Fact is, to do something like this right takes time and testing. I want to put together a campaign that is enjoyable for me to run, delightful for the participants, and something new in the world.
So the plan is not just a plan to take existing rules and run a campaign with them, but to start small with new ideas and develop experience in designing and running games based on them,
The terminology at left - what a surprise - comes from software development.
- I have written about architecture in this blog already.
- Core rules are derived from the architecture and are essentially invariant from scenario to scenario.
- The scenario is not just map, situation and objectives but also those detailed rules (properly integrated as defined by core and architecture) that reflect a particular historical or fictional context.
- Alpha-tests are solo tests designed to exercise parts of a model or a full, small, game situation.
- Beta-tests are normal games with a small number of participants exercising a limited situation. The Franco-Prussian War (or even ts first 6 months) would be a good candidate for such a test. Because these are tests, rules might change through the game and between games more than in the "production release"
- The final "Prime Game Scenario" would be something can could run for years - Europe and Her Colonies 1740-1760 for example.
When you set out what a polished, large scale campaign would take to develop one thing is clear: this could take years. That drives two conclusions:
- Since I am a gaming butterfly, the core here has to be flexible enough to adapt to multiple periods and genres.
- I have to enjoy the process - not just the nattering on about it process I am indulging in here ( although I do enjoy that process) but also the design, testing and most important refereeing of the resulting games.