
Originally Posted by
econ21
Hi Bootsiuv,
On the succession game, I think the key things are ownership and persistence. I think a game works best when one person "owns" the game and has final authority as gamesmaster, then uses that ability to keep the show going. What kills games is that the person who is supposed to do something - typically the King in simple games - just disappears. The others politely sit around for weeks waiting for them and the game slowly dies. In one of the earliest MTW PBMs, Kukrikhan required Kings to post every two days - even if just a holding message "I am busy with RL" - or forfeit their turn. Something equivalent to that is essential and what in practice it means is that the gamesmaster - you, in this case - has to keep checking on the game on a daily basis, navigating it through whatever difficult waters it encounters. Assuming authority as gamesmaster is something you need to do at the start - draft the rules and make sure you are happy with them. It is good to consult widely, but ultimately it is best to have a single coherent vision for the game rather than give power to an informal committee.
Beyond the gamesmaster, the other thing you need is a cadre of committed players. If you are doing a Will of the Senate type game, ultimately you want between a dozen and twenty. A simple succession game, you want half a dozen or more at the start (more will come later, but there is no hurry). There will inevitably be a lot of turnover. Some will drop out, energetic and thrusting newcomers will arrive. If you are assigning players avatars, then you have to try to make sure they go to the active ones. This may mean reassigning avatars away from no-shows and making sure the most active players are rewarded with their own avatars. It can be hard to know who should get the first avatars, although looking at people's participation in other PBMs or TW activities might give you a clue as to who is going to last and who is just passing through. Once the game gets going, you will probably have more players than avatars at the start so you could assign them to the players who are the more active in role-playing. A first come, first served policy is ok with a traditional succession game (provided you quickly skip over any no-shows) but I would not necessarily use it when assigning avatars.
Some other thoughts:
- delegating battles to the player commanding the generals works really well - logistically easy and keeps the participants much more involved.
- delegating moves, finances etc to governors or army commandment is very problematic and to be honest I would try to avoid it. Too slow in RL and TW is just not set up to easily provide the province or army level information you need.
- voting on policies and electing leaders works really well, as does having a Parliament style thread for in character debates.
- battle reports are a must IMO and having a story thread might be rewarding
- we introduced a rule whereby players can change the rules when they have a 2/3 majority; that is quite a nice safety valve for players who disagree OOC with the gamesmaster and also allows for in character constitutional reform.
- 10 turn stints as the "King" are ample; longer than that and things start to drag for everyone.
On moderating powers, I don't think they are needed to run a PBM. The only ones I use is to lock full threads and sticky some key ones, but neither is essential. The key stuff you need to do - start new threads, start polls, upload saves and screenshots etc - you can already do as a member. If your game becomes a forum institution - lasting months - then maybe the EB team would be willing to give you moderator powers. (I think the Org pretty much lets them manage their own sub-forums).
Let me know if you have any more questions and all the best with your PBM.
cheers
econ
Bookmarks