Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6243366" data-attributes="member: 6696971">This is central to a lot of our discussion; granular task resolution versus abstract conflict resolution.  Of consequence here is the "level of zoom" (aesthetic and mechanical) inherent to the medium.  If you're running a game that is meant to cover the 101st Airborne parachuting behind enemy lines on D-Day all the way through the seizing of the Eagle's Nest in Berchtesgaden, then the siege of Bastogne would be one conflict (albeit paramount).  As such, one would then need to resolve that conflict with the stakes being; "Do the 101st Airborne hold Bastogne through the siege or do they fail?"  The resolution of that conflict would then have a ripple effect (as it clearly did) which frame's follow-up conflicts.  Important to the question at hand, at that level of zoom, the thematic adversity (harsh winter, undersupplied, overwhelming opposition) can be dealt with in a single scene.  That doesn't mean that it doesn't have thematic punch and it is without ceremony (it defines them afterall).  It just means that it is one conflict.  Not the conflict.Now.  If you zoom in and the game is entirely about Bastogne, then you have micro-conflicts framed to deal with each piece of adversity (eg; "How do the good guys deal with the harsh winter conditions?").I think it is clear that your default level of zoom is tighter than the level of zoom in the one-off PBP we performed (and the default level of zoom of most "indie" play).  That is to be expected given other preferences that you have conveyed (system, setting, and technique).The scene's setting components did not entail a standard fair, formalized appeal under normal circumstances this much is true.  You could certainly run a scenario as such.  This is one iteration of a potential "obstinate chamberlain setting his will and resources against PCs who are seeking audience with the King to beseech him into a course of action".  I gave another well upthread as an ad-hoc scene resolved by my home players specfically for this thread...thank you home players.  There are still others out there in the ether, waiting to manifest.  Countless configurations actually.In the one played out, the physical form of the Lord Chamberlain is the flesh golem puppet of the primary antagonist in our conflict; The Court Mage.  After the scene played it out, one could sufficiently hindcast that the Court Mage assassinated the original Lord Chamberlain (who may have been of an entirely different disposition...who knows...that was offscreen, in the past, and never had relevance in play) in conjunction with the assassination of the king (made to look as natural death) in order to arrange capitulation to the dragon's demands.Achieving heroic renown within a besieged city that is short on heroes, gathering intelligence on the adversarial elements in play, dealing with the adversarial golem husk as chamberlain (the Court Mage), uncovering the enemy within (the Court Mage), legitimizing their status and mettle as capable heroes of good will, and saving the king from the assassination attempt (arranged by the Court Mage) were all component parts of the conflict.  They each played a role in determining the outcome of the stakes set out at the beginning of play.There is only so much a Lord Chamberlain (even one with the amount of political power and means this one possessed) can do to interpose himself against the will of the PCs after the conflict is escalated to violence.  And he is summarily dispatched and exposed.  It would appear you are not familiar with the resolution of the scene.  After Thurgon and Theron narrowly saved the king from the Hag's "Dream Sleep" assassination attempt, the weary, near-death, warrior-king rolled out of bed and reflexively tried to don his armor (fumbling  terribly from his condition) while calling incoherently for his squire from  days gone by.Having successfully saved the King from assasination, Thurgon helped him to his feet and took him to the balcony for fresh air, upon which time the battle in the Royal Garden below became apparent.  Thurgon and Theron then leapt to the aid of their allies.Much went on in the Royal Garden (much probably relevant to this thread), with much unresolved, but the supposition you had about the King's "first thought" didn't manifest.In play here are many things.  A primary issue here is that Quinn,  [MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION]'s character, is an extremely powerful Illusionist/Enchanter.  He is trained in Arcana and has a very high check.  Outside of Quinn, the only other person (including the other PCs) we encounter who meet these specs is the primary antagonist; The Court Mage.  Default play assumes the PC's are unique protagonists in the world.  There need not be prolific mage towers and magic item shops.  Neither the layfolk nor many/most/all of the Royal Courts, barristers, judges, and other officials are expected to be trained in Arcana.  It is an outcome-based system whereby NPCs are only relevant insofar as the on-screen time warrants their relevance.Further, in 4e, "Detect Magic" is a very different beast than in 3.x:1)  It requires being trained in Arcana.2)  Its identification capacity is limited typically to rituals, zones, conjurations and other specified magic phenomenon.  It typically excludes powers, spells, magic items et al.  Further, it requires an Arcana check at the Hard DC of the phenmonon's or caster's level (whichever is relevant)3)  "Sensing the presence of magic" requires (i) considerable concentration and effort (Standard Action) and, more importantly (ii) an Arcana check at the Hard DC of the creature's level.Therefore, anyone attempting to run "anti-mage" QC at Royal Court would need to (i) be Trained in Arcana and (ii) would need a significant Arcana skill to uncover Quinn's enchantments.  The (ii) would require them to be of Quinn's level, have extreme Intelligence, other augmenting bonuses, and a decent roll to defeat the Hard DC of Quinn's level.  All of the above setting and mechanical elements are true, which presumably should put PC Arcane spellcasters in a position of unique advantage and leverage (as the reasoning has been unpacked in this thread).  And yet Quinn by no means was some unparalleled facilitator of the resolution of the conflict we played out in our PBP.</blockquote>

Verification