Results 61 to 63 of 63
-
06-27-2008, 09:36 AM #61
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
- Location
- Zagreb, Croatia
- Posts
- 417
- Downloads
- 25
- Uploads
- 0
The idea is not about isolation. Forum can be just fine, but a bit tougher to execute certain steps, and again, it could be just perfect for some other.
Rey M. - court wizard of Tuarhievel
-
06-27-2008, 01:40 PM #62
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Both methods were actually done with relation to the BRCS.
The "playtest" version was done by a core group and sent out for comment.
There was a lot of grief and pretty much defamation and personal attacks being leveed at "us" when we didn't get the "product" out promptly.
When Chapter 1 and 2 were revised to become the sanctioned products they are now - pretty much the entire process was run by polls. I tried to keep things on topic and focused but there is only so much you can do. During that process there were a few people who pretty much insulted and dissed me all along the way too.
Again, there was a lot of criticizm over taking so long because of the polls. IIRC it took about 1 year and a half to get both chapters "finalized".
So either method has disadvantages and you can pretty much guarantee that there will be a faction that will diss whatever is being done.Duane Eggert
-
08-28-2008, 12:49 PM #63
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Posts
- 165
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Your post gave me some ideas and I am thinking along the same line, but I am currently expanding on the thought that it might be nice to have various attacks and defences. My line of thought is still extremely crude, but I would like to share them in order to improve these thoughts. Attacks could rely on a) holding type and size b) the leader/agent type and experience and c) regency. There should also be three or four types of defence that these attacks can target, like in 4th:
-Loyalty (straightforward)
-Fortification (of buildings and simple armed power)
-security (how well one can defend against subterfuge.
The actual defence scores depend on holding type and level, special modifiers and regency.
So one might attack a holding by assassinating a key figure, which is a special attack available to a certain level and leader type (the Fox for example):
*Assassinate key figure: You make a guild attack vs the security of a holding.
Other examples:
*Bribe: you make a guild, temple or law attack against loyalty
*Blackmail: you make a guild attack against loyalty
*Arrest: you make a guild attack vs fortification
*Reveal heresy in key figure: you make a temple attack vs security?
These attacks are now called temple/guild etc. but perhaps these attacks should only be based on the type of leader?
Because combat is so well balanced in 4th, we should perhaps leave that part alone and make separate leadership paths… one might think Fox and lion of Machiavelli, but perhaps we could have more… So even a 1st level fighter would be able to rule an empire as a 13th level fo?
just wanted to share my thoughtsLast edited by Sir Tiamat; 08-28-2008 at 12:51 PM.
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
How do I establish a holding
By Bryon in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 1Last Post: 06-09-2007, 02:57 PM -
With a holding (0), am I a regent?
By mayiuchung in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 16Last Post: 02-07-2007, 09:02 PM -
Create holding.
By Question in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 EditionReplies: 9Last Post: 12-05-2005, 04:41 PM -
Contest Holding
By Arius Vistoon in forum BRCS 3.0/3.5 EditionReplies: 2Last Post: 08-05-2003, 08:31 PM -
The Loyalty Holding.
By Birthright-L in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 2Last Post: 04-24-2002, 03:15 PM
Bookmarks