Tomorrow we are going to be starting a new Diaspora campaign as a player. I’m very much interested in getting into a platoon level conflict, as I believe the rules to be some of the best mass combat system for an RPG ↑ .
To do this, I will need to create a star system or two in which platoon conflict is likely. The obvious structure would be Rebellion vs Empire. However I could also see a setting up a two or three comparable entities fighting for control of a thurd region.
Given that Diaspora allows the players tremendous control over campaign creation, I’ll have to look at the system I’m creating. If I have a strong system then I can pick on a weaker system with one of my system’s aspects. If I’m “owning” with a weaker system then I’ll setup one of my aspects as a victim of a stronger system. The other system need not “spend an aspect” to reciprocate.
With a system ripe for a military conflict, my character would then need aspects to get him into large military conflicts. I’d imagine something like “Drug smuggling warlord” or “Corrupt Empirial colonel” or “Captain of the 3rd Light Brigade” should do the trick.
What we found in our previous game is that the collaborative character creation can quickly result in directions no one envisioned nor planned for. And I’m excited, because, while I have a plan, others will be directly affecting me.
So while I may wish to fight platoon battles, I can just as easily see my character being a convicted war criminal who’s military capabilities are severely hindered. Either way, I hope that our GM ↑ brings situations that challenge and engage us. I want information to flow so we can push to a conclusion - I don’t want a slow plod. I’d prefer a narrow scope campaign that wraps up in 6 or so sessions.