Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tyraxus 12-11-06, 03:27 AM	I'm gonna be building my first campaign starting this Christmas break, and I need some advice. I want it to be a heroic "Save the world" type story, but shot through with elements of horror and dark fiction/fantasy. The main event around which the world will revolve is the invasion of the world by an evil army (possibly from the Nine Hells themselves), and the PCs will be dealing with the opening shots of the war (the invasion will starting in the middle of the orcish kingdom, so orc refugees will start flowing across the dwarven borders, which will be seen as a kind of invasion by the Dwarf Lords, who will hire the PCs to stop the invasion; this offers a good chance for a healty dose of Guilty Conscience early on, as if the PCs slaughter the orcs, they'll find out later that they're the older noncombatant orcs who were pressed into service to guard the women and children that are on the run from the Evil). I then want them to get hired by the Dwarves to escort their own women and children to human and elven lands, and from there they will get a few side adventures and then hired as a strike force by the elven general. They'll go on some military-style missions (scout the enemy's position, disrupt their supply lines, take a couple of strategically important points, bolstering the line against a charge, etc.). They'll be offered several different ways to accomplish each mission, and even opportunities to break off the mission to do other stuff, but they'll be dressed down for failing to follow orders. Something will usually go wrong with the mission, something that affects the army, and after several of these, the PCs will be asked to escort a Dwarf Lord to the camp, and they'll find him dead among a burned out wagon. If they follow the trail to the creatures responsible, they'll be hunted down and brought back in chains for murder and high treason, and if they bring the dwarf's body back they'll be charged with negligence, dereliction, and treason. If, somehow, they get to the dwarf before he's killed, they stand a good chance of being accused of collusion with the enemy or being framed for something else. Either way, they'll have to break out, and then they'll be on their own to stop the evil (or not) as they so desire. Sound like a good concept? What do I need to pull it off? I've got Heroes of Battle and Heroes of Horror. What other sources would be good for this kind of campaign? How powerful can I let the characters be, and how do I not let that power turn into powergaming (as myself and two others of our group are hardcore powergamers but the rest aren't, so it'd be a power imbalance)? And most importantly of all... how do I pull the plotline off without railroading, or at least overtly railroading? I've got a fluid enough timeline and battle-line to let the PCs affect the war a bit (if they disrupt the supplies and take the hill, they have helped force the enemy withdraw several miles), but not enough that they can just go off and adventure for a game year and expect the evil army to just wait on them. And how do I deal with magic? I'm not confident enough with the magic system to predict (and therefore prepare for) everything the casters in the group could do, but I don't want to make it a low- or no-magic campaign. Perhaps banning certain spells, but which ones? Anyway, thanks in advance for all the help.
CharlieRock 12-11-06, 08:53 AM	:bump: (still thinking, havn't had enough coffee)
JasonOrlandoHawk 12-11-06, 10:40 AM	I would pause the Campaign building briefly, if I was you. Why? You've definately got good material so far. However, you have one major weakness: You have no idea how your PC's will interact with the world. You don't know who they are. You don't know their personalities. Take a break from Campaign building and talk to your players. They don't have to roll up characters, but you can talk character ideas. Tell them the basic campaign idea (Large Battles, Save the World) w/o giving away any details. See what kind of characters they want to play. Discuss background, team dynamics, adventuring style, etc... The most important question you can ask them is "What would you like to do at some point in this campaign?" Then, after you know their characters (in general), write them into the story partially. If one character is a Healer, make him a Healer for one of the major armies. If the player wants to fight the Tarrasque, then hint that the armies of darkness are trying to unleash a powerful monster that would decimate the country side. Build it up for about 7 levels, and unleash. It's not railroading if you take the time to write in the very things your characters want to do. After these things are in place, continue the campaign building. Keep up the good work.
Matthew77 12-11-06, 10:53 AM	Sounds like a great start. I really like the idea of the Orcs being refugees instead of part of the invading army. Two bits of advice: Spend your time laying out the world and considering what the NPCs and Armies are doing. Don't plan specific events more than a session or two ahead of time. The players might easily do something that makes your scripted event seem contrived. Second, many players (myself included) would frown upon any campaign setup that includes "okay, so you work for this army and they dress you down for not following orders." Most players will instinctively chafe at "following orders" and will view it as a warning sign of railroading. I would suggest instead that the PCs be viewed as independent freelancers that get hired for missions that are too risky to be assigned to regualar soldiers. Maybe one of the Generals says "we need this done, and we don't care how you do it, but if you get caught we'll deny we ever knew you." That would make most players happier than having to enlist in the regular army.
Tyraxus 12-11-06, 12:58 PM	I would suggest instead that the PCs be viewed as independent freelancers that get hired for missions that are too risky to be assigned to regualar soldiers. Maybe one of the Generals says "we need this done, and we don't care how you do it, but if you get caught we'll deny we ever knew you." That would make most players happier than having to enlist in the regular army. That's what I had in mind, but if they get hired on to disrupt supplies and they decide to go chase a troll, or they get hired to strike at the enemy commanders and they decide it's not worth it and go raiding the camp, then the friendly army is in a pinch because the generals were planning and depending on them doing whatever in the context of the overall strategy. If that supply train had better weapons for the frontline troops, or that hill was gonna be where they placed their trebuchets, there's no reason the generals wouldn't be ticked and every reason why they should. Of course, it goes both ways: if they're assigned an escort, and break off to disrupt an enemy charge or advancement, then they'll be heroes (as long as the person they're escorting gets to the camp safely, of course). I've already talked to a couple of the players: one wants to either play a necromancer that sees the war as his ticket to raising an army of his own or a healer that gets corrupted by death and becomes a necromancer, one wants to be a sneaky sneaky fighter, one wants to be the charismatic fighter (we're playing a pirate campaign right now and he basically made Captain Jack Sparrow). I haven't talked to the rest, but I can do so. We wouldn't be playing this campaign until next spring, though, so I don't want to lock them into a character concept this far before the game. Is there any good way to be able to adapt on the fly to things like backstory and such? Thanks for the help guys, this is precisely what I need!
Zycko 12-11-06, 03:20 PM	First of all, I can't give much advice towards the books you should use, I don't use a lot myself. But I can also say that you don't have to use a lot of books, you can create whatever stuff you need yourself and it will lower the complexity, since you will have less books to roam through (but also limit your choices - and books can have great ideas). Regarding pulling off the plotline: I've read.. uhm, somewhere, that if you are planning specific events for your world (and players) you should not choose both time and location, but only one. If you for instance want your players to be captured and do a jailbreak type of session(s), just wait - it will happen in time. Attacking with an overwhelming force or bending rules to get the desired result can/will be seen as railroading, as you mentioned you want to avoid. If you, on the other hand, want a specific city attacked by vampires, then just wait - the players will arrive there eventually (perhaps with a small nudge in the right direction from you, but no railroading). If they want to go adventure unrelated to your plot, you should let them - but not helping the forces of "good" (or at least the ones defending the world) might result in people they care about becoming threatened or killed. Also, it might hinder their adventuring in some way so that they *want* to get rid of the threat (the item they need to retrieve is now far behind enemy lines). Regarding spells and level, if you - like me - are unsure if you can handle the many options casters get at higher level, I would suggest you choose a low level for the players to start at. That might also help make the difference between the powergaming and the nonpowergaming players less (also, since you are one of the powergamers you can try and help the nonpowergamers flesh out their characters). And as always, limiting the amount of books they can use helps too. Are your players going to be evil? You said you might have a player being/becoming a necromancer. I am asking since I find evil characters to be a bit more chaotic (hehe) and harder to control - so you might have a problem with your players trying to strike a deal with the evil army. I think that was all. Good luck :)
Tyraxus 12-11-06, 03:44 PM	Time or place, but not both... okay. I was planning on having the war drag on for a while, but the evil army definitely making progress, and taking/razing cities as they go. If the PCs are there, hey, they get a chance to either defend or escape. If they're not, well... let's just say that the town militia isn't going to be very effective against hordes of devils/demons and undead. I like the idea of them wanting/needing to retrieve an item behind enemy lines. As far as alignment, I was going to take a look at HoH's Taint Replacing Alignment rules and see if that would make sense. Alternatively, I could eliminate the alignment restrictions on most classes and play using the behavioural alignment variant. Paladins and clerics would still be alignment-dependant, but I don't see any reason that you'd have to be inherantly evil in order to study death and necromancy. After all, IIRC medical science is advanced by such study, and I don't think anyone would consider the doctors at Johns Hopkins or the researchers at UT-Knoxville's Body Farm to be the epitome of evil.
Zycko 12-11-06, 03:53 PM	I just noticed you said he would raise an army for himself, and using necromancy - that would be an evil deed (according to the RAW at least). The problem with having lowlevel characters is that they can't do as much, on the other hand, when an army attacks. They can still be valuable, but they might not be high enough level to assasinate generals, or just stand in the way of the entire army.
pres_man 12-11-06, 03:54 PM	I would definitely suggest getting away from thinking "First the PCs will ... then they will ... after that they will ..." That kind of thinking is bound to get you and the players into a corner that it is hard to get out of. Instead, start thinking about what is going to happen in the world (assuming no PC intervention) then go from there.
Tyraxus 12-11-06, 08:15 PM	So how do you build a central plot or story if there's no linearity at all? Should I even have a plot? Mind, I'm not trying to set them in a specific course of action every time, but I want to have a loose plotline that they follow (hired by dwarves, hired by the army, do several missions, get cut off from the army some way, and then make their way in a war-torn land where they have to decide between helping the native army, helping the evil, or saying "screw both, we're gonna be out for ourselves"). I can improv from the point where they're cut off, as at that point there's really no plot but just a generic "save the world" thing.
mlasater 12-11-06, 09:13 PM	As far as plotting. Figure out what will happen if nothing changes - i.e. the PCs have no effect. This is your base plotline (this will also give you an idea of where the campaign will go if the PCs decide to wander off). Figure out (design) some key points where events can be altered - for good or ill & what kind of effect(s) is possible. Add the PCs. Get them involved in the events, have them meet NPCs and such. Have the PCs find clues to the events which are happening. The PCs can then choose to help, hinder, or stay neutral to the events happening around them. The important thing is, since you have a baseline set of events independent of the PCs, you as DM can keep the overall plot going, even if the PCs do nothing at all. Have more than one plot line (series of events) occuring in the campaign world/setting. This will add depth (& options) to the setting. It can also put the PCs in the position of having to make choices - to they help stop the evil invasion or keep the king from being deposed. I have always found the campaign settings with one major story arc & everything involves that are less interesting & too easily lead to the feeling of being railroaded. Afterall, if these are the only things happening, the the players feel like they have no options for their characters. Realize that 90% of your backstory will be ignored or never found out by the PCs.
pres_man 12-11-06, 10:47 PM	The important thing is, since you have a baseline set of events independent of the PCs, you as DM can keep the overall plot going, even if the PCs do nothing at all. Have more than one plot line (series of events) occuring in the campaign world/setting. This will add depth (& options) to the setting. It can also put the PCs in the position of having to make choices - to they help stop the evil invasion or keep the king from being deposed. I have always found the campaign settings with one major story arc & everything involves that are less interesting & too easily lead to the feeling of being railroaded. Afterall, if these are the only things happening, the the players feel like they have no options for their characters. Yeah, I would say have a plot line going with an idea of where it MAY go without player involvement, but be ready at anytime to shift it when the PCs begin to interact. It may be a small shift if they make a small impact or a major one, but they should usually have some impact as long as they try to.
CharlieRock 12-12-06, 12:20 AM	So how do you build a central plot or story if there's no linearity at all? Should I even have a plot? Mind, I'm not trying to set them in a specific course of action every time, but I want to have a loose plotline that they follow (hired by dwarves, hired by the army, do several missions, get cut off from the army some way, and then make their way in a war-torn land where they have to decide between helping the native army, helping the evil, or saying "screw both, we're gonna be out for ourselves"). I can improv from the point where they're cut off, as at that point there's really no plot but just a generic "save the world" thing. That sounds good. As a DM, I don't generally make a 'central' plot. I make plots, mind you (boatloads of them, too many to actually get to play out). Each plot has a 'suspended' moment that it is 'currently' in. Currently = whatever time the PCs explore the opening element. Your plot's suspended point is right when the dwarves decided they needed a spec ops team for a mission. When the PCs open into this element it will 'activate' the rest of the storyline. Ever seem to notice conflicts don't usually get resolved without the heroes presense? "Well, the princess was captured about a few years ago. No one came to rescue her. The King died of old age. Since there were no heirs with the princess gone for so many years, we elected a Republic government. Now, as elected officials, we can't offer any reward for rescuing a Royal heir. Sorry" The PCs may run from their destiny. That could be a central plot for the campaign right there (like A-Team or Farscape, running away after every adventure). Edit: That's actually my personal favorite campaign style. Being 'cut off' from their employing army may be of PC design. Do a few missions, get tired of taking orders. Drop the line of communication. They're cut off. :D (still have to make their own way across the war-torn land ;))
Tyraxus 12-13-06, 01:19 AM	Have more than one plot line (series of events) occuring in the campaign world/setting. This will add depth (& options) to the setting. It can also put the PCs in the position of having to make choices - to they help stop the evil invasion or keep the king from being deposed. I like it. If I'm good enough, I can even tie some of them into the main plot (invasion of the world) in a roundabout kind of way; for example, a group of human dukes sees the chaos and takes the opportunity to expand their lands at each others' expense (or even at the elves' expense!), an elven prince could aspire to lordship by kidnapping family members of the Elven Council, a group of militant druids could use the evil invading through dwarven lands as an excuse to demolish dwarven towns and mines... Everything that would happen as different groups try to take advantage of the chaos of a world at war. Plus your standard "My son was kidnapped by orcs, please save him!" quests thrown in for good measure. Yeah, I would say have a plot line going with an idea of where it MAY go without player involvement, but be ready at anytime to shift it when the PCs begin to interact. It may be a small shift if they make a small impact or a major one, but they should usually have some impact as long as they try to. They'll have to have an impact, all right, since if they don't stand against the invaders, all life will either be extinguished or enslaved... including them. But I see what you mean. Being 'cut off' from their employing army may be of PC design. Do a few missions, get tired of taking orders. Drop the line of communication. They're cut off. :D (still have to make their own way across the war-torn land ;) ) That'd actually probably be best for them, as the plan for random encounters is to weight it in favour of bounty hunters, paladins, and justicars if they wind up fleeing the army after being accused of treason. They could probably stay and clear their names, but I doubt anyone will think to take ranks in Knowledge: Law or Profession: Lawyer so they can fight the charges. So I take it everybody thinks this is a decent idea for a campaign? Would this be a world you guys would like to play in? Thanks a million for all the responses, guys, you have no idea just how much you're helping.
CharlieRock 12-13-06, 04:38 AM	Sounds fun. :) You could also play it 'Viva la resistanse' style. The 'cut-off' came while the team was incommunicado for a bit (patrol, dungeon, E&Eing ,whatever). The sid ethe PCs fought for had surrendered and ceded the territory en masse. Followed by graphic exploitation of the land (and the people, mainly them really). This kinda reinforces in the players mind that they were the good guys (or at least a lesser evil). The team can then E&E back to safer lands, or lead rebellion against the victorious ,evil hordes. Or a combo of both.
pres_man 12-13-06, 11:17 AM	That'd actually probably be best for them, as the plan for random encounters is to weight it in favour of bounty hunters, paladins, and justicars if they wind up fleeing the army after being accused of treason. The only thing I would say about this is leave the paladins out. If there are world shaking events going on, the paladins should be more concerned with that then some deserters. Bounty hunters on the other hand might be reasonable, "Let the paladins save the world, I'll get paid."