Premade Campaign Poll

[Spence]

1 hour ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

There are a couple different kinds of campaigns that can be done.

 

One is just the "lets play Champions" kind that needs lots of adventures to give the GM plenty of fodder for a game to have fun with.  No overarching story, no mega plot, just "ideas for adventures"

 

Then there's the huge story arc, the one big story with at least one minor story behind it.  Chuck Dixon advises doing this kind of thing in serial writing with a 3-plot structure: the main big plot, the ending of the last minor plot, and the beginning of the next minor plot each scenario.

 

While I know its kind of trendy now to have the One Big Story in TV shows and games, I wonder if that's a long term strategy or just trendy now?

 

Well........  You know someone had to drop their two cents

 

So the first example is not actually a campaign.  It is a sandbox setting with a few prebuilt adventures and a lot of plot seeds.    There are a lot of them around and they were very successful for a while, then people ran out of lots of free time.  The big thing about them is no prebuilt storyline or plot which it leaves to the players to create.

 

A campaign is at it's core a storyline/plotline, story arc?   The plotline can be big or small.  A full campaign designed for weeks or month of play, or a mini-campaign that can be resolved in two or three weeks.   You are 100% correct that good campaign has multiple plotlines active at the same time.   But the really great campaigns are built so that many of their secondary lines are flexible and can be injected at anytime. 

 

The reason I really liked the Plot Point books is they were campaign books that combined both the sandbox and the campaign into one product. 

 

The beginning of the book outlines a sandbox with any special rules and information to create characters for the setting.   Plus it has a Gazetteer about the world that fills in any world info that may not be in the core rules or books.   

 

This is followed by a 8 to 12 adventure campaign.

 

And the appendices have any needed bestiary or NPC info plus anything not otherwise covered.

 

The biggest and most important thing is that the Plot Point book must contain everything needed to play the campaign except the rule book itself. 

 

You could for instance build a Supers Plot Point that takes place in Vibora Bay.  You don't actually have to use anything from the Vibora Bay book, but it would need to be written to be able to be plugged right in.  Personally, the best approach would be to get permission to use a few reference points to anchor the Plot Point to the city.  Maybe a cross street name or two.  Nothing that actually relies on or uses VB, but would allow someone that has VB to easily inject the PP into their game. 

 

To me the perfect Plot Point for Hero would be ones that directly link to Hero setting books and use some of the Hero villain/NPC's.  If the GM and players are having a action packed time in a Plot Point in Hudson City, it would prompt them to buy the full HC book and Map so they could get even more info about HC, and better yet continue playing when the campaign line ends. 

 

 

[assault]

8 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Then there's the huge story arc, the one big story with at least one minor story behind it.  Chuck Dixon advises doing this kind of thing in serial writing with a 3-plot structure: the main big plot, the ending of the last minor plot, and the beginning of the next minor plot each scenario.

 

 

The problem here is the difference in media. In writing, TV or film, the characters do what the creators want.

In RPGs, the characters do what their players want. That doesn't necessarily fit the big story. A GM who tries to impose a big story risks ending up railroading the players, even if they are subtle about it.

 

A plot point game can split the difference, but the result can be that the story can be entirely different from what the GM expected.

And of course things are far worse for an author who isn't sitting around the table with the players.

[Tech]

2 hours ago, assault said:

 

 

The problem here is the difference in media. In writing, TV or film, the characters do what the creators want.

In RPGs, the characters do what their players want. That doesn't necessarily fit the big story. A GM who tries to impose a big story risks ending up railroading the players, even if they are subtle about it.

 

A plot point game can split the difference, but the result can be that the story can be entirely different from what the GM expected.

And of course things are far worse for an author who isn't sitting around the table with the players.

It's rare but there are a few times in the past when I told the players "I want the episode to go a certain direction at some point so yes, I'm railroading you. That ok?" Each time, it's been a "sure".  Since then, though, I've developed a style where I don't have to railroad them; it comes with experience.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

The problem here is the difference in media. In writing, TV or film, the characters do what the creators want.

 

Yeah that is the issue, and the best way I see around that is to give GMs the scenarios without being too specific, then include tips on how to work around player mischief to keep the story on track or adjust to changes.  The "Plot Point" idea is an A story and a B story (the main overarching storyline and the other stuff the PCs are up to and want to accomplish with their characters).  The B story is the hard part because you cannot possibly know what the PCs or players will want, so you can only leave openings in the scenarios where other stuff can happen or people can pursue their own interests.

[Jhamin]

5 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

The B story is the hard part because you cannot possibly know what the PCs or players will want, so you can only leave openings in the scenarios where other stuff can happen or people can pursue their own interests.

 

Does giving 2-3 predesignated huntedes and then sketching out how they go about hunting a hero work?  In theory it should always be personal, but Champions is filled with a ton of heroes who are hunted by (say) Viper.  Lay out a series of escapades with Viper and various set-pieces where they attack a hero at a public event or send an infiltrator to find out a Secret ID, then go after his place of employment once they know his secret ID.  Lay out some "Viper Stuff" and give advice on how to handle the PCs taking various tacks on things.

The "Adventure Paths' series by Pathfinder are all pre-canned campaigns and each one starts with a players guide that basically lays out character choices that will fit the game and ones that you can do but probably won't get as much love.  (If your ranger buys special anti-Goblin abilites, well there are lots of goblins on deck, but if you hate Giants there will be like 2 over the entire game.  Or maybe don't play an anti-authority berserker as this game is about all of you being mid-level officers in a fantasy army, but your Career Soldier pc Concept will be *great* for this)

Likewise the Character creation advice in this Hero supplement can say: Super-Wizards and Gadgeteers welcome, but "Mutant Rights" won't be a thing so maybe don't make that the focus of your character.  If you are hunted by one of the following: Viper, Mechassasin, The Ultimates, Black Harlequin, the adventure will seem more personal for you and your GM will appreciate it.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Does giving 2-3 predesignated huntedes and then sketching out how they go about hunting a hero work? 

 

Yeah I think the trick is to offer some suggested scenarios that fill broad categories: here's how to work a hunted into this scenario, here's a good place for a DNPC to show up, this is is the kind of thing a character worried about helping the helpless can tie into etc.  That way a GM can adjust the events as fits the campaign they are running best.  For example, if a character has a hunted, have a bit in the scenario where [insert group of bad guys] can be used for a hunted.  Rather than "VIPER shows up here" have "bad guys show up.  X group works well here, but you can use a specific PC's hunted instead"

[Spence]

15 hours ago, assault said:

In RPGs, the characters do what their players want. That doesn't necessarily fit the big story. A GM who tries to impose a big story risks ending up railroading the players, even if they are subtle about it.

 

Not at all.  Or maybe for you.

 

But a campaign with a strong overall arc is not hard to make and doesn't really rail road anyone.  Though lousy GM's can certainly achieve that end.

 

I have run many campaigns and never had that issue.  The key is to establish the threat, get player buy in, and then let the players decide how to achieve the objective. 

 

This is how you do it.  You design the campaign and then ask your group if they would like to play and outline the campaign requirements.  I ran one where everyone was a chivalic knight (think really good guys) defending the Realm from evil.  All PC's had to be some flavor of Good.  No evil and no evil masquerading as neutral.  The Knights would be traveling on Quests and and a lot of the adventure would be things encountered on the way. 

 

Now here is the really cool thing that makes it all work.  It's a game and no one is forced to play. 

 

If you are a GM and propose a campaign and no one likes it, then do something else.

If you are a player and agree to a campaign then play the campaign. 

If you are a player and start a campaign and discover you don't like it, then let the GM know and bow out.

 

In very broad strokes their are two types of games.

 

Sandbox worlds where PC's just wander around "doing stuff" and the GM is pretty much just a slave chained to the table to keep the books and let the players do weird stuff while enduring the repetitious cry's of "Aaaahhhh I'm being railroaded!!  Waahhhh!!!" every time the don't get their way..

 

Campaign Worlds where the game has an actual story for the PC's to to become immersed in.  A live world where things are happening.  The fun is the PC's reacting and making choices in the world. A major campaign arc can be about a secret slavers ring in the city.   What do the PC's do?  Try to shut it down?  Try to take over the ring?  Did discovering the ring place them in the crosshairs of the slavers? of Nobles? Of the City Watch?  Is the City Watch corrupt?  A first adventure could be the PC's witnessing a kidnapping.  How do the PC's react? 

 

Some campaigns are a bit more directed.  One of my favorite campaigns I played in was a horror game.  Our PC's were swept into a conspiracy where failure would mean our deaths.  One evil organization was blackmailing the PC's into performing "missions" for them. The primary arc was our PC's breaking free from the organization and staying alive.  It was awesome. 

 

In a great campaigns players will find their choices limited, otherwise there is no tension or drama.  That great rewarding feeling you get when your party manages to win against all odds doesn't come unless they had a hard time getting there.

 

A great campaign sets up the background.

The individual adventures outline major events.

But just when the event happens, if at all, and how the event is resolved is always going to dependent on the players. 

And if you run that same campaign multiple times, it will never play out the same.

 

I haven't seen an actual railroaded game in probably 30 years.  But I have heard endless wailing and gnashing of teeth about how someone felt they were railroaded because they did get X or Y. 

 

Campaigns are great and it is why there are so many being published for pretty much every system except Hero.

 

 

 

[mallet]

Something else that needs to be considered in premade Super Hero campaigns, and especially in premade Hero System Super Hero campaigns, is what powers to warn the GM to not allow. 

 

As we've all experienced (and seen in the threads here), two different characters, built with the same number of points, can be vastly different in effectiveness, not only in combat, but in their ability to bypass or overcome challenges. 

 

So if the campaign involves a lot of double crossing and deception a character that can Read Minds or Detect Lies is going to ruin a lot of the fun and surprises, or the GM will have to give every Bad Guy tons of mental defense, even if they wouldn't necessarily have it, just to keep the campaign going, but then that nerfs that one character's shtick. So it would be better to have a warning at the beginning of the campaign book, to not allow characters to have that kind of character or power(s) in the campaign, to prevent hard feelings or trouble later on. 

 

Same goes if there is a lot of robots and drones and a character builds a cybermancer or technomancer or other build that can control robots and technology. Or numerous other examples. 

 

There are so many possible power builds in Champions that could drastically effect the storyline of a premade adventure or campaign that it needs to highlighted and mentioned right from the get-go.  

 

Basically the campaign book needs a list of its own extra "Stop Sign" powers at the beginning, to let the GM know what powers and abilities might ruin or disrupt the campaign and then they can make their decisions and discuss with the players before they make characters. 

 

 

[Spence]

2 hours ago, mallet said:

Something else that needs to be considered in premade Super Hero campaigns, and especially in premade Hero System Super Hero campaigns, is what powers to warn the GM to not allow. 

 

As we've all experienced (and seen in the threads here), two different characters, built with the same number of points, can be vastly different in effectiveness, not only in combat, but in their ability to bypass or overcome challenges. 

 

So if the campaign involves a lot of double crossing and deception a character that can Read Minds or Detect Lies is going to ruin a lot of the fun and surprises, or the GM will have to give every Bad Guy tons of mental defense, even if they wouldn't necessarily have it, just to keep the campaign going, but then that nerfs that one character's shtick. So it would be better to have a warning at the beginning of the campaign book, to not allow characters to have that kind of character or power(s) in the campaign, to prevent hard feelings or trouble later on. 

 

Same goes if there is a lot of robots and drones and a character builds a cybermancer or technomancer or other build that can control robots and technology. Or numerous other examples. 

 

There are so many possible power builds in Champions that could drastically effect the storyline of a premade adventure or campaign that it needs to highlighted and mentioned right from the get-go.  

 

Basically the campaign book needs a list of its own extra "Stop Sign" powers at the beginning, to let the GM know what powers and abilities might ruin or disrupt the campaign and then they can make their decisions and discuss with the players before they make characters. 

 

 

 

I agree 100% with everything you posted here.  I also consider you points to be basic concepts of Role Playing Games 101.

 

But you have also exactly defined what munchkins and power gamers hate [read in a whinny crybaby voice] "Whaaa! You are railroading me! Wahaaaa! You are suppressing my player free agency! Whhhaaaaaa! It's not fair!!!!!"

 

By clearly defining campaign goals and expectations and establishing guidance that prevents campaign breaking abilities and ensures that all the PC's will have the ability to shine in the spotlight, you will have eliminated the power gamers/munchkins goal.  The take over and be the only important PC in the game. 

 

And before someone says it, a Min/Maxer is not a power gamer.  

An Min/Maxer is tinkerer that is trying for the best build they can within a system and can be literally any kind of gamer.

A power gamer is one of those people that have one purpose, to dominate the game and turn all other players into lackeys and to force the GM to let them do whatever they want. 

Power Gamers are the toxic minority that routinely get kicked out of peoples games.  They are "those people" that when they sit down at convention game table or a FLGS game night table, most of the veteran gamers suddenly remember a prior commitment and leave. 

But I am wandering off topic a bit.

 

As you mentioned, a good campaign needs to outline recommendations for rule changes that are needed for the campaign. 

Setting Info

Rules Guidance

Campaign Details

Specific Adventures (in order)

Appendices with NPC's, Handouts, etc.

 

 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Thanks for all the thoughts here, keep em coming.  We have plenty of talent and experience here, be nice if some people were to turn that into action producing content!