Exalted, Baghdad, and Bangs

[Neil the Wimp]

Hi all.  I'm a lurker who's finally go something to say; hence the new registration.  Also, I'm not too sure that this is the right forum to discuss my questions, so if I've got it wrong, please shout.

My question is about the true nature of Bangs, whether I really understand them, and how I can make better use of the technique. 

I've just finished running an Exalted 8-week mini-campaign at my local RPG club. (8-week blocks are standard for the club, as it allows people to try a variety of games.  For each block, people propose games for a block and we then allocate people to their most preferred games.  This means that the players have some committment to the game they're in.)  This being (Solar) Exalted, and all about powerful characters shaping the world according to their will, I thought that preparing a plot for the PCs was inappropriate.  Instead, I decided to try, for the first time, to prep by developing an R-map and a few initial Bangs, and seeing where things went.  To make the moral choices relevant, I based the setting on 2005 Baghdad, complete with Ba'athist insurgent Solars, occupying US/Realm legions, suicide attacks (by demons), looting of palaces, and the like.  The PCs were pitched in the role of 'foreign fighters' and I was interested in seeing how the players answered the moral choice I presented.  Which groups, if any, would they support or attack?

This was a new style for the players, too, but I didn't spend any time theorising at them.  I did tell them that I had no plot, so they couldn't derail it, so they shouldn't be afraid of doing what they wanted.  The players started off a little timid but were soon slaying my pet NPCs with abandon and organising the Glorious People's Revolution.  The players seemed to very much enjoy themselves. 

And now to the Bangs.  Some of them worked very well, some I think could have been better.  I'd like your advice on how to make them better.

One Bang that worked well was when the PCs came into possession of a bag of 'Acme Instant Suicide Attack' magical talismans made by the Ba'athist Solars.  Lots of soul searching went on about what to do with them: destroy them, hide them, turn them against the makers, etc.  One player (who's PC had virtues of Compassion 4, Temperance 1, of which she was rather proud) spent a lot of time worrying about the collatoral damage of using them.  I was surprised (in a good way) when they ended up using them against the Realm soldiers, taking out quite a few civilians in the process.

Now for the ones I'm not so sure about. 

To reinforce the idea that the Realm/US occupiers were similarly unpleasant to the Ba'athist Solars, and to introduce a villian Dragon-blooded NPC, I had the NPC lead a dawn raid on the flat next door to the PCs safe house.  As I saw it, the PCs had several options: intervene in the raid, let it continue, ambush the Realm troops as they left, investigate the raid after the event, etc., so in that respect I think it qualifies as a Bang.  However, I was also well aware that the Compassion 4, Temperance 1 player would want to intervene and would likely drag the rest of the PCs with them.  She did.  As I could predict the decision taken in response to the raid, does it still qualify as a Bang?

Later, a couple of PCs were captured and taken to Abu Ghraib prison.  I'd already established that there were two legions in the city, raised by two different DB Houses (Cathak and V'Neef, with Cathak in charge), and they didn't get on.  In the prison, V'Neef Dragon-Blooded turned up and made the caputred PCs an offer they couldn't refuse: kill the leaders in the Cathak's legion so the V'Neef could take control of the city.  If the PCs didn't do it within a week, the V'Neef would kill all the members of the cult who were worshipping and supporting the PCs; evidence was provided that this was no empty threat.  The PCs, of course, agreed and were released.  The Bang, I was thinking, lay in what the players decided to do oncereleased: kill the Cathaks, get the cult members to safety, kill the V'Neef, even.  But, as there was no pressure to do any of those things right now, does it still qualify as a Bang?

So, do those last two examples qualify as Bangs?  If so, why are their flaws not fatal?  If not, how could they be turned into Bangs?  In any case, how could I make the two less-successful ones better?

Thanks in advance,

Neil.

PS: In case peope are interested, the game's pitch is at http://wiki.mk-rpg.org.uk/index.php/DustShroudedSun and some in-character writeup (by the Compassion 4 / Temperance 1 player) is at http://wiki.mk-rpg.org.uk/index.php/ExaltedGamePlay

[James_Nostack]

Hi, welcome to the Forge, etc.

I am kind of new to Bangs too, so my comments may be way off base.

1.  The Suicide Bombing stuff is definitely a Bang (no pun intended), because the heroes are in a desperate situation, they have a couple of options, and it may tie into some of the thematic questions of your game--like, what is freedom worth, and do the ends justify the means, etc.

2.  I don't quite see how this is a Bang.  Yes, it's urgent--"Oh no, the bad guys are attacking the house next door, what should we do about it, if anything?"--but it doesn't appear to tie into the thematic concerns of your game.  I would recommend recasting the stakes in such a way that the consequences of intervention or non-intervention are (a) interesting and (b) thematic. 

3.  This looks like a Bang to me, though I would have painted these outcomes in pretty bold strokes so the players would know what's at stake.  The actual moment of decision was pretty urgent, even if they had some time to implement whatever they decided.

[Neil the Wimp]

(Note to self: don't start a new thread immediately before going on holiday, so you can't respond to replies.  Sorry for any confusion.)

Hi, welcome to the Forge, etc.

Thanks.

2.  I don't quite see how this is a Bang.  Yes, it's urgent--"Oh no, the bad guys are attacking the house next door, what should we do about it, if anything?"--but it doesn't appear to tie into the thematic concerns of your game.  I would recommend recasting the stakes in such a way that the consequences of intervention or non-intervention are (a) interesting and (b) thematic. 

3.  This looks like a Bang to me, though I would have painted these outcomes in pretty bold strokes so the players would know what's at stake.  The actual moment of decision was pretty urgent, even if they had some time to implement whatever they decided.

Thanks for the comments.  With regards to Bang 2, yes, I'd forgotten the 'address theme' aspect of the Bangs when I was creating them.  Something to note in future.  As for Bang 3, the players came up with all the possible outcomes, and their implications, by themselves, so that worked well.

So, I need to pay more attention to Theme when creating Bangs, and not just 'what would be a cool scene.'  Thanks for pointing that out.

Neil.