Anybody tried a campaign "Machinations Meter"?
- Thread starter Daern
- Start date
Instead of a timeline, I just reveal/create stuff for the next session that implies its been festering for some time.
I may drop in a bit of flavor mention by NPCs about some other problems, but I don't make a big deal about them.
This way, I don't have to make up extra stuff until I need it.
Its not better. Just lazy.
I may drop in a bit of flavor mention by NPCs about some other problems, but I don't make a big deal about them.
This way, I don't have to make up extra stuff until I need it.
Its not better. Just lazy.
Daern
Explorer
Despite the drama, there's some interesting points brought up. What's the difference between a "meter" and a timeline? I think the main difference is in how it effects resources management. By that I mean, when and how oftern do the part rest and get their hps, spells etc back?
A timeline that the DM is aware of is one thing, but perhaps this "Meter" idea is a timeline that the PCs are aware of(in varying levels of detail). The result if like applying the "beat the clock" scenario where there is a hurry to get things done and risk being less prepared.
So, a bit of the difference is semantics. One could discuss this in terms of applying elements of time to the plot of an adventure or campaign, but the original blog mentioned a machination meter.
Now, one would not want to do this constantly, but I like the idea of applying this to a larger campaign, so that players are deciding which dungeon to go to next, it might become a choice of which evil plot is a more imminent threat, but that either decision means the dungeon left un-explored gains in power...
A timeline that the DM is aware of is one thing, but perhaps this "Meter" idea is a timeline that the PCs are aware of(in varying levels of detail). The result if like applying the "beat the clock" scenario where there is a hurry to get things done and risk being less prepared.
So, a bit of the difference is semantics. One could discuss this in terms of applying elements of time to the plot of an adventure or campaign, but the original blog mentioned a machination meter.
Now, one would not want to do this constantly, but I like the idea of applying this to a larger campaign, so that players are deciding which dungeon to go to next, it might become a choice of which evil plot is a more imminent threat, but that either decision means the dungeon left un-explored gains in power...
BriarMonkey
First Post
I think you are correct in that the difference between the "meter" and "timeline" is more semantics. I think it may be more of a focal thing. And by that, I mean the scale of what one is looking at, and perhaps too, its exposure to the party/characters.
I could easily see a campaign timeline having a node for, say, Winter of 122, where the Gnolls of the Upper Gaunt get twitchy and opt to move south to plunder and pillage. This node could be as limited as that, or a little more fleshed out to include another node for Spring of 123 that notes the Gnolls are raiding the southern reaches of Lotsoland.
With that, you could use a matrix to cover these two nodes that describes their actions in a little more depth, such as when they depart the north, when they cross the Dangthatwaterscoldinwinter River, and when they make contact with their first victim settlements.
I guess it really depends on scale. For my part, and how I use these things, they are all timelines. There is a master timeline, which is normally the global calendar and key events that affect large areas. Then, I have one or more other timelines that are used for elements such as our friendly Gnolls.
<grin> I guess really then, I use more of a time-shrubbery! Since timelines can converg and diverg and cross one-another, it goes from being a line to a tree to a shrubbery.
So yeah, in summary, I'm thinking that it's just a matter of scale.
I could easily see a campaign timeline having a node for, say, Winter of 122, where the Gnolls of the Upper Gaunt get twitchy and opt to move south to plunder and pillage. This node could be as limited as that, or a little more fleshed out to include another node for Spring of 123 that notes the Gnolls are raiding the southern reaches of Lotsoland.
With that, you could use a matrix to cover these two nodes that describes their actions in a little more depth, such as when they depart the north, when they cross the Dangthatwaterscoldinwinter River, and when they make contact with their first victim settlements.
I guess it really depends on scale. For my part, and how I use these things, they are all timelines. There is a master timeline, which is normally the global calendar and key events that affect large areas. Then, I have one or more other timelines that are used for elements such as our friendly Gnolls.
<grin> I guess really then, I use more of a time-shrubbery! Since timelines can converg and diverg and cross one-another, it goes from being a line to a tree to a shrubbery.
So yeah, in summary, I'm thinking that it's just a matter of scale.
This is where I am getting lost on....
If the DM is designing as a system for knowing where things are happening outside of the PC influence, then what part should it be playing on PC resources?
Is this 5x5 being handed to the players as part of information gained by then displayed in this chart format?
Is it being designed and the worlds groups happenings going to revolve around available PC resources?
Or you are meaning the resources for the groups in question you are designing some "plans" for regaining their resources so at varying times the party meets then at full strength, and others they are met when they could be depleted?
BriarMonkey
First Post
I think it's supposed to work something like this:
The PCs know that there are Gnolls in the area and have been ravaging the countryside.
The DM has his matrix that shows the Gnolls' activities for the next few days.
The DM can then drop hints, clues, whatever, to the PCs as to potential Gnollish activities.
If the PCs opt to react, then the DM uses the matrix and what the PCs are doing to figure out where the Gnolls are in relation to that.
So, where the PC resources come in is where those points meet. For instance, if the matrix shows the Gnolls moving to Nexttargetville and will be there in 4 hours; and the PCs have discovered that the Gnolls have been spotted a few miles away - if the PCs opt to replenish their supplies from their last encounter before moving out, then they may loose a couple hours which puts them behind the Gnolls - or maybe having to expend a lot more resources to have to catch up. The PCs have to weigh what they want to do knowing that the Gnolls are on the move.
While that is a pretty small example, I hope it tries to answer your question.
A lot of DMs keep this type of information in their head; this mechanism just has you write it all out so it can go in your campaign folder (or what ever).
I found the "5x5 Machination Meter" to be unnatural and rather rigid. There didn't seem to be any logical connection between the triggers and the events, which meant that PC efforts to deal with the "machinations" were heavily metagamed.
With that being said I think the basic idea of having:
(1) Factions
(2) Goals for those factions
Is a good way to run a campaign. But rather than having the relatively rigid method linked to, my prep work for a session usually includes just looking at each active faction in the campaign and figuring out what the next 3-5 thing that will happen with them. (Anything more than that is probably a waste because the PCs will just muck it up.)
With that being said I think the basic idea of having:
(1) Factions
(2) Goals for those factions
Is a good way to run a campaign. But rather than having the relatively rigid method linked to, my prep work for a session usually includes just looking at each active faction in the campaign and figuring out what the next 3-5 thing that will happen with them. (Anything more than that is probably a waste because the PCs will just muck it up.)
Nod. This makes much more sense to me, because it's pretty much how I do it.
My advice would put it this way: "Hey DM's, it can give your campaign depth and interest to have factions of NPC's/monsters and role play their actions, instead of just having static dungeons where the monsters wait to be killed when door 34 is opened. Based on who the factions are, decide on their resources, give them reasonable goals, and have them pursue the goals in ways that fit the faction's nature. And here's the cool part: have different factions bounce off each other, bounce off other NPC's that are not so active plotters/just want to be left alone, and best of all, bounce off the actions the PC's set in motion. Having more than one Boss Monster, with more than one motivation, let's you have more complicated scenarios and chances for intrigue like a Boss cooperating with the PCs, or double crossing them, etc. It also lets you keep the campaign 'in motion' as the PC's run around in it, so it feels like a living world. If you do this properly, your players may say something like one of mine recently did: 'This campaign is great. It seems like every time we look into something, there's a reason for it, and all the NPC's have real personalities.' The truth is, many had motivations, but the personalities and backgrounds got fleshed out because the PC's looked into it."
But that, unless Monte Cook wrote it, is less likely to move magazine sales/blog post hits. Turning it into a tool, though, that'll move some colour TV's and installed microwave ovens.
Turning it into a tool, though, that'll move some colour TV's and installed microwave ovens.
Faction-related tools:
Random Faction Interaction Tables
I think it would only affect PCs resources, if this meter/timeline were within the timeframe of a day. Then knowing "when" something intersects with the PCs might have some value.
I don't tend to offer my players a ton of hooks (especially problems). It keeps them from getting overwhelmed. It also reduces how much work I have to do ahead of time.
If I want something new to appear on the radar, I reveal it as if the PCs just discovered it, but its been there all along. TV does this all the time. Good enough.
I don't tend to offer my players a ton of hooks (especially problems). It keeps them from getting overwhelmed. It also reduces how much work I have to do ahead of time.
If I want something new to appear on the radar, I reveal it as if the PCs just discovered it, but its been there all along. TV does this all the time. Good enough.
Similar Threads
