This page will be updated from time to time with a summary of rules and guidelines for the RPG game Destiny.
GM: FAL, ICQ #: 202402373
Host: Fredrik82, ICQ #: 83278192 or K'shar, ICQ #: 299082577
The goal is to have a game with the focus on historical role playing, but with freedom for every country to act as it wants. So, it is all about trying to create a nice historical feeling for everyone, without having a forced historical path with determined outcomes.
To realise this, players which act in a good historical role playing manner get rewards.
The game has the following rules:
The game has the following general guidelines:
Timeslot: Monday evening (19:00 - 23:00 CET).
The has started may 9th.
Scenario:
We play with Hive's Age of Imperialism mod. The current version of AoI is 2.5. We also play with the most recent beta patch (currently the one of april 21st).
Starting year will be 1520. The current scenario (v14) can be downloaded: HERE
Note: you must unpack this to your AoI directory.
The multiplayer stats for this game are HERE
The AAR thread is HERE
Roster:
Subs, able and willing:
Whilst playing remember the spirit and basis for this game above all else. Roleplaying, not powergaming!
More information about the game
Where this game is about:
The cornerstone of this campaign will be the missions posted after each session. Especially key countries like Spain and France will receive missions, which they can accept or not.
Missions:
After each session, some countries will receive a global mission for the next session. Those missions will be based upon history if possible and alternatively based upon the ingame situation.
Countries are free to accept these missions or not.
If they do accept a mission, they will get a reward after the attempt of completing it. It is not about succeeding, but about making a good attempt. The goal of the missions is to get players to behave more historical, even if it would mean their country gets slightly weakened by it.
Examples of missions
Example 1: Spain gets the mission to send an army to a non-catholic country, with the goal to force convert it to the Catholic religion. It would be nice if it is with Farnese versus England
A difficult one, but it is the effort that counts, not success (though I expect you to make a good effort of course).
Example 2: The Ottomans get the mission to take Vienna next session. (controlling the province of Vienna).
If at least some countries accept such missions, it will lead to a more historical game flow.
The rewards will be based upon what the mission is about. It can be receiving an extra culture, free conversions, deflation or perhaps a manufactory. The rewards will be publicised before the next session, so that everyone knows what they can expect.
But it is not only about accepting missions, it is about roleplaying in general.
Roleplaying behaviour as I would like to see it:
I expect you to act as a monarch of your country would do at the time. It will probably mean you have to do a little research about your country to get used to it's history and why their history was like that.
Good roleplaying does not necessary mean you have to act historically. It means you behave like your country would probably do. However, I do expect everyone to avoid playing with hindsight.
So, with Spain you are not going to prevent a bankruptcy event if you have conquered the gold mines. You simply cannot know it will occur.
Don’t choose an event option because it will grant you a cookie later, choose the event option which makes the most sense for your monarch at that time.
It is difficult, but it can be done. Especially if you as a player don’t expect to let your country prosper all the time.
Everyone defines roleplaying differently, and the only thing that every player can agree on is that while he personally is doing great at roleplaying, making decisions based on the actual situation and such as his monarch really would like to act, while his enemies - particularly when they pursue succesful strategies - are not.
For this game you need to be flexible with other’s persons roleplaying behaviour. Of course, you can point out why the behaviour of a player isn’t exactly good roleplay, but try to prevent pointing fingers to others. Save the whining for when you see really anti-roleplaying behaviour. And you can then expect the GM to interverne.
Try to roleplay well yourself, even if you suspect others of just powergaming.
Example:
Austria and Ottoman Empire should be locked in deadly struggle over the balkans. Currently, game-wise, there is *no* incentive to do so for either country. It is a relatively poor area and it's expensive to convert once the other party has done its conversions. It is extremely convenient for both parties to just divide it between them and go about their more lucrative business elsewhere.
Good for the respective countries? Yes.
Good for the game? No.
The latter should be the deciding one.
It is about leading your nation to it’s destiny. Not about constantly making the best powergaming options for your country.
Play out the role of a nation following historical imperatives, whether or not it makes sense in the ongoing game.
More examples:
AARs
Players are also encouraged to write an AAR, or at least a small summary of what happened with their country.
A small AAR reward you with a small bonus. (-1 % inflation or some ducats) A big AAR rewards you with a bigger bonus. (-2% inflation or more ducats).
It is not required to write an AAR, only encouraged, to improve the feel of the game. Write AARs when you feel like it. Not because you feel forced to do so.
Futhermore, I believe it is only the content of the AAR and not the length of it that counts. Spelling/grammar does not matter much either. Not everyone is very good at English.
It is also encouraged that players talk in character with each other.
Leaders
There will be the normal historical leaders, but extra leaders can be added if a country accepts a mission. Also, the military activeness of nations lacking historical leaders will be followed by the GM. Those nations can receive a leader if the game situation justifies it (example: Portugal receives an admiral because she has been very active naval wise) per mission or something else.
This will always be announced before the next session starts, so there will be no surprises in this aspect.
Leaders also can be downgraded when countries are military inactive.
It is possible a country loses a certain historical leader if the historical reason for the leader to be appearing is no longer present in our game.
Explorers/Conquistadors:
In addition to the historical explorers, extra explorers will approach countries and offer their services for a price. If a country accepts, they will get a loan edited in and the explorer will be added to them.
If they decline, the explorer will approach another country.
This will be done per ICQ.
When a country buys the services of an explorer, it will be announced in the game thread.
This will allow certain nations which lack explorers to get one. Each session two explorers will approach naval nations. It will be randomly determined which country they approach, however if there is a good RP reason for it to approach a certain country (a good AAR for example) the explorer will approach that country first.
The price for an explorer will be a 10 year loan of 750 ducats with 10% interest for the first session. This price will increase for later sessions.
Editing Policy
IF you want to trade provinces, take loans or whatever, you have to post a treaty here (and preferably also in the AAR thread). The treaty needs to be signed by all involved parties.
The treaty needs to include province numbers.
Example:
The king of X and the king of X have come to an agreement to transfer the province of x (ID: xxx).
Signed,
X, king of X.
(followed by post of other parties who also signs the treaty)
Failure of providing the GM with a signed treaty and relevant ID's results in NO edit.
I do plan on altering events if there is a good reason for it ingame. Some events will not make sense anymore if the orginal historical reason for it is no longer present and then they will be altered or removed.
New cores, culture and CB shields can be added if there is a solid roleplay reason for it. This allows for a more flexible game.
This game requires a lot of trust in the GM and therefore I plan to make it before each session known to the public what will happen. This has the disadvantage that there are no 'surprises', but the advantage that everyone can help spot errors.
Limited warfare:
As stated under the guidelines I would like to see limited warfare in this campaign. That means that players can come to an agreement about where to fight the war and for which goals.
When they do so, it would be nice other parties do not take this opportunity for a backstab.
For example, I could agree with Austria to fight a limited war for Milan. We raise some troops for it and when those troops are dead, the war is over. No need for stab hits, or 10-year wars or various allies being called in.
Of course, we have to agree about it.
This concept is also very workable for colonies. Fight wars in the colonies, don't invade the homeland.
And finally: If you agree to fight a limited war, you need to be ready to call it a loss, even when you would in fact have the opportunity to raise more troops and continue the fight.
Again my example: If Austria and France wage war over Italy and one the parties has lost their leader and armies, it should be called a day. It should not be necessary to stall the war and again raise troops.
Example of limited warfare:
I have come to an agreement with Mulliman to fight a limited war with Austria over Milan.
At stakes: claims of Austria and France on Lombardia (ie, the cores)
We both agreed to use a limited amount of troops and fight in a limited area (Italy). We don't keep fighting till one breaks, but rather till it's clear one party has won in Italy.
This allows us to fight a war for something small instead of the usual two or three provinces (you have to demand that in other wars to make them worthwile).
If France loses, she will drop her claims on Milan and release her as a vassal. The core will be removed and France will chose the historical option in the event: French claims on Italy weakened.
If France wins, Austria will drop her claims on Milan and her core will be removed.
Note: This is not only about cores. The historical outcome was that France dropped her claims on Italy for a long time and Karl V send his army against Rome, resulting in the capture of the pope. The pope was so impressed by this fact that he refused Henry VIII his divorce from a Habsburg wife...
If France should win the war, then we're going to tread on a historical sidepath with consequences for other events.
It would be nice if other powers allow Austria and France to fight this war without interverning, though Spain can help of course (they're one country afterall).
I think this concept is very nice to fight for relative small stakes between two more or less equal powers.
If players agree to do a limited war before sessions, I will edit in a temporary CB to make it more smooth.
Map Sharing:
Map sharing isn't forbidden, but I would like to point out that it doesn't fit in the spirit of this game to share your maps early or to bribe the AI for it.
If you want to explore the far East with England, do it as they did in history: plant ports and systematically build your way to it.
example: It is possible that spain releases the Knights because of role playing reasons. In a normal game this won't happen because other countries will then get the Spanish maps. In this game I expect others to not immediately jump on the Knights after it.
In this game I don't expect quick assaults of a capital to gain maps. I expect you to build up to it. Hint that you want access to the riches of the new world first, then threaten a country for map knowledge. This can be done in game, but also on the forum.
If they still refuse to give in, declare war on them and ship troops to their capital.
Do not sit ready for the Portuguese coast with troops, before dowing, to land them on Tago for a quick assault after the dow.
Dutch revolts:
So, how will the Dutch revolts be worked out?
Spain can release the Dutch as a friendly vassal in Spanish Netherlands (and will then lose more provinces than normally). However, this will mean a catholic Netherlands.
If the Dutch player goes reformed or behaves not-so-loyal, Spain has the right to try to re-annex them.
I expect a Dutch player to not immediately behave hostile against Spain should Spain decide to release a catholic Netherlands.
The Dutch revolt event will be slept should Spain decide this.
If the Spanish Netherlands become reformed and independent, I will edit their tag to the Netherlands.
Alternatively, Spain can decide to not give in to the rebels and then they will revolt as a reformed country. A Netherlands as we see in most other games.
Then Spain is forced to release them as a vassal at end of the session close to the years 1568-1580. After which I can do the necessary edits for the Dutch.
The revolt event will be slept after that so that any country can conquer Dutch provinces.
GM: FAL, ICQ #: 202402373
Host: Fredrik82, ICQ #: 83278192 or K'shar, ICQ #: 299082577
The goal is to have a game with the focus on historical role playing, but with freedom for every country to act as it wants. So, it is all about trying to create a nice historical feeling for everyone, without having a forced historical path with determined outcomes.
To realise this, players which act in a good historical role playing manner get rewards.
The game has the following rules:
- Obey the GameMaster.
- Refrain from using exploits of the game engine. If in doubt, ask the GM before you are going to do it.
- Refrain from gamey behaviour. If in doubt, ask the GM before you are going to do it.
- Around 1568-1580 (depending on when a session ends) the owner of the lowlands must release the Netherlands as a vassal.
The game has the following general guidelines:
- Don’t break vassalship early, same when force-converted. A good rule of thumb would be at least 15 years of vassalship.
- Historically, war didn't come at the drop of a hat often. There was a reason for it, bad relations and hostilities built up for example. Warnings were given except in cases where the nations were blood enemies and existed in a near perpetual state of war. This will be the same in our game, if you are going to declare war, try to state demands before doing so. Give your opponent some time to react. It allows for more fun for everyone.
- Wars that engulf Europe should not be the norm. Try to keep it limited. Limited in alliance-size and limited in number of participients during the war.
- If a war is about colonies, try to fight the war there. Not elsewhere.
- Going CRC should only be done for good role-play reasons, ie when you as a mouth-watering zealot want to force-convert heretics!
- England, France, Holland, and Spain should fight for dominance over the Caribbean.
- England and France (and perhaps Holland) should fight for dominance over North America.
- Spain should try to fight heretics and infidels everywhere, especially in the first century of the game.
- The Ottomans should fight with Austria over the Balkan.
- The Emperor of the HRE should protect it, not gobble it up.
- If you can't make a session let everyone know in time, the earlier the better. Players should find their own sub first, I'll do my best if you can't find anyone but no guarantees on the quality of what you'll get, in worst case scenario it could be the AI. Don’t count on cookies after being unable to turn up.
Timeslot: Monday evening (19:00 - 23:00 CET).
The has started may 9th.
Scenario:
We play with Hive's Age of Imperialism mod. The current version of AoI is 2.5. We also play with the most recent beta patch (currently the one of april 21st).
Starting year will be 1520. The current scenario (v14) can be downloaded: HERE
Note: you must unpack this to your AoI directory.
The multiplayer stats for this game are HERE
The AAR thread is HERE
Roster:
Code:
Country Player ICQ number Comment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bavaria Cheech 147-106-898
Brandenburg K'shar 299-082-577 Possible Host
Denmark String 225-715-733
England Kurtbrian 16-916-390
France FAL 202-402-373 Good GM
The Netherlands Hive 173-002-032
The Ottoman Empire Fredrik82 83-278-192 Possible Host
Poland Robertus 125-077-996
Russia Tonioz 2-725-707
Spain BiB 31-622-490
Sweden Slargos 4-070-257
Venice Barnius 119-779-134Subs, able and willing:
- Smn
- Rythin
- The Archmede
Whilst playing remember the spirit and basis for this game above all else. Roleplaying, not powergaming!
More information about the game
Where this game is about:
The cornerstone of this campaign will be the missions posted after each session. Especially key countries like Spain and France will receive missions, which they can accept or not.
Missions:
After each session, some countries will receive a global mission for the next session. Those missions will be based upon history if possible and alternatively based upon the ingame situation.
Countries are free to accept these missions or not.
If they do accept a mission, they will get a reward after the attempt of completing it. It is not about succeeding, but about making a good attempt. The goal of the missions is to get players to behave more historical, even if it would mean their country gets slightly weakened by it.
Examples of missions
Example 1: Spain gets the mission to send an army to a non-catholic country, with the goal to force convert it to the Catholic religion. It would be nice if it is with Farnese versus England
A difficult one, but it is the effort that counts, not success (though I expect you to make a good effort of course).
Example 2: The Ottomans get the mission to take Vienna next session. (controlling the province of Vienna).
If at least some countries accept such missions, it will lead to a more historical game flow.
The rewards will be based upon what the mission is about. It can be receiving an extra culture, free conversions, deflation or perhaps a manufactory. The rewards will be publicised before the next session, so that everyone knows what they can expect.
But it is not only about accepting missions, it is about roleplaying in general.
Roleplaying behaviour as I would like to see it:
I expect you to act as a monarch of your country would do at the time. It will probably mean you have to do a little research about your country to get used to it's history and why their history was like that.
Good roleplaying does not necessary mean you have to act historically. It means you behave like your country would probably do. However, I do expect everyone to avoid playing with hindsight.
So, with Spain you are not going to prevent a bankruptcy event if you have conquered the gold mines. You simply cannot know it will occur.
Don’t choose an event option because it will grant you a cookie later, choose the event option which makes the most sense for your monarch at that time.
It is difficult, but it can be done. Especially if you as a player don’t expect to let your country prosper all the time.
Everyone defines roleplaying differently, and the only thing that every player can agree on is that while he personally is doing great at roleplaying, making decisions based on the actual situation and such as his monarch really would like to act, while his enemies - particularly when they pursue succesful strategies - are not.
For this game you need to be flexible with other’s persons roleplaying behaviour. Of course, you can point out why the behaviour of a player isn’t exactly good roleplay, but try to prevent pointing fingers to others. Save the whining for when you see really anti-roleplaying behaviour. And you can then expect the GM to interverne.
Try to roleplay well yourself, even if you suspect others of just powergaming.
Example:
Austria and Ottoman Empire should be locked in deadly struggle over the balkans. Currently, game-wise, there is *no* incentive to do so for either country. It is a relatively poor area and it's expensive to convert once the other party has done its conversions. It is extremely convenient for both parties to just divide it between them and go about their more lucrative business elsewhere.
Good for the respective countries? Yes.
Good for the game? No.
The latter should be the deciding one.
It is about leading your nation to it’s destiny. Not about constantly making the best powergaming options for your country.
Play out the role of a nation following historical imperatives, whether or not it makes sense in the ongoing game.
More examples:
- I am the king of my country and I decide what motivates me: Which nation do I hate? Who has backstabbed me in the past? I shall serve them revenge with cold steel!
- Someone wants a province from me because it is his ‘core’? Bah! My forefathers conquered it and it is now rightfully mine!
- Why should I give up this province to that country because someone claims that in the future it will give him a good ‘event’? It is my province.
- Making a deal with you? Hell no, you are an infidel and I am a staunch catholic defender of the faith!
- Why would I want to send money to you? Game balance you say? What is that? You mean nothing for my country.
AARs
Players are also encouraged to write an AAR, or at least a small summary of what happened with their country.
A small AAR reward you with a small bonus. (-1 % inflation or some ducats) A big AAR rewards you with a bigger bonus. (-2% inflation or more ducats).
It is not required to write an AAR, only encouraged, to improve the feel of the game. Write AARs when you feel like it. Not because you feel forced to do so.
Futhermore, I believe it is only the content of the AAR and not the length of it that counts. Spelling/grammar does not matter much either. Not everyone is very good at English.
It is also encouraged that players talk in character with each other.
Leaders
There will be the normal historical leaders, but extra leaders can be added if a country accepts a mission. Also, the military activeness of nations lacking historical leaders will be followed by the GM. Those nations can receive a leader if the game situation justifies it (example: Portugal receives an admiral because she has been very active naval wise) per mission or something else.
This will always be announced before the next session starts, so there will be no surprises in this aspect.
Leaders also can be downgraded when countries are military inactive.
It is possible a country loses a certain historical leader if the historical reason for the leader to be appearing is no longer present in our game.
Explorers/Conquistadors:
In addition to the historical explorers, extra explorers will approach countries and offer their services for a price. If a country accepts, they will get a loan edited in and the explorer will be added to them.
If they decline, the explorer will approach another country.
This will be done per ICQ.
When a country buys the services of an explorer, it will be announced in the game thread.
This will allow certain nations which lack explorers to get one. Each session two explorers will approach naval nations. It will be randomly determined which country they approach, however if there is a good RP reason for it to approach a certain country (a good AAR for example) the explorer will approach that country first.
The price for an explorer will be a 10 year loan of 750 ducats with 10% interest for the first session. This price will increase for later sessions.
Editing Policy
IF you want to trade provinces, take loans or whatever, you have to post a treaty here (and preferably also in the AAR thread). The treaty needs to be signed by all involved parties.
The treaty needs to include province numbers.
Example:
The king of X and the king of X have come to an agreement to transfer the province of x (ID: xxx).
Signed,
X, king of X.
(followed by post of other parties who also signs the treaty)
Failure of providing the GM with a signed treaty and relevant ID's results in NO edit.
I do plan on altering events if there is a good reason for it ingame. Some events will not make sense anymore if the orginal historical reason for it is no longer present and then they will be altered or removed.
New cores, culture and CB shields can be added if there is a solid roleplay reason for it. This allows for a more flexible game.
This game requires a lot of trust in the GM and therefore I plan to make it before each session known to the public what will happen. This has the disadvantage that there are no 'surprises', but the advantage that everyone can help spot errors.
Limited warfare:
As stated under the guidelines I would like to see limited warfare in this campaign. That means that players can come to an agreement about where to fight the war and for which goals.
When they do so, it would be nice other parties do not take this opportunity for a backstab.
For example, I could agree with Austria to fight a limited war for Milan. We raise some troops for it and when those troops are dead, the war is over. No need for stab hits, or 10-year wars or various allies being called in.
Of course, we have to agree about it.
This concept is also very workable for colonies. Fight wars in the colonies, don't invade the homeland.
And finally: If you agree to fight a limited war, you need to be ready to call it a loss, even when you would in fact have the opportunity to raise more troops and continue the fight.
Again my example: If Austria and France wage war over Italy and one the parties has lost their leader and armies, it should be called a day. It should not be necessary to stall the war and again raise troops.
Example of limited warfare:
I have come to an agreement with Mulliman to fight a limited war with Austria over Milan.
At stakes: claims of Austria and France on Lombardia (ie, the cores)
We both agreed to use a limited amount of troops and fight in a limited area (Italy). We don't keep fighting till one breaks, but rather till it's clear one party has won in Italy.
This allows us to fight a war for something small instead of the usual two or three provinces (you have to demand that in other wars to make them worthwile).
If France loses, she will drop her claims on Milan and release her as a vassal. The core will be removed and France will chose the historical option in the event: French claims on Italy weakened.
If France wins, Austria will drop her claims on Milan and her core will be removed.
Note: This is not only about cores. The historical outcome was that France dropped her claims on Italy for a long time and Karl V send his army against Rome, resulting in the capture of the pope. The pope was so impressed by this fact that he refused Henry VIII his divorce from a Habsburg wife...
If France should win the war, then we're going to tread on a historical sidepath with consequences for other events.
It would be nice if other powers allow Austria and France to fight this war without interverning, though Spain can help of course (they're one country afterall).
I think this concept is very nice to fight for relative small stakes between two more or less equal powers.
If players agree to do a limited war before sessions, I will edit in a temporary CB to make it more smooth.
Map Sharing:
Map sharing isn't forbidden, but I would like to point out that it doesn't fit in the spirit of this game to share your maps early or to bribe the AI for it.
If you want to explore the far East with England, do it as they did in history: plant ports and systematically build your way to it.
example: It is possible that spain releases the Knights because of role playing reasons. In a normal game this won't happen because other countries will then get the Spanish maps. In this game I expect others to not immediately jump on the Knights after it.
In this game I don't expect quick assaults of a capital to gain maps. I expect you to build up to it. Hint that you want access to the riches of the new world first, then threaten a country for map knowledge. This can be done in game, but also on the forum.
If they still refuse to give in, declare war on them and ship troops to their capital.
Do not sit ready for the Portuguese coast with troops, before dowing, to land them on Tago for a quick assault after the dow.
Dutch revolts:
So, how will the Dutch revolts be worked out?
Spain can release the Dutch as a friendly vassal in Spanish Netherlands (and will then lose more provinces than normally). However, this will mean a catholic Netherlands.
If the Dutch player goes reformed or behaves not-so-loyal, Spain has the right to try to re-annex them.
I expect a Dutch player to not immediately behave hostile against Spain should Spain decide to release a catholic Netherlands.
The Dutch revolt event will be slept should Spain decide this.
If the Spanish Netherlands become reformed and independent, I will edit their tag to the Netherlands.
Alternatively, Spain can decide to not give in to the rebels and then they will revolt as a reformed country. A Netherlands as we see in most other games.
Then Spain is forced to release them as a vassal at end of the session close to the years 1568-1580. After which I can do the necessary edits for the Dutch.
The revolt event will be slept after that so that any country can conquer Dutch provinces.
Last edited:
