Campaign Kick-Off Idea (Moral choices in Conan)

[Supplement Four]

Something flatscan wrote in another thread addresses a campaign I am prepping. Central to the first scene of the game is an extreme moral choice that the PCs will be forced into.

One of my favorite aspects of the Conan game is some of the moral ambiguity it involves and the choices that leads to.

I've been thinking of putting together a new game, and I thought about this very aspect. I like to put some real-world horrors into the heroic action the characters experience, to reinforce their suspension of disbelief and make 'em believe that they're playing real people in a real world.

For example, the campaign I'm thinking of starts in Aquilonia on the edge of the Pictish wilderness. The characters are all young, boys aged around 15, give or take a year. All of them 1st level characters.

As the campaign progresses, I plan on playing out different scenes. There'd be this scene. Then, we'd skip, add a level to the PCs, and play another scene. Not unlike reading Conan short stories. I thought I'd have a scene per level, skipping time in between (so, the campaign wouldn't be continuous, and I could move the game all over the map, if I wanted).

Well, this first scenario would be the "origin" scene. The PCs are children, coming of age, in an Aquilonian border village. Everybody has their place during a Pict attack. Everybody is trained on what to do. The players, just young boys, have a position to defend the women and children--the last line of defense if the Picts get through the grizzled warriors on the wall.

Well, the game would begin. Travellers from afar would arrive--a gypsy-like seer in a covered wagon pass through the village. The first scene would be whether or not the players go see this gypsy-like character, the old woman. If they do, one of them will be told a riddle that foretells the Pict attack and their escape and the dark deeds that they will have to do to pay for their lives.

Later that night, as everyone sleeps, the bell is rung. Picts swarm the village. It's a an all-out attack.

The PCs know their duty. They grab their gear and get to the women and children, collecting them all in one spot, with the PCs guarding the entrances.

All this time, I'll be (the GM) describing the fight on walls. The fires as they start. The sounds. The strange shadows. The men dying. The Picts scaling the walls.

One will get through, and the first action of the game will be the players, at 1st level, fighting a single Pict. I'll either make this a high level, but wounded, Pict, or a younger, lower level, Pict that the players can defeat (unless he gets lucky and kills one of the PCs).

After this, things don't look good for the village. Too many Picts. It's obvious that the Aquilonians are losing. Fire burns on one side of the wall. The men up near the gate are dying, outnumbered as the Picts swarm through the main gate. To the left, a few picts are damn close, looking through cabins for things to steal and women to rape.

But, of course, all the women are with the PCs. The head mother comes out to the PCs. She's been on the frontier all her life. She can see what's happening.

She tells the PCs: "The Cimmerians have a duty they perform when the situation turns dire. They, themselves, kill their women folk and their young to spare them what will happen if the Picts get their hands on them." She looks around. The fight is lost. It's just not over yet. And, there's no where to run. They are hemmed in because the village walls while Picts pour into the front gates. The matron looks at the PCs. "There's no escape. If we run, we'll be caught. The group of us, with the babies, are too slow. We must follow the Cimmerians."

"Come," she says, opening the door to where the women and children are huddled, "do your duty. Then, stand your ground with the rest of the men."

This is the first moral point I'll put to the players. They don't have a lot of time. There really is no where to run. Picts may be on them at any moment.

What will they do?





Assuming that they do their bloody duty, we'll move on with the story. You never know, though, what players are going to pull out of their buttocks. Creative players will bring to the table things I'd never think of if I had years to ponder.

I assume, after the deed, that the players will feel defeated, dirty, maybe already dead and suicidal.

If they hesitate, I'll throw another Pict after them or two, maybe even kill a PC (at first level, this won't be hard to do..and I won't plan it...I'll just let it happen when it does). And, I can have the matron starting the bloody work that the PCs are hesitant to do.

The PCs will have family members in there. A mother. Some sisters. Maybe a baby brother. Who will kill them? The related PC or will he have his friend do that for him?

I'll make this a real horror by having the little kids look up at their older siblings, saying, "No brother! Don't! Why!? I love you! Don't hurt me!"

It will be a real experience.





Afterwards, I'm sure the PCs will take their place with the men, to fight the fight on the "line" with the rest of the village warriors.

But, as they pass the fortuneteller's camp, I'll point out that the wagon is on a bit of a hill, not too far from where the wall is burning. If one were to give the wagon a push, then escape might be possible. Push the wagon, hanging onto it. It rolls down the incline, smashes into the wall, and makes a hole. Then, the PCs can run for their lives.

Some players may be so torn up by what their previous duty that they may refuse to have their characters run. I'll let the players who want to go try and talk some sense into them. And, I'll tell them that they start to see the men on the line route, with Picts chasing them down, scraping off their scalps and pulling out their teeth for jewelry and trophies.

If that doesn't work, they get their wish and face some more Picts, maybe even killing another PC.

Either way, at least one player, hopefully, will run for the wagon, push it, and crash through the wall, running for his life to the forest edge. Hopefully, the others will follow.

It will be a mad dash through the field and into the forest. Picts will start to chase them. It's dark, and they have no idea where they're going.

I want it to be a harrowing night, with maybe the PCs hiding from the Picts searching the wood for survivors.

The PCs sneak off.

The next day, they get as far away from the village as possible. They get their bearings. And, I plan on doing some low-level stuff, like hunting and fending off forest predators in the next day or three.

The players will come up with a plan, and that will lead them in a direction. Whatever that is, is where I'll take the game next. It will be the next "scene".

Those who survive the night earn level 2.

 

[Scorpion13]

Well, I dont know. Its an interesting idea to be sure, but Cimmerians....do they normally reside in the Westermark?

It comes down to how the players play. If they act like the standard Cimmerians, theyll kill them, but if theyre like Conan...they might not. Conan is not fatalistic in the least, unlike most Cimmerians. He would probably try a daring escape to try to save them. Conan is a bastard to be sure, but he wont just give up and kill them. He'll try everything he can do, and only kill them if its absolutely necessary.

If they do kill them, they shouldnt be treated as if theyve failed. Today's modern morality has little to do with how they do things back in the fictional Hyborian age. And they might not be all that torn about it. Keep in mind, its never as impactful as in real life. In the end, they really are just NPC's, no matter how well played they are. And if they are keeping in mind they are Cimmerians, they might not be torn about it, since theyve been raised in a culture that has them do this their entire lives.

If they do go the heroic route, that is, not going gently into the night, fighting and striving to the end, maybe give them a little something extra. Its not the normal thing to do, its what a real character, a hero would do. It sets them apart from the norm, and even if they fail, they did try something great.

Just my thoughts.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

Sounds like a fun night of gaming! What would your moral position be if the players start raping instead of killing? When you open a door to realism in a game, anything can sneak through.

The players seem to be caught in this horror without any ability to change the future regarless of their actions. What if they hear the prophesy, then decide to leave before the attack? I think your players may resent you for forcing their game characters into cold blooded murder at 15 years of age!

 

[Scorpion13]

Sounds like a fun night of gaming! What would your moral position be if the players start raping instead of killing? When you open a door to realism in a game, anything can sneak through.

The players seem to be caught in this horror without any ability to change the future regarless of their actions. What if they hear the prophacy, then decide to leave before the attack? I think your players may resent you for forcing their game characters into cold blooded murder at 15 years of age!

But hey, they might not care. This is Conan.

 

[PrinceYyrkoon]

Sounds like a fun night of gaming! What would your moral position be if the players start raping instead of killing? When you open a door to realism in a game, anything can sneak through.

The players seem to be caught in this horror without any ability to change the future regarless of their actions. What if they hear the prophacy, then decide to leave before the attack? I think your players may resent you for forcing their game characters into cold blooded murder at 15 years of age!

But hey, they might not care. This is Conan.

Well, its certainly not D&D!

 

[Supplement Four]

Well, I dont know. Its an interesting idea to be sure, but Cimmerians....do they normally reside in the Westermark?

The idea actually comes from a John Maddox Roberts Conan tale (Conan The Bold? Not sure which title.)

Conan comes upon a Cimmerian villiage that has been decimated by the Picts. Inside one of the huts that isn't burned are the remaines of a family, except these Cimmerians aren't butchered. They were stuck through with a spear.

Outside the hut, slammed into the post, is the bloody spear.

And, Conan knows, from his upbringing, that this is an honor-bound call. These Cimmerians were attacked by Picts, the villiage decimated, and this family killed their women and children rather than have them ravaged at the hands of the Picts.

Any Cimmerian who finds the blood spear knows what he must do--hunt down and kill the Picts that did this.

I took the idea, thinking that the Aquilonians in the Westermarch might have heard of such a thing against a common enemy.

Although I left out the honor-bound spear of the Conan story, I put the monkey on the backs of the players. What would you do in such a situation? No hope. It looks like everyone will die. You don't want your sister and mother ravaged by the filthy Picts.

But, can you kill your own kin in order to save them that particular horror of death?

It's an interesting moral question.

 

[Supplement Four]

If they do kill them, they shouldnt be treated as if theyve failed.

I'll let the players feel as they will feel. They could go either way.

I like the idea of the "deep dark secret" these PCs will carry with them throughout the rest of their adventures.

It may bind them together--survivors of a shared horror.

It may tear them apart--they can't deal with what they did.

My players are true role players. I don't know how they'll react to this, but it will definitely be interesting for me to watch.

That's what I get out of a game as a GM: Setting up interesting situations and seeing how the players have their characters deal with it. Not every situation has to be external, like fighting the Picts. Some problems are internal, and the characters batteling with this demon will be interesting to watch.

It could influence them to go down any road.

And, in the Hyborian Age, life is grey, not black and white. A character can be "good" one moment and "bad" another.

We'll see what they do.

 

[Scorpion13]

If they do kill them, they shouldnt be treated as if theyve failed.

I'll let the players feel as they will feel. They could go either way.

I like the idea of the "deep dark secret" these PCs will carry with them throughout the rest of their adventures.

It may bind them together--survivors of a shared horror.

It may tear them apart--they can't deal with what they did.

My players are true role players. I don't know how they'll react to this, but it will definitely be interesting for me to watch.

That's what I get out of a game as a GM: Setting up interesting situations and seeing how the players have their characters deal with it. Not every situation has to be external, like fighting the Picts. Some problems are internal, and the characters batteling with this demon will be interesting to watch.

It could influence them to go down any road.

And, in the Hyborian Age, life is grey, not black and white. A character can be "good" one moment and "bad" another.

We'll see what they do.

Oh no, I agree with your reasoning. Its a different, interesting take aside from the standard S&S stuff (well, usually), but I have to say, they may not keep it as a secret, or think of it as shame. If theyre playing Cimmerians to the hilt, they wouldnt be ashamed. Its what expected of them in their culture, and while they may not go around braggin about it, being grim Cimmerians they might feel proud that they did their duty. Now if they would be playing non-barbaric Hyborians, it may very well be a way different story. Even hardened Westermarck settlers would probably be shattered by this.

Good topic, btw. Nice discussion about dramatic and moral questions here.

 

[flatscan]

Hmm, well, I guess it all depends on where you're getting your sources of inspiration for the Hyborian Age. REH wrote that Cimmerian women as often fought in battles (especially in desperate situations) and in fact that is why Conan was born on the battlefield. The scenario where Cimmerian women are slaughtered instead of joining the men in combat seems...not right with that take on the Hyborian Age. But of course, this could just be some crazy Aquilonian's take on how she believes the Cimmerian's live so that could be a non-issue. The other issue (again, depending on where you're getting your inspiration from) is from Across the Thunder River where it states Picts are more likely to capture Hyborian women for breeding stock and such than kill them. Of course, that may be unknown to the Hyborians who just know men are slaughtered brutally and the women are gone, never to be seen again, which is probably a more fearful fate than making peace with Mitra or whatever god they worship and getting a quick mercy killing. Definitely a mature theme to explore with your players. Good luck.

 

[Supplement Four]

If theyre playing Cimmerians to the hilt, they wouldnt be ashamed.

They're not Cimmerians. They're Aquilonians living on the western wilderness border next to the Picts.

And, however the players play it, I'm sure it will be interesting for me.

The GM + Player relationship is a partnership. I set up an interesting encounter. It's not their turn to do something interesting with it.

That's part of what the GM gets out of the deal.

I've found, as GM, I'm much more interested if I don't know what the players are going to do.

 

[treeplanter]

But hey, they might not care. This is Conan.

Yeah but they are civilised folk. They should care.

 

[treeplanter]

BTW I think it is a great campain set-up.

Another interesting way to explore with PC moral choice, if your group is higher level, is war between 2 country, were both have representent in the group. So a very simple exemple, what happen if Aquilonia declare open war on Nemedia. Every players have pledge loyalty to King Conan, but half of them are Nemedian. What will they do?

 

[Zaskar24]

I like the choice you are forcing the players to make. It should show just how good of role players they are. I do have a few problems with some of the answers though which go hand in hand with how people like to use their modern morals for an ancient setting.

1. While they might be civilized it is different then the world we live in. These are settlers on a wild frontier just like those families that settled the western part of the U.S. A tough people who when you think about REH was only removed one generation from Indian raids. Who do the Picts resemble the most from a historical standpoint in many ways?

2. As I said above, placing our current moral views on characters from a different era. There are numerous historical examples but I do not want to start a political conversation about things that happened in the past. By our moral views today they were wrong but in the time and place they were done it was not morally wrong. The same goes for our current views on personal hygiene and other things as well.

Rambling rant over.

 

[Azgulor]

1st Rule of GM Dilemmas: "If presented by the GM with options A or B, the PCs will invariably choose option D."

Just because you're trying to set up a moral choice with 2 options ("mercifully" kill the women and children or refuse) doesn't mean that the PCs will accept those two scenarios as the only viable options.

Also, just because an old bag says "we must follow the Cimmerians" doesn't mean that the womenfolk will fall into line. Unless its firmly established that the Aquilonians are a fatalistic lot that subscribes to such a philosophy, I'd say the situation strains plausibility. The will to live/survival instinct is pretty strong. Will the women fight back/resist?

(Civilized example #1. My wife, who wouldn't hurt a fly was pretty much a pacifist -- until she became a mother. She has stated on more than one occasion that she never thought she could kill anyone. After giving birth, however, she said she would do whatever it took, including killing someone, if it was necessary to protect her children.)

If memory serves, the Picts are big on trophies/slaves but not big on occupying enemy territory. Are they brutalizing their victims during the battle or is it more likely that they'll take them prisoner to use as slaves and sacrifices back at their village(s)? If the latter, the hope for rescue exists. Even if you portray it as hopeless, some PCs may refuse to accept it. (The fools might think they're supposed to be heroes...)

Also, if you're going to "mercy-kill" a group of people, you're not going to run them through with a spear and leave them in screaming agony. You're going to go for something quicker and minimize the pain. Stab victim #1 in the gut with a spear and once the screaming starts I bet everyone else isn't going to fall into line.

Ultimately, while I like the idea of thrusting a horrible moral choice on the players early in the game, I think the scenario you've laid out is a false choice and is unlikely to play out as you might think. I think there are probably other, more plausible and likely scenarios you could use to achieve the same effect. For example:

1. The PCs are conscripts in an attacking force. The invaders (PC's side) take the city/town/village. Despite being teenage conscripts, they're under the command of veterans who expect them to "take their fair share" from the town. Do the PC's comply? If they take a moral stand, are the ostracized, beaten, or worse? Do the PCs attempt to protect the women/children? If you've got the Free Companies sourcebook - what happens when the army they're part of doesn't abide by the "civilized" rules of war?

2. PCs are defenders. As the Picts attack, they are assigned to protect the women. Their superior, thinking all is lost, is determined that the woman refusing his advances will succumb to him before he dies. Do the PCs intervene? The superior is a nobleman - who will blame the PCs for his crime and his words will carry the weight of the law. Will the PCs opt for moral nobility even though they and their families may pay dearly for it? If not, will the fallout of their inaction plague them for years to come?

3. PCs are defenders. As the Picts attack, they are assigned to protect the lord's wife, who is in labor delivering the lord's future heir. The Picts are hell bent of killing the lord and ending his bloodline. The wife begs the PCs to save her child but end her life.

You get the idea.

Just my two cents.

 

[Scorpion13]

2. PCs are defenders. As the Picts attack, they are assigned to protect the women. Their superior, thinking all is lost, is determined that the woman refusing his advances will succumb to him before he dies. Do the PCs intervene? The superior is a nobleman - who will blame the PCs for his crime and his words will carry the weight of the law. Will the PCs opt for moral nobility even though they and their families may pay dearly for it? If not, will the fallout of their inaction plague them for years to come?
.

Azgulor just put it better than I could.

In this dilemma, my players would probably kill a Pict, steal his tomahawk and kill the commander with it and blame it on the Picts. Or just kill him and light out for the territories, so to speak.

Unless youre willing to really railroad them, the players will almost never act the way you expect or hope they will.

 

[zozotroll]

In a game in a system i dont remember the name of, we played a group of Roman soldiers, with one of us as the Centurian of the 9th cohort. We had to take a town, the go do something we really dint want to, but the bottum 2 cohorts had to go.

After the taking of the town, I went out by my self snatched up a local weapon, and waited until the 6th Centurian went out back of the tavern he was drinking in. Couple of quick stabs later, we where no longer the 9th cohort command group, but the 8th. No more stupid mission.

Finger prints? DNA? Magic? Not here this is ancient Rome. When one of the other players mentioned something about murder I just told him thats politics Roman style. And outr Centurian never got to go anywhere by himself again.

 

[Supplement Four]

1. While they might be civilized it is different then the world we live in.

Abso-frickin'-lootly.

Yes. Recently, I finished the 20+ episodes of the Rome TV show that aired on HBO a few years ago. It's a brilliant show, and the storytelling doesn't skimp on showing how morality was different back then than what we have today.

For example, one of the main characters--one of the good guys, who is portrayed with extreme morals--had a scene where he went to check on his slaves he'd acquired while on campaign. He found a cage, with all the adults dead, and a young boy clinging to his dead-white mother.

All the main character could do--this moral bound man who lives by his code and his word--was think of the investment lost. It was like the family store burned down. All those deaths meant nothing.

Why should they? They were less than people.

They were slaves.

Things were different back then.

 

[Supplement Four]

1st Rule of GM Dilemmas: "If presented by the GM with options A or B, the PCs will invariably choose option D."

Just because you're trying to set up a moral choice with 2 options ("mercifully" kill the women and children or refuse) doesn't mean that the PCs will accept those two scenarios as the only viable options.

This is competely true, and I mention that in the OP.

Heck, they may not decide to take the wagon, after having killed the women and children. They might just try to stand with the men, dying along side them.

I've got the old gypsy seer ready to run out and spout something interesting and foreboding about their "destinies", that will hopefully urge them to escape.

Or, they may refuse to kill the women and children. I'll have the matron begin, but if they stop her, they can always try to take the women and children with them.

If this happens, I'll still do the wagon thing. But, the W/C will slow them down. Picts will catch up. There's no way they can protect all of them. I'll have at least one young female tucked under the arm of a Pict as he runs off with her into the smoke.

I will influence them that they probably should have taken care of the W/Cs when the time was right. Now, they can't protect them, and the W/Cs are being stolen off, into the night, to suffer the fate that they could have been saved from.

That may be just as horrible a choice to live with as the original idea.

Also, just because an old bag says "we must follow the Cimmerians" doesn't mean that the womenfolk will fall into line. Unless its firmly established that the Aquilonians are a fatalistic lot that subscribes to such a philosophy, I'd say the situation strains plausibility. The will to live/survival instinct is pretty strong. Will the women fight back/resist?

You've just convinced me to make the women and children they are guarding be either really young, babes, or really old, defenseless. Every other able bodied person is helping in the fight.

Ultimately, while I like the idea of thrusting a horrible moral choice on the players early in the game, I think the scenario you've laid out is a false choice and is unlikely to play out as you might think.

It doesn't have to.

The players can do whatever they wish. I'll be prepared to react to it.

Part of the fun for me, as GM, is watching what the players will do.

It definitely doesn't have to go by my plan at all. The actual encounter may play out completely differently.

And, that will be, "OK".

As GM, I'll react to what they do.

1. The PCs are conscripts in an attacking force.

I like the idea that this is the PC's villiage. It's their home. These are their people.

Not only does it create a background for the PCs (who typically have no mother/father/family mentioned in games), but it adds to the drama.

If that's you're 3 year old sister lying there, are you going to allow her to be taken and possibly sacrificed by the Picts? Or, are you going to run her through, sparing the horrors at the hands of the Picts.

 

[Scorpion13]

1st Rule of GM Dilemmas: "If presented by the GM with options A or B, the PCs will invariably choose option D."

Just because you're trying to set up a moral choice with 2 options ("mercifully" kill the women and children or refuse) doesn't mean that the PCs will accept those two scenarios as the only viable options.

This is competely true, and I mention that in the OP.

Heck, they may not decide to take the wagon, after having killed the women and children. They might just try to stand with the men, dying along side them.

I've got the old gypsy seer ready to run out and spout something interesting and foreboding about their "destinies", that will hopefully urge them to escape.

Or, they may refuse to kill the women and children. I'll have the matron begin, but if they stop her, they can always try to take the women and children with them.

If this happens, I'll still do the wagon thing. But, the W/C will slow them down. Picts will catch up. There's no way they can protect all of them. I'll have at least one young female tucked under the arm of a Pict as he runs off with her into the smoke.

I will influence them that they probably should have taken care of the W/Cs when the time was right. Now, they can't protect them, and the W/Cs are being stolen off, into the night, to suffer the fate that they could have been saved from.

That may be just as horrible a choice to live with as the original idea.

Also, just because an old bag says "we must follow the Cimmerians" doesn't mean that the womenfolk will fall into line. Unless its firmly established that the Aquilonians are a fatalistic lot that subscribes to such a philosophy, I'd say the situation strains plausibility. The will to live/survival instinct is pretty strong. Will the women fight back/resist?

You've just convinced me to make the women and children they are guarding be either really young, babes, or really old, defenseless. Every other able bodied person is helping in the fight.

Ultimately, while I like the idea of thrusting a horrible moral choice on the players early in the game, I think the scenario you've laid out is a false choice and is unlikely to play out as you might think.

It doesn't have to.

The players can do whatever they wish. I'll be prepared to react to it.

Part of the fun for me, as GM, is watching what the players will do.

It definitely doesn't have to go by my plan at all. The actual encounter may play out completely differently.

And, that will be, "OK".

As GM, I'll react to what they do.

1. The PCs are conscripts in an attacking force.

I like the idea that this is the PC's villiage. It's their home. These are their people.

Not only does it create a background for the PCs (who typically have no mother/father/family mentioned in games), but it adds to the drama.

If that's you're 3 year old sister lying there, are you going to allow her to be taken and possibly sacrificed by the Picts? Or, are you going to run her through, sparing the horrors at the hands of the Picts.

Well, actually, the women and children are way more likely to be ok if theyre captured by the Picts, rather than say, your players if youre going by Across the Thunder River. Picts apparently take women as wives and just adopt the children. They wont hurt them, or even rape the women. They just do things differently. If theyre captured by Shemites or Stygians though....hoo-boy....

Or theyll just be killed like any other villager. Of course, you could just be going off of how Aquilonians THINK the Picts will act, which is totally legit.

 

[Azgulor]

Hey, it's cool. You know your players.

As for your last example, I'm not saying it's impossible that someone would "spare" their 3-yr old sister. However, I still find it somewhat unlikely that a 15-yr old (per your example) is going to listen to anyone other than a blood relative or trusted friend. Even then, killing your sister is pretty damn final in Conan's time vs. the potential sacrifice/torture at the hands of the Picts. (You did say "possibly sacrificed".)

What I'm saying is that unless the culture instills a fatalistic disposition, most will opt for the hope vs. the certain horror - esp. if you're coming from the "softer" civilized cultures. YMMV.