The Coming Conflict (Factions)

[Rias]

The biggest concern that I would have is that part of the original concept forced people to choose a faction and felt like it would work because no one could remain neutral... so everyone was impacted and people all make a choice... that does not seem to be the case with this idea. Did you have any thoughts here? I assume that this "faction" influence would be independent of the town government itself so I feel like this type of conflict could be less impactful and make most favor neutrality.

The town wouldn't have an official faction allegiance, but I do like the idea of having different areas favor one faction or the other. There could also be ongoing events where one faction or the other gets more sway over the town, causing some differences in policies, pricing, goods and services available, etc. to give people incentive to support one or the other due to how it's affecting their town life.

I'm with you - I want to discourage people sitting on the fence and playing the "I'm neutral and refuse to get involved" card. I think we can come up with some ways to encourage people to pick a side without keeping them isolated from each other across the map. Irylia and Ocayucos have given some ideas.

I think a way around that would be for the factions to have some kind of heavy influence on the world so you can't really sit out and stay neutral of at least having an opinion for your character.

Right, the idea is for these factions to be driving forces in the various events that go on in the world. Results of events could be pushed this way or that depending on which faction's members put in the most effort. If someone isn't in one of these influential factions, they're going to have a lot less sway in how things go. This isn't to say that I expect all members of a faction to always agree on everything, but they're a gret way to consolidate the majority opinion and put it into action.

it could become a character creation option and something that established characters choose once implemented.

True. It could literally be a choice players have to make from the beginning in character creation. This may happen once we feel things out a bit and get the factions themselves more established and hammered out.

I don't want to move to Porto. At least not without more information on that change.

I'm happy to provide more info. Interrogate away!

Make factions claim some passages. [...] Be denied an area that isn't necessary but still advantageous to have access to. Make the factions deny anyone not in their group instead of just the enemy.

This kind of thing is the idea. The factions definitely won't be allowing access or giving way to people who haven't chosen a side.

Playing without a faction is more like a trial mode for new players, but you join a faction to unlock the full experience.

This might be a good idea for the first character created on a new account.

[alila]

Hi,

My understanding may be outdated in this regard, but if the worry is less about neutrality and more about inaction, a possible alternative to a neutral faction is to have an 'aggressively neutral' faction? This could also tie very well with the frontier wildness themes of COGG and the two primary opposing factions being less blatant; they are not particularly liked by most, so there is more incentive to stay civil and not overtly reveal their standings within cities--I absolutely love Nobody's devious suggestion of making them more appealing through secretiveness. There also seems to already be an existing lore structure to support this: agents of the Mistveil Dominion and the Lapis-affiliated sides of things. They are both interested in expanding across the central Lost Lands, which primarily consists of those who would much prefer both of them keep to their corners of the world and leave them alone. The Dominion already even has signs of a grid presence. More selfishly, because my ultimate goal is of course lore, having the opposing factions be larger-feeling could also be excellent for pulling characters into deeper lore and history with time and recognition.

This is of course only a suggestion, and maybe a very dramatic one. I believe you have mentioned previously a hesitancy to allow players membership in certain organizations, and this possibly runs counter to it? Still, thank you for any consideration, and hopefully the idea helps inspire other better ones.

Thank you,
-Alila

[Acarin]

One thing I am clearly against is any form of secrecy with factions. This would entirely defeat the purpose of having factions in the first place which is to promote and have a game enabled means for conflict. If it is secretive and not clearly delineated, then natural passiveness will set in and everyone will trend towards neutrality. I'm also somewhat against this idea as I have seen factions implemented elsewhere where you just pick an allegiance and there is no clear divided line. Unless the possible mechanical penalties are severe or at least very meaningful, people remain disengaged, and simply make the choice and then ignore their choice. In the original idea, factions would not compromise basic services... just getting the rare stuff. In this case, I think it would have to in order to create actual participation and consequences for neutrality. Forcing someone to choose a faction to progress does not mean that they will have any actual ties to that faction.

Also... identification of other people in your factions becomes more of an issue since you see everyone around town and have no way of distinguishing.

I could see a town literally separated down the middle, maybe with a neutral zone between them... but this potentially gets rid of all the flavor that could distinguish the two factions... if you had a tolerant faction that didn't mind the afflicted and was a "safe haven" albeit a bit darker and then a more intolerant faction that thinks these afflictions are wrong and wants to cleanse the lands... how can no combat in town be justified? The town government clearly allows the afflicted to take refuge there... there is a clear "good" faction that is now operating under city law... and the other faction wants to persecute them and drive them out... I just don't see it working as well with the existing view or at least it feels like it would be A LOT harder to implement well. There would still have to be some clear separation...

[Rias]

I have to agree with Acarin - I think faction affiliation should be overt, not secretive. There seems to be a powerful temptation for people to hide their affiliation with any controversial groups or organizations, if my previous experience in MUDs is any indication. And I get it - it can be fun playing the sneaky secretive spy, or the smooth cagey character whose loyalties are difficult to discern. But the whole point of the factions system is to have people taking sides and having things to debate, argue, and even physically fight over. Making it secretive or allowing people to hide their affiliation would be detrimental to that. Not to mention the temptation that I've often seen drive people to move on to "I want to not only hide my affiliation, but be a double agent with the enemy faction." Which again, is conceptually cool, but bypasses the purpose and mechanics of the factions system for the game.

I have similar issues with offering a third choice that essentially serves as opting out of the faction conflict in favor of neutrality. It circumvents the point of the faction system, which is to have people taking sides, and if not furtively supporting their own, still at least feeling actions taken against their faction by the enemy. And I don't want these factions to be bully factions or overzealous crusaders or other "antagonist fodder" groups that the majority of people wouldn't normally want to be a part of. I want these factions to espouse values and goals that player characters would actually be on board with and want to support, and find worth fighting for. It's going to be a decision every citizen of the Lost Lands is going to have to make - worst case scenario, choosing the lesser of two evils. The Lost Lands is the type of place where one should expect be forced into these types of decisions in order to secure any significant life expectancy.

I've developed an increasing dislike of the word "neutral" over my time running games and MUDs. I understand some people don't want to get involved in the messy and complicated conflict that may be raging around them, but it also gets quite discouraging when a GM tries to run events and have an interesting and dynamic world, only to have a large chunk of the playerbase essentially opt out by proclaiming neutrality. A big part of the post-apocalyptic affliction-ridden nether-corrupted resen-infested pockets-of-desperate-surviving-humans Lost Lands feel is danger and conflict. A character may want to try and avoid getting involved when possible, and that's a perfectly valid stance to take, but the intent of the game and the world it's set in is to say that sometimes the world happens to you whether you like it or not, and you're going to have to do something other than just pretend it's not happening if you want to survive.

[Agelity]

I've been thinking about how the factions themselves could be framed, and I think a shift of focusing on certain aspects that the factions prioritize may help to take away from some of the "good vs evil" feeling, or even the gray vs other gray feeling (ie, what flavor of "neutral" is your fancy). Things like the "Shadgard" faction being more about steam engineering (to a small degree), mining, emphasis on societal-contribution, etc. Then have the "Notshadgard" faction be more about openness to certain debilitations (tainted, partially-infested, etc.), the occult, emphasis on self-reliance but a system in place to entice denizens to contribute to its survival or protect it. Just spitballing ideas as I realize there are still some assumptions that could be made from what values/industries are emphasized.

Guess I'd say to place a greater focus on the manner of living and less the purpose of said faction, as societies themselves can handle that. Harbingers or many sorcerous types likely wouldn't be super welcome in Shadgard, but at the same time Notshadgard probably isn't super keen on the anti-nethrim or anti-infested members. They'd be able to live there, but there may be skepticism and caution around those people from those who very well may be under a very watchful and merciless eye, whereas Shadgard may openly except such members.

[Candelori]

I would like to make a controversial suggestion and propose simply using what has worked in the past. We might emulate the early events of CLOK: Allow the conflict situation to arise over time and progress naturally, eventually provide a secondary outpost for those who are no longer welcome in Shadgard due to this conflict, and require roleplay to join this second outpost. Those seeking more active conflict are able to work their way into this second faction, where they will have the understanding that their home town may be more limited in some amenities, and may take extra effort to build up and maintain from its humble beginnings. The majority of the playerbase may remain in the default town of Shadgard, and enjoy the experience of being among a larger population, having a fuller suite of amenities, and being able to live in a less polarized faction.

The second faction might more often play the role of instigating antagonist, which I do not believe to be a bad thing. Those who join can be clearly assured of what they are getting into, and they will be supported in a more conflict-seeking playstyle as they act against Shadgard and give the Shadgardians reason to rally, take up arms, defend themselves and their holdings, and retaliate. The ability to capture resource sites will remain a valid and exciting option for both sides, which I fear would feel quite trivial were we all to stay in the same town together.

I am of course speaking from a place of minimal perspective of the other side, as I have always remained a Shadgard loyalist. I do feel that in my discussions with players of the opposing faction of the Corvus Outpost, they most often reflected fondly on the early times when the Outpost was first opened, and when it required effort to join with an exclusive membership, with an active GM leading their own events. They were a small but a very proud population of players, and I have always gotten the impression that they enjoyed being both exclusive and largely sequestered from the larger population outside major events. I know I was certainly tempted to join them on more than one occasion, were I ever able to put my original character aside.

Perhaps we do not need to try so hard to ensure both factions are complete and total equals in population and every opportunity. Let there be real differences between the two. Let the default faction enjoy the greater population and more heavily-outfitted town. Let the second faction enjoy the exclusivity and increased GM presence and direction from their guru, and having greater opportunities to be involved in building up their outpost and be the instigators of events with the support of their GM and their overall freedom to act afforded by looser moral and ethical guidelines. There may even be room for allowing players of the second faction to maintain an alt in Shadgard, with some form of restriction of access to faction-related sites, information, and mechanics. A way for them to take an occasional breath of fresh air in the larger and less polarized population, if they ever feel so inclined.

I believe this could work well as it has in the past, though will require a dedicated active and attentive GM presence for the second faction to keep them engaged while the larger Shadgard faction more easily keeps itself entertained with its larger player population as the default. I would very much enjoy experiencing this kind of dynamic again, and am very interested to hear what players from the other side of that past situation think. My assessment of their enjoyment from their side may be inaccurate.

[Acarin]

It is now ShadPorto and NotShadPorto... just to emphasize.

I think it could actually be cool to have the two factions have their own controlled areas of town (bridged off or gated in) with only a small area of "neutrality" with basic services in the center... Two self-proclaimed leaders of the town that have essentially taken control of different sections and have a rather tenuous truce to keep the peace where they live but maybe aspirations of taking territory from the other... but scared to make too aggressive of actions too close to home. I could really see each developing out their side with a different style and priorities...

Instead of migrating to Porto, maybe smash together shadgard and notshadgard... just expand the available land a bit? Even separate exits that are nearby each other in addition to the main area of town?

[Acarin]

Candelori, I appreciate your view on this. I can say that from my perspective, although I loved being outpost and it was certainly fun in the early days, that type of gating creates a lot of problems and leads to particular player behaviors that make it less fun to play from the more conflict-oriented side. There was some discussion with former corvus players in the early days of Rias considering factions and one point most had made is that we wanted to avoid some of the major flaws that were implemented in the last game and that the previous approach would not be sustainable. I would hate to see the same story recreated here (or even the same approach) given the problems that approach had. I won't get into it in detail here, but it is very clear that the old approach can definitely be improved upon.

[Irylia]

I don't have more to contribute on the faction conflict part for now, but I want to get back to PLEASE NOT PORTO. I do love Porto, really, but it just seems like there were so many plans for Shadgard and implementing more steam functions and other elements already built into the town's theme. A lot of my time playing the other game I wasn't even welcome in Shadgard, but I always wanted back in and coveted access because it just always seemed like the center of things. I know that can easily change in this game and I need to stop bringing in my baggage and expectations, but I have a very strong affinity for Shadgard and feel protective of it.

I also don't feel like the town needs to be split up or that the layout is prohibitive to that if that's what's desired, but if you want to do a mafia/gang type thing where certain factions run certain businesses in the town, that might be neat. They could still serve everyone but then have a secret stash, discounts, or side-rooms for members or something similar. I don't think any of the towns in COGG currently are large enough to comfortably support full on boroughs with exclusive faction control.

I agree about not being secretive with the factions. I'd even go so far as to say members should be proud of their affiliation and perhaps mark it with armbands or jewelry or certain tattoos. Societies can be secretive, factions should be fairly easily known. I fully support ALL the drama.

[HeckTurtle]

I don't have much to say other than that I will likely appreciate whatever is settled on in the end, though there are some ideas expressed here I think sound really interesting. I do lean more towards keeping it in Shadgard for the sake of making things easier and to avoid splitting up the already-small playerbase, and would like to stay in the original spirit of neither faction feeling particularly "good" or "evil" in comparison to the other.

Agelity's examples of how the factions could be framed are really good. I don't think I have much else to say on this discussion, at least for now. Hopefully this input was useful, at least for seeing how other players are feeling about it.