The Don's Guide to Role-Playing

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • The Don's Guide to Role-Playing

      Do you think you benefit from this guide? 36

      The result is only visible to the participants.

      Supremacy 1914 RP Guide



      This guide was originally posted in Supremacy 1914, and it is my wish that this guide be maintained as a tribute to that very original, very beautiful game. Regardless of current opinion, I am sure all who played S1914 will agree. And moving forward, the basic principles to a good RP in both games are the same. There is much we can learn from the experiences of S1914, and I hope we will have a vibrant and thriving RP community in COW. Once again, thank you Bytro, for a great game.


      I believe in the old, structured way of RP, with the ordered and formal styling of the community that once existed in S1914. This guide will reflect that approach. There may be those who disagree - I am only presenting my view, and the knowledge I have accumulated over nearly a decade of my association with S1914.


      What is Role Play?


      This is by itself a very difficult question, and the answer is subject to much debate. However, from prolonged discussion and by incorporating various opinions, we can define role playing as " the fine art involving the use of a character, real or fictional, along with other functions of state, and a combination of real, historic and fictionalevents and scenarios for the promotion and extension of one's game such that all events that take place in the natural course of a normal game are represented adequately and with reasonable limits of realism via the in game communication features such as letters, pacts, treaties and articles."

      This definition raises other questions.

      What is a character?

      What are functions of a state?

      What are events and scenarios?

      What is the promotion and extension of ones game?

      What is the natural course of a game?

      How to represent adequately and with reasonable limits of realism?

      What is the balance of power?


      Further, the experience of S1914 tells us that starting too many games, joining too many games at once, quitting games simply because it does not go according to your wishes, aligning with players based on meta-gaming relations etc will lead to a general deterioration of the game. Stay true to the game, and stick with the game you have chosen until it concludes; this will be most rewarding.

      To conclude, I hope this community grows as a worthy successor of the highest points in the history of the S1914 RP Community, and carries forward that legacy.

      Don.
      "Om Namah Shivaya....Aham Namah Shivaya"
    • What is a character?



      The character can be a head of state, minister, general or any other persona you use to represent your state in the international forum within a game. There can be one or more characters, used in combination or individually, and with varying story lines and background stories which may or may not be adopted. Your character will represent you in all state affairs, whether it be the sending of diplomatic messages or posting of articles, or negotiation of treaties and pacts. Your character will also be subject to any events that take place during the game, and will have to be played within reasonable limits of realism.



      Example: Tsar of Russia Aleksey Mikhailovich I (head of state), General Alex Summers (chief of armed forces)



      What are functions of a state?



      This list can be neither complete nor exhaustive. It includes any and all functions of a nation, like declaring war, peace, trade pacts, military alliances, Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), holding military exercises, diplomatic communications, official press releases, declaring ultimatum, state of emergency etc. These events must be used realistically, such as they would in real life, and also in conformity with the game system, as playing realistically without regard for the constraints of the game is not viable.



      Example: India and Russia holding a joint military exercise. To be realistic, both nations release units to the said territory to hold the exercise. However, since this will involve the units being deployed elsewhere and otherwise occupied, such an exercise is likely to be concluded quickly, in keeping with the constraints involved in the game mechanics. The conclusion is not because of a rule of thumb, but because not pulling your troops back will mean they are not where you want them to be, which is a situation you must avoid. If it means nothing to you, you may leave your troops in neutral territory.



      What are events and scenarios?



      Events are the occurrences that are controlled by a single nation. The appointment of a new Air Chief Marshal of Italy is an event, that is cast by the player controlling Italy, using his various state functions and his character. It cannot be influenced from outside directly, though diplomatic pressure may be put of the player to cast events favorably to other parties.

      Events can, however, influence other players actions, by working to change the balance of power.



      Example: Italy declaring the dissolution of parliament is a event. It may be forced by another country, remaining anonymous, by way of diplomatic pressure, and to avoid further damages, which will relegate Italy to a weaker position according to the game mechanics, Italy may conform. The importance here is that the event is the en-action of the action Italy would take to avoid incurring damages that would otherwise happen, and the original action being something that would take place in the normal course of a game, RP or otherwise.



      Scenarios are group events, which influence and are influenced by more than one nation/player. Such events hold much greater influence on other players than a normal event, as they serve to change much of the prevalent Geo-political scenario on the map and shift the balance of power considerably. Hence they are herewith termed 'Scenarios'.


      Example: Forming an alliance between two nations. Such an action would have a widespread impact, as players seek to either form rival alliances to counter them, or seek to to gain the favor of the nations currently allied to each other. It will serve to create much tension and fuel further events and scenarios. Such actions will be taken in response to these scenarios because of each players wish to either maintain the balance of power, or shift it in their favor.



      Events and scenarios combine to form the basis of the game, and create tensions and fuel further events and scenarios, which will provide the material for further RPing the game. They must be used with care and realism, and at the same time in a manner that will not be self defeating or serving to subside the predominance of the game mechanics.


      Example: Making an event whereby a player gives all his resources to another is possible, however, such an event is not realistic, and will stand harsh penalty from the game mechanics. On the other hand, giving resources to appease a player and gain peace is both realistic and true to the game mechanics, as avoiding war might be favorable in future consideration.
      "Om Namah Shivaya....Aham Namah Shivaya"

      The post was edited 1 time, last by DonViswanath ().

    • What is the promotion and extension of ones game?



      The aim of this game is to make the nation you control the most dominant on the map. Playing an RP game on this site, with the current game mechanics, we must respect this object of the game, and play accordingly. Every action you take in the game must be for your cause, towards advancing your position, and achieving your goals, both long term and short term. Playing in keeping with the realism of this game is of utmost importance.



      However, it is also paramount that you RP every action of take in control of a nation, and in keeping with real world realism. Every action must be re-enacted and communicated as it would be as a matter of operation of an actual state.



      Example: On the brink of disaster, it may be correct, RP wise, for Germany to not surrender and continue fighting. But this is not realistic, or in line with the game mechanics, as fighting no longer serves your purpose of advancing your position. However, it is also not right for you to abandon all RP attempts and randomly attack another nation without a justifiable casus belli or proper reason for war, just because it is strategically viable to do so as per the game mechanics.



      Attacking a nation because you can is not un-RP like. However, attacking without providing proper cause is. So, even as we seek to advance our position, and take advantage of a weaker state, we must take the time to find a casus belli and RP the events properly to lead to war.



      The complicated balance between the above mentioned element and the casting of various events and scenarios is what makes role playing a fine art.



      What is the natural course of a game?



      The natural course of the game presupposes that you will act as a rational player and play to advance your own position, or at least maintain the balance of power, so that no player gains too much power and becomes dominant. In this condition, the actions of the players, as they wrestle for control, for the most case using diplomatic and economic means, the occasional subterfuge and the rare war, which are all means and extensions of state policy (i.e., state functions) , will create tensions and continue to fuel the RP, by providing events and scenarios which will lead to more events, in a self sustaining manner, until such day when the number of players in the game gets reduced to the extent that there are only a few and more or less equal superpowers remaining, who are in a state of stalemate, and cannot continue the game further without RP, or such a state where the game finishes by one player reaching the victory condition.



      How to represent adequately and with reasonable limits of realism?



      Adequate realism, conforming to both the games requirements and the standards of the role playing community is something of a balancing act. It requires practice, and patience. The first and most important thing is to understand that things can go wrong, and be ready to make changes to meet the demands of others. At the same time, don't let others change your intrinsic style. Your choices, should be your own.



      Reasonable levels of realism mean that you should RP any event you may create, or influence, or otherwise interact with, and any communication you may engage in, with a likeness to the real world interactions between nations. However, you need not go to great troubles to make it in depth.



      Example: While in real life, there may be many bureaucratic works intervening between two heads of state as they establish contact, you may play it as two characters establishing direct contact. However, realistic titles and signatures to the correspondence would be appreciated.



      Example: Most games use a time scale, like 1 game day being 1 month. In such games, if you are to date your articles, or your events (ex: declaring a time bound ultimatum) then you would have to keep note of the time scale used.



      What is the balance of power?



      In this game, strategically, every nation stands an equal chance to win. The resource distributions and locations might be different, but every nation can win according to the circumstances of the game.



      In this game, whether you are playing an alliance game, individual game, role playing game, or any other version of it, your first intent should be in keeping the balance of power as it is, i.e., making sure that the balance of power does not shift in favor of any one or more players. If all it does, it should shift in your favor, not that of anyone else.


      The basic idea of making yourself more powerful is in securing enough of all resources to make sure you can build up and progress. This must be so even more in an RP, where you are not allowed to wage endless wars and attack without proper reason, as it will destroy popular opinion and support for you and will make more players opposed to you, as your aggressive attempts to shift the balance of power in your favor may be seen as dangerous to others.



      Similarly, when another player makes a gain, territorial, economic, political or diplomatic, you should work to neutralize this gain. If a nation has won over another in a war, allowing them to take over the whole of the conquered territory will not benefit you. You must attempt to minimize his gains as much as possible, by supporting a peaceful and more or less equal solution, that would involve only a bare minimum of gains to the winner, and a bare minimum of losses to the vanquished. And an alliance should be countered by forming one of your own, or making favorable acquaintance with the allies.



      You must also avoid long wars, and must try to make others stop prolonged conflict by using your diplomacy or ultimately, your own military intervention. This is because a war will eliminate one of more military powers, players on the geo-political playing field, which will tend to cast another power as dominant.



      Playing with the balance of power in mind is important as, combined with good RPing, this will make for a game which lasts as players introduce checks and balances to neutralize each other, as well as providing enough tension and RP material, fueling events and scenarios to keep the game interesting. Remember, the real balance of power is not reflected by the game. Simply following these basic ideas will give rise to game that throws up crises and interesting choices in its normal course, without any artificially inserted scenarios/events that the players have to consciously make. And that, is interesting.



      This, so far, describes the game as understood by the "Old Guard", the experienced players of the Supremacy 1914 Role Playing Community. It is also the style that has generated games with the most interest and longest life.
      "Om Namah Shivaya....Aham Namah Shivaya"
    • Role-playing is like poetry in a strategy game, and Role Players are like poets.....a crazy bunch with a head-full of delusions.

      But, under the right circumstances, it can be quite enjoyable.

      Looking forward to playing games with you, vindicator :) Did you have a S1914 name?
      "Om Namah Shivaya....Aham Namah Shivaya"
    • DonViswanath wrote:

      Role-playing is like poetry in a strategy game, and Role Players are like poets.....a crazy bunch with a head-full of delusions.

      But, under the right circumstances, it can be quite enjoyable.

      Looking forward to playing games with you, vindicator :) Did you have a S1914 name?
      Do you like RPs? Cause we already started a Cold War RP its pretty fun. In CoW its easier to RP with the 10 player scenario here than in S1914s Europe only Scenario that was used mostly.
      If the king doesn't move, then his subjects won’t follow.

      Do you know why snow is white? Because it forgot what color it was.

      Strength that knows no boundaries is merely violence.

    • It's strong because 2 alliance never showed up and everyone join the wining side, apperantly im alone and surrounded by red, and taking the Don's advice in RP the game will eventually be a free for all, the balance of power is broken.

      Let's just get it over with, and start a new RP this time with more activity and no more innactivity.
      "Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
      -imperium thought of the day
    • The game is on like day 4 just have 2 people join as France and UK. Its not my fault everyone joined on my side. Italy threatened Turkey's power so he joined my side and Sweden was scared or something and just decided to be communist. I messaged Germany saying i wasn't the neutral faction in Europe but for some reason the neutral's just decided to be Communist. It doesnt help that the leader of the Capitalist Faction is completely stupid and not trying to get people to join his side like italy and Germany.
      If the king doesn't move, then his subjects won’t follow.

      Do you know why snow is white? Because it forgot what color it was.

      Strength that knows no boundaries is merely violence.

    • Italy and Germany is its own alliance, being totalitarian, how neutral can we get? We do what we want, whatever and whenever we want, to justify since everyone become communist, I need to defend myself from everyone, 1 versus 5 is not fun, trying to make some breathing space is already hard is it is.
      "Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
      -imperium thought of the day
    • Guys, guys....I don't know what happened here, but a pre-set alliance is setting up to fail. Ideally, there should be no alliances to start of with. For example, if you are playing CW-RP (which I started back in S1914 btw... 8) ), you have two very different ideologies (USA and USSR). You have a number of nations (all others) that have ideologies that are anywhere between the extreme ends represented by USA and USSR. This should form the basis of how the game sets up.

      So, to begin, you can simply say country X, Y and Z are pro-Communist, while A, B and C are pro-Capitalist. There is no iron-clad alliance there. That is left up to the in-game choices and decisions of all the players. That will create a lot of RP-material.

      Further, this will generate a balance of power by itself. For the purpose of this, to simulate the actual condition, we might have to make a few changes: make USA and USSR a bit more powerful than other countries. This could be done by a minor landswap for USSR, and a system of fixed alliances for USA (Canada and UK could start the game being US allies).

      So on and so forth.

      If you want, we can try a new game. One that has already started and progressed a bit down the wrong path will be a bit difficult to bring back. But that said, if we do start a new one, we have to stick with it to the end, agreed?
      "Om Namah Shivaya....Aham Namah Shivaya"
    • DonViswanath wrote:

      Guys, guys....I don't know what happened here, but a pre-set alliance is setting up to fail. Ideally, there should be no alliances to start of with. For example, if you are playing CW-RP (which I started back in S1914 btw... 8) ), you have two very different ideologies (USA and USSR). You have a number of nations (all others) that have ideologies that are anywhere between the extreme ends represented by USA and USSR. This should form the basis of how the game sets up.

      So, to begin, you can simply say country X, Y and Z are pro-Communist, while A, B and C are pro-Capitalist. There is no iron-clad alliance there. That is left up to the in-game choices and decisions of all the players. That will create a lot of RP-material.

      Further, this will generate a balance of power by itself. For the purpose of this, to simulate the actual condition, we might have to make a few changes: make USA and USSR a bit more powerful than other countries. This could be done by a minor landswap for USSR, and a system of fixed alliances for USA (Canada and UK could start the game being US allies).

      So on and so forth.

      If you want, we can try a new game. One that has already started and progressed a bit down the wrong path will be a bit difficult to bring back. But that said, if we do start a new one, we have to stick with it to the end, agreed?
      Ill gladly join any RP lol but what you said basically was what happened im USSR and extremely Communist with Yugoslavia Pro- Communist. What set the balance of power off was when Italy a Neutral nation Proclaimed to reform the Roman Empire and set Turkey as Hostile by trying to take Greece. Turkey seeing me and Yugoslavia as good allies against Italy decided to join the Communist Faction. Spain who had nothin but Capitalist Nations around felt afraid and proclaimed Communist too. I still didn't know why Sweden decided to join Communist too maybe because he was afraid when i toke Finland and Baltics. The reason the game failed tho was cause the 2 players who was suppose to be France and UK never joined...... So really Germany and Italy are the 2 only Players that ain't Communist and USA whose Capitalist.
      If the king doesn't move, then his subjects won’t follow.

      Do you know why snow is white? Because it forgot what color it was.

      Strength that knows no boundaries is merely violence.

    • "Spain who had nothin but Capitalist Nations around felt afraid and proclaimed Communist too"

      That seems counter-intuitive.... But in that case, the game failed, as you say, exclusively because some players failed to join. That happens, regardless of how carefully one plans.

      So, new game, or continue with the old? I can try to bring in a few other RPers, but they will have to get used to this game, and I don't think it is time for that yet....

      Also, before we try the more complex CWRP....let's try a simpler one? The WW2 RP...starting in, say, 1925, where S1914 lets off....begin with a twenty day peace period and starting diplomatic positions, and the rest will evolve over the course of the game. Maybe it will (I am betting it will) eventually reach CW by itself. Wouldn't that be cool? :D
      "Om Namah Shivaya....Aham Namah Shivaya"

      The post was edited 1 time, last by DonViswanath ().

    • Also, while we are here, I would like to discuss the RP Game Limiting System. An informal control on how many active games there are in the community at a time. The RP community is unlikely to grow very large, and it is time consuming to play a good RP - you can only be so many characters at one time. It is therefore in the interest of all involved to agree on an informal limit to the number of games there are actively going on at any time, to avoid players dropping out of running games and joining new ones. Kind of like a gentleman's agreement.
      "Om Namah Shivaya....Aham Namah Shivaya"
    • DonViswanath wrote:

      Also, while we are here, I would like to discuss the RP Game Limiting System. An informal control on how many active games there are in the community at a time. The RP community is unlikely to grow very large, and it is time consuming to play a good RP - you can only be so many characters at one time. It is therefore in the interest of all involved to agree on an informal limit to the number of games there are actively going on at any time, to avoid players dropping out of running games and joining new ones. Kind of like a gentleman's agreement.
      i will agree to this. usually if theirs to many RP games you will find games with people who don't RP at all. It happens to me alot in S1914. And so far all the RPs ive joined in CoW have failed hard no one RPed at all. the 1 game i did kinda have RP in their was 3 active players other than me and Germany wanted to follow history without telling anyone until he invaded Poland. Then when i told him to stop attacking nations for no reason he complained to me as USA that i wasn't RP correctly cause America would never take over Canada and Cuba even though i gave good reason why i invaded them and then he justifies his reasoning for not Declaring in the Newspaper on the first 5 nations he attacked without telling anyone why was because it happened in history and telling me i need to act like USA in 1945..... I hope he figures out that this is a alternate history game and their will never be a president named Lelouch.....
      If the king doesn't move, then his subjects won’t follow.

      Do you know why snow is white? Because it forgot what color it was.

      Strength that knows no boundaries is merely violence.

    • have you guys ever played 30k? Thirty kingdoms is the Medieval/fantasy version of S1914 with elements of CoW.

      Me and a group of players are planning a RP game, i was wondering if this guide to RP is applicable, there might be some complication when adapting this to a medieval so i kind of need some help.
      "Victory needs no explenation, defeat allows none"
      -imperium thought of the day