'Strongholds' Saga Campaign Underway in 2022

    Andy's Republican Romans advance upon Jason's Carthaginian army in Battle of Heroes

We had 10 players help launch our "Strongholds & Realms" Saga campaign at our first game day in 2022. Each player chose a faction from one of the four "Age of..." historical books and was given a Realm which would function to track their successes over the course of the campaign. Since it was our first meeting, the player initiative order was randomized. One of the things I like best about the design of this campaign is the players will take control of determining the matchups. When it is their turn in the player order, they select another player to attack, and the two are paired off for a battle. The remaining players can't attack those two, and so on until all players are matched up. As GM, I will be "odd man out." The Realms who did the attacking move to the bottom of the player order and the others all scoot up the player order. This simple system should provide fresh matchups month after month.

    Jason, right, tosses the dice and hopes the Carthaginian goddess of Luck will smile upon him

The Attacker also automatically becomes the First Player (or Attacker) in the battle. They get the advantage of selecting the scenario. However, attackers are allowed to choose the same scenario only twice over the course of the campaign. This is meant to ensure players try out a variety of scenarios. I designed the system avoid what I have seen happen before in map-based campaigns: the same two players slugging it out, month after month, mired in a border war. There is no map for this campaign and the space each Realm occupies is abstracted. So, any players can attack any other player participating in the campaign. This should help keep things fresh and interesting.

    Bob's Roman cavalry charges into a massed melee against Karen's Vikings in Feasting & Pillaging

At the suggestion of Bob B, one of my players, absent players can schedule a makeup game if they miss the monthly meeting. Those who are unable to play a game will suffer a slight penalty in Victory Points (VPs), though. I also added mechanisms for new players to join the campaign but not be so far behind as to make their participation meaningless. I was eager to see how all of it worked as the players trickled in that Sunday morning. I filled out an index card with each player's name and faction. Once we were sure we had everyone, I took mine out (as we had an odd number), and shuffled them thoroughly. I placed them in a single column, top to bottom. The order was Jenny T (Vikings), Andy S (Republican Romans - Age of Hannibal), Karen C (Vikings), Mike S (Vikings), Joe M (Mutatawwi'a), Jason S (Carthaginians), Dave E (Romans - AOI), and Bob B (Romans - AOI). 

    Bob and Karen deploy their battle lines, each eying the objective markers placed between the armies

Wouldn't you know it, but my first player passed! Jenny passed up her choice to attack, ensuring she remained atop the player order next meeting. Andy chose to attack Jason to play a historical Republican Romans vs. Carthaginian battle. Karen chose to attack Bob, and Mike S attacked Jenny. With two players left, each tried Jenny's tactic of passing (also trying to ensure they were Player 2 perhaps!). Players are allowed to pass only once, so Joe was forced into launching an attack with his Mutatawwi'a (Arab Conquest army) against Dave's Romans. Of course, about 15 minutes after all the matchups were decided, we had a new player show up who wanted to try out the game. This meant Mr. Odd Man Out ended up playing after all. We rolled for Player 1 (since we didn't have cards made out for us) and I ended up attacking with my Picts against the Viking army I loaned him. See my Picts Pounce on Viking Raiders in the Orkneys post for my battle report).

    Joe's Mutatawwi'a deploy to prevent Dave's wagons from escaping in Prized Possessions

So, did my limiting the number of times players could select a particular scenario work out? I think so. I played Clash of Warlords with Daniel N, the new player. I wanted to make it as easy as possible on him. The other four games all had different scenarios: Battle of Heroes, Prized Possessions, Feasting and Pillaging, and another Clash of Warlords. I call that a success! Mike S made an interesting suggestion. Since Battle of Heroes is so randomized, perhaps NOT limit that particular scenario? Hmm...I'll have to get the player's feedback on that. Maybe dictate the "Chaos Option" rather than the Tactical or Considered options for any times it is chosen after the first two? 

    Dave's Roman legionaries escort 3 supply wagons, hoping to get them off the table on the far edge

One thing that surprised me was the number of battles that ended in a tie. We had two games result in a dead-even tie. Only one of the five games ended up with the Attacker defeating the Defender (my Pict's victory over Daniel's Vikings).  In the other two games, the Defender won. One of the campaign mechanics is that an Attacker takes possession of one of the Defender's strongholds with a victory. So, my Picts took one of Daniel's border towers. Each Realm starts the game in control of one Castle (+3d6 dice VPs), two Fortresses (+2d6 VPs), and three Towers (+1d6 VPs). You can get a bonus +1d6 for killing the enemy warlord. Another bonus +1d6 can come from a Defender victory. Attacker victories result in taking one of the Defender's strongholds. A player must have lost a Tower first in a previous turn before an enemy can seize a Fortress. Similarly, they must have lost a Fortress before the Castle can be targeted by an enemy attack. Surprisingly, with five games, only one stronghold changed possession.

    Mike S and Jenny's Viking warbands face off against each other in Clash of Warlords

Not surprisingly were the player rolls for VPs. I fully understood these would provide a random element that the game of Saga provides, as well. For example, the lowest roll proved to be Joe's 11 dice totaling only 27 points (average of 2.45 per die). The highest was Jason S's roll (well, he'd left already so his dad Mike rolled). Jason scored 46 on 10 dice (4.6 average). Obviously, over the course of the campaign, this is meant to even itself out. The most rolled by a player was 12 (Bob and Dave who both won and killed the enemy warlord). The least was Daniel with 9 dice. The range in VP scores is a high of 46 and low of 27. Certainly not insurmountable over the course of a multi-month campaign!

    Carthaginian cavalry gallop into Andy's Roman legionaries in a game that would end in a tie

For a little color, I am asking players to come up with a name for their Realm, hopefully in the theme of their faction. For example, mine is Orkney -- which was one of the seven sub-kingdoms of the historical Pictish kingdom. Jenny chose Ingstad - the earldom of Lagertha, the strong female character from the Vikings series.  I am still waiting for other player names to roll in and will update the scoring grid with their choices as I receive them.

A huge part of the design of this campaign is to minimize what players (and the GM) have to keep track of over the course of games. For Strongholds & Realms, this means recording:

• Strategic actions of each player (Pass, who they attacked, etc.)
• Scenario the Attacker chose
• Winner of the battle, along with any warlords slain
• Victory Points rolled, to be added to their Realm's total each turn
• Adjusting the Player Order for the next turn
  

The result of the five battles (fought so far -- absent players who want to participate can still get in their games before next month!):

• Bob B's defending Romans defeated Karen's attacking Vikings in Feasting in Pillaging, 24-11.
• Mike D's attacking Picts defeated Daniel N's defending Vikings in Clash of Warlords, no score calculated.
• Dave E's defending Romans defeated Joe M's attacking Mutatawwi'a in Prized Possessions, (-5) to (-8) -- yes, both players ended up in negative points!
• Andy S's attacking Republican Romans tied Jason S's defending Carthaginians in Battle of Heroes, 14-14.
• Mike S's attacking Vikings tied Jenny T's defending Vikings in Clash of Warlords, 17-17.

Here are the Realms, listed first place to 10th, after one round of the campaign (I will add in the names of player Realms as they send them to me): 

Player	Position	Victory Points	Strongholds	Battles chosen as Attacker
BARCA Jason S (Carthaginian - AOH)	1st (T)	46	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 3 Towers	—
ORKNEY Mike D  (Pictish - AOI)	1st (T)	46	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 4 Towers	Clash of Warlords (1)
GALLIA Bob B (Roman - AOI)	3rd	41	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 3 Towers	—
SOSTERIS Andy S (Republican Roman - AOH)	4th	37	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 3 Towers	Battle of Heroes (1)
UPPER PANNONIA Dave E (Roman - AOI)	5th	36	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 3 Towers	—
GEATLAND Mike S (Vikings - AOV)	6th	35	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 3 Towers	Clash of Warlords (1)
INGSTAD Jenny T (Vikings - AOV)	7th	32	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 3 Towers	—
BJON BORG Karen C (Vikings - AOV)	8th (T)	31	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 3 Towers	Feasting & Pillaging (1)
SILESIA Daniel N (Vikings - AOV)	8th (T)	31	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 2 Towers
ALMOHAD CALIPHATE Joe M (Mutatawwi’a - AOC)	10th	27	1 Castle 2 Fortresses 3 Towers	Prized Possessions (1)

Here is the player order for next turn. If absent players join in, this will be adjusted before our next meeting in February.

Turn 2

Jenny T

Jason S

Dave E

Bob B

Daniel N

Mike D

Joe M

Mike S

Karen C

Andy S