First post from a noob player in the middle of a campaign with myself as the Imperial. We've played Aftermath and two other missions and I'm already looking for ways to extend the experience.

I've looked through the Campaign Guide, and it looks like it's pretty impossible to have more than 11 missions per campaign (maybe 12, if you pull the Captured mission), and that no group would ever get more than 14 XP in a normal campaign, while most end up with 10-12 XP. I highly suspect that at least some of my crew will want to stick with their characters even after the end of the standard campaign.

I've also read about the mini-campaigns like BG and TS that are only about 4-6 missions, but can also be played as side missions in a base campaign.

Is it possible to combine the two into a "mega-campaign" where you have maybe 16 or 18 missions and end up with 15-18 XP? I suspect this may screw with balance, but it might work if I tweak some of the rewards throughout. I'm treating my role as more of a GM and also trying to sprinkle in some RPG elements where I can, so I don't mind the extra work of making sure things stay balanced, but I don't want to take the fun out of the game by making everyone overpowered.

It would absolutely screw with balance- but if your group isn't super competitive and is mainly just in it for fun, it could be a cool experiment.

I'd love for FFG to release official rules on playing all campaigns in order, and other rules for playing just the Big Boxes in order.

It would absolutely screw with balance- but if your group isn't super competitive and is mainly just in it for fun, it could be a cool experiment.

I'd love for FFG to release official rules on playing all campaigns in order, and other rules for playing just the Big Boxes in order.

Screw with balance how? Would it be too easy for them, or for me?

Well, if you play it that you just bring in your heroes fully upgraded into a new campaign, it would be ridiculously in favor of the Rebels.

You'll still have your class cards and maybe some Agenda cards/ villains you've won, but the reduced threat is going to ruin you- not to mention that you'll typically have missions built for lower leveled characters at the beginning of a campaign anyway, and the heroes fully upgraded will probably breeze through them.

That's why you'll definitely have to tinker a little bit.

I am sure it could be done but it will require you to do some home work and play test it out to figure out what needs to be replaced or changed.

Let us know how you make out!

One thought i have heard in previous posts is you just modify the threat, (following the threat progression from the core campaign, in that every second or third mission, threat goes up by one, so, your first mission in the mini campaign would be threat 7, etc...).

Here's an idea, play all the missions in order based on their threat level using the core as a base. So you'd play all the Threat level 2 missions, then the threat level 3 missions, etc, etc.

My extended campaign log would look like this:

Threat 2

Introduction - Core (Aftermath)

Introduction - Return to Hoth (The Battle of Hoth)

Side Mission

Threat 3

Story Mission 1 - Core

Introduction - Twin Shadows (Hunted Down)

Story Mission 1 - Return to Hoth

Introduction - The Bespin Gambit (Reclamation)

Side Mission

Threat 4

Story Mission 2 - Core

Story Mission 1 - Twin Shadows

Interlude - Return to Hoth (Return to Echo Base)

Story Mission 2 - Return to Hoth

Story Mission 1 - The Bespin Gambit

Side Mission

Side Mission

Threat 5

Story Mission 3 - Core

Story Mission 2 - Twin Shadows

Finale - Twin Shadows

Story Mission 2 - The Bespin Gambit

Finale - The Bespin Gambit

Side Mission

Threat 6

Story Mission 4 - Core

Story Mission 3 - Return to Hoth

Finale - Core

Finale - Return to Hoth (Our Last Hope)

This is just a first draft. I'm sure these could be re-arranged for maximum effect.

In an effort to keep things balanced, you only get the rewards (xp, credits and influence) from the missions on the core log. You can see that there are only enough side missions to equal that which are included in the core campaign. I think this will help to keep balance as well. If you win other rewards from other campaign missions (Villains and/or Allies) those can be kept. Perhaps making a cap as to how many of those each side can have as not to overwhelm and to allow everyone to be able to keep tabs on what's going on. I think that each side should also be rewarded the best rewards regardless of who won the mission, again to keep balance.

Of course there are still plenty of areas that need to be tweaked, such as what to do with bane and boon missions as well as how to tell a proper story with so many different story lines going on at once. I guess you can just run it as a non-chronological story like "Pulp Fiction". I'm sure there are other problems I haven't mentioned or thought of. I'd love to hear thoughts.

Here's an idea, play all the missions in order based on their threat level using the core as a base. So you'd play all the Threat level 2 missions, then the threat level 3 missions, etc, etc.

My extended campaign log would look like this:

Threat 2

Introduction - Core (Aftermath)

Introduction - Return to Hoth (The Battle of Hoth)

Side Mission

Threat 3

Story Mission 1 - Core

Introduction - Twin Shadows (Hunted Down)

Story Mission 1 - Return to Hoth

Introduction - The Bespin Gambit (Reclamation)

Side Mission

Threat 4

Story Mission 2 - Core

Story Mission 1 - Twin Shadows

Interlude - Return to Hoth (Return to Echo Base)

Story Mission 2 - Return to Hoth

Story Mission 1 - The Bespin Gambit

Side Mission

Side Mission

Threat 5

Story Mission 3 - Core

Story Mission 2 - Twin Shadows

Finale - Twin Shadows

Story Mission 2 - The Bespin Gambit

Finale - The Bespin Gambit

Side Mission

Threat 6

Story Mission 4 - Core

Story Mission 3 - Return to Hoth

Finale - Core

Finale - Return to Hoth (Our Last Hope)

This is just a first draft. I'm sure these could be re-arranged for maximum effect.

In an effort to keep things balanced, you only get the rewards (xp, credits and influence) from the missions on the core log. You can see that there are only enough side missions to equal that which are included in the core campaign. I think this will help to keep balance as well. If you win other rewards from other campaign missions (Villains and/or Allies) those can be kept. Perhaps making a cap as to how many of those each side can have as not to overwhelm and to allow everyone to be able to keep tabs on what's going on. I think that each side should also be rewarded the best rewards regardless of who won the mission, again to keep balance.

Of course there are still plenty of areas that need to be tweaked, such as what to do with bane and boon missions as well as how to tell a proper story with so many different story lines going on at once. I guess you can just run it as a non-chronological story like "Pulp Fiction". I'm sure there are other problems I haven't mentioned or though of. I'd love to hear thoughts.

I like where you are going with this, but I think it might make the flow of story confusing for my crew.

I haven't played them, so I may be wrong, but it sounds like Bespin Gambit and Twin Shadows both are intentionally vague as to when they take place in the Star Wars timeline, so that they can fit in as side missions in a Core campaign. What I may end up doing is telling my players that they have to stick with their one character for the Core Campaign, and then let them pick another for TS or BG, so that when the expansions are finished and they are about to go into the Core finale, they will have two maxed out characters, and they can choose which they want to bring into battle.

I also saw in another thread the idea of shaping the narrative so that they are forced to take the "Captured" mission, and their escape wipes out some experience, since they've been cooling their heels in a cell and lost some skills or equipment. Then they could do TS or BG as a little detour to the main story and pick up the Core Campaign again later. This would let them rebuild their character and try new things in a way that might be fun.

Doesn't help with incorporating Return to Hoth, but we only get together every two weeks and do one mission a night. I figure I've got about a year before I have to worry about that.

Is it weird that I get more excited thinking about making an enjoyable story for my crew than actually playing the game? I don't have much experience being a GM and thought this would be like a tactical game with lite-RPG elements to dip my toes in, but I wonder sometimes if it would be better to just play the game as made, and then go full in and get a proper RPG.

Has anyone played the Star Wars RPG's? How are they?

Hmm. Thestag's idea would fix balance issues (which is an achievement all of its own), but the story would be pretty incoherent.

One way you could do it would be to use 'video game sequel' option - keep the characters and major rewards, but reset skills/equipment. Something like anything from hero specific missions, or those that grant ally/villain/item rewards are kept (and remove those missions from the pool). But equipment and skills aren't kept between campaigns - should be an easier sell if the heroes lose, might be a bit tougher if they win.

This would give them some feeling of an ongoing storyline, without significantly unbalancing the game (still might cause some issues, as the Rebel rewards tend to be more powerful than the Imperial ones - e.g. Diala starting the campaign with a lightsaber).

One way you could do it would be to use 'video game sequel' option - keep the characters and major rewards, but reset skills/equipment. Something like anything from hero specific missions, or those that grant ally/villain/item rewards are kept (and remove those missions from the pool). But equipment and skills aren't kept between campaigns - should be an easier sell if the heroes lose, might be a bit tougher if they win.

This would give them some feeling of an ongoing storyline, without significantly unbalancing the game (still might cause some issues, as the Rebel rewards tend to be more powerful than the Imperial ones - e.g. Diala starting the campaign with a lightsaber).

i was going to let the heroes buy their rewards from the last campaign (if they earn them in the last campaign) for 4Xp. I would also remove their side mission from the deck

Don't forget that story missions are balanced around heroes and imperial having between x and y XP, credits and influence. Which means that starting units and triggers are now unbalanced, albeit not too greatly, favoring the rebels. They have better guns and more abilities, while your starting units and triggers remain mostly the same. Darth Vader isn't as scary when all rebels have a tier 3 weapon and two 4xp skills.

You could manage to get through a big box and small box campaign all with the same heroes and timeline. Just when you do the small box exp: set missions 1 & 2 at 6 threat and missions 3 & 4 at 7 threat, when missions are completed, everyone just gets the typical 1xp, 1 influence (+1 if Imps win), and 400 credits (+400 if Rebels win) and you select from tier 3 items (tier 2 if everything got picked). And then the Imperials replace all the initial small box figures on the battlefield with the elite versions. And if they require that elite version to show up later, then put in some other elite version Imps/Scum.

~D

Apparently this is not a new idea.

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1662841/making-longer-campaign-core-ts-bespin-and-hoth-all