|
Post by Necromancer on Feb 18, 2015 7:18:40 GMT -5
Cool map! Now I just have to pick a realm...
|
|
|
Post by The Semi-Retired Gamer on Feb 18, 2015 10:55:11 GMT -5
Count me in! I'm taking a nap due to nightshift work but I will participate as long as I'm able to after I check out all of the details.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Feb 18, 2015 15:20:46 GMT -5
Okay, with The Semi-Retired Gamer we are now at a solid 5. Who will be our 6th? I am going to be turning my attention through this weekend to a table-game of Dun Kells I am running. Next week I can return my attention to this. By then, hopefully, we will have 6 players and be able to start readying things for launch!
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Feb 21, 2015 21:58:11 GMT -5
The table top game went great this last Friday afternoon! A bunch of first lvl characters successfully cleared the first level of a dungeon! They even cleverly dispatched a mummy without taking a hit! Good players.
Okay, here are some of my ideas for this Risk game. I can see having a "rules and clarifications" thread, and then a "Christendom Crier" (as opposed to "town crier") thread. In this thread I as the ref would post the kind of news that might be able to make if from one end of Christendom to another. Which is to say, not very much. But this would be a place for PCs to place their public announcements, public negotiations, pleas, libel, propaganda and official press releases. These can go on and continue through any phase of play.
We would only allow private negotiations during the official negotiations phase. One of the things which may happen by either private or public negotiation during this phase only is the trading of "trophies of war" (territory cards, but we don't have "territories," and we have no cards! so I'll call them "trophies"). Trophies will be awarded publicly on the Christendom Crier, but not their type ("wealth," "knowledge," "power," or "wild"). Then I would need to ask you all NOT to PM one another during the other three phases of play until the negotiations phase comes back round again.
When the negotiations phase ends, we move on to reinforcement. You PM me where you want to place your reinforcement and I oblige. I will respond letting you know what you can "see." You can only "see" realms you immediately occupy or neighbor. At this point, you have to trust your negotiations and the public announcements!
Then everyone would send in their attack orders, to me as ref, by PM. I would resolve these simultaneously. So your reports will need to include things like: do you want to continue after a successful invasion or stop with only one new realm, etc.? what is the direction you would like your army to continue towards if successful? at what point do you want to stop (when you are down to three armies, two)? What do you want to do if you invade a realm simultaneously with another invader? Do you want to battle them over it? What if they are allied? etc. So we are going to have to develop a fairly complicated but hopefully clarifying written order method. After resolution, I would report generic things on the Christendom Crier but specific reports as knowable to each player by PM.
Finally, everyone would then send in any fortification orders for moving remaining troops after all invasions. I will allow armies to move from any, to any, realm of the same PC or even to an allied realm, if the alliance is public knowledge.
It would then be time to return to the negotiations phase. Public announcements and negotiations would continue on the Christendom Crier. But PMs between PCs would also open back up at this time. These can be written as letters from each monarch or as speeches delivered by ambassadors, etc. Please include me in any of these. This is because I need the knowledge in order to inform any spies or scouts that you may choose to send out.
If you choose to send out a spy or scout, just PM me during negotiation phase. At each subsequent phase thereafter your scout or spy will have a certain chance of finding knowledge and relaying it to you. They may get "discovered," if so, the PC you were spying on will be informed. They may choose to kill the spy, convince him to double agent for them, or send him back packed with lots of juicy false information. Even if they are not discovered, they themselves may choose to turn double agent (less likely). Even still, they may simply be unable to find helpful information. Whatever information they come back with, it will never be complete, or completely accurate. Sound fun yet?
Finally, as this has significantly "Diplomacy-i-fied" what would otherwise be a "Risk" game, please remember the old saying: "Ah, Diplomacy, the friendship killer." Here are my suggestions so that we all remain true friends on this forum! Always, ALWAYS play IN CHARACTER! Every now and then throw in a good "out of character" "I'm so sorry about that, dude!" We will work out conventions for speaking "OOC." Another thing that has worked for friends of mine with whom I've played Risk in this way is that we always set time limits on any treaties or agreements. Usually no more than a couple or three turns. Often only one. That way no one feels too betrayed when the former ally clearly starts attacking! And no one feels too tied down in their options. You do not have to play it that way. A good betrayal is certainly interesting in the gaming sense. So I just throw that out there for consideration.
Okay, that is all I've got for now. We are getting closer to launch. Feel free to go out there and recruit that 6th player!
|
|
|
Post by The Red Baron on Feb 21, 2015 23:15:28 GMT -5
Hi Tetramorph,
Sounds like a blast. If you've still got that last spot open for a grand emperor conquerer, I'll gladly fill it.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Feb 22, 2015 14:34:01 GMT -5
Thanks, The Red Baron, we now have 6 players! Here is the line-up: makofan: IBERICA Mr Darke: BYZANTIA Von: SLAVIA Necromancer: GERMANIA The Semi-Retired Gamer: GALLICA The Red Baron: LOGRES Let me know if there is a particular realm you would like or if I should simply assign you. I will be working up the characters of the monarchs soon. So far I've got a few names: Aelfred the Wise for Logres; Red Catherine, Tsarina of Slavia; Constans the Just for Byzantia; Pepin the Unstoppable for Germania, Eleanor the Unquenchable for Gallica; Isabel the Pious for Iberica.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Feb 22, 2015 16:30:44 GMT -5
Looks very cool. Let me know when you want the forum opened and the name(s) that you want.
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Feb 22, 2015 18:20:01 GMT -5
I'll take whoever
|
|
|
Post by Mr Darke on Feb 23, 2015 16:28:04 GMT -5
I'll take Byzantia.
|
|
|
Post by Necromancer on Feb 23, 2015 17:26:55 GMT -5
Ok, I'll take Germania then... ("First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin...")
|
|
|
Post by The Red Baron on Feb 23, 2015 18:57:19 GMT -5
In that case, I'll play as Aelfred the Wise.
Gallica and Iberia seem to be in difficult geographic positions.
|
|
|
Post by Von on Feb 24, 2015 0:39:56 GMT -5
Looks promising. It might be useful to have a (succinct) bullet point list/flow chart of the turn sequence. I'm a big fan of (*sigh*) 'infographics' in rules material, just as an at-a-glance "I do this and do this and then do this and here's when I can and can't PM" reference. I think Kirby-era Warhammer has ruined me with its handy playsheets. There does appear to be a potential balance/investment issue with Iberia only having one route into a bordering nation (i.e. having to go through Gallica to be involved in the game). That's assuming it works like the London Underground map and you have to follow the lines without just getting on a boat and sailing round the edges.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Feb 24, 2015 18:25:10 GMT -5
Iberia is this Risk game's "Australia." At least that is what I was going for.
Before we begin I will take any concerns into account. I think it should prove interesting to the game. But I do not want a player to feel extremely burdened from the beginning. Challenged is okay. But not burdened.
Y'all let me know before we get started. I can modify the map (but I am sticking to my guns until convinced).
I am modifying my post, above, as players get assigned to kingdoms. All this info will migrate over once we've set up the BpB folder.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Feb 24, 2015 18:29:36 GMT -5
Looks promising. It might be useful to have a (succinct) bullet point list/flow chart of the turn sequence. I'm a big fan of (*sigh*) 'infographics' in rules material, just as an at-a-glance "I do this and do this and then do this and here's when I can and can't PM" reference. I think Kirby-era Warhammer has ruined me with its handy playsheets. Yes, no worries, Von. I will clean everything up and have a "Rules and Clarifications" thread when I finally have Admin Pete set up a folder for the PbP. If we don't have to do too much to the map to make everyone happy (I do hope people will go into this with a play-testing kind of feel to it) then I hope to have things running by the weekend.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Feb 24, 2015 18:52:10 GMT -5
Looks promising. It might be useful to have a (succinct) bullet point list/flow chart of the turn sequence. I'm a big fan of (*sigh*) 'infographics' in rules material, just as an at-a-glance "I do this and do this and then do this and here's when I can and can't PM" reference. I think Kirby-era Warhammer has ruined me with its handy playsheets. Yes, no worries, Von. I will clean everything up and have a "Rules and Clarifications" thread when I finally have Admin Pete set up a folder for the PbP. If we don't have to do too much to the map to make everyone happy (I do hope people will go into this with a play-testing kind of feel to it) then I hope to have things running by the weekend. Looking good! Can't wait to watch it run!
|
|
|
Post by Von on Feb 25, 2015 1:48:08 GMT -5
Iberia is this Risk game's "Australia." At least that is what I was going for. Before we begin I will take any concerns into account. I think it should prove interesting to the game. But I do not want a player to feel extremely burdened from the beginning. Challenged is okay. But not burdened. Y'all let me know before we get started. I can modify the map (but I am sticking to my guns until convinced). I am modifying my post, above, as players get assigned to kingdoms. All this info will migrate over once we've set up the BpB folder. Whether or not the Iberia thing is an issue depends on what your priorities are, for sure. If you want the nations to feel mechanically distinct and want one of them to depend on diplomacy with/invasion of its immediate neighbour in order to interact with others, that's fine, and certainly has verisimilitude. My concern is that only one nation is in this obviously limited position at the start, and that sends a flicker across my game balance/player agency sensors. (This is going to backfire horribly and I'm going to lose the route to Albion. I can tell. )
|
|
|
Post by Necromancer on Feb 25, 2015 7:37:06 GMT -5
Looks promising. It might be useful to have a (succinct) bullet point list/flow chart of the turn sequence. I'm a big fan of (*sigh*) 'infographics' in rules material, just as an at-a-glance "I do this and do this and then do this and here's when I can and can't PM" reference. I think Kirby-era Warhammer has ruined me with its handy playsheets. Yes, no worries, Von. I will clean everything up and have a "Rules and Clarifications" thread when I finally have Admin Pete set up a folder for the PbP. If we don't have to do too much to the map to make everyone happy (I do hope people will go into this with a play-testing kind of feel to it) then I hope to have things running by the weekend. That sounds good to me! I'm looking forward to this with anticipative joy mingled with terror...
|
|
|
Post by Necromancer on Feb 25, 2015 7:48:36 GMT -5
Oh, and while I might be uncertain of the rules and procedures of games like this, I'll try to compensate for it by being halfway through season 1 of Borgias on Netflix, so perhaps y'all need to watch out!
|
|
|
Post by The Red Baron on Feb 25, 2015 11:26:37 GMT -5
(Assuming iberia and gaul don't team up to whoop the rest of us)
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Feb 25, 2015 14:29:47 GMT -5
(Assuming iberia and gaul don't team up to whoop the rest of us) The Red Baron is expressing well the basic thrust of the game that I am going for here. Remember that it is Risk -- you might have all your armies somewhere else entirely and your "home country" entirely occupied but still be "in the game"! I would like to give it a try unless there are any further objections. As a reward for his good sportiness about this (wink), I will give makofan Iberica. So Gallica goes to The Semi-Retired Gamer. Isabel and Eleanor may well unite . . . at first! Here is my idea for starting positions: no one will start with their complete territories so no one is going to get their "kingdom" (in place of "continent") bonus at the first turn. Everyone will have a realm (in place of "territory") that is occupied by a NPC force. So players will have to decide to deal with their own backyards first, or strike out while their neighbor is week. I imagine this may form much of the initial discussion, public and private. Does that make it sound a bit more fair, or at least fun, Von?
|
|
|
Post by Von on Feb 26, 2015 1:56:25 GMT -5
(Assuming iberia and gaul don't team up to whoop the rest of us) The Red Baron is expressing well the basic thrust of the game that I am going for here. Remember that it is Risk -- you might have all your armies somewhere else entirely and your "home country" entirely occupied but still be "in the game"! I would like to give it a try unless there are any further objections. As a reward for his good sportiness about this (wink), I will give makofan Iberica. So Gallica goes to The Semi-Retired Gamer. Isabel and Eleanor may well unite . . . at first! Here is my idea for starting positions: no one will start with their complete territories so no one is going to get their "kingdom" (in place of "continent") bonus at the first turn. Everyone will have a realm (in place of "territory") that is occupied by a NPC force. So players will have to decide to deal with their own backyards first, or strike out while their neighbor is week. I imagine this may form much of the initial discussion, public and private. Does that make it sound a bit more fair, or at least fun, Von? It's like fixing my bike's broken lights by buying me a basket and a cool new helmet. Nice idea, it's going to make things more fun in a Civilisation IV kind of way (smacking barbarians about so we can battle some battles without starting a world war in the opening turns) - but it doesn't address the issue. Here is the issue. The Iberian player has two choices - "interact with NPCs" and "interact with Gallica", everyone else has three: "interact with NPCs", "interact with realm A to which I have a route" or "interact with realm B to which I have a route", except Gallica, which has three. (Four if you count "be everyone's whipping boy because it's like the Spaghetti Junction of Dun Kells - you have to go through it to get anywhere".) I don't want it to sound like a dealbreaker, since I do understand your reasons for the choice, it's entirely in keeping with what I know of RISK, it adds variety etc. etc. - but the RISK map has been the source of debate from the 'pure game' perspective. I might well be making a lot of fuss over nothing and it might be best to play the map as is before tinkering with it rather than MUKKIN ABAHT.
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Feb 26, 2015 11:53:46 GMT -5
First of all, I love Von's signature line. Mistress of Mistresses is one of my favourite books. Second, let's see how I do with Iberia - I played King John (2-2-2) in Empires of the Middle Ages, I can play any side
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Feb 27, 2015 13:30:56 GMT -5
This is addressed to the players in the Dun Kells Risk Group. I created and added you to that group so that only tetramorph and you the players could post in the pbp game. That overrides your ranking by numbers of posts and your stars. So I have given you each a Red Star (I can only give all of you the same number of stars) and I will tweak it from there as your game progresses. Just wanted you to know what happened if you look at those things.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Feb 27, 2015 14:39:46 GMT -5
Admin Pete: RAD! Or, as Red Catherine might say, "radski." One thing: we may not need the status of "group," that keeps others from posting in our PbP. You all let me and Admin Pete know if you think that is helpful for us right now or not. I am starting to build the PbP section even now!
|
|
|
Post by Necromancer on Feb 27, 2015 15:55:01 GMT -5
Admin Pete: RAD! Or, as Red Catherine might say, "radski." One thing: we may not need the status of "group," that keeps others from posting in our PbP. You all let me and Admin Pete know if you think that is helpful for us right now or not. I am starting to build the PbP section even now! For me, I'll definitely leave that up to you guys, Admin Pete and tetramorph. You know what you're doing, I'm not that sure I do (but I'll tag along, obviously)...
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Mar 1, 2015 10:02:12 GMT -5
Okay we are now officially GO!
I've even got my first post up on the "Christendom Crier"!
You all now feel free to add your own in character posts on the crier.
I have received some PMs at this time! That is great! I should be able to respond to those by this afternoon.
Thanks guys. Your humble referee is already having fun.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Mar 14, 2015 17:48:01 GMT -5
I was reflecting to myself the other day how I think it is kind of a good sign of the nature of this forum that its first on-line play-by-post is at the campaign (or what some would, in my humble opinion, falsely call "end-game") level.
I think that sets the tone for our forum here well:
a.) it is Fantastical b.) it is Medieval c.) it is a WARGAME d.) it is at the CAMPAIGN level, in its own CAMPAIGN setting
Now that sounds like a game I've heard about before!
Thanks, all.
|
|
|
Post by Necromancer on Mar 16, 2015 4:49:38 GMT -5
I'm glad you're enjoying it, tetramorph, just as I'm enjoying being a participant of your PbP game and offering a helping hand if needed in your work with the Dun Kells setting. Boards like this, with so many friendly, supportive and creative members, certainly can be very useful while working on personal settings and rules!
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Darci on May 17, 2017 7:53:48 GMT -5
Are you going to bring this back and take another stab at it or are you going to do something else? Do you have stories of your home campaign to share?
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on May 18, 2017 7:16:03 GMT -5
Are you going to bring this back and take another stab at it or are you going to do something else? Do you have stories of your home campaign to share? Inquiring Minds want to Know!
|
|