Alternative Conflict Narrative Resolution (Workshop)
I have a fleet engagement coming up at some point and a campaign where mass battles / conflicts with multiple factions might occur regularly.
The prospect of running long space battles doesn't exactly fill me with excitement and so I've got the germ of an idea for a way to resolve the conflict with a more narrative bent. Thought I would post here for discussion / help beating it into shape.
Conflict is altered to become an Extended Task so we step away from a more simulationist resolution to an abstract resolution. You can use this for any battle, arbitration, fleet engagement etc.
So the base idea is that each faction has a Progress Track. Progress starts at 0 and at the end of the track is the victory condition ("Neutralise the enemy ships", "Capture the opposing general", "Negotiate terms for a treaty").
Determine the difficulty of the extended task (1 through 5). The progress track should be 5 x the difficulty rating. The Difficulty is basically the number of rolls you think it should take to win the conflict (so 1 per enemy ship, 1 per term of negotiation etc).
Resistance should be an abstract number rated from 1 to 5 depending on how tough the various elements. If it is a small skirmish with nausicaans, they might have a high resistance, conversely a raid on a borg cube might increase the resistance every time there is a roll.
Putting it together should look something like this; if are lots of little opponents, then it might be a long track but little resistance, conversely, if the opponents are a small number of very tough starships, then it might be a relatively short track but with a higher resistance.
There are Breaches at every 5 on the track. A Breach represents some concession, disadvantage or loss for the other side (be it a ship, a concession in a negotiation, etc).
Every roll is an opposed test. Whoever wins, advances their track by the Impact. Impact will vary depending on the nature of the conflict. Its an abstract number rated from 1 to 5, based on the effectiveness of the lead actor for the roll. This could be their department rating or some other thing.
Any applicable traits affect the difficulty of the dice roll (a nebula might increase the difficulty of tests by 1).
Any party which rolls no successes always suffers a Breach.
A Breach can damage ships, kill a side character, cause stress 9, force a concession, create a negative trait or some such.
A success of at least 1 adds progress on the track equal to the Impact. Additional successes improve the Impact by 1 per success.
A player always makes the roll. They must narrate how they intend to impact the conflict in some way (it can be by directly fighting someone or helping the negotiations by reading the opponent's emotions or by rerouting power from the engines to shields). This determines the roll to be made.
The GM could even give a narrative prompt to the player and ask them to narrate their reaction / their part of the conflict / engagement.
This is really abstract, so it could be that the Doctor is in sickbay treating the wounded and that's how they contribute to the battle.
They can also narrate how they get support, perhaps its just using the ship's system to support but it could be that they see an NPC drop down behind an enemy and so on. As long as it narratively supports the action, it should be good.
Whatever you use to support your roll will also be damaged on a Breach. So be careful what you employ in your narrative!
The conflict concludes when one faction reaches the end of their progress track.
Any feedback, assistance (even if it is just telling me how awful it is!) would be helpful.