So I started a new campaign of Simple Superheroes this past weekend with some of my original gaming crew. I have used "connection webs" at the start of campaigns a few times, and found it quite useful once again. The chief purpose is to help define some of the important NPC's and organizations connection to the players (and to each other.)
The previous time I used this was for a recent Amber game, and that help set up the complexity of family connections well. This riffs a little off of the "Pathways Map" from the Smallville RPG, though it has no mechanical impact.

The Map we came up with after we created characters looked like this:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]317[/ATTACH]

I wrote down a few important individuals from the setting (Prof Adrakis, Dr Newton, and Task Force Alpha [TFA]) and then the player's Superheroes (Sam, Hyde, Eye of Ra, Shadow, and Grave Walker). Then I started things off by linking Prof Adrakis and Dr Newton with "both worked on the 'disastrous' ONEVA project." Then each player took a turn creating a connection between anyone on the board, or even connections to new NPC/Organizations. We went around a few times, including me as GM adding some connections and new items that I felt were important for the setting, (and a connection line or two to make life interesting for the players).

It worked well, though I would have liked to see players tie in some of their Relations more on the Connection Web. Relations still featured in the first session and

It seems to be a good way to both introduce players to the setting/story, and have them contribute to it and get buy in. Makes it easier to have players operating separately on different goals, in our session there was some conflict when players first ran into each other -- which is a classic comic book trope that we all embraced.

Has anyone else used such "Connection Webs" or similar approaches at the start of a campaign?

Yes. I tinkered heavily with d20m Gamma World's community system which has a sort of overall population attitude web. And tinkered with a system that generates some interesting connections and quirks for NPCs.

Works best when the players are the sorts that like to range out from a central start town. Or who move from town to town only after the current one has been more or less dealt with. (As far as they know.)

Quote from: Omega;916127Yes. I tinkered heavily with d20m Gamma World's community system which has a sort of overall population attitude web. And tinkered with a system that generates some interesting connections and quirks for NPCs.

Works best when the players are the sorts that like to range out from a central start town. Or who move from town to town only after the current one has been more or less dealt with. (As far as they know.)

When you do this, are the players involved in creating the "Web"?

I've run Smallville, so yes.  I tried a modified version of it once for Marvel Heroic Roleplaying, but it didn't work as well.

Quote from: Thondor;916278When you do this, are the players involved in creating the "Web"?

In the d20 GW one the players create the town and allot its interactions. Then the DM plays off that web. But its alot more abstract than the other ones.

For the other system the players have no involvement in the creation overall. But some of their early questions and answers will determine wether thers certain NPCs local or not. But not what their personalities are like unless its some sort of lose background connection. Very case by case and only when needed. Theres not much point in plotting out a towns interactions if only a tenth gets used. It is more fun to roll one up for neighboring towns though. That way have something prepped however vague for ideas.

I've done so with NPCs, political entities, etc., but not with PCs.  Generally I come up with the setting and my players establish their own connections, with that evolving as we go. Would be interesting to give a portion of that network to connect with, but with many elements hidden to start.

Quote from: darthfozzywig;916306I've done so with NPCs, political entities, etc., but not with PCs.  Generally I come up with the setting and my players establish their own connections, with that evolving as we go. Would be interesting to give a portion of that network to connect with, but with many elements hidden to start.

The point isn't really to expose all sorts of upcoming "secrets," but I do find it very useful for defining a player characters current position. And it gives plenty of ideas to riff on. It gives ideas for what a player might know as well.

In the recent game I ran:
Task Force Alpa is a key public player as the government sanctioned enforcers of metahuman activity. The players could have chosen to be part of the force, to have worked for them, or to have people they know as part of TFA.
What we ended up with was one character who keeps declining offers to join TFA, another who gets regularly visited by TFA parol officers, and a 3rd who is on their watch list.
Clearly this is going to go in a different direction then if they had decided that some of the heroes were already agents of Task Force Alpha.
I also included some well known figures from the disaster that created the first metahuman. One character started the session with "works for" Prof Adrakis, and ended the session by putting an arrow into his shoulder and fleeing the complex. Which was epic. But also gives me a chance for this character to know things about how Adrakis operates, that would be a challenge to work in without that (now broken) connection.

Quote from: Thondor;916312The point isn't really to expose all sorts of upcoming "secrets," but I do find it very useful for defining a player characters current position. And it gives plenty of ideas to riff on. It gives ideas for what a player might know as well.

No, I totally get that. That's why I would have (essentially) two social network diagrams, but the player one is incomplete (and possibly incorrect), depending on the goals.

Yes, we use them quite often.

However, we would never base a game around them or have them as a core mechanic. They are useful to show how PCs/NPCs react but are very hard to enforce or to hang rules off.

d20GW did it fairly well. Though its more of a community attitude web than individuals.

Most of the ones Ive seen just build the connections and you plut what you got into the campaign. Akin to some map generators. Never seen one that actually runs a town as a sim during play.

I just put myself into the world, and into the heads of the NPCs, and this stuff takes care of itself.

Quote from: RPGPundit;917200I just put myself into the world, and into the heads of the NPCs, and this stuff takes care of itself.

I would argue (at least in my case) that this sort of thing really isn't for the GM. It's for the players to establish connections to each other, and to NPCs and organizations that you deem to be "important."
Its a good way to get buy in from players because they feel like you are making them a part of the world - and it gives them some agency in how they are part of the world.

I've found that it helps inspired more nuanced play.

Quote from: Thondor;917520I would argue (at least in my case) that this sort of thing really isn't for the GM. It's for the players to establish connections to each other, and to NPCs and organizations that you deem to be "important."
Its a good way to get buy in from players because they feel like you are making them a part of the world - and it gives them some agency in how they are part of the world.

I've found that it helps inspired more nuanced play.

It depends. What Pundit said is essentially what creates the web of interactions being discussed, regardless if it's implicit before the game or whether it's the direct at the table involvement of the PC's interacting with the NPC's. The results are generally the same.

Anything that is established before the campaign kicks off is just "setup". Certainly players can create whatever connections they want during Char-gen in my campaigns. I usually modify those connections as lightly as possible in regards to whatever the setup of game requires, but I certainly wouldn't say they're somehow mutually exclusive. I grant agency to my players to play what they want as long as it doesn't completely not make sense for the setting, or if I can think of some way to make it work despite that. But this isn't some sacred player-right or anything. Depends on the player. Depends on what it is they want to do for a PC in terms of establishing those connections.

I always try to ground a PC into the setting. No one is a lone-snowflake without a very good reason (and in my games, if they are, that generally means there's a very big reason for it and it's usually not good. And the Player understands this beforehand.)

Yes, but not so fixed on the player-side. For players I prefer hook opportunities, and even then to the PCs' own social network, so they may be pursued at their leisure. I may want the PCs to be coherent to the world, and that entails some connection to acquaintences, but I think players are mature enough to roleplay their own relationship reactions in detail.

If we need to have a cohesive party composition with intraparty dynamics, I am totally down with this very Fiasco-reminiscent process. It's the one thing I thought was a great take away from that game.

Quote from: Opaopajr;917572Yes, but not so fixed on the player-side. For players I prefer hook opportunities, and even then to the PCs' own social network, so they may be pursued at their leisure. I may want the PCs to be coherent to the world, and that entails some connection to acquaintences, but I think players are mature enough to roleplay their own relationship reactions in detail.

GENERALLY... I have one or more intrinsic conflicts already in play (not always) and the PC's may or may not even know about them. Depends on their characters and respective backgrounds. The "hooks" are whatever connections I can tie to the motives of whatever factions, NPC's that are affiliated with the PC's, or the sub-systems that my players are interested in delving into with their PC's that their characters will need to interact with. That's all "the windup." Once the game starts... I just let it roll on its own. The pace of the pursuit of those things varies depending on the nature of the conflict, but usually the PC's dictate that by their own actions/interactions.

This is how I do "my web" - the very act of playing causes the web to mutate. Cause and effect. Move and counter-move. New threads pop up, some threads get snipped. GMing for me is just understanding how all the spiders in the web interact and acting accordingly.