D&D: Become Human

ZenBear · Jun 1, 2019

In my hombrew setting there exists a mountain civilization called the Kingdom Underhill where Dwarves, Gnomes and Halflings (oh my) coexist. Their government is a parliamentary monarchy, in a certain sense like Britain with a figurehead monarch, with a council of three elected officials, one for each race, that make most of the decisions. In recent decades, a brilliant Gnomish Artificer named Dr. Frankenstein invented the first sapient construct, bringing the Warforged into existence. Since the end of the war 20 years ago, the Warforged have begun to campaign for a place on the council, but there is of course resistance. The traditionalist Dwarves are obstinate, citing historical precedent and the need to maintain an odd number on the council to prevent ties. The Gnomes are fearful of the potential for AI overlords (the Gnomish leader is obviously named Musk) and similarly traditional. The Halflings are eager for a change of the status quo, since the other two longer lived races tend to be of like mind and thus the Halflings rarely get their way. Two Warforged factions are vying for influence, one led by the original Warforged named Owen (mispronounced 01) who seeks a peaceful resolution, the other led by Magnus, the Lord of Blades, a disillusioned war hero that wants to take the Kingdom by force.

Once the introductory arc wraps up, my players will have free rein to go whatever direction they want, and if they choose to explore the Kingdom Underhill they will find it mired in civil unrest. I'm hoping to get some advice on how to run this sort of adventure. Are there modules anywhere that I can read to give inspiration, or has anyone run this sort of adventure before? I expect it to be mostly RP, which should be fun but I am admittedly not very good at it yet. I hope to take some improv classes soon to get better at reacting quickly and naturally. Anywho, any advice or resources y'all can provide would be much appreciated. Thanks!

LordEntrails · Jun 1, 2019

Justin Alexander's The Alexandrian.
Look at the RPG categories over on the right side. Make sure to read about the Three Clue Rule, and Don't Prep Plots, and Node Based Design. Also take a look at his Dragon Heist Remix, it takes an approach to a dynamic groups of opposing powers you can use the ideas for your situation.

Tony Vargas · Jun 2, 2019

LordEntrails said:
Justin Alexander's The Alexandrian.

The guy that coined "dissociative mechanics?"

Hard pass.

Once the introductory arc wraps up, my players will have free rein to go whatever direction they want, and if they choose to explore the Kingdom Underhill they will find it mired in civil unrest. I'm hoping to get some advice on how to run this sort of adventure

Players are more likely to engage with and care about this sort of situation if they have connections to the various factions.
That means developing NPCs the players care about, which can be an up-hill climb.

It also REALLY depends on the players and their attitudes, especially if they see an analogy to some RL controversies they have opinions about.

So, it's likely to be ignored (oh, that kinda sucks, have we heard any rumors about treasure?) Or a source tension (politics are off limits, here, so no example).

It's different if you telegraph that one faction is in the right and portray another as jerks, then it still might be a long campaign worth of trying to rouse the neutrals and expose the baddies, but it could be less fraught.

LordEntrails · Jun 2, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
The guy that coined "dissociative mechanics?"

Hard pass.

No idea. Not familiar with the term. But, if you dismiss a person based on one idea of theirs then you are probably going to have to dismiss; Aristotle, Descartes, Thomas Aquinas, Confucius, Sun Tzu, Gary Gygax, Dave Arneson, Monte Cook, etc

You really should give yourself the opportunity to study widely and take what is of value from any source and dismiss just those ideas that you disagree with.

Tony Vargas · Jun 2, 2019

LordEntrails said:
No idea. Not familiar with the term.

Join date 2015? I suppose that's possible. If so, yeah, you wouldn't get the reference.

Lucky you.

LordEntrails said:
if you dismiss a person based on one idea of theirs ...

...you ignored the on-topic majority of my post...

...so, y'know be the change and all that...

Zardnaar · Jun 2, 2019

Over reaction there Tony. OP I like your setup.

I would recommend you have a small list of NPCs that matter 6 to 12, just a sentence, goals motivation etc.

Each race could have a faction with perhaps two factions for the warfirged that other races can join.

Shiroiken · Jun 2, 2019

LordEntrails said:
No idea. Not familiar with the term. But, if you dismiss a person based on one idea of theirs then you are probably going to have to dismiss; Aristotle, Descartes, Thomas Aquinas, Confucius, Sun Tzu, Gary Gygax, Dave Arneson, Monte Cook, etc

Having looked it up, it would have been quite an argument starter during the 4E era, but in reality it's a nitpicking philosophical viewpoint. Short version: "dissociative mechanics are all game mechanics that are cause by player decision, not character decision," such as the Lucky feat in 5E. He then goes to talk about why they're "not roleplaying," since it's only roleplaying when you have the character make decisions.

While I think you are generally correct that dismissing someone based on one idea isn't great, it does give you a good idea into the general mindset the person has about a similar topic. A good example of this for me Jeremy Crawford (head 5E rules guy); I have found from his ideas that he and I fundamentally disagree on how 5E should be played.

Paul Farquhar · Jun 2, 2019

It's a meaningless philosophical discussion.

Role playing = character makes the decision

Game = player makes the decision

So a Role Playing Game has both.

Tony Vargas · Jun 3, 2019

Zardnaar said:
Over reaction there Tony.

I don't think so: IMX, a set-up like the OP can be full of potential, but fall flat if the players don't get invested in it. Yet, there's also a risk of one or more of them seeing it as an analogy to some RL issue that could offend them.