The Mist's Eye
The investigation and covert operations arm of the Underdark Government. They send out operatives to look into dangerous organizations like cults, terrorist groups, and even unfriendly surface governments.
Structure
What does an intelligence agency actually do?
• Information Gathering • Intelligence Analysis • Sabotage • Irregular Warfare • Assassination Structure • Departments • Facilities • Recruitment
What do intelligence agencies actually do?
There is a perception of intelligence agencies as shadowy groups responsible for all sorts of mischief, operating with limited accountability. Often, this perception is accompanied by a vision of the average employee as a pistol – or, in this case, hand crossbow – toting badass in the mould of James Bond. This is not entirely correct. Intelligence agencies, both in the real world and in D&D, are certainly responsible for a varied portfolio of operations – but they do not have fingers in every pie (we can leave that to halflings). Moreover, any DM setting out to create a group of spies or intelligence agents without also accommodating for the massive support network behind even one of these individuals is, I think, making a cardinal mistake; both in terms of realism and because it limits the scope of the story.
There are, to my understanding, four key things which intelligence agencies tend to get involved in:
• Firstly, there is gathering information. This is quite obviously something they get up to, but it can take a number of different forms. There is the traditional method of inserting a spy into an organisation and getting regular reports (Human Intelligence, also known as HUMINT). However, there are other ways to go about it; looking through messages and gathering information from them (Signals Intelligence, SIGINT) is a common one, as is poring over maps and other non-classified information like newspapers and proclamations to know more about the enemy (Open Source Intelligence, also known as OSINT).
• Secondly, there is analysing intelligence. All the information in the world does very little if it is not looked through and compressed into useful data – for example, knowing the movements of every enemy military unit in an area isn’t very effective on its own; but using this information in conjunction with captured messages to determine their plan of attack and expected avenue of advance is far more useful.
• Thirdly, there is sabotage, which is on the more kinetic side of intelligence operations. My understanding of this draws primarily from the British experience in WW2, where intelligence operatives would be inserted into an enemy country to destroy key bridges, disrupt industry and generally set Europe ablaze. In D&D, this is even more effective – for example, without rapid bridge building potential, a single platoon of saboteurs with a few flasks of Stonebreaker Acid each could cut off an entire province to the enemy for weeks.
• Fourthly, there is irregular warfare. This comes into an overlap between intelligence work and military operations, but is essentially comprised of being a complete nuisance to the enemy by setting up and arming guerrilla operations within their territory. At the minimum, this is a cheap way to bleed them (such as with the USSR in Afghanistan) – it can succeed even further than that, toppling governments and achieving regime change.
• Lastly, there is good old assassination. Sometimes, the government just wants someone gone – whether it’s an annoying cleric stirring up trouble overseas, or the head of a military occupation of an ally. In such times, they often turn to intelligence agencies to do the actual killing work. One potentially interesting difference within D&D is that, due to the possibility of resurrection existing, kidnapping and holding indefinitely might be a more certain option.
This is list is, of course, not exhaustive. Further, every intelligence agency does not need to do everything on this list. For example, MI6 apparently has a strict policy against carrying out assassinations (to the point of letting go of at least one high-level Al Qaeda mole). In contrast, the CIA is well known for drone strikes and assorted unpleasantness. Moreover, different agencies can place different emphasises on methods and processes. In the real world, the US is a huge proponent of SIGINT to the detriment of their HUMINT operations, whilst many European agencies run far more effective HUMINT departments at the cost of their SIGINT capabilities.
Structure
Now, it’s time to get into the nitty gritty of actually drafting up what the organisation looks like. This will include three key metrics – firstly, what departments and groups make up the organisation. Secondly, what facilities are required, and where they are located. Lastly, how you recruit and train individuals for action.
Departments
Any intelligence agency worthy of its martini machine is going to be full of all manner of departments, dedicated to different operations and functions. In this model which I propose, I assume a large and well-established organisation with the formal backing of a government – a non-governmental secret society will, of course, be of a very different character.
The first department to consider is an administrative one. You need your HR reps, paymasters, secretaries and all the rest – after all, without these individuals, the entire organisation doesn’t exist; instead it’s just a loose collection of adventuring friends. As a DM, you have the option to essentially gloss over all of this and, frankly, I would recommend it as well. If you – or your players – have a particular interest in sourcing the cabbages used in the base cafeteria, then more power to you; but, frankly, handwaving it all seems like a much more useful proposition.
The second really key department are the mission handlers and planners. It would be profoundly farcical to deploy agents without significant planning. Therefore, having whole rooms of intelligence officers who determine the particulars of a target before inserting friendly assets only makes sense – without this, valuable and highly trained assets might end up killed or captured. At best, this is just a waste of gold pieces. At worst, it can reveal vital intelligence to the enemy about your organisation.
Thirdly, you do need field agents which can be deployed into enemy territory on missions. These agents can take a whole range of forms depending on what you want to do with them. For example, if the agency is primarily concerned with irregular warfare and sabotage, then a well-trained veteran of an elite military force would be ideal. If the mission is more to do with information gathering, then the emphasis will be placed on people who can speak the target language and ingratiate themselves effectively within the enemy hierarchy.
Fourthly, you need a training department. Many recruits – as discussed below – will need comprehensive training from the ground-up in all facets of intelligence training. Even if you manage to procure people with significant natural talent; say, former thieves or dissidents; then it is still imperative to brief them on standard operating procedures and mechanisms of the agency. Them not knowing, say, the correct flare colour to summon aerial extraction could mean the difference between humiliating capture and a successful operation.
Fifthly, you may want and probably need a research and development department. Intelligence agencies often require specialised weapons and magical items which mainline military forces just do not need or have in large quantities. For example, compact explosives or acids are of massive importance to carrying out effective sabotage operations. On the more mundane level, gadgets are quite cool and if the players are in a spy campaign then they may well want some – having a sensible source for them is a useful asset.
Sixthly, you will need an intelligence analysis department. Whilst in some models of government, each ministry or organisation has their own intelligence analysis service, it is more effective and more streamlined for your intelligence agency to be producing all of the requisite analysis, papers and so forth. This will also make the agency more useful to the government, meaning it is more likely to be funded and maintained.
There are, of course, other specialised departments and groups that might be needed, depending on the specifics of the setting – for example, in an internally fractious kingdom, relying on the army or police to provide base security would be a poor idea, necessitating the employment of a significant internal security force. However, with these departments, there is at least a rough base of an idea as to what might be needed.
Facilities
That’s right, we’re going to talk about buildings now. So, you’re going to need, at a minimum, four facilities to actually run this agency – though, of course, the more the merrier (provided, naturally, that you aren’t overdue on rent).
Firstly, you’re going to want a central HQ, probably in the capital city and near the government offices. This is where you can stick a lot of administrative staff and intelligence analysis types. It is safe, and convenient for cooperation with other groups – as well as closely linked into the transport network around the nation. The exact secrecy of this HQ can be left up to you, and, of course, depends on the threat level to the agency. In a relatively peaceful situation, it is entirely plausible for the HQ to just be an office building equivalent with a few security guards in the lobby – in time of war, then a heavily fortified bunker is probably a safer bet.
Secondly, you’re going to want somewhere to train new recruits. Due to the covert character of training – you don’t want enemy spies knowing all about your training program – putting it somewhere out of the way is a good idea. The British Special Operations Executive located their primary training area in the Scottish Highlands for this reason. Moreover, depending on how much explosions and shooting you’re going to be doing in the course of the training program, making it a fair bit away from civilization is likely best, if only to avoid scaring the locals. On the training facility proper, you’re likely to want to have all the normal accoutrements of military training – so assault courses, running tracks etc, along with extensive classrooms and space for mock villages or installations to rehearse attacks and infiltrations.
Thirdly, you’re going to want somewhere to develop weapons and assorted gadgets. A belt buckle that can set a small forest on fire is great, but you don’t want to be working on something like that in the middle of a crowded city – something going wrong could result in thousands of deaths and, worse, might cause an inquest. This is doubly true for vehicles and other larger scale creations. They can only really be tested and deployed somewhere with significant open space, and so a dedicated facility, probably somewhere out in the countryside, is required.
Fourthly, you are likely going to want a facility – or perhaps, a series of facilities in different geographic locations – for the actual operational side of intelligence agency. This might include runways and ports for vehicles, holding cells for interrogation, or barracks to house agents when they’re not in the field. An agency may keep these only in home territory, or they might be scattered around the world in consulates, allied nations and uncharted land, giving the agency a global reach of operations.
Again, obviously, you may want a different number of type of facilities depending on the specific vagaries of the setting, but this gives a rough assessment of the sort of things you may want to think about when you create the infrastructure and facilities for your spy agency.
Recruitment
All this fancy organisational stuff honestly means very little without people to staff your organisation. And to get people to do this, you need to actually recruit. There are two basic ways in which you might want to go about this:
• Firstly, the old boys network. A small corps of people at the highest level of government is likely to know all sorts of interesting people who might be of service in creating a spy agency. Invite these people in one at a time or in small groups, give them a glass of wine and then explain that the situation is fraught, the dark lord is rising, the sovereign needs their services on a particularly sensitive issue and so on and so forth. This is in many ways a useful system, because it produces men (and sometimes women) of proven quality and probably loyalty. However, one major weakness is that it can tend to produce a fairly specific type of individual
– it is much less effective at harnessing the talents of poor people or foreigners, who may be equally suited to the intelligence effort, but will be excluded from the agency.
• Secondly, there is the meritocratic and open recruitment service. Run adverts and a selection procedure where the best candidates are recruited and sent for training. This is most likely to get the best individuals and agents, but it much less discreet than an old boys network and therefore more open to infiltration.
There are, of course, other ways to recruit people – but these two systems are the most common around the world and in the past.
One other thing to bear in mind when recruiting for your agency is the extent of background checks against enemy spies. The problem we run into with this is that paperwork is not really a thing in most D&D societies – therefore necessitating the use of mind magic to get a decent idea of what is going on. Considering that this is written for a relatively low-magic setting, this may prove to be a problem. However, it does permit for the intelligence agencies to not be entirely competent and have chinks in their armour which can be exploited.
When considering recruitment, regardless of how it is done, there are probably three key areas from which recruits can be drawn. The first is the military; soldiers and fighters of various kinds will have the skills and physical capability for certain more kinetic intelligence operations. Secondly, merchants and traders may be very useful, as they would have contacts and foreign knowledge which domestic recruits would not have. Lastly, there are rogues, thieves and various other ruffians – whilst they might bring useful capacity to operations, it is crucial to remember that they are criminals and must be managed as such.
• Information Gathering • Intelligence Analysis • Sabotage • Irregular Warfare • Assassination Structure • Departments • Facilities • Recruitment
What do intelligence agencies actually do?
There is a perception of intelligence agencies as shadowy groups responsible for all sorts of mischief, operating with limited accountability. Often, this perception is accompanied by a vision of the average employee as a pistol – or, in this case, hand crossbow – toting badass in the mould of James Bond. This is not entirely correct. Intelligence agencies, both in the real world and in D&D, are certainly responsible for a varied portfolio of operations – but they do not have fingers in every pie (we can leave that to halflings). Moreover, any DM setting out to create a group of spies or intelligence agents without also accommodating for the massive support network behind even one of these individuals is, I think, making a cardinal mistake; both in terms of realism and because it limits the scope of the story.
There are, to my understanding, four key things which intelligence agencies tend to get involved in:
• Firstly, there is gathering information. This is quite obviously something they get up to, but it can take a number of different forms. There is the traditional method of inserting a spy into an organisation and getting regular reports (Human Intelligence, also known as HUMINT). However, there are other ways to go about it; looking through messages and gathering information from them (Signals Intelligence, SIGINT) is a common one, as is poring over maps and other non-classified information like newspapers and proclamations to know more about the enemy (Open Source Intelligence, also known as OSINT).
• Secondly, there is analysing intelligence. All the information in the world does very little if it is not looked through and compressed into useful data – for example, knowing the movements of every enemy military unit in an area isn’t very effective on its own; but using this information in conjunction with captured messages to determine their plan of attack and expected avenue of advance is far more useful.
• Thirdly, there is sabotage, which is on the more kinetic side of intelligence operations. My understanding of this draws primarily from the British experience in WW2, where intelligence operatives would be inserted into an enemy country to destroy key bridges, disrupt industry and generally set Europe ablaze. In D&D, this is even more effective – for example, without rapid bridge building potential, a single platoon of saboteurs with a few flasks of Stonebreaker Acid each could cut off an entire province to the enemy for weeks.
• Fourthly, there is irregular warfare. This comes into an overlap between intelligence work and military operations, but is essentially comprised of being a complete nuisance to the enemy by setting up and arming guerrilla operations within their territory. At the minimum, this is a cheap way to bleed them (such as with the USSR in Afghanistan) – it can succeed even further than that, toppling governments and achieving regime change.
• Lastly, there is good old assassination. Sometimes, the government just wants someone gone – whether it’s an annoying cleric stirring up trouble overseas, or the head of a military occupation of an ally. In such times, they often turn to intelligence agencies to do the actual killing work. One potentially interesting difference within D&D is that, due to the possibility of resurrection existing, kidnapping and holding indefinitely might be a more certain option.
This is list is, of course, not exhaustive. Further, every intelligence agency does not need to do everything on this list. For example, MI6 apparently has a strict policy against carrying out assassinations (to the point of letting go of at least one high-level Al Qaeda mole). In contrast, the CIA is well known for drone strikes and assorted unpleasantness. Moreover, different agencies can place different emphasises on methods and processes. In the real world, the US is a huge proponent of SIGINT to the detriment of their HUMINT operations, whilst many European agencies run far more effective HUMINT departments at the cost of their SIGINT capabilities.
Structure
Now, it’s time to get into the nitty gritty of actually drafting up what the organisation looks like. This will include three key metrics – firstly, what departments and groups make up the organisation. Secondly, what facilities are required, and where they are located. Lastly, how you recruit and train individuals for action.
Departments
Any intelligence agency worthy of its martini machine is going to be full of all manner of departments, dedicated to different operations and functions. In this model which I propose, I assume a large and well-established organisation with the formal backing of a government – a non-governmental secret society will, of course, be of a very different character.
The first department to consider is an administrative one. You need your HR reps, paymasters, secretaries and all the rest – after all, without these individuals, the entire organisation doesn’t exist; instead it’s just a loose collection of adventuring friends. As a DM, you have the option to essentially gloss over all of this and, frankly, I would recommend it as well. If you – or your players – have a particular interest in sourcing the cabbages used in the base cafeteria, then more power to you; but, frankly, handwaving it all seems like a much more useful proposition.
The second really key department are the mission handlers and planners. It would be profoundly farcical to deploy agents without significant planning. Therefore, having whole rooms of intelligence officers who determine the particulars of a target before inserting friendly assets only makes sense – without this, valuable and highly trained assets might end up killed or captured. At best, this is just a waste of gold pieces. At worst, it can reveal vital intelligence to the enemy about your organisation.
Thirdly, you do need field agents which can be deployed into enemy territory on missions. These agents can take a whole range of forms depending on what you want to do with them. For example, if the agency is primarily concerned with irregular warfare and sabotage, then a well-trained veteran of an elite military force would be ideal. If the mission is more to do with information gathering, then the emphasis will be placed on people who can speak the target language and ingratiate themselves effectively within the enemy hierarchy.
Fourthly, you need a training department. Many recruits – as discussed below – will need comprehensive training from the ground-up in all facets of intelligence training. Even if you manage to procure people with significant natural talent; say, former thieves or dissidents; then it is still imperative to brief them on standard operating procedures and mechanisms of the agency. Them not knowing, say, the correct flare colour to summon aerial extraction could mean the difference between humiliating capture and a successful operation.
Fifthly, you may want and probably need a research and development department. Intelligence agencies often require specialised weapons and magical items which mainline military forces just do not need or have in large quantities. For example, compact explosives or acids are of massive importance to carrying out effective sabotage operations. On the more mundane level, gadgets are quite cool and if the players are in a spy campaign then they may well want some – having a sensible source for them is a useful asset.
Sixthly, you will need an intelligence analysis department. Whilst in some models of government, each ministry or organisation has their own intelligence analysis service, it is more effective and more streamlined for your intelligence agency to be producing all of the requisite analysis, papers and so forth. This will also make the agency more useful to the government, meaning it is more likely to be funded and maintained.
There are, of course, other specialised departments and groups that might be needed, depending on the specifics of the setting – for example, in an internally fractious kingdom, relying on the army or police to provide base security would be a poor idea, necessitating the employment of a significant internal security force. However, with these departments, there is at least a rough base of an idea as to what might be needed.
Facilities
That’s right, we’re going to talk about buildings now. So, you’re going to need, at a minimum, four facilities to actually run this agency – though, of course, the more the merrier (provided, naturally, that you aren’t overdue on rent).
Firstly, you’re going to want a central HQ, probably in the capital city and near the government offices. This is where you can stick a lot of administrative staff and intelligence analysis types. It is safe, and convenient for cooperation with other groups – as well as closely linked into the transport network around the nation. The exact secrecy of this HQ can be left up to you, and, of course, depends on the threat level to the agency. In a relatively peaceful situation, it is entirely plausible for the HQ to just be an office building equivalent with a few security guards in the lobby – in time of war, then a heavily fortified bunker is probably a safer bet.
Secondly, you’re going to want somewhere to train new recruits. Due to the covert character of training – you don’t want enemy spies knowing all about your training program – putting it somewhere out of the way is a good idea. The British Special Operations Executive located their primary training area in the Scottish Highlands for this reason. Moreover, depending on how much explosions and shooting you’re going to be doing in the course of the training program, making it a fair bit away from civilization is likely best, if only to avoid scaring the locals. On the training facility proper, you’re likely to want to have all the normal accoutrements of military training – so assault courses, running tracks etc, along with extensive classrooms and space for mock villages or installations to rehearse attacks and infiltrations.
Thirdly, you’re going to want somewhere to develop weapons and assorted gadgets. A belt buckle that can set a small forest on fire is great, but you don’t want to be working on something like that in the middle of a crowded city – something going wrong could result in thousands of deaths and, worse, might cause an inquest. This is doubly true for vehicles and other larger scale creations. They can only really be tested and deployed somewhere with significant open space, and so a dedicated facility, probably somewhere out in the countryside, is required.
Fourthly, you are likely going to want a facility – or perhaps, a series of facilities in different geographic locations – for the actual operational side of intelligence agency. This might include runways and ports for vehicles, holding cells for interrogation, or barracks to house agents when they’re not in the field. An agency may keep these only in home territory, or they might be scattered around the world in consulates, allied nations and uncharted land, giving the agency a global reach of operations.
Again, obviously, you may want a different number of type of facilities depending on the specific vagaries of the setting, but this gives a rough assessment of the sort of things you may want to think about when you create the infrastructure and facilities for your spy agency.
Recruitment
All this fancy organisational stuff honestly means very little without people to staff your organisation. And to get people to do this, you need to actually recruit. There are two basic ways in which you might want to go about this:
• Firstly, the old boys network. A small corps of people at the highest level of government is likely to know all sorts of interesting people who might be of service in creating a spy agency. Invite these people in one at a time or in small groups, give them a glass of wine and then explain that the situation is fraught, the dark lord is rising, the sovereign needs their services on a particularly sensitive issue and so on and so forth. This is in many ways a useful system, because it produces men (and sometimes women) of proven quality and probably loyalty. However, one major weakness is that it can tend to produce a fairly specific type of individual
– it is much less effective at harnessing the talents of poor people or foreigners, who may be equally suited to the intelligence effort, but will be excluded from the agency.
• Secondly, there is the meritocratic and open recruitment service. Run adverts and a selection procedure where the best candidates are recruited and sent for training. This is most likely to get the best individuals and agents, but it much less discreet than an old boys network and therefore more open to infiltration.
There are, of course, other ways to recruit people – but these two systems are the most common around the world and in the past.
One other thing to bear in mind when recruiting for your agency is the extent of background checks against enemy spies. The problem we run into with this is that paperwork is not really a thing in most D&D societies – therefore necessitating the use of mind magic to get a decent idea of what is going on. Considering that this is written for a relatively low-magic setting, this may prove to be a problem. However, it does permit for the intelligence agencies to not be entirely competent and have chinks in their armour which can be exploited.
When considering recruitment, regardless of how it is done, there are probably three key areas from which recruits can be drawn. The first is the military; soldiers and fighters of various kinds will have the skills and physical capability for certain more kinetic intelligence operations. Secondly, merchants and traders may be very useful, as they would have contacts and foreign knowledge which domestic recruits would not have. Lastly, there are rogues, thieves and various other ruffians – whilst they might bring useful capacity to operations, it is crucial to remember that they are criminals and must be managed as such.
We See through the mists
Alternative Names
M. I. Six
Notable Members
Related Species
Comments