Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Calling Wambat. ;)
A while back Wambat (I think) posted a discovery regarding the plunder bonus associated with traits and ancillaries - like the 'Expert Treasure-hunter' that you sometimes get after recruiting mercenaries. Apparently the plunder bonus doesn't actually work as advertised: i.e., the anc claims a 15% bonus to cash gained from looting, but you don't actually see that 15% extra income from exterminating a settlement.
I'd like to know whether the plunder bonus is *entirely* broken - as in, it does nothing at all - or if it is just "slightly" broken - as in, it gives some extra cash, but just not the expected amount.
I'm also open to a change regarding those traits & ancs. Depending on to what extent the feature is broken, we could substitute or add another effect to those ancs, to make them somewhat useful. The change would have to be fairly minimal, since in the case of the Expert Treasure-hunter type ancs, those are easy to acquire (the trigger is just recruiting mercs), and I don't want to unbalance things.
I'm thinking something like a modest discount to troop recruitment (as soldiers are eager to join a captain who is lucky & generous with wealth), maybe 5% cheaper. Possibly also a small line-of-sight bonus (as the anc represents the type of character who is searching high & low for opportunities).
Open to ideas!
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Damn! I got so used to the forums being quite you all caught me off guard. I will need to start checking in every day again. This is exciting.
+% to plunder simply does nothing. This is a vanilla issue.
I remember this discussion. I do not remember if I was the first to point it out or even the first to draw the conclusion, but I did do some experiments to verify, so I can attest to this first hand.
I would definitely endorse the -5% to recruitment cost and +1 to line-of-sight options to make the existing ancillaries relevant. I would choose one or the other for each ancillary. It is actually pretty easy to max your recruitment discount without ancillaries, so the -5% to recruitment should not be unbalanced.
What I really miss is the Hobbit ancillaries from TNS. Maybe they are still in DOM, but I haven't seen any while playing one of the WotW factions. If they are still there, or are brought back, they should definitely have the +1 to line-of-sight attribute; that is just about 90% of what Bilbo Baggins did for the trek to the Lonely Mountain.
Since we are on the subject of ancillaries, I should like to share a few ideas of possible ancillaries to add to the mod at some point:
Blue Wizards - Too lazy to look up their names, though I am pretty sure they are known. Each would be a unique ancillary that functions similarly to Herumor, but for WoD factions. The Blue Wizards were supposed to have traveled off to the east and south, so they should only be able to show up in WoD factions that border those directions: Harad and Rhun; perhaps spawnable by other WoD factions if they possess the required settlement(s). Only one Blue Wizard should be able to spawn in a faction, BUT, it is possible (just) to collect both the Blue Wizards by bribing a character from another faction that has acquired one.
No faction could start with one of these ancillaries, and can only acquire one by having a character with the right attributes resident in one of the required settlements. I would suggest Adel in the east, and Adabbara in the south, as they both border the edge of the map, and why not make that significant? Once the settlement has a fully developed cultural project line, and the faction contains NO other cultural buildings (no WotW or Cultic projects) there would be a small % chance per turn to spawn the associated wizard. The requirements for the character should be a bit less stringent than that required of the Elves to rebuild Ost-in-Edhil, but should not be forced to actually occur in a character the way they seem to be for the Elves. Obviously, the character should need to be fully committed to the WoD, and, perhaps, be intelligent and charismatic. I don't think he should have to be the faction leader, as this would make it nigh-impossible to collect all the Wizards.
Little, difficult to complete, achievements like these would help to enhance the replay value of the mod.
Rings - The fate of the Nine and the Seven is rather ambiguous. The Three were never touched by Sauron, so it is always possible that their fate cannot be assumed to represent that of the other rings of power. That is to say: it is always possible that, unlike the Three, the Seven and the Nine were actually destroyed, physically, when the One was unmade. However, if we chose to imagine they, like the Three, were not destroyed, but only made powerless by the destruction of the One, this would mean that these remaining artifacts would actually still exist somewhere on Middle Earth. And, while they would no longer have any magical powers, they would still have tremendous cultural significance to certain factions. These rings would provide a modest Authority bonus to the holder, and, possibly, to the Faction Leader, should he hold one. Naturally, each would be a unique ancillary, and very difficult to spawn. The spawning circumstances should be different for each based on the known fates of each.
The Dwarven Rings - We can presume Sauron possessed the three remaining rings of the Dwarven Kings in Barad-dûr; provided his emissary was not lying; and that, therefore, it would be theoretically possible to find these rings in the ruins of Barad-dûr. These rings (or, perhaps, just one of them) could only be found by the Dwarven faction, and only if the Dwarven faction is in possession of Barad-eden. The Dwarves would have to have their mines and cultural buildings fully developed in the province, and a character with the appropriate attributes in residence with a very small percentage change to spawn the ring(s) each turn. If it is decided that only one Dwarven ring should be able to spawn in a campaign, it could be made so that all three are possible until one has spawned, thus making each Dwarven campaign unique in that respect, and each ring could provide a slightly different set of bonuses, or, at least, it's own unique description of what is known of it's history.
The Nine - In theory, all nine could exist, with eight scattered across the plateau of Gorgoroth; possibly underneath tons of lava flow, and one, definitely, somewhere on the Pelennor Fields. In the case of these rings, I think it is advisable to make only the ring of the Witch-king spawnable. Unlike the Dwarven rings, which would all have been in one place, some distance from the lava flows of Mount Doom, the other eight rings of the Mannish kings would have either been scattered over a huge swath of inhospitable land, or actually have fallen into the lava flows from Mount Doom and potentially been destroyed by them. I would suggest allowing a Cultist faction to find the ring of the Witch-king if in possession of Minas-Arnor, with fully developed Cultist cultural buildings, and a character with appropriate attributes (and, perhaps, the Herumor ancillary) in residence. The character would then have a % chance each turn to find the ring; small, but probably better than the chance given the Dwarven rings considering the comparatively well-known circumstances of that ring's last known whereabouts.
In the alternative, any or all of these rings could spawn as heritable attributes under the same circumstances.
To reiterate: These rings would have no magical power. Any bonuses they provide would be due to the prestige allotted the holder due to the historical and cultural significance of the relic; in the same vein as the Ring of Barahir
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Thanks for the confirmation!
Some interesting ideas here.
Hobbit ancs: I think we took those out of DoM, although they *may* be available to the Shire faction... Possibly available to the RK as well? But in earlier iterations of the mod I think we found those ancs too frequent (the trigger was probably recruiting mercs). We may have them floating around in the files somewhere still. I wonder if they could be made available again to a few select factions, under select circumstances. Maybe to a Dwarf-lord in the Blue Mountains? Or to a Dwarf who takes over parts of the Shire? Or to an RK leader in Annuminas? Not sure what buildings would need to be present. Anyway, I'd say that the mercenary-recruitment trigger wouldn't work for them.
Wizards - The thing about the Blue Wizards is that we're not sure whether they helped further the goals of the Valar, or whether they went the other direction and decided to set themselves up as mini-Saurons or Sarumans in those faraway lands. (Tolkien wrote about both scenarios being possible.) Another thing is that, when Gandalf departs over the Sea, I think he says something about his Order (the Istari) being finished. Does this mean the Blue Wizards (& Radagast?) are somehow called back West? Or do they just ... dwindle away?
I suppose one thing we could do is make the ancs somewhat ambiguous: i.e., maybe these aren't the 'real' Blue Wizards, but they certainly want important chiefs to think they are ancient, mysterious, powerful beings. Maybe they're 'only' sorcerers, tribal cult-leaders, or what-have-you, but they're sinister and all too happy to have a reputation associated with those figures. This way we keep the lore uncertain (as it is in the few writings we have), and the player can make up his/her own mind.
I'm not sure about the triggers. I'm not too confident about doing more than the most basic trait-work, so I'd like to keep things super simple (unless anyone else feels like coding the ancs?). I'm not sure if traits or anc triggers can be tied to specific settlements. They can be tied to specific buildings. It would be cool to figure out some way to restrict these ancs to the 'edge-of-the-map' settlements, if we can. One thing that occurs to me is maybe we could tie them to the industry buildings: Incense Workshops can only be built in 'edge' settlements (I think the Incense resource is only available in 3 provinces: 1 in eastern Khand, and 2 in Far Harad). The ancs could be triggered by the presence of the tier-2 Incense Workshops. That would be nice, actually, as it would potentially be a gift for those 2 minor factions. One problem is, *any* faction can build those Workshops, and it would be annoying for, say, a Cultic Rhun or Harad who conquers those places and builds the Workshops to suddenly be saddled with a WoD-spreading anc.... but maybe we can also require the presence of WoD cultural buildings? I'd need to see how multiple conditionals work.
We'd want these ancs to be very rare, too, and that would probably mean having more than just a 'building is present' trigger - because, given enough time, even with the smallest possible % chance, the ancs will show up.
So, these ancs would have a bonus to WoD conversion ... anything else? Maybe a bonus to Law and a decrease to Public Order?
It'd be good to find some fitting art for them, too ... don't want to just use the Herumor image again.
Rings - I think it more likely that the Seven and the Nine are irrecoverable at this point: probably destroyed. It seems fitting that they would follow the fate of the One. I know there's no hard evidence for what happened to them, but it would be in keeping with the themes of the Fourth Age that the things of the Third (er, Second?) are passing away.
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
I second the approval of the proposed bonuses.
Maybe Alatar and Pallando (or some pupil of theirs) should only be available to North Rhûn, Khand, and Far Harad.
WRT rings, the only ones I could imagine as bein extant would be some lesser rings (with very minor effects, mainly prestige perhaps?) that weren't made by Sauron, and/or not included in his list of rings that should be controlled by the One.
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
athanaric
I second the approval of the proposed bonuses.
Maybe Alatar and Pallando (or some pupil of theirs) should only be available to North Rhûn, Khand, and Far Harad.
WRT rings, the only ones I could imagine as bein extant would be some lesser rings (with very minor effects, mainly prestige perhaps?) that weren't made by Sauron, and/or not included in his list of rings that should be controlled by the One.
What about Sarumaun's ring?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Interesting idea, but is it mentioned anywhere except in that one passage of LotR (Council of Elrond, IIRC; before Saruman was defeated)? I had assumed it perished with its owner. Or is there other information?
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
To my thinking, it is possible, give Saruman's experiments in ring-lore, that there might be several lesser rings of various sorts kept in Orthanc. https://www.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans...sarumans_ring/ The top answer on this thread pretty sums up my opinions on the matter. The key line to me is this: "To a mortal it (the ring of Saruman) would be a mighty prize, but to a Wizard it is a trifle." In the Dominion of Men, even the least of the rings, made in imitation of the lesser rings of old, is a mighty prize.
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
athanaric
Maybe Alatar and Pallando (or some pupil of theirs) should only be available to North Rhûn, Khand, and Far Harad.
D'oh! yes, that would be a straightforward way of doing it of course: limiting to certain factions. I wouldn't mind extending the possibility of acquisition to Rhun and Harad as well, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mersechal
What about Sarumaun's ring?
That would be more fitting, I'd say - but still I wonder if it would have survived, especially if it was at all bound up with the spirit of Saruman. Even if the material ring is still kicking around somewhere, do you suppose it would have any efficacy after the annihilation/departure of its maker?
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
There is precedent for Maia made rings surviving the destruction of their maker's body.
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
You mean the One and the Nine surviving after the Downfall of Numenor? That's true, but Saruman's destruction at the end of the Return of the King seems to me to be a more complete destruction than just the loss of his physical body. It's described like a mini-version of Sauron's ... dispersal(?) after the destruction of the Ring.
It also seems likely that Saruman's ring would have been discovered, had it been kept at Orthanc, around the same time that they found his stash of Isildur paraphernalia.
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Wouldn't Saruman retain more of himself in death, since he was whole and hadn't poured himself into a physical object before he died? Or would his "human" body have served a similar function as the Ring did to Sauron, allowing a portion of him to be permanently destroyed? It seems to me Saruman is doomed to the same fate as Sauron is now, to wander as a nameless spirit of malice forever. Whether that means crafts of his, such as rings, would be destroyed, I have no idea.
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Here's a far-fetched idea for ancillaries, palantír. I think there would be 2 that might be salvageable under certain conditions by certain factions. The Ithil-stone taken by Sauron, and probably lost in the fall of his tower. Can stones be destroyed? The Annuminas-stone, lost in the bay of the Snowmen. The Osgiliath and Amun-Sul stones are also lost, in the Anduin and the bay of Snowmen, but are too heavy to lift. But the Ithil and Annuminas-stones are the portable variety. It does not seem too implausible that one could find them.
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mersechal
To my thinking, it is possible, give Saruman's experiments in ring-lore, that there might be several lesser rings of various sorts kept in Orthanc.
https://www.reddit.com/r/tolkienfans...sarumans_ring/ The top answer on this thread pretty sums up my opinions on the matter. The key line to me is this: "To a mortal it (the ring of Saruman) would be a mighty prize, but to a Wizard it is a trifle." In the Dominion of Men, even the least of the rings, made in imitation of the lesser rings of old, is a mighty prize.
Saruman's ring, if it held any magic at all, was created by studying the ring making used to create the One, Three, Seven and Nine. Intrinsic to that particular magic art was a dependence upon Sauron's native magic. Thus, even the Three, made before the one and never touched by Sauron, lost their power with the destruction of Sauron. For this reason, I would doubt greatly that any rings forged by Saruman would retain any power after the fall of Sauron.
I am not in favor of introducing overtly magical items into this mod. The theme of the Fourth Age is a conventional world built on passed ages that were touched by magic, and we have no lore upon which to base such rings (as in names, properties, and history of the item), and lore adherence is one of the greatest assets of this mod. The rings I suggested would have bonuses based purely on the notoriety and historical significance of the artifact to the faction that could hold them; no magical properties. While the Dwarven faction would treasure one of the Seven, and a Cultist faction would treasure one of the Nine, there is no faction in the Fourth Age mod that would have any reverence for the relics of Saruman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mersechal
Here's a far-fetched idea for ancillaries, palantír. I think there would be 2 that might be salvageable under certain conditions by certain factions. The Ithil-stone taken by Sauron, and probably lost in the fall of his tower. Can stones be destroyed? The Annuminas-stone, lost in the bay of the Snowmen. The Osgiliath and Amun-Sul stones are also lost, in the Anduin and the bay of Snowmen, but are too heavy to lift. But the Ithil and Annuminas-stones are the portable variety. It does not seem too implausible that one could find them.
These are the only overtly magical items in the mod currently, to my knowledge.
I am pretty sure the only stones that could reasonably be in circulation are already represented by heritable traits. I think this is appropriate as it is stressed that right of ownership is important if one is to use them profitably (so not as appropriate to be sharing them willy-nilly as ancillaries).
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wambat
I do not remember if I was the first to point it out or even the first to draw the conclusion, but I did do some experiments to verify, so I can attest to this first hand.
That would be me, actually.
Also, its not that the traits dont work. They work, but they cap at 9% and since there are already other bonuses on this mod that exceed that 9% bonus, the trait becomes useless.
I posted that on the "ask your questions here" thread. Its everything there, why the traits seems to doesnt work, etc. just search for it, the posts are around the page 177
Re: Plunder bonus and traits/ancs
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guedes
That would be me, actually.
Also, its not that the traits dont work. They work, but they cap at 9% and since there are already other bonuses on this mod that exceed that 9% bonus, the trait becomes useless.
I posted that on the "ask your questions here" thread. Its everything there, why the traits seems to doesnt work, etc. just search for it, the posts are around the page 177
Thanks for that clarification. I always thought it a weird oversight by the programmers. I am happy to see it was not; though perplexed, as in most cases, that a cap was incorporated at all. Silly programmers.
