Shattered Kingdoms

I would think that cities should be gateable, think of all the non combative times you want to go to a city.

As for gate changes, I would HOPE that this was being dealt with in an IC manner as opposed to an OOC manner.

If the city wants to increase it's defenses let it, with the help of the imms, but IMMS impose some building costs for them to be able to make in order for the changes to be performed.



(My humble opinion)

There are multiple reasons to adjust the schema to having less access to cities. Can't tell you those now, but I assure you that its a decent trade off. Recall would still work. Gating to stones would still work. Maybe it would add some effort to getting around, but it would also give people much better chance of being safe inside a city. Right now some cities are just way too easy to steamroll, while others aren't. I'd much rather see them all be safer. It would also make being in a tribunal much more interesting if you actually could defend your city instead of seeing someone waltz in from inside your defenses.

As for IC reasoning, I'm all for that, but we're likely going to see plenty of things coming down the pipe that make this idea a good one. Perhaps there's something in the works that will explain these changes ICly. Execution isn't perfect, but this is a living, changing world and lately its been pretty awesome fun.

Adding in more safety to cities will, IMO, make SK be more sensible and less twinkish. Personally I don't think tribunals need a buff, but city safety most certainly does. It's really difficult to RP when some crazy nutjob can run in and murder you at whim even if he's totally outlawed.

I know one that's kind of a icky-looking sprite. Heard of that guy?

Tolene's an elf I thought

goddamngoddamngoddamn.

I'm a fan of making cities safer, personally, and we all know I'm a proponent for making cities more difficult and involved to siege.

What'll actually happen is that it will be impossible to wage city warfare if even one defending trib members with ranged combat is online. It's just that that's better than the way things currently are, where city gates never get used and guards are posted there to just scratch their balls while the people in the inn get directly gated to and murdered.

Decisions like this are good, because they make sense at an IC level.

Balance wise you might want to consider adding a few more skills to help players identify when a player is vulnerable though.

(For example, Add a scrye spell, to see a room where a player exists - keep in mind it's fun to add counters to that too, spells to protect places from scrying, etc.)

Or have cabal skills where scouts can be placed and hidden to notify when players pass certain locations.

Or skills which allow players to remotely scout, like an out of body experience. (But you'd be incredibly vulnerable in body when you're soul is out of it's body)

What if the aggressors also have access to ranged combat? What if there's no bounty NPCs? What if you stagger your entrance to send in some tankier dudes to clean up before you bring in your more fragile explosion-causing guys?

I dunno styles.

What's the point of theorycrafting something that hasn't happened? I'm just saying that if, right now, cities are made more secure and nothing else is changed, then attacking a city will be absolutely impossible if a ranged defender is around.

However, I'd say that if bounty NPCs were removed on top of that, things would be fine and the game would be soooo much better.