2021-03-14, 08:32 AM (ISO 8601)
Re: A Debate of Dragons
I'm glad you like it! Thanks for the feedback! I haven't read Earthsea, but I'd be curious where the overlap is apparent.
A lot of my interest in dragon psychology comes from the Draconomicon for chromatic dragons, 4e specifically. As for what the players find out, I imagine that players conversing with dragons are going to be like "How can you do any of this and still consider yourself good?" So I'd imagine that insights into dragon psychology would be prompted by player inquiry. So that would be supplemental, optional.
As for which side the PCs would be on, I'd prefer for them to be on the side of the Iron Legion initially. So yeah, the demands placed on them would be increasingly uncomfortable. I'd want contingency plans for a) they decide to rebel and look for allies, or b) they go through with it until someone stops them by revealing some of the truth.
And yeah, the might players decide to **** off and become pirates. That's where the Iron Legion comes in. They're a pretty omnipresent, somewhat Orwellian threat. So actions the PCs take to "go off rail" will have a plausible response in the world around them. Namely, the Iron Legion will go after them. So they'd naturally ask themselves, "How do we defend ourselves against the Legion?" And then some NPC happens to have friends who are working on something for a nameless benefactor who is interested in why the Legion is being so evil...
I'm thinking that designing the campaign will begin with designing the organizations that both Kyros and Ziirka have built to exercise their dominance. That would give me a roadmap to create NPCs, write adventures, and figure out where encounters can fit in.
Last edited by titlebreaker; 2021-03-14 at 08:33 AM.