|
Debates
Oct 31, 2005 17:43:04 GMT -5
Post by Crazy on Oct 31, 2005 17:43:04 GMT -5
I was thinking about adding in Debates in this game, like the Duels. The only problem is how will they be done.
Anyone have any ideas?
|
|
|
Debates
Oct 31, 2005 21:27:22 GMT -5
Post by EwA AznLeader on Oct 31, 2005 21:27:22 GMT -5
I was thinking about adding in Debates in this game, like the Duels. The only problem is how will they be done. Anyone have any ideas? post this after i say/remind you eh
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Nov 1, 2005 5:03:21 GMT -5
how do debates work in ROTKX?
|
|
|
Debates
Nov 1, 2005 11:35:55 GMT -5
Post by EwA AznLeader on Nov 1, 2005 11:35:55 GMT -5
ummm
kinda hard to explain.. you have certain tactics on a board and if your tactic is better you move your opponent back and til they reach the back they lose and you win? sorry im not good at explaining
|
|
|
Debates
Nov 9, 2005 17:35:26 GMT -5
Post by Vaga on Nov 9, 2005 17:35:26 GMT -5
it would have to do with a combination of your INT/CHA stat....maybe POL...and maybe you have points or something...and make it like a real debate.
There will be a judge sort of...then both people post their arguments, then the judge would decide which one makes more sense...etc...(this would also allow for partial RP in debates, so if enemies are debating they can make comments about past battles, etc.)
|
|
|
Debates
Nov 15, 2005 23:12:30 GMT -5
Post by blackjacktrial on Nov 15, 2005 23:12:30 GMT -5
Beware! Dun has experience at debating! He just.... wasn't that good at it.
|
|
|
Debates
Nov 30, 2005 3:30:39 GMT -5
Post by Cao Ren, played by xdonthave1x on Nov 30, 2005 3:30:39 GMT -5
Damn. I just need to make a good argument, and hope my character's 96, 99, 93 Int/Pol/Cha do the rest.
|
|
|
Debates
Nov 30, 2005 8:30:25 GMT -5
Post by blackjacktrial on Nov 30, 2005 8:30:25 GMT -5
I shall rely on my main argument: "I ate my own goddamn eye. I am a badass, so you'd better believe me. Or I'll make you eat yours." (Don't think it'll get me that far.)
My problem in real life debating was "Too much logic, not enough emotion." In other words, adjudicators thought I was missing a pair of pointy ears or something.
*raises quizzical eyebrow*
|
|
|
Debates
Nov 30, 2005 15:40:07 GMT -5
Post by Hell Comet on Nov 30, 2005 15:40:07 GMT -5
how about this you have it sort of as a reverse dual you have a point total and a tatic like attacks skill things that are based on your Int/Pol/Cha you have each depate go to like 1,000 points and each char gains a begining bonus equal to their int/pol/cha and you go until some one reaches 1,000 or 0 and the winner gains stuff like deeds 1,000 point so Xun Yu Led-48 War-18 Int-96 Pol-99 Cha-93 288/1,000
tatic attack skill things Statement- gains points equal to your int+pol/2 (15 MP)
Retort- opponet loses half the points the just gained (25MP)
insult-you lose points equal to your war and your opponet loses points equal to your cha (50 MP)
counter-you gain half the points your opponet gained (40 MP)
note card-you gain 15 MP but lose next tunr (n/a)
ect
|
|
|
Post by blackjacktrial on Dec 1, 2005 5:21:31 GMT -5
I think insult would be a desperate move when you are losing.
3v3 tends to be a good debate set up.
You usually have three types of speaker, too - Mr. Logic, Mr. Emotion, and Mr. Politician (int, cha and pol, I guess)
Logic doesn't make a lot of appeals to people - but he can be decisive if the opposition don't get it right on their end. In other words, he sets a platform for the others to fly off. Usually the most prepared speech too. - In other words, not usually the big winning play, but if the opposition neglects this area, they should expect to pay dearly.
Emotion can often win the game, but it needs to be underpinned by logic. You get your big points here. Problem is, the politician is good at neutralising emotion (but not logic), so there is a greater risk in emotional pleas than logical argument
Politician isn't a very good point scoring move. In fact, compared to the offensive moves of logic and emotion, politician is defensive in nature, seeking to limit the harm done by the other team. He is, however, not very effective at all vs logic, but very good vs emotion, being experienced in knowing what the people believe.
So, you need say 3 moves for logic, 3 for emotion and 3 for politician.
If logic is used vs emotion - logic and emotion both score points, but emotion scores higher. emotion vs politician - politician picks up a few points from rebuttal, but emotion does very badly, often losing points. politician vs logic - politician loses out, scores basically nothing, whilst logic scores a decent hit.
There should also be punishments for continually using one or two of the types only.
|
|
|
Debates
Dec 1, 2005 12:05:28 GMT -5
Post by Cao Ren, played by xdonthave1x on Dec 1, 2005 12:05:28 GMT -5
In ROTKX, they have a board. Something like this. As each player picks their tactics in the debate, you have the arguments color coded, and numbered. If you placed arguments in a way to get three in a row, like below. You would gain a bonus, by pushing your opponent over to your side of the argument more. Likewise. If you get three points of conflicting arguement in a row, you get pushed back yourself. (two colors in a row has no harmful effects) If we could figure out how to do something like this. Cool.
|
|
|
Debates
Dec 3, 2005 23:11:56 GMT -5
Post by blackjacktrial on Dec 3, 2005 23:11:56 GMT -5
Run me through how a sample debate goes - I wish I could see how this works.
|
|
|
Debates
Dec 4, 2005 11:40:06 GMT -5
Post by Crazy on Dec 4, 2005 11:40:06 GMT -5
Wo Di has Debates in his board....wow I never knew.
See Dueling and Debating like Rotk X would be way easier.....but Wo di is using that....
|
|
|
Debates
Dec 4, 2005 13:09:30 GMT -5
Post by Cao Ren, played by xdonthave1x on Dec 4, 2005 13:09:30 GMT -5
Fine. We'll just RP the debates, and it'll be another duel thing I won't participate in.
|
|
|
Debates
Dec 4, 2005 21:36:28 GMT -5
Post by blackjacktrial on Dec 4, 2005 21:36:28 GMT -5
Well, what I propose we do is "blind selection" (like I've proposed in duels). You don't get to just have the best RPer win - though it might definitely help get you bonus points or something - you also have to be capable of anticipating the oppositions moves.
|
|