The Clans and Economy Thread

[Molten Heart]

There's not any IC reason for a merger.  The only thing brought up is that at times, one of two GMH clans may have more people than the other.  That's hardly a reason to suggest a merger.  That's also not a good reason for this pool.

Pool:  aims to fix a problem that largely doesn't exist, and when it does, it is the result of IC action and can be fixed by IC action (poach/kill/aggressive recruiting/ignoring), and could probably be eased by a few minor tweaks to documentation for the lower ends of those two clans.

merger:  aims to fix a problem that (again) largely doesn't exist...with a solution that flies in the face of the IC world, because "merger"

For that matter, there remains a static need for Salarr and Kadian goods at the top that can (or will) be filled regardless of the amount of PCs in the lower reaches of the clans, given the existence of item order requests that merchant PCs in those clans file.  In large part I think there may be an expectation in some quarters (I've thought this before, too) that every clan should have a ton of players in it.  In reality, only a few clans can actively support a certain range of player numbers because there's simply not enough for them to do.

I don't know,ICly merchant houses that banding together compliment each others strengths, reducing their weaknesses while also reducing overhead costs by sharing resources seems like a great way to maximize profits.  Merchant houses seem to care most about profits.   Not to mention they'd expand their collective political reach and power all over the known. A combined trade union could work if they could work together, but internal politics would be their greatest challenge.  All those people working together in groups with their own agendas is sure to cause some conflict.

Edited to add:
OOCly they'd compete less for players and would be able to maintain a more consistent presence in the game world.

[Fujikoma]

There's not any IC reason for a merger.  The only thing brought up is that at times, one of two GMH clans may have more people than the other.  That's hardly a reason to suggest a merger.  That's also not a good reason for this pool.

Pool:  aims to fix a problem that largely doesn't exist, and when it does, it is the result of IC action and can be fixed by IC action (poach/kill/aggressive recruiting/ignoring), and could probably be eased by a few minor tweaks to documentation for the lower ends of those two clans.

merger:  aims to fix a problem that (again) largely doesn't exist...with a solution that flies in the face of the IC world, because "merger"

For that matter, there remains a static need for Salarr and Kadian goods at the top that can (or will) be filled regardless of the amount of PCs in the lower reaches of the clans, given the existence of item order requests that merchant PCs in those clans file.  In large part I think there may be an expectation in some quarters (I've thought this before, too) that every clan should have a ton of players in it.  In reality, only a few clans can actively support a certain range of player numbers because there's simply not enough for them to do.

Am I reading too much into it, or could this be implying a possible tweak to the racial allowances for these clans?

[Ouroboros]

God help me, I'm with Nyr on this. There goes my street cred. Wait...

This all sounds kind of complicated and unnecessary?

So yeah as I was saying, I'm with Delirium on this!

Having been on both sides of this (non)issue in the past, I'm not sure there's anything to solve here.

If and when a GMH has need of goods and can't support those needs themselves, there's nothing to stop them from offering contract work to indies (be they lone rangers or organized groups). There's no written law in any GMH that specifically states they aren't permitted to offer contract work. One GMH offers contracts as a matter of policy in fact, while the other two have always offered contracts to outside hunters when they had needs they couldn't deal with in-House. Sometimes those contracts are under the table, sure, but they still happen all the time. Could this be made clearer in the documentation of those two GMH's that will remain unnamed? Sure, but only in the spirit of protocol. In practice it's always happened. I bet you good 'sid it's happening right now.

What does this mean for a GMH? If you don't have enough hunters, either be a better/cooler leader than your competition or otherwise feel free to outsource your needs. Yes, that means you're actually going to be paying for materials (*gasp*), but then again it's more or less the same coin than you'd be spending on the hunters you don't have. I imagine GMH staff won't have issue with such coin coming the clan account for contracts, since a) it means there's an actual need of these materials for pending orders  that can't be otherwise filled and b) as already stated, they're saving coin that would otherwise have gone to hunters. And this in turn helps indies along by providing them with funding, and more important interaction, which keeps them alive and interested. And that means when you need 10 more thingamabobs, they might still be around and available to help. Can't find an indie to work with, don't know of one, or know anyone else that knows of one? Nothing a simple tavern post can't fix, honest. Once "it is known" you're offering contract work, you'll have hunters and grebbers coming out of the woodwork.

What does that mean for the lone indies? For one, you don't suck anywhere near as much as Nyr would have you believe. Really, he's just being mean. You have options, but you still need to be smart about it. Don't expect anyone to come flocking to you because you have a rep as a hunter or grebber, and definitely don't expect them to roll out the red carpet for you. They're probably not happy to have to come to you, and sometimes that's going to show. Other times it's going to show a lot. Either suck it up, or... well, that's your only option really if you want to do business with them. And without the backing of a group, you've got to work twice as hard to keep your clients pleased.

What does this mean for indie groups and their leaders? You're not the first or last, understand that. Indie hunting groups rise and fall constantly, and are hinged on two things... the ability and charisma of their leadership and a need for their services. Unlike a GMH where staff can keep putting out requests until they get a half-way competent applicant, an indie group usually gets one, maybe two at best, shots at it. If the leader can't keep its members organized, happy, and alive, the group won't last. Also, if there's no demand for the services of the group, they won't last either. Both of those should be common sense. In my experience such groups will form when there's a void to fill (such as a GMH not having enough hunters) and will dissipate when either its leadership dies or there's no longer a need for them to exist. And that's probably as it should be.

The pool idea? It happens in part already, when there's a need for it to happen. I don't think it needs any real formality or rules placed on it though, and is best left organically formed IC as it has so far.

The merger idea? For once I think Nyr was too gentle. The idea is simply ridiculous... Mergers don't happen in a cut-throat world like Zalanthas. Hostile take-overs? Sure. But not mergers. Beyond the IC silliness of the idea, it would also fix a very minor problem that already has other solutions, and create a ton of far more serious new problems. And in the end the game would have suffered the loss of whatever the clans involved brought to the table in terms of unique flavor and diversity.

I'd share more, but I think it's a non-issue to begin so... I've probably said too much already.

[Molten Heart]

The merger idea? For once I think Nyr was too gentle. The idea is simply ridiculous... Mergers don't happen in a cut-throat world like Zalanthas. Hostile take-overs? Sure. But not mergers. Beyond the IC silliness of the idea, it would also fix a very minor problem that already has other solutions, and create a ton of far more serious new problems. And in the end the game would have suffered the loss of whatever the clans involved brought to the table in terms of unique flavor and diversity.

I'd be interested to hear your reasons for calling it silly and ridiculous.  While there's no problem to fix, I think it'd be plausible and entirely within the realm of possibility if there were an IC desire to peruse something like this.  ICly the benefits are many and the drawbacks are few.  Not that it'll ever happen, staff are overworked as it is and this would be a huge undertaking, but to experience this level of change in game would be something on the level of destroying Tuluk, the Naki invasion of Tuluk and the resulting rebellion and rebuilding of Tuluk.

[Dresan]

First of all two different clans or organization coming together is not so strange lately IC if you ask me. The reasons for their 'merger' for lack of better word, or hostile take over is pretty much the same reason for most things in the game happen at all.  Someone thought it would be fun OOCly to do, achieve and make the game better and more fun. I mean if everyone single person including staff sudden liked an idea, i'm sure some ic reasoning would occur almost out of the blue. Firestorm anyone?  Anyways point is I'm not too fixated with ic reasoning, but at the end of the day I do think there is already precedence for it....and even if you really believe there isn't, well there is always a first time for everything.

I don't think being in a clan that feels dead is a good thing especially when you could have just easily joined another very similar one that has a lot more people in it. However your character is stuck where they are for a while or need to store, just seems like a bit of a waste. Truthfully even if there were 12 people in one clan and other 12 in the other, I'd probably still suggest the idea, again the more the merrier especially in these two clans. This isn't always the case though because again the clans compete for people looking for similar roles/experiences. So why have them compete at all? It might not be a problem or something even needing a fix but i still think it might be a fun worthwhile improvement . The idea that joining these two clans would lose any flavor is bogus, since again they are similar enough in structure and what they do that they can pretty much keep all their awesomeness despite being all under one roof. The thought that bringing them together would make more problems is a vague statement at best, which I don't think is true.

All that said,  kadius and salarr are still my favorite clans to join.  I don't think they are broken, bad off or anything. I just love them when they are full of people but then again every clan is that way. Changing something doesn't always turn out how you expect it and no guarantee it comes out better once you are done so probably best to just keep them as they are.

[Ouroboros]

Well, clearly not everyone is on the same page as to how plausible or realistic a merger of this sort would be. My sentiments, since you asked, are based on the following...

There's no precedent for the concept of a corporate merger in Zalanthas, period. Clans have been taken over by other clans, by force of various types, but never have two clans sat down, set their differences aside and engaged in peaceful negotiations as to how they might be better as a team by letting go their identity; by erasing their family names or relinquishing assets that have been fought over and won after hundreds of years of struggle. The setting that a merger would require just isn't present in the culture of Zalanthas. If a clan wants what another clan has, and is in a position to do something about it, they obliterate them and take over their assets as their own. Unlike mergers, hostile take-overs do have precedent in both past and recent times, and both amongst Noble and Merchant Houses.

There is absolutely nothing that a GMH would gain by merging with another from an IC perspective. It would be a loss for either one, not a gain. Each GMH has its own monopoly, and thus has no market share to compete over that might bring them more profit if they stopped competing for it. They each have their own holdings in most cities and would have very little gain in terms of land assets. They'd also have no benefit from downsizing, since each has very different needs from the next and pretty much all employees would have to be retained. So no benefit there either. Remind me why anyone felt this was plausible IC?

If it were to happen, it would be entirely for OOC reasons, and would by flying in the face of everything IC. And while changes can often happen for OOC reasons and have weak IC justifications, they usually happen when there's a damn serious need for it OOC. I'm sorry but having a couple more players to hunt with when someone decides to play in a GMH doesn't feel like the earth-shattering reason a change like this would need to justify it.

I get that it can suck sometimes when a clan isn't absolutely hopping, but it happens. The game itself can suck when not a lot of players are on. It happens. Get over it. It's not a permanent situation, never has been. Looking to destroy one or two clans in a fashion that completely defies IC logic over this issue is like calling the White House and asking for a nuclear tactical strike because you saw a roach. In your neighbour's kitchen. Across the street. When you were a child, ten years ago.

So yes. Forgive me, but I find the idea silly and ridiculous, just as I find silly and ridiculous the length at which it's been discussed already. But it's the GDB, and we can go on for days over which should be spread first, peanutbutter or jelly. So I shouldn't be surprised.

[HavokBlue]

Ouroboros is really good at explaining my thoughts on most topics better than I am

[FantasyWriter]

For those of you that were playing back then, did the Byn feel unnecessary when GMHs all had their own guard/military PC units?
This sounds like it might evolve into something like that if tried in game.

[Lizzie]

There is precedence, but not for a merger in the sense you're referring, Ouroboros. More like a joint venture, the creation of a conglomerate cooperative. So there would be the corporation: The GMH Houses. There would be subsidiaries: Salarr, Nenyuk, Kadius, Kurac. Each would continue to exist as their own families and entities with their own specialties, but they would be clanned members of the Cooperative.

They would strive toward the same end, as a cooperative: For the GMHs to become the Ruling Entities of the Known. This isn't even anything novel or new in Armageddon. Some of us have actually attempted to do this ICly in the past with our GMH-clanned sponsored and/or promoted ranked roles. Usually it would fall apart because one PC couldn't ever log in when the others were logged in to even get a discussion going. Or there would be a discussion started, and then one of the key people would get killed/stored.

[Ouroboros]

I'm still waiting to hear about all these amazing IC benefits this would bring to the table for GMH's, and so far I've only heard IC justifications for perceived OOC benefits of minor (in my opinion) worth. If someone really wants to pitch this as sound from an IC stand-point, I'd like them to do the math.

Edit: Also two things. One, I didn't use the term merger, others did. If those that used it meant something other than a merger, then they probably shouldn't have labeled it as such. Two, precedence by definition means something has happened before. Unless I'm off my mark, you're referring to things that have been attempted, not actually have happened. If that's the case, there is no precedence. Just players who have tried something and failed for various reasons. At the end of the day you can't be sure that if all else worked out it would have happened to begin with, since without staff's approval all attempts are moot. Staff just tends to be generous sometimes and lets players ride out improbable scenarios just to be nice and for the sake of roleplay freedom. If they honestly backed every PC endeavor they've let players run with, the world would look very different.

[Dresan]

Moving back to clan pay.

If clan play is being looked at then I think the change should allow the players within clans to afford food, water, moderately sized apartments, and gear from the shops easily. In short, they would be doing rather well for themselves. However at the same time I think the good stuff salarr, kadius and kurac (except maybe basic spice) should be raised a very significant amount. You can afford that decent set of armor, but if you want the uber armor of death that will hopefully poke carru in the eyes when they charge you, you'll probably need to do something more then just do your job. You will either need to be corrupt, take bribes, or just earn bonuses. Heck maybe stab someone who owns that armor so you can get it for yourself. Everyone in a clan should be able to afford the basics and stuff sold in shops easily but they still shouldn't feel filthy rich.

As for independents, current jobs need to be changed to give the necessities of life. Instead of coin they should just really pay in food and water, and instead of 100 or 200 sid a bag of salt perhaps just enough additional coins to cover stabling fees. The very basics to keep a character going until they level up other skills and find something more profitable to do. This is an issue of playability vs realism. It should be easy for players to survive, as in keep their characters fed and watered but it shouldn't be easy for them to become filthy rich.Again you want food and water, join the levies, you need stabling fees, dig clay.   Even if this changes, some players will eventually become rich anyways. I think the coins coming from easy to kill prey such as chitin from skeet need to be lowered a tad to reflect how easy they are to kill but I mean ranger/crafter and merchant classes are built to be rich characters. I think that is fine. However, unless you have backing from a clan, noble or templar I think the bank should be taking 10% of whatever coins are in your account every month.

If you are poor and have 100 coins that would only be 10 coins a month but as you get richer it will hurt more. Newbie accounts should be exempt for the first month or two of playing. The need for coins will always be there thus fueling, corruption,theft and murder even for independents who might have a couple thousand in the bank. I don't think these ideas are new or even mine, I'm mostly repeating what other people have thought up over the years. I just think they are good ideas that should be considered when adjusting clan play. It still feels awfully hard to bribe someone at the moment. I feel its harder then it should be, mostly because the incentives to take coins aren't there after a while.

[Dresan]

I'm still waiting to hear about all these amazing IC benefits this would bring to the table for GMH's, and so far I've only heard IC justifications for perceived OOC benefits of minor (in my opinion) worth. If someone really wants to pitch this as sound from an IC stand-point, I'd like them to do the math.

IC justifications for perceived OOC benefits is basically why a lot of things happen in the game. Lately, a lot of the things that have changed and happened have had the OOC benefit of making the world more enjoyable for the player-base. Not to say there are no IC consequences for IC action but whether it be war suddenly brewing or a tavern closing down, its all basically for the same OOC reasons, the justifications come afterwards.   It is all the reasoning you need anyways since you can come up with many really good reasons for things happening IC that would still make sense. Its a fiction setting after all, so it just takes some creativity. Whether those benefits are minor or not, are indeed just an opinion.

[Ouroboros]

If we're back to discussing the original topic, which actually stated there was no major issue with clan pay to begin with except where recreational drinking was concerned, then...

Surprise, but I don't think there's much to discuss there either. Staff has already stated they're in the process of adjusting the pay of clans, and already have in some cases, so clan pay is addressed.

If anyone is looking for balance in this game though, you're playing the wrong game. A GMH will never be able to (or care to) offer the same amount of coin an indie can potentially earn. They haven't in nearly two decades the game's been alive, and they won't start now. This is both due to the fact enterprising indies will always look for ways to make coin (and who wouldn't really) and the fact that it doesn't make sense for a GMH to spend that much on labor. It would cut into their profits without reason. What the GMH offers in lieu of coin, are various privileges. Those cost the House little-to-nothing but offer its employees benefits they might otherwise be unable to enjoy (or have a hard time achieving).

Over time staff has, with the assistance of players and staff members alike, corrected most of the truly game-breaking economy issues. I won't go into details on that point. Beyond that though, any attempt to penalize the few will have a negative effect on the many. What can be pushed though are the benefits a clan offers to its members outside of coin. And even on that department changes are still happening these days which benefit clanned individuals. See the recent apartment changes as one example of privileges clans can now offer to their members.

In short, if you're looking to make being in a clan more meaningful, don't look at the economy. Tossing more coin to clanned members or less coin to indies isn't going to fix that. Look at what benefits a clan can offer outside of pay. And keep in mind that the single most important reason a player wants to be a part of a clan is the interaction. You could offer silk-lined beds and bags of coin to your hunters, but if the clan's leadership sucks or the player is more content in isolated roles, nothing's going to get them in there. Likewise, if a clan is the right fit for a player and their character, and/or the leadership of said clan is doing a good job, it'll find itself full of members regardless of how little or how much the salary is. Don't believe me? Two decades worth of clans that have at various times been full of members can back me on this.

As for the merger idea, since we haven't moved from it clearly...

It is all the reasoning you need anyways since you can come up with hundred of really good reasons for things happening IC.

If it were to happen, it would be entirely for OOC reasons, and would by flying in the face of everything IC. And while changes can often happen for OOC reasons and have weak IC justifications, they usually happen when there's a damn serious need for it OOC. I'm sorry but having a couple more players to hunt with when someone decides to play in a GMH doesn't feel like the earth-shattering reason a change like this would need to justify it.

You need at least one of your reasons to be strong when discussing game-wide changes like this. If there's a very serious OOC need, the IC justifications can be weaker. If there's very good IC reasons for a change, the OOC benefits don't have to be as substantial. Right now both are weak. The OOC reasons have already been stated (more player interaction in clans) and I'm not the only one who finds them a minor nuisance. Even those supporting the idea acknowledge that. Which is why I'm waiting to hear how this makes sense IC. If there's a strong enough case for it IC, then perhaps an OOC benefit as minor as this makes the proposal worth consideration.

[FantasyWriter]

I'm still waiting to hear about all these amazing IC benefits this would bring to the table for GMH's

IC:
Lower overhead (no/fewer resource-gathering employees to have to feed/cloth/shelter).
Merchants and political agents could do their jobs without having to micro-manage employees.
Being able to vet possible skilled laborers or trustworthy minions without risking bringing in unknown thieves/troublemakers/dramaqueens.
Larger pool of hunters/grebbers to task with something would likely bring quicker and greater yields of what is needed.
Larger pool of hunters/grebbers increases the chance of specialized skills that may be needed to reach certain places or tackle certain challenges.

OOC and IC:
All GMH/Cooperative employees/leaders would likely have more incentive and opportunity for interaction. Instead of three groups segregated into their compounds, they are all gathering at the same tavern/warehouse to talk shop and discuss business deals.

I would certainly be against this being thrown in OOCly (OOC changes to the game world always leave me feeling resentful when it is something that COULD be done ingame with the right character/player/staff effort), but it would certainly be an interesting venture to tackle in game.  Good luck to anyone who tries!

[FantasyWriter]

I do think drink in most taverns could be lowered to a few sids. Even a runner in the Byn should be buy a cup of piss-ale after a log day of cleaning out the shitter.

[Ouroboros]

Responses in bold below, inline.

IC:
Lower overhead (no/fewer resource-gathering employees to have to feed/cloth/shelter).
Pretty much the same amount of employees would be needed to support the needs of each House individually as they would if combined, given the very different needs each House has in terms of materials and the rate of production of said materials remaining the same. Speaking virtually at least, since this is mentioned as an IC benefit. Further, this actually goes against the OOC benefit being asked for, which is increased interaction. Cutting down the number of PC would lead to less interaction. Lastly, it would have a negative effect on the game due to less GMH positions being available to players as a whole. So it sucks from an OOC standpoint and seems unrealistic from an IC one.

Merchants and political agents could do their jobs without having to micro-manage employees.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this. If reading it correctly, there would actually be more micro-managing involved in order to ensure each employee is properly seeing the needs of a given House addressed (and not overlooking them for the needs of another House). The more complex an organization, the more need for micro-managing. If you mean because there would be less employees to manage, see above response. Feel free to elaborate though.

Being able to vet possible skilled laborers or trustworthy minions without risking bringing in unknown thieves/troublemakers/dramaqueens.
I fail to see how a merger accomplishes this any more than it can be accomplished right now. Elaborate if you like, but as stated it makes no sense.

Larger pool of hunters/grebbers to task with something would likely bring quicker and greater yields of what is needed.
You forgot the caveat to that, "at the cost of other needed resources." If there's 30 hunters in the merged House, which were once 10 per House, those hunters either need to continue bringing in House-specific materials for the needs of each House or production of one House will suffer for the benefit of another. Beyond which, urgent needs can and have been addressed in the past by outsourcing. You don't hire on more hunters that you expect to pay for a lifetime (or their lifetime at least) just because you need a bit more resource x for that month. Also if you entirely eliminate outsourcing, you take away whatever GMH-to-indie interaction existed, which hurts the game as a whole. Essentially taking away interaction in order to promote interaction.

Larger pool of hunters/grebbers increases the chance of specialized skills that may be needed to reach certain places or tackle certain challenges.
Sure, why not. Though at the same time, proper training and/or outsourcing can still see those needs addressed when really specialized challenges come along. Training having the benefit of a stronger force and outsourcing having the benefit of less pay. It would also mean less contracts to the Byn, which means less interaction there. But let's say that no one cares about the Byn, right? I'll give you this one.

OOC and IC:
All GMH/Cooperative employees/leaders would likely have more incentive and opportunity for interaction. Instead of three groups segregated into their compounds, they are all gathering at the same tavern/warehouse to talk shop and discuss business deals.
Yay for interaction, but that's an OOC benefit not an IC one. If members of different Houses have IC reason to interact, they already do. Or should. A merger in order to force them to interact for IC reasons seems... silly. Is the reasoning here, "We're going to merge the Great Merchant Houses because you all need to learn to be more social?" And why would that even matter in most cases? Does Amos Salarr care if Malik Kurac sold a pinch of spice to Joe Indie? They'd also have IC cause to interact because of the merger, which is an after-effect. They wouldn't have cause to interact any more than they do already if the merger never happened. So that can't be one of the IC reasons for the merger to happen, unless we're bringing Inception into this.

I would certainly be against this being thrown in OOCly (OOC changes to the game world always leave me feeling resentful when it is something that COULD be done ingame with the right character/player/staff effort), but it would certainly be an interesting venture to tackle in game.  Good luck to anyone who tries!
Good luck to anyone who tries indeed, because it seems like they have a lot of explaining to do to their Seniors on how this makes sense for their House. But if it happens via IC means, I'm all for it. It means both players and staff is on-board with the plan, and it makes sense IC for it to happen. So far though, it seems like the only way this is going to take off the ground is if it's enforced OOC from staff. Which will need much better reasoning than what's been offered here so far. That's not my opinion, that's been stated plainly by Nyr.

And...

I do think drink in most taverns could be lowered to a few sids. Even a runner in the Byn should be buy a cup of piss-ale after a log day of cleaning out the shitter.
Completely agree. It's an easy fix with minimal impact for a minimal issue. Those are the best kinds of tweaks, which little by little help bring about a better game.

Hope that helps. I'm not trying to burst any bubbles here, I'm just not seeing any IC rhyme and reason to this proposal.

[Molten Heart]

I'm still waiting to hear about all these amazing IC benefits this would bring to the table for GMH's

IC:
Lower overhead (no/fewer resource-gathering employees to have to feed/cloth/shelter).
Merchants and political agents could do their jobs without having to micro-manage employees.
Being able to vet possible skilled laborers or trustworthy minions without risking bringing in unknown thieves/troublemakers/dramaqueens.
Larger pool of hunters/grebbers to task with something would likely bring quicker and greater yields of what is needed.
Larger pool of hunters/grebbers increases the chance of specialized skills that may be needed to reach certain places or tackle certain challenges.

There are political advantages too.  If they're able to all get along under one roof, they'd be a political powerhouse, an effective monopoly over everything.  If Kurac were willing to share Luir's Outpost, they'd also have the sovereignty of having a home base that they'd control outside of the City States, giving them some freedom to do what they want without having to worry as much about Allanak/Tuluk.

[Molten Heart]

nevermind

[Dresan]

Ouroboros, I don't think you ever will either find good IC justification. You don't like the idea of bringing the clans together at all, despite being some benefits (more plots and interaction with people looking to play similar type roles) which you believe is minor. I disagree with you but that is okay. However from an IC mean there is a war. You have two clans that are sending resources back to the enemy. Resources that yes you need but the enemy does as well. Obsidian coins mean shit at the top levels, its all about resources and power. It might just be me but I think I can come up with at least a couple of reasons why the houses might feel the need to bring their resources together stuck in between two gigantic enemies.  

Still its a fool errand to try to justify all this ICly in any way, because for ever IC justification someone can create, you can just as easily make up several IC counters to why that should not happen. I'm not really arguing for the idea of a merger anymore mind you, again the benefits vs the OOC cons of that idea (which I haven't heard many if any of) are subject to debate. I just think its silly that any idea with the OOC benefit of improving the game and the player experience experience needs strong IC justification to do. Again it would be easy to create an amazing story justifying it ICly after all.  If this was the case all the time, nothing would change or happen in the game at all. We'd still have the firestorm around, and I for one like the new tavern and its location.

[Dresan]

 If Kurac were willing to share Luir's Outpost, they'd also have the sovereignty of having a home base that they'd control outside of the City States, giving them some freedom to do what they want without having to worry as much about Allanak/Tuluk.

 

[Reiloth]

I think 'mergers' haven't happened as much as absorption, like with House Delann getting absorbed into House Kurac.

I agree that merging clans would be more of an OOC construct, and unless one of the GMH's were floundering and about to 'go out of business' in a sense, the separate entities wouldn't think of forking over even an iota of their monopolies.

I remember playing a Kuraci Agent and spending some time trying to buy riding boots designs from Kadius -- It was hellish, as it should have been. Kadius didn't want to let go of the design, and Kurac wanted it. Kadius knew and understood that Kurac wanted it, but that just gave them more bargaining power, etc.

So I just can't see a situation where Kadius and Kurac would sit down and hash out terms to 'join forces'. There is no company going public and commoners buying stock, there is no real benefit to combining forces beyond creating more headaches. Part of the reason these GMH are in different monopolies that are so niche, is they don't compete with each other. Clothing/Luxury Goods, Weapons/Armor, Desert Survival Gear/Spice. There's some crossover, but not enough to warrant getting up in arms about. Forking over designs (which is what would happen if the GMH merged together) is like flushing their 'power' down the toilet. And for what?

[Ouroboros]

There are political advantages too.  If they're able to all get along under one roof, they'd be a political powerhouse, an effective monopoly over everything.  If Kurac were willing to share Luir's Outpost, they'd also have the sovereignty of having a home base that you control outside of the City States, giving them some freedom to do what they want without having to worry as much about Allanak/Tuluk.

They already have an effective monopoly over everything, shared amongst themselves alone. What makes you think that the GMH's currently don't support each other when it comes to the political arena?  What makes you think Kurac would be willing to share the Outpost? What makes you think either city-state would let this merger happen? Do you know what happens behind closed Senate meetings? Do you know how little or how much cooperation GMH Seniors offer to each other?

These are some of many questions I would hope someone truly interested in seeing this happen would try to have answered IC. There's no point in speculating on the political aspect though, as none of us besides staff has any concrete information on such. Those questions are just food for thought.

Ouroboros, I don't think you ever will either find good IC justification. You don't like the idea of bringing the clans together at all, despite being some benefits (more plots and interaction with people looking to play similar type roles) which you believe is minor. I disagree with you but that is okay. However from an IC mean there is a war. You have two clans that are sending resources back to the enemy. Resources that yes you need but the enemy does as well. Obsidian coins mean shit at the top levels, its all about resources and power. It might just be me but I think I can come up with at least a couple of reasons why the houses might feel the need to bring their resources together stuck in between two gigantic enemies.  

Still its a fool errand to try to justify all this ICly in any way, because for ever IC justification someone can create, you can just as easily make up several IC counters to why that should not happen. I'm not really arguing for the idea of a merger anymore mind you, again the benefits vs the OOC cons of that idea (which I haven't heard many if any of) are subject to debate. I just think its silly that any idea with the OOC benefit of improving the game and the player experience experience needs strong IC justification to do. Again it would be easy to create an amazing story justifying it ICly after all.  If this was the case all the time, nothing would change or happen in the game at all. We'd still have the firestorm around, and I for one like the new tavern and its location.

Dresan, don't mistake my arguments for bias and don't confuse me with the average GDB poster. While I've played on an off since 2002 and I follow the boards regularly, there's a reason I rarely post. I don't like arguing for argument's sake, as many here tend to enjoy. If I'm posting it's either because I feel strongly about an issue and think it needs vocal support, or because I'm trying to help other players. In this case I'm asking questions that need to be asked, and I'm offering those seeking to support a given proposal the chance to debate their stance in a much more open fashion than they would receive from staff. Whether I like the idea has no bearing on whether it will happen or not, I'm not a staff member. I just happen to agree with staff's opinion on this so far. It happens now and then.

Yes, I believe the OOC benefit of a merger, increased interaction, is minor. That's because the interaction is there already, and the times when it isn't are intermittent and often attributed to more than how many players are active. As I've said before in this discussion, a good portion of the blame for an empty clan falls on the shoulders of its leadership and another good portion falls on the fact not all players enjoy clan interaction. I've tried not to highlight the former too much because no one likes to hear they're not a good leader, but unfortunately not every player is cut-out for it. There's also nothing that can be done about the later, because some players simply prefer isolationist roles. And there are players who might not mind being in a clan, but a GMH isn't their cup of tea. They might prefer one of the various other clan styles, such as the tribes, the respective militias, or the many Noble Houses.

I don't think that forcing a merger via artificial means is the solution, if one is even needed, and I believe it has the potential for more harm than good. Consider for example the scenario where the PC leadership of the conglomerate sucks. It happens in every clan and there's no reason to think it wouldn't in this scenario either. At that point as a potential employee you're screwed. Where you used to have three different options available to you, you're now stuck with one. Whoever is in charge there is it, no avoiding them. And that's just one of many potential issues, off the top of my head.

That's my opinion though, and each is entitled to theirs. I've done my best to support my opinion with facts instead of speculation, and have asked the same of others. I know it must seem like it at times but my goal isn't to argue you to death. It's to force you to either realize you're wrong by discussing various aspects of an issue you might not have thought of, or realize you're right and support your argument in a stronger fashion. One that might be better heard by staff and other players alike.

As far as justifications go, there's weak ones and strong ones. I already shared my feelings on what the ratio of that should be, across an OOC need. And I wasn't the first to say so by any means. Nyr himself clearly stated this in saying, "There's not any IC reason for a merger.  The only thing brought up is that at times, one of two GMH clans may have more people than the other.  That's hardly a reason to suggest a merger.  That's also not a good reason for this pool." I've simply tried to explain why that might be, and hoped that if there was a stronger defense for this idea, that it would surface through discussion. So far it doesn't seem to have.

In any case... I think I've said enough here already, and I don't want anyone to feel I'm bullying them. So I'll step away from the discussion and let folks ponder what's been said and how they might want to proceed. My reason for saying anything here wasn't because I felt strongly about the issue, I stated I felt it was silly and unrealistic to begin with. I only continued with it to help the discussion progress in case something interesting came of it.

[a french mans shirt]

To be honest I can't get my head to wrap around the idea that the upper dozen or so of the two merchant houses would most of them agree to this, I keep thinking of them as a tribal, isolationist, inbred bunch of soulless powermongers who marry each other off for the politics and have shadow artists on the naki payroll. The merchant houses don't share anything but the fact that they are both merchant houses, something I feel works against them because of the above. Anyone feel like wasting some time explaining to me why folks think a merger would work from the eyes of the 0.1%? I know nothing of economics.

[FantasyWriter]

It looks like we may have gotten our wires crossed. I was not meaning to support a merger of the GMHs but having a common pool of indie hunters and grebbers that worked together on contract. We have the Byn when we need to hire muscle. Tuluk has Shadow Artistry when you need people eliminated or pressured.  Merchant houses use both of these established systems with good success at times.

Lower overhead (no/fewer resource-gathering employees to have to feed/cloth/shelter).
Pretty much the same amount of employees would be needed to support the needs of each House individually as they would if combined, given the very different needs each House has in terms of materials and the rate of production of said materials remaining the same. Speaking virtually at least, since this is mentioned as an IC benefit. Further, this actually goes against the OOC benefit being asked for, which is increased interaction. Cutting down the number of PC would lead to less interaction. Lastly, it would have a negative effect on the game due to less GMH positions being available to players as a whole. So it sucks from an OOC standpoint and seems unrealistic from an IC one.

This is incorrect. Any business has ups and downs, even monopolies.  If your sales are down, you are still paying benefits such as food/clothing/shelter/water (this is part of what makes up overhead) at the same cost as if business were booming, even if you do cut their pay. They will also keep bringing in unneeded materials (inventory is also what makes up overhead).  Your crafters will also keep making more inventory that the market can support (more inventory overhead).  Eventually you are going to get desperate for cashflow (cause you need this to keep your bosses and employees from cutting your throat, literally in this game) and lower the price of your surplus goods which lowers the value of your product.  Generally speaking, once this happens a business is going to fail or spend years trying to recover speaking virtually at least, since this was mentioned as an IC benefit.

Also, we are not cutting down on the number of PCs, instead of the merchant houses having three resource-gathering employees each, they have access to nine.  Instead of three groups of four PCs (leader and three grebbers) you have twelve people that play off each other's strengths and make up for each other weaknesses without being bound into any kind of long term contract.  GMHs can still hire people they find particularly useful, but they don't have to hire three BillyJoeBobs off the street just so that they can get someone to gather some branches and tregil hides or depend on solo hunters who MIGHT live through the week.  If PC leaders weren't forced into hiring the PCs they need to get coded materials in, they can instead, save those slots for people with who they have built up a mutually beneficial relationship with and who can better further plots. (Again, the Byn and shadow artistry systems in place have already showed us that this works.)

Merchants and political agents could do their jobs without having to micro-manage employees.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this. If reading it correctly, there would actually be more micro-managing involved in order to ensure each employee is properly seeing the needs of a given House addressed (and not overlooking them for the needs of another House). The more complex an organization, the more need for micro-managing. If you mean because there would be less employees to manage, see above response. Feel free to elaborate though.

Business use temp services (no and low-skill labor pools like the idea I am supporting) because instead of having to vet and hire people and provide them with the already mentioned benefits, you can make a call (way message) and say, "I need three people to come do this job for me and I am willing to pay this much for it." Once the job is done, they go back into the pool until they are needed again, or if one or more seems particularly useful and drama/trouble free, you can offer the job.  I have always seen GMH leaders pleading for employees on city boards to look particularly jarring from an IC standpoint.  These should be coveted positions not places for inexperienced noobs (meaning IC noobs, not new players!) to train up.  And GMH leaders should be begged for employment, not begging for employees.

Labor-pool employees don't require baby sitting, you don't have to deal with their drama or baggage, you don't have to listen to their OMG my life sucks stories, and when they fuck up, the templars don't come looking for you for an explanation or restitution.  You tell them what to do, and they do it or they don't and you get someone else form the pool, end of story unless you WANT to hire them. Again, I don't think that GMHs should HAVE to take on the responsibility of full-time employees unless they desire such, and I remember one kadian who did very well by choosing -not- to have a crew at all *eyeballs Lizzie*.  If you don't think this kind of system can be successful, again, look at the Byn, Shadow artists and patron/partisan systems. YOu can OOCly and ICly still be a good leader, plot driver and keep PCs busy without hiring them.  People will never OOCly or IC look at GMH employment as "elite" when people are being hired straight out of character generation without first proving that they are worth the time, effort, and coin.

Being able to vet possible skilled laborers or trustworthy minions without risking bringing in unknown thieves/troublemakers/dramaqueens.
I fail to see how a merger accomplishes this any more than it can be accomplished right now. Elaborate if you like, but as stated it makes no sense.

With a semi-organized labor pool, you know longer have to hire someone without them proving that they are worth it, and they have a way to skill up and DESERVE and merchant house job without going out alone and getting killed.
I think the above should clear that up, let me know if it doesn't. Sorry that it looked like I was supporting some kind of merger.

Larger pool of hunters/grebbers to task with something would likely bring quicker and greater yields of what is needed.
You forgot the caveat to that, "at the cost of other needed resources." If there's 30 hunters in the merged House, which were once 10 per House, those hunters either need to continue bringing in House-specific materials for the needs of each House or production of one House will suffer for the benefit of another. Beyond which, urgent needs can and have been addressed in the past by outsourcing. You don't hire on more hunters that you expect to pay for a lifetime (or their lifetime at least) just because you need a bit more resource x for that month. Also if you entirely eliminate outsourcing, you take away whatever GMH-to-indie interaction existed, which hurts the game as a whole. Essentially taking away interaction in order to promote interaction.

I believe this has been answered already, let me know if you don't think so.

Larger pool of hunters/grebbers increases the chance of specialized skills that may be needed to reach certain places or tackle certain challenges.
Sure, why not. Though at the same time, proper training and/or outsourcing can still see those needs addressed when really specialized challenges come along. Training having the benefit of a stronger force and outsourcing having the benefit of less pay. It would also mean less contracts to the Byn, which means less interaction there. But let's say that no one cares about the Byn, right? I'll give you this one.

They Byn are not hunters and grebbers, they are mercenaries, paid -soldiers-.  Some sergeants will make exceptions when times are tough but there it is.  Also, these two groups would clash from time to time with contracts, which is great because Conflict is one of the main drivers of Story.

OOC and IC:
All GMH/Cooperative employees/leaders would likely have more incentive and opportunity for interaction. Instead of three groups segregated into their compounds, they are all gathering at the same tavern/warehouse to talk shop and discuss business deals.
Yay for interaction, but that's an OOC benefit not an IC one. If members of different Houses have IC reason to interact, they already do. Or should. A merger in order to force them to interact for IC reasons seems... silly. Is the reasoning here, "We're going to merge the Great Merchant Houses because you all need to learn to be more social?" And why would that even matter in most cases? Does Amos Salarr care if Malik Kurac sold a pinch of spice to Joe Indie? They'd also have IC cause to interact because of the merger, which is an after-effect. They wouldn't have cause to interact any more than they do already if the merger never happened. So that can't be one of the IC reasons for the merger to happen, unless we're bringing Inception into this.

Interaction and building a larger web of influence is not an IC benefit? Sure, if you are some kind of evil abomination.  Humans and humanoids are generally social creatures and the desire to interact with one another is a very strong driving force in your average sapient psyche.  People already use the taverns as places for business meetings, "having the hunter/grebber guild" meet up at a certain time each day if they aren't working to shoot the ship and share/exchange contracts seems natural.
"Hey, Amos Saltfeet, man... you have any salt on you or going out next week? Foofoo Kadius wants a sack of different kinds to try with a new recipe, and I fucking hate getting salt in my asscrack."
"Nah man, but Takki does.... Hey, Takki, head over here when that whore gets done and crawls out from under the table, eh!?"

I would certainly be against this being thrown in OOCly (OOC changes to the game world always leave me feeling resentful when it is something that COULD be done ingame with the right character/player/staff effort), but it would certainly be an interesting venture to tackle in game.  Good luck to anyone who tries!
Good luck to anyone who tries indeed, because it seems like they have a lot of explaining to do to their Seniors on how this makes sense for their House. But if it happens via IC means, I'm all for it. It means both players and staff is on-board with the plan, and it makes sense IC for it to happen. So far though, it seems like the only way this is going to take off the ground is if it's enforced OOC from staff. Which will need much better reasoning than what's been offered here so far. That's not my opinion, that's been stated plainly by Nyr.

Good, I don't want them to merge either!

[Molten Heart]

There are political advantages too.  If they're able to all get along under one roof, they'd be a political powerhouse, an effective monopoly over everything.  If Kurac were willing to share Luir's Outpost, they'd also have the sovereignty of having a home base that you control outside of the City States, giving them some freedom to do what they want without having to worry as much about Allanak/Tuluk.

They already have an effective monopoly over everything, shared amongst  themselves alone. What makes you think that the GMH's currently don't support each other when it comes to the political arena?

You make a good point.  They each have their -own- individual monopolies, but they don't have a monopoly over "everything".  Let me try to illustrate this point with a common situation that might arise in game.  Lets say Warlord Tor gets his panties in a bind over Lady Oash's birthday gift being late or wrong because Kadius just screwed up and this has hurt his chances at get into her pants/skirt.  He's mad and he works to convince House Tor to boycott buying any and all servant livery, food and other luxury goods from House Kadius and instead goes with the option to do it in house or use independents or lesser merchant houses.  If Salarr and Kadius were joined together in some kind of merchant house trade union that's been suggested, Tor wouldn't even think to put the quality or  supply of the armor and weapons they buy from the same group.

What makes you think Kurac would be willing to share the Outpost?

Nothing is impossible.  This is a unique sacrifice that the other houses wouldn't be making but Kurac would be gaining from this too.  I'm not suggesting Kurac share all their super sekrit Kuraci stuff, there are degrees of sharing that they may be willing to accept.   I'm not staff and I don't determine the aspects of the virtual world but I don't think it's implausible that Kurac couldn't be convinced to allow other merchant houses to operate in Luir's.  What if Luir's were to become the merchant house capitol?  As masters over Luir's, that'd give Kurac a lot of power over those inside the walls.

What makes you think either city-state would let this merger happen?

I'm sure the city states wouldn't like the fact that they'd lose a lot of leverage if something this happened, but would they really care that much?  In a situation where they did care, what would they be prepared to do?  Destroy them?  If they do something like that they'd be shooting themselves in the foot, cutting off their supply of whatever those merchant houses supply, at least until someone else moved in to fill the gap which would take a long time.

Do you know what happens behind closed Senate meetings?  Do you know how little or how much cooperation GMH Seniors offer to each other?

These are some of many questions I would hope someone truly interested in seeing this happen would try to have answered IC. There's no point in speculating on the political aspect though, as none of us besides staff has any concrete information on such. Those questions are just food for thought.

While the details do make things much more complicated, my points are still valid.  This would could be a profitable venture for the merchant houses, both economically and politically.  They'd have to get along, which might be a problem but ultimately they'd be better off.   Would the personalities that make up the houses want to do something like this, individuals that are grounded in tradition, greedy rich individuals that don't want the hassle?  Probably not.  But is it icly implausible or even impossible?  Stranger things have happened.

I'm not aware of any IC push to do this and staff seem to be happy with the way things are so I  wouldn't worry that any change like this might happen.