Disclaimer, just in case: No Elsewhere (Moon or Sun) players, please!
Background: One of my PCs "J" is a noble, formerly 13th in line for the seat of power of one of the city-states of an Eladrin country, ruled by these 6 seats of power. The party has time traveled (back to) the distant future (by about 7,000 years) and brought J with them (J is originally from the past), and in passing have learned that, recently, the country J is from has changed its political system to a total monarchy. J isn't too fond of that, especially because they've developed a close relationship with another Eladrin (also of nobility) who utterly despises this new monarch for personal reasons (was sold to him as a servant/slave for a huge gambling debt and escaped); she also knows some of the new monarch's secrets - such as that he's killed off those in line for the seats of power - though they don't know why (it's to solidify his claim as total monarch).
The party might wind up in this country soon and have to face down some decisions about whether or not they're going to interfere with this. J's player still isn't sure last it came up in casual conversation, but I want to be prepared just in case. (I know what I'm comfortable improving - and this isn't it!)
What I'm asking: I've been avoiding pointing the plot towards this story arc because, frankly, I'm intimidated by political plotlines and have little idea where to start. So my question is: if the PCs to decide to interfere, how might I go about plotting out the adventure(s) for them to do so? Especially if it becomes a political coup? Some basic details I already have:
The Seats of Power that formerly controlled the city-states are now reduced to little more than a council to the Monarch.
2 of the 6 city-states disapprove of the monarchy, including the one J is from. 2 somewhat approve, mostly due to economic gains from increased export profits that came with the new monarch's takeover (because he's actually competent, as he'd have to be). The last 2 strongly approve of the monarchy - they are allied city-states who were long considered secondary city-states to the first 4, and one is where the new monarch is from.
There is a small group that strongly oppose the monarchy, secretly lead by the seat of power of the city-state J is from, whom would be prime candidates for staging a coup, but they haven't made any open moves yet, because...
The monarch has enacted some new laws, including a draft for their new military presence that took over the old individual city-states' peacekeepers, and has installed this in all six city-states thoroughly.
If there is a coup of any sort, PC "J" will not be installed as either the new monarch (if monarchy is kept) nor the seat of power (if old structure is restored) because that would take them out of the game. There are 2 prime candidate NPCs for the former (potentially more), and at least 1 for the latter, depending on the party's choices.
This new monarch isn't clean or benevolent - as he's been secretly killing off those who could potentially oppose his place as the monarch. So leaving him in power definitely poses a long-term threat to J's life, which has already come up earlier in the storyline.
TL;DR: How do you go about plotting a political adventure? Particularly one that might include a political coup?
This is yet another example of why plotting out the story arc is not always the best approach to an adventure design. It's an acceptable technique for pretty clear cut layouts like a dungeon crawl where the conditions of an adventure is unlikely to evolve - but not for political intrigues.
Political intrigues ( or any Adventure that has a strong social interaction component ) are quite the opposite: they will evolve rapidly, and chaotically, depending on how social/political situations are resolved, and trying to flowchart out all possible paths through the story would be a gargantuan task which most GMs will fail, because the Players will come up with something the GM never thought of.
In that case, you're better off putting your effort into detailing out your NPCs, and the power factions, in excruciating detail. This allows you to role-play out the factions in "real time" in response to rapidly evolving situations. If you know what the NPCs/factions want, what they know/believe, what their personalities are like, what resources they have, and what their tactics are ( go-to tactics, emergency tactics, never-use tactics ), then at any point you merely need to ask "OK, what does this person/group want, have as their current goal, believe about the situation, and what resources do they have at their disposal - and given all that, what will they try to do next".
For a much more exhaustive description, see this post.
It's probably not less design work - it's just different design work. In an Adventure situation which is highly social/political - where the actions and social interactions of people are the key determiners of what will happen - put your design work into the people, not into trying to predict potentially chaotic events.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Read through the longer version as well - that was a great read, thank you!
Still interested in what others may have to say, but there's some great advice in there that'll definitely help me both here and with plotting out my next campaign, which I'm doing in between working on my current one! So thank you very much!
I can't add anything Ved didn't say in basic design.
One thing I do in these situations is I plot out the goals and plans of every major NPC (and any minor ones the party latch onto in early sessions.)
I also do a very high end rundown of how things would go if the PCs were not added to the mix.
This means if your party ignores certain people or situations you already know how they'll turn out and.can adjust your NPC's power, placement and goals on the fly.
It also makes the world more organic because things don't just wait for the party to get to them. You ignored Duke Lantheon who you found rumors had hired assassins? So sorry, while you guys were doing your thing Prince Hebrah was murdered, placing the Duke as regent for a 2 year old younger sibling of the prince who's now the heir to the throne.
I have to agree that this type of story doesn't work like a dungeon crawl.
Consider a game of chess except with several teams on the board, White pieces, black pieces, red pieces, blue pieces, and the players are a single green piece. The game is played by all five teams at once. The really tricky thing is that each side can join any team they wish at any point during the game. A red knight can choose to become a black knight and begin playing for another team. Some pieces will refuse to be sacrificed even if that would lead to a clear win for their team, but they may not wish to go so far as defecting from the team. And the green piece gets to do what it wants. It can stay a tight ally with the white pieces the whole game. Or they can try and remain neutral the entire game.
I would develop a map and place factions. Then I would give each faction leader a goal they would like to achieve. Then I would brainstorm on a month by month basis what each faction accomplishes each month and some idea of how they do that. Copy the timeline down and maybe redraw your map at a couple key points.
Then drop your players into the map and if they don't change events that allow a leader to accomplish their months goal then the goal is accomplished. If they do interact with the leaders efforts to achieve their goal, the outcome may be changed. The news of the month's outcomes spreads and each leader decides if they are going to change their plans. You will have to update the political layer periodically, but causing it to be felt by the players will be challenging without them thinking they are being railroaded.
I am working on a story like this myself. My paladin NPC is in line for a title. He knows this but has not told anyone among his party. He is trying to earn his reputation before he is compelled to give up adventuring and serve his liege lord. Along the way he will receive news of changes back home. He will send messages and money back from time to time and might become irritable once in a while. Eventually he will say his good buys and journey home. The party will be allowed to come with him or part ways. In this way, they will be allowed to take up the challenge of the political campaign or not. If not, news of the province where the paladin lives will come to them once in a while.
I had some political nonsense going on for a while in my game. I try to keep it simple and even optional. If the players bite then they bite, but if not its no real loss. Another thing I will do that can be applied to a political setting is just to keep the events rolling long whether or not the players are directly involved or not. Consider the pros and cons of what happens and adjust the game accordingly. I like to keep a calendar of my game world and have various events marked on it. If the players are directly involved or not there may be some kind of positive or negative outcome depending if the current quest/adventure is tied to the political stuff going on. Another thing is to consider talking to your players about it. Find out if they would like to be part of a big political campaign or story ark. For me, my game is ever evolving based on what the players do or do not do. I just let my players steer the game in whatever direction they want.
Now when I had political stuff going on and the players were rather involved with it I would basically push an outcome in the direction the players were trying to shift things. I would give bonuses to the favored side based on what the players have done in order to move the story along. Large votes for example the players can talk to political figures in an effort to gain their favor, but they can also loose their favor as well. Ill set this up with some kind of skill check challenge and do the best 2 out of 3 or 3 out of 5. They can gain a bonus or even loose some depending on the outcome of the conversion. Also the same can be applied to quests or adventures that may be asked of them from someone important and depending on the outcome or if the players do or do not to the task. This can effect things as well. All can be applied to a vote for example that I usually just roll on a d100 then add any modifiers that the players may have gained or lost. Just an idea how I have done it and still do.
Disclaimer, just in case: No Elsewhere (Moon or Sun) players, please!
Background: One of my PCs "J" is a noble, formerly 13th in line for the seat of power of one of the city-states of an Eladrin country, ruled by these 6 seats of power. The party has time traveled (back to) the distant future (by about 7,000 years) and brought J with them (J is originally from the past), and in passing have learned that, recently, the country J is from has changed its political system to a total monarchy. J isn't too fond of that, especially because they've developed a close relationship with another Eladrin (also of nobility) who utterly despises this new monarch for personal reasons (was sold to him as a servant/slave for a huge gambling debt and escaped); she also knows some of the new monarch's secrets - such as that he's killed off those in line for the seats of power - though they don't know why (it's to solidify his claim as total monarch).
The party might wind up in this country soon and have to face down some decisions about whether or not they're going to interfere with this. J's player still isn't sure last it came up in casual conversation, but I want to be prepared just in case. (I know what I'm comfortable improving - and this isn't it!)
What I'm asking: I've been avoiding pointing the plot towards this story arc because, frankly, I'm intimidated by political plotlines and have little idea where to start. So my question is: if the PCs to decide to interfere, how might I go about plotting out the adventure(s) for them to do so? Especially if it becomes a political coup? Some basic details I already have:
TL;DR: How do you go about plotting a political adventure? Particularly one that might include a political coup?
This is yet another example of why plotting out the story arc is not always the best approach to an adventure design. It's an acceptable technique for pretty clear cut layouts like a dungeon crawl where the conditions of an adventure is unlikely to evolve - but not for political intrigues.
Political intrigues ( or any Adventure that has a strong social interaction component ) are quite the opposite: they will evolve rapidly, and chaotically, depending on how social/political situations are resolved, and trying to flowchart out all possible paths through the story would be a gargantuan task which most GMs will fail, because the Players will come up with something the GM never thought of.
In that case, you're better off putting your effort into detailing out your NPCs, and the power factions, in excruciating detail. This allows you to role-play out the factions in "real time" in response to rapidly evolving situations. If you know what the NPCs/factions want, what they know/believe, what their personalities are like, what resources they have, and what their tactics are ( go-to tactics, emergency tactics, never-use tactics ), then at any point you merely need to ask "OK, what does this person/group want, have as their current goal, believe about the situation, and what resources do they have at their disposal - and given all that, what will they try to do next".
For a much more exhaustive description, see this post.
It's probably not less design work - it's just different design work. In an Adventure situation which is highly social/political - where the actions and social interactions of people are the key determiners of what will happen - put your design work into the people, not into trying to predict potentially chaotic events.
My advice, anyways :)
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Read through the longer version as well - that was a great read, thank you!
Still interested in what others may have to say, but there's some great advice in there that'll definitely help me both here and with plotting out my next campaign, which I'm doing in between working on my current one! So thank you very much!
I can't add anything Ved didn't say in basic design.
One thing I do in these situations is I plot out the goals and plans of every major NPC (and any minor ones the party latch onto in early sessions.)
I also do a very high end rundown of how things would go if the PCs were not added to the mix.
This means if your party ignores certain people or situations you already know how they'll turn out and.can adjust your NPC's power, placement and goals on the fly.
It also makes the world more organic because things don't just wait for the party to get to them. You ignored Duke Lantheon who you found rumors had hired assassins? So sorry, while you guys were doing your thing Prince Hebrah was murdered, placing the Duke as regent for a 2 year old younger sibling of the prince who's now the heir to the throne.
I have to agree that this type of story doesn't work like a dungeon crawl.
Consider a game of chess except with several teams on the board, White pieces, black pieces, red pieces, blue pieces, and the players are a single green piece. The game is played by all five teams at once. The really tricky thing is that each side can join any team they wish at any point during the game. A red knight can choose to become a black knight and begin playing for another team. Some pieces will refuse to be sacrificed even if that would lead to a clear win for their team, but they may not wish to go so far as defecting from the team. And the green piece gets to do what it wants. It can stay a tight ally with the white pieces the whole game. Or they can try and remain neutral the entire game.
I would develop a map and place factions. Then I would give each faction leader a goal they would like to achieve. Then I would brainstorm on a month by month basis what each faction accomplishes each month and some idea of how they do that. Copy the timeline down and maybe redraw your map at a couple key points.
Then drop your players into the map and if they don't change events that allow a leader to accomplish their months goal then the goal is accomplished. If they do interact with the leaders efforts to achieve their goal, the outcome may be changed. The news of the month's outcomes spreads and each leader decides if they are going to change their plans. You will have to update the political layer periodically, but causing it to be felt by the players will be challenging without them thinking they are being railroaded.
I am working on a story like this myself. My paladin NPC is in line for a title. He knows this but has not told anyone among his party. He is trying to earn his reputation before he is compelled to give up adventuring and serve his liege lord. Along the way he will receive news of changes back home. He will send messages and money back from time to time and might become irritable once in a while. Eventually he will say his good buys and journey home. The party will be allowed to come with him or part ways. In this way, they will be allowed to take up the challenge of the political campaign or not. If not, news of the province where the paladin lives will come to them once in a while.
Good Luck. - Have fun.
I had some political nonsense going on for a while in my game. I try to keep it simple and even optional. If the players bite then they bite, but if not its no real loss. Another thing I will do that can be applied to a political setting is just to keep the events rolling long whether or not the players are directly involved or not. Consider the pros and cons of what happens and adjust the game accordingly. I like to keep a calendar of my game world and have various events marked on it. If the players are directly involved or not there may be some kind of positive or negative outcome depending if the current quest/adventure is tied to the political stuff going on. Another thing is to consider talking to your players about it. Find out if they would like to be part of a big political campaign or story ark. For me, my game is ever evolving based on what the players do or do not do. I just let my players steer the game in whatever direction they want.
Now when I had political stuff going on and the players were rather involved with it I would basically push an outcome in the direction the players were trying to shift things. I would give bonuses to the favored side based on what the players have done in order to move the story along. Large votes for example the players can talk to political figures in an effort to gain their favor, but they can also loose their favor as well. Ill set this up with some kind of skill check challenge and do the best 2 out of 3 or 3 out of 5. They can gain a bonus or even loose some depending on the outcome of the conversion. Also the same can be applied to quests or adventures that may be asked of them from someone important and depending on the outcome or if the players do or do not to the task. This can effect things as well. All can be applied to a vote for example that I usually just roll on a d100 then add any modifiers that the players may have gained or lost. Just an idea how I have done it and still do.
wasn't there a part of the DM handbook that covered political systems as well? just trying to remember because I thought I saw one in there