Who's in charge here? (2)

Two more cards for the deck of leader types, as well as a piece of flash fiction to tie in, for last week's Expansion Joints; Jennie's back and busy, and this week's is already up. The word to use last time was present and the narrative has to be 15 words max.

"On your feet, scum! An officer's present."

"No, sir, you're past. We voted you out."

The cards are aimed at capturing the flavour of traditional and radical without suggesting any specific method being used by the leader. The traditional is assumed to be low-key, but relatively safe, working against extremes, with the radical more explosive and riskier, but the assumption being made that both can be learnt by other parties if dramatic.

More importantly, the traditionalism and radicalism are not necessarily in conflict, don't simply cancel each other, and can be complementary, even overlap. Just like in real life.

The suggested use of the deck is in the first post. A new concept introduced with this pair is 'area of influence', which I'm assuming to mean the area over which leadership extends in mechanical terms in-game, perhaps to a single unit in the case of a squad leader, a given radius in the case of a hero, or an entire force in the case of a general.

_

Who's in charge here? (1)

Following up the discussion on relations between leaders in games, I've put together a couple of cards for a more specific deck. They're based on the fundamental laws of a fictional universe, but less vaguely worded given they're aimed mainly at wargaming.

It's all pretty self-evident. These are themed around feedback and improvement, one of the areas worth looking at. There's not much can be done with two, but the fundamental laws deck is already up to 17 cards and this set should be built up over time as well.

When it does get bigger I'd suggest dealing one card per leader at the start of the game, from unit leader up, but excluding the overall commander as the cards work relative to that position, to suggest imperfections in transmission, wherever the fault lies. The idea with the entry roll on Critic for example is the fact that the overall commander may or may not want that particular person close by, even if the advice given is good. For less impact on the result or the flow of the game, they could be dealt to higher ranks only.

_

You haven't heard the last of this...

There's not enough conflict in wargames. The really bitter kind I mean. Where are those rivalries and petty disputes in and between the ranks? Following up yesterday's post on points values, and The Angry Lurker's reminder most of all, here's a generic approach.

At the start of the game all players roll a die for every leader in their force, from squad-level right the way up, with the overall commander getting a reroll. This could be left beside the model, or a counter placed; for secrecy, maybe those to the left, which could be matched to a master list.

A low roll represents demoralisation, bitterness at being passed over, a festering rivalry or dirt on a superior; a high roll is recent graduation, a chance at promotion, blackmail over a skeleton in the closet or heads rolling in case of defeat.

Players could be allowed to switch some, to represent the work of the commander over time, massaging egos and making sure the trustworthy figures were in the right places.