Thoughts on Smugglers, rep, and faction status:
For a lot of typical Smugglers scores (in my mind, anyway), there’s no immediate “victim” to the score. There isn’t necessarily a particular faction being harmed, and, whoever the Smugglers are up against don’t really know they’ve been circumvented.
How do you treat this, for the purposes of rep and for changing faction status?
If my crew smuggles arcane artifacts, does that put them at war with the Spirit Wardens within three scores? What if they’re smuggling thing If they smuggle arms, does that put them at war with, ummm, I guess the Ministry of Preservation?
And similarly, what’s the “target tier” for the purposes of rep?
(Or, do you just assume a smooth operation is a zero-rep score? That also seems weird; they’ve got satisfied clients…)
Why wouldn’t there be a target or victim? Who doesn’t want them smuggling whatever their smuggling? Are they stealing it from somebody or bringing it somewhere that it could harm somebody? Why do their clients want the stuff that they’re smuggling?
I can’t imagine there not being a victim in the score. If the score isn’t targeting somebody or some faction, then maybe it’s not something that should be handled in a score.
As a GM, I guess you can pull the focus away from the group and consider the impact that their job has on the wider world. Even if the job is completely legal and above board, someone didn’t get to do that job or sell that merchandise or acquire that thing, and they’re going to know who did or find out. And even if they don’t find out who immediately, perhaps they start looking. Could make for an interesting clock.
Think if it this way: every law in Duskwall exists because some faction pushed to make it a law. Things become illegal to smuggle because doing so cuts in on somebody’s bottom line, and that someone does their best to ensure that the smuggling doesn’t happen. The common good is a secondary concern at best.
So yeah, ask whose business is screwed over by this particular score. That’s your target. And a lot of the time, law won’t even figure into it; if someone is buying arms, odds are they’re at war with someone.
I mean, government factions can be a victim too, but that’s kind of what Heat is for unless you’re specifically messing with them. Most of the time.
James Etheridge : So, if your crew smuggled arms to the Red Sashes to use against the Lampblacks, that’d be a tier II target, but if if they smuggled the same arms for an uprising amid the Imperial Military, that’d be a tier IV target?
…that feels really weird to me. There’s plenty of other operations which would be a direct attack, but the smuggling itself seems to me opposed to the people trying to keep the smuggling from happening. Going “Oh no, a violent attack, we’d better get the bastards who smuggled these people weapons” feels… counterintuitive?
Well sure, but more than likely the people trying to keep the smuggling from happening are the ones who are at war. Keeping your enemies’ supply lines cut off (and yes, making an example out of anyone who supports them) is tactics 101.
When the crew I run does jobs stealing from ghosts or acquiring something from Deathlands areas I often have the same issue of being unsure of how to determine the rep and if there are factions disadvantaged. I’ve come to often base the rep on the faction they are doing the job for. Doing right by a higher tier faction seems like it would still be worthy of improving your reputation especially when that reputation revolves around your ability to get what people need and get it to them successfully. So then I’m often giving them more +1s to factions for jobs but good relationships can still bring complications because a friendly faction will expected loyalty and favours back and forth. And then for who is disadvantaged I agree witb the other people’s comments above. Someone has to be losing out or being undercut for a black market to be warranted. I find the best prompt to think about this is in the engagement roll where it asks “are any enemies or rivals interfering on the job”. I think on that and see it would make sense to be yes and then get another faction involved to try to steal the same thing or get the PCs caught red handed.
Finbah Neill : Yes! My group’s crew are starting out with the Deathlands as a “typical” target; they’re not embroiled in any conflicts (yet); they’re just looking to make a quick buck.
Your approach makes a lot of sense to me. If, within the fiction, nobody’s getting their toes stepped on for a score here and there, that’s fine. That’ll come soon enough. 😛
James Etheridge: I can definitely see how once the PCs are embroiled in an ongoing conflict, they’ve got much clearer targets (who are also much more actively getting in their way).
It feels to me like, when the sandbox is just getting started, that isn’t the case yet. Like, maybe getting noticed as a significant line of supply might take a little bit of time, or repeated missions, or more than once-off alliance, at any rate.
Ziv Wities one question is: who’s the opposition in the score.
In case of ransacking the lost district, it might be ghosts, demons and strange monsters.
But also some of the factions:
Deathland Scavengers
The Reconciled
Forgotten Gods
Spirit Wardens
Bluecoats
Also, don’t forget about the secret reason the lost district was given up in the first place. The Silver Nails are really interested in a way to get into it. And a lot of wealthy citizens will get angry when they find valuable family heirlooms on the black market.
Jörg Mintel: Excellent points!
Yes, “Who’s in opposition” is exactly what interests me here. Because I think in some cases there just isn’t one specific opposition.
But you’re absolutely right; fairly quickly I assume the group will find earn themselves some direct opposition, or get involved in a situation where direct opposition exists. And you’re right to list all those options — those are great ways to make “generic” opposition more specific and intentional.