City Hall

[12th Doctor]

As a suggestion for the game, it would probably make things more interesting if we could be "voted out of office" somehow, as well.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

As a suggestion for the game, it would probably make things more interesting if we could be "voted out of office" somehow, as well.

Yes; I was thinking of making defeat (in both elections and selections) an occupational hazard. Though alternative (and complementary) power centres is something that might work as well (ie; Trades Council, Chamber of Commerce, etc)

More on this at a more decent hour.

[afleitch]

One does wonder if people in the 1950's honestly didn't think that rapid exodus from the cities wasn't going to cause a whole host of problems for everyone.  Did they honestly think it was going to make things better? (Clearly they did, but I wonder how this logic came about)

They had genuine faith that it would work. And to an extent it did; there are always successes and failure in any venture - for every Easterhouse there is an East Kilbride etc. And what has to be remembered is that in the 50's in the UK, the emphasis was on public health and improving it through wide open spaces, spacious streets and new housing, as well as vaccination plans such as Glasgow's drive to eradicate polio in 1953 (iirc)

Secondly the housing stock that was pulled down or replaced was dire. It was not fit for human habitation and tenants were broadly enthusiastic about moving into a home with two bedrooms and an indoor toilet. What followed was either a success or a failure depending on how the new community was planned and built.

The question for me is would I go back and do it all again? Yes I would. I would go into the Gorbals and tear much of it down. I would save the street pattern and the businesses and I would gut and renovate the tenements rather than flatten them. I would also not build high rises. But I would replace what had to be replaced and create more green spaces and improved transport. Leaving these areas as they were would simply not be an option.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

In the immediate post-war period, over a third of the housing stock in Birmingham was unfit for human habitation. And most of this wasn't the result of the bombing. Slums had to be torn down and new houses had to be built, and while it would have been better to take things slowly and try to build good quality houses, this was actually very unpopular because most people didn't like living in prefabs. Councils (like the post-war Labour administration in Brum) that tried to do what was (from a social policy point of view) the right thing, paid for it at the ballot box.

[afleitch]

In the immediate post-war period, over a third of the housing stock in Birmingham was unfit for human habitation. And most of this wasn't the result of the bombing. Slums had to be torn down and new houses had to be built, and while it would have been better to take things slowly and try to build good quality houses, this was actually very unpopular because most people didn't like living in prefabs. Councils (like the post-war Labour administration in Brum) that tried to do what was (from a social policy point of view) the right thing, paid for it at the ballot box.

It was a shared experience Which probably would make this city a 'shared' city despite it's Brummie geo-political influence. It's very difficult for me not to 'see' Glasgow here in the same way someone will 'see' Newcastle or whatever city they care from.

For anyone in the UK, try and catch Andrwe Marr's Britain from Above on the BBC; it covers redevelopment (and the never realised plans) very well.

Despite being Glasgow centred this site is very good for archive material.

Thankfully it never came to this

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Basic power structure side of things... this might be a little rambling... anyway... not the most realistic setup possible, but one that will, I think, work. If it looks complicatated, it isn't, not really...

1. Most of the power in the city (that players can actually have) will be in the hands of the City Council and most of that in the hands of elected councillors. Councillors will be elected (details on how elections will be run will come later) from wards for terms of four "years". Each ward will have three councillors (note that most councillors will be NPC's unless this is far, far, far more popular than is even slightly likely). Individual councillors don't have much power as individual councillors, but as members of political groups (more on them in a bit). If a group has a majority of councillors, then that group "controls" the council; its leader becomes the Leader of the Council, it's councillors get to chair all the committees and so on and so forth. If no group has a majority... then comes the time for coalitions and carve-ups. The largest group not part of the Administration forms the Official Opposition.

2. The Leader of the Council is the most powerful position in the game; the Leader decides who shall chair each committee and is responsible for overarching policy decisions and so on. In turn, the Chairmen of the committees are very powerful within their committees. And the bulk of council policy (and thus the bulk of this game, presumably) will be decided by these committees. I'm not sure how many to have, but probably something like; Oversight & Scrutiny (ie; the fiefdom of the Leader), Finance, Housing, Planning, Welfare, Transport, Arts & Leisure. Note that some decisions will be taken by the full council. Membership would obviously overlap and is, of course, in the hands of the Group Leaders. Another position is the Mayor; a largely ceremonial role and worked around seniority (and terms are for one "year"), but nice work if you can get it, all the same.

3. Leadership of political groups will be decided by internal group elections. Other group (as opposed to council) positions be Whip and Deputy Leader. The first is responsible for enforcing the authority and will of the Leader and the Group and gets to do fun things like openly bullying other councillors and expelling people from the group, the latter's role is almost always for one of the following; placating a defeated leadership candidate, placating a powerful faction, as a position for a rising star of some form, cronyism. And sometimes an amusing combination of the above. Group and Council roles can (and probably should) overlap.

4. But there be power outside the council chamber as well. They loosely fall into the following catagories;

a) interest groups (Trades Council, Chamber of Commerce, Arts organisations, etc, etc). These organisations mostly lobby the council for things, but can also serve as useful alternative powerbases for players.

b) stuff to do with the adminstrative side of the council; civil servants, public sector unions and so on. Won't play a big role early on, but may do later (if things head off in certain directions).

c) local parties; to begin with, there will be three important ones; the Municipal Socialist Party, the Municipal Conservative Party (or '' '' Reform '' '' or '' '' Unionist '' '' or whatever) and the Municipal Liberal Party. I'll write up more on these tomorrow, but for now, note that only the MSP will really exist as an organisation with much power on its own (and this will largely revolve around candidate selection and so on. Yes; I'm making a certain sort of factionalism easy). For reasons that will also become clearer later.

d) The police, the courts and so on. Because corruption and crime will for sure be a feature of this game.

e) community leaders & etc. Not important... yet. So ignore for now.

f) Central Government. None of the players will have any influence over this whatsoever. lol.

Most of these overlap to a certain extent.

Anyway. Much more stuff tomorrow, including things perhaps more important than what I've just written. I'll also say again that it won't be nearly as complicated as that might look.

Anyway (again), if anyone has any questions...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

A note on years...

A year is the name given to the pretty informal turn system that the game will use. Years are mostly to be used as a yardstick for various things (ie; how long it takes for things to be built, the age of characters, etc) but will have another use of sorts; they're split into two parts, the first shorter than the other (though the length of both depend on activity, the whims of the GM and so on). In the first part of the year, councillors will be spending most of their time trying to get re-elected or helping other members of their party to get elected. In the second part of the year they will spend most of their time actually doing the job that they were elected to. Or use it as time to get properly involved in corruption and so on. It's your choose.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Aldermen. Bugger. I forgot about Aldermen. Would they add a dose of period-realism to this, or just make it too complicated [qm]

[afleitch]

Aldermen. Bugger. I forgot about Aldermen. Would they add a dose of period-realism to this, or just make it too complicated [qm]

Probably too complicated! I can see a game of this nature generally 'shedding' por combining the bits people don't like. Which is no bad thing.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Probably too complicated!

And maybe letting some people have seats that safe in a game like this is probably a mistake...

[aussieboy]

Yeah, this sounds like a better way to do things. Expect me to be the Councilman arguing against annexation by the Great Big Monster City...

BTW, I propose the name Barton.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

A big update will happen next week but, until then, silence.

[afleitch]

A big update will happen next week but, until then, silence.

'Dumfries: the Game' it is then

Seriously I am looking forward to the mechanism of the game. Hopefully it will just keep rolling without the need for a drawn out set up like mine really.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Something to chew on for now; the draft rules for elections. I'm happy enough with the basic structure, but I'd like a little feedback on details... and questions if anything isn't clear. I have other stuff worked out as well, but it's important to get this right as elections will be the motor (or the trauma. Or both) that drives the game.

============

1. Elections

Elections in Chamberlain are fought on several different (though frequently overlapping) levels, one of which is (almost) totally out of the control of the players, one of which is determined by the collective decisions of the political groups and one which is largely in the hands of individual characters. They are as follows; National, City and Ward.

a) National

Perhaps regrettably, the tone (and often results) of municipal elections is invariably set by national political conditions. As most governments are (to some extent or other) unpopular, this means that the major party out of power nationally starts with a built-in advantage in almost all electoral years. Occasionally national tides are strong enough to sweep all before them (real life example; in the 1968 municipal elections the Labour group lost every seat it was defending). Elections like that are rare, but they *will* happen.
National factors can effect elections in other ways; major government projects built in the city sometimes have an electoral effect, though can also backfire. Almost all national factors are in the hands of the GM; the sole exception concerns begging national government for projects.

b) City

The core of the electoral aspect of the game are the decisions made by each party group about electoral strategy and tactics. The structure of this is very simple; groups make decisions about the general tone of their campaign, which issues to emphasise, which wards to target (and how) and inform the GM. They will do this three times during the campaign; at the beginning, half-way through and at the beginning of the final week of campaigning. They may also decide on last minute GOTV tactics (in the same way) on the last day before the election. As well as this semi-secretive war against each other, groups may hold rallies, public debates and so on.

c) Ward

Individual characters do have some influence over their electoral fate; they are fully entitled to run their own personal campaigns alongside their group’s citywide campaign. While they must inform the GM of the details of what they’re doing, quite how much detail they choose to tell their own group is up to them. This, somewhat needless to say, is the level where most of the election’s inevitable dirty tricks are played.

ELECTION DAY

Characters spend election day in a rather nervous state and do what ever it is that they have to do. Meanwhile, the GM will feed them snippets of information. Whether they react to this (and how) is up to them.

ELECTION NIGHT

When all the polls have closed, characters are summoned into the Town Hall where the votes will be counted and declared by the GM. Group officials (and any directly affected candidate) will actually be told (privately) a rough picture of the results before they are announced. This is to allow the groups to decide whether to ask for any recounts (note that only the Group’s agent (a temporary position appointed by the Group leader) may request recounts). Once recounting has been finished, the GM will read the results out. Results read out by the GM are official and may only be challenged if misconduct is suspected.

[Хahar 🤔]

So, will we use British parties?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

So, will we use British parties?

Yes and no. The parties will be obviously based on them (in particular; as they are in the West Midlands. In particular (and at first) as they were in Birmingham and surrounds in the late 1950's), but will not be them. Much as Chamberlain is based in Brum but is not Brum. I was thinking of the following for names; Municipal Socialist Party, Municipal Reform Party... and either the Muncipal Progressive Party or the Municipal Centre Party. As far as historical local government shadows go, "Progressive" is more authentic, but I have real trouble calling a group based on the Birmingham Liberals "progressive" in any sense. Though perhaps it might work in an ironic way. Especially after I inflict Thurmond Lawley on you all.

[Хahar 🤔]

Okay.

I assume there will be less wards than players?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Okay.

I assume there will be less wards than players?

Oh, no... no, no, no... that's the beauty (or nasty and somewhat unfair satire*) of this. The players will represent that minority of councillors that aren't dull hacks with no ambition to speak of or dull hacks with (almost always totally unrealistic) dreams of glory at Westminster. It also makes for a much more flexible game; it should be able to work with a handful of players or with loads.

But more about that soon

*ie; it's not nearly as fair a charge to make of local government in the '50's as it is now.

[afleitch]

So, will we use British parties?

Yes and no. The parties will be obviously based on them (in particular; as they are in the West Midlands. In particular (and at first) as they were in Birmingham and surrounds in the late 1950's), but will not be them. Much as Chamberlain is based in Brum but is not Brum. I was thinking of the following for names; Municipal Socialist Party, Municipal Reform Party... and either the Muncipal Progressive Party or the Municipal Centre Party. As far as historical local government shadows go, "Progressive" is more authentic, but I have real trouble calling a group based on the Birmingham Liberals "progressive" in any sense. Though perhaps it might work in an ironic way. Especially after I inflict Thurmond Lawley on you all.

'Moderate' may be a good term for the more suburban Tories. Moderate in policy but also moderate in not doing anything at all...(at least until someone decides to route a ring road through their backyard)

[Хahar 🤔]

Okay.

I assume there will be less wards than players?

Oh, no... no, no, no... that's the beauty (or nasty and somewhat unfair satire*) of this. The players will represent that minority of councillors that aren't dull hacks with no ambition to speak of or dull hacks with (almost always totally unrealistic) dreams of glory at Westminster. It also makes for a much more flexible game; it should be able to work with a handful of players or with loads.

But more about that soon

*ie; it's not nearly as fair a charge to make of local government in the '50's as it is now.

Ooh.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

So, will we use British parties?

Yes and no. The parties will be obviously based on them (in particular; as they are in the West Midlands. In particular (and at first) as they were in Birmingham and surrounds in the late 1950's), but will not be them. Much as Chamberlain is based in Brum but is not Brum. I was thinking of the following for names; Municipal Socialist Party, Municipal Reform Party... and either the Muncipal Progressive Party or the Municipal Centre Party. As far as historical local government shadows go, "Progressive" is more authentic, but I have real trouble calling a group based on the Birmingham Liberals "progressive" in any sense. Though perhaps it might work in an ironic way. Especially after I inflict Thurmond Lawley on you all.

'Moderate' may be a good term for the more suburban Tories. Moderate in policy but also moderate in not doing anything at all...(at least until someone decides to route a ring road through their backyard)

Hmm... that would also allow me to use the Reform tag for the Liberals (not historically accurate, as such, but it fits). Yes. Moderates. That works (especially as it fits in with the real-life propaganda of the Birmingham Tories of the time). And also allows for a little irony from the mid '60's or so (if things head down that way. They may not).

Btw, the really, really accurate label for the Tories in this would be "Unionists" (which the real life Brum Tories were using as late as the '40's). But that would only cause confusion.

[afleitch]

Hmm... that would also allow me to use the Reform tag for the Liberals (not historically accurate, as such, but it fits). Yes. Moderates. That works (especially as it fits in with the real-life propaganda of the Birmingham Tories of the time). And also allows for a little irony from the mid '60's or so (if things head down that way. They may not).

Btw, the really, really accurate label for the Tories in this would be "Unionists" (which the real life Brum Tories were using as late as the '40's). But that would only cause confusion.

You may have to help 'place' players into their respective parties remember

Will LEA's be included here in some form? It's a good time for the re-evaluation of the Tripartite system and the comprehensive experiment.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You may have to help 'place' players into their respective parties remember

Yeah, probably. Though if people find the idea of playing (say) an illiterate machine thug or a corrupt businessman more fun than the sort of people common to the party closest to their views (and background! This is based on Brum after all...), then they should feel free to do so.

One thought that just crossed my mind is this; I've got quite a few doodles lying around of various nasty and-or drunk looking people. Could give each player (and some of the stronger NPC's) a doodle to represent them. Might make it easier for people to get into their characters.

Example;

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes. That's one of the details I'm still working on (along with area committees; not important at first, but in real life they became very powerful in Brum from the '80's onwards. Of course things have now reached the point where "ward committees" have rather a lot of power... of course that is mainly to allow politicians in certain inner-city wards to patronage themselves to re-election... elections are a joke in parts of the city these days... but that's enough a' that...).

[ilikeverin]

You may have to help 'place' players into their respective parties remember

Yeah, probably. Though if people find the idea of playing (say) an illiterate machine thug or a corrupt businessman more fun than the sort of people common to the party closest to their views (and background! This is based on Brum after all...), then they should feel free to do so.

Lord knows I'm into playing absurd people.  You'll just have to give me some British machine politics stereotypes to work with.

[12th Doctor]

Ummm... so how goes this?  I haven't checked in for over a month.