Agreed. That's the sort of thing I'd like to see more of. Different factions being aware of each other and the world they live in. Just like in Morrowind where every faction had some relation to the history of Vardenfell and had a certain - historically grown - stance towards other factions. Faction-related questlines should also somehow take notice of the bigger crisis (ie main quest) at hand, perhaps even trying to change the course of events to make the circumstances more agreeable with their own agendas.

Hmm.. Why would I spend money on an incomplete game?
I would buy a new car if the wheels came separate, at 4 month intervals? Doesn't seem like a bargain.

Call me a cranky old coot, but I would prefer the game to be complete and enjoyable straight from the box.
DLC's are great, but they should be add-ons and expansions. Their role is not to complete a halfbaked game, IMO.
I will buy TES5, but I don't want to subscribe to it.

//Rantmode terminated//

Heck yes! And bring back the Legion!

Basically what everybody else has said...more more more, but also more conflict between them. Yes, if you are in two competing guilds, you could find a way around direct choice between one or the other, but only if your character has the right skills or the player has made the right decisions. Although, if you have enough factions it is alright to make some un joinable if you are in another, just like Morrowind was with the Great Houses

Or, maybe you are truly a thief at heart and have no compunction on robbing the Mages and Fighters blind in the name of the Gray Fox.

The problem with Oblivion was the only factions you could join were essentially guilds. There needs to be other kinds of groups that are joinable factions, as people have said. Bandits, other criminals (skooma smugglers) necromancers, all the ones from Morrowind except maybe Dunmer Temple (but local religion instead) and Great Houses, although I think a few Camona Tong missions would be good for assassin characters who aren't as nefarious as DB, Imperial Guard, town guard, merchants, bards and minstrels, trophy hunters, witch hunters, bargain hunters, smiths, ....

This is probably not going to be a popular suggestion,

but there should be some sort of limit to how many guilds you could lead at the same time.

It's just kind of silly to think one man could lead the temple, imperial legion, fighter's guild, mage's guild, ect ect at the same time.

I guess you could tackle this a number of different ways, but I think honorably exiting a guild and picking your successor (ie pick one of the npcs giving you all the quests to succeed you) is the cooler option.

Or, how about not making each questline end with you becoming the faction's leader? That always felt a bit silly to me in the first place (or at least a bit contrived in some cases). You could still give the player perks, privileges or whatnot for reaching a certain status.

Shades,

In the 4th era the Mages guild is replaced by the Synod and College of Whispers

I would LOVE to see that if you join one guild you can not join another...

Another thing I would like to see is Guild Dues and to actually SEE the progress that the guild is making... (Ex For Fighter's Guild how about once X amount of contracts are completed more additions to the Guild armor). Also can I TAKE A CONTRACT OUT with the Fighters Guild or DB.

dbug

Some of what you say makes no sense?
- Why would 'goodly knight' be adversaries to other Knightly orders...unless those are evil knights?
- If the Trade Factions opposes the Thieves Guild, Marauders and Bandits then they would be law-abiding one would assume...yet you say the Imperial Navy opposes them in some cases.
- The Imperial Navy hates Knights...err why...are these the evil Knights again?
- Why are Witch Covens evil? Aren't they a Religious Faction like Wiccan anyway?
- Why do Fighters oppose Knights? Again-- are these evil Knight or all Knights?

Wouldn't it be easier to just say law abiding or law enforcement factions are against law breaking and/or evil factions? Neutral factions are only against evil factions, and often turn a blind eye to common law breakers. Evil factions don't give a damn they are against abiding or law enforcement factions, often neutral to everyone else, but have no problem crossing anyone even each other. If you want to have a humorous rivalry between Imperial Navy and Imperial Army like the US Navy having a rivalry with the US Army that's fine but don't codify a beef between then in the game. Remember 90% of this will be AI. You don't want the Imperial Navy trying to stop a pirate when all of a sudden an Imperial Guard walk up and bashes the Navy guy on the head because these two branches of the service have beef.

There are no goodly knight organizations, I don't mean these guys would be independent like the Knights Hospitaller or something. The Knightly factions would be more like the Knights of the White Stallion, or the Order of the Hawk, or the Knights of the Wheel. These knights serve the political ambitions of their masters, who are kings and noblemen. It would be like joining one of the great houses of Morrowind. This means you don't have to be a sword swinging warrior to be a knight, you just have to serve the master.

The Trade factions are just as law abiding as our modern trade factions are. Like Goldman Sachs. Ok, not that bad, but trade organizations do have great potential to commit illegal acts. The Navy keeps them honest when they can.

If the situation calls for the knightly faction to work against the navy, then they do it.

Witch covens aren't evil in the TES universe. They are just off the grid. Access to magic without the Mage's Guild. They deal with daedra, but the mage's guild has summoning rooms too. Some witch covens are more evil, some are benevolent, but the Mage's guild opposes them all because they don't control that magic.

The Fighters guild opposes whoever they are paid to. I was thinking that if you need instant muscle on your side, you get the Fighter's guild to help. Many times people who can afford to do that would be fighting other political factions, like the Knightly Guilds. Knightly Guilds should look down on these mercenaries in the games because they don't commit to a cause.

There is a large separation between regional forces and the Imperial forces. Regional forces take care of most of the violence going around, Imperial forces are rarely strong enough to put a stop to it all. So the Imperial forces don't try to stop it, they just try to make the outcome work best for the Empire. They fight to keep things from getting out of hand, and therefore the nobles of the region try to win the affection of the Imperial Majesty so they will get more leeway from the Legions. The actual Imp Legion and Imp Navy should never oppose each other. Neither should be the bully on the block either.

I'm also not suggesting any of the factions should be viewed as evil. Not even the Brotherhood, because they are the best ones at discouraging murder. They don't allow other people to screw around with contract killing.

Nice Discusion guys! I couldn't of said any of this better, I agree with all of it. Ever since I started with the TES Series (Started with Morrowind) I always wished you could become just a plain old gaurd.

Shades, you bring authority and organization to our wisps of suggestions.

factions should have basic requirements to join. some factions should be mutually exclusive. if you join the dark brotherhood then you should not be able to join the thieves guild or mages guild since they dont like the DB. the fighters guild might take you since you can fight after all and would be useful, but only after you prove yourself. i hate oblivion where you can become leader of the known universe yet make no enemies.

A few points:

1. Quality over quantity. Daggerfall's guildfolk were downright disposable (due to NPCs having little to no personality whatsoever). Morrowind... don't believe what you read on the forums, the factions are no deeper than Oblivion (except maybe the Great Houses, but they all need ten minutes alone with me in a dark room anyway...), in that most of the time it was simply "show up, do quest, get paid, to hell with you and on to the next quest-giver". And the Fighter's Guild always svcks. The only guild characters I've ever liked are a few Mage's Guild folk in Oblivion, even fewer in Morrowind, the Cheydinhal DB (except that stupid kitty cat. I enjoy beating his face in bad enough he dies of a hairball), and selected TG members from both games. The rest of the characters... annoying (Varon Vamori. Poetic, but could you please not be LOUD and FRIENDLY about my illicit activities?), jerks (Fathis Ules, who doesn't understand that money isn't the only coin), or terminally stuck-up (that Legion guy in Morrowind).

2. I don't like absolute conflicts on the basis of "need more conflict". Conflict needs to make sense, and in many cases, it should be resolvable. Not always, but it makes no sense to pit the Fighter's Guild against the Synod or whoever just to have conflict. Now, if the Synod and College of Whispers are both in-game, it's within reason to ask that both not be joinable (although it would be a heck of a writing job to work in an exceedingly narrow path by which the player could accomplish most of both guild before taking a final side). While there are benefits, there are likewise benefits to offering a narrow and possibly less rewarding path to skirt at least most of the conflict.

3. Sensible mutual exclusion is no substitute for letting the player have it both ways for a while. Suppose you COULD join the Synod and the CoW, but you could had a hard limit to how far you could advance before the dual membership stopped you. That would be bad, if that was it. Allowing you to pick sides once that point you, though? Now you've given the player a much more meaningful choice. With flat-out exclusion, you had "A, B, or NONE". With this, you have "A, B, A/2+B/2, or none". It's one additional option, and doesn't impose an otherwise uninformed choice on the player. Maybe when I was starting out, the College of Whispers was open and welcoming, but as I grew in experience, I realized I agree with the Synod more. Well, limiting progress with a dual membership (with a way to renounce one) allows me to have this realization that would have been impossible if we strictly limited access.

4. Asking for enough exclusive factions to require a bunch of playthroughs is a non-starter for Bethesda because it would involve so much content that would be seen by so few people. While it appeals to forumites, the reality is that this is not effective game design for a business. For mod-makers who have no need to show a profit? It's grand. A business, however, has to justify expenditures, and even $10,000 on a faction that's not even touched by 57% of the audience is $10,000 they can reasonably argue should be put into making Daedric Armor pulse in a heartbeat rhythm to make it creepier and more evil-looking, since that would be seen by a much larger share of the audience.

5. Even my circle of real-life associates might play through a TES game a whole 3 times. Five or six playthroughs would be pushing my ability to sustain an interest (I could start an 8th or 9th playthrough, but not complete it)

Would I like more factions? Maybe. If we get them, they need to actually be quality factions with people we can grow to like (or hate), rather than the Oblivion Fighter's Guild, who would inspire pity but for the fact that they don't ven try hard enough to make you want to feel compassion for them. They act all tough, and for all the bluster, Carwen is friendlier, smarter, and more steadfast as a guildmate...

Please no strict division to "good" and "bad" guilds, or "law abiding" and "criminal" guilds. That is so painfully black and white! We definitely need more ambiguity. The conflicts between factions should not come from a difference in their morality (as there should not be anything like a morality of a whole guild), but from the fact that some people do the same kind of think for a different reason. This should answer why different knightly orders would oppose each other. It should not be so that the knightly orders are all good and holy, but more an arm of a noble, duke, whomever or dedicated to one of the divine. Like that they would sure oppose each other.
Trade factions would sure oppose those who wish to steel form them, they would also oppose smugglers, especially because they are a competition (not out of loyalty to the empire) and they might hold a strong grudge against the authorities who restrict them. I can even imagine that most of the trade factions would have their own smugglers.
Why the imperial forces do not agree with local forces? Well, the Imperial forces, like the imperial legion or navy what to promote the empire as a whole, but do care about the provinces only as a second thought. The knightly orders would work on the opposite basis, they want to promote the regional influence even at the cost of the empire.

I actually like Shade's list a great deal. But I do not think that all those guild should be actually exclusive. Rather they should hold grudges minor or bigger towards each other. Like in Morrowind, where you could join the Mages' Guild and the Telvanni at the same time, but you had a hard time, because you did not get any disposition bonuses.

And on another note:
We sure need more guilds and better stories for them all. Not all of them should be about a great thread to the guild only you can stop. That does get tiring after a short while. Also joining a guild should give you some nice advantages and boosts. Not only when you make it to the last rank, but all the time. The choice of the guild should not only be about role-playing, but also about your strategies and playstile, not only because of the quests you will receive, but also because of the rewards you will get.

From thirty to fifteen, then to four. So YES there should be more joinable factions! At LEAST 30.

Okay I now see where some of you are coming with when you define an adversarial faction to another faction. But how does this work out in AI?

We want more factions. We want shades of gray not good, bad, neutral.

But how does the AI handle these rivalries in a way you would notice or is it just dialogue. You join a faction and you are told "We don't like knights of any kind, and they don't like us so don't expect help?" But how would that be shown in real terms....

- knights just stand around when you are in a fight with a monster?
or
- knights would help you fight a monster, but afterward insult you to your face?

And as I said how would these factional rivalries play out in AI. It can't just be you getting the cold shoulder in interaction and then the NPC's pass by and say to each other, "Hello...I hate mud crabs...good day." If these factions have rivalries how does that play out in the game.

In the end I think adding a whole level of rivalries that make sense, effect the game, and can play out in dialogue and actions would just be added work that adds less to the game then we might think. I think it is just easier to code an action and make a dialgue where the faction is somewhat contained and when they see you they come at you. Its is hader to code 'indifference' when they see you or 'barely veiled hostility' when they see you. It easy to have NPCs call you a 'son of a silly person and your mother smells of edldiberry' then then trying to write "That was an extodinary show of force...[scarcasm]"

Morrowind showed factional rivalries mainly by a combination of disposition modifiers and occasional comments in the dialog. There were a few outright conflicts, but those were pretty minimal, and which I had no problem with in most cases. A charater could still do MOST of them, without a huge amount of trouble, but the different requirements made it easier or harder to do one or the other.

The total lack of minimum requirements and near-total isolation of each faction from the others in Oblivion made it not only possible, but quite easy, to join, advance in, and eventually "master" several "competing" factions or groups, while lacking any specific skills for that "trade" or "ideology". Granted, a guild needs some "diverse" skills, so the skill requirements shouldn't be extreme, but a complete lack of ability in a field that you're supposed to be the "acknowledged expert" in is inexcusable.

In most cases, rivalries should be "minor", and could be covered by occasional comments and minor "inconveniences" if you belong to the "other side": "Sorry, I can't sell that item to YOU". In a FEW more extremely specific cases, there could be mutually exclusive quests against another faction, which would require a declaration or demonstration of one's loyalties. Being in the other faction would put a firm halt on your participation. In most cases, there should be no problem, as long as you meet the minimum standards. In my opinion, ONE character should simply not be able to do everything for every faction in the game, but no more than three or four play-throughs should be enough to cover just about all of them, if you really worked at it.

who would not want more factions?

Knight helps you fight the mosnter and says, "I never ealised that a (insert faction name) could be such a good fighter."

Most should be through dialogue and scripted encounters. You shouldn't meet these people too often otherwise.

If the monster is in a town and you aren't a wanted criminal, they help you fight it. If you are outside of a town and are bitter rivals, they let the monster try to finish you, then move in.

They play out in the storyline of the quests.

The problem with this poll is that more of good thing is always better. Since game development is based on schedule and funding, more of one thing typically means less of something else.

Having said that, I did enjoy the interaction between the Morrowind factions. I also agree with earlier statements that every faction doesn't necessarily need to be going through a huge crisis for its quest line to be memorable or enjoyable. For example, I believe the general consensus is that fans enjoyed the Great House quest lines, despite the livelyhood of the houses not being at stake.

That is one of the things about Oblivion though; everything is about to collapse and you have to try and fix it. you don't sucseed though

I am also of the opinion all the factions should not be joinable at the same time. And I think unless you really can lead a guild, you should not be made leader of a guild. (I mean, the reactions to "you are now the archimage" should not be "ORLY ? Why can't I tell those f*ckers in the guild halls what to do" ?

I think at the beginning of the game, only those factions should be joinable.

Fighter's guilds
Mages Guild.
Imperial Cult : (similar to Morrowind's with different type of missions)

Those should be the core factions if you don't play a local, but an outlander (to reuse Morrowind's word). If you can play a local, then those guilds should be replaced by the local equivalent. (the Brute association, the nerd clubs and the Kyne Fan Club).
Both side are not completely incompatible (except the religions), but you can't join the "other" faction until your reputation toward them is good enough. And odds are they will be tensions between them that will force you to choose a side.

Other factions should be invitational.
If you kill a lot of people (because of the main quest, because of some miscellaneous quest or for fun), the Dark Brotherhood will ask you to stop working freelance and to join. Same for thievery and the Thieves Guild.

If you are reputedly loyal to the Emperor (member of the Imperial Cult) and a competent fighter (weapon skill above 50% or something), you'll be recruited by the Imperial Legion to join a special forces. (the most gruntish Imperial Legion missions from Morrowind could be given by the Imperial Cult here)

If your fame is high, then other factions will start trying to hire you. What faction tries to get you depends on your achievements / skills. (for example, freedom fighters, local nobility (equivalent of Morrowind's Great Houses), Knights Orders and stuff) and most of them are incompatible between them or with the "core" guilds. (you can't be a member of an "imperial" faction and a member of a great house... But then, both Empire and Great House could want a mole in the other faction...)

It requires the return of Daggerfall's reputation system. The possibilities would be endless. Maybe it would make the game shorter because there would be plenty you would not be able to do with a single character, but it would increase dramatically the replayability.

agreed