>> My problem with this, is that you have to spend one (quite rare, now) NP
>> to have one subfaction. I can't see a benefit that warrents this cost.
>> What would be the advantage for such a high cost?
>Greg was complaining that it was impossible to play a law-abiding
>character in public, but have a group of units which went around
>doing evil things.
>If NP's are too rare, we can always hand out more. I'm thinking
>that perhaps one NP should be delivered every four turns, instead
>of eight. Comments?
>Rich Skrenta <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Thats the tail wagging the dog. I thought the idea behind keeping the number
of noble points down was to keep faction size down? I agree with low numbers
of NPs. I would rather the extra skill didn't require an NP, than you start
adding NPs so that people will use the skill.
Better still, don't require the skill. Let people conceal their allegiance if
they want to. Think about how they are announcing it - probably with a banner
or somesuch - easy to conceal. In fact I would make it a noble-point
requiring spell to find out that allegiance. Another service mages can sell.
I really hate the idea of all my nobles being tarred with the same brush. If
I want to play a faction of individuals, I shouldn't need to spend NPs to stop
other players from knowing all my characters are the same faction really.
Mind you. I really like the idea of faction trees, and I think they will be
much more important in the real game where the number of NP's people will be
spending on noble creating will be relatively low. The more NPs people have,
the less it matters, as you make them all oath-1 and don't worry about it.