Community

 
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
3 years ago  ::  May 18, 2010 - 1:05PM #1
MechaPilot
Date Joined: Oct 5, 2007
Posts: 9,372

Mutiny/Coup


 


The PCs incite a group to rebel against an authority figure.  This figure can be a military commander, a ship captain, a superior in  an organization, or even a ruler. The skill challenge assumes the PCs  are at a gathering with those they wish to incite, but it works equally  well if they are meeting clandestinely with potential conspirators. If  the PCs recruit any active conspirators one of the conspirators will  likely become the leader after the revolt.


Level: PC Level +0 (or as needed)


Complexity: 5 (requires 12 successes before 3 failures).


Primary Skills: Diplomacy, Heal, History, Insight,  Intimidate, Streetwise, Thievery.


Conspirators: The PCs have persuaded a respected or  influential NPC to join the mutiny. Recruiting a conspirator is a  complexity one skill challenge (four successes before 3 failures) that  uses the same skills as the mutiny/coup skill challenge. Each  conspirator the PCs recruit adds two successes to the challenge and  grants a +2 bonus (via Aid Another) to the PCs' skill checks. The PCs  can recruit no more than two conspirators during the challenge. Failing  the minor challenge to recruit a conspirator results in creating an  informant (see below).


DM note: If you don't want to use a skill challenge for the  recruiting of a conspirator, you may reduce it to a single Diplomacy  check with a Difficult DC. The Aid Another option should be disallowed  or restricted to a maximum of one PC aiding another for this check only.


Diplomacy (Moderate DC): The PC attempts to sway the  crowd's thoughts toward mutiny by extolling the potential virtues of a  new leader.


Heal (Moderate DC): The PC doses the informant with  something that makes him terribly ill but won't kill him. This check  removes the informant's presence for the next three checks.


History (Moderate DC): The PC dredges up things the  ruler/commander has done to alienate or anger the crowd to turn their  sentiments against the NPC.


Informant: The PC's failure to recruit a conspirator has  created an informant for the leader they wish to overthrow. An informant  will not only tell the leader what is going on but will actively work  to oppose the PCs' influence on the crowd, imposing a -2 penalty to the  PCs' skill checks. If the PCs are successful at the challenge despite  the presence of an informant, the leader who is deposed may target the  PCs for revenge.


Insight (Moderate DC): The PC spots those who are already  disgruntled with their leader and are thus more inclined to revolt. The  use of this check does not grant a success or failure.  A successful  check grants a +2 bonus to the next check in the challenge.


Insight (Moderate DC): The PC becomes aware of an  informant among the crowd. This doesn't negate the penalties of the  informant's presence, only disposing of the informant will do that.


Intimidate (Moderate DC): The PC intimidates a member of  the crowd who is wavering or holding out on their commitment to the  mutiny. This can only be attempted after seven successes have been  accrued, symbolizing that the tide has turned in favor of revolt.


Streetwise (Moderate DC): The PC becomes aware of rumors  about the leader that can be exploited to make him seem corrupt,  unstable, or otherwise undesirable to the crowd.


Thievery (Moderate DC): The PC doses the informant with  something that makes him terribly ill but won't kill him. This check  removes the informant's presence for the next three checks.

Why Mechanics-Alignment Integration is Bad Show

Mar 4, 2012 -- 5:04PM, MechaPilot wrote:

Mar 4, 2012 -- 3:46PM, Warrant wrote:

so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.


Really?  So it goes something like this?

Fighter: "I want to be a paladin."
NPC: "Really?"
Fighter: "Yes."
NPC: "Very well."  Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?"
Fighter: "I do."
NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?"
Fighter: "What?"
NPC: "I don't know what it means either."
Fighter: "Oh.  Umm, ok I do."
NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics."
Fighter: "These what?"
NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."


taking an argument too far Show

Apr 16, 2012 -- 9:27PM, Frostball wrote:

So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion?  Here's a scenario.  The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land.  They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges.  Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.

Part 1:  I didn't describe any of the hits.  What does he see?

Part 2:  Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up.  What does he see?



Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

Gundam_00_Celestial_Being_Logo-logo-E6E4232905-seeklogo.com.gif
Quick Reply
Cancel
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing