►►►Nation RP General - Learn and share in one convenient place! (OP IN PROGRESS)

[Jairo]

remember last time we tried to build a civilization together

there's a difference between building a civilization and leading an established sovereignty

we won't have to found our own religion or determine legal doctrine or anything like that to start

just good, clean diplomacy, war, etc.

[Ad Bot]

[Nonnel]

I demand US Congress Simulator

[Maxwell.]

I demand US Congress Simulator

can I be bernie sanders

[Jairo]

I demand US Congress Simulator

funny you should mention that, me and swat one have been in talks about that

[Juncoph]

i really don't want to do a collective rule rp

[TristanLuigi]

I demand US Congress Simulator

funny you should mention that, me and swat one have been in talks about that

hopefully you guys do it better than i did

[CypherX]

what even is the point of congress simulator? i can guarantee you right now there are about equal parts left and right that would participate, meaning there's almost no administration that would get passed and additionally theres not a lot you really can DO bill-wise or event wise to make that sort of game interesting

in a highly edited scenario where players control states and the US suffers some sort of catastrophy(s) it might work, but otherwise i don't see much more than a fizzle out before page 30

[Jairo]

what even is the point of congress simulator? i can guarantee you right now there are about equal parts left and right that would participate, meaning there's almost no administration that would get passed and additionally theres not a lot you really can DO bill-wise or event wise to make that sort of game interesting

in a highly edited scenario where players control states and the US suffers some sort of catastrophy(s) it might work, but otherwise i don't see much more than a fizzle out before page 30

swat's leaning towards a custom nation with its own issues while I'm opting for a "peculiar institution" thread where slavery was the big legislative hot-button issue (1820s onward)

parties were formed, dissolved, and radically overhauled because of slavery in the states, so I think it'd be a good breeding ground for intense congressional rp

[TristanLuigi]

swat's leaning towards a custom nation with its own issues while I'm opting for a "peculiar institution" thread where slavery was the big legislative hot-button issue

parties were formed, dissolved, and radically overhauled because of slavery in the states, so I think it'd be a good breeding ground for intense congressional rp

I'm not sure the US congress is the best scenario for this game because of the US's god-awful two-party system. Yes, parties were formed and dissolved, but fundamentally the American system does not work for third parties, and in a two-party system, there would be a deadlock like Cypher is describing.

I think a more European-style democracy would work far better (gameplay-wise, although let's be honest, it works better in real life too), perhaps based on Denmark's unicameral parliament. Or perhaps start in the Weimar Republic right before the depression? It provides a good mix of ideologies and a lot of opportunity.

[CypherX]

even with multiple parties theres still a deadlock because there is a natural tendency for a close split between ideologies, and especially here because each party has comparatively less power and therefore can have their issues and legislation stopped easier

[Jairo]

I'm not sure the US congress is the best scenario for this game because of the US's god-awful two-party system. Yes, parties were formed and dissolved, but fundamentally the American system does not work for third parties, and in a two-party system, there would be a deadlock like Cypher is describing.

I think a more European-style democracy would work far better (gameplay-wise, although let's be honest, it works better in real life too), perhaps based on Denmark's unicameral parliament. Or perhaps start in the Weimar Republic right before the depression? It provides a good mix of ideologies and a lot of opportunity.

I'm referring to the 1820s when politics were split based on economic interests, not political solidarity

eg how northern whigs and democrats supported the wilmot proviso while southern whigs and democrats opposed it. it was a geographic split rather than a political one, subverting a two-party deadlock and replacing it with a cultural divide

[TristanLuigi]

even with multiple parties theres still a deadlock because there is a natural tendency for a close split between ideologies, and especially here because each party has comparatively less power and therefore can have their issues and legislation stopped easier

But at least with 3 ideologies (fascism, liberalism, socialism, plus monarchists, etc) you can have legislation passed if two ideologies would vote for it. So the socialists might support the liberals for some legislation, the fascists for others, and neither for some.

[CypherX]

most people on this forum would subscribe to the liberal and the socialist policy

they are virtually interchangeable these days

as for monarchists and fascists (there's no general rightist ideology???) they would still vote a disagree, it would just be tough to make them agree

again, we have a deadlock

[TristanLuigi]

most people on this forum would subscribe to the liberal and the socialist policy

they are virtually interchangeable these days

as for monarchists and fascists (there's no general rightist ideology???) they would still vote a disagree, it would just be tough to make them agree

again, we have a deadlock

I said Weimar Republic for a reason. In modern days, liberal and socialist tend to swim together, but that isn't true in the 30s. Fascists and monarchists would disagree over quite a lot.

[CypherX]

weimar will encourage half of the players to go Riddler and the other half to oppose them

there is almost nothing you can do to avoid a deadlock besides holding actual elections that keep players out of the game. there are inherent problems with this as you may guess