Long-Term Campaign Building

I write a lot about new RPGs including reviews of the most recent releases. But what about that RPG a GM sticks with in a campaign lasting months or even years? Even though I play every other week consistently and have done so for over two decades I’ve only had a couple of campaigns that lasted over a year. What would it take to have a favorite campaign last for over a year and is it worth even trying to make it happen? I want to tackle the second part of that question first.

Map of The World Fantasy - Free image on Pixabay​

Is It Worth It?​

When I read the accounts of GMs and players of long term campaigns, the consensus is that the campaign is great and that returning to the same setting is rewarding. Of course, the sampling is biased since any players who dropped out are unlikely to post about playing in a long term campaign if they didn’t stick with it. But based on the GM feedback, I think it can be worthwhile of the player characters and the setting itself are interesting and fun. Like wanting that second season of Firefly we never got.

Does the GM Want to Make It Happen?​

This might seem obvious, but not every GM wants to run a long term campaign. A GM might want to play a variety of systems or campaigns or not have to worry about long term burnout. I tend to jump system to system in campaigns that last a few months for example. However, my current campaign of The One Ring (2nd Edition) intrigues me enough that this campaign is on track to last longer. If you as the GM don’t want to run campaigns of over a year there is still value in finishing step one.

Step One: Finish Existing Campaigns​

I used to have a bad habit of stopping campaigns in the middle and starting something new. In the middle might be with PC goals unfinished, the big bad undefeated, or even right in the middle of an adventure. I started working on actually finishing campaigns before I tried to run a long term campaign. I would rather play four campaigns in one year and finish each one than try to run two and stop both in the middle. If you can start to finish campaigns then I think the interest in running a longer campaign may start to develop naturally as you improve your campaign building and finishing skills. How to successfully finish a campaign is another topic all together and I might share my thoughts at that in a future article. It is an essential skill in any GM’s toolbox.

Step Two: Work with the Players to Finish at Least One Character Arc​

Not all my players have arcs for their characters. But for those that do, I also worked on helping them finish at least the one arc before finishing the campaign. For example, in the Alien game I ran one PC was actually planning to betray the group to her corporation. I made sure the end of that campaign also included the betrayal by that PC. It was intense and well worth the effort. And just maybe we’ll return for a second season of Alien eventually.

Step Three: Find a Setting That Inspires You​

This one took me a bit longer. I like the universe of Alien but it wasn’t until I ran The One Ring (2nd Edition) that I found a setting that inspired my creativity. I started out just creating various landmarks (location based mini-adventures) and running NPCs and cultures that interested me. This in turn hooked my players, whose Player-heroes started rebuilding the desolate lands around Lake Evendim. This led me to reading more about Eriador and Middle-earth and it inspired me with ideas for a year two to the campaign.

Step Four: Play the Next Season Instead of the Next Campaign​

If you get all the way here, you are on your way. If your players and you enjoy wrapping up a campaign arc, you don’t have to stop and start a new campaign. If your mind swirls with new adventure ideas and the players have more arcs to explore, you are on the road to running a long term campaign.

My Year One The One Ring (2nd Edition) campaign lasted three months, which is about normal for me. However, instead of starting something new, I’m working on what I consider a new season of our already existing campaign. We’re moving away from Lake Evendim to a new location and I’m bringing in some new NPCs and cultures hinted at in the first season.

Even better, these NPCs, landmarks, cultures, and locations were all hinted at in the first season. I’m continuing the campaign because these seeds are ripe to grow into full-fledged landmarks and adventures. My players get the reward of both seeing their Player-heroes continue to grow as well as getting answers to some of these teased mysteries they found in season one of the campaign.

Conclusions​

I’m never going to force myself to GM something except campaign conclusions and if a campaign seems to be wrapping up instead of rolling on, I plan to finish it with some kind of conclusion. If, however, like my Middle-earth setting, the campaign continues to inspire me I’m going to roll on and see what happens next. This excitement is similar to, but in many ways better, than the excitement that is generated by a new campaign kickoff. I don’t have to worry about learning brand new rules for example and I have many adventure ideas to offer my players instead of just a few. And some of these adventures stem from actions they have taken directly in game. I can’t wait to play and see what happens next in season two of our campaign.

 

[Piratecat]

I've run a 16-yr campaign and two 10-11 yr campaigns, and played in a 16-yr campaign. My current Swords of the Serpentine campaign is about three years old. I'm a big fan of this style of play. I've moved towards playing in Seasons, like seasons of TV shows, each of which gets wrapped up excitingly. Then after the season ends we choose whether to continue or do a different game.

If I had to pick one GM-influenced thing that defines the success of a long campaign, it's consequences. Players need to see that their actions are fundamentally changing the world around them, and adventures need to occur that could have never happened if the PCs hadn't been involved with an earlier adventure. If you can show that the PCs help shape the world, I think players are more likely to come back to see what happened next.

 

[payn]

Couple things seem to keep me from the long term setting campaign. I don't like high level play much (+10 level). I have been enjoying the adventure path model where you have a specific experience start to finish. I did spend about 10 years over 6-8 different adventure paths in Golarion so I don't know if that would count or not?

 

[sevenbastard]

I've ran 4 campaign in the latest ten years. Three had 50 ish sessions and one was about 120. As a player in that time three campaign of 10 to 20 sessions. And a few that fizzled out after 2 to 5.

I think sessions is they way to count campaigns not years. I've found that A every other week game probably does 23 sessions a year were a weekly game might do 46. That's a big differance in game time..

But even that can be subjective because my 50 session campaign of 4 hour sessions that takes about 14 months to do is probably about equal in game time to my 20 session campaign of 10 to 14 hour sessions back in high school that took 6 weeks over a summer break.

But I also get that staying focused on one game and setting over time can be hard. With all the different systems out there. During all of my last 4 campaigns I ran some one shots or small 3 session mini series. Some campaign adjacent and some not but these broke up my focus and helped keep breaknup the routine.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I looooooove long-term campaigns. My typical campaign lasts for two years.

One of the most rewarding things for me is the return to the scene of the crime. It is so rewarding in a long-term campaign when characters return to a town, dungeon, or NPC and get to see how things have changed

 

[Ath-kethin]

I have run several long-running campaigns, 2 years to 4 years long, and I really enjoy them. As a GM, I find that the longer I stay with one setting/group/campaign, the easier it gets to generate material for that campaign.

Side note: I've never cared for adventure paths, back to the very first one in Dungeon Magazine. I like stringing together adventures and modules, tailored to the interests of my players, and the big, long plot just doesn't really facilitate that style to my satisfaction.

I truly believe that Point #4 up above is the most important, though. It's OK to have a long term villain in mind or something like that, but I have found the greatest satisfaction in a story that developed episodically according to what the players/characters wanted to do. I've had success in various editions of D&D as well as DCC and other games with this approach.

 

[payn]

I have run several long-running campaigns, 2 years to 4 years long, and I really enjoy them. As a GM, I find that the longer I stay with one setting/group/campaign, the easier it gets to generate material for that campaign.

Side note: I've never cared for adventure paths, back to the very first one in Dragon Magazine. I like stringing together adventures and modules, tailored to the interests of my players, and the big, long plot just doesn't really facilitate that style to my satisfaction.

I truly believe that Point #4 up above is the most important, though. It's OK to have a long term villain in mind or something like that, but I have found the greatest satisfaction in a story that developed episodically according to what the players/characters wanted to do. I've had success in various editions of D&D as well as DCC and other games with this approach.

I'm the opposite. As a player, I find GMs rarely cater to my interests. The adventure paths give me something to work with and expect from GMs. Even a sandbox needs a theme in my opinion of course. Open sandboxes that cater to whatever the players want always fizzle quickly because of how aimless they often are. A good AP can last 1-2 years easy. I do find Pirates of Drinax for Traveller to be an exception to the sandbox campaign. The players are given a very lofty goal during session 1 so everything they do has a purpose. YMMV.

 

[Hand of Evil]

My games are not long term, only running 6 to 9 months but for the last few years have taken place within the same campaign setting, the world of the Witcher using the video game companion world book and Zweihander rule system. Before that, it was Warhammer. I do have my own setting but have rarely played in it.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I'm the opposite. As a player, I find GMs rarely cater to my interests. The adventure paths give me something to work with and expect from GMs. Even a sandbox needs a theme in my opinion of course. Open sandboxes that cater to whatever the players want always fizzle quickly because of how aimless they often are. A good AP can last 1-2 years easy. I do find Pirates of Drinax for Traveller to be an exception to the sandbox campaign. The players are given a very lofty goal during session 1 so everything they do has a purpose. YMMV.

I agree on "sandbox" campaigns - an entirely player directed campaign tends to just implode IME.

What I do is choose adventure modules that cater to the players interests and their characters' backstories. For example, in a Primeval Thule campaign I ran years ago, I chose an aftermath-of-a-heist style adventure because I knew the rogue and the rogue's player would get a spotlight, then ran another stop-the-demon-summoning adventure and tied it into the barbarian's and warlock's mutual history. Everyone gets a chance to shine, and every adventure lets the whole group do their thing.

This approach keeps the game feeling personal and intense, and I really like that. I've had multiple players tell me I ran their favorite D&D campaigns they've ever played, so if we believe them it seems I'm not alone in my feelings.

 

[payn]

I agree on "sandbox" campaigns - an entirely player directed campaign tends to just implode IME.

What I do is choose adventure modules that cater to the players interests and their characters' backstories. For example, in a Primeval Thule campaign I ran years ago, I chose an aftermath-of-a-heist style adventure because I knew the rogue and the rogue's player would get a spotlight, then ran another stop-the-demon-summoning adventure and tied it into the barbarian's and warlock's mutual history. Everyone gets a chance to shine, and every adventure lets the whole group do their thing.

This approach keeps the game feeling personal and intense, and I really like that. I've had multiple players tell me I wan their D&D campaigns they've ever played, so if we believe them it seems I'm not alone in my feelings.

Nice approach. I would worry that modules in this style might be too specific to one PC and the rest might feel like fish out of water. Another reason I like APs is players guides usually put together a team that fits what the modules toss at them thematically. Though, I do think module jumping allows the campaign to switch it up so you are not locked into the same adventure type for long periods of time.