An upcoming ASOIAF game (Ideas & Suggestions)

[Lumine]

Evening!

As you know, over the past couple of years there have been a few games based on ASOIAF and GOT, which have been quite fascinating an entertaining. So far, we've roleplayed the War of the Five Kings on its early stage (Clash of Kings) and late stage (The Lion and the Rose), the time before Aegon’s Conquest (Century of Blood) and the time period before Robert’s Rebellion (After the False Spring).

While I am busy saving my semester and hosting Swords of Damocles, I’d really like to host another of these games once I have the time (I’m hoping in a few more weeks) and I have been laying the groundwork for it, with three different ideas I’m interested in trying. So this thread is to gauge whether there are people interested in playing, whether you have any suggestion and what do you think of the three alternatives:

So far, I’ve come up with:

Fire and Blood (129 AL): A period we’ve never explored before, it’s the historical Dance of the Dragons, of which we have a lot of detail thanks to The Princess and the Queen. Players will choose between Aegon and Rhaenyra Targaryen and the Lords of Westeros as both sides of the civil war take form, the war already begun at the start of the game. The innovative part of this one is a potential dragon system, in which the historical dragons are given stats and players have dragon battles with the characters they control.

The Death of Kings (282 AL): While 281 AL was covered in After the False Spring, I’ve always been fond of Robert’s Rebellion and I think the actual war would be fun to roleplay, starting after Jon Arryn, Robert Baratheon and Ned Stark rebel against the Iron Throne. The idea would be for players to choose between rebels (Baratheon, Stark and Arryn) and loyalists (Martell, Tyrell, and Jon Connington as Hand) as they try to win the war. Every turn a new house would be playable (such as Greyjoy, Tully, Lannister, Frey and so on), to simulate the late entries to the war.

The Iron Throne (298 AL): The Iron Throne is familiar ground, covering the War of the Five Kings once again as a remake of Clash of Kings. Whereas we’ve covered this before it was with the prototype to the game system that’s been tested in the other games, and it had a bit of an unrealistic ending. Since we have a lot of information here (and many things we’ve learned since Seasons 4, 5 and 6 of GOT game out), it also has potential. I could also consider an alternate history approach to this one, changing a few events at the start of the game (Viserys Targaryen surviving, a different outcome in KL to King Robert’s death, and so on).

What do you think?

[windjammer]

Whatever you want as long I'm part of it

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Of these, my vote would definitely be The Iron Throne.  Just from past experience, I think these games work best when the choices are characters from the main storyline.  Too far back and POVs become very difficult to write (at least IMO) and I think there's a risk of losing player interest if there aren't enough familiar options for re-entry once a player dies.  If you look at the two which were most successful, they branched off from a starting point within the main storyline; the two that were less successful started at much earlier dates.

[Dereich]

I voted for the Death of Kings. For me, the goal has to be preventing burnout. You stop burnout by keeping things fluid and fast paced and not putting too much on the GM. From my view, Fire and Blood looks like too much of a risk of creating these. We don't have as many sources for the Dance as we do for the other two scenarios and that creates a lot of blank spaces when considering personalities, alliances, children, and vassals. I think dealing with so many unknowns is a big part of what doomed Leo's game as well as a few other games on this board that couldn't get off the ground.

Of course, trying something new IS nice; we all know by now how X-Tywin/Bolton or Spamage-Tyrell will play in the Wot5K and the After the False Spring went off the rails so fast I don't think it counts as a Robert's Rebellion game.

[windjammer]

I know it is really soon but considering I low playing France and that the Tyrells are basically France in GoT, could I play this House if possible please?

[Enduro]

I'd be interested in another War of 5 Kings. I think we could also add something for the eventual White Walker invasion. Think about it, we're all divided and at war with each other, then reports of White Walkers start becoming prevalent. How do the players react? Are the reports true? Can we defeat the Others? How do we defeat the Others?

[GoTfan]

I agree with Enduro. Have the White Walker/Others invasion at some point.

[Lumine]

Well, 7 to 1 /1 seems sort of clear. It seems it will be The Iron Throne after all.

[diptheriadan]

How do you play?

[Dereich]

How do you play?

There are lots of examples on this board of similar games most of which involve ASoIaF. If you'd like to see more or less how Lumine's games work I'd suggest starting with his most recent ASoIaF game, the Lion and the Rose for which the rules are here.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

How do you play?

Word to the wise, don't believe everything you hear from other players (including me ).

[Lumine]

How do you play?

Word to the wise, don't believe everything you hear from other players (including me ).

Yes, well, chronic backstabbing is one of the hallmarks of these games, with quite a few epic examples of betrayal (including King's Landing blowing up and killing half a million people). I'd recommend reading over The Lion and the Rose as a good example as how we play, but the idea is for players to interact with each other, make decisions to crisis, lead their armies (this is crucial) and handle intrigue in order to survive.

I do plan on changing the gameplay this time, I'm toying to make a week of RL time into a month IG and eliminate formal three-month turns, but I have to consider whether it will work. Additionally, I will be borrowing the "special abilities" idea from Badgate and X, and repeating the guest POV idea from The Lion and the Rose.

Important:

I want to give the game a different feel based on the background, so I'd like to see the possibility of changing the outcome of a few events in A Game of Thrones or Season 1 to give us a different storyline. For example, I'm considering having Viserys Targaryen survive and never meet Khal Drogo, or having Ned Stark survive or even win (temporarily) the power struggle in King's Landing.

Would people prefer an altered storyline or everything being as it was on the book+show at the start of the War of the Five Kings?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

How do you play?

Word to the wise, don't believe everything you hear from other players (including me ).

Yes, well, chronic backstabbing is one of the hallmarks of these games, with quite a few epic examples of betrayal (including King's Landing blowing up and killing half a million people). I'd recommend reading over The Lion and the Rose as a good example as how we play, but the idea is for players to interact with each other, make decisions to crisis, lead their armies (this is crucial) and handle intrigue in order to survive.

I do plan on changing the gameplay this time, I'm toying to make a week of RL time into a month IG and eliminate formal three-month turns, but I have to consider whether it will work. Additionally, I will be borrowing the "special abilities" idea from Badgate and X, and repeating the guest POV idea from The Lion and the Rose.

Important:

I want to give the game a different feel based on the background, so I'd like to see the possibility of changing the outcome of a few events in A Game of Thrones or Season 1 to give us a different storyline. For example, I'm considering having Viserys Targaryen survive and never meet Khal Drogo, or having Ned Stark survive or even win (temporarily) the power struggle in King's Landing.

Would people prefer an altered storyline or everything being as it was on the book+show at the start of the War of the Five Kings?

For me, I'd need to know the specific alterations (ex: I'd be fine with Viserys surviving, but am not so keen on Ned surviving the KL struggle b/c it'd give Stannis an unfair advantage).

[Dereich]

How do you play?

Word to the wise, don't believe everything you hear from other players (including me ).

Yes, well, chronic backstabbing is one of the hallmarks of these games, with quite a few epic examples of betrayal (including King's Landing blowing up and killing half a million people). I'd recommend reading over The Lion and the Rose as a good example as how we play, but the idea is for players to interact with each other, make decisions to crisis, lead their armies (this is crucial) and handle intrigue in order to survive.

I do plan on changing the gameplay this time, I'm toying to make a week of RL time into a month IG and eliminate formal three-month turns, but I have to consider whether it will work. Additionally, I will be borrowing the "special abilities" idea from Badgate and X, and repeating the guest POV idea from The Lion and the Rose.

Important:

I want to give the game a different feel based on the background, so I'd like to see the possibility of changing the outcome of a few events in A Game of Thrones or Season 1 to give us a different storyline. For example, I'm considering having Viserys Targaryen survive and never meet Khal Drogo, or having Ned Stark survive or even win (temporarily) the power struggle in King's Landing.

Would people prefer an altered storyline or everything being as it was on the book+show at the start of the War of the Five Kings?

For me, I'd need to know the specific alterations (ex: I'd be fine with Viserys surviving, but am not so keen on Ned surviving the KL struggle b/c it'd give Stannis an unfair advantage).

How is drastically affecting the fortunes of one claimant OK but another not? I assume that Lumine will think of a way to balance these things out so there's no (non-Tyrell) superpower. Any changes that are not purely cosmetic (like replacing some bit characters or practically unknown vassals) will end up creating large changes to the calculations each lord would make in Westeros.

Just from that example, I'd be interested in the possibilities leaving Ned alive would create because it would actually give the Starks something to do other than revenge-secession. Plus, in every game we've played so far King's Landing has been practically worthless and the primarily KL based players (such as Tyrion, Littlefinger, and Varys) have had little to do and quickly lost/left because of it. Keeping the cold war in KL going a little longer gives those players something to do while making the Tully/Lannister/Ser Beric spats pretty illegal violations of the King's Peace, which could require more diplomacy on that front.

As I indicated in my previous post, I don't think a total replay of the War of Five Kings is fun. We know EXACTLY what each player/faction will try to achieve for a while. For example, know Tywin will recruit mercs (not allies though, because nobody like the Lannisters) and try to save KL while burning the Riverlands, the Starks will attack anyone in the Riverlands while waiting for the inevitable Bolton betrayal, the Ironborn will ineffectually raid, the Tyrells will fight for Renly because of their marriage pact, Lysa will futz around until dying, and the Martells are too far to do anything until the Targs come. Some player might sit at the Wall with little to do while another might try to scheme to little gain in King's Landing. The only players with much capacity for changing how they operate are the Targaryen and MAYBE Lysa and Stannis.

I support as much variation from the original scenario as you are willing to do Lumine. Make us actually have to think (in and out of character) about what our objectives should be and what to do to succeed with them instead of running on book/show autopilot.

[ASPN]

Well, it would give me a good reason to get back into asoiaf. Plus after looking at the other thread mentioned, this does seem pretty cool.

[GoTfan]

How do you play?

Word to the wise, don't believe everything you hear from other players (including me ).

Yes, well, chronic backstabbing is one of the hallmarks of these games, with quite a few epic examples of betrayal (including King's Landing blowing up and killing half a million people). I'd recommend reading over The Lion and the Rose as a good example as how we play, but the idea is for players to interact with each other, make decisions to crisis, lead their armies (this is crucial) and handle intrigue in order to survive.

I do plan on changing the gameplay this time, I'm toying to make a week of RL time into a month IG and eliminate formal three-month turns, but I have to consider whether it will work. Additionally, I will be borrowing the "special abilities" idea from Badgate and X, and repeating the guest POV idea from The Lion and the Rose.

Important:

I want to give the game a different feel based on the background, so I'd like to see the possibility of changing the outcome of a few events in A Game of Thrones or Season 1 to give us a different storyline. For example, I'm considering having Viserys Targaryen survive and never meet Khal Drogo, or having Ned Stark survive or even win (temporarily) the power struggle in King's Landing.

Would people prefer an altered storyline or everything being as it was on the book+show at the start of the War of the Five Kings?

For me, I'd need to know the specific alterations (ex: I'd be fine with Viserys surviving, but am not so keen on Ned surviving the KL struggle b/c it'd give Stannis an unfair advantage).

How is drastically affecting the fortunes of one claimant OK but another not? I assume that Lumine will think of a way to balance these things out so there's no (non-Tyrell) superpower. Any changes that are not purely cosmetic (like replacing some bit characters or practically unknown vassals) will end up creating large changes to the calculations each lord would make in Westeros.

Just from that example, I'd be interested in the possibilities leaving Ned alive would create because it would actually give the Starks something to do other than revenge-secession. Plus, in every game we've played so far King's Landing has been practically worthless and the primarily KL based players (such as Tyrion, Littlefinger, and Varys) have had little to do and quickly lost/left because of it. Keeping the cold war in KL going a little longer gives those players something to do while making the Tully/Lannister/Ser Beric spats pretty illegal violations of the King's Peace, which could require more diplomacy on that front.

As I indicated in my previous post, I don't think a total replay of the War of Five Kings is fun. We know EXACTLY what each player/faction will try to achieve for a while. For example, know Tywin will recruit mercs (not allies though, because nobody like the Lannisters) and try to save KL while burning the Riverlands, the Starks will attack anyone in the Riverlands while waiting for the inevitable Bolton betrayal, the Ironborn will ineffectually raid, the Tyrells will fight for Renly because of their marriage pact, Lysa will futz around until dying, and the Martells are too far to do anything until the Targs come. Some player might sit at the Wall with little to do while another might try to scheme to little gain in King's Landing. The only players with much capacity for changing how they operate are the Targaryen and MAYBE Lysa and Stannis.

I support as much variation from the original scenario as you are willing to do Lumine. Make us actually have to think (in and out of character) about what our objectives should be and what to do to succeed with them instead of running on book/show autopilot.

Well here's my idea:

Ned accepts Renly’s offer to take the throne for him. Cersei, Joffrey, Myrcella and Tommen are spirited away beforw Renly can take power, but not before the Hound, fed up with Joffrey, willingly surrenders. Renly then marries Margaery, securing Tyrell support.

Stannis meanwhile, seethes on Dragonstone. He declares Ned's reputation for honour null and void, and begins raising a force of mercenaries to attack King's Landing. He approaches Yohn Royce of the Vale to gain the support of the Vale lords for an alliance. Royce is able to convince others to join Stannis, and the attempt to convince Lysa to support Stannis. Yohn is known as an honourable man, and likely would be shocked and disgusted by Ned supporting Renly. Lysa, being herself, becomes hysterical, but this time, she orders houses still loyal to her to raise arms against Royce and those declaring for Stannis. Royce and the others are left with no choice but to raise arms in defence of their own lands, with Stannis forced to send what forces he's raised to the Vale in support of his allies.

Ned supporting Renly also creates a moral issue for Robb. His father has instructed him yto lead the fight in the Riverlands, but Robb is struggling with his father’s decision to support Renly. After all, Stannis is the rightful ruler, yet his father supports Renly. This creates a bit of a moral quandry for Robb, who will have to eventually decide to respect his father’s decision, or hold up his own honour and support Stannis, perhaps driving the North into civil war.

Tywin meanwhile attempts to forge an alliance with the Greyjoys, offering them independence in exchange for their support in the war. He also temporarily goes on the defensive, focusing on holding the ground he has, while flexing his political muscles to play his enemies against each other, while he spends time raising large groups of mercenaries to continue the fight.

Meanwhile, Viserys is not killed in Essos, but rather kicked out of Vaes Dothrak. He swears revenge on Daenerys and goes searching for mercenaries to support him. Many see an opportunity for land and loot should he be victorious, and while he manages to raise a large force, its loyalty and and reliability is dubious at best, and they may slip away at signs of defeat or if supply becomes an issue.

Daenerys meanwhile, travels with Drogo's Khalasar, the two preparing for the imminent battle with Viserys. However, an attack from another Khalasar leaves Drogo dead and his host scattered. Daenerys is able to rally a handful of survivors, but many refuse to follow her. She wanders the desert, trying to avoid Viserys and desperately searching for an army that she can counter him with. However, her dragon eggs hatch, giving her potential weapons to use once they are grown. As a result of this, the Martells find themselves facing a difficult question. Which Targaryen do they back? Or do they abandon the Targeryens and thrown their lot in with one of the others?

Meanwhile, reports start filtering down from the Wall of a supposed army of Wildlings gathering under a King Beyond the Wall, and that they are moving south. The reason why is unknown.

[Lumine]

I support as much variation from the original scenario as you are willing to do Lumine. Make us actually have to think (in and out of character) about what our objectives should be and what to do to succeed with them instead of running on book/show autopilot.

All of those being good points, and part of my concern with an exact roleplay of the war as we know it. While at the time I wasn't too keen on the The Lion and the Rose storyline, in retrospect making those changes to the storyline made for a fascinating world to explore, and indeed the story turned a lot better than Clash of Kings. So there's two issues: One, that without the war having started the game runs the risk of becoming stagnant, and two, that with a scenario that is exactly like the one we know we run the risk of being too predictable.

So indeed, I will be making changes to the storyline.

Well here's my idea:

A lot of that actually works pretty well! I'll borrow a few ideas, actually.

[Blair]

Can we start at the beginning of Season 1? It would be interesting to see how the rather fractured peace would last.

I'd not like the game to start off with too many alliances; the problem with Renly on the throne is that he's not going to lose bar being killed- having the support of the Reach/Stormlands/Riverlands and North is going to outweight everything else

[Lumine]

Attending to Blair's suggestion (which also has a lot of merit), here's two suggestions:

The Iron Throne, Plot 1:
(Late A Game of Thrones, Early Clash of Kings)

In King's Landing:
-Renly proves more effective on his pitch to Ned, including rumours of Melisandre and Stannis embracing the Lord of Light to cast doubt on Stannis's chances. Ned, Renly and Littlefinger stage their coup aided by the Goldcloaks, turning into a battle across the Red Keep. Joffrey is killed, delivering a heavy blow to Ned's reputation for honor. With Stannis in Dragonstone, Ned, Littlefinger, Varys and Renly all have agendas of their own.

Across Westeros:
-The war on the Riverlands continues unabated, with Jaime Lannister scoring victory after victory against the Tullys. As Tyrion rejoins the main camp and Tywin, the Lannisters learn of the disaster in King's Landing, although they still have two large field armies in order to fight. In Pyke, Balon Greyjoy recieves the news of Robert and Joffrey's death with interest, as his fleets are ready to sail. In the Vale, Lysa Arryn is steadfast in her decision not to involve herself on politics, although her vassals (many of them now outraged at the death of Robert's son) are of a different opinion altogether... and with Ned seemingly committing treason and Catelyn away, Robb Stark has gathered the North's forces and must make important decisions.

In Essos:
-Viserys still threatens Daenerys in Vaes Dothrak, but is smart enough not to do it armed. He finds himself exiled from the city and manages to reach Qohor, where he acquaints himself with the local magister and, more importanty, with the Tattered Prince. Joined by a mutual dislike of Illyrio (as Viserys believes he's been betrayed), both close an alliance. Aided by the Tattered Prince reputation Viserys gathers his own army of sellswords and hears of Robert Baratheon's death. Across the Dothraki Sea, Khal Drogo has died and Daenerys has hatched her dragons, but it will a long, long time she reaches civilization...

In General:
-In this scenario we have an ongoing war between the Tullys/Starks and the Lannisters, further complicated by the events in King's Landing. Joffrey's death (with few people knowing of his actual character) is likely to turn people against Renly or Ned, making for a complicated scenario between at least three possible Kings in young Tommen, Stannis and Renly himself. And there's the sheer angst of Ned now being a "kingslayer...".

The Iron Throne, Plot 2:
(Based on late A Game of Thrones)

In King's Landing:
-The game starts as King Robert dies with a preliminar turn in King's Landing, pitting the city players (Cersei, Ned, Renly, Littlefinger and Varys) against each other on the immediate succession. Once that turn is ended and someone has established control of the capital we then open the game to the rest of Westeros, and we go from there. Take note that this is extremely open ended.

In Essos:
-Technically same, although we can also roleplay the possibility of Khal Drogo taking a different route and surving along with Viserys, allowing us to explore the idea of a Dothraki invasion.

[windjammer]

As long I'm able to play the tyrells with Olenna as her head I'm fine with any scenarios

[Enduro]

Perhaps we could do something after the White Walker invasion? Simulate that war, and human victory, and play as the characters after the war is ended.

Other than that, I like both ideas Lumine came up with.

Could we also do an alteration of the Red Wedding? In which, Robb manages to kill Walder Frey, leading to a Frey civil war.

[Dereich]

Perhaps we could do something after the White Walker invasion? Simulate that war, and human victory, and play as the characters after the war is ended.

Other than that, I like both ideas Lumine came up with.

Could we also do an alteration of the Red Wedding? In which, Robb manages to kill Walder Frey, leading to a Frey civil war.

What you're describing aren't really full games. The big open question with the White Walker invasion is "how will these people who have been at each others throats work together to defeat a greater threat?" If you base a game around that question the answer is obvious: none of the players are invested in their petty squabbles and all team up easily. Then one side or another quickly wins on dice rolls. There's little if any room for the intrigue and shifting alliances which make Westeros so interesting.

A change in the outcome of the Red Wedding is also not a large enough change to sustain a whole game. It makes the North different, sure, but for most players everything stays exactly the same. Robb sans the Freys, Karstarks, and Boltons isn't in a good position to fight, especially with Ironborn in Winterfell and Moat Cailin. Tywin/Tyrion, the Tyrells, the Martells, Daenerys, the Ironborn, and Lysa/Littlefinger are still in more or less the exact same position and have no reason to change anything. The change has to be significant enough or far enough back that EVERYONE has to plan differently. Otherwise, if we're doing a straight up War of the Five Kings we might as well start off from right when Ned dies and just let the chips fall where they may. I still don't like that plan, but its better than starting mid-war.

[Lumine]

I would have to say no to the White Walkers. I don't mind if they show up in a game, but making them the focus of a game is a bad idea (see the issues with the last part of The Lion and the Rose). Not to mention that a game after the war means world building from scratch, not to mention half the cast would be dead and no one would be in a condition to fight.

Same with the Red Wedding, too far into the War of the Five Kings, too little a change to make a difference in the larger strategic picture.

[GoTfan]

I would have to say no to the White Walkers. I don't mind if they show up in a game, but making them the focus of a game is a bad idea (see the issues with the last part of The Lion and the Rose). Not to mention that a game after the war means world building from scratch, not to mention half the cast would be dead and no one would be in a condition to fight.

Same with the Red Wedding, too far into the War of the Five Kings, too little a change to make a difference in the larger strategic picture.

Maybe the Night's Watch sends a message at some point asking for support.

[Lumine]

I would have to say no to the White Walkers. I don't mind if they show up in a game, but making them the focus of a game is a bad idea (see the issues with the last part of The Lion and the Rose). Not to mention that a game after the war means world building from scratch, not to mention half the cast would be dead and no one would be in a condition to fight.

Same with the Red Wedding, too far into the War of the Five Kings, too little a change to make a difference in the larger strategic picture.

Maybe the Night's Watch sends a message at some point asking for support.

Of course, what I mean is that it won't be the main point of the game (if it happens).