Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="77IM" data-source="post: 6990402" data-attributes="member: 12377">So, at a high level, if you want to design this like a dungeon, instead of rooms you have NPCs, and instead of monsters or puzzles you have the NPC's mind and situation. Instead of exploring rooms, the party is exploring NPCs. Instead of fighting monsters and solving puzzles, the players must figure out how to get leverage over each NPC (or some sufficient number of NPCs).Secrets. Everybody in the court has them. The PCs need to figure them out. Sometimes merely knowing the secret gives them leverage (e.g. the Grand Duchess is having an affair with the Ambassador and doesn't want this to get out). Sometimes the secret reveals leverage (e.g. the Chamberlain is cursed and needs a special potion on a regular basis to suppress the effects).Skill rolls can discover these secrets during conversation. However, sometimes you must talk to other people to figure them out; notably the servants, who see everything. Shadowing people, stealing diaries, surreptitious castings of detect thoughts should all be legitimate options too, though.Wants, Fears, Believes. I like describing the NPC in terms of what they want, what they fear, and what they believe to be true. People obviously follow their wants and flee their fears. What they believe is important because people are much more likely to believe things that confirm their existing beliefs (e.g., if the Grand Duchess believes magic is dangerous, it's much easier for the PCs to convince her that the Chamberlain can't be trusted because the curse is warping his mind).You can go with Bonds, Ideals, and Flaws if you want, but I haven't found those as useful as Wants, Fears, and Believes.Interconnections. The members of the court are playing this game too; they all have leverage against each other already. One of the things the PCs should be doing is uncovering this web of friends and foes and figuring out how to reshape it to their advantage.You may want to actually draw the web yourself with boxes and lines. I find this can make it easier for NPCs to react to changing situations. When something changes about one NPC, you can follow the lines to all the related NPCs and update them accordingly. (E.g., if the Ambassador is outed as a warlock, the Grand Duchess dumps him, because she believes magic is dangerous.)Active NPCs. Some of the NPCs don't wait around for the PCs to approach them; some may actively want things from the PCs, and offer them deals. Ideally, these deals put the PCs at cross-purposes with other NPCs! (E.g., the Chamberlain wants the PCs to investigate the Ambassador but won't say why; it's because he thinks the Ambassador is a warlock who has something to do with the curse. Meanwhile, the Duchess has promised to side with the PCs as long as they don't pry into the Ambassador's business; it's because she's afraid the affair will be revealed.)Don't Sweat It If It All Goes <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Up. When I create scenarios like this, it never, ever turns out the way I expect. Usually the PCs sweep in from way out of left field and get powerful leverage over some crucial NPC too early and the whole situation becomes chaos. To me, this is great! No sense setting up a court with a "stable equilibrium" unless you want the PCs to smash it! It's the equivalent of "beating the dungeon."The only hedge against this that I've found is to limit the PCs access to members of the "court" (or whatever, sometimes it's a wizarding order or a criminal organization or something). For example, if there are 12 movers and shakers at court, maybe for the initial scenario (convincing the King to open the dungeon) only 6 of them are present. Then if you want to have another scenario in this same court, introduce 3 more members. This way if the party totally pwns the first 6 court members, these 3 are new unknowns (and may even bring some of the original 6 over to their side).Visibility. If you want this to feel more like a "game," my only advice is to make the NPCs' mental states very visible. Lay out a sheet with the names of the court members. When the PCs discover how an NPC feels, right it down on the sheet. Quantify it with a number; something that can turn into a DC or a modifier is especially good. This will give the players a LOT of control over their next steps. (E.g., the Duchess has: loyal to the Ambassador +5, thinks magic is dangerous +8. So proving to her that the Ambassador is a warlock is difficult because the DC increases by +5; but once she is convinced, her distrust of magic wins out, and now convincing her to act against the Ambassador is at a net -3 to the DC because of the 8 gets subtracted.)I've seen a lot of complex game rules revolving around social-conflict but honestly I think everything you need is covered by the core rules. The only thing missing is the visibility. Combat scenarios give a LOT of information about NPC positioning and capabilities (you can guess that the enemy in plate armor is a tank, and the one in robes with a staff is a wizard, etc.). For social scenarios the DM may have a clear picture in his or her head but it can be hard for players to relate without something to look at.One visualization tool I've seen that worked reasonably well (a friend used this during a social conflict in a FATE game) is to get minis for the PCs and NPCs and place them on a board. Each location on a board represents a "position" or "attitude" of some sort. So as you change an NPC's mind, or change how people perceive them, they move to a new spot on the board. This gets tricky if the possible attitudes of NPCs is more complex than what you can fit on such a board.</blockquote>

Verification