RE: Creative players

From: Jane Williams <janewilliams20_at_...>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 18:43:43 +0100


LC:
> > Yup. I love when they reveal to me that the main villain is
> > > not in fact the leader, but his
> > > witch assistant who is secretly planning to take over. Which I
> > > didn't know about until then. :)
> From that point on the players could care less
> about the Vampire war, it was ALL about getting Morgan.
>
> So naturally, she tricked her leader, got him killed by the
> Players, all while escalating
> the war so that it took out both sides in furtherence of her
> own plans.

Sounds sort of like one of my games, set in a home-grown generic fantasy setting with modified RQ rules. The players had had several encounters with a female vampire, and were gradually acquiring hints that she was, despite blood-sucking tendencies, someone with at least some moral standards. They had also met a major Necromancer - no such hints. Eventually I wrote a scenario where these two major NPCs met, and they discovered that they were arch-enemies (how do you think a vampire feels about someone who can control undead?). Big Battle, very evenly matched, to be resolved by which side the PCs joined in on. (Yes, I like them to have effects on the outcome...)

What I wasn't expecting was a Paladin, in close combat with both major NPCs, to do a successful DI, and as a result, get the Vampire *cured*. No longer vampiric. She then came over all Good, spent some time having an affair with one of the party, and eventually became a PC...

I knew I'd left it all very open for the PCs to define the ending, but I'd never expected that!

And it would have worked *so* much better with HQ rules! Handling high-level skills and low level augments from PCs, plus augmenting from relationships, under RQ rules, was a pain! Very much "GM winging it - trust me!"

Powered by hypermail