It's a fine day in the mid-9th century. Charles the Bald, king of West Francia, isn't happy. His grandfather Charlemagne made an empire, his dad Louis managed to keep it together - but now it's all falling apart. His oldest brother Lothar, that twat, inherited the empire. So Charles and his two other brothers (well, half-brothers, really - they all have the same mum, except for Charles) had to struggle a bit to get their bit of the empire.
It all seemed to work out in the end. Lothar got the title, Pippin got Aquitaine, Louis got East Francia, and Charles got West Francia. But nobody said it was going to be like this.
First, the Bretons wanted independence, the right to run their own lives etc etc. Well, kings don't usually give away bits of their land for free, and Charles wasn't about to. But then the Breton leader Nominoë started getting nasty. Giving him some limited power to grease him didn't help; he started grabbing land and winning battles over the Franks. So Charles had to appoint him Duke.
Then, the Bretons decided that Nominoë's son Erispoë should be king. King of the Bretons. Charles had hoped that bribing Erispoë's foster brother Salamon with land would make the Bretons fight among themselves, but the result so far is that Salamon just wants - that's right - more power.
Then the Normans arrived. Oh, barbarian invaders are mostly the same - they make a lot of noise at your borders, you beat them with overwhelming force and do nasty things to their leaders' corpses, they go away. But the Normans didn't stop at the borders. They just sailed straight up the rivers in their low boats and sacked and pillaged. And then they just... took Paris. Cost a hell of a lot of gold to buy it back.
Charles the Bald isn't happy.
In fact, Charles the Bald is superf***ed.
Charles the Bald is superf***ed
19 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Charles the Bald is superf***ed
by matthijs » Sun May 22, 2005 11:44 am
- matthijs
- Marmoset
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 1:27 am
by matthijs » Sun May 22, 2005 2:05 pm
Game structure
The game is played in scenes, where players compete at narration. After 10 scenes it's over. This probably takes about an hour.
Who narrates what?
Each scene starts with a quick paper-scissors-stone contest between the players. The sign you pick shows what group you want to narrate - Franks (paper), Bretons (stone) or Normans (scissors). Any players that pick the same thing (paper, scissors or stone) are trying to narrate the same group.
Compare the different sides' signs. As usual, paper wins over stone, stone over scissors, scissors over paper. The side that loses narrates their side first; the side that wins narrates last; any in-betweeners narrate in between. If all three sides are chosen, the winner is the one that most players chose. If it's still a tie, start the scene over.
If several players chose the same group, they have to compete over who gets to narrate their group. They do the paper-scissors-stone thing again. Winner narrates - but they have to narrate how the side they picked does something to help whoever they support in this scene.
Example: Four players. A and B choose stone, C chooses scissors, D chooses paper. All three sides are represented - but stone has the most players, so stone wins. That means scissors are second and paper third.
D, who chose paper, starts by narrating a clever plot by the Franks - against the Bretons, in this example. C, scissors, narrates how the Normans take advantage of the fight to grab some loot.
A and B, who both chose stone, now have to fight to see who gets to narrate the Breton side. A chooses stone (still wants to narrate Bretons), B chooses paper (Franks). B wins, and narrates how the Franks do something stupid that ends up helping the Bretons.
Reward system
At the end of each scene, players secretly allocate a number of tokens equal to the number of players as a reward for good narration.
Example: The four players each have four tokens to give away at the end of the scene.
- A allocates two to D, one to B, one to C.
- B allocates two to D and two to C.
- C allocates one to D and three to B.
- D allocates two to B and two to C.
Total: A gets zero (no narration!), B gets 6, C gets 5, D gets 5.
Schtick narration
Each group has a schtick - a signature narrative event.
- For the Normans it's Invincibility. They tend to win any battles, or escape unscathed.
- For the Bretons it's Accusation. They tend to bicker amongst themselves a lot, and create intrigues by pointing fingers at whoever's not there; a bishop, a cousin, a brother-in-law's trusted vassal etc.
- For the Franks it's Companions. They try to get allies in all sorts of ways - marriage, giving away land and titles, bribery with gold.
When you narrate a group, you may include their schtick in narration. If you don't, you get one token instantly once you're done narrating. If you do use the schtick, and the player after you does so as well, you get three tokens. If you're the last player, you may ask for bribes to influence your decision to use the schtick or not.
Example: D narrates the Frankish schtick of Companions. C narrates the Norman schtick of Invincibility. B is last; if he chooses to use the schtick, he gets nothing, and B gets three. If he doesn't use it, he gets one, and B gets nothing. B gives C a look, and C immediately offers a bribe of 2 tokens if B narrates.
Example II: D narrates schtick, C doesn't. D gets nothing, C gets one. B doesn't narrate either, and gets one.
Predicted effects of the system
- Players compete at good narration
- It's tactically stupid to try to get narration for a side everyone wants, since you're likely to end up with nothing; so the less interesting sides will be ensured narration
- The scenes will be filled with plot twists
- There will be an added incentive to listen to the narrator: Will he use the schtick or not?
Unfriendly competition?
If competition becomes unfriendly, players may start voting tactically instead of awarding tokens for good narration. However, doing so is basically admitting that whoever you're cheating is a better narrator than you - so it kind of defeats itself.
The game is played in scenes, where players compete at narration. After 10 scenes it's over. This probably takes about an hour.
Who narrates what?
Each scene starts with a quick paper-scissors-stone contest between the players. The sign you pick shows what group you want to narrate - Franks (paper), Bretons (stone) or Normans (scissors). Any players that pick the same thing (paper, scissors or stone) are trying to narrate the same group.
Compare the different sides' signs. As usual, paper wins over stone, stone over scissors, scissors over paper. The side that loses narrates their side first; the side that wins narrates last; any in-betweeners narrate in between. If all three sides are chosen, the winner is the one that most players chose. If it's still a tie, start the scene over.
If several players chose the same group, they have to compete over who gets to narrate their group. They do the paper-scissors-stone thing again. Winner narrates - but they have to narrate how the side they picked does something to help whoever they support in this scene.
Example: Four players. A and B choose stone, C chooses scissors, D chooses paper. All three sides are represented - but stone has the most players, so stone wins. That means scissors are second and paper third.
D, who chose paper, starts by narrating a clever plot by the Franks - against the Bretons, in this example. C, scissors, narrates how the Normans take advantage of the fight to grab some loot.
A and B, who both chose stone, now have to fight to see who gets to narrate the Breton side. A chooses stone (still wants to narrate Bretons), B chooses paper (Franks). B wins, and narrates how the Franks do something stupid that ends up helping the Bretons.
Reward system
At the end of each scene, players secretly allocate a number of tokens equal to the number of players as a reward for good narration.
Example: The four players each have four tokens to give away at the end of the scene.
- A allocates two to D, one to B, one to C.
- B allocates two to D and two to C.
- C allocates one to D and three to B.
- D allocates two to B and two to C.
Total: A gets zero (no narration!), B gets 6, C gets 5, D gets 5.
Schtick narration
Each group has a schtick - a signature narrative event.
- For the Normans it's Invincibility. They tend to win any battles, or escape unscathed.
- For the Bretons it's Accusation. They tend to bicker amongst themselves a lot, and create intrigues by pointing fingers at whoever's not there; a bishop, a cousin, a brother-in-law's trusted vassal etc.
- For the Franks it's Companions. They try to get allies in all sorts of ways - marriage, giving away land and titles, bribery with gold.
When you narrate a group, you may include their schtick in narration. If you don't, you get one token instantly once you're done narrating. If you do use the schtick, and the player after you does so as well, you get three tokens. If you're the last player, you may ask for bribes to influence your decision to use the schtick or not.
Example: D narrates the Frankish schtick of Companions. C narrates the Norman schtick of Invincibility. B is last; if he chooses to use the schtick, he gets nothing, and B gets three. If he doesn't use it, he gets one, and B gets nothing. B gives C a look, and C immediately offers a bribe of 2 tokens if B narrates.
Example II: D narrates schtick, C doesn't. D gets nothing, C gets one. B doesn't narrate either, and gets one.
Predicted effects of the system
- Players compete at good narration
- It's tactically stupid to try to get narration for a side everyone wants, since you're likely to end up with nothing; so the less interesting sides will be ensured narration
- The scenes will be filled with plot twists
- There will be an added incentive to listen to the narrator: Will he use the schtick or not?
Unfriendly competition?
If competition becomes unfriendly, players may start voting tactically instead of awarding tokens for good narration. However, doing so is basically admitting that whoever you're cheating is a better narrator than you - so it kind of defeats itself.
- matthijs
- Marmoset
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 1:27 am
by matthijs » Sun May 22, 2005 2:19 pm
Some links:
Wikipedia
Charles the Bald:
Nominoë:
Erispoë:
Normans:
Other
Map of Bretagne:
Franks and Vikings (babelfish translation):
Arms and armour:
A Frankish warrior:
Carolingian costume:
Charles' coins:
Wikipedia
Charles the Bald:
Nominoë:
Erispoë:
Normans:
Other
Map of Bretagne:
Franks and Vikings (babelfish translation):
Arms and armour:
A Frankish warrior:
Carolingian costume:
Charles' coins:
- matthijs
- Marmoset
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 1:27 am
by Emily Care » Tue May 24, 2005 2:49 pm
- Emily Care
- Squirrel Monkey
- Posts: 22
- Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 5:51 pm
by John Kim » Tue May 24, 2005 2:53 pm
Apropos of the contest, it is historically based and uses hand gestures, but I'm not seeing where any of the ingredients work in (Wine, Entomology, Accuser, Invincible, Companion). You could stretch to justify them, but they don't seem central, certainly. This doesn't mean that it's not a good game, but it doesn't seem to fit this particular contest.
In terms of the game itself, is there anything about the mechanisms that are particularly tied to the historical background? It seems like it could be about any set of three (or N, really) groups that get narrated about.
In terms of the game itself, is there anything about the mechanisms that are particularly tied to the historical background? It seems like it could be about any set of three (or N, really) groups that get narrated about.
- John Kim
- Squirrel Monkey
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 10:59 am
- Location: SF Bay Area, CA
19 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Return to Game Chef 2005 & 2006
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests