Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Carl Bussler, June 09, 2006, 11:23:53 AM
Quote from: Carl Bussler on June 14, 2006, 03:57:52 PMCan my character gain more status and influence than the other player-characters in the ongoing rivalries between Ideological groups?Can our immortal/magi/mortal characters survive the determined efforts of opposing Ideological groups? Is it right to use our arcane and divine powers to defend our Ideology, even though it has obvious negative effects on the world and the people in it? When might the justification break down?
Quote from: baron samedi on June 15, 2006, 06:39:18 AMI'm sorry guys, I didn't realize I posted on the wrong forum. :-(
Quote from: baron samediHi Carl,Your Power 19 file is very interesting ! Great propositions from other members too!My take for question #3:I suggest that you bring about your Ideologies under a few "families", so that you have you players minimally work together. The player's goals would be to see their faction prosper by completing important political/social objectives.The best example I could state would be Mage RPG, where you have 3 big factions (Traditions, Technocracy, Nephandi) each comprising a variety of positions. Thus you could have Pro-Magic, Anti-Magic and "Resurrectionist" factions, with Ideologies within each (eg. Curative Pro-Magic, Opportunist Pro-Magic, etc.). You could even have Faction Points, representing one PC's standing and influence within his faction, and allow players to total their PC's FPs when acting together - forcing group co-operation. These wouldn't be "experience points", but a measure of your world's global change towards the goal they work for. Attaining thresholds (e.g. every 10 Pro-Magic points) could give a similar bonus to motivate and reflect the world's change. I think the online game "[Something] of Camelot" has a similar mechanism, spreading players over 3 warring factions with incentives for intra-faction co-operation.Suppose for example that your PC group is made up of 5 Pro-Magic PCs, each with his own Ideology. By playing the first part of your campaign, they complete 5 major plot points - gathering 5 Pro-Magic Faction Points together and various Ideology points individually. At mid-time,"Winning the game" could simply imply winning 100 Faction Points and thus deciding your World's fate, representing the Faction's advance over others and ending up with 1) a Magic world ; 2) a Magicless world ; 3) the world as it was before the Cataclysm.Moreover, secondary Ideology points could determine, within each Faction "sucess", which Ideology dominates, e.g. a Magic World tainted by Opportunist Magi or healed by Curative Magi, etc.Non-magi could have the advantage of never suffering from the negative effects of using magic, and perhaps winning more easily Ideology points (if not Faction points, or vice-versa).That way you give both your players and characters a setting-oriented goal. This could be Gamist as well as Narrativist, not unlike Paul Czege's My Life With Master for ex. The GM's role could be to oppose them (if you take a Narrativist system) or to challenge them (with a Gamist system). Since I'm not convinced about the existence of Simulationist systems (at least, significatively different from Gamist ones), I'll leave it without an example, with all due respect.Just my 2 cents.Erick
Quote from: baron samedi on June 16, 2006, 06:22:37 AMCarl,For "Unconcerned", you could try to to focus them on the "Pragmatic" side (e.g. results matter, not means) so that they could be put to concrete use in gameplay. Possible variations could include Self-Indulgent (hedonist), Greed motivated, Politically motivated (with indifference toward magic), Fatalist, Religiously motivated, etc.Erick