A RPG campaign: discussion thread

[ForzaA]

you could leave out events alltogether, and make new ones based on RP, missions given/accepted/completed, etc.

for example: the Chambers of Reunion, Claims on the Steppes- why do only France and Russia get that sort of free cores?
Both are examples of how a monarch viewed the destiny of his country. So why can't England get cores on Ireland/Scotland, Denmark on all of Scandinavia (Kalmar Union as a personal union) etc?

It will ofcourse be hard to keep the events FAIR, but that's what a GM is for

what you could do, for example, would be that players propose events based on how they envision the destiny of their country, then the GM sets up X versions of the effect, ranging from "backfire" to "great success" on a table, roll a dice, add/substract some points for RP/.. and have that outcome decide the event.

short example based on the Chambers of Reunion:

France: "It is my destiny to rule all the lands up to the Rhine". I want Cores on X, Y and Z.

1: "People are mad over the Kings decision to look abroad while domestic issues go unnoticed, Foreign Powers take advantage of French weakness"
(Revolts, RR, SPA and HAB get temporary CB)

2:"Lukewarm support for Kings Ideas of expansion, Foreign Powers are upset"
(temp CB for France on owner of X, Y, Z, temp CB's for SPA, HAB)

etc. etc.

influencing factors on the roll could be:
- French "investment" (money talks!)
- SPA/HAB/... "investment" (money talks!)
- French RP
- opposition RP

etc.
etc.



Then again, you might not want all that work

 

[ForzaA]

VERY complicated ideas

Split up the leadergenerating into two steps:

1) Talent - historical leaders have some talent (current stats -1? -2?) and extra random leaders can be generated. - this will leave you with a set of leaders in a skillrange 1-4 or so, with 4 being exceptional.

2) All leaders get their stats edited based on military tradition (possibly other things) - a country with a strong military tradition would get +1 or maybe +2 on stats, countries that have been lethargic for ages might even get penalties.

Or, alternatively, you can have "historical leadership" as a modifier for the generation process.

Ie. all leaders are removed, but when Villars would come, France gets random rolls 2-6 instead of 1-5 (for example)

-----------------

Explorers/Conquistadors:

I like the idea of a bidding system, but would like to make it a little different, make it a "looking for" system instead. [sort of blind bidding- you know there might be explorers/conquistadors available, but you don't know their skill etc]

Ie. Everyone who wants explorers, conquistadors etc. makes a royal proclamation (it is roleplay afterall) that they are looking for brave men to chart the seas/land/whatever they want charted, and that they will be greatly rewarded .

Now, the GM(s) has(have) a list of explorers, conquistadors for a session (with a personal price tag depending on skill and lifespan)
The GM compares these pricetags to the countries' offers (could be modified by distance country-hometown explorer, historical enmity, colonial history of nation (ie. number of existing colonies, previously hired explorers/conquistadors) etc) and then approaches the countries that fit the conquistadors/explorers, and see if they will take up the offer. (if they don't that will ofcourse have an influence on further explorers/conquistadors considering offers)

EDIT: the GM could ofcourse throw in a few "active" explorers who go to specific courts to ask for funding (like Columbus did) - to help jumpstart countries (Portugal, Spain) help countries recover, etc. etc.

 

[ForzaA]

Since the newest beta patch hasn't the Kent-Calais strait anymore, I see no reason why BiB should not make his glorious comeback

And I liked it the way it was


...with the strait, I mean

 

[ForzaA]

I tend to agree with BiB, this is getting really damn complicated...

I, for one, don't want to play in a game that has 2-3 pages of complicated rules you have to re-read before each session in order to stay in touch with the game.

Also, many of these suggestions will be too much for just one GM to handle. Not to mention that the game imo will lose some of it's magic if more happens through edits between sessions than ingame...

Have you seen Olympian Rebirth?

I'm hoping/assuming FAL is striving to get something like that but in a historical setting- sure, it has more rules than most games, but it's not only rules

 

[ForzaA]

Yes, I have. And I'm not interested in something like that, honestly.

That is ofcourse quite fine.. but it doesn't have 2-3 pages of rules

 

[ForzaA]

I like those ideas (leaders & explorers). But, would it be realistic that any nation can get access to explorer? I mean (And I might certainly be wrong), exploration was to get access to the spices from Asia. I'm not sure that the Ottomans could have access to the explorer when you see this aspect. Same thing for strongly land-based power like Austria : they don't see their future in the sea.

so, if we suppose what I said to be true, what could be the criterias used ?

If they're willing to fund these men's expeditions, I don't see why they wouldn't/shouldn't be able to.

I don't see Columbus refusing Ottoman funding because they can access the spices overland (he might be refusing because of religious circumstances, but that's a different matter)
Or the Ottomans could RP tales of woe and destruction, and Persians that block their caravans, so that they, too, need to go overseas.

I see no reason why they should not be able to fund expeditions. They might have a worse chance with the explorers because of a lack of colonial tradition
(see mention of modifiers) but I don't think you can say "Austria may not bid on explorers".

 

[ForzaA]

Random events, like random explorers for everyone, already have triggers based on dp settings. Why come up with such complicated schemes when something like it pretty much already exists in the game?

noone trusts "random" events - better make sure by editing
besides, I have yet to receive a random leader through event that was better than 3/2/2