Basic Action Super Heroes!

Seriously. I have read many of the threads here, and it appears that many members here have or want to run "one-shot" games to introduce and "sell" BASH to their home gaming group... Because that's how you "sell" new games. Personally, I have a role-playing group that has a negative history with superhero games, because of the lack of story and focus on combat.

One of the main reasons for "Living" campaigns is to introduce and hook gamers on a new game or setting. For all of their negatives, "Living" campaigns work relatively well to provide gamers the opportunity to play new games at relatively low 'introductory costs' to the gamer. Then, once the gamers get hooked on the system or setting, gamers begin to invest in buying the material increasing demand.

With all due respect, I seriously suggest you consider this model. At least 2-3 well-written introductory issues and a simple "Living" campaign framework would be enough to generate demand and excitement around BASH. Based on my experience with Living Arcanis you should easily expect to multiply your forum membership by at least 10 with correlating book sales.

Then follow it up with additional issues highlighting NPCs and areas in your new city supplements. Having a good over-arching story arc that ties the issues together with foreshadowing like in the comic books would create a sustainable demand for BASH.

Then you can package your issues annually with art and sell it as an Adventure Path.

cheers

I think you'll need to redefine what you mean by "living" campaign. The only context I'm familiar with that is in D&D "Living Greyhawk" or "Living Forgotten Realms" etc, which is essentially a "D&D League" where you can bring your character to any league affiliated game and play as them. The league keeps track of all your characters items, and if they are dead, they're dead. Also, each region in the real world corresponds to a region in the game world. So players in California would be in a campaign set in a different part of Greyhawk than people playing in New York.

While this is a cool idea and seems very interesting, in the context I just described, I don't think it can work. WotC has armies of employees (or better yet, volunteers) that can churn that kind of stuff out and organize league play, etc. BASH! mostly consists of me and a few freelancers.

We do have free support and adventures in the way of BAM! issues, but haven't had a finished adventure submitted in a while, mostly articles. I'd of course, love to have more adventures, but people have to write them and submit them.

Now if someone wanted to be very ambitious and begin writing a serial of adventures to publish in BAM!, I'd be very happy to put it out.

A mainstay in the cons for a while was a "living" superhero campaign run by Rod Currie using the Hero System rules.

It was called SuperSquad America. The premise was that each year, he would run an adventure using the same characters. After the con season was over, he would collect the various resolutions of the games he'd run and come up with "what really happened". This would then become part of the team's history and be used to build future adventures.

The interesting part is how the characters would grow year after year. While the characters were not "yours", we the players would build an affinity to a certain character and enjoy developing them further when we could.

Also, because of the continuing nature of the campaign, Rod could bring events from past runs back into the game and create multi-year arc plots.

Again, setting something like that would depend greatly on a single person (or a small group) dedicated to building, supporting and developing the world and its inhabitants. But if there's someone out there with that mad glint in his eye, this could be a great way to unleash their creative fury.

I found this wiki definition of a Living Campaign which seems pretty good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_Campaigns

I'm going to try to identify the key characteristics that make a Living Campaign. Then discuss each characteristics in the context of cost and benefit. My goal is to show that much of the benefits can be attained with minimal additional costs, since we already have an online forum and a handful of BASH zealots.

1. Living Campaigns have official rules for character creation and play. Over time, these rules evolve with new supplements and clarify additional gaming experiences.

2. Players accumulate story knowledge and sometimes character gear and experience. Players have the responsibility to record this data in generally an official form for themselves, future GMs and peer players.

3. Living Campaigns have published adventures, ie. issues, that are packaged into 4-hour gaming sessions that require a GM and players. Issues are stand-alone stories that sometimes include foreshadowing to future issues, cliff-hangers for future issues, recurring NPCs and themes. These issues are provided free of charge.

4. Issues can be categorized as Introductory, Hard Points and Soft Points. I'm using the Living Arcanis nomenclature, but it translates to other games:
- Introductory issues are designed to show off the game for newbies and distinguish why it is different/better than other games. They assume zero gaming knowledge, pitch to the strengths of the game, and hint at a campaign story. Players graduate from these issues wanting to play more.
- Hard Point issues are designed for players to be the protagonists in the over-arching campaign story. These are must-play issues that deliver clear plot milestones of the campaign story: introduction, background/context, conflicts, climax, denounement, etc. These are generally all written by a single person or small team to maintain control of the story.
- Soft Point issues are designed for players to explore storylines that are in parallel or unrelated to the over-arching campaign story. These are generally written by volunteers and editted by the small team to maintain campaign cohesion, tone and themes.

5. Living Campaigns have online forums to discuss rules, characters, and anything else. They have online delivery of issues.

In my opinion, that's it. Let's look at the costs and benefits:

1. Official rules and character creation are relatively easy to start as long as the core rules are well-editted and play-tested. They can get complicated as the authors want to limit certain things for story reasons. [Minimial initial cost and some recurring cost to maintain and evolve]

2. Player documentation is covered in the rules costs.

3. Issues are the big cost from a time point of view as opposed to cost. It takes time to write, edit, integrate the issues together. However, you can separate the costs into story generation and formating. Story generation is already being done by GMs, so the additional costs would be to write issues in such a way as to be able to handle unknown characters as opposed to your known home characters. Formating is a cost, but good templates and a dedicated team can perform.

4. Types of issues. Here are the benfits:
- Introductory issues give zealots a pre-packaged sales pitch to their home gaming group. If there are only 2-3 intro issues, you can concentrate on them to make them as entertaining as possible. By centralizing this process, you drastically reduce the costs to start playing BASH and drastically improve the probability that new players will want to play more.
- Hard point issues give role-players the dramatic storyline to connect their characters existance. It gives players the opportunity to participate in the big movie. They provide suspense as to where the campaign is going and anticipation for the release date for the next one. Hard Points also give gaming supplements a pulse.
- Soft Point issues engage the gaming community to explore anything else: maybe a particularly inventive villain, maybe a focus on particular disadvantage like kidnapping a ward, etc. SPs allow other authors the opportunity to carve out a section of the campaign and make it their own. SPs also give the fanatic gamers more content to consume.

5. The online forums already exist.

In conclusion, start up costs include publishing the rules and creating 2-3 introductory issues. Recurring costs include maintaining the rules and delivering new issues. The benefits include high quality introductory issues to hook new players, a over-arching campaign storyline to engage role-players, and lots of stories to explore different sections of your upcoming supplement. Finally, players can participate in the campaign in a variety of ways, so they feel ownership in it as well.

Food for thought. If you are interested, we could create a roadmap.

Well it does sound interesting. Tell me more of this roadmap...

BASHMAN wrote:Well it does sound interesting. Tell me more of this roadmap...

I agree.
I'm as big a (new) BASH! fan as anyone and I'm working on developing ideas for paths and issues myself. But right now this seems like A LOT of talk and speculation with very very little content.

The idea is interesting but there's no details to build from. It's difficult for me to understand how or why I would want to help or be involved (as a player, Narrator, or even just casual forum fan) since there is no context as to WHAT you're suggesting.

Show this "road map" and build some content into it, with actual BASH! material and then maybe it'll make sense - this thing you're "selling"... 'cause right now I'm lost.

No offense.
I'm just not seeing what you're proposing to even begin to comment or help.

Thanks!
-kev-

A roadmap is a generic term for a plan to complete a project that's all. We can build it together.

OK let's identify the critical path to launch, which is the longest series of activities from project start to finish. I would suggest that it would be the production of the 2 maybe 3 Introductory issues. They should be play-tested to ensure that they can handle all types of characters and have enough GM support in the issue to run it without problems. I put this activity on critical path, because many things have to happen in series, in order to complete the action. I'm brainstorming here, but these are the tasks that need to be accomplished, in order to ready 3 Introductory issues:
1. Assemble a core team of Campaign coordinators and authors to ensure the campaign does not rest on one or two people that have to work 40 hours per week to keep it going. We should pitch to people's strengths and time availabilities. For example, I won't be an Issue author or a graphic designer, but I could play-test, discuss campaign storylines, manage the project, draft rules and do formating.
2. Decide on overall campaign Age, tone, level and general campaign story, in order to at least hint or tease it in the 3 Issues. These decisions could be edicts, or take some discussion as you want.
3. Write the 3 Introductory Issues. Remember 4-hour sessions focusing on what makes BASH great and teasing enough campaign storyline to attract role-players, as well as roll-players.
4. Finalize the campaign rules and character creation, because the writing Introductory issues may impact the flavor of your rules.
5. Format and play-test the Intro Issues several times each to ensure quantity (time management) and quality control is there.
6. Finalize a server to host the Issues for easy download, whether your Yahoo group or whatever.
7. Coordinate a plan to launch at a key Con and home gaming groups.

In parallel to this activity, there are some other key things that need to be completed. just brainstorming here too:
1. Draft and ballot the campaign rules amd character creation
2. Have some graphically inclined artist to create some nominal art for the Living Campaign to distinguish it from someone's home project.
3. Create the template for Issues
4. Decide who will be the primary campaign authors and editors and draft the first year's main campaign storyline, in order to start the Hard Point Issues. These could be released at key conventions for maximum buzz.
5. Create the guidelines for volunteer authors to write Soft Point Issues.
6. Expand the core team with volunteers to play-test and ballot draft versions looking for backup talent for core members who may have to drop due to real-life commitments.

Does this make the way forward clearer? From my observations and participation in several Living Campaigns, this approach is much more powerful than decentralized creative people producing their own work in relative isolation. By centralizing and collaborating with many creative and passionate people, you can produce a campaign that can attract the non-zeolots whom we all game with at home. It gives people something big and common to discuss and engage.

cheers

Saker wrote: Does this make the way forward clearer? From my observations and participation in several Living Campaigns, this approach is much more powerful than decentralized creative people producing their own work in relative isolation. By centralizing and collaborating with many creative and passionate people, you can produce a campaign that can attract the non-zeolots whom we all game with at home. It gives people something big and common to discuss and engage.

cheers

Yes and No.
In my humble opinion, it's often the BEST work that comes from one single creative source ... it's usually too many "chefs in the kitchen" that makes something bland.

I completely BELIEVE in co-creation and using a team to help come up with ideas and build. BUT, you need a single energy source to START and energize the source.

You can't just be that person that is a "manager" of the thing. That gets nothing done or anyone excited.

I am completely excited for BASH!
I've thrown out ideas that I'm working on. I've talked to 3-4 folks in these forums about working on things. I've spoken with BASHMAN about some things. Just tonight (even) I spoke with my buddy Karl about working on an upcoming Adventure Path I'm planning.

But what I'm saying is *I* am already doing what you're suggesting and I'm the creative force and I'll keep the energy going and I'll make sure it gets done, AND be the primary creative force that asks and adds co-creator work ... a combination and collaboration, with myself as the "Narrator" telling the story.


In my experience, what you're looking for cannot and willnot get rolling until someone (ie. YOU) get the STORY going.
I'm not talking about a "plan" on how to DO the thing. I'm talking about THE story. The plot. The characters. The layout. etc... etc... etc...


That's just my opinion though, if you can get it rolling - GO FOR IT! It's just not my experience that it can spontaniously come together like you're hoping. It takes ONE person willing to DO 90% of the "work" and get 10% or less "help" for the co-creation bit.

It's like that in my home games.
I would (likely) never get to game in person with friends IF I didn't get it going. My friends love gaming but aren't as adiment about getting it going as I can.
I want it, I'm good at it, so I do it.

Just like I am working on with my BASH! projects.
But if I'm doing the WORK, they will BE my projects.


So get rolling, I'm excited to see what comes of it all
Good luck
-kev-

Well, I don't think that they're the same... they're similar and could be connected, but one is essentially free products (the Living BASH!) with the intention to have it be run at cons, store demos, etc for promotion and the other is a series of modules that would be purchased. The former is meant to be played in 4 hour blocks, while the latter would be a series of story-arcs, each of which may span more than a single issue of play.

The Livng campaign is meant to bring in new players, and also to organize players into a sort of a "league" while the Adventure Path products are for individual gaming groups.

BASHMAN wrote:Well, I don't think that they're the same... they're similar and could be connected, but one is essentially free products (the Living BASH!) with the intention to have it be run at cons, store demos, etc for promotion and the other is a series of modules that would be purchased. The former is meant to be played in 4 hour blocks, while the latter would be a series of story-arcs, each of which may span more than a single issue of play.

The Livng campaign is meant to bring in new players, and also to organize players into a sort of a "league" while the Adventure Path products are for individual gaming groups.

Exactly. Kevin, you are right that the story is tremendously important and critical to engage the role-playing community and new players. However, a "Living Campaign" is more about organization and bringing new gamers together in a common campaign that they can discuss and play together. And the successful "Living Campaigns," e.g. Living Arcanis, with 1000+ players have core authors, separate core coordinators and a method to enable volunteer authors to contribute. There is just too much "work" for one person to do 90% of it.

BASHMAN wrote:
The Livng campaign is meant to bring in new players, and also to organize players into a sort of a "league" while the Adventure Path products are for individual gaming groups.

Isn't the idea of a Living Campaign then something that REALLY needs alot of support?
I love the rules and ideas of BASH! but (sadly in my opinion) there are only a very few folks that I've experienced thusfar here on the forums that SEEM that energetic about HELPING get BASH! into the the mainstream consciousness.
That IS NOT a slam on BASH! I think BASH! has, is, and should be one of the best potential supers RPG rule systems out there.
But flatly Mutants & Masterminds 2nd & 3rd (DCA) and HERO seem to be THE primary supers systems out there.
ICONS and Wild Talents seems to be coming online quite quickly. With several genertic systems and pulpy style systems being closer to mainstream.

I feel... to get BASH! UE to rate in the mainstream as much as the big boys, support needs to expand quite a bit. I'm all for that. But I'm not seeing that right now, which stinks. I'm coming (somewhat late) to the game myself. I have ideas and plans in the works and I hope my efforts add to BASH! popularity.
But right now I'd say that ICONS is the primary contender for BASH! to outrate, before anyone that plays M&M or HERO will adopt BASH! as their supers game of choice...

Saker wrote: Exactly. Kevin, you are right that the story is tremendously important and critical to engage the role-playing community and new players. However, a "Living Campaign" is more about organization and bringing new gamers together in a common campaign that they can discuss and play together. And the successful "Living Campaigns," e.g. Living Arcanis, with 1000+ players have core authors, separate core coordinators and a method to enable volunteer authors to contribute. There is just too much "work" for one person to do 90% of it.

Yes.
It's BIG. The thing I'm saying is that (I feel) at current with the relatively SMALL amount of this type support BASH! has, your efforts MIGHT be better spent looking to create more fan CONTENT for BASH! instead.
Gain more interest and support to build a fan support base. Rather than come at it the opposite way. Because right now (while I'd wish you luck) I'm not sure you're going to find the amount of support needed for BASH! Living Campaign.

I'm not being a nay-sayer (that's not my nature) but I am being realistic, because I'd rather see energy directed in a way to build quickly and positively.... rather than futilely...

Hope that makes sense.
-kev-

Kev

You make great points. I think BASH UE is better than the other supers games. Heck just comparing character sheets is night and day in simplicity.

Which is why I think a Living Campaign would generate interest and game play. I believe the best way to hook people on BASH is to get them to play it, then you become a believer. A Living Campaign is a great vehicle to significantly increase the opportunity for players to play a good quality game. I knew a ton of people that were adamantly opposed to 4th edition D&D who slowly converted after playing it in the Living Campaign.

I don't think that a Living Campaign needs to take so much effort. There is startup time and effort, but the on-going maintenance can be done part-time by two or three people. My data point for this is Living Arcanis, which I played for years. There was only a couple of core people making decisions, and they farmed key projects out to zeolots.

I think a Living Campaign is very doable with a big bang for its buck, so to speak/write.

cheers