Running a novel-style epic fantasy campaign - how would you do it?

[Haltherrion]

I think the narrow-wide-narrow approach is a fine way to model the course of the campaign. But beyond that, I guess it depends what you mean by epic.

If by epic you mean, a campaign that lasts a long time, that's probably all you need to do. You can work out the middle bit after you are ready to leave the narrow phase.

If for you epic means a big story with big villains, I think your epic adventure requires some planning. Who is the villain? Why does it matter? How can you build up to the villain?

In the second formulation of epic, a level 1 to 20 progression (slog one might even say ) is not necessary or even necessarily desirable. That's where you might consider starting the PCs much higher level and perhaps even not plan for too many level ups on the way.

To use some fiction analogies, many folks would consider both LOTR and Wheel of Time epics. The former takes place over one year and would not feel to most gamers as more than a level 1 to 5 progression for the hobbits and perhaps less for the other characters. Wheel of Time goes on for much longer, I believe (I assume it does; there's 13 books. Never read it myself though).

It is possible to get to big story and big villains on the long, full level progression path without planning for them ahead of time but it is also quite possible to either miss that goal entirely or fall far short of what you intend. More over, if you do have an epic high level villain in mind, why wait the several years to get to it? Why not cut to the chase?

But again, it depends what you mean by epic. I don't think of long progressions from level 1 to 20 as necessarily epic, myself. I think it takes more than a lot of play time (or in the case of Wheel of TIme, 13 volumes ) to make an epic.

 

[alms66]

Run Dragonlance. Even if you have to convert it, much of the work will have been done for you. Either you and your players will enjoy the experience and you will then have the experience to create one on your own or your group and you will come to dislike that style of play. There seems to be little middle ground regarding DL.

I know absolutely nothing of Dragonlance, so could you (or someone else) please elaborate? What would I need (product-wise) to "run Dragonlance"?

 

[S'mon]

I would focus on the World and the Threat, not the Plot. Spend a lot of time thinking about the Threat - its goals, its plans, its capabilities. You can sketch out a rough timeline of eg the invasion. Think about some ways the Threat could be stopped, but don't force the PCs down a particular railroad. Let the plot epic emerge in play.

For this style I would actually start the PCs fairly competent, maybe 5th level in 4e, and keep the actual threat level mostly low, you definitely do not want high PC attrition. The PCs may be attacked by hordes of Orcs, but make most of them 2nd level minions - allied NPCs should be scaled likewise. And combat should be fairly rare as well as lowish-threat. If you look at say the LoTR trilogy as a model, there are only a few fights that should pose a serious risk of PC death; I'd say the Bridge at Khazad Dum and the Pelennore Fields were the main '+2 over Party Level' encounters.

 

[the Jester]

I'd be very careful not to destroy player choice in this kind of campaign- I've done that, and it eventually fell apart. Beware the railroad. If you want to tell a specific story, write a book; if you want to set up a situation and see how others can affect it, run a campaign.

 

[Mark CMG]

I know absolutely nothing of Dragonlance, so could you (or someone else) please elaborate? What would I need (product-wise) to "run Dragonlance"?

Last person I know who ran it used only the orginal "Dragonlance Adventures" (DLA1: Dragon Dawn, DLA2: Dragon Knight, DLA3: Dragon's Rest) which is 2nd edition but there is 3.5 material to be had. There are also a pile of supplements, if someone wanted broader information for a wider campaign, but that is unnecessary in a plot-driven, novel-style campaign (which is more like a series of flavored encounters supplemented by GM narrative with some potential tangents to keep the players from getting too comfortable). Depends what someone running it feels most comfortable converting, I suppose.

List of Dragonlance modules and sourcebooks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Ariosto]

Even without an enforced plot line, you can have some assurance of certain matters coming to a head if you set up the initial situation strategically. Any old hand at wargames will understand how the combination of objectives, terrain and initial disposition of forces can paint in broad strokes the likely course of an engagement.

"What they don't realize is that it was just a servant of a greater evil," eh? The "onion peeling" scheme was part of the appeal of "Doc" Smith's Lensmen series. "Boskone" had many layers to penetrate, the powers deployed increasing with the magnitude of evil uncovered.

A rationale for such a structure is that the Enemy needs time for its plans to ripen. As awesome as its heart may be, that is at first vulnerable to a well-placed thrust.

A corollary in game logic -- a necessary supplement to whatever rationales might serve an author whose characters do not (as players do) have minds of their own -- is that the players also need time not only to gather intelligence but also to muster their strength. Thus, there is a race between the forces of Good and Evil.

The first thing you need is a goal for your ultimate villains. They want something, and the players want to keep them from getting it.

Next, you need a number of objectives that bring one side or the other closer to its goal. There should be more than one way possible to approach each, and the failure to attain a subsidiary objective or two should not spell a "sudden death" defeat. It may, however, be desirable or even necessary to accomplish some steps in order to follow a given way to an objective.

For instance, let us suppose that there is a legendary magic sword that some dedicated order of Good has been keeping in readiness. Only an heir of a certain legendary hero can wield it, and it will very valuably counter the power of one of the greater minions of the Enemy.

As an objective for the players, this involves
1) securing the sword;
2) securing a wielder;
3) getting sword and wielder into position;
and possibly
4) getting other forces in position to exploit the advantage.

The Enemy will seek to thwart these very steps. Among the things they may try are:
A) capturing the sword;
B) capturing or killing eligible wielders;
C) coming between the keepers of the sword and any wielder trying to reach it;
D) keeping wielder and sword from confronting the minion in question;
E) keeping other forces from deploying to full effect.

As a complication, there could be an heir or heirs at first unknown to both sides. What both sides take at first for the real sword could turn out to be but a decoy.

A "double edged" variant could have an heir in the service of the Enemy eligible to wield the sword, and perhaps even manipulating the champions of Good to bring it to him/her (or him/her to it)!

It is possible that sword and/or heir might trade hands several times, even that the possessors might not always know just what they have until it is lost again.

Now, this may seem quite enough, and I suppose it could be for a novelist. For a game, though, we want to have enough going on to pose the drama of weighing trade-offs and then gambling on the choice. We do not want the whole game -- too soon, anyhow -- to hinge on any one choice or toss of the dice.

"Come for the sword if you will, heroes, or else go to the aid of your allies! Either way, you will pay today a price you will remember until I send you to your graves!"