D&D General How Insane Is This Idea?

[Zaukrie]

I've played every DnD version, and Savage Worlds (twice, long ago). I own Level Up and 13th Age and PF2e and a few starter sets of other games.....

I'd like to try new games, and one idea is.......My party ends up in Sigil (they've chosen to follow a Nothic and Neogi thru a portal), and every time they go thru a new door, they go to an alternative universe where the world is just a bit different. So different, we run a different game for 2-3 sessions to learn their new powers.

This would require me to roll up (for the first world anyway, as a surprise) three PCs above level 1, and to learn new systems (at least enough to run a game). this would be online, as we are in different states.

While I think it would be interesting to run a rogue in 4-7 different systems, I'm not sure I have the bandwidth to learn that many systems. This isn't my only hobby....

 

[Steampunkette]

I think it's absolutely brilliant. So long as your players either know those systems or are interested in trying them out!

But I also recommend the last world you go to be the Level Up world... and stay there. >.>

 

[Clint_L]

To me, that sounds like a lot of work for maybe not that much benefit. Are those systems really distinct enough to make the change in gameplay worth the effort?

I have actually done what you describe, but I substitute games that are radically different...and easy. I have used Dread in my campaigns, but if you can pull a jenga block, you can play Dread. And my next D&D session is going to be mostly done using Fiasco, with some D&D bells and whistles (I am really looking forward to dungeon mastering being shared equally with every player at the table, working alone and in groups).

So if you're going to change systems, I suggest really changing systems. Maybe they are all transformed into animals and its suddenly a game of Trash Pandas or something.

 

[J.Quondam]

It's a fine idea, imo! I vaguely recall someone here on ENWorld has mentioned a campaign like that, where they hopped through portals to different worlds, each one based on a different edition of D&D. Would be an interesting Planescape premise.

Somewhat different, but...
Several years ago I did something similar using ultralite systems. It was structured like a book club: when we switched systems, everyone had to read the rules* on their own time, then we spent a session converting existing characters and playtesting the rules for a few test scenarios. Then in the next few sessions we just continued the campaign with same PCs but restatted on the new charsheets.

The campaign was just homebrew generic fantasy. It wasn't explicitly set up any logical points to switch the rules; we just decided to change every few sessions. (The point at the time was to play with new rules, not focus on the campaign story.) In retrospect, though, I wish we'd thought to structure the campaign itself to something like you mention, with portals or planar rifts or something to purposefully provoke the switch in rules.

Of course, the reason that experiment worked fairly well was (1) everyone involved was specifically interested in trying new rules; and (2) learning those specific rules was easy as they were so small. I don't think it would have worked with more full featured games because of the learning curve. On the other hand, if everyone is already somewhat familiar with the various game systems in question (eg, maybe using quickstart rules and the like?), it could be a really fun thing to try.


* Our candidate rule sets were limited to 40 pages max. The ones we actually used were all under 5 or 10 pages, iirc, even as small as one page.

 

[Voadam]

When running a Pathfinder 1e game and the party went into the First World of the Fey where the rules are arcane and obscure and the world feels more ancient primeval and off I temporarily ran the game using 1e AD&D rules. I felt this matched the fey otherworld feel I was going for well. Part of it was this was a known temporary thing so the party was willing to be disoriented and off their carefully built mechanical stat blocks for a while knowing it was not a bait and switch for the permanent campaign.

I think it can work for a Sigil and different planes experience, but matching planes to systems for a lot of different stuff will be a bit tough.

On Asgard you use Exalted, on Mechanus you use Star Trek, In Hell you use 40K, etc.

 

[overgeeked]

I've played every DnD version, and Savage Worlds (twice, long ago). I own Level Up and 13th Age and PF2e and a few starter sets of other games.....

I'd like to try new games, and one idea is.......My party ends up in Sigil (they've chosen to follow a Nothic and Neogi thru a portal), and every time they go thru a new door, they go to an alternative universe where the world is just a bit different. So different, we run a different game for 2-3 sessions to learn their new powers.

This would require me to roll up (for the first world anyway, as a surprise) three PCs above level 1, and to learn new systems (at least enough to run a game). this would be online, as we are in different states.

While I think it would be interesting to run a rogue in 4-7 different systems, I'm not sure I have the bandwidth to learn that many systems. This isn't my only hobby....

Unless those systems are nearly identical, it's going to be a massive burden on the players to play. Most people refuse to learn a new system as is. Learning a dozen in a short time...not a great idea. The other option is to run it as a black box, i.e. the players just don't know what the rules to the game actually are...which presents a whole host of other problems. Unless the players are 100% on board with the idea this could crash and burn quickly. It's definitely not something you surprise your group with.

 

[Deset Gled]

This really sounds like a "make sure everyone is on board with it" scenario. There have definitely been times where I would have jumped at playing this. I'm a big believer in the concept that mechanics are part of the narrative, and it would be an awesome way to demonstrate the differences in worlds. And it would be a great way to get into new systems.

But right now, I'm more in a "Can't we just play the game?" space in my head. The idea of learning that many sets of rules and keeping them straight feels more like work than play.

It's likely that my desire to play a game like this will change over time. Especially if things with WotC continue to head south. This might be an ideal way to test new systems and decide what to use as a OneD&D alternative. But I'm not at that point, yet.

 

[Richards]

I did something a little bit similar years ago, running our initial D&D 3.0 campaign with my two sons. They were running a male human cleric and a female elf sorcerer, and they both got hit by a pair of variant nagas with venom-laced tail stingers. The venom caused them to hallucinate, so I kept taking away their D&D PC sheets and replacing them with sheets from the game we were (allegedly) really playing. In turn, their PCs (in their minds) became:

• Harry Sullivan and Sarah Jane Smith encountering cybermats in a game of "Time Lords and Temporal Anomalies"
• Simon Tam and River Tam being chased in a hospital in a game of "Rebels and Reavers"
• Xander Harris and Buffy Summers fighting vampires in a graveyard in a game of "Slayers and Scoobies"
• Fox Mulder and Dana Scully fighting a pyrokinetic in a warehouse of fireworks in a game of "X-Files and Extraterrestrials"
• John Steed and Emma Peel fighting cybernauts in an office building in "Agents and Avengers"
• Reed Richards (Mister Fantastic) and Susan Richards (Invisible Woman) fighting Doctor Doom in "Marvels and Menaces"

In each case, it seemed as if they were waking up from a dream and this new reality was what was really going on. Eventually, the hallucinogenic venom wore off and they found themselves back in the treasure room, where they were being partially swallowed by the nagas. But I had made up alternate PC sheets for each of the alternate versions of their PCs, which included a logo of the fake game in the corner. This had the advantage of using the same set of rules (D&D 3.0), just a continuing sequence of different settings.

It was fun for one session, but I wouldn't have wanted it to have gone any further than that.

Johnathan

 

[Zaukrie]

Unless those systems are nearly identical, it's going to be a massive burden on the players to play. Most people refuse to learn a new system as is. Learning a dozen in a short time...not a great idea. The other option is to run it as a black box, i.e. the players just don't know what the rules to the game actually are...which presents a whole host of other problems. Unless the players are 100% on board with the idea this could crash and burn quickly. It's definitely not something you surprise your group with.

That's my fear. Thanks,

 

[Zaukrie]

This really sounds like a "make sure everyone is on board with it" scenario. There have definitely been times where I would have jumped at playing this. I'm a big believer in the concept that mechanics are part of the narrative, and it would be an awesome way to demonstrate the differences in worlds. And it would be a great way to get into new systems.

But right now, I'm more in a "Can't we just play the game?" space in my head. The idea of learning that many sets of rules and keeping them straight feels more like work than play.

It's likely that my desire to play a game like this will change over time. Especially if things with WotC continue to head south. This might be an ideal way to test new systems and decide what to use as a OneD&D alternative. But I'm not at that point, yet.

This, especially the second paragraph. Thanks,