Nation RPs

Discussion in 'THREAD ARCHIVES' started by White, Dec 29, 2014.

  1. So I am currently working on a roleplay that is played from the standpoint of multiple ruler attempting to compete for a new found land.

    I did speak with a few friends about this, asked them for their own experience with these... They noted that people usually try to compete for victory in them with tendencies to overpower the own country.

    I am right now working on a structure that will allow me as the GM to basically keep it properly balanced.
    I have considered a couple of battle modifier to keep the various aspects fair and considered (Battles tend to be a reason for argument for a lot it seems)

    My question is basically... does anybody of you have experience with nation RPs?
    If yes, can you share with me what I should look out for while building the structure everything is built onto? Things I need to balance that I may have overlooked as of yet?

    My apologies if my english is not that great, really tired right now :(
  2. What's the setting? Alternate history? Fantasy? Science fiction?
  3. What kind of Nation RP is it going to be? Character-driven or Dice-driven?
  4. This thread should probably be in the Roleplay Help area rather than General Chatting.

    As for the question at hand, yeah, nation roleplays do seem to get pretty heavily competitive. You definitely do need some kind of arbitration measure to keep things balances, and there are two main ways to do it: dice or freeform. If you go with dice you can set up rules for how dice rolls work to determine the outcome of conflict, adding modifiers for things like terrain and army size and technology levels and whatnot to make it more realistic. If you go with freeform arbitration then it'll just come down to you as the GM deciding how conflicts conclude, likely by judging which battle strategy you think is more likely to be successful given the above considerations that I mentioned as dice roll modifiers.

    It's hard to get any more specific than that without having much information about your roleplay.
    • Thank Thank x 1
  5. Hehe, Newfoundland...

    Oh, please ignore me.
  6. Summoning the master of Nation RPs, one moment please...

    @Kadaeux you're being called for on aisle nine.
    • Thank Thank x 1
  7. I will ask a mod to move the thread. Thank you.
    I was thinking of going dicy-dice to prevent conflicts to some degree and where people simply cannot argue about the random factor.

    It is a bit more than just one genre. Hmm, I must apologize because it does actually cover more than just one aspect but I will name Fantasy as it is the heaviest genre within it.


    I am sorry for the rating but I do not understand the purpose of the post. Please explain it and I will remove it. No offense intended.

    Thank you!
  8. @Desire Ah, sorry, I didn't mean to come off as rude! I should have explained myself earlier... I was thinking about the island, Newfoundland, and the species of dog also called Newfoundland. It wasn't to attack your writing, or your RP idea, which I think sounds interesting. I came by, saw that Jorick had already helped, and just left that rather unthoughtful comment. I hope you can forgive me ><
    • Thank Thank x 1
  9. No problem.

    Dice are good for conflict resolution, yeah, but don't think for a moment that people won't argue about the results just because the decision was made by random chance. When people get hyper competitive about things they'll argue about all sorts of nonsensical things to try to give themselves the advantage. Be sure to include a rule saying all dice rolls and results thereof are final, then point at that whenever someone throws a fit over a poor roll. It really takes the argumentative wind out of their sails when you can tell them that their only choices are to abide by the rules they agreed to upon joining the game or to leave since they refuse to play by the rules.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Yeah I usually make use of that rule to basically "enforce the dice rolls" (which basically just means to me what you said " It really takes the argumentative wind out of their sails when you can tell them that their only choices are to abide by the rules").

    I have set up a pre set of six governments to enforce a certain degree of control over the nations. Roleplaying means to write a story, a book together, not to compete for victory.
    The NS(Nation sheet) allows for historical writing, but enforces once more a degree of control. I do not tolerate people overpowering themself.
    The CS is a regular CS, with the exception that it is allowed to instead play a commander rather than a ruler.

    I can open a PM if you want to review them. Only request then is that you do not yet make use of any concept or structure I will share until I have set the RP up. Afterwards it is open for use either way.
  11. Jorick is quite right: I've moved your thread to RP Help for you.
    • Thank Thank x 1
  12. *cough* Lemme write to the mod I pmed to move this D: so his time isnt wasted QQ
  13. *Cracks knuckles*

    *The guy begins screaming*

    Ok now to begin.

    I've got plenty of experience nation GMing. My usual manner is to create a framework that ultimately makes all players balanced "in balance" not necessarily militarily but in the end equal.

    In addition, it helps if you don't leave the battles in the hands of the players. Resolving a battle is a GMs job /story. While you can if the players are happy to agree on an outcome or a part of their storyline depends on it feel free to then, but in most cases you want the players to describe their strategies and then you resolve it yourself, I find the best "resolution" being

    Step 1: Random Chance. A d100, 1-50 = Player A wins, 51-100 = Player B wins.
    This is your "baseline"
    Step 2: Apply Modifiers. Player A has described an ambushing force laying in wait until player B's forces are committed.
    Roll a dice to see if they're not spotted, if they're not apply a bonus of say 20 to player A. In this cases player A would be 1-70 to win while player B is no a 71-100
    Step 3: Consider "casualties" After the modifiers I'd put in a block "in the middle" of the roll where 'nobody' wins, it's effectively a stalemate, but once you have you need to consider casualties. Did the dice roll = 1? Following that example, Player A utterly rolls over Player B's army like an avalanche, player B would be lucky to get away with a few men and maybe his/her general. But if the roll was 100, then the roll is reversed, despite the success of the ambush player B would utterly tromp player A, but because the difference is not as great then Player A gets away with more of his force. Where if the roll was say, 70, then the battle would not have proceeded bugger all and casualties on both sides would be about even (assuming an equal sized force for both)

    For other considerations.

    Make a player take "weaknesses" for their nation. It adds character and weak points for players to exploit. EG: Player B has the weakness "Spartan Citizens" in this case they make for relatively poor craftsmen and farmers because all the strong men with talent are in the army leaving only the "womanly" men to do the civil labour (no sexism intended, going off of a medieval perspective) where Player A might take the cowardly flaw, meaning that his army is cowardly and requires a clear advantage to prevent them running away from a conflict.

    Also consider the economy. This aspect must be more carefully considered and balanced than any other. If done improperly you can get into a situation where Player C has a poor army, poor fighting skills, but a vast economy, and over time can simply overwhelm by throwing vast numbers at the battlefield, and no matter how GM-Balanced we try to be, we can't justify Player D winning with his 1'000 men if the enemy has a million men.
    • Thank Thank x 1