Veoline

Precipice of War - We Write Under The Sign Of The Goat

*Gasp* 45$/month for a phone susbcription.
It's such a rip-off in the US.

Civilization Roleplay: Rise of Races (The Tribes of Nova Mondial Want You!)

Haha, Mihndar has always been a committed democrat, isn't it? ;)

Civilization Roleplay: Rise of Races (The Tribes of Nova Mondial Want You!)

#nevergiveupneversurrender

@Mihndar

This is not a democracy, dude. I will get my way...someday.

Civilization Roleplay: Rise of Races (The Tribes of Nova Mondial Want You!)

<Snipped quote by Father Dagon>

I rise from my grave to comment on this

This system has been in place with the same issue for ages now and I don't see how implementing a new time system would make it worse or better

@MangoJuice

<Snipped quote by Veoline>

Well, if you have seen, people normally have their technology at the beginning of their introduction, such as:

example nation, example age and such
Technology (1/8)

Every post advances one point, so someone who posts frequently will advance in the scientific field faster.

@Father Dagon

I agree with Mango. The system I proposed wouldn't change the fact that frequent posters advance faster. All it would do would be providing a time frame for the events of the Rp, and that's pretty much it.

As I said previously, it is permissible not to detail the progress made towards a technology in every single post, especially when the technology requires many posts to be obtained.

Civilization Roleplay: Rise of Races (The Tribes of Nova Mondial Want You!)

I might be obtuse, but can someone seriously explain to me how the system would favor frequent posters? I really don't get it.

Civilization Roleplay: Rise of Races (The Tribes of Nova Mondial Want You!)

Mihndar's system is good, but I see one problem that might arise: say two races meet in a given year. Then imagine Player 1 posts more frequently than Player 2. When the two races will interact again, the interaction will have a different date in both systems, which is quite awkward, you'll have to admit.

I do think there was a misunderstanding when I explained the page-based system, though. Since advancement is post-based and not IC-time based, it doesn't matter whether you invent spears in 10 years or 10 days, as long as you spread it out over 10 posts.

Also, in the previous Rps, when a project took many posts to be completed, we could go a few posts without describing the advancement, but still taking it into account. In that way, even when you spend the whole post describing an interaction, you can still move your race forward, considering that in the meantime, out of the spotlight, they are continuing to do something.

Civilization Roleplay: Rise of Races (The Tribes of Nova Mondial Want You!)

Because none of the races have invented a precise time system and shared it with the other races, which is how I'd expect it to work in the first place.

@Raindeer

I actually don't understand what you mean by that. The page-based time system would be for our use only, and would be independent from the various calendars devised by each individual race.

Civilization Roleplay: Rise of Races (The Tribes of Nova Mondial Want You!)

It is not so much the case of a player developing fast. It's the case of some being left behind and developing slower because of the interactions. For an example we currently have people with bronze weapons and leather armor while some of us are yet to figure out how to shape wood into a suitable protection of some sort.

The rhythm have worked out somewhat well so far, even if I myself feel extremely rushed to get interactions done already. My own opinion is that the system would most probably make that problem even worse.

@Raindeer

I don't really see how it would make things worse. Players won't post more or less than before, so their pace of advancement (each race has a different evolution; military technology isn't the only path forwards) shouldn't change much from what it is right now. That's what I would think, but I might be wrong.

Besides, when we reach the "modern" age (that is when all races are in contact with most others and have relatively advanced i.e. Renaissance Europe technology) we'll need a precise time system, so why not implement it right from the onset?

Civilization Roleplay: Rise of Races (The Tribes of Nova Mondial Want You!)

<Snipped quote by Veoline>

Even then I have doubts in it going to make things work better for those of us that interact a lot. At least now in the beginning. I would have to write posts the size of a smaller book to get everything I want said/done within that timespan, which is something I extremely rarely have the time for.

I feel like it may also discourage interactions because of that pressure to further your race to not get left behind in the dust like a tribe in the rainforests of earth shooting arrows at planes as they fly by.

@Raindeer

I think that we'd see to it that no player develops unrealistically fast. I don't think the posting rhythm should really change. 10,000 years have elapsed since the invention of agriculture, after all. I'm not suggesting we fill in 1,000 pages, of course, but the point of the system would be, among other things, to allow our societies to evolve at a historically plausible pace.

Precipice of War - We Write Under The Sign Of The Goat

I don't know if The Grey Warden has settled on the events of the French uprising, but I'd like to add a few things:
-French university and indeed high school student numbers didn't balloon before the 50s in real life. So in the 20's you'd have at most a few tens of thousands of university students in Paris, mostly bourgeois upper-class. Of course you'd have quite a sizeable artistic and political avant-garde, but they could never muster the support of the majority of students. What I want to say is that a student uprising in the 20's is impossible.
-Under the 3rd Republic, the head of the government was the President of the Council, much like in Italy today, the President of the Republic being only a figurehead.
-Television didn't exist, or at least was extremely rare in the 20's/30's.
-The army is a staunchly conservative force (like in most places), and would support the government. In 1870, when the Commune took over Paris, the government retreated to Versailles and then proceeded to lay siege to Paris.
-In that regard, the rest of France, much less prone to revolution than the capital, would certainly be quite resistant to a complete regime change.
-Since the Haussmanian reconstruction of Paris in the late 19th century, the city has been crisscrossed by wide, open avenues which are simply too wide to be barricaded. Thus the police would always have access to most sections of the city unharmed, leaving only a few neighbourhoods whose streets had been untouched, namely the Quartier latin, really off-limits in the event of an uprising there.
-In the early 20th century, the main French political party was the Parti Radical de Gauche, a very moderate center-left party representing the progressive middle class, the bar-owners, the small shop owners, etc. It favored social reforms, but was violently anti-revolutionary.
-In the event of snap elections following social strife, expect the right to gather the support of the law-and-order middle class across the country.
-By the early 20th century, the bulk of the Parisian working class actually lived outside of the city proper, in the "banlieues rouges", the ring of suburbs outside the city limits.
-The SFIO (Socialist Party) was a pretty moderate governing party. The leaders were marxist, but by the early 20th century didn't really believe in Revolution anymore. In the event of an uprising spearheaded by the PCF (Communist Party), it might furthermore be wary of the PCF gaining dominance.
-The PCF had the support of around 10-15% of the electorate, and was widely shunned by the rest of the political spectrum (that was in part due to its perception as a foreign force under the command of the USSR, which it obviously wouldn't have in PoW)
-Arguably, the most significant threat to the French Republic in the 30's was actually rightwing antiparliamentary, proto-fascist militias, the Ligues, made up in large part of former soldiers fed up with the incompetence of the government. It's possible that due to the duration of the war, nationalistic, violently xenophobic forces might have gained in popularity. In that case, however, expect an extremely strong reaction from the Left, which, bar the PCF, was very attached to the parliamentary republican form of government. The PCF, on the other hand, would be the ideological polar opposite of the Right, so it would be even more opposed to it than other leftwing parties. A civil war, rather than a revolution, would actually be more plausible.

@Dinh AaronMK In France, the colonial question actually cut across party lines. Members of some leftwing parties supported it, as in their opinion colonization brought civilization to the natives, and members of rightwing parties opposed it as they thought it lead to negligence of the development of France itself, as well as focusing the country's attention away from its fight with Germany, the "hereditary" enemy.