Please Note, We're Playing Backward!

For the last couple weeks we've been playtesting Domains at War as a way to learn the system well enough for a campaign game. This is particularly important, since I'm supposed to know enough about the system to function as a referee (strategy-game GM) for the campaign, and design relatively fair and interesting opponents for players.

I want to emphasize that what we've been doing, playing it as a one-on-one tactical miniatures game, isn't really the purpose of the system. Peter was saying to me today that it's a shame that this is "just a two-player", which is completely the wrong impression!

First, the whole concept of a strategy RPG is that, at least to a certain extent, players are working together cooperatively to explore a world. So a battle would usually consist of a "player side" of 1-5 players, each controlling a commander/division, versus a "non-player side" of various antagonists. It's an exactly analogue of a single-character RPG, with the "character" being replaced by a "commander and troops", and exploring the "dungeon" replaced by exploring the "world map". Same basic procedures, though -- for example, each player getting a turn in an initiative sequence, one at a time, during battle.

Granted, there's plenty of potential for players to turn on one another, or to be tempted by evil into allying with the forces of darkness, or other events that can put them at one another's throats. And there's also a tradition of letting an uninvolved player take over for playing an NPC (or in a strategy game, "non-player realm"), to participate in a battle that doesn't involve his own kingdom.

But that's still a departure from the basic theme of the game, which is intended to be "player-vs-environment" instead of "player-vs-player".

Second, Walley and I have been playing everything with normal sides reversed, with me playing the human/demihuman "Lawful" side and Walley playing the monsters. That's just what Walley chose to do the first day when I gave him the option, so we ran with it!

In general, the conventional fantasy theme of the system is "Weaker human-elf-dwarf-etc armies use superior tactics and legendary heroes to overcome hordes of more powerful monsters." It's intentionally promoting asymmetric capabilities in the same way that most RPGs encourage individually weak heroes to team up and tackle powerful foes. In some ways, this kind of command system is a detailed implementation of the "Mook Chivalry" trope, where overlords send out their infinite waves of minions just a few at a time. Walley can attest to the constant frustration of playing the disorganized mook waves!

There are some rules in the system for playing a "Chaotic realm" on the side of evil, but it's not necessarily encouraged from a balance standpoint. Having both elite player-classed commanders and also 7 HD troll armies, all at once, would be a pretty potent advantage! You can add some (non-evil) fantastic creatures to a Lawful player army by using a detailed system of hiring trainers, etc, but there are substantial expenses involved. This is also an incentive for exploration elements of play. (Want triceratops-mounted cavalry? Send off an expedition to the Isle of Dread!)