The Shark-style Campaign
A few weeks ago the ENWorld forums had a pretty nasty database crash.
They lost four months of threads.
I lost 300 of my own posts.
The WLD spoiler thread lost 1/3 of its posts (600 posts)
And the thread that I started a week prior to the crash was lost.
It's the one where I asked Shark to give an in-depth explaination of his campaign-style.
Luckily for me, I saved the text of his entry.
So here it is. I did some editing to it, but only to get rid of several of those irritating red & green squiggly lines that MS Word uses. Those irritate me, so I edited them and without thinking that someone other than me would read it.
Also remember that I do not agree with every single thing he says, but the spirit of what he's talking about it what I want to obtain.
Greetings!
I have compiled some thoughts from various posts to begin a discussion describing "SHARK-Style Campaigns." I will elaborate in further discussion, as this serves as a rough introduction. :)
I have a particular view on Epic-Level gaming--that seems for every person who agrees wholeheartedly, and is inspired--there are two, three, or four people that bristle against it vehemently, or are simply too intimidated by Epic-Level gaming, as they have never--ever--"played or run a campaign that lasted beyond 12th level." I believe that such attitudes are generally folly on one hand, and sad and unfortunate on the other. To me, the game offers so much more than what many seem capable or comfortable--in really grasping and getting a hold of.
Still, I submit some of my thoughts here for discussion, hoping that many will enjoy the points that I make and the style of gaming that I embrace.
I have prepared a series of base template characters in advance--say, from level 1-30. I have wizards, fighters, clerics, rangers, etc. Most use base stats of 18/18/16/16/14/14. Then, I have a sub-list of special characters with 18/18/18/16/16/16. The characters are made up with complete skills, spells, items and gear, ready to go. All that is needed are names.
I can select a character, and easily swap out a particular spell so as to fine-tune them, or create a specific theme. I add some specialized treasure items of gold, jewels, and a few magic items, and the character is ready to go. This kind of preparation takes an initial investment that is substantial—but future character creation is far less time-consuming.
I might also suggest that--contrary to some philosophies--that you select a theme for the character, and simply run with it, making good choices, but not necessarily seeking to maximize and optimize the character in every way as to feats or spells. Making potent and effective characters is the goal, and is certainly possible without absolute maximization. Of course, the problem faced is that with absolute maximization, seeking the perfect feat chains, the best spells, etc, makes the characters, after a few are created, seemingly cookie-cutter and boring. They become formulaic. This kind of rigid pursuit of maximization actually sucks the "life" so to speak, out of the character.
Avoiding such will allow you to easily and quickly create a variety of characters of various levels that have character and unique characteristics.
As for the abilities, a careful reading of the Epic Level feats reveals that unless a particular character has several abilities in the 25-up range, most of the book--and hence, most of the benefits--of reaching epic levels are simply beyond the reach of most characters unless they have a base-line of abilities that include several 18's, in order to benefit from magic and stat-increases allowing them to reach over 23 and 25, so they can make use of many epic-level feats. Personally, I don't really find it enchanting to make a character that has three 12's and three 10's as stats. In my philosophy, adventurers, whether players or NPCs, are above "average"--and usually far above average. Such characters are the mighty champions and powerful villains that stalk the land. If such characters do not have a brace of really excellent abilities, then such individuals should consider taking a job as a militia guard, or grab a shovel and dig a ditch!
"SHARK-style Campaigning" is perhaps bewildering and frightening upon first glance, but I believe that some deeper thought reveals something of a philosophy that is sublime in it's simplicity, yet elegant in overall flow. Ultimately, I think that when one fully embraces "SHARK-style Campaigning" there is more fun in the game for the DM and the players alike.
First off, I think a little of my gaming history is useful, so as to provide you with some of the creative inspirations and experiences that have shaped my own philosophy. I started playing D&D in about 1978. In 1988 through 2000 I also added long-term campaigns playing Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, Talislanta, Call of Cthulhu, Pendragon, and Rolemaster. I embraced D&D 3E in 2000 or so, and have been running D&D 3E ever since. And, as an aside, I gain additional inspiration from my studies as a scholar in Ancient and Medieval History, specializing in ancient Greece and Rome, and the Middle Ages through about 1500 A.D.
D&D is a great game, but let’s face it--it has some problems. Always has, really, but it's a great game, and a great system. I decided that as I kept running into irritating rules or other conventions that just disrupted the campaign stories and the mood and atmosphere I was trying to create in my campaigns, I would have to take the bull by the horns, and just change it. Along the way, however, I also discovered there to be some somewhat contradictory conventions and dynamics going on.
I realized that deeper within the text of the rules are some implied dynamics that are not necessarily brought to the fore in actual play. I also encountered some major problems with using the rules as written--I guess someone came up with the elegant acronym of RAW --and campaign verisimilitude. For example, just off the shelf as it were--if the low-level campaign assumptions of many are practical--and they are certainly implied, and stated fairly distinctly in the RAW--it is also plainly clear that unless you are scrubbing much of the Monster Manual, that such a set-up just doesn't make much sense. This syndrome kinda evolved out of some criticisms of Warhammer Fantasy--the foundation being, "Hey, with all of these dreadful all-mighty uber-champions of Chaos running around, with hordes of demons and beastmen at their command, how the hell could humanity survive?" After close reflection, I realized that it probably couldn't—and wouldn't. That dynamic also holds true for D&D. The idea that everyone is under 4th level, with dragons, demons, giants and monsters--let alone bands of greedy, power-hungry adventurers, too, running around, such communities would never get off the ground. They would all likely be eaten or enslaved.
Now, if you open up the level and power expectations--such problems are dealt with, because human societies and other humanoid communities as well, have inherent reasonable access to powerful characters that can do something about problems instead of just leaping into the maw of teeth!
From Rolemaster, I was already accustomed to powerful characters and deadly criticals from that game, as well as from Warhammer. High levels and great power in those games didn't prevent a character from dying a sudden and horrible death, so why not in D&D, too?
Plus, I became frustrated that when I looked at what a Vallorean Legionnaire could do, and should know--closely based on Roman Legionnaires--I realized that the D&D 1st level Fighter just didn't cut it, let alone the warrior class. I carefully worked up the fighter, skill by skill, and level by level, and discovered that it wasn't really until about 6th-8th level that such a professional soldier possessed not only the appropriate feats--but also enough skill points to meet expected essentials, and have enough left over to meet the non-combat related skills that you might reasonably expect such a professional soldier to possess, like engineering, history, tactics, survival, listen, spot, among others. Then, I realized that 1st level Commoners or even Experts don't really reflect what a skilled adult should be able to do and know. Another aspect of my background is that I am a veteran of the United States Marines, and served in combat arms as a machine-gunner in a Rifle Platoon. Now, I'll grant that many 18 to 22 year old kids living at home spoiled by their parents may not know very much about much of anything--but I was amazed by what some fellow 18, 19, or 22 year old Marines knew! Besides killing, fighting, and weapons, they often possessed college degrees, or vast knowledge on mechanics, farming, professional sales, making things, musicians, and on and on. Guess what? Ancient Roman Legionnaires--at roughly the same ages at enlistment--they also knew a great deal of stuff, from craftsmanship, to sailing, to fishing, to getting along in the big city--they too even at first enlistment--say 1st level fighter--they too knew far more than what the game rules seemed to assign to a 1st level fighter. The more my knowledge of the ancient and medieval worlds increased, as well as what we know from modern observation and research--the abilities and skill sets of a 1st level character as seen in the RAW just didn't seem to make sense. Then, on top of the fact that the RAW and many campaigns assume that most adults—even after years and years of hard work and professional dedication--are not often higher than 4th level.
I just didn't buy it. So, I changed some of the base conventions and paradigms of the game, and ran with it. I also didn't like ending campaigns at 8th or 12th level. I remembered a bit of philosophy from my first DM when I was a kid—he said, "Not that you want to go nuts as a DM, or necessarily be a god as a player, but what is a Vorpal sword for? It's in the rules--what good is it if no one ever gets to enjoy using one? What's the point? I'm not really interested in playing just so I can have a +1 sword. We play to have fun, we play to do exciting cool stuff from history, legends and mythology--and that means we want to enjoy having awesome weapons, mountains of treasure, and fighting huge monsters like dragons and demons! I get enough reality at school and at work--when we play D&D, I want to have some fun with crazy fantastic stuff!" I've always remembered that, and it has always been a part of my gaming philosophy as well.
Which leads me to the next philosophical point--with the ELH, I said, "Cool!" and said "Why not?" Indeed, I edit and control some things--you have to keep order and *balance* to a certain extent--but I also run dynamic campaigns, where the players get to control stuff, and have a real impact on shaping and defining the campaign world. I'm not afraid of players becoming 40th level. It doesn't bother me that a player has a spell that can rain fire down on a city for three days causing 30d6 fire damage per round. It doesn't intimidate me that a player has a +8 Holy/Flaming Burst/Ghost Touch/Vorpal/Holy Avenger longsword.
As much as the players can dream, well, so can I. and so can the Forces of Darkness that stalk the world!
Now, let's see. I'll just dive on in!
First thoughts--players want to dream, and the verisimilitude of the campaign implies that player characters should be doing something besides endless gladiator-style dungeon fights. At lower levels, such gets boring. At Epic levels, not only does endless fights room-by-room get boring too--that doesn't change--but the fights take up even more amounts of time. It's also important to realize that characters only gain experience points for creatures up to eight CRs--If I recall correctly--lower than their current level. This means that anything lower than that not only takes up time--in a real sense--to kill, but the player characters gain no experience points for defeating them. Essentially, such encounters are a thorough waste of time--for the players, and just as importantly--for you the DM as well. Thus, these dynamics lead--but obviously don't require--that you create other stuff for characters to do, learn, experience, and accomplish. Things like building cities, forging kingdoms, building temples, going on epic quests, marshalling armies, and leading great crusades on desperate battles against hordes of foul creatures and legions of dread soldiers! In my view, at epic level, the DM has to develop confidence to let go and allow the players to really become the powerful heroes and champions of legend and myth, and do the legendary and mythical deeds that such mighty heroes are famous for!
However, as you ease up on the reigns, and allow the players to create increasingly more powerful magic items, build huge fortresses, and raise vast armies, you also have to be prepared to get a little crazy with how you view the ENEMY. Add class levels to giants--not one or two levels, but ten, fifteen, twenty. Then things start getting interesting! Ask Dragonblade sometime about his character's experience at target practice for a squad of Fire Giant archers/Fighter 20. His character was a Monk 20/Sorcerer 20, and wow!—you should have seen the look of absolute disbelief on his face when in 1...2...3...rounds his supposedly uber-tricked out character that he thought was *invincible*--was shredded by barrages of Flaming Burst Ballista shots fired by the Fire Giant archers! Ask him--he has fun stories to tell!
As some have mentioned, the CR thing gets out of whack after level 25 or so. A character that is 28th or 30th or 35th or 40th level can take on opponents far higher than in earlier, lower levels. The power differential changes hugely. For example, your group of 4 25th or 30th level characters can take on and shred a 40th level character. An opponent *ten* levels or more higher than the players may still not last more than four or five rounds. Of course, there's a chance he might kill one or more of the players as well, but the players--unlike the difference between 10th and 20th level, say, do not have to run away in terror. They can leap in with confidence that they have a good chance of emerging victorious.
At the same time, Epic level play can be something of a paradox. On one encounter, players can take on a CR ten or fifteen levels higher and win. Yet, at the same time, Epic level characters in SHARK-style Campaigning learn a new sense of respect for their foes. Foes at epic level, in my philosophy, should be heavy-hitters, capable of really laying the smackdown on players. Thus, despair and a grim, sudden death are always near at hand! It makes epic-level play in my campaigns terrifying, as round by round, anything can happen! In another game, Dragonblade and the group were fighting against a 60th or 80th level vampire lord with 12 attacks per round. Round by round, the party battled back and forth, on one round, seeming to be at the brink of defeat, and then rallying back and driving against the vampire lord in a fury, where it seemed he was about to be defeated--but then he would heal, and counterattack with some terrible spell, or a whirlwind of blades, and the players would wonder if this round was going to be their last!--and then, *Whomp*--suddenly, the vampire lord was defeated, and the players breathed a sigh of relief and high-fived each other in triumph over their victory! In my experience, monsters close to the players in CR can often--but not always—be defeated far more swiftly than you might expect; so, raising those CRs through added class levels, templates, and so on, usually makes for a better and more challenging encounter.
Of course, at Epic levels, in my view, players should be fairly rich. Remember, according to the rules and the price listings, most of the really good epic treasure is absolutely astronomical in price. So, don't be afraid to set up really epic treasures to thrill the players. Give them a giant statue of a white mithril elephant, inlaid with diamonds and sapphires, worth 5,000,000gp! Go ahead. It might buy them a decent epic level sword, or build a few new towers for their fortress. Dream big!
"SHARK-style Campaign" philosophy for encounters also embraces a sense of epic scope and fantastic visuals. Of course, you don't want to overwhelm the players--for even Epic-level players can be overwhelmed and killed, but I am often motivated to create fantastic, sweeping scenarios where the players at least feel like they are *in* a fantastic, mythical world. Keeping in mind some of the things that I discussed earlier about encounters, it can be more effective and inspiring to dream big on the encounters, too.
For example, say the party is on the march to stop a giant invasion of an allied human city. Instead of the more standard--and flaccid--description of some Hill Giants and orcs ambling along to attack the human city, perhaps like this--
"Under the lead-grey skies a chill wind blows across the barren plain below. A light drizzle begins to fall, and in the distance, several dozen dirty, filthy hill giants, dressed in tattered beast furs and carrying spiked clubs, approach the human city from the east. All about the hill giants are several hundred orcs, mostly armed with spears, running to and fro, shouting and growling, working themselves into a frenzy, as they prepare for battle."
Not bad, really. However, there isn't really anything terribly different from this encounter, than a similar encounter the players may have had when they were considerably lower in level. As an Epic-level player--unless the DM has secretly added something to make the encounter surprisingly different--for an Epic-level party, this encounter probably isn't very epic. There's nothing here to write home about, as it were. No sagas will be sung about the hearth fires about an encounter like this. Now, it's important to realize that my next example isn't appropriate for every encounter, either, but the encounter above doesn't communicate anything epic or mythical to the players. Too many such encounters, and Epic Play can easily seem to be a boring repetition of the same old stuff that the players have always been facing up to their epic levels. What's so different now? Ho hum.
However, something like this--
"The party gallops swiftly along the old road heading to the human city, and before long, the party reaches the top of a sloping ridge before the road heads down, crosses a small stream, and proceeds to the gates of the city to the north. There--from the east, a great horde seems to be moving swiftly towards the city. The lead skies promise more rain to come, and as a drizzle of cold rain begins to fall, the scene becomes all too clear:
From the dark clouds over the mountains, a deep rumble of thunder echoes over the plain below. In the distance, great pounding drums sound in a steady rhythm, and a vast host of some 10,000 Fire Giants, all arrayed in gleaming golden mail, glittering swords and axes shimmering in the dying sunlight, march in a dreadful column, singing in the ancient speech of the giant kings of old. Hundreds—even thousands--of ferocious, grim-looking orcs, armored in black hauberks and carrying great curved pikes, jagged axes, and glittering spears, march like a black tide of steel towards the walls of the city. The ground trembles and groans as several hundred Dire Elephants, armored for war, and mounted by regal-seeming Fire Giants, gathers before the gates of the city. Fell banners whipping in the wind, a loud and mighty horn, like the roar of the gods, sounds as the Fire Giant lord raises a huge, black sword over his head, shimmering to life with waves of shifting blue flames, and shouts for the attack to begin!"
In the first example, the encounter is rather ordinary. The second example may serve as something the players may be proud of--something bards will sing sagas about. Story-wise, feeling-wise, the second example notes to the characters that this encounter is special, epic--worthy of great mythical heroes to charge into the battle, and into the campaign's history.
Note that mechanically-speaking, the party may still only really need to fight several dozen fire giants, including the fire giant leader--like in the first example, that is the meat or focus of the encounter; the rest can be fodder to be annihilated in a few meteor swarms. Depending on your style of play, the rest can be mowed down to allow the party a sense of additional heroism and triumph before, during, or after they fight the several dozen giants that you want them to fight. Or, alternatively, you can use some pre-generated stats for tougher giants, elephants, and orcs, to provide the party with an instantly-scaled encounter, depending on your mood, story needs, or the player’s moods as well--whatever will lead to more fun and more excitement.
Naturally, not *every* encounter--even at Epic level--needs, or should be so...dramatic. That, too, like the first example, can seem to be more of the same, and become boring. However, being prepared and eager to develop such encounters clearly distinguishes epic encounters--"SHARK-style Campaigning"--from mundane, flaccid encounters that seem little different except for some more hit points from encounters the party may have had as part of their routine experiences in lower levels.
In my view, "SHARK-style Campaigning" includes grand visions, gripping visuals and fundamentally different encounters and experiences than from lower levels. It isn't merely the difference in hit points and armor classes--or even numbers encountered. It certainly includes such, but it's different on virtually every level--from numbers, to AC, to equipment, to visuals, to the skills and tactics used, on down the line--many encounters are very memorable in epic, SHARK-Campaigning.
It helps to think of in epic, mythical, and dramatic terms--how does an epic encounter, SHARK-style, differ from non-SHARK-style? How does it look? How does it sound? How does it feel? As my friend Wizardru has mentioned, it's campaigning turned up to 11! On a scale of 1-10, what does an 11 look like? To know what 11 looks and feels like, one has to know what 1's, 5's, or 8's look and feel like, in order to recognize or to *visualize*--in your mind—before creating it on paper and in the game what an 11 looks and feels like. Does this make sense?
I hope you find this discussion interesting and useful! I hope I'm helping by describing "SHARK-style Campaigning" adequately, and in a helpful way.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
They lost four months of threads.
I lost 300 of my own posts.
The WLD spoiler thread lost 1/3 of its posts (600 posts)
And the thread that I started a week prior to the crash was lost.
It's the one where I asked Shark to give an in-depth explaination of his campaign-style.
Luckily for me, I saved the text of his entry.
So here it is. I did some editing to it, but only to get rid of several of those irritating red & green squiggly lines that MS Word uses. Those irritate me, so I edited them and without thinking that someone other than me would read it.
Also remember that I do not agree with every single thing he says, but the spirit of what he's talking about it what I want to obtain.
Greetings!
I have compiled some thoughts from various posts to begin a discussion describing "SHARK-Style Campaigns." I will elaborate in further discussion, as this serves as a rough introduction. :)
I have a particular view on Epic-Level gaming--that seems for every person who agrees wholeheartedly, and is inspired--there are two, three, or four people that bristle against it vehemently, or are simply too intimidated by Epic-Level gaming, as they have never--ever--"played or run a campaign that lasted beyond 12th level." I believe that such attitudes are generally folly on one hand, and sad and unfortunate on the other. To me, the game offers so much more than what many seem capable or comfortable--in really grasping and getting a hold of.
Still, I submit some of my thoughts here for discussion, hoping that many will enjoy the points that I make and the style of gaming that I embrace.
I have prepared a series of base template characters in advance--say, from level 1-30. I have wizards, fighters, clerics, rangers, etc. Most use base stats of 18/18/16/16/14/14. Then, I have a sub-list of special characters with 18/18/18/16/16/16. The characters are made up with complete skills, spells, items and gear, ready to go. All that is needed are names.
I can select a character, and easily swap out a particular spell so as to fine-tune them, or create a specific theme. I add some specialized treasure items of gold, jewels, and a few magic items, and the character is ready to go. This kind of preparation takes an initial investment that is substantial—but future character creation is far less time-consuming.
I might also suggest that--contrary to some philosophies--that you select a theme for the character, and simply run with it, making good choices, but not necessarily seeking to maximize and optimize the character in every way as to feats or spells. Making potent and effective characters is the goal, and is certainly possible without absolute maximization. Of course, the problem faced is that with absolute maximization, seeking the perfect feat chains, the best spells, etc, makes the characters, after a few are created, seemingly cookie-cutter and boring. They become formulaic. This kind of rigid pursuit of maximization actually sucks the "life" so to speak, out of the character.
Avoiding such will allow you to easily and quickly create a variety of characters of various levels that have character and unique characteristics.
As for the abilities, a careful reading of the Epic Level feats reveals that unless a particular character has several abilities in the 25-up range, most of the book--and hence, most of the benefits--of reaching epic levels are simply beyond the reach of most characters unless they have a base-line of abilities that include several 18's, in order to benefit from magic and stat-increases allowing them to reach over 23 and 25, so they can make use of many epic-level feats. Personally, I don't really find it enchanting to make a character that has three 12's and three 10's as stats. In my philosophy, adventurers, whether players or NPCs, are above "average"--and usually far above average. Such characters are the mighty champions and powerful villains that stalk the land. If such characters do not have a brace of really excellent abilities, then such individuals should consider taking a job as a militia guard, or grab a shovel and dig a ditch!
"SHARK-style Campaigning" is perhaps bewildering and frightening upon first glance, but I believe that some deeper thought reveals something of a philosophy that is sublime in it's simplicity, yet elegant in overall flow. Ultimately, I think that when one fully embraces "SHARK-style Campaigning" there is more fun in the game for the DM and the players alike.
First off, I think a little of my gaming history is useful, so as to provide you with some of the creative inspirations and experiences that have shaped my own philosophy. I started playing D&D in about 1978. In 1988 through 2000 I also added long-term campaigns playing Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, Talislanta, Call of Cthulhu, Pendragon, and Rolemaster. I embraced D&D 3E in 2000 or so, and have been running D&D 3E ever since. And, as an aside, I gain additional inspiration from my studies as a scholar in Ancient and Medieval History, specializing in ancient Greece and Rome, and the Middle Ages through about 1500 A.D.
D&D is a great game, but let’s face it--it has some problems. Always has, really, but it's a great game, and a great system. I decided that as I kept running into irritating rules or other conventions that just disrupted the campaign stories and the mood and atmosphere I was trying to create in my campaigns, I would have to take the bull by the horns, and just change it. Along the way, however, I also discovered there to be some somewhat contradictory conventions and dynamics going on.
I realized that deeper within the text of the rules are some implied dynamics that are not necessarily brought to the fore in actual play. I also encountered some major problems with using the rules as written--I guess someone came up with the elegant acronym of RAW --and campaign verisimilitude. For example, just off the shelf as it were--if the low-level campaign assumptions of many are practical--and they are certainly implied, and stated fairly distinctly in the RAW--it is also plainly clear that unless you are scrubbing much of the Monster Manual, that such a set-up just doesn't make much sense. This syndrome kinda evolved out of some criticisms of Warhammer Fantasy--the foundation being, "Hey, with all of these dreadful all-mighty uber-champions of Chaos running around, with hordes of demons and beastmen at their command, how the hell could humanity survive?" After close reflection, I realized that it probably couldn't—and wouldn't. That dynamic also holds true for D&D. The idea that everyone is under 4th level, with dragons, demons, giants and monsters--let alone bands of greedy, power-hungry adventurers, too, running around, such communities would never get off the ground. They would all likely be eaten or enslaved.
Now, if you open up the level and power expectations--such problems are dealt with, because human societies and other humanoid communities as well, have inherent reasonable access to powerful characters that can do something about problems instead of just leaping into the maw of teeth!
From Rolemaster, I was already accustomed to powerful characters and deadly criticals from that game, as well as from Warhammer. High levels and great power in those games didn't prevent a character from dying a sudden and horrible death, so why not in D&D, too?
Plus, I became frustrated that when I looked at what a Vallorean Legionnaire could do, and should know--closely based on Roman Legionnaires--I realized that the D&D 1st level Fighter just didn't cut it, let alone the warrior class. I carefully worked up the fighter, skill by skill, and level by level, and discovered that it wasn't really until about 6th-8th level that such a professional soldier possessed not only the appropriate feats--but also enough skill points to meet expected essentials, and have enough left over to meet the non-combat related skills that you might reasonably expect such a professional soldier to possess, like engineering, history, tactics, survival, listen, spot, among others. Then, I realized that 1st level Commoners or even Experts don't really reflect what a skilled adult should be able to do and know. Another aspect of my background is that I am a veteran of the United States Marines, and served in combat arms as a machine-gunner in a Rifle Platoon. Now, I'll grant that many 18 to 22 year old kids living at home spoiled by their parents may not know very much about much of anything--but I was amazed by what some fellow 18, 19, or 22 year old Marines knew! Besides killing, fighting, and weapons, they often possessed college degrees, or vast knowledge on mechanics, farming, professional sales, making things, musicians, and on and on. Guess what? Ancient Roman Legionnaires--at roughly the same ages at enlistment--they also knew a great deal of stuff, from craftsmanship, to sailing, to fishing, to getting along in the big city--they too even at first enlistment--say 1st level fighter--they too knew far more than what the game rules seemed to assign to a 1st level fighter. The more my knowledge of the ancient and medieval worlds increased, as well as what we know from modern observation and research--the abilities and skill sets of a 1st level character as seen in the RAW just didn't seem to make sense. Then, on top of the fact that the RAW and many campaigns assume that most adults—even after years and years of hard work and professional dedication--are not often higher than 4th level.
I just didn't buy it. So, I changed some of the base conventions and paradigms of the game, and ran with it. I also didn't like ending campaigns at 8th or 12th level. I remembered a bit of philosophy from my first DM when I was a kid—he said, "Not that you want to go nuts as a DM, or necessarily be a god as a player, but what is a Vorpal sword for? It's in the rules--what good is it if no one ever gets to enjoy using one? What's the point? I'm not really interested in playing just so I can have a +1 sword. We play to have fun, we play to do exciting cool stuff from history, legends and mythology--and that means we want to enjoy having awesome weapons, mountains of treasure, and fighting huge monsters like dragons and demons! I get enough reality at school and at work--when we play D&D, I want to have some fun with crazy fantastic stuff!" I've always remembered that, and it has always been a part of my gaming philosophy as well.
Which leads me to the next philosophical point--with the ELH, I said, "Cool!" and said "Why not?" Indeed, I edit and control some things--you have to keep order and *balance* to a certain extent--but I also run dynamic campaigns, where the players get to control stuff, and have a real impact on shaping and defining the campaign world. I'm not afraid of players becoming 40th level. It doesn't bother me that a player has a spell that can rain fire down on a city for three days causing 30d6 fire damage per round. It doesn't intimidate me that a player has a +8 Holy/Flaming Burst/Ghost Touch/Vorpal/Holy Avenger longsword.
As much as the players can dream, well, so can I. and so can the Forces of Darkness that stalk the world!
Now, let's see. I'll just dive on in!
First thoughts--players want to dream, and the verisimilitude of the campaign implies that player characters should be doing something besides endless gladiator-style dungeon fights. At lower levels, such gets boring. At Epic levels, not only does endless fights room-by-room get boring too--that doesn't change--but the fights take up even more amounts of time. It's also important to realize that characters only gain experience points for creatures up to eight CRs--If I recall correctly--lower than their current level. This means that anything lower than that not only takes up time--in a real sense--to kill, but the player characters gain no experience points for defeating them. Essentially, such encounters are a thorough waste of time--for the players, and just as importantly--for you the DM as well. Thus, these dynamics lead--but obviously don't require--that you create other stuff for characters to do, learn, experience, and accomplish. Things like building cities, forging kingdoms, building temples, going on epic quests, marshalling armies, and leading great crusades on desperate battles against hordes of foul creatures and legions of dread soldiers! In my view, at epic level, the DM has to develop confidence to let go and allow the players to really become the powerful heroes and champions of legend and myth, and do the legendary and mythical deeds that such mighty heroes are famous for!
However, as you ease up on the reigns, and allow the players to create increasingly more powerful magic items, build huge fortresses, and raise vast armies, you also have to be prepared to get a little crazy with how you view the ENEMY. Add class levels to giants--not one or two levels, but ten, fifteen, twenty. Then things start getting interesting! Ask Dragonblade sometime about his character's experience at target practice for a squad of Fire Giant archers/Fighter 20. His character was a Monk 20/Sorcerer 20, and wow!—you should have seen the look of absolute disbelief on his face when in 1...2...3...rounds his supposedly uber-tricked out character that he thought was *invincible*--was shredded by barrages of Flaming Burst Ballista shots fired by the Fire Giant archers! Ask him--he has fun stories to tell!
As some have mentioned, the CR thing gets out of whack after level 25 or so. A character that is 28th or 30th or 35th or 40th level can take on opponents far higher than in earlier, lower levels. The power differential changes hugely. For example, your group of 4 25th or 30th level characters can take on and shred a 40th level character. An opponent *ten* levels or more higher than the players may still not last more than four or five rounds. Of course, there's a chance he might kill one or more of the players as well, but the players--unlike the difference between 10th and 20th level, say, do not have to run away in terror. They can leap in with confidence that they have a good chance of emerging victorious.
At the same time, Epic level play can be something of a paradox. On one encounter, players can take on a CR ten or fifteen levels higher and win. Yet, at the same time, Epic level characters in SHARK-style Campaigning learn a new sense of respect for their foes. Foes at epic level, in my philosophy, should be heavy-hitters, capable of really laying the smackdown on players. Thus, despair and a grim, sudden death are always near at hand! It makes epic-level play in my campaigns terrifying, as round by round, anything can happen! In another game, Dragonblade and the group were fighting against a 60th or 80th level vampire lord with 12 attacks per round. Round by round, the party battled back and forth, on one round, seeming to be at the brink of defeat, and then rallying back and driving against the vampire lord in a fury, where it seemed he was about to be defeated--but then he would heal, and counterattack with some terrible spell, or a whirlwind of blades, and the players would wonder if this round was going to be their last!--and then, *Whomp*--suddenly, the vampire lord was defeated, and the players breathed a sigh of relief and high-fived each other in triumph over their victory! In my experience, monsters close to the players in CR can often--but not always—be defeated far more swiftly than you might expect; so, raising those CRs through added class levels, templates, and so on, usually makes for a better and more challenging encounter.
Of course, at Epic levels, in my view, players should be fairly rich. Remember, according to the rules and the price listings, most of the really good epic treasure is absolutely astronomical in price. So, don't be afraid to set up really epic treasures to thrill the players. Give them a giant statue of a white mithril elephant, inlaid with diamonds and sapphires, worth 5,000,000gp! Go ahead. It might buy them a decent epic level sword, or build a few new towers for their fortress. Dream big!
"SHARK-style Campaign" philosophy for encounters also embraces a sense of epic scope and fantastic visuals. Of course, you don't want to overwhelm the players--for even Epic-level players can be overwhelmed and killed, but I am often motivated to create fantastic, sweeping scenarios where the players at least feel like they are *in* a fantastic, mythical world. Keeping in mind some of the things that I discussed earlier about encounters, it can be more effective and inspiring to dream big on the encounters, too.
For example, say the party is on the march to stop a giant invasion of an allied human city. Instead of the more standard--and flaccid--description of some Hill Giants and orcs ambling along to attack the human city, perhaps like this--
"Under the lead-grey skies a chill wind blows across the barren plain below. A light drizzle begins to fall, and in the distance, several dozen dirty, filthy hill giants, dressed in tattered beast furs and carrying spiked clubs, approach the human city from the east. All about the hill giants are several hundred orcs, mostly armed with spears, running to and fro, shouting and growling, working themselves into a frenzy, as they prepare for battle."
Not bad, really. However, there isn't really anything terribly different from this encounter, than a similar encounter the players may have had when they were considerably lower in level. As an Epic-level player--unless the DM has secretly added something to make the encounter surprisingly different--for an Epic-level party, this encounter probably isn't very epic. There's nothing here to write home about, as it were. No sagas will be sung about the hearth fires about an encounter like this. Now, it's important to realize that my next example isn't appropriate for every encounter, either, but the encounter above doesn't communicate anything epic or mythical to the players. Too many such encounters, and Epic Play can easily seem to be a boring repetition of the same old stuff that the players have always been facing up to their epic levels. What's so different now? Ho hum.
However, something like this--
"The party gallops swiftly along the old road heading to the human city, and before long, the party reaches the top of a sloping ridge before the road heads down, crosses a small stream, and proceeds to the gates of the city to the north. There--from the east, a great horde seems to be moving swiftly towards the city. The lead skies promise more rain to come, and as a drizzle of cold rain begins to fall, the scene becomes all too clear:
From the dark clouds over the mountains, a deep rumble of thunder echoes over the plain below. In the distance, great pounding drums sound in a steady rhythm, and a vast host of some 10,000 Fire Giants, all arrayed in gleaming golden mail, glittering swords and axes shimmering in the dying sunlight, march in a dreadful column, singing in the ancient speech of the giant kings of old. Hundreds—even thousands--of ferocious, grim-looking orcs, armored in black hauberks and carrying great curved pikes, jagged axes, and glittering spears, march like a black tide of steel towards the walls of the city. The ground trembles and groans as several hundred Dire Elephants, armored for war, and mounted by regal-seeming Fire Giants, gathers before the gates of the city. Fell banners whipping in the wind, a loud and mighty horn, like the roar of the gods, sounds as the Fire Giant lord raises a huge, black sword over his head, shimmering to life with waves of shifting blue flames, and shouts for the attack to begin!"
In the first example, the encounter is rather ordinary. The second example may serve as something the players may be proud of--something bards will sing sagas about. Story-wise, feeling-wise, the second example notes to the characters that this encounter is special, epic--worthy of great mythical heroes to charge into the battle, and into the campaign's history.
Note that mechanically-speaking, the party may still only really need to fight several dozen fire giants, including the fire giant leader--like in the first example, that is the meat or focus of the encounter; the rest can be fodder to be annihilated in a few meteor swarms. Depending on your style of play, the rest can be mowed down to allow the party a sense of additional heroism and triumph before, during, or after they fight the several dozen giants that you want them to fight. Or, alternatively, you can use some pre-generated stats for tougher giants, elephants, and orcs, to provide the party with an instantly-scaled encounter, depending on your mood, story needs, or the player’s moods as well--whatever will lead to more fun and more excitement.
Naturally, not *every* encounter--even at Epic level--needs, or should be so...dramatic. That, too, like the first example, can seem to be more of the same, and become boring. However, being prepared and eager to develop such encounters clearly distinguishes epic encounters--"SHARK-style Campaigning"--from mundane, flaccid encounters that seem little different except for some more hit points from encounters the party may have had as part of their routine experiences in lower levels.
In my view, "SHARK-style Campaigning" includes grand visions, gripping visuals and fundamentally different encounters and experiences than from lower levels. It isn't merely the difference in hit points and armor classes--or even numbers encountered. It certainly includes such, but it's different on virtually every level--from numbers, to AC, to equipment, to visuals, to the skills and tactics used, on down the line--many encounters are very memorable in epic, SHARK-Campaigning.
It helps to think of in epic, mythical, and dramatic terms--how does an epic encounter, SHARK-style, differ from non-SHARK-style? How does it look? How does it sound? How does it feel? As my friend Wizardru has mentioned, it's campaigning turned up to 11! On a scale of 1-10, what does an 11 look like? To know what 11 looks and feels like, one has to know what 1's, 5's, or 8's look and feel like, in order to recognize or to *visualize*--in your mind—before creating it on paper and in the game what an 11 looks and feels like. Does this make sense?
I hope you find this discussion interesting and useful! I hope I'm helping by describing "SHARK-style Campaigning" adequately, and in a helpful way.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
posted by BlueBlackRed at 8:31 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home