Shared Campaigns/Troope Play

[Thaz]

Hi folks. Just thought I'd kick off a topic for once. 

I'm really lucky to be a Co-GM rather than a sole GM. We currently have 2 groups of characters running every other Sunday (so there's a game running every Sunday but each group plays once a fortnight). There is around a 50% overlap with Players to group. This came about because we simply had too many players to comfortably contribute at the one table. I am the regular GM in one session and play in the other. The other session has a 'Main GM' but makes extensive use of 'Guest GM's' to run one off or episodic side events. We share our Glorantha and I've taken to calling it the Beer with Teeth shared Glorantha although it's documented http://journeyoftheheroes.wikidot.com/ as the journey of hero's 🙂

Does anyone else use the Ars Magica inspired Troope play with multiple GM's or groups impacting the same world? Or have they in the past? Or 

 

(I'd also add I have in no way contributed to the wonderful right ups and poetry on journey of hero's wiki and that's all down to the other very talented members of the group. I just sling dice behind the shield or rampage around as Rajar the Stormbull causing havoc and comedy in equal parts) 

[Joerg]

I haven't seen or experienced this in Gloranthan RQ, but in our old University group RQ3 games we brought a selection of our characters to the table, pulling them out of our golf bag, so to say.

I'm a guest player in a long term campaign (30+ years) on a different world with a different system which basically has this troope approach without ever having seen Ars Magica. Rewriting the setting to some degree is natural in such a case.

 

If your slicing the dice behind the shield inspired some of the poetry, do take some credit for it...

[Akhôrahil]

I can't see any reason why it wouldn't work. Although it might not work quite as well as for Ars Magica, because of how that game assumes that most will bring grogs and companions, with just one or a couple of the mages. (Unless that's how you structure the RQ game as well, naturally.)

[gochie]

There's a popular DM on Twitch/YouTube that made his own DnD world and plays with several different groups. Everything takes place at the same (or similar) time, and changes to the world affects what other groups are able to see/do/etc. Pretty cool stuff.

[soltakss]

9 hours ago, Thaz said:

Does anyone else use the Ars Magica inspired Troope play with multiple GM's or groups impacting the same world? Or have they in the past?

Our RQ2 Campaign was a multi-GM Campaign. Every GM had their own little area for play, some preferred Prax, some Sartar, some Sun County and so on. I preferred Dorastor. Curly Andrew preferred The Acid Pits, which was his own little invention and was nastier than it sounds. We generally didn't impact each other's NPCs or Plot Lines and rarely went into each other's areas. After a number of years, we agreed to be able to use each other's monsters but not major NPCs. Then we agreed that some major NPCs could be used, with some cooperation.

It worked out really well and lasted for several years.

[Akhôrahil]

2 hours ago, soltakss said:

The Acid Pits ... was nastier than it sounds.

It sounds plenty nasty as it is!

[g33k]

2 hours ago, soltakss said:

Our RQ2 Campaign was a multi-GM Campaign. Every GM had their own little area for play, some preferred Prax, some Sartar, some Sun County and so on. I preferred Dorastor. Curly Andrew preferred The Acid Pits, which was his own little invention and was nastier than it sounds. We generally didn't impact each other's NPCs or Plot Lines and rarely went into each other's areas. After a number of years, we agreed to be able to use each other's monsters but not major NPCs. Then we agreed that some major NPCs could be used, with some cooperation.

It worked out really well and lasted for several years.

That sounds very close to the Ars Magica "Troupe Play" model, actually.  Not 100% identical, but very close.

[Thaz]

13 hours ago, soltakss said:

Our RQ2 Campaign was a multi-GM Campaign. Every GM had their own little area for play, some preferred Prax, some Sartar, some Sun County and so on.

Yes, currently my game is ambling around between Aldachur, Alone, Apple Lane and Clearwine and alternates between the politics of the Aldachur Ring, Lekia's Colymar and the Feathered Horse Queen following the Battle of Queens :- The other group are off in Prax hiding out from the fallout of managing to be on both sides of the Lekia/Kallyr fiasco

[soltakss]

11 hours ago, g33k said:

That sounds very close to the Ars Magica "Troupe Play" model, actually.  Not 100% identical, but very close.

I wouldn't know, as I haven't played or read Ars Magica. It is how my 2nd RQ group played, though.

[Ian Absentia]

12 hours ago, g33k said:

That sounds very close to the Ars Magica "Troupe Play" model, actually.

It's been ages since I've played, but isn't the Troupe Play model where there's generally one GM, but individual players control a rotating cast of characters depending on the needs of the story?  Kind of the opposite of the OP.

I recall rotating GMs, though, from way back in our 1e AD&D days.  Tried it in our Vampire games, too.  It worked fairly well, but the problems that arose were twofold:

1) Our different GMs had not only different gaming styles, but different power scales in application of the rules.  The same set of rules for imaginary situations can provide significantly different results depending on who's adjudicating them and how they envision and portray the world.  So the same characters would find themselves behaving differently in response, sometimes with effectively different abilities.

2) As an outgrowth of the first point, players tended to prefer either one GM over another, or playing a different character when switching GMs.  The real practical result was that one player would GM one game while another would run a different title entirely.

!i!

 

12 hours ago, g33k said:

 

 

[Austin]

My campaign sort of operates as a shared campaign with @GeminniRed. We're still working out exactly how it works, but I enjoy it. Thus far, I'm basically "main" GM, but he runs an adventure every now and again so I can play for a bit. It really helps me avoid burnout since I'm typically writing most of our material. Turns out it's tough to play a campaign loosely centered on Pavis in 1625 when all the published scenarios are over with the Colymar in Sartar.

I also adapt from other games now and again, which helps my workload a lot. Our previous GM did this all the time, mainly with old AD&D dungeon-crawl adventures like The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan. The adventurers recently finished Spire of Iron & Crystal (by Frog God Games for Pathfinder), and I also ran part of Prophecies of the Dragon for the old Wheel of Time D20 game in the past.

As "Main GM" I already had a loose plot sketch, based largely on canon and how to use the framework from King of Sartar, etc. So I've basically let my co-GM in on a number of my plot 'beats' without giving away the whole cow, and he's been fitting in places and ideas where he'll do an adventure. E.g. I should plan for a pirate attack, and he'll run the adventure involving the aftermath. And so on.

Our current "meta-plot" or "arc" notion is prepping for a giant cosmologic heroquest taking the adventurers outside time itself... entirely so I can run a pre-made non-Gloranthan campaign while working on other stuff . And hopefully the forthcoming RuneQuest Campaign will be done by that point and I won't have to improve/guess at stuff as much anymore.

[g33k]

On 3/7/2020 at 4:35 AM, Ian Absentia said:

It's been ages since I've played, but isn't the Troupe Play model where there's generally one GM, but individual players control a rotating cast of characters depending on the needs of the story?  Kind of the opposite of the OP.

That's only half of it.

Ars Magica advocates that as many of the players who wish to GM, do so (the Ars Magica term for a game master is "Story Guide," SG).

The conventional / suggested setup is an "Alpha" SG who runs the overall campaign (with "Beta" SG's (yes, the acronym there is "BSG") running recurring locations, foes, rivals, etc; they coordinate with the Alpha-SG, primarily to make sure nobody's stepping on anybody else's toes (i.e. BSG-1 wants to assign a particular NPC to be the Big Bad of their arc, with a vast network of influence & power, while BSG-2 wants the same NPC to be a powerless victim for the PCs to rescue; but the ASG knows that BSG-3 has already developed that NPC in a different way than either; the ASG may ask BSG-3 to coordinate with one of the others to make a compatible version, or just tell them "sorry, that NPC is already taken."  But each BSG is usually taken to be a "virtual ASG" within their own specific domain.)).  Sometimes the BSG will run an entire adventure, sometimes they'll take over for a scene or two, sometimes they'll run "their" NPC's as semi-PC's, or co-GM'ed NPC's, within the scope of other GM's stories, etc etc etc.

Holding everything together is the conceit of a "Covenant," a headquarters/lair/etc treated as a sort of "meta-character" that PC's (new and old) gravitate to.  The covenant has resources and obligations of its own, can grow and flourish, struggle, have victories, etc... independent of individual PC's.  The "Covenant" is also used as the term for the contract/agreement that governs the operation of the physical covenant, and the behavior/rights/obligations/etc of the members.  The covenant as a metacharacter (and sometimes, the explicit "contract") is designed by the Troupe as a whole (often reserving some elements to the SG's, to surprise the other players with).

Every player is asked to make one wizard PC, and one "companion" PC -- not the companion of the wizard, but of the group as a whole, often of the Covenant.  They are also asked to contribute at least one character to a pool of "Grog" characters:  designated as cannon-fodder, comic relief, grunt men-at-arms, etc.  A typical adventure usually runs 1-few wizards, some companions, and at least as many Grogs as the others put together (sometimes 2 or more Grog PCs to a single player, whereas most wizards & companions are typically 1-per-session as traditional).

 PC's are expected to die.  Grogs especially, of course; but companions and even wizards (despite their longevity magics).  The Covenant provides continuity for the campaign.

(Edit:  much of this is readily RQ'able / Glorantha'ble, with a Stead or family or etc as "Covenant," RuneLevels as wizards, Initiates as "companions," and the ordinary un-Initiated laity as "Grogs.")

Edited March 10, 2020 by g33k
Glorantha'bility FTW!

[g33k]

On 3/7/2020 at 3:24 AM, soltakss said:

I wouldn't know, as I haven't played or read Ars Magica. It is how my 2nd RQ group played, though.

If you have the time, it's well worth looking into.  Current is 5e, but the rather-similar 4e rulebook is free (yeah, legally):

http://www.warehouse23.com/products/ars-magica-4th-edition-core-rulebook

The game is set in "Mythic Europe," defined as medieval Europe (late 1100s - early 1200s), but with much of the folklore and myth of the time "true."  So when the peasants tell travellers of a witch in yon woods, or a holy hermit living in the mountains (or a dragon who settled just over the hill)... that's likely true.  So were the classic old tales, such as the Greeks' telling of satyrs and nymphs, etc.

There is the further conceit of "the Order of Hermes" -- a group of wizards who operate across Europe using a unified system of magic developed a few hundred years prior.  Your characters play some of the wizards of the Order (and their allies).

The magic system is the crown jewel of the game; it's probably the best "magic system" I've met.  (it's pretty firmly set in a Western European perspective, and would be hard to Gloranth-ify).

 

PM me (applies to others, not just soltakss) if you want to discuss it further, I think -- this is "Troupe Style play for RQ" not "Ars Magica".   😇