Remove ads

Warhammer Fantasy: Divided Loyalties - an Advisor's Quest

Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Reader mode
Fair. Numerous secondary objectives were secured and we technically fulfilled the primary mission. Doesn't stop it from being a total anticlimax, though.

It's narratively unsatisfying and that's kinda the point.
 
My reaction when Gotrek died :

Who the fuck is Gotrek and why should I care about him ?
[reread]
Oh right, he was a background character with a useful skill. A shame we lost him, but I guess losing some mildly useful NPCs does add a little tension to this cakewalk.

My reaction after thread rage made me google him and learn he is from a novel series I never read :

I guess this explains why people care about this random guy ?
 
Boney said:
Gotrek's death wasn't an unexpected roll. When I made it, I made it in full knowledge and acceptance of the fact that it might lead to the death of one or more major characters. Taking risks needs to be able to lead to the foreseeable consequences of those risks, because if a QM isn't willing to follow through on them, it cheapens the entire decision-making process the players go through.

I know some people find sudden and abrupt death of major characters narratively unsatisfying, but the linear nature of time and the input of votes and dice make it impossible to properly foreshadow and build up to future events in a quest. Abelhelm's death might have ended up in something resembling that, but everything leading up to that fateful charge would have been exactly the same if the assault on Drakenhof had been a complete success. But I don't see this as a flaw of the format, I see it as a trade-off. Instead of carefully-crafted narrative arcs, the events that occur in quests being dictated as much by player agency and random chance as it is by author fiat adds genuine tension and stakes. Natural 100s and boxcars have dictated events in this quest that I would never have had the gall to write if I was in full control, and it has made it so that those events are amazing instead of contrived, but the cost of that is that the natural 1s must also be empowered.

And I don't see how this would be made better by having Gotrek survive but have some invisible OOC Final Destination doom mark hovering over his head. It might make it possible for me to layer on some pathos by having him look at a picture of his family and talk earnestly about how he just can't wait to get back to them, but it would add a weird and uncomfortable element to the period of time between him being doomed and it actually manifesting. 'We need to social Gotrek because he's going to die soon', 'can we get Gotrek to write down all his engineering knowledge?', 'who's the second most senior engineer, we should get to know them and make sure they're a safe distance from Gotrek', 'it's okay to risk Gotrek because he's going to die anyway'... I really don't see that working well at all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly, the two sides of this of the examples here strike me as nothing so much as an old talk I recall on two different kinds of death in narrative, and their roles. Both distinct from the classic one where it's tragic but there's a speech (or a prepared letter in the study) at the end and everyone, including the reader, gets proper closure.

There's the one like Gotrek's that's sudden, out of nowhere. There was an arc and character development here built up and ready to continue with places to go and it all just... stops. In the blink of an eye. There can be very little done to address or make sense of it because the plot is still moving forward, and there's just no time, in character or out, to waste. It gives it all a sense of unreality but at the same time that's just... kind of the point. The sort of thing where you can see where phrases like "he had his whole life ahead of him" came from. It was a waste, but the waste of it all is kind of the narrative point, in stories where this is done more deliberately.

And then you have the other half. Where instead of being too short, it's too long. Something happens, it starts. Everyone has their speeches, their closure... and then it keeps going. You see the character just... hollowed out, more and more, by the thing that's killing them and all the suffering it inflicts. So when the moment of death finally comes, it's as a release from the far-too-long process of dying.

So yeah, I don't think a too-short death like Gotrek's, especially in the midst of an adventure, is at all a bad thing. It's just... something that happens in that kind of situation. Same as I wouldn't be surprised to see someone in a calmer moment, like Qrech or perhaps one of Mathilde's older friends, play out the other half of the coin: Enduring far too much for far too long.
 
Last edited:
TalonofAnathrax said:
My reaction when Gotrek died :

Who the fuck is Gotrek and why should I care about him ?
[reread]
Oh right, he was a background character with a useful skill. A shame we lost him, but I guess losing some mildly useful NPCs does add a little tension to this cakewalk.

My reaction after thread rage made me google him and learn he is from a novel series I never read :

I guess this explains why people care about this random guy ?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Gotrek is one of the few characters who survived the End Times. The only Dwarven character who is not a God who did so. That should give you an idea of how popular he is that even GW in their calamity decided they wanted to keep him to milk him for more money and merchandise.
 
sudden and unceremonious death is kind of the standar for non-original characters, or so it seems.
Sunscrier, van Hal,, even Skarsnik got aborted while haivng nothing to do whit what was happening in that momment.
it's the price it has to be paid in order to have great original characters.
 
Last edited:
Thats not really the intent here thought? They could have been born, they could've had their place in the grand tapestry of fate. But the dice did not agree, and so they don't.

There isn't really some kind of underlying thought that these characters need to bite it. They just have their dice rolled like everyone else. Its noones fault if it comes up one for them.
 
pucflek said:
Thats not really the intent here thought? They could have been born, they could've had their place in the grand tapestry of fate. But the dice did not agree, and so they don't.

There isn't really some kind of underlying thought that these characters need to bite it. They just have their dice rolled like everyone else. Its noones fault if it comes up one for them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Oh I agree, just pointing out another data point.

EDIT: You know, this makes four canon characters dead. Just saying.😒
 
Eisenhelm said:
sudden and unceremonious death is kind of the standar for non-original characters, or so it seems.
Sunscrier, van Hal,, even Skarsnik got aborted while haivng nothing to do whit what was happening in that momment.
it's the price it has to be paid in order to have great original characters.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Albelhelm was an original character.
 
pucflek said:
Thats not really the intent here thought? They could have been born, they could've had their place in the grand tapestry of fate. But the dice did not agree, and so they don't.

There isn't really some kind of underlying thought that these characters need to bite it. They just have their dice rolled like everyone else. Its noones fault if it comes up one for them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ranald, is that you ?!?
 
Boney said:
Gotrek's death wasn't an unexpected roll. When I made it, I made it in full knowledge and acceptance of the fact that it might lead to the death of one or more major characters. Taking risks needs to be able to lead to the foreseeable consequences of those risks, because if a QM isn't willing to follow through on them, it cheapens the entire decision-making process the players go through.

I know some people find sudden and abrupt death of major characters narratively unsatisfying, but the linear nature of time and the input of votes and dice make it impossible to properly foreshadow and build up to future events in a quest. Abelhelm's death might have ended up in something resembling that, but everything leading up to that fateful charge would have been exactly the same if the assault on Drakenhof had been a complete success. But I don't see this as a flaw of the format, I see it as a trade-off. Instead of carefully-crafted narrative arcs, the events that occur in quests being dictated as much by player agency and random chance as it is by author fiat adds genuine tension and stakes. Natural 100s and boxcars have dictated events in this quest that I would never have had the gall to write if I was in full control, and it has made it so that those events are amazing instead of contrived, but the cost of that is that the natural 1s must also be empowered.

And I don't see how this would be made better by having Gotrek survive but have some invisible OOC Final Destination doom mark hovering over his head. It might make it possible for me to layer on some pathos by having him look at a picture of his family and talk earnestly about how he just can't wait to get back to them, but it would add a weird and uncomfortable element to the period of time between him being doomed and it actually manifesting. 'We need to social Gotrek because he's going to die soon', 'can we get Gotrek to write down all his engineering knowledge?', 'who's the second most senior engineer, we should get to know them and make sure they're a safe distance from Gotrek', 'it's okay to risk Gotrek because he's going to die anyway'... I really don't see that working well at all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly, I disagree with the premise that Gotrek was a major character. In DL, he really wasn't. He was only one step up from people like Hexensohn or Sunscryer. And he did get a saving roll after the crash, so he got one more chance than those two. Compare that to Abelheim, who got a saving roll during the fight, and then two or three more afterwards (accompanied by corresponding scenes), or Mathilde that one time she was cornered by Orks, who also got a ton of saving rolls (and passed).

You can also see this in the aftermath. Gotrek got one scene discussing the consequence of his loss, for Hexensohn it was an offhand mention and really more about someone else, and Sunscryer... got used as a warning at some point, I think? And personally, I think all those characters got appropriate amount of plot armor, which I don' say derisvely; a certain amount of plot armor helps a lot to make a narrative enjoyable. If Belegar died because of two bad rolls, I would also be upset (especially because Abelhelm gives a rough estimate how bad you have to roll to get it).

I think the fundamental issue here is that people who read the books, or even just knew of them, expected those would mean that Gotrek was a major character, despite lacking the presence in DL's narrative to justify that. And so they reacted as if a major character had been unceremoniously killed. But Gotrek wasn't a major character, and so he doesn't get so many second chances (and he did get a second chance). And it really shouldn't be a surprise, because Karl-Franz also got diced by the die. But that was so indirect and he had so little presence in the narrative (on account of not existing yet) that it didn't really register.
 
Last edited:
To pull a Sunscryer essentially became a byword for exploding in a miscast. He is literally a cautionary tale. But then again, he's a Sigmar's Blood character, so it's a fitting fate. If only Helman Ghorst could join him.
 
Valarauko said:
Honestly, while Gotrek's abrupt and unceremonious death feels like a senseless tragedy and total waste, it works well for the story, precisely because it captures just how utterly pointless the entire expedition turned out to be after rescuing Karak Vlag.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think that the conversation with Borek, and the resulting relief that Belegar found, because of finding that the way stone siphoning must be for the good of all of Kara's Ankor is a good result of the rest of the expedition.

Thus, I am happy that the expedition helped Belegar very much with his mental health.
 
Brennan Lee Mulligan, a livecast Dungeon Master, once talked about the roll that dice play as a third-party in the game. Specifically in the context of an absolutely brutal series of sessions that saw multiple PC's go from full to dead in the span of a single turn, under the 5e system Live and On Camera.

We make jokes about Renald, but setting aside the kayfabe for a second, the dice are a purely neutral participant. They do not care for the thematics or arcs or plans of the DM or the Players because they're true chaos leashed to the table.

The same dice that killed Albelhelm and Gotrek were the same dice that let us evaporate an Ork army, rob a god, and krump a vampire college. You don't get one without the other. The energy of both sides is the consequence we get for playing whats at its core is *really* a crowd directed rpg with a massive emphasize on the Dice's neutral participation.

You were caught outside with your pants down, the enemy scored a critical hit that exceded your health total, you are now dead. And it works the same for ancient dryads that don't read about the fancy Dwarf Wizard.
 
CornyBones said:
Brennan Lee Mulligan, a livecast Dungeon Master, once talked about the roll that dice play as a third-party in the game. Specifically in the context of an absolutely brutal series of sessions that saw multiple PC's go from full to dead in the span of a single turn, under the 5e system Live and On Camera.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Are you talking about a Crown of Candy? Becuase if so, that's a different situation. Brennan, in that situation, explicitly set out to make an absurdly difficult game where everyone was trying to kill the PCs and going out of his way to make encounters that were extremely unfair for the players to create a GOT-like environment where "everybody wants the Starks dead". He used the narrative to set things up, deliberately ignoring the GM rule that you design encounters to be solved.

He did this because that was the crux of the setting he was working in, and the players knew and agreed on this. Every player came into the first session with a backup character because they knew their characters could die at any moment. DL operates on a different specturm. You can definitely make a Warhammer story where death is the expected outcome, but Boney isn't going that route.
 
Quest said:
Oh I agree, just pointing out another data point.

EDIT: You know, this makes four canon characters dead. Just saying.😒
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Khazrak was the Beastlord killed when the Eonir and Middenland teamed up.

Queek was butterflied.

Karl Franz was butterflied by quest-start; even if Luitpold planned to name the unborn baby Karl Franz, there's no guarantee that he'd have been the same.
 
Mopman43 said:
Khazrak was the Beastlord killed when the Eonir and Middenland teamed up.

Queek was butterflied.

Karl Franz was butterflied by quest-start; even if Luitpold planned to name the unborn baby Karl Franz, there's no guarantee that he'd have been the same.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
If we're counting everyone then Sunscryer, Hexensohn and Sleek Sharpwit can also be added to Gotrek, Franz, Khazrak, Skarsnik and Queek.

Let's not forget that Egrimm is different. He's already betrayed the Empire by this point in canon.
 
Codex said:
Are you talking about a Crown of Candy? Becuase if so, that's a different situation. Brennan, in that situation, explicitly set out to make an absurdly difficult game where everyone was trying to kill the PCs and going out of his way to make encounters that were extremely unfair for the players to create a GOT-like environment where "everybody wants the Starks dead". He used the narrative to set things up, deliberately ignoring the GM rule that you design encounters to be solved.

He did this because that was the crux of the setting he was working in, and the players knew and agreed on this. Every player came into the first session with a backup character because they knew their characters could die at any moment. DL operates on a different specturm. You can definitely make a Warhammer story where death is the expected outcome, but Boney isn't going that route.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah its about Crown of Candy. I also enjoyed the post-games.

My point is that we only get feats of dice-wonder because we allow space for dice-blunder. And where you have a lot of dice being rolled, there participation doesn't respect narritive convention or dramatic positioning.
 
CornyBones said:
Yeah its about Crown of Candy. I also enjoyed the post-games.

My point is that we only get feats of dice-wonder because we allow space for dice-blunder. And where you have a lot of dice being rolled, there participation doesn't respect narritive convention or dramatic positioning.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I feel that's missing a core part of the issue. The dice are neutral, yes. The dice are also inanimate, and so can't actually do anything. They have to be interpreted by the GM (and players). What does a Nat1 mean? Do you miss and are out of position? Do you accidentally strike a friend? Do you cut off your own head? A tremendous part of narrative convention happens in how they are interpreted.

In DL, Asarnil as a total badass rolling badly while fighting some Norscan means he doesn't style on him as hard. Abelheim as the most important NPC at the time rolling badly means that he's in trouble if he fails the next roll too (while Sunscryer just blows up). Mathilde, as a good fighter with a magic sword against some Orks and main character means several really bad rolls results in accumulating wounds (though the roll in question also matters, since her really bad rolls where mostly on the get out rolls).

Now, why do dice still matter if it's all up to the individual interpretation? Because people have relatively clear ideas on how to interpret the dice. And if someone breaks from those ideas, it gets noted (and often called plot armor). The issue here is that two groups of people where applying different rulesets for how to interpret the dice.
 
BurnNote said:
In DL, Asarnil as a total badass rolling badly while fighting some Norscan means he doesn't style on him as hard. Abelheim as the most important NPC at the time rolling badly means that he's in trouble if he fails the next roll too (while Sunscryer just blows up). Mathilde, as a good fighter with a magic sword against some Orks and main character means several really bad rolls results in accumulating wounds (though the roll in question also matters, since her really bad rolls where mostly on the get out rolls).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
To put that whole thing in perspective:
Boney said:
[Asarnil vs Völundr, round 1: 26 vs 29.]

The clash of Norscan steel against Caledorian Ithilmar begins immediately, with Asarnil parrying the first swing of the Norscan to obliterate the patch of ground he had been standing on a moment before, which causes you to raise your eyebrows and concentrate your Magesight as you realize there's more to the hammer than steel or more to Völundr than baseline human muscle. But at this distance you can't make out any flash of energies from the hammer amongst the eddying ambient Winds, so you give up and return your focus entirely to your mundane senses as the two warriors dance around each other, seemingly evenly matched.

Seemingly.

"I thought the Old World's dearest mercenary would have a bit more flash to him," Sir Ruprecht says beside you, and you remember that his attention was elsewhere when Asarnil went blade-to-claw with a higher Daemon of the Tempter and came away unscathed.

"What do you know of Vaul?" you ask as you watch.

"Vaul?" he says distractedy. "Vaul. You mean Vallich? Nordlander God of Shipwrights? Not much, really."

"They do get around a bit, don't they? I must admit, I don't know a whole lot about Elven Gods. What I do know is that Vaul is the God of Smiths and the patron God of Caledor. And most notably..."

[Asarnil vs Völundr, round 2: 97 vs 7.]

You wince as Asarnil's blade flicks out twice, faster than the eye can see, and a scream of pain rises from the Norscan as he clutches at his face. "Most notably," you continue, "he was blinded..." Asarnil circles his foe, and you wince again as the Elf's greaved leg lashes out with a crack of shattering bone. "And crippled by Khaine," you finish, almost drowned out by the second crack.

"Ah," Sir Ruprecht says as Asarnil's blade slips between Völundr's ribs to skewer his heart.

"'Victory is a foregone conclusion,'" you say, echoing Asarnil's promise to any who are able to afford his prices.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Boney said:
They weren't playing the same game. Völundr was fighting to win, Asarnil was lining himself up for the dunk. If Völundr got the upper hand Asarnil might have had to start taking the fight seriously and then the proper modifiers would have come out.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Boney didn't even apply any modifiers to that fight. It was such a mismatch and Asarnil was playing around so much that he deliberately set the fight up so that they would be "fighting on equal ground". Volundr rolled slightly better at first but it gave him no advantage, and Volundr got no second chances with that 97 vs 7. He was crippled and killed.

The dice favored Asarnil, but that's because Asarnil is way beyond Volundr.
 
It's not so much plot armor as conservation of narrative detail. If insufficiently important, your failed attempt to manage your miscast and fumbling of your grounding rod so that you impale your head on it and cause an escalating feedback loop of magic that blows up a district gets abstracted out to a single really lousy roll.
 
consequences said:
It's not so much plot armor as conservation of narrative detail. If insufficiently important, your failed attempt to manage your miscast and fumbling of your grounding rod so that you impale your head on it and cause an escalating feedback loop of magic that blows up a district gets abstracted out to a single really lousy roll.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
But that is a form of plot armor. The more dice get thrown, the less likely truly catastrophic events, and that means you're much less likely to die.

Sidenote: It often also applies towards success. If an important character rolls well, they do something awesome. If a side character rolls well, they get to roll to see if they do something awesome. I don't want to say anything about DL in that regard though, because I don't think we have such clear examples. There's Anton, but he was already an important character, his gimmick is tied into it, and we didn't see the rolls that made him awesome. Other than that, maybe Gunnars. He became awesome through a single roll, but that roll was also a saving throw for Mathilde, so that's also murky.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top