First Prime Faction
- Thread starter DaveShack
- Start date
Lord Civius
Emperor
Triad 
Seidrik_The_Gray
Seidrik The Gray
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,160
There are really just 3 factions now. And, I am greatful that a third came along. I am also greatful for the emense participation here, and the cooler heads that are prevailing now. I look forward to a future discussion on debate ground rules, etc...
May whatever higher power you chose to worship, hate, or ignore bless our future nation with prosperity
May whatever higher power you chose to worship, hate, or ignore bless our future nation with prosperity
Timus looks upon these people, not in anger, but understanding. He knows that he is a stranger, an unknown. If only they knew of what he could do for them. He has been out in the wilderness and he knows the dangers that exist. He's seen another city, much like this one, capture his people and enslave them. These people here do not know the dangers they face and just how much he is willing to sacrifice to lead them.
Though this triad is strong in number, he knows it isn't numbers that lead.
Though this triad is strong in number, he knows it isn't numbers that lead.
croxis
Chat room op
The Follower of the Fish gives Timus a hug
Shattered
Lord of Utopia
May the Triad be blessed with victory! 
At least we have a healthy vote.
I think it would have been more interesting with 4 or 5 factions. The "we don't really care which of us is in charge as long as it's not you" tactic is a bit annoying.
I think it would have been more interesting with 4 or 5 factions. The "we don't really care which of us is in charge as long as it's not you" tactic is a bit annoying.
ravensfire
Member of the Opposition
*shrug*
There might be a few that feel that way, DS, but I doubt most do. The coalition was a good decision - it allowed a smaller Faction to create a large Faction, but still keep the core of their ruleset.
I quite biased, but I think the Tribal ruleset is significantly more flexible and open than the Triad tuleset. There's a large lead for Triad right now, but still time for the Tribal Council to bounce back!
-- Ravensfire
There might be a few that feel that way, DS, but I doubt most do. The coalition was a good decision - it allowed a smaller Faction to create a large Faction, but still keep the core of their ruleset.
I quite biased, but I think the Tribal ruleset is significantly more flexible and open than the Triad tuleset. There's a large lead for Triad right now, but still time for the Tribal Council to bounce back!
-- Ravensfire
Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
I think we should respect that there were three very distinct platform that had three different messages, and that we trust the players to compare the three platforms. I will not make a premature analysis of what were the causes of where the support went, but there are something platform specific that people preferred above the other, look aside from strong personalities and fiery exchanges.
Fundamentally, I think Triad presented a concept and a system enough people liked, and the strongest support of the factions support came there. Just see how Methos' inspiring roleplay suddenly drew 3 more supporters (as of posting time), with a platform conceived a few hours before the deadline.
Roleplay do matter in a forum based mass-experience like this, since people may get more inspired by that, than by numerous abbreviations, pseudo-scientific terms etc, and rather focus on the core narrative, what actually happens to this new nation, and how would it be if all of us actually lived in there (would be brutal, probably, I would probably not even survive a full turn given the activity level on the forum, but still, interesting thought )
Fundamentally, I think Triad presented a concept and a system enough people liked, and the strongest support of the factions support came there. Just see how Methos' inspiring roleplay suddenly drew 3 more supporters (as of posting time), with a platform conceived a few hours before the deadline.
Roleplay do matter in a forum based mass-experience like this, since people may get more inspired by that, than by numerous abbreviations, pseudo-scientific terms etc, and rather focus on the core narrative, what actually happens to this new nation, and how would it be if all of us actually lived in there (would be brutal, probably, I would probably not even survive a full turn given the activity level on the forum, but still, interesting thought
)
...or Timus the Protector.
My one worry is that, no matter what the faction is that wins, players are still going to play this as a democracy. My understanding of the ruleset is we play like the civics we are in, even if that means the ruler acts like a tyrant.
I'm also hoping that as the game progresses, we continue to play this under the RP concept. In other words, if we come to realize that we as players are more comfortable under a certain civic that we stick with that civic, even if it isn't the best civic for us game wise.
For example, if we as players realize that we all play together best under representation [read: less argueing], but find that another civic would work better for the game, we still stick with representation. We make choices RP based, rather than game based. At least, that is what my understanding of the rules is. If I'm misunderstanding, then ignore this.
Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
I 100 % agree with Methos here. Those that want a ruleset reflecting bureaucracy, caste system and free religion, please work towards that end and act it out. If you are not made to act like a dictator, ayatollah or monarch, go ahead in another capacity, and stay true to the civic you actually play.
I also think that Triad is not really a democracy either, and people are aware of that. Tribal is more of a patronage democracy, where Triad is more playing out the decentralized, despotic and barbaric state of an early civilization, with the faction city concept and other concepts that are well thought out and true to the basic civics.
Tribal has done nothing to encourage a game-integrated roleplay or to structure for it, merely promised not to get in the way of roleplay. Well, that promise is redundant, as people roleplay with or without that promise, but they roleplay much better when the nation is actually run by roleplaying principles (Like Timus fighting slavery, for example).
I also think that Triad is not really a democracy either, and people are aware of that. Tribal is more of a patronage democracy, where Triad is more playing out the decentralized, despotic and barbaric state of an early civilization, with the faction city concept and other concepts that are well thought out and true to the basic civics.
Tribal has done nothing to encourage a game-integrated roleplay or to structure for it, merely promised not to get in the way of roleplay. Well, that promise is redundant, as people roleplay with or without that promise, but they roleplay much better when the nation is actually run by roleplaying principles (Like Timus fighting slavery, for example).
The name of the game is Democracy Game for a reason. In my opinion, there is no point in being here without a way to influence events. Tribal Council guarantees that every citizen will have that opportunity, and I have no trust in either of the other factions that ordinary citizens will have anything at all to say about how the game plays.
Daveshack, there will always be a way to influence the Prime Faction, no matter who it is. It's called the Prime Faction Election!! As long as the Prime Faction is decided by popular election, the citizens will always have a say. But everyone will come to realize this as soon as the election is over. Oh, and by the way... POWER TO THE TRIAD!!!!
Shattered
Lord of Utopia
That is the idea of Despotism, DS. One, or a small group of people, will control the government. If an "ordinary citizen" wants to have a say in the processes of running the government, then point them to a faction. The beauty of the Triad is that we consist of three factions, so to have a say in the government, you have three different choices of RP to be apart of. We of the Triad are going to roleplay our term should we win, and I don't see how democracy fits in, in this day and age. We are a decentrilized, barbaric, paganistic, despotism. So we shall run our nation as such, should we be elected. Once the ages fade away, and more civic options are available, there will be a plethora of different ways to run a government. Yet, as it stands now, despots will reign.
Thats what is different about this demo game. Its a faction game and the type of way we rule and roleplay is similar to the era and civics available. So the thing is this game is open for involvement and participaition. But at this stage not in the traditional sense of democracy and rights. As we evolve we will change. The key is getting involved. If some one isn't involved, they probably wouldn't be very involved or have much power in a traditional democracy game.
So if the problem with the triad is that we stick to the faction style of gameplay to much, that makes we question what a vote for Tribal would mean. And what type of demo game you prefer.
So if the problem with the triad is that we stick to the faction style of gameplay to much, that makes we question what a vote for Tribal would mean. And what type of demo game you prefer.
Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
Well, we are not playing "Ralph Nader the Consumer Knight" or "Erin Brockowitz, the concerned environmental soothsayer" or "Michael Moore the Sage". This should be a game reflecting its historical habitat, long before the term "citizen" was coined. The idea is to be true to the historic setting, not use post 1776 concepts of enlightenment and so on.
One needs to liberate oneself from that thought. And yes, the democracy would not be gone, there will maybe be a couple of fewer openings, but enough to log in, discuss and vote all days. What is not going to be, is running detailed operations (where military units go, where workers go, how the slider goes) by committee decision, continuous repolls over minor issues stifling the game and long "legal" proceedings in the tradition of Kafka's "The Procedure", tormenting old and new players with a grievous kangaroo court where only 3 players decides like back in the old days, that was indeed elitist. This system involves more people than before, and would thus work out.
As it stands, elections like this have a bigger say, and have indeed some impact on how the game is run for a few weeks, where the so-called winner before only had a marginal say in their own regime, as it was the loudest voice that dictated. If people are not happy by how its run, we must trust the electorate to replace those in power with someone new. The old constitution system cemented these changes so badly, that people were stuck with a system they did not like for a long time, hurting recruitment.
If we cultivate what factions really do represent, and form distinct factions with era-based identities, interests and objectives as well as basic rules, we will see a more dynamic game, with more participation than ever before.
If one really wants democracy, one needs to wait for representation, bureaucracy, caste system and other civics reflecting that concept.
We want a historical roleplay simulation, not an NGO legal citizens right panel simulation, for that I recommend 2008 Political Machine, Democracy and other pc games out there.
One needs to liberate oneself from that thought. And yes, the democracy would not be gone, there will maybe be a couple of fewer openings, but enough to log in, discuss and vote all days. What is not going to be, is running detailed operations (where military units go, where workers go, how the slider goes) by committee decision, continuous repolls over minor issues stifling the game and long "legal" proceedings in the tradition of Kafka's "The Procedure", tormenting old and new players with a grievous kangaroo court where only 3 players decides like back in the old days, that was indeed elitist. This system involves more people than before, and would thus work out.
As it stands, elections like this have a bigger say, and have indeed some impact on how the game is run for a few weeks, where the so-called winner before only had a marginal say in their own regime, as it was the loudest voice that dictated. If people are not happy by how its run, we must trust the electorate to replace those in power with someone new. The old constitution system cemented these changes so badly, that people were stuck with a system they did not like for a long time, hurting recruitment.
If we cultivate what factions really do represent, and form distinct factions with era-based identities, interests and objectives as well as basic rules, we will see a more dynamic game, with more participation than ever before.
If one really wants democracy, one needs to wait for representation, bureaucracy, caste system and other civics reflecting that concept.
We want a historical roleplay simulation, not an NGO legal citizens right panel simulation, for that I recommend 2008 Political Machine, Democracy and other pc games out there.
Here's what I would have done had Timus won...
Timus would have considered him the final word for the tribe. All major decisions we're done by him and no one else. There would be no voting. That doesn't mean he wouldn't listen to his people. He would still take counsel from everyone, but the final decision would be his. If Timus noticed someone else had more knowledge of a certain subject than Timus would grant him as a sub-leader over that area, but Timus would still have the ability to override him if he chose.
Yes, people may not like this style, but considering the current government we're in, I felt it odd to play any other way. I would have tried to keep everyone interested, involved, and excited about the game, but Timus would have still been the ruler.
Yes this is a democracy game and therefore no matter what civics we are in, we should still do our best to keep everyone included. But if we're going to play this type of game we need to try to stick somewhat within our civics. If everything is played democratic then we're not really playing as the concept specified.
I wasn't around for creation, but I got the idea that the majority wanted to RP this version of the game.
Just my 2
Timus would have considered him the final word for the tribe. All major decisions we're done by him and no one else. There would be no voting. That doesn't mean he wouldn't listen to his people. He would still take counsel from everyone, but the final decision would be his. If Timus noticed someone else had more knowledge of a certain subject than Timus would grant him as a sub-leader over that area, but Timus would still have the ability to override him if he chose.
Yes, people may not like this style, but considering the current government we're in, I felt it odd to play any other way. I would have tried to keep everyone interested, involved, and excited about the game, but Timus would have still been the ruler.
Yes this is a democracy game and therefore no matter what civics we are in, we should still do our best to keep everyone included. But if we're going to play this type of game we need to try to stick somewhat within our civics. If everything is played democratic then we're not really playing as the concept specified.
I wasn't around for creation, but I got the idea that the majority wanted to RP this version of the game.
Just my 2
