Nomadic Packs and Split Territory Claim Discussion

[Forest Family]

So this idea popped into my head, and I guess it’s decided to stick around because it’s paying rent in serotonin.

I posed this question in ‘Souls chat: Do pack territory claims have to be connected? Or could a nomadic group become an official pack with two, disconnected patches of territory if they added up to the same space?

The immediate ‘SA response from Mel was: “We'd probably have to have a discussion about it, but logistically, it would probably make more sense for there to be two separate groups working towards a common goal vs one at that point.”

And Bud and Vida contributed a few more ideas, like two small, sister packs whose members are officially part of one or the other for board reasons, but function as one pack and have free reign to move between the territories (Bud), and one long territory that the pack moved their living quarters across from time to time (Vida).

And I wanted to talk about it more! Because sure, you could do this with a loner band, but that doesn’t have any of the fancy pack things like territory claims or forums! I think one long territory would probably be easiest, but navigating the challenges of a split claim (through approval and beyond) sounds like it could be pretty fun.

Also down to discuss ideas for a nomadic pack in general, because my brain is whirring right now. A pack with multiple claims along the coast? One that spends the summer in the mountains and winters at a lower elevation? Have they always been nomadic, or are they an offshoot of a non-nomadic pack? Nomadic pastoralism??

[Lorraine]

Nomadic groups have been considered and toyed around with in the past; one such instance was Sharga, which was based on the Mongol Empire and ultimately proved unfeasible.

Something worth considering when it comes to nomadic packs and 'Souls in general is that it would create a lot of extra maintenance not only for the pack leaders in question, but the 'Souls Assemblage as well. Even if they were traveling between two static claims, you'd still be constantly maintaining, updating, and creating landmarks, for example.

Another thing to consider is that someone might very well wish to create a new pack in one of this nomadic group's locations; do the nomads find a new location, or stop their traveling ways?

[Forest Family]

You know what, I completely forgot about Sharga. It seemed like such an interesting concept, and I was really disappointed that it didn't come to fruition.

I'd imagine as long as the claims remained static, it wouldn't be significantly more work than creating and maintaining landmarks for any other pack. But other logistical concerns would undoubtedly arise, and it would be a more complex situation than one connected claim. An actual moving claim would require updating maps, for example, which would be a real pain in the butt for the 'SA and probably not a great idea.

I imagine it would vary based on a lot of things, both IC and OOC. A pack returning to a location only to discover it's being used by another group would have quite the problem on their hands, especially if members had stayed behind to maintain the territory; did they abandon it, were they chased off, or were they killed? And why didn't they tell the rest of the pack? I think it could result in a lot of interesting plot opportunities that wouldn't play out the same for a stationary pack with a single claim.

If a nomadic-themed pack came to be anytime soon, I imagine the best compromise would probably be a thin territory that expanded with membership, and groups of members using neutral territories for nomadic pastoralism, temporary lodging, and resource gathering that was unavailable in the pack's claim. And because of loner bands existing as they do, a small group could organize in an official capacity rather easily and enjoy similar plot opportunities on a less time-consuming, logistically complicated scale.

[Kiri]

Some thoughts.

Nomadic pack

OOC considerations: updating the map constantly would definitely be a pain in the ass, but it would be a pain for players to keep track of even if we had something like a seasonal map. Given the average rate of thread progression, fluid time, and many players not dating threads explicitly, this could make threads in a pack forum extra confusing, too.

IC considerations: it wouldn't be feasible for a nomadic pack to maintain many longstanding structures if the whole pack moves together. Territories they leave for a season would be up for grabs to anyone -- including cosmic weather forces, and a pack wouldn't be able to respond to disaster damage, etc. Any members left behind on territories while the rest of the pack moves on wouldn't really be able to defend it anyway.

Traditionally, nomadic groups followed their prey, and while prey movement remains a thing, playable territories are abundant enough that this isn't super necessary, and the pursuit of humanisation more or less requires a static location -- after all, humans were nomadic for hundreds of thousands of years before they began settling for agriculture, and it was only then that they saw a rapid development of technology due to being able to more easily share information with each other, etc. The progression of human society in the last few thousand years is a mere blip in the totality of human history. Humans remained very much the same in their long careers as nomadic people, but as soon as they settled, everything changed very quickly. (See: a great video about this.)

More feral packs definitely still exist in 'Soulsverse, though there hasn't been one in-game for quite some time.

Back to an OOC perspective, a lot of the early speciesism drama in the game has been replaced in part with feral VS humanised Luperci drama, especially has more characters become hybridised, but even though that conflict is fun to write, I think most players have developed more of a preference for humanised Luperci as it's closer to what they know and gives them more options for character hobbies/projects. Even in 'Souls's earliest days, many players never cared for "mundane wolf"-type threads like hunting threads and instead there was a lot of focus on exploring human ruins and trying to glean what they could from artifacts (so even when the game was way, way more feral, there was a fixation on humans, human philosophy, and human technology, which isn't surprising, since our game is built on the human extinction), along with plenty of requisite character drama.

Split territory pack

I think this is a lot more feasible both from an IC and OOC perspective. There might be many reasons a pack wants both area A and area B, if they have the members to protect both areas. Having a thin strip of territory connecting two areas also makes sense, since it'd prevent members from having to traverse off-territory in order to get between A and B. There can be a lot of interesting development from a pack controlling something like a highway or other road, especially as travel between packs and major port hubs/etc become increasingly common.

That said, a strip of highway is harder to defend than a more compact territory claim. The more stretched out a territory is, the more border there is to protect. Something long and thin like a road would have tons of places for people to cross -- which may or may not matter, depending on how the pack is set up.

Having two packs be affiliated in some way can also work depending on what the ultimate goal of this scenario is. There can be a lot of fun plot things that come with this, too, like broken pacts, betrayals, coups, etc, whether that's between two territories of one pack or two packs that are closely associated...

[Forest Family]

I swore I replied to this. Thank you for your thoughts, Kiri! I'm a little wobbly mentally right now to respond in too much detail, but I really appreciate your input.

A split territory pack or two packs would definitely be easier, and a better idea from an IC and OOC perspective; less trouble, with just as much room for interesting plot developments. I hadn't even thought of two groups from the same pack becoming at odds with each other due to their distance, such as how territory less favored by their leader may grow resentful of their frequent absence, and now my brain is full of ideas!