So a funny thing happened to me recently. While scrolling Bluesky, where I primarily follow a number of art and TTRPG related people, I came across a post talking about the "Spectrum of Allies," showing a hand-drawn image of a sort of half-wheel with sections titled things like "passive allies" and "active opposition". Thinking this looked like a promising resource on running NPCs in tabletop games, and with not enough time to read the full post (I was bojangling on actually getting real work done) I opened the link in another tab, saved the post, and moved on.
And SO, imagine my surprise when I later read the article to find that the Spectrum of Allies is actually a real-life political tool, designed to help activists find community support for their causes. Safe to say I was still really interested in the contents of the article, but the thought of using this nicely labelled half-circle as an RPG tool wouldn't leave my mind. But with no one else to do the work, I realized my dreams of another nifty NPC resource would have to be fulfilled by me-- hence this post you're reading now.
What is the Spectrum of Allies?
If you want to read the original article, you can find it right here. It isn't necessary reading because I'm going to kind of recap the essentials, but if you're also the kind of person who likes political science and activism, you really should check it out. The long and short of it is that the spectrum of allies is a tool made by George Lakey, a moderately-famous, nonviolent social activist involved in the civil rights movement, anti-Vietnam War activities, environmental activism, and a lot more. What's wild to me is that he seems to have been very active in Philadelphia (and Pennsylvania as a whole) but this was my first time hearing of him!
Putting that aside though, the spectrum of allies is meant to be a way for activists in a cause to determine which communities would be most helpful, or least helpful, to focus their efforts on for things like campaigning, outreach, etc. The intent is to win allies step-by-step, converting passive supporters into active ones and neutral outsiders into passive supporters. The diagram used to map these groups and assess their support levels looks like this:

An example diagram from the page at the Commons Library, drawn by Josh Kahn (unfortunately no idea who that is and the page doesn't give a link either).
Where I'm Going With This
While it's built to be used as a tool for political activism, this could also be really nifty for tracking the alliances/relationships of NPCs and factions to the players in a TTRPG campaign. In fact, it can be used as both a general and a specific tool. Generally as a way of tracking how certain factions/NPCs feel about the party, and more specifically by examining the actionable goals of a party and figuring out where certain factions/NPCs fall on the scale in relation to that goal.
General NPC Relationships
For general relationships between NPCs and the party, this functions a lot like other "NPC affinity" systems, but for me it has just the right amount of nuance, without getting too complicated or bogged down in details. You can easily place an NPC's relationship to the party somewhere on this scale-- like in real life, most will probably begin at "neutral", with exceptions for people or factions that are overtly against or aligned with players.
An NPC's location on the scale helps determine things like how much help they might offer the party, what fraction of the resources they have that they'd also be willing to let the party use, or even their initial reaction in any social situation (basically taking on the function of a reaction roll). For example, an "active ally" NPC might freely share important information, loan the party supplies, let them stay for free in their inn, etc. On the other hand, a "passive ally" might offer these same services for a fee or in return for a favor, or might limit the amount of help they're willing to give (so maybe a free stay at their inn, but don't come back every night hoping to rely on their good will).
And of course, "passive opposition" and "active opposition" have roles to play, with active opposition being the party's enemies/rivals, and passive opposition functioning as allies to those same rivals.
General Faction Relationships
Using the spectrum of allies to map general relationships also works with factions, though with less specificity. An "active ally" faction, probably a faction in which on of the PCs serves as a member, would be a good source of quests, rumors, supplies, and other benefits. On the other hand, neutral factions might be those who place quests on a job board, or approach the party because of their reputation. In this case, success in the quest might also come with the benefit of shifting the neutral faction's position to that of a passive ally.
In a similar way to replacing the reaction rolls for NPCs, the location of a faction on the spectrum can also help track how specific members react to the party's presence (either by modifying the reaction roll, or negating it entirely in favor of the faction's views). Members of a faction in an active allyship with the party would likely extend a helping hand if the PCs ask for it, while a member of a faction in passive opposition would probably "ice out" the party in social situations, refusing any discussion beyond what's absolutely necessary. And suffice to say, a faction in active opposition means their members are going to treat the PCs as enemies, doing whatever they need to undermine them, up to and including violence.
If you want to get a little more complex with it, you can also think about where an NPC who doesn't recognize the party might fall on the spectrum of allies in a vacuum. A wealthy noble is a member of a "passive opposition" faction, but doesn't know that before talking to the party, letting them ask about important information; once the noble finds out though, that previously accessible source of info quickly becomes closed off. Similarly, if the party meets a rival thief during a heist, the relationship probably won't start off friendly (probably an "active opposition"); but once the heist is wrapped up, if the rival is a member of the same guild, they might be embarrassed by the mix-up and willing to help the party in their next job to make amends (being an "active ally").
Specific Goals
In most TTRPGs, but particularly in games with high levels of politicking, players usually have a specific cause or goal they're attempting to fulfill. Sometimes it's as simple as "clear the dungeon", sometimes as complex as "organize the region's power players into an alliance to fend off the machinations of a doomsday cult." Like the real-life use of the spectrum in organizing and raising support, using the spectrum of allies can be a way to sort factions and NPCs into categories built around their support of the player's goals.
For example, if the party's goal is to "clear the dungeon", their first active ally is probably whoever issued the quest (if anyone). They want the dungeon cleared, and they're willing to pay the party to make it happen. But a "passive ally" might be a merchant in the town near the dungeon, whose business has dried up as a result of whatever threat lurks inside. The merchant really needs the dungeon cleared, but money is tight and they can't afford to chip in their own reward, so instead they'll use what they can offer-- info about the dungeon and its local history, or staking their reputation to vouchsafe the party to other townsfolk.
Importantly though, outside of the goal to "clear the dungeon", this merchant might not be much of an ally. If the party spent time turning the merchant into a true friend, they might offer a small discount. But if not, well, they need to make a living, and supplies way out here aren't cheap.
Turning the same example to a faction, rather than a specific NPC, perhaps the village has a taboo around disturbing the dungeon that the party is trying to clear, one held only by those entrenched in the old ways or adherents of the local religion. Villagers worried about tradition might be "passive opposition", refusing to do business with the party once they find out the PCs are making trips into the depths-- whoops, there goes your blacksmith! Hope you didn't need any armor repairs. Those faithful to the old ways, on the other hand, might take more of an "active opposition" role. This doesn't necessarily have to mean breaking out the pitchforks and torches (although it's a possibility!) It could mean gathering in the local tavern and hosting town halls, trying to persuade the "neutral" villagers (who don't care about the dungeon and just want to be safe) that disturbing whatever lives there is only going to make the situation worse.
Shifting Slices
That final bit is, in my opinion, the strongest function of the spectrum of allies. By sorting NPCs and faction into these distinct categories, you can build actionable information about how they might move from one slice of the spectrum to another-- and what the party can do to make it happen.
In the case of the merchant from earlier, they start as a passive ally, but maybe they just need a way to become actionable that works within their needs. They already said they can't offer a reward... but if the party asks about spare supplies, or a small discount on wares, that might be something the merchant is willing to do. Now you've turned a source of passive support into a source of active support instead (and if you can win them over as a friend, maybe the discount carries on even after the dungeon is cleared).
Creating actions that help move groups back and forth across the spectrum is particularly helpful for tracking factions in campaigns with a lot of politicking, especially if paired with discrete goals. A faction that serves as an active ally for one goal might be more neutral on another, while another faction who gives only passive support during one course of action is adamantly against another, turning them into a passive opposition more willing to help the party's rivals. Of course, the eventual goal is likely to build widespread support for the party's overarching goal of the campaign, whatever that might be, turning all of the factions into "active support"-- or at the very least shifting them from being neutral into something more like passive allies. And having the party take a course of action that a faction agrees/disagrees with might risk pushing them closer or farther from actively supporting the party when it's time.







