Preliminary War Rules

Lannis

Thing Two
Staff member
#1
Here's a list of guidelines and general operational parameters for how to do war. Most things can be tailored to how folk want to do it, but this should offer a basic idea of what to expect.
Starting a War:
(Realistically speaking, 'war' along these guidelines probably works better between two voluntary parties. Though certain actions are suitable cassus belli, we recommend that other avenues of consequence are taken first if both sides aren't on board.)
  • If both parties want to do a war, there's no problem with establishing it.
  • Declarations of War: Certain actions entail a de facto declaration of war, at which point the aggressive faction must agree to see it through. Examples of such are as follows, and others in their vein may apply at discretion of staff.
    • Assassination, attempted or otherwise, of a political leader.
    • Hostile occupation of a sovereign territory.
    • Wanton destruction of a faction's resources (ships, fields, etc).
    • Coordinated violence against a faction's members.
    • Declaring war.
  • Factors leading to war: Smaller acts of aggression may lead to war as a reasonable recourse, at staff discretion.
Managing a War:
  • Prior to scheduling events, all parties must select a neutral GM that will be responsible for deciding the result of all interactions outside direct combat, such as the result of strategies and conditions affecting each army.
  • Each player may field a single character for use in the war, unless agreed upon/coordinated with all parties.
  • Groups of players are considered as 'armies' when on the move, mainly to handle where everyone should be at any given time for an event. There aren't any real restrictions on having multiple armies, but each army has a discrete list of players that can be involved in any conflict the army gets in to. The army isn't really considered to have any useful NPCs, but will have some non player-based attributes in terms of visibility and supply lines and whatnot.
  • An army's location is considered separately from the players that comprise it. This means that players are free to move around and seek RP away from it, but will not be able to participate in war events that the army would not be able to.
  • The GM's role is extensive, and can be categorized into three main areas: managing status and location of all armies, coordinating events between the parties, and distributing information based on what's been earned. The first is a great big catchall for 'GM decides how the war is going.' The GM must keep track of the armies and how their strategies interact with each other. If one group wants to attack the other while they're on the march, the GM chooses the setting based on where the armies might intersect. If one sneaks around and destroys the other's food stores, the GM gets to decide how hungry they'll be, and so forth.
  • The second is pretty straightforward. The GM can be used as an intermediary for coordinating when both sides can get on, but the location of the event itself isn't necessarily announced to the side not taking the initiative for it. Both sides know that something is going to happen, but aren't necessarily told 'where' OOCly and must prepare/strategize accordingly.
  • That brings us to the third point, with the role of the GM as an information distributor. Information gathering should be an important factor for success, and it's the GM's responsibility to make it a viable investment. Scouting an army's location, sending spies, and interrogating captured enemies should all be potential options for locating and predicting enemy movement.
  • Travel restrictions do not apply for casual RP, so long as the travel isn't intended maliciously/doesn't involve major conflict with the opposing group/is otherwise irrelevant to the war.
  • Characters killed during, at, or around a war event may revive as normal, but can't participate or otherwise contribute in the war for 3 OOC months. (This is intended to last the duration of any war, but the grace period expires to prevent things from dragging on.)
  • Characters involved with the war must consent to death in any war-related attacks, even those that take place outside of coordinated events. However, characters killed outside of sanctioned events are not prohibited from participating in the rest of the war once they are revived.
  • Damage to builds is at the discretion of the region owner. Some accommodation may be made for DM effects, but they must be undone at the end of the event.
Ending a War:
A state of war will generally end when one side is unwilling or unable to keep fighting. Victory/defeat cases can be agreed upon by the parties, or left for the GM to call when it seems reasonable.


TL;DR:
  • GM manages most things about the war that don't involve players combat RPing with each other.
  • Players form armies that decide where they can participate in events.
  • Strategy should be important.
  • War events are treated as a time to log on, not necessarily as a place to go. That information must be found IC.
  • No more fight if killed in war.
 

Mitch

Daydreamer
Mystic
Dayshark
Dayshark
LegendMystic
#2
Proposal that each side submits a Google Doc with an updated and managed list of their active fighters, to help with formality and explicitly informing that "if you're on this list, you consent to everything during war."
 

Luam

Legend of Altera
Hero
SirLiam1124
SirLiam1124
Hero
#5
would also like to see a mandatory list of resources on both sides, in terms of food, ships, horses, etc. considering that we can hit supply routes and such
 

Naelwyn

Non sum qualis eram
#7
I don't mean to be critical right as something launches but these rules are somewhat lacking in meat and mechanics and mostly read out as "GMs will ad-hoc everything."

This kills the DMs as well as makes these player-driven interactions dependent upon staff remaining super actively involved, and I don't think I can support a ruleset that concentrates even more power in the hands of people not around to use them.

The whole reason I suspect some folks started this whole thing up in the first place was because they had naught else to do while waiting for DMs. (As have several previous wars.)

Ideally the war rules give some objective "War game" rules to work with that people can choose to utilize on their own and self-adjudicate, thus alleviating burden from staff and allowing such a player-driven and player-centric initiative to drive itself.

I don't see this, as presented, as being in the best interests of neither the staff, nor the playerbase, and thence I tender my critique as such.
 

Immerael

The Shadow Admín
Staff member
#9
I don't mean to be critical right as something launches but these rules are somewhat lacking in meat and mechanics and mostly read out as "GMs will ad-hoc everything."

This kills the DMs as well as makes these player-driven interactions dependent upon staff remaining super actively involved, and I don't think I can support a ruleset that concentrates even more power in the hands of people not around to use them.

The whole reason I suspect some folks started this whole thing up in the first place was because they had naught else to do while waiting for DMs. (As have several previous wars.)

Ideally the war rules give some objective "War game" rules to work with that people can choose to utilize on their own and self-adjudicate, thus alleviating burden from staff and allowing such a player-driven and player-centric initiative to drive itself.

I don't see this, as presented, as being in the best interests of neither the staff, nor the playerbase, and thence I tender my critique as such.
The only issue with this is half the CRP on the server ends up in staff team hands anyway due to reports of Powergaming, Meta, lore breaking etc. Requiring folks to wait for a DM actually reduces their wait time in total in terms of having a final verdict that they can then act upon RPly. Is it a good system? No. I've been a proponent of HW CRP system being broken for years now but leaving it to players to sort it out doesn't work particularly well either, when they end up needing staff to make the final call anyway.

But so long as we maintain a freeform CRP method of combat I don't see how we can settle disputes in a way that is fast other then having DMs.
 

Naelwyn

Non sum qualis eram
#10
The only issue with this is half the CRP on the server ends up in staff team hands anyway due to reports of Powergaming, Meta, lore breaking etc. Requiring folks to wait for a DM actually reduces their wait time in total in terms of having a final verdict that they can then act upon RPly. Is it a good system? No. I've been a proponent of HW CRP system being broken for years now but leaving it to players to sort it out doesn't work particularly well either, when they end up needing staff to make the final call anyway.

But so long as we maintain a freeform CRP method of combat I don't see how we can settle disputes in a way that is fast other then having DMs.
I'm suggesting having something, anything, that is an /objective/ system and not subject to dispute in the first place.
 

Immerael

The Shadow Admín
Staff member
#11
I'm suggesting having something, anything, that is an /objective/ system and not subject to dispute in the first place.
I agree. How would we get there though with a freeform combat system? As the folks who do combat RP would have to have it pulled from their cold dead hands and its by its nature subjective. If we had a DnD, RPG, or some system like that yeah I could see solutions. But with so much being up for debate to begin with idk how to fix the situation as in my opinion CRP is broken to begin with. However removing it would probably cause a significant part of the playerbase to leave which is not solution either.
 

Naelwyn

Non sum qualis eram
#14
I'm not even talking about combat RP here, but in terms of things like

"How do we measure war-preparedness? Logistics? Assembled supplies, quality of equipment, training, tactics, command?"

How do we determine overland and nautical mobility and the ability to respond or reply to motions from others?"

It's all super vague and it's something that'd need to be addressed. The first thing I think of when I look at these rules is attritionary hit-and-fade tactics which the rules don't cover how to catch me at.

At the very least does not it make sense to slap a grid on the dynamic map and work out how many grid squares a mobile/lacking mobility force can move in a given 'turn'?
 
Last edited:

Rossu

Lord of Altera
Mystic
Rossu_
Rossu_
LegendMystic
#15
I'm not even talking about combat RP here, but in terms of things like

"How do we measure war-preparedness? Logistics? Assembled supplies, quality of equipment, training, tactics, command?"

How do we determine overland and nautical mobility and the ability to respond or reply to motions from others?"

It's all super vague and it's something that'd need to be addressed. The first thing I think of when I look at these rules is attritionary hit-and-fade tactics which the rules don't cover how to catch me at.

At the very least does not it make sense to slap a grid on the dynamic map and work out how many grid squares a mobile/lacking mobility force can move in a given 'turn'?
 

Solus

Solzilla
Staff member
Server Owner
#17
  • Assassination, attempted or otherwise, of a political leader.
  • Hostile occupation of a sovereign territory.
  • Wanton destruction of a faction's resources (ships, fields, etc).
  • Coordinated violence against a faction's members.
  • Declaring war.
I'm bumping this for all involved in today's attempt at an event. I should have made this clear at the start- that mass get together or pile into an event or region needs to be talked to with the event holder and region owner if they are not the same. Because then we've a mess on our hands and we don't have time to coordinate when things turn sour if folks are antagonizing each other. If you're coming in with 4-5+ people into another 4-5+ event with opposing friction, forewarning is advised to have moderated a combat DM at hand and not the day of. This is for the benefit of everyone involved, else no one will be happy with the end result.