I'm feeling good about leading a nations RP because: I know a lot about warfare and its logistics. I'm a very politically-opinionated person.

I'd like to start a nations RP that involves strong elements of fantasy, such as fantastical races (elves, orcs, dwarves) while maintaining a very realistic feel to it (information about terrain, government systems, keeping your army fed, etc.).

I'll start working the lore and the mechanics if I get enough interests in this.

Interested.

Hi MissingAxis. What kind of races would you like to play? What would be your nation like?

Please nothing futuristic. This will be in a fantasy setting.

I plan on playing desert dwelling humans, but I haven't nailed anything else down yet.

Interested.

What would your nation be like, Khan? What race?

Hmm, if I do join probably either a goblinoid federation or a united force of gnoll tribes.

Possibly interested.

Will this RP feature a trait system?

I would be interested.

Assuming no stats are involved, I'd be interested. My availability would depend on the success of another RP idea, however.

Fisheye said
Assuming no stats are involved

Yes, pretty much this.

Stats are a good concrete measurement of objectivity. Why are people so opposed to them?

Theodorable said
Stats are a good concrete measurement of objectivity. Why are people so opposed to them?

Generally a post by post RP has no real place for hard math for units like that. It can be done but it get's really gamey quickly.

Theodorable said
Stats are a good concrete measurement of objectivity. Why are people so opposed to them?

In my opinion, their too impersonal and game-like to work with the standard forum RP. A properly Role-played character or nation is more complex than any amount of stats or skills can express, and I personally dislike being limited in my ability to role-play my character as I see fit by a sequence of representative numbers.

Ultimately, it's just a matter of personal preference. I myself don't enjoy RPing with stats, but I know that quite a few others do. In the case of a NRP, a good alternative that was used on the Bethesda Forum was getting a general vote in the OOC for the outcome of a situation. If I may use a battle for an example, assuming there is no absolutely clear victor, each participant would present their battleplans on the OOC and the non-biased RPers for the situation would democratically decide the outcome. Alternatively, each participant in the battle would PM their battleplans to the GM (or preferably a small go up of Co-GMs, to keep things more fair) and the GM(s) would decide the outcomes themselves.

In things other than battle, it's usually enough to just have everyone do whatever they want in the IC until someone protests someone's actions in the OOC. After the issue is brought up, a popular or GM vote ensues and a decision is made (usually in the form of a nerf). Anyway, those are just a couple of suggestions for alternatives to stats and the like.

You haven't provided an argument, you just stated why you didn't like something. I don't like taxes, but I'm paying them.

Hard stats take subjectivity out of the equation. When my troops go against yours, it becomes a muddled "Well my troops are pretty good," and "Well mine have been training for such and such years."

Stats are a hardline reference from all players find a baseline to remove any issue of hurt feelings and gives a valid base from which to grow.

In my opinion, their too impersonal and game-like to work with the standard forum RP. A properly Role-played character or nation is more complex than any amount of stats or skills can express, and I personally dislike being limited in my ability to role-play my character as I see fit by a sequence of representative numbers.

Well even in real life context this is false. Real life nations are largely an expression of dollars spent and bodies that can work. Look at the last World War, it was won by "bullets, beans and bandages" the Soviet Union and United States simply outproduced their opponents, regardless of how fierce Hitler thought his Tiger tanks were.

Ultimately, it's just a matter of personal preference. I myself don't enjoy RPing with stats, but I know that quite a few others do. In the case of a NRP, a good alternative that was used on the Bethesda Forum was getting a general vote in the OOC for the outcome of a situation. If I may use a battle for an example, assuming there is no absolutely clear victor, each participant would present their battleplans on the OOC and the non-biased RPers for the situation would democratically decide the outcome. Alternatively, each participant in the battle would PM their battleplans to the GM (or preferably a small go up of Co-GMs, to keep things more fair) and the GM(s) would decide the outcomes themselves.

Well this isn't a very good option either -- my vote will ALWAYS go to the outcome that best benefits my nation, not the one that makes the most sense. If you're giving me a vote, I'm going to try and make it impactful to better my own nation, in the sense of Otto von Bismarck.

In things other than battle, it's usually enough to just have everyone do whatever they want in the IC until someone protests someone's actions in the OOC. After the issue is brought up, a popular or GM vote ensues and a decision is made (usually in the form of a nerf). Anyway, those are just a couple of suggestions for alternatives to stats and the like.

This is borderline insanity. "Let people do whatever they want until it upsets you."

Theodorable said
You haven't provided an argument, you just stated why you didn't like something. I don't like taxes, but I'm paying them.Hard stats take subjectivity out of the equation. When my troops go against yours, it becomes a muddled "Well my troops are pretty good," and "Well mine have been training for such and such years."Stats are a hardline reference from all players find a baseline to remove any issue of hurt feelings and gives a valid base from which to grow.

Correct, I don't like them. I'm not really trying to get into an argument at all. As I said (verbatim) ultimately, it's just a matter of personal preference.

You're confusing an argument with a disagreement. I'm asking you to back up your personal preference with a reason. An argument: a discussion involving differing points of view; debate: I'm not implying this is an altercation.

Theo, this isn't really something that needs to be discussed any further. I'm not here to proclaim which is better, and I've already expressed why I prefer a lack of stats. You obviously prefer having stats in your RPs and believe that they benefit the RP, and that's fine. I don't, and I was just asking if they were present to see if this was something I could get into and enjoy, not to encourage a conversation about the merits and/or detrements of stats in RPs.

GM said no stats are involved. So that's that, this discussion or agreement doesn't need to happen, regardless of what you want to classify it has. All we are waiting for now is the lore, mechanics and CS/NS skeleton from GM. Assuming they are still up to it.

Or you could, you know, play the RP from a narrative standpoint instead of trying to be an armchair general. Less about gunporn and army wank, and more about really dipping into what makes a nation tick.

To be real, I've yet to see an NRPer conduct his or her military in a proper manner, the reason for this I attribute to the fact no one really knows a lick of anything about actual warfare.

Additionally, I plan to play a fantasy species that in no way adheres to the usual rules and/or formulas associated with conventional human-style warfare, so I don't see how a stats system is really going to benefit nonhuman species unless you're really going to limit people to the usual boring Tolkien-style races and whatnot.