What is a D&D "campaign"?

[Lanefan]

I view a campaign as the "tales of a certain set of adventurers." Granted one or two may come or go without calling it a new campaign. But if the characters change too drastically with different goals and motivations in my book that is a new campaign.

OK, let's see if I can draw up a few hypothetical game histories here and see what's a campaign and what isn't... (I'd format it better but I don't know how...)

Terms used: "Single-track" means one party all the way. "Two-track" means two (or more) parties in the same setting with little or no interaction. "Multi-track" means two or more parties regularly interacting. Anything other than single-track assumes the parties are being run concurrently i.e. there is more than one session a week (or whenever).

I'm assuming no major mid-stream rule changes...rules used at start are rules used at end. Which of these are campaigns?

Game 1. Same DM throughout. Single-track. One adventure only. Characters A,B,C,D start ==> characters A,B,C,D finish.

Game 2: Same DM throughout. Single-track. Multiple adventures tied together by a single story arc. Characters A,B,C,D start ==> characters A,B,C,D finish.

Game 3: Same DM throughout. Single-track. Multiple adventures that start and finish more than one story arc one after another. Character turnover not related to story changes. Characters A,B,C,D start ==> characters C,D die off and are replaced by E,F,G ==> characters B,F retire and are replaced by H,I ==> characters E dies and is replaced by J ==> characters A,J die ==> character B comes back in ==> characters B,F die and are replaced by K,L,M ==> characters G,H,I,K,L,M finish. (player turnover almost as great as character turnover, but at least one makes it all the way through)

Game 4: Same DM throughout. Single-track to start, splits into two-track later. In most other respects same as Game 3 along each track once split. Little to no character crossover between the two tracks. Complete character turnover between start and finish overall and on one of the split tracks; the other split track has at least one character survive throughout. (this was my Telenet)

Game 5: Same DM throughout except as noted. Single-track to start, splits into multi-track later. Character turnover similar to Game 3 except also lots of character crossover between parties once multi-track starts. One party jumps to another DM's world for one adventure then returns and continues original game. Several embedded story arcs started and finished at various times by various parties; sometimes a story started by one party is finished by another, knowingly or not. (another DM's Dafan and my Riveria was/is like this)

To me, 2-5 are each campaigns, though if someone says that Game 4 was one campaign that became two I'd not argue too long. Game 1 does not have enough in it to call it a campaign, however.

Lanefan

 

[The Shaman]

Thematically-linked encounters form an adventure, and thematically-linked adventures form a campaign.

IMO.

 

[RFisher]

It depends. I probably use the word in almost all of those senses at some time or another.

Although, I tend to think of it mostly as somewhere between "a series of adventures connected by the same party (though the exact line-up of PCs may change)" to "a series of adventures in the same world, in the same instance of that world, run by the same DM".

 

[Melan]

From my viewpoint, a campaign is kept together by a sense of continuity. This can mean player characters, players, setting or action. In my experience, a campaign may survive TPKs as long as associated characters can pick up the flag (there was one noteworthy event when our group was slaughtered, we brought in the backup who were also slaughtered, but finally the third wave prevailed and carried on adventuring). A total change of the player pool or if the DM is replaced from the outside is almost certain doom, because the shared assumptions are unraveled and the continuity is lost. In this case, we can speak of a campaign set in the same milieu and related to another, but not the same thing.

 

[el-remmen]

For me campaign has nothing to do with the setting - but rather the characters and the continuity of their story or stories.

So if Adventuring Party A starts their adventures in Greyhawk and then go to the Realms, that is still the same campaign.

Also, multiple parties in the same setting would be different campaigns UNLESS one of the features of said campaign is that the players will be playing different PCs doing different but related things (perhaps not evening knowing each other) around the world.

Here is a list of the campaigns I have run in Aquerra.

 

[Lanefan]

Also, multiple parties in the same setting would be different campaigns UNLESS one of the features of said campaign is that the players will be playing different PCs doing different but related things (perhaps not evening knowing each other) around the world.

Agreed, though the players need not be the same...as long as the actions of one party can affect the other, and-or the parties meet and interact from time to time.

Lanefan