Author Topic: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones  (Read 2513 times)

Andrew

  • Game Master / Lead Developer
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1831
  • Karma: +75/-8
  • Mildly Amused
    • View Profile
    • Lemuria Community Fan Site
A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« on: February 22, 2018, 02:36:00 PM »
So, the topic has come up again and I'd be interested in hearing as much input on it as possible this time, as I'll probably not bring it like this again for quite a while (years?).

Should we allow First Ones to be non-human races?

Alternatively, should we allow people to say that they are playing elves, orcs, or other, pre-defined races?

I say pre-defined because it allows us to have specific descriptions of what the races look like in one place, and it means we won't get people coming in and just creating another race simply because they can.

Personally, I'm for it because it allows us to introduce a new dynamic into the social-aspects of the game. I will state though, this will be purely a cosmetic addition (if we add it). No sort of in-game bonuses or penalties regardless of whatever race your First One claims to be or actually is.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Standing for the creation of interesting things since Year 1, Week 5, Day 4.
Favorite cold beverage: Strawberry Shake
My hobbies: Fixing computers, video games, anime, manga, some other stuff, sleep (in no particular order)

Bluarianknight

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2018, 03:33:07 PM »
I was somewhat the reason this was brought up again, so I think I should toss in my input as well.

I think that allowing people to be non-human is a great idea, personally. It allows people to have another social factor to relay in, and allows dynamics that really aren't that much common nowadays, allowing cultures to likely spring up from these races, allowing more interesting interactions for everyone. It also, to my belief, doesn't really harm anyong, especially with the somewhat fantastical themes already in MaF.

The Vintroth

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +4/-5
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2018, 05:55:41 PM »
As I have said before, lore such as this does need to affect gameplay, and it can only do that if it is considered official, true or whatever. (Discussion on lore and gameplay: http://forum.mightandfealty.com/index.php/topic,6379.0.html)

Cultures hardly exist as is. The depth of M&F is, as I've said before, lacking. Adding the ability to play an elf or orc won't solve the problem of depth. All it does is add another variable. By themselves, variables won't do anything. A specific setting is what is needed as I have argued before. If you want other races, introduce them together with a specific setting or there is little to no point.

You say it add another dynamic, another factor, but there are hardly any dynamics to begin with. There is no culture (in most places, or it is not clear cut even where it exists), no religion (that is enforced in any meaningful way). What difference is this going to make really? Am I being critical, of course I am, because someone needs to be. Does this actually benefit the game? - Does this actually solve a problem or add *meaningful depth*?

How will an orc or elf "First One" spawn cultures when humans and first ones can't seem to do it?

Lastly, for as little of a theme Might & Fealty has, does it actually fit with the current theme? I'd argue no, simply because I find it goes against the already established lore, of which we have precious little. - So unless we're planning on making lots of changes and actually adding more lore in general, I believe my answer comes to a no.


Bluarianknight

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2018, 06:38:40 PM »
As I have said before, lore such as this does need to affect gameplay, and it can only do that if it is considered official, true or whatever. (Discussion on lore and gameplay: http://forum.mightandfealty.com/index.php/topic,6379.0.html)

Cultures hardly exist as is. The depth of M&F is, as I've said before, lacking. Adding the ability to play an elf or orc won't solve the problem of depth. All it does is add another variable. By themselves, variables won't do anything. A specific setting is what is needed as I have argued before. If you want other races, introduce them together with a specific setting or there is little to no point.

You say it add another dynamic, another factor, but there are hardly any dynamics to begin with. There is no culture (in most places, or it is not clear cut even where it exists), no religion (that is enforced in any meaningful way). What difference is this going to make really? Am I being critical, of course I am, because someone needs to be. Does this actually benefit the game? - Does this actually solve a problem or add *meaningful depth*?

How will an orc or elf "First One" spawn cultures when humans and first ones can't seem to do it?

Lastly, for as little of a theme Might & Fealty has, does it actually fit with the current theme? I'd argue no, simply because I find it goes against the already established lore, of which we have precious little. - So unless we're planning on making lots of changes and actually adding more lore in general, I believe my answer comes to a no.



I suppose I can respect that. My belief is that, while there is an incredibly small amount of lore, that having races, the ability to distinctly have a choice of which would allow the cultures behind these races to be easily defined, as long as the races themselves were defined somewhat themselves, or a place to place your 'race', so that you are able to select between them. The reason we don't have any cultures at the moment is because nobody is able to see what cultures exist. There's nothing that provides you, unless you've played a lot, what these cultures are. Races have set definitions, and, at the very least, will allow these cultures to develop easier, and give you a basic idea of what they may be. At this point, almost everyone seems to be the same bloody person, with a few exceptions here or there. Races will change that, make things more unique, and offer more opportunities.

To answer your question of 'how will this provoke culture when FO and Humans cant'? It's simple. It's because nobody has the faintest ideas what cultures exist. So, with races, we will now allow people to see that there are differences. At the very least, these races can have descriptions, and basis of what they look like. Cultures develop from the ideas of these races. People will, in short, be able to be different, and know what's available, from the races at least, provoking interest. Of course, I think we should likely not just shove them in, they should be considered before implementing fully, but I think it would overall improve the setting and theme.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3139
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2018, 10:37:57 PM »
Those of Hawk ancestry believe themselves to be different from all other first ones. I've never claimed it is an absolute truth, it is simply their belief from their religion and their creation story. But I would in general argue against adding more races. Firstly because it is jarring to a persistent game to suddenly go, oh you know what all this time you have been referring to FO's as a distinct species, yeah no they are more of a collection of races. Secondly we would have to hand wave about why distinct races are ending up with the same basic characteristics (immortal, immune to every disease bar slumberblight etc).


We would be far better off in my opinion to initiate a project to flesh out and record the actual culture of the main realms already found in the game and have the ability to align characters to cultural groups that are displayed in game. There are a good few culture in the game with at least some level of written lore, but people simply don't add it to the wiki and even if they have that isn't the same as it being directly accessible in the game.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Foxglove

  • Global Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 555
  • Karma: +72/-10
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2018, 11:34:09 PM »
I'm not against the idea, but I also don't really know that it would add anything. Although I'm not keen on us having elves, orcs, lizardmen, goblins, or what ever drawn from Tolkien, generic fantasy, Warhammer, etc. Let's at least have a go at being more original.

I pretty much agree with all De-Legro just wrote. If we're going to have something like this, there are existing cultures either in the game now, or within the history of the game, that could be fleshed out to create distinct strands of First Ones. The Rathgari had (I think) some belief that they were somehow descended from a bear (?). The Erstes Imperium was originally meant to be an ancient culture that was so bound up in its own bureaucracy that it was often ineffective (perhaps not entirely unlike elves in some versions of them). The Fading Isles have a longstanding culture of magic and mysticism in various forms. The Imperium, Rathgar, and the Isles were realms number one, number two, and number three when the game began and those could easily form the basis of racial or cultural blocks.

Beyond that, you then have the subdivisions. Using the Isles as an example, there are mainly three strands of First Ones - the Hawks; the Iunans; and the Mercians. Although I don't think any of us set out to do it, the three 'races' could be identified with different elements. Hawks has its cultural associations with air through its hawk (spirits?) entities. Mercia is strongly aligned with water and they see themselves as a sea people. Iunans, on the other hand, could probably said to be aligned with earth having a great belief in the mystical properties of the islands themselves. Within all that, there's already some strong culture that's unique to the game rather than having been imported from Tolkien, etc.

If we were to have races, I do believe they should be pre-defined ones that players can choose to join. I'm not so keen on it just being a free-for-all so we end up with all sorts of wild and wonderful creations that could never be sensibly fitted in to the existing lore of the game.
Standing for the responsible use of power since Year 1, Week 1, Day 1.
Fun fact: I wrote some of the text for the M&F crowdfunding campaign.
Favourite warm beverage: hot chocolate.

Ayruin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2018, 11:44:07 PM »
Cultures seem to fail because they can't be policed. When I accept a knight offer there is no information about cultures, no way for the realm to enforce a common FO naming system etc. Now some realms don't want this but I know that others do, my own new realm included. I am hesitant to make knight offers to recruit random people because I don't want to have the constant discussion about - this is who we are please change your character to match.

The character system is in some ways reversed. If we are choosing to accept a knight offer, we should see those offers and relevant information before selecting a character. Allow for cultural pack to be applied to a character not just NPC populations. It would be interesting if when creating a character for a Knight offer instead of picking a name you are assigned a generated one from the cultural pack for example.


Bluarianknight

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2018, 12:48:38 AM »
I, somewhat, have to now agree. I think fantasy races, likely, shouldn't be fully implemented. However, I do believe, (and this is what I originally wished to do), would be 'half-breeds' of First Ones who may have had relations with other races. It'd allow a slight amount of diversity, and still possibly work with the lore?

Honetly, I just wished to try out a half-goblin character, disfigured and goblinesque. So, in a way, I do want races in, but I don't wish for traditional full fantasy races. I agree with De-Legro, with how all of these new races would break lore. I *do* want halfbreeds though.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3139
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2018, 01:20:48 AM »
I, somewhat, have to now agree. I think fantasy races, likely, shouldn't be fully implemented. However, I do believe, (and this is what I originally wished to do), would be 'half-breeds' of First Ones who may have had relations with other races. It'd allow a slight amount of diversity, and still possibly work with the lore?

Honetly, I just wished to try out a half-goblin character, disfigured and goblinesque. So, in a way, I do want races in, but I don't wish for traditional full fantasy races. I agree with De-Legro, with how all of these new races would break lore. I *do* want halfbreeds though.


I hate the concept of "half" breeds generally, as it implies a race relationship unless we wave our "magic" hands. So are we saying that First Ones and Goblins are genetically similar enough to produce offspring? Are we going to compile a list of approved half breed races? Currently beyond humans there are whatever races exist in dungeons as "official". I have heard of some human/First One half breeds. I think there may even a previous forum discussion about it.


If you want a disfigured character, just do what I did and play a horribly crippled/disfigured character. There are plenty of accidents and incidents in life that would leave you nice and grotesque.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Cipheron

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
  • Karma: +9/-4
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2018, 11:17:52 PM »
What I think would be cool is a dynamic system. Here's a rough idea:

Have ethnic groups, derived from realms / subrealms. You can pick one as your primary identity when you spawn you character, and the realm creator gets to specify a set of (optional) bonuses and penalties for the realm. Children would be able to inherit the primary ethnicity of either parent. Possibly, allow characters to change ethnicity based on other realm memberships available to them, and based on marriage, so you can marry someone to get a new ethnicity, giving another use for marriages.

Optionally, allow each ethnic group to get certain +/- values for e.g. living in certain terrains, or for raising / leading certain troop types. I'd split terrains into three groups, mountains/hills, forests/marsh, plains/scrub, and troop ability into three groups too, archers, cavalry and infantry. So you could e.g. get a +2 in hill/mountain production and +2 in archers, but you'd have to take -1 in everything else to get that, or you can have an ethnicity that's an all-rounder. e.g. a large realm like Ascalon would probably make "Ascalonian" have the generic settings, and players could choose just to identify as "Ascalonian", but sub-realm ethnicities would be more specialized based on what terrain and resources are available to them.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2018, 11:22:48 PM by Cipheron »

The Vintroth

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 36
  • Karma: +4/-5
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2018, 11:58:39 PM »
What I think would be cool is a dynamic system. Here's a rough idea:

Have ethnic groups, derived from realms / subrealms. You can pick one as your primary identity when you spawn you character, and the realm creator gets to specify a set of (optional) bonuses and penalties for the realm. Children would be able to inherit the primary ethnicity of either parent. Possibly, allow characters to change ethnicity based on other realm memberships available to them, and based on marriage, so you can marry someone to get a new ethnicity, giving another use for marriages.

Optionally, allow each ethnic group to get certain +/- values for e.g. living in certain terrains, or for raising / leading certain troop types. I'd split terrains into three groups, mountains/hills, forests/marsh, plains/scrub, and troop ability into three groups too, archers, cavalry and infantry. So you could e.g. get a +2 in hill/mountain production and +2 in archers, but you'd have to take -1 in everything else to get that, or you can have an ethnicity that's an all-rounder. e.g. a large realm like Ascalon would probably make "Ascalonian" have the generic settings, and players could choose just to identify as "Ascalonian", but sub-realm ethnicities would be more specialized based on what terrain and resources are available to them.

While I would like to see cultures, such as Ascalonian, Eldamari, Mercian, etc etc, within the game, I don't think giving them specific bonus is a great idea. Largely because it will likely lead to min-maxing which I'd argue harms the game. - Rather, the reason I would like to see cultures is because lore and setting. That is what ties *actual characters* down and generally forces you to play them or at least generally follow along or you'd be laughed out IC.

Not that bonuses can't be interesting or well done, for in many games they are. But I believe for a game like Might and Fealty, it won't do the same thing.

cred

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 27
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Sorry for the bad english
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #11 on: February 25, 2018, 08:46:15 PM »
Any player can create their own culture and have it described on their realm's page. As for non-human races, I don't know. I'd rather have a different trait system than that.

Ayruin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #12 on: February 25, 2018, 10:11:01 PM »
What I think would be cool is a dynamic system. Here's a rough idea:

Have ethnic groups, derived from realms / subrealms. You can pick one as your primary identity when you spawn you character, and the realm creator gets to specify a set of (optional) bonuses and penalties for the realm. Children would be able to inherit the primary ethnicity of either parent. Possibly, allow characters to change ethnicity based on other realm memberships available to them, and based on marriage, so you can marry someone to get a new ethnicity, giving another use for marriages.

Optionally, allow each ethnic group to get certain +/- values for e.g. living in certain terrains, or for raising / leading certain troop types. I'd split terrains into three groups, mountains/hills, forests/marsh, plains/scrub, and troop ability into three groups too, archers, cavalry and infantry. So you could e.g. get a +2 in hill/mountain production and +2 in archers, but you'd have to take -1 in everything else to get that, or you can have an ethnicity that's an all-rounder. e.g. a large realm like Ascalon would probably make "Ascalonian" have the generic settings, and players could choose just to identify as "Ascalonian", but sub-realm ethnicities would be more specialized based on what terrain and resources are available to them.

I like it, but to stop the proliferation of pointless cultures I think making a culture should require a credit spend. The traits would have to be small enough to not seriously affect the game, otherwise as stated by others we will see min/maxing, but they should exist as their presence is a reinforcement of the culture, regardless of the effect they actually have in game.

Esotericus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #13 on: March 08, 2018, 06:47:35 AM »
I agree strongly with both Foxglove and Ayruin, above.
Adding new races just to do so would only cause confusion, really.
There is a LOT of potential culture already existing that should be worked with and emphasized that will provide the same effect with less confusion ans potential game imbalance.

Andrew

  • Game Master / Lead Developer
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1831
  • Karma: +75/-8
  • Mildly Amused
    • View Profile
    • Lemuria Community Fan Site
Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Reply #14 on: April 05, 2018, 01:39:17 PM »
So, the consensus is that races are not something to look at right now, but perhaps down the line if we expand the map and incorporate them in a way that makes sense. I'm fine with this.

The other consensus is that cultures need to be a thing that exists in game, proper like, which I'm happy with, and a simple implementation shouldn't be hard to do. If anything though, I'll probably make it a subscription time reward rather than a spend, or possibly do both and make it cheaper if you wait.

Your input on how cultures should work in a more detailed matter would be greatly appreciated, either here or in a new topic, so I can not get too in the weeds, but at the minimum I will implement at least the following at some point: a name, an origin area, can be applied to realms, can allow new arrivals to use it, and will have settings to make certain things toggleable; This is to make it so i can implement my own dual-culture Iuna, where there's a newer culture post-cataclysm that contrasts with the old Iuna ways pre-cataclysm.

I'm also toying with make it so cultures are like ethnicities here, and characters can have certain percentages of each. Just an idea though.
Standing for the creation of interesting things since Year 1, Week 5, Day 4.
Favorite cold beverage: Strawberry Shake
My hobbies: Fixing computers, video games, anime, manga, some other stuff, sleep (in no particular order)