PDA

View Full Version : DM Help Help with Campaign Ideas?



Reaver25
2016-11-08, 04:40 PM
So I tried posting this on the D&D 5e/Next Forum, and it basically flopped. I wanted to start a new thread here as I feel like more people frequent this forum and I would get a lot more feedback.
I want to start a new campaign, and I've got a few ideas of how I'd like it to go, but for the most part, with either big storyline arcs, NPCs, side quests and the like, I am coming up blank. I'll give y'all what I've got so far, but there are going to be things I haven't thought of. So please, let me know if you have ideas, questions, comments, anything at all!

1. This campaign will be in 5e D&D.
2. Only playable races for PCs will be Human or Vuman.
3. Stats will be on a point buy, with stats going no higher than a 16 base. I might just do a standard point array, but I'm unsure (opinions?) I want my players to have room to grow. I have started a few campaigns off with an 18 in some stats, and the PCs are just too strong.
4. Multiclassing will be allowed, but it must be reasonable (No Paladin/Sorcerer/Fighter/Rogue/Cleric combos or something stupid like that). It has to make sense campaign-wise and character-wise. For instance, If a Monk levels up and decides to take a level in Druid, the Monk has to be trained by a Druid for a certain amount of time, and until this happens, the level is deferred.

The basic idea for the story-line/arc that I have is this: The Human Empire rules over the land peacefully. The Elves, Dwarves, Halflings and other races have slowly moved away from the areas that Humans inhabit. The King is a just, good King. The Chantry (church) has authority in religious matters. Essentially, one of the Chantry members will be a Devil/Fiend of some kind in disguise spreading lies about those who use magic, practice magic, or were born in some magical way. In fact, this will have gone so far that some, not all, Humans will believe that Magic is aligned with Evil and that any creature born of Dragons are Evil (regardless of the Dragon's alignment). This will lead to Sorcerers, Wizards, Warlocks, Druids, as well as certain races like Dragonborn, Tieflings, and even Elves and Dwarves to be hunted down and killed.

I'm not sure if I want the whole Chantry to be infested, only part of it, or just one member manipulating all of the other leaders and even the King himself. I don't know much about Devils/Demons, so I don't know which kind would be most likely to do this. I also don't know how to start out the story for the PCs. I don't know a lot of how I want to run this campaign except for what I've written down. So, it goes to you, fellow Playgrounders. Ideas? Questions? Want me to expand on anything? Ask me questions, it will help me to establish exactly what I want to do. Thank you in advance!

ComaVision
2016-11-08, 04:47 PM
Let players have more race choice. People don't like having their choices restricted that much. Also, it's going to make the players bite on to the story more if their characters have a personal stake in the outcome.

Reaver25
2016-11-08, 04:52 PM
Let players have more race choice. People don't like having their choices restricted that much. Also, it's going to make the players bite on to the story more if their characters have a personal stake in the outcome.

I would do this, but I don't want to give one specific PC *special snowflake status*. Maybe I could do this, but I just feel like it might hinder the campaign in some way. Perhaps it could be interesting, though, especially because, as you said, they'd have a personal stake in the matter. I'll think on that one.

P.S. - we have a character in my current campaign (in which I am a PC) and she is *super-special-snowflake-status*. It is super annoying.

Edit: P.S.S. - I wanted them all to be Humans because they might start off in the Human Kingdom under the King's command.

DeathToGazeebos
2016-11-09, 10:32 PM
Let players have more race choice. People don't like having their choices restricted that much. Also, it's going to make the players bite on to the story more if their characters have a personal stake in the outcome.

I disagree with this. I have found that pulling something like "forcing all PCs to be human" can actually weed out the more novice roleplayers and forces the players to come up with unique interesting characters since they are not able to simply lean on the "I'm the elven ranger in the party" as being their identity. Some of my favourite stories are about parties made up of people who would effectively been all the same class/occupation and race. And I agree with the "special snowflake" thing being annoying sometimes...... most times.

On to brainstorming suggestions:
-Use the "Feind in the Chantry" as the campaign end reveal. Perhaps the rough story arc could go something like this (each point being a seperate adventure):
-PCs are sent by King to stamp out a ring of evil magic-doers in the forest and end up fighting druids. Find out later they were working ceremonial magics against something.
-PCs are sent to kill a magical monster (dragon? griffon?) and return with part of it. Later find uot the lore around such creatures indicates they are of lawful good alignment. The PCs are sent to present the trophy to the Chantry, notice an odd repelling effect on the Feind-in-disguise Chantry member due to the deceased creatures alignment. PCs may find this odd.
-PCs are tasked (or privately hired this time) to journey to a ruin in the nearby hills/mountains in search of a relic. They find the relic belonged to the founding fathers of the Chantry and of the King's blood line and is magical. Should they destroy it? Should they kill the person who sent them for it? PCs descover that the druids they killed were attempting a ritual to banish the Feind in the Chantry.
-PCs return to find a slaughtered party on the road who look almost exactly like the PCs. It seems the PCs were meant to fetch the relic then be killed. Some detective work will reveal the Feind in the Chantry was behind the relic mission and wanted the relic (and all other magic items) for himself secretly. Knowing that if there was no other magic around other than what he possessed and no magic detecting people, than he would be viewed as god like in power.

Of course if the PCs succeed in killing the Feind and revearsing the bad reputation of magic it could leave you with a "magic is okay again" setting which may not be what you want. Although could be an interesting jump off point to herald ina whole new age in the kingdom of collecting, finding and amassing magical treasure and etc.

Anyhow maybe you can use something from all that text. Good luck with it.

Herobizkit
2016-11-09, 10:44 PM
Fun twist:

The King is good and just but wholly supports the Chantry's edict that Magic is ultimately evil.

Twist 2:

The Fiend is an agent of the King sent to the Chantry to precipitate this very fact. In fact, the whole Chantry is a sham - its true purpose is to 'harvest' the magic/blood/souls of magic-using creatures for 'some nefarious purpose'.

Twist 3:

If the King does not support the sham church, his entire Kingdom will fall under sway of the Fiends.

Koo Rehtorb
2016-11-09, 11:57 PM
Why not ask for player input in the setting too? People are more invested in settings they help create because people will naturally put stuff that's interesting to them in the game. And there's no reason why you should have to do all the work either.

Knaight
2016-11-10, 12:21 AM
The setting seems a bit sterile - you've got the one king, who is good and just, you've got the one generally solid church which has an infiltration problem, there's the various racial enclaves tidily arranged around the human empire, and it just comes across as inorganic. I'd recommend populating it a bit more, adding in more obvious avenues for conflict, and just generally making the world more fractious. The campaign may be centered around a particular conflict rooted in corruption within the clergy, but that doesn't mean the setting should be.

Reaver25
2016-11-10, 01:12 PM
The setting seems a bit sterile - you've got the one king, who is good and just, you've got the one generally solid church which has an infiltration problem, there's the various racial enclaves tidily arranged around the human empire, and it just comes across as inorganic. I'd recommend populating it a bit more, adding in more obvious avenues for conflict, and just generally making the world more fractious. The campaign may be centered around a particular conflict rooted in corruption within the clergy, but that doesn't mean the setting should be.

I actually agree with you on this, that's why I was asking for some opinions. I have thought about it some more, and I would also have/add these to the campaign:
-3 Barons who rule in the separate fiefs under the King's authority. 1 is aligned with the Chantry, 1 is secretly a Half-Elf Sorcerer, and 1 is just loyal to the King.
-Elven Kingdom nearby, tensions brewing there.
-Dwarven Kingdom nearby, tensons brewing.
Any comments? What do you think?

Knaight
2016-11-10, 01:58 PM
I actually agree with you on this, that's why I was asking for some opinions. I have thought about it some more, and I would also have/add these to the campaign:
-3 Barons who rule in the separate fiefs under the King's authority. 1 is aligned with the Chantry, 1 is secretly a Half-Elf Sorcerer, and 1 is just loyal to the King.
-Elven Kingdom nearby, tensions brewing there.
-Dwarven Kingdom nearby, tensons brewing.
Any comments? What do you think?

The barons are a nice touch, but it still feels a bit clean - going through and methodically adding different types of conflicts, populating them with organizations, then going back and fleshing in the organizations a bit more and drawing links between them would help a lot here. As for the types of conflicts, there's a bunch of different classification systems. Combining two I'm familiar with leads to the following list:

Social
Political
Economic
Artistic
Religious
Military
Intellectual


It's nice to have all of these, but some are much better suited to background for most campaigns, particularly the artistic category*, and to a lesser extent intellectual. This particular campaign sounds political/religious focused, which is totally reasonable. It's just that there should be other conflicts in the background.

As for actually making these, consider the areas where things look clean and start putting in exceptions. The king of the empire is just and noble currently. What if the king of the empire was widely seen as just and noble, but with a few pockets of people who hated the guy for having wronged them? Maybe this is a class division, where the king has had to make rulings in repeated merchant-noble conflicts that have disproportionately pissed off the merchant class. Maybe there are multiple human ethnicity with a history of conflicts of varying levels, and in ending some of these conflicts the king left smaller injustices in place while stemming more open conflict. On the political side you've got your three baronies, each of which has a baron. There's room for conflict between them, but there's presumably also room for dissent among their nominal followers. Maybe there's an ambitious younger sibling that wants the position for themselves, maybe the religious or fighting class have been supported to the detriment of peasant laborers and that's boiling over into a peasant rebellion. Maybe there's just not enough food and water to go around because of drought or blight and it's causing both an uptick in banditry and a lot of conflict around who's to blame. As for economic conflict, you've always got the old standbys of trade route conflicts, competing markets, etc. There's also a lot of room to look at things like the emergence of a guild based economy which is increasingly mechanized (meaning water mills and similar) coming into conflict with traditional agrarian economies, the aforementioned class conflicts, etc. Then there's the whole matter of the role of magic within an economy, which is a big can of worms with conflict potential all over it. Moving into the religious category, thus far you have a largely unified church which has been infiltrated and changed. That sounds like a schism or three waiting to happen, and a bunch of different conflicts. Who supports the changes and who opposes them? Of the people who oppose them, what divisions are they in what they consider reasonable to preserve the old church? What divisions exist among those pushing for newer changes? If sections start making splinter groups (new churches that split off, inquisitions, holy orders within the church that operate autonomously, whatever) what sort of internal conflicts do these institutions have? These guys are a major player in the campaign you have planned, so get in deep here.

That's all on the institutional side (and it only scratches the surface of the institutional side), but what about the individuals? Right now they map too cleanly to individual institutions. The king is the political leader who does politics, the chantry are a religious institution that keeps to religious business, the barons are a bit more mixed but basically boil down to political entities with weak ties to other institutions. These can easily get messier with more ties around. For instance, what about the king's personal religious beliefs? How are individuals within the church interacting with the economy? What other roles in society have the people holding current roles in society held and how does that inform who they used to be as a person?

*Although it is worth thinking about when figuring out aesthetics, and you absolutely could run a campaign focused on it if you wanted to.

Reaver25
2016-11-10, 05:51 PM
The barons are a nice touch, but it still feels a bit clean - going through and methodically adding different types of conflicts, populating them with organizations, then going back and fleshing in the organizations a bit more and drawing links between them would help a lot here. As for the types of conflicts, there's a bunch of different classification systems. Combining two I'm familiar with leads to the following list:

Social
Political
Economic
Artistic
Religious
Military
Intellectual


It's nice to have all of these, but some are much better suited to background for most campaigns, particularly the artistic category*, and to a lesser extent intellectual. This particular campaign sounds political/religious focused, which is totally reasonable. It's just that there should be other conflicts in the background.

As for actually making these, consider the areas where things look clean and start putting in exceptions. The king of the empire is just and noble currently. What if the king of the empire was widely seen as just and noble, but with a few pockets of people who hated the guy for having wronged them? Maybe this is a class division, where the king has had to make rulings in repeated merchant-noble conflicts that have disproportionately pissed off the merchant class. Maybe there are multiple human ethnicity with a history of conflicts of varying levels, and in ending some of these conflicts the king left smaller injustices in place while stemming more open conflict. On the political side you've got your three baronies, each of which has a baron. There's room for conflict between them, but there's presumably also room for dissent among their nominal followers. Maybe there's an ambitious younger sibling that wants the position for themselves, maybe the religious or fighting class have been supported to the detriment of peasant laborers and that's boiling over into a peasant rebellion. Maybe there's just not enough food and water to go around because of drought or blight and it's causing both an uptick in banditry and a lot of conflict around who's to blame. As for economic conflict, you've always got the old standbys of trade route conflicts, competing markets, etc. There's also a lot of room to look at things like the emergence of a guild based economy which is increasingly mechanized (meaning water mills and similar) coming into conflict with traditional agrarian economies, the aforementioned class conflicts, etc. Then there's the whole matter of the role of magic within an economy, which is a big can of worms with conflict potential all over it. Moving into the religious category, thus far you have a largely unified church which has been infiltrated and changed. That sounds like a schism or three waiting to happen, and a bunch of different conflicts. Who supports the changes and who opposes them? Of the people who oppose them, what divisions are they in what they consider reasonable to preserve the old church? What divisions exist among those pushing for newer changes? If sections start making splinter groups (new churches that split off, inquisitions, holy orders within the church that operate autonomously, whatever) what sort of internal conflicts do these institutions have? These guys are a major player in the campaign you have planned, so get in deep here.

That's all on the institutional side (and it only scratches the surface of the institutional side), but what about the individuals? Right now they map too cleanly to individual institutions. The king is the political leader who does politics, the chantry are a religious institution that keeps to religious business, the barons are a bit more mixed but basically boil down to political entities with weak ties to other institutions. These can easily get messier with more ties around. For instance, what about the king's personal religious beliefs? How are individuals within the church interacting with the economy? What other roles in society have the people holding current roles in society held and how does that inform who they used to be as a person?

*Although it is worth thinking about when figuring out aesthetics, and you absolutely could run a campaign focused on it if you wanted to.

These are exactly the kind of ideas I was looking for! For some reason, I was blanking on all of these types of conflicts, plot hooks, and more. I love the idea of class conflicts and the mechanized industry, and perhaps food shortages due to a drought. Perhaps the Chantry can put out that the drought has been revealed to be the fault of Druids who want to curse the "peaceful" humans. I love all of these ideas, and like I said, I agree with you that my storyline/conflict area was way too cut clean. I like it to be a bit messy and not as clean cut because that's the way the real world works. These are just some fantastic ideas that I need to get into my storybook of ideas. I hope you don't mind if I write these down/use them?

Knaight
2016-11-12, 12:04 AM
These are exactly the kind of ideas I was looking for! For some reason, I was blanking on all of these types of conflicts, plot hooks, and more. I love the idea of class conflicts and the mechanized industry, and perhaps food shortages due to a drought. Perhaps the Chantry can put out that the drought has been revealed to be the fault of Druids who want to curse the "peaceful" humans. I love all of these ideas, and like I said, I agree with you that my storyline/conflict area was way too cut clean. I like it to be a bit messy and not as clean cut because that's the way the real world works. These are just some fantastic ideas that I need to get into my storybook of ideas. I hope you don't mind if I write these down/use them?

The two acronyms I pulled from there are pretty useful, and the combination of SPEARMI* is also reasonably functional and worth keeping in mind. As for the specific ideas, go for it. They were intended as examples and will need more work to actually get into the setting, as they're pretty clearly made by someone working with a cursory description of the setting in question and not a deep knowledge of it, but I'm all for usage of them. I also did very little with the magical side there, so things like working in druids and such are generally a good idea.

*It was the best I could do on short notice using the existing categories; there's almost certainly a better way to arrange those letters.

Reaver25
2016-11-12, 09:34 PM
The two acronyms I pulled from there are pretty useful, and the combination of SPEARMI* is also reasonably functional and worth keeping in mind. As for the specific ideas, go for it. They were intended as examples and will need more work to actually get into the setting, as they're pretty clearly made by someone working with a cursory description of the setting in question and not a deep knowledge of it, but I'm all for usage of them. I also did very little with the magical side there, so things like working in druids and such are generally a good idea.

*It was the best I could do on short notice using the existing categories; there's almost certainly a better way to arrange those letters.

That'd be fantastic, thanks! Yeah, I'm thinking of working in the Druids to seem like they are Evil, doing rituals and what not to banish the Archfiend, but they will believe that they are casting rituals to do things like summon demons, kill farm animals, slaughter innocents, etc. I'm not sure how I want to work all of this in, but I do want my PCs to run into an Archdruid of some kind, and he's dying or something because of how much the earth has become plagued. Idk, I am just flowing ideas now! Anyways, I would appreciate any further ideas and comments!

Stealth Marmot
2016-11-13, 12:49 AM
Just curious, was this intentionally inspired by Dragon Age 2 or are the similarities just coincidence?

Pugwampy
2016-11-13, 03:41 AM
. Only playable races for PCs will be Human or Vuman.

Thats not fun . Other races have cool powers and cultures. Everyone is "playing" a human in real life land already . You could have fun with your xenophobic population attacking your non human players .



3. Stats will be on a point buy, with stats going no higher than a 16 base. I might just do a standard point array, but I'm unsure (opinions?) I want my players to have room to grow. I have started a few campaigns off with an 18 in some stats, and the PCs are just too strong.


No player can ever be stronger then a DM . You can easily make the monster stronger by doubling their HP . If you want to be stingy with the 18,s you can give em the option to roll 3 D6,s . The chances of an 18 will be there but super rare . Players will appreciate it and you wont seem like a kill joy. Lets the players have some fun and beat you up for free every other encounter , you can give em a nasty surprise next time . Its part of the fun having different power encounters .



4. Multiclassing will be allowed, but it must be reasonable (No Paladin/Sorcerer/Fighter/Rogue/Cleric combos or something stupid like that).

If you are worried about strong players you should allow this . They will nerf themselves to a diseased hampster . Your level 5 monster will be 5 times stronger then someone who took level 1 in 5 different classes . All those options come at the cost of being toothless .

Reaver25
2016-11-13, 05:37 PM
Just curious, was this intentionally inspired by Dragon Age 2 or are the similarities just coincidence?

I played Dragon Age 2 back when it came out, so some of it is inspired, but I have thought of running a similar campaign for a long time now.


Thats not fun . Other races have cool powers and cultures. Everyone is "playing" a human in real life land already . You could have fun with your xenophobic population attacking your non human players .

I understand your thinking here, and I'll be play-testing with my group before I actually enact this. I like the idea of it but I can also understand how it can hinder the players.



No player can ever be stronger then a DM . You can easily make the monster stronger by doubling their HP . If you want to be stingy with the 18,s you can give em the option to roll 3 D6,s . The chances of an 18 will be there but super rare . Players will appreciate it and you wont seem like a kill joy. Lets the players have some fun and beat you up for free every other encounter , you can give em a nasty surprise next time . Its part of the fun having different power encounters .

Once again, I understand the idea behind this, but this is exactly what my DM did in my current campaign. I got lucky and rolled an 18 in Dex (as a Rogue), was a High Elf (+2 Dex), so I instantly started out with 20 Dex. Sometimes, that can be cool, but it doesn't leave room for a character to grow, so I won't be changing that. Also, while that may seem like an anomaly, my Rogue's other stats were awful (kind of made up for it), but everyone else rolled way better than me. The Fighter, for instance, didn't have a stat below 14 in anything. That's ridiculous. Her Strength and Dex were both 18 to start.



If you are worried about strong players you should allow this . They will nerf themselves to a diseased hampster . Your level 5 monster will be 5 times stronger then someone who took level 1 in 5 different classes . All those options come at the cost of being toothless .

Again, it just won't happen in my campaign. Other DM's and the PHB allow it, but I won't. It doesn't make sense to me that a Fighter 5 who has been training with arms and weapons his whole life suddenly becomes a Sorcerer, a class whose magical abilities are supposed to be tied to their heritage. However, if the character and I talk about it, and the reason for their Multiclass is reasonable, then I will allow it and fit it into the story.
I am not wanting to start the argument of "this will suck in your campaign, why would you do that?" I just want advice for a very specific campaign, not in what ways I should change the basic rules I know I want to keep in the game.

JoshuaZ
2016-11-13, 07:42 PM
Here are things that may help. I'm going to phrase them as questions because it is your setting and you thinking about them might work well.

Does the King have any direct heirs? If not, that's a potential cause for conflict, especially if King is old the Chantry feels that one potential heir is more likely to support their goals.

What are neighboring kingdoms like? Do they all agree with their borders? Does the Chantry have power in just this one kingdom or others? If so, how does it influence things? If it is only in that one kingdom, maybe their are other potentials for religious conflicts. If it is within multiple, then the Chantry could have a complicated diplomatic position.

Is the King an absolute monarch? It sounds like not, in which case what balances them, on paper, in practice and by tradition? If the nobility balances things in part, then how does that play out? What are the inheritance laws and how much is the Chantry concerned with them? Do any of the major nobles support the Chantry's attitude towards magic? If so, do they so sincerely or because they see their own goals connected? If one is noble, magic might be very frightening since it might balance out the power one otherwise has from having non-magical armies and weapon training.

If the Chantry is claiming that magic is evil, how much does this apply? Do some people think of herbal folk remedies as magic (which may or may not be actually magical) as included? Is this potentially an avenue for a rural/urban divide?

What is the technology level and how does that impact things? If the technological level has been stagnant, why has that been the case? If the technological has changed recently (e.g. development of printing presses, better metallurgy, astrolabes, better agriculture, new dyes), have any of these impacted social stability? How do they interact with the belief that magic is evil?

What is the world's astronomy like? Is there a single moon? How many planets? Do any of them appear in an important way in the Chantry's theology? Does this interact at all with the claim that magic is evil?

Velaryon
2016-11-13, 09:55 PM
With regard to your rules on stats, races available, multiclassing, etc.: how comfortable are your players with the limitations? They seem very restrictive to me, and I know many players who would probably bow out of such a game. But the people at the table are the only ones whose opinion matters for this. If they're fine with it, it doesn't matter who isn't. If they seem to lose interest when you tell them the rules, then you might want to rethink some of them.

When it comes to what to do in the game, I'd suggest making the Fiend your BBEG and building up to it slowly. Have a few simple missions just to establish the world and introduce the players to it - escort missions for merchants, clearing monsters out of areas, etc. You can drop a few hints about the Chantry, and then lead up to that becoming the central conflict of the game.

Beyond that... just flesh out the world with a lot more detail. People, places, and organizations that aren't directly connected to the church, the crown, or the fiend. Basically, everything that Knaight said. You want the world to feel lived-in, so just keep inventing details.

Atarax
2016-11-14, 01:52 AM
I think there are two separate subjects happening in this discussion. One is about the campaign world and the other is about the campaign. What races live where, surrounding kingdoms, technology levels, and even creating tensions between different groups are all things I would consider world building. In my humble opinion, the person above listing adventure hooks (including the quest from the king to confront the druids) was right on. The original post didn't ask for help fleshing out the world. It didn't ask if his setting was fun or what we thought of it. It asked for campaign ideas. Besides, I think that while another typical forgotten realms clone homebrew would follow all the rules, it could be considered more sterile for lack of imagination or originality. Answer based on the background given instead of sterilizing the background until your answer fits.

Pugwampy
2016-11-14, 04:16 AM
With regard to your rules on stats, races available, multiclassing, etc.: how comfortable are your players with the limitations? They seem very restrictive to me, and I know many players who would probably bow out of such a game. But the people at the table are the only ones whose opinion matters for this. If they're fine with it, it doesn't matter who isn't. If they seem to lose interest when you tell them the rules, then you might want to rethink some of them.


I agree . Trust me your story ideas wont matter if your players are unhappy and unhappy players cause you more grief then players with god stats .

You need feedback and assurances from them .
You said your former DM was easy going and well they will expect the same from you .

This is a cooperative game , you need to give a little . Your player wants to try new things and wierd stuff.

Reaver25
2016-11-14, 04:00 PM
Here are things that may help. I'm going to phrase them as questions because it is your setting and you thinking about them might work well.

Does the King have any direct heirs? If not, that's a potential cause for conflict, especially if King is old the Chantry feels that one potential heir is more likely to support their goals.

I was thinking he'd have a son and a daughter. The daughter would be older and hence be the heir to the throne. Perhaps the son would strike some kind of a deal with the "Fiend"/Chantry in order to have the throne. Not sure about this one.


What are neighboring kingdoms like? Do they all agree with their borders? Does the Chantry have power in just this one kingdom or others? If so, how does it influence things? If it is only in that one kingdom, maybe their are other potentials for religious conflicts. If it is within multiple, then the Chantry could have a complicated diplomatic position.

I was thinking about this. They will probably have conflicts with borders. Perhaps a religionless human empire, an Elven Kingdom, and a Goblin/Orc Tribe. Not sure about some of those, but I just want there to be some conflict within the conflict. The Chantry might only have power in just The King's Empire, but eventually they will spread to other nations, afflicting mortals with their fiendyness.


Is the King an absolute monarch? It sounds like not, in which case what balances them, on paper, in practice and by tradition? If the nobility balances things in part, then how does that play out? What are the inheritance laws and how much is the Chantry concerned with them? Do any of the major nobles support the Chantry's attitude towards magic? If so, do they so sincerely or because they see their own goals connected? If one is noble, magic might be very frightening since it might balance out the power one otherwise has from having non-magical armies and weapon training.

I am honestly not sure how to work this part out. I could do a King with a council of nobles. On the Council would be said BBEG Fiend in disguise working within the council to sow chaos. A few nobles will probably support the Chantry, while others would adamantly oppose it. I was thinking that the Chantry would have an "Assassin's Guild" or just several "assassins" working for them. I like the last idea, that magic would frighten nobles. This could worrk to the Chantry's liking.


If the Chantry is claiming that magic is evil, how much does this apply? Do some people think of herbal folk remedies as magic (which may or may not be actually magical) as included? Is this potentially an avenue for a rural/urban divide?

Remedies will not be considered magical/evil, but these will: rituals of any kind besides those allowed by the Chantry, Dragons (and hence any born of Dragons [Sorcerers & Dragonborn in particular]), Fey creatures, Undead, magical weapons, spells, spellbooks, etc.


What is the technology level and how does that impact things? If the technological level has been stagnant, why has that been the case? If the technological has changed recently (e.g. development of printing presses, better metallurgy, astrolabes, better agriculture, new dyes), have any of these impacted social stability? How do they interact with the belief that magic is evil?

I'm not sure on this one, yet, tbh!


What is the world's astronomy like? Is there a single moon? How many planets? Do any of them appear in an important way in the Chantry's theology? Does this interact at all with the claim that magic is evil?

Again, unsure of this one.


With regard to your rules on stats, races available, multiclassing, etc.: how comfortable are your players with the limitations? They seem very restrictive to me, and I know many players who would probably bow out of such a game. But the people at the table are the only ones whose opinion matters for this. If they're fine with it, it doesn't matter who isn't. If they seem to lose interest when you tell them the rules, then you might want to rethink some of them.

When it comes to what to do in the game, I'd suggest making the Fiend your BBEG and building up to it slowly. Have a few simple missions just to establish the world and introduce the players to it - escort missions for merchants, clearing monsters out of areas, etc. You can drop a few hints about the Chantry, and then lead up to that becoming the central conflict of the game.

Beyond that... just flesh out the world with a lot more detail. People, places, and organizations that aren't directly connected to the church, the crown, or the fiend. Basically, everything that Knaight said. You want the world to feel lived-in, so just keep inventing details. (emphasis mine)

With regards to the rules, yes, they are restrictive, for various reasons. They are all mostly new players, so they probably won't mind too much. On the other hand, if they are all adamantly opposed to the idea, then I suppose I would allow it. Again, I have various reasons for wanting this to be the case. Also, see below.*
With regards to your ideas, I do like those ideas. I need a lot more detail in my world at large and in minimal detail. I just need to flesh out a lot of stuff, that's why I created the thread.


I agree . Trust me your story ideas wont matter if your players are unhappy and unhappy players cause you more grief then players with god stats .

You need feedback and assurances from them .
You said your former DM was easy going and well they will expect the same from you .

This is a cooperative game , you need to give a little . Your player wants to try new things and wierd stuff.

You're right, but again, I respectfully disagree. *If they really didn't like to play under these rules, then they could go somewhere else and I wouldn't be stopping them. I will be telling them these rules well ahead of time and will make sure it is something they are all in agreement with. For the last time, I only put my rules on the OP so that any players giving ideas would keep those in mind, not to be argued against and have people say "That's unfair, don't do that your players will hate you."
So, once again, as in my last post, PLEASE don't comment on the rules I have in my campaign. They probably (most likely [most certainly]) won't change! :D Thank you.

FreddyNoNose
2016-11-14, 09:46 PM
With regard to your rules on stats, races available, multiclassing, etc.: how comfortable are your players with the limitations? They seem very restrictive to me, and I know many players who would probably bow out of such a game. I wouldn't want those players in my game if that is the case. Seems like a win-win for both sides.

Joe the Rat
2016-11-15, 02:13 PM
First thing, you need a main concept besides Corruption in the Chantry. The campaign idea you are selling to the players.

I like the Agents of the Crown angle. The party is a team of troubleshooters sent to deal with exceptional problems. They are just starting out, so they are under the command of one of the [Feudal Lord]s to deal with local problems that "more army" doesn't do well. Basic upkeep is covered, training is available, and anything found outside quest goals are kept as reward, less a "tax" that goes to funding the Agents Network. You have a reason for the party to be together, and can encourage the players to come up with connections - common experiences before or during training.

Is this a monotheistic or pantheonic faith? Are there sects for schisms? Are other faiths "okay but weird" or "heretical?" A growing or spread corruption - but not all-consuming - makes for interesting play. Give them allies in the Chantry - someone they'd feel confident presenting evidence of some sort of corrupt takeover.

Known World or Points of Light? How much wilderness is there in the Empire? Is it roads, towns, castles, and scary spaces, or have they patrolled and plowed everything into submission? This determines how rare the dark places, old ruins, and secret spellcasters will be. Actually, more dangerous wilds within the Empire gives you more hook - fighting to tame the outer baronies and bring order / keep people safe / improve trade / for the good of the Empire. Actually, maybe move away from Empire. It's got connotations of "We're actually the bad guys!"

Other races exist, but are "officially" outside of borders. Orc/Goblin/Dwarf/Halfling incursions can be a plot point. A marauding warband deep in the Lands? They must be holed up somewhere, cue the ancient buried temple / dungeon being used as a base (and home to other weirdness). If you look at some of the Adventurer's League Player Guide stuff for the Elemental Evil season, they have some suggestions for how "nonhumans" can sneak around in a humans-only land. Half-elf spies and halfling "children" come to mind.

If nonhumans become a plot angle, give them an easier way to learn languages, or give each Kingdom/Nation/Grand Province/Whatever its own language (Europe: French, Italian, German, Finnish, etc) which are actually racial languages (Gnomish, Dwarven, Elven, Goblin, etc.) co-opted by the locals in ages past.


There's a free 1st level adventure called "The Raid" - It would be an interesting foundation to introduce demihumans. This becomes a mission from the local Feudal Lord rather than a panicked arrival at Ye Olde Random Tavern. I managed to scale it up to 4th level easily enough with larger numbers and stronger monsters, but you can run it from go as a main-plot-tangential starter. I also added a couple of traps. Pit traps are more a hassle than a threat, but having a ghoul trapped inside one? That's fun.

I took a page from the Angry DM, and turned the Boss into a two-stage monster. A surprisingly effective goblin (he hit like a hobgoblin warlord), and when he drops, Budar's ghost comes out of the axe. This has the bonus of giving you a potential (maybe mistaken) "Dwarves are evil" take-away. Dial that back if you're bringing them here low level - a Spectre, for instance.

You might switch the goblins for human bandits and thugs, maybe grab a veteran for the boss. In that case, maybe drop the cannibalism angle, but do keep the women and children. These are desperate people, who have taken to banditry, poaching, and graverobbing to make ends meet, but are now under sway of a Possessed chief. A Pre-Imperial map would make an interesting treasure find here, showing towns and castles where there are none now (Dungeons!), and potentially their first taste of not knowing a language.

Also, perhaps call the ruler of an Empire an Emperor? Or are you going King of the Seven Kingdoms?

Reaver25
2016-11-16, 11:12 AM
First thing, you need a main concept besides Corruption in the Chantry. The campaign idea you are selling to the players.

I like the Agents of the Crown angle. The party is a team of troubleshooters sent to deal with exceptional problems. They are just starting out, so they are under the command of one of the [Feudal Lord]s to deal with local problems that "more army" doesn't do well. Basic upkeep is covered, training is available, and anything found outside quest goals are kept as reward, less a "tax" that goes to funding the Agents Network. You have a reason for the party to be together, and can encourage the players to come up with connections - common experiences before or during training.

I agree with this, and this is exactly what I want the campaign to start with. They won't be truly aware of any corruption or evil for a while. Additionally, I was going to have them loyal to the Baron who is secretly a Half-Elf. That'll make for a fun plot twist and gets them somewhat emotionally involved.


Is this a monotheistic or pantheonic faith? Are there sects for schisms? Are other faiths "okay but weird" or "heretical?" A growing or spread corruption - but not all-consuming - makes for interesting play. Give them allies in the Chantry - someone they'd feel confident presenting evidence of some sort of corrupt takeover.

It will probably be monotheistic, but I am unsure tbh. If there are schisms, eventually they would be considered heretical and be "cleansed." And on the corruption part, it definitely won't be all-consuming. It will be growing and weak at first but will consistently grow stronger. I was actually thinking that either the "right-hand man" of the secret BBEG would be their confidant, or someone within the King's Council.


Known World or Points of Light? How much wilderness is there in the Empire? Is it roads, towns, castles, and scary spaces, or have they patrolled and plowed everything into submission? This determines how rare the dark places, old ruins, and secret spellcasters will be. Actually, more dangerous wilds within the Empire gives you more hook - fighting to tame the outer baronies and bring order / keep people safe / improve trade / for the good of the Empire. Actually, maybe move away from Empire. It's got connotations of "We're actually the bad guys!"

In my mind, there was a small connotation of that exact thinking. However, I was thinking that the Kings before the current one would have made active war against the other Kingdoms, and this King is actively seeking peace and similar treaties with them. I'm not sure how that will work in, but that's my idea.


Other races exist, but are "officially" outside of borders. Orc/Goblin/Dwarf/Halfling incursions can be a plot point. A marauding warband deep in the Lands? They must be holed up somewhere, cue the ancient buried temple / dungeon being used as a base (and home to other weirdness). If you look at some of the Adventurer's League Player Guide stuff for the Elemental Evil season, they have some suggestions for how "nonhumans" can sneak around in a humans-only land. Half-elf spies and halfling "children" come to mind.

If nonhumans become a plot angle, give them an easier way to learn languages, or give each Kingdom/Nation/Grand Province/Whatever its own language (Europe: French, Italian, German, Finnish, etc) which are actually racial languages (Gnomish, Dwarven, Elven, Goblin, etc.) co-opted by the locals in ages past.


There's a free 1st level adventure called "The Raid" - It would be an interesting foundation to introduce demihumans. This becomes a mission from the local Feudal Lord rather than a panicked arrival at Ye Olde Random Tavern. I managed to scale it up to 4th level easily enough with larger numbers and stronger monsters, but you can run it from go as a main-plot-tangential starter. I also added a couple of traps. Pit traps are more a hassle than a threat, but having a ghoul trapped inside one? That's fun.

I took a page from the Angry DM, and turned the Boss into a two-stage monster. A surprisingly effective goblin (he hit like a hobgoblin warlord), and when he drops, Budar's ghost comes out of the axe. This has the bonus of giving you a potential (maybe mistaken) "Dwarves are evil" take-away. Dial that back if you're bringing them here low level - a Spectre, for instance.

You might switch the goblins for human bandits and thugs, maybe grab a veteran for the boss. In that case, maybe drop the cannibalism angle, but do keep the women and children. These are desperate people, who have taken to banditry, poaching, and graverobbing to make ends meet, but are now under sway of a Possessed chief. A Pre-Imperial map would make an interesting treasure find here, showing towns and castles where there are none now (Dungeons!), and potentially their first taste of not knowing a language.

Also, perhaps call the ruler of an Empire an Emperor? Or are you going King of the Seven Kingdoms?

I love the 1st Dungeon idea! I was actually going to run my players through a 1st session so that they could get a feel for it. I think it will be called a Kingdom rather than an Empire, the words are (for some reason) interchangeable for me (even though they're different in many ways.