into account, is that they will have access to the ordinary items. Someone is always going to want the extraordinary. Also, hunters can hunt things to keep other people from having them.
(Sorry. Spitballing here.)
Quote from: CodeMaster on April 07, 2015, 08:12:42 PM
I don't know if it's implemented yet, but if the NPCs that sell to GHM employees only loaded a small random subset of everything that's orderable, then...
- GMH employees that stuck around for a while would have access to more orderable gear, and thus know more recipes.
- GMH employees would get to play the fun game of discovering new items in their database.
- Gear wouldn't be necessarily available 'on demand' unless an enterprising merchant went to the effort of keeping a backstock. It might take a day, or a week, for an order to come in -- unless the GMH member has the recipe and hunters to get the items.
So, staff would remain uninvolved, but there'd still be a bit of challenge and discovery.
this idea is amazing. Put them on rotations like the Kadian clothes shops in Allanak and Tuluk. Genius and definitely increases the need for hunters. Good job!
Quote from: Riev on April 07, 2015, 07:17:42 PM
Change "Hunter" to "Field Operations". No longer are they tied by the role applied by the word "hunter" but are now just "Salarri Field Operatives" which means they don't do their work in the Compound so much as in "the field".
This way, vets aren't tied to "You are a hunter and can never leave", newbies can still feel free to hunt, and a "Field Operative" can be more like that squirmy, greasy assassin that just listens in on everyone's conversations and steals their favorite cloaks, drumming up business. Hunter? Nah. FIELD OPERATIVE.
Your terms may vary.
Superb.
I hope that if you are a PC, you will always have to wait for PCs to procure fresh 'horror shell before you can buy your armour.
I'm just going to throw a perspective up into the air, which is probably similar to the noble thread that was ongoing, but not so much related to power...
The GMH need a lot more money sinks that AREN'T taxes or whatever to just suck up to nobles or Templars. Yes, they should still do that, but also, they need to be able to splurge. This is more directed to the mid-high ranking members, but I think if they have more ways to spend their cash, they will want to make more when they start to run out. I know as one GMH agent I made easy cash, and I got rich and it becomes difficult to spend it (within my limits as a commoner). If the agents and like are fighting for coin, then the hunters below them should be kept pretty busy. I'm sure the PC's can buy the common stuff and not so common stuff from the NPC's everyday all day, but they won't make as much profit as the items that can be crafted with items found in game. Someone start another thread with ideas for mid-high caste commoners to spend lots of cash on rare items and in unique ways?
Quote from: Molten Heart on April 07, 2015, 09:23:19 PM
Quote from: Riev on April 07, 2015, 07:17:42 PM
Change "Hunter" to "Field Operations". No longer are they tied by the role applied by the word "hunter" but are now just "Salarri Field Operatives" which means they don't do their work in the Compound so much as in "the field".
This way, vets aren't tied to "You are a hunter and can never leave", newbies can still feel free to hunt, and a "Field Operative" can be more like that squirmy, greasy assassin that just listens in on everyone's conversations and steals their favorite cloaks, drumming up business. Hunter? Nah. FIELD OPERATIVE.
Your terms may vary.
Superb.
I missed this on my first read through, but yes. This might be a real thought to turn over. Widen the scope. Open the possibilities.
Quote from: Patuk on April 07, 2015, 07:31:40 PM
Thank you for giving me an answer, Adhira
YESSSS
our plan is working
But srsly:
Quote from: Patuk on April 07, 2015, 07:31:40 PM
If anything, it's made me wonder how big the list of crafting recipes really is.
http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,47812.msg837677.html#msg837677 will show you what crafting numbers were for August, 2014. Total numbers were 4613. I didn't want to dig down into each one again, but current totals are 4899. No, we didn't make 286 new crafts in the past 8 months--I just didn't scrub the data like I did last time. I think I'm also able to see some hidden crafts now. I do know that since August 2014, there have been 82 new mastercrafts approved. The overall crafting recipe list is pretty big, though.
Idk. If every staffer did one craft ever day - scribble down the required things, place it on the proper clan's list, rejoice, you'd be done within the year. Maybe these fancy new builders could help out somehow.
Quote from: Patuk on April 08, 2015, 09:27:34 AM
Idk. If every staffer did one craft ever day - scribble down the required things, place it on the proper clan's list, rejoice, you'd be done within the year. Maybe these fancy new builders could help out somehow.
Please note I didn't want the crafters to be given a list of every single craftable item in the game. I meant only House specific crafts they would have knowledge of due to the fact VNPC's would be around them to share that information regularly in the crafting halls/would be making it in front of them regularly.
Then again, that list might be pretty darn big too.
(I absolutely agree that giving House crafters a list of every item, 4,000+ holy shit, is ridiculous.)
I would imagine such a list would be available within the clan forums of each specific House.
It might be a lot of work on the front end, but if they are House specific crafts only, then it doesn't matter if "The knowledge is out.", even if you come back with a new character later you can't use it because it is Salarri coded for crafting only.
I can know every single Salarri recipe in the game, but if I'm not a Salarri, I can't make those items. If I am a Salarri, then more power to me I am giving a lot of people a lot to do if I am making that stuff.
It's the exact same idea as putting the items on a NPC vendor in terms of giving out the crafting recipes. There is absolutely no difference there. The only change? Now they have...."Buy Item NPC", "Analyze Item", "Resell Item to NPC".
The exact same recipes will go to the exact same people, just through a different format.
The only thing that changes? The economy behind making hunters and crafters on the grass-roots level of the Houses feel valuable in any way in terms of them being a necessity for production.
Amount of work for staff? Same. They still have to load ZERO items EVER. (Perhaps even less. I don't know how hard it is to make an NPC and put items on them when compared to typing up a wall of text in a forum and giving that sub-forum special permissions.)
Edited to Add:
I do see one bit of extra staff work involved with my idea. People would have to submit requests for access to the sub-forum once they reach the right rank with their crafters. Based on the number of high-ranking crafters Houses have right now on the PC level, I don't see this being a huge amount of work. One every now and then.
Then again, if you implement my idea, I foresee A LOT more people being interested in being House crafters (not to mention hunters), but still, I don't think it would be a lot of work to grant those permissions as people rise through the IC ranks.
Edited again to Add:
I fully understand staff has already decided what they are going to do. I just enjoy discussing potential ideas for the future. Who knows what they will change their minds about a year after this goes in and they see how it works for them/the Houses. These ideas will be here when that time comes.
(http://i.imgur.com/9gIePy4.gif)
Do you have other ideas on making GMH stuff better without foisting unrealistically high amounts of unfun work on staff and potential builders?
Quote from: Nyr on April 08, 2015, 10:21:18 AM
Do you have other ideas on making GMH stuff better without foisting unrealistically high amounts of unfun work on staff and potential builders?
Let me do the work since I would find it to be fun/fulfilling personally.
With that being said, I have no idea how much work that would be because I'm not a staffer. I'm just giving out ideas. If you don't like the fact I am presenting ideas, I can stop.
It's not like I'm holding a gun to your head making you work like a sweat shop slave. I'm just presenting thoughts in a forum.
And yes, yes I do, but this thread if for discussing the economy surrounding making House hunters feel more useful and was triggered off of the conversation surrounding the new NPC change, so I am focusing on that now in this thread.
I can create another thread if you would like for more GHM ideas not related to this specific topic.
I love the Field Operative idea for so many reasons, primarily because it encourages the type of thinking I'd like to see in the GMH.
Let's make this a thing.
Quote from: grumblezor on April 08, 2015, 10:34:38 AM
I love the Field Operative idea for so many reasons, primarily because it encourages the type of thinking I'd like to see in the GMH.
Let's make this a thing.
+1, I like this one too. It won't change the dynamics of the role in any way really, but, it will change the mindset around the role.
Houses often already do use "Hunters" with special talents to do things other than hunt (though those situations are rare, as are those hunters).
I like it.
Then again, if we delve too far in that direction I imagine we might slip into the realm of other roles already filled within Houses. Things like "shadowy Agents" and what not probably already exist and might already have their own hidden ranks within the House structures.
While I am also concerned about what this will mean for GMH hunters, I think it will greatly enhance the life of a GMH Merchant, and more than that, I am actually really excited to see "forgotten" recipes sneak back into the game. Maybe everyone won't be wearing the same five cloaks. I saw recently the new variety to mounts and thought that was neat. More variety to gear would be even better. So, that's what I would most look forward to from this change.
I think as long as the NPC doesn't have infinite insta-load or something (because I think this would be abused in ways like "For a little extra coin, we can rush this order for you. *take cut, bypass hunters*", etc) I think it will be fine. But ultimately, hopefully if it just really slams GMH lifestyle it will be adjusted. I 1) think Staff probably have adequate information to make at least a decent decision and 2) don't believe they are out to destroy the role of GMH hunter. As long as I have even these small faiths, I can be alright with something coming out that I am apprehensive about.
As far as to the current topic...GMH hunters are more well taken care of than indie hunters...up to a point. A really "powerful" and well known indie hunter can actually probably provide for themselves a lot more coinage, travel, etc, than a GMH can, but you also lose a level of purpose and RP interactions/plots. There's just more to be done in a GMH, than outside of one. You can lead others, do training, get involved in politics, etc etc. I find a GMH really enjoyable. My second ever PC was ...sort of a GMH hunter. Actually worked for a Noble House, but it worked out the same. Was one of my favorites. Then I've played with a GMH a few times since then, and I've found those times more enjoyable than being on my own, as well.
I also like the idea around making the "House Hunter" role, after changing its designation to "Field Operations", a more military role.
The problem? As Delirium stated earlier, there isn't a lot of House on House conflict or meaningful conflict. The military nature of the roles might go unfulfilled since the Houses themselves are city-state neutral. How many fights would they actually be needed for?
I had a character once years ago that was an ex-Bynner that got hired by Kadius and I negotiated being allowed to keep my "Sergeant" title with the Kadian family member at the time. I told them if I took the job I wouldn't make a House of hunters. I would make a House of soldiers and fighters, because that's what I did.
He loved it. I loved it. I got four new hunters in the first RL day. People seemed to love it.
Unfortunately I wasn't a "good man" heh, and was killed in the arena within a few RL days for past crimes I'd committed before ever taking that job.
I would have liked to see how that worked out.
Quote from: Jeax on April 08, 2015, 10:41:11 AM
As far as to the current topic...GMH hunters are more well taken care of than indie hunters...up to a point. A really "powerful" and well known indie hunter can actually probably provide for themselves a lot more coinage, travel, etc, than a GMH can
And here I would respond to myself, and probably say that this should not be true. If one is a GMH leader, I think that person should probably find a way to make their GMH house better than being a rocking indie hunter, just to make the Merchant House shine above the indie life. I will ponder on this.
Quote from: Desertman on April 08, 2015, 10:42:28 AM
I also like the idea around making the "House Hunter" role, after changing its designation to "Field Operations", a more military role.
The problem? As Delirium stated earlier, there isn't a lot of House on House conflict or meaningful conflict. The military nature of the roles might go unfulfilled since the Houses themselves are city-state neutral. How many fights would they actually be needed for?
I don't think a Merchant House needs a military. Their hunters double as protection, or assassins, etc, when the Houses want to play politics. There is no reason for a Merchant family to need an actual military like the Fist or something like that. They are already housed behind a military. If they need to take up arms, their hunters would do that. Hunting is the hunter's first role, and I don't see a cause for them to be soldiers.
However, you are correct in the way that there is not a lot of meaningful House on House conflict. The only time I have been playing in a role where I could accomplish this, I was definitely trying to push a bar up here, but unfortunately I was not in the House long enough to do so. Given that the Houses all have agreements to not create each others' things...it takes away competition, everyone basically have a monopoly in GMH land so there's no reason for worlds to collide there, but there are other areas for conflict to arise. I just sometimes feel like that competition/conflict isn't worth a whole lot.
Give the example, though, of if two modern business tycoons had it out for each other--what could they do to one another? I don't think it would be military assault. It would be embargos, choking off product supply or harming sales in some way. Finding different suppliers...ways to insult and hurt the economy of the other. Without direct competition between Houses though, this would be hard to accomplish.
That's why we'll call them operatives, not soldiers ;)
I like the idea of Houses going to war with each other over potential resource discoveries. This would give the "hunters" something to do other than "hunt".
The Copper War was between Allanak and Tuluk.
I would love to see something like that happen between Kadius, Kurac, and Salarr, though how something would prove valuable enough to get their attention and not the attention of the city-states is a bit of a hassle on the realism front.
Anything Salarr and Kadius would fight each other over in terms of resources would almost certainly draw the two city-states into the mix to fight as well.
Quote from: Desertman on April 08, 2015, 10:27:34 AM
And yes, yes I do, but this thread if for discussing the economy surrounding making House hunters feel more useful and was triggered off of the conversation surrounding the new NPC change, so I am focusing on that now in this thread.
Yes, I'm requesting you do bring your other ideas to the fore. I thought the thread's purpose was getting derailed (might do to reread the OP). Instead of generally going over the issues of GMH hunters, assessing them, and discussing how to make them better in several ways, it had been focused on changes that just won't happen due to policy, or because they are unfeasible, or because they are otherwise unrealistic at this time. You've got staff feedback here and in another thread saying as much. To suggest we want to silence your ideas is a bit much. You've got evidence from another thread of player ideas (implemented recently) that we do want to take in feedback and utilize it. However, while you might enjoy continuing to discuss the merits of something we aren't going to do, it is a derail at that point. That's why we jump in to say "hey, btw, we don't do this/won't do this/this is unrealistic/this is why we don't do that" so that you have more info and can focus on something more productive.
To that end, I like the idea of the business tycoon level of conflict and conflict over resources. I think that is one area of conflict that can be managed by both sides of the equation (staff and players). The larger picture stuff we can do as staff, definitely, though this would need to come out of some sizable plot investment to affect the sizes we are talking about here. I'll explain a few of those things as you may not be aware of them. We can adjust taxes in a city-state against several material types, weapons, spice, armor, artwork, and food. We can do our part to make sure that resource-type conflicts can and do occur, creating plots around them. What can be done to make that a bit more localized, however? We can adjust shopkeepers individually. We can blacklist people or groups. We can adjust rent levels as well. There are more tools in the toolbox that we can use, too.
I don't think staff are going to rebrand all the hunting divisions as something else. The impression I got when I played a GMH PC, for example, was that they really, really wanted to forget the Salarr Expansion Division.
With that said, if you're a GMH hunter and your boss isn't getting you involved in interesting plots, or you're just being used to hunt... I dunno, kill your boss and get a new one.
A lot of the complaints I've seen leveled at the GMH hunter role in this thread have me scratching my head. Maybe my experience was an outlier?... But I found that GMH leaders generally have the freedom to address a lot of these issues in the way they lead their crew. I had inter-House conflict (that was more meaningful than 'your hunter insulted my hunter') and I had hunters and PCs from other clans involved in an overarching plot with a specific goal that a lot of people like to cry about and say can't be accomplished these days.
Everyone likes to get high scores and personal bests...
(http://www.gengame.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/vs-super-mario-bros.jpg)
What if the GMH bank account was the score?
What if staff made a script or something so that GMH bank accounts slowly ticked back down to some large sum (like, 10,000 coins as a really basic example). Then GMH merchants could strive for a high score by depositing coin into this black hole bank account.
It could become an OOC bragging factor (hey I got the Salarr bank account up to 50,000 back in my day), an IC motivator (the House is in need of more 'political' influence, we need to double our liquid assets in the next year), etc.
Quote from: HavokBlue on April 08, 2015, 11:04:36 AM
I don't think staff are going to rebrand all the hunting divisions as something else. The impression I got when I played a GMH PC, for example, was that they really, really wanted to forget the Salarr Expansion Division.
Not for anything it did, but for how and why it was implemented. The players were great about it all, and we got some good plots in there during that time anyway.
Quote from: Nyr on April 08, 2015, 11:03:31 AM
To suggest we want to silence your ideas is a bit much. You've got evidence from another thread of player ideas (implemented recently) that we do want to take in feedback and utilize it. However, while you might enjoy continuing to discuss the merits of something we aren't going to do, it is a derail at that point. That's why we jump in to say "hey, btw, we don't do this/won't do this/this is unrealistic/this is why we don't do that" so that you have more info and can focus on something more productive.
To that end, I like the idea of the business tycoon level of conflict and conflict over resources. I think that is one area of conflict that can be managed by both sides of the equation (staff and players). The larger picture stuff we can do as staff, definitely, though this would need to come out of some sizable plot investment to affect the sizes we are talking about here. I'll explain a few of those things as you may not be aware of them. We can adjust taxes in a city-state against several material types, weapons, spice, armor, artwork, and food. We can do our part to make sure that resource-type conflicts can and do occur, creating plots around them. What can be done to make that a bit more localized, however? We can adjust shopkeepers individually. We can blacklist people or groups. We can adjust rent levels as well. There are more tools in the toolbox that we can use, too.
Understood. I just misinterpreted your "Stick Horse" gif's meaning. My apology. Once staff says it won't be done at this time, conversations about it should end. I just didn't know.
It seems very difficult to create meaningful resource conflicts that wouldn't draw the attention of the city-states considering the dynamics surrounding the world and its politics. I mentioned it above, but what could be valuable enough to make Salarr and Kadius for example, go into disputes, that wouldn't just get taken over by the two cities anyways?
Quote from: HavokBlue on April 08, 2015, 11:04:36 AM
With that said, if you're a GMH hunter and your boss isn't getting you involved in interesting plots, or you're just being used to hunt... I dunno, kill your boss and get a new one.
A lot of the complaints I've seen leveled at the GMH hunter role in this thread have me scratching my head. Maybe my experience was an outlier?... But I found that GMH leaders generally have the freedom to address a lot of these issues in the way they lead their crew. I had inter-House conflict (that was more meaningful than 'your hunter insulted my hunter') and I had hunters and PCs from other clans involved in an overarching plot with a specific goal that a lot of people like to cry about and say can't be accomplished these days.
Yes! People, if you're going to app a leadership role, come to lead. Your PC can be a selfish ass, but you the player should always have an eye on involving the kids. If you don't I want to do that, don't take the roles.
But its not all on those people of curse. All the stuff mentioned in this thread comes to bear - staff policies and support, minions co.ing prepared to make and have their own fun. But I think those leaders leading is a lynchpin.
Perhaps with more accountability and better fleshed out documentation, an 'Expansion Divison' could work if ALL the GMH had one. In that way, they would be competing with one another to find new resource caches, disrupting each other's 'Expansion Divisions', and generally spying/infiltrating each other.
As it stands, the GMH seem very hand-shake yessir no sir with very little backstabbing behind the scenes. This also doesn't breed conflict, it breeds boredom.
Given that the GMH will have more time to run plots and animations with the implementation of NPC warehouse item distribution, I believe we'll see more conflict/murder/corruption/betrayal form the GMH because they won't simply be vending machines anymore. And that excites me.
In my mind's eye, I see vNPC scouts reporting back that rubies have been found in a mine far to the east in Blah Blah Blah mountain range...(Don't want to say because it's not common IC knowledge. For the newbs!). Kadius begins to mobilize their field operatives to investigate, but so does Salarr. And so does Kurac? But why do they want rubies? Because Kadius wants rubies. So they want to get there first and set up shop, clean it out, and sell them to Kadius later.
This kind of 'resource grab' plot could provide endless opportunity and fun for Hunter PCs, as they search the known for areas rich with resources, report them back to their House, and attempt to 'lay claim' to that area. Perhaps a deposit of rare Onyx is found...But in the Tablelands. Now all the GMH have to carefully toe the line with the tribes within the Tablelands, involving all these clans in one fell swoop.
There is nothing stopping GMH leader PCs from telling their clan staff they want to go search for rubies, or diamonds, or whatever contentious loot and then working towards that goal.
Quote from: HavokBlue on April 08, 2015, 12:13:03 PM
There is nothing stopping GMH leader PCs from telling their clan staff they want to go search for rubies, or diamonds, or whatever contentious loot and then working towards that goal.
There's the motivation to actually do anything besides take down item orders of PCs, and passing them on to your Staff, waiting for them to be loaded, try and find a time to connect with that PC again, and then get money from them for the items.
When you're a vending machine, you don't try to create or think of plots, you try to maintain the status quo, which is why there is such massive burnout within the GMH community, both for Staff and Players it seems.
The new warehouse NPCs should reduce the hassle of that significantly then ;)
Quote from: HavokBlue on April 08, 2015, 12:13:03 PM
There is nothing stopping GMH leader PCs from telling their clan staff they want to go search for rubies, or diamonds, or whatever contentious loot and then working towards that goal.
There is staff.
Quote from: Barzalene on April 08, 2015, 11:22:39 AM
Quote from: HavokBlue on April 08, 2015, 11:04:36 AM
With that said, if you're a GMH hunter and your boss isn't getting you involved in interesting plots, or you're just being used to hunt... I dunno, kill your boss and get a new one.
A lot of the complaints I've seen leveled at the GMH hunter role in this thread have me scratching my head. Maybe my experience was an outlier?... But I found that GMH leaders generally have the freedom to address a lot of these issues in the way they lead their crew. I had inter-House conflict (that was more meaningful than 'your hunter insulted my hunter') and I had hunters and PCs from other clans involved in an overarching plot with a specific goal that a lot of people like to cry about and say can't be accomplished these days.
GE's! People, if you're going to app a leadership role, come to lead. Your PC can be a selfish ass, but you the player should always have an eye on involving the kids. If you don't I want to do that, don't take the roles.
But its not all on those people of curse. All the stuff mentioned in this thread comes to bear - staff policies and support, minions co.ing prepared to make and have their own fun. But I think those leaders leading is a lynchpin.
I hate when I babble for twenty minutes and fail to make my point. My point is that leaders should find projects and needs for hunters and crafter's, even if they have to invent them. And make an effort to really sell a sense of urgency rather than busy work.
Quote from: Desertman on April 08, 2015, 11:19:12 AM
Quote from: Nyr on April 08, 2015, 11:03:31 AM
To suggest we want to silence your ideas is a bit much. You've got evidence from another thread of player ideas (implemented recently) that we do want to take in feedback and utilize it. However, while you might enjoy continuing to discuss the merits of something we aren't going to do, it is a derail at that point. That's why we jump in to say "hey, btw, we don't do this/won't do this/this is unrealistic/this is why we don't do that" so that you have more info and can focus on something more productive.
To that end, I like the idea of the business tycoon level of conflict and conflict over resources. I think that is one area of conflict that can be managed by both sides of the equation (staff and players). The larger picture stuff we can do as staff, definitely, though this would need to come out of some sizable plot investment to affect the sizes we are talking about here. I'll explain a few of those things as you may not be aware of them. We can adjust taxes in a city-state against several material types, weapons, spice, armor, artwork, and food. We can do our part to make sure that resource-type conflicts can and do occur, creating plots around them. What can be done to make that a bit more localized, however? We can adjust shopkeepers individually. We can blacklist people or groups. We can adjust rent levels as well. There are more tools in the toolbox that we can use, too.
It seems very difficult to create meaningful resource conflicts that wouldn't draw the attention of the city-states considering the dynamics surrounding the world and its politics. I mentioned it above, but what could be valuable enough to make Salarr and Kadius for example, go into disputes, that wouldn't just get taken over by the two cities anyways?
Nonetheless, I think creating resource conflicts that don't draw the attention of the city-states should be a goal. Having a lot of big guns involved in a conflict I expect will actually make it a lot less fun for the Player Base. Remember, players by and large don't play big guns. They play the little guys. Little guys are only important in little conflicts.
My ideal would be that these resource conflicts would take place on a micro-scale, with the PC's involved representing a good chunk of all the characters involved. A PC Agent should be the one leading the charge, probably with his piddly little squad pitted against another PC Agent and their piddly little squad. As soon as you make the conflict a big deal as far as the greater world is concerned it will take the focus off the PCs (undesirable) and create huge staff choke points for plots which will necessarily slow things down.
My solution to the lack of conflict? Politics! ;D But you need staff support for the bigger things, simply because so many factors can come into play.
As long as the two factions represent an ideal, you will have an endless stream of conflict. For example, make a military vs civic faction. One desires military conquest, the other desires economic conquest, conservative faction vs a progressive faction, preservers vs destroyers, purists vs meta-humans, etc. If you have groups aligned to ideals (which is very realistic, I just don't see why we don't see this more IG on a bigger scale), there is a source of endless conflict. Add in limited resources, and groups are forced to collide!
You know why Allanak and Tuluk can't be at war right now? Because there's absolutely no idealistic reason for them. Allanak and Tuluk basically have the same ideal, which is to consolidate and manage the power around their own regions. There is no threat to each other's sovereignty, and no greater threat playing tug of war between the two city-states. But throw in a super-power that disturbs the balance, aligned toward one ideal (perhaps destruction of all meta-humans), then everyone is forced to throw in toward one side or the other, because to lose is to lose your very ideal and purpose.
Take GMHs for example. Two large factions pop up in Allanak, one that favors conquest, the other that opposes. GMH's are all for conquest if they profit from it, but the path of conquest will lead a region to be taken over and it's natural resources diverted to the effort. Salarr might benefit greatly, because they don't need any of those resources for their weapons/armors (or those resources would be given to Salarr perhaps), but Kadius will lose an important resource that isn't helpful for expansion. Boom! The two major GMH's split and pick sides. Instant conflict. The only thing staff have to do is to give a direction and provide a subsequent consequence if one side succeeds or fails, and let everything else roll into place. Let the players determine the details, and how things play out.
GMH hunters from Salarr and Kadius are no longer just hunters then. They're the scouts and information gatherers for what's happening in the competing region, they're the agents in the field which can collect the valuable natural resources before the other side secures them all, they're the visible presence of the house competing for the favor from the tribes/powers of the region, etc. This opens up so much more for hunters to do, other than "go hunt X animals so we can make Y product for templar Z's fancy party." Screw that, Zalanthas needs REAL conflict, that is tangible and meaningful for players when they pick a side. Your little independent merchant chooses to join faction H? In exchange for safety and wealth, your faction ended up slaughtering tons of children and innocents! We need more of making moral choices -you- make as a player/character, with very real consequences, and having these kinds of decisions will make playing the game so much more alive.
Quote from: Narf on April 08, 2015, 12:40:48 PM
Quote from: Desertman on April 08, 2015, 11:19:12 AM
Quote from: Nyr on April 08, 2015, 11:03:31 AM
To suggest we want to silence your ideas is a bit much. You've got evidence from another thread of player ideas (implemented recently) that we do want to take in feedback and utilize it. However, while you might enjoy continuing to discuss the merits of something we aren't going to do, it is a derail at that point. That's why we jump in to say "hey, btw, we don't do this/won't do this/this is unrealistic/this is why we don't do that" so that you have more info and can focus on something more productive.
To that end, I like the idea of the business tycoon level of conflict and conflict over resources. I think that is one area of conflict that can be managed by both sides of the equation (staff and players). The larger picture stuff we can do as staff, definitely, though this would need to come out of some sizable plot investment to affect the sizes we are talking about here. I'll explain a few of those things as you may not be aware of them. We can adjust taxes in a city-state against several material types, weapons, spice, armor, artwork, and food. We can do our part to make sure that resource-type conflicts can and do occur, creating plots around them. What can be done to make that a bit more localized, however? We can adjust shopkeepers individually. We can blacklist people or groups. We can adjust rent levels as well. There are more tools in the toolbox that we can use, too.
It seems very difficult to create meaningful resource conflicts that wouldn't draw the attention of the city-states considering the dynamics surrounding the world and its politics. I mentioned it above, but what could be valuable enough to make Salarr and Kadius for example, go into disputes, that wouldn't just get taken over by the two cities anyways?
Nonetheless, I think creating resource conflicts that don't draw the attention of the city-states should be a goal. Having a lot of big guns involved in a conflict I expect will actually make it a lot less fun for the Player Base. Remember, players by and large don't play big guns. They play the little guys. Little guys are only important in little conflicts.
My ideal would be that these resource conflicts would take place on a micro-scale, with the PC's involved representing a good chunk of all the characters involved. A PC Agent should be the one leading the charge, probably with his piddly little squad pitted against another PC Agent and their piddly little squad. As soon as you make the conflict a big deal as far as the greater world is concerned it will take the focus off the PCs (undesirable) and create huge staff choke points for plots which will necessarily slow things down.
I agree.
Just to support my view:
You know why something like the Copper War doesn't happen again? Because it was over a limited resource, and resources expire. But if there was a greater purpose underlying the Copper War, like Allanak favoring the proliferation of life-sustaining magick in the world, vs Tuluk who wants nothing to do with magick, then the victor of the Copper War would not only be an economical victory, but a moral victory of an ideal. That would hit home to so many more people, and might even cause inflict within individual city-states, and the conflict would spread just about everywhere, if staff had only provided that underlying reason or ideal for why the conflict was being waged in the first place.
If Allanak has that opposing view, then of course everyone who favors that view would find conflict with those who oppose. There would be a reason for why Tuluki's hate Allanakis once again (and perhaps even get some Allanaki sympathizers within Tuluk!) and city-state conflict would have flared up and continued on, long after the Copper Wars finished.
But conflict between the city-states simply sizzled out. Why? Because there was no IDEAL behind the conflict, just plain resources.
What would staff have to do in order to generate these overall points of conflict? Just decide which Noble Houses, GMHs, or other large groups of people on Zalanthas would pick which side of the coin. House X, Y and Z will join this side because of this reason, House A, B, C will join that side, because of that reason. Then let the players roll with how to respond appropriately. This will cause division not only among Houses, but within Houses, within House divisions, within units. Just about everywhere, if the value is important enough, will conflict spread.
[added: A real life example to hit home on this point? You know why the conflict in the middle east, with radical islam is a problem? Because they represent an ideal, and until the world can defeat the ideal, terrorism and crimes against humanity will always be a problem. That is the kind of ideal that splits countries and families, and I think if Zalanthas has that kind of conflict, this game will become so much more than what it is now. (I'm not saying make players choose something quite as radical as what impacts people in the world right now, but something relevant to a fantasy world. Humans vs meta-humans is one example I can think of.]
I thought the whole conflict between Allanak and Tuluk was in fact ideal based. They are two factions with very radical and different ideals.
The reason we do not see the merchant Houses taking sides? They are worldwide monopolies that have to do business in both cities.
If any GMH takes a side based on ideals they risk complete annihilation of their markets in the opposing city states.
I am a supporter of GHM's having their monopolies broken in terms of "Known-Wide" and making them instead "City-Wide".
You know what would be awesome and completely doable if Salarr was the premier weapon/armor supplying House of Tuluk and Jakowak was the premier weapon/armor supplying House of Allanak?
Lots and lots of conflict between them and their hunters about who controls which resources where/how often/when.
I do suppose that your idea of having them pick sides based on ideals would be the perfect opportunity to springboard the Houses in those directions so we could start doing things like that.
Local markets and monopolies vs other local markets and monopolies on the merchant-tycoon level is just so much more interesting to me personally than global monopolies by a single entity.
Since we are monstrously off-topic for this thread, I created: http://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,49171.0.html
We'd also need a much larger player base to support not 3 GMH but 6.
Quote from: Down Under on April 08, 2015, 01:35:40 PM
We'd also need a much larger player base to support not 3 GMH but 6.
We already have those Houses broken up into "Northern branch" and "Southern branch".
The only difference? Changing the names from "Southern branch" and "Northern branch" to "New House Name".
Quote from: Desertman on April 08, 2015, 01:42:23 PM
Quote from: Down Under on April 08, 2015, 01:35:40 PM
We'd also need a much larger player base to support not 3 GMH but 6.
We already have those Houses broken up into "Northern branch" and "Southern branch".
The only difference? Changing the names from "Southern branch" and "Northern branch" to "New House Name".
Not really. They're both part of the same House, it isn't as if they aren't interdependent on each other.
Those 'Branches' travel frequently in-between Tuluk and Allanak to cover all of the bases. With 6 GMH, how many players would you need for each House to function?
At least one 'seller' type PC.
At least one 'crafter' type PC, though this can sometimes be the seller.
1-2 Hunters.
For 6 Houses, you're talking about 18-24 PCs to make them properly function.
Quote from: Down Under on April 08, 2015, 01:43:25 PM
Quote from: Desertman on April 08, 2015, 01:42:23 PM
Quote from: Down Under on April 08, 2015, 01:35:40 PM
We'd also need a much larger player base to support not 3 GMH but 6.
We already have those Houses broken up into "Northern branch" and "Southern branch".
The only difference? Changing the names from "Southern branch" and "Northern branch" to "New House Name".
Not really. They're both part of the same House, it isn't as if they aren't interdependent on each other.
I'm aware. I mean they should be/would be.
Edited to add: You edited on me!!!! Hehe.
I don't think the problem is that we don't have the player base to support full northern and southern branches, and as such, full northern and southern "Houses".
The problem is not enough people want to be part of those Houses because there is nothing meaningful in any way for the Hunters to do, the crafters to do, etc...etc...for reasons stated previously that I won't state again because, "Dead Horse Beating".
Give them something meaningful to do, and you will see the players flock to them. I know if you create something great that people love, you can get A LOT of people to be part of it. If you don't create it however, you will never get the players.
Once my GMH had a restriction on item X. So I get the idea to ask staff if I can use my minions to get more supplies for item X so that at least our PCs could sell more.
I never really got an explanation as to of it just wasn't feasible or if it was some secret my life sworn PC couldn't know. In the end the restrictions on item X were dropped. So it was a paperwork victory but I really would have rather had something for us to do.
I guess I worry about too much of these things staff can change to make things easier for them but remove legitimate plots and reasons for GMH employees to exist.
Quote from: Desertman on April 08, 2015, 01:45:09 PM
Give them something meaningful to do, and you will see the players flock to them. I know if you create something great that people love, you can get A LOT of people to be part of it. If you don't create it however, you will never get the players.
You know, I think Arm saw a consistent boost to the playerbase when they announced Arm 2.0. That was something new, fresh, and meaningful for players, which might have revived the playerbase, but I'm speaking purely anecdotal. I'm curious to know stats on that. But if Arm can provide a fresh and meaningful interaction for players, both old and new, perhaps more players would come?
But I think perhaps for a bit of time, maybe some consolidation of major clans until players can fill all those roles that are needed for opening up another clan? Seriously, if we had the playerbase, I'm sure all the desert elf clans and human tribes might be open, but we just don't have the number to sustain them all. In a similar fashion, maybe open up some houses while closing others, or even just certain roles (just merchants, no agents/hunters, etc).
At this point I suspect Staff is waiting for my PC to die before we get new docs.
Quote from: KankWhisperer on April 08, 2015, 02:09:56 PM
At this point I suspect Staff is waiting for my PC to die before we get new docs.
If it makes you feel better, staff is waiting for everyone to die.
Quote from: Jihelu on April 08, 2015, 02:26:29 PM
Quote from: KankWhisperer on April 08, 2015, 02:09:56 PM
At this point I suspect Staff is waiting for my PC to die before we get new docs.
If it makes you feel better, staff is waiting for everyone to die.
They can keep waiting, because I'm too legit to quit!!!
(Nyr don't kill meh plz.)
Funny. I'm waiting on staff to live :)
The way GMH hunters SHOULD work is a crew of 3-4 experienced hunters who are already relatively long lived, know what they're doing, and can go where they want, when they want as needed. The merchant tells them what's needed, and they bring it in.
The way it usually worked, is one of the GMHs is hopping at any given time, which attracts a Byn-like atmosphere, where it's hard to tell who is active or can even be trusted to know what they're doing. Or it turns into like an elaborate training course. I think your average GMH is too quick to hire just anyone. If someone can't be trusted with their own mount or means of travel, and go to from one city to the next by themselves, they probably shouldn't be hired.
In my experience, hunters often had very little to do because little was required in terms of raw materials being brought in (absent once in a blue moon) and no quotas to fill or asked for. So it eventually turns into some paramilitary outfit that has to occupy themselves with other things to keep from being bored.
I'd rather more of a Robert Muldoon/Great White Hunter type atmosphere, with official work for a GMH being a mark of elite distinction, and not T'zai Byn with more water and free lockers.
Most of the problems with GMH hunters come from outsiders shaping the crew as they would like it to be seen.
That includes people in the same house.
I wouldn't mind, on a general level, going back to the idea that you aren't joining a Merchant House unless the Byn vouches for your training, or you have someone the Merchant House/Crew might respect, saying you can pull your weight.
And suddenly not a single soul managed to join a GMH thereafter,
Quote from: Riev on April 24, 2015, 11:08:25 PM
I wouldn't mind, on a general level, going back to the idea that you aren't joining a Merchant House unless the Byn vouches for your training, or you have someone the Merchant House/Crew might respect, saying you can pull your weight.
Yeah, the problem with that is that you go in assuming that people are dying to join GMHs, which isn't the case at all, GMHs are dying for people to join them.
Quote from: Tuannon on April 24, 2015, 11:00:45 PM
Most of the problems with GMH hunters come from outsiders shaping the crew as they would like it to be seen.
That includes people in the same house.
Outsiders shaping the crew? ???
Quote from: Clearsighted on April 24, 2015, 03:46:41 PM
In my experience, hunters often had very little to do because little was required in terms of raw materials being brought in (absent once in a blue moon) and no quotas to fill or asked for. So it eventually turns into some paramilitary outfit that has to occupy themselves with other things to keep from being bored.
While I think there's a lot of truth to this, I've also seen a lot of cases of hunters who basically wanted to do their own thing regardless of what was needed. (Whether it's worth keeping that kind of hunter around is another discussion.)
Quote from: flurry on April 25, 2015, 11:37:06 AM
Quote from: Tuannon on April 24, 2015, 11:00:45 PM
Most of the problems with GMH hunters come from outsiders shaping the crew as they would like it to be seen.
That includes people in the same house.
Outsiders shaping the crew? ???
Amos is fucking Corporal Malik, Amos wants the crew to do this that or the other.
Agent Dingus fancies himself as a hunter when he feels like it, he orders
his' hunt unit to hunt here without using bows.
Aide Tressella is a typical aide and tries to bullshit Sergeant Derp into doing this or that thing that his superiors say cannot be even talked about.I'm not saying that it's not cool to have friction and conflicts, but a lot of good crews are wrecked by doing too much damage control and not enough actual hunting. I've seen it happen to three crews that I have been involved at a pointy end capacity in in three different organizations.
In terms of size, ideally you'd want a crew that's smaller than the average Byn or militia unit but not too many people that you can't keep them occupied with either training for newbies or jobs for experienced outside types. People who are not staff will generally have something to say if you don't hire fast enough or will have something to say if you hire anyone, it's a fine balance in my experience and depends.
I am a little confused by the above post and why those scenarios presented are... bad?...
Tressella. I love the name. I vote for this name to be the default identity of all f-mes on the GDB henceforth.
Quote from: HavokBlue on April 26, 2015, 02:12:37 PM
I am a little confused by the above post and why those scenarios presented are... bad?...
All the examples seemed like things someone who cares about their employment should easily be able to brush off. A person in Zalanthas should be WAY more invested in their GMH job than their lover or someone outside of the clan. They should rather lose 10 lovers than lose their job. I can see how it would be a problem if PC leaders were constantly making exceptions and using their clan to help people not affiliated with that clan... Agent Dingus has status, but if he wants to address the hunters, he should absolutely do so by talking to the Sergeant in command of them. The hunters should question any order that doesn't come form a superior of their branch. But in the end the people doing these sort of manipulations should be met with fiery retribution from the higher-ups of the clan.
Also if an Agent ever told me not to hunt with a bow, I'd probably ICly call them a goddamned moron. I know it was just an example but it made me laugh, that's like telling your cooks to use their bare hands to stir a pot of boiling stew.
Quote from: HavokBlue on April 26, 2015, 02:12:37 PM
I am a little confused by the above post and why those scenarios presented are... bad?...
Not bad, just examples of things that shape a hunting crew. In some cases rather badly misused for the good of not singling specific events out.