Hi. I'm hoping to run a one-shot game of Charnel Gods at an upcoming yearly gathering of gaming friends. The ones I have in mind as players, upon being told that the first person to 0 humanity gets to destroy the world, will probably start eating small children and chasing livestock from the word go. Especially since this will be a one or two session game, with no follow up.

Can anyone offer some advice on coaxing the game to actually develop a bit before the apocalypse sets in? I intend to frame the premise as "reluctant would-be heroes pick up weapons of terrible evil for what seemed like a good reason at the time." Still, since the players all know there's a big juicy prize waiting at humanity 0, I don't know how long that will hold them in check.

Alex

I ran my first CG setting without the players knowing, partly b/c my players like a little mystery and partly out of the fear that they would do just as you suggest. There was a bit of a discussion about this in actual play. I may have been wrong in the former, informing them up front might have been wiser, but my latter concern was uncalled for.

I've thought of running CG at conventions, but I've been grappling with the same reasons as you do.

My suggestion is to create a very tense and very intimate epoch - characters are significant figures in a time of abrupt crisis - go for an impending and tragic end for the world with things spinning out of control.

But ground the players in a community - give the players something to care about. Make them all members of a family, perhaps the ruling aristocracy or heralded as figures. Intense and scary people, but still the hope of their community. Keep the players involved in Bangs that often involve their family or cooperation with others.

And I think that part of the problem might be your own expectations, hinted at in your post, such as "a big juicy prize waiting", suggests that perhaps you're developing expectations. The truth of the matter is, if the characters and world and situations are interesting and compelling, the characters won't want that "big juicy prize". If things are going really well, they'll understand the tension between the inevitable fate and their characters' reluctant actions.

That's my perspective on it, I'm sure others will weigh in...

Can you give us a little detail on your setting and what sort of themes you'll be exploring?

--
Garett

Hiya,

I think the real answer to the question is - paradoxically, it may seem - to acknowledge the world-ending possibility ... and then putting it aside.

The point of playing Charnel Gods is not to end the world, and it's not not to end the world either. Make Humanity really central to interacting with other characters and with one another. Bring your GMing "heart" to bear on the events of play, and assign Humanity checks and gain rolls.

Focus on scenario. conflict, character, and role-playing the demons. Let the "end the world" aspect of playing Charnel Gods be a consequence, which may or may not become central, rather than the focus from the git-go.

Best,
Ron

Losing Humanity in Charnel Gods is no challenge at all; if you're playing by the rules, all the players have to do is start contacting, summoning, and binding Fell Weapons. That being the case, hopefully they'll choose something a little more emotionally involving.

Often you can mitigate the effects of Humanity loss by really looking for those Humanity gain moments. There's plenty of opportunity in Charnel Gods; often the same action that constitutes a loss might also be worth a gain, depending on the circumstances.

And as always, you're the one who tells them when to roll.

- Scott

If I were running this in a situation where I could conceal the humanity 0 effect, I might. I understand the appeal of the surprise factor. However in this case, its too late to even consider it. At least two of the players already know the nature of CG.

The "big juicy prize" is partly a term I use because I think it is how my intended players will regard it. Although thinking about this has brought me to an interesting conclusion. I find the concept of CG so aweful that I have to intentionally shut down my own empathy for these imaginary people to really think about playing or running it. And once I do that, it's very easy to simply look at it as an excuse for depravity. A kind of kill epochs for satan. It will definitely be a balancing act on my part. And congratulations on creating something so disturbing.

As far as the epoch, I'm planning on something along the lines of the fall of rome. I want to confine the action to the capital city, to keep characters from dispersing too much, since we have such limited play time. The imagery is exotic vice and squallor mingled. A once great civilization in the last days of its decline, filled with the air of desperation. Various factions either exploiting things while they can, or each with its own contradictory idea of what must be done to save the empire. Politics increasingly bleeding over into violence, both in the streets and daggers in the back at the bathhouse. If the Harbinger wants to fiddle while the epoch burns, it would be right in character.

This actually reminds me of another issue I have to deal with. For these little cons, we've instituted a pre-gen only rule. It has vastly increased the amount of actual gaming we get done, so I'm not arguing. Unfortunately, it means I'll be cooking up the characters for this game, which may not be great for involving the players in their stories. If there's not a huge line up of games, I may ask if they're willing to break the rule, since Sorcerer characters don't have a lot of mechanics to get bogged down in. Any advice or problems people have had running con-game or the like with pre-gens? I was thinking of creating characters and their weapons separately, and letting people mix and match. Should I write kickers for the characters as well, or just write them up?

Alex

When I ran Charnel Gods demos at GenCon, I did exactly what you suggest - I used pregen characters and pregen weapons and let them mix and match. In fact, I've always just used the weapons in the book to save time. I did write kickers for the characters, but I made them very specific so as to focus the action. Of course, I was working with a half hour time limit, so the action needed to be focus.

The very first CG playtest took place at a housecon with some friends, and for that game everyone created characters and weapons. It can take some time. More importantly, you need time to think about their characters and kickers and what kind of bangs they lend themselves to...you know, basic prep stuff. We had three days for our housecon, so I had them create characters on the first day, then I gave myself a night to work out the details, and over the next two days we played almost nothing but Charnel Gods.

By contrast, a ran a pick up game of Charnel Gods a few GenCons ago with Gordon Landis and Ralph Mazza and my brother-in-law Travis. They made up their characters and weapons and we immediately leapt into the game, no prep time at all. It was a total disaster.

Basically, I'm saying give yourself time to prep.

- Scott

If your players will get off on precipitating an apocalypse, why not let them do so immediately? Play a half-hour teaser where everybody already has a Fell Weapon and is at Humanity 1. They're facing some Big Bad who gives them plenty of incentive to go homicidal. Something pushes them over the edge and everything goes to hell.

Then start the real game, set thousands of years later when the world is back on its feet. Ideally, there should be echoes of the previous armageddon, but the players are running new characters in the new setting. This time around, they should be less eager to pop the cork and more interested in letting things develop gradually.

Alternatively, you could run the same sort of teaser, let them destroy the world, then say, "Okay: it's ten years earlier. Now we're going to play how the whole thing started."

As an addendum to jagardner's above post, I'd like to point out that even after one character has bottomed out their Humanity and triggered the Epoch's end, the actual destruction of that Epoch gets played out...play doesn't stop until all of the characters have resolved their kickers, or at least gone as far as they can. This could take several sessions; I liken it to any one of many good doomsday movies (my favorite is When Worlds Collide) where the majority of the film's running time takes place after the end has been spotted and found to be inevitable. Life may be at its end, but there are still stories to be told...

That said, I'd still have Alex's concerns. If the players rush for that 0 Humanity mark, the ones who don't get there are stuck playing unsavory characters that they probably don't have much investment in while the apocalypse rains down around them. In a way, I see the early part of Charnel Gods as being a setup for that later part; everything before the doomsday is about getting emotionally invested in the characters, so that after the doomsday arrives we still care about the choices they make. In fact, I think that's where Charnel Gods is at its best, when the players are answering the question: "Why do anything at all when you know that what whatever you do isn't going to make a difference?".

- Scott

kalyptein wrote: If I were running this in a situation where I could conceal the humanity 0 effect, I might. I understand the appeal of the surprise factor. However in this case, its too late to even consider it. At least two of the players already know the nature of CG.

The "big juicy prize" is partly a term I use because I think it is how my intended players will regard it.

Although thinking about this has brought me to an interesting conclusion. I find the concept of CG so aweful that I have to intentionally shut down my own empathy for these imaginary people to really think about playing or running it. And once I do that, it's very easy to simply look at it as an excuse for depravity. A kind of kill epochs for satan. It will definitely be a balancing act on my part. And congratulations on creating something so disturbing.

As far as the epoch, I'm planning on something along the lines of the fall of rome. I want to confine the action to the capital city, to keep characters from dispersing too much, since we have such limited play time. The imagery is exotic vice and squallor mingled. A once great civilization in the last days of its decline, filled with the air of desperation. Various factions either exploiting things while they can, or each with its own contradictory idea of what must be done to save the empire. Politics increasingly bleeding over into violence, both in the streets and daggers in the back at the bathhouse. If the Harbinger wants to fiddle while the epoch burns, it would be right in character.

I was thinking of creating characters and their weapons separately, and letting people mix and match.

Should I write kickers for the characters as well, or just write them up?

All this rush for what can only be described as the Charnel Gods "Money Shot" has me wondering...

Why, in a con game, is it important for the world to end?

It seems to me that a Charnel Gods game can be perfectly edifying without having to rush headlong in to the end of the world. In truth, in my *very* limited experience with the game, I actually found the endgame to be far less interesting than everything else that came before it. So it might not be important to rush ahead - the relationship between the characters and their weapons and their world, and their choices, could make for a fascinating game without the endgame apocalypse.

--==--
Garett