Yggdrasil's setting is supposed to be rather lightweight. There's a backstory of course, and a map. The most important though, is the provided framework for creating characters, adventures, monsters and such. These decide the "feel" of the world if you're with me so far. I'm trying to figure out what way to do it best.
There are a few strategies to take here but I'm mainly thinking about two:
Leaning towards inflexibility and completenessProvide classes, monsters and spells trying to be as complete as possible. What is provided by the game company is what people are mostly supposed use. Examples: AD&D, Rolemaster
Leaning towards flexibility and incompletenessFramework is presented mostly as a starting point for GMs and no pretense is made to make it "complete". Rules assume players and GM want to extend the system.
The latter is what I'm leaning towards. I'm seeing it like this at the moment:
I provide a bunch of spells, maybe 40 or so all very unique and filled with colour, definately not overlapping. Martial arts and mystic abilities are presented in the same manner. These are nothing more than examples, creating one's own powers are trivial. Skills work in the same manner.
Creatures are given a brief bio in the manner of a monster manual. Certain creatures are given deeper treatment (those more firmly linked with the background) with ways to generate varied monsters of these types.
Playable creatures are given a bio and an overview of abilities and method to create new abilities and what guidelines should apply to them. Some cultural tidbits and quirks.
A sample town, sample religions as well as some "create your own religion/sect/whatever by rolling on a table" things for convenient quickstarts.
To summarize, the approach is that of a universal system (even though it isn't) with examples and certain guidelines to help the things to stay on track and still be "Ygg".[/list:u]
The other major alternative would be to try to provide as a complete framework as possible like say AD&D.
I don't see any immediate drawback in going with the former, and it seems like it would be enough to convey Ygg. It doesn't "lock you into" Yggdrasil as AD&D 2nd ed would lock you into a world with certain spells and certain classes, but will that really mean people automatically won't "get" Yggdrasil and play a vastly different game than I envision?
Quote from: Christoffer LernöIt doesn't "lock you into" Yggdrasil as AD&D 2nd ed would lock you into a world with certain spells and certain classes, but will that really mean people automatically won't "get" Yggdrasil and play a vastly different game than I envision?
How concerned are you that people play the "canonical" world? It seems to me that the game is more about the feel and action than the exploration of the particular world. As such, I'd go with the more open interperetation; examples.
That said, don't skimp on the support. Make sure that those examples are there, and that the system makes coming up with your own stuff straightforward and fun. Otherwise you're just getting the participants to do your work for you. Which makes it less of a product.
This all said, unless you have a lot more than I think you do, what you have could serve all as examples.
Mike
Hopefully Seth will pop on this thread and offer his thoughts. He went through the same process with Alyria (a very mood and flavor heavy setting) and decided to go with the minutia light "flexible" approach.
I imagine he could offer some insights as to the pros and cons behind his decision.
My experience on the second path:
When I ran Torchbearer the first time, one of my players started narrating as if we were in a World of Darkness cosmology - Umbra, Gauntlet, stepping sideways, all that jargon.
For me, this entirely spoiled the flavor of the game. I ended up narrating the spirit world as exactly like the physical world, but with traumatic transitions between them; I didn't want to feel like my implicit cosmology was being impinged on. It felt like Not Torchbearer.
My point is that in a system that expects creation by the players, there is an acute need for what I call 'flavor preservation'. To prevent setting drift, you have to expose all the tenets of the setting that you assumed when you were writing. For Torchbearer, the tenets look something like this:
All characters are essentially human.
Anything can be talked to, if you know its language.
Power implies beauty. Sadness implies beauty.
Everyone has relationships.
Power is discovered, not accumulated.
I was thinking of providing the basics of the mythos in Yggdrasil with each concept presented in a few paragraphs. It shouldn't be longer than a paragraph, and it should give entry-level info that can have multiple interpretations. They're supposed to be a start for the player-GM imagination rather than rules.
I'm getting a list like this:
Demonlight
Demons, origins
Demons, summoning and banishing
Demons, possession
Demonic Homonculi
Demons, Minor and Greater
Souls
Death and the Dead
Witchling Runelore
The Dark Gods
Magical Energies
The Spiritworld
The Outer Realms
Frost Giants
Ogres
Martial Sects
The Goddess
Demonic Taint
Demonsoul
Blood magic
... etc.[/list:u]
These are, of course, only the headings. An example:
The Outer RealmsThe Outer Realms are places beyond space and time where the demons live and its the source of the magic of the sorcerers. Noone knows the true number of Outer Realms. They vary greatly in size, from barely the size of a fist to many times the world of men. Some are very distant and some closer. Although the gates to the Outer Realms are sealed, sorcerers knows how to weaken these seals to let unspeakable things through.[/list:u]
Since your game is named such, does it have a Norse flavoring of that list?
Secondly, I'll say I like details. Frankly as a game designer who buys other games the whole build a setting approach is useless to me--because if I do all the worldbuilding you can bet I've got my own rules to put with it. So at least make suggestions on how the world is themed, how its feel is suppose to play out. Something to consider:
If you put in a setting and one person doesn't like it is easy to
disregard and them make on of their own
If you do not put a setting in people without the time or
inclination to build one are likely to find a game that does have
that information.
Now who do you most wish to cater to?
Greetings Chris,
My main questions here would be:
What is the setting?
(Does it relate to a period of time, fable, or is it generic?)
What is supposed to be happening in that setting?
(If you ask yourself this and take notes you'll quickly find that you have a outline of things to create rules for.)
If you could write up a two column list of "What my World is" and "What my world isn't" what would the game you need to create be like?
That said, in regards to character creation, which fits best with the world setting you envision?
Take Crystal Spheres as a for instance, I implemented a hybrid system of random attribute generation with archetypal template overlay. In fact it is somewhat similar in some regards to MiniFRPG (if you remember THAT beastie, since I am sure no one else would) though whether it retains that simplicity remains to be seen.
edit: Oh, yeah, CS is also supposed to be a 'lite' rules system.
Why did I use such a system, because I thought it fit the setting better than the rigid class systems imposed by games like xD&D or Palladium. Yet, since those games deal primarily with actual medieval cultures, cultures that have strict hierarchical structures, a class system is almost a necessity.
Unless your world has a strict hierarchical structure a class system may not be suited to it. In which case you have several alternative choices, it's just a matter of finding a good 'fit' for your setting. IMHO/DSTM
As for spells and skills, from what you've stated it sounds likes what you want is a meta-TN resolution system. Perhaps something that can be applied across the board to all actions?
Kind Regards,
Kester Pelagius
P.S. My vote's for the 'flexibility' option.
I think its most important to be consisten. I think we have all had an experience where a game says "Area X is for players and GMs to explore and be creative!"Only to find a supplement a year later details everything there.
That said if your going to create a flexible framework, make sure everything is there for the gamers to use. I agree with Shreyas that you need to maintain some Ygg consistency in feel and atmosphere. Perhaps laying down a list of the gods (if they exist) some legends, and name all the major cities/locations. No need for details just name them. That saves people time and I think would be a nice foundation to allow players to move on from where you left off.
Sean
ADGBoss
I'm going to try to answer by referring to older posts rather than to write everything all over again. I hope you'll get a fuller picture that way.
Quote from: SidhainSince your game is named such, does it have a Norse flavoring of that list?
It is no more norse than say the manga "Oh My Goddess!" is about norse myth. The explanation of the name can be found here (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=1814&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=).
Quote from: KesterWhat is the setting?
More info can be found here (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=1901&highlight=) (my first write-up), this (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=1926&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=) is a slightly out-of date example of play, a little on the effects of demonic magic here (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=3781&highlight=) and the last time I attempted to state the idea here (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=4081&highlight=). If it's still hazy, let me know.
Quote from: ADGBoxxI think its most important to be consisten. I think we have all had an experience where a game says "Area X is for players and GMs to explore and be creative!"Only to find a supplement a year later details everything there
I'm following the stategy presented here (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/viewtopic.php?t=1792&highlight=) for the setting. I'm fully agreeing with your suggestions Sean.