S3rgeus's Wheel of Time Mod

1 – INTRODUCTION

A – Channeling in the WoT

For me, channeling the one power – especially the saidin/saidar dynamic, and the taint on saidin in particular – is one of the most iconic aspects of the WoT series. In order for this mod to capture the "feel" of the WoT universe, this is one of the things that needs to be right.

There are a few aspects to this that should ideally be captured, in that they are pretty central to the books (and thus the "WoT Experience”). These are things that are highly memorable, that WoT readers probably remember for years. I think these are the following:

1. Differences/separation between the male and female halves of the source
2. the taint on saidin, and the madness it entails – and of course the chaos that brings to the world (especially via False Dragons and such)
3. Gentling
4. The Three oaths, warders, and other aes sedai specific things.
5. A'dam, sul'dam, and enslavement of channelers.

Of somewhat less importance, but still cool, are the following:

1. Ajah specialties/different strengths and Talents
2. Different kinds of channelers (wilders, kinswomen, wise ones, aes sedai, asha'man etc.)
3. Angreal/sa'angreal/ter'angreal
4. Power-neutralizing locations and items (stedding, Guardian ter'angreal, Mat's foxhead medallion)
5. Tel'aran'rhiod
6. The True Power

B – Design Concerns and Challenges

1. As stated, make it feel like WoT
2. Make it fair and balanced. This is especially true of civs with powerful or numerous channelers (Seanchan), or those without any or at least potentially hostile relations with them (potentially Tear and Amadicia)
3. Make limits around the Three Oaths – and the lack of nationality of aes sedai - both fair and fun (instead of annoying). Having to defend an aes sedai with a warder when at war with a regular civ (i.e., not a shadowspawn or darkfriend) should add strategy and fun, not feel like a pain.
4. Make the potential destruction caused by powerful-but-mad male channelers feel like a real scary thing – in the books, people are horrified by the idea of male channelers. The use of male channeling units should, following the books, be essentially not worth the risk, until the organization-potential of the Black Tower, and, of course, the cleansing of saidin.
5. Make the taint on saidin a fun mechanic, rather than an annoying one. You should be able to employ male channelers as a sort of cooky strategy. And, of course, if false dragons pop up, they should be scary, but fun to deal with.
6. Make the different channeler units reflect the color of the WoT universe, without becoming too overly complex.
7. Based on the flavor of WoT, channeling should be rather rare, but quite powerful. Armies should likely only have one or two channelers. Recall in the final book how channelers are killing trollocs by the thousands – this sense of power should be present, but should also be kept from getting out of control.

I should note here that I am taking into consideration previous disagreements on the relative strengths and importance of various types of channelers. I'll get into more detail on this in the Aes Sedai section below, but suffice it to say for now that I think, given the "highly memorable" and central-to-the-WoT experience qualifiers I stated above, the channeling proposals set forth here somewhat "revolve" around Aes Sedai. Merited or not, the Aes Sedai are absolutely the most significant channeling force in the book's narrative, and thus in the minds of most readers – so in my opinion, the same should be true with our game (in order to capture the proper “feel”).

C – Process

The "proposals" I'm outlining here are really a set of choices. I'm not making epic determinations as to what I definitely think we should do. I'm trying to better develop the different alternatives, many of which have been alluded to or briefly outlined previously. Since a choice on one thing very likely might cause us to make a different choice on another thing, this very quickly could turn into a complicated mess. I've tried to lay things out in an easy way such that we can reasonably keep track of the options we decide, and the discussion en route to those decisions. My hope is that you, in your replies, try to maintain the terminology and/or structure presented here in your references, so it becomes clear exactly what you're talking about.

At the end of each subsection, I've laid out a set of Required Decisions, and numbered/labeled them. These will help us keep track of which things still need to be addressed.

This is obviously quite long, but what I've tried to do is lay out rationale in as clear a manner as possible, to ensure that we're all on the same page. I really don't feel comfortable "telling you how to read" it or "how to answer," but some suggestions I have, in order to save us a lot of trouble:

1. Try to use my terms and words – if you don't like them, please suggest alternatives, but in our discussion, please use mine (until we "officially" change them), so we don't get lost.
2. Try to use my section labels if you aren't going to directly quote them (2A, 2B), etc. It's probably best if we "tag" any following discussion that doesn't include the original text (e.g. "re: 2A, channeler types"). One we get to quoting-the-quote, things would otherwise get very confusing.
3. Similarly, if you're stating a clear preference for an opinion in regards to a specific choice, reference the Required Decision I've listed (e.g., 2A.3). If I've forgotten one, create a new one. When a Required Decision gets settled, we may benefit from marking it very clearly (e.g. @settled 8B.3).
4. Try to read it all before you comment. This is painful, I know – it's super long – but I don't want to waste your time by having you suggest something, or disagree with something, only to find that it is brought up and dealt with later in the document. I hope it isn't too presumptuous for me to say that I think you guys kinda need to read all of it for us to be productive in our discussion. This took a lot of time to put together, so I think a fruitful discussion unfortunately requires some time to be put in on your end – sorry if this slows things down for all of us.

Anyways, long intro over – on to my actual ideas.

2 – TYPES OF CHANNELERS AND ACQUISITION

A – Types

Generally speaking, the channelers in the WoT break down into two groups: the Aes Sedai and Everyone Else. More accurately, though, and with consideration for game balancing and design, we can reasonably observe three categories:

1. Aes Sedai
2. non-Aes Sedai channelers
3. UU channelers

I'm excluding saidin-users from these categories for now, because they essentially could be included, mechanically, in the categories above – the Asha'man, for example, could somewhat be considered a male equivalent to Aes Sedai, and Male Ayyad are a very realistic possibility for a Sharan UU. Saidin will thus be tackled specifically later.

Aes Sedai are important to put into their own category for several reasons:

1. They are a part of no nation, serving their own ends or the ends of the White Tower. This makes the notion of having them be typically "built" by a specific civ problematic, to say the least.
2. Their power is greater than most military units, even when considering one "unit" to actually represent a platoon of soldiers. This is significant because the Aes Sedai's power has not been as effected by technological advancements as military technology has been. While the world was barely rebuilding, the White Tower was built (in AB 98). In the years after the breaking, there were Aes Sedai queens in several nations. With the exception of certain AoL Talents that were only rediscovered as the Last Battle drew near – traveling and ter'angreal-making, for example – the abilities of the Aes Sedai immediately post-breaking were not necessarily weaker than those throughout most of the third age. (In some respects, it was likely greater, as the hunting of male channelers has been suggested in the books to have essentially bred innate channeling ability out of the populace – consider how dreaming and foretelling were once far more common than they were in the final years of the New Era.) The same is obviously not true for military technology (which generally improves over time).
3. While strength in the Power is certainly not reserved for Aes Sedai, training and capability in channeling that is relevant to a game of civ – namely, combat – is most certainly dominated by the Aes Sedai. The exception to this are the Damane and Ayyad, but they are most likely going to be UUs (a side point on the oft-mentioned Wise Ones – recall that they have been forbidden to fight in Aiel wars for what appears to be hundreds of years, and thus likely are not, by and large, particularly combat-trained).
4. The Three Oaths present interesting mechanics that would be unique among all channeling units.

To consider all of the above in the context of game balance and design, it seems appropriate to me that the Aes Sedai should be "the best" of the channeling units, and likely the most rare. The reasoning for and against this conceptualization of Aes Sedai was debated several pages back in the thread, and need not be resurrected here.

The Normal (non-Aes Sedai) channeler units present us with a very simple choice: do we A) want civs to be able to produce them without any special limitations, or B) should they be limited in production like resource-dependent units (or even more so). I think the answer to this depends greatly on the strength of the units. I'd prefer CiV's combat flow to be, in general, preserved, so if Normal channelers are very common and easy to produce, they should be comparably less powerful. If they are powerful, they should be less numerous (this mechanic is of course similar to the one I'm proposing for Aes Sedai).

The UU's will likely be produced by the same means as the "Normal" channelers, whichever method we choose. If they are limited in their production, they shouldn't be any more so than Normal channelers. Any extra limitations should be, obviously, balanced against the strength of the unit, the civ's UA/UB/other UU, and the analogous unique aspects of other civs.


B – Brief Summary List of Channeler Types

Here is a list of the distinct channelers as described by the books, that could end up units we could choose to use. Note that in order to populate a technology tree, some new terms may need to be used, and/or some unit types may need to be made distinct, when they are treated as roughly synonymous in the books.

• Aes Sedai
• Asha'man
• Wisdom/Wise Woman/Wilders
• Kinswoman and Daughters of Silence (the latter or both potentially an Altaran UU)
• Accepted and Novices
• Male Channeler (not typically given any more formal name)Sul'dam and Damane (Seanchan)
• Wise One (Aiel)
• Windfinder (Sea Folk)
• Ayyad and The Freed (Shara)
• False Dragon
• Samma N'Sei
• Forsaken
• Dreadlords

C – Acquisition of Channeling Units


It is highly likely that the different categories of channeler (e.g. Aes Sedai versus Wisdom) will be acquired through different means, In lieu of laying out suggestions under each type of unit, it felt appropriate to create a master list here, to be referred to later.
My pros and cons may be incomplete, and are certainly open for debate. My "Best Fit" and "Worst Fit" points are similarly open to discussion.

METHOD 1 – PRODUCTION
This method treats the channeling unit as identical to any other military unit, able to be produced with hammers or bought with gold.

• Pros: very simple to implement, perhaps simple to balance, intuitive for players
• Cons: no limits to production, doesn't "feel" like WoT, no added strategic depth
• Best Fit For: basic, low-level channeling units, Sul'dam (not Damane)
• Worst Fit For: Male channelers (why would you ever build them pre-cleansing?), Aes Sedai

METHOD 2 – STRATEGIC RESOURCE
This method would involve production and purchase as in method 1, but would consume a new Strategic Resource type. Wide empires or those with start-location biases close to the terrain type featuring the Resource would thus have an inherent advantage (unless the resource was independent of terrain).

As far as what the strategic resource could be, this is certainly difficult to say. One option could be ter'angreal or some other object. Otherwise, a well of power or something (much like the Eye of the World) could be used, though having several of many such wells clashes with the lore a bit.

Potentially certain units would consume variable amounts of this resource (eg. 1 for a Wilder, 2 for a Kin, etc.).

• Pros: limits production, familiar mechanic for players
• Cons: questionable "flavor," bias towards certain start locations, bias towards wide play
• Best Fit For: "normal" channeler units (and UU replacements), Sul'dam
• Worst Fit For: Male channelers, Aes Sedai
  

METHOD 3 – OLD BLOOD
This method is similar to the Strategic Resource method (i.e. produce/buy with limited total units), but with one key distinction. Instead of your civ mining the ability to produce channelers, a civ would automatically be granted a certain capacity for channeler-production based on population, era, etc. Essentially, the more people you have, the higher likelihood you are to find the Spark among your populace. The goal would be to make it so this number was not biased towards tall or wide playstyles. Social Policies and Ideologies, as well as Wonders and National Wonders, could provide modifiers to this value.

We could call this your civ's Old Blood, but a better name may be out there. We could simply call it True Source, which obviously is somewhat perplexing, but does sound like a consumable resource. We Could also call it Power or One Power. Or Spark.

Potentially certain units would consume variable amounts of this resource, as above.

• Pros: predictable limit of production, good integration with different aspects of the game, presumably relatively easy to balance.
• Cons: introduces a new mechanic, somewhat "unrealistic"
• Best Fit For: "normal" channeler units (and UU replacements)
• Worst Fit For: Male channelers, Aes Sedai (though perhaps less so)

METHOD 4 – GIFTED
With this method, you don't buy the channeler, they are given to you by an outside entity. This is most easy to imagine with the channelers associated with established organizations – namely the Aes Sedai, Asha'man, and (to a certain extent) the Kin.

The frequency and cause of gifting would likely be tied to diplomacy, but would also likely be connected to social policies, wonders, etc. The gifted units could be chosen at random, but they could also be done via player request. Gifted/requested units perhaps only last for a limited amount of time, and/or could be recalled if the player were to lose favor with the home organization.

• Pros: good integration with other aspects of the game (especially the Last Battle), feels very universe-friendly
• Cons: problematic correlation between diplomatic and domination victory paths (though this is perhaps already present with militaristic city-state gifting), introduces new "untested" mechanic
• Best Fit For: Aes Sedai, Asha'man
• Worst Fit For: normal channeler units, Male channelers
  

METHOD 5 – GREAT PEOPLE
With this method, channelers are produced in cities much in the way Great People are created, with their creation tied to specialists, buildings, wonders, social policies, etc.

The anti-wide aspect to Great People could theoretically be amended for this purpose.

I do not yet know if a random channeler would be produced, or if each city slowly built various types (i.e., you'd have a separate "charging bar" for Asha'man, Aes Sedai, Wisdoms, etc.).

• Pros: reinforces rarity and specialness of channeling, uses known mechanic, removes some player control.
• Cons: issue with wide empires, cluttered with so many different GP types, removes some player control
• Best Fit For: Male channelers (who would perhaps appear whether you like it or not), Aes Sedai
• Worst Fit For: normal and UU channelers
  

METHOD 6 – SPONTANEOUS
This is very similar to the Great People method above, but made separate here merely to designate that it would not be using any of the specific mechanics of great people. Channelers would pop up at various intervals – which could be somewhat randomized – according to the situation in the civ. A key element here, like in Method 5, is the lack of player choice in the matter.

Social Policies, wonders, diplomacy, happiness, etc. could all serve to change the rate at which a civ acquired new channelers and the type they acquired.

• Pros: reinforces rarity of channeling, removes some player control, kept separate from Great People (which may prevent some clutter and mental confusion)
• Cons: potentially confusing, removes some player control
• Best Fit For: Male channelers
• Worst Fit For: normal and UU channelers
  

METHOD 7 – FAITH
In this method, Faith is used to purchase channeling units, much like it is used to create GP, missionaries, etc. Note that this method does not necessarily take into account that there may be Customs, Wonders, or Social Policies (or the "finishers" of particular Policy trees) that allow certain Channeling units to be purchased with Faith (like is already present in CiV) – these mechanics can exist independent of whether we adopt Faith as a typical Method of Acquisition.

• Pros: known mechanic, makes some sense in-universe, keeps channelers distinct from "normal units"
• Cons: punishes players who do not create a Path (religion) or who do not follow the Light (i.e. are evil and receive less faith), correlates faith production with military strength (potentially)
• Best Fit For: Normal channeling units
• Worst Fit For: Aes Sedai, Male channelers
  

METHOD 8 – CAPTURE
This method pertains almost exclusively to damane. While it is conceivable that a Seanchan civ could "build" Damane, it is highly likely that instead they will capture enemy channelers to fill our their channeling ranks, whether via a specific Sul'dam unit, or any military unit (via aspect of the Seanchan UU). The potential mechanics of this will be discussed elsewhere.

A captured damane could either A) transfer in ownership to the capturing civ, with no change, or B) become a specific and unique damane unit. This will also be discussed elsewhere.

While the damane are the only obvious application of this mechanic, it is of course possible to introduce the a'dam as a tool that can be used by any civ. Additionally, this method is technically applicable if we allow civs to recapture and Heal gentled/stilled units.

• Pros: "feels" right for Damane
• Cons: wholly unique mechanic that benefits only a single unit type and/or civ
• Best Fit For: Damane
• Worst Fit For: everyone else
  

More will be said about which ones make sense in which situations, but in general it seems to make sense that the Aes Sedai would follow one Acquisition Method, while the "normal" (and UU) units would follow another.

The somewhat-"involuntary" methods seem to make a good heap of sense for the Aes Sedai, and likely for the Asha'man, given the specific peculiarities of those groups, and their lack of any single national affiliation. By contrast, these methods seem perhaps overly annoying for "normal" units, and certainly UU's would feel majorly nerfed if they couldn't be built deliberately (even if we balanced with this in mind). Thus, I feel that those normal units should be producible, with the "Old Blood" method currently sticking out in my mind as the best.

Most notably tricky, perhaps, are the non-Asha'man male channelers. To me, it seems almost essential that they be produced somewhat involuntarily. While it would be certainly conceivable to have the madness risk be simply offset by extreme power – making it reasonably worthwhile as a strategic option to regularly employ male channelers – I am reminded of the fact that literally zero nations have ever done this in the pre-Black Tower third age (to my knowledge). Male channelers as military combatants should be possible, but it should generally be a bit of a "crazy" strategy. More often than not, male channelers should probably be something you have to "deal with" when they appear, thus the attraction I have for the somewhat "involuntary" means. More on this later.

Of course, combinations of these methods could be used. For example, we could adopt the "Old Blood" system to limit our channelers, and tie it in with a kind of diplomatic "gifting." For example, you could ask the WT for an Aes Sedai, and since they really like your civ, they might grant it – and that Aes Sedai would also deduct from your Old Blood total.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 2C.1 – Acquisition – Should Aes Sedai, "Normal" units, and UU channelers have the same acquisition method, or should they be differentiated?
• 2C.2 – Acquisition Options – which Acquisition Methods are preferred, and for which kinds of units? Should we combine any Methods? (Note that further discussion will be shown on these points later in the document)
• 2C.3 – Strategic Resources (2) – if we choose to adopt Method 2, what should we name this strategic resource? Should it be bound to a particular terrain? Would units consume a variable amount of it?
• 2C.4 – Old Blood (3) – if we choose to adopt Method 3, what should we name this "resource?" Would units consume a variable amount of it?
• 2C.5 – Gifted (4) – if we choose to adopt Method 4, should the units be gifted by the WT "randomly" or at various intervals, or should they be "requested" by the civ? Are these Aes Sedai permanent members of the civ, or are they temporary "loans?"

3 – AES SEDAI

The following discussion assumes a few things have been agreed upon (which they may not be!). Those things will be listed below. These assumptions are based not only on my opinion, but on the prevailing consensus (though not unanimous) through our prior discussions. If these things are in fact not agreed upon, Aes Sedai can likely be implemented as "Normal" channeling units instead.

These assumptions are:

1. Aes Sedai should be powerful units
2. Aes Sedai should be relatively rare
3. Aes Sedai should be useful inside and outside of combat
4. Aes Sedai should be available – and notable – throughout most of history
5. Flavorful trappings of the Aes Sedai – the Three Oaths, Warders, Ajahs, etc. – should ideally be included
6. Aes Sedai should be connected in some way to the White Tower, and thus diplomatic relations (and diplomatically-relevant situations such as the Last Battle).
   

A – Abilities

Given the fact that Aes Sedai rely on Warders significantly for close-quarters combat, I am imagining Aes Sedai as ranged or siege units. As to which, I suppose it may not matter, especially considering they won't typically be taking cities, and won't be required to "set up" for an attack. Philosophically, siege makes very little sense – why would Aes Sedai be good at taking cities? I imagine that Aes Sedai combat will work similarly to combat for other saidar-users, so this issue is discussed in more detail in Section 4.

While I considered the possibility of Aes Sedai being able to share a tile with their warders, I believe this would be unfairly good – they should take up a full tile.

I could understand them being melee units, but ranged seems somewhat more appropriate.

Additionally, there are other abilities that it might make sense for Aes Sedai to have, or be able to acquire through promotion or other change:

• Healing
• Gentling
• Bonding warders
• Diplomatic, Scholarly, and other related capabilities
  

HEALING
Based on the books, it might make sense for all Aes Sedai to begin with some sort of rudimentary Healing ability, though I could also imagine that this might come only as a result of promotion. I could see this Healing working in one of two ways:

1. an effect similar to an improved Medic Promotion
2. a targeted, "attack" on friendly units that heals them, likely much more than what would be healed by option 1 above.

As to which of those is superior – this depends on how powerful we want it to be, how complicated the mechanics for #2 above would be, and what we plan on doing in relation to Promotions and Ajahs.

I should note here that I think we should wield Healing with caution. It absolutely needs to be there from a flavor perspective, but we should probably not make it too powerful, or should make it relatively uncommon – otherwise it could drastically change the way CiV's combat works.

GENTLING
Gentling would be an ability of some/all Aes Sedai that serves to neutralize a male channeler – likely turning him into a civilian. As with healing, this could be an ability of all Aes Sedai, or merely one grabbed by promotion or other mechanic. In the books, gentling often relied on multiple Aes Sedai working together, but in my opinion, this seems a bit too complex for our game. Details on the specifics of gentling can be found in Section 6 (Saidin) below.

Of course, gentling is certainly possible to be performed by non-Aes Sedai female channelers, though it doesn't appear to happen anywhere in the books (in my recollection). This will be discussed later in Section 7.

OTHER ABILITIES
Warders will be discussed in the eponymous sub-part below.
It certainly makes sense to allow for non-combat uses of Aes Sedai, since many Aes Sedai live non-combat lives as scholars, negotiators, etc. Since they likely tie into Ajah affiliation, those considerations will be discussed in sub-part F below.

Some Talents – foretelling and dreaming, for instance – appear to already be a part of the plan for Great People. Since they are so rare, and are not predictably trainable, they make the most sense as GP. Traveling is a potential exception, and will be discussed in Section 7. Dreamwalking is best either associated with Great People (as previously discussed in the thread) or as a specific feature of Wise Ones (a likely Aiel UU). Some Talents – making ter'angreal, delving, etc. – seem to have mechanics that would likely not be interesting enough to include in the game.


REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3A.1 – Combat – What "type" of combat should Aes Sedai engage in – ranged, melee, or siege?
• 3A.2 – Healing – Should Healing be available to all Aes Sedai, or only those who take a promotion/join the Yellow (see subsection F below)? If so, how should this work?
• 3A.3 – Gentling – Should Gentling be available to all Aes Sedai, or only those who take a promotion/join the Red (see subsection F below)?

B – The Three Oaths

The Three Oaths are central to the lore of WoT and the political situation of the New Era, and thus need to be included as a part of our game.

HISTORICAL ISSUES
The Three Oaths were adopted sometime between the Trolloc Wars and the War of the Hundred years (in the FY years, so likely in our 3^rd or 4^th eras). Thus, we have a very important decision to make:

1. Should the Three Oaths apply throughout history?
2. Should the Three Oaths only apply starting in the mid-game?

The former ignores an important aspect of the lore, though one that is not particularly "present" in the books. However, it is certainly the simplest to set up mechanically, and to balance.

The latter is certainly the most universe-appropriate. However, it is also the most complex both mechanically and in terms of balance. Up through the Trolloc Wars, Aes Sedai would be more usable than afterward. This makes balancing early-game Aes Sedai – already likely a difficult balancing act, since they must still be relatively powerful despite the world's low tech level – even more of a challenge.

If we did elect to have the Three Oaths kick in mid-game, a likely place is once the world era becomes the Era of Freedom. Since the Trolloc Wars are against shadowspawn (and fair targets for Oathed Aes Sedai), it is largely irrelevant whether the wars themselves are done with the three oaths kick in. Alternatively, they could kick in once the world era reaches the Era of Consolidation, since the exact time this occurs is unknown. My preference would be for the Era of Freedom.

I don't have a clear preference as to whether option 1 or 2 is best – I suppose this depends on how complicated the mechanics surrounding Aes Sedai end up.

I should say now that this document assumes that the Three Oaths exist at all. Since they exist due to very specific historical actions/prejudices, it is of course possible to imagine a Third Age in which they were never created. While this is possible to consider for our game, considering their significance throughout the story, not to mention the epic complexity that would result in them being optional, I suggest we assume they do indeed exist.

THE OATHS
The three oaths are the following:

1. To speak no word that is not true
2. To make no weapon with which one man may kill another
3. Never to use the One Power as a weapon except against Darkfriends or Shadowspawn, or in the last extreme defense of her life, the life of her Warder, or another Aes Sedai.

The specifics of how each oath might interact with our game will be discussed below. It seems appropriate to me that Aes Sedai would be balanced "against" these oaths – because they are somewhat limited in functionality, they should likely be appropriately strong as compensation. This makes the pre-oath Aes Sedai all the more difficult to balance – do they receive a compensatory boost in power when the Oaths kick in?

THE FIRST OATH
The first oath is tricky, because it feels mostly irrelevant to most CiV gameplay, but yet is an extremely central component of the Aes Sedai in the books. The only possible in-game mechanics I can think of have to do with diplomacy. Anything the White Tower says it will do or not do should be done or not done exactly as stated. I'm not sure what mechanics that might create, though.

The only other applications I can think of are related, and involve using Gray Ajah negotiators, which we may or may not elect to do. If we did allow civ-to-civ diplomacy to be aided by Grays (either ones directly "controlled" by the civ or independent ones), perhaps the resolutions reached in these situations might be more binding. Similarly, gray-ajah diplomat-alternatives could make diplomatic agreements more binding or something.

I do not know of any other applications, and frankly I don't find these particularly compelling. This oath becomes compelling if civs are somehow able to enter into actual negotiations with the White Tower itself. If this mechanic were to be created, then this oath might be significant (treaties couldn't be broken, promises not to spy would be binding, etc.). However, this game is not equipped to handle the famous Aes Sedai "lying without lying," so this is likely not a great option either.

THE SECOND OATH
The second oath is somewhat uninteresting. It could, of course, be possible to have power-wrought weapons as a unit-upgrades, etc. (see Section 7), having this exist for only the first half of the game feels quite odd – especially since the Talent to do so appears to have been lost until rediscovered by an Asha'man during one of the final books. Probably best to leave this one out, unless anybody has a solid idea as to how it could be implemented.

THE THIRD OATH
The third oath is certainly the most significant to our mod. This oath limits an Aes Sedai's ability to engage in combat. Following the specific wording of the Oath (and its application in the books), we can hold these three points to be true:

1. shadowspawn can be attacked without limitation
2. Darkfriends can be attacked without limitation
3. The Aes Sedai may attack forces who have engaged in combat with her, her warder, or other Aes Sedai.

The first of these is simple – shadowspawn must die. This makes combat Aes Sedai, since they will be quite powerful, probably the most effective shadowspawn killers in the game.

Darkfriends are a bit more complicated. Most simply, any Shadow-sided unit in the Last Battle is fair game (although this is perhaps an over-simplification, as some of those soldiers would potentially be “following orders,” and not truly Darkfriends). Similarly, Dreadlords and other units controlled by the Shadow AI is fair game, regardless of era. Any Darkfriend unit we create, once discovered, would be fair game. If, by some mechanic, we determined that units and/or civs could be "outed" as Shadow-sympathizing before the Last Battle – those would also be fair game. Gray Ajah diplomats and such should be able to kill darkfriend spies they discover. An "outed" Black Ajah Aes Sedai would be killable. It seems that, since most of our Shadow-related stuff in the first 3/4 of the game appears to be mostly under-the-table, these situations will likely present themselves only rarely – we need to decide whether it's worth including them as a mechanic.

The third aspect is perhaps the most interesting – Aes Sedai cannot attack "regular" units without being threatened. I seem to recall it proposed a long time ago – before I joined this thread, I think – that Aes Sedai could only attack when damaged. I find this lacking, as it seems easily exploitable – opponents should simply never attack the Aes Sedai. Following the specific wording of the Three Oaths, I propose the following:

An Aes Sedai can attack nearby threatening units if those units:

1. Attack the sister
2. Attack the sister's Warder – or perhaps any nearby Warder.
3. Attack another sister nearby – regardless of that sister's nationality (i.e., could be an ally or neutral civ's Sister)

The first of these is obvious in its application.

The second may be just as obvious (see the discussion below on Warders), but could be made more complex if we extend it to include the Warders of other sisters that are nearby ("nearby" being perhaps defined as I do in the following paragraph) – if in fact we do bond warders to specific sisters.

I propose that a "nearby unit" represents the nearby "forces" of the attacking unit's civ, perhaps represented by a radius around the Sister – three tiles may make sense. A more complicated option could be using adjacent units – any units within a certain radius, as well as units adjacent to those units (to accommodate large forces). We don't want a situation where this can be exploited through ticky-tacky unit placement, but we also don't want it to become unfair to the attackers.

It could be argued that any siege unit that is set up for attack should be strikable by an Aes Sedai, since it is "threatening" her. This is unfortunately very likely to be exploited, though, so might not be a good idea. A city should not be attackable (unless it attacks any of the triggers listed above).

If an Aes Sedai is garrisoned in a city, I am torn between whether or not she should be able to attack anybody attacking that city. On the one hand, it makes sense for her to be able to, but on the other hand, it does somewhat seem like an exploit – they instantly become the best city defenders. Perhaps Aes Sedai (and their Warders) cannot be garrisoned in cities – they aren't "yours" after all – and must be in adjacent tiles.

I do think that "blanket" attack-authorizations (such as "any units of the attacking civ" or "civs who declared war on you") are a bad idea – the Aes Sedai/warders need to be in direct danger.

The long and short of this, strategically, is that there's a sort of "Mexican Standoff" between Aes Sedai and other enemy units, and this stems mostly from the presence of the Warder. A lone Aes Sedai should probably be ignored – don't attack it, and it won't/can't attack you. But an Aes Sedai with a Warder... The Warder can hack its way through your units with impunity – if you retaliate and stop the Warder, the Aes Sedai can strike you. Ignore it, and the Warder has free-reign over your forces. This adds an interesting and unique strategic element. In typical war situations, it won't matter, since the Warder will attack and the enemies will retaliate. But imagine a situation when units attacked by the Warder don't want to fight – they're outnumbered, for example – they can run away and the Aes Sedai would never be able to strike them. As another example, if an Aes Sedai and her warder want to move through the battlefield to reach a certain point on the opposite end, they may be able to do so without being harassed, as nobody would want to draw their ire. I find this interesting. Lastly, Aes Sedai could follow an army around as Healers and be unmolested (since opponents may not want to threaten them.

Of course, I acknowledge the AI difficulties this might present – I'd imagine Dragonsworn will attack willy-nilly, but certainly we want the AI civs to be appropriately cautious around Aes Sedai. Also, ideally AI civs (and the White Tower) will take advantage of this caution with the Aes Sedai they control.

THE BLACK AJAH AND THE OATHS
The Black Ajah are not held to the Three Oaths, as they are released from them upon swearing new ones. If we decide to allow an Aes Sedai to become Black Ajah (whether by player choice or by other occurrence) that Aes Sedai should be free of the Oaths.

That said, any Black Ajah Aes Sedai who actually acts on that freedom – by striking a unit unprovoked – should be outed as Black Ajah. The attacked civ should certainly gain this insight, but I'm not sure if other civs should find out as well – perhaps the attacked civ can elect to share this info.

The Black ajah are discussed more in sub-part G of this section.


REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3B.1 – History – Should the Three Oaths apply throughout history, or only starting in the mid-game? When would they begin? How do we balance pre-Oath Aes Sedai?
• 3B.2 – Lies – Should the First Oath be worked into the game? How?
• 3B.3 – Power-Wrought Weapons – Should the Second Oath be worked into the game? How?
• 3B.4 – Darkfriend Killing – In what circumstances does a human opponent become a Darkfriend that is legal for an Aes Sedai to kill?
• 3B.5 – Threatening – Should a Sister be able to attack if somebody else's Warder is attacked? What about another Sister? What if these units are owned by other (non-attacking) civs?
  [*] 3B.6 – Nearby – what constitutes "nearby forces" (ones fair to attack once the Aes Sedai is threatened)?
• 3B.7 – Garrison – Can Aes Sedai be Garrisoned? Can they attack anybody invading the city?
• 3B.8 – Black – Should an Aes Sedai's violation of the Three Oaths (proving they are Black) be "public?" Should the defending civ be notified, or is it just a "I hope you didn't miss that" moment?

C – Warders

UNIT TYPES
Where there are Aes Sedai, there should be Warders. The way I see it, these could be handled in the following ways:

1. Warders could be a specific unit that is produced
2. Warders could be a series of specific units that are produced, changing with technological progression
3. Warders are any normal military unit (perhaps any unit at all) that is chosen to be bonded by the Aes Sedai, most likely via promotion.

The problem with the first of these choices is progression over time. An early-game Warder would need to be extremely powerful in order to be viable in the late-game. The second of these choices seeks to combat that problem, but might be a bit clunky (what would you call the different Warder-types?).

The third option is very interesting, and allows a lot of flexibility. Any bonded unit would receive the Warder promotion (or we could call it Gaidin), which confers some benefits to them, and – most importantly – allows them to serve as the "trigger" in the Three Oaths discussion above. I think this is my favorite option, provided the bonding mechanics are reasonable to implement, and we don't anticipate many exploits.


BONDING
If Warders are just produced normally, they could theoretically have their "freedom" and not need to be bonded to any specific Aes Sedai unit. This takes away their use as a Three Oath Trigger, though (unless all Warders are triggers for all nearby Aes Sedai). Perhaps "produced" Warders need to be built in a city with an Aes Sedai garrisoned there. Alternatively, maybe a "produced" Warder needs to find an Aes Sedai and have the Aes Sedai click "bond Warder" when standing in an adjacent tile.

Additionally, any Aes Sedai could automatically have a Warder when created/gifted to the player.

If we allow any unit to become a Warder (option 3 above), that Aes Sedai could click "Bond Warder" when adjacent to the unit (giving that unit the Warder/Gaidin promotion).

I think compulsory bonding should not exist in our game – though it would be cool to steal enemy units, it seems not to be in the spirit of what we're trying to do here.

I think Aes Sedai should be limited to one Warder, for ease of balancing. That said, exceptions could be made in specific cases (a Green Ajah Aes Sedai for example) – see below in sub-part F. Aes Sedai should be able to bond a new Warder upon the death of their Warder, though.

The books show that Warders can be released from their bonds – famously occurring in Thakandar in the final book. Since this seems to be something that could be exploited (releasing a warder right before he dies, and immediately bonding a new one), I am inclined to say this is not possible. Although, if the Warder unit were to be gifted away or disbanded, that could be a sort of work-around for this – a player could just "kill" his Warder and have the Aes Sedai choose a new one – perhaps the Aes Sedai would still suffer the drawbacks of Warder-death in this case? Or perhaps there's a cool-down before a new Warder can be selected?


BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS
A unit that receives the Warder promotion should receive some sort of benefits. Warders are also usually rather lethal, but this seems to have to do with their skill mostly rather than the bond. Since the books characterize this as impressive stamina and toughness, I propose one of the following:

1. Warders receive a slight bonus to Combat Strength, perhaps similar to a terrain effect. Alternatively, Warders receive this bonus to Combat Strength only when defending.
2. Warders do not suffer reduced Combat Strength when they are injured (similar to Japan's bushido)
3. Warders heal a bit every turn, regardless of action (like the March promotion)

I would propose extra HP, but since all units have 100 HP, this isn't really possible in this game. Of these, I think I somewhat prefer the second choice, though this is slight (though this would mean we wouldn't duplicate bushido elsewhere as a UA or other feature in the game). The first feels rather bland (though the defending variation is more in-universe), and the third creates odd situations if that unit has already selected March (also, it is somewhat redundant to the likely Healing they'd receive from Aes Sedai).

Secondly, Warders possess the ability to sense shadowspawn. I'm not sure what would work best given the CiV combat system, but I can think of the following possibilities:

1. Warders could have very far sight
2. Warders could have far sight only as it concerns shadowspawn
3. Warders would detect shadowspawn within a radius, much like barbarian camps are revealed in base CiV.

Of these, I prefer 3, followed by 2, followed by 1. I understand that 2 and 3 might not be feasible, though. Aes Sedai do appear to be able to do this to a certain extent as well, but I think I enjoy it more as a Warder ability.

Also, Warders could have increased movement, befitting their role as scouts and protectors. This could be a static bonus, or be covered by ignored terrain.
As far as drawbacks, the most important is certainly the madness of the Warder if the Aes Sedai dies, and the depression of the Aes Sedai if the Warder dies. The ways I can think to handle this are as follows:

1. The surviving unit would suffer damage (though not enough to cause them to immediately die) when their partner is killed
2. The surviving unit receives a "Broken Bond" "promotion" that lowers their combat strength.
3. In the case of Warders, they could go barbarian, or else act erratically for the rest of their lives (attacking themselves, etc.)

Of these, I definitely prefer the second. The "promotion" could differ between the units – it should probably be worse for the Warders. Perhaps an Aes Sedai bonding a second Warder, or a Warder being bonded by a second Aes Sedai, could lessen or eliminate these penalties. In any case, they should probably be significant but not game-breaking.

Of the other options, the first is the simplest but seems a bit like adding insult to injury, and very likely will result in the death of both units. The third is interesting, but is perhaps a bit too harsh.

I should say here that if an Aes Sedai is recalled to the White Tower (the civ's "loan" has expired or their diplomatic relations with the White Tower have deteriorated), a Warder unit should remain in the civ's control – if that Warder was built by the civ. If the Warder unit came with the Aes Sedai to begin with, they should leave as well. Similarly, I would imagine if Aes Sedai persist in the world (able to come back later, join with other civs, etc. [see sub-part H below]) I could see their Warders going with them. Warders that remain with a civ would of course lose their Warder promotion.

Aes Sedai do appear to have some powers of compulsion over their Warders, but these seem irrelevant to our game since both will be directly controlled by the player.

Similarly, the books describe how channelers who bond one another (like Androl and Pevara) have telepathic abilities – I also think this should be ignored for our mod. On that note, I feel like male-channelers bonding units should not be included in our mod, just as Wisdoms and Wise Ones shouldn't be bonding – while the Asha'man bonding certainly happens in aMoL, in general Warders feel like an "Aes Sedai" thing in WoT, so is best kept that way for simplicity and clarity's sake.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3C.1 – Warder Basics – Are warders unique units? Do they automatically upgrade? Are there different "versions" throughout the tech tree? Alternatively, are they simply "normal" units who are Bonded to the Aes Sedai?
• 3C.2 – Bonding – How are Warders bonded? Can each Aes Sedai only bond one Warder? Can Warders be released from their bond, and if so, how do we prevent exploits?
• 3C.3 – Benefits – What combat bonuses should Warder's receive once bonded? How should we represent their shadowspawn-detection skills? Should Warders have improved movement?
• 3C.4 – Drawbacks – What should happen to the survivor when a Warder or Aes Sedai is killed? If the Aes Sedai leaves the civ to return to the Tower, what happens to the Warder?
• 3C.5 – Male Bonding – Should we include non-Aes Sedai bonding (Asha'man, Wise Ones, etc.)?
  

D – The White Tower

OVERVIEW
Certainly relations with the White Tower need to be an aspect of the acquisition of Aes Sedai. This concept is rather complex because they are likely to also figure heavily into the diplomatic victory. My belief is that, while the WT is required for the diplo victory, heading towards diplomatic victory and having a healthy "supply" of Aes Sedai should not be mutually inclusive. You should be able to use Aes Sedai effectively without a strong commitment to diplomacy, and there should be situations where a civ is aiming for a diplo victory while not necessarily utilizing Aes Sedai much. In short, ideally these things should be somewhat independent. Of course, they will most definitely be linked and/or related – an outright enemy of the Tower shouldn't be using Aes Sedai – but I just don't want them to be completely joined at the hip.

It is not the purpose of this document to outline the diplomatic victory. However, I have already mentioned (as others have) several potential components of how Aes Sedai units might relate to the White Tower. I'll list them again here:

1. Aes Sedai might be gifted to civilizations who have gained the favor of the White Tower. A civ might gain favor with the White Tower by completing quests and participating in certain global events (Trolloc Wars, etc.)
2. These "gifts" might be permanent, but they might also be for a limited amount of time.
3. The gifted Aes Sedai might be at random times, but they also might be by "request" of the civ – the White Tower determining that a particular civ can be granted X number of Aes Sedai for Y number of turns.
4. Aes Sedai might be from specific Ajahs, or may elect to train with the Ajahs, to affect their abilities. This final concept appears to currently be a component of the diplomatic victory as described by S3rgeus.
5. The White Tower will by default stand for the Light. This means they may reward more light-oriented civs with more Aes Sedai. As a direct result of this, in the Last Battle the White Tower will likely only grant Sisters to Light-side civs – and likely more to those with a higher Light value.
6. There are Black sisters, and these have the potential – with civ help – to take control of the White Tower. This would most likely reverse item #5 above.

PROPOSAL
My inclination is to separate the Aes Sedai acquisition as it relates to the White Tower into two categories:

1. Those whose mechanics have no overlap with the diplomatic victory
2. Those whose mechanics have overlap with the diplomatic victory

From a design perspective, I would rather the acquisition of Aes Sedai units not be too uniformly tied to the diplomatic victory – diplomatic nations should not be necessarily better at waging war, except for the fact that they have plentiful allies. Thus, my suggestion is this: The most important components of Aes Sedai acquisition should have little or nothing to do with the diplomatic victory. Smaller elements may correlate with the diplomatic victory. Not knowing exactly how the diplomatic victory works, my hunch is that this could take the following forms:

1. Aes Sedai are gifted or loaned by request (in the WT diplo screen) to a civ
2. All civs have a base amount of Aes Sedai they can receive – the White Tower is "neutral" so every civ will receive some form of attention from them. This number probably increases with World Eras – probably zero or one in the early-game and 2-3 in the late game.
3. Components like population, Alignment, and perhaps social policies, Prestige and wonders will serve as a modifier to the amount of Aes Sedai that are gifted. The Tower assesses a given civilization and determines how much attention they are due. A really big civilization needs careful WT attention. Civilizations clearly in the light do as well (incidentally, Shadow-leaning civs might receive WT attention in a different way, by AI controlled Aes Sedai sneaking around). Other aspects make a civ more or less a focal point of White Tower assistance. This modifier could move your amount of Aes Sedai anywhere between 0 and 5, most likely. Note that none of these factors really have much to do with diplomacy.
4. Components pertaining to the diplomatic victory – quests, Ajah Training, voting, etc. – shouldn't affect the number of Aes Sedai you receive, but should effect the quality of your Aes Sedai. If we elect to make the Aes Sedai be "loaned" to the civ, we could make diplomacy be a modifier to the number of turns the civ receives the Aes Sedai. If Aes Sedai gifts are instead permanent (unless revoked due to changes in item number 3 above), we could alternatively use diplomatic concepts as a modifier to experience points and/or the number of promotions the Aes Sedai starts with – a "friend of the Tower" would receive more well-known Aes Sedai for longer periods of time.
5. Components pertaining to the diplomatic victory could also serve as a small component in the determination of the number of Aes Sedai granted, but I would prefer this be kept to a minimum.
6. Of course, open hostility to the tower (or disobeying tower edicts), while relating to diplomacy, should effect the number of Aes Sedai a civ can receive.

The above suggestions aren't the only way to do it, but it seems like a reasonable way to keep the diplomacy system independent of the Aes Sedai system, and still reward the civs that choose to have great relations with the White Tower.

If the Black Ajah were to take control of the tower, I suppose the system would remain the same, except that Light civs would receive fewer Aes Sedai than Shadow civs (and in the Last Battle, they would receive none). How the tower falls under Black control seems to me to be much more of a diplomatic-victory related issue, and is consequently not an aim of this document.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3D.1 – Diplomacy – Should there be significant overlap in the mechanics that enable diplomatic victory, and those that grant Aes Sedai?
• 3D.2 – Aes Sedai Granting – Should we adopt the system I proposed, wherein non-diplomatic factors determine the amount of Aes Sedai, while diplomacy determines the "quality" of them? What specific recommendations/changes would you make?
• 3D.3 – Black Ajah – How should things change if the Black Ajah takes control of the Tower?
• 
  

E – Balance Throughout the Technological Tree

As has been mentioned before, one challenging issue is that the Aes Sedai of the early game are potentially of comparable (or greater!) power to mid or late game Aes Sedai, as described in the books. As a reminder, some of the reasons we think this are as follows:

1. The White Tower is constructed in AB 98 (probably within the first 20 turns of the game). Thus, we might as well have the game start with it already constructed.
2. Many Talents "lost" until the end of the New Era apparently still existed in the AB and FY periods.
3. There were Aes Sedai Queens during the time of the Ten Nations, indicating, if nothing else, a more direct role in society in the early years.
4. The Ogier build great cities with the aid of the Aes Sedai – something that apparently is no longer practical or possible (and not just because of the Ogier, I think)
5. Because of the hunting down of male channelers, it appears that the "Spark" has been somewhat bred out of the populace – thus, it stands to reason that the Aes Sedai (and all channelers, really) of the late-game should be less powerful than that of the beginning (of course, the Era of the Dragon may serve as an exception to this, due to all the super-channelers that appear)

The problem comes from the fact that technology must progress throughout the game – military units will get better – while Aes Sedai will not necessarily do so.

Aes Sedai should indeed represent a fearsome force in the early game, but it can't be so unreasonable as to break the balance. However, they still must remain relatively formidable in the late game, if not as extremely so. Some ways I think we can deal with this:

1. Perhaps Aes Sedai themselves are not controllable in the true early game. You civ can perhaps only control Wilders and other "normal" channelers – with very powerful AI-controlled Aes Sedai wandering around the country-side killing trollocs and perhaps interacting with civs in other ways. This would take away the possibility of Aes Sedai blasting warriors into pieces (unless provoked) via early-game civ aggression – we have an opportunity to avoid one of the most challenging balancing moments. I would imagine that when a civ reaches the Second Era (for most, this would be before the Trolloc Wars begin), this would be a good point to begin to control them.
2. Civs could discover technologies that automatically upgrade their Aes Sedai. Once a civ discovers the secret of Ter'angreal for instance, all gifted/produced Aes Sedai would begin with higher strength, new abilities, more experience points, and/or new promotion types. We could have various channeling related "techs" serve these purposes (The Five Powers, Linking, Shielding, etc.).
3. Similarly to above, a civ could build certain national wonders or world wonders that might upgrade their Aes Sedai. It's hard to say what these would be, but some options could be a Reliquary of Angreal, Thirteenth Depository, Tower Library, Kin's Storeroom, Treasures of the Stone, Well of Power, etc.
4. Of course, if Warders were to upgrade over time (via different Warder unit types), this would serve as a sort of upgrade to the Aes Sedai themselves.

So, technically speaking, the Aes Sedai would be gaining power throughout the game, but it would be flavored as they weren't, but secrets were being unlocked, and tools are being found, that improve their capability.

I would say, though, in terms of realistic balance, the relative power of Aes Sedai should be greater in the earlier phases of the game, and lesser towards the end – by the end a civ will have more of them, a multitude of non-Aes Sedai channelers, and powerful military units (Dragons) that might be able to hold their own against Aes Sedai without needing overpowering numbers. I think this is essential, otherwise the no-Aes-Sedai-for-Shadow-Players punishment during the Last Battle seems too severe. By contrast, if you find yourself granted an Aes Sedai for 20 turns in the second era, you should be wringing your hands in anticipation of the shadowspawn killing you'll be doing (and perhaps even the barbarian killing, depending on the Three Oaths situation we decide on).

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3E.1 – Balance Over Time – Which of the suggestions do you prefer to keep Aes Sedai balanced throughout the tech tree? What specific recommendations do you have?

F – Ajahs and Promotions

OVERVIEW
Generally speaking, an Aes Sedai's Ajah choice illustrates her interests, and quite likely her specialty. In our game, I can see the Ajahs impacting gameplay in any of the following ways:

1. In diplomacy, having to do with internal Tower politics – influencing different Sitters to vote certain ways in the Hall of the Tower
2. In espionage, having to do with Ajah "eyes and ears," and their pulse of the world.
3. Determining Aes Sedai units' abilities
   

The diplomatic connections of the Ajahs is generally not the purview of this article, but will be discussed briefly below.

The connections between the Ajahs and espionage is also not of primary concern here, but will briefly be discussed below as well.

Of primary concern to us are the abilities that an Aes Sedai's Ajah emphasizes. Of course, Ajah doesn't necessarily prescribe ability – we know Moiraine was a Blue with skill in healing, and Nyneave was a yellow quite adept in combat – but for the general purposes of our game, an Aes Sedai's Ajah would be a flavorful way of differentiating between the skills of various Aes Sedai.

The way I look at it, it appears that Ajahs could effect the skills of our channeling units' abilities in the following ways:

1. Serving as promotions for those units (selecting "Yellow Ajah" upon reaching appropriate experience totals)
2. Serving as initial typing of those units ("you have received Verin Sedai of the Brown Ajah")
3. Serving as "training" promotions for non-Aes Sedai (sending your wilders to study with the Green Ajah, for example, enhancing their combat abilities)

The first and second are most relevant to our discussion here. The third will be covered elsewhere in this document.

I like the idea of the Ajahs representing promotions. We might, instead of flavoring each promotion "join the ____ Ajah", potentially style it "train with the ____ Ajah." That way, an Aes Sedai can gain the abilities of multiple Ajahs, with enough experience, without seemingly to be switching Ajahs.

That said, I definitely don't mind an Aes Sedai also starting out with an initial Ajah – especially if we give each Aes Sedai a name when it is created (as if it is a GP). Alternatively, we could start them out "blank slate," but give the player a "free" promotion, so they can select what kind of channeler this is.

If we do decide that each Aes Sedai has an initial Ajah, which one they are a member of could be based on the civ's diplomatic connections to each Ajah, it could be random, or it could be cyclical (yielding no second Yellow sister until all other Ajahs are given, for example). I don't have a strong opinion about any of these.

It should be mentioned, briefly, that Ajahs need not be the only form of promotion for Aes Sedai. We could certainly recycle generic promotions from other units, or use those we create that work for other channeling units. The Ajahs, though, are useful because they are both universe-appropriate and numerous.

For a discussion on whether an Aes Sedai should keep its Ajah long-term (if that Aes Sedai exists for multiple civs and/or spawnings), see the subsection below.


THE AJAHS AND THEIR ABILITIES
As has been the case with many of the topics in this document, we are faced with a set of rather significant game-design choices:

1. Should every Ajah be represented?
2. Is it ok if some Aes Sedai abilities have little or nothing to do with combat?

These ideas are linked, in that I believe if we desire number 1 to be true, than number 2 must also be true – it's not realistic, for example, to have a combat ability that related to the White Ajah. Well, we could do it, but it would be random-seeming.

I see the following list of Ajahs as the "obvious" ones – these can be thrown in as promotions regardless of whatever decisions we make.

• Green Ajah (combat)
• Yellow Ajah (healing)
• Red Ajah (gentling/dealing with saidin)
• Black Ajah (various)

The following list are the ones that require us to "stretch" our conception of the roles of Aes Sedai within CiV:

• Blue (global events and “causes,” eyes-and-ears)
• White Ajah (logic/philosophy)
• Gray Ajah (diplomacy)
• Brown Ajah (knowledge/history)
• Black Ajah (various)
  

What I will do below is set out a few proposals for how each Ajah's promotions could work. I will try to offer at least one that is very small, akin to typical promotions – "numbers" stuff, mostly – as well as one or two that are more "game-altering," providing new abilities, etc. Note that some of these involve Aes Sedai functions in a role not unlike GP or Governors. I am assuming that these bonuses will be less strong than those from the GP, but will also not consume the Aes Sedai.

In most cases, I'm assuming that while the Aes Sedai are doing these "alternative" things, they are not ALSO killing trollocs – if you want your White Ajah Aes Sedai garrisoned in your city to attack the oncoming invading army, she is going to probably stop generating Science for you. In other words, I imagine Aes Sedai only doing one task per turn.

Our goal should be to balance each of these – we shouldn't make the Green promotion be +50% damage and give the Whites +1 sight and call it even.

I indicate which of the ideas I like, but I could easily be swayed in my opinion. Please don't let my views predispose you too much – if I didn't think an option was somewhat viable, I wouldn't have included it here.

BLUE AJAH
The Blue is tricky because it is rather important to the plot of the books, but has some characteristics that don't translate into the game easily. The Blue is known for their manipulation/concern of and for global events (like the Dragon Reborn) and politics (the most Amyrlin come from this Ajah), taking up causes of justice, and maintaining the largest eyes and ears network. Ideas (I enjoy 1, 2, 3, and 4):

• Consult Eyes and Ears – a Blue Sister could use her turn to gain some intrigue. Perhaps they would have to be garrisoned in or next to a city, and they could get random intrigue from any city that city is connected to.
• Generate Prestige – A Blue Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Prestige per turn. This makes more sense than Culture, but is problematic in the early game. Culture could work as well (one one and then the other). Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor. This is due to their role in world-altering events.
  
• Generate Faith – identical to above, but with Faith instead of Prestige.
• Become Governor – becomes a Channeling Governor in a city (whatever that means!), assuming this is distinct from options 3 and 4 above.
• Discovery – The Blue Sister has a high statistical likelihood of discovering important objects and people – the Horn of Valere, Seals, Darkfriends, etc. Would depend on the mechanics we choose for these things.
  
• Enhanced Sight – the Blue Sister gets a bonus to visibility (because of her eyes and ears!).
  
• Kills Generate Faith – The Blue Sister produces a small amount of Faith for each kill (or each Shadowspawn/Darkfriend kill)
  

GREEN AJAH
The Green Ajah is perhaps the simplest to come up with abilities for, as they are the "Battle Ajah." The Greens prepare themselves for the Last Battle. They typically take multiple Warders. Ideas (I enjoy 5 the most, and 1 and 2 as well):

• Enhanced Combat – the Green Sister gets a simple bonus to Combat Strength
  
• Shadowspawn Killer – same as above, but applies only to Shadowspawn (and is likely a bigger bonus)
  
• Various other bonuses – conceivably any of the normal CiV promotions could make sense here.
  
• Battle Leader – the Green Sister functions somewhat like a mini Great Captain/General, providing combat bonuses to surrounding units
  
• Bond Second Warder – Green Sisters would have the ability to bond a second Warder.
  

YELLOW AJAH
The Yellow concerns itself with Healing, and is consequently also quite simple to work into our game. It should be noted that some version of the abilities below may exist in all Aes Sedai. We can either remove them from typical Aes Sedai, or make improved versions of them (or variations on them) available to Yellows. In any case, we will have to decide whether Yellows (and any Aes Sedai) perform Healing as a dedicated action, or passively while they fight and move around. Ideas (I like 2):

• Improved Healing – the Yellow Sister heals at a better rate than other Aes Sedai. A sort of enhanced Medic Promotion. Alternatively, they could be the only Aes Sedai with this ability.
  
• Focused Healing – the Yellow Sister "attacks" a single ally and greatly heals that unit.
  
• Kill Heal – an odd one, the Yellow Sister heals herself and adjacent units when she makes a Kill.

RED AJAH
The Reds are the most numerous Ajah, around 200 of the 1000 Rand-era Aes Sedai (something I find actually quite preposterous given their characterization in the books) who dedicate themselves to capturing and/or gentling men who have the ability to channel. Typically, Reds do not have Warders, though I think in our game this may be something we can ignore for the sake of simplicity (especially if we view this as "training" with the Ajahs, not actually joining the Ajah). It should be noted that, if we do exclude Reds from having Warders, the abilities should appropriately balance that – a Warderless Aes Sedai would otherwise be much more vulnerable against a male channeler. Ideas (I think I like 3, 4, or 5):

• Saidin Killer – the Red Sister does bonus Damage against male channelers
  
• Saidin Shield – the Red Sister has enhanced Defensive Strength against male channelers
  
• Gentling – The Red Sister has the ability to Gentle male channelers (assuming this ability is not granted to other Aes Sedai)
  
• Enhanced Gentling – The Red Sister has stronger Gentling than other Aes Sedai, doing more damage, or requiring fewer preconditions in order to be successful.
  
• Yield after Gentling – The Red Sister gains something extra upon gentling a saidin-user (Faith, Prestige, Happiness, etc.).
  

WHITE AJAH
The Whites are tricky because they are not particularly well-defined in the books, and are seemingly somewhat redundant to the Browns. They pursue logic and philosophy. They don't care about the rest of the world (and have no eyes and ears), and "reject" passion. Ideas (I like 1):

• Generate Science – A White Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Science per turn. Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor.
  
• Generate Culture – A White Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Culture per turn. Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor. This is inspired by their interest in philosophy, but is largely contradictory with their anti-passion nature.
  
• Research Kills – A White Sister gains a small amount of Science for every kill/shadowspawn kill (this is rather morbid)
  
• Enhanced Sight – the White Sister has enhanced visibility due to their clarity and knowledge.
  

GRAY AJAH
The Gray Ajah is also not particularly well-developed in the books. They concern themselves with politics and mediation. They often serve as negotiators and ambassadors. Ideas (I think I like 4 or 5):

• Enhanced Diplomat – the Gray Sister goes "off the map" for a time and functions as an enhanced Diplomat – perhaps providing some extra benefits beyond those of other diplomats (some intrigue, enhancements to negotiations)
  
• Negotiate with Civ – Unclear how this could work, but the Gray Sister could provide a bonus to trade and diplomacy, provided she initiated the session by moving into the territory of the second civ. This could provide extra gold/yield incentives to both civs, create unbreakable treaties, extend the deals for more than 30 turns, etc.
  
• Improve Trade – similar to above, the Gray Sister could go "off the map" and function as a caravan – one that provides extra yields to one or both parties.
  
• Negotiate with CS – The Gray Sister initiates dialogue with the CS, and provides for easier negotiation – bonus influence from gold donations, non-military tribute demanding, extra benefits/yields from being friends with the CS, etc.
  
• Ignore Borders – the Gray Sister can move as if she has an open borders agreement with any civ (like a missionary).
  
• Faster Movement – related to the above in principle, the Gray Sister gains bonus movement points or ignores terrain.

BROWN AJAH
The Brown Ajah is pretty well-developed in the books, but is tricky in part because of their similarity to the Whites. The Browns seek knowledge and study history. They also maintain the Tower library. Ideas (I like 1, 2, or 4):

• Generate Science – A Brown Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Science per turn. Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor. This one must obviously not be also used by the Whites.
  
• Generate Culture – A Brown Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Culture per turn. Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor. This is inspired by their interest in history.
  
• Ruins Explorer – The Brown Sister gains better results from the exploration of ruins. This is problematically useless in the late game – unless we decide to enhance the presence of ruins.
  
• Enhanced Archaeologist – The Brown Sister functions as a super-archaeologist, doing digs more quickly, not disappearing once they are complete, and perhaps having a chance to find Hidden Antiquity Sites.
  
• Research Kills – A Brown Sister gains a small amount of Science for every kill/shadowspawn kill (this is rather morbid)
  
• Culture Kills – A Brown Sister gains a small amount of Culture for every kill/shadowspawn kill

BLACK AJAH
The Black Ajah doesn't exist a a “real” Ajah, strictly speaking, but we could have it open up to certain civs and Aes Sedai (see below in sub-part G). There are multiple directions we can go in for Aes Sedai who take this as a promotion. Ideas (I like 1, 2, 3, or 6):

• Freedom from the Oaths – The Three Oaths do not apply to the Black Sister – she can kill, lie, etc.
  
• Turning – The Black Sister can, after weakening another Channeler, take permanent control of that Channeler (12 other Aes Sedai and 13 Myrddraal not required)
  
• Compulsion – The Black Sister can, after weakening another Unit, take temporary control of that unit.
  
• Create Darkfriend – the Black Sister can capture a military unit or civilian and make them a Darkfriend, which is a unit we may perhaps choose to create for various purposes.
  
• Assassinate Governor – the Black Sister has a chance (like some darkfriend spies or Bloodknives might) to kill a Governor stationed in a city.
  
• Assassinate Great Person – similar to above, the Black Sister has a chance (like some darkfriend spies or Bloodknives might) to sabotage Great Person generation in a city.
  
• Aes Sedai Killer – a Black Sister receives bonus Combat Strength against Aes Sedai.

AJAHS WITH OTHER CHANNELERS
It has been discussed in-thread that it could be possible for any female channeler to train at the White Tower. As far as the possible effects this could have (we could elect to combine some of these):

1. Provides the unit with a Promotion, the specifics of which would be determined by which Ajah they were sent to train with. These could be minor versions of the corresponding Aes Sedai abilities.
2. Provides the unit with some "free" experience, because of their instruction.
3. Has diplomatic ramifications (boosting favor with various Ajahs in the Hall of the Tower)
4. Takes the channeler "off the map" for a set number of turns while she trains.

I, once again, don't have strong opinions about which of these, if any, is best. A decent part of me wants the Ajahs to remain Aes Sedai-only, and leave "normal" promotions for other channelers.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3F.1 – Ajah Use – Should specific Aes Sedai be attached to Ajahs? Should this be a promotion, an internal choice, or merely "training?". Can Aes Sedai adopt multiple Ajahs?
• 3F.2 – Which Ajah – Should all Ajahs be represented? Is it ok if the abilities granted are non-combat related?
• 3F.3 – Ajah Abilities – For each Ajah, which ability or abilities do you prefer? How should their specific mechanics work? How would you balance them against other Ajahs? Are there any others we should consider?
• 3F.4 – Other Channelers – Should non-Aes Sedai be able to train with the Ajahs? Does this have any effect on their abilities?

G – Persistent Aes Sedai

This concept is only relevant if Aes Sedai are only "loaned" to civs. If an Aes Sedai returns to the White Tower after the loan is up, is that Aes Sedai gone forever, or does she persist, able to return to the civ or other civs later? Another condition that might trigger this is if a civ's relationship with the Tower deteriorates such that the Sister is recalled – can they ever get them back?

On the one hand, this makes little sense, since sisters don't live for thousands of years, but on the other hand, it might reinforce the notion of the White Tower being an independent agent that can interact with various civs at will. Some options to consider:

1. Aes Sedai are gone forever, once they return to the Tower
2. Aes Sedai can return to the civ if requested, but only to the original civ that first summoned them. This prevents others from benefiting from your experience and promotions
3. Aes Sedai can return to any civ if requested. This allows for some excitement due to the unpredictability of it – the surprise of gaining a well-leveled Aes Sedai of a surprising Ajah.
4. Warders could follow their Aes Sedai inside and outside of the Tower, or they could remain with the original civs who built them.

I don't have any strong opinions about this. Option 3 is potentially the most interesting, but it is also the most complex.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3G.1 – Persistence – Do Aes Sedai disappear forever if recalled by the Tower? Can they return to that civ, or to any civ? What about their Warders?

H – Novices and Accepted

ROLES
Since Novices and Accepted are relatively significant to the book series – several main characters spend several books among their ranks – they should be discussed for their possible inclusion.

The role they could play in the game could vary, including:

1. Serving as controllable units, perhaps following similar acquisition mechanics to Aes Sedai.
2. Factoring into diplomacy.

The first is quite odd, especially when considering Novices, who are only seldom allowed to even leave the Tower. Accepted could, theoretically, be released as units, as they are more often allowed to leave the Tower. These could be units who are substantially weaker than Aes Sedai (though not yet bound by the Three Oaths). While it seems unlikely the Tower would ever "loan" them to civs, we could pursue this as an option for civs that don't quite have enough favor to warrant the loan/gift of a full Sister ("here, have an Accepted instead.").

The second option may be more practical and useful for our purposes. Perhaps your civ sends girls to the Tower to train to become Aes Sedai (as is true in the books). Maybe your civ "sacrifices" population, "Old Blood" (or whatever we call that resource), non-Aes Sedai channeling units, gold (which is in harmony with the link between gold and diplomacy set forth in base CiV), or some other yield. In return, a certain number of Novices appear within the Tower, forever associated with your civ. The presence of these novices improves your diplomatic relations with the Tower (a la the Daughter-Heirs of Andor traditionally being sent to train). The actual number of Novices would likely be an abstraction (1-3 instead of 76).

Eventually, those Novices would be promoted into Accepted (perhaps with more expenditure of resources). These Accepted would then declare an Ajah to train with, boosting the civ's relationship with that particular Ajah (which is currently intended to be a component of the diplomatic victory). The civ could play a role in this, or it could be done automatically. Again, this is an abstraction – these Accepted aren't literally living for 1300 years.

Perhaps, even, those Accepted would eventually become Aes Sedai. Those Aes Sedai could become Sitters – lending the civ a real voice in the Hall of the Tower. Perhaps one could eventually be elected Amyrlin.

These thoughts are all rather nascent, but the point is that sending young women to the Tower could be a way to incorporate the flavor of Novices and Accepted into the game in a quasi-realistic fashion, while serving as a reasonable mechanism for Tower diplomacy.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3H.1 – Novices and Accepted – Should Novices and Accepted be included in the game? Should they be units or serve some kind of diplomatic function? How should these mechanics work?
  

I – Thoughts on Diplomacy

Diplomacy with the White Tower is not the purpose of this document, but several of the ideas stated herein tie into diplomacy. Those are collected here for easy perusal.

• Gray Ajah Aes Sedai could have a role in easing diplomacy with the Tower. This is especially true if "real" Diplomacy exists between civs and the Tower (trades, peace treaties, etc.).
• A civ's diplomatic relationship with the Tower might affect the number of Aes Sedai they are gifted/loaned, and/or the quality of those Aes Sedai.
• The First Oath may play a role in diplomacy with the Tower.
• Aes Sedai units may join or train with various Ajahs. These choices may improve relations with those Ajahs. As a related concept, when the White Tower loans Aes Sedai, they may choose to loan a civ Aes Sedai from Ajahs that civ has positive relationships with
• Non-Aes Sedai channelers may be sent to train with the Aes Sedai in the White Tower. This may have tangible effects on the units, or may, alternatively, simply serve to reinforce diplomatic relations.
• Civs may send Novices to train in the tower, perhaps at some cost to the civ. These Novices will boost diplomatic relations, and will eventually become Accepted, and perhaps eventually Aes Sedai.
• Through diplomacy and espionage, it should be possible for the Black Ajah to gain control of the White Tower.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 3I.1 – Diplomacy – In what ways does the creation and use of Aes Sedai affect the White Tower-centered diplomacy system? How should that system work, both in general and specifically?

4 – OTHER CHANNELERS AND ASPECTS OF THE POWER

Aside from Aes Sedai, other female channelers should be available as units. As stated earlier in this document, I am of the opinion that these units should have a different Acquisition Methods than those of the Aes Sedai. The case could certainly be made that these units should be more "voluntary" in their production, as well (as opposed to spontaneously appearing or being gifted, etc.).

This section will examine the possible approaches to the various channeling units, as well as consider some other in-universe aspects of channeling saidar.

A – Units or Not Units

Just exactly how we incorporate non-Aes Sedai channelers into the game isn't as obvious as we might initially think. Perhaps the main problem is the ambiguous notion of what these channelers would actually do. This problem stems from the fact that, with some exception, the vast majority of channelers portrayed in the WoT world are not predominantly "combat-oriented." As far as the potential in-game roles suggested by the books, we have (females only):

• Healers – Wisdoms, Kinswomen, etc.
  
• Combat – Wilders (potentially), (in some cases) Ayyad
  
• Misc. - Windfinders, Wise Ones

The problem is that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense for Wisdoms, for example, to be blasting people with fireballs all around the map. At the same time, I don't particularly like the idea of Healing being exceptionally common – it seems like it has the potential to "break" CiV's combat system. Similarly, the purpose of the "combat" channelers is vague – how exactly are they different from comparable ranged units? This issues are problematic, especially considering the way Civ's tech progression works (units go obsolete, are replaced by better units).

One possible solution might be for some of these channelers to not be units at all.

Consider Wisdoms. They are, essentially, civil servants. They take care of the sick, perform advisory or administrative roles in the community. To me, all of this suggests that Wisdoms may make perfect Specialists.

Specialists exist to 1) generate a yield, and 2) generate Great People. As far as the yield, I could imagine it being Faith, Culture, or even (local) Happiness. Additionally, they could be tied to any "Old Blood" mechanics we choose – providing modifiers to the amount of channelers a civ can produce, or the resource they expend to produce them, for instance. Also, we may have found a perfect generator for some of the unusual Great People we are considering (Ta'veren, Dreamers, etc.). Of course, Wisdoms would require a building to be attached to – I don't yet know what this would be, but I don't imagine it will be impossible to choose one.

All in all, I feel drawn to the idea of Wisdoms being Specialists, and not units. I will consider them as units later, but currently this seems like a better solution.

The other channeler-types make more sense to me as "real" units. A Kinswoman is a kind of "upgrade" over a Wisdom, but they seem to occupy enough narrative space in the final books to deserve inclusion as a unit.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 4A.1 – Specialists – Should Wisdoms be units or should they be a kind of Specialist? If they are a Specialist, what kind of yield would they produce? What kind of Great People would they generate? What kind of building would they be housed in?
  

B – Technological Progression of Female Channelers

One interesting issue with regards to the Normal channelers is the question of what extent they should follow a normal technological progression (having new technologies render old units obsolete and providing their replacements).

If we elect to have the units follow a normal progression, this would make them different than Aes Sedai, which are likely to exist outside of the normal tech progression. Whether this is a positive or a negative is subjective. These are the ways we could choose to treat Normal units with regards to technological progression:

• The units are tied to the tech tree in an identical manner to normal military units – one replaces the other
• The units are tied to the tech tree in terms of their prerequisites, but do not replace one another or upgrade over time. Units may go obsolete, but they aren't necessarily replaced by another unit.
• The units do not strictly speaking tie into the tech tree, but (similarly to one of the options for Aes Sedai) their functionality may improve over time through Social Policies, buildings, wonders, etc.

If we create a normal upgrade path in pursuing the first method, we run into the difficulty of "ranking" units that are not necessarily superior or inferior to one another. Should a Wilder upgrade to a Wisdom (assuming the Wisdom is a unit)? Furthermore, a Wilder is likely a combat-focused unit, whereas the Wisdom is most definitely a Healing/support unit. This could be rectified by creating a two-line upgrade path, where Wisdoms (again, if we chose to make them units) upgraded into Kinswomen, and Wilders upgraded into.... I have no idea what Wilders would upgrade to.

If we chose the second method, the upgrade rationale doesn't need to be there. Wilders could simply be an early game channeler, one that would eventually go obsolete. Later in the game, Wisdoms and/or Kinswomen would pop up, but these units would not necessarily be viewed in relation to the Wilders – they wouldn't be expected to replace or improve their functionality. I find myself drawn more to this option than the first.

I think the third option is probably the best, though. While differentiating these Normal Units from Aes Sedai might be arguably a positive aspiration, in my opinion the stronger design goal is the unify all kinds of channeling units. Since combat channelers might already be viewed as dubiously necessary – how exactly are they different in use from ranged units? – giving them all a cohesive system is a more unified approach that might be easier for the player to adapt to and appreciate them. By relying on incremental improvements to the stats of our channeling units (from Wonders, Social Policies, Era changes, etc.) a single unit type could be more-or-less viable for the entire game. A Wilder would, for example, fill the same role – some sort of special combat unit, most likely – for the whole game. If we elected to make Wisdoms into Specialists, that leaves the Kin as the sole non-Aes Sedai Healing unit, one that would likely appear first in the mid-game, and would remain viable (through incremental improvement) throughout the whole game. Note, code limitations may require that these are these incremental upgrades are technically new units – if that is the case, they should simply carry the same name (if possible).

I think if we did adopt the above (third) system, the "Old Blood" or "Strategic Resource" Acquisition Methods seem to rise up to the top. Since we'd be creating "special" units that may last for many many turns, gaining experience and improving in functionality, it may make sense to limit the number of them that are allowed in a given civ.

The decision we make above certainly has major consequences on the UU channeling units. Based on the books, it seems to make sense that the Ayyad might be a kind of Wilder-replacement unit, while the Wise Ones would be a Kin (or even Aes Sedai) replacement. This is significant because these UU's would, potentially, be available for several Eras, if in fact we decide that their Normal varieties don't go obsolete. That said, I imagine we could easily impose an extra tech/era limitation on them (e.g., at the discovery of some mid-game tech, the Sharans can start building Ayyad instead of simply Wilders). It is quite possible that essentially all channeling UU's could simply be era-linked Wilder replacements.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 4B.1 – Technological Progression – Should female channelers evolve in-line with the tech tree? Should there be obsolescence and upgrades, or should units simply improve their functionality over time? How should we handle UU's?

C – Distinct Abilities of Channelers

One question that might help lead us to the proper decision on some of the issues above: what's the point of channelers? If they're ranged units, how are they different than typical ranged units? Obviously, they won't have the breadth of functionality of Aes Sedai, but we should likely create some sort of niche for them to fill. A few possible ways that the combat of female channelers (perhaps including Aes Sedai) might be differentiated from archers, etc.:

1. channelers could have a shorter range, but higher ranged strength
2. channelers could have a quite large disparity between their ranged strength (quite high) and combat strength (very low) values, leading them to be lethal attackers but very vulnerable to attack.
3. some channelers could Heal/ have the Medic promotion
4. channelers could move after attacking, or have some other atypical combat feature
5. channelers could take advantage of certain channeler-only mechanics that might emerge (linking, etc.)
6. channelers could have attacks that ignore the defensive strength of the target (or reduce it)
7. channelers could do splash damage

As to which of these is the best... this is difficult to say. Some of these make sense for certain units more than others, but it may be best if we can make some cohesive aspects that are true for all channelers, so it feels like a cohesive "magic system." There are certainly other possibilities that I haven't yet considered, as well. Essentially, this boils down to us making us a decision on how we want them to be played.

A note on option 6 above: if we elected to have all channelers do flat damage, regardless of the defensive strength of the target, this would make incremental improvement of channelers over time moot – they'd do the same damage, regardless if they were fighting against a warrior or a knight. This would not only simplify the tech-progression issue, but would also make channeling units stand out as unique of all the civ unit types. That said, it's also a relatively drastic feature that might open up a can of worms in balancing. Similarly, option 7 above would certainly differentiate them mechanically in a cool way. I would suggest that if we elected to go with area-of-effect attacks, that these attacks should be significantly weaker than targeted attacks would be, leaving channelers as a sort of "support damage" role in combat. This could be fine. We would additionally need to decide if friendly fire is possible.

Note that I did not list any "expanded" roles these channelers could have – diplomacy, etc. In the above section on Aes Sedai, I brought up the possibility that channelers could train with various Ajahs and gain various other abilities and bonuses. I do think, if we do choose to do this, it may be best for these to function as "normal" promotions – give the channeler a bonus to something – instead of unlocking wholly new functionality (diplomatic abilities, generating yields, etc.).

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 4C.1 – Channeler Abilities – What's so special about channelers, in terms of mechanics? How are they different from other combat units? What kind of gameplay do we want for channeling units?

D – Normal and Unique Female Channelers

Below, I have attempted to be somewhat systematic in my approach to each particular channeler type. However, this is difficult because A) the tech tree doesn't yet exist, B) we don't have the answers to any of the above questions, and C) it is far too early for specific balancing. Under each unit, I propose various alternatives. Decisions we make on one unit will likely have ramifications for other units as well.

I don't expect that we will "settle" the UU's any time soon – those need to be balanced alongside UA's, UB's, and other UU's later – but we can start thinking about them, at least.

(LEGEND)
Civs: which civs can use it
Primary Role: how they will most likely function
Era Available: when they first become available
Upgrades From: the previous unit in their tech line
Upgrades To: the subsequent unit in their tech line
Replaces: for UU's, the unit that they would replace
Notes: my thoughts

WILDER
Civs: All
Primary Role: Combat
Era Available: After the Breaking (1) OR Era of Nations (2)
Upgrades From: none
Upgrades To: none OR Wisdom OR Kin (depending on our progression system)
Replaces: none
Notes: This is the meat-and-potatoes channeler of most civs for most of the game. I do still imagine it as a ranged unit, but there should be some features that distinguish it from typical ranged units. I would be fine with any of the things outlined in subsection A above. If there are "special features" of channeling – linking with others, being able to be shielded, etc. – than these units will naturally have a somewhat different feel than typical military units.

WISDOM
Civs: All OR Andor OR Manetheren
Primary Role: Healer OR Specialist
Era Available: Depends on what they are designed to be, likely mid-game – Era of Freedom (3) OR Era of Consolidation (4) OR Era of New Beginnings (5)
Upgrades From: none OR Wilder
Upgrades To: none OR Kin
Replaces: none OR Wilder
Notes: These are also called Wise Women in some towns in the books, but given the relative importance of Wisdoms to our characters, and the similar-sounding Wise Ones, I would prefer to ignore that name.

If these are units intended to replace Wilders on upgrade, I would suggest that they are roughly similar but have some Healing ability.

If these are units intended to coexist with Wilders, I would suggest they have little to no combat functionality, instead only having Healing ability. They could theoretically be civilians.

If these were desired as an Andoran (or Manetheren) UU, I would suggest they simply replace the Wilder, with Healing functionality added.

As stated before, my current favorite use for Wisdoms is as Specialists (see subsection A above).

KIN OR KINSWOMAN
Civs: All OR Altara
Primary Role: Healer (some combat)
Era Available: Era of New Beginnings (5) OR Era of ??????? (6)
Upgrades From: Wilder OR Wisdom
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: Wilder OR Wisdom
Notes: Though the Kin are functionally quite similar to Wisdom units (if we elected to have Wisdom units), the fact that they are organized, are nominally trained, and lead such long lives suggest they should likely be more powerful.

The Kin to me make sense as a more well-rounded Wisdom. They could possibly have some enhanced Healing capacity, and/or other features that would make them more effective Healers (increased movement, for instance). Additionally, based on their roles in the final books, they could likely have improved combat ability as well.

If Wisdoms are not units, the Kin could essentially just be an evolution of the Wilder, with Healing ability and either equivalent combat or slightly augmented combat.

It could be argued that Kinswomen should be an Altaran UU. I can see the appeal of this, since they are based on Ebou Dar – especially if we treat channelers very generally (having only one or two "Normal" types). That said, since the Kin are likely the most advanced "Normal"-seeming channeler, it may make sense to keep them available to all civs. Additionally, they do not seem to have any affiliation with Ebou Dar itself – that city may have simply been a good base of operation because it is particularly far from the White Tower (recall that many of them are runaways from the Tower).

If Wisdoms and Kinswomen are both UU's (for Andor and Altara, let's say), it is difficult to say how they would compare. The Kin should be superior probably. This could be balanced by cost, and/or by having the Wisdoms appear much earlier in the tech tree. The Wisdom could theoretically be slightly better at Healing, and worse at combat (or unable to fight at all).

Because of their organization, non-UU kin do seem to make sense requiring some sort of building or national wonder to be produced.

DAUGHTER OF SILENCE
Civs: Altara
Primary Role: Healer and/or Combat
Era Available: Era of ?????? (6) OR Era of Encroaching Blight (7)
Upgrades From: Wilder OR Wisdom
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: Kin
Notes: This is a bit obscure, but the Daughters of Silence were a group of former Accepted who were put out of the Tower in 794 NE and started their own organization – I believe it was in Ebou Dar. They trained Wilders in the power. They were eventually caught by the Aes Sedai. I believe they were essentially the predecessors to the Kin. These could make sense as an Altaran replacement of the Kin – which is somewhat odd, in that the Kin themselves are Altaran. Perhaps a better way to think of it would be an Altaran "enhancement" of the Kin.

Since they were Tower-trained to the point of being Accepted, I would imagine that they would be relatively well-rounded, somewhat like mini-Aes Sedai, with decent combat and Healing. Perhaps they would be equivalent to the Kin in Healing, but would have more formidable combat prowess, movement, defensive strength, etc. Not sure this unit needs to exist, but it is an option (for a UU-starved civ as well).

WINDFINDER
Civs: Atha'an Miere
Primary Role: Naval vessel or UA
Era Available: most likely mid-game: Era of Consolidation (4) OR Era of New Beginnings (5)
Upgrades From: none OR Wilder
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: Wilder OR Caravel (our equivalent) OR Frigate (our equivalent) OR Privateer (our equivalent)
Notes: How to handle Windfinders could be a bit tricky. I do not find it particularly compelling to have them be a normal land unit, based on their characterization in the books. If we do decide they should be land units, I suggest they replace the Wilder and have a significant bonus to embarkation – faster movement, amphibious capability, etc. Any other improvements they have are incidental to this discussion.

I think the books show us the proper way to handle them – we simply assume that each Sea Folk ship has a Windfinder on it, and that that Windfinder is making that ship better. To this end, we would likely not have a unit called a Windfinder. Instead the Windfinder presence would be either a part of specific unit's abilities, or a part of the whole Atha'an Miere UA.

Of the four Sea Folk vessels – darters, soarers, skimmers, and rakers – the rakers are by far the most frequently mentioned in the books, and are known for their swiftness. So, the Windfinders (via UU or via UA) might confer enhanced movement on ships (perhaps on Ocean or Coast or both), or the ability to ignore zone of control. These can be fleshed out when we consider civ UA's later. Alternatively, there could be a Sea Folk ship called a Windfinder that has these abilities, and the assumption would be that the ship is actually a darter, raker, etc.

AYYAD
Civs: Shara
Primary Role: combat
Era Available: unclear, likely anything mid-game or later
Upgrades From: Wilder
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: Wilder OR Kin
Notes: Of course, this all assumes we do indeed implement Shara as a playable civ. I am on record as wanting them, and S3rgeus is on record as preferring to hold off til an expansion. In any case, these thoughts apply to either case.

We don't know much about the Ayyad, but we do know that A) they appear quite adept in battle, B) they are kept separate from the normal populace, C) they breed with male channelers (perhaps keeping the incidence of channeling in their population quite high), and D) they may rule Shara unofficially.

To me, I see the Ayyad as perhaps the most powerful channeler in combat – maybe comparable to non-Green Aes Sedai in strength. This could be accomplished through literal stat boosts, or through other aims – increased range, etc. We may choose to balance this by taking away any Healing ability, or imposing other limitations. They could replace either the Wilder or the Kin, depending on our desired era and design goals (by replacing the Kin, we in essence decide the Sharans have no Healing outside of true Aes Sedai).

It is theoretically possible that the Ayyad could replace Aes Sedai, in that they are organizationally large and are potentially of similar strength. I don't think this is the smart way to go, though, as it ascribes the narrative of the WoT's version of events – that Shara is far from the White Tower, and its enemy – to our game.

The male Ayyad (The Freed) will be covered in section 5 below. Indeed, the possibility of a male-channeler UU makes the Sharan civ quite unique.

WISE ONE
Civs: Aiel
Primary Role: Healer, some combat, "unusual" functionality
Era Available: unclear, likely mid-game
Upgrades From: Wilder OR Wisdom
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: Wilder OR Wisdom OR Kin
Notes: It is very important to get the Wise Ones right, as they are major players in the books. I can see them occupying various eras in the game, though probably not early-game.

In terms of functionality, Wise Ones make sense as a kind of jack of all trades channeler – decent healing as well as combat. Exactly how we approach this depends on which unit they replace and in what Era.

Additionally, it makes sense that Wise Ones can enter Tel'aran'rhiod. This functionality was previously discussed as an ability of certain GP (Dreamers and Wolfbrothers), but could additionally (or instead) be granted to Wise Ones. How exactly this works is still unclear – it would most likely be map-related or espionage-related. I will say more about the potential of Tel'aran'rhiod in Section 7. In any case, it is worth considering for Wise Ones.

Additionally, certain other mechanics could be appropriate for Wise Ones – if we have a Linking mechanic, for example, they could receive bonuses to it (being organizationally rather strong). Or, perhaps Wise Ones receive non-damage-related abilities, like increased movement or sight, etc.

It is of course possible that the Wise Ones could replace Aes Sedai, in that they are well organized and possibly of comparable strength. Again, I don't think I'm a fan of this. It should be possible in our game for Aiel players to be loaned Aes Sedai (while still building Wise Ones), despite that never occurring in the books.

SUL'DAM
Civs: Seanchan
Primary Role: Channeler-capturer/controller OR UA
Era Available: mid-late game: Era of Consolidation (4) OR later
Upgrades From: none
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: none OR All Channeling units OR mid-game melee unit
Notes: How Sul'dam work is likely going to be integral to the design of the entire Seanchan civ. It can't be decided here, but I will share some thoughts nonetheless.

If the Seanchan UA allows for any killed channeler to be captured (and either owned as is, or converted to Damane), then there will likely be no Sul'dam unit.

However, we could set it up that the Seanchan produce a specific Sul'dam unit that captures Channelers... er... marath'damane (most likely when they have been weakened – this could work similarly to gentling, in terms of mechanics). These units could be simply appropriated as a Seanchan unit, or would be turned into a specific Damane unit.

It could be argued that, in the above case, the Sul'dam would replace all Seanchan Channelers. We could set up the Seanchan civ so that the only way they can gain channelers is through capture. This, of course, sets them at automatic odds with the Tower, which is simultaneously perfect and terrible, depending on your perspective. As an alternative, they could be prevented from “building” channelers, but could still be “loaned” them by the White Tower, Black Tower, etc.

Suldam would likely have some combat ability of their own, likely not terrible. In fact, they could replace a mid-game melee unit instead of a channeler (Pike or Knight or something like that).

Though it is not essential, it certainly makes sense to pair a Sul'dam with a particular Damane. This could work similarly to the Warder/Aes Sedai dynamic. It would likely be much less complex (especially considering the lack of Oaths), but suggests some unique limitations – requiring the units to stay within one or two tiles of each other, for example. Perhaps a Damane doesn't need a specific Sul'dam, but needs to simply be near a Sul'dam. This creates interesting questions as to what happens when a Sul'dam is killed and there are no others nearby.

One thing that should be asked is whether or not Sul'dam can become Damane. Of course, this would require a situation where a Sul'dam was trying to capture another Sul'dam – only possible in a Seanchan gifted a Sul'dam to another civ or CS. Of course, we know from the books that the a'dam does indeed work on them. I think, though, given the rarity of this situation, it is probably not worth including. That said, on the other hand it would make for a pretty cool easter egg.

Alternatively, Damane could also theoretically be simply built like any other channeling unit, which, although a much less interesting option, would eliminate the need for Sul'dam.

While a very small number of a'dam that work on men (called a Domination Band) do exist in the books, they are extremely rare and not systematically implemented (certainly not by the Seanchan). I do not think we should use them in this mod.

DAMANE
Civs: Seanchan
Primary Role: combat
Era Available: mid-late game: Era of Consolidation (4) OR later
Upgrades From: none OR Wilder OR Kin
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: none or Wilder OR Wisdom OR Kin OR All Channelers
Notes: The Sul'dam system above is of course inextricably linked to what we decide to do with Damane. Regardless of what we do with Sul'dam, Damane should definitely be present somehow in the Seanchan civ.

Perhaps there is no Damane Unit and whatever unit was captured simply becomes the property of the Seanchan civ.

Alternatively, a captured unit could instantly turn into a Damane unit. A Damane unit would likely be quite powerful in channeling, perhaps of comparable strength to Ayyad and possibly even Aes Sedai. They should certainly have some significant limitations, though, most likely pertaining to the requirement of a Damane or some other Seanchan units being nearby.

Seanchan refuse to let themselves be Healed by Damane, so Damane shouldn't have this functionality. Additionally, the Seanchan don't appear to explore the nature of saidar much, so we could decide that any enhanced features – linking, for example – could be unavailable to them.

A Damane could retain promotions (or some of them) from the original unit, in a way preserving some of what it was. Otherwise, a Wilder Damane would be identical to an Aes Sedai Damane, which, really, might make perfect sense considering how little the Seanchan appear to care about the Damane's prior life.

As mentioned above, it is possible that capture wouldn't be required, that Damane could simply be produced. This to me seems pretty uninteresting, though.

GREAT CHANNELER
Civs: All
Primary Role: Various
Era Available: Various
Upgrades From: none
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: none
Notes: The notion of Great Channeler units has been mentioned a few times within the thread, usually as a means of capturing some of the iconic characters in the series for in-game use (Aviendha, Nyneave, etc.).

My earlier post on Great People mentioned a few potential Great Person types that would fall under the category of "Great Channeler," most notably the Great Dreamer and Dreamwalker. Personally, I think this is the proper way to accomplish this goal – simply choose certain kinds of channelers and create them as specific GP types. I don't think a specific Great Channeler type is necessarily. Similarly, there could be a Channeler-type of Governors (however they work), but I don't think they need to come from a specific unit.

The idea of a super-powered "Hero" unit is something that I have gone on record not thinking is a good fit for this mod. If we want very powerful channelers, I think those channelers should be leveled a great deal by the player.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 4D.1 – Units – Which units should we use? Which ones should be UU's and which should be available to all civs? How should they be arrayed on the tech tree? What abilities should they each have?
• 4D.2 – Windfinders – How should we handle Sea Folk Windfinders? Are they stand-alone units, or merely a part of the ships of the Atha'an Miere? Are they tied to specific naval vessels or are they represented by the Sea Folk UA?
• 4D.3 – Seanchan Units – How should we handle Sul'dam and Damane? Do both units exist or is this merely a part of the Seanchan UA? What happens to a captured unit?
• 4D.4 – Great Channelers – Should Great Channelers exist in the game, or should they simply be folded into other Great Person types?

5 – SAIDIN

As mentioned before, the male/female dichotomy of the power is one of the most flavorful aspects of the WoT magic system, and would be nice to incorporate into the game. This, coupled with the unique aspects of the madness that accompanies the use of saidin, makes male channelers an interesting but complex aspect of our mod.

A – The Taint on Saidin

The taint on saidin, and the madness it causes, is an essential feature of the mod, in my opinion. I should restate that, in principle, I think the madness of saidin should be quite bad in order to accurately represent the state of the Third Age in the books. Male channelers are feared, even when they are neighbors and family members – so feared, in book one the "common folk" of the Two Rivers seem to equate the Dragon with the Dark One. Some societies kill male channelers outright, while others send them to their deaths in battle.

In any case, there isn't really a record of civs using them as "units" until Rand does so in the final years of the Age. While I think it is an important fun consideration to allow them to be playable units, I also think that doing so shouldn't be done in all cases and, in fact, might be something that civs only rarely do, or do under certain duress. A civ could, of course, go nuts with saidin users and take that to an interesting domination victory, but I'd guess this would be the minority of cases. I'm open to debate these points, but I'm moving forward with this as an assumption, because I think it best represents the flavor of the books and the WoT world in general.

It seems to make the most sense for this madness to effect unit behavior, although it could theoretically be represented through some other means (units having mandated "life expectancies," flavor text, etc.). I think this is the most compelling possibility, so this is what I'll be pursuing here. The kinds of effects madness could have on a unit:

• the unit could ignore orders, and simply do nothing sometimes ("your channeler mutters to himself")
• the unit could attack himself
• the unit could attack allies
• the unit could move unpredictably and/or flee battle
• the unit could go "rogue," turning into a barbarian unit
• the unit's attack and defense values could vary wildly

It is likely that the proper solution is a combination of several of the above options. As has been proposed earlier in the thread, madness should occur in several stages, worsening as time goes on. The less severe of these (ignoring orders, moving erratically) should be common in the early stages, while the worst of them (going "rogue") should only occur in the advanced stages of madness. The merits of each of these will be discussed below.

Also important to consider is how quickly a unit goes mad, and what causes the madness. I can see arguments for the following:

1. when the unit gains a promotion, they get a madness "promotion"
2. when a random amount of experience is gained, they earn a madness "promotion"
3. after a certain number of turns, they earn a madness "promotion"
4. after a random number of turns, they earn a madness "promotion"
5. they are created with some degree of madness

While options one and three are very simple, the unfortunate side-effect of this simplicity is predictability. If a player knows that a unit will go very mad after ten turns, players will likely use the unit for nine turns, and then disband it or send it to its death. This is a decent strategy, but doesn't seem to fit the universe particularly well.

I find options two and four solve this problem. You can use a male channeler, but at any point he might descend into madness. This might be fine when the unit is mostly sane, but if he turns completely rogue at an inopportune time... Interestingly enough, option two is simultaneously the most lenient and the harshest. On the one hand, you could have a male channeler garrisoned in a city, or a fort, for thousands of years, with no problem. Once he gains experience – something that, by definition, always happens mid-battle – he might go mad. So when moving along the map, you're safe, but in battles, you are not. Option 4 doesn't specifically target battles, but has the effect of making a mandatory life-expectancy on a male channeler – a garrisoned unit, for example, will eventually go mad, regardless of what he does. Of course, we could elect to make madness not accumulate while asleep or something.

I think units starting somewhat mad (option 5) is actually probably a good idea, as long as that level of madness was relatively mild.

One interesting issue is the notion of gifting or disbanding saidin units. If a player suspects a unit will soon go mad, should they be able to simply disband the unit? If so, what is the purpose of gentling a unit controlled by your own civ? Disbanding makes sense for normal units – you "send them home" – but what does it mean for male channelers? Death? It seems to me that disbanding male channelers might be problematic if included. We, for example, have discussed having Ideologies that are extremely intolerant of channelers. If somebody were to take a "tolerant" Ideology, and then "ruthlessly" disband all his male channelers, this seems to work against the desired outcome and purpose of this Ideology. I don't know what the solution to this is – perhaps it is best for a male channeling unit to be immune to disbanding, or perhaps only immune to it once they are past the first stage of madness.

As far as gifting, I do think if we do allow the gifting of these units to other civs, they should retain their madness and their madness "counter." That said, I'm not sure we should allow it at all – you shouldn't be able to saidin bomb civs (especially given how this might interact with that civ's ideology. Furthermore, "gifting" a saidin user to a CS seems like a bit of an exploit – a free +5 favor, while simultaneously dodging a potential bullet.

In other words, I do think male channelers should have to be "dealt with" on some level, either gentled (ideal if we set up the mechanisms) or disbanded early (less ideal), or used in combat at that civ's own risk.

I propose that madness should occur over two or three stages, depending on how long these stages last. I do like the idea of units being born with a certain mild level of madness – it applies the "flavor" immediately and will make the units feel different. I think the "negative" actions of a mad unit should be random, based on "rolls" made when the action is made (or at the start of the turn, or something that might prevent exploitative saving/reloading). In subsection B below I will describe the characteristics that might make saidin units "worth using" despite all of this.

Here is a proposal for a two stage approach (this assumes the unit is born with the first level of madness). This could be switched so that he starts out completely sane (stage 0), but in that case I would suggest he arrive at Stage one relatively soon.

1. The unit is sane (we may decide not to start here)
2. The unit sometimes (maybe one in five turns) refuses to act (mutters to himself, stares into darkness, etc.). Much more rarely (maybe one in ten turns), the unit might damage himself or somebody near him, or might move erratically.
3. The unit goes "rogue," and becomes a barbarian/dragonsworn

Here is a proposal for a more gradual, three stage approach (also assuming he is born at the first stage). In this setup, the stages of madness should progress more quickly than in the first option above.

1. The unit is sane (we may decide not to start here)
2. The unit sometimes (maybe one in five turns) refuses to act. Much more rarely (maybe one in ten turns), the unit might move erratically.
3. The unit sometimes (maybe one in four or five turns) damages himself or somebody near him. Much more rarely (maybe one in eight to ten turns), the unit might refuse to act or move erratically (this is more uncommon on this stage so as not to "clutter" his actions with too much sitting around)
4. The unit goes "rogue," and becomes a barbarian/dragonsworn

My inclination is towards the three stage approach, starting with first-level madness. I think this makes Saidin units start with some annoyances, but lets them still be potentially viable. Once they reach level two, it would become extremely risky to use them for fear of "accidents" or them going rogue, which seems appropriate. If we elect to go with the two stage approach, then I would suggest we start the units off sane, if only for a brief period.

How long should this process take? How many turns should you be able to use a male channeler before he becomes too great a liability? I don't have an answer to this – it'll probably need to be play-tested quite a bit. I could imagine 10-20 turns between stages, but I could also imagine longer than that. Of course, in-universe such long times are nonsense, since saidin users go mad within a few years (a turn or less). Much shorter, though, makes it unlikely anybody would ever be able to use them before they became uselessly mad – except perhaps to defend the homeland against invasion.... which, come to think of it, might make sense as the only situation a "civ" from the books would ever use them in their armies (pre-Rand). In other words, I'm torn!

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 5A.1 – Madness – What are the consequences of saidin-induced madness? How do these worsen over time?
• 5A.2 – Trigger of Madness – How often, and by what trigger, do male channelers go mad? Are units created with some madness already present? How many stages should there be?
• 5A.3 – Disbanding and Gifting – Can civs disband saidin units without consequence? Is there a late limit for this? Should they be able to gift them to other civs and CS's?
• 5A.4 – Speed of Madness – How long, in game terms, should the maddening process take? Should saidin units be "flash in the pan," mostly useful for defense or close strikes, or should they be of long-term viability?

B – General Characteristics of Saidin Units

All the discussion in the previous section on how female channelers might work applies here to male channelers. However, since male channelers come with a lot of extra "baggage" because of the taint, it makes sense that they be mechanically different from female channelers. If a player decides to be brave and play with saidin units, they should be "rewarded" with, at the very least, a somewhat unique-feeling unit.

The specific differences between saidar and saidin in the books, apart from the taint, are mostly characterized by how one goes about controlling the Power – for saidar, you embrace and welcome the Source, while for saidin the Source must be wrestled with and conquered. I think these are flavorful, and would make good additions to a game that had a more detailed combat system (an action game, for example). Here, where guns work the same as spears, I think it is best ignored.

That said, I do think it would be best if there were some mechanical differences between male and female channelers. What we do know from the books is that men tend to be, on average, stronger in the power than women. However, men cannot link without the aid of women. Additionally, men tend to have affinities with Fire and Earth, as opposed to Air and Water for women. This final point will be mostly ignored here (see Section 7 on the Five Powers), but the others suggest some ideas:

1. Male channelers could have greater combat strength (or ranged strength), and defensive combat strength
2. Male channelers could be melee units, or at least have a range of one.
3. Male channelers could not have the Healing abilities of females (while it is not technically true that men are worse Healers, the Talent is something that is not as common among men in the series), or not have it beyond the Medic promotion offered to most land units.
4. Male channelers could be unable to Link or do other saidar-specific feats.
5. Male channelers would not be able to participate in some game features, such as training with the tower, etc.
6. Male channelers could have attacks that ignore the defensive strength of the target (or reduce it), if that mechanic was not used for female channelers.
7. Male channelers could do splash damage if that mechanic was not used for female channelers.
8. The use of male channelers would tie into other game mechanics more heavily, such as social policies.

Of these, virtually any are acceptable, and some could be combined together. I think the more different they are from saidar units, the better, and the more different they are from normal military units, the better. I like the idea of them being shorter ranged, somewhat stronger, and perhaps having some extra component (AoE damage or ignoring defense), with all of this balanced appropriately.

I think male channelers should be balanced to be somewhat stronger in combat than their comparable female channelers. This makes up for the punitive nature of the madness, while making them quite scary once mad. My goal overall would be that the advantages of a saidin user just narrowly do not outweigh the risks – this way, they would only be heavily used in really atypical strategies, and would only be sporadically used or in emergencies by most civs. Once/if saidin is cleansed, of course, the game would somewhat open-up for the dominance of the Asha'man – this could be balanced by male channelers being, overall, more rare than females.


REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 5B.1 – Difference between Males and Females – How should saidin units be functionally different, in general, from saidar units? What abilities would they have that females don't? Which abilities would they lack?
• 5B.2 – Balance – How should saidin units be balanced against saidar units? Should they be overall somewhat stronger, considering the risks associated with using them?

C- Acquisition of Saidin Units

The previous discussion on the acquisition of female channelers can mostly apply here, with one major exception: male channelers are a liability. In most cases, civs do not want male channelers to be produced. This complicates the issue, obviously.

It seems that it might make the most sense for male channelers to be Acquired involuntarily, instead of actively produced. This way, a civ must "deal with" their male channelers somehow – whether through using them, gentling them, killing them, etc. – and in some way, that way of dealing with them becomes a part of the civ's identity (see: social policies and ideologies). Referring back to the Acquisition Methods described in Section 2C:

• Method 1 – Production
• Method 2 – Strategic Resource
• Method 3 – Old Blood
• Method 4 – Gifted
• Method 5 – Great People
• Method 6 – Spontaneous
• Method 7 – Faith
• Method 8 – Capture

Methods 1, 2, and 7 seem to be bad choices because most civs would happily choose to not produce male channelers – a luxury sadly not afforded the nations of the WoT books. Method 3 is similarly problematic, though aspects of the "Old Blood" system could be used – a male channeler created through some involuntary means could of course "consume" the "Old Blood" resource, or, alternatively, having more of that resource could result in a higher incidence of male channelers. Method 8 is of course not relevant.

Methods 4, 5, and 6 are left as our most compelling options. Method 4 is perhaps not useful for the vast majority of units, but could be a viable option for the Asha'man (see subsection D below). Method 5 is certainly a possibility, but if we treated male channelers as Great People, how would they be generated? What buildings would provide points towards their generation? What specialists would provide points towards their generation? Why would a civ elect to create these buildings/specialists?

The ambiguous Method 6 may be the most viable answer. Based on a variety of variables – population, social policies, ideologies, amount of female channelers used, etc. – a civ will simply "birth" a male channeler periodically – whether the civ likes it or not. Additionally, some randomness could be thrown in. The type of channeler created (if indeed there are multiple types) might be random, or might depend solely on era. The rate of creation of male channelers – and how they are handled – could also be a factor in determining the rate of spawning for false dragons.

All of this should, in my opinion, combine to make male channelers rarer than their female analogues.

Of course, one issue with the approach I am suggesting is that it is yet another mechanic for the player to learn. If we have "normal" saidar units following one Acquisition Method, Aes Sedai on another, normal saidin users on a third, and Asha'man on a fourth, that may a bit hard to swallow.

REQUIRED DECISION

• 5C.1 – Acquisition – How should male channelers be created? Are they voluntarily or involuntarily produced? What factors go into determining how often a saidin user is born in a civ?

D – The Black Tower

The Asha'man are essentially the male equivalent of the Aes Sedai in the Third Age. Similar to the Aes Sedai, they are:

1. Organized and based in one specific location
2. Train younger or inexperienced channelers
3. Neutral and not associated with any one nation
4. Arguably the most powerful (or at least best trained) channelers of their gender

For these reasons, many of the points discussed in Section 3 (Aes Sedai) above can also apply here. The same questions exist: How are they acquired? Are they temporary loans or permanent gifts? There are, however, a few key things that make the Black Tower different from the White Tower:

1. Asha'man have the potential for madness
2. The Black Tower is very new, only being created in the final years of the NE
3. The Black Tower is associated with the Dragon Reborn
4. Asha'man train all their men in combat, and train very recklessly in channeling

The madness issue has already been discussed. The other issues are more important to this discussion.

The second point, on the newness of the Black Tower, is very important. Because of this, we must carefully decide how the Black Tower is created within the world. I see the options being:

1. The Black Tower is a City-State that appears very late in the game (probably at the start of the Age of the Dragon)
2. The Black Tower is a City-State that is there from the start of the game
3. The Black Tower is a Wonder that is built by a civ
4. The Black Tower is a National Wonder that can be built in all civs
5. The Black Tower has no physical presence, instead just being an invisible organization

The first of these – the Black Tower as a CS – makes the most intuitive sense, but has lots of mechanical problems that go along with it. On the positive side, it could function similarly to the White Tower, including diplomatic options and such. It could gift or loan Asha'man out similarly to what I've proposed for the Aes Sedai. There are several problems with this approach, however. Most importantly, where would the CS appear? There may likely not be many prime spots for a CS to appear so late in the game. If a civ produced the Black Tower Wonder, which caused a full CS to appear nearby, we still have no guarantee that this wouldn't pop up in a terrible place. Secondly, it seems a bad idea to introduce a potentially complex situation – an entirely new CS, with unique mechanics – so late in the game (at a time when several other things are getting quite complex).

The second of these seems like a bad idea. While having the Black Tower CS exist forever certainly makes things simpler, it is also profoundly out-of-universe to the point where I find it quite unpalatable.

The Black Tower could make sense as a Wonder, but I think it would have to have some caveats. I think that building the Wonder wouldn't give anybody "control" of the Asha'man. Perhaps, building it would establish the Asha'man as an entity within the game, enabling all civs to use them. I think the building civ would likely receive some benefits such as more Asha'man to control, better Asha'man, etc., in addition to more typical Wonder effects (bonus culture, slots for GW's, etc.). If the books were taking place in our mod, Andor would have been the civ who built the Tower – in exchange, they received arguably a better relationship with the Asha'man as a consequence. Using this method, civs wouldn't do any negotiation or anything with the Black Tower – they would simply gain Asha'man from one of the aforementioned means.

The Black Tower being a National Wonder makes very little canonical sense – multiple Black Towers? – but makes a lot of mechanical sense. By doing it this way, we can make things simple – build the National Wonder and then you can have some Asha'man. I think this could work, but the out-of-universe aspect is definitely distracting – we'd probably have to name it something different to pull it off. Perhaps the Black Tower builds itself at the start of the appropriate era, and civs must build Black Tower Chapterhouses or something like that to be able to build Asha'man. Again, there is no physical entity to negotiate with here.

The final option, wherein the Black Tower doesn't exist could certainly work. It would in effect be the same as the two previous options, except without requiring the construction of anything beforehand. Building Asha'man would instead be limited only by Tech and Era (and whatever Acquisition Method we determine is best).

Of these, my favorite options are probably the Wonder and National Wonder conceptualizations.

As far as the Black Tower's association with the Dragon, which I think would tie into the Last Battle primarily, I think this could go one of two ways. On the one hand, it does make sense that they be connected – he did establish it, after all. Asha'man could be loaned out to civs that are friendly towards the Dragon (pre-LB) or on the side of Light (in the LB). However, given the major schism in the Black Tower in the final books, this is problematic. There was a large contingent of either Darkfriend Asha'man or "Turned" Asha'man that fought for the forces of the Shadow, so in my opinion, limiting Asha'man to Light-only is misguided. Perhaps, before the Last Battle, the Asha'man are loaned/gifted to anybody, but during the Last Battle, they are given to Shadow and Light civs (sorry Neutrals!). Rather than "get into" the Shadow-Light infighting in the Black Tower (like we plan to do with the White Tower and the threat of Black Ajah takeover), I think it's best for us to simply assume it is happening and leave it at that – its in the game for such a short period of time I think the best policy is to keep things simpler. In short, I think we'd best not make too much of the Dragon-Asha'man connection, for fear of over-complicating things.

As far as the combat-training of the Asha'man, I think the best way to deal with this is to simply make them particularly powerful in combat.

One last thing to discuss about the Black Tower is our possible inclusion of their hierarchy. Similar to the Novice/Accepted/Aes Sedai stream, the Asha'man have Soldiers, Dedicated, and Asha'man. One difference in how the two Towers are managed is that the Black Tower appears to "use" their inexperienced channelers in battle, etc., while the Aes Sedai seems to mostly shelter Novices and Accepted from the real world.

If we choose to include these three "tiers" of Asha'man, I can see it going one of three ways:

1. Each of the three is a distinct unit type that can be build/gifted
2. Each of the three are the same unit, enhanced via promotion
3. The three are era-dependent names for male channelers

The first is relatively simple. Whatever means we choose to generate Asha'man, we could have Soldiers or Dedicated be sometimes created instead. The more inexperienced units would of course be less powerful, and would potentially be gifted more often as a consequence (this could all be randomized). I think each of the three unit types could have any degree of madness, since the different Black Tower ranks appear to be granted based on power, not on age and experience – you could have an older, highly mad Solider, and a young sane Asha'man.

The second method is relatively simple as well, especially if we decide that Asha'man are long-term acquisitions that stay with the player. After accumulating enough experience, the unit earns a promotion that advances him to the next rank. The units would start out as Soldiers, and would eventually earn the Dedicated promotion, which would boost nearly all of their stats. A Dedicated would eventually earn the Asha'man promotion, which would significantly boost their stats again. One consequence of this method is that, depending on the madness system we use, Asha'man would be almost always quite mad by the time they advanced far enough.

The last method goes in a completely different direction. Since we have no real names for early-era saidin channelers, we could elect, instead, to call early-game channelers Soldiers, mid-game ones Dedicated, and the real Asha'man would be called Asha'man. There is a certain elegance to this, in that it makes things flavorful, but there is also the fact that it is completely out-of-universe (since Soldiers didn't exist in the After the Breaking era, for example). This will be discussed a bit more in subsection F below.

I can see the benefit of any of the above three methods. I'm not sure exactly which is best.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 5D.1 – The Tower – When should the Black Tower appear, if it does so at all? Is it a CS, a Wonder, or an invisible organization? How does it interact with Civs, if at all?
• 5D.2 – The Tower and the Dragon – How does the Black Tower interact with the Dragon Reborn, if it does so at all? What bearing does this have on the Last Battle?
• 5D.3 – Hierarchy – How are we going to include the various ranks the initiates of the Black Tower (Soldiers, Dedicated, Asha'man)? Are they separate units, the names of promotions, re-skins of various units, or do we simply leave them out?

E – Gentling

Gentling is a non-lethal way of neutralizing the threat of a male channeler. This is depicted in the books as mostly being done by Aes Sedai, but I suppose it could be done by other females (or even males). We could elect to make this an ability exclusive to the Red Ajah, as well. Either way, I could see this mechanic going in one of several ways:

1. the channeler simply does significant bonus damage against male channelers
2. the channeler automatically defeats the male channeler with a close-range "attack"
3. the channeler defeats the male channeler with a close-range "gentling" attack, but only once that unit has been significantly damaged.

The key issue here is whether we want Gentling to be A) easier or B) more difficult than simply killing the male channeler. According to the books, it seems that this is in fact something that is more difficult, yet is done to be more humane – Logain was taken prisoner and gentled, instead of being killed on the battlefield. If that is the case, that would likely lead us to option three above, or some variation of that – the male channeler has lost the battle, but his life is spared.

If gentling is in fact "humane" and the more difficult path to defeating a rogue saidin user, perhaps it should result in some kind of reward – most likely Prestige (though Faith could also be an option). Alternatively or in addition to this, the male-channeler could become an era-appropriate combat unit instead of a civilian (though likely not a particularly powerful one, considering the depression associated with gentled men).These might tie well into rewards a civ gets for defeating a False Dragon, or it could be additional.

It should be noted, of course, that gentling does not violate the Three Oaths. Consequently, even if it is "weaker" than simply blasting a saidin-user into oblivion, in many ways it could be "simpler" to pull off – at least for Aes Sedai.

It does seem to make sense that an Aes Sedai or other female channeler should be able to easily gentle a friendly male channeler that is not yet mad or hostile. However, in some ways this is no longer the humane option (considering the male channeler isn't yet threatening anyone), so I would argue that the gentling civ would no longer receive any Prestige/Faith rewards for doing so. Additionally, what if a civ wanted to gentle its own channeler, but had no Aes Sedai? Perhaps you can “send him to the Tower for Gentling,”, instead, which is perhaps realistically what would happen anyways. Maybe this doesn't allow for Prestige/Faith, but potentially raises the favor of the Reds (maybe all gentling does this as well). This does tie into social policies/ideology – gentling sane male channelers is related to the "strict" policies on saidin users (Seanchan, Aiel, Shara, etc.), and will be discussed in Section 6.

If we decide that gentling should be easier than killing a rogue male channeler, then options 1 and 2 make much more sense. Here, we would be regarding Aes Sedai/female channelers as "saidin killers" in a sense. This makes some sense, but at the same time, it presumes that a single Aes Sedai is more powerful than a single male channeler, which doesn't appear to be the case in the books. If we choose to do this, I would suggest we not give additional rewards for the gentling civ. Careful balancing would be necessary in order to make all of this work.

The Healing of Gentling is something discovered in the books. This should probably not be included in our game, as it seems more cumbersome than would be worth it. If we did want to include it, however, it could be enabled by a late-game technological discovery. Instead of turning into a civilian and/or other unit, gentled channelers could instead turn into a "Gentled channeler" unit-type, which could then be recaptured and Healed, potentially with lower power than when it first existed (though in the books it appears that when one is Healed by the opposite gender, you regain your full strength). Again, I don't necessarily think this is worth doing.

If saidin is cleansed, we might consider eliminating any prestige (or similar) bonuses gained from gentling. It should still work as a means of stopping a male channeler, but it isn't exactly "humane" to tame sane men. That said, in the books, the vast majority of the population was in disbelief about the cleansing, so I could understand us leaving things exactly as they were.

Lastly, if we do choose to allow linking and shielding, these mechanics will likely heavily affect how we treat Gentling. A linked group of Aes Sedai would, for example, likely be able to easily gentle most male channelers, regardless of their strength.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 5E.1 – Mechanics of Gentling – Which units are capable of Gentling? How does Gentling work? Is it more difficult to pull of than simply killing the male channeler?
• 5E.2 – Rewards for Gentling – Does a civ reap any rewards for gentling a male channeler? How does this change if the male channeler is friendly or not yet mad? How does this change once saidin has been cleansed?
• 5E.3 – Healing of Gentling – Can Gentling be Healed? If so, how does this work?

F – Saidin Units

Perhaps the biggest difficulty with the implementation of specific male channeling units is the utter lack of in-universe names. Here is what we get from the books:

• Asha'man (with Soldier and Dedicated)
• The Freed

That's it. Male channeler's who don't take the next step in becoming a False Dragon never get named in the book – they're always just called male channelers, which isn't exactly a great term. Unfortunately, Asha'man is a name reserved for the very specific late-game unit, and The Freed for a potential Sharan UU. Assuming we are looking at needing some sort of "Normal" male channeling unit, we are left with few options. Some I can think of:

• Male Channeler
• Saidin User
• Madman
• The Tainted OR Tainted OR Tainted One
• The Cursed OR Cursed OR Cursed One OR The Accursed
• Pariah
• Exiled
• Son of the Dragon
• Kinslayer
• Soldier

Options 1 and 2 are hopelessly bland. That said, they're also the only accurate option, without some weirdness to it.

Option 3 comes from, by my recollection, a very old post by S3rgeus in which mentioned this name. I mostly like it, but the problem with it is that it presupposes that that channeler is mad, which all of them aren't, obviously. Options 4 and 5 are similar in this regard, though they are perhaps a bit more "fancy" and ominous sounding, and maybe less "loaded" than Madman.

Options 6 and 7 spin off of the idea that these guys are unwanted in society. Kind of ominous in a good way. Not flavor directly from WoT though.

Options 8 and 9 refer to their lineage. The first is perhaps a bit pretentious, and the second perhaps too extreme in its literal evocation of Lews Therin.

Option 10 was discussed briefly in the previous subsection – we could call early-era units Soldiers and mid-era ones Dedicated (assuming we do indeed vary them by era). This is nice in that it borrows directly from the WoT source material – but it is lousy in that it borrows incorrectly from that source material.

Overall, I am very much unsure as to which option is best.

A second and very related issue is identical to one that we dealt with with female channelers – what to do with the tech tree. I still like the idea that channeling units advance in stats throughout the eras, such that there isn't clear obsoletion occurring If this is the case, then in my opinion we would only have one generic male channeler, who grows with us over the years. Asha'man and The Freed would exist in addition to this one (the latter likely being an era-dependent replacement of it). Of course, if we decided to marry them to the tech tree in a more conventional sense, I would advise two or three various options throughout the Eras.

False Dragons and other AI-only male channelers will be discussed later, in Section 7.


"GENERIC MALE CHANNELER" (Man-neler!)
Civs: All
Primary Role: Combat
Era Available: After the Breaking (1) OR Era of Nations (2), potential subsequent versions
at approximately Era of Freedom (3) OR Era of Consolidation (4) AND Era of New
Beginnings (5) OR Era of ?????? (6)
Upgrades From: none OR potential subsequent versions upgrade from the previous version
Upgrades To: none OR previous version
Replaces: none
Notes: This fills the role of the various versions of the generic male channeler (or the sole version). Upgrades over time (whether through literal new units or just stat boosts), should likely merely be upgrades to Combat Strength, perhaps movement as well. The specific potential abilities of these units was discussed at length in a subsection above. I do think they should be essentially combat-focused, though. The potential names for this unit are also discussed above.

ASHA'MAN
Civs: All
Primary Role: Combat
Era Available: Era of the Dragon (7) OR Era of Encroaching Blight (6), in case we want
civs to use them for longer
Upgrades From: none OR final version of generic channeler
Upgrades To: none
Replaces: none OR final version of generic channeler
Notes: This is the late-game male channeler we've been discussing for most of this section. While it most likely makes sense as a stand-alone unit, it could potentially also serve as an upgrade-replacement for the era-equivalent "normal" male channeler – once that civ "unlocks" Asha'man through whatever means we decide. It is definitely possible that Asha'man would not only be stronger than the generic channeler, but that they could additionally have an extra ability or feature. This should most likely still be combat-related (e.g. move-after-attack), but it could be any number of things, included abilities directly linked to the power (shields, traveling, etc.).

FREED
Civs: Shara
Primary Role: Combat
Era Available: Era of the Dragon (7) OR Era of Encroaching Blight (6), in case we want
players to use them for longer
Upgrades From: none OR latest version of Generic Channeler OR Asha'man
Upgrades To: none OR Asha'man
Replaces: latest version of Generic Channeler OR Asha'man
Notes: The Sharans, for years, kept male channelers alive, keeping them around for breeding purposes (before killing them once they start channeling). Demandred freed them, in part to sow chaos, and also to use them in his armies. We know very little else about the Freed from the books, except that they do indeed play a role in the Sharan army in the final book. As a unit in the game, I could imagine these replacing the final Generic Channeler, or, theoretically, the Asha'man themselves. I do not have any specific recommendations for their abilities – they should likely simply have one particular statistic boosted, or have some enhanced combat ability or feature. One thing that should be mentioned is that, while it would be really cool to have a male-channeler UU, it is not without complication – if male channelers have an unusual Acquisition Method, we may be dealing with a UU that is not "voluntarily" produced, instead popping up periodically from the means discussed in previous subsections.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 5F.1 – Names – What should we call the generic male channelers?
• 5F.2 – Tech Tree and Saidin – Should there be multiple versions of male channeling units, each becoming available at certain points on the tech tree (and rendering the previous "model" obsolete)?Alternatively, should we have them simply grow in strength over the years, but not technically become a new unit?
  [*] 5F.3 – Saidin Units – What are the differences between the various saidin units? How do these compare to other units in the game? What eras are they available, and what upgrade-relationships do they have?

G – The Cleansing of Saidin

In the books, Rand and Nyneave cleansed saidin in Shadar Logoth with the aid of the Choedan Kal. This mechanic should likely be implemented into our game. This could be done in several ways. Here are the ones that have been mentioned in-thread, and some new ones I am imagining:

1. A Wonder, or an physical manifestation of the abstract concept (remember when there was the wonder "Sun Tzu's War Academy" in Civ 1 or 2?)
2. A Project, like the Manhattan Project
3. A Global Project, similar to the World's Fair, with rewards for the civs that contribute the most.
4. Some sort of in-game event having to do with Shadar Logoth and/or the Choedan Kal
5. Part of the behavior pattern of the Dragon Reborn, with or without civ-assistance.

I would imagine that these options could become available either at the start of the Age of the Dragon, or sometime between that point and the beginning of the Last Battle.

The first of these is a bit odd, in that it will require some suspension of disbelief. That said, it is also something that we might consider doing if we need extra Wonders.

The second and third are similar to one another, and might be comparably successful. Of course, the Global variety by definition would at least somewhat tie into diplomacy as well. The negative to both of these methods is that they are based on hammers, which makes very little intuitive sense considering what we're dealing with. A civ's capacity for Power is a more realistic source of success on these matters.

Four and five could take many shapes. Perhaps it's very literal – somebody needs to go to Shadar Logoth and do X while controlling the Choedan Kal. This kind of thing seems overly precise and not particularly fun. Still, there might be a way to involve these entities somehow. As far as the Dragon, the cleansing could theoretically be a part of his pre-LB behavior – he goes to Shadar Logoth for awhile, and if the civs defeat the shadowspawn there, he cleanses saidin. Unfortunately, the last thing we need is to add even more tasks to the end-game.

One thing I will say in favor of four and five is that it feels much cooler if the cleansing is something that doesn't always happen – you have to achieve something very cool in order for it to happen. Because of the potentially huge ramifications of this, it makes sense that it might not be as easy as "dump hammers into it."

As far as those implications, obviously this would eliminate further maddening of saidin units. It has been mentioned previously that units that are already mad might remain mad. This could work fine, though I do think if we start off all units with "level 1 madness," we might remove that base level insanity (perhaps all madness levels are lowered by one, "barbarian" ones could come back to the civ that created them).

Obviously the cleansing of saidin immediately raises the usefulness of all male channelers – especially since we had previously balanced them (in theory) to compensate in some way for their insanity. As mentioned earlier, it is possible we can live with this, and that it is somewhat balanced by the relative rarity of male channelers in the first place. At the same time, this would paradoxically raise the usefulness of Red Ajah Aes Sedai (this is somewhat paradoxical because, presumably, gentling is no longer necessary when there is no more Taint). Additionally, if the Freed are a UU for Shara, that civ would become instantly much more powerful. Indeed, this is actually a somewhat accurate reflection of how things worked out in the books. Additionally, this provides advantage to civs with good relationships with the Black Tower – but you could argue that at the same time it also rewards those with ties to the White Tower (more access to Red Sisters).

The above concerns does lean me towards the idea that it should be challenging to cleanse saidin – if civs wanted to prevent it, they could do so (something you might want to do if you plan on going Shadow and Shara and the Asha'man-friendly civs are all leaning Light), via vote, military action, etc.

Of course, we could simply re-balance once saidin is cleansed – make the units drop in power. That seems somewhat cheap though, and I think players might feel cheated. I'm not sure I have the answer!

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 5G.1 – Cleansing of Saidin – How is saidin cleansed? Are Shadar Logoth and the Choedan Kal involved? Should the cleansing be easy to achieve, or should it be something that is only successfully done in some games?
• 5G.2 – Implications – What do we want the consequences of the cleansing to be? Should male channelers be allowed to become more useful? What about relationships with the Asha'man, and other special units such as the Sharan Freed?

6 – SOCIAL POLICIES AND IDEOLOGIES

Social Policies and Ideologies allow us a chance to reflect the societal conditions surrounding channeling that represent a significant part of the flavor of the various nations in the Wheel of Time. While a few of the Ten Nations had Aes Sedai as their Queens, the Tairens outlaw channeling completely, and the Seanchan seek to enslave channelers. While outlining our take on the Social Policies and Ideologies is not the purpose of this document, this section will highlight a few key issues that are important in our conception of channeling in the mod. This is the least-developed of the Sections of this document. Further discussion is needed (as well as some decisions on other channeling mechanics) before it is practical to make clear design proposals.

A – Simple View – Channeling in Social Policies

Channeling-related policies could exist in one of two ways:

1. As part of a channeling-focused policy tree
2. As single policies other trees

The first certainly makes sense intuitively, but exactly which tree this would replace is a difficult question, since each policy tree does seem to fill a very specific niche in CiV. Of the available options, I could imagine Patronage merging with a channeling tree, considering the White Tower's role in diplomacy. Additionally, Piety could make sense, though that might come at the expense of Path-oriented Policies. Especially if we make the Ideologies channeling-centric, it may be enough to simply follow option two above, and include channeler-related policies as components in other trees.

Inspired in part by existing policies, I can imagine the following channeling-related Social Policies being possible:

1. bonus production when building channeling units
2. extra "Old Blood" (if we were to utilize this as a "cap" on the allowable number of channelers per civ)
3. bonus combat strength against channeling units
4. bonuses to influence with White Tower, frequency of Aes Sedai gifts/loans, etc.
5. the ability to build channelers with Faith (possible "finisher" for a policy tree)
6. the appearance rate of False Dragons (or other hostile male channelers) is lowered

The list above is absolutely not exhaustive, but gives an idea of the kinds of things we could consider using. What all of the above have in common is that they are strictly positive for the civ, which is the case for all Social Policies. This is the simplest way for us to implement them, but, as will be discussed below, might not be the most flavorful or impactful. What you should notice is that there aren't any policies the likes of "exile male channelers" or "outlaw channeling," both of which are examples of something that could very well be present in the nations of the WoT – the benefits-only aspect of Civ's Social Policies somewhat requires these kinds of social convention be absent from this list.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 6A.1 – Policies or Trees – Should we create an entirely new/replacement Policy Tree that concerns itself with channeling, or should there simply be a few channeling-related Policies that exist in the other trees?
• 6A.2 – Policies – What kinds of Policies should we create? What policies would they replace?

B – Complex View – Contradictory Policies

Where the Social Policies of Civ 5 differ tremendously from earlier versions of Civ (at least as is relevant here) is that they are cumulative. A civ chooses Monarchy early in the game, and then later, chooses Representation. In early versions of Civ – which viewed these more as clear governmental choices – the latter would replace the other. A civ would lose the bonuses from Monarchy and gain those of Representation – and would also lose any potential drawbacks to Monarchy, while gaining those of Representation. We could debate the merit of the system in Civ 5, but for the time being let's assume it works well enough.

This does cause us some issues, however. Note that CiV doesn't have a Slavery social policy (or any way to replicate this kind of social system). While it could be easy to imagine an in-game benefit to a Policy like this – extra production, for example – there would also likely be a huge drawback (unhappiness, population hits, etc.). Civ 5 does not include the possibility of drawbacks to Policies (or ideologies), which may perhaps be why they did not include an option like Slavery.

Unfortunately, the various ways nations deal with channelers in WoT seems to somewhat depend on costs and benefits. Some examples from the universe to illustrate my point, with the complex in-game ramifications they could have (written in [brackets]):

1. In the Westlands, male channelers are shunned from society and gentled [fewer male channelers born, less risk of False Dragons in your territory]. Since they almost never procreate, it is assumed that the "Old Blood" has been diluted, the number of women born with the spark declines ["Old Blood" value lowered, fewer channelers allowed/born]
2. In Shara, channelers of all types are segregated from society, especially the men [most definitely lower incidence of False Dragons and male-channeler birth], but men are kept around to breed with the female channelers, keeping the Spark common in the population ["Old Blood" value raised and/or channelers born more often.
3. In Seanchan, male channelers are killed outright, and females are enslaved [extremely low rate of birth of channelers, not counting those captured]

The issue created by those examples is that they do not play nice with one another. They are contradictory. In earlier versions of civ, you could switch from one to the other. Here, as Policies, your civ would have the option of choosing all of them, gaining the benefits from all. This most definitely is not in the spirit of what we're trying to do, as it wouldn’t make sense to combine both the Westlands and the Sharan system (for example). Thus, I don't think these kinds of societal structures make good Policies. The only way to change this would be to set up a "work around" of sorts – choosing one policy could lock you out of others. This doesn't seem to me to be an elegant solution.

The easy answer (though it is still problematic) that has been proposed earlier in thread is to use Ideologies to cover the "choices" – a civ could not, for example, have the option of choosing both the Westlands method and the Sharan method (without abandoning their Ideology). This certainly solves the contradiction problem.

Unfortunately, though, it doesn't account for the drawbacks associated with these social systems. The rise and fall of a civ's "Old Blood" (or comparable "resource"), the frequency of male births versus female births, the rate of False Dragon appearance, and diplomacy with the Tower all seem like examples of excellent rewards/consequences for various Social Policy/Ideological Tenet choices (based on the societal realities described in the books), and provide a degree of depth that could be strategically interesting. However, with the exception of diplomatic effects, "negative" effects of a given Policy/Tenet do not exist in CiV.

The other issue issue with using Ideologies is the fact that they appear quite late in the game (World Era 7 in CiV). Civilizations aren't allowed to use these tenets as foundations of their empire – even the most anti-channeler Seanchan empire would have channelers aplenty for the first few thousand years of their history. Whether this is a problem is subjective – the Seanchan, Tairens, Whitecloaks, and Sharans mostly appear to exist only in the second half of the Third Age, so perhaps the lateness of these tenets makes sense. Still, we would be preventing players from adopting one of these stances as a “formative” (i.e. early) part of their civ.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 6B.1 – Contradictions – How do we handle the fact that some social structures from the books would likely contradict one another? Should they be Social Policies or Ideologies?
• 6B.2 – Drawbacks – Should we implement drawbacks to Policy/Ideology choices?
• 6B.3 – Era of Ideologies – If we use Ideologies as the solution, how do we deal with the fact that they appear quite late in the game?

C – Alternative Use of Ideologies

I should note immediately that I am not going to put forward any ideas that will make the Policy/Ideology system resemble that of Civ 4 or other Civ games – I think it is best that we keep Civ 5 as itself. This subsection proposes a few options that may be potential solutions for some of the above issues.

For now, let us assume we are using the system proposed by S3rgeus, where the three Ideologies reflect three world-views on channeling. This system seems to imply that the "complex" societal issues described in the subsection above would not be Policies, and would instead show up here as Ideologies. Should we call them Ideologies, or change the name? What should we name each of these (e.g., Freedom, Autocracy, etc.)? Here they are, roughly:

1. Channelers should be allowed to be free and unregulated (positive/tolerant view of channeling)
2. Channelers should be regulated but still a part of society (respectful but suspicious view of channeling)
3. Channelers should be harshly regulated (intolerant of channeling, even if they find it useful)

Those are my words, so I hope I'm not misrepresenting the idea. I like this idea in general, but it does come with some points of confusion. Namely, how do the various WoT societies fit with these?

• Most of the Westlands appear to follow the second. Female Channelers are an important part of society, but they exist under a clear structural/limiting umbrella (the Three Oaths and the Tower, for example). Male channelers are not a part of society, but are typically treated humanely (arguably).
• The Aiel appear to follow the second as well, for similar reasons. You could suggest that they have more freedom than Westland channelers, but the Wise Ones are still a self-regulating “institution” (to say nothing of the exiles males).
• The Seanchan most definitely follow the third. Females are enslaved, and men are killed.
• The Sea Folk seem to either represent the first or the second. It is unclear the extent to which channeling is controlled. On the one hand, Windfinders appear to have a great deal of freedom, and don't seem too involved in Sea Folk politics or “used” particularly badly. On the other hand, it may be the case that all female channelers are essentially forced to either be Windfinders, or are sent to the White Tower – a practice that is somewhat limited and structured. Also, I don't know what they do with their males.
• The Tairens are also not so clear. Are they the second or the third? They do not tolerate channeling, but still pay proper deference to Aes Sedai, and keep a horde of ter'angreal in the Stone.
• The Sharans are similarly complicated. In some ways they appear to follow the third – they segregate their society, and treat male channelers like livestock. However, it is suggested that in reality the Ayyad may truly hold the real power in their Society. Would this make them fit the second, instead? Or somehow the first?
• Also complicated are the nations from the Ten Nations period that had Aes Sedai queens. Is this an example of the first (because channeling is clearly considered acceptable), or is it yet another instance of the second (the queen may be a channeler, but channeling is likely still highly controlled by the government/society)?
• Similar to above, the cities of the Age of Legends could be considered to be either the first or the second (before their society collapsed, of course). On the one hand, their society was utopian, so I imagine that channelers had extensive rights, but I also imagine that they were wrapped up in the society in a somewhat regulated manner.

Obviously, it seems important that some of the more unique and iconic societies of WoT can be represented in game – there are certainly some challenges in doing this. Also of concern is the fact that the first option seems somewhat unrepresented in the books – is there perhaps a different way we should be looking at this – perhaps a different option than the currently proposed first one?

One other question is whether or not all the tenets of these Ideologies are concerned with channeling. Do they all tie into a civ's channelers, or do we also have "generic" tenets – about science, gold, military, etc? It seems to make sense that we should do this, but we'll have to think carefully about how to flavor it.

Assuming that gets worked out satisfactorily, the following ideas may help us negotiate some of the difficulties described in the subsection above. These are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

STATIC EFFECTS FROM IDEOLOGY
Your choice in Ideology could have some immediate effects, some positive and some negative. These would be in addition to any tenets a civ chooses. The logic behind this is that some social systems would carry natural side-effects. The Sharans, for instance, have a cruel society that probably has a lot of unhappiness, but they probably have a larger number of powerful channelers than other nations.

Some examples (not exhaustive) of potentially balanced static effects that could make sense:

• global happiness bonus, but significant incidence of False Dragons ("freedom")
• high Old Blood, but significant penalty to White Tower relations ("freedom")
• Improved White Tower relations, but lower Old Blood ("regulation")
• high rate of female channeler production, but low rate of male channeler production ("regulation")
• lower False Dragon rate, but lower Old Blood ("regulation")
• no change ("regulation")
• very low False dragon rate, but significant happiness penalty ("intolerance")
• high Old Blood, but significant penalty to White Tower relations ("intolerance")
• high rate of female channeler production, but low rate of male channeler production ("intolerance")
  

Of course, an argument against this kind of system is that these differences could simply be "worked in" to the bonuses – likely what CiV does. In CiV, choosing order doesn't give you a "you're a dictator" penalty, but you miss out on some science/happiness/trade things that Freedom gets, for example (thus, a kind of “penalty”). This works fine in CiV, but I wonder if it ignores too much WoT flavor for our mod.

EARLY IDEOLOGY UNLOCK – FULL
Ideologies could be unlocked significantly earlier in the game, in order to enable them to "define" a civ throughout the course of the game. This presents obvious pacing/balancing issues, potentially.

EARLY IDEOLOGY UNLOCK – STATIC ONLY
This assumes there is a Static Effect in place like the ones described above. Here, your civ would choose their Ideology relatively early in the game (maybe Era 3). However, you would not be able to actually purchase any Tenets (or perhaps only Tier 1 tenets). The Static Effect would be in place, though (e.g., your civ would be pumping out fewer False Dragons, but also fewer Aes Sedai), shaping your civ throughout much of the game. Any diplomatic consequences of your Ideology would also likely remain in place. Actual Tenets wouldn't be unlocked until later in the game.

We would need to address how easy it would be for a civ to switch their Ideology in this pre-Tenet period.

SOCIAL POLICY COMPATABILITY
This one changes the game quite a bit. This is only relevant if we elect to have "important" channeling-related social policies (killing male channelers, etc.) instead of merely leaving them to Ideologies. Social Policies could lock each other out, allowing us to have "slavery" policies while having policies that totally contradict it – you could choose one, but not the other. It would seem silly for a civ to be able to complete the "You're a super nice guy" policy tree, only to then start the "You're a big meanie" tree. This would solve a good deal of the issues (and allow this flavor into the game early), but very much changes the way civ works, perhaps problematically.

As of now, those are the potential solutions I can come up with for how we might add a little more complexity to the channeling-related aspects of the Social Policy and Ideology system.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 6C.1 – Three Ideologies – What should we call the Ideology System? What should we call each choice? What should the three options represent, and how do they fit into the world of the WoT? Do the tenets all concern channeling?
• 6C.2 – Static Effects – Are there some global, static effects that are caused by the selection of an Ideology? Are there positive and negative effects? Which effects make sense for which Ideology?
• 6C.3 – Special Features – Are there any other special changes we should make to Social Policies and Ideologies? Should Ideologies unlock early? Would they be full-featured? Should Social Policies be changed so as to limit a player's choices?

7 – MISCELLANEOUS ASPECTS OF CHANNELING

This section will serve to discuss the various aspects of the channeling not covered by previous sections. I will try to make a recommendation as to whether the concept should make its way into the mod, and if so, how it might best fit.

Several of these are things I do not think should enter the mod – I am still including them here so we can be sure they have been properly "accounted for," and not forgotten.

A – Unusual Channeling Situations

STILLING
Stilling occurs when a female channeler has the ability to channel taken from her. It is the female half of severing (the male half being gentling). While a few notable characters throughout the series are stilled (notably Suian Sanche), overall it has a much lower profile in the lore (likely because it lacks the connection to False Dragons and the taint on saidin that gentling has). Consequently, I think it is best left out of the mod, despite the lack of realism that creates. To me, it seems that we would be adding a mechanic that, if it functioned "properly" would be used too often to make sense. Stilling appears to be extremely rare in the books, such that if a civ chose that as a primary combat tactic, it might feel a bit "wrong." This contrasts to gentling which, while quite similar, is virtually always a "part of the conversation" when dealing with male channelers in the series – there's an entire Ajah based around it completely.

If we do decide that Stilling should be mechanically possible, I suggest it work similarly to whatever we decide for gentling. Whether it can be Healed or not should depend on whatever we decide for its saidin counterpart.

Otherwise, it could be included as the name for a technology or otherwise manifest itself someplace as simple flavor.

BURNING OUT
A channeler Burns Out when they are severed accidentally, usually by wielding too much of the power. Since our game does not focus on the "how" of combat – the player doesn't aim the spear, for instance – I think this is too specific for our mod, and should be left out.

Similar to Stilling, Burning Out could exist in some other capacity as simple flavor to something that is otherwise not tied to the lore of WoT.

BLOCKS
A block is a psychological condition that prevents a channeler from being able to successfully embrace the Source. These are most common in channelers that did not learn through proper training (i.e. Wilders). In the series, Nyneave is a high profile character with a block (only being able to channel when angry).

Most likely this is something that is too specific to be used and should be left out. Additionally, since blocks are infinitely varied – each one is unique in how it works – making a general policy for them would perhaps break some of the spirit of what they represent.

That said, there are a few ways they could be implemented in the game. One way is via a simple re-skinning of a promotion for Wilders and their male counterparts. Essentially, any early-tree promotion that raises their effectiveness (strength, etc.) could be flavorly titled "Remove Block" or "Overcome Block," in order to make it feel more in-universe.

If we wished blocks to be mechanically meaningful, we could decide that newly-created Wilders (and their saidin counterparts) have some clear flaw. There are various things this could be, with the simplest probably being that the channeler has a certain percentage chance to fail to channel on their turn (similar to the potential madness mechanic). A subsequent promotion could overcome this. While this is flavorful, it is also perhaps not particularly fun.

LINKS/CIRCLES
Linking is the ability, commonly used in the later parts of the series, of multiple channelers using their powers in combination. In the books, women can easily link with one another, while men can only join a link if it is with a woman (though the male appears to by necessity control the weaving). Importantly, only one of the linked channelers can actively channel – the others simply serve as a fount of power for the leader to draw from.

It is difficult to say whether we should include Linking in our game. On the one hand, it is perhaps overly complex for a "big picture" combat system such as CiV's. On the other hand, it is a pretty commonly-discussed piece of flavor in the books. Furthermore, it is one of the main ways the books differentiate men and women – males tend to be more powerful, but women can more easily form circles.

I can see a few ways we could use Links in our game. One option would be for it to be a passive ability of all female channelers, providing some bonus to combat strength (or the strength of healing or any other ability) when adjacent to another channeling unit. This could be available to all female channelers, or only the more "organized" unit types (Aes Sedai, Kin, Ayyad, Wise Ones, etc.) This could only be for females, when standing next to females or males, or we could have it apply to males when next to females. Of course, this kind of passive bonus ignores the fact that in a true circle only one channeler can act.

Similarly, we could adopt the system described above, but reserve it for a specific promotion that is chosen upon level-up. Since this promotion would only apply when the unit is next to other channelers, the bonus provided should perhaps be greater than other formation-related promotions that may exist in the game.

Alternatively, we could make Linking a more active ability, in order to more accurately represent the way it works in the books. If channeling units adjacent to the leader pass on their turn (or sleep or perform a similar non-action), the leader's attack gains significant power. Alternatively, the submissive channelers could select a specific "form circle" action, if we didn't want them to simply pass. We could set it up so channelers can "snake," with a long line behind the leader. Since these other channelers would be sacrificing their actions, the bonuses from this form of linking should be significant. I think this method is interesting because it suggests strategies that would be mostly unique to channelers (enabling really powerful attacks on a single unit or city, unbreakable shields on a channeler, or easy gentling of a False Dragon), as well as suggesting unique counter strategies (killing a channeler in the middle of the chain). Again, we could elect to allow this for all or only some female channelers. Taking the books literally, males could only be involved if there were more females than males in the circle, and a male was leading. We could also exclude males from this entirely if balance requires it.

At the very least, Linking could be simply included for flavor as the name of a technology – perhaps one that updgrades the general power of all channelers (or just females).

SHIELDS
A Shield is a common weave that prevents another channeler from accessing the Source. Shields can be of varying strength, based on the power of the channeler laying the shield, and the number of channelers. In the books, shields are a significant part of channeler-on-channeler combat, so would be a nice flavorful addition. That said, they are also (perhaps more so than Circles) potentially more complicated than they are worth.

If we choose to implement shields into the game, they make the most sense as a targeted attack. Instead of taking a normal action, the channeler instead "attacks" another channeler with a shield. Some math is computed, and if the shield is successful, the defending channeler cannot channel. Perhaps combat strength, hit points, and Linking affect how likely the Shield is to be successful. A Shield could last until the controlling channeler chooses another action, or could be "re-rolled" every turn to see if it is broken. Alternatively, the Shield could last a fixed number of turns (either predictable or randomized) One question is whether a shielded unit can move and/or flee – it stands to reason that the capturing channeler likely will wrap them up in binds of air.

The above mechanic makes sense, and sounds fun, but it is also very different from the kinds of things that happen in CiV's combat, which makes it perhaps an inappropriate addition. I can not think of any ways to implement Shields with more passive of "CiV-friendly" mechanics.

Alternatively, Shields could simply be the name of a tech, perhaps one that provides a boost to the effectiveness of channelers.

BINDING WITH AIR
Of all the possible uses for channeling, I bring this one up here because it has an obvious in-game use, as well as its numerous uses throughout the series. Channelers could possess the ability to restrict a unit's movement and attacking ability by using a special "binding" attack. This attack could have a random success rate, or it could be successful based on HP, combat strength, or other values.

Personally, I don't feel that this is worth including, despite some interesting gameplay possibilities it presents – I fear it might change the flow of combat too much. Besides, I would prefer not to include too many "special moves" in our units, as such don't feel particularly civ-like to me.

NEUTRALIZING THE POWER
In the WoT books, there are a few instances of items and locations that prevent the use of the One Power. These are the stedding and various ter'angreal (the Guardian and Mat's foxhead medallion).

Stedding are relatively simple to implement, in my opinion. Channelers simply cannot channel the One Power while within a stedding, nor can they channel into a stedding from the outside. The Guardian (if it is provided as a Wonder or simply as a feature of a Far Madding city-state) can function much in the same way.

Choosing to add other Power-blocking ter'angreal (such as Mat's medallion) is much more complicated. A unit equipping such a ter'angreal would be immune to direct attacks from the One Power, but would theoretically still be able to be hit by secondary effects (in our game, this would most likely be AoE attacks). I find this too complicated to be worth implementing. Still, if it was decided to include specific ter'angreal in the game (see below), this would be one of those that might make sense to include. If we desired it, we would then need to follow whichever general policy we decide for ter'angreal (e.g., promotion, etc.).

COMPULSION
Like Shields, Compulsion is an interesting ability that has some significance to the plot, that is perhaps too overly specific for addition into our mod. It we do include it, it will likely be a significant distinguishing feature of Darkfriend channelers. A channeler uses compulsion to control the mind of another unit.

If we did include Compulsion as a mechanic, it makes sense that it only be possible for Black Ajah or other Darkfriend channelers. While it is of course possible that any channeler could learn it, it appears to be an ability that the vast majority of channelers simply do not know how to do – Black Sisters appear to learn it from the Forsaken or their confidants.

If Compulsion were to be implemented into our mod, it would take the form of a targeted action. Its success would likely be determined by HP, combat strength, and whether the channeler is Linked. A successful Compulsion could have several effects, including A) the attacking civ controls the actions of the compelled unit, B) the compelled unit attacks its allies, C) the compelled unit takes no action, or D) the compelled unit flees. A major question is how long this lasts – the options listed above for Shields are appropriate here.

Note that I think the compelled unit should not be completely captured by the attacking civ. Some compulsions are permanent, but they aren't total mind control in the way that Turning is.

Theoretically, Compulsion could be Healed by an ally of the compelled unit.

TURNING
Turning is in many ways similar to Compulsion. Because of their similarity, we could simply merge the two concepts into one ability (choose whichever we think is the more interesting mechanic). They are not the same, though – Turning is total mind control/wipe, at least in some respects. It is implied by the books that this is very specific in its nature – it converts people of the Light to the Shadow. Whether this is specific control (directed tasks like Compulsion) or a true allegiance shift, the books are relatively unclear, though they do specify a kind of emptiness in the eyes of the Turned (implying that they aren't really themselves anymore).

Turning is also distinct from Compulsion in that it only works against a channeler. Furthermore, it is very difficult to achieve – requiring thirteen channelers and thirteen Myrddraal, apparently. Such extensive requirements may be unreasonable for the purposes of our mod. It makes more sense for it to be able to be performed by a single Black Sister (or perhaps two or more Linked Sisters). That said, including one or more Fades is an interesting idea – it makes Turning a kind of Last Battle-only concept, which might make some sense. The specifics of how it works could be similar to those described for Compulsion above. Certainly, if we include Turning, it should be difficult to achieve.

If Turning is successful, it should serve to permanently turn over ownership of the Turned unit to the capturing civ.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 7A.1 – Stilling and Burning Out – Should Stilling be possible? If so, how does it work, mechanically? Can a channeler Burn Out?
• 7A.2 – Blocks – Should blocks factor into the game at all? If so, is it as a simple flavor-addition to a promotion or other mechanic, or does it have an actual effect on game mechanics?
• 7A.3 – Linking – Should Links be a feature of channeling? Who is permitted to Link? Does it take the form of a passive bonus, a promotion, or a more active ability?
• 7A.4 – Shields – Should Shields be possible for channeling units? How would they work? What about binding a unit in air?
• 7A.5 – Neutralizing the Power – How do stedding and other anti-Power locations work? Are there specific ter'angreal that can be used to accomplish the same?
• 7A.6 – Compulsion and Turning – Should Compulsion be an ability in the mod? Who can use it? How do its mechanics work? What about Turning?

B – Additional Channeling-Related Concepts

THE VOID
The books describe the void (also referred to as the oneness and ko'di by various characters) as a state of perfect concentration, particularly useful for blademasters and for male channelers. There is no direct need to include it in our game, but since it is a significant bit of WoT flavor (especially in Rand POV's), it might be worth including in some way.

I can't think of any direct ways for it to manifest in-game, nor do I think we should seek any – it's much too specific to be an actual game mechanic.

That said, I can imagine it flavoring our game in a few ways. The first could be as a promotion, perhaps for either saidin users or for swordsmen/blademasters. It could be any sort of generic combat upgrade, including bonuses to combat strength, strength against melee units, strange against ranged attacks – any number of things.

We could instead elect to use it as a technology. The Void could be a tech that unlocks blademasters, or some kind of mid-game saidin unit/ability (or provides an upgrade to saidin units).

DETECTION
In the books, saidar users can detect other saidar users, and saidin users can detect the use of saidin. Neither can detect the True Power. Since CiV doesn't really include any stealth mechanics, there doesn't seem to be room in the game for mechanics based on this concept.

I could understand, theoretically, that this could matter in espionage – a garrisoned channeler could increase the chance of a civ detecting a channeler spy or something like that. Otherwise, the only way I could imagine this interacting in our game is as a kind of warning of incoming Traveling – if you had a channeler stationed near a place that was about to be traveled into, that unit could theoretically detect it (though that wouldn't strictly speaking be possible in the books).

ANGREAL, SA'ANGREAL, AND TER'ANGREAL
Angreal are power-made items that, when used, increase the total amount of power that can be drawn by a channeler. Sa'angreal are simply very powerful angreal. Ter'angreal are different, and instead function as "magic items," each with some very specific (and often powerful) special ability. There are a few ways that these could function in our game, though I'm not convinced they need to.

If we elect to require a special strategic resource for the Acquisition of channeling units, any of these three could serve as that resource.

Similarly, the "Old Blood" concept could be re-framed as any of these items – your civ's total number of angreal could determine the total number of channelers they can build.

These items could be included simply as discoveries along the tech tree, each permanently upgrading a civ's channelers (the presumption being that by discovering them, you would discover some). “Ter-angreal making” could be a late-game version of this.

Similarly, there could be some buildings or wonders that are flavored to include these (the Thirteenth Depository, the Treasures of the Stone, etc.) that would increase the power of a civ's channelers, or at least some of a civ's channelers.

We could choose to name some promotions after them, with angreal improving total channeling strength, and sa'angreal being the equivalent of angreal II. Ter'angreal could work the same, though there could also be specific ones that add to very specific abilities ("dream ter'angreal" providing improved ability in tel'aran'rhiod, for instance).

In a much more complex system, we could have angreal and ter'angreal be actual items your civ can collect, found in ruins and archaeological digs. Each item could be paired with a specific channeler, improving that unit's abilities. We could elect for a system like this to serve as the primary means of powering up your channeling units (i.e., your units don't upgrade over time at all, instead gained power as you accumulate these items). Perhaps it is more complex than it is worth, though – especially since the majority of such items in the books sit in boxes in the Tower, and no such Amazing Race searching for them occurs particularly often (Bowl of Winds and a few others excepted).

THE FIVE POWERS
The Five Powers represent five separate strands of the One Power that represent the elements – Wind, Water Earth, Fire, and Spirit. Each weave requires a different mix of these various powers. Each channeler apparently has varying strength in each Power, with men tending to be stronger in Earth and Fire, and women stronger in Wind and Water (and both genders equal with Spirit). By no means am I suggestion these function as real mechanics within the game – that would be much too complex. However, they might make good flavor.

The Five Powers might make great promotions. Each could have an arbitrarily-decided upon upgrade associated with them, bent to make as much sense as possible. Borrowing from pre-existing civ promotions, Earth could be bonus damage in rough terrain, Air could be bonus defense against ranged attacks, Water could be bonus damage in open terrain, Fire could be bonus strength when attacking cities, and Spirit could be bonus to Healing and/or HP regeneration.

The Five Powers could additionally (collectively or individually) be an item on the tech tree, which upon researching provides access to some early-game channeling units (or access to the promotions above).

CUENDILLAR
Cuendillar, or heartstone is an (essentially) indestructible material made through the power. The making of it was lost until towards the end of the series. Notably, the original Seals on the Dark One's prison are made of Cuendillar (an aspect that doesn't seem to be true for the new Seals Rand creates in the series' finale). Interestingly, when Egwene rediscovers its making in the late-middle of the books, it serves as a substantial income-source for the rebel Aes Sedai, yet never really amounts to much more than that, despite the obvious promise of such a substance.

The obvious application of Cuendillar is as a late-game technology. Since there don't appear to be examples of cuendillar being used as weapons, this tech would likely provide economic bonuses and/or buildings.

Additionally, Cuendillar could theoretically be used as a strategic or luxury resource throughout the game – one not needing to have anything to do with channeling, necessarily. Similarly, we could have a “Cuendillar factory” be a GP-improvement, our version of the Manufactory (built by a channeling-related GP).

Lastly, if we still think one of our GW-types should be "crafts" it does make sense that many of these could be artifacts made from Cuendillar.

POWER-WROUGHT WEAPONS
Making weapons with the power is something that is not only forbidden by the Three Oaths, but is also a Talent mostly lost until its rediscovery in the final books. That said, it is something that theoretically would make a great deal of military difference if implemented. Additionally, there are a few ancient power-made weapons still to be found in the world, that are of course rather powerful (“powerful” in that they are very good quality weapons).

Perhaps the greatest complicating factor to the use of power-wrought weapons is the fact that they are outlawed by the Three Oaths. This means that, assuming the Three Oaths do indeed exist, for most of history no Aes Sedai-dependent civs would have any consistent access to power-wrought weapons (the exceptions, such as the Seanchan and the Aiel, still don't apparently use power-wrought weapons, despite not relying on the Aes Sedai for their channelers).

Of course, before they were outlawed (if we have a pre-Oath time in our game), early civs (Ten Nations era, for example) would potentially have access to power-made armaments. How would we implement these, though, without making early-game military units more powerful than late-game ones (an obvious design problem). One flavorful way of dealing with this is to make the early-history civs (Manetheren, etc.) have UU's that use power-wrought weapons. This wouldn't have any specific mechanical effect, but would be used as flavorful justification for that unit's awesomeness.

I think, ultimately, the best path (excepting the UU option) is likely to simply include power-wrought weapons as a late-game technology, referencing its rediscovery in the final books. This tech could provide a new unit type, building, or other gameplay bonus. This way we get the flavor without having to actually deal with the implications of the weapons directly.

TRAVELING
Traveling is essentially the "fast travel" of the Wheel of Time world through gateways. The ability to do so was lost during the Breaking, until its rediscovery in the second half of the series.

The obvious in-game mechanic of this (despite as a potential technology) is the ability to transport units around the map quickly or near-instantaneously. Note that I am eliminating skimming from this discussion, because it is essentially a simpler version of Traveling – we could elect to include it as an earlier technology to Traveling, simply for flavor. Essentially, this could be used as a simple re-basing – though for either channelers or any unit adjacent to a channeler. It could be that all channelers have this ability once the requisite tech has been researched (or an appropriate building has been built), but we could also require those channelers to have acquired a specific Traveling or Gateway promotion. While re-basing makes the most sense from a game-mechanic perspective, it is of of course possible for channelers to Travel to any place they have previously been (or can visualize clearly). This could be thus represented as any revealed map, or perhaps any map tiles currently visible (i.e. with no fog of war). Both of these might be far too powerful, though.

Another big issue with Traveling is that it potentially eliminates the benefit of the Ways. This makes sense, because the Ways become risky enough to never be worth using once Traveling is rediscovered, but may not be as interesting a game mechanic (because of the lack of risk). Of course, the Ways could be something that exists for the early and mid game, with Traveling only appear towards the very end of the game. Similarly, we must consider what, if any, overlap there is between the functionality of Traveling and the espionage-like abilities of tel'aran'rhiod (in order to preserve the viability of the latter).

Ways aside, we also must seriously consider the gameplay implications of Traveling – are there limitations on it? The Last Battle, and wars in general, will be a very different kind of thing if civs can teleport behind enemy lines easily (or even simply teleport within their own territory). I don't have an answer at this time, but Traveling is a significant enough part of the series to warrant at least the consideration of it as a real game mechanic.

TEL'ARAN'RHIOD
Tel'aran'rhiod is the World of Dreams, which can be entered by some channelers and wolfbrothers (and wolves and Slayer). I have an earlier post where I discuss the possibility of Tel'aran'rhiod being entered by Dreamwalker/Dreamer/Wolfbrother GP, it also makes a great deal of sense that it would represent a significant component of a Wise One UU. If we choose to include Tel'aran'rhiod as both a mechanic of some GP as well as that of the Wise Ones, I suggest each of these units use it completely differently – if the GP uses it to Spy, the Wise Ones should use it to reveal the map, for example. Below are some ideas for how it should work (mostly recycled from my earlier post).

First off, and most simply, Tel'aran'rhiod could be a technology, one that potentially enables the construction of Wise Ones, and/or upgrades channelers. Alternatively, it could provide an additional spy.

I don't think Tel'aran'rhiod makes sense as a clear promotion – entry into the world of dreams appears quite rare among non-Wise One channelers, usually only happening with Dreamers and those with special Ter'angreal (thus, it is likely best to count these cases as GP).

Tel'aran'rhiod could serve as a kind of espionage, similar to how it is used in the books. The unit could discover intrigue (similarly to some potential Gray Sister functionality described above), or even steal technologies. Note that if this is an ability of non-GP units (e.g. Wise Ones), it shouldn't be very powerful (since it wouldn't consume them).

The world of dreams could also either reveal some of the map, or at least eliminate the fog of war. A Wise unit could thus explore without putting herself at risk, and/or serve as a sentry while remaining quite far away.

Similarly, following on the late-series abilities of Perrin, a unit could theoretically "travel" via the World of Dreams. In-game, this would likely manifest itself as a unit being totally invisible, moving for a few turns, and then reappearing in the real world (visible) when their journey is complete. This would make Wise Ones function with a kind of pre-Traveling teleportation (understanding that I do not believe the Wise Ones in the series were actually capable of truly doing this).

Most fitting for GP units, the channeler could enter tel'aran'rhiod and defeat Nightmares, provide boosts to happiness of certain yields in a given city.

I do think any more literal uses of tel'aran'rhiod – battles within it, an actual second map, etc. – might be a bit too complex to be worth it. While there is something cool about an invisible map that dream walkers can do battle within, I can't see how it would fit in a civ mod very well.

BALEFIRE
Balefire is a super powerful attack that causes the target to cease to exist, and be written out of the Pattern. In the books it is thus considered "taboo," and is only used by certain characters in situations of dire need – permanently killing Forsaken or Darkhounds, for instance. The ability to use Balefire was lost during the Breaking, and only rediscovered during the books.

We have already discussed the use of Balefire as a RandNuke action for the Dragon Reborn – a really powerful attack that creates some "radiation" that represents the pattern unraveling This makes a lot of sense to me.

The ability could theoretically be used by other channelers as well, though it is difficult to imagine how this might be implemented. Is it available as a very high-tier promotion? This is perhaps my favorite option, though it is a bit odd to add unit functionality very late in its life. Can channelers do it after a National Wonder has been built? Does it consume large amounts of resources to use? Does it affect happiness? It certainly doesn't make sense as a specific unit you'd build (a "Balefire Channeler"). The briefly-mentioned concept of a Great Channeler (something I am not in favor of) would represent a place where we could put Balefire. Perhaps Balefire can be fired from cities with the proper buildings/garrisoned channelers. I can imagine it being around, essentially as the tactical equivalent to nukes in CiV, but exactly how it could work is still unclear to me.

I do think the RandNuke could conceivably be available to Forsaken units as well.

I think the "undoing history" aspect of Balefire is something best represented through radiation or pollution as mentioned above. I do not think it makes good design sense for us to include any sort of "undo" functionality in Balefire (rewriting the Pattern) – seems much too unpredictable.

Egwene discovered the Flame of Tar Valon ability at her climax in aMoL – a way to block Balefire (at the expense of her life). I could see this existing as a building of some sort similar to SDI Defense in previous civ games. It could be an ability of a single unit, as well, most likely as a promotion (that "intercepts Balefire within a certain radius). I think this is only worth including in the game if Balefire becomes an very common mechanic in our game (i.e., more than just the ability of Rand and the Forsaken or very highly-leveled channelers).

Overall, handling Balefire is a pretty tricky part of our game design, and likely won't get settled until much later in the design process.

OTHER TALENTS
There are several other Talents described within the Wheel of Time books not so far mentioned within these pages, such as: Blood Boiling, Cloud Dancing, Delving, Earth Singing, Listening to the Wind, Killing, Milking Tears, Reading Residues, Spinning Earthfire, Ta'veren Seeing, Ter'Angreal Making, Ter'Angreal Reading, Unweaving, and Flying.

I find each of these too specific, and not particularly useful for our purposes. Each of them could work fine as "minor flavor," but I don't see any of these having any direct impact on the game.

THE TRUE POWER
The True Power is the energy of the Dark One, and can be channeled directly only by those units allowed to channel it by the Dark One himself. The True Power cannot be detected by normal channelers, and has some different characteristics: it appears to be somewhat more destructive and chaotic, for instance.

Since it isn't really something that is "rediscovered" or anything, it doesn't make much sense as a particular technology.

Mechanically, it is not essential for us to differentiate the True Power from the One Power in our game. It is only used by the Forsaken (not counting any brief moments of Callandor-Rand), who do so only rarely up until the Last Battle (when they are allowed free use of it). It doesn't appear that rank-and-file Black Ajah users are permitted access to the True Power, so its use by players seems unlikely. If we did choose to implement it mechanically, it might simply make sense to have True Power users simply have some distinguishing combat characteristic – splash damage, ignoring defense, etc. (similar to some of the ways we could differentiate between saidin and saidar). It isn't clear which of these is most appropriate – our decision would essentially be arbitrary.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 7B.1 – Miscellanea and Items – Should the Void, channeler detection, angreal, the Five Powers, Cuendillar, and Power-wrought weapons be a part of the game? Should they feature actual mechanics, or be simple flavor? How should they work?
• 7B.2 – Traveling – What aspects of Traveling should be included in the game? How do these work, and how are they balanced against other game mechanics?
• 7B.3 – Tel'aran'rhiod – Does the World of Dreams exist in our mod? Is it accessible to Wise Ones, or only Great People? How does it work?
• 7B.4 – Balefire – How does Balefire work in the mod? Which units can use it? What are the consequences of using it? How can it be countered?
• 7B.5 – Talents – Are there any other Talents that should be included in the game somehow?
• 7B.6 – True Power – Does the True Power exist in any meaningful way in the mod? Who can use it, and how is it different from saidar and saidin?

C – Enemy Channelers

This section will briefly detail the possibilities surrounding channeling units that are not controlled by the Player.

MADMEN
Civs: "Barbarian"
Primary Role: combat/raider
Era Available: Various/early game
Notes: This unit may or may not exist, but represents a rogue male channeler. These could result from the madness of a civ's saidin units, or could spontaneously appear, similarly to a rebellion or barbarian raid. Think of these as a kind of mini-False Dragon.

In terms of abilities, Madmen would likely be of comparable strength to a civ's contemporary male channelers.

Madmen are obviously mad, but I don't think they should attack their own units and waste turns (for balancing purposes).

FALSE DRAGONS
Civs: "Barbarian"/Dragonsworn
Primary Role: combat/barbarian leader
Era Available: All
Notes: False Dragons should most likely appear as high-powered "barbarians" throughout the game, likely in place of rebellions or barbarian invasions (thus usually surrounded by military units).

We have discussed how they might factor into the discovery of the "true" Dragon Reborn – this discussion will not be continued here (as I am concerned primarily with the unit itself). It might make sense that each of these is unique, with its own name (which might work around the weird "false" issue mentioned by S3rgeus). Whether each one is meaningful to the "story" of the game can be determined later. A civ might gain Prestige or happiness for quelling an uprising by gentling or killing a False Dragon.

A False Dragon should be more or less likely to appear near a certain civ based on that civ's social policies, ideologies, happiness, “Old Blood,” and other appropriate factors.

In terms of the unit itself, I am assuming the False Dragon can channel (though, historically, not all could). I would imagine them to be of power comparable to Asha'man or other relatively powerful male channelers (with some in the late game potentially being extremely powerful). In the early game, I could imagine False Dragons being more powerful than any saidin units available to the civs.

I do think, obviously, False Dragons would be considered mad, but I think for the purposes of gameplay they should not be (they won't attack their own units, for instance).

SAMMA N'SEI
Civs: Shadow
Primary Role: combat
Era Available: Last Battle (very late game only)
Notes: The Samma N'Sei are the Aiel male channelers sent out to kill the Dark One in the Blight, later Turned and used as soldiers for the forces of the Shadow. Oh, and they have red veils. For synergy with the novels, I do think they should only appear in the armies of the Shadow during Tarmon Gai'don, perhaps only for the battles around Thakan'dar itself.

In terms of abilities, I would consider the Samma N'Sei to be probably on par with contemporary "normal" male channelers used by the civs – perhaps not as powerful as full Asha'man. Since there are likely relatively high numbers of them, they might be able to be included as "regular" troops for the Shadow, so they likely shouldn't be too powerful.

You might, on some level, consider the Samma N'Sei to be Dreadlords in a sense, but since they were all Turned, instead of voluntarily going over to the Shadow, they do not appear to have high positions within the hierarchy of Darkfriends, nor perhaps the mental capacity and charisma any longer to serve as battle commanders.

DREADLORDS
Civs: Shadow
Primary Role: combat
Era Available: Trolloc Wars and Last Battle
Notes: The Dreadlords are the battle commanding channelers of the Shadow Forces. Essentially, Black Sisters and Darkfriend Asha'man (or their early-era counterparts) became Dreadlords when the Last Battle began. During the Trolloc Wars, there should likely be a few of these, perhaps one for every large "squad" of shadowspawn. This should likely work similarly in the Last Battle, with the one exception being that, technically, player-controlled Darkfriend Channelers could theoretically be considered Dreadlords as well. If we chose to re-skin those units into Dreadlords, would they gain any new functionality? Perhaps the safest thing is to simply let the Dreadlords technically only refer to the Shadow-controlled channelers (Shadow player units simply remaining Black Sisters, Asha'man, etc.). Of course, Shadow Players could theoretically build Dreadlords as they might any shadowspawn unit, though in this case they should probably follow the same rules and restrictions that apply to the production of any channeler.

In terms of ability, I would imagine the Dreadlords being on par to Aes Sedai and Asha'man, roughly. I wouldn't imagine they can and will do any of the "unusual" functionality of the Aes Sedai (improving yields, etc.), instead serving mostly as combat units.

If players are allowed to control Dreadlords, I am currently unsure what differences, if any, exist between them and Aes Sedai/Asha'man. Considering we currently have the policy that Shadow civs lose access to their Aes Sedai (Black Sisters excepted), this could potentially be a complicating factor – perhaps another reason to keep Dreadlords as an AI-only unit.

THE FORSAKEN
Civs: Shadow
Primary Role: combat
Era Available: Various (Trolloc Wars and War of the Hundred Years for Ishamael, Age of the Dragon and Last Battle for others)
Notes: The Forsaken (Chosen) are the powerful Aes Sedai (men and women) who turned over to the Shadow before the Breaking of the World. A new one, M'hael, was added during the Age of the Dragon.

The Forsaken should not appear for the majority of the game, owing to their imprisonment with the Dark One. One mid-game exception to this is Ishamael (also called Ba'alzamon and Moridin), who was apparently somehow "half-sealed" with the others, allowing him to periodically be born into the world (apparently every 1000 years, approximately). Because of this, it might make sense to have Ishamael be a lone Forsaken to appear at the height of the Trolloc Wars, to serve as a particularly dangerous Dreadlord (likely much more powerful than any currently-available channeler). He is suspected to have played a role in the War of the Hundred Years (as Jalwin Moerad), as well, but since we're likely to make that a non-military event, we could elect to include his participation only as flavor text, or perhaps with some diplomatic functionality.

The other Forsaken should only appear during the Age of the Dragon (with more frequency as the Last Battle nears). The Forsaken should likely function as high-powered Dreadlords during the Last Battle – each should be more powerful than typical Aes Sedai or Asha'man, though likely less powerful than the Dragon Reborn himself. Perhaps they also have some special functionality, such as being able to wield Balefire, or providing bonuses similar to Great Generals.

One option is to treat all Forsaken generically, merely having a "Forsaken" unit (or saidar/saidin varieties), without concern for their individual identities (possibly including even Ishamael).

Alternatively, we could include named Forsaken, but treat them all as essentially interchangeable. For instance, we could have one Forsaken called Asmodean, and another Moghedian – the two would be identical (save for any innate differences between saidin and saidar).

The most complex – but also most flavorful – option is to emphasize their uniqueness. They are not all of equivalent strength. Furthermore, they do not all focus on the same activities – Moghedian would not, for instance, ever be found functioning as a Dreadlord, as her talents lie elsewhere. This could lead us to only using the handful of Forsaken that would likely fight in battle, ignoring/omitting the others, or, could lead us to having them each appear in different facets of the game throughout the Last Battle. Below, I will mention a few words about each Forsaken, and how they might make sense in-game.

Ishamael/Moridin – found in multiple eras. He is the strongest, and is ultimately named Nae'blis. Possible Dreadlord – likely best used doing battle with the Dragon Reborn near Thakan'dar.

Lanfear/Cyndane – the most powerful woman. Could be a Dreadlord, though she doesn't appear to function much as one in the books. She spends time in disguise, and in the world of dreams, trying to manipulate things. Hard to see how this could interact with our game in an obvious way. Perhaps she could serve as a Shadow-controlled spy, entering cities and creating Darkfriends, assassinating governors, and killing Lightside spies. She could be completely AI-controlled, or, alternatively, could be given to Shadow civs during the LB similarly to how the Dragon Reborn can be (at least, perhaps they could choose her destination).

Aginor/Osan'gar – supposedly the second most powerful of the men. He dies early in the series, but is known to be the one who created all the shadowspawn. He could function as a Dreadlord – perhaps one surrounded by a great deal of Shadowspawn. Alternatively, he could serve either as another spy, or perhaps even something more unusual (such as going from city to city, granting shadowspawn to Shadow Civs), though his shadowspawn connection seems to be not so apparent in the Third Age. Osan'gar (his name after resurrection) is secretly the Asha'man Dashiva – theoretically his Asha'man connection could be represented somehow.

Demandred – Definite Dreadlord, perhaps one of the most powerful. Alternatively, he could be the leader of the Sharan Civ (Bao the Wyld), but I don't like this idea, as it means the Sharans are necessarily shadow-aligned (if they are included).

Sammael – Known as a great swordsman and general – certainly a good one for the Dreadlord/combat leader role.

Rahvin – Took power in Caemlyn, so might be a good candidate for a spy-like Forsaken. Could work as a Dreadlord if necessary.

Graendal/Hessalam – Probably the second in strength of the women. She is known for her decadent lifestyle – probably doesn't make a whole lot of sense fighting in battle as a Dreadlord. Could be a spy, but also might make sense as something more unique. Perhaps she provides culture or Prestige, or Gold to Shadow civs?

Semirhage – She is the torturer, once known for her Healing ability. Could perhaps serve as a Dreadlord (perhaps with powerful Healing ability).

Mesaana – She is the Forsaken who infiltrated the White Tower in the books. Makes little sense as a Dreadlord – perhaps better served as a spy. Additionally, she could represent the Black Ajah corruption of the Tower, appearing as flavor text as the Tower is corrupted or when that corruption is cleansed.

Balthamel/Aran'gar – He perhaps makes the most sense as a spy, since he was reincarnated as a woman for the purpose of infiltrating the Aes Sedai rebels.

Asmodean – He's the one that joined Rand for a time, before being killed by Graendal (apparently, though I never personally figured that one out while reading the books). He could function as either a Dreadlord or a spy. I don't think the alliance-with-the-Dragon should be reproduced here, but it theoretically could be. How?

Moghedian – She is definitely not likely to serve as a Dreadlord – definitely should be a spy, or something focused specifically on the World of Dreams.

M'hael/Mazrim Taim – He would definitely function as a Dreadlord during the Last Battle. Could theoretically begin his life as a False Dragon, if we wished to be particularly accurate.

Considering the multiple names, it is worth remembering that the Forsaken are sometimes resurrected by the Dark One under different identities. We could elect to use this mechanic very literally – Balthamel coming back as Aran'gar – or we could elect to use it more generically, having the Forsaken respawn in a manner similar to the Dragon Reborn (with or without any name changing). Perhaps they can only be permanently killed by killing them with Balefire (as is the case in the books). On that note, if we do provide them with access to Balefire, I do not think Rand should be able to be permanently killed by it (except for in situations where he would otherwise be permanently killed, near the end of the Last Battle).

A possible use for the specific Forsaken as a flavor element while avoiding the clutter of them individually running around the map could be to use them in the text for boons. A Shadow player could be approached with a task by Mesaana, or Demandred could present a quest. Could be interesting – could even get crazy if the Chosen give contradictory orders! Poor shadow players!

Lastly, it is worth mentioning that the Forsaken are granted limited access to the True Power (and much less limited access during the Last Battle). See the discussion above for what this might mean in-game.

REQUIRED DECISIONS

• 7C.1 – False Dragons – How do False Dragons work in the mod? How powerful are they? Does their power scale over time?
• 7C.2 – Forces of the Shadow – How powerful are the Samma N'Sei and Dreadlords? How often, and where do they appear? Can player civs control Dreadlords?
• 7C.3 – Forsaken – How do the Forsaken manifest themselves in our game? When do they appear, and does Ishamael appear earlier than the rest? Are they specific units, or treated generically? Are they all combat units, or do some function as spies or in some other capacity? Do they Respawn? Do they tie into Shadow Player Boons? Can they access the True Power?

The wall of text is strong in this one.

Processing....processing...processing

While this isn't a quarter as well thought-out as counterpoint's post, here goes an idea would best suit the Aes Sedai producing problem. Feel free to modify/ignore/implement it as you wish:
Tar Valon serves as a sort of military CS. At around mid-game, all civs known to Tar Valon recieve an Aes Sedai unit to serve as 'counseler'. Civs can accept or reject the gift (perhaps channeler UU civs get a negative value on their UU by accepting, or the 'no channeling' ideology gives happiness for the less channelers or something like that)
Once you have an Aes Sedai unit, Tar Valon will start sending out quests. But real hardcore quests, eg 'capture the false dragon', 'go to war with [x] civ', etc. To aid your efforts, they grant you a new Aes Sedai unit which you later keep if you achieve their mission. Rejecting the mission will still let your original Aes Sedai stay, while accepting but not following through will remove both Aes Sedai, thus making you unable to receive TV quests, and incur the wrath of TV (hostile, perhaps Tar Valon might send a mission to other players to war you)
The more quests you do the more Aes Sedai they gift you but of course that number is limited, perhaps to 7 (1 from each Ajah). Anyway, I just thought of this real quick so feedback appreciated!

Right! I read all of the above on Sunday and in general I'd say I'm very positive about pretty much all of it. Thanks again for putting all this together!

Usually, I write my entire set of posts in one sitting, but in trying to find the time to do that I've realized it's impossible in this instance! So, I'm going to start going through in chronological order (top to bottom) mainly on the specific decision points or anything else I think should be discussed in more detail.

counterpoint said:

ok, i think maybe i just would like to see a specific example or two to wrap my brain around this. I think i'm down with all of this in theory. it's just hard for me to see the whole "prophesy block" thing working out smoothly without seeing some examples. Care you paint a picture for me?

In any case, for now, I'd say we have an understanding.

Click to expand...

Sure! For example purposes only:

"Rumors abound of a man who can channel claiming to be the Dragon. He yet wields no armies but whispers speak of prophecies from the Karaethon Cycle already completed. Your agents believe he will make himself known in White Harbor, where prophecy indicates he must lay claim to ancient artifact."

To fulfill: control White Harbor and place an artifact in a Great Work slot there within X turns. Reward: +Y Prestige one-time bonus, alignment tilts toward the Light (possibly other stuff)

To overturn: allow the time limit to elapse or raze the city. The controller of White Harbor (razing player controls it when it's destroyed) becomes more Shadow aligned. (Possible direct but secret (not broadcast to all players) Shadow bonuses since this is clearly an end-game prophecy.)

counterpoint said:

• 2C.1 – Acquisition – Should Aes Sedai, "Normal" units, and UU channelers have the same acquisition method, or should they be differentiated?
• 2C.2 – Acquisition Options – which Acquisition Methods are preferred, and for which kinds of units? Should we combine any Methods? (Note that further discussion will be shown on these points later in the document)

Click to expand...

My answer to these two questions is very interlinked.

I think they should be differentiated. It sounds like a lot of complexity, but we're crossing over with several different parts of the game and dealing with its entire length (rather than short bursts of time).

From the Acquisition options, I'm a fan of the "Old Blood" option - where you have a "strategic resource-like" limit on channelers that's determined by some other factor (rather than being placed on the map). I'm still undecided about whether or not Aes Sedai should consume "Old Blood" (or whatever we decide to call it). But I like the idea where Aes Sedai are given to civs by the Tower - rather than ever produced/purchased.

I'd say that (overall) the "normal" and UU channelers should be produce-able via hammers, unless their specific UU characteristics lend them to be used differently, but capped by the "Old Blood" requirement. (Some civs may need boosts to Old Blood to compensate for channeling UUs - we don't want them to be unable to build their UU?)

counterpoint said:

• 2C.3 – Strategic Resources (2) – if we choose to adopt Method 2, what should we name this strategic resource? Should it be bound to a particular terrain? Would units consume a variable amount of it?

Click to expand...

Pursuing this for completeness even though I prefer option 3. I don't know what we'd call this resource. I would think it should be distributed relatively evenly and unaffected by terrain type, otherwise specific civs (based on their starting biases) will have channeling advantages. (Unless we wanted to encourage that? But it seems a strange connection to make.)

Yes, I'd say more powerful units would consume more, but it wouldn't vary hugely. (Most consume 1, some powerful ones consume 2, the best one/two channelers in the game consume 3.)

counterpoint said:

• 2C.4 – Old Blood (3) – if we choose to adopt Method 3, what should we name this "resource?" Would units consume a variable amount of it?

Click to expand...

I think "Spark" makes a lot of sense for this one? Having "Spark" as a mineable resource on the map is weird, but as a representation of population (or some other abstraction) it works.

counterpoint said:

• 2C.5 – Gifted (4) – if we choose to adopt Method 4, should the units be gifted by the WT "randomly" or at various intervals, or should they be "requested" by the civ? Are these Aes Sedai permanent members of the civ, or are they temporary "loans?"

Click to expand...

Mmmm, this one is interesting. Requested is the most complex of these, regular intervals is the simplest. Based on discussions later about Aes Sedai persistence and the complications that brings up (particularly with some Warder systems), my gut reaction is to avoid a "loan" system.

counterpoint said:

• 3A.1 – Combat – What "type" of combat should Aes Sedai engage in – ranged, melee, or siege?

Click to expand...

I think ranged - but by making them suitably powerful ranged weapons, they'll be at least moderately effective siege weapons unless we take specific city-attacking measures to prevent it. (More on that when it comes up later on.) Like you've said, it's a bit strange that Aes Sedai would be effective siege weapons - so I'd say we'd avoid any city/siege bonuses in their promotion tree, which, combined with some inherent bonuses, should still make actual siege units the go-to choice for taking cities.

counterpoint said:

• 3A.2 – Healing – Should Healing be available to all Aes Sedai, or only those who take a promotion/join the Yellow (see subsection F below)? If so, how should this work?

Click to expand...

You suggest an approach much later on that I like - all Aes Sedai get the upgraded "medic" promotion, Yellows get the targeted healing action ability.

counterpoint said:

3A.3 – Gentling – Should Gentling be available to all Aes Sedai, or only those who take a promotion/join the Red (see subsection F below)?[/list]

Click to expand...

I think gentling should be available to all of them, but Reds are best at it (get some bonuses to success chance) by a significant margin.

counterpoint said:

The long and short of this, strategically, is that there's a sort of "Mexican Standoff" between Aes Sedai and other enemy units, and this stems mostly from the presence of the Warder. A lone Aes Sedai should probably be ignored – don't attack it, and it won't/can't attack you. But an Aes Sedai with a Warder... The Warder can hack its way through your units with impunity – if you retaliate and stop the Warder, the Aes Sedai can strike you. Ignore it, and the Warder has free-reign over your forces. This adds an interesting and unique strategic element. In typical war situations, it won't matter, since the Warder will attack and the enemies will retaliate. But imagine a situation when units attacked by the Warder don't want to fight – they're outnumbered, for example – they can run away and the Aes Sedai would never be able to strike them. As another example, if an Aes Sedai and her warder want to move through the battlefield to reach a certain point on the opposite end, they may be able to do so without being harassed, as nobody would want to draw their ire. I find this interesting. Lastly, Aes Sedai could follow an army around as Healers and be unmolested (since opponents may not want to threaten them.

Click to expand...

Coolest idea ever, I love this. Will respond in detail to the decision points!

counterpoint said:

3B.1 – History – Should the Three Oaths apply throughout history, or only starting in the mid-game? When would they begin? How do we balance pre-Oath Aes Sedai?

Click to expand...

I think it's way too complicated to have the Oaths show up mid-game. We can mitigate this by making the population of active Aes Sedai on the map at the very beginning of the game tiny. (A decent number of players won't have met Tar Valon for the first while anyway. Side note: I think there should be an early technology that causes the civ to meet the Tower, otherwise this all goes crazy when some people are unable to find the Tar Valon CS.)

counterpoint said:

3B.2 – Lies – Should the First Oath be worked into the game? How?

Click to expand...

If we tie this in at all (mechanically), I think we should do it as part of the diplo victory, rather than the channeling mechanics. Definitely room for it flavor-wise in the descriptive text.

counterpoint said:

3B.3 – Power-Wrought Weapons – Should the Second Oath be worked into the game? How?

Click to expand...

I don't think explicitly as a part of the Aes Sedai mechanics. We can have power wrought weapons through blademasters, ancient artifacts, and as a technology, but I don't think we can reasonably connect it to the Aes Sedai units.

counterpoint said:

3B.4 – Darkfriend Killing – In what circumstances does a human opponent become a Darkfriend that is legal for an Aes Sedai to kill?

Click to expand...

I think Aes Sedai can always attack units controlled by civilizations that have declared for the Shadow during the Last Battle (and I think any Aes Sedai controlled by Shadow civs become Black Ajah, or some similar explanation that lets Shadow civs keep the ones they have). I understand the rationale of wanting to keep "threatening" a part of that, but given the Aes Sedai combat with the Sharans (right?), I think it's fair (and much more explosive end-of-game-y) to let them have at it at the end.

counterpoint said:

3B.5 – Threatening – Should a Sister be able to attack if somebody else's Warder is attacked? What about another Sister? What if these units are owned by other (non-attacking) civs?

Click to expand...

This crossed over a bit with the warder section after, but I'd say Aes Sedai are bonded to individual warders. They can attack any unit within 3 tiles (and transferring adjacence with any of those units - so the "I can attack this guy" cascades out beyond the 3 tiles to all connected adjacent units) of the attacking unit that hits their own warder, themselves, or another sister within the observing sister's vision radius (regardless of which civ the defending sister belongs to). Obviously the normal war restrictions still apply, example:

Andor and Tear are at war. An Illianer Aes Sedai sees a Tairen pikeman attack an Andoran Aes Sedai. The Illianer Aes Sedai can attack the Tairen pikeman only if Tear and Illian are at war. The capability is still recorded though - so if Illian sees that and wants to take advantage of it - they can declare war on the spot.

I also think there should be a cooldown on this - the "I can attack this guy" doesn't let that Aes Sedai attack that specific unit for the rest of time. I'd say a single "instance" of being able to attack a set of units lasts only X turns (10?). They're tracked independently - if you're at war with two civs and civ A attacks one of your Aes Sedai on turn 56, then civ B attacks her on turn 59. She can attack the flagged civ A units until turn 66 and flagged civ B until turn 69.

counterpoint said:

3B.6 – Nearby – what constitutes "nearby forces" (ones fair to attack once the Aes Sedai is threatened)?

Click to expand...

Oops, I answered this above. Within 3 tiles of the attacking unit and all units in the adjacency chain from every unit (owned by the attacking civ) within that radius.

counterpoint said:

3B.7 – Garrison – Can Aes Sedai be Garrisoned? Can they attack anybody invading the city?

Click to expand...

Urk, maybe? I'm leaning towards no in attacking from within the city but I don't think we should stop players moving Aes Sedai into cities at all - mostly because it would make movement quite annoying. (Having to not use all movement or move off the road)

counterpoint said:

3B.8 – Black – Should an Aes Sedai's violation of the Three Oaths (proving they are Black) be "public?" Should the defending civ be notified, or is it just a "I hope you didn't miss that" moment?

Click to expand...

Urk, I think whether or not we notify the player/defender is a small problem. The bigger one is "do we have individual 'outed' Black Ajah Sisters?" I think it might make this simpler if we tie Black Sisters into who their controllers are when alignments are chosen. It seems like a lot of logic for something that will only really happen during a short window towards the end of the game. (Not even the whole LB, just the short time leading up to it and shortly after it starts.)



I'm afraid that's all I have time to get to tonight! Will be back tomorrow!

Just wanted to drop by to clarify - you guys aren't waiting for me to respond, are you?

I figured I'd give people time to read and respond before I interjected anything. Hope that works.

/thread paralysis.

counterpoint said:

Just wanted to drop by to clarify - you guys aren't waiting for me to respond, are you?

I figured I'd give people time to read and respond before I interjected anything. Hope that works.

/thread paralysis.

Click to expand...

Sorry, that was a long 'tomorrow' on my part. I meant to drop in to say that I was away for the weekend, but I got swept up in other stuff. So, an evening! Onwards, to responding!

counterpoint said:

3C.1 – Warder Basics – Are warders unique units? Do they automatically upgrade? Are there different "versions" throughout the tech tree? Alternatively, are they simply "normal" units who are Bonded to the Aes Sedai?

Click to expand...

In general, I like the flavor of bonding existing units with Aes Sedai. I don't think we can do the different "versions" one - that feels very different from what warders are. I think not having a "warder" unit is also a big loss though. I think we could have Warders be a single unit type but that they grow alongside their Aes Sedai (keeping them relevant throughout history). I'd say an Aes Sedai can bond an existing unit and that unit is replaced with a warder unit. (Do we want correspondence between the unit types there - a Warder who's an archer if they bond a unit that uses a bow?)

counterpoint said:

3C.2 – Bonding – How are Warders bonded? Can each Aes Sedai only bond one Warder? Can Warders be released from their bond, and if so, how do we prevent exploits?

Click to expand...

I think we can keep it simple on this front. Aes Sedai can bond a single warder at a time (Green Ajah bonus discussed later) using a custom mission available to only Aes Sedai units. I'd say bonding is permanent (which overlaps well with my position on Aes Sedai being owned perpetually by a civ once they're given them).

counterpoint said:

3C.3 – Benefits – What combat bonuses should Warder's receive once bonded? How should we represent their shadowspawn-detection skills? Should Warders have improved movement?

Click to expand...

I like the idea of "ignore terrain" like scouts - that adds significant mobility without drastically changing the range of the unit. Warders also won't be able to run too far ahead since they'll want to stay within range of their Aes Sedai.

I don't feel as strongly about which bonus the unit should have (March vs Bushido vs defending bonus). I'm leaning towards Bushido.

We can highlight any hex within radius X of the Warder that contains Shadowspawn (while the Warder is selected) - regardless of whether or not it's revealed? (Only needs to be previously explored.) Could be useful for scouting the Blight during the game, and probably during the LB. Not sure how the AI would use this particular ability - I'm not sure if they "cheat" with respect to the fog of war.

counterpoint said:

3C.4 – Drawbacks – What should happen to the survivor when a Warder or Aes Sedai is killed? If the Aes Sedai leaves the civ to return to the Tower, what happens to the Warder?

Click to expand...

I don't think the Aes Sedai should return to the Tower in the normal course of things, mainly for complexity reasons - both for the player and us. However, I think there's an argument for Aes Sedai returning to the Tower when their Warder dies. It might temper the "Aes Sedai + Warder" wrecking ball strategy if the Aes Sedai gets a combat penalty and returns to the Tower a few turns after her Warder dies. (Not immediately, otherwise aggressors just kill the Warders to get rid of Aes Sedai.) Even if we do that, I don't think we'd persist Aes Sedai at the Tower and have them reappear later.

I think the Warder should suffer a massive combat penalty if his Aes Sedai dies. He shouldn't become entirely useless though - that's dull and annoying for the player. Aes Sedai-less Warders could be sent to the Tower for caretaking in exchange for influence?

I'm in agreement that the Aes Sedai should have a smaller combat penalty when the Warder dies (than the corresponding Warder penalty when the Aes Sedai dies). If we don't have the Aes Sedai return to the Tower, then I'd imagine this wears off after a while. Rebonding a new warder would have a cooldown then as well.

counterpoint said:

3C.5 – Male Bonding – Should we include non-Aes Sedai bonding (Asha'man, Wise Ones, etc.)?

Click to expand...

I don't think so, mainly for simplicity's sake. Warders will always be an available mechanism to reach the above mechanics, and Asha'man bonding will only become important/possible very late in the game.

counterpoint said:

3D.1 – Diplomacy – Should there be significant overlap in the mechanics that enable diplomatic victory, and those that grant Aes Sedai?

Click to expand...

I think you've outlined good reasons to keep them separate-but-related. (People can disable the diplomatic victory as well. Lots of fun combinations here!) I like the "Aes Sedai quotas" that scale over the course of the game - 0-1 at the start and up to 5 by the end, scaled by the modifiers you described.

I think we can make that limit explicit to the player, so that they can plan accordingly. (You have 0/1 possible Aes Sedai from the Tower.) This also means we can, as you suggest later, modify this with wonders and eras in a transparent way that players can follow.

counterpoint said:

3D.2 – Aes Sedai Granting – Should we adopt the system I proposed, wherein non-diplomatic factors determine the amount of Aes Sedai, while diplomacy determines the "quality" of them? What specific recommendations/changes would you make?

Click to expand...

Yes, I like that system. Related to what I said in my previous post - I've been thinking on this a bit over the weekend - and I think Aes Sedai shouldn't consume our "Spark" resource that's used for other channelers. In universe, the Aes Sedai you are given don't necessarily come from your civ - they aren't consuming the "Spark" resource generated by your population. Gameplay-wise, I wouldn't want players to be shorted an Aes Sedai because they built a Wilder at the wrong time. Given the differences, I think keeping those "supplies" separate makes sense.

counterpoint said:

3D.3 – Black Ajah – How should things change if the Black Ajah takes control of the Tower?

Click to expand...

The first thing is they switch sides in the Last Battle. That should make a big difference to the difficulty for the Light. (The Tower's forces should be of noticeable importance to the Light under normal circumstances.) I say we characterize Aes Sedai controlled by Light civs at this time as "rebels" against the Black Ajah controlled Tower, allowing them to stay on there.

I think the main differences caused by this switch pertain to the Diplomatic Victory, rather than our channeling mechanics. I think the Tower's role in channeling remains quite similar, just inverted in places related to Alignment. This will take place very close to the end of the game if at all, so there's only time for so much to change then.

counterpoint said:

3E.1 – Balance Over Time – Which of the suggestions do you prefer to keep Aes Sedai balanced throughout the tech tree? What specific recommendations do you have?

Click to expand...

I think the idea of having Aes Sedai get better at certain technologies (and wonders) makes a lot of sense. Linking and shielding seem like great candidates for techs that unlock new abilities (potentially in more unit types than just Aes Sedai though).

Agreed on the general power curve - that from a relative perspective they're more powerful in the early game.

counterpoint said:

3F.1 – Ajah Use – Should specific Aes Sedai be attached to Ajahs? Should this be a promotion, an internal choice, or merely "training?". Can Aes Sedai adopt multiple Ajahs?

Click to expand...

Right, I've been waiting to get to this section in my replies! I think that an Aes Sedai's Ajah should determine its actual unit type. (So "Red Sister"/"Red Ajah Aes Sedai"/"Red Aes Sedai") This means they'd be locked into their own single Ajah. I think this is more true to the way Ajahs work in WoT and also lets us do things like unique art for each Ajah. Given the differences in abilities and the limited Aes Sedai slots available to players, I think the player should be prompted for which Ajah they want when told they'll be sent one from the Tower. (Like the free GP window)

I think names is a nice touch and very easy to do. We have a lot of names for Tower Aes Sedai of the various Ajahs throughout WoT history (right?) and adding unique names to units is very easy on the technical side.

counterpoint said:

3F.2 – Which Ajah – Should all Ajahs be represented? Is it ok if the abilities granted are non-combat related?

Click to expand...

I think all of the Ajahs should be represented, but it's fine if some have non-combat-only abilities. I'm partial to all Aes Sedai being combat units (possibly of varying strengths by Ajah, but all fairly powerful), but I'll have to reread your post again on this subject, because there were some good reasons to go the other way too.

counterpoint said:

3F.3 – Ajah Abilities – For each Ajah, which ability or abilities do you prefer? How should their specific mechanics work? How would you balance them against other Ajahs? Are there any others we should consider?

Click to expand...

I think my answer to this one has to be pretty big. I'll come back to this tomorrow!

counterpoint said:

3F.4 – Other Channelers – Should non-Aes Sedai be able to train with the Ajahs? Does this have any effect on their abilities?

Click to expand...

I think sending non-Aes Sedai channelers to the Tower should be a permanent thing with some valuable rewards (rather like gifting the unit). I'm not sure if UUs should be candidates - but it probably makes sense that they can be.

I'm afraid that's all I have time for this evening. I'll come back to the last couple of topics in more depth tomorrow!

Actual tomorrow this time! So, relating to 3F.3, I'm going to go through each of the Ajahs as outlined in counterpoint's post and give my thoughts on the abilities listed there. My preferences are highlighted in yellow (since that was such a well received color last time )

I'm also going ahead with my preference for Ajah choice determining unit type, rather than using promotions, but I think a lot of these remain relatively the same in either system.

counterpoint said:

BLUE AJAH
The Blue is tricky because it is rather important to the plot of the books, but has some characteristics that don't translate into the game easily. The Blue is known for their manipulation/concern of and for global events (like the Dragon Reborn) and politics (the most Amyrlin come from this Ajah), taking up causes of justice, and maintaining the largest eyes and ears network. Ideas (I enjoy 1, 2, 3, and 4):

• Consult Eyes and Ears – a Blue Sister could use her turn to gain some intrigue. Perhaps they would have to be garrisoned in or next to a city, and they could get random intrigue from any city that city is connected to.
• Generate Prestige – A Blue Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Prestige per turn. This makes more sense than Culture, but is problematic in the early game. Culture could work as well (one one and then the other). Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor. This is due to their role in world-altering events.
  
• Generate Faith – identical to above, but with Faith instead of Prestige.
• Become Governor – becomes a Channeling Governor in a city (whatever that means!), assuming this is distinct from options 3 and 4 above.
• Discovery – The Blue Sister has a high statistical likelihood of discovering important objects and people – the Horn of Valere, Seals, Darkfriends, etc. Would depend on the mechanics we choose for these things.
  
• Enhanced Sight – the Blue Sister gets a bonus to visibility (because of her eyes and ears!).
  
• Kills Generate Faith – The Blue Sister produces a small amount of Faith for each kill (or each Shadowspawn/Darkfriend kill)

Click to expand...

My first question here is what is intrigue? We've mentioned it a few times, but is it anything beyond the information given by spies in base CiV? Things that let you see when a civ is plotting against another (only really works on the AI, just a quick MP note) or the approximate progress of one of their cities towards building a world wonder?

I think we're due to come back to the Horn of Valere at some point, but I like the idea that Blue Sisters can discover the Horn much like Hunters of the Horn. That seems like a nice bonus for them - but definitely not the only one they get. As you've said, they're important in the books and should feel that way in the mod too.

I think their key ability should be the channeling governor one. I think that will include some elements of faith and culture generation. If the Blues are the only Ajah with governor access, then that gives them a strong, unique position.

However, it's probably worth discussing something we went over before here: can governors become units again? I think we were leaning towards "no" or "post-release-if-at-all" for that feature, but having Aes Sedai that can become governors may change this. It's a big drawback to this Ajah to permanently lose the unit through their primary ability. This doesn't have to be all or nothing though - we could make Blue Sister governors the only ones that can become units again, while normal GP governors are stuck in their city?

counterpoint said:

GREEN AJAH
The Green Ajah is perhaps the simplest to come up with abilities for, as they are the "Battle Ajah." The Greens prepare themselves for the Last Battle. They typically take multiple Warders. Ideas (I enjoy 5 the most, and 1 and 2 as well):

• Enhanced Combat – the Green Sister gets a simple bonus to Combat Strength
  
• Shadowspawn Killer – same as above, but applies only to Shadowspawn (and is likely a bigger bonus)
  
• Various other bonuses – conceivably any of the normal CiV promotions could make sense here.
  
• Battle Leader – the Green Sister functions somewhat like a mini Great Captain/General, providing combat bonuses to surrounding units
  [*]Bond Second Warder – Green Sisters would have the ability to bond a second Warder.

Click to expand...

I think second warder is a big one here. It's powerful (but not overpoweringly so), flavorful, and makes the Ajah stand out as very unique. Shadowspawn killer is tempting, but I don't know if we want to add that on top of a second warder - that's already powerful given the system you've outlined in 3B with the third oath. I don't see which other Ajah we'd give that to though. We don't have to have one, I suppose.

counterpoint said:

YELLOW AJAH
The Yellow concerns itself with Healing, and is consequently also quite simple to work into our game. It should be noted that some version of the abilities below may exist in all Aes Sedai. We can either remove them from typical Aes Sedai, or make improved versions of them (or variations on them) available to Yellows. In any case, we will have to decide whether Yellows (and any Aes Sedai) perform Healing as a dedicated action, or passively while they fight and move around. Ideas (I like 2):

• Improved Healing – the Yellow Sister heals at a better rate than other Aes Sedai. A sort of enhanced Medic Promotion. Alternatively, they could be the only Aes Sedai with this ability.
  [*]Focused Healing – the Yellow Sister "attacks" a single ally and greatly heals that unit.
  
• Kill Heal – an odd one, the Yellow Sister heals herself and adjacent units when she makes a Kill.

Click to expand...

I think this one stands out well too. We give a "Medic-like" promotion to all Aes Sedai but Yellow Sisters have the targeted healing ability, which is likely to be much more swing-y and powerful in battle. I don't think they need a buff to the passive healing as well as unlocking the targeted one.

counterpoint said:

RED AJAH
The Reds are the most numerous Ajah, around 200 of the 1000 Rand-era Aes Sedai (something I find actually quite preposterous given their characterization in the books) who dedicate themselves to capturing and/or gentling men who have the ability to channel. Typically, Reds do not have Warders, though I think in our game this may be something we can ignore for the sake of simplicity (especially if we view this as "training" with the Ajahs, not actually joining the Ajah). It should be noted that, if we do exclude Reds from having Warders, the abilities should appropriately balance that – a Warderless Aes Sedai would otherwise be much more vulnerable against a male channeler. Ideas (I think I like 3, 4, or 5):

• Saidin Killer – the Red Sister does bonus Damage against male channelers
  
• Saidin Shield – the Red Sister has enhanced Defensive Strength against male channelers
  
• Gentling – The Red Sister has the ability to Gentle male channelers (assuming this ability is not granted to other Aes Sedai)
  [*]Enhanced Gentling – The Red Sister has stronger Gentling than other Aes Sedai, doing more damage, or requiring fewer preconditions in order to be successful.
  
• Yield after Gentling – The Red Sister gains something extra upon gentling a saidin-user (Faith, Prestige, Happiness, etc.).

Click to expand...

I think enhanced Gentling is the way to go here. Gentling is a potentially globally useful ability that would be concentrated on too few units if only Red Sisters could do it. I think the difference should be fairly drastic between Reds and other Ajahs though - like if normal Aes Sedai can gentle male channelers under 20% HP, Reds can do it under 60% or something to that effect. And since their "primary" ability is only an enhancement, I think it's reasonable to also give them one of the others too. Enhanced damage against male channelers combines well with their main ability, but won't usually allow players to "snipe" male channelers in one turn with it, because it will be unusual for civs to have multiple Red Sisters working in concert. (And if they do - they should have had to do some serious wrangling and be rewarded with some significant power.)

counterpoint said:

WHITE AJAH
The Whites are tricky because they are not particularly well-defined in the books, and are seemingly somewhat redundant to the Browns. They pursue logic and philosophy. They don't care about the rest of the world (and have no eyes and ears), and "reject" passion. Ideas (I like 1):

• Generate Science – A White Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Science per turn. Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor.
  
• Generate Culture – A White Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Culture per turn. Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor. This is inspired by their interest in philosophy, but is largely contradictory with their anti-passion nature.
  
• Research Kills – A White Sister gains a small amount of Science for every kill/shadowspawn kill (this is rather morbid)
  
• Enhanced Sight – the White Sister has enhanced visibility due to their clarity and knowledge.

Click to expand...

This is harder to choose. I think I agree with the association of the White Ajah with science, and also with the problem that creates with the Browns. I think we can characterize the difference as logical being scientific and historical being cultural. That gives us reasonable associations, but we don't want to trample on the Blue Ajah's position as "exclusive governor" because I think that gives a lot of uniqueness to the Blues.

I also think that a flat bonus to science per turn would be quite boring for the player and they would most often choose one of the other Ajahs for the splashier abilities. (Or if it's not choice based, they'd just be disappointed when they get a White Sister, which is almost worse.) The GS "science burst" ability comes to mind, but then if it doesn't consume the Sister she becomes easily one of the most powerful entities (not just units) in the game. Can we balance a science burst against some massive drawback? Something like:

"Logical Edict": Creates a burst of science (of approximate worth with the Great Scientist analogue's ability) but your civilization suffers -10 (-20? more? less?) global unhappiness. (I'm not sure if global unhappiness is a directly modifiable thing, I may need to invent that for this to work.) The negative effects could last for 10 (20? more?) turns and the ability have an even longer cooldown. We could even make the Sister weaker at combat during the cooldown.

counterpoint said:

GRAY AJAH
The Gray Ajah is also not particularly well-developed in the books. They concern themselves with politics and mediation. They often serve as negotiators and ambassadors. Ideas (I think I like 4 or 5):

• Enhanced Diplomat – the Gray Sister goes "off the map" for a time and functions as an enhanced Diplomat – perhaps providing some extra benefits beyond those of other diplomats (some intrigue, enhancements to negotiations)
  
• Negotiate with Civ – Unclear how this could work, but the Gray Sister could provide a bonus to trade and diplomacy, provided she initiated the session by moving into the territory of the second civ. This could provide extra gold/yield incentives to both civs, create unbreakable treaties, extend the deals for more than 30 turns, etc.
  
• Improve Trade – similar to above, the Gray Sister could go "off the map" and function as a caravan – one that provides extra yields to one or both parties.
  
• Negotiate with CS – The Gray Sister initiates dialogue with the CS, and provides for easier negotiation – bonus influence from gold donations, non-military tribute demanding, extra benefits/yields from being friends with the CS, etc.
  
• Ignore Borders – the Gray Sister can move as if she has an open borders agreement with any civ (like a missionary).
  
• Faster Movement – related to the above in principle, the Gray Sister gains bonus movement points or ignores terrain.

Click to expand...

Unplunderable (and better - higher yields?) trade routes jumps out at me here. What if Grey Sisters can use their "Ignore borders" passive ability to enact a "binding trade agreement" (or something) with a target civ (from next to one of their cities that is connected to the civ's capital, or possibly only next to the capital itself) that means all of your trade routes with that civ are unplunderable and better for a certain number of turns? (Do we include trade routes established by that civ to you as well?)

A side effect of this is that the Grey Ajah becomes useful for the cultural victory. At least if we keep some of base CiV's Tourism mechanics for Prestige, having a trade route with a civ provides a significant (+40%) Tourism modifier with them.

counterpoint said:

BROWN AJAH
The Brown Ajah is pretty well-developed in the books, but is tricky in part because of their similarity to the Whites. The Browns seek knowledge and study history. They also maintain the Tower library. Ideas (I like 1, 2, or 4):

• Generate Science – A Brown Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Science per turn. Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor. This one must obviously not be also used by the Whites.
  
• Generate Culture – A Brown Sister is garrisoned (or adjacent) to a city and generates a small amount of Culture per turn. Note: this concept could be incorporated into the unit becoming a city's Governor. This is inspired by their interest in history.
  
• Ruins Explorer – The Brown Sister gains better results from the exploration of ruins. This is problematically useless in the late game – unless we decide to enhance the presence of ruins.
  
• Enhanced Archaeologist – The Brown Sister functions as a super-archaeologist, doing digs more quickly, not disappearing once they are complete, and perhaps having a chance to find Hidden Antiquity Sites.
  
• Research Kills – A Brown Sister gains a small amount of Science for every kill/shadowspawn kill (this is rather morbid)
  
• Culture Kills – A Brown Sister gains a small amount of Culture for every kill/shadowspawn kill

Click to expand...

Archaeologist jumps out at me, but a reusable archaeologist would power through a lot of the world's antiquity sites pretty fast. If we separate Seals from normal GWs (in the map placement part - they'll definitely be separate once you find them) then I can see Browns being good for that. That does make their primary ability only useful in relation to the Last Battle though. That may not be a huge problem - I imagine most players will have that enabled most of the time and some mechanics should inevitably tie into it like this.

I also mentioned culture above, though I'm also not sure how we can balance this one with the Sister not being consumed by the mission. (And without stomping on the Blues as Governors idea.)

counterpoint said:

BLACK AJAH
The Black Ajah doesn't exist a a “real” Ajah, strictly speaking, but we could have it open up to certain civs and Aes Sedai (see below in sub-part G). There are multiple directions we can go in for Aes Sedai who take this as a promotion. Ideas (I like 1, 2, 3, or 6):

• Freedom from the Oaths – The Three Oaths do not apply to the Black Sister – she can kill, lie, etc.
  
• Turning – The Black Sister can, after weakening another Channeler, take permanent control of that Channeler (12 other Aes Sedai and 13 Myrddraal not required)
  [*]Compulsion – The Black Sister can, after weakening another Unit, take temporary control of that unit.
  [*]Create Darkfriend – the Black Sister can capture a military unit or civilian and make them a Darkfriend, which is a unit we may perhaps choose to create for various purposes.
  [*]Assassinate Governor – the Black Sister has a chance (like some darkfriend spies or Bloodknives might) to kill a Governor stationed in a city.
  
• Assassinate Great Person – similar to above, the Black Sister has a chance (like some darkfriend spies or Bloodknives might) to sabotage Great Person generation in a city.
  
• Aes Sedai Killer – a Black Sister receives bonus Combat Strength against Aes Sedai.

Click to expand...

The Black Ajah get all the cool abilities. In my previous post I wondered about whether or not having Black Ajah Sisters at all is worth it due to the limited window of time they're available in. However, rereading these abilities, I think they bring a lot to the endgame. If we share some of these abilities with high level Shadowspawn (Dread Lords/Forsaken) then the abilities themselves should be visible in a lot of games, so it would still be worth our adding them in.

My first question here is how we go about revealing Sisters as Black Ajah to a player (the world?) and giving them access to those abilities. How does that interact with the player's Alignment (if at all)? Does using these abilities make the player more Shadow-aligned? At what point in the game do Black Ajah Sisters begin to appear? Are there situations where a player has become Shadow-aligned enough (during the LB only?) to "choose" Black Ajah from the "You have been gifted an Aes Sedai, choose an Ajah" screen? Or are all Shadow civs during the LB given Black Ajah Sisters in place of all other Ajahs? (This reduces the potential disadvantage of having no Aes Sedai on the Shadow side that you've mentioned elsewhere.) OR do all Sisters controlled by Shadow-declaring civs get replaced with Black Ajah ones? Or are the abilities simply layered on top of the existing Ajah in one of the above cases?

Many questions! I'll keep thinking on all of the above.

counterpoint said:

AJAHS WITH OTHER CHANNELERS
It has been discussed in-thread that it could be possible for any female channeler to train at the White Tower. As far as the possible effects this could have (we could elect to combine some of these):

1. Provides the unit with a Promotion, the specifics of which would be determined by which Ajah they were sent to train with. These could be minor versions of the corresponding Aes Sedai abilities.
2. Provides the unit with some "free" experience, because of their instruction.
   [*]Has diplomatic ramifications (boosting favor with various Ajahs in the Hall of the Tower)
3. Takes the channeler "off the map" for a set number of turns while she trains.

I, once again, don't have strong opinions about which of these, if any, is best. A decent part of me wants the Ajahs to remain Aes Sedai-only, and leave "normal" promotions for other channelers.

Click to expand...

I think this is more of a "fire and forget" situation. You're sending that channeler to train at the Tower to become an Aes Sedai (hopefully). But once that training is complete, they belong to the Tower, not you. They do have some affection (on average) for their homeland, so that's abstracted by an increase in influence.

counterpoint said:

3F.4 – Other Channelers – Should non-Aes Sedai be able to train with the Ajahs? Does this have any effect on their abilities?

Click to expand...

Related to what I said above, I think civs should be able to send channelers to train at the Tower, but once they do then they've lost that unit. Akin to gifting units to city states for influence.

counterpoint said:

3G.1 – Persistence – Do Aes Sedai disappear forever if recalled by the Tower? Can they return to that civ, or to any civ? What about their Warders?

Click to expand...

I think avoiding persistence helps us a lot with complexity of linking it together with all these other systems. (Black Ajah, Warders, Ajah abilities, player Aes Sedai count) Aes Sedai gifting from the Tower is permanent barring the player's actions reducing their "Aes Sedai cap" to lower than the number of Aes Sedai they currently control. (Aes Sedai who disappear this way take their Warder(s) with them. I'd say the player chooses which Aes Sedai to lose.)

counterpoint said:

3H.1 – Novices and Accepted – Should Novices and Accepted be included in the game? Should they be units or serve some kind of diplomatic function? How should these mechanics work?

Click to expand...

I'll think more on this one and may come back to it, but my first reaction is that if we include Novices and Accepted then it would be as a part of the diplomacy system rather than through the channeling mechanics. Like you've said, Novices are kept within the Tower and having them present on the map is a strange departure from flavor that I don't think adds much. Even Accepted have limited freedom that makes them ill-placed on the map for similar reasons.

There's probably a lot of room for them to play a role in the diplomacy side though. If sending channelers to the Tower is one of a civ's major ways of interacting with the Tower, then Novices and Accepted can factor in in some way there.

counterpoint said:

Gray Ajah Aes Sedai could have a role in easing diplomacy with the Tower. This is especially true if "real" Diplomacy exists between civs and the Tower (trades, peace treaties, etc.).

Click to expand...

Just singling this out because I think it's a very good point and something we should consider for Grey Ajah Sisters when we're going a bit deeper on diplomacy. I think it's ok to tie one of the Ajah's usefulness to a mechanic like that because some will inevitably be better for specific strategies and they'll end up more focused and useful if we embrace that to a certain extent.

Below, I discuss the possibility of a "second ability" for each Ajah that could be unlocked through Diplomacy and this was one of the ideas that put me on that track. I like the suggestion above for the Grey Ajah but I think this one fits really well too. (We might want to use this one as the first available ability though - otherwise good relations with the Tower beget better relations through the Grey Ajah, which could lead to "diplomatic runaways" depending on how diplomacy works.)

counterpoint said:

3I.1 – Diplomacy – In what ways does the creation and use of Aes Sedai affect the White Tower-centered diplomacy system? How should that system work, both in general and specifically?

Click to expand...

Despite the difficulties above with picking out a single ability for each Ajah, is there potential for unlocking an additional ability per Ajah via diplomatic relations with the Tower? This would allow diplomatic players with close relations to the Tower to demonstrate their Aes Sedai powers without having to affect their total of allowable Aes Sedai units.

I've mentioned my position on the crux of this above, but for organizational clarity, I'll summarize: I like the idea of having Aes Sedai quality affected by diplomatic relationship with the Tower, while the number of Aes Sedai a civ can control is determined by other external factors.

And I'm afraid I'm out of time for the night yet again! I'm busy tomorrow and Thursday, so I'll be back on Friday!

And we're back!

Quick aside, Civ:BE came out today (and I have it but haven't played it yet). Does this affect our plans in any way? I haven't looked into the modding capabilities of Civ:BE yet. It uses the same game engine as CiV so a lot of the technical knowledge I've gained on CiV is likely transferrable. However, there is likely to be a steep-ish learning curve where I'm not that effective to start with.

Civ:BE may offer some nice fixes for us - terrain graphics updates mid-game comes to mind. I would hope Firaxis have fixed that this time around. The other side of this (that requires me to investigate just a tiny bit) is if Firaxis haven't released the gameplay C++ code for Civ:BE then a mod like ours is basically impossible to do.

My gut reaction is that we'll stay with CiV, but I just wanted to start off that conversation in case anyone had compelling cases to do otherwise.

Now, continuing with the channeling!

counterpoint said:

4A.1 – Specialists – Should Wisdoms be units or should they be a kind of Specialist? If they are a Specialist, what kind of yield would they produce? What kind of Great People would they generate? What kind of building would they be housed in?

Click to expand...

I was under the impression that a significant portion of Wisdoms were non-channelers. The effective Wisdoms were channelers, but that most were "faking" it - reading the wind and such. I think Wisdoms make most sense as a Specialist, but your questions do show us that we're not sure what to do with them. We can definitely have buildings like Wisdom's Cottage that would provide Wisdom specialist slots. (Bonuses to food and happiness make sense to me for the building)

What kind of Great People? My gut reaction is our fun WoT guys - but then that's our old trade-off against reliability problem. Given the Wisdom's association with health and wellbeing, I would expect them to generate food themselves - but a Specialist that generates food is weird. They could generate Faith, since I seem to have avoided Faith yields for all of the Aes Sedai Ajahs above.

counterpoint said:

4B.1 – Technological Progression – Should female channelers evolve in-line with the tech tree? Should there be obsolescence and upgrades, or should units simply improve their functionality over time? How should we handle UU's?

Click to expand...

I'm partial to the normal channelers working like Aes Sedai - external to the tech tree and enhanced by technologies throughout the game to keep them competitive with equivalently teched units. I like that this lines up with the Old Blood system (Spark) from earlier on, since I liked that one too. This has a few consequences:

Small civs that don't focus on military will defend themselves with a small army of channelers. They don't need to be upgraded, so they avoid the constant upgrade costs and are powerful units so they can be used to defend small civilizations very effectively. I don't think this is necessarily a problem, just an observation of where they would be useful. This favors the player because we can make better use of small forces to hold off a numerically superior AI attacker.

Accustomed to the way units work in CiV (this is a problem for Aes Sedai as well), new players may be confused that their "the same" unit is weaker (or stronger) than that same unit being controlled by other civs. This is really just an education thing though - I'm thinking this mod needs its own tutorial.

In terms of Wilder/Kin/UUs, I think having the Wilder and Kin as globally available channeling units makes a lot of sense. Though Kin might be nice as an Altaran UU, I think you've made some good points to the contrary (there by convenience, limited connection to Altaran government/national identity) and the Kin can serve a valuable role as an upgraded channeling unit that isn't the Wilder. I'd be tempted to have the sole upgrade path be Wilder -> Kin. It gives us a good jumping on point for the channeling UUs - Wise Ones, Sul'dam, and Ayyad are the ones I'm thinking of in particular. I think all of those could replace the Kin, so those civs have powerful but limited UUs that they can make use of for longer than usual.

counterpoint said:

4C.1 – Channeler Abilities – What's so special about channelers, in terms of mechanics? How are they different from other combat units? What kind of gameplay do we want for channeling units?

Click to expand...

This is actually a really good point. I think the Medic-like ability would become too generic if we give it to all of these channelers, the Aes Sedai, and normal units can get it through the usual promotion tree. Even if we use the latter, I like Healing as an Aes Sedai-related bonus.

Ranged/melee combat strength disparity is interesting and I think we can do that in addition to a few of the others. It makes them more strategic rather than something you can just throw wholesale at your enemies until they die. (Favoring the player, for our superior tactical know-how.)

I like splash damage, but you mention this again later and I think it makes more sense for male channelers.

In terms of range vs strength, I think we might be limiting too much. I imagine Old Blood supplies being relatively low, so why not go for longer range (3?) and increased strength? If you can only build a few of these units, they should feel special. Or possibly they gain the range at a specific tech. Given how much of a difference Artillery makes vs all previous siege weapons, a range of 3 should make them something special. (Particularly if we don't have any normal siege weapons with a range of 3 - but then we'll make channelers the game's best siege weapons, which we were avoiding earlier.)

counterpoint said:

4D.1 – Units – Which units should we use? Which ones should be UU's and which should be available to all civs? How should they be arrayed on the tech tree? What abilities should they each have?

Click to expand...

So, my overall opinions here:

Wilder and Kin are "produce-able" channeling units that are made available by technologies on the tech tree. Wilders upgrade to Kin. Abilities discussed above (in my answer to 4C.1).

Wise Ones, Ayyad, and Sul'dam are replacements for the Kin. We can probably come back to all of this part when we're going through. I'm partial to the Wise Ones getting the Medic-like ability, making them and the Aes Sedai the only ones who can do that.

Whenever we sort out the Dream World stuff, I'd say we give the Wise Ones prime pick of the abilities available there.

I'm in agreement that the Wise Ones shouldn't replace Aes Sedai for the Aiel.

counterpoint said:

4D.2 – Windfinders – How should we handle Sea Folk Windfinders? Are they stand-alone units, or merely a part of the ships of the Atha'an Miere? Are they tied to specific naval vessels or are they represented by the Sea Folk UA?

Click to expand...

I'm partial to associating them with the UA but I don't want to do something generic like Elizabeth's +2 movement for naval units. Making embarked Sea Folk units on par with combat naval vessels would make a serious impact as a UA. Then again, I like the idea of something exotic like being able to found cities in the ocean - but I don't know how viable that is with varying map types. Either of those would prescribe Windfinders as actual units, which would presumably replace the Wilder.

The Windfinder could embark to a fully capable naval vessel and give movement bonuses to all nearby Sea Folk vessels.

I think we can come back to the finer points of this when doing the civ list.

counterpoint said:

4D.3 – Seanchan Units – How should we handle Sul'dam and Damane? Do both units exist or is this merely a part of the Seanchan UA? What happens to a captured unit?

Click to expand...

I'm gleefully looking forward to trying this one out. I propose Sul'dam replace the Kin but are melee-ish units, as you suggested. Then any (yes any) (female) channeling unit "killed" by a Sul'dam becomes a Damane unit. Damanes are bonded to individual Sul'dam and must stay near them (within 2/3 hexes). If the Sul'dam dies, the Damane either dies too or goes False Dragon (havoc wreaking on everyone) on us. Damane don't consume Old Blood (why would they - they were born in other civs, drawing from their population) and upgrade independently of the tech tree. All damane units are the same (like you've noted, the Seanchan don't use their previous lives' strengths/abilities).

counterpoint said:

4D.4 – Great Channelers – Should Great Channelers exist in the game, or should they simply be folded into other Great Person types?

Click to expand...

Eh, I think there's enough going on without us adding this. Originally I'd thought we'd need this as a way to represent channelers differently, but we have more than enough differentiation above.

I'm afraid Saidin will have to be a job for tomorrow/Sunday! Be back then!