Posted By Daedhel at 2:45 PM - Tue Jul 18 2017
What i mean with "significative" I mean more than just one or two duchies. More like almost half-half
And I know they said not competing tribes, but jjust think a moment about this. Is this that bad? Or just another way to promote conflict and change?
To start, kingdom identity goes down the drain with a population split that high. It brings up too many questions about the situation that brought this about. Lastly, there remains the logistics creating more split kingdoms.
What do I mean by logistics? Let me go through the best combinations without splitting any existing groups.
Scenario 1
The Kypiq and the Neran now share the same kingdom 50/50. We need to make a new combinations to ensure that their are still 6 kingdoms.
Janoa and To'resk are already allied, so we shouldn't pick those two. Same deal with the Brudvir/Hrothi. That leaves two tribes, the Dras, and the Waerd.*
Now, the Waerd could never be split in half, it's completely against everything about their culture and history.
So, it's the Dras that will be split in half, It might totally go against their history, but W/E, we want to make sure that the kingdoms are equal. One half goes to the half goes to the Neran, the other half goes to the Kypiq.
These combos make sense geographically, and there isn't any major conflict. It's the best case scenario, unless we were to break up the other pairs.
So, now the launch kingdoms are:
Brudvir/Hrothi
Janoa/To'resk
Kypiq/Neran
Neran/Dras
Dras/Kypiq
Waerd.
Scenario 2
Let's combine the Dras and the Waerd. The kingdom should be geographical connected, which is a bit of a tall order to put a poisonous swamp next to a semi-arid desert, but it's the only possible combination for the Waerd.
Ignoring the questions about how the Waerd would ever except nobility other than themselves, let's continue.
We now have 5 kingdoms, the only unpaired tribe is the Neran/Kypiq, and pushing them together would create 4 kingdoms. We must combine the Neran/Kypiq, as the Neran is the Kypiq's only ally.
Let's create the other two kingdoms, shall we? The Neran is already friendly withe the Brudvir and the Hrothi, so they are the obvious choices.
Now, the launch tribes are:
Brudvir/Hrothi
Janoa/To'resk
Kypiq/Neran
Brudvir/Neran
Hrothi/Neran
Waerd/Dras.
Scenario multiverse.
I could go on and on about possible tribe combos if I were to split the existing kingdoms, but trust me, you don't want to ask me to do that.
No-matter what we go with, how we split this, and who is allied with who, we face a new problem. 8 tribes to 6 obviously doesn't line up, so two kingdoms need two tribes. If we do anything more than that, it brings up the hard-to-answer questions.
What split the -insert any tribes here-? Does each of these tribes behave the same? If so, why did they split in the first place? If we don't create sub-tribes, these kingdoms start losing their identity, and blend together. Creating sub-tribes is basically asking for new tribes entirely.
It also locks those 3 kingdoms from fighting each other, to an extent.
Now, why don't we consider putting at-odds tribes against each other? No-matter the answer, this writes much of the world's lore for us, and direct conflict in a way that could have been avoided with the current system.
Are they allied against a common enemy kingdom? What kingdom/tribe pissed them off so bad, that they allied with one of their enemies? What happens to this alliance if that's resolved?
This situation forces conflict both between other kingdoms, and within kingdoms. That's assuming the're one of the tribes that isn't split between two kingdoms, if they are, that complicates things further (but this is already long enough).
Perhaps one of the tribes conquered? Who conquered who, to start with, and Is the conquered tribe allowed to be nobility/own a town? Where is the incentive for loyalty towards a leader that does not represent you? Who would voluntarily play as a tribe that is forced into servitude?
Obviously, the conquered tribe would to be split in half, otherwise it would alienate those who wanted to play them as nobility, and locks in the rest to one playstyle.
Because the conquered tribe is split, doesn't that set up for another kingdom to attack them in order to free their fellow tribesmen? Even this situation forces conflict between two kingdoms.
The game is likely going to be conflict riddled as is, the kingdoms need no more incentive to attack each other, nor do the players need more reason to launch a coup. Forcing conflict by putting two aggressive tribes together is to much.
I could go all day about any of this, but this post is already way longer than I originally intended.
Posted By Gunnlang at 3:38 PM - Tue Jul 18 2017
As someone within my kingdom said. The Neran should be in all kingdoms.
They are, just not in huge amounts (and not in the Waerd).