Long-time WaHNtHaC... readers will remember that from 2018 to 2022, I ran a West Marches campaign. The other day, some folks in the TTRPG Finder: Korea Edition group chat (KakaoTalk...it's like What'sApp for Koreans) were talking about West Marches, asking if anyone was currently running one. I of course mentioned that I had run one, but I don't have the time to start it up again.
It did get me thinking about the campaign I did run, though. I've been going over what I did right, what I did wrong, what I did different than Mr. Robbins' original WM campaign that worked, and how I might do it again if I were to do it again. I'm sure a lot of this is in the various posts I made about the campaign over the years. I should probably read over those posts myself. I'm sure they'll jog a few memories.
Well, I'll get what I'm thinking down now, and maybe edit in some insights if I find time to re-read those old posts. These are in no particular order, just as they come to mind.
Change: I'm not a bachelor in my 20s working a McJob. I've got a wife, kids, and a sometimes demanding job. The original WM campaign happened when a group of players got together, picked a time that worked for them and the DM, and made it happen. Not so for my game. It happened on my schedule. That meant bi-weekly in-person games (usually every other Sunday), and occasionally (regularly during the pandemic) online games using Roll20. This meant that the player planning aspect of the original game was lost, and I tended to have a stable core of players that attended most sessions, but it still worked out OK in the end.
Mistake: Starting the campaign with 5E. Not that there's anything wrong with 5E per se (yeah, some people will argue that point), but I wasn't an expert on all the spells, monsters, etc. I picked it because it was the current edition and I knew I could get players for that. But in the end, all the feats, spells, class abilities, monster abilities, and whatnot that I couldn't recall from memory slowed down the game and made it a pain in the ass to prep for.
Correction: Switching to Treasures, Serpents, & Ruins (basically BECMI with my house rules) made it something I was much more familiar with, easier to prep, and easier to run at the table. Yeah, I lost a few players, but gained a few players as well. And I enjoyed it a whole lot more that way.
Lesson: Next time, start with a system I know well. With random encounter tables being a big part of the game, and a rotating cast of players/characters, I need to know the system much better. Yesterday, I was even considering using BECMI/RC (minus the weapon mastery rules) to make it even simpler for players to drop in, roll up a PC, and game.
Change: Ben Robbins would provide the players with the AC and hit points of creatures they were fighting. I didn't do that. Even with 5E rules, which are a bit more tactical, I kept those secret. And the game worked just fine.
Mistake: Working inside out. Obviously, I started preparing content for stuff close to the starting town (mine is called Silverwood), and prepping areas further out as we went along. I'd try to stay at least a session's worth of play ahead of the players. The problem is, not knowing exactly what was further out made it hard to include clues to things farther on in the Marches. I was often dropping rumors when the PCs went back to town, rather than letting them discover clues within the locations they were exploring.
Lesson: Work outside in, at least on the big picture. THEN work inside out to flesh things out. If I do this again, I'll create a map and note the dungeons and special locations throughout it FIRST. All I really need to know is their location and a general idea of what they're about. Then I can plant seeds in areas closer to home that lead the PCs to explore further.
My abandoned plan for a East Marches (using TS&R Jade) was started this way. I've got a map with dungeons and special locations scattered all through it, all named and with a bit of description. Of course, I used some of them in my current campaign, so if I did restart that project, my current players might be bored going over dungeons they've already pillaged.
Change: Safe Havens. Rather than enforce a return to Silverwood at the end of every session, I had certain areas that could be found (or converted) into safe havens, where a session could end outside of town. The next session, different PCs might be in the party, but we didn't worry about "continuity errors" like that. It allowed the players more confidence to explore, knowing they would only have to retreat a short distance to the closest safe haven at the end of a session, rather than save time to get all the way back to town.
Lesson: I dropped a lot of TSR modules in my West Marches. Quasqueton (B1), the Caves of Chaos (B2), the Moathouse (T1), Castle Ravenloft (I6), White Plume Mountain (S2), the Steading of the Hill Giant Chief (G1), Xak Tsaroth (DL1), and plans to use more (like placing the Tomb of Horrors somewhere!). I wouldn't say it was a mistake using these module dungeons. We had some great sessions exploring them. But at the same time, having these generally large dungeons meant multiple sessions would be spent on them. And the PCs didn't always want to get to a safe haven to continue their explorations. So I broke the rule of always ending a session in Silverwood or a safe haven several times.
If I were doing this again, I'd skip the modules. Sure, they allowed me to get a lot of content in one hex, and the players did have fun exploring them. But smaller dungeons specific to the campaign are better and easier to implement.
Improvement: In addition to XP for creatures slain and XP for treasure (at least after switching to TS&R), I included XP for exploration. Every new hex explored, every hex crossed (explored or otherwise), and each dungeon or special location found were all worth XP. And the XP awards scaled up the farther out the PCs went. What I could have done better, and will strive to do better if I run this gain, is telegraph these awards more. Often, I'd just tally all the XP for a session at the end and award it, rather than let the players know how much was from each of the three sources. I think if they'd known how much pure exploration gained them, they might have pressed deeper into the "white space" on the map.
No comments:
Post a Comment