Multipolarity IV Signup Thread

[christos200]

In my opinion, you should replace the leaders of the countries with real countries. It ruins realism to have Hitler in Africa. I would prefer to deal with a nationalist dictatorship or a republic than a state ruled by Darth Vader.

 

[Ailedhoo]

In my opinion, you should replace the leaders of the countries with real countries. It ruins realism to have Hitler in Africa. I would prefer to deal with a nationalist dictatorship or a republic than a state ruled by Darth Vader.

There are possibly 20 leader or less leaders from fictional works. 7 of the fictional leaders are from Alpha Centauri, a 4X game about setting your own power in another world. 1 fictional leader is a civil servant. 1 fictional leader is a political actor in the Song of Ice and Fire. The figures from reality range from thinkers on politics (like Plato) to rulers (like Mao) to power players (Rasputin) to others (Sid). MP2's NPCs (although controversial) were played by the characters than the characters being the leader per say, although like certain players some states will take themselves into the nations admitting. France is divided between philosophers. Hispania is divided by theorists on economics and the father of postcolonial studies. I ensure you that you will be able to get yourself well into the like, as in lines with realism we set along with the storm trooper power in the game by a player, the return of Stalin in East Germany by a player and the return of Lenin in Siberia by not a NPC. Realism can be subjective in IOTs but I ensure you that I might consider NPC nations ruled by nations made up for the game when I start creating my very own IOT.

 

[Jehoshua]

I suppose we could always have a vote on the issue considering a goodly number of persons object to the phenomenon of having certain personalities govern the NPCs.

Surely Ailedhoo, you couldn't deny the will of the people if such a thing happened no

 

[Ailedhoo]

I am not the one who sets the referendums: that is Tani, especially as it took me time to conduct the NPCs to their creation. As such there is a possibility that we will have to have a referendum on whether to have a referendum on the matter. Perhaps we should conduct a referdum on whether to set all nations to realism, including removing characters from the past as rulers of the nation? Just a consideration... there is a lot we could go from this argument. There was a significant objection from Chris to "unrealism" after all. To this end the game of politics is quite shady: your only a cheater if your caught doing so. Sone's idea of making the NPCs blank without personality would both mean I am not needed and the NPCs are boring bare mechanics. Empty spaces with military just means "roll" chance only for the countries that are taken.

Anyway: I am just trying to carry a tradition the Multipolarity series has.

Anyway: if a referendum be set I could make my own nations... but this is my first time as a NPCGM and I am only following what was done with NPCs in the past two MPs... by that I mean their creation as oppose to their management. Well... I will leave Tani to make the mind up but be warned that I will be keeping Greece as a Plato inspired republic, no matter if it is played by my attempt at writing Plato or some newly created fictional characters created for this fictional tales. NPC characters are the players of the nation than the actual rulers after all. Whether happens one thing is certain: the Christian States of America will be played/ruled/whatever by Sister Miriam Godwinson or her expy.

 

[NinjaCow64]

I'm getting mighty sick of all these referendums. They are annoying and stupid and I want them to stop.

 

[Tani Coyote]

My apologies, Ninjacow. I'm just nervous about making an executive decision unless I have some idea as to general sentiment. I'm taking a democratic, rather than autocratic, approach, this time around.

Well, we're in no hurry to start the game just yet until we even have a General Secretary, as such...

Would the player base prefer NPCs with non-character leaders, or are they okay with the current setup with characters?

In my opinion, a better idea overall would have been to not publicly list the character, but instead guide the nation as if it were ruled by them. As in it might be ruled by "Isaac Lovegood" in the game, but would be roleplayed as if Hitler were running it. Would enable the NPC GM to maintain their sanity, while at the same time making it seem believable. Food for thought for next time I suppose.

 

[NinjaCow64]

Well, we're in no hurry to start the game just yet until we even have a General Secretary, as such...

Would the player base prefer NPCs with non-character leaders, or are they okay with the current setup with characters?

Oh god just keep the current leaders.

That's it, I'm making a referendum on whether we want more referendums or not.

Do you want to stop these referendums?

Y.E.S

 

[Jehoshua]

YES, to non character leaders for NPC's.

Oh and on Ninjacows proposition, I see only his hubris in that he actually is attempting to put a referendum up instead of merely insinuating that a referendum "could" occur and leaving it for the sheep to implement it. At any rate presuming it were to be considered valid, I would vote no to it, both for previously mentioned hubris, due to the fact if a cycle of referendums occur it proves a point (that democracy is a terrible form of management, and autocracy is far better so long as the autocrat is decent at his job), and due to various inscrutable reasons I wont bother to detail.

 

[Ailedhoo]

I vote yes on keeping the current characters for my sanity and for the sake of management.

 

[christos200]

Would the player base prefer NPCs with non-character leaders, or are they okay with the current setup with characters?

Yes to non character leaders. Yes to realism.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Yes to non character leaders. Yes to realism.

Will you like to expand that to regulate players? I am saying this because of how a "yes to realism" can be taken to.

 

[Lighthearter]

WHAT.

BANGS.
HEAD.
ON.
DESK.

....

REPEATEDLY.

Are we really putting EVERYTHING up to a vote? What the Batman is wrong with management here?

I VOTE NO TO UNIQUE NPCS.

And since apparently EVERYTHING is a vote:

I VOTE NO TO THE NPCGM EXISTING.

-L

 

[christos200]

Will you like to expand that to regulate players? I am saying this because of how a "yes to realism" can be taken to.

If it is possible, then yes. There should not be a Islamic Republic of Japan ruled by Cats and with Hitler as President. Althought I do not really have a problem as long as someone can justify with RP the existance of his nation.

 

[Ailedhoo]

WHAT.

BANGS.
HEAD.
ON.
DESK.

....

REPEATEDLY.

Someone is angry.

Are we really putting EVERYTHING up to a vote? What the Batman is wrong with management here?

No idea.

I VOTE NO TO UNIQUE NPCS.

None of the NPCs are unique.

And since apparently EVERYTHING is a vote:

I VOTE NO TO THE NPCGM EXISTING.

-L

I am pleased my job in MP4 is being put up the vote like this so early.

If it is possible, then yes. There should not be a Islamic Republic of Japan ruled by Cats and with Hitler as President. Althought I do not really have a problem as long as someone can justify with RP the existance of his nation.

Forgive me but that is not going to amuse some of the players here. Realism is defined by the GM. If they do not want a moose as leader of Canada then they can declare that in the front. However as this is not the case in MP and that this line of argument of "realism" leaded to the troubles at the MP3 sign up... basically it is problematic, especially for a series like MP which had to be honest not been known for banning "unrealistic" powers.

 

[christos200]

Well, it depends if the GM wants to create a realistic or a more funny and open world. I am just saying my opinion because you asked my opinion. If the GM wants this to have some realism, then cats should not rule an Islamic Japan.

 

[Ailedhoo]

Well, it depends if the GM wants to create a realistic or a more funny and open world. I am just saying my opinion because you asked my opinion. If the GM wants this to have some realism, then cats should not rule an Islamic Japan.

But in your calling for realism you seem to... go against some of your past nations you played in IOTs.

As for the GM: Tani has clearly shown no desire to stomp on "unrealistic" nations. After all MP is not the best place to place the boot, especially in considering the nature of the timeline.

Also "funny" is not water to the "oil" of realism.

I am deploying this as considerations.

 

[Terran Empress]

I would like to keep the characters leading the nations, i really don't want to see the NPC controlling Greece, and the one controlling Moscow to be the same same exact bland boring everything, just there to get in the way of expansion. I want each of the NPCs to be unique, I want one nation far away to dislike me for what I did to another nation close to me, I want the NPCs to have personality and not be the same generic get in the way of my expansion NPCs.

 

[Robert Can't]

WHAT.

BANGS.
HEAD.
ON.
DESK.

....

REPEATEDLY.

Are we really putting EVERYTHING up to a vote? What the Batman is wrong with management here?

I VOTE NO TO UNIQUE NPCS.

And since apparently EVERYTHING is a vote:

I VOTE NO TO THE NPCGM EXISTING.

-L

This, completely. With even more banging of the head.

 

[KaiserElectric]

Moving past the pointless rants over NPCs, when are we looking at starting this game?

 

[Ailedhoo]

@People ranting about my job and NPCs in general.

You know... we would not be talking about this if it has not kept being set up right? My little suggestion failed.

I would suggest we get focused on electing a general secretary instead of trying to attack a trail of considerations. If this is all a plot of revenge for my... zealot like intent in taking a consideration of a poster that traits for NPCs might be considered then I have a message for you all: I get it. Tani explained my position. If you think I am going to repeat MP2 then you need to:

A) stop jumping to conclusions because the last person to hold the post of NPC GM had a controversial taking.

B) need to allow me to at least demonstrate myself for a turn or more at the most least than suggesting on whether to execute my position or not.

Still whether the characters are leaders or not I will not be setting the nations to generic bores. Whether from the cast I set the characters (keep in mind I am following a MP tradition here) as leaders or not one thing is for sure: this game will have NPCs. Why? Tani and I have invested too much time on NPC mechanics to suggest otherwise. Plus it would be quite bad to fire me.

Now we should get on the general secretary stuff and get preparing to launch the ship.

@KE

I hope soon.