An Apology and a little rumor control

[Kiel Reid]

I got no issues with what was done in game by Korrigan. Nor do I have any issues with Taki. I know it wasn't favoritism or anything like that.

If I'm gonna say that I don't like something I'm also going to explain the why behind it, therefore the post. Just saying "I don't like the political system!" is not constructive. Nothing personal. This is still one of the best LARPS around. Bitching about the political system is all we can do because everything else is so awesome. With that in mind Mike said it will be looked into. Good enough for me.

[Ark]

I cannot believe im missing a thread bashing the political system

but in seriousness im sure nobody thinks any foul play is happening. Taki is clever, the people who ran things before were clever. the kind of people that like the political system are the exact same people that also know how to work it and bend it to their will. I have no doubt Taki got everything he has through legitimate scheming

as for PVP that usually gets killed out of people a few events in. a lot of people think that sort of thing is fun and cool, but most veteran players are annoyed at the instability that comes with it and kill them until they quit. likewise trying to kill NPC's usually comes back to bite you in the bum. its really just not worth it to be a devious bastard

I understand the political system, and believe me because I have a new brother that just loves it and I kid you not we have fought in the car for hours about different rules (about 2 hours straight on warrior alone) I just don't like the core concept behind it. however I have no problem with a survival system.

the system as it is now works like so: (Taki note im not bashing you in any way shape or form, this is a debate on the system)

1) territories and the like create resources / money / awesomeness / etc.
2) that gets funneled to one person (despite managers and what not that IS what happens)
3) that one person upkeeps EVERYTHING and allocates the extra ( new buildings, more awesomeness, etc.)
4) if an opposing force attempts some action against 1), the one person is alerted and able to bring the full might of everything they control down on them.

a few problems I personally have with this system:

-the way in which the system is designed cooperation is forced rather then voluntary, this I feel has a MAJOR impact.

-military. I cannot tell you how much I hate the military. we are the heroes, the fighters, the peacemakers. I have never played a tabletop game, mmorpg, or console game that allowed you to have a hero, and was dependent on how big of an army you had. it was all about you, the hero.

-the little guy, the loner, the lone wolf. I am very happy that skills have been put in place that allow people to upkeep themselves if they build for it, I realize a lot of my complaining prompted that, but I appreciate a way to upkeep ones self other then Chris saying "starving is not so bad" however I still feel this person is left out. I know this is mostly by design and fits with the world but c'mon.


that's all for now, thanks for reading ^_^
warrior is unstable, rogue is broken, im out, peace -Ark

[Kaylan Chargeender]

Ark, you know the rules...you and I cant post unless it contains something the other can argue and bach the previous poster for...please edit your post ASAP....that is all.

[GM_Chris]

A couple questions
1) What type of political system do you expect when playing in a fantasy game?
2) How does the current political system differ from your
3) If you attempt to go after "the one" what exactly can this person do to you....mechanically?

[Kaylan Chargeender]

A couple questions
1) What type of political system do you expect when playing in a fantasy game?

None. The only games I have played where there are MECHANICS for the effects of in game politicing...are FH/WH and CARPS. 2 out of 7.

2) How does the current political system differ from your (GAME I ASSUME)

it exists. Most of the larps are focused on the PCs being the focus and deal very little with peasents except for plot hooks and RP alliance developement.

3) If you attempt to go after "the one" what exactly can this person do to you....mechanically?

Defend themselves with whatever skills, items and friends they have at the time, assuming you mean direct attack. There is also indirect attacks, but that is handles through RP. (the staff guages if any of thier NPC allies come across the data and drop hints that way, or possibly one of thier PC allies might find out.
In SL my Corbyn esque PC once had several houses think they had a way to kill him by using alchemy to turn themselves into mind flayers and exploit his weakness to mental assault, however I had a spy planted in one of the houses and was informed ahead of time. If i hadnt heard, I would have just had to defend myself when they attacked. no mechanics other than skills.

[GM_Chris]

I didn't mean a mechanical political system..I meant from a cinematic perspective..Feudalism, Democracy, Communism, dictatorship..

I am a little confused by what you mean by that other LAPRS focus on players which would mean that FH focus's on NPC's??

[GM-Phil]

Ok I have stayed away for quite some time, since I did not feel it is my place to post about this, I would rather the FH guys deal with questions regarding the economics at FH.

But as Brian has said rules must be upheld, and when Ark makes statements as he had that are his opinion yet make it sound like fact about the economic system in general I must reply.

Cooperation is forced instead of Voluntary? - This statement is as false as they come - the entire Economic system is voluntary (to a point) - As for how the Managers cooperate, that is entirely up to them.. At FH it so happens that the Territories fell into the hands of one person.. now that was not inevitable nor necessary.. but it happened. At WH the entire Economy has been in flux and is pretty much up for grabs.. it just needs 1 or more people to step up.. which has been happening.

Military - A system used completely OOG (except on rare occassions where the players need the might of a big military to help them, as against the elves) - and in general has little impact on any individual character. I personally do not see FH/Wh characters like Dynasty Warriror characters cutting through hundreds of foes in a few seconds.. this is a Role-playing game, with combat.. The characters are the Hero's (or VIllains) as the case may be, and the military point system helps them in the economic system so that they may continue to be heroic (or Villianous) while the food stores are protected (not heroic), just ask anyone who has ever sat Guard duty for an hour.

The Lone Wolf - Yes it is quite easy now to build a character that is completely self-sufficient, and can still do things.. this is a huge change from years back where it was nigh impossible to play such a character. Mind you just like in real life people are going to be able to accomplish bigger and better things in groups. You want to be the Lone Wolf Hero.. no problem.. but understand that when the group of 6 characters goes and take down a Lich and loots his magic items, a Lich perhaps that had sent you packing a few hours previous.. that is what comes of it. Mind you there are plenty of plots out there for smaller or even single groups to do.. maybe not as heroic as killing a LIch, but usually good.

All in all the Lone Wolf character is your choice, your desire to interact or not interact with the Economy is your choice.. LARP is all about choices, whether you think you have them or not... you do.

[Ark]

Sorry Brian I will try and post something in my response we can disagree and argue about

on the base concept I agree with Brian, FH is unique in that it even HAS a political system. I realize that it is here to stay and a unique concept to FH/WH and there is nothing I can do to change that, so I must try to improve the system through criticism.

Cooperation - I feel it is forced. in FH/WH the "one" finds people that will just hand or sign over the resources from being manager. this is not hard, I and people I know have done this exact same thing, a lot of people just don't care and want things to go smoothly.

Now) 1) all resources funnel to the one, if something happens that threatens town cooperation is forced in "you help town or you starve" I have seen this in game personally. if a splinter wants to argue and get their own territory they must use the political system, take time and events to do it, and may not make enough to survive. if all that works out and you still want to argue the "one" has much better tools and a bigger military to simply take your territory. most of town does not want a problem, and will happily work for the one, if one or two people start causing trouble it creates bad tension and can end in death. (Aiden you and Calvin have been in this exact situation I describe, I remember it was my first event at WH)

What I would like to see) 2) Every individual person has a small amount of resources / money. good things happen like buildings being built and towns being created because heroes come together and everyone chooses to chip in some money and resources to make it happen.

the reason point one happens is because most people don't like or want to deal with the political system. and are more than happy to be compliant and send everything to one person as long as they get their one gold (or however much upkeep is)

Military) 3) troops can be mustered in game, it's not necessary and most things are handled behind the scenes but it can happen. In lord of the rings none of the heroes have or control an army. Théoden has an army and they have his help and support. the Elves have an army and they have their help and support. I have no Problem with GM controlled NPC's having a military, and we the heroes being able to go to them for help when we need it. but I don't feel we the heroes should control a standing army.

If Brian does not agree with anything I have posted yet. . .Warrior skills do not synergize with each other well and the whole thing comes off as weak and not built correctly, it is not the best 1v1 fighter only slightly better then the alternatives, and I feel a few small changes can fix that. . .and 4, 8, 12 is broken. 3, 6, 9 please.

- Ark

[Kaylan Chargeender]

I didn't mean a mechanical political system..I meant from a cinematic perspective..Feudalism, Democracy, Communism, dictatorship..

Feudalism or something close typically, although is that not also dictatorship in a form?

I am a little confused by what you mean by that other LAPRS focus on players which would mean that FH focus's on NPC's??

As in the plots rarely deal with the common masses that arent players, peasants and such. FH tends to involve them frequently. Not saying they shouldnt be, its more realistic and that I like.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

But as Brian has said rules must be upheld, and when Ark makes statements as he had that are his opinion yet make it sound like fact about the economic system in general I must reply.

YEAH...wait...I said that? I hate when I say that...

Cooperation is forced instead of Voluntary? - This statement is as false as they come - the entire Economic system is voluntary (to a point)

Dive in or starve isnt really a choice. The game is designed to force cooperation. Shouldnt be. However cooperation should be rewarded, as groups to have synergistic power and effect typically.

A lone PC that doesnt "group up" should still have, at most any level some chance to find/gather the basics to live.

Military - A system used completely OOG (except on rare occassions where the players need the might of a big military to help them, as against the elves) - and in general has little impact on any individual character

Its not used out of game at all, just in beween events. Very much like the research skill. While I am not opposed to PCs getting military, I can neither support or detract from the current system since I have yet to have a chance to use it.
I think it very reasonable to RP ones way into such a thing, especialy with paladins, knights, captains, noble reputation warriors and such floating around. Just makes such troops a challenge to use with only 4 NPCS at the best of times, in game anyhow.

I personally do not see FH/Wh characters like Dynasty Warriror characters cutting through hundreds of foes in a few seconds.. this is a Role-playing game, with combat.

A RP game with combat however, doesnt preclude the creation of a PC of that level of warrior prowess to ...role play. I can point to a few PCs that are obviously designed to be such, but arent due to the rules not being a rule set to support such a level of individual power.....unless your a polymorphed illithid... : P

The characters are the Hero's (or VIllains) as the case may be, and the military point system helps them in the economic system so that they may continue to be heroic (or Villianous) while the food stores are protected (not heroic), just ask anyone who has ever sat Guard duty for an hour.

The Lone Wolf - Yes it is quite easy now to build a character that is completely self-sufficient, and can still do things.. this is a huge change from years back where it was nigh impossible to play such a character.

I will take your word, because I think I am a slightly better than average min maxer and dont see it. Maaybe PM me a build you think fits that mold.

I will agree that the current rules allow for PCS, especially those in the level 80/90/100+ range to be MORE "self sufficient" than before. But I would say they can do little else.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Sorry Brian I will try and post something in my response we can disagree and argue about

No you wont because your an uncooperative bastage!
*sighs* aaahhhhh...now that feels better!

on the base concept I agree with Brian, FH is unique in that it even HAS a political system. I realize that it is here to stay and a unique concept to FH/WH and there is nothing I can do to change that, so I must try to improve the system through criticism.

and rebel war fare...dont forget that. VIVA LA REVELUTION!

Cooperation - I feel it is forced.

Agreed sort of, the system is just built with " an offer you cant refuse" type of choice overall.

in FH/WH the "one" finds people that will just hand or sign over the resources from being manager. this is not hard, I and people I know have done this exact same thing, a lot of people just don't care and want things to go smoothly.

That isnt due to the mechanics, its due to "the one" AKA FHNEO. I assure you if my last FH PC had tried to Taki Haven, they would have stuffed him into a small jar and dropped it into a sink hole.

Now) 1) all resources funnel to the one, if something happens that threatens town cooperation is forced in "you help town or you starve" I have seen this in game personally. if a splinter wants to argue and get their own territory they must use the political system, take time and events to do it, and may not make enough to survive. if all that works out and you still want to argue the "one" has much better tools and a bigger military to simply take your territory. most of town does not want a problem, and will happily work for the one, if one or two people start causing trouble it creates bad tension and can end in death. (Aiden you and Calvin have been in this exact situation I describe, I remember it was my first event at WH)

True, but where have I seen that before....hmmm...where or where...OH YES...real life!.
This isnt my issue, its its the fact that the choices are get assimilated and not starve or create conflict to not starve. This view may be heightened by the fact I started playing this second time after Taki had is foot in the door so to speak and was already entrenched, but I cant say I PERSONALLY have seen may avenues to earn an individual "income" through dropped loot as there is rarely any significant hordes(barring one mission that fell in my laplast event) and nothing that from my PC eyes seems to hint at holding/territory oppertunities. Could be im to bust plotting korri...i mean....uh...doing stuff.

What I would like to see) 2) Every individual person has a small amount of resources / money. good things happen like buildings being built and town being created because heroes come together and everyone chooses to chip in some money and resources to make it happen.

While the current check in coin income system helps, PCs under 50 that arent political in build get so little.
Would be nice to see food and hide on critters more, and gems/coin/items/rescources on bad guys more often. we faced tons of red tear and zombies last event and I heard they had naught. Accurate? hard to say since I was killing and not searching

the reason point one happens is because most people don't like or want to deal with the political system. and are more then happy to be compliant and send everything to one person as long as they get their one gold (or however much upkeep is)

agreed. I think some of those do then gripe about having nothing or little, and its as often as not due to lack of needed effort to get more.

Military) 3) troops can be mustered in game, its not necessary and most things are handled behind the scenes but it can happen. In lord of the rings none of the heroes have or control an army. Théoden has an army and they have his help and support. the Elves have an army and they have their help and support. I have no Problem with GM controlled NPC's having a military, and we the heroes being able to go to them for help when we need it. but I don't feel we the heroes should control a standing army.

Aragorn eventually gets one, so why should a PC not be able to do so? My limited interaction with military just seems to hint that it is too abstract a mechanic and may need work.

If Brian does not agree with anything I have posted yet. . .Warrior skills do not synergize with each other well and the whole thing comes of as weak and not built correct, it is not the best 1v1 fighter only slightly better then the alternatives, and I feel a few small changes can fix that. . .and 4, 8, 12 is broken. 3, 6, 9 please.

I WILL CRUSH YOUR BONES FOR MY BREAD....

always wanted to say that.

[GM_Chris]

What an awesome discussion so far!

There is currently no real way for a lone wolf to pawn the economic system or for just a couple people to do so. The way a person pawns the system is by massing in game cooperation which is powerful in any proposed system or non system. Right now, as far as I understand it the dwarves have their own group separate from Korrigan. From what I remember the Orcs were highly successful doing their own thing. I suspect the reason there is a "one" or a "two" at FH is due to not having a large influx of new players in awhile. I assure you that if 20 new players Showed up and grouped up the back end stuff would adjust to encourage Korrigan to share power. Heck we already did that once with the dwarves, but I think Korrigan might have owned the situation...

[Ark]

@Brian: your statement about get assimilated and not starve is spot on. . .and bring it on BTW im too lazy to check but as for survival try rogue gavin with utilize resource. . .will that work out? (not looking at rule books)

@Chris: if the percent of people that don't care about the political system is the same as we have now then it would not matter. as Brian said even in real life people are much more content to be quiet and peaceful and get their upkeep then create noise and risk starving. ( no shite right )

If I recall it was before my time but the Orcs were around back when it was the guild system, and I think that supported splinter factions better then our current system.

I just think as a core concept the eco system needs to be split between the players more, and here is the important part: REWARD cooperation more then REQUIRE cooperation.

P.S. as for lord of the rings, yes he does but I don't see we the heroes as him at that point, I see us as the fellowship. im sure Boromir could have got some gondor soldiers to come along, or Legolas some elves, or Aragorn some rangers, etc. but that is not the point, they are the group, they are the heroes.

[GM_Chris]

Why is starving sooooo bad? I am honestly at a loss. Maybe the penalty to starving just needs to be less.

[Malachi]

From the Rulebook:
"Starving characters have their Maximum Life Points reduced by ½ (rounded
down), Charged skills, Time-based skills, Reload and Cool-down times are
doubled, Life Point skills are twice as costly (i.e. Those skills that took 1 Life
Point to initiate now take 2 Life), and all damage the character deals is halved,
rounded down to a minimum of 1."

So yes, to be starving is terrible. It can be bought off with resources (double what the character was short at check out, to be exact), but in the spirit of this particular conversation a PC who is starving because "Damn the Man" isn't going to be able to come up with extra resources short of stealing or finding them in game. Of course in both cases they would be going against a group (when stealing) or a single opponent (if they're really lucky), of whom none are starving.

[Kaylan Chargeender]

There is currently no real way for a lone wolf to pawn the economic system or for just a couple people to do so

Why the hell would anyone pawn the system? its a game mechanic, how WOULD a person pawn it?!

as far as I understand it the dwarves have their own group separate from Korrigan.

As an orbital combat plat form for that group, I know they are seperate. Cant speak about thier rescource opulance...because i sleep near Hamer often....and doing to would result in parts that are important to me dangling form his skull helmet.

From what I remember the Orcs were highly successful doing their own thing.

If I recall it was before my time but the Orcs were around back when it was the guild system, and I think that supported splinter factions better then our current system.

As the former orc leader I can tell you we were just scraping by...and only because my ex wife plays a great healer with theiving tendancies...
And Ark is right, that was the guild system. I dont even recall if a PC HAD to haqnd out 6 resources an event for upkeep then. I do know we rarely had more than one or two bore than what we needed for any purpose.


XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

as for survival try rogue gavin with utilize resource. . .will that work out? (not looking at rule books)

Possibly, but then you have to play a Rogue Gavin...again....no choice but ... X! Besides, rogues are like gingers...no soul!

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Why is starving sooooo bad? I am honestly at a loss. Maybe the penalty to starving just needs to be less.

Really?!?!? You...of all people are asking that? So noy your have been infected with Arks mechanics forcus and turned form your role playing roots? Its because your posts were so close to his and you caught it isnt it....sad....so sad...

Fist, no the MECHANICAL effect of it ist horrid, but its not friggan awesome either. I also think it SHOULD be sterner.
BUT...my issue is a RP one. Why the hell would my PC be ok with walking around starving and then being asked to help others. Screw that Help ME!
That doesnt even take into account the RP side of being starving...as in IM HUNGRY AND DEHYDRATED AND WEAK.
I am amazed you even asked that Chris.

[Ark]

Starving characters have their Maximum Life Points reduced by ½ (rounded
down), Charged skills, Time-based skills, Reload and Cool-down times are
doubled, Life Point skills are twice as costly (i.e. Those skills that took 1 Life
Point to initiate now take 2 Life), and all damage the character deals is halved,
rounded down to a minimum of 1.

starving rules as per rule book.

yes, it is bad. its supposed to be bad ( IIRC certain classes can cause a starving effect through skills) everything good is cut in half, everything bad is doubled. I REALLY don't mind starving being in game and being a negative, I like the idea of a fight for survival.

however the eco system totally trivializes and defeats the purpose, everyone goes to the one and gets their upkeep. their is no fight anymore. the game really does not know what it wants to do. on one hand you say you cannot have loner characters and must all work together to survive that's the core concept of the game. then you have a massively complex eco system that takes care of everyone no problem with things to spare (I know that is because the person doing all the work is doing a good job at it) there is no fight anymore, everyone just assimilates, survives, and goes along their daily business.

__________________________

I would like to see how other people would like the system to work, the results they would like to see. what I would like to see is as follows. (Item upkeep is not assumed, just requirement to survive)

-any individual could cover their own survival about 40%-60% before skills.
-with skills by level 20 they could cover 100% if they devoted skills to it.
-PC's could come together and the amount of wealth they acquire compounds on itself as more people work together. example:
-1 person 40%-60%, 2 people 50%-70% each, 3 people 60%-80% each, 4 people 70%-80% each, etc.
-those numbers could be adjusted its just an example

what this means:
-loners could be just that, and still survive just fine
-people could come together to generate more income, even just 2 people working together.
-if 20-30 people came together they would be well rewarded for working together
-it would be easy to form a splinter group and survive
-a large group would not be hurt by 2 people leaving to do there own thing
-NO MILITARY, we are the heroes.

an eco system could be placed on top of this with bonuses that apply to EVERYONE in the group, power and wealth should be split amongst all members and not consolidated into one or two people. cool bonuses but NOT REQUIRED bonuses could be implemented based on total support points of the group.
a lot of COOL, FUN, NOT REQUIRED stuff could be added this way and built off of it that could benefit every player. instead of an eco system that funnels all money, resources, and awesomeness to one or two people