Right now I'm running a different game for my gaming group, but I'm planning on running Curse of the Crimson Throne sometime in the near future. The group is comprised of people who know nothing about Pathfinder Chronicles or Korvosa.
I'm still a newbie DM, though not new to D&D/Pathfinder/etc. How do other DMs make their party connect with their characters? I know the CoCT player's guide gives hooks for background info, and other stuff.
|
Unfortunately, I was planning on running CotCT later than I ended up starting it. After finishing a nearly two year campaign of STAP. The next DM backed out at the last minute and since I was versed in the story, we rolled characters and ran with it. I wish we would have had more time to prepare but they are pretty well immersed by SDFtG.
Starting off I would highly suggest getting the Korvosa guide and fleshing out backgrounds of each character, so they have a vested interest in the city, its politics and temperament. Make sure they understand the different districts and some of the more notable city officials.
|
Yep, buy a Guide to Korvosa for yourself, use paperclips to section off the Secrets in the back, and let them look through it while creating characters. I didn't push strongly enough to have them make characters that are strongly connected to and care about the well-being of the city. It might be tough to keep them hooked when the going gets rough.
I used the background traits from the player's guide, and also told them that characters would have to be natives or at least someone who's here often; they also need to have some reason to protect "their" city.
The latter part might be a bit heavy-handed, but I did this after one player/character went ape-s~!! during my Rise of the Runelords Campaign, going into a one-hour tirade during our session and demanding lots of money and noble titles and whatnot for going against the giants, and ranting about how Sandpoint and Magnimar are worthless if they can't even fight some stone giants.
I banned that character, and the player left the group (he said that I had no right to restrict his character choice like this).
Anyway, the backgrounds do give you an excellent way of getting the party together. Worlds apart from "you all meet in a tavern and decide to become adventurers."
I gave my players a small in-character benefit if they owned the Guide to Korvosa. I'm really glad that I did, because the players who own the city book are enjoying the campaign way more than those who don't.
|
We had a character creation party where I had the players each create 2 NPCs from the city (in addition to their own character) - they had to come up with a name and the nature of the relationship. Naturally they all came up with additional details about these individuals and a couple of them also decided they knew an NPC someone else created.
This is a brilliant idea! YOINK! (assuming you don't mind) :-D
This is a brilliant idea! YOINK! (assuming you don't mind) :-D
We had a character creation party where I had the players each create 2 NPCs from the city (in addition to their own character) - they had to come up with a name and the nature of the relationship. Naturally they all came up with additional details about these individuals and a couple of them also decided they knew an NPC someone else created.
I concur - I'm snagging this as well.
|
|
I should point out that I did have to promise not to exploit the player creations for DM purposes; no kidnapping, traitors, or off-screen deaths - these are people the players can be persuaded to have long-term, trusting relationships with. Of course, my players are probably extra paranoid.
I like this idea alot, though I have to disagree with you on the point above. IMO I think it adds somthing to the game if you can get the players emotionally attached to the NPC's. Of course abusing the PC's friends and family should be used sparingly.
Of course only you know your group and what they like and dislike.
|
|
IMO I think it adds somthing to the game if you can get the players emotionally attached to the NPC's. Of course abusing the PC's friends and family should be used sparingly.The problem is that many adventures and/or DMs do abuse the allies as a cheap way to score emotional points. It's been done to death as a plot point and as a result, a lot of players refuse to get emotionally attached in the first place.
As an example, the "Serpent Amphora" trilogy is an otherwise absolutely brilliant campaign, but at least three plot points are built around an NPC betraying them - this sort of thing takes its toll *and* makes them extra wary in the next campaign.
Like I said, my group may be extra paranoid (due to me being one such DM), but I really think it pays to raise one's game and find more creative ways to get them attached.
** spoiler omitted **
Well milage will very from group to group. I firmly beleive that a campaign shouldnt hinge on the NPC's betraying the PC's. But I think that an adventure is alot more fun when it's a PC's famliy member or friends that need rescuing or whatever in place of whatever NPC may be established in the adventure already.
In my group, my players gave me all sorts of lovely npcs that are family as they established their characters as folks that live in Korvosa (I didn't allow for wandering visitors). In fact, one of Lamm's little Lambs was the kidnapped son of the party wizard -- his decision, not mine <eg>.
I cannot wait to see how the players deal with the threat to their loved ones in Seven Days to the Grave, and Crown of Fangs :)~
|
|
When my players were making their characters, one of them decided on playing a Shoanti barbarian who came to Korvosa looking for his little brother... Well, when he was interrogating Lamm the party's Barbarian discovered that Lamm had sold him to some man named Rolth...
Thats pretty cool!
Rolth is an awsome npc. One that definatly one I would like to develop if possible if I ever ran this myself.
I should point out that I did have to promise not to exploit the player creations for DM purposes; no kidnapping, traitors, or off-screen deaths - these are people the players can be persuaded to have long-term, trusting relationships with. Of course, my players are probably extra paranoid.
I did the opposite. My players have decided to play a political version of CotCT, so I told them that I needed to know which people who be logical candidates for hostage taking and let them design them. I also said that as aristocrats they probably came from large, well-known families and gave them the choice of designing the families themselves or leaving me to do it.
The way I see it, plot consists of conflict and resolution. Allowing players to create these sorts of NPCs gives them control over what sorts of conflict they'll be resolving, and tells the GM what types of plots will be interesting to the players. Promising to have no conflict at all is just limiting the kinds of stories that the group can tell together, in my opinion.
|
|
We had a character creation party where I had the players each create 2 NPCs from the city (in addition to their own character) - they had to come up with a name and the nature of the relationship. Naturally they all came up with additional details about these individuals and a couple of them also decided they knew an NPC someone else created.
What I find interesting about this option is the amazing array of choices!
My plan is to ask each player to come up with two NPCs that they know, just as you've described, but they are not to assign names to the NPCs -- I'll do that myself.
Then I assign names to some of them, perhaps overlapping them so that Player 1's first NPC is the same as Player 2's second NPC! And of course, that NPC becomes an antagonist to Player 3's character! But in a subtle, not-so-obvious way, of course.
Man, that would be so cool! ;)