Census Game Suggestions Thread - looking for new ideas

http://www.godchecker.com is hilarious in that regard, if you wanted to know.

 

That site cracks me up.

Evil.

 

It also cracks me up as well. lol


Aheh


*hasn't actually looked at the site, but wanted to fit in*

 

Tyi ... any updates? Any chance to see a preliminary draft list?

 

That's what I'm trying to do. Update. Wiggins has been helpful. Hold on to your horses, we should have something soon. It's fascinating doing this, though.

 

I just had a great idea for a game. Something like Battle Royale. I haven't quite worked it all out in my head, but I think I have most of it.

 

Post it whenever you want. The entire thing or just the idea.

I'll post the draft list here as soon as it's alive, but it doesn't matter if you talk about other games in between and around it.

 

Well, the idea is you get x amount of people to join, and then they have to kill each other with a random weapon they are given(From a fork to a grenade launcher). Then you have a map grid, and each turn people PM the host whhere they want to move on the map, and depending on who they run into on the grid, they'll face off against that person, and whoever has the better weapon would usually win, depending upon the terrain and other factors. You'd only be able to move a certain amount of squares each turn, and no one would be able to know where you are(of course, that means a lot of trust in the players not to PM eachother and so forth). The other factors would be how you align yourself in the square. For instance, I had the idea that you could have one of three stances(I really haven't worked it all out, so any ideas would be welcome for this) Dug in, laying low, and sprinting. There would be pros and cons for every stance. Like, if the rule was two squares per turn, but you were sprinting, you could move three squares, but your guard would be down, so someone who is laying low in the square you are sprinting in could kill you, even if you had a better weapon, because the person laying low would have their bearings etc. I thought that sprinting would maybe get you three squares to move, laying low would mean you only get one square, and dug in would mean that you don't want to move for that turn, but you would not be very easy to kill at all. Like the movie or book, there would be random forbidden zones and such to make sure people keep moving. Then you would select your temperment, or something, so when someone else did run into you, they would be told if you were friendly or guarded, etc. I dunno, just an idea I had while reading the book.

 

Very, very interesting. Reminds me of a cross between battleships, chess, and TAO. Most of you wouldn't know what TAO is, though.

I like it.

First things first however, would you mind expanding on this:

And to flesh it out...

How big a grid were you thinking?

How do you change weapons? Are they found on specific grid squares, and are such simply picked up and dropped off on each square? (If you had a fork and landed on a square with a grenade launcher, you would drop the fork on the square and pick up the boom-boom cylinder etc... and then the next person who crossed the square could pick up the fork?)

With the weapons, you could of course do a rock paper scissors arrangement with some of them. i.e. (ignoring stance for the moment) Bow & arrow kills grenade, grenade kills shield, shield kills bow & arrow.

Throwing in defensive options is a great idea, too (stances).

Also, every time a person moves to a new grid square, you'd need the host to update the game with what or who they find there, wouldn't you? (Kind of like Battle Royale in that sense for those familiar with it.) In this game, that may affect things and people going afterwards. Something to think about in the sideline. Perhaps we could even have multiple hosts....



Thanks for sharing the idea in raw form EF, that kind of thing is very welcome. If we can hammer some things out, we could get this to work. Also, if you have more things you were thinking of expanding on, anything is open. Anyone may chime in with things, of course.

 

I'm not sure what you want me to expand on at the top there. I was just saying that we could do something like they do in the novel/movie Battle Royale, which is where I got the idea. Or stole it. Whatever.

No, you don't change weapons. At the start of the game you are given a random weapon, and that's the weapon you have until you find another one(we could maybe have some on the grid scattered around. Or not), or you kill someone else and take their weapon. Now, obviously, that means some people will have an advantage, but that's part of the game(Maybe we won't give anything as useless as a fork like someone got in the book, but it will still be uneven. The Rock-Paper-Scissor thing is a good thing to look into, as well). Though I think I like the idea of just scattering them through the grid, too.


The stances are something else I haven't really pegged down. There could definitely be a defensive stance or something. What I had in mind was the sprint/alert/dug in, which only really affects movement, where the more movement you sacrifice, the more defense you would generally have. Someone with a lesser weapon would probably be better off laying low, while someone with a machine gun could use the sprint option each turn to cover more ground so they could run into more people, but that is up to the player, and whatever their strategy is.

I was thinking that all movement would be PMed to the host(or hosts; more would be better, I think, with this game), and it would be hidden, unless the terrain was right to see to other squares(like a mountain), or another person was in the same grid. For instance, if three people landed on C-3, only those three people would know that there were other people in that grid. The host would PM back to the three players that they've landed on a square with other players, and ask for their response(since alliances could be formed, they might want to be friendly, istead of hostile, etc). The host could then post the fight, and who had died, but no one would know where they had died. Unless you had a loud weapon, like a grenade launcher, then people in the sorrounding area would be informed that an explosion had taken place close to them, or machine gun fire. The closer players would be told which square specifically, but people farther away would only be told what region the exposion came from. An example host post would read something like this:

Players 3 and 5 have been killed with a machine gun, heard in the northwest side of the island, etc.

So, for the most part, movement would be hidden unless you cross the same square in your turn.

And, really, the size of the grid would depend upon how many players you get.

 

That's actually what I was after. I didn't know what movie and/or book you were referring to. I was just curious where it came from.

As far as weapons go, the imagery I had in mind was having weapons scattered across the game. I had Cluedo in my brain for some reason. There would of course still be the uneven part, because it just depends which weapon you find and pick up.

Those stances work. If you sprint somewhere and stay limber, you could move four squares on the next turn. If you are alert, only three. If dug in, one square. I don't know, I'm just thinking aloud. That could keep things simple but still judgement effective.

I agree with hosts. As mentioned above. I'm thinking two or perhaps three. Maybe try it with two, and if need be extend it in future games.

Gotcha about the movement. I forgot that of course it has to be hidden. Since the movement would then happen outside the thread, how about having updates or random occurrences appear in the thread as posted by a host to keep things active and alive? Such as:

Player 4 has just acquired a fork. Watch those eyeballs.

A mine explosion has been heard to the east of the island. Player 2, while avoiding the explosion, has been caught in a ditch and will be unable to move for one turn.

A trap has sprung somewhere on the island. Player 1 is immobile for two turns.

Um.... Player 8 picked up a packet of grenades but accidentally armed one and an explosion was heard to the southwest of the island...

*thinking* ... Player 6 ran across a pack of ravenous wolfs and has been eaten alive (death square?).

Were you thinking of including special squares like suicides, traps and the like? (In edition to having weapons if we did that, etc... that how it goes?)


Regarding the grid, I see what you mean. The map and grid size could easily be announced after sign ups close. Oddly shaped grids would be sweet as well.

 

I am starting to like the scattered weapon idea better. That would also allow for random starting positions, instead of the same one, as in the book.


Death squares would be a little much, I think. That was kind of the idea of forbidden zones, but they would be announced. Maybe we could announce it, then after one turn, have a mod edit it out so that if someone maybe misses a turn, that would be a penalty(along with randomized movement) because they wouldn't know where the square was. However, I do think random trap squares would be neat.


The only thing I'm not sure about is this: What if two people met up without any weapons, and both had the same stance? I mean, I suppose we could judge on who we think would actually win based on a physical description, but then someone could just lie. Maybe we could sort of make it like a draft, and have them draft one kid from the books. Or maybe some other type of character. That's the only thing I was wondering how we would work out. Maybe we could give everyone a certain amount of stat points and categories to use, I dunno. I think it would be fun to be able to pick a character that you like, but that could get weird. It would just be hard to judge when two people meet up without weapons, so we would need to think about a solution for that.

 

Announcing forbidden zones for a bit and then removing them sounds interesting. By one turn, do you mean a whole row of turns (all players?) or more along the lines of a 24 hour period? Also, forbidden zones never change, right?

Good point about the weaponless combatants. I would be hesitant to draft people from the BR book or something similar; I'd think that it would be better to keep it all to the people actually playing the game and running around on the grid. All about what weapons they have, what stance they're in, and so on.

You mention stat points... That has me thinking about Role-Playing ability scores. Strength; Dexterity; Constitution; Wisdom; Intelligence; Charisma. What do you think about giving people things like this to start off with? This may be running a little bit away from the base game you're thinking of, but because I'm not familiar with it, I'm just offering more interpretations to the table.

You could of course just limit it to STR, DEX and CON even. Have a set amount of numbers you can put into each at the beginning of the game. STR is a better fighter. DEX is better for stance. CON is better stamina. And maybe, from these numbers, if two players meet who don't have any weapons, they could simply argue (like drafts) why they - their character, their persona - would win over the other person based on their stat points and of course stance and positioning, etc.

You could also apply these stat points to normal fighting as well. i.e. STR 10 + fork beats someone with STR 2 + machete in a straight out fight, no stance. Maybe? That's just a random example, by no means attempting to make that the case if you were to try to apply these extras.

Or, of course, this is edging a bit too far away from a good Battle Island game. Tell me if I'm wandering.

 

No, that's exactly where I was headed in my thinking, I just didn't want it to get too complicated.

Basically I thought a turn would be everyone sending in their move for however many squares we allow for a turn(say four or whatever). You have however many hours to get your movement in before the next turn. The hosts take all of the movements, and find out if anyone has run into anyone else, or if they've landed on a trap, etc. PM's the players back their current terrain, or if they've run into anyone, and what weapon that person is holding(for people with more than one weapon they would need to PM which they are holding), what sort of disposition they have, etc. If the player is PMed back that they've run into someone, we can announce that those players are fighting, but not where. To keep it secret. The players can then argue their cases to the judges, who will weight all of the factors and decide the outcome.

Uhm, the forbidden zones never change, but they don't stay on forever. The trap squares could stay on the whole game, untils someone hits them.

 

Sweet. So how about as a base using three ability scores? That wouldn't be too complicated...? I'd reckon it'd work, simply because it's just one thing everybody does at the beginning of the game, and then it's locked in.

Of course! That's how turns would run. My apologies, I had an actual turn order stuck into my head for some reason. But when things are PM to hosts, you don't need to do that, do you. . . .

I assume then that if you moved three squares from A to D, but ran into a player on C, you would stop your movement there and deal with whatever is on C. What happens if, in the same example, you ran across a new weapon on grid square C? Would it be dealt with retrospectively after the player has been informed what they've run across? Or do items halt movement as well. . . .

The final point I've noticed, is what happens if a person ends their movement on somebody else's territory that they have just vacated that same turn? As in, Player 1 moves from A to B, and on the same turn Player 2 PMs the hosts making a movement from B to D. Player 2, I would have to assume, is off the square by the time 1 gets there (if things happen concurrently). That then raises the question of movements that cross each other. If Player 1 goes from A to C and Player 2 goes from B-1 to B+1 they would meet at B, no dramas. But what about if, same scenario, Player 2 comes from B-2 to B+1. Do they meet?









myth update: Just wanted to mention that some good progress has been made in the Mythology Draft. Sorry that it's taken a little longer. But I've just been given a project in RL that has to be ready by Saturday, so I'll be juggling that with more Mythology work, but I'll be really busy regardless. Perhaps by the end of the weekend.

 

I think that, if you cross a square someone else crosses, then you meet, but if you're leaving a square that someone else is entering, there would be no detection. Maybe something like "someone has recently been here".

Also, I would say if you don't land on a weapon square, you don't get the weapon.

And three ratings...how about Strength, Dexterity, and Intelligence? Strength would be better with the hand held weapons(and unarmed), Dexterity with the guns, intelligence would give you a bigger bonus with your "dig in" stance or something.

I dunno, maybe that's adding even more uneveness to people with guns, but say you have no dexterity, you'd basically have no clue how to even use the thing.

 

Create a Year of TV/Movies: we're working on it, with some help from Moleman. If you want to give suggestions, the links are on the last page and were suggested by Jango10.

 

EF;

Perhaps the tracking skill - "someone has recently been here" - could also be attached to a certain movement stance. I would say sprinting. Yes, logically that may seem odd, but when I thought about it, if you added it to the dig in stance, then it really is getting all the bonuses. Sprinting wouldn't do you much good. When you sprint, if you cross a square that someone during that turn had previously been in, I reckon you'd smell them you're running so fast. There's my counter-logic explanation.

Ah, so it's all about the squares you land on that really matter? So the ones you cross only matter when there's a person there or a trap.

Those three ratings work. Splitting up guns and hand-to-hand combat is probably smart. I don't see it as unevenness, it's more of a gambit if you go with more dexterity that you will find a ranged weapon. Or go the safe way with strength, but then lose out on the bonus if you find a gun, etc. Works for me. What about Constitution for the third? I just fail to see how intelligence helps a dig in stance. Plus, CON could give you better sprinting bonuses (more stamina) and the like. Either way, it doesn't matter, it does the same.

 

I like Con for the third one. That works. I mean, I really do think it can be kept extremely simple. The categories take some of the randomness out of it, and I like that. It's still pretty random though. Which is good, that leaves it fair to everyone, or someone could just get extremely lucky.

 

Agreed. I'm quite happy/excited for this now. I think the next stage that really needs to be thought and written out is a first post so to speak. The rules, outlined for everybody. Think you could do that whenever you feel up to it?



Also, in regards to the mythology draft, I can assure you it's not a myth (haha ) and now that it's past the weekend and I'm not taken up by what I previously mentioned, we'll have something up this week; perhaps tomorrow evening.

 

The Mythology Draft

We live!

Here is a tentative - but at the same time inclusive - draft list for this new and exciting game:






Draftable Characters

Regular list:


Achilles
Actaeon
Adrasteia
Aeneas
Agamemnon
Agilaz
Ajax the Great
Ajax the Lesser
Am-heh
Ammit
amphisbaena
Andvari
Angantyr
Antaeus
anubite
Argus Panoptes
Asterix
Atalanta
Basilisk
Bellerophon
Beowulf
Brynhildr
Cadmus
Caeneus
Calchas
Calydonian Boar
Cassandra
Castor
Cecrops I
centaur
Cerberus
Ceryneian Hind
Chimera
Chiron
Cretan Bull
cyclops
Cycnus, son of Ares
Daedalus
Dag the Wise
Diomedes
Dvalinn
Echo
Egill Skallagrímsson
Eitri & Brokkr
Erymanthian Boar
Fafnir
Fenghuang
Fenrisulfr
Ganymede
Garmr
Geryon
Glaukos
griffin
Guan Yu
Gudrun
Gunther
Halfdan the Old
harpy
Hector
Heiracosphinx
Helgi Hundingsbane
Heracles
Hikaru Genji
hippocamp
Hippolyta
Hjalmar
Houyi
Hreidmar
Icarus
Imperial guardian lions
Iolaus
Jason
Jörmungandr
Kappa
Kintaro
Kitsune
Lady Zhurong
Laertes
Lamia
Lernaean Hydra
Mare of Diomedes
Medea
Medusa
Melampus
Midas
Minotaur
Mopsus
Nemean Lion
Neoptolemus
Nestor
Obelix
Odysseus
Oni
Orion
Orpheus
Orthrus
Orvar-Odd
Ótr
Paris
Patroclus
Pegasus
Penthesilea
Perseus
Pheonix
Pixiu
Polydeuces (Pollux)
Qilin
Regin
Remus
Romulus
Saito Musashibo Benkei
Sarpedon
Sigurd
Sojobo
Sphinx
Stymphalian birds
Talos
Telephus
Theris Nordo Ichka
Theseus
unicorn
Wayland Smith
Wiglaf
Yrsa





Deity list:


Ægir
Aeolus [specify incarnation]
Aether
Amaterasu
Amun
Anemoi [specify incarnation]
Anubis
Apep
Aphrodite
Apollo
Apollo
Ares
Artemis
Asclepius
Ate
Athena
Atlas
Atropos
Baldr
Bast
Caerus
Calypso
Chaos
Charon
Chronos
Circe
Clotho
Cronus
Cybele
Demeter
Diana
Dionysus
Eir
Eos
Erebus
Eros
Forseti
Fortuna
Freyja
Freyr
Frigg
Fujin
Gaia
Geb
Hachiman
Hades
Hathor
He Xiangu
Hecate
Heimdall
Hel
Helios
Hemera
Hephaestus
Hera
Hermes
Horus
Hypnos
Iðunn
Imhotep
Inari
Iris
Isis
Jade Emperor
Janus
Juno
Jupiter
Kagu-tsuchi
Khnum
Lachesis
Lei Gong
Loki
Lü Dongbin
Ma'at
Mars
Menoetius
Menthu
Mercury
Metis
Minerva
Momus
Morpheus
Neith
Nekhbet
Nemesis
Nephthys
Neptune
Njord
Nyx
Oceanus
Odin
Osiris
Pan
Persephone
Pluto
Poseidon
Prometheus
Proteus
Ptah
Ra
Raijin
Sarutahiko
Saturn
Sekhmet
Selene
Set
Shu
Skaði
Sobek
Sol
Susanoo
Tefnut
Thor
Thoth
Týr
Ullr
Uranus
Venus
Vidar
Vulcan
Wadjet
Wepwawet
Yuki-onna
Zeus







Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Norse, Japanese and Chinese mythologies are currently what is being used. Needless to say, the bulk of it come from the Greeks.

There are 124 regulars in the first list, and, strangely enough, there are 124 deities in the second list as well. That was not planned.

As was explained when the Mythology Draft was first drafted, deities do not fight in battles themselves. They fight through the person they are aligned with. Alignment is a key (and new!) feature in this draft, so note what it means well.

Because of how things have turned out, the original idea of 8 regular characters and 4 deities is not going to work out. When pondering over it, we've decided that a blessed solution to this would be to run a draft in which people pick 6 characters from both lists: 6 regulars; 6 deities. This makes a team of 12 - however, all deities are aligned with regular drafties. Which means only 6 battles occur. This will also mean trumps are a non-factor. You are not allowed to trump characters.





I'll be the commissioner for the Mythology Draft. And I have three brave souls already lined up to tackle the roles of judges - which will definitely be an interesting one in this.

I've explained some random things in direct relation to the draft. Please, nothing is locked in. That's what this thread is for. You can now see the list - if you are interested enough to scroll through it, comments are welcome. Additions

 

Apollo's on there twice

 

How did I not spot this earlier?

Finally, a draft where I know something about the people involved.

Question: if battles that are in the mythology get repeated (e.g. Theseus vs. the Minotaur) does the draft battle automatically turn out the same way? Or could something (say if Minotaur's deity >>> Theseus' deity) overturn the original?

Also, Medusa's on there, but the other two Gorgons aren't. Was this an oversight, or are Sthenno and Euryale simply considered too obscure?

 

Awesome. It would be great to see you in this one, Nemesis.

No, there are no pre-set outcomes. Nothing is locked in. Since everybody will have a deity backing them, that could make all the difference. But, then again, it may still turn out the same. And it's not necessarily about deities > than others, but rather what they can do with their character in a draft battle. And that's where the fun really begins.

No, skipping over the other two Gorgons was not an oversight. And definitely no, they're not too obscure. It was quite simple, really. They are immortal. Doesn't really do us much good in a draft battle, now, does it?

Spot on, my man. When putting this together, I had them in separate mythology lists. Didn't even realise that I had the name in each one. I'm thinking, since there doesn't appear to be much difference between them, that to solve it I'll remove one of them and make the remaining one: Apollo [specify mythology].