[DG2]Organized Role Play & Games

[ice2k4]

Even though we've had little discussion about a Organized RPG for our second demogame, I'd like to start discussing this. This thread is not for a suggestion as to how to incorporate roleplaying into the game without an organized game.

Now should we have an Organized Role Play and Games Forum?

If so:

• Should we have an economy?
• How strict should it be?
• Should we have land conflict (provided enough people)
• If yes to the above, should it end or begin at a certain time?
• Would you participate?
• Would you help organize it?
• Do you perfer a RPG like C3 DG2? (Referring to the one that appears to have had lots of economics

 

[ice2k4]

My own personal opinion:

I think it would be fun to have an economy much like the C3 DG2 one. From reading the archives it looked to be great fun. However, from trying to run the RPG in this current demogame, I realize for this we need someone or a few people to be dedicated to running the RPG. I wouldn't mind helping with this. I really liked the ruleset that existed in C3 DG2 RPG.

By strict I meant, such as no newspapers until printing press (although there are obvious alternatives to publishing news that weren't used, but could have been) or land conflict ending at nationalism. I think we should define tech limits, but be a little lax about them.

I never truly figured out land conflict, so this should be answered by those who have experienced it.

As I'v earlier stated I would participate in the RPG and definetly help to run it.

 

[DaveShack]

Somewhat radical thought -- use actual quick speed duel games between RPG players to determine outcomes.

 

[dutchfire]

I would definetly join, and probably help too.
But I don't know how easily an economy could be set up.
Especially things like land conflict seem to be complicated.

 

[DaveShack]

Let's start off by soliciting free-form input on what would interest potential players. I'll start off with the following.

Interesting to me

• Based on the land within the game.
• Speculative elements
  • Bidding on unexplored territory
  • Going with a scouting party to get dibs on a piece of land it finds or a trade route (but if an animal gets the party, you're dead and cannot profit)
• Technology which paces the game
• Player and NPC attributes: basic character types, promotions based on experience
• "Virtual unit" ownership (player "trains" a unit, can then use that unit in a RPG conflict.

Not Interesting to me

• Large-scale storytelling or extended dialogue between players (but I'd be interested in reading it.)
• Immortal characters. Family dynasties are tolerable, but a fresh start after your character dies is much better.

I'd have to think a lot more about it. The last time I played RPG type games was before the "average" CivFanatics user was born.

 

[Strider]

Honestly, to build an organized roleplaying game (with economy and everything) is just far to much effort. I would love to see it re-emerge, but I just don't think there is enough interest to operate one at the moment.

So how about we make the forum completely (and roleplay) completely unorganized this game? If we can enough interest built up for RPG elements, then we can give an organized and centralized RPG another try during DG3.

Cagematch's are fairly interesting at the moment and I think it would be fun to organize some against differant members. Some one else can make an organized "games" (shooting, gladiator type fighting, etc.) Just whatever interests them.

 

[dutchfire]

I agree with Strider that an Organized RPG is to complicated to do with such a small community, and I do like the dynasties Dave mentions.

 

[ice2k4]

Most of my interests are pretty much aligned with Dave's. I just think that some people (I know me for one) really like the idea of a RPG that has an economy. I guess Im not too much of a role player (although the occasional rpg thread will get me,) I'm more built on the fun of owning business and becoming an entrepreneur and what not. If we do start an organized RPG, Id like to start it maybe 2nd term, so we know how big our crowd is going to be.

 

[Falcon02]

C3 DG2's RPG was kinda interesting and fun, but I felt like it took away from the actual role playing in the citizen forum. I felt like I had to participate in the RPG economy to get any experience with role play.

In DG1 on the other hand the RPG was completely unorganized and we had very casual role play occuring in the citizen forum for the majority of the game.

 

[DaveShack]

If we did the in-game discussions in character, then there would be less need for separate role play activity. The reason it's split off in this game is that there were so many citizen group / political party / allowable spam threads that you couldn't find the game discussions which dropped to the 2nd page.

So how about we make the forum completely (and roleplay) completely unorganized this game?

Like polls and offices in the same forum as discussions, or just no separate roleplay but keep polls and offices separate from citizens?

 

[ice2k4]

Well this brings us back to the age old question of "Are we playing to win or to have fun?"

 

[DaveShack]

Well this brings us back to the age old question of "Are we playing to win or to have fun?"

Sorry, what does this refer back to?

 

[ice2k4]

Sorry, what does this refer back to?

Well keeping roleplay separate from decision making leans towards us playing the game to win. But if we don't care about winning, and care about having fun, then integrating role play into in-game actions is acceptable. I believe in one C3DG, a ship was sent somewhere in-game based on a role play thread.

 

[Falcon02]

Well keeping roleplay separate from decision making leans towards us playing the game to win. But if we don't care about winning, and care about having fun, then integrating role play into in-game actions is acceptable. I believe in one C3DG, a ship was sent somewhere in-game based on a role play thread.

Parcel From Greece
Parcel From Greece 2
Third Parcel from Greece
Radio Transmission from Greece Party

Yes, DG1 we rushed a Destoryer to save Ehecatl and his party who went on a trip to interview the leader of the exiled Greeks. Upon his return he was caught in the crossfires of the continuing war between the Greeks and the Iroquois.

 

[DaveShack]

Well, if we play to lose we have ample evidence that rats desert a sinking ship, so we do need to have some positive attempt to do well in the game. But I agree with defining success as a proper mixture of fun and game results.

 

[GenMarshall]

I pretty much perfer to have the informal RPG that was seen in DG1Civ3

 

[Falcon02]

Civ 3 DG1 Style, Play to win, Play for fun.

Neither should compromise the other...

Informal RPG, play to win, have fun doing it. No, The Forest Reservations were not a valid tactic to win at the time, but did not effect our strength.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

I agree with roleplaying within the context of the game. There seem to be a lot more "real world" concepts in Civ4 that would lend themselves well to roleplay. Do we adopt Slavery just because its makes sense in the early game, or do we temporarily take our lumps based on conscience? Religious discussion could be interesting, though possibly distracting if we take it too far.

I defer to Falcon's and CG's take on Civ3 DG1. Make roleplay an intergrated part of the game.

 

[GenMarshall]

I agree with roleplaying within the context of the game. There seem to be a lot more "real world" concepts in Civ4 that would lend themselves well to roleplay. Do we adopt Slavery just because its makes sense in the early game, or do we temporarily take our lumps based on conscience? Religious discussion could be interesting, though possibly distracting if we take it too far.

I defer to Falcon's and CG's take on Civ3 DG1. Make roleplay an intergrated part of the game.

Sometimes too much of a good thing can be a bad thing and if RPG was intergrated into the game like if it was a pseudo-expantion pack. It would hamper the progress of the game if we just simply go by our conscience and moral values. As for religious discussion in RPG, lets just say I have gotten a few bruses from there and that Religion is a touchy subject to some people which could erupt into flamewars. Not something that I would like to see in the Demogame.

 

[DaveShack]

We can keep the bruising to a minimum by all agreeing that our DG roleplay does not necessarily reflect our personal beliefs, and that we understand the same about others. Toss in fast mod action if someone strays from the path, and we should be fairly immune to this type of problem.