35 minutes ago, whafrog said:The main reason is I find it easier to make meaningful NPCs when they're associated with a place.
Or an organization, or rather, every organization needs a face, be it someone to negotiate with or to serve as a personal antagonist.
5 hours ago, Lorne said:then it might be worth asking yourself if it wouldn't be worth using a different genre entirely to tell that story
I have, and it's not 
Seriously, I approach Star Wars in a kind of post-genre way...I think almost any kind of story can be told in it.
I guess technically 6 for my game. It's been somewhat organic in how it's been developing. Sometimes they go to a specific world for a specific mission, but more often they cause a lot of trouble and get out, and don't go back. ?
I guess technically 6 for my game. It's been somewhat organic in how it's been developing. Sometimes they go to a specific world for a specific mission, but more often they cause a lot of trouble and get out, and don't go back. ?
I guess technically 6 for my game. It's been somewhat organic in how it's been developing. Sometimes they go to a specific world for a specific mission, but more often they cause a lot of trouble and get out, and don't go back. ?
I guess technically 6 for my game. It's been somewhat organic in how it's been developing. Sometimes they go to a specific world for a specific mission, but more often they cause a lot of trouble and get out, and don't go back. ?
Neato! Four parallel universes decided to post in ours!
On 10/13/2018 at 9:14 PM, HappyDaze said:How would you feel in a game, as player or GM, where the scope was smaller--perhaps a 3 or 4?
I'd be ok with "Hutt Space" but not something smaller/less flavorful, the correllian sector hasn't been sufficiently fleshed out to make the call, but the corporate sector and Tapani sector seem a little too confining for a whole campaign
Then there's also the game starts and remains on something maybe as small as a planet for maybe 5 to 12 sessions and then the setting scope increases with perhaps gradually increasing scope
3 hours ago, EliasWindrider said:I'd be ok with "Hutt Space" but not something smaller/less flavorful, the correllian sector hasn't been sufficiently fleshed out to make the call, but the corporate sector and Tapani sector seem a little too confining for a whole campaign
Then there's also the game starts and remains on something maybe as small as a planet for maybe 5 to 12 sessions and then the setting scope increases with perhaps gradually increasing scope
The Corellian Sector gets a few pages in Suns of Fortune, but it's really bare bones. Corporate Sector has a whole book by WEG, but it's not really a mainstream Star Wars flavor. I was one of the few (?--hard to say in the pre-internet days) WEGSW players that never really liked Tapani. OTOH, the Minos Sector from GG9 was a homeground for a 2-year campaign of WEGSW, and it's rather small (only around a dozen planets were detailed).
I've considered something like the Tion Cluster/Greater Tion region for a narrowed-scope campaign. That's 3 or 6 sectors with a unifying theme, but it's mostly bare bones and open for the GM to make it his/her own. (It also helps that Concise Locket made an awesome map of it!)
Other 'regional' games might be set in something like the Chiss Ascendancy (obviously Chiss PCs are going to be required).
I've usually run games at the 6 (whole galaxy) mark, and I'm finding it unsatisfying. Too little continuity of NPCs, organizations, etc. as the group moves too often. I'm thinking a smaller sandbox might help, so I'm looking to see what others have experienced and/or think regarding such games.
Hey HappyDaze,
In contemplating a smaller geographic sized campaign, part of the calculations that need to be taken into consideration are, what type of campaign are you going to run? What is the scope of this campaign?
And I think as a GM one of the issues that we run into is that with a galactic scale setting with ultra fast FTL is that the players do have the option to jet about anywhere they please. And if the players decide to change the course of the plot from the expected, we as GM's can quickly run out of new and fresh ideas.
And as for Star Wars, I don't think the real issue in keeping a game in a limited geographical region is all that urgent. As a GM, I'm letting the players range a bit wider, because I want the players to interact with specific worlds to enhance my particular story. And those systems happen to be strung out along across half the galaxy.
You could easily do the same in a smaller geographical area or region. The real trick is to keep the story interesting.
As for limiting scope, you may want to limit the speed and range of the ships used by the players. IIRC the GR-9 Rigger has a Class 3 hyperdrive and very limited consumables, which means that a group with that ship will need to plan very carefully how far they try to travel (or they'll die)!
And on pains of repeating myself, in trying to run a limited geography Star Wars campaign, I think those constraints could be best defined in the campaign setting.
To be honest, you should be able to run a good Star Wars game on a single world with an AoR team working to subvert local imperial garrison and attempting to curry favor with the locals.
52 minutes ago, Mark Caliber said:Hey HappyDaze,
In contemplating a smaller geographic sized campaign, part of the calculations that need to be taken into consideration are, what type of campaign are you going to run? What is the scope of this campaign?
And I think as a GM one of the issues that we run into is that with a galactic scale setting with ultra fast FTL is that the players do have the option to jet about anywhere they please. And if the players decide to change the course of the plot from the expected, we as GM's can quickly run out of new and fresh ideas.
And as for Star Wars, I don't think the real issue in keeping a game in a limited geographical region is all that urgent. As a GM, I'm letting the players range a bit wider, because I want the players to interact with specific worlds to enhance my particular story. And those systems happen to be strung out along across half the galaxy.
You could easily do the same in a smaller geographical area or region. The real trick is to keep the story interesting.
As for limiting scope, you may want to limit the speed and range of the ships used by the players. IIRC the GR-9 Rigger has a Class 3 hyperdrive and very limited consumables, which means that a group with that ship will need to plan very carefully how far they try to travel (or they'll die)!
And on pains of repeating myself, in trying to run a limited geography Star Wars campaign, I think those constraints could be best defined in the campaign setting.
To be honest, you should be able to run a good Star Wars game on a single world with an AoR team working to subvert local imperial garrison and attempting to curry favor with the locals.
Campaign controls--such as having the PCs reporting to Rebel command--can be used (right up until the point the players decide to dump the whole idea and say "screw it, we do what we want"). I like to run with old (WEG-style) travel times and communications limits, so while Obligation can theoretically be use in this manner, most Obligations stretch credibility if they can't be dodged by scooting halfway across the galaxy. Sure, that crime boss on Malastare might have it out for you, but if you scoot over to Desevero, the locals may not catch wind of that for months or even years (and then, you scoot again). The other option is to play like the entire galaxy is like the state of Georgia (sectors are counties), with the ability to get around the whole thing in under a day and quick communications, but I don't like that model.
As for restricting hyperdrives, the rules make it very easy to get a very fast hyperdrive and one month of Consumables still makes it possible to travel the entire length of Hydian way and back. I'd rather have some kind of in-game ties that work to keep the group localized rather than rely on a transportation limit.
3 hours ago, Mark Caliber said:And I think as a GM one of the issues that we run into is that with a galactic scale setting with ultra fast FTL is that the players do have the option to jet about anywhere they please. And if the players decide to change the course of the plot from the expected, we as GM's can quickly run out of new and fresh ideas.
This, like many other problems, can be avoided with a proper session 0 to set expectations and ground rules for the campaign. Specifically, if a location or NPC is not introduced by the GM, it's not important.
So, the mobile version of the site has some... issues.
Honestly, I think what it comes down to, if you're dealing with a galactic scale, or keeping all the adventure on a single planet, is more scale than scope. If people are gallivanting across the disc, then you're not going to get the same nuanced detail, than if you stick to one world. (Though I suppose a world locked game would miss some of the starship side of things). And travelling all of known space doesn't mean you're going to run into more exotic cultures than if you travel around a smaller area.
16 hours ago, HappyDaze said:The Corellian Sector gets a few pages in Suns of Fortune, but it's really bare bones. Corporate Sector has a whole book by WEG, but it's not really a mainstream Star Wars flavor. I was one of the few (?--hard to say in the pre-internet days) WEGSW players that never really liked Tapani. OTOH, the Minos Sector from GG9 was a homeground for a 2-year campaign of WEGSW, and it's rather small (only around a dozen planets were detailed).
I've considered something like the Tion Cluster/Greater Tion region for a narrowed-scope campaign. That's 3 or 6 sectors with a unifying theme, but it's mostly bare bones and open for the GM to make it his/her own. (It also helps that Concise Locket made an awesome map of it!)
Other 'regional' games might be set in something like the Chiss Ascendancy (obviously Chiss PCs are going to be required).
I've usually run games at the 6 (whole galaxy) mark, and I'm finding it unsatisfying. Too little continuity of NPCs, organizations, etc. as the group moves too often. I'm thinking a smaller sandbox might help, so I'm looking to see what others have experienced and/or think regarding such games.
If it's an edge game and the pcs have a hutt or black sun patron giving them jobs that's a good bit of continuity, and I generally have the party return to important places e.g. coruscant, nal hutta/nar shaddaa, for us aleron in the tapani sector and galtea and pembric 2 were repeated (crev bombassa)
If it's a prequel or KotOR or legends new republic era game they jedi order can hand out missions to jedi PCs.
Also obligation is a great tool for introducing recurrence, relationships with PCs. And my strategy is for each PC to have a side story and I try to make narrative progress on 2+ side stories per session (I think my record was 5 out of 6 sides stories having narrative progress in a single session)
Edited by EliasWindriderI'm about to end a multi-year campaign that combined all three books and tones. My PCs have had multi-session adventures on:
On 10/16/2018 at 6:05 AM, Mark Caliber said:And I think as a GM one of the issues that we run into is that with a galactic scale setting with ultra fast FTL is that the players do have the option to jet about anywhere they please. And if the players decide to change the course of the plot from the expected, we as GM's can quickly run out of new and fresh ideas.
On 10/16/2018 at 9:39 AM, Lorne said:This, like many other problems, can be avoided with a proper session 0 to set expectations and ground rules for the campaign. Specifically, if a location or NPC is not introduced by the GM, it's not important.
I won't argue the value of session 0 in setting the expectation in context, I agree without question. But I would also consider that there's a missed opportunity for the GM to prep in a more generic fashion that would allow them to eschew any specific locale in order to set the story wherever the whimsical players may travel. I recognize we're getting into a railroading vs. player agency pit here and that's not my intention. I like to believe that the entire problem can often be avoided by not only dangling the right carrot in the right direction, but also by setting as few things in stone as I can possibly get away with.
p.s. I hope this multi-quote works right, my kingdom for a preview button.
2 hours ago, themensch said:But I would also consider that there's a missed opportunity for the GM to prep in a more generic fashion that would allow them to eschew any specific locale in order to set the story wherever the whimsical players may travel.
No disagreement there if that's how a GM wants to run things.
It may be an obvious point, but one worth making nonetheless: preparing for a session 0 gives the GM a chance to first clarify with herself what kind of game she wants to run. Henceforth, let it be known as "Session -1".
Edited by LorneIn my last campaign I think we visited around 8 planets though the course of a campaign. I like how the pregen modules take you to 3 planets per book and I would say a full campaign (for me) is 2-3 books or equivalent home-brew. Most of them were linked through a unifying theme "Hutt Space". So I would answer #4.
In my current campaign, we will be traveling all over the place as the story necessitates (an archaeological based campaign with a lot of influence from Nexus of Power) so I'd answer #6 for the entire galaxy.
The last SWRPG game I ran was based off of Firefly. Using their systems as a sector that mirrored the galaxy at large. I had the Empire in tight control of the core worlds and lawlessness on the frontier. Came up with some hand-wave excuse to seal off the sector from the galaxy, like a nebula or something. Players liked it because they could help populate the game with their knowledge of the Firefly universe.