Civilization roleplaying

[xiombarg]

But, you could certainly take diplomacy mechanics and RP on top of that.  But I don't think that on that basis you could then claim that it is an RPG; right out of the box it simply isnt.

Eh. I could argue that in Diplomacy you roleplay the country itself, advancing its own interests in a pure example of realpolitik. But I think that would be quibbling -- I think we're getting off the subject here. What is or isn't an RPG is a topic we've gone round and round on the Forge before... hell, IIRC we had a merry old time trying to define "game", let alone "RPG"...

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

Arguably, a "character" is any entity with definable priorities, especially if acting toward toward those priorities yields a source of conflict. It strikes me that one group might play Diplomacy very much in this vein, whereas another might not. The distinguishing feature would be whether different countries have differing priorities; if everyone simply has the same one ("win"), then the importance of "character" seems diminished. Just which mode is supported by the text of the rules is a bit dicey, although I'd tend agree with Gareth, I think.

However - Jon, is this Diplomacy issue helping, or is it a sideline? And are there any other questions or concerns you have about this topic? Oh yes, and I recommend checking out any and all posts here at the Forge about The Million Worlds, as well as the Wild Muse website.

Best,
Ron

[quozl]

However - Jon, is this Diplomacy issue helping, or is it a sideline? And are there any other questions or concerns you have about this topic? Oh yes, and I recommend checking out any and all posts here at the Forge about The Million Worlds, as well as the Wild Muse website.

Best,
Ron

I did say it was a can of worms.  It's both a sideline and is helping, paradoxically.  Obviously, Diplomacy doesn't do it for me or that's what I would use so it's a sideline.  But imagine if Diplomacy had more identification with the country and you could do more than backstab other countries to accumulate territory.  You would be roleplaying a country with all the detail that you roleplay a character in more traditional RPGs.

My question is now can we build off of Diplomacy to get to this model or do we need to build off something like Birthright or maybe just start from scratch?  

I'll be taking a look at the links provided so far this afternoon.  Thank you!

[quozl]

Well, checked out the links.  Narrativist Diplomacy looks interesting but doesn't have the detail I'm looking for.  Birthright's Book of Regency (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/DnD_BR.asp) looks great but doesn't have much in rules (which must be in the box set).  From what I saw, The Million Worlds isn't really what I'm looking for but perhaps I'm not seeing the right thread.  There were quite a lot of them.  

So right now, I guess Birthright is closest to what I want out of a Civilization RPG (but I am ordering Universalis so we'll see) but Andrew and others say the rules don't deliver the promise it gives so I await his thread to see what the problems are and if they can be corrected or need to be thrown out entirely.

[Balbinus]

Timeline d20 is a pdf based d20 rpg centred around roleplaying civilisations.

Pop it in a search engine and you should find it.  No idea how good it is though.

How do you roleplay a civilisation?  What is it you actually roleplay?

[quozl]

How do you roleplay a civilisation?  What is it you actually roleplay?

Now this is an excellent question and it pertains o the ultimate RPG question: what is roleplaying?  Let's start on a small scale.  If I'm playing a small military unit of 10 people, can I be roleplaying?  What is it that I actually roleplay?  Everything that unit of 10 people do.  Now that might take 10 times as long as roleplaying only a single person so maybe there is more generalization and we change how times run so maybe I just roleplay the major actions taken by that unit for one day.  Make the unit bigger, such as a  small nation, and maybe you'll expand the time out to one year and generalize further.

[Ron Edwards]

Jon,

You're dodging the question, not answering it. You've begun this thread and therefore must take the helm.

Please give me an example of exactly what you mean by playing a kingdom, a civilization, a nation, or a planet (as stated in your first post).

In fact, let me prime it a bit. Say there are four players and a GM. Never mind "what is role-playing" and all that hoo-wa. I'm playing the kingdom of Myrrik, Joe's playing the kingdom of Hoom, Meghan's playing the fragmented but culturally-united states of Veemira, and Angela's playing the whole coastline of the continent. Insert whatever "attributes," "skills," and equivalent role-playing terms you want.

So - what do you mean? What does play look like? There's no way to help you if we have to keep guessing.

Best,
Ron

[quozl]

Jon,

You're dodging the question, not answering it. You've begun this thread and therefore must take the helm.

I honestly didn't know it was so inexplicable.  It's roleplaying just like any other roleplaying you might do except your character is not just one person, it's a civilization.  For example, when I read The Lord of the Rings, I didn't want to play Aragorn or Frodo.  I wanted to play Rohan or Gondor.  So this has been in my head for about 20 years now and the closest I've come to actually playing it is in a game of Diplomacy but Diplomacy definitely limits your options hence this thread.

I'll try to give you an example of play like you requested.  

Say there are four players and a GM. Never mind "what is role-playing" and all that hoo-wa. I'm playing the kingdom of Myrrik, Joe's playing the kingdom of Hoom, Meghan's playing the fragmented but culturally-united states of Veemira, and Angela's playing the whole coastline of the continent.

O.K., let's say all 4 civilizations have friendly relations, trade routes, etc.  There's been peace in the area for hundreds of years.  They are also friendly with a fifth kingdom, Argen.  Recently, all trade routes to Argen have been closed and there's evidence of military build-up.  Diplomats have been thrown out and none of the players knows what's going on in Argen.  

What do the players do?  Well, they can send out scouting parties or more diplomats or stage some huge event for the king of Argen to come to or maybe send spies or build up their own militaries and figure out how to do without iron, since Argen is the only supplier in the area.  

How do these things get resolved?  I'm not sure.  That's why I'm here asking to see what's been done with this already.  I think this is where the problem is because I think it's obvious what you can do as a civilization.  It's just how do you make the roleplaying mechanics for it?

Does this help?

[Andrew Martin]

O.K., let's say all 4 civilizations have friendly relations, trade routes, etc.  There's been peace in the area for hundreds of years.  They are also friendly with a fifth kingdom, Argen.  Recently, all trade routes to Argen have been closed and there's evidence of military build-up.  Diplomats have been thrown out and none of the players knows what's going on in Argen.  

What do the players do?  Well, they can send out scouting parties or more diplomats or stage some huge event for the king of Argen to come to or maybe send spies or build up their own militaries and figure out how to do without iron, since Argen is the only supplier in the area.  

How do these things get resolved?  I'm not sure.  That's why I'm here asking to see what's been done with this already.  I think this is where the problem is because I think it's obvious what you can do as a civilization.  It's just how do you make the roleplaying mechanics for it?

The Birthright game doesn't handle playing like that, but something like that can happen. For the above example, the four players are roleplaying the rulers of the four countries, and it's the rulers that get concerned over the events happening in Argen, choosing to send spies, build up their military, or figuring out what else to do. The ruler (or perhaps their advisors) is the brain commanding or ordering the resources of the realm.

[quozl]

The ruler (or perhaps their advisors) is the brain commanding or ordering the resources of the realm.

That is a great way to introduce yourself to Civilization Roleplaying.  Have everyone roleplay a leader of a group.  The first (and only) time I did anything approaching this was a freeform thing where we all played mob bosses.

[Andrew Martin]

I still haven't thought of a suitable name for a civilization/realm RPG yet. Names I've got so far include: Divine Right, Kings & Queens, Realms & Rulers, and Kingdoms. None grab me yet. Any suggestions?

I've also been discussing Birthright with two fellow GMs and we've decided to run a game in early 2003 on weekends. We've all decided to not use the BirthRight rules and to use something else. Unfortunately we haven't designed a system! But at least two players (me and another GM) have written up free form character/ruler and realm description for a classical fantasy setting (elves, dwarves and medieval humans), along with some situations that demands answering by the rulers of each realm. I'd like to have a system to support the play we want.

At the moment, we've got freeform, written character, realm and surroundings description. I don't want to account for every gold piece, yet I would like to be able to manouver armies from one realm into another, and fight battles. I'd also like to be diplomatic and form relationships with other realms that border my ruler's own, either through trade or marriages, etc. I'd like to have bands of adventurers or spies roaming the lands and causing interference and what not. And I'd like to have control over the dynasty over the years. In single game session, I'd like to have several years pass, perhaps a decade at a time? And where there's important things going on, drop down into roleplaying the PC rulers and associates.

What do you think, Jon? Is this something like what you've envisioned? How does it differ?

[Andrew Martin]

I still haven't thought of a suitable name for a civilization/realm RPG yet. Names I've got so far include: Divine Right, Kings & Queens, Realms & Rulers, and Kingdoms. None grab me yet. Any suggestions?

I've thought of a name: Blood & Politics.

[quozl]

What do you think, Jon? Is this something like what you've envisioned? How does it differ?

That sounds great!  Please let me see everything you write up for this.  That's exactly the kind of stuff I want.

[Michael S. Miller]

Found this several years ago:

http://www.hut.fi/~vesanto/link.elyria/ihrules/interactive.html

It's basically Last Unicorn's ARIA (which you should really track down if your interested in playing nations) and converts it to FUDGE. IIRC, it's linked with a PBeM at pheonyx.net that was a touch too abstract for my tastes (and the fact that I'm not fond of PBeMs). Seems to have a decent-length play history, but I don't know if it's still active.

I have a notebook somewhere of how I was going to rewrite ARIA to be what I thought it was going to be after I read a review of it in Dragon many a year ago. When I got it, it was disappointing. Too much detail in the wrong areas, I thought. Anyway, if I get some time, I'll see if I can find the notebooks and post my 5-year-old thoughts on the subject. I've been thinking of pulling it out anyway when I'm done with Incarnadine.

[Mike Holmes]

Jon,

You're example sounds like a mix of role-playing and wargaming. This is actually older than RPGs. The National Security Decision Making demo is a good example. Military and diplomaic wargames have existed for quite a long while. I've created several games like this, personally. Proper design all comes down to one thing.

In design, people often forget to determine what the player represents. It can be one thing, or many things, but until you determine that, you will flounder. For example, you could say that in addition to the "will of the nation" that you were able to "drill down" and play out the actions of single individuals. Hence for most of play, perhaps you are the king. Or you could just play the king. Lot's of different perspectives. All capable of acomplishing what you want.

Again, to use the NSDM as an example, a player's "position" in the game is described by the people who run it as a "Cone of influence that supports the title of the position". Thus if you are the Secretary of State, you are not just the character in question, but you also represent all the people who support that position (clerks, aides, whatever). If you are the President of Guatemala, you represent all the governmental resources that this particular state has to offer. If you are the media, you represent all major forms of media, and everybody from reporters to people who actually print the newspaper.

So, decide what you want the players to represent, and then you're off and running. Are they Kings and Queens, who have the support of their country only so long as they mainatin their power structure? Or does the player represent the entire will of the people of the country? In the first case, the player is out of the game if the leader they represent is killed, while in the second example, if the leader is killed, another one comes to power, and the player continues as the country. See the distinction? In Aria, you represent the nation on one scale, and then "drill down" to another scale to examine the actions of certain members of the nation.

Does that help?  

Or have you made this choice, and you're just looking for a particular set of mechanics. Once you've let us know what the player represents, I feel certain that I can point you at a game that does what you want. There are lots of them.

Mike