We Want Your Mission Ideas

[CaptainPatch]

While I don't have detailed ideas, I'll throw out a generalization that you may get ideas/inspiration from:

- In the Vietnam War, US soldiers sometimes burned down entire villages, because it was thought the village was aiding the Viet Cong (VC). The VC could have been hiding weapons, using the village as a staging ground for future attacks, or any number of other things. Often times, the villagers themselves were forced to comply with the demands of the VC by force. Then the US soldiers get a tip that a particular village is aiding the VC. Often because of the cultural barriers, the US soldiers couldn't always get the villagers to come clean and rat out the VC. Depending on who was calling the shots on the US side, the US soldiers were sometimes ordered to burn down the entire village. I feel something like this could be implimented in Wasteland: what would you do? Would you burn the village down, or would you try and find a peaceful alternative?

This one brings back some seriously troubling memories. We used to refer to those villages as "write-offs": Because the villagers were obviously NOT doing everything in their power to expel of kill the VC (like throwing themselves on the VC's bayonets), they were construed to be collaborators and traitors to the ARVN government. As such, ALL of them were subject to immediate execution.

In a combined op with ARVN troops, any prisoners we gathered up were to be turned over for "interrogation". "Interrogation" turned out to be gratuitous torture, rape, and ultimately summary execution. Of course, _we_ didn't know this first-hand. I was in the unfortunate position of delivering some prisoners to the ARVN major in charge of the "interrogations". When I arrived, they had been going at it for over 12 hours. Evidence of what they had been doing was back behind a line of tents, which happened to be near where the latrines had been set up. Because I had the runs that day, I got a peak of what was going on. There was one sick ARVN sergeant that preferred to take his ear trophies before his victims were dead. And of course, _any_ female of any age was subject to rape prior to being bayoneted and dropped into a slit trench.

All I could think of was, "These are our allies? What does that say about us?" It made me wish I had just executed my prisoners rather than turn them over for "interrogation". Forty years later, I _still_ have the occasional nightmare.

[Jack Dandy]

Huh. Didn't know we have a vet among us.

Thanks for sharing the story, chilling as it was.

I guess that kind of thing could definitely make for an interesting mission in the game.

[Hasenklein]

Huh. Didn't know we have a vet among us.

Thanks for sharing the story, chilling as it was.

I guess that kind of thing could definitely make for an interesting mission in the game.

Rather, I find that CaptainPatch's story is a reminder of what I definetly don't want in the game...

[malthaussen]

Yeah, I think we want to avoid turning the game into role-playing the Vietnam war, unless the Rangers have the opportunity to turn their weapons on the central regime or the corrupt GVN warlords who made a mockery of everything they tried to do. But that's not an appropriate topic for this thread -- I think I'll start one over in "mood" about it.

-- Mal

[Mr_Neopolitan]

The Township Fulsom

Act I: Prison Gang

Your ranger squad happens upon a chain gang, crushing up gravel as they build up a new road between two communities. The guards are professional, and courteous to you, answering your questions, but first insisting that you put aside your weapons before you approach. The prisoners seem well fed, better than many villagers you've seen, althoug the guards are very quick to enforce discipline. You notice a couple metal boxes, a dozen yards away, and hear a couple men calling for water from inside. You're told they'll be released at nightfall, and to stay away and leave them be.

The next town over is peaceful. The sheriff and his deputies seem competent, aside from one yahoo. The local pub has a few farmers and merchants inside. One of your squad notices that the bartender seems sullen and angry, but questions get you nowhere.

Staying the night, you hear a commotion in a room nearby. You go investigate, and find that the local deputies are carting off a merchant guardsman for theft. The bartender is awake by this time, and, when the deputies leave, starts muttering about the injustice of it all. Questioning reveals that a few deputies are quick to make arrests. Prisoners are rarely found innocent due to manufactured evidence, and are speedily sent out to the chain gangs. The bartender will put you in contact with some disgruntled citizens/merchants who will hire you to free their men.

This scenario is about how you choose to deal with the deputies and the chain gangs.

1) You can investigate the recent 'theft', show that the arrest was unjust, and get a few deputies arrested and put onto the chain gang. Depending on your skills, you convince the sheriff to release other innocent men (if you can identify them), but you get one shot, and if your evidence is lacking, you'll be run out of town for having slandered law-abiding officers. The consequence of succeeding is that a few men get off, but trade route construction slows down. The town sherriff won't be happy with the situation, but he won't hold it against you for upholding justice. You'll still get some help out of the town in the future, slightly lower than average. Crime in the area will moderately increase as there are fewer deputies on the force, and they are more cautious about making arrests. You can end up talking the sherriff into release genuine criminals, either by a failure to gather evidence and discern lies, or because you genuinely want to release criminals, perhaps because you made a few deals.

2) As above, you can investigate and determine that many arrests were false. However, you can make a deal with the deputies. After all, you recall that the prisoners were well fed, and if discipline was strict, no one was dying who didn't actively fight back. You get assurances that the prisoners will be released after serving their time. Depending upon your negotiation skills, you might solicit a bribe. You'll likely be required to help round up the bartender and other discontents, in the interest of public order. Ultimately, trade route construction advances at a decent pace, and you've found some common ground with local law enforcement. Crime in the area will stay down. You can expect better than average help from the town in the future, but several of the prisoners, and their few free friends, will consider you complicit in their false imprisonment and either refuse to deal with you, charge you more, or cause trouble for you in the future.

3) You can backtrack to the chain gang and free them all. If the guards live, or if the guards get off a radio call before dying, the town will be hostile to you. The prisoners will be grateful, and you might get some better deals with merchants who've travelled through the area. However, some prisoners will have been justly imprisoned and you'll hear rumors of increased violence in the area. If you succeed without the town knowing, they'll still help you in the future, but with trade route construction halted, and increased violence in the area, they won't be able to offer much.

4) As above, you can free the prisoners. You can also run the sheriff and his deputies out of town. Calling in another Ranger squad will return law and order, and ensure that the town stays under your control. Some townspeople will resent you, others will cheer. The rangers will be able to import prisoners from other jurisdictions to continue with construction projects. You'll still have a few newly freed ciminals to deal with, and certain crimes will be targetted against Rangers specifically, as a few innocent deputies and guardsmen will have escaped, and now seek revenge. You can expect average help from the town in the future.

5) Walk away. The town is safe, and if a few people are falsely imprisoned, they're not being abused. The town sheriff generally agrees with the positions of the desert rangers, so you can expect an average amount of aid from the town in the future. The disgruntled citizens will leave for other towns, so you will not be able to accept their offer at a later date.


Options 1 and 2 should be the hardest to manage, as it will require a combination of intelligence, perception, and diplomacy to gather evidence, eliminate false leads, and convince the authorities to see your way. These options will also require you to not outright free the prisoners, as the merchants ask.

Act II: Consequences

Options 1, 3, and 4 will result in a few thefts and murders to investigate in surrounding townships. The severity of the crimes will depend on who got released from the chain gang. More serious criminals/deputies will commit multiple crimes, but there should be the option of outhinking them and cutting short their crime spree, perhaps by setting a trap using some innocent lives as bait. Whether you get called in to investigate depends on whether you were run out of town or not.

Options 2 and 4 will result in you getting called in to help negotiate a new alliance of townships as the trade routes are finished. Your success will result in increased influence over a surrounding town or two. Angry citizens, freed prisoners, and/or escaped deputies may speak out during negotiations, leading to failed talks that result in maintaining the status quo. Some prisoners/deputies may have come out better for the experience, and speak up about how their life was turned around. You ability to silence critics, get success stories to talk, and cut deals with relevant parties will influence your success. It should be much harder to silence escaped deputies, especially since many will have a been truly good officers, well known in the surrounding communities. In those cases, you will have to manufacture evidence of corruption if you want negotiations to succeed (this should be very hard to do). Extreme failure will result in war parties being sent to Fulsom to clean up their government. You might still take a side if war parties are sent off, but your influence in certain jurisdictions will decrease nevertheless.

Options 5 will result in nothing. You made no impression on anybody, so they will not call you in for any reason.

-----

I didn't really flesh out the scenario that much, but while some choices may seem more just, I would hope that the writing would influence the players decision making. Some innocent people should be downright unlikeable, while some criminals and dirty deputies should be sympathetic, doing to wrong thing for the right reasons (trumped up charges for real criminals who got away with crimes elsewhere; maintaining order with a healthy dose of fear, pointing out how lawless the town used to be...)

[Zombra]

There's no morality involved in this one, but I wanted to reiterate a mission sketch from the Time and Split Parties thread.

A settlement in the walled shell of an old installation. There is one main gate, not lockable because there's no electricity. The main building has self-powered defense systems so no one goes in there.

For some reason, waves of mutants start attacking. Maybe the PCs led them there. This is a possible hook for moral guilt. I don't know.

The team has to split up: one team stays topside to help the natives fight the mutants, and the other enters the main building to try to turn on the power to the main gate and lock them out. This can be a "dungeon" of whatever depth desired.

The longer the interior team takes, the longer the combat team has to hold out. Hurry!

[CaptainPatch]

THE DOWNSIDE OF BEING A GOOD SAMARITAN

Having departed everywhere even remotely familiar, the party has been traveling ever deeper into the unknown regions of eastern California. The terrain is hilly and extensively wooded --the kind of forests that are no longer to be seen anywhere in the Wasteland.

Spotting trace smoke drifting up from a distant wooded hillock, the party decides to check out what is obviously someone's small campfire, mainly to see what the locals look and behave like. As the party approaches semi-cautiously, a lookout for the camp nevertheless spots them and opens fire with a semi-automatic rifle. [Clue #1: the locals have ammo to burn.] A firefight ensues. The battle looks to be equal in numbers, but the superior Ranger training quickly tells and the locals are killed off, one by one. [Data: Why didn't the locals consider just surrendering, despite calls for them to do so?] Cleaning up the aftermath, the party discovers that the number of shooters is exactly the same as the number in the party. [What an odd coincidence!] Upon entering the camp, the party discovers that the locals had a prisoner, trussed up and looking much the worse for wear. Female, blond, probably about 16 or so. She had obviously been quite attractive before the cuts, bruises, and abrasions had been applied to her young, frail body. Several of her wounds look to have become infected, and she is feverish and mostly delirious when she isn't simply unconscious. About the only thing that you can get out of her is that her name is Pat (Patricia?) and an oft-repeated mumbling about "Blackwood". Despite the team's best medical efforts, she lapses into a coma from which she cannot be revived.

First dilemma: What to do with the poor girl? Abandon her? Bring her along on a stretcher? Try to find "Blackwood" and send back a rescue party? Leave someone with her and go looking for "Blackwood"? If you bring her on a stretcher, that's two party members that will not be instantly available for any... difficult situation that may pop up, making the party more vulnerable to ambush or whatever. What happens if while in a tricky area, she starts to call out in her delirium? Your choice as to how to deal with the situation, so decide.

The party continues on, following game trails and ancient roadways. The miles unwind. Somewhere along about 20 miles further along, signs of current civilization starts to appear, indicating that an encounter with more locals is about to occur. Will they also be shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later? Or would they be the residents of "Blackwood" (if it is the community from which the girl hails)? Will they be pleased to get her back, or angry that she has returned? Is the place totally unconnected to "Blackwood"?

From here, the game path varies according to what the party did at the earlier dilemma point. If they brought her along on a stretcher, just when they are approaching the first local they see that is NOT shooting at them, she will rouse briefly from her coma, look around herself feverishly, scream, and then die from the accumulated wear and tear. If they left her behind, unattended, or with one or more attendants, the party will be viewed warily and quickly surrounded by LOTS of armed suspicious locals that -- for the moment, are NOT shooting.

The obvious local Law authority approaches and suggests that for everyone's sake, the party should surrender their weapons for the moment. "You can get them back when you leave town."

Dilemma 2: Surrender their guns or not? If they don't, or if they try to leave without surrendering their weapons, a firefight WILL ensue.

If the party literally sticks to their guns, the scenario is over. Either the party and a lot of townspeople are dead, or some party members, and a lot of townspeople are dead. If the party is _real_ lucky, no one in the party died. Regardless, continuing forward into town obviously would involve MORE of a firefight. (There is literally an infinite number of townspeople hiding in defensive positions, determined to kill the intruders.) Once the shooting starts, trying to talk your way out of the situation is pointedly not an option.

If the party _does_ surrender its weapons as requested, they will be roughly taken into custody and taken to the local lockup where they will be accused of having kidnapped Pat Blackwood, the local sweetheart, loved by all, and only child of Jacob Blackwood, the richest man for miles around, owner of the only ammunition factory that anyone knows of. Pat and her bodyguards had been ambushed when she was traveling from the town after one of the occasional parties/square dances the town puts on. One of the dying bodyguards had a ransom note on his person. Before he died, the bodyguard managed to describe the kidnappers as "well-armed, disciplined and efficient," and numbering as many as are in the party. In short, the guard's description vaguely matches the description of the party.

Naturally, upon learning his daughter had been kidnapped, Jacob Blackwood posted a LARGE reward for the safe return of his daughter. To complicate matters, Pat's fiancee has already decided that the members of your party ARE the kidnappers, trying to collect on the reward Jacob posted. He will be especially incensed if he actually sees her battered body. [Can we say "lynch mob"?]

Dilemma 3: Fast talking or escape? If escape, quietly, or blaze a path out of town?

The problem with trying to present the logical defense is that the fiancee will argue that you are _still_ the kidnappers and that the bodies you left back at their camp were, in fact, YOU -- the party of strangers that wandered onto the kidnappers' camp and got butchered shortly thereafter.

Resolution: The scenario ends if the party manages to bug out of town at any point. If they decide to stay the course and endure the local Due Process, they will barely be spared the discourtesy of a lynching when Jacob Blackwood intervenes and argues "We need to do this all legal and proper." There will be a VERY heated trial -- not helped by an obviously reluctant Public Defender. The outcome will resolve around: What did the party do with the bodies of the actual kidnappers? Left lying, easy fodder for the scavengers? Or "given a Christian burial"? If the latter, the local equivalent of the Medical Examiner will find some of Pat's jewelry hidden in the clothing of one of the kidnapper's body when the body was exhumed. In which case, profuse apologies and a BIG reward from Blackwood. If the bodies had been left to the scavengers, then, surprisingly, the Public Defender will barely succeed in arguing that if you were indeed the actual kidnappers, then Pat's valuable jewelry would have been found somewhere on the person of one or more of your party members. (No place in the wilderness to trade it for something more useful. Still valuable nonetheless, and therefore kept for future trading.) In which case the charges will be VERY grudgingly dismissed and the party will be given back their weapons and invited to leave town ASAP and encouraged to "Never come back this way if you know what is good for you."

[Hiver]

errm... a few smaller plot holes there Captain. Or at least details not explained sufficiently:
- what actually happens if you carry her there on a stretcher and she briefly wakes up, screams and dies?
why does she scream at all?

If her jewelry is valuable then it can be sold. If not somewhere close by then somewhere further away. If it can be sold then there cannot be an argument of "but it couldnt have been sold".

And it seems that we cannot revisit that place again in any case... so... it seems like really a lot of work for a one time thing.
Maybe a smaller settlement (less NPCs, less dialogue) would be better?

[Zombra]

Another quickie:

The Rangers, in a position of relative safety, see innocents (?) being attacked.

Do they burst out, guns a-blazin', and forfeit their position, risking counterattack or escape by the attackers (and possible future crimes)?

Or do they carefully reposition for a coordinated strike to be sure of wiping out the attackers, even though innocents are being harmed in the meantime?

Or do they shrug and walk away of course

[Hiver]

I like that, its simple and effective and has believable consequences.
I would just change that if you jump out of cover and storm them you risk getting seriously overwhelmed with opponents that seem dangerous enough to take you all out. Or at least do serious damage.

I would also have one of the innocent victims escape in the during the fight so there is a witness of your actions. Whatever they may be. So that the choice has some future consequence.

Assailants using those people as hostage shields in one of the options too?

[CaptainPatch]

errm... a few smaller plot holes there Captain. Or at least details not explained sufficiently:
1) - what actually happens if you carry her there on a stretcher and she briefly wakes up, screams and dies?
why does she scream at all?

2) If her jewelry is valuable then it can be sold. If not somewhere close by then somewhere further away. If it can be sold then there cannot be an argument of "but it couldnt have been sold".

3) And it seems that we cannot revisit that place again in any case... so... it seems like really a lot of work for a one time thing.
4)Maybe a smaller settlement (less NPCs, less dialogue) would be better?

1) Why does a delirious person do anything that they do or say whatever they say? She has been held and abused by total strangers over the course of several days. Whenever she had been conscious during that time, they had been doing "unspeakable" things to here. Just as they are approaching town, she revives just enough to see total strangers. For all she knows, they are just more of the same gang that kidnapped and abused her. Wouldn't your first reaction in her shoes be to scream? And I didn't say they were IN town, but rather just approaching it. From her vantage point lying on a stretcher, she has NO awareness of where they are.

2) Just as the residents in the Wasteland were certain that "there ain't nuthin' in that direction", to the locals there wasn't anything worth mentioning to the East, from whence the party came. (Other than some mutated monstrosities that occasional wandered in from that irradiated hell.) And given that the kidnapping took place in just the last few days, the kidnappers didn't have enough to go off to another communities where they could do some trading, and then get back further East to come wandering into town. Insufficient time to accomplish all of that.

3) Why couldn't the kidnappers' camp be revisited? The obvious defense would be to insist that someone from town go to the camp to see evidence of the fight. (Probably send at least one of the party members to act as the guide for the posse -- a posse just in case it was all an elaborate trap.) The camp will be as the party have left it. If the girl had been left there, with or without a party member in attendance, her body will be found by the posse as she died of complications prior to the posse's arrival. While there, the posse is there, what remains of the kidnappers' bodies ill be _thoroughly_ examined. While the posse is out of town, the trial proceeds and the court will be simply waiting on the posse's report before pronouncing judgement. The camp would be an overworld location, much like the site of the Mine in Wasteland.

4) The settlement is only as large as is necessary to assure that the party will NOT be able to successfully fight its way into town. (I envision it as being about 1/4-1/2 the size of Quartz.)

[Hiver]

I meant that the town itself is apparently not visitable in the future no matter what you do.
Or always hostile after that.
Also... what exactly is the consequence of her dying in front of the town, settlement? Does anyone see that?

- im not criticizing, just trying to point out somethings that can be expanded upon or explained more clearly, which will ultimately make the mission suggestion better.

[CaptainPatch]

1) I meant that the town itself is apparently not visitable in the future no matter what you do.
Or always hostile after that.
2) Also... what exactly is the consequence of her dying in front of the town, settlement? Does anyone see that?

- im not criticizing, just trying to point out somethings that can be expanded upon or explained more clearly, which will ultimately make the mission suggestion better.

1) If the outcome is that the party successfully defends itself _without_ resorting to violence, and they had done the Good Karma effort to properly bury their attackers back at the camp, they would become local heroes for having taken out the men that had taken Sweet Patty away from the town. Resorting to violence means NEVER return. The "marginal victory" doesn't _totally_ preclude a return; just a cold reception and higher prices to be paid for any transaction in town.

2) The dying scream is meant to immediately cast suspicion on the party. Close enough to town to be heard, but not so close as to be clearly seen as to what had happened. The obvious reaction of the nearest non-carrying party member would step close when she pops up screaming and try to comfort her by saying, "There, there, little Missy. You're safe now." From a distance, who can clearly say what he said -- or did to her to quiet her, permanently? There is the argument of, "If we kidnapped her, why would we bring her into town where she might revive enough to identify us?" The fiancee will counter-argue that that excuse won't hold if what they did was just kill her moments before entering town. (Who wants to haul around a dead, stinky body any longer than they have to?) Unfortunately for the party, Pat managed to call out a warning -- for which the party quickly murdered her on the proverbial doorstep. Unconscious, she was "salable"; conscious, she was a very real threat.

[Drool]

I don't know how deep this will be, but not everything need be Sophie's choice, either. But one thing I've always liked in open world games is the small things. Yeah, Skyrim's Blackreach is pretty impressive, but I also like the little huts in the middle of nowhere with people eking out a living and keeping their heads down, hoping the dragons don't notice them. So with that in mind, a small location with a small "mission" with possible ramifications rippling out. Also, I haven't read any posts in this thread aside from the first one. Any similarities in my post and any other is pure coincidence.


Nestled up against the foot of a mountain is a small little settlement. There are, perhaps, a dozen people living there in pretty ramshackle little huts. The mountain makes for a pretty reasonable city wall, protecting two sides of the hamlet; the other two sides are protected by corrugated steel, possible fashion from the remains of semi trailers. That these dozen or so people could survive for very long without being slaughtered by raiders or mutants or other desert scum is something of a head-scratcher, until you notice what's sitting there in the middle of the town: an old Reagan hovertank. Presuming those guns are working, that explains why they haven't been molested by the scum in the wasteland.

As the party approaches, they're challenged by a guard. Judging by his absolute confidence, it's a safe bet the tank works. The players have numerous options on how they can deal with these people. They can, of course, lay siege. The tank may not be mobile, but its weapons are more than sufficient to give the party a hard time, to say nothing of the villagers. After all, they'll be fighting for their lives, the lives of their families, and their backs are, literally, against the wall. The party would need to largely destroy the tank in the process of slugging it out, and even if they didn't, they still don't know how to drive the fool thing.

Should the party play nice, they still are met with suspicion. One of the villagers goes out to talk to the Rangers. The villagers still don't really trust you, but are at least willing to talk. During the conversation, the party can earn their trust (or not). Should they earn their trust, the party will be informed that the while the tank can shoot, it is immobile. The villagers aren't here because they want to be, so much as they don't like their odds out in the wasteland on foot. Technically skilled Rangers can probably repair the tank with scraps, otherwise it'll be a matter of finding whatever widgets are necessary. Of course, should the party just be running a con, they still won't know how to drive the tank.

Assuming the party (eventually) fixes the tank, the villagers thank you and head out, which is where more options open up. The Rangers can wish them well, in which case the villagers will head for the nearest town. They'll probably make it (and the Rangers may stumble across the blasted remains of mutants and scum) but they might die en route (in which case the Rangers may find the slagged tank). When they get to their destination, they'll spread word of the Rangers ("They're jerks, but they helped." "They're friendly teddy bears." "They fixed our tank and then tried to kill us, we barely escaped!") based on what you did.

Should they wish, the Rangers could also go with, playing escort. Of course, escorting a tank isn't horribly difficult, but the villagers would be even more enamored with you. Obviously, the opinion of the villagers would help sway the new town. Especially since they've got a freaking tank.

Finally, if the Rangers were friendly, and have already established a new Ranger center, they can escort the villagers to the center and have them stay there, with the increased defense brought by a tank. Potentially even being able to use the tank at certain key points.

Also, it could be fun to have the Rangers play nice while trying to corrupt the guy in charge, leading to the villagers going across the desert in their tank wreaking havoc.

[Hiver]

Good one Drool, i like that.

Posts by Zombra and Captain patch kinda pushed me into thinking up a similar situation to theirs, but with focus on ranger skills and different outcomes based on usage of skills and results of tactics and combat.


This is written while intentionally avoiding just forcing in bad consequences for doing good acts to the best of my ability. Bad consequences happen but i will try to keep them believable rather than just forced in for their own sake.


setting:
Hostage - kidnapping - slavery related situation.


- The squad of assailants who took the hostages or kidnapped people dont need to be strictly evil. They can be a gang of raiders or a well equipped squad belonging to some other bigger faction that isnt evil itself at all.
Say for example they are members of Guardians of the Old Order. Or Servants of the Mushroom Cloud.
Or one of the Desert Nomads clans, even better.

It would be preferable and much more poignant if they are from a faction that is relatively positive, but has been involved in a long lasting conflict or a war.

These members of any of faction mentioned or some new factions turned into sadistic...well, "things" instead of human beings, such as that sergeant Captain Patch saw in Vietnam. But not all of them are as brutal as the others.

Such things are not exclusive to US at all. All wars bring out and attract and create such people and allow them to get into such positions while being excused and protected by the general belief of being the righteous side.
I have a similar real life experiences although, fortunately for me, not so close and personal as Captain patch did.
And im not from the US at all.

This mission is not based directly on such a situation, but it will use similar themes partially.

..............................................................


It is not impossible to save all the hostages - but you have to think very carefully about what skills youre Rangers and NPC allies are good at, your choice of tactics, what kind of people your NPC allies are and how they react to different situations.


- Importantly, there is always at least one hostage or one attacker that manage to escape unseen during the gunfight chaos and noise and thus serve as witnesses to your actions - that only relates to factions, locations and individual NPCs they are connected with. Its not a global reputation or any kind of karma or evil/good points.


It is daylight when you get there, or just run into that hostage situation without it being a taken quest (although it can be a full quest if you went different way previously and found people or a settlement affected by it - for example).



Options:

- You can use sneaking to get close and surprise them, - very difficult because of terrain , light conditions and guards.
Manageable with high enough skill but tricky and risky. Turns into a full gunfight easily.


1. Storming in, counting on surprise.
2. Find covered positions first and then start the negotiations that results in a fight or simply attack for bit of surprise
3. Sneak in and try stealthing it (Daylight vs Night)
4. Use other skills and abilities


Storming results in:
A Very difficult fight:

- If you storm them during the day they are tough and equipped enough to defend and seriously hurt your team and prolong the fight, having better cover position. Some hostages might get killed too in attackers effort to scare you away... do you back down and go away or continue with the assault and get full frontal, close and personal, and try to take down those threatening to kill some of the hostages? - some hostages still may die in the chaos of the gunfight.

- Do you simply put a bullet in the head of the first hostage and the attacker holding him or her? And then say the same will happen to the rest? Do they crap their pants and surrender or take your bluff? What if it isnt a bluff in the first place and you kill all of them? Or you fail and get a few or a lot of your rangers killed? (game over is also possible but only consequence there is reloading)

- Take into account that you have ally NPCs with you, which may react on their own. That enemies might panic and that a burst from an automatic weapon can take down anyone.

- What if an NPC ally decides to take charge and shoots the first hostage and the attacker holding her-him?
If you have such an NPC with you, of course. They are not all the same. Do you kill him or... decide to let him go later. or she leaves thinking you too weak, or starts disliking you.
If there is a "later" because attackers either surrender or take HIS bluff and a gunfight ensues - which can end in several or all hostages dead.

If they surrender after the first hostage is killed by you - you get to deal with his or her father and family plus lowered reputation on account of all witnesses. NPC allies react to it in different ways too. Some positively some negatively to various degrees and with delayed consequences.

- What do you do with attackers that surrendered? Execution or taking them to that town and leave them to their faith, where they will be killed too, or even escape later on and kill several people while doing it (not your problem or fault), but a sub quest you can investigate later - if you return.

- What if you have an NPC ally that would object very strongly if you do that?

- Do you fall back to better positions and take cover yourself? That tactic, whether you retreat there or start the attack from there always results in a prolonged difficult fight and attempts of assailants to storm your positions by using hostages as live shields - as cover, by hiding behind them and coming straight at you, shooting all the time.
What do you do?

- If you have a sharpshooter good enough can he take them out, or at least most of them? Hostages die or not - with appropriate consequences described bellow.

- Is any ranger proficient in targeted shots so he can shoot to wound the victims, which would make attackers drop them thinking they are dead or that you are crazy sonowabitch that is worse then them? Which would make them back down and retreat. (and have future consequences in other situations involving that faction or gang or whatever)
Hostages die or not - again, depending on skills.

- Do you have a medic/doctor good enough and with enough medicinal equipment to heal all of them later?
What if some of them die from wounds or you dont have a doctor or he is still only a medic and not very good at it?

- What if you have an ally NPC with you who has issues with that?
Or other choices you make (reaction depending on which NPCs you take - not just one having issues with whatever you do).
consequences - goes hostile, leaves the group, starts disliking you - with delayed negative consequences.

- You can wait for the night to fall which will make it easier to sneak in, take out guards silently, and surprise the attackers and kidnappers completely which will be a great advantage in a short fight, but some hostages will get badly treated, hurt, tortured or killed in the meantime.

What if you dont have a ranger or NPCs good in sneaking?
What other skills could be used to achieve a better outcome?

Can you lure some of them away by tricking them in some way and then ambushing those that get lured out and take them out silently to reduce the group strength?

Can you set up traps that would take them out? Silently or loudly?

Can anyone of your NPCs do it in some way that he is skilled for?
Can someone sneak in and poison their food or water? Would that affect the hostages or not? Can you signal them about your intention without getting discovered?
Can you sneak and stealth your way in and rig their weapons to explode? Only available if some of your team has the necessary skills.
If you send in a ranger he will do it with more discipline, an NPC might freak out or attack because he saw something that affects him deeply.

If any of the assailants remain alive... and begs for mercy, do you let him live and run away or execute him?

Would hostages demand execution after being treated so horribly? What if he didnt take part in torture and rape?
(that is random btw, sometimes you get one of those that did it actively, sometimes those that just stood by and watched it)

You let him go and hostages dont take it kindly. They are thankful but distrust you. - this is modified by number of hostages that died in the fight and whether the one left alive was doing the torture or not.
If he actively did they may become angry at you for letting such a horrible and dangerous psycho go.

Your NPC ally may argue you should not kill him for different reasons. Getting info on his faction and their base weak points (which may turn out to be a lie in the future - delayed consequence), info about some other unrelated stuff or just to follow him and see where he goes. Where does he go? Back to the base or surprisingly back to the settlement to blackmail-demand more money from an NPC resident that hired them or gave them info about the hostages they took.

Another NPC ally may argue you should kill him or even kill him herself, despite your orders. Or seriously resent you for not killing him and then turn against you by stealing important equipment while you sleep and disappearing - much later on. (A delayed consequence which you cannot predict in any way)
Additionally (if you use meta knowledge on repeated plays), she can seriously damage your reputation in some important place by revealing your actions.

Another NPC may threaten to leave or threaten to attack you, right on the spot. And he has some pretty useful skill and connections you need. (they all do to an extent but this one really fits with your gameplay and some quests a lot)


- One of the assailants escapes only in the case you dont cover all retreating ways out by tactics and ranger positions you choose or equipment related options such as setting traps. So you can manage to stop him, which closes some paths that open if he escapes and opens some other indirect paths in future dealings with that faction as a result.

As you may imagine this can bring bad consequences for you as he will warn his faction and individual NPCs about you.

In case you acted like a total maniac and he escaped thinking you are crazy and supper dangerous it will make him fear you and not go to warn that specific NPC. Or make his faction members try and avoid confrontation with your team in the future - which should open possibility of new dialogue options with them expanding into new subquests.



-----------------------------------------

aaand.... that would be an all nighter folks!

Throw critiques, suggestions and other stuff at it. (money is good)

[CaptainPatch]

Nestled up against the foot of a mountain is a small little settlement....

Nice set up. The one flourish I would add is have an obviously frequently used cemetery in line of sight with the tank. 20-30 crosses simply marked, "UNKNOWN". When the inevitable question arises, the answer is, "They didn't believe that Ol' Nellie Belle was functional. They learned otherwise -- the hard way!" [Whether or not any of the graves are actually occupied is irrelevant.]

[Drool]

Nestled up against the foot of a mountain is a small little settlement....

Nice set up.

Thanks. I liked the idea of a really small place that only survived because it had a tank. I figured they needed a pretty insurmountable wall partially covering them or they'd get flanked. Your cemetery idea works, especially if the line about "They didn't think it worked" is visible. I figure that the Reagan hovertanks probably used some kind of nuclear engine, so fuel is less of an issue, but they're only going to have so many shells. The cemetery helps with the intimidation factor, letting them conserve ammo.

I also figure that they're pretty much stuck in an unwinnable position when the Rangers come across them. They're probably just barely surviving, and know that they'll eventually starve, but venturing out into the wasteland alone is a good way to get killed. They probably have some pipe guns or pistols, but a large group of mutants or a smaller, but well organized group of Jerks or raiders would overwhelm them. They're kind of stuck with a slow death in their village, or a quick death in the desert. The go vs. stay argument would be old hat by the time the Rangers arrive, and they could easily get sucked in. Of course, fixing the tank would pretty much kill off most objections to going, but one or two crusty old bastards might not want to risk it, even with the tank (unless the Rangers went with).

[derekticon]

The Township Fulsom

Act I: Prison Gang...
I didn't really flesh out the scenario that much, but while some choices may seem more just, I would hope that the writing would influence the players decision making. Some innocent people should be downright unlikeable, while some criminals and dirty deputies should be sympathetic, doing to wrong thing for the right reasons (trumped up charges for real criminals who got away with crimes elsewhere; maintaining order with a healthy dose of fear, pointing out how lawless the town used to be...)

Hi sir, I like the scenario you painted. I've got some questions:

1) Are the Rangers tasked by Ranger HQ to intervene in Fulsom, or was it a unilateral act by the party to investigate the miscarriage of justice? I assume Fulsom is a settlement under the governance of Ranger HQ?

2) Else, how will the townsfolk and governing elites of Fulsom react to Ranger HQ's hegemony i.e. unilaterally intervening in Fulsom's domestic business. Especially so if the justice and legal system is based on the customs of Fulsom's society, and if Fulsom is a sovereign entity.

3) Will this incident escalate tensions between the local populace and Ranger Center, if it's perceived that the Desert Rangers bungled in their (unwelcomed) intervention, resulting in a rise of criminal activities and a general disruption to law and order, leading to a loss of productivity and economic opportunities [unable to complete infrastructure constructions, more bandits preying on caravans]?

[derekticon]

THE DOWNSIDE OF BEING A GOOD SAMARITAN

Having departed everywhere even remotely familiar, the party has been traveling ever deeper into the unknown regions of eastern California. The terrain is hilly and extensively wooded --the kind of forests that are no longer to be seen anywhere in the Wasteland.

Hey sir, I love this scenario too!

Will there be a chance that the ripples of this single incident, may escalate tensions between Ranger Center and "Woodland Hillock ville", such that Ranger Center will send out a bigger party to crush the militia that dare injure Desert Rangers. [Well, the adventure party isn't an independent band, but is part of a larger sovereign entity that is Ranger Center; thus an incident like this is likely to escalate into an 'international incident' since there is no higher authority to arbitrate]

Let's say if the wooded area is found to be rich in resources for sustaining life and economic activities, will Ranger HQ use that incident as a pretext for armed intervention (conquest)?

[derekticon]

Nestled up against the foot of a mountain is a small little settlement. There are, perhaps, a dozen people living there in pretty ramshackle little huts. The mountain makes for a pretty reasonable city wall, protecting two sides of the hamlet; the other two sides are protected by corrugated steel, possible fashion from the remains of semi trailers. That these dozen or so people could survive for very long without being slaughtered by raiders or mutants or other desert scum is something of a head-scratcher, until you notice what's sitting there in the middle of the town: an old Reagan hovertank. Presuming those guns are working, that explains why they haven't been molested by the scum in the wasteland.

Hey Drool, love this scenario too! [Wonder if there's a way to vote for ideas we love on this board]

What if the villagers, with their new found mobility and firepower set off to conquer neighbouring settlements?

Would this village be sitting on top of an abandoned magazine or ammunition depot (the location seems suitable for one - since it's nestled within hills)? If so, they would have an almost inexhaustible supply of high caliber rounds for the tank (assuming they're using the weapon against infantry and static defences rather than other armoured vehicles). But they'll need to secure energy sources in order to power their tank for further military expeditions.