NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6243191" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Our efforts were spent to address multiple angles including:1)  How a closed conflict resolution framework handles the balance issues being debated in this thread.2)  How stakes-based conflict resolution (codified mechanical resolution referencing evolving fictional positioning which decisively carves out the present conflict's outcome and which [ii] leads to follow-up conflicts) promotes a Story Now agenda (or one facet of "indie play" as its been used in this thread).3)  How low-resolution (borderline "no myth") setting, director and/or author stance PC build resources, and GM provocation endows the players with potent narrative authority, which in turn perpetuates a Story Now agenda.Given 1 above, the overarching intent of all activity in the primary scene (the impetus of our play) referenced the stakes:  "The PCs sought audience with the King to beseech him to act (be a presence, rally defenses, stand up to the dragon's demands, embolden his besieged people) or the city would likely fall".  With conflict resolution where those are the stakes and the strategic objective is to "see the king and convince him to act", "the obstinate chamberlain" is merely an obstacle/complication to be overcome.  He isn't the point of play in the same way that the harsh winter conditions, the lack of supplies and ammo, and the overwhelming German numbers weren't central to the Allies' unwillingness to give up Bastogne in the Battle of the Bulge.  The strategic objective was to prevent German armor advance and German access to all of the various infrastructure (road networks leading to and from) of Bastogne.  The harsh winter conditions, the lack of supplies and ammo, and the overwhelming German numbers were all complications for the attainment of that strategic objective of the 101st Airborne.  In the same way, a Lord Chamberlain is just a complication in the way of a group PCs' strategic objective to seek audience with a King and convince him to act.The nature of the Lord Chamberlain was unfixed and turned on your and   @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=27570" target="_blank">sheadunne</a> 's transition scene.  Ultimately, the Court Mage was harvesting corpses in the Undercity to facilitate her network of flesh golems (of which the Lord Chamberlain was her primary creation) to extend her influence over the city, to contribute to general unrest within the walls while the siege did its part outside, and to lead to ultimate acquiescence to the dragon's demands. The Flesh Golem Lord Chamberlain (possessed by the Court Mage's senses) directly opposed the PCs:- He didn't recognize Thurgon's authority as Lord Commander of the Iron Tower.- He rebuffed Thurgon's invocations of the dire situation and plea to see the king in light of it (failed Diplomacy).Subsequent to that, the guards' dogs got loose and were making a beeline for the servant girl with the animal fat covered smock.  Theron showed his mettle (and represented your group as the same), intercepted the dogs and cowed them.  That would impress the guards if not the chamberlain (which it didn't...he was unmoved).  Cue War Troll being brought into the entrance hall in chains, and the refugees beseeching the Lord Chamberlain to heed the Holy Knight's (Thurgon's) pleas...which he dismisses.  As the War Troll is prepped for interrogation all hell breaks loose.  Ultimately, Quinn escalates things, mind-melts the War Troll into attacking the chamberlain.  The chamberlain flesh golem is eviscerated by the mind controlled troll.   Once the "chamberlain" is eviscerated, it made it rather hard for his protestations to pack much punch!  Subsequent to the immediate relevance of the Lord Chamberlain in the Action Scene, Lucann converses with the golem husk momentarily to confirm the truth of things and provide corresponding bonuses to future PC actions.  The "Lord Chamberlain" is exposed as "an enemy in our midst", and the War Council filters in to witness the X-men takedown of the War Troll by Theron and Thurgon (thus saving all the refugees).  As the (now that the chamberlain has been deposed) ranking member of the War Council takes in the disturbing scene, Quinn (by way of Suggestion...Arcana in the stead of Diplomacy...the Charm Person angle) requests the leader of the Council assist the PCs with the King and the Court Mage (identifying the Court Mage as the antagonist).  After that, other stuff happens with respect to the King and the Court Mage.  But that breaks out the obstinate Lord Chamberlain's immediate role as complication set against the PC's strategic objective;  Audience with the King.We can address other aspects if people wish (such as the use of player backstory and direct player action as cues in the creation of relevant thematic conflict/opposition/antagonists).</blockquote>

Verification