I am starting this new thread since the heavy discussion of Meta-plot got OT from MrFish's previous OP thread.
If you want to catch up on the discussion from the previous thread, start HERE.
This thread can continue the discussion of General Meta-Plot Theory as well as perhaps help him develop and integrate a specific metaplot and various minion/pawn plotlines into his campaign.
Just to discuss a couple of specific points of metaplot for my campaign, maybe we could start with the Count himself? He's been somewhat discussed in my siege thread but I'd like to take things a little farther here.
It was the Count who ordered that an undead army should attack Exag. However he did it so that he could SAVE Exag from the attack. The pcs know this because they intercepted a force intending to do just that, and found instructions in the commander's effects. The leader of the undead force was a wight bound by magic, that the pcs destroyed. (admittedly they didn't have a lot of time to interrogate anyone at that moment) Unfortunately the pcs don't yet have solid proof that it was the Count who ordered the undead to attack in the first place, though they are suspicious.
I have a jumble of ideas here that I'm looking over, from Dungeon issues 13, 28, 44, 46, 62. Basically it's the idea of the city being under siege from within and then ultimately from without. Essentially the Count wants to destroy the defenders' morale and possibly the city itself without ever expending his army. What's kind of bedevilling me is whether or not my plot works.
The idea is that the Count's agents use the following means to take over the city:
1. Plague (goblin fever, in Dungeon 46 (this also accidentally unleashes a nest of dire rats and ghouls that were unearthed with the tomb that held the plague)
2. Terrorism (Dungeon 13; mysterious destructive attacks and murders that factionalise the city)
3. Hostile takeover of the thief gangs by wererats. (who are allies to the Count)
4. Using his own barbarian mercenaries to besiege the city. The wild tribes south of the city are united at least temporarily by adventurers in the Count's hire who then have them 'crusade' against the city. (which has admittedly demanded tribute from them in the form of slaves)
I think in this thread I'm going to Spoiler my replies, simply so that I can move through it quickly and rescan your comments to refresh myself of our progress as time goes by.
MrFish wrote:
It was the Count who ordered that an undead army should attack Exag. However he did it so that he could SAVE Exag from the attack.
Spoiler:
Pretty common ploy.
The thing is, if the Count could organize/summon an Undead Army he's too powerful and has too many resources to be bothered by the PCs. They could never defeat him, not at their current levels.
This leads us to the obvious conclusion that the Count has made a bargain with someone else, higher-up and more powerful. That person/creature/organization is the next level of your meta-plot, presumably the 10-15 bracket.
BTW, I still don't know the levels of your party. I've guessed about 8th. Am I way off?
Back to the Count and his "partner". The partner is really just using the Count to advance his own ploys, regardless of how the Count perceives the situation.
Is the Count part of a necromantic cult/religion and has called upon his church/order for assistance? Is there some lich out there with whom he has struck a deal?
Next, if the Count's goal is to become king, how does that benefit the "partner's" schemes?
MrFish wrote:
I have a jumble of ideas here that I'm looking over ... What's kind of bedevilling me is whether or not my plot works.
Spoiler:
Sounds fine from the Count's perspective, and that's really all you need to worry about.
For the purpose of this thread, I'm going to try to stick to Meta-plot, and not get caught up in the specifics of individual adventures and story-arcs.
BTW, don't be afraid to have the Count succeed in his plot. It may be that the PCs will uncover evidence that there is someone behind him, and the only way to draw out that "next level" villain is to allow the Count to become King and then see who/what comes out of the woodwork.
What you absolutely should not do is set the Count up for automatic failure. If the PCs successfully derail his plans, then great for them. However, the Count doesn't see himself as the antagonist. From his perspective he is the protagonist (or antihero) of his own saga, and will actively and assertively pursue his goals and modify his plans to achieve success. In my own campaigns, the BBEG escapes more often than not. They fight hard and they fight dirty. Sometimes they escape in ruin and never return but sometimes they escape with strength enough to hound the PCs. Mostly it's almost a draw and each side retreats to lick its wounds, perhaps to face off again but perhaps not.
MrFish wrote:
The idea is that the Count's agents use the following means to take over the city ... Plague ... Terrorism ... Hostile takeover of the thief gangs by wererats ... Using his own barbarian mercenaries to besiege the city
Spoiler:
These are fine, but perhaps a little mundane for PCs of the level I presume your party to be.
Point is, any of those, and particularly the Barbarian one, would be great starting hooks for the 1-5 block. The adventuring party is defending one village after another from marauding barbarians. Over time they begin to realize there is coordination, and that it is coming from the city.
The 5-10 block then leads them to Exag. They defeat the barbarians but find the city plagued by other problems. They help out where they can, but in time start to see organization and commonality. They realize it is the Count organizing everything and neutralize him.
The 10-15 block is where they go after the hidden "partner" of the Count and learn that the scheme is bigger than feared. Considering that Exag debuted with the Seeds of Sehan story-arc, that is obviously ripe for exploitation as a "next level" in the meta-plot. The Count is trying to gain control of the city, but the Sehan-cult is spread into cities throughout the region plotting to control all of them. Unfortunately, Seeds of Sehan runs only the 8-10 range as-written, but Steve Greer frequents these boards and might be able to offer some "off-the-pages" background, backstory or other ideas that were cut from the adventures but might inspire you in ways to expand that adventure.
The 15-20 block is where the PCs go after the final enemy; the supernatural or ultra-powerful overlord of the entire scheme.
Here's a suggestion. After the attack of the Undead Army and now plagued by barbarians, Exag will be filled with mercenaries and adventurers (same thing, right) of lower levels. These types of people are ideally suited to handling the various problems that plague the city.
Your higher-level PCs could become mentors to these weaker bands, they could coordinate efforts of multiple adventuring groups to solve problems, they might be called upon to "rescue" another band or perhaps simply finish off a BBEG that another party (wisely or foolhardily) found too powerful. The result of all this is that the PCs are in a unique position to gather information from a wide variety of sources and see the Big Picture that none of the other parties can. Even the nobles and people who interact with the Count wouldn't see it, because they don't have the broad base of information coming to them through the various adventuring contacts that the PCs do.
All of this information will allow them to point their fingers at the Count. Of course, they'll need proof, which might mean finding his "partner" and getting a copy of their bargain. Or it might mean they'll have to fight their way past the Champion/Bodyguard sent by the still-hidden partner to protect his investment.
About Setting Up a Coherent Metaplot
Spoiler:
You need some degree of coherence to your metaplot, but you don't want to be redundant. One of my complains about SCAP and particularly AoW was that you always seemed to be fighting a lot of the same kinds of enemies. Variety will keep it interesting. On the other hand, you need to develop common themes throughout the metaplot that keep it coherent.
In my world, despite multiple regional metaplots, they all stem from the same time period thousands of years ago when the world experienced a great upheaval both natural and supernatural. The uber-plot is keyed to that event, the attempt to mitigate the fallout even millennia later, and making certain that something that cataclysmic never happens again.
Let's say that you like the Seeds of Sehan idea and decide that they are the "next step". The Count has partnered with them and it was the Sehan cult that actually "hired" the Undead Army. The obvious direction to go with this is further into the whole Far Realms business. Defeat the Count in the 5-10 block. The 10-15 block involves defeating the regional schemes of the Sehan cult, while the 15-20 range involves reclaiming foreign cities already overtaken by madness and Far Realms creatures, perhaps journeying deep into the Underdark to fight the races of abominations and aberrations that are allied with the Yakfolk and cultists, with the capstone adventure being a journey into the Far Realms themselves to close the gateway to your world once and for all.
On the other hand, you might decide that's too much Far Realms and insanity and aberrations. Using it for the 5-10 block as a diversion from all the undead was fine, but the 10-15 block will pit the PCs against the necromantic cult and the recently-ascended lich or master vampire who deployed the army. Such a person might have planned to marry a mortal descendant to the Count (that was the bargain for use of the "Army") once he becomes king. To the Count the "requirement" to take a pretty bride was no hard decision, and he will even be allowed to live out his remaining years as King.
However, the Undead Lord is planning a multi-generation takeover. The Count's son and heir will also be a descendant of the Undead Lord and will be raised as a disciple of the necromantic cult. Maybe the marriage took place years ago and the "heir" is now a teenager or adult who has already begun plotting to usurp his father's forthcoming throne. The Undead Lord will rule through his descendants as the city turns to death-worship and ultimately come to rule directly himself. Furthermore, he is repeating this plot in various forms in cities and kingdoms across the continent. Eventually he plans to rule the entire continent himself.
It could be that the Undead Lord is the metaplot villain as he turns the various kingdoms of the continent into his thralls to worship him in his attempt to achieve the status of an undead demi-god. Perhaps you could introduce a diabolist element and have his ultimate goal be to challenge Orcus in an attempt to become the new Demon Prince of the Undead.
Another way to go is that the Undead Lord in the 10-15 block is merely a lieutenant of Orcus (or some other master) and then we shift from undead to demons for the final arc. Perhaps Orcus seeks to open a gateway from the Abyss into the world, spewing forth demons and undead. Perhaps he's looking for recruits to fuel his armies of undead, but if he can convert nations of mortals to worshiping him they can become more powerful undead in his armies than if they don't worship him. Perhaps he seeks to have mortal worshippers to leave behind his status as a Demon Lord and challenge Demogorgon or even the God of Death for their position.
Yet another idea would be to have the Undead Lord merely be the servant of an ancient Dragon. Perhaps the dragon seeks the knowledge to become a Draco-lich and has been canvassing the world searching for it. Of course, this is the kind of dragon who has armies of minions, enslaves tribes of giants, has mates and offspring and half-dragons scattered across the continent that each rule their own domains but are ultimately subservient to it (whether they realize it or not).
Conclusion
Spoiler:
My real goal for this thread is to investigate and develop those broader questions, plots and themes. I suggest for specific adventures and story arcs and NPC villains and their plots you do what you have been, continue the strong of threads in the regular forum.
This thread is the place to talk about everything that overarcs them all. This is where we talk BIG picture and paint in the broadest strokes possible.
HTH,
Rez
P.S. In case anyone else comes along and reads this thread, you might consider linking into your previous plot/adventure threads in order. Then, you can include links in this thread each time you start new ones as the campaign progresses.
You have as usual given this a lot of thought, and answered some of my questions so thoroughly as to leave me with a lot to think about in turn. So I hope you won't take it amiss if I take your advice about the current stage of my campaign as read, and use it to plan for the current adventure stage. However as you say the main point here is metaplot. (BTW the pc party are about 9th level average) So here's a few questions:
1. Does the agency of metaplot have to be an individual being of some kind? Can it be an organization instead? I'm thinking here of the Lords of Chaos in Moorcock as an example. In the Elric and Corum series the Lords of Law and Lords of Chaos are behind the conquests and achievements of the mortal races to some extent. To a lesser extent perhaps the coalition of evil sorcerors in the Conan series that utimately clash with him directly when he becomes king.
2. Can there not also be a kind of culture metaplot? Like for example in A Song of Ice and Fire or (shudders) Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth where the existence of gods is a rather dubious thing.
3. If I'm understanding the genre right don't the best stories involve the BBEG almost winning? In a way LOTR is sorta light in that department because halfway through the story the tide begins to turn. (I'm not inviting an analysis of LOTR necessarily here) After all Saruman's advance into Rohan is halted; in spite of Sauron's capture of Osgiliath and driving the Rangers of Ithilien out the battle of Minas Tirith ends up being a catastrophic failure for the Lord of the Nazguls' army, etc. On the other hand in the Elric, Corum, Thomas Covenant series there is a brief respite followed by near total conquest.
1. Does the agency of metaplot have to be an individual being of some kind? Can it be an organization instead?
No ... and ... Certainly.
Spoiler:
However, remember that even organizations will have leaders or dominant members or internal strife, particularly with "evil alliances". That's part of the reason there may be a "meta-meta" and ultimately a singular individual as the capstone. It's also more satisfying that way from a story perspective. I don't know what Paizo has done in the PFAPs, but it's part of the reason the conclusion of AoW and STAP was more satisfying than SCAP, because you defeated a single enemy (Kyuss or Demogorgon) rather than an organization (the Cagewrights).
Frankly, the Meta-Agent can be "tectonic plate dynamics" for all I care. The world has gone crazy with run-away lightning-speed geo-dynamics and tectonic activity is ultimately responsible for the volcanoes that have been waking dragons and causing them to be more active and plotting their evil schemes that ripple down in layers through their minions, as earthquakes rip cities apart and ...
You get the point? It's really just about the layers, and determining what is the capstone agency. Then as you work backwards, decide who is "knowing" and who is being manipulated ("semi-knowing" or "unknowing").
Incidentally, I thing impersonal geo-dynamic activity is a poor meta. "The Story" demands that someone caused it for some reason and therein lies your Meta.
You'll find that I will tend to reduce things a lot to formulae, against which some creatives inherently rebel, but formulae and tropes and so forth exist because they work. Lucas consciously applied the Epic Cycle formula when he wrote Star Wars and it contributed to the film's blockbuster success and status as a "modern epic saga" and cultural icon.
As I've said many times, I break things down into blocks of 5 levels (as did Wolfgang Baur, I'll restate, so I think I'm in pretty good company here). I then peg a key "agent" ... villain or BBEG or organization ... for that block. The basic metaplot pattern for their level of knowledge is:
1-5 - Pawn - Unknowing, and so minor as to be unknown to the Meta Agent/Master
5-10 - Minion - Unknowing or Semi-knowing, still probably unknown or at best vaguely recognized by the Meta
10-15 - Lieutenant - Semi-knowing or possibly Knowing, monitored by the Meta and either specifically enacting its lower-level schemes or carefully manipulated and under the impression that it is doing a different task
15-20 - Meta - The final, master agency of the Metaplot, the Capstone villain and likely the only one who knows the full scope of their own plans
21+ - Uber - Not really necessary, but this is an epic, whole-world or even extra-world power, force or agency interacting with multiple regional metas within a single world or across multiple worlds. Ubers are gods and god-killers, and at the moment I suggest you forget about them ...
Of course, remember that each BBEG at each stage will have Lieutenants, Minions and Pawns of their own, and that many will think that they are their own masters, envisioning themselves as the Meta of their own little drama.
Also, don't forget that Good guys can fill the role at any stage. Nothing is more fun than having a good guy being manipulated to further an evil plot. Even the Meta could be dictatorial, totalitarian tyrant but one who is benevolent and ultimately out for the "greater good" ("Yes, I'm sorry I have to murder paladins and destroy the churches of powerful Good deities and promote the worship of minor demons; however, our world rests on a cosmic leyline in the multiverse that is connected directly to the Abyss and if the forces of Good became too well entrenched in our world Cosmic Balance would open gateways and flood the world with fiends, so to save the world from turning into an Infernal realm I limit the strength of the forces of Good and promote the worship of minor demons to avoid the attention of the powerful ones ... otherwise the people of this world would really suffer).
Nothing like a good moral dilemma for the PCs. Of course, by this point the PCs are Epic, and if the group stays together the PCs themselves arguably become the "Uber" of the campaign as they search the multiverse for a way to clip the leylines of existence and sever the connection between their world and the Abyss so that they can restore the forces of Good to the world.
:-)
Fun, isn't it?
MrFish wrote:
I'm thinking here of the Lords of Chaos in Moorcock as an example. In the Elric and Corum series the Lords of Law and Lords of Chaos are behind the conquests and achievements of the mortal races to some extent.
Yes and no.
Spoiler:
You're right about the Lords manipulating humanity, but the Lords of Chaos especially were also up to their own individual schemes and plots and internal struggles.
Also, at the end of Stormbringer one could argue that Stormbringer itself was in fact the Meta or even Uber, manipulating Elric's interaction with the struggles of both groups of Lords to its own advantage.
This bring up an interesting point:
Why do the Good Guys Always Win?
Is it just because it is satisfying storytelling or because it appeals to our sense of justice or a need for hope?
No.
The Nazi Empire was doomed to fail, the U.S.S.R. was destined for ruin. It's not fate nor any plan ordained by any Great Good.
It's simply the nature of Good and Evil.
Good can work together, while Evil will always pursue its own self-interest. While Evil may form alliances, they will by their nature always be temporary and self-serving and eventually lesser Evil forces will seek to topple more powerful ones.
Good can form alliances and maintain alliances to promote common interests. Good can act altruistically. Good can perform helpful deeds without reward. Good can make sacrifices "for the greater good". Evil can do none of these things.
It may take years, decades, generations, centuries or millennia depending upon the strength of the Evil, but ultimately Good will always triumph over Evil.
My personal opinion, anyway.
Of course, this also plays into why individuals rather than organizations make better Metas, because we really want the Meta to be Evil and the PCs to be Good.
MrFish wrote:
2. Can there not also be a kind of culture metaplot?
Sure. Can't comment on your specific examples but I think I've covered enough above you can answer this yourself.
MrFish wrote:
3. If I'm understanding the genre right don't the best stories involve the BBEG almost winning?
Absolutely !!!
Spoiler:
I'm back to Formulae, here.
IMHO as a writer, the basic formula for a 3-Act story goes something like this:
Introduction - We meet the main characters and set up the initial conflict.
1st Act - The protagonist struggles against bad guys and basically defeats them as he seems to be winning the struggle.
1st Turning Point - The protagonist defeats the "bad guys" but realizes that there is a larger picture they didn't initially see and a greater villain they must defeat, launching their efforts in a "new and unexpected direction" (the definition of a "turning point").
2nd Act - The protagonist struggles against the real bad guy, but at a disadvantage. In fact, the antagonist seems to grow ever more powerful while things fall apart for the hero. Alternately, things seem to be going well for the hero, until something comes to light that brings about the ...
2nd Turning Point - Things fall apart for the hero, if they haven't already. Friends and allies are lost and the bad guy is actually winning as the hero nears defeat.
3rd Act - The hero claws his way back from near-defeat to force a final face-off with the bad guy, resulting in the ...
Climax - In which the protagonist and antagonist have their final battle, in which the protagonist emerges victorious.
Denouement - The antagonist has been defeated and the hero gets their rewards.
Personally, my major focus for this sort of thing is that the Bad Guy is winning for most of the 2nd and 3rd Acts, but possibly the Good Guys don't really realize it until the 2nd Turning Point where they have to run for their lives.
You'll find that this formula applies quite well to most stories. Admittedly, both Star Wars and LotR break the model as much as they follow it, but you can still see the major structure there. Note that, like the layers of metaplot, it will repeat itself internally as well. The break-up of the Fellowship is a 1TP with regard to the entire series, while the formation of the Fellowship is the 1TP within that individual novel (the death of Gandalf is arguably the 2TP for the novel, leading to a relatively short 3A).
If you watch nearly any movie, however, you can quickly see this formula, and it doesn't need to be Action/Adventure. Frankly, Romances and Romantic Comedies are about as formula as you can get, and they follow this model precisely. The relationship will always crumble at the 2TP, usually over some stupid misunderstanding. In a way, the "romantic couple" can almost be their own antagonists.
So, yes, the Bad Guy does almost win. Personally, I find the resolution for an RPG to be much more satisfying if the Bad Guys are winning most of the time and the PCs emerge victorious only at the very end when everything seems to be against them. It matters that the Players are personally invested in the story. Still, that model works well in any other type of story as well.
So how do you translate the 3 Act model to the 4 Block model?
1-5 = Introduction - A lengthened introduction, almost into its own Act.
5-10 = Act 1 - We fight against the "master villain" who was the superior of the minor bad guy who dragged up into this whole mess in the Introduction.
Turning Point - Whoops, turns out the villain is merely a pawn of something larger and more sinister.
10-15 = Act 2 - We're either pursuing the "more sinister" connection, or else it is pursuing us now that we foolishly exposed ourselves fighting its minion in the previous Act.
Turning Point - "Holy Plot-Twist, Batman ... we've been wrong all this time. It's larger yet than we thought and it's about to eat us."
15-20 = Act 3 - We're on the run, but we still have an chance if we can summon a little help and position ourselves to make one good strike at our enemy's critical, vital and momentarily-vulnerable weakness.
Climax - We get all stabby-stabby on that vulnerable weakness, but probably get killed in the process (some of us, anyway, but only those who didn't have the foresight to negotiate a sequals clause into their contract).
I agree about Stormbringer, that's a good point. The final taunting line is disturbing for that reason. I don't know if you've read the Corum books but there's another factor that I wanted to mention but forgot to before. The lieutenant or antagonist who in and of their own right has an agenda to pursue that is closer to home for the heroes. Here I am thinking of Saruman/Wormtongue, Glanyth in Corum, etc. In a sense it seems that just because the metaplot is revealed does not remove the personal element. Have you made use of that in your games? It strikes me that that is done in STAP with Lavinia's evil brother, who is in the story right up till the quest into the Abyss.
Another point is the cosmology. In STAP doesn't the presentation of the cosmology make any good deities seem almost irrelevant? Like supposing I do the evil vs. evil plotline (let's say it's a great wyrm lawful evil dragon vs. an evil demigod) what in the world have the pcs' deities been doing all along? I'm kind of leaning towards an Iliad like perspective in which they are for some reason not supposed to interfere too much...
Another point is the cosmology. In STAP doesn't the presentation of the cosmology make any good deities seem almost irrelevant? Like supposing I do the evil vs. evil plotline (let's say it's a great wyrm lawful evil dragon vs. an evil demigod) what in the world have the pcs' deities been doing all along? I'm kind of leaning towards an Iliad-like perspective in which they are for some reason not supposed to interfere too much...
For epic storytelling, it's really ideal if the various gods can't get involved directly. The best bet, IMO, is to take the Eberron route and have the dieties be unknowable and indirect entities, and even their high priests Commune spells are answered by intermediary celestial (or infernal, etc.) entities.
Otherwise, any serious epic plot point becomes an issue of 'If Vecna is about to try to destroy the world, again, why doesn't Pelor, who is bigger than him, squash the fool like a bug? It's not like the other evil dieties would team up to protect him...' Best to keep the gods faceless, operating through their Clerics, Paladins, Blackguards, etc.
Alternately, the gods might be entities that can be contacted and even encountered, but Pelor and Hextor, etc. are massively limited in power, on the material plane, the vast bulk of their power deriving from their respective Outer Planes, forcing them to rely on their high priests and holy warriors, etc. to 'get things done' on the material plane, or, indeed, any plane that isn't strongly connected to their power base. Gods become distant chessmasters, working through their clergy, which better fits the heroic nature of D&D, where the PCs should be doing the heavy lifting, not 'calling for dad.'
Once, a long time ago. I find that Moorcock and his Eternal Champion gets repetitive, so though I've read the core Elric series a few times I only read Corum, Hawkmoon and the other stuff once each.
MrFish wrote:
The lieutenant or antagonist who in and of their own right has an agenda to pursue that is closer to home for the heroes. Here I am thinking of Saruman/Wormtongue
Absolutely.
Spoiler:
This is an important element of the structure. Also, though I use terms like "minion" and "lieutenant" that imply a direct, linear, knowing hierarchy, that is rarely the case. Most of the lower-level agents of the meta do not even realize that it exists, much less that they are cogs in a massive plot. Also, the meta does not know that they all exist, much less monitor every single one.
Most believe they themselves are master of their own plots, domains and destiny, not realizing that they are in fact being used and manipulated to further someone else's schemes. Even if it's only indirectly, that the circumstances desired by the meta allow them to pursue their own agenda which in turn advances the environment desired to suit the meta's scheme. If I am a Lord of Chaos and desire a city to be overrun with anarchy that does not mean that every petty street thug is my minion, though they are all pawns in promoting my plan by advancing and maintaining the environment I desire. I may, in fact, design my plot to actively eliminate "crime bosses" who become too powerful, for I want Chaos and not Law, even if LE.
Also, many of the "semi-knowing" Lieutenants are actually out to betray or at least cheat the Meta. Saruman wanted the Ring for himself, and arguably had the strength to wield it, giving Saruman of Many Colors the potential to topple and replace Sauron. Denethor looked into the palantir seeking knowledge into Sauron's plans and designs, seeking to spy on him, but was too weak. He sought to use the Ring against him. Sauron would have loved for the Ring to end up in Gondor for he knew Denethor would cave to it and bring it to him.
Ultimately, though Sauron was searching for the Ring with his own, direct agents (the Nazgul) he had innumerable pawns searching for it as well (Denethor, Saruman, goblins, Golum), each for their own reasons but eventually it would have ended up in his hands, regardless. I don't doubt that Sauron even considered Grima a "safety" in Saruman's case, knowing that Wormtongue would fall to the Ring and steal it from or kill the wizard if it came too close to Orthanc.
So what we have is "minions" and "lieutenants" who are pursuing their own agenda, perhaps even seeing themselves as enemies of the Meta if not simply looking for an opportunity to cheat it, but ultimately are still just pawns in the "Great Plot".
That is the nature of Meta-Plot ... it is inescapable and to some degree drives the nature of everything about it.
A little addendum I thought of later related to the previous section, but I wanted to separate a little.
Spoiler:
Consider the following examples of metaplot hierarchy:
In the early James Bond films, the villains are all members of S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Only after several do we learn of the leader Blofeld who is running the organization to further his own schemes, manipulating even its senior members.
PCs in a "Bond-world metaplot" could begin their "adventuring careers" as members of the Guardian Angels, fighting street-crime as red-beret-wearing vigilantes. They become local heroes around the projects in their neighborhood, but gang-bangers begin gunning for them. The local police use them as informants and they develop official connections.
The PCs decide they best way to defeat the gangs is from the inside, so they begin to infiltrate them. Maybe a party-member is a cop on the Vice Squad, or decided to join the force during a period of Downtime. The gangs are running drugs and guns, so the party pursues them up the line, interacting with the FBI, ATF, DEA, etc. and as mid-level characters are perhaps officially recruited into these organizations (or at least have party-members who are agents). However, there are ties to a larger, international syndicate at some level and now Interpol is involved.
Having established themselves as good deep-cover operators, the high-level PCs find themselves recruited by the CIA when it seems that the international connections have foreign governmental ties. Two new Players join the party, one generating a character who is an experienced CIA operative in Tokyo (the party's local contact and handler who operates with them) while her boyfriend plays a former Delta Force operator who can beef up the party's capabilities in wet-work. They investigate the possibility that China or North Korea might be behind the master-plots that ultimately trickle down to the streets of Manhattan or Los Angeles where the campaign got its start.
However, the "government connection" is a bust. The party believes some other agency is involved, but can't quite get a handle on it. This is the point at which they make the acquaintance of Felix Leiter or James Bond. They leave the normal CIA and enter "Department X" where they learn about S.P.E.C.T.R.E. and in time after stopping the plots of several members of the "Executive" identify and must defeat Blofeld himself.
Of course, they ID Blofeld and are the heroes because it's their story, and not Bond's.
Here's another, similar example of hierarchy:
Take the movie Goodfellas. The characters played by DeNiro, Liotta and Pesce all exist at the pawn/minion level. "Uncle Pauly" (Paul Sorvino) is their "boss", but he doesn't know or care about, much less directly monitor, their individual schemes. He just cares that their sub-plots advance his organization, do not break a few ground-rules he has established, and do not endanger him.
In this case, the PCs would be the off-stage cops who investigate street crime and theft, eventually stumbling upon the conspiracy of the airport robbery. They investigate that and put the pressure on DeNiro's group until he "cleans house". They now have a few suspects for the "top-level" but no strong leads. They keep their eyes on Liotta, eventually busting him for drugs, but now know he's part of a larger organization and so use him as an informant to bring down Sorvino and the others.
Of course, if the campaign continues with a true metaplot, then Sorvino is simply one lieutenant of an Al Capone-type super-boss who is himself a member of SPECTRE which is run by a super-villain ... you get the idea.
An important point to remember is that at each stage there are many "agents" who view themselves as the "boss" or capstone or master. Also, the hierarchies of pawn/minion/lieutenant/master and unknowing/semi-knowing/aware repeat in fractal-like fashion. It's very possible for an unknowing-pawn of the meta to have unknowing-pawns of their own schemes.
MrFish wrote:
In a sense it seems that just because the metaplot is revealed does not remove the personal element. Have you made use of that in your games?
The "personal element" is vital, because it keeps the PCs hooked in and gives them a reason to pursue the meta-plot.
Spoiler:
Many years ago I ran a Vampire game for what was supposed to be a Halloween one-shot. The Players made themselves set one year in the future as PCs and then we went from there. I abducted one character's kid and used her as the hook into what became the meta-plot. Talk about personal, a mother whose only child has gone missing from a hospital and down they say she was never even there ...?
The previous installment of my current campaign featured a community the PCs saved, and in which they decided to settle to help re-build, serving as Sheriff or Diplomatic Minister or whatever. They became personally invested, and that region was closely tied to metaplot concerns.
In the current campaign, we have shifted from one region to another and one regional metaplot to another. Previously, the party defeated someone at the "pawn" level to end their 1-5 block. He had some allies they could have taken out personally, but not politically (a powerful County Sheriff they knew was part of an evil cult and perhaps even its regional leader) as they did not have the hard evidence to prove that "it was for the good of the realm" when the Duke came calling about why they were killing nobles.
They decided to leave the region, but have kept an eye on things and may return in the future. In their current region they have saved one large trading post from destruction, become heroes to the local town and major trade-port, gained allies and contacts, and even saved and helped rebuild a dwarven fortress-delve (individual non-dwarven PCs spending anywhere from 2-6 months of Extended Downtime with the dwarves awaiting reinforcements and PC dwarves remaining in the delve for 18 months, in one case as Commander of the Guard).
If you're interested, I urge you to subscribe to and lurk on our YahooGroup.
You may find it entertaining and informative, but moreover I'll be happy to correspond with you off-list and off-forum and share all the great SPOILERS of the world, the Meta and Uber-plots. Then you can really see what's going on in a more specific fashion than the semi Player-safe posts I make here.
MrFish wrote:
Another point is the cosmology. In STAP doesn't the presentation of the cosmology make any good deities seem almost irrelevant? Like supposing I do the evil vs. evil plotline (let's say it's a great wyrm lawful evil dragon vs. an evil demigod) what in the world have the pcs' deities been doing all along?
The answer is usually, "The gods agreed long ago not to act directly in the mortal world, but rather to take action through their churches and their agents." The other part of the answer is that, "Whenever possible, Evil takes the opportunity to cheat."
Spoiler:
There are differing approaches to answering this problem. Sometimes there is a meta-physical/supernatural barrier that actually prevents divinities from entering the world. This becomes the sort of metaplot where a divinity tries to have their minions open a gateway so they can manifest. Another approach is that if a divinity manifests in the mortal world, they not only expose themselves to the possibility of being destroyed therein but also perhaps leave their "seat" in the Outer Realm open to be usurped, so they are reluctant to act directly. Another is that a Gods-War in the mortal realm would kill too many worshippers, and while the demons and devils of the Bloodwar respawn, mortals don't and since gods get their divine strength and power from the faithful veneration of living mortals worshippers then killing too many of them will cut off the deity's supply of veneration, effectively producing a "worship drought" that will starve the deities.
Yet another and probably the most common is the MADD theory, that they have agreed that they are going to fight one another in open warfare, but that they will not use chemical, biological or nuclear weapons (witness WWII and the Cold War). This is the most commonly used one. The Greater Powers refrain from acting directly against one another or using such weapons. Even as defeat loomed for the Third Reich, Hitler did not order out the chlorine or mustard gas, and the US and USSR never fought directly for 50 years (well, pilots over N. Korea, but that's minor). However, such "agreements" between the major powers doesn't prevent Saddam Hussein from using chemical weapons in his war against Iran or against Kurds, nor prevent terrorists from trying to obtain a suitcase nuke.
Taking the above example a step further, though Eisenhower and Hitler were both common soldiers once (Ike a West Point grad. and WWI junior officer while Hitler was a corporal and war-hero in the trenches) neither directly fought in the massive war into which they sent their troops. I doubt Eisenhower ever fired a bullet in combat during the war, and the only shot Hitler is known to have taken was into his own head. So the "gods" themselves actually do very little of the fighting. There's too much to risk (yes, somewhat a Braveheart reference) and they are the commanders not the footsoldiers.
In terms of D&D Cosmology the Greater gods, both Good and Evil, have come up with a "Geneva Convention" of their own, and agree that it is too dangerous to act directly in the mortal realm, lest their destroy their own, entire pantheon. Nearly all of the Good deities, regardless of status, will also join the agreement and keep it. Of course, minor deities, demi-gods, demons, devils and supernatural beings that lie outside the normal pantheon hierarchy are less reluctant to break the rules. In fact, they actually have a lot to gain by breaking the rules and subverting the standing pantheon, as they are the ones most likely to replace it should it collapse.
In practical terms, Zeus couldn't act directly in the world with great frequency lest Poseidon or Hades counter him directly or even attack his throne on Olympus while he was away. Instead, he fooled around with mortal women and produced all manner of demi-godlings who became mythic Greek heroes and also became his mortal agents to handle his affairs for him. In D&D terms, the deities have their Paladins, religious orders, Churches, high priests and Chosen to act for them.
Perhaps the Good powers didn't act directly in STAP. Then again, the PCs always seemed to be at the right place at the right time. Maybe some supernatural force was pushing them along. Perhaps some Greater Good deity identified them as likely candidates early on and led them to a position where the Evil ones could find them and try to use them as pawns, not realizing that while using them for Evil they were in fact the chosen "secret-agents" of Good all along.
Anyway, that's how I'd address it. My own cosmology has a combination of these factors limiting the ability of deities and superpowers to act directly within the world. This is also a case where the Uber comes into play.
Set wrote:
... Various Good Stuff ...
Hey, Set ... I'm glad to see Fish and I aren't alone in here. I hope some others swing by as well from time to time.
Both of the posts by Set and Rezdave make a lot of sense vis a vis the gods. One thing I thought of as well is the occasional adventure to gain magic, knowledge, etc, and reminders that the evil powers don't directly interfere either. So that makes a lot of sense as far as that goes.
Thanks for the link to your other game btw Rezdave, it looks interesting.
So here are some elements I'd like to try to put into a metaplot and see what I am able to come up with.
1. Who is behind the Count? I was thinking of legends of ancient civilizations alluded to in the game and wanted to have a being kind of like the acheronian sorceror in Conan. Basically this would be like a demigod or very powerful cambion like creature who is currently at the mercy of the Count but is plotting against him. In the meantime the Count's sorcerors are using the being's knowledge.
2. In keeping with the homage to the pulp era authors I love so much there ought to be some kind of ancient civilization that is attempting to 'rise' in response to the Creature's resurrection or awakening. So there might be modern devotees to whatever power this represents, or even other beings that are minions of the Creature that will respond.
3. So I guess what I'm interested in in terms of metaplot is evil vs. evil with good caught in the middle.
4. Another element I'm curious about is the development of the good metaplot--does this entirely depend upon the heroes? It doesn't seem to and yet it's often presented that way. It does seem to depend upon their initiative though. For example in many stories it seems to be up to the heroes to build up a coalition of otherwise wary or hesitant people to fight against the evil.
4. Another element I'm curious about is the development of the good metaplot--does this entirely depend upon the heroes? It doesn't seem to and yet it's often presented that way. It does seem to depend upon their initiative though. For example in many stories it seems to be up to the heroes to build up a coalition of otherwise wary or hesitant people to fight against the evil.
For this sort of option to exist, however, the DM / storyteller has to preseed the area with neutral-ish powers / kingdoms / whatever that could be rallied to the side of the good-guys.
Since that's already being done, the DM could get a jump on the 'rally the good kingdoms' metaplot in one of two ways, if the players don't seem to be on the track to doing so of their own volition;
1) Some other neutral / good country, perhaps one that is already being overrun by the badness, has ambassadors out doing that very thing. The party could get involved protecting an ambassador from the refugee country, protecting him (or her) from agents of the bad-guy, who would rather conquer nations piece-meal than have them organize a mutual defense pact. They rescue the ambassador's party from a targetted strike, only to then have to protect her the rest of the way to Kingdom X to meet with the King of X-land, because, oh-so-terribly-conveniently, her travelling guard have been pretty much slaughtered to the last man defending her.
It's a fairly standard fantasy trope. Unsuspecting hero(es) stumble upon wounded messenger and are dragged into war vs. good and evil.
2) The bad-guys have already thought of that, and have their own agents provacateur / Scarlet Brotherhood 'advisors' in place, counciling the various on-the-fence nations that 'oh, they just want Country X, you don't need to provoke them, once he's taken Poland, he'll stop...' The party then is placed in a position to discover this bad-guy diplomatic push and put a stop to it / out the 'evil diplomats' / etc. This one is a bit harder to pull off, as the 'advisors' will come off as far more credible than a bunch of rag-tag adventurers waving around pilfered documents (that could easily have been forged) or recounting second-hand information from enemy prisoners that have likely been killed. I think option 1 would be much less frustrating, plus the 'ambassador' could be a hot princess. :)
1. Who is behind the Count? I was thinking of legends of ancient civilizations
I think the better way to approach this is to determine your Capstone ... the actual Meta-Villain, if you will. I've mentioned before that a "return of the Crafters" is an ideal and built-in one, given your use of Exag, but definitely not the only one.
I'd work forward only once I have a target/goal in mind.
Once you have your Metaplot goal in mind, you'll find yourself working both directions simultaneously ... that is, you'll work the plot backwards from the Meta in terms of complexity, as well as forward from "who's manipulating the guy the PCs currently think is the "master villain".
MrFish wrote:
a demigod or very powerful cambion like creature who is currently at the mercy of the Count but is plotting against him. In the meantime the Count's sorcerors are using the being's knowledge.
So the Count has a "genie in a bottle" that he thinks he can exploit/control, but really this is all part of the "genie's" plan to escape its prison (where it was put by ancient enemies of the meta-villain, who may or may not still exist as a secret order) and so then betray him and pursue its own plots, which may or may not knowingly contribute to advancing the schemes of the Meta.
MrFish wrote:
2. ... some kind of ancient civilization that is attempting to 'rise' in response to the Creature's resurrection or awakening
See above.
MrFish wrote:
So there might be modern devotees to whatever power this represents, or even other beings that are minions of the Creature that will respond.
Certainly. Remember the hierarchal structure, knowing/unknowing thing, though.
What you're talking about was very well presented in the early part of AoW with the Ebon Triad and cultists supporting it. I imagine there will be a lot of people out there who are being duped into supporting the rise of the Meta.
MrFish wrote:
3. So I guess what I'm interested in in terms of metaplot is evil vs. evil with good caught in the middle.
If you're using the "Crafters" from the Exag backstory, then you need to decide now which side they're on ... E1 - G - E2. That will help everything else.
As I said above, you need to designate these entities. That will help you establish the various sides in the meta-conflict. Until you do that I think you're just working forward randomly.
Again, not too much detail at this point, but just a slightly more focused idea of what end-target you're aiming to achieve.
MrFish wrote:
4. ... the development of the good metaplot--does this entirely depend upon the heroes? It doesn't seem to and yet it's often presented that way. It does seem to depend upon their initiative though.
Well, remember that we're trying to tell a story, so it can't be all outside plotting of secret agencies.
Theory BS follows:
Spoiler:
There are some historical theories that claim that individual people are not really relevant historically, because even if some person fails to arise in a given circumstance then someone else will. Basically, Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan and so forth did not make history, but rather filled a historical need. If you could go back in time and kill Adolph Hitler it wouldn't prevent WWII because someone else would have arisen to fill that historical imperative.
Isaac Asimov famously explored this idea in the Foundation series, in which a "psycho-historian" predicts the fall of a galactic empire and the 10,000 years of chaos that will follow. By building a "library" and collecting knowledge and arranging a few simply events, he believes he can reduce that interim to 1,000 years. Again, the idea is that while individual people are unpredictable, masses and populations as they get larger become increasingly predictable, until you can literally "compute the future".
From this viewpoint, "heroes" are inevitable. If not the PCs then some other band of heroes will rise to fill the "imperative", so why not the PCs.
The thing about Metaplot is that the agencies involved are so individually powerful that they blow theories like psycho-history out of the water (something Asimov actually addressed in his series). Furthermore, the goal is for the PCs themselves to eventually achieve this kind of history/world-altering power.
Strictly speaking, the "metaplot" itself is what is driving the story and the world around the PCs, and they "interact with" it, eventually influencing it.
OTOH, in my world it's very clear that if the PCs sit around and do nothing then the world doesn't stop. The individual sub-plots of the world continue to progress and may even pass them by. Adventure hooks I drop for them that they do not take are eventually snagged by other adventurers. They have returned to find that someone else is now the "town hero" for picking up a hook they neglected.
Currently, the PCs are pursuing a BBEG who escaped them twice before. They really want to eliminate him and foil his current plot. However, they are not the only ones gunning for him, and I've made it clear that they may well arrive at his lair to find that someone else got there first and assassinated him already.
While it won't perhaps be the most satisfying ending from a storytelling perspective, that's how the world works. Of course I give the Players the benefit of the doubt in most cases, sometimes stalling the progress of "in-world events" a little to suit their timetable, but not much. My storylines are very Player-driven.
Getting back to Q4, however, a "good metaplot" exists independently of the "heroes". Do not confuse "meta-plot" with "storyline". The Metaplot simply exists, while the Storyline develops and evolves. The metaplot drives the storyline while the interaction of the PCs with the metaplot changes the storyline.
Think back to my "alternate Tolkien" examples. Both of them as well as LotR-as-written all have the same Metaplot, but where they differ is in terms of storyline as defined by the evolution of the metaplot through the interactions of the characters involved.
I hope that distinction makes sense.
Right now, you still need to develop a metaplot. Once that's roughly in place you can focus on storyline. This also gets to the working-backwards / working-forwards thing I mentioned previously.
Set wrote:
agents of the bad-guy, who would rather conquer nations piece-meal than have them organize a mutual defense pact
Good basic comments, with expanded Theory below:
Spoiler:
Depending upon the hierarchal level of the "agents" they may or may not be organized. In many cases, they simply will not realize they are being manipulated. In fact, getting them to fight against each other, weakening them, destroying their leadership and putting weak-willed rulers in power in the aftermath is an ideal set-up for a take-over.
At this point it should not be apparent to anyone that a single agency is behind all of this. If anyone does suspect something larger and more sinister, they should be regarded as such a paranoid, insane conspiracy freak that it makes Oliver Stone's JFK look like Kindergarten-level Vulcan logic.
The goal at this stage really is to separately subvert potential adversaries with agents who may or may not be coordinated to the degree that when you do begin to reveal yourself no one is able to stand against you.
Evidence of coordination means that the plot is occurring at sub-meta level. The only hint that something "more sinister" is happening is the fact that some wide-traveling adventurer sees similar occurrences "randomly" happening everywhere they go.
Remember when I previously discussed the fact that, at their level of 9-10 the PCs are in a position to be better leaders and coordinators of the rebuilding of Exag and foiling the Count's plots than the actual adventurers out looking for herbs to cure a plague and such (that really is such level 1-3 stuff). By becoming city heroes and coordinators and advisors to the other adventurers handling the "grunt work" the PCs can focus on big-picture stuff. They also can mentor other groups, and at the same time be placed in a unique position to hear a lot of stories from abroad. In this case it is they, and not some other "traveling adventurer" who begins to see the connections.
"Hmm ... I think I recognize this plague. We had something like this in the westlands earlier this year. Still bad up there, but we found that a salve of red-root rubbed on the boils helps significantly. Maybe we can find some around here?"
"Ack ... you're 'avin' trouble with undead too, eh? A 'ole army o' zombies attacked me 'ome town last year. Damndest thing I ever saw, actin' all like they knew what they was doin' an' followin' orders n' such."
"I feel for Exag. Our king died heirless just last month, and the whole city's in mourning. The people would support the Queen's brother, but the Council of Barons (greedy, sniveling bastards they are) are more likely to pick one of their own and they have the final say. Another could weeks and we'll know. I'm not sure but I think the leading candidate is actually a relative of some noble from here."
After a while, the build-up of "stories of coincidence" reaching the PCs ears should trigger in them the idea that not all is what it seems. Rather than telling them "you hear lots of stories" you might have a lot of fun running a couple sessions of them as "organizers" and leaders, not fighting and adventuring but making plans, recruiting, organizing and deploying low-level parties to solve problems. You can drop 2-3 "hints" per session as IC dialogue during RP interactions as they are interviewing candidates or debriefing returning adventurers or whatever, and hopefully the Players themselves will start to pick up on it.
It's always fun when one of your Players pulls you aside and says "Dude, I'm not sure if you meant for this to happen, but it really seems to me like ..." and then you just shrug and say, "Well, if that's how your character feels in-game then I think it would be cool to just run with it," as if it's a throw-away. There are a couple times I've really shocked my Players with schemes and plots and when they realize the depths of the murky waters into which they've walked it's always a fun reaction to watch them put the pieces of the puzzle in place and realize what the picture forms.
Set wrote:
They rescue the ambassador's party from a targetted strike, only to then have to protect her the rest of the way ...
SNIP
It's a fairly standard fantasy trope. Unsuspecting hero(es) stumble upon wounded messenger and are dragged into war vs. good and evil.
Yep. It's called "the plot of Star Wars", which was also ripped off from Hidden Fortress.
Certainly you've heard the saying "Go with what works".
CONCLUSION
Back to the topic at hand ... I think you need to:
Determine the basic identity of Ancient and Powerful Evil 1 and Ancient and Powerful Evil 2 as well as the nature of their previous, Ancient Historical Conflict;
Determine if there even is an Ancient and Powerful Good that was caught in the middle of this conflict, if the APG actually triumphed, or if "Good" was just "plain, common folk" who simply tried to survive;
Determine the outcome of the Ancient Conflict and who, if anyone, was/is the victor;
Determine which of these Agencies still exists in the world today, was defeated but is attempting to return or else was completely destroyed (but perhaps someone else has found their remains/relics and is using them for a new plot);
Determine if the New Metaplot is simply a continuation/repeat of the Ancient Conflict or if it is something partially/wholly different.
Once you have determined these, we can begin to "pick sides" for the various groups, villains, NPCs and allies with whom the PCs interact, realizing that very few of these GVNAs will even realize that they are part of a larger conflict, much less know which side they're on.
Personally, I can think of a lot of ideas to develop along each of these lines, but rather than give examples or make suggestions, I think I'd like to see what you come up with yourself and expand upon those, only making suggestions where you are perhaps stuck.
HTH,
Rez
P.S. I'm not taking the time to Proofread today, so please forgive any typos. It's the GFs birthday and I have to taker her out to a movie soon.
I hope you enjoy your gf's birthday and that the movie is fun, thanks for taking the time!
Trying to come up with answers to the questions.
1. The ancient evil being is one of the Acheronian Giant-Kings--a powerful demigod like being whose empire was defeated according to legend by humans who rose against it but also by it's own arrogance--calling upon powers it could not control and destruction raining down upon it, enabling its defeat. I'm choosing the name Nephren-Ka for the time being because I like it. The aim of this evil being is to resurrect its power and glory and gain vengeance. The Crafters were Acheronians. I'm imagining that in some fashion the Giant-Kings almost vampirically used the essence of people to maintain their power.
2. There were ancient good races that helped humanity but these have mostly degenerated or ascended in some fashion. Magical items of power they crafted on humanity's behalf remain in the world in hidden places or as relics of various kinds. I picture this as being more of a rebellion than a powerful opposition.
My basic methodology for this thread will consist of:
Offer Metaplot Theory, usually Spoilered to save space;
Ask you questions designed to get you thinking and see how you answer them, then hopefully help you evolve your own ideas and derivations therefrom rather than just offering my own;
Occasionally to offer examples from existing works or very simple sample ideas but try to keep "real suggestions" to a minimum, instead helping you find your own way.
Busy tonight. Have read your ideas and will post spin-off questions soon.
a powerful demigod like being whose empire was defeated
Was this an empire of demi-gods in a single mortal world, or a pan-world, multi-planar/dimensional empire where each demi-gods "realm" might have included one or more worlds (I'm imagining something a little Stargate here, which might give you an Epic-campaign Uber-plot to pursue if the Players go that far)?
MrFish wrote:
calling upon powers it could not control and destruction raining down upon it, enabling its defeat
Presumably, said "powers beyond control" are so uber-powerful and uber-strange that they have no interest in the mortal world and are not themselves part of the meta ...
MrFish wrote:
Nephren-Ka ... is [plotting] to resurrect its power and glory and gain vengeance.
Is Nephren-Ka:
Raising its personal empire once more in this world it once ruled, but in which it was either defeated or had to abandon to fight against the great threat tearing apart the "Empire" on other worlds and planes?
Raising a New Acheronian Giant-King Empire within this one world where it was just one of many GKs, but this time with itself as emperor but other GKs potentially around?
Vengeance against whom? The "uncontrollable force" or the Forces of Good that overthrew it ... and did they really so much over overthrow it or just take advantage of the other conflict to clean up the mess?
Is there really a singular or unified Force of Good or is it just random and all assorted non-Evil folks?
MrFish wrote:
The Crafters were Acheronians.
I don't recognize the name "Acheronian". Were the crafters human subjects of the GKs or the GKs themselves?
MrFish wrote:
There were ancient good races that helped humanity but these have mostly degenerated or ascended in some fashion.
Are there any still left ... the last remnants of some ancient race now acting as "Guardians" or "Watchers" though they lack the strength to actually fight Nephren-Ka?
Are any of those who "ascended" still watching from the "Other Realm" as supernatural powers and remain opposed to the GKs in some fashion, inspiring Holy Orders of mortal humans or something? Can they be contacted for help, or even just advice and guidance either from the mortal realm, or eventually via planeshift?
I find myself thinking a lot as I read these ideas of both Indiana Jones (mostly Grail) as well as a little Buffy tVS as well as Superman and specifically his father's spirit in the Fortress of Solitude.
MrFish wrote:
Magical items of power they crafted on humanity's behalf remain in the world in hidden places or as relics of various kinds.
So at some point the PCs will have to stop fighting Evil and actually allow it to make gains and progress in its plans, perhaps conquering their homelands which they have abandoned, since they need to go on a quest for these "artifacts"? They must allow Evil to grow while they are away "for the Greater Good"?
MrFish wrote:
I picture this as being more of a rebellion than a powerful opposition.
Are you talking about Ancient Good or the forthcoming Modern Good of which the PCs will become a part?
MrFish wrote:
This is what I have come up with so far.
You spoke before of an "Evil vs. Evil with Good in the middle" scenario. Clearly the GKs are E1 and the "other races now gone" are G. Is E2 the "uncontrollable force" and if so is it still relevant to the current conflict, or is there some other E2 out there, or has that concept been shelved?
Presumably, said "powers beyond control" are so uber-powerful and uber-strange that they have no interest in the mortal world and are not themselves part of the meta ...
Yes, the powers beyond control are basically kind of like Lovecraft's Outer Gods and are not really going to be mentioned beyond weird names in incantations and stuff like that.
Rezdave wrote:
Is Nephren-Ka:
Raising its personal empire once more in this world it once ruled, but in which it was either defeated or had to abandon to fight against the great threat tearing apart the "Empire" on other worlds and planes?
Vis a vis the other worlds and planes, I'm not sure, but certainly trying to rebuild its personal empire.
Rezdave wrote:
Raising a New Acheronian Giant-King Empire within this one world where it was just one of many GKs, but this time with itself as emperor but other GKs potentially around?
Other GKs potentially around is an idea that intrigues me, but I wonder if that is unecessarily complicated. On the other hand I've seen that theme work, even as a potential distraction where either the evil ancients are a) rivals or b) loved ones.
Rezdave wrote:
Vengeance against whom? The "uncontrollable force" or the Forces of Good that overthrew it ... and did they really so much over overthrow it or just take advantage of the other conflict to clean up the mess?
The forces of good are the ones that wrought the final magics, but they more or less took advantage of the defeat of Nephren-Ka by its own hubris.
Rezdave wrote:
Is there really a singular or unified Force of Good or is it just random and all assorted non-Evil folks?
It's more or less the latter, kind of like in Middle Earth, in The Land, etc.
Rezdave wrote:
MrFish wrote:
The Crafters were Acheronians.
Rezdave wrote:
I don't recognize the name "Acheronian". Were the crafters human subjects of the GKs or the GKs themselves?
The GKs themselves.
Rezdave wrote:
MrFish wrote:
There were ancient good races that helped humanity but these have mostly degenerated or ascended in some fashion.
Are there any still left ... the last remnants of some ancient race now acting as "Guardians" or "Watchers" though they lack the strength to...
This is the basic idea. The pcs worship one of these in the form of a goddess who sends them benevolent dreams and things like that. It is also possible to use contact other plane type spells to connect.
In another thread I posted something HERE that I thought might be somewhat relevant to the concept of meta-event influencing the game-world at a low-level in trickle-down fashion.
The rest of the thread has nothing to do with metaplot, however.
