Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

The Civil War - Game idea if anyone wants to run with it.

It's a mafia v. WW type setup.

The Union:
George B. McClellan - Bumbling idiot. Doesn't know he's an
idiot, thinks he's a good general. Vote does not count ever.
If he's the last general left, the north loses.

Ambrose Burnside - Standard Wolf?
Joseph Hooker - Standard Wolf?

William Tecumseh Sherman - Tough son of a bitch. Each night
tries to burn the city of Atlanta. If successfull, the south
loses one general at random.

Ulysses S Grant - Vote counts double every other night.
On alternate nights, is drunk off his ass and kills a random person.

The Confederacy:
Robert E Lee - Kicks all kinds of major ass all over the place.
If the state of Virginia is lynched, switches to the North.

Stonewall Jackson - Serious badass mofo. Guesses once each game night,
player and role. If correct, is told so.

J.E.B. Stuart - Standard Wolf?
Nathan Bedford Forrest - Standard Wolf?
Jubal early - Standard Wolf?


Other players:
Abraham Lincoln - Cannot participate in Union Telegrams, but wins with
the Union. Vote counts double If he is assassinated, is succeeded by
Andrew Johnson, who immediately dies as well.

At any point in the game, Lincoln may issue The Emancipation Proclamation,
freeing the slaves.

Jefferson Davis - Cannot participate in Confederate Telegrams, but wins with
the Confederacy. Vote counts double. If he is assassinated, is succeeded
by a jar of peaches.

The City of Atlanta - Seer. If Sherman finds, is burned to the ground.
The State of Virginia - Seer. If lynched, Marse Robert switches to the Union.
The Slaves - Get no vote unless freed by The Emancipation Proclamation.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

i missed amp so much

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
If he is assassinated, is succeeded by
Andrew Johnson, who immediately dies as well.


[/ QUOTE ]

this, in particular, made me laugh at a disproportionate level to it's actual funniness.
that's amp's gift.

Here's my thought process while reading this
"lol, amp is making a funny joke"
"wait, is he being serious, this actually sounds good"
"naaaah, this has to be an amp joke"
"hmm, but maybe it could work"

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

Actually I wasn't even particularly trying to be funny, this is what I get when I try to craft a real game.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

Shouldn't it be "is immediately impeached?"

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't it be "is immediately impeached?"

[/ QUOTE ]
Well yeah, but what am I going to have, an elected congress to try him for his crimes?

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't it be "is immediately impeached?"

[/ QUOTE ]
Well yeah, but what am I going to have, an elected congress to try him for his crimes?

[/ QUOTE ]Maybe nich can co-mod.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't it be "is immediately impeached?"

[/ QUOTE ]
Well yeah, but what am I going to have, an elected congress to try him for his crimes?

[/ QUOTE ]Maybe nich can co-mod.

[/ QUOTE ]
The REAL war lasted years longer than it should have, lets not get crazy here.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

Can I participate as the second amendment?

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't it be "is immediately impeached?"

[/ QUOTE ]
Well yeah, but what am I going to have, an elected congress to try him for his crimes?

[/ QUOTE ]Maybe nich can co-mod.

[/ QUOTE ]
The REAL war lasted years longer than it should have, lets not get crazy here.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.australianminesatlas.gov.au/images/gold1.jpg

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

George McClellan - Counts 11 wolves to 10 villagers and concedes the game on day one.

Really someone should run this game.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

My co-workers are looking at me funny because I can't stop laughing.

I missed you, Amp. In a totally non-homosexual way.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

Shouldn't the slaves votes count as .6?
And, then after the emancipation proclamation, then they can count for zero?

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

Slaves count as 3/5. Read your constitution.

I would love to play this. It seems like a great game.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

lollllllll

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

how about some Monitor vs. Merrimac action? =P

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
how about some Monitor vs. Merrimac action? =P

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, this opens up a can of worms.

North and south should each have supply lines which can be disrupted by rand(). The north can run out of cotton, and be unable to get dressed, and therefore cannot meet to decide who to night kill. The south can run out of, what, steel? and be unable to build a telegraph to send in their kill, even though they can meet.

Walt Whitman wins with the Union, but can only post in blank verse, sounding his barbaric yawp across the rooftops.

The entire game could begin with a huge auction, during which different states would be wooed into secession or conciliated into solidarity. This could result in a confederacy consisting of Ohio, Arkansas and Vermont, but that's the chance you take.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
Slaves count as 3/5. Read your constitution.


[/ QUOTE ]

3/5 is equivalent to .6, read your math books.

(I assume you were referring to me....)

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

Random note: the 3/5 rule was actually ANTI-slavery, not PRO-slavery, since it DIMINISHED the political benefit the slavers got from slavery in the Congress and the Electoral College.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

umm, it was pro-slavery because it made a 'nonperson' count towards Congress and tax distribution.
That is why it is called the three fifths compromise.
Slave owners had a higher tax burden, but also a greater say in Congress.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Slaves count as 3/5. Read your constitution.


[/ QUOTE ]

3/5 is equivalent to .6, read your math books.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not referring to you, the poster previous to you.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
how about some Monitor vs. Merrimac action? =P

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh, this opens up a can of worms.

North and south should each have supply lines which can be disrupted by rand(). The north can run out of cotton, and be unable to get dressed, and therefore cannot meet to decide who to night kill. The south can run out of, what, steel? and be unable to build a telegraph to send in their kill, even though they can meet.

Walt Whitman wins with the Union, but can only post in blank verse, sounding his barbaric yawp across the rooftops.

The entire game could begin with a huge auction, during which different states would be wooed into secession or conciliated into solidarity. This could result in a confederacy consisting of Ohio, Arkansas and Vermont, but that's the chance you take.

[/ QUOTE ]


Walt Whitman, in the conservatory, without vowels for the win!

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
umm, it was pro-slavery because it made a 'nonperson' count towards Congress and tax distribution.
That is why it is called the three fifths compromise.
Slave owners had a higher tax burden, but also a greater say in Congress.

[/ QUOTE ]They weren't non-persons. They just couldn't be citizens according to the woefully activist Dred Scott v. Sandford ruling.

It was perfectly plausible to count the full count of the enslaved populations of each state for the purposes of representation and taxation. In fact you can tell how adamant some people were in Philadelpha that they should count, that the anti-slavery delegates had to bend all the way to 3/5.

I hope Amp doesn't mind this, heh.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

I don't mind it, but the Dred Scott decision, as activist and ridiculous as it was, wasn't bothering people during the 1787 constitutional convention, Neil, as Dred Scott hadn't been born yet.

Edit: and I think the framers saw that without the 3/5 provision, the south would have become little more than a province of the north, a position that they eventually pretty much reached anyway, due to their antiquated agrarian economy and lack of resources, including support from the world community, such as it was at the time.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't mind it, but the Dred Scott decision, as activist and ridiculous as it was, wasn't bothering people during the 1787 constitutional convention, Neil, as Dred Scott hadn't been born yet.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, but I'm guessing there were a lot of people who thought just as CJ Taney thought: that blacks were not citizens, were not cut out to be citizens, and that they never could be citizens of the US. Especially just by crossing state lines.

That's not what the document says, but that was probably the original intent of most of the southern delegates in Philadelphia.

[ QUOTE ]
Edit: and I think the framers saw that without the 3/5 provision, the south would have become little more than a province of the north, a position that they eventually pretty much reached anyway, due to their antiquated agrarian economy and lack of resources, including support from the world community, such as it was at the time.

[/ QUOTE ]True, especially with the Treaty of Paris line as it stood.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]

It was perfectly plausible to count the full count of the enslaved populations of each state for the purposes of representation and taxation. In fact you can tell how adamant some people were in Philadelpha that they should count, that the anti-slavery delegates had to bend all the way to 3/5.

[/ QUOTE ]

And which way were they (we will just say the north) bending from?

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It was perfectly plausible to count the full count of the enslaved populations of each state for the purposes of representation and taxation. In fact you can tell how adamant some people were in Philadelpha that they should count, that the anti-slavery delegates had to bend all the way to 3/5.

[/ QUOTE ]

And which way were they (we will just say the north) bending from?

[/ QUOTE ]I'm guessing some Northerners were saying that people who weren't considered eligible for citizenship shouldn't count at all. But a desire for unity for survival outweighed that.

I don't have access to any notes from the Convention, though, so I can't say for sure.

At least we got it fixed.

Re: Amplify Presents The Civil War
 

When the Articles of Confederacy where drafted (before the Constitution), the North wishes to count all the slaves as full bodies, while the South did not.

This was because of taxation. No compromise was very successful.

However, when the Constitution was drafted, representation was added. And the North and South suddenly Flipflopped.

It had very little to do with being pro-slavery, or anti-slavery, it was completely biased to how each state could get itself into a better position in the new union.