thread: 2009-06-22 : Secrets: the Smelly Chamberlain
On 2009-06-24, tonypace wrote:
Vincent: I don't agree with what you said about the system mostly causing a tendency in which way the question resolves. I don't see that at all. It seems pretty possible to me for it go any which way, depending on the players and personalities involved. And the motivations for playing this sort of trick.
You could get #5 easily enough with Inspectres, if the same group would do that in D&D. It might even be easier with Inspectres, since all the systems for player input would make it more of a direct challenge if the conspirators didn't bother with any of that.
Or to extend the experiment a little...
Let's say that the GM went with either 1 or 2. Purely based on thinking it was funny and being agreeable to this player input. And then suppose that a little later the GM schemes up that the chamberlain has been taken over by some sort of evil parasite. Which, as a side effect, makes him smell.
So, the players get wind of this, and they start to question everything the chamberlain has told them and every mission he has sent them on. And it's pretty important which exact missions were tainted by the ones from beyond and which (early) ones were possibly untainted. Straight from the king.
And to make it a little tougher, the GM just turns around any questions and says, "Hard to say. Something was definitely smelly that hot day in July. Maybe a little before that. Couldn't really say."
So, where does the players' suspicion fall? The muggy day? The first day they met him? Sometime in between?
My guess is that most players would immediately assume that he was possessed at least back to the first place they noticed the other players acting on it, or alternately right back to the beginning.
My further guess is that the players in the conspiracy would assume it went back to the beginning, the players out of the conspiracy would assume it went back to the first time they noticed the conspirators at work, and the GM would likely have it sometime in between. (changing it a little to account for Brand's comment).
