Political RP

[lordliam]

I've been thinking, in CNRP and other nation-based games and role-plays in general, there's really not much going on within nations, only between them. Political parties, factions within the government and ideological movements have pretty much no effect on the world if the players don't choose to type it all out.
Seems quite boring, no? What if every player in an RP, instead of leading a nation, would be limited to leading a political party? Or a group of rebels? Or the police? Needless to say, the world will be much more dynamic and interesting. Presidencies would have to be won in elections, with multiple players trying to win the hears of the people. And even after the election! The new leader wants to go out and conquer the world, what of the designs of the opposition party? Would they filibuster economic initiatives to help with the war? Would they rise up in rebellion to overthrow the tyrannical new president? The possibilities are endless.
In other instances, taking control of a rebel group within somebody else's nation would be discouraged and marked as a somewhat shady thing to do to just get an advantage. But in this RP it would actually be [i]encouraged[/i]. Internal strife is what the world now-a-days is all about. There are more wars within nations rather than the traditional wars between nations. I think this would be a really fun RP to try.
Anybody interested or have any ideas regarding this?

[king of cochin]

Your idea is good, however the problem is that this community is far from an ideal community of rational/respectful/cordial/mature RPers. If introduced you would see a massive amounts of abuse emanating from pure spite instead of any constructive RP the way you are suggesting.

People would start RPing insurgencies in the opposing player's nation as a supplement to the exiting international intrigues.

[lordliam]

[quote name='king of cochin' timestamp='1286342456' post='2476940']
Your idea is good, however the problem is that this community is far from an ideal community of rational/respectful/cordial/mature RPers. If introduced you would see a massive amounts of abuse emanating from pure spite instead of any constructive RP the way you are suggesting.

People would start RPing insurgencies in the opposing player's nation as a supplement to the exiting international intrigues.
[/quote]
What about limiting the number of "groups" a player can RP to 1 at a time.

Of course, this thread is just a concept, idea, whatever. Probably not going to make an RP like this anytime soon, or ever for that matter. Just seeing what people think.

[Lestari]

Indeed. If people were willing to be mature and cooperative about it? This would work well.

Unfortunately, there are some people who just can't bring themselves to be either of those.

[Sarah Tintagyl]

Christ Almighty can you guys not be negative to people for once. Lordliam, if you want to do a political RP, you're more than welcome to do one with me in France. Shoot me a PM with what you're looking for and we'll hook it up. Look forward to seeing what you come up with.

[Bacharth]

I'd be up for that. I'd love to play just a single political par-*gets an idea*

ow.

[kitex]

lordliam, I am totally cool with that as I have RPed a civil war and a massive Christian uprising in my nation before. If you ever want to do anything, even now, just PM me. BTW my nation is Blue Heaven.

[Executive Minister]

The main reason I RP a pseudo-Authoritarian with a cult of personality-esque government is to free myself from having to RP open political dissent.

[Generalissimo]

I’m willing to try it, what’s the worst that can happen? Next week anyone can play a political party within a reformed Procinctia, for additional fun every group can be secretly backed by a foreign power. Playing in this senario is explicitly agreeing to both non-violence and not internally overthrowing my country – these are reasonable preconditions, it’s not that I don’t trust the CNRP community.

Edited October 6, 2010 by Generalissimo

[Triyun]

Part of the problem is that a lot of people RP political parties and systems of government that would not be very viable, or assume perfect results of economic theory. For example, on the right side of the political spectrum there are a disproportionately high rate of monarchies with basically authurian sage kings, instead of anemic inbred men who have lived in a bubble all their lives like most actual IRL monarchs. Or on the other end of the spectrum there have been regimes which espouse all of Communism and collectivism's benefits with none of the costs. Both aren't very realistic nor are the chances of a great mass of the population of a country accepting such a thing in the 21st Century. You also of course have the separate issue of people wanting to RP 20 year old national leaders who have cultivated none of the experience that an IRL political leader would need to run a country which only comes with years spent building connections and understanding the bureaucratic mechanisms involved in a modern state.

All of these would lead to serious issues with political RP. After the current foreign situation in Asia is resolved and China's national borders are more or less whole, I personally will be focusing on the what next question in domestic politics when foreign policy regarding Chinese territorial integrity is no longer a pressing issue. At the moment there is a very big difference between my ruling party which is socialist but retains elements of state capitalism and remains focused on results, largely modeled after Deng Xiaoping's ideals and their junior coalition partner which is distinctly Maoist and has the same distaste for gradual revolutionary change in favor of sweeping reform and permanent revolution.

[Captain Enema]

And on top of what Triyun just said.. What exactly do you do with a political rp? Sounds a bit dull if you ask me. Too tenuous and not driven enough towards an ultimate end game.

Now if you were to rp something like political parties in a presidential race or something to that effect and let the general audience vote after hearing the debates and smear adverts... that could be a bit fun.

Edited October 6, 2010 by Tidy Bowl Man

[Sal Paradise]

Canuckistan is a boring first world multi-party capitalist democracy. I don't need to worry about economy because the hidden hand does the work for me.

I'm RPing an election right now, but I don't want it to drag out any longer. Next time I wouldn't mind someone or someones RPing a political party or two.

Edited October 6, 2010 by Sal Paradise

[Subtleknifewielder]

Are you talking about doing this in CNRP? Or starting another RP world?

[lordliam]

Maybe we should have GMs that decide what the people of the in-game world think and do, they could also give the children of monarchs different levels of ability, and er mental stability. That should get rid of all the unrealistic economic theory-type problems.

And, frankly, CNRP is way too... weird already. Forcing everybody to only be able to control one party within a nation would just make it worse. :/

[Lestari]

[quote name='Sarah Tintagyl' timestamp='1286343960' post='2476958']
Christ Almighty can you guys not be negative to people for once. Lordliam, if you want to do a political RP, you're more than welcome to do one with me in France. Shoot me a PM with what you're looking for and we'll hook it up. Look forward to seeing what you come up with.
[/quote]

I'm sorry, it just so happens I spent the past few days studying Hobbes XD

But hey, I'm willing to try this out.

[Centurius]

[quote name='lordliam' timestamp='1286406985' post='2477505']
Maybe we should have GMs that decide what the people of the in-game world think and do, they could also give the children of monarchs different levels of ability, and er mental stability. That should get rid of all the unrealistic economic theory-type problems.

And, frankly, CNRP is way too... weird already. Forcing everybody to only be able to control one party within a nation would just make it worse. :/
[/quote]

Eh no thanks, I think GM's already have too much power, opening up that kind of power is just asking for abuse.

As for the idea in general, Athens is pretty much open playground as long as you don't do anything to harm the state and inform me first.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Well, it's good to know some people are doing a more open opportunity for RP, but...my question remains unanswered. Would this potentially be in CNRP, or would it be another offshoot entirely?

[lordliam]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' timestamp='1286474997' post='2478023']
Well, it's good to know some people are doing a more open opportunity for RP, but...my question remains unanswered. Would this potentially be in CNRP, or would it be another offshoot entirely?
[/quote]
Different world.

And, regarding mod bias, we could bar mods from controlling parties, do you think that would get rid of it? Maybe elections in nations could be open to the non-RPing public too.

[Centurius]

[quote name='lordliam' timestamp='1286513278' post='2478619']
Different world.

And, regarding mod bias, we could bar mods from controlling parties, do you think that would get rid of it? Maybe elections in nations could be open to the non-RPing public too.
[/quote]

Anything where a gm or mod can influence the population of an ic country is too much power.

[Subtleknifewielder]

So in essence if we wanted an impartial GM, it would have to be someone having no political power in the RP...if we could get someone interested in doing something like that, sure, it might actually work.

[Bacharth]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' timestamp='1286580881' post='2479197']
So in essence if we wanted an impartial GM, it would have to be someone having no political power in the RP...if we could get someone interested in doing something like that, sure, it might actually work.
[/quote]

Actually...the GM controlling the populous might be a bad idea. Depending on their political beliefs, or their feelings OOC towards someone, they could hammer against one political party and make the people hard for another party. Like, say if we had a GM who loved communism, they would make sure nationalists or conservative based parties would get nothing.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Vince Sixx' timestamp='1286582077' post='2479209']
Actually...the GM controlling the populous might be a bad idea. Depending on their political beliefs, or their feelings OOC towards someone, they could hammer against one political party and make the people hard for another party. Like, say if we had a GM who loved communism, they would make sure nationalists or conservative based parties would get nothing.
[/quote]
Vince... That's what I just said.

Read what I wrote again please.

[Bacharth]

I read what you wrote. You said having political power in the game.

I mean, lets say someone who in [b][u]RL[/u] [/b]liked communism. They would make everything better for the communists, democrats, and liberals and make the people communist. Since politics is something that can be very hotly debated by anyone, there would be no such thing as a neutral GM.

Edited October 9, 2010 by Vince Sixx

[Karl Martin]

The US, which had this basic idea, failed. I do not see this succeeding within CNRP.

[lordliam]

[quote name='Karl Martin' timestamp='1286588401' post='2479284']
The US, which had this basic idea, failed. I do not see this succeeding within CNRP.
[/quote]
I just said like a page ago it would be in a different world.

I think I would be able to give up my right to play in order to act as GM, but I don't know if I'll be active enough. I certainly can go any way in terms of political leaning though.

If one partial GM doesn't work, I'm sure appointing more should do the trick to balance things out.

If that still doesn't work, I'm sure we can just put limits on GM powers. Every time a GM wants to change public opinion, they have to give a legit reason, e.g. (It has been found that the leader of the Conservative party is a black belt in Judo, and so his public image goes up. Thus, the GM increases Conservative support.) We'll limit public opinion swing to maybe 1% a month. So even [i]with[/i] GM support an upstart Na-Soc party will need about 5 or 6 years to actually get enough public opinion to gain control of the government. I dunno, but I think 5-6 years is enough for another outside force to give a legitimate reason for voters to wake up and stop the party from growing anymore.

I really think this would be something cool. Conspiring with others to take down opponents and typing my fingers off trying to get the opposition to support a war. But we'll need a group of people who are not really interested in being the most awesome country (or party, in this case) but rather just in having some fun.

Edited October 9, 2010 by lordliam