The Will of the Senate - out of character thread III

[econ21]

This thread is for out of character comments, questions and general interactions about the Will of the Senate PBM.

Please only post in the other more specialised threads if you are sure it belongs there. If in doubt, post here.

Thanks!

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

This might be handy :

Last page of posts of previous thread out of character thread II.

[Braden]

The hearing is heating up already! This is interesting, I will wait until one of the lower house members sends me a synopsis of the battle gleened from the save file before attempting to RP any first hand (or even third hand) accounts for the hearing.

Shaping up well though.

OH! and Can someone please officially volunteer to take the role of Marius the Mad?

[Dooz]

The hearing is heating up already!

Woowee, it sure is! What a great way to play out a missing players auto-resolve defeat eh? Funny the way things work out. Shaping up to be intense indeed. The drama, the honor, the family matters. Great stuff!

[Lucjan]

I'll play manius and servius for the hearing. It'll be interesting, manius only willing to speak to his son on the issue being the nut that he is, regardless of everybody else being present in the room.

If that's ok by everybody else.

[Dooz]

I'll play manius and servius for the hearing. It'll be interesting, manius only willing to speak to his son on the issue being the nut that he is, regardless of everybody else being present in the room.

If that's ok by everybody else.

Although I do like the idea, it feels kind of sketchy, considering how our characters are now at odds. Maybe that can be taken advantage of unfairly . But if everyone else is for it, it should be pretty interesting.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

I'm all for it !
Of course, you realize that you will never live it down if you come up with anything less than a totally dramatic epic about the battle

[Lucjan]

I'll put my story out there as Manius, and hopefully it appeals to the what the senators expect, both IC and OOC.

[Braden]

...and mad! don't forget the mad! I'm expecting tales of Flaming Flying Squirrels, water boiling around your feet and quicksand appearing from no-where and swallowing whole cohorts.....



However, Econ21 (I will refrain from using his real name), has PM'd me a decent suggestion but the offer to play Manius by another can't be passed up without consultation.

I am on holiday after today BUT will post each evening - a review if you will of what I have heard during the course of the day.

Obviously, the speed of the trial depends on the speed of the campaign, this needs to be wrapped up by mid-term so we have a short time-table to be honest.

So, I will, at least, play perhaps three independant witnesses (soldier, farmer and perhaps a Centurion).

Who plays Manius will be decided shortly.

[econ21]

OOC :
You have laid your finger on the problem here. No-one knows 'what happened' as the battle was autoresolved. Publius could have been sick, the Gauls might have swum over the river in the night and suprised them, lighting might have struck the legion during the battle, Manius might have lost his wits during the battle and fled leading to a rout, a Star Destroyer might have slown by and blasted the legion with its turbolasers, antyhing really.

I would suggest that all the witnesses make up their own versions of the events that supposedly took place.

The above post was in the trial thread, but let's leave that for in-character stuff.

Here's my idea: there is only one truth. If everyone makes up their own versions, we will be at sea with all sorts of possible contradictions and no way of discerning what really happened.

Instead, I will play Publius Laevinus for the purpose of the trial. Publius knows the truth. I have fought it out in game and got something close enough to the autoresolve result. I have screenshots etc to "prove it". But I will not easily tell the truth for it dishonours me. The trial will have to drag it out of me.

Braden knows the truth out of character, but not in character as the judge. He will decide how many other people should know the truth or at least feed them "parts" that allow them to testify consistent with some of the truth.

I'm seeing this trial as kind of like improvised theatre, where a director (Braden/me) tell actors the motivations of their characters and some parts of the plot, then get them to ad lib parts.

The key characters are yet to be confirmed, but I am proposing:

judge - Braden
Publius - econ21
Manius - Lucjan
defence lawyer - Wonderland
prosecutor - TinCow

If anyone else wants to suggest and volunteer for a part, please do so here.

[Lucjan]

Since you've got screenshots for an occurance of the battle with similar results, might I ask, if the lineup as it is doesn't meet any disagreement, that you send these screenshots to me in a pm or e-mail, my e-mail available in my profile, so that I can put some grain of truth into Manius's mad ravings.

[econ21]

Since you've got screenshots for an occurance of the battle with similar results, might I ask, if the lineup as it is doesn't meet any disagreement, that you send these screenshots to me in a pm or e-mail, my e-mail available in my profile, so that I can put some grain of truth into Manius's mad ravings.

Yes, that's my intention. I will get back to you once I have heard from Braden later tonight.

[flyd]

I'm wondering what has to happen for an eagle to be lost. I know that in RTR it is the equites that have the golden eagle thing in a battle. I also noticed that the unit of equites that was in the autoresolved battle was completely destroyed, i.e. had 0 men at the end. Is that what needs to happen for an eagle to be lost? Did that happen in econ's 'reenactment', did he lose the eagle?

[econ21]

Yes on all accounts, FLYdude. However, IMO, it makes more sense to think of the triarii guarding the eagle, so I will write it like that. (I also lost track of the equites in the battle - I think the last one with the eagle died to friendly fire or something equally anti-climatic).

[econ21]

I think there might be a problem installing the latest version of 4TPY mod over our version of Metro-Naval. I did it and tried to start a new campaign but could not - I kept being bounced back to the "New campaign" screen after selecting a faction.

I suspect the problem is that the 4TPY mod has a descr_strat.txt file that is not compatible with the rest of the metro-naval stuff (for example, it will not have the unwalled cities and will have different naval units). When I overwrote the MN version of the file over the 4TPY one, I was able to start a new campaign.

The descr_strat.txt file is only read at the beginning of a campaign, so this might explain why some of us have been happily loading up savegames with the current installation. But in case anyone gets the urge to start their own campaign, I would recommend using the MN descr_strat.txt, not the 4TPY one. I suspect the other 4TPY files (mainly on vices and virtues)are fine.

If no one refutes the above info, I will modify the FAQ to include it.

[Lucjan]

I was having those problems only until I found a spot with full, unseperated download files for both the M&N and 4tpy mods. Thanks in part to Death for the M&N one.

[TinCow]

I will serve in whatever position is required, including a simple jury member if others wish to fill all the roles. If I am forced to serve as prosecution, please ignore my previous in-game statements about defending him.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

I will serve in whatever position is required, including a simple jury member if others wish to fill all the roles. If I am forced to serve as prosecution, please ignore my previous in-game statements about defending him.

That's actually one of your funniest statements in months

Concerning the descr_strat.txt file, I worried about that too, but figured TinCow tested that. Yet I am a engineer and so wisely made backups of all the files affected by 4TPY 1.9.3. So no worries there, for me anyway. I could zip them together and upload them at the FileSpace if desired.
I think you only need to replace the new descr_strat.txt with the one generated by the M&N mod. Am I correct, econ21 ?

[econ21]

I think you only need to replace the new descr_strat.txt with the one generated by the M&N mod. Am I correct, econ21 ?

Yes, that's what I've done and it works. But I confess whenever I start a new SP campaign game, I find it overwhelming and quit. I can only really play TW in PBMs now!

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

I have the same problem, but I manage a serious effort at a campaign now and then, usually with a weak nation like the Germans.

Econ21, will you upload the M&N descr_strat.txt file and update the FAQ and post a message to all our lower house senators regarding this potential problem and how to fix it ? It's a bit of a hassle, but on the other hand, 4TPY 1.9.3 is very desirable if it fixes the problems we've been having.

[Braden]

Popped in. Lots (actually tons) to read through. So will post tomorrow guys.

Briefly though - Econ21, your ideas great and the support I'm getting from you and others is perfect for the next segment i.e. Personal Testimony

Ha! *Watch out!*

[Avicenna]

I'm sure TinCow or someone else already knows this, but just in case... for RP sake, whoever is the Praetor or judge for this can have the trait attributed to him manually. I just discovered it by accident when I wanted to give a character a general trait but I have him the Praetor one, and it's exactly what's needed for this case.

A general is a praetor

[Dooz]

A general is a praetor

Yeah, that's what I thought when I put the Praetor trait instead of General, and instead of the military rank, the character got the office of Praetor, and the description is judge and exactly what we need for this trial.

[econ21]

On the trial - it seems TinCow is not happy to be prosecutor and Wonderland is not happy to be defence lawyer. Maybe a rethink is in order?

We have three options:

(1) try to force TinCow and Wonderland into roles their characters are uneasy with (in reality, perhaps especially in matters of law, we sometimes get in that position); but if the players won't do it, they won't do it. One way to square the circle would be to have Wonderland defend only Publius. Maybe only he is on trial - Manius was not in command - or maybe Manius is too crazy to get a defence lawyer.
(2) find another prosecutor. The problem is we have no volunteers and in some ways this is the most demanding part (perhaps after Manius ). Ideally, I would like someone who does not know the truth (ie not me nor Braden) to tear into the role, being very aggressive with witnesses - a kind of witchhunter type.
(3) Have Braden's character fulfill the joint role of judge and prosecutor - a kind of inquisitor, if you like; a representative of the state. I have a vague notion that judges under the Continental system are more proactive. That would leave TinCow free to play out the defence role he volunteered for and Wonderland free to defend the guilt of Publius and condemn Manius. The problem is that Braden as prosecutor could not be naive about the truth, in real life he knows the story, but then I guess it would easier for the story to emerge in a dramatic way.

What option do people (especially Wonderland, Braden and TinCow) prefer? It might be best if they did not post in character until this is decided, so we don't dig ourselves deeper into a hole.
Any volunteers to be prosecutor under option (2), please post now.

If we have a volunteer, option (2) would seem to be best but I'm not optimistic and don't want to wait - we probably have to work with what we have got.

My preference is for option (1) but am happy to go with option (3) if others involved have strong preferences for it.

[Death the destroyer of worlds]

I favour option (2).
Lucjan can be both Manius and his defence lawyer.
TinCow can be prosecutor.
I would like to see a prosecutor who is ignorant of the real story.

[econ21]

I favour option (2).

TinCow can be prosecutor.
I would like to see a prosecutor who is ignorant of the real story.

I think that's option (1) - option (2) is for someone else to be prosecutor (Tincow is option 1 or Braden is option 3).

I agree, I think Tincow would be ideal as the prosecutor - he can bring the right degree of rigour and venom to the part. It is against Verginius's family ties and his Senate statement offering to be the defence, but that might add to the poignancy (I already have drafted an "et tu, Brutus?" statement from Publius.)

Lucjan can be both Manius and his defence lawyer.

Wonderland has just PMd me suggesting this. I think it is fine, although I do think it would be fun to hear Manius speak directly in the trial as well. I'm visualising a kind of Caligula/Hannibal Lector kind of figure - not a jibbering wreck, but a charmer who is definitely not quite right.

[Lucjan]

I'll play Manius and Servius, Servius will be the defence for Manius only.

[TinCow]

That's fine, I'll serve as prosecutor.

[Mount Suribachi]

Calling all Rome fans!

Check it out, starting tonight BBC4 are doing a "Visions of Rome" season. They're showing every episode of I Claudius at 9pm on consecutive nights!

They're following that every night with Up Pompeii, and a few other documentaries thrown in as well!

[monty burns] excellent [/monty burns]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/cinema/...claudius.shtml

Starts tonight at 8 with Togas on TV

[econ21]

They're showing every episode of I Claudius at 9pm on consecutive nights!

Thanks for the heads-up - I remember watching that as a kid; it made a big impression. It made the recent "Rome" series look tame by comparison. I guess because the Emperors were able to get away with so much compared to the men of the Republic. I wonder how it fares by today's standards?