Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

So as you all know my last campaign was a bust, though not because of its concept, and though disheartened I still dream of DMing once more. I like to envelop the players into a world and concepts interesting enough to suck them in but also to change their entire setting as a result. My last campaign involved a collective history where everyone's ideas came together and clashed (which, in the end... didn't clash too much. The concept was supposed to be people creating largely incompatible ideas and it not working)

In that vein I have another idea that is somewhat similar.

Basically the players have in their possession a book of history that gives very general ideas of the world events that transpired with three or more major time periods.

This book however allows people to add single sentences with a year to the book which will alter history as a result.

So Perhaps a villain the players are having trouble with died, or maybe a treasure was discovered.

The rules of the book as I imagine are as follows
1) No one but the players can see or write in the book
2) The book cannot erase history only add to it
3) The players cannot write of themselves nor change themselves through their own writing, their possession of the book implies a free will and autonomy that cannot be altered.
4) At the end of every session they can write something in the book (possibly they may have to)

That is all I have for now, though bringing this up is making me sad for some reason.

I'll force myself to continue anyhow.

The basic result is that each layer of history adds complications no matter how well meaning as well as contradictions in history ("This villain died here, but history says he did that here") creating fantastical scenarios that can entirely change things.

Eventually the players will get booted to another age where their changes are given full impact.

Right now I am thinking of ways to make the players want to write in the book and write in it a lot. Possibly by making it the point, possibly with a "Final history" that the players are trying to avoid... Or possibly that there is another character who isn't a PC who is using their ability to lead everything to ruin.

[weenog]

Look for and recruit a problem player.  The kind of player that gets bored, hits the track switch lever, and sends the plot train over a cliff.  You'll only need one.  He'll make more than enough entries on his own, and probably get the other players in on it too.

I'd volunteer but I'm pretty busy with work and study lately.

If you're sufficiently experienced with that sort of player, you could also model an NPC after such a player, and give the players some hints and nudges through the NPC.

[Neonivek]

Yeah but the problem with having a problem player is that the perception may become more "That player is messing us up" then "Ohh my the book is a lot more complicated and far reaching then we thought and we need to use it wisely.

[weenog]

Yeah but the problem with having a problem player is that the perception may become more "That player is messing us up" then "Ohh my the book is a lot more complicated and far reaching then we thought and we need to use it wisely.

So implement him as an NPC.  Might be a good opportunity to use a Kender, if you're playing a setting that includes them.  Since you're the DM, you can keep the racial kleptomania, curiosity and fear immunity toned down to "walking adventure hook willing to experiment," rather than some players' "I can fuck over and backstab the party all I want and blame the character" take on it.  The kind of guy likely to acquire the book in the first place, and try writing in it after knowing its effect without worrying too much about the butterfly effect; not the kind of guy to wander off and steal from a sleeping dragon, kick it under the tail for lulz, and then kite it back to the rest of the party, most of whose key magic items are missing.

[Neonivek]

So start the game off with everything messed up because someone just wrote a bunch in it?

[weenog]

Nah.  Start the game normally, introduce the NPC early and build him into an ally, then introduce the book through the NPC.  The book is a time-manipulation device, that's inherently interesting to players with any creativity, you won't have to hard sell it.  What you do need is to show the players what the book does, how to make the book work, and that it's okay to use it.

Maybe a few dramatic but non-threatening demonstrations like retroactively causing a lonely and regretful old man to be reunited with a woman that got away when he was younger, changing the well-known flag design of a powerful nation, or revising a celebrity warrior's choice of favored weapon, would help to show them what they're dealing with, without spooking them.

[Neonivek]

The original other rule I thought of is that it has a year rule. I think I'll keep it, basically they cannot alter immediate history.

[GreatWyrmGold]

some players' "I can fuck over and backstab the party all I want and blame the character" take on it

I think I understand why no one else likes kender now.

Neat idea. Not a lot I can add except figuring out how time paradoxes and such will work out. For instance, killing one's parents (on accident or purpose), preventing yourself from getting the book, etc.

[Neonivek]

For instance, killing one's parents (on accident or purpose), preventing yourself from getting the book, etc.

Ohh on the contrary the holders of the book are entirely immune to the book's effects (well somewhat... they can become "people who never were" and people who knew them may not anymore)

The paradox comes from the fact that you can add to the book but you cannot erase.

Thus if you write the death of lets say the Dragon that ate this city... then the event where said dragon at it still happened as far as the book is concerned.

Thus you created a paradox and it will resolve it by messing with events in order for both events to be true, and where they cannot... Things will occur.

[weenog]

some players' "I can fuck over and backstab the party all I want and blame the character" take on it

I think I understand why no one else likes kender now.

I don't necessarily dislike them, I just distrust them until they prove themselves sane and cooperative.  I've seen them used for aggressive, persistent, antisocial and party-hobbling behaviour too many times, and the race profile seems to encourage it.  I have seen two kender (well, one kender, and one kender-like homebrew race) characters that weren't horrible, though.  In both cases, they behaved more like active children than coked-up retards with an attitude problem.

• Stealing a signet ring with its cool design and interesting ink smudges, rather than a magic ring, a valuable but boring plain band of silver.
• Maintaining a dismissive "It's no big deal, I'll be fine" attitude toward disaster, rather than actively courting it.
• Ability to learn and remember that pain hurts, and should be avoided if possible.
• Awareness of what they are supposed to be doing, and that their associates/guardians will be upset if they deviate too far from the plan (so do it when they're not looking, and make sure it's not anything too noisy or visible).

A little playing with fire is fine.  Chain-smoking in a munitions dump because you think it's a kender thing to do (and you have Evasion anyway) is not fine, and rightly upsets other players and the DM.