"Conspiracy" Fantasy: have you ever done it?

[Nisarg]

I would give you two pieces of advice:

1. You don't need to know the whole conspiracy yourself, as DM, and in fact its often counterproductive to map out the whole conspiracy ahead of time.
All you need to do is: a) know who the various players or power groups are.
and b) know what the Player Characters know about the conspiracy, and keep track of what they subsequently learn.

I have learned that this is the best way to do things; know the groups and their motives, but keep the actual nature of the conspiracy only as generalized as possible in your mind. Don't determine the specifics except as the Players begin uncovering it, and then "reverse engineer" what is going on. This allows you to be personally flexible in what you want and what happens. The players need never know that you yourself didn't have it all mapped out beforehand, if you do your job well, it will look like the astounding secrets they "discover" are things you had planned all along.

2) pick up either GURPS Illuminati or the Amber RPG. Both of these are essential guides to crafting (in the former case) organizational and (in the latter case) intimate conspiracies.

Nisarg

 

[Wraith Form]

I would give you two pieces of advice: ** SNIP ** 2) pick up either GURPS Illuminati or the Amber RPG. Both of these are essential guides to crafting (in the former case) organizational and (in the latter case) intimate conspiracies.

Thank you!

I have the Illuminati book. The first dozen times I read it, it didn't seem to help much. I'll give it a thirteenth go.

Eventually I'd like to STOP reading stuff and START running the campaign. I've sat on my a$$ for several years, reading about "how to be a great DM" and collecting modules/adventures/Dungeon mags to find the "perfect" adventure (which really isn't out there). It's all for nothing if I don't get off my keister, find one or two people that are moderately mature and intelligent, and start a darn game! Mostly I'm just scared--I'm afraid it's not going to be perfect and that the players are going to be bored, so I tell myself that I'll read this book or follow the advice of that article and start a game later....

Err, can you tell that confidence isn't a strong point for me?

It doesn't help that I'm finnicky as hell, too. I think most of the MM baddies are stupid, so every module I read that starts in with the "kobolds...blah blah blah" or "goblins...yak yak" I immediately dismiss as goofy or childish. I grew up on R. E. Howard's Conan, so I generally find that human opponents are preferrable to ogres and orcs. Hobbits, err, halflings, elves and dwarves are becoming a bit tedious, too.

 

[Piratecat]

Of course it's not going to be perfect! My game isn't perfect, nor is Sagiro's, or Sepulchrave's. . . or almost anyone's, really. All you need to concentrate on is making sure that you and your players are all having fun. Do that, and you've really won the battle.

 

[Wraith Form]

Of course it's not going to be perfect! My game isn't perfect, nor is Sagiro's, or Sepulchrave's. . . or almost anyone's, really. All you need to concentrate on is making sure that you and your players are all having fun. Do that, and you've really won the battle.

Actually, I have to concentrate on GETTING some players, first. Details, details.

Oh, and where is Josh Dyal? I thought for sure he'd be in this thread for a little conspiracy advice-giving goodness.....!

 

[Endur]

One recommendation when dealing with conspiracies and subtle clues is to be flexible. If the PCs ignore what seems to be an obvious clue to you, don't worry about it. If they think something you never thought of is a clue, work with them. Let their reactions drive the plot as much as possible.

 

[ssampier]

Some Advice

Conspiracies are cool. In my current campaign I've introduce lots of political, social, and religious intrigue as two dominant, competing religious factions vie for power. It is all very subtle since my players are the "kill all who move, ask questions later" type.

I really like the onion approach, the more layers the better. I'd involve some intelligent iconic D&D monsters, such as Dark Elves, Beholds, and mind flayers (like you suggested). Start small, a bad coverup of demon summoning by a church official (say local priest). It is more effective if the players relied on this person for healing and advice the party cleric should be shaken and appalled.

Of course the priest didn't act alone, the demon summoning wasn't his idea, it was THEM, a convient scapegoat organization. The Scapegoat Organization isn't entirely innocent, they were involved in demon summonings, too, just not in city property. The priest was an ex-member of theirs and needed to get rid of him anyway. Killing is messy, so it's easier to defame him in public. Eventually they may learn the Scapegoat Organization works for Redherring Inc., a multi-national spy network of rogues, assasains, and dark elves....

OK, bad example. But I'm sure you can fill the plot holes yourself.

 

[MavrickWeirdo]

If you want "complexity" and "layers", just add time.

So we have two 'secret sects' within the church.

"The Inquisition", was the dominant sect in the church from 150 years ago, untill 85 years ago when they succeded in sealing the "Demon Gate" and banishing all the Demons. Once there were no more demons "The Inquisition" slowly lost power within the church, but some carry on the traditions of vigelence and purity.

"The illithid Summoners", was founded 100 years ago in hopes that the "powers" of the illithids could be used in the chuches war against the demons. Some current members are after power, others consider it an "intelectual challenge". The "Pin-hole" to the illithid world has only existed 25 years.

The church is currently controled by a "moderate" matriarch/patriarch who holds the church together by making sure that no sect becomes more powerful than any other. She/He has presided for 50 years, and is growing old. Everyone wonders who will be the next leader of the faith.

With decades of: recruiting new seminarians, preaching to the faithful, infighting, some members switching sides, moderats trying to have "contacts" on both sides, and independants rejecting both sides; the layers will write themselves.

 

[Blessed Kitten]

Blessed Kitten, I design my own world the opposite way. I have tremendous difficulty designing the world top-down, and I'm impressed that it's so easy for you. If you want the group to be traveling, make sure you put cool and necessary stuff relatively far apart.

I wouldn't say that it's easy for me. I'm just starting, nothing is easy for me right now. It has more to do with the fact that at the largest scale the world is dominated by forces like climate and plate tectonics. Things that I have a pretty good grasp on the basics of, and that can be abstracted down to a finite set of rules and tables. Details can then be progressively added in an algorithmic manner, moving down in scale and up in exhaustiveness. And the more that there is at a macroscopic level, the more frame work and structure you have to dress up at a lower level.

I'm not a naturally creative person, starting from the top allows a similiar result from a more mechanical and rigorous approach.

Eventually I'd like to STOP reading stuff and START running the campaign. I've sat on my a$$ for several years, reading about "how to be a great DM" and collecting modules/adventures/Dungeon mags to find the "perfect" adventure (which really isn't out there). It's all for nothing if I don't get off my keister, find one or two people that are moderately mature and intelligent, and start a darn game! Mostly I'm just scared--I'm afraid it's not going to be perfect and that the players are going to be bored, so I tell myself that I'll read this book or follow the advice of that article and start a game later....

Err, can you tell that confidence isn't a strong point for me?

Wow, you sound just like me. Except, I actually have some friends now that want to play. Now I'm actually forced to start doing something, "ready" or not. At least none of them have ever played before, so if I screw up a lot in the beginning I'm only making it easier to impress them later.

 

[Piratecat]

The church is currently controled by a "moderate" matriarch/patriarch who holds the church together by making sure that no sect becomes more powerful than any other. She/He has presided for 50 years, and is growing old. Everyone wonders who will be the next leader of the faith.

Geez, I almost forgot. Make the current leader elderly and slowly dying of old age. That way you can have factions battling for control of his position, all while he tries to find a way to keep himself alive.

If I was in your game, I'd play an uncorruptable paladin determined to root out heresy and shake things up. I have no doubt that you'd screw me over repeatedly, but I'd have a blast in the process.

Kitten, I'm impressed because I *can't* do top-down design worth a damn. I just don't care enough about stuff like tides and tectonics. I am plot-driven and character-driven, and I make up the rest on the fly without showing that I haven't known it the whole time. That's why I don't have a good map of my world; every time I try to map the parts that no one has adventured in yet, part of me rebels. If I write it down now, I have a harder time changing it later! It's one of my weaknesses as a DM.

 

[The Amazing Dingo]

If I write it down now, I have a harder time changing it later! It's one of my weaknesses as a DM.

Here is the thing though: that is not a weakness.

The only weakness that a DM can have in terms of "planning out a setting vs. not planning it out" is not being certain of what he can best work with and what his players want. In your case PC, you know what you're good at and you stick with it. Similarly, your players accept the gaming world is developed as they continue playing (as opposed to being mostly pre-fabricated). Thats all you need.

It takes time for a person to find what he prefers in terms of world building. The more I do it, the more I find that I am not like PC. I want my world planned out for the most part. I want to have an idea of the leaders of one area and the cultures in another. I want to be able to know whats going on there while my PCs are doing something else in some other place (and I want it to sometimes come back and bite them in the butts).

But thats me and my PCs like having at least a good portion of what the world is laid out before them.

To the original topic:

My suggestion would be, in a low-magic game, would be to make sure that the government has most of that magic. They want that magic and the people who use it to control the society and whatever their massive secret is. That is the best means that they have for control. Here is a perfect chance to get Wizards, Sorcerors, and Priests involved. The druids might be well protected since they live so far outside of society.

The secret(s)?

Perhaps God has gone missing. For the past 300 years angels and saints have been fulfilling the 3rd level and lower clerical spells (while the Druids still have full access...a frightening idea). The church is trying to cover that up quietly while doing their best to look into it.

While the Church has that problem (and the druids have a problem with the Church) the government is trying to cover-up the fact that they accidentally opened a portal to Hell beneath the capital city about 10 years ago. Now there is an internal struggle in the government - some wanting to close the portal and others wanting to try to use the portal for their own ends (perhaps a way against another nation or city-state).

Meanwhile, the Trader's Guild has uncovered Chutlhu...

Okay, not serious about that lats one, though it is a serious possibility (even though I spelt it wrong).

I think the best way to go (along with a lot of other suggestions here) is to get one or more big secrets to get covered up and then run with it.

PS - Sorry if anything here is old or such. It sat on my monitor for about 45 minutes before getting posted.