How is Neverember depicted in YOUR campaign? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

How is Neverember depicted in YOUR campaign?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Paris7
Nov 07, 2011 19:51:29 I do like how they keep Neverember's ultimate motives up to the DM, whether he's a greedy would-be tyrant that seeks to build a "cutthroat empire", as the book says, or genuinely wants to improve the well-being of Neverwinter and bring stability and life to the city---with him as king, of course.

It seems that more often than not, though, in almost all of the Neverwinter games I've been in, Neverember is universally depicted as a ruthless, greedy imperialist. In both of my Neverwinter games I run him as a genuine champion of the people, albiet a champion who is of course an opportunitist, and with a firm belief that he deserves the Neverwinter crown. I do this for two reasons:

-I (correctly) anticipated my players in one group believing he had some ulterior, evil motive to rule with a tyrannical fist (the other group agreed to prop Neverember on the throne if it meant positions of power and wealth for them. Yep, they're all mercenaries);

-It seems Neverwinter is already chock full of villains, and also chock full of heroes. Neveremeber, to me, floats in the moral grey area of things, something I think is sorely needed when players fully expect everyone in the world to be either 100% good or evil.

To some degree, Neverember reminds me of Napoleon, who is one of those historical figures in the moral shades of grey (unlike figures like Ghandi or Hitler, of whom most people agree were universally good or bad people) and where opinion on him ranges from demi-god to satan incarnate. That, and of course both are/were financial wizards.

But enough history, I know that makes many peoples' brains hurt. My question is, how do you depict Neveremeber in your campaign, or what kind of person is he in games where you're a player?
#2
ritorix
Nov 07, 2011 21:14:10 I've only run one Neverwinter game, still ongoing. In it he is a distant leader that the party opposes. Everyone has an opinion of the man. The players hate him for wanting the same thing they want - the crown. Various NPCs are his ally (Mordai), his enemy (the Harpers, Sons) or sometimes both (Dead Rats).

While everyone talks about Neverember, the players have never actually met him. Along the way I have dropped hints that maybe he isn't so bad. Maybe he is the only good guy in town, and by opposing him the players are on the side of evil. Whether or not that is true remains to be seen.

My campaign is basically all shades of grey, with most of the players unaligned. What if Neverember is the source of civilization, law and order, and the rebuilding of a lost city? Sure, imperialism follows in his wake, but is that remotely as bad as a city dominated by Thayans, Asmodeans and wererat gangs? By opposing him, the players are basically supporting continued anarchy and the spread of evil factions.
#3
eriksdb
Nov 09, 2011 15:58:06 Cool thread.

As the designer for Neverember and his faction and much of the political setup of the city, I wanted to add that I purposefully designed the Lord Protector to be ambiguous, and let the DM use him as fit the game. (For those playing the Encounter season, I also purposefully tried to make him ambiguous there as well.)

When I portray him in my own Realms games, he is a craft, cutthroat politician who is really quite charming and charismatic on the surface, and is a genuine ally to the heroes . . . at least until they cross him, which is when all that goodwill evaporates and he bends his considerable resources to foiling the PCs' plans.

Cheers
#4
Calamity916
Nov 13, 2011 22:51:29 I haven't played any games in Neverwinter yet but me and a friend are putting one together for Jan. 2012.

We are going to go for the ruthless and crafty polititian who will use the players and then cast them away near the end of the heroic tier when their group has outlived its usefulness. When that happens, the heroes will have to build a rival faction to oppose Neverember for control of the city.

Where they go after that will depend on their actions.

OP Your comparison to Napoleon is pretty apt though I like to compare him to Cao Cao from Romance of the Three Kingdoms. As Xu Shao said, "In peace you are an able subject; in chaos you are a crafty hero!" Meaning that he is an able administrator but a ruthless tactitian. How one feels about playing the villain for the "greater good" will determine how you see him.
#5
Scrinoverlord
Nov 20, 2011 21:31:20 In my campaign the PCs have done everything they could conceivably do to mess up things in the Neverwinter region, entirely by accident. They've caused a war between Neverwinter and Waterdeep against Netheril against Thay against the eladrin. In other words, exactly as the Campaign Setting had suggested could happen. Neverember in this case has basically rallied all of his resources to protect Neverwinter, while the PCs are off stemming the undead tide from Neverdeath graveyard. Neverember is using the siege of Neverwinter as an opportunity to prove that, as he is capable of making the people safe, he deserves the crown, at least in his eyes. But I don't plan for him to betray the characters unless they give him a good reason to.

OP Your comparison to Napoleon is pretty apt though I like to compare him to Cao Cao from Romance of the Three Kingdoms. As Xu Shao said, "In peace you are an able subject; in chaos you are a crafty hero!" Meaning that he is an able administrator but a ruthless tactitian. How one feels about playing the villain for the "greater good" will determine how you see him.

Then of course we get to the (literally) centuries-old debate on just how responsible Napoleon was for the so-called "Napoleonic" Wars. People tend to take for granted that he was entirely responsible for his name being in the title alone, but studying the era for four years I can definitely say there were other guilty parties. It wasn't really a conflict fought between "right" and "wrong", as most historians agree was the case with WWII and Hitler (and by the way, everytime people try to compare Nappy and Hitler I genuinely want to puke).

Of course this is neither the time nor place to have such a debate; but suddenly I think I have a title for the conflict in my game, the Neverembian Wars...

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Paris7 Nov 07, 2011 19:51:29	I do like how they keep Neverember's ultimate motives up to the DM, whether he's a greedy would-be tyrant that seeks to build a "cutthroat empire", as the book says, or genuinely wants to improve the well-being of Neverwinter and bring stability and life to the city---with him as king, of course. It seems that more often than not, though, in almost all of the Neverwinter games I've been in, Neverember is universally depicted as a ruthless, greedy imperialist. In both of my Neverwinter games I run him as a genuine champion of the people, albiet a champion who is of course an opportunitist, and with a firm belief that he deserves the Neverwinter crown. I do this for two reasons: -I (correctly) anticipated my players in one group believing he had some ulterior, evil motive to rule with a tyrannical fist (the other group agreed to prop Neverember on the throne if it meant positions of power and wealth for them. Yep, they're all mercenaries); -It seems Neverwinter is already chock full of villains, and also chock full of heroes. Neveremeber, to me, floats in the moral grey area of things, something I think is sorely needed when players fully expect everyone in the world to be either 100% good or evil. To some degree, Neverember reminds me of Napoleon, who is one of those historical figures in the moral shades of grey (unlike figures like Ghandi or Hitler, of whom most people agree were universally good or bad people) and where opinion on him ranges from demi-god to satan incarnate. That, and of course both are/were financial wizards. But enough history, I know that makes many peoples' brains hurt. My question is, how do you depict Neveremeber in your campaign, or what kind of person is he in games where you're a player?
#2 ritorix Nov 07, 2011 21:14:10	I've only run one Neverwinter game, still ongoing. In it he is a distant leader that the party opposes. Everyone has an opinion of the man. The players hate him for wanting the same thing they want - the crown. Various NPCs are his ally (Mordai), his enemy (the Harpers, Sons) or sometimes both (Dead Rats). While everyone talks about Neverember, the players have never actually met him. Along the way I have dropped hints that maybe he isn't so bad. Maybe he is the only good guy in town, and by opposing him the players are on the side of evil. Whether or not that is true remains to be seen. My campaign is basically all shades of grey, with most of the players unaligned. What if Neverember is the source of civilization, law and order, and the rebuilding of a lost city? Sure, imperialism follows in his wake, but is that remotely as bad as a city dominated by Thayans, Asmodeans and wererat gangs? By opposing him, the players are basically supporting continued anarchy and the spread of evil factions.
#3 eriksdb Nov 09, 2011 15:58:06	Cool thread. As the designer for Neverember and his faction and much of the political setup of the city, I wanted to add that I purposefully designed the Lord Protector to be ambiguous, and let the DM use him as fit the game. (For those playing the Encounter season, I also purposefully tried to make him ambiguous there as well.) When I portray him in my own Realms games, he is a craft, cutthroat politician who is really quite charming and charismatic on the surface, and is a genuine ally to the heroes . . . at least until they cross him, which is when all that goodwill evaporates and he bends his considerable resources to foiling the PCs' plans. Cheers
#4 Calamity916 Nov 13, 2011 22:51:29	I haven't played any games in Neverwinter yet but me and a friend are putting one together for Jan. 2012. We are going to go for the ruthless and crafty polititian who will use the players and then cast them away near the end of the heroic tier when their group has outlived its usefulness. When that happens, the heroes will have to build a rival faction to oppose Neverember for control of the city. Where they go after that will depend on their actions. OP Your comparison to Napoleon is pretty apt though I like to compare him to Cao Cao from Romance of the Three Kingdoms. As Xu Shao said, "In peace you are an able subject; in chaos you are a crafty hero!" Meaning that he is an able administrator but a ruthless tactitian. How one feels about playing the villain for the "greater good" will determine how you see him.
#5 Scrinoverlord Nov 20, 2011 21:31:20	In my campaign the PCs have done everything they could conceivably do to mess up things in the Neverwinter region, entirely by accident. They've caused a war between Neverwinter and Waterdeep against Netheril against Thay against the eladrin. In other words, exactly as the Campaign Setting had suggested could happen. Neverember in this case has basically rallied all of his resources to protect Neverwinter, while the PCs are off stemming the undead tide from Neverdeath graveyard. Neverember is using the siege of Neverwinter as an opportunity to prove that, as he is capable of making the people safe, he deserves the crown, at least in his eyes. But I don't plan for him to betray the characters unless they give him a good reason to. OP Your comparison to Napoleon is pretty apt though I like to compare him to Cao Cao from Romance of the Three Kingdoms. As Xu Shao said, "In peace you are an able subject; in chaos you are a crafty hero!" Meaning that he is an able administrator but a ruthless tactitian. How one feels about playing the villain for the "greater good" will determine how you see him. Then of course we get to the (literally) centuries-old debate on just how responsible Napoleon was for the so-called "Napoleonic" Wars. People tend to take for granted that he was entirely responsible for his name being in the title alone, but studying the era for four years I can definitely say there were other guilty parties. It wasn't really a conflict fought between "right" and "wrong", as most historians agree was the case with WWII and Hitler (and by the way, everytime people try to compare Nappy and Hitler I genuinely want to puke). Of course this is neither the time nor place to have such a debate; but suddenly I think I have a title for the conflict in my game, the Neverembian Wars...