TWS2 RPG Discussion Thread

**Nigel** · 09-15-2011, 18:51

-Write up some civil war rules

Here are some thoughts about this:

Any player who is unhappy with the daimyo’s rule can become disobedient.
He would then receive a censure which he can accept and carry out – and that’s it.
Or he can choose not to accept it and turn to open rebellion = become a Rebel/Ronin.

The Daimyo can then order his loyal followers to hunt down the Rebel. The Rebel can try to persuade other players to join the rebellion.

Hunting down and apprehending a player would be done by bringing your in-game character into proximity (Area of Effect) of your target and use the following rules:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**TheLastDays** · 09-15-2011, 23:04

Originally Posted by phonicsmonkey

Yeah I'm warming to this idea too provided we can implement it simply. Maybe we can tie the amount of the Samurai pool controlled to the influence level, making influence even more important? Apologies if that was already suggested...

I think that was the idea, yes. Maybe something like 2 samurai units per influence point? Or even only 1. It all depends on how much we want to limit our clan's Samurai pool in general and how much power influence actually brings. I like the idea of having to rely on Ashigaru as well throughout the campaign, it's a shame we can't impose it on the AI as well.

**phonicsmonkey** · 09-16-2011, 00:11

Originally Posted by Nigel

Here are some thoughts about this:

Any player who is unhappy with the daimyo’s rule can become disobedient.
He would then receive a censure which he can accept and carry out – and that’s it.
Or he can choose not to accept it and turn to open rebellion = become a Rebel/Ronin.

The Daimyo can then order his loyal followers to hunt down the Rebel. The Rebel can try to persuade other players to join the rebellion.

Hunting down and apprehending a player would be done by bringing your in-game character into proximity (Area of Effect) of your target and use the following rules:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

So far with censure we have something like this:
- someone disobeys an order from their direct commander
- the commander has a chance to censure or let it slide
- if he chooses to censure, he picks a level and everyone votes on it
- if the vote is passed, the penalty is applied automatically
- if it fails, the commander receives an influence penalty and the disobedient character is immune to any further censures for the same offence

So, with regard to Nigel's suggestion, we could say that this applies to disobedience to anyone except the Daimyo, which would be a special case and dealt with differently. Would there be a vote on a censure levied by the Daimyo or would it simply either be accepted or not (triggering rebellion)? I think the second makes more sense.

Also, for censure in general I think we should put in place a rule to handle the case where the commander decides not to censure. It would be nice if he could retain the option for a time (for example if he wanted to do some behind-the-scenes work to find out the chance of his censure being accepted in the vote), but there should be a time limit on it so that he can't have it hanging over the disobedient character's head for ever and blackmail him.

So, 2 or 3 turns or something?

**Arjos** · 09-16-2011, 07:41

Retaining the option seems something that would encourage spam to me...
And I agree that censure on Daimyo is meaningless, as he's "above the law", only way should be to take up arms...

**phonicsmonkey** · 09-16-2011, 08:20

Originally Posted by Arjos

Retaining the option seems something that would encourage spam to me...

I guess what I'm getting at is sometimes the only people who know that an order has been disobeyed will be the commander and his vassal (not sure if that's the right word). I can imagine a situation where it might take a turn or two for the commander to discover the vassal has been disobedient. Also, I can imagine a situation where he goes "Oh! I've been disobeyed! I really want to stick it to that guy but I'm not sure I have the support. Let me sneak around and see who might back me on this one..."

Both of those situations seem fun to me and so I think you should be able to censure someone for something for up to x turns after the actual act of disobedience. The limit is there to avoid the constant threat of censure for acts committed a long time in the past - this should encourage acts of disobedience, which should be good for the game!

The question then becomes, what is x? 3, 4, 5?

**Nigel** · 09-16-2011, 09:48

Personally I'd go for 4 turns = 1 year.
Once a matter has been covered by snow, let it rest.

It also offers some time for the offender (retainer, subordinate) to talk to his liege and perhaps explain the reasons for his actions, ask forgiveness and offer amends. But at the same time gives a strikt deadline for the commander to decide if he wants to censure or not and not let the matter drag on for ages.

Still, I hope censures will be the exception and not daily business and that we will have our hands so full of work with building our empire that we will have to work together and not spend time fighting each other.

**phonicsmonkey** · 09-16-2011, 09:57

Originally Posted by Nigel

Still, I hope censures will be the exception and not daily business and that we will have our hands so full of work with building our empire that we will have to work together and not spend time fighting each other.

I think we'd like a healthy balance of both!

By the way Nigel, I've been meaning to ask you how the other TWS2 RPG you were in worked out? The one started by emotion_name and hosted offsite?

**Nigel** · 09-16-2011, 13:48

Yes, a healthy balance of both would be it

As for the RPG started by emotion_name, sadly I have to say that one did not go beyond turn 2.
It is not that it hit a technical glitch or conceptual dead end, but rather players just stopped responding. Especially, one key character, who needed to make a decision before we could go on, seemed to turn inactive. Emotion_name even PMed and chatted to him, and "yes, I am still interested in playing and will post something soon". But then he never did. Technically the game is still going, but there has been no activity for almost 4 weeks now.

I believe we are better set up here at the org, as we have a lot of players with a long history of RPGs and Hotseats and I would think that people here tend to stick to what they have started. It may still be good to have some way of making sure that a drop out or non-responding player does not hold up the game for too long.