Cantonment-based adventure?

[Adm.Lee]

I was thinking about cantonments or villages needing militia. Has anyone ever run/played a group that settled down?

Most of us, I assume, have run/played the games in which the PCs wander about the countryside, either on their own initiative or on missions from higher authority. But what about the guys that stopped wandering, like B Troop in Black Madonna? Or who have sat down in their cantonments and don't want to leave, like a big chunk of the US Army in Going Home?

You could run quite a lot of adventures with the PCs settling into some village somewhere and setting themselves up as the village's army. Patrols against marauders, scouting for resources, and so on. Getting to know the NPCs of the town.

[Double Deuce]

A long, long time ago in a T2K game that I ran I used the the storyline from the movie "The Last Valley" as the basis for a short campaign. Alas, all of my notes are no longer available (too many moves while in the military) but I do remember my players seemed to enjoy it.

[Raellus]

Reminds me of what the Green Berets did in Vietnam.

The eight or so PCs in my online PotV campaign have settled down in the town of Gora-Kalwaria south of Warsaw. In fortnight or so that they've been there, they have interacted with a few key NPC townspeople, helped fight off mauraders, mounted a raid on the marauder encampment, assisted in reopening a trade route to Kozienice, and have worked on training the less experienced among the town's militia. Currently, they are reconoitering east bank Warsaw.

I think it would be interesting to play out a scenario where the PCs were part of a larger, more conventional unit (company sized) trying to set up their own little cantonment.

[sglancy12]

Originally Posted by Double Deuce

A long, long time ago in a T2K game that I ran I used the the storyline from the movie "The Last Valley" as the basis for a short campaign.

As far as historical scenarios go, The Last Valley is a really good choice for a TW2K campaign. I approve.

I too have always wanted to do a scenario where they players settle in for the long haul of rebuilding civilization. One of my regular gamers would also love to try it, but right now my gaming time is being spent playtesting scenarios for publication... just don't have time to play TW2K.

The closest thing to settling down any of my players ever did was becoming anti-Mexican guerillas in southern California. Eventually the campaign would have changed character as the invaders thinned out and the guerillas had to settle down and become part of the local community.

I think the hardest part about planning a campaign set in a specific geographic area is picking the geographic area. I mean, as a game master I've got to design the area, populate it, invent crisis and problems that will be interesting and challenging, and occasionally send some trouble their way. The area needs to be someplace interesting, with good resources, near a water source. A river would be best since it can also act as a highway to allow players to easily travel... and it can bring trouble their way too.

The area needs to be away from the major areas of pre-war government control, but close enough to the conflicts to make things interesting every once in a while.

Certainly becoming part of the administration of a free-city would provide non-stop challenges... but if the players get too high up in the city's hierarchy, they'll never get to go out on missions... They'll end up being administrators. So the area they settle down to rebuild can't be too big or they'll either not be masters of their own fate, or they'll be too removed from the action.

What areas would you think would make an interesting cantonment or independent state for the players to protect and rebuild. I myself think Portland Oregon would be fascinating, with the small caveat that it may be too big for a group of independent minded players to get involved with.

A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing

[Marc]

For me the main problem would be to elaborate a set of rules to simulate things like the needed supplies, medical care, local production, grow rate, commerce potential, etc. For me it’s easier to create and imagine the background conditions, the NPC, and to create the villages and invent possible plots. But the difficult thing is to have a system to measure the impact of the actions of the playing character in the development of the community. For example, if playing characters are providing escort to an incoming caravan, what would be the incidence of the safe arrival of the caravan to the cantonment? If the group manages to clear of mines a field that will be later intended to food production, can this contribution be measured as a game parameter fort he development of the cantonment. A mix between the normal roleplaying sessions and a strategy game, where the characters try to do their best to improve the parameters of their cantonment. I’ve run games where players make decisive contributions to their communities, letting to imagination and common sense the consequences of their actions. But for a campaign with the development of a cantonment as the main goal, some kind of rule system to evaluate the state of the cantonment would be desirable. It would be much more interesting. Any idea if such a system exists?

[headquarters]

Tried it out for a few years.

Our campaign centered around a group of survivors who were working as Private security contractors in CA.

As all came crumbling down they started wandering the rubble until they decided that they needed to settle in to make it .( yeah - I nudged them a little ).

They organized a platoon and took over a village and consolidated.Then they took another and repeated their exploits.

As time (game time ) went by they expanded their influence and area of operations.Beyond the scope of the original game it is fair to say.We made our own rules to do this .

Some things to bear in mind .

Administration : need to be done properly to give the campaign some aspect of being about building a "faction" and interacting with others.Manpower,rations,resources available etc must be kept on record so the players can allocate according to their choices.
This can grow out of hand if you allow it to - it certainly did with us .Some players loved the "Civilization" like aspect of it .Some just wanted to get out and roll the D6 - in a way .

All in all - if you can balance the admin to a tolerable level for all you got a pretty good recipe for generating cool missions. To have the players fight for goals they have defined on their own is more rewarding to the GM and the players than giving them a job at hiring hall etc .The players give the GM the mission in a way , and he /she stacks the odds according to what he feels is the right and balanced opposition /situation .

I wont say that the size of the unit or cantonment is the factor that complicates or not - its the level of detail you find to be correct to run such a campaign.

Bear in mind that as the GM you will need to be up to date on your partys fief as wekll as the fiefs in the area that you can expect them to interact with .

A useful hint is to have a "quartermaster" type NPC that keeps the records and acts as the resource allocation advisor to the party.That way they can still decide on the general strategy and plans but need not bury themselves in XL sheets .The GM will then have to -maybe in conjunction with a player.

The admin for the next session should be done at the end of the preceding one or by email before meeting up . That way you can minimize the paperwork when you actually get together to play .Bean counting needs to be done at the preferred level or it becomes to easy/pointless to run a large unit size game imho .

But given some preparatory record sheets and devising a system to keep track of expenditure and results it could be done fairly easy. ( We never QUITE succeeded in making it to everyone taste -but I am convinced that it can be done .The trick is to be restrictive as a GM in allowing the industrious players starting projects etc - strangle the resources to a level were its easy to keep track and allow them only so many agendas at a time . )

Action and combat missions : there will be no shortage of such if you do not want there to be .

Sure its not realistic that that Generals and administrators go out on patrols etc .

But then again -given the nature of the the situation post WWIII , many missions will be "Too sensitive" for the common militia man .Many will be so dangerous that only a fanatic or PC will actually go out to do them -and succeed.

Sometimes a battle will stall until a leader steps up and leads from the front to break the enemy line .Patton,King Gustav Adolf,king Richard III of England,Fieldmarshall Nay of napoleonic France and countless others did this many times in their careers.

They were sometimes not only the military commanders but also leaders of their nations.So in short - maybe there will not be the random skirmishes that occur during a stealthy patrol as much anymore .(Although they can happen still ) .But missions were the players decide everything from tactics to objective .The GM needs only say that "there is no way anybody will do that Sir!" to give the players the incentive to kit up and go forth.

Another part of such games will be the party`s inetraction with eachother.The fact that power is available and that leaders and positions of influence needs to be appointed can lead to a lot of cool situations -and a lot of griveous ones as well.Jostling for power is one thing when the whole party is dirt poor and need eachother on a day to day basis .But as wealth ( cool gear ) and scores of loyal troops etc come within reach behaviour may change or be enhanced for the worse as far as loyalty to other players is concerned.

I find this more interesting than the campaign where all are of a similar mind and the motives are more black and white .

NPCs - you will need to make up a score of NPCs as the players need to interact a lot more in depth with people .The people in the cantonment,traders,bandit lords ,unit leaders,other cantonment notables etc etc .
If you like it might develop into a post apocalyptic soap opera.

I have thouroghly enjoyed our little "Bloodlines" campaign ( neo feudal setting ) and have tried the many pitfalls that you can stumble into if you dont keep an eye on things .

The biggest one is to keep the records straight and the bean counting at a level you know to be practical in terms of actually playing when you get together.

To end this with a little self promotion - our site

thebigbookofwar.50megs.com

has some stock NPCs and documents on production etc that you might be able to modify to your uses.

[headquarters]

It is easier to use imagination and common sense .
But alot can be done fairly easily by taking elements from strategy games .

Crops - have a Die roll table for result ranging from bad to excellent and take it from there .

Have a set of parameters for what is possible to produce with a given level of technology and give all villages a level according to imagination and common sense.

Set up a defence force for all cantonments .

It is much like making NPCs in detail , but instead of hitpoints you give them a militia.
Instead of gear you give them an inventory .

Instead of initiative give them a moral score.

Top it of by giving them a ration number and the number of rations they gain every harvest and the number eaten every day .The occurence of trade routes or caravans can be added to the ration number .

Correct these numbers up and down as events unfold .

There are already "Village crisis tables" in the core rules .( V.2.0) These can be expanded by your own hand to also have Village Bonus results - like a windfall of supplies etc

The NPCs that run the other places you give motives to your own taste some will want a war of expansion ,some want peace and harmony .Some are desperate and some greedy .In teh end you should have a record sheet for resources and men in every village ,a map of the area it is in and a detailed map of defenses etc and a few NPC sheets of the notables there - with pictures so that the mayor isnt always the same faceless guy .

It takes quite alot of work compared to only making the scenario/firefight that happens next .But alot of the work is already done by your imagination .You know whatr areas have good defenses because you have decided this based on imagination and common sense already .

It is good to keep options limited for the players.They can expand in military ,agriculture or production .Use common sense and determine the size of teh workforce available ,the resources available and give them the projected result if they choose to go this or that way .
Not everyone in a village can work on communal projects at the same time .
Trying to force this will mean that the villagers will fight of teh dictators - or try to .Also an interesting scenario .the players are the evil overlords that force the villagersand a group of travelling heroes emerge to liberate the huddled masses...

Originally Posted by Marc

For me the main problem would be to elaborate a set of rules to simulate things like the needed supplies, medical care, local production, grow rate, commerce potential, etc. For me it’s easier to create and imagine the background conditions, the NPC, and to create the villages and invent possible plots. But the difficult thing is to have a system to measure the impact of the actions of the playing character in the development of the community. For example, if playing characters are providing escort to an incoming caravan, what would be the incidence of the safe arrival of the caravan to the cantonment? If the group manages to clear of mines a field that will be later intended to food production, can this contribution be measured as a game parameter fort he development of the cantonment. A mix between the normal roleplaying sessions and a strategy game, where the characters try to do their best to improve the parameters of their cantonment. I’ve run games where players make decisive contributions to their communities, letting to imagination and common sense the consequences of their actions. But for a campaign with the development of a cantonment as the main goal, some kind of rule system to evaluate the state of the cantonment would be desirable. It would be much more interesting. Any idea if such a system exists?

[jester]

I did it with my Out of ashes campaign. It worked pretty well. I had some talent included to handle medical needs, basicaly they had semi autonomy but were sponsored by Milgov. I even included a dentist.

Their mission establish a presence in the region for Milgov, win hearts and minds by creating a medical clinic, a working dock along the Columbia River and set up industry to include lumber and farming to not only be self sustaining, but to create exports.

[Marc]

Originally Posted by headquarters

It is easier to use imagination and common sense .
But alot can be done fairly easily by taking elements from strategy games .

Crops - have a Die roll table for result ranging from bad to excellent and take it from there .

Have a set of parameters for what is possible to produce with a given level of technology and give all villages a level according to imagination and common sense.

Set up a defence force for all cantonments .

It is much like making NPCs in detail , but instead of hitpoints you give them a militia.
Instead of gear you give them an inventory .

Instead of initiative give them a moral score.

Top it of by giving them a ration number and the number of rations they gain every harvest and the number eaten every day .The occurence of trade routes or caravans can be added to the ration number .

Correct these numbers up and down as events unfold .

There are already "Village crisis tables" in the core rules .( V.2.0) These can be expanded by your own hand to also have Village Bonus results - like a windfall of supplies etc

The NPCs that run the other places you give motives to your own taste some will want a war of expansion ,some want peace and harmony .Some are desperate and some greedy .In teh end you should have a record sheet for resources and men in every village ,a map of the area it is in and a detailed map of defenses etc and a few NPC sheets of the notables there - with pictures so that the mayor isnt always the same faceless guy .

It takes quite alot of work compared to only making the scenario/firefight that happens next .But alot of the work is already done by your imagination .You know whatr areas have good defenses because you have decided this based on imagination and common sense already .

It is good to keep options limited for the players.They can expand in military ,agriculture or production .Use common sense and determine the size of teh workforce available ,the resources available and give them the projected result if they choose to go this or that way .
Not everyone in a village can work on communal projects at the same time .
Trying to force this will mean that the villagers will fight of teh dictators - or try to .Also an interesting scenario .the players are the evil overlords that force the villagersand a group of travelling heroes emerge to liberate the huddled masses...

Good points HQ. Probably I will try to make a kind of experiment with them and with the rules of v2.2 for my next campaign, once the players have received the "Good luck..." message after the battle of Kalisz.