Hi Tim,
> One thing to be wary of is that sometimes setting up the
> "improvisational" scenario (create characters with relationships to
> these npc's...) can seem as much railroading as a "traditional" one
> (this bloke comes into the pub and offers you a job...) - especially for
> players not used to creating characters laden wit "kickers"
Right, player input is a must. Like any other type of scenario design, you at least have to have some kind of buy-in on the part of the players. If everyone is Heortlings and one person is a Chaos spawn Broo, but the scenario is designed for Lunars... Not gonna work. The group as a whole needs to be down for whatever the basic premise.
I would highly suggest getting a group consensus on some basics before even developing one of the relationship maps. Even when the GM is responsible for producing a relationship map, you can easily suggest the players to choose relationships out of the map(which can lead to heroes being at cross purposes), or simply have the group stumble into the whole mess and take sides as they see fit. The Skullpoint scenario in Gathering Thunder is a perfect example of the latter.
If you have a group that is familiar with "kickers" or the basic idea of creating drama for their own character, the entire group can build a relationship map simply by using the relationships of their characters and cooperatively agreeing to set some things in motion("Hey, what if my father and your mother had an affair, and your father is always trying to get me in trouble?" "Cool, and then..."etc.)
Anyway, I'm getting started on producing a guide to some techniques for this sort of play. Thank you for your dialogue on this.
Chris
Powered by hypermail