Topics

1

BM General Discussion / Shot myself on a foot

« on: August 11, 2012, 07:38:30 PM »

Funny. I had this character that I had been building for quite some time, spending a lot of time thinking about him, his personality, his plans, his purpose in life, his weaknesses and so forth. He was the kind of a guy who was always trying to be nice to everyone else, but such people inevitably build up frustration and tension inside and are prone to exploding when the conditions are just right.

So, when the conditions were there and they were plenty. It was almost comical how the situation was exactly the worst possible situation for this character. He had practically no skill with the sword, but he really had no other choice but to challenge an offender to a duel to death. I knew he was going to die and so he did. It was consistent, it was RP, it was remaining in-character, it was shooting myself on a foot.

With the character went away all that I had been building towards. With that went pretty much most of my interest too. The other characters I have just do not feel anything like the one that died. It's just clicking buttons for me, and I feel somehow lost about what to do about it. It all seems to pale in comparison to what it was.

I don't know what to do.

2

Development / Roleplay message -> action message?

« on: August 02, 2012, 06:34:06 PM »

Would it make sense to change the message type "roleplay" to something like "action" or "activity"? This would help in reducing the confusion about the meaning of the term "roleplay", as it would no longer be confused to be a type of message.

We roleplay our characters, whether they perform "actions" or send letters.

3

Other Games / Shadow Era

« on: July 31, 2012, 03:45:43 AM »

So, any Shadow Era players around? It is a collectible card game online with somewhat simpler rules compared to MtG, but with some similarities. Basically you have no land cards, but you can sacrifice a card / turn to turn it into a replenishing resource. The game is still quite new, so there are not that many cards out there yet, but they are constantly developing it.

And it is free to play. You can buy stuff with real money if you want, but if you are willing to grind a little in the beginning with the AI, you get them "experience" and "gold" so you can get your cards from thirty to forty to qualify in a PvP game.

I have not invested a dime to the game, but it seems that one can get by with very gradual deck improvement process as well. It is funny to meet a deck that has obviously been bought (many expensive cards) but is so badly put together that a near beginner's deck can beat it. At times though you just do not stand a chance. But, there is a rating system that ensures you generally meet players around your level, so overall you win some and then lose some.

Do take a look. I play as "Turanthas".

www.shadowera.com

4

Development / Future invasions in Beluaterra

« on: July 23, 2012, 06:23:28 PM »

If it indeed shall be so as stated in Beluaterra subforum and there will be no more GM controlled invasions, I suggest the following:

Make it automated, but make it so that players can influence when, where and what exactly happens, with time increasing the chances of something happening, until eventually the thing erupts. Kind of like a pressure kettle with wheels, where you try to keep the lid on as long as it is on your turf. When dealt with, it becomes the problem of someone else, preferably your enemy.

This would make the invasion influence the characters even when it is not currently running, messing with the politics of the more peaceful times.

5

BM General Discussion / The Levels of Play

« on: July 17, 2012, 06:21:48 PM »

This post was inspired by a brief discussion I had with another BM player recently. The thoughts I had seemed to grow from that discussion, so I thought to share them here. This is what resulted:

There are several ways one can play BattleMaster. Here are some of my suggestions.

The Level of Power

On this level a player seeks to maximize his personal power. Success is measured with such things as skills, income, lordships and titles. On a realm level it can be the size of the realm or the strength of its armies. This is the entry level for most new players who attempt to win battlemaster with any means available to them. If there is a story, the story is about the strength of his own character at the expense of the others, if necessary. It can be an exciting journey especially as the challenges on the way up are many, but therein lies the trap as well. Power for the sake of the power itself is devoid of any deeper meaning. What can one do when the limits of growth are met? Start over again elsewhere, where every climb to the top is an experience duller than the the previous one, leading to inevitable frustration and departure.

This is the level of play of turn junkies, clans and exploiters. This is the level of frequent confusion between OOC and IC communication, where the character is but an extension of the player, where the inalienable rights are most often violated.


The Level of Influence

On this level power is seen as a tool for influence, and like any tool worth having its desirability is measured by how good a job it does. In order to accomplish anything meaningful in BattleMaster, one needs friends. The raw power of the previous level is useful in making friends and gaining allies. This is where a player set some sort of a goal for the character, be it converting the continent to the true faith or changing the culture of the continent to something more desirable, perhaps in a form of a guild or a secret society. The goal can be destructive as well, such as a bloodfeud against a family or a desire to destroy a realm or bring some character to utter ruin.

On this level the player makes choices that may at times reduce his immediate power. The main drive is a story created by the player, and the power is used to make that story happen often at the expense of the other stories. In this sense a player may get frustrated about someone else "ruining his roleplay". Still there is immensely more depth on this level of gameplay compared to the previous one.

The Level of Narratives

Finally there is the level of narratives. Here the choices of the player are governed by what he sees as good for the story that he creates together with the other players. Towards this end the player is willing to create handicaps for his character that at times work contrary the goals of power and influence. They may be anything for personality problems that his character has to physical handicaps. The character may fear entering forests and refuse to do so at the crucial moment, perhaps causing his realm to fall. Or he be paranoid and prone to depression, which makes it difficult for him to make friends. We all have weaknesses, and so do the characters on this level. This is partly what makes them interesting.

The downside of this is that this makes the characters weaker in the powerplaying sense. Powergamers may take ruthless advantage of this weakness, which is why it works the best in an environment where majority of the players are interested in playing on this level. This is where it is not only about my own stories, but about the stories we create together as players. This is where the misery of your character is as good as his success, if it provides opportunities for drama - kind of creative chaos and destruction which enables further growth elsewhere, perhaps in unexpected directions.

Not surprisingly, this is the level of play that I feel is the most rewarding in BattleMaster. Though I must admit I do not always manage to stay on the level of the narratives, but rather find the levels mixing at times and blurring on the edges. But still, whenever the third level is the strongest, the likelihood of thrilling experiences also increases dramatically.

6

Helpline / A noble and an adventurer on Dwilight at the same time

« on: July 16, 2012, 08:43:12 PM »

I was under the impression that you could have a noble and an adventurer at the same time, active and all that in Dwilight. In fact, I distinctly remember I had an advy with my noble at the same time, but now the game tells me I already have that type of a character there.

Granted, the poor fellow I had there just recently died, but he does now show in the account menu anymore. So, is there a problem or do I just need to wait a bit longer?

7

Helpline / What a lord expects of his vassals in region description?

« on: July 08, 2012, 07:19:35 PM »

Would it be appropriate for a lord to enter a few lines to his region description about what he expects of his knights?

"Lord Kepler of Keplerville is known of always expecting his knights to be generous towards their peers."

8

Development / A new subclass of voluntary weakness - marked for death

« on: July 06, 2012, 05:57:21 AM »

Inspired by the discussion of when to retire a character, and idea occurred to me. Once a character is too old or otherwise ready to be retired, the player could choose a subclass that makes the character more vulnerable and creates a distinct possibility of death by game events.

The events that could get the character killed could include:
- being wounded in a battle (just like a hero)
- getting hit by an assassin
- losing an ordinary duel (much increased chance for death)
- getting tortured
- spending time in a dungeon
- getting hit by bandits
- random chance which increases by the age

The explanation would be that the character has gained some weakness, perhaps due to old age or some disease, or simply by the stress of burning the candle at both ends. What this option would provide is then a way for the player to make the death of his character more meaningful and more in synch with the actual in game interactions with the other players.

There would be many applications besides the wish to delete a character. Some could pick this subclass simply because they felt it to be a thrill to have a more vulnerable character. Some could choose this as rulers or other influential characters in order to make the game more rewarding for the infiltrators.

Instead of subclass, this could also be a box you could tick, or perhaps there could be a selection of boxes where you could determine which aspects of the game you would like to have an increased chance of getting your character killed. You could, for example, only add vulnerability to assassins.

Other than giving you more challenge, the feature would not gain you any other tangible benefit. It would be, at its essence, something that you give to the other players.

9

Helpline / When you click "ignore", are orders ignored as well?

« on: May 14, 2012, 06:38:22 AM »

I have a vague recollection from times ancient that when you click "ignore" on a character, it ignores all the messages from that character except orders? Or was that from the time when sending orders were limited to only certain positions?

Also, I do not suppose it would be possible to ignore only certain type of messages such as letters, but let roleplays be visible? The feature, I suppose, is not specifically about ignoring a player (which I do not seek to do) but rather a character instructing his scribes to throw to fire all the letters of another character. I could of course still choose to receive them and only play my character so that he has not in fact received them. But then my OOC knowledge might spill into IC interaction, and I do not want that.

If orders are ignored as well, then I do not think I can use the feature as I would like to.

10

Development / Banquets, Reputation and Largesse

« on: March 30, 2012, 12:23:13 PM »

In light of the thread about reworking prestige and honor, I thought of a way which would, in my opinion, tie together the new stats of Reputation, "New" Prestige and Largesse. I am not making an actual feature request about this yet, as so much is up in the air. I also do not wish to derail the existing threads, so I'll post this idea here.

Basically the core of the idea is this:

1) You can hold banquets, but they must always be in honor of another noble.
2) If you are successful, you gain +1 largesse and target character gains +1 good reputation.
3) If you fail miserably, there are no gains and you lose -1 prestige.

This could actually be the primary way of gaining good reputation. Essentially banquets would be about making a statement about someone else, and in order for your statement to have an effect, a good number of the others would need to agree and pay for it with their precious time. In order for them to drop whatever else they are doing and instead spend time at your banquet, they would either need to care about the reputation of the target character or your reputation - or possibly both, and believe enough of the others will attend for it to make a difference. If on the other hand you are as popular as a rabid rat and/or the target character is a dishonest charlatan, not many may show up. You might even want to turn it into a popularity contest by deliberately hosting another banquet at the same time as another banquet.

It could also be so that the higher your relevant stats are, the more guests you need to avoid total failure. If a popular prestigious king holds a banquet and only his general shows up, it should not be seen as a success. Also the current reputation of the target character should probably also be considered. If he currently has zero good reputation, hosting a very small party with only two guests might be sufficient to give him the gain.

Your reputation is something that is not directly in your own hands. To gain it, someone else needs to suggest it and the others need to agree in sufficient numbers. Thus the difference between zero and one points of reputation would be rather significant. From a player's perspective, it would also feel very nice to have a banquet in your honor.

Perhaps this kind of reputation would also be something that tends to diminish over time, although slowly.

So there it is. Does this idea have any merit? Is it simple enough?

11

Development / The Problem of Blobs

« on: March 20, 2012, 12:26:42 PM »

So, if it is a problem that people tend to make huge blobs of units and crash them at the enemy, something should be done about it. Everything in the game seems to scale so that it is always better to split a huge blob into smaller ones - like it is more efficient to have many estates than a single large one, or many different units instead of one huge. But the question then is essentially how to change this so that the same is true on an army level.

Sure, there are methods already there, like crowded roads. But that is a hindrance, not an encouragement. Would we perhaps benefit from such encouragements, like giving more power to raiding parties somehow? What if it somehow hurt more to have enemy troops present on a number of regions? If you only march your troops in one or two enemy regions, no problem, the population can take that. But what if there were increased morale penalties throughout the realm if many regions were simultaneously under attack? All you need then is a small force to cross the border and spread around the place, so you only need a little bit stronger force to counter it, but then.. and so it becomes a game of guessing what the other will do.

This proposal probably has its problems and it may not be a perfect one, but perhaps we could think of more ways how it would actually be beneficial to split the forces most of the time. When conquering a city, you might still want to blob it and that would perhaps be fine, but for the rest of the time it could be different.

12

Feature Requests / Approved 6692: Erecting statues and monuments

« on: March 19, 2012, 11:28:02 AM »

Title:

Statues and monuments

Summary:

With a great expense, players can choose to erect statues and monuments to honor another character on the continent. Having a monument built for your increases your prestige (or fame in the future). Monuments can also be torn down.

Details:

If you have enough gold at hand, you could build a monument to your estate, provided there is room there (if there will be a limit one day in how much stuff you can have at your estate). If these conditions are met, you are given a drop down menu with all the existing characters on the continent. You pick one and write a description. The end result would look a little like the guild interface, where you would first have in big letters "A statue of Sir/Count/King/General Kepler" and then under it a brief statement, and still under it a longer description of the actual statue. Once completed, a message is sent to the realm stating that "Sir Random has erected a statue in the honor of Sir Kepler at Random Estate, Keplerville." Sir Kepler then gains a prestige/fame +1 until the statue is destroyed. You could only erect monuments for the honor of other characters and never of one of your own.

When visiting a region, a new item would be added under the actions menu. You could spend some time to "visit monuments" if some are built. You would then be able to choose between the various monuments there (if any are built).

If a monument is torn down, a realm wide message is sent to inform who did and what.

Also, for the future, erecting a statue would gain you largesse (if it is implemented).

Benefits:

The monuments would store bits and pieces of history of the regions, realms and most importantly, that of player characters. You would only erect a monument when something truly spectacular has taken place, or to look at it another way, you would only let a monument remain if it is of some importance. As time passes, monuments are torn down and new ones erected, but some central ones will likely remain, giving the new players and visitors from other realms a chance to enjoy the history of a region, which in turn may provoke further interest and questions and give each region a sense of unique culture.

Also, once a character is deleted, there is no chance to build a monument for him/her any more. Thus those that are built and remain become rare and valuable, and if the passed on character is still viewed with importance and reverence by some others, tearing a monument down "just so I can have my new stables there" just will not cut it, and there is much potential for conflict there. Just like with most everything else in the game, that which is important enough for the players to keep around will be kept around - the rest of it will vanish. All forms of conflict between the players is ultimately a discussion about that.

Possible Exploits:

No way to game the system. If you get people to waste their gold, time and "estate space" for your honor, you probably deserve it anyway. There is a possibility of bad writing and childishness in the descriptions, but then the same is true with actual regional descriptions. The lords are in charge of regional descriptions, so with the same responsibility they could order their knights to destroy monuments if bad taste has been applied.

13

Feature Requests / Religious Relics

« on: March 14, 2012, 03:02:57 PM »

Title:

Religious Relics

Summary:

Priests can declare some unique items as relics. Carrying relics of your faith makes the faithful peasants in your region to be easier to control. If an infidel carries a relic, there is an upheaval in the peasantry, especially if it is an infidel of an evil faith.

Details:

An elder priest can declare a unique item as a relic in a high enough temple. It comes with a cost in gold and time, with subsequent simultaneous relics costing more.  A relic grants a bonus in region control in a region where the relic holder has an estate, but only when the peasants in the region are of the same faith and in majority. If an infidel gets his hands on a relic, there is an instant continent wide uproar among the faithful peasants with morale losses across the board with an effect that diminishes over time. If the relic returns to hands of a true believer, the morale penalty is removed.

There would be no benefit in holding on to more relics than one at a time.

Benefits:

Such relics would strengthen the interaction between priests and lay members of religions. The priests would have more to offer to the lay members, and could use these somewhat rare items as gifts and rewards to those members who have done the faith a good service. The holders of the relics would have tangible benefits in improved regional control, provided the peasants followed the same faith. These benefits are balanced with the risk of losing an item to an infidel, thereby creating a weakness that could potentially temporarily damage the entire faith. This opens up possibilities for more drama and wars.

Possible Exploits:

None that I can think of.

And after this one I totally shut up about unique items.

14

Feature Requests / Heroic behavior in battle (removing hero class)

« on: March 13, 2012, 06:54:31 AM »

In another thread Tom mentioned the difficulty in determining which battle is important and which is not. To have the game determine that objectively is probably quite a challenge. Instead we could have the players define what is important and what is of secondary importance. After all, the players will intuitively know if the outcome of some battle is crucial to them or not.

If there is a battle coming that is quite crucial, you could check a box somewhere that says "be heroic". The consequence of this would be that your character would become slightly more effective in the coming battle but should he be seriously wounded, he would die. If enough of the players click "be heroic" the game decides this is an important battle, and the participants gain valor. The amount of valor could depend on the role of the character in the battle and on total number of participants.

The risk of death should be higher than what the current hero class has, since it would be a voluntary choice made every time the situation warrants it. The box would likely be clicked in a very important defense of a city or stronghold or when assaulting one and it really mattered. Note that if you wanted to keep your character safe, you would never need to click the box yourself. The battle would be "important" if enough of the other players clicked the box, either on your side or on the other side.

My assumption is that the box would be clicked only very rarely. Thus only very rare battles would let you gain "valor" or whatever replaces the current "prestige".

15

Feature Requests / Adventurers stealing gold, information and other valuables from estates

« on: March 09, 2012, 07:20:40 AM »

So, the nobility is expected to be very suspicious of the commoners known as adventurers. Presently, however, they only have the capacity to do very much good (fight the monsters and undead, sell unique items) and very little capacity to hurt the nobility (fail to repair and return unique items).

It has been proposed that the new estates would have some limited banking options. Sure, let's have it, but let's have it with some risk. Make it possible for adventurers to visit the estates of the region and attempt to steal gold and valuables from it. It would be up to the noble to pay for the guards, but it should also be relatively rare for the adventurer to be caught in the process, for understandably hard consequences would fall on him should the identity of the thief be discovered. In most cases the effort would fail "you did not find a good opportunity". Sometimes you would be discovered partially. "You have been spotted." The noble would receive a letter from his estate saying "A shady figure has been sneaking around your estate".

Further, when a theft succeeds, the noble is not informed immediately, but with a delay. Perhaps only when he visits the vault again.

Additional bonus would be that you would be less likely to be identified with lower prestige and higher distance from your home. This would create increased tension towards especially foreign outlaws. They would mostly be seen as an useful addition, but they would instantly have an air of suspicion about them.

Now IF we also had the possibility of leaving unique items to the vault and the possibility of having them stolen, this would generate even more possibilities. An item in a vault would degrade slightly slower than otherwise, but would then be exposed for theft. Items in vaults and high amounts of gold could also generate rumors that the adventurers could hear.

An adventurer rummaging through an estate could also come across some other information like random scribe notes or sometimes very rarely, letters written to the master of the estate. (if the adventurers were assumed to be able to read...).

But even with the ability to steal gold the adventurers would become quite more suspicious than what they are now.

Ps. They could perhaps also steal gold from temples and guild halls.