Continuity between campaigns (in the same world or otherwise)

[Davelozzi]

Growing up I always considered that one of the cool things about RPGs was the possibility that the actions of the players could affect the world in the long term, beyond the current adventure/campaign. I always felt like one campaign would build off another, with the old PCs being present as NPCs in a new campaign in that same world, with their prior actions forming part of the world's background.

Presently, after a long hiatus (7 years from RPGS, 10 years from D&D, 19 years from the Forgotten Realms), I am getting ready to run my group through Storm King's Thunder starting in a couple of weeks and I keep going back and forth about whether to use the default timeline in the adventure (anywhere circa 1486-1490 D.R.), or use a timeline just year or two after my prior Realms campaigns (so about 1359/1360 D.R.), about 130 years earlier.

Part of me feels like for the reasons cited in the first paragraph, it would be a lot cooler to use the earlier timeline and have the old characters still present and accounted for, and to be able to keep the NPCs we liked from the earlier era, etc.

That said, the Realms has a lot of baggage, such as the Time of Troubles (which we played through in our childhood campaign...not the published ToT adventures, just the era itself) but I now feel is sort of lame. I am just not a fan of all the divine upheaval and hands on action from the deities. I feel the same about the Sundering and the 100 year gap, I am not into any of the history written into that, however I do feel that where they left the setting after all that, as presented in the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, is basically as strong a presentation of the Realms as I've seen since 1e (again, as long as the recent history is largely played down or hand-waved away).

More than that though, I am now an adult with other responsibilities and using the later timeline is less work for me, so as not to have to change all of the NPCs and local leaders across the North from what is presented in the adventure.

For what it is worth, my group this time around is five players, two of which played in a long running Realms campaign that I ran through the junior high and high school years, one of which played in a Realms campaign I ran at college, one of which has played only non-Realms campaigns with me in later years, and one who will be brand new to D&D.

I'm really on the fence, and while I realize that ultimately it is a personal call, I am curious as to what other DMs feel about this kind of thing. Do you generally assume that one campaign build off the other, or do you consider each campaign to basically be a reset?

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

For my part, I occasionally throw in references to past campaigns set in the same world, or even events that occurred in concurrent campaigns. I don’t go overboard, as each campaign should be focused on the adventurers now, not the ones from elsewhen.

 

[TwoSix]

For both of my groups, we assume continuity if the world is the same AND the DM is the same. (DM duties rotate in both my groups.) For example, one of my friends is just about to start his second DM go-around, and his campaign is a direct follow-up to his first campaign, set in his homebrew world. But a different friend set his second game in his own homebrew, when his first game was Forgotten Realms, so no continuity.

 

[ccs]

For the past 10 years, most every D&D game (including PF) I've run has been linked to every other D&D/PF game I've run/played in. Somehow.
Some more-so than others, some with just references/cameos.

For ex:
*The 1st 5e campaign I ran down at the shop pretty much ended in a TPK. There was 1 surviving PC & 2 surviving NPCs being rescued from the island by a passing boat.
Remember those 2 NPCs. They'll be important later.

*So the 2nd 5e campaign saw an almost complete change in PLAYERS - there were only 2 returning from campaign#1. One of them being the player of that lone survivor. So we just stripped him of some loot (lost during a pirate attack sometime after being rescued from the island - a story in itself to be told later), & froze him at his current xp until the rest of the new character caught up (he was only 4th lv)

*The 3rd/current 5e campaign started once everyone agreed that they were comfortable with the 5e rules & wanted something more than just dungeon crawling.
The links to other games are there & growing.... 1st, the pirate/fighter from our CoS game made an NPC cameo - because I randomly used the same mini that the guy playing the pirate uses. So we used his name as well.
It's in his backstory that he was involved in the pirate attack Survivor guy escaped from between campaigns 1 & 2.
How the pirate made his way out of Barovia & into fantasy Egypt....
Next I introduced the same Bag of Holding that my own warlock PC carries in our CoS game. This was obvious by the odd contents & glitter the current characters found in it.
In the future the party will find direct links to the Sunday PF game I run (Reign of Winter). It's conceivable that they might actually pursue that & end up playing a completely different AP. :/

*The CoS game we just got done playing? Is linked backwards to my 1st 5e campaign. One of the characters - the pirate was involved in an attack against the boat the surviving PC & 2 npcs were on at it's end.
My warlock I played? Was one of those surviving NPCs. (because I'd procrastinated in writing up a character & just used whatever I had in the folder atm not to slow things down. Dropped her to lv 1 & good to go....) The other npc? Her now missing sister.
How the pirate (and my warlock) end up in D&D Egypt? Nightmare/Hallucination as we nearly drown during the pirate attack & our bodies wash up on shore.

*A short lived all barbarian 5e campaign I ran last spring/summer?
It began at a party hosted at the Inn where my warlock & her sister lived prior to becoming involved in the adventuring life as NPCs in campaign 5e#1. It's also the catalyst for them becoming adventurers.

 

[Lanefan]

Though our campaigns more or less stand alone we've always had it that they're all in the same universe, thus characters from one can and occasionally do appear in another.

Our other main DM has taken his three campaigns (35+ years worth) and in effect tied them all into one great big one - we as players are still trying to figure out all the connections - and there's also been crossovers from his campaign(s) to mine, and vice versa. Other minor campaigns are also assumed to be in the same universe, with potential character crossover etc.

Lan-"as a character, of our 6 main campaign 'worlds' I've now been to 4 of which I've adventured on 3 and was born on the other one"

 

[Davelozzi]

Also, I would be curious to know whether or not this time jump in the Realms, or any other timeline advancement in another campaign settings, is playing into anyone's responses.

 

[Lylandra]

Part of me feels like for the reasons cited in the first paragraph, it would be a lot cooler to use the earlier timeline and have the old characters still present and accounted for, and to be able to keep the NPCs we liked from the earlier era, etc.

That said, the Realms has a lot of baggage, such as the Time of Troubles (which we played through in our childhood campaign...not the published ToT adventures, just the era itself) but I now feel is sort of lame. I am just not a fan of all the divine upheaval and hands on action from the deities. I feel the same about the Sundering and the 100 year gap, I am not into any of the history written into that, however I do feel that where they left the setting after all that, as presented in the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, is basically as strong a presentation of the Realms as I've seen since 1e (again, as long as the recent history is largely played down or hand-waved away).

I'm really on the fence, and while I realize that ultimately it is a personal call, I am curious as to what other DMs feel about this kind of thing. Do you generally assume that one campaign build off the other, or do you consider each campaign to basically be a reset?

Hah funny that you mention the ToT, as we played the (really guidebook railroady) adventures as part of our Planescape/FR mashup campaign. And yes, we did some things in that adventures which were not forseen by the railroad, like seducing Adon or stealing the tables from Myrkul in the final battle and getting stabbed by Godsbane. Which lead to some changes in our "default FR setting" that we incorporated in all other campaigns we played in the FR since then.

After this (and a longer break) we did not really return to FR until 4e where we were playing another epic campaign that used the then-default setting and out next campaigns were in wholly different settings again. But our DM did use our old Planescape-based (and quasi immortal) Sigil inhabitants whenever we had a reason to go there. So yes, we do use continuity

 

[Davelozzi]

And yes, we did some things in that adventures which were not forseen by the railroad, like seducing Adon or stealing the tables from Myrkul in the final battle and getting stabbed by Godsbane. Which lead to some changes in our "default FR setting" that we incorporated in all other campaigns we played in the FR since then.

Classic! That's awesome.



Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[ccs]

Also, I would be curious to know whether or not this time jump in the Realms, or any other timeline advancement in another campaign settings, is playing into anyone's responses.

Not mine.
Campaign #1 & the Barbarian adventures took place on my own vaguely detailed world & a bit of the Pathfinder map.
Campaign #2 used the Greyhawk map.
Campaign #3 is absolutely set in the PF world.
And the CoS game I played in? Completely self contained.

The only time I've set foot on the FR (and known it) this century was during my buddies short lived HotDQ game.
He never specified the year, but I'll assume it was whatever is current.

 

[redrick]

We rotate DMs in a mixture of campaigns and stand-alone adventures. Every DM tends to create their own campaign world, and, if that world gets returned to, it generally gets refined and ret-conned between games. I've set stand-alone adventures in a loosely defined campaign world, but more for general campaign world assumptions than any continuity of characters and specific places. Another one of us rebooted a campaign setting used in a couple of one-shots when it was his turn to run a longer term campaign. The location, overall themes, and even many of the major players were the same, but many of the details had been changed, and the outcome of the previous adventure was nowhere to be seen.

All that being said, it is not uncommon for characters who play in one-shots to reappear in different adventures in other campaign worlds. The Ranger in our most recently finished D&D campaign had been the sole survivor of a few one-shots I'd run over the past two years. Most people don't bring their recurring characters into my one-shots anymore, because the fatality rates tend to be rather high.