World-building Sinchronicity

[Penguin_God]

I'm having a strange trend lately. Things that I designed in my setting, even (RL) months and (in-game) continents apart, are fitting quite naturally, without my intervention. I value cohesiveness the most, and my partners are pleased with my work, but it's happening whether I want it or not!

Did this happens with any of you? It's weird...

[Tovec]

I'm not sure I follow exactly. But hopefully this helps..?

I've had times where elements of a setting crystallize and suddenly make sense. I recently had experienced one of these moments when I figured out how to redefine three aspects of my setting and create two but with a much stronger but also stranger whole.

In game, not so much in setting, I have times where elements like plots or characters will suddenly reappear at perfect opportunities. Where I had never realized when setting something up that a pay off was coming. In one campaign that meant when a perfect moment when the party was attacked by an old enemy (a thieves guild) decided to attack them in a way that really hurt them, but in a perfectly understandable and exactly in game reason. Another time happened most recently but in a different way, where I realized my current game would have three different kinds of assassins that the party will be fighting and allying with.

Are any of these things close to what you mean, if not then my bad.. it is my best guess and I enjoy those moments in either case, so it is fun to share.

[Amblehook]

As DMs, we are completely immersed in our worlds. If we haven't already, we are looking to find connections to give our world or our players meaning. We have a distinct advantage to make it look as though we're better at our jobs than what might otherwise be the case. It becomes easy to tell our players that the book they found but no one bothered to read a few story arcs ago is completely related to what they're going through now (even if the book was just a random piece of treasure to us when we gave it to them).

As a player, I've played in a game where the DM would constantly take events from years before and tie them into current storylines. I always suspected that he took advantage of situations and never really planned to have things fit so well, but he says he's planned those things out. Regardless of whether it was intentional or not, it makes for some great story.

[Alexkubel]

well partly due to my players being addicted to armoured warfare, they always seem to get their hands on a tank, I've used this to get them to do almost anything, from robbery to starting wars, most of the time they go away with their tank or towards their tank, sometimes it comes back to haunt them, sometimes centuries in the world after they started the war.

[Penguin_God]

First, thanks for everyone's answers:


I'm not sure I follow exactly. But hopefully this helps..?

I've had times where elements of a setting crystallize and suddenly make sense. I recently had experienced one of these moments when I figured out how to redefine three aspects of my setting and create two but with a much stronger but also stranger whole.

Are any of these things close to what you mean, if not then my bad.. it is my best guess and I enjoy those moments in either case, so it is fun to share.

The last case was like this: I had a ancient race that rebelled against the main deity, for the rebellion was essential for the current setting era. Then I had the idea of exploring classical determinism to provide for a more nuanced balance of "right" and "wrong"*. But doing so, in the metaplotline, the ancient rebellion became impossible. Then, I reread some notes, and notice that an idea I wanted to explore, noted some months ago, fits the situation perfectly, giving the ancients both the means and reasons to pursue their rebellion while giving me an excuse to explore the concept of topological defects**. The whole thing almost wrote itself, took like one hour at most.

I'm baffled because I assumed that, as I fill the blanks, there would be less liberty to be creative.

*The result? The intervention of the "big bad" lovecraftain abominations is that which created true free will. It makes sense in context.

**And the way the thing is done convinced my partners, so I'm (probably) not crazy/biased, because they don't like when I mix these concepts.


As DMs, we are completely immersed in our worlds. If we haven't already, we are looking to find connections to give our world or our players meaning. We have a distinct advantage to make it look as though we're better at our jobs than what might otherwise be the case. It becomes easy to tell our players that the book they found but no one bothered to read a few story arcs ago is completely related to what they're going through now (even if the book was just a random piece of treasure to us when we gave it to them).

As a player, I've played in a game where the DM would constantly take events from years before and tie them into current storylines. I always suspected that he took advantage of situations and never really planned to have things fit so well, but he says he's planned those things out. Regardless of whether it was intentional or not, it makes for some great story.

I'm sorry I didn't explain, I'm not a DM. I'm the main player and co-author of the campaign, and senior architect of the setting. My GM said things like you, about the way you guys build stuff and the players miss it, and sometimes things connect without intentional design. But he's a GM for two decades now, and even he's impressed...And we're talking about a guy who crafted a "metacampaign" for the last X years.


well partly due to my players being addicted to armoured warfare, they always seem to get their hands on a tank, I've used this to get them to do almost anything, from robbery to starting wars, most of the time they go away with their tank or towards their tank, sometimes it comes back to haunt them, sometimes centuries in the world after they started the war.

I'm thinking about the possibility of introducing an equivalent of a tank in the setting, could you give me the pros/cons of it, campaign-wise? Do you tanks make the GM's job harder or no? Possible mechanisms to restrict its use, etc?

Please?

[Tovec]

The last case was like this: I had a ancient race that rebelled against the main deity, for the rebellion was essential for the current setting era. Then I had the idea of exploring classical determinism to provide for a more nuanced balance of "right" and "wrong"*. But doing so, in the metaplotline, the ancient rebellion became impossible. Then, I reread some notes, and notice that an idea I wanted to explore, noted some months ago, fits the situation perfectly, giving the ancients both the means and reasons to pursue their rebellion while giving me an excuse to explore the concept of topological defects**. The whole thing almost wrote itself, took like one hour at most.
Yeah, I've had this kind happen a few times lately actually. Really oddly.

The party met a giant demon locked in a cavern that a witch was trying to bind to her will. At the time I just gave some random roleplaying about who/what he was and let it be. However, lately I've been working on a new setting/cosmology, especially in relation to outsiders and gods, and while I had an idea of what his race was BEFORE and why he was locked up where he was I have a new appreciation and idea how to use him in the future. That has led to this massive demon (like 60 feet tall) being the one who is protecting a PC and giving him prophetic dreams - something I do in campaigns anyway, but now he has a source.


I'm thinking about the possibility of introducing an equivalent of a tank in the setting, could you give me the pros/cons of it, campaign-wise? Do you tanks make the GM's job harder or no? Possible mechanisms to restrict its use, etc?

Whatever you do, do not allow someone to have a self-reloading, seeking, force ballista. That wrecked a dungeon once, by itself. Though, I realize now how I could have reigned it in - it was a game breaker by itself. I'm assuming a tank would be similar.

[Alexkubel]

Yeah, I've had this kind happen a few times lately actually. Really oddly.

The party met a giant demon locked in a cavern that a witch was trying to bind to her will. At the time I just gave some random roleplaying about who/what he was and let it be. However, lately I've been working on a new setting/cosmology, especially in relation to outsiders and gods, and while I had an idea of what his race was BEFORE and why he was locked up where he was I have a new appreciation and idea how to use him in the future. That has led to this massive demon (like 60 feet tall) being the one who is protecting a PC and giving him prophetic dreams - something I do in campaigns anyway, but now he has a source.



Whatever you do, do not allow someone to have a self-reloading, seeking, force ballista. That wrecked a dungeon once, by itself. Though, I realize now how I could have reigned it in - it was a game breaker by itself. I'm assuming a tank would be similar.

my tips, 1 make it an NPC! if they players want they could take it, but it shouldn't be as bad as starting them in a Panzer IV ausf. F2! there's no real contemporise of a tank, it's either a tank or not a tank, if you want to have the players in it, give them WW1 era vehicle, and have it break down at the most annoying moment(s), you could tie it I later when they find the tank again, a moment that has left my people laughing, driving though Russia in a panther find an abandoned Panzer IV ausf F2. they then realise that's where it broke down in their first campaign. they then decided (as they do often) that they'd take it back to base. and if you want my advice for tanks, make sure it's an actual war, not an simple police, guard or equivalent. for me it isn't hard, but your players need to understand there are weak spots, and these are most easily exploited by small things, not massive monsters (which fall before armoured might far more easily) it's the weak ones that kill tanks, not the dragons.