Remove ads

Tales of History - A Civ-Builder Quest

Reader mode
[X] Try to negotiate with the oncoming army. (Might cause conflict with Cultural Ideas)
-[X] Lie and claim you know noting about raiders.
-[X] welcome then as guests and offer gifts worth one production and obsidian (they probaly see this as the bribe it is)
-[X] invite a small delegation to see the city walls(fill them with all hunters and mobs when they do)
-[X] claim that we can hold them back long enough for the attackers to starve
-[X] if that fails:
--[X] Hunker down behind the walls of Greenvalley and wait for Willow to return with the hunters.
--[X] Send envoys to any and all White Clans asking for help in defending the White Halls and Greenvalley, in return for us swearing blood debts to later be repaid to all those who aided us in our hour of need
 
Last edited:
Hm... I'm a bit surprised at the contrast between the discussion and the actual vote count.

Vote still open.
Adhoc vote count started by Azel on Apr 8, 2020 at 4:19 AM, finished with 163 posts and 10 votes.
  • [X] Hunker down behind the walls of Greenvalley and wait for Willow to return with the hunters.
    -[X] Send envoys to any and all White Clans asking for help in defending the White Halls and Greenvalley, in return for us swearing blood debts to later be repaid to all those who aided us in our hour of need.
    [X] Hunker down behind the walls of Greenvalley and wait for Willow to return with the hunters.
    [X] Plan Never Corner A Bear
    [X] The Ancestors demand penance, for the days of blood have come again.
    -[X] Stage 1: there is hope in dispair
    --[X] Send word to the clansmen that the valley is under siege By a substantial force, take any volunteers that will come to the defence.
    --[X] evacuate our population and any food they can carry behind the walls of greenvalley, the elderly will go to the white halls.
    -[X] Stage 2: proving our worth
    --[X] Have our hunters hold the crossing directly, have our mob held in reserve off in the distance camped in the trees incase the enemy get around somewhere and try to take our hunters from behind.
    --[X] chop down some trees for logs, if the enemy is coming up river, toss them from the crossing into the river to clog them up and charge them while they are disorganized. If they come from land or use the crossing, use them as cover for the hunters against arrow fire.
    -[X] Stage 3: Only the worthy die standing
    --[X] if the crossing is lost, those best able and willing to fight retreat to the white halls, those who are not willing to die in the arms of their ancestors will hold up in greenvalley.
    [X] Try to negotiate with the oncoming army.
    -[X]Tell them that the warriors went mad with lust for glory, and foolishly tried to raid the Goat People.
    --[X]Offer to give them whatever was gained by our raids back, and obsidian/azerite as compensation for these that died.
    ---[X]If deemed necessary, make a blood pact that they won't attack brushcrest or the goat nomads as long as they lived.
    [X] Try to negotiate with the oncoming army. (Might cause conflict with Cultural Ideas)
    -[X] Lie and claim you know noting about raiders.
    -[X] invite a small delegation to see the city walls(fill them with all hunters and mobs when they do)
    -[X] claim that we can hold them back long enough for the attackers to starve
    -[X] if that fails:
    --[X] Hunker down behind the walls of Greenvalley and wait for Willow to return with the hunters.
    --[X] Send envoys to any and all White Clans asking for help in defending the White Halls and Greenvalley, in return for us swearing blood debts to later be repaid to all those who aided us in our hour of need
Click to expand...
 
Finally woke up and all I can say is, what the fuck?
In regards to the vote, this is what I wrote:
--[x] The Herdsmen trade caravans and any of their settlements near the mountains, drive them out of the West.
That was meant to target their traders and any settlements like Softhill, or perhaps within 4 or 5 tiles of our part of the mountains, the chain that isn't broken off by the pass the nomads were using, in short the yellow hills on the map, NOT for them to goddamn gallivant months away into the east and south eastern mountains. Them doing this feels like Azel creatively interpreted it to stretch the military's orders to the very widest possibility and then ignored the part about them focusing on the nomad's operations in the WEST, you know, the area just south of us where they were trading with Brushcrest and the others?

Second off, what the fuck again, we were at 9/10 stability, how the hell were we having a political crisis form then, also why the fuck is apparently every high council meeting in public? From our civ page:
General rules
- Meetings of all Councils will be held in private. However, each person attending the council may bring an additional guest, who may listen but not speak unless invited to speak by the council.

It should only have been the 3 councilors, a bone tender and at most 1 extra person per councilor in a private closed doors type meeting, instead reading it it seems more like the council were arguing in the central fucking square of town surrounded by hunters, artisans and serfs. And now apparently our mobs wont proc fanatic status even when they are literally sat on top of the White Halls? Azel, if you really didn't want to write this CIv anymore you could have just said that you were starting a new quest without giving the option to reboot this one.

In regards to to dealing with the invasion at our doorstep, diplo first, scapegoat the hunters hard, the artisans who want peace and serfs who want isolationist peace should be happy to buy that the hunters defied the council's will, and if the hunters return outraged that we've sold them out? Quite frankly, fuck them if Azel's going to use them like this. If diplo doesn't work and the mobs refuse to proc fanaticism, then we use the walls, send out runners to the white clans requesting aid, and we'll unfortunately have to wait until the hunters get back. If the orchards burn and the hunters somehow survive, then we should still be at the point at which we can survive, we'll just have to start rebuilding the orchards and if our farmers survive we don't lose institutional knowledge.
 
[X] Hunker down behind the walls of Greenvalley and wait for Willow to return with the hunters.
-[X] Send envoys to any and all White Clans asking for help in defending the White Halls and Greenvalley, in return for us swearing blood debts to later be repaid to all those who aided us in our hour of need
We have a goddam stone wall, lets use it for once?
 
People, the hostility towards me is getting really tiring, especially as it comes from the same people who kept talking about subjugation the Goat People and raiding their villages last vote. I clarified that you are not aware of the Goat People even having villages, which was responded to by disbelief and the hunters just having to look harder, so I'm not entirely sure how I'm supposed to take a vote that talks about attacking those non-existent villages except by, you know, looking for them in the mountains where the Goat People live.

Furthermore, I gave blatant warning that raiding the caravans would invite retaliation and not do much except maintain the status quo, which can be considered bad since everyone seems to agree that the status quo is bad. Likewise, I made it pretty clear that there was political strife brewing and the general response to that was "fuck everyone but the hunters, we go raiding in force".

I genuinely like writing this quest again and would love it to continue, but if the players keep voting to dig the hole deeper, even when warned, there is only so much I can do.
 
[X] Hunker down behind the walls of Greenvalley and wait for Willow to return with the hunters.
-[X] Send envoys to any and all White Clans asking for help in defending the White Halls and Greenvalley, in return for us swearing blood debts to later be repaid to all those who aided us in our hour of need
 
[X] Try to negotiate with the oncoming army. (Might cause conflict with Cultural Ideas)
-[X] claim that the hunters are no longer a part of us but rebels that went against the leaders.
-[X] welcome the army as guests and offer gifts worth one production and obsidian (they probaly see this as the bribe it is)
-[X] offer blood oaths not to attack for a generation
-[X] invite a small delegation to see the city walls(fill them with all hunters and mobs when they do)
-[X] if that fails offer in the order listed:
--[X] increase the offer to include the the Azurite, second production as well
--[X] offer these goods for several turns.
--[X] blood oaths not to raid for several turns.

I think the locals have grown to strong to raid as long as they are united. my long term plan includes new settlements, gaining control of part of the trade by settling LakeFord and building up till there are new opportunities to expand.
 
[X] Scapegoating the "Great" Deer
Azel said:
People, the hostility towards me is getting really tiring, especially as it comes from the same people who kept talking about subjugation the Goat People and raiding their villages last vote. I clarified that you are not aware of the Goat People even having villages, which was responded to by disbelief and the hunters just having to look harder, so I'm not entirely sure how I'm supposed to take a vote that talks about attacking those non-existent villages except by, you know, looking for them in the mountains where the Goat People live.

Furthermore, I gave blatant warning that raiding the caravans would invite retaliation and not do much except maintain the status quo, which can be considered bad since everyone seems to agree that the status quo is bad. Likewise, I made it pretty clear that there was political strife brewing and the general response to that was "fuck everyone but the hunters, we go raiding in force".

I genuinely like writing this quest again and would love it to continue, but if the players keep voting to dig the hole deeper, even when warned, there is only so much I can do.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sorry Azel, just waking up to read that was not good and I have little idea what could have been done differently, especially in regards to the sudden political crisis at near full stability with the hunter's influence and how vital they are to our defense and food. Granted I should probably have been more explicit in instructions to the hunters, and looking at the map I didn't think our mountain chain was quite as extensive as it apparently is, thought that it was far thinner which seemed at the time to be supported by the hilly path the nomads use.

If people want me to I'll accept the blame for this update as the plan maker, just want to urge people to use whatever results from this to push down the hunters influence and glory seeking, if we survive.
 
Last edited:
You know when negotiating , claiming that hunters that left are traitors while we still have hunters loyal to said traitors doesn't look like most stable thing to do with political situation as it is.
 
Last edited:
Kirron 999 said:
If people want me to I'll accept the blame for this update as the plan maker, just want to urge people to use whatever results from this to push down the hunters influence and glory seeking, if we survive.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not trying to assign to blame, and I think neither should anyone else. Players voted what they voted and said what they said, or didn't spoke up.
 
Azel said:
I'm not trying to assign to blame, and I think neither should anyone else. Players voted what they voted and said what they said, or didn't spoke up.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
People like having scapegoats, much like we're planning on scapegoating the hunters ic, I'm willing to be the ooc scapegoat if it maintains thread cohesion somewhat.
 
Kirron 999 said:
especially in regards to the sudden political crisis at near full stability with the hunter's influence and how vital they are to our defense and food
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think this is the result of interpreting the stability score incorrectly.

Stability is a combination of institutional endurance and how much faith the people have in the system. It is not a measure of prevention of political crisises, but rather an indicator of how well the system deals with those crisises.

The crisis emerges from the narrative, but if we look at it mechanically it hasn't actually done anything terrible yet because of that high stability score. All the player's orders so far were executed. No one has defied a player command yet, the only defiance is the direct result of the plan vote.

Even now, orders are checked against the stability score, so the high stability preserves the civ during this crisis.
 
Kirron 999 said:
People like having scapegoats, much like we're planning on scapegoating the hunters ic, I'm willing to be the ooc scapegoat if it maintains thread cohesion somewhat.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I would prefer if we can get over this without mirroring the IC vitriol or designating scapegoats.
10ebbor10 said:
I think this is the result of interpreting the stability score incorrectly.

Stability is a combination of institutional endurance and how much faith the people have in the system. It is not a measure of prevention of political crisises, but rather an indicator of how well the system deals with those crisises.

The crisis emerges from the narrative, but if we look at it mechanically it hasn't actually done anything terrible yet because of that high stability score. All the player's orders so far were executed. No one has defied a player command yet, the only defiance is the direct result of the plan vote.

Even now, orders are checked against the stability score, so the high stability preserves the civ during this crisis.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Pretty much. Had this happened with a starting Stability of 5 or so, with the rolls being just as bad, this would likely have ended in an active civil war or the Hunters openly couping and instating that Hunter-only Council.

Stability is more hitpoints then armor. It doesn't make bad things go away, just makes you more likely to survive them.
 
Last edited:
Looks at the dice roles
Lets be honest Every time we leave the valley the dice gods go 'No'
So I;m going to sit back and hope.
Cause if our roles stay the same every plan we have at this point will fail.
Meanwhile if we get good roles? literally every plan will work.
The real question is which plan will work with ok roles.
I go with the military will come back in time with a ok role.
And that diplo will fail without a great role.
 
I decided to try to make my own plan for attempting diplomacy, but I am willing to hear, if you think there is anything that could be better. @Azel, I hope that I did not make any obvious mistakes?

[] Scapegoating the "Great" Deer
-[] Tell our people, that this invasion is a clear sign of the folly of disobeying the will and wisdom of the Ancestors. The "Great" Deer has not only provoked this attack, he has also lead many of our strongest warriors astray from their primary purpose of defending The Valley People and the graves of the Ancestors. We could of course still beat them back through the strength of our people and defend White Halls, but it would take a high cost in life.
-[] Therefore the Council of Three will seek terms with the invaders, because of the "Great" Deer's disobedience.
-[] The Council (or rather their messenger) will seek out the invaders seeking to parlay and negotiation.
--[] At the start of negotiation, the Council will explain that they never approved of the raids, but that they will be willing to offer compensation for not stopping them in time.
---[] On the truth of this they will swear Blood Oaths.
--[] As compensation they will start with offering them the following:
---[] 1 unit of Obsidian
---[] 1 Production
--[] But they are willing to go as far as the following:
---[] 1 unit of Obsidian
---[] 1 Production
---[] 1 unit of Azurite OR another 1 Production
--[] If the invaders want more, then the Council will as a last resort be willing to offer send more next year.
--[] The Council will promise to not approve of any raids against the Invaders or their current allies for the rest of their live.
---[] On this they will swear Blood Oaths.
--[] As for the "Great" Deer, the Council will proclaim that he is no longer welcome amongst The Valley People and he therefore is to become a exile.
--[] The punishment for the Great Deer to enter the walls of Greenvalley will be dead.
---[] On this the Council will swear a Blood Oath.
---[] They will also get the remaining hunters to swear Blood Oaths on enforcing this exile with their life.
 
Last edited:
Should probably also include a military fallback if they refuse to accept the offered terms, but other than that it's better than nothing at all. @Azel can we get an extension to this vote beyond a day just to make sure we're all in agreement about this one? The discussion has highlighted that we all seem to have different ideas about what to do, but very few people are willing to commit to a plan as of yet.
 
Kirron 999 said:
Should probably also include a military fallback if they refuse to accept the offered terms, but other than that it's better than nothing at all. @Azel can we get an extension to this vote beyond a day just to make sure we're all in agreement about this one? The discussion has highlighted that we all seem to have different ideas about what to do, but very few people are willing to commit to a plan as of yet.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You are right, I ought to include a fallback.
[X] Scapegoating the "Great" Deer
-[X] Tell our people, that this invasion is a clear sign of the folly of disobeying the will and wisdom of the Ancestors. The "Great" Deer has not only provoked this attack, he has also lead many of our strongest warriors astray from their primary purpose of defending The Valley People and the graves of the Ancestors, leaving only the warriors that did not chose to reject the Ancestors wisdom. We could of course still beat them back through the strength of our people and defend White Halls, but it would take a high cost in life.
-[X] Therefore the Council of Three will seek terms with the invaders, because of the "Great" Deer's disobedience.
-[X] The Council (or rather their messenger) will seek out the invaders seeking to parlay and negotiation.
--[X] At the start of negotiation, the Council will explain that they never approved of the raids, but that they will be willing to offer compensation for not stopping them in time.
---[X] On the truth of this they will swear Blood Oaths.
--[X] They will of course start of by giving back any prisoner captured.
--[X] As compensation they will start with offering them the following:
---[X] 1 unit of Obsidian
---[X] 1 Production
--[X] But they are willing to go as far as the following:
---[X] 1 unit of Obsidian
---[X] 1 Production
---[X] 1 unit of Azurite OR another 1 Production
--[X] If the invaders want more, then the Council will as a last resort be willing to offer send more next year.
--[X] The Council will promise to not approve of any raids against the Invaders or their current allies for the rest of their live.
---[X] On this they will swear Blood Oaths.
--[X] As for the "Great" Deer, the Council will proclaim that he is no longer welcome amongst The Valley People and he therefore is to become a exile.
--[X] The punishment for the Great Deer to enter the walls of Greenvalley will be dead.
---[X] On this the Council will swear a Blood Oath.
---[X] They will also get the remaining hunters to swear Blood Oaths on enforcing this exile with their life.
-[X] As a fallback they will prepare to defend Greenvalley and White Halls, while also sending a runner to the White Clans to see if reinforcements can be found.

Besides the short fallback plan, I also added giving back prisoners, since I presume that they would want those people back.
 
Last edited:
Kirron 999 said:
Should probably also include a military fallback if they refuse to accept the offered terms, but other than that it's better than nothing at all. @Azel can we get an extension to this vote beyond a day just to make sure we're all in agreement about this one? The discussion has highlighted that we all seem to have different ideas about what to do, but very few people are willing to commit to a plan as of yet.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'd tentatively say yes, though most of the regulars seem already committed.
 
To be fair it's currently 3 for scapegoating, 4 for hunkering down, that plus the timezone's issue means some might not have seen the newly suggested diplo plan yet. To that end, sorry about the following mass ping everyone.
@Satar @SpeckofStardust @Omegahugger @Pyre @Tomcost @Profectus @Artemis1992 @Ghostdevil
Mortenkam has suggested a diplo plan which might work, just wondering if you guys are willing to switch to it or at least give feedback on it.
 
Kirron 999 said:
To be fair it's currently 3 for scapegoating, 4 for hunkering down, that plus the timezone's issue means some might not have seen the newly suggested diplo plan yet. To that end, sorry about the following mass ping everyone.
@Satar @SpeckofStardust @Omegahugger @Pyre @Tomcost @Profectus @Artemis1992 @Ghostdevil
Mortenkam has suggested a diplo plan which might work, just wondering if you guys are willing to switch to it or at least give feedback on it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The plan is to cause a civil war when the hunters come back. You don't betray the military and hope that it goes okay.

I'll pass.
 
Tomcost said:
The plan is to cause a civil war when the hunters come back. You don't betray the military and hope that it goes okay.

I'll pass.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Why do you think it would? I mean, I agree the chance exist, but the certainty by which you proclaim that it would happen makes me wonder why you think so.

Personally, I think that there is a decent chance that the Hunters with go along with it.
Firstly, because I think there is a good chance that they will feel shame about leaving us weak to attack, while they are far away in the mountains.
Secondly, because the only real punishment falls on their leader, the Great Deer, and he only has to live with the White Clans, or perhaps just never enter Greenvalley again.
Thirdly, because if my plan actually works, then we would most likely have two units of hunters on our side, since they would have sworn Blood Oaths. The returning hunters would then have to decided to kill them on behalf of the Great Deer, alongside any other non-hunters that decide to resist, just so the Great Deer would not have to go into exile.

If it would make you feel better, I could perhaps add trying to get the remaining close family members of the hunters out raiding to swear a Blood Oath to enforce the decision to exile the Great Deer.
 
Mortenkam said:
Why do you think it would? I mean, I agree the chance exist, but the certainty by which you proclaim that it would happen makes me wonder why you think so.

Personally, I think that there is a decent chance that the Hunters with go along with it.
Firstly, because I think there is a good chance that they will feel shame about leaving us weak to attack, while they are far away in the mountains.
Secondly, because the only real punishment falls on their leader, the Great Deer, and he only has to live with the White Clans, or perhaps just never enter Greenvalley again.
Thirdly, because if my plan actually works, then we would most likely have two units of hunters on our side, since they would have sworn Blood Oaths. The returning hunters would then have to decided to kill them on behalf of the Great Deer, alongside any other non-hunters that decide to resist, just so the Great Deer would not have to go into exile.

If it would make you feel better, I could perhaps add trying to get the remaining close family members of the hunters out raiding to swear a Blood Oath to enforce the decision to exile the Great Deer.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yep, it creates a conflict which will wipe out the rest of our military. Our stability score is rapidly decreasing, and will be strained. It will leave us even more vulnerable than before. At least now we can think about reinforcements, or at least out-stubborning them.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top