Awesome stuff. I keep watching to see your ideas unfold!

Quote from: Silverlion;817328Awesome stuff. I keep watching to see your ideas unfold!

Thanks. This one has been fun to work on.

On Making NPCs for adventures: THE IMPORTANCE OF CHARACTERS

Latest Session: SECRET OF JE VALLEY II

Lastest Report: The Secret of Je Valley Part III

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;817018Last session really changed my approach to grudges for some reason, it just clicked in my head that our previous approach was wrong and I had a good idea of how to better approach it. This is all tentative and messy but this is how I am now handling it in the campaign:

Grudges
A Grudge Encounter involves a person or sect who is after the party, a particular character, or someone connected to the group indirectly. The individual or sect holds a grudge that must be settled for personal or collective honor to be restored. The settlement of the grudge is entirely dependent on the situation and characters. Usually it is resolved through violence but other agreements can be reached. Running away and resorting to wits should always be an option. Also, once a grudge is established, you should roll a Grudge Encounter Check regularly to see if it comes up. Every new Grudge the party acquires should also be placed on the Grudge encounter table.

Rolling for Grudge Encounters
You should roll for Grudge Encounters regularly once a week (or on a regular increment of your choosing). This is separate from Survival Rolls or other encounter rolls. This is a check to see if anyone attacks the party due to a grudge at a time and place that is convenient for the attacker.

The Grudge Encounter Table is different from other tables. This is one you need to build yourself over time. Initially there are no grudges on the table, merely empty slots for future Grudges. As the party or individual characters acquire Grudges, you list them on the table, placing them first at the result of 2, then shifting down one with each grudge that is added. So, if your party kills a member of Purple Cavern Sect, and the table is empty, you would write "Purple Cavern Sect Grudge" in the result of 2 slot. Then if they gained a new Grudge by killing Lady White Blade of Mystic Sword Sect, you would shift Purple Cavern Sect grudge to the result of 3 Slot and add "Mystic Sword Sect Grudge" to the result of 2 slot.

When you roll, there are four possible results: Existing Grudge, No Encounter and Roll on Unknown or Mistaken Grudge Table and Roll on Grudge Encounter Table II. Here is an explanation of each.

No Encounter: This simply means there is no encounter due to grudges this week.

Existing Grudge: If this slot has an entry for a specific Grudge, then someone connected to the sect or person harboring that grudge attacks the party during the week. If the slot is not yet filled with a grudge treat it as "No Encounter".

Roll on Unknown or Mistaken Grudge Table: If you get this result then the players are attacked by someone nursing a grudge they did now know existed (or is the product of mistaken identity or confusion). Roll on the Unknown or Mistaken Grudge Table and use that result to create a Grudge Based encounter for the week. When you roll on the table, come up with a quick character concept on the fly, using the stock stats from CHAPTER TEN: THREATS AND MONSTSERS. Try to make it fit the situation as best as possible and feel free to allow for creative interpretation—such as a terrible misunderstanding on the part of the aggrieved character.

Roll on Grudge Encounter Table II: This is used when you have filled all 8 slots of the first Grudge Table and need to make a New Grudge Table to accommodate additional Grudges. If you haven't yet started a new table, simply treat this result as "No Encounter". If you have a new Grudge Table, then you roll on that when you get this result.

TABLE: GRUDGE ENCOUNTER
Roll      Result
2      Existing Grudge Slot
3      Existing Grudge Slot
4      Existing Grudge Slot
5      Existing Grudge Slot
6      Existing Grudge Slot
7      Existing Grudge Slot
8      Existing Grudge Slot
9      No encounter
10      No Encounter
11      No Encounter
12      No Encounter
13      No Encounter
14      No Encounter
15      No Encounter
16      No Encounter
17      No Encounter
18      Roll on Unknown or Mistaken Grudges Table
19      Roll on Unknown or Mistaken Grudges Table
20      Roll on Grudge Encounter Table II*
*This is simply a new Grudge table you build when you have 8 Grudges on the first table.


TABLE: UNKOWN OR MISTAKEN GRUDGES
Result      Probability
2      Profound Master (Highly Eccentric Gripe)
3      Deadly Master (Personal Vendetta)
4      Fearsome Master (Vendetta that goes back generations)
5      Fearsome Master (Eccentric Gripe)
6      Disciple (Vengeance for Master)
7      Disciple (Personal Vendetta)
8      Underling (Vengeance for Master)
9      Underling (Personal Vendetta)
10      Mundane Character (Vengeance for Family)
11      Mundane Character (Reputation Sullied)
12      Mundane Character (Personal loss of fortune, love, etc)
13      Underling (Vengeance for Sect)
14      Underling (Vengeance for Family or Friend)
15      Disciple (Vengeance for Sect)
16      Disciple (Personal Reputation Sullied)
17      Fearsome Master (Eccentric Request)
18      Fearsome Master (Personal Reputation Sullied)
19      Deadly Master (Eccentric Gripe or Request)
20      Profound Master (Reputation Sullied)

I really enjoyed this part.  It had such a genre-specific feel, and you could see how it would play out in game.  Excellent post.

Quote from: LordVreeg;820305I really enjoyed this part.  It had such a genre-specific feel, and you could see how it would play out in game.  Excellent post.

Thanks. This is one of those things where I find it really needed to be played out a bit in game before I could get a sense of whether we had made the right change. So far this works really well and, for me at least, it is capturing the feel of the genre in a way that flows naturally in play.

On maiming: IT IS ALL FUN AND GAMES UNTIL SOMEONE GETS MAIMED.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;820397Thanks. This is one of those things where I find it really needed to be played out a bit in game before I could get a sense of whether we had made the right change. So far this works really well and, for me at least, it is capturing the feel of the genre in a way that flows naturally in play.

Hey Brendan, are you using the Grudge rules for the current campaign?

Quote from: Jame Rowe;821136Hey Brendan, are you using the Grudge rules for the current campaign?

Yes.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;820686On maiming: IT IS ALL FUN AND GAMES UNTIL SOMEONE GETS MAIMED.

Yeah, I run pretty realistic games, so scars and actual permanent damage happens often.  I think it is important, reminding the PCs, even when death has not happened, that there are consequences.

In my online game, one of the kids...a student....just lost a hand.  Suffice it to say it is noted by one and all.

Quote from: LordVreeg;821164Yeah, I run pretty realistic games, so scars and actual permanent damage happens often.  I think it is important, reminding the PCs, even when death has not happened, that there are consequences.

In my online game, one of the kids...a student....just lost a hand.  Suffice it to say it is noted by one and all.

Consequences are important. Even if realism isn't the aim (ogre gate is much less realistic in flavor than Servants of Gaius or Terror Network) I still find it is important to have decisions and combats to have lasting impact. Sometimes that means being maimed. For me, I really need mechanical representation for things like lost limbs or attempts to remove them. This is a pretty heroic, larger than life genre, but maiming reminds everyone that it isn't a cartoon.

Quote from: LordVreeg;821164Yeah, I run pretty realistic games, so scars and actual permanent damage happens often.  I think it is important, reminding the PCs, even when death has not happened, that there are consequences.

In my online game, one of the kids...a student....just lost a hand.  Suffice it to say it is noted by one and all.

This got me thinking about stakes: TELEGRAPHING THE STAKES

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;821285This got me thinking about stakes: TELEGRAPHING THE STAKES

Short term games this can backfire, and long term vames, you still deal with Mary Sue, but yes, when making it clear you are 'placing the characters within their milieu'  as you do this, it does help.  

I do make it very, very clear that my games are lethal and dangerous.  Even in a non-combat centric game (3 combats in 43 sessions), one PC lost an arm.  and social circumstances are often NOT telegraphed, so I would add that in as a point not made in the post.

Quote from: LordVreeg;821434Short term games this can backfire, and long term vames, you still deal with Mary Sue, but yes, when making it clear you are 'placing the characters within their milieu'  as you do this, it does help.  

I do make it very, very clear that my games are lethal and dangerous.  Even in a non-combat centric game (3 combats in 43 sessions), one PC lost an arm.  and social circumstances are often NOT telegraphed, so I would add that in as a point not made in the post.

There was definitely the danger here that the players sided with the mystic sword disciples and tried to fight One-Armed Fiery Demon. That is always a danger though when you allow for things in the setting to be more powerful than the players can handle. I tried to clearly indicate that by having her use one of her more potent abilities on the sword disciples, but if the players pushed they could have ended up with a TPK for sure. However, I feel in that situation I had very much made it clear to them that she was an unbelievably powerful martial hero.

Long term Mary Sues are a problem, and something I am quite worried about. I've pretty much been striving to not have them in my games for years now (because of this experience: HERE). However after reflection, I felt I had been overcorrecting this issue and limited NPCs in my campaigns too much. So this is an effort to restore NPCs that fit the game, while being mindful of what can happen if they become your favorites or you give them in game protection. I don't really have a problem killing off NPCs if they die in game, and I don't get hung up on them, so I feel this shouldn't become an issue (they have met One Armed Fiery Demon twice since their initial encounter with her, but in both those instances they sought her out).

I do think explaining stakes and consequences out of game is very important. I resorted to this method because I have been explaining consequences so long, and realized people don't always take such warnings seriously. Last campaign for example, people actually got lucky a number of times on the dice (enemies kept bringing them to the brink of death but not beyond it) and I believe they mistook that for me going soft on PCs, but on the 6th session or so there was a PC death, and I sensed that some were a bit surprised that it happened. I wanted to introduce a potentially dangerous situation to make it clear from the outside that these kinds of things were very much on the table.

There is a small detail to this encounter I left out of the stakes post. When the one of the players first walked into the tavern and saw her having a stand-off with the mystic sword disciples, she asked him "do you serve Lady White Blade". He said 'no', and she went on to attack the mystic sword disciples while leaving him alone. So the player realized right away had he chosen wrong, that her hostility would have been directed at him. This was the very first session, so while that was a big risk (and while it might have been possible for him to survive because he was Qi rank 1 and the mystic sword disciples were all only Qi rank 0 and he may have been able to parlay his way out of it) it could have ended very badly for him. My feeling was it would be better to illustrate this out of the gate, early on, before anyone got really attached to their character. That way players would really understand how much risk they were facing in this setting and act accordingly. I want these risks to be on the table, but I really want the players to understand that they are there so they can make their choices accordingly (a lot of times I still get the sense that players have come to expect the GM to save them in dangerous situations).

It is interesting that in a non-combat centric campaign you've had an arm loss in just three combats. But this sort of makes sense to me if you are using a particularly lethal system. The game I am running now, actually isn't that lethal because there are levels, so player are often taking on much weaker threats. But the core system itself doesn't have levels in most of its incarnations. So in terror network or crime network there is no difference in health between any character in the game. Everyone dies the same when they get shot. That kind of parity, makes for greater lethality. There is obviously skill to account for but everyone can take the same number of wounds and that makes any combat a big risk. What I find happens as a result is people tend to avoid combat unless it is really necessary, so the games usually become much less combat centric (a bit like real life, you don't go around beating people up all the time because there are real world consequences and dangers for that behavior).