SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

To organize Player Characters that are owned.

Started by Catelf, June 26, 2015, 11:38:20 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Catelf

During a recent secondguessing of my wip "Ferals", I noticed a couple of important things:
As the PC's is supposed to be practically owned by different organizations and groups, I started out making those groups very diverse, like different corporations, law enforcement, gangs, and so on.
I thought that was a good idea.
It do not seem as that was a good idea now, or rather it is, but not as directly as I thought.

I ended up with organizations that had very little or no reason to cooperate with each other, and as the Player Characters are owned, there are also very little reason for characters from different Corporations and similar to cooperate.
If I compare it to oWoD, not even members of the Clans, the Tribes, or the Traditions had it that bad.

So, after some thinking, I have thus far come up with this:
See to that the choosable groups and organizations has reasons to cooperate, like against common enemies, or limit the characters to only ONE organization or group.

Are there any other possible solutions?
I may not dislike D&D any longer, but I still dislike the Chaos-Lawful/Evil-Good alignment system, as well as the level system.
;)
________________________________________

Link to my wip Ferals 0.8 unfinished but playable on pdf on MediaFire for free download here :
https://www.mediafire.com/?0bwq41g438u939q

apparition13

Being members of the same organization is easiest, since then they will have common goals (but remember that organizations aren't monolithic and sub-groups can have different or even conflicting goals).

If they are members of different groups, then common goals or common enemies are needed, with the limiting factor being achieving those goals or defeating those enemies may remove the motivation to cooperate.
 

Skarg

There can be complementary goals and causes that aren't related except that their goals or threats happen to be co-located. That can be interesting because it can get people together yet give different PCs different goals and concerns.