PDA

View Full Version : Tips for PCs secretly working for opposite factions?



yougi
2013-10-07, 03:07 PM
So one of my campaigns is about to end, and I've been named to be the next DM. There are 6 of us in that group (so 5 PCs), and the current campaign is quite dungeon-crawl-focused, which we all agree we want to step away from for a short while.

Now, I had this idea for the campaign after we had a group discussion about which one could not "win" an RPG, given that the PCs all work together, and the DM does not play against them. The idea is to pit my PCs as "adventurers" or whatnot, working for a public organization (be it a King's court, an Empire, a large corporation or the FBI, that is not decided yet), but with a twist: each PC would secretly be an agent of another organization (a demon cult, a group of vampires, a rival nation, whatever). I'm not set on any setting so far, nor even a system in particular (although we've mostly been playing d20 things, so that would be preferable).

So what I'm coming here for is tips or ideas you have for this game, whether concrete propositions or abstract ones, or problems and issues you could see coming up (with, if possible, solutions to them).

jindra34
2013-10-07, 03:39 PM
1. Keep the offer and choice completely private. Don't start the game with the knowledge they are all opposing agents or what not in the open.
2. Allow players to actually be loyal (and if everybody chooses that, well they didn't want spyworks game anyway).
3. Keep the secret part clear. As in discovery with proof has bad consequences.
4. Have some mechanism in place to prevent blind accusations.
5. Look over the Paranoia rulebooks if you can.

yougi
2013-10-07, 03:43 PM
1. Keep the offer and choice completely private. Don't start the game with the knowledge they are all opposing agents or what not in the open.
Yes, I agree, and that was indeed the plan. Makes the betrayal that much more delicious.


2. Allow players to actually be loyal (and if everybody chooses that, well they didn't want spyworks game anyway).
Good point. Didn't really think of that. Thank you.


3. Keep the secret part clear. As in discovery with proof has bad consequences.
Definitely, consequences most likely being torture and death for the character...


4. Have some mechanism in place to prevent blind accusations.
Hmmmmm, like what?


5. Look over the Paranoia rulebooks if you can.
And what is that exactly? Where can I find that handbook?

jindra34
2013-10-07, 03:51 PM
Hmmmmm, like what?
Imprisonment or other 'bad things' up to and including the actual penalty for treason.

And what is that exactly? Where can I find that handbook?
Paranoia is an RPG that pretty much operates in the far end of the realms of game such as this. It does play it for comedy though.

Couronne
2013-10-07, 03:57 PM
I second the Paranoia suggestion - it was what immediately sprang to mind when I read the OP.

It's a future dystopia setting with an all powerul computer that runs everything and is off its meds. Everyone belongs to one of a number of secret societies with varying goals like 'collect things from outside the complex we aren't allowed to leave' or 'bring back communism, which consists of the teachings of the Marx brothers' and is secretly a mutant and nobody knows this about the other PCs IC, nor OOC knows what the others' society or mutation actually is (and being either is treasonable and punishable by summary execution - usually in a stupid a way as is imaginable).

Might be a bit zany for what you seem to have in mind (though you can play it darkly straight) and it does mean the players know up front that everyone has an agenda OOC (but not what it is).

Not sure where to get the core book from though - Mongoose Publishing used to do them but they've only got High Programmers on their website at the moment and you don't want to start with that splat (it's for the Paranoia equivalent of Epic Level).

Segev
2013-10-07, 04:01 PM
Have your secret organizations planned out, and then look at PCs' backstories. Do insist they provide you with said backstories! Then, take time, privately, to discuss their history and how it fits into the campaign and works with the motivations you want to set up. Suggest certain secret organizations as "hooks" to get the PC involved. You can avoid seeming to do this for "everybody" by offering it as just a possibility. It's something that "happens" to work with their backstory, uniquely.

It works especially well for people who don't have built-in hooks already for the main plot. "Well, perhaps you could be a member of THIS secret group and they sent you to work on this..."

It also works for those who want a little extra something, or a special toy, or the like. They get it "in return for working for" this other organization.

For those who aren't interested, or whom you can't think of an obvious hook, wait and have them approached in game. See what influence and position and trust they have with the known organization, and see what their proclivities are, then have a secret group that supports the proclivities and needs their privy access approach them.


Tell each player that you'll be passing notes to them, but that you'll make sure to pass other notes around so nobody realizes they have a particular secret. For those who don't yet have a secret org, make sure to give them a few special private notes from the legit organization or some hints and clues as well as the silly notes you use to cover sending real secret messages to other players.

yougi
2013-10-07, 04:03 PM
Paranoia is an RPG that pretty much operates in the far end of the realms of game such as this. It does play it for comedy though.

Oooooooh, shiny!

Mastikator
2013-10-07, 04:47 PM
Tell them each in private that they might get back-stabbed and shouldn't take it personally.

Couronne
2013-10-07, 05:27 PM
A potentially difficult bit to handle is likely to be how on earth the players manage to keep their various agenda secret whilst still pulling off whatever it is they are tasked with.

The problem I see is that breaking cover is a massive roleplay opportunity and whoever does it first will inevitably get to hog the limelight whilst the fallout is resolved, then when others come to a point where they feel it is time to 'fess up', it feels less special. Also, the more obvious it becomes that the party members are all working against each other, the less IC incentive they have to stick together. What we have to do is counteract the incentive to break cover.

There only way I see to really cope with this issue is to engender each person to keep their agenda a secret until some sort of final denouement which wraps everything up and brings it all out into the open. If you couple that with some sort of 'points' system for each player and let it be known generally that each player has a way of scoring points each session and the overall highest points 'wins' (which gets you your win conditions for the campaign), but that points will be deducted from players that reveal what they did to earn their points or otherwise discuss the points system, that might keep them on the downlow until it comes time for the reveal.

Then, each session, give each player one 'agenda' goal to do something for their faction and score points and one 'misdirection' goal to make themselves seem trustworthy to the party and score points. Give them a bonus point if they carry off the 'agenda' goal in a particularly innocuous and innocent-looking fashion.

Hopefully, if they play along, although the players will know that each of them is scoring points, they will not know what for or how many and will only know how their scoring system works. If you introduce the concept of the goals to each player separately with little white lies like 'everyone gets a version of these goals tailored to their character, and because you are aligned to your faction yours are a little different from the others', that might be enough to keep everyone sufficiently in the dark.

The challenge with that is making the different goals fair across the campaign.

Omegonthesane
2013-10-08, 06:46 AM
Having players with diametrically opposed primary goals will never work and will only engender OOC resentments, but diametrically opposed secondary ones can work. For instance, in an In Nomine demons game a while ago, for our raid against a sorcerer's fortress the Lust demon was ordered to kill the sorcerer for what he'd done to WW2-era prostitutes while the Theft demon was ordered to get him out alive (albeit presumably preferably in Theft custody) for... reasons that entirely escape me right now, but both shared the primary do-at-all-costs objective of "steal the MacGuffin skull for the party we are both members of".

geeky_monkey
2013-10-08, 07:11 AM
I did something similiar a few years back and it was a lot of fun.

Mainly because all the players thought they were the only traitor.

I'd approached them all individually during character creation and told them to shake things up I was letting them ,and only them, work against the goals of the organisation.

All of them decided to be traitors and spent the next six months messing up each others plans while trying to futher their own goals. Especially amusing was that 2 of them worked for the same cult and they were the ones who stopped each other plans the most - they were both convinced the other was about to out them as a cultist and kept leaving false clues against the other!

It was hilarious when the campaign ended and I let them know what had been going on.

I warn you though - there's a lot more planning and organising things with the players between sessions.

Kornaki
2013-10-08, 08:52 AM
If you don't want them to be directly opposed but still have a bit of fun competition you can have them work for agencies which are ostensibly allies but in reality competing to complete the same objective. For example if you had a modern day campaign, you could have someone working for the FBI, and someone working for the LAPD. The two of them are working together to bust a crime syndicate, but the LAPD and FBI both want to be taking the lead, which means that they are competing to capture evidence and claim it for their jurisdiction.

As everybody knows exactly what's going on but still need to rely on the other players, it's less prone to blowing up I think.

yougi
2013-10-08, 01:07 PM
*snip*

Agreed. Thanks for your input.


Having players with diametrically opposed primary goals will never work and will only engender OOC resentments, but diametrically opposed secondary ones can work. For instance, in an In Nomine demons game a while ago, for our raid against a sorcerer's fortress the Lust demon was ordered to kill the sorcerer for what he'd done to WW2-era prostitutes while the Theft demon was ordered to get him out alive (albeit presumably preferably in Theft custody) for... reasons that entirely escape me right now, but both shared the primary do-at-all-costs objective of "steal the MacGuffin skull for the party we are both members of".

Good thing to keep in mind, thank you.


I did something similiar a few years back and it was a lot of fun.

Mainly because all the players thought they were the only traitor.

I'd approached them all individually during character creation and told them to shake things up I was letting them ,and only them, work against the goals of the organisation.

All of them decided to be traitors and spent the next six months messing up each others plans while trying to futher their own goals. Especially amusing was that 2 of them worked for the same cult and they were the ones who stopped each other plans the most - they were both convinced the other was about to out them as a cultist and kept leaving false clues against the other!

It was hilarious when the campaign ended and I let them know what had been going on.

I warn you though - there's a lot more planning and organising things with the players between sessions.

That sounds awesome- especially the part about having two "traitors" from the same organization. Thanks!


If you don't want them to be directly opposed but still have a bit of fun competition you can have them work for agencies which are ostensibly allies but in reality competing to complete the same objective. For example if you had a modern day campaign, you could have someone working for the FBI, and someone working for the LAPD. The two of them are working together to bust a crime syndicate, but the LAPD and FBI both want to be taking the lead, which means that they are competing to capture evidence and claim it for their jurisdiction.

As everybody knows exactly what's going on but still need to rely on the other players, it's less prone to blowing up I think.

Hmmmm... I really liked the idea of it being secret, but I guess it could be done that way. More thinking to do! :)