Demogame: The good, the bad, and the ugly

Noldodan

2 years of waiting...
Joined
Jun 17, 2002
Messages
1,747
Location
Gondolin!
There are two obstacles to fun in the Demogame as it stands now.
1) The large amount of Bad (not fun) Things.
2) The relatively small amount of Good (fun) Things.

What we need to do is get rid of the Bad Things and bring in more Good Things. But first we need to know what are Bad Things and what are Good Things. Here's my list of these for previous Demogames.

Bad Things:
Too few rules (DG3)
Lots of rules (DGIV)
Low participation (DG3/IV)
Bickering (DG3, T3 and DGIV)
Doing things without discussing first (I'm guilty of this one)
PI's (at least until we can agree on a process)

Good Things:
High participation (DG1/2)
An RPG, even one like DG3's (I have my doubts about DGIV though)

Now, there are more Bad Things than there are Good Things, but, if you think about it, everything else that people enjoy about the Demogame flows from high participation. Now, I challenge you, the Demogamers, to figure out how to get rid of the Bad Things in the spirit of what the Demogame is supposed to be about: fun.
 
PI's and Bickering go under Ugly... hey you have the catagory in the title ;)

the RPG was always a big thing that kept me going.... not DG2 style with rules regulation and pretty much turning the RPG into a varient of Dungeons and Dragons, as in a organized role playing game where you build your "character"

the DG1 RPG was IMHO of what I've seen in the DG's, (only really observed DG1 and DG2 RPG's)

It was mostly role playing, with stories, events, and putting an creative spin on serious game discussions.

examples from DG1
This Post from Charis Term 1
My reaction to the Razing of Falcon's Haven
Almighty Josh's Grand Banquet
Ehecatl's Greece Diplomacy Party
 
The fun needs to be brought back. Although I am not into RPG, I do think this can add to the fun. I did see the RPG in DG3, but I turned away when all I saw was people cutting of tiles for themselves. I didn't consider that interesting, so I backed off.

In DG4 we had (for some time) a 1 thread Creative History department. That was nice and fun in my eyes. The limitation of just 1 thread and the desinterest of many caused that to bleed to death.

I have no experience in RPG, but I do think re-kindling it will be an addition to the "fun".
 
So far we've had 3 posts here, all about the RPG. Any ideas other than the RPG?
 
Noldodan said:
So far we've had 3 posts here, all about the RPG. Any ideas other than the RPG?


um.... give out prizes so we all go bankrupt?
 
Regarding the RPG, I don't want to ask TF to open a forum for that again, after having gotten rid of it once. I imagine it could be structured to include only 5 or 6 threads considering it probably won't have all that many people involved...
 
A forum would encourage more people to be involved, though. It would also probably lead to more interesting RPing, and more of it, and having a few threads.
 
The Forum RPG was tried (DG2) and it proved too become mostly a Civilization based game of Dungeons and Dragons in my opinion and never really kept my attention. It strayed too far from the actual game we were playing other then people buying, fortifying, and conquering tiles, and technology limits (which were only loosly held).

and like eyrei said TF will be reluctant to recreate a DG RPG forum due to the failure of the original.
 
We could probably have a few stickied, "Events Threads", which would be sufficient for roleplay. What I didn't like about the DG2 RPG was the fact that it became unrealistic quick. DG3 was a ton of work to keep in order, too. When the idea of an RPG first spawned, I envisioned a forum where all of the city/province events, citizen groups, etc. would go into. Basically, non-game discussion. (you could essentially have a tavern, which would be like a citizen group. Add, and update graphics as the game progresses).
 
Well, maybe if RP wasn't taken seriously and regulated, it wouldn't turn into that....

The only times I've done things like this it wasn't serious at all, had no real in-game reprocussions, and was completely without regulation. It never turned into the type of crap I'm led to believe this turned into. :goofy:
 
Unless there is someone willing to devote as much time an effort as Shaitan did for the original, anything too complicated is doomed to failure. One hint though is that you should elect an omnipotent gamemaster that is going to take complete responsibility for all unforseen decisions (meaning they don't have a rule in place). Just let this person appoint people to tasks as he/she sees fit rather than trying to come up with a complex rule set. All good RPGs need a 'Gamemaster' of some sort...someone who develops the frame of the story. Hopefully someone will have the time to do this task, but considering how much time some of you spend online, I 'd imagine its a good possibility. ;)
 
I don't think anyone even wants to run a full fledged economics sim. :p
 
I still say you're taking it too seriously. It shouldn't need a gamemaster. Just let people do whatever the hell they want. In all my experiance it works pretty well. :p
 
How about we get someone impartial (you know you're out there) whose only job is to stop the outlandish stuff. The gamemaster decides based on his judgement or on others (if he wishes) what is outlandish and what is not. And no killing off other people's characters. One warning, then a 1-month ban from the RPG, for either offense. I really think that's all the rules we need.
 
Um, perhaps we should change the title of this thread? :mischief: :lol:

I have to agree with eyrei that some pretty solid plans need to be in place before we can even consider reissuing a devoted RPG thread. And as far as the RPG goes, we have tried it three ways: strict(DG2), where there was one person who pretty much held the game together and it lasted most of the game; loose(DG4 - the Creative History Department), which was exclusively story-based and lost interest early in term 2; and in-game(DG1), where the role-playing was a vital part of the game held right in the government threads.

If I were to choose a method that would work best at this point, I would most likely go for in-game. For instance, rather than having leaders just optimize build queues for the perfect game of Civ, why not factor in ideological beliefs? Someone start an enviromentalist movement and stick with it. Have a pacifist governor that will not comply with the wishes of a strongly militaristic Executive Branch. Start a citizen's group to plan a whimsical mission, a la Chieftess' Spice Traders' Guild(where the object of the group was to secure every last bit of spice on the planet IIRC). Grant governors larger territory based on merit.

As you can see, there are several ways we can go by using an in-game RPG system. It is only limited by our imagination. Anyone up for it?
 
Donovan Zoi said:
Um, perhaps we should change the title of this thread? :mischief: :lol:

I have to agree with eyrei that some pretty solid plans need to be in place before we can even consider reissuing a devoted RPG thread. And as far as the RPG goes, we have tried it three ways: strict(DG2), where there was one person who pretty much held the game together and it lasted most of the game; loose(DG4 - the Creative History Department), which was exclusively story-based and lost interest early in term 2; and in-game(DG1), where the role-playing was a vital part of the game held right in the government threads.

If I were to choose a method that would work best at this point, I would most likely go for in-game. For instance, rather than having leaders just optimize build queues for the perfect game of Civ, why not factor in ideological beliefs? Someone start an enviromentalist movement and stick with it. Have a pacifist governor that will not comply with the wishes of a strongly militaristic Executive Branch. Start a citizen's group to plan a whimsical mission, a la Chieftess' Spice Traders' Guild(where the object of the group was to secure every last bit of spice on the planet IIRC). Grant governors larger territory based on merit.

As you can see, there are several ways we can go by using an in-game RPG system. It is only limited by our imagination. Anyone up for it?


thats the best idea i have heard yet :goodjob:
that would be alot of fun, ppl would start different groups like warmongers and pacificists and it could directly tie into the game
 
I'd be up for that, to a certain extent. I'd probably go in for cornering a resource, and, once its developed, runing a Communist party. :p
 
Top Bottom