Trolls Bane - GM ruled?

[Thorvald]

Discussion continues here.

After nearly half a decade (to put it exaggeratively) of playing this game, Trollsbane needs to be ruled by GM's. Only they got the authority and power to make it work. I'm sure they can find people to play some generic "town guard" auto-created chars.

I could not agree more at this point. But, I doubt it would happen.

How often has this been suggested and then totally declined by the playerbase?
*waits for Fooser.*

No we do not need GMs muddling in IG things like being a King or Queen. Trollsbane is of course a mixed up town because it is the largest and it is the mixer of all races. All races are accepted and welcome there. Yes, a self appointed King or Queen would be nice, and several have tried it but they always try to get rid of them with GM help.

Also, in Silas's case he took over and the GM's shut down the traders. I mean you can not take over. I could throw together a group of people right now and this coming weekend take over Trollsbane, its not that hard.

Its just that it never lasts and people will not RP fear or loyalty to the new king or queen. They prefer to say that, no I would not be scared of a man who rallied together enough people to completely take over a whole town. I mean come on.

Then when someone does take over a town the other races who never ever care about Trollsbane say lets help get rid of the new ruler. WTF is up with that?

Back to the GM ruled topic. I think it would add to the atmosphere. Would make it have a true Role Play feel and the like. A player ruled Troll's Bane has never worked. At least, not for long.

[Thorvald]

Personally, I still think it is worth a *try*.
(Try. As in: It can be changed again as well if it doesn't work out. How do we know if it is good or not, if we never tried it.)

[Lrmy]

No we do not need GMs muddling in IG things like being a King or Queen. Trollsbane is of course a mixed up town because it is the largest and it is the mixer of all races. All races are accepted and welcome there. Yes, a self appointed King or Queen would be nice, and several have tried it but they always try to get rid of them with GM help.

Also, in Silas's case he took over and the GM's shut down the traders. I mean you can not take over. I could throw together a group of people right now and this coming weekend take over Trollsbane, its not that hard.

Its just that it never lasts and people will not RP fear or loyalty to the new king or queen. They prefer to say that, no I would not be scared of a man who rallied together enough people to completely take over a whole town. I mean come on.

Then when someone does take over a town the other races who never ever care about Trollsbane say lets help get rid of the new ruler. WTF is up with that?

Richard, really, I don't see your reasoning for why not. Perhaps I misunderstand what you were trying to say?

[Achae Eanstray]

I am neutral on it, if all decide to give it a try, it is fine with me.

[Mr. Cromwell]

I only support it if it means that Edward is given GM-powers. Otherwise no.

Meaning, that no. I don't really support it. If the players can't scramble a government together, it doesn't mean that a GM-intervention was necessary.

Besides, who know how things will end up being after these elections? GM-intervention, while 'maybe' adding to the athmosphere, will encounter just the same problems, and it will also mean that Trollsbane will probably get an unfair advantage when compared to other towns. Instead of planning to take over, the GMs should just stick to their tasks and finish the elections.

PS.
The root of the problem has always been the retardocracy (democracy).

[Thorvald]

The GMs are not planning anything. As you might have noticed that this topic was brought up by a player. It's just a discussion going on here, so that the other thread doesn't get off topic.

[Aegohl]

There are other options, of course. Here is what is done at the UO shard that I've been playing.

On one hand, each city has royalty played by a GM-controlled NPC. These characters are central to the storyline of the city. They rarely show up and when they do they are used as roleplay aids. For example, when things get too out of hand the royalty steps in and fixes everything that needs fixing, but only if it's out of reach for the players to do themselves. Players have no control over who the royalty is.

Then there is a group of representatives. They are voted for in an OOC way, to avoid the notion of democracy ingame. At Illarion this might be done by a script or on the boards or what have you. These representatives can be voted in and out of power over time by the players. To explain this ingame you can say that they are chosen by a magic crown, or a stick that points at the leader, or a rock that makes a noise when the true leader stands over it. Whatever you feel like.

This allows for GM's to make sure that there is a stable, working, long-lasting government while allowing players who like politics to politick. It also ensures that leaders are always active players, because inactive players are likely to get bumped out of office.

Lastly, it allows the GM's to create stories involving the royal family, their enemies, their allies, the people they think are allies but are really enemies, and whatever else.

For extra fun, the King should bestow titles of nobility on deserving players, which gives players reasons to serve the royal line.

[Shara Gumblin]

can some one translate in german please?

[Thorvald]

can some one translate in german please?

Errm, das alles zu übersetzen wär jetzt ein wenig viel, aber ich kann dir ne kurze Zusammenfassung geben:

Es geht darum, ob es sinnvoll wäre einen GM die Stadt Trolls Bane regieren zu lassen, da die Vergangenheit ja gezeigt hat, dass Regierungen von Spielern gebildet nicht besonders lange halten. Wie zum Beispiel im jetzigen Fall. Einige Spieler sind dafür, weil es halt wirklich nicht zu klappen scheint und andere Spieler sind sehr dagegen, weil sie keine GM Einmischungen in IC sachen haben wollen oder sagen, dass die Stadt dadurch einen unfairen Vorteil anderen Städten gegenüber hat.

[Shara Gumblin]

danke Torvald das reicht eigentlich schon als Info


Also persönlich finde ich es nicht schlecht wenn ein GM das leitet... warum sollte da ein vorteil sein? Die Rose wird auch von Lennier geleitet und es klappt ganz gut... ich denke so wird einfach mehr ruhe reinkommen.. es kann ja später wieder den Spielern selbst überlassen werden...

Also ich unterstüzte den Vorschlag das ein GM da mal mit schaut...

weil Briar zum beispiel hat auch probs und man kommt auf keinen grünen Zweig was aber hauptsächlich an den Spielern liegt die da Wohnen

[Estralis Seborian]

NPC rulers for towns, PC executives, just what I would think is best. NPCs that can be controlled by GMs if necessary, but usually sit on their throne and pick their nose.

Something else that came into my mind: When you think about the roman republic, there was a nice concept. Who had most money could buy the most votes in elections. If we rule out the election part (democracy is bs in a medieval/fantasy setting), one could become representive by paying lots of money to the NPC. Hey, before you moan "Then we are ruled by powergamers!", think twice; guilds would start to matter, for only rich guilds could afford to place their candidates. Also, this would give rise to an interesting setting that is much more fitting with the Illarion background, much more than elections, votings and all this modern stuff.

Just an idea, nothing I would suggest to do asap, though.

[Dariya]

Something else that came into my mind: When you think about the roman republic, there was a nice concept. Who had most money could buy the most votes in elections. If we rule out the election part (democracy is bs in a medieval/fantasy setting), one could become representive by paying lots of money to the NPC. Hey, before you moan "Then we are ruled by powergamers!", think twice; guilds would start to matter, for only rich guilds could afford to place their candidates. Also, this would give rise to an interesting setting that is much more fitting with the Illarion background, much more than elections, votings and all this modern stuff.

I absolutely agree with this.

On one hand, each city has royalty played by a GM-controlled NPC. These characters are central to the storyline of the city. They rarely show up and when they do they are used as roleplay aids. For example, when things get too out of hand the royalty steps in and fixes everything that needs fixing, but only if it's out of reach for the players to do themselves. Players have no control over who the royalty is.

If anything needs "fixing", some GM could interfere ... otherwise I don't really like the idea of an NPC-royalty.

Then there is a group of representatives. They are voted for in an OOC way, to avoid the notion of democracy ingame. At Illarion this might be done by a script or on the boards or what have you. These representatives can be voted in and out of power over time by the players. To explain this ingame you can say that they are chosen by a magic crown, or a stick that points at the leader, or a rock that makes a noise when the true leader stands over it. Whatever you feel like.

That democracy-thing is truly nonsense in my opinion, as I already said in reply to Estralis' post. Thus, no democracy, no election, neither ig nor ooc. Some player tries to take the "throne" being "ruler", "king" or whatever, and this player decides which helpers, consultants, advisers, body-guard or whatever s/he want at her/his side.

This allows for GM's to make sure that there is a stable, working, long-lasting government while allowing players who like politics to politick. It also ensures that leaders are always active players, because inactive players are likely to get bumped out of office.

why long-lasting? if the ruler is not accepted by a group, this group tries to overthrow him and his followers, with all consequences of course. And of course, the more active a ruler is, the less is the chance to overthrow her/him.

Lastly, it allows the GM's to create stories involving the royal family, their enemies, their allies, the people they think are allies but are really enemies, and whatever else.

can also be done or proposed by players

For extra fun, the King should bestow titles of nobility on deserving players, which gives players reasons to serve the royal line.

the ruler can do this as well, as s/he's the ruler

weil Briar zum beispiel hat auch probs und man kommt auf keinen grünen Zweig was aber hauptsächlich an den Spielern liegt die da Wohnen

translation first: Briar for example also has problems, does not get anywhere, which mainly is due to the players living there

and yes, this definitely is the point: it has already been said: there are a few players only who allow their chars to show/have fear.

We could try everything which is suggested here, without the players' aid we won't get anywhere, neither with nor without GMs ruling a town or not.

[Jupiter]

Excuse me, what would be the differnet if a GM is the town leader?

I mean, what would make him a better town leader the a normal char? Hm?

Do you want to give him extrem powerfull skills?

A GM-leader would have to same problems like a normal leader. He could be killed, supplanted etc.

I really see no sence at all in this idea.

[Djironnyma]

I personally like the chaos in TB, but i think also, for new players a gm ruled, no-chaotic TB would be better.

[Miklorius]

As always, the most people do not see the real problem :

Inactive/unreliable players!

Under this aspect, it might be correct that a non-democratic government - ergo only one ruling PO - could work better (BTW: Siltaris was for a long time mostly a single ruler!), but there would still be the need for support, esp. town guards, even with GM/NPC-ruler.
But in the past, the most town guards were gone since a few days or hardly active at all, even when Siltaris offered them money.

This is the problem - players came along, became guard or such and gone!

[ogerawa]

Something else that came into my mind: When you think about the roman republic, there was a nice concept. Who had most money could buy the most votes in elections. If we rule out the election part (democracy is bs in a medieval/fantasy setting), one could become representive by paying lots of money to the NPC. Hey, before you moan "Then we are ruled by powergamers!", think twice; guilds would start to matter, for only rich guilds could afford to place their candidates. Also, this would give rise to an interesting setting that is much more fitting with the Illarion background, much more than elections, votings and all this modern stuff.

For Bane which has lots of tax income, this would be a one time deal. Once you get Bane, you will almost always be a representative using the tax money alone. Or so i thought....

[AlexRose]

I'm not fond of the idea.

GMs always usually cause attacks on the town, so this seems silly. The GM will have a happy reign?

And I agree with Jupiter; GMs can run just as well as players, the only difference would be them being pushed, and this just seems a bad idea to have a pushed ruler who couldn't be otherthrown or such if he went against the citizens' ideas.

[Dantagon Marescot]

Being that it is before 9 am and I haven't woken up yet I don't have much to say on the topic. It would probably be better in a way if the GM's took over for a while expecially since these elections are getting us no where, but into more choas.

Hell. Make a quest out of it. Say some army decided to land here and chose to take over Bane. If you are gonna have the GM's rule Bane, we may as well have fun in the process.

[Alytys Lamar]

I'm not fond of the idea.

GMs always usually cause attacks on the town, so this seems silly. The GM will have a happy reign?

And I agree with Jupiter; GMs can run just as well as players, the only difference would be them being pushed, and this just seems a bad idea to have a pushed ruler who couldn't be otherthrown or such if he went against the citizens' ideas.

I agree also.

Its just always a bit oddly for me to see such democratic things in a medivial-fairytale oriented game.
Let both duelling the winner takes it all... a short and fair thing ( sarcastic but not a bad idea in my opinion )

[Scott Macleod]

NPC rulers for towns, PC executives, just what I would think is best. NPCs that can be controlled by GMs if necessary, but usually sit on their throne and pick their nose.

Something else that came into my mind: When you think about the roman republic, there was a nice concept. Who had most money could buy the most votes in elections. If we rule out the election part (democracy is bs in a medieval/fantasy setting), one could become representive by paying lots of money to the NPC. Hey, before you moan "Then we are ruled by powergamers!", think twice; guilds would start to matter, for only rich guilds could afford to place their candidates. Also, this would give rise to an interesting setting that is much more fitting with the Illarion background, much more than elections, votings and all this modern stuff.

Just an idea, nothing I would suggest to do asap, though.

I agree totally.

Trollsbane has always been the 'starting' point for newbies. It should the the most 'orderly' and 'logical' town in Gobiath, leading to easy roleplay for the newbies. I mean, when there's a 'revolution' every month or so, It's awful discouraging for the new player to stick around....they get Pwned, or left out of the 'history'. After all, aren't most towns populated by players fed up with the TrollsBane BS anyways? We could reverse this.

As their RP increases and they get used to the 'system', I say that's what the other areas are for....to diversify and expand the RP possibilities.

Trollsbane is the center of the Island. Most NPC's are there. Most resources are there. Why all the chaos? Very rarely is it ever 'safe'. I think a GM-controlled Government, with Players as Guards, office holders and such would be wonderful. Loyalty and service can be then granted with Titles, awards, maybe even 'land'. We could begin to have a 'Nobility' within Gobiath, self-earned by characters RP. After all, how many characters try to come from 'noble' lineage, but when they come to Gobiath, they're not supported as such. A GM-controlled Kingdom at the heart of the Isle would enhance RP. Other Nobles could embrace the new RP-Noble with a banquet, tournaments or just a feast at the 'palace'. Kings could travel with an 'entourage' to other courts in Gobiath or even the Mainland.

It also opens up possibilities at 'court' such as a Jester, a King's Magician or Astrologer and such. Isn't there a famous Goblin who resides at the court of Albar?

The part about purchasing offices sounds good too. It is what has 'historically' been done for centuries, especially with the church. I like it also because it creates another money 'sink' for players to spend on or aspire to. If positions are 'granted to a player by the GM, then that truly is a reward too. The player could 'sell' his office, or take 'bribes'. Powergamers wouldn't last long in office, as a GM-King could 'remove them for failing to perform their duties (Powergamers have little time for anything but PG'ing)

All these ideas just convince me that a GM-controlled "King" would enhance RP, as well as easily allow GM's to help and influence the Largest and most central city in the Island. Trollsbane needs stability. No town in Gobiath is more crucial for the new players.

[Korm Kormsen]

seems, that all agree more or less, that a player can not rule TB, because of the lack of loyal and present troops.

there would be another solution for that.

a couple of NPC guards, programmed, to attack everybody, who uses arms inside the walls.
result, no more crime in town!
the disadvantage: no more revolutions...

[Scott Macleod]

seems, that all agree more or less, that a player can not rule TB, because of the lack of loyal and present troops.

there would be another solution for that.

a couple of NPC guards, programmed, to attack everybody, who uses arms inside the walls.
result, no more crime in town!
the disadvantage: no more revolutions...

Sounds good to me!

Besides, revolutions were a heretical and 'unheard' of idea until 1776. It was never tried before that. There were revolts, but the 'King' always remained in power. Removing the 'King' are what Wars are for.

[Miklorius]

Nice thoughts, Scott, but it won't work...

And to Korm: Something like in Baldur's Gate? Well, I don't think it will work (or can be realized).

The GMs stated it some time ago: If a GM will rule TB, there won't be much progress. As long as the players do not care about the town (or there is a really strong ingame force), it will be quite the same whether TB is ruled by POs oder GMs.

EDIT: AFAIK, there is no one single god/hell in Illarion of which the people are afraid of.

[Alytys Lamar]

OH my.. I remember the glorious time ( last year ) as Galthran with his rogues rules T.B and Rothman sit in Silverbrand, was a lot of fun.

I would not see a town clean as a new kleenex.... >.<

[Scott Macleod]

OH my.. I remember the glorious time ( last year ) as Galthran with his rogues rules T.B and Rothman sit in Silverbrand, was a lot of fun.

I would not see a town clean as a new kleenex.... >.<

Fun for who???? As I remember it, most 'peace' loving folk and true 'craft people were scared out of their minds!

Temporary fun for the warriors is the reason TB is always a mess. They think they can change it, at least until the next batch of upstart warriors do the same thing.

No, I disagree. We have to have at least one town that you can't 'just' change.

@Mickloris : I hear you, but I don't really see your reasoning. I disagree, sorry.

[Korm Kormsen]

Miklorius,

yes, these NPC mercenaries in Baldur's gate 1, that is, what i would have in mind for the area inside TB walls.

new players would have an easyer start.

or, to throw in another thought:
let the new chars start in different settlements, according to the chosen race.
then every new player will play at least for a time with chars of his own race, learning some typical behaviour.

[Miklorius]

@Mickloris : I hear you, but I don't really see your reasoning. I disagree, sorry.

What you suggested needs players who "keep the pot boiling". This did not happen under PO-based government (see my "Inactive/unreliable players!"-posting above), why should it work when a GM is ruler?

[Scott Macleod]

@Mickloris : I hear you, but I don't really see your reasoning. I disagree, sorry.

What you suggested needs players who "keep the pot boiling". This did not happen under PO-based government (see my "Inactive/unreliable players!"-posting above), why should it work when a GM is ruler?

Don't you see, that as a stable, GM-run government, players can count on storylines, rewards and GM-help with TB. It would be consistent and stable. A GM could do things for the town that a PO never could. A GM could call up guards at a moment's notice, remove characters from thr town, create instant 'treasury', and a host of other things. Creativity and time are a GM's only limitations. Helping the GM with the day to day, would create a class of Nobility since the titles would be asurred by the GM, since the GM couldn't be overthrown. Titles and offices would mean something, and therefore begin to be valued by the players.

I'd love to play an actual Baron, or Count, backed by a King I knew would be there, wouldn't you? It would mean stability! It would mean RP with court and nobility, something Gobiath with it's "Every man is created equal" thinking, surely could use.

Let's give it a try for at least six months. What could it hurt to try?

((I gtg for now, talk later))

[Taeryon Silverlight]

Normally, GMs have even less time to rp or follow all the ig-things going on then the normal players. Also, you can't solve that activity/inactivity-problem. It will always be, that a german governor seems inactive to the american players and vise versa. For me (I've been playing Illa for about 1 and a half year now), Siltaris was the first governor that I could really meet ig when I wanted to.

[Mr. Cromwell]

Why should things be consistent and stable?

Anyways, I think that there have been several problems involved with TB.

Firstly, a long standing problem of democracy and lack of income (latter of which has been fixed, and then atm is broken again.. blame nitters! )

Secondly, there has been a certain "lack of vision" with the ruling characters. There has been little to no change for god knows how long time. The rulers have just sought to rule for the sake of ruling, and to in order to make any real changes.

I personally think, that involving gamemasters with the rule of any town is absolute bollocks. Everything that the staff can do, the players can arguably do better and more fairly (not necessarily IC-fair, but without OOC-invulnerabilities, pushes and whatever).

Dunno. Maybe I'm being biased because there is atm a chance for my own character to get in charge of the town.

Not that I want to go too deep into the plans I have (to keep the surprises) I just wanna say, that some of the ideas presented here which "the oh so mighty GM character-administrator could do" have been incorporated to the plans from the start. Of course, I would not be able to make overnight changes with the character (while in comparison to the GMs who could just force their way immediatly without thinking about the consequences). Dunno, maybe it's just me who finds the idea of overthrowable rulers to be better. Has anyone actually tried to bribe a governor in return for some appointment? I think not.

Everything mentioned here is absolutely, totally and 100% doable with PC-government. Of course, the PC-ruler has to rely on other characters.. But then again, I don't really mind having to cooperate, rely on or be in mutually beneficial relationship with other characters with my chara. But what I do mind is the idea of being told what to do by some GM-entity.

GMs should stick to the quests, supporting the governments by keeping the technical functions working (*nudge nudge*) and leave the other stuff to us players.

RP-LIBERTARIANS, UNITE!