Core problem: super PCs in a diplomatic campaign

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by No2 at 2005-02-28 11:10:39
Converted from Phorums BB System

Railroading the PCs in a straightjacker while offering them nuclear-level powers might be a root cause of the chaos seen in your campaign... The players want to use the "toys" and powers they have!

I'd suggest, instead of providing them with stronger opponents (thus reinforcing their cowboy attitudes), emphasize the disgust inherent in their slaughter of innocents with overkill.

Diplomacy IMHO is best played with low-level characters to de-emphasize the superhero/superkiller aspect, while supermen are expected to use their powers accordingly.

See D20 Dynasties & Demagogues for good ideas on running political campaigns.

No2

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Weasel at 2005-02-28 15:43:53
Converted from Phorums BB System

Well, railroading them in general is a bad idea. Its always tough to balance a heroic threat to innocents versus the players feeling like they are in a cattle chute.
That said, if you intend the mission to be diplomatic, you CAN provide limitations other than "She appears to have the Demi-God Incontinentia on a leash at her side."
Throw some grieving wives and children at them.
Cowering townsfolk are always fun.
If the people you want them to negotiate with are genuinely not nice, then punishing the PCs squishy allies in their stead can drive the point home.
Actually, the higher powered PCs are EXACTLY the ones who will be engaging in diplomatic negotiations. Its not Nick Slade, PI, who would be negotiating with the House Of Sahd. It would be somebody powerful.
And if most of the military might the PC's posess is in a sheathe by their leg, then they will have a hard time negotiating for longer than until they are out of sight if they rely just on force.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by No2 at 2005-02-28 19:53:03
Converted from Phorums BB System

Yes. I agree that, *logically*, you take experienced people for high-stakes missions.

I was simply stating that high-level D20 characters, given the system's emphasis on violent powers, make for super-sleuths, not super-diplomats like, say, a 100 point vs 500 point GURPS diplomat. Even 20th level druids are awesome combattants, on par with 10th level warriors, since D20's emphasis is on action and adventure, not politics.

A system thing, really.

No2

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Ian Sokoliwski at 2005-03-01 01:29:10
Converted from Phorums BB System

I see your point. It was something of an experiment, anyway, just to see if I could do something different than the 'epic' over-the-top struggles with those characters (and players).

I'm not sure 'railroading' was the right term to use however. It is probably just a semantic thing, as ultimately I did allow the players a lot of lattitude in how to act and react, rather than telling them 'don't do that' or otherwise force their actions. I more relied on how their actions didn't have the results they had intended (using extremely deadly force resulted in a massacre rather than just a battle, like they had expected - more or less the 'grieving townsfolk' approach, actually).

Perhaps I was 'railroading' the players more than I thought at first...although with their predeliction to blow up stuff, perhaps they were 'railroading' me into creating a different game than I had originally intended...:)