28 Aug, 2012, Ssolvarain wrote in the 2nd comment:
arholly said:
it would also allow for those kind of disputes as well ("Don't go there, that is werewolf territory" or "Don't go there or the Tremere will make your brain explode").
That would be interesting, especially if you backed it up with a physical occupation. Then you'd have a serious reason not to go there, or your brain would probably get asploded. If the nature of these locations also had a preferential stat to them, like it's easier for x group to occupy and hold it than y group, it would make these locations more permanent and less a matter of who's online and feels like taking things over for kicks. I've seen similar ideas implemented elsewhere, but it usually results in whoever's online taking over as much territory as possible, then losing it as someone comes on in the AM, and it just switches back and forth with no real consequence or purpose. Providing a means to actually hold the location without necessarily needing to be there keeping it safe would go a long way.
28 Aug, 2012, arholly wrote in the 3rd comment:
Good thoughts and I agree. So, the points I'm pulling out of it are:
1a) Needs to include physical occupation (which I read as protection). Some of that can be done by the players, but a mechanism to provide protection when they are not online is important (though not necessarily necessary - a library isn't going to have a whole lot of security guards there…).
1b) A way for players to secure the area through a variety of methods (library example from above might include some sort of mystical wards).
2) I like the preferential stat (and maybe ability or influence) for the location. For example a hospital might have a preferential ability of medicine (go figure).
1a) Needs to include physical occupation (which I read as protection). Some of that can be done by the players, but a mechanism to provide protection when they are not online is important (though not necessarily necessary - a library isn't going to have a whole lot of security guards there…).
1b) A way for players to secure the area through a variety of methods (library example from above might include some sort of mystical wards).
2) I like the preferential stat (and maybe ability or influence) for the location. For example a hospital might have a preferential ability of medicine (go figure).
29 Aug, 2012, Ssolvarain wrote in the 4th comment:
I thought about it a little more, and the idea of wards had me thinking further…
So if you erect a ward, it would probably prevent entry unless you had some kind of pass. This opens up the possibility of subterfuge to obtain a pass and infiltrate the location, and also the option of finding a way to brute-force the ward. Either would require a bit of planning and some daring. Infiltrating means you'd either have to find some kind of map, have previous knowledge or explore it on your lonesome, and then find the source of the ward and destroy it. Brute forcing could be done with an item, a skill, or something similar, but it would probably mean instant retaliation, or at least an alarm, of some kind, meaning you'd want to make sure you have as much might as possible on your side.
And that's just for a ward. You could have powerful guardians, deadly traps, checkpoints, etc. each with their own particular counters. A guardian could be defeated the regular meatheaded way, or tricked in some way leading to its defeat. A checkpoint could be passed with a proper disguise. Traps can be bypassed with detection.
The overall thing though, is that a defense is easier to implement than it would be to defeat. Many things could be done with pure manpower/force, but there would also be an intelligent solution. It also gives some power back to the underdogs, who might lack the numbers or might of another group.
So if you erect a ward, it would probably prevent entry unless you had some kind of pass. This opens up the possibility of subterfuge to obtain a pass and infiltrate the location, and also the option of finding a way to brute-force the ward. Either would require a bit of planning and some daring. Infiltrating means you'd either have to find some kind of map, have previous knowledge or explore it on your lonesome, and then find the source of the ward and destroy it. Brute forcing could be done with an item, a skill, or something similar, but it would probably mean instant retaliation, or at least an alarm, of some kind, meaning you'd want to make sure you have as much might as possible on your side.
And that's just for a ward. You could have powerful guardians, deadly traps, checkpoints, etc. each with their own particular counters. A guardian could be defeated the regular meatheaded way, or tricked in some way leading to its defeat. A checkpoint could be passed with a proper disguise. Traps can be bypassed with detection.
The overall thing though, is that a defense is easier to implement than it would be to defeat. Many things could be done with pure manpower/force, but there would also be an intelligent solution. It also gives some power back to the underdogs, who might lack the numbers or might of another group.
29 Aug, 2012, Runter wrote in the 5th comment:
I used to have a spell that could be channeled out of combat that would allow the room to be shielded from entry. Attempting to enter the room from anyone would cause the shield to be damaged and have a chance to break. The mechanic was mostly used for shielding off sites of PK where team members were looting. So often times it could keep opponents away while other members of the team were doing other things. We implemented "long routes" to many of the PK zones where looting was available. (Or PK system was based on the area you're in, not a flag you set on your character). So often times players would shield the obvious route and it was difficult to shield the long route. Because we'd have many rooms that require shielding for that route and only one for the quick route. I had a system where if you looted an item (and you could only take up to 2 items per kill) then you got 1 minute of lag. This made you extremely vulnerable, so instead of looting in group PK contests someone would shield or guard others. This often times reduced the occurrence of looting, which isn't really a bad thing even though I had the 2 item guard in place. If one group kills another, there's not enough time to look max items if some members are shielding, etc. The looting option for a successful kill became unavailable after 2 minutes.
Players ended up using it for a few other reasons, like preventing wandering aggressive NPCs to come into a boss room without needing to clear the entire area of trash first, but player vs player was by far the primary use of the ability.
Players ended up using it for a few other reasons, like preventing wandering aggressive NPCs to come into a boss room without needing to clear the entire area of trash first, but player vs player was by far the primary use of the ability.
Random Picks
I'm not sure where this goes, so I am tossing it under General. :)
I am in the process of overhauling the World of Darkness mud I was asked to take over and one of the things I am looking at is adding bonuses for controlling locations. For those familiar with the Vampire setting, this is essentially setting up Domain bonuses. If a person/clan/organization controls a location (not yet defined), it gives them "X" bonus.
I think it would be a good way to give the feeling of the proxy wars and turf disputes that go on. Of course, since we have the framework for other supernaturals in there, it would also allow for those kind of disputes as well ("Don't go there, that is werewolf territory" or "Don't go there or the Tremere will make your brain explode").
I would probably need to come up with different benefits depending on the area and how players would gain control of an area (or contest control), but what do you think?
Arholly