[DitV] Non-pathetic Stewards
Neil the Wimp:
I've run a few DitV towns, but I'm always having problems with what to do about the Steward. If he's on the ball, he'll intervene with things going wrong in the town. As he has stewardship over the families, and can interpret doctrine, he should be able to step in and fix problems. For instance, if someone is engaging in false priesthood, the Steward ought to be able to do something about it, up to and including executing the false priest.
But towns are no fun if the Steward solves all the problems. This means the Steward is normally either :
a) competent but dead,
b) part of the problem, or
c) pathetic, and not dealing with the problems in town.
Which is all good fun, but I'd like the Dogs to interact occasionally with a Steward who's actually on the ball.
Any suggestions or advice on how to have a competent Steward, doing a good-ish job, in a town that's gone to hell?
Ta,
Neil.
Christoph Boeckle:
Hello Neil
Haven't played in a while, but it occurred to me that what the Steward might consider the right solution is not the one the Dogs would want to enforce. So he'd be competent in going through with his stewardizing, not part of the problem (he would actually "solve" it, in as far as towns are solvable), but still rub the authority of the Dogs in the wrong direction.
Or, since the Steward has to bow down to the Dogs in terms of religious hierarchy however competent he is, he might agree to let them handle the town's problem, yet criticise the youngsters for any negative outcomes. The Dogs then have to handle a potentially tense situation which has nothing to do with Sin.
Moreno R.:
Hi Neil!!
I usually like having incompetent (but well-meaning) stewards, so I didn't use this solution myself, but you could try having a Steward who simply can't solve the town's problems because he hasn't the authority.
For example, if the town's problems are caused by the son of a rich farmer, and the farmer refuse to do anything about it, what can the Steward do? If you read the stewardship chapter, it's the father that has stewardship over his son, not the steward. The steward hasn't the Dog's authority, he can't simply take someone and shoot him in cold blood.
In this kind of scenario, the Steward can be someone who has "a" solution to the town's problems, but can't apply it himself. So he want the dogs to do it: "take that boy and kill it". Maybe it's the best solution, but will the dogs kill someone in cold blood without trying some other solution first?
David Artman:
Maybe this is another form of "incompetence," but the Steward could simply not have the dice to face the Sorcerer and its demonic influence dice. Not incompetent so much as "underpowered." He's good for a Relationship die, though! ;)
lumpley:
The steward can't execute anybody! Not even a false priest.
Check out this thread: The Law: Territorial Authority vs Steward vs Dogs.
-Vincent
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page