One adventure per season

[Puckohue]

The "one adventure per season" rule/principle of the RQ:G was discussed in another thread, and I'd like to hear more about how you handle this.

The timeline for the scenarios in GM Screen Pack doesn't follow this. The second and third of the scenarios take place in the same season.

There's also an erroneous reference in the second, stating it takes place "less than a season after" the first, while if you follow the printed timeline, it takes place more than a season after the first.

I would have no problem adhering to "one adventure per season", but I guess that if I want to follow the suggested timeline in the Adventure Book, I'll have to deprive the PCs of their seasonal income (or whatever the consequence is, I can't remember at the moment). Not that it'd matter much to them, as almost all of them are stinking rich from game start.

[David Scott]

The Core Rules on page 137 actually say:

Quote

Generally, one adventure occurs per season. The “one adventure per season” suggestion emphasizes the fact that adventures are extraordinary affairs, and that the adventurers have lives to lead.

It’s a suggestion not a rule. There’s no error in the GM Screen Pack.

The only consequence is that experience ticks won’t be resolved until downtime. My players don’t have a problem with this as it simulates lack of downtime, too busy to process what’s occurred. Income is dealt with in sacred time. Continuous adventuring will eventually lead to a dissonance between the Adventurers and their community. This is likely to have a long term negative effect.

[Alexandre]

35 minutes ago, David Scott said:

 

The only consequence is that experience ticks won’t be resolved until downtime. My players don’t have a problem with this as it simulates lack of downtime, too busy to process what’s occurred. Income is dealt with in sacred time. Continuous adventuring will eventually lead to a dissonance between the Adventurers and their community. This is likely to have a long term negative effect.

Actually this is may not even be necessary:

Making an Experience Roll
At the end of each season, each player can make an experience
roll for each check on the adventurer sheet. If more than one
adventure occurs during a season, the gamemaster may allow
experience rolls after each adventure. (p. 415).

We are going through SnakePipe Hollow which is probably quite intensive by today's standards, so I allowed experience rolls after one week downtime (rest & recover) in Alda-Chur, after the first big foray in the caves. I think the one adventure per season is useful to keep the campaign time moving, though. 

[Puckohue]

46 minutes ago, David Scott said:

It’s a suggestion not a rule. There’s no error in the GM Screen Pack.

That's why I wrote "rule/principle". I should have added "suggestion" - at least I did in spirit. Also, I think you misread what I wrote. The error in the Adventure Book is in the description of the second scenario, where it is stated that it takes place "less than a season after" the first, while if you follow the suggested timeline, it takes place more than a season after the first. It's not a big deal, it's just an error.

Yes, the "one adventure per season" suggestion does need somewhere the PCs can spend their downtime, some sort of local connection. Or they could just hang out at an inn in Pavis or something, I guess.

I also agree on the "experience rolls after each adventure" (as we always used to do it in RQ3) rather than strictly "once per season". So, the point is: RQ:G emphazises the need for downtime more than, say, RQ3 did? That's good, I think. And I look forward to seeing how my players will react to being "sent back" to their community for some OL (ordinary life).

[Alexandre]

6 minutes ago, Puckohue said:

I also agree on the "experience rolls after each adventure" (as we always used to do it in RQ3) rather than strictly "once per season". So, the point is: RQ:G emphazises the need for downtime more than, say, RQ3 did? That's good, I think. And I look forward to seeing how my players will react to being "sent back" to their community for some OL (ordinary life).

The old RQ3 Viking supplement suggested one major scenario per year, actually. This time frame was consistent with how the previous experience tables worked, by the way. Basically between every adventure the PCs would accrue one year of previous experience (i.e., they would add the points indicated by their occupation to each skill). 

[womble]

I don't really think it needs 'handling'. It's a general framework/suggestion/average. If you want to be a stickler, it's probably best to count the actual days-away that the adventurers 'steal' from their general livelihoods and other responsibilities, to see whether their income etc. should be affected per 'three week' out of the loop. So the 2nd 2 adventures in the GM pack probably don't exceed the three weeks away, in aggregate.

Also, I'd probably be more lenient on income penalties if the time away were, for example, three weeks spaced out through the season (and not contiguous across a season-break, either) than if the adventurer took three weeks on the trot away from their responsibilities. I'd also be relaxed about the PC's cult duty time counting as additional "away time" permitted from life-management... That gives another 5 days' or so grace.

[Atgxtg]

2 hours ago, Puckohue said:

Yes, the "one adventure per season" suggestion does need somewhere the PCs can spend their downtime, some sort of local connection. Or they could just hang out at an inn in Pavis or something, I guess.

I think that idea was brought over from Pendragon, where one adventure per year is the norm. The idea behind it is that it gives the game a more epic feel, as players can see their characters age and how things change with the passage of time. It allows you to play out the whole campaign timeline - the life of King Arthur, in a couple of years rather than in decades. "Downtime" in Pendragon is referred to as the Winter Phase, representing that time of year where most people would stay at home ans wait for the good weather. 

A secondary effect of this approach is that is gives characters a slower and more realistic progression in abilities. It will take a few years for someone to master a weapon, as opposed to time it would take to complete a few adventures. 

 

As for Glorantha, the principle is the same, but a lot of stuff is happening during the years of the Lunar Invasion and rise of Argath so it uses a "faster" progression. But the idea is that players can see things happen as they rise to greatness, rather than going from zero to hero within in a year. 

2 hours ago, Puckohue said:

I also agree on the "experience rolls after each adventure" (as we always used to do it in RQ3) rather than strictly "once per season". So, the point is: RQ:G emphazises the need for downtime more than, say, RQ3 did? That's good, I think. And I look forward to seeing how my players will react to being "sent back" to their community for some OL (ordinary life).

I think the idea is to emphasis the world events that happen as the characters advance rather than before and after they advance. What can happen in RQ3 is that a group that has a lot of short adventures could conceivable master various skills in the course of a  single year's adventure. This would have a great effect on how the players view the events of the world and the NPCs, who generally aren't progressing that fast.

[Zozotroll]

So far we have stuck to the one per season, and it is going just fine.  We wanted to give it a try just to see how it works, and nobody is unhappy with it.So far most of the adventures have revolved around the steading they are in, so one per season has made sense.  Soon, however, they are off to SPH, ad probably one whole season adventuring.  We will see how that goes.