PDA

View Full Version : The noble house game



Satyr
2009-01-14, 04:58 PM
After our D&D 4E campaign will come to an end this weekend, I am already planniing in a new campaign, with a completely different focus from the latter one (which was a fallback to the dungeoncrawling era).
The basice premise is: The characters are a minor noble house in troubled times, a minor lord or lady and his or her retainers in a very gritty and low magic setting. The player characters should all have an own specific agenda, but also the common interest to protect their fiefdom and exploit the peasants, etc. The campaign should also be based on a very proactive approach, so that the players have a very large influence on how the plot develops.

For this I have several questions - what kind of system would work well with this? I think that Harnmaster or Pendragon wopuld both be good candidates (with very different tastes to it), and Gurps is always an option, but I am not sure if there is a system out there that has nice rules for a gritty, dark ages style game.
What would also be nice would be a mass combat system for playing out battles and ambushes of the house's troops.

What setting would fit to this? My first intention is almost always to use the real world history, as there is no fiction as grand and unpredicatable as the real life and the increased intensity of the game when real world objects play a role. Besides, everybody knows the setting, which is a good bonus, but historical games have their specific problems (especially in a historian heavy group like mine). The other idea is using Westeros (from 'A Song of Ice and Fire'), but that setting is pretty much dependant on the books, and I know that some of the players don't know the books (yet).
But, actually a more exotic background would have its appeal aas well. IDoes anybod knows how well , for example Legends of the Five rings would work with the basic premise?

And third question: If you would play in such a campaign, what kind of plot elements and activities would you expect? What would make the game attractive for you, what kind of roles would be interesting for player characters, where do you see problems?

Tacoma
2009-01-14, 05:07 PM
1: Don't use a real-world setting. Instead, cherry-pick cool ideas from real-world events and cultures to create your own thing. If the players look at a country and say "oh so those are the Germans" you didn't conceal it enough. This is especially important when you're gaming with history buffs.
(Reversal: Sometimes it's cool to do just what I said not to. See: Freelancer, Girl Genius, most Victorian Science Fiction).

2: I suggest you throw out there a few paths to success. In a world like this, success in life is measured by your personal power, the strength and power of your lineage after you die, and what you're remembered for. People could be fighting to unite scattered tribes into a single country, or a revolt against a decadent government. Or something like the decline of Rome, seen from the perspective of the Romans, their subject people, or the barbarians. Anyway, there should be a few obvious ways to succeed, but of course actually getting there and doing it is the hard part.

BRC
2009-01-14, 05:31 PM
I wouldn't go with "A noble and their retainers", depending on how good your players are, there is alot of room for subtle infighting by having multiple members of the noble family present, or people representing the interests of one of them.
Here is my idea, the main family of the noble house used to be doing pretty well, perhaps the king is old and the primary heirs were killed in a war or something, and the current patriarch (lets call them the Duke) is frail and sickly. Before, he was relying on his sons to keep things in working order, but now they're gone, so all the second cousins and in-laws and people who before basically lived with the fact that they had no chance of getting power have come back. Of course, non of them are actively pursuing power, they are just here to "Help out until the Duke gets back on his feet", but everybody knows they are scheming to get a stake in the Duchy. Even if each PC dosn't want to be part of this family, they can be working for one, there to improve the standing of their lord in the Duke's eyes, or they simply have an interest in getting a specific person on the throne, or a specific somthing done (Example, there is an easily manipulate able and very pious cousin of the duke, so a clergyman arrives to try to get him declared the heir).
Thus, a new dynamic is born, the dutchy is weak, and the players are trying to re-invigorate it, but at the same time, each one wants to gain influence with the Duke, specifically, more influence than the others have.

Weirdlet
2009-01-14, 05:45 PM
Oooh, one of my favorite GMs has been doing this for a few years, with his own homebrew world but with a lot of things lifted from Song of Ice and Fire. We'll play a small campaign as one group of characters, accomplish (or not) our goals in time to see something bigger be unleashed, then switch to a different set of people who may be dealing with something else entirely, but that stuff remains in the background and is furthering its own agendas even as you explore an entirely different facet of the world.

We did it in 3.5 D&D without too much trouble- given one quarter of the usual starting gold, we were told we could choose one magic item, and that things like +1 swords or higher would be heirlooms or artifacts found on ancient battlefields, passed down in the families we belonged to (we started off as nobles). They might be named if they were particularly distinctive, or just be 'the really lucky, sharp dagger my grandmother passed down to me'.

One of the things that was in the background that we didn't use too much, but which probably would fit the bill, is the fact that based on your class, your family and your status within the family, you might get a certain number of points you could spend on contacts. I forget the exact details, you'd have to work out what classes would be regarded as higher-status than others, but wizards and such got fewer points, because in this game magic was considered kind of weird and belonging to those weirdos on their volcanic island- it's good for keeping the advancing glacier at the top of the kingdom from advancing too far, but otherwise it's just a way of screwing with the way the world ought to be. Sorcery was forbidden, a dissecting offense rather than a hanging one. (My friend and I, of course, played a pair of sorcerer brothers, passing as wizards, bastard sons of the noble house that runs the wizard school) Swinging round to the point again, that's a means of playing with what characters could have what influences. Rogues might be more into networking than fighting warriors, but by society's standards they're sneaky little thieves who shouldn't rightly have a good reputation. Second sons have less status than first sons, illegitimate sons less than those born on the right side of the blanket, depending on the family and the number of legit kids who stand to inherit. Your charisma might also help out a bit, but it's been a while since that first arc we played.

One of the other things the GM mentioned that we didn't actually see in play (or at least, that we didn't ourselves use) was that the higher nobles would have something like a level adjustment- the benefits of being, say, a prince of the realm are balanced by the fact that really, there are going to be a lot of people keeping themselves between you and the battlefield.

These contacts and status-marks help you find out things, like who just tried to kill the king and with what, and where he might have gotten it. Try to have background worked out- which families are allied with each other, which are feuding. Who's got an interest in what? Why would they work together? It's absolutely delicious finding out these details and at the same time, fighting through the soldiers and the haunted places to try and find what they were looking for and why. Our first arc was nobles trying to investigate the attempted killing of the king and finding that the nobleman who'd done it was keeping captive a monster-queen he'd captured from a long ago raid into their lands and benefiting from her captivity- the second was barbarians trying to find the lost sons of the tribe chief and ended up finding a slumbering robot that had lain dormant for centuries and leaped up to remake the world as it had remembered it. Another arc found us seeking a criminal who'd escaped into a keep but finding elves on the march in the woods (elves being scary monsters in this world) seeking property he'd stolen from them. The keep was reinforced with iron and magic against them, leaving us inside with the criminal. Who was a vampire. Eventually we got out of there, having been kicked around, and another arc in the same neck of the woods (by this time it had switched to one-shot sessions instead of full adventures, but the latest oneshots have stretched into quite fun mini-games) had more minor nobles/highly skilled commoners tracking a girl who'd fled an arranged marriage, but in passing finding the robot from before being displayed at a noble's party, having been at least incapacitated after attacking a great city.

What I mean to say is, have several frightening forces slowly working their way into the world. On the surface, everone's against all of them- if they know about them. Below the surface? Different families might have different alliances or enemies amongst these strange forces, or rogue members allying with them. Simple missions bring you close to weird things that may or may not be in your power to deal with, but you can get away for now and you'll certainly see them again in the future.

Raum
2009-01-14, 05:53 PM
For this I have several questions - what kind of system would work well with this? You may want to consider Reign. From what I've seen, it's set up to do much of what you want by default.


What would also be nice would be a mass combat system for playing out battles and ambushes of the house's troops.The best abstract mass combat rules I've seen are in Savage Worlds. If you want something less abstract I'd look in to some of the wargaming rule sets.


What setting would fit to this? Any setting you want. For real world eras I'd look into the 100 years war and Japan's warring states periods. It works in many areas though, could as easily be planetary warlords in a science fiction setting. I do like all the available source material from settings closer to history though... For published settings separate from history, you might consider Artesia - beautiful setting but poor rules. For d20 settings you might even have each player as a Drow matriarch.


And third question: If you would play in such a campaign, what kind of plot elements and activities would you expect? What would make the game attractive for you, what kind of roles would be interesting for player characters, where do you see problems?Espionage, diplomacy, and warfare! What's not to love? :)

Egiam
2009-01-14, 07:23 PM
I have not played it, but Victoriana sounds like what you are looking for. I think it comes out sometime this summer.

Satyr
2009-01-15, 03:46 AM
Don't use a real-world setting. Instead, cherry-pick cool ideas from real-world events and cultures to create your own thing. If the players look at a country and say "oh so those are the Germans" you didn't conceal it enough. This is especially important when you're gaming with history buffs.

Why? What is in your opinion so problematic with a real world setting? I have made a bit of brainstoming and will probabyl not use a historical setting, but I would find it interesting where exactly you see the problems of a historical setting.


snip

That is beautiful. Not completely what I had in mind (my first idea was a group of retainers that defend the claim of rume for a very unlikely heir, like a girl in a strongly patriarchal society or a bastard), but your idea is admittedly interesting. Perhaps I am going to steal it.


We did it in 3.5 D&D without too much trouble- given one quarter of the usual starting gold, we were told we could choose one magic item, and that things like +1 swords or higher would be heirlooms or artifacts found on ancient battlefields, passed down in the families we belonged to (we started off as nobles). They might be named if they were particularly distinctive, or just be 'the really lucky, sharp dagger my grandmother passed down to me'.

This is pretty much the standard we played with when we used D&D 3.5 (not completely, as the characters themselves gained several power bosts, but equipment was much less significant and much harder to get).


You may want to consider Reign. From what I've seen, it's set up to do much of what you want by default.

I'll have a look at it.


The best abstract mass combat rules I've seen are in Savage Worlds. If you want something less abstract I'd look in to some of the wargaming rule sets.

Abstract is all I need. I want big battles be not more complicated than a duel between two characters, so this is perhaps a start. On the other hand, I have seen that there is a new Gurps Mass Combat system, which is interesting enough for me to overcome my dislike for buying pdfs.



Any setting you want. For real world eras I'd look into the 100 years war and Japan's warring states periods. It works in many areas though, could as easily be planetary warlords in a science fiction setting. I do like all the available source material from settings closer to history though... For published settings separate from history, you might consider Artesia - beautiful setting but poor rules.

I have begun to brainstorm over a setting; it is not very far advanced yet, but I have a basic idea. When I have more than a few key words, I'll try to present it.


I have not played it, but Victoriana sounds like what you are looking for. I think it comes out sometime this summer.

Victorian times would be considerable late for my intentions. All those nationhoods and administrative order doesn't work well with scheming, fiercely independent noble houses.

bosssmiley
2009-01-15, 06:34 AM
"Pendragon" and 2E's "Birthright" should both be useful here. Both are low-magic setting with aspects of feudal rule and courtly intrigue.

As for using real world history. Use the events liberally, but make sure you change the names (it worked for G.R.R.Martin :smallwink: ).

potatocubed
2009-01-15, 07:43 AM
The first game I thought of when I read your post was Pendragon (although I've never played it) and I second the suggestion of Reign as well (suitably houseruled to remove the gobble dice).

The problem with historical games is that in order to run one you have to know history better than your players. If you're a historian and they're not, that's easy. If, as you mention, your group is liberally seeded with history buffs... you're going to have problems*. At the very least there will be arguments over who did what, when. By making a world up you neatly bypass any complaints of that nature.

*In all fairness, you get the same problems in long-established non-historical campaign settings.

Nightson
2009-01-15, 07:56 AM
German nobles in the Thirty Years War would have an interesting time. Lots of intrigue, mercenary armies roving the lands.

Krrth
2009-01-15, 11:01 AM
Check out the D20 version of GRRM's books. It should do what you want, right down to the rules on making and playing a noble house.

Willfor
2009-01-15, 11:26 AM
Check out the D20 version of GRRM's books. It should do what you want, right down to the rules on making and playing a noble house.

He has said in a previous thread that he is greatly disappointed in both official RPG systems for ASoIaF. Personally, I have no idea what is wrong with the one that is coming out. Everything so far has looked on the level to me. But it isn't exactly going to help him in this matter one way or the other.

(The d20 version I actually do understand why he wouldn't want it.)

valadil
2009-01-15, 11:31 AM
I'm doing a noble house game very much like what you described, set in Martin's Westeros. The d20 campaign setting works very well, though it does need some tweaking. I get the sense that the playtesters knew what the rules were supposed to be when they tested, so they couldn't fix all the ambiguities.

Half my players have read the books. One player isn't interested in them. Another says he started, but hasn't gotten anywhere. The game still works.

Satyr
2009-01-15, 12:24 PM
The problem with historical games is that in order to run one you have to know history better than your players. If you're a historian and they're not, that's easy. If, as you mention, your group is liberally seeded with history buffs... you're going to have problems. At the very least there will be arguments over who did what, when. By making a world up you neatly bypass any complaints of that nature.


The idea I had was to a) pick one of those periods which are not completely known to my players or b) get the important base books fast. Historical games have a strong own appeal through the sheer familiarity, but that impresson may be a resuilt of being a historian.


German nobles in the Thirty Years War would have an interesting time. Lots of intrigue, mercenary armies roving the lands.

That is one of two periods I could not pick becuse of the regional content; we are living in the town were the Peace of Westphalia was signed, so for years and years, this was the standard topic for everyone in school. The other one is Roamans beyond the Rhine, because the most important digging to the batle of Varus is around the courner as well...



Check out the D20 version of GRRM's books. It should do what you want, right down to the rules on making and playing a noble house.

He has said in a previous thread that he is greatly disappointed in both official RPG systems for ASoIaF. Personally, I have no idea what is wrong with the one that is coming out. Everything so far has looked on the level to me. But it isn't exactly going to help him in this matter one way or the other.

(The d20 version I actually do understand why he wouldn't want it.)

I have the D20 version of A Game of Thrones (even in the DeLuxe edition with a second set of rules), but I got it quite late, after we had already tried to run an adventure based on the Hedge Knight with Gurps rules, and admittedly, the D20 version was unable to compete.

Until now, I have only seen the preview of the new version; I actually don't know if the system is even already available on this side of the Atlantic. That version was a tad to abstract for my taste and included some rule ideas wjich I found not very fitting for the setting (Fate Points are copletely wrong in this context, the rules for victory after combat includes too few of the chaos and arbitrariness of a combat). I will judge the system again, when I have the book in hands, but until now, I am not very impressed.


I'm doing a noble house game very much like what you described, set in Martin's Westeros. The d20 campaign setting works very well, though it does need some tweaking.

Where? What rules did you tweak? I had the imporession that the influence points rules are a bit dry to simulate the gathering of power and social contacts. How is your experience with them?

Salz
2009-01-15, 03:21 PM
Use Harnmaster. Period. It is an excellent system with realistic rules. Magic is as prevalent as you want it to be. It is gritty, and the setting is not too tied to the system in the end. Keep it to humans only, and limit the magic characters can have.

Otherwise, I have planned on doing something like this for awhile and the thing I kept coming back to was the fact that you have to have pre-sessions (maybe two or three) with each player. You and them both need to understand their contacts, place, and goals in detail since other players do not need to know. The preparation makes or breaks this kind of game.

Satyr
2009-01-16, 02:56 AM
Yes, Harnmaster was one of the system I thought would work well and have the great advantage that I own it; it has two problems though - a) no mass combat rules that I know of and b) I am quite sure that the game is a bit too harsh for at least one of the players; that is no reason not to use it, but I wasn't sure if there is something else out there I didn't know of.

valadil
2009-01-16, 11:23 AM
Where? What rules did you tweak? I had the imporession that the influence points rules are a bit dry to simulate the gathering of power and social contacts. How is your experience with them?

Influence rules seem interesting, but my players seem to be avoiding them so I can't really comment. I did house rule that influence can be used in place of knowledge, albeit at a higher difficulty (since influence goes much higher than anyone's max skill rank).

The combat rules seemed vague. We the rule that says you roll for defense checks (ditching the automatic +10 that D&D gives on AC), but changed shields so they could only work once per turn. Some of the examples hinted that that's how shields work, so it may not have been a change. The rules just seemed vague there. Players still get -2 for each defense check they make, so it is sometimes worthwhile to save the shield for later. IE, if your shield gives +6, instead of rolling defense checks at 0+6, -2, -4, etc, it's usually better to roll 0, -2, -4 + 6.

We threw out ECL based on rank. Everyone is the same level. If I'd planned on a game with more infighting I'd have kept ECL based rank, but this is a friendly party and it didn't seem necessary.

Mounted combat by default lets a rider make ride checks in place of his horse's AC. We changed it so this is usable once per round, but a player can take the feat several times to gain more uses per round.

I think that's it for actual changes. Again, the book is vague and the editing is terrible. There's at least one typo per page. As such, I'm not sure what rulings we've made are changes and which ones are intended. The game does have a lot of good ideas, it just takes some work to get to them.

--addendum--

I can't stress this enough, but you have to make sure your players understand that a noble house game is not your ordinary D&D game, not by a long shot. One of my players is trying to play a knight. He hasn't been knighted yet, so he can't take the prestige class. I explained to him ahead of time that roleplaying requirements are real and he'll have to get himself knighted. Seemed okay with it at the time, but now he's cranky because his build isn't perfect because the prestige class is delayed. I even wrote in another plot so he can get himself knighted and he's still being a PITA about it.

Sorry for the rant. I guess my telling them that in this game story > mechanics wasn't enough to break down years of railroading.