I own them all, but haven't gotten around to reading OWDS yet.
For a few years now, I've been considering running The Throne of Bloodstone (H2? "Levels 18-100) module using the Castles & Crusades rules, to see how high level characters perform in the Siege Engine
Computer strategy and simulation games handle domain management quite well. Picture the user interface of those games and then picture your ttrpg character sheet.
We do have tools that we can use to track these things if you want them to be granular. You can also abstract these things to a degree and break them up amongst other players. Can it be a lot? Yes but the effort should yield a more rewarding game experience.
I like high level stuff because, as a player, it lets me imagine I'm on a course to greatness. The amount of campaigns I've played in that actually stayed together long enough to get there are few but I've always strived.
It's the same with video games with terrible late games. Sure most people die or give up halfway through a game, according to Steam stats, but I think people like to imagine they're going towards a glorious endgame or ending.
Re: spin off campaigns. I was in a game once that handled it in the funniest manner. It went late game enough for us to have institutional wealth but now if you wanted a piece of epic loot you had to hire people to go get it! So my dude wanted short range teleportation and had to hire a team, lower level guys who all of us played a small campaign as, to explore dungeons that were rumored to have something like that. Those guys found it and got handsomely paid - to my chagrin it actually came off of my high level guy's inventory sheet.
For later missions I actually gave the secondary team hand-me-down items which were immensely powerful to them but useless to me. Knowing that your work will kit out someone you or someone else will play as makes the logistical game much higher stakes with higher reward.
You make a great point about retiring higher level PCs from dungeon crawls and instead having them fund and facilitate adventures and battles. I recently got my copy of Farewell to Arms, a WWI-Inspired hack of Mork Borg. Each mission has 3 phases: Diplomacy, War Lord, and Battle.
The game will eventually let you level up a soldier (level 3) into a War Lord if he survives enough missions. At that point, your character is no longer in the trenches fighting the enemy. Instead, War Lords provide the Grunts with War Orders (used once per scenario) that can alter the course of battle. If a War Lord is used in enough successful missions he is promoted to Diplomat. Diplomats have a bonus that can be used when dealing with their assigned faction. A successful Diplomacy Phase means that your mission will get a Twist that benefits the soldiers in the field. A failure, means they always get the Twist that hinders them.
Failed Diplomacy - There will be an artillery strike on your enemy's position, but your squad will also be in the line of fire.
Successful Diplomacy - The artillery strikes will only target the enemy.
Are there any good examples of high level okay and scenarios you would recommend?
Besides Nighthaven, of course, i already own that...
Brozer, On Wine Dark Seas and The Shucked Oyster all handle this kind of thing well
I own them all, but haven't gotten around to reading OWDS yet.
For a few years now, I've been considering running The Throne of Bloodstone (H2? "Levels 18-100) module using the Castles & Crusades rules, to see how high level characters perform in the Siege Engine
Great article. I think you are on to something.
Computer strategy and simulation games handle domain management quite well. Picture the user interface of those games and then picture your ttrpg character sheet.
We do have tools that we can use to track these things if you want them to be granular. You can also abstract these things to a degree and break them up amongst other players. Can it be a lot? Yes but the effort should yield a more rewarding game experience.
I like high level stuff because, as a player, it lets me imagine I'm on a course to greatness. The amount of campaigns I've played in that actually stayed together long enough to get there are few but I've always strived.
It's the same with video games with terrible late games. Sure most people die or give up halfway through a game, according to Steam stats, but I think people like to imagine they're going towards a glorious endgame or ending.
Re: spin off campaigns. I was in a game once that handled it in the funniest manner. It went late game enough for us to have institutional wealth but now if you wanted a piece of epic loot you had to hire people to go get it! So my dude wanted short range teleportation and had to hire a team, lower level guys who all of us played a small campaign as, to explore dungeons that were rumored to have something like that. Those guys found it and got handsomely paid - to my chagrin it actually came off of my high level guy's inventory sheet.
For later missions I actually gave the secondary team hand-me-down items which were immensely powerful to them but useless to me. Knowing that your work will kit out someone you or someone else will play as makes the logistical game much higher stakes with higher reward.
You make a great point about retiring higher level PCs from dungeon crawls and instead having them fund and facilitate adventures and battles. I recently got my copy of Farewell to Arms, a WWI-Inspired hack of Mork Borg. Each mission has 3 phases: Diplomacy, War Lord, and Battle.
The game will eventually let you level up a soldier (level 3) into a War Lord if he survives enough missions. At that point, your character is no longer in the trenches fighting the enemy. Instead, War Lords provide the Grunts with War Orders (used once per scenario) that can alter the course of battle. If a War Lord is used in enough successful missions he is promoted to Diplomat. Diplomats have a bonus that can be used when dealing with their assigned faction. A successful Diplomacy Phase means that your mission will get a Twist that benefits the soldiers in the field. A failure, means they always get the Twist that hinders them.
Failed Diplomacy - There will be an artillery strike on your enemy's position, but your squad will also be in the line of fire.
Successful Diplomacy - The artillery strikes will only target the enemy.