ic consequences etc etc idk what to title this

[ashen]

yeah ik zen thats why like

idk. its just like. idk what to do bc i cant say not to do it, but i also dont rlly get to be like 'hey flintlock actually is kind of hard to get into yknow, its a mountain with subzero temps and they have patrols and guards' with that having....any effect. so it kind of feels like its individual development kinda. erases any group development. and maybe thats just how main games are gonna be, but if so, thats. why im considering stepping down bc like, i get why that might need to be the way it is. but i dont know if i personally can like. lead if my leadership isnt going to have an effect on things

but yeah i think this kind of thing probably effects. every group? i just am speaking in terms of the lodge bc, im. p much only in the lodge rn. i definitely dont think its like specifically targetting flintlock or anything its just the only place i have experience, if that makes sense

[BENJAMIN]

track for now, I understand a lot of this but yeah we can't exactly just shut out development—i've always kinda wondered why it's so easy to get to here for other groups, I mean. They live in hot climates? So I don't feel like anyone is really equipped to come up into subzero temperatures (which is why a lot of the joiners show up half-dead)
But also even though I try and be active and helpful and around, I'm not fit for leader. Well specifically Benjamin is not fit to lead because of obvious reasons
So I wish you luck in this. There's no way to work in a die roll w different consequences in raids and such so idk

[ajdawny]

Agreeing with Grea on the difficulty for people to get up here. The logistics of mounting an attack on a sub-zero city is not easy, take Napoleon as an example, he was breezing his way through Europe, but the harsh Russian winters left him unable to continue without massive losses, and possible death for everyone.
Definitely makes sense hon (in as much as anything makes sense to me without having had two cups of coffee in the morning).

off topic but... I could possibly work out a program to simulate attack consequences.

[zuka]

this is long and im v sorry

i'm not sure this is something that can be fixed internally!! this may be something that requires general discussion ? about the.. longterm direction of tnw maybe because i think it might be due to how the groups themselves are structured and for the most part being without a kind of focus. particularly given the badlands' reputation and premise, paired with flintlock being less combative, objectively speaking it's become a sort of habit (as it has been w the dichotomy of pro- and anti-clans) for occasional raid threads to happen lead by the ''anti'' group without any concrete plot or real restrictions

or like? maybe there could be an emphasis in/reminding of respecting realism to prevent the apparent simplicity/ease of these attacks? or ic they could try to go for negotiations between groups maybe, and the promotion of more, less innately negative interactions between members of the groups too?? though im not sure how they could come to an impasse... but it could be like members having extended stays in other groups to learn.... . ?? and just groups mingling more around e/o, which could lead to interesting situations that might be tense but at the least not wholly hostile, and potentially engaging threads and plots and character dynamics and the like??

but as they are my stance is that there isn't always.. a reason - like a plot or motive? - that can be followed up in regards to all the kidnappings and murders, as opposed to it being because of the whole ~essence~ of obligated bad vs good rivalry, which is a bit how the groups have been constructed! so!! basically imo it takes two to tango, and i think this might warrant brainstorming/negotiation between groups both out of character and in so at least whenever it happens it has meaning, and maybe hopefully happens less??

im sorry this is really messy and im not sure it all makes sense,, i am fond of this group and i think you've been doing a good job with leading!! plus this is a difficult situation! ofc i understand & respect whatever decision you make.

[littlebabes]

i'm super new, but i know where the frustration lies. i think part of the thing that draws people to roleplay in the new world is the realism side, but even if you post a stickied thread for other people to look at that tells them a set of guidelines?? they won't look. i feel like this is something that should definitely be taken up with the mods to see what they think about it, because they can formulate a solution with the assistance of the group members, and keep the place both defended but not untouchable.

the other groups will probably be good with that idea too because it would protect their territories as well- maybe ask them if the general rule could be that you have to ask a leader or other hp to be able to penetrate the borders because guards ought to be super common in a world like this one

this is just my opinion ofc but i hope it helps a bit?

[zenzan]

this is long and im v sorry

i'm not sure this is something that can be fixed internally!! this may be something that requires general discussion ? about the.. longterm direction of tnw maybe because i think it might be due to how the groups themselves are structured and for the most part being without a kind of focus. particularly given the badlands' reputation and premise, paired with flintlock being less combative, objectively speaking it's become a sort of habit (as it has been w the dichotomy of pro- and anti-clans) for occasional raid threads to happen lead by the ''anti'' group without any concrete plot or real restrictions

or like? maybe there could be an emphasis in/reminding of respecting realism to prevent the apparent simplicity/ease of these attacks? or ic they could try to go for negotiations between groups maybe, and the promotion of more, less innately negative interactions between members of the groups too?? though im not sure how they could come to an impasse... but it could be like members having extended stays in other groups to learn.... . ?? and just groups mingling more around e/o, which could lead to interesting situations that might be tense but at the least not wholly hostile, and potentially engaging threads and plots and character dynamics and the like??

but as they are my stance is that there isn't always.. a reason - like a plot or motive? - that can be followed up in regards to all the kidnappings and murders, as opposed to it being because of the whole ~essence~ of obligated bad vs good rivalry, which is a bit how the groups have been constructed! so!! basically imo it takes two to tango, and i think this might warrant brainstorming/negotiation between groups both out of character and in so at least whenever it happens it has meaning, and maybe hopefully happens less??

im sorry this is really messy and im not sure it all makes sense,, i am fond of this group and i think you've been doing a good job with leading!! plus this is a difficult situation! ofc i understand & respect whatever decision you make.

This worded what I meant 1000x better

[dame]

tracking
I've already given my thoughts in other places baeatngyrhm you know I'm gonna support you Fe even tho I like what you've done w FL and Joh as leader

[zenzan]

PSGSKDHSLFHW

BUT JOH LEADING THE LODGE IS LIKE A++

I also get where you’re coming from but I also know at the same time that most of the whatevers (minus npc killings) are for their character development and we can’t just say “please don’t develop your char”.

At the same time, there aren’t many viable candidates to take over either because of age or other issues.

That being said, if it’s too draining for you, as long as Joh doesn’t completely disappear I’ll back whatever you choose

TBH though this seems like something that encompasses the badlands too, not just the lodge.

[sovay]

track to form some thoughts :0