A Regency MU (Conceptual)

[Auspice]

I blame Bridgerton but also Emma.. I've been on a Regency kick lately and I think a MU could be pretty fun (and laid back since no ermgbigevilmetaplot to deal with on anyone's part).

If I did this, I would want to lean into the more comedic, satire, and modern-inspired (such as with racial casting, etc.) things like The Great, Bridgerton, Emma. and so on. I know some people know a great deal about the Regency era, but a fair number more of us don't. Plus, the more satirical spins on things are more fun IMO.

A few thoughts so far:

• Set in London
• Game starts at the beginning of the social season
• A full roster to ensure populated houses and not a dozen instances of a single individual per house (would also help people have built-in RP)
• Regular events would be things like balls, picnics, hunting, salons, etc.

Is this something people would play?

And of those who would be interested:
Would anyone be interested in helping me draft up a grid and/or writing some of the houses and their rosters (Ares, so p basic and honestly, I'd just be asking for demographics: I can do sheets no prob)? (This may or may not extend into an invitation to Staff on the game... I am traditionally picky about who I staff with (a) and it's not a game concept that needs many to run it (b).)

This is not a set-in-stone idea. I start a new job next week and may find I am simply too overwhelmed to even think of running a game. But right now I am in the camp of 'gosh this would be fun to RP' and by the rules of 'if you want it, make it' I may do just that.

[Ominous]

One thing I've missed from Lords & Ladies games are debuts or debutante balls. And, no, Kushiel games don't count, as their debuts are quite a bit different. New adults or almost adults get presented and introduced to the rest of noble society along with other adults or almost adults.

Most of the time, L&L games just have balls and parties for random reasons, when there was a social season to things. And a debutante ball is a good way to introduce new PCs to the game. Why haven't we ever heard of your character before? Oh, it's because you just debuted or are about to debut.

[Auspice]

@ominous said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

One thing I've missed from Lords & Ladies games are debuts or debutante balls. And, no, Kushiel games don't count, as their debuts are quite a bit different. New adults or almost adults get presented and introduced to the rest of noble society along with other adults or almost adults.

Most of the time, L&L games just have balls and parties for random reasons, when there was a social season to things. And a debutante ball is a good way to introduce new PCs to the game. Why haven't we ever heard of your character before? Oh, it's because you just debuted or are about to debut.

Yes!
Which is why I think opening the game with a debut would be an excellent way of things.

I think also, tbh, why not lean into peoples' desire to marry off? Oh you got engaged in a week? How fortunate that you caught someone's eye!

[Tinuviel]

@auspice said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

Regular events would be things like balls, picnics, hunting, salons, etc.

And how would one work to prevent these events seeming... samey?

[Auspice]

@tinuviel said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

@auspice said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

Regular events would be things like balls, picnics, hunting, salons, etc.

And how would one work to prevent these events seeming... samey?

Good question and to be perfectly frank, one of my answers is: 'Most games don't last a year.'
The other answer is: please make suggestions.

Ball after ball does get old.
I'm hoping a bunch of different types of events and some of those events being themed might help, but it's hard to say.

[GreenFlashlight]

Seems like a good place to lean into some unashamed soap opera melodrama.

[Aria]

So there's a game called Marrying Mister Darcy that you might want to check out. It's a card game, not a MU*, but I think it could provide some interesting inspiration on setting up characters with, like..... guidelines of what would and would not constitute a 'good' match for them based on certain characteristics they're looking for and things you can do in game.

[Auspice]

@greenflashlight said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

Seems like a good place to lean into some unashamed soap opera melodrama.

In my notes I already have a draft for a policy file on 'Scandals'

[Pyrephox]

Will the game engage with the underside of Regency London, at all? Gaming hells, the rookeries, riots, Bow Street Runners, brothels and actresses/mistresses, etc? It sounds like you're going for a very lighthearted take on it, but at least including gaming hells might allow for some tension and scandal that isn't entirely manners-based. I admit, I mostly read Regency romances, but the gambling-debt-dodging lords (or ladies who must marry Well to buy their families out of debt their fathers/brothers acquired) is a fairly common trope.

I'd also suggest including at least a couple of gentlemen's clubs (for male characters), and regular salon/charity organizations (for female characters) to gather outside of balls/etc. It might be worth thinking of things, especially, to engage women outside of the social scene, since activities that don't imperil a debutante's reputation were somewhat restricted. Even if you lean into the idea that PC ladies are all Originals and the good kind of eccentric, giving an idea of what that looks like could help people consider what their characters DO in a Regency environment.

[krmbm]

What age limits are you planning to set?

[Snackness]

@pyrephox Building on this a little bit, upper class women in the Regency period gambled too, and some ran gambling establishments out of their homes. It was socially acceptable so long as they paid their debts. So that could be something fun for the ladies.

[Pyrephox]

@krmbm That...is a good question. Especially if you're having debutantes as a focus. Girls were presented as young as twelve, historically, although fifteen to eighteen were more common, and usually married between 1-3 years of their coming out.

[krmbm]

@pyrephox said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

@krmbm That...is a good question. Especially if you're having debutantes as a focus. Girls were presented as young as twelve, historically, although fifteen to eighteen were more common, and usually married between 1-3 years of their coming out.

That's exactly where I was headed. I'm super-squicked by underage PCs (even PCs that look underage weird me out), so it's a HARD PASS if there's not some kind of historical futzing to up the ages.

[Brunocerous]

Just spit-balling here, but I wonder if there is any value in having the head of each roster family played by an NPC to ensure maximum drama. It always seems to me that the joy of regency plotlines is trying to work against a fate in its various forms (loveless arranged marriages, saving the family home with a wealthy match, the inability to get introductions where desired, status vs wealth, attraction vs class, new loyalties as a head of house remarries, etc.). Maybe having npcs to serve as antagonists (or at least to drive antagonistic plotlines) would provide players with the requisite obstacles to drive this kind of rp.

[Pyrephox]

@krmbm If it were me (and it isn't) I would likely age everyone up. Not just debutantes, but just sort of glazing over the fact that a lot of the men with military and naval experience would have gotten those experiences starting at, like, 10-12 for naval sorts and not much older than that for army soldiers.

Thinking about it, I would also move away from 'large, well-populated' families, and instead outright encourage no more than 1-4 PCs per family; a title holder, heir, and a couple of younger siblings. And then other family connections being cousins/through marriage, because most of the ton was distantly related to each other /anyway/. Because the Regency plots most people go for aren't really about intra-family politics, but rather inter-family drama/romance/conflict. You want a lot of title-holders/heirs for people to chase, and having a lot of title-holders/heirs also allows you - if you want - to introduce light political drama through votes in Parliament and political maneuverings among the Whigs and Tories. There were actually several high-impact votes around this time period that could be inspirations for background plots (I wouldn't use the real world votes, nor be beholden to how those votes turned out). Also, the sons of Lords could (and did) stand for seats in the House of Commons, so Parliamentary drama wouldn't just be for title-holders.

[Auspice]

Gambling halls and the like would be present, but characters populating them would be alts as opposed to someone's primary pc (reason being it's not the focus of the game and I don't want balls with 75% commoners because 'but I wanna go!')

Age-wise: see original post re:modern sensibilities for some things and that this is not going to be an ultra realistic take. No PCs under 18. I just don't do that, personally.

As for family sizes....they'll range. Some will be bigger some smaller. But I'm also going to steer away from houses of 1-2 because that leads to 'Well they have to marry in because I can't abandon my name' and people being endlessly unwed. Secondary reason being: I intend to allow same-sex marriage as long as it's not to the heir. More reason for larger families.

As for heads of house being NPCs: I considered it but it'd be hard enough with just a handful of families. No the way of encouraging drama right now (in drafts) is (tl;de version) 'scandal is encouraged but not forced however if you don't want scandal don't flaunt what you're doing else staff might visit it on you anyway'.
aka have affairs etc but don't expect to be able to waltz around in public with your lover and not get smacked in social standing for it.

[bear_necessities]

@auspice said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

not get smacked in social standing for it.

How are you going to represent social standing in Ares?

[Auspice]

@bear_necessities said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

@auspice said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

not get smacked in social standing for it.

How are you going to represent social standing in Ares?

Undecided. It may require coding something new. It may just be something as simple as bb post updates about who is currently being talked about and why (good or bad).

[Pyrephox]

@auspice said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

Gambling halls and the like would be present, but characters populating them would be alts as opposed to someone's primary pc (reason being it's not the focus of the game and I don't want balls with 75% commoners because 'but I wanna go!')

I'm not quite sure what you mean, here. The nobility went to gaming hells, and commoners did go to balls and participate in the Season - the daughters of naval and military officers, physicians, clergy, and barristers could all be presented at Court, and as those were considered aristocratic professions, they were definitely part of the social whirl of London. Any sufficiently wealthy person could be invited to the events of the ton, or any sufficiently /exciting/ person - high class courtesans and entertainers often went to balls, even if they wouldn't be invited to the most rarefied venues or to intimate gatherings. Rather famously, Beau Brummell, one of the most influential figures of Regency fashion, was not a peer, but rather a middle-class fellow and military officer who caught the eye of the Prince Regent.

[Auspice]

@pyrephox said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

@auspice said in A Regency MU (Conceptual):

Gambling halls and the like would be present, but characters populating them would be alts as opposed to someone's primary pc (reason being it's not the focus of the game and I don't want balls with 75% commoners because 'but I wanna go!')

I'm not quite sure what you mean, here. The nobility went to gaming hells, and commoners did go to balls and participate in the Season - the daughters of naval and military officers, physicians, clergy, and barristers could all be presented at Court, and as those were considered aristocratic professions, they were definitely part of the social whirl of London. Any sufficiently wealthy person could be invited to the events of the ton, or any sufficiently /exciting/ person - high class courtesans and entertainers often went to balls, even if they wouldn't be invited to the most rarefied venues or to intimate gatherings. Rather famously, Beau Brummell, one of the most influential figures of Regency fashion, was not a peer, but rather a middle-class fellow and military officer who caught the eye of the Prince Regent.

The way I have it written is upper class vs the others. Which includes military officers, clergy, etc etc. And yes could include certain middle-class who catch the right eye.

But does not include 'a seamstress because she wanted to'.