608,259 gold pieces... *sigh* A friend and I recently finished playing Baldur''s Gate: Dark Alliance. Both of us managed to end the game with something in the neighborhood of +500,000 gp, mainly due to the judicious selling of outlandishly priced weapons. We got into a discussion about open endedness and how a player who has fought his way up from a lowly peon could spend that money now that he''s become the equivalent of a legendary general. Of course, we came up with more and more options for more outlandishly priced weapons and items (like getting them custom made for a million gp, or whatever), and then we detoured into how the player could spend his loot to influence the game world. While we came up with some cool ideas (building armies or backing kings) I noticed that every one of them removed the player from the personal danger that they started out with. That pretty much puts and end to the experience the player might have been enjoying up until then. So my question is why would a leader still get into personal danger? Why would he still be hacking and slashing, instead of hiring someone else to do it for him? Some reasons I can think of: * Combat between leaders is customary and expected * Leading from the front raises morale * The leaders of each force are so strong only an opposing leader can defeat them (uh, then why the army? :\) Any other ideas? I notice that all of this gets more and more implausible, btw, the farther ahead you move in time. -------------------- Just waiting for the mothership...

Well, did you see the movie "Gladiator"? Maximus fought right along side his soldiers at the beginning of the movie - even though he was in line to become Ceaser. Perhaps he didn''t need to and that was just a device the movie used to give a reason for the loyalty of his troops. Consider also the battle scenes from LOTR - Sauron is right out there in the middle of it all kicking ass along with his minions. Perhaps the absurdity of having Generals fight along side the troops is just a modern notion.

It is very true that generals fought on the front lines. It is only a more recent phenomenon, mainly with the advent of radio and satellite communication, that generals don’t go near the front line (or even the same continent). It is an interesting point that at Waterloo several of Wellingtons commanders were shot standing next to him, and he himself is said to have ‘discouraged’ a soldier from shooting Napoleon even though the man had a clear shot.

Bringing it more up-to-date many generals in the second world war were in personal danger as they oversaw operations. I assume that personal danger includes being close enough to be hit by artillery fire. Even now generals and military leaders are in personal danger, for example warlords in Afghanistan (although not generals in the conventional sense) find themselves in constant personal danger. Personal danger and the military go together, its part of the job



"Making it up! Why should I be making it up. Lifes bad enough as it is without wanting to invent more of it."

Hum.. What type of people want to become generals in the first place? Maybe it''s the personal wish of the general to be in the action (I don''t know about that some much now though with the heavy artillery and all), It''s interesting to think about though.

As far as your excess money, I''ve noticed that on a few games! How when I''m at the end, I have enought money to buy a city or somthing. That would be sweet! Just disban the saving the world stuff and go off to get rich, buy some land, a mansion, feed the homeless. That type of thing. hey, fighting has only lead to more fighting, I belive a game could illustrate that there are other ways balance out and define victory.

For some reaosn thuis gets me thinking even further...
Why do villans really exists in epics? THey want to take over the world, WHY?! It''s too large for them to even manage. What would they really gain from it but a planet where everyone disslikes them and will eventually try to take them down.
Maybe someone should make a game about someone who actually rules the world, and how much trouble it is to manage such a thing. That''s way more interesting than trying to prevent the world from being ruled. heck, why we''re at it, why would someone feel the need to destory the world, just blatently? I know we have some people with issues, but geez.

peace

-Sage13

Depends on the era. In ancient times when orders were communicated via riders, it was often necessary for the general to be up on the front lines very close to combat. He had to see what was going on up close and personal, and sometimes things got a little too hairy.

Leonidas of Sparta and Alexander the Great were both known to have fought alongside their men. I think it''s inspiring to see your general fight alongside, and I think they will do their utmost to protect him. So their are several key advantages to fighting along the frontlines. The biggest disadvantage is of course losing the general in the fray of battle.

I guess when you are playing a roleplaying or adventure game its one thing, although in RTS games it''s a hole ''nother ballgame. That''s why in my game there will be an avatar that represents you the general. I haven''t fully thought about what the ramifications will be if your avatar dies, but it ain''t gonna be pretty. I doubt it will be an automatic loss, but your forces will be thrown for a loop during the re-organization process.

quote: So my question is why would a leader still get into personal danger? Why would he still be hacking and slashing, instead of hiring someone else to do it for him? Some reasons I can think of:

* Combat between leaders is customary and expected
* Leading from the front raises morale
* The leaders of each force are so strong only an opposing leader can defeat them

I think especially the first and second motive are very compelling. ''Customary'' is probably the best one, because you can make the game and game world however you like it and make just about anything you want ''customary''.

Of course, the ''raises morale'' issue is the one that will appeal to the players. "If I do A, I will have a higher chance to win while doing B". If I use my general, my army will fight better.

For players, of course the fame that comes along with being a fighting general is another important reward for players. The character can be replaced or revived, but his fame will be eternal. Of course, his cowardice will be notorious if he runs to stay alive.

But, in the end, for the player, the biggest motivational force will be... FUN GAMEPLAY. If fighting as a general is exhilirating, I''m not even going to wonder why I''m fighting. Give me a quick, cheesy explanation in the beginning, let me yell ''charge'' a few times, and I''m a satisfied customer.

Dont flame me for it, but I used to be an avid fan of Games workshop stuff. I think the warhammer and 40k way of dealing with it is simple but effective. All units/characters prone to psychology rules and within a certain distance of the fallen general would have to make a leadership test to determine if they stayed and fought, or fled. This also meant that if units were psychologically challenged in future, they could not roll on the generals leadership value when in range and would have to rely on the unit leaders/special characters leadership to maintain discipline (or their own). This I think, although very simple, acurately reflects how an army would deal with the loss of such a powerful figure. Thus a unit of peasants forced into protecting their lands would be more likely to flee than a dedicated warrior priest who may be immune to psychology due to his fanatical cause. Although the player could manually run these guys away if necessary, as discretion is indeed the better part of valour if the situation is at a complete loss.

Just my 2cp.

Anyways the original topic, what to do when you have such an excess of funds (or Xp or the like).

Some of my ideas for roles of players after essentially beating the game:

General,
Ruler,
Trainer,
Gladiator (after all gladiatorial combat is about being the best of the best),
Set up an organisation to bring you impact upon the world (ie your own brand of law enforcement agency or some such idea)

okies, hmm running low on further ideas now, soooo my approach, think in their shoes. You're hard, almost to the point of immortality, you have enough money to make almost anything a reality, what do you do?

Anyone ever see that episode of Stargate where a human gains access to a community and because the technology he has is so advanced, he makes himself out to be a God? (come to think of it the film itself was based on that theme also!!) Perhaps a player could take this approach, essentially play God upon a commnunity (in a good way or an evil way) either the player succeeds and gets to live out life as a demi-God, or fails and has to find something else (assuming the game doesnt use perma-death).

I personally think its similar to the situation in EQ of "okay I made lvl 60... now what?" If the game mainly revolves around killing being the choice method of playing, why not choose to focus on PK'ing at this point? Allow the players to become rulers or one of the previous suggestions, allow them to influence taxes, start or end wars and so on. If other players of a similar combat prowess disagree with their actions, they duke it out. Encouraging players of dark, neutral and light factions (or even in-fighting) to come to blows would provide the character at the top of the heap reason to continue playing. Only one person in the game at any one time is likely to be undefeatable, and size of opposing forces could undo power in an individual. Thus you could never truly beat the game.

Anyways, justa random collection of thoughts, I still dont think it entirely deals with the situation but I hope its some help.

Steve AKA Mephs

[edited by - mephs on May 14, 2002 8:53:31 PM]

Well, once you have the money and the power. I always wanted to spend the money on things that would enchance the look of my character. Like some reallly nice armor, or buy a cape that looks cool. Buy an airship, or buy 20000 potions.

Diablo handled this very very well. Gambling for what people really wanted, just that those items all really helped your character. I think some items that dont really aid your character in battle would be cool. Like buy some weird jewel that encricles your character in a greenish aura, just doesnt do anything else.

-chris

If its a scripted story you have so mucn more freedom. Work the players cash into the story if you have to. Just thats if its scripted you should have some idea of what the player might have.

lol, you could also just make everything worth anything reallllly expensive, or expensive by level.

"...(building armies or backing kings) I noticed that every one of them removed the player from the personal danger that they started out with."

Backing a king could get you in SERIOUS disfavor with a lot of people. I mean, you could get assasinated by his enemies, or be expected to lead the king''s army as his proxy in battle. Or, if you chaffed under his demands, the king might try to kill/harm you.

Building an army is even worse. Where do you get the manpower? From someone else''s pool of manpower (they might not be too happy with that). Additionally, you become a threat to everyone with a smaller army than you, risking them teaming up on you. Or what if a UN/NATO group of player or NPC kingdoms got together an beat the crap out of you for being a warmonger? What if one of your generals tried to assasinate you to take control?

Getting involved with anything like townbuilding, guild building, etc., is often times more dangerous than just going alone and adventuring.

-Steven Rokiski
rokiski@yahoo.com