Spreading Rumors

[I'm A Banana]

So, I'm sure there's been at least one mechanic for this out there, and I'm curious to see how others have handled it.

In an adventure that I'm writing currently, rumor-spreading can serve as a way to provoke in-fighting and rivalry in the enemy camps. Evil creatures aren't prone to trust each other, so a well-placed story about a lieutenant's aspirations or how the PC's recent victory was perhaps aided by a stooge...things like this can go pretty far. It adds an element of intrigue and manipulation to problem-solving that can be interesting.

I've got some fairly baseline rules for it. I'm doing this adventure in [notranslate]Pathfinder[/notranslate], so it relies on making a Bluff check against an individual member of the bad guys' gang, and then that member goes on to spread the rumor at a baseline rate. The PCs are kind of waiting until it reaches a critical mass, making up supporting evidence, and then making a Bluff check "by proxy" with the rumor against the leaders of the organization. It hinges on an open-ended "supporting evidence" requirement to expose the higher-ups to the potential truth of the rumor, so that the PC's need to be actively involved in spread it, not just droppin' rumor bombs and walking away.

I'm interested in how other groups might've handled this kind of thing. How do you model rumor-spreading with die rolls in your game? Ever had an enemy undone by hearsay? Ever have a party interested in turning evil factions against each other? How've you handled it?

 

[Michael Silverbane]

In my homebrew game, I have a Networking skill that can be used for (among other things) changing one persons or groups attitude towards another person or group. The mechanic is essentially the same as that used for Diplomacy, with time based on the size of the target group and difficulty based on their initial attitude towards the subject group.

 

[Tuft]

Using Bluff seems to imply that you only are creating made-up rumours. How about digging up some *real* dirt using Gather Information, Knowledge Local / Nobility, or even small investigative mini-plots?

 

[howandwhy99]

I use knowledge maps for my NPCs (and track info gained by the PCs), but rumors are just another name for shared knowledge in my game. Rumor/(reasonably) true and false knowledge of the game world is spread according to behavioral designs particular to the creatures in question, always intelligent of course, but creatures like animals have means of learning a few things too.

The whole of true rumors are simply those areas of the campaign map explored by currently intelligent inhabitants of it. That's easy 'cause I don't have to create anything new. False rumors are misinformation created or misapprehended through all sorts of means, but they require creating alternate map portions in place of the primary (think of them like alternate dimensions).

All of this knowledge is then assigned first, for ease, according to faction, and then according to each individual. Really only the "Movers & Shakers" ever need individual knowledge to be generated and assigned, but any NPC that is "named" (encountered actually) should get the same treatment. It's part of the whole process of fleshing out NPCs as required according to the direction of play, just as you don't need to necessarily determine ability scores until ability scores need to be determined. Then you just roll for them, but, like everything, having some pre-rolled makes the game faster.

Tracking what is shared / gained is just like any map tracking: just circle it according to who got what and/or drag your pencil to make the connections upon the appropriate map depending on how you do it. It's not that hard and easy once you don't have to worry about coming up with what NPCs know on the fly anymore and can just recite what they know.

Some characters will deliberately lie to the Players/PCs depending upon what is touched upon, what their alignment is, how that and their current alliances stand to the PCs, and, well, whatever other NPC behavioral rules you have in place. Lies are easy, they are simply deception strategies just like in combat and NPCs will likely use the same ones assigned to that activity per their experience/knowledge as they will for conversation. Think: seeking the questioner harm by leading them to danger, avoidance by leading them away from one's treasure/lair/allies, and so on. It could also arise due to more detailed NPC personality rules like lying as part of a mental compulsion (illness, curse, etc.) or out of cowardice or pretentiousness (by defining these as including lying according to specific strategies within and for your game).

This allows players to navigate what's going on when they are dealing with NPCs in order to judge who is liable to tell them the truth or to lie, who will likely lead them into danger or they can trust. Of course all of this is limited by the players' memories and the extent of their playing the PCs' exploration too.

To answer your questions. Die rolls come up whenever they are built into the game. Attitude and alliance building through Charisma reaction rolls have some affect on how this information is transferred between characters. I've certainly tried and have had players in my games try to call disguised villains a villain, kind of ruin their social standing among certain people, but it usually takes more than that in most games I've played. And I think anyone who has played B2's Caves of Chaos has tried at some point to turn factions on each other. That has plenty to do with alignment, attitudes of factions, gaining followers or associates, navigating by conversing, and, yeah, even lying. The early monsters are generally pretty dim and easy to deceive, but even a low level creature could potentially be strong in their mental states.