Ted Von Penguin
Hello. I was talking with a friend and we thought of two ideas that I want to run by the boards and maybe get some help fleshing out and balancing.
The first is an idea of characters playing civilian and military politics, earning titles, promotions, and influence that could benefit their team during the game. Basically each character would have a rank in political and military acumen that would earn them a number of things roughly equivalent to trauma tokens from exodus. These tokens could then be spent to “campaign”, earning support, discrediting rivals, and other such actions. These would be supplemental actions so as not to take away from the main game and would earn little things like “You are considered higher on the line of succession than the next lowest player” or “Any Leadership card may be used as an XO”.
The next would be shuffling a number of unused character sheets into a deck, at each distance traveled one would be drawn a die rolled and a chart consulted. These would assign secondary missions that would give bonuses. For example if you draw chief, geata, or baltar and roll an 8 you have the option of risking a raptor whenever a heavy raider is destroyed, on 1-4 you lose the raptor, on 8 you gain +1 to all future ftl control rolls. Not sure how to balance this one so as to not make it too easy for humans though.
Thanks for reading. If anyone has advice or wants to spitball ideas send me a geekmail or respond here.
I do like the idea of things that people can be doing while there's not a hugely imminent Cylon threat, as I've played games where there just hasn't been much of anything to do with one's actions for several turns.
I especially like the idea that all these little political maneuverings give you a personal edge which represents a measure of trust. Moving up the chain of command is fine, as long as people trust you more than they trust the person you just bumped.
I love XOs because they have this wonderful trust dynamic; you can increase the total amount of stuff we can achieve, as long as you trust someone else enough to empower them.
Advantages that empower a single player are great for tension, as long as other players can do something about them if they don't trust the player to have them.
As to the second idea: what's the point? In particular, what's the point of making it so unlikely?
It seems to me like it would be better to just make what they offer risky and circumstantial.