The essence of a Robin Hood campaign

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Actually in Ars Magic every player has a pool of characters.
1 magus maybe but a whole horde of companions and Grogs.

[Entsuropi]

I agree with SE. I don't really see any long term goals for the group. Just quietly off John at the start of the campaign, and your group now has precisely zero enemies. I simply don't see what I, as a player, would do in that campaign that lasts longer than 3 sessions. There is nobody to talk to, nothing to be achieved apart from building a castle (not noted for it's roleplaying interest) and the political situation seems set in stone against the magi.

I'd push the local situation closer to civil war. Unruly barons, unrest in the courts. That way the group can talk to nobles who might realistically be interested in what they say. The common people are just that - common. They don't have weapons, any notable power or anything that the magi would really want. Nobles do. So by saying 'all the nobles hate the group' then you leave the group in a hole.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Actually in Ars Magic every player has a pool of characters.
1 magus maybe but a whole horde of companions and Grogs.

This does not alter the essential nature of the argument I put forth, however.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Ok, points taken
.
I don't want to tip the John hand just yet, because he's to good a villian to waste.


I could add a character that could make things more interesting. Richards chancellor, who usurps the Bishops regency and who trys to steal everything thats not nailed down. It nearly causes civil war among the Barons and leads to John deciding "enough is enough, if anyone's going to get rich here in England its me!" Eventually he gets enough allies to help.


The idea was I wanted to make a different Robin Hood story.
One where the players dont know who's best.


On the John, front I was trying to tell a more historical version (more accurate) and slightly different since Richard's like reads pretty much like the life of Jack the Ripper. He's acused of being a serial rapist and was described by people of the time as bloodthirsty> Rebeled against his own father doesnt speak any English, taxes the heck out of everyone to go on Crusade and only spent six to eight months or so in England during his entire rule.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Like I said, it doesn't have to be my initial recommendation for villainy, it was just the first/easiest way I saw of fixing it.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

I very much want this campaign to be two things, 1. Sellable 2.Original
I realize that Robin Hood seems derivitive, but I think something new can be done with the myth to make it interesting.



On that note, Enter William Longchamps.. Richard I's Chancellor and a man   whom the last king had disliked calling him the son of two traitors. In June 1190 he received a commission as a papal legate from Pope Celestine II. He was then master in church as well as state. But his disagreeable appearance and manners, his pride, his contempt for everything English made him detested. His progresses through the country with a train of a thousand knights were ruinous to those on whom devolved the burden of entertaining him. Even John seemed preferable to him.

John soon returned to England; he and his adherents were immediately involved in disputes with William, who was always worsted. At last (June 1191) Geoffrey, Archbishop of York and William's earliest benefactor (the aforementioned son of Henry II), was violently arrested by William's subordinates on landing at Dover. They exceeded their orders, which were to prevent the archbishop from entering England until he had sworn fealty to Richard. But this outrage was made a pretext for a general rising against William.  

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

and I love this quote about John... it so sums up why he would be afraid of the magi or why he would never move against them.

...John's greatest weakness was an inability to trust. The truism that 'a liar won't believe in anyone else', was never more apt than when applied to John. Time and again, when he should have trusted someone and given them power, a free rein and a say in things, he shied away, never daring to put his faith entirely in anyone. It lost him friends. It also lost him opportunities.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

E and I discussed this a little yesterday and I have an impetus for involvement.

The mill

William Longchamps is on progress trying to collect more funds for King Richard. After stopping in Nottingham (and staying too long) he begins to complain that the taxes collected aren't what he would like. He starts lobbying the Sheriff to collect obscure taxes on goods, especially milled grain. To avoid this tax (which they can't pay) the local peasents set up a mill illegally on the covenants land a boon for the covenant because they recive a cut of the grain from the superstitious peasents.

An emmisary from William arrives expressing his displeasure with the Covenant for allowing the mill to operate and warning them that unless they pay a tax on the grain, he will have to burn it down. He is understanding, and willing to negotiate but greedy and a little petty. Any negotiated price will be too high, 500 marks or more. If the mages don't pay he will fume, and secretly send a man to burn down the mill, in the middle of the night. If the Magi pay quickly or put up a fight, or decide not to pay Longchamps will sour on them. (Paying quickly makes them a rival, as they obviously have more). Only skillfull negotiation will have a positive effect on the Covenants relationship with the Chancellor. Making him look like a fool will raise their esteem in the eyes of the Sheriff as he is tired of the Chancellors presence and wants him to move on to York. The peasants relationship with the Magi should be much improved, unless they act in a callous or cruel way toward them.

side note
William Longchamps is secretly a diabolist (in league with Mammon) and if the players thwart him totally he will summon a demon to wreck havock in their Demense. Spreading feelings of greed mistrust and avarice.

[Entsuropi]

So the nobles are sort of neutral, the chancellor is the enemy and the sherriff is an 'enemy of my enemy' - not nice but useful to the magi?

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

for now yeah...

what do you think?

[Entsuropi]

It seems more workable. I would also include several local nobles, each with their own agendas. Make at least one sympathetic to the magi (for whatever reason) but make him the weakest noble, so that the group cannot just lean on him for all their needs. You really want the group to be moving at the noble level, just so they can get their hands dirty in politics.

I think what you really want to happen in the end is that you have a big sheet saying what all the nobles are currently up to, have them be doing those things, and just see what happens when the players start doing their thing. Should end up where you don't have to do much anymore, as the players will run the plot by themselves.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Well it is just a starting adventure for a campaign... If I add too much, it'll be a campaign in its own right.

Still the sheet is a cool idea... really cool
I'll put that in.