Honourable Members- Interest Check

So this isn’t what you were going to do with Lords of Infinity?

But will we be able to rise that far, or is this game going to be more focused on being a simulation of the life of a backbencher?

Personally I would like it to be a bit more lighthearted, or at least have a touch of that famous British humor, as I would like to go for my character being a Jim Hacker type.

There could also be UKIP (or a fictional equivalent) for a nationalistic and populist choice, the BNP (sort of fascist from what I can gather), the Greens (one assumes the UK version also stands for what the name implies) or the SNP and Plaid Cymru (separatist nationalists with a Scottish and Welsh flavour, respectively).
The SNP also seems to have become the de-facto opposition to Cameron at the moment while Labour sorts out its issues in the political wilderness. Oh, and who could ever forget, the Monster Raving Loony Party, maybe managing to actually get elected under that banner should have its own award.

Not necessarily, under Corbyn it might well become that, but “New Labour” under Blair and Brown definitely wasn’t.

My money on the main antagonist being the Cabinet Secretary. :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp: :smiling_imp:

1 Like

What other party do you plan to include? For example would a communist or reactionary party be possible? Being communist I would find it nice to have something that doesnt demonise us and actualy show us for what we are. Being a political game neutrality should be important I think.

1 Like

Partially, though with separate contexts, different procedures, and nowhere near as focused.
Besides, there’s a certain appeal to reviving the Lib-Dems as a viable government: the party of Lloyd-George and Gladstone deserves better than to be caught as a scrap in a dogfight between one lunatic with no empathy, and another lunatic with no grasp of international relations.

1 Like

There’s no sort of about it. They grew out of the national front movement, their nickname is the British Nazi Party and up until fairly recently they didn’t allow non-whites to join.

UKIP are generally considered to be almost as nutty as the BNP, which should tell you something about them.

Wait, the Lib Dems still exist 20 minutes into the future? To frank, their existence for the next 20 seconds is looking fairly dodgy right now.

1 Like

The game will mostly be a simulation of the life of a backbencher with the option to become a junior minister and/or party grandee towards the end. If it’s well recieved I’d like to eventually write a sequel where the player can rise to become the Prime Minister, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

About Labour, I’m anticipating them moving left under Corbyn and I also reckon that it might make for more exicting gameplay if Labour had a touch more Socialism than they did under Blair and Brown.


You might very well think that, but I could not possibly comment.


I havn’t finalised which other parties I plan to include yet. But Incan assure you that I will be politically nuetral when writing the game.


There is some speculation that the Lid Dems may experience a revival as a result of defectors from Labour. Whatever happens it’s useful to have them in the game so as to provide you with a “third option” on the various issues.

1 Like

Don’t forget the 12.5%, or about 1/8t of the electorate who voted for them. Though perhaps that may have hopefully said more about how fed up some people are by “New Labour’s” Thatcherism lite.

That is perhaps a little bit harsh of a statement. As @Cataphrak said classical liberalism has always been and still is an important part of British politics. They still received about 2.5 million votes, and if representation in the UK was a bit fairer they could still have fielded about 50 MP’s (compared to UKIP’s 80 or so, but still…) .
Really the LibDem lesson, aside from the fact that Clegg has been a poor standard bearer for British Liberalism is that winding up the junior coalition partner to a party and a PM that only has a lukewarm commitment to democracy and none at all to liberalism, perhaps wasn’t the best move they could have made.

Oh absolutely, I’m not arguing that point. I merely meant that another party may have to pick up that standard as the lib dems have alienated most of their support base. I’m not quite certain how they can really recover from this.

If our Tories could go from two seats to a majority government within two decades, the Lib-Dems could probably manage, especially if they end up fighting as dirty as Stephen Harper does.

Rename the thing to the Liberal party again, choose a new leader and alter the political strategy and you can turn almost any political (mis)fortune around.
If Corbyn succeeds in moving the Labour party significantly to the left again and UKIP and the Conservatives battle it out for the right and George Osbourne remains committed solely to the interest of the City that would logically leave the center wide open for the Liberals (or LibDems, if they insist on keeping that brand) to attract both the genuine liberals and the people who would not like the Conservatives to become the “default option” yet would find Corbyn’s Labour party too socialist.

Fair enough, I concede the point about rebranding the lib dems. But your second point relies on people being logical, something we are manifestly not. In an ideal world where we all considered our problems rationally your argument would be dead on the money. But I fear there is a fairly well-entrenched belief that the Liberal Democrats are at best a second tier party that are maybe worth tactically voting for in order to keep out another party. The coalition was the closest they’ve been to power since the Second World War and as such many people just don’t see them as a viable party to vote for, for fear of wasting their vote.

The same thing happened to me back when I still brought in to socialism in a big way. Even then I didn’t vote for the SWP or whatever the equivalent was because there was no hope in hell of them being elected. And the same may well happen here, those who would normally defect from Corbyn’s Labour would be somewhat more hesitant when there is no clear party that sands a chance of winning to defect to.

I should note, I wrote this while rather sleep-deprived, so if it is somewhat unreadable and nonsensical, that’s the reason why.

And this last point is completely off topic, but I have to ask, is your icon Lord Blain from Seven Kingdoms? If so, why the guy who is normally the most hated guy in it?

True, the chances of something like that happening in RL are fairly low (but not nonexistent) in the game it would be up to our politician characters to convince the electorate of the logic of it all. Something a well played character ought to be able to do.

It is and I don’t really hate him, he’s the comic relief if anything (and quite cute to boot). I, and most of my characters. reserve our genuine hatred for actual jerks, Like Jarrod, or princesses who try to have us killed (his sister).

@MacMaster, just wondering, in the game, will you be allowed to be a crossbencher, remembered a certain british prime minster who did that

Edit: sorry meant the term cross the floor

Sorry for the late reply, I’ve been away from my computer for the last few days.

I was under the impression that we were discussing real life. Sorry, my mistake. From a gaming perspective I agree, it makes a great deal of sense, especially if it were balanced in some way. (harder to get elected, but easier to rise in the party ranks maybe?)

Wait, do you mean that Gisette is behind the riding incident? Damn, I actually kinda liked her.

Speaking of certain cantankerous half-American prime ministers, and more importantly, the amount of leeway he got by being a member of the aristocracy; how much control will we have over our characters’ social standing and origins? Will it not be an issue, or will it have influence over your support base and the support of your party apparatus?

Would you, for example, be able to leverage membership in the Harrovian/Etonian “old boys” network to get a way into a Tory cabinet; or maybe play up working class roots to gain support in a primarily industrial riding, at the risk of being dismissed as an illiterate rabble-rouser by your opponents?

Social background is a really good one to raise. Truth be told though, if it’s set in modern day, people at the top of the Labour party are generally (not totally but generally) pretty middle class and well educated (usually oxbridge). Its genuinely rare to have a working class frontbencher, so working class background could be seen as a help or a hindrance i suppose, like either a social disadvantage or a popular novelty.

Also, just a little note @Cataphrak , it took me a second to work out what you meant when you said “riding”. Again if we’re talking about modern day here, it’s a pretty antiquated term and I think it only ever referred to areas of Yorkshire…

Huh, I didn’t know that. “Riding” is still used as a pretty common term in Canadian politics, so I guess I’m just used to using it.

@Cataphrak Oh, interesting…
Thinking about it, industrial is also pretty antiquated, its not like Britain has any industry any more… :pensive: