[MUD-Dev] Guilds & Politics [was Affecting the World]

[Jon A. Lambert]

On 26 Nov 97 at 16:22, Mike Sellers wrote:
> >> > > On Thu 11 Sep, Jon A. Lambert wrote:
> >> > > > A politician holds a position.  That position should allow control
> >> > > > of certain environmental systems.  Those systems should affect the
> >> > > > game in positive and negative ways.  If there's nothing the
> >> > > > statesman can do, it's merely a title.  A couple things come to
> >> > > > mind. Allow statesmen to control taxes, pass laws, commission
> >> > > > buildings and improvements, regulate guilds, raise and equipment
> >> > > > armies, etc. Create positions that have effects on players.  
> 
> I think maybe I've posted on this before; I've definitely spoken in various
> places on the importance of player government.  This allows for people to
> play a variety of sub-games if they choose, or to ignore the whole thing
> almost entirely if they want.  It also provides a great, non-wiz way to
> address various IC greviances, and allows you to put stealing, PKing, etc.,
> in your game without making others effectively defenseless from them (or
> defenseless without deus-ex-machine solutions, such as we see in UO).  

I recall these posts in October, "Mud Governance".  My interest is less in 
the area of "governing" players or in providing means for players to solve 
grievances, although this is a pleasant and not unforeseen side-effect.  
I also have no desire to implement a universal mud government or a even 
governments designed with the player characters' happiness or freedom in 
mind.

My interest lies in implementing separate but inter-dependent political 
ecologies (or social ecologies like you mention at the end of this post).
These would form sub-games and players not inclined may opt out of the 
sub-games.  Although this would be rather difficult and undesireable to do 
in my game, but not for other themes.    

[snipped good example of city government]

My game is a collection of city-states with quite variable political 
structures.  Underlying your example city system would be subsystems of
merchant guilds, player run organizations, theological systems, military
politics, class politics, etc.  The potential web of interdependent social 
structures in a single city is mind-boggling and I feel is great fodder for 
game expansion.  Player merchants would play the guild game of aquisition, 
while player clerics might play a game of increasing worshippers and 
political influence.  Side interests in other games would naturally 
develop.  Player merchants and clerics would of necessity take great 
interest in the city mayor's policies and may even drive them.  Perhaps the 
mayor becomes merely a puppet of the merchant's guild... 

> 
> I'll write later (whenI have more time) on the importance of "social
> ecologies."  Just as we have producers, consumers, and decomposers in
> biological ecologies, similar closed-loop cycles are important in online
> societies, even in games.  Many of the social dysfunction problems we have
> are because we do not recognize the importance and position of all the
> social ecological roles, and thus the game quickly moves to an artificial
> point of stability, rather than reaching some sort of homeostatic
> equilibrium.  

I look forward to it.  The web of political ecologies does resemble the web 
of biological ecologies.  I would also posit that political ecology is 
dependent upon economic ecology which in turn is dependent upon 
biological/geological ecology.