PDA

View Full Version : Strange idea for a campaign



Krade
2010-09-27, 02:16 AM
I got this really neat idea for a PbP that I could DM. It would involve anywhere between 20 and 30 players ideally, maybe more. One party with 5 or 6 characters. The first group of players would run through the adventure up to a certain point and after that, they would relinquish control to the next group. And so on for a few more groups.

The problem with this whole thing is that to get the proper effect, I need to refrain from spilling any details. Even more importantly, the later groups need to NOT follow the ones before them. At all. They get the original premise and after that they can't know what has happened between the start of the adventure and where they take control. They will run into situations where previous groups' actions will affect NPC attitudes and behavior (up to and including the possible addition of a party member).

It's tough to describe what I'm thinking of without the intricate details, but if I'm going to try and run this campaign here, I need to be sure that anyone joining didn't see the details here. I started this thread to ask for advice on how to run this and with a secondary goal of figuring out how many people might be interested in this sort of thing.

So... thoughts?

Shinizak
2010-09-27, 02:19 AM
that would be quite the endeavor, you should try it and post the results.

Krade
2010-09-27, 02:25 AM
That's about half the reason I want to do this. It has the potential of being a really interesting read after it's all over.

grimbold
2010-09-27, 11:48 AM
that could be really cool, but frusturating for the PCs

Devmaar
2010-09-27, 03:05 PM
I think that'd be really... interesting to play. It would be extremely frustrating for the later groups though.

Frozen_Feet
2010-09-27, 03:21 PM
Why would it be frustrating for the later groups? I see no necessity for that to be so. I've seen this method done well in many convention roleplays, actually, though I've not personally experienced a game of this scale. Several convention campaigns have worked like this, however, and worked well from what I've heard.

Devmaar
2010-09-27, 03:27 PM
I just think it would be annoying if you came up with what would have been a workable plan except for an earlier pc's actions. Not any major effect on the game but could be a bit frustrating.

mangosta71
2010-09-27, 03:39 PM
I think your best bet might be giving each group a separate thread. Then you can treat anything pertinent that the previous group did as background. Once everything is wrapped up, you copy it into a word processor and edit the whole into something that reads like a short story/succession of short stories.

Krade
2010-09-27, 09:02 PM
Of course each group would get a separate thread. The main problem I'm seeing is that the whole thing would have to rely on the honor system to keep the later groups from reading the previous ones. Other problems would include finding people okay with not making thier own characters. The first group would be composed of the people who made the characters in the normal fashion of picking players. Later groups will have to pick which character they would prefer to play and I'd have to figure out how to choose between them. I don't think it will come up, but I could see a problem in people not wanting others to play thier characters, which would also reduce the pool of likely players.

Everything the previous group(s) do is extremely important. If the previous groups' actions don't impact the later ones, then there's no reason to bother trying to do it like this.

Also, if it matters, this would be 4e (I suppose I could make it 3.5 if more people would prefer it). 1st or 2nd level characters.

mangosta71
2010-09-27, 10:40 PM
Just don't provide later groups with links to previous threads. I don't even see any reason you need to tell them that they're part of a continuing story at all. If they're picking up someone else's characters, just announce that the PCs are pre-generated.

Dr.Epic
2010-09-27, 10:43 PM
So, you have little control over your character build if you're not in the first group? The person get to build the character concept, then you take over for them, then the next person has even less option for their build.

Krade
2010-09-28, 01:49 AM
Just don't provide later groups with links to previous threads. I don't even see any reason you need to tell them that they're part of a continuing story at all. If they're picking up someone else's characters, just announce that the PCs are pre-generated.

I had thought of that, but I quite like the idea of everyone knowing there was a group before them playing the same characters in the same timeline. I guess that, if I actually do this, I will be able to choose whether or not that will be necessary based on the response of interested players.


So, you have little control over your character build if you're not in the first group? The person get to build the character concept, then you take over for them, then the next person has even less option for their build.

So you see the problem. I had originally planned on the characters not leveling up at all since each individual group would probably not be in control long enough to gain that much experience. However, having thought on it more, having them level up would make it easier to put a definite end to the whole thing.

Arg this whole thing is so complicated! It would be easier if I had 20-30 people to do this in real life. It would remove a LOT of the complications involved (or at least make them easier to work around).

Frozen_Feet
2010-09-28, 03:45 PM
I'm not sure why you're so worried about new groups learning about the past ones' deeds. Okay, so I understand fear of metagaming, but I think it might even increase the fun if the new groups could look at the past ones and pick up causality between their actions.

And you shouldn't worry too much about people being queasy about shared characters. Just put up an announcement and see who takes the bait! That works perfectly well for conventions.

NeoRetribution
2010-09-28, 06:00 PM
It might be prudent to test your concept with a certain style first before implementing it into a game. For instance, pick a number of people. Each individual would have to agree to provide you with about ten verbs. Assuming five layers of people have helped that is fifty verbs. Now, add those verbs to a pre-defined plot which you intentionally conceived earlier before asking for assistance. Add the verbs in order without deviation.

The results would most likely be non-sequitur ( inane ), but possibly humorous. And if that is the type of thing that you are looking for, I suppose that you could try for a crowd of willing players.

It does seem to me, though, that releasing a complete log of the campaign, and who the players were at the time, would be necessary to garner enough interest.

Krade
2010-09-29, 12:11 AM
I'm not sure why you're so worried about new groups learning about the past ones' deeds. Okay, so I understand fear of metagaming, but I think it might even increase the fun if the new groups could look at the past ones and pick up causality between their actions.
The whole concept of the campaign would be completely ruined if the later groups knew what happened before they took control (which, incidently, is also why new groups are needed instead of just using the same one through the whole thing). I also think it would cheapen the impact of certain plot reveals if the players knew what was going on.

I suppose I can actually say the reason for this since the only the first group wouldn't learn about it at the start of the session. Memory loss. I plan on the party needing to investigate an unknown phenomenon and when they finally reach thier destination, plot happens and they wake up a good distance away with no knowledge of what happened after they started the investigation in the first place. This will continue until one of the groups passes the challenge at the end (it'll be a doozy). Which is also why I decided to actually have the characters level up, so, eventually, they will be strong enough to pass it without it being damn near impossible.

The biggest problem I'm seeing now is that the ending for each of the groups that doesn't succeed will be incredibly unfulfilling. "You got your asses kicked aaaaaaaand we're done. Thank you for playing"

NeoRetribution
2010-09-29, 05:04 AM
Since I know of such individuals and have worked with them...

When a person suspects, thoroughly, that they have progressive and consistent amnesia, they begin to keep a diary or multiple diaries. Some even make videos of themselves to prove their connections to others to bypass initial uncertainty and move straight to trust.

And I am certain that such things ( plot hooks ) exist in most RPG settings with a little ingenuity. If I were going to run this kind of game, I would leave that option open and leave many hooks to do so.

kamikasei
2010-09-29, 05:19 AM
This seems like a game which would be much more appealing to the DM, who can see the whole thing play out, than for the players. Personally, if I didn't know how it was set up to end when I joined I'd feel cheated, and if I did, I probably wouldn't join, any more than I'd want to get a couple of friends and split up the movie Memento between us, with me watching the third of five segments and swearing never to discuss what the others saw. It'd be unsatisfying by design.

You might be able to improve matters by letting the players know during recruitment that their tenure with the characters is likely to end without the characters' stories actually concluding (rather than springing this on them when the game abruptly ends for them), but that they'll be welcome to follow subsequent games so they at least get to see the story end even if they don't get to play it out themselves.

NeoRetribution
2010-09-29, 11:53 AM
Yes. As stated, as long as every player receives a full account of what happened during the game, I think the concept of the game itself will be more acceptable.

CyMage
2010-09-29, 02:40 PM
Just to chime in on the character point of view, if you get enough people seperate them into small groups to generate a character together.

Say you are going to have 15 players total, 5 of them playing at a time. Make 5 groups of 3 to work on a character, one player from each 'chapter'. That way you'll have players who are somewhat familiar with the character and will know what to do with it.

Tyndmyr
2010-09-29, 03:10 PM
I guessed memory loss right off the bat. It's the main reason. And yes, if I were in any group of players after the first, and was told I could not remember things, I would immediately go through my effects for clues, and begin keeping a diary. Probably not that different from real life, actually.

It might be easier to cherry pick roleplayers you know are very good about avoiding metagaming, hard as that is in this situation, than to run consecutive segments for 20-30 people. That's quite challenging to do.

Also, consider what happens to characters that are immune to mind-affecting.

mangosta71
2010-09-29, 04:08 PM
It sounds like it would be easier to just kill the party if they fail and have the next group roll new characters.

Dralnu
2010-09-29, 06:54 PM
When a person suspects, thoroughly, that they have progressive and consistent amnesia, they begin to keep a diary or multiple diaries. Some even make videos of themselves to prove their connections to others to bypass initial uncertainty and move straight to trust.


Or they make tattoos on their body as reminders.

"It's NOT a mouth-based videogame!"

Zeofar
2010-09-29, 07:49 PM
I'm actually very interested in this, and it sounds like it would be fun to play or DM. I think the concept of not allowing you to see the previous game is just as viable as a straight "succession" style game. At the same time, I don't really like the idea that the characters are memory wiped. While it certainly makes thing easier, trying to roleplay a character if you have a few lines of what is going on and the character's personality while acting like everything is normal sounds more interesting and challenging than "You wake up. Something happened. You don't know where or who you are, or what is going on." That's my take on that part.

As for setting it up, I don't think that it would be terribly difficult. Telling people straight what the game is about seems simple enough. Telling them that it is a one-shot adventure, and ending it at some significant point that isn't a full resolution seems a bit troublesome, but if you make sure that there is some point accomplished it could work. Having the game end promptly when the characters have enough xp to level up could work. Obviously, this could end up badly if people have compunctions about character possession, so really telling everyone what is going on sounds like the best bet.

I also think that some of the other possibilities being suggested here are certainly sound, but they really change the whole concept into something totally different. Like the OP has said, I don't think that letting players know the full previous events would at all be in keeping with the original idea, and just change it into something totally different. Giving the next players an inkling of what is going on (You're [name], a [class]. [Basic personality info]. [party interactions so far]. You have been following the trail of destruction left by Drom Arlin, an evil magician who is intent on turning the world into a shrine dedicated to himself. You just faced off against him and his minions for the first time, but barely just got away, badly beat) sounds like the best solution to me. As long as you give them some amount of information about the story so far, you can get away with withholding important plot reveals as long as it doesn't change the basic nature of their actions.

Krade
2010-09-29, 09:11 PM
To clarify, their memories aren't completely wiped. Just the past however long it took for them to get there. The last thing the characters will remember is travelling toward the area they are investigating. So when they wake up, they still know why they are there and what they are supposed to be doing. They just wake up out in the woods somewhere.

When a person suspects, thoroughly, that they have progressive and consistent amnesia, they begin to keep a diary or multiple diaries. Some even make videos of themselves to prove their connections to others to bypass initial uncertainty and move straight to trust.
I hadn't thought about the possibility of the players doing that... I suppose I would have the player PM the individual pages so I could work it into the next group. It could also be entertaining to "judiciously remove" certain information from it:smallwink:

You might be able to improve matters by letting the players know during recruitment that their tenure with the characters is likely to end without the characters' stories actually concluding (rather than springing this on them when the game abruptly ends for them), but that they'll be welcome to follow subsequent games so they at least get to see the story end even if they don't get to play it out themselves.
I was thinking the same thing. While being first makes it incredibly unlikely that you'll succeed, at least you get to watch how it plays out afterward.

It sounds like it would be easier to just kill the party if they fail and have the next group roll new characters.
While that would certainly be easier, well, it also defeats the purpose. There are other things involved with NPCs that I have in mind to work in for the memory loss thing.

I'm also now considering how long they should be unconscious. At first I was thinking it should be for a day or two, but this is D&D and things don't need to be realistic. I could make it a year. I'm thinking that would make the NPC interactions more interesting.