PDA

View Full Version : Disrupting Negotiations



Surpriser
2014-12-15, 03:07 PM
I recently came up with an idea for an adventure/mini-campaign setting:

There are multiple adventures along the lines of "stop the evil spies/saboteurs from ruining everything", it might be fun to reverse the situation:

In short, there are 3 kingdoms who have arranged for a summit to negotiate an alliance between them against a fourth kingdom's aggressive expansion course. This fourth kingdom has plans to conquer the others but is not strong enough alone against all of them together.
So, the PCs are sent in as agents of kingdom 4 to disrupt the treaty negotiations and ensure that the alliance never forms.

However, straight up killing or assaulting the diplomats will not accomplish anything, as this will only convince the three kingdoms of the need for such an alliance.

Now I am looking for some ways for the PCs to accomplish their task. Basically, every notable NPC (mainly the diplomats and their deputies) should have some hooks that would make them not agree to an alliance or force them to leave the summit. Think things like intimidation, blackmailing, bribes and so on or convincing them that the others are actually plotting against them and not trustworthy.

It would be nice to find a few other possibilities that do not involve only social dynamics (basically anything to which a bard would simply say: "I do it, what next?")
Best would be a mix of combat, skills, creativity and intrigue.

The system is D&D 3.5, though the general scenario should be applicable to most systems.

DireSickFish
2014-12-15, 03:28 PM
A brilliant idea for a campaign or a session. I would make sure to differentiate all of the sides on geography, strengths, and weaknesses.

Perhaps one side is the closest to the big empire and has done the most fighting against the empire. They know your tactics the best and are going to be used as the staging ground for the war against the empire. Being in fights for so long has however left there military rather haggard and they will be relying on the other two to supply the bulk of the force. This sets them up to be paranoid about the other two just splitting up his territory when the alliance is over. He will also be the most resistant to simple persuasion as his kingdom has lost the most to the empire.

Another kingdom could be ruled by more of a mageocracy/scholarly type. They have more mages and clerics to give to the fight. Perhpas they are really after land in the empire which holds valuable crystals that can augment magic, or an area with old runes they which to uncover and investigate. War is a bit bitter on there leaders tong but they see it as necessary because the empire is such a huge threat, and because of the rich resources they covet. This kingdom is the most susceptible to simple bribery, but is the empire willing to give up resources to convert them. They are also educated and smart with access to divinations, so any attempt to fool them would be very hard.

Then a third faction with some other stuff along the same lines. I've got a few ideas but none as good as my previous two.

Edit: Oh I've got a decent idea for a third faction. They are more of a costal kingdom with far flung exotic trade routes and a large navy. Most of there land forces being supplied are actually mercenaries they buy from overseas. There navy is also a huge threat in blockading the empires trade. This kingdom is rich being run by a new young king/queen who is looking for glory. The kingdom is already rich from trade routes and the leader is going to spend to make this a great victory. Bribery of the side would be near impossible as they are rich and willing to spend for glory, the individual mercenary companies might be swayed. The players could try to convince the leader that overthrowing a the huge sprawling empire would not get him the glory he seeks.

Vitruviansquid
2014-12-15, 04:01 PM
Killing diplomats might work if you can frame the other nations for the deed.

You could also convince two of the nations that the third is coming to diplomatic negotiations under false pretenses, as they're actually already secretly allied with the fourth.

You could conduct a false flag operation to poison relations between the three kingdoms by posing as soldiers of Nation A and doing something disruptive in Nation B.

You could try to convince the diplomat of one nation that he has been recalled or the meeting has been postponed.

Surpriser
2014-12-15, 05:23 PM
I really like these characterisations of the three kingdoms. Having the paranoid, battle-worn underlings, the powerful and smart, but greedy and aloof mages and the welthy, glory-seeking traders who rely on mercenaries looks like a great source for conflicts even without the PCs intervention.

It might be a good idea to have the diplomats themselves embody the very essence of their homelands. After all, they were chosen to represent it as well as possible.
Their deputies can then provide a contrast to that, maybe having similar overall qualities, but with an important twist. For example, I could very well see the deputy of the first kingdom (let's call them the Warriors) be cautious, but extremely ambitious. And while he wouldn't actually ally with the empire, he might grasp a chance for a promotion, if a place were suddenly available...
To further spin this line of thought, the deputies should be more easily swayed than the diplomats - but the PCs first need to somehow put them in command.

Knowing my players, false flag operations will probably feature heavily in their schemes. It will be interesting to see how they will circumvent the Mages' divination attempts.

Do you know of any approaches for those players not leaning towards intrigue and roleplay? Some kind of skill- or combat-based mechanics would be great.

veti
2014-12-15, 05:30 PM
Pick the country with the most ruthless ruler (let's call it 'A'). Convince the head of their mission that their ruler is looking for certain - concessions, and will be very upset if he doesn't get them. Things like: tribute or territorial concessions from the other nations in exchange for his support. Basically, insert conditions that are likely to make the other parties go "huh?"

Then bring top-secret intelligence to one of the other parties that 'A' has only mobilised two-thirds of its army so far, it's holding back the other one-third for reasons unknown. (Whatever you do, don't tell this to both of them - that would only arouse suspicion.) Tell them to be on the alert for signs that A is not there in good faith.

Provided you can suppress or intercept communications with country A, to make sure nobody can contradict your reports - that should just about do it.

ClockShock
2014-12-15, 05:57 PM
Provided you can suppress or intercept communications with country A, to make sure nobody can contradict your reports - that should just about do it.

Depending on the setting, this is a potential combat-based solution that could form part of your players' plans. Tracking down and 'disappearing' a trusted messenger before a delivery is made.

Surpriser
2014-12-15, 06:02 PM
While these are certainly very good suggestions, maybe I should have clarified what I am looking for:

I will be DMing this adventure (or at least writing it, we will see whether I actually get a chance to run it...) and I expect the players to come up with the actual strategies to pull it off.

What I need are interesting ... lets call them "angles of attack", the PCs can use if they find out about them. Ideally, each diplomat and deputy would have a different set, with a few (bribery, intimidation, framing the others,...) being common to all, though maybe not equally viable.

Things like: One diplomat has an extremely strict code of honour and will refuse to work together with anyone he perceives as "unworthy". How the PCs use that, if at all, should be left to them.

EDIT:

Depending on the setting, this is a potential combat-based solution that could form part of your players' plans. Tracking down and 'disappearing' a trusted messenger before a delivery is made.
Ideally, that would be a messenger carrying information that both hinders the diplomats and helps the PCs.

DireSickFish
2014-12-15, 06:18 PM
As far as combat I'd use it as a means to an end. The main thrusts of the adventure -should- be the intreague and roleplaying to determine what exactly they need to do. But you could have fruitful information at the end of some combat. For example:

There is going to be a tournament to celebrate the alliance that's about to be formed. The deputy of the Warrior faction will be presiding over it. If the partyw ins the tournoment they will have an opportunity to get the deputy one on one to talk with. Maybe he lets slip something he's not pleased with about the alliance that the pc's follow up on. Maybe they can ransac his quarters for strategic plans, whatever.

Or the Scholars are interested in the Empires ruens .. and the party knows of some ruins in empire land that is close to the meet up. If they do some dungeions delving they may find out what the ruins are. Perhaps the location of an ancient library on a map that the empire would have no problem handing over to the Scholars, because then they aren't giving up land. Or a sentient item form the ancient times, now the party has to decide weather to turn it over to the Scholars to get them to side with the empire or keep it for themselves and come up with another plan.

The exotic mercenaries could have multiple faction leaders. One faction is led by the "strongest warrior". If the PC's can manage to best him then they will disrupt the iron grip he has on the clans. As he is leading with charasma, and is native to the tribe and the PC's arnt they can't maintain leadership over as many as the previous merc leader did. This leaves a bunch of hostile mercenaries in forgen territory which is very bad for negotations as the Traders brought them in and the Warriors have to deal with it.

JoshuaZ
2014-12-15, 06:50 PM
While these are certainly very good suggestions, maybe I should have clarified what I am looking for:

I will be DMing this adventure (or at least writing it, we will see whether I actually get a chance to run it...) and I expect the players to come up with the actual strategies to pull it off.

What I need are interesting ... lets call them "angles of attack", the PCs can use if they find out about them. Ideally, each diplomat and deputy would have a different set, with a few (bribery, intimidation, framing the others,...) being common to all, though maybe not equally viable.


Most of these are written for ambassadors but could apply to their assistants or such.

Blackmail fodder:

One ambassador has ancestry from a disliked minority (e.g. orcs, elves, some disliked other human group) and will be disgraced if this is revealed.

An ambassador has an illegitimate child that their family doesn't know about.

An ambassador is actually the secret the heir to the last imperial dynasty the current monarch or monarch's ancestors displaced.

Bribery fodder:

An ambassador (or his assistant) has large gambling debts.

An ambassador's noble title is entailed in a way such that it can only be inherited by a mage (they themselves are a mage but very weak). None of their children are mages, and the nearest mage-heir is a cousin of the ambassador that the ambassador really doesn't like. If they can find a way around this (such as finding a way to get one of the children to have magical ability).

Intimidation:

Kidnapping family members is always an option. See also secret children above who are even better for kidnapping since the ambassador can't do as much about it.

Kelb_Panthera
2014-12-15, 07:44 PM
Kill one of the diplomatic parties and replace them in the negotiations. The damage you can do to such a meeting as one of its members far outstrips what you can do as an outside influence. You'll also completely eliminate one of the nations ability to influence things. If you can frame it such that it looks like one of the other nations did it, all the better. With any luck you might even be able to push two of them to sparking off a war with one another. Winning a war on two fronts is exponentially more difficult than any one-on-one conflict.

Surpriser
2014-12-16, 06:36 AM
There is going to be a tournament to celebrate the alliance that's about to be formed. The deputy of the Warrior faction will be presiding over it. If the partyw ins the tournoment they will have an opportunity to get the deputy one on one to talk with. Maybe he lets slip something he's not pleased with about the alliance that the pc's follow up on. Maybe they can ransac his quarters for strategic plans, whatever.

Or the Scholars are interested in the Empires ruens .. and the party knows of some ruins in empire land that is close to the meet up. If they do some dungeions delving they may find out what the ruins are. Perhaps the location of an ancient library on a map that the empire would have no problem handing over to the Scholars, because then they aren't giving up land. Or a sentient item form the ancient times, now the party has to decide weather to turn it over to the Scholars to get them to side with the empire or keep it for themselves and come up with another plan.

The exotic mercenaries could have multiple faction leaders. One faction is led by the "strongest warrior". If the PC's can manage to best him then they will disrupt the iron grip he has on the clans. As he is leading with charasma, and is native to the tribe and the PC's arnt they can't maintain leadership over as many as the previous merc leader did. This leaves a bunch of hostile mercenaries in forgen territory which is very bad for negotations as the Traders brought them in and the Warriors have to deal with it.
What I really like about these suggestions is that each of them could be used by the PCs in multiple ways:
They could decide to enter the tournament themselves, maybe arranging for some "accidents" while they are at it, and win influence with the Warriors and Traders. Alternatively, they might use the tournament as cover to ransack some diplomats quarters while they are away.
The same goes for the "ancient artifact" hook - give it to the Mages as a bribe, convince the Traders (who will probably host the summit) that one of the other parties was trying to plunder their treasures under pretense of peace negotiations, or use it themselves.
The mercenary leader might be the deputy of the Traders' ambassador and he would certainly bring his lieutenants with him. That way, if the PCs manage to kill or otherwise remove him from command, the mercenaries will start fighting among each other, thus severly weakening the position of the Traders. Alternatively, one of the lieutenants could be bribed / blackmailed into attacking the other parties or the PCs might use the presence of so many armed soldiers alone to further increase the paranoia of the Warriors.


Most of these are written for ambassadors but could apply to their assistants or such. [...]

I will probably set this up in a way that each of the deputies has a few deciding weaknesses/secrets that the PCs can use to gain control over them.
The ambassadors will have those too, but none that would make them immediately pack their things and leave if they were exploited. Instead, they will have to be convinced that either the alliance will not be successful or that one of the other parties is not playing fair. Of course, if that is too complicated, the PCs can always find a way to remove them from command and replace them with their more easily swayed deputies.