PDA

View Full Version : What Do You Want In A Campaign Setting?



Palanan
2014-10-22, 11:41 PM
Completely open-ended question, and I'm expecting a range of tastes and opinions.

What catches your eye in a campaign setting? What draws you in and keeps you there, and what do you find most rewarding about any given setting?

Honest Tiefling
2014-10-22, 11:44 PM
Consistency, flare and immersion. I rather have one theme then trying to cram everything in there. Flare in that the theme is a new take on something, something fresh and different. Immersion in that I want details to feel like I can visualize how people live in there, not have to wonder about mundane but important details like what sort of food crop their society depends on.

Grinner
2014-10-22, 11:58 PM
Coherency, originality, and presentation.

I'm not expecting that everything should be written in accordance with a perfect socioeconomic, meteorological, and geological models, but things should be fairly consistent.

I've already seen elves done fifty different ways. Let me see something else. Let me see something inspired. Let me see the world through new eyes.

And presentation, well, at least run a spell-check. It would also be nice if the notes were clearly and logically laid out. Organization is key here, since I often see writers group all of the character options separated into neat little piles. While this isn't wrong, I don't think it's a very interesting way to present the setting. What I'd like to see is game information being organized along cultural lines, though that may end up being a pain for new players.

BWR
2014-10-23, 01:44 AM
It really depends. Many of the elements I like are important in moderation and the exact amount can vary depending on other elements. I'd much rather have something with flavor and uniqueness than one that is 100% consistent but drab and boring and dull. OTOH, you can go overboard with trying to make something fancy, leaving an incoherent mess of half-hearted ideas and failed stories.


Flavor: there has to be something about the setting that makes it different from stuff I've seen before. If I sit down at a table and get just another Greyhawk or FR- clone, we might as well be playing GH or FR.
Handholds: This ties into the first point, but nothing ruins immersion faster than not being able to get a grip on the setting. There has to be something for me to base my character around. A country, a city, a race, a religious organization. History and setting information is critical for me to enjoy a setting. It seems obvious that if you don't give players information about a setting they won't get a feel for the setting, but some GMs forget this.
I prefer to know a lot about the setting before I make a character, but even if this isn't possible, at least give me a page or two of something to whet my appetite.

Yora
2014-10-23, 02:07 AM
I've recently come to realize the value of settings that keep the information to the essentials and don't flood everything with details that are most likely irrelevant to actual play. Though it's hard to explain why less is more. I guess, it's the difference between a world that is interesting to read about, and material that is effective in giving GMs something to work with. Those things turn out to not actually be the same.

Things I love in settings:
Fantastic and exotic locations: Most settings seem to try to emulate real world landscape and architecture and keep the magic and supernatural to weapons and tools. I like to see environments that match the most extreme forms of Earth landscapes and human constructions or even go a stretch beyond what would be physically possible.
Fictional animals: Usually there's normal animals and fictional monsters, with a pretty clear difference between the two. I always enjoy seing setting in which there are lots of both wild and domestic animals that don't have clear counterparts on earth.
Bronze and Iron Age: Most settings seem to be late medieval to early modern in style, something like 14th to 17th century. I really like early Antiquity and earlier, but there are not a lot settings that do that.
No human dominance: If there are nonhuman cultures and civilizations in a setting, there is no reason why humans should be 50% or more of the total population. There should be two or three other humanoid peoples that exist on a similar scale of people.
Moderate Magic: Most settings I can think of are going with the extrmes: Almost no magic at all or magic everywhere. I like to see settings where magic can be found in most places, but is accessible only to few; who can do real things with it, but don't take over everything just because of that.

Jeff the Green
2014-10-23, 03:48 AM
hings I love in settings:
Fantastic and exotic locations: Most settings seem to try to emulate real world landscape and architecture and keep the magic and supernatural to weapons and tools. I like to see environments that match the most extreme forms of Earth landscapes and human constructions or even go a stretch beyond what would be physically possible.
Fictional animals: Usually there's normal animals and fictional monsters, with a pretty clear difference between the two. I always enjoy seing setting in which there are lots of both wild and domestic animals that don't have clear counterparts on earth.
Bronze and Iron Age: Most settings seem to be late medieval to early modern in style, something like 14th to 17th century. I really like early Antiquity and earlier, but there are not a lot settings that do that.
No human dominance: If there are nonhuman cultures and civilizations in a setting, there is no reason why humans should be 50% or more of the total population. There should be two or three other humanoid peoples that exist on a similar scale of people.
Moderate Magic: Most settings I can think of are going with the extrmes: Almost no magic at all or magic everywhere. I like to see settings where magic can be found in most places, but is accessible only to few; who can do real things with it, but don't take over everything just because of that.

I'll drink to fantastic locations, marvelous animals, and human obscurity. I'm aiming for those in my home setting; hopefully I'm succeeding.

I prefer a sort of anachronism stew and ubitquitous low-level magic/very rare high-level (e.g. the washerwoman is someone who took out a loan to get an item of prestidigitation, but a +5 tome is pretty much an artifact). The anachronism stew comes from the quirks of D&D. When there's divination I expect there to not be things like trial by combat, but when crossbows aren't any better than longbows there should still be platemail. Plus to me the Bronze and Iron ages (and the early medieval) showcase some of the worst attributes of humans and with a few rare examples have precious little of the best.

Bulhakov
2014-10-23, 04:58 AM
Consistency/coherency - the setting must just "work" which is often difficult to achieve without severely limiting many of the supernatural world-breaking powers. All NPCs act in (mostly) rational ways and use the tools at their disposal to achieve their goals. (e.g. if talking to the dead spells are available, you can be pretty sure the police/city watch will hire someone that can cast them)

"Genericness"/flexibility - how many different environments/adventure types can I prepare in the setting (e.g. it should allow for both city and wilderness adventures, various cities could have different type of rule from crime-ridden hell holes to lawful good utopias).

E.g. I never played D&D but I can't imagine playing it in any other form than the Tippyverse, (unless I severly nerfed the magic rules or decided on a very low-magic setting).

prufock
2014-10-23, 07:55 AM
As a DM, creating settings is one of my favourite things to do. I have created a Weird West setting for my group, and I'm working on a pirate-themed archipelago setting and revamping my default D&D setting. I have ideas in mind for a tribal setting, a monster city, an asian-inspired setting, and a kingdoms-at-war type setting. These are the things I try to achieve.

Internal consistency in both theme and atmosphere. Breaking consistency breaks the illusion.

Simplicity. I don't want to have to read up on a textbook's worth of history, politics, and events to be able to play this game.

Uniqueness, or at least enough of a twist to make it interesting.

Self-Containment. I like some limits in a setting. If a setting contains no other planes, extraplanar beings shouldn't exist. A variety of races, but with limits. Unless the setting is by definition completely open-ended (like Planescape), the boundaries should be defined.

FUN! I have very little interest in playing completely grimdark, gritty, realistic games. BOOOOORING.

Novelty. I like it when a setting has some specific alternate rule, or race that doesn't exist in other settings, or a roleplaying aspect that is different from those I've seen before.

Independence. A setting should feel like a world apart from the PCs involvement in it. If you can look at a setting and say "nothing here would matter if not for the PCs," it's probably not independent.

X Factor. That thing that draws you in and keeps you coming back. Can't be defined, that's why it's named with a variable.

Rondodu
2014-10-23, 07:58 AM
Opportunity for discovery: i like to explore and discover new stuff. I especially like when games have me discover new tradition, new societal organisation. This, of course, requires originality and coherence of the setting.

An overarching story: I like to play different scenario which actually are small parts of a bigger scheme. I especially like to discover the big scheme as we advance along the campaign and understand, one year into the campaign, why we saw such powerful NPC from afar three games from the start, and why he was so pissed when he was seen.

Yes, this usually means some kind of railroading, but really, I don’t mind that.

Optional side stories:I like it when the GM scatter little informations around that players might (or might not) want to explore. So you’ve heard about such and such fact? You might want to inquiry. You might discover information that helps you better understand the main plot. But you might also estimate that there are more urgent actions to take towards the main plot and brush it aside. This requires from the GM a great ability to improvise from small story stubs.

Yora
2014-10-23, 08:37 AM
I think a good setting has story hooks, but without giving a definite answer. It's much more interesting to explore a tomb with an imprisoned demon if there is no prewritten answer what kind of demon it is and what exactly it does when the PCs might reach it. More hints are nice, but it should be ultimately left up to GMs.

Palanan
2014-10-24, 08:52 PM
Thanks for the thoughts so far. Let me add one other question here:

How do you size up a setting when you first encounter it? Do you read it cover to cover, or do you zero in on a particular aspect or angle that helps you judge the feel of the setting as a whole?

Or is there something else you look for?




Originally Posted by Honest Tiefling
Immersion in that I want details to feel like I can visualize how people live in there, not have to wonder about mundane but important details like what sort of food crop their society depends on.

Hmm. Do you mean you don't want those mundane details in the setting at all--or you want that kind of detail (presumably out of the way) so you'll have it handy if you need it?

And what sort of details help you with the immersion you're looking for?


Originally Posted by Grinner
Organization is key here, since I often see writers group all of the character options separated into neat little piles…. What I'd like to see is game information being organized along cultural lines, though that may end up being a pain for new players.

So, are you saying you're not fond of seeing, for instance, all the new feats from a setting in a single table labeled Feats? You'd rather each culture be presented with its own particular subset of feats, and so on?

…not sure if I quite understand what you meant by "neat little piles," so an example would be helpful.


Originally Posted by BWR
There has to be something for me to base my character around. A country, a city, a race, a religious organization. History and setting information is critical for me to enjoy a setting.


Originally Posted by Rondodu
i like to explore and discover new stuff. I especially like when games have me discover new tradition, new societal organisation. This, of course, requires originality and coherence of the setting.

These are very helpful from a player's perspective….


Originally Posted by Yora
I've recently come to realize the value of settings that keep the information to the essentials and don't flood everything with details that are most likely irrelevant to actual play. Though it's hard to explain why less is more. I guess, it's the difference between a world that is interesting to read about, and material that is effective in giving GMs something to work with.

…and this from the DM's side.

What sort of information do you consider to be essential? Political, military, geographic?


Originally Posted by prufrock
As a DM, creating settings is one of my favourite things to do.

...Uniqueness, or at least enough of a twist to make it interesting.

That's a great list, thanks.

Can you give an example of twisty uniqueness from a setting you like? Everyone has a different notion of what qualifies as "unique."


Originally Posted by Jeff the Green
The anachronism stew comes from the quirks of D&D. When there's divination I expect there to not be things like trial by combat….

This reminds me of a book I picked up recently, Shades of Milk and Honey, which is a very close rendition of Pride and Prejudice with magic. In that society, glamours are typically woman's work…so I could imagine a warrior culture in which divinations are performed by the women, but for a true verdict you heft your trusty blade.

Honest Tiefling
2014-10-24, 09:33 PM
As in, I want those details. Many people might disagree, but I want to know how they live and how that drives their society. If they happen to be on crap soil for grain and decide to go raid and build colonies elsewhere for instance. And things like, what do these people wear? What do they eat? When do they eat? How are houses laid out, and what sort of furniture is there?

Then again, maybe I have a lot of PCs that break into houses.

Yora
2014-10-25, 03:50 AM
I think the essential information are ll those things that define the style and themes of the world. Who are the power groups, what are their goals, and what are there methods? Where would one find them and in what situations would one encounter them? Also, what are their relationships to each other? It can be quite useful to include descriptions of two or three leaders and a few ordinary members as examples for GMs, what kind of people they are. They can be used in a game as they are, or serve as reference fo the GMs own NPCs. But it's a disservice to GMs to write up the entire leadership and internal organization of the group. It causes unneeded bloat and makes it harder to introduce new things that are tailored for the campaign.
Same with countries, cities, dungeons, and religions. GMs need enough information to have a reference how to populate the world with new things that match the style, and a few finished examples that can be used out of the box as starting points for their own creations.

What GMs need is a stage for their campaigns, a fully developed world is more restrictive than useful.

prufock
2014-10-27, 07:05 AM
Can you give an example of twisty uniqueness from a setting you like? Everyone has a different notion of what qualifies as "unique."

Eberron, for example, introduced Dragonmarks as a manifestation of prophecy, and had the Lightning Rail. If nothing else, mentioning these two things immediately says "EBERRON!" Magic was viewed in this setting in a practical way, and the term "magipunk" comes to mind.

Dark Sun had an entirely different way of viewing magic, having it defile the environment. They created a harsh, brutal wilderness where the elements were a real danger. They changed up how the races are viewed in some significant ways.

Ghostwalk had an undead city where ghosts are commonplace and can inhabit other bodies. Ravenloft was ultra-goth, located on the demiplane of dread, lorded over by the Dark Powers and focused on fear. Planescape was the "city of doors" where you could travel to any plane or demiplane, and had infinite variety. Rokugan used an Asian-inspired feudal society of clans.
Spelljammer was D&D on spaceships. Underdark takes place in the immense caverns underneath the kingdoms with strongly matriarchal and Machiavellian societies of drow.

In my own settings, I usually mess with the religions, races, and environment in similar ways.

Weird West (http://weirdwestdnd.wikidot.com/) is an e6 frontier-type setting, where guns are ubiquitous, dynamite is available, and the Steamhorse links major towns together. There are only 3 planes - material, shadow (which includes negative energy and evil), and ethereal (which includes positive energy and good). The races have different religions, including ancestor worship, animism, and a monotheistic "Highfather." The main forces at play are frontiersmen vs natives (though integration and positive relations exist and are ideal), humanoids vs the environment, lawmen vs outlaws. It's a very "shades of grey" alignment setting. Casinos play a big part too, and casino chips are used as a de facto currency. As an alternate rule, each player gets 2 poker chips at the beginning of a game which can be traded in exchange for drawing a card from the deck, adding the card (or taking a special effect in the case of face cards) to their roll. I also use armor as DR and class defense bonuses.

Milodiah
2014-10-27, 09:38 AM
Personally I just look for something that doesn't seem to spring into existence when the party members hit their starting age, and has just as much imaginary past as imaginary present. I don't expect the level of psychotic detail you get out of a Dwarf Fortress world-gen run, but I hate to see settings whose history can be summed up as either "this one really bad thing happened in the middling-to-recent past, and now we're rebuilding", or worse, "we're at war with Eurasia the orc kingdom, have always been at war with Eurasia the orc kingdom, and will always be at war with Eurasia the orc kingdom".

When I make my settings, I ensure that I can trace back everything that I feel to be relevant; Country A hasn't existed since time immemorial, I jot down revolutions, succession wars, conquests, and all other sorts of social changes. Demographics have changed, economies have changed, etc. etc. Once you do the major things, you can fill in the details just from knowing those major things. It's just like real life, after all; it'd be some hardcore research to tell the history of a specific town, but you could always make some educated guesses like "when the Great Depression hit in '29, this happened" or "in 1945 the influx of returning GIs caused this to happen", etc. etc. If you don't even know your setting's history, then you're certainly going to have fun trying to portray a grizzled war veteran.

"So, where'd you serve?"
"I, uh...the...army."
"Where, though?"
"In...the war. That we had."
"Which one?"
"...the one with the goblins?"

Also, if I don't have enough access to the setting material, or the DM hasn't even made it up, then I refuse to even bother with a backstory. How could I write a detailed backstory if I don't even know if dwarves here have a centralized monarchy or a scattering of independent settlements?