Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trying to run a pure Beast Game

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trying to run a pure Beast Game

    I know Beast is the ideal crossover game, but i actually want to run a pure beast game with a 3-6 player group. I would love some help with trying to come up with the local beast population in a city...as there is little on how they work on a city scale beyond being in individual broods.

  • #2
    Beast society, canonically, is rather loose...but maybe this city is different. Have something similar, maybe, to a Kindred 'court': one ancient monster as Apex, with his brood as advisors? Maybe this 'beast king' has instituted a system built on competition, with a 'you keep what you kill' vibe going on? With the caveat that Heroes you 'generate' are yours to deal with.

    Comment


    • #3
      Could also leverage the "lesson" culture thing too - The Apex figures the populaces needs some Education, and appoints Beasts (or Broods) to make sure it gets done. You loose favor, respect, and approved "hunting grounds".

      If you don't mind other games being referenced, "ambassadors" to the various groups could be appointed as well.

      Heck, maybe the Beasts compete against each other in the annual Scare Games to decide who is Apex? That would give it an almost sports team feel.

      I know it is Pure Beast, but does that mean all the players are Beasts, or no other supernaturals exist?


      Check out Primordial Sorcery as well. You could always throw in a diverse community of sorcerers to liven things up.


      Malkydel: "And the Machine dictated; let there be adequate illumination."
      Yossarian: "And lo, it was optimal."

      Comment


      • #4
        Do you mean "pure Beast game" as in, 1) All of the Players are Beasts, or as in 2) The setting pretty much focuses on Beasts and other supernaturals won't be present much?

        Comment


        • #5
          It is the former option. The game is going to be set in a fictional city in North California that several different people in the group has used to run games. Currently there is a ctl game and a vtr game going there. So i wanted to try my hand at Beast, but have the game focused on the beast players rather than making it a mixed game.

          Comment


          • #6
            I think you can focus on what the Apex and their brood are doing in the city, since it's likely to affect all other Beasts. I think the Vancouver setting in the core book is a good example of that - in fact I used it twice for that reason.

            Also if you haven't got it yet Night Horrors: Conquering Heroes has a chapter on Beasts and Inheritance, and another on Insatiables (Beast-like creatures which hunt Beasts), providing good antagonists for a pure Beast game.

            Comment


            • #7
              You could include a variety of supernatural places and phenomena - the Swimming Hole (which gets a reference in Beast itself, I think), places or objects infused with bad vibes, places where the Dream brushes up extra close against the Earth - along with places that are rich in fear or abuse like a cruelly run institution, crime-filled neighbourhood, or suicide bridge. Such places become resources for feeding or making Chambers, mysteries to investigate, or fertile ground for lessons ("You thought you wanted to die, but defended yourself when I attacked you - remember how it felt to fight for your life, and take it with you, because it's your creation not mine").

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Caedus View Post
                It is the former option. The game is going to be set in a fictional city in North California that several different people in the group has used to run games. Currently there is a ctl game and a vtr game going there. So i wanted to try my hand at Beast, but have the game focused on the beast players rather than making it a mixed game.
                Thanks!

                How I would approach this... Is I would actually have very few NPC Beasts in the setting. Maybe 5-10 scattered about the wide area, with few of them being in Broods and of varying strength. This group represents other Beasts that the PCs can approach or contend with having shared commonality.

                From there, I would outline in broad strokes the supernatural playing field of the setting. Vampires, werewolves, changelings, mages... All of them, I would set up two opposing factions for each group, each with broad and vague goals against each other. These groups are meant to be the greater part of the PCs interactions with supernatural creatures. Let them personally pick the groups they want to befriend and make kinship ties to. This allows you to draw the Beasts into the conflicts between the opposing factions of the greater community.

                Let your players apply the strengths of being a Beast to pick the winners and losers from the conflicts they get drawn into as terrifying monsters that their kin can barely understand.

                For additional support, have a Hunter cell in the area and a couple of Heroes (one sympathetic and one a real asshole) to mix things up as necessary.

                The supporting cast of who the PCs pick to have kinship with should be defining and important. I wouldn't worry too much if they split up between the different supernatural groups. Let the players explore and learn. And encourage them to involve each other. Flesh out the NPCs the Beasts establish kinship ties with, they need to have personality and more importantly, problems!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Paradim View Post
                  For additional support, have a Hunter cell in the area and a couple of Heroes (one sympathetic and one a real asshole) to mix things up as necessary.
                  Do you mean one kill-them-all Hero and one non, or both kill-them-all but one of them revels in it while the other sees it as a tragedy? (If the latter, maybe they think Beasts are possessed humans and killing them frees their soul for the afterlife - the Hero wishes there was another way, but isn't willing to leave Beasts "in captivity" - and of course can't be reasoned with, because it's the possessing entity talking).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by SunlessNick View Post
                    Do you mean one kill-them-all Hero and one non, or both kill-them-all but one of them revels in it while the other sees it as a tragedy? (If the latter, maybe they think Beasts are possessed humans and killing them frees their soul for the afterlife - the Hero wishes there was another way, but isn't willing to leave Beasts "in captivity" - and of course can't be reasoned with, because it's the possessing entity talking).
                    Seriously, whatever works and seems called for.

                    Basically my view of it is this. There needs to be nuance and uncertainty. The first Hero encountered should be irrational and a threat to be feared. The second Hero should be different. Maybe they're new at this, they don't quite know what they're doing or strictly why. But make them rational and more responsive to what the PCs are doing. If the second Hero is reacting to actual monstrous stuff that the PCs are doing, it serves as a good counterpoint to the first Hero's attitude of "Kill them all".

                    The idea is to show Heroes as being more complex than simple antagonists and to raise questions as to whether Heroes are something that Beasts just have to deal with occurring (such as the irrational one) or if Heroes are something that Beasts shape and mold by their behavior and actions (with the second one being reactive to the PCs predations and uncertain about whether they're ready to actually kill something).

                    The first, irrational Hero should not be gotten rid of without a fight. I would allow that Hero to retreat if the fight allows to heal up and come back another day. In fact, I would greatly prefer that first Hero not get killed in order to present a threat hanging over the PCs heads that may one day return. But if dice rolls kill him before he has a chance to retreat, that's fine.

                    The second, rational Hero, I would allow different resolutions to. They can be talked down or otherwise involved with that can result in that Hero not being a threat that doesn't necessarily include violence. Maybe there's a concurrent threat that the Beast PCs are dealing with and the rational Hero sees that there are worse monsters out there and sometimes it takes a monster to beat a monster? I dunno strictly. This Hero is meant to show that the PCs can affect the narrative and that sometimes, monsters should be better left alone.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X