Kn Rule Feedback
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
There will be no cities next game. It is a lot of work to split up the province anyway, and is just free GB generation.
- YK - Yuri Khavlor
- King
- Posts: 692
- Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:13 pm
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
Consider a Realm regent bonus for diversity: +RP for faiths represented, +GB for guilds represented, (maybe a + TP for law holders, +1 to actions for source holders?)
Gives an incentive for regents to encourage competition?
Gives an incentive for regents to encourage competition?
YK - Yuri Khavlor
Lord Mayor of Lyssan
“Nature is not cruel, but pitilessly indifferent. The hardest lesson for one to learn, is to admit that things might be neither good nor evil, but simply callous -- indifferent to all suffering"
Lord Mayor of Lyssan
“Nature is not cruel, but pitilessly indifferent. The hardest lesson for one to learn, is to admit that things might be neither good nor evil, but simply callous -- indifferent to all suffering"
- WM - The Waste Mage
- King
- Posts: 667
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:41 am
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
How about a random roll each season from nothing up to X amount. Disease can hit any season. And having an amount and season set in stone is too easy to plan for. Not knowing when or how much attrition will strike you seems far more interesting.
- CI - Charrek Ironfist
- Posts: 376
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 2:37 pm
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
Idea:DM Juan wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:04 pmTo be honest, I want to somehow encourage people not to all amalgamate into a unity, and keep everything within strict boundaries. I'd rather sprawling guilder/templars that spread across multiple realms, but don't occupy slots in every province of those realms.
A way to encourage more holding holders in a province is to scale up the DC more for higher level rules
Maybe Rule DC=10+2/new level, so law 4 to 5 = DC20
That would make it more reasonable to not bother ruling up past 2, and to tolerate someone else with a 2.
Lord Mayor Charrek Ironfist | Charrek.Ironfist@mail.com
Stormpriestess Khalia Ironfist
Stormpriestess Khalia Ironfist
- RaH - Rassan al Hamam
- Posts: 324
- Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:43 am
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
Ruling up Law is allready much harder then ruling up Temples or Guilds, since you can add Law to Guilds and Temples. Would not want Law to be harder. Guilds and Temples are the more profitable ones anyway.
- YK - Yuri Khavlor
- King
- Posts: 692
- Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:13 pm
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
Almost as if the support of the law holding is worth it's level in resources for every action the temple/guild is taking. A law holder giving unconditional support should be shown some gratitude no?RM - Ragrum Mithrilhand wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:16 pmRuling up Law is allready much harder then ruling up Temples or Guilds, since you can add Law to Guilds and Temples. Would not want Law to be harder. Guilds and Temples are the more profitable ones anyway.
YK - Yuri Khavlor
Lord Mayor of Lyssan
“Nature is not cruel, but pitilessly indifferent. The hardest lesson for one to learn, is to admit that things might be neither good nor evil, but simply callous -- indifferent to all suffering"
Lord Mayor of Lyssan
“Nature is not cruel, but pitilessly indifferent. The hardest lesson for one to learn, is to admit that things might be neither good nor evil, but simply callous -- indifferent to all suffering"
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
Gods: We would go back to scratch like in Diaspora, where there are no established Gods, and you create new ones from scratch. Not being allowed both Population Growth and Bless Land is an interesting thought, I wonder if it will have strange effects. There would be tension between the pop-growth temple gaining ground, making the blessing templar not want to bless as it becomes less and less cost-effective.
Indeed, a Law Holder should demand support in exchange for their passive bonus to all the actions undertaken by the guilds/temples.
Indeed, a Law Holder should demand support in exchange for their passive bonus to all the actions undertaken by the guilds/temples.
- RaH - Rassan al Hamam
- Posts: 324
- Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 10:43 am
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
The Law wants the Temples and guilds to grow cause if they make more, the Law gets more to. So not encouraging them to grow is counter productive,SAS - Survivors at Sea wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:21 pmAlmost as if the support of the law holding is worth it's level in resources for every action the temple/guild is taking. A law holder giving unconditional support should be shown some gratitude no?RM - Ragrum Mithrilhand wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:16 pmRuling up Law is allready much harder then ruling up Temples or Guilds, since you can add Law to Guilds and Temples. Would not want Law to be harder. Guilds and Temples are the more profitable ones anyway.
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
Don't forget, you can Law Claim provinces too. And oppose loyalty in a Province. Law Holders can contest everything... there is a lot of power in being a Law Holder, even if the power is often unused.
- CSF - Flint
- Posts: 414
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:32 pm
Re: Kn Rule Feedback
I think this will be VERY difficult to achieve. Cooperation = power. Action econ being what it is, forming a 3-4 regent power bloc is just so rewarded by the base game mechanics (and IRL politics) that it is hard to overcome. Sprawled out realms who arent fully cooperating will be eaten by those who do observe amalgamated unity within their strictly enforced borders. Tribalism trumps individualism.DM Juan wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:04 pmTo be honest, I want to somehow encourage people not to all amalgamate into a unity, and keep everything within strict boundaries. I'd rather sprawling guilder/templars that spread across multiple realms, but don't occupy slots in every province of those realms.
Captain Shanol Flint