Warlords and Grotesques: Always Plural?

  • 2 Replies
  • 563 Views
Warlords and Grotesques: Always Plural?
« on: May 03, 2020, 02:12:46 PM »
Hi :)

You could help me prepare for my next sessions. I'm confused as to how to create some threats. Take a look at this section from the book:

Quote
ESSENTIAL THREATS
? Where the PCs are, create as a landscape.
? For any PC?s gang, create as brutes.
? For any PC?s other NPCs, create as brutes, plus a grotesque and/or a wannabe warlord.
? For any PCs? vehicles, create as vehicles.
? In any local populations, create an affliction.

So, looking at the phrasing of the "For any PC's gang" create as brutes, I think I get it. A gang's full of brutes. Fair enough.

But I'm confused about the "For any PC's other NPCs, create as brutes *plus* a grotesque and/or a wannabe warlord." I've interpreted it to mean that I should always have more than one bad guy for each threat, because of #LookingThroughCrosshairs. Brutes are always plural (e.g., hunting pack, cult, mob...). So I would never really create the standalone warlord.

What do you think? Is there such a thing as a Warlord without a bunch of Brutes around? If there is, this would limit the amount of Brute bad guys my players interact with before getting to the big Warlord guy?—not that it always has to be this way, since sometimes players handle the threat quickly and also #LookingThroughCrosshairs. To be fair, if PCs interact with these NPCs, then this kind of interaction is different.... idk...

I just wish I understood this small detail, since threats and threat maps are a big deal. Thanks for reading me and thinking about my question!

*

Munin

  • 411
Re: Warlords and Grotesques: Always Plural?
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2020, 08:07:05 PM »
Understand that this is just my interpretation, but when it's talking about a "PC's other NPCs" it's things like the Maestro'D's employees, or if the Angel or Savvyhead have "skilled labor" or whatever.

So as an example the Maestro'D has a crew of people to help run the establishment and taken collectively they are brutes. But maybe one of them (say the bartender Sunny) is a "grotesque," meaning there's something about Sunny that...ain't right. Or maybe the bouncer Bosco thinks he's tough and is a wanna-be warlord, and when he's deep in the fermented algae slurry he talks shit about how he should really be running things.

This means that the NPCs associated with a player's "crap" are assets, but also Threats. Does that make more sense?
 

*

lumpley

  • 1293
Re: Warlords and Grotesques: Always Plural?
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2020, 10:36:52 AM »
Right on.