Is it possible to have an exciting and long-lasting campaign in a historical setting?

[clarkvalentine]

From what I have read here and there, a majority of gamers think that playing in a historical setting is boring, or at least much less exciting than a true fantasy world.

I played in a two-year-long campaign set in Elizabethan England run by Cam Banks. It was a blast.

-- What supernatural stuff could be added that wouldn't break the suspension of disbelief for play in a pseudo-mythical Europe of the Dark Ages?

Find out what the actual beliefs of the people were, and allow supernatural stuff to occur that reenforces that. Fvlminata is a fine example of this (though not a d20 game). It's set in ancient Rome, and magic works as many ancient Romans believed it to work. No fireballs being thrown around, but lots of curses, speaking with shades of the dead, divinations, etc.

*Edit - Wow, didn't realize this was my first post. I've been lurking here off an on so long that I'd forgotten I'd never posted.

 

[Silver Moon]

My western campaign is heavily based in history - set in Cochice County, Arizona in 1882, but is clearly an Alternate history as it is also a D&D hybrid and the world has D&D races, religions and magic rather than Judeo/Christian history. Essentially the Protestant Reformation was instead a conflict over Clerical Magic vs. Wizard Magic. Beyond that I've stuck pretty close to real history, but that also gives me and the players the flexibility to change things too so that we don't feel weighted down by the actual history.

 

[Vigilance]

As a guy who's written (and playtested!) books on Arthurian England, Medieval Japan and Dark Ages Europe, I can say yes can be long lasting and fun as soon as your players realize they are not in a "real" world that will unfold like whatever book they buy says, but like any other campaign world.

Chuck

 

[Wombat]

Jane Austen-Regency England campaign

...funny you should mention this...

I am busily trying to come up with an alternate version of Ars Magica based on this era after having read Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell, the Patrick O'Brian books, and seeing the previews for The Brothers Grimm; where before I would have been running from this time period, I new see it as rife with possibilities

 

[tetsujin28]

From what I have read here and there, a majority of gamers think that playing in a historical setting is boring, or at least much less exciting than a true fantasy world.

The majority of gamers, like the majority of people, are lame

Most of the games I've run in c. 30 years have been at least historically-influenced, if not historically-based.

 

[MonsterMash]

Historical settings can be great, but I've mainly done it in Call of Cthulhu with 1880s and 1920s settings, personally I prefer the BRP rules or another levelless system for historical gaming as I worry that in D20 games players would soon be looking to overthrow Charlemagne and establish their own empire or become Ceasar (actually that second one isn't too bad for a long term game).

 

[Inconsequenti-AL]

-- So what do you think about it?
-- Why historical or pseudo-historical campaigns are boring?
-- Or does it provide cool opportunities on the contrary?
-- Tell us of your experiences in such a type of setting?
-- What supernatural stuff could be added that wouldn't break the suspension of disbelief for play in a pseudo-mythical Europe of the Dark Ages?

I'm a big fan of pseudo mythical historical games. Like quite a few other people, most of my experience has been with Ars Magica. Played a couple of long running games... IMO, the history works best to flavour the setting and providing background events. Not such a big fan of getting directly involved in real historical events. Although to contradict myself, an alternative Mongol invasion plot arc was a real blast.

Our DM wasn't a mad history buff, just did some decent research on the area/time he'd set the game in. Think part of it was to pick areas that are accesible, but not too familiar to the players. In his case, Turkey and Russia. To give them their modern names.


Pielorinho - Ars magica, pirates, 1690's. Wow. That sounds cool! I'm jealous of the players, hope it runs as fun as it sounds.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I've thoroughly enjoyed playing in various psuedo-historical campaigns over the years. While I have yet to run one myself that's more history than 'pseudo' or just fantasy, I'm looking forward to that opportunity, when it arises.


And this:

a good DM and players can have fun with anything

is QfT.

 

[Spell]

-- So what do you think about it?

if you concentrate on macro historical events, chances are that you might feel like you were wearing a straight-jacket. if, on the other hand, you use those event as background, and give to your character other goals than, say, stopping napoleon from invading russia, chances are you will be much freer.

that said, you can very well run a pseudo history campaign where your PCs do stop napoleon, and the russian invasion never happens, and the european history changes. how? you decide.
historical campaigns don't have to be 100% accurate. modern campaign aren't, and i don't hear many people complaining that the last u.f.o. conspiracy theory doesn't hold water in the real world...

-- Why historical or pseudo-historical campaigns are boring?

because complaining people either:
1. don't know their history
2. don't have imagination
3. think that since it's written in the book, it really went that way
4. have a monolithical and static version of history

-- Or does it provide cool opportunities on the contrary?

nothing is cool or dull by itself. it depends on your campaign idea, on your players, and so on.
you could plan a fantastic campaign in real life 17th century caribbean... but if your players hate pirates, everybody will have a rough time.

-- Tell us of your experiences in such a type of setting?

i never run a full length historical campaign (apart from victorian cthulhu), so i can't really tell. i think, generally speaking, it goes well if everybody accepts the fact that the GM does not have an encyclopaedia in his brain, and he doesn't know everything. if he screws something up, after doing some research, then who cares?
and even if you calim something quite inaccurate, who says that your campaign world isn't in fact, an alternate earth? sure, they didn't have electric light in the street, in RW 1890s london... but if your version of that setting has, well, then maybe there is something more going on, than simple ignorance on your behalf.

-- What supernatural stuff could be added that wouldn't break the suspension of disbelief for play in a pseudo-mythical Europe of the Dark Ages?

i think it's not a matter of suspension of disbelief, but a matter of internal logic and realism.
if your middle ages europe is filled with magical items and dragons, there's no way that it's gonna feel like the RW middle age europe... so you should expect your players to rise theyr eyebrows if you make any claim of the contrary

 

[Spell]

I enjoy historical games better than just about any other genre.

i must say tht i feel the same...
when everything is theoretically possible, the awe factor is reduced.
you walk into a cave in the forgotten realms and find a fire breathing hydra... yawn! been there, done that.
you walk into a cave in 19th century california and find the same beast... holy bowly, how in the world could that happen? what the hell is going on? how is it possible? are there other hydras out there? is this the only one? how could it stay there, unknown to the population? how is it scientifically possible that such a beast even exist?

all of the sudden, the simple appearance of an usual suspect gives way to dozens and dozens of plot twists and campaign ideas...