Crusade of Fire rekindles campaign interest? Looking for advice... - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

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!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Member Brother Gideon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    37
    Posts
    108
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    15 (x1)

    Crusade of Fire rekindles campaign interest? Looking for advice...

    Hello, all! Not a lot of discussion flying around this part of LO, but perhaps with Crusade of Fire landing there may be some renewed interest in campaigns?

    As for me and my stalwart group of 40K aficionados, we have been yearning for a new campaign to sink our teeth into. Crusade of Fire has given us a good bit to digest, and I was wondering if any of the gamers on here that had run campaigns had any advice or cool ideas that might make it more enticing to a crowd of older, more seasoned veterans...

    Some ideas we liked from Crusade, others we were a little leery of. Essentially, I am seeking advice and looking for any other resources that might be out there to help plan and run a large campaign for 6 to 7 serious players playing several forces, with several casual players occasionally stepping in as well. We want something we can run for a couple months in the Spring and not have it be too confusing or complicated...

    Any advice is appreciated! Thanks in advance.

    Ave Imperator.

    "Confront them with annihilation, and they will then survive; plunge them into a deadly situation, and they will then live. When people fall into danger, they are then able to strive for victory." -Sun Tzu

  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    jboweruk
    Guest

    Not much of an input I know but it's an idea, you say you have several 'casual' players, that only play on and off. What I would suggest is have your factions, with say Imperiu, Chaos, nids, Crons, Orks and Eldar factions, Tau too if you have them (sorry I don't so I tend to forget about the Tau's existence). Maybe have the Orks as mercenaries, or even have the 'casuals' as mercenaries to the different factions.

    Also (and it's something I thought of trying to introduce at our club), is rather than an official campaign in that way, perhaps just set up a series of planets or whatever, and whichever factions a club member brings they play for that day. Then you have the general (overlords?) for each faction and it is they who decide on which tiles to take based on the games fought that day. The overlords would of course be chosen from your regular players, so you know they will always be around. Apart from that, just tweak the CoF campaign rules a little. And have somebody completely neutral set up the maps, so that nobody can instawin a bastion or other vital component. If somebody wants to GM the thing, even better, as they can determine the missions and secret objectives.

    For what it's worth I think CoF is one of GW's best ideas for a long time, and one of those few real gems to come out of there in terms of what it offers players.

  4. Thanks Brother Gideon thanked for this post.
  5. #3
    Benevolent Dictator CaptainSarathai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    inside your head
    Posts
    9,222
    Mentioned
    77 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    1480 (x8)

    Personally, I never really like the GW campaign supplements. They always end up getting house-ruled, tweaked, and rewritten by the guys who buy them and run them, so why not just create your own set of rules for a campaign? Why pay GW prices for a bunch of information that is actually pretty intuitive? Just so that whenever someonehas a dispute you can hide behind the "GW wrote it so it much be fair and balanced" argument instead of having to defend your own self-created system?

    As for the Casual guys. What do you mean 'Casual' and how much are they hopping in and out? If you're going to be part of a campaign, you need to actually be there. If someone just comes up whenever they feel like and plays a game or two with their buddies for fun, that's fine - but don't put them into the campaign. You'll spend hours fretting over how you're going to integrate these random players, you plan the campaign based on the increased number of participants, and then they'll decide that they'd rather stay at home and play Call of Duty all day and you won't see them for six months. I've seen it happen with one of the Fantasy Campaigns we ran at my local - two guys drive up, say that they're going to make this their regular store, we add them into the map, play 4 turns of the campaign while they're there, get into some battles, and then we never see them again. Ever. Do we pull their cities? Do their capitals count as defended or can we just move in and take them? It suddenly threw a wrench in the entire campaign and we actually wound up scrapping two months of gaming to start over.
    If these are people who are genuinely interested in the campaign, but just don't think that their work schedule or wives or whatever will allow them to attend a majority of the sessions, then do what jboweruk suggested and make them minor commanders. My only caution is that it will add a lot of record keeping. You'll need to have a way for them to report their battles, and against which opponents etc in order for them to factor in to the overall campaign.
    Another problem is how will they factor in. If the campaign is map-based, you're always going to have too many, or too few "random player" battles for the right factions. In a map campaign, there isn't a battle against every opponent every turn. In the map campaign that we ran, I would spend several turns marching and maneuvering my forces while other players skirmished with eachother, and at one point I spent a period of 4 actual games besieging an Elf stronghold, where every game I fought nothing but Elves, and every game he fought nothing but Warriors of Chaos. So you have to ask yourself, if the Space Wolves are attacking a Tyranid controlled area, do the games need to be:
    Space Wolf vs. Tyranid?
    Space Marine vs. Tyranid?
    Imperial vs. Non-Chaos Badguys?
    Team Good vs. Team Bad?
    The more ambiguous it all is, the better. Two teams, "Team Pro-Galaxy" and "Team Anti-Galaxy" would be the best way to handle the randoms. But you still have to account for never knowing how many random people will show up to fight battles. If I have seven assaults going on at one time and only two people show up to play, what happens to the other six battles?
    One way that I've handled it in the past was to have a D10 handy. We tallied up the number of games played that week, and determined the percentage of wins each team had. So an example week might look like:
    IG vs. CSM - CSM win
    IG vs. Nid - IG win
    SM vs. CSM - CSM win
    Eld vs. Ork - Ork win

    that's 5 games, where 'Evil' won 4 of them. That's 80% of the evil victories.
    When we headed back to the map, we would roll the dice to decide who got to "place" a result. You had to place results where your own faction won first, and once you were out of victories, you could start to place your losses. If you ran out of table-battles for both factions, any remaining battles on the map were down to a simple roll of the D10.

    So continuing on with our example above:
    Going to the map, there are currently 6 battles taking place, more than we had played. We roll the D10, any result of from 1-8 is an Evil victory, and results of 9-10 are Good victories. The first roll comes up a 7, an Evil victory. The Evil team gets to pick one of the 6 battles and resolve it in their favor. Cross off one of the games where Evil won. The next two results are also Evil victories. They pick two more locations and cross off two more battles. The next result is a Good victory. The Good team picks a location, resolves the battle in their favor, and crosses off their only on-table victory. Now there are two battlefields remaining, and Evil still has a win up it's sleeve. The die comes up as a Good victory. Good has no remaining on table wins, so they get t place the next Evil victory and cross it off. The final battle is a raw percentage, and it comes up as an Evil victory, so the forces of Evil resolve the battle in their favor and move on to the next week.

    One thing that we allowed the generals/core-players to do in this system was to "place their flag". Once all the movement was settled and the locations for all of the battles fixed, each of the VIPs got to place a personal banner down on the site of one battle. For this battle, only their result on the table would determine the outcome, win or loss. It made for interesting tactical decisions, because you could either wager two planets against each other by placing your banner on a different planet than your on-table opponent, so that a win would guarantee a victory for your side on both fronts, or you could pit two players against each other directly by placing their heraldry on the same battlefield, and wagering on that one planet.
    More importantly though, "planting the flag" allowed you to ensure that if you were staking your entire campaign victory on one pivotal battle, some random Joe-Blo didn't come in off the street for a pickup game and screw it all up for you.
    Last edited by CaptainSarathai; December 14th, 2012 at 08:01.
    Pts Values for AoS here!

    Nippon Armybook: Isuu, Scribd, and free at Google Docs

  6. Thanks Brother Gideon thanked for this post.
  7. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  8. #4
    Member Brother Gideon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Age
    37
    Posts
    108
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    15 (x1)

    Thanks for the input, guys. We are continuing to prepare. We will likely be running a map campaign, and we will have three factions- essentially, "Good", "Bad", and "Iam a random force for good or evil". Most of the casual players will get lumped into the third option. They aren't people we don't know, or anything, just the friends that we know don't have as much time to dedicate to a campaign. We aren't playing with any people that we aren't very familiar with, so it will all be in good fun.

    Myself and another friend will be co-GM-ing, so we'll always have someone to oversee battles and add in some fun twists and such. We'll probably be drawing on the CoF ideas predominantly, with our own ideas for special battles and the like. I like the suggestion about the percentages and determining who places tiles. Very interesting. We may borrow that.

    Thanks, again. Ave Imperator.
    "Confront them with annihilation, and they will then survive; plunge them into a deadly situation, and they will then live. When people fall into danger, they are then able to strive for victory." -Sun Tzu

  9. #5
    jboweruk
    Guest

    You could always have Tyranids, then you'd have the "good", "bad" and downright "ugly". LOL

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts