[4E] Points of Darkness - working on ideas for a setting

[Neonchameleon]

The Last War is over. The Great Battle Between Good and Evil™ has been fought. And the pretty people surprised no one by winning. The land is now clean and patrolled by armoured knights. The Summer Court has driven the Winter Court into exile. The Dwarves now own the mountains, forcing the kobolds to scratch out a meagre existance, and exiling the Kobold's Warforged creations. The humans won from the conflict, the Dark Queen abdicating with her daughter and heir becoming the consort of Prince Drakul and surrendering her lands to him and his father. (Rumours that there was an agreement between Queen Morgause and King Wyreth to betroth their children and that whoever was on the losing side of the War Between Light and Dark would abdicate peacefully in favour of the offspring of the other are based on guesswork and the knowledge that most human vs human battles were very formalised). This has allowed the humans to conquer most of the orc territories.

But with all the Shining Spears of Light around, it's hard to be someone from one of the dark races. Which is where the PCs come in. Being a doppelganger is punishable by death (the changelings themselves regard this as a darwin award, with some of the younger ones courting lynch mobs against people they don't like.) And the other dark races (and humans with no feudal lord) are being corralled into smaller and more tightly controlled enclaves or driven onto ever more marginal territory. Often both.

Thoughts as a starting point?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I was contemplating such an idea before, though at that time I was more thinking of some 3E idiosyncracies, like Paladins detecting evil in every major city...

Is it true that "good" won if some races are marginalized or being even hunted to death? I personally think not. In my Paladin example - the Paladins wouldn't actively go against you. But they'd take note of your alignment and if something bad happens, you'd be one of the first to investigate.

But as a starting point.

- The PCs are selfish. Being good requires compromises between people. Nobody gets everything they want, but everyone gets a "fair" amount. But the PCs don't care about that. They want to come out on top, no matter what it costs to others.

- The PCs might have a Patron with a similar outlook. He is asking the PCs to destabilize the "good" countries. Revealing unfortunate truth, spinning falsehoods, stealing expensive artifacts, spreading disease, destroying crops, all that. If they don't, he'll have them killed. If they do, they will be rewarded handsomely, getting money, fame, titles and authority.

- At some point, the patron and the PCs might come in conflict, the PCs trying to overtake him or the patron considering them a threat.

- The PCs will have to avoid suspicion, so simply going on a killing spree, torturing people and all that won't work that well. They will have to act subtly, manipulating events, earning trust, sowing distrust between good aligned parties and all that. They are working a fine line, because if they are caught, they will be hunted - and not to death. They will end up in prison, possibly for life. (If that ever happens, the PCs might need to work at an escape plan... Which is possible, since the good guys leave even their worst inmates some freedom...)

 

[Cyronax]

Interestin ideas! I like your line about dopplegangers outing each other for sport. I would be interested in campaigns like this if someone in my group suggested it.

The campaign you describe makes the side of 'Good' sound like a bunch of Nazis, while the 'Evil' side sounds like a bunch of anarchists. Do you want to have a campaign that revolves around zealotry vs. insurgents? To help you sidestep some of the moral/good vs. evil alignment discussions, I strongly sugguest you adopt the BECMI/Classic D&D system for alignment.

Law - everthing should follow an order, and that obeying rules are a natural way of life. Telling the truth promotes civilization. Sometimes seen as 'evil' to some.

Neurtality - too much law or chaos leads to bad times. Can be a keep your head down or 4e Unaligned type, or you could be a philosophical netural. Sometimes seen as 'cowardly' or 'indecisive' to some.

Chaos - life is random and luck and hard work rule. Rugged Individualist. Can be selfish. Sometimes seen as 'evil' to some.

As an aside, I also think this blogger had a really cool Classic D&D alignment concept:
Jeffs Gameblog: Jeff's Threefold Apocalyptic Alignment System

This type of system helps to humanize the two sides in a big conflict and it could help your 'Evil' characters be more sympathetic, even to you and your players.

My two cents.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Did "Good" win? Interesting question. The quick answer is that people won and people lost. There were some really not very nice people leading the dark alliance. The Winter Court are a group of sadists who treated other beings as toys in usually fatal games. The Council, exiled by the war are pretty much modelled on the Daelkyr from Eberron. On the other hand, the dead guarding Letharge (one of the dark holdouts) have volunteered to be raised so they could have more than one life to guard their city state with. And the Dark Horde was the side which had members from every single race in the world (and more than a few constructed by the Council - which is part of where the anti-warforged and shifter sentiment comes from). Most of the leaders of the Armies of Light were feudalists who wanted to maintain the status quo and expand their own influence - a huge improvement on the Council or the Winter Court. But still self-interested people and not that nice.

Edit: And doppelgangers both out each other as doppelgangers and set up non-doppelgangers to be believed to be doppelgangers.

 

[S'mon]

My immediate thought, not taking it too seriously, was you could do a satire on post-WW2 1950s/early '60s America, cultural Marxist style; think of all those subversive movies like Animal House or Pleasantville where the director takes the side of the Chaotics against the Stifling Forces of Conformity. Free Spirit vs Authoritarian Personality, Drow as Beatniks, Let it All Hang Out...

 

[Neonchameleon]

My immediate thought, not taking it too seriously, was you could do a satire on post-WW2 1950s/early '60s America, cultural Marxist style; think of all those subversive movies like Animal House or Pleasantville where the director takes the side of the Chaotics against the Stifling Forces of Conformity. Free Spirit vs Authoritarian Personality, Drow as Beatniks, Let it All Hang Out...

That was one possible campaign in the setting, yes And you've just improved the Drow massively from what I was going to do, thanks. (Francis/Hoka here)

 

[Rechan]

Yeah, this is a classic idea. Pretty interesting.

Especially if your PCs could recruit/court monsters like beholders, illithids, and the like, convicing them to "Move into this territory" and expand. Or to just undermine the Good.

Depending on how dark you want it to be, this could go from desecrating churches to poisoning wells.

 

[Cyronax]

Yeah, this is a classic idea. Pretty interesting.

Especially if your PCs could recruit/court monsters like beholders, illithids, and the like, convicing them to "Move into this territory" and expand. Or to just undermine the Good.

Depending on how dark you want it to be, this could go from desecrating churches to poisoning wells.

Recruiting monsters to protect weaker monsters:

 

[S'mon]

That was one possible campaign in the setting, yes And you've just improved the Drow massively from what I was going to do, thanks. (Francis/Hoka here)

Oh, hi Francis. See you Saturday after next!

Edit: Meant Sunday.

 

[Dice4Hire]

This sounds like it will a more PvP game than a PvM game. This may be fine for some groups, but I ahve always been more of a players versus monsters kind of GM, not with lots of politics and such.

But I know that is just me.