"Campaigns and fortune telling" Topic

I am just embarking on a new 6mm sci-fi project.
I have the rules and almost have enough toys ready to play a few games.

I have done some very brief background around the major 2 forces that will be used so that I can understand their motives and reasons for conflict.
I have done a bit of background / fluff on the planet on which most of the battles will be fought.

What I have also done is written a brief story arc and decided how the future of the next year or so will look like.
I have not written the outcome of the story as that I want to achieve through game play.

How much story writing and emphasis on a story arc do you do when gaming.

Do you just have a series of battles with no single battle affecting the overall story?

Is there a story at all or is it just one off battles that have no bearing on the worlds future?

Is each game like a chapter in a book and drives the story forward to a pre-planned end?

Something else?

Michael.

How does a "story arc" differ from a plot?

All the best,

John.

These days my campaigning is more about the story than the games. In my Hyborian campaign I have resurrected the Nemedian Chronicles as a means of narrating the events and I find that the developing reasons for war and the results of it are more fascinating to re-read than the batreps.

Of course a lot depends on how much of a writer you are. I fancy myself as being a cross between Ernest Hemingway and Leo Tolstoy so naturally I write far more than I should and spend too long pondering over some small and insignificant incident.

Going back to answering the actual question, for me each campaign is a sub-section of the whole 'book' as it were, and I break this section down as necessary, but I start with the premise of the campaign itself and go from there.

How does a "story arc" differ from a plot?

Not sure it does.

Do you have casualties carry over from game to game?

How does a "story arc" differ from a plot?

All the best,

John.

'Plot' is so 20th century.

I am a gamer (and a frustrated museum curator) so the game outcome affects the story. Also I like the suspense of not knowing the ending, so I prefer solo games like my upcoming Liftoff game. Otherwise, I am pretty much in agreement with JJ on this one.

How does a "story arc" differ from a plot?

John,
A story arc usually relates to an episodic format and binds the stories together but you don't have to know the story arc to enjoy or understand the individual episodes – more Friends than Dickens though. The development of the Rachel Ross relationship but not the detailed working out of their eventual union.
The plot is the basic structure and detailed working out of events that lead to that denouement – there is a plot to each episode and an overall plot that links the episodes together.

Story arc should probably be transparent to the viewer/reader/gamer, the plot better not be or else the writers have got it wrong.

So for those of you who play campaigns, what happens at the end of a battle when one side (assuming two players involved) is completely wiped out? Does he just drum up another force for the next battle? Or is one side determined by the "story arc" and one player simply controls those characters, kind of like a Dungeon Master?

I've created a simple game for my son and me that kind of blends SBH and LOTR…it's designed for quick skirmishes with the intent of doing campaigns, but I'm not sure how to carry over from battle to battle…

I am debating this.

This would not work for my games but how about at the end of each battle the winner gets 1 point.

You can upgrade a unit from its starting grade (normal, elite, veteran etc) for 1 point.
If it has been upgraded once then double the points needed, if upgraded twice then quadruple the points.

For Example:

normal to the next grade = 1 point
the next grade to the one above = 2 points
next one still = 4 points

This will require 7 wins to upgrade this single unit.

Just a rough idea.
Maybe also all raw/green units automatically upgrade to the normal grade after one battle?

Upgrades work with it. We're using his 90mm knights…basically, I took the main statistics that LOTR uses for it's fighters and gave each warband 100 points to create the statistics for it's members. So you have to spread 100 points to create the strength, defense, attacks, wounds, fate, and any shoot values for your warband. In other words, a fighter with values of 4, 4, 2, 2, and shoot value of 4 would use up 16 of your points.

Like your suggestion, my idea for the survivors of each battle is that each fighter receives an additional 2 points to assign anyway they choose…whether they restore wounds they suffered, add strength or defense, or increase their shoot value.

But what about the side that suffered the defeat, assuming there were no survivors? What do you do for an enemy now? I'm guessing the best idea is that a predetermined "story arc" designates new foes for the next encounter…

So for those of you who play campaigns, what happens at the end of a battle when one side (assuming two players involved) is completely wiped out?

I've never had a major army wiped out in a campaign – plenty of smaller delaying forces and such like have disintegrated after heavy losses but I wouldn't use the sort of rules that allowed fighting to the death. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just how I want my gaming to be.

However, if it did happen it would only be a case of taking one force off the map. My campaigns are pretty detailed and unless it was a state with just the one army (in which case they would most likely then surrender) then other formations would have to react accordingly to the defeat.

I'm guessing though that this isn't the approach you are coming from, so sorry if I'm not a great deal of help on that.

Old Bear, I think our version of a "campaign" is a little different. My use of the term means that a small warband (6-10 guys) goes through a series of adventures or encounters…sort of D&D style.
I can definitely see how yours works if you're dealing with larger forces, but mine would be much smaller forces facing off…
I think the answer is that you basically have to have predetermined encounters with someone controlling the "baddies"…either that, or have a mechanism in place that allows the mustering of new troops to reinforce a warband that may have chosen to flee at some point…

Ah, sorry, my bad. Taking your style then I too would very much go down the RPG line. For a Total party Wipeout I'd be tempted to fudge a lone survivor for continuity purposes, even if they were then made a prisoner and a new party was formed to recover them. Does that make sense? I think I know what I mean!

Have you tried out the Mythic GM Emulator? It's very in vogue for creating storylines and other side issues which can give your campaign added depth. I use it a lot now and it's very handy.

The prisoner aspect is a fun idea! We'll have to try that.

What is the Mythic GM Emulator? Never heard of it…sounds interesting enough…

I was going to take a crack at describing the GME but JJ has done a way better job than I would have anyway, so I'll do no more than say that it can be a really useful aid to all sorts of styles of gaming.

Sounds like a great tool..thanks, JJ, for taking the time to describe it for me. Now…where do I acquire such a thing? Is this a free PDF, or is this a book, or what?

You can get it here. Only $7 USD which I think is very good value. link

Thanks for the info and the link, all.

Here is a list that may supplement the Game Master Emulator. link