PDA

View Full Version : User generated campaigns



The Song of Spears
07-12-2007, 22:49
I always found it fun to read through others battle reports of the these games they played where they played through a series of games that had several outcomes based on who won, all played to a narrative/campaign scenario.

So i was thinking, maybe with the collective help of warseers, we could gather our resources to have some campaigns/narrative game series up here for everyones use.

Without going into all the fluff and story that will be associated with it, here is the basic premise:

List of who is Involved: this means the armies/races who can participate, what units they have access to and all named personalties(HQs) involved.

Beginning of Scenario: List of the first battle, what each side can use and the rules for the fight. Based on who wins you can go to a separate scenario (A or B) or there is only one scenario up next not matter who wins, but the resources/abilities or such is altered for the winner and/or looser.

Continue on with these scenarios progressing through a story to a final game where the campaign is resolved in one final battle.

Units lost in combat are noted and may not be available after each battle, or maybe they are simply not available at full strength, or maybe they just need a battle or two to sit out for repairs.

Each section is prefaced with a narrative for the battle outlining the possible results should either side win.

All of this should add up to a single Campaign Scenario packet for all to use.

I will try to have my own version up on this here soon, and i hope there are others who can contribute as well. :)

Cheers!

p.s.
Any other ideas along these lines are welcome as well!

Easy E
08-12-2007, 10:47
Good idea, I am going to give it a try.

jubilex
08-12-2007, 12:13
[QUOTE=The Song of Spears;2163059]Continue on with these scenarios progressing through a story to a final game where the campaign is resolved in one final battle.
[/e QUOTE]
I used this sort of idea in my war generator.
It starts with -
Who started the war? Ie, what the attacker wanted to achieve.
What was the response of the defender?

When both are known, you have a set battle at the end.
Whoever is the agressor at the start fights a battle appropriate to their army type.
Whoever is winning at the end of "x" battles, fights their endgame.

Easy E
08-12-2007, 12:18
Here is something I leterally threw together since my first post in this thread. Let me know what you guys think. I tried to make it fairly generic, so there is plenty of opportunity for players to add in any details they want.

jubilex
08-12-2007, 12:43
Nice work Easy!
I think you are right in forming it around a smaller group of armies. A sort of one campaign fits all approach. It is flexible enough to swap armies at any point too, within reason.

One thing though, in the first game, you might want to deny chaos any vehicles.
Imagine a battle cannon round or two in a small deployment zone!

Sister_Sin
08-12-2007, 13:07
We did this over the course of a year's play a while back...starting with a planetfall by the World Eaters and progressing from there. Each mini lost was rolled for after the game to see if it was dead or just wounded and if wounded, when it might return to battle. A fixed number of units was available to each force so having to conserve troops was part of the mix. We had a Referee set each table, check hidden deployments and so on.

It was a hell of a lot of fun. Cleansing of Memnon VI it was called.

Now we're working towards similarly themed things on an Apocalypse scale. O-o

Sister Sin

Easy E
08-12-2007, 13:11
A fixed number of units was available to each force so having to conserve troops was part of the mix. We had a Referee set each table, check hidden deployments and so on.

Sister Sin

I'm would be curious to know if this was an all MEQ campaign, and if not how did the more horde based armies do?

Sister_Sin
08-12-2007, 13:23
I'm would be curious to know if this was an all MEQ campaign, and if not how did the more horde based armies do?

The armies involved at the time were Dark Eldar, Eldar, White Scars, Howling Griffons, World Eaters & Black Legion, Tyranids, Tau, and Orks.

Interestingly, it was the Space Marines that tended to over-commit their resources, one of the guys having to get through a scenario with a fragment of what he needed...a holding action like I have rarely seen I must say. A lot of his troops had been wounded in his previous action when he'd been badly pushed back, creating a salient in the Imperial lines...and unfortunately he had to wait for the third game after that one to get most of them back due to bad rolls on the recovery table. The later fight over the Irapur Salient was a really nasty one.

The horde armies did very well actually; especially the Orks although when he met the Tyranids (who came to the campaign late and were worked in as a surprise seeding swarm) he got so badly mauled he never fully recovered.

Looks like the coming campaign will shake out this way: Adepta Sororitas, White Scars, Orks, Tyranids, Tau, Ultramarines, World Eaters & Black Legion, and Imperial Guard (both Infantry and Armor variants). Still working out just how to handle this one; it's so much larger and includes aircraft and Titans. O-o

Sister Sin

Ordo Ouroboros
08-12-2007, 15:49
I love narrative campaigns, count me in

The_Patriot
08-12-2007, 15:56
I'd love to participate, except that I love map based campaigns. It's more strategic since you move entire FOC's across the map of the planet. Battles only occur when two forces meet.

Ordo Ouroboros
08-12-2007, 16:09
Of course I can only do Chaos v Tyranid for now, but still on an Apoc scale. Woudl that be okay?

The Song of Spears
08-12-2007, 17:06
The game size or type, such as apocalypse games or combat patrol games are all ok. and can come in any order really. It's all up to the kind of story you want your campaign to play through.

And you dont even have to have it on a grand scale. You can simply play out a few scenarios of a invasion or some famous battle from one of the novels.

Maps are a great idea of you want a generic campaign to just conquer with. And can be used like recent DoW to show a progress through a campaign.

However i think the story aspect is what is important here. I suggest that if you want the story type game. You set up the specific forces who are involved and what their armies have in each battle, down to the unit numbers and equipment.

Or you can just go for the generic approach like above with easy E great set up.

If enough people contribute to the story ones, we can cover most armies too. I will try and get one up here in a few days...

The_Patriot
08-12-2007, 17:17
The game size or type, such as apocalypse games or combat patrol games are all ok. and can come in any order really. It's all up to the kind of story you want your campaign to play through.

And you dont even have to have it on a grand scale. You can simply play out a few scenarios of a invasion or some famous battle from one of the novels.

Maps are a great idea of you want a generic campaign to just conquer with. And can be used like recent DoW to show a progress through a campaign.

However i think the story aspect is what is important here. I suggest that if you want the story type game. You set up the specific forces who are involved and what their armies have in each battle, down to the unit numbers and equipment.

Or you can just go for the generic approach like above with easy E great set up.

If enough people contribute to the story ones, we can cover most armies too. I will try and get one up here in a few days...

Well map based campaigns are not mutually exclusive of narrative campaigns. In fact, the opposite is true. Each army gets so many FOC's to deploy on the map via drop podding or other landing methods using scatter dice to determine if the FOC lands on target or not. Plus you have limited supply and reinforcements unless you roll a mission to seize a supply point. Also each army having an overall goal with a mission objective of their own can bring out more story elements. I highly recommend using this campaign and events system by jubilex, but modified to use the XP system presented in the BGB and ignore the set number of battles.

jubilex
08-12-2007, 21:05
I highly recommend using this campaign and events system by jubilex, but modified to use the XP system presented in the BGB and ignore the set number of battles.
Hey, patriot, thanks for the ad, mate!!! :)
It does work for an "open-ended" type of game, that's true.
We, at **** (THESE WARGAMERS ARE TRIUMPHANT), have a few ongoing.

This system we have used (who am I, yoda?), for quite a while now. It has generated some epics!

If any of you guys out there have used (or are considering using) it, tell me what it did for you.
I would love some feedback/collaboration on it.

Patriot's links will get you the pdf's.
There is more on my site (examples of play, etc), see the sig.

@easy.
Liked the root of the campaign. Are you open to a few suggestions?

The civilian rabble is a good one. I used something similar in a campaign for some of my mates a while ago. It was hunters vs tau.
(The following came from this, it worked really well).

An assassination attempt on a rabble rousing speaker, with random civilians charging about. (In this game, I had about 5 "units" of civilians. But, one of them was really a unit of SM scouts that had infiltraited and arrived according to reserves rolls).

A propaganda air drop (using the rescue mission rules).

Ok, something a bit different...

What about a "game mastered" battle?

I have done this a few times, with my mates. They are seriously good.

If you can get a volunteer to do this for you. Otherwise, I (or anyone else out there in internet land, may do it for you), could generate a (narrative) campaign, that could be handled via the net, possibly be turned into a battle report, with real time interraction!!!!!!!!

What do you think?
Anybody up for it?

I may well be biting off more than I can chew, but what about it?

Easy E
09-12-2007, 13:13
I love GMed battles. That's the way it use to be old school.