Quantcast

Episode 270 – mixing your mythoi
by Dan Repperger

* (0:35) Handling interrogation in a roleplaying game.  Allowing the PCs (or NPCs) to get the information they want without degrading into senselessly graphic scenes.  Passing off misinformation or allowing the target of interrogation to manipulate the situation.

* (23:17) Characters that don’t quite fit in.  While this could come from clashes of personality or power level, we focus on those that don’t fit because of the accompanying mythos or setting presumptions needed for them to exist.

Hosts: Dan, John, Julia, Wayne

Comments (3)

DonJuly 8th, 2012 at 8:53 pm

Is it the lack of parallel planes of existence in the Dresden Files which makes this a problem? Certain other settings (Rifts and TORG come to mind) which are based on genre mash-ups partially do not seem (at least at first glance) to have these problems. Could that be a way out for other games which might not be germane to Dresden Files?

DanJuly 9th, 2012 at 4:38 pm

That’s certainly part of the problem. Dresden presupposes a certain mythos where everything is more-or-less within the Nevernever. The appearance of my character established that other realms exist and took the game in rather unhelpful directions.

That particularly problem isn’t too hard to solve. However, there are some other issues I’ll still wrestling with. I describe them in better detail in this forum post…

http://www.feartheboot.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=511139#p511139

EanNovember 13th, 2012 at 9:12 am

On the opening topic of dealing with torture/interrogation:

The way I do it is to ask the players “how far are you willing to go” in abstract terms. Will threaten him? Will you psychologically torture him? Will you physically torture them? Will you go so far as to physically cripple them or just cause pain?

This way I get to know how far they’re willing to push, and what that means for the character they’re interrogating, without making them actually describe what’s going on.

I’ve also added a mechanic in most games where I make the player roll several checks in sequence: First a will save (or equivalent) if their alignment/morals are opposed to what they’re doing, to determine whether they are capable of even going through with their intentions. Next an intimidate or similar check to actually conduct the interrogation. Finally, a Sense Motive check to determine how true what they’ve been told is, and whether the person is still hiding things.

Leave a comment

Your comment