Epic D&D vs Picaresque D&D
My current D&D group has been together for about six years with mostly the same players. In that time, we've completed two major campaigns, both spanning levels 1 to 20. After the last one concluded, a player suggested changes for the next campaign. Instead of going to level 20 and becoming god-killers, he wanted things to top out at about level 10, at a point where many creatures were still more dangerous than the characters. And instead of the campaign being driven by a "save the world" quest, he wanted things to be a bit looser and more exploration-driven.
By a striking coincidence, a few days later, I came across Picaro and the Story of D&D by Grognardia. When I read it, I realized my player had asked me to run a picaresque campaign rather than an epic one. Let me explain.
Picaresque (pronounced pih-kuh-RESK) is a literary genre whose name derives from picaro, the Spanish word for rogue. The genre generally features a low-born rascal who gets by on their wits. There is little plot, and the book is instead a collection of loosely linked episodes. A classic example of the genre is Huckleberry Finn. In fantasy literature, we find the form in Vance's Cugel's Saga and Lieber's Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser. These books contrast sharply with the more popular epic fantasy literature, such as The Lord of the Rings or The Dragonlance Chronicles.
These two categories, epic and picaresque, can also describe different types of D&D campaigns. We can say that epic D&D campaigns have these characteristics:
The PCs are relatively reputable.
The PCs are primarily motivated by altruism.
A big quest connects the campaign episodes.
The stakes are high (often world-threatening).
The PCs usually overcome challenges through heroism.
By contrast, picaresque D&D campaigns have these characteristics:
The PCs are outcasts or marginalized.
The PCs are primarily motivated by self-interest.
The campaign episodes are loosely linked.
The stakes are usually personal.
The PCs often overcome challenges via wit and duplicity.
There is, naturally enough, some bleeding between the categories. For example, epic campaigns often feature moments where the stakes become personal, while picaresque campaigns sometimes elevate the stakes. One problem I've seen is when roguish picaresque-style characters find themselves in an epic campaign; in that case, the motivations become muddy. Why is Flind the Scoundrel risking his life pursuing the dragon army or heading into hell to rescue a city? It doesn't mesh. Indeed, I think it's easier to go the other way and tie a heroic character into a picaresque campaign.
The 5E hardcover adventures almost exclusively cater to epic campaigns (Saltmarsh might be an exception). But my new Iskandar campaign explicitly follows a picaresque pattern, and I can't wait to see how it unfolds!