PDA

View Full Version : Splitting the Party



StryderH
2013-11-06, 11:13 PM
The party is in a massive city and though they finally stopped trying to kill each other for having different alignments they all found different guilds and groups they want to join.

The vampire wants to be a blackguard

The kobold wants to be a bishop

The prince wants to be a Wu Jen

The Orc wants to become a melee litch

The gnome wants to become a technomancer

The mage wants to become a bard.


These are all different guilds and have their own missions.

Now the story can't really be continued until they reach level 20 because the last characters died and the stuff that's transpiring is way over their level 4 heads.

I have tons of fluff to get them there and make some kind of impact on the world, but at this point each person would need to have their own sessions.

I wanted to split the good and evil groups apart so that they will try and fight each other at the very end of the campaign but now everyone has their own agenda. Which is good... And they're dead set on this.. But I can't have separate sessions for everyone until they're level 20.

Any suggestions on how to handle this? At this point pretty much the entire campaign is roleplay if that helps

hymer
2013-11-07, 03:34 AM
My thought on this:

First, how big is the problem? Can you sort of give people what they want between sessions, and then have them come together for mutual adventure at sessions?

If not, talk to the players in plenum. Point out that currently, there is nothing to do with joint sessions, since each of them has opted out of the group and into their own scheme. What do they propose you all do?

If this fails to achieve results, end the campaign, and when you start the next one, have them make a compatible party together, with gentleman's agreements all around that the intent is to play this game together.

Sith_Happens
2013-11-07, 03:55 AM
If the main plot's on hold until they gain 16 levels, why not fast-forward them through that part somehow?

SethoMarkus
2013-11-07, 08:53 AM
If the main plot's on hold until they gain 16 levels, why not fast-forward them through that part somehow?

I suggest this. If they are dead-set on playing those characters/achieving those goals, why not just skip ahead?

Play one session with each player in private, detailing their character joining the appropriate guild and starting on their personal quest, and then one additional session with each player in private detailing the completion of their goal (and acquisition of level 20).

Then, once everyone is happily level 20 wu jen lich technobishops, join them back together somehow (maybe with a prophetic "you are destined to ally yourselves to save the world") and continue the plot you originally intended.

Ordinarily I'd say that forcing the players into a certain plot is railroading, but this seems more like you are trying to keep the group as one group rather than 8 separate games that happen to have the same BBEG.

StryderH
2013-11-07, 12:14 PM
On a side note, the railroading is not bad DM railroading, but it is there

We've been playing for two (closer to three) years and their dead characters left the fate of all the planes in the balance so they wanna fix it.

Also they've all pledged their immortal souls to do one mans will (sounds like super railroad but the PCs actually had the idea themselves before they knew this dude had anything to do with destroying all the realms)

so it's there and it's all the PCs doing

nedz
2013-11-07, 12:23 PM
You need a common enemy to unite the Guilds. Of course, once the threat has been dealt with: the mopping up should be hilarious.

Rhynn
2013-11-07, 12:26 PM
I wanted to split the good and evil groups apart so that they will try and fight each other at the very end of the campaign but now everyone has their own agenda. Which is good... And they're dead set on this.. But I can't have separate sessions for everyone until they're level 20.

Any suggestions on how to handle this? At this point pretty much the entire campaign is roleplay if that helps

First problem: why did you let them create a party that won't (or doesn't want to) stick together? That's not a party at all.


If the main plot's on hold until they gain 16 levels, why not fast-forward them through that part somehow?

I find skipping up to high levels incredibly unsatisfying (second problem: planning a campaign where the important stuff only happens at really high levels; third problem: starting that campaign at low level), because then you never get all those adventures where the characters actually become genuinely awesome in the players' eyes (which has to happen in play, IMO)...

... but really, what other option is there? You're gonna have to gloss over all that advancement. Work with the players to describe what each of them do (including tie-ins to each others' PCs), in one shared session, and fast-forward X months/years and Y levels ahead.

Magesmiley
2013-11-07, 12:26 PM
Sounds like your players would be happied playing Paranoia than D&D/Pathfinder.

BeholdenCaulf
2013-11-07, 12:39 PM
You could put them in a situation where they have to form 2 teams of 3 or 3 teams of 2 which, while a little railroady, still gives them options and choice

A common enemy is always good

I would avoid prolonged one-on-one at all costs, I always found that multiple players working as a team, using tactics and resolving disputes to be what set this game apart from one guy reading another a story

Good luck, it's a tricky one :/

SethoMarkus
2013-11-07, 01:36 PM
This is just an idea, but it seems that the only reason for making the new characters is because of some TPK with the original characters? Perhaps the goal of this new campaign, rather than being new low-level characters trying to fit in old PC's boots, the new characters need to find and resurrect the old PCs? Maybe each guild has a vested interest in one or more of the PCs and all work together to recover and bring back to life the old PCs.

This way, these new characters don't need to be leveled all the way up to 20 (right now, there's always room in future campaigns), and there's a common goal uniting the separate guilds (albeit shakily).

valadil
2013-11-07, 01:41 PM
You need a common enemy to unite the Guilds. Of course, once the threat has been dealt with: the mopping up should be hilarious.

I don't even think this is necessary. You just need to point them in the same direction. If those groups send the players into the mountains to retrieve a bunch of distinct MacGuffins, the players can travel together and maybe even help each other out.

It doesn't need to be so transparent as that. Basically what I'm suggesting is make them travel together. Have three or four sessions of travel. When they get to their destination, split off and do separate things (unless they need each other's help). Spend a session or two on this sort of thing. Then travel together for the return trip home.

If you want to throw a monkey wrench in things, give them conflicting goals. Or give one PC the goal of spying on another guild that a PC is into. Now it's in the spy's best interest to come up with an excuse to follow the other PC around.

The Oni
2013-11-07, 02:37 PM
I for one support rezzing the original PCs. They're bound to serve, aren't they? Better yet, make them kill their old characters as powerful undead with the new characters, THEN rez them.

Jay R
2013-11-07, 03:11 PM
I have tons of fluff to get them there and make some kind of impact on the world, but at this point each person would need to have their own sessions.

I wanted to split the good and evil groups apart so that they will try and fight each other at the very end of the campaign but now everyone has their own agenda. Which is good... And they're dead set on this.. But I can't have separate sessions for everyone until they're level 20.

Any suggestions on how to handle this? At this point pretty much the entire campaign is roleplay if that helps

No problem.

The blackguards are out to destroy all bishops. The bishops are having a religious war with Wu Jens. The Wu Jens have a mission to attack liches. The lich needs the body of a tortured technomancer. The technomancers have a vendetta with a local bard. The bards are trying to steal something from the local blackguards.

And voila! They're all in the same session.

nedz
2013-11-07, 03:17 PM
The mayor has a problem which is too big for him to handle, so he asks each of the guilds to assign some troubleshooters.


The blackguards are out to destroy all bishops. The bishops are having a religious war with Wu Jens. The Wu Jens have a mission to attack liches. The lich needs the body of a tortured technomancer. The technomancers have a vendetta with a local bard. The bards are trying to steal something from the local blackguards.

And now you can play Paranoia. :smallbiggrin:

malmblad
2013-11-07, 05:33 PM
You should talk with the players and come up with a solution together. Having characters with their own goals is good. But each player can't have their goals shine every game. You'll go crazy trying to accomodate every player every game. Hopefully your players understand that.

The answer could be as easy as: they consider each other commrades and prefer to adventure together, or the seat of goverment demands the dedicated service of a member of each guild and as the newest members the honor falls to them. Or you all agree to suspend some disbelief and gloss over the reasons the group is adventuring together.

It isn't so much about the specific answer as it is about the group's acceptance of a solution.

StryderH
2013-11-07, 06:40 PM
Some of you just had really god awful suggestions but over all this is gonna work out... I think I'll put them in groups of 3, and one group has a common goal and common enemy, and the other group is appointed by the state to do work because reasons.


Thank you for the guy who said skipping to high levels is unrewarding. You get it. You need a personal attachment to your character before they get slaughtered

Also the PCs who died are on a different continent, 2000 years ago, and their souls are in an unreachable prison that not even gods can breach, so rezzing doesn't work. They all died of old age anyway

Sith_Happens
2013-11-08, 01:59 AM
Also the PCs who died are on a different continent, 2000 years ago, and their souls are in an unreachable prison that not even gods can breach, so rezzing doesn't work. They all died of old age anyway

In that case, I would like to refer you back to


(second problem: planning a campaign where the important stuff only happens at really high levels; third problem: starting that campaign at low level)

If the PCs are supposed to be finishing the unfinished business of a group of much-higher-level predecessors, then you need to either
1. Have portions of that business that can be resolved at lower levels.
2. Start the new group at a high enough level to take on the business.

SethoMarkus
2013-11-08, 09:15 AM
Also the PCs who died are on a different continent, 2000 years ago, and their souls are in an unreachable prison that not even gods can breach, so rezzing doesn't work. They all died of old age anyway

Yeah, I've got to say that this bit of information would have been helpful from the start. I was under the impression that word had just gotten back that the PCs had failed in their task against evil and only one or two months had passed. It does make me question what sort of peril the world is in if it could sit idle for 2,000 years, but I digress...


I suppose another suggestion would be to not include the original plot hook at all (or at least not until the very end). Rather than trying to make this "Epic Three Year Campaign: Part Two", make it into it's own, separate campaign that is set in the same world, with a shared history. Focus on what you have now, not what you had before. Instead of having the fate of the cosmos lie in the balance and looming over head from day one, introduce that as an aspect much later on when the new PCs are at a high enough level to actually deal with the issue. Pitting the PCs against something that far above their level from the very beginning can make it difficult to give the players a sense of agency- if nothing they do now matters, why are they doing it? I'm not saying that is going to happen, but goals should be spread out so that some are short-term while one or two are long-term.

In the mean time, maybe run it as 2-3 smaller groups/sessions as others have suggested. Those groups can have their goals align when they get closer to that end-game-goal from the previous campaign. The characters need a good reason to all travel together if the goal is that far off, and I really just don't see any way that you could get all of these PCs together without breaking verisimilitude. So, instead, sic one group after Cause A, send another group after MacGuffin B, and when they accomplish those goals they realize that they both need to go after Goal C now.

And yes, I also understand that skipping ahead levels is not as rewarding. However, I also understand that starting a level 1 character with a very clear idea of how you want that character to be at level 20 is a fine way of becoming disenchanted with that character. It needs to be played out carefully to keep interest in that end goal. Skipping ahead is one way to skirt that issue, but from the language I see that you are fairly dead-set against that. The OP made it seem as though continuing the story at level 20 is what was most important, but that was my misunderstanding. I now see that you have three clear goals of: 1) level characters to 20 organically, allowing players to flesh out their pre-determined stories; 2) avoid private/individual sessions as much as possible; and, 3) finish what was left unfinished 2,000 years ago.

StryderH
2013-11-10, 01:20 AM
This is it's own campaign.. The PCs are kind of Air heads and don't actually know that the cosmos are in danger. I am already doing all that stuff you suggested, so it looks like we're agreeing. How do I delete a thread after my question has been answered? XP

Sith_Happens
2013-11-10, 06:27 AM
Why do you want or need to?:smallconfused:

Rhynn
2013-11-10, 08:38 AM
How do I delete a thread after my question has been answered? XP

You don't. That's not how forums work.