Intrigues vs just talking

[Goken91 9]

Question for GMs.  When do you normally switch from narrative to intrigues?  

[Avatar111 553]

33 minutes ago, Goken91 said:

Question for GMs.  When do you normally switch from narrative to intrigues?  

When the stakes are IMPORTANT. And probably when multiple NPCs are involved (Intrigues doesn't really work well for a Party VS One npc, unless you consider Momentum track separate for each PC, which you should anyway, but hey, that is just my way to play).

Use it about as much as you would use a Combat scene (Which are also not the best when trying to make a fight of a Party VS One npc...) Maybe once per session of 4-5 hours ?

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by Avatar111

[DanGers 55]

Good question.  I don't have a great handle on it yet, but I now only bring out the Intrigue rules when:

• All of the players would want to participate
• The results matter significantly and there is a good chance the players could fail
• The scene is a little more formal and would have some kind of structure or rules of decorum (a council meeting, formal negotiation, or banquet for example)
• Turn order might matter
• Either:
  • PCs have competing agendas,
  • Or at least one NPC has an agenda other than the PCs' agenda and there is a chance one or both agendas could fail
• It would be fun

That last part is probably the most important.  I've dragged out the Intrigue rules when I shouldn't have just because I could and no one liked it.  I've also run back-and-forth squabbles between players and NPCs with a minimum of structure.  It went well, but players instinctively wanted to roll inititative and invoke the whole Intrigue apparatus.  So, for me the most important consideration has been, would it be fun to stop the action and insert this mini-game that will take longer or should we just do some role-play, shake a few dice, and move on?

[DanGers 55]

There are a few other thoughts I'd like to share.  First, do you have a courtier character that hasn't been in the spotlight as much?  I've noticed our party's courtiers don't get to do as many cool things in combat and I worry that they feel left out so setting up an important Intrigue scene once in a while gives them a chance to use their special techniques and save the day for once.  Second, I've used Intrigue scenes as a way for the players to dictate what happens next.  It's sort of a GM cheat.  Say that the players are part of a larger group that is going to storm a castle.  Start an Intrigue scene with the leading commander and advisers and have the players make their cases for how to storm the castle.  If they are successful then not only did they impress the commander, but they might get to implement parts of the final plan and I now know what the big battle scene should include.

[Avatar111 553]

5 minutes ago, DanGers said:

 So, for me the most important consideration has been, would it be fun to stop the action and insert this mini-game that will take longer or should we just do some role-play, shake a few dice, and move on?

This is the difficulty in GMing this game. And it isn't really well explained how to do it. Strife management and techniques etc requires that not many rolls are made during "narrative scene".

I found that basically, in this game, you should not roll much dice outside of a structured scene or downtime. In narrative scene, it is preferable to just go with auto-success/fail depending on character skills and just narrate, until it is time for a crucial action/moment. And that moment should be a structured scene or downtime.

[Avatar111 553]

One of the big reason why it is hard to make a lot of checks in narrative scene is that Water ring becomes absurdly good to remove strife. So you end up with a few PC that can go on forever in narrative scenes while some others cannot afford more than a few checks before starting to flip tables and/or start the next scene at half strife already.

Hence why, every actions should be somewhat structured, so that every player have their turn. I personnally rather play narrative scene like downtimes, meaning that, every player gets one "turn" (a major action) and then time moves forward and/or my story narrative advance a step (flexible, depending on what the players actions were). Then, we proceed with the same one action per player in "structured narrative way" until we call that scene over and move into a conflict or full downtime.

Its been a serviceable way to play (and fun since every action carry a lot of weight!) for us.