Just What in Hell does "indifferent" mean?


A change in my work schedule, to take place next month, and last about 3 months, is going to wreck any hope of running two campaigns, at least for the time being. It will probably be possible to consolidate both groups into a Monday Night Session (or run a Monday night session on a weekly basis, and a Sunday Session every other seek or so). So far, there seems to be a motion making the rounds to consolidate everyone on Monday nights.

Thursday Group is House Sturrach, Sundays is House Astyanath/Zethu, there is an apparent desire to continue running the characters in each campaign. This creates a big problem.

From consulting the Political Situation Table, Sturrach and Astyanath are Unfriendly to each other, and I do not see how I could allow a party to be made up of members of these two houses. Zethu is allied with Astyanath and indifferent to Sturrach, so I suppose a possible Sturrach-Zethu party could occur.

But I am wondering what exactly "indifferent" would mean in Hell? I assume simple things like jacked up prices and name calling would be the most common means of expressions, but how obligated would a Sturrach Party member be to aid a beleagured Zethu associate?

Generally I try and discourage party members assasinating each other, but in the Infernum enviroment I don't rule it out (I just drop hints that right now is a bad time to contemplate such an action). However, it seems that a non-convenated non-house (viewed as Indifferent) party member could justifyable be "bumped off" in the interests of 'cleaning house".

I'm working on how I might have to handle this, but I welcome suggestions.

Default might be to just have everyone roll up new characters, but there seems to be a bit of whining about my adopting that course of action....

Thanks for reading this thread...

Toodles all
Indifferent normally equates to suspicion and a "how can I use you" attitude - if there's no shortage of iliaster and other resources, then the next question most demons ask themselves is "how can I make these people serve me".

Encourage convenanting instead of assassination...
Encourage convenanting instead of assassination...[/quote]

I usually try and discourage intra-party assassination when I GM, it only seems to lead to "I'll get you back" mentality's further downstream, hard feelings, and eventual break-up of the party.

Interestingly enough, in the second campaign, when the Zethu character (who had started as a House Astyanath like everyone else) suggested an intra-party covenent, the response from the other party members was a long moment of silence.

Could two "Un-friendly houses" parties be covenented together? Or is that in a "too-farfetched" realm?

I suppose a story line could be developed of a Sturrach-Carthenay-Astyanath-Zethu alliance being in the works, but that would seem to be such a powerful alliance that the other house would only have recourse to War, and I'm not sure I would want to get into that this early in things.

Mikeydanuke said:
Could two "Un-friendly houses" parties be covenented together? Or is that in a "too-farfetched" realm?

No, it's eminently possible. Covenanting is a tool of personal power as well as politics.
After thinking a lot about how to handle the problem of parties made up of different houses being together and the effect that would have on their adventuring, I decided that the best way to resolve the issue would be to simply come up with a table, so that if a Sturrach/Astyanath/Zethu party wanders into a Reithii stronghold, everyone know what to expect. Hopefully this will cut down the "Whine" factor by at least 0.0001%

This table has to be used in conjunction with the Political Viewpoint table I came up with earlier, or as any other GM's see fit. Since there are factions within houses, secret deals, secrets, etc, all that too could play a ppart in determining how a Party si viewed by the denizen's of a stronghold.

I have used a "House/faction Experience" in the past, and I am using something similiar in my campaign. No specific rules have been written down yet, but the basic intent is that a party can just work for leveling experience and/or work for "House Experience". The more House experience a party member accumulates, the more "favors" he/she/it can call in from the House. Favors could include the Loan of a Vehicle, boat, special equipment, and so on.

So here is my rough draft of the Reaction Viewpoints Table,

Party members can exercise profession in stronghold. Any party member exercising his* profession does not have to spend money to buy Iliaster at the end of the day.
Party member will be invited to parties, money can be "converted" into house experience at these parties on a 1 for 1 basis.
No random attacks will occur
Allowed in stronghold
May purchase supplies at normal cost
May sell "loot" at normal (1/2 sell price) to local merchants

Party member may excise profession in the stronghold.
Party member can be expected to be invited to parties, and can convert money to house experience at a 2 for 1 rate.
No random attacks will occur
Allowed in Stronghold
May purchase supplies a normal cost
May sell "Loot" at normal prices (1/2 sell price)

Party member may be able to exercise his* profession ~50% of the time.
Party member will not be invited to parties.
No random attacks possible
Allowed in stronghold
May purchase supplies at normal cost
May sell "Loot" at normal prices

Party member will not be allowed to exercise profession in the stronghold
No parties for you, Jack!
On a 1d6 roll = 6, (once per day) a random attack will occur.
Will have to bribe guards to get into stronghold
May purchase supplies at 2X normal cost
May sell "loot" at 1/2 normal cost (1/4 sell price)

Party members are not allowed to exercise profession in the stronghold
Only parties invited to are Lynch parties
On a 1d6 roll = 6 (Once per Hour) a random attack occurs
Will have to bribe guards to get into stronghold, ~ twice cost for entrance to Unfriendly stronghold
May purchase supplies at 4X's normal cost
May sell "Loot" at 1/4 normal cost (1/8 sell price)

I'm sure I'll need to refine this table in the near future, as said, this is just a rough draft. Suggestions for refionements and/or improvements always welcome.

* He/she/it = a "Him" by default.