|
Post by tetramorph on Mar 14, 2015 17:42:43 GMT -5
What would folks think about following up the campaign level Risk game with a kind-of simultaneous hex-crawl?
Here is the set up and hook:
Dun Kells represents a vast intractable wilderness exactly in the middle of Christendom. It is one of the last of the fay-wilds left on earth.
The six great monarchies vying for imperial authority over all Christendom would gain a great tactical advantage if they could connect to one another in battle through Dun Kells, rather than having to work around it. (Even Iberia would have a magical portal so that all could have "equal access.")
So each monarch would have an interest in setting out at least one expeditionary party of say, lvl 4 PCs with details of lvl 1s and perhaps 2s, just to see if clearing the land and conquering would be a.) feasible and b.) timely enough to grant a war-advantage.
I'm not sure if I would let my current Risk players have a PC in one of these adventuring parties or whether I would want them to "send" PCs, allowing others to play in Dun Kells. Perhaps a mix of both, depending upon interest.
If this sounds fun I think I could work up something like this as early as May or more likely by June.
|
|
|
Post by Necromancer on Mar 16, 2015 4:41:26 GMT -5
I think it sounds like a great idea, tetramorph. It would allow you (and the players) to explore the Dun Kells setting from a different (and more traditional, in terms of RPG's) perspective compared to the RISK campaign. And the fact that it's possible to link those two games together is a rather elegant feature. I say, go for it!
|
|
|
Post by The Red Baron on Mar 31, 2015 23:51:44 GMT -5
An exiting prospect! Keep us in the loop
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Apr 1, 2015 11:35:02 GMT -5
I like the idea of sending other players and then receiving reports from them. One thing that could be done is keep both groups separate so that they can only rely on accounts and second hand information. This would add a level of suspense in that the monarchs would not know if the reports were true and the players would only have rumors from the wars and intrigues.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 1, 2015 12:39:17 GMT -5
I like the idea of sending other players and then receiving reports from them. One thing that could be done is keep both groups separate so that they can only rely on accounts and second hand information. This would add a level of suspense in that the monarchs would not know if the reports were true and the players would only have rumors from the wars and intrigues. Yes, that was kind of the way I was imagining things. I am glad you can imagine it being fun that way too.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Apr 1, 2015 13:15:59 GMT -5
That sounds really cool to me "The Fog of War".
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Jun 3, 2015 20:49:23 GMT -5
I think this is a terrific idea. I like that you have a strong in-game motivation for the exploration.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Jun 4, 2015 0:55:27 GMT -5
I like the idea of sending other players and then receiving reports from them. One thing that could be done is keep both groups separate so that they can only rely on accounts and second hand information. This would add a level of suspense in that the monarchs would not know if the reports were true and the players would only have rumors from the wars and intrigues. I think this is a really interesting feature of this kind of game. Removing the Olympian viewpoint of many wargames really changes how players approach the game. I would go a little further and let the players know that even the data they are told about subjects of their reconnaissance are possibly flawed.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jun 4, 2015 15:43:22 GMT -5
jmccann, Thanks. yes, I really like your wording of "the Olympian viewpoint." There is a place for that kind of play. But refereed play allows for interesting possibilites. In my on-line Risk game, reconnaissance is always spotty and risky.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Nov 10, 2016 17:24:24 GMT -5
hengest, jmccann, and any other interested parties: This post is a test to see if I can do maps for a PbP on these boards. __________ The villagers direct you to the north west of their settlement. "If you keep an eye-out, your sure to see the standing stone." They assure you there must be some hidden lair, as some creature keeps stealing their chickens every night. And it isn't a fox! You walk for about an hour and as you come to a clearing the following comes into view: How would you like to explore what you have found?
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Nov 10, 2016 17:36:54 GMT -5
After some searching, the MU finds a secret door near the eastern most standing stone. The MU knocks the door open and a tunnel descends to the southwest by rough stairs: I assume you descend? And in the stated marching order? Etc.
|
|
|
Post by jmccann on Nov 11, 2016 1:15:05 GMT -5
I don't see the lair in the first one but with more familiarity and context it might work. In the second image I can see what you describe and the image is fine. In both I think the size and resolution are fine and the problem is we don't have much understanding of what the meanings of elements in the drawings are. With familiarity and some shared conventions I think drawings like this would be fine.
Maybe it would be helpful to put together a couple of examples with a little more context so we can get a sense for what the communication would be like. Like the example of play in U&WA or something similar.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Nov 11, 2016 12:12:41 GMT -5
jmccann, great, thanks for the response. Look at the above two posts again: ruinsofmurkhill.proboards.com/post/10559/threadWhat I mean by "lair," is that the standing stones are a point of interest to the party in which I have "hidden" a lair. You can't see it because you need to explore to find the entrance. ruinsofmurkhill.proboards.com/post/10560/threadPerhaps you could be the mentioned MU, and hengest could be an FM (anyone want to be a quick CL?). Y'all tell me what you do next and we will run a little test right here that should give a feel for things. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by hengest on Nov 11, 2016 18:57:18 GMT -5
Hey. Yes, tetramorph, I think this would be fine. I am definitely up for the test.
|
|