The Many-Faced GM's Skulls and Shackles (Inactive)

Game Master Nickadeamous

You are free to discuss things in the discussion thread, but quite often what you think you know isn't accurate in this incarnation. I'm changing a few things on purpose to prevent some meta game knowledge.

While I think thats a very good idea, I'd like to say that I have neither played it nor seen it...from that context, I may still "think" i know something about what's happening, just by reading the situation.

For example, right now, with them picking US to fight their flawed brawler, it could be that they want to see us in action(since they could not when we cleaned out the rats), it could be that they want to place us as villains for beating up the poor ship idiot...but the fact our "friends" cheered us on would suggest it's more of a subtle power struggle.
Beating their choosen fighter would obviously place us on their radar...which we already are...but also make us a natural go-to-point for other people unhappy with them, but also possibly making those too afraid of them avoid us if possible.

Just putting my thoughts regarding the current situation in words. For a simple reason: While I'm all in favor of changing things to provide a fresh new experience to those people already familiar with the AP, I hope you keep things like you did until now, understandable and logically sound.
You did a great job so far, I'm just mentioning it because I hope it stays that way, and you make your changes reviewing them from the perspective of a player, in terms of "does it make sense"?
I feel stupid even just mentioning that considering how much fun this is, but I'm still a bit hurt about another AP that went bad just a week ago in which the GM did not exhibit that same sensibility-

@GM On another note, I want to say I am a big fan of the day recaps you put in the campaign info tab. It's fun to read. Much appreciated.

I will have posting ability until monday night. I should still be able to get them in, but I won't be much for conversation.

If I'm taking so long, assume Sandman continues his patterns of Influencing one person during the day, 2 people at night (unless something else takes precedence) and then using Sow Thought on one of Scourge and Plugg's allies before going to stand not eh prow and commune with the stars the rest of the night.

He will use Guidence before any roll he can actively prepare for and will try not to do anything that gives away what he is really capable of.

@Sandman...a pity, because I just reconsidered our plan regarding getting rid of one of their lackeys...Sow Thought "I had a fight with this person when we were alone last night" on someone that drunk too much...together with something of the dead guys personal items moved into scapegoats locker by Rillum...

If the death is identified as murder, blame can be shifted to this person, and if he himself thinks he was fighting with the person, he can't reliably defend himself, and if he drank too much, may end up unsure himself if he did it.

Suffocation is as simple as pressing a shipboard-equivalent of a pillow on someone until they stop struggling, so the victim not having marks or showing signs of a fight should not be a problem...I know GM's can always find SOMETHING wrong with a plan if they want to, but either of you guys see some problem? Except that 2 guys need to fail their save and Rillum makes his Stealth-Check afterwards? There's some chances we fail but the result could be 2 of Scourges Lackeys gone...so high risk, high reward...

Rillum is happy to help take revenge on the crew members who mocked him. He will likely have a suggestion of a target or two. Rillum will help cover up your murders, it you'll perform a hit on his behalf. :)

He'd much rather fry them personally, but circumstances what they are . . .

Considering that, DM, which of the pirates enjoyed Rillum's defeat the most? He wants to keep an eye on that one.

We are going to need to do some recruiting of our own after all this is well and done.

Which leads me to think, what is our characters' respective endgames? Where do they want to be when this is all over. Rillum has very simple goals. He wants a protected private room on our ship where he can perform his experiments and keep his stuff protected. He has no interest in leadership, but he also doesn't want to take any orders either. He will happily work toward common goals in the party, but will not be blindly obedient, even to whomever is chosen as 'captain.'

I also want to put my two cents in about how enjoyable the game is. I am wonderfully entertained; keep it up all.

You guys really need to start curbing the meta game type conversations about what the plans are and actually start role playing through having the conversations.

If Character A is deciding to risk something by doing something, let's say Rillum is stealing from the quatermaster store. At no point during his efforts should anyone else be commenting on what he should or should not be looking for, especially if your character has no idea that he was going to be risking stealing from the store to begin with. I'm seeing way too much of information that the players are aware of but the characters are not starting to effect the actions that people are taking and that's not what the discussion thread is for.

I highly encourage you guys to work together and plan things out, but it needs to happen through role playing in the game play tab, not by back channels in the discussion tab. I've been letting it slide a bit, but for the sake of the things coming next, you're going to need to face each other and not act you like have a hive-mind mentality.

This has really bothered me the last few days so I wanted to say something before it got worse. I've also had some other games going on and real life and what not, but we're going to refocus and continue on with this. I'm hoping to have more action progression up later today/tonight as time permits.

I'm also glad everyone seems to be enjoying the game so far.

I agree we need to plot together in Game play thread.

Also wanted to give a shout out to the GM and rest of the group. This has been a really fun game and I am enjoying it immensely!

Sorry GM. I will curb the discussion.

Aye. I think we were doing that to not slow down the game. Transmit intent more clearly here instead of detailing things in-game. We've been bypassing the plotting part in game by that.
But alas, we should do so and take the time, we've went quite fast up to now so playing things out in detail won't be bad I suppose. We should make sure everybody is available to chime in though. If we take a couple days to finalize details, wouldn't want someone to get bored :)

DM, which of the Pirates find Rillum the funniest? Who laughed loudest at his fall day 1 and who cheered most when he felt Owlbear's blows?

Tam "Narwhal" Tate. Normally, I'd make you roll a sense motive but the dwarf's laugh is fairly unique and easy to pick out.

Anybody else who stood out as being hostile towards us? Dwarfs can be quite resistant to the kind of thing we want to pull off. It is known.
So I would nominate him the Scapegoat rather than the victim.

Also, did Narwhal seem to not get along with any of the others hostile to us? If Rillum points him out and has been keeping an eye on him, I guess it's reasonable to make a guess as to his relations with others(with a Sense Motive maybe).

"No rules for me, just goals in common. No orders, just deals and helpings."

"No one says 'You can't.' to me.... "I act in my name alone. I am ruled by no one. Those who try, burn!"

Was just wondering, from the sound of that, it seems rather Chaotic Evil, opting to head there? No worries here, just trying to understand where I would mentally place you. And I'd guess being on a ship several days I'd have slightly more to go by than those isolated sentences.

Rillum holds to deals he has made, though I agree he leans more chaotic than lawful in his evil. He just won't recognize authority over his wants and needs. His actions aren't random, as much as they seem; his patterns are just . . . different, but still patterns. In my opinion that holds him close enough to neutral.

Yeah, I just think we'll need to work something out there. In the current example, if Nivian suggests a rule not to steal from one another and Rillum says the rule doesn't apply to him, thats kind of a trust-thing.(And quite a few of us have trust-issues as we already found out).

As player, with metaknowledge, I expect you will not work against the party, but we kind of need to work that out in-character too.
I mean in a way that will not leave all other characters permanently double-guessing your intentions, "knowing" that if your wants/needs/goals demand it Rillum would do anything he wants, wether that be stealing from friends, killing them in their sleep, or burning down the ship during the night.
I have no problems with chaotic evil characters, they can be fun to play, but if we want no inner-party strife, we would probably need some approach that leaves Rillum more trustworthy than a monkey with a gun.
Considering you're an oversized anthropomorphic Rat with Bombs that metapher is weirdly fitting.

As for the stealing from crew, I think Rillum has established his feelings about the sanctity of things. In two cases, the acid vials and fiddle, once he learned they belonged to people who did not wrong him, they were returned.

I think the key is to just understand trust is going to be difficult between us all for a while. Rillum keeps his deals, and he doesn't randomly lash out. He retaliates. Maybe disproportionately, but it takes an offense first, a defense because he is small and easily seen as weak. He feels, from experience, the need to establish strength quickly and definitively. He just looks like a raging psycho because he's surrounded by people who have wronged him. Put him in a better environment, you might see a kinder, gentler Rillum. More barbecue, less munitions.

Aye Rillum, I understand that. You were very honest and returned things and all that.

It's just that in-character, I'm not entirely certain yet how I should take that refusal which is why I came to discussion.
As player I know(knew) these things you just explained.
But as character you just told me you only act that way as long as it is in your interest, and will be refusing (for sake of example) an agreement(=rule) not to steal from one another, because thats a limiting "chain" for you.

So thats what I meant...we should try and, in time, find a way in which Rillum can show/proof in-character that we don't have to sleep with one eye open and keep watch over him at all times ;)
Society and Social Groups are usually built on a framework of rules of interaction. Absolutey refusal of that framework as binding will weird people out. If you tell a guest where your restroom is and he tells you that he finds restrooms very limiting and will "do his business" wherever he feels like and starts taking off his pants in your living room in front of your kids, you may want to keep an eye on what he's doing...
Know what i mean? As player, I know Rillum will not act that way...but Nivian and the others should get a chance to learn that, too.

I don't think it will be quite as big a deal as it initially seems to be. Rillum is all about agreements and contracts.

Rules are really just another kind of contract. He just looks at them as contracts he didn't agree to, which is where the problem lies. If he agrees to the terms then it isn't a rule. It's just an agreement.

If we approach the situation from that perspective I'd imagine we'll find him pretty amiable.

You sure, Sandman? What threw me off was this:
"But those rules, we make together." + "But no chains. Not for anyone who serves with us, everybody is free, to join or to leave or do as they please, as long as they don't break the rules we will agree on."

led to this:
"Rules are for those not clever, not smart enough to judge each situation and act right. Orders are chains called with different words. No rules for me."

As in, basically what was suggested being what you suggest here. That he takes part in formulating these social contracts, and agrees to their terms, which he adamantly refused right after. Which led me to believe that he would consider no kind of contract or agreement binding, because those are chains that attempt to control him. As said, I think it fits the character and I like it but I think some people may sleep uncomfortable if he adamantly refuses to agree not to murder each other during the night, just on principle of it being a rule.(just for the record, I know he wouldn't do it, but the refusal alone would be enough to make some people feel weird about the situation)

It might be the approach. So far Sandman hasn't had any problem cooperating or negotiating with Rillum. We'll see i guess.

well, since the talk is set at dinner, you are there with us :) feel free to try a different approach IC.

I don't think it will be quite as big a deal as it initially seems to be. Rillum is all about agreements and contracts.

Rules are really just another kind of contract. He just looks at them as contracts he didn't agree to, which is where the problem lies. If he agrees to the terms then it isn't a rule. It's just an agreement.

If we approach the situation from that perspective I'd imagine we'll find him pretty amiable.

This is exactly it. It really is a matter of semantics, but important to him. To Rillum rules are imposed - he will not follow them. But deals and agreements, those he will follow. It is as simple as what you call it.

well, since the talk is set at dinner, you are there with us :) feel free to try a different approach IC.

I'm pretty sure I'm still below decks with Owlbear. Those actions were never resolved so I don't know if I'm back yet. That's why I haven't said anything in the discussion.

It is going to be interesting. We have, by Rillum's observation alone, a multiple personality sadist, a withdrawn isolationist insulted when addressed in the only language we share in common, an amphibious homocidal lounge singer, a cook and a monkey handler.

He has a few trust issues of his own about you guys.

And a pyromaniac anarchist rodent.

Of course he knows himself well enough to trust himself . . . Can you say the same Sandman?

:)

I'm sure that will come out during the game. You might be surprised.

well, technically, I'm of course an amphibious heterocidial lounge singer, since I'm not killing other undines! *smug grin*

@Sandman, I went down to Owlbear with you. I believe it's not been resolved since no evening/night actions were, yet.
This discussion is set at the time of evening dinner after rum ration handout, the thought was that we all will eat, and all MUST be present for rum rations(so assuming we either head to owlbear after, or it needs to be resolved at that time already), and its a convenient setting to be among ourselves and have some time to get in-character plotting done.

@Rillum...in that case the ball is in your court on explaining what makes it different aside from a choice of words. As in, what is the operational difference between agreeing on a rule not to steal from anybody in the group, versus formally agreeing to a deal with each member of the group not to steal from one another.
Because if you agree not to steal from me but then you do, I'm trying to enforce things just the same no matter what words we used leading up to that. If you prefer formal contracts and see those as binding, thats fine enough but when the time comes, you should suggest that kind of thing...
Rules=imposed, may well be, but the idea was that we choose the rules, and impose them on the crew, since we agreed on them anyway. I don't think its a very good idea to make individual deals and agreements with each crew member we'll pick up, but neither would I want to explain to each of them that not everybody on board follows the rules because they don't like the wording, but will act in accordance with them because we have a verbal agreement but that same option is of course not open to them.

@Nivian

It comes down to this. Rillum will not sign a paper with a set of rules on it. He won't steal from those who haven't wronged him, and won't kill people in their sleep for no reason. Because it is just a bad idea. BUT, he will strike first if he feels he's being plotted against - like we are doing now. He will kill or set up to be killed potential innocents to improve his station - like we are planning now with Narwhal.

A list of rules will not change or prevent that. Rillum doesn't believe for a second that putting out a set of rules will change that for you or anyone else here. He is trying to show his respect for the group by being honest and forthright about his attitudes and feelings. If he was planning to empty your footlockers and randomly murder you in your sleep, he would have happily agreed verbally to every rule you propose with a smile on his face, just like he is doing with the officers. Just like he did earlier with Rhemus about 'crew.' But to create a more solid group he has put his cards on the table. He will bind himself by agreement and common cause to specific people, but will not be bound by those agreements over others until and unless they prove themselves worth constraining his actions for.

Trying to make him recite empty promises will just have him question your motives and honesty.

Judge him by his actions, not his promises; that's what he's doing with you.

Thats all fine. Point was that right now, we are all allies out of necessity. If we succeed, we are all unbound and can do as we please.

Be aware, though, that while many things are not a concern for her(such as what we intend to do), other things will be taken serious. We can run a complete anarchy based on "common cause", but if someone attempts to magically influence her(she was aware of that attempt. But how far would this go unless a stop is put to it?), that person goes on a death list. If someone starts raping female crew, that person goes on a death list. If someone, without good reason, kills someone close to her, that person goes on a death list.
(Obviously not acting against other players but they should be aware they cannot depend on her in that case...if they go bleeding overboard, I just might fail to charge after them, underwater, to cure them)
Nivian was on many different ships in her long live, and some of those experiences, she does not want to repeat here. She also learned that punishment not based on rules that fails to be final leads to more problems.

Also, the rules imposed on us now, we never agreed on. Whole different story in my eyes. But I think you made your point plenty clear, so thank you a lot for the clarification. I just was not sure if I misunderstood something over in gameplay, but it's all cool now.

We'll just have to work around that. From a certain point onward, we won't have to worry about it as much anymore.

Oh you silly people and you're color coded excel charts. Next you'll be wanting power point presentations showing the profit margins and expenditure reports.

Nivian, did you edit your post regarding asking me to help Owlbear?

I don't remember reading the bit about you offering to be a pain-surrogate. Wish I had, that would have been a neat moment. Let's assume Sandman was too angry to really respond to your offer and revisit that in this scene.

Friday, 05:05 pm
Yesterday, 12:42 am

Considering the time stamps and the fact I can only edit one hour from posting, I'm pretty certain it should have been in this state when you read it before responding :)

I was a bit puzzled upon reading your Healing action and Mask Dialogue. Would have been nice, yep. you can still delete/edit if you want, though...GM already saw your Natural 20 on the heal, so the rest if just fluff I guess :) I figured it's some more bonding opportunity between us.

@OOC in gameplay, you are right. But GM asked me there, and so I responded there. I will always respond to GM in the thread in which he requests information from me.

@Discussion: Unless someone else chimes in, I'm done with Rillum there. I'll have mentally filed him under "Armed and Extremely Dangerous" and re-evaluate his mental state if we manage to win our freedom. Basically I tried to see if common grounds could be found here in discussion, but there was definitely nothing we could agree on now(in character).

It was my fault. I guess I didn't see the part where you made the offer. I'll make it work narratively. Give me a bit.

Feel free to continue any in character dialogue as the events progress. I'll allow it a little while longer while I prep for the next portion.

And do please try to keep the OUT OF CHARACTER posts in the DISCUSSION thread.

And revising my earlier statement. No matter where GM asks me, I'll always answer in Discussion-Thread. I thought it's easier on him the other way, but I erred.

The intent was well-meaning, though.

Ok, I was able to edit my last "to the mask" post and get in a response to Nivian. I know it's a little short and cryptic but I only had two minutes left on the edit-timer.

Feel free to ask questions if you want.

@sandman

Is this just feeling Rillum out? He can produce 10 go worth of cures a night, but if you can't pay for them, he'll be royally pissed you pushed to keep the deal under these circumstances and then didn't complete your side of the bargain. He had a hard day and was looking forward to a good night's sleep.

We have cash found in the bilge. I assumed it was divided up between us.

Also, I have a couple heavy maces I could sell to Grok for money. I'm not completely broke.

But yes, this is basically Sandman playing Socrates. It will get to a point, I promise.

@rillum, I think sandman's trying to prove a point in your favor, to be honest. I'm just not sure how Nivian should react at this time.

She's been on more and less lawless ships, and is a firm believer in maintaining some basic civilization and structure, which is wildly clashing with your views. From my perspective, We'll just have to ride it out, see where it takes us.

Just make sure you can carry the bluff, otherwise a very tired Rillum will expect 25gp for a dose of bloodblock tomorrow morning.

I'll have the money.

Nivian, I kind of need the specifics, because Rillum may act against some of the crew and I don't want to know after the fact that he or she was important to you. This way retconning can be kept to a minimum.

@Sandman...this time I had edited something further up, I think. In response to your talk bout pain. Just in case that got buried.

@Rillum, I intended to keep them "open" for just that reason, assuming you don't act against those I named unless specifically saying so.

As in, those already in good relations to me are all on the list, and a few more wildcards that will get "names" later as I go about influencing them.
If I end up diplomacing someone you acted against earlier, I may have changed my mind, too.

But I would say unless you specifically act against someone and say it's a person I named, it is not.

The reason she gave more names, and gave them all in private is mostly to see if that information somehow ends up in the wrong hands and to make sure it's not absolutely reliable information(while not lying to you at the same time), not to see if you honor the deal.

Nivian,

Rillum is not okay with this. Way outside the spirit of the agreement! You are basically making it so I have to ask you before Rillum acts against anyone on the crew.

No.

You want the freedom, but are expecting Rillum to be okay with none. This is exactly what he was afraid of.

Why would you have to ask before acting against anyone on the crew?

I just explained, I made them wildcards so you can freely act against anybody except existing allies- because the assumption would be that whoever you acted against was not named, and if I later end up influencing someone, I changed my mind.
Wildcards would only play a role IF, and ONLY IF either you decide to target a wildcard character(by specifically stating that the person you are acting against was named), OR you pass the information on to someone else(wether out of free will, torture or accidently because you talk in your sleep)

I don't really understand where you see a problem?
The only people you would need to care about are those friendly+ on the crew rooster. If I succeed in adding someone to friendly terms, that simply "absorbs" one wild card and that person is already named, without me seeking you out and specifically giving you a new name.

So all you need to check is crew rooster and I'd guess you do that anyway before picking out targets?

Consulting with the group before taking actions that could endanger us all doesn't really seem like a bad thing to me.

"Please talk with us before you murder someone" seems like exactly the sort of thing the agreement is about

Also, we've moved very quickly today.

We might want to slow things down or agree to come back to this so that other players can have a chance to speak up.

I am a bit puzzled at Rillum's response in gameplay. Is he saying I make too many friends for his taste? That he wants more victims to choose from?

I really don't understand the problem right now. Sandman, do you understand how I mean to handle the Wildcards? Did I fail in my explanation? I thought thats the most beneficial way to handle it for him, instead of limiting him in a way.

I'm off to sleep now but if you understood and further clarification seems needed, please do.

If it's really just about the amount, then it still leaves all hostiles.

We are just a few days in and I made about 5 friends. It's not totally unreasonable to make 5 more among the indifferent and unfriendly ones. So if names are absolutely needed, Owlbear(which I tried today but failed), Scrimshaw(who is already friendly with someone else), Caulky(Cabin Girl could be useful ally if we get a chance to be near her), and Barefoot Samms(the remaining indifferent female), those would probably be the 4 indifferents. The two unfriendly/hostiles would be the swabs Badger Medlar and Shivikah. Happy like that?

Look, I am really trying to compromise here. You or your character seems paranoid about what Rillum will do. I have worked hard both in and out of character to assuage Nivian's concerns. I thought you understood Rillum's and my point of view, but the instant we make a deal you put 2/3 of the crew under your protection.

I would say it's obvious why I'm a bit upset, but it must not be.

Rillum as a character does not like people telling him what to do. He reacts very poorly to it. He make exceptions to get on in the world, but he doesn't like it. He is evil. Not stupid. He will not engage in a blood orgy of destruction if he is not boxed in by rules and conditions. If a crew member is not under your protection, he will not slaughter every one of them, but I want my character to act according to my vision of his personality.

If you were uncomfortable with evil characters other than yourself, an evil campaign was a bad choice. I would not expect you to not use your cool suffocation spell when your character feels it's necessary. Please give my character the same consideration. I have spent the last two days trying to get us in a position where your character could trust mine only to end up where mine really distrusts yours.

Edited for clarity