In this rule set, players control a “hero” that can in turn control a “squad”. Squads are made up of a hero and up to 10 “units”. A hero gives a squad a benefit, such as increased “speed” or “attack value” or some such. Players play for either the 3rd Kingdom/4th Empire or for the 2nd Editia Republic/Monsters.
Battles take place when two squads of opposing factions occupy the same “node”. If two squads are in the same location, both sides roll 3d6 and the side with the lower “value” loses 1 unit, plus 1 additional unit for every 3 points the squad lost by. Battles are determined at 4 pm California time (12 am GST). When a squad is destroyed in a battle, the player’s hero retreats back to their “capitol”. After a squad either retreats from a battle or is completely destroyed, then the opposing squad takes over the location. When battling an opposing player, you can only move into an allied node. Ties are determined by tactics as shown below. You choose a tactic to give to your hero. If both heroes have the same tactic, the defendin side wins a tie.
Brazen beats Defensive. Defensive beats Tactical. Tactical beats Brazen.
Everyday, a squad can move up to 1 node on the “world map”. They can retreat from a battle in this fashion. If a squad moves into a square that is unoccupied and is controlled by the other faction, they can take control of the location, but cannot move anymore squares for that day. Instead of moving, a player can instead reinforce their squad if they are not in a battle. Reinforcing allows a player to gain units to bring their squad’s total up to 10 again.
On Sunday at, 4pm California time (12 am Monday GST), both factions gain 100 units to their pools.
~Hero: The main character under a player’s control. A hero has a special feature that gives a bonus to the hero’s squad.
~Squad: A group of units under control of a hero.
~Units: Used to increase the size of your squad to allow you to fight longer. These are drawn from a pool shared by each faction.
~Value: The roll a squad uses determined by 3d6.
~Attack Value: Value when attacking a location owned by the other faction.
~Defense Value: Value when defending a location owned by your faction.
~Node: A spot on the world map.
~Capitol: One of 4 nodes owned by a sub-faction. If these are taken, then the other faction, then players of a sub-faction must use their allies’ capitol when they are defeated.
~World Map: All the locations that can be taken.
You can assign one special to your hero, which grants a bonus to your squad or some other feature. Pick one from the list below.
Fall back: 1/week instantly move to your capitol. Recharges after Sunday update.
Offensive: +3 bonus to attack value.
Defensive: +3 bonus to defense value.
Nuke: 1/week kill three units in an opposing squad in your node.
Fangirls/Fanboys: Add 10 to the number of units regained each week.
Large Company: Increase max squad size by 3.
Doubletime: You can move 1 extra node per day.
Hmm...Now that I think about it, why not introduce logistics into this game? What if you could only refresh in "safe" territories, of which you get, say, 1/2 of the territories you take over of each week, with a minimum of 1 if you conquered anything? This means you have to work cohesively with everyone else, to plan where you'll focus, as you'll only be able to refresh in certain spots.
Hmmm...
That'll be good, we can use just 2 capitols. Just more connections. I'll think of names.
Hmmm...
No, use however many capitols you want. I will be redoing the map.
Besides, the monsters need one too, so that's at least three. :P
The whole intention of the monster faction was to be a third entity to harass the other two.
Hmmm...
How about Monster vs 3e/4e with Republic as harassment? Because there's a lot of interest in monster.
How 'bout this. We's got 3e/4e on the left. 2e republic on the right and the Monstars somewhere in the middle. We can say that a lot of the battle are going on in the middle, the monsters' turf, so the monsters are like "WTF!" This is why the monsters are fighting. That and the hate for love triangles that the 3e/4e faction seems to support. :P
Dammit. Am I gonna have to defect?
Oh well, it's not like D_S hasn't had reservations about fighting before.
Maybe they don't have a capitol, but cannot take another faction's capitol.
EE had stated from the beginning that the monster faction shouldn't be able to win, but with so many people interested in it, it had the capability to. This way, it couldn't be completely conquered (no capitol), but it couldn't wipe out another faction (can't take one).
Gah! Arcane spell failure!
Hey, so I was thinking about the flavor of the monster faction, and how to reflect that in the rules.
Maybe they don't have a capitol, but cannot take another faction's capitol.
EE had stated from the beginning that the monster faction shouldn't be able to win, but with so many people interested in it, it had the capability to. This way, it couldn't be completely conquered (no capitol), but it couldn't wipe out another faction (can't take one).
this one, DF.
I might even join the monster faction myself, if I ever get to it.
Since bane felt it was necessary to point out something when it should have been somewhat obvious that I knew what KGM was referring to, I won't respond to what ever it is that I should be responding to and I should see about using more bad grammar and mayb e misspell a few words along the way for it would help with things.
Poor df. *gives a cookie*
Since bane felt it was necessary to point out something when it should have been somewhat obvious that I knew what KGM was referring to, I won't respond to what ever it is that I should be responding to and I should see about using more bad grammar and mayb e misspell a few words along the way for it would help with things.
Well, you did say "What idea?
"So I think it was safe to assume that you missed her post, and were a bit confused. *shrugs*
Well, you did say "What idea?
So I think it was safe to assume that you missed her post, and were a bit confused. *shrugs*
Well, I find it hard to miss the post with the most content (not including the OP), especially when it's from a poster than I find makes posts that are enjoyable to read.
Kids these days. Never getting a joke.
See, using a ;) or :P would be obvious that I was playing a joke without the post ever needing to be read in the first place. The whole point would be for it to be read and to get a snarky and/or playful response back. cuz. well. It should be like obvious that it would be hard to miss a post that was about 3 posts before mine.
If so, then 4:
3E
4E
4E remnant
2E
If not, then:
3E/4E
4E remnant
2E
Right?
It's easy enough to change, I just wish pig would give me some freaking input.
So, how many factions need a capitol? Should 4E and 3E have their own capitols?
If so, then 4:
3E
4E
4E remnant
2E
If not, then:
3E/4E
4E remnant
2E
Right?
It's easy enough to change, I just wish pig would give me some freaking input.
Bolded, and why the star thing? And what's with the area behind capitols?
Here's a less-rough version:
Pretty neat, but the starry dongles should be cut. Remember how I've been annoying everyone by talking about an Australia Gambit? That's what I'm talking about. A location that is easy to defend, but hellish to attack, and which can deadlock the game to the point that nobody can win or lose, which is unfun.
Armisael, I know people tend to pick on you for your posts, but really, you need to find a way to offer constructive criticism without sounding like a know-it-all. One suggestion: expand on what you like, include your constructive criticism, then add something else positive. It's a common style in critiquing that helps you not look like a jerk. Please see below for an explanation for the stars - I wasn't creating "Australia Gambits".
Bolded, and why the star thing? And what's with the area behind capitols?
The star areas, I was thinking, would be "specials" - taking them would grant an extra "something", but it wouldn't count as an "area" for advantages, so it wouldn't be horrible to game balance if they were easy to defend. If you don't want them, easy to take out.
The area behind the capitols would be the "arenas", if we were to still have them - special places that anyone could go to and possibly only travel to/from their own capitol.
These were just a couple ideas. Glad you guys like it so far.
Can either person at a location retreat at any time prior to the battle cut-off? Can you move through occupied squares? Can you move at full speed through occupied territory?
On Sunday at, 4pm California time (12 am Monday GST), both factions gain 100 units to their pools.
Is there a limit to how large the pools get? Should this maybe be scaled based on the total number of players instead?
...Oops. I was trying to congratulate you (and made an aside about design in the process), not chide you or anything else. I'll try to be more detailed, it's just that my posting time is a bit limited lately.
Anyway, what the "Australia Gambit" stands for is that, in RISK, Australia is a location that is extremely easy to defend, as it can only be reached through one country, and can be fortified with armies as much as you like. Thus, players who play to win usually try to get it, as, if worse comes to worst, they can turtle in there and force a draw by boring their opponents to tears. Thus, it is wise to make sure those situations cannot occur in-game.
I offered to make a map of the locations. pigknight has STILL not given me any locations, so I just put some blobs on a page.
...but I'll instead tell you why I'm not doing it. Put simply, I don't understand the system well enough. I need someone to pave the way before I design something for this system, so that I can understand it better and avoid making broken crap. That's why.
And I should point out my comment was directed at Dirtyfrank. I was expecting him to answer, though I'm not one to pass up a chance to remark on the irony of a situation. :P
You know, I could make a very vicious, very sarcastic comment about what it feels like to design something by your lonesome while everyone else *****es at you...
...but I'll instead tell you why I'm not doing it. Put simply, I don't understand the system well enough. I need someone to pave the way before I design something for this system, so that I can understand it better and avoid making broken crap. That's why.
And I should point out my comment was directed at Dirtyfrank. I was expecting him to answer, though I'm not one to pass up a chance to remark on the irony of a situation. :P
Irony? Oh, right, because I was one of the people saying your ideas weren't good enough. You might want to recheck the other rules discussion thread.
And it looks like your system was dropped for a different one - if you wanted to put up your own map, that would be fine by me.
Not to mention the fact that if it was annoying to you, why are you doing it to others?
You're not the only one in the dark about the rules - nobody knows how things work yet. Nobody but pigknight has the authority to say "this is how things work". So, you're not alone in that. :P
One is movement: how is movement affected by traveling through enemy-controlled territory? If it is not hampered in any way, then we need a larger map. If moving into enemy controlled territory forces you to stop and wait until you have the location controlled, then speed doesn't really matter (if it's touching a territory in your controlled network, you can get there)
Another is if we're going to have locations count for victory conditions again. If we just want '10 advantges or taking all capitols' then we might have locations count for that. Alternatively, we might have only certain locations count.
Well, before we can move forward with a map, really, we need to answer a few basic questions.
One is movement: how is movement affected by traveling through enemy-controlled territory? If it is not hampered in any way, then we need a larger map. If moving into enemy controlled territory forces you to stop and wait until you have the location controlled, then speed doesn't really matter (if it's touching a territory in your controlled network, you can get there)
Another is if we're going to have locations count for victory conditions again. If we just want '10 advantges or taking all capitols' then we might have locations count for that. Alternatively, we might have only certain locations count.
I agree. I tried to make all the capitols equidistant, to account for the "capture all capitols" win scenario that is restricted by a 4 speed (ie: you have two turns before you can get to any capitol).
pigknight, if you don't want to work on this, just say so. Don't leave us hanging. But if you do want to work on this, then please try to address some of the issues brought up. Thanks!
Thanks for the explaination KGM, and I like your idea.
So the stars will be like "Gold Mines" and such that give a bonus (such as resources or units) while other locations have little quirks? If this is the idea you're thinking of I love it. *High-five* Also the arena idea is cool as well.
Arms, you come off...strongly.
You can move through unoccupied squares, but if it's controlled by the other side you cannot move anymore for that day.
Good idea for the scaling thing. *High-five*
I need to draw up a list of locations...
Connect them to eachother. Folowing a trail from one star to another connected star would take 3 movement. Only one squad could occupy a star, and only one squad could go down a path a day. They would be like back road trails allowing small forces to flank enemies or avoid larger armies. Great for Gorilllion warfare.
How about some connect?
I like it, if that's the case! Good suggestion!
I.E. Underdark, teleportation circle
And I plan on lowering the movement to like ~2 (~3 with special).
PS: Note, this is just me posing the stupid design questions that need to be asked. I know what you mean, Pig, but it's still good to answer this kind of stuff.
Normal movement: up to 2 nodes per turn.
Special: up to 3 nodes per turn.
...Why have a Speed stat that starts at four, then?
I plan on lowering the movement
Read please.
...Why have a Speed stat that starts at four, then?
Because he originally had it set to 4, but (as in the last few posts, actually, IIRC) decided that starting speed should be lower.
Read please.
...Which is why rules changes need to be bolded. This is the origin of a lot of misunderstandings, right here. :P
Still, I don't see why you should bother with lowering speed. Most people are NOT going to boost it by sacrificing their combat prowess or support abilities. It just doesn't add anything that would benefit you more than an increase to your other stats, unless you lowered it all the way down to 1.
...Which is why rules changes need to be bolded. This is the origin of a lot of misunderstandings, right here. :P
Still, I don't see why you should bother with lowering speed. Most people are NOT going to boost it by sacrificing their combat prowess or support abilities. It just doesn't add anything that would benefit you more than an increase to your other stats, unless you lowered it all the way down to 1.
We are trying to discuss the merits of diffrent changes, stop complaining that the rules havnt been changed yet.
If you do not want to decrease you strenght for speed, then dont.
Perhapes only people who have the "speed upgrade" can move along the "star road"?
Call it "Scout" leader or something.
Because you might want to be able to get back into the fights faster?
Then you'll just pull out before losing and retreat to a safe zone to refresh your troops. Speed is only useful if you can either blitz your opponent or run circles around him. If I only move two nodes a turn anyway, I don't need higher speeds.
And being able to run away faster then the other guy helps with that.
But I don't need to. I just need to move one node. I don't need speed, I need troops.
Just because you don't find a use for doesn't mean no one else will.
Hoping for someone to find something's hidden power to make it more useful is not the way to go when designing said something. It tends to make the feature a trap, too strong, or both. It's better to just make it valuable straight up. Speed +2, for example, WOULD be worth it, as it means you can outrun the enemy without breaking a sweat. Speed +1 is worthless beyond measure.
You were just tearing down +speed?
I have to try and manipulate you all because your a bunch of agressive morons.
Way to avoid a fight.....
:}
That would be nice Escher.
Is there such a thing?
In this rule set, players control a “hero” that can in turn control a “squad”. Squads are made up of a hero and up to 10 “units”. A hero gives a squad a benefit, such as increased “speed” or “attack value” or some such. Players play for either the 3rd Kingdom/4th Empire or for the 2nd Editia Republic/Monsters.
Battles take place when two squads of opposing factions occupy the same “node”. If two squads are in the same location, both sides roll 3d6 and the side with the lower “value” loses 1 unit, plus 1 additional unit for every 3 points the squad lost by. Battles are determined at 4 pm California time (12 am GST). When a squad is destroyed in a battle, the player’s hero retreats back to their “capitol”. After a squad either retreats from a battle or is completely destroyed, then the opposing squad takes over the location. When battling an opposing player, you can only move into an allied node. Ties are determined by tactics as shown below. You choose a tactic to give to your hero. If both heroes have the same tactic, the defendin side wins a tie.
[INDENT]Brazen beats Defensive. Defensive beats Tactical. Tactical beats Brazen.[/INDENT]
Everyday, a squad can move up to 1 node on the “world map”. They can retreat from a battle in this fashion. If a squad moves into a square that is unoccupied and is controlled by the other faction, they can take control of the location, but cannot move anymore squares for that day. Instead of moving, a player can instead reinforce their squad if they are not in a battle. Reinforcing allows a player to gain units to bring their squad’s total up to 10 again.
On Sunday at, 4pm California time (12 am Monday GST), both factions gain 100 units to their pools.
~Hero: The main character under a player’s control. A hero has a special feature that gives a bonus to the hero’s squad.
~Squad: A group of units under control of a hero.
~Units: Used to increase the size of your squad to allow you to fight longer. These are drawn from a pool shared by each faction.
~Value: The roll a squad uses determined by 3d6.
~Attack Value: Value when attacking a location owned by the other faction.
~Defense Value: Value when defending a location owned by your faction.
~Node: A spot on the world map.
~Capitol: One of 4 nodes owned by a sub-faction. If these are taken, then the other faction, then players of a sub-faction must use their allies’ capitol when they are defeated.
~World Map: All the locations that can be taken.
You can assign one special to your hero, which grants a bonus to your squad or some other feature. Pick one from the list below.
Fall back: 1/week instantly move to your capitol. Recharges after Sunday update.
Offensive: +3 bonus to attack value.
Defensive: +3 bonus to defense value.
Nuke: 1/week kill three units in an opposing squad in your node.
Fangirls/Fanboys: Add 10 to the number of units regained each week.
Large Company: Increase max squad size by 3.
Doubletime: You can move 1 extra node per day.
edit: Also, can we play as monsters(no side)? I personally would have fun just harassing the two sides, even if i can't "win" in the end.
Level Up: No, that was the worst decision I've ever done.
So no level up this time?
edit: Also, can we play as monsters(no side)? I personally would have fun just harassing the two sides, even if i can't "win" in the end.
We have a monster faction now. You have to be a real monster, though - no half-whatevers, no humans-who-think-like-monsters.
We don't have a capitol and can't win, but we're going to harass the fleshies.
And I already said so. So...nya! :P
I thought we made it 3e/4e vs 2e/Monsters?
UG no!
It's 3E/4E vs 2E vs 4th remnant. Hence the 4 capitols. Like we talked about before I made the map.
So, how many factions need a capitol? Should 4E and 3E have their own capitols?
If so, then 4:
3E
4E
4E remnant
2E
If not, then:
3E/4E
4E remnant
2E
Right?
It's easy enough to change, I just wish pig would give me some freaking input.
To which your replied:
http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=18599408&postcount=32
3E
4E
4E Remnant
2E
I'll get to it!
Excuse me?
I was just doing what you asked me to do earlier. Jeeze.
To be clear:
SideA = 3rd Kingdom (rebuilt) + 4th Empire
SideB = 2e Republic + 4tth Remnant
SideJustToBeMean = Monsters
That was my understanding...
I understood it to be two main sides, each with two main factions, and the monsters off to the side.
To be clear:
SideA = 3rd Kingdom (rebuilt) + 4th Empire
SideB = 2e Republic + 4tth Remnant
SideJustToBeMean = Monsters
That was my understanding...
This was also my understanding.
I understood it to be two main sides, each with two main factions, and the monsters off to the side.
To be clear:
SideA = 3rd Kingdom (rebuilt) + 4th Empire
SideB = 2e Republic + 4tth Remnant
SideJustToBeMean = Monsters
That was my understanding...
That was my impression as well, which is why the capitol are situmated the way they are.
Well monster was getting more attention than anything else.
Yeah, but we talked about it earlier in this very thread pigknight. :P
Excuse me?
I was just doing what you asked me to do earlier. Jeeze.
I meant I'll get to putting names to the numbers.
Sorry if there was a misinterpritation (I'm 99% sure I misspelt that).
The intent that pig seems to have adopted pairs them with the republic for some reason.
Edit: But... I don't want to side with those stinky republic people!
If you whine anymore you're going to bed with no supper! :P
I thought he was joking...eh...Wasn't he?
Remnat can go bye-bye.
Okay. I'm going to be very clear: Drop the ********. Nobody likes it, it's not working, and nobody gives a damn about what you think here. We had an excellent setup before, and you are screwing it up just because.
Yo, KGM, what happened to 12? Do you not like that number?
12 IS THE DEVIL!!
No, seriously, I just forgot it. I don't feel like changing it right now.
As for the monster faction allying with 2E, I'm not interested in that. I'd prefer if the faction, because it's larger, became it's own faction (taking the 4E Remnant's capitol).
Though I'd rather it be as we discussed earlier - a faction without a capitol that can't take another capitol.
TBH, with this kind of change, I may not wish to continue. It was kind of central to the idea of the monster faction that they were getting involved on their own terms, not with the 2E faction. I HATE 2E!
I'll make it 3e/4e vs 4eR/2e vs Monster again.
I'm "screwing it up" because the monster faction is getting more attention than any of the 2e/4eR side is.
That's because the side sucks. It's the 100%, non-sugarcoated villains. The guys who **** puppies and kittens. The guys who kill the children, burn the villages, and cripple the villagers just for kicks. The only reason anyone would want to play them is to manipulate, as Arms is doing, or to be a hated villain. They're not SUPPOSED to be likeable. They're the evil guys. Not funny evil, not cute evil, cold, calculating, zealous evil.
I'm "screwing it up" because the monster faction is getting more attention than any of the 2e/4eR side is.
That's because of all the shipping and angst in the other factions. The more mature players don't want to be a part of it. Your past RPing actions has made the monster faction popular for it is promising, as of this moment, to keep the shipping and angst out.
Arms, I changed it back. Before you posted.
I know. But I'm explaining to you WHY nobody plays there. Who wants to play a character with no redeeming points, so evil that even its creator wants it dead?
That's because of all the shipping and angst in the other factions. The more mature players don't want to be a part of it. Your past RPing actions has made the monster faction popular for it is promising, as of this moment, to keep the shipping and angst out.
While I may not agree with the "mature" label (I don't want to imply that the other posters are immature, just that the shipping was), the monster faction is also featuring all-new characters, whereas what seems like a lot of the old characters from the previous EW are on the other factions - which has the effect of making it harder to want to play.
The established characters add an air of "we're already here and stuff", whereas the monster faction is completely new.
At least, that's part of my take on it.
What was the difference between 4th Remnant and regular 4e anyways?
The remnant is a bunch of zealous bigots who wants to see the Third Kingdom crushed under its boots, and its citizens enslaved. Bad guys, in short.
What was the difference between 4th Remnant and regular 4e anyways?
4th Remnat hate 3e with a vigor, mostly ex-nobles and racists.
4e are the 4th Empire that don't really hate 3e, but are on shaky grounds with the Kingdom.
While I may not agree with the "mature" label (I don't want to imply that the other posters are immature, just that the shipping was), the monster faction is also featuring all-new characters, whereas what seems like a lot of the old characters from the previous EW are on the other factions - which has the effect of making it harder to want to play.
The established characters add an air of "we're already here and stuff", whereas the monster faction is completely new.
At least, that's part of my take on it.
Monster. M for Mature. :P
I acknowledged that the shipping was immature and stopped that.
And older characters aren't really still playing (except Arms...) but make occaisonal appearances.
@KGM: I was using "mature" to mean "no shipping and little to no angst".
While I may not agree with the "mature" label (I don't want to imply that the other posters are immature, just that the shipping was), the monster faction is also featuring all-new characters, whereas a lot of the old characters from the previous EW are on the other factions - which has the effect of making it harder to want to play.
The established characters add an air of "we're already here and stuff", whereas the monster faction is completely new.
At least, that's part of my take on it.
Which is funny, because ALL of the monster faction players are returning from the last war. :P
Monster. M for Mature. :P
I acknowledged that the shipping was immature and stopped that.
And older characters aren't really still playing (except Arms...) but make occaisonal appearances.
But the "main" characters have been the children of those past characters. Do you see how that is keeping the legacy?
Now, I'm not saying it's a bad thing or that you shouldn't do it, I'm just trying to explain why people would sign up for the monster faction more than the others - the others are filled with baggage/legacy from the last EW, and the monsters are a fresh start.
Which is funny, because ALL of the monster faction players are returning from the last war. :P
... but they're playing different characters. That's what I meant.
But the "main" characters have been the children of those past characters. Do you see how that is keeping the legacy?
Now, I'm not saying it's a bad thing or that you shouldn't do it, I'm just trying to explain why people would sign up for the monster faction more than the others - the others are filled with baggage/legacy from the last EW, and the monsters are a fresh start.
I got ya. Hmmm...maybe I should get rid of the evil baggage for 2e.
But EVERYONE except for me is paying different characters. I don't get it.
That was the point of the 20 year time skip...
I got ya. Hmmm...maybe I should get rid of the evil baggage for 2e.
Don't. It's a more interesting faction that way. It's about time we have a group of completely, totally, 100% evil bastards.
But the "main" characters have been the children of those past characters. Do you see how that is keeping the legacy?
Now, I'm not saying it's a bad thing or that you shouldn't do it, I'm just trying to explain why people would sign up for the monster faction more than the others - the others are filled with baggage/legacy from the last EW, and the monsters are a fresh start.
pigknight: Maybe you should make up some NPCs that don't have to do with previous characters for the factions. Not necessarily put them in the RP thread right away, but introduce them. *shrugs*
Evil = dumb.....no interest from me
Evil = sexy......I want to join so I can burn infants and stampede cattle through a church
I think that labels such as evil for 2e and good for 3e should be avoided. That is a big reason why I want to be a monster if I play. I don't want to be railroaded into a label by the DM because his world/game is more important to him than his players' enjoyment.
It's not labels. It's that the people who are working with 2e ARE evil. They want to enslave the Third Kingdom. If that isn't evil, well...
Also, bad Bane. *brandishes stick*
We're NOT doing the sexy evil. The spiky armor for evil characters is as far as we'll go.
It's not labels. It's that the people who are working with 2e ARE evil. They want to enslave the Third Kingdom. If that isn't evil, well...
So yes a label of evil has already been put upon them.
I don't want to be on the 3e/4e side because that leaves me with all the shipping angsty players. I don't want to be forced to be "evil" just to be away from from the 3e/4e. That was part of the problem I had with the last EW stuff. I had done nothing really, as the emperor, to paint 4e as evil, yet everyone on 3e had decided to give 4e that label and play up that evil without consulting the head of 4e. It was kind of a prick move and got me uninterested in the EW.
Yeah, but what do you expect a racist, zealous faction to be? Mother Theresa's Handmaidens? This isn't a label, this is something obvious. If you don't like it, you're not forced to play it. It's not like anyone was planning on working for the Remnant besides me.
So yes a label of evil has already been put upon them.
Well, duh. See my post above.
Mother Theresa's Handmaidens?
Holy humble ninja, Batman!
(Am I the only one that thinks that would actually be a cool concept for a different game?)
Holy humble ninja, Batman!
(Am I the only one that thinks that would actually be a cool concept for a different game?)
I would play it.
Yeah, but what do you expect a racist, zealous faction to be? Mother Theresa's Handmaidens? This isn't a label, this is something obvious. If you don't like it, you're not forced to play it. It's not like anyone was planning on working for the Remnant besides me.
I was going to do remnant also Armisael. PK being a dictator turned me off though.
I was going to do remnant also Armisael. PK being a dictator turned me off though.
Sorry...
I think I went overboard when KGM told me to be more of a hard ass...
Yeah, but what do you expect a racist, zealous faction to be? Mother Theresa's Handmaidens? This isn't a label, this is something obvious. If you don't like it, you're not forced to play it. It's not like anyone was planning on working for the Remnant besides me.
And this is why it's unappealing. The DM, and friends, have already fleshed out the faction before it has players. Basically if a person is to play it then they're being railroaded into being evil evil. I think those that play 2e should be the ones to flesh out 2e and not the DM (and friends). That's why it is unappealing to me, and others. I don't want to be stuck with the title of "baby eater and slave raper" because I don't want to be on 3e/4e.
Sorry...
I think I went overboard when KGM told me to be more of a hard ass...
:P You just need to find a balance, is all.
And this is why it's unappealing. The DM, and friends, have already fleshed out the faction before it has players. Basically if a person is to play it then they're being railroaded into being evil evil. I think those that play 2e should be the ones to flesh out 2e and not the DM (and friends). That's why it is unappealing to me, and others. I don't want to be stuck with the title of "baby eater and slave raper" because I don't want to be on 3e/4e.
Yeah, I never thought 4E was supposed to be EVIL - I just thought the sides were fighting because that's what they did. People have wars all the time.
But that might have just been me, being a relativist at the time. :P
:P You just need to find a balance, is all.
Yeah, I never thought 4E was supposed to be EVIL - I just thought the sides were fighting because that's what they did. People have wars all the time.
But that might have just been me, being a relativist at the time. :P
They were fighting because:
At first: It was just a game.
Later: ...We never really got a reason...
Now: We have a vague idea...
Play a freelancer then. What's stopping you from doing that?
If I'm a freelancer for 2e then I'm still going to be labeled as EVIL because I'm working with 2e whom are suppose to be the worst kind of EVIL, so that's why it wont work.
It could just be a big enough threat to each of the factions on their own. It doesn't have to be EVIL by GM decree - the other factions will likely see it as evil, but it doesn't have to be baby-eating evil by decree.
Well, they want to enslave the Third Kingdom. Gimme a way to justify the act as something that isn't evil. Not talking about perspectives here, mind, I'm talking about actions.
If I'm a freelancer for 2e then I'm still going to be labeled as EVIL because I'm working with 2e whom are suppose to be the worst kind of EVIL, so that's why it wont work.
Uhh, no, that's not what I meant. Freelancer means freelancer, unaffiliated to any faction.
Uhh, no, that's not what I meant. Freelancer means freelancer, unaffiliated to any faction.
So they're either a merc, which we are no longer using anymore, or they are a monster. Unless you're seeing the monsters as a faction then this would mean I'm my own faction or that I can't play the game because I'm not associated with a faction.
So they're either a merc, which we are no longer using anymore, or they are a monster. Unless you're seeing the monsters as a faction then this would mean I'm my own faction or that I can't play the game because I'm not associated with a faction.
The former. A loose confederacy of free players can't be worse than a whole faction commanded by a single player, right?
...Can we just go back to flavorless sides?
We never had those in the first place. :P
Hero: Francis, the badger overlord (hmm, is this copyright infringement?)
Side: Monsters
Squad: Dire Badger Brigade
Value: 3d6
Special: Its Raining Badgers (Nuke 1/week)
Finally a questions: Will monsters be teamed with each others, or complete loners?
Because if there loners, they should get a small power boost (maybe a second special at half or 2/3rds power? So Nuke would kill 2 instead of 3, and the defense/attack bonus would be 2 instead of three.
However, if they're aligned, they won't need one (but I would like one :D )
Stats
Boss: Ianlaiman Magesblood: Binder, Mage, Anima Mage, Doom Mage.
Side: The one with the money.
Grunts: The Mage King's Remnant- A collection of various cultists, monsters, and mooks.
Speed: 2
Value: 3d6
Special: Devoted followers (Fangirls...)
Side: The one with the money.
Grunts: The Mage King's Remnant- A collection of various cultists, monsters, and mooks.
Speed: 2
Value: 3d6
Special: Devoted followers (Fangirls...)
Here's my stats.
Stats
Name, Occupation: Ianlaimin Magesblood, Anima Mage/Doom Mage
Attitude: Brasen.
Minions: The Mage King's Remnants: The few remaining Simalcrum of the much known Irksome Deathblade, plus fans and apprentices.
Special: Devoted Followers (Fangirls)
Attitude: Brasen.
Minions: The Mage King's Remnants: The few remaining Simalcrum of the much known Irksome Deathblade, plus fans and apprentices.
Special: Devoted Followers (Fangirls)
my stats again
Stats
Hero: Francis, the badger overlord (hmm, is this copyright infringement?)
Attitude: Tactical(hes a smart badger)
Side: Monsters
Squad: Dire Badger Brigade
Special: Its Raining Badgers (Nuke 1/week)
Hero: Francis, the badger overlord (hmm, is this copyright infringement?)
Attitude: Tactical(hes a smart badger)
Side: Monsters
Squad: Dire Badger Brigade
Special: Its Raining Badgers (Nuke 1/week)
Squad
Hero: Sir Artegal Roquefort, Knight of the Platinum Order and Heir to Lord Talus Roquefort
Attitude: Tactical
Side: Fourth Empire
Squad: Scrag, Joshua, and Church soldiers. Max # of Units: 13
Special: Church Funding (Large Company)
Attitude: Tactical
Side: Fourth Empire
Squad: Scrag, Joshua, and Church soldiers. Max # of Units: 13
Special: Church Funding (Large Company)
Quirky Miniboss Squad
Attitude: Brazen
Side: 4th Remnant
Specials: Doubletime
Constituents: Arkos Goblin Wild Magic Sorcerer, Theos Deva Preserving Invoker, Bramos Humane Bravelord, Lybra Minotaur Warden, Redshirts
Attitude: Brazen
Side: 4th Remnant
Specials: Doubletime
Constituents: Arkos Goblin Wild Magic Sorcerer, Theos Deva Preserving Invoker, Bramos Humane Bravelord, Lybra Minotaur Warden, Redshirts
And I'm fine if you only RP.
- Hellblaze's Lair
- Wizard's Tower
- Haunted Canyon
- Void-Tainted Barracks
- Light's Vanguard Chapel
- Frozen Forge
- The Plaguelands
- Plain of Unfought battles
- Mines of Dread
- Nymph's Woods
- Cathedral of the Forgotten ones
- Glory Swamp
Plus names for capitals and arenas:
2e: Arena- The Coliseum (Special: You can die in this arena)
Capitol- Emor
3e: Arena- Dueling Rings (One person per battle, but multiple battles)
Capitol- Fairhaven
4e: Arena- Imperial Tournaments (Winner gets 1 extra resource)
Capitol- Imperial Estates
4r: Arena- Fighting Pits (Loser has -1 penalty to rolls for rest of week, winner has +1 bonus)
Capitol- New Hope
Also, the star paths should cost two squares of movement (So you need the doubletime special). Personally I think 2e should be like rome if you couldn't tell by the location names.
Here's my ideas for the number locations (Stars and letters are to be determined)
- Hellblaze's Lair
- Wizard's Tower
- Haunted Canyon
- Void-Tainted Barracks
- Light's Vanguard Chapel
- Frozen Forge
- The Plaguelands
- Plain of Unfought battles
- Mines of Dread
- Nymph's Woods
- Cathedral of the Forgotten ones
- Glory Swamp
I like these.
Plus names for capitals and arenas:
2e: Arena- The Coliseum (Special: You can die in this arena)
Capitol- Emor
3e: Arena- Dueling Rings (One person per battle, but multiple battles)
Capitol- Fairhaven
4e: Arena- Imperial Tournaments (Winner gets 1 extra resource)
Capitol- Imperial Estates
4r: Arena- Fighting Pits (Loser has -1 penalty to rolls for rest of week, winner has +1 bonus)
Capitol- New Hope
I was thinking
2e: City of Towers
Arena: Sewer Arena
3e: Keep of the Kingdom
Arena: Onslaught Tournament
4e: Citadel of the Empire
Arena: Backstreets
4r: Rebellion Base
Arena: Training Grounds
Also, the star paths should cost two squares of movement (So you need the doubletime special)
I'll get around to naming the star paths. And star paths are supposed to be important strategical positions.
a. Isle of the Dead
b. Castle Shadowpaw
c. Temple of Holy Vengeance
d. Defiled Desert
e. Infernal Bastion
f. Luscious gardens
g. Blood Battlefield of the Bundead War
h. Ziggurat Ruins
Each star location requires one person to actively man it, doing nothing else for the day. As long as the person mans the star location, all allied people gain the bonus in parentheses.
i: Abandoned Tunnels (+1 node movement per day)
ii: Void Armory (+2 dice value when attacking)
iii: Glacial Mine (Those defeated in battle by the side holding this location cannot move the next day)
iv: Undead necropolis (The side holding this location gets a free Nuke special at 2/3's power 1/day)
v: Goblin Encampment (+3 max squad size)
vi: Rejuvenating Spring (Lose 1 less person per battle, gain one if you win)
vii: Poisonous Tar Pits (Kill an extra person per battle, and kill 1 person if you lose)
viii: Volcanic Caves (+2 dice value when defending)
Try pg 1.
Hell no! Screw you pigknight! God you suck you lazy little.....
PK, my names are on the last page.That's disappointing, Pig. If you're working on a project, finish it before jumping onto the next one.
But ya, the EW just dragged on too long.
I need to figure out the Zombiepocolypse rules. But the general outline is:
~ Zombies try to kill Humans.
~ Humans try to survive.
~ Humans must complete "Missions" which will uncover the truth about the Virus.
Very dissapointing. Arms, would you please run this. PM KGM for the map, she should have it.