A new set of thoughts on how to bring Midgard back

[DreamWeaver]

Davin I play the game to have fun, play in character, and play with others that become my friends. I have always tried to play within character and try to not take advantage of the system. For me I will Declare my Primary Faction to be "Seeker" so all (3) clans will be Seeker. Then when I can I will pick up a City Leader position for a Seeker city if I can. Then when I can add +3 more clans, I will most likely add (2) Cymru clans and (1) Gift clan. This is or will be my game play I will follow, but this is me. I can't speak for those that might be of low character, they have to reflect on their own selves in the end. If it becomes discovered by in-game seniors and more importantly the GM, then that will be reacted too.

In your example, would you expect to rise to high-ranking (not necessarily senior) positions in the Cymru or Gift, or would you just play those as minor clans running around having fun?

If we can solve the problem of abuse neatly (which I doubt) then I don't see any reason for allowing even more clans per player (provided they can keep up with them).

Hi Davin,

I would play my (2) Cymru clans as in Character as People's Defenders. I might go after trouble makers or do things for the People or Cymru goals. Build roads, or build on a city that the Cymru wanted worked on, or maybe hunt down some smelly Barbarian Horde or some nasty Bandits. As for the Gift I would work on my idea of developing the "Bath House", or work on developing the "Harbor Fort", or a "Great Light House". Maybe work on my medical knowledge, or even "Healing Gregorian Chant music".

As to things that the Cymru wanted me to do for my connections with them, I would work with the Cymru factional seniorship - Steve Kort to do what he wanted me to do. I would be totally above board and completely transparent. I would work to make a real in-game connection between the Seekers and Cymru. I would do the same with and for my Gift clan as well too I can see many In-Game connections worked out between factions.

[Davin]

Part of me thinks "so what" about spies.  The fun of the game is politics, power gaming, and deal-making.  I think there should be some parameters -- such as Imperials shouldn't play Barbarians or a OTG player shouldn't also be a Blood and Fire player... unless there was a good reason (and there could be).  Letting the players figure things out is what makes the game fun. I think we *might* be spending too much time focusing on this when it may just work itself out.  Players will talk.  I remember being on the phone with people talking about various plans in-game over the years.  I still think about stuff from when I played 20 years ago.  This game was one of the best gaming experiences I have ever had -- and that was barely a turn a month.  And for a while, it was often just a few a year.  The seniors will take care of things and if they don't there is always the veto of the #0.

Well, you may be right -- I may be over-thinking this.  It's just that I like to provide games that are reasonably "fair".  I think that as a player I'd go crazy if I was playing my best within the rules and had someone trash my old (and expensive) position by "cheating".  I'm just trying to minimize such occurrences.

I think the seniors could police things just fine if they noticed when problems occur.  I don't see any good way to help them figure out what's going on behind the scenes, though.  I don't suppose you've got any suggestions to help with detection/reporting, do you (short of my personally monitoring every move that every clan makes)?

[FutureSojourner]

Part of me thinks "so what" about spies.  The fun of the game is politics, power gaming, and deal-making.  I think there should be some parameters -- such as Imperials shouldn't play Barbarians or a OTG player shouldn't also be a Blood and Fire player... unless there was a good reason (and there could be).  Letting the players figure things out is what makes the game fun. I think we *might* be spending too much time focusing on this when it may just work itself out.  Players will talk.  I remember being on the phone with people talking about various plans in-game over the years.  I still think about stuff from when I played 20 years ago.  This game was one of the best gaming experiences I have ever had -- and that was barely a turn a month.  And for a while, it was often just a few a year.  The seniors will take care of things and if they don't there is always the veto of the #0.

Well, you may be right -- I may be over-thinking this.  It's just that I like to provide games that are reasonably "fair".  I think that as a player I'd go crazy if I was playing my best within the rules and had someone trash my old (and expensive) position by "cheating".  I'm just trying to minimize such occurrences.

I think the seniors could police things just fine if they noticed when problems occur.  I don't see any good way to help them figure out what's going on behind the scenes, though.  I don't suppose you've got any suggestions to help with detection/reporting, do you (short of my personally monitoring every move that every clan makes)?

Falling victim to betrayal is part of the game.  Where abuse comes in is when you have the Blood and Fire Senior #1 with three Gift clans building Blood and Fire temples - that's an easy fix... the retainers refuse and if pressed kill the clan leader and the player "gets the hint."  This is an abuse.

But imagine if a Getham player who has several Getham clans and an Imperial clan lets it slip that the Getham are providing a large sum of materials to the Imperials, and says this to a Boda player... I don't think that is a problem.  It is game information.  

The real problem of potential abuse will likely (just my opinion) happen between seniors.  For example, let's say I'm the Gift Senior #1 (which I would be just fine with) and I'm on the phone with the Blood and Fire Senior #4 who also plays a Roder clan.  I share with him that I am just about ready to finish a level 30 Gift Temple and talk about some cool aspects fo the city.  This player then tells the B & F #1 who starts to undermine my efforts in the city resulting in a huge spike in B & F influence in the city and I have no idea what just happened.  This isn't really an abuse but I have found over the years we senior players like to talk and sometimes we talk too much.  Still not a major issue.

A real abuse would be, the Imperials are planning a major offensive against a Boda city.  Let's say I'm the Imperial player organizing the offensive because I'm in the area and have the forces.  What if I am also, secretly, a Boda player who is also city leader of the city being sieged.  I intentionally give my units poor orders and deliberately set up the siege to fail. This is certainly a conflict of interest and should be avoided.  This tells senior players to KNOW who is in your faction!

I would recommend let it organically work itself out and handle extreme abuses if they happen.  The GM always controls the #0.

Oliver

[DreamWeaver]

I always try to get to know all the players that play within the faction that I am a senior within. In most cases I am extremely successful at learning whom is playing within the faction. It takes time to get to know people and it is a leaning process. It is called making friends and that is the way I look at it always. I have made many close friendships that have survived the test of time. So I feel that in most cases it is the seniors themselves that discover possible abuses so lets not worry about that so much. Now it helps if the GM also can just keep his eyes on the situations and speak up if their is something going on.

For me the bigger abuse possibilities is when seniors themselves grant special favors through dispensation budgets to grant bonuses to clans when they don't really have a factional based reason.  Example of giving your own clans a bonus or others a bonus for no in game reason.  When ever I did something I always did a In Game 3x5 card to explain a grant/task to support what and why. Also abuse of assigning regiments to a clan, and not giving any reason why the regiments are being assigned.  I always provide supporting details for In Game explanations to a #0 just to explain what and why the actions are being made. Doing this always explains and is a perfect CYA. A little bit of common sense goes a long way.

On a different topic, I understand that the GM wants to start all clans in a smaller area of the continent of Midgard  instead of the total content of A-1 to A-12 over to F-1 to F12. I think this is a bad idea, just allow players that are former players to choose their starting locations. If you want, start up New players in some start points and just let the game to develop as it develops. Allow the game to develop as it goes, let it grow as it will.

[FutureSojourner]

I always try to get to know all the players that play within the faction that I am a senior within. In most cases I am extremely successful at learning whom is playing within the faction. It takes time to get to know people and it is a leaning process. It is called making friends and that is the way I look at it always. I have made many close friendships that have survived the test of time. So I feel that in most cases it is the seniors themselves that discover possible abuses so lets not worry about that so much. Now it helps if the GM also can just keep his eyes on the situations and speak up if their is something going on.

For me the bigger abuse possibilities is when seniors themselves grant special favors through dispensation budgets to grant bonuses to clans when they don't really have a factional based reason.  Example of giving your own clans a bonus or others a bonus for no in game reason.  When ever I did something I always did a In Game 3x5 card to explain a grant/task to support what and why. Also abuse of assigning regiments to a clan, and not giving any reason why the regiments are being assigned.  I always provide supporting details for In Game explanations to a #0 just to explain what and why the actions are being made. Doing this always explains and is a perfect CYA. A little bit of common sense goes a long way.

On a different topic, I understand that the GM wants to start all clans in a smaller area of the continent of Midgard  instead of the total content of A-1 to A-12 over to F-1 to F12. I think this is a bad idea, just allow players that are former players to choose their starting locations. If you want, start up New players in some start points and just let the game to develop as it develops. Allow the game to develop as it goes, let it grow as it will.

I agree with Penn on starting locations.  For example, I would hope that my past experience and willingness to offer opinions here would grant me the opportunity to serve as a senior (I'd be happy with Gift or Ring).  I would want to be placed at the capital city or other prominent factional cities to serve as a city leader at the start.  I'm not much of an explorer and have always preferred building and city life.  I like the idea of opening up the gameplay area.  For non-experienced players have them start near cities controlled by their faction or if independent a random location -- or GM discretion.  Having everyone start in a similar area seems problematic because it would force players to travel long distances to support factional goals and that would bore me to tears.  I hated traveling long distances (which was rough when turn cycles were not processed very often) and as I mentioned I'm an "urban player" rather than a wandering explorer.

[DreamWeaver]

I agree with Oliver as well...the other issue with having players all start ontop of each other will cause shortages of resources that everyone will need. Such stuff like food stuffs to make rations. Then forks will all need to buy weapons types, horses and uniforms. Remember all the cities will be little better than ruins, which means the amount of anything on the market will be smaller numbers. You setting up a situation that will cause a lot of stress for many players, even experienced players will have issues too.

My advise is as Oliver said allow us experienced players to request map locations and if you must then drop the new players in starting points. Now if those new players have already bin advised by us experienced players, then let them start where they might want as well.

Also for those of us that end up being seniors ( I want the Seeker factional senior-ship) let a city that we are near be a declared city for our declared faction and allow us to become the City Leadership on startup.

[Davin]

Well, I was most worried about being bored with clans not having any interaction with other clans (just NPCs) because they're too far away.  Are you telling me that you prefer to feel like you're all alone in the world and interacting just with automated positions?

[DreamWeaver]

Well, I was most worried about being bored with clans not having any interaction with other clans (just NPCs) because they're too far away.  Are you telling me that you prefer to feel like you're all alone in the world and interacting just with automated positions?

 I think you  might miss the point here...for us former players we will all choose areas where we will want to start up and as time goes on we will attract others to start up around us and expand. I am pretty sure the area that I want to start up in will be pretty populated by many clans/players that I  let know where I am at. Trust me I will not be alone, and even if I were, that would not bother me one bit. Trust me I will figure out something to keep both me as the player and you as the GM extremely occupied!!!


Theme music to set the Mood!!! (Hard to believe this awesome song was from 1986, the good old days)

[FutureSojourner]

Well, I was most worried about being bored with clans not having any interaction with other clans (just NPCs) because they're too far away.  Are you telling me that you prefer to feel like you're all alone in the world and interacting just with automated positions?

I agree with what Penn wrote in response.  Let the senior players build the "hubs" that startup players will eventually start.

Oliver

[DreamWeaver]

Well, I was most worried about being bored with clans not having any interaction with other clans (just NPCs) because they're too far away.  Are you telling me that you prefer to feel like you're all alone in the world and interacting just with automated positions?

I agree with what Penn wrote in response.  Let the senior players build the "hubs" that startup players will eventually start.

Oliver

I agree with Oliver's idea of a factional "hub" can be created. Basically start up the seniors or experienced players near their declared factional cities, this way we can begin to work on those cities and regions to make  game experience a little bit better especially for newer players. I would hop that in the beginning for those of us that wish to be seniors within our declared factions, that as a senior you will allow us to startup with becoming City Leaders of the declared city we are near and this way we can begin to process of forming up the "Hubs".

So in my example I will be declaring all (3) of my clan's Seeker and I wish to obtain the Seeker seniorship position. Next start my three clans in the same region near a declared Seeker city, and this way my main Seeker clan can be assigned as the Seeker City Leader and I can start working on setting up the "hub".