A few people have said they’d be interested in a throwback fantasy campaign, and with so many people showing up on Thursdays, now might be a good time to give it a shot.
What I have in mind would be more a connected series of one-shots (or two-shots, if that’s even a word) than a true campaign, where people can play on and off as desired without missing key parts of the plot if they miss a session. More an anthology than a single story, so to speak.
Anyway, who would be inerested? What would you like to see in such a game? What would you prefer to avoid?
What would you like to see in such a game? What would you prefer to avoid?
Input appreciated …[/quote]
I like Simon’s idea regarding acq. inc.
In addition I’d also leave the relations between the characters as loose as possible, so that it’s not a big deal if someone can’t make it to the game.
And since there might be a bigger group of players, a light system would probably be good. Maybe something like Pendragon - without ‘overspecialized’ character classes - to avoid the ‘We don’t have a healer! We’re all gonna die!’-pothole
I also assumed it do work like that - perhaps something akin to a literal mercenary band that does different jobs at the same time to preserve itself.
If one isn’t here one session, it’s just assumed he is doing another job and that we’re split.
Or perhaps agents of a guild.
It’s not too hard to have a decent excuse for such an episodic structure.
ADnD should be fine, mostly because it is a bit more low magic-ish. So that healers are a small, helpful boost, but not a necessity and requirement to progress.
But yeah, I’d like to see mostly episodic scenarios, with an occasional bigger conclusion. That’s exactly what you had in mind though.
I’d also be interested in this, the fact that’s it’s more rules light is definitely a bonus. Which system and version specifically though? I’d need to check out the rules before I’d commit properly. Loosely connected one shots is also a brilliant idea!
I’d be interested too.
Simon’s idea is good, I think. And GJsoft’s one of a big conclusion from time to time is too.
I also like, for some part, the management aspects associated with being part of a merc group. I played once in a groupe where one of the players were the employer/leader of the others, and had to deal with the choice of missions, the rewards management, etc. And it was also a very fun experience…
[quote=“Auburney”]I have to say, I like the fluff so far (merc company / explorer’s club), but… AD&D kinda scares me off
I’d be up for it if it was Basic though …havent played that in ages and have fond memories of it[/quote]
Well, these two would seem to be mutually exclusive …
I wouldn’t worry about it too much, though. The two are basically (or advancedly) the same thing at lowish levels, Advanced just has more options. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to go with Advanced with all the scary bits like weapon speed factors filed off … which is about as old school as it gets, because that’s how everybody used to play anyway.
Heh. I’m not convinced I could do Dungeon World justice, nor that it could do old school sensibilities justice, either. Not sure it would be the best match.
In short, I just want something that runs fast and nicely without slow downs. I believe that’s everyone’s intention anyway and the tournament module didn’t have any problems with that so I hope for the best. I’ll just leave all the details to H so we don’t get any rules arguing. GM is king.
That’s DM. I’m already practicing my fiendish laugh …
Anyway, regarding mercenary band vs. adventuring company or whatever, why not let the characters decide this themselves? Let them decide what their motivation is, what degree of organization they need, etc.
Anyway, regarding mercenary band vs. adventuring company or whatever, why not let the characters decide this themselves? Let them decide what their motivation is, what degree of organization they need, etc.[/quote]
That’d be an option, too. The mercenary/adventuring company thing would just install a basic common property. So people who’d join once/from time to time wouldn’t always have to explain who they are where they’re from and why they’re joining the group and therefore we could focus on the story.
I don’t have any player limit in mind. Since I see this more as an anthology than a single story, any number of people can be part of the campaign. We’ll just play with whoever is interested in a given week; ideally, this might even turn into the group itself deciding on who will participate in which adventure (“We’ll definitely need a good thief for this one - let’s make sure Alrik comes.”).
For any single evening, I think it’ll generally be the most fun for the players if we aim for a range of four to six, or something close to that. I’d be happy to have a larger number of people at the table, but time in the spotlight can get pretty thin then.
[quote="-H-"]Advanced just has more options. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to go with Advanced with all the scary bits like weapon speed factors filed off … which is about as old school as it gets, because that’s how everybody used to play anyway.
This is what I was reading about a few weeks back when I pm’ed H about ‘retro clones’ and apparently dodged a bullet at the same time! Labyrinth Lord is one such (freely downloadable) retro clone of the 1981 version of D&D. They also have an ‘advanced companion’ for Labyrinth Lord which basically emulates how people used the Basic rules as normal but added the races/classes/monsters from 1st Edition AD&D without all the extra crunch. Sounds great to me!