How to make a playable fantasy world - or a world in general

[Blake Hutchins]

Hi Pale Fire,

Boy, do those frog pills taste like crap. *bleaugh*

For what it's worth, I plan to distill the significant points of the Exalted setting to a one-page handout, focusing on color, possible character options, and basic cultural rules.  Then I'll dispense with the most of the rest of the material and let the bulk of the setting evolve during play.  I like playing off of my group's input, but I'm more Dionysian than Apollonian in my approach, so rather than produce a detailed template, I'm more comfortable with putting rough conceptual stakes around the creative turf I'm aiming at, then let the group go wild.  I agree with Ron that a pre-play discussion about consistency should help keep group input focused, provided the participants are mature about it.  If I tell the group it's a dark, Renaissance-evocative urban setting with a gritty noir-ish flavor and common use of necromancy, humans only, I think we'll stay on target.  The final result may have things I wouldn't have thought of, but that's the point, right?

As far as supplements go -- let's take the Exalted: Dragon-Blooded book as an example, as it's mostly setting and I'm currently working with it -- I dislike the necessity of learning a ton of setting information because (a) it slows down getting into the game, (b) it's logistically hard to keep track of the mass of detail, (c) awkward for players to absorb the infodump, (d) someone who does make the effort to suck it all up could get defensive if we veer off canon (and I do veer, my friends), and (e) I just don't wanna worry about metaplot expectations, continuity with future supplements, whither the signature characters, splatbook micro-detail, blah-infinite-blah.  Hence the one-sheet and judicious reference to specific aspects of the setting.

Best,

Blake

[Lance D. Allen]

You know, Pale Fire, you're onto something, methinks.

 Meta-details are good, if taken in moderation, in the original book. If you're playing in a pre-made setting, you ought to know where the borders are, which country is friendly to which country, and who the people of influence and fame are. However, knowing where every township is, the names of the magistrates in those towns, exactly where all the roads run (and any landmarks along the way) is taking meta-details to gross extents.

 But setting details, such as culture and regional flavor are excellent things. They help the GM set the feel of a story without getting in the way. This should first be set in the original setting book, but can be extended with sourcebooks.

 The ability to add to the mostly blank canvas of meta-details is bread and butter to most GMs. For those who aren't quite so intent on creating the setting, there should be, as part of the setting details, an example town with all sorts of meta-details.. but without stating that the town exists within the setting, but is only there as an example. I think that would be the major difference between meta-details and just plain details. Meta-details are solid, unchangeable (and woe betide you if you do, you bad gamer you) without scrapping the existing setting. Details (by your usage) are flexible guidelines to the setting.

 Am I hitting this nail on the head, or just smashing my thumb?

[Christoffer Lernö]

Meta-details are good, if taken in moderation, in the original book. If you're playing in a pre-made setting, you ought to know where the borders are, which country is friendly to which country, and who the people of influence and fame are.

Yes, there should be enough to convey the flavour of the setting somehow. Depending on the setting, the amount is different, it all depends on how much stuff is different and how much it takes to present it.

That shouldn't be taken as an excuse to make a 100 setting just because "oh it's so different" when you're actually only rehashing the same info over and over again.

Granted, there might be a way to write 100 pages worth of setting and still provide an open world full of opportunity for the GM. But the more stuff presented, the harder it is not to accidentally put meta-detail where it shouldn't be.

Blake's a-e summary of sourcebook problems perfectly sums it up. These are the reasons why meta-detail messes up so much more than it helps.

 But setting details, such as culture and regional flavor are excellent things. They help the GM set the feel of a story without getting in the way. This should first be set in the original setting book, but can be extended with sourcebooks.

I think we're all agreeing here.

I guess the lesson is that a setting sourcebook should be written with the same thought and care as the RPG. Most sourcebooks operate with the premise "any information is good information" and don't consider the fact that someone actually's gonna try using it to help running a campaign which might be vastly different from the author's.