The topic, ..... can a game be put together with 100+ players, several CO-GMs, multiple adventures that all come together for an incredible game.

The issues how would you get players? Would you only take on experienced players or all players?

How much responsibility do you give the CO-GMs; a little or a lot, and why?

FYI
The chat is not to discuss a system that’s best for this nor a campaign setting as this I have already chosen. ASOFAI, by Green Ronin and it’s a mix of free forum with heavy character and background building so that the storyline can be detailed to support open posting by the amount of players.

I'm basically looking to discuss how to make such a large game work and if I overlooked anything, .... What should I add to support such a big game and to keep a game like this going, any recommendation to keep and gain interest?

I look forward to RPoL member help :)
This message was last edited by the user at 13:13, Tue 26 Aug 2014.

I do not see why not? Just section off the game and colaborate between gm and co-gm what news spreads and how their adventures affect each other? Also what stops multiple parties of character from just viewing the same event from multiple angles?

This sounds reminiscent of a long-running USEnet game, Red Dragon Inn or some such, that allowed fairly open posting. Some people just hung out in the inn RPing, some created adventures for other players, some players worked out storylines between themselves in private, then played out the storyline in posts for everyone to see.

I don't see why it wouldn't work here.  Just like any pbp, some adventures will get derailed by dm or player abandonment, some will work smoother.  You could allow as much, or as little, lurking in other threads as you wanted.

Edit:  the game was at alt.dragons-inn, not Red Dragon Inn.
This message was last edited by the user at 13:29, Tue 26 Aug 2014.

there was a dnd game on here a while ago, don't know if it stil exists, that did this.

Basically the whole of faerun was in the game populated by player characters. It worked due to 3 reasons that i can see.

1) Stong GM hierarchy.
   One Gm owned the game yes. however each GM was in charage of creating plots for a certain region. and was fully incontrol of that area being the main GM for a group of people. if they needed to intermingle with other regions then it had to be agreed beforehand. then within each reagion a GM was assigned to each party.

2) stong rule enforcement
   With houserules comes confusion. Make sure each GM understands the rules of the gaeme you are using extremly well and does not deviate from them at all in order to create a snse that everyone is together.

3) strict posting limits
The game has to run the same for everyone. this means GM posting limits as well as player posting limits.

there were other reasons as well but i think those are the main ones.

<players>
I think to make this work you need to find players who will stick around. How pro-active they are is a secondary issue to whether they post and keep posting. How experienced they are is secondary to whether they post and keep posting. The thing which kills huge games is player loss, with characters vanishing out the cast without explanation or being relegated to NPC status and adding to the burdens of the GMs.


<GMs>
I suggest you cut the game into segments and give one to each co-GM. You could do this by House/House lands (Lannisters under GM1, Starks under GM2, etc). Essentially you want a piece of the game where most of the action is run by one GM. It improves continuity and complexity if the GM only has one zone and set of NPCs to worry about.

Then create a hidden thread specifically for the GMs to use as plot scribble pads: to keep notes for themselves AND so that other GMs can see them and talk about linking things together. So when GM3 has an NPC staying over in the zone belonging to GM1, both know what's going on behind the scenes and can work in concert to progress both their plot lines, instead of butting heads and making holes IC.

In the midst of this you want a GM to look after any characters (PC or NPC) who don't quite fit in anyone else's territory. And the main GM should retain the right to settle inter-GM disputes and veto plot points.

The hardest thing to manage is time-lines. Gigantic on-line games work best in real-time. But in a PbP format like most games on rpol, keeping all the shifting reference frames in line would be daunting.

Consider you have Group A and B. They're hanging out in their respective castles and they're supposed to go to the forest to meet up. But one of the groups gets into a fight with some local ruffians on the way and so their trip takes six weeks of real time whereas the other group doesn't and their trip takes four days real time.

You could do it with a turn-based grand strategy game.

Consistency of timelines depends on how interactive you want groups to be, or if you are looking for a shared world, with some inter-connectivity between groups.

In truemanes example, if the plotlines are intending for A and B to meet, then the GM(s) should make sure that one group does not get derailed, or that both have encounters.  In a free form style game like the OP mentioned, combats may be able to be managed without a six week(real time) time gap between the groups.

I agree that having a good structure set up from the outset is important.  I would think lining up several DM's before opening the game up and talking through how you want things handled would be important.

Threads Groups, so far has worked well and at the end of each IC they open up for reading. The tuff part is when a group seperates and then there's 2 or more IC's for that group. Any ideas how to manage when that happens? same thread can get confusing.

Tremendous idea – Players can RP in a single place and the adventures travel though hot spots, like an inn on the king’s road or a famous brothel in the capital.

Thank you, I'm going to use this.

I never worked with posting limits, can you give examples and details on what you mean and how to incorperate them in general?

In reply to Tileira (msg # 5):

This has been done, Co-GMs each get a region to help out with NPCs and character creation and a PC of there own.

Recently I have allowed the CO-GMs to take on some more important NPCs, I think your ideas i have covered. TY

From what you describe it sounds like you;re using an event/chapter way of organising your threads.

I would suggest splitting into two threads: when you need to separate put a link in the main thread leading to the sub thread, and a link in the subthread back to the main one. When the groups rejoin put a link back to main thread in the subthread's final post, and a link to the subthread in the main thread.

Or just close the main thread and open two new threads. It depends on what exactly is happening.

I keep a thread which lists all the IC threads in chronological order and I use numbers in the thread names so that we can all tell what time something is happening: (2) North Thing and (2) West Thing are happening at the same time, but both happen before (3) East Thing.

If you're using the subthread method you can then call them (2) North, (2a) North (Gary & Sue), (2a) North (Bob & Joe), (2b) North, etc. (With the intention that those three groups return to 2 and the end of 2 is after the end of 2b).


I think PBTO means making sure the GMs post X times a week  for every thread they are involved in as well as the players posting X times a week. There's some leeway depending on whether it's the right moment for the NPC to act, but the co-GMs need to be as active as the players.
This message was last edited by the user at 15:07, Tue 26 Aug 2014.

In reply to truemane (msg # 6):

Your right this is a hard thing to deal with. So far we have managed well, but I'm not interest in strict turn base. I'm sure this will lead to some issue but I have a few that post 3 or 4 times a day then they wait a day or two for that one PC to reply as the others continue. So its worked out well.

I think turn base will take way too long with such a big group.

In reply to Lord Caladin (msg # 10):

Basicazlly ensure that players post x times per week and GM's post X times a week to keep the pace moving.

However make sure players know that they shouldn't just flood a single thread with posts before a GM responce. and that the GM doesn;t do extra aditional posts which could be costrued as favoratism.

This is the big one, unfortunately we start with 6 or so players and it grow to 24+ right now. This gaol of 100+ players is my ideas, but not a most. That’s why I started this chat to see how far I should take this.

You’re absolutely correct if I had this advice before I would have tried to get 2 or 3 more GMs in the fold before hand, but I'm now looking to bring them into the fold. I think like myself as a GMs, we like our games which is why we GM :)

In reply to Tileira (msg # 12):

OK this will take some thought,.....

TY

In reply to PushBarToOpen (msg # 14):

Good point and sometimes tuff :) Will work on that.

Wow, another denizen of ad-i?  (Met my spouse there, actually...)

Montfort was the base town, and lots of folks debuted their characters there, with the ability to post to a "general thread" for any PCs sitting around in the inn or to start new threads if you broke into a separate conversation.  Maybe 12-18 folks regularly ran story-lines actually based in Montfort, with other story-lines occurring elsewhere in the vaguely-defined world that tied into events in Montfort.   We did have some coordination behind the scenes to work out timing of events, to avoid time-discrepancies.

In reply to Boomcoach (msg # 3):

I'm going to give this idea a try if there is enough interest.