What You Want in a Campaign Setting?

[Joe]

I'm busy working on a project aimed to combine elements of a campaign setting/monster manual/GM guide so I thought to pose these questions to you.

What do you like in a campaign setting?

What do you find you don't like or need?

What would you include that you have not seen in a lot of books?

Is narrative flavor text a plus or would you prefer to spend those pages on stats and crunchy details?

Ok now for my GM Guide questions:
I want to offer valuable page space for GM's.

What sort of stuff in a GM guide would make your game better?

PM me with specifics if you wish.

[Omote]

What do you like in a campaign setting?

General information with certain detailed aspects for flavor. Vanilla settings are a dime-a-dozen, but overly detailed settings run the risk of driving potential players/CKs away.

What do you find you don't like or need?
Excrutiating detail. Dozens of NPCs. Sure, and NPC or two for general flavor to get the CKs creative juices flowing in a particular direction. Meta-plot. Sure, some idea of the direction of the setting is good, but excessive meta-plot only forces the hand of a CK and makes settings less useful.

What would you include that you have not seen in a lot of books?
Landscapes. Vistas. I think one of the lost arts in RPing is describing the setting itself. Different settings should feel different, even if they are of the vanilla variety. Interesting terrain goes a long way to making settings pop in my opinion.

Is narrative flavor text a plus or would you prefer to spend those pages on stats and crunchy details?
Narrative. Little to no crunch. Again, excessive crunch only forces CKs hand in setting development, which most CKs do not seem to want.

Ok now for my GM Guide questions:
What sort of stuff in a GM guide would make your game better?
>Interesting magical effects that are unique to the game, but not overly complex.

>Magic items that drive the flavor of the setting, but doen't rule it (for example, the sword +20 Godkiller that dramatically effects campaigns or the PCs NEVER have a change to get it because it's too powerful anyway. Usless.

>ADVENTURE HOOKS! A list of adventure hooks that can make a setting feel like the way the author intended. Lots of adventure hooks, without being too specific. Or, very short adventures where the DM fills in a lot of the blanks. An adventure outline if you will.

~O

[Breakdaddy]

I'm busy working on a project aimed to combine elements of a campaign setting/monster manual/GM guide so I thought to pose these questions to you.

What do you like in a campaign setting?

What do you find you don't like or need?

What would you include that you have not seen in a lot of books?

Is narrative flavor text a plus or would you prefer to spend those pages on stats and crunchy details?

1. Sandbox-type settings with wide swaths of real estate that dont have much more than a perfunctory background.
2. I dislike too much detail in most of the setting. Some areas should be detailed, but a lot of the setting should be left open-ended for it to appeal to me. I also dislike big overarching plots built in to my prepackaged campaign settings.
3. Off the top of my head, I'd say that well fleshed out encounter tables based on region or terrain type is great to have and it's not something everyone does anymore in their products. I also love to see descriptions of what types of flora and fauna are likely to appear in any given region.
4. I far prefer narrative text with flavorful descriptions to a boatload of crunch.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I'm busy working on a project aimed to combine elements of a campaign setting/monster manual/GM guide so I thought to pose these questions to you.

What do you like in a campaign setting?

What do you find you don't like or need?

What would you include that you have not seen in a lot of books?

Is narrative flavor text a plus or would you prefer to spend those pages on stats and crunchy details?

Ok now for my GM Guide questions:
I want to offer valuable page space for GM's.

What sort of stuff in a GM guide would make your game better?

PM me with specifics if you wish.

First, GREAT THREAD IDEA!

What do I like? Enough flavor text to give you a feel for what's going on in each geographic location, but leaving enough blanks to fill in to engineer a story/plotline of your own. The locations should be fleshed out, a la what EGG did in the original Greyhawk setting. You should know what the major sources of commerce are in all the areas, the general geography and only the most important NPCs.

What don't I like? So much detail that you're hemmed in. It's a different matter if you're the one developing the plotline of a new homebrew, and you're establishing a significant part of the timeline so that you've got something to run with later on (legends & lore for the bards). If you're going to publish it, it's one thing to put some of that timeline into the setting to give a little flavor. It's another to devote 30 pages to it.

What's good that you don't see much? See reference to local commerce etc. The little things that allow you to make each part of the map unique from one another. It's not just about the relative density of dungeon space per hex unit on the grid. Each locale has to have a unique and interesting feel to it, just to make you want to explore different parts of the map.

Flavor text. For me, not so much. I'm tired of reading an RPG book and feeling like I'm looking at the cards from a certain TCG/CCG. It's one thing to put adventure hooks in, but the flavor text just gets in the way of other things that, again, are aimed at making each locale interesting on its own. That being said, though, I'm also not big on crunch unless it's something that makes the setting unique.

GM's book...again, interesting idea. I think this is where you really bring the map to life. What's the weather in each area like? What monsters are prevalent? Are there gangs in the area? Which guilds are the "Big kids on the block?" What religious pantheons are prominent? Who are the big-wig NPCs? Rulers? Guildmasters? Religious prelates? Basically, the GM's book should flesh out the skeleton concepts outlined in the player's guide/atlas.

[mordrene]

Ive been thinking aboutthis and i have come up with an answer......Players.

as of late, life keeps getting in th eway of some good gaming.

[Joe]

I'm busy working on a project aimed to combine elements of a campaign setting/monster manual/GM guide so I thought to pose these questions to you.

What do you like in a campaign setting?

What do you find you don't like or need?

What would you include that you have not seen in a lot of books?

Is narrative flavor text a plus or would you prefer to spend those pages on stats and crunchy details?

1. Sandbox-type settings with wide swaths of real estate that dont have much more than a perfunctory background.
2. I dislike too much detail in most of the setting. Some areas should be detailed, but a lot of the setting should be left open-ended for it to appeal to me. I also dislike big overarching plots built in to my prepackaged campaign settings.

Can you give an example of too much background? I also have an overarching concept but think it lies in the background enough not to be a long "adventure path". So can you give an example of an overarching plot that rubbed you wrong?

3. Off the top of my head, I'd say that well fleshed out encounter tables based on region or terrain type is great to have and it's not something everyone does anymore in their products. I also love to see descriptions of what types of flora and fauna are likely to appear in any given region.

4. I far prefer narrative text with flavorful descriptions to a boatload of crunch.

Ok, at least we on the same page there!

Good stuff guys...keep it coming!

[serleran]

I want a setting that begs to be explored. Not too much detail that I feel I cannot use it but enough to say "I need details." That is a fine line to balance and very few have managed to do it. Even the "emptiness" of the Wilderlands or City-State of the Invincible Overlord sometimes cross the proverbial point and get too convoluted in themselves. Even my own setting does that.

[Joe]

I have heard "convoluted" in my game before.
It was when I was trying to get a bunch of setting infromation to a bunch of players.

I have learned since then that they are more concerned with righting the wrong of who put chocalate in their peanut butter rather than who is the epic evil behind all the trouble and is the source of such evil things as chocolate.
I can give them all kinds of details about the foul beast that shoved chocalate in their peanut butter, but after 2 years of playing, they are still focused on peanuts instead of the everarching epic plot. (Makes it easy for me actually...)
So I have decided to produce an actual campaign setting. That way they at least can read about the epic source of confection even if they still busy themselves with bite sized morsels.

There is a fine line though isn't there. I don't want to be so exclusive you can't mix and match like some classic games with specific "gritty dark" settings that seems only compatible with the game designed around it.
But my tastes are far from Vanilla also. Wher all da pickles at?

I also think "gritty and dark" is almost as overdone as those damn black elves

So don't expect the back of the book to read, "This is a unique gritty dark fantasy setting just like all the other gritty dark fantasy settings but this one is different because it rains all the time." wait a minute...

Anyway, shoot out some concepts you would like to see portrayed in a campaign setting. I am all ears...

[Willy Rat]

I think I'm with Serleran on this one. Enough detail to get things underway and inpire player input, but not so much that the players are railroaded down a finite path. The convoluted plot, no matter how well concieved or written will quickly unravel once the player's get to grips with it.
"No plan survives contact with the enemy"- Von Moltke

Exploration is key to putting the responsibility back on the player's to provide at least their half of the narrative. They need to feel that they must learn more, "what's over the hill / behind the door / in the cave" and then put their character in that situation.

I realize a setting can't "be all things, to all people". So just enough to prime the pump and get things flowing would probably do it for me.

For funky campaign concepts? Well, I'm just a meat-and-taters kind of CK, so my ideas are pretty basic. I like reading history and enjoy "what-if" historical fiction. Thus I tried to tailor my home-brew setting to have elements of late medieval European history with just the names and races changed to protect the innocent.

Good thread, looking for more ideas too.

[Rikitiki]

yeah, way back when I had players they wanted just the basic us .vs them stuff -- bit by bit I could build up the world by repeated interactions with certain NPCs, areas and such.
I think what saved me was after the 3rd D&D game I ever ran (not 3rd Ed. but THIRD actual DMing of a game) - was the player who said, "Hey, I love your games but what if instead of village-to-dungeon-back-to-village, I just wanted to buy a horse and ride North?" End-of-novice-railroading-DM and start of yeah-I-can-make-a-world-bit-by-bit-cause-they-don't-know-what's-out-there so I can make it as we play!
For me, I have a world map so I can drop modules/adventures into their appropriate terrain/climate areas, but not detailed enough to shackle me into placing something in only one place. Once players actually go there/do that, then that castle/temple/ruins/cave/etc. IS there and will be there if they go back. Otherwise, if they don't go beyond that ridge to the south, neither they nor me know what's there -- other than whatever rumours have said...and those could be wrong.
So I don't have to be anal and overworked and focus on minutae or railroad players (eww...I hate that both as CK and player) -- WE create
the world (and campaigns) together, so it's a surprise for all. And FUN!

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Ive been thinking aboutthis and i have come up with an answer......Players.

as of late, life keeps getting in th eway of some good gaming.

HARRUMPH!

[ThrorII]

What do you like in a campaign setting?
Generalities. The World of Greyhawk boxed set, for example: Thirty or more nations, with dozens of land and sea features, special flora, local custom information, and random tables. Each item only had a paragraph or a page each. Plenty of info to create a campaign, but vague enough that 20 DM's could create 20 different campaigns--and all be canon!!

What do you find you don't like or need?
Lots of crunch, and lots of lvl 1-20 campaign arcs.

What would you include that you have not seen in a lot of books?
Special quirks that make the world unique, without completely breaking the rules system. Schools of Magic based on geography or culture, etc.

Is narrative flavor text a plus or would you prefer to spend those pages on stats and crunchy details?
Narrative. Crunch is for cereal. Although I like brief 'generic' npc guides---standard warrior, standard sergeant, standard captain, standard town priest, etc.

[Joe]

Bumping this up fishing for more comments.

I am using a lot of the excellent input so please keep it coming!

[concobar]

Greyhawk.

[Joe]

Concobar, Greyhawk is a great setting but I doubt if you want me to release something called "Just Like Greyhawk...Only Different!" do you?

Traveller will have me tarred and feathered for sure!

What elements in Greyhawk made it so good?

I know we enjoy the classics, but I enjoy a new ride every once in a while too. That new car smell...not being broken down on the side of the road...ahh!

[concobar]

Concobar, Greyhawk is a great setting but I doubt if you want me to release something called "Just Like Greyhawk...Only Different!" do you?

Traveller will have me tarred and feathered for sure!

What elements in Greyhawk made it so good?

I know we enjoy the classics, but I enjoy a new ride every once in a while too. That new car smell...not being broken down on the side of the road...ahh!

Great questions not all easily answered.
No I would not like you to make a greyhawk clone... maybe. consider that I play LL C&C and DD occasionally I am not the guy that would be opposed to a retro-clone. On the contrary I am a huge fan of retro-clone games.

Traveller is a curmudgeon.

The hard question... what made Greyhawk so good? I will try and battle through the mists of nostalgia and give a fair answer but make no promises.
I think the thing I most like about GH is that as a world it is recognizable as a reflection of our own. I like the medieval fantasy setting and despite the fact the GH had some truly over the top magical items it still managed to feel like a low magic setting. I like that the nations in GH felt like places that could have existed.

Maybe I just love GH because it was my first setting.

[REHowardfanatic]

Great questions!
I usually create my own setting or adapt over from another source, such as Hyboria, Camelot, or Middle Earth. I have used only 3 published campaign settings in my time as a DM: Ravenloft, Birthright, and Earthdawn.
These setting offered a rich and detailed history, great sites of adventure, interesting takes on PC races and classes, and compelling villains.

The history motivated politics and nations in logical fashion (okay, so not so much Ravenloft there)- that way I could run intrigue and court adventures if I was in the mood. It also allowed me to pull off cultural strife and friction (Birthright was sweet at that).

The sites offered up places to go- Earthdawn's lost caerns and flying ships were particularly fantastic at this. Earthdawn also had magnificent PC races, well drawn and fleshed out. Each was like an adventure hook of its own. 1st edition AD&D offered up perfect classes- each class could be played from 1st to 20th as a campaign in and of itself, with class abilities and level titles acting as adventure hooks.

Compelling villains- wow this is an overlooked aspect of settings. Ravenloft's Dark Lords, the Monster kings of Birthright, the unforgattable horrors of Earthdawn all offered challenging bad guys beyond the typical dragons, demons, and orc kings.

Ravenloft fell apart due to the metaplot (I want to play my metaplot, not someone else's) and the expansive rule changes needed to run it. Birthright was left to die in obscurity, despite being TSR's strongest setting IMO. Earthdawn just got too large- 20+ books. So one thing I would say a setting needs is brevity and focus. Also, a striking lack of crunch is appreciated. The fewer rules needed to run the setting, the better. Less is almost always more.

What to include that others don't? I'd like maps of towns and ruins, charts for encounters both combat and non-combat, and lots of artwork and fiction capturing the mood and look of the setting.