Staging Rebellion

[Quixotic1]

So I've got this game in the works. The local people are being oppressed--slowly at first, then the bad guys start to turn up the dial--and it's up to the PCs to put a stop to the tyranny!

They'll need to unite the peoples under a common cause and change the status quo. Viva la revolución!

Except...that's actually a really complex task.

So here I come, hat in hand, to ask: anyone done anything like this? Where are some good sources I could read up on to get to understand this topic better?

Thanks in advance.

[Melayl]

So I've got this game in the works. The local people are being oppressed--slowly at first, then the bad guys start to turn up the dial--and it's up to the PCs to put a stop to the tyranny!

They'll need to unite the peoples under a common cause and change the status quo. Viva la revolución!

Except...that's actually a really complex task.

So here I come, hat in hand, to ask: anyone done anything like this? Where are some good sources I could read up on to get to understand this topic better?

Thanks in advance.

Check out Paizo's Hell's Rebels campaign. It has rebellion mechanics, I believe. You can listen to it in the Find The Path Hell's Rebels podcast. It's 2nd Ed, but it was originally 1st. I know the GM, Rick, said in-cast where the mechanics came from.

[Quixotic1]

Check out Paizo's Hell's Rebels campaign. It has rebellion mechanics, I believe. You can listen to it in the Find The Path Hell's Rebels podcast. It's 2nd Ed, but it was originally 1st. I know the GM, Rick, said in-cast where the mechanics came from.

Interesting! I hadn't really given thought to separate mechanics or subsystems for anything yet, but yeah that may well prove the best way to handle it.

Any idea where I can get a look at it without buying anything?

Hm. That's odd. I thought there was another post, but when I went to look at it, it was gone.

What I've got so far is:

1. Identify the problem.
2. Identify the source of the problem.
3. Identify the solution.
4. Pursue the solution.
5. Inact the solution.

#3 and 4 are definitely the most complicated.
If you want to start a revolution, I know you need to unite the people to a single cause. But in situations where the cause isn't something fairly cut-and-dry, the actual activities you have to undertake are sort of ambiguous.
Recruitment and secret meetings. Protests, rallies and riots. But to what end? What is the subgoal of each of these things, and what are you working toward?

What I need to do is some historical or political research, I guess.

It doesn't help that I feel like this is half a city in revolt and half a workplace on strike. So I kind of want to combine "re-write the constitution" and "form a union".

[KorvinStarmast]

Sorry, I just had the answer dump. Trying again.

What I've got so far is:

1. Identify the problem.
2. Identify the source of the problem.

What is it that requires a revolution to fix? Why will a coup d'etat not suffice?

3. Identify the solution.

You just did. Revolution was your solution. But to get people on your side, you have to sell them on "change from X to Y".
Ok, what is Y, and now is it better than X?

4. Pursue the solution.
5. Inact the solution.

Enact.

If you want to start a revolution, I know you need to unite the people to a single cause.

You need to rally various groups with disparate aims to support a Cause that leads to That Change (X to Y) as the solution to their problems. Plural. They each have problems. The leaders of your revolution need to show how that solution fixes their (all of the groups') problem.

Recruitment and secret meetings. Protests, rallies and riots. But to what end? What is the subgoal of each of these things, and what are you working toward?

The goal is the achievement of a critical mass of people who will act when the day/opportunity comes.

What I need to do is some historical or political research, I guess.

Yes. And a warning: each revolution has some contextual differences from any other one.

It doesn't help that I feel like this is half a city in revolt and half a workplace on strike. So I kind of want to combine "re-write the constitution" and "form a union".

The latter precedes the former.

PS: I have formally studied the Bolivarian revolutions, Russian revolution, Iranian revolution, French revolution, American revolution and the never-ending revolutions in Mexico from the time of Maximillian until the Cristero War. (1926-1929).

But for your case the most important lesson may be from the Revolutions of Europe, 1848 (which has the labor tie in that you may like) ~ there is always a reaction, or a counter revolution, waiting in the wings. That alone provides plenty of further plot/tension/conflict once the revolution does play out.

In politics, the outcome is never final. (Slight paraphrase of Clausewitz).

Also, make sure to listen to this song all the way to the end.

[Quixotic1]

What is it that requires a revolution to fix? Why will a coup d'etat not suffice?

I'm not really familiar enough with the fine shades of meaning of these two terms to distinguish them.
On a quick Google reference, "a coup uses the military force against the government that can overthrow it through inside forces, while a revolution is the mass of the people trying to overthrow the government", and in this case, they probably won't have access to sais inside forces, so. No coup, I guess?
But more importantly: it doesn't matter. Whether it's a coup or a revolution, my question is the same: there seem to be a lot of parts to those things, and I want to learn more about them.

You just did. Revolution was your solution.

Suuure, but I'm asking what a revolution *entails*.

The goal is the achievement of a critical mass of people who will act when the day/opportunity comes.

I've thought about this, but I had to reject it almost immediately. If the PC's just recruit enough people and it all gains momentum and then everything starts moving on it's own, I'm basically denying them a climax and handing the final victory to NPC's. I need the PC's engaged from the beginning to the end.

I have formally studied (various revolutions)...But for your case the most important lesson may be from the Revolutions of Europe, 1848...

Great! Thanks.

And thank you for correcting my spelling. Always a treat.

[Melayl]

Interesting! I hadn't really given thought to separate mechanics or subsystems for anything yet, but yeah that may well prove the best way to handle it.

Any idea where I can get a look at it without buying anything?

You can try emailing the podcast. The GM is great about answering emails and helping folks out. He would be able to tell you exactly where the mechanics came from, even if he might not be able to give you all of the mechanics.

Listening to the podcast, particularly the first 10 or so episodes, could help you plot out your own reasons for revolution.

[Marcelinari]

If you have some time on your hands, I recommend the podcast Revolutions by Mike Duncan. It details the context, immediate causes, and blow-by-blows of several of the western world’s major revolutions, in a very accessible and digestible format (provided you can stomach the occasional razor advert).

As far as I can tell, a revolution takes this approximate shape - the existing government exerts increasing pressure on its subjects, and certain groups with power (minor lords, wealthy traders, lawyers, and business owners) start to grate under the government’s pressure. This may continue for some time, until the government is put into a position of weakness - substantial military losses, financial insolvency, a succession crisis. Then the pressured but powerful groups begin to agitate and build support for substantial (but usually not revolutionary) change.

The government uses force to crack down, but it’s existing weakness prevents the crackdown from succeeding - the surviving power groups decide that since the government cannot be negotiated with, it must be replaced. They promise transformative change to the larger but less politically powerful lower classes in exchange for their support against a now-unpopular government, and use their existing power to equip the lower classes and lead them politically. Whether or not they follow through with those promises is up to history.

Then there’s the military portion - usually the most successful revolutions are urban ones, since there is a large density of disaffected lower classes within swift striking distance of the organs of government. Rural revolutions can be met in the field by loyal government forces, and are generally not a match for well trained military units.

Some revolutions succeed at seizing the reins of power, but are brought down when the competing interests of the groups that comprised the revolution’s leadership no longer align as well as ‘kick out the old government’ did. Often the old government will use this time to rally its own support, often in the countryside, and try to re-take the organs of power. When a revolution is put down, it is never bloodless. You come at the King, you best not miss.

Anyway, all of that is broad strokes. You’ll find variations on each point, and the details are ultimately up to you. Also worth noting that in our world, successful revolutions become historical events, and future revolutionaries look back and take notes. They build upon one another, which makes the echoes all the more noticeable.

[Duff]

Important question for this -
How much do you want your PCs to decide for themselves?
At the Sandbox end, they'll tell you the sort of person they're looking for and make most of those decisions for you. You then just make up the characters they're looking for and decide how it all works.
At the other extreme, you decide who they need to talk to to move things along and simply describe the big picture stuff in general terms.
In the middle you might need to think a bit more

[Anonymouswizard]

You don't need a full blown revolution, a coup (illegal overthrowing of the government) could work with significantly less people. The issue there is that you won't have as much ability to wipe away and replace existing power structures. This requires less of raising an army, more convincing the key political and military figures that they'll benefit from a changing of the guard.

You also have to deal with fewer revolting peasants, although I still recommend mandatory bathing

[Sapphire Guard]

Why are they not revolting as things are, and how do your PCs change that dynamic? What do they bring to the table? Are they the muscle, the money, the political ties? It can't just be giving an inspiring speech, there are three of those in every bar.

[KorvinStarmast]

I've thought about this, but I had to reject it almost immediately.

You should not have. Every revolution needs leaders. Your PCs are the leaders, if I understand the OP correctly and your intention for the game. All mass movements need leaders. (And FWIW, read up on The True Believer by Eric Hoffer. Not too long of a book, a decent treatment of mass movements, and it ties in to your labor theme also).

Spoiler: a short summary and why I think it fits your game concept

Show

The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements is a non-fiction book authored by the American social philosopher Eric Hoffer. Published in 1951, it depicts a variety of arguments in terms of applied world history and social psychology to explain why mass movements arise to challenge the status quo. {That's what your PC's will lead, right?} Hoffer discusses the sense of individual identity and the holding to particular ideals that can lead to extremism and fanaticism among both leaders and followers.
British philosopher Bertrand Russell called the book "as sound intellectually as it is timely politically." People as far apart politically as Dwight Eisenhower and Hillary Clinton have referred to it favorably as a reference.

I need the PC's engaged from the beginning to the end.

Well, if they are the leaders, they will be, won't they?

PS: Marcelinari and Sapphire Guard both offered excellent material in their posts. +1 to them both.

[Quixotic1]

Really good stuff, all around. Thanks, everyone.

It might help to mention that this game will take place in a setting that's fairly light-hearted and self aware. So I don't need to have all of the gritty details nailed down within the game; I just want to understand the concept well enough to be able to make an approximation of it that will feel complete without being overly complicated.

Important question for this -
How much do you want your PCs to decide for themselves?

Ah yes. Agency questions.
Without getting bogged down in the irrelevant details, I want to present the players with enough structure that they aren't totally lost and enough freedom that they've got room to explore.

I don't think this needs to be a super planned-out part of the adventure; I've got my Bad Guys, some Allies and some Neutral Parties. I know what the BG's goals and plans are (roughly) and how that might change based on the player's choices and how successful they persue their choices.
Beyond that, my aim will be to have a good enough understanding of the setting to fill in any blank areas that they want to go to (physical, social or other).

Important question for this -
How much do you want your PCs to decide for themselves?

Again, I want to stress that I'm not really worried about the distinction between a coup and revolution. It's the general process I'm after, that's all.
Based on the definitions I looked up earlier, it seems like "revolution" is a more accurate term. But if it's a size thing, then sure. A coup. Imagine the thread is titled "Staging a Coup".

Why are they not revolting as things are, and how do your PCs change that dynamic?

I hadn't consciously considered this before, but the answer feels obvious. The citizens are tired, dispirited and afraid. Low morale.
The PC's are fresh to the problem and full of motivation to get the job done, etc.

You should not have.

I think we're talking about different things. When you said the goal is the "achievement of a critical mass of people who will act when the day/opportunity comes," that came across as very broad and vague to me. Like, once they recruit X number of rebels to the cause, they win! Adventure complete! And I want them to have to do more than that.
I think it's safe to assume that the PC's will be taking on a leadership role within this process.
What I've been unsure of is what that critical mass will actually be *doing*.

But I'm getting a much better idea as I do a little research on the subject.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think we're talking about different things. When you said the goal is the "achievement of a critical mass of people who will act when the day/opportunity comes," that came across as very broad and vague to me. Like, once they recruit X number of rebels to the cause, they win!

No, that's not what that means. It means that if you want to have a successful revolution, you need to build a large enough base to support it or it is doomed to fail. But building that base is only one step of many to getting a revolution to succeed.

And I want them to have to do more than that.

Indeed, since once they lead the revolution, (1) they have to transition power to someone to lead the new government and (2) they need to be able to resist the reaction/counter revolution.

I think it's safe to assume that the PC's will be taking on a leadership role within this process.

What I've been unsure of is what that critical mass will actually be *doing*.

Among other things, take to the streets, protest, riot, build blockades on roads and bridges, storm the Bastille, be the armed insurrection that overthrows the government: there's a lot you can do with a mob.

Yeah, you might want to read up on a few revolutions. All I've offered you are some very brief high points.

[Quixotic1]

No, that's not what that means.

Sure, I understand that now. The idea of a "goal", to me, is the desired result of one's efforts. So once you've achieved your "goal", you're all set and done. Which in turn carries certain connotations in a ttrpg. I think that's where the miscommunication was.

No, that's not what that means.Among other things, take to the streets, protest, riot, build blockades on roads and bridges, storm the Bastille, be the armed insurrection that overthrows the government: there's a lot you can do with a mob.

Thank you, that's pretty close to the stuff I was looking for.
Any kind of physical confrontation was pretty obvious. And riots and whatnot. But it's like...the purpose and effects of those riots were less clear. I knew all about how they stole the plans for the Deathstar; it's like...the leaders of the rebellion--what's an average day for them look like? What're they up to? And how did they get things to this point?

Now that I have a direction to point my research, I'm sure I'll be able to wrap my head around enough of it to satisty the table (and maybe even myself).
Now to make a kids-friendly version of the Banana Republic. Ouphe.

[Reversefigure4]

How much of the campaign will this rebellion entail? Is it the climax of an adventure, or the entire campaign?

I've done a few rebellions in games, and I'm a big advocate for having a mechanical subsystem of some kind. You start to get into abstracts like how many hundred rebels you have under your command, or how liberating food from the oppressors will help, or why you'd want to damage the tank factory. PCs are often removed from the action, since the player aren't going to be personally playing hundreds of rebels, and it can start to feel a little pointless. It can really help the players to have some sort of numbers in their face that show that they are accomplishing something.

Now, that subsystem could be as simple as "You need a Rebellion Point Score of 20 to have enough forces to stop the Oppressors. Destroying the tank factory entirely will get you +4, but just sabotaging it is enough to get a +2." Players have a tangible goal they can move towards.

It could be more complicated. "Your Rebellion has a Morale score, an Armaments score, and a Personnel score. If you don't liberate enough food your Morale will start to suffer, but halfway through the food stealing mission you see a chance to recruit to try and recruit a techie from the granary to aid your Personnel score. Do you risk the food mission to get her, or let the chance slip by?"

Or you can go to a more complicated subsystem again, where the Rebellion has it's own entire character sheet, special actions it can take, and ways of "fighting" enemies. I've never used it so no recommendation, but Paizo has all their Rebellion rules free in the Hell's Rebels Players Guide. Mine it for whatever you want.

Finally, I'd think about how the PCs personally can have a dramatic conclusion, since "You hit the score of 20, well done, the game is over" is a bit underwhelming. Ideally, it's something where the Rebellion makes a significant difference to that personal level challenge. A simple example: the PCs need to remove evil King Max to stop the Oppressors permanently. He's a high level character, so the only way is to do it in personal combat, since he'll easily slaughter your average NPC rebel. King Max has 4 extra guards with him for every point the Rebellion is under 20, making the fight far more difficult. If the Rebellion has 22, King Max hasn't been eating well from the worry, so he's got a -2 to all his rolls for the fight. If the Rebellion has 25, two of King Max's guards will turn on the other when the fight begins. If it's 28, Max's spellbook has been sabotaged, so he can't cast his highest level spells. Etc, etc, etc.

[Quixotic1]

Yes, I think I'll have to come up with something. Probably just a sliding 10-point scale, if I can wing it. And ideally, I wouldn't have to tell the players about the scale or show it to them; I would much prefer that their actions have a tangible, measurable impact on the world and they come to understand the progress they make that way, with the subsystem just being a means for me to track it.

The focal point of the game will be this whole rebellion/coup thing, with the players meeting and helping the oppressed along the way, organizing an uprising or whatnot and dealing with the repercussions, etc.

I was also thinking that the climax would be a throw down with the Main Bad Guy and some of his friends. I don't believe that every climax needs to be a combat, but in this case it seems fitting. And it would probably be really satisfying.

[Slipjig]

So the big question that the rebels (either the PCs or the NPCs actually leading it) is what they are actually trying to accomplish. Would they settle for the existing power structure remaining in place with structural reforms? Do they want to replace the existing King with a new King? A democracy? A theocracy?

A revolution requires that a significant chunk of the population finds the current conditions so intolerable that they are willing to risk their lives on the uncertainty of overthrowing the current regime and installing a new one. Every person or groups considering participating in the revolution must believe three things: 1) current conditions are bad, 2) things will be better under a new regime, and 3) that the revolution has a chance of succeeding commiserate with the improvement expected between 1 and 2.

Identify 5+ groups that can mobilize assets either in support of the King or the Revolution. For example: noble houses, merchant houses, the army, the city watch, the priesthood, the trade guilds, and the thieves guild.

Figure out what each faction wants, and what might be dealbreakers. For example, the noble houses might be willing to sign on for replacing the existing King with somebody else of royal blood, but are probably NOT willing to sign on if the revolutions goal is a democracy or theocracy. If one of the goals of the revolution is equality in wealth distribution, expect both the nobles and merchants to actively oppose the Revolution, even if they don't like the King much.

Some factions will default to supporting the King, some will default to sitting out the fight. Offer up some plot hooks for how the PCs might convince the leader of a loyalist faction to become neutral, or a neutral faction to support the rebellion. If they can't figure out a plan to make a faction switch sides, they need to figure out a way to neutralize them. For example, if the general in charge of the army is absolutely loyal, maybe they can arrange to raise tensions with a neighboring state to get the army out of the capital. If the merchant houses cannot be swayed, maybe they can be bankrupted.

When more factions support the revolution than the King, the time has come to actually depose him. (You can make it more complicated by assigning each one specific values, but I'm assuming this system won't be explicitly explained to the players.) If the players have recruited forceful factions, it may take the form of actually storming the palace, providing the PCs an opportunity for a throne-room showdown as the climax. If they don't have a military force, it may be an assassination.

[Duff]

2 things to consider.

Rebels often go off too early. You've got the Peasants Revolutionary Committee ready to take to the streets on the first of May. Then, in mid April, some police are heavy handed in raiding a tavern frequented by some revolting peasants. It becomes a brawl, the army arrives and kills some people and before you know it the PRC are out on the streets and have the Snow White Memorial Prison under siege.
The PCs need to decide whether to go early, to try and get them to go home or to accept they'll get crushed and it's better to sit tight for the 1st

Long Live The Revolution. After the revolution, who's in charge? How will the victorious group break up? How will they deal with opposition when things go wrong?

[JeenLeen]

Make sure your players would enjoy the rebellion sub-mechanic/system. But assuming they'd like it...

Now, that subsystem could be as simple as "You need a Rebellion Point Score of 20 to have enough forces to stop the Oppressors. Destroying the tank factory entirely will get you +4, but just sabotaging it is enough to get a +2." Players have a tangible goal they can move towards.

It could be more complicated. "Your Rebellion has a Morale score, an Armaments score, and a Personnel score. If you don't liberate enough food your Morale will start to suffer, but halfway through the food stealing mission you see a chance to recruit to try and recruit a techie from the granary to aid your Personnel score. Do you risk the food mission to get her, or let the chance slip by?"

Or you can go to a more complicated subsystem again, where the Rebellion has it's own entire character sheet, special actions it can take, and ways of "fighting" enemies. I've never used it so no recommendation, but Paizo has all their Rebellion rules free in the Hell's Rebels Players Guide. Mine it for whatever you want.

Finally, I'd think about how the PCs personally can have a dramatic conclusion, since "You hit the score of 20, well done, the game is over" is a bit underwhelming. Ideally, it's something where the Rebellion makes a significant difference to that personal level challenge. A simple example: the PCs need to remove evil King Max to stop the Oppressors permanently. He's a high level character, so the only way is to do it in personal combat, since he'll easily slaughter your average NPC rebel. King Max has 4 extra guards with him for every point the Rebellion is under 20, making the fight far more difficult. If the Rebellion has 22, King Max hasn't been eating well from the worry, so he's got a -2 to all his rolls for the fight. If the Rebellion has 25, two of King Max's guards will turn on the other when the fight begins. If it's 28, Max's spellbook has been sabotaged, so he can't cast his highest level spells. Etc, etc, etc.

I really like the last recommendation. I saw a PbP game here... I think it floundered, but it had PCs from a mix of Marvel and DC Comics forming a unified organization to better the world before Darkseid shows up. The idea being that the better the world was, the less power he'd have when he arrives. It was set out mechanically from the start and the DM said something like "You need a score around 200 to have a chance. I expect around 250. IF you can reach 300, the final fight will go a lot better."
The score had subscores, like how well the PCs had defeated villians, promoted social justice, etc. The rank in each subscore gave certain boons in combat, like Advantage on certain rolls. E.g., if the wizard's guild joins the rebellion, maybe you have X uses of "you roll advantage on a targeted spell attack OR can make an opponent roll disadvantage on a saving throw against a spell".

You could also have each faction that is/isn't with the King modify him.
I remember the final boss of Saga Frontier 2. In the last dungeon, there were several fights you could skip. But if you fight them and win, you not only get a cool item but also weaken the final boss.
Probably not literally weaken the King unless he's got some Soul Pact or something, but I could see something like "if hte military has joined the rebellion, his guards are gone" or "if the nobles have joined the rebellion, his income has lowered so his gear bonuses are less"... or well, something that makes sense.

snip

A lot of what was written here sounds good for figuring out what factions like the PC rebellion.

[Morgaln]

You might also want to figure out what the key infrastructure is that the rebellion has to get a hold of. If they want to be able to form a new government, the rebellion will need to control the places that allow them to govern. Obviously, this includes military and city watch (including weapon depots and the like), since those are the most likely to organize armed resistance otherwise. But it might also include banks, to keep the current rulers from cleaning out the government accounts and start you off bankrupt; mail service and newspapers to control the flow of information; the mint; key storage and production facilities (e. g. foundries, granaries and in more modern settings, power plants); possibly churches/temples, depending on how involved they are with the government.