Originally inspired by Wargaming with Dragons and Demographics and Hiring.  Which I somehow managed to bookmark without saving the source, so I don't know who to credit.  

I've been kicking around the idea of running a hexcrawl game where players start with 1st level characters as normal, but 20 men at arms as well, and deal directly with overland travel and combat from day one.  So there'd be dungeons and lairs on the map to deal with as normal, but dealing with wandering monsters, brigands and free mercenaries (but I repeat myself; the 30 Years' War is a real world influence) would be a major part of play as well.

So essentially an open-ended wargame in D&D.  I figure I'd put out a big hexmap for the players, just make the major landmarks common knowledge, and see what they do.

Anyone done this?  Any advice, best practices, or just table stories?

I'm getting hung up on a couple of things.  First, how much ready opposition to provide, and how much in the way of quests.  I've seen sandboxes go better when there's some initial direction to get your feet under you (or rebel against) than when the GM just says "go forth and sandbox!"

Second, how to pitch this.  I'm not converting a regular game group or night, but I do have a large pool of people I've played with or GM'd for.  So I can handle drop-ins or differing player groups just by asking them to agree on a mission to cooperate on.  But more modern style games (3.5/Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, Shadowrun, others) have been the biggest draws in this community.

System would almost certainly be ACKS.  I have it, I like it, and its got the demographics integrated in, with a mass battle system forthcoming.  But I'd take input on that as well.

Anabasis. Go read it. Add fantasy. Voilà, there's your campaign. You're welcome.

Quote from: The Butcher;735696Anabasis. Go read it. Add fantasy. Voilà, there's your campaign. You're welcome.

Can't really go wrong with this as a solid foundation for a game. Take a multi-ethnic/polyglot mercenary force. Bring them to the very heart of a vast and powerful empire. Put them on the wrong side of a succession crisis in said empire. They suddenly find themselves thousands of miles from home, surrounded by enemies, and needing to work together and fight battle after battle, scrounging for supplies along the way, to survive and reach home.

Something a little like that ages ago when my players joined a caravan and were given leadership positions among the guards. Eventually there was a big battle with orcs or goblins that took a couple days to play out because I didn't have an effective mass combat system. It was a lot of fun, but tiring.

I think maybe the game you're proposing is similar to Dave Millward's game, Heroes, which seems to focus on expeditions.

Aside from that, for inspiration I would look to the career of Robert Guiscard, and of the various adventurers of medieval Central Asia. Basically mercenary leaders who hired themselves out to various kings and cities, eventually becoming powerful enough that they took over.

Heh, my campaign is about to enter such a stage as well, as PCs are about to get the proverbial offer they can't (or won't, since 1k gold and all the loot they can carry from a city they are to perform a coup in is a lot of gold for 4th level group).

I think opening with a group on a quest already is a good idea indeed. Just think how you'd like to start, as it'll set some tone of the play to come - does the have a tour of duty mercenary contract, or it's a single job? In both cases, it's worth to flesh out the employer (because of lengthy interactions, or probability of the job being actually a trap/riskier than advertised).

Secondly, the main challenge, especially early on, is actually managing the warband. Early on the main problem is keeping the food on the table (the payment rates are somewhat wonky, at least in OSRIC, but oh well). You might want to flesh out a few members (though not necessarily all), give them conflicting ambitions, some good for the group, some bad, as managing those personalities will become a challenge once there's enough gold in the group that mutiny due to lack of payment isn't an issue. Remember also that some parts of the group may level (and in fact, most should, though most perhaps slower or even much slower than PCs)

Thirdly, though partially in regard to the first point - such bands of armed men are sure to draw attention, and the PCs will probably be a bit more ambitious themselves. In fact, the need to feed such a large group will probably enforce such ambitions, so you may want to prepare political sphere early on. It needn't be very complicated at first, as a lot of complications will probably form in your head once you figure out the conflicting goals and ambitions, but it's best to have some rough structure already, in case first thing the PCs declare is finding the nearest rich man who needs someone done that requires a lot of paid murderers. Which they probably will.



I'll give my own example what I'm currently working with in regard to my campaign and some hooks I envision:

The party's in northeastern part of Hellade (the quasi - Greece as you probably guessed ), where there a conflict brewing, for economical, political and divine reasons. In the bigger picture, there are omens of an incoming Persian invasion from the East, as oracles are seeing visions of Hellenic cities in Asia Minor raising against their oppressors, supported by their allies in Hellade's south, which shall trigger a conflict that none will know how to end. Currently in the northeast, however, at the main stage there are three powers of the region:

Tartar, the city ruled by God - Tyrant Arachnos (also the man who's about to give the party the offer). An ambitious ruler and a (demi)god, he has foreseen by his divine powers, that due to his blasphemous, born out of sorcery and trickery, divinity, Fate is now to turn against him and bring him down (this'll have to do with the artefact that one of the PCs was tricked by Hermes into taking). In order to combat that prophecy, he wishes to unite entire northeastern part of Hellade under his boot, and ally with the Persian king against Hellade in the coming war. Right now Tartar's main problem is famine - it's placed amongst the great swamps of Hellade, and the rice that grows on it's wetlands isn't enough to feed the population, as the rival city of Lefuma, weary of rivalry with Tartar in regard of trade as well as Arachnos' endless ambition, embargoes the city. On the other hand, Tartar is also a capitol of bizarre magical items and potions, which are produced by city's skilled craftsmen, taught by Arachnos' priests, as well as producers of finest oil (due to free - flowing kerosene lakes in the swamp).

Lefuma, the city ruled by a Council of Twelve, an oligarchy of twelve richest noble houses. A very stratified city, only the citizens have the right of commerce - everyone must deliver products to them, in return for arbitrary payment, as only the citizens may own shops and enterprises. Still, due to the city's strategic importance as the city controlling the northeastern trade, as it lies at the source of the river connecting the northeastern Hellade with Hellade's biggest river, the city's rich and bountiful even to the non - citizens, who are none the less strangled by various privileges of citizen class. In return to growing militarisation of Tartar, they had embargoed it in hope of weakening it economically enough, that it poses no threat to them.

I have a third power written up, but they don't matter right now, nor do the few other city - states which, while important, for the next few sessions won't probably come up in play. What matters is, as you can see, a pretty simple relations and power struggles, which are a fodder for mercenaries to find work.

Tartar's ambitious ruler wants to conquer other city states, which, right now, try to weaken it economically. So you have a tyrant with a hungry  city, who now must go to war if he wants to keep ruling, and a few city states who, while perhaps stronger, face themselves problems of populations that aren't as scared into submission as Tartar's, or desperate for some social justice - while Tartar's ruler is a ruthless autocrat, he taxes some of the activities of non - citizens instead of outright forbidding them.

Which gives a lot of hooks for play - the PCs may be hired to perform a coup by Tartar's leader, or perhaps a food raid. On the other hand, other city states may be looking for new mercenary companies in the coming war, and to protect against raiding parties, brigands looking for smugglers, and hungry hordes of peasants and refugees. When there are embargoes,  there are people willing to break them for double the profit, and they are also looking for people with swords to protect the transports from bandits and hungry peasants, as well as take out the competition. Or the players might literally take out the middle men, and try to establish a smuggler's ring themselves, though that might cause them a visit from local mob lords/Thieves Guild representatives, reminding them about their dues and shaking the boat they all sail on. And again, big politic might knock on small crime's door, as lords of embargoed or embargoing cities might want people whom they know they can hang, to help them run the deficit goods, for the greater profit of both sides.

I've had players be part of warbands and also parts of larger armies. Sometimes they have leadership roles and sometimes they are just part af the crew. Anyhow, a Few Thoughts:

1) It's a really good format for am episodic, westmarches-style, casual drop in and ready to play community. The troupe provides the continuity that individual players may not.
2) Figure out your mass combat system. Man to man systems don't scale up well when it comes to playability. Related to this, you'll have to make foundational decisions about magic and battlefield applications of magic. Tactics, organisation will reflect this.
2b) Do your players like wargaming? This matters.
3) That said you can change scope as needed, session to session, from focus on individuals to small groups to larger formations. So it's pretty flexible when it comes to episodic adventure design.
4) For hexcrawling, you'll quickly find that the players (and their group/band/army) *are* the wandering monster. Encounters will change in style from the usual adventuring norm.
5) Logistics matter. Learn to love spreadsheets, and don't handwave food and supply. Also campfollowers.

We ran something more gradiose.

Basically we built a continent and we divided it into 4 empires, humans, elves, undead and goblinoids.
Each area was given to a player who divided it into provinces of roughly the same size.
Each province had garison, towns, food supply, etc etc

Then we each when and built a huge army using the 2e Battle system and a costing points model I wrote.
Then we went to war. Every weekend there was a battle Orcs vs undead, elves vs humans etc etc.
Every Friday before the battle there was a roleplay session. The roleplay sessions were a little odd because they were one-offs set in the same campaign but each session had a mission. So in one session we all played goblin spies who were trying to sneak into the human camp to steal the battle plans. In another we were elven assassins trying to eliminate the ORcish general etc. The player who ran the "defending" army was DM and everyone else, even folk not involved in the battle side were players.
The next day's battles were influenced by events. So the battle plans were indeed stolen so the Humans had to set up their armies first and then the Gobos were able to respond (don't worry we still won the day thanks to the Spears of Rovac and a mass of peasant archers positioned behind a wall). The Elven assassins failed in their mission and so their leader was unable to lead his elvish skirmishers the next day and in fact that unit had -2 morale for the fight as their leader's head was now part of an orcish battle standard.

It was an ambitions project and we only ran it for 8 weeks due to Real Life over a summer but it was outstanding fun.

I would love to have another stab at it but using an online battle system rather than a Live system. Beleive me having 80 provinces each detaield on an index card (for each player) and trying to give some realism to logistics, foraging etc was a total PitA and I had to spend a shed load of cash on GW minis as well

My worry about your scenario is that in D&D 0 level Men at arms are very fragile. I could see your group of 20 + PCs meeting a similar group of bandits and your forces being cut by 40% and I could see that happening pretty fast so you would quickly end up with no troops left. You really need a number closer to 100 or the ability to raise new troops as levees or something.

I love Kiero's idea - its got a simple powerful hook, so little would have to be explained to the players and its nigh-instant action. I absolutely would love to run that someday.

It would be a cool Traveller campaign too.

Quote from: Saladman;735688Anyone done this?  Any advice, best practices, or just table stories?

Yup here is part 1
http://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2013/06/a-sandbox-campaign-nomar-campaign-part-1.html

and Part 2. Haven't finished Part 3 yet. But it ends with the party building a tavern and clearing an ancient graveyard next door.

http://batintheattic.blogspot.com/2013/06/a-sandbox-campaign-nomar-campaign-part-2.html

Quote from: Saladman;735688I'm getting hung up on a couple of things.  First, how much ready opposition to provide, and how much in the way of quests.  I've seen sandboxes go better when there's some initial direction to get your feet under you (or rebel against) than when the GM just says "go forth and sandbox!"

You need an initial context from which the players can base their decision. I develop this through one on one talks with the players prior the campaign's starts. The result is a basic background of their character, from that I develop the specifics of the initial situation. It not formal or complicated, you probably already do much of this in the pre-campaign banter with your players. The only difference now you direct that banter to a specific purpose.

And remember it OK if all the player is interested is role-playing a version of himself in a fantasy setting.  That his motivation is little more than wine, women, and treasure. For this type of player the focus of your banter is finding out what kind of treasure he wants. He will have a preference even it is as simple as owning a big-ass sword.

Quote from: Saladman;735688Second, how to pitch this.  I'm not converting a regular game group or night, but I do have a large pool of people I've played with or GM'd for.

Come up with four to a half-dozen initial situations and find out which one the consensus settles on. For the Nomar campaign, I pitched a couple and what I got was "We want to be in a Game of Thrones situation." So I pitched a couple of variations of that. And they settled out as being newcomers to a mercenary group. The I talked to each of them about what type of characters they wanted. Gave them some specific to use. Then they rolled up their characters.

Quote from: Saladman;735688So I can handle drop-ins or differing player groups just by asking them to agree on a mission to cooperate on.  But more modern style games (3.5/Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, Shadowrun, others) have been the biggest draws in this community.

The campaigns needs to be centered on a "thing" that transcends the players. For example Ars Magica easily supports drop-in play because the game centers around the doings of a covenant of people.  Star Trek RPGs likewise focuses on a ship. In your case the focus should be on the unit.

However to keep the sandbox feel be flexible about what the unit is. In my Nomar Campaign the players were part of the Red Hawks but eventually went independent. Which was fine instead of the "unit" being the Red Hawk, it became the player group and their missions. Later it became centered around the inn construction site.

As long as your campaign as a center then drop-ins and drop outs won't be a difficulty

Quote from: Saladman;735688System would almost certainly be ACKS.  I have it, I like it, and its got the demographics integrated in, with a mass battle system forthcoming.  But I'd take input on that as well.

Use what you are comfortable with. ACKS can and does work for many. Personally use a lot of Harn material because that what been using since the late 80s. With Domains at War nearing completion ACKS will have even more options in that regard.

Read and adapt the One Ring's travel rules to D&D. They're an excellent fit for a hex crawl, proving you create new roles for exploration!

Based on my experience of ACKS so far, for combats involving less than 100 participants, you can quite safely use the regular combat rules. Make the players run their allied mercenaries, so as GM you just focus on the opposition and it should run fine.

Save Domains@War for the bigger stuff with a hundred or more on each side.

Another inspiration is the Chain of Dogs from the Malazan Empire series. An army shepherds many times its size in refugees across a hostile continent, against a rising of most of the native population, being whittled down bit by bit at every step.