Player Political Organizations

Home Forums Rulebook Player Political Organizations

Viewing 17 reply threads
  • Author
    • #765

      You may only belong to one official Faction at a time. If you are in a Faction and wish to set up another, you will have to decide when it is appropriate for your clan to leave the Faction it is currently with. Some of your retainers may decide to leave your clan, and if you are running a city, some other problems could result.

      Factions are broken down into 4 parts:
      1. Kingdoms
      2. Factions
      3. Groups
      4. Religions

      Not a faction = independent

      I would say 2. Faction = Families or Secular

      That’s the rule in the book.

      Decided to post this as new topic as this is one discussion point keeps on being raised in other topics blurring it


    • #767

      for me religion should be separate to everything else. In other words you can be x and have a religion.

    • #769

      For me I am primary Seeker as I wish to be the Seeker senior and secondary Cymru as factions. Now I was also thinking of play in yet a 3rd faction too. What are all of you so upset or concerned about here, don’t you trust Jon and the other (3) GMs to do their jobs. I have faith in Jon and crew to watch what is going on. These GMs will be interacting with the game very much…don’t expect to get any “Noted and Done From these guys”!!!

      Have a little faith guys…

      • This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by DreamWeaver.
    • #788

      Your reading what I am posting the wrong way. I’m just putting out idea’s. The difficulty mechanism thread went off topic into this topic. Here it is now around to discussed. Please don’t paint this as something else. From what I have seen so far I like how they are setting this up.

    • #789

      Here is a another idea players selecting more then one “Faction” An alternative.
      Four streams within “factions” to choose from.
      *Independent Groups

      > One choice of Kingdom hierarchy
      > One choice of Family

      > One choice of religion

      > Any choice of a “Guild Group”

      Any of the “Guild paths”. It would mean Guilds ain’t a faction per say… but re-jigged as a Guild Group but with a Seniorship structure.

      > Any choice of a “Alternative groups”

      Groups as an alternative path “Bandit, pirate, barbarian etc” and all the different varieties. Alternative groups would not have seniors… like herding cats to do what you want to be involved with them.

      Choice depending on goals of the faction will make you exempt some alternative path selections.

      • #836

        I think this is worth considering. It may need tweaking, but the basic concept feels sound.

    • #796

      Well said!

    • #829

      For myself, I would like to see players having the ability to run no more than 6 clans, and across a maximum of 3 factions.

      However, if and when Manchuria opens up (which i hope it will), a player can then play up to 8 clans, however the 7th clan must be one of the Manchurian sub-factions (ie… Khitan, Nippon etc).

      The 8th clan be also be Manchurian if desired, or can be a Midgard continent clan, and can even be a clan belonging to a fourth Midgard faction (hopefully by then a formal mercenary faction, aka MV or SOA will also be in the wings).

      If a player does not pick up a Manchurian position, then their clan limmit remains at 6 positions.


      • #834

        Six clans sounds good for a starting number. It can always be increased later on, when the model has shown it does not buckle, complain, or quit without reason. Nine has been the traditional limit, but perhaps we should take it easy to get there.

        Manchuria was a continent I liked. If it were to open at some point, I would like to play there too. Also, if there is to be no (or extremely limited) communication between Manchuria and Midgard/Kalamar, perhaps the lvl 15 max for clans of players who have a non-Manchurian main faction could be lifted. If there is no way to influence the other side of the world, I see no need for it. This is to be far in the future, if at all, though.

        Just my 2 cents.

        • This reply was modified 2 years, 8 months ago by windpeoples.
    • #830

      Why should the level be set at 6? and why if they were to open up Manchuria should be increased to 8? I think many of you should ask Jon for some guidance here.

    • #832

      Because considering the vastness of Midgard, a three clan limit in my opinion, is to limited. Plus, by deciding upon a current 6 clan limit, the GMs can always increase the number of clans allowed to take into account expansion (Imperial Home anyone or the Barb continent).

      And it’s a lot easier to expand the number of allowable clans, then to turn around to someone with 8-12 clans, and say, sorry pal, you can now only have 5 clans. you are going to have to dump half of them out the airlock.

      And lastly, it is you that wanted to open things up for discussion. That’s my take on this topic. Based on my experience.

    • #833

      I think 9 clans is a good level of clans. Now just because you can play 9, doesn’t mean you have to play 9 clans. I just wanted to understand why adding another continent, we should add more clans? So that is why I asked my question.

    • #842

      Because of the vastness of the map at that time (assumption), most likely never the two shall meet. Some players may want to experience play on the other side of the world, so to speak.

      But having said that, don’t know why you should be allowed an additional clan in Midgard/Kalamar because you picked one up in Manchuria. If you want to play in Manchuria, play your two additional clans in Manchuria. Of course, you know some Lief Erickson character is going to sail from Midgard to Manchuria eventually!!!!

    • #843

      If it exists someone will eventually try to go there and check it out.

      As for the number of clans I see no real need for a limit at all, while I don’t see many able to play more than 6-9 clans, with a 2 week turn around they plan to keep.
      Just the amount of time it would take to run that many clans would be prohibitive. But what also needs to be taken into account is the size of the world and the length of time to travel. In the old game I spent 14-15 turns just traveling from Northern Midgard to Northern Kalmar, it would have take another 3-4 to get to Southern Kalmar. Most every clan I had in Kalmar would take a minimum of 2-3 turns of movement to get to each other. Now if your clans are of decent size you will quickly find out that scrounging up food in an area can be an issue, especially if you have multiple large clans in an area. My very first act in this game was to have my Boda clan gather up all the food I could in 3 cities and take to the Boda Seniors Army that was laying seige to some city. It took 4-5 turns to accomplish. The idea that someone would take 9 clans stack them up and just attack things would be extremely difficult at best and would be extremely hard on the faction as it would leave very little defending what they have and with the length of time to get to places you likely could not get there in time to be of much use. Logistics of the game limit many things and the GM’s will limit the others.

      As for the limiting of factions I just don’t get it unless you want players like me that might play in one of these clans that will not be my main and probably not my second, but could be my 3rd or 4th faction. Groups like the Getham, Gift, Seeker and Ring. They have little to no effect on my Primary faction the Cymru. In fact I would play them to have something completely different to do in the game or try to accomplish. My Seeker would be all about SA’s, my Getham would be all about making money, my Gift would be all about building and promoting my religion. This also allows me to in some way help out these factions that may not have the large number of players or clans in the game while giving me something else to focus on or do in the game.

      We need to realize this is a game and meant to be fun and challenging. The more clans and more diversity in the game makes this a much better game and allows for a variety of different types of players. I want to keep the limitation to a minimum. If something needs to take place I trust that Jon and his group will do what is in the best interest of the game. I don’t want knee jerk reactions to any possible issues that could possibly come up.

    • #847

      As I lay my head to sleep…. I kept getting this faction and clan thing popping up IN MY HEAD.

      Penn asks why 6, I ask why 9?

      Anyway, back to my faction fetish.

      I think every clan that chooses a faction that is not the players primary should lose some benefit of that faction. Read every clan choosing a faction not the players primary as a secondary clan. So in some previous versions your secondary clans couldn’t advance above rank 15. So to precede, we have to be honest. Mostly, secondary clans are created to support the primary clan/faction in some form or fashion. At least a symbiotic relationship. So it doesn’t really matter if your’re rank 15 or 20. Doesn’t really matter. Tasks are voluntary and if it doesn’t benefit your main primary goal of supporting your primary clan or at least run parallel to your goals, you’re most likely to reject the task, because you really have other tasks for your secondary clans, thus why you have them for the most part. They may have no other purpose that to provide information, gather scouting, CVRs, explore, provide additional SAs at far away places, whatever, but they are providing something to your primary, which is ok, IF. see below,

      So for example, if you and possibly a few other players are Imperials, they may choose Getham (example) for their secondary clans/factions. Place city leaders in various cities and begin moving quantities of goods around gaining this Getham benefit to the advantage of their primary faction. Are the Getham doing their Getham thing? Sure. Do they really care about the Getham? Not one ioda! However, if secondary Getham clans for example lost the city leader benefit, but still got the 10%, players then could still can play Getham if they choose, but since they’re ‘not all in’, then they shouldn’t get the same benefits as those players they have committed to the faction as their primary. How many players would still choose Getham then as a secondary clan? Maybe a few, perhaps.

      Every faction should have a lost benefit table that applies to secondary clans. Clans who fully commit to a faction should have something extra going for them. Your clan or clans that make up your primary faction, all gravy. Secondary clans that aren’t nearly as invested, just butter biscuits.

      If this were the case, I could probably get rid of my acid re-flux with respect to multiple faction play.

      Additionally, this would again place players in a position for the need to engage other players that hold primary positions within a faction that they don’t hold should they want/need something from that faction. Players get to play other factions if they wish, albeit at a more limited role commensurate with their commitment to the faction and still find themselves possibly in a situation where they may need to negotiate for services and it doesn’t dilute the benefit value of those factions. How valuable is a factions benefit package if anyone can pick up a secondary clan and be fully vested in that package. Kinda sucks for those that chose it as their primary imo.

      And as Steve mentioned, players do have friends and associates that could provide services those other factions provide, but now those friends will need to pick those factions as primaries to get the full benefit of those factions.

      my unprofessional opinion….. back to bed……

    • #850

      Naz your fatal flaw is thinking that people play the game and all their clans for the benefit of one faction and one faction alone, but it is very obvious from your persistence on this matter that you play that way and believe most others would do the same. So their must be something put in place to prevent this from happening in your mind.

      In you example you just assumed that the Imperial primary player chose to play some Getham clans and gained a city just to move goods around for the benefit of the Imperials. First could that person just as well be playing the Getham clan to play the economics system in the game and to enjoy something less militant. Second if he was doing as you said it would be obvious when the GM looks at his turns and notices all these goods being taken by the clan going to the same faction.

      Now using your idea in my example. My main is Cymru and lets say i decide to help out Brian M (Imperial guy) and take a Imperial clan just so I can get into lots of battles with the Boda. You want to strip some Imperial abilities from my clan making me an inferior Imperial going into battle against their enemy? Second my main factions gains absolutely nothing from this, infact it possibly hurts them greatly as this could allow the Imperials to firmly control things in Midgard and send exploratory parties down to Kalmar to check it out, at the very least it is one fewer Cymru clan defending and building up forces in the area.

      Now just to let you know you are talking to a person that one of my Cymru clans ran a city for the Getham for there benefit. Did it benefit my Cymru clan, yes but not nearly as much as it helped the Getham as I grew the city some 4,000 people in the short time I ran it and increased the number of their office by 10. This all with the approval of the Getham #1 (Jeff P at the time) So talking to other factions will always be necessary as you can always get embargo or blocked by factions and prevented from certain privileges of other clans.

    • #858

      From a GM perspective – nothing can stop a player from (pardon the pun) gaming the system. Midgard is at its heart a role-playing game; and their will always be folks with divided allegiances. To that end, it is up to the Seniors to decide if a player is helping their Kingdom, Faction or Religion.

      It is up to the GM to decide if they need to step in to “correct” the activity – and woe be it to the Senior that waited for the GM to fix the problem! Seniors and the GM work in a partnership to ensure that players play the game. The GM is the #0 in all Kingdoms, Factions, and Religions and has the advantage of being able to see all the data.

      In this game, we have a new factor – Kingdoms. They will not just remove you from office but also tend to remove your head from your shoulders. A Kingdom can hire mercenaries, raise armies, hire privateers and post rewards for people that irritate them.

    • #859

      sigh… Steve, why must you always make these things personal. Seems like the free flow if thoughts, ideals and suggestions are only welcome if they fit already preconceived templates. These are mere suggestions made to address potential exploits.

      I’ve played open-ended power games since 1976. This is a recurring theme. See it all the time so of course I look for potential exploits. If that was my play style as you suggest, why would I suggest ways of limiting the very exploits that would benefit my play style? Why if I played that way, I would be wanting unlimited clans, unlimited factions, unlimited, oh wait a minute. Sorry…..

      But you are right. There are people who enjoy playing different clans and factions for the sake of playing different clans and factions, but not everyone. It’s the ‘not everyone’ we need to think about.

      I’ve also played Imperials and Getham. Imperials up north and Getham in the south landing in Kalmar attempting to set up a trade agreement. The distance between the two was enormous, well a lot. I enjoyed role-playing them both, but I’d be willing to take the ‘modification’ to benefits to my secondary clan since it isn’t my primary. Having said that, if I played in the game, I’d play by whatever rules that were established.

    • #861

      Naz I understand your thoughts and played in much the same types of games and you will never get rid of power gamers. The key is to try to keep them in check enough that they do not ruin the game for the rest of the players. As Jon said it is up to Seniors and the GM’s to police the game and make sure people are not abusing the system, even if it is for your factions benefit. These things need to be stopped. If we don’t do a good job then like most other games it will go away because no one will have much fun if things are to easy or hard to accomplish and you are limited in what you can do in the game. That is why despite the fact I may be in a 2nd or 3rd faction with a clan. I don’t want others limited because I knew several that only played 1 clan in 3-4 different factions. They seemed to have more fun that way and were great to roleplay with in the game. What there favorite was change every few turns pending on what exciting thing was happening to one of their clans. I personally want more of those type of players in the game as it adds so much to the game.

    • #865


Viewing 17 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.