Is it redundant to try a 4th age all neutral game? When this originally came out I viewed it as a war of 25 nations…period…you could ally w/ anyone and attack likewise…
I’ve played it several times and I still hear (read really) that the goodies stay w/ the goodies…darkies same…and now there are neutral alliances…
I’m just curious since I saw a new 4th age game starting w/ king and prince characters…but I stay away from it because of the “alliance” mentality of the combatants not to mention teams of a zillion emissaries at 100 rank that take out pop centers at will…it’s a race to build them up and then flip, flip, flip pops…
I’m hitting everything today I guess…thanks for the input,
You’d have to change the rules a bit to a) prevent nations from turning good / evil b) allow all nations to place wherever they liked, but essentially I see it as doable.
mentality of the combatants not to mention teams of a zillion emissaries at 100 rank that take out pop centers at
Part of the change of design has reduced the number of 60 rank characters starting up - so around 1/3 less emis and incentives to play other classes have been introduced.
As for the all neutral game - I’ve only ever been able to find around 12 players. One idea was to have regional choices and you play two nations but basically there weren’t enough players. Instigating rules about the no chanigng to certain allegiances is fine. We’d need 23 players for the game probably keep the Kingdom as aligned neutrals to stop the game ending.
I would be interested but am concerned that 25 neutral nations would mean 25 Human nations. Would it be possible to have competing nations of various races?
Of course this would remove a bit of the Tolkien flavor. And would the kingdoms be removed entirely in such a scenario?
Would make it quite fun if you could mix all the races up in one big neutral mish mash. If you keep the Kingdoms everyone will want to be buddies with them since they have access to lots of info.
