1. Organics (anything alive/nature/living etc)

2. Religion/Mythology

3. Open Theme

I feel a little wierd entering another man's spreadsheet... 

1. Medieval
2. Fantasy Worlds
3. Role Playing Games

In http://www.wargear.net/forum/showthread/3213/Slowing_down_the_map_making_contest_schedule Tom made the point that he'd like the next contest to be something that would be a fit for the mapmaking talents at http://www.cartographersguild.com/content/.

Therefore I will vote for:

1. Fantasy Realms
2. Medieval
3. Role Playing Games

Unfortunately, it seems I'm just not prolific enough to participate as a designer.  Working with a given theme has apparently been too much of an imposition.  The one category that sits well with me is "Interesting Game Mechanics" because that tends to be an over-arching theme with most of my maps.  I just voted directly on the doc, and cast only one vote for maximum effect.

So I believe I have updated the spreadsheet correctly with all the latest votes.  I think we have an agreement on moving to only 2 contests a year & Tom has suggested these prizes:

First prize: $100

Second prize: $50

Third prize: $30

Fourth, Fifth prize: $10

Which is a nice bump up from the previous contests.

The only question now is what theme?  "Role Playing Games" is the winner, with "Medieval" close behind.  Do we want to try a duel-theme?  (i.e. boards must be either RPG or Medieval themed).  It seems like with some minor tweaking any 'Medieval' board could fit into a RPG theme, but maybe  saying the theme is "Role Playing Game/Medieval" is a nice broad description that doesn't feel too bifurcated.

I'm still not clear on the best way to decide themes, so if anyone wants to offer suggestions, please do.  The biggest problem is that many suggestions overlap or are only slightly different.  How I decide to combine that has a big influence on what wins.  I thought that I would just not combine unless they were exactly the same, and later voters would look at earlier votes to influence their decision and not "throw their vote away", but that doesn't seem to happen.

When I see RPG/Medieval I think that you only want Medieval games.

But there were and are a lot of non-medieval RPGs.  I can think of games that are sci-fi, fantasy, history, horror, superhero, etc.  Heck, GURPS is all of the above!  That said, any medieval environment can fit as an RPG.  And RPGs have been created based on other fictional works.

So we could fit anything from a Star Wars theme to Lord of the Rings as an RPG.

RPG is awfully broad. Which I like. As btilly mentioned, an RPG could be in any setting. You're simply playing a role. See: Earthbound. If you extend it far enough, in tabletop RISK you're playing as a Dictatorial General hellbent on world domination. Throw a little flair into your board description and it's hard to argue that you don't have an RPG.

Beyond having an incredibly broad scope, there are at least two main ways to interpret the direction. I could make a standard landgrab map and copy paste some copyright violations images of popular video game characters on the side, call it Final Risk XVII and wah-lah, an RPG themed game board. Or, I could try and make an unique gameplay format map like RiskyBack's "Gauntlet" map where you actually play out as though your units are characters on the board. Of course, there's a spectrum of options in between those two examples, and extensions well beyond.

Basically, the above is rambling. From the mapmaking perspective, I like a broad topic because then I can do whatever I want. From the perspective of having a meaningful competition, you should probably ask if there is value in trying to tighten that up.

I can't even begin to guess what kind of boards/maps/games the folks who voted for RPG are hoping to get out of the competition. Maybe some of them would like to step in with some guidance?

I like broader categories, but I worry that for someone who has never played an RPG, RPG might not feel like a very broad category.   Sure, I played a bit of 'star frontiers' back in the day, so i know that if I want to make a sci-fi themed map I could hammer it into a 'star frontiers' mold somehow, but someone who has only heard of D&D might find RPG a more confining topic.  

Another question.  I have never played, but I've heard of MERPs, which was a middle-earth extension to GURPs.   What would it take to turn any generic middle earth map into a MERPs map?  Nothing?  

Anyway, I'm fine with RPG, and I doubt adding 'Medieval' broadens it much, so let's assume we are going with RPG for the the next theme, but I'd love some more discussion on what that means from everyone.  I for one will probably dust of my D&D map that I started, but never finished before:

 http://www.wargear.net/boards/designer/2117

I put it back into open beta in case anyone wants to play.  Please invite me if you start a game.  I think I left it in a state that was playable, but not much fun, so I'm sure it will require a lot of work.   You can even kind of see an evolution from that to Invention I think looking back on it.

MERP connected to Rolemaster, not GURPS.  It was set in the 4th age.  So not all middle earth maps would qualify.

But that illustrates the vagueness of RPG.  Think of a popular series.  Did people adapt it for RPGs?  Then it is fair game!

(I'm personally hoping that someone comes up with a map with a dragon breathing deadly fire...)

I bow to your superior geek-hood.  But this illustrates my point, RPG is very broad, but unless you are familiar with the details it might be hard to figure out where you board fits in.  Maybe most wargear map makers are also RPG geeks, I dunno. 

We have historically been pretty lax about what maps qualify for a theme, so I guess it won't be too much of a problem, but I hope it doesn't discourage people who haven't played RPGs.

Cramchakle wrote:

RPG is awfully broad. Which I like. As btilly mentioned, an RPG could be in any setting. You're simply playing a role. See: Earthbound. If you extend it far enough, in tabletop RISK you're playing as a Dictatorial General hellbent on world domination. Throw a little flair into your board description and it's hard to argue that you don't have an RPG.

I wouldn't call myself an RPG expert by any means, but in my mind while you could describe Risk as playing a "world dictator" role, that isn't any more helpful than saying I am playing a lazy teenager role while playing Assassin's Creed or a brilliant psychopath role while playing chess.

Korrun wrote:

Cramchakle wrote:

RPG is awfully broad. Which I like. As btilly mentioned, an RPG could be in any setting. You're simply playing a role. See: Earthbound. If you extend it far enough, in tabletop RISK you're playing as a Dictatorial General hellbent on world domination. Throw a little flair into your board description and it's hard to argue that you don't have an RPG.

I wouldn't call myself an RPG expert by any means, but in my mind while you could describe Risk as playing a "world dictator" role, that isn't any more helpful than saying I am playing a lazy teenager role while playing Assassin's Creed or a brilliant psychopath role while playing chess.

Sounds like everyone is in agreement.  Just about any board qualifies as an RPG.  It's simply a matter of each voter's criteria.

I, for one, think that RPG is a good and fine theme. To try to address the concern about ambiguity of this category, I propose the following rubric to help define RPG:

Role-playing games mean that there are two additional elements to the board apart from tactics: (1) a character-based story for each player and (2) character development through "leveling" or acquiring abilities/items.

To give some examples, this means that:

• Ozy's Invention wouldn't quite qualify, because it only has #2, not #1.
• Risky's Gauntlet would qualify, though, because it has a (very basic) character-based story to it and allows the characters to develop by acquiring items in the maze.
• M57's Battle of Waterloo wouldn't qualify because although it has a character-based story, there is no real character development possible in the game.

As a huge Runequest fan back in the day, I strongly object to considering "leveling" integral to an RPG.  In a skills based game, you basically lived an interesting life and later noticed that you'd improved.

You could say that character development in a different form is necessary.  But then I'd point you to Call of Cthulu where all character development inevitably gets truncated by insanity.  (Let's just say that it had a really, really fast character creation system for a reason.)

Personally if someone put up a dungeon with natural obstacles and a dragon with treasure, I'd be happy to call that an RPG board.  Even though there is no character story or character development.

Cramchakle wrote:

I can't even begin to guess what kind of boards/maps/games the folks who voted for RPG are hoping to get out of the competition. Maybe some of them would like to step in with some guidance?

 

There are a lot of different places this could go, here are some thoughts I have had:

• Smaller scale feel than your typical turn based strategy game map. Make it possible to envision small numbers of people being involved instead of thousands of soldiers
• Along the same lines, a more personal feel. A theme that makes it feel like you are in the game instead of controlling someone in the game
• Something focused on a fantasy (not necessarily medieval) realm like middle earth, star wars, etc.
• An isometric board
• Something based on turn-based computer/video game RPGs
• A duel map focusing on the combat part of an RPG
• Something based on the RPG/tower defense hybrid found in browser games
• Something that involves character improvement (like Invention only on a character level)
• Something that involves gameplay other than your typical get continents and control every territory on the board. Maybe collect a certain number of artifacts to win or defeat the dragon or something.

Some maps for inspiration:

Obviously the Final Fantasy map:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Final+Fantasy

Any of the duel maps like Wizard's Duel or Gear Wars:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Wizard%27s+Duel

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Gear+Wars%3A+The+Force+Unleashed

Small scale/personal feel with interesting themes like Vampires or Zombies:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Salem%27s+Dusk%3A+Deluxe

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/The+Walking+Dead

You could have characters to role play that aren't reflected in the rules:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Marvels+Manhattan

Or only have 1 territory ("person") to use:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Rescue

Different bonus structure/RPG looking map:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Resource

A more straightforward Risk map like Fortress or Captain's log could be tweaked a little to add an RPG theme:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Fortress

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Captain%27s+Log

And of course nothing says RPG more than a dungeon:

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Dungeon

http://www.wargear.net/boards/view/Notebook+Paper+Dungeon

btilly wrote:

As a huge Runequest fan back in the day, I strongly object to considering "leveling" integral to an RPG.  In a skills based game, you basically lived an interesting life and later noticed that you'd improved.

You could say that character development in a different form is necessary.  But then I'd point you to Call of Cthulu where all character development inevitably gets truncated by insanity.  (Let's just say that it had a really, really fast character creation system for a reason.)

Personally if someone put up a dungeon with natural obstacles and a dragon with treasure, I'd be happy to call that an RPG board.  Even though there is no character story or character development.

+1

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game#Varieties

and

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080821002559AANFBwI

btilly wrote:

As a huge Runequest fan back in the day, I strongly object to considering "leveling" integral to an RPG.  In a skills based game, you basically lived an interesting life and later noticed that you'd improved.

You could say that character development in a different form is necessary.  But then I'd point you to Call of Cthulu where all character development inevitably gets truncated by insanity.  (Let's just say that it had a really, really fast character creation system for a reason.)

Personally if someone put up a dungeon with natural obstacles and a dragon with treasure, I'd be happy to call that an RPG board.  Even though there is no character story or character development.

Sure there are, just in very weak forms. You have to play your dungeon-crawlin' PC and move your way toward the center of the maze. If it were just a race-to-the-middle or another king of the mountain, though, I don't think it would be very RPG-like: where's the role playing? However, it would be easy to fix if you just add some mechanics whereby the different players had different advantages (like one player has vision, one player has more unit production, one player has some fortify options, etc.) or development trees where you can choose how to "build" your character to best tackle the maze. The dungeon and dragon feel can't just be a thin skin on top of a basic board, IMO, but should be integrated into the fabric of the gameplay -- players should feel, to some extent, like they're inhabiting the world of the game. That's what makes it role-playing.

i still think the contest should be who ever puts out a map .

there are not that many maps put out in a year. maybe if you could just submit the map you like the most and have it run six months. that would give people enough time to play it and not limit the designer. granite it would have to be a passed board.

it might even tighten up the review board to make it a little harder to have  a map passed.

i like the contests but i don't see why we need a theme.

I'm fine with RPG. Here's what I've got cooking for that theme:

Mountain Stronghold

It meets Kjeld's strict interpretation of the theme as well as any of the looser views.

It's still quite a ways from playable, and I'd be surprised if it took any less than 6 months of testing before it can really be cut loose. Hopefully that wraps up before the contest ends.

I didn't want to give it away before it was done, as I've been working on it since the days before Wargear, but this theme seems like the perfect opportunity for a battle of helm's deep type map, and I wanted to "dibs" it.