Systems for PC-led gangs/crews/etc

[pemerton]

In my Prince Valiant game two of the four PCs are the leaders of a holy military order that they founded - the Order of St Sigobert. One is the Master of the order, the other its Marshall.

When they lead their soldiers into battle that is resolved using the system's mass combat rules - which is basically a structured series of checks based on the Battle (= mass combat) skill. So in mechanical terms the order serves as an element of the fiction that opens up a mechanical possibility which in turn allows engaging the fiction in new ways. (Eg in our last session, linked to above, they were able to take a duke's castle using the forces of their order in conjunction with a peasant uprising.)

I know from reading (not yet playing) that Powered by the Apocalypse has rules for gangs and similar crews of NPCs, and that they don't so much open up new mechanical options as provide a new resource for performing actions - so eg when a gang is used to threaten or attack that increases the amount of harm done, makes it possible to meaningfully threaten other groups, etc.

Does anyone else have experience with these sorts of elements in their RPGing. How do other systems handle this stuff?

 

[chaochou]

The rules for gangs and groups in Apocalypse World open up quite a lot of new space. The PCs have to invoke really interesting moves in order to stir their gang to action - so for the Chopper it's pack alpha, and Hardholder it's leadership. Worth reading those carefully as they have some pretty crazy implications on failed rolls or even 7-9.

Gangs have 'mass combat' rules in AW too, based on their relative size to other groups, their equipment, and have countdown clocks that represent damage in different ways to individuals. Also the gangs have tags - unruly gangs have internal factions, ambitious wannabes and internecine warfare. Savage gangs commit atrocities when unleashed.

All of these combine to ensure gangs aren't passive, but dangerous and unpredictable while bringing some new elements into the fiction and the situation, and a fearsomeness that not much can withstand, except another gang... and maybe the Gunlugger.

The Hocus gets some very interesting play through their followers, but it would take too much to type - there are too many options in their moves to properly talk about how the moves feed into the fiction and back into mechanics. You have to see it in action. Better to read it for yourself.

 

[Jaeger]

Blades in the Dark is the game you want to steal from.

The actual gang mechanics are fairly system neutral, but you will have to do some conversion work to port it over to prince valiant.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

Legend of the 5 Rings (3rd edition, I haven't read 4th or 5th) has competitive rolls between the opposing commanders to see who wins. You can drag it over many rolls or use one to settle the whole fight.

More importantly there are rules for giving the PCs something interesting (possibly important) to do in the battle. The players basically get to decide how much danger they face during the battle. Then they make their own roll to see what happens to them. The more danger they accept the more interesting and potentially important the results are likely to be. The less danger the more likely you are to survive but the less important your role.

 

[pemerton]

Blades in the Dark is the game you want to steal from.

The actual gang mechanics are fairly system neutral, but you will have to do some conversion work to port it over to prince valiant.

I'm not looking to steal/convert, more interested in looking at different approaches to the topic. So in that light, I thought that the gang in BitD is the PCs. Are their NPC elements too?

 

[pemerton]

The rules for gangs and groups in Apocalypse World open up quite a lot of new space. The PCs have to invoke really interesting moves in order to stir their gang to action - so for the Chopper it's pack alpha, and Hardholder it's leadership. Worth reading those carefully as they have some pretty crazy implications on failed rolls or even 7-9.

In my reading of the rules II've been intrigued by these moves and what they imply. In your AW experience, how often do these come up in the context of play?

Leadership is when your gang fights for you and then generates hold. Looking especially at the notion of "hard advance", is there a corresponding sort of "soft advance" that doesn't spend hold?

And pack alpha is when you try and impose your will on your gang. Do you find there many circumstances where the gang goes along with the Chopper without needing to impose his/her will?

I know there's the commentary in the later part of the book, and I've read that, but I'm curious about actual play experience if it sheds any useful or non-idiosyncratic light.

In the Prince Valiant session I referenced two of the PCs had command over a peasant uprising. To deal with the impose your will/hard advance issue, one of the players cashed in a Storyteller Certificate (kind of like a strong fate point) to Arouse the Passion of a Crowd (and the peasants storm the castle is even called out as an example in the description of that effect). If they hadn't done that then they knew I would call for an Oratory roll which had a chance of success around 60% or so.

Prince Valiant leaves it as a matter for GM discretion what happens if the peasants run amuck.

When it comes to the knightly order I tend to take it as given that they will fight as instructed, and to leave it to the mass combat rules to determine whether they break, are killed etc. I'm not sure that turning on the leadership AW-style would fit with the more light-hearted spirit of the system! On the other hand, real-world holy orders had intrigue within and between them, so it's something I do need to think about some more. Again, within the framework of Prince Valiant this would lean heavily on GM framing or GM narration of failure consequences.

 

[chaochou]

In my reading of the rules I've been intrigued by these moves and what they imply. In your AW experience, how often do these come up in the context of play?

In my experience (running several long-standing AW games) they come up all the time. Not in a peripheral way, but in major, ground-shifting-under-everyone's-feet ways. The ways which create plot and story from play in the here and now.

So for example, in the first AW game I ever ran, we had a player with a Hardholder character who tried to get their gang to fight an approaching horde, missed the role and the session flipped completely into an attempted coup against them (as per the leadership move) and the game spun into a civil war as other characters rallied support.

That wasn't a sideshow... that was one of the central and defining events that happened in the game, which none of us saw coming. And then, there it was!

Leadership is when your gang fights for you and then generates hold. Looking especially at the notion of "hard advance", is there a corresponding sort of "soft advance" that doesn't spend hold?

No! In the same way that 'seize by force' doesn't have a parallel 'seize by having a chat over tea'. The moves are carefully designed to fit a post-apocalyptic aesthetic, and to require action.

And pack alpha is when you try and impose your will on your gang. Do you find there many circumstances where the gang goes along with the Chopper without needing to impose his/her will?

Ha! To fully quote the Chopper section: "By default your gang consists of about 15 violent ba**ards with scavenged and makeshift weapons and armour and no discipline at all."

I think it's clear from the language, tone and guidance throughout the whole book, that to be pack alpha you have to prove you're pack alpha. To do it, do it. That's what the move makes the character do, while putting binding and definite stakes into play.

I've had a player inflict greivous violence on one of their deputies to get the gang to fall into line. And it was both awesome in that it showed us an awful lot about that Chopper, and also split the gang into factions which cracked and splintered in satisfyingly realistic and dramatic ways. You have to play hard as the MC, but when you do, you get the best out of your players and the system.

 

[Ratskinner]

I'm not looking to steal/convert, more interested in looking at different approaches to the topic. So in that light, I thought that the gang in BitD is the PCs. Are their NPC elements too?

Yes. The PCs are generally the leaders of the gang. But they can have cohorts, which include bands of thugs or experts. You can send them out on missions, etc. Some of the playbooks, IIRC, have moves that help them lead missions with their cohorts.

 

[pemerton]

I've had a player inflict greivous violence on one of their deputies to get the gang to fall into line. And it was both awesome in that it showed us an awful lot about that Chopper, and also split the gang into factions which cracked and splintered in satisfyingly realistic and dramatic ways. You have to play hard as the MC, but when you do, you get the best out of your players and the system.

Was that violence (PC vs deputy) resolved as Seize by Force?

 

[Campbell]

My last experience with Blades featured our gangs fairly heavily, including many straight up Gangs of New York style blood baths in the streets. One of the characters was really good at leading the gang into violence. My character, Candros Slane, a hound/slide combo, pretty much always had his cohort with him, but that was more for story reasons as they developed a romantic relationship despite Candros searching for his missing wife.