• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

I need help to test a set of events

I agree to that. But, I was trying to be polite. Believe me, I could put more holes in the scenario than a screen door, but then this is a game too...

Now, some possible changes...

The assassin brings the weapon in with him, disassembled and made of materials that the guards inspecting his tools and gear wouldn't think are parts of a gun. The three rounds of ammunition (or 5 or whatever) are carefully concealed to avoid known methods being used for detection.
An alternate is the weapon is sent in in pieces by very small robots that home on a known signal to one of the empty cells moving through the sewer drain system and emerging from say, the cell's toilet (at least with current plumbing code this would be a 3 or 4" diameter pipe). Something a bit more sophisticated than GPS would easily allow these to maneuver to the right location.
After use, the assassin simply disassembles the gun, tosses / puts it in an adjacent cell and the same robots move it back out of the facility to say a septic tank or treatment plant never to be recovered.

Getting in is the hard part. I can't see a prison, particularly a high security one, using nothing but card entry into areas. The keying system would be broken up. One reason for this is if a prisoner gets a key card, they have access to every door with the system described. Unacceptable. Instead, the keying would be broken up. So, to get in you need to get through whoever lets people in and out. Inside, you have access to certain areas based on what you do. To get into the cell block with this prisoner there is going to be more than one guard on duty, even if there's only one supervising the cells in the immediate vicinity of this prisoner.
There is likely a dual system requiring you to go through a "sally port" that the guards on the cell block have a single key for one door and somebody outside the block has the key for the other. That's common to all prisons even today.
Once inside, the cell may be behind one or more additional keyed doors that this person may or may not (likely not) has the ability to operate. A two person or multi person system ensures nobody... staff or prisoner... can get in or out of the facility or have free run of it on a single key.

Getting out is just as hard. The assassin needs to go back through all those doors and such needing people to open and operate them.

I'd say it'd be easier to do an inside job. You have another prisoner that has access to the right area, say an orderly that cleans the cell block. The little robots send in the parts of the weapon and other stuff necessary. The prisoner is paid a grunch to do it or has an other reason to do the hit. He recovers the weapon and such then does the hit. In fact, some prisoners in a gang might even be proud to do it gaining prestige in their gang, maybe financial gain for their family, and the like.

If those wanting this guy dead have the cash that'd be better than the scenario proposed.
 
Last edited:
I agree to that. But, I was trying to be polite. Believe me, I could put more holes in the scenario than a screen door, but then this is a game too...


As a game, the players have to buy into the premise. If I'd placed the plot outlined here in front of my players, without also making it a meta-comedy, they would have howled their derision and the session would fail.

I'd often pepper sessions with call backs, meta-game references, and outright goofy bits like Javier Blanco, Arglebargle-IX, or the Stooges Subsector to keep the players' interest. I'd like to think they enjoyed it.

I never snapped their belief suspenders without good reason however.
 
I agree. I asked a few questions and based on that alone I had picked the scenario apart. Then it becomes a situation of the ref trying to recover a scenario that is falling apart. That's never good.

I've had mine attend 43 Man Squamish...

The original...

tumblr_m4z1t6oDeb1qj0yh3o1_500.png


And, my Traveller version...

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=36428

It also actually works! I did think it through as insane as it is...
 
I agree. I asked a few questions and based on that alone I had picked the scenario apart.

If you and I were able to pick it apart on our computer screens, what will a FTF game group do to it?

Then it becomes a situation of the ref trying to recover a scenario that is falling apart.

You got a whiff of that too?

That's never good.

No it isn't and Gygax knows I've repeatedly been guilty of throwing good, but limited, FTF play minutes after bad materials I'd prepared. I tried using a plot from a spaghetti western once once and it fell apart from the first. Another time I was adamant the session would use the research rules DGP introduced for MT. I pulled the plug, but not as fast as I should have.

I've had mine attend 43 Man Squamish...

Potrzebie! I remember that!
 
My problem is usually throwing in far too much detail, subtlety, and plot twists. Most players seem lost when you go all "Sherlock Holmes" on them. It becomes a case of "Don't you think, or don't you...?"
 
My problem is usually throwing in far too much detail, subtlety, and plot twists. Most players seem lost when you go all "Sherlock Holmes" on them. It becomes a case of "Don't you think, or don't you...?"


There's a rules set out there called Gumshoe which is specifically designed for mysteries, investigations, and the like. I don't own it, haven't run it, and have barely skimmed it, so I don't know how well it works.

SJGames (who else?) has GURPS:Mysteries. I do own it and I wish I'd had it when I was an active referee.
 
I was referring to games in general. I like to give the players a trail of "breadcrumbs" to follow, and don't always make them obvious. The problem always seems to be they don't want to invest in thinking about or looking deeper into them.
Instead, they take them in some superficial way and seem to expect me to lead them to the "prize."
 
I was referring to games in general. I like to give the players a trail of "breadcrumbs" to follow, and don't always make them obvious. The problem always seems to be they don't want to invest in thinking about or looking deeper into them.
Instead, they take them in some superficial way and seem to expect me to lead them to the "prize."

Monty Haul is alive and well.

will+mclean+monty+haul+humor+D%26D+cartoon.JPG
 
It could be worse...

394411-leisure-suit-larry-reloaded-inside-lefty-s.jpg


Nothing quite like Leisure Suit Larry in space...! Trapped in a dive bar with no way out unless you find the right clues...!
 
The problem always seems to be they don't want to invest in thinking about or looking deeper into them.

it's about seeing things the way the players do. the whole situation is obvious to the referee, but it's not at all obvious to the players. frequently after half a dozen miscommunications and wild goose chases the players will take charge of the game themselves (if they can) or give up and just wait (if they can't).
 
There's a concept set used in many new-school games that's really useful in running Mystery games....

  • No Retries - Let it Ride...
  • Failed roll ≠ failed task
  • solving the crime isn't winning the case

No retries means just that. once you set the stakes, and roll the dice, that's it. If you failed the roll, you failed the roll.

Failed rolls become irrecoverable alterations in the situation, rather than failure to accomplish the action goal. Examples include...
  • Investigation roll to find the clue in the room: Failure means you either can't use it in court, or you damaged it in recovering it.
  • The interruption in download: you find the clue, but you are interrupted before you can actually copy it all. You've seen it, but can't proove it.
  • The door lock: failure, you still open it, but broke it and/or left your prints.

When players are investigating, it's one thing to figure out who the actual guilty party is, and another to have admissible evidence sufficient for legal action.

The best villains in crime shows are those who manage to get off on technicalities, and drive the cops to total distraction... Especially in shows like CSI, NCIS, Castle, or Blue Bloods. Eventually, the guilty get got, but the struggle to get them is half the fun.

Works well in RPG's, too.
 
When players are investigating, it's one thing to figure out who the actual guilty party is, and another to have admissible evidence sufficient for legal action.

The best villains in crime shows are those who manage to get off on technicalities, and drive the cops to total distraction... Especially in shows like CSI, NCIS, Castle, or Blue Bloods. Eventually, the guilty get got, but the struggle to get them is half the fun.

Works well in RPG's, too.

The MgT1E book Agents has a law system where the cop/investigator has X amount of pieces of evidence collected, it gets to court Y amount gets thrown out, and you to trial with Z number of pieces left. Works really nicely, no matter if you are using an Imperial style court, something on Common or Napoleonic Law, Military Code, etc.
 
Back
Top