Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
YES! Expect to see me participate!
yep, but I won't be participating.
this will never work!
A thread recently came up in the WHFB sections, wondering about an old campaign system that GW ran in the late 90s. It essentially mixed role-playing with Mighty Empires and a World Wide campaign like SoC or Nemessis Crown. My question is if anyone here thinks it'd be a viable system to attempt here on LO.
The original campaign was run with players submitting battle reports to help determine the outcome of certain actions. Players also formed the economy, and each nation had a market, navy, etc. run by PCs and NPCs alike (players and "AI" or neutral characters).
I envision the campaign system working by getting a select group of players from each army-specific forum, electing/nominating a "Ruler" for each kingdom who coordinates the navies, NPCs and sets out the grand strategy. Within the GHD section here, we could nominate some referees, and bigger "DMs or GMs" to toss in plots and what not.
Games could be played on the Online engine, or at your home, reports filed in the "Battle Report" sections, and lists posted in the Army Lists sections with links posted in the relevant threads.
This would be a great way to get in the motivation or meaning needed for a good summer of gaming. It could even include the Mordheim and Warmaster players, the Painting Challenge that we've got going on, and something akin to Iron Chef Scenery if we wanted it to.
WHO'S UP TO TRY THIS THING?!
Hey there - thanks for posting this idea.
Well, er, it wasn't strictly a GW official campaign, but the essence of the "game" was there would be a group of "warmasters" mods for better words, who ran the different races and acted as arbiters. Each race was given an economy for upkeep of armies, navies, and building fortresses. Each player character had a few armies and navies, and cold conduct diplomancy, and coordinate attacks with his race and their allies. All orders for each turn had to be processed by the warmasters (e.g. move army A from Tor Anroc to Arnheim, loaded on Navy B, or build a new garrison for X gold bars in Lothern)
Evidently, as a race conquered new areas or specific locations, this carried an impact on their perfromance as a race on the whole, but also menat that they spent more garrisoning it. Sometimes players could conduct spying, scouting etc. Just as a matter of interest, I believe that Tuomas Pirinen had some links to the Netcampaign, as a lot of his special characters were used (e.g. I was Hallar the Swordmaster)
Each time a couple of enemy armies were in teh same area, they wouldn't as a matter of course fight, there was some form of algorithm used (e.. really small armies could run away from really big ones on most cirucmstances) , and if it was decided a battle would be fought, based upon the relative army strengths, the two sets of armies would battle it out. This would form the basis for a scenario, detemined by the appropriate warmasters, and then sent out to all teh players, who could paly the battles, send in batt-reps, and the outcome would decide the battle in favour of one player or the other..
I voted that it won't work, but if you do get it working, I'll be your biggest participator, especially if it's map-based.
I think it would be great, but it sounds like it would be very hard to make work, this would be a very complicated campaign unless you used/plagiarised the right materials.
Good luck with it.
Lol - it would indeed be map-based with more detail around cetain areas - Old World, Ulthuan, Naggaroth, Lustria etc.
I recommend looking at the rules for old DnD Birthright for some inspiration on how to run kingdoms.
Anybody know where I could possibly get the birthright rules?
I don't think that the forum has quite the right amount of gear to run a decent map-based campaign. However, in the back of the last edition rulebook that had rules for a node-based campaign. Instead of an outright map, it could be something like
"State, Nation, Region" and each would include things with different bonuses.
For the nation of Ulthuan, there could be the state Lothern, which could have Ports for the Navy and for trading. Each could have it's own bonus.
After taking over all of the States, you have taken the nation, once you have all of the nations in a region, you are well on your way to domination.
It wouldn't really create a variant map for each area, or particularly accurate movement (you could concievable have Orks walk through Brettonia to attack the Southlands) but it would atleast give each army something to defend and something to use. Perhaps special rules could unbalance it, and sticking to the fluff for things like number of cities or ports will alter it a bit, but it should come up pretty fair.
I would like to see this thing go up. Perhaps I shouldn't have refered to it as the net-campaign. That system really could be a bit too overwhelming. Anyone have any other suggestions for rules, or where to get them?
I know this is seriously dredging things up from teh past - but any ideas as to how this can be resurrected perhaps? I think it would be great to have an LO NetCampaign to be honest as it would be a brilliant way to bth promote the game and teh website and to generate interest in the role-playing gaming aspect rather than tourneys
Kithre, I (platonic) love you. I saw this and was thinking "When did I post up my idea??" but I realized that this is EXTREMELY old.
One of the problems which stopped this dead, was that while wracking my brain for ideas, I couldn't come up with a way to keep things reasonable or fair. For example- I only know 1 local LOer. It would work amazingly well if we could all get together like a normal gaming club, but we're far too spread out (one of the things I like about LO, btw). If I say that you can play against Non-Lo'ers, we have no way to validate what you've done for the game. Not to mention that if you're playing against someone who's not involved, they may not take kindly to you using a bonus gained from the LO campaign.
However, I've thought of something which could be very localized here on LO, and while it's not a full-tabled campaign perse, I'm still turning it over in my head. I was going to keep it hush-hush for the time being, since Dael is just starting in on what looks like a promising Arena of Death, but you've just dragged this back up.
CaptainS's Crazy Concoction of Campaigniness
yes, I just made up a word- I'm an English Major, my words are law
To drum up activity in the Campaigns section of the boards, I was considering hosting a system that is one part AoD, one part VoteWar, and one part Online Campaign.
The idea would be to give each participant the chance to create a single regiment of models and a commanding Character, worth a specific points value. Each player (or race or faction) would then be assigned to, or allowed to choose, a location on a map. The map would include bonus areas, roads, special features, and anything else you would expect from a campaign.
From there, battles are fought between players in a similar style to the AoD. Regiment vs. regiment, with rules for magic and shooting similar to my last Arena. Players would either wager map tiles along their mutual border, or would follow a loose storyline (the events of the SoC for example). Players would gain revenue and experience to be spent on unit upgrades, or even to add units to their army in order to expand their roster (battles are still fought 1v1 however). I'm considering using the Warbands rules for progression of individual characters.
The problems that I can see with this campaign is limited support, and fatigue. If we can't muster enough players, the campaign will stall, and if the Campaign Master(s) get tired, and CMs/Players start missing deadlines, we're going to bog down and die. Ideally, I would like to find a way to make a campaign that is less reliant on consistent members, allowing one player to step in for another as needed. That way deadlines could be made longer, and the campaign could possibly even evolve into a constant war between the WHFB sections (similar to the old Hurt/Heal and Forum Combat games).
I agree that if there is fatigue, it will die - as happened with Netcampaign to be honest - although it did run for nigh on 3 years before it eventually DID die. It can spin of scenarios, rules, special battles etc. ANd if it is self conatined then the campaign can function like the Albion campaign - sel focntained and relatively limite in scope, but a nice narrative - e.g. maybe setting it in the far east or the Dragon Isles...
My intent is to avoid Vassal if possible. Not everyone has it, and I for one can't figure out how to use it. Regiment vs. Regiment would be the easiest way to go about it. It means that we'd lose out on scenarios though. The entire campaign would be hosted here on LO.