Scenario formation

I have run one (1) session of rules-as-written Coup 'Étrange (meaning a session with a custom scenario written to include the PCs) and it was just ok. (Would have been a lot better if I had clearly explained that PvP was on the table from the beginning, and we hadn't had a player drop out last minute -- the missing character was a key part of the scenario.) Nevertheless I feel qualified to write up my guidelines on creating a scenario.

(Actually this is a draft. I'm going to put it into practice and revise if necessary.)

First, decide if you're playing a dungeon game, a wilderness game, a town game, or a mix of two or three. If you have a published module in mind, that's fine too. For the sake of example, let's say you're doing a dungeon game.

Make or read through the dungeon.

Make a list of principal agents in the scenario, not counting the PCs. A principal agent is somebody with a motivation related to the scenario who is active within it. If you can, add in some characters from the PCs' contacts or stories. These agents can come from the module, too -- a gang of goblins is a fine candidate for an agent.

Don't give the agents motivations like "Kill all the goblins" unless they're intended to be genocidal maniacs. Don't give the agents motivations like "Live in safety from the goblins" unless you have a clear idea of how that motivation will inspire the agent to act within the scenario. (A peasant who wants to be safe from a goblin raid is not a principal agent, even if they hire the PCs to stop the raids -- that's just framing the scenario. The peasant only starts being an agent when they start going after the goblins personally, or fortifying their farm, or looking for other mercenary bands to stop the goblins instead.) Don't give to many agents paired motivations, like the Axe Gang has the motivation "Defeat the Blade Gang", and the Blade Gang has the motivation "Defeat the Axe Gang". That's both boring and unrealistic. Really one of them wants total control over the eastern entrance to the dungeon, and the other wants a big score in the next 5 days.

It's totally fine if some, none, or all of the agents have motivations aligned with the PCs.

You'll want more or fewer agents for a bigger or smaller scenario. In No Country for Fantasy Men, I had two agents (a rival magician and a gang of thieves) and that filled about 90 minutes of play.

Sprinkle these agents in and around the dungeon, if they're not already in or around it. Give them definite spatial locations at the start of the scenario, or, if you're lazy, put them on the random encounters table. Give them a list of resources, if they don't already have one. Especially include their information-gathering resources, their wealth, and their capacity for violence. Figure out what they are doing about their motivation, and how long that will take if nothing interrupts them.

Make a scoring schema for the scenario. For a dungeon, this can be really easy! 1 rupee looted = 1 xp, X level enemy defeated = 10 * X^2 xp. The only motivation the PCs need, for a dungeon, is that it's a hole in the ground that probably has treasure. You might also consider making the inhabitants of the dungeon a threat to the outside world -- maybe the goblins go on raids to nearby farms, as above, in which case the PCs could get savior xp (1 nameless person helped = 1 xp, level X named person helped = 10 * X xp, double for lives saved) or even quest XP. Even if a PC contact didn't make it into the scenario as an agent, they might be able to fit in as a beneficiary.

When the scenario starts, every time the PCs make an important move, ask yourself, which, if any, of these agents finds out about this? (In a town game, this probably means making passive Streetwise checks to see if they hear any rumors; in a dungeon game, this probably means making literal hearing checks, to see if they can hear violence in the halls, or else putting them on the random encounters list.) What are they doing about it? How long will it take them to figure out what to do, how long until they begin putting it into practice, and how long until they achieve their goal?

After every session, if the scenario is incomplete, review the list of agents, and, if necessary, revise their motivations and resources. Consider promoting new agents, or demoting those who no longer have an active motivation.

In my current Thracia game, the gnoles and lizardmen aren't agents. They're happy where they are, and well fortified. One PC has a rival gang of treasure hunters, and they are agents. They have prepared an expedition and been added to the random encounters table. The cultists weren't agents, they were happy to worship in secret, but now that the gnoles and PCs have both penetrated their lair, they have become agents. They will fortify their position and send patrols around the ruined city, explicitly hunting gnoles, lizardmen, and looters.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tasks and skills

Image
 I have thought a lot about this while waiting for Eero to write up his CWP and thought I might put mine in the ring first. A lot of it is based on the stuff I've seen in the RPG Theory discord, but not all of it. Some small preparatory notes. The skill system, whatever it is, and the task "system", are totally separate. Their formalisms are just not the same. The task "system" is not a system at all, it is a vocabulary with which you can construct individual task resolutions. Various tasks are so different it would be nonsense to treat them all the same. Simple skill system In the simple skill system, you either have a skill or you don't. What the skill is is completely free-form; anything you can be good at is a skill. At any point, you can declare that you had a skill the entire time, if the skill is consonant with your background and current situation. If you want to train a new skill, go train it, for however long that would take. Maybe the skill requi...
Read more

Combat overhaul parent post

I'm rewriting the combat procedures from D&D-like games for my fantasy heartbreaker Coup Étrange. Why? I lay out some motivations here. I got a lot of my inspiration from discussions with Eero Tuovinen and the fine folks at the Finnish RPG Theory discord server. I'm playtesting these rules with the fine folks at the Old School Table-Time discord server . Thanks to everybody involved! The overall structure of combat is different in the overhaul. In normal D&D, you roll initiative to see who goes first, then one side goes, and then the other. Rinse and repeat. (Maybe if you're fancy you get alternating phases -- this would be my preference -- or you get to interrupt your opponent's slow actions with your fast actions, as occasionally happens in AD&D 1e.) In my overhaul, melee ebbs and flows, as in a real fight. When you advance into melee, you commit yourself to being tied up in it for a variable amount of time, possibly unable to retreat. The alternating stru...
Read more

Combat overhaul: attack algorithm

Dice tech basics When you make a check of TN/D difficulty, you want to roll TN or lower on a D-sided die. Call that a hit, otherwise, the die is a miss. Sometimes you'll modify the roll by adding bonus dice (roll an extra die of the same size and take the better result), penalty dice (roll an extra die of the same size and take the worse result), or changing the target number (TN). If you would increase TN to the point where the task is a sure thing (in other words, TN = die size), bump up the die size instead and increase the TN accordingly. (So a task gets easier as 4/6, 5/6, 7/8, 9/10, 11/12, 19/20...) Similarly, if you would ever decrease TN to the point where the task is impossible (in other words, TN = 0 or less), keep TN the same and increase the die size. (So a task gets harder as 2/6, 1/6, 1/8, 1/10, 1/12, 1/20...) If you have both bonus and penalty dice, cancel out one of each until you have only bonus dice, only penalty dice, or neither. Now, roll the dice. If you have a...
Read more