Re: faction trees - keep em!

John Sloan (
Mon, 06 Dec 93 14:56:17 GMT wrote :

>> I'm beginning to think either one every 4 turns is needed - or a reduction
>> in the number of skills that require NPs. I don't mind which, and changing
>> the NP income rate seems the least intrusive.
>Actually, I would be in favor of eliminating all NP requirements on
>skills, if this wouldn't destabilize anything much. This would simplify
>the rather complex study requirements a bit, and bring NP's back to
>their original pupose of limiting the number of units in the game.
>Some skills, such as Survive fatal would, wouuld probably need to take
>a bit longer to learn (say, 4 weeks in this case).
>Rich Skrenta <>

Hmm. Perhaps its worth splitting off Noble Points, which are required to create
nobles, and Resource Points, which are required to learm strange skills, swear
nobles to oaths, found cities, build castles and so on.

Then you could just limit the number of nobles in a faction to 12 (or whatever)
and allow new nobles to be created using Resource Points, and you could remove
NP's completely.

RP's would be obtained on a regular basis, and would be required for any major
effort. Recruiting a noble costs 1. Building a castle requires 3. Founding a
city would probably require about 12 - 2 from each faction participating.
Learning arcane skills would require RPs. Building a ship might cost 1 or 2

You could make the scope of these as narrow or as wide as you like. The purpose
being to slow the rate at which someone who knows the system can create or learn
things with respect to someone who is starting from scratch.

Alternatively you could do away with NPs, do away with RPs and just have a limit
on the number of nobles/faction. Recruiting a new noble would take four weeks
in a city, and building the other big things takes time anyway.

There are a number of things that could be done. What are you trying to limit,
bar the number of nobles in a faction?


Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links