Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Doom]

I've been thinking about this one for awhile and I'll try to commit it to writing. Here goes!



Assume we're playing D&D 4th Edition over the Internet(IRC.)

Generally, everyone will meet once a week and play. You have a DM and an average of four players. These five people tend to be the same for the full duration, particularly the DM and most of the players. They start the campaign and play until it ends or they all lose interest and typically it is a self-contained world/story. Even if the setting is picked up again, it's usually a prequel/sequel/different part of the world with only casual mention of stuff that has happened.

Let's also dictate that for the sake of this idea, you have a larger pool of people than you have actual players. You could have say, 20 available players, but due to scheduling, interest and taste, only 4-6 at a time will participate.

Anyways



So the idea for my system is, let's assume that the character generation background is blindingly simple: you're hunters in a tribe of jungle-bound natives. You have the capability to learn technology and all that, but the most pressing concern is to go slay something to eat.

Starting from here, let's take myself as Doom(DM) on Monday Morning. I stomp into the IRC channel and shout LET'S DO A 4E ONE-SHOT IF YOU GOT 2-4 HOURS TO SPARE AND LOVE SOME PNP. I get Mook, Dope, Jerk and Assface to roll level one characters and they slay a dragon. The dragon's meat keeps the tribe alive for random-period-of-interest(generally whatever time passes without active play between DM and PCs until next session) and they get a perk, like crafting it's bones/claws into weapons. Mook, Dope, Jerk and Assface gen to level 2.

Wednesday Afternoon, Doom(DM) stomps into the IRC channel and shouts OK STOP CRYING 4E IS PRETTY GOOD LET'S GO ONE-SHOT I GOT TWO HOURS. Mook and Dope return with level 2 characters. Twitchy and Doritos join as level 1 characters. They hunt down a small pack of Blood Apes. Another meat-based benefit, the tribe is sustained further and maybe even saves a bit of food, to allow for a possibility of a later failed hunt or natural disaster. And Blood Apes are magical apes, so they skin them and you get some enchanted leather armor for 1-2 players that lets them grow a size catagory larger once per day. Neat. Twitchy and Doritos become Level 2, Mook and Dope get some experience but are still Level 2.

So, in Week 1, I have Groups 1 and 2, or 1-1 and 1-2. I have six players at Level 2, and the game is primarily episodic. I'll let all six of them know that they can perhaps enter in bids or interest for the assorted loot, so I might split four dragon-claw weapons and two blood-ape leather armors amongst the six. It's probably best here to provide more treasure than four people can take on average and assume some of it will not be desired and will be sold/disenchanted.

That's how we start.



So entering Week 2, I might continue entering IRC, announcing one-shot time, and taking new or returning players. If the returning players get to be high enough level, I let new players gen at higher levels (Level 3 to Level 4-5, Level 10 to level 12-13, etc.) so we don't end up with Level 9 and Level 1 splits.

It's also possible that I may not always DM! If the original DM provides a stable idea of the setting and general location with room to expand, he can even sub in as a PC if others want to DM or he feels the itch to switch! All that matters is keeping track of the Community Base(in this case, the Tribe's health, food stores, available treasure and possible technology gains and territory) and the individual PC characters(That the PC will gladly do himself.)

Buuuut the sum of this idea and it's benefits are:

A) It does not require a set, permanent group that gives up a set night a week. Although this is the traditional and "easiest" method, I've always hated that it can often be utterly destroyed by bad circumstance. Once a week games tend to die terrible deaths if Fate wills it. The DM's got a nasty headache this Friday, and then next Friday, Grandma's funeral. By the third Friday, half the players don't even show... ROOOBOOOOOT HOOOOOUSE!

B) It allows for one-shot, episodic gaming that may not necessarily have a direct, powerful over-arching plot, but gives everyone a bond that strengthens for their good fortune and that they work to defend and better. And even that can be the crux of the direct plot. The tribe encounters terrible foreigners and civilization! Maybe you begin hunting Men and their worn armor is today's addition to the loot pile... the consequences of which plot plot plot.

C) It allows gaming at any time, assuming that people are available when 1 DM + 3-5 players want to go. It provides easy enough access for flexible parties: higher levels and lower levels intermingle, the better hunters teaching the newer ones.. the hunters go together with who they have assembled, for the need to hunt exceeds the sometimes impractical balancing act of keeping the same PCs together for the entire campaign... and if you have enough players and DMs, you can even have simultaneous games going. Imagine if I go into the IRC channel and shout, and I get ten interested replies? Split into groups of five, two DMs, eight players... whenever both conclude, the treasure pool is twice as large! What progress!

As a community body, it just feels natural and makes sense that maybe people are subbed in and out and even multiple groups function. If it's not a tribe, imagine an army. One party (2-1) fortifies a pass against Goblin invaders as another separate party with separate DM(2-2) that same day go out scouting to find a magical item to help group 2-1. They're both fighting for their army/nation, but they can even intermingle later and it won't be weird. The item is found, the pass defended.. next week, you have group 3-1 made of members from both groups 2-1 and 2-2. They're all squad-mates at the same base. Natural.

D) There is room for long-term, once-a-week groups anyway! Assuming the player interest exists, there's no reason Doom can't DM for Mook, Jerk, Twitchy and Doritos every Monday at night if they all agree to it until they conclude or lose interest, while Doom or Twitchy DM one-shots on non-Mondays. The groups, as always, contribute to a shared loot pile and are expected to maintain respectable level gaps with-in their own boundaries.

For example: Doom's-Every-Monday-Night group should strictly stick to characters that are around 6-8 and progress from there. But if Doom one-shots with Mook, either Mook's level 8 character fits in with the newbies(Doom might ask the newbies to gen at level 7), or Mook rolls a new character(everybody wants to do a level 3 game, so Mook rolls a level 3 with everyone else.)

This is strictly optional, of course, since the system originally exists to eliminate the need for Every-Monday-Night campaigns.

So: It removes the need to adhere to a strict time, it allows for one-shot episodic games that tie together, and it even allows gaming at any time with any people available.

Presumably, the most important and only strictly necessary part is a home website with information on setting, available loot, trust-worthy DM and PC lists, and where to meet/hang out for the games. Post logs, post brief summaries of sessions, provide setting materials(maps, hand-outs, pictures, character bios, etc) in one easy to access site for all interested to catch up.



Everything should be out in the open, wrapped in trust, and actions should be noted officially. Group 3-3 (Week 3, 3rd One-Shot Group that week, 18th level) slayed Driknyth the Foul, a necrotic White Drake. Driknyth's treasure is added to the loot pool and barring a good excuse, he does not appear again. A good reason might be that a new group decides to do level 10 game where they kill Driknyth in life, leading to him becoming necrotic. That'd be a flashback/retcon.

But above all, everything is open and official! Whoever runs the site looks at the bids for items, can calmly and maturely talk to players in case of over-competitiveness for an item and resolve the issue, and post an official judgement, so everyone knows that Mook gets the +3 Dragonfang Sword. The site-runner makes a note(removes the +3 Dragonfang sword from the available loot pile), Mook updates his sheet and it might even be listed on the site, and a small note of Mook's bidding/loot history is made, so that Mook does not consistently take +4 and +5 Dragonfang swords from future kills from Jerk, who has had a +1 Dragonfang sword for a month. Canon is kept the same: perhaps at some point in time, an inarguable action occurs(Earthquake wracks tribal land on 10-13-FantasyYear.) Games after that must account for it, games before can't mention it. Sensible Canon!

AND SO ON! There'd need to be a structured blue-print for actually building the site, but I'm hardly that far yet.

... So, what do you guys think? I've been hosting a good 3e game every Friday for 4 months now, but I sometimes want to host a few more than one a week and to have room to try out new things. I was thinking of trying this out with my next 4e campaign.

[jsnlxndrlv]

Yeah, scheduling regularity is biggest obstacle between me and roleplaying with you guys. I just can't guarantee that I'm always going to be available at a set time. This arrangement would skirt that problem altogether. I'm interested in giving it a shot.

[JDigital]

I like the sound of this. Some questions:

Can one player join multiple DMs' games? With the same character?

What if you want to take a 1st-level character into a 9th-level game, then play another DM's 1st-level game the next day?

Can an adventure span multiple sessions, or is this forbidden?

[Doom]

For point of reference, newbie will refer to a player making a new character for a one-shot that is just starting.

Can one player join multiple DMs' games? With the same character?

Generally, yes. Obviously not simultaneously. but.

If Doom hosts a 2nd level game on Monday, Mook plays it as Mook-Fite the Fighter. On Wednesday, he plays in Jerk's 3rd Level game. Maybe Mook-Fite got to level 3 at the end of Doom's game. Maybe he joins the newbies starting at level 3 as a 2nd level guy looking to benefit from the experience of the other hunters.

What if you want to take a 1st-level character into a 9th-level game, then play another DM's 1st-level game the next day?

Probably not going to work. It will fuck with the setting at large and time-line canon if you have separate character sheets for Mook-Fite Level 1 and Mook-Fite Level 9. At best you can logically retcon within reason as in the example I gave.

It's generally taboo in rolling new characters to just slap a "II" on the end of their name and keep going to begin with.

Rereading that.. if you start with a 9th level character for the first 9th level game, and the second 1st level game is a flashback, and from there-on you play the 9th level character as 9th level in the present.. it'd WORK, but I think overall flashbacks/retcons should be exceptions rather than expected. Just typing that sentence made my DM fist clench and my teeth grind.

Can an adventure span multiple sessions, or is this forbidden?

I included an allowance for that. It's not forbidden, but it probably requires the same DM and at least half of the same players, otherwise you have a rotating cast that didn't get set-up/dramatic tension and it's overall a wasted effort. An adventure spanning multiple sessions would be the same as a "permanent" group running until their campaign ended, so long as everyone agrees on the time and can honor it with a majority of commitment. I guess the only real difference is a permanent group wants to claim a set date EVERY week and you're wondering if say, Jerk(DM) and Doom, Mook and Assface can try to bump into each other next week at whatever time they can. Assuming they don't end up waiting for that "random" bumping into forever..

If a one-shot goes too long, it may be reasonable to schedule something with the same people. It may also be best to simply cut it loose. "You return to camp for the night, the trail of the spotted basilisk eluding you." That way, it makes sense for you to give it another try or for others to have a crack at it, as word of such elusive prey spreads throughout the tribe. Your mileage may vary.

tl;dr: Characters should not, with rare exception, bounce back and forth in time and levels. Make new characters. Everything else is up to DM judgement and scheduling reasonably.

[Burrito Al Pastor]

A tiny, self-contained, ad-hoc RPGA. I like it.

I think the tribal context could be limiting, though - a different meta-setting would be more robust. I think Eberron would work well, since its a setting in which it's expected that PCs can go anywhere on the planet in a 24 hour period with the right resources - like a sponsoring organization they're all contractors for.

Of course, I think everything would work better in Eberron.

[Doom]

The tribe is an example, though naturally my next 4e campaign is inspired by Monster Hunter so it blossomed from there. I edited it in later, but you could just as easily adapt to any community setting.

Army, mercenary outfit, nobles court running a nation, a gang of school-yard kids fighting the snotty little hob-goblins who're taking over the school, etc. The Community provides a backdrop to the larger pool of players that you draw parties from 4-6 at a time.

This also comes back to what JD was asking: A player wants to keep his same character. He can, where warranted and it makes sense. The system ultimately asks PCs and DM to be mature enough to not fuck up the Canon because ultimately, success for the Community will benefit their existing and future characters almost as well as if they leveled them up in a direct session. This also benefits people who pop in and out once a month to enjoy a one-shot.

I was thinking, what if you do it in reverse? What if Mook-Ranger is level 2, and then somebody announces Time For A Level 9 One-Shot? Can Mook-Ranger be leveled to 9? It's hard to say. On one hand, Mook wants to see what Mook-Ranger can do and he feels he's up for some mid-level antics and that the starter stuff is beneath him for now. On the other hand, it'll be a giant pain in the ass and a suspension of disbelief for him to stat Mook-Ranger-LvL2 and Mook-Ranger-LvL9. The sudden power gain makes no sense in the life-span of Mook-Ranger and we want to avoid "In The Future" games, since it's tough enough to even provide the occasional "Flashback." I'd honestly recommend he just roll a new 9th level character. Maybe a new build of ranger, but hopefully not Mook-Ranger-LvL9-The-2nd.

[Doom]

Ultimately, you should just roll new characters if the level gap is big enough to cause an issue. Bouncing through time is feasible but creates problems and is irritating and should be done after much agreement, same as if you wanted to play Tricky-Monster-With-ECL-Race.

The system works smoothest as episodic, start to finish. Rather than making an overall arc at random, picking pieces together regardless of time.

If you guys want to test this and run a 4e one-shot I can start building from.. I'll begin chargen/setting basics and burst into #finalfight and maybe #suptg and shout someday during this week. We'll see what happens from there.

[Burrito Al Pastor]

Making high-level 4e characters is a hell of a lot easier than high-level 3e characters ever was, so that also supports "just try something new".

The "ensemble cast" is also good because sometimes people just get tired of their old character, and this gives them the liberty to just try something new without killing off their old character.

[Frocto]

I'm the kind of person who would make anyone who joined gen a level 1 and work for their levels.

Otherwise, I like it quite a bit.

[Burrito Al Pastor]

Then you're the kind of person who wouldn't be running this kind of thing in 4e. Level discrepancies are a huge issue - two levels can quite literally make the difference between an impossible and challenging enemy.

[JDigital]

How about this: If you're too high level, you can make a new character who isn't. XP gained by any character goes to all of them. That way you can play in a low-level game and still gain XP to your main.

Scale the XP, so that one full level at L3 is worth one full level at L10.

[Büge]

This sounds neat.

[Doom]

Then you're the kind of person who wouldn't be running this kind of thing in 4e. Level discrepancies are a huge issue - two levels can quite literally make the difference between an impossible and challenging enemy.

Easily fudgeable by any DM worth the flimsy cardboard screen he is using to hide his rolls.

How about this: If you're too high level, you can make a new character who isn't. XP gained by any character goes to all of them. That way you can play in a low-level game and still gain XP to your main.

Scale the XP, so that one full level at L3 is worth one full level at L10.

Good idea, though I don't know about the scaling directly. Ultimately boils down to DM Judgement, as per usual in this system. If you catch somebody trying to slip into a bunch of one-shots and pad his "main" out to level 21 real fast, then you'll have to stat out a proper level 21 adventure and any newbies joining with him would roll at level 21. Etc, Etc, Etc. Just a thought, I don't think it'd be a real issue with sensible players.

I'm the kind of person who would make anyone who joined gen a level 1 and work for their levels.

Otherwise, I like it quite a bit.

So you can be trusted to run introductory adventures that might roll over into once-a-weeks. To each his own. If there's no demand for a lowbie game or your players can't meet the schedule, your early efforts will contribute to the tribe but I guess you'll be out in the cold as a DM for awhile.

Making high-level 4e characters is a hell of a lot easier than high-level 3e characters ever was, so that also supports "just try something new".

The "ensemble cast" is also good because sometimes people just get tired of their old character, and this gives them the liberty to just try something new without killing off their old character.

Yeah, I really like the idea that I can start as Doom-Warden, level with dedication and fervor whenever the games are up to like, level 5, and then just hop into a level 7 game or even just gen a new level 7 character if Warden is looking long in the tooth.



Gonna make a few one-shots to test this. It ultimately lives or dies on the back of a DM's creative force to generate episodic adventures. So multiple DMs allowed by the system is a God-send.

[JDigital]

Just encountered rules in Dungeon Master's Guide 2 for quickly scaling a PC up or down. Add or subtract level to attacks and half level to damage, and give or remove hit points for level. XP doesn't scale, so low-level characters in a high level game will catch up quickly and high-level characters in a low level game will level slowly.