This post is the next in a short series inspired by a conversation between myself and @zakludick. It related to setting up a narrative campaign for a wargame.
I originally started out just writing this as a single post, but once I started writing down the headings for all the different topics, I rapidly realised that it needed a short series to do justice to the concept.
In the series, I'm not going to write up a set of fixed "rules" for setting up a narrative campaign. Rather, I'm going to highlight a number of topics which can be discussed with your friends as you set one up. There are no "right answers", it's just a case of thinking about what your game to be like, and creating a structure which is fun to play and minimises the inevitable differences of opinion.
Image created by AI in NightCafe Studio
What Kind of Campaign Do You Want ?
The first stage of planning is definitely to get all the potential players together and agree what kind of campaign you want to play.
Chances are the idea is coming from one person, which will probably pre-determine things like the genre and scale of the game. A medieval or fantasy campaign fought within the confines of a single province will look and feel very different to a space-based sci-fi campaign spanning whole galaxies.
Things to ask your players include;
- How long do they want the campaign to run for ?
- Do they want the players to be grouped into a fixed number of factions (e.g. four factions with three players in each), or are the players working independently (with all the diplomatic permutations that can create) ?
- How much time do they have available, how long for, and how predictable ?
- If model armies are being used, who is providing them, and how much preparation time will be needed ?
- Are they interested in playing to create a memorable storyline, or is it all about achieving fixed victory conditions ?
- What kind of balance do the players want between military, economic and political ?
- On the political side, is each player representing "the government" or whatever their faction stands for in an abstract sense, or will there be characters in a roleplaying sense to represent the individual diplomats, kings, emperors or whatever ?
- Who wants to do what to help run the game ? Normally, one person is the "lead" but it can help spread the workload and increase layer buy-in if jobs are delegated out; collecting and processing orders, writing up newsletters, distributing information etc.
Open Or Closed ?
Once you know who your players are and what kind of campaign they're looking for, it's time to decide on the format.
Closed Campaigns
A closed campaign is more common, where the game lasts a finite number of turns, a finite duration in real time (often along the lines of "it's an all-weekend game"), or until one side or another meets specific victory conditions.
Victory conditions don't have to be the same for each faction. For example in a medieval "Robin Hood" game, the sheriff might win if he can capture or kill the leadership of the outlaws, while the outlaws have to survive a fixed number of turns until King Richard reappears from captivity.
Open Campaigns
An open ended campaign is generally far more story driven and less competitive. Think of it as writing a collaborative "alternative history", where the ending isn't pre-determined. Players are playing for the story rather than for absolute victory.
Generally, open ended campaigns tend to have a stronger focus on economic and diplomatic aspects, and they'll often include setting up a timescale.
In one space campaign I was involved in, the starting point for setting the timescale was how long we thought it would take a colony world to build a space cruiser. Of course, it's a total guess, but we decided two years. We then looked at how fast we wanted depleted fleets to be rebuilt, and from that worked out that each real world day was 2 game years.
Closed To Open Campaigns
An intermediate option is what I call "closed to open campaigns". This is where a closed campaign proves enjoyable enough that some or all of the players decide they want to keep it going.
This will almost inevitably need a bit of discussion and agreement. Which players are going to carry on with it and what happens to the assets and territories controlled by any players who drop out at that point ? What additional rules need to be agreed ? If it's a continuing storyline, what needs to be added to the story that makes the "final victory" of the closed campaign less final ?
Almost all of the open campaigns I've been involved with started this way. Effectively, the initial campaign fills the same role as a pilot of a TV series; it tests the concept out to decide if it's good enough to carry on with.
But in a few cases, it's gone the other way. I'm a keen Dungeons & Dragons player, and D&D is effectively the ultimate open narrative campaign. But the emphasis is almost totally on the characters, and things like economics, politics and warfare are just extra elements that add a bit of background flavour to the adventures.
Sometimes, however, the military aspect becomes interesting enough that players want to explore it in more depth. It can lead to a political-military narrative campaign born out of that which explores the more geo-political aspects of the game world.
The key thing with all of this is to listen to the players, find out what they enjoy, and try to build around that. Most especially, be prepared for some surprises when you actually start to talk to people one-to-one to get these answers outside the group setting !
Next Post: Preparing Your Campaign