Is there an RPG specifically and explicitly (as in: the developers stating this in the actual book) designed for parties whose members gather irregularly (there's always someone who can't make it) and play irregularly? (Meaning the system has some built in solution for handling the characters of missing players.)
|
|
While I've not had the opportunity to play or run in this setting, it might be what you're looking for. http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/ It's a framework that's designed to allow any subset of a large group of players to play at irregular intervals, but in a consistent setting. The idea is that whenever any group of the available players is able to meet, they can schedule a game, show up, and pick up from where they left off. |
|||
|
|
Paranoia (troubleshooter, specifically) fits very well for this. Adventures are one-offs and you're expected to die as easily as not in each adventure. Character creation takes 5 minutes -- you roll stats (they're completely random) and you're done (optionally, you pick skill specializations.) In addition, missions start with the Friend Computer calling players, so they're not "adventuring" together. No need to explain why one is missing. |
|||||
|
|
There are good answers here already, and they've already hit the key elements of:
Any setting in which those requirement can be satisfied would work. However, there is a system specifically designed to support a changing cast and gives something for the characters of absent players to do: Ars MagicaArs Magica is designed around troupe-style play. Each member of the troupe is intended to GM (called "StoryGuide" or "SG" in AM parlance) sometime, and each member of the troupe has at least 2 PCs - a powerful Magus, and also a Companion, an adventurer comparable to the non-magic users of other fantasy RPGs. The troupe as a whole has a group of serving-class characters called Grogs (a group of grogs is called a turb) who provide muscle and other skills, like smithing and muleskinning. It is expected that for each season's adventure, a different mix of Magi, Companions, and Grogs will participate. The system also focuses on the long-term research efforts of Magi - so players can say, "Until I say otherwise, if I'm gone, my Magus is studying Rego," and then each session that player's away, you can tick of a season of Rego work for his wizard. Now, most AM games I have played have "episodes" that take more than one session to complete - but that's just how those stories were designed. A more aggressive approach to scene cutting, etc., in addition to a tighter, more self-contained scenario design could remedy that. |
|||||||||||
|
UniversalisBilling itself as a game of unlimited stories, it's a zero-prep game that allows all resources to be shared amongst the players. It's unusual structure sometimes makes people call it "not an RPG," but it feels like one to me. It lends itself well to one-shots, but you can certainly save materials for follow-up games if you want to. Because resources are shared, it serves well when group composition changes. In a Wicked AgeWicked age is designed to have session-to-session links, while re-shuffling the characters and situations each session. It's explicitly designed for episodic play, with a longer term narrative arc between episodes. It's a low-prep game. Because character allocation is done on a per-episode basis, the game serves changing groups well, as long as an episode is finished each session. |
|||||||
|
BattlestationsBattlestations is well-suited for this, as it's build around self-contained missions. Whoever's around goes on the mission, with empty spots filled by bots. The expansion books include simple campaign rules, in which each mission affects the campaign status indicators, giving you a sense of continuity without sacrificing the episodic nature of the game. Purists have complained that it's not a true RPG, but rather a boardgame-RPG hybrid. Maybe so, but for those without the time for "true" roleplaying it might be the only solution. I ran a lunchtime game for six months and it was a blast. |
|||
|
|
|
I don't know about specific system that lends itself well to this, but try for 'episodic' type play. Each session can be one 'episode', like a TV show. They can share a setting and characters, and even an overarching plot, but individual sessions don't need specific people. Think of a show like Star Trek, for example. Try to build your campaigns around that concept. I suspect one gotcha is that you could end up with a mechanically uneven group if some players show up significantly more or less than others. I've handled this in my off-and-on Freemarket group by just saying that the other character was away on his own business. When he was back at another session, I asked him what his character had been doing in that time span, and gave him a bit of advancement mechanically in that direction. This worked for the setting though, because the plot didn't have to involve him specifically; it was more based around their group rather than the individuals, in some ways. |
|||
|
|
Pendragon has as its default approach a year of game time in one session. The action is usually based on the "campaign season" in the feudal sense. This means that adventures and major campaign events tend to be bookended by session boundaries. This makes it easy for players to come and go each session or for some players to sit out (or even to rotate the GM responsibilities.) Of course, you can also play Pendragon in the classic D&D approach. Our group sticks to the default approach above and it works really well for this group of busy, middle-aged professionals. |
|||
|
|
|
I don't know of any RPG system that i actively designed around this, but with mosts systems it can be solved with the right campaign framework. One general framework the group I am a player in have had a good success with is to have an over-arching story line, with each session being a single mission (so essentially self-contained, with a mission-start and a mission-end in 3-5 hours of playing). However, this does not work too well with a campaign framing that isn't well-suited to that sort of structure. |
|||
|
|
|
Shadowrun. In my old group, we typically could get the job, do the legwork, and execute the shadowrun all in one sitting. If your group regularly has members who don't show up, and you can play the full run in one night, then it doesn't matter as much if Joe is out of town for the weekend. Also, since the runs themselves are somewhat self-contained, then you don't need to worry about what happened in the last session against Renraku; since you are hitting Ares this week. |
|||
|
|
|
You might be surprised to know this, but the DnD essentials lines, actually qualifies as an answer to your question. on page 6 of the Dungeon Master's Book (of the essentials line) it has a section called 'The Gaming Group'. In this section, it describes the make up the group, how often they might play, how to pick the DM, the fact that DMs can rotate for the same campaign etc. The book specifically says that it is up to the group to decide these things. On page 16 of the Dungeon Master's Book (of the essential line), under the section setting up and determining house rules, it reads:
|
|||
|
|
