Citizenship Without Property

What are people's thoughts on offering citizenship or affiliation to certain cities/towns/villages when a player does not own any property in them? Basically, additional options for the vast majority of players who will not be land owners playing the game. Affiliating yourself with a city or town could offer some sort of benefit to players who choose to call that area their home, perhaps at the expense of being taxed. Maybe a vendor discount (like discounted reags for being in the UO Mage's Guild) for NPC purchases or repairs in your home town, or something more creative like access to a better forge or some such. The public vendors in the bazaar may take a slightly smaller chunk of your money if you put your items up for sale at home vs. abroad out in other cities.

Taxes could escalate between village, town, and city citizenship but offer benefits on par with the cost and convenience. It is still unclear how recalling or "hearthing" might be handled, but being a member of a city could set your default recall spot there. As you progress through the game, you may choose to move out of your village and into a town and so forth. Citizenship could offer another sense of progression as their character can begin to afford hanging out by the bank and doing the bulk of their business in larger cities. I am also all for additional money sinks.

Players not owning houses, and there will be lots of them, will naturally still want to be a part of a greater community and have a "home base" to return to for their day to day business. I feel this could be an elegant solution to the sense of nomadic loneliness players might feel who play casually or just cannot afford to get into the crowded housing market. Nothing would restrict players from frequenting any town they please, but a sense of belonging could go a long way to making you feel like you live somewhere in this awesome world even when you do not own a house.

 

I think anyone who wants one willl eventually be able to have their own house. But if not, I think you have some great ideas.

 

I also think this is a good idea. Land/property ownership should not be the only way players should feel an attachment or citizenship in a village/town/city. Perhaps they work in the local gardens, move some material from point a to b, and thus have a job in the city. NPCs say good morning to them by name since they know the person. Some shops offer the person a discount.

I like the idea of an exit from citizenship too -- if someone violates certain laws or rules, or they don't come around much anymore.

 

Thanks guys. As far as guilds go, people will join guilds and find a sense of belonging with other players no matter what type of housing or town system the game offers. I guess the feeling I am trying to convey is what about solo players or single player folks who want to feel attached to the world itself? And not just these folks, but even very social players. I believe there would be some value in giving homeless players a greater connection with the world and environment from the game itself and not just from other players.

How many houses there will be? I believe RG said housing and plots will be "vast" however he still wants housing to be difficult to obtain. All of us who play at launch will probably get ourselves housing, but what happens when you have 100K players? 200k? There will be even more players than this sharing the same persistent world since there are no "servers." I do not see 100K houses being available, so I think there is still some value to letting people be a part of all those cities and towns in some meaningful way.

@Winfield, I love the idea of NPCs dealing with you more personally if you are a resident there. Maybe living in a town could offer more town specific quests that only members of the same community could be trusted with. Why would a merchant trust a stranger to help him recover a stolen necklace when he's got some adventurous neighbors to call upon?

 

It'd make sense if you got the trust of the village/town/city/region after being registered to the place for a certain time, perhaps things would add up as you lived there for longer, as a result people wouldn't change their hometown all the time looking for special discounts That's if such system was going to happen of course. I like this idea. It'd make the choice of your homeplace meaningful and a reason to do business there.

I probably won't be buyinga a house, my choice will most likely be a gypsy wagon - it'll suit my playstyle. But this idea would probably lead to creating a bond with a specific location in the game. +1.

 

I think it would be kinda cool if Lords could hire on people as Serfs to work their farmland, mines and forests. They would split the resources they find and gold they earn with the Lord in return for access to a small personal space in a manor house or a castle.

Heck, sounds like a guild to me.

 

@LordSlack I do think a good model of your idea is in the present Ultima Online MMORPG. By doing certain deeds you gain virtue in one of the cities and in return you can obtain city titles. This was expanded recently by having a Mayor of each city that the player base can submit and vote on.

@Grimkor - Interesting idea but I don't think the Town and city houses lots will offer much in resources. Of course The Lord - Lord of the Manor won't own vast spaces of land. I agree with you that your idea is a guild.

LordG

 

I like this idea too - it adds a bit of depth to the role playing. Everyone should come from somewhere and not just always be nameless hordes passing through. What kind of a coherent world is it where a small percentage of the population has regional/community ties and the vast majority wander as nomadic world travelers without attachments? Doesn't make sense from a story perspective.

Why couldn't someone be attached to a locality plus also member of a guild? I don't see it has to be one or the other.

No matter the housing situation there will always be new players working hard to obtain property who can't at the moment or those who don't want it for whatever reason.

 

I really like this idea as long as it doesn't mean players with housing miss out on things though.

 

What?! Like a Vagrant!? you wont be tolerated in my town!

(Calling a town home but having no dwelling....)

 

@Sir Mishri: I refer to those people as homeless, or beggars, but the people with houses will probably be the 1%-10% when it goes public.

 

I would love it if the area was open pvp and we paid taxes for some guards or players to chase the criminals out of town.
I mean what else do we need taxes for?
Unless the house could catch on fire.

 

@jondavis: maybe decorating the town for some in game holiday like harvest, or maybe pay to upgrade village into a town with enough money, maybe astatic improvements to the city like aqueducts, fountains ect.

 

Wouldn't it be more fun to have some lawless towns vs some more secure towns?

I'm still not sure if your open for attack based on where you are at in the game or based on what mode of play you have switched to.
Or both.

 

@Jondavis Yes I think having some sleezy towns where dandys don't quite fit in would be cool. Or at least quarters of the cities where scoundrels could go for a little illegal R&R or to find quests that only unsavory folks would be interested in. Mos Eisley, Thieves World, Tortuga come to mind.

 

It could be the town underneath the surface.