Avatar of Little Bird

Status

Recent Statuses

10 hrs ago
Current Sleep deprivation is a Hell of a drug.
3 likes
3 days ago
Effin work probably got me for hella OT this week. I'll get CS's and replies as best I can. ~Itbewhatitdoitdowhatitbe~
4 days ago
I just want to fall completely in love.
4 likes
5 days ago
ecarg nosive 😈
7 days ago
Is this love? is this love? Is this love? Is this love that I'm feelin'?

Bio

Not born in a log cabin, I came into the RPing venture around 2009 and quickly joined about twenty roleplays more than I should have at the time. I've been around the internet in that time span, participated in and run RPs on multiple forums, and brushed shoulders with a wide variety of players and characters. Getting to work with new people has always been part of the allure of the experience.

My interests in RPing are pretty diverse, and not genre-specific; if there's room at the table and I can think of a dish to serve, I'll cook something up for just about any meal. If you know what I mean.

Most Recent Posts

Personnel does have the added feature that, in a battle, you can lose it. If a battle is particularly bloody, Player A could attack and pay the fee of P -2, but I determine they also lose an additional P -5. And maybe Player B defended really well, so they only lose P -2.

We haven't seen this mechanic in action just yet, but I believe it will enhance the battles.


When attacking do we automatically send in all of our personnel? Or can we limit to only paying up the minimum? Hence my thought of paying personnel to thwart an invasion and forego an actual PvP event. Kinda just a thought for time saving if we were to hit a stretch where there's a lot of back and forth so we can concentrate on more pivotal interactions.
<Snipped quote by Little Bird>

You realize without bodies, making a check to wealth means nothing? For example, if I have $100,000 to build a house but I do not want to hire a group of people to build that house. How is that house going to be built? How is that money going to actually be used? Having personnel a little distracted from wealth investments just makes sense. You need someone/some people at least to focus on whatever you are upgrading.

You cannot upgrade an area and just think it'll magically be upgraded without anyone touching/working to get it upgraded.

Now, I could see there being already established weapons/gyfts/etc... in a personnel and your character sending out troops to go fight another district/take other a district without expelling extra money.

But to spend money, especially on something like upgrading/building. You need to actually have people to do that.


From a realism standpoint, you're correct. Bodies are needed the build/repair things.

From a game design perspective though, we're running two stats that are functionally the same thing; Personnel is an extension of Wealth. It serves no distinct mechanical purpose as of right now.

In the vein of realism we can just as easily say that the factions themselves aren't putting their manpower into the upgrades; rather they're investing monetary resources into the community and outside entities are using that momey to build and develop.
I'm really just spitballing ways to maintain a degree of parity so that the map doesn't turn into a Monopoly board.

As far as personnel expenditure on defense, I'm putting up the idea that sacrificing the requisite personnel can effectively counter an invasion without having to go into a drawn out battle sequence.

I'm of the opinion that the Personnel really should have it's own functional identity, and yhat it and Wealth should have actions in which they can act independently of each other. (EG - The above suggestion, and making District upgrades a Wealth only expense).

As I've more or less inquired previously, what's the point lf the personnel metric if it's just going to be used in exact tandem with Wealth and not play into the process of invasions and defense, etc? Would it not be simpler to just consolidate everything into Wealth and trust that no one is gonna pull a 'gotcha,' by having a full on army come around the corner in the middle of a battle? (Endgame scenarios notwithstanding; if we get that far into this I'd be dissappointed if we didn't have forces of 100s if not 1000s in a city-wide fire fight.

EDIT:

All of the above aside my sentiment boils down to two questions:
1. Are we all in agreement that the story is of higher importance than the game elements?
2. Are we (mostly) ok with collaborating our way to a more even board state before getting into the more cutthroat activity of trying to conquer one another?
We got some really good discussion going on here, and some really good insights.

I've given it a bit of thought, and it's true. Just like how one Wealth could equal $10,000 or $1 million, I may have been thinking about Personnel wrong. 1 Personnel could, in fact, equal to 10 people, or 100, depending on the district.

I believe it's still realistic to say that you lose Personnel when you claim a new district, as I'm sure there are roles to fill, and if there is a war, people die. However, I would be willing to make it so you only need to meet the minimum for upgrading a district - I wouldn't take your Personnel from you as a fee.

(That way Personnel are not turning into bricks....)

Would that make it more fair and realistic? :>

And yessss, I had a thought that in the beginning, all the mafias and organizations are small and struggling with their numbers, maybe due to a recent war, or people quitting. Perhaps the war was expensive, which is why no one really has any money right now. Whatever reasons, I want to leave this open to your own interpretation as to why you're starting out somewhat fresh.


Retaining personnel after upgrading would certainly be a benefit for lower districts looking to grow. It's a lot easier to only have to accrue more wealth and still have personnel on hand to validate a competent defense of territory should one be attacked.

Call me selfish, but at least allowing Poor -> Comfortable to happen as a purely monetary investment coukd balance things a bit.
I find it a little unrealistic if the personnel number reflected the faction size.

Say, if having 5 personnel meant your team is only 5-man strong, and no gyft at that... I don't know how they would've came into control of an entire area, much less multiple... (Not to mention the possibility of being a bare-stick commander after losing an attempt)

If these personnel had their own teams or 'outsourced' certain tasks... But then it would be unrealistic for a group to double or triple in size over 1-2 GM posts (which I don't think spans that long IC), when everyone has already an established faction


I just imply that my faction sustained losses prior to the RP which necessitated a rebuild. Losing personnel in attempting to take a district is reasonable. I'm not sure about upgrading though... kind of implies people are dying in the effort to improve conditions.
Does the personnel requirement for upgrading a District reflect overall faction number? Or do I need the minimum within the district to upgrade? Do I lose personnel when I upgrade, similar to wealtb?
@ERode Noted, I've updated it. :>

@Little Bird The Personnel gives me an idea how big your mafia is. You could have no wealth, but without a personnel block, you could send two hundred mafiosos to a fight. ^^; I mean, I doubt anyone would do that, but it's a safety measure and helps with realism, I think.


There just doesn't seem to be a way, mathematically speaking, to keep the Wealthy Districts from just running the table. Especially given the jump in resource allottment. Unless the personnel number isn't a hard count and we can have a bit of wiggle room to say we have enough bodies in a street fight to make it even in that respect.
<Snipped quote by Yankee>

<Snipped quote by ERode>

Exactly that. You're picking up exactly what I'm laying down.

In the past, I've run a mafia in a roleplay where, if I wanted to do anything, I would just magically create the money necessary for it out of thin air. I don't think that's the most realistic. But I also wanted to keep the roleplay aspect. So the Wealth and Personnel is more like like a physical wallet. I think it's more fun to earn, steal, and spend in a way that actually affects the roleplay world around you. I don't want to it interfere with roleplay, rather enhance it. If that makes sense. :>


The wealtb metric is all well and good. The personnel aspect is what feels supurfluous.
I've yet to invade anyone. So...
Dom't you think that kind of makes the wealth and personnel values a bit pointless though? Feels like that system could use some expansion.
© 2007-2025
BBCode Cheatsheet