Fledgling GM having trouble working beliefs/instincts in.

Burning Wheel Subsystem Advice and Guidance
1

Howdy, forum. Asked a question here and got a good response, so I’d figure I’d go for a second.

I’m running an online roleplay right now involving four characters set in a low fantasy themed world based around real-life historical events. This is a politically motivated faction war style campaign. Plenty of political intrigue, espionage, fading Imperial splendor, and other such things; the world shifts between the late Renaissance to 1600s depending on the area. The players are 5 lifepaths.

Currently, the group is in the Capital of one of the larger nations in the game, running hither and thither doing tasks and quests to make a name for themselves. Tasks so far include investigating the work of an Alchemist gone wrong, investigating a spree of violent murders concentrated in a University, and deciding whether or not to assist a Lich in completing his ascension for a grand reward.

The issue I’m running into, though, is that I feel like the party I’ve assembled have varying beliefs. This isn’t a bad thing, and can lead to conflict–But in my case? I just feel like it’s so hard to unite them all and engage their characters under one concept. I can come up with quests and plotlines that engage them individually, but grasping them all together isn’t easy. I feel like I’m failing to engage the beliefs and instincts properly into my stories, and the narrative is suffering because of it.

The core conflict of the campaign will be two of the largest nations waging war on each-other, and the PC’s deciding which side they want to support, and why. The war will engulf most of the world’s continent and will shape the world’s future drastically.

Player one: The Mercenary

A grizzled veteran and gold-hungering warrior that has no problems being dishonest to achieve his goals.

Beliefs:
Loyalty is just a measure of who offers the bigger reward.
Always pick the winning side. Or plan to change sides.
A heroic story is just as good as a heroic act.

Instincts:
Always keep a blade close to hand. You can never have enough knives.
Always watch a ‘good’ man. Morals make him unpredictable.
Never rush to a fight. You don’t know all the details.

Player two: The Wizard Spy

A sarcastic, zealous former battlemage turned spy that seeks to purge the undue influence of magic and sorcery where he finds it while advancing the cause of his homeland, Ascaria. In love with his brother, Jorgen. One of the most engaged players.

Beliefs:
As a spy, I will find a way to sabotage Enscien in favor of Ascarian interests.
I suspect there is a conspiracy against Jorgen; but I must confirm it.
Only Ascarians are capable of controlling magic; all others are mere heretics.

Instincts:
I always keep an eye and ear out for things that might interest my brother.
Given the option, I always kill the elf first.
In the event of a failed spell, I am never the man in front.

Player three: The Cossack

A horselord based off of the Mongols and Cossack peoples.

Beliefs:
The Cossacks are indisputably the greatest people in the world.
Gunpowder is a dangerous new technology; understanding and controlling it will be of major importance
[Had a third belief, but decided to do away with it. They’re considering a third now.]

Instincts:
If someone attractive pays me attention, pay it back.
Overlook no insult to a horse, they are sacred animals and should be treated with respect.
If they waste my time, I waste them.

Player four: The Craftsman

A hardworking, kindly craftsman that seeks to better himself and others through improving his work.

Beliefs:
I will always find a way to improve myself and my craft.
If it is broken, it can be fixed. If not by me by someone better.
Magic is not to be messed with in any way shape or form.

Instincts:
If it’s about crafting, I’m already paying intense attention.
If it’s broken I start looking it over to try and fix it.
When things get physical I go on the defensive.

My questions, then

  1. How can I get these varying characters engaged in the story, and consistently be giving them artha for their actions? I feel like their characters are just so different. How am I supposed to incorporate the guy who’s all about crafting with the person who wants sabotage and anti-magic with the person who wants gold and fame WITH the person who really likes horses? I can come up with one plot based around these things, sure, but how can I make these elements constantly interact? Am I approaching this from the wrong train of thought?
  2. Currently, the players are small fish in a big pond–How should they realistically be scaled up and gain access to larger opportunities without it being unrealistic or forced?
  3. Unrelated, but to you, what does a 6 attribute in a skill mean? How good would someone with a 6 attribute be at that thing? What about a 7? 8?

Cheers.

2

In my experience it would help if the players had more specific actions attached to their beliefs rather than just vague goals. A useful belief often is structured as “I Believe X, So I will do Y.” and telling the GM exactly what the character plans to do tends to streamline prep. This is most useful for newer players and GMs. It will also make it easier to give out Persona for accomplishing a goal that can clearly be pointed out.

Based on exactly what you’ve given here, I’d also have trouble figuring out what to do. Making beliefs more specific really can be a benefit.

3

Good input, yeah. I feel like the players should have beliefs more tailored to things at hand.

4

In general, I’ve found that a good way of keeping the party focused is to require the players to write one belief about some pre-agreed pressing scenario, one about another PC, and one about whatever they want. This works especially well for large groups and for inexperienced players.

5

Ack! Investigating. Never an easy choice.

No wonder you’re having trouble. These Beliefs aren’t giving you anything to work with.

Player one: The Mercenary

A grizzled veteran and gold-hungering warrior that has no problems being dishonest to achieve his goals.

Beliefs:
Loyalty is just a measure of who offers the bigger reward. Beliefs are not half measures! That Belief is just a character trait, like “Ruthless.” Who is paying this PC? Are they paying the Biggest? If not, what is this PC going to do now? If yes, then the GM’s first move is to challenge that shit.
Always pick the winning side. Or plan to change sides. Is he changing sides or not? Who’s side is he picking and why? What’s his next move to get on the right side. GM, you need to make sure his side starts looking like the losing side. Maybe the winning side is a pro-Enscien, anti-Ascaria side? Maybe the person that P2 thinks is against Jorgen.
A heroic story is just as good as a heroic act. So, he wants people to think he’s a hero? What story is he going to spread and how? I’d have the entire town start treating him like the hero he’s pretending to be, except the one guy who actually did the things he’s claiming to have done. That guy isn’t so happy. Maybe that guy will ruin things for him. Is he going to knife the real hero to protect his lies?

Player two: The Wizard Spy

A sarcastic, zealous former battlemage turned spy that seeks to purge the undue influence of magic and sorcery where he finds it while advancing the cause of his homeland, Ascaria. In love with his brother, Jorgen. One of the most engaged players.

Beliefs:
As a spy, I will find a way to sabotage Enscien in favor of Ascarian interests. Not bad. It would be better if the player said what he’s going to do rather than “I will find a way.” But, not bad. I’d make whatever he needs to do something that threatens another PC interest or Jorgen somehow.
I suspect there is a conspiracy against Jorgen; but I must confirm it. He likes these “I must find out something” Beliefs. They’re hard to activate. Ask him why he suspects this conspiracy, and based on what he says, incorporate that into the Belief. Name names. Who is (allegedly) after Jorgen? What’s his next move.
Only Ascarians are capable of controlling magic; all others are mere heretics. A guiding light belief, which is fine, if the other two beliefs are concrete and actionable. Make sure he has an opportunity to start caring about some non-Ascarians and then reveal that they are doing magic to try to fix the situation.

Player three: The Cossack

A horselord based off of the Mongols and Cossack peoples.

Beliefs:
The Cossacks are indisputably the greatest people in the world. Okay as a source of RP, but not very useful. Is he spurred on to some action because of this?
Gunpowder is a dangerous new technology; understanding and controlling it will be of major importance That’s not a Belief. Beliefs are statements of driving character motivation. They’re not just a thing the character believes to be true. Gunpowder is dangerous, therefore I will do What? This guy’s giving you “Cossacks, good. Gunpowder, bad.” That’s not fair to the GM.
[Had a third belief, but decided to do away with it. They’re considering a third now.] Use this to tie him into something another PC cares about.

Player four: The Craftsman

A hardworking, kindly craftsman that seeks to better himself and others through improving his work.

Beliefs:
I will always find a way to improve myself and my craft. No, no, no. How is he going improve himself and his craft today, right now? GM, offer him a workshop and new tools and time to study and practice in peace, as long as he works for someone he hates. Maybe someone who is plotting against Jorgen, or against the Ascarians.
If it is broken, it can be fixed. If not by me by someone better. Again, this is just a statement of his opinion. That’s not a Belief. A Belief is a mission statement. What’s broken? Is he going to fix it or find someone better? If he looks for someone better, be ready with someone problematic. Someone magical with an agenda.
Magic is not to be messed with in any way shape or form. It’s okay. Not very active, but okay. Obviously you need to be offering magical means to fix whatever that broken thing is in the last belief, or to improve his craft. But, that’s so passive. You can’t tempt him with improving his craft, you need something more immediate. What would he need to fix so badly, that he’d consider using magic to do it?

6

great posts. to reiterate: it would be helpful if the belief had a “what are you going to do now” built into it. A belief should be like a good New Years resolution:

"I will no longer be a fat slob, I will talk to bob about joining fitness club X.

A bad New Years resolution is "I will no longer be a fat slob, “I will do something about it…”

In the modern world a “belief” if often just an amphorous feeling. It really needs to be tied to a goal (otherwise the players are kind of making it challenging for you the GM to easily come up with scenes). “My parents want me to go to college.” Is part of a belief. The second part “I will download Khan academy math onto my iPad after dinner.” Or “I will ask my teacher for help after class”. Or “I will get online and make a list of 5 colleges might attend”.

BELIEF: “blah blah blah”
Step 1: (written down)
Step 2:
Step 3:
Step 4:
CULMINATION OF BELIEF

Step 2 through 4 should be kind of in the back of the players mind, they will become the new “step 1” as the game progresses and be modified as the plot and previous actions demand. Also, like others have said, it is good for characters to have beliefs of other characters to tie them together and a belief about a shared object person or goal (even if those beliefs are contradictory).

I also can’t recommend page 60 of the new codex enough.

7

One other thing I would point out is that the current quests and your stated theme for the game don’t seem to line up. How do the murders, the Alchemist and the Lich tie into the upcoming war? If the war is the game focus, where are the armies massing on the horizon, the diplomats vying for peace, the frantic preparation for siege or flight?

Based on the initial quests I would have thought this a game of magical intrigue. So that is something to consider too. Tie the Beliefs into the situation you all want to play out.

8

These replies are all great. Especially you, noclue. Brilliant.

Verrain, the idea is that I didn’t want to throw them right into a global conflict to start the game out. I thought it would make more sense to have them start smaller and build up into greater spheres of influence. The way those events tie in, though, is that they’re all in the capital city of one of the nations, meaning that it’ll be weakened or strengthened by their actions. The war isn’t on yet, and I’m waiting for that point where I feel like the PC’s are confidently established in BW to launch it.

9

I understand that Tornado but foreshadowing is a wonderful thing in both gaming and literature. Even if the PCs are not directly connected to the war yet, even if the war hasn’t started yet, they should be hearing rumblings of it now. The murders should be traced back to a delegation of the other country. The Lich guy is racing to perfect his formula to beat a rival sorcerer on the other side. Whenever they fail a Resources roll, the merchants should be grumbling about the caravans being raided on the border. Make the war look like something that has been organically growing during this whole “tutorial” time. Heck, if things go a certain way, your PCs might be part of the event that finally causes the two nations to declare war! What better way for the players to feel invested in the conflict than to discover they’ve been part of the events that brought it about, even in minor ways.

10

That’s good, yeah. I definitely want this all to link up or become relevant later. I’m not looking for throwaway plots. I wish I could say more, but I know for a fact that at least one member of the group knows of this topic snd is reading replies!

11

Understood. Don’t want to give away the plot. If you want to bounce ideas of someone, feel free to drop me a private message.

12

Ultimately, I think it really does boil down to if the players don’t have beliefs about the alchemist or the lich, then you really shouldn’t be making adventures out of those topics. The players beliefs determine the plot and the current beliefs aren’t giving you anything to work with.

BW is a lot less demanding on the GM than D&D. It’s really not your responsibility to come up with a plot hooks and adventure or even major NPCs, that’s their job (via beliefs) your job is simply to challenge those beliefs. Why hasn’t one of the players spent character burning points on a relationship with the lich (or liches surrogate) or the alchemist for example?

It seems to me (obviously I don’t have all the information) that the players might be waiting for you to lead them on a classic D&D adventure. Making you responsible for introducing the plot, NPCs, quests, etc. it really isn’t your job. All the players need to sit down and decide what they want this game to be about and the players need to, as a group, come up with beliefs that they want you, the GM, to challenge.

“The Cossacks are the greatest people in the world”. If that is really the characters belief, your only job as a GM is to set up a scene where a bunch of Cossacks mercenaries are being jerks to homeless orphan flower monger or the characters stumble upon a group of beleaguered Cossack farmers. If a player has a belief…you challenge it. That’s all you need to do. A good belief is a scene a player wants to have happen in the game.

“Always pick the winning side”. If that is the belief, you are obligated to challenge it. Which probably means creating a scene where the party is clearly out matched, or where an Cossack underdog is about to get curb-stomped by a superior force (which would create an opportunty for a duel of wits between that player and the player who loves Cossacks…) Again, beliefs are the plot.

If you’re committed to this looming war thIng, then you could try and tie the group about to kill the Cossacks to the lich perhaps? ¯_(ツ)_/¯.

13

Hit you up with a PM. I don’t see it in my ‘sent messages’, though, so hope you got it.

14

The easiest mistake to make when starting with BW, and one I’ve made and I know many others have made, is treating the freedom and flexibility as a sandbox. BW can quickly and completely fall apart if you throw together a disparate bunch of characters made in isolation, even with a strong overall plot idea.

Players need to make their characters together and they need to make sure their ideas and their Beliefs make a coherent game. You all need to sit down (virtually) together and decide not just what the big picture of the game is about, but what’s happening right now in the game and how everyone is going to be involved. Particularly for new players and GM I’d discourage antagonistic and opposing Beliefs; that’s difficult stuff. Instead, make sure everyone’s just interested in playing with the same stuff in the game.

At this point, that means pausing to talk it over. Current Beliefs don’t necessarily need to be scrapped, but they need to be refined, and they need to be refined into some concordance. That’s not an in-game task, that’s something out of game, for the players to work out. If they can’t, these characters aren’t going to work for a single game. Once everyone has somewhat congruent and specific Beliefs for you to challenge the game should rush along much more smoothly.

In general, I like to open with exactly the same scale I want to continue with. If the awesome thing for the game is big political conflicts, open with that, and have the characters start out in the awesome stuff. Don’t save it for later! If you want to scale things, you need to throw the characters’ Beliefs into challenges that bring them into contact and conflict (or agreement) with important entities in the game’s world.

As far as stats, what the numbers mean is roughly suggested by the Obs given for sample tasks, but it’s flexible, and it’s part of how you set the idiom of the world. You can have a game where a master swordsman fighting off a dozen bandits has to succeed at an Ob 8 Sword test or be cut down. Or you can make it Ob 3… to take a minor cut while thrashing those puny brigands. Where you choose to set the difficulty of doing things sets how gritty or cinematic tonally your game is going to be, and also whether a 3 in a stat means kind of weak, or totally normal. (For reference, 3-4 is roughly human average for stats, and 3 should be about where an unremarkable professional has a useful but not core skill for what he does, at least in my idiosyncratic way of handling it. A smith might have Blacksmith 3-4, Haggling 2, and Iron-Wise 2-3, depending on whether this is a skilled urban smith or a backwoods village smith who just makes horseshoes all days. For a stat, 6 is a remarkable strength, not unheard of but certainly unusual. For a skill, 6 says you’re a real master, and you should be well on your way to establishing a notable reputation with that skill if you don’t already have one.