One thing I've learned over the decades is that players differ a lot in how they perceive information in play, how much they understand of what they perceive, how much they can remember, whether or not they take notes and if they do how detailed their notes are, how skilled they are at connecting seemingly unrelated data, and how much effort they are willing to put in to figuring things out either during or between sessions.
I like detail. A lot of detail. Shockingly, a lot of people don't like detail. At least that's a conclusion I've come to over the years. So I try different ways to present information to the players to help them understand the information they have without telling them what to think. Now maybe the point I am trying to make here is clear...but I doubt it. I know what I mean, but I don't think what I wrote above conveys it very well. Maybe an example will help.
In the last session the I summarized some clues the players had acquired and they then followed up on some of the leads the resulted from the summary information. But some of the information is pretty detailed and it requires seeing certain connections and drawing conclusions from those connections. Now the connections are fairly clear to me. I discovered them (many are actual historical connections) or created them. But the connections are not so clear to the players. But two of the PCs are experienced courtiers with good connections and knowledge. One is also a spy master with a network of spies and a pair of elite agents. So these sorts of connections should probably be almost as clear to for them as the connections are for me, the GM. The question is, how do I do that? And how do I do that in a way that does not take away control from the players, doesn't make the PC a pawn of the GM, and doesn't take away the chance for the players to have fun drawing conclusions from the connections?
Here's the information I gave the players. It's not secret. You can look it up by browsing the Internet. That's how I found most of the information in the first place. In essence, here's what I told the players:
The next afternoon, the four friends met
in de Chambre’s Paris apartments to discuss next steps. At their latest
encounter at the Eyes of Esus, the Witch called the accompanying noble “Monseigneur”
which is a title for a Prince of the Blood or a prince of the church, i.e. a
Bishop, Archbishop, or Cardinal. Later Father Signoret followed the noble and heard
one of his retainers address him by the same title. Guy and de Chambre recalled
the bynames of the four acknowledged heirs in succession for the throne of
France: the King’s brother called “Monsieur,” the Prince de Condé called
“Monsieur le Prince,” Condé’s infant son who was too young to have a byname,
and the Count of Soissons called “Monsieur le Comte.”
So what conclusion do you draw from this information about the identify of the mysterious noble who goes by the title Monseigneur?
This is what the players concluded.
Since none of the four
used “Monseigneur” as a byname, Guy suggested that the unknown noble might be
an illegitimate heir who self-styled as a Prince du Sang and used the byname
“Monsiegneur.”
And here is the additional information they found.
The four friends separated to follow various
leads. The Seigneur de
Chambre collected information on royal bastards. He
identified several possibilities for the noble called Monsiegneur. Charles IX of
the House of Valois died in 1574 without legitimate male issue and was
succeeded by his brother Henry III. Henry died without issue and was
succeeded by Henri IV of the House of Bourbon. Henri IV had two children out of
wedlock by Catherine Henriette de Balzac d'Entragues (now Marquises of
Verneuil). The first, Gaston Henri de Bourbon the Marquis de Verneuil, called
“the Bastard of France” is the Abbot of Saint Germaine de Pres and the Bishop
of Metz. A bishop of the church is called “Monseigneur.” However, Father
Signoret said the voice that he heard was not that of the Bishop of Metz who
the Jesuit had previously met at the Abbey of Saint Germaine des Pres.
The second child, a daughter Gabrielle
Angelique, was married to the Duke de La Valette. If the contract that Guy
found were upheld, the Duke’s wife would become a Princess du Sang. La
Vallette’s father is the Duke d’Épernon. Épernon never accepted Henri IV as
king and was rumored to have aided François Ravaillac, the assassin of Henri IV.
The Duke de Bellegarde is Épernon’s first cousin. Épernon’s youngest son is the
Cardinal de La Vallette. Cardinal de La Vallette is said to be a very good
friend of the Princess de Condé.
Catherine Henriette was at the heart of
a 1604 Spanish-backed plot to install her son Gaston-Henri as heir to the
throne. Her father was involved in this plot, along with Charles de Valois d'Auvergne,
her half-brother. In 1616, one of her former companions, Mlle d'Escoman,
accused Catherine Henriette of meeting with the regicide François Ravaillac.
Catherine Henriette’s mother Marie
Touchet Dame de Belleville was the mistress of Charles IX of France. Although
an old woman (age 75) Marie Touchet is still alive. Marie Touchet had a son by
Charles IX. He is Charles de Valois d'Auvergne the Duke of Angoulême. Charles
de Valois is the half brother of Catherine Henriette. He was involved in 1601
Biron Conspiracy with Savoy and the 1604 Spanish plot. Charles de Valois is
married to Charlotte de Montmorency (b. 1571), the half-sister of the Princess
of Condé (who is also named Charlotte de Montmorency). They have three sons: Henri de Valois (b. 1594), Louis-Emmanuel
de Valois (b. 1596), and François de Valois (b. 1598).
Now I could be wrong, but I'm betting that it is not very obvious from the above five paragraphs which, if any, of the NPCs are likely to be the mysterious Monseigneur. There are a couple of problems. First the names are long, confusing, and frequently different people share part or all of their name. Second, it's hard to see who is related to whom. Now the latter is, as we say in mathematics, a previously solved problem. Showing relationships between people, especially related people, is something that genealogy charts have been doing for well over a hundred years. So first thing I decided to do was to provide a simplified, 1-page chart of the relevant lineages. Here's what that looks like.
The next thing I did was to show basically the same information as the parapI've already presented two other examples of presenting information in these two charts for religious groups and for the Prince de Condé.
“Monseigneur”
maybe be an illegitimate heir self-styled as a Prince du Sang. Investigating
illegitimate births turns up several possibilities.
Charles IX of the House of Valois died
in 1574 without legitimate male issue and was succeeded by his brother Henry III. Henry died without
issue and was succeeded by Henri IV
of the House of Bourbon. Henri IV had two children by Catherine Henriette de Balzac d'Entragues (now Marquises of Verneuil).
The first, Gaston Henri de Bourbon the Marquis de Verneuil, called “the Bastard
of France” is the Abbot of Saint Germaine de Pres and the Bishop of Metz. A bishop of the church is called “Monseigneur.” However,
Father Signoret said the voice that he heard was not that of the Bishop of Metz
who the Jesuit previously met at the Abbey of Saint Germaine des Pres.
The
second child, a daughter Gabrielle
Angelique, is married to the Duke de
La Valette. If the contract that Guy
found were upheld, the Duke’s wife would become a Princess du Sang. La
Vallette’s father is the Duke d’Épernon. Épernon never accepted Henri
IV as king and was rumored to have aided François Ravaillac, the killer of Henri IV. The Duke de Bellegarde is Épernon’s first cousin. Épernon’s youngest son is the
Cardinal de La Vallette. Cardinal de
La Vallette is said to be a very good friend of the Princess de Condé.
Catherine
Henriette was at the heart of a 1604 Spanish-backed plot to install her son Gaston-Henri
as heir to the throne. Her father was involved in this plot, along with Charles de Valois d'Auvergne, her
half-brother. In 1616, one of her former companions, Mlle d'Escoman, accused Catherine
Henriette of meeting with the regicide François Ravaillac.
Catherine
Henriette’s mother Marie Touchet
Dame de Belleville was the mistress of Charles IX of France. Although an old
woman (age 75) Marie Touchet is still alive. Marie Touchet had a son by Charles
IX. He is Charles de Valois d'Auvergne
the Duke of Angoulême. Charles de Valois is the half brother of Catherine
Henriette. He was involved in 1601 Biron Conspiracy with Savoy and the 1604
Spanish plot. Charles de Valois is married to Charlotte de Montmorency (b. 1571),
the half-sister of the Princess of Condé (who is also named Charlotte de
Montmorency). They have three sons: Henri de Valois (b. 1594), Louis-Emmanuel
de Valois (b. 1596), and François de
Valois (b. 1598).
Is this information easier to understand? Which presentation makes it easier for you to see connections? To draw conclusions?
No comments:
Post a Comment