Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 rvaducks Jan 11, 2015 19:01:51	Hey all,   I'm struglling a little bit with a story telling issue. My players are currently in the largest city in the kingdom. The kingdom is more of a confederacy between the Elves, Dwarfs and Humans. The kingdom is seperated from other civilizations geographically and after years of fighting a power sharing agreement was made. Since that agreement, gernerations agon, there has been no major wars.   Maybe you see where this is going. I'd like there to be an attack on the council ( a rep of each race) that results in a disientgration of the pact. This sudden vacuum means that other parties that have been looking for a chance to strike are going to make moves to take advantage.  But I'm struggling to come up with a plausible reason why this attack would result in fingerpointing and ending the defense agreement. I can understand the elf and dwarfs blaming the humans as it happened in a human city., perhaps they think the humans didn't do enough to protect them. But why would they blame each other?
#2 Fikkle Jan 11, 2015 19:58:37	Have an attack occur on the dwarves that the players have to go investigate. The evidence should point to elves. Then have humans attack the elves while the players are there. Have all of the evidence point to each side attacking the other until they all start attacking each other. In the end, you can have the attacks orchestrated by a fourth, enemy race like orcs, or have it be orahestrted by a powerful wizard.    The journey that the players go on is to discover the truth, which can lead them to try to keep the pact together (regardless of whether old hatreds win out or not).   Hope that helps
#3 Archon007 Jan 11, 2015 23:19:29	Pretty plausible. They had been at war for a long time and peace only a short time. There is always bad blood in timelines like this. Maybe the elfs where planing on attacking and another party found out about it so they attacked using the real evidence against the elfs. Maybe one of the factions has been luring the other two into a false sense of security and uses the time to make a power grab. Maybe the leaders son or brother frames the leader by making an attack so they can become the new leader and they get more than they bargained for. Maybe there is a Remeo Juliet thing going on with an Elf and Human and the leader attacks to stop it.    Really so many options.
#4 OrwellianHaggis Jan 12, 2015 0:51:36	Unless you've shared all your information with your players, you should be able to get away with just running the scenario. You'll have time to think of an explanation later, if the characters care to ask why the various races started killing each other.   The above posts are good. My take on it would be that a doppelganger, in the employ of another monster, is trying to destabilise the peace do that the area's monsters have an easier time getting dinner/loot (attacking scattered bands of disorganised elves, dwarves and humans is easier than assaulting a city).
#5 rvaducks Jan 12, 2015 5:30:03	Thanks guys. I actually already have the impetus for the attack. In my plan neither the dwarves, elves nor humans are responsible for it. I'm looking for backstory that would explain why the alliance was so fracturous that is dissovlved as a result of an attack on th council as opposed to grew closer in solidarity.
#6 gregsc Jan 12, 2015 7:33:41	I like the idea of running with it and letting the players speculate. They'll come up with something good.
#7 BRJN Jan 12, 2015 18:09:36	The tri-racial alliance was to fend off a greater threat, not because the races love each other.  Now the outside threat is exterminated.  The races do not really trust each other (there are individuals who are exceptions).  Somebody important got drunk and said / did something stupid and offensive / insulting where lots of people witnessed it, and things just spiralled out from there. Or, think how US / USSR went from Allies to Cold War in just 5 years. Or, think how the victorious World War One alliance broke up as each member went its separate way.
#8 RasmusNord Jan 13, 2015 7:38:57	You could also have a look at some of the real life political reasons for similar situations and create several reasons for existing tensions to make a more interesting backdrop that players can speculate in. In wwI the assassination of the Austrian arch duke was only the spark that lit the powder keg. Eg. - rapid population growth among humans who needs new farm lands pressure the dwarves and elves  - trade treaties and tariffs on different goods have caused quarrels - hard liners on all sides have been lobbying, demonstrated or even attacked each other or symbolic locations of the other races - laws reduce one segment or race to second class citizens in one or more areas - legal disputes over territory or conquered Magic items or art from the war
#9 Razintarr Jan 14, 2015 1:17:13	Means, motive and opportunity are the elements to consider in a murder case, and each of those elements could point to a different party.   Means: the Council wasn't just killed, their souls were destroyed/imprisoned. The only artifact capable of such a deed is in the hands of the elves, a remnant of the Great War that they sought to protect. Of course the elves say it's still save in its vault.   Motive: The human population has grown a lot in the past centuries, and cities are getting crowded. Proposals to built new cities in vacant areas beloning to the Elves or Dwarves have been shot down. The Elves support the Dwarves when the Humans request to move into their territory, for which the Dwarves support the Elves in similar requests. The Council has been in a deadlock over this growing problem, and the Humans have become resentfull. The humans have the most to gain with the end of the alliance.   Opportunity: The attack took place while the Council held seat in the Dwarven capitol. The Dwarves take great pride in this being the most fortified and wellprotected city in the lands. No attack in the capitol should be possible, unless perpetraited or aided by the Dwarves.   Then murder happens and the fingerpointing starts. Fingerpointing leads to incidents (Humans attacking Dwarven border towns). Incidents lead to retaliation (Dwarves sending armed troops to rectivy the situation). Retaliation leads to another retaliation (those armed troops use too much force, and now the Humans vow to avenge the massacre). Before you know it, it doesn't matter who killed the Council, becasue everyone is too busy taking revenge for the acts of others.
#10 PSusac Jan 16, 2015 9:41:19	~~One of the basic considerations in this sort of thing is backstory.   People (and probably elves and dwarves to a lesser degree) have a tendency to believe what is in our INTERESTS to believe.   So create a backstory that incentivizes the beliefs of each faction.  This even justifies the conflict, because if the situation is tenuous to begin with, an outside enemy will be incentivized to trigger the conflict.    Note however that the WORST thing that can happen from the outside enemy's point of view is that the get fingered for the conflict, since this will cause the three sides to close ranks against the outsider. So what are the interests of each group? Elves want esthetic pleasures – maybe the bad guys simply forged a document that authorized the humans to engage in logging in a sacred grove – that would create a conflict.  Maybe the wood from this sacred grove is particularly useful in the forging of mitral armor, so the dwarves are implicated as well.  This has created tension that is being expressed in the counsel prior to the attack.   Dwarves want mineral wealth and beer but they live underground and other than mushrooms don’t have much in the way of food supplies.  Maybe the bad guys formed an alliance with a human merchant who sold all the hops and barley out of the country.  Now we have a bunch of dwarves that are facing the specter of a beer-free society.  And the sacred beer festival is coming soon, so they are facing not only a shortage, but <shudder> SOBRIETY.  If that’s not a call to battle against the treacherous humans nothing is!   Humans grow fast, and population pressure has already been considered, but also consider that human society needs minerals and wood in order to create the finished products of human society.  So rather than wanting territory, they may want iron and lumber.  With the breakdown in relations caused by the other two nations’ cutting off economic ties, the humans are hard pressed to maintain their military strength against the orc raiders on the western border (or some similar long-standing military issue).   Finally we need a reason for the elves to fight the dwarves.  Racial animosity and pride might be enough given the overall stresses.  A generation ago, the Elves were accused of stealing a dwarven artifact.  The bad guys have acquired this artifact, and planted it in a place where the elves can be seen to be in possession of it.  Accusations fly!  “Treacherous Elves!” “Impudent Dwarves! “ etc. etc. And there you go….
#11 Caliburn Jan 17, 2015 16:05:53	The best way would to have a history of increasing fractiousness preceeding the event.   If it came out of the blue and everyone thought the alliance was valuable they would immediately suspect outside ot rogue influences, not turn on each other.   There has to be precedence...