The campaign setting to end all campaign settings!

[Cyclone231]

You’ve all been there - that setting that looked so good... except that one little flaw that bothered you. Not anything big, mind you, but it was something that was ingrained in there and a real effort to remove. Or maybe it was so good, except the designers forgot to include something important. Or maybe it was so good, except it was half finished, at just the wrong spot to contribute, and probably never going to get all-the-way finished.

Why don’t we do it? A poster-built campaign world would be awesome, a world filled with ideas and gestalts and interconnecting concept that work out better together than they did alone. I mean, a second person makes your setting twice as good, so how much better does twenty-three thousand, four hundred and ninety-one other people make it?

I mean, after all, Keith Baker wasn’t the one who came up with the Warforged. And what would Eberron be like without them? No matter your opinion on the quality of Eberron, the answer is “certainly quite different.”

So let’s do it. Let’s make a setting as a group, a conglamerate.

Our first question is obvious, the question every campaign setting confronts first: What is the key to this setting? How can I describe the setting in such a way as to get the point across clearly?

In Iron Kingdoms, it is “a fantasy world’s industrial revolution”. In Eberron, it is “a fantasy setting combined with elements from the pulps”.

This doesn’t say everything about the setting by any means - I mean, “a fantasy world’s industrial revolution” doesn’t tell you that Iron Kingdoms is henotheistic with dualistic elements, about the Menoth Protectorate, about Cryx, or about the invaders from across the sea who worshipped their dark gods in ancient days and caused Thamar to give mankind arcane magic. “A fantasy setting combined with elements from the pulps” doesn’t tell you that the gods might or might not exist, that the fantasy equivalent of WW1 just ended, or about the Mourning. And there’s far, far more to both those settings than those things.

So let’s do it. What do we want to do with the setting - that hasn’t been done (or at least, done well and done well-known) before? Okay, wow, located my “fifty-four thing that happened seeds”. Peruse them, see if you get any ideas.
1 Old Nation Becomes An Empire
2 Reformation of an Empire
3 Secession from an Empire
4 Failed Secession from an Empire
5 Dissolution of an Empire
6 Nation Joins an Empire
7 Significant occupation of a nation by an enemy (rw ex: moorish occupation of spain)
8 Genocide, attempted
9 Genocide, largely successful
10 New Nation
11 Major Cultural Change (rw ex: great awakening)
12 Major Discovery/Innovation (causes social changes) (rw ex: crossbows; industrialization)
13 Major Discovery/Innovation (causes change in military tactics) (rw ex: crossbows; nuclear weapons)
14 Major Discovery/Innovation (causes economic changes) (rw ex: the assembly line)
15 Major Discovery/Innovation (causes religious changes) (rw ex: heliocentricity)
16 Religious War
17 Race War
18 Merging of Two or More Nations
19 Land War
20 Formation of a Federation (ex: articles of confederation)
21 Reformation of a Federation
22 Secession from a Federation
23 Failed Secession from a Federation
24 Dissolution of a Federation
25 Nation Joins a Federation
26 Civil War
27 Reselection of Leadership
28 Reformation of a Nation
29 Plague
30 Major New Law (causes social changes) (rw ex: illegalization of slavery; prohibition)
31 New Moral Philosophy (rw ex: confucianism)
32 New Functional Philosophy (rw ex: the scientific method, romanticism)
33 New Political Philosophy (rw ex: marxism)
34 Colonization
35 New Deity
36 New Religion
37 Death of a Deity
38 Death of a Religion
39 Merging of two Religions
40 Important Bonding of two Deities
41 New Taboo (ex: no bow use on other catholics)
42 Major Cosmological Change (religious) (ex: civil war between deities)
43 Major Cosmological Change (profane) (ex: the plane of fire becomes inaccessible)
44 Increase in Political Power of a Religion
45 Decrease in Political Power of a Religion
46 Successful Invasion
47 Failed Invasion
48 Creation of Notable Site (rw ex: great wall of china)
49 Creation of Religious Site (rw ex: vatican)
50 Population Boom of a Nation
51 Population Decrease of a Nation
52 Change in Theology (rw ex: lutheranism)
53 New Race is Born/Created
54 Extended Conflict (rw ex: hundred years war)Obviously, once we've decided what the major thing about the setting is, the tone will come through naturally. This is just a [Discuss] thread, in terms of Tears of Blood.

[SilverClawShift]

It's an interesting idea, but the question of where to actually start comes to mind. There needs to be a common theme/goal in what the world will be like, and even agreeing on that goal would be tricky.

Afterall, if you don't like the goal (or no one likes your goal), you go start on your own campaign setting. Which is what's happening anyway.

Sooo yeah. The first starting place would be a unifying concept of some kind.

[Cyclone231]

Sooo yeah. The first starting place would be a unifying concept of some kind.I agree completely.

I've got an idea that I think could work: "A fantasy setting that has recently begun an ice age."

Agrarian societies begin to be forced to change their crops (at best), hunter-gatherers find themselves with little food, unique religious consequences (especially considering most fantasy polytheisms are elementally-colored), and the dwarves get the opportunity to be an important, interesting part of the setting.

So, anyone else got any ideas for unifying concepts? Or opinions on my concept?

[Vadin]

What about, instead of the usual Good vs. Evil, it's Chaos vs. Law? The PCs are all Chaotic or Neutral, and the enemies are any non-chaotic alignment (yes, even Good). The reason? The Lawful gods, their names don't matter so we'll say Pelor, Cuthbert, and that evil guy (LG, LN, and LE), decide to enforce some order on the Material Plane.

The players battle against devil and paladin mooks, first taking down a LN BBEG, then a LE one, and then a LG villain. After they've got the forces of order on the run, they head to Mechanus, Law Domination Headquarters, to take down whoever (or whatever) managed to get these forces allied and primed to conquer the multiverse.

Think about it...huge battles between Barbarians and Paladins...the Blood War moves to a major campaign focus with the players clearly on one side. And instead of some King handing out quests, they could be getting orders from Demon Lords and Slaadi. This unconventional set of allies and villains can provide for a lot of unexpected encounters for combat-driven groups, and a lot of excellent RPing (ethical ramifications of too much order, what makes the good guys good and the bad guys bad) for groups more into that.

[SilverClawShift]

I've got an idea that I think could work: "A fantasy setting that has recently begun an ice age."

It's certainly an interesting idea with a lot of potential. Unfortunately, I think a lot of that potential has allready been thoroughly covered by WOTC themselves, in the frostburn book. I don't mean for that to sound snarky, it's certainly not a bad idea, it just raises the question of what the creation of the setting is meant to accomplish.
Is the goal to simply to define a new world? A place with a history and timeline? In that case, what are we accomplishing in defining it that needs to be accomplished? Why use this world instead of, faerun, or eberron, or anywhere else? Prefixing any campaign with "An ice age is coming" will have the same effect.

Please note that I'm trying to be constructive, not negative. These are questions that can have answers, they aren't meant to shoot anything down.

So what's intended to be produced? A books worth of history on racial relations and religions in this world?
Are we looking to produce a world new content can spring up from? New races, classes, ideas, ect? Or just a new world to use existing content in?



What about, instead of the usual Good vs. Evil, it's Chaos vs. Law?

That's actually one of the central thoughts behind my groups dustlands campaign. The world is meant to be less about good and evil, and more about law versus chaos.

[Vadin]

Not so much about the rest of the world, but if we want to go in a direction where there are large civilize empires or at least well-established cities, why not have the gnomes run one (either an empire or a series of cities)? They always seem to get the shaft despite their being highly intelligent, hard-working, charismatic, and gifted in the arts of engineering. And as long as these metropolitan policies would shake up the gnomes, why not cast orcs in a new light as well?

What if, as plagues will do, a sickness hit the orc population of the world? With 3/5 of their people gone, the orcs couldn't continue their nomadic raider lifestyles. The gnomes, seeing these powerful warriors as potential allies, offered them a new life. With the orcs somewhat civilized and guarding the grand gnomish cities, the gnomes could focus on other pursuits, both mundane and magical.

A potential step further: One such pursuit was Gnomish Battle Armor. Though the orcs were strong, there were instances were their depleted numbers just weren't enough to quell an alien force seeking gnomish riches. After several such incidents, it was decided that the orcs must be given something to compensate for their previous strength in numbers. After many weeks of work, a suit of armor was crafted through means of engineering prowess and arcane talent. Equipped with powerful suits of Gnomish Battle Armor, the orcs could repel almost any invader. The suit's Antimagic Fists and Battering Arms also laid waste to the occasional magical beast or rogue golem that threatened the orcs' newfound tranquility.

The first paragraph is a broader idea being put forth. Think of the gnomes as a people not unlike the Persians (minus the endless conquest, of course. The gnomes are really quite happy ruling what they rule now and see no real reason to expand). The second paragraph is just a thought about how what would usually be seen as a monstrous race can instead be just another group of humanoids, as they aren't in any way really inherently evil. The third paragraph is a look into the level of potential depth that untraditional ideas can achieve. Ideally, that last paragraph would also have some stat blocks for the Battle Armor, orc guards in Battle Armor, and perhaps even a short story from the eyes of someone about to be laid to waste (incapacitated, really. The gnomes do so hate the mess of a bloody body) by a well-equipped guard.

Seconding Shift, here. What level of depth are we looking at, do we just want fluff, how much crunch can it handle, and just how out of the box are we willing to go ("dwarves aren't Scottish" or "elves are all Kuo-Toa illusionists ruled by a council of warforged druids")?

[Carrion_Humanoid]

Or perhaps, the gnomes HAVE tried to take over alot of land, but they were reppelled by another nations, say the Kolbolds? That would also explain the gnome vs. kolbold relationships they have. Plus that would allow the Kolbolds <3's around here to have some Gnome killing fun!

[Cyclone231]

It's certainly an interesting idea with a lot of potential. Unfortunately, I think a lot of that potential has allready been thoroughly covered by WOTC themselves, in the frostburn book. I don't mean for that to sound snarky, it's certainly not a bad idea, it just raises the question of what the creation of the setting is meant to accomplish.Really? I thought Frostburn was just a book about dying of frostburn and stuff, you know, a list of all the terrible things that could happen to you in the middle of Antarctica and the game mechanics that come with them. Also cold-themed prestige classes and races and monsters and feats.

Is the goal to simply to define a new world? A place with a history and timeline? In that case, what are we accomplishing in defining it that needs to be accomplished? Why use this world instead of, faerun, or eberron, or anywhere else? Prefixing any campaign with "An ice age is coming" will have the same effect. I tend to think of this sort of thing in terms of the big, sweeping changes that they make, so it would be rather distinct from the worlds of Eberron, Faerun, and such, if only by virtue of the effects that the new ice age has upon civilization. But on the other hand, an ice age makes things happen, but it isn't a flavor other than "oh no, we're starving!" So, to add a unique flavor... Perhaps an emphasis on the interaction between the old factions and religions and the new factions and religions? Maybe an increased focus on fratricidal cultures?

So what's intended to be produced? A books worth of history on racial relations and religions in this world?
Are we looking to produce a world new content can spring up from? New races, classes, ideas, ect? Or just a new world to use existing content in?I think I see your point here. How much of the world will be fabricated from whole cloth, right? Well, while it's certainly an important question, I think that, in this context, it sort of needs to be sat on for a while. We don't have any particular reason to do either until we have an idea of the foundation. I mean, if we were Wizards of the Coast, the answer would be "everything has a place in the world", but we aren't Wizards of the Coast and we don't necessarily want to encourage people to buy all the 3.x or 4.0 supplements they can get their hands on.

[Vadin]

But why do gnomes and kobolds have to hate each other?

Where do assumptions based on previous and/or outside gaming lore (other than inherently racial things like dwarves=tough, elves=smart) fit into a new campaign setting? Is there a feud between devils and demons? Are there multiple pantheons of gods, two deities that embody opposing extremes, or is there one all-powerful being who refuses to interfere with the lives of mortals? I guess the question is: Does this world change to fit people's predetermined ideas about the fantasy genre, or are people presented with a world largely independent of an inexplicable need for setting elements to fit into stereotypical boxes?

Perhaps we should start with determining a campaign hook and working out specifics from there?

For example: After the <dramatic event>, the magic broke; the casters could still cast, certainly, but its been 30 years-why haven't any new powerful mages appeared? (No new magic users with full casting. 1/2 casting and 2/3 casting are fine, though. Probably incorporates several alternative homebrew casting systems, all pretty different.)

Or: The monsters stopped being monsters. Sort of. It all started when an aberration berated a group of adventurers for barging into its home and trying to murder it. After that, more and more reports of beasts acting in mysterious ways came flooding in. No longer all black dragons evil, and it isn't uncommon to hear of bugbears taking jobs as accountants and record-keepers. (No more alignment restrictions on monsters. Also, anything with less than 8 or 6 in any mental stat that isn't of the animal type instead has 3d6 for mental scores like any other intelligent race.)

[EDIT]Wow, apparently I just spent half an hour typing a post...

[levi]

Aw shucks, with a topic title like that I was so sure this thread was going to be about Tears of Blood, Iron Kingdoms, or The Archipelago. But seriously, what's whith the hyperbol?

Honestly, I think what a campaign setting needs is inspiration that causes it to be something different from the usual fantasy norms. Anyone can rip off Tolkien and his imatators, it happens every day, but what's the point.

All the above mentioned campaign settings, the few others I really like, and those of my own creation have one thing in common. They aren't the same old song and dance. Thats the one thing in my view that makes a campaign setting worth the effort, money, time, etc.

I have a number of settings of my own and am colaborating on some others (including Tears of Blood), so a campaign world has to have something really special going for it to draw me away from my own projects.

Even the much praised Ebberon was too generic for my tastes. I liked some bits of it, but I'll proably never run a game set there. I did, however, decide it'd make for a great spelljammer port.

So the question any world building project has to ask itself is "What are we gonna do that hasn't been done too death?" Practiacally everything has been done before and most things have been overdone. The key to making it worth your while is to find something original, creative, awe inspiring, etc. and run with it.

Whatever you do, don't use generic DnD, Tolkien, or similar settings as a starting point. "Go out on a limb or you'll never reach the fruit."

[Cyclone231]

But seriously, what's whith the hyperbol?

[. . .]

I have a number of settings of my own and am colaborating on some others (including Tears of Blood), so a campaign world has to have something really special going for it to draw me away from my own projects.Know thyself (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12308&highlight=discuss).

[SilverClawShift]

Really? I thought Frostburn was just a book about dying of frostburn and stuff, you know, a list of all the terrible things that could happen to you in the middle of Antarctica and the game mechanics that come with them. Also cold-themed prestige classes and races and monsters and feats.

Oops.

I didn't mean to sound hostile.

The thing is, I think of any new content (homebrew or not) in the frame of 'what purpose is this content serving'.
"If it were a book, what would its title be?" Even if it were just a magazine article, what would THAT title be. And so on. The flavor and fluff of Eberron, for example, worked with its mechanics to naturally lead to new content. A new base class (artificers) were made necessary by a mage-industry world. New races popped up in combination with the worlds history (warforged, shifters).

Now, I don't mean to imply that a new world HAS to have new mechanical content, far from it. But one does have to keep in mind the game aspect of any content creation, homebrew or professional. What impact does this world serve in context of rolling the dice and playing the game? Is it really a brand spanking new world, a realm so to speak? Or is it just a new take on existing content (more fluff heavy, as the task at hand turns into an explenation of the world, and how that world works). Both are good, but a clear goal helps avoid a lot of spinning in circles trying to decide what to do next.

When I say that a lot of it is covered by frostburn, I mean that a lot of questions that arise when creating a world enterting an ice age get answered by cracking open the frostburn book. What races thrive here? Dwarfs, neaderthals, people with the constitution and durability to march through the snow. What kind of paladin order arises when you live on an iceberg? Knights of the Iron Glacier. It's got everything from mundane equipment like ice axes, to magical materials like blue ice, and winter domains for clerics and alchemical items for surviving the feirce cold, and snowbound animals and how it interacts with everything else.
I don't mean that the setting (an entire world about to face the crushing glaciers of a millenia long ice age) isn't one ripe with possibilities :smallsmile: . Just that it pulls the concept of world creation strongly in one direction (the socio-political aspects of a world where survival is about to become a question mark for anyone and everyone). Are fire spells suddenly the most sought after and valuable of all arcane magics? Is alchemists fire skyrocketing in price, while kingdoms deplete their treasuries keeping the nobility warm while outraged commoners starve to death outside the castle walls? Is the temperature dropping enough that cave systems are becoming unstable due to water cracking stone throughout the world, forcing normally subterranean races to brave the bitter chill and blinding sun on a blanket of white snow? I imagine gnomes would be a very survivable race here, being naturally hardy (with their +2 Con) and having a natural affinity towards magic and 'gear'.
Heck, you could argue that water shortages become an ironic hazard in some areas, as means of melting the snow and ice become more difficult to find as the temperatures continue to collectively drop, and things with body heat start dropping along with them.
Then there's the question of undeath. Not only the frostfallen undead creatures that arise from the (really horrible way to die) of freezing to death, but who's willing to give up their humanity (or elfmanity. or dwarfmanity) to no longer fear the inevitable heat-death of the world. It's not unreasonable that a world that was slowly succmbing to winters unrelenting grasp would see small groups, towns, or even full blow kingdoms forming of people giving up their warmth just to have no reason to fear losing it.

The world's really a fluff/writing heavy place with less emphasis on vague concepts and more emphasis on historical details. Which is, ultimately, a job better suited for a small group, rather than a community project.

Just my two cents. it's certainly a fascinating idea.

[Cyclone231]

Oops.

I didn't mean to sound hostile.You didn't. If you sounded hostile to me, I'd post something more like this:

"GRR I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU'D SAY THAT, MEANIE! :smallfurious: :smallfurious: :smallfurious: "


"If it were a book, what would its title be?""The XYZ Campagn Setting"? Or am I not understanding the question?


When I say that a lot of it is covered by frostburn, I mean that a lot of questions that arise when creating a world enterting an ice age get answered by cracking open the frostburn book. What races thrive here? Dwarfs, neaderthals, people with the constitution and durability to march through the snow. What kind of paladin order arises when you live on an iceberg? Knights of the Iron Glacier. It's got everything from mundane equipment like ice axes, to magical materials like blue ice, and winter domains for clerics and alchemical items for surviving the feirce cold, and snowbound animals and how it interacts with everything else.Okay, so it is a book that's just a bunch of PrCs and races and rules and such? I thought for a moment it was more specific than that, especially considering that my searches on it found that it apparently included Frostfell, some sort of setting.

The world's really a fluff/writing heavy place with less emphasis on vague concepts and more emphasis on historical details. Which is, ultimately, a job better suited for a small group, rather than a community project.There are lots of vague concepts to consider in any setting. You know, things like what are the cultures, races, religions, social classes, continents, landmarks, deities, important people, et cetera? Where do they stand in the world? How does preparatory arcane magic fit into the setting? Preparatory divine magic? Spontaneous arcane? Psionics? Astrology? Alchemy? Spontaneous divine magic? How do people fight? Where to unarmed warriors learn their techniques - monestaries, or somewhere else? Perhaps these techniques were invented by a brilliant innovator who wanted to create a way of defending one's self while unarmed, or perhaps they're intertwined with the nationalism of a dictatorship.

I mean, there are so many questions to ask in any campaign setting that by the time you've gotten through it all to get down to the history, you're basically done.

[Flame_Drake]

I mean, there are so many questions to ask in any campaign setting that by the time you've gotten through it all to get down to the history, you're basically done.

Then lets give ourselves a historical starting point. Our themes to start with:


Recent Ice Age
Law Vs. Chaos
(pseudo-theme) Gnome-Orc nation


I included the last one for the sake of inclusiveness, it's not going to figure into this brain child of mine.

In order to distinguish this world from any other, we should define some of its conflicts and history. We've already got Law vs Chaos, but lets also add another theme: Fire Vs. Ice. Despite the recent onset of the Ice age, the world has been divide over the elements of Fire and Ice for ages. The conflict is spiritual, meta-physical and philosophical in nature, with Fire being roughly aligned with Chaos and Ice being roughly aligned with Law. Please not that this is a general division, not an absolute one, a Pit Fiend would still be aligned with Fire and a White Dragon is still aligned with Ice, despite the fact that their ethical alignment is the opposite of their elements' general trends.

How does this effect the recent history?

Perhaps it caused this 'Ice Age'. Say about 20 to 100 years ago, a massive war broke out on the main landmass of the plane after it progressed for several years/decades, one of the big bads seized control control of a nation and conquered several others in an attempt to take over the world before most everyone else stopped fighting each other and started fighting him. Eventually he got assassinated, destroyed, otherwise defeated by the good guys and the rest of civilization. While he was in power, he used a lot of dark magic/necromantic spells/unholy powers (TBA) which severely damaged the earth and nature. The druids and wizards of the world decided to put aside their differences to heal the planet. They conducted a worldwide ritual that involved blending the fire and ice magic together to recreate the damaged parts of the world. The spell worked, but something went wrong as it was ending and the ice portion of the ran out of control. The followers of Ice tried to rein it in, but they couldn't so the followers of fire attempted to counter it by strengthening their half of the spell. The result of this was that over the last X years, most of the world was plunged into perpetual winter, while the part of the planet that were naturally hot or connected to fire such as jungles, deserts and volcanoes were made even hotted by the misfired attempt to balance the spell. Despite everything that has happened, most of the nations still hold grudges over their old enemies from the old war.

Thoughts?

Drake

[SofS]

It might be useful to keep more than one end of the creation process in mind while laying out the basic framework of this setting. It's important to think about the big themes, the cosmological reasoning behind events, and the things that one wants to include in the world, as everyone here is doing. I suggest that it might also be good to think on a lower level at the same time. What is life like for a resident of this setting?

This is a world in the grip of an ice age. How much of the world has succumbed? Are there still warm spots around? How does a given person live in a given area? Are racial social structures still in place? How did elves, if they're here, deal with being forced out of their forests? Are the traditionally mountain-dwelling peoples doing fine, or do they have special problems to deal with?

Maybe an isolated tribe of neaderthals or goliaths or adapted humans or other tough creatures has become expansionist now that everything is essentially home turf to them. If so, are people actively resisting them? Who's winning? Did they start to integrate with other cultures instead? Can you play one as a "normal" PC?

Is farming possible? How do people get the necessities of life?

A thought: consider the idea of kingdoms, abandoned under the creeping inevitability of the new age of cold. Sure, people probably took most of their stuff with them when they fled, but there are many valuable things that can't be easily transported. If a city was sacked while the ice was coming, there might still be plenty left under the glaciers. Think of it: endless caves of ice, tunnels where the meanest creatures and the most secretive conspirators dwell and hunt and scheme, and unfathomable riches possibly laying underneath.

Anyway, that's just my opinion. Consider what daily life and average adventures should be like while working with the big stuff as well.

[levi]

Know thyself (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12308&highlight=discuss).

He he he. I don't think I've ever read that thread. Too far back in ancient history (internet time, of course), I guess. The funny thing is, as great as ToB is, one could could hardly say it actually lives up to that title.

It's actually quite specialized in it's tone and theme, making it work well for some sorts of games and really poorly for other sorts. On the other tentacle, a setting that tries to be everything to everyone will fail horribly.

Unfortunatly, I don't have anything really useful to contribute at this time. Anyway, keep up the good work, I'll be interested to see what you come up with.

[Cyclone231]

Then lets give ourselves a historical starting point. Our themes to start with:


Recent Ice Age
Law Vs. Chaos
(pseudo-theme) Gnome-Orc nation
Well, we haven't really decided on any of those. Personally, I would really appreciate some more ideas to choose from.

So, hmm, what are some important things that could be foundations of a world.

"Anti-aristocrats or anti-monarchist succeed in a bloody revolution". If it happened very recently, it's an interesting nation.

But if it happened a few decades ago? The downtrodden in other countries, seeing that one nation succeeded in overthrowing it's rotten rulers, may take up arms to fight against their rulers. The surviving monarchies are colored in a very different light, paranoid about uprisings as they are. And the role and vision of the crossbow as a symbol of freedom and revolution: what if the peasents in another world learned how to use it properly? It could easily become the tool of such revolutionaries, seeing as it takes little training to use properly.

Or perhaps a similar revolutionary movement, more closely resembling a different real-world ideology, such as anarchism or communism, succeeds. A typical "pseudo-medieval pseudo-europe" which borders the Soviets will certainly be a very different nation for it.

Another idea - "all of the good races' gods die/disappear suddenly". The church crumbles to pieces, and "good" civilization restructures itself entirely, either as secular nations or using variants on the evil races' gods. Alternatively, in a monopantheon world, all (or most) of the gods suddenly die/disappear.

At this point in the game, I think that focusing our efforts on coming up with lots of these kind of ideas and then (in another thread?) voting on which ones we like the most is a good idea.

[ArmorArmadillo]

Something that's almost universal in fantasy settings is that the world has been around for a while. Great events happened "In ages past" and the current kingdoms are well established, and often in advanced stages of political decay.

It's often a good device, because it allows you to build plot hooks into the world and allows you to have a lot of history to develop the world with.

But imagine, instead, a world that's new. Think "Fertile Crescent" or "Rise of Rome," where people are just starting to gather together and form the civilizations and cultural identities that will some day become the world as we know it.

A lot of what makes a good campaign settings-and one of the reason Eberron has, for many people, supplanted Greyhawk or Forgotten Realms-is what place the players take in that setting.

Rather than the players being "MacGuffin Questers" whose job is to perform a quest that's not intrinsically connected to the world outside it's own MacGuffitude, the players were given things like the Last War, the wars of the Dreaming Dark, and the Draconic Prophecy that players can not only know about but participate in.


I think it could be a very cool aspect of a setting if the players' main function could be to not only see the world changing, but to actively build the civilization.

[Fiery Justice]

Well, I at least have always taken things from a religious perspective first (because I assume the influence of the religion will be huge):

The types of Pantheons and their effects:
1. Polytheism. I'll come back and edit polytheism later. Maybe. I need time to rest my brain and I was writing polytheism at the end.

2. Monotheism. In a Monotheism (even a finite one, assuming its been around forever) you have the cultural power of the Medieval Vatican or the Chinese Imperial Court, a big central focus around which much of the universe rotates. If the monotheistic god is inactive, then the church may be corrupt or impotent (but it may not, depends), if it is very active, the church may be made entirely of cowed followers afraid of a super powerful being. If its mildly active, the church may be comprised of people there as a matter of policy. Or the above could apply to any of the possible active levels (a god might be very active because its church is corrupt, inactive because it has already cowed everyone or any combination). The tone of a monotheistic church says a lot about the setting.

Of course, one might have a finite monotheistic deity that replaced an earlier pantheon or is a last survivor of an old set, or whatever. They could be the god of things as important as Life, Death, or Magic, or (previously) unimportant things, like Crafts or Peasants. If the new monotheistic deity was once weak but now isn't he may be constantly intervening and mucking about in things, if he is still weak he may be desperately trying to reign the world in, whatever.

Another subset is Pantheism, where the One Deity is everything, inhabits everything, and does everything. Such a deity could be any alignment but regardless inhabits everyone. A world where Pantheism is true looks a lot like Animism on a superficial level, but in its effect on philosophy its quiet opposite. Whereas a Monotheistic church is normally super powerful, a pantheism probably won't even have a church at all. It would simply be taken as fact that everyone was part of everyone else.

3. Ditheism/Bitheism. Different from Dualism, ditheism/bitheism is a religion where there are two deities. Generally speaking, a ditheism has two opposing gods whereas a bitheism has two allied gods.

Now, under ordinary circumstances, a ditheism will inevitably have two churches constantly trying to stamp each other out. While interesting, this doesn't make for a lot of dimension added (because everyone inevitably lines up with the good god). This is slightly better if your ditheism is on a Law/Chaos axis, because there are good people on both side. BUT! In this set up you still have both sides lining each other up for destruction, just with more open morality. Now, if one were to take two opposing "good" forces like say The Material World and The Spirit World. In this scenario, mortals worship both gods, because nobody wants to displease either. Their priests may worship one exclusively, but they are exceptions, not rules. The Material World may have undead and deathless in it, whereas the Spirit World would not.

The Material Vs. Spirit World is an example, the point being that there is a lot more dimension added when the struggle is between two things that mortals like, because nobody dislikes either but its still a ditheism.

Proceeding forward, Bitheism has two friendly deities. Again, the temptation is to make them alignment based (a Lawful God and Chaotic God, in the same place on the Good V. Evil axis. Or shared Lawful V. Chaos axis and different on moral), but one can find a lot of creativity if one is looking. One could have "Feminine and Masculine" gods, both whatever alignment you like. The Feminine god would be prayed to by artisans, most women (duh), healers, caretakers, and governors, whereas the Masculine would be prayed to by smiths, most men (duh), athletes, sages, and warriors. (You could give the Feminine traits to a male deity and vice versa and the point would still stand.)

Or Air and Fire, or Material and Spirit World, or Death and Life, or whatever. The Bitheism is much more interesting when there is a notable difference between the pair but they are still on the same side. Still, a bitheistic church (even one where the gods are pretty different) is gonna look a LOT like a monotheistic church, because everyone will serve the same pair of gods.

4. Animism. Here spirits inhabit too much stuff for any single spirit to be a god, because the power is just too split up. Because of this, individualistic philosophies will be much more common. There is no overriding purpose, just a world in semi-order. Most spirits will not attract singular devotion. One might be dedicated "Weather", which is five or six different spirits (sun spirit, rain spirit, wind spirit, snow spirit, and cloud spirit for example). These may be broken even further down by making local spirits (East Wind, West Wind, South Wind, North Wind for example).

In such a world, nationalism is potentially fragmented, with spirits worshipped making anything larger then city states impossible. Or perhaps the spirits are generally benevolent, and share, allowing for a greater sense of "United in Difference" akin to say, early USA. Still, the homeland will be important is such a world and a lot of stock might be put in where you were born. I'm not as certain here though

5. Atheism. There are no gods (or perhaps there are gods but no mortal to deity or deity to mortal interaction and the gods don't care about mortals at all, same effect, and so I feel no urge to start a new section). This may seem like a simple option, but it is not. A lot of the tone of an atheism will be set by how the atheism came about.

One option is the, "It has always been this way" well then, how did the mortals appear? Perhaps the ambient magic of the world or perhaps the world itself (the world in this situation is mindless, if it is not, thats probably an inactive monotheism) created them magically, instantly but without purpose. If this is the case, then any religion is potentially dismissed as pure nonsense and mortal philosophies (thats another question, is divine magic just an alternative magic craft or do you gain power from your dedication to some cause?) will replace religion, with people following great teachers for any given reason.

Another option is the deism option in this case the questions are philosophical and practical, and two major ones exist, "Why?" and "Does anyone think they are still here/coming back?" Its worth noting that the objects of the latter question may not be untrue on a theoretical level but are useless on a practical level (the gods aren't coming back for ten thousand years/are trapped behind a wall that prevents them from acting/drunk and have a divine hang over they won't be getting over for some time). If the Gods made known that they were leaving and why, mortals might endeavor to fix the problem they pointed out, or they might be content to wait. If the gods just disappeared, then their earlier existence will eventually be questioned. They may be hated and despised or sorely missed. The social effects of such a atheism will be the constant trying to live up to the gods/trying to flip the bird at the gods.

The third option is the deicide option. Someone(s)/something(s), maybe a mortal, maybe a god killed the gods and didn't ascend/remain alive to replace the former gods. If this is the case, then the mortals may hate the killer or honor it immensely. Again, it largely depends on the view of the old gods.

Now for the attitudes:
1. Benevolent. The Gods are generally nice. Its worth noting that it does not matter if they like mortals or not, just if they act like they do. The Gods in this world will try and make the world comfy (in proportion to their activeness level, see farther down). Such a world may have prosperity, and the effects of prosperity should be considered:

Firstly, it makes people fat and lazy. Sloth will be a problem. Inactivity will lead to corruption. One is more likely to face a intrigue game of rooting out corruption in a prosperous world then go dungeon delving.

Secondly, education. Everyone will probably have a handful of knowledge ranks, a craft, and a profession. A higher quantity of experts brings you closer to a modern era faster (even the bronze age one could imagine a theoretical progression where 200 or so years could be pretty close to modern in tech given a sufficient portion.).

Thirdly, government. In a prosperous society, a government may be held more or less accountable. It may be completely corrupt and corpulent because the people are always happy. Or it may be constantly scrutinized because the citizens have nothing to do with their time.

1. Malevolent. The Gods are mean. They try to hurt and hamper (in proportion to their activeness) mortals. The effects are probably as follows.

Firstly, paranoia. Mortals know the gods are out to get them and any action may ignite their wrath. They are very cautious in dealing with others, for fear they may be servants of the foe gods. They are not often trusting, they are always fighting for their own survival.

Secondly, poverty. Mortals are hungry, hurt, and in serious need of stuff, to appease the gods, clothes themselves and their families they might go to any lengths.

Thirdly, brotherhood. The oppressed join together and gain strength in unity. Afraid and angry, mortals will rally around anyone who claims to be bringing salvation for their dark world.

3. Uncaring. The gods don't care about mortals. You might say, "so they don't act"? Not for sure. One can easily imagine Odin wandering the world gaining knowledge, seeking out mysteries, and affecting the world with no regard to the effects on mortals. Those effects may include

Firstly, interest. Mortals may take an extreme interest in whatever interest the gods. They may spend their whole life trying to gain pieces of it to give to the gods. This may lead to a lot of ambition and cut throating or greater unity in helping the gods.

Secondly, stagnation. Its possible that areas outside of a deity's interest, or even inside it (if no one passes the information on to other mortals) may lag and die, slowing progress and learning (unless those are a deity's interest). If this is happens then one may find spectacular magic in a world where people are still knapping stones.

The activity levels:
0. Total Inaction. This is deism, refer to atheism.
1. Very inactive. The gods would only intervene to stop the destruction of the world or similar. The gods may care but stay out by general agreement. In this case, many will not worship the gods because the gods don't do jack for anybody.
2. Decently inactive. The gods are distant, but not completely unacting, and may intervene to stop a truly horrible war or cause one but not in the day to day rising and falling of kingdoms.
3. Mildly active. The gods are messing with major issues, causing or curing plagues, starting and stopping wars, and always giving warnings of the future. Depending on how forceful the intervention is, quantity may shift.
4. Very Active. The gods intervene and muck in everything. They are constantly, unendingly meddling in everyone else's business and directing the course of the world. If this is the case, "governments" are probably just churches. Theocracy is likely here.
5. Super active. The Gods will come and break your window if they don't like you. Not recommended for games.

Thoughts?

[Lady Tialait]

I've been looking at this and one very fluffy idea I had kinda is blantant theivery..but not realy.

Cities in Glaiers. Mages who work their magic through the Ice. and peaple acuallynot wanting the Ice Age to end. not nessarly Evil. but Tradionalist.

This Makes Dwarfs the badguy. in the extreame. The whole world is changeing. everything .It's best if the world stayed the same for alot of peaple. enless you where going the 'it's gunna be a new ice age' then this is sooo not what you want.

[Flame_Drake]

Well, we haven't really decided on any of those. Personally, I would really appreciate some more ideas to choose from.


Fair enough, its just that no one was suggesting anything else.


But imagine, instead, a world that's new. Think "Fertile Crescent" or "Rise of Rome," where people are just starting to gather together and form the civilizations and cultural identities that will some day become the world as we know it.
I think that's a great idea. I have a similar campaign in the works actually, it's just that the six 'races' of humans are only now coming into contact with each other with the help of Gnomes.

Drake

[MagFlare]

I like the "imminent ice age" idea. It'd help to rationalize why the world is in conflict: as the ice age progresses, the world's habitable area gradually decreases, and races who previously had nothing to do with each other now find themselves camping in each others' backyards. And, as Armor noted, it's neat to put players in a world that's changing.

Other ideas:

Elves aren't arboreal; they're excellent shipwrights, sailors, and traders, and their lifestyle isn't in danger due to deforestation, human encroachment, etc., but because the waterways they've used for thousands of years are freezing over. (The idea that elven civilization isn't in danger at all doesn't even bear thinking about.)

A group of humans, using stolen dwarven mining equipment, dug deep into the earth to find a source of geothermal heat. What they found was an extinct but technologically advanced civilization. Now, armed with unthinkably powerful weapons, they're planning on conquering the world before the ice does.

[Reptilius]

A group of humans, using stolen dwarven mining equipment, dug deep into the earth to find a source of geothermal heat. What they found was an extinct but technologically advanced civilization. Now, armed with unthinkably powerful weapons, they're planning on conquering the world before the ice does.

Very nice, but wouldn't it be a little mean to have this super cool race of ancients that is unplayable? Maybe they're trying to end the ice age, and by extension rule the world. Also, how + why were they trapped? What legends, if any, remained of them?

[Vadin]

Maybe instead of focusing on one specific points of time in the setting's history, we could first work on coming up with some basic assumptions that we want to start with in this setting?

For example, let's look at Final Fantasy's Ivalice. Several FF games take place in Ivalice, and it is (by and large) recognizably the same place, just at wildly different points in the setting's history.

We could have a campaign set at the onset of the Cyclerian Ice Age, or have a campaign set thousands of years earlier shortly after the common races (humans, elves, gnomes, dwarves, etc.) have driven the Phaedrans (now a long lost civilization) and their Arcane Might underground, away from the surface dwellers. Similarly, a campaign set thousands of years after the Ice Age is equally intriguing. Have the Phaedrans, returned to the surface after so long underground, forgiven the other races and integrated into what is now a prosperous and metropolitan society? Or have they instead declared war against those common races who banished them to the Depths, their once mighty powers diminished and the common races' heightened by huge amounts? Better yet, is it the players' jobs to determine the course of events now? Is the future in their hands?

All names used solely as examples, but some reasoning behind the names:

Cyclerian Ice Age: The Ice Age of Cyclone231, obviously made to sound slightly different

Phaedrans: The name of this long lost race is based on the Roman author Phaedrus, the first writer to record in Latin most of the fables that we take for granted now (some of them were in Greek first, of course).

Basically, I think the question I'm trying to ask here is: are we coming up with a setting with a vivid and living history for players to explore at various points, or a campaign setting where the past is unchangeable and decided and the players can only adventure in a set period?

[Cyclone231]

A group of humans, using stolen dwarven mining equipment, dug deep into the earth to find a source of geothermal heat. What they found was an extinct but technologically advanced civilization. Now, armed with unthinkably powerful weapons, they're planning on conquering the world before the ice does.Unthinkably powerful weapons? Why not just give them 19th-century weapons? I mean, god, an infantry armed with revolvers or rifles would just maul, say, 10th-century technology. Even with arcane magic. After all, shouldn't it be possible to enchant a revolver?

Basically, I think the question I'm trying to ask here is: are we coming up with a setting with a vivid and living history for players to explore at various points, or a campaign setting where the past is unchangeable and decided and the players can only adventure in a set period?An interesting question. But let me reply with good old Rule 0: DM decides everything.

I mean, even in an Eberron campaign, where it specifically says that 998 YK is the present day, there are games set in the Last War, and probably those that take place in other times too. Why not give a couple pages of history in the book for a DM to develop if he wants, and perhaps have supplements on the subject of important periods which are both important to these hypothetical DMs and to the modern era as well? I mean, an Eberron book titled, say, "The Last War" would still be useful for a campaign set in Sharn circa 998 YK.

Perhaps simply supplying a more well-developed timeline than that of ECS would be sufficient to assist those who want to set their campaign dozens or hundreds or thousands of years prior to the "preset" timeline.

One option is the, "It has always been this way" well then, how did the mortals appear? Perhaps the ambient magic of the world or perhaps the world itself (the world in this situation is mindless, if it is not, thats probably an inactive monotheism) created them magically, instantly but without purpose. If this is the case, then any religion is potentially dismissed as pure nonsense and mortal philosophies (thats another question, is divine magic just an alternative magic craft or do you gain power from your dedication to some cause?) will replace religion, with people following great teachers for any given reason.Man, I really like this idea. Rather than being a "Skeletorist" or a "Thorist", you're a "humanist" or a "determinist" or a "existentialist" or a "pragmatist" (only with made-up names).

Just felt like saying that, since you know, nobody else responded to you :smallfrown: .

[MagFlare]

Very nice, but wouldn't it be a little mean to have this super cool race of ancients that is unplayable? Maybe they're trying to end the ice age, and by extension rule the world. Also, how + why were they trapped? What legends, if any, remained of them?

I may have been unclear. What I was thinking - and of course this is totally open for discussion - is that the advanced civilization (the campaign setting's equivalent of the Underdark, maybe) is long gone, possibly having bombed itself into oblivion, and that the human heat-miners simply discover their subterranean cities full of mysterious artefacts.


Unthinkably powerful weapons? Why not just give them 19th-century weapons? I mean, god, an infantry armed with revolvers or rifles would just maul, say, 10th-century technology. Even with arcane magic. After all, shouldn't it be possible to enchant a revolver?

Actually, I was sort of thinking of steam power when I suggested unthinkably powerful weapons, but maybe steam power applied toward ridiculous ends - giant tanks, powered armor, that sort of thing.

Oh, hey: additional, unrelated thought.

The ice age isn't a natural part of the planet's cycle, but rather the result of long-term magic use. Maybe not even magic can violate the second law of thermodynamics, and thousands of years' worth of spellcasting has actually drained the world of energy. Attempts to fight the cold with traditional magic only exacerbates the problem. However, a certain sect of wizards claims to have found a solution in the form of "balanced thaumaturgy," a new magical philosophy which declares that there's no such thing as a free spell, that each fireball must be counterbalanced by a corresponding cone of cold elsewhere, and that a cure spell causes irreparable harm unless an inflict spell is also cast.

Hmm. Now that I write it out, it doesn't seem that clever, but I still submit it before the forum in the spirit of brainstorming.

[Istari]

We could do a world ruled by a race besides humens. All of the elven sub races could have banded together to take over the world. They had control peacfully for a time but then they couldn't decide who did the most work in the the war and rightfully got to rule it so they all started fighting for control.

The PC's could either be non-elven races or a traditional mixed elf with a reletive almost from every part of the world. They could be hired by one of the contries as spies to help in the war effort.

Critism Appriciated.

[Fuum Bango]

I've been wanting to do something with this idea for ages, care to take it?

The Myth of Dwarves

The dwarves once lived in a world of perfection created by their god.
The begun to mine upwards as they found treasures like iron, gold and diamonds.
The god didn't mind at first, but their greed drove them to mine more and more, until the dwarves left the perfect world and found themselves on the sides of cold mountains.
In sadness and anger the god sealed the tunnels they had dug with a new, tough rock called granite.
Since then they have mined downwards, giving any treasure they find to the humans...but many succumb to the maddening greed.

The basic idea is the dwarves appear ordinary enough...but truely believe this is a false world and have beliefs that differ from everybody else.


This idea also creates two other:
The humans trade with the dwarves, they gain a hell of a lot of wealth but give very little in return. This makes them quite the power across the land.
Dwarves also consider humans demons, twisted versions of themselves. They do not share secrets with them or let them in their homes.

[Scythoro]

I new to GITP, but not to Role-Playing or D&D. Introduction over. One of the reasons I joined this forum was to get idea for my own fantasy world.

To Cyclone: I like this idea, but whether the campaign setting has a flaw in it or not, is opinion. You can't please everyone. In any case, I'm willing to throw as many ideas out there as I can.


We could do a world ruled by a race besides humans. All of the elven sub races could have banded together to take over the world. They had control peacfully for a time but then they couldn't decide who did the most work in the the war and rightfully got to rule it so they all started fighting for control.

The PC's could either be non-elven races or a traditional mixed elf with a reletive almost from every part of the world. They could be hired by one of the contries as spies to help in the war effort.


Interesting idea, 1. Are we working outside the boundaries of the D&D rulebook, because typical elves (not including Drow) would never do that. 2. If so, then perhaps the elves attempt at genocide of the human race was largely successful.
Assuming two: What would cause the the elves to kill off the human race? (Fear, Anger, Precaution, Prophecy?)

[Fuum Bango]

I think having elves rule the land could be a interesting thing...the phrase Greater Good comes to mind.
They could treat the other races as animals, giving them land to live on but attacking whenever they try to expand. To a elf, a wolf and a human are on the same social level.
Perhaps we could also keep them chaotic good, but make them more choatic.

The usual setting rarely make use of their alignment, you could have elves that are not patient, elves that are not noble but rough, cunning and always on the move. The word Wild Genius suits them.

[Flame_Drake]

We could do a world ruled by a race besides humens. All of the elven sub races could have banded together to take over the world. They had control peacfully for a time but then they couldn't decide who did the most work in the the war and rightfully got to rule it so they all started fighting for control.

The PC's could either be non-elven races or a traditional mixed elf with a reletive almost from every part of the world. They could be hired by one of the contries as spies to help in the war effort.

Critism Appriciated.

My only suggestion? Drop word subraces. Otherwise it looks great.

Drake

[FlyMolo]

Having read this thread, one idea immediately comes to mind.

There's some upset in the pantheon. The Law-and-Chaos axis suddenly becomes more important, and militant forces of law encroach on the material plane. I'm thinking that a major Lawful Diety and a major Chaotic Diety suddenly got in a fight, and they both try and take control of the material plane.

Lawful Gnomes, aligned with ice and cold and gear, opposed to Chaotic humans or elves or something. Aligned with fire and chaos and such.

World Changes. Gnomish empire is on the move, making everything cold and orderly, and authoritarian. (hey, frozen is orderly) Some kind of God Of Cold grants powers to Gnomish clerics and paladins.

I like the idea of an anarchist rebellion, using clerics of some God Of Fire. Or an opposing nation of Heat and Chaos.

Two new classes immediately come to mind: an Ice Paladin/Cleric, and a Fire Barbarian/Cleric.

One problem is that wizards don't really have a place here.

[Cyclone231]

Okay, the ideas we have so far:

A world ruled by non-humans (elves?).
A world that has begun an ice age.
A world where a revolutionary movement has taken hold.
A world with a central Law vs. Chaos confict
A world where the gods have died/disappeared
A world where civilization has only recently begun.


I have a few functional questions:
• Should we rename this thread? The current title obviously attracts attention, but it's not very descriptive of the contents of the thread.
• Should we start a vote as to which of these ideas we'll use now?
• If so, should we do it in this thread or another?

[Vadin]

Actually, I was sort of thinking of steam power when I suggested unthinkably powerful weapons, but maybe steam power applied toward ridiculous ends - giant tanks, powered armor, that sort of thing.

Actually, the Nazis had plans for things just like that...giant land tanks and such, a battlewagon the size of the Titanic...it wouldn't be entirely unlikely then that an race of steam-powered ancients would have similar devices in the works.

On the topic of naming the thread, perhaps a name like Campaign Setting X?

Also, I'd like to re-ask the question: how willing are we to move away from typical D&D assumptions in designing this new campaign setting? How necessary is it that elves live in trees, dwarves sound Scottish, and orcs be angry?

[Fuum Bango]

Also, I'd like to re-ask the question: how willing are we to move away from typical D&D assumptions in designing this new campaign setting? How necessary is it that elves live in trees, dwarves sound Scottish, and orcs be angry?

I don't plan on being that involved, but come on people, we have to move away from the norms because;
A. We want this to be our own world with our own ideas.
B. We can. We aren't held down by a fanbase or the need to make money from the setting.

[ArmorArmadillo]

Also, I'd like to re-ask the question: how willing are we to move away from typical D&D assumptions in designing this new campaign setting? How necessary is it that elves live in trees, dwarves sound Scottish, and orcs be angry?

I don't plan on being that involved, but come on people, we have to move away from the norms because;
A. We want this to be our own world with our own ideas.
B. We can. We aren't held down by a fanbase or the need to make money from the setting.

We should keep these things only so much as they allow these things to remain recognizable.

If we want to have elves, they should still have pointy ears, be blonde, live for 1000 years, and be somewhat "fey-ish". If we have elves that are entirely different, than it seems like we're arbitrarily keeping a name for no reason.

That said, there's no reason not to have totally new races, rather than retreading the Tolkeinn crew.


That said, Gnomes have always annoyed me. They fill no useful role in the racial heirarchy, they've been "Tiny Pranksters, who are good with random quasi-steampunk technology and illusions." The societal/cultural structure of them seems to lack any reasonable source or definitiveness.

Frankly, that's just ridiculous. When you try to make them "serious", they either don't make sense or don't really bear any relevant similarity to gnomes.

Frankly, I think the ideas about gnomes presented here make for an interesting race, but we should use either an original race or one other than gnomes.

Kobolds would be a good alternative, I think. The idea of a "small" race coming to militaristic power seems to fit better with one that has seemed weak for so long but suddenly comes to its own.

[Vadin]

As an alternative to those silly, fun loving-gnomes, here's an alternatives gnome-esque race. Still small, still wild, but not necessarily pranksters. Without further ado, I present the beginnings of...

The Svin

Stats: +2 Constitution OR +2 Wisdom, -2 Strength, and -2 Charisma. The Svin are tough and observant, but generally weaker and less sociable than other races.

Size: Small. As a Small creature, a Svin gains a +1 size bonus to Armor Class, a +1 size bonus on attack rolls, and a +4 size bonus on Hide checks, but he uses smaller weapons than humans use, and his lifting and carrying limits are three-quarters of those of a Medium character.

Base Speed: 20 ft.

Special: Low-light Vision

Tougher Stuff: A Svin gains a +1 racial bonus on all saves. Evolving from prey has given them a talent for avoiding harm.

Roll With It: Svin gain a +1 natural armor, as they're skin is so rough as to be almost leathery. If the Svin picked the +2 Constiution bonus, he also gains DR 1/- as his skin hardens into a thick protective layer.

Hit The Weak Point: When an opponent is denied a Dexterity bonus to AC because it is flat-footed, the Svin gains a +4 bonus to hit. If the Svin picked the +2 Wisdom bonus, he also gains the ability to ignore 1 point of damage reduction against all targets.

[Fuum Bango]

Gnomes, gnomes, gnomes...a tough one.
I think they could be suited to being sly diplomats and peace-makers, some living in homes carved into hills near the dwarves, some living in the roots of trees near elves, while the rest live with the humans. Unknown to the big three, the gnomes have stopped countless wars between them and often trade information with each other, reguardless of the nation they live in.

That said, are we using the standard races? Are we using sub-races, monsters and other races of DnD? Or are we making our own races, if so, are we using myths as a base or just making them up on the spot?

[Fuum Bango]

Oh, and I tell everybody this, it would be easier, thousands of times easier and you guys might actually finish this project if together the forum makes a country instead of a whole universe.
Think about it, would you rather write up England's history, religions, animals and people or the whole of Earth's history, religions, animals and people?

If you guys narrow it down to a country you can get the chance to write up characters and make maps of places players can actually use. These things never get detailed enough to use if you make a world.

[EldritchExMachina]

I would strongly suggest limiting it to a continent instead. This allows for enough international conflict to make things interesting while limiting the scope of the setting to something accomplishable.

[Cyclone231]

I would strongly suggest limiting it to a continent instead. This allows for enough international conflict to make things interesting while limiting the scope of the setting to something accomplishable.So, what, something like Iron Kingdoms, with pretty much just Western Immoren being described?

[Akal Saris]

You could go for the scope of the Birthright campaign setting (2nd ed. D&D). WoTC detailed one continent briefly, gave vague hints about the existence of another two continents, and put a lot of detail into describing the most populated 1/5th of the main continent (the Southern Coast and the Heartlands).

While I'm on the subject of Birthright, the elves there are thoroughly chaotic, and are infamous for their periodic surges of genocides against humans and goblin-kind (known as the Elven Hunt). A similar envisioning of elvenkind would probably fit very well into this campaign setting. Also, I think Dwarves were supposed to have an Irish/Celtic accent in Birthright, oddly enough =P

[Heliomance]

An alternative idea for a setting - an old, established world, but one where, for one reason or another, magic is a very new development.