Ok, here's a little question about something that popped up in my head and that's threatening to eat time if I don't let it crystallize bit:

What is a group of players controlled a group of characters (1-on-1 mapping not neccesarily required), and instead of these characters having individual hitpoints, or life or death, what if they could only life or die as a group?

For instance, a group of highly powerful sorcerers that have made some kind of communcal liche-spell. Nothing's powerful enough to kill them individually (effectively giving them infinite 'hit points') - the only way to stop them is to dispell the spell - killing the whole group. A sci-fi explanation might be the 'liquid' Terminators out of Terminator 2+.

Has this been done before?

If yes, links would be appreciated. If not, I'm wondering what kind of game-play this gimmick would support best. The group needs a goal, obviously, and something challenging. A strong reason to cooperate is presumed (and whatever is keeping them alive might need to be renewed periodically). Players could explore character relationships, but a gamist slug-fest between such tied groups could also be fun. Individual goals would of course still be possible - they just wouldn't be life-or-death related.

Thoughts?

NO, I never read before, suchas an idea.

But.. I think it colt be the initial plot of some really interesting adventure.

Especially if the PCs have very different target. i.e. maybe one wold like to contrat another.. but also to protect him cos he NEED him alive.

Or... good fro hard politic session... if anybody would menace to break the spell wto pursuit his own scopes...

I've never seen this as a game design before, but a similiar idea about magic is presented in Tom Farland's Runelords series....

Tobias wrote: A strong reason to cooperate is presumed (and whatever is keeping them alive might need to be renewed periodically).

My IGC game, Brotherhood, had essentially this setup. The characters do a powerful ritual that has to be reneved every 24 hours before dwelving into a dungeon to kill a wizard. The ritual allows them, along other things, to resurrect each other relatively easily.

I really like this idea. This idea would work completely differently if all the players had an individual character that was theirs, or if no-one really owned any individual character, and both ways sound really interesting to me.

I'd probably be tempted to push the idea further, to make it so that not only can no-one die unless the group dies, but that nothing can get done unless the group co-operates. In essence, contests would be rolled within the group, with the various current group dynamics forming the factors involved. For example, someone in the group proposes a tactic of sorts, but someone else in the group might disagree, and another person in the group might have hidden feelings for the person who disagreed, so all these things would work as bonuses and penalties for the contested roll which would determine whether or not the group follows the proposed tactic.

Just an idea, but it sounds cool to me.

But I'd definately extend the group focus that prevents individual death to most other areas of the game, really solidifying the importance if the group to these characters. Looking forward to seeing you develop it further.

-Ben

Hi,

I think some of the 'god' games come close to this idea, without exactly meeting the specifications.

By this, I mean games where players take on a the role of a god within a specific 'pantheon'. The gods are (by definition in this case) immortal, and can only die if mortals stop believing in them.

The difference in the games I've seen so far, is that individual gods can fall by the wayside in favour of more 'popular' gods.

What if the players were gods competing against an oppposing pantheon (or the coming of the One And Only God). They are in competition with each other because of thier different aspects, but if opposition prevails through superior Belief, they're all gone.

This may not be the game you're looking for - it has been done before in many respects - but I offer it as an example.

Doug

thanks everyone - as some of you can undoubtedly tell, I'm suffering from too many ideas on the brain.

Still, that's a luxury problem.

I'll see where this goes. :)