Question about NPC Faction Downtime Actions (pacing and targeting the PC crew)

Question about NPC Faction Downtime Actions (pacing and targeting the PC crew)

Question about NPC Faction Downtime Actions (pacing and targeting the PC crew)

Pg 20 of the QS says that for each downtime phase, NPC factions both advance their agenda clocks, and can do their own downtime action. What is the difference between planning an operation and executing it? By which I mean, do factions have to spend a downtime action to plan an operation first before they execute it? If so, then in order for Faction A to reduce Faction B’s hold by -1, they would need to invest 4 downtime actions: plan to make B vulnerable; execute operation; plan to reduce hold of that now-vulnerable B; execute operation. Am I reading that correctly?

Question Part b) Is there any reason NPC factions can’t execute operations similarly against the PC crew to reduce their hold or make them vulnerable? Does executing operations against the PC’s work differently? I would guess the PCs can and would resist and play out such operations, rather than just returning to their turf to see trouble has befallen them and thus their hold is reduced. With regard to the PC crew, the concept of “vulnerable” as used in the Faction Downtime action list is maybe too vague. If another faction has succeeded on an operation to make the PC crew vulnerable, what would it take in play to end that vulnerable condition? Does the answer to that question always depend solely on narrative context?

The following thread of questions by Chris Boyd raised the issue of the value of a downtime phase in terms of coin, but if NPC factions can pull off operations that easily reduce the PC crew’s hold, then each phase of downtime becomes much more valuable, and therefore spending hold for another downtime phase may be sufficient (but spending coin is still rather cheap): https://plus.google.com/u/0/114451952512667903737/posts/idLkBSdb2EA

7 thoughts on “Question about NPC Faction Downtime Actions (pacing and targeting the PC crew)”

  1. Am I reading that correctly?

    Yes that’s how I read it. Except I imagine once Faction B is vulnerable, any Faction could plan to reduce its hold -1. 

    I agree about the vagueness of an NPC faction “planning an operation to make an enemy vulnerable”. Assuming its distinct from gathering info—because that’s another action on the list (though only targeting PCs)—I think it must smaller scale attacks or set ups for attacks. For example:

    – keeping an enemy busy with work away from the main strength,

    – misdirecting them to attack another faction

    – getting a spy or saboteur in their midst

    – paying someone loyal to betray them

    – giving info to the bluecoats (or other high tier faction) that gets them in trouble

    – sabotaging their equipment

    – swaying their allies against them

    – stealing their plan or secrets

    Question Part b)

    Yes, I would run these actions against PCs the same. This makes having lots of enemies particularly problematic. I suppose factions may need to gather info on the PCs, if they’re not a good position to act against them.

    I’m not sure what would happen if a PC crew was made vulnerable. It’s not obvious whether the GM should make the NPC downtime actions all openly or whether just as part of playing the game. Questions I have are would they when they were vulnerable, who made them vulnerable, and how they protect themselves again.

    If the PC crew resisted the (gather info/make vulnerable/-1 hold) operations, I think they should probably take heat instead of stress.

    Another thing to clarify is: this unrelated to the concept on page 5 of “A faction at zero hold (or less) is vulnerable to lower-tier factions who want to move up.”

     

  3. a) Yes, NPCs are slow to do things. I think this is intentional. Big changes happen over time, and although the world grinds on and fortunes change in the PCs absence, they’re the movers and shakers of the game because it really is all about them.

    b) I’d be hesitant to actually take Hold from PCs in off-screen operations, but I think the “make vulnerable” move is fine to use and actually important. “While you’ve been busy the Cabbies made their move against you. You’re in a tough spot now. If you don’t do something the jackals will move in and nibble off pieces of your little kingdom.”

  4. If an enemy is vulnerable to an NPC faction, they don’t need to spend downtime making them vulnerable, right?

    Every other criminal organization is vulnerable to the Unseen, for instance (since no one knows who they are). So the Unseen don’t need to spend a downtime phase “making you vulnerable” first. You already are.

    Those states and actions are fictional states and actions, not some kind of board game action economy.

    So it takes a variable number of downtime moves, depending on the fiction.

Comments are closed.