What is the boundary between having a Patron and the campaign premise?

[AmesJainchill]

Working on a modern cinematic military themed play by post game using GURPS 4e--think GI Joe, via the Marvel comics.

I was considering a campaign package for all the PCs to take.

Something like:

Patron (Action Force) (20p)
Duty (Action Force)(Extremely Hazardous, all the time) -20
Enemy (Red Shadows) (-20p)
Luck (Defensive -20%)(12p)

But the Patron. All the assistance--weapons, gear, fuel, vehicles, whatever, is all for use in furtherance of Action Force goals, not individual PCs goals...so that's not really a Patron, is it?

Similarly, now I'm thinking the Duty and the Enemy are really just the same thing. The premise is to fight the Red Shadows, there isn't another option, this isn't D&D where you could just go do something else.

I feel like I used to have a better grip on this when I ran GURPS more about ten years ago. Any assistance would be appreciated.

[Stormcrow]

Not every employer is a Patron. If you can depend on your employer to get you out of trouble (at least sometimes), it might really be a Patron. Otherwise, it’s just a job. For example, a small police department is a 10-point Patron if, as most do, it takes care of its own. But the U.S. Army, though powerful, is not a likely Patron – at least for an ordinary trooper. You could say, “The Colonel takes care of his men.” But you could just as easily say, “I’m on my own if I get in trouble,” and play a soldier who does not have a Patron.

In other words, if all you get from your employer is what you need to do the job, it's not a Patron. If you get help beyond that minimum, it's probably a Patron.

[DaosusLeghki]

This is sort of tangential to the discussion, but if all the PCs take it, then who cares if it's Patron or something else? Just call it Campaign Premise [0].

[AmesJainchill]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

In other words, if all you get from your employer is what you need to do the job, it's not a Patron. If you get help beyond that minimum, it's probably a Patron.

That is exactly the kind of clear question to answer I was looking for. Thank you!

[AmesJainchill]

Originally Posted by DaosusLeghki

This is sort of tangential to the discussion, but if all the PCs take it, then who cares if it's Patron or something else? Just call it Campaign Premise [0].

This is also a good point.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by AmesJainchill

Similarly, now I'm thinking the Duty and the Enemy are really just the same thing. The premise is to fight the Red Shadows, there isn't another option, this isn't D&D where you could just go do something else.

If the Red Shadow is the focus of the mission, it's just part of Duty. If the Red Shadow might attack the character when he's walking to the bus stop on leave, it's Enemy.

[whswhs]

In GURPS, Patron is more or less an alternative to Rank. If you have Rank, you can use it to get assistance from the organization you work for, in various forms. You don't have to define the organization as a Patron; you get the benefits because you can make a case that you need them to do the job. Patron applies when you personally get benefits because of a relationship with a powerful individual or organization.

The kind of setup you're envisioning seems better defined as a combination of Rank of some sort with Duty. I wouldn't call the benefits a Patron. And I wouldn't call the threats an Enemy; you already have accounted for the threats by making the Duty Extremely Hazardous, and having the threats also personified in an Enemy seems like double counting.

Now, in GURPS terms, if every character has to have the Duty, as part of the campaign premise, you still treat it as a disadvantage (the points from which may well go to buying Rank, also a campaign premise). But you should treat those disadvantage points as not counting against the campaign limit on negatively valued traits (if you have one). See p. 120 of the Basic Set for an explicit statement on this point. It's not that the disadvantage grants no negative points (or that the Rank costs no points); it's that the points it grants are outside some of the usual accounting rules.

[Phantasm]

I highly recommend looking at GURPS Social Engineering: Pulling Rank for situations like this. It'll add an Assistance Roll mechanic to your Org Rank, replacing the number of subordinates (and IIRC the Status boost from Rank as well), based on the power of the org as a Patron and the frequency of the Assistance given.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Phantasm

I highly recommend looking at GURPS Social Engineering: Pulling Rank for situations like this. It'll add an Assistance Roll mechanic to your Org Rank, replacing the number of subordinates (and IIRC the Status boost from Rank as well), based on the power of the org as a Patron and the frequency of the Assistance given.

I don't think that's right:

People with high Rank are assumed to have lower-Rank subordinates . . . and that is one reason why their requests are given more weight. (P. 11)

There is nothing at all about the Status boost in Pulling Rank, one way or the other, as far as I can see.

[Lisandro]

I really believe you would benefit from using the Boardroom and Curia supplement. The question here are not the characters, but their organization.