Splime
Regular Lurker
Maybe, but aren't the rules way more important?
[NEW MP] Constitutional Convention
- Thread starter Splime
- Start date
Maybe, but aren't the rules way more important?
The Ninja
Secretary of Defense
Ground rules first, then constitution, then game. (Ok, so I over simplified. Sue me.)
Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
This is what killed the previous game, among many other things, that they did not set up the gameworld first. As a GM, you should use your dictatorial powers, decide on a map, a world, a population, an ethnicity and so on, so we at least had an idea of which country we should run.
But I am probably not listened to at all here it seems, so that's ok.
You seemed to like the initial idea (Kerguelen) then suddenly got cold.
Add: A MP can't vote on a bill proposed before he signed up.
If MP voted on PM he's not allowed to vote again, unless he meantime voted on a proposed bill.
GM can declare a PM term as a "term with minor activity" when he declares a new PM vote. In that case this paragraph won't apply.
And 2 approvals are too low IMHO.
If MP voted on PM he's not allowed to vote again, unless he meantime voted on a proposed bill.
GM can declare a PM term as a "term with minor activity" when he declares a new PM vote. In that case this paragraph won't apply.
And 2 approvals are too low IMHO.
Splime
Regular Lurker
OK, guys, I'm not in charge of the Constitution, and I haven't seen much activity here for a few days. I'm not going to make this MP for you, you guys need to be active in creating it. I'm just here to help this move along a bit, but if nobody else pitches in, this won't get anywhere.
The Ninja
Secretary of Defense
Unfortunately, actually writing a constitution is something I'm not very good at. The best I could offer would be to take the old one from Civilitas and alter it a little, which I assume would not be what we want. (If I'm wrong, however, tell me and I'll get right on it.)
lurker's comment: In my opinion, basing this off my experience DM'ing many D&D games, it's the GM who typically does a lot of the work to start the game off. Such as creating the world, it's inhabitants, climate, and everything else. Once the game starts, the players interact with the world and the GM reacts to their actions. Just my 2 
.
.Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
Yes, this game will not fly before the GMs have set up the gameworld. Everybody knows that. Making a fictive constitution would not make a difference at all.
Splime
Regular Lurker
Maybe that's true, but we at least need some initial activity if we're going to get anywhere with the gameworld.
Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
To be honest, I think you simply need to present a fully fledged game vision on how you want it. The two proposals that had come has 1. been shot down (my proposal) or 2 been held back due to illness (Happys proposal).
Since there seems to be so strong opinions on how this game should be or shouldn't be run, I simply propose that the GMs work to set up the gameworld and some of the basic rules, and see how many that will be attracted or not.
After being shot down yet again, I sort of lost my nerve in trying to work for this game by delivering work. You can possibly ask the perfectionist Happy to do what he seems is so proper and good, as he clearly disliked the proposal I came up with, or you can provide your own proposal as you see fit.
Let's face it, Pre-Gameworld democracy would never work.
Since there seems to be so strong opinions on how this game should be or shouldn't be run, I simply propose that the GMs work to set up the gameworld and some of the basic rules, and see how many that will be attracted or not.
After being shot down yet again, I sort of lost my nerve in trying to work for this game by delivering work. You can possibly ask the perfectionist Happy to do what he seems is so proper and good, as he clearly disliked the proposal I came up with, or you can provide your own proposal as you see fit.
Let's face it, Pre-Gameworld democracy would never work.
Splime
Regular Lurker
In that case, I may develop a plan soon. However, the players should take up the role of developing the constitution.
If no one else does anything in the next few days I will just write a Constitution and propose it.
There will probably be some flaws, as it is not the type of thing I am great at. But, if people insist on delaying it by complaining about something they weren't doing anything about I will not care much for the game.
That's not to say that there shouldn't be discussion and votes and amendments; but as long as it consist of the fundamentals of a democratic constitution, I would be very upset if in the end I wasted my time because players insist on clashing over a bunch of small things that they weren't doing anything about themselves. I mean if people are going to care so much why didn't they do something about it before. That's the way I view it.
For example, I doubt any new players will care about for example the veto power that was being discussed, as long as they see this is actually a game with 1) a world and 2) rules. I mean seriously what is the big deal? I know someone will say something like "well it's a big deal to me because it's an important rule". And no offense, but it was these strong opinions by stubborn people who couldn't accept what was being done that caused a lot of problems. I have my opinions, but I will accept whatever is ultimately decided. If you can't do that yourself then don't bother wasting anyone's time.
While I don't expect the GM's to write the constitution I do expect them to come up with rules and a basic structure for how we are going to form one. For example, should there be an order in the areas covered? (Exectutive Branch first, legislative branch second... etc). Should we split up task and get organized? Or would it better to have an open thread for everything?Questions like these need to be decided by the GM in my opinion otherwise we will just get into those arguments with stubborn people who get upset when they don't have things 100% their way.
Anyway, that's just my opinion on how I think the best way to go about it is. But like I said I don't like stubborn people, and if things are done differently I won't make a big deal about it unless I feel nothing is getting accomplished with the chosen course.
There will probably be some flaws, as it is not the type of thing I am great at. But, if people insist on delaying it by complaining about something they weren't doing anything about I will not care much for the game.
That's not to say that there shouldn't be discussion and votes and amendments; but as long as it consist of the fundamentals of a democratic constitution, I would be very upset if in the end I wasted my time because players insist on clashing over a bunch of small things that they weren't doing anything about themselves. I mean if people are going to care so much why didn't they do something about it before. That's the way I view it.
For example, I doubt any new players will care about for example the veto power that was being discussed, as long as they see this is actually a game with 1) a world and 2) rules. I mean seriously what is the big deal? I know someone will say something like "well it's a big deal to me because it's an important rule". And no offense, but it was these strong opinions by stubborn people who couldn't accept what was being done that caused a lot of problems. I have my opinions, but I will accept whatever is ultimately decided. If you can't do that yourself then don't bother wasting anyone's time.
While I don't expect the GM's to write the constitution I do expect them to come up with rules and a basic structure for how we are going to form one. For example, should there be an order in the areas covered? (Exectutive Branch first, legislative branch second... etc). Should we split up task and get organized? Or would it better to have an open thread for everything?Questions like these need to be decided by the GM in my opinion otherwise we will just get into those arguments with stubborn people who get upset when they don't have things 100% their way.
Anyway, that's just my opinion on how I think the best way to go about it is. But like I said I don't like stubborn people, and if things are done differently I won't make a big deal about it unless I feel nothing is getting accomplished with the chosen course.
Provolution
Sage of Quatronia
Sorry to say, Gameworld seems less important than the Constitution and the petty squabbling in the Model Parliament World. People were happy with the map and all that, but the Party Convention was a big mistake, for example.
One cannot make proper parties and proper policies without a context to place that activity and your roles in, otherwise it is a metagame of personal reflections on legal principles, right and wrong and politically correct gibberish, not the political simulator it was meant to be.
One cannot make proper parties and proper policies without a context to place that activity and your roles in, otherwise it is a metagame of personal reflections on legal principles, right and wrong and politically correct gibberish, not the political simulator it was meant to be.
Splime
Regular Lurker
OK, I'll have a world setup this weekend, hopefully.
Aramazd
Deity
So, this died again?
