Creating bands of Villages; Kingdoms or Alliances Idea

[Fredulom]

I had an idea that has spawned from the fact that people have been asking for the ability to join more than one village for a while now (I've seen posts scattered about over the last few weeks) and I was thinking that maybe something should be done about it?

Specifically, instead of letting people join multiple villages, why couldn't there be a system implemented where villages give each other some kind of 'token' or 'item' (or alternatively, the chieftains come together) and form a Kingdom or Alliance. This would then allow more progression as villages could progress together. Also, this means that each chieftain would be able to give trespassing/stealing rights to the members of other villages in their Kingdom/Alliance (through a menu whereby you would be able to see each village's members and give them colours much like you can with Claims currently) and people working together currently could be more organised in certain aspects of war and peace (with maybe an Alliance chat as well as a Village one... Although the chat area is currently quite full what with Combat, Party, Village, Area Chat and Crafting already existing there so that's something to consider).

This isn't really a finalised idea so much as a starting point for a possible expansion upon the current endgame... You also may decide to create a diplomacy window whereby you could have a Kingdom of cities and also at the same time be able to initiate relationships with other Kingdoms; the difference being that you could only join villages into a kingdom if they are in a certain proximity to you (in order to stop a Kingdom from becoming fragmented settlements which span multiple supergrids or something) but also allowing for relationships to occur with friends from different Kingdoms at the same time (maybe with the learning of an optional skill, Emissary or something to that effect?)

I don't know what you guys think to this but it sometimes feels at the moment that despite having kin from other villages and such that you are isolated from the outside world... Ideas/suggestions/criticisms anyone?


Fredulom

[BWithey]

This system should be able to be put in place via the social system. IE - Interaction between players, alliances and agreements, etc.

The best way to do this, IMO, is to be able to assign permissions as you can for a claim, for a village. This would allow you to set anyone you like, with any permissions you like, for the village.

Combined with Jackards idea for the removal of official offices (Like Lawspeaker and Chieftain) from a village, and simply allowing the responsibilities associated with those offices to be set by those who have permissions to do so. (One would assume that all permissions would be set to the establishing individual of a village at the time it was founded).

Kingdoms were never set in stone, they were always the result of social and political pressures applied through force or charisma.

[Fredulom]

The best way to do this, IMO, is to be able to assign permissions as you can for a claim, for a village. This would allow you to set anyone you like, with any permissions you like, for the village.

This is kinda what I said Although allowing you to choose which villagers have what permissions would increase the flexibility of the thing, and I'm sure I'd feel more comfortable being able to give people only I considered responsible the ability to take things off of my claim (since you probably wouldn't know or trust everyone in a village to behave in the manner you would expect them to)

Kingdoms are born through mutual benefit as well... Although that's kind of the same thing really, necessity calls for groups of villages to band together in order to repel people who would seek to kill people in said villages

In response to scrapping chieftain and such, maybe once people decide to form a village then new classes like 'King' or 'Ruler' or whatever should be put in place, ultimately someone has to be in charge and lead the people; whether that be one person or a council is down to the Kingdom in question but obviously how to decide that is down to the villagers themselves and perhaps a system should be put in place to support these two methods of rule... Democracy or Despotism anyone? I see political stances arising!

Also, maybe there should be a bonus to certain skills depending on the size of the Kingdom e.g. 10 people in Kingdom = 1% rise in the stat of the Kingdom's choice or something... That doesn't seem too overpowered to me, maybe it's a bad idea idk.


Fredulom

[aso11]

To anyone who knew me World 3, would know that I would highly support this idea. Not only because I had such an insanely long kin list, but rather because I had villages that I was "allied" to, but couldn't actually formally do it in anyway, and I would love to see this idea happen.

[Lahrmid]

can't believe this hasn't been suggested before!


oh wait...

[Aegir]

Damn! I would not want there to be kingdoms. The idea of a king/surpreme ruler sucks at all levels, even though there most likely would be councils at the king/queen's side.
Alliances on the other hand... It would be great to have some way of confessing to an alliance or a country and not simply a village, also there should be a way to upgrade from villages to towns/cities.

feel free to hate on this, I'm just making my opinion known.

[Fredulom]

Damn! I would not want there to be kingdoms. The idea of a king/surpreme ruler sucks at all levels, even though there most likely would be councils at the king/queen's side.

Well, again I mentioned the idea of having different methods of rule because giving one person absolute power WOULD kind of suck but it depends how fair and just a ruler they would be... But yes, I suggested councils (Giving certain members certain responsibilities and such; although this is kind of similar to Democracy I think this should be permanent instead of elected), maybe an elected group (If over 50% of the kingdom wants to vote new people into power then a vote is called; I see the potential for griefing of this particular method but idk) and a dictatorship (Despotism) as three possible choices a Kingdom could make concerning the governing bodies

Although, now I think about it, I reckon there should be a ruling council which is comprised of one member from each village that joins the Kingdom That allows for a fair representation of each village involved in said Kingdom.


Fredulom

[smileyguy4you]

that'd be nice could be useful for an above ground village and a cave village being run by the same ppl as well...

[Koya]

Damn! I would not want there to be kingdoms. The idea of a king/surpreme ruler sucks at all levels, even though there most likely would be councils at the king/queen's side.

Well, again I mentioned the idea of having different methods of rule because giving one person absolute power WOULD kind of suck but it depends how fair and just a ruler they would be... But yes, I suggested councils (Giving certain members certain responsibilities and such; although this is kind of similar to Democracy I think this should be permanent instead of elected), maybe an elected group (If over 50% of the kingdom wants to vote new people into power then a vote is called; I see the potential for griefing of this particular method but idk) and a dictatorship (Despotism) as three possible choices a Kingdom could make concerning the governing bodies

Although, now I think about it, I reckon there should be a ruling council which is comprised of one member from each village that joins the Kingdom That allows for a fair representation of each village involved in said Kingdom.


Fredulom

You should gather 40-50 people together, 4-5 villages, and then try to manage all this. I don't think you see the total thing in Kingdom idea you offer.

[Jackard]

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5309