Numenera: Auspar - The Houses and the Antagonists

First and foremost this is your less than four  day warning to grab your own box set, that's right I said box set, of Numenera which includes practically everything published for Numenera, some not even in printed format before and more oh and a walking talking, gelatinous kitchen sink!  Head over to the Kickstarter campaign for the box set of Numenera.

I've already discussed the more generalist elements of the guilds/factions for an urban campaign and specifically within Auspar, now it's time for the narrative ones. If I'm going to be honest I cannot claim sole responsibility. As the campaign has developed so too has the understanding of the old families within the Steadfast. These I have taken from Ryan Chaddock's  et al. Whisper Campaigns supplement. For those of you that haven't read this wonderful thing, it provides not only a political framework for courts and other gentrified settings but something I love, Intrigue Cyphers.

These cyphers  are more akin to one shot social advantages, rather than a physical item. They have allowed my characters to gain status, holdings and even as you will read this week in the narrative blog, heists.  But this is not all I've used, the structure of the royal court of Auspar was heavily influenced by the supplement as well as the houses and families. These specifically are Lyathra, Narrkonis, Ethis and Thanosa. Each has a distinct flavour and differing relationships with each other which help contextualise their concepts. It has even gone so far to be the focus of the character of Chloe, Transmutes Matter. Although I have lifted them out of framework given by Chaddock they have proven far more than just mere NPCs. They have become a centralised part of the game and I could not imagine the campaign without them. For this campaign in particular, the PCs became more focused on the Whisper Network and in turn Lyathra.

For the Matrix I had given them these base motives; Preserve Secrets, Gather Secrets, Abuse Power, Infiltrate, Gather Information, Increase Control. The point here is that in no way should any antagonist be described as 'evil'. Their intentions and actions may be at odds with other factions, including your PCs but that does not automatically make them the 'Big Bad'. In fact the antagonists, which there are a few of in my campaign, are all seen through different eyes, and those voices colour their interpretation to the PCs. Thematically they are the string pullers, a reference made by the  rankings of the Whisper Network.  Although their work may not be seen as beneficial to the region, their abilities and links have been to my players, which has caused more than one conflict of interest. And this is what I have found most fascinating about it. My PCs have been willing to forgo the stalwart hero archetype in favour of what benefits them as a PC. This is vital and hopefully a confirmation of my portrayal, they are dangerous when betrayed, but kept sated, they have become a tool for my players. 

As I have said there are many antagonists within The Shattered Child, some yet to come in Season 2, while some are only being realised now by my PCs as I come to the finale this weekend. Those for the moment have been drawn entirely from the source text. They have been born out of a amalgamation of the history of Auspar and the highly influential bestiary. At no point does any of the Numenera works or glimmers define an specifically antagonistic creature, but they may have, to certain viewpoints, a malicious intent. If a creature is killing humans, it's more likely to be due to the fact that it needs to feed. One of my antagonists is actually built upon three different creature interactions with the world. Albeit very different to how they are laid out in the bestiary. For me as a writer, there always have to be two sides of an argument, or more. Nobody is in the right! My characters, my PCs and even you dear reader, should question your own intent. If your world is set up as clear cut as good vs. evil then that is by design not by narrative providence. I wanted my PCs to make their own morality choices and what better when their preconceived  ideas are shattered.

I guess this makes me a fan of the red herring. I love a good murder and a good mystery, give me my Sherlock, Miss Marple and Poirot any day of the week. However,  red herrings must be rewarded, much like shattered preconceptions. Exploration and understanding is key in Numenera. If you're going to allow such freedom and creativity then there is no such thing as a dead end, rather a new angle to approach. And this in part is also why I created the matrix for myself. If the PCs wanted to go further than what other NPCs were telling them, then I couldn't make them one dimensional. I have tried my hardest to never say 'No' to my players, but reward them for the ingenuity and resourcefulness. This is something I recommend to everyone. Plot armour is bad, railroading is bad. As long as you have a contingency, multiple tracks to switch to even though pre planned, they give the illusion of derailment and you can hear the excitement in the players  voices when they do something unexpected, awesome and logical which would go against everything you've done and are rewarded.

I apologise if this blog is a little veiled or a little rantish. I'm currently suffering a minor illness but it has been sapping all my strength as of late. And unfortunately, until my campaign ends and all is written up on the other blog some of the big twists related to this topic are currently under a personal NDA.  In essence, inspiration is what you make of it, and I am ways inspired by the community, every time I open up anything related to Numenera, and especially my players, who have never made it easy for me as a first timer to this whole thing but have made me fall in love with Numenera and the tale I have told you.

GMs: Think back to a time where you players have gone in one direction rather than another. Was it by their choice or yours? Were they rewarded for their actions or did they end up falling into a pit of snakes? Is your antagonist really the embodiment that polarises with your PCs. Are their motives purely selfish or are they more complex. Could you try to turn one of your PCs into the antagonist role, in fact, could your entire PC party be unwittingly the antagonist to the setting. Do your PC's ever guess correctly what is going to happen next, if so why?

PCs: If you see yourself as a 'hero', why? Is your character infallible or would something easily corrupt their morals or point of view. How much of the world you are playing in has been informed by your interactions with it. Do you trust everything you see or hear? Do you trust your own party? Who is the most likely, when given enough power, to turn on the party and try to murder them all. Has anyone, or anything surprised you? Next time you play, try to approach a problem from a different angle, you're more than likely to find something far more interesting.

PS.  KICKSTARTER!