That seems like a good option! Though I like the idea of there being something they're both interested in and it kind being a stalemate of sorts, a cold war per se. Both sides waiting to make the first move but still defining something they are both vying for. For complete disengagement they just don't overlap.
I also like 5 as a good number of factions; alignment-wise arranged in a pentagon, each faction with two ally and two enemy factions and everyone with at least some conflict of interest. This is how colors in MtG are aligned.
I am trying this more or less right now and was wondering; have you considered having factions be hesitant towards each other?
That seems like a good option! Though I like the idea of there being something they're both interested in and it kind being a stalemate of sorts, a cold war per se. Both sides waiting to make the first move but still defining something they are both vying for. For complete disengagement they just don't overlap.
beautiful idea! I like the graphical simplicity of it. Thanks for sharing!
Thank you!
I also like 5 as a good number of factions; alignment-wise arranged in a pentagon, each faction with two ally and two enemy factions and everyone with at least some conflict of interest. This is how colors in MtG are aligned.
Yeah I feel like that’s plenty to power a campaign! Also gives PCs plenty choices of what to engage with but not too many!
Fabulous concept, I will certainly be making use of this going forward! And thank you for the mention, much obliged.
Fantastic to hear! And no problem, the sea fortress deserved a call out