Future game set-up concepts

User avatar
WM - The Waste Mage
King
Posts: 666
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:41 am

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by WM - The Waste Mage » Sun Jul 25, 2021 6:44 am

The token system needs tweaking too. Just thinking out loud and should be asleep.

User avatar
CIC - Duke Cicero
Posts: 375
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2018 6:47 am

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by CIC - Duke Cicero » Sun Jul 25, 2021 9:17 am

I like the spirit of the tokens.
Duke Cicero
Mayor of Salviene

A man so deep, he's almost unfathomable!
A man so quick, he's even fast asleep!

User avatar
YK - Yuri Khavlor
King
Posts: 684
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:13 pm

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by YK - Yuri Khavlor » Sun Jul 25, 2021 9:23 am

What is the 'token system' referring to?
YK - Yuri Khavlor
Lord Mayor of Lyssan
“Nature is not cruel, but pitilessly indifferent. The hardest lesson for one to learn, is to admit that things might be neither good nor evil, but simply callous -- indifferent to all suffering"

User avatar
TH - The Hunt
Emperor
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by TH - The Hunt » Sun Jul 25, 2021 9:30 am

There's nothing to stop players from awarding tokens strategically or transactionally rather than to reward good roleplaying, and we already see players doing that with in-game assets even when it's bad role-playing to do so. So, I would say it's not a good idea to allow players to hand out these rewards.
"The Hunt rides. The Hunt protects."

User avatar
WB - Water's Blessing
King
Posts: 711
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:01 pm
Location: Mind your own business

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by WB - Water's Blessing » Sun Jul 25, 2021 10:01 am

Mae - Maedhros wrote:
Sun Jul 25, 2021 6:16 am
I think, up to a point, the addition of buildings and additional rules of such kind is part of why there is less rp. BIrthright at its core is very simplistic. If we want to really boost RP then a core game with simplistic rules might be the thing. It might also cut down on some of the difference in realm effectiveness between the most dedicated players and most others.

Same with additions. Crystals and simular are massive timesinks, that means there are less attacking other players. Not saying its a bad addition.. but I do believe it cuts down on player interactions and fights.
The thing that cuts down role playing is the formation of alliances. Every game follows the same pattern -- lots of fluidity and role play at the beginning, factions form as relationships are worked out, people settle into factions. Once factions form, they declare their area exclusive to members of their alliance only -- even forming a holding 1 is seen as a declaration of war by some. This stops players from talking much to people outside of their faction.

If you want to create an incentive for more role play, we need to a) make it harder to form large alliances (no more than ~4 players per faction) and b) make it unattractive to dominate holdings in the area.

One way to fix this would also help rebalance the classes favourably -- during set-up, make it so warrior-class players have the vast majority of the land, with single-class fighters having more land at start than either rangers, paladins, or multiclass fighters. That's how the base game is set up, after all. If you do that, regents would begin with multiple temples, guilds, etc in their domains, and giving a single fighter more land would also help to slow down the game by making it so provinces grow slower (since they wouldn't have any more rule province actions).
WB - Temple of the Water's Blessing

"You can be forgiven, if you make amends..."

User avatar
CSF - Flint
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:32 pm

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by CSF - Flint » Sun Jul 25, 2021 10:59 am

Most of those restrictions can be easily overcome by players reorganizing afterwards. A good new mechanic will encourage the actions you wish to see. Factionalization works, and you will see it happen over and over because of the base power mechanics, and game theory. Tribes will always form, because those who dont are consumed. Players incapable of or unwilling to engage in the social interaction required to form those tribes will be habitually marginalized. Placing artificial limitations on alliances will only benefit those who circumvent them.

Alliances will always form, if you want to reward factions engaging with each other, you have to create a mechanical system that will do just that. Minor mini objectives regarding the inhabitants of a river system or mountain range having to compete or cooperate with each other to get unique benefits for example. Individual points of interest/conflict can create military engagements which are more nuanced than "i win give me your territory." Geographic or Magical events which dont correspond to natural borders and cant be threatened or contested out, just off the top of my head. I think Michael Roele has the potential to be almost exactly that in this game, if the anuirean elements are engaged with that massive hook.

I personally love the mechanic reward for RP news posts concept, I suggested it once myself before. The trick will be to build a system which encourages good posts. Easier said than done.
Captain Shanol Flint

User avatar
WB - Water's Blessing
King
Posts: 711
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:01 pm
Location: Mind your own business

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by WB - Water's Blessing » Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:15 am

Yes, factions will always form. The key is to make sure that it's multipolar factionalism (3-5 factions) so that there are shifting alliances and considerable uncertainty rather than bipolarity, which bogs down into a cold war. Part of it would be mechanical -- limiting the number of legally-binding alliances a domain can have. But, part of it has to be players embracing the concept.

It's also helpful to make sure that fighter-realms have power and leverage over the guilds/temples so they aren't dependent on them. Having a single land divided between 3 guilders, each of whom also have interests in other lands and with other factions, changes how regents interact with each other. People might not like Guilder Kalien or Mheallie Bireon, but they have to deal with them because they have a toe-hold in so many places.

I'm lukewarm to the token idea. I think it has merit, but it shouldn't be awarded by players. In essence, it would be sort of like inspiration in 5e.
WB - Temple of the Water's Blessing

"You can be forgiven, if you make amends..."

User avatar
CSF - Flint
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:32 pm

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by CSF - Flint » Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:18 am

I think the player driven suggestion was as a way to take more work off of Juan's plate. Anything we can devise which doesnt require more effort from him will be most likely to be implemented / succeed.
Captain Shanol Flint

User avatar
TH - The Hunt
Emperor
Posts: 1224
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by TH - The Hunt » Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:27 am

*eyeroll* It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. When people are afraid of rivals--even unjustifiably--they form into factions. When they form into factions they generate more fear, which increases the desire to factionalize. It's a positive reinforcement loop of harmful behavior, one that can be stopped at any point if those involved are mindful of the consequences of their actions and rhetoric. While I don't think artificial limits on alliances are the solution, an obvious solution is pointed toward: There should be undesirable consequences for those who push the game's political situation down the out-of-control crazy tracks, as well as for those who are foolish enough to permit themselves to be pushed so far.

That's how people were able to slow down factionalism for most of human history. People reacted badly to those who made too much noise or caused too much disruption, put them down, and restored the status quo of power being diffusely held and carefully engaged. While there were times whole cultures would unite to form a mighty fist they could urgently flail at one bogeyman after another, these were exceptional, not the rule. Those events generated interesting stories, but they were punishing, humiliating and impossible to control for the people who sacrificed for them, so it happened uncommonly, they had regrets, and generally tried to avoid repeat experiences, until much later, when those who remembered the lessons learned no longer had influence.

It's too right to use the word 'habitually'. It's a habit, a bad habit, to marginalize the voices that say to stop doing the stupid things which cause others to do even more stupid things, back and forth, ad nauseum.

The amount of work Juan has to do relative to how rewarding it is increases when players are acting out and trying to 'win' this unwinnable game. Even if it takes more work for him to provide incentives and disincentives to steer players toward good behavior, in the end it's less work for him than if players are further enabled to steer themselves and their cliques toward domination of others.
"The Hunt rides. The Hunt protects."

User avatar
AaH - Avicerra al Hamam
Posts: 489
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:20 am

Re: Future game set-up concepts

Post by AaH - Avicerra al Hamam » Sun Jul 25, 2021 11:36 am

I dont think there should be rewards for posting. It just gives active players an even greater advantage than the less active players. We have several not english native players and for them to make good RP posts is not that easy. To many players go inactive that is the problem resulting in Juan having to play NPCs.

But I think what AA mentioned about minor objectives that give uniq benefits could be looked at. In adition to events you could have some objectives that force the players to interact.

Post Reply