Boy God Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 I've been looking at the RP topics and they all seem to fall into three categories: A) War B) Diplomacy (treaty signing and such) C) Haggling over land (arguing for protector positions) and that seemed to be rather bland. some nations who sign up for CNRP do not get to really RP all that much because their countries are too small, too unimportant, or just don't have the political connections to jump in. This is why i propose that we should allow the introduction of natural disasters. Natural disasters are great in that it allows RP opportunities for those who do not have them. It gives nations chances to interact with each other and build bonds (ie Japan gets hit with an earthquake, UFE helps, they start a friendly relation that leads to a treaty). Such things have been done before with success in RPs from other forums and boosted interest in the RPS which implemented natural disasters. I think we should have natural disasters which range from 1-5 (1: plane crash, 5: Yosemite erupts) in severity with 3+ also involving neighboring nations along with the primary target of the disaster. It should of course be implemented by chance, but since some nations are larger, they have a higher chance of being included the secondary effects of a disaster. Since this will be a new thing and some people might not wish to be bothered with it or are too busy to deal with it, I’ll be asking for volunteers, the secondary effected nations could choose not to respond if they do not sign up. Current nations taking part: 1) DR of Ontario 2)... If this kind of thing has been done before or something like it is already in effect, please tell me. Other than that, please also comment and tell me what you think of this idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHAYD Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 This idea has been brought up many times before, and was consistently shot down. Many RPers dislike the idea of idea of RPing something that occurred outside of their control (except for wars or other diplomatic stuff). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 (edited) This has happened before, but many people simply do not wish to RP secondary effects from disasters in neighboring nations. A number of nations have been around for years (RL time) and have developed long standing relations, enemies, etc. The CNRP arc changes all the time, but it is always a gradual change. In regards to "too small, too irrelevant, too unimportant", RP more and RP well. Build your nation up ICly and regardless of your military strength, you can be "important". Edited October 20, 2011 by Voodoo Nova Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 If you want to introduce major disasters, a surprising amount of RPers will join you in it. I remember when Mael did his massive earthquake, and me and Cochin RPed damage to our nations too. Feel free to go for whatever disaster you want (so long as it's not a huge asteroid or supervolcano or something like that), and just roll with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 I love the idea but i mean if a GM hated me and even if they did randomly cause a huge disaster on me, id be pissed lol. So i understand the out of control thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iKrolm Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 [quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1319076045' post='2828945'] If you want to introduce major disasters, a surprising amount of RPers will join you in it. I remember when Mael did his massive earthquake, and me and Cochin RPed damage to our nations too. Feel free to go for whatever disaster you want (so long as it's not a huge asteroid or supervolcano or something like that), and just roll with it. [/quote] ^ This, basically. If you don't want to start a disaster yourself, ask around for someone who wants to: you're bound to find at least a few. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Timmy Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 No thanks, next question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted October 20, 2011 Report Share Posted October 20, 2011 There is a longstanding policy in CNRP to not force people to rp something, with the exception of war. As such unless there is a decisive majority in the community to remove this policy I see no way to implement it and am personally against it. That said, you can rp a global disaster with people who are interested in it but it will only affect those nations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vedran Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 I suppose it would be interesting. But nothing really cataclysmic. At least, I wouldn't want to do anything cataclysmic. Arctica is still rebuilding Pretoria and Bloemfontein. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted October 21, 2011 Report Share Posted October 21, 2011 UFE shall build HAARP and use it on Cochin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Timmy Posted October 22, 2011 Report Share Posted October 22, 2011 Be advised, if we get forced to RP these sort of events I will RP an asteroid the size of asia that would kill all life on earth impacting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beauty Posted October 22, 2011 Report Share Posted October 22, 2011 [quote name='King Timmy' timestamp='1319284262' post='2830414'] Be advised, if we get forced to RP these sort of events I will RP an asteroid the size of asia that would kill all life on earth impacting. [/quote] Thank god the GMs will do the forced RPing then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShammySocialist Posted October 22, 2011 Report Share Posted October 22, 2011 (edited) I stand by the old standing policy that Centurius outlined, that forcing people to roleplay disasters is off the books, with the vote as it stands now, although it gives a slight advantage to the "Yes, great idea" side, is by no means a [b]decisive[/b] majority. I am against forcing people to roleplay disasters that they do not want to be involved with, that withstanding, I am not against roleplaying disasters, so long as someone can [i]choose[/i] to be a part of them. There is nothing stopping you from having disasters of your own, and roleplaying them with other people, just organize it yourself. Edited October 22, 2011 by TheShammySocialist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted October 23, 2011 Report Share Posted October 23, 2011 What Shammy said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.