I don't play LG but since I enjoy the GH gameworld storyline, I still follow what events are happening on my beloved Flanaess.
In the LG do the players ever fail?
How does the "opponents" advance their agendas, is it all triad sponsored "fait accompli" or do the players sometimes come up short within the events and the triads use these failures to provide consequences for the gameworld.
Granted given the size of the player pool may cause my suggestion to be unworkable, however one of the best home games I played followed this premise, The "opponents" both good and bad were not static but had goals that they tried to advance so the gameworld always had a sense of change and movement.
This evolving kept the campaign from becoming stale as even when "we as the PCs" failed to complete a module or adventure we knew our failure would ripple outward or even the apprehension knowing that Iuz or the SB weren't waiting for us to show up at their front gates but were constantly plotting and spreading even if we could not see it.
Resolution of adventures is determined by the results at the premiere of the adventure. (For interactives and such this is also the sole running of the event.) That limits the actual campaign impact to 10-50 tables or so, depending on the adventure and the convention it premieres at.
For individual adventures, yes the PCs can fail. However, because of the peculiar habits of players, sometimes even succeeding can have strange, or outright negative, results. It all depends on how they succeed, or what they choose to do with their success.
As an example, in one of the Brendigund adventures, the players had to recommend a temple for him to go to for an atonement for his being an annoying git. (And to get his kids turned back to human from being half-fiends.) Even if the players had otherwise completed the adventure, they still had a choice of three different temples to send him to, and that would affect the future adventures in the series.
Certainly. We have a regional module where the bad guy has escaped from the crime scene (So to speak) to such extent that only one group of players has actually caught him. As far as campaign consequences go, he survived and will return in the future.
Aside from that, we have multiple factions working against each other for political gain and we hope to concentrate mostly on that in the future. For example, one retired regional module had a fake heir of House Eddri appear and ultimately players will find this out and they will have four choices what to do.
1: Give the heir to Idee Volunteers to discredit current ruling family.
2: Give the heir to current rulers so that they can marry off the 'heir' and show that they clearly have the support of even old ruling family.
3: Give the heir to competing house to use as political tool against ruling house.
4: Kill the heir, run off and pretend they never saw anything:)
Idee Volunteers were leading 5-0 until Finnish players came along and changed to result to 6-5 for the ruling house (with one odd table going for rival house).
It should be noted that Finland is by far the most active country in the region and all players are blatantly Pro-Ahlissa.
Resolution of adventures is determined by the results at the premiere of the adventure. (For interactives and such this is also the sole running of the event.) That limits the actual campaign impact to 10-50 tables or so, depending on the adventure and the convention it premieres at.
In Verbobonc, we currently allow for approximately 3-4 months after the adventure premieres before considering the results finalized. That said, there is an appeal to having the Critical Events determined solely at the premiere.
Our plotlines are not preordained by any stretch of the imagination, however there is such a thing as 'inertia.' Just because the characters have succeeded in a particular adventure doesn't mean that the machinations of the antagonist are completely thwarted. Rather, it means they take longer to come to fruition. Another tack is that the characters may unwittingly further the goals of the antagonist without knowing what they are doing. Not every adventure is black and white where if you defeat your opponent, you strike a blow against the bad guy. Things can be a lot more grey.
Not always, no.
And they certainly don't always do what you expect them to do.
To take an example from LG Onnwal, in the first year of the campaign we had a module called To Catch a Traitor, where the PCs had to go and hunt down a collaborator. The intention was that the collaborator would be a minor front character who'd get yakked and lead the PCs on to his more dangerous boss, an SB Kesh. In the event, the collaborator got away in the majority of tables and ended up becoming far more significant to the overall plot than we'd originally intended (we had to write another module called To Hunt a Traitor, which was completely unexpected in terms of our carefully laid evil plans) - actually displacing the aforementioned Kesh as the big bad in one of our plots.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises
