New NESes, ideas, development, etc

[Neverwonagame3]

This seems to be going off topic, and given that I may as well propose some actual NES ideas. I'm not sure which are good and which are bad, and I don't intend to do any of them. They are:

1- Something of the NESLife style with fast, low quality updates.
2- A new Story NES where two vetoes block any story, a person has to show how the map was changed by the story, and majority vote comes if it's a major enough issue.
3- A NES which tries to integrate the best bits from the varying rule sets that have been tried.
4- An NES which tries to incoporate the impact of individuals (how would a standard NES calculate the odds of, say, a Napoleon?) into it's mechanics.

 

[Ninja Dude]

I personally really like 3 and 4. 1 sounds good also. I'm not too sure about 2 though. I guess it could work, but the idea of vetoing stories strikes me as kind of strange. But in the end it's up to you since you would be the one starting the NES.

 

[Luckymoose]

Been done, mine hasn't.

 

[Neverwonagame3]

Sorry Luckmoose, I didn't see your idea. It sounds like an interesting one.

 

[das]

3- A NES which tries to integrate the best bits from the varying rule sets that have been tried.

Er, that's sort of the main principle behind most ruleset innovations. We all try and borrow the best bits, at least for the more mainstream NESes.

4- An NES which tries to incoporate the impact of individuals (how would a standard NES calculate the odds of, say, a Napoleon?) into it's mechanics.

Are you assuming that the impact of individuals (such as it is) isn't in the mechanics of NESes?

 

[Neverwonagame3]

To give a player a Napoleon in an NES would seem like blatant mod bias, and giving a player skilled (or incompetent) individuals in a time period seems arbitrary.

And the Spending point mechanic has not been incoporated into mainstream NESes. I don't know, but I don't think anybody has even considered it.

 

[Luckymoose]

To give a player a Napoleon in an NES would seem like blatant mod bias, and giving a player skilled (or incompetent) individuals in a time period seems arbitrary.

And the Spending point mechanic has not been incoporated into mainstream NESes. I don't know, but I don't think anybody has even considered it.

Because Spending Points are extremely limiting in an average NES.

 

[das]

To give a player a Napoleon in an NES would seem like blatant mod bias, and giving a player skilled (or incompetent) individuals in a time period seems arbitrary.

It is pretty much arbitrary unless you're [wiki]Lev Gumilev[/wiki] or something. And a "Napoleon" is a militarily-gifted ruler, if I understand you correctly - therefore a player with sufficiently gifted military orders gets is one by default.

And the Spending point mechanic has not been incoporated into mainstream NESes. I don't know, but I don't think anybody has even considered it.

Eco. points are spending points, you know.

 

[Luckymoose]

Eco. points are spending points, you know.

One of us must be incorrect in our understanding of his usage of spending points. I think of one or two points a turn based on DaftNES or something.

 

[das]

Ah, those things. That's more specific; the way they work in DaftNES wouldn't really work with any of the more strictly stat-based systems.

 

[Neverwonagame3]

Firstly, why would Spending Points not work as a seperate mechanic? They represent efforts of the people not assosiated with the government.

Secondly, the current system fails to account for changes in the skill of leaders over time. A 1-generation Napoleon would almost certainly never happen in an NES.

 

[das]

Firstly, why would Spending Points not work as a seperate mechanic? They represent efforts of the people not assosiated with the government.

Um, what? If the player is the government, why is he going to have control over the efforts that are explicitly not connected with the government? What's the point of it anyway?

Secondly, the current system fails to account for changes in the skill of leaders over time.

If meaningful changes occur they would likely be taken into account.

A 1-generation Napoleon would almost certainly never happen in an NES.

What the hell is a "1-generation Napoleon"?

 

[North King]

What the hell is a "1-generation Napoleon"?

If you're relying on a player to be the Napoleon through excellent orders, then he is unlikely to get worse even after said leader would have died/retired.

 

[das]

Fair enough, but how else are we going to handle rulers if not through their players?

 

[kkmo]

I was wondering if anyone here would want to play out some sort of fantasy-based story? I was toying around with ideas such as Middle-earth, but I honestly think it would be more fun, and balanced, if we could somehow play out our own invented fantasy world. I could write some guidelines up or something about maybe creating our own creatures and heroes, and nations that these are from, and I could even draw a new map for our world if anyone is interested in doing this.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

I've always wanted to play a NES where people play dynasties or individuals, so there isn't a constant 'fight to the death' attitude.

 

[Neverwonagame3]

I'll stop defending my ideas, despite thinking they are better, because I think Luckymoose's and more importantly kkmoo's ideas should get more attention.

EDIT: Better then those who commented on them think they are.

 

[Dachs]

Fair enough, but how else are we going to handle rulers if not through their players?

Didn't NK handle Great Leaders in a few of his NESes?

Also, since it's always a poor idea to have player tactical control (even with focus points or a similar thing, you really only have operational control of the battlefield), military Great Leaders ought to have at least a far higher chance of victory and battlefield innovations than someone without one. Since the player really ought to only play the part of one person (or perhaps one legislative body depending on the country controlled), having the player be responsible for any military success outside of the grand-strategic or strategic sphere seems an awful lot like MMing.

And nobody likes MMing. Especially because it doesn't work.

 

[kkmo]

Hi there. I still don't know if anyone is interested in playing out a fantasy NES, but I have already written up some rules (I was bored). I won't post them all yet, but basically, you go through some start-up steps in creating your nation, beginning with choosing a race. The races I have included are Humans, Elves, Half-Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, Orcs, Goblins, Undead, and Dark Elves. Then there are four basic categories, the skeleton of any kingdom: military (combat), magic, technology, and economy. Each race has +/- modifiers to two of these categories (for example, Humans have +combat, -economy). The world will have a back-history to it that I have started writing a little bit of, but I won't go into too much detail unless there is some interest (otherwise I might try this out somewhere else?). I hope it doesn't sound too complicated. Basically each Sunday of each week you accumulate points in those four categories, based on certain factors such as population, etc. Each nation begins with only one town, this town can grow to a city, or you can branch out and settle other territories. The advantage to settling, I am thinking, is that for every 3 towns of at least 20,000 people you have, you get a Hero. Heroes get +modifiers only, so they can add significantly to your rankings.

I think it's pretty simple. You make this skeleton, and then we play it out. I was thinking everyone will be put on one continent, then two other continents will be composed entirely of ancient races, two massive nations that will drive a lot of the story perhaps.

Anyone interested at all?

 

[das]

I cannot promise my involvement, but it does sound like a potentially very interesting experiment, so I wish you the best of luck and promise that I will, at the very least, be lurking with interest.

With regards to races:

(for example, Humans have +combat, -economy)

If that's what the Humans have, what have the Orcs?

Also, the Undead are probably a really bad idea. All species are different, but those would realistically need entirely different rules, unless you are planning to use something other than the usual fantasy strategy undead formula. Depending on the role they are supposed to play on the system, you could should be able to come up with something different (and possibly more original).