I've been thinking about making a Dwarf Fortress-like minigame for a game I'm going to run soon. They players "get to" decide how the fortress should be made, and maybe the dwarves don't get sober and go into tantrum spirals. So, I opened up this thread hoping you guys had some ideas. Like, any. Instead it's just sticking your cocks into someone else's ear. Do better.
Back on topic. I've looked into modular structure building like 1e D&D, Cathedral (the board game), and a couple others. That's not the way to go. You end up with a learning curve where at the top you've determined that it's not a set of building blocks, but instead just a puzzle without any reference. Make it the right way or you've done it wrong, and if you're new to it, you will do it wrong while thinking that you're being creative.
Narrative tools actually seem like they are more valuable. Something that guides the user in describing aspects of the structure, not with statistics, but with internally-consistent notes. You can bog yourself down in design work all day with too many rules, and I think in the end most of it will be unused. Instead I think it'd be more useful to have something that shows you what elements are necessary, other things that should be included or are optional, and some guide on how to give the structure a purpose. "How do I draw a map with rooms, hallways and doors?" is really something that can be answered in a page, at most. "What should the map I draw include to make it seem like a realistic place?" is something worthy of actual instruction, and something that D&D has never gotten right. I mean, if you want to just put the combat rules through their paces and get XP based on monster kills alone, anyone can fill an 8.5x11 piece of graph paper and roll the players through it. That's how D&D gets played, not because it's fun or good, but because it doesn't require any learning to get things started. How to make a place that looks like an actual abode that supports lives of creatures that matter to someone is far more difficult.
Why Don't We Have a Thread About Stronghold Building?
Moderator: Moderators
-
Lago PARANOIA
- Invincible Overlord
- Posts: 10555
- Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am
This got lost in the dick waving, but I only partially disagree.Bihlbo wrote: Back on topic. I've looked into modular structure building like 1e D&D, Cathedral (the board game), and a couple others. That's not the way to go. You end up with a learning curve where at the top you've determined that it's not a set of building blocks, but instead just a puzzle without any reference. Make it the right way or you've done it wrong, and if you're new to it, you will do it wrong while thinking that you're being creative.
1.) From my very limited experience on this topic, people like modular building. Human beings LIKE putting underside backlights and spoilers and spinners on a car and even if you personally find it gaudy you still have to admit that it speaks to a human need to 'trick out' what you already have. Having prepackaged buildings like in Dark Cloud is probably less fun than, say, The Sims.
2.) For a cooperative roleplaying game modular building is the only way to go. Some people will just want a harem-bedroom with running water while others will want a miniature university for wizards. If you have discrete packaged units you're either going to have players with five separate strongholds or you're going to have an argument.
3.) As far as there not being a 'right' and a 'wrong' way to build strongholds... I only partially disagree with this.
On one hand, people don't like having to give up shrines and underground bazaars and orphanages for guard towers and catapults and grain stores. On the other hand people also want to engage in Magical Tea Party/wargamers with their strongholds where they wave their dick at all comers and watch them flail and siege out in the cold while they enjoy heated tea in the throne room.
If I was going to do a stronghold system I'd make it two-tiered like Skies of Arcadia. You have a pool of resources for combat additions (and by which I mean for the sieging/tax collection/prestige minigames) and a pool of resources for non-combat resources like bedrooms and dining halls and such.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.