Strategic Fantasy Crossover RPG

[Setzer]

We should have character traits and personal retinues, like in Rome Total War. A limited number to start with, but more as the game progresses.

[The Romulan Republic]

This is a nice idea. I'm in something similar on a different forum. One minor nitpick to the OP though. The Cauldron-Born are not a faction, they are a single type of unit in Annuvin's army, and would probably be utterly incapable of being an independent faction due to their inherent nature.

[Setzer]

So we take yet another page from the Total war series and have faction specific units.

[The Romulan Republic]

So we take yet another page from the Total war series and have faction specific units.

Seems resonable. some units only work within a specific faction. Though in the aforementioned example of the Cauldron Born, its not that another faction couldn't have them so much as that they couldn't be a faction on their own.

In their universe of origin, whoever had the Black Cauldron was the only one who could make them. Other than that, their largely generic mindless zombies.

[Darkevilme]

Should I use dice rolling, readers?

No. Things here have always used the point values of armies as an approximation for when two armies clash, the actual battles are usually just rped out and the actual mechanism is only brought out if there's contention and doesnt need dicerolls as those also can cause contention.
And I think the character/city traits should be pure rp so as not to overcomplicate the game.

We already have or will have:

Territory, production and upkeep. (how many resource points gained per section of territory and how much goes to feeding existing troops.
Point buy armies.
Basic combat rules for last resort resolution where rp fails to sort out a conflict between players.
An epic magic system of some kind.

And on top of that you wish to place a hundred modifiers for empires and people?

So that we can at least get one of the things we have already out of the way.
My proposal for magic is you buy a certain amount of casting power for epic spells using army points. Casting points can be expended in a given battle to weigh it in your favour, if the combat system is in effect the magic does this by creating 'virtual troops' which either add to attack or take casualties in place of your usual troops soaking up attacks. The ratio of casting power to virtual troops is something i cant decide and that we need more input on. virtual troops last one battle.

Please note virtual troops is just a handy way of putting a mechanism in place when needed the actual spell could be a killing fog or meteor shower.

For buying casting power i'm thinking either we can have it as you buy casting power with production but once used it must be rebought (mana essentially) or where casting power regenerates each turn like i said earlier. The snag is that if people can buy more casting power as turns go on we might end up with someone able to annihilate someones entire army each turn cause they've accumulated so much. So a cap of some sort might be needed.

[Norseman]

Maybe some sort of mandatory point system this time around, so we can know exactly how powerful each nation is and so forth. Also faction specific units would work wonders too, I'd like something sneaky and spyish.

[The Romulan Republic]

Maybe some sort of mandatory point system this time around, so we can know exactly how powerful each nation is and so forth. Also faction specific units would work wonders too, I'd like something sneaky and spyish.

I'm leery of anything that makes it overly complicated. It's a matter of allowing players some freedom to rp their own battles. Of course, weather that works depends on the maturity of the posters in question, but I think that's true regardless.

[Darkevilme]

There should be freedom and there will be. But at the same time it should be clear that 800 points of soldiers has an advantage over 500 points of soldiers. The 500 can still win through rp and good tactics, the basic combat rules only come out for dealing with when players cant agree on how the battle should go.

A quick way to guage the strength of armies and nations isnt too much to ask surely and point values allow that.
Though on the point values.

Is everyones territories the same size?
If we are city state size i think we should use a fraction of the world map just so we can reach eachother.
If we are the same size does that means everyone gets the same amount of army points?

I'll also say that with nonhuman races and exotic groups there's going to be some sides that are mostly faction specific units.

[The Romulan Republic]

Something else to consider is that certain types of armies should do far better against certain other types. For example, if I'm going up against 20,000 charging knights with 5,000 skilled long bowmen and disciplined pike men, I would expect to win barring some very unusual event.

[Setzer]

Yes, the old rock paper scissors setup. That's why RPing battles makes sense.

As for size, I have a perfect map of Europe:

There's enough room here for us to RP fairly big nations and still have lands left to fight over. And I call dibs on Thrace and Macedonia. There shouldn't be any problems saving and editing the map, but if anyone has trouble, they can just tell me what their borders are, and I can edit a master copy.

[Darkevilme]

Well the goof who has knights an only knights should of thought things through before sending forth said army. We could create point specializations for units (ranged attack, fast attack, counter fast attack, counter ranged attack. etc) but that would complicate the game further and i dunno if people want it for something that will be dealt with through rp most of the time anyway. And it will be dealt with in rp.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well the goof who has knights an only knights should of thought things through before sending forth said army. We could create point specializations for units (ranged attack, fast attack, counter fast attack, counter ranged attack. etc) but that would complicate the game further and i dunno if people want it for something that will be dealt with through rp most of the time anyway. And it will be dealt with in rp.

I agree. My whole point is that its impossible for a system to handle all the possible details without becoming unwieldy, so beyond the very basic ground rules, in my experience through many rps, it works better to keep things as much in the rp as possible.

[Setzer]

yeah, keep things as simple as possible. It's not like we can gush over technology like we can in a more modern setting, so the advantages one can stack up over an opponent should be simpler. I do think there should be some sort of value assigned to things like training, morale, etc.

[Darkevilme]

Setzer. I really think those kind of distinctions should be kept rp side not rules and number side. If you want to list your units confidence and training next to each entry then okay but really i want the rules to be something quick light and easy to use not something that takes into account all variables and thusly requires all these variables of players writing their OOBs, which will likely scare them, or at least the heavily roleplay inclined, off even if they never use those variables.

Although i suppose its a question of intent, are we making a creative writing and rp exercise like the other STGODS or are we making a wargame with hundreds of numbers and a complex combat system that takes into account morale, training, weapon specialization and the colour of the cabbage the soldiers had for lunch?

The Romulan Republic. Just to be clear on where you stand here you're okay with point values as a quick way to guage an army or nations strength and resolve contentious battles yes?

[Zor]

I prefer having a system on these lines, with each person being able to specialise in (based on postcount) a few schools of Magic, with three tiers of Magic Users in certain types of monster (Naga being be the main magic-users). You yourself automatically counting at the top level of one school. They are as such...

Necromancery-Raising the Dead to fight for you and a few other things...
Tier-I Necromacers can raise a few (two or three) of Shambling Zombies from recently fallen corpses to attack with teeth and hands (and die if the Necromancer controlling them dies) to fight for them and can give the weapon they carry a poison spell, making Melee weaponry form toxic chemicals on them while weilding them.
Tier-2 Necromacers can raise about 5-10 Zombies that actually carry weapons into battle and can run run, give a couple of weapons poison buffs that last for a day as well as being able to shoot short range blasts which can be defeated by most armor, but cause deadly toxins to form in their body as well as high resistance to toxins
Tier-3 Necromancers can raiser up to 20-30 Zombies like those tier-2 Necromancers can, or the creation of two or three Ursiod level Zombies or Necronic Guard, which are Elite Undead Warriors with super-human speed and strength combined with enhanced armor and poisonous weaponry as well as being able to summon toxic miasmic clouds (effectively Chlorine Gas) against Enemies, or use all your forces to bring back an recently fallen beings back to life completely, killing all summoned critters under their control and leaving the user exausted and unable to magic for a couple of Hours.

Psionics-Basically think Force Powers, with limited Yuri style mind control at the end (one high end Psionic can dedicate all his powers into running someone like a puppet)

Geomancery-A little Earthbending mixed with nature control, able to grow plants, change geography and animating trees to act as soldiers and creating Golems.

Runic-Gives objects improved charicteristics via inscribing runes onto them, from sharper and more durable blades to weapons which deliver sugnifigant electrical shocks when they strike, homing spears and armor which offers immunity to enemy spells.

[Darkevilme]

Forgive me Zor but....why is this a good idea? It seems to needlessly complicate things when so far we've got magic already able to do three things.

1. Augment the capability of units, by making them more expensive.
2. Longterm summon/create/raise creatures as extra units, by buying them using production points.
3. Short term summon/raise creatures as extra units for one battle, Harm armies, protect armies and enhance armies each for one battle, as epic magic using the casting points system.

Tiered magic just seems to make things more complicated for no good reason.

Plus i reckon someone will want to come with a low or no magic nation.

[PeZook]

Question: What's to stop people from simply developing gunpowder weapons?

[Darkevilme]

Nothing. You just add expensive musket wielding dudes to your army who are more potent but more expensive than the spear and bow wielding dudes you already have. I believe i already covered this, better tech > better soldiers > More expensive soldiers > Fewer soldiers.

[PeZook]

Nothing. You just add expensive musket wielding dudes to your army who are more potent but more expensive than the spear and bow wielding dudes you already have. I believe i already covered this, better tech > better soldiers > More expensive soldiers > Fewer soldiers.

That's for the initial army purchase. But then I tell my folks how to mix gunpowder and start experimenting with metallurgy and use technomagic to make flintlocks and rifled barrels and I can have cheap conscripts shooting boomsticks relatively quickly

[Darkevilme]

Nothing. You just add expensive musket wielding dudes to your army who are more potent but more expensive than the spear and bow wielding dudes you already have. I believe i already covered this, better tech > better soldiers > More expensive soldiers > Fewer soldiers.

That's for the initial army purchase. But then I tell my folks how to mix gunpowder and start experimenting with metallurgy and use technomagic to make flintlocks and rifled barrels and I can have cheap conscripts shooting boomsticks relatively quickly

Time to reveal a hypothetical for dealing with production. This like everything else i've said in my extremely chatterbox fashion is open to criticism akin to what i so freely dole out.

The Hypothetical is to steal the system from STGOD 2k8 wholesale and replace the word planet with the word territory or province.

So you distribute a certain amount of production points amidst your provinces to determine how much they're developed/exploited/mineral rich/whatever and give the other people something to try and capture. Each turn (in game month perhaps) you get say ten times the sum of production from the territories you control. Subtract the maintenance bill for your existing army and then what's left can be spent on your gun wielding farmers, but they'll still be high point value/cost units if you want them to be as potent as kickass boomsticks would suggest.

There is no escape from the balancing power of the points system, the points system knows all and sees all.

[The Romulan Republic]

The Romulan Republic. Just to be clear on where you stand here you're okay with point values as a quick way to guage an army or nations strength and resolve contentious battles yes?

Yes I'm ok with it.

[Norseman]

I am thinking Sarmatia would be eastern Ukraine and points east, bounded by the Caucasus mountains. Lots of plains land there, and not many people are likely to take it. However how many points will people be getting?

[SisterMiriamGodwinson]

I think that 25,000 sounds good. 100 commoners per point sounds good for population.

[Norseman]

Will all nations be built equal, or will we give more points to old hands etc?

[SisterMiriamGodwinson]

Uh. Well, I think that all nations should start equal. Yes...