"Battle Royale" Campaign

[8BitNinja]

If you have looked at the gaming community recently, you will know the Battle Royale shooter has been a popular subgenre. What started with ARMA 3 mods such as H1Z1 and RUST has turned into a massive phenomena, with games such as PUBG and Fortnite that are nearly unavoidable to see. This had me thinking last night.

Would a "Battle Royale" campaign for an RPG work well? If so, how would be the best way to execute it. I was thinking maybe combine ideas such as a large battle with a magical/scientific closing field with death walls from the original Battle Royale book and PUBG/Fortnite with also an added survival aspect, similar to that of The Hunger Games. Since it's an RPG, the PUBG/Fortnite squad idea would also probably be implemented.

Would anyone like to help make this.idea concrete?

[Whoracle]

Watch the last Acquisitions Inc (Pax east I think), strip the over-the-top humour and build from there. Sry, no links because mobile.

IMHO it works as a one- or twoshot, but not for a whole campaign.

[Obscuraphile]

Well, how many people are we talking about? If you mean how would a standard party look dropped into a campaign where there are other parties, individuals, and hazards (all run by one DM) roaming around a limited map then I think that could be kind of fun and would work in an RL tabletop setting.

However if you're thinking about 20+ people here on the forums (the only way that I believe such a thing could be managed), I would say, also badass. Maybe take an island divide it up into zones, each with its own DM (4-5 depending on size) and have some sort of hand off between. Some sort of time control, maybe a "turn" a week and battles handled differently. The big thing would be making time line up across the combat zone.

[8BitNinja]

Well, how many people are we talking about? If you mean how would a standard party look dropped into a campaign where there are other parties, individuals, and hazards (all run by one DM) roaming around a limited map then I think that could be kind of fun and would work in an RL tabletop setting.

However if you're thinking about 20+ people here on the forums (the only way that I believe such a thing could be managed), I would say, also badass. Maybe take an island divide it up into zones, each with its own DM (4-5 depending on size) and have some sort of hand off between. Some sort of time control, maybe a "turn" a week and battles handled differently. The big thing would be making time line up across the combat zone.

While the first idea sounds good, I'm now intrigued at the prospect of the second, although it would be incredibly hard to pull off. I think the first word take standard time to plan a campaign, but I think I would need a solid month to plan the other one.

[Armored Walrus]

I ran a battle royale mini-campaign using D&D 5e for about 3 months. There are definitely issues with doing it, because PCs are not balanced to face each other. Team battles worked just fine, but free-for-alls were fairly messy. I can't point to specific houserules you'd need for other systems, but I can share what I did with 5e's rules to make a workable system.

As for the premise of the campaign; mine was set in an arena surrounded by an extra-planar space that held spectators from all worlds. From fiends to illithid to giants to evil dragons to whatever. The combatants woke each session back in the arena with no memory of their lives before, only knowing they needed to kill these folks. As we got deeper into it I added a small story element and a few sessions that were mass pve instead of pvp. (10 level 5 fighters vs an adult black dragon, chained so it couldn't fly away, was a fun one)

As a "campaign" I would say it's not a very satisfying experience. It will attract players that are mostly oriented on the tactical board game aspect of whatever system you're playing. IMO, that's a feature, but it doesn't lend itself to a deep, story-oriented adventure. If you're going to try to run one, I'd plan on it only lasting a little while.

[Armored Walrus]

While the first idea sounds good, I'm now intrigued at the prospect of the second, although it would be incredibly hard to pull off. I think the first word take standard time to plan a campaign, but I think I would need a solid month to plan the other one.

The second idea already happens on these boards; it's the Empire games.

[Obscuraphile]

While the first idea sounds good, I'm now intrigued at the prospect of the second, although it would be incredibly hard to pull off. I think the first word take standard time to plan a campaign, but I think I would need a solid month to plan the other one.

Oh definitely, it's not something I would try on a whim. You would need a group of DMs/Moderators with a common vision if you ask me.

The second idea already happens on these boards; it's the Empire games.

Yeah, but those aren't exactly D&D games, and you're not coordinating turn based combat with fluid exploration

[Kaptin Keen]

Well - I think for a computer rpg, it might work well. Specifically, if you had some sort of persistent world party based base construction and pvp, that might well be a thing. Sort of the opposite of Fortnite.

[Armored Walrus]

Yeah, but those aren't exactly D&D games, and you're not coordinating turn based combat with fluid exploration

This isn't posted in a D&D forum. :P But I agree with your second point. A game that combines the two elements, though, would be pretty darn ambitious. You could probably do it with a Stars Without Number style faction system, giving each player a faction to run on a certain time cycle, and then drilling down to the player level with maybe a West Marches style campaign.

I know there are groups out there doing the West Marches thing - though I don't think any of those are here on GitP. But I haven't seen anyone combine the two - factional/regional play combined with drilled down action.

[Slipperychicken]

A dynamic hexcrawl could easily do justice to the battle royale format.

The main thing you'd need is random loot/encounter generation (i.e. how many teams, what are they doing, how many dead, how skilled/equipped they are, awareness, aggression, ambushes, etc), mid-battle events (fleeing, more enemies appearing, morale, etc), battle maps for each hex, and changing these things depending on how long the match has progressed. From a design perspective, it's basically a gigantic open-air hexcrawl mega-dungeon that gets harder over time; most of these ideas have already been created in RPGs. And of course you could easily tack on a circle/storm mechanic to restrict the hexcrawl and make it finish faster.

I think the way to go is having the PCs be their own squad, so that the map can be run as in a traditional RPG; largely abstracted until the PCs reach it, with the option to quickly determine things at random.

[Obscuraphile]

This isn't posted in a D&D forum. :P.

Point. I should have said that the nation games are not really RPGs so much as grand strategy in PbP