Team Intwischa has another cabin trip coming up. This trip will present the post-penultimate (the way folks in academia say "last") adventure of "The Krystoran Quest for Purity"--an adventure in a Middle East-type setting featuring characters from a variety of castes. The quest has us searching for many things: personal redemption, a disgraced Sultan, and a mysterious and possibly mythical character from the nation of Krystoral's past.
My character, Zaim al Tahir, is a disgraced military general who can no longer appropriately be referred to as "middle-aged." Early on in this adventure, when the party was commissioned for the adventure, the characters were asked to select from among themselves one who would be a speaker for the party. It was clear that this role was significant--with no Sultan on the throne, the religious authority of Krystoral would recognize this person as a political authority. Zaim knew he didn't want to do it, but much of the rest of the party looked to him. Zaim did the only thing that felt right to him on something called "a quest for purity:" he nominated a slave named Timur (also a fellow PC) as speaker.
Since that (arguably wise) action, Zaim's view of Timur has changed. The former general is no longer content with solving a mystery or finding a new Sultan. He wants a savior, and he's decided Timur is the man for the job. He hasn't told Timur yet, and if he plays his cards right, he won't have to. Zaim just needs to make sure a good legend is crafted around the slave-king.
Spoiler alert?
There was a time in my gaming life where I thought secrets between characters should be secrets between players. I've come to the view that it's far more interesting to have things open between players--that way, everyone can act on the same information.
"Act" is the key word here. I've heard it said that the only actor on the TV series Lost who knew the ending ahead of time was the guy who played Jack. Judging from the other characters' actions, that seems like it might be true--no one else seems to be moving toward a coherent purpose as the show reaches its climax. I think many RPGs suffer from the same problem: one GM and a handful of characters are trying to take the game in their own direction, but no one (except the GM in the best of cases) know what that direction is.
So, I hope Timur's player reads this. (Doubly so because that player is co-author Chase!) I hope the rest of our adventuring group reads it, too, because that gives everyone an equal opportunity to play out this side story. And since the GM knows of Zaim's intent, he has two important opportunities:
- He can prepare for the game knowing that one of the party has just decided to make himself John the Baptist, and
- He can tell me to cool it if Zaim's goals are simply too contrary to the game he wants to run
What's who's motivation?
I'm finding myself in an interesting situation here. My goal in playing games is always to craft a good story. The way things have shaken out, my character's goal is also to have a good story told. So, what's the difference?
Zaim's view of "a good story" is that, for a legend of nation (or world-wide) redemption to be penned, the order of things must be turned on its head. Established religious authority must be milquetoasty, political authority must be undermined, and the voice of salvation must be the voice of the people. He also understands that the slave-king must conquer death itself--and he's not quite sure how that's going to happen.
Most significantly, Zaim sees the need for a "Judas" to the slave-king. There is an unethical merchant in our party who is a candidate, but Zaim sees two problems with that. First, Zaim doesn't know the merchant's goals, and suspects the merchant isn't interested in making a messiah. Second, Zaim sees the merchant as a secondary character for redemption--won't the story be so much better if the most damned person in the tale finds salvation? Thus, Zaim sees himself as the most likely candidate for villain. He has begun to understand his own tragic life story as a preparatory trial for this event. He sees his own salvation wrapped up in destroying his own life to create a savior.
Messed up, huh? So, how are Zaim's motivations different from mine?
The key answer is that Zaim is presupposing what "a good story is," while I'm not. Sure, I'd love to see if Zaim can find a way to kill and raise the slave-king, and I suspect that Zaim's gotta die at some point in all this. However, if the story goes the way of the other characters unraveling Zaim's plot and put a stop to it--either through reason or sword--that'll be a good story, too. Zaim might not be happy with it, but I will.
Have you ever had a character go totally off the deep end? Do Messianic ideas work themselves into your adventures? Tell us about it in the comments!
PDF