I’m running an Urban Shadows game and I have a Revenant PC. The Revenant has the ability to instantly kill any NPC. While I’m okay with this most of the time, there are times when it severely undercuts the feel of some of the more powerful NPCs in their city. What are some ways to give those NPCs protection that don’t feel like I’m just turning off a PCs powers?
I’m running an Urban Shadows game and I have a Revenant PC.
I’m running an Urban Shadows game and I have a Revenant PC.
.
I wouldn’t recommend giving any enemy “plot armor” that undercuts the PC’s move. That would feel really crappy to the player, and feels against the principles of the game.
Instead, consider the exact wording of the move – “Kill, disable, or disarm (your choice) an NPC within reach” – and think about the implications of both this wording and within the context of a political scene.
1) If the NPC isn’t actually there in person, they are out of reach. Have them act through proxies. Has anyone even seen their real face?
2) “Death” is fairly meaningless for some NPCs. Fine, you can kill the body a ghost or demon was inhabiting. What are you going to do when they come back from hell/faerie/incorporeality in a new body – especially if that body belongs to someone entirely innocent who is still alive in there?
3) Are all the PCs on the same page about how to deal with that NPC? How’s the tainted going to feel about someone going after one of their clients? How’s the hunter going to feel about someone killing a human being? How’s the wizard going to feel about someone killing their old apprentice, who they’re sure they could bring back from the dark side? And so on.
1. Make “go into a battle” extremely costly for both sides. A battle requires more than just intimate violence, so that means allies are at risk.
2. Make removing the NPC a worse option.
3. Talk with the player and group about what kind of story they want to tell. Do they want to churn through villains or do they want to struggle against them.
4. Let them die. It seems there are always a ton of NPCs and the removal of some allows the focus to shift to others.
If they just outright kill an NPC maybe that NPC just wasn’t that big of a deal in your game. Thems the breaks of a game where you’re playing to find out what happens.
Just want to second Steve Moore ‘s suggestions, and affirm that “let them die” can lead to even bigger issues down the line. I did manage to keep two NPCs alive as major players in the city scene (one by making him rarely leave his seat of power, the other by covering him in do many magical talismans that i broadcasted from a mile away that there was a custom move before you would be able to kill him), but most “major” NPCs got wiped out easily as soon as players decided to wipe them out. The result was more problems on their plate. Killing the influential guy in the power faction meant they inherited duties they were not prepared to perform. Killing a scheming queen of faerie meant they gained even more powerful enemies. Killing a werewolf gang leader put them at risk of being investigated by mundane police. And so on.
Jason Tocci I have watched many skilled MCs and their tricks for dealing with potentially problematic pc/mechanic interactions.
I distinctly recall having an NPC I liked die, and I looked at my notes and went “ah shit, I got nothing. he’s dead as a doornail. Hey PC Who Was Just Observing, what’s the worst rumors you’d heard about this guy’s boss?”
I have no problem with an NPC dying, it just destroys the dramatic tension of a moment that builds up to a physical conflict with a major NPC for the Revenant to say, “Okay, I kill him.”
I guess the summary of all the above suggestions is this: If the Revenant can suck the dramatic tension out of a situation because they can automatically kill whoever they want, you may find yourself in some scenes where dramatic tension needs to arise from a question other than will they or won’t they be able to kill this enemy? This is a risk of playing with that playbook – the answer to that question will always be the same, so don’t play with the Revenant at all if you want your game to frequently focus on drama in physical conflicts. Other questions you might derive tension from instead include are they willing to accept the fallout of killing this enemy? and will they find the information they need before they kill the enemy?
Doc Mo8ius Swords Without Master, a very different game, talks about how in the Perilous Phase of the game, a character can simply narrate killing your big bad when they have the dice, and ending the phase quickly. It says that this means they were unchallenged by what you presented them – that the players thought their characters could easily deal with this and it wasn’t a big deal.
Such good answers here. Thanks, all.
I’d like to highlight one thing from above: “make battles costly.” Most violence in Urban Shadows is intimate: 1-1, small groups… not battles. In a battle, your Revenant can catch people off guard, move like a ninja, etc… but not every enemy is interested in a battle.
Try this:
– They go to confront Big Bad A in his house. He’s got a bunch of goons, but he’s not there.
– They go into battle. It’s awful. People die. PCs take tons of harm. The Revenant looks like a badass, but he’s going to burn through his hold pretty quick so he gets beat up too.
– They go into the badguy’s study: he’s sitting quietly, reading. They move to kill him. “Great,” you say, “But this is a murder. Not a battle.”
– And… play to find out what happens. 😀
.
📌
That last but one point is something I’ve done with similar “when in battle” moves. If it’s not a battle, it’s not going to trigger the move.