RPG: How do we want to do it?

[Noldodan]

Since my other thread has been swamped by RPG ideas, I've decided to create a new thread exclusively for the RPG. Now I hope to get some real discussion in the other thread.

 

[Zarn]

I believe the following could work, but this how I would want it. Thus I know it will fall flat on its face.

1-Economic stucture
a) Gain money through adventures/ events/ land
b) All items must be purshased
c) business should be held by a gamemaster(s)

2-Clans
a) Pay money to form a clan (to limit number of clans)
b) 5 people max per clan

3-Land rights
a) Prez: Despotism and Communism
b) Elite: Monarchy (Prez and Govs)
c) All: Republic and Democracy (purshased and very costly)
d) Under Anarchy, the land is under the person that had it in the last government
e) rent/ taxes can be demanded on people/ clans living on someone elses land

4-Tech
a) Purchased items must be disovered/ invented
b) Recent items should be more costly while others start to diminish in value

 

[Epimethius]

I still say we go with anarchy. Everyone does whatever the hell they want, possibly with a moderator to void things that are absurd. Self-regulation would develop quickly enough to fill the void without an excess of rules.

 

[Black_Hole]

I still say we go with anarchy. Everyone does whatever the hell they want, possibly with a moderator to void things that are absurd. Self-regulation would develop quickly enough to fill the void without an excess of rules.

that wouldnt be much fun.... it has to be structured at least slightly somehow with someone in charge

 

[Epimethius]

I tend to think of doing whatever the hell you want as more fun that following a set of guidelines.

 

[Zarn]

It isn't better. People just go too insane with things.

 

[Donovan Zoi]

Here's my two cents as it was posted in the Good, Bad and Ugly thread:

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?

 

[Falcon02]

Please, no more economic sims here.... If ya want one of those please do it seperate from the Demogame. Even in DG2 when I practically ignored it (I did have a few plots of land, and weaponry) it felt like it had some sort of dark sucking force pulling people away from the Demogame itself, under the guise of trying to draw more people to it.

 

[GenMarshall]

Yes, I agree. Economic sims kind of draws away from the free for all RPG. In my eyes, an economic sim makes the RPG more restricted.

 

[Black_Hole]

it doesnt have to be economic based, but it cant be all out chaos

 

[Immortal]

Id like to propose an idea: we stay in the medieval ages.

 

[Octavian X]

I don't know about anyone else, but I actually enjoyed the economic stuff of the first RPG, like my palace estate on a mountain outside Bavaria...

Otherwise, it's just like any other aspect of this game - can't be too restrictive, nor excessively freeform.

 

[Stuck_as_a_Mac]

yea, oct. you liked it, donsig liked it and shaitan liked it. the rest of us, though, were happy when our names got drawn for one or two new tiles.
anywho, ditch the economic sim. eternal middle ages sounds nice, especially with Japan as our civ. but it is true that we need some order. and no, i am not signing up to run anything.

 

[Cheetah]

In-game RPG sounds fun.

At least it's much better than the DGIV's history department. It was a good read, but that was it. Shorter RPG-entries and having them all over the DG sounds a lot more fun.

As for some RPG rules:
1. Characters can live for as long as you wish.
2. Characters should(?) be the same as your forum-name. (So that people don't make 3 characters with different names etc, and so that the RPG characters will be someone holding an office, etc.)
3. Don't kill other peoples characters or otherwise make very large changes for the character or the characters surroundings without agreement with the other party.
4. One can only use the technologies we know in-game.

That's what I posted in the good, bad and ugly thread before I saw this one.

Basicly I agree with Epimethius, self-regulation to some extent would be the best way. Let people take land which is free when they want it. If all our land is taken, people without land should ask someone (pm) with land if he could take a bit of it. Make a story out of it, like a revolt, a gambling or something. No economy sim, and let people get what they want. Maybe we'll need some gamemaster to mod the most absurd ideas, but I believe it can work with self-regulation.

 

[BCLG100]

The only possible problem with point 4 is that for maybe the first term we will have very little technological advancement, therefore it would need some interesting story lines to keep interest. Though i may play little part in it i think the an RPG idea on the whole would be a very good idea.

 

[Ankka]

I thikn in-game would be the most fun. Would also add a little to the basic vanilla game..

 

[Cheetah]

The only possible problem with point 4 is that for maybe the first term we will have very little technological advancement, therefore it would need some interesting story lines to keep interest. Though i may play little part in it i think the an RPG idea on the whole would be a very good idea.

Very little technologies? We're playing as the Japanese. That means we start with knowledge of the Wheel and Ceremonial Burial, in addition to stone working, hunting, hut-building, despotism, war-making, road-, mine- and irrigation-building and general native superstision!

We can go around all day talking about the demons living behind the next mountainridge, fight to be the the despot, try to ride on horses in some way or another, build huts, burn huts, go out to hunt big elephants with a few stones, bury those of us that don't make it back from the hunt in fashinable ways, build roads through the despots hut and learn the name of all the animals we find!

I'm allready looking forward to it!!

 

[BCLG100]

So err whats happenening about this then? are we just doing it in the citizens forum? is it getting its own seperate forum? if so is there going to be a 'boss'? whos going to make sure it doesnt get out of hand?

 

[Black_Hole]

So err whats happenening about this then? are we just doing it in the citizens forum? is it getting its own seperate forum? if so is there going to be a 'boss'? whos going to make sure it doesnt get out of hand?

i believe it should have its own sub-forum, as for boss im not sure... either mods are in charge or someone is elected every term

 

[GenMarshall]

i believe it should have its own sub-forum, as for boss im not sure... either mods are in charge or someone is elected every term

Well, I beleve now its imposible to get our own RPG forums like in DG2-3 since I doubt that TF would create a forum again.