PDA

View Full Version : What makes you feel like a setting is worth your time?



Atarax
2021-06-03, 01:23 PM
I realize most of you are probably more DMs than players. But...as a PLAYER, what makes you enjoy a campaign setting? This could apply to video games as well. What makes you feel like this is a world in which you can have fun living out imaginary adventures? (Obviously I'm curious about this for world building reasons, but I posted here because it's more a question about experiences playing in a world, which seems to me like a general rpg question)

Mastikator
2021-06-03, 02:13 PM
It has a clear view of what it is, and more importantly: what it isn't.

Besides that extremely vague answer I like settings that inspire the player with ideas for characters that fit into the setting, and inspires the DM with ideas for campaigns. Having things to do, things that are going on, complications and problems. Things that will get in the players way.

Segev
2021-06-03, 02:13 PM
To a degree, whether a game is running in that setting. I'm not being tongue-in-cheek, here: if there's a game running that I am interested in joining, I will be more interested in learning about the setting. Now, there's a bit of a chicken-and-egg, here, because the setting could be WHY I am interested in the game. But it's not guaranteed to be that cyclical question-begging: I could be interested in the game because a friend is DMing/friends are playing; I could be interested in the game because it's being run in a system I wanted to try out; I could be interested in the game because it's run in a system I want to try a specific build or concept in.

But for the setting itself to hook me, it needs to have a strong hook, itself. I won't say all of these interest me, but as good examples of hooks:

Athas is a desert world with high psionics and magic that destroys the environment, and is about harsh survival choices in a world of mysterious and powerful monsters
Planescape has the City of Doors at its heart, which is a vibrant crossroads with interesting internal philosophy-driven politics and where philosophies literally shape the laws of physics as you galavant across the multiverse
Tomb of Annihilation takes place in Chult, whose hook is local by being an exotic jungle of mixed african and mayan/aztec flavor with dinosaurs and literal dinosaur races in the starting town (this one is interesting because it's a sub-section of the Forgotten Realms, which are fairly generic in their own right)
Birthright has the conceit that the players are all not only royalty, but royalty by right of special magical powers
Eberron has a sandbox of interaction between multiple kingdoms, various twists on classic D&D themes, some unique races of its own, and a few well-developed locales
Sharn, within Eberron, is big enough to be multiple adventures in and of itself; I'm in a campaign that started at level 2 and has gotten to level 6, and we've not even glanced at leaving the city. (This is a good example of one I only got interested in reading about because a friend came up with a campaign he wanted to run in it.)
I have a poorly-developed concept for a setting where civilization is on isolated islands ruled by sorcerers and where wizardry is illegal (they see it as a threat to their power). These islands are surrounded by mists that turn to water at the touch of wood, but otherwise plummet thousands of feet to the ground below. Dwarves live down on the surface below, but most sail from island to island on wooden ships held aloft by the water they transform the mists into.
Rokugan, of Legend of the Five Rings, has "fantasy samurai/Japan/China" as a hook

So, it really depends. A setting can have all sorts of possible hooks. But a strong, solid theme or a really cool element that raises questions and shapes the way people live in the setting will go a long way.

There's nothing wrong with "generic." Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms both do it, and do it well, but have their own unique elements that make them distinct. I would argue that those elements don't hook people into them, specifically, but rather emerge as distinguishing points in how they shape the rest of the setting.

Heck, Game of Thrones provides a setting that could be pretty generic, but would sell based on the rich political intrigue.

Batcathat
2021-06-03, 03:07 PM
I agree with most of what Segev said.

In addition to that, I like a setting that feels well-thought-out and internally consistent. The author can add pretty much whatever element - magic, high tech, super powers, non-humans, almost anything - as long as it feels like an organic part of setting with reasonable consequences. Basically the opposite of how some fantasy worlds are basically medieval Earth (or what the creator think medieval Earth is like) except with wizards and orcs who never really impact the setting in any meaningful ways beyond being villain of the week.

Lalliman
2021-06-03, 03:30 PM
What's important to me about worldbuilding is that it exists to facilitate character-based stories, not as a goal in-and-of-itself. The setting should offer opportunities for player characters to integrate themselves into the world and the narrative. From there, the setting should, to a reasonable extent, lean into the presence of the players, emphasizing the parts that play into their personal narrative and deemphasizing the parts that are irrelevant to them. In extension to that, I think a setting can easily be too unique, too detailed, or too alive, to the point where it becomes a barrier to entry. That last part is probably an unpopular opinion, I bet many people like the worldbuilding to be as unique and detailed and alive as possible, and they're not wrong to want that. But what I want is character-based stories, and I'd like the setting to be only as detailed as it needs to be to facilitate that.

Catullus64
2021-06-03, 03:46 PM
I'm often surprised by the things which can really grab me about a setting as a player, since they're not always the things that I assume are important about a setting when I'm making or adapting one as a DM.

A sense of humor in the setting is surprisingly important, even (perhaps especially) for a setting that aims to take itself seriously or to tell dark stories. Even though I've decried its lack of originality before, I'm amazed by how much I enjoy roleplay in the Warhammer setting because the materials commit so much to a bleakly comical tone, in comparison to the grandiosity and self-seriousness which accompanies so much non-roleplaying Warhammer fluff.

In fantasy roleplaying in particular, which is the majority of the hobby itself, I always want a setting that respects and reflects upon real-world history and myth. These, for me, are the most authentic sources of grandeur and pathos, which I do want to experience in a game. At the same time, I want a setting that also looks unflinchingly at the dark and ugly elements of that same history and myth, and tries to understand them. (This element is one that I go for as a DM as well, but I appreciate greatly when other DMs do it.

I like the sense that the world has life and scope that goes on independent of the actions of the player-controlled characters. I prefer to play as spectators, small characters in the grand drama of a world, with maybe a little part to play. I dislike settings that seem determined to hinge their narrative arc around the actions of the PCs, and I find that doing so is far to often a fault with my own settings. In brief, I want a world that doesn't expect my to be the main character.

There's another quality that I find compelling, but it's rather hard to put into words. The best way I can describe it is the creator's willingness to relinquish control of the setting to the players; or a confidence that the core themes and aesthetics are strong enough to endure and flourish when other creative voices are added.

Pex
2021-06-03, 04:35 PM
Regardless of what I do play, hypothetically, would I have fun in the campaign if I played a Lawful Good human cleric.

When playing Lawful Good I need to know I'll get respect. I will not be bombarded with continuous moral quandaries. I will not be demanded to sacrifice everything - treasure, a reward, a vote, etc. - because as Lawful Good I must put everyone else before me for everything and anything forever. Prominent NPCs exist who share my values and support me.

When playing human I need to know I'm not handicapped. I don't get punished in game play for lack of darkvision. I'm not always suffering bad effects because I lack a resistance or immunity. These are not the same things as demanding never suffering bad effects nor lacking the ability to see in the dark being an obstacle to overcome. I'm not constantly dismissed and ridiculed by non-human NPCs for not having a superior talent or culture as they and having a short life span.

When playing cleric I need to know religious faith is not mocked, especially out of character. It is not necessary for the Church of my faith to be a prominent force in the campaign, but neither is it secretly corrupt to be exposed as a Plot Point. I am not to be forced into being a healbot nor yelled at, especially out of character, for casting a spell or taking an action that is not healing someone. I have no problem with casting healing spells when needed.

NichG
2021-06-03, 06:21 PM
I tend to be drawn to discovery and change as setting elements. There should be fundamental secrets or mysteries or just things that are not known, which can be poked, explored, discovered, etc as part of play. It should also be possible for things to change in fundamental ways (be it a transhumanist thing where the character changes themselves, a societal thing, a technological thing, cosmic order, etc) and that should be accessible as part of play.

The forms of those things should not be overly pre-specified - in engaging with mysteries and changes, there should be an element of expression, not just choice. This is the difference between a setting that is set up ahead of time to have a particular war or industrial revolution, versus one in which there is enough give and potential that you could choose to pursue war or technological advancement or a magical renaissance or founding a new city or whatever.

I also sort of have a pet peeve about settings which are constructed to enforce acceptance of the tragic or terrible. Stuff like the honor system in L5R where conflicting orders could put someone in a double bind where dying beautifully is their best option; or things like Kelemvor's Wall in FR or all the arguments in Dragon Age that the circles and harrowings and so on are necessary - and your characters are expected to approve of that system just annoys me. It's fine to have tragic things as long as there isn't an expectation that PCs should just go with them, but the 'your cultural upbringing says you should approve' bit is a problem for me if enforced at all.

Quertus
2021-06-03, 08:44 PM
Not to be cheeky, but… it being worth my time?

If the GM puts in NPCs, they are worth my time to interact with, have actual personalities, can be interacted with, and are neither just cardboard cutouts, nor plot-point sacrifices to "motivate" the PCs.

If the GM puts in monsters, they are worth my time to interact with, via investigation, diplomacy, combat, dissection, breeding, selling components from, whatever.

If the GM puts in a plot, it is worth my time to interact with, following logical laws, and not just "guess what one answer fits the rails".

If the GM puts in a magical phenomenon, it is worth my time to interact with and investigate. It has actual, discernable causes, and its discovery can be utilized in any reasonable way.

Or, as I usually put it,
If the GM puts flying rocks in the game, I want the GM to already know the underlying mechanics, and for those mechanics to be… hmmm… reasonably interfacable. I want to be able to research it, and utilize it. Maybe I use it to make Shoes of Water Walking, or super skipping stones, or juggling statues, or flying castles. I don't want to find that it's already been Explored, and is the home of the Flying Rock School of Martial Arts, the one and only possible use for this anomaly ever.

And this should go without saying, but no "poisoned pancakes". No "every NPC will betray you". No "connections are only disadvantageous", that leads naturally to orphan murderhobos. No "pants on head" interpretation of PC actions.

And, preferably? Lots of cool things to Discover, lots of cool tools to utilize. Like
An orcish invasion. A lonely Driad. Dungeon mummies who "just came in to get out of the rain". A kidnapped princess. An evil king and his noble vizier. Cabbage migrations. The elemental plane of taffy. Phoenix extinction. A new technique for ascension. Floating rocks. A Wizard war. An underwater portal to the elemental plane of taffy, with invisible, incorporeal guardians. Troll bridges viewed favorably. Sentient bats. Dragonfire legions. The library in the mirror realm. The source of freckles. Suicidal immortals. A beaten dog. An artifact ice cream truck. Contagious visions. A lake of gilding. Mass enslavement of Kaorti for their weapons. Pumpkin-headed zombies spontaneously appearing.

What makes a setting seem worth my time? My temporal investment bearing fruit. My interactions with it being worth my time.

Pauly
2021-06-04, 07:05 AM
For me, in order of importance.
1) A hook that can explain the setting in 2 or 3 sentences to someone who has never heard of it.In addition, you don’t need to be hardcore about the environment to be able to function well in it.
2) Internal consistency. Not everything has to be explained, but it has to be believable in context. The superhero genre is a good example where you really can’t explain satisfactorily the mechanics of how super powers exist, but everyone can get on board with the genre with a bit of hand waving.
3) Relatively equal power levels. This refers to playable races, classes and backgrounds. If I think background X or race Y are interesting I don’t want to be screwed over if I take them for my PC.
4) Flexibility of challenges.if the solution to every problem is a variation on “I hit it with my sword” I will get bored sooner or later.

I’ve been roped into many campaigns over the years by friends in genres i wouldn’t choose myself. So my kist is assuming that I am joining a campaign run by a friend.

Xervous
2021-06-04, 09:05 AM
While humor in the right places is a visible breath of life it’s the more general attitude that a setting portrays. Not all settings are so self acknowledging, with many coming across as dry lists rambled off. That’s not to speak ill of the content of those lists, I’d find one agreeable if I wanted those details off the list. But I’ve seen it with Warhammer, I’ve seen it with Shadowrun, I’ve seen it in Paranoia. I suspect I might see it in VTM (but peoples’ mention of potato dice rules have scared me off). When the setting knows what it’s about and pitches the theme, lightly, in a casual way, there’s a taste of the fun and emotion right there before you go add your own twist.

Demon slayer class Exit (possible advancement).The only entry is “Glorious Death”.

If you hit -BOD overflow in Shadowrun, you’re not dead... instead “your friends will be toasting your memory at your favorite Shadowrunner bar”

You aren’t just chosen by an AI to go do hazardous missions. You’ve been elevated by Your Friend, The Computer to Mandatory Bonus Assignment Fun. Try not to get killed too many times along the way.

On the flip side there are things that may instantly sour a setting for me. Poor handling of assorted classic concepts. The messaging inherent in Dark Sun‘s and Shadowrun’s magic is certainly flavorful but just not something I’d willingly include. Gritty survival not being my thing (for TTRPG) I’ll pass on Dark Sun but engage with parts of Shadowrun because you can easily run a campaign that ignores the nature ties.

Screwy meta plots, obnoxious races or those that otherwise feel like they were tacked on rather than integrated to the setting can be other turn offs. And of course there’s technological or magical oddities breaking from the rest of the setting assumptions and degree of seriousness.

But Burning Hate, lend me your rage if a setting does dragons poorly.

Segev
2021-06-04, 11:02 AM
But Burning Hate, lend me your rage if a setting does dragons poorly.

Setting pitch: literally everything in the setting is dragons. The humans? Shapeshifted dragons. The elves? Half-dragon, half-human (who are shapeshifted dragons) hybrids. The trees? wooden dragons. The furniture? Dragons crawling over each other and holding poses. The air you're breathing? Molecule-sized dragons.

Xervous
2021-06-04, 11:25 AM
Setting pitch: literally everything in the setting is dragons. The humans? Shapeshifted dragons. The elves? Half-dragon, half-human (who are shapeshifted dragons) hybrids. The trees? wooden dragons. The furniture? Dragons crawling over each other and holding poses. The air you're breathing? Molecule-sized dragons.

Ah yes, the Andalusian serpent basket. Though this one has a very low capacity. You haven’t been overfeeding them have you?

I wonder, do they have furniture giveaways after the couch gets pregnant?

Segev
2021-06-04, 12:21 PM
Ah yes, the Andalusian serpent basket. Though this one has a very low capacity. You haven’t been overfeeding them have you?

I wonder, do they have furniture giveaways after the couch gets pregnant?

Depends if the Ottoman Empire is still expanding.

Yora
2021-06-04, 12:34 PM
It has a clear view of what it is, and more importantly: what it isn't.

Yes, that's the primary thing. Strong focus is a requirement to make something interesting. The 27th iteration of generic fantasy mush doesn't offer anything different from all the other mush.

Cluedrew
2021-06-04, 08:02 PM
To be very generic I'm going to stick to structural points, but I will use examples:

Consistency: Knowing what it is and what it isn't kind of thing. I will not say "hook" because while a short description helps it can't carry a lot of weight because it is so short. But I want the feel of the setting to be pretty consistent, also pushing towards the same type of campaign. The setting should know what it is for as well. Actually going back to a hook, Blades in the Dark is "You are a gang of thieves in a haunted city surrounded by lighting. Go do crime." The thieves and crime is what you are doing, the haunted is a major part of the game's feel, but the lighting could be a whole district away. But I leave it in because its actually really important to the game's feel loop because the lighting (actually, what the lighting is keeping out) is why you have to stay and deal with the heat system as consequences for your crime. And there are bunch of things like that. Took the long way around on this one.

Freedom: The PCs need room to act. I could pull a lot examples out for this, basically any game set in a post-apocalypse or frontier area of a prime example of removing the rules to enable the PCs to move around and make decisions with consequences. Admittedly this depends on campaign style a little bit, you can make it work with enough "right place at the right time" stuff but that isn't the type of campaign I enjoy as much so I am less interested in those settings.

Entrance: A place to get started. No matter how interesting a setting is I don't want to have to know everything in it at once. So there should be some way to get started without knowing everything ahead of time. Lancer has a pretty complex setting but to get started you only have to know one thing: You want to be heroes or morally grey? There are two separate organizations the PCs can join that will give them interesting situations and encounters.

Depth: I don't know what else to call this, but the opposite of when you are just starting, as time and experience with the setting grows I want to be able to get more involved. There should people, locations and groups to interact with and (especially as power-levels increase) effect. Sort of as a pay-off for continuing with the setting but also so that things can change, avoids the kill-rats, kill-general, kill-dragon repetition.

Alcore
2021-06-04, 10:29 PM
I think your term "setting" is more broad than mine.
But...as a PLAYER, what makes you enjoy a campaign setting? This could apply to video games as well. That, in a brief overview, gives me everything I need to know to build and ground a character into the setting. As player buyin for a campaign increases future characters will likely be more grounded and characters still alive are expanded upon.

I also enjoy a setting that doesn't go overboard in powerful creatures and regular calamities and other plot holes that make me wonder why anyone is still around.


What makes you feel like this is a world in which you can have fun living out imaginary adventures?All and none; generally...

The DM brings the adventure in the form of a campaign. In a setting I am, instead, thinking; is this a world I would want to be in? If there is not a place I can find that I, personally, would want to live in or could see myself wanting to live in I have little investment in the setting. Most published settings are **** holes two steps away from not existing and only a literal army of heroes across the globe keeps it alive.

In all of Golarion (the main Pathfinder setting) the only place I could conceive of living in is the River Kingdoms as it is Egalitarian enough that I could stomach a lord. It also has few calamities. Only the Stolen Lands and some countryside actually requires a hero.

Middle Earth is bland with a capital B only because their "age of heroes" is pretty much past and being the archtype is the same old stuff redone again and again. Yet I can see myself living in most sections of it without too much trouble (I would seriously miss technology).

Atarax
2021-06-05, 04:33 AM
The 27th iteration of generic fantasy mush doesn't offer anything different from all the other mush.

Is the 27th take on elves or reshuffling of races and roles in the world any more interesting? I totally see your point. Still, I'm asking in an antagonistic way because this is a debate I often have with myself and I wonder what other folks think. Dwarves drive steampunk cars in this setting? Halflings are like regular halflings but ride dinosaurs? I'll have to keep reminding myself to add steampunk cars and dinosaur riding to my (already established) idea of dwarves and halflings. What's left that hasn't been done before? I love world building, but I'm no author. I'm just a guy running games for my friends. Even with a unique setting...don't you ever feel fatigue at having to learn another twist on magic systems and pantheons? Idk. I wonder if necessitating the subversions on top of subversions only serves to bring us around full circle to Greyhawk or Middle Earth. Also, to back that up: "I'm going to be a warlock who gains his power from a pact with a horrific outer presence" "Awesome! Welcome to the party!" "I'm going to play a LG paladin" "You disruptive mother••• you better watch your back!"

Yora
2021-06-05, 04:49 AM
Using old and well established components is not necessarily a bad thing. I believe in my own setting, I can point at 99% of all things and tell you immediately where I copied it from.
But the relevant part is that these elements need to be used in new, or at the very least deliberate ways. The dwarves are withdrawing into their mountains and become reclusive. Why? The elves are going to the West. Why? Dragons are almost all gone. Why? If the only reply to that is a stammered, "Well, in Lord of the Rings...", then that's just bad design. Tolkien came up with these things not as a default for the genre, but because it was relevant to telling a story about the end of the mythic age and the start of our own modern world. If your setting copies old well established tropes of fantasy, do it with purpose. Don't throw in everything you've seen and think is neat. Take those things that contribute to a certain style and tone that you want to accomplish with your setting.

A seperate thing that is important to me for the perception of an interesting setting is that it should have a culture. If it's populated by 21st century Americans pretending to be 19th century Americans in 17th century European costumes, I don't care-

Atarax
2021-06-05, 04:51 AM
Freedom: The PCs need room to act. I could pull a lot examples out for this, basically any game set in a post-apocalypse or frontier area of a prime example of removing the rules to enable the PCs to move around and make decisions with consequences. Admittedly this depends on campaign style a little bit, you can make it work with enough "right place at the right time" stuff but that isn't the type of campaign I enjoy as much so I am less interested in those settings.

This is a big one for me too. I find that plot is what gets in the way of free exploration. I always want enough time to have a look around. It's unfortunate that an engaging story will often commit you and your attention to a smaller bit of the world. Maybe moderation between the two is the key there.

You like to know a little but not have to know everything (I'm too lazy to quote again)? How do you like to find out? Through in game interactions? How do you justify your character, who's lived here their entire life, not already knowing these things?

My players have been playing my game for 5 plus years and still don't know the names of my gods. Yet they always show up and seem to be having fun...

Atarax
2021-06-05, 06:01 AM
I think your term "setting" is more broad than mine....

To my knowledge "campaign setting" has traditionally meant Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Eberron, Krull, Hyborea, ancient Mesopotamia, my homebrew world, Chad's homebrew world...

One campaign takes place in Cyrodil and one takes place in Skyrim. These are both places in the Elder Scrolls setting. Solomnia and Neraka are both places in the Dragonlance setting (ie the world of Krynn).

I absolutely agree with your point about not wanting to start in an area that barely exists because it's always almost being destroyed or completely dependent on heroes. 1. You must save this land from certain doom. 2. There is magical equipment for sale that could drastically help you to save everyone 3. Merchant (who will die if you fail): I can't let this go for a single gold less than that price and that's final!

Alcore
2021-06-05, 07:30 AM
Another point i didn't bring up is; it has to hold up to casual scrutiny.


Which is something published settings fail abysmally at. I get it; they are adventure lands and, as a player, if i want to play in their playground i have to shut my brain off. When someone asks me "why is X here" my answer will likely be "because I said so" but that isn't the problem to me; it is however a red flag. It tells me my setting failed at some level; it failed to hold up to scrutiny...

For example I'll pick on orcs and frost giants;

First up are giants which (in pathfinder) are 15ft tall, about one and a half ton man that lives in snowy mountains. To maintain their frame they need fifteen tons of food every so often. They are found in a place where food is rare on a good day. Known for being destructive and brutal i question the "hunting and raiding" they use to sustain themselves. What do they eat? How to they build and maintain society? How do they build weapons when the heat from the forge melts their face off? How do they keep slaves around for more than a day or two without providing them large amounts of fire?

Notice all the ways the setting, without DM involvement, has failed. Remember that summer to a frost giant is so cold as to prompt fort saves from 99% of anything they enslave that doesn't have the cold descriptor. Since they use their slaves as livestock maybe that is okay.



Now for orcs... done my usual way in my settings...

At all times i use artic orcs found in 3.5 unearth arcana. Instead of darkvision and light blindness they have low light vision. It plugs a nice hole in why orcs are not the most dominant force (as they are not too stupid to not attack at night).

Without darkvision my orcs are hunter gatherers forced up into artic conditions by ever encroaching human empires and heroes. Taming herds of yak they wander around the frozen tundra (which despite popular belief has a lot of green). Clad in leather supplemented with some bone armor and using bone weapons they favor spears, javalins and a variety of clubs. These guys hold up to scrutiny.

Replace the orcs with giants? Still fails suspension of disbelief but I'll give credit to where it is due. He (DM) took the time to care. He is probably satisfied with the answers he provided. He put in the effort for his setting; he will likely put in the effort for a game. Both are worth the time.


Still don't really 'enjoy' a setting though...

Leonard Robel
2021-06-08, 03:27 AM
I like it to feel consistent and realistic, aside from the fantasy element. Just enough like real life that I can believe it could be a place somewhere, and not so dark that it's depressing, unless it's a temporary thing.

RandomNPC
2021-06-16, 07:58 AM
I'll give examples in videogames as I go, because while you can DM Forgotten Realms vastly different from someone else, your Playstation plays the same game an Xbox does.

I enjoy a setting you can describe in a short to mid length paragraph, that becomes much more detailed by adding a few minor spoilers with the permission of the one reading/hearing said description. Bonus if that alone inspires the person to either try the game or turn that in and of itself into a conversation.

Story has to make sense. Are you a bug, fighting invader bugs for the safety of your bug village full of women bugs and children bugs? Cool. Are you a shadow, moving about a 3D world while stuck to 2D surfaces, avoiding things that would break you while you seek the thing you are a shadow of? Nice. Are you a green ball of color trying to stay green while collecting more mass, avoiding red at all costs, while a red ball of color does the same except avoiding you, until one of you is big enough to consume the other without diluting your pigment enough that you lose who you are? Neato! Are you a child, sent by some unnamed voice to stop horrific acts while a perfectly capable authority figure with the power to stop the thing sits by and does nothing? If I wanted trauma I'd still live with my parents.

Characters have to fit. Horizon Zero Dawn fits. You play a motherless outcast in a community that worships motherhood. You were raised by an outcast because even motherless, they couldn't bring themselves to let a baby die. Most NPCs say things about you, because MOTHERLESS until you do something that directly helps them or their community directly, and then they have a personal growth moment. Later the sun worshipers treat you differently, because they have a different set of beliefs and don't care one way or another if you know your mum.

The world has to exist outside the main story. Horizon Zero Dawn has plenty of NPCs you can talk with, and a lot of them mention family or things they enjoy. Dishonored literally starts with you returning from a trip to nearby kingdoms you never see in game, but you know they exist. Control has side quests and sub-missions that have nothing to do with the main plot, and bits of lore you pickup have detailed information on things you never use. My favorite example is the swan boat in Control. The lore says it just launches occupants into the air and it killed a few people before it was taken into protective custody, but at no point is there a super cheesy cut scene where a boss fight ends with the boss windmilling their arms on a ledge just before they fall three stories into the boat and then get launched into some kind of dangerous scenery.

TL:DR

Easy but not one sentence description.
Internal logic throughout.
Characters make sense within the world.
Proof there's an entire world out there while you go on this adventure.

KorvinStarmast
2021-06-16, 08:20 AM
In addition to that, I like a setting that feels well-thought-out and internally consistent. The author can add pretty much whatever element - magic, high tech, super powers, non-humans, almost anything - as long as it feels like an organic part of setting with reasonable consequences. Basically the opposite of how some fantasy worlds are basically medieval Earth (or what the creator thin This, and there being room for the characters to grow into it.

Psyren
2021-06-17, 12:54 PM
What Segev said, but beyond the setting itself I like it if individual regions or countries have hooks also.

For example, Golarion's overall hook is "the gods can't stand each other, but are forced into uneasy mutual cooperation because the planet serves as the padlock on the jailhouse of reality. Too much overt conflict would let something out that has the potential to annihilate everything, so they're forced to act through their churches, other organizations, and individual champions to advance their goals." Similar premise to Order of the Stick in other words, which I also like. But within that world you also get smaller hooks, like "what if devils established an empire on the material plane that is now in decline" and "what if a spaceship crashed into a savage Conan-esque land and a shady group started trying to hoard all the tech" and "what if a powerful sorcerer used propaganda, terror and secret police to convince an entire country to worship him" - etc.

Democratus
2021-06-17, 01:50 PM
A good hook.

Faith that the campaign will last longer than a few sessions.

Trask
2021-06-21, 03:32 PM
Assuming it's a setting that requires significantly more initial investment than "you are in a fantasy world", I value novelty, the exploration of a overlooked niche in the genre, or genre emulation; preferably a genre I am familiar with and enjoy.