More actions
Implemented metagroup rulings |
→Antagonists: edited with to which |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Definition == | == Definition == | ||
A metagroup is in essence a group of two or more players who enter a round of Ratwood with a predetermined goal in mind. Whether it be to pillage the bog as a Gronn wartribe or build an inn somewhere in the Rockhill Basin, players are able to plan their general actions before the round starts with their friends. This normally has no issues, but larger groups of players tend to sway the round into bouts of conflict. | A metagroup is in essence a group of two or more players who enter a round of Ratwood with a predetermined goal in mind. Whether it be to pillage the bog as a Gronn wartribe or build an inn somewhere in the Rockhill Basin, players are able to plan their general actions before the round starts with their friends. This normally has no issues, but larger groups of players tend to sway the round into bouts of conflict. | ||
Size Limit | |||
== Size Limit == | |||
A maximum of eight players may engage in a single group. This is a hard limit, admins cannot change this in a regular round nor an event. This doesn’t mean that there can’t be more than one group, except in the case of faction metagroups. These can only have a single group in the round. | A maximum of eight players may engage in a single group. This is a hard limit, admins cannot change this in a regular round nor an event. This doesn’t mean that there can’t be more than one group, except in the case of faction metagroups. These can only have a single group in the round. | ||
| Line 14: | Line 15: | ||
== Antagonists == | == Antagonists == | ||
Disregarding the obvious example of a group of friends playing bandit, no metagroups should be willingly cooperating with antagonists without sufficient IC reasoning. Furthermore, remember that might makes responsibility, and the additional hands your metagroup provides the antagonist | Disregarding the obvious example of a group of friends playing bandit, no metagroups should be willingly cooperating with antagonists without sufficient IC reasoning. Furthermore, remember that might makes responsibility, and the additional hands your metagroup provides the antagonist which may sway the round into a bloodbath of ducal proportions. | ||
Latest revision as of 01:34, 26 April 2025
Definition
A metagroup is in essence a group of two or more players who enter a round of Ratwood with a predetermined goal in mind. Whether it be to pillage the bog as a Gronn wartribe or build an inn somewhere in the Rockhill Basin, players are able to plan their general actions before the round starts with their friends. This normally has no issues, but larger groups of players tend to sway the round into bouts of conflict.
Size Limit
A maximum of eight players may engage in a single group. This is a hard limit, admins cannot change this in a regular round nor an event. This doesn’t mean that there can’t be more than one group, except in the case of faction metagroups. These can only have a single group in the round.
Role Restrictions
- Regardless of size, any group may roll for migrant waves.
- For impromptu plans such as two players rolling twin heirs, some friends playing as the vanguard, or other innocuous examples, there are no restrictions.
- However, faction metagroups are restricted to refugees only.
Base Construction
Metagroups are unique in their ability to effectively coordinate large building projects, but this can often have a negative impact to the round and lead to the group players not interacting with the general playerbase - as well as potentially providing an unsiegeable fortress. Both of which aren’t very interesting outcomes, so to ensure that metagroups can still build bases without becoming a nuisance, be aware that the admins online might ask you to tone down the scale or defenses of your base if they feel you’re going overboard.
Antagonists
Disregarding the obvious example of a group of friends playing bandit, no metagroups should be willingly cooperating with antagonists without sufficient IC reasoning. Furthermore, remember that might makes responsibility, and the additional hands your metagroup provides the antagonist which may sway the round into a bloodbath of ducal proportions.