Faction Rules - What do we like?

From a design standpoint my personal interest is on the player side. I agree about tracking though, 100%.

The difficulty with factions is often that it really hard for the players to get a solid grip on. Here I'm talking about games with multiple factions. Complex webs of relationships are tough to portray at the table.

I'm discovering this as I peel the layers off a complex interweb of factions in a city campaign. Might be the players I've got, but they're struggling to find the threads. I'm trying to be realistic with the interconnections, but .... definitely re-thinking how to do things.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I liked the computer game Freelancer's method of your actions influencing your standing with the various factions in the setting, including the "friend of my friend" bonus or malus your actions for or against some other party would incur.

Keeping tally of that in the freeform environment of a GM's table is a bit harder, though, although that also includes the option of getting away with crimes by keeping the affected party uninformed about your involvement. (Performing a hit job for another faction will sooner or later leak from the organization paying for the hit job.)

What exactly does joining a faction mean? Taking a vow of service, or just aligning your current business model with that of the faction in a mostly mutually beneficial way?

Getting a say in a faction might come through indirect methods (placing assets, lobbying, bribing, re-organizing character or actual assassinations) and means a fair bit of book-keeping to keep the revealed and un-revealed actors in the faction organized and up to date for the GM and the players. In settings with significant communication delays, local chapters of a faction may have rather different agendas or at least priorities than the main faction.
 

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Remove ads

Top