Re: Wishes for next chapter

[Samurel Manderly]

I see Nathan very much as Dorian. :;
):

Without the incredibly dum looking Freddie Mercury moustache.

Maybe in a few years when he becomes master of coin, every master of coin has to have a mustache. xD

[Septon Arlyn]

But then he would have to marry a noble Lady to get a title

[Samurel Manderly]

Varys was Master of Whisperers and he wasn't a noble technically. He just has to be really good at what he does.

[Septon Arlyn]

This is true. But masters of coin I think have generally been pretty bad at what they do, with little finger being an exception, not the rule

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

I see Nathan very much as Dorian. :;
):

Without the incredibly dum looking Freddie Mercury moustache.

I thought he and his moustache were very sexy.

[Nathaniel Mason]

This is true. But masters of coin I think have generally been pretty bad at what they do, with little finger being an exception, not the rule

Baelish was a terrible master of coin. He basically just held the Royal credit card. (Although he was good at embezzlement. I suppose that counts for something.)

I thought he and his moustache were very sexy.

He was kinda sexy... the 70s porn star moustache, not so much.

Nathan and Dorian do share some personality traits, but Nathan is not quite so glib as Dorian.

[Septon Arlyn]

This is true. But masters of coin I think have generally been pretty bad at what they do, with little finger being an exception, not the rule

Baelish was a terrible master of coin. He basically just held the Royal credit card. (Although he was good at embezzlement. I suppose that counts for something.)

I did not say he was good for the realm. But for the act of making money few were his equal

[Nathaniel Mason]

I did not say he was good for the realm. But for the act of making money few were his equal

He was basically good at two things. Borrowing money, and melting down gold coins and alloying them.

That axiom of him rubbing two gold dragons together to get a third was literally true.

[Septon Arlyn]

ah, I always that that was figurative for him using interest and loans to other minor lords to gain back the money. Or using monopolies and the crowns influence, however that makes a lots of sense as well, him actually melting down the coins

[Lady Corrine Marsten]

This is true. But masters of coin I think have generally been pretty bad at what they do, with little finger being an exception, not the rule

Baelish was a terrible master of coin. He basically just held the Royal credit card. (Although he was good at embezzlement. I suppose that counts for something.)

I thought he and his moustache were very sexy.

He was kinda sexy... the 70s porn star moustache, not so much.

Nathan and Dorian do share some personality traits, but Nathan is not quite so glib as Dorian.

I personally liked it. I thought he looked very dashing. I am aware that I may be in the minority with my love of well-kept and twirly facial hair...
No prizes for guessing who I romanced first, hehe. I play those games for the romances, in large part. I loved that there were Twitter hashtags relating to thd DA:I romances, like #ClimbTheWall and, my favourite, #RideTheBull.

I do think Nathan is definitely more compassionate.

[Loreia]

There should be a #Honeysuckle. Cookie for those of you who get the reference!

[Kevan Lyras]

The stepstones storyline would also allow another wish of mine to be included into the story: More sophisticated warfare battles. I know they can be a pain to go through, but by now I feel we are a lot more efficient in running them than at thr clan battles, which we dragged out way too long
I imagine battles with 10 or more units per side and maps bigger than the forum code maps (so archers actually have to get into range etc.) Also one could include some siege weapons etc

[Ser Jorah Holt]

actually having to besiege a fortification is of interest to me, especially as at least two houses actually have siege engineers

[Reader]

Hearing the warfare wish loud and clear. We'll have something more elaborate in Story 3, could even open with it so we can crunch the battles while we're in the offseason.

Open with seizing one or more locations, then trying to defend them and manuevering to get allocated the best assets when the King formally divides up the prizes?

Vague plan for 126
- Personal offseason stories - I know lots of you have plans and these interludes help resolve these, advance the world's clock and grow your personal stories. Potentially including the canon illness of Lord Corlys Velaryon.
- One or two houses have tournaments planned for marriages/bodyguard selection - we've got lots of tournament mechanics and we can crunch these quickly. Tournaments are an important part of Westeros's flavour.
- Quick joint visit to King's Landing for the appointment of a new Kingsguard and the (canon) bad death of Vaemond Velaryon - http://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Vaemond_Velaryon [this even gives something for our likely new Kingsguard to help with!]. Many of you will be big enough hitters post the first two stories so as to not be totally out classed (both in terms of mechanics and IC status/reputation)
- Story 3 - The Step Stones: Stepping Stones to Power (ahem, working title). Control here will be an asset to the Greens/Blacks in the unlikely event of a Civil War, so there's potential for a united front but jockeying for the best prizes.

House Objectives
- Will be back with a vengeance. Glad people liked them. Probably sticking to my original formula (one big picture issue, one internal competition/dispute, one objective to encourage interaction with other houses). Help cooking these up and brewing mechanics will be appreciated, when the time comes.

Global mechanics
A return to the Black v Green scoring from story 1. It allowed for some PvP competition without it being personal, and gave a hard measure of how each side was doing. Plus, fabulous prizes that have had some impact in story 2 and beyond.

[Kevan Lyras]

One thing to add here: I love cooperative fighting scenes. The cave battle, where you could work together, save another PC etc. were a lot cooler than the 1 on 1 battles we had so far!

[Baelon Drakeson]

One thing to add here: I love cooperative fighting scenes. The cave battle, where you could work together, save another PC etc. were a lot cooler than the 1 on 1 battles we had so far!

Agreed, I'd have loved to have been in one, if PLOT! had not demanded otherwise. :;
):

Marei's Seven, for all it's messiness, was a lot of fun. I have to say that is the biggest let-down I have about the warfare system - it really is set up to be like a 1-on-1 miniatures game... those can be fun, but I like my RPGs to have more room for cooperative play. That's one reason I suggested the multi- force battles earlier in the thread.

[Kevan Lyras]

That's one reason I suggested the multi- force battles earlier in the thread.

And I don't see, why this should not work. You just have to have multiple defender forces as well, so that the number of orders per side are roughly equal. Say: Commander 1 attacks the enemy camp from the North, while Commander 2 brings a force from the South. The commander A holds the Castle and its surrounding forces, while Commander B is in charge of the nearby occupied village and the warships.
However, I dont think you can have more than two commanders per side (maybe 3 max)

[Yoren longshore]

That's one reason I suggested the multi- force battles earlier in the thread.

And I don't see, why this should not work. You just have to have multiple defender forces as well, so that the number of orders per side are roughly equal. Say: Commander 1 attacks the enemy camp from the North, while Commander 2 brings a force from the South. The commander A holds the Castle and its surrounding forces, while Commander B is in charge of the nearby occupied village and the warships.
However, I dont think you can have more than two commanders per side (maybe 3 max)

I'd say that splitting it into smaller groups still would be manageable, if done correctly. Also, given the amount of commanders from the different houses, perhaps it would be possible to have a commandstructure like the old romans, with a rotating command.

[Baelon Drakeson]

I'd say that splitting it into smaller groups still would be manageable, if done correctly. Also, given the amount of commanders from the different houses, perhaps it would be possible to have a commandstructure like the old romans, with a rotating command.

Except that would be out of character of the setting. However, multiple lesser commands (such as leading the Vanguard) is common in setting. The subcommander setup sort of captures that, but not really.
Kevan has the right of the suggestion though - what is good for the goose and all that.

[Marq Mooton]

So, maybe it has been said earlier in the thread or something, but if so, it did not catch my eye.

A reflection I have made of late is that if something requires the collaboration of more than two-three houses it gets messy. Logistics of having so many characters and players needing to coordinate stuff tends to sap energy. The best stuff comes when a small group of characters can be played to bring forth the awesomeness of each other. Bring six houses into one thread, especially if some of them have more than one character taking part, like the assembly...and meh.

Ideally, there should be a fair mix of house to house interaction, so that most characters have at least one scene with someone from each of the other houses, might be difficult to pull off between a house with one PC and another with five, and activity levels can factor in, but that we'll just have to manage. This sort of game requires pro-activeness on the part of the players, so it's equally up to ourselves as to reader to make it so, the narrator can mostly help facilitate.

As for warfare, I've sort of always favored doing away with the rules of the book and take a more cinematic approach to it.

[Reader]

We'll stick with the Warfare rules, as many players enjoy them (and have invested in them!) and they're reasonably clean and elegant.

However, I'll try to blend this with a cinematic approach:

- personal scenes amid combat
- truly massive combat will have the results determined by relative power and opposing warfare checks. That will leave PCs to command a flank/vanguard etc at a manageable warfare scale and adjust the default outcome (e.g. your side is set to lose the battle, but withdraws with fewer losses if you break the enemy right wing, as they wheel to reorganise rather than pursue).

[Septon Arlyn]

Necromancy! Blurb blurb blurb!


Anyways I think that a fun scene we could have is a who dun it, especially if we can separate our cunning PC's from the more warfare/combat oriented PC's

One of my favorite things from the kings justice was flubbing rolls and getting sent on wild goose chases.

Also forced rolls in things that we are not good at.

I feel like there should be some high risk/ high reward scenarios where using skills that not everyone has

(Marksmanship, stealth, fighting (for some), cunning (for others)

Can lead to some massive benefits on follow up skill checks. Such as, maybe I don't have the best athletics(running) + endurance (stamina, but by spending a DP I can use my knowledge (streetwise) + cunning (logic) at a higher TN to know short cuts and use those to cut off the target during a chase scene. Or conversely have a scene where the PC's must choose to flee or fight the mob, or a riot occurs, such as the one that happened in kings landing against Joffrey during the war of the five kings, where people have to choose to try and stick together, protecting the weaker folks, or to simply get out of there to the safety of the keep/ gatehouse it whatever.

Anyways those are some of my thoughts

[Reader]

Thanks Septon. Forcing people out of their comfort zones is fun - this can even be player generated via intrigues, albeit best to discuss things OOC first.

Some of the best scenes have come from people failing rolls - it's an opportunity for story, not a disaster.

[Kevan Lyras]

Can we have dates (as in year/month) in the titles of the various off-season events please?
(e.g. 125/11: Trials at Riverrun, 126/02 Redwain wedding etc.)

[Reader]

Can we have dates (as in year/month) in the titles of the various off-season events please?
(e.g. 125/11: Trials at Riverrun, 126/02 Redwain wedding etc.)

Yes, when I get home tonight!

[Sponsored content]