In the Wild West-themed series Deadwood, there are narrative story beats where all the town “Elders” get together over cans of peaches to discuss the important events in the town. These serve to both remind the viewers what went before as well as give each influential character a formal chance to share their perspective. Notably, Deadwood is a largely lawless town, but lawmen and criminals alike are invited — because of their influence, not their role in the legal hierarchy — to state their case. I adopted this for my game as a form of narrative beat before the PCs level up, as well as tying up any loose ends.
How it Works
In the town of Hammersmith, various NPCs hold influential positions. Because it’s a dwarven-run town, most of the characters at the table are dwarves, including shopkeepers, the Ironmaster, and the local Pastor. Two humans are present, the leader of the farmers, and the town healer and druid. The host is Vark, a teal-colored goblin who fills the equivalent of Al Swearengen of Deadwood — he has the location to host the meeting (at the Hearthstone Inn in this case) and puts out the “good tableware” to signify the occasion. Other characters may watch from the sidelines, but sitting the at the table has political meaning that’s obvious to anyone watching the proceedings.
The PCs then pick a speaker — probably the most respected, possibly the more influential — with the ability for other PCs to confer with the party leader. Given that in some cases, the topics at hand may be the PCs themselves, this can get interesting quickly when they argue at cross-purposes.
Then Vark brings up each topic, covering various loose ends in town. My game is open-ended with different quests happening at different times; each Council of Elders serves as a chapter end, culminating in the PCs leveling up. But if the PCs caused trouble in town, fines are charged (dwarves almost always use fines vs. corporal punishment, though they can escalate to that if things get out of hand). Most importantly, everyone has a say about what happened, be it a monster slain or a NPC arrested, and the PCs are asked to chime in, along with Charisma skill checks as appropriate to try to sway the group’s opinion.
The Trial as Narrative Recap and Synthesis
This mini-game of influence has several important forcing functions, not the least of which being that PCs have to actually remember what happened previously. If they have evidence, they can present it. In some cases, PCs blackmailed characters by NOT revealing evidence to get what they wanted. This created rivalries as PCs used different levers to alternately convince or threaten NPCs into guiding town politics.
There are rules interactions beyond just role-play. PCs can roll various Insight and Perception checks to engage with the various characters in the room, as well as Charisma checks (Intimidation, Persuasion) to influence them. And of course, Intelligence (Arcana, History, Investigation, Religion) checks help them use their in-game knowledge of facts to bolster their arguments. I liberally use Advantage/Disadvantage when the PCs should be in a better position due to their status (species, class, being related to a NPC) or strong role-playing.
After the first two Elder Councils, the third cluminated in a formal trial from a visiting judge, shades of The Crucible, where a much sterner and more powerful authoritation figure arrives with far less interest in town politics and more interest in the rule of law. PCs had to step up to defend their friends and allies against their enemies (mostly Pastor Caol, whom they ended up hating with a passion) while also working through what happened in the game up to that point. In some ways, it’s like a narrative repeat of clip show. If I’ve learned anything from playing D&D, it’s that PCs can never be reminded enough about what happened if you want them to engage in any way with the plot.
Consequences
That said, there are potential consequences that can go awry if PCs roll poorly, say the wrong thing, or misinterpret or forget something. I always give them the opportunity to remember using Insight checks, but the group largely has to figure things out as to where they stand on any particular NPC’s guilt (including their own!) or innocence:
- Our noble elf paladin at one point punched out the local sheriff. She claimed she was caught up in mind control and paid a fine.
- One PC straight up punched the Pastor in the face during one of the Elder Council meetings. That player retired that character (who was banished from town after paying a fine), as he had rolled up a new one he wanted to play.
- Several NPCs could potentially have been executed if things went awry. They fortunately didn’t, but gallows were built to show how serious things might get.
In a world of magic, the dwarves invented means of holding “witches” accountable too. The dwarves instituted witch-cuffs, iron gloves that lock around a caster’s hands so they can’t cast somatic components, and “the beard” a cruel metal tool fastened around the caster’s mouth that looks like a dwarven beard that covers the mouth so using verbal components are impossible.
Most important though was that the trial forced the PCs to have an opinion. PCs were regularly asked and answered who they thought was guilty or innocent, and why. It made the stakes feel higher, especially if turned out their initial judgement was wrong.
Magic Forensics
There’s a place and time for this sort of play. As PCs advance, certain magical effects generally just get to the heart of the matter. Divination spells (Augury, Divination) and Charm (Charm Person, Zone of Truth) spells all lend themselves to just answering questions without guessing. At low levels, there’s still some wiggle room to be wrong and have PCs interpret things incorrectly without the help of magic. At higher levels, some of these issues can be decisively resolved quickly.
This doesn’t mean that the PCs are necessarily any more right. Spells can be countered, misinterpreted, or simply ignored in favor of social authority. It does however make an NPCs opinion potentially carry less weight unless it’s backuped by magic. In a gritty ironsmithing town, a goblin innkeeper can convene a council of his peers to determine if a PC is innocent. When that PC is 15th level, it’s probably a king backed up by his court wizard.
A Mnemonic Beat
In the end, the real purpose of these “trial of peers” isn’t the trial at all. It’s a mnemonic enhancer and a narrative beat to let PCs and NPCs weigh in on what happened before, give them a chance to speak their peace, and then give them a clear milestone for leveling up. I found it works wonderfully to help tame a somewhat chaotic system of new players leaving and joining, large groups at my local library, and a timeline and NPCs that can sometimes get so complicated it’s easy to lose track.
Your Turn: How do you create narrative beats for milestones in your campaign?
Read more at this site