Yeah, D&D as we played it in the 70s was much more like modern campaign skirmish games in feel than like RPGs as they are played today. A dungeon run was a series of tactical encounters, executed by a recurring warband which gradually gained power and experience. Admittedly, some tactical encounters were more efficiently solved by guile or diplomacy, but that was the extent to which we portrayed our characters as fictional personas. Backstories and plots/story arcs didn't come into the game until later in the 80s, and funny voices by anyone other than the GM trying to differentiate NPCs weren't a thing until the 90s. That's not a knock on modern RPG play--just an observation that it's evolved away from its roots, and some of us OG gamers are finding that old itch better scratched by skirmish wargames than by D&D 5e and its contemporaries.
@@Smittumi OD&D also uses Chainmail and if you actually read the way the rules imply you play it; the game is basically like a series of Decent-style skirmishes to clear dungeon floors.
It's easier to schedule game with one other player than to gather whole gaming group for a RPG session. That's why it can be easier to have wargaming campaign instead of roleplaying one. That being said they are two different animals. Both are awesome!
In some respects! Entirely depends on your prep routine as a GM and your style of running. Me, I have a rough outline I go by, but the thing I spend the most time "prepping" for is the next session or two of a game. For models though, that's some serious time that I still haven't found the perfect way to juggle it. But I'm sure I'll find out at some point. :D
@@FenrisChosen it also depends on the other players too. I mean, there's always *that* player who cancels a day before the game, and scheduling can be reaaaaaally tough, especially when you and your friends get older and have more stuff to do.
For me the main difference is that in a wargame you can be playing and still talking to your friend about something non related to the game. A roleplaying game doesn't allow that kind of thing, you can talk with a friend about non game stuff, but then you won't be playing.
Eh, only in super hardcore games. I assure you that our friends often get onto weird tangents that are spurred by in game events, but then we go back to the game.
@@jaimerivera2382 sure. I've been playing rpgs with my friends for more than thirty years, and we talk about lot of things non game related. But, as you have said when you talk about something non game related you have to come back to the game. There's a stop and you back, that doesn't happens in a wargame.
I recently just assembled a squad of Intercessors to use in skirmish level games. So I built the sergeant with a sheathed power sword mag locked to his thigh. The comms specialist with their comm panel on their wrist open calling in target situation. The marksmen bracing against a wall about to take the shot. The veteran stoicly advancing. The newbie in basic kit with less embellishments etc.
I roleplay my wargames and do silly voices for my space marines BROTHERS!!!! ARRGH I HAVE BEEN HIT!!! AVENGE ME!!!!! Uugggghhh.... FOUL XENOS !!!! I MUST SLAY YOU IN THE NAME OF BROTHER CAPTAIN LEONHARDT!!! yeah.... :|
Yes, I came down to the comments to suggest *Rangers of Shadowdeep*. it really hits a sweet spot of campaign-based mini-wargaming and an rpg-lite/crpg.
It should be much easier with a kill team since they are fever and it's possible to create a name and a persona for every character involved. This would include the characters strength and weakness especially mentally such since these tend to differ more among soldiers than the physical traits. Then you figure out what motivates each character to be where they are now, do they fight for honor, to protect their friends and family or to redeem themselves etc. And then finally you list the relationships between the characters, are some best friends, other rivals, leaders, followers etc. Now you should know the characters well enough to imagine how they would react to what happens in the game. :)
I run a Wrath and Glory game, and when we do combat, we've taken to a complete transition into playing a kinda Kill Team variant where each player runs their model, and I run everything else. It's a blast.
Great video. I play D&D the way you describe, but without minis. Fantasy Wargame with pen and paper. Time and logistic are essential. No silly voices, no boring interactions, no tavern game. Declare your adventure site and Go, using the Ad&D rules.
One thing that is cool for the busy folks is to have role play stuff on like a discord, playing at a slower pace over the course of the week and then the battle happens at the weekend as sort of the narrative before and after the games. Sort of makes the games impactful and makes a sort of unified...idk...universe.
I guess a part of doing it over call is that you don't need to include the entire party in some way or another, and can just let the group split off and have their personal journeys.
I enjoy campaigns in board, role and war-gaming. Of course, my two minions during Warcry had a lot of questions when they both discovered they were named ‘Chaff’.
It sounds like a micro vs macro thing, overseeing a few people vs stepping into the skin of one. Also in wargaming campaigns you have expectations that you can meet and enjoy; in RPG games there is a lot of unknown as far as game types, playstyle and group.
i wonder if you would enjoy a D&D dungeon crawl, start of the D&D game is at the door of the dungeon and you work your way trough it. it has a lot less of the play your role in the world and more of a use the tools given to your characters to solve all the problems, such as bad guys that need a sword in them, and has the leveling up and character building and stuff...
I pretty much only play tabletop campaigns these days. I think it's so much more fun than just one off games; sticking with your army/warband as it grows and the stories you play through with them are awesome. I also play a couple of pen and paper RPG's and it's the campaign and the character growth and stories that keep me coming back there as well. For me, it's the same kind of fun, just with different systems.
Which philosophy are you leaning towards? I have basic Cabals set up for Lords of Hell, Earthbound, Judges and the Brokers so far. Used a lot of dnd devils/demons. But also a lot of plant type monsters for one of them too.
In Denmark "normies" assume your talking about LARP when you mention roleplaying :) Live action roleplaying is huge here so it kinda makes sense, but it can be annoying.
I believe he is referring to Dungeons and Dragons, World of Darkness, etc ... Pen and Paper Roleplaying games, though the message certainly can be extrapolated out to LARPing. =]
Excellent video. As someone who loves RPGs and Tabletop Wargaming I have always enjoyed campaigns. Linked games where you can invest effort in your character or army. It adds a whole new dimension to a game when you can't treat your troops as disposable tokens just to win that particular battle. Adding a campaign element allows for 'character development' and forces new strategic decisions into the game.
The indie F28 ("Fast 28") rule system has three ways to use the rules; Battle, Skirmish and Narrative. Battle and Skirmish is akin to the various "normal" wargaming games out there, while in a Narrative game you have a GM and each player have 3-5 models and do missions and have a lot(!) more customized squad. The rules are made to fit for *any* 28mm models out there so you can your favorite 40k faction go up against your Infinity or Konflikt47 troops. No silly voices needed. You still "roleplay" as an officer giving commands to soldiers, gang members, cultists or whatever.
Really interesting! I do both rpgs and tabletop minis games. They really aren't that different at bottom... Original Dungeons & Dragons (the 3 Little Brown Books) plus the Chainmail miniatures rules (or later Swords & Spells) is very much a wargame campaign about plundering a fantasy environment. Orcs and goblins appear in the *hundreds*, and you're expected to hire platoons of spearmen and mule trains and torchbearers. Later editions of the game may have evolved into the Critical Role style of "Ye Olde Renne Faire speakeing withe yon peasantes in yon goodlee tavernne forsooth" but the good ol' original is very far from that, and still very popular. "Roderick Ironbrow spends the week canvassing town for mercenaries, while Red Morgan and the rest of the group hire an armorer and repair the expedition's weapons and armor; they buy extra drinks at the taverns for rumors every night." DM: "OK, the combined efforts cost 320 gold and you have the option to hire a group of 40 heavy foot who just got back from a chevauchee in a neighboring kingdom, plus 20 dwarven armored foot who are rumored to belong to a pariah cult, if you're interested. You also get 4 other rumors about the environs...". That's a far cry from "'allo guvnah! Wouldst thou seek to purchase a roast turkey leg for a mere fifteen florins?" I hope you agree.
The original Warhammer Quest from 95 is a great example of something that does all this. The Roleplay book for that was outstanding by giving you a non GM led development framework and flexible to GM a more DIY set of progression and adventures.
I'm 100% with this. Played WFRP 1st edition over Discord during lockdown. It was great fun and scratched an old itch, but now we're playing tabletop again I can't wait to get back into 40k Crusade, Zona Alpha, Necromunda and other narrative games.
Was thinking about getting into or developing my own Skirmish game and wanted to know more, this was the first video. 7:35, immediately you got my sub.
Ohhh, I wasn't quite sure I understood what "campaigns" were like when I first looked into them, but I'm glad you explained it, because it sounds like something I could really get into! Thanks!
I play in a really fun Iron Kingdoms RPG campaign atm. which includes a fair amount of wargaming campaign elements and it's a lot of fun! Our characters have allies and underlings that we can control in combat encounters, basically turning it into a full skirmish game, and we have downtime between adventures to acquire and trade resources, craft things, build things in our little village, and undertake other projects.
Have you ever tried Inquisitor? The 54mm scale was originally off-putting, but since its original run, it's been converted to 28mm, and is pretty fantastic.
Hi Adam, there is this movement in the spere of roleplaing games called OSR (old-school renessaince). It tries to return to the root of roleplaying games, when they split from chainmail wargame back in seventies. In this style of playing there is very low (if any) protagonization, Players represent adventurers (and their retinues!) who are entering dungeons or traveling and questing. As I said, there is usually low emphasis on roleplaying and high emphasis on strategy and resource management, there are often incorporated large wargaming style battles, that can move the state of whole gaming world. Maybe it would surprise you if you try to look around this gaming movement and maybe even try to play some game.
This is exactly how I feel, sitting at exactly this sort of space in the tabletop gaming spectrum. Not least of all because while I have the kind of mental investment in character creation/development and tactical gameplay, I also have a much better imagination than I do an ability to perform; and I don't enjoy that disparity xD
I like the group hangout that long form TTRPGs give us, but if I was ever able to find some skirmish games taking on new players, I think I would enjoy the dice and chats you could have with those as well.
Everything you've said in this video absolutely chimes with me. Something about saying aloud what my characters actions are in even my own voice makes me wince. I almost physically can't play D&D because of the play acting.
That’s a very interesting take. I like miniatures games for their rules and how you can have a lot of fun in a quite short time (if your miniatures are already built and painted there is very little preparation involved). I don’t really enjoy making up stories in those games though, because my miniatures usually live in a very violent world and are going to die soon. In RPGs on the other hand, I build my characters to last throughout a long campaign. Sure, character death happens, but it’s never as short lived as in a miniature war game.
@@JoelJoel321 it certainly requires one to remove the typical constraints of the definition but I'd posit that all games are inherently roleplaying games. The more abstract a game is the less of an RPG it is.
I definitely love doing both, they scratch different itches but they do have a crossover in what’s appealing. To me, the connection is a narrative, you’re telling a story, a story has growth and change and conflict. But then, even when I’m playing larger wargames, I still like to build that narrative into things, who the characters are, rather than the individuals, why each squad is part of that army, what their purpose is in battling etc, I’m very strong driven as a hobbyist, playing just for the sake of playing a war game doesn’t do much for me.
@@Fughley I’ve played a LOT of Frostgrave, I’ve got almost everything they’ve done, including almost all the North Star models for monsters. For some reason though, Stargrave just hasn’t had that same narrative hook for me, the concept of Frostgrave and Felsted just seems like a more interesting setting than a rather generic sci fi
I think I get you, and am somewhat similar. I like the story that you get from a campaign, and I like rolling dice between games to see what happened to my folks. I just don't think I'm super keen on trying to inhabit a character to the cost much else. Also, the voices...
If the thought of needing to do a voice is putting off role-playing then you're in luck because most games aren't critical role and the majority of role players don't use a voice when playing.
I’ve been playing a narrative skirmish style campaign using 2hour wargames 5150 rules. I wrote up 10 scenarios, each building on the story, and using escalating forces set on Mars during a rebellion using my 40k minis. But I also like D&D. :)
I think there is often a difference in scale between roleplaying and campaign-roleplaying. This leads to a difference in the granularity of story-telling. Even though a tabletop warband and a roleplaying party might have almost the same size, they play differently and the story will unfold differently. In a roleplyaing game the focus is very much on my little sci-fi gunner who struggles to get from cover to cover, swap mags and take peeks and pot-shots at the enemy. That takes time do develop, as a narrative. In a campaign-style skirmish game my little gunner might do the same (and this might even play out as a memorable part of the story), but the act of doing it plays out over a very short period of time. So this specific narrative develops rather very fast. This leaves the player with time to invest in other narratives. I would really like to know if there is a good in-between of both worlds. If you know such a system -shoot!
The made-in-Germany skirmisher system "Freebooter's Fate" comes to my mind, it strikes a sort of middle ground between RPG and tabletop game - Set in a pre-industrial fantasy caribbean populated by pirates, an imperial army, voodoo-priests, pirate goblins and assassins, it offers a very enjoyable fighting system in which the individual acts of your crew/gang matter VERY much, a narrative more or less develops by itself (getting crippled, drinking rum/injecting yourself with Mr.Hyde-serum in the heat of battle, using the enviroment to your advantage and random, luck-based actions that vary from something as simple as stumbling over a rock and falling to mishearing an opponent's battle cry as an insult to your mother and attacking even more furiously are the bread and butter of the combat system) and the individual models are of very good quality. Since your "army" is usually not greater than 8 models (unless you're playing Goblins or Voodoo-Cultists) the individual struggles and heroic deeds/failures and fuck-ups of your guys will really stick with you. It's an immensely fun, snack-sized game that would work very well as a long-term campaign, especially because the rule books and supplementary materials offer a metric twat-ton of scenarios and gameplay modes that reach from the epic (a full-on pirate war between up to four crews) to the hilarious (competitive dodo-catching). Some downsides, however, are that the potential of individualizing your guys (making them "your dudes") is pretty much limited to battle experience and colour schemes, because not only are all the models metal and thus not easy to convert, but also each model already IS an existing character in the game's lore with their own backstory, abilities and relationships - you can merely equip them with different stuff, but never really change what they do and who they are. Also you need a LOT of terrain if you want play the game with any semblance of strategy and skill. But all in all it's a definite recommend from me. It's cheap, fun, can be played in many different ways and the setting and miniatures are both rather cool. Another fun thing is that it's played completely without dice, but rather with cards. Sounds weird but works pretty well once you're accostumed to it.
My group takes turn having each person prepare a 6 mission narrative campaign. Some of us make little videos with the silly voices that get played at the beginning or end of each mission, others just write the narrative for each mission, but we all get to experience the narrative side that we're after.
I got into warhammer last summer as a way to collect hordes for dungeons and dragons and I've loved the models and lore! Now just need someone to play with. 😅
Both games are awesome, but I'm glad this video exists because once I got into miniatures and painting I drifted away from D&D, and this video assures me that there's nothing wrong with me, lol. Almost all of my Space Elf psykers, Exarchs, HQs and even some special troops have names and kitbashing them into distinct characters is one of my favorite parts of the hobby. They are my ride-or-die army. (I've also kitbashed a bunch of Nurgle abominations but that's a little different.)
DnD has official organized play - adventurers league (AL). AL is really a streamlined version of DnD, so if role-play is not your jam, AL format might be the game you'll enjoy. The focus of AL gameplay is actually on fast level progression and rewards. The adventures are usually one-shots, around 4 hours each. The format of that game doesn't leave much time for role playing, so the only things left to enjoy are combat encounters, the narrative and the character progression, that video gamey RPG element of leveling your character and getting better gear. Also, AL allows you to take your character to any other AL game of appropriate level.
Interesting food for thought. Thanks! My first impulse was to say that we're all on the "threeway game experience spectrum" between 1) the 'soft/social' aspect, 2) the 'immersive/table presence' aspect and 3) the 'mechanical/structure' aspect. And then RPGs gravitate more towards 1 while wargaming more towards 2 (regular boardgames would be a solid 3). Favouring skirmish campaigns just means that you're moving away from 3, because you're looking towards a more personalized adventure which is fascilitated by 1 and 2, but because 1 does not appeal, you're more firmly entrenched in 2. I have something similar where I solo a lot of my adventure games, which tend to be dungeon crawlers or miniature & terrain games like boss battlers and light skirmish games (Core Space for instance). Cuz, like you, I feel the story of my characters generally starts when painting them but ends during play, where I too don't identify with any one miniature, but instead see the group move through a dungeon or battle field as a whole.
The reason why I prefer RPG is because it adds beloved characters and high stakes. Narrative adds context to the battle, a reason WHY you are fighting. I never made funny voices unless there was a pre-planned cameo of NPC characters. Indeed when we played at home, we described what happened instead of making voices. Basically like telling what happens in the movie instead of reading the screenplay with actor speech.
which is which though? In a lot of ways, I think wargames actually make you feel more like a character then an author. in wargames, units are much more susceptible to the caprices of circumstance, while in rpgs characters actually seem to have a good bit of “narrative fiat” that determines how the scenario as a whole progresses in an authorial way. In a way I think rpgs are much more like scene writting and wargames are more like setting writing. you may create a groups initially,but the actual events are much more procedural.
Translated to books and written stories: You like the story and the journey of a character, but you prefer it written in a third person view to a first person view... :-D
I do totally understand this! With my gaming group I play Dogs of War, which was a smaller version of Confrontation (Rackham) with a RPG-themed small warband that could level up, gain abilities, etc. I always looked for a certain language for a new warband and used the translated words for "Sword" or "Axe" or whatever was typical for the model as a name.
I'm only about 9 seconds in but I'm already smiling at the state of modern social media where you have to spend the first minute explaining that this is an opinion and you are not trying to invoke the wrath of everyone who has a different opinion... :)
I run a hybrid game: (Dungeon crawls are traditional rpg, and overworld is wargaming rules usually.) Its a post-apoc scifi magitek wasteland, so theres a lot more overworld vehicle combat and was easier on me to run it with wargaming in mind (and less to set up on table)
Might I suggest organized play, something like D&D Adventurer's League or Pathfinder/Starfinder Society. Much less emphasis on going to talk to the tavern owner and it tends to just get right down into the thick of the shit.
I've written up my own campaign system (simplified V.10 40k rules) for space marines versus necrons, added some tyranids and deathguard too. Even been working on a base upgrade system, it's in French for now but if any of y'all are interested notably Mr. TM here gimme a shout.
I guess it ultimately comes down to the difference in wanting to act out a scenario than to build one. Because in an RPG style game you build off and create a narrative whereas campaigns focus on an objective and an inherent competition.
I really would love to be in a wargaming campaign. I joined a few Battletech ones but they always wind up ending before the dice even get a chance to roll. I haven't been able to join in any campaigns for 40k, but that's because everytime I've tried to start up 40k I've had to sell my models because my grandmother needed the money.
TLDR: enjoyed the video! Looking into Necromunda. Fair enough! Enjoyed hearing your take on it, and while I can't quite relate I respect your position. With a completely smooth transition of subject: Necromunda, specifically the first edition, only recently showed up on my gaming radar and has intrigued me enough to look into it and if it's right up my alley or not. Hearing you mention it here, however briefly, has me thinking it may be. I won't hold my breath, although if this rain keeps up I might need to.
I was just like you about a year ago - until Covid hit and in person gaming sort of had to stop... no more 40k for a while. Always had a bit of a thing against RPG’s and thought of them as ‘not for me’ but gave it a go and actually... really enjoyed playing D&D virtually on Roll20. Most encounters could be considered small skirmish games. It’s a different kind of evening for sure, but I don’t miss the 40k first turn smashing I get for 30 mins every game. It’s nice being always invested and involved in the game at all times so definitely prefer the idea of alternate activation systems going forwards.
I'm a game master for Invisible Sun and have played in various different ttrpg systems over the years - I first got into mini painting through DnD - but wargaming campaigns have intrigued me since I first dipped my toes into warhammer. I think large scale wargaming has the opportunity to tell different kinds of stories than regular ttrpgs do. Rather than telling the story of a group of people, you could be telling the story of a whole nation. A much more over-arching kind of story, more tied together by seperate scenes that could take days or even months in universe to unfold.
I like to compare it to playing Warcraft and StarCraft but it's more like Warhammer Tabletop stuff. And the story campaigns in PC Real Time Strategy Videogames is not about rooting for personal vendettas or unethical personal gains. In fact? That's how the villain happens.
While a RPG will have you talk to the tavern owner, make you talk to this other dude then travel somewhere to find a clue that will eventually get you where you need to be to find the Mcguffin, a miniatures game session will start as the characters arrive where they need to be with the Mcguffin in the middle of the table and the various faction will duke it out to get it. Of course, with minis you can also build up to that with various scenarios. Minis game sessions are usually important scenes in a story while the fluff is simply rolled between games.
There's also alot more gameplay in wargames/skirmish games than in most modern plays of TRPGs, and that gameplay is almost always a direct competition rather than a cooperative meet. I also imagine that the "roleplaying" and world building in a skirmish campaign is borne more through action and consequence, whereas consensus of imagination seems to rule a lot of TTRPG tables.
I'm completely with you on this one. I started off with MTG and wanted more out of tabletop games so I tried playing DND with a few different groups. I always felt like there was too much fun depending on the DM and I never felt like I was having fun pretending to be someone else.
"I don't mind the fluff, it's fun, but the CHRUNCH of numbers is why I'm here" --Me, to one of my previous DND groups. This was while I passed four turns in a fight with the tarrasque, because I was calculating the most damage I could drop in a single turn on my level 17 psion. I had enough cards stacked in my favor that it topped 1500 damage, psionic and unresistable, straight to that lizards ugly dome. Failed to account for the fact that you can't keep a tarrasque down via brute force, but hey, thats the failing of the high INT character. In the end, that sessions fluff was made memorable by the crunch. There is nothing wrong with preffering one to the other, but I highly agree, skirmish campaigns are my favorite.
Only ever played one real campaign of DnD with a few of my buddies and I gotta say roleplaying is really hit or miss. You've got to be in a specific mood to get the most out of it, versus the very clinical and by the numbers approach to a combat encounter. But I will say, two years after the fact, I still remember the roleplaying moments way more than any of the combat encounters. Having to hold a door up in the frame while thoroughly bullshitting a guard during an investigation, convincing him we didn't break in. Or "accidentally" falling overboard on a ship to buy our warlock time to break into the captains quarters. I can only imagine if the game were entirely combat oriented, I wouldn't remember moments nearly as fondly. But I bet picking up a campaign session for the homies when you aren't really feeling it wouldn't be NEARLY as draining, not having to engage in make-believe nonsense you aren't up for at the moment. You're all still playing a game at any given moment. Not pretending it isn't a game at all.
There is a lot of story to be explored from “the general’s” perspective; wargaming campaigns. The story becomes less about what an individual does but how a faction does. Or how a country progresses. I wonder if Mr. Minions here is into World War 2 documentaries because that’s a similar thing: you have the grand scope of how the battles went and where they ultimately led the country which is a story itself… but then you have some individual stories interspersed throughout it to give details.
This reminds me of a top down stick shooter game where you control your main guy and you got npc allies to back you up that you can command. So you got the "Hero" feel but got teammates for all that horde clearing action.
I often use a mix of play types at least as they are defined here. My players get yo RP there captain or first mate between combats and then have the rest of their crew deploy when needed.
This all reminded me that some people just love to talk and that they might be mistaking roleplaying as a means to just talk about localized detail which slows the game down drastically. The concept of campaign skirmishing is an exciting subject because I think the idea of roleplaying without the real-time banter is an amazing experience and even more amazing because it is a rare experience. I think I'll look into how people can experience this more often. I personally seek conversation about three things. Mechanical Strategy, Character Driven Narrative (not filler conversations about things that have no impact on the game), Big picture objectives as well as button pressing ones, Art Techniques. Siege of the Citadel has a a pdf available that shows how to mix the Mutant Chronicles RPG in with the miniatures board game. As someone who involves himself in way too much, I find that idea fascinating because it sounds like a streamlined way to get an adventure going.
This is why I like Inquisitor or Inq28 because I can run games that combine a bit of role play with skirmish wargaming. Usually a bit of role play at the start I dub the mission briefing and then the mission where everyone has a big fight usually avoiding the actual objectives no matter how important they are.
I like to bring roleplaying elements into my wargaming. My gaming group's gone next level - our Warhammer 40k RPG is in the same setting as our Kill Team campaign and our Crusade campaign. Characters dying in any medium affects things that happens in the others so the universe is persistent and we can all engage on it from different directions. It's awesome. Currently trying to work Necromunda in there too....
I wish I had seen this video when you first posted it. As it happens I combine an aspect of role playing into the miniature games that my group of players enjoys playing and it works out well. The basic summary is this. If we are playing 40K for instance, I act as the Game Master, which is to say, the bad guys. My players each control a portion of a joint group of Space Marines because of course the good guys have to be Space Marines and also that's what was in the box when I started. At any rate, each player might control a squad or two squads or maybe a squad and a vehicle. The division of forces is not so much the focus as the fact that they must use their given part of the team to work with the others against ME, the bad guy, the game master. I present the scenario, lay out the background story and control the opposing force. I give them an objective to obtain or achieve and control the flow of the story from one gaming session to the next. I should also point out that I have completely altered the combat rules from 40K as I find them to be utter trash but that's another post and I lack the rare and powerful "Pachow" skill. At any rate, the point of our gaming sessions is not for the gathered players to beat one another at a table top wargame because frankly that gets old pretty quick. Instead the focus is for them to work together to collectively beat the bad guys and in doing so develop the story put in place by the game master. I also apply this same approach in playing Team Yankee, Flames of War and Bolt Action. My Bolt Action story is going to be particularly good as I have already acquired a 40K Primaris Dreadnought that will be painted up in German yellow camo scheme and be set in place in the story as a secret German weapons experiment that the joint American and British team will stumble upon. So to sum up. No goofy voice, no tavern keepers or bar wenches. But we still have engaging story telling combine with all the best things about miniatures.
the Tom you should definitely check out the miniature game "MERCS" formerly published by megacon games. now it has a resurgence because another company has taken a hold of the IP and are planning to release a 3rd edition. this game lands itself beautifully to a narrative campaign, no points u use only 5 miniatures and the background is there but the company fell under before making the next jump I hope you read this and check it out.
I've played a few RPGs, and I've never felt the need or pressure to play act. The leveling, skills, and storytelling is the real draw for me. Same with tabletop campaigns and video games too. To each their own, but I'd recommend giving RPGs another shot.
@@randombencounter263 in my experiences, it's been more like narrating what my characters do and say rather than acting or speaking as them. It was a more conversational, casual style that I liked. I enjoy listening to folks play and act their parts, like adventurezone, but it's not for me.
As I see it, a wargame has rules and a role game has guides. That's it. You don't argue 'rules' with the DM. You can ask the referee for a ruling in a wargame.
I played TTRPGs throughout my childhood and teenage years, it was what I did. Later, life got in the way and I didnt have a group to play with for 10ish years. After a move I met some friends who played shadowrun, and i was so excited, as SR is my favorite setting. I learned VERY QUICKLY that I no longer enjoyed the role playing aspects of the game, and fought through it for almost a year, hoping it would come back to me. It did not :/ Thankfully during that time I got into wargaming, and it's been great for me. The campaign wargaming stuff that's happening rn is perfect for my situation. I really like that the narratives form in a way that feels more real, because what happened last game has bearing on what happens next.
To me roleplaying just means that you're making game choices based on the fictional world. Not necessarily talking in character at all. I very much relate to your aversion to the play acting aspect of roleplaying games
You would probably enjoy running a combat focused RPG. The DM is the general of the faceless hoard that the Player Characters are fighting. You would have to "put up with" a little RP to get the players to the next fight, but there are a lot of people that like that kind of combat-focused TTRPG.
I started with AD&D ages ago and have leaned into wargames for the reasons you outlined. The channel "The Joy of Wargaming" has several playlists dedicated to wargame campaigns, largely solo. His series 'You can win at RPGs' is all about using AD&D as a skirmish campaign. He covers other resources as well. Ultimately you can use an RPG to generate a team and have another person generate the opposition and have a very fun narrative campaign. I left the D&D scene, not because of the play acting portion but because I don't like the what the game developed into and it seemed everyone was to interested in talking about the rules rather than playing the scenario (and 2 hours to play out one combat scene). If I can get folks into playing rules light RPGs I would choose Barbarians of Lemuria, Rocket Age or the free Warrior, Rogue and Mage. Just some friendly plugs for what I think are superior roll playing games.
I wargame and role-play but thats just me. Though bc I DM I tend to use the role-playing game as an excuse to buy tons of miniatures to use in it. Though lately im now finding use for a lot of dnd miniatures in games like Reign of Hell so there is a lot of cross pollination there nowadays.
I've been roleplaying for, well, a loooong time now and it is definitely my main hobby with my friends, however I do like this wargame skirmish campaigning idea. So far I've only been working on the hobby side of the miniature world. This serves as a potentially very good gateway into actually playing... Thanks! ;)
i like both now, but have found many sci fi like warhammer can be used in different rpg systems. However some miniatures can get very expensive and their a lot more to making the miniatures too. Like in dnd you buy the miniature paint it and go. In war gaming the hard part is building them and all the weird table scenery too.And now we must remember Gygax started dnd after he played a war game with his tactical studies and rules club. So to me it might be all the same.
I think I've had one wargaming campaign that worked out well. All the others just died out as people lost interest. Where as we've had a lot more success with roleplaying campaigns over the years. But we also had a lot die out too. One of the tricks to make one resolve in a satisfying way seems to be to have a planned end. I would really appreciate a video on how to run a good wargaming campaign. or a link to one you've already done on the subject.
Called granularity. You're more of an empathetic existentialist. Appreciate the scenario and players to an extent, BUT at the end of the day it's about moving models and chucking dice. Played D&D "back in the day" and just feel the current table gaming environment is just now getting to what I've always wished I could have gotten out of the RPG experience back then. Some games producers are getting really good at a light fusion of both game formats. Battles and decisions having consequences down the line in the campaign. It's all good!
Great video! 👍🏿 As a Gen Xer my background has been in video games from Warcraft (before the crappy WOW 😉), Starcraft, EverQuest, and many other games.. As of recently the most addictive has been League of Legends which everyone knows is a MOBA that was created within the branch of Warcraft's player created mod games. I always wanted to venture into tabletop. And I always wanted to play dungeons & dragons. My first investment on table top was a miniature battlefield game called HeroScape. I loved the game but somewhere in management they droped the ball and halted production. Meanwhile I always had my eye on Warhammer but haven't had a chance to play it yet. I finally got to play d&d for the first time in my life now the age of 47. And really thought it was "meh". It was interesting but I don't think it's for me. Then I came across your video and it made me realize the line in the sand. I love the battlefields with small armies which is what heroScape was. League of Legends is still a huge addiction for me and you only manage one hero in that game. So I guess what I'm saying is the small team skirmishes is probably what's for me. I like to give Warhammer a go because I miss the old days playing Warcraft and Spacecraft. Although I don't want to get into heavy investment but having had a huge tackle box full of heroescape miniatures to pick from (I sold them all because we moved and I didn't have the space) I know it's going to happen regardless of whatever miniature battle game I get into. I'll be taking a look at some of the ones you named. Please let me know if you have any others I need to look out for.
The funniest thing about this is that's basically how D&D was originally intended to be played. It's just the campaign-skirmish version of Chainmail.
Yeah, D&D as we played it in the 70s was much more like modern campaign skirmish games in feel than like RPGs as they are played today. A dungeon run was a series of tactical encounters, executed by a recurring warband which gradually gained power and experience. Admittedly, some tactical encounters were more efficiently solved by guile or diplomacy, but that was the extent to which we portrayed our characters as fictional personas. Backstories and plots/story arcs didn't come into the game until later in the 80s, and funny voices by anyone other than the GM trying to differentiate NPCs weren't a thing until the 90s. That's not a knock on modern RPG play--just an observation that it's evolved away from its roots, and some of us OG gamers are finding that old itch better scratched by skirmish wargames than by D&D 5e and its contemporaries.
@@printandplaygamer7134 Yep, came here to say basically this! (Although I do enjoy modern RPGs too.)
I pointed this out recently. Full circle..
Eeeeee, not really. Before they used the Chainmail rules they played Blackmoor and it really wasn't a wargame.
@@Smittumi OD&D also uses Chainmail and if you actually read the way the rules imply you play it; the game is basically like a series of Decent-style skirmishes to clear dungeon floors.
It's easier to schedule game with one other player than to gather whole gaming group for a RPG session. That's why it can be easier to have wargaming campaign instead of roleplaying one. That being said they are two different animals. Both are awesome!
And! It's a lot easier to *prep* for a wargaming campaign than for a roleplaying campaign.
Yeah, that's one of the reasons why I've been gravitating towards wargaming more and more since I've gotten into the hobby last year
In some respects! Entirely depends on your prep routine as a GM and your style of running. Me, I have a rough outline I go by, but the thing I spend the most time "prepping" for is the next session or two of a game. For models though, that's some serious time that I still haven't found the perfect way to juggle it. But I'm sure I'll find out at some point. :D
@@FenrisChosen it also depends on the other players too. I mean, there's always *that* player who cancels a day before the game, and scheduling can be reaaaaaally tough, especially when you and your friends get older and have more stuff to do.
@@pedrobastos8132 True! I was more referring to GM-prep time compared to painting minis in preparation. But scheduling conflicts abound with RPGs.
"Skaven gonna Skaven" lol
"Skaven gonna Skaven." wins the internets today, imho.
Makes it better since i got that "cats gonna cat," ad before this video
Best line in the video. Loved it.
I want to give your comment a like, but you're currently sitting at 69, so I think you can understand why my hands are tied. (10 July 2021).
@@frocat5163You can like now (21st October 2024)
For me the main difference is that in a wargame you can be playing and still talking to your friend about something non related to the game. A roleplaying game doesn't allow that kind of thing, you can talk with a friend about non game stuff, but then you won't be playing.
Eh, only in super hardcore games. I assure you that our friends often get onto weird tangents that are spurred by in game events, but then we go back to the game.
@@jaimerivera2382 sure. I've been playing rpgs with my friends for more than thirty years, and we talk about lot of things non game related. But, as you have said when you talk about something non game related you have to come back to the game. There's a stop and you back, that doesn't happens in a wargame.
I recently just assembled a squad of Intercessors to use in skirmish level games. So I built the sergeant with a sheathed power sword mag locked to his thigh. The comms specialist with their comm panel on their wrist open calling in target situation. The marksmen bracing against a wall about to take the shot. The veteran stoicly advancing. The newbie in basic kit with less embellishments etc.
Sounds to me like Adam doesn't like playing RPG's, but might like being a DM...
I roleplay my wargames and do silly voices for my space marines
BROTHERS!!!! ARRGH I HAVE BEEN HIT!!! AVENGE ME!!!!! Uugggghhh....
FOUL XENOS !!!! I MUST SLAY YOU IN THE NAME OF BROTHER CAPTAIN LEONHARDT!!!
yeah.... :|
Same here, only miniatures for me. Rangers of Shadowdeep covers the mini aspects and also scratches my RPG itch just enough
Yes, I came down to the comments to suggest *Rangers of Shadowdeep*.
it really hits a sweet spot of campaign-based mini-wargaming and an rpg-lite/crpg.
Was curious about this subject today, was trying to think how to introduce rpg elements into a kill team campaign.
It should be much easier with a kill team since they are fever and it's possible to create a name and a persona for every character involved. This would include the characters strength and weakness especially mentally such since these tend to differ more among soldiers than the physical traits. Then you figure out what motivates each character to be where they are now, do they fight for honor, to protect their friends and family or to redeem themselves etc. And then finally you list the relationships between the characters, are some best friends, other rivals, leaders, followers etc. Now you should know the characters well enough to imagine how they would react to what happens in the game. :)
I run a Wrath and Glory game, and when we do combat, we've taken to a complete transition into playing a kinda Kill Team variant where each player runs their model, and I run everything else. It's a blast.
Great video.
I play D&D the way you describe, but without minis. Fantasy Wargame with pen and paper. Time and logistic are essential. No silly voices, no boring interactions, no tavern game.
Declare your adventure site and Go, using the Ad&D rules.
One thing that is cool for the busy folks is to have role play stuff on like a discord, playing at a slower pace over the course of the week and then the battle happens at the weekend as sort of the narrative before and after the games. Sort of makes the games impactful and makes a sort of unified...idk...universe.
I guess a part of doing it over call is that you don't need to include the entire party in some way or another, and can just let the group split off and have their personal journeys.
I enjoy campaigns in board, role and war-gaming. Of course, my two minions during Warcry had a lot of questions when they both discovered they were named ‘Chaff’.
So did they get their questions answered?
@@TheCimbrianBull I haven’t heard back from them after the last game.
It sounds like a micro vs macro thing, overseeing a few people vs stepping into the skin of one. Also in wargaming campaigns you have expectations that you can meet and enjoy; in RPG games there is a lot of unknown as far as game types, playstyle and group.
i wonder if you would enjoy a D&D dungeon crawl, start of the D&D game is at the door of the dungeon and you work your way trough it. it has a lot less of the play your role in the world and more of a use the tools given to your characters to solve all the problems, such as bad guys that need a sword in them, and has the leveling up and character building and stuff...
I pretty much only play tabletop campaigns these days. I think it's so much more fun than just one off games; sticking with your army/warband as it grows and the stories you play through with them are awesome. I also play a couple of pen and paper RPG's and it's the campaign and the character growth and stories that keep me coming back there as well. For me, it's the same kind of fun, just with different systems.
I don't know how many people appreciate that kind of stuff, but you have a really nice lighting set up there.
Frostgrave is an amazing skirmish game built for a campaign!
That was a great 40k-ification of the hobgrott models!!
Thanks, but actually I’ll be using them for games like Space Weirdos and maybe Stargrave. Thanks for watching!
Were you talking about the models at about 4 minutes in?
@@ChazCharlie1 I believe so. Those are definitely the hobgrots from Dominion.
Ordered my copy of Reign in Hell this past Friday, got it a couple days ago and I'm super excited to give it a go!
Which philosophy are you leaning towards? I have basic Cabals set up for Lords of Hell, Earthbound, Judges and the Brokers so far. Used a lot of dnd devils/demons. But also a lot of plant type monsters for one of them too.
In Denmark "normies" assume your talking about LARP when you mention roleplaying :)
Live action roleplaying is huge here so it kinda makes sense, but it can be annoying.
Well, Vikings are pretty awesome, so you've got that going for you.
I believe he is referring to Dungeons and Dragons, World of Darkness, etc ... Pen and Paper Roleplaying games, though the message certainly can be extrapolated out to LARPing. =]
@@adamgill4623 Why wouldn't you want to LARP as a Viking! You're right though, my tired brain mixed up LARP and reenactment.
Tried Larping once 😬. That was enough.
@@andrewsjurseth2517 I "monstered" a few times in LARP, and that was fun.
Excellent video. As someone who loves RPGs and Tabletop Wargaming I have always enjoyed campaigns. Linked games where you can invest effort in your character or army. It adds a whole new dimension to a game when you can't treat your troops as disposable tokens just to win that particular battle. Adding a campaign element allows for 'character development' and forces new strategic decisions into the game.
The indie F28 ("Fast 28") rule system has three ways to use the rules; Battle, Skirmish and Narrative.
Battle and Skirmish is akin to the various "normal" wargaming games out there, while in a Narrative game you have a GM and each player have 3-5 models and do missions and have a lot(!) more customized squad.
The rules are made to fit for *any* 28mm models out there so you can your favorite 40k faction go up against your Infinity or Konflikt47 troops.
No silly voices needed. You still "roleplay" as an officer giving commands to soldiers, gang members, cultists or whatever.
Tabletop wargame campaign is my jam now.
Really interesting! I do both rpgs and tabletop minis games. They really aren't that different at bottom... Original Dungeons & Dragons (the 3 Little Brown Books) plus the Chainmail miniatures rules (or later Swords & Spells) is very much a wargame campaign about plundering a fantasy environment. Orcs and goblins appear in the *hundreds*, and you're expected to hire platoons of spearmen and mule trains and torchbearers. Later editions of the game may have evolved into the Critical Role style of "Ye Olde Renne Faire speakeing withe yon peasantes in yon goodlee tavernne forsooth" but the good ol' original is very far from that, and still very popular.
"Roderick Ironbrow spends the week canvassing town for mercenaries, while Red Morgan and the rest of the group hire an armorer and repair the expedition's weapons and armor; they buy extra drinks at the taverns for rumors every night." DM: "OK, the combined efforts cost 320 gold and you have the option to hire a group of 40 heavy foot who just got back from a chevauchee in a neighboring kingdom, plus 20 dwarven armored foot who are rumored to belong to a pariah cult, if you're interested. You also get 4 other rumors about the environs...". That's a far cry from "'allo guvnah! Wouldst thou seek to purchase a roast turkey leg for a mere fifteen florins?" I hope you agree.
The original Warhammer Quest from 95 is a great example of something that does all this. The Roleplay book for that was outstanding by giving you a non GM led development framework and flexible to GM a more DIY set of progression and adventures.
I'm 100% with this. Played WFRP 1st edition over Discord during lockdown. It was great fun and scratched an old itch, but now we're playing tabletop again I can't wait to get back into 40k Crusade, Zona Alpha, Necromunda and other narrative games.
Was thinking about getting into or developing my own Skirmish game and wanted to know more, this was the first video.
7:35, immediately you got my sub.
Ohhh, I wasn't quite sure I understood what "campaigns" were like when I first looked into them, but I'm glad you explained it, because it sounds like something I could really get into! Thanks!
I play in a really fun Iron Kingdoms RPG campaign atm. which includes a fair amount of wargaming campaign elements and it's a lot of fun!
Our characters have allies and underlings that we can control in combat encounters, basically turning it into a full skirmish game, and we have downtime between adventures to acquire and trade resources, craft things, build things in our little village, and undertake other projects.
Have you ever tried Inquisitor? The 54mm scale was originally off-putting, but since its original run, it's been converted to 28mm, and is pretty fantastic.
We combined the two for a truly epic 40k campaign
Sorry, no offence but my head is now spinning with idea of role-playing with epic scale minis...
Hi Adam, there is this movement in the spere of roleplaing games called OSR (old-school renessaince). It tries to return to the root of roleplaying games, when they split from chainmail wargame back in seventies. In this style of playing there is very low (if any) protagonization, Players represent adventurers (and their retinues!) who are entering dungeons or traveling and questing. As I said, there is usually low emphasis on roleplaying and high emphasis on strategy and resource management, there are often incorporated large wargaming style battles, that can move the state of whole gaming world. Maybe it would surprise you if you try to look around this gaming movement and maybe even try to play some game.
This is exactly how I feel, sitting at exactly this sort of space in the tabletop gaming spectrum. Not least of all because while I have the kind of mental investment in character creation/development and tactical gameplay, I also have a much better imagination than I do an ability to perform; and I don't enjoy that disparity xD
I like the group hangout that long form TTRPGs give us, but if I was ever able to find some skirmish games taking on new players, I think I would enjoy the dice and chats you could have with those as well.
I got the message: avoid tavern owners at all costs. Especially, avoid talking to them. For reasons. 😂
It would indeed save you a lot of money if you don't ask for the bill. :P
Adam has serious tavern owner beef - something clearly happened to him in a tavern...
Everything you've said in this video absolutely chimes with me. Something about saying aloud what my characters actions are in even my own voice makes me wince. I almost physically can't play D&D because of the play acting.
All I got from this is that Atom isn't keen on taverns, isn't a plumber, but knows how to make a plug...
That’s a very interesting take. I like miniatures games for their rules and how you can have a lot of fun in a quite short time (if your miniatures are already built and painted there is very little preparation involved). I don’t really enjoy making up stories in those games though, because my miniatures usually live in a very violent world and are going to die soon. In RPGs on the other hand, I build my characters to last throughout a long campaign. Sure, character death happens, but it’s never as short lived as in a miniature war game.
Miniatures games are role-playing games.
Skirmish games you're a Sargeant and the big army games you're the General.
By that logic Chess is a role-playing game where you play a king.
@@JoelJoel321 id say that it is.
@@codyweaver7546 Fair enough but I fear the term loses all meaning then.
@@JoelJoel321 it certainly requires one to remove the typical constraints of the definition but I'd posit that all games are inherently roleplaying games. The more abstract a game is the less of an RPG it is.
@@codyweaver7546 I guess... but that means we need a more precise term to distinguish games like D and D.
I definitely love doing both, they scratch different itches but they do have a crossover in what’s appealing. To me, the connection is a narrative, you’re telling a story, a story has growth and change and conflict.
But then, even when I’m playing larger wargames, I still like to build that narrative into things, who the characters are, rather than the individuals, why each squad is part of that army, what their purpose is in battling etc, I’m very strong driven as a hobbyist, playing just for the sake of playing a war game doesn’t do much for me.
Frostgrave/ Stargrave ?
@@Fughley I’ve played a LOT of Frostgrave, I’ve got almost everything they’ve done, including almost all the North Star models for monsters. For some reason though, Stargrave just hasn’t had that same narrative hook for me, the concept of Frostgrave and Felsted just seems like a more interesting setting than a rather generic sci fi
I think I get you, and am somewhat similar. I like the story that you get from a campaign, and I like rolling dice between games to see what happened to my folks. I just don't think I'm super keen on trying to inhabit a character to the cost much else. Also, the voices...
If the thought of needing to do a voice is putting off role-playing then you're in luck because most games aren't critical role and the majority of role players don't use a voice when playing.
I’ve been playing a narrative skirmish style campaign using 2hour wargames 5150 rules. I wrote up 10 scenarios, each building on the story, and using escalating forces set on Mars during a rebellion using my 40k minis. But I also like D&D. :)
I think there is often a difference in scale between roleplaying and campaign-roleplaying. This leads to a difference in the granularity of story-telling.
Even though a tabletop warband and a roleplaying party might have almost the same size, they play differently and the story will unfold differently.
In a roleplyaing game the focus is very much on my little sci-fi gunner who struggles to get from cover to cover, swap mags and take peeks and pot-shots at the enemy. That takes time do develop, as a narrative.
In a campaign-style skirmish game my little gunner might do the same (and this might even play out as a memorable part of the story), but the act of doing it plays out over a very short period of time. So this specific narrative develops rather very fast. This leaves the player with time to invest in other narratives.
I would really like to know if there is a good in-between of both worlds. If you know such a system -shoot!
The made-in-Germany skirmisher system "Freebooter's Fate" comes to my mind, it strikes a sort of middle ground between RPG and tabletop game - Set in a pre-industrial fantasy caribbean populated by pirates, an imperial army, voodoo-priests, pirate goblins and assassins, it offers a very enjoyable fighting system in which the individual acts of your crew/gang matter VERY much, a narrative more or less develops by itself (getting crippled, drinking rum/injecting yourself with Mr.Hyde-serum in the heat of battle, using the enviroment to your advantage and random, luck-based actions that vary from something as simple as stumbling over a rock and falling to mishearing an opponent's battle cry as an insult to your mother and attacking even more furiously are the bread and butter of the combat system) and the individual models are of very good quality. Since your "army" is usually not greater than 8 models (unless you're playing Goblins or Voodoo-Cultists) the individual struggles and heroic deeds/failures and fuck-ups of your guys will really stick with you. It's an immensely fun, snack-sized game that would work very well as a long-term campaign, especially because the rule books and supplementary materials offer a metric twat-ton of scenarios and gameplay modes that reach from the epic (a full-on pirate war between up to four crews) to the hilarious (competitive dodo-catching). Some downsides, however, are that the potential of individualizing your guys (making them "your dudes") is pretty much limited to battle experience and colour schemes, because not only are all the models metal and thus not easy to convert, but also each model already IS an existing character in the game's lore with their own backstory, abilities and relationships - you can merely equip them with different stuff, but never really change what they do and who they are. Also you need a LOT of terrain if you want play the game with any semblance of strategy and skill.
But all in all it's a definite recommend from me. It's cheap, fun, can be played in many different ways and the setting and miniatures are both rather cool. Another fun thing is that it's played completely without dice, but rather with cards. Sounds weird but works pretty well once you're accostumed to it.
My group takes turn having each person prepare a 6 mission narrative campaign. Some of us make little videos with the silly voices that get played at the beginning or end of each mission, others just write the narrative for each mission, but we all get to experience the narrative side that we're after.
I got into warhammer last summer as a way to collect hordes for dungeons and dragons and I've loved the models and lore! Now just need someone to play with. 😅
Both games are awesome, but I'm glad this video exists because once I got into miniatures and painting I drifted away from D&D, and this video assures me that there's nothing wrong with me, lol. Almost all of my Space Elf psykers, Exarchs, HQs and even some special troops have names and kitbashing them into distinct characters is one of my favorite parts of the hobby. They are my ride-or-die army.
(I've also kitbashed a bunch of Nurgle abominations but that's a little different.)
DnD has official organized play - adventurers league (AL). AL is really a streamlined version of DnD, so if role-play is not your jam, AL format might be the game you'll enjoy. The focus of AL gameplay is actually on fast level progression and rewards. The adventures are usually one-shots, around 4 hours each. The format of that game doesn't leave much time for role playing, so the only things left to enjoy are combat encounters, the narrative and the character progression, that video gamey RPG element of leveling your character and getting better gear. Also, AL allows you to take your character to any other AL game of appropriate level.
Interesting food for thought. Thanks! My first impulse was to say that we're all on the "threeway game experience spectrum" between 1) the 'soft/social' aspect, 2) the 'immersive/table presence' aspect and 3) the 'mechanical/structure' aspect. And then RPGs gravitate more towards 1 while wargaming more towards 2 (regular boardgames would be a solid 3). Favouring skirmish campaigns just means that you're moving away from 3, because you're looking towards a more personalized adventure which is fascilitated by 1 and 2, but because 1 does not appeal, you're more firmly entrenched in 2. I have something similar where I solo a lot of my adventure games, which tend to be dungeon crawlers or miniature & terrain games like boss battlers and light skirmish games (Core Space for instance). Cuz, like you, I feel the story of my characters generally starts when painting them but ends during play, where I too don't identify with any one miniature, but instead see the group move through a dungeon or battle field as a whole.
The reason why I prefer RPG is because it adds beloved characters and high stakes. Narrative adds context to the battle, a reason WHY you are fighting. I never made funny voices unless there was a pre-planned cameo of NPC characters. Indeed when we played at home, we described what happened instead of making voices. Basically like telling what happens in the movie instead of reading the screenplay with actor speech.
It's the difference between being the author of the story and a character in it. Very different creative pursuits.
Truth!
which is which though? In a lot of ways, I think wargames actually make you feel more like a character then an author. in wargames, units are much more susceptible to the caprices of circumstance, while in rpgs characters actually seem to have a good bit of “narrative fiat” that determines how the scenario as a whole progresses in an authorial way.
In a way I think rpgs are much more like scene writting and wargames are more like setting writing. you may create a groups initially,but the actual events are much more procedural.
Today I learned that Uncle Atom has a beef with that damn tavern owner. Doesn't want anything to do with him.
Translated to books and written stories: You like the story and the journey of a character, but you prefer it written in a third person view to a first person view... :-D
I do totally understand this! With my gaming group I play Dogs of War, which was a smaller version of Confrontation (Rackham) with a RPG-themed small warband that could level up, gain abilities, etc. I always looked for a certain language for a new warband and used the translated words for "Sword" or "Axe" or whatever was typical for the model as a name.
I'm only about 9 seconds in but I'm already smiling at the state of modern social media where you have to spend the first minute explaining that this is an opinion and you are not trying to invoke the wrath of everyone who has a different opinion... :)
I run a hybrid game: (Dungeon crawls are traditional rpg, and overworld is wargaming rules usually.) Its a post-apoc scifi magitek wasteland, so theres a lot more overworld vehicle combat and was easier on me to run it with wargaming in mind (and less to set up on table)
Might I suggest organized play, something like D&D Adventurer's League or Pathfinder/Starfinder Society. Much less emphasis on going to talk to the tavern owner and it tends to just get right down into the thick of the shit.
I've written up my own campaign system (simplified V.10 40k rules) for space marines versus necrons, added some tyranids and deathguard too.
Even been working on a base upgrade system, it's in French for now but if any of y'all are interested notably Mr. TM here gimme a shout.
I guess it ultimately comes down to the difference in wanting to act out a scenario than to build one.
Because in an RPG style game you build off and create a narrative whereas campaigns focus on an objective and an inherent competition.
I really would love to be in a wargaming campaign. I joined a few Battletech ones but they always wind up ending before the dice even get a chance to roll. I haven't been able to join in any campaigns for 40k, but that's because everytime I've tried to start up 40k I've had to sell my models because my grandmother needed the money.
damn dude
@@luc410 At least I've not been forced to sell my Battletech stuff. And I still have some unassembled space marines from the Indomitus box.
What got me into WFB and eventually 40k was using a large amount of minis for fights in D&D.
TLDR: enjoyed the video! Looking into Necromunda.
Fair enough! Enjoyed hearing your take on it, and while I can't quite relate I respect your position. With a completely smooth transition of subject: Necromunda, specifically the first edition, only recently showed up on my gaming radar and has intrigued me enough to look into it and if it's right up my alley or not. Hearing you mention it here, however briefly, has me thinking it may be. I won't hold my breath, although if this rain keeps up I might need to.
I enjoy Necromunda, especially the models and terrain that have been released in the last few years. Thanks for watching!
I was just like you about a year ago - until Covid hit and in person gaming sort of had to stop... no more 40k for a while. Always had a bit of a thing against RPG’s and thought of them as ‘not for me’ but gave it a go and actually... really enjoyed playing D&D virtually on Roll20. Most encounters could be considered small skirmish games. It’s a different kind of evening for sure, but I don’t miss the 40k first turn smashing I get for 30 mins every game. It’s nice being always invested and involved in the game at all times so definitely prefer the idea of alternate activation systems going forwards.
I'm a game master for Invisible Sun and have played in various different ttrpg systems over the years - I first got into mini painting through DnD - but wargaming campaigns have intrigued me since I first dipped my toes into warhammer. I think large scale wargaming has the opportunity to tell different kinds of stories than regular ttrpgs do. Rather than telling the story of a group of people, you could be telling the story of a whole nation. A much more over-arching kind of story, more tied together by seperate scenes that could take days or even months in universe to unfold.
I like to compare it to playing Warcraft and StarCraft but it's more like Warhammer Tabletop stuff. And the story campaigns in PC Real Time Strategy Videogames is not about rooting for personal vendettas or unethical personal gains. In fact? That's how the villain happens.
While a RPG will have you talk to the tavern owner, make you talk to this other dude then travel somewhere to find a clue that will eventually get you where you need to be to find the Mcguffin, a miniatures game session will start as the characters arrive where they need to be with the Mcguffin in the middle of the table and the various faction will duke it out to get it.
Of course, with minis you can also build up to that with various scenarios.
Minis game sessions are usually important scenes in a story while the fluff is simply rolled between games.
There's also alot more gameplay in wargames/skirmish games than in most modern plays of TRPGs, and that gameplay is almost always a direct competition rather than a cooperative meet.
I also imagine that the "roleplaying" and world building in a skirmish campaign is borne more through action and consequence, whereas consensus of imagination seems to rule a lot of TTRPG tables.
The old rogue trader was really a skirmish game. Before a lot of support material came out, we build personalized units with leaders and characters.
I have the exact opposite feeling about the Roleplay aspect. But tabletop RPGs arnt for everyone enjoy what you enjoy!
I'm completely with you on this one. I started off with MTG and wanted more out of tabletop games so I tried playing DND with a few different groups. I always felt like there was too much fun depending on the DM and I never felt like I was having fun pretending to be someone else.
"I don't mind the fluff, it's fun, but the CHRUNCH of numbers is why I'm here" --Me, to one of my previous DND groups. This was while I passed four turns in a fight with the tarrasque, because I was calculating the most damage I could drop in a single turn on my level 17 psion. I had enough cards stacked in my favor that it topped 1500 damage, psionic and unresistable, straight to that lizards ugly dome. Failed to account for the fact that you can't keep a tarrasque down via brute force, but hey, thats the failing of the high INT character. In the end, that sessions fluff was made memorable by the crunch. There is nothing wrong with preffering one to the other, but I highly agree, skirmish campaigns are my favorite.
Only ever played one real campaign of DnD with a few of my buddies and I gotta say roleplaying is really hit or miss. You've got to be in a specific mood to get the most out of it, versus the very clinical and by the numbers approach to a combat encounter. But I will say, two years after the fact, I still remember the roleplaying moments way more than any of the combat encounters. Having to hold a door up in the frame while thoroughly bullshitting a guard during an investigation, convincing him we didn't break in. Or "accidentally" falling overboard on a ship to buy our warlock time to break into the captains quarters. I can only imagine if the game were entirely combat oriented, I wouldn't remember moments nearly as fondly. But I bet picking up a campaign session for the homies when you aren't really feeling it wouldn't be NEARLY as draining, not having to engage in make-believe nonsense you aren't up for at the moment. You're all still playing a game at any given moment. Not pretending it isn't a game at all.
There is a lot of story to be explored from “the general’s” perspective; wargaming campaigns. The story becomes less about what an individual does but how a faction does. Or how a country progresses.
I wonder if Mr. Minions here is into World War 2 documentaries because that’s a similar thing: you have the grand scope of how the battles went and where they ultimately led the country which is a story itself… but then you have some individual stories interspersed throughout it to give details.
I’m not particularly into World War 2 documentaries. I think my wife has watched some, however. Thanks for watching!
This reminds me of a top down stick shooter game where you control your main guy and you got npc allies to back you up that you can command.
So you got the "Hero" feel but got teammates for all that horde clearing action.
If anyone is wondering, it "Red Solstice 2 Survivors"
I often use a mix of play types at least as they are defined here. My players get yo RP there captain or first mate between combats and then have the rest of their crew deploy when needed.
This all reminded me that some people just love to talk and that they might be mistaking roleplaying as a means to just talk about localized detail which slows the game down drastically. The concept of campaign skirmishing is an exciting subject because I think the idea of roleplaying without the real-time banter is an amazing experience and even more amazing because it is a rare experience. I think I'll look into how people can experience this more often. I personally seek conversation about three things. Mechanical Strategy, Character Driven Narrative (not filler conversations about things that have no impact on the game), Big picture objectives as well as button pressing ones, Art Techniques. Siege of the Citadel has a a pdf available that shows how to mix the Mutant Chronicles RPG in with the miniatures board game. As someone who involves himself in way too much, I find that idea fascinating because it sounds like a streamlined way to get an adventure going.
This is why I like Inquisitor or Inq28 because I can run games that combine a bit of role play with skirmish wargaming. Usually a bit of role play at the start I dub the mission briefing and then the mission where everyone has a big fight usually avoiding the actual objectives no matter how important they are.
Necromunda is an awesome compromise. Needs a dedicated Arbitrator to really flesh it out i reckon.
I like to bring roleplaying elements into my wargaming. My gaming group's gone next level - our Warhammer 40k RPG is in the same setting as our Kill Team campaign and our Crusade campaign. Characters dying in any medium affects things that happens in the others so the universe is persistent and we can all engage on it from different directions. It's awesome.
Currently trying to work Necromunda in there too....
I wish I had seen this video when you first posted it. As it happens I combine an aspect of role playing into the miniature games that my group of players enjoys playing and it works out well. The basic summary is this. If we are playing 40K for instance, I act as the Game Master, which is to say, the bad guys. My players each control a portion of a joint group of Space Marines because of course the good guys have to be Space Marines and also that's what was in the box when I started. At any rate, each player might control a squad or two squads or maybe a squad and a vehicle. The division of forces is not so much the focus as the fact that they must use their given part of the team to work with the others against ME, the bad guy, the game master. I present the scenario, lay out the background story and control the opposing force. I give them an objective to obtain or achieve and control the flow of the story from one gaming session to the next. I should also point out that I have completely altered the combat rules from 40K as I find them to be utter trash but that's another post and I lack the rare and powerful "Pachow" skill. At any rate, the point of our gaming sessions is not for the gathered players to beat one another at a table top wargame because frankly that gets old pretty quick. Instead the focus is for them to work together to collectively beat the bad guys and in doing so develop the story put in place by the game master. I also apply this same approach in playing Team Yankee, Flames of War and Bolt Action. My Bolt Action story is going to be particularly good as I have already acquired a 40K Primaris Dreadnought that will be painted up in German yellow camo scheme and be set in place in the story as a secret German weapons experiment that the joint American and British team will stumble upon. So to sum up. No goofy voice, no tavern keepers or bar wenches. But we still have engaging story telling combine with all the best things about miniatures.
So you finally did it, you made me buy Reign in Hell :D Looking forward to build a cabale or two and see them grow throughout the campaign.
We all love different things for different reasons. Love what you love, play how you play, have fun!
the Tom you should definitely check out the miniature game "MERCS" formerly published by megacon games. now it has a resurgence because another company has taken a hold of the IP and are planning to release a 3rd edition.
this game lands itself beautifully to a narrative campaign, no points u use only 5 miniatures and the background is there but the company fell under before making the next jump I hope you read this and check it out.
I've played a few RPGs, and I've never felt the need or pressure to play act. The leveling, skills, and storytelling is the real draw for me. Same with tabletop campaigns and video games too. To each their own, but I'd recommend giving RPGs another shot.
how can say you don't like the play-acting but like the storytelling? The acting IS the storytelling, everything else is set-dressing
@@randombencounter263 in my experiences, it's been more like narrating what my characters do and say rather than acting or speaking as them. It was a more conversational, casual style that I liked. I enjoy listening to folks play and act their parts, like adventurezone, but it's not for me.
As I see it, a wargame has rules and a role game has guides. That's it. You don't argue 'rules' with the DM. You can ask the referee for a ruling in a wargame.
I played TTRPGs throughout my childhood and teenage years, it was what I did. Later, life got in the way and I didnt have a group to play with for 10ish years. After a move I met some friends who played shadowrun, and i was so excited, as SR is my favorite setting. I learned VERY QUICKLY that I no longer enjoyed the role playing aspects of the game, and fought through it for almost a year, hoping it would come back to me. It did not :/ Thankfully during that time I got into wargaming, and it's been great for me. The campaign wargaming stuff that's happening rn is perfect for my situation. I really like that the narratives form in a way that feels more real, because what happened last game has bearing on what happens next.
To me roleplaying just means that you're making game choices based on the fictional world. Not necessarily talking in character at all. I very much relate to your aversion to the play acting aspect of roleplaying games
You would probably enjoy running a combat focused RPG. The DM is the general of the faceless hoard that the Player Characters are fighting. You would have to "put up with" a little RP to get the players to the next fight, but there are a lot of people that like that kind of combat-focused TTRPG.
Physically playing games..
Is nostalgic an awesome.
In a world going digital,
I have a lot of respect for anything table top.
I started with AD&D ages ago and have leaned into wargames for the reasons you outlined. The channel "The Joy of Wargaming" has several playlists dedicated to wargame campaigns, largely solo. His series 'You can win at RPGs' is all about using AD&D as a skirmish campaign. He covers other resources as well.
Ultimately you can use an RPG to generate a team and have another person generate the opposition and have a very fun narrative campaign.
I left the D&D scene, not because of the play acting portion but because I don't like the what the game developed into and it seemed everyone was to interested in talking about the rules rather than playing the scenario (and 2 hours to play out one combat scene). If I can get folks into playing rules light RPGs I would choose Barbarians of Lemuria, Rocket Age or the free Warrior, Rogue and Mage. Just some friendly plugs for what I think are superior roll playing games.
Right On...model the new weapons and gear...PLUS battle damage. The model / Painting aspect is so cool.
I wargame and role-play but thats just me. Though bc I DM I tend to use the role-playing game as an excuse to buy tons of miniatures to use in it. Though lately im now finding use for a lot of dnd miniatures in games like Reign of Hell so there is a lot of cross pollination there nowadays.
Core Space by Battle Systems is a great skirmish game with campaigns and levelling up in it.
I've been roleplaying for, well, a loooong time now and it is definitely my main hobby with my friends, however I do like this wargame skirmish campaigning idea. So far I've only been working on the hobby side of the miniature world. This serves as a potentially very good gateway into actually playing... Thanks! ;)
i like both now, but have found many sci fi like warhammer can be used in different rpg systems. However some miniatures can get very expensive and their a lot more to making the miniatures too. Like in dnd you buy the miniature paint it and go. In war gaming the hard part is building them and all the weird table scenery too.And now we must remember Gygax started dnd after he played a war game with his tactical studies and rules club. So to me it might be all the same.
Would be fun to hear your opinion on the new one page rules quest. :)
I think I've had one wargaming campaign that worked out well. All the others just died out as people lost interest. Where as we've had a lot more success with roleplaying campaigns over the years. But we also had a lot die out too. One of the tricks to make one resolve in a satisfying way seems to be to have a planned end.
I would really appreciate a video on how to run a good wargaming campaign. or a link to one you've already done on the subject.
Called granularity. You're more of an empathetic existentialist. Appreciate the scenario and players to an extent, BUT at the end of the day it's about moving models and chucking dice. Played D&D "back in the day" and just feel the current table gaming environment is just now getting to what I've always wished I could have gotten out of the RPG experience back then. Some games producers are getting really good at a light fusion of both game formats. Battles and decisions having consequences down the line in the campaign. It's all good!
Great video! 👍🏿
As a Gen Xer my background has been in video games from Warcraft (before the crappy WOW 😉), Starcraft, EverQuest, and many other games..
As of recently the most addictive has been League of Legends which everyone knows is a MOBA that was created within the branch of Warcraft's player created mod games.
I always wanted to venture into tabletop. And I always wanted to play dungeons & dragons.
My first investment on table top was a miniature battlefield game called HeroScape. I loved the game but somewhere in management they droped the ball and halted production.
Meanwhile I always had my eye on Warhammer but haven't had a chance to play it yet.
I finally got to play d&d for the first time in my life now the age of 47. And really thought it was "meh".
It was interesting but I don't think it's for me.
Then I came across your video and it made me realize the line in the sand. I love the battlefields with small armies which is what heroScape was. League of Legends is still a huge addiction for me and you only manage one hero in that game.
So I guess what I'm saying is the small team skirmishes is probably what's for me. I like to give Warhammer a go because I miss the old days playing Warcraft and Spacecraft.
Although I don't want to get into heavy investment but having had a huge tackle box full of heroescape miniatures to pick from (I sold them all because we moved and I didn't have the space) I know it's going to happen regardless of whatever miniature battle game I get into.
I'll be taking a look at some of the ones you named. Please let me know if you have any others I need to look out for.
Have you looked at the Inquisitor tabletop game?
I own a copy. It is weird, which is part of why it didn’t sell well. Also, making it 54mm was a terrible decision. Thanks for watching!