I have regularly stated over many years that my goal is to play one ongoing and essentially never-ending campaign in a world of my own design. As I sit here today, contemplating this long-held desire, it strikes me that this goal really doesn’t fit the way I behave as a gamer.
To run an ongoing campaign in a single world I’d have to commit to at least two big decisions:
- A single world within a single genre.
- One set of game rules to run that world.
Sure, I can import some pretty broad genre tropes into a single world and bend that environment to fit my tastes but what I am suggesting is committing to a world I believe in. Additionally, to run that world consistently, I would need to commit to a set of game rules that I can feel comfortable with as a structure and (over time) make rulings within to reflect my own vision of the world I’ve created.
This thought scares me.
Too Many Games?
If you’ve ever been to my house, talked to me about gaming, read this blog for any length of time, or listened to my podcast you’ll know this is true: I have a problem when it comes to buying too many game books.
The stacks in my “hobby room” – the space dedicated to housing the rat cage, the old desktop computer, and the gaming books that I feel the need to keep close to hand – are ridiculous. I think I counted six stacks of tomes, four of which are about 5 feet tall last time I paid attention. There’s a six foot bookshelf full behind them. I have arguably wasted more money on gaming than anything else in my life. Honestly, I am coming to believe that this is an addiction.
Most of the games I own are games that I have never played or, at best, played once or twice. Usually I play a game once in solo mode – what I am coming to call self-play because it’s not really a full-on solo game but rather me rolling up / designing a character and then running a short combat or a very short adventure. It’s more like I test-drive the new game to see how it feels. Then it goes on the pile.
Clearly, I am a collector. I think that’s a trait that many gamers share. But I suspect that this is deeper. Along with expressing a desire to run just one world I have also expressed the inevitable desire to find that “perfect” game system. Long ago, however, I realised that this was a futile quest: someone else’s vision is never going to entirely mesh with my own tastes, prejudices, beliefs, and ideals for a game. And yet…
Could You Commit?
This week I’ve been asking myself whether I could commit to that vision that, for many years, I’ve glibly trotted out as if it was some kind of noble goal. The short answer is that I’m not sure. Could you?
One world. One system. One campaign. Or, to put it another way, one sequence of campaigns in the same world over many years. I rather suspect that, if played long enough and with the usual attrition of players, the world would be run with multiple campaigns that interlinked and complemented each other over time.
As I sit here and think about it, a strong urge to say “Yes” rises in my chest. I feel a rush of excitement about the idea. A strong desire to commit and make something worthy of play. Pick a game, work out something with my players, and go build it… run it… play it! YES!
But hang on.
One world. Which would I choose? Would it be a fantasy world, a science-fiction world, or a modern conspiracy-horror? Those are the three genres I enjoy the most. Within each of those choices I have a multitude of possibilities because a genre is a very broad concept. Before we even consider the game system, which will also immediately suggest some genre limitations due to the game designer’s original assumptions, I’d have to limit myself to just one of those three major genres. Could I do that?
Perhaps I could tell myself that I am allowed to build just one world for each genre. I will nobly decide to have one fantasy world, one science-fiction universe, and one horrifying modern conspiracy. But, to me at least, that feels like I already compromised the vision. Add to that the question of whether I could truly bring myself to even limit my gaming to just one particular universe in a science-fiction game. Could I do that? Just play my universe? Ignore Trek, Star Wars, and Rifts forever? Sure, I could plunder those other universes for inspiration but, ultimately, I’d be quitting them as possibilities. Could I do that?
I don’t know. The thought kinda causes me to slightly, ever so slightly, begin to panic.
Just One Game?
As I think about this more the real elephant in the room is the need to pick just one game system. To choose something, commit to it, and make it work long-term. To be willing to learn one game inside out, play it and over time make rulings as needed to express the vision and world I have chosen.
This thought prompts me to wish that I have never discovered and had the wealth with which to own all those books in the hobby room (or the ones in the top room: even more up there). I feel a sadness but I would not feel the inner turmoil that rushes upon me as I contemplate pushing all those rulebooks aside.
Which would I choose?
Let’s extend the thought that I would limit myself to just three worlds – the fantasy, the universe, and the conspiracy. Just three games. Suddenly, in truth, that is an easier decision than I thought:
- Mythras, probably with Classic Fantasy attached
- Traveller
- …and here is where I stumble.
I honestly don’t know what I’d use for the modern game. I’ve not really thought about it as a genre for so long (despite having had a recent abortive attempt at playing “Beyond the Supernatural”) that I feel conflicted. Probably GURPS, though. Maybe Savage Worlds… but that might be because I just dropped cash on the new edition of the game.
Can you see how hard this really is?
Is This What I Want?
Honestly, I am not really sure whether I want to limit myself to just one world, one system, one campaign. I do feel, however, that it might be a really healthy decision for me to make. This might be something that would be good for me. Something that I need.
What about my players? Need to consider the players, right? How would they react? Depends on the group – remember that, right now, I have three separate games that I run. I expect that the Friday Night Roleplay group, once they stop rolling around on the floor laughing at the sheer absurdity of the idea that I would play only one game in one world (for I suspect that they would view this idea as impossible), would embrace it. I know that the school students would think it was cool: we’ve had the conversation about how cool it is to write your own world and then play in it for years a few times before, you see. The Saturday Night online group would probably react much like the Friday Nighters. At least, those are my suspicions.
Would anyone believe that I could do this? Inside, I already doubt that I could.
Imagine if I put all the stacks of books aside and selected only the tomes that related to a measly three specific game systems. That would be quite the cull. Immediately my heart leaps in to point out that you could hold on to quite a few because they’ll have useful ideas to steal and reskin for each bold new world you are creating. Bestiaries are an obvious example. Is this addiction?
I am starting to think that, yes, it is something that I want. But I don’t truly believe that I can do it. I feel somehow trapped in the joint worries that I might miss the arrival of the “one true game” (based on 36 years of gaming, unlikely) or miss some cool idea that I used to own (if I let most of the books go). This is a flipping addiction, isn’t it? This is unhealthy. Damn.
Maybe I need to take this idea more seriously. Make a commitment to something, long-term.
I’d need to really talk to my players about it, to listen to what they want to play. I’d have to ask them to imagine that we are going to play just one world and one system, every session, every two weeks, until I stop being here. What would you like to play? What do you want?
Can you tell me what you want, guys?
I tend to run very long term campaigns. The big ones have been AD&D (4years) in a world of my own design, The Morrow Project (2 years) and the best, by far, World of Darkness (a 7 year campaign). I love to collect games and farm them for good ideas but ultimately I play very few of them. I do feel I get great value from them I just don’t play them beyond character creation. Games that I felt were super impactful even though I didn’t play them, or played them briefly were: Traveller, Rolemaster/Spacemaster, Tekumel (Empire of the Petal Throne), Chivalry and Sorcery, Stormbringer, Call of Cthulhu, Paranoia, and Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay.
Each of these really informed the extended campaigns that I ran even though they were not the game being played.
Currently I’m laying the groundwork for a Space Opera using home brew rules and am seriously considering a return to Vampire in the new Modipus edition.
At the end of the day, while I’m a games junkie… I really, really, want a consistent, long term, world to explore and a system that I understand and can feel knowledgeable about. A place where the player actions are important and not just a variable in a pre-ordained story. One offs have a place, especially when exploring new possibilities but only so far as they lead to an enduring system.
That pretty much expresses where I am at, right now. I want that long-term campaign in a world (more likely, universe) of my own design. Thanks for sharing!
I have used many systems over the years but now in my 60’s intend to stick to using Mythras and its variants for my two campaigns. One is set in Hellenistic times the other is Classic Fantasy in Ashfar. I think it brings the best of worlds to my games and the players like them. For one off Super Hero fill in games I use BASH. I no longer have the resources to buy lots of systems however I do convert adventures from other systems to use in my games. I pray that you find the way you are looking for.
Rather brave to show the reality rather than the curated image, I thought. Your post led me to eviscerate The Fantasy Trip boxed set that arrived this week. WTF do I need this stuff? My tuppence worth: perhaps the R. E. Howard model is the way forward? Howard wrote hundreds of stories in different genres, worlds and time periods. Some he consciously linked together, others have been retrofitted into games with relative ease. Then again, Howard killed himself at thirty whereas the author of A Song of Bloat & Vice has lived into a prosperous old age. There is contemporary modern version of Traveller (Cepheus Modern – free, electronic) so you really could whittle it down to Mythras and Traveller. Sounds like the perfect blog to me.
what about one world, many systems? the fluff need not interfere with the crunch and the two campaigns with different system need never meet. You could get all crazy and do one world all genres and write out each ‘era’ as fantasy, modern, sci-fi. plus there’s always the world of numenara.
I like the idea of one world, many eras. Not so sure about learning and mastering many systems simultaneously because I feel that would make the rules of the game too conspicuous, interfering with the emergent game play. Still, thank you for the suggestion: I am letting ideas mull and percolate. Your comments are all useful in that process. As for Numenera, yes, it’s a cool world and I also own the game… but it’s not my world and I find I don’t believe in it enough to use it for very long.
This post really hit home for me, as the large catalog of games I own often leads to indecision and lack of focus on my part. When I do finally choose to run something, I don’t seem to put my all into session preparation because I’m distracted by a bunch of other books. Is that fair to my players?
I live somewhat of a minimalistic lifestyle, except when it comes to board games and RPG books. Times when I’ve sold belongings have been freeing for me, but I can’t seem to let go of these books, because I want to read and play them all, but the reality is, I don’t have time for all of them.
I want to know a ruleset so well, that it never gets in the way of the game. I want to explore a world from east to west and north to south, giving the players the opportunity for their characters to make lasting changes in the setting, and playing new characters a generation later, that interact with those changes.
I’ve been asking myself, what is the purpose, for me, of gaming? Maybe I got that idea from one of your excellent podcast episodes. Is it just to have fun, is to escape, is to share something specific with others, is it even to draw people towards virtuous/heroic behavior in their own lives through the use of story, or is it some combination of these? Which system is best for what I want to do? I have so many different systems that do a lot of the same things, but in just slightly different ways….
I am in the process of simplifying. I have decided to choose one system and run it exclusively for all genres I’m interested in for a while (with one exception). The system that I believe best fits my interests and gaming purpose is Mythras and Mythras Classic Fantasy. I love detail, and I love Sword & Sorcery, Low Fantasy, and ancient and dark age settings, and I also love old school dungeon crawling.
The exception I mentioned, was the times when I need something rules light, to introduce new players or kids to RPGs, for one-shots, and for running an open table (which I learned about from your blog and podcast). For these situations, I’ve chosen Old School Essentials as my base system. I have a bunch of OSR and TSR D&D games that I’d like to convert to PDF and use for add-ons to OSE, building my ideal from of B/X (I’m looking at you ACKS Mortal Wounds Table).
…but there are some books that are just too beautiful to get rid of, like the new RuneQuest, the newest Hackmaster (especially the Hacklopedia of Beasts), and The One Ring.
Thank you for the work you put into your blog and podcast. I thoroughly enjoy both. And if you read this whole post, thanks for taking the time!
Of course I read it to the end. 😉 Thank you for taking the time to post it. I think you and I are in similar places with our hobby.
I’m no fan of Aquinas, but I think his (reputed) famous dictum applies here: hominem unius libri timeo — I fear the man of one book. Or maybe that should be ‘unius ludi’ — I fear the man of one game.
A long campaign is certainly a worthy goal, but it need not preclude other games creeping in, either as additional material to convert, less mechanical forms of inspiration, or even just the occasional one-shot to give things time to breathe.
That said, I rarely buy anything I’m not intending to play, unless it’s £2 down the Oxfam. Now, if i could just find the time to continue all the solo campaigns I’ve started…
I’m not sure I am advocating only one book. There are certainly many to use as reference or inspiration. I’m also fairly sure you’re quoting Aquinas out of context, but that’s by the by. Certainly I agree with drawing on the whole hobby tradition.
Pingback: Beginning The Campaign | UbiquitousRat.net
In August 1979 I sketched a map of an ocean port city on a river with a wizard’s tower to the south and a pirate base to the north.
In a little over 90 days I’ll have reached 40 years of running the same world using AD&D 1e + house rules.
In those 40 years I’ve played and run a lot of other campaigns, systems, etc. My gaming collection has grown, not shrunk.
Have a single system ‘forever’ campaign isn’t a lockout to everything else
Clockwork & Chivalry, BRP/Renaissance rules. 1645 English Civil war with monsters. Sorcerers, dimensions, historical material you can research, guns as well as swords.