D&D 5E Do you favour short or long campaigns?

[dropbear8mybaby]

I've decided that I'm done with long campaigns. I'm currently running two long term campaigns. One with a group that started at 1st and wants to get to 20th. The other I took over to run SKT and will, hopefully, go back to playing in once I'm done.

I'm really over long campaigns. All the campaign books are exhausting. Curse is relatively short, all things considered, but even it is too long IMO. The same with Horde, especially since it's really only part one of two.

The problem is, IMO, that there is simply too much filler and dragging out of plot elements. Most players forget what happened twenty sessions ago and rarely ever can recall enough to piece puzzles together across multiple sessions. It becomes a slog rather than a fun jaunt. I also get bored of the campaign as a DM and constantly feel like either pushing the players towards faster resolutions, or just skipping filler content to speed things up. Right now, in SKT, I feel as if the last ten sessions have been basically about nothing other than pure exposition, even though the characters have traversed half of the north just to get to this point. In my homebrew campaign, it's becoming increasingly difficult to give the players motivations for their characters since the only real motivation has been the same one since 1st-level, and everything else has been filler to get to that resolution, which is still seven levels away. It's becoming a really drawn out drag.

I equate it much to the same phenomena as British TV shows which have much shorter, more compact seasons, and American TV shows which stretch things across 20+ episodes. All the current campaign books feel like a 24 season American TV show when what would be much more fun, would be a six season one.

I think from now on I'll only do sub-5 level campaigns, with the aim of three levels being the sweet spot. I'm currently playing in the Sunless Citadel and I'm hoping that the DM decides to continue on with Forge of Fury. I really like the concept of having a break in-between campaigns so that it always feels fresh and new and exciting and has a decently quick resolution to all the elements. I almost envy him being the DM for this.

So what do you favour? Short or long campaigns?

 

[pogre]

Are you referring to adventure lengths or actual campaigns. If you say you are burnt out on long adventure paths - I sympathize. Long campaigns with numerous smaller adventures and the same set of PCs is what I enjoy.

 

[guachi]

I've had good success stringing unrelated old adventures together into a campaign. The adventures are standalone, except for a few, so even with overarching plot points added to them they still are a complete story unto themselves.

 

[Jester David]

I like long campaigns. But they're hard to sustain interest in.
So, the ideal is long campaigns broken into seasons with short mini campaigns between the seasons

 

[S'mon]

I particularly like open worlds with lots of adventures and campaign arcs in one continuing setting. I worked on my Pathfinder/Golarion AP stuff, mashing up a bunch of APs to get away from the linear slog feel you can get with running just one, so my current campaign uses 2 or 3 APs plus unrelated adventures - 50 sessions in and going great.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I only do long campaigns. If my actions today don't affect the world I'll be playing in or the character that I'm playing six months from now, then it feels like everything that happens is kind of pointless. It would be like logging in to play an MMO, when you know they're about to shut the servers down for the last time.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I like campaigns that go the amount of time I intend them to go.

My D&D includes:

• One Shots. A one to three session adventure unconnected to anything else, generally with characters used (or leveled) only for this purpose.
• Theme Adventures. An focused, thematic adventure designed to run somewhere between 8-15 sessions, with character custom created for this purpose (and who generally will not level up during the adventure).
• Mini-Campaigns. The best example of this is Lost Mine of Phandelver. A few months of play where organized around a large adventure or series of adventures, freeform or more structured, where the characters should advance multiple levels.
• Campaigns. A multi-year (the longer the better) exploration of the lives of the PCs, as they advance from their starting level towards an expected end point, generally at a much higher level than the starting level, and which may include any number of unrelated adventures and adventure arcs in addition to any that may be related. There need not (but can) be any story or event focus other than following the lives of the PCs.

I don't really consider anything that lasts less than 4 years a true campaign. If it were intended to be a campaign as I defined it, but stopped before hitting the intended end, I consider that a failed campaign. I'd honestly rather have played something else than to have started a D&D thing (whichever of those it may be, but especially one intended as a campaign) and have it not get to its completion.

I know it seems to be a pretty common thing for people to start a lot of campaigns and not finish them, but in my opinion that is a planning failure half the time (the other half of the time it's someone else's fault). I think the problem is that people really don't think about where they want things to go, and how they plan to get there before they get started. Kind of like (to bounce off of something from the OP) a lot of TV series. Some TV series are well-planned, they tell the story they want to tell in the right number of seasons, and then they end it in a pleasing manner. They knew what they were doing before they started, and it shows. Other TV series just sort of bumble along after an initial good season, without any real purpose, getting loony and stupid until they are eventually canceled. Don't let your campaign be that type. Be the planned type.

Now, out of that list I gave, my absolute favorite is the true long campaign. "Sim-Adventurer", so to speak. Planning doesn't have to mean plot. The plan can easily be, "The PCs adventure until they reach about 20th level, and then retire rich and well-settled in the world. Oh, and hopefully they'll kill an evil god or found a kingdom in the meantime." In fact, that's pretty much the old school D&D campaign goal.

But if I'm doing something other than a long campaign, I figure out what the heck it is going to be first (generally from that list I gave above) so that I can make sure it happens in a satisfying manner. Otherwise, you end up with failed experiences rather than successes.

(One thing I should point out is that it practically impossible to run a real campaign in 5e (or 3e, or 4e) using the default XP rates, because they are designed to level your characters way too fast.)

 

[Shiroiken]

It really depends on your definitions. I generally like longer campaigns filled with shorter adventures. IME an adventure that takes longer than 2-3 sessions runs the significant risk of the players forgetting the goal/purpose. Stringing several adventures together can expand the problem, because you might be 10+ sessions before you get to the goal, and no one remembers/care why anymore. I still like longer campaigns that tie various things together, especially watching your characters grow.

 

[S'mon]

• Campaigns. A multi-year (the longer the better) exploration of the lives of the PCs, as they advance from their starting level towards an expected end point, generally at a much higher level than the starting level, and which may include any number of unrelated adventures and adventure arcs in addition to any that may be related. There need not (but can) be any story or event focus other than following the lives of the PCs.

I don't really consider anything that lasts less than 4 years a true campaign. If it were intended to be a campaign as I defined it, but stopped before hitting the intended end, I consider that a failed campaign.
(One thing I should point out is that it practically impossible to run a real campaign in 5e (or 3e, or 4e) using the default XP rates, because they are designed to level your characters way too fast.)

I like these, but I generally prefer to go for 3 years not 4+. I finished a 5.5 year 4e 1-29 campaign last year (Loudwater) and in retrospect it was too long, should have gone for 1-20 over about 3.5 years.

I also have run several ca 2 year games of around 30-35 sessions (eg 3e Lost City of Barakus level 1-8, 3e Willow Vale level 1-8, PF Curse of the Crimson Throne level 1-14), which I think are large mini-campaigns in your metric. I would tend to regard these more as full campaigns, albeit on the short side, but not failures. I ran a 12 session level 1-4 Pathfinder Beginner Box Yggsburgh game, which was designed and completed as such. I would call that a true mini-campaign. I have also run a couple 4e campaigns (levels 1-8 and 3-10) that each lasted around 18-20 sessions and could be considered failed campaigns, having been conceived to potentially run longer.

My current campaigns are:

1. 5e Wilderlands - long running open world sandbox game since at least 2009, longest lasting current PC Hakeem the Barbarian-18 started Jan 2015 when we rebooted in 5e rules. No end point, but current major story arc will likely be another year or so.
2. 5e Varisia/Runelords of the Shattered Star - started November 2015, 50 sessions in, expect to run
about 70 more sessions over about the next 1.5 years, so aiming for about 3 years total.
3. Just announced my Classic D&D Karameikos game has ended as a group tabletop game at least for now. In current form went from start of 2015, so 2.5 years, going from level 1 to about 19th.
4. 4e Nentir Vale, 6 sessions in, intended to run around 50 sessions fortnightly over about 2.5 years, go 1st to maybe 14th level.

So it sounds as if I prefer slightly shorter campaigns than you, but similar principle.

Speed of levelling in 5e is definitely a potential issue. My solutions are (1) to run at 20th with Epic Boons, plus Feat and ASI gains every 50K XP and (2) Individual PC XP, which has a surprisingly significant effect in slowing down group advancement. One high level PC in a mid level group basically has to play a mid-level game, totally unlike 5 or 6 high level PCs.

Edit: Definitely disagree that 4e XP levels PCs too fast. Default 4e advancement rate is glacial, especially from 11th level up. If you use the DMG2 systems, tons of minions, and generous quest awards, you can get it up
to about 1 level per 12 hours, but by default is nearer 1 level per 20 hours' play. With default XP my 4e level 1-29 campaign would have taken 8 or 9 years rather than 5.5.

 

[Lanefan]

The longer the better. When I start a campaign as DM my intent is that it keep going as long as I'm willing to run it (and have any ideas to put into it), anyone's willing to play in it, and the rules system holds up.

So far my three campaigns have gone 10+ years, 12+ years, and 9+ years: the last of those is still running with lots left in the tank.

BUT - there's some tricks you kind of have to be able to pull off in order to make it work:

- slow the level advancement to (compared to RAW 3e-4e-5e) a snail's pace a la 2e
- encourage players to each have several characters on the go, and to cycle them in and out (changing the party makeup both helps keep things fresh and further slows overall advancement)
- encourage players to make more than one party out of those characters, then run each group for a few adventures before flipping back to the other (same benefits as changing the party makeup)
- from experience I've learned that having a really well-nailed-down history and backstory for your game world* is very useful, in that you can then mine it for stories and plots
- you'll want to have a big collection of adventure modules etc. for a wide range of levels available, depending on the story arcs you might have in mind
- don't use published APs as written; instead build some proto-APs out of adventures you already have in mind and embed them into your campaign (and break the published APs into stand-alones)
- don't have a fixed endpoint in mind at any time until and unless you're considering winding the campaign up
- assume you'll have player turnover as well as character turnover (in other words, always know where to dig up replacement players for when someone leaves, moves away, or whatever)

* - or at least the general region where the party starts - the realm they're in and those realms just around it at an absolute minimum - but keep in mind you might have to expand later once they get access to long-range travel.

Lan-"as a player I also expect a campaign, once started, to keep going until the system collapses or the players or the DM have had enough"-efan