Historical MU*s

[Kanye Qwest]

@Lotherio Considering that most people don't have the sort of historical knowledge necessary to rp slice of life in such specific settings, what do you propose people rp about? Are you longing for these settings in a mud game where there's free pk and raiding/war to keep people occupied?

[Arkandel]

@Kanye-Qwest That's the main issue with historical games, always. You have to do movie/TV takes on them (i.e. only touch the surface) and unlike modern games they absolutely can never be sandbox since people simply won't know enough to kick-start thematic RP on their own.

The plot and metaplot gears must be constantly turning for a MU* like this unless it's basically Witcher with RL history names pinned on everything.

[Lotherio]

@Kanye-Qwest said in Historical MU*s:

@Lotherio Considering that most people don't have the sort of historical knowledge necessary to rp slice of life in such specific settings, what do you propose people rp about? Are you longing for these settings in a mud game where there's free pk and raiding/war to keep people occupied?

Just to be clear, I don't imagine folks would be interested in playing slice of life in any historical context ever. No one wants to play toiling in the dirt, living in filth, dealing with smallpox, dysentery, measles, leprosy, typhus or the plague.

No, I am not looking for a Mud, or free PK. PK is an option with reason certainly, as it is on most WoD games. I'm not proposing anything new or different.

I do believe most folks have watched Vikings or Braveheart (or Camelot, or Merlin, or some such) to have an idea of things to do on a day to day basis. Strengthening family/clan structures, establishing their own lands (even if small plot), or their own position in their local structure, or shirking some work to live instead of toiling in the dirt. Vikings was good at showing how one man rose in such a setting, but also shows a good deal of 'slice of life' one could do without being bored when things aren't happening.

Everyone has played enough WoD to get how politicking can work, or enough L&L games to get the basis for what would drive any game. Its setting up political groups in the settings to give folks some ambition and drive. In this case its dependent on the setting.

So 1) - hearths: the Viking structure of one hearth to one boat, the hearths (family/clans) that came over, and the decisions they make, to raid, to settle, who should be in charge. Groups upping each other for control as Ivar and Halfdan move off to join Amlib and raid in Ireland instead, or focus only on Aella for the time, leaving others to deal with Mercia and the southern kingdoms. Its deciding on a number of hearths to join for political agendas, one group wants to settle, another wants to raid the wealthly lands of Mercia, another thinks Mercia is too strong to anger currently.

2. Pick any number of Slavic groups/clans, this is the politics. Throw in some of the Tsar's groups, or the Mongols even as they come to collect taxes and have to deal with this stand up group on their borders. Its rich enough to have enough conflict right there between external invasion and internal struggles of who should be in control of this group that has come together.

3. A little more rich than the above two. You have Celtic groups/clans/families and the incursion of the Roman settlement. Skirmishes from time to time, Roman fall out with senate policies, politics back home, and their necessity to deal with the locals (for those not familiar with what this entails, watch Game of Thrones and the concerns of the Watch and those beyond the wall (or read up on Hadrain's wall)).

I don't want to go into detail, I have no time to develop any theme for such games. I'm just saying what I would want.

[Lotherio]

@Arkandel said in Historical MU*s:

@Kanye-Qwest That's the main issue with historical games, always. You have to do movie/TV takes on them (i.e. only touch the surface) and unlike modern games they absolutely can never be sandbox since people simply won't know enough to kick-start thematic RP on their own.

The plot and metaplot gears must be constantly turning for a MU* like this unless it's basically Witcher with RL history names pinned on everything.

The areas I'm after have enough to have some plot/metaplot going. There is a bit of turmoil and conclict in place. History may have to be condensed a little to spur some things; such as the huns and Budapest early years, the huns don't show up till later, but introducing it as an element early on gives a little more conflict potential. Or the Novgorod idea, they have to deal with the Tsar of the area deciding what do to with this group as well as the Mongol's take on this new group if it turns the Tsar towards ideas of rebelling from the whole system of paying up the chain so to speak. The Vikings are making decisions left and right as they have settled this newly invaded land, squabbling amongst themselves, dealing with multiple kingoms on their borders, probably having Saxons come to visit/want to stay, other visitors from the homeland, new hearths arriving and upsetting the balance.

It would take staff effort to keep driving them all, but there is enough conflict, turmoil, politics around the time periods it shouldn't settle into slice of life - and in the same vein, for those folks that like slice of life, the status quo shouldn't just overturn one day.

[Misadventure]

Sounds closer to a low to middle fantasy game, which happens to use geography, cultures and a rough history outline from reality. Similar to how Conan took place in a mishmash of places and cultures based on Europe etc.

Seems like it could work.

[Coin]

The Hyborean Age would be a great era for the kind of game I was talking about above.

[Arkandel]

@Coin said in Historical MU*s:

The Hyborean Age would be a great era for the kind of game I was talking about above.

At that point isn't it just a fantasy game?

[Coin]

@Arkandel said in Historical MU*s:

@Coin said in Historical MU*s:

The Hyborean Age would be a great era for the kind of game I was talking about above.

At that point isn't it just a fantasy game?

I'm sorry, what would you call a game with vampires, werewolves, mages, et al? Historical Realism?

[Misadventure]

A lot of fiction currently out has the supernatural, or at least parts of it, out in the open. Might be a nice change.

[Arkandel]

@Coin Apples and oranges is what I'd call it!

Even if a historical MU* isn't trying to be 100% accurate in the depiction of whatever era it's set at (and it shouldn't) the era still existed and what it depicts is at least based on concrete information; we have a decent idea of how Rome worked, or what Victorian London was like.

The Hyborean Age is fictional and falls into the same 'fantasy' category as Game of Thrones or LotR MU*.

... Having said that I'd probably play it. It's weird no Conan game has become popular (as far as I know).

[Lotherio]

@Coin said in Historical MU*s:

@Arkandel said in Historical MU*s:

@Coin said in Historical MU*s:

The Hyborean Age would be a great era for the kind of game I was talking about above.

At that point isn't it just a fantasy game?

I'm sorry, what would you call a game with vampires, werewolves, mages, et al? Historical Realism?

I think its only meant to distinguish between any other thread about new games or what people want and the thrust of this thread which was Historical Mu*s.

I think there is a line between Historical Mu* and say Fantasy Historical or WoD historical. Mind, I wouldn't mind some good fantasy or alternate history. But I'm good with Historical too.

As the OP mentioned, Chicaco Mush, I'd love to play some of that again.

[Lotherio]

@Misadventure said in Historical MU*s:

Sounds closer to a low to middle fantasy game, which happens to use geography, cultures and a rough history outline from reality. Similar to how Conan took place in a mishmash of places and cultures based on Europe etc.

Seems like it could work.

I'd avoid fantasy in these instances, only to keep it Historical, and I enjoy historical. Plenty do to without it being fantasy. All human, based on history, even if alternate history (alternate just meant as a deviation, not to introduce fantasy or supernatural elements). I was going with Chicago Mush reference in my other reponse as it was a fun place when folks were playing it; and surely, Changeling Prohibition Era would be pretty fun, but so was regular old historical Chicago Mu*.

I was just trying to turn it back to historical as it was deviating into historical WoD.

[Kanye Qwest]

@Lotherio I get it, I just still think that sort of game would require constant GMing and plot feed to sustain any number of players, unless you just want three history pedants arguing in the ooc channel about which clasp was possible in what year and what it meant for pack animals, or some shit.

[Misadventure]

Basically, most RPGs make the player character super human compared to the average person. WoD/CoD and similar games literally make you a supernatural type. This empowers the player to feel like they can get away with a lot, make things happen.

For anything other than the modern era, you need to provide support for a lot to think about, participate in, and look up. For instance, Victoriana, a steampunk and fantasy 1800s setting and game lays out quiet a few social and economic ills to address one way or another. This gives the players a sort of compass to act on and a context to place their characters.

Pure history comes with the heavy feel of "be realistic" and "be accurate", and that expresses out as wildly differing levels based on what one has studied.

[Arkandel]

@Kanye-Qwest said in Historical MU*s:

@Lotherio I get it, I just still think that sort of game would require constant GMing and plot feed to sustain any number of players, unless you just want three history pedants arguing in the ooc channel about which clasp was possible in what year and what it meant for pack animals, or some shit.

I agree with you on that one but I want to add that unless the game has been designed from scratch to deliver content in other ways, it'll fail to sustain any number of players anyway if there isn't enough plot being served.

See: Most sandbox games these days which fail to survive their first six months.

[Lotherio]

@Kanye-Qwest said in Historical MU*s:

@Lotherio I get it, I just still think that sort of game would require constant GMing and plot feed to sustain any number of players, unless you just want three history pedants arguing in the ooc channel about which clasp was possible in what year and what it meant for pack animals, or some shit.

We're on the same page, I never said to sandbox it without any meta/plot to keep some interest in it. I'm not looking to develop such games myself, so am trying not to focus on what to do so much from a staff perspective other than saying I'm interested in those time periods.

I can develop a slight timeline for one of them if we really want to see one so everyone gets a picture of what to do on a historical mu other than sit at the bar or do bandits/robbers/horse riding RP.

Danelaw ...
York is sacked, the Viking have moved in and named it Jorvik.

Current situation: Ivar and Halfdan have stayed the winter with the settlers, but its spring, they are taking a slew of ships further up and around the coast, to meet Amlaib.

There are 10 or so hearths (hirths) players may choose to be from. Two or three think they should be in charge, Ivar couldn't give half a wit to who is in control of Jorvik. The initial thrust is that once Ivar and Halfdan have gone away, both Northumbria and Mercia, Wessex is on the rise with want for revenge.

News arrives from the north, raiders of Aella have started to come closer to areas the Danes have moved into. A few of the hearths can go participate in some skirmishes and discover a larger army is coming. Gear up for a battle.

On the eve of the battle, within a week or so, the raiders of Mercia start as well, along with news of more Danes landing in Anglia to follow where the Great Heathen Army has come and gone.

I'd include a gaelic-norse mix to the west, around Strathclyde as well. Potential groups to ally with or make enemies of. Aella and Northumbria is always an enemy, along with Mercia.

Beyond this all honestly depends on what the players do.

[Ganymede]

@Lotherio said in Historical MU*s:

Danelaw ...
York is sacked, the Viking have moved in and named it Jorvik.

You mean Eoforwic, right? The Danes sacked Eoforwic.

Yes, I'm that kind of pedant.

[Thenomain]

@Lotherio said:

Beyond this all honestly depends on what the players do.

And there is the key. What do players do on this game? What do characters? You say you don't want dirt-toiling realism, but then what's? Are the characters leaders trying to stave back the Danes? Will they be allowed to? What character model would you use? How to they do this, because I can't even begin to imagine unless you have traits that would answer these questions. (D&D had one for a while that I can't remember. Birthright?)

What RP scenarios are there for Vikings? For monks? Yes, I know some of it writes itself (Chicago 1930s), but most of it doesn't.

[Arkandel]

@Thenomain said in Historical MU*s:

Are the characters leaders trying to stave back the Danes? Will they be allowed to?

Hm, emphasis mine.

Are significant deviations from history permitted on historical games? Is Asimov's invisible hand guiding the way things are supposed to be? And yes, you could just never give players a shot at tipping the scales at critical points in history but that's kinda boring. Yet if they do the premise can swiftly change to a 'what-if'.

[Misadventure]

I'd go with The Band approach, meaning that you manage a group of people whose abilities can matter, could be politicians, soldiers, mercenaries, scouts, whatever.