PDA

View Full Version : Setting



shadow_archmagi
2009-05-25, 08:37 AM
So, I'm working on homebrewing a setting, because it's fun to look at fantasy maps and say "That's an elf kingdom, and those blotches are the territories of orc tribes that've been at war with each other for centuries. The twist is that they're fighting over whether an ancient prophet was preaching love and equality, or as the other side claims, truth and brotherhood."

It occurred to me that I have no idea how to integrate the, you know, players. I mean, it's all very well and fine to say "OK, you're an elf, so you're probably from the Eid Confederacy" but that doesn't do the player much good unless he knows what an Eid Confederacy is. It feels wrong (and I believe it's one of the usual "DM of the Rings" mistakes) to give each player a stack of backstory notes. On the other hand, I don't want to be sitting there trying to quickly summarize a nation in 30 seconds of explanation, (20 of which will be "um, it's like, you know, the... um).

I suppose I could let the players in on the worldbuilding, and that'd make it easier and more fun to build the world, but then I'm worried they'd know too much; where's the fun in exploring a world if they were there for every second of it's creation?

I'm curious; how many of you do go through the endless hassle of homebrewing an entire world, and drawing up maps, and writing up biographies of famous kings?

How many of you just rip open a Box O Dragonlance and call it a day?

kamikasei
2009-05-25, 09:03 AM
How would the problem go away if you're using a pre-made setting? The only advantage there is if you presume that the players are already familiar with the reams of description of the setting that someone else wrote up for you.

Have brief descriptions available - a sketch of the setting from a few different angles (geography, race, culture/theme). Have two or three levels of deeper and more detailed information available. Make the exploration process interactive - don't just have the players an off-putting flat document describing everything, but let them ask questions and give them answers. Get them to give you a very rough idea of their character concept, point out where various aspects of it fit in to the world, where there are tensions or contradictions, and let them refine it. Be accomodating in letting perhaps somewhat odd characters have a place on the fringes of the societies you've come up with.

e.g.:
DM: The main setting is a single continent with an inland sea. Human civilizations are spread around the sea and the eastern coast. Dwarves are mostly in the mountains of the north with a smaller nation in the south too. Elves have a homeland in this forested peninsula in the west but are spread through the north too. There are five major nations around the sea and two of them are cosmopolitan enough to have a mix of races, so pretty much anyone could be from there.

Player: I want to be an elven rogue who uses a hand crossbow!

DM: That sounds like a city-based origin. You'd probably want to be from one of the two cities I mentioned. What kind of culture do you see as more fitting? This one is the capital of a theocratic empire while this one is a hafling-ruled trade city that's a bit more open and anarchic.

Player: Hmmm, the halfling city sounds better. The other one sounds like he'd have to be a criminal whereas there he could just be a scoundrel.

DM: Yeah, that's accurate. Okay, let's talk about the society and religion of the elves and of that city so you can make some choices there.

Point being, you as the DM should probably have a fair bit of detail on the setting in mind, but it doesn't all have to be exposed to the players at creation time.

Halaster
2009-05-25, 09:10 AM
I love doing that kind of thing, but I'm the kind of guy who only half finishes it. There's a map, there are some notes for the players to read and maybe some heraldry or other symbols. The rest comes in whenever somebody asks. So it's a bit of a mix of letting the players in on the worldbuilding and handing them notes. The things I care about I write down, the rest I make up as I go along, and if a player comes up with that ultra-cool elven order of warrior-poets he would like his character to be a member of, I let him, unless it totally contradicts what I have written. Since I don't usually tweak the races all that much, there rarley is any conflict.

And I simply have my gripes with all published settings. Dragonlance sucks real hard in my view. Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms are tolerable, but also kind of over the top and un-verisimiltudinistic. I love Iron Kingdoms, but there's just no way I'm spending something like 80€ on a setting. I'd rather come up with something myself.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-05-25, 09:12 AM
Check out the region descriptions in existing campaign setting sourcebooks. Write up descriptions of similar length.

Seriously, though, if a player wants to know what it really is to be an elf of Faerûn, they have to read (in 3.X) the Campaign Setting, Player's Guide, Races of Faerûn, and Lost Empires of Faerûn, to start with. In AD&D there was Elves of Evermeet and then some.

If you can't condense the pertinent background of a nation in your setting onto one page, you need to practice being concise (one of the most important traits of good writers, generally). Don't use two words where one will do. Get to the brass tacks, summarize, choose what's actually important. (And don't repeat yourself for effect... :smalleek: )

Make this material available to your players outside the actual gaming gatherings; put it online or send or print everyone a copy. Let them read it on their own time. Even a lot of background is rarely amiss, frankly - it can't take much more than an hour for anyone to read 30 pages, and if you players can't spare that over a week, they're probably just not interested. Most roleplayers read hundreds of pages of material they never have any use for, for no other reason than that it's related to the game they play.

Chiron
2009-05-25, 09:13 AM
Here, Tropes are your friend. It's the easiest way to impart maximum information in minimal verbage. They can find out all your wonderful specifics through the course of play, the important part is that they know the basics of what the place resembles in terms of common stereotypes. Don't think of just apeing one however, think of them as colours on a palette: You have dozens to choose from and every combination is something new and unique. Don't try and do all the thinking for your players, just get the IMPORTANT details, these are the details that raise interesting questions and imaginative solutions, they'll fill in the rest.

Take my own world:

The Kraanish empire: A feudal hobgoblin empire ruled over by the strongest Chieftan by right of combat. Something between the riders of Rohan, The Mongols under Gengis Khan, and Feudal Japan.

key facts: They're horsemen, they're semi-nomadic, infamous for raiding settlements, and and highly martial with a rigid caste structure that glorifies warriors.

The Historians Guild: An organisation largely comprised of halflings, who have come into their own recently, after the Gnomish invention of the printing press. A mish-mash of differing styles abound from tabloid-style journalism to dispassionate watching of events.

key facts: They're the media. They're a relatively new phenomenon and they have problems with sensationalist slandermongers. Just like ours.

Areswargod139
2009-05-25, 09:24 AM
[snippity, snip-snip]
And I simply have my gripes with all published settings. Dragonlance sucks real hard in my view.

Really? I'd love to hear what you have to say on it...I'm trying to "poll the electorate" of the gaming community on Dragonlance in the other thread...stop on by!

Anyway, back on topic...


The Kraanish empire: A feudal hobgoblin empire ruled over by the strongest Chieftan by right of combat. Something between the riders of Rohan, The Mongols under Gengis Khan, and Feudal Japan.
I think you've unintentionally done something a little risque there...the hobgoblins are the Japanese, eh? Do a quick image search of Japanese in Golen Age Comic Books.:smalleek:

shadow_archmagi
2009-05-25, 10:01 AM
Hobgoblins as Mongols? Seriously? With a bit of Rohan thrown in so they can have knights in shining armor? What!? %&*(#!

"Mongols and Rohan" were literally the two keywords I had written down for my own hobgoblin nation. What are the odds?

arkol
2009-05-25, 10:14 AM
Got a questions that's sort of related.

How do you actually divide regions by race? I mean if you have an orc kingdom right next to an elven kingdom how the hell do they come up with a stable border? Constant war is a possibility, but you can't have EVERY border between a evil race and a good race to be a constant war....

shadow_archmagi
2009-05-25, 10:16 AM
Natural geographic barriers, personally. Rivers, forests, mountains, that sort of thing. Otherwise you just have to assume a sort of sliding scale of ownership "Another four miles and we'll be well into Orc territory. That's when we can expect to be attacked."

EDIT: My High Elves are basically romans, so they have nice big walls where there are not geographical borders. My Wood Elves define there borders as "Is it under a tree yes/no?"

Dwarves basically just consider their home and everything underneath it theirs, or build walls around surface land they really want to keep.

Only humans have trouble with borders, really.

kamikasei
2009-05-25, 10:17 AM
Got a questions that's sort of related.

How do you actually divide regions by race? I mean if you have an orc kingdom right next to an elven kingdom how the hell do they come up with a stable border? Constant war is a possibility, but you can't have EVERY border between a evil race and a good race to be a constant war....

How do two human kingdoms do it? Are orcs incapable of forming treaties?

Farlion
2009-05-25, 10:21 AM
I homebrew my own setting and really put alot of time into it. The map wasn't the problem, but politics are hard! I had a friend (who doesn't play with me) help me out with some out side of the box thinking. We ended up with about 50 pages of descriptions just about different aristocratic families and their feuds amongst each other. Then about 20 pages of history and another 20 pages about other races (only elfs, dwarves and gnomes). So you see, it was alot of work =)

The whole setting is held quite classic with two twin brothers splitting up the land after their fathers death and are now waging war on each other, each one claiming they are the rightful king.

The idea of homebrewing came up, because I hate the high power and magic setting of all the written campaigns I've seen so far. I like to keep my setting low magic, dirty and dangerous.

Getting the PCs together was really easy in my case. They all came from the same village and were chosen to attend a religious ceremony outside of town. As always, the town was burnt down as they were away and their relatives were taken hostage to work in a mine. It was quite harsh for them to find a new perspective in life, since everything they knew so far, just burnt and died, but were still playing ;-D

So if you want some ideas for bringing characters together, it's usually easier to just tell the players: "We start in this village, now make your story accordingly".

Cheers,
Farlion

Sergeantbrother
2009-05-25, 10:50 AM
I believe in letting my players participate in world building. I played in one campaign years ago where the DM allowed each player to design his or her home nation - it was great and I have been doing the same thing in my campaigns ever since.

So if a player wants to be an elf from a nature based civilization, the player can create that civilization. They still get to explore the rest of the world, but they also feel like they have had an active hand in the setting. I know that when that other DM ran the campaign where I could design a setting, I really enjoyed it, both getting to design my own nations (with several different characters over the course of playing with that DM) and getting to see those settings played in game.

shadzar
2009-05-25, 11:07 AM
Some people like this, and others do not. Character backgrounds.

Who are you, where did you come from, and why are you adventuring.

You can give them an overview of the world and names of places they may have come from or areas, or let them decide.

The question would be up to you if these places exist as interest for the party to visit later on.

Then the only real way to get them into the story is the same problem had for years by all DMs..."So you all meet at a tavern"... How do you actually get them into the adventure now that they belong in the world you have created for them?

That will depend on those backgrounds, and they help you decide with that little bit of player chosen info on how to add them to the adventure you have designed to start out.

Or was that more the problem as how to start the adventure, rather than how to incorporate them into the world as it exists?

TheThan
2009-05-25, 11:38 AM
Option 1:
Take several 3x5 cards, write the name of the location, “Eid Confederacy” at the top, and then write out a description. If you can’t fit what you want to say on one card, then you need to cut it down so it’ll fit. That should give you a good enough description of the location, place or whatever, while still being brief.

Option 2:
You can do the whole “DM of the Rings” idea, with pages and pages of background info. In fact, if you’re planning on using this campaign for an extended period of time, it might be a good idea to do so.

Option 3:
Drop your players in don’t give them any ideas about this world and just let them sink or swim. Not exactly the best idea here, but it’s still an option.

Option 4:
Split the difference and only give them relevant information. For instance if you start them in say, a small town, give them all the information they need to be able to adventure there. Players will either be from the town, or from somewhere nearby. Then, let them discover everything beyond their “sphere of influence” for themselves.

shadow_archmagi
2009-05-25, 11:55 AM
I guess one could also always pull a Morrowind on them. (Morrowind begins with the character being deported to Morrowind on a prison ship and basically just dumped there, Australia style. )

Thus you have players who have already been associating for some time, with whatever backstory they want, but who are also totally new to the setting.
Of course, you'd need something to replace the Prison Ship, since not all players want to be in prison and the idea that they have an entire homeland they can return to with merely a boat are two things you'd want to leave out.

shadzar
2009-05-25, 12:02 PM
There was a 0-level adventure called Treasure Hunt for AD&D, that plops you down as a prisoner on a ship as well.

It could easily be one of the simplest ways to get someone into the adventure and explain why they are an adventurer to begin with.

When all else you have is slavery, then you look for something to do or remain a slave.

Devils_Advocate
2009-05-25, 12:55 PM
Instead of giving everyone all of the setting information that their character would know beforehand, you could just call for relevant Knowledge checks as the information becomes relevant. That's pretty much what the Knowledge skills are for, if I'm not mistaken.

"OK, is anyone trained in Knowledge (nobility and royalty) or Knowledge (local)? Huh, so, no one then. OK, it's common knowledge that this kingdom is ruled by the wise and just King Brad. There are no well-known peculiarities to local law."

"Is anyone trained in Knowledge (religion)? OK, cleric, roll it. A 12, huh? You recall that Moradin is the head of the dwarven pantheon, and revered by most dwarves. His portfolio includes mining, smithing, beards, and alcohol. You're pretty sure he's Lawful Good."

Farlion
2009-05-26, 02:54 AM
Instead of giving everyone all of the setting information that their character would know beforehand, you could just call for relevant Knowledge checks as the information becomes relevant. That's pretty much what the Knowledge skills are for, if I'm not mistaken.


Thats exactly how my players learn more about the setting I homebrew.

Cheers,
Farlion

elliott20
2009-05-26, 03:08 AM
I personally think going the world building route would be the best way to go.

The trick here is to give them JUST enough world building power to fit themselves in, but not so much that they call the shots EVERYTHING. I think that's what you're shooting for.

so, a player wants a relationship with say, an elf organization? fine, give them a bunch of elven organizations, and let them pick one or two, and fill out some details about the elven organization, but just a little bit. What you supply, on the other hand, is an overall "feel" of the organization.

you already use keywords to describe some of your institutions, so you're already got a good start here.

if your players want to write their own enemies, organizations, etc, just let them write that they exist, but leave the details to you to explore later.

Satyr
2009-05-26, 03:24 AM
I always found that the more people are involved in a creative process, the more compromises must be made and therefore the more mediocre and shallow the final result becomes in the end. When I write a setting, I am the author, and I don't like to let other people to get overtly involved; I listen to teir critique and avice when they have something to offer, but it is me and noone else who finally decides what parts of the feeddback is considered and what is ignored.
If a player wants more influence on the setting development, he or she should write an own one; I am happy to offer my advice and critique then.

elliott20
2009-05-26, 04:11 AM
I always found that the more people are involved in a creative process, the more compromises must be made and therefore the more mediocre and shallow the final result becomes in the end. When I write a setting, I am the author, and I don't like to let other people to get overtly involved; I listen to their critique and advice when they have something to offer, but it is me and no one else who finally decides what parts of the feedback is considered and what is ignored.
If a player wants more influence on the setting development, he or she should write an own one; I am happy to offer my advice and critique then.

I can understand why you would want that, but the motive for getting players involved in the creative process is less about the quality of the product, and more about involving the players. The focus is completely different.

In your case, your priority is about writing the best setting, players or not. In which case, yes, a solitary approach would work best.

but for me, quality of the setting is often not my top priority, player enjoyment of said setting is. This can and has backfired on me a few times, I will admit. However, for me, the trade off is worth it as I'm not asking my players to read a book about my world, I want my players to enjoy playing around in it.

While it's cool watching them stare in awe of what my imagination has dreamed up, more often than not, my players will just give it a quick nod, and move on, where as when they get involved with their own creations, they usually get a huge kick out of it through and through.

kamikasei
2009-05-26, 04:15 AM
Instead of giving everyone all of the setting information that their character would know beforehand, you could just call for relevant Knowledge checks as the information becomes relevant. That's pretty much what the Knowledge skills are for, if I'm not mistaken.

Knowledge checks during the game don't help the player make decisions about his character that are influenced by the setting, though: where he's from, who he worships, the culture he derives from, etc. That sort of thing needs to be available at character creation.

Knowledge and Gather Information tell Conan about Thulsa Doom and the cult of Set. They don't tell him that he was born in a barbarian tribe that worshipped Crom.

Even more than that, the player may need to know things his character doesn't in order to decide what kind of character he wants, before getting to the level of deciding details about that character. Nothing at the character level represents the sort of overarching view of the entire setting that a player takes when deciding what's appropriate to the game and what aspects of the game world he wants to explore.

Satyr
2009-05-26, 04:43 AM
In your case, your priority is about writing the best setting, players or not. In which case, yes, a solitary approach would work best.

but for me, quality of the setting is often not my top priority, player enjoyment of said setting is. This can and has backfired on me a few times, I will admit. However, for me, the trade off is worth it as I'm not asking my players to read a book about my world, I want my players to enjoy playing around in it.

Yes, my target audience is priarily myself. Simply because I have to run the game afterwards and I am much better if I run a setting I can completely identify myself with. I would do no favor to anyone if I would allow anyone to diminish what I think to be an excellent setting, because that would make it less likely that I am at my best as the game's gubernator.

And the very least I expect from every player in my campaigns is to learn the necessary details about the setting, the same I expect that they learn enough about the game's rules. That is the absolute minimal dedication of a player, and anyone who is not willing or able to show this minimal effort is plainly wrong in the more dedicated and involvement-focused games I strive for.


Even more than that, the player may need to know things his character doesn't in order to decide what kind of character he wants, before getting to the level of deciding details about that character.

And, more importantly, why shoul I want to run a game for a player who doesn't show the minimal commitment to the game to read the necessary basic information? Especially if I created the setting myself, I expect a minimal respect for my work and that is reading it. It is pretty much the same with the game's rules - players who refuse to learn the game's system are an annoyance, and I always felt that the setting is more important than its mere mechanical aspects.

elliott20
2009-05-26, 04:52 AM
Yes, my target audience is priarily myself. Simply because I have to run the game afterwards and I am much better if I run a setting I can completely identify myself with. I would do no favor to anyone if I would allow anyone to diminish what I think to be an excellent setting, because that would make it less likely that I am at my best as the game's gubernator.

And the very least I expect from every player in my campaigns is to learn the necessary details about the setting, the same I expect that they learn enough about the game's rules. That is the absolute minimal dedication of a player, and anyone who is not willing or able to show this minimal effort is plainly wrong in the more dedicated and involvement-focused games I strive for.

It's funny, because the quality you're asking for in your players is EXACTLY the point of me letting the players fill in the setting. the thing is, MOST of the time, you will not get that kind of dedication because it can become time consuming. If you DO find it, great.

In my particular case though, it was just easier to go the joint creation method to get the same level of familiarity.

Having said that, I think the benefit of your method is that you can re-use the campaign setting later with far less development effort beforehand, where as my method almost always produces essentially one use campaigns.

kieza
2009-05-26, 10:15 AM
I'm currently on page 112 of my homebrew campaign setting; when I'm DMing, my players are pretty cool with it, especially as I've been writing their significant exploits in as canon, but I'm taking a break over the summer and the guy taking over for me doesn't want to read through 112 pages of reference material to use it. (not surprisingly, as we're all college students who do a lot of reading as it is.)

I've thought about making a 1-page cheat sheet for him, but he seems to have another setting in mind for his upcoming campaign...

Satyr
2009-05-27, 01:06 AM
It's funny, because the quality you're asking for in your players is EXACTLY the point of me letting the players fill in the setting. the thing is, MOST of the time, you will not get that kind of dedication because it can become time consuming. If you DO find it, great.

As already said, I expect it that players prepare and understand the setting. It is the same with the mechanical rules, I think a Gamemaster should expect that every player learns and understand the rules well enough to applicate them in the game with minimal interruptions, and I personally think that the game's background is much more important than the rules. And I have absolutely no problem to tell any player that if they are not able or willing to show the minimally expected interest in the game, they should look for another group. I am certainly not sacrificing the quality of the gaming groups I run because of personal favors, and a certain exclusivity is always a good trait. Besides, being arrogant and elitist grants a certain reputation (if you are good enough to back it up, at least) and that helps to lure new potential payers...

SurlySeraph
2009-05-27, 02:02 AM
I'm currently on page 112 of my homebrew campaign setting; when I'm DMing, my players are pretty cool with it, especially as I've been writing their significant exploits in as canon, but I'm taking a break over the summer and the guy taking over for me doesn't want to read through 112 pages of reference material to use it. (not surprisingly, as we're all college students who do a lot of reading as it is.)

I've thought about making a 1-page cheat sheet for him, but he seems to have another setting in mind for his upcoming campaign...

I'm only on page 73 of mine. I feel jealous. :smalltongue:

Personally, I think it's best to have two layers to homebrewed settings: the "at a glance" information and the "full story" information. At a glance is the information that you can give in a couple sentences, like "Ancient northern city ruled by elf necromancers with an oppressed human underclass." That's usually enough for players to decide what they want; if they're not sure, give them some or all of the full story information, like "Founded in the Age of Dragons by the arch-lich Byelin as a fortress to defend his friends from the rampaging white dragon Pzorzyl, expanded over the decades as more people sought refuge there, besieged 35 separate times by 19 different armies, etc., etc., etc."

elliott20
2009-05-27, 02:36 AM
As already said, I expect it that players prepare and understand the setting. It is the same with the mechanical rules, I think a Gamemaster should expect that every player learns and understand the rules well enough to applicate them in the game with minimal interruptions, and I personally think that the game's background is much more important than the rules. And I have absolutely no problem to tell any player that if they are not able or willing to show the minimally expected interest in the game, they should look for another group. I am certainly not sacrificing the quality of the gaming groups I run because of personal favors, and a certain exclusivity is always a good trait. Besides, being arrogant and elitist grants a certain reputation (if you are good enough to back it up, at least) and that helps to lure new potential payers...

oh yeah, at a certain level, you NEED to have your players be willing to put some time into learning the game and the world around you. That much is certain, or else the game will just become one gigantic history lesson where you educate the players and it becomes a waste of time.

Of course, I can't pull off that elite thing very well since I'm keenly aware of the fact that my own writing chops and my own ability to craft quality products are all horrendously flawed.

It's like this, a lot of photography experts HATE photoshop because it allows every joe schmoe without a lot of knowledge or skill to pump out even more trash. The problem is, I'm not an expert, I *AM* joe schmoe. which, you know how the saying goes, those who live in glass houses and all that.

Quietus
2009-05-27, 08:04 AM
Never. EVER. Give them more than a couple paragraphs to read. This just guarantees they'll forget any details. As was mentioned before, pull on well-known, established things, and that will create an instant picture in their mind.

I recommend starting everyone off as having been from one, relatively small, geographical area. Then you can give everyone the same two paragraphs. For example, in my homebrew setting of Vethedar :


Vaeles : As close to a metropolis as you'll find in Vethedar. The major Human city, and the largest on the continent. Patron deities are the Twins, one an Evil tyrant (think Hextor), the other the "provider and life" deity (think Yondalla, if she borrowed some of Pelor's healing). The "Hextor" type is decidedly dominant, but his most extreme aspects are balanced by his sister's presence.

Things are very strict, legally. The laws themselves are much akin to what you might expect to see in real life, but the punishments are worse. Violent offenders, after being given a fair trial and proven beyond a doubt (by magic, if need be) to be guilty, are given capital punishment. Non-violent offenders are sent to state-approved "rehabilitation" farms, set to work the fields almost like slave labor, earning untrained wages per day until it equals the value of whatever they stole.

I may also include a point-form list of important NPCs they know, and a couple important locations, and MAYBE a map. But that's it. If it takes more than a skim to get the important details, you're wasting your time. That blurb tells you enough to get a starting idea of what life in Vaeles is like; Strict, busy, with multiple religious stances. As for the point form, it would be little more than a name, role, and two to three word description. Alundra, Adventurer's Guild head, crass but easygoing. Tranquility Inn, inn/tavern, peaceful and cozy.

If they want to know more, let them ask. Other than that, remember the rule of games is "Show, Don't Tell".

Devils_Advocate
2009-05-27, 04:53 PM
@kamikasei: Well, sure. Obviously a certain amount of setting information is needed in order to make a character, which you obviously need to have before you can start finding things out in-game.

We're talking about what and how much information to give beyond the minimum needed for character creation, and how best to give it. I think.

Rensvind
2009-05-27, 07:14 PM
In our group, it's me and the DM who are in charge of creating the world, but we made it easy for ourselves:

In the middle of the continent, is the great country of Riesenland, ruled by a great Emperor.
To the west, we have the country of Rouen, known for it's knights and chivalry.
To the west of Rouen lies Archipelagia, a lawless bunch of islands, filled with pirates and rastafarians.
To the north lies the country of Thule, with big, bearded warriors running around in the snow and mountains, worshipping their old gods when not plundering the rest of the world.
To the east of Riesenland lies the country of Helvetia, a small country, with a history for neutrality, and they guard the mountain passes wich separates these countries from the Badlands, an inhospitable steppe filled with orcs.
To the south lies Vaticania, the religious centre of this part of the world.
South of Vaticania, beoynd the great sea, lies the desert land of Dune, known for the dangerous heat, old temples, mummies, flying carpets and the like, a very rich country.
To the south east lies the old imperium of Byzantia, once rulers of the whole known world, now way past the peak of it's rule.

That's about it in our world:smallwink:

kamikasei
2009-05-28, 02:43 AM
We're talking about what and how much information to give beyond the minimum needed for character creation, and how best to give it. I think.

My impression from the OP was that it's exactly the problem of telling the players what they need to know to create and play their characters that's at issue:


I mean, it's all very well and fine to say "OK, you're an elf, so you're probably from the Eid Confederacy" but that doesn't do the player much good unless he knows what an Eid Confederacy is. It feels wrong (and I believe it's one of the usual "DM of the Rings" mistakes) to give each player a stack of backstory notes. On the other hand, I don't want to be sitting there trying to quickly summarize a nation in 30 seconds of explanation, (20 of which will be "um, it's like, you know, the... um).