I would like to propose the following changes to villages:

First, make a setting for the guards in each village that decideds how they work.
Setting 1: Guards work just like guards do now.
Setting 2: Guards will only attack people enemied to the village itself, but using this causes the village to stay with Org longer.

Second, a new skill in influence that allows a person to covince a villager to revolt against the org the village is held by. The command would be

INFLUENCE WITH SEDITION

Every time you sucessfuly influence a villager with this, the village the villager belongs to will move a little closer to revolt. This allows people to cause conflict without killing off loyals and upseting people. This also allows people to get a "visible victory": You have a chance to capture the village.

Orgs not wanting this conflict or feeling overwelmed by it can use normal guards to keep people out. Orgs feeling up to the challenge can use the village guards and keep their villages a bit longer if they can defend them.

Might have worked with the old system, but not so much with the paired revolts.

the only change I want to see is forced debating. It does not make any sense that someone can come up to me and argue with me and I can't just ignore them. Mages especially. Annoying.

It's avoidable, both in-combat and pre-combat.

I hope you're not talking about burnout.

People complain that they have to keep their karma up to fight well against monks, but it's okay that you are forced to get a friend to debate you every few minutes to keep telepaths from forcing/debating you to death. That has always annoyed me.

Of course, that's an issue separate from someone walking in and debating you and you not wanting to debate back (which is what they seem to be talking about)...I have no idea how that is avoidable.

Run

Or what Mitbulls said. Which also means you can't influence.

Both are ridiculous.

I've heard of mages...i.e. Forren debating through serpent then mindbursting. This could be made up, but the source is fairly reliable.

This got derailed fast.

Serpent is Lowmagic, Mages need Highmagic. So a mage did not debate anyone through serpent. Now, getting someone else with serpent to debate you, sure.

Anyone want to comment on the idea itself?

It sounds interesting, but as was mentioned above, it may not work with the paired revolts.

It would be nice to go around whispering bad things about Magnagora to get one of their villages to revolt. But there is also the notation that how many groups would actually say "Okay, we're going to try this style". If the kinks get worked out so that it doesn't turn into a bloodbath, it might be useful.

Bloodbath scenario: City A: "Hey guys, let's try to keep Delport longer than normal. Let's use the village guards." City B and Communes A and B: "Hey! Delport can be incited to revolt faster!" Now, City B and the Communes jump Delport. They want to try and get it to revolt faster and keep influencing as much as they can until it revolts. City A steps in and says "No! This is MY village!" Then everyone begins to fight like it was a combat heavy event. Only this event lasts as long as it takes for the village to revolt and for the new owners to say "I like my town, I'm using city guards, suckers." Meanwhile, Estarra and all the other gods are giving each other money they won off of bets made to each other on who would get the village.

Maybe a new village or two that specifically require you to use village guards. So that all conflict is constantly used there and to try and keep the village.

Made me lol. This is true, by the way.