Forums of the Megaverse®

I found in watching and reading about Zombies that a common theme is finding survivors.. This helps make a story.. That or your trapped in a building waiting for survivors to rescue you.. Either way survivors to be found.

I think that any good zombie apocalypse themed stories is ultimately not about the zombies. Whether it's focused on the search for survivors, the wait for rescue or humans clawing at one another for scarce resources, the zombies are really there for setting, ambient danger or complications, and a driving force that casts into question how much humanity can mankind afford in this new world.

But survivor themed adventures is a good way to start, I think.

I think the giant mounted picture of Rick Grimes standing on an overturned bus that I have hanging in my house said it best. "Fight the Dead. Fear the Living."

Let's face it, in Dead Reign you know that there are zombies out there looking to kill you and while that is scary, worrying about your fellow survivors are capable of should be down right terrifying for players.

It's human nature to fight, human nature to want what's best for oneself/family so it isn't too much of a stretch of the imagination to have people killing each other over a bottle of water.

I can think of all kinds of creepy scenarios to throw at players.

They come across a house that is somewhat secluded, (could be a cabin, farm house or just a regular house of a rural route) it's in perfect condition, with no sign of zombies anywhere and inside you find the nicest elderly couple ever........
Who decide to poison you (put to sleep, paralyzed, instant death) with the amazing meal they provided and one by one feed you to the members of their family who have been turned and are now locked in the basement and/or barn.

Same scenario but a slight twist, they meet the elderly couple who feed them and give them a place to sleep.

Next morning bandits or zombies show up so the PCs are now in a moral dilemma. Do they leave them to their fate, even though they showed strangers kindness, and wait it out in the barn/basement/attic or come to their rescue at risk to themselves?

Say they do rescue them, imagine the difficulties of travelling with two elderly people and by elderly I don't mean in their 60's (my father is 63 and is in better shape then people in their 40's) I'm talking about people in their 80's or 90's. They still have all their wits about them, they just don't move quite as fast as they used to.

I know that the above scenarios are totally movie/tv show cliche, well mostly the first one but parts of the second one as well, and your players realize this and would probably on their guard.

This also works to your (the GM) advantage. There is a chance your players might not trust them and decide to lock them in a room/tie them up, or even worse kill them out right, but why stop there?
Now that they are tied up, do they leave ? stay a few nights? grab all the food they can and leave them with nothing? or just turn around and walk away ?

If they do assault the old couple, perhaps they do it before knowing that some of their younger family is on the property somewhere and once attacked they do not provide this information. Then you have yourself a hostage situation going on.

Do your players apologize and explain why the locked them up and if so are they forgiven? or do they just blast their way out, the noise drawing plenty of Zeds to them.

Yea I'm not about that life. Any zombie adventure to me and my mindset is. Um. STAY ALIVE!! more people more resources. More people greater chance of a coup. Numbers are always trouble.

I, personally, love the human element in Dead Reign. Without human interaction, the game would simply be rolling dice and comparing numbers to see whose were highest. Moreover, I like to let the players act in any way their hearts dictate, regardless of their "alignment" (it's the apocalypse, maybe you aren't as scrupulous as you were two weeks ago?). I do have a twist to this rule that I never share:

The world around them is a reflection of their own behaviour. If the players are noble, caring and altruistic then the general bent of survivors tends to be good. If, however, the players have been self-serving d#&k-holes, then the world around them tends to be going in that direction as well. They are the barometer by which I measure the attitude of the world.

This has come to haunt them when an established party picks up a new player, and his actions of "kill them all and take their stuff" may pay off in the shortrun, but end up changing the "feel" of the encounters for the rest of the game. The group first met a bunch of survivors early on in the apocalypse, who were friendly and helpful, while remaining cautiously optimistic about the future. Fast-forward in time several months, and the group encounters them again. This time they are on edge, paranoid, and much more willing to shoot first to protect themselves from thieves and bandits. What was once a potential source for help has become, at best, antagonistic and indifferent, and at worst an immediate threat.

But that is the world the players have crafted for themselves, thanks to following the actions of a single angry man.

say652 wrote:Yea I'm not about that life. Any zombie adventure to me and my mindset is. Um. STAY ALIVE!! more people more resources. More people greater chance of a coup. Numbers are always trouble.

I agree with you to a point, however, it would be nice knowing someone is standing guard while you snatch a couple of hours of sleep.

I'm not saying you need to travel in a huge pack of like 12 people, but you and 1 or 2 other people you can trust wouldn't hurt especially if you knew them from before the Wave.

filo_clarke wrote:I, personally, love the human element in Dead Reign. Without human interaction, the game would simply be rolling dice and comparing numbers to see whose were highest. Moreover, I like to let the players act in any way their hearts dictate, regardless of their "alignment" (it's the apocalypse, maybe you aren't as scrupulous as you were two weeks ago?). I do have a twist to this rule that I never share:

The world around them is a reflection of their own behaviour. If the players are noble, caring and altruistic then the general bent of survivors tends to be good. If, however, the players have been self-serving d#&k-holes, then the world around them tends to be going in that direction as well. They are the barometer by which I measure the attitude of the world.

This has come to haunt them when an established party picks up a new player, and his actions of "kill them all and take their stuff" may pay off in the shortrun, but end up changing the "feel" of the encounters for the rest of the game. The group first met a bunch of survivors early on in the apocalypse, who were friendly and helpful, while remaining cautiously optimistic about the future. Fast-forward in time several months, and the group encounters them again. This time they are on edge, paranoid, and much more willing to shoot first to protect themselves from thieves and bandits. What was once a potential source for help has become, at best, antagonistic and indifferent, and at worst an immediate threat.

But that is the world the players have crafted for themselves, thanks to following the actions of a single angry man.

I like that you don't tell them that this is what determines their world/fate.

I also like that you spell behaviour with a U like I do, Go Canada

Hello...

filo_clarke wrote:I, personally, love the human element in Dead Reign. Without human interaction, the game would simply be rolling dice and comparing numbers to see whose were highest. Moreover, I like to let the players act in any way their hearts dictate, regardless of their "alignment" (it's the apocalypse, maybe you aren't as scrupulous as you were two weeks ago?). I do have a twist to this rule that I never share:

The world around them is a reflection of their own behaviour. If the players are noble, caring and altruistic then the general bent of survivors tends to be good. If, however, the players have been self-serving d#&k-holes, then the world around them tends to be going in that direction as well. They are the barometer by which I measure the attitude of the world.

This has come to haunt them when an established party picks up a new player, and his actions of "kill them all and take their stuff" may pay off in the shortrun, but end up changing the "feel" of the encounters for the rest of the game. The group first met a bunch of survivors early on in the apocalypse, who were friendly and helpful, while remaining cautiously optimistic about the future. Fast-forward in time several months, and the group encounters them again. This time they are on edge, paranoid, and much more willing to shoot first to protect themselves from thieves and bandits. What was once a potential source for help has become, at best, antagonistic and indifferent, and at worst an immediate threat.

But that is the world the players have crafted for themselves, thanks to following the actions of a single angry man.

That's a good way of GMing your Dead Reign game. Reputation is vital in a world where the unfortunate few are looking for good people to link up with against the bad people who would shoot first and then take their stuff (Or worse... ). But anyway, good trick!

Razzinold wrote:I like that you don't tell them that this is what determines there world/fate.

I also like that you spell behaviour with a U like I do, Go Canada

I prefer a quote by Robin Williams, the main man... "Canada is a loft apartment over a really great party." Anyway, I'm glad that I have someone to agree with, even though I live in the lower 48 of the US. Well I have to go, so please take care; thanks a bunch, and have a good day.