One thing I have struggled to do is to really bring the Saxons to life. Yes they're there, and yes they're a threat, but in our current campaign, they've hardly sprung into life as three-dimensional characters. Pondering this the other day I remembered a discussion I followed some time ago on the the old Treasure Tables website. It turns out that this has been converted into an article which is downloadable here: http://www.treasuretables.org/files/Evil-Overlords-TT006free.pdf.

The idea is that the GM recruits a set of people to play the bad guys - not around the table, but in the background. At the end of each session, he emails them what has happened, and how it effects them. They then in turn email back how they think their 'evil overlord' would respond. They can also ofer suggestions as to what other activities they might be involved in.

Strikes me that this would fit the various Saxon factions in the GPC perfectly. No longer would they just be a set of similar sounding names who blend into one, but potentially a set of distinct and intelligent opponents who are no push over...

We're at 505AD and so its probably too late to introduce this into our campaign now, but I bring it to your attention in case it is of use to you!

An excellent idea there. Although in my campaign the player Knights ended up becoming the Evil Overlords themselves, so it'd have been pretty redundant for me...

Sounds like you have a very interesting story to tell...

The idea is that the GM recruits a set of people to play the bad guys - not around the table, but in the background. At the end of each session, he emails them what has happened, and how it effects them. They then in turn email back how they think their 'evil overlord' would respond. They can also offer suggestions as to what other activities they might be involved in.


That is a very keen idea.



We're at 505AD and so its probably too late to introduce this into our campaign now, but I bring it to your attention in case it is of use to you!


Oh, don't lose that resource! I suggest that if you actually have people who enjoy doing this, you use them to enliven the decisions of several households whose rivalry becomes more and more visible and which eventually fractures the perfect circle of the Brotherhood.

Each time I play I try to offer* the great factions as allies and leaders of a power group. The famous knights of the de Ganis, de Galis and Gawaine clans become factions, and possibly the players own characters forming a powerful faction, unafraid to challenge NPCs. My groups have always chosen one or the other.

*(or force, like through a PCs daughter marrying Sir Agravaine)

--Greg

This is where not reading too far ahead in the GPC has me at a disadvantage! Sounds like there will indeed be scope... [Dons evil GM head]
Have to say, did smile when reading about you offering factions... I am sure that forcing is far nearer the truth :P

This is where not reading too far ahead in the GPC has me at a disadvantage! Sounds like there will indeed be scope... [Dons evil GM head]
Have to say, did smile when reading about you offering factions... I am sure that forcing is far nearer the truth :P


Whatever drives the story is good for us.
But players generally choose who they like and don't like, and once committed, generally remain so (until the Table splits, anyway).

--greg

:'( Don't forhget the chuckle that accompanied the evil smile....

The idea is that the GM recruits a set of people to play the bad guys - not around the table, but in the background. At the end of each session, he emails them what has happened, and how it effects them. They then in turn email back how they think their 'evil overlord' would respond. They can also ofer suggestions as to what other activities they might be involved in.

Strikes me that this would fit the various Saxon factions in the GPC perfectly. No longer would they just be a set of similar sounding names who blend into one, but potentially a set of distinct and intelligent opponents who are no push over...

I always pit the players against each other - it makes my job as GM easier, and I can actually concentrate on being an adjudicator rather than an "NPC player".

For instance, one half of the players play Cymrics, the other Saxons (or whatever the campaign focuses on - the next one I start I think it will be Britains versus French - I want to stress that ancient feud more next time ... I've always wondered if they Saxons weren't just proxies in reference to the Norman invaders ... )

Or, if this is Star Wars, for instance, one group of players plays the Light Side, the other the Dark Side villains they struggle against.

This gives my campaigns a more dynamic, epic feel, when the bad guys don't also have a script. The players are the ones actually writing the story as they go along (and I just add in a third "neutral" chaos element, from time to time, when things get into a lull)!!!

I always pit the players against each other - it makes my job as GM easier, and I can actually concentrate on being an adjudicator rather than an "NPC player".

For instance, one half of the players play Cymrics, the other Saxons (or whatever the campaign focuses on - the next one I start I think it will be Britains versus French - I want to stress that ancient feud more next time ... I've always wondered if they Saxons weren't just proxies in reference to the Norman invaders ... )

Sounds intruiging. How does that work out in practise around the table? My most stressful times as a GM have been when a party of characters have been disfunctional and have ended up antagonising each other. Do you give one side a turn and then the other? Is it a free for all?