Go back to previous topic
Forum Name Gameplay
Topic subjectIn regards to the debate about merging Empire/Tribunal
Topic URLhttps://forums.carrionfields.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=64632
64632, In regards to the debate about merging Empire/Tribunal
Posted by Moligant on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Some links to past suggestions:

http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=6&topic_id=56632&mesg_id=56633&page=

http://forums.carrionfields.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=6&topic_id=55224&mesg_id=55296&page=
64634, RE: In regards to the debate about merging Empire/Tribunal
Posted by N b M on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Honestly, I would just get rid of empire. They don't seem to fit particularly well with the modern structure of CF. CF seemed to be more balanced and at the height of enjoyment when empire was removed after scion was created.

Buff Trib powers a bit, implement a sort of divide between how certain trib powers are used based on alignment. Implement the rank structure in trib... for instance

Each alignment has an overall command (justiciar, vindicator, *one for nuetral). There is a provincial from each ethos that is just below the alignments commander but in charge of applications of the law instead of a nitch position (or make those justiciar, vindicator, whatever... not part of the rank structure or even under the provost). Provost is voted on or elected from the 3 leader positions.

Now you have that set order vs chaos with the intrigue of which align is voted into provost and the fun of class (mage or not mage for more intrigue with battle).

I dunno, just seems more balanced as far as cabal dynamics are concerned.
64635, I think we are beating the dead horse.
Posted by Beront on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Tribs with smaller playerbase are much much boring.

PS: Imms already answered 'NO' on that question.