Quote:
Original post by umbrae
I like the idea of 'influence'. At any point in time your focus as a leader is on a number of chosen things, and you can delegate and split this 'energy' however you want.
OOC, how "formal" do you think this should be? Should it be formalized as an ability with resources that only allow you to do it so often, or as a natural part of the game? Let's assume that there's no telling how much you'll want to do it, really, because the powers in the game world will rise and fall.
Quote:
Original post by Jotaf
What about if you simply control another character, period? People are used to seeing different points of view or sides of the same struggle in the movies or TV shows. It would actually be very cool to send your most trusted officer to lead an army into battle, and then the rest of the story would unfold from his point of view, while the original "you" would stay in the palace and deal with paperwork.
I'm giving this some serious thought, but here's the problem I have: How do you foster character identification?
RPGs and RPG-like games (which I'm aiming for) are famous for getting you to really care about your character because you can customize them. Although I have to really work out some serious problems, I see you controlling multiple characters, but only as time evolves. That is, you play for awhile, level up your self and your holdings, then carry the game on through offspring or cloning yourself or becoming a cyborg.
So you'd play multiple characters (decendants) in some cases, but only after you got a chance to get really attached to a single character. If you're switching characters while you're getting attached, won't it disrupt the process?
To be really out there, do you really need to get attached to one character to care about what's going on in an RPG-like game?
