TWS2 RPG Discussion Thread

[Zim]

Thanks for the link Monk. After being told how to find my save last night I was thinking that will be in the faq for our game.

As Monk said it works fine, I recruited DLC units in Kai...
They are under Yoshinobu, here is the file...

I can download and play the save without any problems, even with the units you recruited (we'll have to not use them in the rpg itself).

Great, this seems to be taking off.

I'd be intersted in a general's position.
Captain, waiting to become a general, or son, waiting to come of age, would be just as fine - if it is appropriate to voice preferences, yet.

In any case - looking forward to it, whatever role fate will give me.

No problem giving preferences right now, although it could be a little while. I'm thinking the goal is to have a ruleset together within a few days, but I'm not sure how long it will take hammering that out into a final form.

I might be interested in this!

I think one important thing that has been missing from the discussion so far is what scope you had in mind for the playerbase. I'm asking because this has a direct impact on the rules and roles you are already thinking of. So far I think we're at something like nine major roles.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

• Damyo
• Heir
• Commissioner for Warfare
• Commissioner for Finance
• Commissioner for Supply
• Commissioner for Development
• Head of Ninjas
• Head of Metsuke
• Head of Monks

So depending on the amount of players you could have a small focused approach, much like S2TW itself, where every participant has a major role to play and considerable powers at his command. From my experience this would be a refreshing appraoch from the older RPGs where there were far fewer major roles and more standard roles, who only had voting powers.

Which brings me to my second point: Voting? How could this be incorporated into the Shogun setting? My knowledge of medieval Japan is limited, but were ther precedents for democratic structures? Could they be incorporated sensibly in the game?

Anyway, I'm gonna follow this with interest!

When Phonics was telling me about his idea for head agent titles, I initially said I liked the idea but worried that we'd have a game where most players had a title. It took only a few moments to wonder whether that would really be a problem or not. As long as most of them are still fun without being too taxing on their players (commissioner roles seem the worst for this, but they can be switched to new players), it could work and, as you say, would be a change from previous games, maybe a good one. Playerbase is tricky. By the midgame when our faction is fair sized I was thinking 10+ players. Most players would would then have more than a voting role.

From what little I know of Japan Samurai were very important, and not just in the military, tending to fill out a wide range of administrative roles. Perhaps the players have influence with these rank and file samurai, making them hard to ignore as advisors. If anyone has more knowledge of Japanese culture during the period could they correct me? The meetings each ten turns and voting have long been the staple of the rpgs here (it's even in the definition for the games stickied here) so this is a subject I'm very interested in. Doing away with a voting system or a big rehaul would be the biggest change (for good or ill) we could make compared to the other games.

[phonicsmonkey]

There are ways we could roleplay a voting system that would make it a representation of something other than actual voting.

To extend the idea that Zim suggests, perhaps the vote by players simply represents the 'weight of opinion' of notable persons in the faction.

Maybe, if this is the case, we make votes non-binding, in the sense that opinion could be ignored by the active party (whoever that happens to be). That could have considerable consequences.

On the topic of consequences I was also thinking about a way to cater for in-game 'disobedience'. For example, say the Commissioner for Finance instructs the Head Metsuke to send an agent to accompany a particular army and instead the Head Metsuke does something different.

He has disobeyed an order, something that happens in real life all the time. It'd be great to make it possible for this to happen in the game, within a framework that caters for it so we aren't all in a grey rules area all the time.

What if it's possible to disobey an order but the commanding officer can they decide to censure you? This would give players freedom to engage in skulduggery while knowing there is a potential cost to their action.

The proposed censure could be voted on and if passed a penalty could be applied according to a scale which is appropriate to the offence. Penalties could include fines (if there is personal property), loss of title or lands, temporary imprisonment (so the avatar is out of the game for a short period) or even death.

Making it an interesting dilemma for the player as to whether to disobey and also presenting the commander with a dilemma as to whether to press for censure. All creating lovely IC conflict and politicking within a framework that guides players' decisionmaking.

[Zim]

Cool idea. Would censure votes be confined to the major voting each ten turns or occur right away?

I may have missed it in the posts thus far, have we discussed who would be giving orders to head agent. Daimyo, certain commissioners (warfare for ninjas, Finance or development for Metsuke, Monks are independent, something like that)? Would there be a limit to how many orders could be given in a term, and the head agents can otherwise direct resources as they see fit? What happens if you try to censure and fail?

Starting when I get off work next morning (I work a graveyard shift) I'll start working on a very rough draft of the rules utilyzing the suggestions given so far. While it's not the same as actually playing the game, seeing everything together in a rules set might help us imagine how it will all work in game, and give a base for further additions and changes, as well as helping us see if we start to get feature heavy. Of course, the draft will be mostly for discussion, and nothing will be set in stone just yet.

[phonicsmonkey]

Cool idea. Would censure votes be confined to the major voting each ten turns or occur right away?

Right away.

I may have missed it in the posts thus far, have we discussed who would be giving orders to head agent.

Above I suggested:

The Head Ninja (call him Shinobi?) could report directly to the Daimyo who would have the power to direct all ninja activities for a given turn. If no specific orders are given by the Daimyo (and 'take no action' is an order) then the Head Ninja has discretion. The other ninjas do what the Head Ninja tells them unless there are no orders in which case they can do as they please (perhaps with restrictions around action against clans which are not enemies).

The Head Metsuke could report to the Commissioner for Finance who would have the power to direct which cities metsuke are to oversee (except in the case of no orders etc.). Except in wartime when the Commissioner for Warfare gets to appeal to the Daimyo for the release of specific metsuke to travel with armies or apprehend enemy agents. They would then be his to control until the Commissioner for Finance (or Head Metsuke) successfully appeals to the Daimyo for their release back to oversee towns.

I'm thinking the Monks could be an independent force and report to no-one (except the Head Monk).

Would there be a limit to how many orders could be given in a term, and the head agents can otherwise direct resources as they see fit?

Not sure...perhaps it should be less formal than that. After all, particularly in wartime the situation is likely to be fluid and we want the Daimyo (for example) to be able to make turn-by-turn decisions on who to assassinate, sabotage etc. If he misses the boat and the Head Ninja takes the turn first then the Head Ninja has discretion. Of course the HN should be looking for his orders but he may not always want to...

A loose structure here might reap benefits in terms of IC conflict!

What happens if you try to censure and fail?

Perhaps you lose influence for a time? proportional to the level of censure you tried to apply?

[deguerra]

Some nice ideas.

Doing away with a voting system or a big rehaul would be the biggest change (for good or ill) we could make compared to the other games.

An interesting thought. I'm tempted to say that 'roles' are already powerful enough without removing votes altogether. That said, I like the idea of votes being informal and non-binding.

None of you so far have mentioned player structure (in terms of houses or families or whatever we called them). While ironically it almost works best historically with STW2, I wouldn't mind giving the game a try without the usual strict hierarchy and associated bonuses. It would free of inter-player diplomacy to be more varied and less rigid. And it would mean that a smaller playerbase or dwindling numbers (IMO the bane of all our RPGs) would be less of an issue.

I'd still be up for making Mon though

[Arjos]

For the little I know about Sengoku Jidai Japan, the Daimyo held war councils where every general could and had to make known his view regarding strategy, but the final say was the Daimyo's...
So orders where issued according to his plan, influenced or not by his generals, and he could take control or choose a "delegate"...
Same with agents, with the head/s of each commission be given free hand or directives...
Influence points is a very good idea, could determine if one gets pardoned, trusted or forced to commit seppuku :D

[Kagemusha]

I would definetely be interested in this.

[Nigel]

For the little I know about Sengoku Jidai Japan, the Daimyo held war councils where every general could and had to make known his view regarding strategy, but the final say was the Daimyo's...

That is my understanding, too.
With that, we could still have votes, but they are non-binding and the Daimyo makes the final decision in the end. Votes would in that case be like the Daimyo sitting in front of his council and saying: "Gentlemen, we have this problem to solve. Suggestions!"


Here is another though about controlling the navy.
At some point I thought that the CoFinance will have very little to do (just setting taxes to the maximum possible and exemptimg those cities which are about to revolt is a bit of a no-brainer, really), so perhaps he could be given control of the trade ships, or the whole Navy, or the decision of whether the CoF or CoW controls the navy is left to be made by the Daimyo later in the game and the two can bicker and rival each other for that additional power, if they want to.


As for difficulty, keep in mind that overall we will be much less efficient than if a single player was playing agianst the AI. I would suggest using either Normal or Hard. We do want to have the time to work on our careers and not just fight for survival all the time.

[Ituralde]

None of you so far have mentioned player structure (in terms of houses or families or whatever we called them). While ironically it almost works best historically with STW2, I wouldn't mind giving the game a try without the usual strict hierarchy and associated bonuses. It would free of inter-player diplomacy to be more varied and less rigid. And it would mean that a smaller playerbase or dwindling numbers (IMO the bane of all our RPGs) would be less of an issue.

I agree that the feudal chain that was introduced in LotR would not have to apply to this game. All players would belong to the same clan without further subdivisions. The abilities would depend on whether you embody an agent or a general and wheter you have one of the nine major roles. Aside from that allegiances, and alliances are free to shift for whatever purpose that is required. It would be a much smaller and focussed experience.

[TheLastDays]

I had a very crazy idea: I don't have enough knowledge about historical Japan to say how accurate that would be but how about the following:

1) Every player represents the head of a "family" inside the clan. They'd be noble families and thus controlling the Samurai of the clan. Influence could then be used on a biased vote but the Daimyo doesn't necessarily follow the results of the vote. Influence also controls Samurai though, so for a certain amount of influence a family would control a certain amount of samurai units (maybe they would choose what kind of Samurai units). They can directly choose to send their Samurai on campaign and support the current goals or withhold that support. Control on the battlefield would still be up to the general in charge of the army stack but the family head decides if his Samurai will fight at all, similar to what was proposed about the Head Monk and monk units.

2) I also support that going for the Head Monk and monk units and maybe the Head Ninja for Kisho units, although they are hardly ever used anyway.

3) This would give the Daimyo direct control over the Ashigaru units only, making the influence of the other players much more tangible in the campaign. It would also effectively limit our access to special/samurai units, giving us an overall limit and forcing us to rely on Ashigaru as well, maybe the Daimyo will even rather rely on Ashigaru in some situations, instead of giving his subordinates too much power.

4) Not sure what to do with the Agent players though. Maybe they could be heads of families as well and just in control of their current agent or we find something else to involve them some more. The Head Monk would work well with the control of monk units but what if we decide to convert to christianity? We could also go ahead and just have one player as head agent for each category and have him control all his agents.

Oh, also I'm very interested in joining this

[Arjos]

I like the idea about each ingame general as a family leader, which is historically correct, but I'd say all and even the Daimyo should've access to both ashigaru and samurai recruits...
As for the metsuke/ninja, their head could represent a lesser figure, but capable to recruit ashigaru and maybe special units; afterall these individuals had a koku salary given by the clan...
The monk is all set with sōhei units...

[TheLastDays]

Well the monk units only come into play as long as there is no conversion. Also, who'd be in charge for naval warfare.

What I forgot is, yes, of course the Daimyo would have his own amount of samurai units as well, just limited, just like the other family heads and I like the idea that this will limit the overall amount of samurai the clan will be able to field.

Also, any ideas as of yet, what difficulties to use and which clan to play? Some of the ingame mechanics should probably represent the clan, like someone already mentioned, the spiritual class would hold a lot of influence in the Uesugi clan while the Takeda would favor a skilled cavalry commander, etc.

[Arjos]

If the Daimyo turns christian, we could even rp the clan splitting and maybe even killing the Daimyo :D
Otherwise instead of monks we'll have missionaries, and they could administer trade deals with europe, and with more influence maybe some admiral from the continent to oversee the Nanban ships...
For naval warfare, we'll need an ingame general (I had a general fighting only on ships in a campaign and he gained pirate/admiral retainers was fun ^^)

As for which clan I have no preferences, but imo we should pick something like the Hojo, Takeda, Mori or Shimazu: a clan with a lot of brothers and sons, since generals aren't as many as previous TW games...
Difficulty anything beside legendary, because we'll definately need the manual savegame feature :P