At the conclusion of my previous rambling I declared my intent to write about my thoughts on choosing, preparing and running a campaign for two players and a GM. Much like eating an elephant, this is best done in small chunks, one chunk at a time.
My first consideration when deciding what to run is the style of game for which I’m aiming, and which will best suit the group, or in this case, duo. Now, the word ‘style’ will have different meanings for different people, especially when talking about RPGS, so let me clarify my definition of the word, as follows:
Styles of RPGs
- Classical e.g. AD&D, RuneQuest, Traveller, Call of Cthulhu.
- Neo-Classical e.g. Dying Earth, Ars Magica, Star Trek, Trail of Cthulhu.
- Avant-Garde e.g. Hillfolk, Invisible Sun, Amber, Freemarket.
No, the above definitions are not completely arbitrary, but you will be forgiven for thinking so. Splitting RPGs up in this manner makes sense to my brain, and explaining this to you will help you follow my tortuous mental route to deciding what to run. And you thought I just I looked at my collection and did ‘eeny meeny miny mo’. For shame.
So, how do I explain my broad RPG taxonomy? Well, games that fall into the ‘Classical’ category are generally the giants upon whose shoulders our hobby stands, imperfect masterpieces that have stood the test of time and are still played in their original forms, despite a plethora of revisions over the decades. ‘Neo-Classical’ games are those which retain the sensibilities of their Classical forefathers whilst defying certain expectations and establishing new ways of doing things around here. Breaking the mould, whilst respecting why the mould was there in the first place, is the raison d’etre of the ‘Avant-Garde’, games that try a different approach, with varying degrees of success. The examples provided are in no way exhaustive or capable of standing up to any degree of scrutiny, but as I said earlier, this is how my brain works and how I see the fantastic world of RPGs.
Now for the tricky part, applying this lunacy as a method for deciding what to run for my two players. Thank Gary that they are easy-going and happy to play anything, more or less.
‘Classical’ RPGs are always tempting because we all know them inside-out and there’s a ton of material available for them, mostly in my house. Set-up is minimal, character creation is quick and painless (alright, Traveller is the exception, I know, ok? Ok), and we can jump straight into an adventure without lots of preamble, or pre-ramble, perhaps? However, such games are notoriously lethal and unforgiving on small parties that cannot achieve the balance and spread of abilities expected by the games’ mechanics. I know there are ways around this problem but in my experience, the measures required to make such games enjoyable for two players result in play that is quite far removed from the intended style desired by those who enjoy a ‘Classical’ approach to their RPGs. In short, ‘Classical’ games are off the menu.
Next! ‘Neo-Classical’ games often take a slightly more complicated approach to mechanics, setting, or both. There’s a familiarity here but also a tinge of the unknown, a waft of the unexpected. Character creation can be more involved with these games as we are asked to think about motivations and examine the weaknesses of our characters; this ain’t your Dad’s AD&D. Settings tend to be deeper and play a more significant part in our adventures. Some players will have more knowledge than others about the setting, or all the players may be equally ignorant, both possibilities present their own challenges, which I won’t ramble about here, although I do think that consideration of such challenges will provide good fodder for a future rambling. On the plus side, the ‘Neo-Classical’ style is more forgiving of elements such as lack of party balance and skill-gaps, whilst deeper characters lend themselves to a more character-driven game, with social interaction and exploration of the setting taking precedence over killing monsters and stealing their stuff. As with ‘Classical’ games, there tends to be plenty of support material available, again mostly in my house. Let’s put the ‘Neo-Classical’ to one side whilst examining the final category.
The ‘Avant-Garde’ style has become my favourite RPG style over the last ten years or so. Hillfolk practically makes me cry at its simplistic genius. Essentially, any RPG that has been labelled as ‘Indie’ can pull up a chair in the ‘Avant-Garde’ cocktail lounge and order a Martini. It’s difficult to make any sweeping generalisations about games in this category because it is their distinctiveness that defines them. I suppose that the one thing they have in common is that they are not widely played and there is often little support material available. Also, from experience, you will be stared at like a dog that has just been shown a card-trick when attempting to explain a lot of these games to your players. If you’re lucky you’ll have players that trust you and throw themselves into the latest peculiar game you’ve decided to unleash upon them. In case you’re wondering, I’m lucky. That said, ‘Avant-Garde’ RPGs seldom run for more than a handful of sessions, with many games being better suited to the one-shot format. At this time I’m looking to run a campaign of 10 or more sessions, so with heavy heart and tears in my eyes, I show the ‘Avant-Garde’ style the door.
‘Neo-Classical’ has won the style challenge and will progress to the next post, wherein I will ramble about choosing the right game for my players, as well as for me.
Game on.
Nerdtropolis 