yes it is a long post....
So I've been reading the Midnight campaign setting and I believe I finally have a good idea for a campaign. So far I have rounded up two players and I will possibly have a third joining us. I wanted to run my idea past a few people. I have a few questions in mind....
Is it too railroady?
Is it too cliche?
Are the roleplaying opportunities developed well?
With that in mind consider one of my players is my brother who will be playing a human ranger. He is an experienced role player. My other friend will be playing a dwarven cleric. He has minimal role playing experience.
I have welded together a few tried and true campaign hooks to forge a Frankenstein like abomination....Here is the premise.
The campaign is going to start with the players captured, enslaved, on the way to the gallows. They are currently being carted to the local city to be put to the death...The slaver caravan is packed with other slaves including the remnants of a band of well known resistance fighters. A day out from the city, riders attack the caravan, desperately trying to free their trapped brethren. The PCs are freed but the fight goes terribly wrong. Reinforcements from the shadow ambush the rescue attempt from behind. It almost appears like they were waiting for the rescue operation to be sprung. The resistance fighters are wiped out and only a few slaves survive. The leader of the resistance fighters who wears an ornate mask covering his features is mortally wounded. He beseeches the player characters to contact the resistance movement and warn them that he believes they have a traitor in their midst.
I have a whole back story woven for the resistance movement but to make a long story short they all wear masks so as not to reveal their identities to each other in case the organization is infiltrated. The resistance movement consists of several fallen nobles, church leaders, and merchants who all live in the neighboring city. Haven't decided where yet.
He asks the human pc to assume his identity, gives them the location of the next meeting, and begs them to warn the others that something is afoot.
Now my back story on the leader is that he was the traitor. He was horribly scared by burns, tortured and turned to the shadow. He couldn't live with himself anymore and lead the suicide mission to rescue the slaves knowing he would be cut down. It was the only way he felt he could be redeemed. He also has betrayed several other long term plans and he hopes by sending the PCs to warn the resistance council his sins will be atoned for.
so this leaves several options.
the first factor I was going to throw into the mix is that when they make it into town a couple days later, there are rumors circulating that one of the lords, who was a puppet to the shadow legate in the area, is missing and presumed to have joined the resistance. There is reason to believe that his young and beautiful wife is going to be put to the death as show of force. Obviously this turns out to be the dead resistance leader's wife....
this will give the players some choices.... first...ignore the situation. second ....wait till the wife is captured and rescue her.... or contact the wife, explain the situation, and then assume the role of the husband, disguising himself in some manner. The husband was horribly burnt and scarred after all so maybe it could be done....
The players will go to the meeting and hopefully try to convince the others that something is wrong. I'm gonna play one guy as a war hawk who plans on leading another series of raids regardless. I'll have one who doesn't trust the PCs... and so on and so forth. "So you were the only survivor of the raid, I see? You and this lone dwarf that you've brought into our midst...." That sort of thing.
Then I was going to have the players be surreptitiously contacted by agents of the shadow looking to be fed more information..... give the players a chance to figure out whats going on. They'll either have to out right kill the contact or try to bluff their way through the situation.
I'm trying to think of ways to tie the dwarven player in.... he has never read any fantasy books so I was almost going to sneak in the whole "reclaim the dwarven fortress and use it as a base" device...
so that's the beginning.... what do you think?
I haven't read the Midnight setting, but I don't think you need worry about it being too cliche - you say 1 player is experienced so very few campaigns are going to be entirely original in his eyes, and the other is quite inexperienced and most likely won't mind or notice.
The plot line you've laid down here seems pretty strong to me, and the introductory scene is a more interesting way of bringing the group together than meeting in the pub or being called together by a patron.
having the Party begin as slaves will present you with one problem though: In your first fight - the ambush of the slave cart - they have no particular reason to stick around - they wont have any armour, weapons or gear so getting stuck into the fighting with armed soldiery is not going to seem a great idea. There is the risk that they will simply flee from the encounter, not very heroic but in the circumstances quite sensible.
I don't think you need worry about it being too railroady either:
you are not forcing your players to fight with the resistance. There are a number of points at which the campaign can change course: They may flee or refuse the rebel leader at the beginning (which hopefully wont happen but its a risk), they may decide not to rescue the noble's wife (which should have long term consequences for the party beyond her just being dead), and finally they may decide to work with the agents of the shadow (which given that its underhanded and unheroic should probably result in them being betrayed so that they can seek redemption)
you've laid the foundations for some good characterisation, so I think roleplaying opportunities will develop on their own.
Having the Party begin as slaves will present you with one problem though: In your first fight - the ambush of the slave cart - they have no particular reason to stick around - they wont have any armour, weapons or gear so getting stuck into the fighting with armed soldiery is not going to seem a great idea. There is the risk that they will simply flee from the encounter, not very heroic but in the circumstances quite sensible.
As the force attacking the slavers is there to rescue their other compatriots in arms, I was thinking about having a couple riders break off the attack force with extra weapons meant for their friends among the caravan. This would give the players an opportunity to arm themselves. Though they would be fighting without armor. Sound fair enough?
they may decide not to rescue the noble's wife (which should have long term consequences for the party beyond her just being dead)
any good ideas on how to nudge them into rescuing her or at least getting involved in the plot circiling around her?
weapons are certainly at a premium in the setting. I was going to throw around some rumors that there is a cache of weapons at the resistance leader's manor giving the PCs more of a selfish desire to involve themselves.
I also want to liven up the role of the wife some...
I was thinking of a couple ideas.... either she was also a traitor and is fully involved with feeding the authorities information concerning the rebels....
I was also thinking that since the continent is over run with forces from the shadow....since you haven't read Midnight - think Lord of the Rings if the good guys lost.... I was thinking she could be a noble from a seafaring culture that is a distance away and free from the shadow's reign. She was sent here to research the current climate, find out the shadow's weakness, and ascertain if they plan to expand off the continent once the elven and dwarven lands are secured.
or she was blissfully unaware...she never knew of her husbands involvements
again thanks for your feedback. I certainly appreciate it.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
As the force attacking the slavers is there to rescue their other compatriots in arms, I was thinking about having a couple riders break off the attack force with extra weapons meant for their friends among the caravan. This would give the players an opportunity to arm themselves. Though they would be fighting without armor. Sound fair enough?
I wouldn't even worry about that... if the battle is a total massacre like you say it would be, there would likely be dead bodies and weapons strewn about the caravan. Have the battle going on for a bit, then, as they are freed, the ambush is sprung, causing the battle to move back towards the woods. The PCs would have a moment of respite in which to arm themselves and have the conversation with the resistance leader, before the shadow soldiers became aware of survivors. (At which point they would flee.)
As for the wife, one of the surviving resistance leaders or high ranking captain could have been having an affair with her (intimate or merely courtly love-letter writing stuff). Her husband was mutilated and tortured, after all, and he wouldn't be the same man she married. He could plead with the PCs to rescue her. If they do, he becomes a valuable ally, feeding them info and loaning them fighters if they need it. If they don't he begins self destructing, going on suicide missions, draining the resistance's resources, or turns sides, barganing with the Shadow to save her, even betraying the resistance further.
As far as including the Dwarf player, what is the status of Dwarves in this world and this country/city in particular? Why would a noble have one at his side? Are they Equals? Mercenaries/Bodyguards? Food tasters (High Con)? Slaves? (See Mask of Zorro w/ Anthony Hopkins for inspiration on that one. ^_^)
Make sure the Dwarf gets a chance to shine, so he doesn't feel like Robin to the Ranger's Batman. Perhaps the reistance could send them on a mission to recruit a clan of Dwarves to demolish a wall or reinforce a stronghold, or even join the Rebel Alliance.
|
Ha, I just watched the Midnight Chronicles movie last night. Very interesting campaign setting.
I think your premise sounds fine. The thing to remember is to always keep a couple contingency plans.
Work out what's going to happen if the PC's do absolutely nothing. Make sure that things continue realistically, but also make sure that the consequences of inaction will have a tangible effect on the PCs.
Once you have the baseline of what's going to happen, figure out what would happen if the PCs interrupt the process at every given point in the process.
You don't have to work out every conceivable possibility, but if you have a clear idea of what is going to happen without the PCs, it's easier to quickly decide what will happen once they get involved.
With that in mind consider one of my players is my brother who will be playing a human ranger. He is an experienced role player. My other friend will be playing a dwarven cleric. He has minimal role playing experience.
Might want to rethink a dwarven cleric character. The Shadow is the only god in that setting . . . that's one of the reasons the Shadow is winning.
Of course, I haven't cracked open a Midnight book in months, so check and make sure I'm right.
|
|
With that in mind consider one of my players is my brother who will be playing a human ranger. He is an experienced role player. My other friend will be playing a dwarven cleric. He has minimal role playing experience.
Might want to rethink a dwarven cleric character. The Shadow is the only god in that setting . . . that's one of the reasons the Shadow is winning.
Of course, I haven't cracked open a Midnight book in months, so check and make sure I'm right.
Yup. If you're going to be using the Midnight setting in its entirety, then the only clerics allowed are clerics of the Shadow, as everyone else is cut off from their gods.
However, if you're just using Midnight as inspiration for your own setting/campaign, then that obviously doesn't apply.
Might want to rethink a dwarven cleric character. The Shadow is the only god in that setting . . . that's one of the reasons the Shadow is winning.
The player was rather set on using a cleirc so we came up with an interesting backstory for him. When he was a child there was an earthquake at his clan hold. A passage opened up that led to the depths of the mountain. The pc explored the concealed passage way and found that it led to a ruined temple. The temple was adorned in grotesque artwork and the corpses of hundreds of dwarves. Admist all the wreckage, he sorted through the bodies and found a miniature fallen idol set with precious jewels. He took this artifact back to his clanhold with him. Soon the artifact began to manifest a strange aura and he began hearing whispered voices. Then his clerical abilities manifested.
It progresses on from here but the basic idea is that he stumbled onto a ruined temple of a twisted dwarven demi-god. That god's followers killed themselves off years ago while partaking in the dark machinations of their patron. After being alone in the darkness for countless years without followers the god began to reflect on its purpose and decided to work toward becoming a god aligned diety. However it went mad during the time period, alone without followers. Now it appears to its only contact, the PC, occassionaly offering cryptic advice. It has no idea how to be good and advises the player character to take the wrong paths from time to time because of its misunderstandings of morals.
I think it should make for some interesting situations. Obviously, I am not too concerned with violating cannon!
|
|
Might want to rethink a dwarven cleric character. The Shadow is the only god in that setting . . . that's one of the reasons the Shadow is winning.
The player was rather set on using a cleirc so we came up with an interesting backstory for him. When he was a child there was an earthquake at his clan hold. A passage opened up that led to the depths of the mountain. The pc explored the concealed passage way and found that it led to a ruined temple. The temple was adorned in grotesque artwork and the corpses of hundreds of dwarves. Admist all the wreckage, he sorted through the bodies and found a miniature fallen idol set with precious jewels. He took this artifact back to his clanhold with him. Soon the artifact began to manifest a strange aura and he began hearing whispered voices. Then his clerical abilities manifested.
It progresses on from here but the basic idea is that he stumbled onto a ruined temple of a twisted dwarven demi-god. That god's followers killed themselves off years ago while partaking in the dark machinations of their patron. After being alone in the darkness for countless years without followers the god began to reflect on its purpose and decided to work toward becoming a god aligned diety. However it went mad during the time period, alone without followers. Now it appears to its only contact, the PC, occassionaly offering cryptic advice. It has no idea how to be good and advises the player character to take the wrong paths from time to time because of its misunderstandings of morals.
I think it should make for some interesting situations. Obviously, I am not too concerned with violating cannon!
Screw canon - that backstory is sweet! :D
Make sure the Dwarf gets a chance to shine, so he doesn't feel like Robin to the Ranger's Batman. Perhaps the reistance could send them on a mission to recruit a clan of Dwarves to demolish a wall or reinforce a...
Yeah, I was concerned about this as well. Definately have to give the dwarf a more prominent role and I am probably going to take your advice and give the dwarven player an opportunity to negotiate an assistance treaty between the dwarves and the resistance.
What you may consider is the background of the characters so far. If these characters are so heroic that they'll join the fight against the Shadow, then why haven't they done so yet? After being rescued by the resistance, are you assuming the PCs will feel so grateful that they'll dedicate their lives to joining the cause? Maybe, but it's not a sure thing.
|
I read the first half of the OP -- it's pretty railroading.
Here's a good way to check if you're railroading: For the stuff that you want to happen a certain way, describe it to the PCs as "setting description." If it looks like your setting description is more than say, 10% of the session, it's railroading.
So, when you begin the first session, describe that they are in the prison wagon and have been traveling for a day to their death. It sucks to be them.
Then on day 2 folks show up and start a fight; now there's dead bodies everywhere; make perception checks (or search checks but realize you might get caught in that time) and see if you can find some gear. (Let them get some equipment -- perception, search, stealth)
After you have some initial gear the NPC comes up and asks them to join the Resistance...
And the campaign begins there.
Then let them ask questions, decide where to run, look around -- and drive the game to the next thing. Maybe they won't find out about the masks yet, or the suicide thing yet, or whatever.
If, by using this "setting description for stuff you want to happen" it turns out that you're gonna be describing stuff the whole game -- you're RAILROADING.
What you may consider is the background of the characters so far. If these characters are so heroic that they'll join the fight against the Shadow, then why haven't they done so yet? After being rescued by the resistance, are you assuming the PCs will feel so grateful that they'll dedicate their lives to joining the cause? Maybe, but it's not a sure thing.
The reason why the PCs are captured and on their way to death is because they have been fighting against the shadow.... just not with the formal resistance in the area.
They haven't joined the official fight yet well because they were just rolled up and the ink is still drying on the character sheets.
I do know the intentions of the players is to role play their characters as heroic and interested in being a part of a resistance movement...
I read the first half of the OP -- it's pretty railroading.
Here's a good way to check if you're railroading: For the stuff that you want to happen a certain way, describe it to the PCs as "setting description." If it looks like your setting description is more than say, 10% of the session, it's railroading.
So, when you begin the first session, describe that they are in the prison wagon and have been traveling for a day to their death. It sucks to be them.
Then on day 2 folks show up and start a fight; now there's dead bodies everywhere; make perception checks (or search checks but realize you might get caught in that time) and see if you can find some gear. (Let them get some equipment -- perception, search, stealth)
After you have some initial gear the NPC comes up and asks them to join the Resistance...
And the campaign begins there.
Hello! What you describe as the opening of the adventure.... prison wagon on the way to death....fight starting... and then roll initiative... Is exactly what I want to do. I wouldn't say that there are events that I "want" to happen. There are certain events that I am fairly sure will occur. I am fairly sure the people I am playing with will want to get involved in the fight. Because we have had some discussions about the campaign setting, I know there is some interest in being involved with an underground resistance. This is not something I am trying to externally impose on the players.
What I have done is developed some events that will unfold. The players can take part and influence them as they wish. I have roleplayed with my brother for twenty odd years. I can predict the way he reacts to things. Usually, I am right... sometimes wrong. I develop ideas based upon my perception of what his decisions may be. I know what interests him. I know why the other player is interested in rpgs. I use this insider knowledge to motivate their actions in the games. I like to be prepared but if we go off the map I can wing it too. Is this railroady? I dunno. Its kinda what I have always done.
I think maybe you might be taking some of what I developed as back story to be things I plan on forcing on my players. I do want to craft an interesting plot. I am planning on setting up events that frankly I want to make irresistibly interesting so the players will get involved. If they don't, they don't.
Then let them ask questions, decide where to run, look around -- and drive the game to the next thing. Maybe they won't find out about the masks yet, or the suicide thing yet, or whatever.
I never wanted to just outright spill anything about the suicide or the masks. I was offering up those ideas here to get feed back on if they sounded like interesting ideas. At no point in time was I planning on launching into that guys back story without the player's attempting to investigate. Did I develop a back story? Certainly. It will be revealed over time as the players investigate it. If they don't, then only I and the internet will know the story.
They hear rumors.... they ask questions.... and pieces of the puzzle begin to fall togther..... they make decisions off what they hear.... and the plot moves forward. Do I know where the pieces fit? In the beginning I do but as things unfold I move things. Sometimes when a player says.... "hey I think the evil bad guy is doing evil plan x" and that plan was better than the one I came up with.... I sometimes adopt and twist the idea my player was musing.
Maybe they won't care but I feel like if I present the situation in the right light, make the story exciting, they will grab on and pursue it. If they decide they want to go to the nearest dungeon and tackle rooms A1 through A7, they are most welcome too. I won't wad up my dice and pepper my brothers head with criticals.
If, by using this "setting description for stuff you want to happen" it turns out that you're gonna be describing stuff the whole game -- you're RAILROADING.
Just to be sure.... I was never intending to narrate or force anything. I am intending to make the encounters interesting enough for the PCs to want to get involved. I have an overall plot arc. Events will unfold whether the PCs are involved or not. If the PCs are not involved, these events will not unfold with me launching into a long story session while they are forced to listen to me describe everything that occurs. If the PCs continue to be uninvolved, then we move on to what they are involved in. The PCs can influence those events or they can move on to something else. I like to think of the campaign as a living world.
I am coming up with a sandbox of ideas.... this is this guys story.... these are the activities conducted by the resistance.... this is what the dead resistance leaders wife is doing.... this is what the shadow's lead investigator is plotting.... it is up to the players to search out each event and become part of it.
The only thing I want to happen is for the players to have fun. Do I think the plot I prepared will go down that path? I hope so. When you play a campaign around the Ruins of Undermountain would it be wrong to "want" your players to go in the dungeon? Would it be wrong for you to "want" them to meet a certain NPC and get involved with the plot surrounding him? I am going to describe an opening encounter. I am going to let the players take it from there. I have events that will unfold. I hope to hook the players with these events. If I don't I will try other hooks. If I don't hook anything then I'll see where they want to go.
I was concerned with the whole escape from the prison caravan idea as being over done and cliche. I wanted to freshen up the resistance plot with good role playing opportunities. I wanted to freshen up the opening fight because I have read a fair amount of adventures that use the slave plot device. I wanted to do something different yet familiar.
The beginning of a campaign is the toughest part for me. I come up with my keystone idea and then I see what happens. At the end of the session I ask...."well what do your characters want to do next time?" To which I normally hear.... "investigate the thieves guilds operations." or "see what happened to missing caravan..." Then I design the next adventure with that in mind. I like to think it is very player driven.
Do I have an over all back story? Yes. Do I want the players to partake and interact with my back story? Yes. Is it a static unchanging pre-composed series of dialogue boxes overridden by my personal plot desires? No.
edit: one last thing in this impossibly long post....
my concern with the railroadyness of the plot revolves around starting the players off as being captured.... I have had a lot of players in the past be awfully opposed to the idea... I should have stated this up front but I failed to do so I just wanted to clarify that.
|
|
Okay.
It's a common problem -- we can't really articulate the whole situation in a messageboard post. And, of course, when we try the post goes on forever and almost no one likes to read those.
I was under the impression, based on my admittedly cursory look at your OP, that everything that you wrote was going to happen without the Players really having any choices. And maybe that was somewhat easy based on the Thread title. No harm / no foul.
.
.
.
My experience with "prison time" scenes:
When I first ran Noonan's friggin AWESOME installment of SCAP, "Zenith Trajectory," I knew I wanted my PCs to be stuck in Bhal Hamatugn's Apocolypse Now jail for a while.
I really struggled with this. Ultimately, after capture, I seguayed several days in description. I told them that they were in jail for somewhere around 20 days and described the things they observed, learned, guessed, smelled, etc. and now, after days, have gathered all the info and maybe can come up with a plan. Of course, I gave them some rolls for extra info or to come up with a way to figure out exactly how many days had passed and then they escaped.
In other words, I described the situation and elapsed time as setting or background, giving them the info, and let them figure out how to escape.
It worked so well I've changed my mind on "prison time" in D&D.