The freedom of one-shots!

[Alan Shutko]

I've been too busy with work and a toddler to run an ongoing campaign, but I was reading through old Dungeon magazines and found a gem of an adventure in Dungeon 22: Rank Amateurs. It's a fun adventure for humanoids in BECMI following the Orcs of Thar humanoid classes. It looks perfect for a couple-session game!

Since I don't have to run the game at any particular date, and I don't have to worry about making it an ongoing concern, I get to go wild prepping it. I'm making handouts for the sign of the inn, journals, etc. I'm going to use World Works Games terrain to build the fort that they can explore in the game. I need to go come up with ideas for foods that would be served in a humanoid tavern. Maybe I'll figure out sound effects too!

This is great! I'd never be able to go this crazy for an ongoing campaign!

 

[Alan Shutko]

It's a lot more time than I would spend on an ongoing game, but since it's a one-shot, I can schedule it for June. That gives me months to get things together... Half hour here on the sign, some hours there on the terrain, but spread over enough days that I can do it even with everything that's going on.

 

[Water Bob]

How about playing, then, when you're ready? You can have your cake and eat it too. There's no law that says you've got to play ever week, or twice a month.

My current game is like this. We had a 5 month gap, played, skipped two weeks, and are now playing two weekends in a row.

We play when we can. Sometimes that's a lot, close sessions. Sometimes that means skipping months. But, we always come back to it.

 

[MortalPlague]

I love one-shots. They give me a chance to put together a whole world of stuff with no need to check continuity, or to even obey the 'rules' of the setting I've put together. Also, it eases the stress of prepping encounters a little; if you make it too tough and a character dies, it's only a one-shot. No big deal.

Also, from a player's standpoint, it lets me try out all the interesting concepts I have that might not be suitable for a campaign. For instance, in an epic 4E game, I played a pair of warriors who functioned as a single tempest fighter, down to sharing a space. Mechanically, they were one creature. But flavor-wise, Will and Charles were two people, exchanging banter as they carved up the battlefield.

 

[Piratecat]

I couldn't agree more. It's a major reason why I go to conventions; they give me the chance to haul out and/or play a one shot. I usually have 3-4 prepped at any one time. Right now it's Ashen Stars (soon to be gratefully retired since I've run it almost ten times), Night's Black Agents, and Marvel Superheroes.

 

[MortalPlague]

Right now it's Ashen Stars (soon to be gratefully retired since I've run it almost ten times)

That must be entertaining; to see different groups attempt the adventure, to see who they choose to interact with, what details they pick up on, and how they approach the challenges therein. In almost ten times, have you ever had a party derail the adventure?

 

[delericho]

Yep, I love one-shots. I don't have time to be involved in more than one campaign at a time, but that's just not enough gaming! But one-shots allow me to schedule a game well in advance, to build up a one-off scenario, and give the freedom to really let loose - there are things I can readily do in a one-shot that I simply wouldn't touch in a campaign. Plus, I really get to take the gloves off in terms of lethality, in a way that (despite my best efforts) I never quite manage to do in campaign play.

The other thing I think is useful, although we haven't yet managed to get off the ground, is the notion of an "open table". This is basically something between the one-shot and the "true" campaign - there's a common set of characters and a certain amount of continuity, but it doesn't have anything like the same expectations in terms of regularity/attendance. The idea being that this allows you to just schedule games whenever, and hopefully get together some random group of players to adventure. I think it requires a certain pool of players to get started... but once you've got that, it should not only be self-sustaining, but may well enable you to increase the available pool of players.

 

[Piratecat]

The other thing I think is useful, although we haven't yet managed to get off the ground, is the notion of an "open table". This is basically something between the one-shot and the "true" campaign - there's a common set of characters and a certain amount of continuity, but it doesn't have anything like the same expectations in terms of regularity/attendance. The idea being that this allows you to just schedule games whenever, and hopefully get together some random group of players to adventure. I think it requires a certain pool of players to get started... but once you've got that, it should not only be self-sustaining, but may well enable you to increase the available pool of players.

I'm doing exactly this with my current playtest. I'm running B1: In Search of the Unknown. I have about 10 people in my playtest group, and about 4-5 can make it in any given session. It works perfectly; each group leaves cryptic notes for the next group on the door to the dungeon, and they crow about the great treasure they grabbed from under the nose of the other adventurers.

 

[Piratecat]

That must be entertaining; to see different groups attempt the adventure, to see who they choose to interact with, what details they pick up on, and how they approach the challenges therein. In almost ten times, have you ever had a party derail the adventure?

Because the ending isn't scripted - the bad guys have some failsafe plans in place, but I know their goals so it's easy to interpolate their actions based on how they're caught and how the PCs approach them - I haven't had the adventure derailed per se. One glorious group at Anonycon DID manage to start a major civil war through their actions, with the six PCs each choosing sides in the conflict instead of sticking together when everything went to Hell. That was kind of amazing.

The best example for multiple play sessions is Dread. Because every player fills out a questionnaire, PC personalities vary remarkably from one game to the next. I must have my Dread scenarios "The Curious Murder of Artemis Hume" and "Separation Anxiety" twelve times each, and they're completely different every single time. At one con, I had four people playing the same character in different sessions sitting around laughing about how their answers were completely different.