Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

I want to be a wheeling, dealing, backstabbing, bloodsucking wyrm! Maybe there will still be room when I cave in to temptation...This is a great idea.
-yc

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

Sympathetic and still resisting...

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

On the subject of wars, I see people asking for permission to go to war with another player to the bitter end. For example: "Pangaea is too weak to be allowed to persist in this world. I request to eliminate them from their miserable existence if I can. Give me 15 months to complete this mission." Or: "I request to take every province from Ermor on my side of the mountain chain because ..." Stuff like that. Anything goes, limited only by the players imagination and diplomacy skills.

And sure, NaPs are clearly allowed since they violate no rules. The difference is that two allied nations cannot attack a third without clearing it through the Council. This seems to be a big change to me.

Obviously, though, any NaP is instantly null and void if one of the nations goes rogue. I would love to have a NaP with a neighbor where I have a long, undefended border who decided to go rogue. Easy territorial expansion! Sure, a rogue nation might be able to convince a dangerous neighbor to delay an attack on them for a few turns with the proper bribe (like perhaps 50 gems, something QM actually got me to accept in order to call off a major invasion for 10 turns in a recent game). But a rouge nation runs a big risk with this, especially if it appears the rogue might be near to winning the game. There is nothing stopping the other player from taking the offer and then doing whatever they want to do anyway. After all, rouge nations have no status in the Council and would get very few sympathy votes.

I am open to opinions about the rogue status. It can't be too severe such that a player won't be able to go rouge and still win the game. It also has to be totally enforcable within the mechanics of the game.

On the subject of the wyrm pretender, it is an excellent and very powerful pretender under the Zen mods at only 75 points with a very nice 3 dominion. He also is completely versatile with respect to magic, allowing any school(s) that any nation might want. The only drawback is that you won't be able to get a lot of magic or artifacts on him, so he will be more of a fighting type God instead of the typical near-unbeatable VQ or Virtue type of SC (which is not necessarily a bad thing). You can also easily get a single bless with the wyrm. Heck, even a dual bless is possible if you want to totally trash your scales. I have been testing the N9 wyrm for my white centaurs, and it can definitely be made to work even on a poor world. The wyrm also gets afflictions at 25% the normal rate, and he has a very hard time losing all 4 of his eyes.

I expect that pretty much every nation will get the wyrm. I would be very surprised if someone didn't. I mean, why would they sign up in the game if they don't want to participate in the Council? Without a wyrm, how can you accept bribes or trades for your vote? Without a wyrm, how can you vote against a neighbor that wants to invade you?

On the victory condition, my son pointed out that merely sieging a fort puts the province on your side for the province count determination. He could envision a player with maybe 40 provinces doing a blitz using enough mages (or fliers) with a couple of devils each to siege 35 forts in one or two turns. That is not what I had in mind to win the game.

I agree with Iron Hawk that the rules need to be modified. They are now different than my original thoughts on the subject due to all the excellent input I have been receiving.

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

Actually, you DO have time for the game. The hosting schedule is Monday, Wednesday, Friday at about 9 PM Mountain Time. I have noticed that a 17 player game cannot move faster than this anyway except maybe for the first 10 turns or so. And as the host, I know I would not be able to move faster either with all the emailing I will be doing.

Also, djo, I was hoping you would have time to put together a nice website for the Council, kind of like you did for Yarnspinners 2. You have plenty of time, for it will probably be another 2 weeks or so to get this game off the ground. You would surely have my vote for Council Chairman if you do this! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

I can't take credit...the site was puffyn's (with I believe Sedna's help). Once it was up, I did some work in shaping the wiki, but the hard work was theirs. I don't actually have a server I can host that kind of things on.

Still resisting...but the nation(s) I'm eyeing are still unclaimed...

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

The only thing I would say about rogue status is to make an amendment that states: "All diplomacy, trade, and other agreements with rogue nations are null and void.". That way you can break agreements with them without it hurting your reputation for future games.

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

This sounds like a very interesting setting.
I would like to join the party http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Please give me control of lovercraft's hideous creations. R'lyeh if you please.

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

Question: Is there a significantly higher chance of indy commanders with artifacts on 9 than on 8?

I really wanted indies hard, for the key to doing well in this game should be indy grabbing from the very start. We can't have people waltzing over them like they were mush.

I then backed off a bit because of the poor world. It will definitely be a hard slog for all players. One bad decision or bad battle result could set a player back for a long, long time if the wyrm dies. Mercs are VERY expensive given such low incomes for all nations. I expect people will be winning mercs with a minimum bid, even with 17 players!

I then settled on 8 because I have never had an MP game with this setting. I have had an MP game with 5,6,7, and 9 (the most frequent by far) setting. Besides, 8 happens to be my favorite number!

At this point, I am inclined to leave indies at 8 unless there is a general hue and cry about the sheer difficulty of the game settings.

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

I agree with the reasoning for strong indied. 8 is good, 9 (imo) better.

sorry for OT question but,
@djo, could it be by chance that your avatar is a GSP (germen pointer)?

Re: The Council of Wyrms
 

A reading suggestion for this game: "Tooth and Claw" by Jo Walton. It's a novel of mannered society a la Jane Austin, with politics and marriages and dowries, except everyone involved is a dragon.


Actually, Dusty is a Brittany. The orange coloring is the give-away.

Our family has, however, had a couple GSPs over the years. If I ever change my avatar, I'll use one of them.